[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 12:03:02 +0000 Simon Waters wrote: > Tom Brough wrote: > > > > Whats so "dirty" about the command line ? You make using the > > command line sound like breaking the 11th commandment "THOUST > > SHALT NOT USE THE COMMAND LINE!" > > It is fine if you've invested the time to learn to use it, which takes > about a week of learning (30 to 35 hours) for Mr/Mrs average. That is > rather more than most people need to learn to drive a car, which is > far more useful than bash shell (unless you work in IT). I would argue that it takes < 35hrs to learn how to pass your driving test... not necessarily < 35hrs to learn to "drive". > Take for example "broadband routers" for ADSL lines, which is my > topical example of poor design, and unneeded know-how in the way. > > They have several configuration settings; "username", "password", and > a couple of settings to describe the type of ADSL line. > > All BT residential ADSL lines are identical in terms of the technical > settings (AFAIK), so good vendors could set these before distribution > to the UK (NetGear do!). Sure they'll be odd cases, but the defaults > could be right. Yep, I'd agree with you so far... > Similarly the username/password could be made redundant by either > setting it at the ISP, or (more sensibly) revising the standard so > that the line identifier would connect you to the ISP of your choice, > and the username and password would not be required to be set (BT > happily ignore the password for BT speedtests). This could potentially involve a fairly hefty change to the way PPP is used. Since PPP is a modular protocol anyway, it could be done... Since you have to have a "BT Line" (not counting LLU cases) for general ADSL connections anyway, the authentication could very easily (from BT's perspective) be done using your line identifier (ie your phone number). Somehow I don't see this catching on, though. > Thus with one or two minor changes to the way things are generally > done, one could plug the ADSL router into the wall (I'll ignore > microfilters for the moment), and it would "just work" (since they > pretty much all ship with DHCP enabled for a network in 192.168/16), > in that one would plug a PC into the router using a Cat5 (or better) > cable, the PC would have default DHCP settings (all major OSes do > that as a default already), and it would get sensible DNS, routing, > and ideally NTP (and maybe other) settings from the router. Minor point... it's 192.168.x/24. > Currently most people have to work through a manual, find the admin > password in the documentation, set the username and password for the > PPPoe connection (using a browser or software, many users don't know > what a "browser" is, and know they don't want to install more software > from yet another company), and in many (most?) cases change a few > parameters they know nothing about to what it says in the section of > the manual for the UK. I find it kinda scary to even *think* that these people don't know what a "browser" is... (oh, and in this country, it's PPPoA). > Not saying we need to take the admin interface away from ADSL routers > (no that would make it useless if you left the UK), just saying there > is no reason, apart from poor design and planning, that the ordinary > user should be exposed to it for the common case. Taking the admin interfaces away would make them useless if you actually want to do anymore than simply "plug in and surf"... what about those who read about "wireless Internet"? --Grant. -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html