__/ [ Oliver Wong ] on Friday 18 August 2006 15:27 \__
> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:pcrfr3-rnn.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> On 2006-08-17, Oliver Wong <owong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> It's not so much the author (I've never heard of him/her before), but
>>> the stance that I'm critical of. To me, it's remeniscent of the elitist
>>> attitude towards criticizing fine art ("If you don't like this painting,
>>
>> Except the state of fine art is rather static. The underlying
>> principles are quite static. You could apply an art appreciation class
>> you took 50 years ago to the whys and wherefores of a particular bit of
>> art.
>
> If you believe one must take classes before one is allowed to say
> whether or not they like a certain painting, then you've missed the entire
> point of my post.
>
> Some person, let's call them Joe, looks at a painting. He says he
> doesn't like the painting. Some might say he doesn't have the *right* to
> dislike the painting, having not taken any fine art appreciation classes. I
> believe that Joe is entitled to his opinion, and if he says he doesn't like
> the painting, I believe him. I'm not going to get into an argument of the
> form "Yes, you *do* like the painting, you just don't realize it yet,
> because you aren't aware of this or that, etc." or "If you don't like this
> painting, you're an idiot."
I strongly agreed with JEDIDIAH and, with hesitance, I would argue that you
missed the point s/he had made or dug too deep to intercept its value.
Putting it simply, a painting, let us call it "a portray of Joe" will remain
the same 50 years down the line. It will still be called "a portray of Joe"
and be identical. Debian, on the other hand, changes all the time. It
evolves. Its present state is dependent on time, but the name is immutable.
>> Linux will change significantly in 6 months.
>>
>> Someone's benchmark experience with it may be MUCH older.
>>
>> There's also the server vs. workstation vs. consumer desktop
>> stratification to consider.
>
> If you really believe that Joe would benefit from trying a certain
> Linux
> distribution again, even after just 6 months after his previous bad
> experience with that distribution, then go ahead and tell him to try it
> again. However, note that if he just experiences the same difficulties
> again, then you're establish a "cry wolf" pattern with him, and after a
> while, he won't listen to you anymore when you tell him Linux has improved,
> even if it really did.
That, on the other hand, is true. Linux has a high levels of momentum.
Windows, on the other hand, is a total mess (60% of it needs rewriting, it's
full of hole and so forth). Sadly, the high speed of growth you find in
Linux also means that /some/ people get on the ride too early, with the
wrong hardware (read: hardware that was chosen for a Microsoft O/S). So
there are some premature cries for "wolf".
>From other points of view such as usability, there is another factor:
duration of use. Was it you who argued that "shortcut" is better terminology
than "link" (or soft and hard links, which are more proper interpretations)?
I suspect it was HQ who said that file extensions made more sense than
executability attribute. Now that's just preposterous.
> At any rate, 6 month seems semi-reasonable to me (much more than 24
> hours, anyway). However, I usually hold off until I see a *significant*
> improvement. For example, I tried to convert a couple of people with Redhat
> Linux Shrike. They didn't like it. So I didn't push them. It wasn't until I
> discovered Ubuntu that I went back to them and told them Linux has really
> improved in usability, and now I'm telling people to give Ubuntu a try.
> Between Shrike and Ubuntu, I think that's at least a year, maybe a year and
> a half.
>
> Again, my issue is that I believe 24 hours is really too much of an
> exaggeration, and people simply won't take you seriously if you tell them
> Linux changes dramatically enough within that timeperiod. I think you will
> convert *FEWER* people by making claims like this.
It was a figure of speech, for illustrational purposes or for an argument to
be made. You take it far too literally or perceive it in a way that suits
your (possibly unconscious) will.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
For governments that eavesdrop, here is a quick list of tags: Communism,
Hawaiian shirts, China, Suitcase, Martha Stewart, Encryption, Prison,
Stalin. Thanks for tuning in.
|
|
