Hi,
Yes I agree with you, but I most of the work that we require to do is available as a GUI toolkit. And however integrated we are to the Linux systems, we would love to use the graphical version of linuxconf rather than the text version. Anyway Linux is always better since all of have used both of them (Win and Lin). And not many people who say that Win is better have just used Win.
Bye. -----Original Message----- From: linuxers-admin@mm.ilug-bom.org.in [mailto:linuxers-admin@mm.ilug-bom.org.in] On Behalf Of Philip S Tellis Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 1:40 PM To: linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in Subject: RE: [ILUG-BOM] Linux is not reliable . Windows Still rulez
On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Amish K. Munshi wrote:
I have realized that these OS's do a great job but Linux is difficult to configure and windows is simple to configure but then it
is
Actually, many people (me included) would argue that linux is easier to configure. All configuration files in linux are text files. All options are well commented. The ability to have comments right in the configuration file is great.
In windows, you've got to search around n dialog boxes (for acceptable values of n), search through tabs, and figure out what weird terms mean. If windows doesn't start (even in safe mode), then there's no way
you can reconfigure things. I've seen it happen.
You don't have to be a linux guru to be able to configure, you just need
to know where the configuration files are, and how to read them.
If there aren't inline comments, it is very likely that the configuration file has a man page of its own. eg. man xinetd.conf