Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

I've been having problems with Firefox on Ubuntu turning black and white now and again. From what I've read this seems to be related to Flash sites, some graphics cards can't run them properly in Ubuntu so they reduce the number of colours. However, it's not a huge problem, and it isn't what I wanted to talk about in this thread.

Here's the main topic: what fascinated me was what people were saying about this problem on Ubuntu-related forums I searched.

An awful lot of messages about this bug were along the lines of "Flash is proprietary software, we don't deal with that" or "It's Adobe's problem" or even "Flash is the cancer of the web"!

Is this kind of attitude really going to help Ubuntu and Linux spread into the mass market and replace Windows?

Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with the ideal that open standards are much better for everyone in the long run, but there has to be a measure of pragmatism alongside such idealism. The bottom line is that if Ubuntu can't run Flash sites as well as Windows, even when they're using the same Firefox browser, then people will be encouraged to stick with Windows.

And another home truth: In theory Adobe should fix this, but considering how small Ubuntu's market share is, are they really likely to give this priority? As a commercial company they're probably not going to do anything about it, so the most realistic way to fix things is for Ubuntu to deal with whatever quirks Flash contains.

I really really want to see people switching from Windows to Linux, but one of the things holding this back seems to be an irrational hatred of anything proprietary.

For Linux to succeed it has to be used by people who neither know nor care about open source software, and those kinds of people will be put off using Linux if they see Windows doing things better (such as handling Flash websites properly).

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

The point you miss, and the main reason why many companies do not wholesale convert to linux/oss instead of Windows systems, is that Linux and OSS do not, as a rule, come with a comprehensive technical support system. Companies pay big money to MS and various software manufacturers in order to have support (or even 24-hour emergency support) to which their underqualified IT staff can refer actual problems for resolution.

When companies are willing/able to spend decent money to hire qualified individuals for their entire IT staff, who can research and repair all sorts of system issues on their own without a backbone of help desk support from the OS software vendor, then you can see them work towards Linux/OSS for the vast majority of workstations on their networks.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Sorry, I should have made myself clearer: I'm talking about ordinary consumers, not corporate users. People at companies seldom get to choose the OS they use, it's normally a decision made at management level.

You're right that companies need more support, but ordinary people usually manage with forums like this one and with the support lines of hardware vendors.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Exactly. The ones (usually) least likely to have the knowledge/capability to make the decision, let the software vendors (and their salespeople) make the decision for them.

...and, companies don't really need more support, per se... they just need more of the same exact support that individual users would need, as there are more individual users (ordinary people, if you will) within the company structure. The whole idea of having a team of qualified, knowledgeable folks in the IT/MIS department is so that each and every person within the company doesn't have to be a "computer wizard" or otherwise have to rely on their own resources and ingenuity to solve problems on their assigned workstation(s). Those (IT/MIS) people can easily, as their jobs would require, become the proxy for scanning forums and calling hardware vendors on behalf of the population of users within their company. (Incidentally, this is predominantly how IT/MIS departments functioned, prior to the introduction of Windows and the proliferation of computers throughout the workplace. Unfortunately, instead of expanding that model and increasing IT/MIS staff as the ratio of workstations to employees neared 1:1 within the company, a new support model was created ...and that support was dutifully supplied [for a price!] by the software vendor that enabled the situation in the first place.)

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

I don't think it is a problem of OSS in general. Some distros are very hardcore FOSS while others, like Linux Mint, take a more pragmatic approach in terms of including proprietary software. I think it is a good thing to make people think about how proprietary software can have real disadvantages for them, and that is not just some abstract philosophical issue.

You could argue that people should put their principles aside for a while to get a bigger marketshare. But the risk of becoming dependent on some proprietary technology is always there. Be it dotnet/mono, or some protocol or file format.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

1) I'm looking at the next version of the EEE PC (for the simple reason that my N800 doesn't make comfortable reading with such a small screen. But I still love it, of course).

