I expect the people that are capable of creating a good virus scanner and are interested in contributing code to an open source project mostly use systems where security is a priority. And as such would rather spend time to fix the security issues that allow virii and worms to spread and contribute to security pojects that have broader applications in the areas of intrusion detection, firewalls, proxy servers... etc.
Later, Seeker
Better than IE since before XP was even released
on
Mozilla 1.4 RC1
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Mozilla was my preferred browser on Windows longer than XP has even been released up until the early incarnations of Mozilla Phoenix started being released, but opinions are subjective.
I never cared much if it took an extra few seconds for the browser to start and I put more weight on being able to read what I want from a web page and move on than on total rendering time.
In addition to tabs which have been around for a while, what really puts Mozilla browsers higher on my list than IE these days are:
1. When you remove cookies you have the option for them not to be accepted in the future.
2. The option to block all pop ups except for sites you have put in the list of accepted sites.
I don't see MS putting features like these in IE in the forseable future and when/if they do these features will probably be over engineered.
Later, Seeker
Re:Disclosure would Nullify Trade Secret
on
What if SCO is Right?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
"I seriously doubt your interpretation because it would render trade secrets useless. If the trade secret holder has done his due diligence, any receiver of the secret would have to obtain it through illegal means"
Just because a person or group reveals a trade secret does not mean that the recipients know it is a trade secret. In the case of an open source project that is posted in a public forum, that means it becoumes public knowledge.
One reason not to reveal it is because Sco's engineers are biased and in the cases where it is not clear that code was cut and pasted they may come to the conclusion that code was obfuscated when it was created independently. If they wait for the independent analasys and it agrees then they have more leverage to work with.
The fact that they have not revealed any examples could mean there were no clear cases or they may just want to have the full picture and deal with it all at once.
But then you have the comment about not revealing it, because Redhad, Suse etc...would hav a chance to scrub the code to which my thought is knock, knock, knock...Hello-O-o..How can you scrub the public record?
Well, heres a thought. Maybe they feel if they wait 'till they take it to court they can force the removal of additional surrounding blocks of code that would then become off limits because only a limited number of people would know which code was the offending code and which code was collateral damage.
"You will never see any sort of broken dependencies with the official Debian repositories"
I guess that depends on your definition of broken. Or maybe you have not seen them because you don't update that often.
I update from unstable every 1-3 days and I can tell you if you follow unstable there will occasionally be packages that don't install because of conflicts or will cause something else to be uninstalled, there will be packages that don't install correctly, there will be circular dependencies where package A won't install because it depends on package B and package B won't install because it depends on package A, and there will sometimes be one or more packages that don't install because they depend on something that has not made it into the repository.
Granted most of these are not big issues usually because they tend to be short lived situations, but half installed packages can be a bear to deal with sometimes.
Later, Seeker
Debian? apt-build and apt-src
on
Gentoo Reviewed
·
· Score: 1
I have been running Debian unstable for a while as my desktop system and have not had to compile things very often.
Most often I use kernel package to create packages for the kernel and kernel modules.
There was a stretch when VideoLan Client would not install and more recently MythTV would not install, both of which are available from apt-gettable locations hosted on non Debian servers. In both cases I was able to use apt-build to download the source packages, compile, and install the resulting deb packages.
There is a package called apt-src also which seems like it may be more flexible than apt-build.
I have not tried Gentoo yet, but base on the descriptions of emerge these tools fall way short. However, for those of us that like the Debian way of doing things they do provide a couple of nice alternatives to dpkg-buildpackage.
There is a lot of effort in LindowsOS to make things just work, but how much effort is being made to make problems easier to work around when things don't go according to plan?
SCO may have some ELF related IP ownership. But GCC is one of the core project of the FSF and the adoption of the ELF binary format is a big deal.
Given this I find it highly unlikely that ELF was adopted without much discussion and agreement that it is implemented in a way that will not create legal issues for the project.
