[sf-lug] what "consistency", not near the user - we don't got no consistency!

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Paul Ward (dssstrkl at gmail.com):

> I think the problem is there's no consistency for people used to the
> Windows or OS X experience.

You see a problem; I see something merely being itself.  Ain't
perspectives grand?

> The big reason why I bought a Mac in 2002 was because  OS X 10.2 on a
> powerbook was just that much of a better experience  than I was having
> with either Linux or Windows on a series of PC  laptops, plus it had
> the unix-y stuff that I had come to love!

Oddly enough, the big reason why I prefer to run Xubuntu rather than OS
X on my Macs is that OS X's implementation of Unix sucks at nearly every
level.  (I've used nearly every MacOS version going back to 1984, by the
way.)

> What I'm trying to say is that for people who want to try linux, but
> are in between the levels of propellerhead and techtard, a lot of that
> low-level consistency has to make its way to the high level GUIs.

Funny thing:  Just about every time someone says Linux "has to" do
something or other, he or she turns out to be factually mistaken.  What
you appear to mean is:  You would personally prefer that a vast
community of people whose paycheques you do not sign _change_ what they're
doing at a very fundamental level, to do things in the way that you
imagine is best, probably (I would speculate) while having an at best
uncertain understanding of the details of what they do.

I hope that works for you, but I've honestly never seen it work for
anyone else, in the entire history of software.