Linux vs. Windows: Choice vs. Usability

ThaReetLad writes "In this article at DevX, Executive Editor A. Russell Jones makes the case for a standardised GUI for Linux. He argues that the promotion of choice of GUI as a positive feature of using Linux is detrimental to its chances of attacking Microsoft's home user monopoly. From the article: '...the open source community must recognize that its primary goals: freedom of choice, freedom of source code, and freedom to alter applications, are not the goals of the average user.' In particular he argues that the choice of desktop between KDE, Gnome, IceWM etc, is not one that a former windows user, even a fairly technically competent one, is going to able to make an informed choice on, and that they should not be forced to make that choice in order to get good use out of any applications they might want to use."

Comments

Outlaw mouse-over focus and button copy and paste

[b1t r0t]

Yes, I know you X-windows old farts love your mouse-over focus and mouse button copy and paste to death, whine about the lack of it when someone tells you to try the Mac, and get extremely defensive when someone suggests that it's less than perfect. But it's confusing as hell for those who weren't forced to use it from the start because that's all there was.

Steve Jobs was right about a one-button mouse, although a second button for pop-up menus is arguably useful. But when Ma or Pa slips on the mouse and suddenly they can't type any more, or suddenly this big chunk-o-text appears in the middle of what they were typing, do you think they're going to laugh and say "but it's so convienent to have the paste button right under one of my fingers at all times!"?

And the best reason of all is: because that's the way that the two most popular consumer window-based operating systems work.

Im not saying there can't be some config panel which you can use to enable mouse-over-focus and mouse-copy-paste in your WM, but IMHO these two "features" should be disabled by default on any window manager that's going to be for "mainstream" users.

Re:So what's the story here?

[Tyler Eaves]

Linux already has a unified interface. It's called the command line. Besides, it's not like figuring out any of the mainstream WMs is hard.

Re:Good idea

[Darth Hubris]

"I don't care if the unwashed masses ..."

This is your opinion of them, and a lot of others I've seen on this overgrown Usenet alt.chatroom. This is why they hate us. This is why Microsoft will win.

Re:Good idea

[Goldberg's Pants]

This is a stupid article. The whole point is CHOICE! You try them and see what you like. Of course the average consumer isn't used to being given a choice.

Re:Sucks idea

[rudolfel]

> Users are not going to adapt to Linux, because Windows does what they want in a familiar and easy way. Linux must adapt to them. It must become very consistent on so many levels, easy and familiar. This is reality.

They should't use linux. Every adaptation is painfull. WIndows 9x/2k/XP was a pain in the ass
for me to use even from the first time. Does the name "Windows Explorer" means anyting to you ?
Explore what on windows ? the buttons ?

Anyone who says that windows(tm) is a easy and
intuitive interface is an idiot who has never
done anything in windows except playing games and
typing letters in whatever editor he wants.

Some people are used with the annoyances of
windows and they won't complain because for
them is normal for an application to crash,
is normal to have to press a predefined, ugly
button to make a menu appear. Some windows
managers are years (12 years fvwm) old and
you still can't find in Gnome or Kde a decent
functionality. They are windows on linux:
same look and feel same interface, same
memory hog, same crashes, same idiot user base.