[CLUE-Tech] Re:downward spiral of increasing complexity

[Cyberclops]

That's a great website, but I think it points out the need for more
hands on experience.  I think it's one of the hardest things about
learning and using Linux.
Unfortunately the entire Linux operating system is full to the hilt with
"geek talk."

This wouldn't necessarily be so bad but it presumes a fair amount of
understanding from the target audience.  Obviously the CLUE meetings are
full of people that have a great deal of knowledge and experience.

For myself, I'm just looking for a good alternative to the M$ operating
systems.  Charlie Rose had a good show last night that was on computer
technology.  Michael Dell was a guest along with the head of Yahoo
(Chang?), the CEO of AT&T, and Wang (some computer conglomerate).  They
all have a rather broad perspective.  They brought up the point that a
keyboard is not necessarily the always best way to relate to all of this
data.  They also brought up the point that too much time is being wasted
configuring individual computers and that's what drives what they call
"the subscription model."
Chang from Yahoo brought up the issue of "value" of "value added."  He
is interested in delivering a product that has "value" to the end user.

I feel this is the short coming of Gates and M$.  Their model is not a
"value" model, but a "profit" model.  In my opinion M$ products have
questionable value.  I think someone brought up the point that Gates
never really went to college or perhaps just didn't finish college.  I
think that's perhaps one of the reasons why he has totally missed the
idea of value.

Again I think it's extremely important that Linux clubs concentrate on
effort to make Linux not only intelligible, but easily usable. It's a
perplexing problem because it is generally acknowledged that Linux is in
fact very complex.

Taking all of this in mind, I've kind of been thinking about more of an
appliance type of computer that is more like the Toshiba 1000 laptop I
used to have.  In that case the OS was actually in ROM on the machine. 
It really does seem to me that in the past several years we really have
entered the downward spiral of increasing complexity in regards to
computing.  The machines lose "value" as they becoming increasingly
difficult to configure and administer.

David Anselmi wrote:
> 
> Amazing what you take for granted after doing this for a while, isn't it?
> Here are some links:
> 
> client/server
> http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,289893,sid9_gci211796,00.html
> 
> host
> http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,289893,sid9_gci212254,00.html
> 
> No entries for localhost, but here's some elaboration.  Sense 1) of host
> (above) is a node on the Internet.  That means the machine has an IP address,
> and (usually) a name that maps to the IP address through DNS.  So a local
> host is one that is 'here' and a remote host is one that is 'there'.  I would
> say that the distance between 'here' and 'there' depends on context and is
> usually fairly irrelevant.
> 
> On the other hand, localhost is Unix shorthand for 'this machine that's
> processing for me'.  If I type 'nslookup localhost' then localhost will be
> the machine that runs the nslookup program (I can telnet from one machine to
> another, to another, so that the characters I type go through many machines
> (hosts), but only one will run the nslookup program).
> 
> Clear as mud, right?
> 
> Dave
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CLUE-Tech mailing list
> CLUE-Tech at clue.denver.co.us
> http://clue.denver.co.us/mailman/listinfo/clue-tech