[Lancaster] Re: Install Fest

[Martyn Welch]

> Easy - grab all processes, select the ones that contain "foo" but not
> "grep", take the first thing on the line (the pid) and feed 'em into kill.
>

No - not easy.

Most linux users should not have to understand what a process is, let alone 
why they would have to kill one or how to select which ones to kill.

> Most linux users would probably just type "killall foo" - the effect is
> largely the same; my version has the advantage that it works (bar ps -ef
> and $2 on SysV) on pretty much every *n?x system in existence. Then, I'm
> not really a Linux user - I'm a *n?x user who happens to use Linux as their
> most common flavour.
>

And is thus counter productive when "killall foo" - 10 characters, will 
suffice on the systems just about everyone on this list will be using. *Even 
if they did need to know how to kill processes*

> Correct. The people who aren't even used to a GUI, however, will often find
> a command line easier if you show them how to use it.
>

Read: "hours of training"

> We teach children out of picture books, and adults out of books with words;
> the common paradigm of computer teaching is to never take people beyond the
> "child" stage, but if you're faced with an adult who wants to learn as an
> adult teaching them how to use a command line is often a far better
> technique.
>

But you are forgetting one v.important thing - all those adults started off as 
children and thus has years of teaching with pictures and whom have learnt 
the stuff that they saw in those pictures.

But we are not generally dealing with adults whom want to learn about the OS 
in front of them in any detail. We are faced with people who want to write 
letters and emails and browse the web. They see computer maintenance (if they 
see it at all) as a necessary evil. Thus the GUIs are a much safer way to go. 
It's a lot easier to muck things up from the command line as root than 
through a GUI.

> I'm mostly playing devil's advocate here, mind - which is why I didn't
> suggest Slack base at all, I suggested a derived distro which has a GUI
> software installer and configurator.
>

Please don't play the devil's advocate so much. We need to provide support for 
whatever we install and the regular contributors to the LUG would not 
necessarily have the time, skills or patience to deal with unfamiliar 
systems, especially if they aren't sitting in front of the system concerned.

We need to be pragmatic.

> Install SuSE/Mandrake/Ubuntu if they've got hardware that'll handle it. 

Bingo.

> If 
> they haven't, I still say better to try *something*, especially a something
> that you know you've got an expert on the mailing list for, than to say
> "no, you'll have to use a pirated copy of Windows 95, sorry".

Dubious.

If it isn't going to run OpenOffice well then it might be counter productive. 
Though if it is running a pirated copy of windows and it is not powerful 
enough (which would be hard to prove without digging) we should politely 
point out to the owner that they are breaching copyright and should get a 
newer PC.

I'd rather install OpenOffice, FireFox and ThunderBird on their old windows 
(as long as it is legal) than trash there current working system to install 
something half-baked on it. 

Shoddy installs are not going to help, rather hinder.

Martyn

-- 
Martyn Welch (welchm at comp.lancs.ac.uk)

PGP Key : http://ubicomp.lancs.ac.uk/~martyn/pgpkey/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/lancaster/attachments/20050904/260a0571/attachment.bin