Linux shouldn't be more user-friendly

[Qchem]

Masses have already taken Linux over and their vision of the future of Linux is menus, buttons and windows, not a command line. And I've a hunch that Linus himself is also sharing this view.

 

I'm sure this POV is not shared by many kernel developers - the entire idea behind Linux was to have a 386 version of UNIX that Linus could run on his own computer.

 

Whilst graphical interfaces and some hand holding is necessary to make GNU/Linux attractive to new users, those of us that want a UNIX environment on cheap hardware tend to find them superfluous and shouldn't be forced to do everything with a GUI.

[Sarissi]

Remember alot of people who use computers, are just that: users. They are used to buying OEM systems that come with the OS preinstalled. They wouldn't know how to reinstall that OS if they had to (presuming it wasn't some hokey 'rescue' disk)! They don't even know what is inside their computers.

 

These people just want to use their computers.

 

Most everyone here knows what a PITA Win98SE is when it comes to installing some drivers. Sometimes you have to be real quick to swap the driver CD with the OS CD during a reboot, or you can't swap them when 98SE wants you to. That is not user friendly.

 

On the other hand, Win2K Pro is user friendly in this department, and so much easier to install.

 

For myself, Mandrake Linux is a breeze to install, since all of my hardware is compatible (camera doesn't count).

 

Mandrake is very user friendly, in terms of actual usage. I don't need to boot to text mode to do anything.

 

Actually, nobody should mess around with the OS (tweaking), unless they know what they are doing.

[Gowator]

I hope I understood topic completely wrong: does somebody want computers, which make a big men cry? Do tears give extra value to computing? Please read my message written by a common user, not a war flamer. My opinions just may be so strong, that somebody may feel offended by them.

 

For me making things a more complicated/harder way won't give extra pleasure, if user friendliness is described a such thing. If some thing can be done by pressing a button instead of writing something into console, I prefer buttons to text. But maybe I see Linux as a tool like a car is, which enables me to do some things. The way how car or Linux makes things done doesn't interest me as much. I understand the existance of tweakers and tuners who want to keep their cars or Linuxes as polished as possible. I've seen some vintage cars and I agree they would certainly lose something if seat belts or better tyres would be installed on them.

 

But answer is under your nose, folks. Why vintage linuxers want to update their software? Let others have their buttons and help texts, but you can keep your systems the way they are made. Let other world fill their eyes with windows and colours. But if somebody else wants to have more candy, it doesn't take your Linuxes away. Vintage car owners probably are happy modern cars having seat belts and ABS even their car doesn't have such equipment. Masses have already taken Linux over and their vision of the future of Linux is menus, buttons and windows, not a command line. And I've a hunch that Linus himself is also sharing this view.

 

I may sound rude, but why development process should be stopped to a certain phase? Just because some things are done a way X dozen years? Gangsta-Linux wanna be still underground thing? I know those times won't come back. And IMHO, luckily.

I see the point but Linux isnt really the vintage car, its more the Rally car (see bvc's avatars)

 

However dont dispair because there are many flavours of car. In addition to my modified 245HP beast my model has a normal injection 6 speed model which still gets 167 HP and handles politely and another 136HP 5 sp. model which handles like a town car.

 

Linux has lots of different flavours too.

 

The whole CLI thing is an extension of the favours. Its the ability to have pistachio and banana if thats what you like. If you prefer you can always stick with vanilla !!!

 

If the CLI dissapeared or became ineffectual like in Windows then I would not use linux anymore. There are plenty of real OS's out there like BSD.

 

If you expect to click a button and have an efficient computer either forget it or buy a mac. Its that simple. (the reason being the Mac is controlled hardware)

 

The problem is you dont understand how linux works undereneath. (fundamentally)

 

now if your in the school that says you dont want to or need to then you get an inefficient system and you should pay for it.

It will always be out of date and behind but thats the cost of not bothering to learn about it but yuo can outsource this worry to Xandros, Linsppire etc.

 

Linux is a layered system. Every part depends on something else (more or less)

Everything that can be done in linux takes place at the command line whether you notice it or not.

 

When you press a button the button passes command line arguaments to a programme. In reality so does Windows but windows is HIDDEN ...

 

Choose a task, any task... lets say ripping a CD to mp3.

You can have lots of options etc. on which FRONTEND and which codec etc. in addition to bitrate and 101 other options.

 

However lets say one codec gets improved and adds another option.

You cant use it from the GUI becuase that option wasnt written in. (yet!)

however if you use the cli you just add the extra option.

 

when the new interface comes out it will probably include the new option. If your desperate you can add it yourself since its likely just a bit of gtk or qt code.

 

In reality most GUI's only provide the very basic parts of the CLI programs they are front ends for, they keep expanding but the underlying CLI programs keeop changing TOO.

when you use diskdrake or similar to create a partition and filesystem you miss the majority of tuning options.

