Slashdot Mirror
How to Encourage Use of OSS?
Marc Light asks: "I repair computers as a side line cause I want to keep up on what's going on in the world of computer technicians. When someone comes to me with a problem, if I have to reinstall I first try to convince them to install Ubuntu. For now I only have 25% of success, mostly because they usually use an app. or some hardware that would complicate their experience too much. When I install Windows, I also install Firefox, OpenOffice, VLC, Winamp (not open source but if they eventually switch to Linux, XMMS won't scare them), and CDex to drive them off Windows Media Player and DRM. I then take 15 to 30 minutes free of charge to explain to them the basics of their new software. For my part, I mostly got positive response. I'd say 80% of it is positive feedback. My questions to Slashdot readers: Do you think that computer technicians can make a difference in the adoption of OSS? And if they're for OSS, should they try to put some pressure on their users/clients?"
I really don't like the idea of trying to convert people.
What's your actual rationale for changing their use experience (Windows to Linux)? I'd be interested in hearing what the 25% who did switch from Windows to Linux actually experienced.
The beautiful thing about OSS is that it's free. And you're not forced to use it (like Dell forces people to use Windows). Let's keep it that way.
Please only install this software on their machines if they give you permission. If their computer stops working soon after or they experience problems that they don't understand (file associations), they may just quietly blame it on those applications and tell that to all their friends and relatives.
My work here is dung.
I just recommend Ubuntu. It's the most user-friendly Linux desktop out there today. I know some people will suggest that Linspire is better, but I don't think that's the case. Packages are far easier to find and install on Ubuntu, and Ubuntu uses far more recent versions of the software they do offer (which often include important stability, usability and security fixes).
The one thing I dislike about Ubuntu is that it uses GNOME as the default desktop. Often times I remove it for people, and install KDE instead. Geeks may like GNOME, but many average users find KDE far easier to use, and much more comprehensible. This is especially true if they are coming from Windows or Mac OS 9 (or earlier). I could always use Kubuntu, but I find it's just as easy to stick with Ubuntu instead, and remove GNOME in favor of KDE.
Talk down to everyone that uses Windows.
Use phrases like, "I guess if you are willing to accept that level of insecurity" even if you don't know of any real security flaw in what you are describing.
Assume that every Windows user simply doesn't know better.
Laugh at someone's choice of programming language. Ignore the fact that they make better software than you do. Just harp on the fact that they use IIS while you use Apache.
In short, just be a pompous ass. Don't let the facts or manners get in your way. The converts will come running. Or walk away laughing. Either way: believe you win. The truth is really far too sad.
I'm all for converting as many people as possible, and I think there are some areas where you can make a real difference, like Firefox, because it will do what they want it to and they don't have to think about anything new or different. I've not even been able to get my girlfriend to agree to only have linux PCs in the house. She thinks she only know windows and that's all she wants. It's the same with my mum. I've shown them new things, triend to encourage... all for nought.
Some people just don't want to change - and they are the vast majority of people... These are also the same people who complain the second something doesn't work on linux and yet put up with endless crashes with windows (because windows never causes problems). I'm amazed that you have a 25% rate. Maybe you should be posting to use about how you have such a good level?
*''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
what api's will you rely on? microsofts solely?
and what heppens then?
it's time to teach the kids what is open source all
about, and not only in programing / computer technology
matters but also in music, fashion, art and life's little
secrets each one is carrying.
free and open, as pure as it gets
and then you install an OS on their computers that will give you less work in the long term?
Do you want to die a pauper?
Why not just do your job and fix their computer like they asked you to. Would you like your waiter to try and convince you to change your order because they don't think it's right to eat lamb?
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
You should suggest it, but don't try to convince them unless they ask for more information. Put together a sheet comparing the two operating systems and give them a live CD, but I would leave it at that. Besides, if they come back afterwards and say, I like this live CD, can you put it on the drive, you get more cashish.
Technicians can play a role in getting the word out on FOSS and you seem to be doing a good job with FF and OO. Just remember that you don't know how they use their computer and perhaps Linux just is not right for that user.
tinfoilmedia
If your installing all this other software for them, install something that is OSS and would do the same as VMWare and an image of Linux. Set it up so they can delete it VERY easy, doesn't take up TO much space and takes a simple double click to get a taste of this mystical creature.
Long ago I helped a guy rationalise his laptop; upgraded DOS, and Wordperfect (shows how long ago this was...). Then weeks later I get a call "I can't save my file! You've messed up my computer! It worked before!!! etc...". Turns out he was trying to use an illegal filename. So a problem he created that had nothing to do with what I had done, had become my problem. And this continued for months. It only takes a few people like that to sour you on the whole idea, and you revert to "Reformat and reinstall; call MS if it doesn't work". Beware those who nod and agree when you make suggestions, often they have no idea what is going on and will come back to you time and time again to ask the same question and drive you insane. Unless you're either a BOFH or Mahatma Gandhi, don't be a suggester.
If me or a family member takes my computer to you to be serviced, you're going to act like AOL or Real Player and try to install a bunch of crap I didn't ask for and hijack the applications that I'm accustomed to using. I don't know about others, but I certainly wouldn't go to this sort of technician. I think the pompus ass comment above would pretty much cover my feelings if someone came to me and showed me this was done.
Also you have to think about liability. If you go installing crap that _you_ think is better without the customer understanding or knowing and then god forbid a huge bug is found in firefox and their computer is breached, guess what? You're probably liable.
You didn't mention the mail client. I hope you're putting Thunderbird on also. Giving them a good browser and then leaving them at the mercy of Outhouse Express hardly seems fair.
Secondly, each new user created is going to get the default file associations, so it's back to IE and friends. (Yeah, the odds of anybody actually using multiple logins on a Windows machine are nil.) Does anybody know how to change the default associations? I've never bothered to look.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
While I think offering the option to install Linux makes sense, trying to spin it as a far superior alternative to Windows and convince users to switch simply doesn't. While the average Linux desktop (I'll use Ubuntu as an example, since that's what was mentioned in the article.) is certainly usable, it lacks things that many (though, of course, not all) users need, such as MS Office, (As a college student, most people I know would need this functionality.) compatibility with hardware, and various other Windows only drivers and programs.
And then, of course, there's the issue of compatibility with peripherals. Until the Linux kernel offers a stable binary driver API, (Which, as we've all been assured, will never happen.) hardware manufacturers won't be able to include drivers for devices such as scanners and printers in the package, thus discouraging them from ever creating such drivers in the first place.
You could always keep a stock of older (PIII 700Mhz) computers around that have Linux or BSD installed with just Firefox so that when you take their computer to get fixed, they can still "surf the IntarWeb tubes" but they will get a OSS experience.
But this only works for some people... Other people will just refuse to do anything with something that is different. So even if you set up the Linux desktop to look close to a standard default XP install, the tiny changes will be too much for some people.
Karma: Excellent. 15 moderator points expire sometime.
If you really want to champion this movement, you have to recognize the problem before you can start to offer people solutions. You mention installing OSS apps that you seem to enjoy on everyone's machine.
While you may feel that this is doing them a world of good, what problem did you solve? Did they complain to you that they were sick of DRM? Did they complaining that they wish they hadn't bought MS Office and long for a free suite of editing and publishing tools? Was IE failing to fill its role in their lives?
For the average person, there are few problems with their computer experiences. If they have issues with security online or troubles coming up with the cash for MS Office, then you have definite problems that need solutions. And OSS is there for them, that's when it's your duty to step in and offer your services and free 15-30 minutes of time to explain how this new software works. Nobody wants to climb extra learning curves and, let's face it, commercial software products are usually years ahead of their OSS competitors.
A lot of open source applications are developed to satisfy a very specific problem. That is, they don't have a breadth of system requirements, just very very specific ones. They may come out fulfilling these few requirements far and above their competitors but they often lack the bells and whistles. For instance, I love CDex because it's simple and slimmed down with no DRM. Does this mean that my sister should also want to use it? No. She doesn't care or know what DRM is and my explanations bore her. Instead, she wants quick instant American gratification at the click of a button. iTunes gives this to her, CDex is ugly and foreign with no online tutorials or music store built into it.
So before you ask me how to encourage the use of OSS, you first need to tell me the problem that OSS needs to solve. I'm guessing for a lot of these people, there isn't one. Unfortunately, OSS is simply not for everyone.
If someone comes to you in distress with a problem, simply say, "you know, I use this app that
My work here is dung.
The way I see it, Windows got two major problem. The insanely greedy company developing it, and the incredibly stupid user base. Spare the community and dont tell your customers about foss. Ok, that was only one of my many, and incompatible, points of view.
I think it depends vastly on the age of the person you are trying to convince. I have found that younger people (less than 40) are willing to try new things and are able to realize that ABC is not the same as XYZ and that it will take time to learn the new system. Older people on the other hand HATE change! People over 40 and in paticular I am speaking of my parents even hated switching from 98 to XP. There are exceptions both ways of course, but I have found the most common reason among the older crowds resistence to open source is that 1.) It's different. 2.) It's free.
Now it is time for an "oh so famous" car anology!!! Older people see a computer like a car. Why shouldn't they? They want to get from point A to point B and do it as easily as possible. Most older people have worked only with Windows. They see everyone else using Windows and that is the standard for them. Giving them Linux is like replacing the steering wheel and pedals with a joystick and levers. They are going to hate it and are less likely to give it a fair chance.
As much as the Slashdot crowd hates it, most older folks hear the name Microsoft and think a high class respectible business with knowledgable programmers creating the worlds most popular computer operating system. When they hear Linux, they think... "wtf is Linux?". Why should they make such a radical change over to a platform that they have probebly never heard of before? Software is an issue as well. Some people will not give up programs like Microsoft Office or the "point-n-click" software that came with there printer/digital camera/etc products.
If you're shopping for a new car, do you want to buy a brand name you have heard before that works as soon as you get it? Or would you rather get the car (OS) that the dealer (technition) recommends? Oh and the dealer has to take the car to shop before you can buy it in order to prepare it. The car doesn't have a radio (mp3 support) out of the box and needs to be installed. And if the dealer tells you that you can change the engine (recompile kernel) on the car, do you really give a shit? Oh and one more thing... the car is free!!! If someone offers you a free car, you are going to instantly think that something is wrong with it or that it is very cheaply built. Behold! The 2007 Linux Sadan!
i had a girl in my office actually request firefox installed on her machine because she had heard about it. she told me she had never heard of it before and i was able to tell her "well, you remember netscape, right? firefox is what netscape became after microsoft demolished them."
i think firefox is her main browser now.
I do the same, mostly just for friends or family, though. I don't believe in forcing a person, or even putting pressure on them. A lot of people are scared of change, and you must respect that. If you carry a laptop, and have linux installed, give them a taste of what they could be using. If they see some features they like, they may concider the change. Do not put pressure on them, it will just scare them off.
:-)]. They are concidering the use of OSS as they mostly just use it for the internet and music, and that extra $150+ MS tax is just too much.
So far I've managed to get my girlfriend hooked on all the fancy XGL/Compiz goodness. My younger brother is starting to come around. If we can get Flash 9 [Not the player, the authoring application] to install under WINE, then he'll be sold. If not, I can set him up with VMware and an XP install. At the moment, my girlfriends parents are looking to purchase a new computer. They've consulted with me on where or what to buy, and obviously I have pursuaded them to purchase through me [and in turn I do my hardware shopping online
I fully support OSS, but you cannot simply force the client into using only OSS. However, what you can do is meet with them and go over the basic advantages and disadvantages of OSS. Explain to them that while OSS is free, sometimes support for it just sort of...craps out to put is simply. Also give them demonstrations of OSS and have them actually sit down and use it so they can decide if they prefer it over whatever Software or O/S they are using. I admire your passion for trying to pass along OSS, but just don't force it onto the client/customer
I've had a few relatives ask me to help them with computer problems. Most of them have been due to malware infecting their systems beyond repair. For those cases, I've calmly explained the problem to them, trying my best to get them to understand how the problems are inherent with Windows. But then I tell them I have a solution, and it will cost them nothing. At this point, they're usually quite eager to at least try it out.
