GrokDoc Goes Live; All GNU/Linux Newbies Welcome

An anonymous reader writes "Writing at LinuxWorld, Groklaw's PJ asks "What Do Newbies Need to Make the Switch to GNU/Linux? and invites the world - literally - to help with answering the question, by participating in the wiki she and some colleagues have just launched. GrokDoc aims to turn the usual process on its head: "Instead of experts telling newbies how to do things, we will let newbies show and tell us what they need." Might be a fantastic way to help push Linux still further toward that fabled tipping-point."

Comments

Online docs are a good thing...

[mahdi13]

but you know the newbies STILL won't RTFM

Re:Online docs are a good thing...

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe the problem is newbies not knowing what RTFM means when you tell them to RTFM?

Re:Online docs are a good thing...

[Len Budney]

but you know the newbies STILL won't RTFM

Is that the issue? I didn't read the article...

Listening to Newbies

[wambaugh]

On the other hand, rather than pushing linux past a "tipping point," listening to newbies might lead to many of the aspects of the Microsoft/Mac models that many hard core PC users hate.

Not that I think this is a bad thing, but it's worth considering that if, for instance, standardarized application appearance/performance becomes more important, much of the speed and robustness of Linux may fall by the wayside.

Re:Listening to Newbies

[John Hurliman]

I'm not pointing out the obvious to troll, but remember Linux is just a kernel. If one desktop team decides to make an Apple clone that sacrifices top performance for a common user interface (I don't see how that argument makes any sense at all, but I'll go with it), another team will step up to give you the bare bones written in optimized C and assembly. People have this vision of every Linux enthusiast on the planet except for themselves heading in one unified direction that isn't to their liking; I don't think you'll see that happen any time soon.

Soundcard / Printer Support

[John Hurliman]

Being able to detect and have control panels for common peripherals like sound cards and printers. Some distributions do this better than others, but a newbie shouldn't have to deal with the nuances of OSS vs. ALSA vs. JACK or CUPS vs. LPR just to listen to music and print a document.

Simple

[mrjimorg]

NEVER tell me to modify the xyz file in the abc directory!

What newbies need...

[Anonymous Coward]

1. An installation process as straightforward and simple as Windows
2. The device compatibility offered by Windows
3. The level of cooperation shared by Windows applications
4. The games available on Windows
5. The simplicity of changing system configurations offered by Windows

I wonder where the heck I can find an OS that does all that and more? Hmmm...

(This is not a bash on Linux. I use Linux and love Linux for doing SERIOUS WORK. Most of the world does not do SERIOUS WORK at home. Windows meets virtually every requirement a home user could have. To meet these requirements, Linux would have to effectively become Windows. I, personally, would never use that distro.)

Re:What newbies need...

[deadmongrel]

1. An installation process as straightforward and simple as Windows
True. Simple installation yes. Like windows no. Why? I haven't come across a newbie who can do a clean installation with windows(I am not including those recovery disks that just dump an image into hdd). No one complains about windows because not many newbies install windows. it comes pre-installed on their system. In linux I really like the 4-click install of XandrOS.Its clean and simple and asks minimal questions.
2. The device compatibility offered by Windows
this is going to a problem because not all hardware manufacturers want to openup their drivers. A lot of them have given out binary only drivers(Think Nvidia) but the drivers suck.
3. The level of cooperation shared by Windows applications
agree.
4. The games available on Windows
chicken and egg problem 5. The simplicity of changing system configurations offered by Windows
I find apple give more simplicity when it comes to changing systems. But if we narrow our vision to what both apple and MS does for usability, then we are bound to make the same mistakes. There are other designs that are much more usable than windows and apple for that matter. We just shouldn't follow windows, just because people are used to it.

I like this idea

[dumpsterKEEPER]

Assuming this is implemented well, I could see this being a very useful tool for new linux users. It seems like the hardest time I have convincing people to at least give Linux a try is when they want to know where to go when they need help. It is often a little difficult to describe to them how they need to search Google, picking through endless messageboard postings and offtopic comments, and find what they need, especially when they aren't even sure what they were looking for in the first place. A centralized resource that is helpful and friendly could be very useful for those who are intimidated by learning a new OS.

I Disagree

[Seek_1]

I don't consider myself a newbie by any stretch of the imagination, but the majority of the time I still can't make sense out of linux documentation.

I tried every night for two straight weeks (reading the docs, getting some great help from the standard linux forums, reading every samba tutorial I could find etc) to get Samba working on my home network before finally giving up on it (and hence linux altogether).

You can't really complain about newbies not reading the manual when the manual either just plain doesn't contain the information you need, or has wrong or out-of-date information in it.

