RE: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
Jumping in late here, I was on holidays... I'm afraid I need to disagree with this. I picked up linux mostly because I wanted to have some understanding of unix, but it does have potential to be a desktop os. Think about the ease of use complaints, the original poster complained about not knowing how to even change directories. Would it be so difficult to add alias dir="ls -F --color=tty" to the bash defaults in the distro? I don't think so, and setting up some aliases for In recent months, a new HOWTO has seen the light of day. It's called the Config HOWTO, and in the words of its author "This HOWTO aims at making the fine-tuning of your newly installed Linux box quicker and easier. Here you will find a set of configurations for the most common applications, so you can start to work with a well-usable system". I found some of the information to be of great use. I certainly didn't see anything glaringly wrong. I think many people would do well to read it, for there is much to recommend it. And should you have a trick for easing an installation that is not covered by the HOWTO... send it to the author. Now I would say that it might be very educational for new users to read this documentation, and apply some of the tricks and tips themselves... as part of the installation process. They will feel like they are doing something constructive. While we wait for mouse-pusher applets that front-end the editing of resource files, getting new users to edit dot files and the like has three important benefits: a) they learn what files control what behaviour, b) it encourages them to explore and c) they get a warm-fuzzy feeling of empowerment over their system. I'm sure the issues described in the Config HOWTO could be encapsulated in a Tcl application. But hey, it's easier just to grab the latest version of the HOWTO and follow the latest guidelines. I draw a parallel to the market for packet-mix cakes back in the fifties. Companies came out with packets of industrial powder where all you had to do was add water and mix, and stick it in the oven. Instant cake. Sales were disappointing. They then redesigned the glop by removing the powdered egg. To make the cake you had to add water, *break an egg*, and then mix and stick it in the oven. The sales took off overnight. The moral of the story is that people like to feel they are doing something constructive. The point to remember is that Whinedows does not install out of the box. Sure, it's useable, but who really uses it "bare"? I find I spend a couple of days installing things like PowerToys and KernelToys extensions, choosing cursor packs, chasing down a backup of my favourite screen background, tweaking the colour settings, etc., etc., and arranging things to be "just so". This is a *big* part of the addiction problem people have with Windows. It's too much fun wasting hours doing this sort of stuff. DL -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
RE: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
Adding aliases to the dist, IMO, would be very bad. People would use dir, or md, or whatever, without ever knowing the corresponding Linux commands. What would motivate people to learn the OS this way? Ok, what about $ cat dir echo I think you meant ls... (see: 'man ls') sleep 1 ls $* DL -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, William T Wilson wrote: On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Greg Thomas wrote: Adding aliases to the dist, IMO, would be very bad. People would use dir, or md, or whatever, without ever knowing the corresponding Linux commands. What would motivate people to learn the OS this way? I have mixed feelings here. The first thing I do whenever I install a Red Hat version of Linux is fix all the little "preferences" which I consider completely idiotic. I change the default prompt so it looks like Slackware; I can remember what system I'm logged in on but find it useful to know what directory I'm in. When you're regularly logged into three or four systems in multiple xterms, having the system name in the prompt is pretty handy. Whatever the case, prompts are and always have been a very personal thing. Everybody likes a different prompt. Red Hat's default is no better or worse than anyone else's. Personally, I think RH should have stuck with the shell defaults rather than set their own, but I don't think it's a big deal either way. Most users either don't care or are going to change it anyway. I get rid of the aliases on mv, rm, and cp, since all they do is slow things down. But that's good for newbies. In a multi-user environment such as an ISP, adding "-i" to everything is *very* valuable. When I completely redesigned our login scripts, I made a point of making sure those aliases stayed in. I add an alias to ls so it displays color. Not always good in multi-user environments. Not all terminal emulators handle colors very well. In short I make a couple little tweaks. Who is to say that adding a set of "DOS compatibility aliases" is so wrong? Personally, I like the idea of environment options. Say, if the user has a certain file ($HOME/.dosenv), the system login scripts add certain additional environment features to mimic DOS. The login configuration system we use here looks in a directory named .shellconf in the user's login directory for a whole variety of configurable