And I think I'll end up with the Windows version for the simple reason that I can't watch my live streaming video from my Major League Baseball subscription on any of the Linux players.

It's a simple as that, but as elemental as that; not being able to have what some web sites require you to have to do what you want (and, in my case, I'm paying for).

Equally as simple and elemental is my loathing of Windows - which explains why I'm even debating whether to get the Windows-installed version of the EEE PC instead of rushing joyfully to the Linux version and saying 'to Hell with my want of live streaming video!' and debating that if I have to spend that much $$ on the new EEE PC with Windows, I might as well spend a couple hundred more and get a decent used Macbook that can handle the same tasks (at a slighly heavier weight and slightly more awkward size).

'Course. Um... if someone figures out how to put a fairly new Mac OS on the EEC PC, I'd be very very happy... .

2) Also, from a non-Linuxian point of view, I find this whole 'post something in a repository and announce to world without adequate instructions 'cause I'm *so* finished with this project' kind of frustrating.

I'm not an idiot, I can figure things out (mostly) and I'm grateful to get things for free but I do think there's definitely a computer-cultural barrier between 'normal folks' like me and some Linux developers who offer up applications with little or no useful or helpful instructions.

Going to an online public forum for help should *not* be the first course of action when you're trying to figure out a question. The 'Help' file or the homepage of the website should be and the answer should be there - if only in a FAQ page.

I guess this is the 'corporate clients need technical support' brought down to the individual :-)

You have to *want* to understand and work with Linux and most people don't want to put in the time or effort to do that. They want to turn on their computer and make things happen with a few clicks in an intuitive way and not blow time and brain cells trying to figure out how to go to root or learning some basic coding language and fiddle with things.

So. Yeah. Seems there's a fundamental disconnect between technically-disinclined potential users and being able to properly use the free stuff.

3) The development of programs, themes and overall useability is so scattershot because there isn't a Grand Plan since development seems entirely based on the personal interest of developers (not necessarily users).

To wit: the wonderous Statusbar Clock by fiferboy. Um. The clock *should* have been a no-brainer basic inclusion for the tablet. Why did someone have to develop it so far down the line? Personal Menu? Same thing.

ThemeMaker should also have been an obvious application to develop at the inception of the tablets and not dependent on someone getting the time and skill together to do it at a later date. Both of the developers should have been paid for their efforts, too, to get those applications out in a far more timely fashion instead of waiting for the Tablet Gods to poke fiferboy and Kontorri et al. on the shoulder and whispered into their ear, "hey... think you can...?"

It just seems that most consumers/clients/normal folk want an integrated, holistic approach to the tablet experience and what Linux seems to provide is a smattering of very smart basic stuff that doesn't always get released in a linear or on a logical schedule and a whole lotta geeky stuff (blessed be the Geeks, I say!)that answer very specific needs of the developer's interest.

I guess Linux answers the needs of a few techie users while Windows and OS X answers the wants of a whole lot of users who are actually willing to pay (mostly).

Oh, dear. The caffeine rush just ended... think I'll fall asleep under my desk now.

:::end of ramble:::

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

The other problem in the corporate world is that Microsoft has taken over most University computer science departments (just look at all of the "thanks to Microsoft for their generous support in the construction of this wing" and the fact that they either entirely or virtually give away software in the University environment, so that they have tech students "locked in" to the "Microsoft Way" by graduation. That is, of course, "buy Microsoft and pay someone else to do the heavy lifting so I don't really have to understand what is really going on". I work for a State government, and if it wasn't for .Net and Windows server, the entirety of State government would grind to a halt. It's really sad what this state is throwing away on Microsoft and other proprietary support. And decisionmakers (and I am one) live on such a short tenure that it does not "pay" (at least in the political short-term) to make the investment necessary to retrain the IT staff so they really can do some things themselves. OK, now my rant is over. . .(!)

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Erm, I think we're missing the point here by discussing corporate/university policy, that wasn't what the original post was about.

The question in the original post was to do with Linux enthusiasts' attitudes to supporting proprietary standards.

