[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: C Integrated Development Environment



On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 07:01:37AM -0500, Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> On 31/01/02 Scott Henson did speaketh:
> 
> > Sorry all.  I guess i should mention he is using gnome.  Its going to be
> > a woody system.  And before anyone suggests I switch him to KDE.  I
> > showed him both and he perfered gnome.  It is ximian-gnome and he liked
> > it alot.  And he isnt interested in emacs or vim.  I introduced him to
> > both and he got lost.(GO EMACS) Thanks to all.
> 
>     It amazes me how so many people are so unwilling to invest time to learn
> something worthwhile. I've taken the time to learn both Emacs and Vi/Vim, and
> find both suitable in different situations. With some tools, you just don't
> know you need them until you try them. 

I agree, and it's something I keep coming across. Personally, I believe that
it is a deficiency of the society in which we live: there is never any time
left to learn new things: people have to be able to pick up a tool and use
it immediately. That is certainly the attitude of people that come across
from windoze and try to use linux and can't even be bothered to read any
books/man pages on apt-get.

Seriously, almost every product that is on sale is designed to be used with
next to no knowledge required: almost every car radio can be operated in the
same manner, every TV or VCR conforms now to a standard usage pattern, even
political parties... (whoops!).

This is actually one of the reasons I love linux so much: there is so much
wealth of documentation available, barely a day passes when you don't learn
something new that can help you. The effort of actually learning something
new is by far outweighted by the joy and satisfaction of discovering
something new and exciting that makes your usage of your computer more
productive.

Just a few pennies.

Matthew

-- 

Matthew Sackman
Nottingham
England

BOFH Excuse Board:
Too much radiation coming from the soil.



Reply to: