OStatic

The Conundrum of Choices and the Linux Learning Curve

Datamation's Matt Hartley revisited the timeless issue of Linux and uniformity-- the infamous question of choice. On one side of the argument, people say that the number of options available is what makes Linux great. The other side says that the array of choices holds Linux back.

Both sides have valid points. Uniformity shouldn't mean giving up options, and choices shouldn't be a scapegoat for what ought to be an expected (but not necessarily painful) learning curve.

Computers -- and the act of computing -- suffer from serious misconceptions. This isn't Linux related, this isn't platform or architecture specific. This is human nature. Operating systems, far too often, try to be everything to everyone.

Just like that multi-function printer/copier/scanner that makes questionable copies, scans at inconsistent resolutions, and prints a good eight minutes after a job is in the print queue, an operating system that focuses on offering a far flung range of specific, detailed services isn't able to deliver all of them well. Even if it is able to do many of them well, and the rest adequately, some things suffer. It might be user-friendliness, or speed and efficiency.

There is also the myth of "intuitive interfaces." This isn't the same as user friendly interfaces. By definition, if something is intuitive, it shouldn't need to be user friendly. Intuitive implies a course of action so natural, no active, engaged thought is required.

In the "everything to everyone" case, software falls into one of two camps. The developers/designers might decide what the mythical "everyone" wants (or doesn't), and that's it. Software, components, and modules can be added, but there is often a price to pay in time, or system speed, or the number and variety of add-ons available.

The other camp offers every single option out there. They may not be all pre-installed on a system, but they're accessible with a few clicks.

The first school of thought is quite limiting, but the limits might make it feel just a tiny bit more user friendly, and perhaps can even be mistaken for intuitiveness. This arrangement, to be fair, might work just fine for some people. It isn't by any means for everybody, or maybe even most.

Case in point, using a Linux example: My aunt may have an Eee with her on a trip, and all she needs to do is email her vacation pictures to family members and check the weather at the next stop on her itinerary. The default Easy Mode is all she needs. I might have the same configuration for fifteen minutes before I am enabling the advanced desktop.

The second approach is far less limiting, but it can be intimidating. It can be confusing. Why? There is a learning curve involved. Learning is part of any new experience. Here, again, we fall victim to the idea of intuitiveness. The software might be user friendly, again, but it's not intuitive, and we've been told it ought to be. We've been told it is. The learning curve is sometimes rejected outright at this point, because it isn't supposed to happen this way. The defect -- or perceived defect -- of unintuitiveness, sometimes breaks down into "there's something wrong with me" or "there is something wrong with the operating system." Usually, neither is the case.

Does there need to be uniformity between distributions? Perhaps. It would seem far more important that the ability to choose is maintained, however. There are distributions geared clearly toward specific tasks and users with varying experience levels. New users might have a better experience if they -- and those who advise them -- look honestly at what is needed from their Linux distribution. Realism is key. There is a learning curve, just as there would be when a Windows user tries a Mac for the first time. Believing -- or telling others -- any system is intuitive is a set up for disaster.

We need to promote and encourage others to use Linux and open source software. We also need to think about how we do so. Is Linux hard? Not particularly. It may be very different, and require research in the beginning. We need to be upfront about this, and reassure new users that being puzzled by the various options and applications available isn't a negative reflection on them -- or on Linux.

• linux
• datamation
• learning
• learning curve
• choice
• distributions

by iampriteshdesai on Sep. 30, 2008

There is a golden mean. There should be limited means. All those who need tons of options can build such a system from scratch. Normal home users should have a stable, normal options OS. It isn't good scaring kids with TON's of options.

0 Votes

by Khürt Williams on Oct. 01, 2008

The problem of non-uniformity in Linux is that the distro I choose for myself and the one I recommend for my friends and family are often not the same. What do I say when they come asking questions about why their digital camera or printer doesn't work when in fact we all have the same ( or similar or same brand ) printer and camera and we are all running Linux? Do I tell them that their Linux is different than my Linux and that their Linux doesn't have the same "features" as my Linux?

0 Votes

Share Your Comments