Re:I Disagree

[Elecore]

I've gone through a few different distros the past year, and I must say that so far, the Gentoo handbook is the best manual for linux I've ever read. They show you exactly what to type, and where, as well as telling you WHY you're typing it. I learned a lot about linux simply by installing and troubleshooting Gentoo.

Re:I Disagree

[kfg]

It really depends on what you're doing. For something as mature as Samba, you should be able to get docs. . .

He didn't say he couldn't find docs. He explictly said he found lots of docs.

Finding docs is worthless if they all suck.

In my early Linux days I floundered around for a couple weeks just trying to find basic information. I'm no command line novice either, going back to the days when we typed it, on a typewriter. Finally a simple diagram of the generic file system printed in Linux Journal (that's right, even Linux for Dummies didn't bother to even show me a diagram of the file system, and this is enough editions back that it was still command line centric) and a copy of Kernighan and Pike had me whizzing along in about half an hour.

Because Kernighan and Pike writing generically decades ago wrote better Linux documentation than what was available for Linux, and even better Red Hat documentation than that which came with my boxed set with triple the page count. I would have been better off if Red Hat had just tossed me a copy of TUPE with a note on saying,"Best we can do, you'll have to figure the rest out by yourself."

Because Kernighan and Pike know how to write documentation.

KFG

Re:I Disagree

[RAMMS EIN]

I agree with that. At the time I installed Gentoo, a lot of UNIX commands were still abracadabra to me. Still, I managed to get Gentoo up and running without a hitch, and learned a lot in the process. What this means is that Gentoo, typically considered for advanced users, is a good way to kickstart newbies.

I really think that, in general, one of the best ways to learn about computers (any part of hardware and software) is by diving into it at the deepest level with a good walktrough. This not only teaches you how to do things, but also why you do them that way. With strong knowledge of the low level, it is easy to come up with any solution for the high level.

Of course, the _quickest_ way to learn how to use a computer is to learn just the things you need to use. However, do not confuse this with the easiest way. For example, there is a widespread belief that GUIs are more intuitive, and therefore easier to use than the command line. I disagree. I can hardly think of anything more intuitive than pressing the key which has the character that you want on the screen. From there on, you build up the complexity until you have a command that does what you want done, and press the key that causes the command to be executed.

In a GUI, one typically moves the mouse (in a different plane!), to the location where an action is to be performed, then does one of clicking, right clicking, holding a key and clicking, double clicking, etc. Often, the command to be performed is selected from a menu, which sometimes appears in a completely different location from where the action is performed. Intuitive?

The strength of GUIs is that they are discoverable. Once you learn how to move the mouse, select items, and navigate menus, you can discover pretty much everything a program can do by doing just that. There is a lesson here for CLI designers: make your interfaces discoverable. Tell the user how to get a list of commands and how to find out what they do.

Re:I Disagree

[mrroach]

OK, I call shenanigans on all of you. You're putting me on, right?

You did not even read this documentation that you are claiming is no good.

You also did not look for it very hard.

Let's see...

• go to samba.org
  
• click on USA
  
• click on documentation
  
• choose the html version of the howto guide (the first link on that page)
  
• skim through the index and see "2. Fast Start: Cure for Impatience" and click it
  
• Lo and behold, the two configurations you just mentioned are configurations #1 and #2 on that page.
  

Now, have a look at that documentation, then come back and tell me that it sucks and why, or tell me that it doesn't but that you just couldn't find it, or tell me that you were really just not looking that hard.

-Mark

Newbies don't need Linux...

[Anonymous Coward]

The same way they don't need DOS. And they definitely don't need "GNU/Linux". Give us a break, any newbie who wants to go around pronouncing that awful name all day is a nerdy geek and no newbie.

Anyway, Linux is the underlying OS and no use to any newbie. Newbies want to use a user-friendly desktop system. The discussion can't be centered on Linux itself. There should be discussions specific to each distro or window-manager.

Newbies don't give a shit about the OS. They want to install a desktop and run things and go back and easily find and use the files they created last week. Oh and, no childish games about names, evil monopolies, litigious bastards and whatnot. In other words, no "grokxxx"!

Re:SSDD

[Anonymous Coward]

whatever fedora people use?

We tend to rely on the power of prayer.

Re:More fluff ahead

[Unnngh!]

A talking, pop-up tux that spits out hundred-page man pages might be kinda funny though...

Re:WM?

[stevey]

You can do far worse than pointing people at The Linux Cookbook.

