Warp wrote:
> YaST is not Linux. You can't blame Linux for the problems of some
> third-party software you are running in it.

Sure I can. :-)   Especially since it's the installer for the version of 
Linux I use. Yes, yes, I've heard all the arguments, many times, thanks.

My point is that this is symptomatic. I'm not saying "YaST sucks."  I'm 
saying that huge bunches of Linux stuff is not user friendly in a 
variety of ways that anyone being *paid* to do the stuff would have 
fixed long before releasing it. Since I work with both professional and 
amateur operating systems, I find myself constantly stumbling over the 
little things that annoy me.  "Abort" buttons are also high on the list, 
along with incomprehensible or useless error messages, along with things 
reacting to the user very poorly when the machine is under load, to the 
point where the display is downright deceptive.

I'll grant you that of the major OSen, Linux is the OS most likely to 
improve, mind. :-)

>   In the Windows case in question it was a core feature of Windows.

Err, not more so than, say, X. :-) There are many replacements for 
Explorer. Not many people replace it on general-purpose desktop 
machines, because there aren't that many flaws with it.

>   And besides, if you don't like how YaST works, take the source and make
> it better. Attempt to do that with Windows core features...

... and you're fine. So? You just don't do it by patching source code 
and recompiling, any more than you install new device drivers by 
patching the kernel source.

You just write a plug-in for explorer, like (say) TortiseSVN uses, etc. 
Indeed, I just saw someone somewhere complain that copying several files 
at once thrashes the drive, and why don't OSes queue up the copies? 
Followed by someone the next day posting code that patches into explorer 
to do exactly that.  It isn't difficult, if you're immersed in how the 
system works. It's just that most programmers only have a very surface 
understanding of how Windows works and what you can do with it.

>   I always copypaste in the same way everywhere. I don't remember a
> program where it wouldn't work.

VI? I'll have to see if the middle mouse button works there to paste. 
The fact that some programs use one paste buffer and others use another 
is also annoying.

I'll grant it's more an issue of training fingers than anything.


>   (Sure, it's not immediately obvious how it's done, I admit that...)

It always throws me also that some programs will do the copy as soon as 
you highlight text. Or, if the text is still highlighted when you give 
the program focus, it'll replace whatever's in the copy buffer with 
whatever is highlighted.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     It's not feature creep if you put it
     at the end and adjust the release date.

Post a reply to this message