Something's gotta be done.

[reboot]

I've spent the last 5 days downloading various versions of Linux.
I'm just getting tired of my Mandrake 7, so...
Of all the various versions around, only 1 has anything remotely resembling a setup program (which failed to work installing from HD, because the thing is designed to install from an autorun CD).
The .iso images all range around 160,000,000 bytes. Nobody in their right mind is going to want to download that much, especially when the servers only transfer at about 10k/second, even if you've got braodband.
You can't get a download from ANY HTMl site, you've got to FTP it (slower still).
How does the Linux "community" ever expect it to become popular (other than it's free) with arcane setup/install/formatting procedures?
Anyone (even with a little DOS knowledge) probably doesn't know that the secondary master hard drive on their system is located at /dev/hdcx (where x is the number of the partition), and on a multi-partitioned HD, it's impossible to determine where your install location would be. Mine ended up at /dev/hdc7 aka Drive K:
Anyhow, I've downloaded Suse, Mandrake, Debian, RedHat, ArmedLinux, Phatlinux, Slack, Bestlinux, Conectiva, Caldera, and Corel.
Over the next few weeks, I'm going to try installng them all as a fresh install over a FAT32 partition, and just see what's easy, what's included, and what's not worth the download.
So far, a couple of them are only available in .iso format, so I'll burn a couple of install CD's, but this counts as a strike against, as not everyone has a burner.
Armedlinux installs on a DOS partition, as well as the "trial" version of Slack.
My whole point to all this, is; until it becomes mindless to install and get to a desktop (ala win9x), it's going to be a serious battle to get the masses to even attempt a linux box.

[Statica]

>I've spent the last 5 days downloading various versions of Linux.
>I'm just getting tired of my Mandrake 7, so...
>Of all the various versions around, only 1 has anything remotely resembling a >setup program (which failed to work installing from HD, because the thing is >designed to install from an autorun CD).
>The .iso images all range around 160,000,000 bytes. Nobody in their right mind >is going to want to download that much, especially when the servers only >transfer at about 10k/second, even if you've got braodband.
>You can't get a download from ANY HTMl site, you've got to FTP it (slower >still).

Firstly, those that use Linux for their desktop or their servers will and do download it, those that dont have any mission critical uses, aka those that will want to install to try out on a FAT32 wont sit through it, and it is always been urged to buy a cheap CD. Out where I am a cheap CD of a Mandrake distrib costs about $15 CDN. Of course if you would rather pay for a Microsoft Product, the nearest Futureshop cant be that far off
& wherea re u looking for, perhaps you should take the time to look for mirrors. I download ISOs esp Mandrake at about 280k using @home.

>How does the Linux "community" ever expect it to become popular (other than >it's free) with arcane setup/install/formatting procedures?
>Anyone (even with a little DOS knowledge) probably doesn't know that the >secondary master hard drive on their system is located at /dev/hdcx (where x >is the number of the partition), and on a multi-partitioned HD, it's >impossible to determine where your install location would be. Mine ended up >at /dev/hdc7 aka Drive K:

Nobody is to assume that they know how to work with partition and disk tables just cos they know how to use DOS. Would you hire a person to administer your UNIX server cos his resume listed DOS and Win 9x?? No this requires knowledge along those lines, failing which it is urged that you either research what partition tables and DISK Howto-s or you buy yourself a book and sit with it.
The biggest problem of Linux and other UNIX is not that they arent trying to be userfriendly its that people dont take the time to understand whats going on, and to read, whenever they create a drake to simplify something some dude wants it the way Windows does it .. well boo hoo .. windows sucks! It may look pretty, but if you want a robust OS ESPECIALLY for a server then no sysadmin worth his salt will go with a Windows OS, unless (s)he has the time and money to sit through such. They would more likely than not go for a UNIX.


>Anyhow, I've downloaded Suse, Mandrake, Debian, RedHat, ArmedLinux, Phatlinux, >Slack, Bestlinux, Conectiva, Caldera, and Corel.
>Over the next few weeks, I'm going to try installng them all as a fresh >install over a FAT32 partition, and just see what's easy, what's included, and >what's not worth the download.

Ok we will expect posts of why they are really crappy Run it on its own partition formats, FAT32 is the most arcane filesystem.

>So far, a couple of them are only available in .iso format, so I'll burn a >couple of install CD's, but this counts as a strike against, as not everyone >has a burner.

Again, where are u downloading it from? ISOs are getting increasingly popular. Those that dont want to get it for free can buy it. At least u have an option.

>Armedlinux installs on a DOS partition, as well as the "trial" version of >Slack.
>My whole point to all this, is; until it becomes mindless to install and get >to a desktop (ala win9x), it's going to be a serious battle to get the masses >to even attempt a linux box.


I kinda like it that way, speaking for myself. Most windoze users I have met dont know anything beyond the 3 finger salute.

[mairving]

My whole point to all this, is; until it becomes mindless to install and get to a desktop (ala win9x), it's going to be a serious battle to get the masses to even attempt a linux box.

I don't know if Linux will ever be a desktop contender. The Linux desktop, eihter Gnome or KDE, look a lot prettier than Windows. They are some resource hogs too though. I am really not sure if being the desktop champion is such a great thing either. Too many tradeoffs with security, etc. And until more apps are ported to Linux, it will never be the desktop of choice.

Reboot, sounds like a experiment that I did several months back, except I used the whole hard drive. Go ahead and put Esmith on there. It will wipe out those Windows partitions for you too. Anyone coming from a Windows world will be confused by drive letters. It also is weird to see terms like grep, gawk, gimp, kaudio, etc. They all sound pretty nerdy. Linux in the hands of a master like Statica or WLSB is a marvelous thing. It is a pretty good thing for some of the rest of us.

For iso's check Linuxiso.org . Pretty good site with just about every distro.

[reboot]

OK, I personally don't have anything against iso's, but those that don't have a burner, this format is useless, unless they want to purchase the CD, and wait.
Yes, I managed to find .iso's in various places to download fairly speedily, BUT, again, if you don't want an .iso, just a downloadable .zip or somesuch, you're out of luck.
You can FTP the whole mess, if it doesn't hang in the middle, and leave you with portions missing.
Mandrake8 seems to be the leader in ease of install (so far), and includes so much stuff, a new user won't be needing to download or install anything else for a long while. Some of the leaner installs don't include KDE or X, so once an install is successful (text based, and very arcane to a newbie), they're going to have to read plenty to figure out how to get a desktop, and install it. Not real high on most people's priority list.

[WickedLittleSlaveBoy]

Reboot:

download the full Slackware ISO, extract it to your hardrive....make sure to keep the directory structure intact. boot from one of the boot disks...Slackware's install program is more or less unique in its control of the setup process, it will drop you at a command line, which gives you all the power you're looking for....run cfdisk or fdisk, create an ext2 partition and a swap partition, mount the FAT(32) partition that has the distribution on it, run setup, then when asked for the media, specify the path to the files.

in the old days, it seems to me that Red Hat could be installed form a partition, too....so you might want to try running expert installs on both Red Hat and Mandrake. at this point their installations are shrouded by the mists of time.

be glad that they let us download Linux at all, but most especially in ISO images....you know they don't have to.

I was originally put off by OpenBSD's refusal to make downloadable ISOs. after doing two ftp installs and having to tweak the boot image's kernel to get my PCMCIA NIC working, I'll gladly pay for an ISO, cause the end result was worth it......while you're testing, you should do an FTP install, the ISO will seem the easy way to do things.

as for how to start with Linux....Red Hat, Mandrake or Slackware. experimenting with all those distributions isn't the way a beginner should start, you're mainly just going to be oooooo'd or ahhhhhh'd by the way one distribution sets up KDE or Gnome and how another distribution has all the cool programs, and you'll pick your final distribution that way....all that stuff is easy enough to do on any Linux distro....sticking to the mainstream has advantages, you'll find more resources for Red Hat and Mandrake....from there you can make an informed choice as to which suits your particular needs.
and Slackware just forces you to learn.

on other thing.....don't even bother with the mini distributions that coexist with Windows, they're all trash....might as well just download BeOS, the experience will always be better.

[WickedLittleSlaveBoy]

Statica:

again I agree with you....I see a lot of people that aren't prepared for Linux(or other *nix) go away with a bitter taste in their mouths and start telling everyone how Linux sucks, because they made the decision to try Linux thinking it was a Windows replacement and putting exactly that much effort into it. then there are the other types who think that latest copy of Mandrake is going to revive the 486 w/16M RAM in their basement, while they have Windows ME installed on a brand new Athlon/P4 system w/256M RAM.....

the experience is only as good as what you put into it.

[WickedLittleSlaveBoy]

Mairving:

thanks, but I hardly qualify....my roots are in DOS and Windows, and half my brain cells are dead from my experiences there.....I can never hope to recover fully.

[HAL9000]

I agree. I toyed with Linux on slower machines and to say the lease, not overly impressive, but I took it as that was the reason why. So when I built my Linux box, I made sure that there was at least something that was going to perform a bit. Started with a Celeron 566 (now an 800), 128Mb of RAM, and a 9Gb 10K RPM SCSI hard drive. Well, I don't have to wait for things to happen, but then again, I haven't put that much time into becoming a Linux guru either, thats when Mairving and Statica step in for me when I do get a chance to play.

'Boot, look around for other servers, the first server that I tried downloading Mandrake from gave me a whopping 2k/s, then I found one that pulled a constant 180k/s... good enough for this guy.

Now here is the interesting part, one of the employees at the university asked if he could download Mandrake 8 in our office as we have a CD writer. We burned the ISO with Easy CD Creator and all appeared fine. He tried installing, but no go. He hit the discussion forums about it and apparently it had problems if you used Easy CD or Nero to burn the image, so we tried NTI, same problem. When he enquired which program should be used to write the image, he was told to use (can't remember the name) in Linux. Well, if you don't have Linux, how do you use a program in Linux to write the Linux ISO. Kinda reminds me of modems that give you a BBS to log into if you are having problems setting up your modem.

[mairving]

Man this place is just full of Canadians tonight.

Hal it depends on what you want to use Linux for. I have a Pentium 200 box with 64MB RAM. It runs plenty fast as an apache/samba server. Rarely do I even use the desktop. You need to have RAM aplenty if you use KDE. I have never had that ISO problem that you are talking about but I haven't burned a Drake 8.0 on my system. I have burned the 7.2 version with no problems.

[WickedLittleSlaveBoy]

I use Nero only on windows, I've never had an issues with anything....and I've burned pretty much everything, even Mac HFS and HFS+ formatted ISOs. I wonder what Mandrake could have done to mess with it....

anyway, there is a port of the cdrtools package available for Windows, via Cygwin. have a look here for the package:

http://www.fokus.gmd.de/research/cc/.../cdrecord.html

and here if you're interested in the rest of the Cygwin project ports:


http://www.cygwin.com/

as far as using *nix tools on Windows, it can't be beat...it gives Windows a little class.....unlike that poor excuse for a POSIX layer that NT and 2000 have. still haven't gotten the MS port of vi or sh to work.


mairving:

your average file type server isn't processor/video intensive, so you're right...in cases like that, it's better not to run X, or if you do without a WM or Gnome/KDE/CDE and spend your money on SCSI disks and PCI network cards.

for an X workstation, I can't imagine running Linux with anything less than Pentium II(maybe a PPo, maybe.) and 128M RAM. that's a cheap enough setup these days.

[HAL9000]

Originally posted by mairving Man this place is just full of Canadians tonight. Hal it depends on what you want to use Linux for. I have a Pentium 200 box with 64MB RAM. It runs plenty fast as an apache/samba server. Rarely do I even use the desktop. You need to have RAM aplenty if you use KDE. I have never had that ISO problem that you are talking about but I haven't burned a Drake 8.0 on my system. I have burned the 7.2 version with no problems.

I didn't really know what I wanted to use my Linux box for (so far just as a web server) so I built it strong enough to handle what I want to throw at it without finding out that I'm too slow.

I never did have a problem burning 7.2, it just seems to be a problem with 8.0.

[Statica]

Hey HAL9K
Regarding burning with CDRW programs, it depends on what you use and how you use it. Check out the settings of your Windoze based burner, most of the formats like JOLIET etc are again, basic Windoze based formats (which incidentally even the bootable Win98SE CD does not use), make sure you switch to ISO9660 / El Torrito standards). What I use for burning ISO's is Fireburner. I basically look for windoze programs with small footprints, Lord knows that Windoze registry is bloated of its own record anyway and I dont need programs that crap it up, and fireburner is perfect. Try it out and see what I mean, you wont get another OS wasted.

& regarding using images, well the fact is that before Win98SE, M$ did not acknowledge that your ATAPI device (any ATAPI, heck Slackware allowed Zip bootables for what seems eons now) device can be used to boot a system, hence you dont see programs that do the job right for the Win platform. Rawrite etc are basically windoze ports of Linux/Unix concepts.

