Linux-Advocacy Digest #335, Volume #26 Tue, 2 May 00 08:13:09 EDT
Contents:
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots ("Cihl")
Re: Government to break up Microsoft ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (Charlie Ebert)
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Linux from a Windows perspective (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (Charlie Ebert)
Re: KDE is better than Gnome (Neil McAllister)
SV: Linux for a web developer ("Rolf C Stadheim")
Computer Terms.....(was "Re: MS caught breaking web sites") (David Gillam)
Re: which OS is best? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (mlw)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Cihl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 10:39:11 GMT
Will everbody -please- stop answering this kind of posts? The longer the
thread is, the more attention it attracts. Stop it! This is just a dumb
Windows-user scared by eventually having to learn something new.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in bericht
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> First off, Linux is a great operating system and given the proper
> venue it is a good choice.
>
> However, to believe for a moment that Linux could replace, or even
> co-exist with Windows in the home environment is a pipe dream fantasy
> of the Linux zealots.
>
> As an example I offer up the home networking problem. The reality, and
> it is a good one, is that home networking is becoming a big reality.
> Families with children are competing with each other for internet
> time, printers, scanners and so forth. Most new home construction
> includes pre-wired Cat 5 cable as an option.
>
> Anyway how is a home network with internet connection sharing, printer
> sharing, scanner sharing and firewall set up easily under Linux?
>
> Answer; it isn't.
>
> Oh sure you can play with Samba if you happen to not have a
> Win-printer and assuming you are able to figure out how to set it up
> it might work ok. You can play with ip masquerading and ip-chains and
> so forth, entering all kinds of crap in text files and so forth.
> That is of course assuming you know what to enter. How many times in
> the Linux help system do you see "ask your system administrator"
> mentioned?
> So who is the sys admin of a home network??
>
> Know how you do all of the above with Windows 98se or Win2k?
> Select internet connection sharing in help and the wizard does it all
> for you.
>
> Download ZoneAlarm for free and it works without a single amount of
> input required by the user to configure it.
>
> It simply asks you if you want a particular task to be allowed to take
> place (Realplayer accessing the internet as an example).
>
> Resource sharing?
>
> Place a check in the sharing box...That's it..Wizard does it for you
> when you select "How do I share my printer"
>
> That's the way it should be.
>
> I spent 3 weeks trying to get a network working under Linux and
> finally gave up. And another thing, the default set up is a real
> security risk even selecting Medium security under Mandrake. FTP,
> Telnet and other ports were wide open.
>
> Sorry Linux Zealots but you should read more of the the Linux
> install/set up groups to see how many folks have had it up to their
> ears with Linux and more will follow.
>
> Take off the rose colored glasses and look into the world of reality
> for a change. Linux is certainly improving, but it isn't even close to
> Windows.
>
> Windows is a much, much better choice.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Government to break up Microsoft
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 06:05:13 -0500
Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8eltgi$7p0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >Bad example. Car manufacturers provide tremendous incentives to the
> >dealerships that sell the most product. The biggest or most aggressive
> >dealerships will get the first crack at new/desirable models and withold
> >product that the smaller dealers would like to have (but can't get).
>
> I thought the MS contracts did not deal with absolute volume but
> the fact that windows had to be included with every sale. The
> obvious early target would have been Novell since machines purchased
> as Netware servers had no use for Windows.
You thought wrong. Per processor liscenses ended something like 6 years
ago. Microsoft has used volume pricing since then. The more copies of
windows you sell, the lower your cost. Thus, to keep margins as high as
possible, you sell every system with Windows, or else you raise your price
of Windows by offering choice, due to less volume.
Novell may not need Windows, but it does need Dos (or at least it used to).
You had to load Netware from a Dos command prompt.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 11:09:37 GMT
It's like the guy has either never heard of Linuxconf or has never=20
started it?
Oh, let's not forget all those great KDE tools they have for Samba=20
also.
Geeze.
No, I'd have to disagree. Windows is NOT easier to set up than Linux=20
for the
home network.
You have indicated you've used another third party tool on Windows to=20
do it yourself.
