Re: [Cooker] some thoughts about the installation
On 4 Aug 2001, Frederik Himpe wrote: > I've got some suggestions concerning the Mandrake installation. > > The first one came in my mind when I read a review of Caldera > Workstation 3.1. Caldera was my first distribution I tried, now 1,5 year > ago. There was one feature of the installer i liked very much: it starts > already installing files in the background, while you are configuring > things such as network, printer, etc. This makes installation that bit > less boring... I've never installed it, but I love their "Tetris" idea. We should put some games there to play during the install, but make sure that if some error occurs a dialog will pop up and tell you to switch to the appropriate screen. -- Sincerely, David Walluck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[Cooker] some thoughts about the installation
I've got some suggestions concerning the Mandrake installation. The first one came in my mind when I read a review of Caldera Workstation 3.1. Caldera was my first distribution I tried, now 1,5 year ago. There was one feature of the installer i liked very much: it starts already installing files in the background, while you are configuring things such as network, printer, etc. This makes installation that bit less boring... Another idea has to do with the configuration of http- and ftp-proxy in the installation. I wonder where this is exactly used for, IIRC this is not used to set the environment variables http_proxy and ftp_proxy (This should be possible I think?), nor to configure the proxy in browsers and tools as rpmdrake.I guess configuring browsers is almost impossible, because of the variaty in configuration files. But maybe the *drak* tools could be made to use the environment variables http_proxy and ftp_proxy? Frederik Himpe
Re: [Cooker] Some thoughts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< On 5/28/00, 3:22:32 PM, "Guy T. Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: [Cooker] Some thoughts: > Also, it's been quite a few years, but if I recall correctly, beta couldn't > get as much on a tape as VHS. People love to pull this example out and > parade it around, but the simple fact of the matter is, although beta was > superior to VHS in some ways, VHS was superior to beta in some ways too. > And with all due respect to sour beta-heads, for those features that were > truly important to consumers, VHS *was* the superior technology. Get over > it... Doesn't M$ have more than one competitor? And who is grabbing at Amiga's new systems, though they aren't released yet, I haven't heard of anybody trying to make any claims. This also means that we, Linux, have more than one competitor, though the most stress is with M$. Btw, I'm not a M$ buff, and I would very much like M$ to lighten up on the marked, however it is done.
Re: [Cooker] Some thoughts
On Fri, 26 May 2000, Anton Graham wrote: > Submitted 26-May-00 by Hoyt: > > | Fun to MS bash, but the reality is that MS is the competition and > | the poorer product has been known to win and the other die out (VHS > | vs. Beta?). > > In that particular case, the superior technology was far more > expensive for the end-user. Additionally, to put it in software > terms, the ``Operating System'' (tape format) had to be licensed from > Sony. This increased costs for ``developers'' (movie studios), who > chose to use the more freely available VHS. Also, it's been quite a few years, but if I recall correctly, beta couldn't get as much on a tape as VHS. People love to pull this example out and parade it around, but the simple fact of the matter is, although beta was superior to VHS in some ways, VHS was superior to beta in some ways too. And with all due respect to sour beta-heads, for those features that were truly important to consumers, VHS *was* the superior technology. Get over it...
[Cooker] Some thoughts
Okay, sorry. What was initially supposed to be a response to an (IMHO) inapproprriate analogy turned into a statement about why we aren't really in competition with Redmond. Submitted 26-May-00 by Hoyt: | Fun to MS bash, but the reality is that MS is the competition and | the poorer product has been known to win and the other die out (VHS | vs. Beta?). In that particular case, the superior technology was far more expensive for the end-user. Additionally, to put it in software terms, the ``Operating System'' (tape format) had to be licensed from Sony. This increased costs for ``developers'' (movie studios), who chose to use the more freely available VHS. In this case, we are not only superior, but less expensive (both in terms of initial cost and TCO). Furthermore, since the developers do not have to support some would-be mega-corp's dreams of grandeur by paying royalties on the use of the underlying technology. Also, unlike the aforementioned videotapes, this is not a case of one standard will survive. As long as *anybody* uses Linux, development will continue, if only by that single user. That's part of the beuty of it. Microsoft achieved its dominant position in the market not because of the quality of its product, but the lack of options. Remember, Linux has come further in the nine years since it was first envisioned than Microsoft's OS offering did in the same time span. Certainly a great deal of that time has been spent ``catching up'' in terms of hardware support, etc. Microsoft successfully brought the computer to the masses with an easy to use (if buggy) dress for good old 16 bit DOS. We aren't competing with that. We are bringing choices, alternatives, and power. Compared to Windows, our GUI projects are in their infancy. Win has been a commercial product in one form or another for longer than our OS has existed. This makes it the defacto standard by which our GUI will be measured by potential users. There are a great many talented people working on improving both of our dominant GUI's (notice the choice). Theere are also many people, like Daouda, who are working on making them play nice together and run apps designed for the other smoothly. Some of the coolest undocumented features in any given MS product can not be reproduced exactly even in another MS product because of *how* development there works. They have teams competing with each other and hiding the APIs they use to roll the product out. Eventually, nobody even knows how to use those undocumented APIs. Here, if developer A sees an incredible feature in developer B's product, he *can* find out how it works and incorporate it into his own software. Whithout opening the Open- vs Closed- Source can of worms, it is apparent that any system in which the best features of many products can be readily reproduced by annother with sufficient skill will ultimately lead to better products. Some of you still use Windows extensively, and that's fine. We have that choice. For me, there are three pieces of software I run in Windows, and all three are games. One of them has viable Linux alternatives, which I support, but find still inadequate to my needs. While I do not hold out much hope of Linux ports of the three particular games, I can now think of my $180 investment in Windows as a game console. My $50 investment in Mandrake was for an operating system that works the way I like. -- _ _|_|_ ( ) *Anton Graham /v\ / <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /( )X (m_m) GPG ID: 18F78541 Penguin Powered!
