RE: Three questions
> > The poor quality of documentation, such as these "how tos"
> is one of the
> > reasons why I recommend when ever I am asked whether a site
> should move
> > to linux to recommend that they don't.
>
> Although I didn't agree with the tone of this message, I
> definitely think something
> needs to be done about Linux documentation, especially if it
> is expected that
> people switch to it from Windows/Mac (my personal opinion is
> that they *should*
> do that) where a lot of things are tucked away and done
> behind their backs.
For me this is a dangerous road to go down. It may be that to "dumb down"
Linux enough that it can be used by a larger group of less computer literate
people might alienate the current users. I believe one flaw in the Microsoft
Windows approach is that the inherent complexity in configuration can be
hidden but never eliminated; the poor user is left wondering what the
computer might be doing and why.
In Linux this complexity is in your face; but in my opinion that's the
safest place for it to be.
But I agree, Linux needs better documentation and some more tools to manage
the configuration in a canonical way; preferable across a network of similar
machines.
Andrew
Reply to: