RE: To the Debian Project, IMHO [long]
You Wrote:
If you present someone with a challenge they will usually rise to it (as
long
as it is within their sphere of competence). So let's make life easier, not
more difficult.
Reply:
This is an interesting way to lead into the following ...
You wrote:
Let's tell the truth "Linux is like
Unix. You need to know. We can help you, but your a big boy/girl now, and
you have learn how to take care of yourself". Microsoft didn't and takes a
bashing from the general users who complain that it doesn't live up to
expectation, and it doesn't, you still have to know, despite what Microsoft
or others may say.
Reply:
I agree Microsoft still requires knowledge. But the knowledge is somewhat
transferable between programs.
I also agree we need configuration GUIs in Linux. If you still enjoy the
endless research to execute a simple command, by all means don't use the
GUI. There are many times when I need a administrative task done more than
I need to be doing it! I say endless for one reason. If it is so
non-intuitive you need to go through 5 pages of help, you'll probably forget
it in short order. Next time you'll be looking it up again.
Don't get me wrong, people still need to learn some Unix. Point is, if you
want the marketplace, you better go after the market people. The market
people want windows offers. This is not by mistake. Microsoft has invested
major $$$ in searching for what users want. Namely:
1. Simple peer to peer networking with resource sharing.
This means you don't get in line for a cap and gown when you finally get it
working.
2. Simple install.
Most Linux variants are here. I think RedHat is the easiest to install.
Debian is the easiest to maintain due to apt-get. My opinion.
3. Must integrate seamlessly into existing "standard".
Like it or not, the desktop standard in the majority market holder. At this
point, that is clearly Microsoft. Linux needs to be a drop in replacement.
4. Simple maintenance.
Linux is not rocket science. It just takes more ongoing administrative
effort than windows NT Server. The major difference I see is the GUI. I
don't run X, maybe that would change my opinion. I have run it before, but
not on debian. Any comments here welcome. I might be missing a big part of
debians administrative aids.
Time and time again the best argument for Linux is stability. I have run NT
workstation for over a year now. That's 24x7. I just don't turn it off.
It has been rock solid. Under development conditions, I reboot maybe once
per month. 90% of those reboots are because I have changed/installed
something.
I am not knocking Linux. I am just interested in the comments regarding
level of development. Fact is, replacing Microsoft on the desktop requires
one of two things. First you have to offer something they don't/can't/won't
provide and you absolutely must have. Second, Linux offers enough that the
difference between the two is negligible.
It seems you don't like the progression of Linux from a standpoint it's
going to put it into everyone's hands. Within the lazy man's reach if you
will. If I were in marketing, I would yell YOU BET.
To continue to grow, it must start capturing people who are less interested
in how it works and more interested in what is can do for them. I.e.. a
marketing person. Remember, they have computers to. Maybe the question is,
should Linux be pushed beyond the server market into the desktop. That is
the major hurdle. A system administrator may be able to justify the extra
time. I know a died in the wool Unix administrator who chose NT 4.0 server
because he had other tasks (programming) and needed low administration.
Just my rambling opinions. Thanks for reading.
paul
-----Original Message-----
From: Simon Martin [mailto:smartin@isys.cl]
Sent: Monday, September 20, 1999 7:15 AM
To: Stephan Hachinger
Cc: Debian User
Subject: Re: To the Debian Project, IMHO
Hi Stephan,
No offence taken, with your mails, and don't get me wrong I quite like GUI
interfaces for some jobs, command line for others. I just
pick the tool I prefer for the job at hand. As far as I am concerned this
thread is not about the GUI/OOUI/command line debate, but
about the marketing focus, which can do a LOT of harm.
If I go to a hardware store and by a drill to put up some shelves at home I
have to know how to use a drill, what kind of wall I am
going to be drilling, the type of rawl plugs I will use, etc. It is actually
quite a complicated business, and the thing is most of
us accept this as normal. Why make using a computer different. To be alble
to write with pen and paper I had to learn about ink,
hand position, types of paper (don't use a biro on bond because it smears
easily, etc.), all things that have nothing to do with the
actual activity of writing a letter, just the mechanics of writing a letter.
Today I rarely use pen and ink, I use computer and
printer, but does that mean that I don't have to learn the mechanics of my
writing materials? Am I born with a mouse attached to my
left hand? Is there an instinctive power-on reflex? Do I come into this
world knowing that opening seventeen instances of a
spreadsheet program on a 486 with 16MB RAM is not a good thing to do?
All this is basic computer use skills. I HAVE to learn. If somebody tells me
"here is your computer it just works" what do I expect?
If someone says "here is your computer, it's fairly simple to use, but
you'll have to learn a few things to keep it running
smoothly" the effect is subtly different.
Unix has been famous for cryptic commands and general user unfriendliness it
most circles. This is not necessarily good. When the
usage message for a command is in excess of 5 pages (tar --help) it makes
you wonder. I like an easy life, the same as the rest of
us. I also like my challenges, it adds spice to life. If you present someone
with a challenge they will usually rise to it (as long
as it is within their sphere of competence). So let's make life easier, not
more difficult. Let's tell the truth "Linux is like
Unix. You need to know. We can help you, but your a big boy/girl now, and
you have learn how to take care of yourself". Microsoft
didn't and takes a bashing from the general users who complain that it
doesn't live up to expectation, and it doesn't, you still
have to know, despite what Microsoft or others may say.
