Control Center -- Does it matter or not?

[yochenhsieh]

Some Linux distros feature a control center for configuring system settings, e.g. Mandriva(MCC), SUSE(YAST). However, there're also popular distros which does not have a control center of its own at all, e.g. *buntu, Fedora. What do you think about control centers?

 

Talk about your thoughts.:)

 

ps. Control centers of Linspire & Xandros are just KDE control center with little (or no) modifications. That doesn't count. :P

 

Mandriva Control Center

http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slidesho...42&slide=44

 

SUSE YaST Control Center

http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slidesho...37&slide=43

 

Conectiva Control Center

http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slidesho...00&slide=53

 

Lycoris Control Center

http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slidesho...65&slide=38

Edited September 23, 2006 by yochenhsieh

[scoonma]

Hm. Control centers are convenient for users who are new to Linux or Computers in general. Personally, the design of MCC was one of the aspects to choose Mandriva (instead of SuSE or RedHat). If you want to dig deeper into the system, you may leave it aside by time (but you don't have to). This makes complexity of a system handy. OTOH, there are many approaches. One could also think of an adjusted version based on webmin for sytem management, for example.

 

If you prefer system control in very detail, you'll presumably leave topmost level management tools aside. So in the end it's up to your needs. How much time are you willing to spend for control tasks?

[arctic]

I guess for newcomers, centralized controls are quite important. That explains the popularity of e.g. SUSE or Mandriva. But for the more advanced users, they are mostly only one possible approach to do things. Some things can be adjusted faster and with more options by editing config files by hand.

 

After all, it is just a matter of personal preferences imho.

[Artificial Intelligence]

Someone in our 3 party forum is building a control center for ubuntu (I think there's no problem to port it Fedora though),

here the wiki: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/Universal_Control_Panel

 

from 3rd part forum: http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=157

Edited September 23, 2006 by Artificial Intelligence

[ffi]

W/o the MCC, I guess I would have never stuck to Linux, so I guess they are a welcome thing..... if you like having me in the linux world :P

[scarecrow]

I liked MCC a lot when I first met Mandy, eight years ago.

Today I prefer editing by nano or MC, and even webmin appeals more to me for most administation tasks.

[Ixthusdan]

Control Centers are essential. The average computer user is not a geek. While command line is absolutely the best method of system management, the average user is looking for a gui. Also, a new user is not up for memorizing all of the config files. Documentaion is still at a geeky type of level. A Control Center overcomes the geekville and enables linux to present well to the average user. Distros without gui approaches are not concerned with a majority of users but rather only the geeks.

 

 

B)

[apbsa]

The control centres were created in response to a need. Ubuntu is much harder to use because it doesn't have one, and Mandriva better off for it. The Mandriva Control Centre is not easy to use without experience, but it is getting better. In my opinion it is better than the Suse control centre.

 

The 2007 control centre is better, but still not very intuitive, especially for newbies. Hopefully the 2008 control centre will have a complete overhaul.

Edited September 23, 2006 by apbsa

[mystified]

distros without gui approaches are not concerned with a majority of users but rather only the geeks.

 

There are a lot of people that know more about linux than I ever will and I don't really consider myself much of a geek (inspite of my irc nick ;) ) but I definitely prefer Gentoo's hands on approach.

 

I admit gui's are great for beginners but if you're really serious about learning linux then I think cli is the way to go. Not that you can't do that in Mandriva but it's too easy to just use MCC cause it's there. If you're lazy like me anyway. :P

[arctic]

Hmm... funny. I am lazy and usually never use the MCC. :D

[Ixthusdan]

The average user is not hands-on and is not going to become hands-on. I used to think that linux would change that sort of thing, in that windows attempts to "keep secret" how it works, and disourages hands-on. It is possible that users will change, in time. But any os appealing to the masses must be simple to use. As it is, whether windows or linux, I set up a computer for a client prior to delivery.

 

Any serious effort to get to the masses must use a gui; it is just that simple. Now, not all distros try to appeal to the masses. But, the ones that do will need a Control Center.

[arctic]

Nothing to add. :)

[mystified]

True if your pure desire is to appeal to the masses. But the question is what do you think about control centers and do they matter or not. To me that depends on the individual. Gentoo is not designed to appeal to the masses or even your average linux user. But it forces you to learn, something that a distro with a control center doesn't. So for me the answer is that I'm not interested in a control center cause I want to do things the hard way and learn more. Yes I know it's wierd. :)

 

But if you are trying to convert window users then I agree that something like MCC is essential.

[tyme]

control centers can be useful when you need to get something done quickly. some times i don't have the extra couple minutes to google for the right driver for my [insert hardware] and then install/config/etc. - if there is a central place where i can do this quickly, that's perfect. but other times i want to be able to get down in the system and muck around. my beef with control centers is that they (in the backend portion) tend to keep you from easily messing with the inner system. which, to a degree, is just a flaw inherent in that track. if you modify something yourself, the the control center isn't going to recognize that, so if you try to change things again it may very well overwrite previous changes you made by hand. possibly a smarter control center - and a manner in which to "mark" user-edited stuff so that the control center can recognize it.

 

so i think control centers, like any program/technology can be both very useful, and a large pain in the arse - depending on the day of the week, i suppose :P

[Ixthusdan]

I agree that Control Centers do need to be functional, that is, accurately reflect the system states and work when used. Ideally, a Control Center should not affect the use of CLI. I should be able to use either/or and get the same results. In the past, MCC would alter certain config files without my asking it to, which simply will not do.