Understanding Unix, was Re: [plug] Cron scheduling

[John Summerfield]

> John Summerfield wrote:
> 
> > > I think i see the problem here. You are making one huge assumption
> > > that unix is intended for a "Complete Idiot" who sits down to use it.
> > 
> > However, i have used an assortment of computers over three decades. Most
> > modern sstems are designed to be easy to use. There's a good reason for
> > that; time learned using a computer is unproductive; unproductivity wastes
> > employers' money.
> 
> I agree completely with Mike.  As for your comments...
> 
> Systems that continually crash or require massive reprogramming to do
> things that aren't built into the system are also unproductive in many

That's completely irrelevant to my point.

> situations and thus a waste of employers' money.  Unix solves both of
> these problems.  Just like any powerful and/or specialised machine it
> requires an investment of time and effort to learn.  You may see this as
> a disadvantage, and in some ways it is, but I believe it's mostly a
> reflection of the power of the system - the more powerful, flexible and
> sophisticated a machine is the more time it takes to learn.  Employers

It does not have to be hard to START to use it. OS/2 is reasonably easy to 
START to use. Within its design  limitations (single user system), there's 
not much I can do on Linux that I can't do on OS/2. I've not benchmarked 
the two, but I would expect OS/2 to outperform Linux on some applications; 
certainly Warp Server Advanced on a multiCPU box (4-16) would leave Linux 
standing.


> are usually willing to devote time/effort/money to training people to
> use such machinery (or they hire people with the appropriate skills)
> since the short-term investment is outweighed by the long-term gain.  In
> situations where employers aren't willing to make this investment, maybe
> Unix is not the correct "machine" for the job.
> 
> > I want to USE my computer. I don't want to spend half my time figuring HOW
> > to use it, or why something didn't work, or to think it did when it
> > didn't, and I don't want to be interrupted by other family members to help
> > them use the computer.
> 
> Most properly set up Linux systems don't require very much time
> investment to keep running well.  I virtually never have problems with
> mine while I often have people coming to me about problems with their
> Windows machines.

As I said before, I've never advocated Windows. Windows is irrelevant to 
the argument (except it's easier to learn).


-- 
Cheers
John Summerfield
http://os2.ami.com.au/os2/ for OS/2 support.
Configuration, networking, combined IBM ftpsites index.