Suggestion: non-free package distribution

[tinker123]

Great article on digg.com about a recent digg innovation:

http://digg.com/linux_unix/New_OFFICIAL_Ubuntu_package_auto_installs_codecs_F lash_Java_MS_Fonts

I thought this quote had some insight:



Sorry, but theres nothing 'simple' about asking users to install a package when it could just be a checkbox during install.


It is easy to forget what is and is not "easy" for end users. Ubuntu is about being a linux distro for regular, non tech-enthusiast people. I thought the quote above is a good suggestion for the future, perhaps with a short paragraph about the free vs non-free issue.

[meng]

But if a package isn't simple enough (I argue that it IS), then Windows fails there too, because flash and java don't come by default with Windows. And just try to get Windows to play ogg files, that's super difficult!

Next question will be should the checkbox be checked or unchecked by default, because if it's unchecked, then that's a strain on the poor end-user. But if it's checked, then you're one step closer to bloatware.

[DoktorSeven]

I'm tired of hearing about how hard it is for the poor end users. Computers are hard, complex machines. They're not freaking televisions or toasters with a simple interface. To operate one, you're going to have to do a little thinking and learning.

If users don't want to do that, they should pack up their computers, send them back, and take up cross-stitching, or something.

[mushroom]

They're not freaking televisions or toasters with a simple interface. To operate one, you're going to have to do a little thinking and learning.

Unfortunately, lazy people still want to take the benefits of using computers, as lazy as they are. For the end-user, the OS must act as an appliance; responding to their every command instantaneously. Not everyone obsesses over every last low-level detail of their OS, or even knows what an OS is. Nor do they want to. Hence the catchphrase "just works". The most a user should ever have to do to complete a specific task is to install the application.

This isn't to say that users shouldn't have to learn to use an interface, but it's the OS's job to make that task as easy as possible. It shouldn't just assume that a power user is going to be using it right out of the box. The interface should be easily accessible to newbies while still being efficient for power users. It's a tough balance to find, but I think Apple and Gnome are doing great in reaching it.

That said, an option to install patented codecs and Flash should probably be an install-time option while warning them that Ubuntu can't be responsible for the stability or security of those packages. No "this is non-free, therefore evil" stuff, everything the OS does should be for the benefit of the user and the user only, not for an ideology. Don't take that as me turning my back on free software, though; I just think that free and closed software can coexist. Most users want those things anyway, and really, the primary task of an OS is to get things done.

Ubuntu is meant for home users, primarily. Home users are usually not geeks. They don't care to jump through a bunch of hoops to get things working. It's certainly my opinion that those who want to use computers should really learn how to use them, but people are busy. So I believe it's the interface's job to be as intuitive as possible and making the learning process very easy and convenient. If you think otherwise, you're probably using the wrong distro. Slack is that way -->.

Also, never justify what Ubuntu doesn't do with "well, Windows doesn't do that either". Remember, we're better than Windows. If there's something that can be feasibly done that excels beyond what other OS's do, then implement it.

[meng]

Also, never justify what Ubuntu doesn't do with "well, Windows doesn't do that either". Remember, we're better than Windows. If there's something that can be feasibly done that excels beyond what other OS's do, then implement it.
I agree entirely! But it is worth pointing out for the purposes of comparison that Windows does not do this. Similarly, with the "ease of install" question - Ubuntu is not THAT easy to install, but neither is Windows, and I would argue that Windows is much HARDER and more time-consuming to install.

I don't mention this to suggest that Ubuntu is "good enough". But we should also keep a reasonable perspective, and Windows is the "standard".

[stalker145]

If users don't want to do that, they should pack up their computers, send them back, and take up cross-stitching, or something.

Have you ever tried cross-stitching? ](*,)

I tell you, computers were far simpler for me to pick up on than that.

Still, I am in full agreement with you. Thinking and learning are key in today's society. Stop doing that and you are not going to go anywhere in life.

[mushroom]

I consider Ubuntu extremely easy to install. There's not much farther you can go in way of making partitioning simpler, and everything else is dirt easy. The LiveCD installer was a stroke of pure genius, too. It's six steps and then about a 30-45 minute wait while you surf the web and you're on your way.