Personally, I'm sick of the Linux zealots who think that the future of Linux depends on mass acceptance on the desktop.
I think a bigger problem is the attitude that usability is only good:
a. for "eye candy", or
b. for morons.
This is a pernicious attitude. It is insulting. It encourages bad design. And most perniciously of all, this bad design stands in the way of more efficient tinkering.
Usability isn't just an issue for ATs or PHBs, it's an issue for geeks too.
The majority of the posts I'm seeing that are 'anti-gnome' stem from the sheer fact that all of you out there are more than just computer users; you are programmers, devleopers, engineers, students, enthusiests, etc. Gnome is not directly targeted toward you.
Fsck that. I don't disagree with the spatial decision, much as I'll turn it off immediately on download; but slagging off power-users is a sure and certain way for a platform to kill itself quickly.
What I found really interesting, though, is Novell's idea that they're going to make most of their money off thin clients. This means one of two things. Either they're deluding themselves, and their thin-client effort is going to end up in the same anemic state as everyone else's; or else Novell's push might be what makes thin-client computing finally break out.
I'm not confident the second thing will happen, but I'd say this effort has a better chance than previous ones, since it's Linux-based. Windows wasn't built for timesharing. The Sun Ray system is gorgeous and sexy, but you can only run it on Solaris/SPARC. Sun's service division also hasn't had the reach to do the handholding though broadbased installations. LTSP has no marketing behind it.
I dunno if Novell can do it, but they're in a better position to do it than anyone else right now.
ID software have been gracious to release their old games to the community, but for the latest "killer" games you need Windows.
False dichotomy. Software that runs on Linux doesn't have to be "release[d] to the community.
I really believe that when we get our act together and launch a game-based distro, we will be home and dry.
This is an intriguing idea. Though let it be noted that this is a different model from either PC or console gaming.
With PC gaming, you buy games to run on hardware and software that you already have and use for other things. With console gaming, you buy hardware specifically to run games you couldn't otherwise run. In both cases, basically no setup is required.
What a games-based distro would ask of its customers would be to run a more or less arduous setup on hardware they already have that already runs games fine.
In order to compensate for that tradeoff (lost uptime even if no effort or thought is required) you'd have to have some pretty frickin' sweet games that couldn't be gotten in another way.
* We need the source for the games on that CD.
So this about more than Linux vs. Windows/console gaming: it's about free vs. proprietary gaming.
* We need kids able to pick up that CD (or DVD, with respect to another learned friend posting here) and turn their PC into a games console, without ruining Mum's or Dad's official documents.
Now this is an interesting angle. I guess he's envisioning something like Knoppix? But how often do PC games fsck up official documents?
As those games are played, kids will be encouraged to learn how they work and maybe work on their own. AMOS and Blitz basic on the Amiga formed a huge range of great games, but getting people learning C++ from an early age would lead to great things for the future, I'm sure.
Most modern commercial-grade games are of a level of complexity much greater than AMOS or BlitzBasic oldies.
Linux games sites at the moment are not brilliant, let's be honest.
True dat.
I snipped the rest, but here's my main doubt with a free-game-based anything distro: Okay, all software is art, but games - good games anyways - are much more art than other software. Much of software is becoming commoditized, but the sort of artistry it takes to come up with tight gameplay or appealing and immersive visuals are not being commoditized, are unlikely to, and probably never will.
Look at the OSS games out there: mostly clones: either simple clones, or clones that have metastasized far beyond their progenitors (NetHack); but still clones. Will a CD full of clones "promote *NIX to a new generation"?
HP sells a Linux and a Windows version of the Compaq dx2000 Microtower (see link at bottom). The price difference is $21. Is this the free software dividend?
Or does it have to do with the fact that the Linux box has a slower CD drive?
Based on my informal survey, it seems that the Microsoft tax is alive and well, at least for desktops.
The primary audience for wide-adoption consists of your parents, your grand parents, your neighbors and friends who call you to fix their systems, children, etc.
For the home market, yes. There are, however, also the business and educational markets. There you have the same users, but they aren't necessarily doing all the install/config themselves.
And as long as there is anything that requires a text file to be edited in linux, Windows will remain king.
Mandrake's visual config is clunky, but it's comprehensive.
I really love Linux and all, but this changes nothing. I hate HP.
Yeah. HP: where technologies go to die.
That said, I don't like Mandrake much, either. I mean, their stuff works okay (other than a couple of fried cd drives, which I don't count against them) and it is, in a way, easy to use.
But they're determined to make commercial linux on the desktop look and feel as clunky and amateurish as possible: all the way from their 3rd-grade-girl logo through the spaghetti-codeish entanglement of the default menu setup on their KDE desktop. I think they deserve each other.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I'm sick of the Linux zealots who think that the future of Linux depends on mass acceptance on the desktop.
I think a bigger problem is the attitude that usability is only good:
a. for "eye candy", or b. for morons.
This is a pernicious attitude. It is insulting. It encourages bad design. And most perniciously of all, this bad design stands in the way of more efficient tinkering.
Usability isn't just an issue for ATs or PHBs, it's an issue for geeks too.
