Linux's Difficulty with Names 946
JohnTyler writes "This article at XYZ Computing takes a look at Linux's strange naming practices. When compared to their Window's equivalents, the names of many Linux programs are difficult to recognize and even tougher to remember. This may seem like splitting hairs, but it is actually an important usability issue. Just think, if you had to do a bit of graphic design which would be easier to pick out of the menu, GIMP or Photoshop? Or if you wanted to play a song, Media Player or xine?" The article is a bit thin, but it raises an excellent point.
Windows has problems too... (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows' Difficulty with Names (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not bad really... (Score:3, Insightful)
-Jesse
Linux Naming (Score:3, Insightful)
What a moron. (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, FWIW, and unlike any version of Windows I've ever seen, the GNOME "start" menu breaks things down by category, so you can look in the "Graphics" or "Sound and Video" submenus if you have a general idea about what you're looking for. The last Windows I sat down in front of offered me an almost flat menu of two complete columns on a high-resolution screen, and since I rarely use Windows I didn't know what more than a handful of the applications were.
Worse, in those rare instances where things were put into sub-menus, you had to look under the vendor's name to find the product. So you not only had to know that "Photoshop" means "graphics editor", you also had to know that it's published by someone named "Adobe".
Idiot-level apologetics.
GNU, not Linux! (Score:1, Insightful)
Recognition vs decipherability? (Score:3, Insightful)
To someone who knows nothing, PhtoShop sounds like a place to buy/print photos. And Windows Medial Player sounds like a game of newpaper/TV congomerates :)
To the Unix cogniscenti, cp, du are nothing more than CoPy, Disk Usage, etc. It is a question of something learned.
On the other hand (Score:2, Insightful)
See? It kinda swings both ways...
What problem? (Score:2, Insightful)
Furthermore, I realise that this is aimed at people who have absolutely no experience in either computers in general and at least linux specifically, but a name like "xine" should not be an impediment to progress. For instance, any distro worth anything ought to be set up with some useful file associations. Most people play a movie or mp3 by clicking on /it/ rather than opening a player and then opening the file within it.
Names don't matter... (Score:5, Insightful)
Names don't matter, it is all about training and then familiarity.
What's more intuitive, "Matt", or "Coffee Boy"?
Oh, and what does Exel and Outlook do? Does Outlook Express do it any faster?
As a technical discussion, names as handles to objects or ideas don't matter (excluding downright misleading names, like a boy named Sue): it gets down to user training. To write that "Whatever the reason, desktop Linux's usability is hindered by its naming practices" is just silly: in a work enviornment, users will use what they are trained on. At home, Grandma is going to use whatever will let her get her polaroids out of her new camera.
And Windows isn't particularly easy to use; rather, everybody has had some exposure to it.
As for your examples... once you know what they stand for ("list","remove","disk free", etc.), those commands are a hell of a lot quicker to type (and less prone to error) than spelling the words out.
Re:Like most of the *NIX family . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Windows' Difficulty with Names (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't think the problem is with odd names (although sometimes they can be a bit obtuse), I think it's really just market share. If thunderbird was preinstalled on 100% of windows machines (like outlook express does), people would quickly learn to equate thunderbird to e-mail the same way they do with outlook. The same thing applies to gimp, xine, konquerer, etc.
Part of the standard appology (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Windows has problems too... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Like most of the *NIX family . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know about that. I have been a touch-typist since I was 12 but I still alias the names of commonly used programs to a couple of letters. Even if you're a touch typist, it is faster to type two letters than more than two letters.
contrarian (Score:5, Insightful)
Why give applications boring vanilla names like photoshop, media player, etc.?
With the names that are given to many linux applications it could be argued that someone new to the platform would be lost, but I say they will be lost anyway and when they do learn about the applications that meet their needs the interesting names will leave an impression which will differentiate them from the applications on competing platforms that have common names.
I would also argue that vanilla naming creates its own confusion. How many people think Internet Explorer IS the internet?
I say we stick with the fun names.
burnin
Cleverness vs Clarity (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with getting too clever is that without a strong advertising push or word-of-mouth push (Firefox), people really don't know what your program does. The problem with going too generic is that the program isn't memorable.
There's a few programs that get it right by choosing a name that's both descriptive and clever (Photoshop, Winamp, OpenOffice, etc). Point is, either get a big ad budget or take some extra time choosing a name. Of course, if your target audience isn't the general public (read: ethereal), then it doesn't really matter since computer experts will recognize software based on how good it is.
