What does Kubuntu really need to take over the desktop?

[HalationEffect]

Linuxes (Linuxen? Linuxi?)

Distros

[Qqmike]

woodsmoke -- I got the same experience re hp drivers. In the past, choosing one from a list has been as subtle and arbitrary as having or not having a punctuation mark in a certain place. This time, though, on installing 12.04, the system auto-detected the printer and DID configure it correctly, calling it
deskjet-2050-j510 (or some such). Upon finding hplip-gui and opening it, I again configured that printer (chicken superstition) and it was identical to what the system had already set up for me. My printer setup was called
deskjet_2050_j510
Note the underscores rather than the dashes.
Both are identical setups for that one printer. Guess which one I kept?
Yep, I like the underscores better. Crazy is as crazy does ...


On positioning Kubuntu mainstream AND
on positioning Kubuntu for people who don't have the time or interest or motivation in geeking around too much ...

For the standard stuff, the packages should be there and a decent GUI front-end Welcome should be in place and accessible in English (or your language) with a click. Printer, email, Firefox, T-Bird and common email programs, music, movies, word processor, whatever.

For other more advanced, enhanced, extra, subtle stuff, but stuff that is often needed, if it's not there, and the user needs it (like he tries to play a movie and this deficit is triggered), there should be some sort of GOOD help pointed at; or maybe a hint ("You might need package such-and-such. Try Muon for that.")

I'm not wording this very well (I'm still on my first cup of green tea here at 4 am). The problem as I see it is this: Before you can get another package, you first have to know (1) you need it, and (2) the name of that package. Given (2), getting the package is trivial (and if you don't know how to get it, it's an easy post here at the forum, "Help me find package X"). Of course, it would be great (and I've seen this in Windows) if the system could go one step further with "Looks like you need package X. Would you like to install Package X now? If so, click Yes."

[woodsmoke]

That was a very thoughtful reply in the second part there qq, and worth a read by many people.
woodsmoke

[Jonas]

I agree with you Qq, all people know the applications on windows/mac but the alternatives isn't known to many people. I don't know how to code or do a widget but if someone could make a widget for http://www.osalt.com/ then it would be easier for all new to Linux, (with a button query linked to Muon for that specific application/package?). Maybe integrate it somehow with the introduction widget started here on the forum?

b.r

Jonas

[gnomek]

Indeed, very good point Qqmike. I discovered for example that there is a package jockey-kde.
Jockey provides a user interface for configuring third-party drivers, such as the Nvidia and ATI fglrx X.org and various Wireless LAN kernel modules.
It wasn't installed by default so I needed to do a little search after installing Kubuntu from install DVD. On Mint Gnome 2 I just had an option after system installation and I could chose to install additional drivers. The same with hplip and hplip-gui. Not many new users know that this packages exist. Perhaps it would make live easier if there was some kind of "tweak" tool / script that would help. Perhaps a link on Kubuntu download site to an article on wiki mentioning "first things to do after installing Kubuntu" to make it up and running with various devices.

[oshunluvr]

I've not been a big fan of Muon, but I'm getting used to it. However "Muon DIscover" might actually be a huge step in the right direction for this issue. At least newbies would have a place to go and look for stuff they otherwise wouldn't know about.

Another idea might be some sort of Transition Tool that could be installed be default or at least made available during install. A short narrative about what's available and what might replace what for a new convert coming from windows could be very helpful.

Also: I know there's always a push to keep the ISO small enough to fit on a CD, but I'm willing to bet there are few computers made in the last decade that don't have a DVD-ROM. I know the HP laptop I bought in 1999 had one. This, in conjunction with the proliferation of high speed internet access means - to me at least - that it's time to make the default install ISO larger. Even an increase to just 1GB could add a lot to the default setup and it could still fit on a very small thumb drive. They could leave the Alternate Install disc a CD size for those with older computers or slow connections.

[SecretCode]

Also: I know there's always a push to keep the ISO small enough to fit on a CD, but I'm willing to bet there are few computers made in the last decade that don't have a DVD-ROM. I know the HP laptop I bought in 1999 had one. This, in conjunction with the proliferation of high speed internet access means - to me at least - that it's time to make the default install ISO larger. Even an increase to just 1GB could add a lot to the default setup and it could still fit on a very small thumb drive.

