GrokDoc Goes Live; All GNU/Linux Newbies Welcome 504
An anonymous reader writes "Writing at LinuxWorld, Groklaw's PJ asks "What Do Newbies Need to Make the Switch to GNU/Linux? and invites the world - literally - to help with answering the question, by participating in the wiki she and some colleagues have just launched. GrokDoc aims to turn the usual process on its head: "Instead of experts telling newbies how to do things, we will let newbies show and tell us what they need." Might be a fantastic way to help push Linux still further toward that fabled tipping-point."
Online docs are a good thing... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Online docs are a good thing... (Score:5, Insightful)
Programmers are poor writers. (Score:5, Insightful)
My career involves many publishing venues, including a very popular book publisher and a city newspaper. While most developers are very adept at their work, self-expression or documentation is not their strong suit in general. The text is jargon-rich and circular, presuming that the reader already has a knowledge base equal to that of the writer.
This one point alone is why Linux and almost all other UNIX blends and clones never get the attention they seek. It's not that the OS is rotten (far from it), but because users have NO FRICKIN' CLUE what to do with it, including installing the OS (which programmers should really assume will be atop or supplementing Windows), and the help information is incomprehensible, if it exists at all.
Further, the diversity of X Window-based interfaces (window managers and desktop managers like KDE) are too diverse, leaving users very confused where anything is. Mac OS X is essentially the only UNIX clone/blend that a grandma can use. Sure, grandma CAN use Linux, but who's going to teach her how in a way that is understandable? She certainly won't try to READ how.
My humble opinion is that programmers should stop trying to steal the likenesses of Microsoft Windows and Mac OS X and attempt to kidnap the companies' marketing and human interface staff!
Re:Programmers are poor writers. (Score:5, Insightful)
I will second the motion on MAN pages being stinking rotten messes. I have tried for years to read them and tried to make any useful sense of them. The problem is that they give you a command name and a set of switches and input values not considering that many combinations have no real value or simply don't work together.
I could use a man page with a few examples for how to use the command. Try chmod for example. Goof around with chmod in a recursive fashion and you are likely to have the OS fail to work! It is easy to not know that unless a program is not editable it will fail to work.
Take the wonderful commands for applications of grep!!! Which goes with which and which conflicts with which and why.
Well if you are not confused you have not tried these wonderful tools. They are powerful but obscure. A MAN page which actually gave you a useful script like command [Switches] [FileName] and actually showed you a simple examle or two might help. tar for example can be pretty awful without a good example.
I suppose a wrapper tool might be in order as well
So are you saying... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So are you saying... (Score:4, Interesting)
Though you deserve kudos for actually using that software (and I agree with you wholeheartedly with regards to hypocritical Windows users), your anti-anything-linux rant is amusing and rather silly.
I run Windows XP Pro at home because I play games. However, I've run Red Hat 6.1, 7.1, and 8 on other machines, but have never found them to be terribly useful for personal uses. If I were to constantly have more than one machine, I would probably run Linux as well. I, however, do not have any qualms about running WinXP, especially because it *can* be a very stable and powerful OS.
Professionally, I've done my web developing in the past with perl on a Linux server. As the years went on, however, our company made the jump to Windows 2003 Server and .NET using C#. Though I am no fan of the "corporate bastard" that is Microsoft, production costs have lowered and development has become much more efficient since we made the switch. All biases aside, I have been relatively content to use a Microsoft product in this situation.
Free software is great, but is seldom intuitive enough for the masses. Linux, and the realm that surrounds it, is largely for those that enjoy and have the time to endlessly tweak their software. I have enormous respect for those kind of people, and I must admit that I've felt jealous of them and their coolness.
When you call everyone "IE-using scumsuckers" and "shitbags", you're as annoying as the very n00bs you taunt. At least Linux wannabes are open to software that they don't even use.
Re:So are you saying... (Score:3, Informative)
If you want at least somehow reliable stats, you have to rely on something more robust, eg. passive TCP fingerprinting; a good tool for this purpose is eg. p0f.
I Disagree (Score:5, Interesting)
I tried every night for two straight weeks (reading the docs, getting some great help from the standard linux forums, reading every samba tutorial I could find etc) to get Samba working on my home network before finally giving up on it (and hence linux altogether).
You can't really complain about newbies not reading the manual when the manual either just plain doesn't contain the information you need, or has wrong or out-of-date information in it.
Re:I Disagree (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I Disagree (Score:3, Informative)
Funny thing is that Gentoo's documentation has been criticized by the 'hardcore' linux community.
It's consistent, it's up to date, and most of all, it's really easy to read. Like the parent mentioned, you really do learn a lot when reading it.
Gentoo is without a dobut one of the most complicated of the distros. Consequently, it is one of the most difficult to use, and even long-time linux users will need to refer to the documentation.