Re:KIllustrator (Score:3, Insightful)
The trademark for "OpenOffice" belongs to someone else. Therefore we must use "OpenOffice.org" when referring to this open source project and its software.
It wasn't em-dollar-sign that forced the name change; it was "someone else." hope this helps.
Poor communication = part of the OSS culture? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet try as I might, with the notable exception of Python, I've never been able to pick up an open-source product of any complexity that I'm not familiar with, without buying an O'Reilly book or something of the like. Flame me if you will for "not trying hard enough," but it seems to me like having to try hard goes against the definition of usability in some ways. This makes for a pretty big hidden cost.
Open-source projects are the products of engineers working on something they feel is personally important, and it's perhaps unsurprising that communication with the end user (at least on the level of completeness and polish that larger companies need to demonstrate) is not given much priority. But the end users are what will drive the victory or loss of Linux on the desktop, and I think they are already voting with their mice.
And say what you want about Microsoft - but the level of effort they put into this front (from the easy-to-understand language in setup to the MSDN) is way ahead of what I've seen from the Linux world. I think they are the ones to be applauded in this case.
At least its documented (known) - people can learn (Score:4, Insightful)
"Ah! alg.exe csrss.exe ctfmon.exe dllhost.exe explorer.exe internat.exe kernel32.dll lsass.exe mdm.exe msmsgs.exe mstask.exe regsvc.exe rundll32.exe services.exe smss.exe spoolsv.exe svchost.exe system winlogon.exe winmgmt.exe wisptis.exe wmiexe.exe wmiprvse.exe wscntfy.exe wuauclt.exe are running - I know EXACTLY what all that is doing."
Linux processes/apps are named from convention and are all documented. The less said about the alternative (and comparing with) the better.
Say what!?! (Score:2, Insightful)
I realize that this will likely be modded down to hell, but I could really care less if it makes even one developer stop and think. The real problem with the entire Linux movement is a total lack of even the basic understanding of human psychology. Just like they still think that a file is the solution to everything.
We're not machines with RAM and hard drives. Our memory is highly associative, meaning that most of the things we remember are associated to other things. The only "hard-wired" things are those which are used on continuous basis, which I suppose explains why the developers don't notice these problems. For everything else, the less links there are, the harder it is to recall something, which is why naming software using names that say absolutely nothing about what the software is for creates such a mess.
Re:What a moron. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What a moron. (Score:2, Insightful)
Your argument is more Devil's advocate than anything substance. You just can't bring yourself to admit that Linux isn't perfect.
Re:What a moron. (Score:5, Insightful)
Even with GNUs Catagories. You know it has to deal with Graphics. But on most distributions there are about 10 or so to choose from. Is it a graphic converter?, A PowerPoint like application?, A 3d Ray Tracing Program?, who knows. Most common people don't want or like trying different applications until they find the one that does the job.
Stop defending these bad names for these application, Change is good deal with it.
Re:Reason for strange Linux app names (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:contrarian (Score:3, Insightful)
eh? (Score:5, Insightful)
No it doesn't. Is it saying 'Linux' (?) should start giving things super-generic names? Well that's a great idea. Let's call things 'Media Player'. But who gets to decide which media player gets named the definitive 'Media Player'? And they may not realise that most obvious super generic names are already trademarked by someone.
I don't see anything wrong with Gnu (General?) Image Manipulation Program. Rather effective description if you ask me.
It's not like the windows world isn't full of stupid Win* names is it? Winamp? WTF? It's a pretty tenuous link that you're supposed to guess that 'Amp' means an MP3 player.
Linux is Not Windows (Score:2, Insightful)
Outlook, Access, Excel...real intuitive names there. If you want to throw in third party vendors like the original did with Photoshop, you have a whole host of products that do different things with similar names - i.e., Quicken or Quick Time.
Linux names are acronyms. Acronyms are easier to type and remember. Just as a wouldn't want Linux to be renamed Runs Computer, I do not want software to be renamed from a four letter command such as gimp to Image Manipulator because someone cannot be bothered to learn its name. If they cannot be bothered to learn the name, then they are welcome to go use the programs that are named something they can remember.
The whole world does not revolve around the lowest common denominator. Let's stop pretending that it does, shall we?
Re:What a moron. (Score:3, Insightful)
"The writer only knows it's a graphics editor because he has read or heard it somewhere." - AND THEN EASILY ASSOCIATED IT WITH PHOTO EDITING because the name works.
