Bah you all whinge too much. <snip> On 0, Karl Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Look at the number of idiot computer users windows and mac has given the world? </snip> I thank the lord every day for this. Its idiots such as these that, to some extent, keep us all gainfully employed in often overpaid jobs. (not me of course.. im underpaid..but i know some of you bastards out there are earning far too much money)
> Linux is not intended as a desktop os, sure the desktop has come a long way, but its >not there yet. Most of the user friendly gui's (kde, gnome come to mind) are too >resource hungry to to be any good, and the XF86 is very inefficient. > More whinging. Linux is a wholly viable desktop OS. As I type I am writing this from a linux console, although this box is a p133 which runs the latest version of gnome with enlightenment on top. Admittedly it runs a tad kludgily but it is well within the realm of usability. If I tried to run a more bare bones X environment I'm sure it would fly along. Enlightenment is very pretty but somewhat...as i said before...kludgy. My work machine is of a much higher spec but is also running gnome + enlightenment at an insane resolution and I have yet to encounter any of the resource grabbing or inefficiency of which you speak. Sure there are the leaky apps but once killed the systems usually restores itself almost immediately. As far as the ability to remotely log in and kill apps which have been leaking memory over night or suddenly segfault and not have to restart my graphical environment and lose other perhaps unsaved material, this is a useful feature to have at one's desktop disposal. (Yes im well aware that similar solutions are available on the windows platform like Ataman for remotely logging in and say ports of 'ps' and 'kill' or whatever but it still isnt native and its not as good ;p) You call XF86 inefficient but what do you proffer as a MORE efficient option? Surely not a Microsoft option? Are you serious? A Microsoft option? I told you not to suggest one.[1] > For linux to gain a larger market share X needs to be reworked so its more efficient >and someone needs to put together a user friendly wm that doesn't chew up all your >resources. > I dont know what rock you've been hiding under for the past year dude but computers really dont cost anything any more. You can get half a gig of pc133 ram for less than $200. A very very decent system will cost you no more than a few grand, the entire value of which you can probably write off through your tax over 3 years. With the advancement of technology, you really dont have to scrimp and save that last iota of memory when you code. What would a complete reworking of X to make it more efficient do? Allow a more useable system for all 50 people that still have p100 machines and just use them as headless gateways anyway? Waste Of Time. > until that happens linux belongs as a server, or as a desktop for someone with half >a clue. > ugh. see above. I wont even dignify this with its own comment. > I can run 2k quite happily on my 300, slack8 with kde on my 300 however is slow as >all hell. This is why I dropped kde. If i can run gnome and e sufficiently on a p133, then i dont know what your problem with kde is on a 300. > -- > Karl Clements > "Everyone is stupid, its just the degree that varies" which degree are you? -Dane [2] [1] Im not anti-MS. Everything has its place. [2] Im probably going to regret mailing this narky email tomorrow but I've had a really bad day and I just discovered that im Berlin Era-Bowie in the Which Bowie Are You Quiz? (http://kaffee.150m.com/bowiequiz.html) My life may as well be over. Still it could have been worse. I could have been Ziggy Stardust Bowie. :( > > <reply who="Andre Pang" date="Sat, 5 Jan 2002 20:24:53 +1100"> > > > On Sat, Jan 05, 2002 at 12:38:41PM +1100, Alan Vink wrote: > > > > > It is important to "understand" what you are doing when using any distro, > > > with the more "efficient" or "modern" as someone called it distros - it is > > > possible for people that do not understand to go wild and install services > > > and apps with packages while never even thinking of possible ramifications > > > and system compromises that this "loose cannon" approach can cause. > > > > I agree -- but only if you're a sysadmin, and you _want_ to be a > > sysadmin. > > > > The day that I install Linux for my mum and dad, I don't expect > > them to understand that clicking on their 'Internet connection' > > icon runs a script which launches pppd which talks to chat with > > appropriate paramters for the ISP's logon prompts. Bugger that > > for a lark. > > > > Basically, 99% of Windows and Mac users have no idea WTF is going > > on under the hood, and they seem to be quite productive in using > > it as a desktop machine. Why should we set ourselves a lesser > > goal for Linux distributions? > > > > > > -- > > #ozone/algorithm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - trust.in.love.to.save > > -- > > SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ > > More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug > -- > SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ > More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