The ELF binary format has been the default format produced by GCC longer than I have been using Linux, which is longer than IBM has been actively lending development muscle to Linux.
It seems likely that the only benefit to SCO in metioning it is to add to the noise, and create FUD surounding Linux.
If they are looking to be bought out they may be attempting to pump up their percieved value.
In the event SCO actually thinks thay can win the lawsuit or force IBM to settle then SCO could be using this lawsuit to inflate their claims about ELF for use in future lawsuits.
"When they find a bit that's too antiquated to be useful, they hack it a bit until it looks kind-of modern."
That is the benefit of having a standard for the X window system. The Xfree86 developers can hack , redesign, rewrite XFree86 as much as it takes to keep it up to date. As long as it complies with the standard for the X window system, it will be able to run applications that also conform to the standard.
"The original poster does make a valid point - that Linux is only now approaching the level of usability required for use by the general population that, say, Windows possesses."
And the counter point was that Linux is reaching that level of usability and the recently released XFree86 4.3 helps address some of the remaining issues.
"And Linux would have achieved this level of usability faster if development skills were concentrated in certain areas (for example, the issues above). However, Linux is a free OS and such things can't be forced. Well, unless someone chips in with funding -- like the German government is doing with KDE development IIRC."
As you said Linux is a free OS. Unpaid developers are going to work on projects they have an interest in or that help them do their "real" job. Even if you just look at the different projects that accomplish the same thing , it's better to have 3 groups of developers who can work together and get things done then a single group of developers that can't agree on what direction a project should be going.
The example of the German government funding KDE development highlights the usability point. Linux distrobutions are reaching the level of usablility required for the desktop so you have an increase in the amount of money that is being spent to take that usability to an even higher level along with the utilities and applications they need/wish to have.
Previously in this thread drivers were mentioned. It does not give an accurate reflection of the driver situation to compare running setup.exe in Windows to compiling a driver in linux. The accurate reflection is that more hardware is supported in Windows then in linux, big suprise!, end of story.
As someone who has to deal with driver installations gone wrong I have to say the rollback feature in XP is pretty nice in situations where it can be used and the "hit F8 during boot and choose "last known good configuration"" has also proved helpful. Having said that, generally speaking I have a low opinion of the whole (hardware management/driver management) process in Windows.
Where I see Linux distrobutions having a real advantage, when you put aside the issues of driver installation and the range of hardware supported, and one of the major points of developing an open platform is... When I buy hardware I want to base my dicision on the hardware without having to concern myself about the bundled software. If I buy a printer I don't want to be forced to deal with printer control software that behaves oddly and only works with that printer. I don't want to be forced to use a mixer that was bundled with the soundcard to control all my speakers. And I don't want to be forced to use the viewing software that came with the TV card. Etc.... Etc....
" i think it's funny when people don't know jack about windows, or realize it's pretty simple to troubleshoot."
I think it's funny when people who think Windows is simple to trouble shoot fail to ask themselves, if Windows is so easy to troubleshoot why are there so many forums spread across the net filled with people who can't find a resolution to their problems?
"64-bit processors are absolutely unnecessary on the desktop at this time, and Intel knows it. Why the supposedly tech-savvy geek culture of Slashdot can't grapple this is beyond me."
When it is absolutely unnecessary is the perfect time to pit an architecture that gives your existing software a significant performance boost and lets you transition to 64 bit software gradually against an architecture where you have to upgrade all of your software now or face a significant performance penalty.
"nowhere in the linked story does AMD ever say they're going to stop producing PC chips"
I noticed this too. When computers with AMD chips sell for close to the same price as computers with in Intel chips of similar performance it becomes more productive to focus on expanding the market for the chips instead of the price difference.
Most times I have had to reset my machine I have seen a message about replaying the journal which happens quickly the machine continues to boot and everything is fine. 1 or 2 times I have had to enter runlevel 1 and run fsck.
