[Linux4christians] List purpose? (mission?)
singingfalls at tymewyse.com
Sat May 29 12:35:28 EDT 2004
On Saturday 29 May 2004 03:16, David Fierbaugh wrote:
> The famous linux learning curve is ONLY for administrators. The learning
> curve for an average end user type is no higher (I think it's actually
> lower for someone completely new) than the curve for m$ windoze.
I don't have a clue what XP is like. The last version of window$ I've used is
95 but I must say that I haven't found linux desktop to be purely "point and
click" and neither is security so easy to establish. tripwire, nmap and
firewalls aren't super easy to compile and use.
Certain tasks require root privileges. I wouldn't consider myself anywhere
near a power user and I have managed to get the main programs compiled to be
functional to the level I desire - with much difficulty.
Manipulating /etc and /fstab, searching for hidden applications in /usr/bin
and creating "shortcuts" on the desktop, or just being able to work your way
around a frozen x server are simple functions that are some some of the
required basics I should think. Setting up ppp, switching desktops or
installing a new application can be formidable tasks for a newbie.
I don't really think point and click functionality (the well established M$
lowest common denominator) will serve well in the mission field at all and
besides linux isn't that way.
> point, my mother. She can break a windows box by walking by it, and had
> problems with her windows machine continually, because she had not a single
> clue as far as computers go. I installed linux for her over a year ago, and
> she's doing far more with it now than she did with it as a windows machine.
> No she can't perform any admin stuff, but she couldn't on windows either,
> so what's the difference? The difference is that without root access, she
> really can't break anything, beyond deleting her own files.
> So, to answer the question "how to get them past the learning curve?", it's
> easy, you do the install, and set them free. I don't know how many people I
> have let use a linux machine to browse the web or something for a short
> time, and had them say, "I thought you ran linux on this thing?" Those who
> don't know the difference, WON'T know the difference.
I understand that somewhat. My wife is a published writer and I have helped
her to "get around" and be functional on the linux box. Nevertheless getting
around and actually making the most of linux are world's apart. My main
interest as a work station user has been in the arena of computer graphics,
literary production and website design. I have gigabytes and gigabytes of
information, websites and images stored and used from the www. Maybe it's me
but it hasn't been easy getting where I am. I am not where I want to be.
> With most distros today, the installs are actually easier than an XP
> install. (Drop the cd in, boot, click next about 10 times, type your name,
> click next 10 more times, wait, switch cd's, wait, reboot.) And there's the
> added advantage of having pretty much every piece of software that a common
> desktop user needs, preinstalled (most distros have OO.org and kde/gnome
> office, gnucash, gimp, imagemagic, a cad program, multiple browsers,
> multiple email clients, multiple ...... you get the picture). A windows
> user would have to add all that stuff after the fact, unless they bought it
> bundled on the machine.
Don't get me wrong. I am a grateful and zealous linux advocate. My box is
loaded with high end open source software for multimedia production. I have
had the joy of modeling, texturing, animation production. None of it has been
point and click. Say what anyone will, I seriously believe that linux was an
answer to prayer. I often ask the Lord to save the souls that have given so
generously with such idealism as is often common in the linux world.
Linux is hard to do - period. I've been wanting to switch distros for years
and finally just do debian. Maybe I haven't tried recently but my repeated
efforts in the past just went belly up. I'm on a 24600 baud rate with a PII
300 :-) Not cutting edge by any stretch. The hurdle of the file system
varying distro to distro is a nightmare for me. We all have run up against
the RTFM so common in the linux world. It's there because linux is not easy.
These are some of the many factors that have gone into my notion of linux
complexity. My point is that secure real functionality is where we want our
brothers and sisters to be. No M$ point and click clones. The door to the
linux world is much easier to enter now than it used to be. We don't want a
log jam at the threshhold.
> Those of us (I'm assuming most on this list fit this category) who like to
> tinker have to remember, that whether we're talking windows or X, the
> average user does not have the competencies we do (however much/little)
> they are, and what's more have no desire. That being said, if the average
> user doesn't need to know the stuff we do about windows, why would they
> need to know the stuff we do about linux? If you doubt this, drop a knoppix
> cd in someone's windoze box, and let them see linux. They'll be amazed at
> how easy it is.
> We need to stop seeing Linux's "hard to learn" status as a drawback, and
> seeing it's "ease of use" as an advantage, because it truly is that easy
> Sorry for rambling and ranting, it's late I'm tired, and I'm in the middle
> of compiling KDE.
No prob. I enjoy the dialog. Besides, it's early, Sabbath and all I have to do
right now is answer email. :-)
More information about the Linux4christians