Linux-Advocacy Digest #697, Volume #29 Tue, 17 Oct 00 00:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Tim Smith)
Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Space Station, Windows & Unix (Tim Smith)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? ("Jan Schaumann")
Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: New Linux Install ("kosh")
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Jerry L Kreps)
Re: Suggestions for Linux (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Why the Linonuts fear me (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Michel Catudal)
Open Source in the Enterprise ("Sean Sullivan")
Re: Suggestions for Linux
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("JS/PL")
Re: Suggestions for Linux
Re: What I would like to see in an OS:
What is COLA? im in the dark on this one
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: 16 Oct 2000 19:03:28 -0700
Reply-To: Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tell that to your boss when you hand in your report and it looks like
>crap, all because you used Linux and he, along with the rest of the
>world, is using Word.
Uhm...ever heard of TeX? You can argue successfully that Word is easier
to use, but if you try to argue that it produces better looking
documents, you will reveal yourself to be a fool.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web!
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 02:21:53 GMT
Otto wrote:
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> : And this might be where RED HAT comes in.
> : RED HAT helps to keep you from having RED ASS.
> :
> : http://24.94.254.33/Linux/intro.html
>
> Interesting point of view at the above link, not to mention your
> interpretation of the article. However, there are some perspective which
> isn't mentioned on the site and you might've drawn the wrong conclusion.
> The masses rather have "RED ASS" than "RED HAT" for the time being. This
> might change by year 2005, but that would require couple of things to
> happen, they are actually related to one and other and somewhat overlooked
> in the article.
> Linux need to become as easy to use as Windows, or the masses will be
> proficient to use Linux. The former one already started, to the dismay of
> hardcore Linux advocates, Linux will be controlled by the GUI instead of the
> CLI. Only time will tell how successful this will be, anyone's guess is
> valid on this subject at this time, including the author of the article.
> As for the masses becoming proficient in the present form of Linux, good
> luck. The masses have no interest in the inner working of the OS. Microsoft
> built, or exploited their business on this fact.
>
> Otto
I'll disagree with that Otto as the embedded market is going to make
some very cheap alternatives to a full blown PC. It's likely that
a significant number of people will opt for this despite the failure
of WEB T.V.
WEB T.V. has two problems. The cost. The difficulty in upgrading
your software. The fact your locked into a certain ISP route.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: Space Station, Windows & Unix
Date: 16 Oct 2000 19:13:25 -0700
Reply-To: Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I doubt they're switching the satellite monitors (I assume
>Cheyenne Mountain is an adjunct of NORAD or something, dedicated
>to keeping our airspace clean of enemy missiles :-) ).
>I'm not sure even Linux would be appropriate there.
Why does it matter? I'd hope this would be a controlled environment.
In a controlled environment, basically running just one custom
application, Linux, Windows, DOS, OS/2, are *all* fine, stable, safe
platforms. Pick whichever is most convenient to develop on. Now, if
your system is going to monitor the missile defenses *and* be your Quake
server (gotta entertain the soldiers waiting for the attack!) *and* run
your timeclock for calculating payroll, etc, etc, then you need to worry
about your OS!
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: "Jan Schaumann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 22:25:26 +0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Oct 2000 01:35:57 GMT, Grant Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In article <8seufm$c7d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, MH wrote:
>> >Latex is fine. But try to give this to an experienced user of Word and
>> >it's not going to happen in this life time.
>> Learning to use LaTeX is certainly no more difficult than learning to
>> use Word. Provided with a set of LaTeX templates, I've seen people
>> with no typesetting or programming experience whatsoever producing
>> within a day
>> ...
>
> I agree with you completely.
>
> But why is it that the majority of the corporate world uses Word? Is
> that all marketing in action?
>
> I just find it so frustrating as an individual who is strictly a Linux
> user when someone sends me a Word document or puts up some useful
> information in Powerpoint or Excel form. It's honestly one of my
> biggest fears when I graduate from college and join the "real world"
> that I'll have to interface with MS products just to keep up with the
> operations of my organization.
You don't. You can educate people. Show them that you are far more
fficient and that the result will look far more professional if you use
your preferred environemt.
I have so far convinced all of my employess not only to let me work on a
Linux-box instead of some stupid NT-machine (where everybody had to have
the same password and the sys-admin didn't know what ftp is), but also
have many people since then made an effort to learn Linux/Unix...
The act that most people use Word is b/c M$ has a Monopoly. That is a Bad
Thing (tm). It has been found that M$ did in fact stifle competition and
harmed the customer by preventing progress
(http://usvms.gpo.gov/ms-findings2.html) - here we see it in action.
