Linux-Advocacy Digest #83, Volume #35 Sat, 9 Jun 01 16:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Here's a switch for a change ("Todd")
Re: Opera (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Laugh, it's hilarious. ("Chad Myers")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Will MS get away with this one? (Peter Hayes)
Re: A Browser is a Browser ("David Dorward")
Re: Laugh, it's hilarious. (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("JS \\ PL")
Re: Laugh, it's hilarious. (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Laugh, it's hilarious. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Laugh, it's hilarious. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Laugh, it's hilarious. (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Here's a switch for a change
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 03:13:08 +0800
Reply-To: "Todd" <todd<remove>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
So he'll probably spend about a week *trying* to get Linux to *install* on
his system only to find out he can't run shit.
-Todd
"flatfish+++" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I just got back from an early morning visit to the local CompUSA and
> while browsing the aisles this guy and his wife come in carrying what
> appears to be a PC and a box containing Windows98ME upgrade.
>
> He's demanding to talk to the store manager because Windows wiped out
> all of his data which contained some kind of a web based research
> project (best I could gather in between screams).
>
> They plug in the system and use a display on the shelf and
> keyboard/mouse and sure enough when he boots up the entire system
> freezes with a BSOD complaining about corrupt files.
> Of course the idiot had no current back up and he said everything was
> fine until he installed the Win98me upgrade which he paid $125.00 for,
> so he said.
>
> This guy was going ballistic and putting on quite a show and when he
> started screaming about how Windows sucks and CompUSA should be sued
> for selling inferior programs and so forth someone said why don't you
> run Linux?
>
> Another person picked up RedHat from the shelf and handed to him and
> the thing ended when the manager evidently gave him the program for
> free if he would take his system and leave.
> This guy was also HUGE at about 6'5" or more and 275lbs at least.
>
> I thought it was so funny I almost forgot what I went there for in the
> first place.
>
>
>
>
> flatfish+++
> "Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 19:10:56 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> What are you on about? I have cookies either completely turned on or
> off. And if I wanted streaming media I'd switch on the telly.
I want to be able to enable/disable cookies per server.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.aol-sucks,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Laugh, it's hilarious.
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 18:55:56 GMT
"Charles Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Shice Beoney wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 08 Jun 2001 16:24:35 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > (The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
> >
> > >In comp.os.linux.advocacy, T. Max Devlin
> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote
> > >on Fri, 08 Jun 2001 04:05:43 GMT
> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >>Said Chris Ahlstrom in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 07 Jun 2001
> > >>>flatfish+++ wrote:
> > >> [...]
> > >>>> ie: This machine comes with 40 gigabytes of memory right?
> > >>>
> > >>>On the other hand, in the auto section of Walmart you'll hear more
> > >>>intelligent questions. Why is that?
> > >>
> > >>Well put. Why *is* that?
> > >
> > >It might be that NASCAR is more interesting than the yearly competition
> > >amongst highly intelligent, computer-knowledgeable students (I forget
> > >the name, but it's an East vs. West competition setup). :-)
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > I find it hard to believe there's ANYthing less interesting than
> > NASCAR.
> NASCAR - YECCCH. However, you will have to come to the track here and
> see my Linux/Java enabled '72 Charger 440.
Java enabled Charger? So it spends 3/4 of it's RPMs translating the power
to the drive train and only 1/4 of them actually moving the car? What's
it do? 0-60 in 4.6... minutes? =)
-c
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 19:12:47 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > In any case, it is nothing like what you've accused me of. You accused me
> > of snipping inappropriately, and I've done none of that.
>
> I also accused you of that Pete!
And I've still not done it!
> > That you have
> > misinterpreted what I've said is not my fault, but yours. You see what
> > you want to see.
>
> This is the perfect method to NEVER solve anything Pete, you're so convinced
> that it's *everyone else* who's wrong.
>
> Let me ask you this one question ?
>
> Have you ever admitted to being mistaken/wrong ?
Yep. Here on COLA.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 19:13:47 GMT
In article <9ffev9$gh5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> No. I accused you of snipping and posting out of context.
And the evidence, please?
> Also, you wrote it in a way to imply that. I can't prove that was the
> implication, but it was bloody obvious and all replies to your post
> seemed to agree with my point of view. If it was not the case, you made
> no attempt to inform people that you had been misinterpreted, bcause that
> is the way you wanted it to be interpreted.
I did no such thing. You read something into what I wrote.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Will MS get away with this one?
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 20:05:42 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001 19:35:39 -0600, Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Jun 2001 10:07:48 +1000, Ian Pulsford
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >How long will it be before
> >IE begins editing out certain words with suitable M$ replacements from
> >webpages?
