Linked by Thom "Slakje" Holwerda on Sun 27th Jul 2003 19:04 UTC
Misinterpreted. I think that is about the best word around to describe the reactions to my previous article. Whether it has been misinterpreted due to people only reading what they want to read, due to an unclear choice of words on my behalf, or other factors, I am going to try it again. I will try to explain my position, again. Now, more stable, the code has been rewritten from scratch!
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Please explain why Windows users need to search for DLLs.
Good question, but I'm suprised you asked. There have been instances I've been plagued by 'Missing *.dll error' errors. Most users who have used Windows Long enough now what I'm talking about. When did you say you started using Windows again?
And applications make these handy shortcuts and entries on the start menu.
Yes, and if you've used Windows long enough, you most have experienced broken shortcut links both in the start menu and program files. In which case you begin a hunt to see if the executable is present at all in C:Progam FilesName of Filesearch a bunch or randomly ordered files.
I've never experienced broken links or missing libraries to begin with in Linux. But their instances when I'd love to launch a program both I errorneously use the programs wrong launch name. For example to launch xchat version 2, I can need to type xchat-2 and not xchat or xchat2. In such instance I find easier to search /usr/bin for the executable real name. Try that on windows, and tell me it isn't messier.