On Thursday 11 October 2001 17:14, Shriram Shrikumar wrote: > Linux is a couple of steps behing in ease of use in comparison to > windows. Windows is weak where linux is especially strong like > stability and flexibility. Ms has billions of dollars to invest > getting windows to be as good as Linux whereas the linux community > has mostly its followers (of which there are plenty but not if ms > gets to be as good as linux and win2k seems a step in the right > direction) Being in this position, shouldn't we be investing our time > and effort in improving the ease of use of linux rather than blaming > ms for their faults which they are investing a lot of money trying to > fix.
Unless M$ (sorry, force of habit) decides to suddenly become a loser, your statement is bound to be a truism. They've had a decade's headstart. Let's be relative. Minus a decade. Would you say that Windows ca. 3.1 (early 90s) is really that much user-friendlier than GNU/Linux/X/Gnome-or-KDE? If people's demands about ease-of-use continue to rise, the only user-friendly combination of hardware and computer is the one the says "Mr. Smith, your letter to the editor is ready." I'm not against user interface improvements. But I think it should stop at the "Here's a typewriter/Braille encoder, now write" level. Give me working speech recognition and synthesis, not another mouse trap. -- Sir Isaac Newton: "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