>
> Or inserting Microsoft's own ads onto every page Windows users view.
This really sums up all that is wrong with Microsoft.
They produce OSs that brought computing to the masses. They may not be
great, but they generally work for most users. They produce a reasonably
competent server/workstation OS (W2K). They produce reasonably competent
office applications. But their business ethics appear to come from the
gutter.
If after Bill Gates had made his first billion (who needs more than that?)
he'd stepped back from trying to put every competitor out of business by
assimilation or extermination, if he hadn't tried to blackmail every OEM
into loading his, and only his, OSs, if he hadn't tried to include spyware
in his latest products, and now this; if instead he'd promoted his products
in a fair and equitable manner, if he'd introduced updated file formats in a
manner that didn't blackmail users into upgrading, if he didn't try to ram
his browser down everybody's throats, he wouldn't be embroiled in a fight
with the DoJ, he wouldn't be looking over his shoulder at Linux, he wouldn't
be accused at every turn of devious and underhand tactics, and I expect his
products would still be installed on 95%+ of the world's office and home
systems.
If Gates had put half the energy into fixing the flaws in his products that
he's put into his attempts at taking over the world's computers he'd have
produced products that we'd *want* to install and use, instead of these
constant devious tactics, the sole result of which is that nobody trusts
Microsoft to give you the time of day.
The man's a moron.
Peter
------------------------------
From: "David Dorward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A Browser is a Browser
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 20:14:43 +0100
It seems that on Sat, 09 Jun 2001 13:47:39 +0100, someone claiming to be
"Ian Pulsford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed this:
> How can we stop this crap in its tracks?
<?PSUDOCODE
If Internet Explorer 6
{
redirect to page explaining why it is banned from
the website.
}
else
{
PAGE
?>
If enough people do it it might be effective, if too few people do it
then visitors will just get annoying and give up on the site.
--
David Dorward http://david.us-lot.org/
The only way to keep your health is to eat what you don't want, drink
what you don't like, and do what you'd rather not. -- Mark Twain
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Laugh, it's hilarious.
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 19:25:12 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ayende Rahien
<don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 8 Jun 2001 20:21:27 +0200
<9fr2jf$gjj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> Many years ago, I taught computer classes all about dos. Windows was not
>> on the horizon then. The biggest hurdle hurdle was the directories. Md,
>> cd and rd were the hardest concepts. I tried analogies like file folders
>> in a filing cabinet. I even brought paper files, file folders and a
>> cabinet to demonstrate what the computer was doing. Still, despite my
>> most valiant attempts, half the class could not understand. The other
>> half were angry because the class was being held up.
>>
>> Even in a GUI environment, understanding the concept of directories is
>> still baffling for many users. I can quickly judge a user's technical
>> competence just by looking at the way they store their data files. When I
>> see 500 data files in the root, I know that I am dealing with a "special
>> needs" user. If I see data files neatly organized in a well thought out
>> hierarchy, I know this user is comfortable with the technology and when
>> they request tech support, it will be a real problem. They won't call tech
>> support to turn on their computer.
>
>
>I *just* had to explain this to someone, he is training to be a PC Mechanic
>(have no idea about the correct term in English. Basically, the guy that
>work at help-desk, OEMs, tech-support, come and fix computers, etc.)
>They are just starting, and he (following the orders) tries to get the
>described file layout on the disk.
>He couldn't distingish betweena folder and a file even *after* I spent 15
>minutes explaining it to him.
>I'm not *that* bad in explaining stuff, I think.
>
>The scary thing is that another person in the same class came in and while
>he had a better understanding, he still had trouble getting this concept.
At a fundamental level, there is no difference between a file and
a directory; both are organized sequences of bits, enforced by the
kernel -- in the case of Linux, a file system (/usr/src/linux/fs [*]
contains source code for all supported file systems, currently).
In the case of a directory, the file system restricts access so that
people don't munge up the subitems within that directory by trying to
write "Hello World" documents into the directory itself. (Some
older variants of Unix actually did allow open(..., O_RDONLY) access.
Linux and most modern Unices, however, will return the error
code EISDIR -- probably as a hint. :-) )
At a higher level -- a directory and a file are nearly identical as they
are both icons on a computer display screen or window. The casual
user is going to have trouble if he doesn't understand the high level
of abstraction going on here and the multiple layers of things
happening -- the mouse click lands on an icon, which is most likely
a rectangular region represented by 4 numbers in the computer and some
additional data; the 4 numbers themselves are probably 16 bits in a
structure and the additional data may be scattered in a number of spots,
depending on how the icon system is implemented (e.g., it may be using a
polymorphic class hierarchy). Now a menu comes up -- this is a
subwindow (again with the 4 numbers) and a bunch of subitems, each with
data. The user selects on an item making it recolor (state bit,
redraw), the menu goes down (destructor? refresh) and things happen.
