Mail from ILUG-BOM list (Non-Digest Mode)
_______________________________________________
Ravindra Jaju wrote:
> Keyboard shortcuts .. to what?
> There is no simple answer to this. Way beyond my power of description.
Shortcuts to work your way around your editing session -- all of which
assume that you already know what you are doing.
> Yeah definitely. X is surely a bloated, highly layered architecture. No
> arguments here. You could still stick with the faster window managers
> and performance isn't that much of an issue. BTW, the slow reponse in X
> doesn't affect the other processes ... it's just the visual components that
> show up slowly.
Not really. Run GNOME and everything slows down. Unless you feed it 96+
megs of RAM.
> Ok. And what about the simple things like multiple desktops and a WHOLE
> lot of choices. Windows can have it (from some third-party software components)
> but none like the ones on Linux/*BSD.
This is the overwhelming reason why I prefer Linux on my desktop. I tend
to run a lot of stuff simultaneously, and lack of good workspace
management makes Windows unusable.
But I've seen novice users get paranoid when I open more than one
browser window. They prefer to single-task, so workspaces make no sense
to them.
Still, this is a plus for X based desktops.
> Windows probably has some of these ... but not so quick and elegant.
Windows's internal support for shortcuts is pathetic, but good external
tools are available. I use an app called "The Wonderful Icon" that
provides me with shortcuts far more responsive than Sawfish under Linux
(although not as much control).
> Win2K for desktop you mean?
Yes. And desktops is what this argument is really about. On the server
side, there is no argument. Windows sucks.
> Yup. Spontaneous reboots for me too. When I tested kernel 2.4.0-test8. I
> reported the bug to the kernel mailing list.
Happened to me on 2.2.13. Stopped only after I rebuilt my kernel.
> BTW, we had a major power-surge problems. Win2k destroyed it's own ntoskernel.exe
> (I guess that's the name it said is corrupt) and refused to boot after that till
>repaired.
> Hard disk has been sent to the "experts" for that.
>
> All Linux servers are fine.
Ext2 is susceptible to massive corruption in case of a faulty
controller, where FAT would have lost just a few files. This kind of
argument can be thrown both ways.
> Yeah, definitely. And I am happy. And besides, I am sorry but I do not
> understand the issues raised by you in the above para.
The point is that, GNOME is still a clunky interface, no matter how
elegant it appears. If your mouse is uncomfortable, too bad. You don't
have a choice.
> Are you judging the Linux/*BSD GUIs on the basis of GNOME/Gtk+?
Yes. GNOME and KDE are the only environments available that are advanced
enough to be presented to a novice user. A newbie would completely freak
out if presented with fvwm on the very first trial (as happened to me
back in early 1996 -- I didn't look at Linux again until late 1998).
> jace> GUIs suck anyway? Why don't we all go back to punch cards?
>
> The second (rhetorical) statement does NOT logically follow from the first.
For those people who insist that GUIs are for weenies anyway, and
everyone ought to use a command line.
--
Kiran Jonnalagadda
http://lunateks.com
baby.sh: while true; do echo "^G^G^G^G^G"; sed -e 's/food/poop/';
sync; sync; sleep 15; done
_______________________________________________
Website: http://www.ilug-bom.org.in/
Linuxers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
