[luau] Mac OSX / User Friendly?

[Cyberclops]

Here's the question:  Is OS-X actually user friendly?  After spending 
lot's of time with Linux and putting a great deal of effort into making 
it user-friendly, I have come to the conclusion that Linux isn't user 
friendly primarily because of file permissions and software management 
issues.

For example when you create a new folder (directory) in KDE it doesn't 
ask you what permissions you want to set when you create it.  More over 
you can sometimes think that you are saving a document or file into a 
folder and it acts as though it is being saved, but only later you learn 
that nothing was saved at all because you didn't have permission.

This has happened to me in GIMP, and it happened to me yesterday on a 
whole bunch of KDE3 files that were being downloaded.  They all seemed 
to be saved, but then the new folder was empty and I had to do it all 
over again.  It wasn't a case of them being downloaded into a different 
folder by mistake.

Another huge issue is software installation.  It's still far too 
difficult to manage the software on the system.  A lot of this is 
distribution specific. but in my most recent case, the KDE3 install had 
a few glitches in it and was getting mixed up with KDE2.  When I tried 
to remove only the KDE2 files it took the KDE 3 with it.

Now of course there will be those on the list that will claim I don't 
know what I'm doing.  They might say if you used the CLI you wouldn't be 
having these problems.  But to what extent do you need to be a full on 
system administrator just to run a single home computer?

Again question is has Apple made their system more user friendly and 
more intelligible by an ordinary person?  I don't know.  It could be 
better, or it could be worse.  What we know is that it has a great look 
and feel, but I'm questioning if it has the same problems as Linux.  As 
for the Apple file system, they probably had to do that to keep it 
compatible with early Macintosh systems.

How is the "fstab" managed on OS-X?

Does the system have true flexibility or is it limited to the way it is 
sold from Apple?  Obviously Macs aren't particularly economical and for 
the most part are totally unupgradeable.  They can actually clutter your 
actual desktop with the addition of extra, but required USB peripherals 
hanging on the side. (Diskette Drive)  The cost machine is one thing, 
but the additional software is going to be very expensive for everyone 
who chooses to use it.

The software on linux is getting better and better and of course the 
cost is for the most part minimal.

While I have complaints about Linux, it is what I'm using, and it's good 
enough for most of what I do.  I'm into graphics and I particularly 
enjoy "gimp", so I think I would stick with Linux for that reason alone.

The Macs are very tempting, but I don't think they are from me because I 
have a low budget personality, and general don't pay extra for designer 
items such as expense cars and clothes.

Worst of all the OS-X operating system doesn't run on a PC clone and I 
have a  bunch of them.  Macs and OS-X just doesn't fit my personality.  

Jeff Mings wrote:

> I just received the latest issue of Linux Journal, wherein OSX is 
> objectively discussed and compared.  The bottom line:  they liked it 
> quite a bit, said that version 10.1.2 has come a very long way from 
> 10.0, but still has a long way to go.  The only "deficiency" I can see 
> is that the default filesystem seems to be HFS+, which I have on an 
> old Powerbook 1400 running MacOS 8.1.  HPFS+ doesn't seem nearly 
> robust enough for the job, and is case-insensitive, which would seem 
> to break many things.
> I would hope that ext3, reiserfs or a similarly capable journalling fs 
> would be made available for it soon.
>
> -Jeff
>
> _______________________________________________
> LUAU mailing list
> LUAU at videl.ics.hawaii.edu
> http://videl.ics.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/luau
>