Unfortunately, to forge a unified, integrated and pervasive UI, you need a dictator to lay out the framework, and impose it as the standard.
The linux world can't even agree on a toolkit! What do they expect, vendors to develop separate Qt and GTK versions of their software? Ha!
Look at the two shining examples of integration and useability - Mac and NeXT. They are/were both also shining examples of fascism in design. There was usually only one way to do things. This might have made some developers mad, but it was and is beneficial to users.
Linux is the antithesis of fascism in design. It is inherently anarchistic. That is why you will continue to have complete anarchy in the world of linux UIs.
And remember, if linux becomes the Mac, it will cease to be linux. None of you will be very happy with it. Let the novices use Macs. They'll be happier too.
Any format will need to have strong support and a strong presence in the conventional audio device market.
I would say that this might provide the IBM/Sony system with an advantage, as Sony is a leading vendor or portable and console equipment, but I think they are still more interested in DVD Audio.
On the other hand, MP3 is also dead in the long run. sorry folks, but the selection of artists using MP3 is simply far too weak. Please, no arguments about "the music biz telling me what to like" - that argument is ridiculous. The leading users of MP3 are garage bands who couldn't score a gig playing a bum's funeral.
In other words, its still up for grabs. Whether DVD Audio will win out is the bigger issue.
Reading this thread, I must conlude that Slashdot readers are really lacking a clue when it comes to "ease-of-use" in computing for consumers. If you insist (like me) that linux is not for consumers, then you should stop reading - this rant is in response to users who think Linux can be the next Mac by simply using GNOME.
To understand what "ease of use" means for true consumer appliances, look at the VCR. Most people still can't manage the programming of even the most simplest units. How on earth do you expect them to understand a computer that may require them to edit files in/etc?
when looking at the future of computing devices for consumers, you should consider the Mac to be too complicated. The model you are aiming for is the Palm Pilot. This is the type of computer that will bring computing to the masses. Its cheap, its effective, and it accomplishes only a few tasks but does them well. If you really want to, you can expand it to do other things, but most people don't want to.
Listening to this thread has really been humorous for me. Most contributors seem to believe that redhat linux with gnome is going to pass the "mom test". Only if your mother is esther dyson.
Most contributors here are very computer literate. Some are capable of writing complex apps. These are not the people you go to in order to understand ease of use. Power users assume too much of novices. Most people out there in the world can't even wrap their heads around the notion of logging in.
I wish Corel luck, and I hope they get some Windows users - these people are already used to dealing with complicated systems that break, so they will certainly enjoy a complicated system that is much much harder to break. Mac users will never be linux converts, unless they were already versed in unix.
Going after consumers is far too lofty. Palm Computing has the best shot of anyone right now of building a computer that a billion people can use.
WordPerfect "ruled the roost" because it was the first real word processor. GUI products destroyed it when they came along. Where is WordPerfect corp now? Part of an even lamer corporation, Corel!
Nonetheless, I don't expect Mac-like levels of integration and ease-of-use.
I prefer power and flexibility. There is a pure trade-off.
Linux/FreeBSD has power and flexibility, and that is how most users like it. Mac has inflexbility but ease of use. That is how Mac users like it.
Trying to make Linux into a Mac is like trying to make a screwdriver into a hammer. Let the screw drive screw, let the hammer bang. Screwdriver users and hammer users everywhere will be happier when their products excel in their given areas of strength, which for linux is serving.
The Mac doesn't make a good server, so conversely I think Apple is silly to pursue this server thrust with OSX. Macs will never make it on server racks.
You proved my point exactly - your example of ease-of-use is KDE, which is "layered on as an afterthought" just as I explained.
You haven't understood a thing I've said. Ease of use requires integration. Integration includes hardware, software, and apps. ALL apps. Linux does not have this. NeXT did, and the Mac does (as does the Palm Pilot). What can't you understand?
Like the Mac, NeXT was designed from the ground-up to support this ease-of-use. It was a design factor from day one.
The same cannot be said for linux. It must be layered on as an afterthought. This type of design only works well for Elightenment themes. For true ease of use, you need to have a plan before any hardware or software hits the shelves.
It takes everyone out there developing to agree on stringent guidelines for applications.
It takes hardware interfaces that are not designed for tinkering, but designed to auto-detect.
It takes getting EVERY app to use one UI, and support it pervasively.
Sorry, that just doesn't happen in a distributed open-source model.
Open source software is not driven by the market, it is driven by what the programmers want to program. Looking at linux, *BSD, etc., this historically has not covered any of the issues that Apple takes care of for users. You need a dictator.
Its called the Mac, and it will always be easier to use than linux.
There does not exist an alternate reality where linux is easier to use than the Mac. The entire philosophy of the Mac is that hardware, OS, interface, and apps act in a way that is easy to use, even if that sacrifices other qualities.
Trying to match this level of user-friendliness on linux is a waste of time because it will never happen. Sorry for the downer.
To really do a consumer version of Linux, there are a few issues that simply need to be addressed:
1. X Configuration - there is nothing "consumer" about current X configuration tools. Even some of the commercial tools could use some work. X configuration would hopefully be worked into the basic Linux configuration.
2. System configuration tools that are more task-based. Most consumers think in terms of a task they want to perform, not a particular tool they want to use. Consumers are not going to know that/etc exists nor do they want to. You have to develop tools that mask this from the user and focus on accomplishing tasks.
3. Even more mind-numbingly simple defaults. If you wish to cusotmize nothing, you should still be given a workable system. RedHat approaches this, but still needs work.
4. Simpler methods for dealing with devices. Floppies, Zips, Sound Cards, etc. Plug and Play is probably too much to hope for, but you have to aim for it.
5. More real apps. WordPerfect porting would help, and a v 5 browser.
In the face of all of this, I am still smarting from Corel's last attempt to "kill" Microsoft, which was Java based and a complete laugh.
Just remember this when Transmeta actually comes to market.
Intel does not produce the fastest, smallest, lowest-power-consumption or coolest (thermally) chip on the market.
Outperforming Intel is not going to work - others are already doing that with only middling results. To beat Intel, you have to match their performance for less than half of their price. AMD matches the performance but doesn't offer enough cost savings to deliver the TKO punch.
Users want very fast and very cheap. Unless Transmeta addresses this, their impact will be negligable.
If you want to really test a browser, see how fast it renders a schwab page or a my yahoo page or an ebay page or any other page that people actually use.
This is a common flaw in useability testing - demonstrate your strengths on corner cases. And yes, CSS is a corner case - no popular sites use it or are likely to use it.
Most search engines place ads based on the search term you used. This really isn't that much different - its only seen as legit as the ad is put at the top as a banner, where most people expect it.
Let the market decide. If people don't like this type of tool, there are numerous excellent search engines they can use instead.
No one seems to object at the yellow pages, which offer up ads for every search query!
The Times They Are A Changin'
on
Generations
·
· Score: 2
Wow, fascinating meme. Really.
In case, it wasn't clear, I'm being sarcastic. This is the time-honored practice of old coots the world over - to bemoan the fact that the icons of their lives are forgotten by most everyone they meet.
Yes we age, our favorite shows go off the air, our favorite appliances rust, our bellies/boobs sag, etc.
So what of it? Live for today. Nostalgic sentimentality exists for those who have otherwise no reason to wake up.
Unfortunately, there does not seem to be a place for the reduction of demand in our modern economics. The growth of our economy seems hinged on getting more soccer moms to buy more chevy suburbans (4wd model, natch) and more raymond weil watches.
Nerds are part of the problem. They have voracious appetites for toys.
Slashdot Mirror
I have found at least one document that is available in Word format only.
d oc
http://www.luigui.org/projects/recommendations.
Is this useable? At least they could put all their ideas in html.
How lame.
The mom test includes setting up a system out of the box, including hardware configuration, etc.
The mom test includes installing software.
The mom test includes crash recovery.
In other words, the mom test means your mom can send you to sweden and still use her computer.
Of course linux fails. So does windows98, NT and some of the times, also the Mac (although it gets higher marks than any other desktop system).
The only systems that truly pass the mom test are WebTV and the Palm Pilot.
Once again, linux users have no understanding of what ease-of-use really means.
Unfortunately, to forge a unified, integrated and pervasive UI, you need a dictator to lay out the framework, and impose it as the standard.
The linux world can't even agree on a toolkit! What do they expect, vendors to develop separate Qt and GTK versions of their software? Ha!
Look at the two shining examples of integration and useability - Mac and NeXT. They are/were both also shining examples of fascism in design. There was usually only one way to do things. This might have made some developers mad, but it was and is beneficial to users.
