451 CAOS Theory 
A blog for the enterprise open source community
Linux, just difficult enough … to be easier
Jay Lyman, September 19, 2007 @ 11:36 pm ETI recently read with great interest Walt Mossberg’s review of the latest Ubuntu Linux, described as “relatively slick,” but still not ready for non-technical users. I have a couple of differing perspectives. The first is that Ubuntu is ultra slick. It’s free. It’s open source. It’s growing. It’s Linux and it works (usually). My second point is that yes, Ubuntu and increasingly Linux distributions in general are getting easier to use, but they are still difficult enough to change your perspective on computer use. A continued beauty of Linux and open source software, perhaps overlooked in the quest for ultimate ease of use, is that it can tap into one’s inner geek. For those persistent and interested enough, it can connect you to the technology you use in fascinating ways.
For example, when going through the normal problems of a Windows install, or re-install as has been more of a requirement on the Microsoft side, there is typically frustration, finger pointing from service providers and the usual pains in the neck. When going through the normal problems of a Linux install (as if they could be described as normal), the user is forced to be more resourceful and often must find and execute the solution on their own. Sure it was no picnic wading through all of those Ubuntu forums when I couldn’t maintain good wireless connectivity, but I got better at it. Now, I can fairly quickly zero in on the right place for an answer. When I couldn’t find an answer, I would post on a forum or send it along through a list. My experience has been pretty positive, and thankfully without much of the user hate one might expect from project developers and maintainers. My experience prompted me later to seek out IRC support for another open source application running on my wife’s Windows computer. I’ve also grown accustomed to seeking out new free and open source software, including office, browsing and backup programs in addition to games.
Mr. Mossberg is correct, mainstream users aren’t stupid and just want computers to work without hassle. Certainly continued ease-of-use improvements and broader support from hardware suppliers will help Linux to grow more palatable and pleasant for ‘average users.’ Nevertheless, it just takes a little command line to make even the ordinary PC owner geeky enough to more greatly enjoy and improve their computer use and, thanks to open source, their software too.
Comments (18) Categories: Linux,Software
Jay, your description of your OSS experience crystalized some market research I have been doing.
You describe a hobby, an avocation. That’s good. It involves a level of intellectual and/or physical involvement (I assume intellectual in this case) to take one’s mind off the real stresses of life. And it’s free, unlike golf.
From a business person’s perspective, that’s the problem with OSS on the desktop. There’s no business there. Today’s action is on the server (the business’s or the SaaS farms’) where Unix/Linux continues to lead over Windows (just barely) and legacy O/S. This provides the total opportunity for higher-layer OSS software, requiring the business person’s services and support. Tomorrow’s action is on the appliance where Mossberg’s ultimate ease of use is attained.
Dennis,
Thanks for your comment. You’re right that I described my Linux use as a hobby/avocation. Computing transformed from a mundane task of professional business to something that had me more involved. Still, there have been moments when intellectual frustration led to physical involvement (pounding of a desk or the need for a walk). I suppose I get those with Windows, too
.
In terms of business, yes, the action for Linux is certainly on the server. However, that doesn’t mean there is NO business for the desktop. There are plenty of markets around the world — Australia, South America, parts of Europe and Asia and others where Windows is not yet or as dominant. It’s interesting you mention the appliance, and that may be better suited to Linux under the hood. Also, consider virtual desktops, which will naturally be linked to servers. Here is another way in which we may be using Linux on the desktop, but largely unaware of the OS.
JL
>> From a business person’s perspective, that’s the problem with OSS on the desktop. There’s no business there. Today’s action is on the server (the business’s or the SaaS farms’) where Unix/Linux continues to lead over Windows (just barely) and legacy O/S.
>> Tomorrow’s action is on the appliance where Mossberg’s ultimate ease of use is attained.
and
>> In terms of business, yes, the action for Linux is certainly on the server.
I have to disagree completely. The only entity to whom this view makes sense is the entity that wants the desktop field left alone. “That battle is over. Let’s move on.”
The desktop is where the real action is coming. Just wait until Dell and others get the hang of what life can be like without having to let Microsoft set all the terms and control all the profits. It will be interesting to see Bill write Mike a check in order to put a butterfly on Dellinux. I’ll enjoy watching Bill write some checks out to Mozilla corp and to any of a bunch of FOSS related groups.
No, unfortunately Microsoft cannot afford to do this, so they’ll fight FOSS and smile before the investment community ..until they implode.
FOSS will bring real ease of use to the desktop. All the “standards” of the world cannot match what code openness and hard work by groups that don’t answer primarily to the dollar can achieve.
