> > They're all there, its just that Mandrake has practically eliminated the > > need for the CLI tools. And don't think that this is _not_ what people > >It's not what *I* want, though it'd be nice at times to have them when >knowledge is lacking and it's not in a situation where it would stomp >on an existing custom-configured text file.
That's fine, and I want everyone to have what they want. Choice is paramount. Working the way you want to is critical. The problem lies with the new users. Whether they approach a Mac, Windows box, or even Mandrake configured Linux box if they can't get some results from it immediately they will walk away. Ask anyone who's spent a mere 5 minutes with any OS for the first time and if it didn't go well, that OS will go on their "Sucky" list. So, IMHO, the ultimate goal for Linux is twofold: -Create a GUI-based system that is the pinnacle of ease and intuitiveness. Tools should fall to hand. Menus should contain only the items that need to be there. A standardized widget set language should be created, allowing the user, not the developer, to globally decide what their widgets will look like and how they will work. This last item is critical. There are far too many widget libraries and no standards of appearance are adhered to. Leave choice in, but give the ultimate choice to the end-user. -Leave the system architecture alone. Don't fix what ain't broke. Design applications for both GUI and console use. Every time someone develops a new application they should also provide a framework that could be rolled into a global framework system. Make it easier to develop for Linux than it is for Windows. When starting a project, make it for Linux *and* MacOS X. Somebody please yank the WP code out of OpenOffice and make a real clone of M$ Word!! I believe that this mission approach will make Linux an Every Person OS... in time. Forget chasing Windows. Forget trying to integrate Windows this and Windows that. Dump WINE. Yes, I said dump WINE. There's enough talent out there to make Linux native versions of everything that Windows has, and nobody has to pay the Pied Piper of Redmond. Finally, stop being afraid of making proprietary code. People have to make money and making everything free is not going to do it. Keep the OS GNU licensed, but make some commercial apps, folks! Do you think M$ has nearly $40 billion in the bank because it gave everything away? > > Last, and certainly not least, is Linux. Even Red Hat, the self-appointed > > champion of the Open Source and Linux movements, has been unable to > achieve > > the ease of use and GUI integration of Mandrake. There are few distros > that > >Red Hat is not meant for the desktop, it's CEO and one of it's founders >have both made statements to that effect. Once that's been considered the >lack of GUI-driven tools versus having stable and more conservative >versions of software becomes important; availability of servers, not the >desktop, is their goal. What should be compared is Mandrake versus SuSE, >as SuSE hasn't abandoned the desktop market completely, though it is >closely involved with a partnership with IBM. (That will hopefully cure >it's occasional financial worries.) This is a major problem. The most visible Linux company in the world is saying that Linux is not bound for the desktop. If anyone is shooting themselves in the foot, its Linux. If IBM can take Linux and make an entire server business out of it and HP can sign a contract with Mandrake to supply them with desktop software (corporate or otherwise) then Linux can work on the desktop. In fact, its far more scalable than Windows. Hell, we've seen Linux in everything from a matchbox sized server to an IBM behemoth. What more does it take to prove the damn things worthiness!! Tyler _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list - http://linux.nf/mailman/listinfo/linux-users Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Archives,and Digests are located at the above URL.
