1:33 a.m.
Hi There,
I have some thoughts regarding the future and aim fedora developers should
take. I - as a very average normal user - have installed several releases,
and am very happy with Fedora 13, and have no doubt Fedora 14 will satisfy
my needs as well. Having said that, there are some concerns that I'm
missing in the direction Fedora seems to be taking.
I can not code to save my life, so all that follows are things I think
developers should think about, but please do not consider what I say here
serious accusations. I'm just stating, what I - as a very average user -
am missing.
1) Looks: Forgive the curse-words, but Linux has been surpassed in looks
by as far as I can see all other OSs. I don't know all, but Windoze and
Mac all look better on lesser graphic-cards. Things like true
class-borders should be developed. True see-through should also be made
possible for apps like conky et al.
Btw, I Love the F14 background.
2) Wifi: It may be a sore point, but there is no ease of installing
(newer) machines with built in wifi cards. While I understand that all
those things are built for functionality with Windoze, and that many
manufacturers don't make their own Linux drivers, but even with the
correct drivers it doesn't often work. I feel it should be on the
forefront of the developers attention to make wifi work more easily - on
all machines. Wireless computing is getting more and more popular, and is
the future for the internet. So if Linux wishes to survive (sorry to put
it so strongly), it is important that wifi works as easily as when
installing Windoze. It doesn't; check the forums, check google. Few issues
are so frequent.
3) Hardware management: su -, lshw, isn't good enough a hardware manager
for the average user. A new app should be developed that looks better and
is interactive. Enable and disable certain hardware should be an option.
Finding manufacturer's details of driver-less hardware is a must. Aida32
springs to mind, XP's Device Manager springs to mind. GUI, interactive.
This is necessary to appeal to the average user - ie. me.
And while we're at it, try and make the wifi-card enableable through this
app; rfkill unblock all doesn't always do it.
As I said, just some thoughts. Do with it what you see fit. I'll keep
using Fedora till it stops working. This is what I'm missing. Note that
if all this is already available, it isn't well enough advertised.
--
Greetz,
Roelof Kusters
aka Ben
The internet isn't a highway, it's a swamp: the more you surf, the more it
draws you in.
Make 1000 euros in minutes! Sell my house: http://www.bentrein.com/house
4:47 p.m.
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Beartooth <beartooth(a)comcast.net> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 08:55:19 -0700, James McKenzie wrote:
[....]
> Intel is famous for their poor quality video drivers for Linux. Just
> run Wine with notepad and you will have some idea on what I am talking
> about. Some of the more famous games that were ported to Linux don't
> work there either. The recommended solution: Get a video card with
> high quality Linux drivers. Right now nVidia is leading the pack.
OK; but I don't speak hardware.
So I launched my lshw-gui (not knowing a better way). But if it
sees any video card, it calls it something else. How do I check what I've
got in any given machine?
If you have a external video card then it should be listed under one
of the "PCI Bridge"[1] unless it is a really old AGP card.
Hope this helps.
[1] http://imagebin.org/129674
--
Suvayu
Open source is the future. It sets us free.
4:02 p.m.
On 12/26/2010 12:49 PM, Beartooth wrote:
So I launched my lshw-gui (not knowing a better way). But if it
sees any video card, it calls it something else. How do I check what I've
got in any given machine?
Doesn't show much (anything?) on the pci bus ...
lspci -v shows video cards
that said what does lshw supposed to do if not in part show what
hardware is in ... bug?
11:49 a.m.
On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 08:55:19 -0700, James McKenzie wrote:
[....]
Intel is famous for their poor quality video drivers for Linux.
Just
run Wine with notepad and you will have some idea on what I am talking
about. Some of the more famous games that were ported to Linux don't
work there either. The recommended solution: Get a video card with
high quality Linux drivers. Right now nVidia is leading the pack.
OK; but I don't speak hardware.
So I launched my lshw-gui (not knowing a better way). But if it
sees any video card, it calls it something else. How do I check what I've
got in any given machine?
--
Beartooth Staffwright, Neo-Redneck Not Quite Clueless Power User
I have precious (very precious!) little idea where up is.
12:44 p.m.
On 12/26/2010 07:55 AM, James McKenzie wrote:
Intel is famous for their poor quality video drivers for Linux.
Just
run Wine with notepad and you will have some idea on what I am talking
about.
Built in graphics card on a notebook. And, everything Just Works
including the 3D graphics.
11:36 a.m.
On Sunday 26 December 2010 08:11 AM, Tim wrote:
Transparency's all very well for shuffling windows about, trying
to find
the one you want behind the currently front-most one. But it's
appalling to try and use a terminal or application when you're seeing
what's behind it through what you're actually trying to look at.