As a result, the documentat
Re:I Disagree (Score:5, Informative)
I really think that, in general, one of the best ways to learn about computers (any part of hardware and software) is by diving into it at the deepest level with a good walktrough. This not only teaches you how to do things, but also why you do them that way. With strong knowledge of the low level, it is easy to come up with any solution for the high level.
Of course, the _quickest_ way to learn how to use a computer is to learn just the things you need to use. However, do not confuse this with the easiest way. For example, there is a widespread belief that GUIs are more intuitive, and therefore easier to use than the command line. I disagree. I can hardly think of anything more intuitive than pressing the key which has the character that you want on the screen. From there on, you build up the complexity until you have a command that does what you want done, and press the key that causes the command to be executed.
In a GUI, one typically moves the mouse (in a different plane!), to the location where an action is to be performed, then does one of clicking, right clicking, holding a key and clicking, double clicking, etc. Often, the command to be performed is selected from a menu, which sometimes appears in a completely different location from where the action is performed. Intuitive?
The strength of GUIs is that they are discoverable. Once you learn how to move the mouse, select items, and navigate menus, you can discover pretty much everything a program can do by doing just that. There is a lesson here for CLI designers: make your interfaces discoverable. Tell the user how to get a list of commands and how to find out what they do.
Re:I Disagree (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I Disagree (Score:5, Interesting)
Point is, most commercial software isn't released if it's not documented (not always the case, of course). But Open Source you get when you get it. If it's not done, it's not done but you can still download it. If it's done but the docs aren't, nobody holds the release up. C'est la vie.
Re:I Disagree (Score:5, Insightful)
He didn't say he couldn't find docs. He explictly said he found lots of docs.
Finding docs is worthless if they all suck.
In my early Linux days I floundered around for a couple weeks just trying to find basic information. I'm no command line novice either, going back to the days when we typed it, on a typewriter. Finally a simple diagram of the generic file system printed in Linux Journal (that's right, even Linux for Dummies didn't bother to even show me a diagram of the file system, and this is enough editions back that it was still command line centric) and a copy of Kernighan and Pike had me whizzing along in about half an hour.
Because Kernighan and Pike writing generically decades ago wrote better Linux documentation than what was available for Linux, and even better Red Hat documentation than that which came with my boxed set with triple the page count. I would have been better off if Red Hat had just tossed me a copy of TUPE with a note on saying,"Best we can do, you'll have to figure the rest out by yourself."
Because Kernighan and Pike know how to write documentation.
KFG
Re:I Disagree (Score:5, Insightful)
Instead he should be directed to a convenient administration tool (swat/webmin) which would allow him to set up his home server without 3 hours spent trying to make head or tail of his new (GNU/)Linux system.
Later, if he wants to become more proficient, or fine tune his installation (in general), then by all means show him the CLI and point him in the direction of a M for him to RT, just not straight away.
What a lot of us seem to forget all to easily is that there is something called information overload, and learning the command prompt/SysVinit runlevels/Samba configuration/hosts.Allow/Deny.... all at once is an easy way to get there. We didn't learn all of this in one weekend, so we shouldn't expect others to.
Re:I Disagree (Score:4, Insightful)
Huh?? why is anyone new using anything but the gnomeedit or other point and click text editors that are automatically installed?? It's just like the windows ones they are comfortable with...
And anyways, why are you messing with the smb.conf file or SWAT?? use the mandrake config tools and call it done. Too many newbies are being directed at advanced distros like gentoo and Debian and Slackware.... Give them the easiest for anyone to use, Mandrake 10.0 and soon to be even easier SuSE.
That was the biggest problem in my Local LUG.. the Seasoned Linux experts are telling newbies... "dont use XXXX use Gentoo it's better... here Debian Stable is what you want, etc....etc....etc...
Most linux newboes need to start with Knoppix then graduate to a real-installer but still brain-dead easy to use like Mandrake then graduate when they learn to hate RPM based distros...
throwing someone the Linux from Scratch PDF when they are a newbie is plain stupid, and most linux experts pull that crap on newbies every single day.
Getting them to change is the first step... the LUG I help with is standardized on Mandrake for newbies... we also reccomend that they actually BUY it so they can access the support community for it. then after they are ready they graduate to other distros...
Re:I Disagree (Score:3, Informative)
And anyways, why are you messing with the smb.conf file or SWAT?? use the mandrake config tools and call it done. Too many newbies are being directed at advanced distros like gentoo and Debian and Slackware.... Give them the easiest for anyone to use, Mandrake 10.0 and soon to be even easier SuSE.
That's exactly my point (sorry for the SWAT reference, being predominantly Slackware myself, I don't really know what's out there).
But what's really needed is for people to be sent to the right tool for the job
Re:I Disagree (Score:3, Interesting)
What distro were you using? Where did you have problems? Were you trying to just share stuff or do full Domain Authentication as well?
