I'm sorry, but it is FOR something. There's actually a large, growing thread in the forums about this very issue. It seems I'm not the only one: http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=25501
Alright, so let's assume that you're right, and the Raspberry Pi fails at the task it's intended for. Does that mean that the device itself has failed? Must a device only be used for its intended purpose? I'd say definitely not.
Personally, my perception of the Raspberry Pi was that it was supposed to be a relatively cheap and nostalgic "toy" computer that was meant to evoke the days when a computer was a simple device that you plugged into a TV and programmed by hand. I highly doubt that it's meant to be "easy to use" at all, it's meant to be minimal enough (like the computers of yesteryear) that just figuring out how to use it teaches you about how computers work. I remember when I was learning to code (back in the 90s), the clunky old DOS machine I was using gave me lots of headaches just in trying to do anything more complex than moving files around. I learned a lot that way, however; I was actually solving problems that forced me to think about how the system worked and how I was going to tell the system what I wanted it to do. The Raspberry Pi seems to me like it's meant to evoke memories of a time when computers were that or even more primitive than the good old DOS 5.0 that I personally started my programming career with. A lot of people in our industry got started in an environment like that, so I'd imagine that the creators of the device figure that it would be a good way for "kids these days" to start in the 21st century. There might be problems with that approach, of course, seeing as this is the 21st century and "kids these days" are no doubt used to computer interfaces that are much easier to work with by the time they encounter the RP.
You called the device "painful to use." I guess my point is that if that is the complaint you're making, I'm not sure you're seeing the point that I think the creators of the device want you to see.
I'd love to have a true discussion about this, but there's nothing more boring than when someone tries to downplay my opinion or right to speak by saying that "You're not makin no sense! What you talkin bout!?"
Er, pointing out that an opinion (or an expression thereof) makes "no sense" on the face of it is a perfectly legitimate thing to do in a discussion. In a truly rational discussion, ideas which do not make sense should be shot down, in fact. Pointing out that a statement doesn't make sense gives the speaker an opportunity to revise their statement so that no misunderstanding is made; or possibly revise their opinions, if that proves useful. And I admittedly haven't read the entire thread all that closely, but where is your opinion being "downplayed" and what exactly do you mean by that? Again, contradicting another person's opinion/pointing out flaws in their argument or understanding is not "downplaying their right to speak" - it is the whole point of rational discussion in the first place.
Edited by Oberon_Command, 30 December 2012 - 03:15 PM.