On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 10:54:17AM -0500, Kevin McLauchlan wrote:
On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 16:30, Keith Winston wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 03:47:10PM -0500, Kevin McLauchlan wrote:
[snippety-doo-dah]
[snippety-ay]
Well, give that another moment's thought. Linux already HAS all the geeks, and SuSE has a goodly portion of 'em. The people whom Linux (and the various distributions) wants now are the NON-geeks, the folks who just want to press the [On] button and then start working on ordinary tasks that they do every day.
I'm not sure Linux "wants". It seems there are a few Linux distros that want to reel in the NON-geeks.
This means that the most basic setup stuff needs to be made either intuitive or automatic/bullet-proof.
"Most basic" includes: - finding and supporting video cards to some standard higher than VGA (worry about fancy features and non-standard 3D accel later)
- finding and supporting pointing devices to some standard that includes two buttons and maybe a wheel
- finding and supporting sound cards sufficiently to play audio CDs and system sounds
- finding and supporting modems and ethernet cards.
My experience is that Linux gets better at this stuff every release.
(Try to imagine the mess I made when I first tried to set up SuSE 5.x and traced through every man/info/HowTo that made any mention of e-mail or dial-up or network or... I had so many daemons and apps and processes and servers and... and ... but I had no way to know. To the newbie, all the words carried the same weight. Never, anywhere did any man page or info, or HowTo ever say "not only do you NOT need such'n'such app/daemon, but you must not use it if you are using the method described here."
I went through the same thing, too. My point is that to become competent at anything requires some effort. This goes for Windows users, too. I can't tell you how many of Windows using friends have toasted their computers trying to install a new program or install a new piece of hardware. Sometimes these things are easier in Windows, sometimes not.
The fellow who finally got me reading e-mail from my dial-up ISP spent literally HOURS weeding out all the unnecessary stuff.
Many Windows users suffer the same just to get their dial-up account working, often requiring a geek friend to help them out. [snippety-ay]
But, that's the point... he doesn't *want* to do most of that stuff. He just wants to do the things he does everyday with Windows.
He wants to turn it on and start working, or turn it on and start playing. He is turned OFF by having to open the hood and tinker in the engine, while referring to a manual that includes everything back to the Model-T Ford.
Is he not turned OFF by the frequent crashes, the daily/weekly security holes, the constant threat of e-mail virus meltdowns, the increasing costs of forced upgrades, the stealing of personal information, the lack of control? I'm not implying that man pages aren't cryptic or that Linux isn't hard to master. But I have found Linux to be the best documented system I've ever used, from PCs to midranges to mainframes. I like that better than not being allowed by law to understand what my computer is doing. [snippety-ay]
My wife would look at that paragraph of yours and say: "Listen, Bud, just what do you think my time is worth, anyway? There's no way I want to spend $20,000 worth of my precious time to learn how to do a bunch of things the obscure Linux way, just to save a few thousand dollars 'cost of convenience'."
To do all the things I do with Linux using Microsoft software would be every bit as complex and time consuming. So, you've spent a few thousand dollars on software licenses PLUS $20,000 worth of precious time. In fact it might be more complex since many products are integrated only with other certain versions, service pack levels, etc. of Microsoft software. And every service pack you load carries the chance of breaking something else integrated invisibly behind the scenes.
See, you are speaking from the point of view of someone who would be in there tinkering "just 'cuz it's neat", even if you didn't need to, in order to do your job. That's the hobbyist or the geek mentality. Like I said, Linux already HAS all the geeks it needs. Linux wants to harvest some ordinary folk who have interests that DON'T involve the workings of the box and of the OS.
Again, I don't know what Linux "wants", but I am guilty as charged on the geek mentality.
Sure, it may be beautiful and fulfilling to delve into the mysteries and acquire deep understanding that allows you to make the system sit up and beg. But, it's only beautiful and fulfilling to people who are bent that way. The shocking discovery is that other people not only fail to get misty-eyed over a well-written shell-script, they actually resent the time needed to make it work.
Then, these people should not be allowed to put unpatched IIS web servers on the Internet where they will be infected with Code Red or Nimbda in less than 24 hours. Maybe we need a "server license permit" similar to a driver's license before people are allowed to connect to the Internet and cause damage and headaches for the rest of us.
The race car is great for he who has independent wealth or sponsorship to support the costly endeavor. A race car needs a pit crew. You can't just pull into any garage and have it serviced.
But Linux is far better. It doesn't require special hardware, it runs fine on the hardware you have. You can service it yourself. Yes, it takes time and effort but it does on Windows as well.
Meanwhile, the minivan can be serviced anywhere. It probably won't ever need to have the engine rebuilt. It wears out a set of tires after a couple of years, not a couple of hours.
No, the minivan in our analogy breaks down often. It needs it's engine rebuilt every week from leaking oil, it's tires wear out in days while the Linux tires will literally run for years. The race car is fully street legal and runs rings around the minivans. When the minivans pull onto the freeway, they sputter and spew noxious gases into the faces of the race car drivers. And of course the minivan cost lots of money. There is a repair shop for minivans every other block because they break so often. Due to illegal licensing agreements, car dealers have not been allowed for many years to sell anything other than minivans. When they have tried, the minivan makers threaten them.
Anyway, I'm suggesting that the expanded target audience, that Linux/SuSE now seeks, is the audience of ordinary Windows users. I mean, think about it. There's not a big audience in people who don't have computers and aren't likely to get one soon. So what's left is:
I think there is a huge audience, especially in poor an underdeveloped countries. Even in the U.S., there are many poor schools that can't afford the high cost of Windows and Office. Most of the world population does not even have telephone service, there are billions of people that Linux can help.
Kevin McLauchlan Chrysalis-ITS, Inc. "Ultimate Trust(TM)"
Even though I took a few jabs at your post, I really did enjoy reading your point of view. I do think many people will benefit from continuing ease of use work on Linux, but it should never come at the expense of security or loss of rights as a user. And I still maintain that the hard things will always be hard, regardless of OS. Computers are complex and no amount of GUI sheen can hide that. Neal Stephenson used the term "metaphor shear" to describe it. If you haven't read his "In the beginning was the command line" article, I think you would enjoy it. You can read it here: http://www.cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html or here: http://www.spack.org/words/commandline.html and other places. Peace, Keith -- LPIC-2, MCSE, N+ wielder of vi(m), an ancient, dangerous and powerful magic Don't get lost, show no fear, and you'll be ready for a new frontier -- d.w.