The problem in a nutshell: Potential home users of Linux going to be put off switching to Linux if it can't run Flash sites as well as Windows, but Flash is a proprietary standard which open source enthusiasts often hate.


I do agree that people should think about these issues, especially when you consider how much money people could save with OSS, but I don't think leaving out support does make people think.

Ordinary users would just assume that the lack of support for a common proprietary standard is a defect. They would say something like "It doesn't run YouTube? I'm not using it then!" and go and buy a commercial product instead.

Most people don't know what "open source" means, because it only has significance if you're familiar with the basics of software development. A lot of people think it just means "freeware".


You're right, this is a question of balance. Proprietary support brings market share but erodes the advantages of OSS. You need both in order to succeed.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Look, if Flash is broken (and it is; the Linux version sets the standard for buggy, proprietary software), it doesn't matter what attitude we have; it's still broken.

If, otoh, Flash weren't broken, it wouldn't matter what attitude we have; no one would be bringing it up, so they wouldn't know we hate it.

There are attitudes about open-source software, too; I hate KDE's guts out of habit. (It used to be abominably slow, though in my experience it has been sped and GNOME slowed, so now I hate them both.) But when people have KDE problems, I ignore it, and K people can help them. It's when people can't help, and are still pestered with pleas for help, that they let fly with (apparently) newb-scaring vitriol.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

@krisse: You do get some (a lot of) zealotry on forums, but I think the dislike for closed source software from actual Ubuntu developers probably stems from them being stuck between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand they have users with pitchforks screaming "Why is flash broken on teh Ubuntuz?!" and on the other hand they have Adobe saying "Well, it's not really worth our time to look into that. Good luck!" Even if an Ubuntu dev had the technical knowledge to fix flash their hands are likely tied without access to the Adobe Flash source code. The flash plugin is basically a separate application that is embedded in the browser. It is the thing that draws pixels on your screen (or hangs uselessly, or doesn't play sound). In many cases there is just no way to work around its brokenness.

To sum it up: New Linux users often tend to be open source zealots just because they think it's cool. Long time Linux users are often heavily pro-open source because they got screwed over one too many times by proprietary software and were left to pick up the pieces themselves when the software vendor decided they didn't want to cater to the Linux using market.

Anyways, I'm curious what you would do in a situation like this. If you were a volunteer developer, stuck shipping broken commercial software, because "everyone needs it" with known problems that you had no way to fix, what would you say to users?

-John

PS: As for the actual point about flash, something is being done. People are working on an open source flash player.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

agreed on your last point (not to say that I disagree with anything else in your post, mind you), a lot of people don't know what open source is... not even vaguely.

as for "common folk" and the Linux desktop... yeah, it's complicated, and I can appreciate that most folks aren't interested in learning the ins & outs of getting and/or keeping it running properly. having said that, i'll offer that those same individuals are probably no more competent at keeping their Windows desktop running properly, either. :)

My sister is not a "power user" by any means... about a year ago, she asked for my help in replacing her old PC (a 200MHz PII machine, running Windows ME) with something that "doesn't take a half hour to boot up!" I spec'd out and built a 3.2GHz machine with 2G of ram, 300G of hard drive space, all the 'standard bells & whistles', and a 20" wide-screen monitor. I set everything up, and sent it off to her. (for the record, it took less than 20 seconds to boot into Windows XP Pro SP2). Last month, I was visiting her, and I went to use her computer to check my mail; 30 minutes after turning it on (why does she keep turning it off? feh.. that's another story), it still wasn't done booting -- she had put so much crap on the machine, that it was just as unusable (if not moreso!) than the ancient relic that it replaced. All manner of explanation on how a program calling itself a "download accelerator" could not possibly do -anything- other than, perhaps, slow down her downloads, fell on deaf ears. she's convinced it works, and insists on keeping it installed. the same for the seven (yes, seven) different "toolbar" launcher applications, the 29 "helper apps" in her browser (oh, and she won't use the firefox I installed, either -- "it's weird"), etc.

my point is -- are these the same sorts of folks that think that running a Linux desktop is difficult? do they truly think they are effectively managing their Windows desktop?

