On Thu, 3 Jun 1999 00:00:02 +0000, Automatic digest processor wrote:
> Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 14:26:13 +0000
> From: Boanne Lorraine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: BACK to DOS GUI (please) Dale's problems solved! (Was: DOS GUI)
> Hi Dale,
> I can solve all your problems, easy-peasy:
> 4.) Feed the parrot to the cats.
Sorry, I value the cats. Being house cats all their lives they wouldn't
have a chance. In fact, the parrot has free rein of the house anyway.
The only real gripe I have with the parrot is her sceaming, hence her
name - "Banshee"
> 6.) Get on a baseball mailing list. That way you can at least
> talk about it.
Here in Minneapolis, we've the Minnesota Twins for baseball.
Deepressssing!
> Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 21:13:08 -0500
> From: Will Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: DOS GUI
>>> Hallelujah, hallelujah! Can I get an Amen?
>> AMEN!
>> Now what hymn do we sing?
>> "All praise the power of DOS's name, let command.com be called!
> Perhaps we should add:
> ....Thy output come, thy input done, on disk as it is in memory.
In the name of the Operating System,
In the name of the Hardware,
In the name of the Holy Tech Support,
AMEN!
There full circle.
Back to DOS/GUI. This is a perfect thread to examine how people think
and learn. I think that bears directly on how appealing computer users
find command line operating systems versus oject-oriented visual systems.
I initially learn best by seeing something demonstrated. (GUI ?)
I master that thing by studying manuals and explanations. (CLI ?)
In other words: start by seeing and develop by reading.
Some are more vocabulary-oriented than I am, many others are far less.
In many things, lots of people only go to the instructions, if they
aren't successful on a naked try or two first. I think this tendancy
is the hook that Microsoft used to market Windows. I also think that
it is a functional approach for a great many basic users. I did not
say good or complete approach. It is just that it works well enough for
them that anything additional is learned by accident and is really gravy
above and beyond what they actually need out of a computer which is
really little more than turn-it-on-do-this-do-that-turn-it-off like a
TV, and, yes, automobiles are more and more like that, too.
Those of us who want more or must learn to a deeper level have a
different set of priorities and needs.
Microsoft is missing the boat by increasing the bloat and complexity of
Windows, and will kill their own market, if folks like us who are
probably far more oriented to words and language, and who are willing to
do things the hard way, can accept the fact that most computer users
have a different orientation to their machines than we do.
Most want what the computer can do, in fact many would prefer to have
that without the computer.
I think most of us want the computer, and then we want to see what we
can make it do.
Peace
Dale Hoogeveen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.net-info.com/~dutch/
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
