[NTLUG:Discuss] Desktop Linux - From Open Source

[Stephen Davidson]

Hi Guys.

It really would be appreciated if installs could be made easy on the Non-Linux
geeks (like the Java Geeks, such as me!) as well.  ;)

I am wondering if the authors of YaST shared this view?  Both the name (Yet
Another Setup Tool), as well as the fact that YaST is designed to operate with
RPMs (in this case, one or more repositories of RPMs), indicate the authors are
trying to provide flexibility and ease of use, but stay compatible with the basics?

(Long post -- heads up!)
To expound a little bit on what Dennis is pointing out, RPMs, while a nice
solution, are too complex for the non-geek.  The same basically applies for any
other command line tool.  And that's before you factor in how to handle missing
dependencies (although some tools I understand are starting to handle that, such
as Yum?).  SuSE went a long way to making software installation easy with YaST
(to the point where I had non-geek managers recommending this to me as a
solution, and that was back in SuSE 7.0 days!).  Whether YaST gets ported over
to other platforms (its open source now after all, and does have a 'pluggable'
framework, so far as I can tell), or some creative type comes up with a viable
competitor, does not really matter to me.  What matters to me is not having to
spend weeks learning how to configure a new install, but to be able to just
install the software I need and start using the system.  Not having to spend
days chasing down dependencies is precious.  What I have found that matters to
most end-users is that, if necessary, they just want to select check boxes for
software that they need, and it magically installs and works.  'I have work to
do!' is often heard.  YaST normally does that (about 90% of the time), which is
why I like it, and prefer SuSE.  I think for general user uptake, easy and
uniform software installs (MS has InstallShield, for instance) is the last piece
that's missing from Gnu/Linux.  So far as I can tell, everything else is already
in place. To use recent experience with MySQL for Bugzilla as an example, after
messing around with MySQL for a couple of days and not getting anywhere, I just
gave up, and spent 1 hour on PostGresSQL before it was up, running, and
accepting logins. If something can't be readily installed, or readily installed
and then started, the 'unwashed masses' won't spend time trying to figure out,
but will simply move on.  Just something to think about.

In regards to Dennis point about Free vs. Pay, if I can get Pay software online
quickly, and I am looking at Days, or especially (more often) weeks or months to
get the Free software online, pay often starts looking cheaper.  Especially, as
is often the case, when said Pay Software can be brought online for testing in
minutes or hours, and has good documentation (yes, many users really DO read the
documentation!  Or try to, anyways).  What good are the algorithms if the
software can't be installed or used?  Pay software does not ignore the customer
support call (or at least, not if the company expects to stay in business!).  As
many here are aware, requests for assistance to open source developers (although
THIS situation is rapidly improving) are not always answered as well as they
could be.  And this is why many companies are going for 'Pay' software.
Sometimes its just perception, but don't think Pay companies are not going to
'promote' any incidents that they hear about that make the OpenSource community
look poor, as well.  Just something else to think about.

Regards,
Steve
(Java/J2EE Developer)

Dennis Rice wrote:
> Part of my message is lost in the following response.  Steve is 
> providing a view for ONE distribution.  Please do not misunderstand, as 
> I feel Yast is excellent, and so is Yum or Apt-Get.  If a user elects to 
> use Debian or Red Hat / Fedra or Slackware or Ubuntu or .... then the 
> installation procedure will not be the same.  How do you respond to 
> software that MUST be installed from source?
> 
> The software developer must now write different installation packages 
> for each distribution.  That is not a way to make new software sell (be 
> it for free or with a cost).  I believe that all of us are willing to 
> pay a price for software that we find to be the very best for a given 
> application.  Yes free software may be out there to compete, but will it 
> always do what a commercial software will do?  Sometimes yes and 
> sometimes no.  Pays your money and take your choice.
> 
> What I am advocating is consistency between the MANY distributions for 
> software installation, we have a very long way to go in that respect.  
> We must also make software installation easy for the non-geek!
> 
> Dennis
>