"Server" is a computer people either log on to and does work ON THERE, or people use stuff ON that computer.
"Workstation" is the computer users can PHYSICALLY see and touch (and stroke, for whoever gets that fancy). They run programs there, locally.
For your information, people used server/workstation before Microsoft started making a server-oriented OS. Heck, even before they started thinking about networking. Who? Novell. Are THEY the evil empire now?
Grow a brain, for fucks sake. And a spine. Posting anonymously is (for lack of a non-punny way of saying it) cowardly.
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
"it takes longer to reboot than to fix the problem the easy and proper way"... eh, sure. Replace keyboard => keyboard no workie. How do you fix that short of rebooting? stroke the server's sides and hope the keyboard automagically starts working? Bullshit.
As for your post, I've said it before, and I'll say it again... If you've got something to say, either stand by it, or shut up about it. Posting anonymously makes you look like a tard.
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
So, instead of trying a reboot to see if something has fucked the system over this once, he should automatically use, say, a week? Good grief, dude, server admins have better things to do than spend 100x the time of a reboot just to figure something out.
The correct way of doing it is
1) Something's wonky? Let's reboot, see if this fixes it 2) Hmm, it DIDN'T fix it permanently, *now* I will spend some time trying to figure out what's really wrong.
PS: Next time you've got something worthwile to say, don't say it anonymously. It just makes you look like a dork looking for someone to flame. If you've got something to say, stand by it or shut the fuck up. Thank you.
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
While this is true, it points to another criticism of MS operating systems. They seem to require upgrades. Whereas one can install FreeBSD or Linux on a machine and rely on it for years, ignoring new versions, one is apparently compelled to always have the latest-and-greatest version of Windows. This is particularly interesting in light of the fact that aquiring a new version of FreeBSD or Linux need not cost a thing, while there's a price associated with every new version of Windows.
Right, so taking your comment to the extreme, why aren't we seeing linux machines with an uptime of something like 10-20 years? Upgrades? we don't need no stinking upgrades! Give us linux 0.001 over linux 2.1 any day!
See the point here? Uptimes ISN'T the be-all and end-all. Shit happens. The power fails. Someone stumbles in the power chord. What IS important is
1) Functionality 2) Security 3) Stability
Even linux has to be rebooted to replace the kernel when there's a WEAKNESS in it, otherwise it's not really a good server anymore, is it?
I can see it now, the server admin of a linux box going "ooh! i can't fix this security hole, i'll fuck up my uptime!".
For what it's worth, I personally think linux IS better than win9x, and NT is irking me a bit. However, I do NOT automatically look on uptime as compliments of how good an OS is. I look at functionality, security AND stability... I've had to reboot my linux server quite a lot lately simply due to my wish to keep my server secure. My server isn't automatically an unstable server, nor is the OS automatically unstable. I do this willingly, because I wish to have a secure system. Then again, if I *really* wanted a completely secure server out of the box, I'd run OpenBSD, not Linux.
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
That's just as important as anything else, since during a Quake deathmatch things get rather heated... so if someone constantly wins (being either the chick or the guy, doesn't matter), and there is NO hope whatsoever of the other person getting any better, some tact is most likely required.
However, I'm not saying "share wins 50-50". Since my gf is better than me, she beats the shit outta me regularly. However, I do manage to sneak up on her occasionally, and kill her in a way that makes her go "wow, impressive". Or is that just her being tactful? Hmm...:)
There's one problem with his feature, and your response (and mine, for that matter)... point of view. It's difficult to set oneself into someone elses' perspective, and that won't change. So no matter who writes an article on how the sexes should treat one another, it will most likely be slated more one way instead of another.
My view? Even tho my gf spanks me most of the times, I don't really want it any other way. It gives me a challenge, something to try to better, and that makes me a better player. She, too, has to keep on her toes because I'm always hounding her. Of course, if she were to let me kill her once or twice (heh, that sounds worse than it really is) because she feels sorry for me isn't that bad, given it's not hidden too badly. Her being TOO nice to me all the time, however, would make me lazier in the long run. It may give me more satisfaction there and then, but in the long run I'd lose out.
In short, I like a good fight, as long as it's not too one-sided.
