Weekly Edition
Return to the Distributions page
| |||||||||||||
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer)
There is lots of Ubuntu buzz right now due to the release of Hardy, but the Content Consumer weblog has an article with wider applicability as well. If the year of the Linux desktop is ever going to happen, usability by non-technical folks is a requirement. One way to measure the usability is to sit your girlfriend in front of a Linux desktop and see what problems she encounters trying to do some normal desktop tasks. "Erins knowledge of computers is limited to word processors, spreadsheets, Photoshop and a reasonable amount of browsing on the Web. Fairly standard stuff for a university philosophy student. All I did to the system (before leaving Erin at the log-in screen) was to install it and create a user account for her. She had no problems logging in, and loved the stylised heron background. Then I gave her one by one the tasks Id set her. I didnt give her any help at all." (seen at Slashdot)
Update: As can be seen in the comments, this item offended some of our readers. I offer my deepest apologies to anyone who was offended by it. That was certainly not the intent. (Log in to post comments)
Failure Posted Apr 28, 2008 13:58 UTC (Mon) by elanthis (guest, #6227) [Link] This will not succeed for me. :) My girlfriend wants to: play WoW play Oblivion play Age of Conan etc. Linux usability is fine. Compatibility with games is the problem. Even Vista had/has market troubles due to incompatibilities with older Windows games - why would Linux be any different? Wine needs to be installed by default and needs to work for a wide variety of games. The "basic desktop stuff" people do pretty much equates to a Browser (and Firefox on Linux works as well as Firefox on Windows, although Flash is more of a pain in the ass on Linux and is, sadly, pretty "vital" to most home users) and Office (and OpenOffice.org's usability is Good Enough in most cases - same as it is on Windows, at any rate).
Failure Posted Apr 28, 2008 15:47 UTC (Mon) by chris144 (guest, #30028) [Link] Just get Cedega. Works very nicely. The $5 a month is a much better investment than paying M$ tax... http://www.transgaming.com/products/cedega/
Failure Posted Apr 28, 2008 16:07 UTC (Mon) by wertigon (guest, #42963) [Link] Or, just get Wine and save those $5/month. Chances are your game will work right out of the box, with a few minor hitches.
Crossover Games Posted Apr 28, 2008 16:24 UTC (Mon) by southey (subscriber, #9466) [Link] Alternatively use Codeweavers Crossover games that officially supports WOW and many others.
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 28, 2008 14:16 UTC (Mon) by dthurston (subscriber, #4603) [Link] What a sexist way to frame the "naive-user" experiment. There are plenty of female geeks who would have no issue with Ubuntu, and plenty of clueless male users.
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 28, 2008 14:25 UTC (Mon) by kripkenstein (subscriber, #43281) [Link] I agree this article was treading on borderline-sexist material. However, the article itself (and not the writeups of it) isn't sexist - the guy talks about himself and his girlfriend, two specific individuals. He makes no general claims that girlfriends are a good way to test usability, it seems that he just happens to have a girlfriend who isn't a computer geek, and tested her on Ubuntu. At least that's how I saw the article.
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 28, 2008 14:42 UTC (Mon) by jake (editor, #205) [Link] > What a sexist way to frame the "naive-user" experiment.Believe it or no, I tried to frame it in a non-sexist manner. Out of curiosity, if the article had been about someone's boyfriend, and the blurb text have changed the gender-specific words appropriately, would it still have been sexist? The point is that the author chose someone who was not 'naïve' about using computers but didn't know Linux and that person happened to be a girlfriend. I certainly meant no disrespect to anyone, female or male. jake
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 28, 2008 15:16 UTC (Mon) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link] "One way to measure the usability is to sit your girlfriend in front of a Linux desktop and see what problems she encounters trying to do some normal desktop tasks." That sentence assumes a few things about the reader and the reader's assumed girlfriend, and that's what's sexist. You assume that the reader is a straight male (or a lesbian, though it's unlikely you assumed that), that the girlfriend isn't already using Linux, and that the girlfriend would encounter problems trying to do some "normal desktop tasks". If the article had been about someone's boyfriend, would you have written this? "One way to measure the usability is to sit your boyfriend in front of a Linux desktop and see what problems she encounters trying to do some normal desktop tasks." I have serious doubts that you would have. And if you had written that, you'd probably get complaints about assuming that the reader is female or has a boyfriend. In short, don't assume the gender of your reader, nor the technical abilities of the reader's partner.
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 28, 2008 15:40 UTC (Mon) by jake (editor, #205) [Link] > That sentence assumes a few things about the reader and the reader's > assumed girlfriend, and that's what's sexist. That sentence, in isolation, could be seen as sexist I suppose. In the context of the entire blurb, though, I think it is fairly clear. I am trying to report on what went on in an article elsewhere. The author (who I assume is male, based on the photo, but don't know), is who the 'your' refers to here, but it can certainly be misread. I might very well have used the 'boyfriend/he' construction had the article been written that way, fwiw. jake
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 28, 2008 15:56 UTC (Mon) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link]
"The author (who I assume is male, based on the photo, but don't know), is
who the 'your' refers to here, but it can certainly be misread."
