Re: WebserversFrom: email@example.com
- Previous message: Sebastian Tiponut: "Re: Restricting the access to a web server"
- In reply to: Robert Buel: "RE: Webservers"
- Next in thread: Mark Merchant: "RE: Webservers"
- Next in thread: M Ravi Kumar: "Re: Mail server"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 12:23:41 -0400 From: firstname.lastname@example.org To: email@example.com
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 11:46:41AM -0500, Robert Buel wrote:
> That would be true if both NOS's required equal intuition to
> master...but they don't...I can stumble around in MS and see
> configurational windows--and usually find what I'm looking for...but on
> a 'NIX box, you have to specifically enter in commands (read: know the
> commands)to configure each aspect of the NOS. Sure, there are windowed
> GUI interfaces available, but then, it becomes Windows, doesn't it?
No, it just has a GUI. That's like saying 95 and 2000 are the same OS.
They aren't but they look the same to the uninitiated.
> I agree that once you have mastered the NOS's, that the effort to
> achieve that is, in fact, equal. It's just that the newbie would find it
> easier to have a visual representation and configurational groups to
> learn from--i.e. "figuring it out" is easier.
For newbies, maybe. It's not really that easy, though. You have to go
through a bunch of menus to get anything done, and remembering a series
of 10 buttons to press is harder for me than remembering what command
does something and then looking it up on a man page.
> I think that better analogies might be:
> >Driving with an automatic versus a stick shift.
> >Using a manual camera versus an automatic camera
I think the only reason these analogies hold up is because UNIX lets
you get into the guts easier. Once you've got a UNIX box up and tuned,
it can be as easy to use as Windows.
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored