Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (4348 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [SLE] My patience has run out
- From: Chris Carlen <crcarle@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 13:28:32 -0800
- Message-id: <3DC04F00.4070606@xxxxxxxxxx>
Damon Register wrote:
That's why I made it very clear that my complaint was coming from a
"business user."
It was almost intended to be a preview of what's to come when Linux
starts being deployed in pilot programs in corporations.
I have been a home user of Linux for a long time, but today I wear two
hats: home user, and business user. The demands are *very* different
for the two users. That can be seen quite clearly simply from the
prices I pay.
I am willing to pay for Suse professional , and StarOffice rather than
OpenOffice at work, because I expect that my money will get me
something that is useable out of the box. At home it is different, I
use OpenOffice, and I may take home the CDs for Suse from work, but
leave the manuals at work. I pay at work, and get a free ride at home.
My expectations differ accordingly.
Most importantly, the generally accepted reality that using Linux
involves "customization" (translation--a lot of fixing it up before you
can use it) is really very similar to the conditioning that we perceive
in Windows users, that when it crashes or does something stupid, they
just re-boot or re-install, and never question if this is right or not.
Thus we are conditioned to accept the need to a considerable amount of
"customization." But this is a problem for business users, who will
expect to have it working, now! They will also be looking for any
excuse to crawl back to their comfortable world of Windows, in which
the investment of time is more like a using a credit card, compared to
the initial but one-time high capital cost (in time) of setting up a
Linux box. Their Windows works quite well out of the box, but then
gets flaky and costs them in the long term.
Thus, they can turn a blind eye to these long term costs(the
conditioning), but when hit with the initial (time) investment to
"customize" a Linux box, they will perceive that to mean sub-standard
quality, which is what they fail to perceive with Windows because it is
chronic rather than acute in that case.
It is for this reason that I believe that Linux must present to the
potential business user a *disproportionately* better computing
experience, in order to ward off the excuses to run back to Windows.
Thus, things like the file manager (Konqueror) must be nothing short of
perfect. Now I doubt there is anyone here who can honestly say that
Konqueror is even remotely as stable as Windows Explorer. For example,
just take the Konqueror that comes with Suse 8.1, click the little
"wrench" icon in the sidebar, then click some of the menu items (toward
the bottom--I don't have 8.1 running right now so I can't describe
exactly). Poof! I discovered this crash within *minutes* of my first
user log-in to Suse 8.1! That is very unfortunate, and a very grave
danger for the acceptibility and staying power in the hands of those
critical initial pilot users of the Linux desktop. Can anybody tell me
of an obvious and repeatable crash mode such as this in the Windows
Explorer of Windows 2000 or NT? Perhaps if you can't crash Konqueror
like this in other versions of Suse, you have still seen the crashes
that come when you log out of X to a text console. Or you have seen
KDE get confused and try to start up programs that were closed in the
last session, the next time you log in. A lot of goofy quirks like
this. Many of them are certainly livable. To us. But not to potential
converts from Windows to Linux in the business desktop environment.
The fact is that Windows has improved dramatically in stability over the
years, and I am considering here only the NT class Windows, which are
the only ones that are even considerable for business use by any sane
human. (Still not absolutely sane, but relatively sane. Heh heh.)
It is for that reason that the challenge for Linux to take hold in the
desktop is a formidable one. And it is perhaps one of the reasons why
people haven't even looked at Linux until feeling the heavy hand of
MS's new licensing financial prison sentences.
Finally, the business user will not tolerate the response to his
complaints that sounds like what we all know is commonplace out there
in the newsgroups (though the discussion on this subject within this
list has been downright civil and admirable). You know, the "RTFM"
attitude.
That is another indirect intention of my letter. We have to respond to
this kind of frustration and troubles with professionalism. From what
I've seen so far here, I think there is great hope!
Good day.
--
____________________________________
Christopher R. Carlen
Principal Laser/Optical Technologist
Sandia National Laboratories CA USA
crcarle@xxxxxxxxxx
john B wrote:
On Tuesday 29 October 2002 19:11, Chris Carlen wrote:
months when I have some more time. But I have blown several days
without acheiving even a modicum of useability out of this thing,
uncovering nothing but quirks and bugs, that I just can't take it anymore.
