[Cumbria] The guy has a point...

[Michael Saunders]

Interesting little article.

> "problem with the idea of linux on the desktop are the die-hard CLI
> users"

Slightly OT here and not really arguing that guy's point, but the
shell prompt gets much flak when it's often far easier than doing
things the graphical way. In my experience (through writing
tutorials), telling someone to type in a single line is immensely
simpler than faffing around with dialog boxes, switches and menus.

Say there was a graphical front-end to GCC, and you're teaching
someone how to compile a basic C program. It's much easier to say:

gcc -o myapp myapp.c

Rather than having the user trawl through windows and boxes and
buttons.  It's the same for a lot of stuff -- humans speak English and
respond to commands; it's not always appropriate to walk someone
through a 2D surface with pictorial representations of actions.

> "Yes, it's a bit of a rant, but I maintain that the biggest barrier
> to widespread acceptance of Linux is not ease of use, because in
> terms of ease of use, Red Hat 8 does everything necessary. It's the
> attitude of the community, which is both sad and contradictory,
> given that the community itself is also one of the /best/ reasons to
> use the OS."

That's a bit optimistic though -- the barrier for Linux adoption is
the 95% (or so) usage of Win32 on the desktop, with all the apps and
mags and games and support that go with it. Coupled with an overly
aggressive business controlling it, the dominance of Office and the
upcoming DRM shenanigans, the behaviour of the community is a trivial
side-issue. All that home users know is Microsoft; most businesses
feel happiest with MS too.

What some people tend to forget when they write these columns is that
zealotry and bad community behaviour was just as rife in the
Windows/DOS world going back many years -- just on a smaller scale.
Did that stop MS taking the desktop and a good chunk of the server and
workstation market? Home users don't care if "s00pah-hax0r" in #linux
likes to flame anyone who doesn't use it; equally, megacorps like
Shell are only interested in the ability of support contracts and
steady development of technology.

So, in a nutshell, the loudmouth advocates in the community have a
negligible effect on Linux uptake -- zealots have been around for all
OSes and platforms, and there are MUCH bigger obstacles at the moment.

> "but I also suspect that there will always be a large element of the
> group that insists that they have an 'elite' operating system, and
> when they can't find it in Linux, they'll move on to the next 'best'
> thing."

This has already happened -- many of the counter-culture moaners who
used Linux in the late '90s have moved over to FreeBSD now, and if
that becomes a greater success then no doubt they'll start installing
Syllable or OpenBEOS on everything, just to be different and l33t.

A few long-time Linux users actually feel threatened by the OS'
increasing popularity -- if Aunt Tillie starts running Linux to type
up her recipes, these people feel that they'll lose their geek status;
they'll no longer be guy in the area who only runs Linux so he knows
all about computers. They'll no longer feel unique.

Anyway, flame on!

Mike

-- 
Michael Saunders
www.aster.fsnet.co.uk