Linux-Advocacy Digest #522, Volume #26 Mon, 15 May 00 21:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux lacks (Syphon)
Re: Here is the solution ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Is there any money in knowing Linux? ("Francis Van Aeken")
Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks (Syphon)
Re: .TAZ format?? What the hell?
Re: Linux lacks ("Evan DiBiase")
Re: Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks (mlw)
Re: WHICH LINUX??? (Thomas Phipps)
Re: WHICH LINUX??? (Kurt)
Re: Why do I need Linux? (Christopher Browne)
Re: WHICH LINUX??? (Syphon)
Re: WHICH LINUX??? (Thomas Phipps)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Syphon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lacks
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 00:10:04 GMT
Charlie is an idiot... A complete LinoNazi....
He needs to wake up and realize that he is stepping back in time to
the 19th centuries running Linsux....
On Mon, 15 May 2000 19:53:18 -0400, "Evan DiBiase"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"JEDIDIAH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Mon, 15 May 2000 23:22:06 GMT, Syphon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Evan, these people are a crazy bunch of radicals. They believe that
>> >less is better, hence your somewhat dismal support of video. They lie
>> >and lie by omission over and over again all in the name of Linux. The
>>
>> This is a perfect example.
>>
>> You're leaving out Utah-GLX.
>
>Uh, except I said "DRI," not GLX. I've tried GLX, and it was just OK. When I
>tried it, it had some major problems with Quake III Arena, for example.
>
>I'm not trying to be an asshole here, I just want to shut ol' Charlie up --
>he's making crazy claims as usual that _someone_ has to refute.
>
>> >truth is Linux sucks, it has always sucked but now that it is
>> >challenging Windows it's suck factor is out in the open for all to
>> >see.
>> >
>> >Try it for yourself and see how much it sucks. You are not alone. Many
>> >have tried Linux and dumped it in the garbage where it belongs.
>>
>> That should be true of anything.
>
>Indeed.
>
>-Evan
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Here is the solution
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 19:22:01 -0500
Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > That's just it, there aren't hundreds of examples of undocumented API's
that
> > MS's applications use (which is the subject, not just undocumented
API's).
>
> So Corel knew how to use the IIS Office extensions at the same time as
> Microsoft did?
Which IIS Office extensions might those be?
> They may not be hidden, but Microsoft enjoys tremendous technical
> advantages in their application house.
Clearly, since MS invents the API's, MS has knowledge that outside companies
would not have earlier.
> > This is not a casual listing of undocumented API's used by MS
applications
> > to their advantage. It's a casual listing of undocumented API's Those
are
> > two different things.
>
> Then how come the Wine team must implement them before applications
> run?
Who says they do? The page has nothing to do with the Wine team.
> > I don't understand. You're complaining because MS didn't give you code
for
> > an RFC?
>
> They never did put the NT Domain code in an RFC.
What does a domain controller have to do with CIFS?
------------------------------
From: "Francis Van Aeken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Is there any money in knowing Linux?
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 21:22:24 -0300
> Please take a moment to take the survey, so that I can show all my
> friends with MCSE's that employers are indeed paying people who are
> skilled in Linux. Please take the survey if any part of your job
> involves Linux.
It's interesting to see that you know the outcome of your survey
already. Why don't you just make up the numbers, it will save you
a lot of work and the Linux advocates will love you all the more for it!
More proof that Linux rules, yippee!
Francis.
------------------------------
From: Syphon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 00:25:32 GMT
1. Netscape as the primary gui browser. Need I say more? Netscape sux
even under Windows. IE 5.0 is light years ahead.
2. Email clients...Pine? Sendmail? Archaic kludges. If you want to
MANAGE and play with your email instead of read it Linux is for you.
You can sort catalog and score all that email on a bit by bit basis
under Linux. real great geek stuff. Reading email seems to be
secondary to playing with it.
3. Multimedia...Run antique versions of Real Player and not be able to
run Real Juke box (no Linux version). Run cheap Winamp Clones that
suck.
