Fighting FUD with Humor 530
Technophiliac writes to tell us MadPenguin in running a review of "Fighting FUD With Humor" Marcel Gagné's 2nd edition of "Moving to Linux". From the article: "The biggest obstacle is fear. Modern Linux distributions are easy to install and easy to use. Unfortunately, we are constantly presented with messages telling us that it's too hard and that the average person couldn't possibly grasp the complexity. That's rubbish. People aren't stupid and people who use computers learn new things all the time."
It's not that it's hard (Score:5, Insightful)
HAHA (Score:5, Insightful)
Clearly... (Score:5, Insightful)
Clearly, this person has never performed basic tech support. I mean, come on. If you have that much faith in humanity, you've never done time as "The I.T. Guy" in a typical office. Turn in your geek card, sir, and report to AOL for further processing.
Bzzzzt! (Score:5, Insightful)
No, but they're easily confused.
and people who use computers learn new things all the time.
Hard to believe, given that most non-technical people (and some of the technical ones) in my building haven't even learned not to double-click URLs. When things don't work, it's attributed to gremlins, and when it does work, it's attributed to a higher diety.
I'm sorry, but the REAL obstacles (hint: fear isn't one of them) to adopting an entirely new operating system don't go away just by putting your fingers in your ears and shouting, "NAH NAH NAH, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!"
Let's be HONEST here (Score:2, Insightful)
I did spend at least an hour getting Quake III to work in Linux properly. It still doesn't quite work as well as in Windows.
I also took some time to get my mouse wheel working in Linux. Granted, I use text-only installs of Slackware or Gentoo where I build my own optimized kernels, but still, I had some difficulty.
Linux isn't easy and it's not a pretty shiny desktop OS. Let's just admit that. I mean heck, would we want it any other way? I enjoy the challenge and I enjoy the OPEN ness of it.
Not easy to configure (Score:5, Insightful)
If there is ONE thing Windows is good at, it is getting stuff configured. It may not be as powerful or flexible, but at least it is easy. Sometimes, you just need to get things done.
not easy enough to install, not easy enough to use (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm a computer geek. There was a period where Linux was too hard for me to install -- I tried and failed a few times. Finally, about four years ago, the installs got easier (and I learned more) so I got a working install. But it's simply not true that Linux is now easy enough for most computer users to install and use. Most computer users are not computer geeks, and in fact, no OS is easy enough for them to install. They'd have trouble installing Windows from scratch too, but they never had to do it because Windows came preinstalled.
Just last week I installed the latest Ubuntu. There were two problems that it took me some time and hassles to work out: (1) The sound software I was trying to use didn't work in GNOME, because GNOME uses ESD. I had to do a "killall esd" before it would work. This took some detective work, because none of the software gave me an error message that told me this was what the problem was. (2) I couldn't install some libraries (such as libc6-dev) because they were in a munged state at the point where I did my apt-get update.
These were time-consuming, frustrating annoyances for me, but for someone who's not a computer geek, they'd be total showstoppers. The average person simply is not going to go looking for help on usenet or IRC (and my experience with posting on the Ubuntu forums has been that I don't get any useful replies, either). The average person will give up.
And BTW, Gagne might want to update the subtitle of his book, "Kiss the blue screen of death goodbye." I have to use Windows a lot at work. I haven't seen a BSOD in years.
But... (Score:3, Insightful)
Can we be honest with ourselves for just one second?
Claiming that Linux is "easy" to configure is a prima facia falsehood.
Install is still only about 80-85% not the 99.9% that it needs to be.
Maintenence of a 6+ month old distro, any distro, is a nightmare as about that time updating no longer works because dependancies on updated dependancies reach an unmanageable threshold. And no, ignoring maintenence is not an option.
It doesn't anyone any good to spout platitudes about how "easy" Linux is when there are still huge gaping holes in it's ease of use.
The only way to fight FUD is with truth, not more FUD!
Re:Bzzzzt! (Score:3, Insightful)
Marvel Gagne? (Score:5, Insightful)
Incidentally, writing introductory books like "Kiss the Blue Screen of Death Goodbye!" seems to me to be a dead end. Seething haters of Microsoft (and even they haven't seen a BSOD in five years) don't make up a significant share of Windows users, and pandering to that mentality seems counterproductive.