On my other machine that uses ReiserFS about %20 of the time (give or take) I have to boot from my installation CD enter recovery mode and repair the file system from there.
"No, you don't. The default is for Windows to automatically update itself. At least, with XP Home and Pro"
Actually the default in XP is to repeatedly pop up a message about the automatic update feature until you choose to have it enabled or disabled. If you get a computer with XP preinstalled that choice may have been made for you, but that is a seperate issue.
"I prefer the branding. I had heard about Evolution. People said it was great. So I tried it. Ten seconds later it was "Oh my God it's installing all of GNOME! Stop stop stop! I didn't want GNOME! Aaargh!""
To me that just prejudicial. All these Ks and Gs are just a distraction from the real question, is it the best app for the job.
"- but gnome 2 totally sucks. even hardcore gnome users refuse to use it. read all the flames and rants about gnome 2 on all kind of news pages and mailinglists."
Gnome 2 works good for me. How many of those complaints are about Gnome 2 and how many are people saying things like "my favorite panel app has not been ported yet, what's up with that"? After reading this article I have a lot more confidence in the forward compatibilty of Gnome apps in the future then I do with the forward compatibility of KDE apps.
"looks like ximian is trying to tie 2 different things together. openoffice has it's own framework, api and abi which is in no way gnome related."
Given their relationship with Sun and the fact that Sun presented the idea of Openoffice being the default office suite for the Gnome project, is this really surprising that they would work together to bridge their respective component models so the 2 projects work well together? Open Office is a good office suite so what reason is there not to do this?
"Mozilla might be very nice but I dont think a web browser should be the basis of all applications."
But the article is making a point that the cross platform application interface that the browser was built on can easily be used to create other networked applicatoins with little more knowledge than it currently takes to build an advanced website.
A developer creating a non web related application would only have to use the components that are necessary for their application.
As more applications are created new developers have more than the browser that was initially created with the framework to base thier own applications on.
"If music was so undervalued that a musician couldn't expect to take in enough to break even, or live above the poverty line, then no artist would take time off from their job at McDonalds to commercially compose a tune."
Music is a bad example. If a musician or band is not good enough to draw a paying crowd it does not matter if their music is being traded on a filesharing network. If they are good enough the filesharing networks can get their stuff heard by more people who then buy stuff to support them and pay money to see them perform.
Copywrite has a whole different set of issues than patents do and IMHO the relevance of 1 to the other is sketchy at best.
"Patents create temporary monopoly in order to foster creativity."
That was the original idea anyway, but with no limits on what can be patented you get the opposite. When you can get a patent on sidways swinging it should be clear to anybody that things are very wrong.
Lycoris is based on Caldera. Sometimes finding a version of the software you want that will run can be a non trivial exercise. This is offset to some degree by having a friendly community forum at the website and a download directory for user contributed downloads.
This release was primarily a minor update to the previous release, the next planned release will be a major upgrade.
>>" the registry is never accessed by users, and ditto for the Linux file system."
>"To me it seems like a horrible mistake to classify users into "stupid" (i.e. running the StupidSimpleLinux distro like Joe User), and l33t superwizgeeks like you running whatever other distro - I don't think you've brought linux to them then, just as you arent a "linux user" just because the ATM you just got money from was running a linux-based system. Like said in other posts - the "friendlyness" and "easyness" should scale up to the advanced level - where everything is open. Claiming that spewing config files all over my home dir would be better than putting them in e.g. ~/config just because you can hide it is silly."
>> "I can't think of any compelling reason to do this at all, considering that these are paths normally only used by software."
> "Now that's a gem. You never use the filesystem layout on your systems? Would YOU want to use the system never seeing the filesystem? Or is this exlusively for the stupid newbies? Come on... in your vision of a newbie system the paperclips aren't that far off - and just admit that you would never run such a system without an "advanced" switch that let you disable all your nice UI gadgets."
