Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/01/30/09:02:07
On 29 Jan 1997, Jeff Weeks wrote:
> > If you are experienced with an operating system then you can solve the
> > problems that arises when you install anything on it. If you are a
> > newbie ...
> Yes indeed!
Agreed.
> > First: I have never had any problem installing Linux, if it included the
> > correct drivers for my hardware. The same is true for other OSes. I have
> > installed DOS, Win2,-3, -95 many times without problem. BUT many people
> > asked me to help them install or manage DOS or Windoses, because they
> > could not do it. Why, some people around me does not even know how to
> > copy files from the hd to a floppy using Windows! (They mostly use
> > Winword or Excel.)
>
> I agree.
Also agreed. Don't you hate it when someone continually asks you how
to copy a file, or how to unzip something? Drives me nuts. After a
couple times, I just tell them to RTFM!
> > Second: If you have installed your OS, you can manage it even with
> > control panels, at leas in Windows and in Linux. (In Linux you can use
> > the RedHat distribution which has a Win95 like X window manager with
Don't use RedHat, but I'm wanting to try it out. A control panel
would simplify life to a great extent on a lot of things.
> > taskbar, start menu, control panel and the like, etc.) And the design of
> > Linux is much more clean that e.g. Win95. (Try to modify your internet
> > settings! You must look into the internet AND the network applet on the
> > control panel. Or modify the command strings for your modem if you want
> > to feel what I am talking about.)
Yeah, try and modify your internet settings in Linux!
joe /etc/hosts
joe /etc/resolv.conf
joe /etc/ppp/*
joe /etc/rc.d/*
joe ....
You get the point. A *SIMPLE* ppp setup for Linux is MUCH needed.
Granted it may still require editing some config files, but it can
definately be done (and will) I'm sure. I'm working on my own
internet control panel for Linux right now as we speak. It isn't
going to be any great big program that will do all that I'm asking
for, but it will be a start in that direction. Try switching ISP's in
Linux, and you'll see what a pain it can be! I've had to edit SO MANY
DAMNED FILES that I feel I'll be still editing them 6 months from now.
Granted a lot of them are custom scripts which I've written, but if
there was a better way I'd use it in a second.
> Plus, the AfterStep window manager comes with a control panel for
> playing around with window settings (and, I should add, it MEGA
> customizable... must more than Win95). Everything is configurable in
I use fvwm95 and I like it very much. I don't want to use another WM
every day of the week, so I don't want to try Afterstep yet. I've got
5 other WM's that I havent tried.
> Linux, and fairly easy, IF you take the time to figure out how. I
That is the whole point! I am not arguing that Linux *CAN* be
configured, just that it can be a pain sometimes. A control panel
*IS* needed for a lot of different things. I would much rather set up
XF86, by clicking the mouse on settings than by reading 1000 files and
editing a config file with vi. The end user will want this too. I
want the *CHOICE*. It is especially a pain if you have to install
something more than once and can't remember what config file
such-and-such a setting went in. The /etc/rc.d directory is a prime
candidate for being control-panelized.
I strongly feel that Linux will get this eventually. I just long for
the day when it does.
> I think Linux can be an end user environment if more people take it
> seriously.
I take Linux VERY seriously. In fact it is the only OS that I *DO*
take seriously. However, "joe average" doesn't want to learn vi, nor
does he want to edit 1000 config files and read 10000 man pages (a lot
of which are either not there, or are outdated).
> I'd love to see if destroy M$ but I have large doubts. It's
Linux is not going to destroy M$ by a long shot. Nor should anyone
care.
> MUCH better than any M$ OS... but M$ is too big and has that monopoly
> thing going :)
Very true.
> > The reason, IMHO, that we do not want to switch to Linux from DOS is
> > that we want our computer to be compatible with the majority of the
> > software (e.g. games )out there.
Play games in DOS. Linux is a REAL OS, games written for it run fine,
DOSemu is just that, and emulator. Games are ok, but when evaluating
an OS for real day to day work, games just don't have any part of it.
Nobody has said that you must delete DOS or 95 to run linux, therefore
games can still be played.
> Exactly! They don't realise though, that many programs are available
> for Linux. Most people don't want to leave M$ Office... however Linux
> has StarDivion's StarOffice (which, I should add won editors choice a
> while back). Quake and Doom have been ported to Linux as well.
Yes, I've got Quake and Doom for Linux, as well as Abuse. I can run
many DOS games in DOSemu w/o sound. Games are a moot point.
StarOffice is more of a real issue here though. I haven't installed
it yet, but I would like to check it out. If someone doesn't want to
leave MS office, then Linux is not for them, and they shouldn't even
consider it. You must choose an OS based on what it *CAN* do for you.
There are up's and downs to both sides. For example: I can't run
Xtetris in '95, nor can I run xview, nor can I run iNES with sound in
'95. I could go on and on, but it is pointless. Linux is for ME.
'95 is for someone else. Likewise, someone else can easily say the
opposite. I can at least say that my OS doesn't lock hard. :o)
> > But I am a little bit sceptical about OpenDOS's future. It is too late
I'm sure that Caldera has thought a lot about this.
> > now for DOS. Like it or not the dominance of DOS was a result of
> > Microsoft's and IBM's software strategy. Now everyone (except us...)
More like because of Microsoft's anti-competitive practices.
> > wants to use some version of Windows.
Yeah, "Xwindows". :o)
> I agree again but I'd like to see OpenDOS succeed. It's needs Win95
> support. That would be most excellent :) I wouldn't mind running the
> odd Win95 program... just not FROM Win95 :)
LFN support yes, a full 95 GUI replacement - no thanks. If I need to
run a 95 program, I'll either wait until WINE runs it, install '95, or
else find an equivalent native Linux program.
Mike A. Harris | http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris
Computer Consultant | My webpage has moved and my address has changed.
My dynamic address: http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris/ip-address.html
mailto:mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca
DOS must have's: 4DOS 5.50c ftp://ftp.std.com/vendors/jpsoft
- Raw text -