Mark Johnson wrote:
> Wow! That's really a refreshing viewpoint. I have this love/hate
> relationship with Linux. I started out as a GUI programmer in the NT world,
> and currently I write backend network management systems for Solaris/Linux
> as well as GUIs on NT - so I "wear two hats" so to speak in my career as a
> programmer. In general, I like Windows and I like Linux; however, I have
> not been able to afford the Linux religous zeal because my ability to eat
> and buy computer equipment was/is contigent on writing GUIs for Windows.
>
> I have always had this nagging feeling that the unix/linux community
> couldn't care less about user interfaces almost to the extent that GUIs were
> pretty much plain evil. If you think about it, all computer interfaces are
> GUIs whether it is a CLI terminal window or the GIMP. The GUIs in MAC,
> Windows, and BeOS are all really pretty good, they behave pretty much
> intuitively. Linux GUIs on the other hand are generally pretty crappy, maybe
> that's why a lot of Linux folks are always bemoaning GUIs? GUIs themselves
> are not road blocks, it's the design of a particular GUI that is a road
> block.
>
> I would have hoped by now, nearly 10 years, that someone out there in the
> Linux community would sit down an write something on par (IMHO) with MAC,
> Windows, and BeOS. Enlightenment is really cool, and so is KDE, but there
> is a consistency that is missing -- little trivial user feed-back things and
> navigation issues that don't have the maturity of the other GUIs on the
> market.
>
> I would be willing to pay as much for a decent GUI IDE for Linux as I do for
> Visual Studio/MSDN. KDevelop is realy great - a godsend in fact - but you
> get what you pay for. Just because it runs on Linux doesn't mean I will
> refuse to pay for it, or that I must have the source code for a particular
> product. Actually, for a majority of software products I could care less
> about owning the source code. It's not that I want an AOL-type OS, it's more
> that a lot of times I have other things to do than to tinker with my OS.
>
> I don't think the advancement in human-computer interfaces will ever be
> found within the Linux community - i think that's too bad. It will probably
> be this one thing that keeps Linux as a server/embedded OS or something for
> the OS hobbiest.
>
> I would really love it if Adobe, InstallShield, Quicken, etc, and even MS
> would develop products for Linux; however, if MS starting writing products
> for Linux I think many many people would chunk Windows in a heartbeat.
>
> ps: too bad that BeOS is de-emphasizing their place on the desktop - to me
> it was what Linux could be as a desktop OS...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brendan K Callahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, August 25, 2000 4:34 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [newbie] WIll this thread end?? lol
>
> OK, time for my 2 cents, lol
>
> I always enjoy having a Linux box--connecting a LAN to the internet is so
> stable that way!
>
> I also enjoy the *wealth* of apps available for Windows.
>
> Each OS has different consumers, and end uses in mind--the only real
> solution
> I've ever seen is to have at least two computers--one with Linux, and one
> with
> Windows. Each has it's strengths and weaknesses. Linux has gained on
> Windows
> for ease of use and installation in the last few years. WIndows, IMHO, has
> improved over the years. It's not perfect. Linux is not easy (but getting
> there very fast.). As my Canadian guest has said, the OS that combines the
> best of both, will win.
>
> And if you want to talk dumbing down of users by OS, I think Mac takes the
> cake
> for *that* one!
>
> Brendan K Callahan, Grinnell, IA, US K0EES, Extra Class License
> http://www.mp3.com/darkmare_romeo
> K0EES, Extra Class License <dahdidah dahdahdahdahdah dit dit dididit>
wouldnt it be cool if we could connect to our operating systems with
just our minds :)
now would that be easy or not
