just a small rant...

Like many of you I would like to see linux become more mainstream. Luckily with the release of Vista, Microsoft has helped out a lot with that dream becoming reality.
Since I have dumped M$ 4 months ago here are some things that i have found over the last few months that I can recommend to help improve end user acceptance.

1. Ask for Linux at work.
Simple but true. When I deploy a server these days I put CentOS on it. I It saves the company time, money and reduces the amount of over all Windows servers I have to deal with.

2. Make applications end in .exe
Lets face it the daily user knows to click an .exe file and something will happen. They don't know what and they dont care as long as something,anything happens.

3. Package installers.
One of the great things that M$ has is the .msi it really is a true blessing when you want to install or script an install. msi works on almost all versions of Windows no questions asked. Could someone contact the Linux distro makers and give them the hint that to the daily end user rpm, deb, tar, tar.Z, etc... is confusing. I understand what they all mean but again the average user would look at these extensions like a monkey with a math problem.

4. C:\Program Files
I just installed an game... now where the F%#@ is it? in Windows I would be in the Program Files directory. but Linux it could be ANYWHERE! /usr/local/games/ or wait maybe /usr/share/games/ or maybe it is in my home directory. Doesn't matter. I love the endless searches when i am trying to make a desktop icon(why one wasn't created when I installed is also beyond me). Most Linux noobees would too.

5. Drive letters (or numbers)
Most people making the jump from windows to Linux would love to see C:\
or even C
I like my /dev/sdb1 as much as the next guy, I really do. But the old hags in the records department will never figure out what means. they know that they go to C:\where ever and double click.
Perhaps when drives are mounted they could auto mount as C,D,E etc...




The choice is hard; be largely unaccepted by the PC community, or dumb down the OS so that simple people can understand it (b/c the users aren't gettin' any smarter)

http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm
...if this post has at all a serious intent...

With the recent blog and news articles on the failures of Vista, I would disagree with that surmise! However, between now and the next release, Vista's use will rise simply because Microsoft will not make anything else available.
IMO, this is the best way to promote Linux - even if only on the server estate. We can all proselytise as much as we want - but showing someone that it works and makes savings works far better. Its great that you are in a position to do this.

Firstly, this isn't always possible. The Klik project is an attempt to do this, but it's still not widespread. The thing is that most distros now have a package manager of some sort or another which makes installations of software just as easy (if not easier) than in Windows. It also needs to be said that using .dll files in Windows means that every bit of software can be self contained - although you do end up with a large number of these files. And what's the fix for conflicting .dlls?

I also needs to be said that mindless clicking of .exe files has led to any number of security breaches in Windows.

The .msi is great - as long as it doesn't fail. And it does fail regularly.

The various package versions are down to the choice of distros and the fact that they all do things slightly differently. How many times have you questioned why Windows doesn't do what you want it to? The proliferation of distros is down to the fact that Linux users ask the same thing of their distros and have the tools to make it happen!

These are really the same question. Linux has, in it's history, Unix. The whole drive letters thing is a Microsoft invention, Unix has never used them. In a lot of ways, Windows is the cause of so much ignorance about computers - because they dumb down and hide so much of the information users just don't know what's going on.

The best way around this is education - sites like ours to give help, we can all help by populating wikis and helping to rewrite documentation, we can also blog about this sort of thing.

I don't feel that we are not accepted - and we should be helping users rather than talking down to them.

One of our members wrote this which explains a lot of what I'm trying to say.

Just a several replies to a small rant...
To my opinion most things you've posted are not that deadly important.

Let's face it that "Daily user" doesn't necessarily know that files are *.exe, since he double-clicks on "icons" (or uses "shortcuts" from start menu), and by default Windows doesn't show file extensions for known file types. Windows tries to hide extensions where it is possible - you don't see them in folders, and even when you are working in console, you don't have to type .exe for every program - windows add's extension automatically. So there is no point in adding *.exe extension. Many people even have trouble understanding what a file (or a file extension) is. So as long as there is a shortcut to a program, or a start menu entry, it doesn't matter if this is exe or not.

Installing stuff is admin's job, user just works on the machine where everything he needs is already preinstalled. If user tries to install something, then he is trying to be admin. So he'll have to learn how to install programs and all about packages and package managers.

Does it matter? You probably have a nice shiny shortcut in start menu, which launches your new game. Also, adding "Program files" is a huge step backwards. By default you can launch most of "normal" Linux programs by calling "run command" window and typing program name, since program is already in path. In Windows you normally can't do that. Also, navigating to "program files" in Windows takes too much time, and most people use shortcuts instead. Also on Windows many people do not install games in "program files". Splitting HDD into two partitions (smaller "C:\" for system installation, and much larger "d:\" for everything else) is a normal (or, at least, recommended) practice, so many install games in c:\games or d:\games instead of "program files". Also don't forget that Windows (AFAIK) tries to hide content of "program files" by default.

This is really pointless, but if you really wish to do so you can add symlinks to your drives, placed in "root" (it won't be C:\, but you can make it "/c:/" or "/c:\/"). You can also try to modify kde and gnome so they'll show drives as c: and d: in their windows. But there is not much point in doing that, since drive letters are not that important.

A new ugly manifest-based *.dll loading system which gives developers headache.

1. Ask for Linux at work.
Not always possible. Sometimes there is software that only runs under some version of WinDuhs. Also, clueless support people and clueless managers will usually veto this. Of course I've used Linux at work since 2001 but everyone at work thinks I'm weird (and I think they're plain dumb).

2. Make applications end in .exe
People are happy to click on desktop icons instead; besides, many file managers will let you know that a file is executable.

3. Package installers.
Still a good source of holy wars. Personally I find the apt/dpkg system the most suited to me, but I wouldn't say anything bad about other package managers. apt/dpkg now have a variety of friendlier GUIs.

4. C:\Program Files
Hmm ... yeah, that's something of an art. The problem is, a typical system has hundreds of tools. We can create a 'Program Files' directory with symlinks to various executable directories, but what good is that - navigate to that and you could be swamped with over 2000 executable filenames. Distros (often) make use of features provided by various desktop managers; I run KDE and the "KMenu" has a list of all sorts of goodies - conveniently sorted into 'developer', 'games', 'office', etc - all I have to do is click on the icon in the lower-left corner - just like WinDuhs!

5. Drive letters (or numbers)
Well, too bad, UNIX has been like this before Microsoft even existed. You COULD create symlinks to mounted volumes and name the symlinks 'C:' and so on, or you could simply tell the users that the only directory they can use is the equivalent of 'My Documents'. In a work environment, there is often a network drive mounted for storing all work-related stuff; you just have to tell people to put their work in that directory.


Overall, I think you've fallen into the trap of thinking "if only it were more like some other system". Most developers are concerned with writing things that work and would see no point in reorganizing things to make the system look like something else. Since most people use GUIs, much of this is rather pointless since people can click about and be pretty ignorant of everything going on. If you can read French, you can have a look at the comments about the French legislative assembly moving to Linux. The short story: everyone was working normally within a week of having their laptop loaded with Linux. The same would be true if they had all changed to OSX. Personally, when I work with OSX you see me grinding my teeth and tearing out my hair - but if I had a Mac of my own and just sat down and learned to use it, I'd probably be a happy Mac user within a week.

A different perspective.....

While I agree with most of what XavierP is saying, I submit that the real issue is the lack of generic computer skills, and unawareness of what the alternatives are. (As so many have observed, it is a travesty that some schools' view of teaching computers is to have a class on how to run MSWord.) Arguably, one factor in the lack of computer skills is that things like Windows and Mac are so dumbed-down. I won't repeat the perjorative language used to describe a prototypical employee--but, it the days of MSDOS, this same person would learn what he/she had to to get the job done.

Consider a spectrum of computer users, described by two limiting cases:

1. I'm not learnin' nothing--show me which button to push.
My local users fall in this group (although they have better grammar...). As long as the browser, e-mail, and printer are working, they could care less what the OS is doing.

2. I understand computers, and I have no trouble learning that different OSes have different procedures and syntax.
While a lot of Linux users fall in this category, I think there are many Windows and Mac users who do also. They would have no trouble adapting to Linux. These people are not programmers or sysadmins---just folks like many of us that have the ability to think past the instruction manuals written for 8th-graders.

At both extremes, people will have no trouble with Linux. And there are forces at work that will bring more of each into the Linux fold. Most of us can relate to how Group 2 will do this, but consider that Group 1 will be buying low-end laptops like the Asus EEE.