This is intuitive? While it's commonplace, it's not something
people are going to pick up by default -- unless they've seen it before.
Try explaining a mouse click to someone in, say, Ungi Burungi. :-)
Bear also in mind that the meaning for "icon" is a representation for
something -- classical icons, for example, show Jesus on the cross, the
Madonna, and other such deities.
Windows is a little weird in that it stores its icons directly in
the executable itself, as opposed to a resource fork (Macintosh)
or a separate icon file (Amiga). This is one reason for that
annoying desktop rebuild on occasion. :-) Icons for non-executables
are deduced by the registration mechanism, which is mostly suffix-based
and stored in that beehive of a registry.
Amiga didn't have a suffix-based system at all beyond ".icon" files;
applications were expected to write out the icon files themselves (Amiga
provided a toolkit). Files without icons weren't displayed until
Amiga put in an option to show all files on their Workbench (their
older name for what is now called the desktop, essentially).
Macintosh's icons -- both executable and non- -- are handled through
the resource fork, at least as of System 6 and 7. I doubt they've changed
that much.
Amiga was a workable design; Macintosh is an elegant, if unconventional,
one. Windows is a gigantic kludge.
The Unix method for displaying file icons is far simpler -- there
isn't one! It's up to individual user programs or libraries to display
pictural representations of concepts, should they desire to do so;
some libraries may provide toolkits/APIs to assist therein.
Most programs display a list of file entries with the desired suffix,
or all file entries, in a scrolling listbox, when opening a file
or set of files. (Note that a file name is an abstraction,
as well.)
Gnome and KDE might have a type registration mechanism of some sort, but
I don't know offhand.
>
>
>
[*] Debian likes to put things in /usr/src/kernel-source-*.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 40d:06h:00m actually running Linux.
[select one]
Life's getting too complicated, even listening to the radio.
Microsoft. When it absolutely, positively has to act weird.
The Usenet channel. All messages, all the time.
Linux. When Microsoft isn't enough anymore.
Would Emperor Palpatine approve of this?
Hi. I'm a signature virus.
We are all naked underneath our clothes.
This is a voluntary signature virus. Send this to somebody.
------------------------------
From: "JS \\ PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 15:30:18 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> Why are you spending money to make up for bad design? You just have
> money to burn, or do you get a kick-back somewhere? If you wanted to
> spend the money, that's fine. Why does Microsoft have the power to
> cause millions of dollars in *OTHER* people's money to be spent in order
> to make up for bloated monopoly crapware that nobody wants to begin
> with, but has to get in order to continue to keep up with monopoly churn
> on a product which is the most notoriously unreliable in the entire
> field of IT?
I'm NOT having to upgrade hardware, that;'s the whole point. And neither
will anyone else who's running a 233 or better on 64mb of ram, and has a
1gig HD. If you can't afford a computer or can't afford the two year upgrade
cycle get out of the game and stop complaining. It's pretty simple. Systems
are growing more complex and bigger as you read this. Get used to it, or sit
fat and happy in your Model T shaking your fist at all the "whipper
snappers". Either way makes no difference to the world.
> Just how stupid are you, sir? It is one thing to tolerate Microsoft; it
> is something else to celebrate them.
I celebrate Microsoft! Thank you Microsoft for providing me with a crash
proof OS (Win2k) and thank you for improving it for consumers with the
upcomming release of WinXP. T Max Devlin thanks you too!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Laugh, it's hilarious.
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 19:32:43 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ayende Rahien
<don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sat, 9 Jun 2001 09:52:11 +0200
<9fshcc$9ed$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Fri, 08 Jun 2001 03:14:47 -0700, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> (Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>>
>> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>>
>> >> Typical LoseDOS lusers.
>> >>
>> >During my past life as tech support, I responded to calls like "My
>> >computer won't work!!!" Upon arrival, I turn on the monitor. Or sometimes
>> >the box itself needs to be turned on. The "typical" user appears unable
>> >to learn anything. I have discovered a pretty good test for the "special
>> >needs" user.
