>>>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Simon >>>>> Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
SM> dialogs are ok, this is not the issue. The real issue is not to SM> fall into the Microsoft or RedHat paradigm. This is a flavour of Hmmm... don't think so. SM> Unix, Unix is not trivial, Unix is a fairly mature fully featured SM> operating system and you have to know at least a little about what SM> you are doing and be prepared to read the manual before you do SM> something useful. OK, if i want to design a big network, i have to know many things about networks. But that has nothing to do with this or that os. It should be plain and simple to setup an os. An os is a tool - it should help me in getting my job done. Some tasks are complex, ok, then you have to learn something. But the UI of the os and the tools to fullfill the task should be as simple to use as possible (and still be flexible). SM> IMHO one of the reasons that there is a contest between NT and SM> Linux is that Microsoft said that NT was so simple to install and SM> use, unfortunately tuning and other administrative tasks can be a The main problem with NT is not problems in tuning it or some other nice to have features. The main problem is, that NT is not scalable and most important it is not reliable and stable. If NT would be as stable as Solaris or even Linux, than NT would be a killer system, because MS knows that even experts like it, if complex tasks are simple to solve. I work with NT once in a while and at home i work with Linux. Linux is very flexible and i like this. But there are many tasks which are much simpler to do in NT. For example the registry of NT is no problem - but missing tools to edit the registry even from a boot disk is a problem. SM> real pain. Linux never made any bones about the fact that you have SM> to learn to be able to use it. It's not out of the box and run. I Here everything goes wrong! As i said above: If i plan to make a (big) network i have to learn about network-basics and network-theory. It's a problem when MS claims with NT you have not do know anything about network-basics. But it is very good, if you can do your tasks with easy to use tools. Let's take some network-settings as example. If you want to use DHCP with NT or Win, it's quite easy - go to network settings an say to get IP address automatically. If you want to use DHCP with Linux you habe much more to do. Why? Is there anything good if activating DHCP is not as simple as for NT? One pain with NT is, that often there is only one way to do this or that and this way gives you not all possible options that should be available. Here Linux is better. But a tool have not to be a pain to use in order to be flexible. -- Until the next mail..., Stefan.
