Re: [SLE] Re: samba
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 and a family, so I need software that I can use without spending hours learning how to use it.
This samba thing has made me realise that I'm not sure Linux is for people like me, although I am keen to use an alternative OS to the dreaded W98, I don't have the time to put into learning enough about it to use it to do simple tasks.
No time no reward. No education no fulfillment. No freedom no life. mk _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
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.
On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 01:59:46PM -0600, Michael Schwager wrote:
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?
I do sympathise with Julia, but you must understand that Linux is a variant of UNIX. UNIX/Linux provide the user with an incredible amount of control over the computer. This control creates the need for complexity. I have been using Linux for a couple of years now, and have seen great advances in the UI space. Things are much easier for beginners now then they were then. This is a good thing. Unfortunately, developers must still deal with that complexity, and some of it must be passed on to the user. If Julia, and other newbies are willing to put in the effort, then they will be rewarded with a fully functional, fast, stable, and very cost effective operating system. If they are not willing... well then perhaps Linux/UNIX is not for them. Victor Cardona -- Victor R. Cardona vcardona@home.com "Behold the keyboard of Kahless, the greatest Klingon code warrior that ever lived!"
On Friday 02 March 2001 00:52, Victor R. Cardona wrote:
On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 01:59:46PM -0600, Michael Schwager wrote:
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?
I do sympathise with Julia, but you must understand that Linux is a variant of UNIX. UNIX/Linux provide the user with an incredible amount of control over the computer. This control creates the need for complexity.
However, Linux is moving as fast as it's army of coders can move it into the rodent driven GUI world. In that world no particular technical expertise is required besides knowing how to point and click and where the nearest help desk is located for the more complicated procedures (Help! my kernel paniced! what does that mean?) See below
I have been using Linux for a couple of years now, and have seen great advances in the UI space. Things are much easier for beginners now then they were then. This is a good thing. Unfortunately, developers must still deal with that complexity, and some of it must be passed on to the user.
If Julia, and other newbies are willing to put in the effort, then they will be rewarded with a fully functional, fast, stable, and very cost effective operating system. If they are not willing... well then perhaps Linux/UNIX is not for them.
That's the point! Julia and many other newbies, not all, DON"T HAVE the technical background to become 'proficient' in Linux as you seem to think they must. I've had a computer in my home since 1978 and my wife has only recently learned how to turn it on and run the browser and email. My wife is not stupid, but she doesn't have the training or interest to become technically literate. I showed her how to point an click. She's happy. That ALL she needs to know. I can guarantee that the recent Zip100 problem would have sent her to Windows or off the computer all together had she been required to tackle it alone. If the Linux desktop doesn't become as user friendly in both installation and maintanence as WinXX is *percieved* to be (and it's there for many hardware configurations and in the hands of folks like you and I) then the KDE and GNOME folks are wasting their time. Julia has no reason to become a technically proficient computer user, as much as that would help her. She has a life. Linux is no making the PROMISE that she can user her computer with all the ease that WinXX offers. Except for her samba problem that may be true, but if she can't get samba to work then Linux is not the OS for here. JLK
Victor Cardona
On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 06:42:24AM -0600, Jerry Kreps wrote:
However, Linux is moving as fast as it's army of coders can move it into the rodent driven GUI world. In that world no particular technical expertise is required besides knowing how to point and click and where the nearest help desk is located for the more complicated procedures (Help! my kernel paniced! what does that mean?) See below
That is what we should avoid. I am all for making computers easy and accessable, but I do not think that we should reduce users to drooling, mouse-clicking idiots. Microsoft does that because it allows them to retain control over their users. We as Open Source/Free Software developers and advocates should rise above that.
That's the point! Julia and many other newbies, not all, DON"T HAVE the technical background to become 'proficient' in Linux as you seem to think they must. I've had a computer in my home since 1978 and my wife has only recently learned how to turn it on and run the browser and email. My wife is not stupid, but she doesn't have the training or interest to become technically literate. I showed her how to point an click. She's happy. That ALL she needs to know. I can guarantee that the recent Zip100 problem would have sent her to Windows or off the computer all together had she been required to tackle it alone.
I know that hardware trouble can be frustrating, and you are probably right in that many newbies probably would throw in the towel. I disagree with your assesment of users though. Users may not have a technical background, and they really don't need one. They just need to be able and willing to learn new things.
If the Linux desktop doesn't become as user friendly in both installation and maintanence as WinXX is *percieved* to be (and it's there for many hardware configurations and in the hands of folks like you and I) then the KDE and GNOME folks are wasting their time.
Again, I have to disagree. Making a computer accessable and easy to use is a worthy goal, and I don't think that we should base the success or failures of our desktop projects on how well they can imitate the Win32 GUI.
Julia has no reason to become a technically proficient computer user, as much as that would help her. She has a life. Linux is no making the PROMISE that she can user her computer with all the ease that WinXX offers. Except for her samba problem that may be true, but if she can't get samba to work then Linux is not the OS for here. JLK
I do think that there is a lot of hype out there, and that is unfortunate. Hoever, new users should gain a certain level of technical proficiency. Julia herself claimed that a computer was a tool. Well, guess what... We use tools everyday, and we all had to learn how to use them at one time or another. Why should a computer be any different? - v -- Victor R. Cardona vcardona@home.com "Behold the keyboard of Kahless, the greatest Klingon code warrior that ever lived!"
