From: j...@presto.med.upenn.edu (Joe Smith)
Subject: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/03/20
Message-ID: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 143398347
sender: j...@presto.med.upenn.edu
organization: University of Pennsylvania
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Well, I finally heard an argument against using Linux that actually
made some sense. Here it is in a nutshell:
Solaris/x86 is <$100 (educational). Why fiddle around with
Linux when you can run 'real Unix'.
Sure, that's single-install (what's the regular price?); no
compiler(s); much less bundled software (TeX, Perl, emacs...). But
you do get CDE and it comes in a nice cereal box with 'Sun' all over
it (gives most folks a warm fuzzy feeling).
For people who are technical enough to need Unix, but don't want to
hack, this seems pretty reasonable.
Anybody who's had experience with both care to comment?
<Joe
--
Joe Smith
University of Pennsylvania j...@presto.med.upenn.edu
Department of Physiology
Philadelphia, PA 19104
From: jeri...@sleet.seas.ucla.edu (Arthur D. Jerijian)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/03/20
Message-ID: <slrn4l0qij.18mp.jerijian@sleet.seas.ucla.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 143421850
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
organization: University of California, Los Angeles
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
In article <m2wx4fg...@presto.med.upenn.edu>, Joe Smith wrote:
>
>Well, I finally heard an argument against using Linux that actually
>made some sense. Here it is in a nutshell:
>
> Solaris/x86 is <$100 (educational). Why fiddle around with
> Linux when you can run 'real Unix'.
>
>Sure, that's single-install (what's the regular price?); no
>compiler(s); much less bundled software (TeX, Perl, emacs...). But
>you do get CDE and it comes in a nice cereal box with 'Sun' all over
>it (gives most folks a warm fuzzy feeling).
>
>For people who are technical enough to need Unix, but don't want to
>hack, this seems pretty reasonable.
>
>Anybody who's had experience with both care to comment?
Haven't I heard somewhere that there is a possibility of Linux
becoming "real UNIX" in the not-too-distant future? Please correct me
if I'm wrong on this.
><Joe
>--
> Joe Smith
> University of Pennsylvania j...@presto.med.upenn.edu
> Department of Physiology
> Philadelphia, PA 19104
..........----------==========**********==========----------..........
Arthur Dikran Jerijian
UCLA Undergraduate, Computer Science and Engineering
E-mail until June 1997: jeri...@seas.ucla.edu
World Wide Web: http://www.seas.ucla.edu/~jerijian
..........----------==========**********==========----------..........
From: drs...@ni.cba.csuohio.edu (drsoran)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/03/20
Message-ID: <4ips2j$nfa@csu-b.csuohio.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 143426478
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<slrn4l0qij.18mp.jerijian@sleet.seas.ucla.edu>
organization: Computer Science Association at CSU
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Arthur D. Jerijian (jeri...@sleet.seas.ucla.edu) wrote:
: Haven't I heard somewhere that there is a possibility of Linux
: becoming "real UNIX" in the not-too-distant future? Please correct me
: if I'm wrong on this.
Besides.. how many "real UNIXes" come complete with all the
kernel source code? <grin> No thanks.. they can keep Solaris/x86.. I'll
stick to Linux.
--
--------------------------------
drs...@ni.cba.csuohio.edu
Give my Linux or give me death!
Better dead than M$ infected.
From: gbu...@usenet.kent.edu. (Gerald E. Butler)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/03/20
Message-ID: <4iq5bd$e2s@tombstone.kent.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 143445059
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<slrn4l0qij.18mp.jerijian@sleet.seas.ucla.edu> <4ips2j$nfa@csu-b.csuohio.edu>
organization: Kent State University Information Systems
reply-to: gbu...@res.kent.edu.
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
drsoran (drs...@ni.cba.csuohio.edu) wrote:
: Arthur D. Jerijian (jeri...@sleet.seas.ucla.edu) wrote:
: : Haven't I heard somewhere that there is a possibility of Linux
: : becoming "real UNIX" in the not-too-distant future? Please correct me
: : if I'm wrong on this.
: Besides.. how many "real UNIXes" come complete with all the
: kernel source code? <grin> No thanks.. they can keep Solaris/x86.. I'll
: stick to Linux.
I ordered SUN OS for PC's about 10 months ago. It cost me $140.00 with
manuals ( not very extensive, no compilers etc. ) Before ordering I contacted
SUN and gave them my EXACT hardware specifications in order to ensure that
my hardware was supported.
