Firstly, open source does (or can easily) have one big usability advantage: installing things, assuming it's on a repository, is much easier. Or, at least, it's very close to there; I haven't asked a lay user how useful they find the "Add Application" menu in Gnome. But assuming it's not already done right, once it is, that's a huge advantage.
Secondly, so we've admitted that non-company-backed open source projects can have good code, making for a good backend. So the economic model does work. What we need now is for more non-developers (UI designers, artists, etc) to join this movement. I think that it's slowly happening. Tech savvy ones would be more likely to join, and as it becomes more and more inviting I think the less savvy will join as well. I can't think of any specific reason this economic model applies to developers more than others, so I think that over time, UI will become good for the same reason the code is good.
I'm primarily a Windows user, having just recently installed Ubuntu onto a netbook. Obviously I'm carrying old habits and baggage, but from my point of view, finding and installing stuff in the repository is a nightmare.
On one hand, I can see how putting it there makes a unified update system possible.
But the system does nothing for me in helping me discover what I need. To learn of the existence of a tool, I still need to stumble across it from a user recommendation or web search. From there, in Windows I just download and install.
But on the Linux platform, I get lost in all the various repositories available, each of which has multiple levels (I forget them specifically, but I remember something about "universal"?). And god forbid that the necessary repository isn't one of the standards (as I had to deal with when installing XBMC); finding and setting up the public keys is like root canal.
The flip side of this, uninstalling software, I haven't figured out at all. It seems that doing so doesn't actually delete the deadwood, but I happened somewhere on a command line way to tell it to clean up. I remain confused about how to specify precisely which packages to uninstall. The way they're built into dependency blocks, with optional recommended pieces, on the installation side is great. But I don't see at all how to determine the root package of something I don't want anymore, so that all the children are removed as well. And I really don't get if or how it determines which shared, possibly optional packages, will stay or go.
So I think that this is precisely what the OP is referring to. As a developer I can appreciate the benefits of the Linux repository system. But as a user of it, It's hideously unfriendly.
I agree that finding the right tool is sometimes hard because there are so many options. My general rule is open up the package manager (System->Administration->Synaptic Package Manager) and search for what I need. Then I google the 3 or 4 options and see what people recommend, and just install that one.
I just let Uninstall do its thing, if it misses a few pieces it doesn't really matter. If it really bothers you just use Purge instead of Uninstall.
As for repositories, again you are overcomplicating matters. You really just need to know if it is in the repositories you have connected or not, you might have 40 repositories by default but it doesn't matter which it is in to you. I generally add 1, max 2 repositories to my machine but thats it.
You also don't need the public keys, you can just hit YES when it asks if you want to use it, though I am sure that is not recommended. Generally the instructions just include a command to copy and paste into the command line i.e. Medibuntu's instructions.
And you are over-simplifying it. In Windows, install = double-click setup.exe. In Ubuntu? ... Wait, what was that again? I didn't get it.
For those who have been using unices for many years, it is difficult to remember the challenges of a switcher. I've been using Linux for 12 years, but I have constant reminders, because I'm a CTO, and have to support the end users who are coming into a new OS environment. When you, who have all this stuff in your head, trivialize the new users legitimate challenges, you are part of the usability problem, not part of its solution.
I guess this is reflected in the popularity of the "app store" for iphone - and now others trying to replicate that (not just for phones either). Its the proprietary equivalent of the open source repository approach.
The electronic gift economy. People collaborating and working for free to produce electronic goods.
The point of the article is that, so far, open source only works when there's a company behind it, and companies are structured the way they are, I would argue, because of their profit motive.
Comments
Firstly, open source does (or can easily) have one big usability advantage: installing things, assuming it's on a repository, is much easier. Or, at least, it's very close to there; I haven't asked a lay user how useful they find the "Add Application" menu in Gnome. But assuming it's not already done right, once it is, that's a huge advantage.
Secondly, so we've admitted that non-company-backed open source projects can have good code, making for a good backend. So the economic model does work. What we need now is for more non-developers (UI designers, artists, etc) to join this movement. I think that it's slowly happening. Tech savvy ones would be more likely to join, and as it becomes more and more inviting I think the less savvy will join as well. I can't think of any specific reason this economic model applies to developers more than others, so I think that over time, UI will become good for the same reason the code is good.
I'm primarily a Windows user, having just recently installed Ubuntu onto a netbook. Obviously I'm carrying old habits and baggage, but from my point of view, finding and installing stuff in the repository is a nightmare.
On one hand, I can see how putting it there makes a unified update system possible.
But the system does nothing for me in helping me discover what I need. To learn of the existence of a tool, I still need to stumble across it from a user recommendation or web search. From there, in Windows I just download and install.
But on the Linux platform, I get lost in all the various repositories available, each of which has multiple levels (I forget them specifically, but I remember something about "universal"?). And god forbid that the necessary repository isn't one of the standards (as I had to deal with when installing XBMC); finding and setting up the public keys is like root canal.
The flip side of this, uninstalling software, I haven't figured out at all. It seems that doing so doesn't actually delete the deadwood, but I happened somewhere on a command line way to tell it to clean up. I remain confused about how to specify precisely which packages to uninstall. The way they're built into dependency blocks, with optional recommended pieces, on the installation side is great. But I don't see at all how to determine the root package of something I don't want anymore, so that all the children are removed as well. And I really don't get if or how it determines which shared, possibly optional packages, will stay or go.
So I think that this is precisely what the OP is referring to. As a developer I can appreciate the benefits of the Linux repository system. But as a user of it, It's hideously unfriendly.
You are over complicating the matter.
I agree that finding the right tool is sometimes hard because there are so many options. My general rule is open up the package manager (System->Administration->Synaptic Package Manager) and search for what I need. Then I google the 3 or 4 options and see what people recommend, and just install that one.
I just let Uninstall do its thing, if it misses a few pieces it doesn't really matter. If it really bothers you just use Purge instead of Uninstall.
As for repositories, again you are overcomplicating matters. You really just need to know if it is in the repositories you have connected or not, you might have 40 repositories by default but it doesn't matter which it is in to you. I generally add 1, max 2 repositories to my machine but thats it.
You also don't need the public keys, you can just hit YES when it asks if you want to use it, though I am sure that is not recommended. Generally the instructions just include a command to copy and paste into the command line i.e. Medibuntu's instructions.
And you are over-simplifying it. In Windows, install = double-click setup.exe. In Ubuntu? ... Wait, what was that again? I didn't get it.
For those who have been using unices for many years, it is difficult to remember the challenges of a switcher. I've been using Linux for 12 years, but I have constant reminders, because I'm a CTO, and have to support the end users who are coming into a new OS environment. When you, who have all this stuff in your head, trivialize the new users legitimate challenges, you are part of the usability problem, not part of its solution.
I guess this is reflected in the popularity of the "app store" for iphone - and now others trying to replicate that (not just for phones either). Its the proprietary equivalent of the open source repository approach.
What economic model are you referring to?
The electronic gift economy. People collaborating and working for free to produce electronic goods.
The point of the article is that, so far, open source only works when there's a company behind it, and companies are structured the way they are, I would argue, because of their profit motive.