On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 12:02:24PM +0200, Timon Gehr wrote: > On 09/19/2012 11:54 AM, Mehrdad wrote: > >... > >At least when Windows has the occasional boot problem which I > >stupidly caused, it's _fixable_ and doesn't lie to you about having > >fixed it!! > > > > The issue is that in one case you know how to fix it and in the other > one you do not (and you care less about it because you prefer to think > Windows is superior as it is what you use '99% of the time'), not that > the problems are inherently (un)fixable.
Yeah, that's one of the things that irks me about Windows culture. It's touted as being "user-friendly" and "easy to use", etc., but actually it requires just as much effort as learning to use Linux. People complain about how Linux is hard to use or things break for no reason, but the same thing happens with Windows -- you either do things the Windows way (which requires that you learn what it is), or you quickly run into a whole bunch of gratuitous incompatibilities and bugs that nobody cares about because you aren't "supposed" to do things that way. (I tried switching the mouse to sloppy focus once... and never dared try it again.) As a programmer, though, I find Windows fundamentally annoying because the hood is welded shut. Sometimes you *know* what's wrong but it refuses to let you fix it, whereas on Linux you can look at the source and figure out how to fix it -- heck, you can modify and recompile the dang *kernel* to make it do what you want, should you be so inclined! You can't even get close to that in Windows. But then again, this is from the POV of a programmer. From the user's POV, none of this matters, it's all just a question of familiarity and preference. I personally find the bash shell far easier and more comfortable to use than any kind of klunky GUI, but most people won't because the prevalence of Windows has made GUIs more familiar to the average user. T -- Turning your clock 15 minutes ahead won't cure lateness---you're just making time go faster!
