Lang Murphy wrote:[color=blue]
> I've said it many time before, and I'll say it again... nix ain't ready
> for "Joe Normal."
>
> Sorry, I forget the person who suggested I try PCLinuxOS, and, that
> said, I d/l'd it today and installed it on a desktop. (Tried installing
> it on a laptop with a wireless NIC, but, uh, no go?)
>
> So I installed PCLOS, as it's called, on a desktop. Install went OK. Got
> to the desktop fine. Where's the Network icon? None. How does one access
> the local network? Ah, open "My Computer". Heh, heh, heh... then open
> "Remote Places." Then open "Local Network", only to receive the msg "The
> Lisa daemon does not appear to be running. In order to use the LAN
> browser, the Lisa daemon must be installed and activated by the system
> administrator."
>
> Uh, OK... where does one go from here? (NOT looking for answers from nix
> folks, it's a rhetorical question.)
>
> Is it so hard to put a "Network" icon on the desktop?
>
> Is it so hard to have that functionality be transparent to the user? Is
> the "Joe Normal" user going to know how to log on as administrator and
> install and activate the Lisa daemon? Uh, no?
>
> OK... this may appear to be an attack on nix... it's not, believe me.
> Were one to have the time to determine how to install and activate the
> Lisa daemon... well, no issue, right? One can figure it out
> -eventually-, right?
>
> And, of course, I'm not saying that Vista is "issue free." That said...
> when I install Vista, I get a "Network" icon on the desktop that takes
> me right to the stuff I'm tryng to access. No "install Lisa daemon"
> stuff...
>
> So, yeah, Vista's not "issue free." We all know it, and I'd be a dope to
> claim otherwise.
>
> And I -am- most interested in trying different nix distros; ones that
> might be considered "Joe Normal" friendly.
>
> Have yet to discover -that- nix distro.
>
> And, no, don't tell me Ubutnu. Been there, done that.
>
> Lang[/color]


Strange, I had no such trouble. My biggest problem thus far has been
with Video drivers and Printers.

However you do mention one of the major irritations of Vista, ie things
not being where expected or even where they would be logical. These
cosmetic changes impose a quite unnecessary learning curve on users.

You said

Is it so hard to have that functionality be transparent to the user? Is
the "Joe Normal" user going to know how to log on as administrator and
install and activate the Lisa daemon? Uh, no?

So why is the user who is moving to Vista expected to know that
"Add/Remove" programs is gone and hiding in control panel when all the
other control panel stuff is elsewhere? Why disguise display resolution
as something else?

You are citing unfamiliarity as a problem yet Vista has it designed in...

What I see so far is a slower, more awkward, more cumbersome version of
XP with fancy visual effects. When you look at what is really "New"
there is very little, well, maybe a mail client that's already on it's
third replacement cycle and still doesn't actually work :)