So we back up their data, and I install OpenBSD on their systems. We set up the firewall, install X11 and KDE, set up KMail for their email, configure Konqueror for their web browsing, configure Kopete for all their instant messanging needs (they really love it all being in one program), make sure their media files are playable, install OpenOffice.org, set up their printer and scanner, and make sure any other hardware they have works. Wine is mature enough these days that it runs many Windows programs without problem.
At this point, they're usually quite pleased. Their system is reliable, it often runs faster because they don't need to use any anti-virus software, and they're able to perform all the tasks they need to get done. Another benefit is that I can ssh into their system, to perform updates or otherwise maintain their system remotely. This works very well for installing software, for instance. Before I had to drive out to their place to help them get stuff installed, while now I can do it from home.
People are willing to switch over if you make it easier for them, and get it all set up for them. I think it's well worth it, as I'm confident they won't run into problems, and thus I won't have to come over and fix them. And in the rare case something does break, I can easily diagnose and remedy the problem from my home computer.
The general computer users are either
1. forced to use Windows by company or government job
2. Don't want to switch because their software will no longer function.
If you've got kids in the house - they want to play games and use programs available freely on the net. It's an unfortunate fact of life that most of these programs are developed soley (soulessly?) for windows only.
I'm converting though... my daughter's PC will stay windows for a while until I can get educational / entertainment software working - but the rest are running some sort of *nix distro. I'll admit it was easier than I remembered it a few years ago. With Ubuntu or Kubuntu making installation of software as easy as seach, click, install.
My laptop provided by my company is next... I'll run Outlook in citrix.
It is relatively normal for techs to install anti-spyware/anti-malware software on client PCs. Some offer or require to install commercial programs to make a little extra money by selling a license. Others install freeware as part of their service.
If a web browser was less vulnerable to spyware and malware, than I don't see any difference in installing it.
If I go out for sushi, I would certainly expect the itamae to suggest the fish that is fresher than others.
Do you think that computer technicians can make a difference in the adoption of OSS?
Well, yes, however I don't see why would a person living off of repairing broken Windows would suggest that people would use something that doesn't break as often...
this is kinda stupid, you know.
You should not try and enforce software of any kind on people. Anything goes wrong, they will be blaming the technician and therefore you get a very bad rep by word-of-mouth. And XMMS is no in way comparable to the pice of work Winamp is, there isn't even a media library. If you really want to show of, show them Amarok. Otherwise, if you constantly disinfect other peoples desktops, show them Firefox and ask, whether they'd like to use it. Install a few extensions (Adblock, Flashblock etc...) just to show them how quiet the web can be. Explain about the Auto Update function Microsoft and why it is valuable to them. Try to educate them a little at a time, but don`t shove software down their throats.
having the ability to boot linux or windows can be a plus. You can explain to them that should their windows system again get corrupted for any number of reasons, least of which is not online garbage, they can still use linux.
I once created a triple booting system with windows98, windowx XP and Knoppix. I had to disallow either windows partition from seeing each others but had a common partition for anything that any of teh systems needed to access like user files. Of course Knoppix had full acces to the whole system as that didn't cause potential conflicts. I didn't create this system for myself but for a friend who had been running Window ME and letting all his friends and kids access the internet. It took over 15 minutes for it to boot, had over 600 items of spyware on it, and a few viruses. In trying to fix it I watched it deteriorate to the point of non-functional.
Choice is a wonderful thing, but removing windows altogether can be a plus to, as it forces the user to get use to linux.
Personally I prefer Linux, Ubuntu as of current, for general computing and even programming with python.
My use of windows at home has been reduce a great deal and only use it when I need to use an application only available in windows.
But I'm finding more that is not available in a windows environment. Linuxcnc machine controller, even just for simulation, uses the real time kernel and is not available on windows.
OS I look to for the no to distant future include AROS, DragonFlyBSD and look over at the HURD and Minix3. Something has to give!!! As even Linux is not as user empowering as computing should be. And Windows is probably becomming the worst in terms of user empowering (The shell is a good indicator)
alot of the people who actually bring their computer to a shop are clueless about software because many of their problems relate to software. If you put something that's free, open source and of high quality than they'll have a more stable system. Take for instance you installing Firefox. Firefox is probably the defacto in f/oss. Not only is it a cross platform browser, but it's very high in quality. Puting a app like this will actually help the user instead of hindering his/her usage. like the other person said, the last thing you want is someone be ungrateful for what you've done and call you back saying it's your fault that someone isn't working and it was working fine. well for that, make sure you are getting their permission and once you do get the OK sign, make sure you install all plugins and what not, so that they dont' have future problems. however don't go on a shove-oss-down-people's-throat spree. the last thing you want to do is put in so much f/oss that the user will get lost on what to use. and remember, not all f/oss is really high in quality. alot are unstable, crash often and have defaults which are so crude that people may think this is a whole different app instead of a "replacement". you can put OOo (i recommend the premium edition since it has templates which people normally use). you can put thunderbird, heck you could even put opera even though it's not really oss but simply because it's cross platform. the main idea is to give them the crucial apps (things they use regularly) which in case they ever switched to linux, would find them compatible there aswell.
Tried this too, only replacing Kubuntu with OpenSUSE (ok, skip the distro war now, please). Success rate was also around 30%, but the most interesting thing is what happens when the customer brings the machine home. Connection to the Internet is usually not a problem, but then the worst happens... kid want to install their favorite games. And that's not applications, where you can get some flexibility. If they play CS or SecondLife, THAT is what they want to have... and that's where the fater/mother/whoever reaches for the Windows CD and the family happily reerts back to Windows. I have experienced thaton numerous occasions.
http://www.automatiq.se
I think the poster has the right idea about promoting OSS.
Also, I think it would help if he were female and had great tits.
Know what I like about atheists? I've yet to meet one that believes God is on their side.
It's entirely situational.
Yes--If they have older hardware and a Win9x system that's no longer supported.
I do 2 or 3 conversions like this a month. Usually it's a 300-450 Mhz box with 64 meg of ram or so. It ran 9x well enough, but it would be godawful running most of the 'Desktop Environment' based distros available today. I have a customized Debian package list with a set of light weight packages and WM. Total install space, with apps, is just under 300 megs. I've successfully installed it on everything from a Cyrix 133/32 meg to a P-II 450/64 meg. Every person I've done that for has been thrilled. They can do everything they were able to before (email, surf, word process, etc.) and not have to have the machine bogged down by anti-virus, anti-spyware, and application-based firewalls running all the time. And to top it off, the OS is updatable and supported.
No--If they're using AOL/some other proprietary connection software.
It's a god damn shame that after all this time, that AOL still hasn't come up with a software package for Linux, considering that their entire backend is *nix based. The 'AOL dialers' available for Linux are just that - dialers, and those used to using AOL aren't getting the same experience that they want. Some ISP dialers (i.e. Earthlink) are nothing more than just a standard DUN connection with some unnecessary eyecandy and other overhead... those can usually be set up pretty easily.
FYI - winmodems are the tools of the devil. ISA sound cards and and serial mice are nothing compared to those damned things.
Maybe--If they're on a highspeed line and have no idea about security measures with Microsoft Windows.
This is a pretty typical case. I've wow'd enough clients with the likes of Knoppix and they've been interested enough to at least dual-boot. More often than not, they tend to stick with the Linux side of the machine because the machine runs so much faster. Unless they're heavy gamers, they pretty rarely boot back into Microsoft Windows.
The key is no-pressure. It's their machine, and they shouldn't be forced into using something they're not comfortable with. I'm not a salesman, and I don't intend to be. I run Linux on a couple of laptops (P-II 233 Mhz/128 meg and a P-III 700/384 meg), and I carry whichever one most closely matches the client's machine, and let them play with it while I'm working on theirs to showcase its usability. They're always aghast when I tell them that all the software is _free_, and then show them the 15,000+ listings available in the repositories. Dual-booting is a damn nice option and allows people to try it out to their hearts' content and not have to commit to anything.
...Rob
The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
You need some marketing, something that eludes most coders, unfortunately.
A logo for OSS with a catchy saying is needed, like OSS-Read The Code, or No Smoke and Mirrors: OSS, or OSS- Tastes Good, Too! etc.
Use a color code to denote whether the code runs on Linux, BSD, MacOS, Windows, etc.
Use the logo on every OSS site, including the freaking owners of this one! Put the OSS logo on every home page run by OSS code. Stickers, bumper stickers, window stickers, whatever stickers. Promote because no one will search you out and love your code because it's just too cool. Really. You don't have to boast, or not be humble. You have to get the idea across that OSS transparency works, costs less not only in capital costs but also in ongoing service costs, and drive the point with humility-- but DRIVE THE POINT.
Otherwise, only one in a hundred people know the difference between OSS and a live hand grenade. Sad, but I'm sure it's true.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Stop acting like closed source software is some sort of contaigion. And referring to DRM'ed files as "infected" is really off-putting, not to mention incomprehensible to most people, who REALLY don't give a fuck.
Agree on a Linux distro for once, at least in public. Stop all the in-fighting if you want people to take you seriously. It seems lately there are more versions of linux than there are stars in the sky. And yet you stuck up assholes slag Microsoft for having SEVEN different versions of Windows!
Stop referring to Microsoft as "M$", "Micro$oft", "Microshaft", "Microsuck", "Microshit", etc. And their product is WinDOWS, not blows, okay? I realise your smug, self-serving denunciations of all things Microsoft is your primary source of self esteem, but if you're really serious about being taken seriously, the juvenalia must stop.
We really don't care about your politics. Give us the technical specs, explain the differences, answer our questions, and then SHUT THE FUCK UP. Chances are excellent we won't understand at all and will care even less than we understand. Explain how Software X is superior to Software Y in technical terms. And be prepared to help with tech support.
And speaking of tech support, if you're going to force a distro on your relatives, be prepared to provide tech support. And be prepared to explain why some stuff doesn't work. And no matter what you say, making things work is not easy. Don't just dump your poor mother or grandmother in Ubuntu and expect her to be able to figure things out without calling you a half million times. Don't get angry: you pushed this on her, so you get to hold her hand. A Mac or a Windows box would have been more sensible, but you just had to push Linux on her, so take it like a man.
But maybe the waiter knows that you shouldn't eat the lamb because the meat had a green fungus covering it. The best thing the waiter can do in such a case is to recommend another dish, one that doesn't suffer from such problems. As much as you like and want lamb, it's probably better for yourself and everyone else if you order something else. After all, nobody else in the restaurant wants to see you puking up your guts after eating the bad meat.
It's much the case with Windows. We know it suffers from some very inherent flaws. Things have gotten better as of late, but that is only because of the pressure that Linux, BSD, Solaris and Mac OS X put on Microsoft to improve the security of Windows. As computer professionals, it's our duty to recommend alternate products that are safer for the user to use. They might really enjoy Windows, but it's better for everyone if they switch to a better operating system. After all, when their machines becomes compromised, it's their data that may get stolen. It's our mail servers that will have to handle all of the spam their systems send out. We might as well just help them out in the first place by recommending a better system, and save everyone a lot of trouble later on.
> Do you think that computer technicians can make a difference in the adoption of OSS? And if they're for OSS, should they try to put some pressure on their users/clients? If price of a software product is not the problem, I'd say that the responsibility of a computer technician, as an engineer, would be to suggest, if he was questioned, to find the most cost effective solution to a particular task. Including the number of hours it would take work time for the new user to learn to use the software. Really, your main concern should be the productivity of the software and the maintainability. The cost of the software to an organization usually is neglible compared to the labor costs. Sometimes free options are just fine and dandy, or even better than anything else. And sometimes you just don't have anything that compares to a commercial product (say, like Adobe's CS suite , some engineering FEM modeling software like Ansys). Learn the need, then find the best tool for the job. It's all process instructions to the computer, and the value to the end user is in the final product (a publication, report, memo, whatever), not the tool he used.