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
Fair enough. As long as you give her plenty of practice she might (might) concede the point.
Being good at Quake is a surprisingly effective way to impress geek guys. With some of them it seems you've shattered their most fundamental prejudice against women - 'woman no Quake'.
Heh, my gf is actually not just beating me in Quake, she's wiping the floor, the roof AND the walls with my ass, almost every time I play against her. I get the occasional lucky shot in, but usually, it's a one-sided match. *sigh*:)
How about being nice to guys, and letting them win?:)
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
Someone who'll let her win at Quake. All the time.
Oh, that's going to happen, sure... If a chick wants to gloat over me for winning a match, she's going to work for it. Then at least she can feel she's earned it, not just feel "oh, he let me win to make me feel better".
Someone who will put off sex for a couple more minutes to discuss the intricacies of debugging their latest program.
That can possibly be arranged, but see next case.
Unless we want sex instead, in which case, be ready.
What guy ISN'T ready?:)
Someone who gives us root password on their box.
We'll give you your root password if you'll give us yours:)
Someone who lets us change root password on their box so that we're the only one who knows it.
We'll let you change the root password on your box if you'll let us change root password on yours. Gotta be fair, you know:)
Someone who is less complicated then a computer, takes up less time, and less maintenence, and is all to willing to maintain our computers, and us, any time, day or night.
Whadda you mean, less complicated than a computer? the computer is the least complicated piece of equipment you'll get! garbage in -> garbage out:)
Less time? Less maintenance? we MAKE time, and we maintain ourselves, thankyouverymuch:)
You maintain us, we maintain you. The computer'll have to see to its own needs:)
An Open Source guy, all transparent nice simple coding, but not GPLed - none of this freely distributable stuff.
Aww, and i wanted to share my wisdom with other people. *sniff*:)
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
I'd like to just quickly point out to you that every software producer have this disclaimer in their warranty. It's standard practice nowadays, not just MS doing it.
/. had an article about this exact problem in the software industry a few days ago.
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
It does seem like men have less need for social contact (me being a prime example, being an utter geek, heh).
It's sad, but it's a fact that [most] chicks don't do geeky stuff, because it's not the popular thing. The sad part about this is that because most chicks don't do this, the chicks that DO venture into computers, are either not believed, or they suddenly get hit on by lots of geeks (they're lonely out there, y'know, and there aren't that many geek chicks to hit on, so when they DO find a geek chick, they'll hit on them for all they're worth:), and are deterred through that. That means that there are less chicks for us guys to talk to, so the evil circle starts.
I doubt this'll change too much the next few years, and more's the pity. Most chicks I know (that are geeky, and that's not saying that much, it's like 2 or 3, heh) think in radically different ways from me. They think "usage", while I'm better at remembering little details that might be bringing down a box.
Chicks ARE a resource untapped of thus far, and we'd gain a lot from getting them into computing, but it's no use FORCING chicks into computing (like I know one teacher of mine tried to...). A lot has to change for that to happen, and, as mentioned earlier, that'll take time.
I wait eagerly for that time to come.
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
I know Linus Torvalds made the OS for his own personal use, and I wasn't pointing at that at all. What I was pointing at was the people who bash MS for making Windows "an OS for dummies", and kept saying "Linux is the ONLY viable option, use this or be lame". It's not, it's for the technical person (me included, soon) who likes to fiddle with things. Not JRL who doesn't know a CDROM from a disk drive.
And give me one reason for flaming you for your opinion... there isn't one, it's your opinion (it's also what I mean). Chill, dude.. not everybody like to flame needlessly:)
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
Just to play the devil's advocate nr. 2... Technically it doesn't really matter if there are chicks with the Open Source movement or not, BUT... we COULD still be losing out because of this lack.
Women think in different terms than we men do, generally speaking, that is. It seems to me that women are better at seeing the whole picture, while men focus on the little things, so if women were to join in more, we would most likely benefit.
The main problem IS that women are discouraged during their whole trip to adulthood. I'd like to think I was unbiased when it came to this subject, but no matter how much I try, whenever I start talking to women about computers, I expect them to go "Computers? eww!" or something like that. It's sad, because I'm often surprised at how interested some of them CAN be in computers (some almost moreso than I am myself, and that's saying a lot).
