Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
KDE GUI Operating Systems Software Windows

Windows XP Edges Out KDE in Usability Test 918

Posted by michael from the click-and-drag dept.
AstroDrabb writes "Linux, once viewed as an operating system that only computer geeks could appreciate, is today a much more user-friendly software that companies, public administrations and consumers can master almost as easily as Microsoft Corp.'s Windows XP."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Windows XP Edges Out KDE in Usability Test More

Windows XP Edges Out KDE in Usability Test

Comments Filter:

  • not a kde user but (Score:4, Funny)

    by Mantorp ( 142371 ) <mantorp 'funny A' gmail.com> on Monday August 04, 2003 @07:59PM (#6611319) Homepage Journal
    does it have a Start button?
    • It has a "K" button.

      Probably because everything in KDE "starts" with "K". KWord, KMail, KPorn. er. sorry. That's Konqueror.

      I like KDE and have it on all my machines except the servers.
    • No, KDE does not have a "Start" button to stop the system with.

  • How true (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Slack0ff ( 590042 ) <{matbrady} {at} {bored.com}> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:00PM (#6611327)
    KDE is a very simple interface. To tell you the truth I had a harder time going from windows 200 to xp then going from gnome to kde. I know thats like compairing apples to oranges but i like oranges better anyway.

    • Re:How true (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ceejayoz ( 567949 ) <cj@ceejayoz.com> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:13PM (#6611459) Homepage Journal
      To tell you the truth I had a harder time going from windows 200 to xp then going from gnome to kde.

      Well duh... going from stone tablets to a modern operating system is quite the jump.

      Seriously though, you had problems going from 2000 to XP? It takes like three clicks to set it all back to looking exactly like Windows 2000, and even if you leave it on default there's nothing much changed... just the new themes, an extra panel in Explorer, and a slightly rearranged Start menu...

      • Re:How true (Score:5, Interesting)

        by AvitarX ( 172628 ) <me AT brandywinehundred DOT org> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:47PM (#6611743) Journal
        And a god-awful network browser and control panel (or are they in Win2K also?)

        Everytime I try to browse a LAN from XP I am like, where the fuck is Entire network, it pissess of and humiliates me.

        • Re:How true (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward
          The new network browse is a stroke of genious by MS. Now it primarily lists all those random comments by machines as if they were the actual machine name and puts the actual machine name in only as an after thought. I mean what sort of company would have some sort of organization in the network neighborhood when people want to browse right?

          I dread the day 2000 is no longer supported...

          • Re:How true (Score:5, Interesting)

            by malelder ( 414533 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @09:58PM (#6612203)
            I'll bite...stupid me (;

            It sounds like you are mentioning the listing of shares collected by the auto-browse thingie in XP. For a small home network, seeing "MP3's on (insert machine name here)" is nice, IMO. Especially when there are multiple shares with the same names on different machines (I love the home user...no really!). You actually only see the comments field if you use the "Details" view, and even then, those comments come after the share and machine name...Although I haven't used XP Home, so if its different in that version, well...you shoulda mentioned which version (;

            When browsing the "Entire Network", machines are listed by machine name only, and if you find yourself browsing the Entire Network alot (or a specific domain) then you should just make a shortcut to that item and save the hassle of the multiple clickthroughs. But thats the same hassle that is in Win2k, not something new to XP.

            Next show at 10...

          • Re:How true (Score:5, Interesting)

            by FCKGW ( 664530 ) <cclpez802 AT sneakemail DOT com> on Monday August 04, 2003 @11:57PM (#6612814)

            Let's see some pictures, shall we?

            Windows 2000 Professional [dyndns.org]
            Here's my network in Win2K SP4. Mapped drives are marked neatly as "share at machine." Machine names show in My Network Places, with the comment showing to the right in details view.

            Windows XP Professional [dyndns.org]
            This is my network in WinXP SP1. Microsoft got rid of the nice mapped drive names of Win2K, so now it uses the longer and less useful "share at comment (machine)." That's one thing they shouldn't have changed IMHO. The Entire Network part of My Network Places hasn't changed at all; however, the root of My Network Places [dyndns.org] shows all the shares on the network in alphabetical order, which I think is stupid and disorganized. Worse, it still uses "share at comment (machine)" for the listing so it's even harder to follow, especially on a large network.

    • Re:How true (Score:3, Funny)

      by bad_fx ( 493443 )
      I know thats like compairing apples to oranges but i like oranges better anyway.

      Wait, wait, wait... Are you saying that Windows 2000 is like apples and XP is like oranges?.. or is gnome the apples and kde the oranges?.. or is windows the apples and linux the oranges?... or is it that other way round? or are you just saying you like citrus? I'm confused....

      PS: obligatory: No! This is comparing apples and oranges! [inno-vet.com]

      • Re:How true (Score:4, Funny)

        by Laur ( 673497 ) on Tuesday August 05, 2003 @07:56AM (#6614226)
        Wait, wait, wait... Are you saying that Windows 2000 is like apples and XP is like oranges?.. or is gnome the apples and kde the oranges?.. or is windows the apples and linux the oranges?... or is it that other way round? or are you just saying you like citrus? I'm confused....

        So what would Apple [apple.com] be?

  • start leading.. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Suppafly ( 179830 ) <slashdot&suppafly,net> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:00PM (#6611328)
    I really don't see KDE or any other linux desktop software beating Windows or MacOS in usabilities tests anytime soon. KDE and GNOME keep playing catchup to windows instead of leading the way. Sure there are some unique features, but the bulk of linux desktop development is recreating features that windows and macos have had for years. The KDE team does unquestionably good work, but they are going to need to keep stepping it up if they expect anyone to find their software more useable than the already existing mainstream products.

    • Re:start leading.. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by sheemwaza ( 570202 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:05PM (#6611379) Homepage Journal
      I can't live without virtual desktops... The poor man's multi-monitor setup. Barring extensions like litestep, Windows has never done this. This is a big useability feature puts linux desktops ahead of Windows. How can you multitask when you can only have one desktop. KDE could include spikes that stick out of the computer and pierce my skull every five minutes, and I would still prefer it over the single desktop windows interface.

