Linux casual use question?

Just because something is a tool does not mean the user needs to have no knowledge of how to use it. The reason modern end-user tools are gui-based is because a lot of people started using computers past the point in their life when they can easily learn things(like another language). It has been shown in studies over and over. It is much easier for a child to learn a second language than it is for a teenager. If, when you first introduce a person to computers, you tell them how to use the command line in addition to the gui, then they will be able to use the command line. The seriously dumbed-down gui of windows is somewhat of a training wheel, only people grow in to it instead of out of it. They become more reliant on the training wheel. People should advance with the times along with the tools. Command lines are not relics that should just be tossed aside. They do not need to be the central part of the operating system either. Day to day work in linux does not require usage of the command line. I usually have several xterms open at any given time, but that is because I know how to use the console and I can do things faster there than trying to do the gui equivalent.
 
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why LotD will never see the light of day.

I'm someone who is working on writing software for both Linux and Win, and if I took that approach when designing something, I wouldn't blame anyone but myself if the interface was bad and no one wanted to touch it.

Most of the Linux community blames everyone but the developers. The sad thing is that I've seen where and how Linux can work, and that more of the people actually developing still don't stick to anything but the loosest of standards. (note: there's an ass-load of Windows "freeware" programs that suck ass, too... that's usually why they're free)
 
What is this blame you are talking about? We are blaming somebody? I'm not blaming anybody for anything. Are we supposed to blame the developers for not having enough free time to develop a smooth interface? Many open source developers have full time jobs and do not get paid for the open source software they develop. I appreciate all the work every one of those developers has done. If it was not for them then I would have had to spend several hundred dollars and live with a shoddy operating system. I do not have to, though. It is just a whole different mindset and I am sorry that you do not understand it. I am not just trying to be some college hippie when I say that I believe in open software. I am not in it just because I do not have to pay anything. I am in it because of of the ethics involved. For more information, read Richard Stallman's website.

btw, What the hell does the Lord of the Dance have to do with anything? ;)
 
All I know it that I had 3812 fonts that had to be converted for ghostscript, and had to delete the old files. I don't know how long it would have taken or how much of a PITA it would have been if I had to do it using a gui. It was very simple to do an "rm -rf *.pfb".
 
I understand things just fine, so insulting me gets you nowhere. However, Joe-Six-Pack doesn't want to or need to do any of those enthusiast-level things. Assuming that they should shows the elitism that is prevalent not only in the Linux community, but the whole computer enthusiast community in general. Using a computer does not make you a smarter person, a better person, a better looking person, or more desireable to the ladies.

A quote: "you are not your fucking khakis."

A computer is a tool. When said tool has far easier alternatives, then the lack of public enthusiasm for said tool is not misplaced.

The problem with this thread is that it became yet another Windows-bashing thread, when I didn't bring Windows argument intitially. I brought up GUI versus CLI, both of which are options in Linux. Linux has the options and the possibilities already present, as well as plenty of the capability. All it needs is to not require the end user to drop from GUI to CLI to perform a great many of the tasks. If working strictly from CLI, good for you, but it's not intuitive. If a GUI is built around a CLI, it's not intuitive (think the clunkiness of Win3.1 and even 95). The only thing that brought computers to the general public was ease of use and visual practicality. Command-line kept computers out of the interests of "regular people," because having to learn a whole new language just to get around on the thing is not worth the benefits it could provide.

You CLI guys are perfectly welcome to stick with it, but Linux development is moving towards trying to make it to the desktop in most areas. This includes running things with X. This means making things not only powerful, but easy to use. Open Carpet is the best package management system for any distro running X, because it takes advantage of the capabilities of the GUI with the flexibility and capabilities of the CLI tools. Name a CLI package manager, and Open Carpet can do the same thing, but without needing to drop to CLI.
 
Originally posted by GreNME

You CLI guys are perfectly welcome to stick with it, but Linux development is moving towards trying to make it to the desktop in most areas. This includes running things with X. This means making things not only powerful, but easy to use. Open Carpet is the best package management system for any distro running X, because it takes advantage of the capabilities of the GUI with the flexibility and capabilities of the CLI tools. Name a CLI package manager, and Open Carpet can do the same thing, but without needing to drop to CLI.
Click to expand...

Actually, the most interesting question is "Will they provide CLI tools"?
Quite seriously. A GUI can be nice, but requiring X is a limitation, not a feature.
(A GUI should only be an interface to an underlying system when dealing with something as basic and neccesary as a package system, and adding CLI-tools interfacing the same ought to be doable.)

I can very clearly imagine a distro with an X-only package system, where you have to add X from packages. *shudder*
 
Originally posted by HHunt
Actually, the most interesting question is "Will they provide CLI tools"?
Quite seriously. A GUI can be nice, but requiring X is a limitation, not a feature.
(A GUI should only be an interface to an underlying system when dealing with something as basic and neccesary as a package system, and adding CLI-tools interfacing the same ought to be doable.)

I can very clearly imagine a distro with an X-only package system, where you have to add X from packages. *shudder*
Click to expand...
i was about to say the exact same thing :p
usually in the linux world, there are two projects for a tool, the main people write the c c++ or whatever tool, and provide a console interface to this
someone else can come along and write a qt or gtk or whatever else front end they want to the cli tool.
this is the ideal situation, since in some cases, such as getting x to work, and old machine, and different times when some kind of scripting is needed.
deleting one type of file is a good example of this.
and the fact it, computers are programmed in text, there is no gui equivelent; so they will always be accesible with text commands, even if some groups, like m$ decide to not make this possible with their product.
 
what exactly do you mean by click and run?
you mean 1 click setup "wizards"? well it is because of mentalities such as this why so many people get owned
 
Originally posted by cloaked
what exactly do you mean by click and run?
you mean 1 click setup "wizards"? well it is because of mentalities such as this why so many people get owned
Click to expand...
Exactly. Just imagine bonzai buddy on linux. :rolleyes:
 
That's a little tough to impliment since most things are downloaded as source. You would have to check for dependancies, configure, make, and make install in most cases. Alot of people would wonder what is taking so long and just kill the process. It could be done, but most people with the ability to code for that are perfectly happy with a terminal window open the text of a compile scrolling by. And don't tell me that's what pre-packaged binaries are for.
The beauty of Linux is being able to have the source, and compile/optimize how I want with and without the features I want. I like that I'm able to patch xmms so my scroll wheel will move forwards or backward in a song instead of changing the volume. Fact is if you want to be spoon fed an OS that does everything for you behind the scenes then I can think of two. WindowsXP and MacOS both fit this bill. If you don't mind getting your hands dirty or having to change a config file to get [insert hardware/program here] working just right the give Linux or BSD a try.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top