You comepletely fail to acknowledge that Photoshop is infinitely easier to brand as a PHOTO related product than GIMP, a funny and quirky, but horrible name to brand. I'd love to have to rebrand the leather midget image... ugh. Fun for a project working name, death for marketing.
Now, you mentioned cool features for Gnome, but I think you failed to address that GNOME is a another branding problem. At least it isn't GIMP, so it has the potential to be branded easier, but it's not easy.
Sure you can shoot yourself in the foot and take the uphill road for marketing, but it would be easier to not be quirky. You can be deft at not just programming, but distribution and brading as well.
Re:What a moron. (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, THAT'S a good name. (Score:5, Insightful)
The KDE guys need to Kut the Krap with the names already.
Linux isn't on the normal users radar... AT ALL (Score:4, Insightful)
I ask you, why should you care about vi when you have notepad (which does the same job with less confusing commands)? Making Xine or Helix useable requires setup and configuration of codecs, whereas it just works under windows!
For Linux to gain ground it needs to add utility without adding futility. No one is going to accept that it more trouble to get the thing to work the same way, and they would barely consider it if the improvements are only marginal. As far as features, Windows is better to average joe. It reasonably works out of the box, and there is nothing to screw up in the configuration. When Linux works like that then it will compete with Windows, but if the software included with Linux surpassed it that would be the end for Redmond. There is no way a "normal" user is going to put up with the bullshit involved with setting a Linux box up, so these Linux people should shut up about their desktop until it works or even happens and stay on the servers.
All that being said, I love Linux as far as the performance... It turns "dated" machines into useable machines, and for those that are running on a budget it may still have a place. For servers, I don't think there is a better choice you can make. But again, the Linux people need to stop thinking they have a desktop offering -- they have a toolbox of many tools but they do not have a leatherman. Desktops need to be useable by the computer challenged to qualify as an offering, and anything too complex is just missing the mark. Do you think the normal person would know much about partitions, screen mode depth and resolution, or even the goofy device names for mice or screens? These things make the whole proposition unrealistic.
-Mind
Re:Windows' Difficulty with Names (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You seem to be around my age, then. (Score:3, Insightful)
Well there's your problem, right there. Someone who tries to use DOS command syntax at a Unix prompt shouldn't have root access.
Now, Please Take This The Right Way... (Score:5, Insightful)
I suppose Outlook Express is the ideal name for an email client...as is Outlook. Acrobat is the perfect
The name of an app is not meant to be Literal!! It's meant to make you want to own it! If you had a choice between two toilets, the Open GNUFeces gtkSepticPort, or a CrapThrasher 3000, is there any question which you would select? Calling a graphics program The GIMP (yeah, I know it's meant to be a snarky acronym; newsflash: after the age of 16, nobody cares.) is like naming your son Susan. In fact, I've introduced the GIMP to new users (all of whom look like they'd rather be anyplace in the world than in that room at the time) with a, "Hey, look, with a name like The GIMP, it's got to be good, right? Right??"
For serious 'flagship' Linux applications, allowing the "coding community" to name them is right in line with allowing the "marketing community" to write them. It screams "Hobbyist," which is fine, if that's all you want it to be. In the early '90's, when nobody knew any better, it was not unusual for an organization's HTML jockey to also be responsible for creating the site's look and writing its content. Then, the medium matured, rapidly. When I see the names for a lot of these (very, very fine and well-coded) linux apps, I get the urge to crank Nine Inch Nails, order a double-mocha-latte, and re-read SnowCrash...
Re:Like most of the *NIX family . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
I, for one, appreciate the shorthand, and I do touch-type.
Re:just try using a good name... (Score:3, Insightful)
You have to get away from the idea that there's one "best" name for any concept. Even if they were, the featureset and audience of Adobe Illustrator (the product) isn't the same as those of Killustrator; thus, the concepts differ, and so should the name. Nuance is everything.
Re:What a moron. (Score:2, Insightful)
Leaving aside the point that it's "shop" as in "workshop" that others have made, you seem to forget that "photoshopped" has entered the common vocabulary to mean "edited or touched up", as in "no way is that picture real, it must've been photoshopped".
Re:Names don't matter... (Score:5, Insightful)
Names do matter when you insist on stuffing 14,000 poorly documented apps into your favorite Linux distro, half beginning with "G" and the other with "K."
