On Thu August 12 2004 21:51, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > On Thursday 12 August 2004 09:21, Andrew Graupe wrote: > > turn, made me think about what I do on a regular basis to keep my linux > > system working perfectly, which can't exactly be described as > > user-friendly. > > it's hard to discuss generalities =) which things do you do on a regular > basis that aren't user-friendly? > > > This brings me to an interesting point: what does "ready > > for the desktop" actually mean? > > define "desktop" first, since not all desktops have equal needs or demands. > > > the desktop. Or does it mean that it is ready for use by the average > > computer user that justs wants to surf the web, check e-mail, and play > > games (collectively, the "Desktop" market, note the capital D)? > > there is no such thing as "the Desktop market" in the way you mean it. > there are desktop computers of various ilk, and these are sold into a large > number of rather different markets: corporate, scientific, government, call > centre, educational, home, gamer, etc, etc...each has its own peculiar > requirements. > > > I would > > argue that linux, although it is good, is not quite there yet. > > i would probably agree. there are segments that it isn't ready for yet, and > this is almost exclusively due to a lack of 3rd party commercial > applications on the platform that people are, for better or worse, > currently tied to at the hip. > > there's also the issue of accrued knowledge. keeping up a Windows or Mac > system is also a burdon. this is why most people don't change configuration > options much and rely on a friend or paid techie to help them through the > more difficult parts. power users usually manage on their own, but that's > because they've acrued system-specific knowledge. put a hard core Windows > user on a Mac, or vice versa; it's the same with Linux. there is a learning > curve involved if you want to manage your system, regardless of what system > that is. most people have accomplished that with past version of Windows > and Mac and so it's a past issue (and a current investment). moving to > Linux may mean making that investment again. > > i think we've done a lot of work towards minimizing that investment, > however. with well set up defaults, configuration tools that are becoming > easier and easier to use and familiar metaphores and application designs > it's pretty easy to switch a user over. getting under the hood is a > different question, but most people don't do that. > > that said, there are (large) segments for which Linux is quite ready for > daily use.
Thank you, Aaron. You nicely said everything I was thinking -- only your reply used coherent English and conveyed the concepts accurately. I'm not feeling quite so lucid (2 nights bad sleep, what can I say?). :-) Curtis _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca
