I suppose you can define common workstation computers as general purpose machines, but since today's cars, light trucks, and SUVs (collectively known as Light Duty Vehicles) can all contain most common workstations (just add an inverter and pay attention to laws regarding driver distractions), while no common workstations contain LDVs (set theory alert!), one could argue that LDSs are a more general class of objects than small general purpose computers.
Nit picking aside, we use LDVs for getting from here to there in the civilized parts of the world and even the uncivilized parts if the vehicle has off-road capability. Once you start getting into specialized uses, the operation of LDVs can become complex quite rapidly. Ditto for workstations. The thing that annoys me about Linux (and recent versions of Winblows) is that one can't install, upgrade, repair, or optimize the OS correctly without knowing a shitload about computers. It also is fair to say that once can't install, upgrade, repair, or tune the drive train on an LDV without knowing a shitload about automotive technology. So why am I griping?!?
Computer tech is fairly able to pull itself up by its bootstraps as it matures. Automotive technology tends not to. Once can use the current generation of computer tech to make the next generation faster, cheaper, more reliable, more versatile, more effective and easier to use. In fact, it is fairly safe to say that one must use computers to develop newer, better computers. That is not true of LDVs (unless you claim that LDVs allow automotive workers, designers and engineers to get themselves and small items to the workplace...but that is a trivial case).
So where am I going with this? Well, how come nearly all Linux geeks seem to avoid the obvious when it comes to making their favorite OS more appealing to the masses? The sort of general purpose tasks most people use and maintain computers for are really fairly standardized, conceptually and even functionally. The first major problem for most multi-platform users is terminology. Way back before Linux was even a dream, one could get Unix shells that emulated DOS, the OS that the first significant generation of microcomputer users got to know "by heart". One of the reasons Macs never really comprised more than a tiny segment of the microcomputer market is that they worked differently from a user perspective. People who really got to know and like Macs rarely wanted to use PCs and vice versa. The problem for Apple is that there is nothing inherently special about a Mac that can't be done on more standard PCs. Guess what? There is little that most folks do on Linux boxes that can't be done on a Windows system.
I really want to see Microsoft blown out of the OS, office software, and Web browser marketplaces. That won't happen until one or more competitors assimilate the parts of the Windows interface that have become a standard and make it better. So far, Linux tends to be more powerful, but far less intuitive, less popular, less versatile, and more difficult for the typical user to work with. A big part of that is terminology. WTF is KDE? Gnome? A kernel? A distro?
Linux geeks have set themselves up as being elite because they know Linux. Feeling superior seems to be a major part of life for many of them. The problem is that most people do not want to become computer experts and expect their computers to do most of the work as far as being easy to use and maintain. Like it or not, MS Windows, Office, and (to a lesser extent) IE, have become what the majority of computer users expect and want to see...but they are fickle and almost certainly don't give a damn about things having the MS logo on them, as long as those things provide the familiar look and feel and can be discussed using the standard terminology. Just as Apple took some great ideas from Xerox ARC and ran with them, only to get stomped by Microsoft in turn, so can the Linux community assimilate the part of the computing experience that users like and expect
The real problem with Linux, IMNSHO, is that while it is certainly technically feasible to make it easy for most users install the OS itself as well as major apps and utilities, that is not the case in the real world. Wintel systems are bad enough as far as ease of setup and use go, but Linux is not nearly as mature a technology, although it is an improvement over Unix.
People want to do useful things with computers and networks. Most of them have no interest in being geeks. Look at how they buy and use cars. Many people who are serious consumers of automotive technology and often are also driving enthusiasts really don't give a flying fuck why their spiffy vehicles do what they do. They just want to get behind the wheel and go!
Admittedly, one need only watch traffic on busy roads to realize how woefully ignorant most people are of cars and driving. But think about this: there is the now classic analogy of what today's cars would be like if automotive tech had progressed as fast as computer tech (e.g., incredibly fast, cheap to own and operate, and reliable); yet I can get behind the wheel of almost any car in the U.S. (or England) and drive it reasonably well. I don't feel too lost, even when driving cars with everything on the wrong side (Brit style) or when I encounter an different transmission or gear pattern than the ones I know and prefer.
The thing is, one needs to know very little about how cars function internally in order to make effective use of them. That is not true of computers and especially not of any Linux systems I am aware of.
Linux already allows for far more powerful and functional systems than Windows or MacOS systems ever have, but the extra utility is not accessible and therefor not useful/meaningful to the typical consumer. Gets what? Typical consumers are the folks who buy things in mass quantities and thereby determine which products/technologies will be most successful.