486DX-50 mb
Soundblast 16
Sony CDU31a CD-ROM on the soundblaster
730 meg HD
16 meg RAM
Canon BJ-200e printer
USR 14.4 Fax/modem
Diamond Stealth 64 w/ 1 meg DRAM video card
They told me no problem, everything was supported and I had enough
RAM. When I received it in the mail, cracked open the case in my excitement,
checked out the installation manual, lo an behold, the only CD-ROMS supported
were SCSI. My memory was BARELY enough for it & the manuals were cheaply made.
Realize, I was getting the educational pricing for a bundle ( if you can call
it that ) that retailed for somewhere around $1000.00. I prompty returned
the junk ( and they did give me my money back with no hassles ), yet it still
left a bad taste in my mouth.
So, I picked up the Infomagic 4-cd developer's resource for $15.00 at
some software store, and have never looked back. There is absolutely no
way SUN OS can begin to compare to the $value$ nor the VALUE of Linux.
Now I currently maintain 4 machines ( 3 networked ) with Linux running
everything from "named" to "dosemu". I do program development for DOS and
UNIX using it, and really enjoy all it has to offer. My total investment
in Linux, $15.00.
I just don't see how anything else compares.
Have A Nice Day!
gbu...@res.kent.edu.
P.S. At the time I purchased and Installed Linux, I knew not a SINGLE unix
command. I had no manual, other than the ten page 4"x4" pamphlet that came
with Infomagic's set, and yet in less than a year, I am a system admin
of 3 linux servers. Linux not user friendly. HOGWASH!
From: j...@presto.med.upenn.edu (Joe Smith)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/03/26
Message-ID: <m291gnn8a9.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 144345843
sender: j...@presto.med.upenn.edu
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
organization: University of Pennsylvania
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
[ A week or so ago, I quoted someone who said 'why use Linux when you
can get real Unix (Solaris x86) for <$100'. Naturally, this provoked
several responses. ]
Thanks everyone for your feedback. Obviously, some people have had
some 'frustrations' with Solaris. I think this must be typical for
just about any current PC OS. I'll pass on some of the comments to
the fellow who made the original comment.
It seems that there is a core group who have been long-time Unix
_users_ (not programmers or admins) who simply can't accept that
something like Linux or FreeBSD is to be taken seriously. I don't
think it's anything you can argue with. I also expect that those are
the people who will switch to NT, because they don't need or
appreciate the things Unix is really good at. They feel good when
they lay out a pile of $$ for something that comes in a nice box and
has a recognized brand name plastered all over it, and NT seems a
clear winner on those criteria.
Among those who do need and appreciate the Unix way of doing things,
and are willing to get their hands dirty, it seems that Linux provides
a far better solution than any commercial Unix: it's more flexible,
it's more up to date, it's more complete, and with the rapidly evolving
commercial support, even things like Motif and CDE are available at
reasonable prices if you really need them.
It should be an interesting next few years...
<Joe
--
Joe Smith
University of Pennsylvania j...@presto.med.upenn.edu
Department of Physiology
Philadelphia, PA 19104
From: sund...@vervet.cig.mot.com (Divya A. Sundaram)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/03/29
Message-ID: <4jfe7i$5rj@trotsky.cig.mot.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 144766666
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<4j6vfc$2t8@pell.pell.chi.il.us> <m291gnn8a9.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
organization: Cellular Infrastructure Group, Motorola
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
In article <m291gnn...@presto.med.upenn.edu>,
Joe Smith <j...@presto.med.upenn.edu> wrote:
>
>[ A week or so ago, I quoted someone who said 'why use Linux when you
>can get real Unix (Solaris x86) for <$100'. Naturally, this provoked
>several responses. ]
>
>Thanks everyone for your feedback. Obviously, some people have had
>some 'frustrations' with Solaris. I think this must be typical for
>just about any current PC OS. I'll pass on some of the comments to
>the fellow who made the original comment.
>
>It seems that there is a core group who have been long-time Unix
>_users_ (not programmers or admins) who simply can't accept that
>something like Linux or FreeBSD is to be taken seriously. I don't
>think it's anything you can argue with. I also expect that those are
>the people who will switch to NT, because they don't need or
>appreciate the things Unix is really good at. They feel good when
>they lay out a pile of $$ for something that comes in a nice box and
>has a recognized brand name plastered all over it, and NT seems a
>clear winner on those criteria.
>
>Among those who do need and appreciate the Unix way of doing things,
>and are willing to get their hands dirty, it seems that Linux provides
>a far better solution than any commercial Unix: it's more flexible,
>it's more up to date, it's more complete, and with the rapidly evolving
>commercial support, even things like Motif and CDE are available at
>reasonable prices if you really need them.
