David Kramer writes: >On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Glen Lee Edwards wrote: > >> Gregory Cox writes: >> > >> >I think Linux, in general, is far superior to WinBLAHx. The main problem is >> >that people are scared of it. And M$ doesn't hesitate to exploit (no pun >> >intended) that fact. Then there's that whole "open source controversy".... >> >> Linux is still a geek's or computer nerd's operating system, although it's >> making vast improvements in becoming a home users desktop environment. Windows >> was designed for the intellectually challenged - everything is decided for you, >> you do it Bill Gate's way; you turn on the computer, then click on the pretty >> picture... > >This is a very good point, Glen. We need to stay reality-based, and not >get caught up in the Linux hype, because if we do that, we really can't >poke fun at M$FT for doing it. > >Face it: For most people, Windows is a better choice than Linux. And you >know what? That's OK. All efforts that have been made to turn Linux >into a plug-and-play no-knowledge OS like Windows have failed, because >that's not what Linux is supposed to be. Most people need an OS that they >know will work as shipped, and as long as they don't turn the power off >without shutting down or install bad programs, it will work pretty >reliably for a couple of years. > >Linux vendors should not try to replace Windows on the desktop. That is >an unwinnable battle. They should focus on the web/mail/cluster market. >That's where Linux shines, where the knowledgeable users are, and where >the money is.
I wholly agree that Linux should stick with what made it great. However, with home PC's becoming faster and more powerful, Linux is no longer facing the problem of cutting out projects and programs because of lack of HD space or processor limitations. Because of this, I personally would like to see a group of Linux loving, GNU supporting desk top gurus design a default desktop that would fit within the existing system that would be designed for the average user. It could be pre-installed on new computers, would already be configured for the new pc (modem and all), and would allow the home user to just turn it on and point at the pretty picture. Menu's would be preconfigured and would have the basic programs that a home user needs - a web browser, an icq client, a simple text editor (nedit, kword, whatever...), a quality point and click email client that would allow for multiple POP3 accounts from the home user, etc. It wouldn't have to walk on water, just provide the basics. It would have to some degree work like Windows in that it would *not* run any local servers from this option. Mail would have to be delivered directly to the ISP's MTA. DNS would also be provided by the ISP, etc. If, however, the purchaser was more computer astute, he/she could bypass this option and configure his PC to run a more typical Linux configuration. In life there is no such thing as "one size fits all." When we're forced to live this way a lot of people are miserable. I hated Windows, still do. It locked me into a mold I just didn't fit into. I love Linux because it lets me do it my way. I personally hope that no operating system corners the market. But I would love to see Red Hat Linux knock Microsoft on its greedy behind and take a big hunk of the home users PC market! Glen _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
