We’re all guilty of it sometimes, but even the hardcore Linux people in my circle of friends are well aware that most computer users are either unwilling or unable to put as much work into their systems as they do. Editing text files, no matter how well-documented, is not something that most computer users consider easy, and saying they should just suck it up and figure it out doesn’t work. People don’t want to read paragraphs of comments in a text configuration file and then hunt for entries, they want to look at a checkbox with a one-line description and click on it. It’s the same as the Terminal/dmesg versus graphical notification discussion we had earlier. Linux is clearly an excellent product for TheLetterK, and my Linux-using friends, but not for the majority of the market, until all (not just most) of these issues are resolved. I’m a reasonably experienced computer user, and I don’t like editing text files. Considering that, my grandmother who just sends email and browses the web, or even my father who uses computers 5 days a week at work, wouldn’t even consider an OS that required them to edit text files. Even if it was easy, it gives people the impression of being unfinished, which doesn’t make them feel very good about using it.
Going back to the original topic, I think you’d get a higher percentage of experienced computer users looking at just students as opposed to the whole population, but they would still be a minority. Most younger people are more skilled at using computers in the sense that they can navigate the interface faster, but that’s about it. Most of the people I’ve gone to school with can print a Word document or bring up a website faster than people my parents’ age can, but they don’t know any more about computer maintenance, troubleshooting or configuration than they do.
You’re looking at this the wrong way--it’s a lot easier to simply post the correct xorg.conf file, and have the user copy it than it is to explain the process. Especially if we’re talking about something more complicated than changing refresh rates.
That’s good if you’re getting someone else to troubleshoot for you, but when you’re just doing some normal configuration, you’ve got to navigate this file on your own to pick the settings you want. It’s an annoyance for me, but it’s much worse for your typical computer user.
I consider it easier to work with than a GUI.
That’s the point: you’re an experienced computer user who appears to like tinkering, and what’s more, you’re an experienced Linux user. Most computer users are none of these things.
Most Linux users don’t really care about getting people to switch. Especially if it means changing the good things about the platform to gain the users.
That’s good to hear; I’m sure some of you are aware that I feel the same way about Apple and the Mac OS. I’m glad Linux exists for the kind of people who prefer editing text files to GUI configuration, and I don’t want Linux developers to start inconveniencing people like you in order to attract new users. However, your context made it sound like you were claiming that editing text files is an inherently easier/better way to configure, and that’s just not so. It’s better for you, but it’s beyond most people.
You very well may consider it easier to work with than a GUI, but sit any average computer user in front of a computer and give them the choice of 3 mouse clicks vs editing a text file and they’d take the 3 mouse clicks any day
While it may be easy for someone like you or me to quickly edit a text file to change the configuration of something, we aren’t exactly “average users”. The average user is used to clicking buttons, check boxes, and drop down menus in order to get things done. While the power of an operating system might reside in the CLI or config files, it’s the GUI that the majority of users go through to accomplish their tasks.
The average computer user is one who knows the basics of computers, but nothing very advanced. Overall they mainly use their computer to surf the web, send email, word process, calculate budgets etc in spreadsheets, listen to music and play a few minor games (card games etc). They generally rely on sales people to inform them about what the figures mean when they buy their computer. Two things that are becoming increasingly common for the average user are managing photos and, especially with younger people, instant messaging.
While it may be easy for someone like you or me to quickly edit a text file to change the configuration of something, we aren’t exactly “average users”. The average user is used to clicking buttons, check boxes, and drop down menus in order to get things done. While the power of an operating system might reside in the CLI or config files, it’s the GUI that the majority of users go through to accomplish their tasks.
Now see here’s the thing. They are advanced enough to use a word processor right? If they are, why would be it be hard to edit a text file? What exactly is different about it?
This is if course of such config file is well documented in easy to understand language.
That’s the catch all of an “average” user. To justify average, you would have to assume they are not competent enough to edit a text file, nor read what’s printed on the screen. if they can’t do either of those, then they can’t do most basic tasks on a computer and fall into the newbie class
Of course, in all reality there’s one thing separating advanced form a average user and an advanced one. How scared they are of the computer. Newbie is scared to touch it. Average may do some wok with it, but scared to touch any of the inner workings. Advanced doesn’t have that fear, and will go an modify system files
Exactly, people are going to feel safer if you say, “Click this, then this, then click this and select this” than if you say “Find this, open it in a text editor, find this section, follow the instructions to change it then save the file”. The whole point of having a GUI is to get rid of all the faffing about in text files for everything. Sure for some things like configuring a server or something then sure, it’s not something many people will do and it allows the , but changing something as simple as display settings should have a GUI.
Exactly. I can change a setting as simple as display resolution in a fraction of the time and much more easily using the GUI on OS X than it would be to change it with the text files on Linux
Yes, LDM, if an average user knows how to work with a word processing program then they should also be able to edit a text file. The difference is they WILL NOT. It doesn’t matter if the skill itself is the same. Most people just will not do that.
I can’t believe in 2006 we’re arguing over this. You guys really expect people to move to Linux BECAUSE of this? You’re asking them to move backwards from a GUI to text input again. You may not see it like that, but most people would.
Exactly. I can change a setting as simple as display resolution in a fraction of the time and much more easily using the GUI on OS X than it would be to change it with the text files on Linux
A fraction of the time? What fraction? 15/16ths of the time needed to edit the file?
Took me 6 seconds to open system preferences, get to the display tab and change the colours (refresh rate is right below it but I have an iMac so it’s disabled). If you give an average user 10-15 seconds in order to find the display section and find the refresh pop up menu. I’d like to see you locate, open, edit and save a text file in 6 seconds. I’d like it even more to see an average user to it in under 15
Yes, LDM, if an average user knows how to work with a word processing program then they should also be able to edit a text file. The difference is they WILL NOT. It doesn’t matter if the skill itself is the same. Most people just will not do that.
You completly and utterly missed the point there Recall your own defention of average user? they could edit this file. See Pilky’s? they could edit this file. Both definitions clearly state they should be able to do this with no problem at all.
I can’t believe in 2006 we’re arguing over this. You guys really expect people to move to Linux BECAUSE of this? You’re asking them to move backwards from a GUI to text input again. You may not see it like that, but most people would.
I didn’t argue anything, just stated that “average” is poorly defined that the the definition given contradicts what’s been said about who would find this usable.
Plus some food for thought. What is spotlight other then a CLI? You type in words and launch files. That’s a CLI. Sure there’s a GUI wrapper around it, but all in all it’s a CLI.
You completly and utterly missed the point there Recall your own defention of average user? they could edit this file. See Pilky’s? they could edit this file. Both definitions clearly state they should be able to do this with no problem at all.
Yes, they have the capability to edit a text file, but it would be a much more daunting task than using a GUI. By the same theory you could write an OS. You can write a post on here, it’s no different writing an OS
Yes, LDM, if an average user knows how to work with a word processing program then they should also be able to edit a text file. The difference is they WILL NOT. It doesn’t matter if the skill itself is the same. Most people just will not do that.
You completly and utterly missed the point there Recall your own defention of average user? they could edit this file. See Pilky’s? they could edit this file. Both definitions clearly state they should be able to do this with no problem at all.
I can’t believe in 2006 we’re arguing over this. You guys really expect people to move to Linux BECAUSE of this? You’re asking them to move backwards from a GUI to text input again. You may not see it like that, but most people would.
I didn’t argue anything, just stated that “average” is poorly defined that the the definition given contradicts what’s been said about who would find this usable.
Plus some food for thought. What is spotlight other then a CLI? You type in words and launch files. That’s a CLI. Sure there’s a GUI wrapper around it, but all in all it’s a CLI.
The process of physically typing letters is the same, regardless of whether you’re typing them into a Word document or a config file. That much is true. But from that assumption, you’re extrapolating that because it’s the same, anyone who can do one can do the other. This is what I don’t agree with. You need to be a bit more knowledgeable to edit a config file and actually KNOW what you’re doing than to type a Word document.
By your logic, anyone who can type a Word document should be able to make a webpage. You’re just typing things, right? So what’s the difference? You’re completely ignoring skill/knowledge level, and, in this case, ease of use.
While it may be easy for someone like you or me to quickly edit a text file to change the configuration of something, we aren’t exactly “average users”. The average user is used to clicking buttons, check boxes, and drop down menus in order to get things done. While the power of an operating system might reside in the CLI or config files, it’s the GUI that the majority of users go through to accomplish their tasks.
Even I’m used to doing that. I don’t see the point of having a GUI if you have to go edit text files. Sure, text files were okay in DOS, but does is much more simple than something like Linux. If you have 52 settings, would you rather see a panel with 52 checkboxes or a text file with 52 possible entries, some of which are not there and thus set to the default?
You’re completely ignoring skill/knowledge level, and, in this case, ease of use.
