True. The Windows installation is typically easier than *any* linux distro,
even the almighty (and it is, IMHO) Mandrake.
Consider the fact that Microsoft spends $$$$$$ on employees whose sole
purpose is to understand how the computer disinclined people think.
Consider the fact that Microsoft founded itself with the purpose of
producing an OS that *anyone* can install and use on *any* machine (i386
based mostly).
Unix did not start out with that purpose and Linux is just realizing this
purpose, but doesn't have the financial backing to support it the way
Microsoft has.
Linux is for sure on the way however, and Mandrake (IMHO) is really helping
to push this.
>From: "Gil Baron W0MN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: [expert] MaximumLinux Magazine CD version of 7.1
>Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 06:17:11 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Received: from [216.71.84.35] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id
>MHotMailBB31D3DD006ED82197E8D847542304BB0; Sun Jul 09 07:14:54 2000
>Received: (from sympa@localhost)by mandrakesoft.mandrakesoft.com
>(8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA27145for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 9 Jul 2000
>09:14:42 -0500
>Received: from mail.rdc1.il.home.com (ha1.rdc1.il.home.com [24.2.1.66]) by
> mandrakesoft.mandrakesoft.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA01378 for
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 06:17:08 -0500
>Received: from cb621265a ([24.6.0.62]) by mail.rdc1.il.home.com (InterMail
> vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id
><20000709111713.RZIV1229.mail.rdc1.il.home.com@cb621265a> for
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 04:17:13 -0700
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Jul 09 07:17:15 2000
>Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
>X-Msmail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
>X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
>In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Importance: Normal
>X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>X-Sequence: 133
>Precedence: list
>
>You are lucky if that is all you have.
>I cannot install because it does not find xfree86 RPM. I amusing the
>downloaded iso images and that is what I get and I am then dead, no
>xfree86,
>no install.
>Anybody have a solution?
>
>You are totally correct about Windows install being VASTLY better!
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bob Puff@NLE [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2000 9:38 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [expert] MaximumLinux Magazine CD version of 7.1
> >
> >
> > Hello Dennis,
> >
> > > No. Our beta-testing period for 7.1 was 3-4 x longer than for 7.0, and
> > > there was nothing even near to "abrupt cesation" of testing.
> > There were 3
> > > public betas, and we did not receive any "critical bug reports" for
>the
> > > third one, so we had all the reason to beleive that 7.1 will be a good
> > > product (and it is).
> > > but none are really "show stoppers" (workarounds exist), and I
> > still think
> > > that overal quality of 7.1 is miles better than 7.0, or any previous
> > > Mandrake release:
> >
> > Well, as someone who had a little experience with 6.1, and
> > recently did several installs of 7.1 (never tried 7.0), I would
> > beg to differ with you big time. There are some significant bugs
> > dealing mostly with the install that I have posted here, but no
> > one has responded. And yes, they will keep 7.1 from installing!
> > Let me see if I can recall these:
> >
> > 1. The CDROM bug: once you get to where it wants disk #2, the
> > cdrom drive will not eject a disk. No way whatsoever to change
> > disks. (I did manage to change the disk by powering down the
> > CDROM drive, but then Linux wouldn't recognize it. Happened with
> > two out of four computers.
> >
> > 2. The way to start the install program from a DOS prompt is
> > broken - doesn't work at all.
> >
> > 3. The install program starts up running in high resolution, if
> > it sees you have a card that can do it. Unfortunately, it
> > doesn't ask if your monitor can support it, and thus my screen
> > turned to hash, and I was unable to install the program.
> > (Thankfully I had a multisync monitor on another system that I
> > robbed long enough to do the install.) THis should default to
> > 640x480, and ask / let you try higher rez if you want.
> >
> > 4. Setup properly detected my 3com 509 network card, then set up
> > the wrong drivers for it! (Had to change from whatever it had to
> > the 3com 509 driver, what a concept.)
> >
> > 5. Setup did not install the 75dpi or 100dpi fonts, which gave me
> > all sorts of error messages when X tried to start.
> >
> > 6. My monitor type and card must have been screwed up somewhere
> > in the detection, as I couldn't even get 256 colors at 640x480
> > working on one system. When I tried running the XF86setup, it
> > core dumps when you tell it to list devices.
> >
> > 7. "Automatic setup" is definitely not what anyone should use.
> > It skips many important steps. Also installs junk packages, and
> > doesn't install ones that should be installed by default (IMHO).
> >
> > 8. The KDE/X stuff looks like it was pre-configured for 1024x768
> > rez. WHen you're in 640x480, some things are off the screen, and
> > other boxes are so large you can't even get to an OK or CANCEL
> > button! Even in Win95, it defaults to the lowest common
> > denominator, and every window is accessible.
> >
> > I think that any of these things would cause a newbie to give up,
> > if they didn't have persistence. I am not a Win95 (or microsoft)
> > fan, but for the average user, their setup works a whole lot
> > better. From reading the comments here, it seems that 7.0 didn't
> > have some of the big nasty bugs that 7.1 has.
> >
> > Bob
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