The bottom line is this: We are in an intermediate world between the way computers used to be, command line control by nerds), to the way they WILL be, voice activated AI devices that learn as they are used. A previous comment compared computers to cars and suggested that having ot become a mechanic in order to use a car was rediculous. Even some nerds don't want to become more computer expert than they are, they just want to be able to use the computer on what they are really interested in. I.e., some folks don't want to be continually "working on their car", and they don't want to manually adjust the spark advance, manifold pressure, carb heat, tire pressure and generator belt tension. They just want it to work when they hop in, turn the key, and take off. I have an AS in Science, a BS in Chemical Education, and MS in Biochemistry, which major graduate hours in Physics and Math. I also earned major hours in Biology, Earth Science, Bible and Greek, and several hours in numerical analysis and fortran programming. (No CS depts when I went to grad school). I've earned 36 hours beyond the MS in several disciplines. I just love to learn things. For 15 years I had my own consulting business installing hardware and networks and writing software. But, my main interest in computers is two fold: as a tool to study the Bible and in using math engines to solve calculus problems relating to physics problems that retain my interest. I was vary annoyed when I had to spend 3 days to sovlve the Zip100 problem in 7.1 when it was just a two line entry in boot.local in 7.0, taking no more than 3 minutes. That's replowing old ground and is a tremendeous time waster. If I didn't have such a larege disrespect for Gate and M$ unethical behavior I probably would have returned to WinXX and waited another year or two to see if things smooth out. I've been trying to get BibleTime to compile for over 6 months. I thought that if I loaded both KDE1 and KDE2 it would work again, like it used to. Nope. I've got to be a programmer again if I want to get it to run. While some may have an interest in doing that I do not. That I have the skill to do it if I wanted to is not material. I choose not to because I have other, more interesting things to do with my time. Julia is of the same mind. Someday, the hardware + OS + software combination may be powerful enough to work by voice command in a practical way. Meanwhile, as Linux works toward a more GUI (vocal?) interface it will attract other users. Many may not be technically skilled as you wouls wish.. Many, like me, may be but have other users for their time. If the Linux community wants the status quo to remain as it is then the best way to achieve that is to suspend GUI RAD development and re-emphasize emacs and the command line. Not even X windows. Just the console and command line. After all, as many keep telling us over and over and over, LateX worlks better than Word or WP for wordprocessing. "Don't have to use no stinking GUI". This would about guarantee that only techno nerds would be using it. Pleading for folks to 'User their brans" or "have some gumption" and "learn" Linux is a waste of time. About all the folks that would would be interested in Linux because of its technical challange have already climed on board. The rest are the great unwashed masses who think it would be nice if a compter was a stable reliable appliance that did what they wanted to do without getting in their way, or costing them an arm and a leg in license fees. Julia is right. The folks at KDE and GNOME realize this and they are working as fast as they can to make it so. They have to be supported by the distro makers like SuSE. SuSE is, in my opinion, the best destro on the planet, but even they make progress in starts and stops and the occasional regression in some areass, like Zip drives :), As long as they take more steps forwared than backwards progress is being made. The Julias are not sensitive to preaching or 'sensitivity training' They don't care. Either it is ready and it works, or it is not. If it is not... bye. JLK On Friday 02 March 2001 15:58, Victor R. Cardona wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 06:42:24AM -0600, Jerry Kreps wrote:
However, Linux is moving as fast as it's army of coders can move it into the rodent driven GUI world. In that world no particular technical expertise is required besides knowing how to point and click and where the nearest help desk is located for the more complicated procedures (Help! my kernel paniced! what does that mean?) See below
That is what we should avoid. I am all for making computers easy and accessable, but I do not think that we should reduce users to drooling, mouse-clicking idiots. Microsoft does that because it allows them to retain control over their users. We as Open Source/Free Software developers and advocates should rise above that.
That's the point! Julia and many other newbies, not all, DON"T HAVE the technical background to become 'proficient' in Linux as you seem to think they must. I've had a computer in my home since 1978 and my wife has only recently learned how to turn it on and run the browser and email. My wife is not stupid, but she doesn't have the training or interest to become technically literate. I showed her how to point an click. She's happy. That ALL she needs to know. I can guarantee that the recent Zip100 problem would have sent her to Windows or off the computer all together had she been required to tackle it alone.
I know that hardware trouble can be frustrating, and you are probably right in that many newbies probably would throw in the towel. I disagree with your assesment of users though. Users may not have a technical background, and they really don't need one. They just need to be able and willing to learn new things.
If the Linux desktop doesn't become as user friendly in both installation and maintanence as WinXX is *percieved* to be (and it's there for many hardware configurations and in the hands of folks like you and I) then the KDE and GNOME folks are wasting their time.
Again, I have to disagree. Making a computer accessable and easy to use is a worthy goal, and I don't think that we should base the success or failures of our desktop projects on how well they can imitate the Win32 GUI.
Julia has no reason to become a technically proficient computer user, as much as that would help her. She has a life. Linux is no making the PROMISE that she can user her computer with all the ease that WinXX offers. Except for her samba problem that may be true, but if she can't get samba to work then Linux is not the OS for here. JLK
I do think that there is a lot of hype out there, and that is unfortunate. Hoever, new users should gain a certain level of technical proficiency. Julia herself claimed that a computer was a tool. Well, guess what... We use tools everyday, and we all had to learn how to use them at one time or another. Why should a computer be any different?
- v
On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 05:31:19PM -0600, Jerry Kreps wrote:
The Julias are not sensitive to preaching or 'sensitivity training' They don't care. Either it is ready and it works, or it is not. If it is not... bye. JLK
That is why I said in my original reply that perhaps Linux was not for her. No one operating system is going to be suitable for everyone. - v -- Victor R. Cardona vcardona@home.com "Behold the keyboard of Kahless, the greatest Klingon code warrior that ever lived!"
participants (4)
-
Jerry Kreps -
Michael Schwager -
Purple Shirt -
Victor R. Cardona