|
Post by Liberator on Aug 11, 2009 17:09:09 GMT
Last week I was having a discussion with one of the members of the Linux Foundation about a series of articles I am writing for Linux.com. The series centers around helping new users either discover open source alternatives to Windows applications and/or help the new user learn how they can run those “must have” Windows applications by emulation or virtualization. During this discussion we discussed what it would take to create a “definitive manual” for new Linux users migrating from Windows. It became all too clear that there is one issue at the heart of the creation of any single “definitive manual” for the Linux operating system. That issue? Too many choices. I know, I know…absolute crazy talk. But hear me out before you label me a mad man. This issue is fairly key to the wider adoption of Linux. When someone comes to you asking for help in the migration from Windows to Linux how do you help them? You might start off telling them about the fundamentals of Linux, how it came to be, and what open source means. You will discuss the abundance of applications available. You will discuss the Linux desktop and how many choices there are. And that discussion will fuel the first flames of confusion. When this confusion builds you will eventually come around to the topic of distributions. It is at this point where you can finally start showing your newbie the similarities and differences between Windows and Linux. Now, imagine that scenario if you didn’t have to worry about finally getting to the point where you had to sell the user on a distribution. Imagine, if you will for a moment, there was only one “officially sanctioned and supported” Linux distribution. How much easier would the task of migrating users be? Not only would you not have to worry about standardization, you would also speak the same language as other Linux users and gurus. We all know there is a standards-based organization - the Linux Standards Base. This organization works in conjunction with the Linux Foundation to come to some semblance of standards for the Linux operating system. This hasn’t been an easy task because their are so many distributions to standardize. But imagine if one distribution could be chosen above all else to “officially represent” and be sanctioned by the Linux Foundation, Linus, and possibly a governing body made up of developers, media, and corporate sponsors. This distribution could easily be the focal point of plenty of documentation, education, support, you name it. Migrating from Windows would become a piece of cake because every user of the “official Linux” would speak the same language for a change. How would an "official" distribution affect Linux? Tech Republic
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Sept 7, 2009 0:14:31 GMT
Best advice is to dump Linux and dump Windows and buy a Mac.
|
|
|
Post by Liberator on Sept 7, 2009 2:00:21 GMT
Woops. I should have made that clear that it was a quote, not myself talking. I must admit that for the way I use a 'computer' now, a Mac videophone would be fine. I just have the dream of one day reverting to programming again. That kind of went through the floor when my last upgrade went to KDE-4 and all the online tutorial stuff for Fortran - woops, I mean C++ - is KDE-3. I'm an Algol-68 programmer but the battery of visual controls does not exist in that language. For the rest it is like C# with intelligible controls instead of reverting to the kind of codes familiar from valve machines from the 1950s.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Sept 7, 2009 2:17:29 GMT
You can't be all inclusive, ratarsed. Start with "need to know", work up an outline, toss in a few choices and be happy. At the rate he's going, the writer of the article will never get his manual written. btdt lol, das . . . sheer propaganda. But, seriously, MACs are nice.
|
|
|
Post by Liberator on Sept 9, 2009 1:22:43 GMT
MACs remind me of automatic cars - great when they work, but no way round when they don't.
|
|