On Wed, 2004-05-26 at 20:28, Keith Vassallo wrote:
> Philip Serracino Inglott wrote:
>
> >I do not have a problem with admitting that Desktop usability for
> >the average home user is a problem on Linux, or that it lags
> >behind windows. Just as long as it is clear what you mean
> >by Usability and what you mean by the Average Home User.
> >
> >
> Usability
> 1) You spend more time working on a system then configuring it
Granted!
> 2) You can do whatever you want (if you want) without touching a
> command line
Ouch! if you are blind or have a motor disabilty thaen a mouse is
pretty useless!
This is like asking "where is the brake" on a ship.
Windows Icons Mouse and Pointer are just one way to look at things and
in windows I still cannot do whatever I want without touching the
command line. try and set up a laptop you use on different subnets with
different dns and other configuration options on each ... how do you do
it -- trough a shell script!
Besides I think the above to points are a bit mutually exclusive!
> 3) Interfaces are consistent
SURE! i'd love that.
(I assume you are not considering CLIs since there
most interfaces are consistent, but this is besides the point)
> 4) Help files are actually help files, not "about" files.
A VERY BIG OUCH! Yes DOcumentation in Linux is a Very weak point. But
then again it is somthing there is never enough of.
>
> Some developers don't seem to know the difference between technical and
> user documentation
>
> Average Home User:
>
> 1) Someone who's hobby and profession are not computers
> 2) Someone who has to use computers for their hobby/profession
hmmmm my mum uses a computer to comunicate with relatives abroad and
read stuff of general interest online (which she does not need to do,
she could always read a magazine, altough it would be more of a hassle),
and ocassonally type and print somthing.
so she is NOT an avarage home user?
> >Remember NOT ALL users are average home users.
> >
> >A few years back BOV replaced their dos based system with a
> >windows based one. The result was that what a bank clerk could
> >do blindfolded in a few (several actually) keystroke now requires the
> >bank clerk to move his/her right hand from numpad to mouse and back
> >around 10 times for each transaction. If what was needed was a Graphical
> >display to fit more info and a multitasking system to allow different
> >applications, it could have been the case that Linux would have been
> >more adequate.
> >
> >
> The old system was definately faster then the new system - and hence,
> more usable - but ONLY to bank employees who had been using it for ages.
> I'm sure that if a new bank employee who had never used the system had
> to choose between the GUI and CDL versions, the GUI would definately be
> chosen.
Why? are you sure? even if he would be told that he would need more time
in training and would be slower at his job?
> Likewise, in Linux usability we shouldn't target hardcore UNIX and Linux
> users... They don't need usability, they've adapted themselves to the
> quirks of the system. However, you can't expect a novice user, who isn't
> even interested in computers, to spend time adapting themselves to all
> these quirks.
If someone is not interested in the least in computers why should they
use it? If someone is not interested in travelling should they have a
car, or learn how to drive?
This is like saying that if I am not interested in carpentry
I still should be able to use a saw to cut some wood without ever
learning how to do it. Sure I can get the saw and hack away senselessly
at the wood, but is it not more sensible to spend time learning the
quirks of the system. i.e. how to hold a saw properly, how to use my
thumb as a guide without slicing it off etc ....
Do not think this is far-fetched I once saw a boat-builder who could not
use a marine VHF radio. He insisted on using it like a telephone, never
pressing the PTT. It is ridiculous to expect ALL technology to be
trivial to use without training, especially powerful technology like
computers and cars!
> Edward Debono always says this about his books on lateral thinking "I
> write for people with down syndrome"
And the results are there for us to see :-)!!
> >My objection is that a sentence like this:
> >
> >
> >>>Their results just confirm the obvious: in certain areas, like
> >>>storage handling and uptime reliability, Linux wins. On usability and
> >>>ease of installation, Windows wins.
> >>>
> >>>
> >is merly confusing.
> >
> >
> I don't find it confusing at all. I find that it's the truth
The TRUTH ... now your talking like you were GOD aka RMS.
> >Then again I am the kind of person who believes that if a person does
> >not at least know in theory how a car works, that person shouldn't drive
> >:-)
> >
> >
> To "Drive" a computer you need the "European Computer DRIVING license"
> (ECDL). As far as I know, nowhere in the sylabbus does it teach
> "compiling a kernel", "using gcc" or "bash scripting for dummies"
>
> Keith
The ECDL syllabus is based on MS products AFAIK ... 'nuff said!.
--
Philip Serracino Inglott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.inkwina.net/
--
Paul's Law: You can't fall off the floor.