Coming from both sides of the fence. (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Windows has problems too... (Score:1, Insightful)
Huh. Because if I saw "System" when I pressed the Start button, I would have assumed it was, you know, system stuff. Like preferences or printer drivers. And I very rarely burn a CD for archival purposes -- usually to copy something to give to people, or for music. I would NOT have expected a CD burning utility to be in System/Archiving. And what the hell does "K3B" mean?
This would have been one hard program to find.
I Keep Saying It! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hehe... (Score:3, Insightful)
Which ironically is the complete opposite of Windows where you don't have to login with a password and you ASSUME you are the only one using the computer when in reality there are probably several script kiddies who are also using the computer, with no password.
burnin
One big reason for weird names (Score:5, Insightful)
It has a lot to do with the fact that open source geeks can't afford trademark lawyers. A name like "gwksprt" may be horrible, but at least you're unlikely to be sued over it.
Is one's focus more on the name or the interface? (Score:3, Insightful)
GNOME organizes programs by subject, and can be customized to a more organized set. Windows simply lists the programs (sometimes in order of when it was installed, not by alphabet). At times you just can't find it because it's rarely used - you have to do a little more work to find it. Other than the increased memory usage and wasted "graphic effects" on the xp start menu I do have to applaud about the browser and mail location, along with the list of most commonly used programs.
I'm not going to go into the names issue. If an computer illiterate user had a choice between "Outlook" and "Thunderbird" or "Excel" and "Calc" which would they choose? I'm sure it would be different for different people, but you get what i'm saying.
(and wtf is with the name eXPerience? i'd find "Windows Excel" an OS that goes beyond bounaries - by definition - more appealing.)
Since i've given enough examples - i shall shut up.
Geez... (Score:2, Insightful)
This article is based (near as I can tell) on one person's comment about stupid names. Great, so there's one idiot in the world who doesn't realize that Firefox on Linux is the same as Firefox on Windows.
Personally (yes, I am a geek) I've never had any problems with the names. apropos normally gets the job done nice and quick. Ok, that'll ellicit "But you're a geek, think of the normal people !!!1!!" Let me rephrase.
Having sucessfully installed Linux on a few (non-geek's) systems, I can say they've never had any problems. They're not the stupidest, I'll give you that, teaching someone in college might be harder then teaching Grandma Jane, but they were just regular users of their Windows machine, not really utilizing them to their full potential. They took to it rather quick. Yes, these weren't full command line only machines (as I prefer), so the similarities between Windows and Gnome/KDE did all the work.
No one uses any computer with non learning, much as Bill would like to have you think otherwise. So I showed them the basics. "Ok, you know the Start button? That's now here, the picture of the hat." Then I'd explain the most used programs (come on, who didn't have to say "Grandma, click here for the internet"?). "We use Firefox for the web, and thunderbird for email. Gaim is there for IM, and OpenOffice (click here) is just like Microsoft Office." Next came the Linux-specific crap. "To figure out a command, use 'man '. And to find what you're looking for, try apropos and grep."
Some of you may say "oh, they're a geek if they understood that", but I assure you, if you stay, and talk with them about the change they just made in their lifestyle, everyone can pick it up. Just sit, and answer any questions they have, its that simple. Oh, gee, exactly like what I do when I install Windows for someone for the first time. Hmm... perhaps because each are different operating systems, with their own learning curve and commands? Just... might... be...
Now, to say that Linux commands/programs are confusing, where Windows commands/programs aren't... boggles me. Linux breaks things down into nice categories by default. So my friend wanted a cd player, went to sound and video, and found, miracle of miracles, a cd player. Didn't have to ask me. People new to Windows have to figure out to use Windows Media Player.
Windows, assuming you didn't use it in the last ten programs, makes you search through a list of everything installed on the start menu. Which, since the programmer decides what to put it under (ok, no flaming, I know you can change it, but would a 80-year old woman who just clicks "next"?) it could be the name of the software suite, the company name, the program name, even the programmer's dog's name!
Who's to say "Illustrator" and "Photoshop" are such good names? The former literally would be something to illustrate books, and the latter would be software to buy pictures. Hold on, notepad AND wordpad for text editing? I guess one must be for notes, and the other for individual words. AOL Instant Messanger... interesting, that won't work with my Yahoo account, how do I get that to work? WinAmp to play music (ok, some of my favorite windows software, granted) that should be an amplifier of the Win? No... software to amplify sounds for windows? Sorta... but no... Wait a SEC! Windows Media Player to rip CDs?! I thought it played music, not copied it. Roxio blah blah blah for CD burning. The odds of someone having that specific program on their computer depend on who they bought the computer from. I have problems saying that's something on a typical installation. Nero, that program should squander my money in lavish parties, have sex with young boys and ruin the empire, erm, my system.
