Very well said, I will vote for you for vice-President next go around,
sorry already committed to someone
else on the list for prez. OK, I'll be quiet again.
James Mellema wrote:
> Adrian Smith wrote:
>
>>>>> Sridhar Dhanapalan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 6:12:43 AM 1/15/01 >>>
>>>>
>> I personally don't like this solution, but it's yet another way for Linux
>> (and Mandrake) to gain market share (at the expense of becoming more like
>> M$). I believe that if anyone is stupid enough not to understand the already
>> very user-friendly Mandrake Drakx, then they shouldn't be using Linux at all.
>> What do everyone else here think?
>
>
> Adrian,
>
> For egotistical reasons I am tempted to agree with you, but I think in
> the real world that's a poor way to look at the problems here. Everyone
> had to learn somehow, but just because you and I learned in the school
> of hard knocks doesn't mean everyone has to. There is no reason to need
> an advanced degree in comp sci to use a computer. If you want the
> computer to be a tool it has to be usable by those that need it. If you
> want it to be an ego trip for the cognoscenti then what you say is true.
>
> The Drake tools are very good and easy to use for those of us with more
> than a smattering of technical knowledge. But without better
> documentation they are a huge barrier for the average user. Some of the
> problems I see with Mandrake are trying to use the server install
> instead of workstation, (I wiped out 3 gigs of webpages, graphics files,
> and programs on ide2) probably 20 installs before I figured out a
> reasonable partitioning scheme, multiple development programs an
> libraries which just take space and are not usable for most users,
> multiple programs which are extraneous for the majority of users (i.e.
> text editors, mail programs, web tools, system monitors, and sound/video
> multimedia programs).
>
> I would like to see a documentation link on the splash screen as you
> open the installation program. Ideally it could be in pdf format and
> open a pdf client that would give simple steps to the installation
> process. This could also define terms and give examples of what is
> necessary for a minimum install, as well as provide warnings about
> terminal (as in kill your computer) problems. Some examples could be:
> 1) install linux prior to WIN2K,
> 2) do not use 'server' installation on a dual boot computer, (or one
> with data you would like to keep),
> 3) known unreconcilable hardware problems (windmodems, incompatible
> peripherals)
> 4) The steps necessary to create a dual boot machine.
>
> I did a portion of my Master's work on usability problems. Much of it
> based on my long, difficult, and destructive attempts at learning linux.
> Fortunately I have several computers and don't have to take the chance
> at destroying my workstation to experiment, most of the computing
> population doesn't have that advantage. Linux isn't easy but it will
> have to become easier if it is to become a standard in the business
> community, and amongst the computing public. Most people don't want to
> experiment, they would like to use their computer to surf the web, write
> the odd letter, track their checkbook, and keep records. There is no
> reason to make things difficult (or impossible) for Joe User. The past
> 20 years is littered with good ideas, hardware and software that didn't
> take that unnecessary difficulty into account
--
Dennis Myers Registered Linux user #180843