Use LinuxConf or KDE Samba setup tools.
Geeze.
Charlie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 5/1/00, 8:32:47 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote regarding The Dream=20
World of Linux Zealots:
> First off, Linux is a great operating system and given the proper
> venue it is a good choice.
> However, to believe for a moment that Linux could replace, or even
> co-exist with Windows in the home environment is a pipe dream fantasy
> of the Linux zealots.
> As an example I offer up the home networking problem. The reality, and=
> it is a good one, is that home networking is becoming a big reality.
> Families with children are competing with each other for internet
> time, printers, scanners and so forth. Most new home construction
> includes pre-wired Cat 5 cable as an option.
> Anyway how is a home network with internet connection sharing, printer=
> sharing, scanner sharing and firewall set up easily under Linux?
> Answer; it isn't.
> Oh sure you can play with Samba if you happen to not have a
> Win-printer and assuming you are able to figure out how to set it up
> it might work ok. You can play with ip masquerading and ip-chains and
> so forth, entering all kinds of crap in text files and so forth.
> That is of course assuming you know what to enter. How many times in
> the Linux help system do you see "ask your system administrator"
> mentioned?
> So who is the sys admin of a home network??
> Know how you do all of the above with Windows 98se or Win2k?
> Select internet connection sharing in help and the wizard does it all
> for you.
> Download ZoneAlarm for free and it works without a single amount of
> input required by the user to configure it.
> It simply asks you if you want a particular task to be allowed to take=
> place (Realplayer accessing the internet as an example).
> Resource sharing?
> Place a check in the sharing box...That's it..Wizard does it for you
> when you select "How do I share my printer"
> That's the way it should be.
> I spent 3 weeks trying to get a network working under Linux and
> finally gave up. And another thing, the default set up is a real
> security risk even selecting Medium security under Mandrake. FTP,
> Telnet and other ports were wide open.
> Sorry Linux Zealots but you should read more of the the Linux
> install/set up groups to see how many folks have had it up to their
> ears with Linux and more will follow.
> Take off the rose colored glasses and look into the world of reality
> for a change. Linux is certainly improving, but it isn't even close to=
> Windows.
> Windows is a much, much better choice.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 11:13:36 GMT
Why should they! They are teaching C and C++ on Linux at OU and OSU!
Linux is all over every college her including OCU!
See, the colleges found out it was cheaper to teach Pascal, C and C++=20
on=20
a Linux OS as Windows was too expensive. So they threw Microsoft=20
completely OUT!
You won't even find a Microsoft product in administration anymore.
If it ain't a mainframe terminal, then it's linux!
Charlie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 5/1/00, 9:48:13 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote regarding Re: The Dream=20
World of Linux Zealots:
> Not trying to assume anything, but if YOU go to any computer club,
> strike up a chat at Compusa, strike up at chat at any trade show,
> Computer show, ham fest etc, it will be YOU that is in the minority
> and YOU that will spend countless time explaining Linux and what it is=
> about.
> It will be YOUR kids that will have to go in circles trying to find
> software that conforms to their college standards. It will be YOUR
> kids that will have to explain Linux to all of the other kids as well
> as teachers in their school that will most likely be running Windows.
> So if YOU wish to run Linux, that is great but understand that YOU are=
> in a small, very small in fact, minority that are excersising their
> choice in operating systems. If YOU are willing to assume all of the
> ablve, both plus and minus, that's great.
> I prefer to ignore the os and get some work done that conforms to
> accepted standards, meaning what everyone else is using.
> On Tue, 02 May 2000 03:21:58 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> First off, Linux is a great operating system and given the proper
> >> venue it is a good choice.
> >>
> >> However, to believe for a moment that Linux could replace, or even
> >> co-exist with Windows in the home environment is a pipe dream fanta=
sy
> >> of the Linux zealots.
> >>
> >
> >
> >Buzz, wrong answer. Windows has been replaced at my home. You, Like=20
most
> >WinTrolls(tm) seem to think that one size fits all. Well MS products =
DO
> >NOT FIT MY NEEDS. Linux does. Please do NOT tell me what will work=20
best
> >on *MY* home computer.
