<offtopic>
They should teach the basic concepts of using ANY word processor out there, because in that sense they are all very similar. Probably if you learn OpenOffice Writer or M$ Word, you'll know how to use the other without much difficulty. Some goes for say Lyx and Texmacs, etc. You shouldn't learn how to use a specific program, it'll do you no use. You should learn the concepts that can be applied to a larger group of programs. That's what I hate about most computer courses, for example one I took recently about how to use Word and Powerpoint. In most cases they taught me where to find things in the menu, and the steps to get to different options. This was not useful. However, there was something that did help a lot, that would be the different ways to handle a problem, and the advantages of each, and that certain features exists, but are rarely used because they are obscure. There is actually a right way to do things in a word processor, and a wrong way. The wrong way will make you struggle to get what you want, the right way will not. Lyx and Texmacs have tried to stop this by making the right way the only way, but it doesn't always work. |
Hi,
If the instructor is fluent in the application and has good presentation methods then the course follows his/her methodology. Everyone handles problems differently. No matter what the semantics are but the syntax will dictate how you will perform the task within the application. There are cheat codes within most applications, it's the specialist that can bring most people to the awareness of how to implement these to the desired condition/output. I've been to some system seminars that were really boring but when the presenter got into some intricacies that was when it got exciting. So some jewels do exist within those long hours of listening/following through someones presentation. |
My Review to 12.1:
Slackware 12.1 is in my opinion the best release of Slackware since its birth. Esspecially the support for kernel 2.6 is very well now (well, it was well at 12.0 too). I think Slackware is one of the best distributions, because you are able to administrate your system only with an editor like elvis. Sometimes I test openSUSE and I saw, that Yast ist very inscrutable. The second part of the Slackware is, that the software is shipped unpatched, I have used Kubuntu, there KDE 3.5 was unstable, it crashed quite often. At Slackware it crashed only two times. Kubuntu patched KDE to death, something which would not happen at Slackware. The last thing, I like at Slack: I love this Unix-Style. I'm using Slack since 11.0 and I had no better distribution since my change to Slack. VERY BIG THANK YOU TO PAT AND THE SLACKWARE TEAM. Best Regards Christian |
Caitlyn posted her final review of Slackware 12.1 yesterday.
http://news.oreilly.com/2008/06/slac...est-versi.html Pretty much the same as the first except perhaps a bit more negative... or maybe just defensive. I figure she's entitled to her opinion and all, but I don't like that she appears to be actively discouraging people from using Slackware and a couple lines in particular kinda peeved me off: Quote:
|
Such a long string of good comments and her first comment post accused people of "blindly going into Slackware defender mode." I stopped reading there.
|
There is so much wrong with that new article it isn't funny. You would think the writer would do more research, but alas she didn't.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
another review article: http://www.linux.com/feature/136601
|
Of the people discussing her review on O'Reilly, she is the only one resorting to personal attacks. She's the one accusing people of not reading the article, equating their words with Microsoft FUD, telling them to get a clue, etc. In an earlier discussion, she told people who did figure out Slackware that they were not normal (of above average intelligence was what she said, but her meaning was clear). Not one person who disagreed with her has used these tactics.
Needless to say, I have not added her blog to my Google reader feeds. |
very nice post, T3slider! I had a nice laugh about it.
After seeing a couple of the posts about the article I decided not to bother even read it, but if all the quotes you listed are actually there then that article is clearly r-i-d-i-c-u-l-o-u-s. Of course it seems like every Linux distro has a group of users that like to bash another distro, and almost every Linux user likes to bash Windows. Add this to the internet where anyone can ramble about what is on their mind and you can end up with a lot of literary garbage. I hope you linked to, or made a copy of, your above post on the comments section under the original article, T3lider. |
Hi,
Quote:
She doesn't have a clue! Slackware is used on a lot of servers. There are a lot of spin offs that use Slackware as a base for their OS of choice when working with servers. Easy to spin a distro within a corporate enterprise. Quote:
It would be nice if Drew would write a review on Professional reviewers and their biased opinion. They really know how to spin! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Is O'Reilly paying her to tell people that their comments are "inane and ridiculous," and to accuse anyone who disagrees with her of being a cultist?
|
Do her opinions really matter? How much weight do they carry? Are people going to be put off trying Slackware after reading that review, given the already prevalent myth that Slackware is "difficult"? I knew nothing about the relative ease or otherwise of any distro when I first installed it. Wouldn't have taken any notice of any review, anyway. I've read enough subjective reviews of books and films to take all such reviews with a pinch of salt. But a lot of people seem to be more easily led.
|
The thing with all these reviews are that they don't mean squat ;).
If I were to write a review for Slackware, it would be stellar for Slackware users - because I use Slackware, and know about how to use and some-what administer ;) Slackware. However - if I were to write a review for Suse, it would be pretty bad. I don't use Suse, I know nothing about Suse other than what Wikipedia states. Suse would ultimately fail. Anyone who bases their choices off of a review, evidently doesn't have enough mental capacity to form their own decisions, and must only follow the opinions of what other people state. The best, and IMHO, there has only been one valid review of Slackware recently. It was from a person that upgraded from 12.0 to 12.1. Valid because this reviewer knew Slackware, and how to do more than turn the power button on and use the mouse. There are only 2 classes of Linux persons. Admins and Users. Users should never attempt to administer a system. Which appears to be the case here. A user is clearly lost in admin land. Some of these users should just stick to *.ubuntu, if they're looking to point and click their way through an OS. The comment about administering an enterprise with 10,000+ PCs, I'm calling BS. In this review, the reviewer clearly has issues operating one PC, I couldn't imagine entrusting this person with anything at all. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:55 PM. |