Slashdot Mirror
Caldera's 'Consumer Friendly' Linux
An anonymous reader sent us a link to a news.com story
that talks about Caldera releasing a
'Consumer Friendly Linux' designed to allow the newbies
to use it without touching a CLI.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Read topic. I have seen WP* for linux. I don't undestand WHY is it so damn ugly. Widgets are ugly, fonts are ugly, dialog boxes are ugly...
Just compare WP8 to StarOffice5. StartOffice is bloated, but it looks nice at least.
Also, Corel apps don't seems to be as tightly integrated as MS office. Of course Corel Office has good points too, but if their other producs will have the quality of WP8 on linux, I would not buy it..
I dunno about your mom but, my mom didn't know what to do with a GUI or mouse the first time she encountered one.
Novices tend to toss all of our preconcieved notions regarding ease of use straight out the window.
What most Windows or MacOS users think about usability has more to do with what they're used to than any thing else.
This spawns the 'I must have mirc and agent' threads.
The answer to that is simple: Include a case of beer with every Linux distro! That way you can have both free speech and free beer. :-)
Make it the buyer's choice: Penguin Premium Pilsner or Penguin Light (Tastes Great, Less Disk Space).
Good waiters have command-line completion:
"Let's see... fish, you said? Well we have..."
a) Extra stuff does not need to be visible. However, it can be there for when it may (on the off chance) be needed.
b) Good security defaults are much more important. All of the major distros need to work on this so that the 'workstation' install is fairly airtight and not in need of constant security fixes.
c) The programming tools allow for one distribution for multiple cpu architectures. It might not be that important for the user but potentially useful for the admin/helpdesk type person.
d) The multi-user features still need to remain. They help ensure that Unix is as robust as it is. Furthermore, it may be useful to disallow users access to the root account, period.
e) The PlusPack proved that minor tweaks to the end user interface is indeed relevant. As many WM's and filemanglers and desktops as possible (within disk constraints) should be installed with a sane default.
Caldera is great.
Caldera's GNU/Linux dist., DR-Linux has come along way since they bought it from Digital Research.
I'm glad they are renaming it from that silly Open name. DR makes much more since it now matches their DOS thingy.
With DR-Linux, Caldera makes it easy for me to use GNU/Linux and surf the Gore/Internet on my IBM/Computer.
Geordi is smart. He will make us strong.
This certainly explains why even in the Windows StartMenu, there remains a top level menu option to run programs manually...
Those icons and menus quickly become a mess, sometimes as bad as the CLI they try to replace.
Except this rule of thumb didn't do squat for Apple, Atari or Commodore.
I may be biased here (i do tech support for corel..) but I don't think the quality is all that bad on wp8 for linux.. I agree that it is kinda ugly, but it seems they are going for that motif widget look, which I think is outdated, and butt-ugly in general. Maybe they will go to the gtk sometime in the future. I also agree that they really stiff you on fonts in the free version though, and not letting you add your own bites even harder. All in all though, the l+f isn't really the only mark of quality, and I have yet to find a wordprocessor for linux that functions as well.
oh yeah, and the new version (WP2000) will have tighter suite integration, although i've personally never found a need to be all that integrated..
If you aren't going to take advantage of the diversity of the PC hardware, why bother with it? If you are going to throw money at the problem, you can just get a Mac or Sparc or Alpha. If you are going to throw time at the problem, Linux will be just as 'userfriendly' as Windows.
Besides, Linux runs my 'cheap shit' just fine.
That's rather the point of the PC architecture.
"The problem with Microsoft isn't its GUI but rather the fact that they are proprietary software."
Actually the problem is that they make proprietary software that also sucks.
I don't think its fair to call anyone who can't sit down at a prompt and automatically figure out the commands "stupid". The whole point of a GUI is to make computers reasonable to use for everyone, not just technical people who enjoy figuring that stuff out. My TV doesn't require arcane knowledge, nor a reference manual to learn, and I like it that way. I may personally like the CLI, but it scares my mom away from my computer, so whats the harm in making it easier for her to use? While a CLI may come natural to some, its by no means intuitive, and why should your average user have to fight the operating system to gets things done?
What I think this comes down to is, we all get to think we're cool because we use linux, because its notoriously underground and seen as hard to use. If the general public jumps on the bandwagon then we no longer have as much "geek-chic" and bragging rights to our techie-wannabe friends. You watch, in 3 years when the user base has exploded because the learning curve decreases all the old-schoolers are going to either 1)move to a more underground OS, or 2)bitch all the time about how back in the day linux was so much better. It all comes down to this being an insiders club and we don't want the general public to tramp on our fun..
Nobody is taking bash away. People who want to use the CLI can continue to do so. People who want to use a GUI can. Us CLI-users can point out to the GUI users that CLIs are better, and gradually they will start using CLIs.
The important thing is that GNU/Linux is a solid foundation.
You mean a Linux equivalent of MSD (the one from Micro$#!t that can't detect Win95 correctly? Calls it 3.0 at times).
Well, maybe, if it actually worked.
If you boot from the disk (supposed to be) supplied with your machine, the HDD will be partitioned automaticaly.
If you on the other hand use your own home made boot disk you will be forced to manualy start FDISK and create your partitions.
All this talk make me long for the good old days back when you had to low level format your drives. This you did with the hard drive controller card's propriority program, most often stored in rom and accessed by using DEBUG (can't remember the most common address). Then you had to enter the bad track list. This was a list of all known media defect's that were supplied with all drives. The maximum tolerated errors were 1 per MB, so this list could be quite large when you were preparing a 130 MB Hdd (hey! they were so cute! you could even carry one of these a cuple of yards!). Then you installed the OS, often something like SuperDOS, Concurent CP/M or Interactive UNIX V.3.21...
Now THAT were the Good old days! NOT!!!
Thank Good I don't have to fight with those installations any more.
It's not be necessary to custom compile kernels for quite some time.
I saw Caldera's Installer at the Linux World Expo and must say it is quite slick. It seems to autodetect quite a bit of stuff. The list of monitors is much larger than what Redhat has. It lets you configure hardware while the packages are installed at the same time. It even has a tetris game to play if you are done configuring hardware before the packages are installed.
A GUI install is somewhat problematic due to the fact that hardware support for Linux is not done by default.
What would be more appropriate would be a widely circulated 'hardware tester' that would clue in the potential user BEFOREHAND to any problems. Before install support could even be given.
It is ocassionally appropriate to tell the user 'not yet'.
I agree; who cares about Office? I don't use a word processor or a spreadsheet or a presentation program or anything like Access. It's pretty boring to assume that most people use their computers for "work" (after all, we know it doesn't increase productivity anyway).
Installing OS software on PC's is not for the stupid, regardless of whatever anti-intellectual prattle you might come up with.
%netscape
or
%control-panel
or
%civctp
is not exactly rocket science.
The success of DOS over the MacOS pretty much proved that.
Just how narrow minded can you get?
Making Linux more easily accessible is a good thing. Why? Because it opens it up to a whole section of people who cannot presently access it - non technical users. This is good. Why? Because it builds momentum. More Linux installs means more demand for Linux software products. More software products means that I can use Windows less. You've got to face facts - this show has reached critcal mass. The train is rolling, baby, its unstoppable....:)
It's rather more a reaction to the 'CLIs must' go attitude of some.
Erm, this is Matrix but I'm on a friend's computer .... Anyway
That is EXACTLY what I said. People who don't want to know that kind of stuff shouldn't be using Linux (yet). My whole point was that Linux isn't quite ready for the clueless masses.
Maybe I missed the part of the Emancipation Proclamation where only slaves who passed an IQ test would be set free.
This is a good thing for freedom no matter how unspecial it makes a bunch of command line elitists feel. Either everyone deserves freedom, even the people who will benefit a lot more from a Linux where you don't need bash than any current distribution, or Linux isn't about freedom, it's just about nerd games.
So, you really WANT 50 icons on YOUR desktop?
Have you checked out NetMAX, http://netmax.com
It has a way easy install and a repair from CD.
"1) Nobody makes you call the OS GNU/Linux : a polite request is made."
From my understanding RMS is anything but polite about it. If you mention the word linux without the GNU in front he reprimands you, no matter if its the nth time during a press conference or what. Whether or not he has a point, thats just obnoxious..
Unless you are making a distro for a machine with a tiny hard drive (becoming uncommon these days) I don't see why any of this is necessary. A standard linux distro that includes almost all the tools any user will want still takes up less space then windows. i agree that a gcc icon shouldn't be placed on the desktop, but beyond that..
Right now the "masses" aren't using Linux. There are several reasons of which. Only one of these is the Evil MS : the other is that it is "different", and we have only really just started getting good GUIs working.
If we have numbers, it will mean we have VERY good GUI facilities, as otherwise users simply won't.
Apple continues to be successful with the Mac OS. With the advent of Mac OS X Server (and Mac OS X), the CLI (as we know it) will finally be there, satisfying both geeks and non-geeks.
I don't buy into this "dumbing" down of Linux. I see it as part of the maturation process.
It would be wise for any pro-Linux companies like Caldera, RedHat to imitate the Mac OS's eas-of-use and yet satisfy the geekiest of the geeks where it starts from the simplicity and building on it to add complexity (GUI + CLI).
It's harder for something complex and make it simple than making something simple, complex. That's just a fact of life.
I say more power to Caldera and to others who will bring Linux (all variations) to the masses.
So? Just what's the problem with a file mangler being like a browser. That's all that most file manglers are, essentially. If Netscape had better options available for local files in it's versions, you could have used it as such 5 years ago.
The only real problem there is not keeping the distinction between your system and the hostile world beyond.
Huh?
1) Nobody makes you call the OS GNU/Linux : a polite request is made. Often interviewers will bring this up with an interview with RMS and make a big deal of it, when it isn't.
2) It's as much based on GNU libc and GCC and the GNU Binutils as any other distributions.
Go find another bridge.
KDE is pretty good : the main thing is Apps not being well integrated with it. That is not really a failing of KDE itself, but it's something that needs working on.
I doubt they are. As for me, my favorite part is the CLI. I like X, yeah, but the application support just isn't there. I use X for minimal purposes, mostly Netscape and WordPerfect. Once they get a few more productivity tools, maybe you'll see more wide-range usage...But I dont think this is in the forseeable future.
Louis B.
ps@dal.net
-A dedicated 'Console guy'
What you described is nothing more than poorly-supported hardware. Caldera alone is hardly doing squat to address that. Mandrake does as much to address that particular sort point.
That Redhat might be problematic on occasion does not address the underlying problem: ALL PC OS installs can be problematic, even the Win9x ones.
Whereas Suse and Redhat both actually make attempts to get more hardware supported on their own dimes.
This is an area where Suse really deserves the credit for taking the lead and where the heart of the problem lies, not Caldera's installation time game.
Yup, that certainly is 'beat' by Windows just deciding to do whatever it likes with your disk regardless of the consequnces. This was especially nice in the days before FAT32 with large disks.
Wasted disk out the wazoo.
Compared to the Win/DOS fdisk, even fdisk is a gem.
That might put them on par with where Suse and Redhat are already. For Caldera, this is more catching up than anything else.
Their real innovation is bundling Partition Manager. Beyond that, this is pretty much more of the same (Redhat or Suse).
Try cracking open the manual. It's not there to just kill trees.
I've never had to work around any limitations in fdisk.
I dont agree that it is a gamble. That company has no future unless it can make a success of Linux. Look at where it is now compared to 3 years ago. They are desperate, and Linux is clutching at straws
I don't think he was assuming that a newbie would be using the slackware method.
.... ] -- progress bar goes here :-) ../archives/netscape_whatever.deb)
apt-get install netscape
[
( Reading database... X files and directories installed)
Unpacking netscape... (from
Setting up netscape...
bluegreen:~> which netscape
/usr/bin/X11/netscape
bluegreen:~> netscape&
(netscape starts)
Daniel
Linux may not be too hard to install (especially with Red Hat), but reinstalling Windoze sucks if something goes wrong. It screws your ext2 partitions, and you have to reinstall Linux. =P
That's more of a pain anyway!
Okay, let's do what you've done and think in automotive terminologies. You can have all kinds of funky items in the car to make life a bit simpler (cruise control, automatic transmission, climate control, etc.), but in the end you still need to drive the car.
Just because Caldera Systems is slapping a GUI on top of its installation and X Window system, that doesn't mean you can just think really hard in the general direction of your computer and have it do what you want it to do (that would be pretty cool, actually). You still have to know something about what you're doing. The GUI thing is more psychological than anything else anyway; people will be more comfortable with a CLI in an Xterm than they will in character mode (it sounds crazy, but it's true).
Here's the main issue with this entire line of thought. Currently, Linux is good for techies like you and I who are perfectly happy with CLIs, reading O'Reilly books, etc. However, there is an entire pie slice of society that does not and will not use Linux because they DON'T like CLIs, O'Reilly books, etc. These people are being shut out of the Linux world in the interest of preserving some kind of bizarre technical purity, and it simply does not make sense anymore.
There is nothing that a GUI will do to Linux to take away its power, so you and I should be fine. A GUI will attract a whole slew of new users, though, that are currently keeping a large company in Redmond fat and happy. Bring them to Linux, and you'll bring all their backing to Linux as well. In the end, you'll STILL have your CLI, you'll have not lost a thing, and Linux will be that much better because of the industry backing that is currently going to closed source systems like W_____ws.
Hmm..
Whats a partition?
Whats a video card?
What the hell are all these bizarrely named packages?
I think you may be assuming too much of your average user..
One thing. Wouldn't it be cool if this setup would get a `basic' UI up without inhibiting play and tinkering? A `peeling the onion' approach to learning Linux system administration would be good, the goal being to flatten the learning curve. If the machine would allow a few standard things to run, with a tip o'de day that said `if you don't like such and such a default, you can investigate the file .profile. [] click here to read the file'. Now, you might have fewer newbies going `how do I set up my modem?' in c.o.l.s.
At last, an OS based on the Linux kernel that we don't have to call GNU/Linux.
Why does everybody use Office? WordPerfect is a far superior product. It doesn't get macro viruii like Office. Its fill format hasn't changed since version 6, version 9 still uses it and its coming out soon. Ms changes its fill format every release. Right now its going to be MS XML, which doesn't follow the XML standard (although its fairly close).
BTW, the only reason I use the CLI these days is for Sysadmin & file management not suited to limited file browsers (including explorer).
As for the quote of the day at login, that's easy:
/usr/games/fortune
/etc/profile
/etc/hosts.(allow|deny)
just append the line
to the end of
As for tcp wrappers, they are on every linux distro I know about, but you have to know to edit
Just boot a Linux Root CD/floppy.
The same goes for BeOS as well.
Who says this is a "good thing"? Why propogate ignorance...we see what has happened with the helpless "Windows Generation" -- why remove the user from knowing what it takes to run a system, if it will only foster a new and helpless "Linux Generation"? CLI is elemental.
So now we will three mass market Linux dist.'s this fall:
EasyLinux, CorelLinux, and now "Friendly" CalderaLinux.
I guess Redhat will eventually have to bend(or split) to do the same.
Can you tell us what the bugs are so we can fix them?
We don't usually like people complaining about bugs and then not actually reporting them...
Think about it:
WE get a powerful operating system with a CLI interface and, POSIX api and Unix compatibility. We can work with it professionally.
THEY get a simple and easy to user interface, that is stable, and that WE can exploit (in the capitalistic sense) by writing code for them.
Everybody is happy. Except Microsoft, and who the hell cares if they are happy?
Why? Because cars are infinitely more reliable than software systems. This is a LAME comparison and completely glosses over the problems inherent in the consumer software industry at this time. That's not even getting into user education issues relating to macro viruses like Melissa.
netscape &
/usr/local/netscape /usr/local/netscape in
$ bash: netscape: no such file or directory!
DOH! - netscape installs in
and unless you have
your path - it's not gonna work from anywhere else.
Partition Magic, however, is notoriously expensive by itself. This $60 bundle is quite the deal. Although the $30 Redhat still might lead in sales based on price alone.
IOW: a complete, free, replacement to PM is what's really needed.
linux installation is the easy thing, but the thing that fucks me up about linux is how it loves to make you go through like 6 steps to do a 1 step type operation. Fuck Windows. Fuck Linux. I always thought I hated the Macintosh, but I'm getting frustrated enough to move to Mac OS X and if not that then the Amiga. Heh, I don't want an OS that crashes constantly nor an OS that requires you to get some fricking degree in computer screen.
They did: Redhat 5.x.
The only thing really missing relative to Caldera's new offering might be some eye candy and an X based install which Redhat tried already.
Sorry, but Caldera is the LAST distro I think of when ease of use comes to mind. Even Slackware comes out in front (of Caldera).
Redhat has more to worry about, or perhaps learn from, from Suse or Mandrake.
A CD will be faster than your modem.
Nothing of that kind has been claimed. Instead, all that's really been addressed is installtime eye candy.
that's not it at all.
the main beef wrt win9x is that it's
dependent on a real-mode os and gets
some really annoying limitations from it
(also driver instability)
none of that is true of Linux/X
Then tell the world...
The DrunkDruid is not the only option.
No OS install on a PC is for dummies. PC hardware just isn't that well behaved.
This is why I find the assertions that somehow Windows is more suited to the novice at that level so absurd. If Windows weren't a miserable failure at that level, I never would have had any motivations to discontinue it's use.
How would you feel if you had a vision, set up a project and then ten years later some people had finished your project and weren't acknowledging you?
This would be funny if not for the fact that I've been able to compute between various versions of Unix for longer than Microsoft has had a viable GUI with little effort.
Unless I want to experiment, I typically DON'T NEED THE MENU in those restaurants that I frequent.
That's the problem with this line of thinking. You're trying to apply a casual use mentality to tools that really are used quite frequently. While a novice interface has some use, and actually has existed in X since before a usable version of Windows existed, the notion that expert interfaces are not useful and infact eventually desirable is absurd.
How can you say that they aren't doing anything to support hardware until you've tried their new version? What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Give them a chance to at least expose the product to the fire before you light the match!
Debian did that for years, it offers to run XF86Setup + starts an X server fpr a test + asks you if you want xdm on boot..
That would be people like me. Never written a line of code in my life, but love reading about computers. When someone tells me I can get a copy of Linux, even if I have to pay, that I can easily install and use for fun, I will.
Sign me "Patiently Waiting"
kzemach@hotmail.com
Personally I don't think Linux is hard to setup. It's no harder than installing dos on a blank disk and setting up your gui of choice.
I have installed Red Hat Linux several times, always in dual-boot situations with Winblows 95. I agree that the actual Linux installation is relatively simple and straightforward. The real pain, though, is the partitioning. Unless you want to spend the money for Partition Magic, installing Linux in such a situtation often includes a complete reinstall of Winblows. And THAT is a real pain. People only think Winblows is easy to install because most of them have never had to do it.
Caldera's inclusion of Partition Magic in the install program is the real benefit here. This should make this sort of Linux installation MUCH easier.
Yes, but everyone knows that the CLI is just a click away by hitting the terminal icon. On the other side of the coin, very little is known about GUI, except for those that are tight within the Linux community.
Even if init5 blows bloody chunks, you should still be able to use the other virtual consoles. Except some odd side effects that some of us 'CLI in an xterm' running types have seen, there really isn't any reason why you can't just go to init5 by default.
Better really has never mattered in the consumer computing market or even cheaper really. There have been competitors that were either or both and excelled against M$ by wide margins yet still failed.
The platform just needs enough critical mass to keep going indefinitely in the commercial market segment so that it can be viable to the wider market when that market finally wises up.
Enough people in the PC space have Bill's shoeprints on their faces that this should not be a problem.
Caldera itself is a product of the spite that comes from the guy at the top stepping on everyone to get there (Ray Noorda).
An example:
You are a used-car dealer. You have 2 cars for sale, identical models. One car looks like it's brand new, but the brakes are flaky and it doesn't always start in cold weather. The other car is a rust-bucket with torn seats but it runs perfectly. Which car will sell first?
Hint: It ain't the rustbucket.
Most people buy on looks rather than function. GUIs look nicer than the command line, although the CLI is more powerful and efficient.
This is why it is imperative that all Linux GUIs (KDE, GNOME, and all the window managers) be developed as soon as possible. Linux will not sell without them.
Starbuck (RedHat 5.9) - will not only startx DURING the install (to test) but it asks you if you would like X to start every time (init 5)!
:)
THAT is user friendly!
NOTE: I opted NOT to start X every time
-A.Sleep
cat /proc/pci /interrupts /ioports
cat
cat
All remarkably more reliable than MSD.
I started as a holy Mac user. I've moved to the Wintel platform because that's what my workworld uses. Since that move, I've learned to dis and re- assemble PCs with competence. I'm not a fan of MS at all, but with two choices, the PC won out cause I must use it for work compatibility. Plus, I liked the idea of building my own computers, and the PC side was the only viable way to do so.
Now I wanna explore Linux. Biggest hassle is getting all the pieces over this shakey v.90 connection! I had most of Red Hat, then read this news item. So now I'm attempting to get the Caldera version instead.
I want to try Linux- first simply as a router for my home LAN. If that works well, then I'll consider moving to it as my primary OS- but I can't afford to jump in head first. This will be a GREAT way to get the feet wet, see, play, understand... Once I get it working, then I'll explore HOW it works....
If I can't get something working from the get-go, I loose interest fast. But once it IS working, then I grow curious as to HOW it works, so I dig.
Kudos Caldera for making it easy for me first- now that you got my attention, lemme giver 'er a try!
hm...
mv from to
that's TOO HARD TO REMEMBER!!!
ARGH! MY BRAIN HURTS!!!
Mebbe they could GUESS?
They're supposed to be able to do it in the GUI. Why is that such a stretch for a word oriented interface.
I went from DOS/Win31 to Linux after I tried to implement a print server with Win31. OK, I realize it was a dumb idea, but I figured it out by the first afternoon.
It isn't the distros, it's the documentation. My first contact with Linux was the book by Barkakati with the flames. Without it, I would have given up. I'd still like to figure out how to do the neat quote of the day at each login.
I went to Caldera 1.1, I still use it. I also play with RH5.2. I look upon them as interchangeable. The Infomagic Workgroup Server is still the best organized, and it would be nice if someone would pick it up again for updating. It's a real winner.
Actually, my biggest problem with Linux are the man pages and the O'Reilly books. Both of them like to look at the broad view, without telling why it's important. They offer choices for experts, but us newbies don't want choices, we want direction.
O'Reilly told me to shut off services that I didn't use, but I had no idea what that meant. I wisht it just told me to go into inetd.conf and services, and just comment out everything.
At least with the IWS, the tcpd wrappers were installed, and I experimented from there.
And there is a great deal of code from win3.1 there...
This is better than NT5, I mean Win2K, I mean Windows 2000, or whatever the hell Micro$oft is calling it these days. If they don't watch it they will have to call it Windows 2001, a Blue Screen Odyssey.
