"Rich Grise" typed:

> I noticed that fluxbox is very clean, and you can edit a menu, close
> it, and boing! there it is. But I decided I like a little more eye
> candy, so went back to KDE. Mainly, I just didn't want to spend the
> time really customizing it when so much of KDE (in the style I'm
> using it) is already there. And I'm used to the MICRO$~1 minimize,
> maximize, X control buttons. ;=)

I used KDE and nothing else for the last two and a half years. Then,
early this semester, out of nowhere I switched to Fluxbox. I haven't
since found a need or reason to switch back to KDE, and probably never
will.

But, then, I don't use the GUI for anything else other than browsing
webpages. I guess PINE, slrn, and Emacs make my world go round.

--
Ayaz Ahmed Khan, <http://fast-ce.org/linux>
"I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated Development
That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb. Thank you."
-- Vance Petree, Virginia Power

Blumf wrote:
> Not everybody who uses a computer wants to spend ages remembering thousands
> of obscure command switches/keystrokes. A computer these days is a business
> tool, like a phone or a photocopier. People use them to get non-IT tasks
> done and therefore need the UI to have a very shallow learning curve. This
> isn't because they're lazy or stupid, it's because they have a job to do
> and learning the ins and outs of bash or whatever CLI isn't their job.

If you want your job done fast by an intuitive GUI without thinking
about how or why it works, get an Apple.
If you want to do _anything_ else with your computer, get a PC.

~Mik

--
ls -l /mnt
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 9 2004-11-11 17:57 doom -> /dev/null

Mario Berger <no_damned_spam@nospam.no> writes:
> If you want your job done fast by an intuitive GUI without thinking about
> how or why it works, get an Apple.

have you ever really worked with OS X? do you realise that the base system
is open source, and that the unix base makes it just about as transparent
as linux?

--
Joost Kremers
Life has its moments

Joost Kremers wrote:
> have you ever really worked with OS X? do you realise that the base system
> is open source, and that the unix base makes it just about as transparent
> as linux?

I have, and I know it's based on BSD. However, the overall impressoin of
Apple stays the same: You don't wanna know why it works, but it does
nicely, get an Apple.

~Mik

--
ls -l /mnt
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 9 2004-11-11 17:57 doom -> /dev/null

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kenneth wrote:

> What tasks, writing a letter, sending a fax....what tasks are so difficult
> that a gui makes it easier.

Most real world business editing I've seen in various organizations involves
bringing togeather formatted text, graphics and embedded data from other
apps. The company I currently work for, a typical fax would involve
embedded graphics (the companies letter header, maybe a scan of the senders
signature, although I've never seen the point of that myself), text of
different font families/styles and embedded spreadsheet tables (quote break
downs for example). Even if this isn't that case in 99% of letters/faxes
written, that fact that it's needed at least once in a while requires the
software to be capable of doing it, and simple to use in the process
(people forget).

> I only use my computer for business...I fax, I write letters, I send and
> receive email, I print what I want or need, I add and deleted and manage
> my database records, I keep track of expenses, I do my billings ... and
> here's the topper...I couldn't write a bash script if my life depended on
> it!

Good for you (except the bash scripting, for shame ), however that's just
you. Saying how you prefer to do something isn't proof that it's the best
or correct way for everybody to do things[0].

> Starter motors add to the reliability of a car, a gps doesn't add or
> detract from the reliability of a car....a gui doesn't add or detract from
> an OS.

Reliability? Hardly, everytime somebody has to push start their car, thats a
time the starter motor system has failed on it. That never happened with
crank starting (no worries that the battery was too low on charge or the
motor had just plain broke). A starter motor is unnessecery, the only
reason they're in cars is because people are too lazy to walk round the
front and turn a handle. I'd consider GPS more like a spell checker, handy
if you're unsure.

Ask yourself, how how many seconds did you take to start typing with a GUI
wordprocessor/text editor when you first saw one. How how many seconds to
start using vi/emacs in comparison? (BTW if you claim it took you less time
to start using either vi or emacs, you're going to have to explain how you
instinctively knew what the key combinations were without referring to the
manual.)

Note the above question isn't proof about which editing system is the more
powerful, just how easy it is for a non-technical person to use.

Blumf

[0] http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/unrep.htm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBoJhzMid3IcxolsoRAhxJAJ9YGjHduMxlmG5imIL/+a0pcvYF1wCgkgHx
U0kvST38CpVbC8YNATvITfQ=
=Z97P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Keith Matthews wrote:

> There is also the argument that anyone who is incapable of learning the
> significance and meaning of basic commands is also highly likely to be
> incapable of learning the significance of anti-virus software and
> firewalls. And just look where that problem has got us.

Personally I don't believe there's any reason an OS/distribution can't be
both secure and easy to use. It's just an unfortunate accident of history
that the most popular OS at the moment is written by untrained chimps[0].
As someone else suggested, MacOS X is a good easy to use system, yet it
maintains the underlying power of BSD.

Blumf

[0] I say untrained as I'm pretty sure trained ones could do better[1].
[1] i.e. the ones who wrote the NT kernel, which is quite good.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBoJyuMid3IcxolsoRAn0EAJ9wH2Pp9YOqwQDkOcGVSO QF8WYpHgCgi9fB
9EdobnbNf8iJIJyMWE4TrXU=
=gTtj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Keith Matthews wrote:

> There is also the argument that anyone who is incapable of learning the
> significance and meaning of basic commands is also highly likely to be
> incapable of learning the significance of anti-virus software and
> firewalls. And just look where that problem has got us.