To design for the masses you have to assume the user is stupid. The people who are new or just don't want to learn all that other stuff will want a system where they don't have to ever see that stuff.
For those that do want to learn the file system layout is not that hard to learn and a large percentage of the help you need to get started can be viewed by opening the Gnome or KDE help browser.
Just about every program I have installed that was not packaged for my distrobution either installed in/usr/bin or/usr/local/bin. Adding/opt/ to the list is not that big of a deal.
Distrobutions that are being targeted at Joe User are doing what they can to eliminate the need to have to delve into the file system. The percieved complexity of the file system layout makes no difference to Joe User and changing it too drastically will just make it harder for him to get help when he really needs it.
Drag the slider to the resolution you want. Select colour depth. Press OK."
You still have to know about it and I find "Ctrl Alt +" much easier to explain on the phone.
"No text config file that you need to setup with all the options your system can support."
In a recent interview http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=1294 XFree developer David Dawes had this to say.
"6. Why there isn't an automatic failsafe method on XFree, when a graphics adapter is not supported to automatically try to load the VESA 2.0 driver instead? This way a lot of newbies would find their way around with Unix instead of feeling "locked" to the command line without... being able to use Vi or Emacs and edit the XF86Config file.
David Dawes: This is one of the things I'm currently working on in my spare time: to make configuration automatic. My goal is to make the XF86Config file optional and to provide a facility for the X server to choose the best driver for the given hardware, with appropriate fallbacks if the hardware isn't explicitly supported. This is something I think XFree86 needs, because, as you mention, it can be very difficult for people new to this environment to get it up and running. "
Slashdot Mirror
I expect the people that are capable of creating a good virus scanner and are interested in contributing code to an open source project mostly use systems where security is a priority. And as such would rather spend time to fix the security issues that allow virii and worms to spread and contribute to security pojects that have broader applications in the areas of intrusion detection, firewalls, proxy servers... etc.
Later, Seeker
Mozilla was my preferred browser on Windows longer than XP has even been released up until the early incarnations of Mozilla Phoenix started being released, but opinions are subjective.
I never cared much if it took an extra few seconds for the browser to start and I put more weight on being able to read what I want from a web page and move on than on total rendering time.
In addition to tabs which have been around for a while, what really puts Mozilla browsers higher on my list than IE these days are:
1. When you remove cookies you have the option for them not to be accepted in the future.
2. The option to block all pop ups except for sites you have put in the list of accepted sites.
I don't see MS putting features like these in IE in the forseable future and when/if they do these features will probably be over engineered.
Later, Seeker
"I seriously doubt your interpretation because it would render trade secrets useless. If the trade secret holder has done his due diligence, any receiver of the secret would have to obtain it through illegal means"
Just because a person or group reveals a trade secret does not mean that the recipients know it is a trade secret. In the case of an open source project that is posted in a public forum, that means it becoumes public knowledge.
One reason not to reveal it is because Sco's engineers are biased and in the cases where it is not clear that code was cut and pasted they may come to the conclusion that code was obfuscated when it was created independently. If they wait for the independent analasys and it agrees then they have more leverage to work with.
The fact that they have not revealed any examples could mean there were no clear cases or they may just want to have the full picture and deal with it all at once.
But then you have the comment about not revealing it, because Redhad, Suse etc...would hav a chance to scrub the code to which my thought is knock, knock, knock...Hello-O-o..How can you scrub the public record?
Well, heres a thought. Maybe they feel if they wait 'till they take it to court they can force the removal of additional surrounding blocks of code that would then become off limits because only a limited number of people would know which code was the offending code and which code was collateral damage.
Later, Seeker
"You will never see any sort of broken dependencies with the official Debian repositories"
I guess that depends on your definition of broken. Or maybe you have not seen them because you don't update that often.
I update from unstable every 1-3 days and I can tell you if you follow unstable there will occasionally be packages that don't install because of conflicts or will cause something else to be uninstalled, there will be packages that don't install correctly, there will be circular dependencies where package A won't install because it depends on package B and package B won't install because it depends on package A, and there will sometimes be one or more packages that don't install because they depend on something that has not made it into the repository.
Granted most of these are not big issues usually because they tend to be short lived situations, but half installed packages can be a bear to deal with sometimes.
Later, Seeker
I have been running Debian unstable for a while as my desktop system and have not had to compile things very often.
Most often I use kernel package to create packages for the kernel and kernel modules.
There was a stretch when VideoLan Client would not install and more recently MythTV would not install, both of which are available from apt-gettable locations hosted on non Debian servers. In both cases I was able to use apt-build to download the source packages, compile, and install the resulting deb packages.
There is a package called apt-src also which seems like it may be more flexible than apt-build.
I have not tried Gentoo yet, but base on the descriptions of emerge these tools fall way short. However, for those of us that like the Debian way of doing things they do provide a couple of nice alternatives to dpkg-buildpackage.
Later, Seeker
There is a lot of effort in LindowsOS to make things just work, but how much effort is being made to make problems easier to work around when things don't go according to plan?
Later, Seeker
SCO may have some ELF related IP ownership. But GCC is one of the core project of the FSF and the adoption of the ELF binary format is a big deal.
Given this I find it highly unlikely that ELF was adopted without much discussion and agreement that it is implemented in a way that will not create legal issues for the project.
The ELF binary format has been the default format produced by GCC longer than I have been using Linux, which is longer than IBM has been actively lending development muscle to Linux.
It seems likely that the only benefit to SCO in metioning it is to add to the noise, and create FUD surounding Linux.
If they are looking to be bought out they may be attempting to pump up their percieved value.
In the event SCO actually thinks thay can win the lawsuit or force IBM to settle then SCO could be using this lawsuit to inflate their claims about ELF for use in future lawsuits.
Later, Seeker
"When they find a bit that's too antiquated to be useful, they hack it a bit until it looks kind-of modern."
That is the benefit of having a standard for the X window system. The Xfree86 developers can hack , redesign, rewrite XFree86 as much as it takes to keep it up to date. As long as it complies with the standard for the X window system, it will be able to run applications that also conform to the standard.
Later, Seeker
"The original poster does make a valid point - that Linux is only now approaching the level of usability required for use by the general population that, say, Windows possesses."
/wish to have.
And the counter point was that Linux is reaching that level of usability and the recently released XFree86 4.3 helps address some of the remaining issues.
"And Linux would have achieved this level of usability faster if development skills were concentrated in certain areas (for example, the issues above). However, Linux is a free OS and such things can't be forced. Well, unless someone chips in with funding -- like the German government is doing with KDE development IIRC."
As you said Linux is a free OS. Unpaid developers are going to work on projects they have an interest in or that help them do their "real" job. Even if you just look at the different projects that accomplish the same thing , it's better to have 3 groups of developers who can work together and get things done then a single group of developers that can't agree on what direction a project should be going.
The example of the German government funding KDE development highlights the usability point. Linux distrobutions are reaching the level of usablility required for the desktop so you have an increase in the amount of money that is being spent to take that usability to an even higher level along with the utilities and applications they need
Previously in this thread drivers were mentioned. It does not give an accurate reflection of the driver situation to compare running setup.exe in Windows to compiling a driver in linux. The accurate reflection is that more hardware is supported in Windows then in linux, big suprise!, end of story.
As someone who has to deal with driver installations gone wrong I have to say the rollback feature in XP is pretty nice in situations where it can be used and the "hit F8 during boot and choose "last known good configuration"" has also proved helpful. Having said that, generally speaking I have a low opinion of the whole (hardware management/driver management) process in Windows.