My 3D accelerator, Scanner & TV tuner all work fine under Linux. SBLive support is forthcoming.
Turning Linux into some lame Windows/NT clone is pointless. People can run the real thing for that. As soon as you define yourself by the competition, you've just made yourself irrelevant.
The value of Linux is the things that it does different. This distinctness neither harms nor hinders it's support of USB or devicefoo beyond what merely being !DOS does.
The 'better than Windows' install has already been achieved from that perspective.
Hype from Caldera doesn't really help. Although hype from Creative or Diamond would.
You still need to know the hardware. There is something non-trivial there to know. This goes for them all, even including BeOS.
Macs are what are really appropriate for the 'I don't want to have to know anything about this box' set. They always have been and will be into the foreseable future.
There's just too much random junk that can find it's way into a PC. Much of the progress of Windows and Linux in terms of installation ease is more the death of that junk rather than improvements in either.
PC's are starting to more resemble the more tightly controlled Mac hardware.
Even Linux or BeOS on PPC might be a better option for the vast majority of consumers than anything on the PC.
Perhaps that will be one great thing to become of this whole Linux thing. People can stop buying kludge klones for much the same reasons they might buy Windows.
|||
/ | \
If something goes wrong in CL, it's your own fault and if something goes wrong in menu selection, it's designer's fault. Just as simple as that.
Thats because windows has the envious position of already being installed on most new computers, so unless you are buying a new hard drive, like you said, partitioning is not necessary. Besides, most people who attempt to install their own HD (hopefully) already know how to partition.
damn fast fingers.
GUI's are far from the silver bullet user interface they are made out to be. There are still instances for which they are woefully inadequate or inefficient. Of course various particular interfaces could benefit greatly from small improvements that acknowledge that some users actually know what they are doing. However, GUI design rarely acknowledges such users.
Thus, an xterm ends up being, perversely enough, the least painful way to do some file management tasks.
Until GUI's get better (even the M$ spawned ones), CLI's need to hang around.
Or maybe Open Source Stout, complete with recipe? (Linus is a Guiness drinker, after all)
Please name an aspect of the Windows GUI that makes it more useable than KDE?
And no don't mention applications. I am talking about the base KDE GUI which is better, IMO, than Windows.
Firstly, your use of "its" should be "it's". Secondly, you obviously don't have a clue what you are going on about. X is NOT built on top of a CLI. What do you think it does, open up a bash and use "dd" to write stuff to the video card?
Um, actually RedHat's install process does lots of hardware autodetection and so on...
And did you know that rpm had a manual page : see "man rpm", as well as the "rpm --help" option?
Just so you know...the common usage is the way you used it, if you follow what Ymerej over there said, then no-one will understand you. You will, however, be correct. So, decide which you want.
I won't go into the parallels this has to so many other things and what it says about hacker culture...
The BeOS partition editor was even easier :) And i see that Caldera used the BeOS idea of bundling a vers of PQMagic (PQMagic is usually non-free).
The BeOS partition editor was even easier :) And i see that Caldera used the BeOS idea of bundling a vers of PQMagic (PQMagic is usually non-free). We'll have to se what this new vers of linux is like :)
Once you start measuring linux by the raw numbers of users it has is the day linux becomes Just Another MS Wanabe.
Linux shouldnt be about raw users, it should be about qaulity of apps, stability of services, and the ninja skills to use em.
You folksplaying the numbers games are simply sheeple for the jihad.
baaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh
Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap! Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap! Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!
Many are put of because they have heard linux is hard to install.
Most people are normal people and this is what the need.
After compiling their first kernel they can move over to debian.
Real consumers don't compile kernels.
Not only will the average user (Mom/Grandma, Mr. PointyHairedBoss and/or his secretary) ever compile a kernel, they will never have a need for GCC or any of the other programming tools available. A true "consumer-oriented" Linux will not include these as they are unneccessary for anyone but programmers.
A consumer-oriented Linux should include the following, IMHO:
1. The base Linux system, including the BASH shell (it does come in handy at times).
2. XFree86 and X-oriented configuration tools.
3. One window manager which the buyer can choose (we have several, after all).
4. A text editor that is not too complex (GEdit is good)
5. A simple Works-like WP/spreadsheet/database app.
6. A web browser/e-mail/newsreader (NOT considered as part of the OS!), such as Netscape Communicator.
7. A good file manager (xfm isn't the best and the one that comes with GNOME doesn't always work).
8. Probably some other consumer-oriented stuff that I can't think of right now (games, etc.).
It should not include (although instructions on how to download them should be included for those who want to expand their knowledge):
1. Programming tools. The average person will not use them.
2. Emacs, vi, or the other geek-oriented editors.
3. More than 1 shell (bash is good enough).
I believe that this will be enough to de-geek Linux. For those who still want to use the programming tools and the command line, I say "go ahead!" There is plenty of room in the Linux world for all kinds of users. I personally use both the CLI and the GUI, depending on what I'm doing.
And, once those who do want to expand their knowledge and have done so, they then can move over to Debian or Slackware.
Don't get me wrong here, I love KDE. KFM just seems a bit to me more like a browser than a filemanager, which of course it is... I'm sure many people like it the way it is, and I certainly don't hate it. I think it'd be nice if you could customize things one way for the browser and another for the filemanager (which konqueror may do? Can't wait for KDE 2.0!) ... Kexplorer will probably turn out being an excellent filemanager, but for the time being I am unable to use it (dies on me every time I try to do something.. :) I hope none of the KDE developers takes this as an insult, because I really do like kfm; it's the best filemanager I've used for X, but I just have those few issues with it, like most people do with a lot of software.
:)
I think my main point in the previous post was that you still need the CLI to do some stuff, and while this isn't a bad thing at all (I like the CLI), it means that Linux as a whole (even with KDE) isn't for complete beginners. Of course, a lot of the CLI stuff I'm referring to is editing configs, which you can do with kedit or kwrite, but that doesn't really count, because that's still not newbie-friendly (but maybe a bit more so that vi or emacs..
So, after another ramble, I wasn't knocking KDE at all, just making some points.
The problem is just what I said... *I* don't like it as much. I didn't say no one did. It's my opinion, and therefore cannot be right or wrong.
Relatively new compared to what? I'd bet that the vast majority of reporters (including the one who wrote the article) believe that Windows 95 predates Linux.
--
Ahhh.... you know... I've always thought that an OS should teach it's user how to use it. This may seem like a pretty simple idea and in some ways it's been done.
Mac's have come with their little tutorial deal since th early years, but I was thinking more on the lines of the interface itself teaching the user and learning their habits.
What people are missing is that the bulk of Linux was created because individuals needed specific features. Now some individuals need a working user interface because they want an easy to understand distribution... so what's the big deal?
It's not like they are forcing you to use this distribution. They bring more users to the Linux scene, which means more jobs for Linux users/developers and tech support people.
It's a win win situation.
--
The world is neither black nor white nor good nor evil, only many shades of CowboyNeal.
The distributors would do Linux newcomers a great service if they would just ship their product with every line in inetd.conf commented out: that way, a new user would have to consciously turn on service x if she needed it.
--
there is a screwup under (any version) of Windows the users somehow think they are at fault? My personal experience as a user of MS OS's and those that I have supported has not followed the precepts you have outlined. Moreover, I had to reassure my users many times before they begin to understand that it is not reasonable to believe hitting a single wrong key should bring their system down or cause it to be irreversibly locked.
I too have my doubts about the readiness of Linux for a massive influx of unsophisticated users. In particular, since UNIX (and by inference Linux) is inherently a multi-user system with major system administration tasks that are not easily automated. Moreover, unlike Win95/98 Linux has security features that are not circumvented with the ease of hitting the Cancel button on bootup.
You may, however, be correct that some/many new users will have what they interpret as a poor experience in their introduction to Linux. Thereby, providing a damping effect upon others that might have considered this operating system. However, to not to put any effort in making those willing to try Linux a bit easier is the wrong path. In my case, my early experience ( not now ) is these users might be more offended by the brusque responses to their questions that advertise their inexperience with Linux.
In other words: a few jerks can do more damage to the reputation of Linux quality than all the frustrations due to installations gone wrong.
You don't use Office, so nobody should care about Office? If you truely think that, you need to get a job in the real world. There's one hell of a lot of Office installed out there. Regardless if you happen to think it's boring or not, the majority of computers are installed in business.
...phil
...phil
"For a list of the ways which technology has failed to improve our quality of life, press 3."
>>>
why do people consider this more userfriendly? it is so damn inefficient.
>>>
Using a GUI file manager is more user-friendly because:
1) you don't have to know the 'mv' command and its syntax.
2) you don't have to type out the whole path without misspelling a single directory, or have to know that tab-completion makes it a little easier.
And yes, it may be considered ineffecient. But you command-line zealots need to learn two things:
1) User-friendliness and efficiency are, in most instances, opposite qualities in an interface. It's a rare interface that is both extremely easy to use and extremely efficient.
2) Efficiency is not the be-all, end-all, ultimate aim of tools.
Of course I'm not saying that expert interfaces such as CLI are not useful. Yes, I use xterm a lot.
;o) without looking at the menu.
And yes, when I go to my local Cantonese noodle shop, I can order my favorite noodles with sui-kau and squid balls (no, that's not what you may think..
But I had to look at the menu the first few times I went there, and I like to try something new now and then. You yourself claim to have been using UNIX for years, but it's those very years of use that gave you fluency with the command-line interface. You had to start somewhere, and as for me, I'd rather start out with an easy to use GUI.
My problem is with the attitude that "GUIs are inefficient, and _I_ don't need them, therefore _no_one_ should need them. (And anyone who does is an idiot!)" And this is precisely what some people here seem to be saying.
>>>
I'm always amused at how people have been confused into thinking that typing commands is evil. Which is easier? Searching through menus and looking for icons, or just typing "netscape&"?
>>>
All right...
"Welcome to my restaurant! We've got some wonderful meals for you today, and we'd love to serve them for you.
"But I know how much of a hassle it is to browse through the menu, and read all those superfluous descriptions, and have to decide between the many choices available.
"So to save you the effort, we've dispensed with menus. Instead, you can just tell your friendly waiter exactly what you want. Of course, you'll have to specify your choice exactly. And if we don't have what you ask for, all your waiter will do is silently shake his head.
"So, sir what would you like today?..."
Are you for real?
Windows NT is closer to this when compared to Windows 95/98. We all know how bad Windows is at stability. Linux is even closer again but by no means perfect. Once the OS is reliable, and the software is well tested, I see no reason why the average user needs to know what is going on under the hood. Of course, there's no reason to PREVENT them from tinkering if they wish to do so, but it shouldn't be a requirement.
The Linux distributions are like the car manufacturers. The kernel versions are different engine makes. Some are more stable and powerful than others, but what really matters is that whatever kernel is used, it's very well tested before a release. Once that is done and a (GUI) shell is built around it, why should you have to get your hands dirty if you don't want to?
I admit Windows was very unsuccessful at hiding its guts using a GUI, but I think the Mac does a reasonably good job.
My $0.02 :)
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
The only way to keep from having to re-partition is to have Linux come pre-installed--which is the only reason Win95 seems easier.
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
How could Linux be EASIER to install than RH5.2? Here are the steps I went through:
1) Boot up
2) Answer a couple basic questions (yes, I want to install...I speak English....this is a server...)
3) Use the EXTREMELY simple partition table editor to create a partition.
4) Let it work
That's it. This is easier than Win95.
