apologetics

C'mon guys. Don't be apologising or explaining about why something is such and such in Linux.
I have no problems using numerous distros of Unix and Linux. I don't need any explanations.
 
The purpose of the forum is to say what we think is annoying in Linux as it currently stands, and in my case I am also stating things that I might not necessarily have a problem doing (although it really sucked when I was starting out a few years ago!) but that I see as being major annoyances that are keeping Linux from gaining widespread mainstream acceptance and taking a big chunk out of the evil one's profit margins. 
 
You can always configure your box as a command line server with no gui whatsoever if thats your joy, but I believe that the installation should default to a gui that's slick, feature filled, idiot proof, super simple and yes, basically the same as a windows or Mac box (and nearly as bloated to all the puritans). Under the hood its still Nix and that's what matters. KDE is pretty close these days, but the issues I raised clearly fall into the idiot proofing and convenience category. Including a network neighborhood that will talk to the evil wintel boxes without needing special configuration. Windows did it to Apple, why shouldn't we? Take all the stupid things that run of the mill non technical people love about windows and incorporate them into an X gui that sets all the settings necessary in the various config files. I have people calling me to walk them through a windows installer setup wizard. They aren't ever going to learn vi and edit a .conf file. They are NOT going to learn how to make and compile. Often these are the people with the signing power for the tech budget. They're paying through the nose for windows in the enterprise and they'll keep doing so as long as there's no alternative that gives them what they want...idiotproofness and a pretty interface.
 
You can have the geeky hand configure computer nerd linux if you must, but if we're going to see linux increase its desktop share, which is currently not converting companies in droves, then we have to streamline all the geek stuff with wizards and a great gui on top of it. If the OS is free, but can't be used by a minimum wage employee or a suit who can barely operate their own toaster, then it will stay firmly in the realm of servers, specialist applications, and geeks. 
 
Getting mainstream acceptance of the desktop version is the only way for linux to truly grow and become a sizeable force, and for that we technical people have to accept that our beloved arcane patchwork needs a shiny coat of paint and pretty little knobs so that our moms will like it. And we have to choke a bit while we watch brainless putzes and chimpanzees using our powerful linux operating system for solitaire, chat and email.
 
Basically, if someone could make everything as slick and workable as Apple's OSX but have it sitting over linux and useable on ibm compats we'd see a steady decline in M$ use.
And it would have to be FREE GNU not like "Lindows" with their purchase scheme. OSX is plug and play idiot proof, but lots of techs buy Macs because under the hood its still nix.
[/end rant]
 
Someone had just suggested the "file association with a program" thing. Definately important.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

 
 
Chris Taylor, Systems Engineer
MCSE/MCSA, CCNA, A+, Websense WCSE