I disagree. (some distros of) GNU/Linux can be easy to use and still customizable (coders have the source even if it's easy to use). What I think GNU/Linux and *BSD lacks is PC manufacturers' support... as in some PC manufacturers making their own easy to use distros (based on proven ones... like Debian) and selling hardware (with software libre).

In order for linux to gain popularity we must get more people to use linux.No,I'm not being sarcastic.Pass out some knoppix or DSL cd's or brag on some open source software.Thats one big advantage of open source, you can make copies.The Gimp,Firefox,VLC there are several programs that even the clueless will be able to use.Spyware ?adware ?I don't get that on open source. And if they really want to know about computers ,I could go on all day about linux. Marketing is where we come in.

Typing commands is by no means as "user-friendly" as an inteeractive graphical process.

First of all, how do you know what to type?

Even if you've never seen the particular program before, it's fairly obvious that if there's a button labeled "install" then clicking on that button will install the program. Compare this to being faced with just a blinking cursor and absolutely no indication of what you need to type. One major advantage of an interactive setup is that they can be understood by people who've never seen that particular program before, and don't rely on either familiarity with that particular program or a lot of research to find out what to type.

Secondly, the number of operations necessary is generally a lot less for a graphical installer. In your example of "make && install", the user has to:

1. Press the letter "m"
2. Press the letter "a"
3. Press teh letter "k"
4. Press the letter "e"
5. Press the space bar
6. Hold the "shift key" down
7. Press the "8" key (or different key on some keyboards, but that makes no difference to the overall process)
8. Press the same key again
9. Release the "shift" key
10. Press the space bar
11. Press the "i" key
12. Press the "n" key
13. Press the "s" key
14. Press the "t" key
15. Press the "a" key
16. Press the "l" key
17. Press the "l" key again
18. Press "enter"

Compare this eighteen-step process to a typical graphical installer whicht requires somewhere in the region of three clicks, and you'll see that even this aparently simple process requires six times as many steps to do from the command line as qith an interactive setup.

You may be more familiar with commad line methods, but your familiarlty doesn't make them any easier for anyone else.

Most people are born with a brain and the ability to use it, but no-one is born with the ability to use a Linux command line. You seem to be confusing posessing basic inteligence with having learned extensive specialist knowlege and aquired skills.

Not posessing the same specialist knowlege as yourself doesn't make someone stupid, and I'm sure there are a lot of people who don't posess specialist knowlege of the Linux command line but who are by no means stupid, and would take great offense at your assertion that that are.

>> "Most people are born with a brain and the ability to use it ... "

hmm ... strange ...


ok , serious ...

i think "learned extensive specialist knowlege and aquired skills" are needed to build usefull stuffs for those inadequately/half/or_whatever_its_called educated users ... at the minimum least , convert them into well funtioning illiterates ... a kind of democracy and human rights (these strictly in my own words though) ... but its not easy ...

let there be only one class as one minimum basic to start off for all to each own's ability ...

but its not easy ...

.

Sez you. I've seen plenty of people completely baffled by GUI interfaces.

How do you know what to click? How do you know that clicking is the right thing to do as opposed to yelling into the built-in microphone? It's called learning. Nobody, and I mean nobody, knows how to use a computer right from the get-go. Even the much vaunted OSX is going to take some learning in order to use.

How is this ANY DIFFERENT from the console? Pretty much any source code I download is installed by the same ./configure&&make&&make install. It doesn't matter if I've seen the program before or not, the process is EXACTLY THE SAME. Once someone has learned to install one program via the console, they've learned to install almost all of them via the console.

Are you freaking serious? By the "logic" you are using I should count each pixel move of the mouse as an independent event, in which case you're three clicks ends up being thousands of events. Then, of course, a mouse click has more than a single componenet. You have to move the button down, and then you have to allow it to move up.

If you are going to illustrate a point, try not to use utterly ridiculous examples.

No, I'm not, but you've confused familiarity with intuitive. As I've said before, nobody is born knowing how to use a computer. Everyone, me, you, everyone, needs to be shown how to use one. If you show someone how to use a console, their first exposure to a GUI isn't going to be any more "intuitive" than someone who has always used a GUI being faced with a console. The main reason GUIs are now considered "intuitive" is because we have a couple of generations of users who never had to face a DOS or UNIX command line as their only way of getting work done.

Lets try to read what I wrote shall we?. At no point have I called anyone lacking knowledge of the command line stupid. Nor have I suggested that lack of knowledge of the command line is a defining hallmark of stupidity. What I was saying was what I've just said: You have to learn (i.e. actually use that grey crud between the ears) to use a computer no matter what OS it is running. And that learning, more than any other factor, will dictate what is intuitive down the road.

Maybe if the average computer user's IQ was raised a good 30 points.

hand of fate, I wrote these for you:
Random Musings on Intuitiveness, Ease of Use, and User-friendliness
Why I think the command-line is user-friendly...

Might save Hangdog42 some typing... or clicking.

I am sure one day Linux is going to take over windows.

If there's an icon with a label describing an action, then it's pretty obvious that you should click on that icon to perform that action. Compare this to seeing nothing but a blinking cursor, in which case what to type is by no means obvious. Obviously the GUI gives much more guidance.

The point is that once you've learned how to click on one icon, you automatically know how to click on any icon you see, wheras if you've only learned what command to type to make particular action, that gives you absolutely no idea what to type to perform a different action.

See above.

What do you think might not bve serious about what I've writen? Everything I have stated is 100% true.

How many people have you seen using a mouse by moving it by one single pixel at a time then stopping before moving it by another single pixel? I know I've never done that, I always move it in one continuous movement. On the other hand, if you're typing you do have to press eack key separately. Pressing each key definitely does require a separate movement.