Posted by Mike@ABC:
Geez...if Go needs traffic that badly, I don't think posting to Slashdot will help, do you??
I'm posting primarily to start discussions and see what people think. That helps me get a better grip on things when I do my job, which only helps produce better stuff for my readers. It's that nifty Net symbiosys thing.
As for experience, I've installed and use Red Hat 5.1 on my testing machine, and have the fried brain cells to prove it -- I write about tech, but I'm not a techie. Can't wait to test out Caldera's release, though.
But hey, thanks for your constructive criticism.
Geeks are consumers too.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
I think you're right.
I suspect that a lot of would-be Linux users turn back while reading the documentation for FIPS. Once the disk has been partitioned, installing Linux is a piece of cake (assuming that your hardware is supported).
TedC
PS. Nothing against FIPS; it's a great program.
Why do you think they want to add more to that pool? Money. Moneymoneymoney! What else? I don't think the whole "pretty GUI on Linux for all the (l)users" is so wonderful. Linux as it is now makes the user actually LEARN something. Now we're just gonna encourage stupidity? Oh. Great. Wonderful.
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
No, THIS is what happened during your install:
;-P
1) Boot up.
2) Answer some basic questions(This is a server)
3) You edited a partition table with a simple editor
(You proceed with the install, and, having selected 'Server', have 3 times more bloat installed on your box, including many, MANY daemons that Red Hat Will later find holes in, yet, not knowing what's running, becouse you selected Server install, never get updated leaving your server wide open. Oh, and you're wasting 25% of your drive becouse you didn't use the partition editor exactly right, and it doesn't tell you you didn't utilize it correctly. You really didn't KNOW that once you divided it to three primary partitions without using an extended partition you where dead in the water..Oh, and upon bootup, while initing a module you didn't know about, it locks up your machien.. Doh! Partitions corupt, gotta fck it.. Doh! Bad INODES!!)
I'll stop now..
-- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
I truely can't wait to see it..
-- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
It all depends on the person..
Some like to type it, some like to click it.. This way, we provide both..
-- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
No, it's not.. The GUI is NOT on top of a CLI. X Windows exists without x CLI.. Ever seea CLI in an X Terminal?
-- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
Yes, but I wasn't really impressed.. It's autodetection is done by loading EVERY module, and seeing which ones worked.. It's the kernel itself autodetecting, not the installer.. In the case of the X installation, it's calling X --probe (I think) to detect things..
;-P
And yes, I KNOW about man rpm and man --help. I also know that I can buy a Chiltons to see everything about my car, but I'd much rather be able to just add some oil without having to READ it..
-- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
Red Hat's installation is severely lacking. It ISN'T a good installation process. What improvments have they made over the original Slackware install? Not all that much.
What they improved is being able to maintain a system with a simple package based system.
Corell's system will continue to USE this system, but ADD the front end that it really does lack.. RPM could do so much more, if you didn't have to remember every switch it used..
-- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
Really? So the 20 Million copies of Office currently in use will cease to exist in 8 months? Wow.. So.. Have you called CNN yet? They may want to cover THAT event..
-- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
...but SuSE Linux 6.0 ships with the 2.2.x kernel (albiet only as an option.)
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
No joke.
Seems that the clueless variety of computer users are under the delusion that you *have* to go through the CLI at all times to have a non-sucking OS.
It's like masturbation. You're just fscking yourself.
Quite frankly, I pity the folks
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
What does not matter? What do you mean, "Built on top of a CLI?"
/is/ a CLI for Linux, or are you complaining because there is something /other than/ a CLI? I hope you are not complaining that X is just a hack on top of a CLI, because then I'd have to suggest you learn something about system design before commenting.
The CLI is a shell. A shell is just a program. Linux is not the shell; Linux is not the CLI. Linux is the kernel, which does *not* have a CLI. The kernel controls memory, CPU use, program context-switching, and low-level I/O. The CLI controls launching programs from a command-line-interface (hence the name).
The GNU portion of a typical Linux system is mostly made up of CLI-based programs. A lot of programs are geared to the CLI.
X is not a CLI, nor is it built on a CLI. X is a set of system functions for low-level display and input-device handling. There are X programs that do not use a CLI at all.
I'm not sure what you are complaining about; are you upset because there
> I like Linux fdisk lots, but it's surely not easy.
cfdisk is.
ooops... yup, that was too obvious. ;)
What I wanted to say was that I think it read about a more open standard for storing information. But I cant remember where I read it and as I wont buy/use Office 2000 anyway I dont really care either. (That, of course, until someone wants... ummm... forces me to read something stored by Office 2000)
With Word having 95% market share it's pretty useless to have anything like it w/o being able to read those crappy .doc files.
On the other hand you're probably right about the proprietary formats. I think I even read somewhere that Office 2000 would use a different approach in storing things.
oh, wait, I see, you mean Command-Line Interface. Nevermind.
fish and pipes
, they'll be on to something. A text-only installation program just isn't going to be that dramatic a hardship for most folks. If nobody can address them, though, Linux isn't going to stay on most users' desktops as a replacement for Windows.
I'm always amused at how people have been confused into thinking that typing commands is evil. Which is easier? Searching through menus and looking for icons, or just typing "netscape&"?
People are so afraid of anything that isn't point and click, even when point and click isn't faster or easier.
Andrew Gardner
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside a dog, its too dark to read.
Because Office is actually a quite nice app (just because MS writes crappy OSes doesn't mean that every app they make sucks), and is the standard for many companies. It doesn't have to be office however. WordPerfect does and OK job giving some of the same functionality and giving some level of compatability, and koffice should be even better when it leaves beta later this year.
You are wrong. Now let me tell you some of the reasons why:
1. Lets first assume you are right, and that all this happens, lots of apps are written for user friendly linux systems, and the split happens. Where will the hacker be left. Well just where he would have been if none of it had happened: using the apps we have and the Free Software has and will develop but none of those commercial apps. However, without the user friendliness the commercial wouldn't have existed anyways. I'd rather have more choice than less.
2. Vendor specific versions of products are a myth. All they mean is "we only have so many lame tech support people, so unless you're running a stock redhat install we won't try to figure this out", which I find reasonable. Any expirienced linux user can figure out a package's dependencies, what libc, what other libs, what little apps, ect. I've used applixware, star office, and wordperfect. I believe all asked for redhat or a couple others. My machine is a mutation upon a distribution a couple of guys in a dorm I used to live in wrote a while back, and it barely even resembles that. I've never had a problem.
3. GUI consitency is a good thing. However, have you looked at KDE's "apply KDE styles to non-kde apps" feature. Using all sorts of xresources you can produce a workable hack to simulate this without moving everything to a new toolkit. On the other had, if everyone could agree on a higher level toolkit the way everyone has on xlib, that would be a-ok for me.
4. Don't fear the newbie. We were all newbies once. Some will just get stuff done, others will join the ranks of the hackers. Neither is bad.
Autoupdate is a bad example. How about the way that some of the BSD systems allow you to with one command grab the latest cvs source and rebuild much of the system. Same idea, different implementation. As for GUIs. Of course they've been around since the PARC days of inovation. Smalltalk, ethernet, and the concept of OO Programming also came from PARC around the same time. We wrestle with how to deal with that stuff to this day, as well we should.
I once had the idea (and I occasionally rant about it (especially when intoxicated)) that we should have a sysadmin cabal that runs everyones' systems, because most people have no business whatsoever admining their computer (any more than I have any business adminning the power grid).
The problem with Windows is that its easy to use and has a GUI. I thought that was its strength.
It's weakness IMHO, is that its buggy, crash-prone, and less powerful. The GUI doesn't suck the code doesn't.
It's all in the code, not in making the linux user 31337(tm).
Try comparing it to an aircraft, and you will see what i mean. You don't need to know how an aircraft works, but if you don't spend time understanding HOW they fly, you will crash often. Trying to make a dumb "push to take off" "push to land" aircraft interface will lead to alot of idiots dieing...
then again, that may not be such a bad idea...
Its spelt "L-I-N-U-X", but pronunced as "Free Beer"
does netscape run from a cli (ala lynx)? Nope. It uses a gui. Well if you're going to use a gui in your apps then you might as well use a gui to access them. It takes me half a second to click on the netscape icon on the side of my screen
---
if you like MS apps then use Windows. People come to linux because they want an alternative to MS. Not all of them want to put up with a cli. We won't need MS Office if Wordperfect can read .doc files. Don't need IE because there's Netscape. Quicken-yes there's a need for that.
---
it's about time. Linux with a GUI AND an easier install (thanks to Partition Magic bundle) AND real support from Caldera
---
This is a very good development.
Me, I prefer the CLI. Red Hat's install is very easy, and I hear Debian is relatively painless too.
But for your average computer user, they don't really care what the OS is, so long as they can play games and send e-mail. I believe people will sit up and take notice of a packaged OS that is:
Partition Magic is a good product. WordPerfect is a very capable editor. Of course Netscape is built in.
And some new users will appreciate the freedom in both senses of that word.
I believe that an easy-to-install, easy to use distro can only be good for Linux and for computer users. Congratulations, Caldera!
That is SOP (standard operating proceedure) for Microsoft. It is not surprising that Office 2000 will have some different way to do things. Sorry, just seemed like such an obvious statement. :)
Locutus
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
and besides... once you even figure out the basics of a CLI, it is sooo much more efficient. I hate using GUIs when i have to do stuff that takes a second in a shell....
/some/ridiculously/long/path/to/my/file /the/other/really/long/path/where/i/now/want/my/fi le
like
mv
in macos or windoze (if you don't know dos) you have to go open up windows till you get to the original location of the file, then close all those or minimize them or something, and drag the file through nested layers of windows to the new place you want your file.
why do people consider this more userfriendly? it is so damn inefficient.
I personally believe that Caldera making a user-friendly Linux distro is a good idea, because it makes Linux accessible to more users. However, just a fancy GUI won't be enough. What is needed is applications.
Yes, it brings StarOffice and WordPerfect. Guess what... users of other Operating Systems will have no idea what Star Office is, and while WordPerfect has a following, mainstream users don't use it much. People want THEIR apps, such as Quicken, Word, and (haha) Internet Explorer. They already know how to use those, and they don't want to change. COL could have a CLI, but as long as users could type in commands like "Quicken", "Word", or "Internet Explorer", they'll be happy. Of course, a nice GUI would help, but apps are needed. Maybe when these apps are exactly cloned or the manufacturer ports them, Linux will be excellent for newbies. But for now, servers and the computing elite will mainly be the users of Linux.
Armando Rojas - Member of SALOS
Society for the Advancement of the Linux Operating System
Hopefully, this will increase Linux exposure to the people who were to scared to get it before :)
----------
"They misunderestimated me." --George W Bush, Nov. 6, 2000
if yo've ever used the macos, you'd realize it's a whole lot closer to a cli than windoze or any of the window managers in *nix. The finder is truly a thing of beauty - you act directly on your files, no browser that has to be manually refreshed, and you know immediately what's happening where.
In kde (or any other x-window system) you're dragging files around with no indication (highlighting) to let you know whether the files you're moving are going in a folder or subfolder. try grabbing the middle 5 out of folder of 10 things and copying them to another directory - on the mac you'll be moving on to other things before yo'd even finish typing filenames on the command line.
the cli -vs- gui winner depends purely on the work you're doing. if you need to move massive files, create logs, do keewl strings of pipes while typing and typing (with occasional glances at that handy command reference book), use the command line. Otherwise, a well-done gui can let you manage files without having to become a sysadmin.
hmm...
opening Xterm (or moving to it if it's already open) and typing in 'netscape&' or double-clicking on the Mozilla icon conveniently placed on your desktop...
let me think...
~enucite~
Seriously. Thank you for pointing that out to me.
;-)
I'd rather be wrong once, and be corrected, than go running around looking like an idiot.
Thanks Ymerej.
Hey... just wondering... your name wouldn't happen to be Jeremy? Cool, that's mine too. (I apologize for the stupid observation.)
~enucite~
No, not quite that many... unless I actually used them all.
And they also have to fit in with my desktop.
If I can put them around a picture or if my desktop is a tile it's ok.
Right now I've got 34 icons on my desktop.
I use 'em all.
Easy access to all the programs I use.
Much easier than opening Xterm and typing it in... or swiching to Xterm and typing it.
:-)
I like my icons. They are my friends.
LOL
~enucite~
People have been talking about making Linux easy ever since it came out. Red Hat's distribution made it within reach of technologically savvy people, but still, it ain't "for Dummies" yet.
Caldera's move is a big gamble not only because of the capital outlay, but for brand recognition. Red Hat has always been about usability; witness the installation vis-a-vis Slackware, and how hard they are working on GNOME.
Red Hat is not going to jeopardize its name (a name now worth millions) with a release that it brands "for everyone" unless the distribution has full functionality (or at least, full newbie functionality) from the GUI and is well-supported. When that happens, you're going to see it pre-installed with Dell family computers, just like how it's coming with Dell servers now. It's going to be a big event, so big that they'll have a press kit even ZDNet writers can understand.
The important thing to note is that even in your example, there is a change of paradigm: I want to run Netscape and do almost everything via point-and-click. However, to get into Netscape, I have to go to the command prompt and type in its name.
I find it inconvenient to have to switch between the paradigms if I am editing text files or simply switching between windows, and I think that newbies must find it confusing, to say the least.
A user interface must have several attributes, including simplicity and consistency. If you try to teach a newbie how to use a GUI, you wouldn't teach him to run Netscape from the command line. After all, he's already confused as to what the difference between the Internet, e-mail, and the Web is, and why he has to click a button to check his e-mail. Keyboard shortcuts are almost as bad to introduce at this stage.
...the consumer market...think about it. You have all the raw power and reliability of a linux or whatever running underneath and a pretty gui up top (can you say MacOS X?), then what happens when you have grandma getting core dumps all day long and has no idea what to do? Phone your on-call sysadmin. Companies do it now, homes could do it in the future. Serious money issues to work out, but hey, it might work. :-)
korc
I would venture to say that all [IBM] PC hardware is by definition because of the limited number of IRQs and DMA channels available.
I've seen a few new PCs (especially laptops), that ship from the factory with exactly zero free IRQs. Adding new hardware is going to be a fight under any operating system. (And don't even tell me about IRQ sharing which I've only seen work reliably once with 2 Intel NICs and an Intel motherboard.)
Of course Intel, MS, IBM and the other powers-that-be haven't really done any thing to address this situation, except propose more IRQ sucking expansion interfaces such as USB and FireWire.
If you are only interested in Linux, Mac hardware* is an obvious solution to this. Sure, you are paying a few hundred dollars more, but think of the hours of resource fucking that you'll avoid over the life of the machine. That is, as the saying goes, unless your time has no value.
Admittedly the name brand PC stuff is better, but Creative Labs just informed me that my AWE64 Gold (name brand) is not supported on my Compaq EISA system (also name brand), although I can kinda sorta make it work.
* I don't know if Alpha hardware avoids this problem or is based on the same broken 1984 PC AT design.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
And all remarkably useless to the newbie Linux installer (because he doesn't have Linux yet!)
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Note that I was referring to the RedHat partitioner, and not fdisk.
How can I tell you about the bugs when you are an AC?
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
I like Linux fdisk lots, but it's surely not easy.
I've never had a the Windows NT formatter or boot loader step on my partitions, which is one very minor data point in it's favor. Linux's behavior in this regard is buggy and not good. Y'all have worked around it, so it might not seem that pressing, but it's a big user adoption issue.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Arrghh. A "steep learning curve" means that one learns a lot in a small amount of time. Therefore, if something is hard to learn, or takes a long time to get up to speed on, etc., the learning curve is shallow, not steep. "Learning curve" refers to a graph of time on the X axis and skill, knowledge, ability, etc. on the Y axis. It doesn't bother me that much when a non-technical person uses it incorrectly, but it irks the hell out of me when I see technical people refer to the "Linux Learning Curve" as steep. I know, I know, people use it wrong all the time, but it's ignorant. Soon the wrong meaning will be in the dictionary, if it isn't already! AARrghhhhh. I promise I won't flame about this again for a year.
I have been following the discussion about Consumer Linux. The CLI aficionados seem to be offended that Caldera is adding the Lizard to the distribution. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know Caldera is not taking anything out of Linux. It is simply adding the Lizard to make the OS more user-friendly for new Linux users. I think of it as more being Linux on training wheels, not as a lobotomized Linux. So long as Caldera doesn't remove anything from the Consumer Linux product I don't see what the commotion is all about.
:)
This situation reminds me of the time when Windows first came out and the die-hard DOS fans treated it like it was sacrilege. They called Windows DOS with a clown suit. Now I agree that the OS under Windows leaves a lot to be desired, but the user interface is great for end-users. I think that some of the difference of opinion may have something to do with what people have grown use to using. Doing business in DOS is a different experience from using the GUI of Windows. I had to relearn how to use a PC in order to get the greatest benefit from the GUI of Windows. I still use the CLI of the MS-DOS command prompt from time to time, but I've been doing more and more work with the GUI tools. The MS-DOS vs Windows debate prompted me to write a bit of doggerel that goes as follows:
You've Got To Be Carefully Taught
---------------------------------
You've got to be taught to hate and fear,
you've got to be taught from year to year.
It's got to be drummed into your dear little ear,
you've got to be carefully taught.
You've got to be taught to be afraid,
of interfaces that accept user input that's not keyboard made,
And interfaces whose screen output is a graphical shade,
you've got to be carefully taught.
You've got to be taught before it's too late,
before you are six or seven or eight,
to hate interfaces that are up to date,
you've got to be carefully taught!
You've got to be carefully taught!
(With apologies to Rodgers and Hammerstein)
(Sorry I couldn't resist.)
At about this same time I remembered having read an article where it was claimed that Mac users used about twice as many software packages as their IBM PC DOS counterparts. I credit this to the consistent user interface of the Mac. People like to talk about write once, run anywhere programs. The GUI of the Mac and Windows is a learn once, use anywhere user-interface. You don't have to keep reinventing the user-interface wheel for each new application that an end-user installs on his or her Windows PC or Mac. I'm pretty sure that the corporate market is going to demand a similar consistent user interface in any Linux productivity applications. Training and support costs are such that it is the only sane course of action. Otherwise, Linux will end up being a boutique OS that will fail to claim the desktop.
FWIW for those who are wondering about my Linux background I have successfully installed Red Hat Linux 4.2, 5.0, 5.1, and 5.2. I have also installed KDE 1.0 and 1.1, Star Office 5.0 Personal Edition, WordPerfect 8 for Linux, Adobe Acrobat 3.0, Netscape 4.51, and I use the kppp dialer to connect with a local ISP. My sound card is fully configured and functional, as is my CD-ROM, and I can read my Windows/DOS partitions from Linux. I did this with the assistance of the HOW-TOs and a couple of books about Linux. I'm probably a run-of -the mill Linux newbie. Virtually all my installs worked SOTB, as did the X-Windows system. When X-Windows worked SOTB it was almost anti-climatic, what with all the horror stories that I had read. I know quite well from first hand experience the steep learning curve associated with the Linux OS. If Caldera can make this process easier with various GUI wizards I say more power to them.
I hate the network config part of the setup. To set my ethernet card I had to go to the maker's web-page and look at the specs, just to find out it was a clone of the ne200 (which appears as ne2K in the installation program
In a lot of ways I don't want the "masses" using Linux - I think it just cheapens it. Besides, I already have enough conversations with morons in one day, why would Caldera want to add more to that pool? Ninja skills is right.
"Ford, you're turning into a penguin. Stop it."
I have several friends who have seen me spend more time on Linux and less on Windows. They're interested, especially because of the price. They've even seen how easy some software installations go (./configure, make, make install).
Most of them are rather impressed with the fact that once Linux is installed it is almost crashproof (I haven't managed to crash mine yet).
On the other hand, many times Windows will crash the first time it goes to install Plug-and-Pray (no typo) devices.
Digital Wokan, Tribal mage of the electronics age
Trying to make a dumb "push to take off" "push to land" aircraft interface will lead to alot of idiots dieing...
Actually a lot of people crash (and burn) in their stupid cars every day. Cars are really no more reliable than the combination of all drivers on the road.
send + more == money?
actually it does have package descriptions... try F1 i think. but i know that i does.
"Computers will never truly be free until the last windows user is strangled with the entrails of the last mac user."
I installed RH5.2 just fine. But you
can't expect general public to RTFM.
Besides, I am not aware of any snapshots,
or good detailed description of packages.
It didn't even tell me what other packages
I needed for each of them. Good thing I had
a clue. I was still surprised to see the
little amount of info given out (at least by
default).
RedHat install does not describe the packages it is
about to install, so a new user who never heard of,
say, pine, and who saw its description as a mail
program might think it's Eudora for Linux. An install
that does not explain what the software is (preferably
including snapshots), just doesn't cut it.
They do have good hardware detection though.
Nice, succint, thought provoking, non-confrontational, peace-making, and intelligent.
If I were a moderator, I'd bump your post's score a point.
hanzie.
********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
That's funny - netscape is in /usr/bin...
And if you don't know where something is, there's always "locate"...
I should make a point about partitioning. For most of us, it's just another step in the os. as another guy said, someone would rather pull teeth than partition. But I must say this, atleast linux, regardless of RH or debian (my favorite ), and I think even slackware says you have to do it (or prompts you to). What about windoze? Unfortunately, I've installed 95 moretimes than I can count. Take this senerio (anyone correct me if I'm wrong, I do as much through CLI on windoze as I can). You get a new hard drive (nothing installed!), you stick it in the machine. Ok, you put in the cdrom boot disk and install 95.. It won't install, it gives some kinda crap about drive 'C'. Nowhere did it say I have to partition my drive. Humph, imagine that. nt does force you to use a partition, but how many average joes use nt? (Uh, lets not start about w2k. Humph, sounds like the millennium bug to me ) Email me if I am wrong about something here... Just remove all references to 'no spam' (shouldn't be that hard =)
Lab test show that use of micro$oft causes deadly cancer in lab animals.
Come on now, M$ OSes have been 'training' their users since inception, rather than the users training their OS...
It crashes when you do this; you stop doing it. It slows down when you run this; you plan your activities around less usage of that program... GPFs pop up whenever this happens, so you stop making that happen.
It should be both ways; take the Palm, in which you are taught how to communicate with the OS, but are still free to use the OS the way you want to. The OS should adapt to the user at least as much as the user to the OS.. That's uesr friendly, I think.
I like your closing arguments though, and it is a win win situation because there will always be several distros of linux.
The netPC distro, for example, that is user-agnostic, only one user at a time, no settings for security or privacy or safety besides the defaults, no server or multi-user functionality, all for dumb clients for non-brilliant people.
