- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Anyone Can Use The Linux Operating System
Now most modern Linux distributions work with a fairly wide range of hardware - so most of these users will install the operating system successfully and move on to setting everything else up. What about those that have hardware that doesn’t work or works poorly without closed source/restricted drivers? They get upset, curse the penguin in their disc drive, call it a cr@ppy operating system, swear to never try it again and then proceed to tell all their friends about the negative experience that will obviously happen with any hardware and Linux. |
|
|
Comments (81)
RTFM
3 earlier comments in the full thread.
Speaking of documentation, here is a link talking about doing it right. Audio and video documentations & tutorials are the way to go. They are easiest for a user and most effective to learn by. Most modern training material and applications are based on video an audio
http://dot.kde.org/2011/06/05/be-part-kritas-first-training-...
A picture is worth a thousand words, but a video is worth a thousand pictures, or may be more.
http://dot.kde.org/2011/06/05/be-part-kritas-first-training-...
A picture is worth a thousand words, but a video is worth a thousand pictures, or may be more.
@Fettoosh -
UGH!!!!
They are snazziest, perhaps, or easiest on the developers. The lazy way to convince yourself that you have done your duty. They are a great addition to the documentation universe, but they are no substitute for proper written documentation.
As a user, they are slow and difficult to use in a setting with others around you.
Absolutely difficult to browse through for specific bits.
UGH!!!!
They are snazziest, perhaps, or easiest on the developers. The lazy way to convince yourself that you have done your duty. They are a great addition to the documentation universe, but they are no substitute for proper written documentation.
As a user, they are slow and difficult to use in a setting with others around you.
Absolutely difficult to browse through for specific bits.
Quoting:They are snazziest, perhaps, or easiest on the developers.
Dino, Dino, Dino, lighten up guy and be a little creative.
Done right, the audio narration has to be written down to be accurate and of good quality, so I assume they will have a text version.
Also, they don't have to make a single gigantic video/audio file, they can make a hundred or more little self contained clips for each feature or operation, create DVD/Web interface with search and such feature to make it easier than text documents.
You must have seen such material, haven't you?
Let's get the text only w/ screenshot version done first. Then video work could be delegated to others (working from the written documentation).
At any rate, I recently got a forum reply of "So, I searched Google and got 76,000 hits... so either you didn't look..." blah blah blah recently. I was not happy. That isn't "helping" (and, since I'd looked through a healthy number of those 76,000 hits to no avail, it was also insulting). I checked this "helpful" responders other posts... and their most common response involved "google blah blah blah." My advice to such helpful posters: get off of the forums.
At any rate, I recently got a forum reply of "So, I searched Google and got 76,000 hits... so either you didn't look..." blah blah blah recently. I was not happy. That isn't "helping" (and, since I'd looked through a healthy number of those 76,000 hits to no avail, it was also insulting). I checked this "helpful" responders other posts... and their most common response involved "google blah blah blah." My advice to such helpful posters: get off of the forums.
Quoting:Let's get the text only w/ screenshot version done first
Sorry, I can't oblige because I am not involved in that project but, they might accommodate if you donate to that project.
Besides, this is a project to create documentation for a graphics application. Audio and video are essential to create a meaningful training & help material
Quoting:...a really good manual with full notes, illustrations, etc.. But from what I can see, it doesn't exist. A lot of notes, yes - and undoubtedly very helpful.....but what I was looking for was a proper download file, probably in pdf format, that I could print and slowly digest - something to sit on my shelf as a basic reference. There are a series of places where you can get other "fill ins", but as for one single manual site......I haven't seen it yet if it exists - but I would be happy to be told I am wrong and that it does exist.Notice the contrast between the FM documentation commented upon here and FreeBSD's Documentation at http://www.freebsd.org/docs.html
Noticeable difference, yes ??
Observe how nicely (subjectively-speaking) and appropriate the documentation categories are in the latter.
E.g.,
- FAQ **
- Handbook **
- Manual Pages
- Books and Articles Online
- Publications
- Web Resources
- For Newbies
** Of special note, the FreeBSD FAQ and Handbook are both handily available as downloadable html, pdf, ps, rtf, and txt -formatted references.
There is even a strong documentation/reference effort for the entire FreeBSD "community", see the 'FreeBSD Documentation Project' at http://www.freebsd.org/docproj/
Conclusion: It is perhaps unfortunate that excellent documentation for Linux continues to lag further and further behind that of FreeBSD (e.g., Linux documentation within the somewhat antiquated 'Linux Documentation Project', http://tldp.org/ )
@vainrveenr --
I'm not quite as enamored of FreeBSD as you, but agree that it is head and shoulders above most free software doc. I still break into cold sweats over libxml2, and I haven't had to program to that since 2007.
I'm not quite as enamored of FreeBSD as you, but agree that it is head and shoulders above most free software doc. I still break into cold sweats over libxml2, and I haven't had to program to that since 2007.
I'm not saying the FreeBSD Manual isn't a great thing (because it is), but it's in no way as easy to run a desktop in FreeBSD as it is in most Linux distributions (and I'm definitely including Slackware just to put this in its proper perspective).
Not that you can't run a FreeBSD desktop successfully. I've done it. But there's a lot of work to be done to get from the basic installation to a full desktop-environment-powered system with all the apps, all the configuration and all the multimedia extras that many (if not most) users require.
PC-BSD http://pcbsd.org/ is a great way to get all of this without so much legwork ( ... or finger-work). Dru Lavigne's PC-BSD book is also a great help, and there's also a PC-BSD Handbook.
While you can turn just about any "core" BSD project (Free-, Open-, Net-, DragonFly-) into a desktop system, it's neither quick nor painless. They all ship pretty much bare and server-oriented.
More BSD "distros" like PC-BSD would go a long way toward closing this gap. As much crap as Slackware gets for "pain" incurred, you can burn a DVD, do an installation and have KDE and a bunch of apps ready to go.
GhostBSD http://ghostbsd.org/ helps, bringing a GNOME-based project into the fold, and when PC-BSD stops relying so heavily on KDE in its upcoming release, the FreeBSD core will be much easier to turn into the desktop system of your choice.
Not that you can't run a FreeBSD desktop successfully. I've done it. But there's a lot of work to be done to get from the basic installation to a full desktop-environment-powered system with all the apps, all the configuration and all the multimedia extras that many (if not most) users require.
PC-BSD http://pcbsd.org/ is a great way to get all of this without so much legwork ( ... or finger-work). Dru Lavigne's PC-BSD book is also a great help, and there's also a PC-BSD Handbook.
While you can turn just about any "core" BSD project (Free-, Open-, Net-, DragonFly-) into a desktop system, it's neither quick nor painless. They all ship pretty much bare and server-oriented.
More BSD "distros" like PC-BSD would go a long way toward closing this gap. As much crap as Slackware gets for "pain" incurred, you can burn a DVD, do an installation and have KDE and a bunch of apps ready to go.
GhostBSD http://ghostbsd.org/ helps, bringing a GNOME-based project into the fold, and when PC-BSD stops relying so heavily on KDE in its upcoming release, the FreeBSD core will be much easier to turn into the desktop system of your choice.
On the original topic, that being what is needed for less-frustrating Linux uptake, it's true that documentation across the Linux and BSD spectrum can be very spotty.
Distributions that focus on new users (you know which distributions I'm talking about), that produce documentation aimed at those users and offer forums that can help them -- these are invaluable.
More valuable (and rare) are Linux desktop systems preloaded. I wish (fill in distro name) would focus on that and that alone ...
Distributions that focus on new users (you know which distributions I'm talking about), that produce documentation aimed at those users and offer forums that can help them -- these are invaluable.
More valuable (and rare) are Linux desktop systems preloaded. I wish (fill in distro name) would focus on that and that alone ...
@Pmpatrick.....written in much haste without reading all the additional comments properly....so if I have missed it, sorry in advance. With respect to the "one-click" issue, not as yet. I don't know if it is possible, but so far I haven't found a solution. If this is brought home to the developers, I am sure it will be addressed......maybe.....perhaps....but I do hope so; I am so used to one-click operation that the double click method is irritating.
PS....in fact the absence of the Xfce manual as it apparently has been confirmed by others above, almost begs me to do a simple project for LXer and write a beginner's guide to the wretched software with screen capture illustrations etc, rather like my previous articles on setting up KDE4. Wouldn't hurt because I think Xfce is pretty good.......my impressions are that it is much faster and simpler than KDE, even in my cutdown form, and I could even see me shifting to Xfce to get both of those characteristics. It depends on Scott's wishes and needs - and my time of course. Or someone else might like to take it up, because the package needs it badly.
PS....in fact the absence of the Xfce manual as it apparently has been confirmed by others above, almost begs me to do a simple project for LXer and write a beginner's guide to the wretched software with screen capture illustrations etc, rather like my previous articles on setting up KDE4. Wouldn't hurt because I think Xfce is pretty good.......my impressions are that it is much faster and simpler than KDE, even in my cutdown form, and I could even see me shifting to Xfce to get both of those characteristics. It depends on Scott's wishes and needs - and my time of course. Or someone else might like to take it up, because the package needs it badly.
Quoting:They are snazziest, perhaps, or easiest on the developers. The lazy way to convince yourself that you have done your duty. They are a great addition to the documentation universe, but they are no substitute for proper written documentation.