parameters. For instance, if the user wants to define the $ORGANIZATION environment variable, they need only put the defintion they want into a file named "organization" in their ".shellconf" directory. The advantage is that users don't have to tinker with any shell scripts at all. The down side is that it slows login down a little. Yes, it prevents the user from using the Unix commands and makes Linux seem like DOS. But for those familiar with DOS it may make things easier. The best thing would be aliasing it to something like alias dir="echo 'dir is a DOS command, you should use ls instead'; sleep 2; ls" Except "dir" is not strictly a DOS command, and its existance in DOS doesn't preclude its existance in any other environment. There's no reason Linux can't also have a "dir" command. -- Steve Coile [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Bruce Tong wrote: [...] * Each machine will eventually be a web server as this is how individuals will collaborate their work as well as access their own information from remote locations. Already Linux is like this. MacOS now ships with "Personal Web Sharing." Windows will follow suit in time. HTTP is not designed well for file sharing and collaboration, just for file publishing. CIFS is better suited for collaboration. The big advantages of HTTP-based Web servers are (a) CGI and (b) content negotiation, neither of which are really used by the average desktop user. * Each machine could have its own database server, as needed. Today, individuals maintain personal databases in "MS Works"-like applications. SQL Servers have taken great strides to accomodate the net, and I see no reason why this won't happen with the smaller databases, or the SQL databases could scale down. Linux already does this. Hopefully, future OSes will have mature database management systems built in and used extensively for configuration purposes. The Windows 95 and Windows NT Registry is a step in that direction. X's rdb was an early attempt at such a system, but it never caught on well within the X world, let alone outside of X. -- Steve Coile [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Steve "Stevers!" Coile wrote: the case, prompts are and always have been a very personal thing. I think it's the first thing in a long time that we agreed on :) But that's good for newbies. In a multi-user environment such as an ISP, adding "-i" to everything is *very* valuable. When I completely I disagree. If you have to hit 'y' every time you issue a command, you just start hitting 'y' all the time. Soon it is no benefit at all, but the hassle never goes away. Not always good in multi-user environments. Not all terminal emulators handle colors very well. Which ones don't? All the common terminal emulators I know of either ignore the color information or simply make colored text bold or underlined or something they can do. The only exception being that some colors on my Apple // show up garbled, but I don't worry too much about that. :) For instance, if the user wants to define the $ORGANIZATION environment variable, they need only put the defintion they want into a file named "organization" in their ".shellconf" directory. The advantage is that That's kind of neat. Except "dir" is not strictly a DOS command, and its existance in DOS doesn't preclude its existance in any other environment. There's no No, but it's most common in DOS, and the majority of users who will be unfamiliar with the Unix command set will come from a DOS background. The most common OS's are DOS/Windows (which obviously follows the DOS command set), Unices (where the users will already know the right commands), Macintosh (which has no legacy command line at all), OS/2 (which also uses the DOS command set), and a small fraction of VMS users (who probably will at least be prepared to learn some new commands). I don't think we need to worry about users coming from a Commodore 64, Apple //, or CP/M background (and CP/M uses the DOS commands anyway, or vice versa :) ). In short, I think, the DOS command set is the only one worth worrying about. reason Linux can't also have a "dir" command. Except that the appropriate command for this in Linux is 'ls'. It is hard enough to go from one OS to another and learn all the commands, even between BSD and SysV based Unices. How much worse would it be if every installation of Linux had a different set of commands too. -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Greg Thomas wrote: [...] Adding aliases to the dist, IMO, would be very bad. People would use dir, or md, or whatever, without ever knowing the corresponding Linux commands. What would motivate people to learn the OS this way? Why should they have to? If the aliases allow the users to get their work done easily and without confusion, what difference does it make? -- Steve Coile [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
Adding aliases to the dist, IMO, would be very bad. People would use dir, or md, or whatever, without ever knowing the corresponding Linux commands. What would motivate people to learn the OS this way? Why should they have to? If the aliases allow the users to get their work done easily and without confusion, what difference does it make? Yeah, but don't you think a pre-existing alias in a particular distribution would cause confusion? If somebody started new and typed in md and it worked they would not even wonder if it was a Linux native command. So they get a job or something where there are Linux machines and they go and try md and it isn't there, they're gonna go crazy, right? Wrong? I don't know, it just seems like it's playing the Microsoft game of making things easy to use at the expense of efficiency and knowing what's really going on. I really liked the idea of putting a little message in the alias telling the user that it was a DOS command, they could then either get rid of the message and continue using md or they could start using mkdir. Greg -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Greg Thomas wrote: [...] ...but don't you think a pre-existing alias in a particular distribution would cause confusion? If somebody started new and typed in md and it worked they would not even wonder if it was a Linux native command. So they get a job or something where there are Linux machines and they go and try md and it isn't there, they're gonna go crazy, right? Wrong? But that's already going to be the case. Every variant of UNIX (and thus Linux) is different somehow. There's always going to be some degree of confusion moving between UNIX and Linux variants. Another way to look at this: if organizations like Red Hat (and Caldera, and Debian, ...) don't make an effort to improve the UNIX user interface, who will? Are we to hope that UNIX will have the same, cryptic interface in 10 years that it has today, or should we hope that it will improve? I don't know, it just seems like it's playing the Microsoft game of making things easy to use at the expense of efficiency and knowing what's really going on. The problem with Microsoft is that they make it difficult to get at the guts of the system. Aliases just disguise the guts, they don't prevent access to them. I consider that a big distinction. I really liked the idea of putting a little message in the alias telling the user that it was a DOS command, they could then either get rid of the message and continue using md or they could start using mkdir. Ick. -- Steve Coile [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, William T Wilson wrote: On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Steve "Stevers!" Coile wrote: who will? Are we to hope that UNIX will have the same, cryptic interface in 10 years that it has today, or should we hope that it will improve? No, we should hope that it will improve. But replacing all the Unix commands with identical DOS commands is not a step in the right direction. Don't get stuck in an "us versus them" mentality. Just because Microsoft does something doesn't mean Microsoft's doing it wrong. If people know and understand "dir", "ren", and "del", why not accomodate them? We're not accomodating Microsoft, we're accomodating *OUR* users. Linux should not pretend to be where Microsoft was 10 years ago. It is important to emphasize that Linux is not DOS. I agree, but we shouldn't ignore conventions and expectations that have developed. We don't need to make things difficult just because easy seems too "Microsoft". That will simultaneously make new users realize that it is probably BETTER than DOS,... I'm afraid most people don't equate difficulty with "better". We're talking about command names here. The best command name is one that users find convenient. If most people thought it was convenient to type "moosebuckets" instead of "ls" or "dir", we should accomodate that. ...and at the same time if it does not try to pretend to be DOS then users will be less likely to be upset when it turns out to not, in fact, be DOS. A user presented with a Linux (bash) feature such as job control will be astounded. Is it better to think "DOS doesn't have it, I'm really using DOS, so I shouldn't use it here either" or to think "this must be one of those neat Linux features." But shouldn't we try to ease the transition from other operating systems to Linux? Hell, if Linux is so great, shouldn't it be able to make users with any OS background comfortable? Conceivably, we should be able to provide user interfaces that are familiar to people with diverse backgrounds. The problem with Microsoft is that they make it difficult to get at the guts of the system. Aliases just disguise the guts, they don't prevent access to them. I consider that a big distinction. Maybe for you as an experienced user, but insulating the user from knowing what's going on also makes for uneducated users, users who must continually call tech support for basic tasks. I disagree with your implication that the average person will, if presented with a difficult alternative and an easy alternative, will choose the difficult alternative because it may potentially be possibly better maybe. If UNIX is kept difficult under the pretence of encouraging users to learn the inner workings of it, UNIX will continue to founder in the face of simple OSes like Windows 95. Most people don't want to learn the guts of their system. Most people don't want to have to think about their computer, any more than they want to think about how their car works. I'm not saying that users must know how to do everything, only that there isn't any need to actively prevent them from learning about the system. Putting aliases around commands is NOT "actively prevent[ing] [users] from learning about the system." NOT putting aliases in place specifically to "encourage" users to learn more about the system is actively preventing users from USING their system by forcing them spend time researching operating of the system. -- Steve Coile [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Joe Klemmer wrote: [...] Linux is NOT in competition with anything MS produces. Huh? Since when? What, then, *is* Linux competing with? What niche market does Linux serve without competition? -- Steve Coile [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Steve "Stevers!" Coile wrote: Don't get stuck in an "us versus them" mentality. Just because Microsoft does something doesn't mean Microsoft's doing it wrong. If people I'm not. I don't have any religious dislike for Microsoft. I like their context sensitive help, for example. (I just wish it were more helpful). I do, however, believe that Linux should not attempt to pretend to be Microsoft, because it isn't. Users who use Linux want it usually because it is NOT Microsoft, and they have (for whatever reason) gotten tired of Microsoft. Either the expense, the instability, the waste of system resources, or maybe the interface (which drives me nuts). digression Actually, I think I've been able to trace most of my irritation with Microsoft interfaces to the fact that they present so many non-functional controls and so many controls which vanish whenever some random program decides it should be more important. It is not uncommon for a Windows 95 system to take five minutes to boot and get all the startup programs launched, and during this entire time you are sitting there trying to run a program out of the start menu, except that it is constantly disappearing. /digression I agree, but we shouldn't ignore conventions and expectations that have developed. We don't need to make things difficult just because This is exactly what I have been saying, and it is why I recommend that we stick to the existing Linux conventions. talking about command names here. The best command name is one that users find convenient. If most people thought it was convenient to type "moosebuckets" instead of "ls" or "dir", we should accomodate that. What I am trying to avoid is a situation wherein a user goes to apply for a position in some company, and they say "Do you have any experience with UNIX?" The applicant says, "Yes, I've used Linux on my home system for five years!" The applicant is hired, and is unable to use the Unix system at the place of work. Even worse, is for the boss to say "That doesn't count, Linux is nothing like UNIX." I disagree with your implication that the average person will, if presented with a difficult alternative and an easy alternative, will choose the difficult alternative because it may potentially be possibly A user will rarely choose the "more difficult alternative" under any circumstances. However, I don't think that 'ls' is any more difficult than 'dir', and I don't think that 'mkdir' is any more difficult than 'md' (except that it's longer to type). When it comes to using a GUI, of course (which any user concerned about ease of use will want), as long as it's "intuitive" then it doesn't matter. These days Windows and Macintosh are less and less alike but they're both "simple enough" so users can cope with it. Just like it doesn't matter too much whether you type 'ls' or 'dir' it doesn't matter too much whether you switch between tasks by clicking on the button on the taskbar or picking them out of the little menu in the corner of the screen. It all does the same thing, and I don't think there's any useful way to say that one is 'easier' than the other. better maybe. If UNIX is kept difficult under the pretence of encouraging users to learn the inner workings of it, UNIX will continue to founder I'm not advocating that. I simply believe that a dialog box which says "Windows has detected a conflict between installed devices and was unable to resolve it." is much less useful than "Windows has detected that your modem and mouse are both using the same interrupt line, and cannot automatically resolve the problem. One of the devices must be reconfigured to use a different interrupt line." For the non-technical user who doesn't care how it works, then the two errors have the same effect. "My computer won't work." But a curious user will wonder "what's an interrupt line?" He might even go look it up in the documentation (which of course, no longer contains information like this because it is much more concerned with telling users which end of the mouse is up). Technical support will have to spend much less time trying to figure out what the problem is. Overall it is better to present the information. But Microsoft does not do this. Putting aliases around commands is NOT "actively prevent[ing] [users] from learning about the system." It is indeed. A user who comes from DOS, knows dir, and never learns any different because of the existence of this alias, has been prevented from learning about the system. A user whose dir alias makes a fuss, has been encouraged to learn about the system. NOT putting aliases in place specifically to "encourage" users to learn more about the system is actively preventing users from USING their system by forcing them spend time researching operating of the system. I don't advocate this. Don't forget, I was the one that suggested using the aliases in the first place. I simply believe
Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree. I personaly don't like Windoze, but there are thing Linux can learn from MS: mainly, some easy to use interfaces that can help those who just bought Linux to configure their machines and learn the basics, so they would be able to go deeper after that.. The basic problem with all this is that Linux is NOT a desktop OS like Win3/95 or OS/2 or the Mac. It's a high end server OS. It's not even in the same category as Win95. If you've tried to install NT you know that it is much more difficult than installing 95. And Linux is to NT what the SST is to the Wright Brothers plane (yes, that is my quote) so the inherent level of complexity will always be greater no matter what you try to do to make it easier. It's like apples and oranges. --- "Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup." -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
I agree. I personaly don't like Windoze, but there are thing Linux can learn from MS: mainly, some easy to use interfaces that can help those who just bought Linux to configure their machines and learn the basics, so they would be able to go deeper after that.. The basic problem with all this is that Linux is NOT a desktop OS like Win3/95 or OS/2 or the Mac. It's a high end server OS. It's not even in the same category as Win95. If you've tried to install NT you know that it is much more difficult than installing 95. And Linux is to NT what the SST is to the Wright Brothers plane (yes, that is my quote) so the inherent level of complexity will always be greater no matter what you try to do to make it easier. It's like apples and oranges. I'm afraid I need to disagree with this. I picked up linux mostly because I wanted to have some understanding of unix, but it does have potential to be a desktop os. Think about the ease of use complaints, the original poster complained about not knowing how to even change directories. Would it be so difficult to add alias dir="ls -F --color=tty" to the bash defaults in the distro? I don't think so, and setting up some aliases for ease of use was among the first things I did when I got going. Little things like this go a long way. Yeah, it might be a little more complex, but maybe the installer could have options like installing packages as a workstation, as a web server, etc. It's naive and counter productive to say that becuase something is inherently complex that it can't be made more easy to use. I know my machine is easier for me to use just because of little thinks like that. Adding an easy to use window manager and some aliases might just give some the inpetus to dig deeper. Don't throw them off just because of any initial lack of sophistication. -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
I'm afraid I need to disagree with this. I picked up linux mostly because I wanted to have some understanding of unix, but it does have potential to be a desktop os. Think about the ease of use complaints, the original poster complained about not knowing how to even change directories. Would it be so difficult to add alias dir="ls -F --color=tty" to the bash defaults in the distro? I don't think so, and setting up some aliases for ease of use was among the first things I did when I got going. Little things like this go a long way. Yeah, it might be a little more complex, Adding aliases to the dist, IMO, would be very bad. People would use dir, or md, or whatever, without ever knowing the corresponding Linux commands. What would motivate people to learn the OS this way? -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
I'm using RH 5.0 on my desktop, and planning to upgrade my users to it : - RH 5.0 - StarOffice 4.0, when StarDiv issue a french version - Netscape Communicator 4 - Java intranet applications we're developping - MySQL ... We just need to choose compatible hardware. Most low-priced PC are compatible with Linux. -- Jean-Christophe PRAUD - LUDEXPRESS Game Web: http://www.pbm-chronos.com Perso Web: http://www.brutaltruth.com Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu n'gah Bill R'lyeh Wgah'nagl fhtagn. Craig Kattner wrote: I agree. I personaly don't like Windoze, but there are thing Linux can learn from MS: mainly, some easy to use interfaces that can help those who just bought Linux to configure their machines and learn the basics, so they would be able to go deeper after that.. The basic problem with all this is that Linux is NOT a desktop OS like Win3/95 or OS/2 or the Mac. It's a high end server OS. It's not even in the same category as Win95. If you've tried to install NT you know that it is much more difficult than installing 95. And Linux is to NT what the SST is to the Wright Brothers plane (yes, that is my quote) so the inherent level of complexity will always be greater no matter what you try to do to make it easier. It's like apples and oranges. I'm afraid I need to disagree with this. I picked up linux mostly because I wanted to have some understanding of unix, but it does have potential to be a desktop os. Think about the ease of use complaints, the original poster complained about not knowing how to even change directories. Would it be so difficult to add alias dir="ls -F --color=tty" to the bash defaults in the distro? I don't think so, and setting up some aliases for ease of use was among the first things I did when I got going. Little things like this go a long way. Yeah, it might be a little more complex, but maybe the installer could have options like installing packages as a workstation, as a web server, etc. It's naive and counter productive to say that becuase something is inherently complex that it can't be made more easy to use. I know my machine is easier for me to use just because of little thinks like that. Adding an easy to use window manager and some aliases might just give some the inpetus to dig deeper. Don't throw them off just because of any initial lack of sophistication. -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject. -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
