There would be if there were any buyers.
I suppose I could ask a Linux user if there were some places to buy Linux
computers, but, although I know hundreds of computer users, none of them
use it on their personal computers.
Off the top of my head I only know one place that sells Linux preinstalled.
Fry's Electronics. And that is a low budget computer. You can usually get it
minus monitor for $199.
And it is the Linspire distribution (Formerly Lindows thanks to M$).
I have it on one of my personal computers. It's good to know the major
operating systems if it is your job.
There were a a lot of Linux on new computers a few years ago, but mostly got
dropped as Linux got a bad reputation as not being very user friendly for
the new or average user. Also many hardware companies do not even make
drivers for it.
The problem for putting it on new computers it lack of support for newer or
average users. M$ can do support because of also the sales of other items to
go along with their OS. There is many Linux providers and not many of them
selling other software with their distros. Mostly only expensive support.
I always wanted to get into Linux but feared it. Its used for a
lot of science aps, professional astronomy & spectroscopy etc.
I was always waiting for a windows version? My son is a CEO
and former CIO or a large corp and would have given me a
machine years ago .... Linux is used for higher level telescope
control and spectroscopy analysis software like SPECTRUM;
the windows counterparts are all pure crap full of bugs and
no documentation at all (real crapware, eg. Vspec!).
Im too old to do it now ......... maybe?
Give me a headsup if you think I should do this - why is Linux
sucha bitch to operate?
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 02:26:30 -0600, More Advertising
More than anything, the lack of a standard user interface or GUI.HTere
are several "flavors" of them out there some good and some bad and if
they can ever get standardized on one style GUI they could grow more.
More than anything else MS provides the standard GUI to write software
for and to work with.
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, GeekBoy
on Tue, 6 Feb 2007 12:16:50 -0600
Microsoft Windows Vista(tm), presumably. Of course that
tips the entire problem on its head, since X has been
standardized long since presumably, by the X/Open group.
But that's part of the problem. What does one see?
A bunch of windows. Microsoft has basically implemented
a user/system interaction model involving windows, menus,
mouse clicks, etc. that everyone more or less recognizes
(yes, including that dumb horizontal scrolling bar in the
file requester! Java copied that for some bizarre reason).
Others have different implementations, with somewhat
different results. I don't claim that Microsoft "innovated"
anything here, though they are ubiquitous enough to have
commoditized the problem to some extent.
I'm old enough to remember the close icon being in
the upper left, for example; Amiga and Athena had some
interesting ideas about scroll bars.
The scrollbars for Intuition/Workbench 2.0 or 1.4 (?)
placed the up/down/left/right buttons near the lower right
-- quite different from the now-more-or-less standard
placement of the right/down near the lower right, left near
the lower left, and up near the upper right, making troughs
with arrows at each end. I've not seen Amiga's layout
anywhere else, and am not sure of its real usefulness,
though it might have been an attempt to minimize mouse
movement. (I don't remember whether other applications
I don't know if this was kept in 3.0.
Scrollbars could also be shifted by clicking in the "trench".
Classical Athena scrollbars used all three mouse buttons.
- Left: Move up or left, with the proportion dependent on
the distance from the top or left and the current cursor
- Right: Move down or right, with otherwise similar
semantics to left.
- Middle: Drag to the desired position.
There was no concept of clicking in the trench.
This is quite different from the "one button" mode used
by every other GUI I can think of offhand. To be fair,
these were remappable if one wanted to bother tweaking
One can also customize some applications to move the
Some applications are "hot" -- the window updates as
the scrollbar moves. There are also issues with the
thumbwheel, which in X shows up as buttons 4 and 5.
Many apps interpret these as commands to scroll up or
down, and may interpret them as other commands if SHIFT
or CTRL is pressed. Ctrl-Thumb in Epiphany allows for
font resizing, for example; Shift-Thumb goes through the
URL history. If one positions the cursor on a tab in
Epiphany, Thumb will move through the tabs.
Windows had the slightly annoying issue -- that could
be construed as a godsend if one's careful enough --
that if one moved off the scrollbar while dragging, the
scrollbar snaps back to its original position. One can
also press <ESC>. For the most part Gnome and KDE follow
the X model: a grabbed scrollbar is grabbed until released,
regardless of where the pointer (and in some cases the
editing cursor) ends up.
There is also the cut/copy/paste issue. X used two mouse
buttons again, plus the notion that only one client could
select [*] a range of something at a time. (This is enforced
at the protocol/Xlib level, in fact.) Windows, and I
think Apple as well, used the X, C, and V keys, along
with a modified -- in Windows, CTRL, and Apple uses an
Option button which looks a bit like a four-leaf clover.
Nowadays, Gnome and KDE are copying Windows (since most
x86 PC keyboards don't have a flower :-) ). I do not know
precisely how the Windows clipboarding works. X has a
rotating text clipboard; the apps could either use that
or the selection protocol.
I will briefly mention menus:
The menu for whatever window was active is always at the
upper left. One selects items by pressing, then dragging
down, then releasing, or by clicking, dragging down,
and clicking again -- I forget which. Maybe both.
Amiga is a modified Apple. Instead of having an always up
menubar, one presses the right mouse button; the menubar
then appears, overlaying the current screen titlebar.
One can then move the pointer to the appropriate item,
which drops down the requisite menu. Releasing the
button selects the item and visually removes the menubar.
Moving the pointer off the menu rolls up the menu.