The majority of the posts I'm seeing that are 'anti-gnome' stem from the sheer fact that all of you out there are more than just computer users; you are programmers, devleopers, engineers, students, enthusiests, etc. Gnome is not directly targeted toward you.
Fsck that. I don't disagree with the spatial decision, much as I'll turn it off immediately on download; but slagging off power-users is a sure and certain way for a platform to kill itself quickly.
KDE/Gnome? Seriously, dude - yawn.
What I found really interesting, though, is Novell's idea that they're going to make most of their money off thin clients. This means one of two things. Either they're deluding themselves, and their thin-client effort is going to end up in the same anemic state as everyone else's; or else Novell's push might be what makes thin-client computing finally break out.
I'm not confident the second thing will happen, but I'd say this effort has a better chance than previous ones, since it's Linux-based. Windows wasn't built for timesharing. The Sun Ray system is gorgeous and sexy, but you can only run it on Solaris/SPARC. Sun's service division also hasn't had the reach to do the handholding though broadbased installations. LTSP has no marketing behind it.
I dunno if Novell can do it, but they're in a better position to do it than anyone else right now.
> 3. "The Internet is also the platform through which open source is developed."
Most users don't care about the development platform of what they use.
> 4. "It's simply going to be more secure than proprietary software."
Going to be?
> 5. "Open source benefits from anti-American sentiments."
I've heard this argument before. Could we be setting ourselves up for an anti-anti-American backlash?
> 6. "Incentives around open source include the respect of one's peers."
Read: OSS users are snobs. And snobs about something dweeby. More negative than positive.
> 8. "Servers have always been expensive and proprietary, but Linux runs on Intel."
Fine for the server market.
> 12. "It's free."
So far this has helped on the server, but not the desktop.
> 11. "Companies are increasingly supporting Linux."
This might be the strongest one.
ID software have been gracious to release their old games to the community, but for the latest "killer" games you need Windows.
False dichotomy. Software that runs on Linux doesn't have to be "release[d] to the community.
I really believe that when we get our act together and launch a game-based distro, we will be home and dry.
This is an intriguing idea. Though let it be noted that this is a different model from either PC or console gaming.
With PC gaming, you buy games to run on hardware and software that you already have and use for other things. With console gaming, you buy hardware specifically to run games you couldn't otherwise run. In both cases, basically no setup is required.
What a games-based distro would ask of its customers would be to run a more or less arduous setup on hardware they already have that already runs games fine.
In order to compensate for that tradeoff (lost uptime even if no effort or thought is required) you'd have to have some pretty frickin' sweet games that couldn't be gotten in another way.
* We need the source for the games on that CD.
So this about more than Linux vs. Windows/console gaming: it's about free vs. proprietary gaming.
* We need kids able to pick up that CD (or DVD, with respect to another learned friend posting here) and turn their PC into a games console, without ruining Mum's or Dad's official documents.
Now this is an interesting angle. I guess he's envisioning something like Knoppix? But how often do PC games fsck up official documents?
As those games are played, kids will be encouraged to learn how they work and maybe work on their own. AMOS and Blitz basic on the Amiga formed a huge range of great games, but getting people learning C++ from an early age would lead to great things for the future, I'm sure.
Most modern commercial-grade games are of a level of complexity much greater than AMOS or BlitzBasic oldies.
Linux games sites at the moment are not brilliant, let's be honest.
True dat.
I snipped the rest, but here's my main doubt with a free-game-based anything distro: Okay, all software is art, but games - good games anyways - are much more art than other software. Much of software is becoming commoditized, but the sort of artistry it takes to come up with tight gameplay or appealing and immersive visuals are not being commoditized, are unlikely to, and probably never will.
Look at the OSS games out there: mostly clones: either simple clones, or clones that have metastasized far beyond their progenitors (NetHack); but still clones. Will a CD full of clones "promote *NIX to a new generation"?
HP sells a Linux and a Windows version of the Compaq dx2000 Microtower (see link at bottom). The price difference is $21. Is this the free software dividend?
Or does it have to do with the fact that the Linux box has a slower CD drive?
Based on my informal survey, it seems that the Microsoft tax is alive and well, at least for desktops.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?U3D8228B7
The primary audience for wide-adoption consists of your parents, your grand parents, your neighbors and friends who call you to fix their systems, children, etc.
For the home market, yes. There are, however, also the business and educational markets. There you have the same users, but they aren't necessarily doing all the install/config themselves.
And as long as there is anything that requires a text file to be edited in linux, Windows will remain king.
Mandrake's visual config is clunky, but it's comprehensive.
I really love Linux and all, but this changes nothing. I hate HP.
Yeah. HP: where technologies go to die.
That said, I don't like Mandrake much, either. I mean, their stuff works okay (other than a couple of fried cd drives, which I don't count against them) and it is, in a way, easy to use.
But they're determined to make commercial linux on the desktop look and feel as clunky and amateurish as possible: all the way from their 3rd-grade-girl logo through the spaghetti-codeish entanglement of the default menu setup on their KDE desktop. I think they deserve each other.
The advent of the techno-Raj?