The desktopPC, slightly more loose than the netPC distro, with ability for multiple user preferences, applications, and such. Still no server functionality, and security settings are at a minimum to prevent people from screwing with it; ownership of files, directories, etc...
and then you have your conventional serverPC distro, much like Linux is now, and then the superPC distro, for Supercomputers, and even your beoPC distros...
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
Wahh. My post level got set to 1. What happened? It was 3 this morn!
Anyhow, some issues:
Why should a newbie care about compiling a kernel? Why should they *have* to deal with bash, csh, zsh, etc? Why should they deal with security? Why should they deal with services? Perhaps Linux isn't the best solution for these people, but the alternative is either MacOS or Windows.
In a similar vein, if you aren't a mechanic but own a car, why should you care about the suspension arms? The drivetrain? The number of valves and nature of the cams of your engine? How the ignition and safety lock features work?
It's nice for you to know some of these things, but you don't/shouldn't need to know any of these things to use your car.
Similarly, you shouldn't need to deal with all the above in your OS in order to use your computer...
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
To the best of my understanding of your post, I have an objection:
Misleading a newbie and making them further removed from their tools is like saying "We know finding a job is hard. Now you don't have to. Welfare for the common man."
To a certain market, the non computer literate, the PC is not the tool, the OS is not the tool, but the apps they use atop their OS atop their PC is their tool. Office. Netscape. Email. Games. Etc. Their OS is as important to them as the color of the paper in their morning newspapers. Just like many could care less the cylinders, valves, bore, and litres their car engines carry, as long as their car can be used to take them where they are needed, and look good while doing so.
Would you have us all understand our cars, our toasters, our TVs, our microwaves in a similar way to the way I or you may understand our PC?
I don't care how my toaster works, as long as I can set the toast level. Or how my microwave works, as long as it cooks meat, chicken, heats pre-made dinners, and leftovers, and makes my popcorn.
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
I'm going to take a gamble and bet some comments will be up soon as to the elite and special nature of Linux, and how this is going to ruin everything...
Or on how by dumbing down the OS this way, Linux will be no more and no better than Windows...
Maybe a tiny fraction of Linux users feel this way. Thing is, they kind of look like they're made out of straw.
Or how Linux is their OS, meant and built for hackers, and not meant for idiots, newbies, the clueless, or the Great Unwashed Masses...
The idea that Linux is "meant and built for hackers" is, IMO, true, and it does have some important implications for this discussion.
Not to mention the vagueness of your suggestions, they are not trivial to implement. Why? Because Linux was not designed to be this kind of system from the start.
"Zero administration" is the holy grail of people who wish to bring their operating systems to the "great unwashed masses." Seek it if you wish.
As it stands, Linux is extremely conducive to productive hacking. In this respect, it's been "a good thing but not perfect" for a very long time.
If other people want to make it easy for me to do other things with it, or easy for other people to do other things with it as well, that's fine. Thanks. I needed that.
The command line is superior because of its power and flexibility. Take this simple example, you wish to change the name of all the files in a directory - adding a prefix.
DOS ren *.* dit*.*
Windows - do it individually
Now which is easier, be honest or punish with your RSI.
And that is DOS, imagine what you can do with the tools Linux/UNIX has.
Woe be on to them, all who rise against poor people, shall perish in a the end. Buju Banton
As one who despised Windows 3 I am offended by your inference that I was unwilling to relearn/learn.
I do not use Caldera, so I am less concerned with the fact that they changed their dist than the fact that it is heralded as an achievement. I am sorry but I watched as ease of use infected WINDOS, to the point of plug and play and the return of hieroglyphics.
As long as the command line exists, not in the NT format, I am a happy camper. And I also have a problem with the presumption that most people are too lazy/stupid to use the command line.
Woe be on to them, all who rise against poor people, shall perish in a the end. Buju Banton
The thing that I like about GUIs is that it is possible to give clues as to what the user can do, e.g. tooltips, underlined words that allow alt key shortcuts, etc. this allows for fast navigation--well, at least as fast as the increased resource strain allows. DOS, and therefore Windows, came from this line of thinking that things need to be navigable and fully usable with a keyboard--WP for DOS users didn't have a mouse to use, generally. I can press win, u, s, Enter to shut down the computer, and I found this out by _simply looking around_, not poring over manpages in my free time.
One of the things I liked when IE4 came out was the address bar in the local navigation--I can type the damn thing in myself if I want to.
One thing that the CLI could use to help out would be a line somewhere to show the arguments that need passing. the TI-89 has a basic help built in--maybe that could help as I wouldn't have to consult a manpage every time I wanted to do something but forgot something. on the other hand, this would annoy anybody that knows the commands like the back of their hand.
I will never forget the time I was on IRC recently, and was helping someone with PPP setup. He told me that the last time he had configured it in X, so he didn't know how to do it from the command line. It cracked me up.
I actually had a similar experience. Although from the point-of-view of your friend.
Prior to Linux, most of my experience was with Irix -- so I was used to doing things through the GUI. When I finally got around to installing Linux on my PC, I kept on trying to setup my net access through linuxconf, and assorted GUI equivalents -- I had absolutely no idea what pppd was, nor even that it existed, and could not figure out why it wouldn't work. I finally enlisted the help of a friend, whose first comment was to the order of, "Huh? You haven't even run 'man pppd' yet!"
"Umm... no... what's pppd?"
--
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
83 desktop icons!
...but then, I'm just weird...
And that's in NT. Under X, I only have 29, and even those are accessed via GNOME drawers.
(BTW: somewhat offtopic, but... does anyone know how to configure the GNOME panel / Enlightenment so that the drawers automagically slide out on top of any existing windows? It's always annoying opening the drawers, then having to rollup any existing windows so that I can get at the launchers that are obscured by said windows.)
--
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
Good waiters have command-line completion:
/etc.)
"Let's see... fish, you said? Well we have..."
Not analogous at all. Perhaps it would be if available commands were along the lines of 'file-copy', 'file-move', 'file-link-create', 'file-delete', 'directory-make', 'directory-remove' and so on...
If this were the case, then a user could type 'file [tab]' and it would respond with a list of available file operations.
This would be analogous to the restaurant-goer saying 'fish' and getting a list of different fish dishes (arg -- tongue-twister!) available.
As it is, though, the user has to be able to type (for example), 'mk [tab]' to get a list including 'mkdir' and so on. What is there that indicates to the new user that 'mk' has anything to do with creating directories? (Ok... bad example -- mkdir exists in DOS also -- but you know what I mean).
This is more analogous to the diner going into the restaurant and saying 'cala' to get a list of dishes that might include 'calamari'. Not terribly useful unless he/she already knew that calamari was available.
If you look at it from the point of a new user who hasn't a clue what to do once confronted with a command-line, it is exactly like the diner going into a restaurant and being confronted with a waiter that expects them to 'know' what they want and what is on the menu and how much it costs, etc.
Sure, sure, the new user can type 'man [command]'. Again, not terribly useful unless they already know what the command is. That's useful when you know a command and want to find out what it does, but not when you have a procedure in mind, but want to find out how to do it.
Info is a great utility in this regard. How many newbies will instantly type 'info' to find out what commands are available? Obviously, only the ones who know about info. I didn't; not until I had been using Linux for a week or more. Granted, I already knew a lot of what commands were available (prior experience with Unix), but a lot of newbies won't.
If you aren't going to hand the diner a menu, at least let them know where one can be found. Perhaps the first n times the user logs in, they should be presented with a message to the effect of, "Type 'info' for a list of available commands." or some such. Or maybe have a little 'help' bar always sitting on the top row of the CLI screen (even one that can be mouse-activated) that informs the user of 'man', 'info', 'startx' and a few others. (obviously, you should be able to easily turn this off via a conf file setting in
That simple change would be a vast improvement over the existing setup. If you aren't going to hand the customer a menu, at least point out where they can find a pile of them themselves. And it shouldn't be too far away!
--
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
And if you don't know where something is, there's always "locate"...
sigh -- and how many newbies are gonna know of the existance of "locate"?
Not arguing that the CLI is bad -- but it needs improvement for the newbie...
--
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
Agreed that there need to be more consumer oriented applications.
The basic office stuff looks like a solved problem (maybe not finished, but solved), but then there's the entertainment/recreational/educational software niches to fill. When can I get a "Jumpstart First Grade" or "Sesame Street Numbers" equivalent so my kids can be using Linux?
That they need to be free, though isn't true. Yes, it'd be nice if they were, but most consumers don't care about that (as evidenced by the success of non-free software).
-- Alastair
You would be amazed at the number of people that would rather pull their own teeth (sans whiskey, even!) than face your #3.
--
Okay, I got Linux installed. So where's the free beer everyone keeps talking about??
I've just installed a version of Caldera for my hitherto Windows using in-laws. The version I got hold of isn't completely CLI-free but it came with a very cute easy-to-read glossy book covering just about everything I can think of that a newbie would want to use - Netscape, Star Office, kde, gimp, adding users, printers, setting up ppp, all of which come on the CD.
Okay, it's not brilliant and I'll be sticking with RH or S.u.S.E. for myself but then again I'm not a newbie. I set the machine up as a dual boot Caldera/Win98 box (hey, they're newbies afterall) and the proof as to whether Caldera are successful will be in how much time they spend in Linux and how much time they spend in Win98. I'll be interested in seeing how Caldera's dist develops.
The book, btw, is H ow to use Linux by Bill Ball, published by SAMS.
DISCLAIMER: I'm not being paid to advertise this book - I just found it helpful
"in macos or windoze (if you don't know dos) you have to go open up windows till you get to the original location of the file, then close all those or minimize them or something, and drag the file through nested layers of windows to the new place you want your file. "
.5 seconds faster is not going to sell this:
/some/ridiculously/long/path/to/my/file /the/other/really/long/path/where/i/now/want/my/fi le"
Um try opening your drive window, going to options and selecting the open folers in the same window option (under Win 95). Then you can open two version from my computer or explorer and drag and drop or cut and paste, or copy and paste. All with a few mouse clicks and no typing. I can teach a 4 year old to do that, or a monkey or even my Luddite mother. That's what makes it "user friendly" - its easy to use. being
"mv
Do you really think your mother or grandmother will want to learn this? If you do, get out of the lab. No one out side a university or server room uses a CLI to do work anymore and all the hoping in the world is going to make them go back (yeah, dos died as mainstream, commonly used os about 1994). Come on, get off your high horse, not everyone is a CS major. They just want to use their e-mail. Why should they need to learn the computer equivelant of latin to do that?
90% of the world outside thelab does not use CLI. Get used to it.
Never by hatred has hatred been appeased, only by kindness - the Buddha
Well, yeah, you and I would do this, we're programmers. I'm not saying get rid of the CLI, since obviously people like us will use it. But most computer users (note they are USERS not programmers, sysadmins or any other techies)are not like us. I suspect there would be few instances when they would want to do this. Even if there was, why not create a GUI interface to this command for the average person? What's the harm? You and I won't use it, but it might attract a lot of people away from MS and to Linux.
Your example is also one of the easier commands in DOS. The MV example from the previous post is a far more common operation with a far more complicated CLI syntax, and no matter what kind of power it may have over drag and drop/cut and paste, normal people are going to choose the easier way.
Why do you think MS and other GUI interfaces (MAC, NExTStep etc)currently own the desktop? Are they more efficient or technically superior? No, they are just easy for secretaries, grandmothers and stock clerks to use.
I can hear the nay-syers saying "But Windows really isn't easy to use!". Why not ask your brother the cop what he'd rather use..or your sister the hairdresser. For some people perception is reality.
