Tugger the SLUGger!SLUG Mailing List Archives

Re: [SLUG] Linux news on slashdot

> I haven't read a README since going to Debian to get an application to
> work. I'm still unsure whether that's good or bad.
> > decompress/run/do somethngt with that file - get a Cd of 3rd party
> > software (linux has distros - but they will never answer everything -
> > in the end 3rd party is going to be the "big thing" and it's
> important
> > it gets worked out) and you actually have to go to a lot of effort to
> > read the readme - set things up (quake3 is an example) - installign
> > drivers is a real pain. under windows installing 4rd party software
> is
> > just a matter of sticking the CD in - same with drivers. windows
> takes
> > it from there - pops up the autorun thing -where you get a nice big
> > "install me" button or "uninstall" etc. - its just so much less pain
> Uninstall doesn't work properly nine times out of 10. apt-get remove
> gnomehack works everytime.

Uninstall is good with rpm -e, you know everything is pretty much
that was added.

> I think your perspective is where we differ. You use Linux on the
> bleeding edge, so close you're falling off (points for recognising the quote).
> You use windows as a closed product - this is equivalent to buying
> RH/SuSE/Corel and not tampering with it when it's installed. just adding apps
> that run on it. I don't think there's any real basis for comparison
> between a heavily hacked Linux system and Windows, unless you're also working
> with the windows source code and trying to do similar things with that
> system as you are to Linux.
> I'm just a lowly admin/user. I do *NOT* want to hack code, I want things
> to just work and work properly. This is what lead me from Windows to
> Linux and eventually, Debian. My servers and desktops are just smooth and my
> grandma can use them providing I have installed her system correctly.
> I'm not going to say that Linux is good for the brain dead user, it's
> not, never will be, even when the interface improves. Windows/MacOS are for
> passengers, Linux is for people who like to be in control of their
> vehicle(s).

The difference is drive i think. Linux doesnt sell, thats why it doesnt
need to be simplified. Redhat etc are trying to sell it, and to sell
they are focusing on simplification. Fine. But Im worried when people
"linux must become more simple" "linux must be easier to use" if it
to get on the desktop, as if being on the desktop is a conquest. 

IMO being on the servers is more of a conquest. Think about it? what is
difficult to achieve? Happy simple interface, or rock solid performance?

Ultimately an OS that is both simple and complex (which is how linux is
i want to be able to pop the hood strap on some extractors and catalitic 
converters and hear my baby roar =)

Dean "I luv unix, bow down" Hamstead
http://www.penrithcity.nsw.gov.au	| Penrith City Council
http://www.bong.com.au			| BONG LAN Parties
	dean@xxxxxxxxxxx	dean@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx