The first point I covered in the original article was migration. I said "For 'Regular People' to adopt Linux (which usually means leaving Windows) Linux is going to need a serious migration plan. It will need to install on machines next to Window, leaving that completely intact and easy to return to, and carry over all or nearly all of the user's data and settings."
The overwhelming majority of potential converts are currently using Windows and they have set up their desktop and each of their primary applications to work the way they want the things to work. They don't want to put that at risk in any way. They hate troubleshooting computers and will avoid anything that sounds like it might disrupt their semi-stable environment. A "Regular People" Linux (which I'll call "RPL" in these articles) must not threaten their existing environment at all.
So what specifically is needed here and how can it be accomplished. The RPL distribution will need to install beside the Windows installation, leaving Windows fully intact and functional (and give the new user a lot of confidence in that -- don't even bother offering to over-write their Windows install. Seriously.) The install CD should include a graphical partitioning wizard that will explain to the user that he needs to free up space on his Windows machine and that this will not harm his Windows installation in any way. This utility should autorun when the user inserts the RPL CD and should clearly explain to the user how much space is available on the user's disk and recommend to him the necessary amount of space required for the RPL installation. After the user agrees, the tool should then perform the necessary work to set up the partition(s) without further user interaction and, upon conclusion, kick off the actual RPL installer.
Most Regular People are not going to copy their files and settings (if they can even find them) onto a CD or USB device and manually carry them over to the Linux installation and then reorganize them. Neither are they going to figure out how to mount their Windows file system, locate and copy over those files and settings, so it is up to the Linux installation to handle that. Even if they haven't done serious customization, they still have information like fonts, printers, timezone, desktop shortcuts, desktop wallpaper, language, files, bookmarks, cookies, history, passwords, email, contacts, recently accessed file lists in apps, windows size and position, etc. that exists in their current environment and that needs to exist in the new environment. If the desktop and applications they arrive at in their new Linux installation have these bits, the user will be a lot more likely to actually use it and to stick with it.
How does Regular People Linux deliver this. After installation, on the initial launch of RPL, the user should get a migration wizard that offers to copy the his Windows data -- making it very clear that this is a copy and not a transfer so the user doesn't feel he's risking anything. The wizard should list each of "Web browser settings," "Email settings," "Instant Messenger settings," "Office suite settings," "General desktop settings," and "My Documents, Pictures, Music, and Videos." Next to each of the generic labels, the wizard should display the actual names of the specific applications that are being migrated so the user can understand the relationship between his Windows applications and the receiving applications. The migration tool will need to be able to mount the Windows partition, migrate the various settings and copy the user's files over to his new RPL installation. While that's happening, the migration wizard could offer a brief tour that explains the RPL applications that will replace the user's Windows applications and point out where his documents will be located.
The individual migrators may be difficult to write, but at least two of them, for Firefox and Thunderbird, are already mostly done and could be easily repurposed for this task. Migrators should carry over as much as is available from Windows itself (and the Windows applications) and as much as the receiving clients can handle -- including toolbar organization, recently accessed documents, applicable options/preferences/settings, and desktop/start menu/quicklaunch toolbar shortcuts to those applications.
The copying of user files should be a fairly easy task. They should be copied into a similar folder structure as they are in the user's Windows filesystem (probably a "My Documents" folder with "My Pictures," "My Music," and "My Videos" sub-folders.)
These migration features are the first major steps to getting Regular People to give Linux a try and stick with Linux in any reasonable numbers. My next article will focus on the second set of issues that are necessary for widespread adoption by Regular People -- API stability and a familiar application install experience.
Posted by asa at July 21, 2005 08:45 PM | TrackBack"Mozilla Linux", go for it. Impress us. I personally can't wait to see if you can type as much code as you can blog entries describing hypothetical operating systems.
Watch out Novell, Asa's coming for ya! ;)
Posted by: Beer on July 21, 2005 09:09 PMAsa:
If you had addressed the linux community like this to begin with you would have seen so much less backlash. (this confirms in my mind the troll nature of the previous post... but mah). This is so much more informative and collected than the previous post offering actualy advice, without offending the hard work already being done in these areas.
As to the points you bring up, I'm curious as the viability of an effective copy of user files from the windows partition to the new linux partition. What with peoples files being all over the globe when it comes to putting things places in windows. How many times have you hopped on a machine and found that they keept pictures in a directory in C:/? (my experience is that these sorts of things end up all over the place. How then do you inform users that this migration can't be perfect and that they will need to find this stuff on their own?
maybe it would be possible but it seems that with the a) variety of software and b) chaotic nature of most peoples data that this might be close to impossible.
I also think that we should add a section to this... that is... allow users to remove the windows partition once the migration is complete (hidden away somewhere perhaps?) Also adding an icon to the desktop labled "WINDOWS" might help if the user needs to dig through to find old files.
Anders
Posted by: Anders on July 21, 2005 09:41 PMHow did microsoft get it's OS on most machines world wide?
MSDOS was aweful, so was windows all the way up through win98.
They had IBM and later the clones OEM it into people's homes, like it or not, with no competition.
I think linux should take the same approach. Convince the hardware manufacturers to power linux into people's homes by shipping machines preloaded. They're starting to do it in europe slowly.
I think SuSE/Novell will make breakthroughs in this area eventually.
This whole switching thing isn't going to work for joe user. Get new users, make sure the only way they know from childhood is the "linux way" (AKA what microsoft is doing now), then they'll be reluctant to switch to windows for life.
Microsoft donates a heck of alot of equipment to schools and libraries, running windows. Is it a charity or an investment? It's probably both.
I think that anything short of this will fail. Short of that I think that linux users should just be happy using linux and knowing what a great system it is. I feel lucky to use such a great operating system. Most people will never use linux, and it's not something to lose sleep or hypothesize and or ponder over.
Posted by: Beer on July 21, 2005 09:54 PMBeer This problem is a catch22
we need the user base to attract vendors to supply linux desktops, we need OEM's to supply desktop to attract users.
In reallity we should be targetting both area's pushing for linux desktops on vendor supplied machines (becuase as you rightly say this is the only way to ventor towards getting a large market share) however I don't think much will happen here until there apears to be a large enough demand. Thus we have a request for a realisticaly simple migration system. The idea being that if this were implimented, it might be possible that if migration is easy enough linux could grab that magical 10% without the vendors full support. If that happens things look a lot more bright for the linux future.
Anders
Posted by: Anders on July 21, 2005 09:59 PM"however I don't think much will happen here until there apears to be a large enough demand."
Ah, microsoft did not need demand to push it's OS out, they had IBM, and by the time the AT/XT compatibles came out, it was too late.
So for linux, I think some brave vendors out there will have to take a chance. I think Novell can make it happen. HP is selling linux desktops in Europe now.
People used to windows, are going to expect linux to be like windows. That's a fact. Linux isn't windows.
For truly widespread adoption, people have to use linux as their first system and be used to using it, not windows.
Otherwise you're ideas implemented will just end up turning linux into a free version of windows. At that rate, why not make an open WindowsNT kernel with all the same syscalls implementation and use NTFS and make an open windows clone?
I mean, we use linux because it's linux. Some people don't like linux BECAUSE it's linux.
Posted by: Beer on July 21, 2005 10:13 PMAt that rate, why not make an open WindowsNT kernel with all the same syscalls implementation and use NTFS and make an open windows clone?
You mean, like ReactOS?
As for Asa's Grand Scheme for Windows Migration, I expect we won't see it happen any time in the near future: I'm sure the majority of Windows installations are using NTFS filesystems. Last I heard, Linux could not read an NTFS-formatted disk without causing damage (even without trying to write to it!). This is not because Linux sucks, but because NTFS is horribly, horribly complicated.
Posted by: Screwtape on July 21, 2005 10:19 PMscrewtape, I've had no problems in recent times reading from ntfs partitions. the newer kernely modules for this seem to do just fine now. (writing is out of the question for now though)
Anders
Posted by: Anders on July 21, 2005 10:21 PM"Last I heard, Linux could not read an NTFS-formatted disk without causing damage (even without trying to write to it!). This is not because Linux sucks, but because NTFS is horribly, horribly complicated."
I use this and it works flawlessly, and has a build for the latest fc4 kernel 2.6.12-1.1398_FC4
http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/rpm/fedora4.html
It doesn't cause damage. Mandriva linux has ntfs compiled into the stock kernel and automounts windows partitions automatically.
Fedora Core does not, but it's as simple as installing the module, making a new dir mkdir /mnt/win and mount /dev/hdx /mnt/win -t ntfs -r -o umask=0222
So it's pretty easy, you could make a gui with glade for it in about 10 minutes with anjuta. It's so easy I don't see the point though.
Posted by: Beer on July 21, 2005 10:25 PMAsa - Since for some reason none of the major (or even minor so far as I can tell) distro's are doing anything close to this... man would it be sweet if the same logic and design principles that went into FF were to now be directed into a Linux distro... I'm just saying... I think that'd get the attention of the folks in Redmond in a big ass hurry. Is there *ANY* chance of something like this ever happening?? I'm sure the fine folks who make FF as awesome as it is are far too busy to change their focus on a linux distro, but maybe if there was a distro out there that at least consulted you guys on design ideas. They might actually get somewhere.
sigh... one can dream.
Posted by: jreyst on July 21, 2005 10:36 PMI've heard rumors about Google making one. They have SOOOOO much cash. They honestly easily could pour the money it would take to compete with MS Windows.
"GoogleOS"
They've been grabbing so much media attention lately with wild new software, I'm not doubting it for one second. Microsoft hired the founder of Gentoo http://news.com.com/2061-10805_3-5745763.html Daniel Robbins recently, so something is definately up.
For what's in front of the curtain(that us folk can see, IE, not evil under the table stuff), I think Novell has done some great things, hiring away alot of the leading OSS project teams in the past year or 2.
If google is making an OSS, Mozilla should collaborate. A google/mozilla based Linux OS, could potentially crush microsoft once and for all.
Of course I doubt it would look or act like the linux we all love, but oh well. That's the free market, consumer driven system.
The migrators idea is great - as an extension, you could also scan their Windows partitions for software and suggest Linux equivalents - that way, if the distro doesn't include them, they know what to go get (or just use some package manager to get them right away). It would also let them know what the names of the programs they should be using in place of their old ones are. That list should probably stick around for them to refer to.
Posted by: Ben Hollis on July 21, 2005 11:21 PMWhen you _copy_ the user's files and settings (assumed a tool can really find all files...), the user will make a big mess himself. He receives some emails on Linux, edits some documents, switches to Windows, does some similar task - boooom, he doesn't know where which file is, has different versions of the same files, misses emails, ...
You would have to write a synchronize tool, but that has the problem of accidentially destroying something on the Windows system...
I think, it would be nice to import settings, so that WLAN is activated, email accounts work (but don't delete emails from server by default!!!) and so on. But no file copy!!!
Posted by: Tobias on July 22, 2005 12:08 AMAsa's right on with this one. I have worked as a HelpDesk technician, and with consumer tech support for a large computer manufacturer... and if Linux is to make any substantial headway, it *must* behave nicely and interact with Windows.
I would add to Asa's suggestions by even saying that RPL should not only copy, but outright use data files contained on the windows partition (such as My Documents) -- so that changes made in one OS would automatically be picked up in the other. Some will yell and scream that this would cause instabilities and whatnot, but if done intelligently, it works perfectly fine (this is one of the first things I always did on my Linux installs before I ditched Windows completely).
These issues are all trivial, however, compared to the greatist stumbling block on the road to widespread linux adoption - which (in my opinion) is application install. The current system is absolutely abyssmal for ease-of-use (assuming you can call what linux currently has a 'system').
Many folks out here still just have dialup connections, and asking a normal user to download a file - decompress it, finagle the terminal, download dependencies, compile, etc. is completely, utterly, stupid. Neverminding the fact that actually learning something something about their computer might be a good thing -- most people have precious little time or desire to master such intracacies. They need their system to 'just work' so they can get tasks efficiently accomplished, check their email online, or whatever.
Posted by: John on July 22, 2005 12:09 AMI enjoyed and agree with your position. Most people are not interested in OS - why should they be.
We have had to become interested because the largest and cheapest (not so cheap slapped on the price of a computer) is more trouble than solution.
I must admit I found Ubuntu just seemed to work - and I got bored. Maybe we need the drama of a semi-working OS?
I suppose I compromise. Using Puppy Linux full time for the last few months. It looks similar to Win 95 - puts one file on your Windows machine and boots happily and fast from CD.
I suppose the real migration occurs when (check out 21 July news)
http://www.goosee.com/puppy/wikka/LatestNews
Linux is sold with hardware and no one notices.
AMD inside? Linux OS? Mac on intel? Geek gibberish.
Most people expect there computer to work in a way they already know.
No mounting. No passwords. No compatibility problems - in fact no hassles at all. At the moment what are the hassles in installing Linux? How about the OS that comes with the hardware? Oh look Windows is the devil we know and we already have it - so who are these weird penguins offering solutions that involve - what?
"Partition what?" (I can hear you scaring them Windows users with your geek talk right now)
The truth is MS and hardware manufacturers have made people feel guilty that the solutions they are paying for do not work after a few months. Good trick. Like building a car designed to break down - so you can sell lucrative parts.
Will people wake up? Doubt it!
Posted by: Ed Jason on July 22, 2005 12:44 AM
John: interesting, I found application install the best (in fact the only) place where Linux was ahead of OSX. I clicked update... and every app on the computer updated. That's *slick*. Other than that, I found it reasonably nice, but lacking the polished apps I was used to (Adium, in particular, but I'm kinda biased about that). It also didn't support my wireless, but that's not really a usability issue as much as a technical/political one (not openly documented).
Posted by: David Smith on July 22, 2005 12:50 AM"Mandriva linux has ntfs compiled into the stock kernel and automounts windows partitions automatically.
Fedora Core does not, but it's as simple as installing the module, making a new dir mkdir /mnt/win and mount /dev/hdx /mnt/win -t ntfs -r -o umask=0222"
ROTFL :-)))
That is the funniest thing I have read all week. Thanks for cheering me up!! I tried the Suse Live CD, and I wanted to check my C drive, couldn't figure out how to do it, couldn't get it to connect to the 'net. Tried it for a couple of hours... look, Linux *may* be amazing, but trying to read my files on C:\ and connect to the internet are too tricky. Man life is *too* short. I threw the CD out and went kitesurfing. I'll wait untill the Linux crowd either (1) stop telling me why Linux is so good, or (2) fix it.
Firefox has got 'it' right. Asa knows how to beat Microsoft. Stop moaning about how Linux is great and listen to him. Thats my advice.
john.e.boy
Posted by: monk.e.boy on July 22, 2005 01:17 AMAre we already at the stage where 'Real People' self-installing Linux is the next step? Wow, Linux is doing better than I thought.
Interestingly new Macs come with software that sucks your PC settings and carries them over to your new Machine via USB (I believe). Given the rapidly plummeting cost of hardware I'd suggest that as a more fertile route (though obviously to Apple buying the hardware is kind of the point, and Linux may like to tout the saving of reusing some scabby old PC hardware. Not worth it in my opinion)
Also most people use more than one computer these days (work, school, kid's, laptop, wifes) that's another changing reality that Linux distribs should look to.
There's also the action in the live CD market that let's people try things out and even save state to a flash drive.
Installing a dual-boot system sounds like it is targetting a relativly small semi-clueless/semi-geek market that I can't see being profitably targetted either by businesses or by an OSS community like Ubuntu.
Didn't a Mozilla Foundation spokesperson (possibly even you personally Asa) just announce that Firefox wouldn't be able to break out of the geek/techno-dabbler market and advance beyond 10% marketshare without getting access to the people who don't actively install software? Meaning tie-ins with ISPs, organisational IT and PC resellers.
Posted by: dave on July 22, 2005 02:10 AMHmm, a thought on the issue of migrating user data to a Linux install. Once Linux is installed you boot straight into that, which is something Windows users are used to, and within Linux you have to option to switch to Windows.
If the user decides to switch you copy back any changes to their preferences since the last switch. This way when they use Windows they have all their preferences plus the added bonus that it is that little bit harder to boot into Windows.
Of course you also offer an uninstall Linux option that returns the bootloader to normal and removes the Linux partitions so people don't feel forced.
Posted by: Simon on July 22, 2005 02:13 AMThe trouble with the kind of migration described is that equivalent applications for common Windows ones often don't exist on Linux. So a lot of user info would have to be thrown away when moving from Windows to Linux. Even simple apps like Mailwasher have no equivalent (there is one Linux app that's nearly there but has no filters or friends/foes list). So the first thing the migrator software would tell an aspiring migrator is "Warning, the following applications have no equivalent in Linux, do you want to proceed? {list of twenty or so programs} - if you do proceed you will not be able to access your data in the new system."
So that would end that little experiment!
W.
Posted by: Wally on July 22, 2005 02:18 AMThe whole migration thing seems to be taken care of by Ubuntu. Although, it's only "low priority".
http://udu.wiki.ubuntu.com/MigratingToUbuntu
It will be based on the already working, and open-source OpenMoveOver
http://openmoveover.sourceforge.net/
http://sourceforge.net/project/screenshots.php?group_id=128044
That is the funniest thing I have read all week. Thanks for cheering me up!! I tried the Suse Live CD, and I wanted to check my C drive, couldn't figure out how to do it, couldn't get it to connect to the 'net. Tried it for a couple of hours... look, Linux *may* be amazing, but trying to read my files on C:\ and connect to the internet are too tricky. Man life is *too* short. I threw the CD out and went kitesurfing. I'll wait untill the Linux crowd either (1) stop telling me why Linux is so good, or (2) fix it.>>
I don't know, last time I tried to install linux it was a Debian Sarge (before it's release).
I had gotten hold of an old Compaq box, 233MHz and 32Mb ram or something, I don't even know the hardware inside (other than a S3 Virge and a "Compaq" branded mobo).
My home network accesses Internet through an old computer running W2K (since i'm not linux-savvy enough to run a linux server as of today).
Well, I downloaded the netinstall of Sarge as well as the complete install (figuring that I may as well try the 100Mb netinstall before the 2 or 3 CDs full install if I managed to download it faster).
100Mb later, I burn the netinst on a CD, load the CD into the ol'box, perform a few inputs, go for some laundry...
And next thing I know the netinstall has actually found the server and the web, has connected itself to the deb servers and has started downloading and installing the required packets... and when I finally boot to Sarge I have a fully functional web connection without having manipulated anything in it...
Granted I did not have to install modem hardware, but that's still damn neat...
Posted by: Masklinn on July 22, 2005 02:47 AMYou know, you might actually be right :)
SuSE does a pretty admirable job with a lot of what you've talked about. YaST - SuSE's setup tool automagically partitions (no need for a seperate partioner), mounts your windows drive (solid read of ntfs partions, experimental write).
I look forward to someone with your vision actually implementing some of this.
Just out of interest, Asa, are you or have you been a linux user?
Posted by: David House on July 22, 2005 03:49 AMIf you're going to partition a Real Person's disk you shouldn't say any more than "RPL needs to use 25% of the free space on your computer to install. OK?". If you say "partition" you've lost them.
One you thing you seemed to miss, Asa, is that the list of users from Windows should be migrated automatically. You'd also probably want to bring over whether they are administrators or not.
I don't see the absolute need for copying back settings to Windows (which some people have mentioned) as you're trying to move people onto Linux permenantly. However, it would probably increase their confidence if they're don't feel locked in. You could probably achieve this with files by just creating a folder called "My Windows Documents" in their Linux home directory that links into the Windows partition.
