Except the article explicitly mentions twice that the submitter wants to be anonymous. Once in the introduction, then once again at the end as written by the submitter.
This mentality is dangerous and part of the reason why the usability of OSS suffers. A similar dedication to the converse is why Windows is easy for the average user and difficult to manage for the advanced user. If you like a command-line interface, great! That's not a reason why a simpler GUI cannot exist for the task.
Let's consider a simple task like deleting a file. If you tell the average user that it's way faster to use the command line and then teach them a little about rm (or del in Windows), you'll be faced with a terrified phone call after they use the wrong arguments and delete their entire drive. These people should be using a graphical shell to hold their hand through the process; they don't view the computer the same way you do. They want it to be like a TV: push button, do thing. On the other hand, the more experienced user is writing a script to do the deletion for him anyway; the shell interface is probably never used by this user.
It's not insightful to say, "I'm a Linux user and I do things the command line way, the way $deity intended! If you want your hand held, why don't you just use Windows?" I see plenty of OSS developers act this way and then they are surprised that some people still think Linux is hard. You told them to use Windows; don't make fun of them for it. The optimal design can accommodate both the power user and the casual user.
Slashdot Mirror
It sounds like you were at the theater for a different reason than the girl.
Except the article explicitly mentions twice that the submitter wants to be anonymous. Once in the introduction, then once again at the end as written by the submitter.
You fail for not reading.
This mentality is dangerous and part of the reason why the usability of OSS suffers. A similar dedication to the converse is why Windows is easy for the average user and difficult to manage for the advanced user. If you like a command-line interface, great! That's not a reason why a simpler GUI cannot exist for the task.
Let's consider a simple task like deleting a file. If you tell the average user that it's way faster to use the command line and then teach them a little about rm (or del in Windows), you'll be faced with a terrified phone call after they use the wrong arguments and delete their entire drive. These people should be using a graphical shell to hold their hand through the process; they don't view the computer the same way you do. They want it to be like a TV: push button, do thing. On the other hand, the more experienced user is writing a script to do the deletion for him anyway; the shell interface is probably never used by this user.
It's not insightful to say, "I'm a Linux user and I do things the command line way, the way $deity intended! If you want your hand held, why don't you just use Windows?" I see plenty of OSS developers act this way and then they are surprised that some people still think Linux is hard. You told them to use Windows; don't make fun of them for it. The optimal design can accommodate both the power user and the casual user.