While I agree with some of what you said, Mike, I must add that as of February 4th, 2002, GUI apps for remote administration are still infants. They are relatively insecure and bloated in their use of bandwidth when compared with the their slick cousin, SSH. Yes, you can get lost in bash/etc... but that is because it is so powerful, as is the CLI. GUI's are great and I love to see more added to Linux all the time. I fight for Linux on the desktop and GUI-everything is what it is going to take. But when I administer remote clients (especially the poor souls locked into a 5 year contract with their 56k ISDN connection) SSH and the command line is what I want. Dated and trapped in a time-warp? Perhaps. Pragmatic? You betcha.
On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 00:17:38 +1130 "Mike Andrew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 4 Feb 2002 15:41, Burns MacDonald wrote: > > > frontal lobotomy can produce a Windows OS clone. > > You're opinion is always worth respecting Burns but that's a cheap > throway shot at explaining away the need to make an OS user friendly. A > killer line to knock out opposition. (anyway, it takes a real idiot to > create 10million lines of code and call it Windows, a lobotomy would > have reduced the line count) The arcane blitheringly stupid cli syntax > of Linux can get consigned to the dustbin where it deserved to be 20 > years ago. The cli is an embarassment to those who use it. I no longer > need to grep an awk before I bash it. It hasn't put one more hair on my > chest. While I've learned a few more verbs since 1972 *nix hasn't kept > up beyond the monosylable. We're stuck in a time warp with ls, tre, man, > and a host of other inscrutable geek. The only reason people defend tar: > a tape archiver for god's sake, is because it brings back fond memories > of Bob Dylan, Coffee Shops and Duffel coats. (Ask them to be rational > and the expression mists over) > > I'd call this geekspeak a high entry barrier when what I want to do is > design T shirts and run accounts. If that were my profession, i'd like > to love Linux, not wrestle it to the mat. CP/M did better. Bash syntax > and the engine that runs it is more profuse with bloat than any > complaint about kde. (read the maintainers' comments on same subject) > > Gui's and point n click assist in a need, and it doesn't equate to being > a Windows clone. X is a good idea(tm). If there are similarities, then > it's because Bill was savvy enough to use the original Xerox > reccomendations, and the laid-in-concrete specifications for the > 'special' keys of the keyboard, Not many people realise that the feel in > windows look 'n feel is an IBM dictation(SAA something) for System 36/8 > in existence prior to the PC, adopted by DEC, and passed on (partly) via > the x-motif widget set. > > I would certainly back you in an argument where some distro was stupid > enough to chase the Windoze market by emulating Windoze, but being a > self-confessed gui-adorer doesn't make me a me-too Windoze luser. > > >then maybe > > there are some users we just don't need to attract. </sunday evening > > rant> > > too bloody right. I've never been attracted to *nix. I use it because > Bill Gates and Steve Jobs gave me no choice. Linux has some way to go > before I 'like' it. A decent gui is one. > > > The MAC suffered because they insisted on a completely proprietary > > model in an increasingly generic market model. They were clobbered by > > the dominance of the PC clone model and all the explosive > > cross-development that brought with it. > > I would argue with you here, not on the clearness of above, but Steve's > greed. The cause of all of the above ills were and are that Macs are > crazily, greedily, unnecessarily, expensive. It was the Apple ][ that > introduced the bus concept, *the* item from above that made all the > difference for the Oem. Motorola fuelled to the 68040, a far better cpu > in all respects than it's 80486 counterpart (not my say so, industry > definition), Apple would not reduce the price sufficiently to get the > cpu chip-volume up, Motorola, sensibly, gave the public what it > deserved. Intel. > > -- > http://linux.nf -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-users mailing list - http://linux.nf/mailman/listinfo/linux-users > Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Archives,and Digests are located at the > above URL. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list - http://linux.nf/mailman/listinfo/linux-users Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Archives,and Digests are located at the above URL.
