Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 2 Feb 1999 22:55:10 +1030 (CST)
From:      Kris Kennaway <kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au>
To:        Sue Blake <sue@welearn.com.au>
Cc:        freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: desktop stupidity
Message-ID:  <Pine.OSF.4.05.9902022210490.2461-100000@bragg>
In-Reply-To: <19990202185713.43112@welearn.com.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2 Feb 1999, Sue Blake wrote:

> Now wait a minute! Most of you people don't know what newbies need, you
> haven't asked them, won't listen or believe or sit down with them to
> help them work it out for themselves, you're so set with your
> comfortable little stereotypes that you really think you know the Great
> Truth and have all the solutions and nobody can tell you different,
> least of all a loathsome newbie. You think you can just dish something
> up and they'll love it. What if you're wrong? Oh, yes, newbies fault.

[SNIP]

How about you write some of that documentation - you seem to have a good
handle on what is needed. Not everyone remembers the kinds of questions and
problems they had when they were learning UNIX. If you do, then more power to
you - get typing and get some useful stuff out. Complaining that other people
should be writing newbie documentation instead of working on other projects
isn't likely to win any recruits.

I think people need to get some perspective in this debate. We are talking
about a WINDOW MANAGER here, for pete's sake - not FreeBSD 2000, the
all-singing, all-dancing new UNIX which ships with no xterms or console 
drivers, manages your entire system through a spiffy Wizard interface, and is
chock-full of nice, friendly, nonthreatening error messages.

I'm pretty sure most people out there running X use a WM of some description -
many even use KDE. What then is the problem in giving people the option of
installing a nicely customized,
engineered-to-hopefully-not-be-gratuituosly-confusing WM when they install
FreeBSD?

Given the choice of twm or KDE, which is less hostile?

Nobody is claiming that we can just throw a nice glossy KDE package at the
hordes of slavering newbies and they'll go away forever happy, leaving us to
hack in peace. KDE is, however, a good starting point for people who are
"computer-literate" (*ahem*, Microsoft-literate), who are not afraid to learn
new things, but who aren't drop-in compatible with the standard UNIX way of
frobbing configuration files, passing esoteric command-line options, learning
arcane pathnames, and tweaking environment variables.

In short, the millions of curious Win '95ers who have heard about this "new
thing called UNIX", who actually have half a brain in their head, and who want
to give it a go. If all they see is a 1980-era console and some scary-looking
minimalist thing called twm then they'll go right back where they came from
and write it off as a bad idea. I know a lot of people who are in this
situation.

If people want to do all the trickier UNIX things, they still can - KDE scales
somewhat with user experience (which is why many experienced UNIX folks use
it).

Now, some other points:

* Good documentation and a nice window environment are not mutually exclusive.
I fail to understand why the fact that one group of people is working on the
former means no-one can work on the latter. If you think the former goal is a
waste of time, don't participate and do the latter instead.

* This proposal was intended to provide *a possibility* for *people who want
to use it*. If you don't fall in that category, don't tick the box and keep
doing what you've always been doing. If you're a newbie and don't want to be
"hand-held" (to whatever extent using a customized-but-standard WM is
"hand-holding"), then don't tick the box and get twm like everyone else.

* No-one is ever going to agree on which WM is "best". People who are slightly
fanatical about their particular WM are always going to try and fight to get
theirs "chosen" above the "competition". Most of the objections raised so far
to this debate have been of the form "KDE sucks, it doesn't do what I want,
but MegaWM is really cool, so we should use that."

* This being the case: this is Free Software. If you think MegaWM is a perfect
environment for people who are new to FreeBSD, then get off yer butt and build
the necessary framework so people can drop it in at install-time. At this
stage it's hardly like there's any competition - if it came down to it and
there were 2 or 3 available "desktop environments" packaged up, then I'm sure
they'd be considered on their merits. If the people currently espousing KDE
never bother to get anywhere, and the only "package" option is for MegaWM
(providing of course it's actually a decent job), then congratulations, you've
won!

Kris (wondering why the mere mention of the two letters "WM" is enough to make
normally rational people suddenly become incandescent).

-----
(ASP) Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) announced today that the release of its 
productivity suite, Office 2000, will be delayed until the first quarter
of 1901.



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.OSF.4.05.9902022210490.2461-100000>