OSNews

[q
2) The Gimp 2.4 - In the past, for me anyway, The Gimp has always been a tool that allowed me to do a subset of the things I use Photoshop for. The Gimp 2.4 is the first time I've ever used The Gimp and thought to myself, "I wish Photoshop could do that". Perhaps I will finally be able to dump the aging and bloated Photoshop for good. It's still too early for me to tell. [/q]

This intrigues me. I'm currently using Gimp a lot on the Mac to retouch photos I take. I'm tempted to go investigate Photoshop Elements 6 as the Gimp's interface drives me slightly insane.

What does the Gimp do that Photoshop doesn't do? Or what does it do better than Photoshop?

To be quite honest, the average consumer today is quite the fool when it comes to computers. And that is through no fault of their own. When you are working and have a family and the such, it is totally reasonable to assume someone does not want to spend the time reading new documentation and forums to get their computer to work.

To most people, a computer is simply an appliance, not a toy or hobby. A truly modern OS should be transparent to the user much like a refrigerator is. You do not need to understand the mechanics of a fridge to keep your beer cold and the same should go for computers. They should not need to know they are learning a new filesystem, they should not have to care. The system should be intuitive enough that the simple tasks most people use computers for are quick and accessible.

Linux has the opportunity to be the "People's OS" but there seems to be a great deal of internal resistance to making it a populist system. Much like when someones favorite indie band makes it big, people for some reason do not want their own private operating system being the next big thing.

Ubuntu, and for that matter Fedora, SuSE and the other "mainstream" Linux distros are making great strides to the sort of transparency needed, and I hope they keep making this progress.

Edited to fix my quoting mistakes

Edited 2008-04-28 19:04 UTC

Your refrigerator analogy is a good one in regards to what people expect however it breaks down in that a refrigerator only does one thing. Keeps things cold. A computer is a complex piece of equipment and as you make it easier you also make it "simpler" as in, you will be limiting it. I think as a "Power user" desktop OS, LINUX is there. It hasn't yet reached the status of "Stupid User" desktop, and to be honest, I hope it never does as that would hold ME back. Also to be fair, Windows hasn't reached "Stupid User" status yet either, thats Mac OSX territory.

The real situation is that Windows basically is forced on you by every PC maker out there. LINUX had to WORK to get where it is and I think it is doing marvelously and already IS a better OS than Windows.

Sorry, but this is just wrong. Think of a hammer: this is a tool that is extremely simple to use, just grab it and bash away. Do only fools use a hammer? Think of a blacksmith. A good tool should enable fools to get the work done, and experts to deliver exceptional results.

A blacksmith is not a fool. A blacksmith is a professional. And I know some people who are definitely not able to get a nail into a board without deforming it (that doesn't really have much to do with the blacksmith but w/e).

Also, comparing operating systems to things like that is... unfitting.

Hmm, Start of Rant:

The blacksmith very likely had a good teacher, when he was the apprentice, if he became an expert. If he wants a new generation to become equally expert, he'll put aside some time to pass on the skills. This time he might spend crafting exquisite works, through which his own fame might be spread and strenghthened, but it's a price worth paying, since the profession is after all greater than he is, and he does owe it something. How will he achieve the skilling of the apprentice? Will "OMFG, naaah, not like that you f*ckwit" do, or something a tad more encouraging and instructive?

The attitude frequently evident on this site by certain individuals is "Jeez, I did it myself so there's no way I am gonna help anyone else to figure it out". I am sorry, did you learn to speak, read and write on your own? it's possible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Wright_%28linguist%29 - Wright is said to have taught himself to an extent by deciphering the upside down Bible, i.e., as it would have been presented to him on the knees of his Sunday School teacher, if memory serves) but the illogical attitude is, nonetheless: "I ain't gonna speak to anyone else in case they learn this language thing too, they gotta work it out for themselves."

Therefore I am not at all surprised that recent studies have shown a correlation (albeit non-exclusive) between increases in autism and the computer-wielding classes in the States, and presumably elsewhere:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2192611.stm

(and yes, the opposite side of the coin is that many with autism are enabled in their communication through computers: http://current.com/items/88847568_mute_autistic_girl_finally_speaks...)

Hey, we are social beings, and the anti-social don't belong to the species by definition. Still, this micro-Eureka makes it clear to me now why the cry of simultaneous triumph and derision is more often than not "RTFM", since hardly any self-respecting, or perhaps self-styled UeberGeek is going to say with meekness rather - "Actually, I did this with someone's help"


PS - Don't you just love the beautiful serendipity of the Internet. Looking up Eureka just now, I discovered that the word not only literally means "*I* am in a state of having found it" but also that it's the State motto of California...."

"Who's the more foolish - the fool, or the fool who follows him?"

Exactly.

This whole "review" boils down to "The system works different than Windows so that's bad" and "The programs work different than popular Windows-alternatives so that's bad, too".

Seriously, that one definitely wasn't woth the read.

Ever since computer illiterate people were allowed to use computers, they spoiled the fun for the rest of us ;-)

Edited 2008-04-28 19:51 UTC

What's even more frustrating is watching people try to attach a file (which they just finished typing and saved) to a new e-mail.

Or, trying to explain to people that you don't "save it to my Excel". We have some people at work who can't grasp the concept of files stored on disk and being able to open them in multiple applications. To them "Excel" is their file manager. (Or OpenOffice.org for those that are using our Linux systems. They manage their files via the File -> Open dialog.)

It's not that people are dumb, or computers are hard. It's that people lack common sense and the ability to think things through logically. That, and they are too lazy to experiment or explore.

I don't agree. If the system lumps all the files into an anamorphic mess we call a filesystem and then we expect a person to realise that the computer doesn't remember the files we just told it to save when you run another program, we should be blaming the system not the user.

Of course the solution to this is to rewrite all the applications using file selector that is not stupid.

We can't really train 1 billion people how to navigate a hierarchical file system by using pretty icons. Much easier if the system kept track of the files for the user.

Common sense? The common thing about 'common sense' is that it ain't that common.

That's true to an extent.
I mean, I used a mac at school for the first time. I ended up mucking my usb drive because I couldn't find the eject button for the USB (On window I know its the icon in the tray...even if it is annoying). On MAC, apparently, u drag the drive to the trash. Not exactly intuitive to me.

Anyways, the point is what the operating system SHOULD do to make the transition easier. Sometimes, these things sound totally stupid, but they would help.

Consider the windows Start button. For one, it is labelled Start and not just some obscure item. I think when it first came out, an arrow would blaze across the bottom to tell you to click start. Pretty simple and you might think who would need that.

I realized how useful this would have been when I first tried office 2007. I explored the ribbon just fine, but I couldn't find out how to save-as. It took me a while to realize the circular icon on the top-left is where you find a 'traditional' menu. I thought it was just decoration for a while.

It's amazing how far tool tips, popout thingies, simple help things can go.

So he made a lot of good points about Ubuntu. Many of which I've ran into personally.

1. Naming (very important). Most of all, don't try and be cute. What is pidgin.im. First the name is odd, but worst... .im domain? I get it's cute for instant messenger, but just stick to the regular.

2. locations. Even for a 'advanced', say you install a program, how do you find out where it installed to or the executable name? I've resorted to clicking to edit the menu, which invokes a separate program...finding the entry and right-clicking properties...totally weird. Why can't i just directly right-click the menu item or it could have a context popup when I'm under the item.

3. Do things automatically. Getting flash...in firefox should be made simple. Fine, don't install proprietary stuff by default, but prompt the user when it is needed, explain why, get their permission and then do it.

The cool thing about the Start button: to shut down your PC, you'll need to press the Start button!

Umm. His GF is an idiot because FF in Ubuntu automatically pops up the installer when it encounters Flash or java or what have you.

Linus is not windows, they should break the user habit of going from site to site to download apps, when they shoudl be going to the repos. You can;t get more moron prrof the add/remove programs. In windows they should just call it remove programs because that is all its useful for but in Ubuntu Add/remove programs actually gives you a slew of apps to install. So in that respect he's basically asking his girlfriend to work how windows works. He should have told her how Linux works Ubuntu in this case) first and then had her try the system. It doesn't have to be an in-depth tour or anything just simple things like this is how you install software in Ubuntu. Better yet he should have opened the help browser by default, it outlines everything they need to know. I'm sure his gf had the same issues using windows when she first sat in front of it. She will have the same issues using a Mac as well and using a mac is as easy as it gets.

I do Agree that better named menu entries would be cool. Its like people want notification for everything though. This is not windows we don;t need 500 hundred popups giving you an up the minute synopsis of how windows found your harddrive and is preparing itself to pop up another dialog asking you what you want to do with it. Mac and Gnome don't bother with that crap, they just open the folder, no popups no notification, your notification is the fact that you have an open folder and a nice icon on your desktop letting you know that your harddrive is mounted. I like the fact that Mac 9which has very minimal notification popups and relies on icons and visual cues to let you know what is going on) and gnome just get out of the way. In-fact I think Ubuntu has been putting in too many notification popups. I've seen it where there are three on the screen at the same time, unnecessary.

