<RANT&RAVE>
There are varying degrees, and even types, of Linux elitism. I, for example,
believe that while Windos users are dumb, many can be slowly "converted" to
the cause. Of course, there will be those who will remain ignorant for quite
some time, and I'm sure that as Linux programmes develop they will cater more
and more for these people. For those of us who are not stupid, there will be
apps for us too. For example, people who don't like the (over-) simplicity of
KDE can easily use something more spartan like BlackBox. It is this dynamism
that keeps Linux competitive in so many different markets. Want an 8-way
system with 64GB of RAM, with lots of eye candy and features? Run KDE with
Enlightenment as a window manager. Run OpenOffice and The Gimp as
productivity apps. Want an OS and software for a small PDA? Compile your own
tiny kernel containing only what you need. Use something like GTK-embedded or
QT-embedded for graphics. Run cut-down versions of already-existing desktop
apps, like Konqueror-embedded and a small AbiWord. This is an example of how
development in one sector of the market can help development in other
sectors, something quite unique to Linux (M$ WinCE is a very poor attempt at
doing the same thing). Linux programmes may not be as refined as their
Windoze or Mac counterparts, but they are very quickly becoming so. Look how
rapidly projects like The Gimp, GNOME and KDE have progressed compared to
their closed-source competitors. The speed is blindingly fast. The so-called
"wars" in the Linux world between supporters of programmes like GNOME and
KDE, Vi and Emacs, etc. are only superficial things. Their most important
effect is the increased drive to create better products. GNOME and KDE are
coming closer together - they shall adopt a unified drag-'n-drop standard,
KDE supports GTK themes and the embedding of GTK applets, and GNOME's panel
can take KDE panel applets. These are merely examples; there are plenty more.
The "paradigm shift" that you speak of is happening, but so slowly that it
is barely noticable. A notable example is now Linux-Mandrake is sold in US
Wal-Mart stores. People actually buy these, install them using the
user-friendly installer, configure them using user-friendly graphical tools,
and work on them using user-friendly environments and applications. And this
user-friendliness is getting better all the time. If they have a problem,
they send an e-mail to a list like [EMAIL PROTECTED], and they are
hopefully answered and helped out by one (or several) of us. This scenario is
becoming increasingly common. It is this grass-roots support that has kept
Linux going for so long, only the base has shifted somewhat. First there were
the real geeks, then the power-users and then those who buy Linux
off-the-shelf at Wal-Mart. Each group has and will continue to have a
considerable amount of input into Linux development, and they all impact each
other. The newbies cannot exist without geeks writing the code that make
Linux usable for them (or even exist for that matter), and the power users
testing that code and making suggestions. The geeks would have little reason
to develop the things they do without a user base. Real geeks use a console,
not KDE! Do you think the average programmer uses *all* of the features of
The Gimp? Of course not; much of the feature set has been coveted by
power-users like graphics professionals (some of whom are programmers too).
This is the new paradigm. Instead of just a monolithic closed-source company
and a bunch of clueless users, we have a whole open-source society consisting
of people from all walks of life.
</RANT&RAVE>
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 01:45, Mark Johnson wrote:
> My impression is that the Linux community in general cannot decide whether
> linux should be seen as a viable desktop alternative to Windows and MAC, or
> a viable backend alternative to Solaris, or simply as a hobbyist OS. (To
> me the former is very debatable, the laters are more realistic.)
>
> I think that linux will never be a viable desktop for the masses until
> productivity software is as common as it is for Windows (but then, i guess,
> linux programmers would have to contend with the "dumb windows user"
> mentality). I know that a couple of months ago the Linux Journal had a
> multi-media issue that showed how linux could be used for generating music
> and movies, and while interesting, it's not even comparable to the
> multimedia power of the MAC and BeOS. (I can't open any application
> without XMMS "coughing" on me....)
>
> To me it seems that despite all linux advances it is still _just_ an
> inexpensive internet sever (web, mail, news, etc..), and a hobbyist OS for
> developers. I think a lot of the reason why is the elitism that Linux folks
> have and distain for the "dumb windows user." What's needed is a real
> paradigm shift within the community. Yeah, we have token companies like
> Gnome and Eazel that genuinely care and are compassionate about the
> computer food-chain, but this isn't enough. (What's up with this
> in-fighting between KDE and Gnome?)
>
> Then again, maybe the fate of linux is never to become a computer for the
> common user, but rather a development environment for programmers and web
> developers. We seem very divided on this issue.
>
> One last thing, I'm not complaining really, it just that I think there are
> different priorities that drive linux compared to the other OSs.
> Consequently, there are opportunity costs and trade-offs. The thing that
> really bothers me is the elitism.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 9:35 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [newbie] Mandrakesoft CEO defends Linux
>
>
> using the expert mode on the install, my package install was 347.2mb.
> That includes KDE2 with Koffice the network stuuf. Blackbox. Abiword and
> all the other stuff that is needed.
> After adding a bunch of updated and stuff from the unsupported dir it
> whent up to 422.7 mb.
>
> Now mandrake make it so easy to add/remove packages that when I need to
> compile a program from source, I install those packages then and remove
> them when I am finshed.
>
> Mark Hillary
> Registered Linux User 200755
>
> eryl wrote:
> > john rigby wrote:
> >> The 99.99% of people out in the Cyberbog that Linux NEEDS to
> >> reach/convert to save us all from Bill, do not need now, in the
> >> future, ever, ANY Development Tools.
> >
> > I agree. That's been one of the problems I have with linux. When I
> > hand a linux disk to one of my Windows using friends to try, I tell them
> > that the minimum workstation GUI install will take about 1.5 gigabytes.
> > Everyone gives me the "Huh". Why? Because Windoze 98, with office and
> > a bunch of other programs takes about 600 meg. The distros need
> > something like a "Minimal GUI Install" that includes KDE office, One
> > text editor, one file manager, etc. Everything should be available, but
> > face it--for these newbies it's not necessary. Once they find out that
> > they really like using linux, then they have room to experiment. My Mom
> > does not need 5 different terminals or 6 window managers, and she will
> > never have any use for developmental tools.
--
Sridhar Dhanapalan.
Your mouse has moved. Windows must be rebooted to acknowledge this change.
