Philip Serracino Inglott wrote:
On Wed, 2004-05-26 at 20:28, Keith Vassallo wrote:
Philip Serracino Inglott wrote:
I do not have a problem with admitting that Desktop usability for
the average home user is a problem on Linux, or that it lags
behind windows. Just as long as it is clear what you mean
by Usability and what you mean by the Average Home User.
Usability
1) You spend more time working on a system then configuring it
Granted!
2) You can do whatever you want (if you want) without touching a
command line
Ouch! if you are blind or have a motor disabilty thaen a mouse is
pretty useless!
This is like asking "where is the brake" on a ship.
Windows Icons Mouse and Pointer are just one way to look at things and
in windows I still cannot do whatever I want without touching the
command line. try and set up a laptop you use on different subnets with
different dns and other configuration options on each ... how do you do
it -- trough a shell script!
Besides I think the above to points are a bit mutually exclusive!
3) Interfaces are consistent
SURE! i'd love that.
(I assume you are not considering CLIs since there
most interfaces are consistent, but this is besides the point)
4) Help files are actually help files, not "about" files.
A VERY BIG OUCH! Yes DOcumentation in Linux is a Very weak point. But
then again it is somthing there is never enough of.
Some developers don't seem to know the difference between technical and
user documentation
Average Home User:
1) Someone who's hobby and profession are not computers
2) Someone who has to use computers for their hobby/profession
hmmmm my mum uses a computer to comunicate with relatives abroad and
read stuff of general interest online (which she does not need to do,
she could always read a magazine, altough it would be more of a hassle),
and ocassonally type and print somthing.
so she is NOT an avarage home user?
Remember NOT ALL users are average home users.
A few years back BOV replaced their dos based system with a
windows based one. The result was that what a bank clerk could
do blindfolded in a few (several actually) keystroke now requires the
bank clerk to move his/her right hand from numpad to mouse and back
around 10 times for each transaction. If what was needed was a Graphical
display to fit more info and a multitasking system to allow different
applications, it could have been the case that Linux would have been
more adequate.
The old system was definately faster then the new system - and hence,
more usable - but ONLY to bank employees who had been using it for ages.
I'm sure that if a new bank employee who had never used the system had
to choose between the GUI and CDL versions, the GUI would definately be
chosen.
Why? are you sure? even if he would be told that he would need more time
in training and would be slower at his job?
Likewise, in Linux usability we shouldn't target hardcore UNIX and Linux
users... They don't need usability, they've adapted themselves to the
quirks of the system. However, you can't expect a novice user, who isn't
even interested in computers, to spend time adapting themselves to all
these quirks.
If someone is not interested in the least in computers why should they
use it? If someone is not interested in travelling should they have a
car, or learn how to drive?
This is like saying that if I am not interested in carpentry
I still should be able to use a saw to cut some wood without ever
learning how to do it. Sure I can get the saw and hack away senselessly
at the wood, but is it not more sensible to spend time learning the
quirks of the system. i.e. how to hold a saw properly, how to use my
thumb as a guide without slicing it off etc ....
Do not think this is far-fetched I once saw a boat-builder who could not
use a marine VHF radio. He insisted on using it like a telephone, never
pressing the PTT. It is ridiculous to expect ALL technology to be
trivial to use without training, especially powerful technology like
computers and cars!
Edward Debono always says this about his books on lateral thinking "I
write for people with down syndrome"
And the results are there for us to see :-)!!
My objection is that a sentence like this:
Their results just confirm the obvious: in certain areas, like
storage handling and uptime reliability, Linux wins. On usability and
ease of installation, Windows wins.
is merly confusing.
I don't find it confusing at all. I find that it's the truth
The TRUTH ... now your talking like you were GOD aka RMS.
Then again I am the kind of person who believes that if a person does
not at least know in theory how a car works, that person shouldn't drive
:-)
To "Drive" a computer you need the "European Computer DRIVING license"
(ECDL). As far as I know, nowhere in the sylabbus does it teach
"compiling a kernel", "using gcc" or "bash scripting for dummies"
Keith
The ECDL syllabus is based on MS products AFAIK ... 'nuff said!.
I find it ridiculous that there is not even a mention for the Mac. In
the States (not that I really bother), every classroom has a Mac. Thats
the first thing they ever learn. After all they are the pioneers of GUI
usability. Having said that, there are many other forms of Linux
certification, but they are aimed at the industry of professionals.
--
Philip Serracino Inglott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.inkwina.net/
--
Paul's Law: You can't fall off the floor.
_______________________________________________
MLUG-list mailing list
MLUG-list@linux.org.mt
http://mailserv.megabyte.net/mailman/listinfo/mlug-list