Another thinsg. Why would his gf automatically assume that somethign like limewire would be installed ny default, is it installed by default on a windows machine? I doubt it very much, in-fact you don't even get a default bittorent client. I do agree that the name shoudl be more coherent, but the fatc that transmission is there at all shows the real difference between Ubuntu and windows.

In-fact I want his gf to use a default windows install and see how far she gets, I'd bet money that she wouldn't get very far without severe issues. I'm not talking about an OEM "default" install, I'm talking about a default install of plain old windows. Even on an oem install I see issues down the line for this type of user.

Why would the user have issues with directory names the user should not be mucking about in anything but their home folder where directories are very clear as to what they do. Anything that downloads goes to their desktop. So I don't see the point on this one.

If you read the article carefully he mentions that YouTube was to blame for flash not being installed, not Firefox. Youtube has a javascript that will send you to Adobe's website to download flash if it is not already installed but since Adobe doesn't have a .deb for Flash it wasn't as easy. If she was running Fedora/Suse/Mandriva it would have been easier for this install.

If she went to another site that didn't forward her to Adobe.com it would have prompted her to install it through Firefox. This happened to me on my last reinstall because I forgot I had to reinstall it and went to YouTube. I just went to another flash enabled site and it installed all nice and happy.

Later in the article she installed Skype using a .deb file and only had troubles finding it in the Internet menu because it wasn't clear as to where it would go so she trudged through the filesystem trying to find it. She eventually found it but without it being explained to her how the menu's were set up it would have been difficult to understand.

This is one reason why developers need to agree on a single installer format and use it. Be it .deb, .rpm, or .linux for all I care. Once that format is established users will not have to guess which file to download. It will work in Fedora, Ubuntu, Arch and Slackware just the same. If distros need special configurations, have that set up in the file and be done with it.

I've tested Ubuntu 8.04 and I wanted to play a movie with subtitles. The installed player was not able to display them for some reason so I had to install another player. Guess what I did? I googled "ubuntu movie player subtitles" and found out about mplayer, vlc and xine. Then I searched in Synaptic and found tens of items that had VLC or MPLAYER in the name - which is retarded. I couldn't care less about the libraries that VLC uses. So no, for now Linux's way of installing programs is not better than Windows'. It's not worse either, just as bad. I know there is an Add/Remove programs option in Ubuntu, but there are not enough applications in there.



Well, regular users have their computers set up for them. So it doesn't matter that Linux detects more hardware out of the box, or that it comes with more apps. The computer savvy friend will set up the machine whether it is Windows or Linux. In these days the user is expected to know just to use the machine, not set it up.



Then just don't let the user access anything but the home folder and make it super easy for them to find other partitions. For example - for Windows partitions auto mount them, put an icon on the desktop with the drive letter that the user sees in Windows. How the hell is my mom supposed to know what 283gB partition means?

---

I think that now Linux is much more user friendly than Windows in some aspects and it needs to be, to convince people to switch. I really hate it when people take this kind of criticism personally and immediately start comparing with Windows or MacOS X. It's not like Linux is perfect or couldn't be improved. The fact is that people know to use Windows since it's so widely spread.

To make them use your product you have to make it way, way better and as for the GUI make it either identical to Windows, super intuitive or do some serious hand-holding (with popups, video tutorials, visual cues and so on).

This state of denial won't make regular users switch. Linux has to be good on its own, period. Not somewhat better or comparable to the competition.

I googled "ubuntu movie player subtitles" and found out about mplayer, vlc and xine. Then I searched in Synaptic and found tens of items that had VLC or MPLAYER in the name - which is retarded. I couldn't care less about the libraries that VLC uses.

I agree, that is a little retarded. This issue has been solved in Mandriva so that by default it only searches for packages with a GUI, not library packages or such. So, if you search for f.ex. Abiword it will not display any libraries with the word "abiword" in their name. I think that's a good start, helps newbies get around a little faster. I did select for it to display all packages though, I am a geek

I've tested Ubuntu 8.04 and I wanted to play a movie with subtitles. The installed player was not able to display them for some reason so I had to install another player. Guess what I did? I googled "ubuntu movie player subtitles" and found out about mplayer, vlc and xine. Then I searched in Synaptic and found tens of items that had VLC or MPLAYER in the name - which is retarded. I couldn't care less about the libraries that VLC uses. So no, for now Linux's way of installing programs is not better than Windows'. It's not worse either, just as bad. I know there is an Add/Remove programs option in Ubuntu, but there are not enough applications in there. "

This is an unfortunate misperception on your part. If you just select the single entry that says "vlc" or "mplayer" alone, as the case may be, Synaptic will automatically select for you all of the essential pieces that are required, and display the result of that selection. At that point you can see which of the vlc or mplayer components are essential (a minimal install, if you will), and which pieces are optional extras. Select as many of the optional extras as you want (which could well be none), then click apply.



Well, regular users have their computers set up for them. So it doesn't matter that Linux detects more hardware out of the box, or that it comes with more apps. The computer savvy friend will set up the machine whether it is Windows or Linux. In these days the user is expected to know just to use the machine, not set it up. "

So if a regular user wants Ubuntu and knows he or she does not have the knowledge to set a computer up, the he or she should buy Ubuntu pre-installed, just as they would Windows or Mac OSX. You can buy Ubuntu pre-installed from Dell, Zareason or System76, or even Wallmart online if you must.

The point to note here is that if such a user actually did obtain such an Ubuntu system equivalent to the way they would obtain a vista system or a Mac OSX system, then the Ubuntu system would require the very least from them. It would all come installed for them, including applications, ready to go.



Then just don't let the user access anything but the home folder and make it super easy for them to find other partitions. For example - for Windows partitions auto mount them, put an icon on the desktop with the drive letter that the user sees in Windows. How the hell is my mom supposed to know what 283gB partition means? "

This is an issue of naming.

Windows has the same issue but it is disguised through familiarity.

When my wife uses Windows, and she plugs in a USB stick, there is often a confusing menu presented of what she wants to do. She normally cancels this, because she is unsure. Through familiarity only, she knows that the actual files on the USB stick can be found in the "My Computer" window, but she never knows if it is going to be E: or F: or G: ... and has trouble deciding which one to pick if there are a number of options. Also, when looking at the "My Computer" Windows, she knows only through my telling here that her own "My Documents" area can be found under C:\Documents and Setting\her name\ . Still, to this day, she does not transfer files by dragging and dropping from her "My Documents" folder to or from her USB stick. Rather, she will open the document she wants in Word, and then "save as" onto the USB stick (and sometimes failing because she picked the CDROM drive letter by mistake).



The only thing that would be required is if, when you walked in the the local computer store, the salesman had two machines to show you, side by side, exactly the same hardware for sale, but one with Vista and one with Ubuntu. The Ubuntu one was $100 cheaper, ran much faster on the same hardware, could do everything that the Windows machine could do with equivalent programs, and had all applications already installed for you (no extra charge), had a recent version of Wine that could run your odd Windows-only legacy application that you could not do without (and ran it better than Vista did), did not require expensive extra security software, and had no ads.

This is already the current state of affairs (in terms of what a end user would see if the choice was offered to them) ... except that Microsoft will refuse to allow such a side-by-side choice to actually be offered to people.

Edited 2008-04-29 10:52 UTC

That's what I don't understand about Canonical's idea of "Long Term Release". Why are they putting in new, untested, beta, and just-barely-out-of-beta software into an LTS release? You'd think they'd spend the 6-months after LTS -1 prepping LTS -1 to become the LTS, fixing bugs, fixing regressions, fixing apps, and only adding new software that has been well-tested and well-integrated into the system. The LTS release should be more than just a moniker, which is all it is in Ubuntu.

Yeah, I agree. In addition, the new GVFS stuff introduced problems that are beyond Ubuntu's control. With Pulseaudio, at least there's the hope that fixes will get into this LTS. But if the Gnome devs fix their bugs in the usual way, eg fixing them for the next release which is only in a few months, then this LTS might never get the fixes.

Yeah I can see how well that would go over. The Ubuntu devs putting out a call to "Send us your girlfriends! It's for a good cause!". ;-)

Edited 2008-04-28 19:54 UTC

Yeah I can see how well that would go over. The Ubuntu devs putting out a call to "Send us your girlfriends! It's for a good cause!". ;-) "

Yeah, sudden growth in Ubuntu testers community expected.

The gf's bias is a desired feature of the test. The point was not to take someone who had never used a PC before and set them down with HH, but rather to sit a typical Windows user down with HH and see how they do.

You're absolutely right, the majority of users to sit down at Ubuntu, or any flavor of Linux, will likely have some experience as a Windows user.

So this brings up a very important question for the developers and designers of Gnome, KDE, XFCE, etc.... and further down the line the distros that use these environments and attempt to polish them into a streamlined, elegant user experience. How much of windows do we want to emulate in order to make the switchers life easier?

Every desktop environment and distro may come up with a different answer for this question, as it should be. I see Ubuntu's role in particular as trying to make it is comfortable as possible for the switchers while still loosing the crappiness of some of Windows design and implemetation choices.

I really like the idea of context sensitive help and information. It should be presented in a obvious, but non intrusive manner. This is something that Mac has done a wonderful job of in many areas. The use of animations and effects to simulate real life experience to indicate what job is being done. For example, think of a window minimizing and visually shrinking into a dock or application panel. Or deleting a file and sseing it move to the trash. As much as some effects are for bling value. Well done effects can greatly increase usability.

However, things like how to organize the system, retrieve and install software, add/remove hardware really need to explained if there isn't a simple way to show it visually. But not all users want these explanations all the time nor the same level of detail. I like the idea of user modes. Allow a user the choice to easily choose a skill level and to adjust that level to get the prompts that will help them.

I know several people that actually like the popup bubbles in Windows that tell them what to do, and how to do it. I'm not saying all the help is useful, just that if popup info bubbles and tool tips are used effectively they can be a lot of help for a beginner. But bloody annoying for the intermediate or advanced user.

I think the mistake lies in trying to please everyone. Good design should consider that and make the transitions easier. Switching will likely never be completely painless. Bad habits are still habits

Another problem is the assumption that a Computer should be easy to use with no training. We constantly train ourselves to do the simplest tasks like operating an elevator, a car (damn I hate anything approaching a car analogy, but I couldn't help myself), crossing the street. How many people do you know that would be able to effectively organize a filing cabinet without understanding how to alphabetize, separate, group, etc... To think that some one should be able to sit down at a computer with no instruction and effectively perform any of the millions of tasks that can be accomplished is silly. We should be looking at better ways to have the computer teach us.

And no matter how idiot proof we make a system someone will find a way to not understand how it works and blame it on the system.

Please NO! We will the OpenOffice.org problem all over again! The biggest problem I have with OpenOffice.org is that it is TOO MUCH like Office. Everything that sucks in Office is emulated! Clippy? Copied. Default 'i-can't-really-type-correct-so-i-lett-office-do-it-for-me features? Copied.

What's next? Blue screen of death? Drive letters? Please no!!!!!

Let me tell you that autocorrection feature of Microsoft Office is perhaps one of the best features you'll ever find. Your "I type perfectly so I don't need correction" attitude doesn't change anything.

The fact that a dictionary is constantly checking what you write and inmediately pointing out possible mistakes is very important. You just bash MS Office for pleasure. Microsoft Office is perhaps one of the best things Microsoft ever produced. It's thanks to Office that old typing machines were replaced. That people (still) jumps to the computers. You know, there are people out there still using paper.

Office has many UI problems, but it played to the "average user" a very important role in the last decade and beyond.

I personally have not used Office 12, but all I've heard (after you get used to the new ribbon stuff) is that it was an "excellent idea". I don't know, as we don't have the ribbon in Mac.

Ubuntu may be nice (have it since testing was available), but there are LOTS of stupid problems that the average user shouldn't see. Lots of incorrect decisions plague Ubuntu. So no, it may be very well integrated, but if you don't spend sometime with it, the average Windows Switcher will not be 100% comfortable with it.

And if you don't want linux to "replace" Windows switchers, then why spending time creating companies and improving user interfaces. Let's just use Enlightenment and or the command line and live with it.
Since that's not the case, Ubuntu and LInux distributions in general should aim to fix these issues. The very same way Apple is doing with his own OS. Time Machine brings Backup to Average Users. Almost transparently. One step at a time.

I can name (if you're interested) 10 things that are completely annoying under Ubuntu, and will -for sure- frustrate an "average user" in 1 second.

You gotta live with it. Computer users will possibly be Windows users. It's a standard. You don't "improve" standards in two days.

Did you read the rest of my comment or just the first 2 paragraphs. If it wasn't clear I think we should emulate as much of the good or even expected behavior common to all desktops to ease transitions yet where Windows (or Mac or any other DE) has made poor choices Linux should attempt to implement things better.

While I appreciate your frustration. I've had my own issues trying to get HH to run 'in' Virtualization.

A better place to ask and research your issues is the Ubuntu forums and Ubuntu's bug tracker launchpad.

However, your input on what worked and what didn't work for you and how that made you feel is completely valid here

Mayeb that's because BeOS does a fraction of the things GNOME does?