Where I see Linux distrobutions having a real advantage, when you put aside the issues of driver installation and the range of hardware supported, and one of the major points of developing an open platform is... When I buy hardware I want to base my dicision on the hardware without having to concern myself about the bundled software. If I buy a printer I don't want to be forced to deal with printer control software that behaves oddly and only works with that printer. I don't want to be forced to use a mixer that was bundled with the soundcard to control all my speakers. And I don't want to be forced to use the viewing software that came with the TV card. Etc.... Etc....
Later, Seeker
" i think it's funny when people don't know jack about windows, or realize it's pretty simple to troubleshoot."
I think it's funny when people who think Windows is simple to trouble shoot fail to ask themselves, if Windows is so easy to troubleshoot why are there so many forums spread across the net filled with people who can't find a resolution to their problems?
Later, Seeker
"64-bit processors are absolutely unnecessary on the desktop at this time, and Intel knows it. Why the supposedly tech-savvy geek culture of Slashdot can't grapple this is beyond me."
When it is absolutely unnecessary is the perfect time to pit an architecture that gives your existing software a significant performance boost and lets you transition to 64 bit software gradually against an architecture where you have to upgrade all of your software now or face a significant performance penalty.
Later, Seeker
"nowhere in the linked story does AMD ever say they're going to stop producing PC chips"
I noticed this too.
When computers with AMD chips sell for close to the same price as computers with in Intel chips of similar performance it becomes more productive to focus on expanding the market for the chips instead of the price difference.
Later, Seeker
Ext3 seems more robust to me.
Most times I have had to reset my machine I have seen a message about replaying the journal which happens quickly the machine continues to boot and everything is fine. 1 or 2 times I have had to enter runlevel 1 and run fsck.
On my other machine that uses ReiserFS about %20 of the time (give or take) I have to boot from my installation CD enter recovery mode and repair the file system from there.
Later, Seeker
"No, you don't. The default is for Windows to automatically update itself. At least, with XP Home and Pro"
Actually the default in XP is to repeatedly pop up a message about the automatic update feature until you choose to have it enabled or disabled. If you get a computer with XP preinstalled that choice may have been made for you, but that is a seperate issue.
Later, Seeker
"I prefer the branding. I had heard about Evolution. People said it was great. So I tried it. Ten seconds later it was "Oh my God it's installing all of GNOME! Stop stop stop! I didn't want GNOME! Aaargh!""
To me that just prejudicial. All these Ks and Gs are just a distraction from the real question, is it the best app for the job.
Later, Seeker
Maybe people have what you consider to be a knee jerk reaction because:
You point out features of X as not being necessary on a consumer desktop, but make no case as to why they should not be there.
The shortcomings you point out are being addressed.
Your claim about X being slow does not match what others are experiencing on their boxen.
Later, Seeker
"- but gnome 2 totally sucks. even hardcore gnome users refuse to use it. read all the flames and rants about gnome 2 on all kind of news pages and mailinglists."
Gnome 2 works good for me. How many of those complaints are about Gnome 2 and how many are people saying things like "my favorite panel app has not been ported yet, what's up with that"? After reading this article I have a lot more confidence in the forward compatibilty of Gnome apps in the future then I do with the forward compatibility of KDE apps.
"looks like ximian is trying to tie 2 different things together. openoffice has it's own framework, api and abi which is in no way gnome related."
Given their relationship with Sun and the fact that Sun presented the idea of Openoffice being the default office suite for the Gnome project, is this really surprising that they would work together to bridge their respective component models so the 2 projects work well together? Open Office is a good office suite so what reason is there not to do this?
Later, Seeker
"Mozilla might be very nice but I dont think a web browser should be the basis of all applications."
But the article is making a point that the cross platform application interface that the browser was built on can easily be used to create other networked applicatoins with little more knowledge than it currently takes to build an advanced website.
A developer creating a non web related application would only have to use the components that are necessary for their application.
As more applications are created new developers have more than the browser that was initially created with the framework to base thier own applications on.
Later, Seeker
"If music was so undervalued that a musician couldn't expect to take in enough to break even, or live above the poverty line, then no artist would take time off from their job at McDonalds to commercially compose a tune."