Having a "Start Windows" option visible, which just reboots the machine with Windows are the default OS, might be a very simple step to help out novice users. Similarly, so that they can get back to Linux, you'd need to install a "Start Linux" option in Windows.
You should probably also consider providing a "Remove Windows" option, or perhaps make removing Windows an option in an equivalent to the Disk Cleanup wizard. This could prompt the user automatically if they haven't booted into Windows in the last month, or if they start running "low" on disk space. ;)
If you're after total user confidence, when you come to remove Windows you let them burn a recoverable back-up onto CD/DVD.
Posted by: Andrew Smith on July 22, 2005 04:46 AMFirst, I want to say that I agree with Andrew's first post - If you had used this tone on your first post - the linux community would have been more willing to listen.
Now to the blog post -
A migration tool would be, nice but copying really isn't the solution here.
Why would I want 2 copies of each document? I can see a few problems here:
1) Personal data takes too much room - let's say the "Regular Person" has a lot of media files, all in "My Music" and "My Videos" - a Regular Person (RP) may have 20GB worth of files. do we really want to copy that?
2) During the migration process, the RP would be moving back and forth from windows to linux, he wants to complete his .doc essay no matter where he is and use his bookmarks. Remember, this isn't an application like firefox, it takes more time to close every thing and reboot, and you can't use both at the same time (without solutions like VMWare or CoLinux) so you would want his personal data to move along with him, with all the changes that happened since the last reboot. And yes, that means the you need to export your bookmarks back to IE - something that Mozilla doesn't do with a wizard (not that it should do it on windows)
So what you would want to do is to link the files and guarantee that writing to NTFS would work.
This of course has some problems that can't be solved - FAT32 can't emulate linux permission structure and I'm not sure what the status is with NTFS - so you can't guarantee user privacy over these files from other users on the computer.
another thing that you might want to include is windows drivers to read and write to linux file systems - you might not want to include these for the same reason Mozilla doesn't provide a migration to IE wizard.
If you do provide these drivers, you could move all the user files to linux and add shortcuts to them from windows - this way you'll get the file permission thingy straighten out.
You would also have to have better support for Microsoft's propriety stuff. Open Office would have to read every Microsoft Word document in the way the writer intended, I don't know about OO 2.0 but 1.4 is no where near that.
Firefox would have to support broken up websites - you try to explain the RP that his bank's websites doesn't work on linux because the bank didn't write its website according to W3C standards, I did it a couple of times - the RP does rarely understands it. On windows he can always use IE in these cases - but he doesn't have that option on linux.
Asa, this isn't meant as a dig, but I think you've drastically oversimplified the issues and unintentionally offended a lot of very hard working people. As should be obvious to you, migrating settings between two applications on the same OS is no small undertaking. Smoothly migrating settings between two entirely different OS's would be an almost herculean task. I also think that you realy understimate the work involved by stating that most of it has been done for the browser already.
On Windows almost all application settings are stored in the registry. While there are certain tricks with driver thunking that have provided fairly reliable access to NTFS, the same does not apply to the registry. The registry on disk format is undocumented, cannot be reliably read (much less modified) outside of Windows, and varies significantly between different versions of Windows. The reverse engineering effort required just to reliably access the registry from an alternative operating system is tremendous. Firefox on Windows does not have to deal with any of this because the API's are just there.
Thunderbird has even more concrete examples of where it leverages Windows functionality and installed aplications to import data and settings. Thunderbird uses the MAPI API's to import all of the messages and addresses when transferring from Outlook. These are all Microsoft proprietary components, and a perfect example of where this fails is when a user wants to convert PST but doesn't have Outlook installed on that machine. The process is halted because Thunderbird uses Outlook to retrieve all the data.
You're also talking about targetting the "Real Person". Real people generally have a number of obscure applications that they consider essential. From their perspective those one or two random apps (like my mother's geneology program) better have an immediate analog and seemless migration or switching is not an option. It would be an exceptionally difficult undertaking just to harvest and translate the settings from core OS components and a few of the most common applications. It would be unfeasible to try and handle all the apps that people consider deal-breakers. Mozilla faces a very similar problem with IE proprietary sites, and the response has always been (and rightly so) that the sites need to change.
I've been a strong supporter of Mozilla for a while and I think you guys should all be proud of your accomplishments. But I also think you should extend a reasonable degree of courtesy to others and be mindful of their situations. As part of the Mozilla Project you've benefitted from the vast amount of work contributed by large numbers of people over the course of more than a decade. Of course that kind of history also brings it's own complications and I'm sure that all of you have to deal with issues on regular basis that most outsiders aren't aware of. Meanwhile there are armchair developers and wanna be software moguls who question and second guess every step you guys make. I'm certain that behavior is of no value to you; I just ask that you be careful that you don't fall into that trap yourself.
Posted by: Justin on July 22, 2005 06:31 AMFor those above complaining about passwords: There's nothing stopping you from setting your user password or your root password to blank. You can use it just the same as Windows 98 if you want, and you can easily set up the login manager to do autologin.
Just don't go crying to anyone when the box gets r00ted 5 minutes later: You wanted no security and that's what you'll get.
Posted by: ant on July 22, 2005 06:48 AMAsa, good article. I've been thinking similar things myself.
A couple of notes:
(1) The best way to "install" Linux is not to partition things at all, but rather to create a continguous file on an NTFS drive then install into that using the NTFS driver (which can write to files that already exist but cannot grow them). This lets you skip the scary "THIS MAY DESTROY YOUR DATA" partitioning setups and also makes it easy to uninstall Linux, giving people confidence
(2) It is in fact possible to read the Windows registry from within Linux, no tricks. The Wine project has reverse engineered the format years ago.
(3) MoveOver looks pretty cool. Seems like a pretty complete solution already!
(4) Automatic online updates need work, as the Firefox team have discovered. Right now yum/apt/etc aren't good enough IMHO - a better solution would be a more low-tech one: a cron job that downloads signed scripts, checks the signatures are valid then simply runs them. A simple API can be provided to download "patch packs" for the core, which are highly compressed tarballs of delta RPMs. The packs can also contain a small HTML page describing what the update does and what's new, so users can see what their computer is spending all its time downloading. This scheme has a few advantages if you assume a controlled core - you get release notes, the patches can be batched up so they are downloaded only once every week or two, the overhead of depsolvers (which at least for yum is significant) is eliminated, and there aren't any issues with depsolvers getting "stuck" in the testing branches due to downgrades of packages.
