On 22/11/2007, Qingye Jiang (John) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When we are moving to opensource, I think we are really moving to where > the (potential) users are, and deliver what the users would expect to > see and use. When I typed the command "pkg status -a" and there came a > long list of stuff that I did not understand unless I want to dig deep > into the definition of FMRI for packages. A large number of potential > users might just give up at that point.
There is no usability study to back these claims at this point. I also do not understand how "SUNW" in front of a package name would keep you from "understanding" the output pkg status -a. > Again, can we think about the word 'user friendly', rather than the Sun > guildlines that were written in the grandma age? Isn't it because we > lost market share miserably in the past that we want to make something > different? Your definition of user friendly and mine do not necessarily match. For example, what is user friendly to existing Sun customers, and what is user friendly to those that have never been a Sun customer? Meeting the needs of both is a necessity. As far as "guidelines...written in the grandma age"; remember that many of these guidelines were established by fellow peers. They were not invented without thought, debate, and careful deliberation. Sun has been commercially producing software and providing industry-recognised support for years. To dismiss their experience out-of-hand simply because it does not seem "modern" would be a great loss. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list indiana-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
