>I find it arrogant that Mandrake would deliberatly cripple the
functionality
>of programs in order to prohibit certain behavior that they have
decided is
>inappropriate. This kind of "I know better than you" unwelcomed
>paternalistic coercion is awfully Microsoft-ish. Is this the direction
>Mandrake is heading? Yuck!
I think it more like good solid design. We work machines in my line of
work, and without safety limits it's easy to get killed or hurt very
badly. So when we design something we put restrictions on what the
operator can do. However, it's also necessary for someone to fix it
occasionally, so we design a "maintenance mode" to defeat the safeties,
but we don't make it easy to do by accident. (That's what root is, the
UNIX "maintenance mode" user.)
Now, after the machine is in the plant there is absolutely nothing in
world to stop the plant personnel from shoving a pencil in the safety
switch and running the machine with the doors open. And there is nothing
in the world stopping you from reconfiguring anything on your machine to
work any way you feel like it should work. But, in the same way it would
be irresponsible of us to deliver a machine that's unsafe to operate, it
would be irresponsible of Mandrake to deliver a configuration that's
unsafe. (And if you really want to see somebody making decisions for
you, install an OpenBSD system. It's locked up tight as a drum! And they
do it on purpose!)
Michael
