Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (1695 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse] Re: Beagle frontend
- From: Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:15:38 -0400
- Message-id: <1247768138.5395.60.camel@linux-m3mt>
On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 11:52 -0400, Dan Goodman wrote:
Ok. The only way LINUX will reach the "average" computer user is if it
comes preinstalled on their hardware. In which case it isn't an
"alternative" Operating System, it is "what was installed".
Yes, you do. Non technical people try out new *products*: TVs, MP3
players, game consoles. An Operating System just is not equivalent in
the marketplace to those things.
I don't think so. Some non-technical users come to LINUX because they
are frustrated, but they do so primarily by having a technical user
present [advocate?] an alternative and take them there.
They are "supportable and selectable"; with the possible exception of
KDE4. I don't know anything about KDE and haven't used it in years.
But from the outside KDE4 looks to me like an issue for the KDE user
community. KDE cut a new release and distributions followed suite;
which is the entirely expected and reasonable thing for distributions to
do.
If your talking about "KDE devs" when you say "vocal minority of devs
seems" please say "KDE devs". Otherwise I don't know if you are still
in the context of the previous paragraph about KDE [which I don't see as
a distribution issue] or speaking in general.
It is easy to turn them off, or at least to turn Beagle off. The same
goes for Avahi and other services. Trivially easy. Disabling them is
even well documented in the case of Beagle.
KDE4 is a KDE problem.
For everything I've seen mentioned [aside from KDE4] this is ALREADY and
equivalently simple way to disable the mentioned service.
Good gosh. You take it from "vocal minority" to "wrong-headed vocal
minority" and disagreement to an intent to "harm the rest of the
community". That is just bogus. I never mentioned, anywhere, anyone
"intent". I stated what I believe would be the outcome of that
direction. Are you unable to discern the difference between those two
statements?
THEY ARE "selectable by users". This is/was a discussion as to the
optimal *default* state of those features.
THEY ARE EASY TO TURN OFF, RIGHT NOW.
chkconfig avahi-daemon off [for example]
Having auto-configuration off by default is pretty pointless;
especially since it has zero effect on the presence of manual
configurations in 99.999% of situations. The same goes for every other
feature mentioned [KDE4 isn't a "feature", it is a platform].
Options are provided. With the exception of KDE4 [maybe?] which is a
problem for the KDE community releasing [maybe?] a release before it was
ready.
In line behind all the other features that wouldn't add weeks or months.
Toggles are provided for almost everything mention in this thread.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
If that is true, Linux will never reach the average PC user.You can skip this if you don't want to read more. But it gives what II don't accept that this is comparable. Someone 'joe-six-pack' buying a
think is a good example from PC history about how this has bitten other
vendors.
PC more than a decade ago to selecting an alternative Operating System.
We need to be realistic, *zero* non-technical users wake up in the
morning and think "I'll try an alternative Operating System today".
Ok. The only way LINUX will reach the "average" computer user is if it
comes preinstalled on their hardware. In which case it isn't an
"alternative" Operating System, it is "what was installed".
They do go buy PCs. If you even know what an "Operating System" is youSome move on, some don't...you don't have to be technical to want to try
are in a small minority and at least a PC Jockey.
new technologies.
Yes, you do. Non technical people try out new *products*: TVs, MP3
players, game consoles. An Operating System just is not equivalent in
the marketplace to those things.
Most continue in the same vein out of habit, but some
who aren't technical are changing at any point in time.
I don't think so. Some non-technical users come to LINUX because they
are frustrated, but they do so primarily by having a technical user
present [advocate?] an alternative and take them there.
I think there is a vocal minority of 'minimalists'How about the idea that there is a group that may be less than 50%, but
who don't like the direction of the modern desktop, but they'd dislike
other current distributions for the exact same reasons. They wouldn't
like OS/X or Windows Vista/7.
that is significant, that feels that modern desktop features should be
options, rather than forcibly included, and who believe that both
minimal and futuristic configurations should be supportable and selectable?
They are "supportable and selectable"; with the possible exception of
KDE4. I don't know anything about KDE and haven't used it in years.
But from the outside KDE4 looks to me like an issue for the KDE user
community. KDE cut a new release and distributions followed suite;
which is the entirely expected and reasonable thing for distributions to
do.
And as an aside, it seems funny to me that KDE4 seemed to try to go out
of its way to not provide certain Windows-like features on the desktop,
such as a taskbar equivalent and the ability to place icons on the
desktop, features that were originally rejected but later added as a
configurable overlay on the base vision of the developers?
It seems to me that a certain vocal minority of devs seems to believe
that they can and must provide a better high end graphics experience
than Brand X and Brand $, but at that same time, they reject some of the
common user-control features that those companies have adopted to meet
the needs and desires of their customers?
If your talking about "KDE devs" when you say "vocal minority of devs
seems" please say "KDE devs". Otherwise I don't know if you are still
in the context of the previous paragraph about KDE [which I don't see as
a distribution issue] or speaking in general.
Some of them see adding modern featuresNo, that is a straw man argument -- many of us see them as just unwanted
as "emulating" those [despised] platforms [which it isn't].
and unneeded bloatware, at least for certain usages. And hence should be
easy to turn off, even if they do meet the needs of 51% or more of the
users.
It is easy to turn them off, or at least to turn Beagle off. The same
goes for Avahi and other services. Trivially easy. Disabling them is
even well documented in the case of Beagle.
KDE4 is a KDE problem.
I have noSo you think that providing an option to make a browser the default, and
issues with their choices I just disagree that their wishes should
hobble the experience and usability for everyone else.
the ability to turn off the paperclip assistant just by clicking on it
and selecting an option, have hobbled the experience and usablility of
Firefox, IE and M$ Office for everyone else?
For everything I've seen mentioned [aside from KDE4] this is ALREADY and
equivalently simple way to disable the mentioned service.
You seem to carve the world up into those who agree with your position,
and the "few" who disagree are the wrong-headed vocal minority who wish
to harm the rest of the community because they won't try the new
Good gosh. You take it from "vocal minority" to "wrong-headed vocal
minority" and disagreement to an intent to "harm the rest of the
community". That is just bogus. I never mentioned, anywhere, anyone
"intent". I stated what I believe would be the outcome of that
direction. Are you unable to discern the difference between those two
statements?
No wonder you refuse to entertain any suggestion that these features
could, and should, be selectable by users...
THEY ARE "selectable by users". This is/was a discussion as to the
optimal *default* state of those features.
that allowing them easy
on-off would ruin the experience for everyone else.
THEY ARE EASY TO TURN OFF, RIGHT NOW.
chkconfig avahi-daemon off [for example]
Having auto-configuration off by default is pretty pointless;
especially since it has zero effect on the presence of manual
configurations in 99.999% of situations. The same goes for every other
feature mentioned [KDE4 isn't a "feature", it is a platform].
It is easy to keep knocking down suggestions for change, by
characterizing them as being unnecessary, but you have failed to show
why they would do any harm for anyone, and why they couldn't and
shouldn't be provided, even if only a minority ends up using them?
Options are provided. With the exception of KDE4 [maybe?] which is a
problem for the KDE community releasing [maybe?] a release before it was
ready.
After all, I am not asking for features that would add weeks or months
to development.
In line behind all the other features that wouldn't add weeks or months.
This is the issue I'd like to hear your opinions on...not how you think
the user community is divided up, but why a simple toggle with the
default being off, shouldn't be the standard for ALL features that are
not truly essential to operation.
Toggles are provided for almost everything mention in this thread.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |