Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 10:36:06 10/24/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 24, 2003 at 10:27:16, Anthony Cozzie wrote:
>On October 24, 2003 at 03:26:00, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On October 23, 2003 at 19:42:59, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>
>>>On October 23, 2003 at 05:55:12, Daniel Clausen wrote:
>>>
>>>i've tested so many toolkits and environments and really
>>>very *little* even *works* both in linux and windows.
>>>
>>>when something works great for linux and also works for windows, then usually
>>>that allows, to say very kindly, at most year 80s software to be produced for
>>>windows.
>>>
>>>This where we live 2003. You can't sell something years 80 now. Not even to a
>>>big bank organisation who works currently years 70...
>>>
>>>then possible sales under linux.
>>>
>>>Yes linux is great, but selling something under it????
>>>
>>>It's simply NAIVE to guess that porting an application to *nix will sell some.
>>>All what happens is that your helpdesk will get flooded for 99% by questions
>>>about linux and how to install it and why it doesn't work and what they have to
>>>type.
>>>
>>>Even experienced linux users when i ship them a default diep version, they
>>>simply do *not* get diep to work without extensive instructions.
>>>
>>>The same users *do* get diep to work under windows.
>>>
>>>Why?
>>>
>>>Because everything runs there simply.
>>>
>>>coming weekend i plan to play diep under linux at the dutch open championship,
>>>but saying that linux is a commercial succes. No way. It's for nerds and very
>>>experienced users only at the moment.
>>>
>>>That's very sad.
>>>
>>>All my hope is pointed towards the Japanese/chinese/korean government who are
>>>creating a new OS that should go compete against microsoft.
>>>
>>>Linux has come a long end, but to get commercially interesting to use for mass
>>>market products, it has a LONG way to go.
>>>
>>>At the moment it's only cool for companies who have system administrators and
>>>who want to save out for simple database stuff and online stuff a lot of money
>>>by using a linux platform + MySQL, to give a popular example.
>>
>>
>>
>>What I see is that I have a very capable operating system packed with loads of
>>software that comes free, works, and replaces almost everything I was using
>>under Windows.
>>
>>It is not much harder to administrate Linux than to administrate Windows on the
>>desktop. Many Windows users are anyway absolutely unable to administrate their
>>desktop computer.
>>
>>Those who are would not find much more difficult to administrate a Linux
>>desktop.
>>
>>In the end the Linux user's experience is very similar to the Windows user's
>>experience. I have been using Linux for a year now and when I work I completely
>>forget that I'm using Linux and not Windows.
>>
>>I just work on my stuff, the system is stable and does not crash, so I don't
>>even notice that I'm using that scaring geeky stuff that Linux is supposed to
>>be.
>>
>>I think that's an important message to pass: Linux looks and feels like Windows.
>>People that just use their PC for email, Internet surfing, word processing,
>>spreadsheet and so on would not notice much difference. Those who do more and
>>want to install programs and tune their system would have to learn a few tricks,
>>but who could do that under Windows without first learning how to do it anyway?
>>
>>
>>
>> Christophe
>
>IMO, there are several big differences between Windows and Linux:
>
>1. Most people learn to use a computer on Windows; the Windows GUI is what they
>are used to.
The Linux GUI I have in front of me at this time looks exactly like Windows.
Somebody used to the Windows GUI will simply feel at home in front of a Linux
PC.
I could even make it look EXACTLY like Windows.
>2. Linux apps don't present a uniform look/feel. You can run any of 30 window
>managers and 15 GUI toolkits. Cdbakeoven looks vastly different than gaim which
>looks different than openoffice etc.
That's true, but that's getting better.
And it is not worse to the point that using those apps is a pain.
It is not. The difference between apps will be for example that buttons will
look slightly different.
It will not stop you from using the application.
And anyway, many Windows programs have a different look and feel anyway. For
example I have installed a CD-burner management program on my mother's Windows
box that followed none of the Windows GUI guidelines. There was no window frame,
buttons were pictures, combo boxes looked weird...
>3. Microsoft spends billions in usability testing. Linux geeks are much more
>likely to do "cool stuff" than write documentation or worry about
>userfriendliness. The Linux program will contain awesome configurability and
>run in 241kb of ram, while using 2.3% of your CPU - if you spend 5 hours reading
>newsgroups. The MS program will just work.
My experience is that Linux program also "just work".
They might be a little bit more difficult to install sometimes, that's right.
But not that hard. For example, in order to install the latest Mozilla I had to
install 5 packages instead of one. But installing each package was easy. And the
documentation told me to install them all, one after the other.
So I agree that it is not really state-of-the-art in term of user friendly, but
you do not have to be a geek either.
I would not describe myself as a Linux geek.
>Linux has made a *lot* of strides in usability. When I first installed linux 4
>years ago, I had to hand-edit my XF86Config file. There was no Mplayer or XMMS
>or whatnot. In a year or two, you might be right. But I think you are vastly
>overestimating the computer expertise most people possess.
>
>anthony
I know most people do not know how to administrate their system.
So they have to ask expert friends.
Most people do not know how to install Windows programs and will have it done by
somebody else.
If I had installed Linux on my mother's PC, she could use it every day without
even noticing it's Linux.
I have not installed Linux on her PC because we are several thousands miles
apart. So if there is a problem on her machine I could not fix it myself, and as
there are at this time more people able to fix Windows than people able to fix
Linux, I have decided that it was safer for her to continue with Windows.
So the problem is not that Linux is more difficult to use. It is not.
It is not that it is harder to administrate. It is indeed a little bit harder to
administrate but not really a problem for somebody who can administrate a
Windows system.
The problem is lack of availability of trained technicians.
It is a problem, but it will get better with time. And I would not say it is a
problem related to the quality of the product.
>P.S. When is CT for linux coming out?
Some day... I cannot give you a release date because it is not my highest
priority, so other projects are advancing faster.
Christophe
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.