On Sun, 2004-10-03 at 13:14 +0100, Ed Mack wrote: > 1) Terminal users are 99% likely to know and understand the workings of > a $HOME directory, and will have no problems telling what are > configuration files. Desktop users often have very little knowledge of > such things (think corporate roll-outs ect..) Funny, can you point out non-broken configuration files/folders accessible with nautilus drawing $HOME as Desktop ? Other than broken apps like old evolution, netscape, and only a few others (oh, and some nautilus dirs like ~/Templates, sheesh) come to mind, and that way to do things is broken. Oh, and minimally competent corporate roll-outs are very unlikely to use setups that would depend on things the users have technical permission to break. > 2) In the terminal, you are very likely to cd somewhere else, the > desktop is static in this respect Double click Computer, Double click Filesystem, etc... So, no difference. > 3) The terminal doesn't show you every single file in $PWD 24hrs a day, > as the desktop does Of course. GUIs have that WYSIWYG thing, a way to reduce the need of abstraction from the user so he can instead focus on the task at hand. Still no significal difference. > 4) The desktop is meant to be purely the user's 'play area'. Its where > they can see things, manipulate them and feel safe. If you were told 'DO > NOT DELETE x, y ,z' you would no longer feel as confident working on the > computer. Not applyable to non-broken apps, by default, so I completely miss your point. What difference is there? Ok, it's pointless to present sound argument here so I'll just shut up. Rui -- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments. See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part