[rescue] Re: nuking from orbit

[Dan Sikorski]

Jeremy Nielson wrote:

> 
> Ya know, this is actually arguable.  (funny on top, but realistically....)
> People tend to go for what works.  There's a psychology behind it.  I use
> Windows98 SE here at work, because... (wait for it...)  It works(tm).  [i
> also have a linux box, and use Novell Netware because the boss is reluctant
> to switch to NT, which is fine by me].

Yes, it works, for now.  I don't know how many winderz machines that 
have just randomly stopped working one morning.  You go into work, and 
it just doesn't work (tm).  There's a reason that the novell market 
moved into the NT market, it's the people looking for the easy way out.  
How long have unicies been around??

> 
> People don't want to learn all the control-whatever combinations in order to
> write a letter to someone.  Remember all the fuss with WordPerfect 5.1?  "We
> have to learn all these flipping Function key combinations?!".  So you
> notice more people fundamentally know how to use MS Word 2000, than know how
> to use WordPerfect 5.1  (although, i'm sure there's no argument, Word2k is
> better...).  Dang, people hated the fact they had to type commands at a
> prompt in order to get WP5.1 to run, anyways.

Um, when did wordperfect 5.1 come out?  Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't 
think it is in direct competition with Word 2000.  Besides, "power 
users" LOVE shortcut keys, they let you get things done faster.  A good 
word processor will have both easy menus for newbies, and the shortcut 
keys for those who learn them, and make good use of them.

> 
> But People will fundamentally go to what works.  What works isn't always
> what's the most reliable.  Give *NIX/*BSD/Whatever the same intelligent "it
> works" Apple/MS design, and I'm sure you'd see an insurgance of people using
> them at home.

It does work, and it will work tomorrow, and next week, and next 
year........

> 
> So the two axioms for today are:
>     1) People go with What Works.
>     2) Companies develop software to make money, so they make it for
> platforms people use
> 
> In the end, it's not common sense... Ask any CEO if he'd use vi to write his
> correspondence to the company he's planning to take over.  After you explain
> all the wonderful joys of the control-whatever combinations, I'm sure he'll
> say "uh, no." and promptly fire your ass.  It's not lack of common sense,
> it's simply that Microsoft products "work".

vi is NOT, never has been, and never will be a word processor.  Have you 
ever used word to edit a configuration file?  I'd hope not.  It's a 
matter of the right tool for the job.  /etc/resov.doc doesn't work.  Nor 
does c:\autoexec.doc for that matter.

> 
> And I know this will get taken out of context, and I'll be touted as being a
> flamer, or whatever else... but if you don't truly agree, seriously sit back
> for a moment, and think about it... one size does not fit all.  :)
> 
> Jeremy Nielson
> 
I don't believe i took a single word out of context.  I don't think 
you're a flamer (unless you sent this message just to get an inflamitory 
response, which i don't think this is), just horribly mistaken.  I've 
sit back for many a moment, and I use what I believe to be the best tool 
for the job at all times.  This usually includes as little MS products 
as possible.  Why?  because they don't work.

   -Dan Sikorski