lubuntu-desktop team mailing list archive

[Liam Proven <lproven@xxxxxxxxx>]

2009/7/23 John Thng <johnthng83@xxxxxxxxx>:

> We have discussed the problems as before.
> There are mentions previously that people in third world countries are
> living with limited internet bandwidth unlike people in developed countries
> with large or unlimited internet bandwidth.
> Thus, it'll be good if the distro bundled usable applications inside instead
> of the people finding ways on how to download the applications in.

This was one of the core points of Ubuntu itself, originally, as I
understand it.

It has achieved it very well, with the exception of the
ubuntu-restricted-extras and so on.

> There should be a compromise point. It is possible to make the spec as low
> as possible, but does it surf the purpose of usability over normal people or
> the distro is purely for geeks to use.
> As for my point of view, it should be light but at the same time, usability
> is important, thus making it a bit different. We don't want people in low
> internet bandwidth hunting for bandwidth to load usable daily applications.
> There's a need for compromising. We can't restrict too much till it's a geek
> distro which does not care about the usability. I know there are distros
> putting lightweight apps, but does it solve the usability problem with
> lightweight.

What do you mean by "usability"? Do you feel that a distro with a
lightweight desktop such as IceWM would be less usable?

> I'm not sure what the big picture is, but lubuntu should be for everyone,
> young till old, developed or developing countries, and not too restrictive
> to make it hard and user friendly to use too.

Well, if you want a distro for everyone, then Ubuntu itself is that.
If you have ideas on how to improve Ubuntu, then the Lubuntu project
is not the place to discuss them.

If Ubuntu is a good effort at being a distro for everyone, as I think
it is - and its download and usage figures suggest that millions agree
- then Lubuntu cannot be this "distro for everyone". The role is
already filled.

If this is the case, then the question becomes: what is the purpose or
target of Lubuntu?

If LXDE is meant to be a lightweight desktop for low-end kit, then it
seems to me that a lightweight distro is one answer that suggests
itself.

> It's pretty sad that some applications are bloated, but do we have the
> choice not to use them, but even if we do have the choice, will the
> usability of the distro be affected much.

Personally, I see no point in using tools like OpenOffice, good as
they may be, if they rule out or eliminate a significant proportion of
would-be users whose machines are too low-spec to run OO.o.

> Some might believe that Lubuntu will be the solution for people living in
> developing countries with no/limited bandwidth. Some believe Lubuntu should
> run on old computers in developed countries.
> But I would choose for usable Lubuntu that benefits more people with
> no/limited bandwidth than keeping people with old computers or geeks happy.

What's the difference here? What do you see as being the trade-offs?

> For people with old computers or those lightweight geeks, I think other
> distro might surf better for the purpose.

I am not aware of any. That is my point. Are you? Please tell me what they are!

> And last time during discussion, OpenOffice.org is chosen is because
> compatibility issues and also presentation program. In addition, I do think
> OpenOffice.org would surf as a need to bridge those in developing countries
> to the world.

It is not a helpful bridge if only those with powerful computers may cross it.

-- 
Liam Proven • Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/liamproven
Email: lproven@xxxxxxxxx • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven@xxxxxxxxx
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AOL/AIM/iChat/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven • LiveJournal/Twitter: lproven
MSN: lproven@xxxxxxxxxxx • ICQ: 73187508