>
>It should be an interesting next few years...
>
BUT BUT BUT BUT BUT ...
There is *NO* Linux equivalent for little nifty things like:
Quicken!
TurboTax!
etc ... WHere is Grolier's Encyclopedia for Linux.
This is what frustrates me with Linux. I have to buy a separate machine
for the rest of my family because the apps they need will not run under
Linux. You know that MCAT Test prep software that my sister wants to
run - doesn't run under Linux (or Solaris x86 w/WABI). That cool
Grolier's Encyclopedia, doesn't run under ....
That's the problem with Linux as I see it. Not enough end user apps
(yet). Now Windows NT allows me to meet this situation halfway.
I have my PERL, TK/TCL, Bash etc while also being able to run MOST
popular softwares as I mentioned above. I lose time-sharing, but so
what ....
I think that once Linux has the application base that covers most of
these "Home/Office" categories, Linux will have finally reached
Critical Mass and be a good alternative to a Macintosh or Windows
machine.
Comments? Ideas?
--
Divya Sundaram CONDITUR IN PETRA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Motorola IL32 & IL76 Information Systems Support
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: by...@cc.gatech.edu (Byron A Jeff)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/03/29
Message-ID: <4jgnte$1kv@solaria.cc.gatech.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 144837533
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<4j6vfc$2t8@pell.pell.chi.il.us> <m291gnn8a9.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<4jfe7i$5rj@trotsky.cig.mot.com>
organization: Georgia Institute of Technology - College of Computing
nntp-posting-user: byron
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
In article <4jfe7i$5...@trotsky.cig.mot.com>,
Divya A. Sundaram <sund...@vervet.cig.mot.com> wrote:
-In article <m291gnn...@presto.med.upenn.edu>,
-Joe Smith <j...@presto.med.upenn.edu> wrote:
->
->[ A week or so ago, I quoted someone who said 'why use Linux when you
->can get real Unix (Solaris x86) for <$100'. Naturally, this provoked
->several responses. ]
->
->Among those who do need and appreciate the Unix way of doing things,
->and are willing to get their hands dirty, it seems that Linux provides
->a far better solution than any commercial Unix: it's more flexible,
->it's more up to date, it's more complete, and with the rapidly evolving
->commercial support, even things like Motif and CDE are available at
->reasonable prices if you really need them.
->
->It should be an interesting next few years...
->
-
-BUT BUT BUT BUT BUT ...
-
-There is *NO* Linux equivalent for little nifty things like:
-
- Quicken!
- TurboTax!
-
-etc ... WHere is Grolier's Encyclopedia for Linux.
-
-This is what frustrates me with Linux. I have to buy a separate machine
-for the rest of my family because the apps they need will not run under
-Linux. You know that MCAT Test prep software that my sister wants to
-run - doesn't run under Linux (or Solaris x86 w/WABI). That cool
-Grolier's Encyclopedia, doesn't run under ....
-
-That's the problem with Linux as I see it. Not enough end user apps
-(yet). Now Windows NT allows me to meet this situation halfway.
-I have my PERL, TK/TCL, Bash etc while also being able to run MOST
-popular softwares as I mentioned above. I lose time-sharing, but so
-what ....
-
-I think that once Linux has the application base that covers most of
-these "Home/Office" categories, Linux will have finally reached
-Critical Mass and be a good alternative to a Macintosh or Windows
-machine.
-
-Comments?
This is probably the most lucid post that I've see in the advocacy group.
It's right on the mark.
-Ideas?
One that you didn't mention: DV/X from QuarterDeck. It essentially converts
all the Win API calls to X calls so it projects a windows display onto an
X display. Still requires two machines but you don't have to get up. It
also multitasks Win 3.1 applications better than windows does. It's another
compromise.
Fact it: it's going to be tough to get Linux to serve windows applications
as well as Windows does it. But we'll have to both do that and generate
Native applications.
Good post. Keep it up.
BAJ
--
Another random extraction from the mental bit stream of...
Byron A. Jeff - PhD student operating in parallel - And Using Linux!
Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332 Internet: by...@cc.gatech.edu
From: d...@infoman.com (Del Simmons)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/03/29
Message-ID: <315c535a.25727484@client1.news.psi.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 144947056
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<4j6vfc$2t8@pell.pell.chi.il.us> <m291gnn8a9.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<4jfe7i$5rj@trotsky.cig.mot.com>
organization: Information Management, Inc.
reply-to: d...@infoman.com
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
On 29 Mar 1996 01:26:10 GMT, sund...@vervet.cig.mot.com (Divya A.
