Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> __/ [ Andrea ] on Wednesday 13 December 2006 09:51 \__
>
> > Kelsey Bjarnason napisa?(a):
> >
> >>
> >> The mind boggles.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Linux does NOT need to look like XP.
>
> Unfortunately, for some people it's a prerequisite. They suspect any
> unfamiliar pace.
The prerequisite is that it acts like XP, and runs XP software, not
looks like XP. Either you know that this is Linux and not XP, in which
case you probably don't give a crap about it looking like XP, or you
don't know that it's not XP and are fooled by the way it looks. In
which case you would be in for a very nasty surprise.
> "Oh, look! XP in olive-flavoured gown... scary stuff."
>
> "OMG!! The Start botton is at the top of the screen."
>
> "Wow! How did you make the panel disappear and reappear?"
>
> I think people were generally taught that computers are some rigid thing.
> Imagine yourself applying the same concepts to cars.
>
> "Oh no! This car is red."
>
> "Freaky. This car is so narrow."
>
> "This car has just a single windshield wiper."
>
> I guess it's all about perception. Diversity in computing is assumed to be an
> oddity.
All that's different between Linux and XP is appearance?
|
|
