On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 11:46:41AM -0500, Robert Buel wrote: > That would be true if both NOS's required equal intuition to > master...but they don't...I can stumble around in MS and see > configurational windows--and usually find what I'm looking for...but on > a 'NIX box, you have to specifically enter in commands (read: know the > commands)to configure each aspect of the NOS. Sure, there are windowed > GUI interfaces available, but then, it becomes Windows, doesn't it?
No, it just has a GUI. That's like saying 95 and 2000 are the same OS. They aren't but they look the same to the uninitiated. > I agree that once you have mastered the NOS's, that the effort to > achieve that is, in fact, equal. It's just that the newbie would find it > easier to have a visual representation and configurational groups to > learn from--i.e. "figuring it out" is easier. For newbies, maybe. It's not really that easy, though. You have to go through a bunch of menus to get anything done, and remembering a series of 10 buttons to press is harder for me than remembering what command does something and then looking it up on a man page. > I think that better analogies might be: > >Driving with an automatic versus a stick shift. > >Using a manual camera versus an automatic camera I think the only reason these analogies hold up is because UNIX lets you get into the guts easier. Once you've got a UNIX box up and tuned, it can be as easy to use as Windows. Rob
msg06710/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
