At 10:46 PM 7/24/01 +0200, Jens Benecke wrote:
>On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 03:10:51PM -0400, Dan Swartzendruber wrote:
> > At 08:50 PM 7/24/2001 +0200, Jens Benecke wrote:
> > >On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 01:28:36PM -0400, Joel Hammer wrote:
> > >
> > > > DOCUMENTS IN EMAIL EFFORTLESSLY!!!!! etc....
> > >
> > >You would perhaps get a few more clueless beginners to buy your distro,
> > >but you will most certainly scare off *ALL* experienced Linux users ...
> >
> > this attitude is one of the prime reasons linux faces such an uphill
> > battle.
>
>What are you proposing? Dumb down Linux to get accepted by the "stupid
>masses" (quote from Futurama, not my own)?
No, I'm objecting to the (apparentl) arrogant attitude frequently espoused
by linux bigots.
>Sorry, been there, done that. I've been using the Web and Usenet since
>1994, when it was _not_ totally swamped with pr0n, SPAM, banner ads, "E-Z
>click-here buy-now" javascript pop-ups, and all the rest.
color me unimpressed. i was around back before there was a web or usenet
(and all email
was via UUCP). i'm well aware of all this.
>I don't dislike the idea of making technology accessible to 'the masses'.
>What makes me want to cry out loud (some of the time) is that people start
>stripping (crippling) useful technology because they assume that "most
>people" are simply too retarded to use it and get confused.
i've never claimed that all of linux is for everyone. nor do i advocate
dumbing down linux
so mom&pop can use it. the original issue was "it's convenient to be able
to open an email
attachment right from the message". i agree. you're the one who made the
sweeping statement
about "all experience linux users". arrogant. and demonstrably wrong.
>Making Linux more 'user-friendly' would probably include removing or at
>least hiding xterm, because it is "user-unfriendly". It would perhaps
>include removing the kernel startup-messages because they "confuse" users
>(i.e. kill a possibility to find out what goes wrong if something does).
>It would most probably include removing all but one desktops because having
>choice means clueless people would get confused ("What's a Session Type?").
>It would perhaps even mean people actually get encouraged logging in as
>root because if they didn't, clueless users would complain they cannot
>access "their computer".
this is all a huge strawman.
>And so on. No thanks.
>
>Keep Linux honest. Not user-friendly. Don't hide or disable functionality
>just because you ASSUME that many people would not like/use/understand it.
>That's simply arrogant.
agreed. no more arrogant than not wanting to put in features that are
convenient
because you perceive it as pandering to the masses.
>btw: Do you know why Corel Linux failed? They produced a (basically quite
>good) distro that was as functional as a freshly installed Windows. No
>apps. No utilities. Not even a desktop choice, nor a shell choice. Just a
>(graphical) text editor, browser, Wordperfect and a modified KDE desktop.
>
>When people install Linux, they don't expect Windows, they expect
>functionality.
agreed. none of which has anything to do with the specific issue you
started in on
originally.
_______________________________________________
Win4Lin-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.netraverse.com/mailman/listinfo/win4lin-users
