Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX
Sample Letter to Laymen Users Encouraging Linux
bedouin:
I sent this letter to a couple non-technical mailing lists I'm a member of, in hopes of letting 'normal' people know about Linux. This is pretty much the same technique I used for Firefox in its earlier days, and I found it to be pretty successful in generating interest, if not complete adoption. This is the kind of simple grass-roots advocacy we need to start employing if we truly want to show people alternatives to Microsoft. I probably should have given brief instructions on how to burn an ISO though, and also included a link to Ubuntu's free CD program.
----
A new Linux distribution has started to make some inroads, and will likely gain even more popularity since it has been granted $10 million in funding.
If you are new to Linux, Linux is completely free, however it has traditionally been a bit too difficult for average computer users to adopt, despite its technical superiority over Windows. The Ubuntu project has been developed to allow 'normal' people to try Linux, and subsequently find a free replacement for Windows. Included with the distribution is everything you'd need to have a functional machine: Firefox, IM clients, and full MS Office compatible productivity suite, etc.
You can try Ubuntu without even installing it, albeit at a slower speed by downloading the "Live CD" from the following URL:
http://ubuntu.hands.com/releases/5.04/ubuntu-5.04-live-i386.iso (for Intel/AMD hardware)
http://ubuntu.hands.com/releases/5.04/ubuntu-5.04-live-powerpc.iso (for Macs)
If like what you see, full install CDs can be downloaded here:
http://ubuntu.hands.com/releases/5.04/ubuntu-5.04-install-i386.iso (AMD/Intel)
http://ubuntu.hands.com/releases/5.04/ubuntu-5.04-install-powerpc.iso (Mac)
Below are some screenshots of what Ubuntu looks like:
http://www.ubuntulinux.org/screenshots/document_view
And more about the project:
http://www.ubuntulinux.org/
If you are tired of viruses, spyware, and general incompetency, yet can't afford a Mac, here is an alternative.
ksym:
There are about ONE really good reason why normal "PC hobbyists"
won't install Linux.
And that is the way software is installed.
They just can't get used to the idea, that one has to
install software from centralised repositories.
If they want to have a piece of software, they want to
browse the web for it, get the file, click-click-click and
install it all they way so easily.
And the same goes for hardware drivers: driver installation
should be either a) Fully Automatic or b) 100% retard-proof
plug&pray way, eg. put in some hardware, and OS asks
for the driver CD or package with files.
With Linux the hardware management is, currently, either
a) Automatic, works like magic or b) some hardware won't
work without user digging deep into system spesific
configuration ;)
Yeah it just sucks people are dumb, hyperactive and have
no imagination whatsoever. That is why dull pieces of shit
like Windows will always be successful. And that is also
why viruses/trojans are so popular, stupid people want to
click around the net and install them into their systems ...
From a developers perspective, the current lack of
GOOD and well-designed standards is the main headache.
If they cannot be sure that Linux-system includes some
base-components with compatible ABI's, then they
will NEVER even think about making their closed source
crap to this system. Simple aye?
Anyway, like i'd care ... most GNU/autotools packaged
OpenSource programs have stasfied my needs this far ...
Only thing i miss are GOOD GAMES and maybe some GOOD
AUDIO software.
Anyway, if none of those spank-hacker Linux-distro
cookers wont FORCE any good standards and guidelines,
we're all screwed beyond belief. I JUST hope that
this debate over software patents would scare the shit
outta Linux-distro ppl, and would force em to CO-OPERATE.
Sigh ;D
I wish i was god. I would standardize Linux, and throw
all those who resist into burning hells. Period ;)
WMD:
--- Quote ---They just can't get used to the idea, that one has to
install software from centralised repositories.
If they want to have a piece of software, they want to
browse the web for it, get the file, click-click-click and
install it all they way so easily.
--- End quote ---
It's funny, because the Ubuntu way of Synaptic + Debian universe is much better than the Windows way of search Google + run EXE + click next next next next and hope it isn't a spyware program. You just find by category, click "set for install" or whatever, and then hit apply when you're done. All programs, at once, with no prompts.
ksym:
--- Quote from: WMD ---It's funny, because the Ubuntu way of Synaptic + Debian universe is much better than the Windows way of search Google + run EXE + click next next next next and hope it isn't a spyware program. You just find by category, click "set for install" or whatever, and then hit apply when you're done. All programs, at once, with no prompts.
--- End quote ---
Well sure, but those programs were FREE SOFTWARE. They all were
tailored to smoothly integrate into the OS. Yes, you heard
right! INTEGRATE! Gaah, how i hate this world when speaking
of most Linux distro's ...
Let's just admit it, out favourite penguin OS has no
marketproof standards. You ever tried to make a software
to Linux so that it could be a) easily installed across
many distro's and b) at the same time trying to keep
up with the ass-whopping speed those programming API's
and ABI's change?
This is not even possible, since the guys who make distro's
ALL have their "grand visions" of Linux as an OS.
And so, every fcking GNU/Linux is mostly incompatible.
We got this LSB-standard, whom about 7 of the biggest
distro's embrace, BUT it has tooooo little API's to
make any good commercial software. No standard for a
working desktop environment, even the C++ standard
libraries break fcking binary compatibility about
every month (ok, maybe a bit overexxagerated ... but),
no single specification on howto install/remove services,
and no standardised IPC mechanism.
The only way we can get software really working is
to release the software as gnu/autotools source
package, and let the other linux-hobbyists bang their
head into the wall while trying to make a decent build
out of it ;D ... and this automatically means the
software MUST be integrated tightly into the OS.
I have some good idea's on how to avoid this problem,
especially i got some plans on implementing somekinda
reverse-soname-dependency system ...
but heck, it seems you people don't even give a shit ;)
WMD:
--- Quote ---Well sure, but those programs were FREE SOFTWARE. They all were
tailored to smoothly integrate into the OS.
--- End quote ---
Ok, so...?
--- Quote ---You ever tried to make a software
to Linux so that it could be a) easily installed across
many distro's and b) at the same time trying to keep
up with the ass-whopping speed those programming API's
and ABI's change?
--- End quote ---
Opera, VMware, and ut2k4 don't seem to have much trouble with this. And that's just what I have installed myself. Heck, even the "RHEL Certified" Oracle supposedly runs on many other distros.
--- Quote ---The only way we can get software really working is
to release the software as gnu/autotools source
package, and let the other linux-hobbyists bang their
head into the wall while trying to make a decent build
out of it ;D ... and this automatically means the
software MUST be integrated tightly into the OS.
--- End quote ---
This doesn't really integrate it into the OS - it just builds it for the installed libraries you have. It would be the same if there were standard libraries like you talk about - just more people would have the exact same thing installed.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version