Then you should have written it in third person ("his"), not second-person
("your").
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 28, 2008 15:52 UTC (Mon) by alankila (subscriber, #47141) [Link] So if the article had said "One way to measure usability is to sit my girlfriend ..." then it would have been ok?
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 28, 2008 16:07 UTC (Mon) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link] "So if the article had said "One way to measure usability is to sit my girlfriend ..." then it would have been ok?" Sure, if it's ok with your girlfriend. :-)
Sexist forumlation Posted May 1, 2008 14:53 UTC (Thu) by Duncan (guest, #6647) [Link] > You assume that the reader is a > straight male (or a lesbian, though > it's unlikely you assumed that), Actually, that's /your/ assumption. There's certainly cultural reference for what I'd call the "Oprah-atic" "girlfriend", that is, as Oprah might say on her TV show, referring to a female guest, to explain the pop-culture reference. I've similarly seen gay friends refer to female friends as "girlfriend", certainly without implication of non-platonic relationship or intent -- rather the opposite in fact. Further, there's nothing in the article stating specifically that "girlfriend" referred to a traditional straight non-platonic relationship. Thus, the assumption is as much on the part of the reader as it is the author. Common cultural assumption it may be, but there's enough other common cultural usage of the term as well that an assumption it remains.
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 29, 2008 6:49 UTC (Tue) by ekj (guest, #1524) [Link] You may have tried -- you failed. Seriously. If I "sat my girlfriend down" in front of a computer running Ubuntu and tried to "see what problems she encountered", the result would -not- be a useful measure of usability for non-nerds. Instead, it'd be an insult, given that most people with a doctorate in informatics and 10 years of experience running, installing, configuring and programming under various unixen are more than capable of using Ubuntu. That is some time ago, that I had a girlfriend. If I tried it today, with my wife instead, the result would be similar, though my wife is a economics nerd not a CompSci nerd. So your statement is not only sexist, it is FALSE. It assumes that all girlfriends are non-technical computer-users. Which is false and sexist as a general assumption even though it is true for -some- girlfriends. (and some boyfriends)
Sexist forumlation Posted May 1, 2008 9:44 UTC (Thu) by jospoortvliet (subscriber, #33164) [Link] I'm sorry, but that's a bit unfair. Sure, there are women who are pretty good with computers - but in general, they aren't. How many female geeks do you see at FOSDEM? So if this would go for 80% of the female/geek combinations, I think an article like this wouldn't be bad at all. I know several developers who actually do put their girlfriend behind their desktop to test usability (I know I used to) and I don't see why it is sexist.
Sexist forumlation Posted May 2, 2008 4:20 UTC (Fri) by ekj (guest, #1524) [Link] That's simple. It is sexist to formulate oneself as if women are in GENERAL poor with computers even if the AVERAGE skill of women may be lower than the average skill of males. It is an insult to those women who are good with computers. It also -DISCOURAGES- women from becoming more involved with computers, because it sends the strong signal that this is the normal state of affairs. Read this: http://cacahuate.livejournal.com/518686.html It's a completely equivalent comment, from the photography-community (of which I'm also part) see if you can spot the problem. I get the same in reverse since I spend time off work taking care of my kids (a 3 year old and baby twins) People give me praise on HELPING my wife. Which infuriates me -- it assumes that by default this is HER responsibility, and anything I do is simply ASSISTANCE to her primary role. Which is plain bullshit. Nobody has EVER commended my wife on being such as nice HELPER to me when -she- is the one to take care of them.... Words matter. I am absolutely 100% positive that our editor didn't mean to come off sexist. I'm also 100% certain that he considers tech-skilled girls a GOOD thing, and indeed would love to have MORE of them. There are reasons, several reasons, why that isn't the case though, and comments such as this one is one of those reasons.
Sexist forumlation Posted May 2, 2008 6:20 UTC (Fri) by jospoortvliet (subscriber, #33164) [Link] You've got a point. So the issue should be formulated different - more like "As most girlfriends tend to be less geeky and computer-trained than their code-writing boyfriends, they can be very helpful in analyzing the usability of user interfaces".
Sexist forumlation Posted May 2, 2008 7:46 UTC (Fri) by ekj (guest, #1524) [Link] Why state even that ? It's irrelevant to the topic at hand, and as far as I see it serves no useful purpose to point out repeatedly the nongeekiness of many females. Why not simply say: "One way to measure the usability is to sit a less technically savy friend or relative in front of a Linux desktop, and see what problems are encountered" Is there some reason the -sex- of this friend is relevant to the topic at hand at all ? The relevant part is that the tester should be someone with less technical experience. So why not just SAY that then, rather than pointlessly and insultingly replacing "technically unskilled" with "girlfriend" ?
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 28, 2008 14:44 UTC (Mon) by gabba (guest, #31909) [Link] This comment betrays an interesting preconception, namely that the inability to use a bad user interface reflects poorly on the user. It does not.
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 28, 2008 15:49 UTC (Mon) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link] There's nothing here about "an inability to use a bad user interface", nor even about "reflecting poorly on the user". What is here is an assumption that the reader (a) has a girlfriend who's (b) unfamiliar with Linux. Now when you consider the fact that there are plenty of female LWN readers, and plenty of girlfriends who are familiar with doing everyday tasks on Linux, such assumptions are sexist. For the most part, the linked article doesn't make such assumptions, and talks only about the writer's experience with *his* girlfriend.
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 28, 2008 17:08 UTC (Mon) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] Yes. The botch is the sentence "One way to measure the usability is to sit your girlfriend in front of a Linux desktop and see what problems she encounters trying to do some normal desktop tasks." That isn't supported by the article, which described a very specific situation and a specific girlfriend, and made no sexist generalizations.Had LWN written "One way to measure the usability is to sit a friend who is unfamiliar with Linux in front of a Linux desktop and see what problems she encounters trying to do some normal desktop tasks", then we wouldn't have had this flame war, and it's a surprising screwup to see on LWN, which has had sharp female Linux experts on staff since the beginning.
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 28, 2008 21:45 UTC (Mon) by sdalley (subscriber, #18550) [Link] All this officious vicarious "sexist! waaah!" indignation on behalf of some imaginary offended party, is getting rather tedious ...
Sexist formulation Posted Apr 29, 2008 0:49 UTC (Tue) by amcpherson (subscriber, #44132) [Link] It's not an "imaginary offended" party. Of course this title is sexist. You can dismiss it as "one writer's experience" but it's building a stereotype, one that is certainly still in play in this community and that keeps a lot of women from participating in it. That offends real people. Articles like this, and defensive and dismissive comments by LWN readers, contribute to these stereotypes. Perhaps some people, as evidenced by these comments, don't care about that since they do not encounter the condescension personally, but I know others do care, since it limits participation and code/bug reporting back into the community.
Sexist formulation Posted Apr 29, 2008 2:38 UTC (Tue) by jake (editor, #205) [Link] > Of course this title is sexist. I'm sorry, but this is just over the top. The title is sexist because a person on their blog referred to the gender of someone they used to test the usability of Linux? This blog posting had interesting points and no sexism in my opinion. If mentioning gender at all is sexism, we have all lost. It in no way denigrates women, nor does it paint them all with the same brush. I guess I can see how my lame blurb can be construed as sexist, but I think that is even a stretch. Can we look for people who are trying to put all women in one (negative) category and save our ire for them? The Great Ubuntu-Significant Other Experiement? sheesh ... jake
Sexist formulation Posted Apr 29, 2008 5:24 UTC (Tue) by jamesm (guest, #2273) [Link] > I guess I can see how my lame blurb can be construed as sexist, but I think that is even a > stretch. Can we look for people who are trying to put all women in one (negative) category and save our ire for them? Please stop trying to deflect the issue elsewhere. What you wrote is blatantly sexist, regardless of your intent, and you are entirely responsible for it. Perhaps consider how, for example, a young woman considering a career in FOSS might feel if reading it, especially given that it's sitting on the front of the leading Linux news site.
Sexist formulation Posted Apr 29, 2008 6:02 UTC (Tue) by ejr (subscriber, #51652) [Link]
"An Ubuntu Usability Experiment"
Remember that computing often is viewed as a sexist field, and all too
often lives up to that reputation. Your intent (and the original
author's) need not matter. The feeling imparted by your words in the
already existing environment does matter.
It's not about removing gender but rather incorporating gender in a way
that doesn't encourage existing negative *impressions*. I've found I can
test my own writing by asking myself "how would a sexist jerk read this?"
or "how would an insecure and nervous person read this?"
The topic of the referenced article is usability. People expect a
description that welcomes possibly insecure and nervous new users. From
that point of view, the title is jarring. You didn't pick that title, but
you did propagate into a more "formal" setting. And you expanded the
scope from one person's girlfriend to everyone's ("sit your
girlfriend..."). If you had described the article's topic more
specifically and restrained from generalizing, I expect you would not have
received complaints.
Sexist formulation Posted May 2, 2008 0:50 UTC (Fri) by ikm (subscriber, #493) [Link] > It's not about removing gender but rather incorporating gender in a way that doesn't encourage existing negative *impressions*. No, really, it *is* about removing gender. So called "sexism" is all about genders. The fact is, you either don't use the word "girlfriend" with geeks, or they would try to invent something to fight back.
Sexist formulation Posted May 1, 2008 4:41 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link] > I'm sorry, but this is just over the top. You'll cop to your own write-up's problems, but go out of your way to defend the author of the original piece by dismissing complaints against it? Wow. Most people tend to do it the other way around. Still, I guess either alternative is easier than admitting an error of judgment - which, despite your update, you still haven't done; there's a *world* of difference between "I screwed up and I'm sorry" and "if I screwed up, I'm sorry".