4. Graphics... Gimp? Name says it all. Even the trial versions of
Adobe included with scanners are more powerful.
5. Internet? Call your favorite ISP and tell them you run Linux...
Make sure and listen to the laughter at the end of the phone....
6. Supported printers? Damm better be a Postscript printer, linsux
seems to be the only folks using these printers these days....
Otherwise you will be burdened by some filter that a pimple faced geek
dreamed up that won't utilize 10 percent of your printers
capabilities.
7. Have a scanner? read the above. same thing applies....
8. Networking....Want to get the whole family pissed off at you? Take
away their internet conection sharing, standard under Win98se, and try
and set up the same deal under Linux...
Hint: Give up now, because others far more qualified than you have
already thrown in the towel.
You'll be reading How-To's till the cows come home...Or your wife
leaves you, whichever occurs first.
9. USB...Most devices barely, if at all, function.
10. Graphics...Take a look at the shitty font display of Netscrape
under Linux...Makes your eyes tear doesn't it.
That's only the surface. Linusx is a piece of garbage that needs to be
exposed for the crap that it is...
WANT TO RUN OUTDATED TEXT APPLICATIONS? TRY LINUX!!!!
Ever Wonder why there are very few 1.x version Linux applications?
Reason is they are too scared to commit to anything...Bunch of back
room hackers they are....
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: .TAZ format?? What the hell?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 00:32:08 GMT
On Mon, 15 May 2000 18:44:45 -0400, Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>JoeX1029 wrote:
>
>> I just downloaded the Minix source code and unziped it and the two remaining
>> files are CMD.TAZ and SYS.TAZ. What the hell is TAZ?? On the site itsadi it
>> is a comprersssed tar archieve. How do I uncompres?? Thanks.
>
>That's probably a shortened name for tar.gz files. Try renaming them to
>cmd.tar.gz and sys.tar.gz and then use tar to extract:
More likely .tar.Z
tar -Zxvf tazfile
------------------------------
From: "Evan DiBiase" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lacks
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 20:40:48 -0400
"Syphon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Charlie is an idiot... A complete LinoNazi....
I agree with you here...
> He needs to wake up and realize that he is stepping back in time to
> the 19th centuries running Linsux....
But not necessarily here. Linux does have some great advantages,
specifically as a low-cost POP or IMAP server, or as a web server.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 20:50:21 -0400
Syphon wrote:
>
> 1. Netscape as the primary gui browser. Need I say more? Netscape sux
> even under Windows. IE 5.0 is light years ahead.
All a matter of taste.
>
> 2. Email clients...Pine? Sendmail? Archaic kludges. If you want to
> MANAGE and play with your email instead of read it Linux is for you.
> You can sort catalog and score all that email on a bit by bit basis
> under Linux. real great geek stuff. Reading email seems to be
> secondary to playing with it.
And all those wonderful viruses just waiting for "outlook" (Which should
me renamed to "look-out")
>
> 3. Multimedia...Run antique versions of Real Player and not be able to
> run Real Juke box (no Linux version). Run cheap Winamp Clones that
> suck.
I have a modern realplayer. What are you talking about.
>
> 4. Graphics... Gimp? Name says it all. Even the trial versions of
> Adobe included with scanners are more powerful.
"Adobe?" Adobe what?
>
> 5. Internet? Call your favorite ISP and tell them you run Linux...
> Make sure and listen to the laughter at the end of the phone....
All the ISP's I talk to say, "great, that's one less person we have to
worry about."
>
> 6. Supported printers? Damm better be a Postscript printer, linsux
> seems to be the only folks using these printers these days....
> Otherwise you will be burdened by some filter that a pimple faced geek
> dreamed up that won't utilize 10 percent of your printers
> capabilities.
I have an HP 870cse, it is not a post script printer, but it works fin
under Linux. Your claim is baseless.
>
> 7. Have a scanner? read the above. same thing applies....
SCSI scanners work fine. I few printer port ones work too. This is an
OEM issue, not an OS issue. try to get a scanner driver for Windows NT.
