Mainstream . . . (LONG)

[Brian Densmore]

Best Regards,
Brian

Brian Densmore <mailto:DensmoreB at ctbsonline.com>  

 
Associate 
Computech Business Solutions <http://www.ctbsonline.com>  
voice: (816) 880-0988
fax: (816) 880-0998
:-{)> 

> get used to the configurability of the interface, sending them back to
> the single-purpose buttons will aggravate them.  That's the point I'm
> trying to make.
Which brings us back to why Linux isn't likely to become mainstream. If you
chase off the users before they get used to using it, they don't come back.
Equipment needs to be simple and easy to use, or only technical people will
ever use it by choice. People, for the most part, don't enjoy learning new
things. I happen to be unusual in that respect, I am an information monger,
and would be a professional student given the opportunity. So are most of
the people supporting Linux. We're a different breed, not afraid of the
unknown. If we want to dominate the OS market we need to make the
installation, configuration, and upgrading of software simple. Don't get rid
of the complexity and configurability, that's what gives Linux it's
strength. Just don't put it out in the open for newbies to stumble on. It's
not really that hard, as you point out, Apple has already done the ground
work. And, dare I say it, so has M$.
> 
> It's OK for there to be development work in dumbing down the interface
> for OSS desktops.  Don't expect people who have gotten used to
> configurability to suddenly jump to the baby interfaces, if 
> and when they
> are created.  Don't expect us to give up our right to advocate
> customizable interfaces.  Don't expect us to try to convince neophytes
> that dumber is always better, if they ask us what kinds of 
> interfaces we
> prefer, we will tell them.  A few will probably try the complicated
> interfaces anyway.
> 
Dumber isn't better, just a neccessary evil. All the great marketing minds
have known this (e.g. PT Barnum, Evil Bill, Evil Bill East, Howard Hughes,
Edison, Ford, etc.)

Brian