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.
Just another 2 cents from a newbie; I use Linux because IT WORKS! The first PC
I ever used was plain Vanilla DOS. Back then we carved our own windows and
climbed in and out of them the hard way, with a little help from our friends.
The Linux community seems to have that same spirit. I have been using Windows
for a few years, but have never liked it. LM was the answer to my problem. I
think that LM could be an alternative to Windows, not by making it more "user
friendly," but by getting more productivity software to run efficiently on it,
without having to be a programmer to install it. That doesn't mean to make it
"for idiots." Can't we find a happy medium? User friendly, to me just means
"limited." I would like to see LM become less like MS, not more! LM 7.2 was a
big dissapointment to me. I went back to 7.1, which is the best OS I have ever
used. I hope that the next distribution will have all the bugs out of it,
because 7.2 would have been really nice, if I could get it to run properly. As
it stands, it was just a tease.
ShalomOut
Chal
