El 01/04/2016 a las 10:37, Michael Van Canneyt escribió: > I cannot understand that Canonical agreed to cooperate on this. > It's called shooting in your own foot... >
Me neither. >> And don't deceive yourself. Scripts are the most powerful solution, but >> a GUI need less knowledge and expertise, so they may be cheaper in the >> long run. > > You therewith assert that microsoft advocates ignorance and stupidity > ? :-) It is a wise strategy. There are more middle users than gurus. > All very nice till you hit a really hard problem and then you need to > call an expert anyway, who charges you astronomical amounts of money > for deleting a > registry key or so. It's a nice deceit... Yes, when you hit a hard problem, windows is a blackbox. There is the old linux saying "Windows makes easy what is easy and impossible what is difficult". You needn't to convince me. Nevertheless, Unix world should have more configurations tools with a good UI (graphic or not). If you need to do hard things, you must be able to tweak with well documented configuration files (that's what windows doesn't have and unix products shines), but 90% of times you shouldn't have to mess with configuration files, each one with its one syntax (that's what many unix products miss and windows shines) The Cherokee web server (now a dead project) offered a configuration utility with a web UI as part of the product. That is the right path. Well, this is going too off topic. -- Saludos Santiago A. s...@ciberpiula.net -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