Sexist formulation Posted May 1, 2008 4:47 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link] Oops - my turn to apologise; I just found the comment (http://lwn.net/Articles/280406/) where you said precisely that. My bad; I'll read all the comments first in future. Sorry.
Sexist formulation Posted Apr 29, 2008 9:35 UTC (Tue) by sdalley (subscriber, #18550) [Link] If you are, or know, a lady who has actually found jake's summary or the blog article offensive, then I humbly eat my words. Similarly if someone from LinuxChix concurs with your view. I also have the impression, though, that women themselves can find it a distracting embarrasment when a steaming great fuss is made of gender issues. The software we all know and love is the thing, making it better, more usable. Props to anyone who furthers this cause.
Sexist formulation Posted Apr 29, 2008 14:22 UTC (Tue) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link] My girlfriend is a geologist with a masters degree. She's had to deal with all too many engineers dismissing her knowledge because she's a woman. She found Jake's summary offensively sexist, and she wasn't too fond of the title and over-generalizing summary in the article itself. Bon appétit!
Sexist formulation Posted Apr 29, 2008 14:58 UTC (Tue) by sdalley (subscriber, #18550) [Link] Ah. I beg your pardon. There you go ... (gulps)
Do you want fries with that? Posted Apr 29, 2008 15:34 UTC (Tue) by jamesm (guest, #2273) [Link] I know for a fact that women are involved in this discussion who have not explicitly identified themselves as such. And why should they have to? it's irrelevant to the point, and perhaps they're using gender-neutral aliases online for some mysterious reason. I also know women who are members of LinuxChix who've voiced concerns over this elsewhere. It's not their job to police LWN and to have to constantly educate and confront the ignorant.
Do you want fries with that? Posted Mar 27, 2009 13:06 UTC (Fri) by maco (guest, #53641) [Link]
"Mysterious reason"? The reason is simple: men don't have to worry about sexual harassment nearly as much.
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 30, 2008 3:25 UTC (Wed) by vaurora (guest, #38407) [Link] I find this hilarious! As if there is some cadre of officious men wandering around Linux web sites taking offense to sexist comments that women themselves don't find offensive. Imagine, a world in which the biggest problem for women in open source is over-zealous men protecting their interests - can I visit? Yes, real women are offended by this article and by the way it was reported in LWN - that is, all three of us who haven't already quit open source.
Sexist repentance Posted Apr 30, 2008 9:07 UTC (Wed) by sdalley (subscriber, #18550) [Link] The genuine authorative rebuke. Yeow. That a man (me) could really be that stupid.... What I take from this is a) post in haste, repent at leisure, b) asuming you know what others feel, and actually knowing it, can be two vastly different things. It takes time and effort to put oneself in another person's shoes and learn to do as one would be done by, but I mean to go on trying... Please don't quit open source. Your overcoming in adversity is a genuine inspiration.
Sexist repentance Posted Apr 30, 2008 23:13 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] Plus she's damn good at it, and at explaining it as well, in an entertaining and interesting way. More columns, please! :)
Sexist forumlation Posted May 2, 2008 7:57 UTC (Fri) by ekj (guest, #1524) [Link] I take offense, and I'm a male. I don't think that's so rare. Yeah, this may be connected to the fact that I've had girlfriends who out-nerd me by a mile, or that I have spent a lot of time as the primary caretaker of my own children -- and experienced the same shit in reverse. Being automatically assumed technically inept, because you're a woman, is insulting (even if it is true that the -average- computerskill is lower among women) Being automatically assumed an "assistant" to your wife when you're taking care of your own children is equally insulting. (even if it is true that on the average, women take more responsibility for their children than do men) I tend to think that the ones who fail to grasp this are people who have not experience it first-hand, or even second-hand.
Sexist forumlation Posted Apr 28, 2008 17:05 UTC (Mon) by pflykt (subscriber, #2757) [Link] This Finn (meaning me), just learnt a new way to look for sexism in an english text.
are you american? Posted May 5, 2008 16:48 UTC (Mon) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link] Always wondered what some biorobotic folks would have against "granny test" or "girlfriend test". Anyone with a tiny bit of clue has no problem with warmly smiling over that, even if they're grandma or a girl :) I've recently met a man who moved from America to Russia (Siberia, in particular) several years ago, he told that America was *boring*. Having heard of at least one more such case and having seen his eyes I guess at least one of the reasons was "politically correct" morons!
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 28, 2008 14:24 UTC (Mon) by djabsolut (guest, #12799) [Link] This is a great article - I hope the developers of Ubuntu and Fedora take heed from the described experiences of an intelligent user that is not familiar with the innards of Linux.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 28, 2008 14:47 UTC (Mon) by kirkengaard (subscriber, #15022) [Link] Now, please understand that my wife is a) a professional foreign language educator, b) has specific computer needs which are at the same time not *that* hard to come by, and c) wants to know what time it is, not how the watch works (until she has that particular itch). For me, this is still a very valid test, as to how the non-computer geek reacts. We use Linux for most everyday tasks. Her user account has MS Office installed under Wine so that she can get the UI behavior she expects from work, but she frequently hops on while I'm logged in, and winds up using Open Office to type up small documents. She's a big fan of the game selection that comes with the desktop environments (i.e. Mahjongg, the far-superior solitaire programs, marble games, &c). We use Firefox under both Windows and Linux, so that's no difference. I have KDE set up so that the features she needs are easily accessible. Open Office is frustrating because she has no desire to look around for where something is, when she knows the UI in MS Office. Some features in OOo also don't do what she intuitively expects, for values of intuition trained by MS Office behavior. However, day-to-day, everything just works. What doesn't, she complains about, and I fix like a good little sysadmin. The thing that my wife *despises* is my hobby hacking practices. When I was single, I would blow away my current install and upgrade or change it fairly regularly. With good backups, it was just easier sometimes, especially on the bleeding edge, especially with older Slackware. I liked having a nice, fresh installation to play with. As I worked on various projects, or experimented with new software, it was just easier to start with a fresh slate after some things (or for certain new projects). This is unacceptable behavior in a married couple's sole workstation, but so is blowing the money on a new full workstation. So, the "girlfriend test" for me was more an issue of making my Linux practices sociable, not making Linux sociable.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 28, 2008 18:22 UTC (Mon) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] "What doesn't, she complains about, and I fix like a good little sysadmin." Trouble is that the "little sysadmin" who knows its way around and is able to "fix" is sometimes hard to come by. I've heard of several users who were enthusiastic about Linux at the beginning, but gave up when they got into trouble and the only computer-savvy people at hand knew some Windows and no Linux.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 29, 2008 11:43 UTC (Tue) by kirkengaard (subscriber, #15022) [Link] Yeah, this is where my situation deviates from the "here's a fresh Ubuntu, have at it." I have the advantage of long-term experimentation and much RTFM under my belt, so that's an important difference. Of course, it also took some training of my wife in how to "report bugs" -- i.e. not "Your computer is stupid."
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 28, 2008 14:58 UTC (Mon) by tajyrink (subscriber, #2750) [Link] I wonder why ubufox extension didn't pop up in the experiment, offering automatic Flash installation. That's one thing that should generally work, and I think it oughta be working when going to YouTube, too. Apparently it does not always work. Filesystems stuff should definitely be improved, that's true. BitTorrent stuff is a bit more uncommon, most ordinary people do not know beforehand about "uTorrent" or such and try to find it. Pidgin has gotten improved start screen, but it's not enough yet. Also the account settings is a bit too complex or too generic, as can be seen. Great article. And indeed just because his girlfriend was a good test subject does not mean the point of the article would be to claim something about genders in general.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 28, 2008 15:55 UTC (Mon) by madscientist (subscriber, #16861) [Link] The Flash test is one that is supremely annoying. Here's why it doesn't work, and why I, at least, don't see any way to fix it. I don't know all the details and terminology, but this is basically what's going on: Normally, when a web server delivers up flash content to the FF browser, FF realizes you don't have a plugin for this and it will offer to install the flash plugin. You say OK, and Bob's your uncle! But, some servers DON'T just deliver up the flash content. They query the browser to see if it supports flash (somehow; not sure how this works exactly). The browser says "no", because you don't have the flash plugin installed. Once the server sees that, INSTEAD OF sending the flash content down to be played, the browser sends down a page that offers to send you to the Adobe site to download the plugin. Since the page is a normal HTTP page, with no flash in it, FF doesn't offer to download the flash plugin. This is what happened to Erin in this story. Any website that tries to implement any sort of "helpful" advanced support to make the flash experience easier for their users, like YouTube, actually _breaks_ Ubuntu's detection and automated plugin installation! Bob is decidedly NOT your uncle here. The only ways to fix this I can see are: 1) Include a flash player with Ubuntu. The article suggested including Adobe's flash player but as we all know, this is out of the question for legal reasons. A non-starter. If/when gnash or another free flash player becomes robust and reliable enough to support most of the flash on the web, then this will be a good option of course. 2) Ask all the web sites that do this helpful redirection thing to NOT do it for FireFox on GNU/Linux (or at least on Ubuntu). This seems... impractical. 3) Have FF reply that it DOES support flash, when asked. Then the server would send down the flash content and FF would offer to download the plugin properly. I really have no clue exactly how this handshake works so this could well be completely impractical as well... but something like this seems like the only realistic short/medium term solution to this problem.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 28, 2008 16:14 UTC (Mon) by dwheeler (guest, #1216) [Link] Firefox could detect an attempt to load an executable from a particular company, and go from there. It's more work - and odd - but usability is often tricky. For usability, it's critical to anticipate likely uses and make the "obvious", whatever that entails.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 28, 2008 18:38 UTC (Mon) by madscientist (subscriber, #16861) [Link] I don't see how this is practical. The name of the file to be downloaded could change at any time. And, there are more things from "adobe.com" that you might want to download than just the flash plugin. I don't agree with your assertion that the only way to achieve usability is for the computer to anticipate likely uses and perform "obvious" operations behind the scenes to facilitate them. That's the mistake Microsoft makes ALL THE TIME with things like clippy, constantly asking for permissions, etc. That's not usability. Or, if it is, then I don't want Ubuntu to be usable. To me, usability is when it's obvious where to look to find the operation you want to perform, it's easy to recognize it when you see it, and when it behaves in a predictable and reliable manner. I really HATE when the computer thinks it knows what I really meant and does something different than what I explicitly asked for. That kind of heuristic is invariably wrong as often as it is right, and I'd much prefer it be predictable than have it sometimes guess correctly.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 28, 2008 18:01 UTC (Mon) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link] A better solution is to teach users that, if you want to install something, you use the package manager, pretty much no matter what it is. It's much more likely to actually work than letting some other program do it, and it means that regular system updates will maintain it.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 28, 2008 18:43 UTC (Mon) by madscientist (subscriber, #16861) [Link] Not sure if you're aware, but the automatic flash plugin we're talking about IS using the standard Ubuntu package manager. There was a special project to integrate FireFox's plugin update utility with dpkg, so that it goes out to the Ubuntu repository, obtains the DEB package, and installs that. This is the thing we're discussing, that does not work with YouTube for the reasons I mentioned. Sure it might be considered simpler to go to Add/Remove packages but people are used to having their browser tell them what they need and offering to install it for them. There are good reasons why that's problematic (security is an obvious one) but it's also extremely handy. The FF integration is/was a great step in the right direction, until it was subverted by helpful web servers.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 28, 2008 18:52 UTC (Mon) by TxtEdMacs (guest, #5983) [Link] Flash problem: I think there different problem than what many here assume. I have flash, supposedly loaded as Adobe advises on Firefox (I did it quite a while ago). I can some times get UTube videos to play (depends upon where they are offered). Moreover, the videos on the BBC work as do many on the NYT and Salon. However, there are certain sites that insist I do not have flash installed. Despite my experience loading the flash myself, when I get an offer to load flash from one of the non-working site it leads nothing useful. Therefore, I am more than a bit dubious about Ubuntu supposed flash problems and proposed fixes. Perhaps I should mention I have FlashBlock installed as a Firefox extension.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 29, 2008 16:22 UTC (Tue) by renox (subscriber, #23785) [Link] I disagree with you that the 'flash detection' issue is the only one revealed by the flash test: the other is that the 'packaging war' of the various distribution creates issue for the users: when distributors provide software users have a hard time installing it.. LSB was supposed to fix that, if Adobe provided a LSB compliant RPM package would it be installable easily (in a two click install) in Ubuntu?
Sexism Posted Apr 28, 2008 15:33 UTC (Mon) by jamesm (guest, #2273) [Link] It's very disappointing to see this on LWN.
Sexism Posted Apr 28, 2008 16:11 UTC (Mon) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link] I think Jake just tried too hard to weave the article's topic into his prose. Meanwhile, the article itself provides plenty of suggestions for small tasks which would improve usability considerably if prioritised, and there's not a shred of sexism to be found, at least for those readers who haven't already convinced themselves of its presence.
Sexism Posted Apr 28, 2008 18:59 UTC (Mon) by TxtEdMacs (guest, #5983) [Link] " ... at least for those readers who haven't already convinced themselves of its presence." Maybe, unless it is like the air you breath one pays no notice. When it's innate, where people may be attacked just because of their sex without consequence, then it too easily escapes notice even when blatant. Sexism, I assure you does not exist.
Sexism Posted Apr 30, 2008 12:38 UTC (Wed) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link] Well, I'm not excusing sexism, but I am pointing out that when attempting to write high quality prose, it's possible for people to make mistakes. Moreover, writing text for public consumption can be exhausting work if you care about what you're writing and are trying hard not to insult people: it involves continual rechecking and reconsideration of the content from many other perspectives, and if you're tired or distracted it's easy to miss things that will irritate people afterwards. There have been blatant public examples of sexism in Linux-related circles with plenty of apologists to explain away the infraction; this isn't one of them.
Sexism Posted Apr 30, 2008 14:10 UTC (Wed) by TxtEdMacs (guest, #5983) [Link] The point is simple, but not personally accusatory. Sexism exists. Moreover, it is rampant. It goes seemingly unnoticed both by those that give it voice and in the minds of those receiving the message. It is innate and ignored by too many. While the author may not have meant his words being taken that way, those that suggested the inverted status of gender would not have played the same gives credence to the story's tilt. That is, the message is there despite the author's personal view and intent. Sorry, I am busy writing I lack the time to say more.
Sexism Posted Apr 30, 2008 15:53 UTC (Wed) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link] Indeed, sexism is rampant, particularly in various professions related to technology. That said, I think it's just unfortunate that by putting himself into the role of the article's author, the commentator managed to articulate something which was perceived to be a sexist statement, mostly because the resulting statement sounded like a generalisation. (The title does seem like something formulated by the Slashdot crowd, and it certainly made me skeptical of even reading any further, but it's actually the one used by the article's author.) I think it *would* have been interesting had the sentence read "sit your boyfriend down in front of a Linux desktop" to see how the audience would have reacted (aside from the usual puerile drivel prevalent on many technology sites), and I'm surprised that no-one has attempted to formulate and publish a number of articles, varying only in substance in terms of the roles of the featured individuals, in order to study audience behaviour. Perhaps it wouldn't tell us much more than what we already know, but it might also suggest ways of building more tolerant and open communities. There is indeed a lot that can be said on this matter. What strikes me is how much various respondents assume about the commentator, perhaps framing those assumptions with previous experiences and leaving no margin for inadvertent mistake or misunderstanding.
Sexism Posted Apr 30, 2008 19:28 UTC (Wed) by TxtEdMacs (guest, #5983) [Link] <quote>" ... I'm surprised that no-one has attempted to formulate and publish a number of articles, varying only in substance in terms of the roles of the featured individuals ... "</quote> Only academics with funding could even attempt a fraction of what your suggest. The work required is enormous*. Moreover, other than in an academic publication with an article targeted at a narrow group it would not be read. At best some readers might get the results to seep out if it had a catchy title and it gained notice on slashdot or digg where it might educate a small fraction. The usual route out into the public domain would be a more limited readership publicantion where it could escape notice, e.g. Atlantic or similar journal. Perhaps you could suggest it to someone you might know in gender studies program. * Upon reflection, if such an article could be published that alone might be more effective than the follow up studies. But my skeptical side doubts that it will either get attention or as educational to those most in need.
stupidity Posted May 5, 2008 16:50 UTC (Mon) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link] see above, titled "are you american?"
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 28, 2008 16:23 UTC (Mon) by marduk (subscriber, #3831) [Link] Most "average" Windows users I know can't even use Windows. I know Windows users who don't even know how to get to a web address (If it's not on their home page or in the Favorites or a link thereof, they're lost!). Ditto for running apps (If there is no icon on their desktop they don't know where to find it). As for maintenance things (defrags, backups, my pc has a virus, etc.), they consult their local geek or just do without it. Security? Just forget it. Windows users bypass security if they can get away with it because usually it's too much of a pain to deal with. But actually security is probably one of the things Ubuntu would shine. When I see a Windows user's desktop, they've downloaded every app known to mankind, not to mention the crap that's already installed when they got the PC. Most crapware like this isn't even available for Linux, so that's might be a good thing.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 28, 2008 18:13 UTC (Mon) by lordsutch (guest, #53) [Link] I believe they made a movie about the Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment in the 1980s called "Weird Science." This story just pales in comparison.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 28, 2008 19:48 UTC (Mon) by jzbiciak (✭ supporter ✭, #5246) [Link] Heh. My wife's been running Linux almost as long as I have. (12 years vs. 15 years) I guess I can't really try this experiment. ;-)
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 29, 2008 9:52 UTC (Tue) by renox (subscriber, #23785) [Link] Well you could try with your mother or your father, but be very careful about how you report it otherwise you will be accused of anti-parentism! Just joking, but this 'sexism' debate is quite stupid in my opinion.. Personally I found the article very interesting which show quite well how a Windows user may have trouble using Linux, some things are fixable, some are harder as the Flash issue, wasn't LSB supposed to bring an unified installation mechanism for external applications?
Your editor's perspective Posted Apr 29, 2008 16:48 UTC (Tue) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] So, I've been watching this conversation go by for a bit, but have not joined into it. I guess, though, that a few things perhaps merit saying:
Please forgive us if you were upset by this article. And now I'd like to suggest that we all move on to a safer topic - whether it makes sense to manage background images in a file manager, say.
Your editor's perspective Posted Apr 29, 2008 17:55 UTC (Tue) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link] Thanks for speaking up!FWIW, I know no offense was intended, and that LWN is generally good about this sort of thing. I think I understand your "Aunt Tillie" point, and may be able to expand on that slightly. The name "Aunt Tillie" references a hypothetical person (yes, female, though not so dependent on the reader's gender) of a previous generation, which is much different from talking about the reader's girlfriend.
I'm with you on the background images. Though of course there's other controversy there as well.... and I'm not touching that one. :-)
Aunt Tillie v. Your Girlfriend: Cage Match! Posted Apr 30, 2008 3:16 UTC (Wed) by vaurora (guest, #38407) [Link] I can't help but point out that things would have been very different if the conversation had been phrased in terms of "Aunt Tillie" instead. I do wonder why that is. It would have been different because Aunt Tillie is a construction of Eric S. Raymond (that noted feminist) to justify a complete rewrite of the kernel configuration system, a construction that has been used so often and incorrectly that it is a joke - "Yeah, Aunt Tillie would love that." While the Aunt Tillie meme definitely rankles, no one bothered to fight it because it was already ridiculous - though I can't help but notice that "Uncle Ed" never became a symbol of computer-related incompetence. And while Aunt Tillie is a harmful sexist stereotype that sends the message that women are incompetent at computers, it's a definite improvement over "your girlfriend" in one way - at least women are just as likely to have aunts as men are. "Your girlfriend" says that not only are women incompetent at computers, but women are not reading this article, either. In summary, Aunt Tillie is bad. "Your girlfriend" is infinitely worse.
My apologies Posted Apr 30, 2008 14:02 UTC (Wed) by jake (editor, #205) [Link] I would also like to offer my deepest apologies. I certainly didn't intend to offend anyone, but this clearly did, and I am truly sorry that it did. jake
My apologies Posted Apr 30, 2008 16:15 UTC (Wed) by vegge (subscriber, #6926) [Link] Dear jake, Thanks to both you and Erin for taking the time, and having the patience, to conduct this experiment. Friends and family members getting started with their first PCs have had very similar experiences...to a new computer user even a "polished" interface like OS X is pretty non-intuitive. Helping them work through a simple task always reminds me how much we take for granted, and how much I have adapted myself to the idiosyncrasies of the machine. I don't think that your language was "sexist", or that you need to apologize.
I'm glad for the article!! Posted May 1, 2008 18:59 UTC (Thu) by dwheeler (guest, #1216) [Link] I'm glad that both the author and the victim (er, subject) took the time to do the experiment, wrote about it, and posted it. Linux-based systems will NEVER get better until a lot more of these experiments are done and published. Sure, some of the ideas could have been expressed in ways that wouldn't offend some. But if the result is that only males can be experimental subjects, that would be a huge loss. I would rather concentrate on what the article was REALLY about: Intelligent users can sometimes quickly get work done on Linux-based systems, but sometimes they have difficulties that they shouldn't have. Which gives the developers specific issues they can actually address, making the system better for everyone. Please, let's keep publishing usage experiments, or our systems will not get better.
hey :) Posted May 5, 2008 16:57 UTC (Mon) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link] Jon, you won't (and can't) help those who want to feel or look offended. Just let them be, no need to worry. *Thank you* for what you're doing!
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted Apr 30, 2008 18:11 UTC (Wed) by ris (editor, #5) [Link] This thread just won't die. Wow! Thanks to all you big strong men stepping up for us poor little girls because we really can't take care of ourselves. </sarcasm> This is not an article that I would have chosen, but it was interesting none-the-less. Was it sexist? Yes. Jake's blurb was just cut and paste from the article. A poor choice, but if writing bad blurbs for LWN is a crime then I'm guilty as well. It happens, move on. As sexism goes this is pretty mild, but it's great that more people are starting to recognize it when they see it. Great, move on. FWIW In my family the women tend to be more computer literate than the men. Rebecca - who has been working in male dominated fields since 1968 and a computer professional since 1982.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted May 1, 2008 7:39 UTC (Thu) by vputz (subscriber, #5639) [Link] What I find a bit distressing about almost all of these conversations--and there are often many--is that those complaining of sexist overtones (and yes, there are many here) assume they are intentional, get verbally offended, and set up a confrontational relationship with the author/editor right from the start. I've NEVER seen anything productive come from a confrontational relationship. If anything, it just makes people dig in to their (possibly wrong) viewpoints even more. Such as my wife and her parents, who got into enough arguments about eating vegetables that to this day she won't let her father see her eating a salad. I mean honestly; if you assume the intent of someone was to offend--as many of the posters seemingly did--you'll make no progress on what is a pretty valuable social agenda. Did the article and blurb have, probably unintentionally, sexist language? Sure. But the author and editor are more than likely intelligent rational people who (gasp!) MADE A MISTAKE. Treating them as he-man woman-haters intent on keeping a gender repressed is going to do more harm than good; pointing out the problem in rational terms and asking for admission of the problem and an apology--which was eventually given--will do a lot more.
The Great Ubuntu-Girlfriend Experiment (Content Consumer) Posted May 1, 2008 23:15 UTC (Thu) by pdundas (subscriber, #15203) [Link] It's unfortunate that so many of the comments seemed to be nitpicking about attitudes that the article might have shown, and so few expressed the slightest appreciation of the testing efforts put in by the author and girlfriend, or of the thoughtful and informative article itself. Thanks to both of you for an interesting article - and (if we can ignore the side issues for a moment) some sensible suggestions.
me too Posted May 5, 2008 17:03 UTC (Mon) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link] Well, I've done something similar er... 5 or 6 years ago; there was no Ubuntu at all of course, but we've been pretty OK with ALT Linux and Galeon 1.2 on that old Pentium. :) Helping girls is helping girls, not waving "sexist!!" flag indeed.
|
|||||||||||||