As a user, they are slow and difficult to use in a setting with others around you.
Absolutely difficult to browse through for specific bits.
I must confess, I agree with Dino 100%, here.
(Should I seek professional help immediately?)
Re: single-clicking in Xfce, there's a setting in Thunar, but I haven't tried it to see if it does what you want:
Thunar > Edit > Preferences > Behavior
Thunar > Edit > Preferences > Behavior
Quoting:I must confess, I agree with Dino 100%, here.
(Should I seek professional help immediately?)
No need to seek professional help. You and Dino are not the average computer users and I am sure you would prefer man pages.
Quoting:It depends on Scott's wishes and needs - and my time of course..
If its my approval your asking for in writing up your own version of a Xfce walk-through manual Ridcully you most certainly have it..;-)
Video tutorials can be very nice and useful, but they are not good for everything. Especially not for finding the solution to a specific problem or question quickly, since it takes time to see through them, you can't search in them and you can't copy-paste from them.
@ComputerBob..Thankyou for the suggestion........Yes, I know of that one from my limited "playabout" with Xfce, and it works......BUT......only for opening the items in Thunar and a few other places, but not for the main screen - or at least that's what I have found so far. Curious but true.
@Mortenalver.......hmmmm.......you didn't intend this because you were talking of videos, but an index to actual items in the script would be very, very, very useful......I shall give it much thought.
For Scott.........I just KNEW that would be your response.....my big mouth LOL. :-) However, lemme take a long think about this. I'll be using openSUSE 11.4 and its variation of Xfce. There are reasons for this such as being able to easily import KMail into Xfce if desired.......since that allows me to get at all my previous mail. Xfce uses Thunderbird I believe......but I have never used that software and I'd like to concentrate on Xfce if at all possible.
@Mortenalver.......hmmmm.......you didn't intend this because you were talking of videos, but an index to actual items in the script would be very, very, very useful......I shall give it much thought.
For Scott.........I just KNEW that would be your response.....my big mouth LOL. :-) However, lemme take a long think about this. I'll be using openSUSE 11.4 and its variation of Xfce. There are reasons for this such as being able to easily import KMail into Xfce if desired.......since that allows me to get at all my previous mail. Xfce uses Thunderbird I believe......but I have never used that software and I'd like to concentrate on Xfce if at all possible.
Yeah, the hardest-to-use desktops certainly have the best documentation!
It's really true for Gentoo and NetBSD as well; I have used both (and Free and OpenBSD) as my desktop. Compared to Gentoo docs, I find most Debian / Ubuntu tutorials / howto's I find on the web pretty dissatisfying, as they usually only tell how, and not why.
One has to remember - beyond 'corporate desktops' and Ubuntu, it's all volunteers. So if XFCE-volunteers enjoy coding but not documenting, then there will simply be no documentation. Even if users ask for it, why would free software developers write documentation - if that's not what they like doing most?
After all, last time I checked being a volunteer is mainly done for satisfaction and fun; not for answering to 'customer demand'. OK, coding would probably be even more fun if there are satisfied users out there in the real world; but one should never forget there's also something called "Art pour 'l art".
Applied to coding: "Coding solely for the sake and fun of coding and forget everything else". Usually, such art is pretty useless, except for making the artist happy.
If you want something which makes the user happy, sooner or later someone in a software project has to do a job that one doesn't like doing, and most of the time people have to do things they don't like, a monetary reward is involved. I'd say no monetary reward pretty much means no one is doing the boring / frustrating jobs. Can't really blame them, do you?
I mean, if you like making brooms as a hobby, and the neighbours ask you: "Given you're making brooms but don't put them to use, why not make us real-world people happy and broom our garden?" I think most people wouldn't be surprised you'd rather stick to making brooms just for the sake of it, and not using them to make the world population happy. I think the neighbours should be happy if you lend them the broom for free, and have no right to demand you broom their garden as well.
Read the whole commentIt's really true for Gentoo and NetBSD as well; I have used both (and Free and OpenBSD) as my desktop. Compared to Gentoo docs, I find most Debian / Ubuntu tutorials / howto's I find on the web pretty dissatisfying, as they usually only tell how, and not why.
One has to remember - beyond 'corporate desktops' and Ubuntu, it's all volunteers. So if XFCE-volunteers enjoy coding but not documenting, then there will simply be no documentation. Even if users ask for it, why would free software developers write documentation - if that's not what they like doing most?
After all, last time I checked being a volunteer is mainly done for satisfaction and fun; not for answering to 'customer demand'. OK, coding would probably be even more fun if there are satisfied users out there in the real world; but one should never forget there's also something called "Art pour 'l art".