      • Re:start leading.. (Score:5, Funny)

        by MarkusQ ( 450076 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:12PM (#6611443) Journal

        KDE could include spikes that stick out of the computer and pierce my skull every five minutes,

        You could probably rig something up by hacking xscreensaver to run a usb link to one of those battle-bot kits off e-bay.

        Just a thought.

        -- MarkusQ

      • Re:start leading.. (Score:5, Informative)

        by rapett0 ( 92674 ) <liquidgod@hotmail. c o m> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:13PM (#6611456) Homepage Journal
        Um, hello. Go to MS, download powertoys, right click on the taskbar, go to toolbars, check desktop manager, and viola, msvdm with support for 4 desktops you can toggle between or view all 4 at once. How much simpler can that be?

        • Re:start leading.. (Score:3, Interesting)

          by NormalVisual ( 565491 ) *
          It could be simpler if it was supported out of the box, instead of requiring the user to download something from MS, which in turn requires that they know that it's available. :-) KDE doesn't have a 4-desktop limitation, which can be kind of nice sometimes.

        • Re:start leading.. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by toga98 ( 109028 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:43PM (#6611699) Homepage
          Done this. Although they do offer multiple desktops, it's poorly implemented. When I tried using it on XP, the items in the taskbar reorder themselves in what seemed like a random fashion. Sometimes I would have trouble switching to apps and getting focus. Sometimes I would "lose" applications entirely - they were there but I couldn't get focus or see them in the taskbar. There were quite a few annoying aspects. Enough to make the feature useless. I think this is one feature that could be made more useful, but I'm afraid it is only for power users. I know too many people that use windows and can't grok the fact that you can have more than one application open at a time.

        • Re:start leading.. (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Istealmymusic ( 573079 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:53PM (#6611776) Homepage Journal
          I actually tried this, but it sadly falls short.

          Maybe my pirated windows installation is fucked, but when I change virtual desktops, it appears that all the windows are minimized. The transisition is very choppy. Contrast to my GNOME install, which is much more quick (even with a slower CPU).

          I tried a couple illegally-downloaded cracked commercial "virtual desktop" utilities but none of them made the cut. Whilst trying to find the software I ripped off; I came across a Slashdot article: Virtual Desktops for Win32 [slashdot.org]. Maybe those stuck on Microsoft will find it useful.

          Interestingly enough, the linked article [slashdot.org] recommends LiteStep, a GPL'd application for a Win32 virtual desktop alternative shell. So here I am, on a cracked commercial OS, downloading cracked software, and I find that the freely available programs (LiteStep and GNOME for Unix) work better.

        • Re:start leading.. (Score:3, Informative)

          by Marlor ( 643698 )

          Um, hello. Go to MS, download powertoys, right click on the taskbar, go to toolbars, check desktop manager, and viola, msvdm with support for 4 desktops you can toggle between or view all 4 at once. How much simpler can that be?

          It could be simpler if the virtual desktops didn't screw up every 5 minutes. Having a snapshot snapshot of the windows on each desktop in the toolbar would also be nice, rather than the useless full-screen pager.

          I used the multiple desktop powertoy for a month, and kept getting s

        • Re:start leading.. (Score:4, Insightful)

          by FuzzyBad-Mofo ( 184327 ) <fuzzybad AT gmail DOT com> on Monday August 04, 2003 @11:30PM (#6612681)

          Go to MS, download powertoys, right click on the taskbar, go to toolbars, check desktop manager, and viola, msvdm with support for 4 desktops you can toggle between or view all 4 at once.

          VS, just log into KDE and click on the pager.

          In my opinion the only reason people think Windows is easy to use is because they're used to it. What's the logic of putting Shut Down in the Start Menu, or a gajillion cascading menus, graphical configuration tools scattered all over the place? KDE isn't perfect but at least all the window manager configuration is in one place.

      • Re:start leading.. (Score:5, Funny)

        by ceejayoz ( 567949 ) <cj@ceejayoz.com> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:16PM (#6611473) Homepage Journal
        How can you multitask when you can only have one desktop.

        Alt+Tab?

        You get pretty quick at it if you need to multitask in Windows, and I personally find it easier to use than multiple window setups... now if only I could get my second flatpanel working on dual monitor... mmmmm.

      • Re:start leading.. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by fwarren ( 579763 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @10:52PM (#6612481) Homepage
        One of my favorite tricks is to log into the user account I have on my system for web development, So I have 4 virtual windows for user B. Then I open a console and su to my normal account and do a "nohup gaim &" and "nohup kmail &"

        So here I am with my 4 (virtual) desktops, running 2 apps from another users account.

        Just another feature in addition to virtual desktops that I can not live without.

        Try that ONE on XP.

      • Re:start leading.. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by mellon ( 7048 ) * on Monday August 04, 2003 @11:02PM (#6612531) Homepage
        Ironically, the first thing I did when I installed KDE for the first time was to go looking for how to disable the virtual desktops because I wanted that real estate on the task bar. I really don't understand the value of virtual desktops - I just want to be able to switch between applications using the keyboard, so I care that meta-tab works, and that's about it.

        I'm probably a bit of a freak in the geek category because I never adopted virtual desktops - I was using uwm until about five years ago, and then twm until I switched to MacOS X. Now I'm using gnome, because it's prettier than KDE. Usability is about the same - not very consistent. Some things work, some don't.

        You have to bear in mind that what they mean when they talk about usability is usability for the average person, not usability for the power user. So what matters most is consistency and simplicity and, believe it or don't, easiness on the eyes. They want to see anti-aliased fonts and rounded edges and shadows. The average person doesn't want fancy stuff like virtual desktops. They want it that when they have something highlighted and then they hit 'delete', the thing they've highlighted gets deleted.

        They want it that if dragging a highlighted thing works in one place, it works in other places too. They want it that the preferences dialog is always in the same menu in every application, and that to save a file you type Ctrl-S or CMD-S, depending on whether they're Windows people or Mac people. They also want it that what they expect to happen when they do a new action is what actually happens.

