On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 02:37:27PM -0600, The Fool wrote: > From: Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > You are mistating the argument. Most people I have heard complain > > about this are upset with Microsoft forcing certain software to be > > used, for example, resellers who want to include Windows on their > > computer also had to include other programs. > > In what way are you 'forced' to use specific software? I was referring to some of the practices Microsoft has used in the past. For example, if a retailer wanted to distribute their PC's with Windows, Microsoft had restrictions on things like installing Netscape and making it the default browser. Microsoft, of course, wanted people using IE. But the retailers didn't have any choice, since they HAD to sell machines with Windows if they wanted to stay in business. So they were forced to agree to Microsoft's restrictions. This was a part of the DoJ case against Microsoft. > Yes but not all packages that can be used with debian come with > debian. I had to hunt down my modem manufacturer (it had one, but > compiled for newer versions of the kernel than debian was using, which > means you had download the latest kernel, than compile it...) Yes, there is software available for Linux that isn't part of the Debian package collection. Obviously. How could it be otherwise? Also, depending on when this was and your exact hardware, it is likely you didn't need to compile the kernel yourself. Part of the Debian package collection is binary kernels which can be easily downloaded and installed. Usually a binary kernel is available for easy downloading with apt-get within a month or two of the kernel release. By the way, Winmodems are poor pieces of hardware. Your difficulty was mostly the result of being stuck with a lemon of a modem. > It's not about, what I or You can do, but what the CAD software can > do, which puts AutoCAD out of "QCad's" league. More specifically it's > about what these $150k+ engineers and designers need for their work. In other words, you haven't used QCad and are just talking. By the way, I am an engineer and designer, and I use CAD software for my job. And as I said, I can use QCad to do everything I need to do. It is worthwhile to ask what is the purpose of this discussion? My purpose was to point out to anyone who was interested that there are alternatives to Windows and the frustrating problems that Rob is having. Also, it sounds like you are interested in arguing something much more esoteric than I wanted to discuss. I stated that "But for home productivity use, linux can do 99% of what you can do with Windows, and it does it much better in most cases." It sounds to me that you are arguing with the "much better" part of my statement. But you are talking about an esoteric example that most home productivity users aren't interested in. If you want a better example than AutoCAD, then I suggest you look at SolidWorks or Pro/E. These are 3D CAD and modeling packages for which there is not a good alternative on Linux that I know of (and I've looked, SolidWorks in particular is a great program which I would like to use at home, but I can't justify the expense). These programs cost many thousands of dollars and do not qualify as "home productivity". And I did read to the end of that thread you referenced the first time. You didn't have to include almost the whole thing. What I was asking for was specifically which part you thought was relevant. To me, the closest thing to relevance looks like an esoteric argument about whether a specialized CAD program, or other highly specialized tools, are available for Linux. It doesn't seem relevant to me, so I was asking which part you found relevant? Certainly there are specialized applications available which do not have alternatives for Linux, and certainly programs for Linux don't have identical features with those on Windows. I think that is obvious. That doesn't detract from my point that 99% of the home producitivty uses of a computer can be accomplished in Linux. And that registry-type problems of the kind Rob is having are almost non-existant under Linux, because the configuration design is more robust in Linux. -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.com/