>> >
>> >Many years ago, I taught computer classes all about dos. Windows was not
>> >on the horizon then. The biggest hurdle hurdle was the directories. Md,
>> >cd and rd were the hardest concepts. I tried analogies like file folders
>> >in a filing cabinet. I even brought paper files, file folders and a
>> >cabinet to demonstrate what the computer was doing. Still, despite my
>> >most valiant attempts, half the class could not understand. The other
>> >half were angry because the class was being held up.
>>
>> How can anyone noe understand directories? I could understand them
>> when I was 7. God help them if they ever need to learn about
>> double-linked lists or bitwise operations.
>
>And here we get to the other wall.
>Pointers. Just like some people can't get directories, some people just
>*can't get pointers*.
Tell me about it; I was once in a user's group and tried to
explain the concept of C pointers to this one individual (he
wanted to learn how to program the Amiga in C).
He never did get it, while I was there. I'm not sure if I'm
a great instructor, but I can't say I had problems with the concept --
although I have problems remembering where I first learned it. :-)
But pointers point to something. I find this an *extremely*
intuitive concept. Maybe I'm special. :-)
(Another individual wasn't too clear on the particulars
of why the sequence
char * ptr;
strcpy(ptr, "blah");
didn't work. That one's a bit tougher.)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- one hopes I'm special in a good sense :-)
EAC code #191 40d:06h:22m actually running Linux.
Linux. When Microsoft isn't enough anymore.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Laugh, it's hilarious.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 19:35:14 GMT
Said Michael Vester in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 08 Jun 2001
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
[...]
>> Typical LoseDOS lusers.
>>
>During my past life as tech support, I responded to calls like "My
>computer won't work!!!" Upon arrival, I turn on the monitor. Or sometimes
>the box itself needs to be turned on. The "typical" user appears unable
>to learn anything. I have discovered a pretty good test for the "special
>needs" user.
>
>Many years ago, I taught computer classes all about dos. Windows was not
>on the horizon then. The biggest hurdle hurdle was the directories. Md,
>cd and rd were the hardest concepts. I tried analogies like file folders
>in a filing cabinet. I even brought paper files, file folders and a
>cabinet to demonstrate what the computer was doing. Still, despite my
>most valiant attempts, half the class could not understand. The other
>half were angry because the class was being held up.
Apparently, it is your skill as an instructor that is lacking. The use
of physical analogs were a good idea; I can only presume you executed
the lesson poorly. I've never had a single person fail to grasp
directories when I have explained it to them this way.
>Even in a GUI environment, understanding the concept of directories is
>still baffling for many users.
It is still trivial to understand, even without a GUI. It is the
explanations, not the subject matter, which are baffling for many new
users. This is most often a direct result of people making the badly
flawed argument that anyone who understands something is capable of
explaining it to someone that doesn't. Quite the opposite is true:
generally, the first thing to go once you grasp an idea is the ability
to remember what it was like not to understand it. This is why it is
usually and more effectively left to people such as myself, with some
peculiar dysfunction in our brain which makes it possible for us to
understand things from the newbie's perspective, even after we are no
longer newbies. Technical specialists make the worst instructors
possible.
>I can quickly judge a user's technical
>competence just by looking at the way they store their data files.
Apparently, then, you have no ability to improve that technical
competence.
>When I
>see 500 data files in the root, I know that I am dealing with a "special
>needs" user. If I see data files neatly organized in a well thought out
>hierarchy, I know this user is comfortable with the technology and when
>they request tech support, it will be a real problem. They won't call tech
>support to turn on their computer.
Which 'non-special needs' users are the ones born with the knowledge of
how to create a file directory hierarchy genetically imprinted into
their brains?
You seem to be saying that as long as they already knew what you were
supposed to be teaching them, they were 'smart enough to learn', while
if they didn't already know what you were trying to teach them, they had
"special needs" and were incapable of learning. Doesn't that seem a bit
strange to you?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Laugh, it's hilarious.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 19:35:15 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 8 Jun 2001 20:21:27
>"Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> Many years ago, I taught computer classes all about dos. Windows was not
>> on the horizon then. The biggest hurdle hurdle was the directories. Md,
>> cd and rd were the hardest concepts. I tried analogies like file folders
>> in a filing cabinet. I even brought paper files, file folders and a
>> cabinet to demonstrate what the computer was doing. Still, despite my
>> most valiant attempts, half the class could not understand. The other
>> half were angry because the class was being held up.
>>
>> Even in a GUI environment, understanding the concept of directories is
>> still baffling for many users. I can quickly judge a user's technical
>> competence just by looking at the way they store their data files. When I
>> see 500 data files in the root, I know that I am dealing with a "special
>> needs" user. If I see data files neatly organized in a well thought out
>> hierarchy, I know this user is comfortable with the technology and when
>> they request tech support, it will be a real problem. They won't call tech
>> support to turn on their computer.
