An interface that beginners are quicker to use to do some basic stuff is not necessery an interface where experienced users (like people working everyday with it) will be efficient using!
Basic things should be made implicit and the least intrusive as possible, just clearly recognizable. This is what makes it hard for beginners, but let experienced users concentrate on the task at hand.
More to the point, numerous studies have proven that the brain works quicker by reflex when it comes to simple, repetitive tasks, so flooding it with useless and repetitive information just forces it to revert to "conscious" mode, tiring it, decreasing its performances and wasting energy. A good test to that: try to walk down a staircase by consciously thinking every move of your legs. You'll notice it is very hard not to fall.
Aqua will seem tough for first time users. But as they get used to it, they'll find that they work better and quicker. And then, when they will work again on win95 or Xwindow, they have in impression of being slowed down by something they cannot easily describe.
That's precisly my user experience with NeXTSTEP, which I still use to browse the web, as it let me work much faster. Nevertheless, I clearly remember spending the first week bitching at my friend who had installed it on my computer.
Heck! You don't find a "prull down" sign written on all doorknobs in your house, isn't it?
ha ha 80% of small businesses don't need SMP and can afford to make sure they don't pick unsupported hardware. Tell me about commercial support with linux... Apps used have (like samba) have the same support as with linux, as it is simply the same. Your point [d] betrays you as just an ideologic opensource hater and nothing else. Point [e] shows you're clueless. OpenBSD runs linux and Solaris binaries...
You think that I propose OpenBSD as a valid alternative for anything and everything? You should learn to read!
There is one thing in which OpenBSD has the edge over EVERY other OS's in the world: the stress factor. I'm rookie, ok. Most of all, I'm availability conscious and rather the anxious type. I guess I'm not alone. Three days ago I gave OpenBSD a try. This OS is straight Unix. Configuration may be painfull at some stage, like disklabel creation. I guess more awaits me. I compiled Samba in, which is not audited and may suffer exploits and flaws. I'll certainly add other similar software in the future. Why bother then, some will argue? That's what is impressive with OpenBSD: network exploits, security holes, can only result of MY wrong doing. To my surprise, the thought is surprisingly conforting. The thing is, I know I may be adding vulnerabilities which each service I add, but as I add services, I can read the related doc, learning IN TIME about the security issue, and learn AT THE SAME TIME what countermeasure I have to take. I've added Samba, my next move is set the firewall accordingly.
The relief is so great that the unix "unfriendliness" of the systems appears light in comparison: being carefull is feasible and will be fully rewarded.
In summary: The stress factor is all important but often neglected, especially in business. But the hidden costs inccured are probably high. OpenBSD may help reduce these costs, as it gives the following adventages:
Less time spend closing hole(!), following bugtrack, upgrading faulty software, etc.
You spend more time setting up your server, but as a reward you get increased preemptive security, strong knowledge of your system and by derivation, a stronger ability to deal quickly and efficiently with incidents.
You are more confident, less subject to stress, so you think better.
Everything you learn is standard stuff, which will be usefull everywhere you go. Conversely, you stop cloggering your brain with lists of distribution dependent problems, exploits, holes...
You have more time to develop your system and educate users.
Your boss can boast to his peer (and competitors) when they go offline while he doesn't. That's what you want, right?
Slashdot Mirror
An interface that beginners are quicker to use to do some basic stuff is not necessery an interface where experienced users (like people working everyday with it) will be efficient using!
Basic things should be made implicit and the least intrusive as possible, just clearly recognizable. This is what makes it hard for beginners, but let experienced users concentrate on the task at hand.
More to the point, numerous studies have proven that the brain works quicker by reflex when it comes to simple, repetitive tasks, so flooding it with useless and repetitive information just forces it to revert to "conscious" mode, tiring it, decreasing its performances and wasting energy. A good test to that: try to walk down a staircase by consciously thinking every move of your legs. You'll notice it is very hard not to fall.
Aqua will seem tough for first time users. But as they get used to it, they'll find that they work better and quicker. And then, when they will work again on win95 or Xwindow, they have in impression of being slowed down by something they cannot easily describe.
That's precisly my user experience with NeXTSTEP, which I still use to browse the web, as it let me work much faster. Nevertheless, I clearly remember spending the first week bitching at my friend who had installed it on my computer.
Heck! You don't find a "prull down" sign written on all doorknobs in your house, isn't it?
ha ha
80% of small businesses don't need SMP and can afford to make sure they don't pick unsupported hardware.
Tell me about commercial support with linux...
Apps used have (like samba) have the same support as with linux, as it is simply the same.
Your point [d] betrays you as just an ideologic opensource hater and nothing else. Point [e] shows you're clueless. OpenBSD runs linux and Solaris binaries...
You think that I propose OpenBSD as a valid alternative for anything and everything? You should learn to read!
I'm rookie, ok. Most of all, I'm availability conscious and rather the anxious type. I guess I'm not alone.
Three days ago I gave OpenBSD a try. This OS is straight Unix. Configuration may be painfull at some stage, like disklabel creation. I guess more awaits me. I compiled Samba in, which is not audited and may suffer exploits and flaws. I'll certainly add other similar software in the future.
Why bother then, some will argue?
That's what is impressive with OpenBSD: network exploits, security holes, can only result of MY wrong doing. To my surprise, the thought is surprisingly conforting.
The thing is, I know I may be adding vulnerabilities which each service I add, but as I add services, I can read the related doc, learning IN TIME about the security issue, and learn AT THE SAME TIME what countermeasure I have to take.
I've added Samba, my next move is set the firewall accordingly.
The relief is so great that the unix "unfriendliness" of the systems appears light in comparison: being carefull is feasible and will be fully rewarded.
In summary:
The stress factor is all important but often neglected, especially in business. But the hidden costs inccured are probably high. OpenBSD may help reduce these costs, as it gives the following adventages:
More infos:
- BSD Today: A step-by-step journal of installing OpenBSD
- www.openbsd.org
- OpenBSD Explained
enjoy!
Raph