Hey, the guy turns around on page two (if you got that far) to say that "Linux names may seem confusing but actually are not." Good he points out what GIMP stands for. Not a program to beat up handicapped children by Rockstar, but a sensibly named image editing program. Ho
Re:Like most of the *NIX family . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Windows' Difficulty with Names (Score:5, Insightful)
Forget Microsoft for a second. Application names of most Open Source software sucks. Yeah that recursive acronym may be very clever, but its useless to anyone who's just searching for the app they want. Wanna know why people call it Linux and not GNU/Linux? Guh-Noo-Linux is hard to say for the 99.9% of the world that doesn't speak Klingon.
Yeah Outlook Express isn't a great name for an email client. Acrobat doesn't tell you its a PDF reader. But you know what? Microsoft and Adobe have this thing called a marketing department. Spend enough on marketing (and having a monopoly doesn't hurt) people will associate Outlook with email, and Acrobat with PDFs. In fact most people don't know what a PDF is but they know what Acrobat is.
So to recap: Microsoft: 1) get a monopoly and 2) spend a lot on marketing 3) name your products whatever the hell you want. Open Source: 1) name your product something stupid and 2) sit around complaining about how stupid people are for not using your superior product.
And even if you have a monopoly and the world best marketing department, some names are just never going to sell. ie. GIMP: At best the name is confusing, at worst its offensive. GNU: hard to pronounce and even if you know what the letters stand for its confusing on multiple levels.
On the other hand, Firefox: Has nothing to do with web browsing but they have put some effort into marketing it so they should be able to make it work.
The name of your product is a big part of marketing your product. start out with a stupid name, you're going to be fighting an uphill battle in promoting your product. Of course, promoting the GIMP is like climbing Everest with no equipment. I've seen people who were literally afraid to click on an icon labelled "GIMP". Have you ever seen Microsoft come up with a application name that got that reaction?
Alright, Names Do Matter (Score:4, Insightful)
Web Browser
Windows: iexpore, Opera, Mozilla, Firefox
Linux: Opera Web Browser, Mozilla Web Browser, Firefox Web Browser
Graphics Editing
Windows: photoshop (a place to buy photos?), illustrator
Linux: GIMP Image Editor
Movie Playback
Windows: wmp
Linux: Totem Movie Player, MPlayer, Xine, VLC Media Player
DVD Playback:
Windows: WinDVD (what titles can I win?), wmp
Linux: Totem Movie Player, Xine, VLC Media Player
Simple Text Editing
Windows: Notepad, Wordpad, TextPad
Linux: Text Editor
Instant Messaging
Windows: AIM
Linux: Gaim Internet Messenger
Music Playback:
Windows: wmp, Itunes (you tunes we all tunes to Itunes), WinAmp (I don't want Windows louder)
Linux: Beep Media Player, Rhythmbox Music Player
CD Ripping:
Windows: Itunes, wmp
Linux: Sound Juicer CD Ripper
CD Burning
Windows: Roxio, Nero
Linux: Gnome Toaster, Serpentine Audio CD Creator, Nero
It's pretty clear that Windows needs some consistency work before it will reach the level of polish and ease of use found in today's modern Linux distros. Anybody can write a story that manipulates the details in their favor.
Re:Alright, Names Do Matter (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Names vs. GUIs (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Names don't matter... (Score:3, Insightful)
1) Many scholars in linguistics feel that naming something is asserting power over it. That may be extreme. But think about the importance of names, such as pejorative titles like the N-word that are no longer considered appropriate.
2) RMS also disagrees. It's why he makes such a big deal out of GNU/Linux. Why can't people just call it Linux, as long as we properly train them? I disagree with RMS's insistence. I merely point it out to use RMS as an example of someone who does care about names.
3) Think about advertising. Consumer products such as foods are named by easy to pronounce and remember monikers. A cheesy snack called MCSAF (my cheesy snacks aren't freetos) or some such unpronounceable name will fail to sell every single time. Every single time. Like it or not, an easy to remember and pronounce title such as Outlook or Excel or Paintshop is going to be better received by consumers than esoteric titles like GNUxxx.
Re:Well... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not really a fanboy of GNOME or KDE; I use both interchangably (and I like the occasional change of pace). I find it interesting how... rabid each side's fanboys can be towards the other.
It's interesting how often GNOME fanboys complain about the 'k' prefix for KDE programs, yet seem entirely oblivious to the fact that GNOME does the same thing. The famous telescope effect -- the other guys problems seem much larger than your own.
KDE users complain about similar nonsense about GNOME, all the while blissfully ignorant that KDE usually does the same things.
All in all, it's remarkable how similar the two environments are, and how many good ideas are passed between each other. (As well as how many bad ideas get dropped because the other project did the same thing in a better way).
To be honest, I don't see using the 'k' or 'g' as a prefix much different from Apple's use of 'i' (iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD,
It's interesting how the article also selects Linux programs that don't have a descriptive name, yet completely ignores unhelpful Windwos names.
Cases in point:
Simple Text Editing
Listed:
Windows: NotePad, WordPad, TextPad
Linux: gedit, kate
Unlisted:
Linux: kwrite, kedit (only listed because they're quite obvious)
On the Windows side, how about:
PowerPoint: (a powerful pointer? a SUPER laser pointer? WTF!?!)
Excel: (Excel... excel at what?)
Nero: (what is a dead Roman emperor doing on my hard disk?)
WinAMP: (Apparently this amplifies windows; so it must make it better or more powerful somehow)
PhotoShop: (Must be a photo printing service...)
Basically, the article takes what brand recognition Windows has for granted, while completely discounting the same effect for Linux. More astounding, is when you have a brand that exists on both platforms (GIMP, FireFox, Opera).
You see the same problem for people who move between a Mac and a Windows box; Mac users have such obscure program names as QuickTime, Pages, Keynote, Preview, Safari, BBEdit, Text Wrangler. iMovie... does this mean it plays or makes movies?
Basically, he's complaining because different platforms have their tools named differently. It happens everywhere; if I walk into a bar and ask for a screwdriver, I'm going to get something entirely different than I would if I were to ask for a screwdriver at the hardware store. Differences in the dialects of English spoken in Australia, the US, and England are good examples. The bottom line is you have to take the time to use the proper dialect, at leeast some of your meaning will get lost in translation.
Re:Hehe... (Score:3, Insightful)
I spent like 10 minutes looking for a menu. In the end, I discovered that you have to drag the disc to the trash. I guess it is intuitive (as it ocurred to me, eventually), but it is just an idiotic way of doing things.
What was so bad about a menu, or option on the disc icon?
Also, Quicktime for Windows doesn't make a good case for the usability expertise of the Apple developers.
Re:Names don't matter... (Score:5, Insightful)
I know you meant that number facetiously, but a quick search of my main XP box at work shows 1472 ".exe" files and another roughly 2000 somewhat-executable files (assorted scripts, dlls, and other extensions generally considered unsafe to allow your email program to open). Of those, oddly enough, over half begin with "w" or "m"
Now, I consider myself fairly knowledgeable when it comes to the actual files on a Windows system, but I could only tell you what perhaps a tenth of those do (without some research, of course). And even looking them up online, past experience doing exactly that has shown that for probably a third of those, no one outside Microsoft has the faintest idea what they do or how to use them.
Like it or not, computers take a bit of education to use. A good GUI can make that far, far easier (and a bad GUI can make it considerably harder), but at some point, you need to accept that users just need to "suck it up" and crack a book (or load a webpage).
Re:Alright, Names Do Matter (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Alright, Names Do Matter (Score:5, Insightful)
Looking through my menus in Gentoo, it is fairly clear what the program does either by the name, or icon. There are some exceptions, like GIMP is just called "The GIMP", but at least it is under the Graphics menu group so I've a pretty good idea what its function is even without recognizing the application. That actually applies to most applications under my Gnome desktop actually. Everything is grouped by it's function, unlike Windows where typically applications are grouped by manufacturer.
Re:Alright, Names Do Matter (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Names don't matter... (Score:5, Insightful)
Please. At least Gnumeric gives you a hint that it involves NUMBERS somehow (as does "Lotus 1-2-3"). "Excel" sounds like it should be a flashcard trainer for standardized tests.
Nobody would think Excel is a spreadsheet if they hadn't been taught it.