It's not your decision to make. Imagine someone fixes your computer and, being a MS certified tech, he decides that with MS soft you're much "safer" and thus removes all your non-MS replacements for MS software and installs the newest (and most DRM-ridden) MS replacements instead. Would you be happy?
What you can (and IMO should) do is to suggest it. Offer them to install the other soft, point out the increased security and usability (and the fact that that soft doesn't give a damn about DRM), and of course mention that it's free of charge and, very important, that they can switch back to their tried ways without any hassle, and they will take the offer. Hey, they get "more" for free, why should they turn it down?
But you leave the decision to them, that's important. If you force people to use something, they will likely react with hostility and resistance, not because they don't know it but because they didn't make that decision themselves and thus it's invariably your fault and the bad software when they run into any problems, and they will switch back to their old soft and blame you.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I'm kind of growing tired of the conceit that OSS is always better all the time. These things are tools in a toolbox. The more you know about all of them, the better off you are. Sure, you can use OSS for a lot, but that doesn't mean it's always better to do so. Get over yourselves. Linux's desktop OS interface is still pretty primitive compared to it's commercial alternatives. I know no one here wanted to hear that, but that' doesn't make it any less true.
Learn something about human factors and design (hint: design is not about making things prettier, it's about making them better) and then start improving the desktop interface using the lessons gained. Then you will start to see people convert to Linux of their own free will, no coercion necessary.
For my applications, I try to let the software speak for itself.
Asterisk is a perfect example. You can either drop some serious cash on a system which isn't as featureful or flexible, or you can get asterisk which is a fraction of the cost and works better ( in most cases ).
You don't need to really push this option. You just give them the options and they choose the one they want.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Double their harddisks, delete windows. Install Linux. :)
Then tell them to download a Vista Live CD if they want to.
And they are going to complain about a *FREE* loaner that doesnt happen to have the exact same system as their machine on it? OFW. I think they will either take it or leave it. And perhaps the same 30% (or more) will decide they like the OS on the loaner, and may ask if/how they can get the same on their own machine.
Consider that you are doing a public service. Most people are simply not aware there are better products out there. Most of what people know comes from biased sources.
Salesmen are known to misrepresent. Would one expect a salesman to tell a potential customer to try Open Office for instance when there is a copy of Word sitting for sale on the shelf? Would the salesman's manager be honest enough to tell their sales staff to do their best for the customer?
Since much of what people think they know tends to come from what marketing people want people to know, would you think we are dealing with a level playing feild?
The profit motive is a very powerful one, and one problem with FOSS is the "F". Licenses do allow for profit to be made. Unfortunately many people who work with FOSS seem to think it is unethical to ask for money for something that is free. This idea does not seem to exist in the business community.
I don't look at it as trying to convert them I look at it as making them legal. I refuse to install pirated applications. Most of the time when I re build for a home customer they have duplicated install cd's from a friend, child and so fourth. They dont have an MS office license or a photoshop license.
I tell them that I wont help them break the law and then tell them I have free alternatives they can try legally if it doesnt work I will be more than happy to assist them in purchasing and installing the software they want legaly. Normally with the cost of MS office everyone is willing to give it a try.
My load is
Open Office
Firefox
Seamonkey
Picasa2
paint.net
foxit reader
pdfcreator
iTunes
Quicktime
I know its not all OSS but it the load I find gives the most people what they want. Very rarely do I get called back to install MS office, and I have never come back to find an illegal copy of MS office after I load the OSS alternatives.
Carnage Blender
You can make thousands in USD!
How do you deal with the increased amount of support calls for all these people you are converting? It's unlikely that they know anyone else who knows anything about Linux so you are now the "go to guy". How do you maintain your patience when you're watching a movie at 11pm and old Martha calls asking why she can't connect to the Net or that she can't install that software from work? I mean, as you convert more people how do you deal with being front line support for everyone because you can't just stick them on Linux and then say RTFM. Just curious because that is the main reason I don't install Linux unless someone comes begging to me to want to learn. Honest questions here because I can see converting just a dozen people being a real pain in the ass. I love Linux but the things I love about it are not the things that the average user really wants out of their system. thanks
I don't think technicians can make a difference but the OSS community itself can. There are many cases where the OSS software simply doesn't cut it but using the original software is blocked because "its closed source" (or something similiar) and so people will have to cope with the OSS variants. Naturally you can overcome this, but by this time most people will have already gotten a first impression.
Example? I'm a Java developer and enthousiast. When it comes to Linux users who are interested in Java but run into weird problems the first question to solve this is: "Are you using the gcj compiler by any chance? Yes? Then ditch that P.O.S., goto http://java.sun.com/ and get the Sun JDK for Linux". I've explained numerous of times that gcj isn't Java but an OSS variant and simply doesn't work as the authors claim. And the fact that this is the defacto standard on new Linux environments can (and is) a turn off for many Java interested Linux users. There are a lot of people who became less enthousiast with OSS after this experience and as such approach it with a little reluctance.
How hard would it have been for the "OSS community" (I know; generalizing) to simply accept Java the way it is and instead of distributing a broken product just refer to Sun ? Ofcourse this is all seen from my Java-liking perspective, but I still think that people should be less anal about some things.
Firefox is a great ambassador for OSS - it gives people a good experience and makes them open to trying other offerings, so start with Firefox and then if you get a good response, suggest maybe OpenOffice or Thunderbird next. Eventually, you can say "well you know that all these programs run under Linux too, so if you want, you can get rid of Windows altogether and then you don't really need Spybot, Ad-Aware or that subscription to Anti-virus either".
Once people focus on using OSS applications and not on the underlying OS then they will be much more receptive to a change.
Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
On one hand everyone we switch over to OSS is one less spambot on the internet. Just that much less background noise in an already noisy ecosystem.
On the other hand, why do I care? If users aren't smart enough to ask for OSS or spend 15 minutes learning about it, why is that my problem to solve? I can sit back and laugh at the Windows threats making the rounds, make appropriately sympathetic noises when my friends claim their computer is getting more sluggish every time they boot up. I make a lot of money fixing MSFT crapware, so I'm not doing myself any favors converting the Great Unwashed.
The only thing I might change is requiring PC manufacturers to offer a competitive choice of operating systems on new PC's. They don't have to support them, just offer the choice with the price difference plainly visible. Or, at a minimum, offer the same machine with no operating system minus their OEM Windows price. It's quite likely most consumers would choose Windows anyway and that's fine. Right now there is no choice and that's wrong.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
"And you're not forced to use it (like Dell forces people to use Windows)."*
l iances/en/red_hat?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz
http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/al
Once again slashdot demonstrates that it prefers politics over facts.
*That and the fact that it loves abusing the english language. "Forces" indeed.
When I install software on a client's machine, I offer them options and give my personal recommendation based on what I perceive to be their needs. Sometimes that's OSS software, other times it's proprietary.
At the end of the day, I think you should be promoting what will work best for the user. Pushing products without consideration for the user's needs is a disservice.
I am the maverick of Slashdot
It seems that it is not just the articles that my fellow Slashdotters don't read. Many comments have chimed in with "if they are happy, leave them alone", but he said that he was there to do a re-install. I am thinking that his very nice conversion rate of 25% has to do with the customer NOT being happy about needing a re-install. It seems to me that this guy is trying to fix their problems such that they will be less likely to need another re-install.
My only recommendation to him would be to ask before installing Firefox and the like on the machines which are to remain as Windows boxes. An argument for Firefox and Thunderbird as solutions to some of their Windows problems would probably be easiest to make. If they go for that, then the additional suggestion of Open Office and the rest can be made to audience more open to new things.
Use it at work, and (without becoming the Free Software bore) let people know what it is. I'm lucky, in that I have enough freedom at work to be trusted with root on my own machine; I've installed and configured everything myself. Occasionally, I'll be in a meeting with project managers, directors or veeps, and I'll let them get a glimpse of my desktop, or Nautilus (better eye-candy than Konq. IMO :) before opening up a web page or "a Powerpoint" in OpenOffice. So far I seem to be getting away with it, and I think it gradually sinks in to people that Linux actually exists. (Non-tech people, and indeed lots of Windows and web developer types, too, might hear about Linux, but they never see it - it's a word in a box on a network diagram. Showing them that nice big icons, anti-aliased fonts, multiple desktops etc *and* that websites look just the same as they do on Windows, and that you can read/write Office docs without problems is worth more than any amount of well-intentioned button-holing, earnest explanations and possibly even giving out CDRs (I've never actually tried that, tho' I think I will try to have a few Live CDs hanging around that I can hand to those people who say "Hey, I like those big icons, what is that?"
Everything I needed to know about life, I learnt from Blake's Seven
I have been trying to promote OSS for some time. I have found that the uptake is much better since I tried a different tack: using my GPL rights and charging a small amount for the software.
In my experience people are put off by the word free, they assumed it would be crap, so now I simply say the software is more cost effective and as long as the charge is miles below M$ prices, they prefer it.
"If the truth can be told so as to be understood, it will be believed" -- Terence McKenna.
I think it's very important that "ordinary" computer users are told about the enormous scam that is closed-source software. In no other field of endeavour would the standard practices of the closed-source software industry be tolerated. Whoever heard of a restaurant putting drugs into the food so you would return there again and again, or shoes that would not stay on your feet unless you were also wearing a particular manufacturer's outfits? Yet computer users routinely tolerate vendor lock-in and DRM schemes for ignorance of the alternatives.
We -- the smart techies -- need to explain to non-technical people in simple terms exactly why these things are so bad. And then the smart non-techies will turn away from them. There will always be a few who aren't smart enough to do anything except bend over and take it, but you get that everywhere. We need to explain to people who have been let down by closed-source software how so many of the problems they have suffered arise directly from the closedness of the source, and that there is a better way of doing things.
If we who know the truth don't tell it, the liars will win.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
The first time a user is required to "build" his or her OSS, will be the last time they use OSS. I don't understand why the linux community still thinks that it's appropriate to make end users compile their own software.
"When I give talks with presentations I always use open source software and it is amazing how often people come up to me afterwards and say "that looked so much better than powerpoint what is it?" or "What browser was that you used?" "
In other words you demonstrate the biblical admonishment to show one's faith in action.
I worked as a computer tech at a small store for a few years, and at one point we decided to start distributing ubuntu cds (including live distros). We had them on display and anyone that was curious enough was allowed to take one for free. We also bought/sold used computers, and with older machines that didn't have an os there would be no way to make a profit if we installed windows. So we installed Ubuntu. Anyone who wanted an inexpensive machine was shown our linux boxes.
I've found that giving people a copy of The Open CD works nicely. They can use open source software without leaving their Windows comfort zone. When they're ready to take the next step, they can boot from the CD and have Ubuntu (LiveCD) to play with.
Last semester I made 100 copies to hand out at the Computer & Information Technology department's booth at our college's "Find out about the college" day. It was quite popular; we're doing it again for the same event next week.
If you can't make a difference, who can? You are the expert and the customer has come to you for advice. If you think free software can meet the customer's needs, it's your duty to tell them so and why it might be better for them.
I've had better luck with Mepis and Xandros than Ubunto or Fedora. Mepis is now based on Ubunto, so things might change, but it has been by far the easiest distribution to give a normal Windoze user what they want. From a live CD, you get KDE, Firefox with working Flash, OO2 and more. Xandros is better for users with heavy application dependencies. They make it easy for you to get and use Crossover Office and now Parallels, so the user can easily use whatever legacy application they need for business. Fedora is beautiful and makes system administration very easy for the user but comes at a price of relative installation complexity. I have not worked with Ubunto enough to find it's strengths, mostly because I prefer KDE over Gnome. KDE, for one reason or another, is easier for a Windoze user to navigate.
OS details are unimportant. What matters is that you, the expert, can tell the user that there's something better out there. As the Vista monster rolls over the major vendors, the user will remember what you said. If everyone is brave enough to say what they are thinking the user will remember a regular chorus.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
You are *hurting* the cause. You must apply zero pressure, barely even encourage them, and fully disclose the inconveniences they will face. Unless the motivation for Linux is their own they will most likely have a negative experience as they have to go through re-education and deal with quirks and limitations. Keep in mind that marketing folks have determined that someone with a negative impression is *three* times more likely to share that opinion than someone with a positive impression. Unless they are enthusiastic about installing Linux, not merely accepting your recommendation, you will generating far more bad word of mouth than good word of mouth.
...), they *must* be prepared to be the outsider. You can avoid some of this by running Windows under VMWare or Xen but if they slip back to Windows because it is more convenient or familiar they will not get over the Linux learning curve and wonder why they even have it installed. Games will still be an issue unless you configure the system to dual boot, but that will probably lead them to the "why bother" realization even faster. Please don't post answers to the "why bother" question, I've been dual booting and using Linux for a decade, I know why. It's a question that someone who got talked into Linux will most likely develop. Hell, even if they are curious and ask for Linux to just check it out many will go back to Windows.
Re-education: Little controversy there, few will argue that Windows users need to learn and re-learn a few things after moving to Linux.
Quirks: To a typical Windows user Linux will seem to have some quirks. Linux has made an awful lot of progress but it still suffers from a "by nerds, for nerds" attitude.
Limitations: They have to understand that their software options will be quite limited. Most of what they see or hear about they can not have. That viable alternatives often exist under Linux does not fully mitigate this. They lose the "network effect" (offline, with friends and family: pooling knowledge to figure out how to do something with the app, sharing tips and techniques, interoperable files,
The most you should do is ask them if they have considered Linux? If they are curious go ahead and tell them of the benefits, but be sure tell them about the extra effort they will need to put in and about the downside. Tell them you can install it if they would like, that you personally use it yourself and think it is vastly superior, but that they have to make the call and be willing to accept the extra effort in order to get used to it. Tell them if they do put in the effort they will most likely wish they had done so years ago.
Simply wait, what's the rush? It isn't like OSS will die without more marketshare.
Quietly mention that you use something else, and let them make the first step.
I'm using this approach of "I use something else, it works better, but it takes quite a bit of work to get used to"
I think it is a better approach because then when they do come and ask, they expect they will have to put in some effort. Despite the ease of use of ubuntu, it's a change, and many end users will have some trouble adapting.
Putting pressure on someone who came to get their computer fixed, to use OSS options is kind of vague. If you're giving them the option, telling them about some of the OSS or free options that they have, that's cool. Maybe they didn't know, and would like the chance to try something different.
But there is a point that you can reach where I'd say you could be getting too "evangelist" about it, in which case there could be a problem. Like if they say "I don't want this software you installed" and the response is, "Well, this software is better, you'll have to uninstall it yourself". I think at that point you're overstepping.
Show them what other options are out there, but let them make their own decisions.
I think it's going to be a hard sell to have repair technicians providing something that'll reduce their profits. I have a few experiences with friends who've finally got tired of needing their computers/Windows fixed and I've switched them to Linux. I've only been called a couple of times over the years(2-3) for things like help replacing a printer, when the wireless mouse batteries ran out, or to help teach them how to use a spreadsheet or something like that. With Windows, my wife and I could count on atleast one evening every 1-2 months spent having dinner with friends and fixing their computer/Windows.
:-)
Can you imagine people who make their living fixing computers wanting to put themselves out of business? Well, it might not be THAT bad but I would venture to guess that more than 50% of their business is fixing software/Microsoft issues.
So, keep up the good work. You are a rare bird IMO.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
I think that computer repair people, telephone support people and the like, are in forefront of OSS adoption. Just yesterday I was in some hardware shop, getting myself a new mouse (having to ask twice for a behind-the-counter model, because the ones they had on display all looked retarded to me (I said as much; I like simple mice)). In front of me was this somewhat older, but obviously educated (in some other field than CS, that is) guy, wanting something. He spoke bullshit like it was somehow a magical thing, computers, with the guy in front of him. The shop-guy tried to make out like he understood it all, but it was very obvious that neither was willing to break the magical-speak spell, each for their own reason. So it went on for a while, and eventually resolved itself because they had enough - no deal was made. But no understanding was created, either.
I occurred to me that if anyone was in a position to educate the guy, however, and/or make him change his ways, it was the guy behind the counter. For most people computers are a magical thing, and if the wizard or the witch-doctor tells you what to do about your ailment, you'd damn better do it. These people are our prime evangelists. They go with cool and new. OSS needs to be cooler and newer.
Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
That's a great idea, except the loaner should be a Mac. ;-)
I'd say 80% of it is positive feedback. ...you got 20% negative feedback? I guess the ultimate test is if they ever come back. Don't think it's because "Ubuntu/Firefox/OpenOffice/VLC/Winamp is working so great they don't need to come back", because I am certain they will need more help, particularly if you set them off on Ununtu. If they're not coming back, it's because they're not coming back to YOU, and instead went to someone who has reinstalled Windows for them.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Actually, I do agree with you... (I'm posting this from a Mac)
The only difficulty is that it is hard to find discarded Macs which I can refurbish to use as loaners.
I can get lots of old Compaq Deskpro PIII 700 for $25 each and they still have a few more years of life in them.
Karma: Excellent. 15 moderator points expire sometime.
alsa is much better, no need to use the old open sound system. or as api even suggest some higher level api used by both gnome and kde.
"I repair computers as a side line cause I want to keep up on what's going on in the world of computer technicians."
Clearly not for the money. Oh no, you do it for the EXPERIENCE of getting bitched at by people whose computers are broken.
___ alwaysBETA.com - Hey, you've got nothing better to do.
Agreed, I would never think of trying to switch a Windows user to Ubuntu in one go, you'd be bound to cause more problems than you solved. Hardware incompatibilities, the fact that they can't install any of the commercial software they see at PCWorld, they are bound to have some trouble with a website or file someone sends them at some point etc. Much better to let them switch gradually through Windows FOSS.
computer technicans can make a bg impact by testing if some hardware works. and with that I mean: works for simple, unexperienced first time linux users.
get those latest ubuntu/suse/fedora core previews, and give it a in detailed testing. you know how to use dmidecode to see what should work, you know the
main board manual and all the whistles and bells that should be available (e.g. sensors, special keys on notebook keyboards, etc.). do a real test and give
feedback to the distributions detailed enough, so they can get all of that working out of the box without any changes necessary..
linux doesn't fail on the first impression, and that is the status for a few years now. but once people use linux for a while, they sometimes stop liking
it if some small problem pops up and is not easily solved. like notebooks not properly hibernating, serial ports not working, or some other issue.
as computer technican no one expects you to write that new kernel driver for some hardware, or financial software people might want for linux. but you can
help where your expertise is and where help is needed: giving hardware a 100% check with even the smallest feature, and note down how to get them working
(or that they don't work - even this is very valuable, so people don't waste hours to try). and as linux enthusiast you can not only test the released
version of your preferred distribution, but also some pre-release. the final release always gets tons of users finding all kinds of problems, but only testers
of pre-releases can find problems and report them with fixes in time to improve the quality of the final release.
What the user wants is a browser, email, text editor and spreadsheet that work.
/. analogy coming on.
twitter knows what users want. Apparently users don't care about games, peripherals, Outlook (not just for email ya know), media players (i like winamp), websites that use flash movies (saw someone complaining about this earlier), or millions of other third party apps.
I can see you are doleing out some truly first rate advice here so I'll read on.
Wow, what a crappy analogy. First, the waiter would not work there because, thankfully, one company has not forced us all to eat their brand of food and restaurants enjoy a free market. The software market more resembles a nightmare world where McDonald's took over the entire food supply with government help.
lol. The waiter would not work there. Sometimes I can't even believe what I'm reading. Government help? They may not have broken up the company like some borderline communists would have forced them to but help? Please. If anything the government has been a hinderance (even if not a great one) to MS's monopolistic goals. Anybody even remotely in touch with reality can recognize this.
Automobiles provide a better analogy in this case. - I feel another great
How would you feel if the mechanic also knew of and use a community developed replacement engine that cost nothing, worked better and lasted forever?
This analogy is a real car wreck. An OS is more akin to a car model than simply an engine. You can swap out an engine and the rest of the car will still work, but if you replace Windows with Linux or visa versa most of your applications probably won't run. I'm not saying that this is a good thing but I no more expect to get Winamp to run in Linux than to get Konqueror to run in Windows.
How would you feel, if your mechanic "fixed" your SUV by replacing it with a Prius?
Aww, jee, the gas mileage is great, but I can't get in my driveway without scraping the bottom of my car. And I feel like kind of a goofball beeping when I back up. Is there any way to turn that off?
So what do they think of you, Linux, and OSS in general when they get home and realize they can't install that new game for themselves (or their kids) or that app they use at work or similar things? Do you think they come away from it with a good view of OSS/Linux?
You're being paid to fix the machine. Using me as a captive audience for anything else is not just rude, it's downright insulting.
First thing to keep in mind is to never, ever pressure the person to use free software. Let's face it, other than the fact that it is free, OSS is inferior. OpenOffice needs better Office support plus a better interface, Firefox is a RAM whore, VLC looks horrible in any mode and most any available skin doesn't help much, GIMP's interface is awful, and as a whole commercial software is much more polished. "BERGFEOGI BUT WMP AND DRM LOL!?!?!?!". Yeah, DRM exists. Deal with it. Whether you want to believe it or not, piracy is an issue and it's hurting companies. Course, most people use the excuse that "well, they're multi-million dollar corporations, they don't need my money." But they want it, you owe it to them, and they'll be damned if they're letting you cost them more by giving people what they're selling. There's also this old myth that free software is more secure. This is 100% pure bullshit - Firefox is more secure because nobody bothers hacking it, it makes up less than 10% of the browser market. Linux is more secure for the same reason; it makes up virtually none of the client operating system market. Not enough people are using the software for anyone but bug testers to bother putting effort in to hacking the thing. It's the same reason Macs are "more secure" - nobody cares. Grow up.
Windows is a better operating system than Mac OS X or Linux for the same reason the PlayStation 2 is better than its competitors. Sure, the others boast better specs, but Windows/the PS2 has tons more software/games and huge commercial/third-party support. It's also of comparable quality (let's be honest, even Ubuntu is not nearly polished enough to be considered quality - it's quality for Linux, but that doesn't change the fact that 90% of all Linux distros suck, and it only looks good when compared to those). Even more, Windows can run all that open source software. Whoever you're trying to get to use OSS probably isn't going to want a learn an entire new OS like Linux just to use some software, and it's really convenient that you can run it on Windows without making the switch.
Killing animals for food under modern circumstances is nothing short of evil.
Let's see... I bring my computer to you, and you fix it, but install a bunch of software I don't ask for... for free? That is 100% pure distilled lame.
I don't care if it's the bestest most bug-free software in the world, that would be last time I would let you near my box.
Whatever your personal feelings are regarding closed vs. open the bottom line is that unless it's absolutely required for the box to function, or the user specifically requests it, you shouldn't install it. By doing so, you are imposing your will onto others and denying them the opportunity to choose for themselves. Instead of just assuming that you know what's best for others, that they would like firefox or OpenOffice better than the software they've been using, just suck it up and "fix their computer" like they ask. Then, take your "15 to 30 minutes" and offer to show them the alternatives on your own box. If they say "wow, that's neat, where can I get it", offer to install it for them.
Whenever possible, software should involve a fully informed choice by the end-user. It should not be shoved down their throat by some well-intentioned ideologue on a personal crusade.
I see you post and think I must have left my diary open on Slashdot this morning....
Every single day I convert someone over to Mepis 6.0 (ubuntu basically) but with all the media stuff preinstalled
and I also run a business doing this...
Most of the time I won't even take a windows job...
and in all but the most extreme cases I have converted them over....
but when there is a rare instance....like you mentioned...
I likewise insist on installing all the OSS there is...
The Gimp, Openoffice, Firefox, Thunderbird, Cdex, Winamp, etc....etc...
also using as open as possible protections....AVG, Ewido, blbeta, spybot, adaware, zonealarm....
It's amazing.....every single one of them are still up and running perfectly while the other boxes
in the same households are crashing....infested to no end...and bot fodder...
The freakiest part of all is nowadays I'm seeing more and more idiots buying new computers and new hard drives
because they are so infested (slowed to molasses speed) that they think that is the fix...
and yes techs like you and I are making a huge difference.....
keep it up....we're gaining on em....
I've seen this pattern so many times in Windows users that there must be a name for it by now. Anyone know what to call this behavior?
I am astonished that people with no understanding of computers or OSs will
and then blame me , their technical support specialist, when their system quits working!
Like the OP said, they will insist "It worked before!" or "It worked fine until you changed the system!" when, upon questioning, you find it really never worked. These compu-turds have such egos that they blame anyone/anything except themselves for the crappy state of their systems. In severe cases I put these people on my shitlist and refuse to speak to them. Their behavior unnecessarily dooms them to live in Windows Hell forever.
I, for one, applaud the decision to not offer stable binary API:s. Hardware manufacturers should be doing what they do best; HARDWARE. Software developers should be doing what they do best; software. Anything in between should be regulated by open and common specifications.
In most cases where the hardware follows a common spec, the "just works"-behavior comes for free. Examples includes USB-mice, USB storage devices (both harddrives and smartcard-readers), IDE harddrives, Postscript Printers and more... These devices generally works without extra software, or even clicking an OK-button, in Windows just as well as MacOSX and Linux. This is what gives the user the friendliest long-term experience and least hassle.
Hardware vendors should never provide a potentially hurtful blob of code, for a software environment they potentially don't understand. (Does anyone remember the hell that was IOMega Drivers, or SoundBlaster Live in Windows?) It is a stability issue as much as a security problem. Instead, give me the hardware and tell me which common specification it follows.
My wife passed out CDs when she taught some community ed html classes the other year. Not only are there a couple editors, she was able to explain that an html designer really does want to view the results on multiple browsers so they should install Firefox too. Who knows how many had the motivation to look at The GIMP or OpenOffice.org?
Nothing pisses me off more than a proselytizing Linux guru, especially if he is trying to force the subject of his fetish onto my very own machine. I am pretty sure that most people will agree on this. Thus, no, what you are doing is not a good idea and may eventually cost you your job.
You forgot the question mark there, but it's clear you were making a statement rather than asking a question anyway. You might as well have said that it's everyone's job to do just what Bill Gates wants them to.
Um...no. If someone asked "could you fix my computer please?" a reasonable person wouldn't see that as an invitation to completely change the operating system for them. Imagine (car analogy coming up) taking your car to a mechanic, and instead of fixing the exhaust they've resprayed it, changed the engine and given you new seats. You'd be pissed.
What the user wants is a browser, email, text editor and spreadsheet that work.
And all users want that, because twitter says so.
What a lot of users want is MSN Messenger. The current most functional MSN client for Unix-alikes is aMSN (IMHO), and it's terrible. The fonts look out of place, it's a Tk program so it looks like shit and it doesn't support things like winks. They might want to use their webcam, which aMSN can do...if Linux supports it. They bought some songs off iTunes or Napster or something, they want to listen to...WHOOPS, they can't (no, saying how DRM is evil and the RIAA are fuckers isn't going to make someone any less pissed when you tell them they can't listen to their tunes). Oh, want to play some games? Well, if they work with Cedega (a big if) then sure. And those Works documents they had (lots of people use Works...)? Well, screw ever getting those back.
See? Linux isn't a panacea. YES, if you want basic web browsing and email, with maybe an ounce of word processing, Linux (or BSD for that matter) will do perfectly fine...but then, so will Windows really. Hell, for that, Windows 98 would suffice. Not much point in switching someone over just because you think Linux is better.
The software market more resembles a nightmare world where McDonald's took over the entire food supply with government help.
Government help? Jesus wept. Are the Jews or the Illuminati involved as well? How about the UN? Can't have a good conspiracy theory without those guys.
Second, I'd be more than happy if my waiter told me something like, "We got some beautiful fish today, you really should try it." Most of us like a helpful waiter.
Fair enough. Nothing wrong with a recommendation, so long as you're not saying "non-free software is evil, use Linux or you're going to hell to have your wallet raped by Bill Gates" (or it's equivalent in the silly lamb/waiter analogy).
How would you feel, if your mechanic "fixed" your car with a factory replacement fully knowing the part was defective by design?
"Defective by design". Yes, twitter. God you kill me sometimes.
By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
Quality hardware. Quality hardware. Quality hardware.
I think the best way to encourage OSS is to turn in people who have illegal copies of software.
The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
People actually don't care what they're using, if it gets the job done. The problem with installing Mozilla Firefox, VLC, Winamp, etc., it that, if they'll have to format their PC again, they will not bother to reinstall all that software again, unless someone will do it for them. They just don't care.
I have done the exact same thing for about 7 years, you can get people onto better software. It's all good to see others gets smart(er). That's the tip about CDex, some times the problem is finding a machine without GNU/Linux on it to test this software out... :)
The immature mind measures.
These people are coming to him as they can't fix the computer - they're walking up to him and saying 'I don't know what I'm doing and I believe you are an expert'
So you tell them to install Unbuntu and give them the hard sell, and 25% of them do. This is precisely the same tactic used by high-street PC stores to flog people shit they don't really need. The £100 HDMI cable, the extended warranty, the AV software with the high markup etc.
So assuming you do get them to switch to Ubuntu - do you honestly think they'll have a more trouble free future with their PC than they would with a repaired windows machine (with a copy of clamav/avg, ms defender and autoupdates on?).
I mean it makes great sense to do this is I repaired machines for money - in 6 months time you just know they're going to turn up with a webcam or a printer they've bought and can't get to work.
More I think about it the more sense this makes - install something on their machines they've got less chance of managing without you - you cunning bastard - you've got them for life.
The best way to encourage the use of open source, is to use it yourself. Run it on your laptop. Run it on your desktop. Run it on your server. Run it on your PDA. Run it on your cell phone. Put penguin/distribution stickers on everything.
As more people - that others recognize for their technical ability - run a piece of software, the more it attracts attention. As other environments have problems, but your SELinux/ExecShield protected machine keeps chugging, people will notice. When they ask tell them, but don't try to sell them. Say "Linux" not Fedora, Ubuntu, Mandriva, SuSE, etc. Use a common term, so they can begin to associate the environment with the benefits in their own minds.
When other people are watching, don't use the command line. Yes it's easier to do some things that way, even on Mac OSX or WindowsXP. But when you use the command line, that's the association that people make with Linux.
Linux is already much bigger (installed base) than people recognize. It runs under the radar. No registration, no cost, no audit trail of downloads or copies. To help manufacturers understand that, everytime you purchase a product ask the vendor a question and mention Linux. Does it work with Linux? Are there Linux drivers? Is it Linux compatible? Even if the vendor is providing a product for another OS. Are the files this program creates compatible with "program X" on Linux? Can I move this USB device between "OS X" and Linux? Is the compact flash/USB/Firewire in this camera/camcorder/PDA/phone/etc. Linux friendly?
It doesn't take much to change the world; you just have to do something to let the world know you're there.
Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.
Average computer users would have a real hard time with the command line interface. Sure, the GUI helps with most things, but eventually almost everyone is going to encounter the dreaded command line. Is there really a need for it? Linux needs to become more intuitive. The average computer user isn't going read volumes of material just to learn how to do something they already know how to do in Windows.
As for 3rd party software (ie. games) and hardware manufactures (ie. creative) not giving enough support. It is merely a numbers game. Get the average computer user on board, and the software and hardware people will follow.
I didn't see any mention of holding in RHAT or particular capacity to make more money from FOSS than from Windows.
On the contrary, he obviously knows and works on Windows and all of its maladies spell $$$ for techs who are willing to slog away at it.
His interest is social: He sees benefits that won't immediately or necessarily return to him with material rewards. Which is fine, as long as his customers and colleagues can see benefits in switching and agree to do so.
Yes. As a computer technician, you are in a position to move people onto Linux and/or Open Source. And if that computer has a large hard drive (around 100gb), consider using Dual Boot system. I know when a neighbor got a new computer, I immediately added Firefox and Thunderbird.
\
Seriously. Well, whenever one of my customers has a computer they need data "wiped" from, because, say, they're going to pass it down to an employee or something, I will wipe the drive then install Ubuntu. Since I don't usually have the Windows license key (and they don't either) for that system, I just tell them "I threw a version of Linux on there. It's free, it has everything you need, but if you want to install Windows you can." I don't charge them for the install, just the wipe. That way, they'll probably at least be curious and might boot the computer up, and from then it's their choice.
Let the software speak for itself. You don't have to push it.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
...who aren't really technically inclined are frustrated beyond belief on how fouled up their machines get even after installing anti virus and firewalls and whatnot. And the deal is, no one tells them any different, they never get exposed to anything else! The computer they buy has windows on it. They go into the local big box computer store, all windows stuff. They heard of macs maybe, but that's it. They are entirely within their consumer rights to be informed there is a viable third alternative, it's almost become a civic duty to turn people onto some more options. Then at least they can think about it and make a choice.
1. Support. Sizable and friendly community for when things go wrong. Very important.
Helps build a community spirit too. Compare e.g. Ubuntu to another far more obscure Linux distro, but about as friendly.
2. Features. Make something Windows (or OS X if that's the user's OS) can, but better.
Being free is often not enough, assuming a user has already purchased or pirated (and don't mind pirating) the software setup.
3. Information. Media/news coverage, preferrably beyond any geeky OSS sites themselves.
For something to get used, people need to know it exist.
Take one of these out and you seriously limit wide adoption.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
As long as it's good. Windows is best for some people, OSX for others, and *nix for others.
There are certain things, like Flash >7 or Photoshop (which can do certain exclusive things such as vector layer-styles) that aren't open-sourced or *nix compatible. On the other hand, Firefox is an example of an open-sourced program that's thought of as the best available.
Point is, most everyone will use whatever is best, regardless of what they can do with the code.
I make websites and stuff. Buy one.
I also do a lot of on-site computer service, and although I've often dropped a suggestion that someone might benefit by making their next computer purchase a Mac, I don't attempt to change over their existing OS while I'm there to fix something.
I have no doubt you could construct an environment in open-source that initially pleases at least 1 out of 4 of your clients who need help. (Many people don't know enough about their computers to really understand what "Windows" is in the first place. I find a lot of confusion out there, especially with the OS and apps coming pre-loaded so often. People think Microsoft Office is part of Windows, etc.)
My concern would be long-term hassle and confusion. What if a family member brings over a shiny new piece of software the following XMas (maybe some Family Tree software for Windows, or a Print Shop Deluxe type package, or ??), and they discover their PC can't even run it anymore? Guess who will be blamed? Yep - that damn technician who wiped out my whole hard drive and set me up this other stuff that was supposed to be so much "better"!
and that is a copy of the Open CD, or some similar project that they can give to their friends.
Once they begin to see they can begin computing on OSS, the first step has been taken toward greater use of OSS.
Solid advocacy is always a good thing. If they don't hear the alternative story, they won't be considering OSS at all. Converting someone should not be the goal however. That's their choice. Making that an informed choice should be the goal, IMHO. When somebody is in possession of all the facts, surrounding OSS, the choice is very compelling.
Blogging because I can...
This is exactly what I do, and I rarely find complaints as well. I also never get requests from people to find out how to purchase MSOffice or Photoshop etc. Even if people don't convert over to OSS, at least it may give MS and Adobe et al reason to lower their prices, so it's beneficial either way.