> >
> >
> >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> >Before you buy.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux from a Windows perspective
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: 2 May 2000 08:41:46 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) wrote in
<8ej2lb$1jtd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>It works about the same for me as Win98 on a P133 with 32 Megs. Neither
>one is spectacular, but X seems to work well on the Matrox card.
Strange, it appears to me that Linux Mandrake running KDE on a P166 with
32M runs slower than Windows 98 SE on the same machine.
>>As for X being able to run on other machines, that's not terrible
>>useful when you have a network of just one machine (or the other more
>>powerful machine is running Windows 98 SE!).
>
>Some people with old junk have lots of old junk...
Please explain what you mean by that?
--
============
Pete Goodwin
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 11:16:12 GMT
What we should all be asking here is why is this Microsoft POSTER=20
using
a fake E-mail address and name?
If your really proud of your product and want to make a point of it,=20
you
should put at least your first NAME at the bottom of the text. You=20
could
at least show yourself that far from under the rock so people will=20
take you
a little more seriously.
Charlie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 5/1/00, 9:13:19 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote regarding Re: The Dream=20
World of Linux Zealots:
> On Tue, 02 May 2000 03:02:46 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)=
> wrote:
> >On Tue, 02 May 2000 02:32:47 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>=
=20
wrote:
> >>First off, Linux is a great operating system and given the proper
> >>venue it is a good choice.
> >>
> >>However, to believe for a moment that Linux could replace, or even
> >>co-exist with Windows in the home environment is a pipe dream=20
fantasy
> >>of the Linux zealots.
> >>
> >>As an example I offer up the home networking problem. The reality,=20
and
> >>it is a good one, is that home networking is becoming a big reality.=
> >>Families with children are competing with each other for internet
> >>time, printers, scanners and so forth. Most new home construction
> >>includes pre-wired Cat 5 cable as an option.
> >>
> >>Anyway how is a home network with internet connection sharing,=20
printer
> >>sharing, scanner sharing and firewall set up easily under Linux?
> >>
> >>Answer; it isn't.
> >>
> >>Oh sure you can play with Samba if you happen to not have a
> >>Win-printer and assuming you are able to figure out how to set it up=
> >>it might work ok. You can play with ip masquerading and ip-chains=20
and
> >
> > Samba comes out of the box sharing the local printers, so this
> > is PURE FUD. If a printer is supported in some fashion by the
> > server machine, a shiny happy gui applet will help you set it up=
.
> Right...As long as you get the password option correct (encrypted?)
> and you can figure out what workgroups and users should be allowed to
> use it. And figure out where to input all of this crap, even using
> swat, and Maybe, just maybe it might work.
> SUPPORTING printer sharing, and making it actually WORK are two
> different animals.
> >>so forth, entering all kinds of crap in text files and so forth.
> >
> > ...and this is fundementally different from wading through
> > dialog boxes and entering text then, just how? Besides,
> > samba comes with a shiny happy tool for the server side
> > configuration. So, the claim that one must dibble with text
> > files in order to configure samba is more PURE FUD. Others
> > gui configurators for samba abound as well.
> How is it different?
> YOU must be kidding...How about CHECKING ONE BOX...ONE FSKING BOX..
> The only place wading applies is under Linux...
> >>That is of course assuming you know what to enter. How many times in=
> >>the Linux help system do you see "ask your system administrator"
> >>mentioned?
> >
> > That's the problem with home networking in general. The mother-
> > in-law that can't work with a fully preconfigured Windows scanni=
ng
> > solution will be equally as lost in either OS.
> Wrong..Put the CD in the drive and it works...Netgear, Linksys,
> HomeNetwork, Brown Box and so forth..They just simply work.
> Try it sometime, you'll be amazed.
> >>So who is the sys admin of a home network??
> >>
> >>Know how you do all of the above with Windows 98se or Win2k?
> >>Select internet connection sharing in help and the wizard does it=20
all
> >>for you.
> >
> > ...assuming you know what to look for. If you know that, then yo=
u
> > are likely saavy enough to deal with smb.conf. Of course you
> > wouldn't necessarily have to.