        Really, more importantly, though, they want it to be the case that things *work*. They want the network wizard to succeed in setting up the network. They want the modem to work. They want to be able to double-click on the RPM file to install it - they do not want to have to go to a shell prompt. They don't want to know about the DHCP client - they just want their network to work.

        Unfortunately, KDE and Gnome, although they have improved *tremendously* over their predecessors and even their early versions, just aren't there yet. Don't lose hope. I think they're gaining ground.

    • Ah, but there's a trick (Score:5, Funny)

      by MarkusQ ( 450076 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:07PM (#6611401) Journal

      I really don't see KDE or any other linux desktop software beating Windows or MacOS in usabilities tests anytime soon. KDE and GNOME keep playing catchup to windows instead of leading the way.

      Then you obviously don't know the trick to winning this kind of game. The trick is to stop implementing new features at the exact moment that the "leader" commits to becoming an unusably bloated, worthless feature ladden pile of... Oh my gosh! Stop! Stop!

      -- MarkusQ

    • Re:start leading.. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Surak ( 18578 ) * <.surak. .at. .mailblocks.com.> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:15PM (#6611464) Homepage Journal
      Actually, with a little bit of customization, I bet a KDE desktop would at least match Windows XP or MacOS in useability tests. This can easily be rectified with a little customization using basic KDE functionality.

      Which is the main thing that KDE has going it for -- it is infinitely customizable, yet the customization ability doesn't get in the way of ease of use.

      KDE apps generally adhere to design guidelines, not unlike those for Windows XP or MacOS, which gives the system a consistent look and feel.

      My tips would include changing the "K" menu to look more like the Start button in Windows; if you're going to use OpenOffice, get the OpenOffice.org Quickstarter; to create a "My Computer" and "Network Neighborhood" icons using symlinks and folder; and turn off the desktop switcher, as this just confuses most non-techie users.

      Also, the default KDE style, Keramik, is very nice and usable, I recommend sticking with it. :) For GTK apps, you can get the Geramik GTK theme, which mimicks the KDE Keramik style quite well and leads to less confusion and more consistency.

      • Re:start leading.. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by connsmythe96 ( 576445 ) <slashdot@NoSpaM.adamkemp.com> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:28PM (#6611568) Homepage
        Argh. I'm tired of hearing people say that the multidesk features are too complicated. They're NOT. They're only confusing when people click em before they know what they do. If you included that in a little "tour of KDE" like windows does then I really don't think it would be a problem. Everyone I've ever showed that to has understood it, and they weren't all computer geeks.

        Everyone says we need more unique features, but then when we do have a good feature they say it's just confusing and we shouldn't use it. Every new feature needs to be learned. That will always be the case. You don't throw out good ideas because people haven't seen them yet. You show people the new ideas so they can make their lives easier too.

    • KDE/GNOME/etc is much more useable than XP (Score:4, Interesting)

      by SHEENmaster ( 581283 ) <travis&utk,edu> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:19PM (#6611500) Homepage Journal
      How do I make a window always-on-top in any version of Windows? No way that I know of unless the application supports it.

      How do I get virtual desktops in Windows? Litestep, the best way I know of, involves replacing explore.exe, the brunt of Windows's interface.

      How do I locally display just a single application (such as a systray program) without viewing the entire screen of the remote system? VNC/TerminalServer doesn't come close.

      How do I update every single installed program from a single command entry without rebooting in Windows? (OK, maybe that's not relating to the GUI argument.)

    • Re:start leading.. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by jjc2222 ( 100453 )
      There are several features of KDE and other X window managers that I miss now that I'm an OS X user (although I hope Expose addresses some of them).

      1. Virtual screens. Having multiple desktops is great. When I was an FVWM user, having multiple _continuous_ desktops was even better.

      2. Borders snapping to other windows and screen edges. This makes it easy for extremely anal people like me to squeeze out every pixel of screen real estate. It also makes everything look nice and neat, which I like.

      3. M

    • Re:start leading.. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Arandir ( 19206 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:41PM (#6611682) Homepage Journal
      I really don't see KDE or any other linux desktop software beating Windows or MacOS in usabilities tests anytime soon.

      Did you read the article? Of course not, this is slashdot!

      Let me quote: "Linux, once viewed as an operating system that only computer geeks could appreciate, is today a much more user-friendly software that companies, public administrations and consumers can master almost as easily as Microsoft Corp.'s Windows XP."

      SuSE/KDE came damned close to meeting or beating Windows XP. I suspect that "anytime soon" they WILL meet or beat WinXP.

      Why did WinXP win by a narrow margin in this test? The answer is simple. Look at the test subjects. Although none had previously used WinXP, they were familiar with computers, which means a very high probability that they were familiar with Win9x/NT/2K. WinXP isn't that much different from the older Windows desktop. It has some nice new features, and a huge facelift, but its foundation is still the familiar Windows desktop. WinXP beat out SuSE/KDE simply because the test subjects were already familiar with the basics of the WinXP desktop.

      The hurdle facing the new UNIX desktops is not usability, but a public completely unfamiliar with UNIX.

    • Re:start leading.. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by pi_rules ( 123171 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @09:27PM (#6612009)
      My biggest beef with Win2k usability is how often is just acts funny. I've never gotten entirely comfortable with it just because it's so damned touchy. Things that I can do on my Gnome/Linux machine here just plain suck sometimes on Win2k.

      I sometimes have to map a large number of drives when I need to push/pull configuration files to machines. This is horrendously slow. I've got it scripted through a .bat file to mount and umount them all but some of these links are across a WAN and encouter 200ms ping times. I open up 'My computer' and -boom-! explorer.exe just halts while it pulls who knows WHAT back from these systems just to let me know that drives G-L are still working. I still have no idea what it's doing.

      Doing anything with a "large" set of files just plain sucks. I tried moving 30MB of data (mostly 1k files) into a different directory today in Windows. I don't know why it took darned near 3 minutes to do. Cripes, you just relink the file -- it doesn't even have to do that much I/O. Something braindead going on there.

      I just love clicking 'Start' and having it take 2-3 minutes to come up sometimes. I haven't the foggiest as to why this happens. It's usually over a Terminal Services session though.

      Why the heck can't I right click -> properties on a directory and just turn off all the read-only bits? Seems like the folder itself has to be read only for the option to show up. It's just confusing. I usually drop to Cygwin and just do a chmod -R 777 on it. Works for me.

      Oh, and the last time I actually did tell explorer to remove the read only flag from a large set of files it popped up a counter telling me it would take 5 minutes to complete. That damned box was there until my next reboot. That's usability.

      Why the snot do minimized windows like to magically pop back up when I restore a -different- application? I see this more often than I care for. Restore Mozilla Firebird and, oh thanks Windows, I wanted to see that minmized My Documents folder! Thanks!

      Why can't the OS read an ISO9660 image natively? It's not like it's that hard -- ISO 9660 is already in the OS for cds.

      Of course we have the braindamaged idea that deleting an open file is impossible. Just unlink it. It's worked fine for years and years in other filesystems -- get with the program. I don't want to hunt down every process that might have something open when trying to trash a large directory. Just get rid of it.

      Oh, and what's with "Preparing to Delete..." crap? That cancel button never works either on that little ditty. Do I cycle exploer.exe like an impatient little snot and jump into Cygwin to just get rid of it or let myself stew for 3 minutes at a dialog box that does nothing for me and refuses to go away nicely?

      Every day I have to work with that pile of drivel I remember why I installed Linux for the first time 5 years ago.

    • don't bother (Score:5, Informative)

      by 73939133 ( 676561 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @10:31PM (#6612376)
      I really don't see KDE or any other linux desktop software beating Windows or MacOS in usabilities tests anytime soon.

      You say that as if usability tests actually test something concrete and meaningful, like mass or height or temperature. But they don't really. Usability testing isn't physics. Yes, KDE may do slightly worse in usability tests than Windows, but what does that actually mean? At most it means that it takes a little more time to learn a few more quirks that the KDE interface has. Big deal. In return, KDE is also a more featureful interface and comes with a lot more software out of the box. Usability is only one of many things to optimize for in a piece of software, and it is not the most important one in many applications.

      In fact, the fact that the users in the study had "prior computer skills" suggests that they had experience with Windows-like interfaces, which means that most likely a significant part of the slight Windows XP advantage was simply due to familiarity.

      What this test shows is that KDE is in the ballpark, and that's all that is really needed.

      KDE and GNOME keep playing catchup to windows instead of leading the way.

      Many open source projects are unashamedly about providing open source versions of closed-source systems, and there is nothing wrong with that.

      Sure there are some unique features, but the bulk of linux desktop development is recreating features that windows and macos have had for years.

      Yes, and Microsoft and Apple copied many of those features from yet other systems. That's the way business and product development work: you look at what works in the market and you copy as much of it as you legally can. There is nothing wrong with that.

      The KDE team does unquestionably good work, but they are going to need to keep stepping it up if they expect anyone to find their software more useable than the already existing mainstream products.

      This test shows that KDE is close enough as far as usability goes. Maybe they can edge out Windows XP in such tests by sacrificing some features or some other hacks, but you are naive to think that there are any great hidden usability improvements possible.

    • Re:start leading.. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by jaavaaguru ( 261551 ) on Tuesday August 05, 2003 @03:18AM (#6613466) Homepage
      Some things that KDE definitely has the lead with:
      • The fish:// protocol. Being able to browse remote computers' filesystems through SSH is increasingly important in a world where firewalls are being implemented and security is being tightened. I require to use it every day that I work from home. And it doens't require any additional software.
      • The audiocd:// protocol. Being able to insert a CD that I bought, and drag and drop the audio tracks on to my home directory (while they're automatically turned into MP3 or OGG) is very convenient - and again, doesn't require any additional software.
      • Having a text editor that has the option of doing nice things like syntax highlighting, auto-indentation, etc. (Okay, this will only be good for "power users", but still I don't require to install anything extra to get it).
      • The ability to add applets to the panel and choose from a decent selection of pre-installed ones like the Dictionary applet. This is useful for any user who types documents.
      The thing I've noticed about other responses to the parent is people suggesting URLs to get software from that mimics some of the stuff KDE already does. The brilliant thing about KDE is that it already does it - a lot of people don't want to go and hunt for software to do these things. I know a lot of people who wouldn't have even thought of these features unless it came with their desktop environment, and would miss them if then had to use another environment.

  • A different perspective (Score:5, Insightful)

    by GeckoFood ( 585211 ) <[geckofood] [at] [gmail.com]> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:00PM (#6611329) Journal
    For those of us that work with Linux and UNIX on a daily basis, especially in the work place, and have been at it for years, it's even easier than Windows. (That's not sarcasm, BTW).

  • It's a short article (Score:5, Interesting)

    by randyest ( 589159 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:02PM (#6611347) Homepage
    And rather short on details (such as what is the nature of the assigned tasks used in the test? Copying a file? Formatting a drive? Partitioning a drive?) Also, they had 60 users "aged 25 to 55 with computer skills but no prior experience with Linux or Windows XP" work on KDS, and "20 users with the same qualifications who performed the exact same tasks on Windows XP."

    Eh? Why not have them all do it on each? Or even out the groups a bit more?

    Anyway, a short, vaguely interesting pro-Linux article. So I'll just be happy, but this could have been much cooler with bigger samples, better planning, and more detailed reporting of the results.

    • Patience (Score:3, Informative)

      by _LFTL_ ( 409654 )
      The second paragraph says that a full english report will be available in a few days. This is just a write-up.

  • Bad study (Score:5, Interesting)

    by oyenstikker ( 536040 ) <slashdot @ s b y rne.org> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:04PM (#6611365) Homepage Journal
    I'd be more interested in seeing a study in which half the group tried it on GNU/Linux,KDE first then on Windows, and the other half, vice versa. I've never heard from someone who has never used either operating system having new experiences with both of them.

    I wonder, did they consider experience with Windows 9x as _no_ experience with Windows XP?

    • Re:Bad study (Score:5, Funny)

      by guacamolefoo ( 577448 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @09:50PM (#6612160) Homepage Journal
      I'd be more interested in seeing a study in which half the group tried it on GNU/Linux,KDE first then on Windows, and the other half, vice versa. I've never heard from someone who has never used either operating system having new experiences with both of them.

      I think that they should find a tribe of african bushmen who have never used computers, and test it out on them. While these bushmen are familiar with IBM databases (remember the ad with the clicking bushman?), they seem to have no familiarity with desktop computers, sort of like the mainframe guys most of us keep in the back room.

      I expect that the bushmen (not buschmen -- those can be found in Appalachia watching NASCAR) will decide to worship the superior desktop environment, and thus, anthropologists and geeks alike will finally know which is the better desktop environment -- KDE or XP. Mac users, as usual, will be left out.

      GF.

  • Firstly... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by JessLeah ( 625838 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:05PM (#6611376)
    ...the ease of use is only for USE. Not for support. There are a bajillion different variants of "desktop Linux" system, and each has to be supported differently. (Compare and contrast with Windows, where its much-berated centralization actually makes it easier to support. You see users helping OTHER USERS with Windows-- e.g. "Yeah, you just have to click on X, then click Y and you're done". You'd never see that with Linux.

    What's more, to most of the people I've talked to about Linux, ease of use is not even a factor so long as commercial games won't run on Linux. (No, I'm not talking about WineX or VMWare. I'm talking about native support.) Most users are unwilling to talk about how easy Linux-based systems can be to use if they can't use them to game. You may poo-poo something that seems so frivolous, but it's a HUGE factor to many (most?) Windows users, particularly those under 30.

    I love Linux. But frankly, this sort of story just seems like the Linux community patting itself on the back. Here's a challenge: Go to a college computer lab (make sure you fit in, i.e. don't do this if you're 45 and have a long gray beard) and ask random students if they've heard of Linux. (It may help to wear a Debian pin, or a Tux pin, or both, or the like). Then ask if they've considered switching to it. Be sure to tell them that some distributions of Linux can be quite easy to use. It won't matter... You may be surprised by what they tell you. And I guarantee games will be on the menu (in the majority of cases, anyhow).

    • Supporting Linux Desktops (Score:4, Interesting)

      by RevMike ( 632002 ) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {ekiMver}> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:46PM (#6611727) Journal
      ...the ease of use is only for USE. Not for support.

      In certain business environments, Linux can be far easier to support. Many business users need a small suite of office and productivity apps, and not much more. A great setup is to put diskless workstations on each desktop, then run a few Linux terminal servers, locked down, in your datacom closet. Once the initial setup is done, maintenance is a breeze. Backups can be made from a central location. The user environment is portable to any workstation in the office. The admin can all be done in one place.

      Obviously this is not a solution for every environment, but where is fits, it fits really well.

    • Re:Firstly... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Stephen Samuel ( 106962 )
      ...the ease of use is only for USE. Not for support. There are a bajillion different variants of "desktop Linux" system, and each has to be supported differently.

      In most shops, they say "We will support Software X, Y and Z. Anything else, and you're on your own."

      In any sane Linux shop, they'll say something like, We'll support OpenOffice on Linux with KDE. Just because Gnome, tvm, Koffice and AbiWord are available doesn't mean that they have to be supported -- any more than a Microsoft Office shop sou

    • games (Score:5, Interesting)

      by David Jao ( 2759 ) * <djao@dominia.org> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:50PM (#6611761) Homepage
      Back in 1996, I gave up games completely in order to switch to Linux.

      Everything you say about games is correct, and none of it matters. Windows will always be the best gaming platform. There is nothing the Linux community can possibly to do change that fact. The power of numbers is just too much to overcome.

      If someone values gaming too much to switch to linux, it's really not my problem.

      From your tone it almost sounds as if you think Linux has to win over gamers in order to survive. Nothing could be further from the truth. Linux does not need a large userbase in order to thrive. All it needs is a small group of dedicated developers and the assurance that it will not be outlawed. Anything more than that is nice but not necessary.

      Linux is not useful for gaming. Linux is not meant for gaming. I don't use Linux for gaming. Gaming is not the only thing in the world that computers are used for.

      The mindset that a computer platform has to win market share or die is an artifact of the commercial software paradigm that has no relevance to open source software like Linux. With Linux, the users are the developers, and while new users are certainly welcome, there will always be certain markets like the gaming market where Linux serves no purpose and plays no role.

      • Re:games (Score:3, Insightful)

        by nathanh ( 1214 )

        Linux is not meant for gaming.

        Windows was not meant for gaming, either. The history of how Windows turned from "not for games" into "not bad for games" is an interesting read.

        Windows will always be the best gaming platform. There is nothing the Linux community can possibly to do change that fact. The power of numbers is just too much to overcome.

        As you seem to think that the power of numbers is essential to being the best gaming platform (I agree) you'll certainly grok that all Linux needs to


  • For most people, that's all they need. Should have something to steal music and upload pictures. but, that's about it. The other stuff is admin stuff.

  • Come again? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by nukey56 ( 455639 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:06PM (#6611391)
    One group consisted of 60 users aged 25 to 55 with computer skills but no prior experience with Linux or Windows XP.

    They're either talking about old DOS users, or Mac users, and go on to say that "83% of the Linux users said they liked the design of the desktop and the programs, compared with 100% of the Windows XP users."

    I've never met a Mac user who would even come close to complimenting the Windows XP interface, let alone a whole gaggle of them. This reeks of bias.

  • XP wins? not suprised (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gilesjuk ( 604902 ) <giles DOT jones AT zen DOT co DOT uk> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:08PM (#6611411)
    It has a Fisher Price GUI that holds your hand when you do anything complex.

    Ultimately make computers easier to use and you will get more idiots using them. What we really need is a computer operation license like a driving license :)

    • Re:XP wins? not suprised (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:39PM (#6611664)
      Ultimately make computers easier to use and you will get more idiots using them. What we really need is a computer operation license like a driving license :)

      Welcome to the reason Linux has taken so long to gain desktop market share--attitude.

