> On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 18:24 +0000, Oliver Kullmann wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 12:58:30PM -0500, John A. Sullivan III wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 09:01 -0500, Katheryne Draven wrote:
>> > > On 1/23/11, David C. Rankin <drankinatty@...> wrote:
>> > <snip>
>> > > I think we need to focus first on the parent directories (Office or
>> > > Desktop Publishing, Tools, Utilities, etc etc) then work on the
>> > > subdirectories. I think the apps should help us determine what
>> > > subdirectories are needed. I urge the use of proper computer
>> > > terminology, avoiding the use of "MS Terms". We should mean to
>> > > education as well, after all knowledge is freedom (among other good
>> > > things).
>> > >
>> > > With regard to "mytools", it smacks too much as a homage to MS, with
>> > > its "My this" and "My that", but in the end its not my decision. Its
>> > > clearly something Trinity as a whole must make. I do urge against
>> the
>> > > use of MS terminology. I understand the belief that if its familiar,
>> > > it will make the use more comfortable. That, however, has not been
>> my
>> > > eXPerience :). Users who leave windows for Linux cringe when they
>> see
>> > > references to it. They're finally free of their master, why would
>> they
>> > > wish to build a shrine to it? The use of MS terms, also reinforces
>> the
>> > > belief that Linux is just a second rate Windos wannabe.
>> > >
>> > > OH BLAST! Where did this soapbox come from??!!
>> > >
>> > <snip>
>> > <grin> I'd be a little careful of the soap box, though.  I have little
>> > respect for Microsoft practices but, as someone on the front lines of
>> > Windows -> Linux conversions, familiarity is critically important.
>> > People have businesses to run and could care less about educating
>> > themselves (rightfully).  They just want to be able to drive the car
>> > without knowing how it works.  So, where something is functional
>> (folder
>> > vs. directory) we might be able to make the case (frankly, folder is
>> > probably more familiar to those who consider a directory structure
>> > analogous to a filing cabinet while directory makes much more sense to
>> > IT types) but, where it's simply a name, we could call it lampshade
>> for
>> > all I care but keeping things familiar remove possible stumbling
>> blocks
>> > to adoption. Office politics can be mighty powerful and if the
>> opponents
>> > are all crying, "it's all different and we don't have time to learn
>> it,"
>> > they can turn the tide on a conversion effort.  I vote for familiarity
>> > even if it makes me cringe.  Thanks - John
>> >
>>
>> I think the KDE 3 -> KDE 4 disaster has much to do with a kind of
>> take-over
>> by ms-centric thinking. Sure, hard to quantify, but with KDE 3 I always
>> had the
>> feeling it moves in principle into the right direction, while with KDE 4
>> this
>> basic trust is completely lost (on a daily basic --- I have to use it
>> under
>> various circumstances).
>>
>> More concretely, names like "my ..." are infantil. Anything which is
>> worth
>> something is about doing the right thing, not about doing something to
>> gain power
>> (and "keepings things familiar etc." is basically that). Sure people can
>> go
>> for the power, but was that the starting point of Trinity (I hoped it
>> would
>> have something to do with the "right thing")?
>>
>> If the argument is about what that "right thing" actually is, sure,
>> that's not
>> so easy, but just relating to the status quo and following it is just
>> opportunism,
>> which even pays out only for very few (the rest fights for the coins
>> thrown into
>> the pack).
>>
>> My hope of Trinity would be that it would be a bit of a radical
>> spearhead
>> (at least radical in the sense of quality, and in the sense of not
>> giving up
>> on what KDE 3 achieved).
> <snip>
> I would like to politely disagree while admitting that many others on
> the list may be better qualified than I to address this issue.  However,
> my impression of why KDE4 has been such a problem has not been the MS
> imitation but their prioritization of developer interests over user
> interests - a neat new paradigm, a fun playground, but something that
> should have been pursued as R&D while not abandoning the production
> KDE3.  I think the understandable response from the KDE devs was they
> don't have the time for both and their interested in development and not
> production support - hence the importance of Trinity as a Desktop
> Environment that focuses on production usability rather than fun and
> novel paradigms.
>
> I agree that "my . . " is infantile.  I don't like it at all and I feel
> stupid using it.  However, if we impose our opinions of what computing
> should be on end users, we risk driving into the same ditch as the KDE4
> devs.  In some cases, we really do have to think for our users and make
> decisions in spite of them.  But, where it is not critical, I would hope
> we would sacrifice our "purism" which is technically correct and elegant
> for what is more likely to make Trinity desktops face the least
> resistance to adoption.
>
> Again, I don't want to set off a war and am perfectly willing to defer.
> Just wanted to share my opinion after dealing with lots of end users who
> struggle during conversions and trying to remove as many obstacles for
> them as possible even if it smacks of Microsoftisms.  Who knows, even
> though we approach it from different directions, we may all look at the
> end product and say, "that's just what I meant!" Thanks - John
>

Without jumping into the fray, may I ask for suggestions as to what text
should replace My Computer, My Network Places, etc?  I am open to renaming
them if it makes sense.

Thanks!

Tim