Glad to hear they're anxious to learn... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Bzzzzt! (Score:5, Insightful)
"... people (and some of the technical ones) in my building haven't even learned not to double-click URLs."
contradicts this
"...the REAL obstacles (hint: fear isn't one of them) to adopting an entirely new operating system..."
If they don't understand double-click how will the OS make any difference? They aren't configuring hardware or apps anyway.
I'm the last person to ascribe extraordinary technical prowess to the general public and yet sucessfully converted a staff of 50 to what in effect is PC-based multimedia editing from tape without a hitch. One staff member just celebrated his 50th year in the industry and has never required our help. Step one: make them part of the application selection process. Step two: an orderly rollout with scheduled training. Step three: encouraging self support and establishing staff 'experts' outside of the normal support channels. It's not that hard.
On the other hand, we're also a distinct division outside of the normal 'MSCE' pool. If there's any group with finger in ears here it's the latter, imposing solutions on users as mandates and forcing them to work around bugs and unresolved system idiosyncracies from memory. 'Lusers' can do a hell of a lot more than most IT support gives them credit.
Why don't you explain it to her? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Let's be HONEST here (Score:4, Insightful)
In GNOME I just go to System->Preferences->Removable Drives and Media.
Everybody has stories of how they have had a hard time with an OS. It's all just anecdotes which don't prove anything. For me, Linux is easy and pretty because it's what I'm used to. When I have to use Windows it's unfamiliar and illogical. And it sure as hell isn't pretty.
BTW, the reason I had to disable autoplay is because it was going crazy grinding the system to a halt whenever I connected a usb drive. Never happens in Linux. But again, that's just another anecdote. Doesn't prove anything. I just wish folks from the other side could admit the same thing whey they're talking about the problems they've had with Linux.
Re:amen to that (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I offer a lot of tech support on message boards. When someone comes to the board once in a blue moon with a really difficult tech issue, I'm more than happy to help. But there's a certain class of user who will continually post questions that can be answered with 30 seconds of googling. Questions like "Can I use this 1MB SIMM in my P4 box?".
It's rather akin to someone walking in to the emergency room with a paper cut... 4 times a day. The "experts'" time is better spent on those who have more severe problems. Learn to apply your own bandages, dammit!
There's a difference between needing help with a truly obscure problem after conducting your own exhaustive research, and being completely unwilling to learn at all. Believe it or not, if you're willing to take the time to research, and learn on your own, you can do just about anything. If you decide that you don't understand computers, never will, and shouldn't even bother trying... Well, that's a self fulfilling prophesy, and a waste of my time.
Yes there is FUD, but some of this FUD is true... (Score:3, Insightful)
There are severe exaggerations in Linux usability for example; but we can't be morons and miss the 'truth' in this.
On the computers at my Grandmother's house - True story(200mhz P, to a new 3.4ghz system now.) - My Grandparents have been able to drop an XP install CD in all their computers, type in the code and their computer works faster and better than when they first purchased it. No install problems, driver problems.
And that is a solid arument, sure most of US are smart enough to wrestle any distribution to install and run well on any piece of hardware, but for the people that surf the web, write email, write letters and video conference with their grandkids - Linux and FreeBSD is NOT YET THAT MATURE on the desktop.
We can argue it is, and it truly isn't. We know this inside somewhere, but hate to admit it.
There is NO distribution yet that has the driver support, or hardward support, or 99% success rate of install that WindowsXP does...
That is where we are failing, and until we admit things like this to ourselves, this will NEVER get better.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:amen to that (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why don't you explain it to her? (Score:2, Insightful)
He probably has his reasons. (Score:2, Insightful)
You paint him as some awful villain, as if he is trying to intentionally destroy all those teachers' systems by using Outlook Express. Perhaps he's being the opposite of a "moron," and rather just doing what makes his job easiest. That's not stupid. That's a smart thing to do, from his perspective.
If you truly want people to get away from using Microsoft products, then you'll have to make some sacrifice. Yes, you may have to help those particular teachers install and configure Thunderbird. It'd be even better if you could create and print up a single page that'll tell them exactly how it can be done. Give them pictorial instructions about what exact server address, etc., to enter, and where to enter them.
