Re: Attracting newbies (Was Booting Debian/testing fails)
Good points, but the people who don't or don't want to upgrade aren't just people who are afraid to change. A friend who first introduced me to Debian still uses Woody. He hasn't upgraded because he downloaded a lot of packages and upgrading would require more time than he has available. I'd like to dist-upgrade to etch, but I'll wait until it becomes officially stable. Right now, i just don't have the time to tinker with it.
--Steve Mazurek
On 2/5/07, Andrew Sackville-West <andrew@farwestbilliards.com> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 02:07:39PM -0500, Michael Pobega wrote:
> Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 07:15:44AM -0800, Michael M. wrote:
> >
> >
> >>"why Debian instead of Ubuntu/SuSE/Linspire/etc.?" Do that and I doubt
> >>you'd get too many users for whom Debian probably isn't the best
> >>choice.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >maybe our focus, as a trying-to-be-helpful user community is to
> >examine what the derivative offerings are and redirect people
> >appropriately.
> >
> I fully agree with you.
of course! ;-)
> The one thing I really don't understand, though, is why people use
> Ubuntu.
bleh. responsing anyway...
I return to the example of my mom. Many people don't want to "update"
their system. They want it to just work and stay that way. Many users,
especially novices, don't deal well with change and don't want
it. Ubuntu, if you don't upgrade, is perfect in this respect. At the
time it is released, it just works. If you leave it there, if will, of
course, just work forever.
This same thing applies in the wondows world. I work on win98 machines
quite a bit because people don't want to change (there are hardware
issues too...).
People don't want to upgrade constantly but want instead to just go
out and buy a new computer every X-years and use whatever that new
system is. Ubuntu fits that mold nicely, IMO. Note that I have little
experience with ubuntu -- just my impression.
> Maybe if
> Debian changed the word "/Unstable/" to something else it would bring in
> more users? Maybe Stable, Testing, and BleedingEdge? Just my thoughts.
>
not a bad idea. although we all know that unstable is a good name for
it, it can be scary. Many people think it means their system will be
unstable (which it might) not that it refers to the state of package
movement within the release. Ummm... how about "CuttingEdge" instead
of "Bleeding Edge" or how about just refering to sid only?
A
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFFx5BGaIeIEqwil4YRAn4HAKDhFxleRRyBpjNwPWOPMBlIBG0dAQCeMtlm
CdVh+3PMqKYWvjtG4k5LmIU=
=gAAR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: