Thanks, Kevin. I did get Red Hat running sufficiently to use several of its features. I like everything I've seen.
People on this list have been quite helpful. One way or another, I will get Red Hat running. Thanks again, everyone. Pat 1/2/03 8:41:01 PM, "Kevin Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Linux support is more community minded that anything else. There's no phone >number (generally) for someone to call for assistance. You'd ask questions >here, and we'd help where we could. > >For non-tech people, especially frustrated non-tech people, which is the >category you're moving into (from the sound of previous posts), I'd >recommend Knoppix. It's a non-committal way to test out Linux. You load >your windows machine up, download it, burn it, put it into your CDR, and >reboot. When it comes up, it'll be running a completed Linux distro. You >can play with it a bit, and see if it's "for you" from there. If it is, >then I'd suggest starting with Red Hat, Mandrake or Suse. Red Hat is the >best documented, both in print, and on the web, PLUS, almost every Linux >user has seen Red Hat at one time or another so I'd put them first. >Mandrake is probably most common distro among the people on this mailing >list, so it'll be the easiest for people to help you with, Put that second. >I've heard lots of good things about Suse, and it's by far the most popular >distro in Europe, so I'd say that would be my third choice. > >I'll bite on what reads like a troll, but is probably just frustration. > >Non-technical people should use Linux because once running, it just works. >Technical or not, you're here because you're dissatisfied with Windows. >Linux has a learning curve, you should understand that right off the bat. >But the truth is, once you've learnt the basics, you'll have a system that >you like better because it doesn't make the assumption that you are a moron. >Microsoft's Paperclip helper might be fine the first time he interrupts your >work; in fact he might even be helpful; but after about the 10th, you want >him gone, but you can't get rid of him (unless you pay for an upgrade to a >different version of Office). Linux doesn't hold you hand right off the >bat. You will end up asking for help here or somewhere like this. But in >the end, YOU will know how to do the work, you won't rely on some idiotic, >irritating paperclip to do it for you. That might seem inconsequential, but >it isn't. The paperclip is meant to be helpful, and it often is. I'll >ignore the annoying side for now, the real problem is that it (and most >Windows products) are overly idiot friendly. This is great in the >beginning, but it ends up being a bad thing. Think of it like this. If you >were wanting to learn chess, and I offered to help, that would be gsound >great. Initially, I'd help by advising you on all your moves. After a few >games though, you'd want to make the moves on your own, and my making every >move on your behalf would become annoying. After LOTS of games, you >wouldn't want to learn about chess because every time you played, I did >everything for you. It would be better for you to be able to make your own >moves, even if it meant mistakes, because learning is as important as >winning. Windows has lots of Wizards looking over your shoulder. Linux has >few if any. > >Linux means that if you need help, you need to turn to other people, and ask >for help. Some people find that hard at first, but the reality is, we were >all new once, and none of us know it all. In the end, you will know more >you would if a wizard helped. That sounds a bit eliteist, but it isn't. >Knowing Linux will actually help you learn Windows, Mac's OS X, Your >PlayStation, and almost every other computer you'll encounter. The reason >is that rather than learning to click in the right place at the right time, >you'll learn how the underlying pieces fit together and interact. If you >know how to point and click, you need to relearn it every time you change >OSes. > >Lastly, non-technical people generally underestimate themselves. I'm sure >you can run a TV/VCR/Microwave/Playstation/Calculator/Cell Phone/etc without >any problem. People think they don't know how to work a computer because >they place the blame in the wrong place when their PC crashes. Keep this in >mind. The problem is the PC, not you. That includes Linux. There will be >times that it crashes, or is too difficult or whatever, that's a problem >with the Operating System, not with the user. Those other computers don't >crash, why does your PC? > >I'd answer, but this is long enough already. > >Kev. > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Pat Roche" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 6:58 PM >Subject: (clug-talk) should non-techies avoid Linux? > > >> >> After an unsuccessful weekend struggle to get Red Hat 8 working properly, >I'd like to hear the views of this technically adept group on whether >non-technical people >> should attempt Linux at all? >> >> Should someone who doesn't have the technical aptitude to do his own >troubleshooting avoid Linux until it becomes less problem-prone (e.g., >Jesse's recently posted >> headache with Mandrake 9.0? >> >> If your answer is "go for it anyway," which distro would you recommend? >> >> And do you have a phone number I can call when I run into trouble? >> >> Pat Roche >> >> >> >> > >
