Re: [SLE] Re: samba

Purple Shirt

1 Mar 2001 1 Mar '01

20:42

I had much harsher words for Julia but I deleted my first response. My three correlations summed things up nicely without insult. Linux was never an OS that behaved like Windows. It was never meant to be. It still is not today. You have to weigh off ease of use with power of use. I am sure one day we will combine the two and have the OS of all OS' Maybe it will suit you or Julia. Maybe it will never arrive. We have given Julia plenty of help leading her to Samba information. She said she doesn't have the time to track down the problems she has. We cannot help her if she has no time to invest in learning about Unix/Windows networking. We gladly invite her back when: 1. she finds time 2. she finds more courage 3. she finds more curiosity 4. she finds a friend or consultant who is willing to install samba for her 5. Linux is where she thinks it should be. PS: btw I have done number 4. for my friends because they couldn't possibly manage a Linux box and I didn't mind. Linux is not for everybody. PPS: I don't know but Linus' goal ever the adoption of Linux on the desktop? I doubt it. These are new entrepreneurial goals. I don't care what anybody uses as their OS as long as I can communicate with the people I need to communicate with and vice versa. mk

...

From: Michael Schwager Reply-To: Michael Schwager To: Purple Shirt , suse-linux-e@suse.com CC: julia.maddocks@zoom.co.uk Subject: Re: [SLE] Re: samba Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 13:59:46 -0600

...
...
that's really a really great idea for people who have the time, or maybe it's part of their job - I use my PC as a tool, have a job which is unrelated to IT ... This samba thing has made me realise that I'm not sure Linux is for people

...
No time no reward. No education no fulfillment. No freedom no life.

Not sure how that response was supposed to help, but Julia hit the nail on the head (see http://www.forsitesolutions.com/Techstuff/techie_manifesto.htm, also http://www.unfinishedrevolution.com/book.html).

There are millions of people like her (and me) who want to use computers to get from point A to point B. If every driver of every car on the road needed to become a mechanic, imagine how inefficient we would be- what an absurd situation.

Julia's difficulties point to the heart of the problem with Linux' adoption as the OS of choice for the desktop. The sooner we realize it the better.

Well, we could simply say goodbye and good riddance to millions of people too busy or with no desire to become an expert kernel hacker. How absurd is that? -- -Mike suse-list@Linux.Schwager.com -o) Go to www.forsitesolutions.com to read Linux /\\ "Guides for Reasonably Intelligent People" _\_v The list will grow as I do.

_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

Show replies by date

Michael Schwager

2 Mar 2 Mar

06:12

New subject: [SLE] Re: samba

...

I had much harsher words for Julia but I deleted my first response.

I don't doubt you did, because you're operating under today's computing paradigm. But I applaud your kind gesture and you deserve credit for it.

...

My three correlations summed things up nicely without insult.

For you perhaps. But they didn't help her, or answer her questions.

...

Linux was never an OS that behaved like Windows. It was never meant to be. It still is not today.

Actually, I don't care if Linux behaves like Windows (nor did I mention it in my post). We can leave Windows out of it; a desktop computer doesn't necessarily have to act like Windows. That said, if we are content to leave Linux in the back room, to the exclusive use of the experts, then let's do so.

...

You have to weigh off ease of use with power of use.

That's the horrible truth of computing today.

...

I am sure one day we will combine the two and have the OS of all OS'

Oh really? The problem is, that as long as we believe in our hearts that we "have to weigh off ease of use with power of use" then what is the incentive to combine the two? We need a fundamental paradigm shift, now. Today. We need to listen to people like Julia. She is pointing the way towards how we might combine the two. She is showing us how we are failing people like her.

...

Maybe it will suit you or Julia. Maybe it will never arrive.

We have given Julia plenty of help leading her to Samba information. She said she doesn't have the time to track down the problems she has. We cannot help her if she has no time to invest in learning about Unix/Windows networking.

That is a very sad situation, and goes to the heart of the problem. We need a fundamental paradigm shift. This is what I'm hearing (from you and the industry in general): User: I have a problem Expert: Give me a detailed analysis of your problem. User: I don't have time for that... I don't understand it... I just need it to work. Expert: Listen, if you can't figure it out you've got a serious problem. Get back to me after you've gotten your Baccalaureate Degree in <Technology X>. (whatever X happens to be in the moment) The dialog should be more like: Expert: Hmm... well if you don't get it, there must be something wrong with my - Installation procedures - Error reporting - reference manuals or, you, Mr. User, are mentally retarded and I'm both surprised and confused that you were able to send me an email about this problem.

