Kristoffer Walker wrote: > The discussion of Linux as an "everymans" OS has been very interesting. > It is always mentioned in these discussions how much easier it would be > if information could be found in one place. One of my favorite places > to go when I have a question is the online book "Rute User's Tutorial > and Exposition" at http://rute.2038bug.com/index.html.gz > > Linux has deep roots in the "hacker ethic" so Linux gurus expect us to > do some work, and are not willing to give up information for free. > However, if we are willing to put in an hour or two a day for a few > weeks to work on your system with an in depth resource like "Rute User's > Tutorial" or another similar book, working with Linux (including the > command line) becomes second nature. The important thing to remember is > that you are choosing to make an investment of time that will change > your computing workflow and reward you with significant time savings in > the future. The question to ask before diving in is "Do I use my > computer enough to make the time investment worth it?" If not, then > Windows or a Mac is where you should be. After spending a few weeks this > past winter to finally make the leap and really learn a Linux distro > (Slackware), my workflow has improved tremendously. Changes and > upgrades to the system are made easily in no more than an hour (for a > more complicated piece of hardware and much less for software). For me, > it has been a very wise investment of my time. > > -- Kris > > From another point of view from someone who's as far from being a Linux guru as possible, and after spending time and money on OS/2 until it was abandoned by IBM, I have to disagree about the windows/mac comment. The only reason to use either of these IMO is to run needed software written by companies that refuse to use Java for whatever reason. I have managed well and have not lost anything as far as work/play/entertainment using no windows since 3.11. The less you use your computer the less you should use anything proprietary. I learned my lesson. I find Linux to be easier to install and much less hardware sensitive. Software can be a pain, and I use tars rather than RPM's because there is more control over the install. A failure of either due to "you don't have this and you don't have that" means I don't use that program usually, just like the windows-specific software I can't use. But I sometimes try to give it what it wants. I do use it at home and at work, and am incapable of programming so I do depend on other people just like Windows/Mac users and believe I'm better off than them. Even not being familiar with all aspects of Linux, our company is having 40 year old software converted to PC for hardware issues. I trust Linux enough that I chose it over windows server for the job. That puts any failure on my head, but I consider it much safer in the long run than anything Redmond has to offer. All it has to do is run 24/7 indefinitely without fail, and I sure trust it to do that.
Thanks for the info link. I need all the help I can get. I know I'm the odd man out on this list as a non-guru, but read it to pick up interesting things from them that know. Louis _______________________________________________ Mid-Hudson Valley Linux Users Group http://mhvlug.org http://mhvlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mhvlug Upcoming Meetings (6pm - 8pm) MHVLS Auditorium Sep 3 - Porkchop - The Areas of My Expertise Oct 1 - Ubikeys Oct 4 - Linux Fest Nov 5 - Releasing Open Source Software Dec 3 - TBD
