Hi Jerry,
}- All the same, in order to discover what OS is most suitable
}- for ones needs, one should have a working knowledge of
}- computer technology, preferably begun in a objective classroom
}- setting. Experimentation is fine, but it can get expensive.
}- And a well-rounded knowledge of computer logic should include
}- at least some experience with a language of words instead of
}- pictures.
Oh yes, I agree completely. Certain basics are necessary no
matter what OS one decides to use. To carry on the (ill-fated)
analogy of cars, one need not know all the intricacies of the
internal combustion engine to drive a car - true. But one had
better know where the brake pedal is! And as someone else said,
one had better know the traffic regulations before venturing
out onto the roads.
}- Linux is far too massive (if you include its multitude of
}- applications) for the average casual user. I believe its best
}- use is within a professional setting (networking). We should
}- be pressured to change or adapt other OSes for realistic
}- reasons, instead of artificial reasons, such as popular fads.
I expect you're right, and not only about Linux but several other
OS's as well. And this is where I part ways with the average
user. Until very recently I had never used a computer in a
work or business setting. I am one of those strange and uppity
women <grin> who dares to think computers can be a very creative
medium, and even (gasp!) FUN. And I don't mean fun in the sense
of playing poker or tank commander or whatever. I mean fun in
the sense of figuring them out, making them do what *I* want them
to do, pushing the envelope as it were. When I first began my
computer adventures my local computer community was chock-full of
people like that. But it seems to me the numbers of people like
this are dwindling more and more as time goes on.
}- Linux itself is just another CLI, like DOS, but there are
}- several Windows-like GUIs being developed for it that are now
}- getting all the attention -- and which, I believe, is what the
}- general public now perceives to be Linux itself. By itself,
}- Linux has wonderful multitasking capabilities (by
}- ALT-<function key> switching) among "Virtual Consoles" -- but
}- there are few applications developed for this mode. One
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
}- development, however, that might alter this is a Linux version
}- of Arachne.
They better be careful then, it's my understanding that this lack
of applications is what killed OS/2. I imagine you're right
about Arachne, but I also think Arachne (unlike Billy and M$)
would do well to remember it's roots. Can we say DOS? I knew we
could...
}- If VMiX 386 development would have continued, we would have
}- had a similar multitasking environment for DOS by now, much in
}- the same way as used with Linux.
I lost track of the thread about VMiX, I think I did see
something about the author being found. Is there any chance that
someone else will continue developement?
Boanne
- --
FROM: Over the hills and far away...
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
A Dinosaurs Garden (collection of DOS links and files)
http://www.sound.net/~ashelton/dinosaur/dg.htm
*Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