...

We gladly invite her back when:

There is no need to invite her back. She is always welcome. In the meantime, we will enact solution 0: 0. She is able to install Samba quickly and easily. In the event the install fails, the on-screen dialogs will pinpoint the cause of the problem so she can readily repair it or, send the data to a group of experts who will be able to point her to a solution in short order. Well much of this discussion is dialogue that clouds two truths: 1. We need a fundamental paradigm shift. Computers must be made easier to use. All computers. 2. If the User has a problem with the computer, it is rarely the user's fault. Fundamentally, the responsibilty of usability lies squarely on our- the technologist's (e.g., programmer's)- shoulders. Again, http://www.unfinishedrevolution.com/book.html -- -Mike suse-list@Linux.Schwager.com -o) Go to www.forsitesolutions.com to read Linux /\\ "Guides for Reasonably Intelligent People" _\_v The list will grow as I do.

Victor R. Cardona

07:15

New subject: [SLE] Re: samba

On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 12:12:37AM -0600, Michael Schwager wrote:

...

0. She is able to install Samba quickly and easily. In the event the install fails, the on-screen dialogs will pinpoint the cause of the problem so she can readily repair it or, send the data to a group of experts who will be able to point her to a solution in short order.

I have to disagree a little with this statement. Perhaps I missed something, but I never saw any config files or error messages posted to the list. If Julia had been on one of the FreeBSD lists, she would have been asked to provide such information. I know that Purple Shirt asked for that information. My point is that users have to take some responsability for their computers. They have to take the time to learn a system. That does not mean that developers should use crappy UI designs and shift all blame on users, but it does mean that users should learn to use what they have. Otherwise, they should find something that they can use.

...

2. If the User has a problem with the computer, it is rarely the user's fault. Fundamentally, the responsibilty of usability lies squarely on our- the technologist's (e.g., programmer's)- shoulders.

I work as a PC tech in an academic library. I see computer problems that are caused by a direct action of a user every day. - v -- Victor R. Cardona vcardona@home.com "Behold the keyboard of Kahless, the greatest Klingon code warrior that ever lived!"

Steven T. Hatton

08:14

New subject: [SLE] Re: samba

On Friday 02 March 2001 02:15, Victor R. Cardona wrote:

...

On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 12:12:37AM -0600, Michael Schwager wrote:

...
0. She is able to install Samba quickly and easily. In the event the install fails, the on-screen dialogs will pinpoint the cause of the problem so she can readily repair it or, send the data to a group of experts who will be able to point her to a solution in short order.

I have to disagree a little with this statement. Perhaps I missed something, but I never saw any config files or error messages posted to the list. If Julia had been on one of the FreeBSD lists, she would have been asked to provide such information. I know that Purple Shirt asked for that information. My point is that users have to take some responsability for their computers. They have to take the time to learn a system. That does not mean that developers should use crappy UI designs and shift all blame on users, but it does mean that users should learn to use what they have. Otherwise, they should find something that they can use.

...
2. If the User has a problem with the computer, it is rarely the user's fault. Fundamentally, the responsibilty of usability lies squarely on our- the technologist's (e.g., programmer's)- shoulders.

I work as a PC tech in an academic library. I see computer problems that are caused by a direct action of a user every day.