Great article by the way. I completely agree that the reason Microsoft users are stuck in a reboot cycle and are ignorant of most of what is in front of them is because of the closed nature of the beast. The openness of FOSS is why you can have real and responsive communities. FOSS can always be made to work for you. On the other hand, you will ultimately find yourself working for closed apps.
And we know what happens when people are allowed to cut out the middle person and enjoy the “profits” of their labor.
“Jay, your description of your OSS experience…describes a hobby, an avocation – From a business person’s perspective, that’s the problem”.
I would just like to add that this IS the real problem in more ways that it seems from Dennis’s answer. First, it is a problem for all non-ICT businesses, which are computer END uers: they must not use computers as hobby, they must use them to make money spending as little time and money for ICT training and maintenance as possible. So anything that presents FOSS to a company only in this perspective is going to make them NOT use it.
Presenting FOSS as an hobby or advocation is an even greater risk when you try to promote FOSS among the general public: only very, very, very few people want to see source code and play with it. Almost every desktop computer user today could not care less of software freedom as defined in the GNU manifesto. They’re never going to compile and debug software anyway. So, this kind of FOSS activism may be actually counterproductive.
I see the fact that many FOSS activists still seem to forget this fact very often as a great danger for Free as in Freedom ICT standards and software. I could go on and on on this point, but since I’ve already done it at http://digifreedom.net/node/56 and http://digifreedom.net/node/57 , I’ll just point you there and ask what you think about it.
Ciao,
Marco Fioretti
Hmm… You say it’s a problem for END users in businesses environments.. well..
The most of those businesses I have worked for have a IT department. This department installs, configures and delivers the computer to the end user. The END user has noting to do then to start up the machine and start working. Its not the job of the end uster to install programs or “tweak” the computer. In most working environments that is even a absolute no-no! It’s the IT department that’s doing the “tough” work of configuring and installing all needed programs for that workplace. It also resoves problems if they might occour. That’s how it works…
And that’s where the people like Walt Mossberg get it wrong. They put a pre-installed Windows machine next to a clean machine with only a CD/DVD laying on top, and complain they have some installing and configuration to do. Let’s be fair – a lot of END users wont be capable of installing Windows and all the needed software and configuring either. So – let’s do a fair comparisation and compare a pre-installed an configured Linux machine with a pre-installed an configured Windows machine. I think the outcome would be very different..
For the END user it don’t matter what OS the machine is running, as long as it’s doing the job he wants it to do. Sure – there are applications that are platform-dependent. But there are not as many as a lot of people want us/you to believe. Most of those applications are very specialized. A lot of those applications can be used running on wine. Also – a lot of those applications only have to be used one or two times a day or week, so a stand-alone Windows machine (or VMWare “machine”) can be kept fort those relatively rare occasions..
There always be differences between OS-es, but those differences are not interesting for the END user in a work environment. They get a seat and workplace – instructions how to do things and off they go. They get a tool (computer+OS+programs), instructions on how to use that tool, and start working. If that tool is called Windows or Linux does not matter at all!!
I have to agree wholeheartedly with this description – dead on!
If a company’s IT department is given the job to roll out Linux, the onus is on the IT department to ensure the hardware is up to snuff. This would be exactly the same if the IT department was to upgrade to a newer version of Windows.
The department sets up a hardware list after ensuring the parts will work with Linux. They ask for one or more test machines from the manufacturer with the correct specifications. Linux is installed, necessary applications are installed, and tests are run.
Once it all succeeds, the IT department orders the rest of the machines needed. They have created an image from the original test machines that includes all the necessary applications. Futzing around for drivers won’t be needed since the hardware was matched up correctly. The IT department may even use a centralized management suite that handles remote software installation and policy enforcement on the Linux desktops. Centralized authentication is already a proven feature, even using Active Directory.
There are going to be odd sorts of folks that just have to have certain applications – I like the suggestions of using VMWare or terminal access to a Windows server for those few. Yep, Wine might even run what they need. If so, set up an image with Wine and that application already configured and drop it into each machine that needs it.
Linux just freakin’ works, folks! There is a healthy mix of individual and corporate developers that keep GNU/Linux and other FLOSS projects moving along in the right way. Quality can be accounted for, and all your PR/executive suite buzz words can be realized.
It simply takes a change in stinking thinking.
Well done, great reply! Hit the nail on the head!
I think mr. Byron is getting a misleading impression here, actually. If it were the case that Linux forces you to take a hobbyist approach that would be a serious problem, but it’s simply not true. Many people who write about Linux give that impression because hobbyists are more likely to write about Linux. But I don’t think they represent the typical Linux user–no offense, Mr. Lyman. I, for instance, like and use Linux, but am in no sense a hobbyist. Sure, I’ve ended up doing some commands on the command line to troubleshoot Linux problems. But I’ve overall spent less time and had better success solving Linux problems than solving Windows problems. The way to solve Windows problems tends to be nested five levels deep in some arcane but graphical configuration utility with a cryptic interface. It is true that by contrast, the simplest way to solve a Linux problem tends to be on the command line; when it isn’t, the GUI solution generally maps pretty clearly to some kind of command or text file should you be interested. This does give a somewhat better feel for the true nature of the problem, and cues towards learning more if one feels like it.
