🚀 go-pugleaf

In <ericb.478.301E3C09@psu.edu> ericb@psu.edu (Eric Bennett) writes:

>The comparison was Mac vs. Unix.  In any case, part of the argument has to do 
>with consistency among applications.  Try switching from Win Word to Win 
>WordPerfect, and try switching from Mac Word to Mac WordPerfect.  In which 
>case are you able to use the same keys for saving your work?  Okay, this is 

What?  You use _keys_ in a GUI based app?!!  You must be a pervert.
Be careful, you might become a CLI addict :-)

>partly cheating because the wacky key commands in WordPerfect for Windows are 
>the exception not the rule, but now try cutting & pasting on a Mac.  Always 
>the same keys.  Last time I pressed control-c to copy text in Microsoft's very 

I do a lot of cutting and pasting in Unix, but I use exclusively the 
mouse for this purpose (having a mouse with more than one button definitely
helps :-)

>own Windows FTP program, I found out that control-c quits the program; 
>Microsoft doesn't use consistent key commands within its own software!

What would you expect from Microsoft?  I keep my PC Microsoft free,
thank you.
>
>>Provided that Peter Lewis's FTPd and Timbuktu are already installed on
>>his Mac, not very likely for Joe Mac User's Mac.
>
>But likely if I'm fixing my dad's Mac, and that was the original scenario.  

Nope.  The original scenario was that a friend calls, asking for help.

>Also likely if I'm administering a group of Macs remotely; do you think that I 
>will have root privileges on Joe Unix User's box?

Joe Unix User will tell you the root password.  Simpler than installing
various 3rd party software on the remote machine, when that machine needs
to be fixed.
>
>>Don't be so sure.  In my experience, Joe Mac User is very proud of his
>>computer illiteracy (isn't this the main selling point of the Mac's?)
>>and tries very hard to preserve his status quo.  
>
>Well, Mac users do seems to pride themselves on not reading manuals (I include 

A pretty silly reason to be proud.  

>myself in this group :), but I don't think Mac users are "proud" to be 
>computer-illiterate.  More accurate might be "happy to be able to use a 
>computer productivly without being computer-savvy."

Nowadays, this apply to any kind of personal computer.  Or do you believe
that there are 100+ million experts who are using the PC's?
>
>>This is aggravated by the
>>fact that one specific problem doesn't tend to repeat very often, so that
>>the user who doesn't understand what's happening can use his memory to
>>remember the meaningless (for him) sequence of actions that has to be
>>performed in order to fix it.
>
>It's not meaningless if you give a full explanation of what the purpose of 
>each step is (unless the explanation is way over the person's head, but it's 
>usually possible to find some analogy to explain it reasonably well).

Yeah, and it would take a couple of days until the person forgets the
explanation and vaguely remembers parts of the analogy.  If you don't
understand a computer as a system, you don't have too many chances to
understand isolated parts of it and your best chance is to have a 
cookbook, telling you what to do, step by step, to solve a problem.
But the Mac user doesn't read computer books, so...

Dan
--
Dan Pop
CERN, CN Division
Email: Dan.Pop@mail.cern.ch 
Mail:  CERN - PPE, Bat. 31 R-004, CH-1211 Geneve 23, Switzerland