On 23 March 2012 21:21, Neil Greenwood <neil.greenwood....@gmail.com> wrote: > They spent lots of money testing different behaviours
In my opinion, this is where the problem lies. The main people Linux attracts, no matter which way you look at it, are hackers (in the general sense). The reason Ubuntu grew was because the hackers advocated it, gave it to users to try when Windows broke or when they complained and could reasonably say "this is better". It's a hacker culture, reaching out to the wider world and telling them there is something different, something better that you can try, and taught them how to use it. Now hackers are good with computers, they know what they are doing (in an ideal world) I gave 10.04 to someone who originally had Windows 7, he didn't know much about computers, you should have seen his face when he realized he could have all his applications at the bottom in an easy to reach fashion again and we talked about how "simplicity" and "design" go hand in hand and conquer all others. The more complex it is to navigate through to get to what you want to do, the more of a pain in the ass it becomes. The OS should be seamless, it should keep out of the way when it isn't needed, and allow users to find precisely what they want quickly when it is needed, that to me, is a perfect OS. The direction we are all heading is away from simplicity. Simplicity is key to hackers, Unity interferes with that, it makes you more hands on with the OS. This perhaps makes it marginally easier for the new user, but it makes life more difficult for the hacker. Which brings me back to my first point, who's going to advocate Ubuntu if it annoys the hacker and makes life more difficult? -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