Then there is the middle: These people can and will learn whatever is required to get their work done. If they are happy with Windows or Mac, they'll stay there. Most will not be overly adventurous in trying new things like Linux, but many will. In the corporate world, they will adapt. If their children are running Linux, they may eventually also try it---some will stay, some will leave.

The various "dumbing-down" measures suggested by OP are clearly not going to have any effect on the two extremes. But I also question how they will help in the vast middle ground. People are motivated by cost, functionality, or--in the extreme--by what their management tells them what to do. They are not motivated by the realization that they can get Ubuntu Linux and the drives will still be called C:\

Bottom line: Let's work on a minimum of three things: 1) Education, 2) Regulation of monopolies and anti-social corporate behavior, and 3) Making better SW (not by making it more like MS). Otherwise, let people choose what works for them. Linux and OpenSource will find their place in the great world order, regardless of how drives are named.

surprisingly the developer of Ultima Linux wrote in their forum that
Microsoft bought them and will support Ultima Linux to be a good linux.

Maybe he just teased his fellow Linux fans? But who knows. Ms wants to be
the main player so they maybe will develop a Linux that get installed together
with Windows 10 or Windows 20 or so when all the development has matured.

They have enough money to be the leader of Linux distros? Just me friendly teasing.

Its good to see that there is so much input on this subject.
by no means am i suggesting that Linux should mimic windows. However there should be a distro made for people who are not ready or willing to make the leap from Windows to linux... sort of a half way point.

Personall i would love to see 1 directory for installed applcations. for thoes of us who remember windows 3.0 and the birth of Windows 9x going from a model where everything was installed to C:\ to one where things were installed to C:\Program files\ was a much needed improvement.


all in all I love linux and all of the tools and options that are available in it. i cannot imagine going back to windows...

Linux XP, ReactOS and Linspire all aim to do just that. Ubuntu is another choice for people who want to ease in, as is PC LInux OS.

great something to look into. maybe easy enough for my wife...

I would have to agree with watcher's "making Linux for dummies;" however I don't really agree with his list of improvement.

What most Linux users/admins/developers don't get is no matter how great/technologically advanced/cool, if it's not user friendly/intuitive, it's junk. OK, a little too dramatic. "Junk" really means "low user acceptance." If you want Linux to be popular, you MUST make it as simple as possible and don't expect/try to educate general public - they are dumb and will gladly remain so.

Right now? Make it Windows-like as much as possible. I know / /home, /usr /var may look cool, but they mean crap to users (me included). It is so much better to call them "Hard Drive 1," "My Documents," "My Programs." I would even throw in some folders like "System Files," and "Newly Installed Programs."

Oh, why the hell do I need to mount my NTFS partitions? Or the external USB drive?

So where can we read about that? I thought MS has made it clear - everyone will use VisDuh or else. An MS Linux is an interesting idea though - guaranteed to be analyzed by thousands of people to find out what they've been destroying.

I like this part. or else.

Now what could that be. What else could happen.

I almost hate Vista. Such incredibly bloated sw.
Just crazy. So it has made me very eager to know Linux.

Just now I am trying to befriend three distros that are
not so bloated. Puppy Linux 4.0 and two slack based ones.
French Canadian Alixe Linux and Brazilian GoblinX linux.

That they are slack based is downer to me cause a reviewer
looking into Vector and Wolvix and Alixe and GoblinX he wrote
that even him who have a long time getting used to work in Linux
even him felt as if he started anew when coming to slackbased distros.

So maybe these are not for a complete newbie like me.

Ultima developer quote? I try to find it. Not polite of me
to not include it. I had hoped google would give it in top
ten result. Give me 5 minutes ...14.28 start counting

14.29 closing in to find link
http://www.ultimalinux.com/forum/vie...6a0f75f35b2a24

14.31 I almost made it
http://www.ultimalinux.com/forum/vie...649479ab6cbfba

14.32 jay, could it be a April first fool thing?

Wow I feel had or something. It was an April Fool joke.

And I am so incredibly naive that I trusted him. I do apologize.
I better go hining for a while heheh. Typical me, I'm too trusting.

Drive letters are important. eg. if I plugged in my USB drive and I'm not in a GUI and I dont know where it's mounting the thing, how do I put something on it?

But surely if you're using the CLI in your daily computer usage, you'd know where it is or how to find it?