[CLUE-Tech] Mandrake 8.0 or SuSE 7.1?

[Kevin Cullis]

RANT
Keep in mind that this is YOUR machine and version of Linux, not
others.  In addition, two things are at work here: competition and
curiosity.  Competition is healthy and both developers and users want
things better, which includes making a better GUI.  Curiosity by both
developers and users who hear about Linux and want to try it as well as
developers wanting to try and improve the user's experience with Linux. 
BTW, let's ask another question: why don't you go use MS-DOS?  It has a
CLI and it's before Linux!  You see, the very thing you RANT against is
the very thing you've endorsed: CHANGE!  Many MS-DOS users said the same
arguments about the Mac when it first came out.  Fine, but people still
bought them, didn't they?  If Cyberclops can have a cleaner GUI AND
still allow you to have a CLI, why NOT let it happen?  Why NOT allow
users to have a clean GUI with the power and reliability of Linux? 
While you're ranting, you're limiting my/others choices about what they
want and restricting innovation just like Microsoft does, and that to me
is un-Linux-like.

As for me and my house, we look for the day that every new computer
bought has a clean GUI with the power of the CLI underneath so that NO
ONE is restricted in using or learning about Linux.

Apple's OS X will do nothing but help Linux.  It'll spur more people to
use UNIX because that's what it is and it'll help Linux users by getting
GNOME and KDE off of their chairs to copy some of the better GUI stuff
and put it into their products.  In each case, Linux wins because it
takes away from Microsoft's marketshare.
RANT OFF

Kevin

Nicholas Perez wrote:
> 
> RANT_MODE=1;
> Maybe it is just me, but why on earth should linux attempt to become user
> friendly? Why should Linux become a Redmond-esque clone, trying to immitate
> the ui? Personally, I like Linux at the level it is at. Sure it's no OpenBSD
> when it comes to installation(thank god, because that is a nightmare). But I
> don't want flashy desktops filled to the brim with pointy-clicky icons with
> all sorts of frill and lace and cpu cycle eating, mem hogging "desktop" apps
> and "docking bars". If you are unable to navigate through a *nix system
> without a mouse and icons, if you are unable to hand edit config files, read
> the right man pages to accomplish the right tasks, figure out and solve
> problems on your own then you need to go back to windows/mac. I for one am
> seriously scared of automagical configurators and so should you. I don't see
> *nix going to the common man anytime soon. Let Microserfs and Apple handle
> "user friendliness". Because *nix is user friendly, it just tends to be
> choosy about its friends.
> RANT_MODE=0;
> 
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 07:40:22 -1000, Cyberclops wrote:
> 
> >  I'm wondering how Mandrake 8.0 will compare to to SuSE 7.1?
> >
> >       Mandrake 7.2 is user friendly until you try to seriously use it.  I
> >  have had much more satisfaction with SuSE 7.1 although I see it as being
> >  overly complicated in certain respects.  I'm still looking for a simple
> >  Linux.  One that is more like the old Mac OS.  I still would like to see
> >  a discussion developed as how to go about making SuSE more user friendly
> >  for a home user system.  I don't like not have permissions to do things
> >  on my own desktop.  I see user friendliness oriented towards these
> >  features:
> >
> >  1. Installs easily on your particular hardware.
> >          SuSE 7.1 - Pass
> >          Mandrake - 7.2 fail - not good at the configure X portion
> >
> >  2.  File system and disk access immediately available to the home user.
> >          SuSE 7.1 - not so good - entire SUSE doesn't seem to follow
> >  conventional Linux procedures.  SuSE has their own way of doing things
> >  which may be better, but not easy for someone to understand.  For
> >  example manually editing the XF86Config file doesn't do anything.
> >          Mandrake 7.2 - much better in this respect - Supermount disk
> >  mounting
> >  is very smooth.
> >
> >  3.  Menu system easy to understand and use.
> >          SuSE 7.1 - Overly complex and confusing with strange names such
> >  as
> >  "YaST" and "YaST2" which do different things, and have a different
> >  interface.
> >          Mandrake 7.2 - Menu system is a disaster as menu items
> >  disappear.
> >  Drake
> >  Config while being central has many confusing portions which go beyond
> >  the understanding of an average computer user.
> >
> >  4.  Menus and Desktop easy to configure.
> >          Mandrake 7.2 - less than desirable
> >          SuSE 7.1 - it works, but some KDE tools are present but
> >  disabled.
> >  SuSe
> >  limits configuration by tying everything up with a complicated
> >  permission system that I don't exactly understand.  Even root can't
> >  change the permissions of some items.
> >
> >  5.  Package manager easy to understand.
> >          SuSE 7.1 - very good in this respect
> >          Mandrake 7.2 - I never understood how to use it or what the
> >  icons
> >  mean.  I could never figure out what was installed and what wasn't.  The
> >  Mandrake animated Web tutorials were a total flop as there were even
> >  more confusing and hard to follow as they jump forward before you can
> >  see and absorb what is going on.
> >
> >  6.  Pleasing user interface
> >          Mandrake 7.2 - Very cartoonish.  Standard program icons and
> >  splash
> >  screens changed by Mandrake - a very bad idea.
> >          SuSE 7.1 - much better.  A more or less totally professional
> >  look
> >  and
> >  feel.
> >
> >  In then end, SuSE 7.1 works, and Mandrake 7.2 doesn't.  I know a lot of
> >  people think Mandrake is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but I
> >  didn't have an overall satisfying experience with it.  Things would
> >  break too easily.  With SuSE 7.1 things seem very solid.
> >
> >  I like the concept of "Libranet" Linux it has a Mac like "Adminmenu".
> >  Unfortunately it's not complete, but conceptually it's probably one of
> >  the best tools out there.
> >
> >  I am one who believes Linux could and should be easier to use.  But more
> >  thought has to be put into making it that way.  As Warren points out
> >  there is a difference between a professional server farm operation, and
> >  some flunky sitting at home with a single computer, and his family to
> >  deal with.