There are many ways to learn Linux, and I can't think of one as being the 'best'. Of course, something may work for some users while failing miserably for others. There are users who prefer to ask a friend or get their answers fast on a forum, either because they are too lazy or they just don't have enough time to learn something new: they want it to work in their own way. Well, that's not quite an option, since there is no universal program which will fit any user's way of doing things.
I remember that when I started I made some very dumb questions on forums and IRC, but I always liked to read documentation, which is by far the best way of learning Linux in my opinion. There is a saying which goes like 'give a man a fish and he will have food for one day, teach the same man how to fish and he will have food for his entire life.' Well, not exactly like this, but you got the point. I think keeping asking questions rather than reading manuals and tutorials first will get you out of trouble for the moment, but there will always be problems in the future which need to be taken care of.
A thing I recently observed was how most of the IRC channels and forums handle beginners: on IRC there is usually a topic and a helpful bot, and on the forums are the stickies which contain detailed information for newbies. The only problem is that this kind of help reached a level of automation: not once I saw well-intentioned persons on IRC who just give a command and a channel robot will show some help regarding that specific problem. Now, I really don't know how much a newcomer understands from help provided this way, but I can't think of a better way to do it either. Users who are new and ask the same question over and over again are countless: in forums, threads like this are always on the front page, and there is a big percentage of similar threads on the entire forum.
Too few users search, and too few read the helpful stickies. This is a common problem actually: usually (and it's just a natural thing) somebody wants a fast answer to his problem, and prefers to post on a big forum like Gentoo forums or Ubuntu forums to get a fast answer rather than reading ten pages of FAQs and an entire thread specially made for this kind of problems. But what is the gain in this? It's true, a little annoying, but the user gets his answer usually. But is this the right way to learn doing things? If that same user would have read the manual page (painful for a beginner, i know - how many even know how to quit the manual page after reading it?), he would have earned much more than asking in a forum or a mailing list. This process is part of learning how to learn.
Not to mention the satisfaction: at least I know how happy I am when I troubleshoot something on my own, without going to ask more skilled users on how to handle something. And the gain is bigger: a manual read well offers 10 times more general knowledge about a certain issue than an answer to a single, specific question.
If new users understand that it's better for them to first do the reading, then Linux and the Linux community will make one step ahead.
Updated: Jun 22, 2008 (Created: Jun 22, 2008)
Showing posts with label essay. Show all posts
Showing posts with label essay. Show all posts
June 22, 2008
June 18, 2008
Why Many Projects Is Better Than Just a Few
I kept reading opinions regarding the big number of Linux distributions out there, most of them saying that we have a huge number of distros, each one with its own package management system, keeping Linux divided. Most of them suggest only a few such projects, and that all developers should unite in order to produce a 'universal' solution to this. A comparison with MS Windows is always brought in as an argument. Of course, every person with its own opinion, but why do I think a big number of projects is the way to go?
Well, in the first place, I think a 'universal' distribution is not quite possible. There will always be persons who will want to have their own project and eventually start it from scratch instead of contributing to an already solid one. Not to mention that Linux itself was born from such a project, and examples of projects which started the same way as the Linux kernel are countless.
Since free-software as promoted by the FSF is all about freedom and free choice, the developers are free to choose their own way of programming and building projects. If someone wants to start a new audio player instead of contributing to Amarok or Audacious, for example, then good for him. This way, we'll have one more audio player available out there, one more to choose from. Most of the big, established projects already have enough developers and contributors. They usually need only feedback from users and bug reports.
Now, regarding the way of installing things. It's true, we have big distributions like Debian (with its popular derivative, Ubuntu), Fedora or Gentoo, each of them with their own package management. So you are tempted to say that we have too many systems of installing software instead of a single one. Well, in the first place, learning to use a new package installing system can only take a few hours (if you really need to switch from a distribution to another). Most of the software one needs is available in the repositories and can be fetched easily using either command line or a GUI interface. Decent applications like Skype or Opera offer their software packaged for each distribution out there, so there will be no problems installing it on any system. Not to mention the graphical tools available. For example: a Fedora user who somehow will need to fix a Debian box (or install some software on it) won't need to know how to use APT, he will only need Synaptic or KPackage to do the job. And I'm sure over 90% of the Linux users get familiar with a new graphical tool in less than 30 minutes or one hour. It's true, if problems like a sources.list file edited the wrong way arrive, he will only need to follow an online guide which will get him out of trouble.
Again, ten projects for one thing is better than a single project. It happened to me to see people who were not satisfied with a very popular application for some reason, even though the majority liked it. So they had the choice to try another one, which probably suited their taste better. What if they didn't have that choice? They would have been forced to use something which they don't like. The same goes with distributions: a single 'universal' solution might be OK for most of the people, but there will always be a number of people who will want an alternative, something which works the other way around. And to have this alternative is imperative. Just think of a Linux world where there would only be Ubuntu, or only SuSE, or only Slackware.
I already said this, a single project for a specific task is not even possible. There is no such thing as 'let's all unite our forces and only do this thing'. 'Every KDE developer, forget KDE and let's develop GNOME, or vice-versa. Every passionate, either professional or amateur programmer, forget your little projects you love and join the big ones'. This won't happen. And it's better not to happen: free choice is all what Linux is about.
Updated: Jun 18, 2008 (Created: Jun 18, 2008)
Well, in the first place, I think a 'universal' distribution is not quite possible. There will always be persons who will want to have their own project and eventually start it from scratch instead of contributing to an already solid one. Not to mention that Linux itself was born from such a project, and examples of projects which started the same way as the Linux kernel are countless.
Since free-software as promoted by the FSF is all about freedom and free choice, the developers are free to choose their own way of programming and building projects. If someone wants to start a new audio player instead of contributing to Amarok or Audacious, for example, then good for him. This way, we'll have one more audio player available out there, one more to choose from. Most of the big, established projects already have enough developers and contributors. They usually need only feedback from users and bug reports.
Now, regarding the way of installing things. It's true, we have big distributions like Debian (with its popular derivative, Ubuntu), Fedora or Gentoo, each of them with their own package management. So you are tempted to say that we have too many systems of installing software instead of a single one. Well, in the first place, learning to use a new package installing system can only take a few hours (if you really need to switch from a distribution to another). Most of the software one needs is available in the repositories and can be fetched easily using either command line or a GUI interface. Decent applications like Skype or Opera offer their software packaged for each distribution out there, so there will be no problems installing it on any system. Not to mention the graphical tools available. For example: a Fedora user who somehow will need to fix a Debian box (or install some software on it) won't need to know how to use APT, he will only need Synaptic or KPackage to do the job. And I'm sure over 90% of the Linux users get familiar with a new graphical tool in less than 30 minutes or one hour. It's true, if problems like a sources.list file edited the wrong way arrive, he will only need to follow an online guide which will get him out of trouble.
Again, ten projects for one thing is better than a single project. It happened to me to see people who were not satisfied with a very popular application for some reason, even though the majority liked it. So they had the choice to try another one, which probably suited their taste better. What if they didn't have that choice? They would have been forced to use something which they don't like. The same goes with distributions: a single 'universal' solution might be OK for most of the people, but there will always be a number of people who will want an alternative, something which works the other way around. And to have this alternative is imperative. Just think of a Linux world where there would only be Ubuntu, or only SuSE, or only Slackware.
I already said this, a single project for a specific task is not even possible. There is no such thing as 'let's all unite our forces and only do this thing'. 'Every KDE developer, forget KDE and let's develop GNOME, or vice-versa. Every passionate, either professional or amateur programmer, forget your little projects you love and join the big ones'. This won't happen. And it's better not to happen: free choice is all what Linux is about.