>
> 8. Networking....Want to get the whole family pissed off at you? Take
> away their internet conection sharing, standard under Win98se, and try
> and set up the same deal under Linux...
I have friends that connect to media-one using Linux and share to the
kid's Windows machines. Very happy family.
>
> Hint: Give up now, because others far more qualified than you have
> already thrown in the towel.
I know of no "qualified" people that have thrown in the towel on Linux.
Quite the opposite.
>
> You'll be reading How-To's till the cows come home...Or your wife
> leaves you, whichever occurs first.
Better public "HOWTOs" than hard to find obscure readme's in Windows
various resource kits which are available for a price.
>
> 9. USB...Most devices barely, if at all, function.
Hey, it is a Microsoft driven standard. It is meant to hurt competition,
but, hey, the 2.4 kernel will handle it.
>
> 10. Graphics...Take a look at the shitty font display of Netscrape
> under Linux...Makes your eyes tear doesn't it.
I have great fonts. There is a great "HOWTO" to make your fonts great.
(To the author, forgive me I forget your name, but the "Font
deuglification" is a great work. Short, to the point, and helpful)
>
> That's only the surface. Linusx is a piece of garbage that needs to be
> exposed for the crap that it is...
If you wish to talk about exposure, take a good hard close look at
Windows.
>
> WANT TO RUN OUTDATED TEXT APPLICATIONS? TRY LINUX!!!!
Want to run a 32 bit extension to a 16 bit shell, over a port of an 8
bit OS from a company that cant stand one bit of competition? Run
Windows. If you want an OS that will be around forever, supported by
millions, stable, robust, and, lets face it, cool? Run Linux.
>
> Ever Wonder why there are very few 1.x version Linux applications?
> Reason is they are too scared to commit to anything...Bunch of back
> room hackers they are....
Ahhh, statistically speaking, there is currently more "new" development
happening on UNIX than there is on Windows. Why? because the end of
Windows is coming, most developers know it. The consumers do not yet,
but hey, they bought 80286 machines when the 80386 was coming out, they
bought 80386s when the 80486 was out, and so on.
--
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"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Phipps)
Subject: Re: WHICH LINUX???
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 00:55:08 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Syphon wrote:
>On Mon, 15 May 2000 23:52:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(Thomas Phipps) wrote:
>
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Syphon wrote:
>>>None of them...Linux sucks and you will find this out in time. Run
>>>Windows 2k and run a real, supported operating system instead of a
>>>piece of junk hack job......
>>>
>>
>>such a informative piece of work
>>
>>as for Linux Sucking? humm ... I have had very little problems
>>with linux ... I set it up and leave it alone ... {with the way I like it
>>look,{still don't understand the point of taskbars ...
I"m not stuck in CLI land ... I have my choice of any gui made for
linux ... how many choices of gui do you have in wondows? and
how many ways can you adjust the gui it's self
heres a hint ... try getting rid of the task bar to where it won't show up
>Hence you will be stuck in CLI land forever....
>
>Linux sounds like the perfect os for you.
it is ... does everything I need ... is fast is powerful ...
and a hell of a lot safer
>
>>they always just get in the way{no I don't use gnome or kde ...
>>I use window maker}} feel and everything} ... if I want to know about
>>my internet connection ... I look at a graph ... not a icon with two
>>pictures of computers with two blinking lights{who the hell thought
>>that shit up}my ip? ifconfig is a nice little program ... tells me everything I
>>need to know .. includeing if my network card is having problems...
>
>
>Good thing cause you will need to know about all those little problems
>when running Linsux.
humm ... actualy ... I didn't hafta know about all those little bugs
because I havn't had any ... but then again ... if windows has a
problem with a network card ... what kind of information does it give you?
just won't work... or a GPF ... or a BSOD
>>hell I"ll admit I use one of the worst distros out there ...
>>vectorlinux ... but because it came with so little for it I can build it into
>>anything I like ...
>
>
>Time is money.. Linsux users like to waste time. To others an
>operating system is an evil...Applications rule....
>>now ... take your little shit else where and if the man wants to try linux ...
>>let him ... live and let learn ...
>
I havn't wasted any time being a linux user in fact I"ve saved time ..
I didn't hafta tweak the os as much ... I had it up and running in two
hours and on the net {more then I like but faster then Windoz{and with
only one reboot} with all the software I like}
>
>
>You have me all wrong. I encourage users to try Linsux....Just one
>boot and they will be back to Windows. Linsux speaks for itself...
no I think I figured you out pretty well ... you don't want anyone to
have a choice ... to move away from a operating system
where they have achoice and if they feel that it's not what they
want they can always do something else with it ... a operating system that
does speak for it's self ... with it's growing market share in
the server market.. I know more people that try *honestly* try linux and
never look back then try linux and then reboot right back into windows
to never pick up linux again
>>>
>>>
>>>On Mon, 15 May 2000 17:33:19 -0500, Kurt wrote:
>>>
>>>>I am a newbie to Linux and am wondering which Linux to go with. Suse,
>>>>Mandrake, Redhat, Debian, Corel Linux etc......... you get the point.
>>>>I am doing reading but haven't found good info that describes the
>>>>differences between the Linux variations. could anyone give me links,
>>>>or info that will explain differences of each and what they are best
>>>>suited for. I've heard Corel Linux is easy to work with, as far as
>>>>Linux goes, and am looking into that more than the others. Please
>>>>provide ANY INFORMATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for your input
>>>>KURT
>>>
>
------------------------------
From: Kurt
Subject: Re: WHICH LINUX???
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 19:50:24 -0500
I'm going to try Linux on an KA7 w/ Athlon 700 w/ 128MB ram, I think
this would be enough to handle Linux. I know of some compatibility
issues, but i'm still going to try. which Linux, I don't know. Info on
which OS still needed though..............
On Tue, 16 May 2000 00:08:53 GMT, Syphon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Mon, 15 May 2000 23:52:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(Thomas Phipps) wrote:
>
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Syphon wrote:
>>>None of them...Linux sucks and you will find this out in time. Run
>>>Windows 2k and run a real, supported operating system instead of a
>>>piece of junk hack job......
>>>
>>
>>such a informative piece of work
>>
>>as for Linux Sucking? humm ... I have had very little problems
>>with linux ... I set it up and leave it alone ... {with the way I like it
>>look,{still don't understand the point of taskbars ...
>Hence you will be stuck in CLI land forever....
>
>Linux sounds like the perfect os for you.
>
>>they always just get in the way{no I don't use gnome or kde ...
>>I use window maker}} feel and everything} ... if I want to know about
>>my internet connection ... I look at a graph ... not a icon with two
>>pictures of computers with two blinking lights{who the hell thought
>>that shit up}my ip? ifconfig is a nice little program ... tells me everything I
>>need to know .. includeing if my network card is having problems...
>
>
>Good thing cause you will need to know about all those little problems
>when running Linsux.
>>hell I"ll admit I use one of the worst distros out there ...
>>vectorlinux ... but because it came with so little for it I can build it into
>>anything I like ...
>
>
>Time is money.. Linsux users like to waste time. To others an
>operating system is an evil...Applications rule....
>>now ... take your little shit else where and if the man wants to try linux ...
>>let him ... live and let learn ...
>
>
>
>You have me all wrong. I encourage users to try Linsux....Just one
>boot and they will be back to Windows. Linsux speaks for itself...
>>>
>>>
>>>On Mon, 15 May 2000 17:33:19 -0500, Kurt wrote:
>>>
>>>>I am a newbie to Linux and am wondering which Linux to go with. Suse,
>>>>Mandrake, Redhat, Debian, Corel Linux etc......... you get the point.
>>>>I am doing reading but haven't found good info that describes the
>>>>differences between the Linux variations. could anyone give me links,
>>>>or info that will explain differences of each and what they are best
>>>>suited for. I've heard Corel Linux is easy to work with, as far as
>>>>Linux goes, and am looking into that more than the others. Please
>>>>provide ANY INFORMATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for your input
>>>>KURT
>>>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Why do I need Linux?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 00:57:16 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when The Image would say:
>I hate asking newbie type questions on an ng, so my apologies to anyone
>bored by this question! Everyone seems to be saying that if you want to
>do anything serious on computers you need Linux! Why?