A few weeks ago, I bought my dad a subscription to a magazine online. I
receved an email saying "see attached" with an MS-Word doc attached,
containing the lines
"Dear Mr. Schaumann
we have received your order. Mr Schaumann (Sen) will receive the magazine
from the next issue onwards at address xyz. Thank you very much."
When I responded with an email saying that it's bad practice and looks
foolish to send a word-document for these purposes (I phrased it nicely),
they responded that they did no know, that they had no idea that people
might no have word and that they will, in the future, send plain text.
Voila, my good deed for the day.
Cheers,
-Jan
--
Jan Schaumann <http://www.netmeister.org>
Please add smileys where appropriate.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web!
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 02:30:22 GMT
Bob Hauck wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 11:10:36 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> >on Sat, 14 Oct 2000 18:43:44 GMT
>
> >>On Sat, 14 Oct 2000 07:02:58 GMT, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )
> >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>>Ironically, Microsoft has been killing it's own market. They
> >>>created checks that now make it impossible to develop server
> >>>software on workstation editions.
> >>
> >>Can you clarify what you mean by this? What sort of "checks" are done?
> >
> >This generated some traffic a few months (years?) ago on this newsgroup.
> >Basically, the kernel for NT Workstation and NT server was identical,
>
> Yes, I remember that. But MS did eventually back off and dropped the
> technical means of enforcing the 10 connection limit. It seemed to me
> that Rex was referring to W2K having some new scheme along the same
> lines.
>
> Some software won't install on NT Workstation because it checks for the
> registry entry. Maybe that's what he means? This will somewhat
> increase your development costs if you have to buy Server for every
> developer, but it isn't too serious given that you don't need CALs for
> that situation.
>
> --
> -| Bob Hauck
> -| To Whom You Are Speaking
> -| http://www.haucks.org/
Two things.
If you've bought a seat group, you can have more than the limit.
But the re-connection established each time a pc net's in is
the delimiting factor. You waste time that way.
There is no limit on Linux with Samba.
And I just wanted to say that administration of Linux is easier
than NT.
#1. There are no blue screen crashes which force you to spend 17 hours
rebuilding your server.
#2. With Linuxconf and WEBADM the effort of daily administration
is greatly reduced. Not that VI was a bad administration tool in itself,
the latter two are more understandable to the average Windows person.
This doesn't even cover the burden of license adminstration and the
annual BEG to get budget money to implement your companies goals
to stay modern.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "kosh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: New Linux Install
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 20:31:10 +0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 23:20:30 GMT, Matthew Gardiner
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I installed mandrake using a 9.4GB HDD (around 1200Cylinders) and the
>>rest swap, I did not experience any problems, even when I used reiserfs
>>for the boot partition.
>
> Be wary. Mandrake likes to rotate logs on a daily basis. Over time this
> can create a lot of internal fragmentation as you end up with far too
> many really small files in /var/log taking up more space than you might
> expect them too.
>
>
Actually lots of really small files is something reiserfs deals with very
well. Reiserfs also does not seem to really suffer from fragmentation
problems. Most advanced filesystems deal with fragmentation pretty well
now.
------------------------------
From: Jerry L Kreps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:38:45 -0500
On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Matthias Warkus wrote:
<snip>
>In the de.* hierarchy, we tell everyone who doesn't post under their
>realname to fuck off, which is a useful policy IMO.
>
>mawa
I wish this real name policy was universal!
JLK
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Suggestions for Linux
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 02:48:07 GMT
Shortly after Microsoft falls.
#1. Remove all easy administration.
#2. Force everybody to install from gziped tar files.
#3. Remove all doc files.
#4. Make it impossible for anybody to run games.
#5 Create embedded Linux which can't reach newsgroups for
cheap - cheap $50 internet device.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why the Linonuts fear me
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 02:50:29 GMT
Nigel Feltham wrote:
> >Yep. Me too. But you know what? Slackware really sucks as far as what the
> >users you allude to want on their desktop. So, there you are.
> >
>
> What makes you think everyone wants to run windows on their systems. Are you
> stupid enough to believe than 100% of users should use a computer in the
> same way, that all users want a system where they lose the configuration for
> every program on the system when a single files gets corrupted, that all
> users prefer to use a GUI, that all users want to run the same programs on
> their systems.
