Stef wrote:

Joel wrote:

"Roger Blake" wrote in message
...

On 2015-06-10, Joel wrote:
This machine it's slow to open applications and fast to close. That's
why I prefer older Windows versions, they are much smoother. And it's
becoming darker
interface like Linux.

There is no single "Linux user interface." Linux users have the choice
of quite a few, some very much like Windows, some like nothing else on
Earth. I use Xfce myself which has a pretty traditional look and feel,
and would hardly describe it as "dark."


The command console is usually black as ms-dos. I know Linux users can
change the wallpaper and configure the looks. You can have both on same
machine, there is a lot of options to do with those. Only thing I don't
understand is why they say Linux is safer and open source. Should be
closed and safer.

With Linux you can change everything or just about. Well, even "just
about" can be changed, but you have to get into the code and recompile
it which you can't do with proprietary "closed" software. And that's
one of the reasons that makes Linux "safer:" you can check the code for
"bad" things, edit them out, and recompile. Or fix errors. Or alter
the app to suit your needs.


That may be as one that can and understand linux and where the config files
are, but for the rest of the people, linux will be almost impossible for
them to configure without going to some school or class. If their wi-fi
connection doesn't work, what would you think their first reaction to this
will be?

Dell has tried to sell PCs with linux preinstalled and so has HP. Their
efforts were ignored by the public and soon the PCs were pulled from the
market place.

The real problem is computing stagnation. Even HPs CEO recognizes this and
is trying to do something about this. Kind of reminds me of the 70s and
CP/M and S-100 boxes. That market stagnated as well. When IBM came out
with something new, the PC, the CP/M almost died overnight.