Linux vs Windows and why win is winning!

[Brian Densmore]

First off. John, I'm sorry if I gave you the impression I was offended. I'm a 
thick-skulled Scotsman and it takes a lot to offend me. Secondly, I think we 
are all pretty much in agreement here, but we are all coming at it from 
different angles and perspectives. After giving the thread some thought, I 
think I found a suitable project concept. Let's hear what you all think about 
this:

 A smart help system, written with a GUI interface that includes point and 
click "walk me through the process". 
What I see as necessary for something like this is: some basic shell scripts 
that do certain tasks in a child terminal window, A GUI front end, and a 
searchable database (there are some already installed in Linux). "Pluggable" 
help modules (you'll understand later in my post why).

I think this would be of great use to the Linux community for the following 
reasons:
1) It would "teach" users about using Linux (even if they don't realize it),
2) It would not "dumb down" Linux, but "smarten up" users,
3) Users who "don't know, don't care" how it works can still get things done 
they need to.
4) It would smooth out the learning curve.

The problems I see here are:
1) There are some many ways of accomplishing some tasks, it can be 
mind-numbing. So we will need to choose a limited set of "default" software 
solutions to include in the help system (ie. choose one ppp client to 
demonstrate how to configure ppp networking).

On the flip side here, once a user can configure networking for one client, 
it will be easier to switch to another client, and the user can then switch 
on that configuration help module if it exists (if we have pluggable help 
modules). 

So how's that sound?

Thanks for all the great ideas on this. I also agree with Patrick, this would 
be a good topic for the next meeting.

I hope i didn't throw in more than my two cents worth here,
Brian

On Friday 20 July 2001 19:47, John Heryer wrote:
> > John, I do think the Linux Learning Curve is real and does exist. 
> > Windows _IS_ easier to do for a lot of common tasks, especially something
> > like dial-up networking.  It was moderately difficult the first time I
> > set up PPP on my slackware box.  Many of us Linux users like the OS
> > because it is powerful, exteremly powerful.  Where a young child can
> > master much of the basic user parts of Windows, that child probably could
> > not do this with Linux.  Since windows is simpler, it isn't as flexible
> > and extensible.  Linux on the other hand can be very complex and the
> > complexity allows for the great flexibility for whatever the application.
> >  One can think of windows has a hammer -- easy to use, useful as tool but
> > not very good for all jobs.  Linux is the swiss army knife or the
> > leatherman's tool, versitile, can be used for many jobs very well and
> > more difficult to use (in simple terms here).  This makes it a more
> > powerful tool.  Just my two honest two cents here...
>
> The reason why people get frustrated with using Linux is because when they
> run into a problem, they have no clue how to solve it.
> The command `rpm -Uvh mypackage.rpm` is just as intuitive as My
> Computer*doubleclick*<insert cdrom drive mapping
> here>*doubleclick*setup.exe*doubleclick* . Just like Windows, an average
> user can install an rpm on a RedHat Linux system, using the command line
> if they are told or they read how to do it. (even young children) The
> problem does not lie in the operating system, it is in users who jump into
> Linux, and get frustrated because A) they have not found the proper
> documentation or B) Did not read the proper documentation. Like I said
> before, we have memorized trivial facts all of our lives. Hense, the
> "learning curve" is mearly the lack of know-how. Linux isn't complicated,
> it just requires some basic knowledge to use properly, just like anything
> else.
>
> There, now you have four of my cents, don't spend it all in one place. :-)