[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Tue, 2010-01-19 at 22:41 +0000, Grant Sewell wrote: > > 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. > I don't think there is that much that needs to be explained to someone who has switched from windows to, lets say K/Ubuntu (not MY fave distro, but I think the best for convertees), if they are just the "typical" browsing/e-mailing/word prcessing person. They don't really need to know about the file system in any depth - there it is under places and if you want a new folder you do the following... As for users, user groups and file permissions.. if you try and do something which needs adim privillages you get asked for a password. What more is needed. What does need explaining is repositorys. When I started out with redhat about a decade ago I wrecked my system several times and spent hours in dependancy hell because I didn't understand this. So this does need explaining, but on the other hand the snazzy way apps are named and described the best thing is to tell the new user "if you want an app for doing X phone me and I'll find out what you need" - say you want to watch an encrypted DVD of course you'll go to synaptic and look for libdvdcss, obvious.... Simon -- 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