Jens D. Baumgartner writes: > On Tue, Dec 08, 1998 at 11:34:29AM -0800, Keith Beattie wrote: > > > Well, I disagree. Personally I dislike massively integrated > > applications like Outlook and Explorer. They are too big, too slow > > and too complicated (to use and maintain). And I'm convinced that my > [...] > > Create small programs that do a single task and do it well. > > Support a common communication mechanism so that each of these > > small programs can be used together to solve complex tasks. > > Mmmmmh, Emacs is big, and IMHO pretty complicated. I don't want to say > that Emacs is a bad application - no, I really like it. But learning > how to use it cannot be regarded "easy". ;-) >
What I really love about Linux (and other unixes for that matter) is how easy to use they are. I find Windows incredibly difficult to be productive in but I would classify myself as a fairly advanced windows user. This may sound a bit contradictory to people quite new to Linux or unix in general but I think most people who have used unix for a while will agree with me. If we are taking Emacs as an example it certainly is not trivial to become good with Emacs but I certainly wouldn't want to use a lesser editor just because it is easy to learn. I can do things so much faster and easier with Emacs that I have surely at least made up for the time I spent learning it. Pretty much all of the unix tools that have corresponding tools in windows are considerably more complex and powerful. This can be quite intimidating to new user and so I will suggest a strategy that has worked well for me: 1. Learn how to do the basic things you knew how to do under windows with the new program. 2. Once you feel comfortable, then try to expand into the more advanced areas. As an example, I am an avid Emacs user but recently I decided to learn mutt and vim. In the process of learning the basics of how things operate I noticed things I would like to work or look differently. These observations easily carried me over into learning how to reconfigure these programs as I already knew what stuff I wanted to configure. This of course led to learning about other interesting features. This approach works with parts of a very complex program like Emacs. Learning about each different mode or feature of Emacs is coniderably easier if you don't try to learn the entire thing as a whole but instead divide it up. OTOH, I have not found this approach to be particularly successful on MS apps. The beginning step is simple enough but without the tremendous extensibility and customizability of Linux apps (e.g. Emacs), it is difficult to find a logical path for expanding one's knowledge. -- Evan Parry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
