Ubuntu

[Matthew Copple]

On Mar 21, 2008, at 5:53 AM, Leo Mauler wrote:

> --- Arthur Pemberton <pemboa at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Instead of one bottom taskbar (in
>>> Windows and KDE)
>>
>> This is purely it's default state, so doesn't
>> seem fair to use that as a mark against it.
>
> Kubuntu will both be used most of the time by the same
> people who use Ubuntu, people who won't change from
> the default, so I think its completely fair to use it
> as a mark against it.

The only evidence to support this assertion is the stereotype that  
somehow, Ubuntu, and Ubuntu users, are "Linux Lite" and just want a  
Windows machine without paying for it.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. I've assisted hundreds of  
Linux users over the years, including a large number of Ubuntu users,  
and in my experience, Ubuntu users are no different from any other  
Linux user.

First off, if they were the kind of people who just stuck with the  
default, no matter the circumstance, then it is unlikely they ever  
would have left Windows in the first place. It takes a bit of
courage, and a lot of effort, to move your electronic life from one OS  
to the other. In part that is why Linux and Apple have not taken  
significant market share from Windows, despite an abundance of  
technical and financial reasons to do so. So the folks who do it, and  
more significantly, the folks who stick with it after the initial  
shock, are not likely to be timid wallflowers with a high resistance  
to change.

Secondly, my experience with Ubuntu users (and Linux users in general)  
indicates to me that they stick with the default as long as it works,  
and no longer. One of the most common reasons given to me for why a  
particular user switches is that they want to make their computer fit  
their lifestyle, rather than changing their lifestyle to fit the  
computer. The folks who I've helped were often highly knowledgeable  
Windows users who had simply exhausted its capabilities for  
customization and wanted to evolve, for lack of a better word. The  
ability to modify not just the Linux desktop, but the entire operating  
system in a nearly infinite number of ways is a selling point, not a  
turn-off, for the Linux user who chooses to stay with the OS. The  
folks who need cookie-cutter solutions either go back to Windows after  
their first experience or never bother leaving at all.

I am not an academic, so I have no statistics other than a *lot* of  
experience helping out my fellow Linux users, but I think my  
observations are valid. What I generally see is that once a user (of  
Ubuntu, Fedora, or any other distribution) gets over the initial bump  
of getting the OS installed and getting into a routine, one of the  
first things he or she does is tweak it to fit their needs. They play  
with the menubars, experiment with alternate file managers and  
software alternatives, throw on some new themes, and generally get  
dirty. I strongly encourage users to play with everything on their  
system even before they try to get "productive," because once they  
discover just how much fun it can be to have an OS that really  
responds to the way you think and work, they are much more willing to  
make the changes and sacrifices necessary to move over.

I've used several versions of Ubuntu and Kubuntu, and I have never had  
a problem customizing it to fit my needs. For example, just before  
buying my Macbook, I decided I wanted my Ubuntu machine to act more  
like a Mac. I was so successful that when I purchased a Macbook with  
OSX, I quickly discovered that I liked my "Gnome Like a Mac" version  
better than I liked the real thing. Hence, OSX is about to go "bye  
bye" and I'm about to say Hello to Ubuntu once again, this time on a  
quality piece of hardware.

>
>
>>> which has to hold everything, a top and
>>> bottom bar means more of what I'm doing is
>>> visible at any one time, and no application
>>> names are being abbreviated or erased in
>>> their buttons.  I also get to see day of the
>>> week, date, and seconds in addition to the
>>> time, without having to increase the width
>>> of a single taskbar or further shrink
>>> everything else on a single taskbar.
>>
>> Really, you get to decide how you want it.
>
> Unless you don't know how to change it to something
> else, like most users of Kubuntu.
>
> You may recall back when AOL went "average user" and
> millions of people who had never used the Internet
> before ended up on the Internet?  Back then there were
> thousands of technical users complaining about all the
> AOL Internet users really screwing up on the Internet
> because they didn't know how to do anything.  This is
> that situation all over again, only with Kubuntu
> Linux.

Kubuntu (and its *buntu brethren) were designed with ease of use in  
mind. IMNSHO, they have succeeded to a remarkable degree, without  
losing the features that make Linux the operating system I have known  
and loved for several years now. But being easy to use does not  
necessarily mean "dumbed down" or designed for the technically impaired.

The difference between a Kubuntu user and an AOL user is that, as you  
mention above, the AOL user had never been on the internet before. The  
internet culture was unknown to them (as, indeed, it was unknown to  
nearly all of us who discovered the Internet outside of a University  
CS department). Most Kubuntu users are quite comfortable around  
computers, or as I said before, they wouldn't have wiped Windows off  
the drive and replaced it in the first place. Most of them don't seem  
to be that put off by the hacker culture, either -- after all, there  
have been Windows hackers as long as there have been Linux hackers,  
and Windows users have been downloading freeware and shareware for  
years. You don't even have to be particularly adventurous to do that.  
I don't see many who find themselves lost in the free software world,  
either -- after all, applications such as openoffice.org, Firefox, and  
Thunderbird are very popular in the Windows world.

What you are trying to describe are not Kubuntu users in particular,  
but new Linux users in general; and your stereotypes are no more valid  
to describe that group then they are the subset who might choose  
Kubuntu (because many distros attract new Linux users, not just *buntu).

A final thought about AOL users -- the Internet was a pretty barren  
place before they arrived. They may have been an annoying lot to the  
academics who already populated the 'Net, but it was those newbies,  
not the CS and EE professors, who made the Internet a household word  
and an irreplaceable piece of modern life. And it will be future Linux  
newbies, not old crusties like me, who will make Free Software  
similarly irreplaceable.


>
>
>>> If KDE does do that behavior then I have
>>> another reason to dislike KDE, though I'm
>>> afraid its a bit of a "damned if you do,
>>> damned if you don't" situation for KDE,
>>> because the alternative to "application
>>> stacking" is to shorten the application
>>> button size until the text is unreadable.
>>
>> Is it still damned if it leaves the choice
>> to the user?
>
> I have the option of converting my gasoline engine in
> my car to an electric engine.  The fact that I don't
> know how to do it and would have to take
> weeks/months/years to learn means that it really isn't
> an option.  If one has trouble sending an E-mail, I
> really don't see them being able to take advantage of
> the option to change the desktop.

If one has trouble sending an e-mail, one is probably not using  
Kubuntu (or any other distro) in the first place. One may not even own  
a computer.

>
>
>>> Obviously I could do more to make my workspace
>>> more efficient by really customizing my window
>>> manager, but as I haven't had a lot of free
>>> time lately, having a top and bottom bar in
>>> default Ubuntu Linux has made me rather enjoy
>>> using Linux (and made Windows in many ways
>>> downright painful).
>>
>> It takes less than a minute to add a second bar.
>> Definitely less than 5 clicks
>
> Find someone who barely knows how to send an E-mail in
> Outlook, and see if it only takes them 5 clicks.  And
> you then have to add applets to the top bar, which is
> going beyond "5 clicks" and going into "hours of time"
> if you;ve never done it before.  I know it took me
> awhile to learn it, and I did it several times a week
> just for the practice.  Joe Average is just going to
> screw it up and go back to Windows.
>

I don't think you know enough about Joe Average to make any  
generalizations about his or her behavior. Ask yourself how this  
individual got into Linux in the first place, if he or she is so  
incompetent that they cannot configure Outlook. Why would they even be  
trying Linux in the first place? More than likely, the bad experience  
with Outlook would convince them to stick with IE7 and gmail or  
hotmail, rather than driving them into the arms of KDE or Gnome.

> The problem you're having here is that you are
> thinking Fedora while forgetting that we're talking
> about Ubuntu (note subject line if you don't believe
> me).  The reason Ubuntu Linux is so popular is because
> it takes away a lot of the options by making most of
> the choices for the end user (unlike Fedora).  While I
> personally find that irritating (it isn't difficult,
> but it is still a pain to always have to uninstall
> OpenOffice from a 128MB RAM PII-300Mhz machine after
> Ubuntu installs it automatically without asking), most
> people probably find that it makes their lack of
> computer experience irrelevant to their enjoyment of
> Linux.
>

Ubuntu doesn't take away any options, it just backloads them. In the  
interest of being able to install off one CD (instead of a DVD or five  
CDs, which is a pain even for a long-time Linux guy like me), they  
limit the amount of software one initially installs and sets  
reasonable defaults -- all of which can be changed after installation  
is completed. Yes, the install is highly scripted, but IMNSHO, that is  
an advantage, because I'd rather tweak my machine after it is  
installed rather than trying to do it during the install.

The only real "options" you have with SuSE or Fedora are the option of  
choosing between thousands of packages at installation, 99% of which  
no one needs and many of which introduce dependencies that are best  
analyzed when one isn't worried about just getting a workable system  
together. In Ubuntu, when you figure out you need it, you just go to  
Synaptic and search for it.

Everything on an Ubuntu system is fully as configurable as on a Fedora  
or a SuSE system.

> Kubuntu defaults to everything I've said, and most of
> the end users who use it won't know how to change the
> default KDE desktop to something else, let alone make
> it look like GNOME's default "top and bottom taskbar"
> desktop.  I don't think its unfair to point out all
> the problems of KDE that will be unfixable (or at
> least have a long "steep learning curve") by *most* of
> the end users of Kubuntu.

I think Linux users are a lot smarter than you give them credit for.

Matthew Copple
mcopple at kcopensource.org