As for the "having to dumb down the conversation", I actually find that a nice challenge, trying to explain to others what exactly, f.x. a partition is, why a DMA conflict is bad, etc. It helps me deepen my own understanding of the topic, weird as it may seem.
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
You're SURE you want to use an easy OS like Linux then? Sure you don't want to go back to the 1950 mainframes, where you had lamps and switches to flick?
It's nice to have your own policy when it comes to what OS you choose (and how you perceive it should be), but don't enforce that on others.
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
I ask "why not?". Nothing wrong with this. It means you get yet another choice when it comes to how to run your box (choice is good, mmkay?), and it's gimmicky.
Let's not forget it's easier than setting up a complete new linux box, so newbies can learn Linux easier, and they can move on to more advanced linuxes later on. There's no need to shove the whole kit and kaboodle into their laps all at once, when all they want to do is try it out.
OS's... Some like to call Windows Windoze (it IS slow at times, I'll admit that... linux IS a slicker OS) or Winblowz (that's intelligent...), yet they forget something... not everybody like to get their hands dirty with all the greasy stuff under the bonnet (compile the kernel, f.x.), and windows is aimed at them. MS may claim it's secure and all that, but it isn't as secure as Linux.
They both serve different purposes, yet people tend to treat them just like any religion, i.e. linux is the ONLY way to go, or Windows is the only way to go. Both are wrong, but people continually refuse to see this. *sigh* fanatics.
News on MS.com: Winux!
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
Maybe it's because most people (me included, I admit, I haven't dug deep into linux yet, just fiddled with it) don't know wtf "loopback mounted large file" means. Some may even look at the words "vfat partition" and go "wtf?".
Not everybody is (or want to be) totally IN when it comes to computers, just like when it comes to cars. Who wants to know how a piston engine works, let alone how it LOOKS...
Some people just want to USE a computer, yet they want to try out linux. That means ease of use above security. If they were to run this server on a mission-critical and/or oft-targeted box, they would have more sense than run linux on UMSDOS. The point here is that the people who try linux this way, use this as a possible starting point, to LEARN linux without the first hassle often associated with installing linux.
For that matter, would you prefer to use a computer via DIP switches, like they did in the 50's? I seriously doubt that.
People assume too easily that other people know exactly what they know, and everything is SO easy. Remember that people still mistake the CD-ROM for a coffee cup-holder. Stuff must be made easy enough so that a complete newbie can use it, the hard-core group which dedicate their whole life to hacking away at the computer is NOT someone to look for in userability testing.
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
I've used both Windows and Linux for a while, and while Linux is better, technically, well... I find it doesn't really matter what I use. Windows is easier, because it's more mouse-based, while Linux is also easier because it's more cli-based. That's because I'm USED to CLI's. A normal user is not.
Just USING a box, and setting it up is 2 very separate topics, and completely different cans of worms. If the Linux box is set up right, it's just as easy to use as a Windows box. Right there there's no discernable difference. The main difference is when you try to set one up.
I've done both, both used it as a user, and set it up (Linux and Windows), and I can say that setting up Linux can be a pain. I was lucky, it took just 1-2 hours, with minimal intervention on my part, just like Windows'. There's just one problem I can see here, and that is... "looks". Linux outputs a lot of text while it's installing, windows does not. All this text can be daunting to the newbie. See the difference here?
Sure, Windows is more "cuddly", and Linux is more powerful, but to the average user, do you think they care if it's more powerful or not? Not really. They just want it to work. They don't want to get into the nitty gritty of it all (how many people know exactly how a car's engine work, or even the basic theory behind it? I'm sure a few don't even know the basic theory, they just use it.).
The way I see it, people jump on something (Linux or Windows), and preach about it like it's a religion. It's not. In their continuous endeavour to convert people to The Right Thing (tm), they lose sight of what's important about computers.
Until people realize there is no One Right Solution For Everything, we'll still have this discussion (or fanatical quarrel, if you will), and people will just keep regurgitating the same shit over, and over, and over. Just like any other religious war:)
Having a choice is good. Having Windows and Linux as a choice is good. And to the contrary of what most people might think, Windows AND Linux have good points to them. Whoever don't see that, needs to either take a break, or get off prozac. No system/solution/whatever is without flaws, and neither are they without strongpoints. Learn to relish the strongpoints, instead of vehemently bashing the other system/solution/whatever's flaws, while elevating the other to godlike status.
*sigh*
TGR
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
I just love it how people either say "Windows Sucks!" or "Linux is too hard" "Linux sucks!" etc. Yet when you ask them about WHY they say it, they usually can't answer you. People need to start understanding that Windows is for users who like things easy, while Linux is for the more advanced guys. Sure, Linux is more stable than Windows, but who cares if a windows box is up and running for 2 weeks or 2 months? What do most people do? Shut ut down every day. What do most people need? Just a computer that works. If that happens to be a Windows PC, so be it. I use Windows most of the time, because it's the most convenient OS most of the time (less hassle installing programs, less hassle maneuvering around, and less hassle getting the right program I want. not to mention the more (to me) comfortable UI). I've tried Linux a few times, and it's neat. It's a really neat toy for those who like to delve into arcane commands, dig into those text files to set stuff up, etc. Is it for the normal user? Not really. I don't see it being for the normal user either, not for a long time. Whoever keep on saying that linux is for the masses is dead wrong. It's for the interested, the technically competent. It is NOT, however, for the people who say to tech support "I broke my coffee-cup holder today, can I get it replaced? It says 8x". Don't confuse "cool toy" with "necessary tool", for gods sake. TGR
-m
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, fix one bug, compile it again...
Slashdot Mirror
"this guy isn't thinking things through MY way, he MUST be using Microsoft"
Blow it out your ass, instead of out here.
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
"Server" is a computer people either log on to and does work ON THERE, or people use stuff ON that computer.
"Workstation" is the computer users can PHYSICALLY see and touch (and stroke, for whoever gets that fancy). They run programs there, locally.
For your information, people used server/workstation before Microsoft started making a server-oriented OS. Heck, even before they started thinking about networking. Who? Novell. Are THEY the evil empire now?
Grow a brain, for fucks sake. And a spine. Posting anonymously is (for lack of a non-punny way of saying it) cowardly.
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
Stop looking like a fuckwad, and stop posting. Or do what Real Men (tm) do -- SIGN THEIR POSTS.
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
As for your post, I've said it before, and I'll say it again... If you've got something to say, either stand by it, or shut up about it. Posting anonymously makes you look like a tard.
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
The correct way of doing it is
1) Something's wonky? Let's reboot, see if this fixes it
2) Hmm, it DIDN'T fix it permanently, *now* I will spend some time trying to figure out what's really wrong.
PS: Next time you've got something worthwile to say, don't say it anonymously. It just makes you look like a dork looking for someone to flame. If you've got something to say, stand by it or shut the fuck up. Thank you.
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
Right, so taking your comment to the extreme, why aren't we seeing linux machines with an uptime of something like 10-20 years? Upgrades? we don't need no stinking upgrades! Give us linux 0.001 over linux 2.1 any day!
See the point here? Uptimes ISN'T the be-all and end-all. Shit happens. The power fails. Someone stumbles in the power chord. What IS important is
1) Functionality
2) Security
3) Stability
Even linux has to be rebooted to replace the kernel when there's a WEAKNESS in it, otherwise it's not really a good server anymore, is it?
I can see it now, the server admin of a linux box going "ooh! i can't fix this security hole, i'll fuck up my uptime!".
For what it's worth, I personally think linux IS better than win9x, and NT is irking me a bit. However, I do NOT automatically look on uptime as compliments of how good an OS is. I look at functionality, security AND stability... I've had to reboot my linux server quite a lot lately simply due to my wish to keep my server secure. My server isn't automatically an unstable server, nor is the OS automatically unstable. I do this willingly, because I wish to have a secure system. Then again, if I *really* wanted a completely secure server out of the box, I'd run OpenBSD, not Linux.
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
That's just as important as anything else, since during a Quake deathmatch things get rather heated... so if someone constantly wins (being either the chick or the guy, doesn't matter), and there is NO hope whatsoever of the other person getting any better, some tact is most likely required.
However, I'm not saying "share wins 50-50". Since my gf is better than me, she beats the shit outta me regularly. However, I do manage to sneak up on her occasionally, and kill her in a way that makes her go "wow, impressive". Or is that just her being tactful? Hmm...
There's one problem with his feature, and your response (and mine, for that matter)... point of view. It's difficult to set oneself into someone elses' perspective, and that won't change. So no matter who writes an article on how the sexes should treat one another, it will most likely be slated more one way instead of another.
My view? Even tho my gf spanks me most of the times, I don't really want it any other way. It gives me a challenge, something to try to better, and that makes me a better player. She, too, has to keep on her toes because I'm always hounding her. Of course, if she were to let me kill her once or twice (heh, that sounds worse than it really is) because she feels sorry for me isn't that bad, given it's not hidden too badly. Her being TOO nice to me all the time, however, would make me lazier in the long run. It may give me more satisfaction there and then, but in the long run I'd lose out.
In short, I like a good fight, as long as it's not too one-sided.
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
Being good at Quake is a surprisingly effective way to impress geek guys. With some of them it seems you've shattered their most fundamental prejudice against women - 'woman no Quake'.
Heh, my gf is actually not just beating me in Quake, she's wiping the floor, the roof AND the walls with my ass, almost every time I play against her. I get the occasional lucky shot in, but usually, it's a one-sided match. *sigh*
How about being nice to guys, and letting them win?
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
Oh, that's going to happen, sure... If a chick wants to gloat over me for winning a match, she's going to work for it. Then at least she can feel she's earned it, not just feel "oh, he let me win to make me feel better".
Someone who will put off sex for a couple more minutes to discuss the intricacies of debugging their latest program.
That can possibly be arranged, but see next case.
Unless we want sex instead, in which case, be ready.
What guy ISN'T ready?
Someone who gives us root password on their box.
We'll give you your root password if you'll give us yours
Someone who lets us change root password on their box so that we're the only one who knows it.
We'll let you change the root password on your box if you'll let us change root password on yours. Gotta be fair, you know
Someone who is less complicated then a computer, takes up less time, and less maintenence, and is all to willing to maintain our computers, and us, any time, day or night.
Whadda you mean, less complicated than a computer? the computer is the least complicated piece of equipment you'll get! garbage in -> garbage out
Less time? Less maintenance? we MAKE time, and we maintain ourselves, thankyouverymuch
You maintain us, we maintain you. The computer'll have to see to its own needs
An Open Source guy, all transparent nice simple coding, but not GPLed - none of this freely distributable stuff.
Aww, and i wanted to share my wisdom with other people. *sniff*
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
*cough*netscape is worse*cough*
So much for Open Software automatically being better. It's also the only browser I know of that crashes 3 OS's within 5 minutes of eachother
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
/. had an article about this exact problem in the software industry a few days ago.
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
It's sad, but it's a fact that [most] chicks don't do geeky stuff, because it's not the popular thing. The sad part about this is that because most chicks don't do this, the chicks that DO venture into computers, are either not believed, or they suddenly get hit on by lots of geeks (they're lonely out there, y'know, and there aren't that many geek chicks to hit on, so when they DO find a geek chick, they'll hit on them for all they're worth
I doubt this'll change too much the next few years, and more's the pity. Most chicks I know (that are geeky, and that's not saying that much, it's like 2 or 3, heh) think in radically different ways from me. They think "usage", while I'm better at remembering little details that might be bringing down a box.
Chicks ARE a resource untapped of thus far, and we'd gain a lot from getting them into computing, but it's no use FORCING chicks into computing (like I know one teacher of mine tried to...). A lot has to change for that to happen, and, as mentioned earlier, that'll take time.
I wait eagerly for that time to come.
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
And give me one reason for flaming you for your opinion... there isn't one, it's your opinion (it's also what I mean). Chill, dude.. not everybody like to flame needlessly
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
Women think in different terms than we men do, generally speaking, that is. It seems to me that women are better at seeing the whole picture, while men focus on the little things, so if women were to join in more, we would most likely benefit.