I don't think the problem is Linux, or any of the several window managers you can use on it. I think the problem is the users. ...regardless of operating system, they don't understand enough about computers to truly decide whether Linux or Windows is "tougher to learn", so they rely on the marketing hype for their decision. Windows has a gigantic marketing arm that shouts slogans at them from every direction. Linux has a technically-oriented user community, and no marketing budget.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

lately konqueror would hang every time a flash element was loaded. why? because whoever coded flash tried to call a gtk function that would only be available if gtk itself was properly loaded, as a test to see if they needed to load gtk or not.

and i have seen flash not letting go of sound resources correctly, or basically hanging the whole of firefox when i close a tab with a running flash video.

and the only way to "fix" it for none-adobe developers are to try and find out what flash is doing and build some kind of workaround. beyond that its a matter of reporting to adobe and pray that they come around with a fix, that do not break something else in the process.

basically proprietary devs seems all to used to the microsoft way. thats the way where microsoft left a workaround in windows 95 or something specifically for simcity, because simcity made use of a dos bug where it could access areas of ram after it had freed it.

as for creating a open source implementation of flash, can someone say wine?

unless adobe goes to the step of turning flash over to some standardizing org (if microsoft didnt manage to permanently undermine the trust of those with their ooxml mess), it will be perpetual catch up. that is, if they can implement some parts at all, like video codecs, because of patenting issues.

the attitude seen is the attitude you will see everywhere when you cage a animal thats used to run free and wild...

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Actually, the only reason I use Windows (and yes, I know how to use Windows properly - I keep my computer fairly clean now) is because of the lack of hardware or proprietary software support. I've really tried hard to make Linux work. I've installed Ubuntu various times, various versions, in various ways, and it always ends up sitting there on an ignored HDD partition. Why? Because I'm watching a flash video on Windoze.

First it took me ages to get my wireless usb adapter to work with Ubuntu. When I finally got that far, I sighed in relief as I downloaded a whole bunch of updates. Then - I had to set everything up. My usual stuff - firefox extensions + bookmarks, extra apps, etc. Then I got to the flash installation, I installed it directly from Firefox, and whooo! I have flash. I go to youtube, watch a video or two, and everything freezes up, the whole computer, everything. I'm almost sure this was a flash issue, related to my hardware. I read up around the forums and find out that there's some issues with my sound card, and I give up.

Personally, I think the entire problem with linux is too much variation. There are few standards.... How many distributions are out right now? It's probably not too difficult to get an app working on another distro, since they're basically the same, but it can't be easy to go around making sure it works on each one, right? Things can only get worse as distros become more distant. Looking around distros I find some that support my wireless adapter out of the box, some not at all, and some "with some tweaking." The tweaking is really difficult for a semi-smart kid who can follow directions and has some basic knowledge of linux (I flatter myself). To end users with no knowledge of linux or computers in general, it must be really hard. I know Vista's not perfect with hardware support, but Windows XP has had years to catch up with hardware.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

linux standard base...

and wireless is a beast because of different nations have different channels they allow. and to keep cost down, the brands use firmware rather then hardware to control that. and you cant let a unlimited radio loose in public hands, as thats a jammer waiting to happen...

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

either way it's a bit frustrating... I'm going to try Ubuntu Hardy Heron soon...supposedly my wifi adapter works right out of the box. Hope everything else cooperates.

*edit* another point - linux probably does just fine if it's preinstalled on a computer when you buy it, it just doesn't seem to like my mismatched setup though.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

I'm pretty much gone over to Linux entirely, though I can call myself a Microsoft Professional if I want to, having passed a few tests. Linux drives me crazy at times because it is so much trouble to fix problems that have known solutions, and some people act so superior because they happen to know the name of some file that you have to edit or that such and such a fix can be found in such and such a place, or that the correct syntax for a command is "this" and not "that".