Posted by: Mike Hearn on July 22, 2005 07:18 AMThe best way to "install" Linux is not to partition things at all, but rather to create a continguous file on an NTFS drive then install into that using the NTFS driver (which can write to files that already exist but cannot grow them). This lets you skip the scary "THIS MAY DESTROY YOUR DATA" partitioning setups and also makes it easy to uninstall Linux, giving people confidence.This has already been done by several distros, years ago. It sucked. The system was terribly slow. Posted by: michel v on July 22, 2005 07:45 AM
dave said: "Are we already at the stage where 'Real People' self-installing Linux is the next step? Wow, Linux is doing better than I thought."
Dave, if, after what about 10 years of development, by thousands of developers, the current state of linux is the best that can be done, then linux is never going to touch MS on the desktop.
Posted by: jreyst on July 22, 2005 08:15 AMMichel V: Why was that? Did anybody do profiling to find out what the cause was? If the file is truly not fragmented (and iirc there are ways to make such a file) then the hardware should not cause any problems so the slowness must be on the kernel side; ripe for optimisation.
Posted by: Mike Hearn on July 22, 2005 08:16 AMThe reason it'll be slow is because it's basically running on an emulated hard disk inside the NTFS partition. Emulation is always slower than the real thing.
Posted by: ant on July 22, 2005 08:22 AMThere's two things that a lot of you defending Linux are missing:
1 - virtually EVERYONE reading this is on your side! We all want Linux to be successful, and to solidly compete with Windows. That's why we're here!
2 - Those of you suggesting that the only key is getting Linux OEM'ed in or in front of kids are missing one key factor: Windows sucks! MANY Regular People would be willing to switch, if the pain involved in doing so was low enough. That's why Firefox has the user base it does - the threshold to leaving IE got low enough, that there was finally an escape route. Basically, we as users have become used to a certain threshold of pain, but that doesn't mean we wouldn't escape it for a better route, it's just that we don't see that better route. Once the barrier is low enough, many of us would even accept one type of pain (windows spyware, etc) for another (missing a few apps on linux, learning new tricks). But THE PAIN THRESHOLD OF SWITCHING HAS TO BE LOWERED. This, btw, is why I'm switching to Mac instead of Linux. And this is what I predict over the next 2 years: In the fight for the desktop, Mac is going to take the fight to Windows, not Linux. But Asa's got part of the roadmap to make Linux a contender too. Please realize he (and we) are on your side, and try to find the value in his post instead of the flaws. I applaud Anders, Ido, Mike Hearn, and michel v (there are probably other too, sorry if I missed you) for doing exactly that: turning this into a productive discussion, finding the value in the post and adding more value. Hopefully I've added value as well. Ta Ta
ant: I don't accept that. Wine emulates Windows and is usually not any slower than the real thing. It isn't "emulating" a hard disk, what actually happens I guess is that a loopback device is used to mount the disk image onto the system, then a pivot is done to make that the root drive. If it's slow, I'd imagine it's because the file[s] used to store the contents of the disk image are fragmented. But I don't know - it'd need to be profiled.
Posted by: Mike Hearn on July 22, 2005 08:37 AMxen will apparently soon support MS Windows
http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenFaq#head-fcb85a149da66907086cc8ba4f0793ad01769b92
Instead of windowzmatizing linux, why not just run them side by side?
That way you can keep linux clean and beautiful!
SuSE9.3 already has full easy xen support in YaST2
Posted by: Beer on July 22, 2005 08:58 AMYour proposed migration requirements sound good to me.
Only question: Why would you want to copy the users' data files to a new My Documents tree? Why not access them where they are?
Are you afraid that the linux install or it's apps would damage them?
Setting up a copy might be ok for testing, where it's clear it's a copy for test only, but I'd think it'd cause more hassle having to resync your data files than just leaving the one set for use by both OSs.
Posted by: Jeff Wilkinson on July 22, 2005 09:00 AM> most people use more than one computer these days
People want a single contact to the universe of hardware and data, along the lines of a cell phone/video phone. They want to just ask the universe to tell them what is going on and what to do next.
You need something that installs in a distributed way -- figures out whether you have another OS already installed (and whether it's Windows, or Mac, or another *nix) and what the capability of the hardware is, AND what other pieces of hardware are talking to it fairly often. Then installs and handles the person's information _across_the_variety_of_hardware. You need something that operates in the background behind the variety of different pieces of hardware a person may use to look at and change the information.
This is hardly a novel idea -- but it's really time someone did it.
Tim Oren
http://due-diligence.typepad.com/
says this much better than I did when I tried to above:
QUOTE
... The desktop fulcrum has been overused and is crumbling. Relying on it has produced design choices that have had to be revisited, while tough competitors moved forward. ....
Opportunity costs. Even a decade back, the desktop user interface and way of thinking was thoroughly broken, and I'm including the Mac. Applications as such had already quit mattering. Our lives were being fragmented into files, schedules and other bits in numbers well beyond the original design point of the desktop metaphor (I have Alan Kay's word on that). Since then it's gotten far worse. More of our lives are lived virtually - photos, music, IMs.... The storage learning curve beat out even Moore's Law, so we just keep everything now. Binding those bits of our lives to a particular device or body of code seems pointless, we're now used to having our resources 'in the net'. The next wave is taking this already hideous management problem, and moving our user interface onto mobile devices with far fewer affordances.
END QUOTE
Posted by: Hank Roberts on July 22, 2005 09:24 AM"The copying of user files should be a fairly easy task. They should be copied into a similar folder structure as they are in the user's Windows filesystem (probably a "My Documents" folder with "My Pictures," "My Music," and "My Videos" sub-folders.)"
No, no,[i]no[/i]. Screw copying. Linux should be able to read all music/pictures/videos from the originating Windows-partition. It should also be able to run most of the windows-applications by just double-clicking on the .exe.
I tried my share of distro's, but I'm _not_ willing to hand over most of my HDD-space (which is already pretty packed) to the _same friggin' data_.
Posted by: Nanaki on July 22, 2005 10:54 AMOHNOES! You can't make Linux friendly with Windows - that is teh evilz and M$ are evil.
Perhaps these people actually need to get out of their basements and realise that to get anywhere they have to start respecting the market leader and work with it, not against it.
"Last I heard, Linux could not read an NTFS-formatted disk without causing damage (even without trying to write to it!). This is not because Linux sucks, but because NTFS is horribly, horribly complicated."