Re:Not easy to configure (Score:4, Insightful)
Not just sometimes. For most people in the tech services area, they like a challenge, more or less. Configuring things and solving problems is what got them into the field in the first place. But the vast majority of computer users just want to get the job done. They don't care how it works, or why, or what options are behind the command line switches. This thing is a tool. An appliance. More complicated than a screwdriver.
But basically it is a toaster.
Turn it on, it does something useful, turn it off. Anything that requires understanding what is under the interface is hard. Anything that requires thinking about how the interface works is effectively impossible. Windows lets users get away with that. Macs are great at it. Linux (so far) makes the users learn how it works. Or at least ask for a lot of help.
Re:He probably has his reasons. (Score:5, Insightful)
My whole point however, which we've drifted from, is that this reliance, or just perceived reliance on Microsoft products is institutionalized. People hear this kind of stuff every single day, much of it false, from people who are supposed to know what they are talking about. This everyday experience drives the notion that Microsoft is a necessity.
Re:It's not that it's hard (Score:3, Insightful)
XP Home is something like $60 (you'll need to excuse me, I'm not American so I'm guessing from a quick online search), and that'd be 12 months of Cedega if it's tied to the subscription like that. I'm still a bit hesitant for things like that, personally.
Re:not easy enough to install, not easy enough to (Score:2, Insightful)
A couple of years ago, I talked myself into using Linux as my one and only desktop at home. I was sick of Windows, I still am. After 2 years, I am utterly disgusted by it and am planning to switch to Windows at the next convenient time or maybe a Mac. Why? Because things don't just work.
I have a kernel with all the drivers compiled into an initrd. I have hotplug and coldplug loading drivers to all the hardware. That's half way. The userland doesn't match. Let's use sound as an example. If I play something with mpg123, Arts (KDE sound) can't play audio and buffers it until
The same argument can be made for dozens of others. XFree/XOrg (although it is getting a little better). Desktop managers: why are KDE and Gnome slower on my 2.4GHz P4 than Win2k on a 300MHz Celeron? Don't say "bloated, try XFCE", that's the wrong answer. I could run FVWM and it would be fast as hell, but I would not have all of the features I need. Why is dynamic linking on Linux so damn slow? Firefox takes maybe two seconds to launch on my slower Windows box at work (when not loaded in memory). It can take upwards of 30 on my faster Linux machine with no load. Those who complain about Windows DLL hell, take a look in your
Linux is not user friendly. Linux is not ready for the desktop. If anyone tells you otherwise, you have my permission to stab him (or her, but let's not kid ourselves) in the neck.
posted anonymously to stay out of my Google permanent record.
Whatever! (Score:5, Insightful)
That having been said, I've used linux before, I've used Windows. If you want to install something not included in the distro, you're in for some work. I tried installing FreeNX on Mandriva over a SSH terminal. I never did get it working. Apropos hadn't been set up by default, and install was failing on a file whose package I couldn't find.
So, here's what I want in Linux:
Be better than Windows. Where windows wants to tell you every five minutes that your wireless connection is down even though you're working on a wired connection and your laptop's wifi switch is off, be smarter. Tell the user once, if you must, then leave them alone.
Install all the docs by default. Never assume that your user doesn't need man pages.
Label each program with a name that describes what it does. Look at Windows accessories. Most of the program names are much less abstract. Backup, Address Book, Notepad, Command Prompt, Backup, Security Center, Disk Defragmenter, Disk Cleanup. So, what's easier, drakxconf or Control Panel? Let's also map some commands to likely alternatives. man is good, but what if help worked too? Maybe if help pointed to an overview of man, apropos, lynx and some docs?
Usabilty testing by non programmers. I like vi about as much as the average person. That is, not very. compared to the MS-DOS edit.exe, vi is pretty weak. Or rather, it's very strong, but it makes what should be a 100% intuitive task for anyone familiar with a computer into a series of random button-pushing and man-reading sessions.
Build a roadmap.So, this distro wants the config file here, and that distro wants it there. Super! Fine! But if you want to put this sort of thing all over, how about building a map? I'd love to be able to download a single installer, run it (in the gui!) let it figure out where everything is, what needs to be downloaded, what dependencies need satisfying. Fix it all, and exit. I hate installing software that didn't come with the distro currently. Windows does this well, Mac does this well, why is this so hard for Linux?