Once again, sez you. The only reason it is obvious is that most people have experience doing it. Again, you are assuming that because something is familiar, it is therefor intuitive.

Familiar != Intuitive.


And I would argue this is EXACTLY why a GUI is not necessairly a good thing. People click on all sorts of crap without having even the slightest clue about what they are enabling. The entire spyware/adware industry is based on the foundation of people without a clue operating a mouse. Since the console requires that the user have at least a basic understanding of how a computer does stuff, the risk is greatly reduced. By the very act of having to understand what to type next, a user becomes more knowledgeable about their computer in general.

Lets take a look at a nice example of why this is a bad example. You're using a word processor and need to save a file:

The GUI way:
1)Move the mouse to the File Menu
2)Click on File
3)Move the mouse to the Save entry
4) Click on Save

The console way:
1)Hold down the CTRL and S keys.

Looks like the console wins to me.

I guess you two would rather argue than read my articles. That's cool.

I'll sum up one of the main points:

Point and click: Good for one-time tasks. Minimal thinking, maximum labor.

Command-line / keyboard shortcuts: Good for tasks performed often. Maximum thinking, minimal labor.

If I go to a foreign country once, I may find it sufficient to just gesture and point at things. If I stay there, it would probably make sense for me to learn the language.

guess that its also depends on who and which is doing the thinking and labouring ... and before we know whats actually is going on anyhow ... we could also swap these back and forth with ease ...


.

When did I say anything about having to be familiar with that particular icon?

It is obviously NOT familiarity that makes it obvious, since I have already shown that it is obvious even if the user is not familar with that program.

If an icon has a label, you know that that icon does what the label says even if you've never seen that particular icon before. That is something you don't get with a console program. In other words, familiarity with the particular program is NOT necessary for a GUI program, but it IS necessary for a console program

Can I sumarise that as "you want computers to be as difficult as possible to use"?

I definietly disagree. I (and I'm sure many other people) want to be able to use my computer, not be made unable to use it by someone who has a mission to put all possible obstacles in my path.

Firstly, where did you get the idea that you can't use keyboard shrotcuts in a GUI program? You can, and I have done it myself many times. Indeed many GUI programs even tell you what keyboard shortcuts you can use alongside the menus, which is a level of guifdance yoyu don't get with a console program.

Secondly, that is a single example which doesn't prove anything. Compare it to your previous example which involved eighteen steps in a console but much fewer using a GUI.




The bottom line is that there are still many usability issues with Linux. Things have improved a lot over the last few years, but there's still a long way to go. Installing software is still an area that causes a lot of problems.

Deluding yourself and producing whatever spurious arguments in an attempt to delude others that these issues don't exist won't help anything. These issues need to be addressed, not denied.

Sit a Windows user in front of two computers, one running KDE and one running Fluxbox. I guarentee that they will use the KDE box simply because it is the most similar to Windows. Does that mean KDE is more intuitive than Fluxbox? No, it just means that someone familiar with Windows will be more comfortable with KDE because they've seen something similar before.
No, you may not summarize it that way becuase you know perfectly well that is not what I'm talking about.

The whole notion that computers should be easy for any village idiot to sit down and use productivly the very first time they see one is complete and utter nonsense. It's like saying everyone should be driving around in 1979 Toyota Corolas because that is really all the car anyone could possibly need. Pretty much anybody can drive one, so why should anything be different?

Computers are complicated and people who use them need to invest some time into learning how to operate it. In which case, learning how to use a console is no more difficult than learning how to run a GUI. Once again, if you have to learn something, learning to type ./configure&&make&&make install is absolutely no more difficult than clicking on icons.

Oh, so now you're admitting the much dreaded console and keystrokes have advantages over a GUI? May I remind you that you were the one arguing that each and every keystroke meant that console commands were MUCH harder to use than clicking. And for the thought that console programs don't give guidance simply shows your ignorance of console programs.

You're the one deluding yourself here. Linux is not Windows or OSX, and wasn't meant to be. If you want a completely GUI driven environment, Linux isn't the place for you. That's not arrogance or elitism, it is a plain and simple fact. Windows didn't get to be the dominant OS because it is particularly intuitive or easy to use. It got there because when people bought computers, Microsoft made sure Windows was on it and therefore they had to learn it. And because of that, people have come to believe that Windows = Intuitive.

Heck, look at the lack of success the various Apple OSes have had. Here is a GUI that by pretty much every measure is VASTLY more intuitive than Windows, yet it has always had very poor market penetration outside of academia. By your reasoning, people should have been flocking to Apple, yet that never happened. Why? Because Windows was what they used at work and were familiar with. Or because Windows came on the computer they bought from Dell/HP/Compaq/etc. Switching to Apple would have meant they would have had to leave familiar territory, and that was something most users are unwilling to do.

Once more, with feeling: Familiarity != Intuitive

The reason we don't all know command line is because we are evolved beings. We have organized ourselves into a civilization that uses division of labor because that is much more efficient. To expect everyone to learn command line is a terrific waste of time. The average car driver is not and SHOULD NOT be assigned the task of assembling his own car. An unwillingness to learn commands is not a reflection of intelligence. To a new user, command line linux installation is like a door, and you have a pile of keys to sift through. A GUI installation has a sign on the door that says "Pull to open". Which door does the intelligent man walk through? I'm not saying people are stupid for using command line. Kudos to you for learning it. But the majority of people want to use computers to accomplish things....they don't want the use of the computer to be an accomplishment in itself. I have a question for you hangdog. I am sure that even you are forced, at times, to use Windows. When you are, do you open a command prompt and do things from there? just curious.