[CLUE-Tech] Re:"to get Windoze adjusted"

[Joe Linux]

The question for me would be how good is Mac OS-X as compared to Linux? 
 I'm very curious about whether or not OS-X is actually user friendly.
Coming from seven years of Macintosh experience, I never saw WinDO$ as 
being a good operating system at all.  In fact my opinion of it is that 
it's down right horrible.  All that being said, I would never buy a 
Macintosh at this point in time because is an expensive proprietary 
platform and I have a clone's mentality.

Jed S. Baer wrote:

>Well, I have to say that main thing that got me to switch to linux (RH 5.1
>- back then) was how insanely difficult it was to get Windoze adjusted to
>work how I wanted it to. Many, many things had no configurability at all,
>without getting into the registry and editing them. Often, that meant
>dealing with bitmapped option indicators. One example being that it kept
>recreating unused directories that I was deleting. Something was just
>assuming that of course, I'd be using IE to browse the web, even after I
>deleted as much of it as I could find. Hey, even Gnome doesn't create a
>sprawling hidden directory tree unless I actually invoke a Gnome program.
>And, once I got the hang of it, I much prefer doing a kernel compile to
>hacking the 'doze registry.
>
>Yes, there have been times when I've been frustrated with Linux as well -
>or more precisely, somebody's notion of what constitutes a man page, or a
>config file. The thing is, that with Linux, you _can_ find out what's
>going on. I've worked on thing like Windows networking settings, and found
>things that just weren't settable, even though they should have been, and
>were easy to do in Linux.
>
>And no amount of frustration has been able to overcome the joy of not
>having to deal with Windows. Yes, Linux needs some things to make it more
>user friendly, and I suspect many of them will come along (ever tried to
>customize a .gtkrc file?).
>
>Could you summarize what you have done? I recall many suggestions, but not
>the results. I'm assuming that if setterm did the trick, we wouldn't be
>having this converstaion. IIRC, you already checked your BIOS settings?
>Have you recompiled the kernel with the power management stuff turned off?
>
>jed
>