Music is a bad example. If a musician or band is not good enough to draw a paying crowd it does not matter if their music is being traded on a filesharing network. If they are good enough the filesharing networks can get their stuff heard by more people who then buy stuff to support them and pay money to see them perform.
Copywrite has a whole different set of issues than patents do and IMHO the relevance of 1 to the other is sketchy at best.
Later, Seeker
"How many drugs would we not have today if the pharmaceutical companies couldn't patent them?"
There is no clear answer to that question. And there is no clear answer to this one.
How many drugs do we not have today becuase the cost of acquiring the rights to use all the patents needed to make them was too high.
Later, Seeker
"Patents create temporary monopoly in order to foster creativity."
That was the original idea anyway, but with no limits on what can be patented you get the opposite. When you can get a patent on sidways swinging it should be clear to anybody that things are very wrong.
Later, Seeker
Lycoris is based on Caldera. Sometimes finding a version of the software you want that will run can be a non trivial exercise. This is offset to some degree by having a friendly community forum at the website and a download directory for user contributed downloads.
This release was primarily a minor update to the previous release, the next planned release will be a major upgrade.
Later, Seeker
>>" the registry is never accessed by users, and ditto for the Linux file system."
/usr/bin or /usr/local/bin. Adding /opt/ to the list is not that big of a deal.
>"To me it seems like a horrible mistake to classify users into "stupid" (i.e. running the StupidSimpleLinux distro like Joe User), and l33t superwizgeeks like you running whatever other distro - I don't think you've brought linux to them then, just as you arent a "linux user" just because the ATM you just got money from was running a linux-based system. Like said in other posts - the "friendlyness" and "easyness" should scale up to the advanced level - where everything is open. Claiming that spewing config files all over my home dir would be better than putting them in e.g. ~/config just because you can hide it is silly."
>> "I can't think of any compelling reason to do this at all, considering that these are paths normally only used by software."
> "Now that's a gem. You never use the filesystem layout on your systems? Would YOU want to use the system never seeing the filesystem? Or is this exlusively for the stupid newbies? Come on... in your vision of a newbie system the paperclips aren't that far off - and just admit that you would never run such a system without an "advanced" switch that let you disable all your nice UI gadgets."
To design for the masses you have to assume the user is stupid. The people who are new or just don't want to learn all that other stuff will want a system where they don't have to ever see that stuff.
For those that do want to learn the file system layout is not that hard to learn and a large percentage of the help you need to get started can be viewed by opening the Gnome or KDE help browser.
Just about every program I have installed that was not packaged for my distrobution either installed in
Later, Seeker
Distrobutions that are being targeted at Joe User are doing what they can to eliminate the need to have to delve into the file system. The percieved complexity of the file system layout makes no difference to Joe User and changing it too drastically will just make it harder for him to get help when he really needs it.
Later, Seeker
"Right click on desktop -> properties -> settings
[or Start -> Control Panel -> Display settings]
Drag the slider to the resolution you want. Select colour depth. Press OK."
You still have to know about it and I find "Ctrl Alt +" much easier to explain on the phone.
"No text config file that you need to setup with all the options your system can support."
In a recent interview http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=1294 XFree developer David Dawes had this to say.
"6. Why there isn't an automatic failsafe method on XFree, when a graphics adapter is not supported to automatically try to load the VESA 2.0 driver instead? This way a lot of newbies would find their way around with Unix instead of feeling "locked" to the command line without... being able to use Vi or Emacs and edit the XF86Config file.
David Dawes: This is one of the things I'm currently working on in my spare time: to make configuration automatic. My goal is to make the XF86Config file optional and to provide a facility for the X server to choose the best driver for the given hardware, with appropriate fallbacks if the hardware isn't explicitly supported. This is something I think XFree86 needs, because, as you mention, it can be very difficult for people new to this environment to get it up and running. "
Later, Seeker