Bob Warren wrote:
>> And further to what I have just said further, note how this brings us
>> back to the whole question of real "installion" in Linux, the very
>> subject of this thread, which of course should take the
>> existence/upgrade of library routines into account. But as I said at
the
>> beginning of the thread, perhaps that is a future dream, unless Richard
>> managed to find a piece of satisfactory 3rd party software for the
>> purpose. Somehow, I doubt it.
Richard Gaskin wrote:
>>>
Nope, I haven't.
Thus far what I've seen is that every window manager thinks their work
is the Ultimate Solution, without regard for compatibility with any other.
I'd like to be more supportive, but my experience thus far is that the
biggest thing holding Linux back from broad desktop adoption is the
Linux developer community.
If we get to a stage where they begin to regard their work as less
precious than the user experience, perhaps they'll prioritize
standardization higher than it's been thus far.
But until then, the issue with Linux is that there is no "there" there,
in the sense that Linux isn't a particular thing, but a collection of
things, and many of those things just don't play nice together.
Technologically I believe Linux is well poised to blow Micro$oft out of
the water. Once the project leaders for the various window managers get
around to handling the work of compatibility for the basics, I suspect
we'll see a renaissance of Linux development.
Alternatively, it might be ideal for consumers if one window manager
began to reach the tipping point, the critical mass which makes it the
single clear choice, relegating all others to minor, specialized roles.
At that point the complete Linux experience would become a single
thing, something consumers can more readily wrap their collective head
around.
Until then, the whole thing is much harder than it needs to be....
--------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with you completely, Richard, but I am perhaps a bit more
optimistic. We have seen great improvements over the last year or two,
and I believe we might perhaps be on the verge of a qualitive change. I
have been involved with teaching/training all my life, and one of the
great talents I have (or perhaps it is the only one!) is that I am a
natural dummy. In my experience, technicians often cannot see the wood
for the trees, and they revel in complexity. But ordinary people are not
like that, and in the modern world they have a voice. People such as
myself are now becoming involved in Linux for the first time. I don't
want to know about DOS-like terminals, sudo, itsy-bits binary packages
and what to do if they get broken, etc., etc. I want something which is
simple, elegant, automatic and practical. And the Linux producers are
listening. But it is early times yet. Give Linux one or two more years
(just as Windows has had, for example), and we might see even greater
improvements. What is perhaps involved here with Linux, different to the
Microsoft and Macintosh dictatorial systems, is the question of the need
for concensus, which is a widely social process that takes time.
Personally, I would like to see it today, but if that is not possible
then I am prepared to wait and to contribute. And for a great many
people, the commitment to Linux is absolutely crucial.
By the way, Mr David Grogono has very kindly offered to compile the
necessary console version of our temporary module for deducing the Linux
system paths. I think his co-operation in this respect shows a great
attitude.
Bob
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
