[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: About the goals of Indy


I have revised Bud's revision with an eye on your comments.  Although I have based my revised
revision :-) on your original structure, I feel that there is a certain amount of redundancy, and
that a different approach may send out the same message in a more coherent manner.  I'll think
about it and see if I have time today to propose a different structure.

JF Martinez wrote:

> > From: "Bud Beckman" <n7su@micron.net>
> Here comes your revision with comments.

Herewith the revised commented revision:

What is Indy?

More and more often new Linux users are not the typical Unix user, with years of practical
experience and training in the details of system administration.  The needs of the home or hobby
user have been ignored.  Most of us learned how to use Linux on our own, often administering
multiple computers from one. Solutions that are appropriate for well trained people are
insufficient for the novice, and news group responses, like "Read the FAQ/man page/etc", are not
helpful for someone who doesn't even know how to use a command line text editor.  Home users
typically don't have a permanent LAN/Internet access, but configuration of a dial-up connection to
allow access to e-mail and newsgroups is still a hit or miss proposition.

At home, the novice should not need to re-boot to Windows to connect to the Internet.  And at work,
setting up network shares should be intuitively supported to allow the penetration of Linux into
Windows dominated office environments, including adequately supporting DHCP handling and not
assuming that the Linux machine is the master server on the network.

Distributions seem to treat all users as hackers.  In fact, more and more marketers, musicians,
professors of literature and other non-technical people are using Linux.  These individuals' skills
and needs are vastly different from those of the traditional Unix user.

Obsolete programs continue to find their way into distributions due to tradition, or through the
lobbying of a vocal minority of Unix users and special interest groups, while far better and easier
programs remain in obscurity and infrequently used.

All these problems have a common origin: typical distributions treat Linux as Unix without noticing
that its low cost allows it to be used by the non-Unix public for tasks and in contexts where Unix
has never been used.

We are tired of this.  We think that it is time for us, the new Linux users, to take charge and
build our own distribution, paying attention to our needs and our problems.  We will no longer
accept solutions imposed by the aristocracy of the Unix world, or based on the obsolete traditions
of many distributions.  This is Indy.

Brian Wiens