WLSB hit the nail clean when he said that most people give Linux bare bottom hardware specs trying to eek out performance out of a dead horse. The fact remains is that even though Linux does require minimal hardware requirements it still is based on what you need and you still get the option of using it the way you need. Other than changes to whether you want the clipboard viewer etc, there is little or nothing you can do to reduce system load on ANY distrib of ANY M$ OS. If all you got is a 486, then classify the linux box accordingly. I've got so many potentially crappy hardware sitting around doing valuable tasks, including a 486 DX 4/100 performing as an IMAP server.
& Yeah, these distribution channels take a HUGE hit on their bottom line because they provide ISOs, but they are bound to it because of the nature of the Linux project. They could consolidate their revenues by not allowing you to download the ISO, and become like Corel (bwahahahaha..snork..choke..hahahahaha) and charge you $99.99 (and a helpful $20 mail-in rebate). But instead they do provide their ISOs and their packages in an age where everyone's outhouse has a DSL connection going to it.

Its just a difference in how you are conditioned to perceive your desktop. For example, in my little corner of the world, am surrounded by an academic community (the one-eyed man vs blind ppl), a few years ago I simply put on Gnome as the desktop on a few of the machines, and we have that one Win2K machine. Nobody has a problem with using Gnome, they might not know the console, they might not care about what init level I have set it as, but it is fully functional, and people do their work without any gripes of having to look in mnt/cdrom for their data, because they dont know that its in mnt/cdrom. Nobody complained in my lab, largely due to what I believe was not being conditioned by thinking Windows. & now with the latest Mandrake, people are really pleased. We use it for just the common stuff as a desktop, office work etc. And we use the windows simply for powerpoint, before sending in posters/slides for printing for presentations. & when star office was bad and koffice wasnt around, I tried to get people to use http://www.thinkfree.com

The basic issue is that, you have to get your system administer to stop griping about not being able to find 'My Computer' if you are to have success about Linux as a desktop. If you are the system administrator, then take the time .. read a little, as I've said before many a time on this board dont assume you know operating systems and computers .. Linux/BSD is a different beast. Maybe win98 will work well for you at home, but in an office environment with sensitive data at most times, windows blows .. win2k is better but way too pricier than can be justified, and requires too much work securing. Linux as a desktop (a new concept for me) is just too cool to pass up, and a winner when u consider that the OS behind the desktop is rock-solid, and the icing on the cake is that I can still do EVERYTHING from a console .. faster and cleaner.

Cheers (had a bit of time before the day began, hence the 2 page essay).

[reboot]

Well, I'd like to thank you guys for the excellent input on this.
It's long been an issue of "ease of use", and is (Linux) at the point where it's now an "ease of install" issue.
I'm not a newbie to Linux, I've had it on one box or another for almost 2 years, starting with RH5 (I actually still have the CD's), and it's definitely come a long way.
The purpose of my exercise is to find out what's big, what's small, what's easy and what's hard, both for the install procedure (be it from .iso, ftp, floppy, or HD), and the ease of manipulating the desktop (KDE, Gnome, X, whatever).
Of all the distros available, it would take me a month to download them all, so I picked the biggest/best/most popular?
Extra features are a BIG part of any OS, and Mandrake comes in miles ahead of anyone else, even though the download is NOT as large as RH.
Some of the distros don't even include X, so I'm not going to argue their merits/faults, because an install should be easy, but if you don't even get a desktop, it's just like installing DOS 5, and sitting there watching the cursor flashing, with no idea what to do next.

[HAL9000]

Fingers must be tired after that post Statica. Yes, being "windows conditiond" is my biggest problem right now. I'm sure I'll get over it eventually, maybe someday when I actually take some vacation time I'll have more than the hour a month to really look into my Linux box to see what's doing what.

[mairving]

Some of the distros don't even include X, so I'm not going to argue their merits/faults, because an install should be easy, but if you don't even get a desktop, it's just like installing DOS 5, and sitting there watching the cursor flashing, with no idea what to do next.

It is nothing like DOS. A lot a things are done better without X.

[WickedLittleSlaveBoy]

Originally posted by reboot Extra features are a BIG part of any OS, and Mandrake comes in miles ahead of anyone else, even though the download is NOT as large as RH5.

hmmmmm....I don't think I would agree with that. you can't compare GNU/Linux with commercial OSes, cause the extra features are free and downloadable. personally, I have very little respect for Mandrake....but I'll not start a distribution holy war.