I'm afraid I need to disagree with this. I picked up linux mostly because I wanted to have some understanding of unix, but it does have potential to be a desktop os. Think about the ease of use complaints, the original poster complained about not knowing how to even change directories. Would it be so difficult to add alias dir="ls -F --color=tty" to the bash defaults in the distro? I don't think so, and setting up some aliases for ease of use was among the first things I did when I got going. Little things like this go a long way. Yeah, it might be a little more complex, Adding aliases to the dist, IMO, would be very bad. People would use dir, or md, or whatever, without ever knowing the corresponding Linux commands. What would motivate people to learn the OS this way? I use aliases for a lot of that stuff, but still need to some things that I don't know, but am able to look in man pages, etc. Besides, does it really matter that I can ls or dir? Different means to the same end in this case is hardly faulty. And, if you don't like them odds are you know how to change them. Also, whats more important, having a good, stable system that you can use comfortably or just sticking with the lower quality stuff because someone EXPECTS you to learn a myriad of new stuff? There's a lot of talk on this list about using FVWM95 as a default window manager because it's familiar, but what about command line familiarity? Is there no value to that? -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
Joe Klemmer wrote: The basic problem with all this is that Linux is NOT a desktop OS like Win3/95 or OS/2 or the Mac. It's a high end server OS. It's not even in the same category as Win95. ^^^ And Claire Bradford wrote: Unix is an opertaing system that does require a little bit of patience and understanding. Which in my opinion makes it all the more fun. I think this is what Linux could learn from MS. Back in the "old days" computers and computing was only for the elite few in government institutions. Soon, hobby groups began putting together "personal" computers, much like more recent hobbyists have put together a "personal" Unix. But it took people like Gates, Wozniak and Jobs to make a hobby into a necessity. Humor an analogy: Most everyone with a car drives an ordinary off-the-lot vehicle (windows), but many dream of that candy apple red hot rod (or whatever). However, even if a hotrod dream car was offered free of charge(ex: Linux), few people would have the time and resources needed to learn auto technology and maintain the car, and it would probably spend most of its time in the garage. Somehow, through documentation, installation procedures, powerful apps, GUI's or what-have-you, Linux needs to step beyond the "High end server OS" and "garage hobbyist" to appeal to the non-tinkerer types. Only then can it really compete with Windows (if that's what Linux want's to do, that is.) --Andrew -- | Andrew Duhan| Cereal is | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | g00d. | | http://chimera.acs.ttu.edu/~aduhan/ | -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
Adding aliases to the dist, IMO, would be very bad. People would use dir, or md, or whatever, without ever knowing the corresponding Linux commands. What would motivate people to learn the OS this way? I use aliases for a lot of that stuff, but still need to some things that I don't know, but am able to look in man pages, etc. Besides, does it really matter that I can ls or dir? Different means to the same end in this case is hardly faulty. And, if you don't like them odds are you know how to change them. Also, whats more important, having a good, stable system that you can use comfortably or just sticking with the lower quality stuff because someone EXPECTS you to learn a myriad of new stuff? There's a lot of talk on this list about using FVWM95 as a default window manager because it's familiar, but what about command line familiarity? Is there no value to that? I still believe that if you provide an alias right off of the bat for something like mkdir and somebody gets used to using md they are never even going to wonder if md is the correct command. They get a job or work on somebody else's machine that doesn't have the alias and they freak out because they can't get md to work. Is this the right way to do things? Also, I see more newbies, like myself, make their first post to the list because they want to know how to get rid of FVWM95 because they don't want something that emulates Win95 and they want to try something new. Greg -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