      By the way, people love to say XP "holds your hand," but all it does is require you to click to show the hard drive's contents for the first time, and provides a grouped view for Control Panel. Um, that's it, unless you count system tray popups that alert you to things like low disk space, which is a damned good idea anyway.

  • Desktop/app design (Score:3, Insightful)

    by NormalVisual ( 565491 ) * on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:13PM (#6611448)
    But when it comes to the design of the desktop interface and programs, Windows XP still has a strong edge: 83% of the Linux users said they liked the design of the desktop and the programs, compared with 100% of the Windows XP users.

    This is an interesting metric. I'm curious to know whether they tried a few different themes and window decorations with Linux/KDE, and in general how they arrived at this number. I will agree that XP seems more polished than KDE in many respects, but my personal experience has been that there are some aspects of KDE that initially take a little getting used to, but become indispensable once you are comfortable with them. Multiple virtual desktops, for instance - I feel so limited under Windows for not having this simple feature.

  • Misleading (Score:4, Informative)

    by rmohr02 ( 208447 ) <mohr.42@DALIosu.edu minus painter> on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:15PM (#6611463)
    The title on slashdot is misleading--the study compares Suse 8.2 Pro (with KDE as the desktop environment) with Windows XP. It then says it kept track of how long it took users to complete certain tasks, such as word processing, sending email, copying CDs (don't let the RIAA find out about this study), and managing files, to name a few. These things can be done by KApplications alone, but you would have to know what SuSE makes as the default email client (Mozilla, KMail, Evolution), word processor (OO Writer, KWrite), and cd writer (K3B, X-CD-Roast, cdrecord (ok, not for people new to Linux)). This title could be better titled as "Windows XP Edges Out SuSE in Usability Test".

    Unfortunately, I won't know what applications users were expected to use or did use for a couple days.

  • Good to see (Score:5, Informative)

    by failedlogic ( 627314 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:17PM (#6611486)
    Considering Microsoft fortune of, according to this website (http://www.microsoft.com/usability/lab.htm) :

    Most of our research is conducted in Usability Labs based in Redmond, WA. On average, approximately 750 participants per month evaluate our software. A database of 35,000 people in the Seattle area helps us find the right person to match the profile required for each given study.

    MS has invested millions of dollars (and hours) on usability testing on its software. To consider that KDE is rated almost equally should be humbling to its UI designers and programmers. Way to go.... can't wait for KDE 4!

    • Re:Good to see (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dirk ( 87083 ) <dirk@one.net> on Monday August 04, 2003 @10:27PM (#6612351) Homepage
      Considering Linux UI is basically a copy of Windows (for the most part) this isn't surprising at all. Take something you know people like and copy it and people will like what you will do. When I boot RH9, it looks like a Windows knock-off, which means any person with Windows experience will have an idea of what to do. That said, it will get them close to being as easy to use as Windows, but always a step behind. Until they start actually innovating UI usability instead of trying to copy what Windows does, it will always be a step behind.

      Where Linux really lags behind Windows is 2 areas. Install/uninstall programs and UI conformity. Installing/uninstalling many programs is still a chore. Where does it install? What's this stuff about compiling (if there isn't an RPM). How do I uninstall? And the UI conformity is nonexistant. Almost all Windows programs have the same setup. The menus have the same option in the same places (cut/copy/paste is always under Edit, which is always second from the left on the menu). In Linux, every app has it's own look and feel. Which means most apps have to be completely learned from scratch instead of building on the base. Until Linux overcomes these 2 major hurdles, it will always be 2 steps behind Windows.

  • I'm a 98% Linux user but Surprised! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by erroneus ( 253617 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:21PM (#6611524) Homepage
    I live in the real world. The real world runs on Windows. In my private life, the world runs on Linux and MacOS (currently)... with an unavoidable smidgeon of Windows because it's necessary in the real world. (One of these days I'm going to get off my butt and learn to use WINE or VMWare or something...)

    I knew that "something Linux" would become equal with Windows eventually but I didn't expect the time to arrive so soon. Bravo but "beating Windows" isn't the point exactly is it? It's fun but not the purpose of Linux, KDE or OSS.

    The next "what if" is "what happens when Linux rules the desktop?" I tend to see a touch of chaos in the future. Very unpredictable. The next "what if" is about innovation. If Linux becomes king of the hill, where will innovation lead? Where will it come from? I don't want to open the debate about whether or not Microsoft "innovated" anything but when Linux finally captures the hill, where will it come from?

    I know of a very prominant financial institution known for its stodginess...still running WinNT 4.0 on many of their machines who is starting to run Linux on their machines as well. Linux is an eventuality.

    This is definitely a milestone. This is a "sit up and take notice" moment. But once Linux leads, Microsoft will have no choice but to make "compatible" software... and this time they won't dare to make their stuff lock out the competition or they will be ignored... in the future...

  • Linux needs UI standards (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Aqua OS X ( 458522 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:24PM (#6611542)
    I's funny how the linux community tends to embrace hundreds of standards... yet no one is seemingly able to get the GUI geeks to come together to for some sort of Linux UI standards consortium.

    Linux will never be as usable (GUI wise) as MacOS or Windows until a standard GUI path is chosen and development proceeds with tight integration to the core OS.

    Right now everyone seems to be caught up in this "my software works better then yours" BS.

  • Congradulations KDE Team! (Score:3)

    by 1stflight ( 48795 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @08:30PM (#6611582)
    I'll take the redundant risk and say it anyway! Good going and I can't wait to see your future work!

  • Close, but no cigar (Score:5, Interesting)

    by OzJimbob ( 129746 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @09:01PM (#6611826) Homepage
    Yeah, KDE is pretty usable. But it's lacking real smarts. I consider usability to mean "the interface is efficient, and acts as I expect it to". Here are a few (what I consider fairly obvious) features that would really improve KDE for me.

    1. Drag-and-drop menus. In Windows, the Start menu is really just a directory structure, and a special case of the Explorer view. You can drag and drop new items into the Start menu / Taskbar and they appear there instantly. You can "Explore" the Start menu and arrange / delete / add items as you please. Compare and contrast with the latest version of KDE that I've tried, where you essentially need a "menu edit" application to set up new shortcuts. Painfully old-fashioned.

