From: jxmi...@borg.uswc.uswest.com (Jeff Miller) Subject: Why do you care about Linux? Date: 1995/05/16 Message-ID: <3pb3fl$50h@borg.it.uswc.uswest.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 102716431 organization: U S WEST Communications newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy Hello, fellow Linux people! I am very new to Linux. Last friday, I checked out a copy of "Using Linux" (with CD-ROM distribution included) from my company and installed it over the weekend on my P-90. Things went reasonably smooth, and I was able to get booted up in multi-user mode within a few hours. I got stuck for a while trying to get X configured, but eventually that came around also, and as of Sunday night I was really rocking! My challenge for tonight is to get Seylon working. When I start it, I get a popup saying that it can't talk to the modem. Oh well, one more thing to figure out. Now, on to the topic of this post. I have lurked here for a while, and am curious about this whole notion of Linux "advocacy". My perception was that Linux is self-justifying, which is to say that it was written because the (many) people who wrote it wanted to. But here there is all sorts of talk about "Linux vs Mac" and "If we just had a good WP program" as though the average computer user would *ever* use Linux! Without engaging the debate over Linux vs Win3.1, I am puzzled as to why the question is even being asked. From my experience this weekend, I can say with a great deal of confidence that Linux will have to be simplified an enormous degree before comparisons between it and Mac or Windows are even meaningful. I use the 'mother' test. My mom bought a PC a while back to do typical PC stuff: light word processing, personal finance, etc. She is the prototype non-techie person. It is just out of the question to think she could have installed Linux. No way. Someone in another post noted that CD-ROM distributions of Linux are flowing out of the bookstores at the rate of 30,000 per month. This is great, but I suspect that combined Win3.1 and Mac sales are still pulling away at a substantial rate. So, what is the future of Linux? Not the generic home market. It doesn't solve that market's needs. The business market? No way. Businesses look for things that Linux can't (by its very nature) provide. Things like risk minimization and corporate stability. The attraction of Linux, its low cost, is not relevent. But Linux has a bright future with people like me. Professional computer people who want a Unix installation at home. I think its great, but I would never think of debating its merits as compared to 'mainstream' OS's. Jeff Miller jxmi...@borg.mnet.uswest.com
From: iia...@iifeak.swan.ac.uk (Alan Cox) Subject: Re: Why do you care about Linux? Date: 1995/06/01 Message-ID: <D9I64z.1vn@info.swan.ac.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 103630009 sender: n...@info.swan.ac.uk x-nntp-posting-host: iifeak.swan.ac.uk references: <3pqc5c$jvk@borg.it.uswc.uswest.com> <coleman.801170868@mmsun5> <3pqq1s$l5e@borg.it.uswc.uswest.com> organization: Institute For Industrial Information Technology newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy In article <3pqq1s$...@borg.it.uswc.uswest.com> jxmi...@borg.uswc.uswest.com (Jeff Miller) writes: >As to the security issue, I see no reason to believe that Linux is more >stable than any other environment. Could just be a fad, after all. What I >do know is that there is no economic stability behind it. You have the most absolute stability of all. You have all the bits. If someone stops supporting it others can pick it up. You can't get screwed by a vendor. What are you all going to do with SunOS 4.x boxes on non solaris hardware when we move to IPv6. Bit stuffed aren't you ? Alan -- ..-----------,,----------------------------,,----------------------------,, // Alan Cox // iia...@www.linux.org.uk // GW4PTS@GB7SWN.#45.GBR.EU // ``----------'`----------------------------'`----------------------------'' Redistribution of this message via the Microsoft Network is prohibited