- v Victor,

At the risk of starting an international flame war, I will state my opinion on this issue. I believe Linux/Unix is a very powerful system. One of the big reasons this is ture is because many different people have contributed in many different ways to make it so. This is even more true of Linux. Linux/Unix is also a mess because of this very reason. There are things strewn about in what often seems a haphazard manner. SuSE have done a fine job of starting to clean this mess up in 7.1. It can be very difficult to troubleshoot what should be easy problems, particularly when it comes to shell scripts in the initialization process. This is true because shell scripts are almost always poorly structured in terms of good programming practices. They regularly contain non-branching returns, and rely on variables which are not identified parameter lists, etc., etc. There is absolutely no reason that setting up SMB networking should be more difficult on a Unix box than it is on an NT box. I take the opposite line of reasoning vis-a-vis the power of Linux and ease of use. I believe a more powerful operating system should support a better UI. The QT and KDE seem to vindicate this assertion. I believe the problem lies in bringing the core technology under the control of the UI. Most developers such as the SaMBa people are focused on getting the protocol right. Since they have no support from Microsoft, this is a rather daunting task in and of itself. Where are these people going to find time to write a nice QT based UI? OTOH, there are the people who can spin up a nice UI, but don't know how SaMBa works. Trying to bridge this divide is where things have not come to maturity. There are also other areas where GNU/Linux has traditionally had problems wich distract it's developers from this important area. That is the lack of support form hardware vendors in creating drivers for their products. When I buy a video card it comes with DOS/Windows.XX and NT/W2K dirvers and installation tools. Try calling MS when your Adaptec AHA driver won't find your hard drive. They will tell you to call Adaptec, all MS did was include the dirver in their distribution, they didn't write it. Not only does MS have the largest development war chest in history, they get most of their development done for free by hardware vendors! What I believe needs to happen is that the Linux community needs to get a better 'community' understanding of the way the different components of the OS work, and interoperate. At the same time we need to get this incredibel sprawl under control. I don't see these two efforts as independent. Both rely on the other. I spend an incredible amount of time trying to figure out how to do things like get a freaking HowTo to print without taking up 15 pages for 15 paragraphs. And when I find the solution it's so damn essoteric that I can't remember how I did it that last time. That is what UIs are for. The bring the different task together in a way that make them easy to understand and remember. If I sound a bit edgey, please don't take it personally. I'm just a bit frustrated at the whole situation. And I should add that I had a conversation with a friend of my who is also a sysadmin who commented that "everything always takes forever because you always run into someting that needs to be fixed before you can accomplish your original goal. And that goal was just an intermediate goal toward another end." I let him finish and then asked him what OS he was using. He said NT. The reason I asked is because I was feeling exactly the same way about Linux. NT sucks, Unix sucks, Linux sucks. The one thing about Linux that is different is that we have the power to make it better. So let's stop talking about it, and get to it. Steve finished venting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PS I'm too tired to proof this so it is what it is. PSS Peace/Friede

Michael Schwager

16:37

New subject: [SLE] Re: samba

Very well said. I proofread it for you... it's perfect. :)

...

At the risk of starting an international flame war, I will state my opinion on this issue. ... -- -Mike suse-list@Linux.Schwager.com -o) Go to www.forsitesolutions.com to read Linux /\\ "Guides for Reasonably Intelligent People" _\_v The list will grow as I do.

Michael Schwager

16:31

New subject: [SLE] Re: samba

...

On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 12:12:37AM -0600, Michael Schwager wrote:

...
0. She is able to install Samba quickly and easily. In the event the install fails, the on-screen dialogs will pinpoint the cause

...

I have to disagree a little with this statement. Perhaps I missed something, but I never saw any config files or error messages posted to the list.

Well, I was going to address that response in my original posting but decided against it because it was long enough already (and maybe people wouldn't latch onto it... because the point is that we need a fundamental paradigm shift, where we as the providers of technology make it easy for the users of technology to use the technology). Anyway, The Samba suite does a poor job of letting the user know what is going on. Expecting a user to provide config files rather than pithy error statements from the program is lousy error reporting. I know exactly how Julia feels- I had the same experience trying to set up Samba. Now what? I asked myself. Where the hell am I supposed to look for answers? Well, I've got 17 years' troubleshooting experience- I know how to troubleshoot, and I did. It wasn't so hard for me because I'm a grizzled old warrior. But I know that lots of people are going to have a hell of a time. Again, we have failed the user.

...

...
2. If the User has a problem with the computer, it is rarely the user's fault. Fundamentally, the responsibilty of usability lies squarely on our- the technologist's (e.g., programmer's)- shoulders.

I work as a PC tech in an academic library. I see computer problems that are caused by a direct action of a user every day.

