Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote: > I feel sorry for the people who just try to use it at home > occasionally in the evenings.
Exactly. It's really not that bad for folks in a 'work' situation where there's a full-time, professional sysadmin for every 20 - 100 workstations, and other users running a very similar setup in the next cube to share knowledge. And I don't mean Linux specifically, or Unix. The same is certainly true of Windows, too. > it's getting to the point where it's about as > easy to use as Windows on the whole; By "it" here I suppose you mean Linux. I have very little direct experience with Linux, and with Windows only as a reluctant user and a "guy who knows computers" and so gets called on when a machine is hopelessly bollixed up. In my opinion, Windows (95, 98, NT4.0 at least) is the most difficult to *understand* I've ever seen, and not particularly easy to *use* either. The impression I get from Slashdot and similar fora is that Linux is trying to catch up. Uh oh, I'm starting to slip into rant mode again. > but there's so much more you *can* > learn, that it seems harder. I don't think there's less to learn about Windows, it's just that useful information is so completely inaccessible that everyone just gives up very early. I suspect what attracts many people to Linux is that there's an opportunity to learn to understand it. -- Remember, more computing power was thrown away last week than existed in the world in 1982. -- http://www.tom.womack.net/computing/prices.html _______________________________________________ Newbie mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** To unsubscribe , or change message options, see: http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/newbie