Trademarks & Paying for Names (Score:3, Insightful)
JM2C
Re:Names don't matter... (Score:3, Insightful)
you could maybe guess that its windows media player, or you could just be scratching your head. about the only informative word is player. ok, so it plays something, but what? music, video, games?
and the names may not be informative pr see under linux, but often the menus are often sorted. so if you want to play a video, look under multimedia->video and try one of the programs listed there. want to write a letter, take a look under office->wordprosessor or something similar.
and most often people want to use openoffice, and the 2.x version have names like writer, calc, impress and draw. try to guess what they do
Re:Alright, Names Do Matter (Score:5, Insightful)
Go to the menu...
What menu?
The Start Menu
Oh.
Now, click Multimedia.
I don't have Multimedia.
What do you have?
I have, My Documents, Settings, Windows Update, New Document, Programs...
Oh yeah, sorry, click Programs, then Multimedia.
Ok, I clicked Programs
Multimedia
(long pause) There's like 100 things, they're not in any order I can discern and they go off the screen (another long pause) no, there's no Multimedia.
(much dialog occurs before our players find "Dell's Musicmatch Jukebox" in Programs -> Dell -> Dell Toys. Then, it turns out, its and old version of MMJB that doesn't have the cool feature. Oh well, it was fun, good times.)
Again, we can all make up stories using "facts" to present what we want. For instance, you conveniently dropped "VLC" from your menu entry. So, instead of the menu entry being "VLC Movie Player" which would have messed up your example, you just put "Movie Player". Don't worry, I did the same. My menu entry says "VLC Media Player" and I made up the location of the Dell branded Musicmatch Jukebox because I couldn't find it.
Re:Windows' Difficulty with Names (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe there should be some kind of catalog of linux applications, broken down into catagories that explains what they do, how they differ and a link to install/launch them.
You mean like the categories in the KDE and GNOME menus? You mentioned xmms, kopete and GIMP. Let's see where they're found on my Debian KDE system:
Pretty easy.
For a GNOME system, I have a Red Hat Enterprise 4 VM here...
Also very easy, even if you don't have any idea what the names of the Linux apps are. Just look in the funtion-structured menus and find something that does what you want to do.
Applications are the reason I've not switched to linux. I'm used to the windows ones I have, finding linux applications that do what I want takes time, and with names like xmms and kopete and gimp its not easy to find them.
If you install a reasonably full-featured distribution, all of the common tools will be pre-installed and be nicely categorized and named by function.
Notice how much easier this is than the corresponding situation on Windows. After you've installed Windows you have, what? Windows Media Player will cover XMMS, but what about Kopete or the GIMP? Is MSN messenger pre-installed? Even if it is, what if you have friends who use AIM, Jabber, Yahoo, ICQ, etc.? Gotta find and install something. For GIMP, I guess you've got Paint. Other than that, you have to go find something.
On Linux, even if you what you want isn't already installed, most distros make it trivial to find and install whatever you need. On Debian, for example, just start Synaptic (which is nicely categorized on the menus), click "Search", type "edit image" and you get a list of a number of packages that do the job. Click on any one of them and you get a description of the package. Click the checkbox next to all of those that sound interesting, click "Apply" and wait a couple of minutes, then try them all out and decide which you like (they'll all be in the appropriate spots in the menus).
Sorry, but I think Linux destroys Windows in this department. It doesn't matter what the apps are named, good packaging and nice menus make the names irrelevant. It's worth pointing out that Linux beats Mac OS X in this regard as well. Not only does OS X not have as much stuff pre-installed, it doesn't provide a nice way to find applications. You have to go to the Applications folder and then try to figure out what everything in there does.
In your case, you already went through the pain of figuring out what Windows apps you like, so switching to Linux is painful. But that's not because of Linux, it's because you're moving from something you know to something you don't. Even if the "something you don't" is actually easier, the change requires effort.
Re:Names don't matter... SHAME SHAME SHAME (Score:4, Insightful)
Statements such as these:
Names don't matter, it is all about training and then familiarity
it gets down to user training
are not just "not insightful", they are so 180 degrees, 100% wrong the fact that they would even be modded as anything close to "insightful" brings more disrepute than usual to slashdot.
Ok, now that I've raised the alarm, let me justify it.
First of all, USABILITY MATTERS. This is no longer 1986, or 1994 for that matter. We know now that the usability of a system is a key to its successful deployment.
Second, the opposite of usability is "that which needs training or re-learning when it shouldn't."