You are both right and wrong. In 2.4.x the built in NTFS driver would allow you to activate a "write" option that could damage the filesystem while writing to it. In 2.6.x (and this still rings true for the 2.6.12.2 kernel according to the description I read on menuconfig last night) you can only write changes to the NTFS volume that don't change the size of the file you are writing (which means you cant create new files):
http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/info/ntfs.html#3.2
"The new driver, introduced in 2.5.11, has some write code, but it's very limited. The driver can overwrite existing files, but it cannot change the length, add new or delete existing files... Adding write support will take a long time. NTFS is built like a database. Any changes you make, necessitate making changes in many places, for consistency. Make a mistake and the filesystem will be damaged, make too many mistakes and the filesystem will be destroyed. Also, the current developers are only working on NTFS as a hobby, during their free time. If you'd like to help, please email me: linux-ntfs-dev@sourceforge.net"
Again this is still true according to the 2.6.12.2 kernel configuration program. Given how long this has been the case - I doubt this situation will change anytime in the near future.
Thats it for me - please feel free to return to your regularly scheduled ABMer vs. NBMer argument now.
Posted by: jay on July 22, 2005 11:29 AMHmmmm... it's also worth mentioning that you seem to have set a pretty high bar for Linux on Desktop. Now I'm not somebody who has confidence in the future of LOTD but nonetheless... I don't think LOTD needs to be able to copy over all of a user's settings from a Windows partition in order to suceed. Honestly I think the beginning "kick off" period is the least of the problems with the LOTD solution as most of the issues inherent with that can be resolved by a one-time visit from your local geek or some help from your local LUG. It's also worth remembering that most normal users on Windows can't come close to installing and configuring Windows on their own either.
Upgradability and Compatibility are the issues that reign at the top of my list when it comes to LOTD. A lot of commercial distributions require that you buy a new version every 6 months - 1 year in order to get major upgrades on a lot of the included software (note: This obviously doesn't include security updates as any reputable distro offers those).
So lets say I have RPL distro version 7. Let's say it came with Gnome 2.10 preinstalled. Let's say that three months after I bought RPL 7, Gnome 2.12 is released and another month afterwards RPL 7.1 comes out and includes that package. Even though technically it is possible for me to hack around myself and get Gnome 2.12 installed on RPL 7, my life gets a lot easier if I just go out and shell out the bucks for RPL 7.1.
Because of the fact that commercial distros work this way, it creates a "software subscription" type of situation. It is further aggravated by the fact that software in the OSS world tends to develop faster and be released more often than in the CSS world.
Of course we all know what I mean by compatibility... so there is really no need to expunge on that point further.
Posted by: jay on July 22, 2005 11:41 AMI don't think the migration issues are as big a deal as you might think Asa. Don't get wrong, they are important, but if you look at how people upgrade their editions of Windows they're already used to starting over. When people moved from Win98 to XP they either formatted their machine and reinstalled from scratch or they just bought a new computer. As said before, this is why getting OEMs on board is important. And if you look over on the Ubuntu development Wiki they're working on an OEM oriented version as an option for the next release.
I think THE most important hurdle stopping people from using Linux is getting applications running on it. Regular people can't care what OS they're using, they just want one that works. The first thing that'll happen when you try to switch someone over to Linux is they'll say "Hey, I need such and such program" and then...well, crap. It isn't released on Linux and there's no decent replacement app. It never fails, Windows users will always find a program or 12 they can't live without and they just also happen to only work under Windows. Games have this happen alot, and accounting/business/tax software quite often as well. Sure, Wine is an option, but it's no where near easy enough for these "regular people" to attempt using, especially since none of the majore distros come with it built in and ready to use :(
Better APIs will help this, but most distros are already fairly similar thanks to LSB and Posix. The big problem is installation. As I continue to go on and on about...I really believe Mike Hearn and the Autopackage guys are working on what will solve this problem ;) People can spend a few minutes changing settings as long as they can copy all their files easily. Hell, most "regular" people I know just use the default settings on everything anyway. Installation is the key.
Posted by: Derick Eisenhardt on July 22, 2005 11:45 AM"Last I heard, Linux could not read an NTFS-formatted disk without causing damage (even without trying to write to it!). This is not because Linux sucks, but because NTFS is horribly, horribly complicated."
jay, he's talking about reading the disk. You don't need to write to NTFS to copy over settings and local files.
This is how easy it is to mount a windows partition on FC4, mind you that SuSE and Mandriva will do this automatically, and they have ntfs support precompiled in, so they don't need this kernel module.
wget http://easynews.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/linux-ntfs/kernel-module-ntfs-2.6.12-1.1398_FC4-2.1.22-0.rr.7.4.i686.rpm
rpm -Uvh kernel-module-ntfs-2.6.12-1.1398_FC4-2.1.22-0.rr.7.4.i686.rpm
mkdir /mnt/windows && mount /dev/hda1 /mnt/windows -t ntfs -r -o umask=0222
Where hda1 is your windows hd device
As for the SuSE live cd not mounting the win partitions. I run SuSE9.3 and it does automount the partitions, so that's not an issue. Mandriva also does this, and the latest Live Mandriva Move CD also automounts ntfs partitions, I can confirm this because I run all 3 systems, FC1/3/4, SuSE93, and Mandriva 10.2/Move. I'm also a silver member at mandriva club and have been running these distributions minus SuSE for almost 7 years.
Linux was not always as easy as it is today, so we have a lot to be thankful for!
"jay, he's talking about reading the disk. You don't need to write to NTFS to copy over settings and local files."
Yeah I know. I'm just trying to point him in the right direction. And I do agree what writing to NTFS is irrelevant in the context of the original topic. Still I think the migration is something that most Windows users have absolutely no clue how to perform between two Windows installations... (even with the Files and Settings Transfer Wizard in XP). Everybody I know falls into one of two classifications when it comes to their computer use:
1) Power Users (people like all of us here).
2) Appliance Users (they believe the computer is an appliance and will never attempt to take it further than that).
Consider for a second just how many people can't even program their own VCRs. Given the complications involved in today's applications and operating systems I don't see how it's possible to every fully cater to that brand of user. When most Real People want to upgrade to the next version of Windows, they buy a new machine. Then they get somebody who is bit more technical than themselves to assist in the transition.
Posted by: jay on July 22, 2005 11:54 AMyou also have to load it into the kernel before you mount so
wget http://easynews.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/linux-ntfs/kernel-module-ntfs-2.6.12-1.1398_FC4-2.1.22-0.rr.7.4.i686.rpm
rpm -Uvh kernel-module-ntfs-2.6.12-1.1398_FC4-2.1.22-0.rr.7.4.i686.rpm
modprobe ntfs
mkdir /mnt/windows && mount /dev/hda1 /mnt/windows -t ntfs -r -o umask=0222
nautilus /mnt/windows
There, it's that easy
Posted by: Beer on July 22, 2005 11:54 AMJust out of interest, Asa, are you or have you been a linux user?
(among others)
Seriously. Dude. This is not Slashdot. Back here in the blogosphere, you actually have to read the article before commenting it.
