DaWei

I'm pretty much with Marvin on this one. Geekdom is geekdom and if that's what you want, you have a multiplicity of choices. If you want Aunt Gertie to buy your stuff, you better look for another approach. If you don't care, you need to not bitch because she's buying something she doesn't have to understand just to get her work done. She buys a car. It gets her from A to B. If she wants faster, she buys one with a bigger engine. Don't bother to tell her whether or not you have chains versus belts here and there.

__________________
Abstraction doesn't make it impossible to write bad code; it makes it possible to write superior code.
Contributor's Corner: Grumpy on C++ Exceptions DaWei on Pointers

King

I don't think Linux is as hard to use as people make it seem. People just get into the mindset if using Windows or Mac and don't feel like learning anything else, and when they can’t pick it up in a day they say it sucks and quit. It’s true that Linux is less user friendly then Windows and Mac, but girlfriend who is not overly technical can use Linux on a daily basis, so it can't be that horribly complicated… just need to take the time and learn it. It just takes more configurations sometimes to get certain things to work. I think the biggest problem with Linux is driver support. If companies would make drivers for Linux, it wouldn't be so hard to get things to work.

__________________
I am Addicted to Linux!

MBirchmeier

The hundreds of different versions of linux might give you the 'building on quicksand' type of approach that makes life difficult for users in finding programs to put on their base kernel. However it allows for the 'lets throw everything to the wall and see what sticks' approach. Then once something sticks everyone attempts (often poorly) to improve upon their success. It's the nature of the beast.

From what I understand (although I haven't used it) OS X is kind of your 'gold standard' linux. It used a solid linux core at the time, than standardized everything within for app developers and the users.

Honestly I don't think you'll ever see interface restrictions because it's not what people want. You never know when you'll see an awesome new idea that wouldn't have worked on a less restrive interface. Due to these restrictions though, it's why linux won't catch on for many people, they want the comfort of knowing when they buy a program it will work on their machine. What makes linux successful is exactly what prevents linux from being successful in the PC market. Amusing isn't it.

All I think that we can hope for is for more people to start making 'gold standards' the key names in the industry. Apple especially has the potential to make huge waves with 'gold standard' endeavors. I wouldn't be suprised if their next version (OS XI or XII depending on their naming) might have less reliance on the command line if a distro, (or Apples marketing research )successfully shows a desire for it.

-MBirchmeier

DaWei

You're not paying attention, (not you, MB, you just snuck in ahead of my post, but King) because you're a geek. Aunt Gertie doesn't want to learn ANYTHING, much less anything ELSE. She shouldn't have to. She's the market of USERS, not mechanics. Is that so hard to pick up on? I'm not saying some cars shouldn't be designed for race drivers; I'm saying don't expect a mass market in those machines. No auto manufacturer requires their customer to know what makes a car run in order to get it off the showroom floor. No need to change your own personal mindset, but don't try to get rich off the world market if you can't broaden it to non-you people.

__________________
Abstraction doesn't make it impossible to write bad code; it makes it possible to write superior code.
Contributor's Corner: Grumpy on C++ Exceptions DaWei on Pointers

King

DaWei, I was just making a point that Linux isn't as hard to use as people think, they are just not used to it. I do realize that my grandma isn't going to want to use Linux over Windows hahaha. My post wasn't replying to your post. I agree with you, some people just want something that works. But some people want something that works, but don’t want to spend money on windows or a Mac, so maybe Linux might be the choice if they could get someone to help them set it up, and take the time to learn it.. But this person probably wouldn’t be Aunt Gertie. I am not trying to convince anyone to use Linux over anything else, use what suits you.

EDIT:
OS X does not use a Linux Core, it uses a UNIX Kernel... but I see what you are saying.

__________________
I am Addicted to Linux!

stevengs

hey now, credit where credit's due, MB. "Oh, beans.", said Homer, "That's no Linux!".

I would love to have an Apple "Gold Standards" system. Sadly, I don't possess enough gold beans...

__________________
-Steven
"Is this a piece of your brain?" - Basil Fawlty

MBirchmeier

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this, but what I'm (intending) to mean by gold standard, is a solid OS foundation on which to build in the face of the 'shifting sands' of most *nix platforms.

Something that the developer community can build and test on and know:
1.) Dependant interface methods/libraries/plug-ins/hacks aren't going to be completely change tomorrow
2.) Something robust where support, documentation etc. is there from both a building and testing perspective.
3.) Something where a significant userbase is using this product. Even in the world of linux what percentages of users use the top kernel, compared with how many use OS X.

-MBirchmeier

*note: There are many times where I don't use the true terms, I try to use terms in the context and relation to those around me. I turned Martin's 'standard' into Gold standard because Linux does have a base set of standards, for both kernel calls and interfaces. However this is a very minimal set, I was mainly attempting to use 'Gold Standard' to differentiate between these two types of standards.

<edit> this is a habit I've picked up with working with customers. I use the verbage of those around me and try to tweak it slightly for emphasis/meaning. A lot of times I've found that words to describe their processes are often misused, but seeing as they've used them for the last X years they aren't likely to change their verbage, rather you have to adopt theirs to accomidate and communicate </edit>

stevengs

I understood and largely agree with your point. It is certainly a noble goal, and I really would love to work on a OS X system. For one, I love BSD, which is the linux core you keep mentioning .
The thing is, my daughter always needs stuph... new clothes, diapers,... food... probably college tuition... I can't afford Apple.

__________________
-Steven
"Is this a piece of your brain?" - Basil Fawlty

Marvin

Mac OS X does not use the FreeBSD kernel, it uses the FreeBSD userland and the XNU Kernel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XNU

__________________
"Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without trying to invent any more of it."

stevengs

Well I said core... isn't the XNU based partly on BSD??

time to nit-pick

__________________
-Steven
"Is this a piece of your brain?" - Basil Fawlty