>> Like he said, he (and most users in my experience) has little
>> interest in why something happens, and his only interest is in
>> what to do to fix it once it happens.
> When, oh when will people learn that this is just not possible
> in general?
Probably about the same time as the average man in the street knows
as much about how his car works as the mechanics do...
> And for those things in Windows where the "Microsoft Fix" works
> (1. Restart computer 2. If that doesn't work, re-install),
> well, you *can* do the same on Linux. I think it's silly, but
> it's certainly possible.
I know...
> Oh, and Linux gives exactly the same amount of clues as Windows
> wrt. when to apply this "fix": none.
Wrong: Windows gives plenty of clues as to when to apply the said fix:
One should apply the said fix every time one switches on the computer,
as that's the only way to guarantee a stable Windows system.
Of course, if you want a system you can actually do something on,
that's a different story...
> Of course, there are things where the Microsoft Fix doesn't work
> at all - flaky hardware, programming bugs, data overflowing
> disk, network congestion, any number of things. Which brings us
> back to the beginning: you simply cannot fix most problems
> until you understand at least partly what is going wrong in the
> first place.
You think I don't know that!!!
Let's get things straight: *I* am well aware that one needs to know
what the problem is before one can fix it. The problem is that the
vast majority of users do NOT realise this, and look at software - ANY
software - as being a tool they can just pick up and use. Microsoft is
what it is now BECAUSE of this very fact - old Gates'y realised that
very early on, hence M$'s fabled marketing success - they RELY on that
very fact...
>> I have explained the precice meaning of the latter comment. In
>> reply, he pointed out to me that when an agent is using the
>> computer, the customer can also see the screen, and were any such
>> expressions to appear on the screen at such a time, it would be
>> unlikely to enhance the company's reputation much.
> Since, given Linux, that screen would probably be showing X,
> it's not very likely that the customer would get to see that
> message anyway.
According to the US Dept of Defence, it was "not very likely" that
problems would be caused by representing dates with just two digits
for the year. Can Linux afford the same kind of backlash that decision
caused?
> Or do you expect a travel agent would have xconsole showing?
I also don't expect a travel agent to have to ask me to show him how
to operate his computer, but that happenned today...
Best wishes from Riley.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| There is something frustrating about the quality and speed of Linux |
| development, ie., the quality is too high and the speed is too high, |
| in other words, I can implement this XXXX feature, but I bet someone |
| else has already done so and is just about to release their patch. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
* ftp://ftp.MemAlpha.cx/pub/rhw/Linux
* http://www.MemAlpha.cx/kernel.versions.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/