And before you critisize, you actually have to understand the article's arguments. You'd actually think that Übergeeks would actually understand the ethics of good debate... (Don't you just looove strawmen logic and flamebait mentality?)
But I digress, we're here to discover, not to burn each other to crisp. Some discussions are actually happening, new thoughts are developing. Some even discover that ideas don't have to be coded in C to be Turing complete.
And Asa, I don't know how deep you are into command-line stuffs (God knows one does not have to learn much Bash anymore to try out three different distros, like I have; you can give GNU/Linux that at least), but I wish you courage and perseverence in reading each and every comment here, one by one.
I do want to migrate to Linux full time. Urgently. And take as many RPLs with me. But right now its dizzying enough maintaining my dual-boot machine; how am I supposed to hand-walk my friends? I still prefer sticking to my pirated WinXP partition. And if you want to tell me to buy a licensed copy, well I can't afford a license can you buy me one? And can you raise my nation's GDP while you're at it?
(or at least help us organize a proletarian communist revolution so we can skin all those borgeuists alive and redistribute the wealth more equally?)
Posted by: Lemi4 on July 22, 2005 12:49 PMAsa,
The migration idea is somewhat compelling, however, I think the idea that a os installer should complete migration for all apps around install time sounds unfeasible -- doubtless there are many cases where migration would require user interaction, and compounding those at the install phase would lead to some tedium. A more feasible solution would be for the os installer to detect windows applications, and install functionally equivalent packages as possible, and the applications themselves could at first run offer app-specific migration facilities. This approach would seem to lend itself to better distribution of effort, too.
A an aside, that eyesore of "API stability and a familiar application install experience" ...irrelevant. You seemed to allude in a previous blog post that this is something like: stumble upon interesting sw on the web, browse a seedy ad-overloaded Nth party site for an install executable, run that manually, have a tedious dialog with a dumb wizard, end up with spyware half the time. Linux distro equivalent: stumble upon interesting sw on the web, ask your package manager app if it has that (if it's at all available on linux, it does, up to many nines ), tell packager app to install it.
So yes, linux end-user types should use distro-supplied packages of mozilla software. Anything else would be shoehorning them into an inferior user experience. Moving-target API may make the inferior case /more/ inferior than on competing platform X, sure, but how relevant is that, really?
Posted by: tuukka on July 22, 2005 02:26 PMThat was supposed to say "(if it's at all available on linux, it does, up to many nines <handwave/>)" ;)
Posted by: tuukka on July 22, 2005 02:28 PMI'd like to be able to migrate between Linux distros more easily. Upgrading generally works fine, but I have yet to see (or if I have seen one, I don't remember it) an installer that will let you "upgrade" from another distribution. The closest I've seen is directions on how to trick Yum into upgrading an old Red Hat to one of the REHL clones, but that's moving into dark arts territory as it is.
Sure, you can preserve your data and app settings by save your original /home, but even then you still have to redo your system-level config...and re-select all your optional packages.
Posted by: Kelson on July 22, 2005 03:31 PM"Upgrading generally works fine, but I have yet to see (or if I have seen one, I don't remember it) an installer that will let you "upgrade" from another distribution."
Kelson, This is the beauty of linux.
tar cfz myhome.tar.gz /home/username
Open K3B and burn that bad boy. When you install your new linux distribution, simply untar it from the CD back into place and all your settings will be back as if you never switched. All your newsgroups settings, all your emails, browser settings, everything.
You could NEVER do that seemlessly with the windows registry from one system to another with an archive backup. It could work with a couple apps, but most of them would fail, especially those that verify shareware unlock regkeys with the drive serial or some other machine specific number as the crypt key.
It would be a disaster to do that on windows, but on linux migration is really THAT easy.
Posted by: Beer on July 22, 2005 03:40 PMBeer, dude. I think you have to remember that this is about getting Mom and Pop to migrate to and be comfortable in Linux. :-) While your knowledge of the OS is impressive, your command line solutions to some of the issues listed here totally reminds me of the Linux mini-tutorial contained in this flash animation:
;-)
Posted by: Iczer on July 22, 2005 05:13 PM"tar cfz myhome.tar.gz /home/username
Open K3B and burn that bad boy. When you install your new linux distribution, simply untar it from the CD back into place and all your settings will be back as if you never switched. All your newsgroups settings, all your emails, browser settings, everything.
You could NEVER do that seemlessly with the windows registry from one system to another with an archive backup. It could work with a couple apps, but most of them would fail, especially those that verify shareware unlock regkeys with the drive serial or some other machine specific number as the crypt key.
It would be a disaster to do that on windows, but on linux migration is really THAT easy."
The easier way would just to have /home on a seperate partition from /
Posted by: EricM on July 22, 2005 05:45 PMAnother perspective on what people really need, from SF Chronicle 7/20/2005, p.E10, by Bay Area writer Jon Carroll:
"My computer had a mystery illness ....
"I ended up buying a new computer. The new computer was not, interestingly enough, the solution to the problem. But in poking around my old computer, the experts found regrettable viruses and Trojan horses. I could, of course, have gotten my old computer cleaned, but that would have cost as much as a new computer, so what the heck....
"In the age of disposable everything, this is an increasingly common solution to computer infection problems ...
"I am so entirely ready for biodegradable computers."
Posted by: Hank Roberts on July 22, 2005 06:03 PMEd Jason wrote: "I must admit I found Ubuntu just seemed to work - and I got bored. Maybe we need the drama of a semi-working OS?"
LOL! Not for me thanks, I'll stick with ubuntu ;) But if you want, use your happily working ubuntu computer to browse Troubled Windows; lots of OS drama there ;-)
Posted by: Limulus on July 22, 2005 06:10 PMKroc Camen wrote: "to get anywhere they have to start respecting the market leader and work with it, not against it."
Right. Which is why Firefox should never have been created; Mozilla should have concentrated on making add-ons for Internet Explorer. Seriously, if you ever want to see PCs escape from monoploy-induced-mediocrity, there needs to be healthy competition among OSs (it will even make Windows better, as they'll have to compete based on quality instead of coasting along on their ubiquity).
Posted by: Limulus on July 22, 2005 06:20 PMMy feeling is: coding up those converters will be so unpleasant that nobody will do it for free. Therefore RPL will need to be funded by a pretty deep-pocketed company.
Posted by: Cur Mudgeon on July 22, 2005 08:29 PM"The overwhelming majority of potential converts are currently using Windows and they have set up their desktop and each of their primary applications to work the way they want the things to work. They don't want to put that at risk in any way."
In that case, they already have their solution: Windows. If they are so deathly afraid of change, do you really think they'd even bother installing something else?