Originally posted by reboot Some of the distros don't even include X, so I'm not going to argue their merits/faults, because an install should be easy, but if you don't even get a desktop, it's just like installing DOS 5, and sitting there watching the cursor flashing, with no idea what to do next.

if you made a conscious choice to install GNU/Linux without X, then you'll know what to do next....the DOS 5 remark makes me think the 2 years you've spent with GNU/Linux hasn't been quality time.

[reboot]

I'm referring to a total newbie, who has successfully installed an OS (Linux or DOS), and now has a command prompt.
Without some serious research, one would not know what to do next.
We might, but most wouldn't.
Without a GUI, 99% of new users are totally lost.
I admit, I'm NOT a fan of the command prompt in Linux, but I'm familiar enough with it in DOS.
My other big beef (remember, this is only a personal observation) is that all distros come with Netscrap, but that's a whole 'nother war I'll not get into at this time.
On chosing an OS, Windows beats all others, hands down for ease of install/use.
It also comes with a TON of built in stuff, pre-installed (sure, most of us seasoned veterans disable/delete a lot of that stuff, in favor of a 3rd party app).
On chosing a distro of Linux, Mandrake, RH, and a couple of others will beat the rest, because of all the extra stuff included, pre-installed.
From a newbie's point of view, this is a GOOD thing, for the rest of us, it can be simply an annoyance, something else we have to disable/delete, in favor of a 3rd party app.

[WickedLittleSlaveBoy]

Originally posted by reboot I'm referring to a total newbie, who has successfully installed an OS (Linux or DOS), and now has a command prompt.

yes, I'll agree with that, but therein lies the problem. too many of our more vocal brethren feel that Linux is ready to take the desktop market....GNU/Linux wasn't designed for that particular task, it was designed as an alternative to Unix, BSD and HURD....it was not designed as an alternative to windows. if it was, they would have integrated the GUI, like the guys at BeOS and AtheOS have.

*nix does make a fine workstation and can be adapted for desktop use, but remember, it was designed by programmers not companies...they've done things the way they want to, not always the way that's easiest for the end user. you'll never hear me telling a newbie to come to GNU/Linux....

Originally posted by reboot I admit, I'm NOT a fan of the command prompt in Linux, but I'm familiar enough with it in DOS.

the DOS comparison only goes as far as the most basic tasks, changing directories and such. all of the *nix shells are so much richer than command.com or the quasi-DOS 5 emulation NT/2000 uses.

Originally posted by reboot My other big beef (remember, this is only a personal observation) is that all distros come with Netscrap, but that's a whole 'nother war I'll not get into at this time.

I've never liked Netscape, either. Why Netscape tries to blame MS for loosing their monopoly in the browser is beyond me.....IE is one of the best things MS has done, too bad they refuse to release it for other X86 OSes. I do have it installed on my Sparc boxes and my Mac.

Originally posted by reboot On chosing an OS, Windows beats all others, hands down for ease of install/use.

I have to disagree with that one...MacOS and BeOS have the GUI down to an art, and their installation procedures are way easier to the uninitiated.....

but, you seem to be changing your story, because true computer newbies don't generally spend a lot of time installing Windows from scratch....their local computer stores install it for them every couple of weeks, but again that's another war...hehehe. anyway, all the questions people ask that start with Help I formatted my C drive and I can't access my CDROM... would seem to indicate that newbies have problems installing any OS....except MacOS, that is.

[reboot]

true computer newbies don't generally spend a lot of time installing Windows from scratch....their local computer stores install it for them every couple of weeks, but again that's another war...hehehe. anyway, all the questions people ask that start with Help I formatted my C drive and I can't access my CDROM... would seem to indicate that newbies have problems installing any OS....except MacOS, that is

OK, you've got me there. I spend enough time reinstalling Windows on my own customer's machines, I've got to agree.
I also admit I have absolutely NO experience with MAC, and absolutely REFUSE to even touch one. Call it a stigma, but in my business, if any customer saw a Mac in the store, I'd be up the creek.

[mairving]

I would have to say that when I installed Mandrake 7.0, it was the easiest and quickest install I have ever done. In about 45 minutes, I was surfing the Internet. I won't disagree with you either Reboot about Netscrape. That is certainly one of the downsides to using X. Mozilla is better but it is still in beta.