Again, we have failed the user. It's too easy for computer problems to occur that "are caused by a direct action of a user". We need a paradigm shift. What is wrong with our computers that are making them so difficult to get right? Or so easy to screw up? We are not listening. We are blaming the user. -- -Mike suse-list@Linux.Schwager.com -o) Go to www.forsitesolutions.com to read Linux /\\ "Guides for Reasonably Intelligent People" _\_v The list will grow as I do.

jfweber＠eternal.net

21:36

New subject: [SLE] Re: samba

** from the outer limits of space and time electrons arranged themselves into a message from Michael Schwager on Fri, 02 Mar 2001 10:31:12 -0600 Earth Standard Time

...

...
...
2. If the User has a problem with the computer, it is rarely the user's fault. Fundamentally, the responsibilty of usability lies squarely on our- the technologist's (e.g., programmer's)- shoulders.

Ahhh yes, wasn't this one of IBM's "prime directives" origionally, as well as " nothing should be done to the computer w/o the users knowledge and consent??" ( or words to that effect ) Nothing should be hidden, and the user was to be told what a program was doing ,and more importantly WHY ?? That whole concept has been turned on it's head by teh "dominat" OS company, where the user shouldn't be allowed to do anything , or know anything , not allowed to delete anything ! ( have you ever tried to get rid of all htose stupid animated curesers!! <heavy sigh> Blondley, j afterthought--- I'm fat. You're ugly. I can diet.

Michael Schwager

3 Mar 3 Mar

00:07

New subject: [SLE] Re: samba

...

...
...
...
2. If the User has a problem with the computer, it is rarely the user's fault. Fundamentally, the responsibilty of usability lies squarely on our- the technologist's (e.g., programmer's)- shoulders.

Ahhh yes, wasn't this one of IBM's "prime directives" origionally, as well as " nothing should be done to the computer w/o the users knowledge and consent??" ... That whole concept has been turned on it's head by teh "dominat" OS company, where the user shouldn't be allowed to do anything , or know anything , not allowed to delete anything !

Because of their agenda, which is to keep the information "proprietary". It has little to do with doing what's best for the user, which should be the ultimate goal. The dominant OS company's ultimate goal is the almighty $. -- -Mike suse-list@Linux.Schwager.com -o) Go to www.forsitesolutions.com to read Linux /\\ "Guides for Reasonably Intelligent People" _\_v The list will grow as I do.

Victor R. Cardona

2 Mar 2 Mar

22:15

New subject: [SLE] Re: samba

On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 10:31:12AM -0600, Michael Schwager wrote:

...

The Samba suite does a poor job of letting the user know what is going on. Expecting a user to provide config files rather than pithy error statements from the program is lousy error reporting. I know exactly how Julia feels-

I agree with you. I would extend the above comment to all software, not just Samba. How many times have we looked at a BSOD and wondered as to what the heck it all meant? How many times have we run an app on UNIX/Linux, and suffered a "segmentation fault". Consumer software has extremely poor error reporting. I won't even try to deny it. The problem I was trying to point out though was that people don't do anything to overcome the limitation of current software. Technology is here to make our lives easier, and it inproves with time. However, it will always have certain limits at a given point in time. When we reach the current limits of technology, then the burden falls on the user. This does not just occur in programming, or even just in computers. This is a fundamental attribute of technology in general.

...

Again, we have failed the user. It's too easy for computer problems to occur that "are caused by a direct action of a user". We need a paradigm shift. What is wrong with our computers that are making them so difficult to get right? Or so easy to screw up? We are not listening. We are blaming the user.

We as developers should make hardware and software systems that are resiliant and robust. We should design software that makes error reporting easy. We should create software that is usable. Finally, we should try to avoid blaming the user. All that is certain, and unquestionable. Unfortunately, developers cannot anticipate everything a user might do. Systems will fail at some time or another. That is when the user must become involved. - v -- Victor R. Cardona vcardona@home.com "Behold the keyboard of Kahless, the greatest Klingon code warrior that ever lived!"

8461

Age (days ago)

8463

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

8 comments

5 participants

participants (5)

jfweber＠eternal.net
Michael Schwager
Purple Shirt
Steven T. Hatton
Victor R. Cardona

Re: [SLE] Re: samba

Purple Shirt

Michael Schwager

Victor R. Cardona

Steven T. Hatton

Michael Schwager

Michael Schwager

jfweber＠eternal.net

Michael Schwager

Victor R. Cardona

tags

participants (5)