On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 00:00:07 +0200 Polytropon <free...@edvax.de> articulated:
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 17:39:36 -0400, Jerry McAllister > <jerr...@msu.edu> wrote: > > Just a nit here -- I would think of BSD as less cluttered > > rather than simpler. > > The definition of "simple" is individual, it depends on > present knowledge and the ability of thinking (concluding, > deriving, understanding). > > Simple things SIMPLE, complex things POSSIBLE. FreeBSD > utilizes this approach by providing small "units" that > fulfill a certain purpose and that can be combined to > do something more complex, instead of trying to build > a "one size fits all" complex that denies the simplest > choices. Sadly, such things are more common in software > than you want them to be... > > > > > Those that have all the extra built-ins with no thinking required > > tend to be more complicated, not simpler. They just cover it up > > by allowing fewer choices -- as you imply above. > > A good preconfiguration does help. If common tasks are > already well prepared, built-ins can be very helpful. > Instead, you often find a "pile of garbage" in software > that you're forced to pick what you intend to use, always > hoping it will work as intended. If problems occur and > you want to diagnose what's wrong - well, big problem. > As nobody thought of doing so, you don't have the option > to diagnose anything. > > Is THAT simple? I don't think so. > > +----------------------------+ > | | > | An error occured! | > | | > | (Yes) (No) (All) | > | | > +----------------------------+ > > :-) > > The often called attribute "simple" does take the opportunity > to LEARN. As it has been initially mentioned, the OP wants > to learn BSD. So how can anybody learn if there is no way to > do so, because the "simple" concept states: You'll do it THAT > way. You can't do it differently. If it doesn't work, it doesn't > work. Period. Reboot and try again. > > There's also the belief (as in church) that certain systems > or programs are simple because WHEN problems occur, they are > ignored, or solving them is delegated to somebody else who > has the knowledge and experience to do so. For the user, the > mystic "It's so simple, it does anything on its own!" prevails > and gets communicated to others, although it's just wrong. > Aggressive advertising also uses this approach. After all, > I'll repeat my statement: PCs are not simple. Face it, it's > a fact. :-) Your approach to the problem neglects to factor in each individual's own level of expertise and desires. Example: there are millions of cars and drivers in the world. Now, how many of those drivers truly want to do more than drive their vehicle from point A to point B unencumbered by the nuances of their vehicle? Now, if an individual wants to learn to be a class 1 mechanic, that is fine; however, requiring it to just operate a vehicle is absurd. When I was a kid, I use to tear down motors and rebuild them for competition racing. Today, I won't even waste my time changing the oil on my own car. I don't have the time to waste and I can easily afford to have others who want to do that for a living attend to it. -- Jerry ✌ freebsd.u...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