I just installed SuSE 9.1 on a latop here at work, and it saw all three NT/2K domains immediately. I was able to share some files just with a couple of clicks.
-Charles
Re:I Disagree (Score:3, Insightful)
Samba configuration is exceedingly simple.Most distros even come with a very thorough config template made out for you. You can get it set up and running in a matter of seconds:
[global]
netbios name = machine
workgroup = name
security = share
[shares]
path =
browseabl
Re:I Disagree (Score:5, Interesting)
However, until then, my network server will remain a Windows 2000 machine, where I can actually access its files without any issues whatsoever from other machines.
Re:I Disagree (Score:4, Insightful)
When I first used SAMBA I read through the entire documentation. After the headache subsided, I only needed to look at 3 pages to configure it. Then I used SWAT and had to reconfigure it afterwards since it messed it all up.
I currently have a SAMBA server running on Fedora Core 1, works great with very little trouble using the GUI to select the shares and permissions. Even have my printer setup through it, works great.
The thing with SAMBA is, once you have it working...don't mess with it!
Re:I Disagree (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I Disagree (Score:3, Funny)
Just don't ask for help on because you will be called stupid and ridiculed for wasting everyone's time.
That is always my favorite troubleshooting answer.
"It works fine for me, I don't know what your problem is?"
Re:I Disagree (Score:5, Insightful)
Even when I set up the share, which finally worked pretty well in Windows, I still can't use it correctly while mounting it in another Linux box. I suppose I still might have something misconfigured, but it keeps telling me the owner is '502,' which is the ID# (user #? whatever you call it) of the actual owner, but not the name of the owner. It sorta works, but not for subdirectories where I still lose ownership of what is supposed to be a full control subdir and files. It's just too much hassle, and I think somethings broken based on how it identifies the owner and permissions. Back to Windows. Hey, everything works. *shrug*
Re:I Disagree (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes Mark, you're right. Documentation QUANTITY for Samba under Linux is high, therefore documentation QUALITY must be impeccable.
Come ON.
In fact, the more different versions of the documentation there are, the worse it is to try to follow them. How do you know which version is the best? How do you know which versions are even CORRECT?
Look, you can cop your RTFM/PEBKAC attitude all you want, just stay away from the newbies, ok? You're not doing anyone any favors otherwise.
Re:I Disagree (Score:3, Insightful)
First point: I help newbies all the time. I do everything I can to help on mailing lists and writing documentation myself.
Second point: This is not about me helping a newbie. This is the newbie saying "Samba documentation is bad" Now, since I have personally looked at the samba documentation a number of times and found it to be quite good, I found this interesting. I went looking for documentation and found not only quantity, but quality and that it was very easy to fi
Re:I Disagree (Score:5, Informative)
You did not even read this documentation that you are claiming is no good.
You also did not look for it very hard.
Let's see...
Now, have a look at that documentation, then come back and tell me that it sucks and why, or tell me that it doesn't but that you just couldn't find it, or tell me that you were really just not looking that hard.
-Mark
WM? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:WM? (Score:5, Informative)
You can do far worse than pointing people at The Linux Cookbook [dsl.org].
This is something that is task orientated which seems to make lots of newcomers to Linux (but not computers)
that's a good one (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Online docs are a good thing... (Score:5, Funny)
Is that the issue? I didn't read the article...
Re:Online docs are a good thing... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Online docs are a good thing... (Score:3, Insightful)
Experts don't always RTFM either. (Score:3, Interesting)
Montessori Linux (Score:5, Interesting)
SSDD (Score:4, Insightful)
www.linuxquestions.org
or
www.mandrakeusers.o
or
whatever fedora people use?
Its just a fancy forum! Move along, nothing to see here people.
Re:SSDD (Score:5, Funny)
Re:SSDD (Score:5, Funny)
Re:SSDD (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, this does sound like it's reinventing the wheel.
Listening to Newbies (Score:5, Interesting)
On the other hand, rather than pushing linux past a "tipping point," listening to newbies might lead to many of the aspects of the Microsoft/Mac models that many hard core PC users hate.
Not that I think this is a bad thing, but it's worth considering that if, for instance, standardarized application appearance/performance becomes more important, much of the speed and robustness of Linux may fall by the wayside.
Re:Listening to Newbies (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Listening to Newbies (Score:4, Insightful)
This is something everybody should really make a point of...because really, all of Linux' benefits start to fall apart when they hit the desktop, and one of the reasons for this is that people treat the entire set of x servers, window managers, graphics toolkits and desktop packages as "Desktop Linux," when really each is not interchangable with the others. Understand wheat I'm saying? Your machine can use any of a half dozen different mail clients and they're all compatible with each other...but the thing the user uses most, the desktop interface, has no real coherent interoperability save that offered by the ancient and useless X.