Sundaram) wrote:
>In article <m291gnn...@presto.med.upenn.edu>,
>Joe Smith <j...@presto.med.upenn.edu> wrote:
>>
>
>BUT BUT BUT BUT BUT ...
>
>There is *NO* Linux equivalent for little nifty things like:
>
> Quicken!
> TurboTax!
>
>etc ... WHere is Grolier's Encyclopedia for Linux.
>
Never Fear!! Help is on the way!! Those wonderful people at Caldera
are currently porting SunSoft's WABI to Linux! Amen! God Bless Ray
Norda!! (hope I spelled his name right!!) Can you imagine the fun it
will be having a sweet linux box with windows apps to boot!
Thoughts?? I can't wait to give the first betas a try!!
I have used WABI on Solaris X86 (x86 is a nightmare to setup IMHO) and
WABI performed quite well!
Del Simmons
d...@infoman.com
From: ch...@44mag.vistech.net (Champ Clark III)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/03/30
Message-ID: <slrn4lqho8.rof.champ@44mag.vistech.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 145005919
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<4j6vfc$2t8@pell.pell.chi.il.us> <m291gnn8a9.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<4jfe7i$5rj@trotsky.cig.mot.com>
organization: CMDS News machine
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
>>
>>It should be an interesting next few years...
>>
>
>BUT BUT BUT BUT BUT ...
>
>There is *NO* Linux equivalent for little nifty things like:
>
> Quicken!
> TurboTax!
>
>etc ... WHere is Grolier's Encyclopedia for Linux.
BUT BUT BUT BUT.....
When it came to setting up DNS, operating a gateway between
two networks, POP mail, dedicated PPP connections, and
multiple users, I just couldn't get Win95 to pull it off.
.. Look, dont count on "Quicken" or "TurboTax" to make its
way to Linux. Linux is great, depending on your applications....
Now.. another matter, maybe we can look into decent Windows
emulation with SunSoft in the game soon..
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vistech Communications. Internet Access Provider/Network Services
Voice/VMB: [904]561-6679 For more information, check our URL:
Data : [904]561-6433 www.vistech.net, or telnet to our address
Address : 44mag.vistech.net and login as "new".
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: gbu...@usenet.kent.edu. (Gerald E. Butler)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/03/31
Message-ID: <4jkihm$kbf@tombstone.kent.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 145060323
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<4j6vfc$2t8@pell.pell.chi.il.us> <m291gnn8a9.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<4jfe7i$5rj@trotsky.cig.mot.com> <315c535a.25727484@client1.news.psi.net>
organization: Kent State University Information Systems
reply-to: gbu...@res.kent.edu.
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Del Simmons (d...@infoman.com) wrote:
: On 29 Mar 1996 01:26:10 GMT, sund...@vervet.cig.mot.com (Divya A.
: Sundaram) wrote:
: Never Fear!! Help is on the way!! Those wonderful people at Caldera
: are currently porting SunSoft's WABI to Linux! Amen! God Bless Ray
: Norda!! (hope I spelled his name right!!) Can you imagine the fun it
: will be having a sweet linux box with windows apps to boot!
: Thoughts?? I can't wait to give the first betas a try!!
I think this will ultimately spell an end to native apps development
for Linux ( as I believe it was for OS/2 ). Why would a company bother
producing a native Linux version when they can produce a Windows version that
will run under an emulator on Linux. They could even do what Wordperfect did
with OS/2, that is add an "integration disk" to cause the windows version to
take advantage of some of the non-windows features of the OS, yet still remain
a windows app.
I find it hard to believe that any program will ever run better under
an emulator than it will under its native OS.
I say, we in the Linux community, keep our focus on developing and
encouraging commercial outfits to develop native code for Linux. Emulators
such as dosemu, wine, and wabi should not be furthered in lieue of native
apps development.
Just an opinion. Anyone care to disagree?
Have A Nice Day!
gbu...@res.kent.edu.
From: sund...@vervet.cig.mot.com (Divya A. Sundaram)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/03/31
Message-ID: <4jmpkc$76j@trotsky.cig.mot.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 145265514
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<m291gnn8a9.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu> <4jfe7i$5rj@trotsky.cig.mot.com>
<slrn4lqho8.rof.champ@44mag.vistech.net>
organization: Cellular Infrastructure Group, Motorola
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
In article <slrn4lqho8...@44mag.vistech.net>,
Champ Clark III <ch...@44mag.vistech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>It should be an interesting next few years...
>>>
>>
>>BUT BUT BUT BUT BUT ...
