On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 18:35:32 -0800 Andy Streich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 06 January 2006 02:41 pm, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 20:46:18 +0000 > > > > Clive Menzies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On (06/01/06 12:18), Andy Streich wrote: > > > > I really appreciate this topic and am delighted to see experienced > > > > Debian users responding positively to the "help, help" emails. > > > > Andrew's question is the critical one: is Debian for newbies or not? > > > > From my own experience over the last couple of years I'd say it is not > > > > -- unless the newbie has strong technical skills and lots and lots of > > > > time to read manuals and this email list and getting the system > > > > up-and-running quickly is not critical. Without a prior Unix/Linux > > > > background or the dedicated help of a local expert, you have to > > > > approach Debian at the very least as a time consuming, very technical > > > > hobby. > > > > > > I disagree about strong technical skills but you need some time and > > > motivation to learn. The 'new' sarge installer it is a lot easier > > > than installing woody. > > > > Clive & Andy, > > > > I agree with Andy, that it is at least time consuming, and for a total > > linux newbie, would be daunting if not impossible. I agree that Debian CAN > > be newb-friendly, but I don't think it necessarily needs to be. I think the > > derivative distros cover that pretty well. I look at them as > > gateway-distros, once you're hooked... > > [snip] > > Again, Andrew, you've put your finger on it. If the Debian-Way is to serve > advanced users, at least it's a clear, definitive approach. I'd only ask > that it be clearly labeled as such in the What Is Debian and Getting Started > sections of the www.debian.org home page. > > But, as you say, Debian can be newbie-friendly. So why not make it so? I suppose if you look at the derivative distros as down-stream, there should be some flow back upstream. That is, a lot of these problems could be solved by Debian, at the top of the tree (mixing metaphors), looking at what the derivatives are doing and picking and choosing those things that work to re-incorporate back into debian. For example, Knoppix has fantastic hardware detection. Certainly that could be incorporated into the installation process to produce really good and meaningful information to help with the installation. Obviously you don't want that hardware detection around once you're installed (or do you? maybe a way to run that when new hardware is installed to facilitate configuration?) anyway, I know a lot of my problems could have been solved with better detection at install time. Likewise *buntu has some great desktop setup things that would really be helpful for first time users. I know a lot of these things already exist for basic debian, but they aren't in a default install -- things like reporting hardare issues through a nice gui dialog, automatic update checking and so forth. These are things that joe-six-pack users expect in an OS now. Perhaps there needs to be a "general user default" setup for X. Give people the options of course in install to pick what they want, but the default setup would include ALL these things automatically, plus a selection of productivity apps, music etc. all automatically. Does that make sense? Seems to me that if you install right now and get a basic X system working out of the box, that's all you get. people are bound to be frustrated and confused by that. I know, the other OSes (large elephants in rooms) don't come with anything userland-wise, by default, but most boxes come with added packages installed already. damn, I'm way OT. .02 A > > My story: > > I kind of grew up with Unix on a VAX in the 1980s. Then my career led me to > into Windows for a decade before, of all things, bringing me into Sun > Microsystems developing JavaCard in one of only two groups using Windows > boxes in a company dedicated to Solaris. (Drivers for smart cards then were > only available for Windows.) When I finally had the professional and > personal freedom to delve into GNU/Linux the first challenge was to pick a > distro -- from more than 100 possibilities! That is the first problem a > newbie faces and in itself a reason to stick with a Win or Mac box. I chose > Debian for its open source community philosophy and reputation for > robustness, luckily just after the new installer appeared. > > As I installed Debian on a few, very different, machines I thought it was a > wonderful experience -- for me. Because I've been involved in rolling out a > number of commercial products and the user feedback that entails, I couldn't > help but think of the more typical user experience and what a nightmare it > might be. > > As a true believer in FLOSS to me Debian is a sort of a cornerstone of that > approach. The multiplicity of distros is a good thing -- but not in and of > itself -- only if the lessons learned are rolled back into Debian. Having > gone from 100 to 1000 distros by 2010 would not be a win. A win will be > having Debian incorporating the advances made in the distros it has spawned. > > IMO the current situation -- raw newbies should start with Ubuntu, for > example > -- is a temporary holding pattern. Who wants to be told Debian is too > advanced for you, install Ubuntu (again, as an example), use it for a while, > then wipe that out and install Debian when you've learned your way around? > Especially when it's all about factoring software and writing good > installers. It's not about changes in the operating system but in system > configuration. That speaks to installer evolution and system configuration > management rather than distro multiplicity. > > With all that said, how does one discover/influence the roadmap for Debian? > > Andy > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