Welcome your users. Sure, you may never click through the overly-animated Welcome to Windows intro. Some people will. Just a quick tour of the nifty little features of your OS, some quick pointers to the help, the configuration, the browser, the email, and most people will be fine. Add a world-class tutorial. Back in the days of the classic Mac OS, there were tutorials that included clicking, double clicking, dragging, hovering, typing, text entry fields, dialog boxes (modal and non-modal) menus, powering off. The basics that most of us nerds don't remember learning have to be taught to some people! Linux should teach them, by default.
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:He probably has his reasons. (Score:2, Insightful)
We used to give away old computers. This was until people wanted us to support the old giveaways at home like they were still on the premises and like they were still being used for work. That is not our job. That is our job for our families, like it is yours to get your mom's email on Thunderbird at home.
Now, if all the district used was Thunderbird (etc.) would you help someone who wanted to use Outlook at home for it or would you tell them it was not supported?
stupid stupid stupid (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's not that it's hard (Score:2, Insightful)
Start with Knoppix or Ubuntu for instance - Configures it all for you automatically.
Heck, I started with Mandrake and it had a lot of bugs, but big deal - I tried out Debian, fell in love with it and stuck with it ever since.
Most people give up too quickly.
And I just have this extreme urge to rant this out: Why do so many people think that just because one GNU/Linux distro is crap that ALL distros are crap!?
Re:It's not that it's hard (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's not that it's hard (Score:2, Insightful)
"My email doesn't work."
"Okay, open Outlook for me."
"I don't use Outlook."
"Okay, what do you use?"
"KMail."
"Umm... Okay. Open that, then go Tools, then Email Accounts."
"It's not there."
"How the fuck am I supposed to support 500 different pieces of software?"
*Click*
Re:At the danger of coming across as an elitist... (Score:1, Insightful)
Fortunately Microsoft has been associated with the USA, and as our country goes down in debt, Linux will rise up!
Re:It's not that it's hard (Score:3, Insightful)
Another thing, I was reading an article, saying that OpenOffice had take 5 years to get where it is today, like it was a long time. Microsoft Office has been around since 1989. At that rate, OpenOffice will bet 10 times as good as MS Office in 3 years.
Re:HAHA (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah .. Easy (Score:3, Insightful)
Linux will be easy for the average user when I don't have to download a source package, compile it and install it, extract Windows drivers for ndiswrapper using another tool I had to compile from source, and then fiddle around with rc files to make sure my SSID got set on boot all so I could get on the local network.
Yeah, sing me the song of vendors not releasing drivers. I hear and understand, brother
Give a user a pre-configured Linux box with everything working, fine - for most uses people will get along fine. Anyone trying to tell me that an average user can install Linux on their home box and walk away happy most of the time is living in a dream world.
Oh, look at the idiots jump all over it! (Score:3, Insightful)
No he probably believes it (Score:3, Insightful)
1) The last time they used Windows was a long time ago, when they converted. They haven't touched it since 95 and thus haven't seen any of the improvements.
2) They dislike Windows and so remember bad experiences more than good ones. No matter what the OS, you will inevatibly run across someone who screws it up and it's never stable for. These people usually complain loudly about this. Being as there's lots of Windows users, and many are the "L33t ovacloka' gamer" types that push their hardware too much, it's not hard to find. They remember those whines, and forget the hundreds of people who just use it and don't complain because it doesn't crash.
3) They badly want Windows to be unstable, since that's been such a cornerstone argument for so long. Sometimes I'll challenge people to try and convince me why I should convert and I'd say at least half the time stability is one of the first things they try.
All sides of the OS wars engage in FUD and the Linux users are just as bad as any others. They are quick to scream foul when people bash Linux, but come right back with equally unsubstantiated things.
Re:It's not that it's hard (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm saying packages shouldn't exist. Period.
I like the fact that all software on my systems are completely managed, e.g. I can easily tell which file belongs to each package and vice versa. I like the fact that my systems are upgradeable by issuing one command over the internet. I don't like dll hell of Windows or base system/ports .so hell of BSDs, sorry. The reality is that Linux software world is comprised of miriads of libraries and small applications, not just dozen big names from posh vendors like Microsoft or Adobe. This situation requires advanced package handling tools. No, whining about it won't help, just man up and deal with it.
Tell that to the millions of Mac OS X users. They will laugh at you as they merely drag Applications to the Applications folder.
