"It has come to this. Having failed to successfully attack Linux
on the basis of too many distributions and of not having enough
applications, the FUDmeisters are now coming after Linux for not
being easy enough to use. The "usability" experts -- the kind that
charge $40,000 a day in fees -- have proclaimed that the Linux
interface is just too different to actually use...."
"My point isn't to highlight mass ignorance of tractor-control
layouts, but to point out that usability is highly relative, and
why Brandt's statement is just too bizarre. No, a GNOME or KDE
desktop doesn't look like a Macintosh desktop, but anyone who has
used a Mac could easily use a typical GNOME or KDE installation.
The same goes for a Windows or CDE user. And you know what?
Netscape on Linux works a lot like Netscape on Windows or even
Internet Explorer on Windows. Corel WordPerfect for Linux works a
lot like Microsoft Word. And so on."
"But listen to the usability experts, and they'll tell you that
Linux is too difficult to use and could do with a dose of
simplicity. (This is essentially what Eazel is trying to tell the
Linux world, by the way.) But interface design is not advertising,
and while the best advertising has the clearest message simply
told, there's really no "best" interface for a computer or the
"best" design for a Web page. According to the usability experts,
the best Web page has a striking design and just enough data to
draw out a user. Of course, Yahoo -- with its data-rich text-based
interface -- pretty much blows the usability experts out of the
water. (Come to think of it, a usability expert would have a heart
attack after seeing the Linux Today home page as well.)"
Some of the products that appear on this site are from companies from which QuinStreet receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site including, for example, the order in which they appear. QuinStreet does not include all companies or all types of products available in the marketplace.