Linux's Difficulty with Names

JohnTyler writes "This article at XYZ Computing takes a look at Linux's strange naming practices. When compared to their Window's equivalents, the names of many Linux programs are difficult to recognize and even tougher to remember. This may seem like splitting hairs, but it is actually an important usability issue. Just think, if you had to do a bit of graphic design which would be easier to pick out of the menu, GIMP or Photoshop? Or if you wanted to play a song, Media Player or xine?" The article is a bit thin, but it raises an excellent point.

Comments

Re:Names don't matter...

[jZnat]

One of the big issues I'd assume with newbies adopting KDE is that nearly every KDE program's name is a pun on something usually involving the letter "K" or "Q". Although, they at least make more sense sometimes (i.e. when that program was C&D'd by a corp that produces a program with the name very similar to it).

Re:Alright, Names Do Matter

[ultranova]

Give us a break. It's real cute how you go to all the effort to capitalize and make all the Linux program shortcuts real pretty and then use the executable filenames for the Windows equivalents.

A bit like the article said "gedit" instead of "Text Editor", the latter being what Gnomes start menu calls it ?

How many users go mucking around the filesystem hunting for the executable to use? None, and that's why so many Linux distros have blatantly copied the concept of the Start Menu and Taskbar.

Actually, the concept of a start menu was copied (I don't know from where - I doubt Microsoft was the first to get the idea that it would be nice to be able to launch programs from a menu of some sort) because it is convenient to be able to start programs without having to type in their names.

The purpose of taskbar is to make it easy to switch between many concurrently running programs and open windows; it has nothing to do with launching them.

Also, almost all MS-installed shortcuts have a description as a tool-tip, found when you hover your mouse for a few seconds:

I'm sure they do. I'm not so sure that it's fun and/or productive use of time to wait a few seconds once per each of the for dozens of programs in the menu just to find the correct one.

Just how intuitive are the "polished" Linux app names of "Xine", "MPlayer", "Gnome Toaster"?

Luckily, as the parent poster stated, the distro is free to name these as "Xine movie player", "MPlayer movie player" and "Gnome Toaster CD recorder".

Let's also forget that most of the applications you list (iTunes, Nero, Photoshop, WinAMP, WinDVD, etc) are not even native Windows applications. They are third-party and if the user went and bought or downloaded them they did so for a reason and obviously know what they do.

So when the article names them as examples of intuitive application names, the fact that they are third-party doesn't matter; but when a Slashdot poster answers the article and claims that they are actually unintuitive, their origin suddenly does start to matter ?

Guess you missed the memo. Slashdot zealotism is happily on the decline, partially evidenced by the Funny mod you received. "Oh look honey! It's one of those cute /. zealots! Isn't he precious?"

Stupidity and lack of insight, however, seem to be big as ever. For your sake I hope that you were just trolling, rather than demonstrating your genuine level of expertise in said subjects.