On Wed, 7 Aug 2002, lucidity wrote: >Sorry to rant, but I believe anybody trying to learn *nix or *nux, should >know how to do it manually: ie: you need to re-enable kudzu to detect a >new piece of hardware you just installed, but for some reason, your X >interface is broken...
I think Dave's point was that most users aren't interested in fixing things manually. In a recent meeting, Wayne (Liauh) mentioned that doctors/lawyers/accountants are the ones who might benefit most from the Linux on the desktop. If so, these people are not interested in fixing a computer. They already spent 4 to 8 years learning their profession, they don't want to spend another 4 years just to learn how to use a computer. Concerning your case-in-point, I think most people would rather take their computer in for repair rather than open up the hood. But not even I would rebuild a distribution from scratch every time something goes wrong with my system (I'm a software engineer). I think both sides of the GUI/CLI debate needs to compromise. I think the GUI group should admit that learning the CLI is benefitial and can improve productivity (and it may not be as hard as everyone thinks it is). While the CLI group should admit that the GUI is not going to knock your IQ down a few points. >Ps.- Assembly is "pretty-much" good now-adays for the dedicated C >user. ( but it gives valuable insight into just how x-86 processors/memory >operate... I agree. All programmers should learn at least one assembly language. Understanding what happens in the processor when you execute a statement is knowledge that a programmer can not function without. --jc -- Jimen Ching (WH6BRR) [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
