> Linux developers seem to be in love with cryptic acronyms which means nothing is intuitive or simple.
To add to that point: Linux exposes a lot of information in general. That's great for me as an experienced user, but is certainly overwhelming for the "normal" computer user.
GNOME is trying to de-mystify the Linux desktop and I think they're on the right track, but they don't have widespread support among the Linux community. A lot of people use and/or like it, but a very vocal group (is it a minority? I don't know) is opposing their approach. They (this certain group that's well represented on e.g. /r/linux) sometimes seem to dismiss any work on UI or UX as not relevant or limiting their freedom.
Actually, `apt update` has a GUI application called 'software updater' and `apt` has a 'software centre' on Ubuntu these days. I'll grant you the other two.
I don't. Ubuntu does not come with a firewall, but if you want one you search in the software center for firewall, not for an acronym. Scheduled tasks finds a gnome app for managing automatic jobs (which are cron jobs).
cm2187 is either a troll or completely clueless of what a current linux desktop actually is.
Worrying about things like automated tasks and being put off by the differences between Windows and Linux in specialised areas like this no normal user would ever touch is rather common for Windows power users though. For them, any change means losing a big part of their abilities, and that hurts. It's exactly what Linus mentions: Many people don't like change for their desktop environment (in the broad sense, not only KDE/Gnome). This is a perfect example of user inertia.
The replies seem to hint at the real problem. Fragmented efforts to settle on a desktop. The desktop could make the "Scheduled Tasks" -> "Cron" association more transparent. But not when there are a dozen variants for each of the 3/4/5 different base desktop stacks floating around.
No, that does not follow. If all dozen variants properly made Scheduled Tasks available than it would not matter that we do not have the one unifying linux desktop (and the gods be thanked we don't) and that we call them cron. In fact I state that all popular DEs solve those basic usability problems since a few years ago.
Ok. So there's something that compels them all to call it "Scheduled Tasks" and some unified way to find/navigate to it, shared language/terminology? Seems doubtful.
Compare the typical results for a Google search on how to add a scheduled task in windows to the same for linux. For the UI oriented answers on Linux, guess the chances it works on your desktop.
Great soundbite, but in the real world, things aren't always that easy. Like when you plug in a USB to Serial connector, and the driver doesn't attach.
For windows, a little google-fu reveals that you want the device manager. For linux, command line solutions are easy to find. Gui ones exist, but they vary, and aren't easy to find.
You are right; I should have rephrased that sentence. I merely meant that I have never looked into those. And when I use scheduled tasks I refer to them as `cron`. Even on Windows.
You are right, but let's not forget that Windows has very cryptic names and acronyms too (visible in process names and mmc snap-ins, for example). But they are much more hidden away than on Linux. I think that's the key difference: There's a (more or less) nice frontend on Windows concealing Windows' bowels most of the time.
But for example, GNOME 3.18 on my Fedora 23 installation has an application called "(GNOME) Software" which automatically notifies me about new updates available and allows me to easily install them. It also summarises all non-application updates as "operating system updates". If you're interested in Linux UX, you really should try out a recent Fedora version in a VM - I think it has come a long way.
And honestly, Ubuntu is a terrible example for the Linux Desktop. They have dropped the ball long ago.
>And honestly, Ubuntu is a terrible example for the Linux Desktop.
Funny. I just find the opposite: Ubuntu is a superb desktop, polished, clean and powerful, very productive and easy to use for the experienced use with keyyboard shortcuts, but also to new users with mouse and no prior knowledge.
Have you used recent versions of KDE (on openSUSE, for example) or GNOME (on Fedora)? Because Ubuntu (or Unity, to be more precise) did not really change since 12.04 and largerly used GNOME applications anyway. The things you actually can attribute to Ubuntu, for example the Software Center, are an absolute trainwreck in comparison to the "competitors" (GNOME Software e.g. is moving fast and is capable of staging upgrades to the next OS release as of recent).
So, your mum isn't going to RTFM, but she is going to use Windows' 'Scheduled Tasks'? She must be quite an unusual person - I've never seen a tech naif do either scheduled tasks or cronjobs. If it's time-based, it goes into a calendar app, and there's not even the vague idea that the OS has it's own scheduler.
Firewalls I'll grant you, but as another commentor mentioned, there's plenty of GUI updaters around.
FWIW on KDE you just click the application launcher ("Start" button as it was on MS Windows, not sure what they call it now, "Windows button"?) and type "schedule" or "task" and it suggests Kcron (in system settings it's known as "task scheduler") and gives you a description of its function.
Or use the launcher - which gives a search box that does things like install new apps, work as a calculator, search files, etc.. Or go in to the system settings and type in the search box there for the setting you're after.
If a user can't manage those things then they're surely not going to have any clue what to do with a firewall manager once they've opened it.
To add to that point: Linux exposes a lot of information in general. That's great for me as an experienced user, but is certainly overwhelming for the "normal" computer user.
GNOME is trying to de-mystify the Linux desktop and I think they're on the right track, but they don't have widespread support among the Linux community. A lot of people use and/or like it, but a very vocal group (is it a minority? I don't know) is opposing their approach. They (this certain group that's well represented on e.g. /r/linux) sometimes seem to dismiss any work on UI or UX as not relevant or limiting their freedom.