Re: Fedora Core 2 - review.

From: Michael (mogmios_at_mlug.missouri.edu)
Date: 05/22/04

  • Next message: Rodolfo J. Paiz: "Re: Fedora Core 2 - review."
    Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 01:06:09 -0700
    To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
    
    

    > I think the problem is the direction of Linux. Admit it: Linux is best
    > as a stripped down OS running on servers. But right now, everyone is
    > trying to make it "easy to use" and "just like Window$" At some point,
    > there needs to be a split.

    Trying to be just like Windows, or MacOS, is a problem.. not because
    Linux can't be easy to use but because Windows, and even MacOS, aren't
    easy to use. You may have been brainwashed into thinking they're easy to
    use but just start recording how much time you spend fighting with the
    interface, fixing weird lil bugs, or just accepting that things are
    going to be some weird quirky way. I've done a lot of work at using
    Linux with users that have little or no prior computer experience and
    they pick Linux up just as quickly and then upon trying Windows or MacOS
    they make similar complaints as users from those OSs trying Linux..
    except a lot more complaints about stuff breaking.

    > The server market and the home user market to completely different. In
    > my server room, I want stable, single-purpose machines. A web server
    > should serve web pages; a MySQL server should serve data. But at home,
    > I want a box where I can do everything. Listen to music, surf the web,
    > play a game. Sounds like I need 2 different OSes.

    I've used Linux as my main desktop for years. I can't say I'm happy with
    the direction Gnome or KDE has taken (to much copying Windows and
    MacOS.. flaws and all) but it works as well as other alternatives. There
    is no OS related reason that Linux is any less suited for the desktop.
    The only issues are related to the Windows monopoly.. drivers and boxed
    software not being available for Linux. I get a lot better multimedia
    experience out of Linux than Windows but that does come at the price of
    having to install a few things myself. IMO MPlayer is far and away a
    better video player than anything easily available for Windows and it's
    much easier to rip cd's and dvd's in Linux as well as to burn cd's or
    dvd's. Surfing the web in Linux is much less painless. Sure, if you want
    annoying plugins then you have to install them but it's no big deal.. or
    you can do without them and have an even less annoying web experience.
    Listening to music in Linux is easy enough.. xmms is standard with most
    distros and there are other players with nifty features available for
    download. Major commercial games are harder to find for Linux but it has
    a wealth of small free games and many studies have show that this type
    of game is actually played far more often than those huge 3D games.
    Games, as are all apps, are becoming more available Linux also.

    > I like what Red Hat is doing with RHEL and Fedora, but they don't do
    > much for the average home user. I hear that Mandrake has filled this
    > gap quite well, but I haven't looked into it myself.

    I think there is potential for a distro that is good for the average
    home user but I haven't yet seen it. I do a lot of magic when I install
    Linux for non-techies to use.. mostly in simplifying their desktops to
    target their needs. I think distros should really work on that. My users
    average desktop has less than half a dozen icons available to launch
    apps from their toolbars and they like it that way. I leave other apps
    available (by clicking a desktop icon for 'More Programs') but I am very
    targeted with which apps are presented all the time. Also I never show
    two apps with the same purpose on the toolbars. If they plan to watch
    movies I put one movie player, if they plan to browse the web I put on
    browser, etc. Don't overwhelm them but don't block off their choices
    either. I really liked Gnome 1's 'Favorites' menu and hope it properly
    makes it's way back into Gnome.. especially if it becomes more like
    Windows where it automaticlly adds favorites as programs that are ran
    often.. as well as letting users manually select permanent favorites.
    IMO that was an excellent feature from a usability point of view. I'd
    have a recently opened files menu available too but extended to do more
    sorting by file types.. such that it might open a submenu that provided
    'Recent music', and another for 'Recent movies', and another for 'Recent
    documents'.. but showing only those that have actually had something
    opened recently in them. Off the top of my head the last desktop feature
    I'd add would be a wizard that could be popped up easily to reconfigure
    the desktop.. changing the types of programs the user wants in their
    quick access menu, making available (or removing) applets they might
    want, etc. Do you want to listen to music? Y/N Are you interested in
    seeing the current weather? Y/N Those sort of questions that could
    configure things without needing to know how to make changes manually.

    > All that to say you need the right OS for the job. And if it ends up
    > being window$ or MacOS, so be it.... NAH! :)

    I don't mind a bit if others use Windows or MacOS but I think you're
    wrong if you're counting Linux out of the game for the desktop.

    -- 
    fedora-list mailing list
    fedora-list@redhat.com
    To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
    

  • Next message: Rodolfo J. Paiz: "Re: Fedora Core 2 - review."

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Question about Red Hat Linux Enterprise
      ... we have is running Windows 2000 Server ... Luckily running Apache + MySQL on a Linux system is not a lot ... MySQL database and injecting it back into the MySQL installation ...
      (comp.os.linux.networking)
    • Re: Sweet Success
      ... Let's continue to assume that I prefer Windows to anything else: ... neither Linux nor Windows may be the answer. ... While it may well be initially less expensive to install a Linux-based ... of Linux simultaneously, along with Windows Server, AIX, and OS/400. ...
      (RedHat)
    • Re: [Full-disclosure] 70 million computers are using Windows 98 right now
      ... Linux is definitely not a natural migration pathway. ... Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Mac OS X seem to work pretty ... > desktop to server. ... But then the persons across the sea just can't install ...
      (Full-Disclosure)
    • Re: Benutzerkontenverwaltung mit Win 2003 Server - Teil 2
      ... und dann bin ich über Solaris zur ersten 30-Disketten-Version Linux ... Server auch keine grafische Oberfläche, der vi ist halt mein bester ... Und das ganze geht schon in Ansätzen seit Windows NT so ... > Unternehmensnetzwerk unter Unix administrieren könnte. ...
      (microsoft.public.de.german.windows.server.networking)
    • Re: Formatting [was: Re: Grammar Crackdown]
      ... that needs Windows. ... Yes, the games are the showstopper for many users, as I have mentioned ... I like the Linux Internet program, for one, so I might run Linux on a ... and the updates are painless and can be 100% automatic ...
      (alt.usage.english)