The main problem IS that women are discouraged during their whole trip to adulthood. I'd like to think I was unbiased when it came to this subject, but no matter how much I try, whenever I start talking to women about computers, I expect them to go "Computers? eww!" or something like that. It's sad, because I'm often surprised at how interested some of them CAN be in computers (some almost moreso than I am myself, and that's saying a lot).
As for the "having to dumb down the conversation", I actually find that a nice challenge, trying to explain to others what exactly, f.x. a partition is, why a DMA conflict is bad, etc. It helps me deepen my own understanding of the topic, weird as it may seem.
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
It's nice to have your own policy when it comes to what OS you choose (and how you perceive it should be), but don't enforce that on others.
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
Trust the force, Luke.
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
Let's not forget it's easier than setting up a complete new linux box, so newbies can learn Linux easier, and they can move on to more advanced linuxes later on. There's no need to shove the whole kit and kaboodle into their laps all at once, when all they want to do is try it out.
OS's... Some like to call Windows Windoze (it IS slow at times, I'll admit that... linux IS a slicker OS) or Winblowz (that's intelligent...), yet they forget something... not everybody like to get their hands dirty with all the greasy stuff under the bonnet (compile the kernel, f.x.), and windows is aimed at them. MS may claim it's secure and all that, but it isn't as secure as Linux.
They both serve different purposes, yet people tend to treat them just like any religion, i.e. linux is the ONLY way to go, or Windows is the only way to go. Both are wrong, but people continually refuse to see this. *sigh* fanatics.
News on MS.com: Winux!
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
Not everybody is (or want to be) totally IN when it comes to computers, just like when it comes to cars. Who wants to know how a piston engine works, let alone how it LOOKS...
Some people just want to USE a computer, yet they want to try out linux. That means ease of use above security. If they were to run this server on a mission-critical and/or oft-targeted box, they would have more sense than run linux on UMSDOS. The point here is that the people who try linux this way, use this as a possible starting point, to LEARN linux without the first hassle often associated with installing linux.
For that matter, would you prefer to use a computer via DIP switches, like they did in the 50's? I seriously doubt that.
People assume too easily that other people know exactly what they know, and everything is SO easy. Remember that people still mistake the CD-ROM for a coffee cup-holder. Stuff must be made easy enough so that a complete newbie can use it, the hard-core group which dedicate their whole life to hacking away at the computer is NOT someone to look for in userability testing.
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
Just USING a box, and setting it up is 2 very separate topics, and completely different cans of worms. If the Linux box is set up right, it's just as easy to use as a Windows box. Right there there's no discernable difference. The main difference is when you try to set one up.
I've done both, both used it as a user, and set it up (Linux and Windows), and I can say that setting up Linux can be a pain. I was lucky, it took just 1-2 hours, with minimal intervention on my part, just like Windows'. There's just one problem I can see here, and that is... "looks". Linux outputs a lot of text while it's installing, windows does not. All this text can be daunting to the newbie. See the difference here?
Sure, Windows is more "cuddly", and Linux is more powerful, but to the average user, do you think they care if it's more powerful or not? Not really. They just want it to work. They don't want to get into the nitty gritty of it all (how many people know exactly how a car's engine work, or even the basic theory behind it? I'm sure a few don't even know the basic theory, they just use it.).
The way I see it, people jump on something (Linux or Windows), and preach about it like it's a religion. It's not. In their continuous endeavour to convert people to The Right Thing (tm), they lose sight of what's important about computers.
Until people realize there is no One Right Solution For Everything, we'll still have this discussion (or fanatical quarrel, if you will), and people will just keep regurgitating the same shit over, and over, and over. Just like any other religious war
Having a choice is good. Having Windows and Linux as a choice is good. And to the contrary of what most people might think, Windows AND Linux have good points to them. Whoever don't see that, needs to either take a break, or get off prozac. No system/solution/whatever is without flaws, and neither are they without strongpoints. Learn to relish the strongpoints, instead of vehemently bashing the other system/solution/whatever's flaws, while elevating the other to godlike status.
*sigh*
TGR
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
TGR
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
-m
99 little bugs in the code,
99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...