I am very familiar with Billyware and can make it do almost everything my clients or I need.
That being said, I would prefer to be using Linux for all my needs. But I lack the time and energy
to learn ALL the ins and outs so given a choice I'll use a distro that covers as much of that as possible.
I learned how to drive many moons ago in a VW Bug. I even learned how to work on the engine, clutch
and brakes. And I was proud of that.
Now I drive a 2001 Saturn. If it breaks, I take it to the mechanic, because my time is better spent
on other things. My view of my car is that it is a tool that facilitates transportation. My view of
computers is similar. I need a dependable tool, but I do not necessarily want or need to be
fiddling with it all the time. I think that is fairly descriptive of the mainstream population of
people.
Another example of this is probably PDAs running Palm OS. Out of the box they do pretty much
exactly what they were intended, with a very very short learning curve for the average user.
More sophisticated users can add all kinds of stuff in as needed, but the basic package is
pretty clean and easy.
Full scale computer OSs are a lot more complicated to implement because they have to do so much more
with so many more pieces of hardware. However, there has to be some sort of reasonable and acceptable
compromise in features, add-on software, GUI etc. if there is an expectation of appealing to the mainstream
user.
Dennis
At 12:09 PM 6/13/2003 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All the helpful suggestions on this list are one reason Linux has garnered such a good reputation -- not only for the helpful nature of the community, but also for the range of solutions available for a given problem. If I had to sum up my reasons for using Linux, it would be that helpfulness, and that flexibility.
That being said, the main issue with the original post is still a big one for desktop Linux. Red Hat is the distro most identified with Linux in general, and like others it has tried its best to be a Windows/Mac replacement -- same rich interface, same capabilities, same ease of installation and administration. They and the GNU/Linux/open-source developer obviously have some work ahead of them, and that's not taking away from the huge amount of work that has already been done.
But the goal is still out there -- desktop Linux needs to have the same rich interface and features that Microsoft and Apple have led the average user to expect. Switching to a faster, but less feature-filled interface, isn't the ideal solution. It doesn't matter that KDE or Gnome get installed with a boatload of features that one, a few or all of us don't need. Someone wanted or expected it there, and it's all about the greatest utility for the greatest number. Linux bloatware should run at least as fast as Windows bloatware out of the box, and any performance tweaking should be done automatically, without bothering the average user.
Most of us on this list understand how to tweak, optimize and choose software that gets the biggest bang out of the machine. And that's great. Since I've switched to Gentoo and its kernel I've never looked back. Hdparm is a wonderful tool. But I also know that our approach to computing is very different from most people I know, and although that sample size is pretty small I feel reasonably confident that I'm in a small minority of geeks and malcontents. Not that I mind.
But the performance comparison Eric gave us should not stand for the average user, who after all wants the features bloatware gives them. It's not confusion or a moral failing on their part -- it's how they get the most out of their computer, which is the ultimate goal. And the key is that my or your idea of "most" probably differ from others. For someone not real familiar with computers, they don't care that Emacs or vi is a more productive way to edit text, or that Blackbox is faster than KDE. They want the WYSIWYG "certainty" something like Word provides, the helpful wizards, and friendly, soothing bells and whistles of Windows. They're not misguided, but they do have different priorities. They should be able to get a similar experience on the Linux side without having to take a performance hit.
-Marcel
Marcel Levy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________ RLUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
_______________________________________________ RLUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
