On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 07:35 +1100, john gibbons wrote: > Thank you for the questions that are meant to help. However, I am > inclined to think that the need to ask the questions at all helps me > make my point.
I don't entirely disagree with this however... > One simple interface that asks simple questions and > automatically installs is a real need for Linux if it is ever going to > be upon PCs for the common mob which includes me. Computers are general, Linux is even more general and complete than legacy systems (Microsoft) out of the box therefore obviously more complex. > For as long as > different distros go about a very common communication task in often > very different ways they delay widespread acceptance of Linux by home > and small business users. The distros may be Ferraris, Rolls Royces or > outback rustbuckets underneath, but they must be able to accomodate the > day-to-day travel needs of the ordinary drivers who can get into them > and use the manual or automatic gearbox to get to their destination. I think that each of these have their purpose. The interesting thing is technically each are totally different however the brake peddle is always in the same place. The blinker stalk tends to shift from one side of the steering wheel to another without dramatically changing functionality though. Basically there is a consistency about all these things. I can use KDE, Gnome or even legacy Windows without any difficulty. Yes the metaphorical blinker stalk is on the wrong side sometimes but overall it works the same. > Other drivers and engineers can break the speed records, design better > engines, or whatever, if they have the skills. On the surface, at the > interface, they must be understandable and useable for the most common > tasks by ordinary folk. If not, they will forever be brilliant feats of > engineering suitable for a limited range of users. This is actually harder than you might think. I have studied this in University and it is a complex job that requires resources. Guess what these are resources that OpenSource does not have. > Nothing new about that comment, I guess. > > Different distros will use KDE and/or GNOME and everyday users will > adapt and be able to use whichever distro they started with or switch > between them and get common tasks done. That is all the great majority > want. So why not have a simple common interface for downloading and > installing, which is a very common task? Behind the interface the really > great distros can continue to do it more elegantly and those who > appreciate and understand the elegance and the advantages it offers will > provide the appreciation and the use. This is happening in practice. Although the convergence of technology is taking time. There is I believe a move towards apt technologies, there is a port of apt- for rpm systems and the real benefits of apt is the stringent mapping of prereqs. This is being worked on and I believe that that stringency is being mapped into RPM. In my opinion, and is it strictly my opinion, I believe that every distribution will be using the Debian packaging system shortly. They will have their own special versions of them with typical Open Source diversity. > So, I think that the basic question is not "What is it I don't > understand?", even though that is meant to be of help, but, "What is not > being quite obvious?". Everything is obvious to me. This obviously is not good enough. We could also talk about being obvious to Luke who gave an excellent talk on usability for the blind at last months meeting. People are diverse. What one finds easy others find hard. How does Open Source compensate for not having a usability lab. Well the whole world is a usability lab. Take for example the new icon set for OpenOffice.org this was developed for the Ximian (Novell) desktop and reach huge acclaim and is now being integrated into the mainstream release. A fork of the original was taken, the old version died a natural death and the new method grows and flourishes. The diversity of Open Source is a huge problem to be sure and a cost to users, it is also it's strength. If I mention webserver what do you immediately think about, apache. There are at least 6 other available in Debian archives. BOA is an excellent solution for a specific use for static webpages, Open Source is not one size fits all. Do not expect that what you see as a problem every one else will. A text console is a strength for the blind but perceived a weak solution for a sighted person, different strokes. I hope that this helps, Ken Foskey OpenOffice.org developer -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