Not every computer user in the real world is, or needs to be, a computer
administrator. The typical office worker will never be responsible for
firewalls, virus protection, system or network security in any way.

They *will* most likely need to work with graphic images and PDF documents,
deal with formatted text, view websites in full javascripted flash-enabled
graphical glory, join Net Meetings and Presentations, and read/write
proprietary document formats from other OS's, such as .doc files.

Jeffrey

On 2004-11-21, Jeffrey Froman <jeffrey@fro.man> wrote:
>
> They *will* most likely need to work with graphic images and PDF documents,
> deal with formatted text, view websites in full javascripted flash-enabled
> graphical glory, join Net Meetings and Presentations, and read/write
> proprietary document formats from other OS's, such as .doc files.

Having worked on both sides of this issue, I think the computer has, in some
cases, actually caused the dumbing down of users. After ten years working
at a major hi-tech firm, I was very disheartened by increasing levels of
stupidity exhibited by computer users. A perfect example is Powerpoint, the
single most insidious piece of software ever created. Hundreds of man hours
completely wasted sitting in meetings listening to some moron recite, word
for word, what is clearly readable up on the wall/screen. Send a memo,
ferchrysakes!

As for the fax machine, the damn thing should be outlawed! I can't tell how
many times I've had to make a phone call or send an email to get a fax
sender to use email because the fax sent is simply unreadable. It's
outdated technology that should have died years ago, or at least improved to
the point where faxes don't look like a bad mimeograph.

As for the question of gui's versus cli, the argument that one should use
whatever gets the job done best, I agree. OTOH, someone avoiding learning
cli-based apps because they're too busy and have to get some real work done
is bull. Educating one's self is part of one's job. If avoiding learning
cli and shell scripting is going to decrease one's effectiveness at their
job, then they are not properly trained/educated. As one who came from dos
up through an all gui environment (win,cad) and back to a cli biased
environment, I can honestly say someone who is not using cli is not working
most efficiently.

my 2¢.....
nb

On 2004-11-21, Blumf <blumf@hot.mail.com> wrote:
>
> Kenneth wrote:
>
>> What tasks, writing a letter, sending a fax....what tasks are so difficult
>> that a gui makes it easier.
>
> Most real world business editing I've seen in various organizations involves
> bringing togeather formatted text, graphics and embedded data from other
> apps. The company I currently work for, a typical fax would involve
> embedded graphics (the companies letter header, maybe a scan of the senders
> signature, although I've never seen the point of that myself), text of
> different font families/styles and embedded spreadsheet tables (quote break
> downs for example). Even if this isn't that case in 99% of letters/faxes
> written, that fact that it's needed at least once in a while requires the
> software to be capable of doing it, and simple to use in the process
> (people forget).

There's nothing wrong with the gui. My orginal comment was only that the
gui is the gui is the gui and has no bearing on the value of the OS. That
most things, note the phrase **most things**, can be done from the commandline
as easily as from a gui. In my opinion KDE is as good as fluxbox which is as
good as blackbox which is as good the winxp gui. Now the OS that's a
different story.

>
>> I only use my computer for business...I fax, I write letters, I send and
>> receive email, I print what I want or need, I add and deleted and manage
>> my database records, I keep track of expenses, I do my billings ... and
>> here's the topper...I couldn't write a bash script if my life depended on
>> it!
>
> Good for you (except the bash scripting, for shame ), however that's just
> you. Saying how you prefer to do something isn't proof that it's the best
> or correct way for everybody to do things[0].

Agreed...I don't think I said otherwise ... I only said (see above).

>> Starter motors add to the reliability of a car, a gps doesn't add or
>> detract from the reliability of a car....a gui doesn't add or detract from
>> an OS.
>
> Reliability? Hardly, everytime somebody has to push start their car, thats a
> time the starter motor system has failed on it. That never happened with
> crank starting (no worries that the battery was too low on charge or the
> motor had just plain broke). A starter motor is unnessecery, the only
> reason they're in cars is because people are too lazy to walk round the
> front and turn a handle. I'd consider GPS more like a spell checker, handy
> if you're unsure.

Well I define reliability differently. For some reason, the thought of crank
starting a car that's been sitting out in sub zero weather all night with an
engine full of oil with the viscosity of cement while tring to compress the
air fuel mixture in a cylinder...well, to me that's not a reliable way to
start a car.


> Ask yourself, how how many seconds did you take to start typing with a GUI
> wordprocessor/text editor when you first saw one. How how many seconds to
> start using vi/emacs in comparison? (BTW if you claim it took you less time
> to start using either vi or emacs, you're going to have to explain how you
> instinctively knew what the key combinations were without referring to the
> manual.)

Control h b That's what they make help files

ken

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 00:33:06 -0500, Beauford wrote:
> ... There are many programs I use in Windows
> that I have no idea if equivalents are available for Linux....

Check out this link, Beauford.

http://linuxshop.ru/linuxbegin/win-l...en/table.shtml
--
Chick Tower

For e-mail: aols . sent . towerboy AT xoxy . net