On Wed, 26 Aug 1998, Greger Haga wrote:
> I can only agree with you on one point:it should be easier to install. On
> the other hand, that cannot be an impossible to arrange.
I agree... as Linux becomes more widespread, installation won't be such an
an issue. Procedures will become better documented, and hardware
support will continue to expand.
I've never really had any problems getting Linux set up yet. Perhaps I've
been lucky. Or just patient. Getting everything under Linux running is
certainly more involved than doing the same under DOS. But then, DOS
was never worried about network configuration etc.
I've actually been a bit UNLUCKY with installing Win95... I've only had to
do it once, and it was a nightmare. In the end it turned out to be an
error in one of the installation .ini files.
As far as Linux applications, I'm more than happy. My PC at the moment is
an ancient 386/25 with a 50 meg hd and 8 megs ram. Can't run Windows95/98,
which leaves DOS and perhaps Windows 3.1. Linux performs far better than
the DOS/Win3.1 combo does, and lets me do everything that I want to do
right now... access the Internet, and practice my C. In a couple of weeks,
I'll be getting a new machine, just in time for classes, and it will
satisfy all the demands that I place on it for school, namely word
processing and perhaps the occasional spreadsheet.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Clifford | http://www.tripod.com/~MrBobo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | The best way to make your dreams come true is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | to wake up. - Paul Valery