Actually I set my terminals to an opacity of 90-95% just so that I can
do that, but only on laptops where I don't have enough screen
space. Often it so happens I want to look at some webpage/email/source
code (or an occasional watch a video while work ;)) as I type at the
terminal. On a sub 14" laptop, there is no better way to do it.
...
I find Macs like those Lego bricks with six bumps on top (a grid of 3
by
2). They can *only* be used in certain ways. You're stuffed if you
want to do something different.
Very well put, all around me in the academic community I find people
toting their Macs and recommending Macs to me and they say "its so easy
to use". But then I learn on a Mac you can't do this or that, or some
usual way of doing things on linux have to be done in some not so
straightforward way. For me the worst are the keystroke -> character
mapping, specially the control keys (I am an Emacs user).
--
Suvayu
Open source is the future. It sets us free.
10:11 a.m.
On Sun, 2010-12-26 at 14:33 +0700, Roelof 'Ben' Kusters wrote:
1) Looks: Forgive the curse-words, but Linux has been surpassed in
looks by as far as I can see all other OSs. I don't know all, but
Windoze and Mac all look better on lesser graphic-cards. Things like
true class-borders should be developed. True see-through should also
be made possible for apps like conky et al.
The basic looks are perhaps a bit barren, but many fancy desktops
substitute usability for eyecandy (Windows, Mac, or Linux). But
seriously, anything more than basic Microsoft Windows effects really
creaks on low end graphics hardware.
Transparency's all very well for shuffling windows about, trying to find
the one you want behind the currently front-most one. But it's
appalling to try and use a terminal or application when you're seeing
what's behind it through what you're actually trying to look at.
The one thing I'd really pick on, with Fedora, is that the default fonts
are too big. You end up with whacking great big text and GUIs, to fit
it all in. And people tend to do the wrong thing to compensate, fake
the DPI settings, to scale it, so the desktop designers never pull their
finger out and put the proper sizing controls in where they can be
easily fixed. (Including the login screen.) So those of us who need
accurate scaling, find it hard to adjust things properly, because
everyone else thinks the dumb kludge is good enough.
Yes, it's handy not to have midget GUIs and text. But much of it's just
way too big. Windows is bad at handling this, too. Try scaling your
fonts up to the size you want, and you often find the GUI doesn't scale
up to fit, with it. And I'm So Sick Of Windows Texts Being Written In
This Fashion In Nearly All The Pop-Up Windows. Is the programming
author 8 years old?
Transparency, movement animations, etc., all look flashy and showy, and
cool for demos. But they get in the way of actually using the computer.
It's harder to see, and slower to do everything. So, they're the first
thing to get shut off.
2) Wifi: It may be a sore point, but there is no ease of installing
(newer) machines with built in wifi cards. While I understand that all
those things are built for functionality with Windoze, and that many
manufacturers don't make their own Linux drivers, but even with the
correct drivers it doesn't often work.
Much of that is the manufacturer's fault, and beyond our control. If
they make it damn near impossible to use their hardware with anything
other than Windows drivers, for one or two versions of Windows, you
can't really expect much. Though, I have to say, you have the same
problems with some hardware on Windows. It's just damn flakey, and
there's absolutely nothing you could do to fix it. It's closed source,
hidden/obfuscated binary content, with no alternatives. And replacing
built-in hardware on a laptop PC is a bit difficult. It's worth
remembering that configuring networks on Windows can be a complete pain
in the bum, options in windows inside window, or options spread across
several different disparate windows, and very little actual explanation
of what half the options mean. I'm so sick of the "see your system
administrator for help with this." Where are they getting the answer
from, because it's not in the help guides, not in the printed manual.
And my "home" version of Windows doesn't have a person to administrate
it for me.
On the other side of the coin, there are aspects of networking within
the control of Linux, that could be better. In the sense of configuring
the hardware that *can* be used. NetworkManager continues to be a black
box affair. Fine if it works, a pain if it doesn't, or doesn't work in
the way you want it to. Those users with multiple access points, or
without well-configured DHCP servers, know that pain.
3) Hardware management: su -, lshw, isn't good enough a hardware
manager for the average user. A new app should be developed that looks
better and is interactive. Enable and disable certain hardware should
be an option.
Hmm, hardware management hasn't been an issue with me (several desktop
PCs and a laptop). As a general rule, I've always found that hardware
just works. Luckily, I haven't had to fiddle with anything. But if I
had to, we do have options to try out, completely under our control.
Windows, on the other hand, has always left a lot to be desired. Their
hardware mangler leaves me with about two choices: Try to disable
errant hardware (though it'll still get in the way of something). Or
try to get it to reload the manufacturer's (bad) driver software.
