Fr�d�ric Aguiard wrote: > You can't ask a secretary to understand all the complexity of a linux > system. You can't even ask her to use a shell, nor anything like vi or latex > or anything else. This is not HER job. She just needs a tool, a tool > providing her what she needs for her daily work, a tool that does not break > up in her hands while just using basis functions, nor doing something > reasonably foolish.
Bear in mind the first commercial users of Unix were ``three Patent Department typists who spent the day busily typing, editing, and formatting patent applications''. http://www.bell-labs.com/history/unix/firstport.html Sounds a lot like secretarial work to me. When did vi last break up in your hands? Word's stability, on the other hand... The Great Myth of {Uni,Linu}x is that it's `too hard to use', which is Not True. The problem is that it's difficult (not `too difficult') to _learn_. The effort spent in learning early on is repaid several times over later on. Speaking from my own experience, so not necessarily verifiable fact :) It's not obvious, on first approaching a Linux box, what the user should do in order to type a letter to their great-aunt, but once you've learned, it's straigtforward [*]. I had problems learning to tie my shoelaces (when I was 4; I've been doing it succesfully for over 20 years now), but after making the effort all those years ago, I can do it without thinking. Same with a shell, Emacs, vi, etc. 5 years ago. If I'd stuck with Word and Windows, I'd be far less productive than I am now. These days I find Windows, Word, etc. hard to use; they focus exclusively on easy to learn, so someone who knows what they want to do is hamstrung by the interface. I'm not particularly singling out Windows here; substitue your least-favourite point-and-drool interface if my use of MS products offends. Just a mid-morning rant, ignore it if you want :) Stephen [*] Actually, it's not all that obvious on approaching a Windows box, come to think of it.