Applied to coding: "Coding solely for the sake and fun of coding and forget everything else". Usually, such art is pretty useless, except for making the artist happy.
If you want something which makes the user happy, sooner or later someone in a software project has to do a job that one doesn't like doing, and most of the time people have to do things they don't like, a monetary reward is involved. I'd say no monetary reward pretty much means no one is doing the boring / frustrating jobs. Can't really blame them, do you?
I mean, if you like making brooms as a hobby, and the neighbours ask you: "Given you're making brooms but don't put them to use, why not make us real-world people happy and broom our garden?" I think most people wouldn't be surprised you'd rather stick to making brooms just for the sake of it, and not using them to make the world population happy. I think the neighbours should be happy if you lend them the broom for free, and have no right to demand you broom their garden as well.
"Ars gratia artes" is specifically a revolt against the patronage system of yore, but it's really "art for the artist's sake" in practice.
(Where "sake" is understood to be a rice-based booze from Asia.)
(Where "sake" is understood to be a rice-based booze from Asia.)
Uhm, yeah, code for the coders sake is probably better, since I'm pretty sure there's no mirror where 'code' can look into and see how beautiful it is.
Thanks for sharing the Latin and English name (they only taught me the original French one), and now I also now what Greek "autotelic" means. I think autotelic pretty much describes how much free software is written, however "auto" indeed not referring to the code itself but to the coder.
Wow, RTFW can be really helpful!
Thanks for sharing the Latin and English name (they only taught me the original French one), and now I also now what Greek "autotelic" means. I think autotelic pretty much describes how much free software is written, however "auto" indeed not referring to the code itself but to the coder.
Wow, RTFW can be really helpful!
If it itches, scratch it.
Linux has always been about scratching an itch. For me in 1999 it was the possibility that Microsoft was going to go the Software As a Service route and would own all the software AND my data. I decided I wanted to own my data and thought that the sooner I moved away from Microsoft, the sooner my data would be safe. I also decided I was tired of pirating software and knew that if I switch to Open Source software, I would never have to pirate another program ever again.
I embraced the penguin in 1999. Perhaps there was something wrong with me. I believed Linux to be a Unix clone. Other than hardware related issues, I thought any shortcomings or things I did not understand were shortcomings on MY part. All I had to do was learn Unix like I had learned DOS.
The good news is that if it looks like Linux will scratch an itch for someone, they will learn it no matter what they have to overcome to do so. The even better news is thanks to the efforts of many people whom Linux has scratched an itch for, Linux is eaiser than ever to use and may non-computer oriented folks can run Linux with little or no difficulty.
As for Windows System Administrators who are not willing to overcome any hurdle in their way of mastering Linux. Just remember this. Someday you may have interview for a job where the other candidate knows both Windows AND Linux.
I embraced the penguin in 1999. Perhaps there was something wrong with me. I believed Linux to be a Unix clone. Other than hardware related issues, I thought any shortcomings or things I did not understand were shortcomings on MY part. All I had to do was learn Unix like I had learned DOS.
The good news is that if it looks like Linux will scratch an itch for someone, they will learn it no matter what they have to overcome to do so. The even better news is thanks to the efforts of many people whom Linux has scratched an itch for, Linux is eaiser than ever to use and may non-computer oriented folks can run Linux with little or no difficulty.
As for Windows System Administrators who are not willing to overcome any hurdle in their way of mastering Linux. Just remember this. Someday you may have interview for a job where the other candidate knows both Windows AND Linux.
Obviously the author does not understand that there are many Linux users that do not want the OS dumbed down; that is what MS Windows is for. Linux is not a gaming OS and should not become one. And developers seem to have the same opinion, certainly those developers who work for IBM et al developing for Linux. Please do not assume that everyone in the entire universe has the same point of view that you do, and so the world should be remade.
Some obvious errors in your article: "What about those that have hardware that doesn’t work Linux lost a potential user"
Only Apple products guarantee that everything works since they control the hardware. Windows users probably have to search for drivers more than Linux users.
"They find the download link with the penguin above it Linux lost a potential user" No one should download from some unknown web site. If it's not in the repositories and can not be installed with the distro's package manager, find an alternate. One strength of Linux is that you download from a trusted source, and not from anybody, anywhere on the web. Hopefully that's not going to change.
Finally, you are comparing a system like MS Windows or Apple, that come pre-installed, with installing Linux on your own. Try installing MS Windows (it will format/delete the disk first so you lose everything and can not dual boot) or Apple (wrong hardware so it won't work) with a pre-installed Linux system.
Some obvious errors in your article: "What about those that have hardware that doesn’t work Linux lost a potential user"
Only Apple products guarantee that everything works since they control the hardware. Windows users probably have to search for drivers more than Linux users.
"They find the download link with the penguin above it Linux lost a potential user" No one should download from some unknown web site. If it's not in the repositories and can not be installed with the distro's package manager, find an alternate. One strength of Linux is that you download from a trusted source, and not from anybody, anywhere on the web. Hopefully that's not going to change.
Finally, you are comparing a system like MS Windows or Apple, that come pre-installed, with installing Linux on your own. Try installing MS Windows (it will format/delete the disk first so you lose everything and can not dual boot) or Apple (wrong hardware so it won't work) with a pre-installed Linux system.
What you get is what you (buy already installed)
It is easy to forget that everybody in the world buys a computer (ok, nearly everybody) and they get Windows. They get on with it, ecosystems are formed, traditions, habits, and momentum has been created. What they do not do is mess with partitions, or install operating systems, ever. Most users I come across do not even back up in a serious way, if at all.
Expectations are already in place (even for Windows experts). They expect trouble, and can easily find it instead of doing what I would think of as sensible, and easy. I think you are pretty well spot on with your points. Particularly your last point 'by someone that knows what they are doing' - a friend, family member, mentor or whoever. There are powerful enemies out there who also know what they are doing. Expectations are distorted by FUD, and the Free software community is pants at any sort of marketing. I would add that I find some home grown and (by me) unwanted uncertainty (the 'U' in FUD) in the commonplace use of the word 'Linux' and the dual personality - kernel or OS - implied by the general usage I believe works against free software.
Expectations are already in place (even for Windows experts). They expect trouble, and can easily find it instead of doing what I would think of as sensible, and easy. I think you are pretty well spot on with your points. Particularly your last point 'by someone that knows what they are doing' - a friend, family member, mentor or whoever. There are powerful enemies out there who also know what they are doing. Expectations are distorted by FUD, and the Free software community is pants at any sort of marketing. I would add that I find some home grown and (by me) unwanted uncertainty (the 'U' in FUD) in the commonplace use of the word 'Linux' and the dual personality - kernel or OS - implied by the general usage I believe works against free software.
The thing is they can buy with Linux preinstalled. It isn't hard to do. A quick Google search is all it takes. Then Linux is usually problem free.
They can buy with Linux pre-installed -- but first they have to believe that Linux can meet their needs, and do so better than the default choice -- the "safe" choice -- and that's Windows.
They have to go significantly out of their way to get anything but Windows. Even if they're not satisfied (and how can they judge, without broader experience), Windows defines their expectations.
They at least are sure that they are no worse off than everybody else, and haven't thrown money away or inadvertently screwed themselves by trying to be clever and choosing an "exotic" product. They know someone who "knows computers" and can help or at least give advice, etc...
And Microsoft is a prestigious, lauded and wealthy corporation that "made computers "easy" and "affordable" for ordinary people -- so it must be good, right? So if there are differences from and incompatibilities with that other operating system, obviously the "free" alternative must be at fault.
It's not a level playing field. I'm not a techie, But I have become relatively computer-savvy. And I remember what it was like, buying my first computer. Newbies -- especially those who have to watch their budget -- are going to be less concerned with picking out the "best" choice (they realize they're not qualified to judge) but rather with avoiding a bad one. And in that context, Linux often looks like a bigger risk than they're willing to take, whether it comes pre-installed or not.
They have to go significantly out of their way to get anything but Windows. Even if they're not satisfied (and how can they judge, without broader experience), Windows defines their expectations.
They at least are sure that they are no worse off than everybody else, and haven't thrown money away or inadvertently screwed themselves by trying to be clever and choosing an "exotic" product. They know someone who "knows computers" and can help or at least give advice, etc...
And Microsoft is a prestigious, lauded and wealthy corporation that "made computers "easy" and "affordable" for ordinary people -- so it must be good, right? So if there are differences from and incompatibilities with that other operating system, obviously the "free" alternative must be at fault.
It's not a level playing field. I'm not a techie, But I have become relatively computer-savvy. And I remember what it was like, buying my first computer. Newbies -- especially those who have to watch their budget -- are going to be less concerned with picking out the "best" choice (they realize they're not qualified to judge) but rather with avoiding a bad one. And in that context, Linux often looks like a bigger risk than they're willing to take, whether it comes pre-installed or not.
> Then Linux is usually problem free.
Well, except for those necessary programs which sometimes pop up, which are almost universally Windows only. And services which refuse to support Linux or use Windows only media formats (Netflix, for one example, but there are many). Etc, etc.
The problems are legion. They're also, in any individual case, usually relatively minor, but they do build up. Most people will find that they need some type of Windows machine around (whether physical or virtual) to deal with them. But it's reached a point where Linux should be your primary machine, and Windows the niche one. That's a significant improvement over the way it used to be.
