--- Giorgos Keramidas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > .. I know its hard for people to swallow, but MS Windows IS easier to
> > use than BSD/Linux/OSX ...  thats WHY its the most widely
> > used.... regardless of marketing/costs etc ...
> 
> Yes, I know.  Windows is easier.  Thanks, I won't buy!

Neither will I .. can't remember the last time I paid for software...
All my software is War.. *cough* ...donated...

 
> Do you want to come at home and explain what is easy about Windows to my
> sister who's been fighting with DVD playback on Windows XP for more than
> a month now, who wasted precious exam-period time to troubleshoot and
> solve Powerpoint and Word problems?

I agree with you 100% Windows XP is CRAP! - I don't use it - its Windows 2000
with Windows ME integrated functionalty.

If you want a rock solid GUI workstation, stick with Windows 2000
(all other Windows version are crap - I have tried & tested them all)



 
> Reaction-time that you mention above is something that depends on a lot
> of subjective factors, on the themes you have selected, on the load of
> the machine at the time and a host of other things.  Can you describe
> the setup of the machine at the time you measured this "reaction time"
> that bothered you and the tests you did to measure it?


My Test Box Setup:
Pentium 200Mhz
128MB RAM
5 GIG HD
16MB TNT Graphics Card
Windows 2000 Parition (2GIG)
FreeBSD Partition (3GIG)


 
> FreeBSD is not Linux.  Sorry, you'd have to complain to the Fedora
> people for any problems you have with their slow monster of an
> RPM-beast.
> 
> Yes, I hate working on Fedora too, and I avoid it like hell.  But that
> has nothing to do with the way FreeBSD works or what it can do :)

Your right... I went off topic.

 
> The X11 desktop is described in detail in "The X Window System", a
> chapter of the FreeBSD Handbook.  This chapter contains a lot of useful
> information for people who are new to X11.  Please do read it.
> 
> There is even a section in that chapter that describes XFCE4 and the
> steps that you need to take to install it and start it.  I'm sure you'll
> find it very helpful.


I will try another xfce4 install following step-by-step the BSD docs & get back
to you... :)

All I did so far was:

# pkg_add xfce4

then went to .xinitrc with VI
and added "exec startxfce4"

.. typed startx & xfce wouldn't start...



> > Whats the purpose of having to manually set the system to automount ??
> > as opposed to having it as a system install default ?? if there is an
> > advantage, I am sure its for the 0.01% of the user base
> 
> It's more in the range of 99.9%.  Automounting can be annoying like hell
> when you happen to accidentally insert media in your drives.  It can
> also be insecure if you don't want anyone to use the machine you've
> installed to mount CD-ROMs, floppies or other media of their choise.

Accidently ?? what ?? Like you were walking down a hall way, tripped & slipped
& accidenlty shoved a CD into the drive :))

I can put a CD into Windows 2000 & it has never been accessed unless I
explicitly do it. - I don't see the problem ??



 
> Instead of leaving *all* the users exposed to risks like this, which is
> the usual Windows philosophy of doing stuff, FreeBSD has the capability
> to automount media but keeps it disabled by default.

Why not enable it by default & then allow people who love messing around with
OS disable it manually - this seems more logical
.... hey why not add a nice GUI that allows you to edit all the OS
configurations .... nahh ... no one would use that !!


 
> Is it so hard to edit a text file like rc.conf and add a simple line
> like this?
> 
>         amd_enable="YES"

Hard to edit... no your right, knowing where the file is located, yes ??
knowing where in the file it needs to go or does ordering matter, yes ??


 
> Do you really mean that this is so much harder to do than fumble and
> fight with multiple dialogs, which you have to remember by heart of
> course, just to find that disabling automounting is impossible (unless
> you download TweakMyRegistry version 95.3.2000.13.27 paying careful
> attention to the version numbers because the wrong version can mess up
> your entire system with a single click)?

TweakMyRegisty ?? not needed - use MS TweakUI - Freeware
Windows XP - crap(stick with Windows 2000 - its the stable version, like v4.10)

- as for automounting, I think you are confusing this with AutoRUN for CD's
AFAIK - you cannot disable automounting of Floppys/CD in Windows 2000




> > - installable YES, configurable ... you've got to be shitting me :o
> 
> Not really.  But even if we provided examples of this configurability
> you wouldn't accept them as valid examples because they wouldn't be
> point and click on some wimpy dialog-based wizard, right?

Right



> > - while in wmaker, dynamically change the Montior settings from
> > 1600x1200 32b to 1028x768 24b (wouldn't have a clue - off to the docs
> > - manually edit configuration files ?? - then restart - but what is
> > the correct horizontal frequency OR vertical refresh(hard++) - I don't
> > know & I don't want to know(hey while I am at it, why don't I start
> > designing my own CPU)... that's why people use Windows(easy to
> > configure)
> 
> You don't really need to know or provide all of these details.  I just
> updated my system to use X.org the new X11 ports of FreeBSD from XFree86
> 4.3 that I used to have before.

seems like I did... the default configuration X choose for my wmaker was some
high figure like 1280x1024 at low colors like 256 or 16b



> Running the xorgcfg utility that the documentation of X.org mentions and
> running it only *once* I generated an /etc/X11/xorg.conf file that was
> essentially the same as the one I had before.  So I went ahead and
> deleted the new X11 configuration file.


There is an xorgcfg ? - I will take a look at that ...



> > ...XPde seem to have the right idea... looks promising... hope the GUI
> > reaction time is fast
> 
> I'll ask yet one more time.  Are you sure that XPde is faster than, say,
> windowmaker running with a simple theme?  Or are you saying this just
> because it catters to your need to "look" at something that resembles
> Windows XP because you're afraid of changing the way you think about a
> desktop?

I couldn't get xpde to run, but the screenshots look nice...

as for Windows XP ... don't like it, full of bugs, insecure & crashes easily...
Windows 2000 - not a crash in 2 years... & with 80% of the services turned off
as set out be the NSA document to secure Windows 2000, its pretty secure

Don't get me wrong, I am not pushing MS crap, I am just more annoyed that the
alternative(BSD, which I really want to get working) seems so far behind(my
opinion) usability wise...

.. as for the look ... couldn't care less for themes.. waste of time fidling &
resources... I only want rock solid simple GUI's & stability & ease of use

 
 
> I'm not sure why you're saying "yea right" above :-/

Because sometimes students search the Java(bloatware) docs & because the docs
are thin on details, they ask the Lecturer for help... refering back to the
docs is not helping....


 
> > Benchmarks - How about FreeBSD+wmaker(GUI) & Windows 2000 installed on
> > EXACTLY the same box.  Any person standing next to me could see which
> > is faster
> > Windows 2000 GUI - Much faster than Wmaker
> > Loading/Using Notepad/Wordpad - Much faster than Nedit
> > Windows Explorer - Heaps faster than xfe
> 
> Windows 2000 GUI is faster than windowmaker?  Now that's news.

Don't know what to tell you... it IS on my box... either my Windows 2000 setup
is good(likely) or my BSD setup is wrong(also likely)


> I've seen this "fast" 2000 GUI crawl almost to a halt because someone
> else is copying a large directory tree over the network.  I've also seen
> windowmaker fly on a Pentium 200 with 64 MB of RAM while I was updating
> a huge checkout from a CVS server, over the network too.

When I was fiddling with 4.5, I was able to crash the GUI many times... & was
taken to the cmd line.... lets hope 4.10 is more stable!


> Are you sure there's nothing wrong with your BSD setup?

Thats what I would like to know ???


> You should also note than nedit is not the "Notepad" of X11.  The
> features of Nedit are much much better and innumerable compared to the
> lack of features of Notepad.  Highlighting, configurable TAB size,
> wrapping and block-mode editing are just a few that I remember now.
> Even if nedit takes 1 second more than Notepad to load, its wealth of
> features is more than ample reward to me.  If you want to compare
> Notepad to an X11 editor, you should probably compare it to 'xedit' and
> that would probably be an insult to the features of xedit ;-)

point taken.


Kind Regards,

DK


                
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to