The reason Win95/98 are so large and slow is that they
WERE supposed to be backwards compatible as much as
possible. Win2000 is not the next step in the Win95/98
chain, its the next step in the NT chain. Windows
Millenium is the next step in 95/98 chain, and it has
the same problems 95 & 98 do, plus the obligatory new
bugs MS introduces with each new product.
I like Mandrake BECAUSE it's not backwards. If I
wanted to run Linux on a 386, I wouldn't have bought a
PIII 500, yet most of the Linux (binary) distros I see
are for 386s. Since I'm new to Linux, I didn't want to
have to figure out how to do a build just to take
advantage of my hardware.
If Mandrake doesn't install on my old hardware
(haven't tried it yet, but I will) I won't be
heartbroken - heck, I won't even be annoyed. There are
enough distributions out there that DO support
obsolete equipment by default. :)
--- Sean Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thank you for reading the whole message and not
> being overly sensitive. The
> reason I wrote such a stinging message in the first
> place was due to the
> lack of response to the problems by people that
> would rather be led around
> on their favorite distributions corporate change and
> could not see no wrong
> in the distribution. Thank you for looking past this
> prejudice and trying to
> solve the real issue.
>
> I agree with you that 7.0 + is not as backwards
> compatible. I understand
> what you are saying about older hardware. But, I do
> believe the original
> idea of Linux was so that it worked on all of these
> old pieces of hardware.
> Ive run Win98 on the same two computers and they
> work but they sure do bog
> down. But when I run Linux, I can do things on these
> old computers that just
> wouldn't be possible under Win98 because of speed. I
> thought the whole
> reason for switching to Linux was to get away from
> Winbloze. Now, by your
> own argument, it sounds like Mandrake wishes to make
> their distribution more
> like windo$e. No backward compatability. Have you
> tried Win2000 yet? This is
> a major problem with Win2000. And Win200 runs faster
> on my computers than
> Win98. Can you believe that? I don't like Windoze. I
> love working with
> Linux. I'd hate to see people lose focus of the
> Linux objective just to make
> a profit. Thank you for your patience.
> SA
>
> >From: Wolfgang Bornath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Re: [expert] Formerly: Mandrake 7.02 is
> messed up
> >Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 22:32:18 +0100
> >
> >On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 13:13 -0600, Sean Armstrong
> wrote:
> > > Now that I've had some time to cool down, let me
> start by apologizing to
> > > those diehard Mandrake people that couldn't read
> past the Subject before
> > > getting offended and defensive of their
> distribution.
> >
> >I read past the subject and I even read this mail
> till the end.
> >And I understand quite well what you mean. I do get
> the point
> >you're making.
> >
> >I cannot say anything about the mouse-problem or
> other problems.
> >
> >Just about the CD issue. You made it very clear
> yourself in this
> >mail.
> >
> >1. You have old hardware and new hardware.
> >
> >2. You have an "old" Mandrake version and a new
> version.
> >
> >See the picture?
> >
> >Mandrake's distribution aims at the hardware of
> today *without*
> >carrying all the back-compatibility with it. The
> optimization
> >for 586 cpus makes that very clear.
> >
> >So my questions are:
> >1.
> >Why do you want to run a distribution of that kind
> on hardware
> >which is not fit for it?
> >2.
> >Why do you have to upgrade the older machine at
> all?
> >A know someone using RedHat 5.2 with some upgraded
> packages. It
> >suits his hardware and his purposes.
> >In our office we have a 486SX running DOS 6.2 and
> Win 3.1 for
> >testing and for some cardgames and for some newbies
> who never
> >saw a computer at all.
> >We'd never get the idea to install Win95/98 on this
> box.
> >
> >IMHO there are really stable distributions with
> rocksolid
> >conventional setup for hardware which is not up to
> a bleeding
> >edge distribution. Mandrake 7.0 never wanted to be
> and never
> >said to be such a backwards-compatible
> distribution.
> >
> >It all comes down to one of Linux' main principles:
> >For every purpose and every liking and every limit
> there is a
> >way to go under Linux. You just have to choose what
> you and your
> >hardware want and are able to do.
> >
> >So, maybe I'm a diehard Mandrake disciple. But
> maybe I just see
> >the meaning of an old proverb (popular in Germany):
> Each pot has
> >a matching lid. There is no lid matching all the
> pots.
> >
> >I think this has nothing to do with marketing or
> "World
> >Domination Now!". Mandrake made the aim of Air
> clear. Like
> >Coral's CEO Mr. Coupland did when he stated that
> they want to
> >make Corel Linux as similar to Windows as possible,
> so not to
> >offend possible convertites with something too
> alien to them.
> >
> >That's another attitude. SuSE has different aims
> and Debian is
> >another story altogether.
> >
> >Get the picture?
> >
> >wobo
> >--
> >GPG-Fingerprint: FE5A 0891 7027 8D1B 4E3F 73C1
> AD9B D732 A698 82EE
> >For Public Key mailto [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> Subject: GPG-Request
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
> >ISDN4LINUX-FAQ -- Deutsch:
> http://www.wolf-b.de/i4l/i4lfaq-de.html
>
>
______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at
> http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
=====
Mage Grimau, Strange Unwashed & Somewhat Slightly Dazed
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
