Slashdot Mirror
Interview: Xandros and KDE
Fabrice Mous writes "The Xandros Desktop OS is known for their intuitive graphical environment that works right out of the box. Their polished desktop product is based on KDE. The
KDE News website had the privilege to talk to Rick Berenstein, Xandros Chairman and CTO and Ming Poon,
Vice President for Software Development about Xandros and their products and the relationship between
Xandros and the KDE project. Without further ado ... enjoy the
interview!"
$90 a download, I'm not sure really what they have that other distributions don't? I think they have simplified a few processes (look and feel of the desktop) a little for the average user, which is fantastic, but most of which is in some form or the other on other distributions.
Sig it.
They're merely familiar!
"Why is this deemed "intuitive" then? Isn't this just another attempt to replicate MS experience on another OS? Or am I missing something?"
Actually, you'll find that the KDE desktop project in general is very much like this. It's always seemed to strike a rather uneasy balance - the look and feel are mainly based on Windows, yet the icons seem to be more Apple like. This is going to be very confusing indeed for a migrating user.
Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
Why the heck are we still focused on emulating windows right down to the exact contextual menus? Why not try to strike out on a new path.
I use OS X and I love it, but I also love mu Suse and I have always thought that a good GUI (ahem...not like windows) could launch linux into the stratosphere. Why spend time and effort "creating" a GUI that is already in use???
C'mon, don't waste your talents for another second!
Exactly my point. I fail to understand this whole OSS need to make a desktop, an interface and file manager that "just looks like MS!". Why is is to?
Or is it that they all accept deep down that MS has an interface that's hard to top?
http://efil.blogspot.com/
Many of the posts here are slagging Xandros for trying to look like Windows and are questioning the idea that this makes it intuitive.
Maybe you are all just trolling, because I find it hard to believe that you haven't seen the desktop numbers (or at least heard about them). Almost everyone uses Windows on the desktop, except a few who use the Mac (with MS's full blessing).
The purpose of the Xandros distribution is to appeal to Windows users. It is supposed to be intuitive to Windows users, not Linux users. 'Lock-in' really exists and it is really important: it is very difficult to switch to another OS if you've only ever used Windows. It's not a matter of which is better, it's a question of familiarity.
I personally would like to see more Windows users using Linux (in any form), and I would especially like to see a small dent made in the MS monopolies so I'm glad to see Xandros working on this.
Now, if you want to slag Xandros, there are lots of better ways to do this. Most importantly to me, they don't seem to contribute much back. People are attacking Red Hat a lot these days, but take a loook at the amount that Red Hat contributes to important OSS projects (eg. GCC). Xandros does not. But that is their right - they are not breaking the GPL or anything (to the best of my knowledge). By the way, Dream Weavers (which is included in Xandros and shares some ownership) is also an excellent contributor (to Wine).
It also seems to me that their product is way over priced, but I guess I don't know what their strategy is.
...will any Linux distro forego familiarity and try to revolutionize a new desktop? People are familiar with Windows, but, as stated here, is it really that intuitive? Not unless you've used it for some time. So why not develop the next gen desktop and trump MS. I know IceVM and the like are vastly different, but I don't know how Joe Sixpack would adapt to the interface. Who knows, maybe he would... but I would definitely like to see some innovation in the desktop as it has been untouched for decades, really. Christ, I remember GEOS on the C64 that was an 8bit, 64k version of today's desktop. End of rant... informative or not...
The biggest reason for look-and-feel cloning is to make migration from Windows, with it's 98% control of the desktop market, to Linux as pain free as possible.
Besides, imagine trying to sell off the idea of Linux migration to a Fortune 500 company saying that "Oh, yeah, you'll have to retrain all of your staff who will be using the new Linux installation because we feel our WM and Desktop environment is cooler/slicker/13373r than that Windows crap." as opposed to "The computing environment will be familiar requiring minimal retraining and no loss of productivity."
I would respectfully disagree with Mr. Raskin. Familiar is all well and good, but they should be discoverable above all else. Even if it's not familiar, the interface should be very accessible, users should immediately know where to go next, or have an obvious starting point to locate features (start menu, menu bar, etc).
I don't know what kind of crack I was on, but I suspect it was decaf.
Posted AC originally but I thought it needed better visibility...
The biggest reason for look-and-feel cloning is to make migration from Windows, with it's 98% control of the desktop market, to Linux as pain free as possible.
Besides, imagine trying to sell off the idea of Linux migration to a Fortune 500 company saying that "Oh, yeah, you'll have to retrain all of your staff who will be using the new Linux installation because we feel our WM and Desktop environment is cooler/slicker/13373r than that Windows crap." as opposed to "The computing environment will be familiar requiring minimal retraining and no loss of productivity."
"We all rant about things that MS got wrong and the superiorities of *nix over MS - why not apply all that to UI's as well?"
Because most of the time people, when confronted with a different UI, shreak and complain about how they'll never use it because it requires them to learn too many new things.
Change has to be gradual, but familiarity has to be maintained. When I show people Konqueror's split panes, they panic. Over the course of a few days to a few weeks, they learn how to use it somewhat effectively.
KDE has a good number of these UI enhancements over Windows, but most of the users I've introduced to KDE get very scared when I diverge from the things to which they are accustomed.