Gnome, KDE, Motif, and Windows:
Each window has its own menu area at the upper left,
below the title bar. Icons on the title bar allow
for minimization, maximization, and closing (request).
The lower right can be used to stretch the window --
and the other corners can stretch the window as well,
though it depends on window manager. (Twm in particular
had some very weird notions but is now rarely used.)
All of these can have popup menus as well, which show up
when a mouse button is pressed. The Amiga is a little
weird in that respect, but all others simply wait for the
right mouse button. In some cases all three buttons with
a modifier can also be used -- Xterm in particular has
three popup menus accessible by Ctrl-Button 1 through 3.
In all cases, "panels" are also available -- in Gnome's
case a menu is provided at the upper left, but is generally
static, unlike Apple's. Icons can also be registered,
then clicked, on these panels. For its part Microsoft has
a quicklaunch area, plus an icon area, plus the infamous
"start" button, which in Vista got changed to a flag logo.
Vista is also innovating its start menu, which is now
looking more like a rather complicated dialog box.
Gnome and KDE provide "capplet" functionality; in my case,
for example, I have two geyes at opposite corners, plus a
clock capplet, a load capplet, and the workspace switcher.
Windows also has a clock; I'm not sure how it coordinates
with a calendar. Gnome's clock drops down a calendar which
includes events scheduled with Evolution -- days with such
events are marked in a bold font, and clicking on such
days adds a list to the calendar showing the events.
So...how standard is all this? Good question, and I've
not gotten down to the desktop icons yet. Note that Motif
didn't have desktop icons representing files and directories;
it had desktop icons representing windows. Windows 3.1 used
icons for programs and program groups.
Gnome, KDE, and Win95 now put window icons in an icon area,
making a bit of X's protocol slightly less than useful (one
can create a custom icon window in X but I don't know where
that will end up now).
Applications include additional clutter; Eclipse can be
festooned with draggable actionbar icons, for example. IE,
Word, OpenOffice, and Mozilla have similar functionality.
Opera didn't bother. Gimp has its own ideas, and is
being annoying (I can't put the subrequesters back into
the main toolbar). :-)
The new Office GUI introduces tabbed menus -- dubious from
a usability standpoint, but somewhat attractive from a
visual one. Vista introduces 3D elements, though XGL and
Looking Glass probably preceded it (though I do remember
Windows making some noises about silly demos at one point).
Welcome to the New World Order.
[*] X implements a primary and a secondary selection
system; the secondary one is now rarely used.
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Linonut
on Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:20:50 -0600
Actually, I was referring to the sliding area of a
scrollbar, which visually looks a bit like a trench.
You're referring to something else entirely specific
to the window manager/environment. I'll admit I'm not
familiar with those beyond noting that mwm, the Motif
windows manager, did have an option for putting icons in
a mwm-managed window. The window manager I use now --
metacity -- emulates Win95 and every other Windows family
by putting long buttons in an area of the panel with text,
usually on the bottom.
I type fast. :-) Comes from 6th grade; never regretted it.
New Technology? Not There. No Thanks.
Something that it is more consistant to write installation
instructions to install apps to or configure devices. The different
"flavors" of Linux makes this a bit more difficult.
It's all the same. Windows uses a graphical interface to make changes to
text files to tell it how most of it to operate.
Same thing in Linux.
No matter what branded or styled window interface they use (KDE, Gnome),
they still have to use the X-windows server which is standardized in all
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, GeekBoy
on Tue, 6 Feb 2007 14:40:49 -0600
Presumably, most of the system is geared towards making
modifications to that great big grab bag, the Registry;
this Registry has settings galore in it, and I'd frankly
have to look to see where things are for such things
as TCP/IP, graphics display characteristics, and other
miscellaneous crap. Some third party tools might still
use .INI files.
Gnome has its own ideas on registry entries, though
they are backed up by a file in ~/.gnome2 somewhere.
I'd frankly have to look. Most of these are for the user's
benefit. I don't know where KDE puts things but suspect
a vaguely similar structure.
System settings are handled elsewhere, scattered
in various places in /etc. For example, /etc/conf.d/net
is for the aforementioned TCP/IP settings. Graphics are
handled through /etc/X11/xorg.conf . Since Linux has
a fair number of daemons, these need to be configured
as well; these generally are also in /etc/conf.d or /etc/
There are also tools such as webmin, which attempt to
GUIfy all this.
That's only a small part of the problem. However, it's fairly
straightforward, except maybe for Apache -- but Apache isn't exactly a
typical desktop app.
Useless C++ Programming Idea #104392:
Linux was derived from UNIX. UNIX was designed by and for programmers. Linux
still heavily retains its roots with text interface.
I have a book that is 5 inches thick full of commands and included text
based software that is included with Linux and it covers only basic
It could take months to years to learn all that and the power that could be
done as compared to windows.
Some software packages for Linux, is a serious learning curve and most non
technical users would not be able to understand even how to insall some
software on their Linux. A lof of people who make software feel it is best
to have the software compiled on their system is best policy to ensure it
That has changed a lot with different versions made for different platforms
and making a RPM file for the software package which is similar to the
The desktop has also become a lot better and more windows like.
One good thing about Linux is that there is just not too many viruses and
other malware for it.
Not so at all. It can take years to truly become an expert with windows.
There are 1000's of little known hidden features buried among the
multitude of applications, registry entries etc. Most people tend to
work around those features and instead opt for the limited usuability of
the GUI. I still drop to the DOS prompt because some things are far
easier from the command line than in Windows GUI.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.