A tree does not fight the wind, it bends gently to its force. Why not create a GUI that can do some of the things we like the CLI for so, common users can use them if they choose. A GUI could then be almost as powerful as a CLI AND easy for every non-technical person to use...and we'd still have the CLI for us to use.
Win-Win.
Then users could have a CHOICE (that is what OSS and Linux are all about, right?) of which interface to use, both very powerful. Then when you ask a store clerk "which would you rather use, this easy GUI which can do a,b,c or this easy GUI which can do a,b,c,v,n,d,g...? And you don't have to learn crytic commands and you can use it right away and..oh yeah..its free! and if you want to use the CLI, well you can do that too..."
I think the chioce would be real easy then.
Never by hatred has hatred been appeased, only by kindness - the Buddha
is what are the other dists that sell for more than $2 going to do to get a jump on the obvious load of cash Caldera is going to be making from this. I think most new users, who would probably be Red Hat users, might opt for the Caldera package instead. Especially with the install working from within Windows.
"Unix is a proprietary operating system intended to compete against Microsoft Windows" --Patrick Reilly
The inclusion of PQMagic will make it easier for users for sure. I've heard about a program called FIPS though that is free and does partition resizing in dos. I guess Caldera's idea is to hide the cmd line totally though so in that respect PQMagic would be the best bet. All in all it's a good investment too. Once the users make their purchase and get PQMagic the rest of their software will be GNU and free ;).
"Unix is a proprietary operating system intended to compete against Microsoft Windows" --Patrick Reilly
Using X to configure a system scares me. I am a Mac user, so this might seem funny, but it makes sense to me. On a mac, I know what files to change, and how to change them (using GUI tools). On a linux machine, I know what files to change, and how to change them (or I'll learn how to). However, using a GUI is a scary proposition, because it makes it harder for me to figure out was/is being changed. I also don't handle changes very easy, so I view it with some reluctance.
I don't even care for the distros very much, because I never know what they put on my system. Of course, I'm not quite at a level where I want to roll my own, so I do use the distros, but I never feel like I learned anything by doing the install. I think part of the problem is that I was pretty familiar with linux before I did my first install, so most of the challenges (mount points, directory structure, etc) were not difficult for me to handle.
I will never forget the time I was on IRC recently, and was helping someone with PPP setup. He told me that the last time he had configured it in X, so he didn't know how to do it from the command line. It cracked me up. (He actually knew most of what he needed to know, but the modem was still acting up, so he thought that he was going about it the wrong way).
Once we can get the "mom factor" - ie: your mother can use linux - then we can really consider linux mainstream.
Yuck. What a dumb idea. My mom prefers Unix/Linux/Solaris/Whatever with a CLI to Windows. Hell, I had to teach her how to move windows around, close them, all that shit, and within 20 minutes she had given up and was back to telnetting into her Solaris box at work.
Now what we need to do is to teach her that it's a dumb idea to lick a power supply to see if it's plugged in. No joke. She actually did this and electrocuted herself.
"Software is like sex- the best is for free"
Since when does having a decent GUI make you become Windows? The problem with Microsoft isn't its GUI but rather the fact that they are proprietary software.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a GUI that is open and easy to use. You may prefer the CLI for its power and flexibility (I do too), but Free Software is about choice. The CLI is there. If you prefer it, use it. If someone wants the simple GUI, they should use that.
*sigh*
No, 50 icons on the desktop is stupid. For one thing, windows can hide the desktop. A good GUI would have something like the panels that come with KDE, CDE, or GNOME. Very few programs can't be accessed in less than two mouse clicks, and those are infrequent enough that users don't care. With each of the panels, you can have just a few icons represent "trays" of programs with logical grouping (like Internet, Games, Apps, Utils, etc.).
I don't know why you would even use that argument. Very few users have obscene number of icons on their desktop, prefering trays and menus to access their programs. Those with cluttered desktops are usually newbies who haven't figured out all the time saving features of the interface yet.
You shouldn't have to know Linux to install it. Otherwise nobody besides those that know it now could ever use it.
They are not taking away the CLI. They are only putting a wizard on top of the installation. I'm sure you can change settings by typing at the prompt later on.
I see this as a purely good thing. There is some scary shit in the Linux installation. Like the line that says something about permanently destroying your monitor if you input the improper parameters. If this Caldera program can query for that sort of information itself, fewer people will turn and run screaming.
I agree. But, to the 'unwashed masses' there is nothing more intimidating than a prompt and a blinking cursor. The user has to actually remember something instead of having lots of icons (pictures, my mother-in-law calls them) to jog their tiny memory into what it is they want to do.
This is kinda the same thing I saw with wordperfect that made novice users run to word. WP used to start with a totally blank screen, you had to know what keys to press to get the command menus. Word had/has lots of little taskbar icons to make it easy for you to find the actions.
Once you learned the shortcut-keys in WP, it was easy as hell to navigate, where word always seemed to not require/allow any learning beyond the point and click interface.
It is just that initial terror at the 'what do I do now?' point in the first few hours of applications that a GUI is more comfortable to the novice than the CLI.
...and see how 'easy' it is for some people. Yes, I thought RH5.2 was very easy to install. I had all supported hardware, read the book and had an easy time getting everything to work on the first machine I installed to.
The second was a different story because the motherboard had on-board video and sound that required some config-file editing and a download of xfree86 3.3.3.1 to get it working. Still, no big-deal but then I already had about a month of Linux under my belt and knew how to navigate the directories, mount DOS floppies and use the editor. If this had been my first install it would have been a bad time.
Not everybody has an easy time. There are a lot of things that could be made better to help the novice install Linux, sounds like Cladera is doing it. Hooraay for them!
Everyone here agrees Linux is great. If we didn't we wouldn't be here. However there's this subset of the community that wants to conquer the desktop. While that's a noble idea (As one post put it, "Since when do you have to pass an IQ test to gain freedom?".), this "user-friendly" approach is the wrong way to go. Infact I think this is the most likely cause for a balkinization of Linux.
:)) saying that they are forced to support the the "Mr. Roger's" toolkit because that's what all the new apps are for. They're upset at the new users, because they innudate the newsgroups and sites like /. with comments like "How do I change my background?" and "STOP IT! I'M NOT AN ENGINEER!!!", making them completly unusable by the "Hacker" camp. The "hackers" eventually say, "Go to Hell losers! We're going this way!" and the new users say, "Good! You're just a bunch of nerds anyway! Linux is OUR OS now!", and the two groups never talk again. So you see Linux isn't just fractionalized, but balkinized, because of the extreme hatred each camp feels for the other one.
/etc/fstab and /etc/rc/rc.local files.
I chose the word "balkinization" carefully. In the Unix world for the most part its, "Oh it's Solaris", "Oh it's Irix", "Oh you're running AIX". Sure there's the hardcore users ("Solaris Sucks! Linux Rulz!"), but most people don't care that much. (I for one use Solaris at work, and Linux at home. I don't really care. It's all UNIX to me.) However this "user-friendly" vs "hacker" distributions is a volatile issue. (Just look at this thread.)
Some have said, "Let the newbies have thier own distributuion and we'll have our own.". Let's say this happens, now which one do you think is going to be more popular distribution? Sure for a while, "Hacker Linux" simply because that's who the current users are, but with the exposure Linux has gotten recently, do you really think the masses are going to pass up "Mr. Roger's Linux Neighborhood"?
In a year, Linux reaches critical mass and all of a sudden all the big vendors port their flagship products to Linux. Hell even Microsoft, knowing that a Linux user's money is just as good as the next guy's, ports Office and even makes the win95 shell a window manager. (The new users, gobble it up, because they don't share the anti-Microsoft feelings of the rest of us.)
Undoubtedly the commercial vendors of the future will behave like the new commercial vendors of today. Which means distribution-specific ports. (There's many example of this, most recently "Code Warrior for RedHat") I imagine this distribution requirement would go beyond linking only with a certain library, or only making the the program available in a certain package format, but to require the toolkit for "Mr. Roger's GUI". After all, we all want the programs to look-and-feel consistant (unlike today's X enviroments (Just compare Netscape and Ghostview)).
The "Hacker" community get's upset at vendors and the "Mr. Roger's" community (or would "neighborhood" be more appropriate here
The main problem I have with the "Linux for the Masses" camp is, theire just a little too eager to spread the word. Is there any real reason why the hairdresser across the street needs to be running Linux instead of win98? All she does is run AOL and occasionally types something in Word. That's all she wants. She doesn't want to be playing around with
I started running Linux in Nov94, because I was a CS major, and I wanted a UNIX on my desk so I didn't have to telnet to the bogged down server when I had to do projects. I got into UNIX, and pretty soon, I had my mail routed to my machine, and was serving my own web and ftp site. (Yes, I was running NCSA httpd back in 94 and whatever the new version of NCSA Mosaic was available. It was UIUC after all.)
What the Linux community needs is to make a bit easier to mainatin Linux. The package tools step in this direction, but we really don't need every man, woman, and child running Linux. We need to keep the open friendly community feel, but not at the expense of removing the right-of-passage (installation woes) we've all gone through. After all, when you've finally gotten Linux working, it feels good, and you know you've crossed into a new world.
Sure this is long, and it may ramble a bit, but everything I've said has come out of my love for the community.
--
Coaxial
(a.k.a. Jonathan Koren)
koren@cig.mot.com
(If you really think I'm talking for Motorola, you've got another thing comming.)
Heh, heh. Good! (I need them myself.)
;-(
Consistency of interface. This is extremely important. (exit emacs via reset button
A key point here is that cars and computers are both consumer products, whereas I know many fewer people who own planes.
I'd like to think of a box running a consumer linux as a sort of transformer: There's more than meets the eye! (TM)
Umm, Mike@ABC, how much installation experience do you have with Red Hat and Caldera? I find your posts to be devoid of content. Are you just fishing for traffic at go.com?
You know, all this mess kinda reminds me of when the AOL users first started being able to access the internet.
My how times have changed... or not...
"Responsibility for my career? I'm just a freakin' phone monkey!"
It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of Karma to burn off
This is what I've been "raving" about for over a year. This is great.
Once we can get the "mom factor" - ie: your mother can use linux - then we can really consider linux mainstream.
And why would having two versions of linux a bad thing. Give your mom Caldera's User Friendly Linux, and hack away on the usual distro!
"Responsibility for my career? I'm just a freakin' phone monkey!"
It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of Karma to burn off
Spring loaded folders in MacOS 8.x It's a thing of beauty. If you want to put a file somewhere else, you just move the icon over the folder, it pops the folder open, recurse until you get to your final destinatioon, leave it there, all the folders close up behind you. Of course, the CLI is missing, and there's other stuff that's way better with the CLI, but you have to admit that it's a cute and useful and fun feature.
It does not matter, its still built ontop of a CLI just like Win9X
PC hardware not well behaved?
Well, I guess when you consider that you can either go out and buy quality, name-brand gear and have it work (at least from a hardware perspective), or, you can save around 50% and get a board that has all kinds of electrical problems, signal reflection, ringing on the I/O lines, bad traces, trace cuts, bad solder joints, etc. There's a rule in this industry, and it goes, "You get what you pay for."
I have bought high-quality stuff in the past, and I have bought bargain-basement stuff in the past, and out of all the crap I've collected, the brand stuff works the best consistently.
IMO, the real problem with plug-and-play (and PC hardware in general) is the crappy way in which Windows handles drivers. I haven't had to set a jumper or anything in YEARS, and yet new hardware will consistently f*ck Windows up.
Clean installs with all the parts in the box work fine, for the same reason. Windows doesn't get a chance to mung the registry or any other of it's config files.
