RE: [suse-amd64] Dont expect any "support" from suse.com ![Scanned]
I think I missed most of this ... how did everything turn racist? That's just not on and should stop. The original comment on support I think may be a valid one. If Novell wants to break into the desktop market in a serious way then there should be more information available. I have been trying to get a desktop to allow log in through a Windows domain and have tried many things to no avail. I also was told that the question was a chargeable one. This in itself is fair enough however the big difference between Microsoft and Suse (for example) is that Microsoft have on their site a huge amount of information, white papers, and 'best practice' documents that anyone can look through. The basics are normally covered so if you are simply evaluating a product you can do this without real cost. I have purchased SUSE 9.2 and love it in my home environment (not as much as my OS/X though) but as I run business systems am interested in finding a real alternative to the MS desktop. If the basic testing and something that should be fairly straight forward is made chargeable I start to feel that as time goes on the support costs will become a lot higher than the cost with regard to using MS. It all depends if you want to move out of the 'enthusiastic experimental' market and challenge properly. Were the support on these items free and the test successful the subsequent rollout would more than cover the costs involved in resolving what must be a fundamental question raised. Blah, blah, blah. BTW we do have snaps in the UK ... diluted maybe, softer for sure, but still snaps! Tim -----Original Message----- From: Willibald Krenn [mailto:Willibald.Krenn@gmx.at] Sent: 25 November 2004 13:42 To: suse-amd64@suse.com Cc: Örn Hansen; Marshall Kiam-Laine Subject: Re: [suse-amd64] Dont expect any "support" from suse.com ![Scanned] Örn Hansen schrieb:
torsdag 25 november 2004 01:33 skrev Marshall Kiam-Laine:
There is no insult, in hearing people make comments, generalizations and comparisons. If you (Bald Willy) feel an insult, youre no better than he is.
***yes ! a glimmer of intelligent philosophy there Orn :) you are too good for this newsgroup, why not take up linux instead, and you may even become helpful one day.
@Marshall: If you think that comparing a person living in Germany or Austria to Hitler will not seriously insult this person, you are a very sick puppy. There is no excuse for doing things like this. By comparing someone to Hitler you are implicitely saying that he/she behaves like a Neo-Nazi. You seem to have absolutely no clue what this means to the person... By chance: Did you ever visit a KZ to see first-hand what the Hitler regime did to people? If not, then I would strongly encourage you to do this and get your Hitler-picture right again. If you afterwards still feel the need of comparing living persons to Hitler, noone can help you. @Örn: You ought to know that there have to be some guidelines in conversation and limits in what is allowed and what is not: Comparing someone to Hitler - even if based on ignorance - is definitely one step too far! I see no reason why I should tolerate this behaviour and why I am not allowed to speak up. You really want me to shut up?! There is no joking on that issue. This was my last message on that issue, Bald Willy -- Those who cannot remeber the past are condemned to repeat it. -- Check the List-Unsubscribe header to unsubscribe For additional commands, email: suse-amd64-help@suse.com ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **********************************************************************
Tim O'Neill schrieb:
The original comment on support I think may be a valid one. If Novell wants to break into the desktop market in a serious way then there should be more information available. I have been trying to get a desktop to allow log in through a Windows domain and have tried many things to no avail. I also was told that the question was a chargeable one.
Well, if you ask me, Linux isn't really ready for the ordinary Desktop user.. I don't think that SuSE -ahm Novell- can change that in the short term. I'm running 9.0 AMD64 here and browsing SMB has never worked for me. KDE never managed to set the volume of my sound device - I had to use alsamixer for doing that. Some programs I tried installing from SuSE supplied DVD just died SIGSEGV when invoking for no obvious reasons. The YAST kernel update once upon a time was working - today I do this by hand, cause I don't trust YAST on getting the job done (stalled downloads etc.). But I don't complain - that's Linux. Nothing's really working here as it should.. ;-) If SuSE was to build a suitable desktop distribution, I fear SuSE would have to start from the very beginning and just supply a small set of applications that are widely tested, were found to be stable, are pre-configured in a sane manner, come with sufficient and in-depth documentation and can be updated over several years without having to install a completely new base system. However, this is impossible to achieve given the development process of open source software in general.
