Re: Emacs - was Re: Mail/news software

[Brian May <bam@debian.org>]

>>>>> "Pat" == Pat Mahoney <pat7@gmx.net> writes:

    Pat> For me, Linux makes me think. For others, windows may make
    Pat> them think. For still others, something else (not computer
    Pat> related) may make them think. If linux makes you think,
    Pat> good. If windows makes you think, good. If something else
    Pat> makes you think, good. If nothing makes you think, then I you
    Pat> truly have my sympathy.

For me, the problem with Windows is you have to think when thinking
should not be required. Take for instance, autoexec.bat.

I know a Windows computer, that whenever it starts, it flashes up
with the message "Bad command or filename" for a few seconds until
it goes away. However, it doesn't give the important information:
what command cannot be found? what line is it on?

So, instead of going directly to the bad line (like you would for any
Unix based interpreter), you have to do a lot of fiddling just to find
out which line is bad.

I have had similar problems for "out of environment space" errors (I
never remember or can find how to change it, although it seems to be
fixed now) and programs that automatically add lines like: PATH
%PATH;c:\newprogram which fails when %PATH% contains a directory with
spaces (trial and error suggests that correct quoting helps).

Perhaps Windows 2000 won't require autoexec.bat, I will believe it
when I see it. However, I encounter similar problems throughout
Windows (especially device drivers).

So, the way I see it, with Windows you always need to be thinking
"There is a bug in this program. It won't say why it is crashing. What
is the best work around?".

With Unix, you get more descriptive feedback of what the program is
doing (eg look at the output of dpkg), and I have never had problems
with a device driver suddenly going broken, requiring a complete
re-installation of the OS. You don't have to try and second guess what
the computer might be trying to do.
-- 
Brian May <bam@debian.org>