If Linux is going to invade the consumer/home user space, there need to be more consumer oriented applications. They need to be better than the Windows shit and they need to be free.
Autoupdate a behemoth to make up for creating a market of morons. YAPoV Yet another piece of vaporware.
I worked in a computer lab. Newbies are not idiots. They're scared. Hence, they ARE, however, ignorant. I read their tutorials on Win95. A load of crap. They treated right mouse clicks like the plague as if you have to be a genious escaped from the mental ward in order to use them.
Think back a while 1971. Xerox Palo Alto Research Center. The first Monochrome GUI. No color because Monitor technology was reserved for the rich. GUI with a drawing program and (wouldn't you know?) a MOUSE. Guess what Xerox didn't give a hoot for it. I used to think what anal, retarded, myopic morons would give it up. Who could miss such a profitable opportunity? I know better now. They probably would have gone out of business if they'd thrown their money into it.
Note this was a little before Amiga 32-bit GUI'd OS (1985) lost against yech MS-DOS! The reason Xerox would have failed is because no newbie cared about compurters. They were just as afraid of them as they are now. Making it easier would have meant no thing to them. They wouldn't have had anything to do with it. Now computers mean jobs, so they whine.
Every newbie has first contact syndrome. They have just as much trouble using the mouse now as they did typing "copy a:*.* c:" a decade ago.
Misleading a newbie and making them further removed from their tools is like saying "We know finding a job is hard Now you don't have to. Welfare for the common man."
The ship sank. Get over it. (This sig was cut out from another's shirt and painstakingly hand-posted)
Scrapping Windows by becoming windows.
Blow me! Flame!
The ship sank. Get over it. (This sig was cut out from another's shirt and painstakingly hand-posted)
I admit Windows was very unsuccessful at hiding its guts using a GUI, but I think the Mac does a reasonably good job.
Back to the car analogy, you may want to hide the engine under the hood, but PLEASE, don't weld the damn hood shut!!!! The mac fails because it is very hard for the user to see or control what is really going on behind their nifty UI. Windows fails also, but for another reason. You can get at some of the engine, but it is missing half the spark plugs and is held together with duct tape.
Even if it is maybe the way of the future, but it looks like if a car producing company said, that it is going to make cars, for those you don't have to know anything about traffic, just say the car "where do you want to go today". I wouldn't sit in a car like that anyway, it's better if I drive it myself.
Anyway, I think, it is impossible as well. GUI can look fancy and nice, but where comes the idea from, that it is useable for everything as well ?
(I don't want a flame war and beeing offtopic, but in my opinion it resembles the OOP-belief)
Are you talking about free speech here, or free beer? It's not clear from the context.
TedC
It does, in a way.
Contrary to what MS would like people to believe, there's still MS-DOS code left in Windows 95. Not a lot, maybe, but it's waaay down deep.
TedC
I would prefer a nice, dark Linux Lager myself. :-)
TedC
Why is everyone saying that Linux has to offer MSOffice in order to be competitive against Microsoft? Are these reporters so dense that they can't see the irony in what they write?
The writing is on the wall, proprietary formats won't survive the millenium.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
It was a 1 when it made me snicker. Let's see which way it goes.
Save the whales. Feed the hungry. Free the mallocs.
I have no idea how my car works, yet I drive it every day.
Why should people have to know how their computers work just to write email, browse the web, etc?
The big benefit of a real Consumer Linux is that its probably way more stable than doing the same level of tasks on a Windows box, and its much easier for your techie friend to quickly fix something (or even remotely!) than wading through a bunch of dialog boxes under windows.
Perhaps a consumer Linux should work kind of like the way Kai's Power Tools does? Exposes more functionality to users that explore all the tools available?
Reward the curious users, and give the others the benefit of a crash-free desktop experience.
Turning the task of learning Linux into a kind of discovery process seems a lot better than just dumping a CLI on someone and saying, "Here you go! Feel the power yet?".
My opinion on a "user-friendly" Linux is always in a state of flux. Right now, Linux is NOT as newbie-friendly as Windows it. KDE is the best thing we have going for us there, but even with KDE, useability is just not quite that of Windows. Such being the case, simplifying the install is not necessarily in everyone's best interest. So a newbie installs Linux just fine, but doesn't know what this "root" thing is. Perhaps there is something that (for the time being) requires the use of the CLI. You can just hear the newbies saying "bash? What the heck is this?" as they stare blankly at an xterm. I fully believe that KDE will fill most of the gaps for newbies, but it's just not 100% there yet.
... Just some of my opinions.. :)
But there are also some things that newbies may never get if they don't take the time to learn. The kernel (invariably spelled kernal by them) is a mystery. What does compile mean? Why should I change my kernel? What IS a kernel? Let's not also forget that Linux is a networking OS. There are lots of services running (normally) and what if one is exploitable? Sure, your distribution may release a new package or such, but a newbie doesn't know what Bugtraq is, or doesn't even know that he is running an exploitable service. He goes onto IRC and before you know it, he's been rooted (Or 0wned if you try to sound "kewl"). Of course, this is Linux's fault, not his, and this would never have happened in Windows! Don't tell me newbies (for the most part) don't think like this.
I think it would be great if Linux got more popularity, but we need to realize that it is NOT Windows. I think if someone wants to run Linux, they need to take the time to learn things about it. If you want an idiot-proof (well, fairly idiot-proof) OS use MacOS or Windows. But if you have a NEED for what Linux offers (Server usage, and otherwise) or if you're curious and actually have the initiative to READ and LEARN, then I think using Linux is a good idea. You really do learn lots of great things while using Linux, as long as you don't expect it to do everything for you.
OK, so my post rambles and doesn't have any clear point
Posted by Mike@ABC:
Have to say, you hit the nail on the head. Would that others would learn from your insights...!
Posted by Mike@ABC:
Sure, there's not a lot of demand for newbie Linux distributions, but you can bet RedHat is kicking itself for not doing it first. Eventually, Linux will find its way to the consumer space, and Caldera will be ready, willing and able. Heck, there are already consumer-folk out there wondering about Linux.
It's a gamble, but it's a very good one.
If you folks think that RedHat's install is some paradigm of ease, you shouldn't be participating in this discussion.
The partition editor only works sometimes, and furthermore, it's pretty non-obvious to the newbie what to do (create a / partition).
LILO is a major problem with all Linux systems. Yea, sure it works, sometimes, in certain conditions. (I've had it spontainously change my partition type codes on FAT partitions.) Look at the NT Boot loader, it just works. Don't believe me on this one -- search DejaNews for "LILO AND LI" and see what you get.
The RedHat install is not at all clear on what network services you're installing, and provides no descriptive information and no ablitity to alter the configuration during the install.
Once RedHat is installed, you are presented with a confusing Control Panel full of really ugly icons. By futzing around with this you can perhaps find certain options you're looking for, but it's usually extremely non-obvious. RedHat also provide the linuxconf program, but the thing just seems too klutzy to trust. It's also real slow and has many drawing bugs.
Well, that's the rant. Just wanted to point out that there's a way to go.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Good for Caldera. I'm glad it's them doing it. In my opinion Caldera's always represented the business side of Linux better than the other distributions. Plus they've showed some balls taking MS's ass to court. That's the kind of company that should be representing the business angle. Funny but I thought it'd be Corel doing this before anyone else.
Personally I don't think Linux is hard to setup. It's no harder than installing dos on a blank disk and setting up your gui of choice.
When I was first getting into Linux I was blown away by Caldera's desktop that came w/ the retail OpenLinux. I never bought it since I didn't have the cash but it looked impressive. I wound up downloading slack 3.3 via a 14.4 dialup and using wmaker.
I don't see anything wrong w/ OpenLinux for Linux workstations. It's not like anyone's being forced to use it so nobody has a right to complain about it. I know alot of people are going to piss and moan about this but think about how great it'll be having developers jump on the bandwagon with the users. Plus the need for linux techs will be more in demand. The world needs a clueless-friendly, stable OS for a change.
Bundling PQMagic might not have been the best choice though. I think Wabi might have been a better one. Anyway if Linux starts to get lame, there's always BSD.
"Unix is a proprietary operating system intended to compete against Microsoft Windows" --Patrick Reilly
I know a lot of people believe that something like this will make Linux worse and not better.
However, it isn't true.
Just because someone is selling something that makes it easier for people to use Linux, it doesn't
mean that it's going to make Linux "Just as bad as Windows."
The CLI and steep learning curve isn't what makes Linux good. What makes it good is the Openess and
the great programmers behind it.
The one thing that has been SEVERELY over-looked IS
the user-friendliness.
The only thing that making something easier to use is going to do is let more people use the operating
system without having to know as much in advance. I know those of us who have already done it the
hard way may feel cheated because the new users don't have to go thru everything we did... but so
what?
And another thing... Making something more user-friendly DOES NOT mean that it is going to be less
powerful. Those of you who think that have a lot to learn about software design. Basically it all
comes down to the masculinity argument. Many people feel that their balls are bigger because
they can memorize a man page about a particular piece of software.
Yes, I have felt the same way sometimes. However, I would much rather have the option of a quick GUI
with a couple checkboxes instead of having to open an Xterm, reading a man page, and memorizing the
sequence of options I have to enter. Don't get me wrong, I like the speed that you CAN do stuff with
the CLI once you do remember the commands. I just understand how many new users can feel.
Another thing that has been overlooked that could easily be implemented in many X-based programs is
something like an "Advanced Options..." option. Show the simple stuff, then if they want to, show
everything. Even though their programs do suck, M$ has got this UI thing down. Not many people
complain about the UI in M$ programs. (Except maybe for that little paperclip guy...) Which
brings me to something else... Help systems. Let me just say this:
The man system in Linux is awesome. The GUI based help sux.
IMO, Linux users *should* be happy about new users coming in, even if they have been dumbed-down by a
Micro$oft OS.
More users mean:
More programs
More drivers
More support period.
Sorry for getting a little bit off-topic (kinda) in that. It's just something that has been bothering me about many Linux users.
They think that if something comes in that makes Linux easier to use, it's going to ruin the Linux
community.
C'mon people, it's ok.
Let 'em in, even if they can't work a CLI.
~enucite~
/me puts on his asbestos suit in preparation of the flames.
I'm going to take a gamble and bet some comments will be up soon as to the elite and special nature of Linux, and how this is going to ruin everything...
Or on how by dumbing down the OS this way, Linux will be no more and no better than Windows...
Or how Linux is their OS, meant and built for hackers, and not meant for idiots, newbies, the clueless, or the Great Unwashed Masses...
Please, I just gave all three, so don't feel you need to add any more.
That out of the way, I feel this is a good thing, but not perfect. Consumer space is important, especially if you feel that M$ doesn't deserve it and that Apple repeatedly makes routine screwups in the arena. Linux needs enough support to garner first class citizenship from consumer hardware manufacturers; USB drivers and support, AGP and 3d acceleration, perhipherals like TV tuners, scanners, sound cards, and most importantly, consumer space Applications.
User Friendly Linux, regardless of distro or brand name, needs to have an easier setup than M$s. Fill in a bunch of checkboxes and defaults in one dialogue, and allow install without further user interaction. Automatic repair, in case the user screws up or something goes wrong... Refer to some sort of image, and restore from CD or something. Automatic update of safety image as user adds or removes components and hardware. Default security and protection, without the user worrying about patches and updates and holes... Like Netscape's or M$'s autoupdate, check routinely for patches and such, and if possible, download and ask for user permission to install, detailing the changes and allowing for selective removal and uninstall...
Am I missing anything?
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*