    2. Faster file access and directory listing in Konquerer. Comparison:
    Windows - to view C:\mp3 takes 3 seconds.
    Mandrake - to view \mnt\Windows\mp3 takes 9 seconds.
    What's more, in KDE the files display one-by-one as they are "found". My "Jazz" folder might appear first, but by the time I go to click on it, more folders have appeared and it has moved. Ugly.

    3. Please, give us the option of a double-click interface.

    • Re:Close, but no cigar (Score:5, Informative)

      by manly_15 ( 447559 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @09:34PM (#6612065)
      3. Please, give us the option of a double-click interface.
      In MDK 9.1, got to K Menu-->Configuration-->Control Centre. Under the Peripherals entry, select Mouse. Right in the middle of the window, you can choose between double and single click, as well as configure single click. Hope this helps!

  • Where Linux starts to fall down (Score:5, Insightful)

    by RzUpAnmsCwrds ( 262647 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @09:18PM (#6611947)
    GNOME2/KDE3 makes for a very usable desktop, I'd say it's along the caliber of WinXP/Mac OS. Linux starts to fall down when you try to install 3rd party applications (what if you can't get RPMs? what if you're running an older GLIBC?) or hardware.

  • OS usuability in General (Score:4, Insightful)

    by aliens ( 90441 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @09:28PM (#6612017) Homepage Journal
    You take a person who never used a computer and teach them. Guess what, they'll pick up DOS, Linux, Windows, BeOS, any GUI, any console, pretty much just as easily.

    People can understand, but geeks have an ability to understand right away. They then assume that everyone one else is a flipping idiot for not understanding. Some people just need to be taught.

    Imagine something that doesn't come naturally easy for you, say cooking. Now imagine not being taught but just kind of trying different things. Not so easy is it? Remember you don't have a natural ability to cook so you're not going to pick it up easily.

    Now think about how you might fare if you took courses and practiced a couple of times a week. You wouldn't be great but you'd get by. Of Course you'd still get stuck sometimes. That's what it's like for Joe and Jane computer user I think. We assume they should just know, and they just need some courses to get by.

    They still annoy the piss out of me with their annoying questions.

  • This wasn't a useability test (Score:5, Insightful)

    by roystgnr ( 4015 ) <`gro.srengots' `ta' `yor'> on Monday August 04, 2003 @09:36PM (#6612083) Homepage
    The key phrase is here:

    with computer skills but no prior experience with Linux or Windows XP

    In other words, unless they were running these tests for months, this was a "learnability" test, which measured how productive you will be with your computer for the first few days you use it. Unless you're only planning to use the computer for a few days (and other than offices who hire a lot of temps I don't think this is a very common situation) this probably isn't the best measurement to optimize for.

    It's the easiest measurement for computer magazines to make, though, so it's probably the closest thing to actual "usability testing" we'll ever see, and it's better than nothing. I just worry that it will lead to companies improving learnability at the expense of useability. It reminds me of the way commercial Linux distributions at one time seemed to be competing to have the easiest damn installation in the world at the expense of post-installation config tools, because all the "reviews" of different Linux distributions stopped shortly after the installation was over.

  • Not fair (Score:3, Informative)

    by TwistedSpring ( 594284 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @10:35PM (#6612402) Homepage
    Article snippet:

    They tested the preconfigured open-source software according to various criteria

    Sadly it's not the GUI thats the most difficult part of linux to get to grips with. It's the configuration of the GUI and software that phases most users. I like the fact that so many people said they thought they could migrate to the new OS (Linux) easilly, unfortunately most of them will probably find that when the thing breaks it's impossible for them to fix.

    Linux doesn't yet have the niceties that Windows users expect (especially in installation, the process would be very confusing to someone not au fait with the system, for example which packages do you install? I don't need all this developer stuff I'm not a developer! Oh no Random Application #317 needed that M4 thing! What's hard disk partitioning? etc etc). Though the guides are there, it's my feeling that currently it's not as "click and go brush the dog" as WinXP is.

    Before I get modded troll or offtopic, I'd like to also mention that personally I would not like to see one-click installations of Linux, I can't stand distros that use graphical boots or boot up into X, Linux has always catered for my server needs very well, but never really cut it in the desktop area. It's getting more and more difficult to obtain Linux distros that *dont* cater for the computer illiterate. I think one of the nicer things about Linux was that it wasn't windows, so what the hell are they doing trying to turn it into windows? There's no revenue in this, it's just a scrap over popularity to the tunes of Rage Against The Machine.

    They should probably rename the "Troll" mod to "Pessimist"

    • Re:Not fair (Score:3, Insightful)

      by FooBarWidget ( 556006 )
      And how's this any different from Windows? My friends have called me to fix their Windows install many, many times because they can't figure out how to do it themselves. Windows is *not* better than Linux in this case.

      Installation problem? The solutions are called apt and urpmi. If you're using Mandrake you already have URPMI. If you use RedHat, download Apt4RPM [sourceforge.net] (the next version of RedHat will include apt).

      "I can't stand distros that use graphical boots or boot up into X"

      X is the windowing system and

  • My Experience (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tewley ( 415350 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @10:41PM (#6612428)
    This may be off-topic, but ...

    As "Joe User" with moderate technical acumen, I recently made the jump and set up dual-boot SUSE. The install went very well, and I was very pleased with the KDE GUI.

    But very quickly I had to spend a couple of hours doing things like learning how to set up header files in order to re-compile my kernal to support NVIDIA drivers.

    I figured it out. But it took a while.

    And still -- after a lot of careful study and research on linuxquestions.org -- I can't get my sound card to work. The best I have gotten for folks with the exact same configuration is "buy a new soundcard and save yourself the trouble".

    My point is not to complain, but to indicate that there is still "geek time" and knowledge that must be "paid" to support free software. For many people it becomes like changing the oil on the car -- it's something that *can* be accomplished with enough time and patience. But how much do you want to fritz around with it, when all you want to do is play an MP3 ?

    God forbid I want to hook up my digital camera.

