Linux-Advocacy Digest #892, Volume #32 Mon, 19 Mar 01 16:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: User Friendly?? (Chad Everett)
Re: How is FreeBSD faster than Linux? (Chad Everett)
Re: What Linux MUST DO! - Comments anyone? (Eugenio Mastroviti)
Re: the truth about linux (Edward Rosten)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> (Edward Rosten)
Re: What is user friendly? (John Fereira)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Subject: Re: User Friendly??
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 19:54:12 GMT
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001 19:39:41 GMT, Martigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Chad Everett wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 19 Mar 2001 14:16:55 GMT, Martigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >I think user friendly is: The ability to change everything about the OS
>> >to fit your needs, with out multiple reboots.
>>
>> I disagree. I think user friendly is providing interfaces that do what
>> the user expects. www.gnome.org had a link to a pretty an article that
>> some guy named Joel wrote that I thought was pretty good:
>>
>> http://joel.editthispage.com/stories/storyReader$51
>>
>>
> I see this as more of a luxury than user friendly. Being able to point
>and click at everyhting you want is a luxury, which will require a whole
>bunch of programing to anticipate everything a user would want. Look at
>MS's Office Suite. They tried to anticipated everyones desire and came up
>with a program that is so huge.
I didn't say "want", I said "expect". Two very different things.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Subject: Re: How is FreeBSD faster than Linux?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 19:55:30 GMT
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001 19:35:25 +0000, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hey bastards, how the hell do you come up with this ridiculous assertion
>> that FreeBSD is faster than Linux? I mean, what kind of benchmark tests
>
>IIRC, it was the case (still is?) that FreeBSD ad a rather better VMM,
>making it run much faster under heavy loads with a lot of swapping.
>
>
I think you are overlooking the linux 2.4.x kernel.
------------------------------
From: Eugenio Mastroviti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What Linux MUST DO! - Comments anyone?
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 19:56:49 +0000
Nick Condon wrote:
> Eugenio Mastroviti wrote:
> >Nick Condon wrote:
> >> Bringing up a Linux installation is *easier* than doing it in Windows.
> >
> >This is simply not true. Again, it is from my and your point of view (a
> >*really working* Win installation is not simply harder, it's
> >impossible...). It is not from Joe User's point of view.
>
> The only people who install operating systems are people who build their
> own PCs and corporate techies. Everyone else gets a PC with an OS already
> on it, so Joe User is irrelevant to this discussion.
>
> When I got the single CD version of SuSE 7.0, it booted off the CD into a
> graphical installion routine that detected all my hardware correctly;
> helped me chose the packages I wanted; setup my disk partitions for me,
> including the existing Win98 one. (Actually I wanted something different
> so I point-and-clicked a different setup, opting for more partitions and
> Reiser filesystem, all without leaving the setup tool). Installion
> completed smoothly, and I eventually logged onto a desktop without ever
> seeing a command-line. It doesn't come any easier than that. Even Joe User
> could do it.
It would seem to me that it's been a long time since you met a Joe User :)
Being very seriously engaged to a Jane User, I'm probably a bit more
experienced than you... :))
Seriously, an inexperienced user can be daunted by a number of things we
don;t even figure would be a problem...
1) As you pointed out, Windows is installed, SuSE is not (upgrade to 7.1,
in my opinion it's worth it). "Installing the thing" is a scary proposition
for a beginner
2) Had you ever imagined that having a few thousand programs that it's
possible to install would be "bad"? I hadn't - and I have received this
specific complaint 4 times in little more than one month. It *is*
confusing, actually, but I had never realized it...
3) GUI does not necessarily mean "easy", believe me. Any long-time
Linux/Unix administrator who has tried to set up NT Server knows what I'm
talking about...
4) Once you've done it, integration of the software in the desktop is far
from optimal - OK, I use KDE and I'm told Gnome is far better on that (I
just don't like it).
Eugenio
P.S. I just like playing devil's advocate - for me it IS easier to set up
Linux than Windows, and once it's set up, it works. Repeatedly. I just
think it's not the same for people with different jobs/experience.
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the truth about linux
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 19:59:42 +0000
> The MSCEs also recommend defragging the hard drive once a week and fix
> the registry as well.
> I've never had to defrag under Solaris and I don't have a registry to
> fix.
I've only once seen a harddrive that needed defragging under Linux. It
was abused with a cycle that went like this:
Create a large bunch of small and medium sized files and a couple of
huge ones. Delete some and repeat hundreds of times.
By the end, it couldn't sustain an 8x write on to a CD.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the oldest known rock is the famous |u98ejr
Hackenthorpe rock, which is over three trillion years |@
old? |eng.ox
-The Hackenthorpe Book of Lies |.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:13:52 +0000
> You've never heard of a disassembler? It's not uncommon for people to
> disassemble huge parts of OS's to prove such things. The license agreement
> isn't valid if it's used to cover up illegal behavior, so the no-disassembly
> clause would not be an issue.
But until you find something wrong, you are violating the license. If
you don't find something wrong (there's a helluva lot of assembler to go
through) you're violation the license. Either way, you violate the
license for a period of time.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the oldest known rock is the famous |u98ejr
Hackenthorpe rock, which is over three trillion years |@
old? |eng.ox
-The Hackenthorpe Book of Lies |.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Fereira)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:20:01 GMT
In article <995m23$t8n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Shades" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Well this is all true but creating a multitasking OS and having hardware to
>support it on was way too expensive for companies to put on someones desktop
>in even the early 80's.
When I was a unix systems administrator in the early 80's I had an HP9000/900
on my desktop. Not only was it multi-tasking but it was running a real time
O/S (RTE-A). Everyone else in my department was running the same machine
on their desktop as well. One of them wrote a significant portion of that
O/S. I left that job in 1984 to become the unix systems administrator
resposible for the first four unix machines that Hewlett Packard owned and
subsequently set up their first tcp-ip network.
John Fereira
Ithaca, NY
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
