Re: Explaining Linux

[José Luis Gómez Dans <nospam [at] sheffield.ac.uk>]

On Tue, Feb 29, 2000 at 11:05:13AM -0000, R.A.Fletcher wrote:
> My friends and I have been talking lately about Linux, and it has 
> lead to some pretty heated debates. Simply put, they have never 
> used linux, they are used to Windows and see no reason why they 
> should change, and hence anyone else like them. They presume 

	This is a very common argument. But note that, as some have
said, your average user uses the computer as a means of doing something
more efficiently than without it. In order to do so, a person
needs to become used to a new way of doing things. If the "learning
curve" is too steep, this person won't make the change.

	I tend to use Linux because I feel more at home with UN*X like
sytems then with Win-like systems, it helps in my work and I have all
the applications I'd ever dream of having. Moreover, work in my area is
usually done either in fortran 77 (ooo-er!!!) or in C using gcc, so if I
want to try somebody else's routines, I can use any box around, since
they all have gcc installed, be it Solaris, Linux, freebsd or whatever.
To me, this is an important asset.

	Then there's the whole load of free software which compares to
commercial quality software with one single distinction: it's easier to
install and upgrade. In the last few days, I have had a need to play
around with MuPAD (while not being _free_,it's free-ish :D) for symbolic
maths. Simply unbelievable.

	And then there's the possibility of changing apps so you get
what you want. Specially true if you have to use a system for a
particular purpose (data logging). I want the system to be there doing
something without me having to force my experiments to work so that this
agrees with the software I'm using.

> that Linux only has advantages for the technically minded and will 
> be useless to the average user. They accuse Linux of being harder 
> to use, having less software and being less dependable as, since 
> its free, there is no accountability like there is with Micro$ofts 
> products.

	Well, as of harder to use... I guess that all you really need
for Linux is a piece of paper with a list of the hardware your computer
has. This is something Windows seems to do for you :D I am fairly new to
the PC scene, and so far, the only problems I have encountered with
Linux were due to hardware not working nicely.

	As for the system being less dependable... Well, anything more
complex than writing letters with Word in a machine with less than 128
Mb... :)

> How can I explain that when I tell someone about Linux its 
> because I think it may benefit them, if not educationally then 
> financially?

	Since you mentioned that you were a student before, I think that
you should be learning new stuff. So your "educational" point is fully
acknowledged here. Financially, for the average user, this is not a
concern, as they usually get Windows bundled with the computer anyway
(and you cannot get a refund, can you? :D). But I find it hard myself
telling the average user the advantages of Linux for them. It's no use
telling them samba runs like a breeze, and apache is top of the pops,
and wow, writing kernel modules is kool & the gang... As my experience
goes, the average user wants a "glorified typewriter" (from the LyX
homepage!) with Quake capabilities.

	I don't think that it's a drop in replacement for Win in most
environments, but yes, you _do_ get the modula-3 as an add on to gcc.
Somewhere in sunsite X-)

	Enough said! :)

-- 
José L Gómez Dans			PhD student
					Radar & Communications Group
					Department of Electronic Engineering
					University of Sheffield UK
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheffield Linux User's Group - http://www.sheflug.co.uk
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to
- <sheflug-request [at] vuw.ac.nz> - with the word 
 "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. 

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.