🚀 go-pugleaf

Chris"Big-Kahuna"Rampson (rampson@ave050.ve.ford.com) wrote:
: Brian Hoort (hoortbri@pilot.msu.edu) wrote:
: : Sounds like Linux to me.  Any features you don't find in Linux could be
: : implemented personally.  Source code included.  I'm reading news at this minute
: : with Netscape under Linux and X11R6.
: : Its' already here.

: I am of the opinion that the smaller the OS, the easier it is to understand.
: This makes Linux "harder" to understand. Now I'm talking about Joe Average,
: you know the blue-collar guy that wants a computer to do good things for
: him. Is this guy capable of debugging a very complicated multi-tasking
: system with hundreds of commands? UNIX is a 2-edged sword - it is a
: wonderfull multi-tasking OS, that you can configure endlessly. It is also
: VERY complex, which is why it has never "caught-on" with the masses. An
: educated, intelligent, persistant person can use it quite well, but how
: about Mr. high-school diploma (GPA 2.1) and working on the "line" all day.
: Can he grasp the UNIX ideal? Yeah I know you can make a GUI slick install
: program that does it "all" for him, but what happens when errors start
: popping up?


I see, so its your idea that operating systems should be designed for the
lowest common denominator. Assume your users are complete morons, therefore
making sure nobody gets confused.

Clearly, this is microsofts strategy, and it may appeal to many, but its
certainly not for me...

molding linux, freebsd, or any other *nix into that kind of system would be
quite offensive..there is no cookie cutter os for everyone, people have
individual needs...