Ubuntu is under attack

[Eric Dunbar]

On 12/19/05, Jason Straight <jason at jeetkunedomaster.net> wrote:
> On Sunday 18 December 2005 18:19, Rick Chagouri-Brindle wrote:
> > Interestingly enough, this is why I am trying out Kubuntu at the moment
> > . . . I like the flexibility, although I do miss the Ubuntu desktop
> > approach too. I guess I can haver everything though!!!
>
> Yeah, this is the reason I chose kubuntu as well, I was a long time user of
> Redhat and Mandrake, but I grew very tired of the neutering they did to the
> packages. I want my KDE to have the full power and options the developers
> gave it, and I don't think I should have to go around unhacking it to get KDE
> as it was meant to be.

Disclaimer: I'm not at all trying to do the jingoistic bigotry thing
(person x states she "doesn't like the country she's living in" and
then jingoist asshole y says "well leave if you don't like it"). I'm
quite happy to see a diversity of users on Ubuntu.

I'm a little confused, however, by your (and other's) attitude -- it
sounds like you want to have the 'full power' of KDE at your finger
tips as the DEFAULT, _for everybody_, non-hackers be damned (my own
extension ;-).

"Ubuntu is a free, open source operating system that starts with the
breadth of Debian and adds regular releases (every six months), a
clear focus on the user and usability (it should "Just Work", TM) and
a commitment to security updates with 18 months of support for every
release. Ubuntu ships with the latest Gnome release as well as a
selection of server and desktop software that makes for a comfortable
desktop experience off a single installation CD."

Into `clear focus on the user and usability' and `it should "Just
Work", TM' I read the assumption `for as many people as possible'.

Expecting "my KDE to have the full power and options the developers
gave it" runs counter to the goal of "a clear focus on the user and
usability".

What may be usable for you is what makes computers unusable or less
useful to the bulk of computer users -- DOS and other CLUIs were great
in the eyes of some (not-so-sane IMNSHO), yet DOS and all such CLUIs
required people to the be the tools of the computer, and not the other
way around where the computer itself was the tool.

PS It would not be a Bad Thing (tm) to ask a GNOME user whether they
really want to browse outside of "~/" (let alone /usr). There's no
reason that a person using a computer as a tool should be going
outside of "~/" so it's probably good practice to caution them against
going there, unless they have a REASON to be there.

You (_and_ I) may not like that level of hand-holding, but, it's quite
sensible and commonplace. FireFox (et al.) all ask a myriad of
questions the first time you do something which causes a change in
security mode or may expose your communications. These reminders are
annoying as all heck (since I occasionally wipe out browser
preferences, on purpose (if a link is really that important, I'll find
it again with "Spotlight"
(http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/spotlight/) or with
http://www.google.com)), but, they do raise general awareness of such
issues as (in)security in communications and monitoring your security
level.

Anyway, ultimately, the point of my e-mail should be this: there IS
room for the "expert"/"hacker"/whatever one wants to call him- or
herself in Ubuntu -- Ubuntu is a full fledged Linux. However, the
expert/etc. needs to recognise that they way s/he works is not the way
the bulk of users work OR NECESSARILY OUGHT TO WORK! You and I have
spent (some would say wasted) a lot of time learning how to really
make computers work for us. It's up to experienced people (more like
the developers since I don't code if it doesn't involve analysis ;-)
to translate their experience into tools that "just work". Xerox
pioneered this approach. Apple refined it (contrary to common
misconception, Apple did pay good money for access to Xerox's
technology and did significant research on their own). Microsoft
copied it and screwed it up (Plug-and-Pray anyone?). Now it's Linux's
turn to take the "just works" paradigm and make the computer
invisible.

Unfortunately, that's going to mean that our old skills and Ways of
Doing Things (tm) become less useful.

Computer expertise is now less valuable which sucks for computer
experts (since they/we can charge less for our services and there are
fewer (per capita) opportunities), but it's great for "ordinary"
people because they can now do things that were unimaginable a decade
or two ago, or, only accessible to the most holy of computer
programmers (GIS anyone... 15 years ago only a select few could do
it... now, we're teaching grade 5 kids how to use ArcView GIS 9).

Ok, too much time on my hands. Need to take a holiday from my holiday :-0

Eric.