On Fri, 26 Nov 1999,Michael R. Batchelor wrote:
| I'm not so sure this a good long term strategy. I agree that using a
| $200 CPU to replace a .50 chip is pretty stupid, but some of the DSP
| based software modems are very robust at call management in the MS
| windows environment.
|
| At the risk of flames, let's think about the discussion that was raging
| through here a few weeks ago about browsers. I made a strong point that
| the browser and email client were crucial for maintaining a desktop
| presence. I'll be willing to stick my neck on the line and make a
| similar statement that the same is true for telephony applications. And
| there are surly others I haven't thought through yet, all of which will
| be "crucial" to the long term success of Mandrake as a desktop.
|
| But how can they all be "the one crucial app" you ask. Well, they're not
| all the "single" crucial application (but I think the browser is
| probably most important user application). The crucial application is
| the whole system. If we think about an automobile for a minute I'll
| explain.
|
| In an automobile the user expects to be able to use the "entire" package
| upon delivery. But no individual piece of the package is suitable to the
| drivers purpose, only the entire package. No automobile salesperson
| would think of trying to get me to settle for only an engine or only a
| transmission or only tires. None of those individual components is
| sufficient to meet my transportation needs. Likewise, no salesperson is
| going to try to convince me to accept a vehicle without an engine or
| without a transmission or without tires. Each of those components is
| necessary for the package to function as intended.
|
| These are the analogous parts for the browser and email client. Like it
| or not, most of the millions of PCs which will be sold this holiday
| season are for people to surf the net and exchange email. Neither is
| sufficient; both are necessary. Period. That's life. Get over it.
|
| Now, lets go back to the automobile. As I'm standing on the lot looking
| at the various items for sale, I notice that some of them have cute
| little map lights and rear window defrosters. I decide I like those
| touches, and I'm swayed by emotion rather than logic. The truth is I
| almost never need the cute little map light and the rear window
| defroster, but I buy then anyway. (OK they're crucial for some drivers,
| but not most.)
|
| The call management functions of a WinModem will be available to about
| 90% of those PCs sold this year, and almost nobody will ever use them.
| I've personally bought 5-6 computers/modems with all that stuff in the
| past few years and never turned any of it on. But I would guess that 10%
| of the people who buy the stuff try to use the call management
| functions, and perhaps 5% of the people who try it actually continue to
| use it. So, in the long run, lets assume that 0.5% of the users actually
| find the call management function useful, and everybody else abandons
| it. So, do we say, "Well, nobody uses it in the long run, so we'll leave
| it out." Or do we acknowledge that, "Despite that fact almost nobody is
| going to use this, it's a major selling point on the front end. So we
| need it, or we'll be shut out."
|
| Now, let's finally consider one more totally unnecessary option
| available on modern automobiles. Back in the 1920's Cadillac developed
| an "electric starter" for their vehicles. At that time it was an extreme
| luxury. These days, however, you cannot buy a production automobile
| without an electric starter. And if we started the "Mandrake Automobile
| Company" making cars without electric starters we'd go out of business
| fast. Even if we made astonishingly beautiful vehicles with map lights
| and rear window defrosters, ordinary people will still flock to the
| "inferior competitors" who have those convenient electric starters
| instead of a crank.
|
| Well, the electric starter is the installer routines. And, while it's
| true that Mandrake may be a far technically superior and elegant choice
| to many of the other Linux distributions, and to that "other" OS, it's a
| bitch for Grandpa to get set up compared to taking an HP Brio with Win98
| preinstalled out of the box from Wal-Mart. If anyone wants to help with
| that aspect, I'd suggest that it's probably the most crucial hurdle to
| overcome. (There is a group named SEUL - Simple End User Linux,
| www.seul.org, but I don't much about them.)
|
| So, I've ranted enough. More OT comments?
|
| MB
Michael,
You have a point, and I agree that there is room for improvement - especially
in the web-related software. However, we as new Linux users must remember that
the Linux community is not a tightly organized one, and that the people who
produce the software we are using (for the most part) are not being paid for
their efforts. As a result, Linux is at best a spare-time developement project,
albeit one (I must assume) of love for the art of programming.
As I consider the Linux community and articles I have read about the history of
Linux, it occours to me that (I have said this before) Linux is sort of like an
accident that had to happen. Linus Torvalds produces the Linux kernel for his
own purposes (school I think), then releases it to the web. Others see it, and
are impressed, so they start building software to support this new soon to be
OS. Soon, there is enough freely available software to assemble distributions.
Now several years later, we see the Linux distributions as an organized effort
(which it is not, and will not likely ever be). One of these distributions is
Linux-Mandrake. The reality is that Mandrakesoft assembles the work of others
- adding their own personal touch - and distributes it as Linux-Mandrake. They
do not charge for the software, as it is not theirs to sell or license. They do
however charge for the CD on which you purchased the distribution. In
adddition, they sell a "power pack" which (if I am not mistaken) contains some
of their own work, and they do sell or license that (the power-pack).
My point here is that Mandrakesoft has no direct control over the people who
produce the software used in the distribution, and can only give us what they
consider to be the best suited packages for their distribution. As a result, if
web related software needs to be produced, then someone is going to have to do
the work of coding it. If there are any programmers reading this, here's a
challenging project for you. I am not a programmer, and so I can not do the job
myself, but if some of you who are programmers get involved, perhaps with the
Gozilla project, or start your own project, I as a still new Linux user will be
in your debt.
For me the bottom line is that the various Linux distributions are "freely
available" software, and as such should be considered a gift. We did not have
to pay for the software, even if we paid for the CD.
BTW, I'm the fellow who felt that M$ did a fine job producing their installer,
and was shown the error of my assesment in another thread, so take this as my
personal opinion, and do with it as you will. I've just been seeing a lot of
posts lately which sounded more like complaints than requests for help, and I
wanted to tell the folks at Mandrakesoft that their efforts are in deed
appreciated.
--
Ernie ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
The measure of a man is in his honor ...
