Replies

I don’t know, guys, you are awfully contemptuous of non-techie people in the “if they can’t figure out how to get online, they shouldn’t be there” kind of mode.

Why must it be one or the other? They make cameras that can be used by both techno-idiots and techno-geeks. Why can’t they find a way to do that with computers.

They make cameras that can be used by both techno-idiots and techno-geeks. Why can’t they find a way to do that with computers.

"They" have done so for over 20 years -- "they" call them, "Macintosh"...

I don’t know, guys, you are awfully contemptuous of non-techie people in the “if they can’t figure out how to get online, they shouldn’t be there” kind of mode.

That sure wasn't my intention. I agree that OS installation from Linux and the various BSDs should be made easier for end-users, and it's getting there slowly (it's a vast improvement now from the days when configuring XFree86 took a calculator and crossed fingers).

But we need to keep demanding powerful, useful computers, not just glorified web-browsing machines. Software, hardware, and media companies would love to have a captive audience of passive Internet users receiving commercial content, corresponding to the old model of television viewers. This isn't good for any of us - real computers and the Internet provide individuals (even granny!) with the ability to create and share/market their own content, devise and share/market their own innovative applications. The ongoing campaign by tech and media companies to lock down the capabilities of hardware and software are going to inevitably hamper innovation.