Re: Thoughts on Linux

[Paul Anderson <hacker@geeky1.ebtech.net>]

On Sat, 15 Aug 1998, Ephren Taylor wrote:

> BUt until commercial Linux
> software hits the shelves or Linux is able to fully run Windows apps then there
> will be a problem. 
>
"5 years the server, 10 the desktop"
-- Linus Torvalds

So far, we're right on schedule.  IMHO, office suites are the best
application for commercial software on Linux, because it takes a lot of
work to write one.

> Any thoughs on this or something?
> 
Personally, I feel efforts to make Linux easier to use are somewhat
misguided.  Linux should be made as simple to use as possible, however.
Simplicity means well-commented text config files, 'user-friendlyness' is
assuming the user is too stupid to comprehend the comments.  Linux, for
the most part, is currently simple to use.  If anything seems abtuse,
excellent documentation is available EVERYWHERE.  Linux is easy to
install, it's a hell of a lot easier than Win98!  Why?  It's simpler.
Consider: WinNT gives you a BSOD, no other error.  User reboots computer
and ignores problem, even experienced admins have difficulty tracking down
what's wrong.  A Linux program starts coredumping, you view the dumps in
gdb, which promptly reports which program is causing this and where it's
having trouble.  Problem is easily fixed.  NT assumes the user is too
stupid to understand an error message, and will only be confused by it.
Instead, it dumps core to the screen and hangs, ensuring only those with
the source will be able to decode what's wrong.  However, Linux takes the
view that the user _CAN_ understand error messages, so it tells you what's
going on in succinct, accurate terminology.

"Everything should be as simple as possible; but no simpler."
-- Albert Einstein


---
Paul Anderson
hacker@geeky1.ebtech.net
"This is Maurice, our sheep-hearding carrot."