Linux is the antithesis of fascism in design. It is inherently anarchistic. That is why you will continue to have complete anarchy in the world of linux UIs.
And remember, if linux becomes the Mac, it will cease to be linux. None of you will be very happy with it. Let the novices use Macs. They'll be happier too.
Any format will need to have strong support and a strong presence in the conventional audio device market.
I would say that this might provide the IBM/Sony system with an advantage, as Sony is a leading vendor or portable and console equipment, but I think they are still more interested in DVD Audio.
On the other hand, MP3 is also dead in the long run. sorry folks, but the selection of artists using MP3 is simply far too weak. Please, no arguments about "the music biz telling me what to like" - that argument is ridiculous. The leading users of MP3 are garage bands who couldn't score a gig playing a bum's funeral.
In other words, its still up for grabs. Whether DVD Audio will win out is the bigger issue.
What is important is what you said in the last sentence.
Currently the KDE/GNOME split is nearly 50/50.
Nothing could be more damaging to creating a pervasive UI for linux.
Until people simply let the debates rest and choose one, they can forget their UI dreams.
Match the tool to the user, and/or to the task at hand.
If you are a novice, doing simple things, use a Mac.
If you are an expert, doing complicated things, use Unix.
This simple notion has escaped most users here.
Reading this thread, I must conlude that Slashdot readers are really lacking a clue when it comes to "ease-of-use" in computing for consumers. If you insist (like me) that linux is not for consumers, then you should stop reading - this rant is in response to users who think Linux can be the next Mac by simply using GNOME.
/etc?
To understand what "ease of use" means for true consumer appliances, look at the VCR. Most people still can't manage the programming of even the most simplest units. How on earth do you expect them to understand a computer that may require them to edit files in
when looking at the future of computing devices for consumers, you should consider the Mac to be too complicated. The model you are aiming for is the Palm Pilot. This is the type of computer that will bring computing to the masses. Its cheap, its effective, and it accomplishes only a few tasks but does them well. If you really want to, you can expand it to do other things, but most people don't want to.
Listening to this thread has really been humorous for me. Most contributors seem to believe that redhat linux with gnome is going to pass the "mom test". Only if your mother is esther dyson.
Most contributors here are very computer literate. Some are capable of writing complex apps. These are not the people you go to in order to understand ease of use. Power users assume too much of novices. Most people out there in the world can't even wrap their heads around the notion of logging in.
I wish Corel luck, and I hope they get some Windows users - these people are already used to dealing with complicated systems that break, so they will certainly enjoy a complicated system that is much much harder to break. Mac users will never be linux converts, unless they were already versed in unix.
Going after consumers is far too lofty. Palm Computing has the best shot of anyone right now of building a computer that a billion people can use.
WordPerfect "ruled the roost" because it was the first real word processor. GUI products destroyed it when they came along. Where is WordPerfect corp now? Part of an even lamer corporation, Corel!
I don't use a Mac - I use FreeBSD.
Nonetheless, I don't expect Mac-like levels of integration and ease-of-use.
I prefer power and flexibility. There is a pure trade-off.
Linux/FreeBSD has power and flexibility, and that is how most users like it. Mac has inflexbility but ease of use. That is how Mac users like it.
Trying to make Linux into a Mac is like trying to make a screwdriver into a hammer. Let the screw drive screw, let the hammer bang. Screwdriver users and hammer users everywhere will be happier when their products excel in their given areas of strength, which for linux is serving.
The Mac doesn't make a good server, so conversely I think Apple is silly to pursue this server thrust with OSX. Macs will never make it on server racks.
A secretary that is going to be spending the next 5-40 years using a word processor can stand to waste a little time learning it.
This is the attitude that has consigned unix to the server shelf for 20 years.
Thanks god the inventors of the phone had more foresight.
You proved my point exactly - your example of ease-of-use is KDE, which is "layered on as an afterthought" just as I explained.
You haven't understood a thing I've said. Ease of use requires integration. Integration includes hardware, software, and apps. ALL apps. Linux does not have this. NeXT did, and the Mac does (as does the Palm Pilot). What can't you understand?
Like the Mac, NeXT was designed from the ground-up to support this ease-of-use. It was a design factor from day one.
