Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.co
!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeedt0.toon.t-
nline.de!newsmm00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news.t-online.com!not-for-mail
From: Michel Firholz
Newsgroups: alt.comp.freeware,alt.os.linux.ubuntu
Subject: Re: My ubuntu experience
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 23:06:10 +0100
Organization: T-Online
Lines: 148
Message-ID:
References: <1vrbauo6y9whr.62zxagpyjwro$.dlg@40tude.net> <1ct3eit29ohji$.1fdstpgp7b8w4.dlg@40tude.net>
<518068F1j92iaU1@mid.individual.net> <4iArh.32832$k74.3454@text.
ews.blueyonder.co.uk> <519ohvF1jdrt4
1@mid.individual.net>
<45b357fe$1@news01.wxnz.net>
Reply-To: me@privacy.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: news.t-online.com 1169417170 03 5455 siRMLVoloOBLSKWs 070121 22:06:10
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@t-online.de
X-ID: XVpQrQZBYet-8dVu6blT+R2Q3sJEPlEcmPo7F+clYeJuFwrmsf3vgE
User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table (Debian GNU/Linux))
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.comp.freeware:548060 alt
os.linux.ubuntu:8669
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 19:11:19 +0000, Bernard Peek wrote:
> The paragraph you quoted has some clues to what the real problem is. The
> phrase "if the Linux _community_ want newbies to try out and switch to
> Linux" is the key. There are an awful lot of hidden assumptions behind
> that, and while they stay hidden a lot of people are going to be talking
> at cross-purposes without really communicating much.
>
> The first assumption is that there is such a thing as "the linux
> community." There are lots of individuals and groups that use or develop
> Linux but I don't think that there is a Linux community that "want
> newbies to try out and switch to Linux."
>
Very true...
> There are individuals who want newbies to be able to use Linux in
> exactly the same way as they would use Windows.
>
> There are individuals who are quite supportive of newbies but expect
> them to learn the Linux way. My guess is most volunteer Linux developers
> are in this group.
>
True again...
> There are individuals that work for companies that are trying to make a
> profit from selling Linux-based products or services. They want more
> people to use Linux.
>
They might want Linux to keep on being complex, to ensure they will still
be needed.
> There are individuals who believe that "dumbing down" Linux to make it
> more like Windows is wrong.
>
> Most people don't fall completely or consistently into any of those neat
> pigeonholes.
>
Most people...
>>I don't necessarily disagree with the effort to make a newbie friendly
>>distro. But how far is it going to go. People are going to complain that
>>it's not easy enough even if it were exactly like Windows.
>
You can't never go too far towards usability.
> *If* someone wanted Linux to replace Windows then they should work on
> making the user interface identical to Windows, so that users can switch
> without having to learn anything new. In general the people who really
> do want that to happen are a) those who believe that non-free software
> is morally wrong or b) want to make a profit from Linux.
>
Xandros?
> I believe that a lot of the opposition to "dumbing down" Linux comes
> from people who have learned how to fix problems using the command-line
> or by editing configuration-files, and don't understand that there are
> other people who find that an insurmountable problem. I think this
> includes a lot of Linux developers who have written software that does
> what they want and don't see why they should put in a lot more work to
> make it work for people who aren't prepared to meet them half way, by
> putting in some effort to learn those techniques.
>
Hmm, that lot more work is'nt mostly necessary. The existing repositories
are full of solutions out of the box, whereas some the "regulars" still
answer with tweaking the .conf's and the CLI.
> I don't think either side is being unreasonable. Let's not lose sight of
> the fact that most Linux developers are volunteers, you aren't paying
> the piper so you don't get to call the tune. If you want a particular
> feature in a program then you can hire a programmer to add it, or you
> can sweet-talk the existing developers into it. Demanding that an unpaid
> volunteer puts in many hours of their own time to do it just isn't
> reasonable.
>
Full ack, that attitude is not acceptable and i could seldom see it here.
> On the other hand there are volunteer developers who actually want to
> persuade newbies to use Linux, and there are developers working for
> companies like Redhat, SuSE and Ubuntu who are paid to make Linux
> software easier to use.
>
> I've got a suggestion that developers might like to consider. When they
> next work on a program that newbies might want to use, change the way
> configuration options are stored. Make a conscious decision to store the
> program configuration options in a binary format instead of a text file.
> Alternatively whenever a tester has to edit the configuration file by
> hand, log that as a bug.
>
Uch! That's radical! The mood is to store everything in XLM, which is
readable. I don't want to steal the regulars their toy!
>> I just
>>fixed a Windows computer for a friend who has had it for years and still
>>don't know the difference between a hard drive and memory. He thinks all
>>pop-ups are viruses and hacker attacks. Can we make Linux user friendly
>>enough for these folks? Do we really want to? Does it matter if Linux
>>becomes No. 1?
>
> Does it matter to who? There are different people involved with Linux
> and all of them have different wants.
Once Linux has reached the critical mass (and it will need millions of
noobs to), there will be no more nights fiddling with drivers, since you
will get them from the manufacturers. Better: these nights will be PAID to
the regulars by the manufacturers.
>>There comes a point where if people want *better* they must learn how to
>>use the *better* option. If they want easier, stick with what they know
>>and pay people to keep it going.
>>
Full ack.
> That's only partly true. If car manufacture was evolving as fast as
> software there would be people trying to build cars that had the ride of
> a Cadillac but could travel at 200mph.
>
Why trying? BMW exists... and you don't need a screwdriver to drive it.
> I started programming computers when there was only a CLI.
I started programming computers when there was not even a CLI! We had TTY
ribbons. God was that a good time! ;-)
> But even
> though I recognise that the CLI is very powerful and flexible I don't
> think that it's acceptable to require average computer users to have
> anything to do with it. Neither do I think it's acceptable to force
> users to edit configuration files by hand.
*Full ack!*
> But Linux doesn't have to replace Windows. There's a job that needs to
> be done and Windows currently does it reasonably well. Linux has the
> potential to do it better, and there are people who want it to do that
> and are willing to put in time, effort and money to do that.
There is a place for both (and even for Apple as well). As God created
life, He could have created only one specie, why did He make millions of
different ones?
> But let's
> not lose sight of the fact that nobody has a right to demand that the
> volunteer developers work towards that end if they don't want to.
They mostly don't have to. Just sometimes try to open their minds and
refrain to preach the CLI and the .confs when it's not required. It's
better not to answer a question (another noob user might do it better!)
than to give the wrong advice (from the point of view of an user).
Michel
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Omicron Theta BBS (1:261/20)
|
