[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: very sad.... No more....



Interestingly, I have no objection to configuring as system
through "text based files."  In fact I think it' s the way to
go, if you have adequate documentation to reference for your
choices.   I'm not always a fan of "automated configuration."
It's good if it works, but as you point out, it doesn't always
work.   If the software isn't "open source," there may not be
much you can do about it.  My only concern is that I like to
manage my system from a GUI interface.  Actually Linux does
allow that, but only completely in "root" mode.  I simply would
like a feature built into the system where "authorized" users
could toggle into root without having to actually leave their
"user" desktop, enter the "root" desktop, make the changes, log
out of root, back into user, to then check to see if the change
actually worked.  There are a few things about Linux that are
very cumbersome in a GUI.  I agree that the problem is
eliminated in "Xterm."  I just don't  choose to engage in that
form or computing in any major fashion.


Helmut Steinwender wrote:

> Linux is in my opinion, a few years back where windows was in
> usability. This gap is rapidly narrowing, though, if the
> current trend toward desktop sophistication continues. The
> downside is, that it may well become too windows-like in terms
> of loosing flexibility and transparency. I use Mandrake 8 on
> one of my machines and while it installs and runs flawlessly
> out of the box, it is easy to destroy that pretty picture by
> doing too much 'configuring'. There are so many
> interdependencies and I have many times wasted my install by
> upgrading components or just customizing desktops that I had
> to reinstall. I hope that a debian distribution, while
> somewhat harder to set up, is less vulnerable to corruption.
> The nice thing about Linux is that the configuration is
> essentially all text-based and with sufficient knowledge, one
> should be able to troubleshoot anything, which is not so under
> windows or mac. I think that in terms of general acceptance as
> a desktop, it will need to be! dome more userfriendly before
> it c > A perfectly valid point of view, Eddie, but a tad harsh
> and unnecessary.
> > There is nothing inherent in the architecture of Linux that
> should make it
> > anymore difficult for any user (lazy or otherwise) than
> Apple or Windows. It
> > is only the absence of suitable tools and organized
> documentation that leads
> > to that impression.
> >
> > IMO, rather than reject the person who only wants to use
> applications rather
> > than learn the nitty-gritty of the hosting OS, all of us
> should be supporting
> > the development of open-source Linux tools that
> significantly improve
> > usability. The more users there are, the more comprehesive
> the suite of
> > available applications will become - and that is surely to
> everyone's benefit.
> >
> > Unnecessarily rejecting users seems to me to be somewhat
> short-sighted.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sunday 03 June 2001 09:35, Eddie Torres wrote:
> > > Good post Jason. Maybe if people attempted to learn linux
> then they could
> > > bitch about it. If they don't want to learn then they need
> to go back to
> > > apple or windows because they definitely don't belong
> using linux.
> > >
> > > Eddie Torres
> > > www.veloct.net
> >
> > --
> > The archive is at https://www.libranetlinux.com/archive.html
> > To unsubscribe, send email to
> [email protected]
> > with a subject of UNSUBSCRIBE.

-- 
The archive is at https://www.libranetlinux.com/archive.html
To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected]
with a subject of UNSUBSCRIBE.