Fortunately, some distributions exist that try to minimize these problems.

BTW: I think that the basic premise of this thread is false -- I don't think that Linux is particularly "held back". I think it's thriving.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

True, I think its doing better and better, but it's like it's hit a wall that it cant get past: appeaal to normal, non computer-savvy people. People immediately like linux when they see Compiz/Beryl and the snazzy interface, but their eyes go out of focus when the commandd line pops up. Its getting easier though, no doubt, with certain distros aimed at making things easier.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

This may change a few things
http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2008/0...cess_protocols

Rick

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Sounds promising. That may solve the Flash hassle for now. Even though means dependency on Adobe. Still I think it is a sign that desktop (and mobile)-linux is becoming more important commercially. And in this case partly driven by Microsoft pushing Silverlight/Moonlight for Linux..the irony. Also lately big companies like Novell and Dell are demanding open source linux drivers, like the recent graphics-card driver from ATI .

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

@Krisse - i'm wondering about black and white problem... By default Compiz turns a non-responding program black and white and if flash hangs FF, then that's the problem.

There is an open source flash player already, but it has only progressed to Flash 7 support. Hopefully that new Adobe step on opening the flash can help the OSS flash player evolve to a usable stage.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

This is Adobe problem. Flash for Linux is broke. They released buggy software. Period.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

@Krisse: I think, the main reason that Linux\OSS is not so consumer-friendly in general, is just the (diminutive) amount of Linux\OSS developers who care about 'consumer-friendliness' in the same sense as you are describing.

Most of them probably just want to scratch their personal\own organization's itch in the first place which they don't need the 'userfriendliness' in the solution. It's apparent that the OSS projects with better alignment to such 'consumer-friendliness' usually has a commercial backing\relation of some sort with a by-product of the 'community version'.

I mean, there's really no such thing as a free lunch, right?

PS: Also... any effort to package the programs to be more user-friendly can also be construed as 'DUMBING THINGS DOWN', which may hurt the developer's street cred :)

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Yeah, look at Gnome (which i love) - too often accused of dumbing things down and not providing enough options.

Then there is Pidgin, which i hate... Not having the option to close a window with Esc or to close automatically on send is a serious flaw in my eyes. I don't want hunderds of windows to get in my way. Too bad there's no good ICQ client for Gnome at all. Maybe Empathy will grow up to be one. :)

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

You'll never be able to make the purists happy. Why? Egos.

We live in civilized society, not tribalism. Windows is the former, Linux is the latter. Living in Linux is like living on a small reservation in the middle of this Wal-mart driven society that doesn't give 2 craps about FOSS-- they just want their goodies. So no matter how popular Linux gets, it's gonna bump up against that wall of commercialism/consumerism that its hardcore adherents despise... and while that wall may get compressed a little, it's not coming down.

As long as there's a profit to be made in software, proprietary goodies will exist, and *pure* Linux will be consigned to the reservation-- UNLESS the Linux tribe does one thing: beat capitalists at their own game. Create websites utilizing SVG and/or other open technologies that do what Flash and others do, but even better. And where SVG (et al) comes up short, start pulling the tribe together to lobby W3 to get it in gear. Problem is, I don't think egos will allow it. Egos are what's kept Linux on the reservation up to this point, and I don't see that changing.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

heh, about pidgin:
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?.../04/30/1822237

forking pidgin over automated size change of the input area?!

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

That is precisely an example of developer's ego.

And it's very interesting that in this sense an opensource program can be more restricting, when the developer don't listen to the user (no reason or $$ can change his mind).

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

the freedom to fork is always there. kinda like, if you dont like the available product, make your own. now, if that level of ego was presented by the flash crew, this would be a whole different ball game, as one basically had to bend over and take it...

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

I am surprised that Gnash has not been mentioned here
http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/
http://www.gnashdev.org/
http://www.getgnash.org/

Is this not a viable option? I haven't tried it myself yet as I only came across it a few days ago and my Linux setups are in a state of broken/experimental.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

It has, at least twice, though not by name. Thanks for the links!