X is no longer "good enough." Linux NEEDS something new and universal that is built for new technology, instead of patched to allow it. It's 2000-friggin-4. Let's follow Apple's lead and push the desktop onto the graphics card. Let's follow Be's lead and make the GUI something integral to the system, AS important as the CLI, and not just a "front end" for CLI commands. Let's follow -- gasp -- Microsoft's lead and not immediately assume everybody's RTFM...change defaults to prevent ignorance from killing a system and start failing over with useful error messages.
Re:Listening to Newbies (Score:3, Insightful)
Your fear of adding new things is typical among Linux users. They can be added, but if optimizing for them requires modifications to ANYTHING else, opt to slow them down. And so we're stuck trying to patch holes in X. Fuck that, man, I'll stick with Windows...or better still, OS X.
Re:Listening to Newbies (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Listening to Newbies (Score:3, Insightful)
On the other hand, people that are used to windows or macs will tend not to understand this issue, after all MS is actively tring to blur the line between the OS Kernel and the UI on top of it, even in the development m
Re:Listening to Newbies (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, what most newbies use is some sort of X/Linux, either a KDE/Linux package or a GNOME/Linux package. For instance, take some of the most popular activities for newbies in a computer: surfing the web and listening to music. Their personal contact is with the browser, let's say konqueror, mp3 player, XMMS for instance, and the desktop, KDE in this case. If there are any GNU software in there it's buried deep out of the user's view. "Linux" is a good name for i
No (Score:3, Insightful)
In 1983, X and TeX existed, RMS decided we needed a free OS. So he started writing one. He personnally wrote GCC, Emacs, and GDB. He recruited volunteers, he founded FSF (who hired 15 programmers), he wrote the GNU GPL, he asked people to help again and again and he gave them the tools to write free software. He gave talk
Re:Listening to Newbies (Score:5, Insightful)
E.g., MS Visual C still optimizes a LOT better than GCC.
I know it will sound like blasphemy to a lot of the
Most of Microsofts's faults, such as never thinking twice about ignoring the standards if it can optimize better without them, or inventing its own formats, are the exact same things we admire in the archetipal idea of a hacker. (The one illustrated in the Jargon file, for example.)
And indeed it has committed more sins in the name of speed, than for all other reasons combined. (Anti-competitive behaviour included.) E.g., that's the reason why MSVC++ was always slightly deviating from the ANSI standard: they could optimize code better that way. E.g., that's the reason it let drivers run in kernel mode, and made Windows inherently unstable. E.g., deliberately pissing off Sun aside, all the changes they did to their implementation of Java were precisely aimed at making it very very fast. Etc.
So either way, what I'm trying to say is: "user-friendly" doesn't _have_ to mean "slower than a snail". Windows has managed to stay pretty fast (fast enough to play real time 3D games, for example) even while cattering to the newbies. I'm sure Linux will, too.
Now stability, that's another thing. No idea there, and indeed MS doesn't exactly come to mind as a good example there
Plus, as was already said, it's not like anyone will stop you from running another desktop environment, if the newbie-inspired one gets too user-friendly for your taste. E.g., most distros ship with KDE, which is aimed at precisely that: looking like Windows to newbies, yet I happily run XFce 4 instead. A couple of co-workers run Ratpoison [sourceforge.net], and that's as far from Windows (or user friendly) as you can get in a graphics mode.
Soundcard / Printer Support (Score:5, Insightful)
Simple (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Simple (Score:5, Informative)
Slightly better GUI design for config windows would help a great deal. What we need:
- make the damn windows resizable already! Especially if you want to put in a three-line selection box with 3000+ items! (this is of course a point mostly aimed at Windows).
- Do NOT use tabs, *especially* if you need more than one row of them. Instead, use a Mozilla-style category list on the left side of the window. That allows you to group together related 'tabs', and use longer (and more descriptive) names.
- Group options together in a logical fashion. Disable controls that are made irrelevant by other choices.
- Provide a fscking help option for EVERYTHING, describing the finer nuances of setting or unsetting that option. Don't write "LPGR: sets the LPGR option". Describe what it is, why I want it, what happens if I set it and what happens if I do not set it. If a value is a string, provide examples and full BNF syntax.
- Do NOT use acronyms or abbreviations unless you are REALLY certain they are common words. And even then it is probably better not to.
- Never invert the meaning of a checkbox. Checkboxes ENABLE things. If you check them something should be turned ON, not OFF. "Disable debugging" is incorrect. "Enable debugging" (with inverted state) is. If you do it right you will find you can drop the "enable" without losing meaning.
- While I'm on the subject anyway, checkboxes are for on/off choices. There are plenty of things that masquerade like on/off choices but really aren't (for example, the choice between 22KHz and 44KHz sound has only two options but a checkbox is utterly inappropriate since 22KHz is not the logical opposite of 44KHz even if your application only has those two options). Use radiobuttons or a combobox for those, even if there are only two options.