I try to do the same, I am not an IT pro, but I do fix other peoples computers as a hobby. I personally would recommend MEPIS Linux, I do not get much in the way of converts there though. I do routinely introduce people to Openoffice with great results especially when I explain that it is FREE and legal to have. I really want to introduce this to the school system. I am annoyed when homework comes home requiring a file in MS something. Not every student can afford MS ???. Even with the steep discounts. I would explain that not only is the OpenOffice system free they can hand it out to a student that does not have Internet access legally. I have also had good results introducing PIO people to Scribus. They have passed on to me that it handles memory better then the other software they were using.
You're right on the money.
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
First I start with The Open CD; install Firefox and give it the IE icon (because they can't find The Internet without it); then PDF Creator and Open Office. I explain the software to them, try to explain the OSS concept (most don't care) and ask them to give it a month or so. Most keep it.
The next step would be a Linux installation, but that is a conceptual challenge that far exceeds some open source apps.
In addition to the many short-term benefits you can demonstrate to the users, explain to them the benefits of freedom such as how free software can help protect their privacy, how exercising freedom is important in preserving it, how freedom has inspired cooperation and, in turn, such a great amount of progress in the quantity and quality of free software in such a short time and with few resources compared to the billions from the likes of Microsoft, etc.
Explain to them that there may be inconveniences from time to time just as you find with proprietary software, but that in the case of free software, inconvenience is a price of freedom, just as other freedoms have prices. We all need to be reminded of such prices so as not to take freedom for granted. If they understand these things, they will face unfamiliar situations with more patience and determination, and, in turn, become more self-sufficient.
Remember that helping them in this way is not a one-way street. You will improve your own skills and reputation, and their greater understanding will invigorate free software in the long run.
Everytime someone asks you for a pirated version of Microsoft Office give them Open Office instead. And tell them about how great Firefox is.
[signature]
Unless your job is OSS cheer leader, it isn't your job to push software on people that they didn't ask for. Or at least, to install it without asking them.
You need to inform them of their choices, and then if they wish to proceed, then install it.
Unless they tell you to though, stop trying to convert people... this isn't a religion, and you're supposed to be a professional.
Justin - Don't be afraid of my blog, it won't bite.
Techs get paid to do a job...fix computers. Most people want their computer restored to the way it was when it stopped working properly. They do not want to be badgered into trying some new OS or new office suite or anything else. So a tech should not be preaching the open source bandwagon, if they are getting paid.
If, on the other hand, you are doing something for a friend cause their computer is fubared, go right ahead and suggest Ubuntu, Firefox, and whatever. Suggest, not install and make them use. If you suggest it and they go for it, hey, more's the happier.
I know, for instance, that Winamp doesn't suit my desires as I have tried it. Ubuntu is fine, but I'm lazy and getting WoW to run under Ubuntu is more work than I'm looking for. I want to play the game, not tinker with my computer. I run firefox for everything that doesn't require Exploder, but I still have to have explorer because Opera doesn't work with my bank's website. But, not everyone is going to want to figure out even as little as I bothered to find. The average user is going to want consistency in their computing experience. And, quite frankly, for the nimrod with no skills, windows still offers the most cost effective experience (lets face it, Macs are outrageously over priced, even if the OS and interface are better at this time...which would change if they became a more dominant computing platform, yessiree bob).
Microsoft, Apple, all these commercial companies have billions to throw at marketting to make sure people know about their new! shiny! product, and OSS has very little monetary resources to compete.
I see grassroots activity (read: you and I) as a necessary counterforce in the market to ensure a level playing ground. For example: a vast amount of people that use IE use it because they don't know about the existence of other browsers nor care.
The other day a guy was showing me this new! shiny! system by which you could actually run a Windows application on another machine, and just get its interface on the local machine. When I told him that's been built into the X Window system for decades, he snapped "well nobody wants to run sh*tty linux apps anyway." Not only was he unaware of this powerful feature of X, he's also unaware of the host of great Linux apps that he probably would want to run, had he known about them...
OSS sucks, you should be using ALSA by now.
Seriously, I hate that fucking acronym
God Fucking Damnit
Since this discussion has moved from arbitrarily altering an owner's machine without permission to the nearly inevitable Windows-Linux migration question, here are some thoughts.
Let's just say I'm over the hill. I used to be a programmer and hardware designer (pre-PC and pre-Mac, starting in 1977). I settled on DOS because it was there on the first PC that I bought after retiring my bunch of small computers, and Windows because of the easy migration path and the ability to run what I already had. And that's been the situation to date -- despite the best education attempts of my stepson, who is a phenomenal Linux guy and installed our entire town-wide cable access system which lets me enjoy 5MB download speeds. I have no trouble using his Linux machines for everyday office tasks.
Hear me: I want to move away from Windows, especially since the dismal experience with sluggish, messy Windows XP.
But several things have kept me from moving to Linux, despite knowing the value of open source (which I use for as many professional-level applications as possible under Windows) and knowing enough to assemble my own machines:
1. Inertia. There are six machines in the house and we both work at home. As longtime computer users, we have habits. Linux means re-learning a lot of those habits, from mousing styles to keyboard shortcuts. And it would mean learning how to connect the whole mess together and have it work -- without massively losing productivity in the meantime. That potential loss matters when you're self-employed and depend on your own knowledge and learning to get you through.
2. Migration. What to do with mailbox files that go back to 1993, for example, or more importantly, other documents created in Windows-only programs? I could save a computer just for Windows, of course, but how would I migrate these documents that are historical and artistic in nature if I need to update them? I already had that experience in moving to PCs in the early 1990s, losing nearly 15 years' worth of specialized sound work. Am I willing to do that again? I'm not sure that I am.
3. Applications. This is talked about over and over, but the dicussion often ends up with the most popular office-style applications. There are clones (and improvements) of these, and the graphics software is improving. But there are not yet functional equivalents to programs like Sonar, Finale, Sibelius, and Adobe Audition -- nor the literally hundreds of small applications that I use, some only for a few minutes each day.
4. Hardware. After total failure trying to get Red Hat to work about three years ago, I gave Ubuntu a run last week. It only recognized about half my hardware (but not any of the pro sound hardware, just the low-grade onboard audio), saw all my hard drives and network but none of the other computers on the network (all set up via TCP/IP). This was pretty darn good, but not good enough -- because the sound hardware doesn't have Linux drivers, it turns out, and without those, there was no point to pursuing it until that hardware investment is obsolete.
For users without special needs, who don't need to migrate data and who don't have deeply ingrained work habits, it looks to me like Linux in an Ubuntu-style package is about ready for everyday use.
(But I certainly wouldn't want someone taking my machine and changing a single thing about how it worked in the guise of a repair!)
Dennis
Herd mentality. And I don't mean that as insultingly as it probably sounds. Computer techincians are not mainstream computer users. They are not thought of as mainstream computer users. You *might* be able to pass of a "trick" or two but thats about it. And thats going to apply to a small group of mostly young users or users who consider themselves for lack of a better word: advanced.
:)
Like OpenOffice (hey, did you know theres a free Office product you can use from you're son/grandmothers/sisters/brothers computer without having to buy a second copy?) or (the dreaded) WinZip which appears like a parasite and I love to replace with 7-Zip (although most users don't really notice until I point out that annoying nag screen is gone).
I use/depend on a lot of OSS software and I routinely install pieces but I don't expect it to change or stick. People are too busy, too habitual, too dependant on what vendors are preinstalling (*cough* Norton *cough*) which in turn are the tools they are comfortable with and can depend on finding on most of their peers computer systems. I think it makes life easier to navigate, even if there are some certain crimps in the system.
Quack, quack.
The waitresses there do it all the time :-)
"No, you don't want that. I'll get you this instead. You'll LOVE it."
Switching to Linux, or Mac, or whatever from Windows, is just another method (a.k.a. a scam) to "ensure" that the customer comes back to you for support. If your the kind of person who's going to fall for this, then your also the kind of person who didn't think ahead about...
Will my documents all open flawlessly when I copy them to a PC (or Mac), will I need my tech person's help if I want to do so?
Will any hardware I purchase in the future have drivers for Linux, would I even think to check this first?
Will my children's learning to use the computer be consistant with what is taught in school?
Will I be as productive when using the standard that corporate America has adopted (Windows PCs) or will I be at a disadvantage?
Does this mean I can call my computer guy more often for help, perhaps he will find me attractive over time, and sleep with me, and then we can have children, and I will name one Linux, sweet!
I agree with your sentiments btw. To install something on somebody's box (Firefox etc) when they don't want it [even if they've said yes under pressure], is wrong, IMHO.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
My point would begin from rising very similar lesson of Firefox: does recommending this product makes sense? It must be mostly deployed on the Windows platform, where IE is very well integrated, and has most of the sites targeted at - then what is the very idea for alternative to occur?
Idea might be bringing back competition and flexibility, fun and more open future for use, for computing itself. More, than just senseless consuming.
We must be well aware, that Linux, and Ubuntu in particular as good contemporary example, is carrying very similar message of being accessible (FREE!), flexible (if needed), competitive (would you want copy to try), and so on. It is alternative and fun way of computing, and remaining doubts are hidden in rare occasions, where it, unfortunately, cannot deliver.
Role of posting guy is quite important: he is guru for the crowd, looking for help, and can introduce them to the worlds, where they well might need competent guidance. Conversion rate of 25% alone is speaking about certain abilities and potential. HOWEVER: my way would be less agressive - I would provide with dual boots, to allow both - curiosity and opportunity for alternative to shine and persuade, and yet preserve safe former environment "compatibility" for the case. Otherwise, effort of introducing alternative is as good thing, as having alternative.
Servant of karma
I've repaired a number of machines for people, and have found OFTEN that their copy of Windows (whatever version) is not valid. When trying to update through the MS site, the OS is rejected as pirated. When that happens, I do what I can, but give them a warning that it would be in their best interest to stay on the right side of legalities. That's when I've offered Linux. Recently, Ubuntu or Kubuntu, but before that it was Mandrake 10 (I know, major change over). With all the new software that's come out in the last two years that OSS, and really seriously good, unless someone is stuck with some bizarre feature of their favorite app, or their hardware is unsupported by Linux (yet), it can be quite enticing to tell a person that they'll have much fewer problems with spyware or virus threats, and without anti-spyware and anti-virus programs running the background their machines will appear to run SO much faster. That's the best selling point I've found. As long as people can surf the Internet, use GAIM, do their e-mail, use OOo, and the other basics, they're generally content after they find that the GUI is little different from what they're used to using. Just, low key, no pressure.
... is that you don't appear to be interested in what people want, you're more interested in trying to push OSS on people who frankly don't care. I have the same problem with the OMFGGETFIREFOXNOW movement - I have MSIE, it works (better than FF, as a matter of fact), I don't visit sites that will install malware, so why should I change? Oh, that's right - IE is made by Microsoft which automatically makes it evil, and FF is open-source which automatically makes it good.
As the most computer-literate person in my immediate family, I hear a good bit of complaining from my brothers about miscellaneous computer issues. (My dad uses an office laptop, and my mom uses a Mac) The majority of the time, it's something that's solved fairly easily (change a setting, or explain that in the future they should do this and shouldn't do that) within the existing Windows environment.
While it's certainly possible that switching to OSS would solve problems like instability and so on, I would never try to convince them to switch, let alone switch it without them asking me to - they want something that's intuitive, easy to use, and that does what they want it to do, and as a general rule OSS is not geared towards that end.
Try listening to what your customers want instead of deciding for them. I'd be seriously pissed if I came to you for a simple fix and ended up with all my software replaced.
Pressuring is a bad idea,it's more likely to drive people away, encouragement is better. Remember they have to use what you give them, so since presuring them will only leave a bad taste in their mouth, it is far better encourage them and let them choose to take that last step.
D00d. What's a 'computer technician'?
