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