- Do not hide options behind three layers of windows, tabs, subwindows, and more tabs. You are allowed one layer only. It is provided by the navigation choices in the left-hand column. This allows any user to navigate to his option of choice in ONE click.
- Remember the last location of the user. Select it for him, next time he opens the configuration window. This will probably save another click.
And most importantly, there is this:
- Work with your own software. Try to _feel_ what is annoying; what works, and what doesn't. If some task is unpleasant to accomplish, redesign the GUI so it is no longer a problem.
Another one? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Another one? (Score:3, Funny)
Because new users won't know to use man in the first place!
Re:Another one? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:LinuxQuestions wiki ! (Score:3, Informative)
Blind (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Blind (Score:5, Insightful)
However, you will see plenty of student teachers observing classes so they can learn to teach better.
Re:Blind (Score:3, Informative)
Basicaly, Experienced Linux users sit a complete noob down and watch what they do.
Imagine sitting your mother/girlfriend/neighbor down at your Linux box then record what she does to get online. Maybe she has trouble navigating the menus. Maybe there is problem just logging in. Is there any problems using the broser itself? Which web browser was chosen?
There are more complex tasks like setting up the computer for internet access. Also one can see how well they can handle finding and readi
Re:Blind (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're building something for the blind to use (software, sidewalks, whatever), don't you think you ought to ask the blind what they need?
Re:Blind (Score:3, Insightful)
The teachers know the mat
What newbies need... (Score:5, Interesting)
2. The device compatibility offered by Windows
3. The level of cooperation shared by Windows applications
4. The games available on Windows
5. The simplicity of changing system configurations offered by Windows
I wonder where the heck I can find an OS that does all that and more? Hmmm...
(This is not a bash on Linux. I use Linux and love Linux for doing SERIOUS WORK. Most of the world does not do SERIOUS WORK at home. Windows meets virtually every requirement a home user could have. To meet these requirements, Linux would have to effectively become Windows. I, personally, would never use that distro.)
Re:What newbies need... (Score:5, Insightful)
True. Simple installation yes. Like windows no. Why? I haven't come across a newbie who can do a clean installation with windows(I am not including those recovery disks that just dump an image into hdd). No one complains about windows because not many newbies install windows. it comes pre-installed on their system. In linux I really like the 4-click install of XandrOS [xandros.com].Its clean and simple and asks minimal questions.
2. The device compatibility offered by Windows
this is going to a problem because not all hardware manufacturers want to openup their drivers. A lot of them have given out binary only drivers(Think Nvidia) but the drivers suck.
3. The level of cooperation shared by Windows applications
agree.
4. The games available on Windows
chicken and egg problem 5. The simplicity of changing system configurations offered by Windows
I find apple give more simplicity when it comes to changing systems. But if we narrow our vision to what both apple and MS does for usability, then we are bound to make the same mistakes. There are other designs that are much more usable than windows and apple for that matter. We just shouldn't follow windows, just because people are used to it.
You forgot... (Score:5, Interesting)
Anti-virus software and monthly security updates and bug patches.
The typical Windows user has become so adjusted to the idea of constant crashes, security holes, and bug fixes that they'll think Linux is somehow lacking if it doesn't provide them - constantly. After all, viruses are a normal part of computer operation, right?
And should you try to convince them otherwise, they won't believe you. I've actually heard pro-Windows CS students say, "Well, it's impossible for a computer system not to crash from time to time..."
Sometimes I think that Windows is Bill Gates' revenge against all those kids who used to make fun of him on the playground. He charges Joe "corporate-fool" Sixpack exorbitant amounts of money for the software equivalent of a Pinto - sweet revenge indeed!
Re:You forgot... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:You forgot... (Score:3, Interesting)
Ah, yes, but the idea of Windows crashing has not left them....
Oh, and how's your system restore work?
Thought so. Mine didn't work either. I've used XP, and it is junk. Try inserting an unreadable CDROM in the drive sometime, and watch XP become useless for about 5 to 10 minutes, if it recovers at all.
That bug has existed since Windows 95.
Granted, the days of Windows suddenly refusing to boot are probably past us, but the OS as a whole is still trash. To a Windows user, the aforementioned b
Re:What newbies need... (Score:3, Interesting)
2. Many devices are compatable, but require a lot more legwork on part of the user. I agree
More fluff ahead (Score:4, Funny)
Re:More fluff ahead (Score:5, Funny)
I like this idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds Like a Plan (Score:5, Interesting)
This kind of testing is exactly what needs to be done. Recently I took several seminars on useability engineering and useability testing, and I was amazed at how much better you can make a product after testing it. I suggest that if you do plan to add your input to the project that you incoiurage the user to think out loud and write down all the things they say. It's really enlightening to hear a user say something like, "I'm looking for a button to do XYZ." when you know that the feature he wants is in a menu right in front of him.
