On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 10:29:03 +0100
Axel Berger  wrote:

> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> > How very single user of you.
>
> Yes. Multiuser and terminals are a thing of the sixties. From the late
> seventies onwards we have such a thing as a "personal" computer. Yes, I
> am aware that there are good reasons for several different roles of that
> one user, like safe and adminstrator, but why should I by forced to set
> up everything several times just for it to be the same?

 You shouldn't of course, that's why applications on sane systems
(like Raspbian) have system wide defaults with per-user overrides (TBH I
have no idea about Windows I haven't used it in years, hopefully it also
supports this approach).

> Yes, there are computers in libraries and such, but those are the
> exception, not the rule and on top of that most of those are set up
> *not* to store user settings, so from the computer's point of view it's
> single user just the same.

 Hmm - until fairly recently we had a family computer with accounts
for everyone in the family, it fell into disuse so the last time it broke I
didn't fix it.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN                                     | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05