Hi Larry,
I feel what you described in here. Maybe Mark's point was not really
just have an interesting beta stuff, he wanted to fix stuff in
LM7.2. But, I think my point is still valid for a lot of people's
upgrades.
I think stability and featurefulness needs a different approach.
The legendary linux stability meant stability of the kernel. The stable
kernel. Not all the programs, desktops, and new programs from
cooker. And probably not CUPS, either. Debian is considered one of
the most stable and featureful linux distros. They stick to
software, installation methods, desktops which are usually found in
Mandrake distros like 6.2 -7.0. And yes, if you want cool stuff to
be working on your linux, you may have to tweak a little bit to make it
stable or usable. Sorry...
Just an example: For a really stable KDE desktop, you probably have
to stick to KDE 1.2...Until all the fixes for KDE 2.0 come out.
Well, I have to admit, I switched to linux some 4 years ago not
because of stability, but couriosity and because I allways change
stuff on my computer, try out things. I got bored with Windows, it
was closed I knew it, it was not interesting any more. It did not
help me to learn more...
But of course, I also need a working version of some kind of OS.
That is why I suggested to have two copies of the same distro. By
the way, a lot of the problems in LM7.2 are probably hardware and
setup dependent. My *stable* distro is a LM7.2, with KDE 2.0 and it
works for me...CUPS too. Actually without CUPS I would not be able
to print at all, because my printer is not supported.
Finally, as much as I love linux, I have to say, linux is still not for
the Walmart people. Never was. And when it will be suitable for
those people, its name will be Windows, and comes pre-installed...:-))
That is just my view right now, and if I will be wrong about it, I
will be the happiest to see the Linux World Domination. Amen.
Viktor
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 10:54:55AM -0500, Larry Marshall wrote:
>
> going to convince your buddies to try it (remember the World
> Domination theme of the Linux movement) and they're not computer geeks
> you have to have something that they can use without going through
> what you're talking about. How does it sound to say
>
> "Well, I'll give you version 7.1 of LM as it's pretty stable. You
> won't be able to use the nice stuff I've mentioned in the new version
> of GIMP and you won't have any of these nice windows I have in
> KDE2.1. I'm sorry, no, we'll have to update your Netscape so that
> 4.73 doesn't bleed memory all over the place and no, pppoe isn't built
> into 7.1 but we can easily get what you need and install it. Oh sure,
> once Mandrake gets its 7.2 installer sorted out, all this other stuff
> stabilized, and I figure out how to get CUPS to reliably print we
> might be able to make a run at installing this newer stuff on your
> system."
>
> Kinda takes the wind out of the sails of "Linux is more stable than
> Windows" doesn't it? How do you answer these people when they say
> "But 7.2 is available in a store; can it really be that bad?"
>
> I don't envy the job that companies like Mandrake have but they're
> making these decisions based on short term marketing, not in order to
> stabilize their products. The CUPS change wasn't positive and I've
> yet to read anything to suggest that anyone thinks it was, except for
> maybe the author and Mandrake. Why was it done in the midst of
> struggling to deal with a major leap in the KDE interface, with
> KOffice being dumped into the mix and a changing file system? Mark's
> point, and mine, is that some of Linux above the kernel level needs to
> remain stable for some period of time and change for change sake might
> fit a geek-development mindset but it doesn't create commercial
> products.
>
> There's an interesting thing about the Linux dynamic. Linus Torvalds
> and others talk about how the open source concept causes rapid change
> and that approval for features come from the users. If something is
> popular in one distro it becomes part of all of them very quickly is
> the chant. What seems to be missing from the equation presented is
> that the distros are adders and changers; they rarely subtract or
> stabilize.
>
> Once everyone in the community proclaims that this or that application
> doesn't work worth a darn, where is the compulsion to remove it from
> the system. Once the world proclaims that they like their Linux "like
> this" and all the distros become the same, what do the distro people
> do to set themselves apart and provide the box art people with fodder
> for selling their product? They change it, that's what and this is
> the dilemma we have right now. Red Hat has just done this with their
> v7.0 upgrade. They provided some improved functionality but most of
> what got added/changed makes 6.2 worse as 6.2 was very stable, the
> tools that came with it worked, and Red Hat hasn't yet made the KDE2.0
> plunge. In short, as long as distro people are driven by marketing
> (and what else would drive them?) they will be adders/changers, not
> subtracters/stabilizers that's a fundamental problem in my view.
>
> BTW, the only thing that has allowed me to run v7.2 of Mandrake was
> climbing out a bit on that bleeding edge and getting a stable version
> of KDE. Do you really think Walmart operating system purchasers
> will/should_have_to do this?
>
> Cheers --- Larry
>
