[H-GEN] HP officejet 6310 and suse10.1

andrew laidlaw aa_laidlaw at yahoo.com.au
Tue Sep 19 02:43:20 EDT 2006


I wonder if I shouldn't have called this a new thread?

Anthony Irwin <anthony at server101.com> wrote:
Everyone I know that has spent any real time learning an alternative 
operating system to windows ends a liking it more then windows. A 
handful will still keep a windows box for games or some specific program 
but generally do all their real computer work in another os.

........

I think you will find that depends on the user. If they think that they 
are doing something technical when then throw an install cd in the 
computer a click next, i agree, next, next and finish then its probably 
a bad idea. But if they are some what comfortable with browsing file 
systems and like playing with things then trying out another os may be 
beneficial for them.

Also for users that do nothing but browse the internet and use email etc 
they would have no problem with it if someone else set it up for them as 
a lot of people are too scared to even reinstall windows and don't do 
any installs or upgrades anyway.

.......

> Against my expectations, I now envisage the day in the not too distant 
> future when I dump that other (windows) box altogether.

The more you install linux on different devices you have the more you 
will learn. You should really be happy about the problems you had as you 
learned more from the experience and didn't quit. I used to install just 
about every linux I could get a  hold of onto a spare machine and its a 
great way to learn more.

If you want to play then you could even just get another hard drive 
pretty cheap and just swap them over when you want to experiment. Things 
like linux from scratch is nice to set up at least a couple times as you 
learn about the nuts and bolts of things. Also the gentoo stage 3 
install is pretty good as you get to chroot your system and compile your 
own kernel, boot loader and just about everything else and the portage 
system takes care of dependencies etc.

To do source based distros you need a spare machine cause it does take a 
while to do and its nice to be able to have a production machine and 
play machines. I learned a lot by doing that because you will no doubt 
stuff something up in the process and if its not your production machine 
you can take your time and work out what you did wrong it makes you 
learn more but I guess it depends on what sort of level of knowledge you 
want to have.

Your comments are, of course, totally appropriate for the 5% of the world (including, I suppose, the likes of me) that intrinsically wants to take a real interest in computing as an end in itself  (although I've always resisted the temptation of such an abstraction).   I remain concerned about what to do for the other 95%. 

These you rightly divided into two groups - those who can't, or won't, do even windows for themselves  and the (shall we say) advanced non-technical users, those who might arguably form the next logical linux target market.

Now, since about DOS 2, along with the majority of the engineering/technical community, I've spent a great deal of time and effort warning family, friends, and anyone else who would listen, about the evil MS empire - that an effective monopoly in an otherwise open hardware architecture would severely compromise the entire mission, which indeed it has.  No one should be paying hundreds of dollars for an operating system if it is used on billions of machines.  There should not arise the opportunity to distort markets by bundling. To spy on your own users.  etc etc.

However, the opportunity / problem is innate in the laws of technology development - a proprietary one-stop shop usually gets to a better out-the-door user solution in the short term, whilst generic, standards based, open systems with multiple suppliers inevitably outperform verticals over the long run.  

The market leader controls, and (usually) ultimately ends up perverting, standards to its own ends (as opposed to the user benefits for which they are supposed to be designed).  Uniquely in technology businesses (due mainly to the lack of entry barriers), this frequently ends up by bringing the top dog undone.  

So, where are we up to with the demise of MS?

Clearly there is now more weight of resources behind linux than can conceivably be brought to bear by any one firm, and a near critical mass of users has been established.  We even have software freedom day.  The technical solution has emerged, just as it should whenever the market leader messes with its own customers in an environment without nice high entry barriers. 

In my experience, the wider public is now highly receptive to the arguments of insiders re: the consequences of monopoly power.  This is a pretty major shift of the public consciousness that has occurred just this millennium.  They do keep getting themselves in the news.

On the other hand, I've had some of those advanced non-technical users looking over my shoulder through this exercise, folk who are getting pissed off and would be genuinely interested in adopting linux's superior technical result.  

Without exception, they are saying "no way known to man would I buy into that"..... "Yet".  So, whilst it's clear enough that linux "deserves" to take over, it remains anything but clear whether this is really going to happen, nor when?

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but what I'm hearing in these comments is the implicit assumption that members of the linux community should either need or want to be interested in computing as an end in itself.  I think this grossly underestimates the maturity and potential of linux offerings: whilst there will always be a few petrol heads, the market for cars is, and should be, made up of people who are focussed on getting from A to B (and that in comfort).  

Correct me if I'm wrong, but there seems to be the view that promulgating linux is equivalent to convincing that wider car driver base that it is really missing out by failing to appreciate the sheer beauty of the supercharged V6 with quad cams.

It's not going to happen.  Promulgating linux means fitting both the product and (equally important) the way it is perceived by prospective users to their ideals rather than the other way around.  

There is no doubt in my mind that the few residual technical loose threads on the product side will sort themselves out in the not too distant future, at an exponential rate.  On the other hand, I wonder whether the subtext ("you'll love it once you get sufficiently deeply involved in the minutiae") message which really is being sent from linux to the wider community of desktop users doesn't undermine the (stated) noble goal to promulgate the open software model?  It only seems to amplify public negative perceptions about those loose threads, which are objectively not nearly as bad as the external reputation would have it.

Don't we need proactively to develop a culture that mirrors the openness of the software?

Regards..... andrew.

 		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!? 
  Take part in Total Girl’s Ultimate Slumber Party and help break a world record 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.humbug.org.au/pipermail/general/attachments/20060919/58f46182/attachment.html>


More information about the General mailing list