<snip>
job. It's not worth bitchin' and moanin' about something, because that won't
help make it any better. If you didn't want to spend the money and jump on
Certainly there will be those who disagree but I have no doubt that
this is one of the reasons why Linux isn't any better off than it is.
Too many times it seems that the Linux community is so in love with
their OS that they refuse to see the problems and will jump all over
anyone who does complain. Perhaps one day when the Linux community
finally admits the problems, it will be the first step on the road
to recovery. Fortunately there are some really great people in this
group who do help with real solutions to problems. Thanks to all of you.
Damon Register
That's why I made it very clear that my complaint was coming from a
"business user."
It was almost intended to be a preview of what's to come when Linux
starts being deployed in pilot programs in corporations.
I have been a home user of Linux for a long time, but today I wear two
hats: home user, and business user. The demands are *very* different
for the two users. That can be seen quite clearly simply from the
prices I pay.
I am willing to pay for Suse professional , and StarOffice rather than
OpenOffice at work, because I expect that my money will get me
something that is useable out of the box. At home it is different, I
use OpenOffice, and I may take home the CDs for Suse from work, but
leave the manuals at work. I pay at work, and get a free ride at home.
My expectations differ accordingly.
Most importantly, the generally accepted reality that using Linux
involves "customization" (translation--a lot of fixing it up before you
can use it) is really very similar to the conditioning that we perceive
in Windows users, that when it crashes or does something stupid, they
just re-boot or re-install, and never question if this is right or not.
Thus we are conditioned to accept the need to a considerable amount of
"customization." But this is a problem for business users, who will
expect to have it working, now! They will also be looking for any
excuse to crawl back to their comfortable world of Windows, in which
the investment of time is more like a using a credit card, compared to
the initial but one-time high capital cost (in time) of setting up a
Linux box. Their Windows works quite well out of the box, but then
gets flaky and costs them in the long term.
Thus, they can turn a blind eye to these long term costs(the
conditioning), but when hit with the initial (time) investment to
"customize" a Linux box, they will perceive that to mean sub-standard
quality, which is what they fail to perceive with Windows because it is
chronic rather than acute in that case.
It is for this reason that I believe that Linux must present to the
potential business user a *disproportionately* better computing
experience, in order to ward off the excuses to run back to Windows.
Thus, things like the file manager (Konqueror) must be nothing short of
perfect. Now I doubt there is anyone here who can honestly say that
Konqueror is even remotely as stable as Windows Explorer. For example,
just take the Konqueror that comes with Suse 8.1, click the little
"wrench" icon in the sidebar, then click some of the menu items (toward
the bottom--I don't have 8.1 running right now so I can't describe
exactly). Poof! I discovered this crash within *minutes* of my first
user log-in to Suse 8.1! That is very unfortunate, and a very grave
danger for the acceptibility and staying power in the hands of those
critical initial pilot users of the Linux desktop. Can anybody tell me
of an obvious and repeatable crash mode such as this in the Windows
Explorer of Windows 2000 or NT? Perhaps if you can't crash Konqueror
like this in other versions of Suse, you have still seen the crashes
that come when you log out of X to a text console. Or you have seen
KDE get confused and try to start up programs that were closed in the
last session, the next time you log in. A lot of goofy quirks like
this. Many of them are certainly livable. To us. But not to potential
converts from Windows to Linux in the business desktop environment.
The fact is that Windows has improved dramatically in stability over the
years, and I am considering here only the NT class Windows, which are
the only ones that are even considerable for business use by any sane
human. (Still not absolutely sane, but relatively sane. Heh heh.)
It is for that reason that the challenge for Linux to take hold in the
desktop is a formidable one. And it is perhaps one of the reasons why
people haven't even looked at Linux until feeling the heavy hand of
MS's new licensing financial prison sentences.
Finally, the business user will not tolerate the response to his
complaints that sounds like what we all know is commonplace out there
in the newsgroups (though the discussion on this subject within this
list has been downright civil and admirable). You know, the "RTFM"
attitude.
That is another indirect intention of my letter. We have to respond to
this kind of frustration and troubles with professionalism. From what
I've seen so far here, I think there is great hope!
Good day.
--
____________________________________
Christopher R. Carlen
Principal Laser/Optical Technologist
Sandia National Laboratories CA USA
crcarle@xxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |