Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (720 mails)

[hattons@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Steven T. Hatton)]

This message disapeared into the bit bucket.  I am sending it again.

Steven T. Hatton wrote:

> Steven Udell wrote:
>
> > Steven T. Hatton wrote:
> > >
> > > Zentra,
> > >
> > > You say that people tend to migrate over to Linux based applications.  I have
> > > noticed that Mathematica and WordPerfect are available for Linux.  I don't
> > > know how well they are selling.  I'm expect that it is a bit of a social
> > > deviance to use software that you actually buy in the Linux community.  On
> > > the other hand, if Linux were to become as easy to use as 95/NT for the
> > > uninitiated, and Linux were capable of running software that people already
> > > have invested money in, there would likely be a mass migration from M$ OSs to
> > > Linux.
> > >
> > Hi,
> > I would like to know more about Mathematica, and WP7 I do have for
> > Linux.
> > I know that Star Office 5.0 (which will be out very soon) will Do
> > OFFICE97
> > stuff (namely WORD97), had a German friend translate Star Divisions WWW
> > site for me, as the anoucement is only in German for now. And 5.2 SuSE
> > should bring all the (somewhat) latest stuff to us in an easy package..
> >
> > I want a SUSE T-shirt!!!!!!!!!! (black please) hehehehe (you can get
> > them)
> > How about a coffee mug too :) (i dunno if they have em)
> >
> > > As far as running standard Win32 software on intel platforms goes, there is
> > > no need for emulating the CPU as is done with a Sparc.  All that needs to be
> > > done is to emulate the Win32 API.  I am not a stellar programmer, so that
> > > "all" could be a lot more than I am making it sound like.  The main reason
> > > that I bring this up is not to dismiss the programming effort required, but
> > > to observe that the intel based Win32 programs should perform at least as
> > > well under Linux as under M$ OSs.
> > >
> > Let's not turn LInux into windows9X, although, you might say well all
> > the
> > software(retail) is made for them. With the trend seen today, you might
> > say
> > MS overwelms everything else, this might happen for a few more years,
> > but
> > I think it will start to die off. By 1999 NT4.0 will be around only, and
> > thats
> > Unix based(MS Unix), MS will cut off the life support for DOS/WIN.Old..
> > and
> > more people will start complaining.
> >
> >
> > > > Everyone had high hopes that SUN would continue with it,
> > > > and get WABI to run win32's ; but they figure there really isn't
> > > > a demand for it. Most linux users quickly switch to pure
> > > > linux apps, or they dual boot to win95 or NT.
> > > > zentara
> >
> > I wana be PURE LINUX POWER
> >
> > GNOMEs, Elfs, Trolls and Deamons...(is that all? ;)
> > freewm, Binarys, QT, and you know demons(amt,kerneld)
> >
> > (off note- I think a G3 Mac running Linux, would be more powerful than
> > a SMP Best Intel slot one or two or ?? heh. or Merced(blah), or Alpha)
> >
> > --
> > Steven Udell             Wayfarers
> > hettar@xxxxxxxxxxxx      for truth love
> > sudell@xxxxxxxxxxxx      and courage
> >   <A HREF="http://www.teleport.com/~hettar";><A HREF="http://www.teleport.com/~hettar</A">http://www.teleport.com/~hettar</A</A>>
> > --
> > To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@xxxxxxxx with
> > this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
>
>  Steve,
>
> I understand your point of view.  You just don't want to have anything to do with
> MS-Bill.  I see a place in my paradigm where folks like you could be fully
> satisfied with the same base Linux running on your preferred platform, while those
> who wanted to emulate Win32 could add that functionality to their Linux x86
> systems.  I have been working as a sysadmin for five years now.  I remember when
> NT was in beta.  I have watched it become a dominant market player.  One of the
> most effective selling points of NT/95 has been the ability to do everything that
> a Novell server or client could do, and then some.  Microsoft has produced some
> decent products.  (Word is not one of these, BTW. ) Right now they are crushing
> Netscape's browser development by dumping IE on the market.  That yanks my chain
> big time! Part of the reason that MS can do this is because of their virtual
> stranglehold on the intel OS market.  If they could not sell NT at $250 per
> workstation and 95 at $100 per workstation, if there were a Linux alternative to
> NT/95, MS would have to compete more equally in the marketplace when it comes to
> other software products.
>
> Now consider what happens when Joe administrator sets up his Linux system to run
> MS-SQL server.  If MS-SQL server works well and does everything a Unix based SQL
> server can do, then Bill gets to keep the business.  If, on the other hand, MS-SQL
> can't hang with another product, perhaps a freeware product, Bill looses the
> market share.  People who transition to Linux because they can get it for much
> less, and can still use their MS investments, will then be free to move between
> Win32 based products and UNIX based products.
>
> It is also likely that software producers would be more willing to compile
> software for other CPUs that don't run NT, but can handle Win32 calls through
> Linux.  There would be no need to port the code to UNIX style calls.  All of a
> sudden, people are using a Win32 API on a non-intel platform, and Bill isn't
> getting a cut either.
>
> The Linx/UNIX user who doesn't want to participate in this simply doesn't load the
> Win32 emulator on his system.  He uses pure Linux software, and keeps a clear
> conscience.
>
> I guess what I am trying to say is that one of the best ways to break down the
> MS proprietary fortress is to emulate MS OSs.  I truly believe that Linux/UNIX can
> "do that too".
>
> Remember when people were saying that the reason MS-DOS was so successful was
> because it would run on open system architecture.  IBM made a killing on this
> strategy for a while and then found that is had created its own major
> competition?  Well,  its about time there was an open systems operating system
> that could stand up to MS proprietary products.
>
> Mathematica:  I love it!  I have not yet tried it on Linux.  I have run it on DOS,
> 95, and NT.  See: www.wri.com
>
> NT = MS-UNIX?  I would not say that.  I am not as knowledgeable about the core
> UNIX architecture as I am of NT's architecture.  There are some major differences
> at the user interface level that I can speak authoritatively about.  First off,
> that stuff about POSIX compliance?  I work in a Major DoD lab, and nobody talks
> about POSIX.  UNIX products run on UNIX systems and Win32 products run on NT/95
> systems.  The NT/DOS scripting language doesn't hold a candle to UNIX shells.  The
> registry makes basic system administration easier, but puts many restrictions on
> what you can do with a system.  NT seems to me to be slower in every respect than
> UNIX.  I also have far more problems with Dr. Watsons than I do with core dumps.
> As a workstation I have little trouble with NT other than the fact that it seems
> to take twice as long to load things as it does on Linux.  I installed suse a week
> or so ago.  At first I figured that it was going to be a clunky curiosity that I
> would play with a bit here and there, while my real work would be done on NT.  I
> haven't booted into NT in days except to retrieve files.  I am thinking of buying
> a new system.  Before I tried suse, I was debating between NT and Solaris x86.
> (which I do like, but has few applications which run on it.)  Now I am almost sure
> that I will put suse on my new system. (if it will run on the dual Pentium II 333
> Asus MB).  I then want to set up Samba  and network with my current NT system.
>
> Steve
>
> --
> "Alles Vergaengliche
> Ist nur ein Gleichniss"
> -Goethe, as quoted in Ludwig Boltzmann's Vorlessungen ueber Gastheorie.


--
"Alles Vergaengliche
Ist nur ein Gleichniss"
-Goethe, as quoted in Ludwig Boltzmann's Vorlessungen ueber Gastheorie.

--
To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@xxxxxxxx with
this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e