[Statica]

Originally posted by WickedLittleSlaveBoy I've never liked Netscape, either. Why Netscape tries to blame MS for loosing their monopoly in the browser is beyond me.....IE is one of the best things MS has done, too bad they refuse to release it for other X86 OSes. I do have it installed on my Sparc boxes and my Mac.

I truly, sincerely hope & pray that this does not get out of the pages of this discussion forum. I hate IE with a vehemence, it works on Windoze cos Windoze cannot co-exist with anything that does not come out of Micro$oft. I sincerely hope IE and its bag of critters never reaches anywhere close to Linux. And lets not start talking about ActifX! I am more than happy NOT, (take a note: I can NOT install Netscape if I choose not to!!!) to install CNN/TimeWarner/AOhelL/&AnyOtherGetRichPunkWhoWantsToEnterTheMediaConglomerate Netscape and instead go with Mozilla or for more practical purposes (my needs on the web involve a lot of research from boring journals) Konquerer and the like. Netscape is there as a choice, X is there at a size, freshmeat apps are there as a choice, Linux is there as a choice.

I would always recommend newbies to Linux, because the alternatives are just plain bad or expensive. Again I would not categorize Win 9x as a real OS, its just a GUI really isnt it, and its a GUI over a feature poor OS, I mean if they included Win 9x over the functionality and some of the stuff that came with DOS 6.22 (my favourite) I'd call it a better OS? Whats the differences between a grafical install of Linux vs a Grafical install of Win?

& none of my friends who have taken my advice and actually bought an Apple have ever complained.

Again the problem with newbies (not a dig against anyone, just a general rant) is assumption, just cos they have a computer and a Linux CD they assume that they know how to run the thing, which they dont. It sounds militant, but we have road tests to determine the worthiness of people using our roads, why cant have such a system with computers?

I'm sticking with my Mandrake OK banner cos there is everything else is worse .. speaking in terms of a desktop. otherwise i use specialized distribs.

[WickedLittleSlaveBoy]

Originally posted by Statica I hate IE with a vehemence, it works on Windoze cos Windoze cannot co-exist with anything that does not come out of Micro$oft. I sincerely hope IE and its bag of critters never reaches anywhere close to Linux.

you're being naive. MS isn't king of the hill because they're stupid. rumour is that MS started porting Office to Unix and there are already two Unix ports of IE...they're just sitting on releasing them to see how the market goes.

Originally posted by Statica (take a note: I can NOT install Netscape if I choose not to!!!)

that arguement never held up for me. actually none of Netscape's arguements have, but especially that one. MS's plan was to make the shell a browser(didn't work, Active Desktop failed miserably)...kind of hard to do if you don't have the browser built in...if they gave a choice to not install IE, the only thing that would be different is that they wouldn't copy the IE executable to the hard drive...wow, major space savings. the Netscape users would have had to install Netscape, one way or another.

Originally posted by Statica I would always recommend newbies to Linux, because the alternatives are just plain bad or expensive.

that's fine, too...if they're up for it. I don't have much faith in the average home user wanting to learn enough to administer a GNU/Linux box, and it does take an administrator to keep one up. one mistake as root and it's over.

Originally posted by Statica Whats the differences between a grafical install of Linux vs a Grafical install of Win?

graphical X installs depend on the default X server to be able to support the video card on the system....it's getting better, but it's still not there yet. that's actually a HW manufacturer issue, though. if they want their hardware to work well, they should release their own servers, cause the XFree servers are pretty crappy sometimes.

[Statica]

Originally posted by WickedLittleSlaveBoy you're being naive. MS isn't king of the hill because they're stupid. rumour is that MS started porting Office to Unix and there are already two Unix ports of IE...they're just sitting on releasing them to see how the market goes.

3 ways to become king of the hill:
Clause I: Invent something
Subclause - If you dont have the resources to create, steal & eliminate
(QED: DOS, Windows).

Clause II: Innovate something to make it indispensable.
Subclause - If indispensable is beyond your resources, at least convince people that it is indispensable
(QED: IE indispensable to OS, www.98lite.net )

Clause III: Claim invention/innovation to be the greatest.
Subclause - If innovation/invention is bogus, cater to lowest common denominator, the law of averages govern that there will be more in the dark than in the light.
(QED: Security)


Kudos on them for creating that port, am sure it will get popular too, popularity is NEVER an indicator of whether something is good. I will stick to my guns thank you very much.

that arguement never held up for me. actually none of Netscape's arguements have, but especially that one. MS's plan was to make the shell a browser(didn't work, Active Desktop failed miserably)...kind of hard to do if you don't have the browser built in...if they gave a choice to not install IE, the only thing that would be different is that they wouldn't copy the IE executable to the hard drive...wow, major space savings. the Netscape users would have had to install Netscape, one way or another.

