Jennifer wrote:
> The fact that micro$oft prevents its users from being able to
> understand the source code is disconcerning. Users can go to school and
> learn everything there is to know about operating the system, but they
> will never understand the intimate details of the source. You shouldn't
> trust what you can't understand. (before I'm flamed...yes, I know
> nothing about the linux source code, nor how to use my system.
Same here -- I don't know enough to understand the Linux source code. But
it sure is comforting to know that there are plenty of people who *do*
understand it and *do* examine it.
> At least with linux, you have the opportunity to discover everything
> about the system. Although all the dual-booters can attest that windows
> is easier to operate, I'm sure that as they get more familiar with
> linux, they will understand how powerful they can be over the system,
> and not the other way around.
Windows isn't necessarily easier to use, but it is more familiar because it
has a single GUI that has been around for several years. Linux has several
different GUIs, some of which are IMHO every bit as easy to use as use as
the Windows user interface, but none have been around as long as Windows.
Because Linux has so many graphical options (KDE and Gnome being the most
popular) while Windows has only one, anyone who's worked with Windows can
find his/her way around someone else's Windows system but the same is not
necessarily true for all Linux users. Oh, I could eventually figure out
where everything is in Gnome, fvwm or icewm, but the only GUIs I really know
well are KDE ... and Windows. (I'm using Windows 2000 Professional now,
waiting for it to break.)
> (As soon as I learn how *not* to trash my system, I won't use windows at
> all, but as it stands, I'm very good at trashing and rebuilding my Linux
> box!! :)
Trashing-and-rebuilding is how most of us learn, isn't it? I don't think
it's actually possible to wear out an installation CD, but if it was I would
have worn out several -- mostly Windows 9x, but also a few Mandrake and Red
Hat CDs. I'm convinced I can break any piece of software with just normal
operation (or what passes for "normal operation" with me, at least). I
haven't completely broken Win2K yet, but I have managed to render its
"hibernate" feature inoperative -- not bad for just two days of playing with
it.
I'll probably continue using some version of Windows for awhile, since not
everything I want to run is supported under Linux ... yet. Problem is, not
everything I want to run is supported under Win2K either, and Win9x is far
too unstable for me to take seriously.
--
Walter Luffman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Medina, TN USA
Supercharged with extra glucose! (Type 2 diabetes 5/99, d/e/m/motorcycle)
"Sage", purple 1998 Honda VT1100C Shadow Spirit
