Norton Go Home! We don't want you!

[Greg A. Woods]

[The article being replied to had a "Distribution: na", and the first
reference seem to be from .oz.au?!?!?!] 

In article <kherron.666298945 at s.ms.uky.edu> kherron at ms.uky.edu (Kenneth Herron) writes:
> Not everyone has the time,
> inclination, or aptitude to learn unix (or computers at all, for that
> matter).  Are these people supposed to stick with DOS, or Macs, or not
> use computers at all?  The days when ordinary mortals bowed down to the
> computer priesthood are supposed to be over.

I really wanted to pick nits with your entire article, but I didn't
think it would accomplish anything.

I get very upset by people who perpetuate myths.  MS-DOS is *not*
easier to learn to use than UNIX.  Perhaps Mac's are, but that's
comparing apples to oranges [:-)] [I can smile at my own pun, can't
I?]  Yes, MS-DOS can be easier to administer than UNIX, but that's a
different story.

If you'd care to take some time to read some background you'd find out
that even Bell Labs patent secretaries could turn out troff documents
using ed on teletypes after only 2 hours of training.  I believe they
even had a significant increase in productivity too.

If you need to *use* a computer to get a job done, there's nothing
standing in your way from learning to use UNIX, and there's certainly
nothing standing in the way of letting UNIX do the job for you.

As far as I know, there is more real *information* about how to use,
administer, and programme for UNIX than there is for any other
operating system.  I would guess there is also far more real expertise
for UNIX in the world than there is for any other o/s.  There may even
be more *information* about how UNIX works than for any other o/s.

Just today I read a message (in some other group) where the author
expressed some questions about UNIX administration, particularly about
filesystem related things, such as fsck.  This person claimed he
couldn't find any information in the manuals.  I'll guarantee that he
didn't really read the manual, or maybe he didn't have "the" manual he
should have.  One may not be able to blame him for the latter, but you
certainly can for the former!

The problem with Norton Utilities for UNIX is that they are muddling up
the task of the user with the task of the administrator.  They also
muddy the waters the average administrator must walk through.  What's
going to happen to the system run by an administrator who comes to
rely on the Norton Utilities, when some day he has to repair his
filesystem from a boot floppy that doesn't have Norton on it?

There is a problem when someone switches from using something kind of
computer to using some other kind of computer, and then expects to
learn nothing new, and that everything will work the same, because
they already know how to use a computer!  ARGH!

Just because you know how to "administer" an MS-DOS system with the
Norton Utilities, doesn't mean porting those utilities to UNIX will
allow you to be a UNIX administrator!

[For those things where you might say that Norton for UNIX adds value,
I'd say there are far better ways add such value without breaking the
UNIX philosophy, i.e. the thing which makes UNIX strong!]

The only day when ordinary mortals will be able to stop bowing down to
the "computer priesthood" will be the day when they stop walking
around in a daze, and put some intellectual energy into learning about
the computing environment they are using.  Computers really are easy,
once you both accept the fact that they make you think, and that you
may have to re-adjust the way you view the world.  (It seems to me
that most people need to make that little leap into knowing that the
computer is a powerless slave that follows your directions, and only
your directions, to the letter.)  This goes for UNIX, MS-DOS, and
IMHO, Mac's too!

Now, as for the question of whether a "user" can learn to administer a
UNIX system, I say yes, iff he is willing to learn a little more than
he did to use the system.  Today's UNIX (i.e. UNIX SysVr3.2) with
'sysadm' and/or 'face' is extremely easy to learn to administer,
compared to what one had to learn not so many years ago.  With the
wealth of information that is available for the new administrator, I
see no reason why anyone who *understands* something about computers
can't learn to administer a UNIX system.

[Wow!  I wish this discussion wasn't taking place in comp.unix.shell.
Maybe we should move it to comp.unix.misc, or somewhere?]
-- 
							Greg A. Woods
woods@{eci386,gate,robohack,ontmoh,tmsoft}.UUCP		ECI and UniForum Canada
+1-416-443-1734 [h]  +1-416-595-5425 [w]  VE3TCP	Toronto, Ontario CANADA
Political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible-ORWELL