Care and feeding of a Linux user

As you all know, I am all fired up about how computer users are trained these days. It is not for computers in general but targeted for specific products. Usually it is about being a MS PC or a Mac person. Even general knowledge books assume we are using a MS PC and Macs get a cameo mention just to be inclusive. What about Linux, "Oh Linux is....... and Linux is........ It doesn't help when you get a Linux book that begins with the standard Bash command line commands. Why is it that MS PC's and Macs are point and click and Linux is still type in the commands? I have read a number of helpful Linux books and they all start off with command line training. What about the people who criticize as to whither Linux is ready for the desktop or not? They all are saying the need to use the command line makes Linux user-unfriendly. To extend the push even further, it is assumed that people interested in using Linux will grow up to be System Administrators one day or a programmer. You must be destined to use Linux on a server and manage a network and might even learn about Unix. All these perceptions prevent the popular use of Linux as a desktop operating system. Lets see, Linux on a server is highly respected but on the desktop is highly suspect even by Linux server people. Even though the Linux OS does the same things the other OS's do and the GUI on Linux does the same things that the other OS GUI's do, Linux is not ready for the desktop because it's too complex for average users because "you have to use the command line".
I have in my possession a book, "Red Hat Linux 7, Fast and Easy" by Brian Proffitt, published in 2000. This book starts off using the GUI to explore Red Hat Linux 7. It is too bad that other books I've read aren't like this one. This book is about Linux on the desktop for users to use Linux. Not for system administrators on servers, not for programmers. It does have a chapter on how to use the command line but in truth you do not need to use it unless you choose to.
So let me state the facts, you do not have to use the command line in order to use Linux on the desktop. Linux has a GUI with all the toolbars, icons and windows that other desktop operating systems have. Then, the problem with the perception of Linux not being ready for the desktop is because of people saying that Linux is for servers and programmers but not for typical users. Linux has a GUI and programs (applications) that open in windows using the keyboard or mouse, just like MS and Mac. It is the same, period. Here is a picture of my desktop.

Here I have two applications open, a game and a video playing, using only my mouse to do it. Notice the toolbar at the top, the desktop icons are hidden under the open windows. Believe me, if you can use a mouse you can use Linux on the desktop the same as you can use any other desktop operating systems. I myself am a long time computer user, but not a system administrator or a programmer. I am here to assure you that as a user you are free to point and click, drag and drop, and cut and paste on any computer you jump on, including the Linux desktop.

The approach, how to arrive safely in Linuxville

In the Linux past users have been IT specialist, coders and developers. Today Linux has spread to include less knowledgeable business and home users. The problem has always been that Linux is not in wide popular use because it hasn't been simply described and taught by the experienced users.
How do you approach Linux so that any user can want to begin to understand it? There are lots of Linux experienced people whose claim to fame is that they also are IT specialist, avid coders and developers. They know all the ins and outs of Linux but in truth have no need for the reassuring comfort of a GUI. I learned this from working at NASA, never ask an engineer for a quick overview of a project. They will impress you with the vital (interesting to them) details, important to know how they see it. With these type of folks the simple basic truth of Linux is the command line or terminal. So you need to learn something called the standard basic Bash commands and eventually learn to compile programs. Then you should learn how to use the text editor called Emacs (it does everything!) or Vim. "Only then can you know the true nature of the force." Yeah, you must become an auto mechanic before you can drive too. I have a great respect for IT folks, coders, developers and auto mechanics but the know what I know how I know it way of passing on knowledge is not the path to user enlightenment. Critics of Linux seem to perpetuate the attitude that the complexities of Linux are barely covered by the desktop GUI. Let's talk cars, you will find a dashboard, steering wheel, gas and brake pedals on a Ford Focus sedan and on a heavy-duty F-150 truck. Does more power under the hood require a different driver interface? How is it the Focus driver is able to drive the F-150? The driver interface is standard on cars/trucks and the GUI is the standard user interface on computers. The question of whether Linux is ready for the desktop is a stupid one. The Linux desktop has all the features the MS Windows or the Mac desktops have. The perception that Linux complexities and power is cheapened and degraded by the GUI is ignorant. The perception that Linux is only for geeks and techies in spite of having a GUI is also ignorant. Let's review the facts of computers. The OS (operating system) is a program that makes all the hardware work together at the request of a user. A GUI (graphical user interface) is an efficient (point & click vs type in commands) way to make those request.
Now we have settled the basic truths of computers (users point of view), you can argue all you want about who has the best or most popular operating system and who has the best or most popular desktop GUI. The fact is that the GUI is what the user expects after boot up. Robin 'Roblimo' Miller of "Point & Click Linux" fame (very good book) says that today's Linux can be used with six commands, point & click, drag & drop, and cut & paste. Linus Torvalds the inventor of Linux said that the OS (operating system) should be transparent to the user. The Linux desktop GUI does this very well and yet you can if you have the skills, tinker under the hood. Speaking of cars, even if you like the outward appearance, the engineering and the standard features, the interior look and feel is what sells the car. An awkward dashboard design and misplaced amenities will spoil the allure, you look good being seen in it but it doesn't look good to you while you are in it.
Of course when we talk about desktop Linux we also refer to the programs that run in Linux. We first want to run MS and Mac programs on it because we already know, love and use them. Then we want to know if Linux has equivalents (drop-in compatible replacements) of MS and Mac programs. Finally we come to realize that there are softwares for Linux that are better or worse than MS or Mac programs that do the same things. It is so hard to convince us users that the only true requirement is for file formats that are transferable between systems. The MS Office file formats that are widely used in business and home can also be read and written by Linux programs. There are other file formats like PDF and multimedia formats like Flash that can also be used in Linux also. You can safely use Linux rather than use MS or Mac and not miss a beat. Well, I guess there is a curve to over come. If you are a Ford Focus person and come to drive a F-150 (I've seen it done), you might have to adjust your judgment, perception and your techniques but you should have no problem working all the features.
OK folks, you got the GUI and the file formats, you just need to kick the tires and drive around the block. Don't worry about the terms and agreements of leasing because you can actually own it, to pimp it, junk it or drive it until it dies (if ever). You can fold, spindle and mutilate it without voiding the warranty. You can copy it, clone it, replicate it, even mutate it and yet, install it on as many machines as you have access to. With all the freedoms and liberties with Linux the only thing holding you back from using it is FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt). This is user inertia caused by extended MS and Mac product use. I assure you that the existence and pedigree of Linux are firm and the pleasure of using it is comparable to if not better than what you have previously known. Sorry there is no money back guarantee, Linux is free!

The mystery of history and the dusty PC in the attic

I was in college in the 70's and missed Viet Nam because of a medical deferment. My older brother though signed up and went. When he came back he filled in all the stories I had heard about the war. He also brought back with him something else, tapes of the music of the times. Jimmy Hendrix, Steppenwolf and others. There weren't any real west coast hippies in Ohio that I knew but hearing the stories and the sounds put me there. Yeah, we had records but the tapes were magical, they put me there. I can't remember when I first got computer cravings, I was into architecture in school. When that was no longer a practical pursuit, I guess I caught the technology bug. We live in amazing times even when we aren't in the center of where it's happening. I read magazines and journals not comprehending what I was looking at. It became real when I got my first computer (a Sinclair 1000). Many guys/gals like me dreamed of what I might of been like to be on the ground floor of earth shaking happenings. The 60's and 70's came and went so fast if all you can remember is hippies and disco you had your eyes closed. I just watched the movie "The Pirates of Silicon Valley". According to it, personal computing ultimately owes it's existence to Jobs and Gates. They weren't the originators but they did in huge part make computers personal and popular. They stand out today because their companies are big and in the forefront. But they don't tell the whole story as I have said before. Many, many users regard Jobs and Gates as iconic figures that overshadow their respective lives and characters. How they got there is no longer important because we just use the products of their companies. So if we criticize them we are sort of attacking their products creditability and such. Well, it is in fact good to inquire into the history of things. To know the circumstances from which things are born. Not for the technology itself, but the attitudes of peoples that caused opportunities to be taken or missed. The noise of the foreground focus often obscures the stuff going on the background. With the stage set, the stuff in the foreground happens because some seize the moment. If you were too young to remember or weren't born yet, I speak as an older guy, you have missed a lot of what has made today possible. If you only know part of the story then you will forever be short in your access to all the opportunities before you. This is why I say that if you know the truth, you should tell the Linux story, how it fits into the times to where it is today. I just saw "Pirates of Silicon Valley", and it is very eye opening as far as an example of American entrepreneurial spirit breaking the old notions and boundaries and developing into a mirror image of both their founders and the very entities they were repelling from. Absolutely nothing is said about Unix finding its way onto personal computers in the way of Linux. The development and growth of Linux was out of their scope though probably not out of their sight, after all Linux was born on the new thing called the Internet. I also just read one of many sites, http://www.sitepoint.com/article/real-history-gui , about the GUI. Many vocal users claim the superiority of Macs or MS Windows interfaces. You should look into the GUI history, the series of deals and misdeeds that took place to develop what we have today is not a glamorous one. For one vendor to claim a legal leg up is as stupid as claiming rights to turkey quills as the first ink pen. Sorry, to borrow or steal or appropriate or copy is just business to some. Who stole first, who drew first blood all happened before most of us were even aware of computers. Mr. Gates even insisted that computer hobbyist protect their ideas from being stolen. He, to this day still insist on rights of propriety and leasing the use of technology to other companies and to users. If you know these beginnings, you can understand the how and why of MS products and their relationship to users today. You can also ask the question of how can there be a Linux today if it didn't come about the same way that Microsoft and Apple came about? What was the source and the motivation that drove it because it wasn't market forces. Yet, Linux survives and flourishes, in spite of not being a commercial success. And you can ask if Linux is such a hot operating system, why am I just finding out about it, I grew up with computers?
In college you find out that the world is larger than even the media can expose. Things happen in your world, things happen elsewhere at the same time. The media shows you one thing and not another because it's not news worthy or something. Or the company that controls the media is in cohoots with someone paying for you not to know, or........it's the perception. Linux is for geeks and former IBM techies. How about Linus Torvalds not being American, how good can that be? You know the Edison/Tesla thing I keep bringing up. Well, I had an inkling that computers didn't need MS software to run because I read about it. One day I stumbled on a book (Power Linux) with a CD of LST Linux in the back in a local library years ago. I can't remember installing it but I must have tried. I do remember downloading Slackware Linux onto floppies. Then my first significant install was Red Hat Linux. I dual-booted with MS Win95, it was a total mess. I did a 5 year stint as an electrical draftsman at a NASA facility. There it was confirmed that computers can be designed to run without the aid of MS software. And that PC's could be run with Linux and that Linux was adequate on the desktop for most if not all of my computing needs. Engineers at NASA were still skeptical about Linux on the desktop and I heard all the typical user excuses for not using it from not looking right to not enough games. Getting back to the GUI, a touchy subject among users, it is such a subjective thing to pit one GUI against another. Sort of like comparing ink pens. Look, feel, and polish have all been expounded on. But GUI's improve with all the criticism in tow. Most of what we call a GUI is standardized down to point and click. If you point to it and click it, it's suppose to work and that is that. Most don't really care what the operating system actually is, as long as the point and click works. Most have bought into the pitch that one companies point and click is more natural than another or that you can only understand one style of point and click in your life. Also if you change from one point and click system to another, the learning curve is so high/costly. Gee, that says a lot about the confidence companies have in folks who grew up programming buttons on the microwave, TV remote, VCR and cell phones.
"Once you know it you can't change" has been the mantra of software vendors for years now. It is a marketing tool that says only our stuff fits you, forever.
I think I have said enough for now. Look into computing history and find out the how and why of things, it is interesting and it might change how you feel about things you accept as common place today. The larger lessons of ethical behaviors and outcomes of things and events all color the stuff going on today. Life did not begin with us, we stand on shoulders, take part in, mesh with and continue a pattern of in a time we pass through. Some of us make a difference and some are un-noticed but once we are here we experience and are a part of the story. To get the chance to tell the story is cool but to hear the same event from a number of sources is to hear the story in "HD".

Linux challange, comparing oranges with organges.

I finally got my old standby computer running and connected to my main brain. It's one of those home-brew, first love kind of machines. 850mhz, AMD Duron with 256mb of ram and a ATI Radeon 7200 video card, not an extreme machine by any means. It has Win98se and Wolvix Linux on the 20gig hard drive. You all know Win98se but the Wolvix is one of those smallish Linux distros with the Xfce desktop. Wolvix is Slackware based which is the oldest of the Linux distros and has a reputation of being a challenge even to seasoned Linux users. Wolvix is a mix of the old formats and new Linux strategies. It even has a program called Slapt-get like the Debian's Apt-get to handle program dependencies, a well known problem with the Slackware packaging system. What turned me on to Wolvix was the Xfce desktop. Though it is growing as it matures, Xfce is a light weight GUI compared to KDE and Gnome.
Now I don't want folks to get the idea that I hate KDE or Gnome, I just like and prefer Xfce. The point I am making, once again, is that Linux is a Linux is a Linux. My main brain has WinXP Pro and Xubuntu on it. Comparing Win98se to WinXP Pro is a night/day upgrade kind of thing. Comparing the two newer versions of Linux is almost like a mirror, but Xubuntu is Debian and Wolvix is Slackware. If you listen to some people you'd get the idea of extreme differences. But in reality the main struggle a user handles, besides the package format, is the GUI. The GUI is the look and feel thingy that most users squabble over. If you put your favorite GUI on any of the basic Linuxes, (rpm, debian, or tar.gz), a lot of the hassles of the other guys, seem to go away. The GUI makes the hidden part of Linux somewhat transparent. I say seem to and somewhat because some people are really picky.
Anyway, Xfce makes Xubuntu and Wolvix identical in look and feel. Now debian and tar.gz systems both have their advantages and short comings, also some things might not be available in one format or the other. So you have to examine what's there to see what is the right combo for your needs. And on top of that if you are inclined to tinker with code, you could convert a package to another format or compile the source code to run on your computer. This is all possible because underneath the GUI it is just Linux. In fact, you really don't need the GUI to run Linux at all. The GUI is there for our comfort and enjoyment. I only mentioned Xfce, KDE and Gnome, there are quite a few other window managers for Linux that are popular as well. I am going to end it here, I just want you to realize that the GUI is the look and feel part of the thing we call Linux.