__ _ Debian GNU User
/ /(_)_ __ _ ___ __ Simon Martin
/ / | | '_ \| | | \ \/ / Project Manager
/ /__| | | | | |_| |> < Isys
\____/_|_| |_|\__,_/_/\_\ mailto: smartin@isys.cl
'I used to be schizophrenic, but now both of us are all right'
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Stephan Hachinger <Stephan.Hachinger@gmx.de>
> To: Simon Martin <smartin@isys.cl>
> Cc: Debian User <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
> Sent: 18 September 1999 21:05
> Subject: Re: To the Debian Project, IMHO
>
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > Again some criticism about your opinions...
> >
> > >Ok, ok, I sit corrected in several respects, but I am still adamant
that
> > any attempt to paint Linux as an out of the box solution
> > >with no prior knowledge is a real danger to the on-going comercial
success
> > of Linux. I worked in tech-support for Xerox for about 7
> > >years (Xerox used to sell Apple Mac, IBM PS/2 and Dell in Latin
America),
> > and I would say that at least 70% of the problems we had
> > >we with users who not only did not know what they were doing (no
problems
> > with that) but who did not WANT to know what they were
> > >doing. Microsoft has fixed the image of it's OS as "just use and ignore
> > it". Let's not fall into that trap.
> > >
> > >Fixing the customers expectations is paramount for a successful
install. If
> > you fix the expectations as "zero cost, zero learning"
> > >then you are NOT going to have a successful install. I am fairly
competent
> > with Debian, but the last time I looked at RedHat, I did
> > >not want to do any real config changes until I had read the
corresponding
> > man pages and other documents, and these are both Linux
> > >based!!!!
> > >
> > >In short. If you use a tool you have to know it. If you want to use a
tool
> > well you have to learn how it works. You don't get
> > >something for nothing and you definitely don't want to tell your
customers
> > to expect the world for nothing.
> >
> > OK, I know what you mean. I've been using Debian for a short time and
> > Windows for a quite long time now, and I worked together with many
people on
> > PC projects. I also think in a way that there are two extremes
concerning PC
> > users: There are some who want to dive deep into the secrets of the
system,
> > and others only want to use it for doing their work. And I (I belong to
the
> > first group) realized, whatever I worked on, that the second group of
users
> > also got very good results out of their work.
> >
> > Let's look on what the computer was invented for: Scientific
calculations.
> > But people had to have very good knowledge and time to use it. And what
the
> > computer can do now (at least sometimes): Help at work and calculate
things
> > without needing much time for administration any more. Although I like
to
> > administrate a system properly, IMHO it is very admirable that people
can
> > now work with computers almost with zero administration. And it makes
life
> > easier and makes the computer work for what it was created: Solving
> > problems.
> >
> > So, IMHO, it is not good to think that people that can only work with
GUI
> > interfaces and "dumb" OSes are stupid or worth less. I think it's very
> > understandable if someone wants to concentrate on his problems and not
on
> > his systems.
> >
> > Now, what do this thoughts end up to? I think there should be both kinds
of
> > OSes: The "just use and..." ones and the ones which require proper
> > administration and can be tuned properly.
> >
> > Why should we let MS control the market of the "just use and ignore it"
> > OSes? I there should be a Linux for EVERY person, and distributions like
the
> > coming Corel-Linux, which are almost completely GUI-based, will improve
the
> > success of Linux. But "Linuxes" also have to be tweakable.
> >
> > I think that's why there are different distros: That different users can
> > reach different aims. Admins who want to tune it thorougly as well as
home
> > users who want to use it without reading any manual, just to show to
> > extremes.
> >
> > That's what Linux should be, I think. And if Debian should become easier
to
> > install or something like that, there should be discussions about how
the
> > future Debian can solve problems in a better way than last versions. But
> > there should not be a flame war about UNIX philosophy because it's no
use
> > starting such a war. Time and users will tell where to go finally and
which
> > philosophies are right. Why can't there be just peaceful coexistence
between
> > different users and philosophies???
> >
> > And: About the last paragraph: I think good software can be used without
> > knowing any manual. It has some help functions that quickly guide to the
> > required functions/params. You can see what command you must call.
That's
> > good software. I want to dive into internals of OSes. But, personally, I
> > don't read manuals very often. And I succeeded with WIN and with Debian
this
> > way. So that philosophy can't be that bad.
> >
> >
> > That was my opinion about this. I already have used WIN and LINUX, and
DOS,
> > and the GEM UI, and DR DOS, and CALDERA DOS, and so on. Intolerance
brings
> > no solution.
> >
> > Did not want to offend anyone:).
> >
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> >
> > Stephan Hachinger
> >
>
>
--
Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe debian-user-request@lists.debian.org <
/dev/null
Reply to: