Political Blather

[Phil Thayer]

> 
> Ok- When I mentioned usability - it meant to appliance operators.
> and it's defined as the majority of GUI actions working even 
> semi logical.
> Drag and drop for example and Cut&Paste working between applications.
> Yes, windows does not pass the c&p across apps perfectly either .
> Yet that one alone embodies the goal- not a "who's better" brag point
> rather consider it as a target neither OS fully quite hits 100% on
> Why it was mentioned was to describe WHAT  "usability" means
> for these comparisons.
> 

I think the Linux is probably the most usable OS there is once a person
is used to using it.  The problem is that most people give up after
trying something that would work in MS Windows and it doesn't work the
way they expect it to in Linux.  If you truly want just a simple "thin
client" to browse the web on only, then by all means use an old version
of Win95/98.  That is what that OS was built to do and was marketed
toward.

> 
> See above comments regarding usability and response time to the user's
> perceptions.
> As to the "not installing properly" issue- yes the guru level 
> folks can tweak,
> recompile, hand select components and every metric of 
> performance can only be
> improved by doing so. That however does not cover the box 
> stock units .

That is the job of the IT professionals on the job to provide the
specifications for the boxes being provided to the users.  If they
cannot do it right maybe you should advise them as to what you would
like on a laptop/PC.  If the end users are not provided with a suitable
solution fitted to their needs then they will not be happy with the
results.  If that suitable solution means that the IT staff has to
tweak, recompile and hand select components to get the desired results
for the user then that is what they will have to do.  I would suggest
making an image of the OS after the tweaking and using some sort of
version control on the image so you can drop it onto a bare metal
computer with relative ease so that you don't have to tweak each system
that is deployed.

> The piles of retired laptops that won't even load newer 
> windows let alone our
> standards of Knoppix and it's full size siblings. DSL as 
> Brian mentioned does
> "work" but is almost painful to use in it's "insert cd,power on  wait
> for desktop"
> modes. OR "hand user an old laptop with CD in drive, they turn it on
> and it just works.
> I do NOT doubt that there may be ways of hacking down unused cruft to
> gain speed,
> but then we re-enter the world of "us" and upper level "us" at that.
> 
> I'd like to see perhaps a "damn smaller" concept whacked down to maybe
> even only a browser and networking in GUI even lacking audio.  So
> turning an otherwise dumpster bait laptop into a functional net
> interface. Yes- we won't have eye candy or idiot videos but the
> basic web itself before ADD/ADHD audiences demanded all the 
> crap will work.
> After all- much of the crap we have been despising in some other
> threads won't work
> on 95/98 either.

O.K.  So why not try uCLinux http://www.uclinux.org/ which should
provide what you are looking for.  A version of Linux that is "whacked
down" to just the bare essentials.  By the way,  If you have a car that
is any newer than 1990 or so, then you already own a whacked down
version of Linux.  If you have a new car (less than 5 years old) then
you probably have about 5 to 10 versions of a whacked down version of
Linux already.  In fact there are sites on the internet that you can
search (with the whacked down version of Linux) that will explain how to
connect to the systems in your car and install RPM's that will change
how your car runs to run more powerful or more economically.  Of course
if you just want to by the chips that contain the whacked down version
of Linux with those RPM's installed you can look in most car magazines
and buy them and simply do a chip swap on your car  (I guess we will
call that a whacked down version of an firmware upgrade.)

> 
> ALL of my comments are based on my self observations and personal
> experiences as to
> "what I and many others REALLY use a computer for the most clock hours
> of any day.
> For me- most of the time my mail is web based. It is simply the most
> hassle free default.
> And most of the daily reading sites are often chosen for a 
> lack of flashies.
> SO we have me spending my time on webmail,a few websites,and some
> usenet often thru google. All of which shows that a mail client, a
> news client etc , audio capacity all cruft?
> IS an integrated browser suite like Mozilla embracing or missing the
> best way to do this?
> Firefox Vz Moz looks more lopsided reading what I just listed 
> as my usages.
> Same concept applies to my major music listening- dedicated audio
> devices often just plain work where a computer will be so much a PITA
> it's often easier to turn the TV to XM480 and
> "Let there be music" It's truly amazing to me seeing how far we've
> come with "media pc"
> functions in FOSS.
> That said  to underscore the divergence of THIS thread's past with an
> appropriate closer.
> 
> "In trying to be all things to all people there lies a chance of
> becoming nothing to anyone"

I would HARDLY say that Linux is becoming nothing to anyone.  I would
venture to say it is actually starting to become all things to all
people but most people don't realize it.  The most used embedded OS is
NOT MS Windows it is Linux.  (In fact Windows only recently came out
with an embedded version of windows in the last 5 years and it has
failed miserably.)  When you look at the server market it is NOT windows
that is dominating the market it is a combination of Linux, Solaris,
HP-UX and AIX.  All of which are different flavors of Unix.  Windows
Servers are not the server of choice when it comes to a mission critical
environment that requires such things as clustering and 5-nines uptime.
MS doesn't even understand the concept of what a cluster is.  The reason
for that Linux has been exploding in the embedded and server markets is
because the support that is provided through major computer vendors and
software companies as well as the general users community actually far
surpasses what windows can provide.  So this leaves one market that
Windows dominates and that is the home/desktop market which Linux and
other flavors of Unix are making headway into.  Personally, if MS wants
to dominate the desktop market I don't really mind.  The real work in
the IT world is being done by the *nix systems that run the backend
databases and servers.  The desktop market is becoming more and more a
"thin client" market.
>