There's little choice in different configuration beyond try basic
Windows driver, try manufacturer's driver disk, try updated driver from
manufacturer's website (if they have one, and if they've released an
update).
Been through years of hell with some Windows PCs, where the sound card
(or something else) doesn't get along with some other peripheral, it's
always got yellow exclamation marks in the hardware mangler. Even
stripping all the other hardware out, re-installing Windows afresh,
applying the updates, never resolved it. PCs with a phantom mouse, in
the hardware mangler, that can never be removed, is always there, is
always causing problems with the real mouse...
Finding manufacturer's details of driver-less hardware is a must.
This is something that would be nice, but very difficult to implement.
When you poll most hardware, there's some sort of ID *code*, and that
needs to be looked up in a database of some sort (by the polling
program). Much more rarely does hardware has a string of data that
actually says manufacturer's name, and product's name. That's why
unknown hardware comes up listed as "unknown hardware" with a
random-looking string of characters.
It's the same with Windows, of course. If the OS doesn't already have
drivers for the hardware available on disc, it's "unknown hardware."
Sorry, but the "Windows just works," or "Windows as a shining example of
computerdom," just doesn't cut it with me. These days I take great
delight in forestalling hours of grief for helping someone resolve their
(usually petty) Windows problem by answering their plea for help with,
"sorry, but I don't use Windows anymore, I don't know where to begin."
Yes, I have kept reasonably up-to-date with toying with Windows. Though
Vista was the last version that I've tangled with. I'm *not* comparing
Linux with Windows 98. My hatred of Windows was well earned.
I find Macs like those Lego bricks with six bumps on top (a grid of 3 by
2). They can *only* be used in certain ways. You're stuffed if you
want to do something different.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
9:55 a.m.
On 12/26/10 2:47 AM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 12/25/2010 11:33 PM, Roelof 'Ben' Kusters wrote:
> 1) Looks: Forgive the curse-words, but Linux has been surpassed in looks
> by as far as I can see all other OSs. I don't know all, but Windoze and
> Mac all look better on lesser graphic-cards.
You are joking, aren't you? I don't know what you mean by "lesser
graphic-cards," but I have a Toshiba laptop with Intel graphics and F 13
that I use as a showpiece. All of the Winderz fanboiz and the
MacFanatics are blown away by the desktop cube and what it can do. Then
I tell them that it's only available for Linux and watch their faces drop.
Intel is famous for their poor quality video drivers for Linux. Just
run Wine with notepad and you will have some idea on what I am talking
about. Some of the more famous games that were ported to Linux don't
work there either. The recommended solution: Get a video card with
high quality Linux drivers. Right now nVidia is leading the pack.
Even compiz complains when run on Intel 'on-board' video systems.
James McKenzie
5:34 a.m.
su, 2010-12-26 kello 02:14 -0800, Suvayu Ali kirjoitti:
The other day my (Mac using) supervisor went "Ooh wow"
seeing my
"translucent on move" windows on XFCE. :)
--
Suvayu
My (windoze 7 using) supervisor was astonished seeing my good old
timeless twm running on scientific linux ;-)
--
'Ooohh.. "FreeBSD is faster over loopback, when compared to Linux
over the wire". Film at 11.'
-- Linus Torvalds
6:18 a.m.
--- Joe Zeff <joe(a)zeff.us> wrote:
On 12/25/2010 11:33 PM, Roelof 'Ben' Kusters wrote:
> 1) Looks: Forgive the curse-words, but Linux has
been surpassed in looks
> by as far as I can see all other OSs. I don't know
all, but Windoze and
> Mac all look better on lesser graphic-cards.
You are joking, aren't you? I don't know what you
mean by "lesser
graphic-cards," but I have a Toshiba laptop with
Intel graphics and F 13
that I use as a showpiece. All of the Winderz
fanboiz and the
MacFanatics are blown away by the desktop cube and
what it can do. Then
I tell them that it's only available for Linux and
watch their faces drop.
--
users mailing list
users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Perhaps he means that the default profiles should be a bit
more snazzy. I agree with that. Default Clearlooks is
dated.
On the other hand, since learning a bit about how Gnome
and GDM work I have a general "make my desktop look sweet"
ritual I go through every time I do a new install (for me
or anyone else). I've never had complaints at all. Meh...
Maybe what this really means is we should make the "sweet
FX" more prevalent, one-clickish accessible, or something
else along those lines. Compiz, Gnome settings, desktop
effects, themes and GDM are *not* very well integrated --
and there's no reason they shouldn't be. Compiz is a great
idea, but it does only work when supported 3D hardware is
present (or 3D drivers are set to work against all
warnings of proprietary evil) and doesn't give any
lesser-but-cool options -- just full-bore awesome or
all-bore...bore.
Worth thinking about.
--------------------------------------
Get the new Internet Explorer 8 optimized for Yahoo! JAPAN
http://pr.mail.yahoo.co.jp/ie8/
2:44 a.m.
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 14:33:32 +0700,
Roelof 'Ben' Kusters <web(a)bentrein.com> wrote:
2) Wifi: It may be a sore point, but there is no ease of installing
(newer) machines with built in wifi cards. While I understand that all
It should work for wireless cards where there is freely redistributable
firmware that works. Some manufacturers don't allow people to redistribute
their firmaware and if there is no open source firmware for their chips,
it isn't going to work out of the box with Fedora.
4:14 a.m.
On Sunday 26 December 2010 01:47 AM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 12/25/2010 11:33 PM, Roelof 'Ben' Kusters wrote:
> 1) Looks: Forgive the curse-words, but Linux has been surpassed in looks
> by as far as I can see all other OSs. I don't know all, but Windoze and
> Mac all look better on lesser graphic-cards.
You are joking, aren't you? I don't know what you mean by "lesser
graphic-cards," but I have a Toshiba laptop with Intel graphics and F 13
that I use as a showpiece. All of the Winderz fanboiz and the
MacFanatics are blown away by the desktop cube and what it can do. Then
I tell them that it's only available for Linux and watch their faces drop.
The other day my (Mac using) supervisor went "Ooh wow" seeing my
"translucent on move" windows on XFCE. :)
--
Suvayu
Open source is the future. It sets us free.
3:47 a.m.
On 12/25/2010 11:33 PM, Roelof 'Ben' Kusters wrote:
1) Looks: Forgive the curse-words, but Linux has been surpassed in
looks
by as far as I can see all other OSs. I don't know all, but Windoze and
Mac all look better on lesser graphic-cards.
You are joking, aren't you? I don't know what you mean by "lesser
graphic-cards," but I have a Toshiba laptop with Intel graphics and F 13
that I use as a showpiece. All of the Winderz fanboiz and the
MacFanatics are blown away by the desktop cube and what it can do. Then
I tell them that it's only available for Linux and watch their faces drop.
10:47 a.m.
Tim wrote:
On Sun, 2010-12-26 at 14:33 +0700, Roelof 'Ben' Kusters
wrote:
> 1) Looks: Forgive the curse-words, but Linux has been surpassed in
> looks by as far as I can see all other OSs. I don't know all, but
> Windoze and Mac all look better on lesser graphic-cards. Things like
> true class-borders should be developed. True see-through should also
> be made possible for apps like conky et al.
The basic looks are perhaps a bit barren, but many fancy desktops
substitute usability for eyecandy (Windows, Mac, or Linux). But
seriously, anything more than basic Microsoft Windows effects really
creaks on low end graphics hardware.
Transparency's all very well for shuffling windows about, trying to find
the one you want behind the currently front-most one. But it's
appalling to try and use a terminal or application when you're seeing
what's behind it through what you're actually trying to look at.
The one thing I'd really pick on, with Fedora, is that the default fonts
are too big. You end up with whacking great big text and GUIs, to fit
it all in. And people tend to do the wrong thing to compensate, fake
the DPI settings, to scale it, so the desktop designers never pull their
finger out and put the proper sizing controls in where they can be
easily fixed. (Including the login screen.) So those of us who need
accurate scaling, find it hard to adjust things properly, because
everyone else thinks the dumb kludge is good enough.
Yes, it's handy not to have midget GUIs and text. But much of it's just
way too big. Windows is bad at handling this, too. Try scaling your
fonts up to the size you want, and you often find the GUI doesn't scale
up to fit, with it. And I'm So Sick Of Windows Texts Being Written In
This Fashion In Nearly All The Pop-Up Windows. Is the programming
author 8 years old?
Transparency, movement animations, etc., all look flashy and showy, and
cool for demos. But they get in the way of actually using the computer.
It's harder to see, and slower to do everything. So, they're the first
thing to get shut off.
I think the conservative and correct thing to do is run the minimum possible
feature set by default, and make it easy for users who want that stuff to turn
it on. Perhaps a few "feature sets" of effects could be put on a radio button
GUI so if people find they like a set of features they can select it easily.
But making minimal demands on video is important; if someone finds the behavior
plain they can adjust it, but if it doesn't display well enough to adjust, new
and low tech users will just give up and bad mouth Fedora.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
4866
days inactive
4870
days old
13 comments
11 participants
participants (11)
-
Beartooth -
Bill Davidsen -
Bruno Wolff III -
Genes MailLists -
Hiisi -
James McKenzie -
Joe Zeff -
Roelof 'Ben' Kusters -
Suvayu Ali -
Tim -
夜神 岩男