Civileme wrote:
Snip
> >
> > The real beauty of a free OS implemented in this way is that once people
> > become proficient and used to the basic operation of the system they can
> > go to any number of websites and download a more sophisticated desktop,
> > application or whatever when they desire. I believe that Linux will not
> > succeed until some steps are taken to limit it's diversity.
> >
> > 'Scuse the rant
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Colin H. Close
>
> "It needs to be simpler, but limiting choice isn't the way to do it," said a
> certain linux CEO. I have to agree from my own feelings.
>
> Having the choices is what linux is all about. For example, most developers
> believe strongly in free software, so strongly that soon you will see
> Netscape disappear from the downloadable distro, and you will not see new
> software added to the downloadables that have license problems. We are
> hoping some free browser will soon be able to provide equal functionality,
> and when it does....
>
> But does that mean you cannot use non-free software with the distro? Not at
> all. You can rpm the NVidia 3D accelerator right off our CD of commercial
> software in the release that's being prepared, because we want you to be free
> to choose, even if you choose non-free software. On the other hand, we
> certainly are not going to promote it and we will continue to solicit your
> support to write to NVidia and ask them to change their policy so we can
> really support the card.
>
> But there is a distro, selling rather poorly, which has a single desktop.
> And there is another, which used to be around, that took the desktop in its
> own direction and did not share back the results, with a resulting "niceness"
> for the user that slammed into a dead end when the desktop was enhanced by
> the desktop makers.
>
> And there is a third distro that has a single desktop which is available. It
> does not have much of a following, and it has problems staying current
> without the resources needed to do so, but it is available in a very small
> size, comparatively speaking, about 150Mb.
>
> We are doing a balancing act between free software and the need to pay
> internet fees and employees and give investors returns on their dollars. We
> see that those who have limited choice, with the exception of a predatory
> company like Microsoft, which filled a gap that does not now exist, just
> haven't done well at all in customer satisfaction and sales. (And Microsoft
> has done well only in sales, I believe. I have never met a happy Microsoft
> customer, and only one system administrator who thought it was great.)
>
> Well, we want to listen to our customers. If you find a few people who want
> a simple distro, simple in terms of pre-chosen software, we can make a couple
> and probably even keep them reasonably updated, as subsets of our main distro.
>
> In the new release, the customer can roll his own. If he wants a KDE
> Desktop, he can have it. If he wants GNOME, he can have it. If he wants to
> change to a different menu structure (mostly for GNOME), he can do that. If
> he wants only a server; it works, though it may install a minimal graphical
> desktop.
>
> But the problem for the customer remains--choices are not made for him. I
> think that "problem" is permanent with this distro. It is part of the
> culture of this effort.
>
> As for simplicity, and examples... That is what mandrakecampus and
> mandrakeexert are supposed to be about. put a www before and a com after,
> and check them out--still in formative stages.
>
> Civileme
Hi Civeleme,
Thanks for your well considered reply I hope the thread hasn't gone
dead (I've been away a week). I must admit that the line between free
software and "open sources" is an important one and I have no hesitancy
in supporting the view of those generous individuals who give their time
and intellectual capacity to provide all of us with intelligent and
diverse software. I must though question the wisdom of removing Netscape
from the next distro is this being done for legal or philosophical
reasons?
I remember seeing the quote and the article from the "certain Linux CEO"
but I don't recall how things were going to be made simpler; however I
do see that Mandrake in the upcoming release have appreciated the need
for a more "customisable" approach which will certainly make things more
efficient for the moderately informed user. It may be that this is where
the answer lies, that is in the install process: I agree that the "roll
your own" approach is sound since it allows the size and functionality
of the OS to be chosen to meet the requirement thus maintaining the
"choice" philosophy but, as you quite rightly point out is that he user
has to make the choices.
As part of my job I have to write operating & maintainence manuals for
health physics equipment and when I do this I have to constantly remind
myself that the people I am addressing may not know as much of the
subject and equipment as I do. I feel that this is an approach that
could perhaps be born in mind when preparing distros.
My first Mandrake installation (7.1) came from a CD given away free with
a well known computer mag in the UK. The magazine carried a "health
warning" that the CD provided contained a complete OS and that it was
not intended for the faint hearted. I considered the install process for
that distro pretty good it certainly got me up and running but a Newbie
would have found it daunting. Imagine if you will being in the algebraic
position of X=?; now that's not an easy one to solve!! or to keep in
context with the thread "grep is a regular expression parser" Newbie
asks "what the hell is a regular expression"?
Perhaps the installation program could provide the user with the means
to be able to make INFORMED choices, this approach would at least give
the Newbie some knowledge of the fuctionality of the software packages
he/she is installing at the outset. Much of this information is already
contained in the RPM's (although sometimes the descriptions are somewhat
abstruse).
One thing is for certain and that is if a Linux distro is to win over
users from the B. Gates contingent the install program must cope with
the dual OS situation flawlessly (particularly with regard to
partioning). I feel Mandrake is well on the way to doing this and on
reflection I think the Linux CEO was right, lets have choice but please
lets make it informed choice, lets have an "insformation" program.
Regards,
Colin H. Close