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
I think it is one of the best way to educate user. This is because the computer technician can introduce the user to a new app. But to put pressure on them is not a good idea. In my experience, as user, i like to here what option do i have, and what are the advantage and disadvantages. Then, i will decide which suitable my needs.
...... As a user, i like to be platform independent. I also now searching open source application to try. but i still lack of resources like good web sites that can help me. Maybe my keyword googling the net not powerful enough :P (sometimes i dont know what i want! I just try if its look and hear good :P)
Forcing user to use something will make you worst than
Any url to recommend?
about 6-7 years ago, my computer broke real bad. So I called someone from the tech service (which was located at the basement of our 10-story building). He came and fixed the computer. Then he put in a CD and installed a number of software (open source stuff like audacity). He continued to share software he knew about after that time (more open source software). He also left a CD in case I'd like to try new stuff out (which was Knoppix) and experiment a little. This is how I got used to software that didn't come with MS Windows, and this is how I got used to the idea that it is okay to see scrolling white on black background (very very scary at the time) with a penguin picture (still funny) when the computer is booting... Now, I'm using Linux. Go figure...
Why all the yakittyak when a video is worth a couple of words. Go to YouTube and search for "Princess and Professor", view! SoSFW (sort of safe for work). Just imagine next week's show: Install Ubuntu.
And exactly how much would you charge them when they see some neat command line online and type rm -rf in their root folder after logging in as root?
That's what I thought.
Free software isn't free when the noob people who have computers can't remotely fix their problems. You charge just as much, if not more, than someone to fix a Windows machine.
I swear if you showed someone PySol, TuxRacer, and most of the little games that come with KDE, you'd have instant converts. I've had many customers who really use their machines for e-mail, web surfing, and solitaire. You'd probably get converts just by showing them PySol with some extra card packs installed and they'll go nuts.
I re-installed the OS on somebody's box and got them using Mozilla--so, yeah, it works.
I love NetHack.
I applaud your initiative. So all of you know, I'm good enough with computer to use Office, download patches, change a password and reinstall Windows on my own. I have no idea of what a kernel is, and from reading posts on Slashdot I know it's something I shouldn't try touching with a ten foot pole. Like MOST computer users, all I ask of a OS and programs is that they do what they're supposed to do without making me curse every then seconds. I recently switched to Firefox and Thunderbird, as well as started using Joomla! and OSCommerce for my website, and OpenOffice for my work. For all that I have to thank my computer repairman. After upgrading my machine, he took the time to show me these options I didn't even knew existed. He showed me the advantages of theses programs over the ones I used, the ideas behind the Open Source movement and he took the time to go over the most common uses of theses programs so I knew how to use them properly. I wasn't ready at the time to switch to Linux because I felt there was too many things I didn't understood. Now, not only do I like the sheer diversity of the available options and plug-ins for these programs, but I learned a lot more on computers (and save a lot of money on technical help): when I have a program problem, I can usually get help on forums in minutes and correct the problem myself. That repairman has saved me a lot of money and introduced me to a whole new world of possibilities. Maybe I don't call him as often, but be sure he has all my busines from now on (and since I own a small business with half a dozen computer, I'm still a good customer). So my point is that many computer users (business or personal) don't care about what we're using both because we just want our machines to work and because no one ever took the time to show us the possibilities. Remember that for most of us, talking with a IT guy is like talking with a martian. You see, I'm not dumb, but everything that seems labelled in martian to me need a little explaining. So I applaud the article writer's effort, and the time he takes to teach his custommers.
I use OSS both at home and at work (and I don't currently own a Windows computer), but I hate it when the OSS bigots do this (and it's an almost constant refrain these days): pick some obscure situation with unusual parameters and say "That's why OSS... it's for the children" or "just run this undocumented command with these eighteen switches and it's teh roxor!"
The truth of the matter is that the vast majority of users are familiar with "standardized" GUi-driven applications as seen in Windows. Ignoring the fact that OSS applications tend to defy standard software design conventions (or even take delight in breaking them) is missing one of the important reasons that people familiar with Windows are concerned about switching to something else. When you've invested a lot of time and effort into memorizing keyboard shortcuts, menu locations, and icons, there's a significant cognitive dissonance associated with switching platforms/applications. Add to that the fact that apparently no two OSS applications use the same interface elements (sometimes even within product screens) and you're looking at a painful learning curve.
That doesn't mean that you shouldn't encourage people to switch (in my opinion, you should) but it's important to understand the reasons that people are reluctant to change. There's inertia involved beyond the mere "it's different and I don't like it because it's different." Understanding this lets you work to help reduce the difficulties a new user might encounter and to offer explanations (not excuses) as to why things are different.
But using name-calling against users and the software they are familiar with isn't the type of rational discussion this issue needs.
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
We had a customer (a legal office) running a W98/W2000 site across a few hundred machines.
We then went thru all the options with regards to running software.
Without getting on my FOSS high-horse I explained the following
* The cost of MS Office over 200 machines was $x and the cost of OpenOffice was $0
* The fact that for the money you would get (alledgedly) better product support with the MS product, but there was a lot of info on the net re: OO/Firefox etc
* The fact that they could go get a royalty free DVD of clipart and fonts from next door for $20 and the lack of clipart with OO wouldn't be an issue.
* The advantages/disadvantages of differing email clients
* The cost of an exchange server over the cost of a simple mail server on a linux box
As the machines we were providing all came with XP I decided not to go down the linux path, although it was raised by the customer and we did discuss it.
In the end, the customer is now running XP w/ Firefox/Thunderbird/OO and using apps like CDex and is quite happy.
They were not convinced around and OSS or free virus scanning though, and we ended up having to install TrendMicro at their request. (Also there was an aborted attempt to run WordPerfect Mail 10, but it was a huge piece of ass and Thunderbird was rolled out site wide)
All done without either zealotry or what I would consider over-advocacy.
Sometimes the goods speak for themselves, there are some solid apps out there now that don't requre a lot of effort to promote.
Just be calm, rational, listen to the persons concerns, explain your position and you'll be suprised what comes from that.
No-one will listen to you if you go down the zealot route....it smacks of desperation .
(and as someone above said, sadly most people DONT care about DRM, using that as your sole point is futile)
Burma?
The technician is over-stepping his bounds in the name of OSS zealotry. A lot of proprietary software works fine and I haven't had a crash or lock for a long time. Except for Firefox + Java.
I commend Mark for his efforts to promote OSS. Do any of the major hardware vendors really ask their customers whether they want Windows? A lot of people dont even know what linux is. I think all big players like Sony or Dell should really start giving the option to the end-user. Why can't Dell on its cutomise and buy section say: Operating System: MS Windows Vista Premium (or whatever) : $199 Linux - (Ubuntu or whatever): Free (Dell Recommended) Now, wouldn't that be a huge boost for linux. Linux like somebody else said will have to beat MS on merits (features and usability). Most average users can't be won over by the OSS philosophy.
when I was a kid I was a big supporter of OSS.. now though I'm a big fan of pirated proprietary software because, well, it works better than OSS (in general).
I don't really care if you disagree... whatever...
Wow man.. Just fix there crap and give it back like the real of us.. if you want to deal with 5x increased phone volume because people don't understand where there beloved Windows Icon went.. thats your business.. Don't bring it to slashdot and give other tech's the ideas please. The last thing I want is more jack asses coming and going "My thingy dun work bad now! Fix it good!" and then I hit on, and its fucking Linux. Then they want there *exact* distro back.. and all there hardware installed. Its a PITA.
God !q's a kitten.
Why is the submitter suggesting "conversion" to OSS (as if it were a religion)?
The key is to pick the right solution for solving a problem.
Windows is one option.
OS X is another.
And OSS (be it BSD or Linux) is yet another.
What is the basis of this "conversion?"
If those people have a working solution, and that solution is well-supported, then why change anything? It simply does not make sense to move from a working system to a new system without some actual requirement (business problem, technical problem, support requirements, etc.) to justify it.
As an example: Most of my clients are on homogeneous networks running Windows. It is what they are comfortable with. Their applications run on Windows, and their medical apps require Windows. When we first started doing work for one of them, their network was WIDE open on the network, it was peer-peer, and sharing files, printers, etc. was frightningly finicky. Their systems were rife with spyware, viruses, and so forth. The first thing we did was clean off viruses, spyware, rootkits, and so forth, and put them behind a proper firewall. They had a server they had purchased prior to our coming on board which was installed as a standalone server. We implemented active directory. They wanted to upgrade their systems and a LOT of their software was "unlicensed" (e.g., one set of Office disks used to install MS Office on all computers. We then centralized and secured their data on the server, made it easily accessible those who needed it, and otherwise locked things down.
Our next step after setting up active directory was to install Firefox and having them implement a policy where MSIE was disallowed except where business requirements (claim submissions, etc.) presented a technical requirement for MSIE, and have since installed Windows Defender. This solved their previously-recurring Spyware issue, and in that case OSS (Firefox) was the most inexpensive and best solution. That made sense; business and technical basis were used for that decision, not "ZOMG Microsoft is the debil, use OSS!"
Now, to resolve the Microsoft Office dilemma, we presented several options: Office, Office Pro, and Open Office and the costs involved (OEM pricing since OEM software legally CANNOT be tied to hardware based on several court rulings). The manager at the time was open to trying out OpenOffice. She tried it, decided to let us deploy it, and we were pleasantly surprised to discover that the extent of training required was telling the clerks "Write = Word, Calc = Excel, Impress = Powerpoint, and Base = Access" and they quickly (the first day) discovered OOo had features I didn't know they had. Now, prior to late OOo 1.9xx builds, I would never, ever have suggested OOo as a solution for ANYONE who had to exchange MS Office docs with anyone, but OOo 1.99/2.x works admirably well and it turned out to be a practical solution.
However there is another division of the company (under the same roof) where the scheduling macros one of the manager implemented in Excel would require a rewrite for OOo, so given the time to reimplement vs. the cost for Office seats, the more practical and less expensive solution is Microsoft's proprietary offering. So, they elected to continue using Microsoft Office, but since they were purchasing new computers anyhow, they just ensured that they purchased Microsoft Office for each PC.
In each case, we weighed the pros and cons with the purchasing managers and the president, and chose OSS where practical.
Now, I have several architectural/civil engineering firms as clients. One of them was in bad, bad shape and their servers were running on "pirated" Windows Enterprise licenses, for which they lacked even the install media, one single "license" of Acrobat Pro, and they had issues with Spyware. We suggested Firefox for the web browser, PDF creator for generating PDFs, but in no way, shape or form was Linux an option due to the "does it run AutoCAD" requrement (fortunately AutoCAD is fully and legitima
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Yes, it might be possible to do a difference, not a huge, only a little, but still it might be able todo something. You shouldn't pressure anyone as that makes it awkward and scares them away.
Installing Firefox is good though. Every personal computer in the world should come pre-installed with Firefox.
Have a Linux poster on the walls of your computer workshop.
Put a link about FOSS or a link to Linux or Firefox or another of your favourite FOSS project in your forum signature.
Link to you Linux or some FOSS from your website or blog. Talk about it on your website or blog.
Serve your customers, not your own agenda. Promote open source because it usually really is the best, not because it's open source. Open source produces great software, but it takes time, and you've already admitted that winamp is still a better player for Windows users.
From how you state your approach, it is blatantly clear to me that you are completely and totally unqualified to recommend or support any type of software installation - OSS or otherwise. The dead giveaway is the sentence:
Anyone who has done any serious workflow design, or has helped the average user match their needs to specific software applications knows that "15 to 30" minutes of "free time" is not going to cut it. Even something as simple as switching someone's work system from IE to Firefox requires attention to details - I've seen intelligent and reasonable users completely thrown off by (relatively small) interface or rendering differences between browsers that just happened to overlap a crucial portion of how they went about their daily tasks. Many of these details are not apparent in the "15 to 30" minute range - they require someone to work with the user, with understanding and respect for the specifics of their work.