Tell these millions of users that I can upgrade my server park with one shell command and I see this kind of functionality as basic and required even for my desktop machines. Pray tell, how am I worse than Grandma Tillie, why my needs should be sacrificed for some very questionable usability ideas?
THere's this concept called "Bundles" where all shared libraries, language packs, and binaries for multiple architectures are stored in a single folder that appears to be a single application.
I don't know about you, but I don't want twenty versions of slightly different GTKs each in its own bundle all loaded at different addresses hogging memory and diskspace for the sake of some Grandma Tillie's usability. Sorry, just because Holy Apple does something doesn't mean it is best idea ever for any possible use case. And just because some self proclaimed usability experts (which always seem to come out of the woodwork in any Linux-related discussions, oh dear) can't spend 15 minutes to figure out the packages on their own doesn't mean that people who require functionality they provide should just switch off the lights and go home. Which, surprisingly, always seems to be the case, because those experts always know better for everyone of us.
By the way, even Microsoft recently began to reinvent package management, albeit poorly like they usually do at first. Even they begin to understand that dozen different incompatible installers is not the way, and bundles are actually no better either.
(Sorry, this came out somewhat rantish, I've got nothing personal against you, just needed to get this off my chest).
RED HERRING ALERT! (Score:5, Insightful)
Insightful? What are you people on? What does MS specifically have to do with making sure that the client who needs support uses (tada, drum shot) supported software?
Obviously, sane people who offer technical support (and want to remain sane) will make sure first thing that the clients will be using only stuff they (the support) know about! What exactly that thing is (MS products or a KDE suite) is irrelevant, as long as both the client and the support person know what it is.
So there's no inherent advantage to using MS products, unless you're already locked in because your support contractor only supports MS products.
Re:He probably has his reasons. (Score:2, Insightful)
Dangers of humor in the workplace (Score:3, Insightful)
I began using humor in my work many years ago. I worked for a high-tech company doing software tools, which requires (on my part) some level of user support in the form of documentation, web pages, and email - the end-user in this case being the other engineers employed there. Technical documentation is such a droll, dry medium, and I wanted to make it more interesting, and help hold the reader's attention. There is nothing funny about the X3T9 or 1394 specs. I also felt the need to extend my personal creativity beyond the realm of interesting code comments.
Things went ok, even fine, for a few years. I received lots of positive feedback from users, indicating how they always looked forward to my next group broadcast email, or how funny a web site was. But such feedback encouraged me to "push the envelope" in terms of content. Our company is multi-culture, multi-ethnic, and multi-national. What might be funny or innocuous in American English can be mis-interpreted by people in Thailand or Singapore. Eventually I crossed an invisible line, and the Political Correction department, sometimes ironically referred to as "Human Resources", came down on me like a ton of diarhea. With my future at stake, I retracted my email and publically apologized. My job had been saved, but my manager's reputation had been compromised. He was in trouble for not "keeping the reins tight enough", as if any manager can effectively herd cats. Of course, while my actions caused problems for my boss, they caused greater problems for me. My future with that company had suddenly grown much more circumscribed, a fact I was not to learn for some time, when raises and promotions sailed past me like leaves in a nor-easter.
After several years, that incident was forgotten. I glided under the radar during subsequent management shake-ups and re-orgs, and ended up working for another manager. Our company policy forbids managers and HR personel from officially discussing individual employee records, so I felt that my past was behind me - safely locked away in the depths of HR. I could relax and drop my guard, which I did but, as you can probably guess, this led to another lapse in judgement, which resulted in the "final warning" from HR. My manager at that time issued an edict demanding "no more humor, no more creativity" in all my work. At the time, it felt like a knife through the heart, but it actually inspired me to redirect my energies and intellect for my own gain, not the company's. The company would survive.
Or course, I accept responsibility for what I said. I could have kept my keyboard locked, toed the company line, and been a happy drone. That company is ancient history, so all I can do now is reflect, and use my talents elsewhere.
Bottom line? The HR department is no longer the "personel" department. It's geared toward protecting the company, not representing the individual worker unit. HR's primary task is protecting the company from harrasement and defamation lawsuits brought by current and former employees. This is extremely difficult in America, with it's current "Politically Correct" atmosphere - an attitude that people are not responsible for their own feelings, thoughts, and interpretations, combined with a "get rich quick" lotto mentality.