    Pay the dude $30 for an oil change.

    For Linux, the last piece of non-geek usability may be the hardest to attain.

    (It's not like I WANT to use MS XP ...)

  • Not too surprised (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mdielmann ( 514750 ) on Monday August 04, 2003 @11:12PM (#6612580) Homepage Journal
    As a Windows user, I've been nothing but irritated that MS keeps changing where to find anything but the most basic items. From Win95/WinNT3.51 to WinXP, they've moved everything from Network ID to the command prompt icon. There haven't been more than two releases in a row on either track where at least one feature I would consider fundamental hasn't been moved. I'm not saying that some of the changes haven't been useful, or logical, but some just look like another way to require certification. I would consider myself fairly adept, but nothing irritates me more than trying to remember where a particular feature is in this particular OS. If MS proponents want to complain about the multitude of Linux window managers, they should think about this. At least in Linux, a coimpany can pick one, and keep it on multiple versions. Some would say you can with Windows, too, but the useful new features are tied to the new UI, too.

  • KDE (Score:3, Interesting)

    by oohp ( 657224 ) on Tuesday August 05, 2003 @01:20AM (#6613112) Homepage
    I believe KDE has too many bells and whistles distracting the user. I'm talking thing enables by default like animated mouse cursors, task-bar apps. Some of the task bar apps are really clumsy (eg. the disk mount thingie, I had to show my dad trice until he could use it -- and he's not a moron). Nevertheless, I find KDE easier to use than the new default Winzode XP look. Always switch that to classic.

  • A scary statement in the article (Score:5, Interesting)

    by iamacat ( 583406 ) on Tuesday August 05, 2003 @01:42AM (#6613169)
    But when it comes to the design of the desktop interface and programs, Windows XP still has a strong edge: 83% of the Linux users said they liked the design of the desktop and the programs, compared with 100% of the Windows XP users.

    I hope the study is flawed, because its too depressing to consider the alternative. Btw, why no MacOS in the test? Then we would see how KDE measures up to an OS with good UI.

  • More of what works out of the box. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Bruha ( 412869 ) on Tuesday August 05, 2003 @02:22AM (#6613316) Homepage Journal
    Things being the way they're are I'd consider XP ahead of the game in the Home Desktop area for several reasons.

    Drivers
    Video Card support
    Cant play dvd's out of the box for 2 distro's that are mostly used.. Mandrake and Redhat
    Video Game's (Transgaming helps here)

    Now other than that it's mostly elemental on how the computer works.. Normal user accounts should not be able to see anything above their /home/user directory as far as they're saving things and when they search for their files it should be done in there. Installation really needs a revamp such as the user want's X functionality it presents them choices and they click 1 button.. downloads and installs and works perfectly the first time! Otherwise it's just a mess of download compile install and pray for many applications.

    It would be better if all distro makers got behind one format for installations and bundle all applications to work that way.. then a install would be essentially the same for a RedHat/Mandrake/SuSE/Gentoo or whatever else someone run's.

  • i wonder... (Score:5, Funny)

    by koekepeer ( 197127 ) on Tuesday August 05, 2003 @02:48AM (#6613378)
    where they get test subjects that used neither XP nor linux/KDE...

    mac users? i can't believe that! they'd never be pleased with the appearance of XP ;)

  • Not the GUI that is the problem (Score:3, Interesting)

    by forgoil ( 104808 ) on Tuesday August 05, 2003 @04:57AM (#6613679) Homepage
    The KDE GUI is just fine by now, more or less at least (I still can't stand X), but the real problem is the integration with the underlaying OS, especially since it can be different OSes and different Linux distributions (which does thing differently for no good reason at all).

    An example, it took me 10 seconds in 1995 to figure out how to share a folder in win95, but after almost an hour I gave up on getting samba to share properly in gentoo. I have a fair amount of Linux experience, and would count myself as knowing quite a lot about computers (I'm a software engineer), but I have no intention of learning all about smb just for getting a few files over.

    That is the problem with KDE, that is the problem for Linux, if you want to make it an easy to use system for ordinary people (if you want to make it a geek system that's never really finish, well, it's there;)).

  • Crappy Windows shell (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mrselfdestrukt ( 149193 ) <nollie_A7_firstcounsel_com> on Tuesday August 05, 2003 @05:43AM (#6613789) Homepage Journal
    IMO, the biggest problem I have is that I can't find a decent shell in Windows.
    In Linux, even when I run SX, I just open a bunch of terminals and type happily away. I can do everything from CLI whether it's inside a GUI or not. In windows, I keep looking for bash or any decent shell, but all I can find is this stupid Dos shell that seems only useful for changing directories. I can't quickly check my running processes, launch an app or 2 , write scripts or code and check on stuff running in the background while changing some stuff in my Mysql databases.
    It's like the GUI works against the OS not for it..

  • XP and KDE are pretty much dead-even (Score:4, Interesting)

    by esarjeant ( 100503 ) on Tuesday August 05, 2003 @07:59AM (#6614250) Homepage
    What this journalistic snippet fails to mention is the fact that there are some tasks that XP excelled and other tasks where KDE outperformed XP. In other words, while XP was a bit faster for the user to initiate email it was easier for the Linux user to play an audio CD.

    Most of the numbers were expected. For example, the Windows Media Player is a more complicated tool than the KDE CD Player; therefore it is not surprising the KDE was quicker at this task.

    What did surprise me was that KDE took so long to change the background (almost x2 as long as XP) yet the users thought it was easy. This might have something to do with the more advanced background features native to KDE; for example, a background per-desktop or a scheduled background change.

    To modify shortcut icons in the toolbar was much quicker under KDE and I have always found this to be more cumbersome than XP. Perhaps the XP "personalized" menus have something to do with this? Users not only took less time to create icons in the toolbar but KDE users generally graded this task as easier than their Windows XP counterparts.

    One other interesting comparison is email; users took a little longer to perform this task under KDE but they generally graded this as easier to do than their XP counterparts.

Slashdot Top Deals

Almost anything derogatory you could say about today's software design would be accurate. -- K.E. Iverson

Close