-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi I will have to second this one. Also i would like to add, that Linux does not need (pushing). What it needs, is a solid knowhow from our side, and the familiarity with lots of the open-sourse / free solutions out there. Remember, it is choice that needs to be (pushed) propegated. Once the corporate realize they actually have a functional choice. Then they may swithch over to linux if they want to. Being exactly like vintage will not help linux. And remember when the first version 3 win came available. I still remember people stumbling around it, and not finding the solutions for their problems and screeming in agony and frustration :-) Cheers Szemir
On February 1, 2004 11:16, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > On January 31, 2004 02:42, Jesse Kline wrote: > > 1) Many people resist trying Linux because they are scared of using > > something unfamiliar. If they could start out without having to learn a > > new interface, then they could focus their time on checking out all the > > cool open source programs that Linux has to offer. > > i understand the psychological issues involved, but in that case perhaps > the person should just stay put. if there's no compelling reason for them > to move to Linux, such that "what does it look like" becomes a decision > breaker, then why should they switch? i can name half a dozen good reasons, > but if those don't mean anything to the user, then i'm not going to push =) > > in a corporate environment, it's up to the IT dpt and "does it look exactly > like windows" is fairly low on their "issues to discuss list" when it comes > to desktop replacement. > > the good news is that real world experience and tests have shown that the > retraining required for the difference in icons and menus takes <.5 day and > can be done en masse in larger roll-outs (e.g. workshops)... > > what really gets people are the differences in individual applications. > this is where XPDE actually has an advantage over most of the > theme-it-to-look like-windows 'solutions' as that project is duplicating > many of the individual bits and pieces of WindowsXP. it's a losing battle > though, as Windows is a moving target and there's a lot to replace. the > question is, how much time/comfort is actually saved by this approach, and > how much of the same-old problems will they confront? > > bottom line is that unless the user uses IE via Wine, they'll be using > Mozilla (or one of it's wrappers) or Konqueror which all diverge to some > extent from IE. which means they'll have to learn some differences between > "browsing the web on windows" and "browsing the web on Linux". the > differences are, thankfully, minor and usually the person picks them up as > they go along without hardly noticing. > > i really think that the "must look like Windows to succeed" theory is > largely the confused dreamings of ex-Windows _users_ with rather little > experience outside that realm. it's a red herring not worth chasing; i'd > rather see the XPDE folks improving KDE and/or GNOME =) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAHVLXsv2SdkgY6dURAsIpAJ4gAVz1xevrsJY6nBcw0hxMZ93BpACgwGr1 E1gsQrP71p/K6CWXRefTJB0= =96OM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca
