On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 20:37, Randall Ross (rrnwexec)
<email address hidden> wrote:
> Did you bother to check which systems are certified first?
> http://webapps.ubuntu.com/certification/
>
> Think of your experiences in the Windows world. You likely have used
> hardware that is stickered "Windows Ready", "Works with Windows" etc.
>
> The Ubuntu world is no different, and Ubuntu does NOT work on
> everything. Please reset expectations accordingly.

Although Ubuntu runs on a lot of hardware that is not listed there and
no certification has been done, people should simply prefer the
hardware that is certified or at least known to work.

Simply becauce: Manufacturer's first aim is to work with Windows
because that is the majority of people and this simply is what gets
preinstalled in the vast majority of cases when shipping the thingy.

Some manufacturers have looked beond the the rim of the plate and see
that the world around M$ is wide and large and take this into
consideration, like Dell or Lenovo for example.

If people buying stuff do not explicitely prefer the more compatible
hardware manufacturers also will not change their habits.


On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 20:59, Tom <email address hidden> wrote:
> So 30mins to install Ubuntu against 1hr30 to install Windows.
>
> Did the Windows system then need upgrades or additional software?  After the
> first round of updates and reboot  were all the drivers, codecs and new programs
> all up-to-date and fully patched?

Yesterday I tried to install an MS Office plugin from M$. Result: Half
an hour of applying necessary updates including upgrading to IE8 (and
I have no plain idea why IE8 needed in that case)... - and the machine
had applied all updates before...


> Installing a system you know well (Windows), with the standard preparation you
> do before an install to that particular set of hardware does not really compare
> against installing a system you have no experience with and have not prepared
> for in advance.

Yeah, people used Windows many, many years and then they expect to do
the transition in a day. Although I think that Ubuntu can be learned
quite quickly (just to think of the plenty of forums and documentation
available - or the very helpful community), my experience is that a
standard low experienced home user needs approx 2 weeks to get
familiar enough to be productive - but this is an awesome short time!


On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 21:14, houstonbofh <email address hidden> wrote:
> I have expertise in both Windows and Linux.  Windows takes longer.
> Mainly it is the massive amount of reboots between updates and drivers.
>  Also, the install is far to interactive, not set it and forget it.

If you look at the installation of Windows 2008 R2 Server for example,
installation of Windows is really not very interactive - it neither
asks for a host name! - It generates an automatic one that you can
change later. So even less interaction than for an Ubuntu
installation.

That said, afterwards plenty of clicks needed to get only in the near
of being productive - not to tell that Windows OS after installation
is naked as a jaybird! Even the text editor that comes with it is ...
- well the only word I have for it is "impertinence".


> As
> an aside, the only programming language I know is Perl, and I haven't
> really used in in years.

When I started with Linux all programming languages I knew were
Windows-only. So really, there is no need to know a programming
language for using Linux. That I felt strange using an OS I can't
program is natural after having always been capable of programming the
PCs I was working on before. - Well, I have fixed that bug in the
meantime. ;-)


On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 21:14, houstonbofh <email address hidden> wrote:
> You want Ubuntu to be as easy for a beginner to install with no
> experience as Windows is for an expert with years of experience.  That
> is the bug...  Unreasonable expectations.  And the thought that
> "Windows" is "Computer" and if you know "Windows" you know "computers."
>  Not so helpfull with Mac, Linux, HP-UX, Aix, Solaris, AS400, VMS, or a
> number of accounting specific systems.  Now if you give the same test to
> your grandmother, I bet Linux is easier.

Full ACK!

But: I agree that anyway it must get better, because there are plenty
of people who care a sh* about the OS - their focus is completely
different and they don't want to bother.

But, that said, those people must be illuminated that: Even if they
want to just pull coffee from the coffee machine or if they "just"
want to drive a car, some knowledge of the thing you are using is
needed to use it (efficiently). In general for every thing (be it
technical or non-technical) there are some basics (knowledge,
experience, training) needed to use something - and more knowledge,
experience and training is needed to use something really efficient -
or - to help yourself in case of a problem. - This applies for
computers as well as for cars, giving presentations or even just your
daily habits.

And then, when people want to improve their efficiency, then it comes
to the very special strength of Linux: There are plenty of different
desktop environments or just window managers, plenty of look and
feels, desktop elements like Docky (and the like - plenty of options
available just there), look & feel, different options for writing
office documents and and and... - According to your needs and focus!
Remind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Seven_Habits_of_Highly_Effective_People


On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 22:25, Setve Gentilly <email address hidden> wrote:
> Well it still comes down to not having drivers for stuff.

Yes.


> Thank you guys for your time, but when Ubuntu is more compatible I will have
> another look at it.

No, you missed the point: The hardware manufacturers sold the thingy
to you. If you need to use Windows on that thingy because you can't
use Linux - they don't care! - They only will care when nobody is
buying their stuff because it is not Linux compatible! So YOU NEED TO
CHANGE FIRST! Don't buy that crappy hardware!

I tell everybody asking me for consulting which hardware to buy that
they should look for a Linux compatible hardware, even if they don't
plan to use Linux (now). Situation could be different in a year, so
they should not lock themselves out from trying something new later. -
Guess what: The last time I said that resulted in 2 weeks later
switching to Ubuntu after the user destroyed the Windows 7 preinstall
within a week.


On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 22:41, »John« <email address hidden> wrote:
> I don't mean to be rude; I just want the message to be perfectly clear
> because we've been through this shit for like million times already and
> I'm simply getting sick and tired of hearing the same stupid whining
> over and over again. Bad hardware support is always caused by stupid
> hardware manufacturers and not the operating system in question, because
> someone needs to write the damn drivers!

You nailed it!


On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 00:10, Randall Ross (rrnwexec)
<email address hidden> wrote:
> We should instead be aiming to teach people to be creators and
> contributors, so their information access tools remain robust and enable
> any one to get to any and all information they need to educate
> themselves.

For the very interested user, yes - but many just have different
focus. E.g. a non-technical book author just wants to write his books
and do conversation with readers and publishers and typically does not
want bother with the OS. So most people are not going to read a bulk
of documentation. Of course, for the interested user who wants to get
more out of his/her PC, documentation should be at hand quickly and
easy to understand.

-- 
Martin Wildam

http://www.google.com/profiles/mwildam