[This is a re-send. Sorry if its a dupe, but I sent it 22 hours
ago, but even though the thread is way past me now, I wasted too
much time writing this to let it drop ;)].
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 11:45:51PM -0600, Rodd Ahrenstorff wrote:
> On Saturday 26 January 2002 8:49 am, you wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, but that's irrelevant. If you get the .config files
> > from your
> > fooBar distro and copy them onto RedHat/Mandrake/Debian, you
> > should get
> > the same "ergonomy".
>
> It's not irrelevant because the other distros do not include
> these .config
> files and new users generally would have no knowledge of
> "copying" them to
> others like RedHat/Mandrake/Debian. I may be wrong, but I
> doubt the entire
> "ergonomic" feel of a distro is based solely on .config files.
> For example
> Lycoris has the following features which make it easy to use:
I use Debian and haven't tried any thing else in a couple of
years and Debian is definitely not targeted to newbies, but I
still think that most of your points don't hold for Debian (and
probably not for Red Hat, Mandrake et al. either).
> 1. The default menu layout is "function based" i.e..
> Internet, Music &
> Movies, Pictures & Photos, Productivity, System Management,
> Development etc...
Debian's menu system has done this for at least 5 years.
> 2. I updated my entire distro online from version 43 to 44
> using the Update
> Wizard without any problems.
Apt-get has been making updates a snap for quite some time and
Debian and Debian has a huge amount of number of official
packages available.
> 3. It includes a My Linux System folder ala Windows My Computer
> and a Network
> Browser similar to a Network Neighborhood. No configuration is
> generally
> necessary. I was able to browse and share files with my
> Windows box by
> simply "clicking" my way though the "Network".
This is nice, but as others have said automatically setting this
up without asking is not a good idea, especially for newbies.
> 4. Applications are not duplicated. There isn't 3 different
> browsers, 4
> email clients, 5 editors , etc... One popular application is
> installed to
> perform each task, however others are included on the cds.
I have a hard time seeing how this is an advantage. There are
several instances where giving multiple options would be useful.
For example for text editors, a console capable text editor is a
must, even if the user themselves won't use it, recovery
situations if X breaks. The user themselves should also a mouse
friendly editor. I don't know what the defaults are for Debian
at the moment, but I think vi{m} and another console text editor
are standard. Depending on what install profile is chosen, one
or more other editors would be chosen for installation (emacs for
the programmer profile, some "easy", mousy editor for the newby
profile, et cetera).
I guess I don't see the problem of giving the user a few extra
choices. Especially for newbies who might be more likely to try
out random programs that show up in a menu than they are to go to
the install disks and to install a bunch of text editors to try
out. Of course _all_ choices for a particular category shouldn't
be installed, but several for the majors categories seems like a
good idea. Installing all of both Gnome and KDE by default might
be overkill, but I think it would be good for a newby workstation
install to include Mozilla, Konqueror or Galeon, and Lynx or W3m
or Links. For email Mutt and at least one of the popular GUI
email programs would make sense.
Anyway, I guess I just don't see why having several options for
crucial tasks would be a bad thing. Heck, Windows 95 had
Wordpad, Textedit and DOS Edit all installed by default I think.
> 5. All the config tools are built into the KDE Control Center.
> No seperate
> config gui to worry about.
Well, I don't know about this since I don't like GUI config apps
;).
Keeping config apps synchronized with all of the programs in a
distro that have config files always seemed to be more trouble
than it was worth to me. I think there are some available on
Debian, but they're not the standard. So I guess I'll cede you
this point.
> 6. Xine, xmms, aKtion, Real Player, gphoto, and Kooka are all
> installed and
> layed out nicely within the menus.
I know Real Player isn't standard on Debian since its non-free,
but at least some of the others would be default for a newby
workstation profile. And I think that all of them would be
installed and work fine with the menu system (though I'd never
heard of aKtion or Kooka before). I'd be surprised if the same
weren't true Mandrake and the other desktop distros.
> 7. Java and Flash are installed and configured for Konqueror
> and Mozilla.
(I thought you didn't like
duplications ;))
Flash isn't standard with Debian because its non-free and I
think it has be downloaded from Macromedia, but Java installs
nicely with Mozilla. Frankly, I think that installing neither
would probably make for a better browsing experience, but that's
just me.
> 8. There is an automount feature for removable media.
> Inserting an audio cd
> will either bring up the correct app or automatically begin
> playing.
I think this is available, but I haven't set it because I don't
like auto-run - its too abused in Windows.
> ...there are more. I realize these features could be added to
> any distro.
> I'm not trying to say Lycoris is so much better than the
> others. I would
> like to get your opinion on whether you think these features
> will make it
> into other distros. Are they required to gain more users? It
> would seem so
> IMHO.
I agree there's lots of work that could be done to make Linux
easier to use, but I think I disagree with where the focus of
that work would be. I think a lot of the complaints about Linux
(and lots of the usability work in KDE for example) seem to be
focussed more on making Linux's interface like Windows (or MacOS)
than on making Linux easier to use. And being likes Windows and
usability are definitely orthogonal ideas. Being like Windows is
useful for helping people to _transition_ to Linux, but if it
leads to some Windows pitfalls being transferred to Linux, its
very debatable whether its worth it. It'd be to spend the effort
on making Linux usable in original ways than to clone the
mistakes of the past.
Ramblingly yours,
Jim
--
Jim Crumley |Twin Cities Linux Users Group
Mailing List (TCLUG)
crumley at fields.space.umn.edu |Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota
Ruthless Debian Zealot |http://www.mn-linux.org/
Never laugh at live dragons |Dmitry's free,Jon's next?
http://faircopyright.org