Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!news.vbc.net!samba.rahul.net!rahul.net!a2i!news.PBI.net!news.mathworks.com!howland.erols.net!nntp.crl.com!Symiserver2.symantec.com!news From: tedm@agora.rdrop.com Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.infosystems.www.misc Subject: Re: Unix too slow for a Web server? Date: 6 Oct 1996 18:04:41 GMT Organization: Symantec Corp. Lines: 59 Message-ID: <538sbp$b9d@Symiserver2.symantec.com> References: <323ED0BD.222CA97F@pobox.com> <51pog8$1gj@newsbr.eunet.fr> <Dy0K58.MLv@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <32423719.6904CE4@julia.de> <51uo7m$bu9@magic.metawire.com> <R.3244780C.23B6AB75@aug.com> <01bbadcf$6ef66e60$8588b6cc@tzspc> <324E26CD.7785@www.play-hookey.com> <l7ij25.2s8.ln@localhost> <324E80B3.21F4@www.play-hookey.com> <slrn54tqh5.23e.cbbrowne@wolfe.brownes.org> Reply-To: tedm@agora.rdrop.com NNTP-Posting-Host: shiva1.central.com X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:133898 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:28704 comp.infosystems.www.misc:44516 In <slrn54tqh5.23e.cbbrowne@wolfe.brownes.org>, cbbrowne@wolfe.brownes.org (Christopher B. Browne) writes: [long rant deleted] >Do you use wordprocessor macros to run your business' POS system? Why then >should you use a web browser to read news, or assume that that's the best >idea? >-- This is an old battle in the computer industry: Do we have one unified program that does everything adequately, or multiple programs that each do their own thing excellently. There are advantages to either position. Using your above example, if I have a business that has a POS system running on a wordprocessor, I only have to train my secretaries and admin assistants to use the Wordprocessor, and they can then use everything they need. Also, if the Wordprocessor is the unified program, I never need to do more training again, as all the upgrades are going to be unified into the wordprocessor. Consider for a moment, DOS. Well, DOS used to take the tack of lets have a separate program like DIR, COPY, XCOPY, RENAME, DELETE, etc etc each that does their one function well, and others badly. Now it's all replaced by a graphical filemanager that does all those tasks adequately. Maybe we lose a bit of functionality, for example now you cannot do a "del *.xls" and delete all your spreadsheet files, you have to individually select them in the filemanager, but it seems that the majority of people prefer the filemanager, and guess what, I'm no longer bothered by stupid questions like "what is that command that deletes files?" It is easy to forget in a forum here where everyone is very computer literate that the vast majority of people out there that use computers are neither literate, nor want to be literate. If they were, they would immediately recognize the meodocrity of Microsoft's software solutions and MS would be making a lot less revenue than they are now. Now, I for one like the idea of using a web browser to read news. I certainly don't use a web browser to read my _own_ news, nor do I ever expect to do so. However, I read a lot more news a lot faster than the majority of people out there. At my office, I want to be able to tell people" Hey, you know that NetScape browser you learned how to use last month, well if you click here you can also read these things called newsgroups", instead of telling them "well if you learn how to use this DIFFERENT and NEW program that you currently know nothing about after a while you can figure out how to use these thing called newsgroups" simply because I know that the vast majority of people that I'll be telling this to would rather use a crapper solution that they know about rather than a better solution that they don't know about, and I'm more interested in having them use the newsgroups to begin with! Now maybe there are going to be those one or two people in my office that after getting into the newsgroup scene for a while are going to get sick of using a browser to access them. Then, I can take them aside and tell them "you know there are better ways to do this" but this is the exception, rather than the rule. Anyway, while I prefer the technological superiority of the non-unified approach, I have spent too long attempting to get people to use it only to see the majority of them run to the unified-but-crappy approach as soon as it is available to ever delude myself that the first approach is going to win.