Quoting Clarence Verge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> A far better idea (excepting embedded interpretation) would be a JS to HTML
> translation on the fly with the existing HTML interpreter doing the
> work.;-)

Good joke, except that JavaScript is doing exactly the things HTML can't do...
(99% of them)

> > I think it will be easier to bring all Arachne fans to Linux than
> > do for DOS that what is already done for Linux, or could be done easy.
> 
> Linux isn't ready for prime time. It's a "nerds only" thing.

I think anyone who have contributed text-only documentation files to Arachne 
package can be considered nerd ;-)

The problem is, that there is not single Linux, but about 1000 different 
distributions, and about 5000000 individual installations worldwide, some of 
them very specific. It is not nerd-only thing, but of course, if you don't like 
GUI icons and don't want to learn new command line tricks, and want just to 
live with your existing DOS habits, it is hard to move. I think it should be 
fairly easy for anyone under 20 years to move to Linux - problem is that at 
that age, young people sometimes request latest effects in games, multimedia, 
etc. But not always - when I was twenty, I was crazy about "garage culture", 
all the things I could do myself. I moved to Linux when I was cca 25-26, and at 
that time, it was already quite hard to get used to new system. On the other 
hand, my father started to use Linux instead of Windows recently (at work), and 
he is over 50 years old. (At least learning new things helps you to keep your 
brain cells alive ;-)

I think it is not hard to use Linux, but to maintain Linux. On the other hand, 
it is even harder to maintain DOS - most DOS boxes today live because their 
owners don't want to mess with modifying the hardware, installing new drivers, 
etc. Adding new driver in config/autoexec can be more painful, than recompiling 
kernel and rebooting - of course, as there are pretty straigtforward device 
drivers (like mouse drivers) in DOS, which are easy to install and easy to load 
high, there are also some perfectly supported components in Linux kernel, which 
will ALWAYS work - not only all your disk drives, serial devices, etc., but 
even some of latest graphical or sound cards. On the other hand, some hardware 
support is painful and requres you to specify manualy IRQs, etc. (older ISA 
sound cards...). 

Some hardware is supported in a very stable and reliable manner, but it is not 
easy to figure out how to make it work. Eg. IDE ATAPI cd burner is good 
example: Linux supports mainly SCSCI devices, as all Unix veterans were used 
that SCSI is something which always works with all Unixes, so they implemented 
that support first ;-) You can add SCSI over IDE emulation to your kernel, but 
this requires you to check two very unusuall options at two completely 
different sections of kernel setup. If you have this, cdrecord utility will 
find your CD, and with cdrec GUI frontend, you will find, that burning CDs is 
now just click away. But before you figure out what to do, it looks scary. On 
the other hand - how many of you have managed to install CD burner drivers for 
DOS ? Are the any such drivers available ? (If you tell me how to play MP3 
files on background in DOS, and how to burn CD-ROMs in DOS, I may continue DOS 
only development of Arachne ;-)

I think it will be possible to create Linux distribution oriented on DOS users. 
What has to be done, is to remove all the /etc/rc.d server-oriented stuff, and 
to launch all system daemons (equivalent of DOS drivers, more or less) from /
etc/autoexec script file. This would reveal power of Linux even to DOS 
veterans... lot of people who say Linux is bloated are not aware of the fact, 
that common distributions automaticaly launch lot of services useless for end 
users, like http server, ftp server, telnet server... you can get usable linux 
command line on system with let's say less then ten files (kernel, shell, and 
couple of libraries - minimum is libc). I think this would be really 
interesting for for minimalists like you, Clarence. You would immediately 
realize, that such bare Linux would boot and respond faster than average DOS. 
My knowledge is so far insufficient to setup such system, but I am getting 
closer....

Reply via email to