Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!metro!metro!asstdc.scgt.oz.au!nsw.news.telstra.net!act.news.telstra.net!vic.news.telstra.net!news.mira.net.au!news.vbc.net!news.cais.net!news.ac.net!news1.erols.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.ios.com!usenet From: Bryan Seigneur <freds@gramercy.ios.com> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: Historic Opportunity facing Free Unix (was Re: The Lai/Baker paper, benchmarks, and the world of free UNIX) Date: Thu, 02 May 1996 00:18:27 -0400 Organization: SONETECH, Inc. Lines: 149 Message-ID: <31883793.3F7F1BFC@gramercy.ios.com> References: <NELSON.96Apr15010553@ns.crynwr.com> <31784FD9.28AA98F6@lambert.org> <kevinbDqC0xC.99w@netcom.com> <4lkcv6$n4j@gorgias.uchicago.edu> <4ll8dq$38b@solaria.cc.gatech.edu> <4lqril$j7q@news.missouri.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-49.ts-4.dc.idt.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b3 (X11; I; Linux 1.3.20 i486) Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.development.system:22774 comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc:898 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:3605 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3461 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:18536 comp.os.linux.advocacy:47685 Justin Rhys Thuryn McNutt wrote: > Byron A Jeff (byron@cc.gatech.edu) wrote: > : That's what we've all been saying. On the desktop it's all about applications. > : The hardware and system software underneath is really a black box to the > : average user. They wouldn't care if the engine was three gerbils running on > : a wheel as long as the job gets done. > > Don't be so sure: "Save the gerbils enslaved by the horrible computer > industry!" :) > But yes. To the average user, the computer is a black box that responds > to a few known inputs, like your dishwasher. To make it do X, you just > do Y. Anything else is wrong (of course it isn't, but they don't know > any better). A Unix on the desktop must be able to cope with this sort > of user. Right now, it really can't. Sure, you give a user a machine with a modem and a formated disk, they aren't gonna be able to do with it what you said. But you've seen all the nauseatingly patronizing software covers for home machines, right? It doesn't matter what the engine is, whether it's Windows or Linux, the only difference is that Linux isn't gonna crash, is multiuser, etc. But, you're right, no one is selling such a beast, yet. > : >then there are other people who actually *like* computers and even work > : >with them for their living and then in their free time. these people > : >should use computers, and many of them (like myself) love to use computers > : >running unix. > > : Bad distinction IMHO. If microsoft provided me an environment I liked > : to use I'd use it. But is has so many failings I simply cannot stand to > : use it. > > Exactly. I *like* some of Win95's interface, and the MacOS has some nice > conventions as well. I use my Mac at work all the time. Then, of > course, I use my Linux box for anything to do with networking, and any > "real" work that needs to get done. :) Windows and MacOS are too > unreliable even for running Word! It crashes too often. [java and net-terminal discussion snipped] > : >90% of the people who use computers would then use these simple terminals, > : >and the other 10% of us who actually like computers and like understanding > : >how they work, etc, will run free Unix. perfect world. > > : Nope. We still have to deal and interoperate with the other 90%. > > Exactly. Besides, I have a fundamental disagreement with the idea that > we should allow people who want to use computers to remain stupid. You > are required to take a firearms course before you use a gun. I honestly > think that computers should be the same way. Issue licenses. That would > be great revenue for local governments, too (not that I enjoy paying more > money, but I'm trying to look at the bright side here). :) Oh !@#$, this is the type of line that Unix-hating columnists like to quote. "As a Linux advocate once wrote in Usenet 'No one should be allowed to operate a computer without a license'." > : >i think it's crazy to expect unix to take over the desktop. why in > : >god's name should professors of english, secretaries, doctors, CEO's, > : >etc etc learn unix? > > : Who said anything about learning Unix? This isn't about OS but applications. > : Question: If there were a version of Microsoft Office for Free Unix and you > : could get it for free how many folks would switch? Quite a few I belive. > > Exactly. Amen. Hallelujah. Agreed. Yes. Ita, si, oui, dah, io. > : Very few Windows users understand how the OS works. And they could care less. > : We can build a simple to use Unix box with an X-based desktop. The only > : problem is that we don't have the application that the doctors, CEO, and > : whotnot need to do the job they want to do. > > See above. :) > > : > if they like computers this much, they'd be CS ppl > : >or programmers or whatever. i don't want to be in a world with that > : >many computer geeks, as much as i love them and i am one myself. and > : >who thinks this would happen, either? > > : So let me get this straight: > : Unix = Computer Geek > : Microsoft = Not Computer Geek > : My wife is not a computer geek. However she uses Linux to get her work > : done. How does she fit into this equation? > > Exactly. And what about all those non-computer-geek types who always > wander into the computer labs that I administrate, sit down and use > Windows and the Mac to their heart's content, but know *ZERO* about the > actual machine. They are just following a known procedure to write a > paper, get their E-mail etc. It's like using a car. You don't have to > understand the engine to drive it somewhere. > > Not only that, but at least for Linux, the learning curve isn't much > steeper than DOS/Windows if you've just bought your first machine. It's > like the difference between an automatic and a manual transmission. > While it'll be more work to learn to use the manual (Linux), it pays off > in performance advantages over the automatic (MS). Exactly, Linux may be a bit more difficult (and most people consider it very difficult only because it's not what they're used to) for the hard core user than MS, but Linux gives you so much more power, that it more than makes up for it. Ease of Use |NTNTNTNT |LNXLNXLNX Functionality |NTNTNTNTNT (out of box) |LNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNX Openness |NTNTNT |LNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNX-> Affordability |NTNTNT |LNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNXLNX-> Yes, the units are unspecified, but the scale is good ;) > : >and as far as microsoft has the desktop -- who cares, the "desktop > : >computer" was a stupid idea in the first place. > > : Why? It's a natural phase of computer evolution. Computers are continually > : getting smaller, more powerful, and cheaper. Having one on the desktop > : is inevatible. > > Hell, they have them for your *pocket* now! I mean *real* machines the > size of a calculator! > > : Segregation is a bad idea. usually the minority in a segregated society gets > : the short end of the stick. I see this happening here in the desktop. Any > : offering that isn't Microsoft based is looked down upon. We need to be able > : to interact with the 90%. All we need is the applications. We have the OS's > : already. > > Bingo. One of the reasons I hate MS is because everyone has the idea > that there's nothing else. Please. > > -------- > If you can lead it to water and force it to drink, it isn't a horse. > Got a Linux problem? Or can you help others solve them? Visit the Linux > Common Problems page at http://vortex.cc.missouri.edu/~rhys/linux.html > rhys@vortex.cc.missouri.edu Very sane discussion. On Usenet? Nah. :) Bryan -- Y W8 4MS? LNX4FREE!