>I've bought the magazine Linux Format, but apart from saying that Linux
>is an alternative to Windows, it tells me very little. The mag provides
>a CD for 'Definate Linux' but I want to know why I need it (if I do at
>all) before installing.
Linux may reasonably be characterized as a "gentler, cheaper UNIX
work-alike."
UNIX is one of the important operating systems particularly from the
perspective of the popularization of the Internet. Many of the
Internet services that you likely use, such as:
- Web serving (HTTP)
- Email transfer (SMTP)
- File services (FTP)
- News (NNTP)
tend to "run best on UNIX," as that is where the software that is
widely used was pioneered.
[Some things came _first_ on TOPS-10, ITS, and other such systems that
are far more inscrutable to the public than Linux... If such systems
are still in service, the service likely takes place in a museum...
But I digress...]
Furthermore, almost all the computer systems you likely encounter are,
under the covers, becoming "more like UNIX" over time.
For instance, _MANY_ of the enhancements to the Windows systems over
the last number of years represent adding in functionality that UNIX
has long offered, such as providing APIs that resemble those used to
program UNIX systems (the standard is called "POSIX").
UNIX, and thus Linux, is a quite good platform for running
multi-process multi-user applications, and is a well-understood
platform for this purpose. It is fairly reliable; _certainly_ vastly
moreso than Windows 3.x or 9x. The difference in degree of
reliability between Linux and Windows NT is less marked, but Linux
still seems to get longer "up times" between needing to reboot
systems.
That represents "reason #1" for people to be interested in Linux.
A "reason #2" is that there is a _VAST_ array of development tools,
including more kinds of programming languages than you can shake a
stick at, that are readily available for Linux.
Perl. C. C++. Python. Lisp. Scheme. Several versions of Prolog.
Icon. Several versions of ML. Several Javas. REXX. Objective C.
Haskell. Poplog. And that is merely a _few_ of the options.
"Reason #3" is more on the "socio-engineering" side of things. The
"open source" development model for Linux (as distinct from UNIX,
where it is somewhat less common) involves widespread public
participation, unlike the "closed" model (with Windows or MacOS or
...) where programs are developed by a small group of developers, with
_no_ ability for outsiders to look at the code.
If the things I've just said doesn't fill you with excitement, that
may suggest that Linux may not be of _vast_ interest to you at this
point in time.
At this point, the things that tend to fill people with excitement
over Linux are things that tend to appeal to the "propeller heads" who
are likely to find programming to be a "cool" thing to do.
If the "some assembly required" approach doesn't appeal to you, then
Linux probably isn't quite ready yet. To parallel the .signature, the
"general usability to newbies" of Linux has been a year away for the
last five years :-).
--
Artificial intelligence, like fusion power, has been ten years away
for the last 30 years. -- Conrad Stack
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: Syphon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: WHICH LINUX???
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 01:03:52 GMT
I don't have to play with it because it works fine as designed. Just
like it works for the other 90 percent of the desktop market that runs
windows.
Linux certainly offers many choices, unfortunately most of them, if
not all suck, so there really is no choice at all.
On Tue, 16 May 2000 00:55:08 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Thomas Phipps) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Syphon wrote:
>>On Mon, 15 May 2000 23:52:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>(Thomas Phipps) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Syphon wrote:
>>>>None of them...Linux sucks and you will find this out in time. Run
>>>>Windows 2k and run a real, supported operating system instead of a
>>>>piece of junk hack job......
>>>>
>>>
>>>such a informative piece of work
>>>
>>>as for Linux Sucking? humm ... I have had very little problems
>>>with linux ... I set it up and leave it alone ... {with the way I like it
>>>look,{still don't understand the point of taskbars ...