But you don’t *have* to follow those cues. I personally haven’t done so. I like having an understanding of some of the principles of computing, but I have other hobbies than learning about the nuts and bolts. So I’ve basically skipped it. Half the commands I’ve entered have been cut and pasted, actually. And it’s really no harder, and often easier, than solving problems on a Windows system. Some of the problems I’ve had on Windows I’ve simply had to give up entirely–technically, I dual boot, but basically what happened to my Windows partition is that some problems I can’t figure out how to fix started to accumulate and so I’ve gradually let it quietly bit-rot away because I can’t be bothered.
So while the Linux way to solving problems may pose an invitation to be a hobbyist in a way that Windows does not, I think it would be inaccurate to say that it *forces* you to be a hobbyist by being actually any more difficult than Windows. It’s just that solving a Windows problem doesn’t point you to anything else–all you’ve learned in the process is how to click on a semi-arbitrary widget somewhere deep in a GUI. Or how to reinstall. Solving a problem on the Linux command line, on the other hand, provides an intimation of the possibility of knowledge, mastery, power, which creates the temptation to approach it in a hobbyist way. I personally am still not interested, but it doesn’t force you to be a hobbyist, and I’m not going to call being presented with the option a negative.
A couple more things in this discussion:
Marco, first off, thanks for your post. You’re right that hobbyist software is unlikely to win mainstream business and consumer use. However, no one is advocating presenting Linux and open source “only in this perspective.” There are also perspectives and advantages of security, cost and yes, support and ease of use.
Perhaps the point of my original post was not very clear. What I was trying to say is that the switch has its rewards, and chief among them is ease of use. Because it promotes self-service, Linux is eventually easier and less time-consuming. I think Rufus did a better job conveying the point:
“But I’ve overall spent less time and had better success solving Linux problems than solving Windows problems.”
His description of a dual-boot machine dominated by Linux use, and unaddressed Windows issues, also parallels my own experience. If only all machines had both Windows and Linux so everyone could decide for themselves.
Thanks again all for posting.
JL
Forgot to add that I updated the title: “Linux, just difficult enough … to be easier.”
JL
As a “mainstream” user and a very proficient “windows” user who has been playing around with various linux distros for about 9 years, I’d suggest that adoption of linux by firms served by competent IT departments is more likely than adoption of linux Tby the “mainstream” desktop user. As noted elsewhere, a company determined to make the switch and willing to make the investment in new hardware can manage adoption of linux fairly easily. The problem for the desktop user in linux is the same problem faced by desktop users of “Vista”—a lack of drivers. Sure, some programs that ran on XP don’t work in Vista, but the problem that’s a deal-breaker is the lack of driver support.
After years of using windows I finally found Linux in 1998 and have never looked back. I still “fix” friends windows computers on a regular basis, but as time goes on, it has become easier and easier to fix Linux problems than windows problems. I dread having to do anything with windows these days because it is time consuming and invariably ends up leading to a full reformat and reinstall. With Linux I rarely go to the command line any more, because the gui’s are becoming many and varied enough to do just about anything one would want to do to solve just about any problem you could have. Is Linux ready for the desktop? Well, it already is on the desktop, used by many non tech users every day, and it will continue to grow, especially now that it is being taken up by some main stream hardware suppliers!
Ingredients for Great Computer Training Software…
When it comes to talking about Computer training software, a new world of possibilities is available for those who want to improve their skills, learn more about certain subjects or obtain an IT certification….
[...] drive with Linux ‘in a simple a safe way.’ Comforting words and further evidence that Linux gets easier over [...]
[...] it has a technical and economic edge in the development and end user aspects of these devices. The benefits of Linux apply not only to the end users, but also to manufacturers, as Intel’s Otellini attests. [...]
[...] things have calmed a bit, but I really don’t enjoy using my Windows very much (not as much as Linux), and use is limited mainly to Webinars and rare instances when a vendor or project provides [...]
[...] by trade or preference or chance, to use Linux, provide some savings and maybe even go further in supporting themselves. These are the new Linux desktop users in enterprise and business. While Windows 7 and [...]
[...] sustain itself and its own technology deployment. Similar to how a desktop Linux user is forced to improve his or her own computing and problem-solving skills, enterprise organizations tha use open source [...]