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

To test this hypothesis, buy a $300 computer, with one of those cheap everything-on-the-motherboard chipsets. Go and make two partitions on a hard drive. Install XP SP2 on one and Ubuntu on the other one. See which operating system recognizes the most hardware.

I'll give you a lollipop if XP even installs drivers for the ethernet hardware. If you don't have that, you can't get on the 'net. And if you can't get on the 'net, you'd better have a driver disk, otherwise, you're dead in the water.

In general, Ubuntu (even older versions, say, Dapper) will give you all the drivers you need to get on the net and get your system up and running fairly well. Sure, not all hardware comes with an install disk with Linux drivers on it, but a surprising amount of hardware does, these days.

By the way, anyone think we can get gnash working for the tablet? That would give us some more flexibility re: flash.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

You owe me a lollipop.

Every integrated motherboard I've built PCs on comes with a very helpful master disc with (brace yourself) XP drivers for the integrated devices. Including ethernet.

I'll take watermelon, thanks.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

I think the lollipop offer was only good if XP installed the driver itself, from the XP CD; the driver disk is being considered separately.

In which case, it's not surprising; Microsoft owns the market, so all hardware people make Windows drivers, and distribute them with the hardware. Linux is scarce and mildly fragmented, so many drivers come from "the community" and are distributed with (and tweaked, auto-configed, etc. to suit) the distro.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Hey, based on qole's wording, I still demand a lollipop!

:p

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Thanks, this is what I meant. Pretty much any hardware that comes out....they're going to make a Windows version of the driver. It may not be on the xp install disc but there's a good chance the product will come with a setup cd for Windows, while linux is often ignored.

And btw, I'm not dissing linux. Linux is great, I'd like to convert, it's just a hassle and doesn't seem worth it from my perspective. I have everything I need on my cozy little Windows machine. Why should I convert?

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Properly phrased, this question should read, "Why shouldn't I convert?" ;)

...and then, there are a myriad of questions and technical issues, 99.99% of which can be overcome, when moving from Windows to Linux. I've (still) got a WindowsXP box running, but I find I'm using it less and less as time goes on. Eventually, it will (also) be reformatted and set up to run Linux.

No, it's not a no-brainer, one-click install and "everything works" just like you're used to in Windows; there's some work involved in getting the machine set up. ...but you will find that nearly everything is that easy, and the few things that aren't that easy don't require too much horsepower to overcome. In the long run, you'll be free of the chains of MS, and that feeling alone is enough to urge some folks to make the change.

YMMV, IANAL, etc.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

That's why Novell offered every manufacturer to make them drivers for free. No idea if that has any fruits though.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Well, I have had about 4 BSOD's in the past two weeks. :D
Of course I install alot of programs, it would be difficult to pinpoint the problem.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Yeah, i noticed that, but that's not so irritating as the other ones. Becoming unfriendly to users is the begininng of the end (at least where you don't have to pay to use it - i guess i'm stuck with Synergy forever :))

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Well, it depends whether those BSODs are things you need; if not, that's why you should convert.

Re: Is this what's holding back Linux and OSS in general?
 

Sorry Mr. Texrat, Benson's right. You mis-read my challenge. XP doesn't install those drivers. After 45 minutes of installing (or longer, if you think you can wander away and let it install unattended, only to come back and discover it's asking you about your keyboard layout in the middle of the install), XP dumps you to a 800x600 desktop with most of your drivers missing. You have to put the motherboard CD into the drive, install (some of) the drivers, then reboot. Then you can install a few more of the drivers, then reboot. Sometimes you even have to do this again. Finally, you're ready to go. There's no way you can say that satisfies my initial challenge.

Ubuntu, on the other hand, drops you to a desktop with most, if not all, of your drivers installed and configured. Heck, you can use the LiveCD and it will install and configure your drivers without even touching your hard drive.

That being said, I still use Windows XP. A lot.