Updated: Jun 18, 2008 (Created: Jun 18, 2008)
May 27, 2008
It Takes a Convert to Make a Convert
Updated: May 27, 2008
I was a Windows user for several years when I decided to switch to Linux, late 2005 or early 2006, can't recall exactly. I remember that on Windows I was always looking for legal software, and freeware alternatives to all those paid applications. I was not aware of the terms 'open-source' or 'free software' back then, but still looking and searching I bumped into Linux and decided to give it a try. First it was Red Hat 9 for a couple of days, then I discovered Ubuntu. After about one month of dual booting with Windows I finally made up my mind and wiped it out, leaving all the hard disk to a freshly new Ubuntu 5.10. I knew when I started that the transition will be tough for me; things are done differently on Linux then on Windows. And it's pretty hard to get unused with a way of doing things which was in my blood for about 6 years. But what made me stick to Linux and never return, what kept me getting used to all this new stuff and a new, different way of doing things, was the pure fact that I knew Linux will be different and I must have to make an effort, I understood that I'll have to learn most of the things again. And I was prepared to do it. From the start, Linux offered me flexibility and free choice, with no fear on using the software or sharing it using BitTorrent or Direct Connect. And it gave good results: I'm a happily and passionate Linux user for three years now, and I'd never go back. I can't imagine going back and leave all this behind.
I think the main reason most of the people try Linux and go back to Windows is that they aren't determined to make the switch. If something is done differently on Linux, they quickly jump to a conclusion that goes like 'This is not right, on Windows this is done the other way around. It's no good.' Or the eternal, endless and already legendary proposition which us, Linux users, are tired and bored of hearing, 'On Windows everything is easier'. Well, I usually smile now whenever I hear it or read it. Once you get used to something, it's hard to do it the other way around, especially if you're not determined to do it or at least give it a good try, not just 'this doesn't work, I go back'. This 'easier' stuff is so relative, and why do I think that? Well, to give you an example: I got used to rip flac files using the flac and oggenc command line tools, I also have several small Bash scripts to ease my work. For me, this method is the 'easiest' and fastest, maybe another person feels more comfortable using KAudioCreator, for example. Or some other GUI application.
I agree, when I first started there were many things which I didn't understand and which I felt that were not right. Believe it or not, it didn't seem logical to me that Linux allows two files with the names 'Music' and 'music' in the same directory. Was that because it really wasn't logical? Simple answer: no. It was because I was used that way in Windows. Or, to take another simple example, the lack of 'Apply' buttons in GNOME applications. I just felt like the options were not applied if I didn't have that button there. But I knew it's different, and I embraced it. I kept reading forums and articles, and many other tutorials; I started to love what I was learning, and the whole Linux as an OS together with the open-source development method.
Most of Windows users expect the change to be fast and smooth: they expect to find in Linux all they have in Windows; it's a known issue. When they find out it's not like that, all is over. Linux is no good and they go back to Windows. If games are not ported on Linux, it's no good; if drivers are not available for Linux, it's no good; if I can't receive files using my favourite IM protocol - then Linux is no good. Unfortunately this is pretty much what happens inside the mind of a long time Windows user trying Linux for the first time.
Windows and mainly closed-source applications drive to a strange mentality. There was a thread on the Battle for Wesnoth forums (a TBS game for Linux, Windows and Mac, licensed under the GPL) about some guy selling the game on CDs on eBay. Believe it or not, the guy was highly criticised by several players posting on that thread. The reason was 'he should ask for permission' or 'isn't this illegal?' Now, I really don't have to mention whether they were the Linux users or the Windows ones. Don't get me wrong: I'm not criticising the people, but the mentality behind.
I remember I had this friend, pretty techy guy, who decided to switch to Linux. He was pretty determined, so I installed Kubuntu for him and tried to help him and explain the best way I could how to solve his problems on Linux. He was open-minded - I remember he tried to make Alpha Centauri work a whole night, with no intention on giving up. Whenever I could, I tried to help him; and he took my advices and stick to Linux for a while. Well, eventually, he finally gave up. Maybe I didn't try enough, or maybe he depended too much on Windows. I'm not sure. The thing is, if I would have tried harder, he would have probably ended using Linux today.
I think there's no chance for one to switch, unless he truly wants it. He may be lucky like me, clever enough to know what awaits and how to try and deal with it, or may need help from someone who has already been there and knows how to prepare a convert for this wonderful Linux world.
I was a Windows user for several years when I decided to switch to Linux, late 2005 or early 2006, can't recall exactly. I remember that on Windows I was always looking for legal software, and freeware alternatives to all those paid applications. I was not aware of the terms 'open-source' or 'free software' back then, but still looking and searching I bumped into Linux and decided to give it a try. First it was Red Hat 9 for a couple of days, then I discovered Ubuntu. After about one month of dual booting with Windows I finally made up my mind and wiped it out, leaving all the hard disk to a freshly new Ubuntu 5.10. I knew when I started that the transition will be tough for me; things are done differently on Linux then on Windows. And it's pretty hard to get unused with a way of doing things which was in my blood for about 6 years. But what made me stick to Linux and never return, what kept me getting used to all this new stuff and a new, different way of doing things, was the pure fact that I knew Linux will be different and I must have to make an effort, I understood that I'll have to learn most of the things again. And I was prepared to do it. From the start, Linux offered me flexibility and free choice, with no fear on using the software or sharing it using BitTorrent or Direct Connect. And it gave good results: I'm a happily and passionate Linux user for three years now, and I'd never go back. I can't imagine going back and leave all this behind.
I think the main reason most of the people try Linux and go back to Windows is that they aren't determined to make the switch. If something is done differently on Linux, they quickly jump to a conclusion that goes like 'This is not right, on Windows this is done the other way around. It's no good.' Or the eternal, endless and already legendary proposition which us, Linux users, are tired and bored of hearing, 'On Windows everything is easier'. Well, I usually smile now whenever I hear it or read it. Once you get used to something, it's hard to do it the other way around, especially if you're not determined to do it or at least give it a good try, not just 'this doesn't work, I go back'. This 'easier' stuff is so relative, and why do I think that? Well, to give you an example: I got used to rip flac files using the flac and oggenc command line tools, I also have several small Bash scripts to ease my work. For me, this method is the 'easiest' and fastest, maybe another person feels more comfortable using KAudioCreator, for example. Or some other GUI application.
I agree, when I first started there were many things which I didn't understand and which I felt that were not right. Believe it or not, it didn't seem logical to me that Linux allows two files with the names 'Music' and 'music' in the same directory. Was that because it really wasn't logical? Simple answer: no. It was because I was used that way in Windows. Or, to take another simple example, the lack of 'Apply' buttons in GNOME applications. I just felt like the options were not applied if I didn't have that button there. But I knew it's different, and I embraced it. I kept reading forums and articles, and many other tutorials; I started to love what I was learning, and the whole Linux as an OS together with the open-source development method.
Most of Windows users expect the change to be fast and smooth: they expect to find in Linux all they have in Windows; it's a known issue. When they find out it's not like that, all is over. Linux is no good and they go back to Windows. If games are not ported on Linux, it's no good; if drivers are not available for Linux, it's no good; if I can't receive files using my favourite IM protocol - then Linux is no good. Unfortunately this is pretty much what happens inside the mind of a long time Windows user trying Linux for the first time.
Windows and mainly closed-source applications drive to a strange mentality. There was a thread on the Battle for Wesnoth forums (a TBS game for Linux, Windows and Mac, licensed under the GPL) about some guy selling the game on CDs on eBay. Believe it or not, the guy was highly criticised by several players posting on that thread. The reason was 'he should ask for permission' or 'isn't this illegal?' Now, I really don't have to mention whether they were the Linux users or the Windows ones. Don't get me wrong: I'm not criticising the people, but the mentality behind.
I remember I had this friend, pretty techy guy, who decided to switch to Linux. He was pretty determined, so I installed Kubuntu for him and tried to help him and explain the best way I could how to solve his problems on Linux. He was open-minded - I remember he tried to make Alpha Centauri work a whole night, with no intention on giving up. Whenever I could, I tried to help him; and he took my advices and stick to Linux for a while. Well, eventually, he finally gave up. Maybe I didn't try enough, or maybe he depended too much on Windows. I'm not sure. The thing is, if I would have tried harder, he would have probably ended using Linux today.
I think there's no chance for one to switch, unless he truly wants it. He may be lucky like me, clever enough to know what awaits and how to try and deal with it, or may need help from someone who has already been there and knows how to prepare a convert for this wonderful Linux world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)