Why Ubuntu isn't for New Linux Users

[Harold]

I have to agree that Mandriva is more Windows User Friendly than 
Ubuntu.  I started with Red Hat a couple of years, went to Suse for a 
couple of months, then spent a couple of years with Mandriva. 

When I started refurbishing older machines, Ubuntu fit the bill for me:  
A very clean install that I could tweak very easily, and allowed me to 
give CD's to the new user with the machine.  I end up with machines 
equivalent to the expensive Mandriva club membership OS's.  This was 
important as I was refurbishing the machines as a fund raiser and to 
expose new people to Linux.  Setting up the machine was not the problem, 
as I was doing that.  Cost was the most important factor along with the 
end result.

I personally use command line tools to manipulate audio files for my 
church website.  I went back to Mandriva after using Ubuntu for several 
months.  One month back with Mandriva gave me inferior command line 
tools to work with and I had to rework several audio files after 
reinstalling Ubuntu.

However, if you want to give someone an install CD and let them go to 
town with it, I find that most computer users will not be able to do a 
simple Windows install very well.  That was my experience back in the 
bad old days when I worked with Windows.

Harold Sawyer
www.SawyerSphere.net
www.centralconnecticutwcg.org

This email has not been scanned for  viruses  . . .  
as I am running Mozilla on Linux, they can do nothing to me.
If you are using IE on Windows, you might want to at least think about using Mozilla for browsing and Thunderbird for mail.



Michael T. Richter wrote:

> On Sat, 2006-25-02 at 16:42 -0600, Randy Gloden wrote:
>
>>This blog entry makes good points, but it is the same sad song.  We have 
>>covered most of these issues in this very list in the last few weeks.  
>>No one . . .  make that most aren't denying the issues raised, but this 
>>blog doesn't really help as it doesn't detail any solutions.  
>>    
>>
>
> Actually it does.  It's just that the solution is one that developers 
> (of any stripe -- paid or volunteer) don't like to hear.  Let me quote 
> the relevant part again:
>
> "This is about all of those people who possibly haven't even heard of 
> Linux before. This is the target audience. This is who all programmers 
> and application designers should keeping right in the middle of the 
> bullseye."
>
> This is the core problem.  Many software developers -- again, any kind 
> -- think that "core functionality" is king and the user experience is 
> the stuff you do at the end to make things pretty.  This view is 
> patent nonsense, however, since spectacular core functionality is 
> utterly *useless* if the end-user can't figure out how to access it.  
> Further, the user interface will often inform the implementation of 
> the core functionality, so if you design something that's resistant to 
> including a good user interface, you're killing any hopes of an 
> end-user adopting the technology.
>
> I think that all software developers around the world should be 
> required by law to make friends with at least two technology-declined 
> people.  People that are not viewed as targets for techno-evangelism, 
> but who are instead sat down in front of programs and recorded trying 
> to use them.  People, in short, who are listened to instead of talked at.
>
> --
> *Michael T. Richter*
> /Email:/ ttmrichter at gmail.com, mtr1966 at hotpop.com
> /MSN:/ ttmrichter at hotmail.com, mtr1966 at hotmail.com; /YIM:/ 
> michael_richter_1966; /AIM:/ YanJiahua1966; /ICQ:/ 241960658; 
> /Jabber:/ mtr1966 at jabber.cn
>