Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

["Alan MacHett" <machett AT ibiblio.org>]

     [bottom posted; references first]
In response to Ian Meyer's message:
> Years ago, Apple donated thousands of computers to schoolsfor classroom
use. The idea was that kids would learn on that Apple's and then when
the family went out to buy a computer, they would but an Apple as well.
Judging from how many kids go through public schools and how many people
have bought Apple computers...I don't think it worked too hot.
>
> Now, getting Linux into the home is a little more of an achievement,
but .... as great as it is, IMHO, and as neat as it is to see these
being sold, I don't think its going to start a revolution.
>
...and to Bill Geschwind's message:
> I suspect that once you start having technologically unsophisticated
people buy Linux desktops for their home computers you are going to
start seeing some of the same problems ...
>
...and to Paul Smith's message:
> I agree... I don't think the WalMart crowd is going to bring anything
positive to Linux. They probably won't add anything by way of code or
community support
>
...and to Ilan Volow's message:
> The unix people are totally clueless at decent user interaction, and
the sooner Open Source is rid of them, the sooner we can have Open
Source for the masses.
>
> Hopefully, in 10 years, there won't be a command-line or any other trace
of unix in whatever OSS OS that achieves world domination.
>
...and to Tanner Lovelace's message:
> Actually in this case, I believe it's "MacOS", but close enough. For
general use, a GUI can be nice, but if you want to get anything done
on a large number of servers all at once (and hopefully even from one
remote machine), you absolutely cannot beat a command line.
>
---

I suppose I misspoke myself.  No, I don't forsee a revolution here.  The
popularity of automobiles didn't make everyone a mechanic, and the
popularity of radio and television didn't make everyone electrical
engineers.  But the popularity of those technologies in and of themselves
have revolutionized our lives, *all* of our lives.  I don't think
computers can make that claim just yet, else there wouldn't be talk of the
so-called digital divide.  I'll have to do some research, but I believe
that automobiles, radios/stereos, and television are nearly omnipresent in
the American household; all but the poorest of the poor have a tv and/or a
car.  But I don't think the same can be said for computers.  Computers are
still toys and tools for the middle and upper classes.

This Sun-Walmart arrangement has the potential to bust that.  The bonus is
that it also promotes a third option for consumers, versus Windows and
Apple.  By and large, computers are prohibitively expensive for the poor. 
An old, cheap tv or an old, cheap car still still functions usefully, but
the rapid obsolescence of computers and software makes purchasing an old,
cheap one pointless.  Instead, at Walmart one can purchase a new, cheap
one, with Linux to boot.  If Apple had ever been anything other than the
most expensive platform on the market, then perhaps Apple could have
accomplished what I hope this Sun-Walmart arrangement can.

And the hope in the arrangement isn't intended to "bring anything positive
to Linux."  People use the tool, not the other way around.  No wonder
Linux is such a pain in the ass; the maintainers/creators haven't gotten
past the notion that it's only for programmers and sysadmins.  Open Source
does not mean do-it-yourself.  The end user shouldn't be penalized for the
politics of the creators.  If anything, Linux will be improved by the
arrangement, by the needs and desires of consumers.  M$ continues to
expect lazy consumers to apply patches to it's buggy proprietary products;
"here's our new product; deal with it."  But I'd like to think Open Source
would say, "here's our product; how can we improve it?"

And if eliminating the command line is one of those things, then so be it.
 It's not as if the command line is a programmer's wet-jack to communing
with the system; the CLI is *still* a user interface.  Pretty pictures
aside, me double-clicking on a folder and me typing 'cd subdirectory' are
the same thing.  The difference is that we are a visual species and
therefore a GUI is a more intuitive interface.  The problem with GUI
nowdays is not the GUI but the lack of well-thought design and support to
the GUI.  There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that a GUI could not
"get anything done
on a large number of servers all at once (and hopefully even from one
remote machine)".

Notice that ATMs and the earlier-mentioned barcode-scanner-remote-order
microwave (concept) don't have command lines, rather touch-screens and
GUIs.  The advent of very cheap computers is a good thing, because it will
truly bring computing to the masses; and then the notion of
computers/networks in our microwaves and refrigerators becomes more
popular by design...

*my* $0.02,
Alan