4 ms·
Logging it is great, it's the fact the interface says "look in the log" rather than doing it for you. It's tiny annoying things like that which leave a bad fir
by isostatic 8y ago
Logging it is great, it's the fact the interface says "look in the log" rather than doing it for you.
It's tiny annoying things like that which leave a bad first impression. Rather than going "hey this system is great, it logs what it tells me", instead I'm left thinking "this system isn't for people like me, it doesn't think I need to know why it's broken"
First impressions are so important.
- lightedman 8y ago"Logging it is great, it's the fact the interface says "look in the log" rather than doing it for you." So now I have to go digging instead of being told upfront what the problem is. No thanks. Time is money, and having to dig through a logfile when simply putting the error message after the failure to execute would have sufficed, just wastes time and money. That's why we removed every Linux machine from our production lines at the solar plant I manage, and went back to (ugh) embedded Windows. SystemD is a waste of time and money in every single one of our experiences with it.