[Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop from GNOME to Unity"

Tue Oct 26 08:29:05 UTC 2010

Marked with ::

On Tuesday, 26 October, 2010 03:38 PM, hard wyrd wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 1:53 PM, JC John Sese Cuneta
> <jcjohn.sesecuneta at laibcoms.com
> <mailto:jcjohn.sesecuneta at laibcoms.com>> wrote:
>
>     I think what most are arguing against this decision is the level
>     of "migration" it will attract from Windows users.  Our experience
>     with demo-ing Ubuntu with Windows users was really eye-opening -
>     [1] they don't care if it looks cool; [2] they don't care if it
>     feels fast; [3] they want something that they are already
>     accustomed too; and [4] something that requires less (re)-learning.
>
>     When we demoed Ubuntu, we made it look like Windows XP and Windows
>     7, as in customized as much as possible, and still those 4 I
>     mentioned above still came up.
>
>
> I don't quite agree with that move. We're trying to migrate them. Not
> deceive users into thinking that it's the same banana or at least
> behave like the old one.
:: It's not really deception per se.  You have to consider where they're
coming from and where they're standing at.  For us geeks, it's a
no-brainer.  For them, it isn't.  Our brains function way differently
than the non-geeks.  And most of the time, we geeks are willing to spend
more time into reading, experimenting, learning, asking questions,
finding solutions, etc.  They are not and they will never be.

:: You see, if we ever want them to migrate, especially offices, we need
to see things from their eyes, from their perspective.  We need to think
like them.  We can not just go to them, present and demo "our superior"
product, and tell them every little and big thing that we can think of
why they need to migrate to Linux all we want.  But if we can not
address their needs, not ours but theirs, then they will never bite. 
They won't even bother trying it out.

:: Personally, I have more success in converting people to use Linux, or
to be exact, Ubuntu, by presenting it to them based on what they need
and what they are looking for in an OS.  I first try to find out more
about them.  Their habbits, what are their primary, secondary, and
tertiary purposes of using a PC, and their outlook in this matter.  Then
when the time is right (or they gave the schedule), everything that
comes out of my mouth has been catered to them.

:: It isn't perfect, and it is harder in office evironments.  But I have
better success in that method than presenting GNU/Linux and Ubuntu
"as-is".  It is far from being a deception.  We want to present
GNU/Linux as a product "for them, not for geeks".

>  
>
>     So changing the desktop to Unity default, based on our experience,
>     will further make the Windows users to _not_ to migrate, nor even
>     try.  "Unity for desktop as default" will not break that ice.  For
>     netbook, sure, it _is_ a netbook after all, we need space and
>     speed.  But for a desktop as default?  It's a bad decision.
>
>
> I don't quite think so. It requires relearning - yes. Relearning was
> not a barrier to Windows users who purchased Macs. They just have to
> learn the ins and outs. Sadly, a lot of users want to be spoon fed.
> I've been there.
:: Well, Mac users are better than Windows users, they always have
been.  Mac and GNU/Linux have the lowest share vs. Windows.  So our side
obviously can learn Windows much easier because our thinking has been
molded different already.  Windows users are not, as you have said,
"spoon fed".  And to add to that, Microsoft has a strong marketing
department.
>
> If the new user interface will be a lot simpler and straight forward
> to use, then why not? At least it has to be made clear to migrants
> that this is a different operating system, and adjustments will need
> to be made.
:: If the name isn't "Windows" (or "Mac") then it is a different
operating system, there's no other way to be clearer than that.  ^_^
>  
>
>     This clearly tells me that Canonical is done with the "come
>     Windows users try us out" phase.  The recent decisions, from
>     Jaunty onwards, were all signs to me that they have a new vision
>     and a new objective.  They are now treating Ubuntu as an
>     independent "OS".  A product worthy to be called an Operating
>     System in and of itself.  Ubuntu is Ubuntu.  Ubuntu _is_ _the_ OS.
>
>
> I don't think they're going to drop "Linux" because it still is a
> Linux distribution. To me the recent decisions were to make it a bit
> more recognizable than "just another Linux distro". How will it
> distinguish itself from the rest? It's still Linux but something will
> need to be done as far as risks and bold moves are concerned.
:: No, I wasn't referring to dropping Linux, it won't run without it. 
And if you meant "name", they never used "Ubuntu Linux", not that I
remember.  Regardless, that's what I was talking about.  They're looking
at the product to become a "household name".  Instead of "Linux", it
will be "Ubuntu".  It is still Linux underneath, but the non-geeks know
it by "Ubuntu".

:: For us, we care so much about correctness of terminologies, like
"GNU/Linux" vs. "Linux".  To the non-geeks, they do not care and never
will.  What they want is a working operating system that they has a very
low (re)-learning process - in other words, they can use with minimal
supervision and QnA's.

:: It's like this: "why fix when it is not broken?"  For them, "why
migrate to Linux (or GNU/Linux) if I already have Windows?"  We can't
just sell them "no viruses" if the individual or entity (office
environment) have a system in place that keeps viruses out ¾'s of the
time.  We can't just sell them "it is faster than Windows" if the
individual or their ITC department made enhancements to it.  If we want
to sell the idea to them, then we need to cater the product to them.  If
we want them to migrate, then we need to give them compelling reasons to
switch.
>  
>
>     Compare that to say Debian: Debian is the distro, Linux is the OS,
>     hence "Debian Linux".  Canonical look to me to be aiming for
>     something like this:
>
>     Person A: "What's your OS?"
>     Person B: "Linux"
>     Person A: "What distro?"
>     Person B: "Debian" or some other distro…
>     Person A: "How about you?"
>     Person C: "Me? My OS is Ubuntu"
>     Person B: "That's the distro, you should say Linux"
>     Person C: "Huh?  What is Linux?  My OS is Ubuntu not Linux,
>     whatever that is"
>
>     They're repositioning Ubuntu down that path (or up that future). 
>     It's done being an "alternative", it's done being a "gateway to
>     Linux".  That's why they're deciding on major changes that many
>     people are reacting against, like this one now.
>
>
> This is still relatively speculation at this point in time.
:: It is.
>  
>
>     For us geeks, again, for "us geeks", it is as easy as installing
>     whatever DE and DE-shell we want to use.  For the average user,
>     most of them are not comfortable with that, doesn't have time to
>     learn and tinker and break their machines, and whatever reason why
>     they are still an "average user".  There are people built for
>     building skyscrapers and people made to be just end-users of those
>     skyscrapers.  And there are people with plenty of time on their
>     hands, and people who just wants everything familiar so they
>     bother not with reading this and that just to do this and that.
>
>
> Exactly. Is Unity that complicated to use? Was the install that
> complicated? Let's recall what have been the greater barrier to Linux
> adoption? It's not the user's capacity to re-learn stuff.
:: Hehe, I think I answered your questions in that same paragraph :D
>
> -- 
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> "Penguin, penguin, and more penguin !"
>
> www.madforubuntu.com <http://www.madforubuntu.com>
> baudizm.blogsome.com <http://baudizm.blogsome.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/55ab2ba0/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/55ab2ba0/attachment.pgp>