Well, except for those necessary programs which sometimes pop up, which are almost universally Windows only. And services which refuse to support Linux or use Windows only media formats (Netflix, for one example, but there are many). Etc, etc.
The problems are legion. They're also, in any individual case, usually relatively minor, but they do build up. Most people will find that they need some type of Windows machine around (whether physical or virtual) to deal with them. But it's reached a point where Linux should be your primary machine, and Windows the niche one. That's a significant improvement over the way it used to be.
Many Factors
32 earlier comments in the full thread.
Quoting:nor could anything I have said be reasonably read to imply that.
My bad, I went too far in interpreting the statement of both of you.
Excluding " forcing or arm twisting " my point still stands.
Quoting: Why?
The same reason developers make an effort to code Free software.
So we too enjoy having some good commercial applications running on Linux.
So we all have a better Internet experience with less spam, viruses, etc...
So we all enjoy IT Freedom and not locked-in by a monopoly.
....
They hate Windows but are scared of Linux? Tell them they have more to fear from their cars than from Linux. (Ignoring our propensity for vehicular analogies...)
Quoting:There are good reasons to use Linux instead of Windows, but there are good reasons not to use Linux.
This was the point of my initial post. In http://www.phws.info/linuxlowdown I outline ten reasons people might want to use Linux and ten reasons they might not want to use Linux. From my experience, if Linux is not best for a person, but we get them to switch, we do them no favor. They will eventually switch back to Windows after a painful experience that leaves them critical of Linux.
Reading what tuxchick said, I can't make a dent in her beliefs. The arrogance in her attitude is what keeps Linux an also-ran. You can't see that as a marketing angle, giving the people who "give-up-after-six-seconds" a nurturing customized experience is what would make Linux a first choice.
I am learning disabled. I tend to give up quickly like they do. It's a lingering after-effect of a crappy childhood. But I persisted to get this far because I see the potential that Linux provides. I love Linux. What takes some weeks to learn has taken me years. But I will NOT be pushed away.
I will present Linux to noobs on my level. TC and the others who think like you? go back to the forums and scatter the people you don't want to help. Business as usual is what they all expect anyway......
I am learning disabled. I tend to give up quickly like they do. It's a lingering after-effect of a crappy childhood. But I persisted to get this far because I see the potential that Linux provides. I love Linux. What takes some weeks to learn has taken me years. But I will NOT be pushed away.
I will present Linux to noobs on my level. TC and the others who think like you? go back to the forums and scatter the people you don't want to help. Business as usual is what they all expect anyway......
Quoting:OK, I'll bite and play devil's advocate. Why? If a user is perfectly happy using Windows, why must we make an effort to get them to use Linux? Unhappy Windows users, sure. They're ready for an alternative. But happy ones? Why should we bother them?
The problem with that argument is revealed if one replaces Linux versus Windows with
healthy diet versus fast food diet, regular exercise versus coach-potato-ing, motorcycle helmets versus wind in your hair, UV-blocking sunglasses vs "fashion" glasses , swimming lessons vs water wings, taxi vs drunk driving, Democrat vs Republican, marijuana vs crystal meth...
sure, some things are more like
sailing vs surfing, pizza vs chocolate, wine vs beer, coke vs pepsi...
I guess the question is whether it's just a matter of preference, or something with actual consequences (especially consequences that affect others).
> From my experience, if Linux is not best for a person, but we get them to switch, we do them no favor.
Exactly. And if a user is happy using Windows and it meets their needs, or simply isn't willing to make the effort to learn a different OS, then Linux isn't best for them.
It's the users who simply can't put up with the various Windows annoyances anymore (mostly viruses and spyware) or can't afford to keep up with the Windows upgrade treadmill who need Linux the most.
Exactly. And if a user is happy using Windows and it meets their needs, or simply isn't willing to make the effort to learn a different OS, then Linux isn't best for them.
It's the users who simply can't put up with the various Windows annoyances anymore (mostly viruses and spyware) or can't afford to keep up with the Windows upgrade treadmill who need Linux the most.
> healthy diet versus fast food diet, regular exercise versus coach-potato-ing, motorcycle helmets versus wind in your hair, UV-blocking sunglasses vs "fashion" glasses , swimming lessons vs water wings, taxi vs drunk driving, Democrat vs Republican, marijuana vs crystal meth...
Sigh. Apples and oranges. And even allowing for that I could take half an hour and tear your list apart point by point. But why bother. The differences should be obvious to anyone willing to look.
Linux vs. Windows is a choice, and there are costs and benefits to both sides. To me, the benefits of Linux far outweigh the costs, but that's not true for everyone. And even I need to keep a Windows machine around for work.
> ...or something with actual consequences (especially consequences that affect others).
And there's no way you can gauge those consequences for another person. Only they know their circumstances well enough to do that.
Sigh. Apples and oranges. And even allowing for that I could take half an hour and tear your list apart point by point. But why bother. The differences should be obvious to anyone willing to look.
Linux vs. Windows is a choice, and there are costs and benefits to both sides. To me, the benefits of Linux far outweigh the costs, but that's not true for everyone. And even I need to keep a Windows machine around for work.
> ...or something with actual consequences (especially consequences that affect others).
And there's no way you can gauge those consequences for another person. Only they know their circumstances well enough to do that.
dinotrac said:
Since then, among many other things, oldgeek said:
No loco weed here. I stand by what I said.
Quoting:Whoa there, CB, methinks you grabbed a little loco weed with your oats this morning... I can see why you say what you say, but I really don't see any insults intended, just a desire to say one's piece among new friends.
Since then, among many other things, oldgeek said:
Quoting:Reading what tuxchick said, I can't make a dent in her beliefs. The arrogance in her attitude is what keeps Linux an also-ran.. I will present Linux to noobs on my level. TC and the others who think like you? go back to the forums and scatter the people you don't want to help...
No loco weed here. I stand by what I said.
@cb -
The reference to TC's beliefs is jut plain dim-witted. I don't know many people who have made a bigger contribution to getting plain and comprehensible Linux documentation out than Carla. I happily reviewed her Linux Networking Cookbook on Slashdot, and keep it on my bookshelf.
The reference to TC's beliefs is jut plain dim-witted. I don't know many people who have made a bigger contribution to getting plain and comprehensible Linux documentation out than Carla. I happily reviewed her Linux Networking Cookbook on Slashdot, and keep it on my bookshelf.
@eldergeek -
If defending your beliefs is arrogant, then I should hope we are all guilty. Calling people arrogant for having beliefs and acting accordingly (Carla's written several helpful books, was a linuxchix chick, etc) says more about you than it does about her.
Just remember: you're among friends here, if you want to be.
If defending your beliefs is arrogant, then I should hope we are all guilty. Calling people arrogant for having beliefs and acting accordingly (Carla's written several helpful books, was a linuxchix chick, etc) says more about you than it does about her.
Just remember: you're among friends here, if you want to be.
I think we're getting trolled. And if not--if you have time to write multiple rants, you have time to do your homework and learn what is already available. And collect it in a blog and share it.
Jeff, solutions to the (IMO rather improbable) hurdles you mentioned already exist, and have for many years. I think there is a good article in providing answers-- which distros support multimedia out of the box? Where to purchase good OEM Linux computers? What do you do with a tarball? It wouldn't require long answers, but merely links with short descriptions.
Chasing this mythical "average user" has done more to damage Linux than anything or anyone.
Jeff, solutions to the (IMO rather improbable) hurdles you mentioned already exist, and have for many years. I think there is a good article in providing answers-- which distros support multimedia out of the box? Where to purchase good OEM Linux computers? What do you do with a tarball? It wouldn't require long answers, but merely links with short descriptions.
Chasing this mythical "average user" has done more to damage Linux than anything or anyone.
@Chasing this mythical "average user" has done more to damage Linux than anything or anyone.
It is, at the very least, up there.
It is, at the very least, up there.
Quoting: Chasing this mythical "average user" has done more to damage Linux than anything or anyone.
Agreed. I am especially irked by the fact that the developers could always create an "easy mode" interface like the Ubuntu netbook remix launcher. They don't have to dumb down the whole shebang. I consider myself an "ABOVE average user"...
@TC and @JP --
And here's the rub, something you know if you watch kids spend any time with techno toys:
There's day 1 and there's day 10 and there's day 100.
They figure stuff out as they go.
The essential thing is that you can operate on day 1, operate better on day 10, and be awesome on day 100.
And here's the rub, something you know if you watch kids spend any time with techno toys:
There's day 1 and there's day 10 and there's day 100.
They figure stuff out as they go.
The essential thing is that you can operate on day 1, operate better on day 10, and be awesome on day 100.
I take the viewpoint that Linux is a system that provides a foundation of affordable computing for folks with little money.
I advocate the re-use of what lots of people consider "old" computers because they can be effective AND inexpensive.
The main portable computer in my last job was an IBM @233mhz. laptop, because the battery held a charge and a Puppy Linux made it a viable machine for the tasks I did. That was this year.
dinotrac, you're likely right about TC. I am always touchy about "exclusionary" practices which is what the blustering over a struggling newby looks like to me.
CB, I dunno what your loco weed quote and answer means. My premise is that Linux represents an OS that the poor can use. And I keep doubting that many people see that clearly enough.
I insist they get the proper treatment by savvy users so they aren't locked out of the experience that computing and the internet provide.
I see quotes here about "dumbing down". That's not what I want. I want Linux to be understood for the amazing tool it is.
What I learned by playing with Puppy Linux, and breaking/repairing it is that it is NOT as mysterious and strange as it is generally regarded to be.
Thus far it is misused, misquoted, underorganized, (where info is concerned), and generally viewed as more of an odd and secondary thing than it should be.
Linux is a powerful answer to the question of how information, education and world-connectedness get into the hands of those who need those services to improve their lot.
The tools to make that happen are better structured answers and learning materials. A series of video learning aids that start with the use of live Linux discs and expand to installs either separately or dual-booted.
What I see so far is too much pre-use history and histrionics. Lesson One must be the hands-on tour.
Somehow, in all the vitriol my attitude has created, I'm hoping to change how Linux is perceived and presented. I also hope all you responders and lurkers get the gist and roll up your sleeves.
Read the whole commentI advocate the re-use of what lots of people consider "old" computers because they can be effective AND inexpensive.
The main portable computer in my last job was an IBM @233mhz. laptop, because the battery held a charge and a Puppy Linux made it a viable machine for the tasks I did. That was this year.
dinotrac, you're likely right about TC. I am always touchy about "exclusionary" practices which is what the blustering over a struggling newby looks like to me.
CB, I dunno what your loco weed quote and answer means. My premise is that Linux represents an OS that the poor can use. And I keep doubting that many people see that clearly enough.
I insist they get the proper treatment by savvy users so they aren't locked out of the experience that computing and the internet provide.
I see quotes here about "dumbing down". That's not what I want. I want Linux to be understood for the amazing tool it is.
What I learned by playing with Puppy Linux, and breaking/repairing it is that it is NOT as mysterious and strange as it is generally regarded to be.
Thus far it is misused, misquoted, underorganized, (where info is concerned), and generally viewed as more of an odd and secondary thing than it should be.
Linux is a powerful answer to the question of how information, education and world-connectedness get into the hands of those who need those services to improve their lot.
The tools to make that happen are better structured answers and learning materials. A series of video learning aids that start with the use of live Linux discs and expand to installs either separately or dual-booted.
What I see so far is too much pre-use history and histrionics. Lesson One must be the hands-on tour.
Somehow, in all the vitriol my attitude has created, I'm hoping to change how Linux is perceived and presented. I also hope all you responders and lurkers get the gist and roll up your sleeves.
> I take the viewpoint that Linux is a system that provides a foundation of affordable computing for folks with little money.
Well, we agree about that. From my comment above:
"It's the users who ... can't afford to keep up with the Windows upgrade treadmill who need Linux the most."
And with off lease Pentium 4 machines going for $100 or less (see http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=P1-PH1-P4300-SFF-PB-... for just one example), it's a practical solution.
Well, we agree about that. From my comment above:
"It's the users who ... can't afford to keep up with the Windows upgrade treadmill who need Linux the most."
And with off lease Pentium 4 machines going for $100 or less (see http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=P1-PH1-P4300-SFF-PB-... for just one example), it's a practical solution.
Quoting:I take the viewpoint that Linux is a system that provides a foundation of affordable computing for folks with little money.
That's not what led me to Linux. I switched because my family tired of the endless expense of poorly performing software. . . software that never, ever, improves.
Linux is secure and provides a continually improving (although with the occasional hic-up) user experience. It truly does get it done.
Quoting:@Chasing this mythical "average user" has done more to damage Linux than anything or anyone.
There is nothing mythical about the Linux average user because it does exist, you see it all over the internet, especially on the multitude of forums. Even Lxer has Linux average users.
I wonder how chasing the "average user" damaged Linux? Do you mean it lead to dumbing down Linux?
@ Dino...
I agree with the learning curve thing... But my point is that instead of removing features, the developers should be simply creating tools to tweak the UI for new, moderate & advanced users. The Ubuntu Tweak app is an excellent example of what I'm talking about, but it was developed by outside users, not Ubuntu's team.
I agree with the learning curve thing... But my point is that instead of removing features, the developers should be simply creating tools to tweak the UI for new, moderate & advanced users. The Ubuntu Tweak app is an excellent example of what I'm talking about, but it was developed by outside users, not Ubuntu's team.
@JaseP -
Or, at the ver least, creating a discoverable interface which lets the new be useful and the experienced be great.
Or, at the ver least, creating a discoverable interface which lets the new be useful and the experienced be great.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
http://www.pclinuxos.com/forum/index.php/topic,79604.msg6652...