>I"m not stuck in CLI land ... I have my choice of any gui made for
>linux ... how many choices of gui do you have in wondows? and
>how many ways can you adjust the gui it's self
>heres a hint ... try getting rid of the task bar to where it won't show up
>
>>Hence you will be stuck in CLI land forever....
>>
>
>
>
>>Linux sounds like the perfect os for you.
>
>it is ... does everything I need ... is fast is powerful ...
>and a hell of a lot safer
>
>>
>>>they always just get in the way{no I don't use gnome or kde ...
>>>I use window maker}} feel and everything} ... if I want to know about
>>>my internet connection ... I look at a graph ... not a icon with two
>>>pictures of computers with two blinking lights{who the hell thought
>>>that shit up}my ip? ifconfig is a nice little program ... tells me everything I
>>>need to know .. includeing if my network card is having problems...
>>
>>
>>Good thing cause you will need to know about all those little problems
>>when running Linsux.
>
>humm ... actualy ... I didn't hafta know about all those little bugs
>because I havn't had any ... but then again ... if windows has a
>problem with a network card ... what kind of information does it give you?
>just won't work... or a GPF ... or a BSOD
>
>
>>>hell I"ll admit I use one of the worst distros out there ...
>>>vectorlinux ... but because it came with so little for it I can build it into
>>>anything I like ...
>>
>>
>>Time is money.. Linsux users like to waste time. To others an
>>operating system is an evil...Applications rule....
>>>now ... take your little shit else where and if the man wants to try linux ...
>>>let him ... live and let learn ...
>>
>
>I havn't wasted any time being a linux user in fact I"ve saved time ..
>I didn't hafta tweak the os as much ... I had it up and running in two
>hours and on the net {more then I like but faster then Windoz{and with
>only one reboot} with all the software I like}
>
>>
>>
>>You have me all wrong. I encourage users to try Linsux....Just one
>>boot and they will be back to Windows. Linsux speaks for itself...
>
>no I think I figured you out pretty well ... you don't want anyone to
>have a choice ... to move away from a operating system
>where they have achoice and if they feel that it's not what they
>want they can always do something else with it ... a operating system that
>does speak for it's self ... with it's growing market share in
>the server market.. I know more people that try *honestly* try linux and
>never look back then try linux and then reboot right back into windows
>to never pick up linux again
>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On Mon, 15 May 2000 17:33:19 -0500, Kurt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I am a newbie to Linux and am wondering which Linux to go with. Suse,
>>>>>Mandrake, Redhat, Debian, Corel Linux etc......... you get the point.
>>>>>I am doing reading but haven't found good info that describes the
>>>>>differences between the Linux variations. could anyone give me links,
>>>>>or info that will explain differences of each and what they are best
>>>>>suited for. I've heard Corel Linux is easy to work with, as far as
>>>>>Linux goes, and am looking into that more than the others. Please
>>>>>provide ANY INFORMATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks for your input
>>>>>KURT
>>>>
>>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Phipps)
Subject: Re: WHICH LINUX???
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 01:07:42 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kurt wrote:
>I'm going to try Linux on an KA7 w/ Athlon 700 w/ 128MB ram, I think
>this would be enough to handle Linux. I know of some compatibility
>issues, but i'm still going to try. which Linux, I don't know. Info on
>which OS still needed though..............
>
ok ... well for a beginer I would recomend coldera I"ve heard it's
one of the easyest install's ...
there is also red hat a fairly easy install but they forget a few
things at the begining of the install {like sound card}
and as for your hardware ... what you list is way more then enough
I"m currently running linux on a pent 166MMX with 32 megs of ram
{lets see Win2K do that} and if you need help don't be scared to post
questions ... even if you get alot of assholes {every os has there
assholes}that complain about you being a newbie don't give up ...
it's people trying linux and makeing it into what they want thats really
helping the linux comunity ...
I have heard about some problems with some Athlon MB's ...
one piece of advice ... turn your broswer onto freshmeat.net
you will find almost anytype of software you need there
[ushal battling about os's sniped]
WhyteWolf
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
