Slashdot Mirror
FOSS Is Not Free if It's Not Free From Complexity
A reader writes:"This article argues that freedom from complexity is an essential part of the first FOSS freedom - the freedom to run a program. Freedom to run means nothing if the exercise of such right excludes people who do not possess high technical knowledge or advanced skills sets. Without the guarantee of "ease of use", the freedom to run FOSS for most users is a hollow promise. " (My own bias ensues here): I think that there are some valuable points in here; what good is a good if it cannot be used, but OTOH this argument seems simplistic.
1) The author talks about 'complexity', but all software is complex, the number of people who understand the countless abstraction layers that exist in a typical piece of modern software can be counted on one hand (a closed fist). I suspect by complexity, the author means usability
2) Usability is not specifically an F/OSS problem - it is a software problem. There's a lot of crap software out there, that the vast majority of people never see (because it costs money). However, many people do see free / oss as it's (generally) availalbe free of charge.
I do take the authors point that for a user to effectively maintain their freedom, free software must be usable.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
Has this guy ever installed Windows XP on a new bare computer? I don't think so... The first thing I have to do is to go and hunt for the diverse drivers for nearly every device that it has. Graphics, sound, wireless,....
Linux often supports everything out of the box, and what is not supported is, ehm... simply not supported because the specs of the devices are not available and thus the developpers that want to develop the drivers have to resort to reverse-engineering.
Sure, application installation is "harder" in a Linux environment, because it doesn't follow the "double-click-on-that-icon-and-press-next-next-nex t-finish" or even worse "insert-cd-and-automatically-run-a-program-that-mi ght-damage-your-computer" (see Sony Rootkit on Audio CD's...)
If we want it that easy, we have only one way to go, and that is the Apple way: drag an application in the "Application" folder and that is all you got to do for installation. The Windows way is actually not what you want...
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Normally, I'd be a little put off by what amounts to an opinion piece bya lawyer on open source, but there are good points:
Current FOSS operating systems (OS) are targeted mainly at geeks, hackers and other technically skilled developers and users. While there have been some progress in making the installation and use of FOSS OSes like Ubuntu easier and simpler, they still do not have the "click-click-click" ease of installation of popular proprietary OSes like Windows XP or Mac OS X. In addition, even after one successfully installs a FOSS OS on a computer, a user will typically have to deal with issues like lack of drivers, incompatibility with third party devices or difficulty in installing new programs or software packages. A normal user wants everything to work out-of-the-box [emphasis mine]. This is especially true in developing countries where a computer costs more than a month's salary. Since a computer is a major purchase, it's usefulness and usability should be present at the moment a user turns on his or her computer. People are not interested in (in fact, most are adverse to) messing around with, tinkering or hacking a program - the second, third and fourth software freedoms.
It goes back to the whole idea of Linux as an everyday operating system. Anyone who is not a geek, i.e. most of the population, is not going to adopt something that isn't easy to operate. I mean, there's no reason to make a Windows-like GUI for Linux unless you want people to actually think of Linux as an alternative to Windows. And while you might impress the average user with a Windows-like look and feel, unless it's just as easy to use out of the box as their Windows PC is now, there will be no great swell of converts.
I've said it before: Linux's popularity depends on what it wants to be. If it wants to be the OS of geeks and hackers and multi-million dollar corporations, so be it. If Linux (or any of its derivatives) wish to compete against Windows for market share, there has to be a shift in thinking, away from kernel-centric, gizmos-and-gadgets way of thinking to the "what would a user want to do" mindset.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
What a rubbish statement. Take 3d for example. An open source 3d program is free, grreat and at this point is called Blender. But 3D ain't simple, it ain't easy. It's gonna take a couple of days to figure out if you've done nothing in that direction. So for any newb, it's gonna be very complex. Hell, certain aspects can be complex for non-newbs.
But to call Blender non-free 'cause it's a complex piece of software? That's a very stupid thing to say.
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
I have installed a few machines recently and not once did I have to hunt down drivers to have a functional machine.
