How might one meaningfully separate issues of familiarity and true ease of use?
I've set up computers running GNU/Linux for older individuals with no real tech expertise. They didn't know if/how/why they were different than MS machines. (And there's the added bonus of relative immunity to viruses... Yes, they exist. But really? Have you encountered one in the wild ever?)
This is rehashing some familar arguments. When it fails in MS, it's acceptable, we're used to it. Whereas when it happens with GNU/Linux, it must mean GNU/Linux isn't ready for the desktop.
I quit using MS at home about 7 years ago. When I use MS now I find several things a bit confusing and annoying. Programs seem to be installed in arbitrary places. Finding software and drivers is a bit of an Easter egg hunt. Many people are used to it, so they don't complain. I find signed repositories of quality software to be much more comforting,reassuring,trustworthy, and preferable.
I've had sound cards that worked out of the box with Linux require a driver search in MS.
I've had MS machines on the LAN that could not / would not work with the network printer (and there was an in house IT MS guy who didn't get it working either).
As to whom one might recommend Linux...
For "grandma" - GNU/Linux - make sure webpages, Java, Adobe, and multimedia plugins work and forget about it.
For "Aunt Jane" -- well, maybe she's more familiar with Windows. You may hear the incessant "Where's Windows Media Player?", "I miss IE", or "This website that requires ActiveX just won't work, what's wrong with this program you put on my computer???"
There are a lot of conflating variables - to whom can one turn? what do ones friends, acquaintances use? Does one cope better with commonplace problems that others accept out of hand better than novel errors that lie outside of one's experience?
To meaningfully discuss this, it seems that one would need some sort of metric to differentiate, tally, and rank ease of use factors in contrast to familiarity/acceptance factors.
How might one meaningfully separate issues of familiarity and true ease of use?
I've set up computers running GNU/Linux for older individuals with no real tech expertise. They didn't know if/how/why they were different than MS machines. (And there's the added bonus of relative immunity to viruses... Yes, they exist. But really? Have you encountered one in the wild ever?)
This is rehashing some familar arguments. When it fails in MS, it's acceptable, we're used to it. Whereas when it happens with GNU/Linux, it must mean GNU/Linux isn't ready for the desktop.
I quit using MS at home about 7 years ago. When I use MS now I find several things a bit confusing and annoying. Programs seem to be installed in arbitrary places. Finding software and drivers is a bit of an Easter egg hunt. Many people are used to it, so they don't complain. I find signed repositories of quality software to be much more comforting,reassuring,trustworthy, and preferable.
I've had sound cards that worked out of the box with Linux require a driver search in MS.
I've had MS machines on the LAN that could not / would not work with the network printer (and there was an in house IT MS guy who didn't get it working either).
As to whom one might recommend Linux...
For "grandma" - GNU/Linux - make sure webpages, Java, Adobe, and multimedia plugins work and forget about it.
For "Aunt Jane" -- well, maybe she's more familiar with Windows. You may hear the incessant "Where's Windows Media Player?", "I miss IE", or "This website that requires ActiveX just won't work, what's wrong with this program you put on my computer???"
There are a lot of conflating variables - to whom can one turn? what do ones friends, acquaintances use? Does one cope better with commonplace problems that others accept out of hand better than novel errors that lie outside of one's experience?
To meaningfully discuss this, it seems that one would need some sort of metric to differentiate, tally, and rank ease of use factors in contrast to familiarity/acceptance factors.