This is something that is task orientated which seems to make lots of newcomers to Linux (but not computers)

let homer design linux

[happyfrogcow]

ever see the Simpsons where Homer designs a car? that's how Linux would end up if we let the newbies do it all.

What newbies want.

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

No more command line.

What's That! Blasphemy!! BaSH him to Death!!!

Seriously, I challenge someone out there to make a distro where a user need never resort to the command line interface or a terminal of any kind.

I guess something like....Windows really...

If you ask Aunt Tillie to type
rpm -ivvf lovelyrpm-withnoguitoinstall-2.3-5.rpm

she will, legitimatly I think, return to windows. She's a busy person with no time to appreciate the finer points of red hat package management.(Or why up2date keeps crashing)

P.S.
This does not say that you must get rid of the command line altogether mind. Even XP still has the command prompt, hidden away somewhere.

Knoppix can be as usable as Windows

[WarmBoota]

Recently, when my hard drive borked, I had to resort to using Knoppix to check my email, et cetera while waiting for the spare time to get things working again.

With a Knoppix CD, I could:

• instantly boot into Linux (look Ma, no install!)
• Access my USB Memory stick
• Create a word processing document
• Print to an HP Inkjet (the configuration was actually less painful than the Windows procedure which dumped hundreds of megs of junk on my hard drive)
• Access web-based email with Mozilla

Now this was incredibly usable to me since I am familiar with Linux in the first place. There are only a few places where things fall apart.

1. Knoppix can be installed to the hard drive, but typing "knoppix-install-hd" at a root prompt isn't the most discoverable interface.
2. I know that k3b burns CDs and Mozilla is used for the Web. Until Linux applications have brand-name recognition of things like QuarkExpress or Excel, I think that application names need to be more descriptive, or some other mechanism is required for users to discover the application purpose. KDE is pretty good with sorting applications into Internet and Graphics folders, but it could be done better. I wouldn't find a hand-holding introduction useful, but others might.
3. I was able to use konqueror to browse a Windows network, but again, this is only because I knew that I could type smb://ipadress/share.

I think that the Harmony Remote concept would be useful for Linux Configuration. For those too lazy to Google for it, the concept is this:

1. Answer some questions on the devices that you actually have (e.g. Do you have a TV, Stereo Recevier, DVD Player, etc).
2. Identify the model numbers (I know that this is a stretch for basic users, but bear with me).
3. Answer some questions about how you want things to work. (e.g. Do you control the DVD volume with the TV or with the Receiver).
4. Once that's complete, activities appropriate for each device are created. The Linux equivalent would be a walktrhough tailored to their machine (Printing, Scanning, Internet, Local Network, etc).

Programmers are poor writers.

[Spencerian]

I'm a computer tech and consultant that generally putters with programming. I wasn't too shocked to see, as I moved to Mac OS X, how badly the man help and documentation files were written.

My career involves many publishing venues, including a very popular book publisher and a city newspaper. While most developers are very adept at their work, self-expression or documentation is not their strong suit in general. The text is jargon-rich and circular, presuming that the reader already has a knowledge base equal to that of the writer.

This one point alone is why Linux and almost all other UNIX blends and clones never get the attention they seek. It's not that the OS is rotten (far from it), but because users have NO FRICKIN' CLUE what to do with it, including installing the OS (which programmers should really assume will be atop or supplementing Windows), and the help information is incomprehensible, if it exists at all.

Further, the diversity of X Window-based interfaces (window managers and desktop managers like KDE) are too diverse, leaving users very confused where anything is. Mac OS X is essentially the only UNIX clone/blend that a grandma can use. Sure, grandma CAN use Linux, but who's going to teach her how in a way that is understandable? She certainly won't try to READ how.

My humble opinion is that programmers should stop trying to steal the likenesses of Microsoft Windows and Mac OS X and attempt to kidnap the companies' marketing and human interface staff!

Re:Programmers are poor writers.

[cluckshot]

I will second the motion on MAN pages being stinking rotten messes. I have tried for years to read them and tried to make any useful sense of them. The problem is that they give you a command name and a set of switches and input values not considering that many combinations have no real value or simply don't work together.

I could use a man page with a few examples for how to use the command. Try chmod for example. Goof around with chmod in a recursive fashion and you are likely to have the OS fail to work! It is easy to not know that unless a program is not editable it will fail to work.

Take the wonderful commands for applications of grep!!! Which goes with which and which conflicts with which and why.

Well if you are not confused you have not tried these wonderful tools. They are powerful but obscure. A MAN page which actually gave you a useful script like command [Switches] [FileName] and actually showed you a simple examle or two might help. tar for example can be pretty awful without a good example.

I suppose a wrapper tool might be in order as well