I am tired of hearing and reading that GNU/Linux is not ready for the "regular" or "normal" user. Self proclaimed experts and pundits insist that these users can not, or will not, use GNU/Linux. They give all kinds of reasons for this. I say that most of these reasons exist only in the minds of these experts and pundits.
My first computer was a Tandy TRS-80 Model I. Since then, I owned many different computers prior to the first IBM PC that I bought. I have worked with Mini, Micro, and Mainframe computers and their users since 1976. I have written and installed software, designed, built and installed hardware, and trained users on many products over the years.
When I first started working with computer users, most of them were using dumb terminals attached to a Mini or Mainframe computer. The computers were used for accounting and process jobs not for personal productivity. Word processing was done with typewriters.
When PC's started gaining ground in the business environment, they were used as replacement terminals that had word processing, and spreadsheet capability. About this time some of the products that my employer supplied to clients started having the capability of being interfacing to computers. One company, Kronos, came out with computerized employee time clocks that could be tied to PC's for reports and management of the database. PC's ran DOS, a command line operating system.
As PC use increased in the corporate world, standards were established for software and hardware within branches and divisions. Most of our clients used DOS 3.3, Novell Netware, Wordperfect, Lotus 123 and dBase as their standard products. A lot of training was done on these products and users were encouraged to learn as much as they could about them. Keep in mind that the command line was the only way to interact with these programs.
Upgrades were common and frequent for both hardware and software. Kronos was no exception to this. They went from stand alone clocks that interfaced to the computers to PC based systems that did all processing and calculations on the computer. We did more upgrades than new installs.
With every upgrade, users had to learn new techniques for accomplishing their daily tasks. I always learn as much as I can about new and upgraded applications. I do this so I can develop training materials that focus on making the transition easier for users. I highlight things that are easier and features that are new. This keeps the user interested in learning instead of having them thinking about things that no longer work the way they have become accustomed to.
A few years ago my corporate clients started upgrading their hardware and software to new standards. Windows 95 and Microsoft Office were replacing the old standard platform. This meant that users were having to be trained all over again since these products were very different from what they were used to. Kronos software, at this point, was still DOS based and had to be installed on the Win95 machines.
Users, many of whom I had been working with for 10 years or more, would ask me if I thought they were going to like the new systems. I always told them that once they got used to it, they would wonder how they ever got anything done without it. That, combined with training that made tasks seem easier with the new system, kept my customers happy with the upgrades. I never had a user complain that things were worse with the upgrade than before.
But, not everyone that was doing these upgrades had the same views I did. I was called in to a site that someone else had done the upgrade at. This user was very unhappy with the upgrade and was very vocal about her displeasure. Many of the other sites owned by this corporation were holding off on the upgrade because of this. This user was known for being very computer savvy and was often called on for assistance by users at other sites. I made an appointment to see if I could solve the problem. She only agreed on the condition that if I could not solve the problems within 2 weeks, we would put her old system back in place. Needless to say, the pressure was on because that would put a stop to the other sites upgrading.
When I went to the site, I first went through the software configuration and found that everything was setup properly. I then sat down with the user and discussed the upgrade process to see if I could determine what went wrong and what needed to be done to get it right. The first thing she told me was that the person doing the upgrade had a lot of trouble getting the software to run on her new machine. It seems that was the first time this tech had tried to install software on Win95 and he was not familiar with the operating system at all. He spent most of his time on the phone with his boss trying to get the software installed, then his boss wound up having to meet him on site to get it working. That was a bad start and planted the idea in the users mind that Win95 was going to be hard to use. The next thing she told me was the real root of her displeasure with the upgrade. She had spent many hours of her personal time learning to write macros in Lotus 123. She had several custom macros that generated custom reports using the data from Kronos Timekeeper Central. She had come to count on these reports to do her job. Those macros would not run in Excel and 123 was not installed on her new computer.
Armed with this information, I met with her boss and the IS director to outline a strategy. I proposed starting over with one of the computers that had not been deployed yet. We would put it on her desk and let her see that installing the Kronos software was not difficult. Then we would install her copy of Lotus 123 on that computer and I would train her in using the new systems. At first they were hesitant to install 123 since that was no longer the corporate standard. I convinced them that once she was trained on Excel, and had time to learn how to generate her reports in it, she would probably be willing to give up 123. I also suggested that they make Win95 and Microsoft Office available to her on her home computer since she seemed to be the type of person that liked to learn new things at her on pace. They agreed and we setup the new system the next day.
Two weeks later, she abandoned 123 and started using Excel for all her reports. She also became one of the biggest advocates and a great reference account for our upgrades. I was soon swamped with requests from other sites for the upgrade.
The Important Points:
Ok, that was long and probably meaningless for most readers. But, the important points are easy.
- Users have been changing operating systems, software and hardware for as long as computers have been around.
- Users do not mind learning new things if they see an advantage to it in the long run.
- Most users love to learn new things and really like it if they are one of the first in their group to learn something.
- Training and perception are the keys to successful change.
- The person installing and training on new systems and software must know it so well that they make it look easy.
- If there are problems, they should be resolved without making it look like it is difficult to overcome issues.
Am I saying that GNU/Linux can be used in every situation? No, I realize that there are some applications that can not be replaced by FOSS software today. But, I think that these are the exception not the rule. Most desktop users could run GNU/Linux without issues today. In fact, I suspect that most users would not think it was anything more than an upgrade if their system were running GNU/Linux and OpenOffice tomorrow. I have helped switch many users to GNU/Linux and, so far, I have had only one who insisted on switching back to Windows. In cases where a need exists for a Windows application that will not run under Wine, I set up a machine running Windows with VNC server and create links that open VNC viewer to that machine.
So, why are companies still not willing to lower the cost of software for their users? I believe the major reason is that we have far too many "EXPERTS" telling them that GNU/Linux is not ready for their users. Those folks are getting the press. These are some of the things they say and my response to them:
- They say that users are familiar with Windows, and accustomed to doing things within the graphical environment. They further claim that GNU/Linux would make users go to the command line far too often. Remember that all computers had to use the command line not so long ago and users worked with it just fine. But, with the excellent window managers available for GNU/Linux systems today there is no need for most users to go to the command line for the tasks they do in most cases.
- They say that Windows software will not run on GNU/Linux systems. So what! Software written for Macs will not run on Windows systems. Software written for GNU/Linux will not run on Windows systems or Macs, for the most part. Most applications can be replaced by FOSS applications and many Windows applications will run under Wine. For those few apps that do not fall in either of those groups, run a system with Windows and access it by VNC.
- They say that installing software on a GNU/Linux system is difficult. In fact, this is the one I saw today that made me want to address this issue. An "EXPERT" claimed that you have to compile software yourself to add anything to a GNU/Linux system. I think the people saying this spend way too much time indoors and have not seen a real GNU/Linux distribution in far too long. In Windows, you usually have to run an installer to load new software. Even autostart CDs usually require some user input, even if it is just to accept the license terms. With most modern GNU/Linux distributions, you select the application in a graphical software management program, tell it to install and it does it with minimal user intervention. As a bonus, installing new software very seldom requires the machine be rebooted. How many times have you done that in Windows? Then there are operating system and software upgrades. With GNU/Linux, you tell the same software management program to upgrade your distribution and it does it while you continue working. No reboot or interruption of work required. How many Windows users can say that they did an major upgrade to Windows without having to reboot several times?
- They say that hardware support is lacking in GNU/Linux. Ok, so some hardware is not supported. Most hardware used in a corporate environment is supported. And there is alternative hardware available that is supported for most of those items that are not, yet, supported. Use some of the money saved on license fees to replace hardware. While we are there, hardware requirements are much lower for a GNU/Linux system so there is money to be saved on replacement computers as well.
With all the advantages of GNU/Linux, why are companies not flocking to it en masse? I think that it is because they are scared off by all the press that tells them it is not ready for that environment. I find no other reason for them to continue to ignore the benefits of the platform.
To overcome that, we need to stop highlighting the reasons not to change. All advocates for GNU/Linux need to stress the positive benefits of the platform. We should point out the improved security, the reduced problem of lockups and reboots, the availability and ease of installation of software. Some other items to bring up are; lower cost of hardware, easier upgrades to software and the operating system, fewer virus threats and less damage from them, and software that is peer reviewed by thousands of programmers who are quick to point out any security risk or flaws.
I believe that any multiple site corporation that works with a GNU/Linux professional to convert a test site, will soon convert all of their sites. In the process I think most of them will find the savings to be larger than they ever imagined.
If you are the professional called in to help a company decide if GNU/Linux is right for them, please take the time to do a complete evaluation of their current software and hardware. Suggest a strategy for upgrading that provides everything that the users need to continue doing their work with minimal down time and training. Instead of telling them that they can not do things they have become accustomed to, teach them to accomplish the same results with the replacement systems. If proper surveys and planning are done prior to installing, I think that GNU/Linux systems will thrive on the desktops of many more users. As that base grows, users will start wanting GNU/Linux systems at home. That will lead to more supported hardware and software for the growing market.
What we do not need are quick installs with no user training. That leads to more bad press about how GNU/Linux was tested and failed. Lets do it right and be sure that the stories getting published are the success stories.
For a follow up added on 3/20/08 click HERE.
0 comments:
Post a Comment