Re: [ Attn: Randy ] Ad-hoc Parsing?
From: Betov (betov_at_free.fr)
Date: 12/16/04
- Next message: T.M. Sommers: "Re: [ Attn: Randy ] Ad-hoc Parsing?"
- Previous message: Ro : "a problem in n5.dll in windows 95"
- In reply to: C: "Re: [ Attn: Randy ] Ad-hoc Parsing?"
- Next in thread: Percival: "Re: [ Attn: Randy ] Ad-hoc Parsing?"
- Reply: Percival: "Re: [ Attn: Randy ] Ad-hoc Parsing?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 16 Dec 2004 17:58:24 GMT
"C" <blackmarlin@asean-mail.com> écrivait news:1103204320.867819.94500
@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
> Betov wrote:
>> "T.M. Sommers" <tms@nj.net> écrivait
>> news:lQcwd.181$uN2.74003@monger.newsread.com:
>>
>> > SevagK wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hehe. Installing is the easy part. Figuring out why it can't
> find a
>> >> file that's definitely in the same directory you are viewing is a
>> >> whole other matter!
>> >
>> > What is the 'it' that can't find the file? Do you have the
>> > appropriate permissions for that directory? File? Did you try
>> > 'ls -a'?
>>
>>
>> This is not the job of an OS user to try anything
>> like 'ls -a'. An OS is there to _do_ the user job,
>> to _show_ the user where the things are, and so on,
>> and this is exactely where Linux completely fails,
>> and why almost no real final users want to use it.
>
> What you descibe is _not_ the job of _any_ OS. It is
> the job of the user interface or shell. The OS
> exists to provide a uniform interface to hardware
> so that applications do not need to know this.
Yes. But i am basically opposed to pedantism. :)
>> The fact that you seem to be proud of knowing how
>> to type 'ls -a' is zero interrest, and such attitudes,
>> that are out of reason pedantiscisms are what make me
>> think that there are few hope for ever having any
>> usable Linux. Mind you your opinions about Command
>> Lines being "more powerful" than Click&Go counts
>> for nope. What matters is that a decent OS _MUST_
>> address, first, grand mothers and 5 years old children.
>
> There are _several_ GUI interfaces for Linux,
One more unacceptable problem.
> any of
> these is suitable for novice users.
None of them is. Proof: Nobody use Linux, but a couple
of sectarian programmers claiming that it works for
them (what it true, by the way..., but, unfortuately
of zero interrest. Mind you MenuetOS, also works fine
for the guys who use it, and the QNX interface is also
OK to me...).
> While these
> interfaces could use improvement, they are in general
> no way inferior to Windows' IDE
_Yes_ they are evidently way inferior. Do you believe
that i never gave them a try?
The only real problem is that no discussion is ever
possible with the Linux propagandists. You can say
any verifiable fact, they will always has something
to argue. So, in my own case, i have even stopped
completely to give any argument against Linux. This
is a disesparated case.
-- and given that Linux
> has a range of _more_ powerful CLI shells installed as
> standard, the advanced users are not crippled by a gui
> which forces every action to be selected using a cursor
> / pointer.
??? And then ???
>> Now, even for the cases of Programmers, there is
>> absolutely no reason why we should have any usage
>> of Command Lines thingies. If an author of a Tool
>> designed for Programming is unable to make it
>> Click&Go, this is the final demonstration of his
>> lack of competency. Nothing else.
>
> If you regard the use of a CLI as not useful, how
> would you do...
>
> mv *.[1-9].asm dir/
I don't know what "mv" is, and i don't want to know,
but i am also used to DOS command lines, and to .bat
Files, under Windows. My first PC was an Amstrad 1512,
if you recall...
> ... with a cli and _not_ have the user take several
> minutes selecting the files from what could be
> thousands of entries?
??? Sure!!! Users do that!!!... ??? :)
So said, i am wondering _why_ you write this at my
intention. I have already said, here, that i have
been one of those guys who tried to migrate to Linux,
since the earlier days. Mind you have spent _MANY_
times more money for Linux than i ever spoiled at
Windows, including, in the earlier days, at buying
specific HardWare that could have been assumed by
Linux (...). I have also spent way more time at
trying to use Linux, than i ever did for Windows.
By the way, i do not recall that i ever had to _learn_
anything about Windows... :))
If i ever had any hope in linux, i would not have been
longing for ReactOS for so long, and if Linux, in its
actual state, would be more or less usable, nobody would
be talking of Windows since some time. And this is very
sad, because, IMHO, all of the requirements were easy to
fullfill since day one for a full success. Unfortunately,
_BECAUSE_ of guys clainming that CLI are great, that the
security levels are great, and other such absurdities,
this will remain a failure case. So, let me go on waiting
for ReactOS.
Betov.
- Next message: T.M. Sommers: "Re: [ Attn: Randy ] Ad-hoc Parsing?"
- Previous message: Ro : "a problem in n5.dll in windows 95"
- In reply to: C: "Re: [ Attn: Randy ] Ad-hoc Parsing?"
- Next in thread: Percival: "Re: [ Attn: Randy ] Ad-hoc Parsing?"
- Reply: Percival: "Re: [ Attn: Randy ] Ad-hoc Parsing?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
