Too geeky, indeed
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| claus May 26, 2007 4:20 AM EDT |
While using the example of Ubuntu Update for the "geekiness" of Linux was indeed foolish, the author still has a point. Let's have a look at some other examples: When I upgraded my Ubuntu box to Feisty I noticed that desktop items for my hard drive partitions changed behavior, once again. The behavior already changed when I upgraded from Dapper Drake to Edgy Eft. This made me look into the issue. While doing so I noticed a lot of people have problems here. For example, one guy added a second hard drive to his box, with four partitions. He entered the data into his fstab -- and don't say this isn't already geeky! -- but only the first partition showed up in the 'Computer' location. All other partitions don't show up. However, he's able to mount them all using the command line. The problem is still not solved. Another guy with years of experience had a different problem: He used many partitions and didn't want them to show up in on his desktop. Additionally, he didn't wanted them to be mounted automatically after log-in. The obvious reason was that these icons cluttered his desktop. Getting rid of this behavior included editing obscure XML configuration files deep in the system to make HAL behave correctly. He didn't even understand what was wrong because he had no idea about HAL being responsible for the desktop icons. I was able to help him but just because I spent hours of googling for the correct information a few days earlier. Funny enough, we just found a workaround, but no proper solution to his problem. I'm sure, there are many more examples to be found in every proper Linux forum about stuff that just works under Mac or Windows but requires editing XML files to get stuff behave correctly. Linux -- and even Ubuntu -- still has places that are really, really geeky. Additionally, is shows that there are occasions where users are lost who are afraid of using the command line. |
| dcparris May 26, 2007 7:09 AM EDT |
It's true there are some geeky areas - I've encountered one or two myself. Part of my point is that, if you're going to use some of these old arguments - and let's face it, even Windows support techs frequently walk users through opening a DOS shell for network troubleshooting - give me solid examples of what's really challenging - not something that can be easily shot down. |
| bigg May 26, 2007 7:20 AM EDT |
@claus: I hate to break it to you, but I don't think a "mainstream" user is the one who messes with partitions, or has a lot of partitions but only a few of them show up. Few Windows users have any idea how to install a hard drive or what a partition is. But yes, it would be nice if every possible situation had a simple GUI solution. OTOH, I had a keystroke logger on my Windows box. Fixing the problem required making changes to the registry (whatever the heck that means). You are warned to be extremely careful when editing the registry. You should always make a backup of your registry. Of course, you get the tool to make a backup of your registry with XP Professional but not XP home. At that point I saw no further reason to stick with Windows. The point of my post is that you have given an example that applies only to the most advanced users. I have given an example that is not only important (keeping icons off the screen is not quite as high a priority as removing a keystroke logger) but also likely to affect a large percentage of Windows users. To make matters worse, the Windows users most affected by security problems are those least able to handle them, or even know they exist. We can always cook up examples, but if I have a choice, I will set up my mother's computer with Ubuntu rather than Windows any day. It really does "just work" once I set it up. She can do the updating. She can run the programs she wants. There is close to zero maintenance. "Geekiness" is optional with Linux for a typical user who just wants to do basic web surfing, email, and word processing. The same cannot be said for Windows. |
| NoDough May 26, 2007 6:38 PM EDT |
claus: My Windows partition automatically shows up on my Linux desktop. When my Linux partition automatically shows up on my Windows desktop, then you might have a point. Until then, Linux is easier and less geeky for me. Windows isn't less geeky, it's more familiar. |
| claus May 27, 2007 4:47 AM EDT |
@ bigg and NoDough: For the success in the desktop market, it is not sufficient that Linux is just as geeky as Windows. Would you switch to an operating system that is as secure as Windows? Probably not. It needs to have better security than Windows before you consider switching. Likewise, Linux needs to be less geeky and needs to have better usability than Windows. So i still think the original author has a point, although his example was really a clueless choice. For the core problem wasn't yet adressed: Under Windows, user can get applications for all walks of life: According to John Cherry, initiative manager for Desktop Linux (DTL) at Open Source Development Labs Inc. (OSDL), about 35,000. Thus, Windows is still the better option for most people -- despite their low security record --, because there are the applications that people need to get stuff done and the games to have fun. So, who cares, whether Windows cannot mount Linux partitions? That's not a problem for the vast majority of Windows users. Mounting Windows partitions, however, is a problem for many Linux users. If Linux isn't better in solving problems than Windows, there's no incentive to switch. @dcparris: The problem with these 'old' arguments is that some of them are still valid, from the point of view of many people. But I agree that the Ubuntu Update example was foolish. |
| dcparris May 27, 2007 7:07 AM EDT |
> @dcparris: The problem with these 'old' arguments is that some of them are still valid, from the point of view of many people. But I agree that the Ubuntu Update example was foolish. I hear you. The problem is, I have given Ubuntu to folks who are non-geeks - they manage quite well, and ask very few questions. The only technical difficulty the one family has is a grown daughter who keeps spilling liquids into the keyboards. In fact, they prefer it over the Windows boxes they occasionally use (library, community college, etc.). So whether it's myth or reality probably depends more on the individual user - and probably more for those more familiar with Windows than these folks. I think if you knew this family, you would better understand the comment above about Windows being more familiar to people. Ubuntu was their first real computer experience. To me, most of those arguments really are myths. But we may just have to disagree on that. :-) |
| Bob_Robertson May 27, 2007 9:03 AM EDT |
The arguments are myths, entirely. If you only know one system, then any other system is going to seem "geeky". So I had a Mac. Editing the resource fork, adding sounds, changing icons, lots of fun. Very geeky. Windows. The registry is a wasteland, undocumented, barely understandable to people who mess with it all the time. Exceptionally geeky. Linux has HowTos. They mention (gasp!) the command line. But they do it with copy/paste-able examples. How geeky is copy/paste? But really, I'm sure TRS-80 command-line BASIC would seem geeky to someone whose only experience with a computer is, "If it's not right up front on a menu, I don't understand it." I fully expect that there are going to be lots of Ubuntu-newbies going forward who are just as clueless of the underlying technology as Windows-newbies or Mac-newbies. And I must echo the other folks here who said, "Anyone who is adding disk drives and worrying about partitions is _NOT_ a "newbie". They may be early in the learning cycle, but that's not the same thing. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!