> From: Charlie Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Now, in my experience, the UI's have changed quite a bit. So much so that I > generally always try to set things to the Win2000 'approach'. But even > then, the dialogs, their sequence, where the options are stored, has > changed a whole lot. The main reason I know this is because over the past > couple years I've helped users try to get their PC's working (mainly OS and > networking config stuff). They bought new machines - so it had XP - and I > had Win2000. Helping them over the phone was pretty much a nightmare. > Almost nothing matched up on my screen as we were stepping through various > operations.
I see it more like switching between the various Latin rooted languages. They are all similar but different. I can see you having a problem in helping users in the newer GUI when you don't have one. If you did it would have been a snap. > So I agree with Ed. This industry is absurd. MS puts on the face that the > new 'eye candy' is fantastic. But then they spread FUD about switching to > any other OS because of UI retraining costs, etc. It's a lot more then that ;-> It's that log in as root when you need to. Then log back in as the standard user. Funny story but at this workplace everyone is an admin. I suggested stripping that luxury and making a single user as "super admin" They all looked at me like I was a freak. The horror on their faces! _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