>
>I *just* had to explain this to someone, he is training to be a PC Mechanic
>(have no idea about the correct term in English. Basically, the guy that
>work at help-desk, OEMs, tech-support, come and fix computers, etc.)
>They are just starting, and he (following the orders) tries to get the
>described file layout on the disk.
>He couldn't distingish betweena folder and a file even *after* I spent 15
>minutes explaining it to him.
>I'm not *that* bad in explaining stuff, I think.
<*Smirk*> Nobody ever does.
You would have saved the 15 minutes if you had realized, as this
obviously rather astute gentlemen did, that there *isn't* really any
distinction between a 'folder' (directory) and a file; they are both
merely entries in a folder.
Now, you can argue the point with me (because, obviously, there are
distinction between the two) but the fact is, I have no trouble
explaining these concepts you say you have trouble explain to newbie
users or anyone else. Given the procedures, functions, and methods you
were presenting, obviously in the context of the lesson the difference
between folder and file was meaningless. Had you recognized that and
explained it (leaving the fact that there really is a big difference
between the two as a teaser for a more advanced lesson) you might have
had more success.
>The scary thing is that another person in the same class came in and while
>he had a better understanding, he still had trouble getting this concept.
The scary thing is that you were unable to understand why they were
having trouble getting the concept.
Let's make a deal, Ayende. I'll leave the programming to you, if you'll
leave the instruction to me. OK? :-)
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Laugh, it's hilarious.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 19:35:16 GMT
Said Michael Vester in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 08 Jun 2001
>Ayende Rahien wrote:
>>
>> "Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> > Many years ago, I taught computer classes all about dos. Windows was not
>> > on the horizon then. The biggest hurdle hurdle was the directories. Md,
>> > cd and rd were the hardest concepts. I tried analogies like file folders
>> > in a filing cabinet. I even brought paper files, file folders and a
>> > cabinet to demonstrate what the computer was doing. Still, despite my
>> > most valiant attempts, half the class could not understand. The other
>> > half were angry because the class was being held up.
>> >
>> > Even in a GUI environment, understanding the concept of directories is
>> > still baffling for many users. I can quickly judge a user's technical
>> > competence just by looking at the way they store their data files. When I
>> > see 500 data files in the root, I know that I am dealing with a "special
>> > needs" user. If I see data files neatly organized in a well thought out
>> > hierarchy, I know this user is comfortable with the technology and when
>> > they request tech support, it will be a real problem. They won't call tech
>> > support to turn on their computer.
>>
>> I *just* had to explain this to someone, he is training to be a PC Mechanic
>> (have no idea about the correct term in English. Basically, the guy that
>> work at help-desk, OEMs, tech-support, come and fix computers, etc.)
>> They are just starting, and he (following the orders) tries to get the
>> described file layout on the disk.
>> He couldn't distingish betweena folder and a file even *after* I spent 15
>> minutes explaining it to him.
>> I'm not *that* bad in explaining stuff, I think.
>>
>> The scary thing is that another person in the same class came in and while
>> he had a better understanding, he still had trouble getting this concept.
>
>I have been able to teach this concept to a six year old. A former
>girlfriend brought her six year old son to visit me at work. Of course, he
>wanted to play games on my computer. I had selection of games in c:\games
>(back in the dos days) and I showed him how to start one up. When I came
>back a few minutes later, he was playing with a different game. I asked
>him how he did that. He showed me. He picked up the directory concept
>after one example. He had to "start" the game first to know what the game
>was because he could not read yet. Perhaps this kid was an exception but
>most kids I have seen playing on a computer don't have any problems with
>directories.
>
>I am inclined to believe that if someone can't understand directories,
>they are too stupid to use a computer. Either a user gets it or they
>don't. You are not *bad* at explaining stuff.
Oh, yes he is. So are you, obviously. It sounds more like you are just
standing next to someone while they figure it out themselves, if you
claim that a six year old can understand your explanation but a grown-up
can't. Kids don't have problems with directories because they have no
preconceived notions (also known as "knowledge and experience") that
needs to be contradicted for them to grasp the metaphor being presented.
>I have tried to explain
>directories in a many different ways. If someone does not "get it" right
>away, there is nothing that can be done. The user is destined to be
>completely ignorant about a critical part of whatever operating system. In
>the tech support business, finding a user's misplaced data files is one of
>the most common type of help call.
That's because newbie errors are the most common type of Windows
problem, since Windows tends to force people to remain newbies forever.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