>
> Linux, BSD, BEOS, QNX, and several other less well-known operating systems
> are there to give users a choice about what they run on their systems and
> help to promote innovation - if everyone were running the same software
> where is the incentive to improve anything - we need competition in the
> marketplace to keep things improving. Wouldn't you be pissed off if Ford
> suddenly decided they would buy up all other car companies and give buyers
> only one choice of car to buy or if all your local supermarkets were merged
> into the same company who could suddenly sell only low quality food in every
> shop and if you didn't like it that would be tough luck as you have no
> choice. It is the same with computing.
>
> >> You yo-yo's are so caught up in your own pile of bullshit that you
> >> have not a clue as to what the rest of the world wants, needs or is
> >> asking for.
> >
>
> And presumably they are all asking for the same thing with no alternatives
> are they?
>
> >> Think again. You can't even give it away.
> >
>
> Slackware, Caldera, Redhat, Mandrake, Storm, SUSE, Debian and many other
> companies seem to be doing well enough out of selling it - funny how
> multiple companies can make a profit selling something that is also
> available for free download when another company can only make a profit by
> forcing PC suppliers to OEM bundle their product with the hardware.
>
> >Think of all the burned copies, and cheapbytes and linuxmall cd's sitting
> >around.
>
> Think of all the copies of Windows that get bundled with the hardware then
> wiped in favour of one of the alternative operating systems.
>
> >I use gnu gcc. But I'm more productive with Borland's turbo C++ from back
> >in the early 90's. Plus the documentation is abysmal.
>
> It is compatible with most if not all other standard UNIX compilers so why
> not try reading the documentation available for one of the compatible
> versions for other operating systems.
>
> Seems strange that multiple versions of Unix can compile the same code yet
> different compilers under windows will not compile the same code ( it is
> easier to compile a BSD, Solaris, AIX program under linux as long as there
> is no assembly code than it is to compile a Microsoft C and Borland C
> programs under each-other's compilers - just look how portable the linux
> kernel code is for example).
>
> >> Why is it not taking over the desktop?
> >
>
> It is - the battle may not be as quick as some would hope but linux is
> winning (in japan and china it is easily outselling windows even if you only
> count copies sold and ignore multiple installs from same copy and copies
> downloaded).
>
> >> You have half assed Windows clones that neither perfom as well nor
> >> have the features of the equivilant Windows programs. In some cases
> >> you don't have any equivilant at all (a decent browser).
> >
>
> And in a lot of cases windows software sucks for the purpose the user wants
> to put it to - for example I have installed linux (mandrake 7.1) on the
> machine we burn CD's on to make our weekly backups easier - I have written a
> scriptfile to scan through subdirectories on the server (NT4 small business
> server) and automatically create a kisocd project file containing all
> directories created within the last 2 weeks which is then loaded into kisocd
> and the CD is reliably burned.
>
> Under windows I have to manually look for all directories and add all dir's
> under 2 weeks old to project and burn the CD which wasted 3/4 of an hour
> each week (and you say windows is more productive). Also as of last week I
> have started burning the data to CD direct from the server via our 100mbs
> network which saves 15 minutes for each cd of a 3 cd backup set (machine
> time not user time as nobody would have needed to watch the machine for
> those 15 minutes). Even when writing on-the-fly the writing buffer didn't
> drop below 85% full (under windows it can barely manage this even with image
> writing and on-the-fly writing across networks is disabled in all software I
> have tried).
>
> For this purpose all windows software I tried sucks and linux rules - again
> proving that not everyone uses a machine in the same way.
>
> >Now we REALLY agree on something. Until someone in this open source panecea
> >realizes what MS realized years ago; that the internet is the market, then
>
> Didn't bill gates openly say that the internet will never seriously catch
> on.
>
> How many users would IE have if it wasn't forcefully installed with the
> operating system?
>
> The sales of opera and other non-free browsers proves that IE sucks for a
> lot of users otherwise why would they pay to replace something they already
> had free with the os?
>
> >> You fear me, because I have the facts, have used Linux and have come
> >> to the same conclusion that legions of others have come to. Linux is
> >> nice, but Windows is better. I just choose to expose this Linux scam
> >> for what it is. A scam.
>
> And per processor licencing to force computer buyers to also buy windows
> isn't a scam?
I'm just glad it wasn't titled,
Linonuts FEEL ME...
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Michel Catudal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: 16 Oct 2000 22:10:03 -0500
jazz a écrit :
>
> In article <qEqG5.3541$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jan
> Schaumann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Well, then you probably want to take a look at
> > -abiword
> > -StarOffice (BLOATware)
> > -ApplixWare (payware)
> >
> > Or you can just distribute your documents as pdf's...
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> > -Jan
>
> Please tell me more. For example, I just wrote a paper with someone in LA.
