Linux and Open Source... What is still missing?

Kristian Rink kristian at zimmer428.net
Tue Oct 24 17:29:37 UTC 2006


Joel, world;

Joel Bryan Juliano schrieb:
> This is a relative question since alot of people are using Windows and
> the question might be in comparison to Windows features that the current
> Open Source tools doesn't have.


There is one big question we should, initially, think about: Should
open-source software attempt to be just a copy of Windows? This,
probably, could be a crucial point talking about where open-source
development (especially talking about home and desktop systems) is heading.


[...]
> worrying about what system it is. My suggestion is to create a name for
> all of multiple options, like "Default", "Default Video System",
> "Default Audio System". etc, just to point out that the user doesn't
> need to worry about the system he/she is going to use.
[...]

You are right about default configuration here. And yet: Modularity, the
freedom to choose from a wide range of options - ain't that better than
the idea of "default solutions integrated well" of Windows? Look at
Windows/Microsoft - here, the "default configuration" fits together well
- Outlook, MSIE, MS Office, MS Media Player - _unless_ you decide
choosing some other software, i.e. Thunderbird or Firefox (which, then
again, doesn't at all seamlessly integrate into this monocultural
environment).

Do we really _want_ this? Even by now, I see GNOME and KDE as two
systems where it is hard to exchange software as a KDE application is
likely to integrate with KDE and a GNOME application ... you know.
Things like dbus and freedesktop are the way to go here - make an
interoperable environment, maximum freedom of choice, _without_ breaking
things.



> - Audio/Video support for Instant Messanging in commonly used protocols
> (AOL/Aim, MSN, Yahoo!, etc.)

For what I know, there is a gaim port providing this sort of
functionality. I agree, basically, but in the end this first would
require an open standard for audio/video enriched IM configuration - yet
I don't know of one.




> - Hardware Properties configuraitions

Let's not copy Windows. For now, Unix/Linux has lived off the idea of
having an "administrator" (the guy who is responsible for
configuration/maintaineance) and "users" (those who just want to work
with the machine and don't care about the gory details of hardware and
configuration). Ever thought about how many hours of precious time users
are wasting in Windows fiddling around with drivers, how to update them,
how to get them configured (worst of all, messing with things like
interrupts or i/o ports without having a slightest clue what those are
about)?

Personally, I think we'd need some pre-configured / preinstalled Linux
versions rather than "easier" hardware configuration. Those who what
needs to be done are likely to know how to do this. Those who don't -
shouldn't.




> - Flashy introductions and tutorials (aka. Welcome Center)

Probably. But then again, I know quite a lot of users who feel annoyed
and frightened by those things - because suddenly the machine is doing
_something_ in an obvious way without being told to. An example slightly
off-topic: Plug your USB pen (or even just a CD-ROM) into your Windows
machine and your Mac OS X system and see what they will do. ;)



> - Marketing!!!
> 

The Ubuntu people do fairly well here, don't they? ;)


Cheers,
Kristian



-- 
Kristian Rink *  http://zimmer428.net * jab: kawazu at jabber.ccc.de
icq: 48874445 *  fon: ++49 176 2447 2771
"One dreaming alone, it will be only a dream; many dreaming together
is the beginning of a new reality." (Hundertwasser)




More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list