D&C GLug - Home Page

[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]

Re: [LUG] Spreading the Linux gospel

 

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 20:05:33 +0000
Paul Sutton wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Neil Williams wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:17:00 +0000
> > John Hansen <whitover@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> >>> Linux has so many versions (distros). Distrowatch lists 100 and
> >>> there are more. To us that may seem like a strength but actually
> >>> it is a weakness.
> > 
> > No, it is a strength and the comparison with Windows is false. There
> > are multiple "castes" of each flavour of Windows,
> > 
> >>> For most people Windows has just three choices, XP,
> >>> Vista and now Windows 7. That is already more than enough to worry
> >>> about. Even when I said that there were perhaps about 20 strong
> >>> contenders that was still scary.
> > 
> > Can't have it both ways - you want a system that is easy for
> > newcomers but other users need to have the absolute power and
> > flexibility to do clever things with servers for the cloud or tiny
> > embedded devices. GNU/Linux does that, Windows does not.
> > 
> >>> Most Windows users acquire their computer with the OS already
> >>> installed.
> > 
> > Which is the primary source of all subsequent problems.
> > 
> >>> Learning about a different layout for files and folders on the
> >>> hard disk. Again, they all looked a bit worried and puzzled. The
> >>> main question was why?
> > 
> > Because that is how GNU/Linux delivers the improvements that users
> > want. The Windows model is not a good one. An imposed monopoly is
> > not necessarily a result of a good process, merely the result of the
> > monopolistic approach.
> > 
> >>> The user system was again a big problem. Learning about root,
> >>> users and their passwords, groups, the home folder etc. Wow.
> >>> Scary again.
> > 
> > Benefits.
> > 
> > There is no need for GNU/Linux to be useful to every possible user -
> > Windows is not. GNU/Linux isn't targetting a monopoly.
> > 
> >>> Installing new packages. Well on Windows, I think, you either
> >>> download the exe file and double click on it or put the relevant
> >>> CD/DVD in the drive, wait for the install button to appear and
> >>> click on it.
> > 
> > And that's a good thing???
> > 
> > It's not a good idea for users to download random rubbish from the
> > internet and be able to execute it on their own system!
> > 
> > Security is the enemy of convenience and if we are still pushing
> > GNU/Linux as more secure than Windows, we undermine the entire push
> > by driving for more convenience.
> > 
> >>>  On Linux I could have mentioned apt-get, synaptic,
> >>> adept, deb files, repositories, RPM files, dependencies, well you
> >>> get the idea.
> > 
> > Yes, and it is a good one.
> > 
> >>> Need for an incentive to move.
> > 
> > Not everyone has one. Not everyone needs one. Not everyone can be
> > persuaded. And all of those are GOOD things.
> > 
> >>> Much help and hand holding required.
> > 
> > As there would be if Windows was not pre-installed.
> > 
> >> I think you hit the nail on the head! There are far too many
> >> options and the file system leaves me cold.
> > 
> > It serves others very well.
> > 
> >> I like my A,B,C,D,E,F drives! Why OH why does Linux need to make
> >> every thing so complicated?
> 
> what happens when you reach Z
> 
> i think with linux hda1 can go beyond hda27 if need be,

You're mixing your partitioning with your mounting.  The "c" drive is
not so-called because of any Windows partition naming conventions.
Indeed, Microsoft use the RISC naming convention:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/102873

Windows only 'mounts' the filesystem on a partition to a drive letter.
It doesn't have to do so.  If you wanted you could have your user data
stored on a completely separate partition, have Windows mount that as
"c:\documents and settings" and it'll work.

Unfortunately Windows (to the best of my knowledge) only supports non
drive-letter based mounting for physically attached media - you cannot,
for example, mount smb:\\nasbox\mediafiles on c:\media - no, that would
still require a drive letter.

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