Hello Tomi, hello all,
> > Extended monitor (to monitor a specific callsign qso). Lots of goodies us
> > old-timer packet operators enjoyed when using Stupid programs like SP, GP,
> > etc.
>
> Did I say these programs are stupid? No, I didn't. I said the platform
> they run on sucks and thus required them to be designed as they are. That
> doesn't automatically make the desing good or bad. I'm just slightly
> annoyed everytime someone goes "it works this way on DOS, why the heck
> does it work differently on Linux."
And I just can't understand why some people stick to _one_
solution ("it is Linux, and therefore things should _only_ work
somehow they call perhaps the Linux way") when there's no
obvious reason (for me as a newbie) visible.
Thank God, we have Linux, and Thank God it is by far more flexible
than DOS or something like that.
So why shouldn't we as Linux users be flexible and tolerant, too
and accept other ways of working?
It was one of the reasons why I started trying Linux a long time
ago, that under this OS _nothing_ is impossible, or to say it in
other words:
There's just nothing that can't be done with Linux.
So why not work under Linux in a DOS way from time to time? It
makes things a lot easier especially for people like me that are still
on the way to migrate to Linux.
Don't be bothered, tomi, but opinions like yours give me an
impression like this:
Under DOS, the OS restricts the functionality of the programs and
usability, under Linux sometimes the users do this themselves.
My appeal here for a little bit more tolerance.
Though a lot of people do not believe it there are a lot of users who
want to use a graphical surface they're familiar with under Linux
too. I think there _are_ reasons for developing fvwm95 and KDE :)
Cheers, 73
Gerd