Believe what you will, Netscape has at least, if nothing in your memory of the web and web browsers has given us a launching ground for the web as we know it, a platform independent forum for the exchange of ideas .. I cant say the same for anything Micro$oft has done or will ever done, I am tired of their proprietary, recycled baloney, and will never pay for their products, not simply cos M$ bad evil empire and all that childish tripe, cos they hoodwink the users, and others that I do not need to get into cos its beyond the scope of this thread.

Cheers

[WickedLittleSlaveBoy]

Believe what you will, but there is one event in the history of PCs that has made it all possible. without MS retaining ownership of DOS, we would be living in an IBM world....that would have been a far worse fate. it's nice being able to second guess PC history, but without a common OS we would have been mired in the proprietary hardware/OS mess that was so prevalent in the beginning. it's also good to remember that MS is the first to bring Unix to X86.


I'm sorry, but I was under the impression that Mosaic was the first browser....how does Netscape get the credit for that?


the whole evil empire thing was played out when the Apple and the OS/2 guys spewed it, and quite frankly I don't think it's becoming of the Linux community....I would say that the rising prejudice is one part of the fragmentation that's eroding the Linux movement.

the amzing part is that you can accept Apple, but not MS....Apple is far worse than MS as far as proprietary goes.

[Xayd]

Win9x user: "I have this problem...What, you can't help me fix it?!? Your crap service sucks, I want this fixed for me personally right now, I don't care if it is AOL's fault!"

Mac user: "You can't solve my problem right away, yeah, I know that. Try this, that, and this? Ok, thanks, I'll see what I can figure out and let you know how those things go." *click*

Win9x user: "I can't get to your site. Ping it? Yeah, that works. No, something is NOT wrong with my proxy, your site is down. BTW, what's a proxy, and when are you gonna fix this damn thing?"

My one Linux call to date: "I can't get to your site. Ping it? Yeah, that works. Whoops, looks like a problem somewhere in Netscape or our proxy then, sorry, I'll get the network guys to take a look, thanks." *click*

That's the difference in the two schools of thought from my experiences. I wish every new comptuer user was a Mac user, because they don't get free unlimited tech support for everything they buy, and eventually have to resort to a good ole' RTFM to figure things out for themselves . I don't particularly like Microsoft, I loathe Win9x, but being a gamer and a host of game servers, at least one install of Windows is a necessity. So I keep Win2k around for playing and NT 4 Server around for hosting for those purposes. Is Win9x 'enough' for the average user? Sure, probably. I'm more put off by the alliance with Microsoft and the pre-built computer manufacturers, though. AOL, Gateway, Compaq, and Dell are responsible for more of the crap I see and shouldn't have to deal with than anyone else, and Microsoft made those companies what they are.

Xayd

[WickedLittleSlaveBoy]

I used to agree with you, but with all the 31337 Linux newbies, you have to add:

31337 Linux newbie: "Ping? which KDE/Gnome menu is it under? Xterm? what's an Xterm?"

[spinoza]

Well, I've read all with great interest. There's been some excellent points brought up and I just can't help but put in my two cents worth.

These past two months i've been developing a Twig/Imap/Postfix/Mysql mail on a RH6 server at work. That's two months starting as a newbie. We don't have all the kinks worked out and i'm not crying about all the work we've put in but I can assure anyone that once this project is finished the whole IT Dept. can probably feel assured that we could all take a vacation and not worry one iota about that server.

We are all confident that it's going to be stable as a rock.

Also, before I bore anyone too much, let the newbies come. It's been my experience that if you've never had any experience with anything then you don't realize how hard it is until you've had something much easier. Let's put it this way, administering NT is, I'm afraid, that much more tinker like now. Don't get me wrong, there's still much to learn there , but it seems to me that, compared to navigating through Linux file systems every other OS is pretty intuitive.

That's all I've got to say about that.

[WickedLittleSlaveBoy]

I actually have no problems with newbies....that remark was spillover from another forum where a few self proclaimed 31337 LiNuX HacKeRZ(ask a KDE question and they jump all over it, ask anything else and silence) are wasting everyone's time feeding trolls and generally turning the place into MS hate group. anti-MS sentiment is not ground breaking, it's not original and it's not accomplishing anything....

[OOPS!]

Like Spinoza I got a couple of pennies to toss in,



I must be one of the few who thinks that Linux is ready to do the desktop and is as easy to use as windows. I base this on whst my kids tell me. I have 4 daughters ages 7 to 16. They have all pretty much given up on Windows of their own accord. My 7 yearold likes the fact that she can play her games without Daddy having to fix it for her every 5 min.And my 16 yrold quit using Windows the last time Word crashed and took down a 5 page report from school.They love KDE because it is easy and intuitive for them to use. They can just point and click to get what they want done.And that is what users need/want.



As far as difficulty to administer each system. Well every computer needs an Admin. Weather it is a Windows box or Linux. I persoanlly don't think that one is harder than the other, just different. And that is what causes all the trouble. Since we all "grew up" using Windows, Windows seems "easier" because we are all more familiar with it. And everyone runs in to problems when doing Admin on a Linux box when they expect it to "work like Windows".It won't because it isn't Windows. Compiling a new kernel isn't really anymore difficult than hacking the registery (jobs that are not for everyone to be doing).



Installation of Linux distros' are getting much easier, But Windows ain't no cakewalk either for newbies. Just check out some of the posts in this BBS.Hardware support in Linux is virtually as good as Windows.You can't fault an OS if the venders are too lazy to build drivers for it. At the very least, when the hardware works in Linux, it always works.Windows is not anymore full-featured an OS than Linux. At least with 'Drake I got all the programs that I need to make my box a useful tool. I didn't need to install it and then go out and buy the ~$4000.00 worth of software I need to get Windows to do what I need/want to do.



Boy this is getting too long, What it boils down to for me, is, we need to use the right tool for the right job. For me, I've probably bought my last copy of Windows. Sorry Bill



OOPS!

[getafix123]

reboot:
Linux versions .. NOT .. its Distributions, linux is a collection of tools and each runnig its own version trove
HTML is for Markup, FTP is for File Transfer, and you can also use HTTP as a transport for file transfer. Broadband or Not, download speed is directly dependent on your ISP' aggregation ratio nd its peering path on BGP, any cribbs for that, please speak to your ISP, i doubt this is a platform for that.
Linux is popular thats why newbies wanna try it!!

oh u gonna install all linux distro over fat32, kewl, sounds like u trying to install a V8 engine in a Ford-KA( i guess even Ka is more advanced then FAT32).

Reboot, let me sum it up for u, and few others, if u are looking for a an OS that looks feel and fails like M$, then . go to www.microsoft.com, because thats the one stop shop (read brothel) for that.

No, linux and **nix) are not desgined to be mindless to install, they do not serve the least common denominator.

as regards your another lame cribb of iso/cd-burner etc, if u dont have a burner, then go an buy a distro for as less as 10 A$, fully licensed, think b4 you cribb (but then again, i doubt u can)

statica, i agree, windoze leaves u with no option but IE, linux, u choose the browser you want, nope netscape is NOT the only one. check your facts first!

now here is a pointer, with all this crap flying around about ease of install blah blah, u know the flagship of M$ product win 2k and win nt, they talk about security, has any one of you ever tried to fix say closing all but DNS client port (53) on UDP, (TCP/IP security) . what happens, ur DNS lookup function breaks .. now that doesnt mean M$ Windows is bad, well in nutshell every OS has its fucntions, it depends do you get the worth of what you pay for it, or more?

I do agree with what Statica, Opps!, and Spinoza, etc have said so far. WLSB its unfair to blast off a user group just because their knowledge lies in a certain field. Knowledge, less or more is knowledge, and worth some respect!

Spinoza, as regards your twig, mysql,postfix,imap issue, you may find phpgroupware to be your one-stop-shop! (mind you, be very scared of uw-imap, buggy code try courier-imap or cyrus). I run my whole setup on Qmail/Courier-IMAP/SquirellMail-- http://mricon.com/SM/guide/qvcs-guide.html may be of help

With no pun intended, after 11 yrs in *nix and right from the day one of windoze (yup i had production systems running on windoze 2.0), both OS have evolved, but, the fact u still have the power to do what you want makes *nix different and my favorite.

my 0.022 (GST included)

Gtfx