If you dont care about throwing away disk space or speed then go ahead and use the options, disk space is pretty cheap and machines are pretty fast.

This is how windows works it assumes you just want a mediocre everything.

Compare qtparted or diskdrake with

http://www.die.net/doc/linux/man/man8/mkfs.ext3.8.html

(and thats just ext3)

-m reserved-blocks-percentage 
Specify the percentage of the filesystem blocks reserved for the super-user. This value defaults to 5%.

 

In other words if you have a 200GB disk 10GB will be reserved for root when 50MB would be sufficient

 

-T fs-type 
Specify how the filesystem is going to be used, so that mke2fs can chose optimal filesystem parameters for that use. The supported filesystem types are: 
news 
         one inode per 4kb block 
largefile 
         one inode per megabyte 
largefile4 
         one inode per 4 megabytes

 

THE LATTER WOULD BE BETTER FOR AVI FILES AND THE FORMER FOR LOTS OF SMALL FILES. In linux you might have one partition specially for avi's or vobs etc.

 

Now remember you also have options for xfs/resierfs/jfs etc etc. so making all of these available from the GUI is subject to some delay.

 

Linux gives you plenty of chance for medicoracy.

Mandrake in particular has lots of suboptimal wizards which apply the generalist settings. You can even for the most part take the EASY option first and then tune it later. This is WHY documtantion is SO IMPORTANT.

 

However the GREAT thing in linux is you get to choose.

 

This means for instance that to use bleeding edge stuff will always take a bit of hand configuration.

Mandrake has traditionally managed to hit a balance between ease and bleeding edge although its now drifting closer to ease!

 

So unfortunately there is no simple way to KEEP all the power and have the point and click because one trades off against the other.

I remember my frustration years ago with a mac that refused to print becuase the printer reported it had the wrong type of paper in! This is the other route, complete standardisation. You cant have all 3 together!

[Gowator]

Actually, nobody should mess around with the OS (tweaking), unless they know what they are doing.

Then how do you learn ??

 

I take your point but people who dont want to mess should use Mac's.

I don't need to boot to text mode to do anything.

 

Not exactly true. Well it might be if YOU dont want to install say the nvidia driver....

actually you CAN install it from the GUI if you use the CLI in the GUI and do a --extract-only. but thats rather defeating the object

 

You cant change kernel without a reboot or several other things like adding RAM.

 

but mainly although you can do most stuff from the GUI you end up with a crap system.

 

Just as an example...

plenty of WinLand people are running 32bit XP on AMD64.

 

You can also run 32bit Linux but WHY would you?

 

Windows limits your computer to what MS want.,...

linux gives you the opportunity to use it as YOU want.

If you only use GUI config tools then your not really doing it how you choose but how someone else chooses.

[tyme]

Actually, nobody should mess around with the OS (tweaking), unless they know what they are doing.

If all of us followed that logic, many of us wouldn't be on this board right now - helping others.

 

I learned everything I know by playing with things I didn't know anything about. I broke things, and learned how to fix them. Read my sig!

[Huerzo]

(All bolded text written by Gowator) I see the point but Linux isnt really the vintage car, its more the Rally car (see bvc's avatars)

 

I didn't mean at all that Linux (with CLI) is like a historic car - but vintage, definitely. Cambridge dictionary describes vintage as "high quality and lasting value, or showing the best and most typical characteristics of a particular type of thing, especially from the past". Maybe "past" is a word which can hurt somebody, but it supports my view well...But your comparison Linux with CLI to Rally car (WRC) is good, much better and complete than my attempt.

 

Both CLI and WRC have lost almost all their decorations because both are built for extreme performances. To make a certain thing as efficiently as possible. Light weight, powerful engine and skillful driver are also needed to keep WRC raging on special stages and CLI on info highways. And it's also clear, that if for example family related (=wife opinions) things would be topped on your chart, WRC (and so on CLI, if still using metaphores) wouldn't be so luring choice. Maybe GUI (I know, it's built on CLI) would be (for example) radio, seat belts and automatic gears added to our WRC. Our WRC isn't anymore a Concorde on wheels, but some compromises are needed to keep whole family satisfied...

 

I tried to describe what is to happen with Linux, if user friendliness will be neglected. If somebody wants to have a Linux with 100% CLI it's possible to compile a Linux version without KDE's and applications build on it. Right?

 

If you expect to click a button and have an efficient computer either forget it or buy a mac. Its that simple. The problem is you dont understand how linux works undereneath. (fundamentally)

 

No way. I'm using Linux, and I'm satisfied with it. But you can always do things better and easier. It's IMVHO madness to make computers less user friendly and stop listening users how they want to get things done. Like you said, GUIs are built on CLIs, so who's losing in the end? And like you wisely said, we are able to make choices. But it's important that there would be WHERE to choose: if all programs are CLI-based, where are those choices? In Mac-store?

 

I want to see more Linux distros in everyday use, that's why I'm so stubborn with my opinions. And no, I won't forget computers - I'm studying Information Systems, and I don't want to throw credits and upcoming thesis away ;). It's true that I don't know how Linux WRC 2.6 Turbo works in detail, but following kernel development process has opened my eyes a bit. And of course Linux (even Mandrake) has required some tweaking and twisting to keep my computer rolling. And coding programs has given a very good view how things are basicly done. But it's not a relevant thing to this topic...

 

So unfortunately there is no simple way to KEEP all the power and have the point and click because one trades off against the other.

 

Like I said, if WRC (=CLI) is wanted to be smoother to get family on a holiday, it would be definitely better to make some improvements to car to make a trip easier. CLI offers more power, but if you can't see (understand) where the power is (common user?), we are facing a situation where user misses all the opportunities just because (s)he can't see where the power switch is! Like tyre company's ad declared, "The Power Is Nothing Without Control". So, IMHO better to introduce users to Linux via "compromised" GUI and then, if needed, CLI can be offered as a "guru choice".

 

Once more: CLIs are OK, GUIs also. User friendliness: super. And Gowator and bvc: please welcome to Finland (Neste Rally, Jyväskylä) to see how WRCs rock gravel road. But I prefer Peugeot to Citroen for a certain reason :).

Edited June 1, 2004 by Huerzo

[bvc]

:woops:

i need to go home to play cmr04 and compile a kernel or something....I like this conversation B)

B)

[Urza9814]

Wow...seems I've started quite a debate...

 

When I say it shouldn't be more user friendly, I don't mean it should be solid console or stuff only a guru can figure out...I'm just saying you should have to know the basics about your computer. Linux on the Desktop is for people who like to tinker and mess with it...and I personally would prefer it stay that way, but I understand that it can't. But at the same time, it shouldn't be for the people that call tech support to figure out what type of internet connection they have, or have to get someone else to set up their comp. If you don't understand 'pink wire to pink plug' you need serious help...Besides, Linux being open source, it would be very hard to have that much tech support staff on hand to answer those questions. IMO, we need Linux to be for people that know the basics...Right now it seems good, just no one knows that. If people knew how easy it was, a lot more would use it. It's not a problem of how user-friendly it is, so why change that to try to fix it? It's a problem of letting people know about it. Maybe when that happens, it will be possible for these companies to hire large tech support staffs to answer the stupid questions of the average users, but until then, the more user friendly it gets, the less companies will be able to afford their tech support staff, the less support they'll be able to give, and, in the end, the less users moving to Linux. If you called tech support for your computer and couldn't get through, would you recommend that company to others?

[mystified]

:woops:

i need to go home to play cmr04 and compile a kernel or something....I like this conversation B)

B)

:D That's why I love gentoo. It's hard and it makes me learn. I got my 17 year old daughter using Mandrake with no prob cause it's so user friendly. It has a great gui. But I still have a distro like gentoo that challenges me from installation on.

[Sarissi]

During install, Mandrake installs both nForce2 and nVidia (not nv) all by itself for my nforce2 mobo and nvidia card. I don't see how it can get any more user friendly than that.

 

Oh, I agree that you do need to know your system's hardware, at least to a point for Linux. However, if you don't need to tweak, why bother?

 

I am knowledgable about computer hardware and I am a computer user. I am not a software guru by any means. Linux is about choice and having control to a greater extent than Windows allows.

 

"Linux on the Desktop is for people who like to tinker and mess with it..."

 

I prefer to use it than mess with it.

[Guest JoeDesertrat]

There is no reason that Linux cannot be made easier to use without retaining the advantages it already has as an O/S. Keeping it difficult in order to keep out those who don't want to learn about their PC smacks of elitism and will only lead to Microsoft's ultimate triumph.

Right now someone like myself would still really have to want to and be determined to switch to Linux. I have a Windows 98 PC that I want to keep off the internet solely for use as a legacy PC for the games and graphics software I use. I was tired of "upgrades" robbing me of the functionality of my favorite software. I used Unix years ago, figured Linux was a good bet so I bought a new PC for internet and general use with Lindows pre-installed to get into Linux.

I didn't like the way Lindows went about its business so I decided to try a different distro. Tried Debian, couldn't get it to install, tried Red hat, couldn't solve certain problems and couldn't find out why so I tried Mandrake. I've been able to make headway with Mandrake but there is still a learning curve ahead. However, if I didn't enjoy computers as a hobby I would probably have given up in disgust by now. I'm willing to sacrifice some time but it's difficult to justify spending hours of time I can't really afford to waste searching for some hint in the documentation that would allow me to solve a problem that really shouldn't exist to begin with.

Software installation, for instance, is far too difficult for beginners although I suspect, as mentioned above, better documentation would help. I have a handful of books and not one gives any real pointers on handling tar's other than tar -xvf filename. Which directories are best for installing software? Why am I unable to access downloaded rpm's with the graphical package manager? If a library is missing and is not on the installation disks where can one find it?

I came to the forum today to find out how and why my default browser changed and how to make my own choice. It ws Konquerer, I used Epiphany once and suddenly it's my default although I would really like to change it to Firefox which I did manage to install. Somehow, I got distracted and ended up in this thread. One of the best things about Linux is its communities of users. If we can make Linux just a little easier to use for beginners the superior power and flexibility of the O/S will eventually start to threaten MS, especially as they become more console-like and less PC-like.

[Gowator]

:woops:

i need to go home to play cmr04 and compile a kernel or something....I like this conversation B)

B)

I did!

 

 

Seriously OT .....

 

How sad! Just like me you can identifiy the manufactuers by the engine specs.

I quoted the 16v numbers of course ... the old 8v were 150 and 127 bhp as used in the S16 and the Xsi ....

I used to have a GTi-6 and before that an Xsi (8v). My present is a stripped Gti-6 with Turbo. However although the Xsi was quite normal to drive and quiet etc. the Gti-6 never was. With the back windows open at 7500 RPM it sounded like a 4 stroke bike and the tuned exhaust always made a quiet rumbling when changing down. (the current car cuts all pretence at being civilised!)

It was simply too raw. The clutch and brakes are savage ....

 

 

 

p....

But I prefer Peugeot to Citroen for a certain reason .

 

A Citroen is just a Peugeot with the handling deliberatly messed up.

You can take any Citroen and retrofit the Peugeot suspension !

 

The WRX versions have modified suspension anyway do the cars are identical except the bodyshell.

 

 

Enough enough !!!!!

 

What im saying is the WRX analogy is good becuase you choose your level.....not everyone wants a monster car so they make other models. In the case of linux this is more different distro's

 

Those like Linspire and Lycoris, Xandros etc. are designed for the uninsterested user. they are rock solid if boring but they get the job done.

 

Gentoo/Slack/LFS etc are the challenges...they are for the tinkerer. You might be able to run em without tinkering but why bother when there are specific tinker free distro's.

 

The reason I mentioned Mac's is they just work like nothing else.

You turn em on and type emails, browse the web etc. They can do this becuase of the restricted hardware and the fact the Os is written for it. They might be the diesel Toyota Corolla's in a way because they are reliable and go miles without services but they also have the styling of pinafiori thrown in!

 

Mandrake is somewhere between the Linspire's and the Gentoo's

They force a certain understanding but you can also accept a LOT of defaults and it still works.

 

What people dont realise is you cant have the latest test versions of software and not tinker. The latest and greatest nightly buiilds will always have bugs, thats why they are released. Some people seem to want to have there cake and eat it and its just not possible. If you use bleeding edge everything you will need regualkr maintainance and need to understand how to fixc stuff yourself.

 

 

Each distro needs to target different markets and be specific about WHO they target and HONEST about the ease of use vs lack of power.

 

Linspire etc. can be a pain to customise becuase its delicatly balanced to make it simple or brain dead to configure. All this brain dead config has a price though. If you wanna tinker you stand a VERY GOOD chance of wrecking the install.

 

LFS is the opposite, you cant not tinker BUT you cant wreck something you built from nothing.

[ramfree17]

loooong thread... unlike bvc, i dont have time to compile a kernel. :D

 

however, this user-friendliness mumbo-jumbo struck a chord on a post in the local mailing list that i once again encountered recently. i dont know if it fits in this thread but it was an excellent post which you might want to read sometime.

 

ciao!

 

[EDIT] sacha is a gal. she is the icon geekette of the local linux organization here in manila/philippines.

Edited June 3, 2004 by ramfree17

[bvc]

loooong thread... unlike bvc, i dont have time to compile a kernel. :D

 

however, this user-friendliness mumbo-jumbo struck a chord on a post in the local mailing list that i once again encountered recently. i dont know if it fits in this thread but it was an excellent post which you might want to read sometime.

 

ciao!

sheesh! talk about looooong :P ....I didn't say I did have the time to compile a kernel....I just felt the need ;)

[Gowator]

I just thought of something else.

The problem is US!

when you start the distro you want it to be easy then as you get practiced you want it to be more powerful and bleeding edge, until you convince someone else to try who's not techy then you want it to be easy again!

 

 

So what I said above distilled is distro's shouldn't try and be everything and jack of all trades (thats what Windows fails at)

Each distro should have its own character and if you grow out of it you should move onto another distro instead of expecting the distro to change!

 

Some stuff should WORK, like insallers etc. but the rest is really down to the type of distro it is!