> How about help? It's in the main menue....
> >>
> >>Download ZoneAlarm for free and it works without a single amount of
> >>input required by the user to configure it.
> >>
> >>It simply asks you if you want a particular task to be allowed to=20
take
> >>place (Realplayer accessing the internet as an example).
> >
> > ...assuming that the developer covered everything...
> Whats so hard to cover? A service tries to access a port and the
> program let's you know.
> BTW it is a real eye opener when you run it the first time. Most users=
> will be horrified what ports are wide open and how many times they are=
> being probed.
> Linux?
> If you can figure it out maybe, but don't count on it.
> ZoneAlarm is a great piece of software. It works, it is simple to use
> and it is free.
> Linux has NOTHING to compare. Nothing...
> > Otherwise, you're back to square 0.
> >
> >>
> >>Resource sharing?
> >>
> >>Place a check in the sharing box...That's it..Wizard does it for you=
> >>when you select "How do I share my printer"
> >>
> >>That's the way it should be.
> >>
> >>I spent 3 weeks trying to get a network working under Linux and
> >>finally gave up. And another thing, the default set up is a real
> >
> > I spent about 15 minutes my first time. Then again, I can
> > follow directions. Although, the net configurator in
> > Slackware did most of the work.
> Sure we believe you..
> Now why don't you wander over to the setup/network/hardware groups and=
> help them all do the same. While your at it tell all those nice folks
> running websites dedicated to explaining how to do all this that it is=
> so simple they are not necessary..
> I'm talking about all the above, not the basic ability to ping another=
> ip address.
> >>security risk even selecting Medium security under Mandrake. FTP,
> >>Telnet and other ports were wide open.
> >>
> >>Sorry Linux Zealots but you should read more of the the Linux
> >>install/set up groups to see how many folks have had it up to their
> >>ears with Linux and more will follow.
> >>
> >>Take off the rose colored glasses and look into the world of reality=
> >>for a change. Linux is certainly improving, but it isn't even close =
to
> >>Windows.
> >>
> >>Windows is a much, much better choice.
> >
> > ...only if you want Ignoramuses in control of firewalls...
> The only ignoramuses are the "elite" idiots that believe their Linux
> software is better, easier to set up and more user friendly than the
> alternatives.
> You have proved nothing, as usual. =20
------------------------------
From: Neil McAllister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.kde,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: KDE is better than Gnome
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 12:43:30 +0100
> I'm a federalist if that gives you any clue...
That gives no clue whatsoever. The fact that you hold to a certain
political ideology does not determine you're nationality. I am in
Scotland where many people think a federal system would be good. If you
don't want to answer the question then don't.
Neil
------------------------------
From: "Rolf C Stadheim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: SV: Linux for a web developer
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 14:17:29 +0200
Why stay away from Mandrake 7.0?
RCS
Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
meldingsnyheter:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I'd stay away from Mandrake 7.0, but for a nice customizable system with
> a stable desktop and a good out of the box gui, Mandrake 6.1 has been
> very good to me.
------------------------------
From: David Gillam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.security,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip
Subject: Computer Terms.....(was "Re: MS caught breaking web sites")
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 12:04:51 GMT
Chris Hedley wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > My mom still calls the whole case the CPU, I can't convince her that the CPU is
> > just the chip.
>
> The term CPU often refers to the enclosure in which the actual processor
> complex(es) reside; the chip, OTOH, is more properly referred to as a
> microprocessor or logic array (depending on the system involved.) Many
> people think otherwise, however, which is what I believe is referred to
> as "small computer thinking." :)
>
> Chris.
Maybe I'm guilty of "small thinking", but.....
CPU stands for Central Processing Unit, which is the "special" chip in
the computer case that uses all the other chips in the computer case (or
outside it, depending on your setup) to process various computer
algorithms.
While the CPU is a microprocessor, many chips in the computer case are
also microprocessors.
