From: Ian Macdonald Date: 2002-06-21T17:26:39+09:00 Subject: Re: Why is I/O slow? On Fri 21 Jun 2002 at 16:18:07 +0900, james@rubyxml.com wrote: > This matches my observations as well; I could never imagine convincing my > sister that any Unix was, in the longer run, better for her than Windows. > She just has no interest in doing anything that is even remotely geekish. > She does not want to try and install some application only to find out she > has the wrong version of glibc, or needs libpng.so.2. That was my point, really. If you want to move past the beginner stage, an investment of time and energy is needed. Windows, IMHO, has fewer productivity tricks to learn than UNIX, so once you've learned them, you're at full speed on that OS. Someone learning UNIX, OTOH, will continue to learn and become more productive for a long time to come, ultimately becoming vastly more productive than the Windows power user. > Windows and *nix are meant for different audiences. Saying Widows should > be more like Unix is like saying Ruby should be more like assembly > language. I'm not advocating making Windows more like UNIX at all. I have no interest in Windows beyond dealing with the fall-out that its flawed applications create for the rest of the computing world. Ian -- Ian Macdonald | Never have so many understood so little ian@caliban.org | about so much. -- James Burke | | |