>>
>>There is *NO* Linux equivalent for little nifty things like:
>>
>> Quicken!
>> TurboTax!
>>
>>etc ... WHere is Grolier's Encyclopedia for Linux.
>
> BUT BUT BUT BUT.....
>
> When it came to setting up DNS, operating a gateway between
> two networks, POP mail, dedicated PPP connections, and
> multiple users, I just couldn't get Win95 to pull it off.
>
> .. Look, dont count on "Quicken" or "TurboTax" to make its
> way to Linux. Linux is great, depending on your applications....
>
> Now.. another matter, maybe we can look into decent Windows
> emulation with SunSoft in the game soon..
I have NO disagreement with your sentiments, but please note that for
HOME USE, where DNS and Internet connectivity is not quite a premium,
and things like Quicken are (for the majority of users), Linux is
falling short.
Let me re-iterate my point exactly:
For average home use, Linux does not have the application
base to be a viable alternative to MS-Windows. The Home
Applications like Quicken, Turbo Tax, Nutrition Planner,
Grolier's, children's educational software, Test Prep
Software etc are not available on Linux.
Once these sorts of applications can be used under Linux,
we will see Linux become a TRUE alternative to MS-Windows
and Macintosh as a Mass Market End User OS.
I make no claims or assertions about Linux's capabilities as a
Unix machine, or as a DNS server etc ... but these things are not
as applicable for the Home Market.
I want a discussion of Linux for the end-user ... what does Linux
offer the current Home user of MS-Windows or Macintosh? What can be
done to make Linux more attractive for the Home User?
And I donot approve of dual-booting ... I don't trust my 9-year old
nephew to be rebooting my PC...
That's what I wish to discuss.
More comments invited.
--
Divya Sundaram CONDITUR IN PETRA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Motorola IL32 & IL76 Information Systems Support
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Axel Boldt <bo...@math.ucsb.edu>
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/04/01
Message-ID: <ywt3f6nnxfa.fsf@emile.math.ucsb.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 145342060
sender: bo...@emile.math.ucsb.edu
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
organization: Univ of California at Santa Barbara, Dept of Mathematics
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
sund...@vervet.cig.mot.com (Divya A. Sundaram) said:
Divya> I want a discussion of Linux for the end-user ... what does Linux
Divya> offer the current Home user of MS-Windows or Macintosh?
Crash-free word processing and web browsing.
Axel
From: jinx...@sover.net (Chris Johnson)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/04/03
Message-ID: <jinx6568-0304962326340001@pm1a15.bratt.sover.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 145725558
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<m291gnn8a9.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu> <4jfe7i$5rj@trotsky.cig.mot.com>
<slrn4lqho8.rof.champ@44mag.vistech.net> <4jmpkc$76j@trotsky.cig.mot.com>
organization: Airwindows
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
In article <4jmpkc$7...@trotsky.cig.mot.com>, sund...@vervet.cig.mot.com
(Divya A. Sundaram) wrote:
> I want a discussion of Linux for the end-user ... what does Linux
> offer the current Home user of MS-Windows or Macintosh? What can be
> done to make Linux more attractive for the Home User?
> That's what I wish to discuss.
> More comments invited.
Seems to be mostly MS-Windows responses...
I'm a Mac user, very familiar with working on that platform (heck,
that's what it's _for_, to get familiar with)
I have been interested in what I might call the _drama_ of Unix, but am
greatly turned off by some of the attitudes towards Macs in particular (it
seems) and towards ease of use.
I run my computer to _do_ things, application type things. If I wanted
to play with the OS I'd be doing AppleScript. I'd have Quickdraw GX
running. I'd have a bunch of extensions. I don't.
I would want _some_ kind of good program for:
sound editing, MIDI recording and editing, graphics editing, text
editing, rendering, basic desktop publishing, IRC, FTP, WWW, Email, and
conceivably a programming environment, better still an expert systems
environment fairly fixed in its configuration, which I could load with
data and get results from. Note that I am not saying brand names here, nor
am I expecting the MacOS programs, per se, to work...
I would demand that these programs respect at least the bare minimum of
the Apple Interface guidelines- I don't care if there are no icons, if I
can:
select with a mouse, access things through a menu bar, cut, copy and
paste with the same command-key equivalents, kill a program with
command-Q, launch a program as with a 'view by names' window (no icons
needed) by double clicking on the file name, bring up background windows
(no need for anything more than a white rectangle with a black border) by
clicking on them.
Other things that would be very nice, and which are very basic to the
Mac, are:
closing a window either with a close box in the upper left hand corner
or with a pulldown menu item (in the File menu, above Save and Save As)
_or_ with Command-W, having a scroll bar or bars with arrows that scroll
smoothly, gray (or indeed just white) areas that move the scrolling more
rapidly, a fixed-size indicator (the 'thumb') that moves in the scroll bar
and can be moved itself to navigate, having a resize box (in the lower
right hand corner) that causes text to reflow but images to be cropped...
Is this so blasted hard, or unreasonable? I don't know whether the
Toolbox is firmware or software, but if it's firmware there is even less
excuse to impose Unixisms on a machine that is designed for a consistent
environment. Anyone who can make a Unix that does _not_ sabotage the
perfectly valid conveniences MacOS offers (and I'm talking a much lower
level than AppleScript, much lower than OpenDoc) will really have
something.
Heck, they use meeses, don't they? ;)
Jinx_tigr
(aka Chris Johnson)
From: jinx...@sover.net (Chris Johnson)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/04/03
Message-ID: <jinx6568-0304962339530001@pm1a15.bratt.sover.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 145726289
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<m291gnn8a9.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu> <4jfe7i$5rj@trotsky.cig.mot.com>
<slrn4lqho8.rof.champ@44mag.vistech.net> <4jmpkc$76j@trotsky.cig.mot.com>
<ywt3f6nnxfa.fsf@emile.math.ucsb.edu>
organization: Airwindows
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
In article <ywt3f6n...@emile.math.ucsb.edu>, Axel Boldt
<bo...@math.ucsb.edu> wrote:
> sund...@vervet.cig.mot.com (Divya A. Sundaram) said:
> Divya> I want a discussion of Linux for the end-user ... what does Linux
> Divya> offer the current Home user of MS-Windows or Macintosh?
> Crash-free word processing and web browsing.
> Axel
Which is not enough. I'm a sound engineer who works with MIDI, also
plays with graphics and rendering. I don't care about icons and zooming
windows, but if Linux cannot offer the consistency of application behavior
and interface that MacOS offers, if it can't even handle selecting text
with a mouse, copying with the keyboard equivalents (minimum=V,C,X,Q, and
W, possibly S for save), if it can't deliver at least a _functional_
window-based shell no matter how vanilla (for instance, white rectangles
with text in them) that behaves sensibly...
*sigh*
Damn it, I _want_ to like Linux. But it does not like _me_... I would
be content with a _very_ plain-looking interface as long as it had a basic
subset of the _behaviors_ of MacOS. A very basic subset. That OS lets me
work smoothly and focus on the task I'm trying to do, not the means by
which I do it. It shouldn't be that blasted hard to abstract the most
simple behaviors of MacOS and ditch all the fancy stuff.
They use meeses, don't they?
Jinx_tigr
(aka Chris Johnson)
From: r...@netcom.com (Robert Woodcock)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/04/04
Message-ID: <rcwDpCJ1D.8Jn@netcom.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 145824873
sender: r...@netcom13.netcom.com
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<m291gnn8a9.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu> <4jfe7i$5rj@trotsky.cig.mot.com>
<slrn4lqho8.rof.champ@44mag.vistech.net> <4jmpkc$76j@trotsky.cig.mot.com>
<ywt3f6nnxfa.fsf@emile.math.ucsb.edu>
<jinx6568-0304962339530001@pm1a15.bratt.sover.net>
organization: my computer
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Chris Johnson (jinx...@sover.net) composed eloquently:
> Which is not enough. I'm a sound engineer who works with MIDI, also
>plays with graphics and rendering. I don't care about icons and zooming
>windows, but if Linux cannot offer the consistency of application behavior
>and interface that MacOS offers, if it can't even handle selecting text
>with a mouse,
You didn't install gpm????
>copying with the keyboard equivalents (minimum=V,C,X,Q, and
>W, possibly S for save),
You're avoiding Linux because of lack of keyboard functionality??????
>if it can't deliver at least a _functional_ window-based shell no matter
>how vanilla (for instance, white rectangles with text in them) that
>behaves sensibly...
xterm or rxvt doesn't behave sensibly?????
You don't like virtual consoles?
> *sigh*
You are making no sense!
> Damn it, I _want_ to like Linux. But it does not like _me_...
Oh, I figured out why: Just look at the kernel source:
if (getuid(user) == CHRIS_JOHNSON)
be_a_pita();
:)
--
Robert Woodcock - r...@netcom.com
Where there's a will, there's an Inheritance Tax.
From: jinx...@sover.net (Chris Johnson)
Subject: Re: sensible reason to avoid Linux
Date: 1996/04/04
Message-ID: <jinx6568-0404961956090001@pm0a27.bratt.sover.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 145869335
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
<m291gnn8a9.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu> <4jfe7i$5rj@trotsky.cig.mot.com>
<slrn4lqho8.rof.champ@44mag.vistech.net> <4jmpkc$76j@trotsky.cig.mot.com>
<ywt3f6nnxfa.fsf@emile.math.ucsb.edu>
<jinx6568-0304962339530001@pm1a15.bratt.sover.net> <rcwDpCJ1D.8Jn@netcom.com>
organization: Airwindows
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
In article <rcwDpC...@netcom.com>, r...@netcom.com (Robert Woodcock) wrote:
> Chris Johnson (jinx...@sover.net) composed eloquently:
> > Which is not enough. I'm a sound engineer who works with MIDI, also
> >plays with graphics and rendering. I don't care about icons and zooming
> >windows, but if Linux cannot offer the consistency of application behavior
> >and interface that MacOS offers, if it can't even handle selecting text
> >with a mouse,
> You didn't install gpm????
I didn't install Linux. I've never heard of gpm. Nobody has ever seen
fit to mention it to me before. I have never heard of any Linux front end
that uses the same behaviors as MacOS. I downloaded Jove once thinking it
was a typical text editor. Not... You'd think a text editor made to run on
the MacOS would use the consistent behaviors that are suggested in
interface guidelines. Jove taunts and mocks these expectations, just as a
lot of Unix users taunt and mock me. Yeah, I understand that it's not
meant to be MacOS-ish, but still, in neither case am I left with any
desire to use Linux.
> >copying with the keyboard equivalents (minimum=V,C,X,Q, and
> >W, possibly S for save),
> You're avoiding Linux because of lack of keyboard functionality??????
Read what I said. I'm avoiding Linux because I am not at all confident
in it. My _only_ experience with Unix is Jove, and logging onto my ISP
with Telnet. That's it. I can partition my HD for a A*UX partition, and
can easily make the space, simply to try it out. Don't call me names,
Linux people- make me _want_ to do it, or hush with the scornfulness: it's
anything but encouraging. If I did start using Linux I'd be looking to you
for _help_. Why would I expect any different treatment than I'm getting
now? (note- rcw included a smiley at the end of the post, he isn't as
hostile as I thought at first) I know at least _one_ Unix guru who likes
Macs and Mac users, and who is friendly and helpful and encouraging. If
not for him I would be very tempted to relegate you all and your Linux to
trash/Empty Trash...
> >if it can't deliver at least a _functional_ window-based shell no matter
> >how vanilla (for instance, white rectangles with text in them) that
> >behaves sensibly...
> xterm or rxvt doesn't behave sensibly?????
> You don't like virtual consoles?
> You are making no sense!
I think I am making perfect sense. The subject at hand is, "What is
needed to make Windows and Mac people want to run Linux?". I am telling
you and whoever else is reading this from Linuxland what _I_ would want.
You could have run down a list of features and behaviors of the
apps/shells/whatever you're talking about, and that would really have
caught my attention. I _know_ that Linux people could deliver what I want,
almost by definition- it's _flexible_. Instead I am accustomed to getting,
indeed have come to _expect_, contempt. Please reconsider your personal
human interface guidelines in light of the fact that you want people to
_like_ Linux.
> > Damn it, I _want_ to like Linux. But it does not like _me_...
> Oh, I figured out why: Just look at the kernel source:
> if (getuid(user) == CHRIS_JOHNSON)
> be_a_pita();
> :)
Please reconsider your personal human interface guidelines in light of
the fact that you want people to _like_ Linux. (btw I just noticed the
smiley *shrug* okay, that's cool. Maybe not so much contempt as all
that... guess I'm used to it, which is kinda sad, no?)
Jinx_tigr
(aka Chris Johnson)
From: Andrew Veliath <vel...@rpi.edu>
Subject: Re: ...avoid Linux (hopefully some insight here ;)
Date: 1996/04/04
Message-ID: <wm768bfpbpv.fsf@vccnw07.its.rpi.edu>
X-Deja-AN: 145987705
sender: vel...@vccnw07.its.rpi.edu
references: <m2wx4fg3n1.fsf@presto.med.upenn.edu>
to: jinx...@sover.net (Chris Johnson)
organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
>>>>> Gandolf, with all his courtesy, informed:
>>>>> "All kneel at the words of the bewildering Chris Johnson!"
