On 02/11/10 14:14, Natalie Hooper wrote: > @Sean - I've been using Linux since 2005, though I didn't use it at all in > 2008/early 2009. As stated before, these things don't stop ME from using > Linux/Ubuntu/whatever app I use, but from my experience, they stop new users > from using Linux/Ubuntu.
Well, over the time I have been using Linux I have seen a steady increase in the number of people using it, and not just techy types, so the perceived complexity of Linux is not a barrier to everyone. My point is that we are moving in the right direction, albeit too slow for some. > I'm not sure where you understand that I wanted to impose my views on how to > make it user-friendly - the reason I posted this is to get a whole range of > views, not to push my views. Also, it was inspired by an existing article - > in fact, about half of the things on my list are in the original article > too. It's a feeling I get, and one that I am struggling to articulate as I reply. Perhaps if we take one statement: Users shouldn’t have to use the command line, only developers/tinkerers should. Make everything available via the GUI, including the documentation. As I have already mentioned, for the most part users don't have to interact with the command line, if they have chosen their distribution well. That being the case, why does this need to change? Here's another: I don’t see the point of two different heavy GUI desktops (KDE and Gnome). I see the point of desktops lighter on resources for niche uses but not two mainstream GUI desktops. Unite and you will be able to offer an even stronger mainstream GUI desktop. Okay, so you don't see the point but others do. Pick your preferred desktop and stick with it. Your argument could be said to apply equally to the lighter choices too, and as such is inconsistent. The fact is we have many choices and you get to pick the one you like. There are even distros that make it easy for you: Ubuntu Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Lubuntu, etc. If you see this as a barrier to people using Linux then the inference is that there should be markedly less choice, which is not a good thing, in my opinion. I'd also go back to my point that some of the issues you point out are not Linux issues, but software and distribution issues. > As a community, Linux is both exciting and horribly frustrating - technical > people don't always make for good communicators, devs quite often get > offended if somebody suggests a different solution to a problem, many geeks > are prone to patronising those they think of as ignorant, and in my opinion, > Linux is suffering from this. For me, Linux users should also teach other > computer users about the benefits of open source development and how a PC > doesn't need Windows to run, but quite often, the feedback is "if you don't > know how to do this in Linux, then you understand nothing about it and you > should go back to Windows". Not helpful at all in the context of the open > source vs closed source dev public debate. Well, I was not especially technical when I arrived at Linux (and many would say that's still the case!), but I quickly realised that to interface with technical people who are giving up their time and expertise to assist me I had to learn how to phrase my questions in such a way as to help them help me, and also to grow a thicker skin. Breaking this down further, I think it is fair to say that with any suitably technical subject matter you have to be prepared to meet the expert half-way, or alternatively be prepared to acquire the knowledge yourself, or pay for someone to do it the way you like it done. > Yes, Linux complexity is great and I don't suggest to dumb it down. Most of > the changes I would like to see are to do with presentation, not how Linux > works deep down. Some changes also require devs/foundations to work > together. None of this should be imposed by an outside force, it has got to > come from the parties involved obviously. As I said before, I think we are seeing progress in that regard. However, there will always be individuals who want to stamp their name on something and do it their way, and as such slow progress and the odd hiccup is something we as a community have to tolerate along the way. > As stated before, I don't have a problem with using Linux, I have overcome > whatever issues I have with it but this list was written with the mainstream > user in mind. The list is based on my own experience, watching those around > me trying to use Ubuntu on my desktops and netbook. Sometimes, when a new > user points something out, you just have to admit the way Linux presents > itself isn't the best way (for example, the names of apps in Ubuntu software > centre, which in itself is a great idea by the way). Other times, you can > explain why it works like this but when a user says "I don't really need to > know all that" and you know that the distro you are using is meant to be > user-friendly (it's not like I'm using Gentoo!), then again you have to > admit that even though there is a reason why something is done a certain > way, it might be useful to show fewer options, and allow for a way to show > more options (for example, the bootloader). Well, maybe, but I think you lack the perspective of someone who has seen massive improvements over the years, and sees continued work in that regard. Think software centre is a pain? Try installing from tarballs or good old rpm-hell! Give it time and these things will improve, and I guess that goes some way to explaining my stance: Linux is a massive achievement on many levels and the glass is far from half-empty. Sean -- music, film, comics, books, rants and drivel: www.funkygibbins.me.uk -- Next meeting: Crown Hotel, Blandford Forum, Tuesday 2010-11-02 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