While the CPU generally has an ALU (Arithmetic Logic Unit), most chips
by design are "logic arrays", in that they are built to have NAND, XOR,
etc.. logic gates, which output certain predictable voltage levels
depending on predictable input voltage levels. One therefore can argue
that the entire computer is one "logic array". This does not mean the
entire computer is one CPU, however.
This is the dawning of the day of mass-distributed-computing (seti@home,
beowulf clusters, SANs, etc...). By your definition of CPU, the almost
2 million (I'm not kidding here) computers worldwide that are current
members of the seti@home project are collectively one CPU (for the
purposes of the project, they all are working on the same computer
algorithm, in concert). Again, maybe it's small of me, but I don't
think most people would see it that way. They might view it as one
massive computing device, but not one CPU.
I hear a lot of non-techies refer to the disk drive as "memory" (which
historically is better defined as RAM -- Random Access Memory).
Historically the disk drive is referred to as "Data Storage", or as IBM
would have you say, DASD (Directly Accessible Storage Device). But I
digress. If most people refer to disk as "memory", should we then
change our computer texts? What would we redefine RAM as (considering
the word "memory" is part of the term)? Would we simply call both
"memory"? Try to go to a store, and say, "My memory died, I need more
to replace it." What product will you get? The reason "disk" has
largely replaced the term "DASD" is because it's *more* descriptive of
the actual part, not less.
Let's stick to the terms:
CPU = chip(s)
Computer = collection of input/processing/output/storage devices that
work together to process algorithms. Commonly seen as that box sitting
either on or near your desk, to which the cables from your keyboard and
monitor run. Sometimes "seen" as a collection of these boxes, connected
by some type of network cabling, that work in concert to process
algorithms.
Regards,
-- Dave
"If we were meant to fly, we wouldn't keep losing our luggage."
_/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ David Gillam
_/ _/ _/
_/ _/ _/ _/_/
_/ _/ _/ _/ USA
_/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 07:08:47 -0500
On Tue, 02 May 2000 03:58:13 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
wrote:
>>>>Get real. Stop the registry whining and just remove the old version
>>>>of Acrobat and install the new one. Geez.. you'd think it was as
>>>>difficult as installing a kernel in Linux the way you whine about it.
>>>
>>>Difficult? Are you typing the source in yourself?
>>>Rpm -Uhv kernel*rpm works for me. Or grab the source and 'make install'.
>>>Your distribution may vary, but it is nowhere near the conceptual
>>>problem of being forced to associate a data type with only one
>>>application and worse, to do it according to the file name.
>>
>>You're kidding, right? Installing a new Linux kernel is a nightmare -
>>my 486/75 laptop is now next to useless until I figure out what went
>>wrong.
>>
>>First, do a make mrproper to clean up any old stuff (and reclaim
>>needed hard drive space).
>>Then, do a make menuconfig and step through the options you want.
>>
>>Then, on the same line, seperated by ";"
>>Then, do a make dep and ensure the dependencies are all there.
>>Then, do a make bzImage to make a compressed boot image.
>>Then, do a make modules to get the right modules.
>>Then, do a make modules_install to install said modules.
>>...and come back 8 hours or so later, when it all finishes.
>
>
>This is the process to _compile_ a new Kernel,
> not to install a kernel rpm.
OK, -compile- then.
>>Something's obviously wrong with that, though, because I now can't get
>>any of my modules to work. Since my PCMCIA controller is controlled
>>with a module, that laptop's dead in the water unless someone
>>(please!) can tell me what's wrong. It's done this time and time and
>>time again, and it's become very frustrating. I've renamed the
>>/var/modules dir to /var/mod2 and made a new, empty /var/modules
>>directory, to no avail (but after that, it only gets 3 or 4 dirs in
>>there when I do a make modules_install, although granted I've left out
>>most options that I don't need - sound, MMX, extra IDE support, SCSI,
>>etc., and my modules.dep is only 2k or so in size...) The modules
>>page in the kernel's menuconfig has 3 entries in it, and all are
>>selected; it _should_ load the modules just fine, no? I get all
>>kinds of errors when the modules try to load up from depmod, devfs
>>isn't found, and no entries for a PCMCIA controller are found in
>>/proc/pcmcia, so eth0 doesn't come up.
