Re: Corel/Debian Linux Installer
Another solution is to let those who are looking to remain ignorant to go use
Redhat. The real issue is that a standard UNIX type system will have telnet,
rlogin, rsh, as well as FTP and other remote access tools turned on by default.
For an enduser, this is a negative, since if they don't know what they are
doing, their system can be easily hacked and used to attack other systems. The
ease of use issue basically comes down to having a complete minimal system
without telnet, FTP, or anything turned on, with only the minimum needed to go
into xf86. I do NOT recomend that Debian go down this path, except as a
seperate "distribution" that aims for the enduser system. Even Redhat is more
than the typical end-user wants in many cases. If you go through the Win98
installation, the selection of what to install is more than many end-users want
to deal with. Until these end-users are ready to accept that they need to learn
something about computers, a "Newbie Linux" distribution will be needed. Now,
our base-install is almost perfect as a starting point. If we could set up an
installation to take away the need to select modules, similar to what Redhat
does, that would also help.
Dave Bristel
On 20 Aug 1999, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Date: 20 Aug 1999 12:24:38 -0500
> From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Corel/Debian Linux Installer
> Resent-Date: 20 Aug 1999 17:51:40 -0000
> Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ;
>
> Hi,
> >>"Michael" == Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> writes:
>
> >> A better system would be to ask the questions anyway, and
> >> provide the defaults.
>
> Michael> But the questions themselves are confusing, if the user has
> Michael> to sit and consider them. IME, users assume that if there's
> Michael> a question there, it's there for a reason; i.e., if they
> Michael> don't put the right thing into the box their system isn't
> Michael> going to work. They worry about it. (Really!)
>
> They have what the system considers a decent option right in
> front of them. And if they are that ignorant about UNIX, they really
> should be worrying. You are doing them a major disseervice by saying
> everythiung is fine, for it is not: now they are the sys admin of a
> UNIX box.
>
> >> Novice users would be encouraged to stick with the defaults,
>
> Michael> If we encourage them to just hit enter, and tell them that
> Michael> the questions aren't really important, what have we gained?
>
> Who says the questions are not important? The question can be
> explanatory, let them know what options exist with a help screen, and
> provide a decent default if theyu are in doubt.
>
> They learn way more than if the decision had happened behind
> their back.
>
> >> but would learn that something called partitioning exists.
>
> Michael> That's a subject for a "so you want to know more" guide, not
> Michael> an install routine. We're _installing_ not _teaching_ in the
> Michael> _install_ routine. And as I said before, it's not enough to
> Michael> say that partitioning exists: you need to say how partitions
> Michael> are accessed, etc. Do you really want a tutorial on the
> Michael> logic behind the unix vfs in the install program?
>
> Try and achieve a happy medium. You have to start them
> learning, not teach them all there is to know.
>
> >> Education of novice users should be a part of our efforts.
>
> Michael> Why? What purpose does it serve for someone who wants a word
> Michael> processor to know about partitioning? Not everyone has a
> Michael> need or a desire to be a unix guru, and such should not be
> Michael> an expectation or a requirement for running debian.
>
> Then they should be using Windows. Linux is ot for everyone,
> and blind fanaticism hurts more than it helps. If we lie to users and
> say Linux is as easy as windows, you need know nothing and do not
> need to look at manuals, that is a lie.
>
> And it is a lousy way to gain users in the long term, because
> they would have been burned so badly to start with, they will never
> come back.
>
> Michael> What about an "easy/quick/generic" option, a "customized"
> Michael> option, and an "expert" option? What I'm trying to address
> Michael> isn't so much the person who isn't yet a unix expert as the
> Michael> person who has *no desire* to *ever* be a unix expert. I
>
> Then being a UNIX sysadmin is a stunningly bad move on their
> part, and shame on us for decieving them into it.
>
> Michael> understand what you're saying, but my intent isn't to be
> Michael> patronizing; I'm not assuming that people can't learn, but I
> Michael> think that you're making an assumption that everyone wants
> Michael> to learn everything.
>
> If they do not want to, they should not be pitchforked into
> being UNIX sysadmins.
>
> Maybe Linux can get to be easy to use in a couple of years or
> so, and we shall revisit this. But right now, you should encourage
> these people to go to Windows. When they learn abvout the drawbacks,
> maybe they shall be willing to learn how to use UNIX. If they are
> happy with windows, leave them there.
>
>
> manoj
>
> --
> Give me a sleeping pill and tell me your troubles.
> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
> Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
Reply to: