On Sun, 12 Sep 1999 23:00:21 -0600, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 4)On my computer, Linux Red Hat 5 and SuSe Linux 6 actually took
>> more time to load then Windows 95.
>> modules loading that I didnt need. Unfortunatly, I didnt knew
>> which module do what, and there was no good help about it in
>> either installer or documentry file.
> It needs to come new, preinstalled, on new machines assembled with linux in
> mind. The way w95 does. That is it's greatest disadvantage. It's an open
> market, folks, who's entrepreneurial?
That computer I mentioned was a P350 on an AT box, without
any PnP card or device at all. (I think that I was the most
"problematic" costumer the poor salesman in that computer shop
ever had.. I actually bought everything separetly because I didnt
want any of there "pre-built" computers!)
That should be fast enough, and Linux compatible. (actually I designed
it to be DOS compatible, but its the same parameters for Linux.)
But the main factor is adding extra help for the totaly, completly,
absolute computer-newbie who doesnt care about the "how is that
thing working, anyway?" question.
But if talking about what you mentioned, yes, most of the PCs sold
for home-use today are "designed for Windows 9x/NT". I got a LapTop
that got that dreaded sticker. If I try to use anything else but
Windows on it, only the basic system works. No sound card, on IR
port, and the PCMCIA system begin to choke. All the terminal
emulation programs just crash if I try to use them there... unless
its a Windows based terminal emulation.
Or Botton
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- "Truth is stranger than fiction, because fiction has to make sense."
-----------------------------
http://members.xoom.com/dsdp/
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