> I'm in New Jersey. I wrote a draft, emailed it to them, they revised it,
> resent it to me, I revised and made additions, sent it back, he revised,
> and I sent some additional parts, he put it all together, and sent it out
> to all the other authors, as a word attachment they all can read and make
> changes to.
>
> So these would have to import/export files in word-readible format.
>
> Can they do that? I doubt Bill would put up with that, and would instruct
> his minions to make a couple of tweaks in Word for insurance.
>
> Thanks
> Jim
Star Office 5.2 does a good job. It comes free with SuSE 7.0 and perhaps some
other Linux distributions.
StarOffice and Quatro Pro do most of what excel do except for the crashing.
--
Tired of Microsoft's rebootive multitasking?
then it's time to upgrade to Linux.
http://www.netonecom.net/~bbcat/
We have software, food, music, news, search,
history, electronics and genealogy pages.
------------------------------
From: "Sean Sullivan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Open Source in the Enterprise
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 03:17:03 GMT
To all,
Can anyone out there direct me to an active newsgroup or newsgroups with
discussions revolving the business case for open source software? I am
writing a research paper and have done some considerable research in the
business case from the standpoint of the open source community itself.
However, I am interested in the model from an actual end-user perspective.
I realize from reading this and many other related newsgroups, that hackers
are end-users too, but I would argue they probably make up less than 5% of
end-users.
For mainstream business to really buy-in to open-source/free software they
set different expectations. It is these expectations that I am researching
now. From my research from the hacker perspective, I have encountered a lot
of problems and difficulties in fine tuning my continued research. Some of
these revolve around the fact that (1) there are differing opinions on what
qualifies as open source/free software - and do companies care about the
minute details (2) pretty much all companies use open source software wether
or not they realize it now. Small issues, granted, but they are things I
am seeking to clarify and define as I progress.
Again any helpful links, newsgroups, commentary, or other reference sources
would be appreciated. Please post to the group not to me directly.
-Sean
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Suggestions for Linux
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 23:24:45 -0400
I got psdoom. What a blast! First thing I did like any idiot would do like
trying it as root. Didn't kill any processes though. (darn) so I did a
userlogin and start up a bunch of stuff there like Netscape, StarOffice, and
a lot of others in an X session. Still being root at the console, I followed
the directions with the game and started popping off my user processes one
by one, then I got the BFG9k and totally cleaned house! hehehe! I can
imagine doing this on other people like kill off his bash prompt and make
him/her login again and again. It's definately a great tool to knock off a
belligerent user in one fell swoop. Then again, so does deleting his/her
account. ;-P
Another funny thing to note is that if those monsters/processes did kill
each other off just like the original Doom, then that would be the perfect
description of what Windows does while it runs <big grin>
P.S. Sorry I don't have M$-Office. It's way out of my budget ;-)
"2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > p.s. Please note that I'm not even a unix guru and never claimed to be
one.
> > 3 months expirence with Linux, though and I already learned to do the
same
> > basic things and more. How do I find a 12 step program to cure my
Micro$uck
> > dependency? Can someone please tell me? I need help!
>
> Here's a good bit of therapy (if you have MS Office). Download psdoom
> (see later in the thread). Run MS Office under wine. Run psdoom. Have
> fun.
>
> -Ed
>
>
> --
> Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
> binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
> first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
> commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 23:29:11 -0400
Reply-To: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> So I posted some real numbers. I could have posted a lot more, all of
them
> equally shocking, but I figured one set would be enough to show you where
> you were mistaken.
>
> Here. Here they are again.
>
> Per processor prices.
> 8086 - $6
> 80286 - $10
> 80386 - $16
> 80486 - $16
> Weighted average: $8.22
Not only are these prices next to nothing even at $30.00/copy, you obviously
have never heard of volume discounting. It is prevelant EVERYWHERE ON EARTH!
The only place you'll never get a volume discount is maybe Sears, every
other business on earth gives them. Most volume discounts are as high as 50%
off. So even if your prices are accurate, which I doubt because you've
provided no proof, the fricking sales tax on the OEM computer had about 4-10
times more impact on the overall price of a system than a price hike from
$16 to $30 on the operating system. Not to mention that MS got their foot
into the business by offering the lowest price on an OS. The few other OS
companies all decided the best route would be gouging. MS offered a very low
cost OS, they won due to competitor stupidity. Get over it.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Suggestions for Linux
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 23:41:32 -0400
Before Microsoft falls...
#1. Force everyone to use the same operating system
#2. Force everyone to fix registry problems after bad install programs
(without any help) hint- reinstall
#3. Force everyone to printout your 100 page user manuals because companies
are too damned cheap to pack manuals in boxes anymore (at least I got an
install manual with RedHat Linux)
#4. Force everyone to deal with downloading the latest DirectX drivers for
their latest games and pray that you don't have to buy that real expensive
video card
#5. Put embedded Microsoft devices in homes, businesses, police vehicles,
traffic lights, airplanes, oil tankers, orbiting sattellites, and everything
else imaginable and watch the whole fucking planet fall apart
Oh wait! they're doing it now! Guess we should just bend over and kiss our
asses goodbye, huh? Not if I got something to say about it!
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Shortly after Microsoft falls.
>
>
> #1. Remove all easy administration.
>
> #2. Force everybody to install from gziped tar files.
>
> #3. Remove all doc files.
>
> #4. Make it impossible for anybody to run games.
>
> #5 Create embedded Linux which can't reach newsgroups for
> cheap - cheap $50 internet device.
>
> Charlie
>
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in an OS:
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 23:51:38 -0400
How about CP/M?
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Try OS/400.
>
> claire
>
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 17:22:19 -0400, "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >The FIRST thing I would LOVE to see in an OS is NO ADVOCACY news group
for
> >it.
> >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: What is COLA? im in the dark on this one
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 00:03:43 -0400
I'll temper my fear with courage by asking this....
Who or what is COLA?
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8r2rp9$12ai$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> >As an excercise (and for the experience to back up your arguments),
> >your assignment is to go grab a copy of WinLinux2000 and install it
> >on a fat32 filesystem.
> >
> >Then shut down the system suddenly and with no warning to anything
> >running on it at all...pulling the power plug is just fine for that.
>
> Here's one for you:
>
> Go to your exotic car dealership, and buy a Ferrari 550. Head down the
> local interstate, and about when you get up to 150, slam into the
> nearest concrete pole.
>
> If the car doesn't survive, it must be junk.
>
> Seriously, what is the point here? He was talking about _running_
> reliably. How does a stupid act like you suggest prove anything?
> He asked you how FAT32 affects the stability of the running operating
> system. Your reply is totally out of context.
>
> >> Due to lack of hardware support primarily.
> >
> >Thus generating alot of the reasoning behind the arguments of some of
> >the most illogical and vehement anti-linux people on COLA. Try it,
> >you might like it alot. BFS is the most incredible filesystem I and
> >many others have ever seen.
>
> It's a nice fs, but hardly remarkable. In fact, it is actually
> pretty primitive compared to other journaled filesystems. It's
> all you need for a desktop machine of course. I think even Be will
> tell you simplicity was a goal, not bleeding or even leading edge
> feature sets. In fact, Be backed way down from their original concepts
> for the filesystem, a fact documented on their own web site.
>
> It's OK to be a fan, but don't hype it beyond what it can support.
>
> BTW... "Due to lack of hardware support primarily." is a perfectly
> logical criticism. BeOS has been in development for many years,
> and still has horrible driver support, does not have active software
> development (when compared to Linux for example), and the pace of
> development seems very slow. Sometimes it appears that Be is dead,
> there are such long periods of time between news from them. They
> have left dead links on their web site for months, just for example.
> The UI is very nice, and I enjoy using it, but really lacks a lot
> of things I use every day on my UNIX systems. Some of this is hard
> to quantify, other things are glaringly obvious. Some of this is due
> to its inherent simplicity, which I like. But it is very immature in
> some ways too, and that needs to be fixed.
>
> The whole idea of how you store so much in $HOME/config, and a great
> many other things, are going to break when BeOS becomes multi-user.
> I hope there is a plan for all this. They should have at least made a
> rudinetary login that gave you a proper username instead of defaulting
> to "baron". After this many years, I think that's a reasonable idea.
>
> Just the simple things like having a mode where Tracker uses a single
> window to browse the filesystem, or being able to remap my control and
> caps lock keys is missing. It's terribly annoying. I can't get a mail
> program that has good PGP support. NetPositive, I like a lot, but
> it still crashes as much as Netscape, and doesn't have some important
> features. I think it must just be a given with web browsers that they
> are going to crash. They all do that, and I don't really like any of
> them.
>
> BeOS is a wonderful OS, but pretending it's faults are not there
> doesn't help at all. I am using it, but I would have to be completely
> blind to not see it's obvious shortcomings. Same for Linux and
> BSD, at least for desktop use.
>
>
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________
> ______________________/ armchairrocketscientistgraffitiexenstentialist
> "And in billows of might swell the Saxons before her,-- Unite, oh
> unite! Or the billows burst o'er her!" -- Downfall of the Gael
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
