On 11/10/2013 10:17 AM, thomas aylward wrote:
how does a novice begin with debian? Tom
I think there is some confusion that is introduced when we call a
distribution like Debian an "operating system," which used to be a term used
for the software that interacts with hardware, loads and runs other
software, controls basic resources, etc. Debian is a collection of
thousands of pieces of software, most of which are what used to be called
"applications" and would have been considered separate from the "operating
system" (1). There are good reasons for this, we all know that it makes a
lot of sense to have a common distribution and update system for the OS,
libraries, applications, all of the dependencies worked out and updates
coordinated; and that this is really only possible with free software.
The reason why I bring this up is that when a user tries to switch from a
proprietary OS to a free OS, the switching of the core operating system is
likely nearly invisible to them; but they often are also switching many of
the applications that they use every day, and this is where it becomes such
a difficult transition and a steep learning curve.
But, some (many?) of these free software applications can also run on
proprietary OSs (2). So, my advice to a novice who is using a proprietary
OS and wants to begin with Debian, or any other free OS, is to start by
using free software on their proprietary OS. Don't install an entire
operating system on a virtual machine, don't install a multi-boot system, I
think that without a _very_ motivated user, these efforts are usually
abandoned. A live image is OK just to take a look, but is usually
problematic to use as an ongoing every-day machine.
Instead, try using a free-software web-browser (Firefox & Chromium come to
mind as cross-platform choices). Step by step, try using free alternatives
to your main applications. I don't normally use proprietary OSs, so I don't
know for sure which software that runs on Debian also has portability to
proprietary OSs, but I think that LibreOffice, Thunderbird, Gimp, Pidgin all
have versions for the major proprietary OSs and I'm sure that many others do
as well. In many cases they may be far superior quality to the proprietary
applications that the user is used to. If you're a developer, start using
gcc or clang, and so forth. With each new application that is tried, give
it time to get familiar with it, find the edge cases, get fast at doing your
normal operations, so that when you try the next one, you don't mind the
extra time to figure out its workflow. Switching to booting directly into a
free OS should be the _last_ step, and if the user has already made the
transition so that he or she is already using 90% of the applications that
will be used in the new environment, it will be trivial and there is no need
for virtual machines or live-boot images.
By trying to make the entire transition in one fell swoop, it is _vastly_
more difficult. People need their computers to do real work for them. If
they are only trying to learn a new way to do one piece of the picture at
once, it's tolerable. If every step of the way it's a frustrating
experience due to lack of familiarity, the user will revert back to their
familiar environment in short order, 9 times out of 10, and that will be the
end of the experiment.
-- David
(1): Admittedly there is no perfect criterion to differentiate between OS
and application and I eschew the distinction anyhow [it reminds me of the
artificial distinction between "systems programming" and "applications
programming" which I also don't make -- to be a good programmer, you need
the same skills for both so there's no such thing as an "application
programmer"]. My point here is only that the usage of the term "Operating
System" has become much more expansive and ambiguous over the last several
decades -- although that trend started even earlier, e.g. with Unix's
separation of the shell from the supervisor program (kernel) and the
separation of the system commands ("ls", "ps") from the shell, leading to a
whole blurry spectrum of "system" and "application" programs.
(2): I remember when the entire "GNU system" (as it was called then) ran
essentially exclusively on top of proprietary OS's. You could buy it
mail-order from the FSF on 9-track mag tape and compile it on your
proprietary OS to get much improved versions of the standard Unix utilities
such as cc, tar, make, etc. as well as GNU-only stuff like emacs. I
initially adopted gcc mostly because it was almost the only way on my system
to get ANSI C rather than K&R. So, while I don't do it and always recommend
against it, I also don't let anyone tell me that there's something wrong or
immoral with running free software together with proprietary software --
they may not like to admit it, but they _all_ did it themselves at one time.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52811eb1.6040...@meta-dynamic.com