Hi Let me accept one thing about linux that many of the features in linux are as of now not very userfriendly to configure or setup. One requires some or good knowledge about the subject at hand to get an efficient solution in linux. Also one may have to patch the things a bit here and there and is not for the faint heart as of now. Coming to some issues that were raised in the article, as the author himself acknowledges most of the problems he has faced have solutions in linux BUT ONLY THAT THEY ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE USER KERNEL RELEASE AS OF NOW, one can get patchs for many of these and for others they have been already included in the 2.3.x kernels and should find themselves included in 2.4 kernel. These include issues like a) Larger Memory (2.4 or 2.3.x ) b) Journaling (I think as of now its to be Patched for ext based filesystem) or you have other Filesystems which do provide journaling in linux. This is mentioned at the website containing this article itself. c) SMP (2.4 or 2.3.x) i.e the more robust and flexible one. d) Posix ACL (Is a patch) e) Clustering (Hell lot of different implementation has Patches(MOSIX, BEOWULF,etc), One who is working on distributed computing will know that a Do It yourself approach with source code availability WILL MOST PROBABLY give more power in implementing it than an off the Selve proprietery solution in the LONG RUN) f) Desktop apps, Even thou one can find an hell lot of Desktop apps normaly you have a handful of these which are most regularly used like Office suites, Internet apps, etc. For this you have good solutions in Linux, may be not popular everywhere but you do have good solutions. g) As far as apis are concerned I program for diverse enviornments so I have used Win16 and Win32 api, MFC (VC), VCL(DELPHI), VB, etc. As well as the XLIB, GTK based (and I have looked into QT and KDE based ) solutions. I would say that GTK and QT provide a better solution to fitting event driven programming to C or C++ than MFC's macro based approach in C. As far as Object Pascal is concerned well there Borland as control over many of the features they add to the language so to a application programmer It does provide a clean interface. I don't see any reason as to why cann't a programmer write EXCELLENT programs for Linux and XWindow UNLESS HE IS LAZY THAT HE WANTS A APPLICATION FRAMEWORK TO DO MOST OF THE JOB FOR him, Even here the GTK, QT ( and KDE api built on QT and other protocols ), LESSTIF, XFORMS, (why not even tcl/tk, ATHENA) etc provide him most of what he requires. However one who has used these Application Framework for large projects will know that many a times we have to work around the Framework implementation or use Lower level apis to get the required thing done in an efficient and proper manner. On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, you wrote: > ______Linux___________________________________________ > > Can You Trust The Penguin? > Forget the hype. This special report, more than 10 months in > the making, presents the truth about Linux, once and for > all. > > http://cgi.zdnet.com/slink?12823:4646466 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Keep :-) HanishKVC -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Linux India Mailing List Archives are now available. Please search the archive at http://lists.linux-india.org/ before posting your question to avoid repetition and save bandwidth.