My only concern is that, quite frankly, I find that the first and most difficult hurdle for new users is installing linux. Many people have no clue what's inside of their machine, and more times than not you need to specify some odd bit of hardware during the setup process.
Heh, I should try this on my mother.
How about this? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How about this? (Score:4, Interesting)
Because the problem is not the name, it's that it's used in a derogatory fashion. As soon as the new name becomes politically correct, the people who use "newbie" to belittle them will use the new name to belittle them. Changing the name will not stop people from being derogatory to whom it refers.
Newbies don't need Linux... (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyway, Linux is the underlying OS and no use to any newbie. Newbies want to use a user-friendly desktop system. The discussion can't be centered on Linux itself. There should be discussions specific to each distro or window-manager.
Newbies don't give a shit about the OS. They want to install a desktop and run things and go back and easily find and use the files they created last week. Oh and, no childish games about names, evil monopolies, litigious bastards and whatnot. In other words, no "grokxxx"!
What Do Newbies Need to Make the Switch to Linux? (Score:4, Insightful)
Whos should switch and who shouldn't (Score:4, Insightful)
We still can't run games out of the box. We've got to compile kernels and tweak and adjust because I have YET to see a Linux distro install itself optimized for any given graphics card allowing for 3D acceleration that's worth a damn... OUT OF THE BOX... (please don't tell me anything that works after tweaking... it's the before-skilled-tweaking that I'm talking about.)
So gamers? You're stuck with the trojan/virus/worm-target, MS Windows for now.
If you're browsing the web and doing email and quite possibly even things like the office apps, graphic and web design, you're about ready with some exceptions. Just install whatever Linux distro appeals most to you and go with it... they're almost all free to acquire to take your time, learn a little and install them all, evaluate and decide. It's all good.
If you're running server-oriented services such as SQL, HTTPd, SMB, NFS, FTP, SMTP, etc... Why haven't you changed already!? What are you stupid?!
Re:Whos should switch and who shouldn't (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean, think about it. If you had to keep Windows, what's the solution to ridding yourself of virus worries? Education! Learn what to trust, what not to trust. Learn how to lock down your computer. And learn how to find out about new viruses.
Now, if you want to use Linux, what'
First step (Score:3, Insightful)
I know RMS has a point that many GNU utilities are in Linux. But as a brand name, it's crap. "Linux" is hard enough to remember or understand in comparison to names like "Macintosh" or "Windows" - please, please don't make it worse by adding something vaguely unpronounceable and obscure-sounding at the beginning and then arguing about it endlessly.
Just call it Linux. Not Lindows, not GNU/Linux, not the endless new and old distribution names (and what the heck is "Gentoo" anyway?!), just Linux.
Then people might understand what the heck you're talking about. Which would be a step in the right direction.
Re:First step (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:First step (Score:3, Insightful)
Not that anyone asked, but here's my $0.02 about the whole GNU/Linux thing. While it may not be the strict definition of what an operating system is, it stops being Linux if you change the kernel but keep the GNU utilities. It wouldn't stop being Linux if you change the GNU utilities but kept the kernel. The question I think needs answering is does running the GNU utilities on MacOS X make it GNU/MacOS X? How ab
Re:First step (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not just about the GNU utilities. People forget that for Linux in 1991, GNU was *everything* except the kernel. The C library. The init scripts. The login process. The shell. The basic text editors. *Everything*.
It was a very fair call in 1991 to say that the Linux distros of the time were just GNU plus Linux. I remember even in 1992 when people asked "what's this Linux thing" the basic reply was "it's that GNU OS but with a different kernel". It's no longer a good call because there's far more in a modern Linux distribution than GNU plus Linux but there's no denying that the UNIX-like core in any modern "Linux distribution" is mostly GNU[1].
Yes, there is a GNU/BSD. No, it's not the same thing as the "GNU utilities" running on top of FreeBSD. It is the entire GNU reimplementation of UNIX running on top of the FreeBSD kernel. But running the "GNU utilities" on top of MacOS X or Windows would not make them GNU/Mac or GNU/Win, because GNU is not essential to those operating systems. They have their own startup and login behaviour, their own system libraries, etc.
[1] Actually even that is becoming less and less true. Modern distros occasionally swap out GNU components for BSD components or whatever. The Free UNIX scene is rather incestuous. There is a lot of cross pollination occurring.
Re:First step (Score:4, Insightful)
Linux is just a kernel. Linux is in a GNU system and not the other way around. Stallman is the father of open source software and newbies should be taught this as well as just exactly what linux is. This will avoid stupid questions like "I downloaded Linux and its nothing but a 30 meg source archive for a kernel or something" If GNU/Linux is too hard for them to understand, they have no hope of ever using and maintaining a GNU/Linux system.