The biggest Linux Annoyance for most geeks is that they have to waste so much time fiddling with and explaining the guts of it. If/when Linux becomes a mature technology, it will be as intuitive and easy to operate as the more popular cell phones and will "network" as seamlessly. One will Just Use It! (apologies to Nike)
Slashdot Mirror
I suppose you can define common workstation computers as general purpose machines, but since today's cars, light trucks, and SUVs (collectively known as Light Duty Vehicles) can all contain most common workstations (just add an inverter and pay attention to laws regarding driver distractions), while no common workstations contain LDVs (set theory alert!), one could argue that LDSs are a more general class of objects than small general purpose computers.
Nit picking aside, we use LDVs for getting from here to there in the civilized parts of the world and even the uncivilized parts if the vehicle has off-road capability. Once you start getting into specialized uses, the operation of LDVs can become complex quite rapidly. Ditto for workstations. The thing that annoys me about Linux (and recent versions of Winblows) is that one can't install, upgrade, repair, or optimize the OS correctly without knowing a shitload about computers. It also is fair to say that once can't install, upgrade, repair, or tune the drive train on an LDV without knowing a shitload about automotive technology. So why am I griping?!?
Computer tech is fairly able to pull itself up by its bootstraps as it matures. Automotive technology tends not to. Once can use the current generation of computer tech to make the next generation faster, cheaper, more reliable, more versatile, more effective and easier to use. In fact, it is fairly safe to say that one must use computers to develop newer, better computers. That is not true of LDVs (unless you claim that LDVs allow automotive workers, designers and engineers to get themselves and small items to the workplace...but that is a trivial case).
So where am I going with this? Well, how come nearly all Linux geeks seem to avoid the obvious when it comes to making their favorite OS more appealing to the masses? The sort of general purpose tasks most people use and maintain computers for are really fairly standardized, conceptually and even functionally. The first major problem for most multi-platform users is terminology. Way back before Linux was even a dream, one could get Unix shells that emulated DOS, the OS that the first significant generation of microcomputer users got to know "by heart". One of the reasons Macs never really comprised more than a tiny segment of the microcomputer market is that they worked differently from a user perspective. People who really got to know and like Macs rarely wanted to use PCs and vice versa. The problem for Apple is that there is nothing inherently special about a Mac that can't be done on more standard PCs. Guess what? There is little that most folks do on Linux boxes that can't be done on a Windows system.
I really want to see Microsoft blown out of the OS, office software, and Web browser marketplaces. That won't happen until one or more competitors assimilate the parts of the Windows interface that have become a standard and make it better. So far, Linux tends to be more powerful, but far less intuitive, less popular, less versatile, and more difficult for the typical user to work with. A big part of that is terminology. WTF is KDE? Gnome? A kernel? A distro?
Linux geeks have set themselves up as being elite because they know Linux. Feeling superior seems to be a major part of life for many of them. The problem is that most people do not want to become computer experts and expect their computers to do most of the work as far as being easy to use and maintain. Like it or not, MS Windows, Office, and (to a lesser extent) IE, have become what the majority of computer users expect and want to see...but they are fickle and almost certainly don't give a damn about things having the MS logo on them, as long as those things provide the familiar look and feel and can be discussed using the standard terminology. Just as Apple took some great ideas from Xerox ARC and ran with them, only to get stomped by Microsoft in turn, so can the Linux community assimilate the part of the computing experience that users like and expect
The real problem with Linux, IMNSHO, is that while it is certainly technically feasible to make it easy for most users install the OS itself as well as major apps and utilities, that is not the case in the real world. Wintel systems are bad enough as far as ease of setup and use go, but Linux is not nearly as mature a technology, although it is an improvement over Unix.
People want to do useful things with computers and networks. Most of them have no interest in being geeks. Look at how they buy and use cars. Many people who are serious consumers of automotive technology and often are also driving enthusiasts really don't give a flying fuck why their spiffy vehicles do what they do. They just want to get behind the wheel and go!
Admittedly, one need only watch traffic on busy roads to realize how woefully ignorant most people are of cars and driving. But think about this: there is the now classic analogy of what today's cars would be like if automotive tech had progressed as fast as computer tech (e.g., incredibly fast, cheap to own and operate, and reliable); yet I can get behind the wheel of almost any car in the U.S. (or England) and drive it reasonably well. I don't feel too lost, even when driving cars with everything on the wrong side (Brit style) or when I encounter an different transmission or gear pattern than the ones I know and prefer.
The thing is, one needs to know very little about how cars function internally in order to make effective use of them. That is not true of computers and especially not of any Linux systems I am aware of.
Linux already allows for far more powerful and functional systems than Windows or MacOS systems ever have, but the extra utility is not accessible and therefor not useful/meaningful to the typical consumer. Gets what? Typical consumers are the folks who buy things in mass quantities and thereby determine which products/technologies will be most successful.
The biggest Linux Annoyance for most geeks is that they have to waste so much time fiddling with and explaining the guts of it. If/when Linux becomes a mature technology, it will be as intuitive and easy to operate as the more popular cell phones and will "network" as seamlessly. One will Just Use It! (apologies to Nike)