I think it is good for all if the userbase is expanded to the point where it
is proffitable for companies to support them. It makes things that much
easier for those of us who actually use the system for it's flexability. So
we need super easy linux distros out there. However, a person who is
curious about the system itself, enough so that he attends a user group
meeting and puts up with its bizaar members, should not (IMHO) be told to
install Mandrake or whatever the Walmart version of Linux is these days.
This hypothetical person needs substance and education. He should be handed
a powerful, Unix-like system, not a Windows look-a-like. Ya think? The
great thing about Linux and FreeBSD is that they have (No! Really!) a very
user friendly command line interface with plenty of documentation and help
available.
Think I am lying? Install Solaris 8 (if you can, it still requires BIOS
tweeks on most PC hardware to even install) and type "man man". You will
quickly discover why this system isn't used in many homes. Luckily I only
needed it to restore some tape archives that were in a legacy format (bar).
I quickly deleted it and ran to my OpenBSD CDs. Even OpenBSD has a less
friendly default interface. How many of you know what '!!' does? One thing
I miss about Slack is my neeto colored console. This can be installed in
BSD too. FreeBSD has a much easier CLI, and I think it is much easier to
configure a custom kernel too.
Anyway, my point was really that Dumbed down Linux Distros are great for
getting users, but I don't think they should be promoted by UGs to curious
parties unless they actually want something that has been easified.
But I digress...
--Tim
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Justin Bengtson
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 11:11 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: [EUG-LUG:1622] RE: 2001, EUGLUG at the Magic Odyssey
>
>
> what i think Tim is saying here (in my own little world...)
> is that dumbing
> down the OS while hiding functionality and power is bad. i
> hate it when the
> OS tries to save me from myself. if i want to delete
> something, i should be
> able to do it without a little message box popping up and
> asking if i'm
> "sure" that i want to do it. if i screw up, it's a lesson to
> be learned and
> i should face the consequences. debian offers me that power
> and learning
> experience, and i'm sure BSD does the same for Tim. mandrake (for
> instance...) does not.
>
> while making the OS simpler and easier to use is a fine and
> admirable task,
> removing the user's ability to learn and hiding key files is
> despicable.
> it's a "function" built into micro$quish and macintosh OS's.
> it effectively
> removes any kind of learning regarding the OS and how it
> interfaces with the
> system.
>
> and as far as "lazy" windows users... today's windows users and techs
> weren't weaned on DOS and windows 3.1 (okay, i'm a heretic,
> but i still
> think DOS was awesome...) they never had to edit
> configuration files by
> hand. they just click a couple of buttons and off it goes.
> they never had
> the opportunity to witness, first-hand, just how the OS does
> things. the
> question is, can you offer that kind of power and still keep
> the OS simple
> and easy (and what i mean by "easy" is not having to remember
> eighty billion
> freakin' command line switchs for every damn program you
> run... does your
> mother have the time to sit down and figure that kind of crap out?
> especially when all she wants is access to e-mail and the web...)?
>
> can linux (or BSD, or Unix, etc...) offer both the power users and the
> "average joe" users what they want?
>
> IMO, not by a long shot. but it's something to work towards.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tim Howe [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 8:57 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [EUG-LUG:1615] RE: 2001, EUGLUG at the Magic Odyssey
> >
> > I should probably be clear... I am not a Linux user at
> all. If I was
> > going
> > to use a Distro, it would be Slackware or Debian. I am a
> BSD user (among
> > other things) and I have no love for Red Hat, Mandrake, or any other
> > Distribution that attempts to dumb down the OS so that a
> lazy Windows user
> > can use it.
> >
> > </rant>
> >
> > OK, now it's time for my morning coffee...
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> > > Justin Bengtson
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 8:36 AM
> > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > > Subject: [EUG-LUG:1611] RE: 2001, EUGLUG at the Magic Odyssey
> > >
> > >
> > > i know this was directed at Tim, but i'll pitch my $.02 in.
> > >
> > > several reasons debian is better than redhat :
> > > 1. apt is the poop!
> > > 2. you can get the kernel source through apt easily.
> > > 3. debian is still packaged with afterstep (no idea about RH)
> > > 4. with debian, you can have an entirely "free" installation.
> > > 5. they give you the above option during installation.
> > > 6. debian isn't a corporate entity, unlike redhat.
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Ade Talabi [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 1:43 AM
> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: [EUG-LUG:1610] RE: 2001, EUGLUG at the
> Magic Odyssey
> > > >
> > > > Tim Howe,
> > > >
> > > > I do hear a lot of about how good the Debian distro, is.
> > > Apart from it
> > > > having an easy intsall routine,
> > > > no-one has ever mentioned anything else.
> > > >
> > > > Is there anything else apart from that, when compared
> to RedHat 7.1?
> > > >
> > > > Tim Howe ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said thusly on
> [17/07/01 at 19:04]:
> > > >
> > > > > Actually there are special cases, at least one anyway.
> > > OpenBSD is
> > > > free for
> > > > > all and under the BSD license, but the CD layout is
> copywrite Theo
> > > > DeRaat.
> > > > > You can make your own CD with all the same stuff on it,
> > > but you can't
> > > > copy
> > > > > one of the official CDs. The reason for this is that
> the CDs fund
> > > > > development. This has come under fire from the Slashdot
> > > crowd, but I
> > > > think
> > > > > they are wrong and Theo is right. The funding he has
> used to do
> > > > development
> > > > > has done wonders for the security of every free OS,
> > > including commercial
> > > > > versions of Linux (OpenSSH anyone?).
> > > > > So, OpenBSD CDs would have to be done custom. Also,
> > > doesn't Red Hat
> > > > and
> > > > > some others ship with commercial software for Linux? I
> > > don't think
> > > > that's
> > > > > legal to copy. If we do Debian CDs, we should probably
> > > include some
> > > > install
> > > > > instructions, the last version I looked at was confusing,
> > > and I install
> > > > > OpenBSD all the time. I still think of Slack and Debian
> > > as the two
> > > > "pure"
> > > > > distros. ...but I digress...
> > > > >
> > > > > --Tim
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ================================================================
> > > > | Ade Talabi | Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
> > > > | ::SELLFOTO:: | Web Page: http://www.net-africa.com |
> > > > ================================================================
> > >
>