The same cannot be said for linux. It must be layered on as an afterthought. This type of design only works well for Elightenment themes. For true ease of use, you need to have a plan before any hardware or software hits the shelves.
My point still stands.
It takes everyone out there developing to agree on stringent guidelines for applications.
It takes hardware interfaces that are not designed for tinkering, but designed to auto-detect.
It takes getting EVERY app to use one UI, and support it pervasively.
Sorry, that just doesn't happen in a distributed open-source model.
Open source software is not driven by the market, it is driven by what the programmers want to program. Looking at linux, *BSD, etc., this historically has not covered any of the issues that Apple takes care of for users. You need a dictator.
nuff said.
If it was a matter of the free availability,why
did they choose it over Linux?
FreeBSD is just as "free" in terms of price, just as easy to download, and arguably freer in terms of license.
Perhaps it was the superior performance?
There was a link on Gartner Group's site (now removed) that described FreeBSD's superior web serving performance.
Its called the Mac, and it will always be easier to use than linux.
There does not exist an alternate reality where linux is easier to use than the Mac. The entire philosophy of the Mac is that hardware, OS, interface, and apps act in a way that is easy to use, even if that sacrifices other qualities.
Trying to match this level of user-friendliness on linux is a waste of time because it will never happen. Sorry for the downer.
The only question I have is. Who is more suited to battle MS...Corel, or Red Hat?
Neither. You need to be 10% pure evil to beat them.
Ignore or break the rules until someone makes you stop. That is the way of business. Everything else is charity.
Ha!
Emacs. Ever hear of "major modes"?
To really do a consumer version of Linux, there are a few issues that simply need to be addressed:
/etc exists nor do they want to. You have to develop tools that mask this from the user and focus on accomplishing tasks.
1. X Configuration - there is nothing "consumer" about current X configuration tools. Even some of the commercial tools could use some work. X configuration would hopefully be worked into the basic Linux configuration.
2. System configuration tools that are more task-based. Most consumers think in terms of a task they want to perform, not a particular tool they want to use. Consumers are not going to know that
3. Even more mind-numbingly simple defaults. If you wish to cusotmize nothing, you should still be given a workable system. RedHat approaches this, but still needs work.
4. Simpler methods for dealing with devices. Floppies, Zips, Sound Cards, etc. Plug and Play is probably too much to hope for, but you have to aim for it.
5. More real apps. WordPerfect porting would help, and a v 5 browser.
In the face of all of this, I am still smarting from Corel's last attempt to "kill" Microsoft, which was Java based and a complete laugh.
Just remember this when Transmeta actually comes to market.
Intel does not produce the fastest, smallest, lowest-power-consumption or coolest (thermally) chip on the market.
Outperforming Intel is not going to work - others are already doing that with only middling results. To beat Intel, you have to match their performance for less than half of their price. AMD matches the performance but doesn't offer enough cost savings to deliver the TKO punch.
Users want very fast and very cheap. Unless Transmeta addresses this, their impact will be negligable.
If you want to really test a browser, see how fast it renders a schwab page or a my yahoo page or an ebay page or any other page that people actually use.
This is a common flaw in useability testing - demonstrate your strengths on corner cases. And yes, CSS is a corner case - no popular sites use it or are likely to use it.
At any U.S. school you'll find a Gates/Rockefeller/Carnegie Hall etc.
You're either in one dead captialists' mausoleum or anothers.
Most search engines place ads based on the search term you used. This really isn't that much different - its only seen as legit as the ad is put at the top as a banner, where most people expect it.
Let the market decide. If people don't like this type of tool, there are numerous excellent search engines they can use instead.
No one seems to object at the yellow pages, which offer up ads for every search query!
Wow, fascinating meme. Really.
In case, it wasn't clear, I'm being sarcastic. This is the time-honored practice of old coots the world over - to bemoan the fact that the icons of their lives are forgotten by most everyone they meet.
Yes we age, our favorite shows go off the air, our favorite appliances rust, our bellies/boobs sag, etc.
So what of it? Live for today. Nostalgic sentimentality exists for those who have otherwise no reason to wake up.
Reducing demand is the only way to go.
Unfortunately, there does not seem to be a place for the reduction of demand in our modern economics. The growth of our economy seems hinged on getting more soccer moms to buy more chevy suburbans (4wd model, natch) and more raymond weil watches.
Nerds are part of the problem. They have voracious appetites for toys.