>
>pcmcia is a seperate package in the 2.2 and earlier kernels, If you are
>going to recompile your kernel, you need to recompile the pcmcia-cs package
>also for the new kernel. Or you could simple install the new kernel and
>pcmcia-cs rpms. If you want to do it the hard way, that's up to you. But
>don't claim that installing a kernel is tough, whilst describing
>the steps to compile one instead.
It's the same kernel version, it's just I'm changing a few options.
The PCMCIA stuff is there already.
>>Lilo is being updated correctly; I am booting from new kernels (and
>>the old kernel does the same thing now, immediately after I did a make
>>modules_install, too). Sigh.
>>
>>All this just to make the kernel a bit smaller - their compressed
>>kernel is 680k or so, mine hit 380k or so; with a 10M laptop that
>>might make a difference, although just getting Linux on this thing was
>>a bear. I also removed a bunch of tty terminals from runlevel 3, so
>>dropping each of those should free up some RAM too...and dropped the
>>atd and crond stuff. Any other suggestions to lighten the RAM load
>>are welcome.
>
>Check out the linx router project (from memory, www.lrp.com a websearch would
>turn up their site if that is wrong.)
Why would I want to do that?
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 08:06:12 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> First off, Linux is a great operating system and given the proper
> venue it is a good choice.
>
> However, to believe for a moment that Linux could replace, or even
> co-exist with Windows in the home environment is a pipe dream fantasy
> of the Linux zealots.
That depends on what one does with their computer at home. If you want
the latest and greatest games, then maybe Linux is not for you. If you
use your home machine for checkbook, home accounting, recipes, word
processing, e-mail, etc. Absolutely, Linux can and does work very
nicely.
>
> As an example I offer up the home networking problem. The reality, and
> it is a good one, is that home networking is becoming a big reality.
> Families with children are competing with each other for internet
> time, printers, scanners and so forth. Most new home construction
> includes pre-wired Cat 5 cable as an option.
>
> Anyway how is a home network with internet connection sharing, printer
> sharing, scanner sharing and firewall set up easily under Linux?
>
> Answer; it isn't.
>
[snippage]
It is a matter of learning. Regardless of what you would like to think,
the vast majority of home computer users have no knowledge of TCP/IP
stacks, routing, etc. For you to say it is "easy" to setup, you assume
that a user has the conceptual understanding to do so. In reality no.
Point and click still assume one has an idea of how they want something
to work.
The average home user will not do these things by themselves, they will
always ask a knowledgeable friend or tech-support at where they
purchased the computer.
>
> Take off the rose colored glasses and look into the world of reality
> for a change. Linux is certainly improving, but it isn't even close to
> Windows.
>
> Windows is a much, much better choice.
This is a poor conclusion, one based on, I guess, a misconception of how
knowledgeable an average Windows user is. Most Windows users do not
understand directories.
A linux box, fully setup, with a good office package (Applix is my
choice) a good browser (Netscape, for lack of alternative at this
point), Acrobat reader, RealPlayer, a good printer, decent sound card,
KDE, etc. Is much easier to use than Windows simply for the fact that it
does not crash, it allows FULL separation for different users. When a
user is going to screw up the system - either by logging in as root, or
using su, makes it perfectly clear that they have that ability.
When one looks at all the little quirks one must learn to use a
computer, learning one or two things about Linux/UNIX is a better
investment than all the things people learn about Windows:
(Actual quotes from real Windows users)
"Always save BEFORE you print."
"I like to reboot my computer every morning so it doesn't crash."
"Every time I reformat in Word, I quit and restart it, that way it
doesn't crash."
"Sometimes, if I can't log in, I just reboot and it's fixed."
"After I make a CD, I have to reboot or the system will crash."
"Whenever I play this game, I reboot because windows doesn't like it."
"Oh, it does that all the time, just press reset."
"After I quit the internet, I reboot because the computer usually stops
working."
Yup, Linux will do very well.
>
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 9x, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
"We've got a blind date with destiny, and it looks like she ordered the
lobster"
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
