I love what you're saying Kevin, Oh, the juices are flowing this morning (a Friday at that, go figure) so I figure I'd a add a bit to what you're saying.
I read an interesting quote the other day on a comments section of an article. A guy got into saying that he thinks (quite correctly) that something like a 486 is a valuable and usable computer, citing several examples, like mail server, webserver, firewall ...etc. He also made the point (this was an article about how MS is their own worst enemy) that by MS continually forcing the upgrade cycle, people are developing an impression about how non-useful old hardware is, blar blar blar (nothing new here). Here's the point of this present rambling; he finished his comment by saying that "I want my kids to learn about using Computers, not using Microsoft" What I like about this comment is that it clarifies some of the struggles people have with trying out Linux. Being fluently bilingual I understand this concept quite well. Anyone who has travelled and immersed themselves in another culture or simply immersed themselves in a different language, understands that one's perspective is unfailingly changed by doing so. No one language/culture defines reality (as much as some may like to think). Knowing more than one language/culture is like listening to music in stereo (as opposed to mono). There's simply no turning back and no un-doing that experience. By extension, I'd argue that by knowing more than one OS, I believe a person has a much clearer understanding of "computers" (and their capabilities) as a whole. Let's face it, the majority of people we live and work with have had their major technological breakthroughs on computers while using Windows. That is how they learned to get things done, and it's a good feeling knowing you can do what you need to do, and even better when people ask you how to do things. That's all about mastery and feelings of self-worth (and a bunch of other stuff I won't bore you all with). Many of these same people are challenged when the familiarity of Windows is replaced by what may be compared to a new language and culture. ...how do you say "My Documents"? Shifting back into the language concept earlier alluded to, it is the language they know. The better they know the language the more adaptable they may be because they understand the grammatical rules and are able to map those ideas a bit more quickly. Someone totally new to computers who starts by using Linux, MacOS, BeOS, Amiga, etc may find themselves in a similar situation. However, any OS based on POSIX will have immediate transferability similar to that shared by Latin based languages. I like to think that newcomers to Linux are like people who decide they want to experience the world and go travelling and/or learning another language. They are an adventurous lot as a rule. There are others who are simply sick of the language/cultures they know and travel in the hopes of finding something better elsewhere. I would say curiosity and adventure are the prime motivators to "Trying Linux". So, in response to the question "Should non-techies avoid Linux?" I would say a resounding NO!, that would be like asking whether I need to be a linguist to travel abroad, hell no! A bottle of wine (no pun) can conquer more language barriers than a Ph.D. ...Just be aware that you're going to notice some big differences between the world you are used to and the place you're travelling in, the world of Linux. Maybe have a look a the brochure (knoppix), and study the culture a bit before you go. Like many of us here, you might want to get your free patch of land (as opposed to paying rent) and make it your home. :) Marcel -----Original Message----- From: Kevin Anderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 8:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: (clug-talk) should non-techies avoid Linux? Linux support is more community minded that anything else. There's no phone number (generally) for someone to call for assistance. You'd ask questions here, and we'd help where we could. For non-tech people, especially frustrated non-tech people, which is the category you're moving into (from the sound of previous posts), I'd recommend Knoppix. It's a non-committal way to test out Linux. You load your windows machine up, download it, burn it, put it into your CDR, and reboot. When it comes up, it'll be running a completed Linux distro. You can play with it a bit, and see if it's "for you" from there. If it is, then I'd suggest starting with Red Hat, Mandrake or Suse. Red Hat is the best documented, both in print, and on the web, PLUS, almost every Linux user has seen Red Hat at one time or another so I'd put them first. Mandrake is probably most common distro among the people on this mailing list, so it'll be the easiest for people to help you with, Put that second. I've heard lots of good things about Suse, and it's by far the most popular distro in Europe, so I'd say that would be my third choice. I'll bite on what reads like a troll, but is probably just frustration. Non-technical people should use Linux because once running, it just works. Technical or not, you're here because you're dissatisfied with Windows. Linux has a learning curve, you should understand that right off the bat. But the truth is, once you've learnt the basics, you'll have a system that you like better because it doesn't make the assumption that you are a moron. Microsoft's Paperclip helper might be fine the first time he interrupts your work; in fact he might even be helpful; but after about the 10th, you want him gone, but you can't get rid of him (unless you pay for an upgrade to a different version of Office). Linux doesn't hold you hand right off the bat. You will end up asking for help here or somewhere like this. But in the end, YOU will know how to do the work, you won't rely on some idiotic, irritating paperclip to do it for you. That might seem inconsequential, but it isn't. The paperclip is meant to be helpful, and it often is. I'll ignore the annoying side for now, the real problem is that it (and most Windows products) are overly idiot friendly. This is great in the beginning, but it ends up being a bad thing. Think of it like this. If you were wanting to learn chess, and I offered to help, that would be gsound great. Initially, I'd help by advising you on all your moves. After a few games though, you'd want to make the moves on your own, and my making every move on your behalf would become annoying. After LOTS of games, you wouldn't want to learn about chess because every time you played, I did everything for you. It would be better for you to be able to make your own moves, even if it meant mistakes, because learning is as important as winning. Windows has lots of Wizards looking over your shoulder. Linux has few if any. Linux means that if you need help, you need to turn to other people, and ask for help. Some people find that hard at first, but the reality is, we were all new once, and none of us know it all. In the end, you will know more you would if a wizard helped. That sounds a bit eliteist, but it isn't. Knowing Linux will actually help you learn Windows, Mac's OS X, Your PlayStation, and almost every other computer you'll encounter. The reason is that rather than learning to click in the right place at the right time, you'll learn how the underlying pieces fit together and interact. If you know how to point and click, you need to relearn it every time you change OSes. Lastly, non-technical people generally underestimate themselves. I'm sure you can run a TV/VCR/Microwave/Playstation/Calculator/Cell Phone/etc without any problem. People think they don't know how to work a computer because they place the blame in the wrong place when their PC crashes. Keep this in mind. The problem is the PC, not you. That includes Linux. There will be times that it crashes, or is too difficult or whatever, that's a problem with the Operating System, not with the user. Those other computers don't crash, why does your PC? I'd answer, but this is long enough already. Kev. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pat Roche" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 6:58 PM Subject: (clug-talk) should non-techies avoid Linux? > > After an unsuccessful weekend struggle to get Red Hat 8 working properly, I'd like to hear the views of this technically adept group on whether non-technical people > should attempt Linux at all? > > Should someone who doesn't have the technical aptitude to do his own troubleshooting avoid Linux until it becomes less problem-prone (e.g., Jesse's recently posted > headache with Mandrake 9.0? > > If your answer is "go for it anyway," which distro would you recommend? > > And do you have a phone number I can call when I run into trouble? > > Pat Roche > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This communication is intended for the use of the recipient to which it is addressed, and may contain confidential, personal, and or privileged information. Please contact us immediately if you are not the intended recipient of this communication, and do not copy, distribute, or take action relying on it. Any communication received in error, or subsequent reply, should be deleted or destroyed.
