Linked by David Adams on Mon 24th Aug 2009 09:21 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 380552
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Is Linux that Unfriendly?
by marcp on Tue 25th Aug 2009 20:19
in reply to "Is Linux that Unfriendly?"
RE[2]: Is Linux that Unfriendly?
by Peter Besenbruch on Tue 25th Aug 2009 21:41
in reply to "RE: Is Linux that Unfriendly?"
Correct. My mom uses highly accustomized Arch installation, same happens with my grandma ...
My father uses Debian. My kids use Linux in college. It wasn't a case of them installing anything. I did the installing.
Had they just purchased a machine, it would have run Windows, and it would have been loaded with crapware. I could have spent the time removing what wasn't needed and locking down the system, but installing Linux takes the same amount of time. Once Linux is installed, there isn't that much maintenance needed. Does that count as user friendly?
When it comes to the larger issue of user friendliness, I tend to avoid the "user friendly" distros, and go with Debian. I find it "friendlier" to install a base system, then add X and a desktop environment. With KDE, I install Kdebase and add other items on an as needed basis. That tends to produce a lean, responsive system. Yes, such an install routine requires a basic knowledge of what you want, but if you have that knowledge, Debian is one of the most "user friendly" distros out there.
So, God bless "user friendly." I just wish I knew what people meant by it.




Member since:
2006-07-26
If you were to give mom a CD of Ubuntu and one of Vista, which would be more friendly? Or...make it a fesh install of each. I know from personal experience that people are often quicker to befriend Ubuntu than Windows.