On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 09:12:37 +0100 Neil Bothwick <n...@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 00:18:49 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote: > > > I remember things being improved. While I was in my 50s I was > > continually faced with youngsters' ideas for improving the company's > > methods. Stupid, every one. When challenged, they couldn't say how > > their proposed new "solutions" would lead to specified gains by > > anybody, but the changes were forced through anyway. This isn't > > get-up-and-go; it's I've-got-to-make-my- mark. > > > > Pathetic. > > But not comparable. The reasons for the changes in GRUB2 have been > given. > > I may not like how they have implemented everything, splitting the > settings between config files in two separate directories means you > always look in the wrong place first, but I understand the need for > the changes even if I don't need the vast majority of them. > > Problems with upgrading from GRUB1 to GRUB2 are irrelevant. If you > have a working legacy installation, there is absolutely no reason to > change beyond curiosity. Well the only constant is change, right? The trick is to spot the difference between change for the sake of change and change that does make sense. This usually means getting inside someone's head, which makes life fun. Doubly so if the change proposer works in sales.... -- Alan McKinnnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
