On Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:16:04 -0500, you wrote:
>Original message from: John Aldrich
>>My take on this whole "newbie who doesn't want to learn
>>Linux" is as follows:
>>If you don't want to learn Linux, then hire someone who
>>knows or will learn Linux to administer your system for
>>you. If you're too cheap or just can't afford (like a kid
>>who downloads and installs Linux) to hire someone, then you
>>MUST learn Linux, whether you like it or not!
>>
>>It's that simple:
>>1) Learn to administer your system
>>or
>>2) Hire someone to administer it
>>
>>Can't afford #2? You got two choices:
>>
>>1) Learn Linux yourself
>>2) Format the hard drive and go back to Windows!
>> John
>>
>
>I think that's a valid opinion, except that if people want Linux to
>become a mainstream, well-accepted OS, then it's going to have to take some cues from
>MS. I
WHY? Do we really want linux to go the road of MS?
>mean, really do you expect a person that uses a computer for work
>and a little at home to write reports, surf, check email, etc to have to learn
>everything that
>goes into getting Linux up and running.
There isnt that much to learn in getting it up and running.
Besides...most folks buy their computers with the OS pre-installed.
And if anything happens they go running to their support folks for
their computer.
>Not only that, but with hardware
>compatability issues it's kind of difficult to convince someone that their new
>machine that
>they paid good money for is all but useless if they want to use something
>other than Windows.
That seems to be a problem of manufactorer not linux.
>I know that a lot of this is not the fault of Linux, but we also can't
>be a cadre of snobbish techno-elitists and say that you must know your machine inside
>and out in order to use this OS. That only accomplishes one thing; turning
No one has said that the newbies need to know their machine inside and
out. That statment is disenginuous. What has been said over and
over is that the newbie needs to be able to learn to do some basic
things to tweek their systems and to make some changes, such as
updating kernels, etc. But they have to be willing to learn. If
they cannot at least try learn a little bit about the OS then they do
have an alternative...windoze.
>a lot of people off to a viable alternative.
What viable alternative if all you want is just a clone of windoze?
>
>Adam Koch
>"Nothin in here 'cept a trunkful of dead bodies"
>