Re:First step (Score:3, Insightful)
To really get off linux must... (Score:3, Insightful)
The most promising Linux newbies are those who aren't computer newbies but who are yet to be turned into Linux users/advocates. I'm talking about the people who have wide knowledge of how computer and windows work. Those that do patch, run firewalls, set up networks for their buddies and so on. Unfortunately they also like how Windows works. By GUI.
Now, they're a good target because:
- They decide the computing trends
- They know enough to get Linux up and running
- They also can be courted with things that Linux does better then Windows
But they're also a difficult target because:
- They aren't really interested in learning new stuff. Knowing stuff is a means to an end, not an end in itself.
- UNIX way is way too hard for them and without commandline Linux isn't as complete as windows is.
But as the computing trendsetters they truly are a group that must be courted in order to get Linux a wide acceptance.
Re:To really get off linux must... (Score:3, Funny)
Did you ever consder that?
Some people may actually feel more comfortable with bash or tcsh. Denying such options to them denies their indiviuality and their essential humanity.
You would treat us all as generic grey boxes.
That's really not the point of the market diversity that the invisible hand should be providing us.
let homer design linux (Score:5, Funny)
The Linux Learner's Guide (Score:4, Informative)
Too bad more beginners don't know about it:
Linux Learner's Guide (PDF) [thejemreport.com]
-JemWhat newbies want. (Score:5, Insightful)
What's That! Blasphemy!! BaSH him to Death!!!
Seriously, I challenge someone out there to make a distro where a user need never resort to the command line interface or a terminal of any kind.
I guess something like....Windows really...
If you ask Aunt Tillie to type
rpm -ivvf lovelyrpm-withnoguitoinstall-2.3-5.rpm
she will, legitimatly I think, return to windows. She's a busy person with no time to appreciate the finer points of red hat package management.(Or why up2date keeps crashing)
P.S.
This does not say that you must get rid of the command line altogether mind. Even XP still has the command prompt, hidden away somewhere.
Resolution (Score:4, Interesting)
Avoid Supply Side Arrogance (Score:5, Insightful)
we will let newbies show and tell us what they need.
This is an excellent idea.
A lot of people in IT have a lot of experience with Microsoft, whose approach since they gained market dominance has been to more or less shove new products to their audience after some token sampling of the marketplace.
But FOSS is currently making a similar supply-side mistake, too: people that want to use Linux to do something in particular for their business have to "just accept" a distro and what's out there. Before you say "but they can write their own app", think - How many small business owners are capable of "writing their own app", modifying an Apache module, etc?
Sure, there's tons of free and open source software out there that people can use to build systems for their businesses, but many of those small business owners have little time or little expertise about how those pieces could be put together to help them. They need help with insight. Call it marketing, for lack of a better term.
Instead of just offering a supply, either as MS offers OurOneSizeFitsAll - take it or leave it; Linux offers an OceanOfFreePartsAnyExpertCanUse, drive a focus more onto customer demand that will help provide more people with Linux solutions that can really help them. And, if it helps them, it will help even more people as they can more easily see how it can be done.
set up a FIREWALL??? (Score:3, Insightful)
Knoppix can be as usable as Windows (Score:5, Informative)
Recently, when my hard drive borked, I had to resort to using Knoppix to check my email, et cetera while waiting for the spare time to get things working again.
With a Knoppix CD, I could:
Now this was incredibly usable to me since I am familiar with Linux in the first place. There are only a few places where things fall apart.
I think that the Harmony Remote concept would be useful for Linux Configuration. For those too lazy to Google for it, the concept is this:
How about letting newbies know what's available (Score:4, Insightful)
What would be helpful is a site like Freshmeat, but set up for new users, ideally like a software store. You could look for apps under various headings, and install them by clicking a link. Maybe a Mozilla plugin that autodetects what OS you're running on and grabs the appropriate rpm/deb/ebuild/whatever. Ximian has something like this, as does Lindows, I think. But it needs to be even easier to use than their systems.
While we're wishing, how about a consistant interface for help? Base it on XML (Docbook?) and make it possible to import info and man pages, and make it auto-update from the net with bugfixes, changes, and news. I really like the old Microsoft help format, about Win98 vintage, not HTML help yet but it could display HTML and had a nice contents page and tree-style index. Hmm, time to start coding...
blind leading the blind (Score:3, Interesting)
The point being is this: newbies do not know what they need, anymore than the examples above, or the person buying a Dell running WinXP which comes with only 128Mb of RAM.
I'm tired of people trying to make linux something that it is fundamentally not. Linux is not designed to be an OS for the masses; it is designed to work. Breaking that paradigm will inevitably break the core of what Linux is.