---Reply on mail from Greg Thomas about Not a Desktop OS Also, I see more newbies, like myself, make their first post to the list because they want to know how to get rid of FVWM95 because they don't want something that emulates Win95 and they want to try something new. Greg I suggest you look at something I've assembled: http://www-personal.engin.umich.edu/~gmfall/fvwm2-ade.html -=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=- Greg Fall [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www-personal.engin.umich.edu/~gmfall -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Greg Thomas wrote: Adding aliases to the dist, IMO, would be very bad. People would use dir, or md, or whatever, without ever knowing the corresponding Linux commands. What would motivate people to learn the OS this way? I have mixed feelings here. The first thing I do whenever I install a Red Hat version of Linux is fix all the little "preferences" which I consider completely idiotic. I change the default prompt so it looks like Slackware; I can remember what system I'm logged in on but find it useful to know what directory I'm in. I get rid of the aliases on mv, rm, and cp, since all they do is slow things down. I add an alias to ls so it displays color. In short I make a couple little tweaks. Who is to say that adding a set of "DOS compatibility aliases" is so wrong? Yes, it prevents the user from using the Unix commands and makes Linux seem like DOS. But for those familiar with DOS it may make things easier. The best thing would be aliasing it to something like alias dir="echo 'dir is a DOS command, you should use ls instead'; sleep 2; ls" Now the DOS users will still be able to get around, but they will quickly become irritated with the 2 second pauses. :) Perhaps an initial 'tutorial' in place for the first time the system boots, which asks if the user is familiar with Unix and, if not, would he like to see a brief introduction to the commands (and possibly print out a quick reference card). -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Steve "Stevers!" Coile wrote: On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Greg Thomas wrote: [...] So they get a job or something where there are Linux machines and they go and try md and it isn't there, they're gonna go crazy, right? Wrong? But that's already going to be the case. Every variant of UNIX (and thus Linux) is different somehow. There's always going to be some degree of confusion moving between UNIX and Linux variants. Well, if the GNU tools were everywhere this would be less of a problem, and there's no reason they can't be. Another way to look at this: if organizations like Red Hat (and Caldera, and Debian, ...) don't make an effort to improve the UNIX user interface, who will? Are we to hope that UNIX will have the same, cryptic interface in 10 years that it has today, or should we hope that it will improve? This is simple a matter of learning. I've been using *nix for a while, and I no longer consider the command line cryptic. In fact, I like it. You can do more tasks more quickly with a good command line interface. To me, the command prompt is my faithful servant, waiting to do my bidding on a moments notice. The real question is whether or not we can have an interface that is best suited for both the new user and experienced user alike. I'm not sure this is possible, so both types of interfaces should be present. I really liked the idea of putting a little message in the alias telling the user that it was a DOS command, they could then either get rid of the message and continue using md or they could start using mkdir. Ick. I like this idea. It would be a good weaning tool. = Keith Dart, Devtest Engineer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Cisco Systemsphone: +1.408.527.1391 Network to User Business Unitpager: +1.800.365.4578 internal web page: http://kdart-pc2.cisco.comfax: +1.408.527.3778 = .||..||. The network kicks butt. No excuses. = -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Felix wrote: Somehow, through documentation, installation procedures, powerful apps, GUI's or what-have-you, Linux needs to step beyond the "High end server OS" and "garage hobbyist" to appeal to the non-tinkerer types. Only then can it really compete with Windows (if that's what Linux want's to do, that is.) This is the key point. Linux is NOT in competition with anything MS produces. A Lamborgini is not in competition with a moped. Yeah, they both get you somewhere but it's a matter of what you can do with them. Actually, Linux is like a combination of a race car, semi-truck a bus. But now we're getting way off topic. --- "I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them." -- Isaac Asimov -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
Please do not send emails to this address Junaid -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Re: Not a Desltop OS (was: RE: thanks, but no thanks)
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Joe Klemmer wrote: [...] Linux is NOT in competition with anything MS produces. Huh? Since when? What, then, *is* Linux competing with? What niche market does Linux serve without competition? Many many scientists are rather fond of linux and much less so of anything microsoft. -- Steve Coile [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- John Pearson E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] XCM MS F645Phone:(505)-667-7585 Los Alamos National Laboratory Los Alamos, NM 87545 -- PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
