On Tue, 28 May 2002, Alastair Scott wrote: > As for the second, you have to know it exists: it's remarkable _how > different_ the approach to learning how to use Linux is to someone who > has come from a Windows variant. > > With Windows, for home use, the command line is deemphasised (almost to > the point of invisibility in Win2K and WinXP) and, in my experience, > people eventually learn to do things through trial and error with the > GUI. With a Linux command line, you'll become frustrated very quickly > if you use trial and error. > > Thus doing things by looking up manual pages, HOWTOs, FAQs and so on may > well be a big leap. (As someone who's used Unix/Linux for about 13 > years I'm probably about the worst to say whether that thought is > correct or not :)
These are interesting comments. There was a discussion about a year ago on comp.os.linux.misc with similar viewpoints. Though there was a spectrum of opinion, the arguments were generally polarized around either the "rtfm" or "there are no stupid questions" camps. On the one hand, to grow the Linux community we need to be very forgiving of newbie mistakes. There are things in Linux that are very non-intuitive and sometimes inconsistent (not any moreso than pressing "Start" to do a shutdown, but just different). Many argued that the current groups of Linux gurus merely want to maintain the illusion that they were privy to arcane lore. On the other hand, there's the idea that a certain level of entry is needed to prevent the usenet groups from having to answer the same "how do I telnet as root" questions over and over and over again. The usefulness of the groups are diluted when questions that are answered in the FAQs get asked every single day. Because the groups are almost entirely "staffed" by volunteers, it's annoying and insulting when someone feels that their time so valuable that they cannot be bothered to spend the little extra time needed to do a Google search. > > There are also big conceptual differences; last night I was > 'evangelising at dinner' and it was extraordinarily hard to get across > the concept of 'no drive letters' and the fact that applications and > data are separate in Linux. (Eventually it did get across and I was > handing out Mandrake CDs :) Does Windows *still* do this? I'd hoped that they'd dropped that idiotic drive letter madness with 2000. There's nothing like editing a registry to get your system working after you add another drive causing everything to move up a letter or two. > > Perhaps there should be an 'Conceptual Differences between Windows and > Linux HOWTO' ... ? (If anyone else thinks it should exist I might have > a shot at writing it; there's nothing like a difficult challenge ... !)
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
