On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Binand Sethumadhavan <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 21 May 2013 06:14, Ashwin Dixit <[email protected]> wrote: > > When a Windows or BSD ( *BSD | OS X ) user locates a desired application > on > > the Internet, they pretty much know it will run for them. > > On Linux, you have to use the right package manager to install a desired > > application based on its package format, and your architecture. > > Choice is great for the brilliant Linux hacker, but terrible for the > > average Linux user. > > Care to give an example? A very recent personal experience. We needed to change the serial number on a serial dongle. The dongle maker had not provided any utility on linux, but had 200MB of crapware for doze. So we set about installing the software. Just insert the cd. Wait.......20 minutes later the customary reboot. AND "intelligent" doze has discovered new hardware, so insert cd again. AND..... reboot. Ad nauseum. The drivers and applications failed to install. What was supposed to be a 2 minute job failed to get done after more than an hour. Back to google. Found a small application on source forge. Download source. Compile. Run. 5 minutes from starting to google the job is done. The oft stated stance of windows being transparent to the user is plain rubbish. It is transparent for certain restricted and well defined run of the mill tasks, BUT even in those cases is substantially less stable and capable. Linux is actually substantially better for run of the mill stuff, and is absolutely unstoppable for all the other cases that one might think about. This is no accident. It is due to the diversity and richness of the ecosystem. As I stated earlier mucking up 98% of the market to cater to 2% of microserfs is dumb from every perspective. Almost all the third-party apps that I have > seen clearly says something along the lines of "Download for Windows, > OS X, Fedora, Debian....". Where is the confusion here? If I am > running Fedora I download the Fedora version. If I am running Debian, > I download the Debian version. > > > For an OS to be intelligent and user-friendly, it has to hide its > > complexity from the common user. > > The OS should just DWIM ( Do What I Mean ). > > > > The average human user, is statistically more error-prone than a modern > > machine. > > The user should be removed from the loops of most decisions. > > That is the line of thinking Microsoft adopted, and the larger FOSS > community wisely rejected. Why do you think the software is more > intelligent than the human and can take better decisions? > > > The OS should shield the common user from decisions such as: > > "Software updates available. Install now?" > > "Do you want to trust this site?" > > See above. Why do you think the computer is better poised to answer > either of these questions? Extending this line of thought, will you > let the computer order stuff from Flipkart for you on its own (and > charge your credit card)? > > Binand > -- > http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers > -- http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
