Conrad Knauer napisał(a): >> The problem: >> - Users coming from Windows (and in general beginners) want installation >> of applications to be as easy as possible. Download, Next, Next, Done >> kind of experience. > > Individual DEB files installed with Gdebi provide this sort of thing > currently (e.g. try http://www.getdeb.net/)
Yes, but many applications consist of more than one package. Example from the top of http://www.getdeb.net/: X-Moto 0.3.2 Download: xmoto (1.0 Mb) , xmoto-data (6.9 Mb) User must install 2 packages, in proper order, or the installation will fail. It also does not support security upgrades as you install deb, not repository. By combining http://www.getdeb.net/ with One Click Installer you can create great online software repository, exactly what I hope to become true. So thanks for pointing it out, I will contact them to see if they are interested. >> - If you start talking about command line and adding keys, repositories, >> etc. you have lost them. They will not understand and they will not >> _want_ to dig into technical details. > > It sounds like this step should be improved then; maybe a GUI tool to > add the most popular repositories? (e.g. I added Kubuntu's > "kde-latest", Medibuntu, Wine, Miro, Opera, VirtualBox and Google) Average user is not interested in "repository" concept, as I tried to explain in my post. They do not want understand why it is needed and they should not be forced to. It is technical detail. >> - There is plenty of packaging formats used on Linux and average users >> do not want to know the differences between them, they just want to >> install application. > > In my experience, almost everything I ever wanted has been available > as a DEB. You miss my point. There are DEBs for Debian based distros, RPMs for RedHat based distros, ebuilds for Gentoo, etc. User does not want to be shown a page: "please choose your packaging format: deb, rpm, ebuild, etc." because he does not understand what is the difference and he does not care. It should work. >> Package installation applications (Synaptic, Adept) and apt repositories >> do not solve the problem for the following reasons: >> 1. Repositories must be added manually and this exceeds skills of >> average Windows user. Keys must be added also and repositories updated. >> Too many steps, too difficult. > > Solve this! :-) > > Seriously, this is the problem that needs a good solution. Well, I have solved it in One Click Installer - it automatically adds repository and key, then installs selected packages. >> 2. Users are not used to going to package management application to >> install application. They want to click link on application web page, >> download, run, Next, Next, etc. > > Ack! > > What you are describing, as a general practice rather than as the > occasional procedure for a DEB, is a return to the ugly and slow way > of doing things that I left far behind in Windows. Please no! > Synaptic (and similar, e.g. gnome-app-install) in Ubuntu work so > nicely with so little fuss. You are free to continue using Synaptic if it suits you, One Click Installer files do not affect that. >> 3. Package management applications are too bloated with features and >> contain thousands of applications. > > Generally speaking, if a program has good defaults, a user won't mess > with more advanced features... Synaptic doesn't seem overly complex > to me though. Maybe I am just very used to it :) Also, complaining > that there are too many apps in Synaptic is like complaining that > there are too many books in a library! ;) I am not complaining that there are too many books, but that it is not convenient for users to find them according to their criteria. And no - adding search with Boolean operators is not what I am talking about, it just isn't usable by average users. > Do remember that "average users" will probably NOT install an > alternative media player... Though for basic software installation I > think a site like http://ubuntuguide.org gives some good tips. Exactly. They install apps recommended in software reviews, guides, by people in forums, etc. > >> Users want to have >> some context - other users comments, grades, etc. > > gnome-app-install partially does this (popularity stars). If they > really want to research a program, users should look on the forums or > do a Google search. Grading apps can be rather subjective, ne? Exactly. There should be more than one place where apps can be graded with different angles - sites for begginers, sites for French users (with taking into account quality/lack of translation), sites for graphic designers, etc, etc. > Also, > think of how big the comments database for the ~20K Ubuntu packages > would be unless you really moderated it... in which case it would look > rather like the current description I suspect :) That's why it should be split between many web sites, each with different scope, users, moderators, etc. >> 4. Application descriptions are in English (I know about DDTP, but AFAIK >> it does not work). Many users do not know English and they want >> information about applications in their language, on native portals with >> applications (like localized Tucows). > > [...] http://www.flickr.com/photos/annoiato/275701797/ > > I would clearly describe that as a bug, yes, but something like DDTP > should be the solution. Should be but I it is not, and I think it will never be, because it is centralized. Descriptions/grades/etc. cannot be centralized because each group of people has different criteria. And translation must follow descriptions. >> 6. If user is using some other distribution than Debian-based he is even >> more in pain, he has to know what package format to use (DEB, RPM, TGZ, >> Ebuild, ...), what channel (APT, yum, Yast, ZMD, etc.), what distro, >> which version. > > Um... how does this affect Ubuntu? It affects Ubuntu in this way that when you go to some application site (let's say Skype), for Linux version you are shown a choice of package formats/distros, while for Windows you have one/two installers to choose. If you start looking further you will see that this should be solved for all Linux distros, not just Ubuntu. > I note, later on in your e-mail > that you have in mind basically a front-end for just about any package > management system. That's one way towards getting a unified Linux > package management system, though Mark Shuttleworth comments that "so > many divergent packaging systems in the free software world (and I > include the various *bsd's) is a waste of time and energy" I couldn't agree more. But I cannot solve the problem of common packaging format, so I am not trying to. The problem of common packaging format is important from application developer view, because they have to create many packages. I am trying to solve the problem from user point of view, so that he does not have to choose from that plethora of formats/distributions/versions. > Also, this is important: > > --- > Packaging is also one area where we can definitively improve on the > real user experience for most people who treat computers as a job not > a passion. It's a strategic tool in the battle between proprietary and > open approaches. I often think that the proprietary software world's > way of distributing software is one of its biggest weaknesses - an > Achilles Heel that we should be exploiting to the full extent > possible. I'm often asked why Linux can't make it easy to "write > something like Microsoft Installer, or Installshield". That's the > wrong rabbithole, Alice. Linux can make it so when you dream of > databases, PostgreSQL or MySQL are "just there" and "just work". > That's a much nicer experience - we should make the most of it. See above, it is about packaging formats, not user experience. >> Now compare it to installation on Windows - user goes to Google, types >> "movie player download" or browses some application catalog like Tucows, >> selects one with best reviews, downloads installer (in most cases he has >> to choose between installer for Windows 98/ME and installer for Windows >> 2000/XP), 3 clicks and he is done. > > How is this really different from installing a DEB with gdebi? It works only on Debian/Ubuntu, only for single deb packages which do not require additional dependencies. And no security fixes, as this is not repository. Krzysztof Lichota
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