Now there are cases where there are newer drivers that I could go get should I need them but they are not required.
The big difference between installing Linux versus XP?
If I need drivers they most likely exist for XP.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
No more blog entries please.
And anyway, there is already a "FOSS OS that is as easy to install and use as any proprietary OS", it's called OpenSUSE. It's the easiest thing I've ever used in my life, though it was bloaty and I eventually got sick of it and came back to Slackware.
Math is too hard! Until the mathematicians make it more usable, it will never gain acceptance in the Real World(TM).
Here's my summary of TFA:
"Somebody needs to do everything for me, including all of my thinking."
Move alone everyone. There is nothing to see here.
I don't agree with his argument but it's not because he's confused
My work here is dung.
Would you know where to do it in Adobe Photoshop? If you answered: "Yeah, you simply write a file importer plugin" then you'd also know where to do it in the GIMP code.
I always like the whole Photoshop vs GIMP discussion. People take a lot of courses learning Photoshop. Then when you start a discussion that GIMP is a great tool they always complain that it's design isn't intuitive and that Photoshop is "better". Yet they spend hours learning how to use Photoshop. If they spend the same time learning GIMP there wouldn't be a problem.
My Linux boxes are free in the sense that I can hire anyone I want to help me with them, or I can get a book from O'Reilly Media, and do it myself.
Freedom doesn't mean that no effort/expense is required. It only means that the effort won't be artificially impeded.
[100% ISO 646 Compliant]
SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.
Exactly.
The problem is that the human organism has two modes of learning. Babies tend to learn by blind repetition and obedience; older children and adults tend to think more in terms of abstract concepts and underlying reasons. This makes sense from a survival point of view: it's more important for a toddler not to fall off a cliff / get eaten by a bear / drown &c., than to understand why not.
It seems that some adults are simply frightened of computers, and this is triggering a change in their behaviour around computers. The Eternal N00b is reduced to the status of a three-year-old playing near a pit of deadly vipers. The computer's error messages are interpreted akin to the strident warnings barked out by a nearby adult. The E.N. learns nothing about the way computers work, only that certain courses of action are proscribed. A real child probably would eventually come to understand what is so dangerous about the snakes, or leave them alone altogether. In fear born of ignorance, the Eternal N00b never understands computers or software, only learns by rote what not to do; and so will remain evermore a n00b.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
Amen, sir. This bothers me to no end as well. Most objects in the everyday world are so simple because they have a very small set of tasks to perform. A car has one pedal that makes it go accelerate, another that makes it slow down, and a wheel that directs its motion. The concept of a clutch and shifter is too complex for most people today.
Computers, on the other hand, allow the user to run multiple applications, enter text, perform searches, communicate with a global network, burn writable media, etc. A web browser alone has about twenty times more options than a car. They are not simple machines, and the people who have been selling them as such have been lying through their teeth.
You can either have a simple interface, or a full feature set. You can't have both. Google's Search, for example, is so simple because you can take one operation. That's all. I give them some words, it gives me back what it thinks I mean. Anything more complex (searching within a certain site, searching page titles) uses cryptic search keys that most users are unaware of. Even more advanced operations like searching by change date, are not provided at all. Desktop software provides many, many more options, and it has to because the software provides that much functionality. But it also requires people to learn for a change. I'm all for simplifying interfaces as much as possible, but there's a certain amount of complexity inherent in a task.
Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
The Urban Hippie
Freedom comes with responsibility. A free people can only remain so if they watch their government. If one is to be free to walk the streets, one must be able to protect oneself. When one is free to learn, one must take care to educate oneself.
Therefore, freedom comes with the exercise of effort (vigilance, skill, exercise, study) and cannot be exercised without it.
If one does not watch, the power of government will increase. If one cannot defend oneself, he will be afraid to go out at night or rely on the police to protect him. If one is not educated, anyone can tell him anything, and he will believe it.
Convenience is not a "freedom".
All data is speech. All speech is Free.