Chris> I didn't install Linux. I've never heard of gpm. Nobody
Chris> has ever seen fit to mention it to me before. I have never
Any rational person should not expect you to have heard of these,
surely if you have never had the fortune (or misfortune) of installing
Linux.
Chris> MacOS-ish, but still, in neither case am I left with any
Chris> desire to use Linux.
Chris, you really should not bother installing Linux if you have no
desire to learn something along the lines of Un*x! Of course, it
shouldn't stop you from placing it on a small but usuable partition to
play with it every once in a while. Of course again though, you
should have someone experienced with Linux around though, since "doing
it right" DOES take someone who has been through mistakes (much as
they wouldn't like to admit it ;). Linux has gotten a LOT easier to
install recently however, but I do think you should still have someone
experienced with Linux physically there for installation.
As goes Unices, Linux is more friendly than Unix since you are using
GNU utilities, which have better help and are more functional.
However, there is a moderately steep learning curve if you are coming
from a strictly Windows type environment (not to mention Mac!). Even
though the CDE (Common Desktop Environment) is out now, it really
doesn't lessen the impact of using Unix, especially if you are going
to *use it at home*. Most Unix oriented people tend to be (well, to
generalize a bit ;) command-line (shell) oriented types, and actually
like to use their beloved shells (even though many of these people
have to use DOS type shell every once in a while, how many of them
tell you the like using it ;).
If you are coming from the world of DOS/Windows, you must say to
yourself: I want to learn Linux, I will try to learn to develop
"substitutes" for my everyday tasks that I do under <OTHER OS>, under
Linux.
It maybe peculiar, but if you are persist it works (and can be quite
frustrating in the process). Not everything will be replaced, but
somethings you might like better (TeX for one, but it is something of
a religious issue, as is Emacs/Vi etc.). However, you must be
prepared to be somewhat alienated from your mall computer-store ;).
Best thing to do (obviously) is to get a big hard disk and put both
your original environment and Linux in. However, don't go delete it a
week later for more space. But a new hard disk. Eventually you will
be bored and go check it out.
It is important to realize that some of the people you are asking why
they like Linux are people who, say, 10 years ago (or more)
desparately wanted a "Unix workstation" but couldn't afford one (I was
ready to buy a brand-new 386 running SCO or an Amiga running
Commodore's Unix a few years ago, but too much $$$ at around 4-5Gs or
so). In other words, some of the diehard Linux users were Linux
well-wishers even before "Linux" was born.
Chris> all confident in it. My _only_ experience with Unix is
Chris> Jove, and logging onto my ISP with Telnet. That's it. I can
Chris> partition my HD for a A*UX partition, and can easily make
Chris> scornfulness: it's anything but encouraging. If I did start
You need considerably more experience with Unix to get a feel for what
it is like (and decide if it is for you). If you are coming from a
DOS oriented world, you might feel helpless under something like Unix,
with reason to be so.
In general, it is not easy to switch and really learn, since it does
require a significant amount of time (which otherwise might be spent
productively under something you already know how to use, which is why
it is difficult to convince people to switch over "just like that."
You really have to want to and be dedicated. I've installed Linux
many times on other people's machines only to find that it was erased
from their machines about three days later ;).
Chris> I think I am making perfect sense. The subject at hand
Chris> is, "What is needed to make Windows and Mac people want to
Chris> run Linux?". I am telling you and whoever else is reading
Chris> this from Linuxland what _I_ would want. You could have
Chris> run down a list of features and behaviors of the
Chris> apps/shells/whatever you're talking about, and that would
Chris> really have caught my attention. I _know_ that Linux people
Chris> could deliver what I want, almost by definition- it's
Chris> _flexible_. Instead I am accustomed to getting, indeed have
Chris> come to _expect_, contempt. Please reconsider your personal
Chris> human interface guidelines in light of the fact that you
Chris> want people to _like_ Linux.
Some people hate Unix. Some people love it... Some people haven't
used it and even take one of the former opinions ;). You need a Unix
guru to show you Linux.
The problem with Unix, I consider it an advantage, is that it is made
to be incredibly customizable. So much so, that application
"defaults" (as they work under Unix and X/Windows) usually aren't all
that spectacular, but can be customized to look "spectacular." If you
look at a Unix guru's screen you might be confused or you might like
his setup, but when you go and install Linux it will probably take you
a long time to achieve anything similar (similarly, becoming something
aking to a Unix guru takes lots of time as well).
Well, good luck, and hope you get to see an "educated tour" of a Linux
machine one day ;),
--
Andrew Veliath <vel...@rpi.edu>
http://www.rpi.edu/~veliaa
Finger for PGP Key