Doom to fail... (Score:4, Insightful)
GrokDoc is asking about the _applications_, and that's not the problem. Mozilla on Linux is the same as Mozilla on Windows. OpenOffice is the same on both platforms.
It's the system, stupid!
If I install an application on Windows (or Mac or OS/2), where does it show up? Usually on a nice folder on the desktop or on some sort of "system menu". In Linux? Usually the answer is "I don't know!". (Problem is, some will play nice, some don't). Even if I knew to get to the command line, where is it? It's usually not fixed my $PATH variable, so it doesn't point to it yet. So how do I find it?
In any other OS, it's obvious. Look in "Programs" or "Program Files". Bloody obvious. Linux? Err...is that
And last of all, don't tell the user to RTFM. Most of these FM's are derived from man pages, which are F*** all useless to your average user.
RTFM??? (Score:3, Insightful)
People are used to turning the computer on and using it. I dual boot with XP Home and Fedora 2, I do not consider myself a Linux guru, but I know how to get around.
For the most part, Windows is easy. Linux is not if you grew up using Windows that last umpteen years.
Some of you will hate me for this, but the billions of distros doesn't help. With Windows, there's only one. Having a computer background, I can say I enjoy having a choice in my flavor of Linux and desktop. But the everyday user will look at this as a hinderance. They don't want to choose the wrong one. Not everyone is a Unix admin or a developer.
You can't find the same program in the same place on different distros. Or if it is, it's not given the same name. In Suse, XMMS is 'XMMS', in Fedora Core 2 it's 'audio player' or something like that. Not a big deal to the normal Linux user, but a huge deal to the everyday computer user that grew up on Windows. When they install Winamp, they're gonna find it under Winamp, not Audio player or anything else.
Not to mention the amount of upgrades different distro companies produce. People don't want to feel like they have to upgrade every six months to a year.
You can flame me all you want. The truth is, I love Linux and enjoy the upgrades, etc. But the normal computer user is discouraged by all of this.
Until Linux works with all hardware(it won't work with my Lexmark all-in-one) and is unified in it's overall look, normal users won't adopt it.
Finally, somebody with a clue about usability (Score:3, Insightful)
Watch them try and record the results. If you have a video, and they are willing, record it for your own use so as to analyze carefully what happens.
That's how usability testing is done. Although, to do it right, the user should be alone; no hints. And you need video and audio of the screen and the user.
It is worthwhile to make a highlights reel from such videos for developers to watch.
Newbies WANT to learn Linux! (Score:3, Insightful)
This webpage isn't intended for computer newbies - people new to computers altogther. This is for people who want to make the Windows (or MacOS)-to-Linux transition, and need help doing it. There's still an awful lot DOS/Windows people need to learn to progress to Linux, and I think it's knowledge worth having.
All I'll say is: more power to them!
about time (Score:3, Interesting)
My local linux guru happens to be a good friend of mine, and even when I come to him with seemingly intelligent questions, I get borderline hostile responses, suggesting to me I am an idiot/asshole/whatever for daring to waste his time with a question that I could've found the answer to myself.
Unfortunately, for someone of my intelligence and experience, "finding the answer for myself" usually means hours spent poring through manuals and FAQs and HOWTOs for the weird little behavioral quirk I'm looking to get answered. I dare not look into newsgroups and ask, for fear of even harsher treatment.
Most of the time, the people complaining about how idiotic newbies are, are often the same people wondering why linux hasn't taken over the world, established peace and harmony and cured cancer. Quite simply, it's not because people aren't curious about a free operating system and tons of free apps to do what people normally pay to do -- it doesn't take a sociologist or economist to realize that people will gladly do the same things they pay for, for free, given the chance. The problem is, they need to ask questions, and the best people to ask generally have enormous egos and a massive elitist streak.
RTFM/RTFFAQ is not without it's merits, but unfortunately many linux geeks use it as a simple, smarmy response to questions one can't reasonably be expected to know or discover for oneself. RTFM is meant to stop people from wasting time with common questions, but instead it's being used to stop otherwise interested people from pursuing linux further because those already steeped in it treat them like idiots. People like free software, but they don't like being insulted to get it.
One of the reasons Microsoft ascended to where it is now is not because they make high quality, stable, efficient, easy to use software. It's because they treat their customers like gold, help them with their problems happily, and treat even the most idiotic questions with empathy. Linux users looking to evangelize the movement should do likewise. Remember, you were there once too, not knowing how the hell to install patches or configure a Samba server or get your network running. Just because you have the knowledge doesn't make you a better person, unless you REALLY embrace the open source movement and make your knowledge as open source as the software.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Blaming Users For Defective Software, Eh? (Score:3, Insightful)
Nuts. This is just another way to blame users for software that isn't good enough.
Better to write software that doesn't require an education than whine about users.