The thing to look at is not just whether computers have a DVD drive, but whether they can boot from it - I've seen some that can't. Also, high speed access internet access is still pretty difficult in less urban areas, even in the UK and US.

They could leave the Alternate Install disc a CD size for those with older computers or slow connections.

I think the Live CD is still a huge benefit in "converting" people. It shouldn't be too hard to have a "Live DVD" ("recommended") and a "Live CD" for less fortunate circumstances, and an alternate cd/dvd.

[vyperlinux]

I expect Linux will be ready in 10 years........


Kernel/Driver management: YES.


Data Backups: WE NEED THIS NOW! we need roll back!

Roll-Back of the OS installation: WINDOWS BEEN DOING THIS FOR YEARS!!!!!! WE NEED IT NOW!!!!!!!

[SteveRiley]

Backups: many such programs exist. Lucky Backup is one popular example.

Roll-back: do you mean something similar to the Windows system restore points feature? A possible starting point.

[SecretCode]

Roll-back: do you mean something similar to the Windows system restore points feature? A possible starting point.

A couple of interesting clips from the second result, Is there a "system restore" for Linux? What do you do when the system act badly?:

To those who would say Linux installations don't go wrong:

To be fair, who doesn't mess up their system now and again? If you've not broken it, you've not been playing with it enough.

And to those who think Windows System Restore is reliable:

I don't trust System Restore in Windows. I've found that in the event of a major system meltdown or malware infestation, the System Restore is insufficient to bring the system back, or has even gotten infected itself, rendering it useless as a recovery tool.

I find myself in strong agreement with both points!

[bsniadajewski]

And to those who think Windows System Restore is reliable:


I find myself in strong agreement with both points!

The one (and only) time that I ever used System Restore, on Vista no less, it actually worked for me. I hadn't used before or since.

[james147]

Backups: many such programs exist. Lucky Backup is one popular example.

Roll-back: do you mean something similar to the Windows system restore points feature? A possible starting point.

I think Linux has a much better approach using btrfs snapshots. Snapshoting the file system and recovering it seems much better then windows approach to attempt to fix a broken system (which I don't think has eve worked for me when I really needed it, ie total system failure not just minor problems)

Eventually btrfs should become default on ubuntu (at least I hope so) like it has on fedora (or was that opensuse, can't quite remember) and should support snapshoting and system recovery by default. But until then you can always convert ext3-4 to btrfs (and back again!) if you wish to take advantage of the newer file system.

And to those who think Windows System Restore is reliable:

The btrfs solution should work far better then the windows system restore as you can restore the entire system to a point rather then what ever windows tries to do (restore configs/settings??).

[vyperlinux]

I think Linux has a much better approach using btrfs snapshots. Snapshoting the file system and recovering it seems much better then windows approach to attempt to fix a broken system (which I don't think has eve worked for me when I really needed it, ie total system failure not just minor problems)

Eventually btrfs should become default on ubuntu (at least I hope so) like it has on fedora (or was that opensuse, can't quite remember) and should support snapshoting and system recovery by default. But until then you can always convert ext3-4 to btrfs (and back again!) if you wish to take advantage of the newer file system.
The btrfs solution should work far better then the windows system restore as you can restore the entire system to a point rather then what ever windows tries to do (restore configs/settings??).

Does it have btrfs support in the installer? I might have to try it.. Is btrfs faster then ext4?

are there any tools that can take snap shots yet?

[james147]

Does it have btrfs support in the installer? I might have to try it.. Is btrfs faster then ext4?

It looks like it does.

are there any tools that can take snap shots yet?

Yes there are (the "btrfs subvolume snapshot" command does it) See the above link for more details.

[oshunluvr]

BTRFS: "faster" is relative to what you're doing with it. Generally not as fast, but not so slow as you'd notice it. You can use BTRFS-RAID to increase performance if you have multiple drives and when you add the abilities to add or subtract live volumes along with snapshots BTRFS is clearly superior to EXT4.

With both filesystems, proper tuning and mount options will enhance the speed potential. Do a little research on fstab options.