With all due respect, Don, I've read your comments and some are fair and some may not be so fair. Allow me to explain.
First, I get the impression that part of your frustration stems from your existing knowledge of MS Windows quirks and an expectation to be able to use this knowledge directly to the Linux distribution of your choice. I think that is a bit unfair as it's akin to expecting my existing knowledge of Yaesu HF radios to transfer directly to my K3. That was not the case and I prepared myself to accept and learn the K3 as it is and not attempt to overlay my Yaesu knowledge onto it. A Linux distribution is not a bug-for-bug drop-in replacement for any version of MS Windows. It is its own system and, as you have expressed, has its own vernacular and jargon. I'm not going to assert that one is correct and the other is not, it just is what it is, to use an over used phrase. While general computing concepts transfer between systems, I have found that I need to just accept the differences and move on. Being more familiar with Linux I often find working with MS Windows to be an eye-gougingly frustrating experience and cannot fathom how anyone believes it to be "better" except from a perspective of familiarity. As for distributions, a lot of people reach for Ubuntu these days. Since its adoption of Unity for its GUI, I think that Ubuntu has made a terrible regression for anyone interested in doing anything more than surfing the Web and reading email or doing multi-media work. My recommendation based on my experience is to point people toward Xubuntu which uses the XFCE4 desktop which is much like the older version of GNOME. It works well and even has a menu entry to manage users and groups in its System menu. It is also quick and has lighter system requirements than Ubuntu or Mint. * On 2012 09 Jul 23:25 -0500, Don Wilhelm wrote: > In other words, there are no clear and concise instructions for Linux. > The "Man pages" are supposedly the answer, but they offer geek-speak > explanations for those who are not initiated and expert into the Linux > brand of geekdom. There is a group of HOWTOs that has been maintained for years: http://www.tldp.org/docs.html#howto http://www.tldp.org/ I don't know if a guide exists that is a cross-reference from your Windows knowledge to Linux, which seems to me what you're asking for. Believe it or not, there are some people who have not used MS Windows and find it as foreign as experienced Windows users find Linux. That doesn't help you, but I think it points to my long held belief that whatever one learns first goes a long way to establishing the foundation in one's mind of how things should be. > I once thought Linux would be my road to salvation without buying > Windows7 for 7 computers on my home network, but it just does not work > consistently, so I guess I will have to spend the upgrade fees for Win7. I'm not sure what you're fighting here as I have no problem with Linux networking. Perhaps what you are looking for is something like: http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html I have never tried it and cannot comment on its stability and compatibility. > So until Linux gives up its superior "I am geek and I want it to stay > that way" attitude, it will never fly properly. Ubuntu and Mint have > come a long way in making installation easier, but there is a long way > to go in usability. I don't quite know how to respond to this except that once again I suspect you may have been expecting a "just like MS Windows" set of options and menu entries. I think that is a failing of us who have engaged in Linux advocacy over the years where Linux has been touted to be "just like Windows". I have never used Apple's OS/X but I never hear anyone complain that it's not "just like Windows" even though casual reading of this and other mailing lists indicate to me that it is its own system and people just accept that. I don't see commentary such as yours regarding OS/X, but I don't pay much attention to OS/X topics so the comments may exist and I just don't see it. To be fair, OS/X is the realization of one vision. Linux is the realization of a free-flowing and formless community's vision. > Linux will also have to give up using "cute" names for applications to > make sense to users - for instance, Photoshop has a relevant name for > photo editing, but GIMP might mean something like "geeky image > manipulating program" to Linux fans, but it has no obvioous meaning to > the average user. I hate to say, but this is a bit of a strawman argument. Photoshop existed before the GIMP. There is no way Adobe would have allowed the authors of the GIMP to use or allude to their name in any way. GIMP actually stands for GNU Image Manipulation Program. What would be a proper name? > Until Linux "gets real" instead of continuing to be "geeky", it will > never fly - meaningful names are important - at least that is my opinion > - I equate abstract naming to "geeky", and by saying "geeky" it means > exclusionary, and not to be understood by the general user. And that is > what is wrong with Linux. The same arguments are leveled at amateur radio and even sub-avocations of amateur radio. We see how much resistance there is to bend amateur radio to the lowest common denominator to make it more acceptable to a wider audience of less technically inclined people. There is the same mindset of "holding the line" in Linux circles as in amateur radio circles. I think an argument can be made that many of problems that have plagued MS Windows in the past are directly attributable to design decisions to appeal to a large audience. >From what I see, Apple has been able to build a system that has wide acceptance without a lot of the issues that historically plagued MS Windows. From over here, I see that to do so, Apple forces everyone to play on their terms and not much is left for independent expression. Conversely, Linux builds on the concepts of Unix and is wide open and allows anyone to implement things as they see fit. This leads to variety and choice but also a lack of consistency. For me, the Linux community provides an ever expanding universe of tools that is only possible on a general computing platform. Working in such a universe requires more of me than using a more focused system. Likewise, there have been people that have sold their K3 citing various factors such as "too much radio" that allude to the K3 providing a wide range of settings to affect its operation. I liken the K3 to be much like a general computing operating system. Some hams will much like the defaults--i.e. staying within the GUI of an OS or not customizing things--and others will dig in and fiddle with all the options. Don, use what suits you the best. 73, de Nate, N0NB >> -- "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true." Ham radio, Linux, bikes, and more: http://www.n0nb.us ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