There is definitely a role for intelligent and responsible technologists to design and recommend OSS-based systems - but the first consideration has to be the tasks that the user needs to perform. I'd be pretty damn pissed if my doctor told me they could not read my latest scans because the oh-so-bright technician that fixed their system did not check to make sure that the necessary codecs were supported under Linux...
I think technicians are the ONLY people who can legitimately convert people or at least expost them to alternatives. PHBs ram things down people's throats and create resentment but if someone is fixing up your computer and takes the time to actually talk with you- I think people are inclined to listen carefully. The good techs really care about people and people respond to that. People are busy and don't have much inclination to explore or do anything other than what they have done or are told to do. They don't want to waste time with the problems many MS systems create. They'd like to work on documents at home but may not want to fork over for MS Office, etc. I think this guys efforts are great. You can bet your ass MS wouldn't pass up the opportunity to convert someone- neither should we.
The approach I've taken in my office is purely problem-solving.
We just bought a bunch of new computers and the main office didn't want to spring for MS Office (and why not, it costs like $150 per these days). "Oh no!" they say, "we need Excel!"
"Aha," says I, and show them OpenOffice. Only one of the five people who have been substituted in order to save money is unhappy with it (she has never owned a computer of her own and it shows). Three of the remaining four say they actually prefer it to MS Office (which shows how little they know). To the ones that prefer it, I simply mention how OpenOffice, quite frankly, is a craptastic example of open source software, and most OSS alternatives are much better. Then I burn them a live CD.
I've got one guy who can't get enough OSS, he asks me all the time about it. When I described Amarok's features to him, he almost wet himself (and he's a Mac user normally).
Also, for the record, I am not the tech person in the office, nor did I have any hand in the decision to pass on paying for MS Office. These are my colleagues (and sometimes superiors), not my underlings, so they're under no pressure to like what I show them.
- the Blow Leprechaun
... Although I am frequently happy to promote OSS to my computer tech customers, one must be careful not to be too pushy. One customer of ours only became our customer because one guy, with whom she had been happy for quite some time, inexplicably decided to uninstall her MS Office installation from her Win98 PC. This was only a few months ago -- obviously, she was behind the times -- but still, even though he replaced it with Open Office, she was highly upset that he would dare to do such a thing. She, for whatever reason, had no Office CD (I refuse to speculate as to why), and she claimed to be too poor to purchase it for herself. Anyway, no matter what we believe, we should never push our beliefs forcefully on others.
I love animals... they're delicious!
I also have been advocating the use of Firefox, OOo, and Linux itself on the school's computers. I just tell them that FF is less likely to get hijacked and nobody will really care if you switch. I tell them OOo is almost the same as office, and they can spend that money on other stuff (hell, if all their new computers saved on the cost of licensing by using OOo instead, they could buy more RAM so that we wouldn't have to suffer with 256 MB.) I have asked for GIMP on the PCs because paint seems to have issues with any non-BMP format on their PCs. Our school is upset because kids mess with the computer settings (sure they're limited acounts, but when has that ever stopped anyone) and they want all new PCs to be thin clients. I try to tell them that with Ubuntu, they wouldn't have to worry about kids messing with stuff because all they are allowed to modify is stuff in the home folder. I also tell them they wont need to pay money for Windows and that a Samba server could suite their needs as well as the pricy Windows server would. They don't listen, but our district is in debt and a tad understaffed in the tech area, so they just might.
The Gospel according to lolcat
I install linux for free on any box that has been compromised by the Windows s**t. Other wise I just syy I don't do Windows, and they have a choice.
You are quite a Christian priest, aren't you?
You can't just install Linux on somebodies computer and have it work.
THey'll come across a website that needs windows media, or Flash 8, and be willing to spend $200 for windows and other crap software.
Heck, sound doesn't even work in Firefox for plug-in content on Linux. You have to edit scripts and crap like that to make it work.
There is no point for cross over office or anything like that for a non-techie (for flash 8 or shockwave) it's just too complicated for somebody to maintain.
That said, we need to make sure that all of our websites work on a couple year old linux install, and not purchase stuff from people who don't make linux compatable websites.
No Lamborginis for me!
Please use [ informative / summarizing ] SUBJECT LINES
Flame me here
Amen, brother. A lot of people try to use linux as a means to promote OSS, when what they should be doing is promoting cross-platform OSS apps ...
You're speaking a true word, while a Linux-System may be the last step the first should always be "cross-platform". Yet most OSS developer simply ignore cross-platform development since they don't know it, they don't believe how easy it is and how much they would gain. With wyoGuide (http://wyoguide.sf.net/) I pray for cross-platform development for several years yet the result is more or less neglectable. It seems OSS developers are either too stupid or too conservative to grasp the impact cross-platform development, the vast majority just ignores it while even a minority fight against with ridiculous arguments.
Well I'm on the brink on giving up since I've lost any hope that OSS developers will ever realize the importance and I'm fed up with the answers I get or the troll ratings I get.
Sorry guys,
O. Wyss
See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
Never, because you are going to do yourself out of a job fixing up knackered Windoze boxes. Linux machines require a mere fraction of the support needed by Windoze boxes, so unless you have an ocean of work, you will quickly end up with no work, and thus no $$$$.
If asked, that is a completely different situation. Be sure, however, to install a distribution with which you are completely familiar. Otherwise you won't be able to answer that awkward question when you are away from your keyboard.
When fixing their MS installation, looked quite confused at the prospect that their PC doesn't make coffee for them. When they question you, simply place a Live CD on their desk and walk out.
After a few weeks, they'll forget your lie and love you for providing them with linux...
I see a lot of people bashing this guy, but I don't really understand why. He's not saying that he is pressuring these people, just asking if he should be more forceful. I think maybe that is the keyword here.
Forceful doesn't mean refusing to fix their computer if they don't do what you want, it just means being a better sales person and pushing the sale more.
If people like this don't offer OSS replacements to Windows and various applications when users come to them, how are these users every going to even know that they have other options? It's all well and good to say that it should be the user's choice and if he isn't asking for OSS don't give it to him, but how is this user supposed to even know that he has a choice?
Create and Inspire.
... then after that only answer the questions they have, stop ramming stuff down there throat. GNU linux free/open source are a community and at the same time it is a very intimate relations between your ethics and most basic principles, this experience/lifestyle can label you as a geek/nerd computy type, and that is out of the question for most society folk, it could mean actually having an opinion.
Supply the inspiration/reason.
I have tryed to help encourage people to use or move linux with little or no success
Most of the success i have had is from showing a the creation GNU/Linux/Ubuntu on my laptop, letting them use the system applications browser/office/game
The GNU / Debian / Ubuntu philosophy in should be a good enough reason for people to make a shift in culture, but alot of people do not care for ethics or simply do not understand the need, even if you explain reasons.
Good luck,
rule 1: Do not hassle hoff the potential linux victim, mimic a coiled cobra and wait for the question then pounce.
rule 2: Remove your cobra outfit and answer the question, without core dumping on the victim.
rule 3: Refer to rule 1
Don't try to convert people when you are fixing their computer. They will just want what they had before which was Windows. The time to catch them is when they are ready for a new computer, or when they are really frustrated with having to come back to you again to get the spyware cleaned off. If they are just asking to replace the motherboard or their machine doesn't have any spyware on it, they will just want their issue fixed.
Gorkman
How many of you computer users like having something installed on your computer without your prior consent? Why is this situation any different? I would not only demand it be removed, but ask for a full refund. Then I would tell anyone who asked, to not use him for services. After all, if someone is willing to violate my trust that far, where is the boundary of what gets installed without my consent. If he wishes to promote, than he could supply a cd at his own expense to the customer.
Look, the long and short of it is, people are used to the Windows world. The issue is not that we can't convert people, it's that it is a culture change, and well, to be honest, that is messing with people's known methodology, and that is a nasty job. I for one do it when I can. Even if I leave them on the Windows platform. To be honest, if we all as IT geeks continue to help people do many functions free, then we can continue in the right direction. We can't expect an overnight change. Be real. M.
mkilpatric, to all the mysterious people, I am the folded dollar.
"There can be no rational reason not to use windows"
well, here's one: because i prize my freedom.
here's another: because, for me, Linux suits my needs better.
I guess they're both pretty rational from my point of view.
I don't feel like it...
As the sometimes helpful neighbour who gets a phone call "Can you come and look at ..." I would love to convert some to Linux. But, they don't want to know, they have enough trouble understanding what Windows is doing, they don't want to start on something new/different. I've tried Knoppix discs for people, to give them a "taste", but that hasn't born fruit yet.
Guess we'll just have to soldier on for a while yet.
I'm using Fedora Core 5 on a 2nd hand Dell Laptop.
Don't blame me, it's usually 2 in the morning when I post
This software is free, which means they might not have known about it or had the capability before of using software that does this stuff. The fact that he's showing them NEW SOFTWARE, regardless of whether or not it's closed or open source, is a GOOD thing. A free 30 minute training period in the use of powerful software? I would have given him positive feedback too. If they didn't want to have him show them new programs they can just say no thanks. If they are already using a paid program that does the same thing he's showing them, then they'd say "I already have something that can do that." Come on people, this isn't religion, and he didn't say he was forcing it in their face.
Cliff, my recommendation is to not get deep into the politics behind it either, unless they show some obvious interest, of course. Otherwise it might come across as being too pressuring, as I'm sure you already knew. I would start off by simply using the "free" angle. It's free! So this is software you can be running, I'll even install it for you or give you the installation packages. I'll even show you the basics of how to use it, free of charge! I'm sure your costomers would love you for trying to be helpful. If they wanted to know more, you could explain to them about the community behind it, how free/OS software exists, etc. I work for a school district as a tech and I can tell you that the fact it is free and accessable to all (including the students) is a major plus for anyone. I'm sure they will thank you for showing them a "computer secret" that they can share with their friends as well. Heck, you could even show them some good websites that would keep them up to date on OSS that they might be interested in.
Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
twitter already posted the above comment, and was modded down for it. He has reposted it verbatim to try and get some karma.
By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
Make a difference, yes.
Pressure: Only very light. Salesmanship rather than pressure. Like what you describe yourself as doing.
Be informative rather than demanding. "Were I in your shoes, I'd notice this and this, and therefore make this other choice." kind of thing.
OTOH, I'm a lousy salesman. Be honest, though. Tell the truth as you see it. Just don't insist that they see things the same way. (I've a lousy record. If you get 25%, you beat me by a mile.)
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Loading software on someone else's computer without their knowledge is at the very least unethical if not downright illegal in some instances. People who purchase software must agree to the EULA, and people who download software agree to the license via usage.
If I ever found software on my machine that a tech loaded without my knowledge, not only would I never use his services again, but I would consider legal action against him. I have no problem whatsoever in a tech counseling someone on preventative action against future problems and then installing software if the owner agrees, but I have a huge problem with a tech deciding that his activism should take precedent over my right to enter into a license agreement with vendors or developers of my own will.
If the computer is powerful enough you could install a copy of VMWare Server or VMWare Player with an Ubuntu image. Then they could play with it if they are interested. Or you might be able to convince them to use it for browsing the internet so they can avoid spyware.
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
I own a technology (Reddog Technology, http://www.reddog.com.au/) company that sells hardware, software, service plans, tailored IT solutions, networking and technology consulting to Business, Education and Home users. We have a policy where we always offer the open source alternative where it is appropriate but we still install and service Windows. We offer free phone support if our customers choose an open source operating system and we are getting great reviews. We have installed Ubuntu (for the home user) on hundreds of computers and only one has asked us to install Windows (but in dual boot mode). We have never had a corporate customer ask us to install Windows on any system we installed an open source OS on. We even have people who contact us to install Ubuntu (seems alot of joe six packs have heard of it) on their existing systems. I feel I have a duty to offer OSS as a thanks for the work, OSS programmers have put in. We actually sell more systems because we offer Ubuntu to those consumers who just want a (new) cheap system for the internet, email and word processing.
My 2 cents!