Note: I'm fuzzy and disjointed at the moment. I'm sure I ramble a bit below. TIA for your patience. On Sat, 27 Jul 2002, Daniel Churchill wrote: > On Friday 26 July 2002 09:49 am, Daniel Taylor wrote: > > If they are end-users why should they have to care about the OS? > > > > I think that it is totally unfair that computer _users_ need > > to worry about administering their own boxes and as such the > > OS they have matters. > > It doesn't much matter what you think or do not think is fair. The fact > of the matter is that there are millions of end users in the world who are > using computers in a small work environment and/or at home, where there is > not the benefit of a full or part-time system administrator (professional > or otherwise) to do their administering for them. Those people have to do > it themselves, and such being the case, they have to worry about the OS. On the contrary, what we _all_ think is fair matters. What is fair provides a target, something to aim for when the world (as usual) is unfair. > > > If the Interface follows the rules they have learned, why should the OS > > matter? > > Ideally, an OS would be like a car. All cars have the same basic > interfaces, which work in basically the same way. The frills may work > differently, but are generally self-explanatory. > [snippage of coherent explanation of point] I believe that it is possible to have a system that is "close enough" (as in RH driver vs. LH driver or manual trans vs. automatic). Note what most people do when they want/need a modification to their car: they take it to someone who is trained in doing such things. Free installation with $100 of software? It would work for laptops, not so well with bulky systems. Can you change the oil in your car yourself? Do you? What about tune-ups? Why do you think Geek Squad is so successful? -- Daniel Taylor dante at plethora.net