A pilot needs training to fly a 747. However, Boeing works damned hard and invests millions of dollars to make the systems as intuitive and usable as possible nevertheless, as this will lead to:
- fewer accidents
- fewer training and re-training costs for the airlines, their customers
- better day to day operation
Nobody at boeing says "the pilots are professionals. let's name the #3 engine Hi pressure bleed air valve malfunction switch "Xooomer". for that matter, let's give their FMS a CLI, since a well trained pilot can be faster with this than with a modal, menu-based FMS."These basic, BASIC principles of design are well known in virtually all fields of engineering. And, I (following in the footsteps of tongue-in-cheek works like the unix haters handbook) have been banging this drum in the linux world since at least 1995. And yet, just as it seems that a little light is shining through, in the form of a slashdot headline that actually says (gasp) intelligent things about usability, we open up the comments to find the same old nonsense from users that "it's not a usability problem, it's a training issue" being modded +5 insightful, which basically tells me that a lot of people still aren't getting it.
Pity.
Mark parent down. Severely down. Please.
Re:Names don't matter... SHAME SHAME SHAME (Score:5, Insightful)
AMEN. I would go a step further and say that most technological revolutions are effectuated more so by usability breakthroughs than pure technology. The rise of the Internet was precipitated by the web browser. The widespread availibility of a graphical interface drove the adoption of personal computers. MP3's weren't even on the RIAA's radar before Napster made finding and downloading them easy.
Usability and accessibility are FAR more important that most geeks realize, probably because most of them want to use their knowledge of technology as a social lever, rather than as a boon to others.
Re:Names don't matter... (Score:3, Insightful)
2) Ruby simple? What are you smoking? Ruby is as complicated and as much a mishmash of paradigms as anything.
Re:Alright, Names Do Matter (Score:2, Insightful)
It would be nice to see K, G, and X go away. And things like "Kaffeine" read more like "Kaffeine Media Player." If I'm looking for a basic calculator I should find it under Calculator or Calc. KCalc is hard to find because I'm looking for a word that starts with C. I really don't care who made it or for what desktop it's for as long as I can find it and use it effectively and quickly.
Now when I use my windows box I don't find MCalc, MSolitare, MPBrush, MIE, MControlPannel, or MNotepad. Apparently it isn't a system limitation to start with K, G, or X and contain no spaces.
Re:Like most of the *NIX family . . . (Score:1, Insightful)
All possible political correctness is averted!
Re:Alright, Names Do Matter (Score:2, Insightful)
Windows: Start/programs/Adobe/Acrobat? nope, not there.
Start/programs/Adobe inc/Pagemaker? nope
Start/Programs/Adobe co/Illustrator? nope
Start/Programs/Adobe Systems/GoLive? nope, where is it?
Start/Programs/Adobe Solutions/photoshop There it is.
And we know who Adobe is. It's worse when you have a hundred apps from companies you never heard of before.
Linux: K(or foot, etc)/apps/graphics/GIMP What could be more simple?
Re:Read directly off my WinXP menu (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Alright, Names Do Matter (Score:2, Insightful)
Web Browser
Windows: Web (on XP-like menus), Internet Explorer or Mozilla Firefox (Classical menus)
Linux: Opera Web Browser, Mozilla Web Browser, Firefox Web Browser
Graphics Editing
Windows: Adobe Photoshop, PaintShop Pro, Paint (just joking! don't kill me!)
Linux: GIMP Image Editor
Movie Playback
Windows: Windows Media Player, QuickTime
Linux: Totem Movie Player, MPlayer, Xine, VLC Media Player
DVD Playback:
Windows: WinDVD, Windows Media Player
Linux: Totem Movie Player, Xine, VLC Media Player
Simple Text Editing
Windows: Notepad, Wordpad, TextPad
Linux: Text Editor
Instant Messaging
Windows: MSN Messenger, Google Talk
Linux: Gaim Internet Messenger
Music Playback:
Windows: Windows Media Player, iTunes
Linux: Beep Media Player, Rhythmbox Music Player
CD Ripping:
Windows: iTunes, Windows Media Player
Linux: Sound Juicer CD Ripper
CD Burning
Windows: CDBurnerXP Pro 3 (That's a real name!), Nero Burning Rom
Linux: Gnome Toaster, Serpentine Audio CD Creator, Nero
I still like GNOME naming conventions better, but I think that usually the names of most actual Microsoft apps are pretty clear (though a tad too generic). What I really dislike, though, is the menu structure.