"fonts, printers, timezone, desktop shortcuts, desktop wallpaper, language, files, bookmarks, cookies, history, passwords, email, contacts"
I can agree that most of those would be useful to migrate over. Things of that nature are certainly being worked on, see for instance
http://udu.wiki.ubuntu.com/WindowsInteroperability
"... windows size and position, etc. that exists in their current environment and that needs to exist in the new environment."
For the love of god, please tell me that you are joking. Someone who is unable to cope with his windows changing size and position does not need a new operating system. He needs a bib and a legal guardian.
Posted by: Johan on July 22, 2005 08:34 PM"The easier way would just to have /home on a seperate partition from /"
EricM, Touché, very good, BUT, what if you had SuSE93 or Mandriva2005LE and you now switch to fedora core. F3/4 will use LVM volume management by default. Now you're up sht creek without a paddle if you're not knowledgeable with LVM.
Anaconda is going to ignore that partition by default, and set up your default user in the LVM ext2/3. You'd then have to mount the other partition, and copy your data over.
That's entirely possible and easy to do. Actually, Anaconda aside, most installers like YaST and Mandrake's will not autopartition using an existing long /home dir. You'd have to go into advanced mode even on those.
So Yes, your solution is good, but not for people who don't know any better.
Another solution would be to mke2fs a new small partition, and copy the data there before you switch. I still think just tar'ing and burning their user dir then restoring it is easier.
The nice thing about linux and unix, is that all your personal info is in your home dir, in windows, it's strewn across both your /Dcouments and Settings/Username, and the registry, so putting that all back together after exporting the registry and rar'ing the user dir, could be a real pain, not to mention it probably wouldn't work for alot of apps.
The simplicity of the ~/.local_config_dir model is astounding and a real plus for linux.
Posted by: Beer on July 22, 2005 09:30 PMHere here. I used to be the kind of person who would gladly spend an afternoon installing something like the typical Linux distro. Then at some point I realized that I just don't have the time for that kind of crap anymore. I know Linux is more stable. I know it's Open Source and therefore it shines like a Beacon of Truth against the ominous, boiling clouds of Microsoft, but I don't care. Windows WORKS for me, and until Linux can JUST WORK for me, I won't be switching over. Although if all this DRM stuff turns out to be what's supposed to be...
Posted by: Jonathan Dobres on July 22, 2005 09:32 PM"The easier way would just to have /home on a seperate partition from /"
EricM,
actually, I just put in a minute of thought into this statement.
You could have a SuSE, Gentoo, Debian or MDK install and mke2fs a new home partition then symlink it to /home. I do that alot with the /tmp dir to keep it safe on my webservers, mounted as rw only.
So yeah, but look, as soon as you decide you want fedora core 4 or any other distro that uses LVM by default, now in Anaconda you will HAVE to keep your /home partition and symlink it to the ext2 in LVM /home. You can add the /home mount to fstab.
OK, that's fine, but now your /home is not in LVM and it's not a dynamically resizable volume with the rest of your system fs. So that's not an elegant solution. Then you have to copy everything over to LVM, and regroup the nonLVM parition into your LVM volgroups.
It may not be as hard as that, but I think it could be. Because FC4 uses LVM, I think it's safer to just burn it, unless you have 2 HDD's in your box, where you can dump it on the other HDD. Otherwise it's a fast track to losing the dynamic volume resizing for X number of blocks.
Posted by: Beer on July 22, 2005 09:45 PMJohan: LOLOLOL!!! Is that why XP rounded the corners on its windows? (for safety? ;)
Posted by: Limulus on July 23, 2005 12:35 AM@John (but a general comment):
Use Windows against itself. Run the migrators from Windows.
Posted by: voracity on July 23, 2005 06:47 AMI agree, but it's really not the OS responsibility's to sort out migration. I had no problem moving to Linux because I used Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, Gaim on Windows so all my prefs and files worked fine upon being copied over. If users use these for a month before migrating, they are half way there. You use an OS for the apps, the OS gets you between them. For someone who only ever uses a computer to surf web and check email (boots up and clicks blue E and giant envelope), getting used to that red fox globe and blue hairy wig envelope is far more intimidating.
My other point is that Windows users will move to Linux without migration files and config. Nearly all Windows users I know have had to reinstall or format at some stage because their PC has 'broke' as they say. They saved some files but they had to reinstall all their apps, and lost settings (because they didn't know how to copy them). They managed to start again. At these moments, I try and persuade them to move, because with Linux you get most the apps you need, and they're much easier to install.
Posted by: Matt on July 23, 2005 10:24 AMIf you're really lazy and want to migrate
works with RH Linux(FC), Mandriva, and SuSE
"normal" people are not going to use debian or gentoo, let's face it.
It's $39 and has a trial. I'm certainly not the type of user that would have even demo'd this product, but I've read good things.
I looked at redhat about four years ago and well it was way too full on. I then proceeded to ask for help on forums where I just got know it all people who started flasming each other over how I should set things up.
I still have not tried Linux.
I have used windows and Mac. Windows cause its a commercial reality and mac cause it looked and felt cool to use. I would like to see Linux come from a diferent angle and while a good OS is the foundation its really getting the product out there infront of people....advertising/promotion. Heck windows does this and thier OS sucks, if Linux is as good as you guys say it is it should have no problems beating m$
Ask your mums if they have herd of Linux, SUSE etc....then ask about windows. Now which do you think they will get on thier next email accessing computer.
Anyway just my two cents and please dont start flaming me about this, as I may leave trying linux for another four years.
Posted by: Cam on July 23, 2005 11:55 PMAsa's right, however the solution is far simpler...
1. Run the installation utility inside Windows itself
2. Use the registry to find the relevent information
3. Auto-Select the default "My documents/My Music" paths etc
4. Allow the user to add additional paths/documents
5. Browser, email, office settings can be block duplicated for potential reuse.
6. Store in what ever formats neccesary, and gzip to the route of C:\
7. Now look for the imports.gzip file in the "RPL" install
Neil, I was just going to write the same thing you just did but wanted to make sure no one else had said it already. :)
Posted by: David Tenser on July 25, 2005 10:08 AMI strongly agree with Neil and voracity's posts.
It is essential to run the migration utility from inside Windows. That way you're not forcing users to quickly adapt to an entirely new interface and filesystem. Doing it in Linux would take a huge leap of faith and trust in the new system, and that's not established yet. The process needs to be a kinder, gentler move overall; somewhere they're already comfortable with.
Real People (myself included) will feel safer in their known environment knowing that the buttons they're pressing aren't over-writing their current o/s or messing it up in any regard.
geof
Posted by: Geof Harries on July 25, 2005 10:48 AM