This in itself is fair enough however the big difference between Microsoft and Suse (for example) is that Microsoft have on their site a huge amount of information, white papers, and 'best practice' documents that anyone can look through. The basics are normally covered so if you are simply evaluating a product you can do this without real cost.
Actually there is plenty of free information available about Linux. You "just" have to invest enough time to find the right piece. Willi
Willibald Krenn wrote:
Tim O'Neill schrieb:
The original comment on support I think may be a valid one. If Novell wants to break into the desktop market in a serious
way then there should be more information available.
I have been trying to get a desktop to allow log in through a
Windows domain and have tried many things to no avail. I also was told that the question was a chargeable one.
Well, if you ask me, Linux isn't really ready for the ordinary Desktop user.. I don't think that SuSE -ahm Novell- can change that in the short term. I'm running 9.0 AMD64 here and browsing SMB has never worked for me. KDE never managed to set the volume of my sound device - I had to use alsamixer for doing that. Some programs I tried installing from SuSE supplied DVD just died SIGSEGV when invoking for no obvious reasons. The YAST kernel update once upon a time was working - today I do this by hand, cause I don't trust YAST on getting the job done (stalled downloads etc.). But I don't complain - that's Linux. Nothing's really working here as it should.. ;-)
If SuSE was to build a suitable desktop distribution, I fear SuSE would have to start from the very beginning and just supply a small set of applications that are widely tested, were found to be stable, are pre-configured in a sane manner, come with sufficient and in-depth documentation and can be updated over several years without having to install a completely new base system. However, this is impossible to achieve given the development process of open source software in general.
This in itself is fair enough however the big difference between Microsoft and Suse (for example) is that Microsoft have on their site a huge amount of information, white papers, and 'best practice' documents that anyone can look through. The basics are normally covered so if you are simply evaluating a product you can do this without real cost.
Actually there is plenty of free information available about Linux. You "just" have to invest enough time to find the right piece.
Willi
I have read this whole diatribe with amusement, the guy who started it is obviously a clown, & was tolerated far longer than I would have tolerated him. Kudos to SuSE for that. I disagree that Linux itself isn't ready for the average user, but I agree that the current level of 'fit & finish' of various distros (SuSE least among them IMHO) is problematic. I have worked on SGIs professionally for about the last 12 years. They are &%$*(&%$ expensive, but smooth as silk, well documented, everything just works, etc. I consider that 1 end of the 'fit & finish' spectrum. Then there is the Linux of the mid '90's, with cryptic installs, mismatched packages, for uber-geeks only, the other end of that spectrum. The Linux community has made good progress from that state, but still seems too tolerant of screwups that some (hopefully simple & cheap) check-outs at the distro level could eliminate or cut down. IMHO, that wouldn't/shouldn't be much of a hurdle, & I place responsibility for that with the distro packagers. They can/should do what they can to assemble their packages from parts that really do match, rather than always striving for highest package/kernel version #'s. The bleeding edge is cool, but only when it works. I realize that the distributed nature of the Linux developement model, as well as the nearly malignant variety of different hardware makes this integration difficult, but it seems that a (hopefully) small amount of extra attention there might clean up a larger fraction of screwups/package mis-matches/etc. SGI & most other high-end builders have sophisticated testing regimes (automated, software based) to verify that all of their stuff not only works, but works together with other included packages. With the increased power of machines today, it seems to me that some of the distro packagers could make some progress in this area, even if only by some brute force methods.
torsdag 25 november 2004 17:15 skrev William A. Mahaffey III:
I have read this whole diatribe with amusement, the guy who started it is obviously a clown, & was tolerated far longer than I would have tolerated him. Kudos to SuSE for that.
I disagree that Linux itself isn't ready for the average user, but I agree that the current level of 'fit & finish' of various distros (SuSE least among them IMHO) is problematic. I have worked on SGIs professionally for about the last 12 years. They are &%$*(&%$ expensive, but smooth as silk, well documented, everything just works, etc. I consider that 1 end of the 'fit & finish' spectrum. Then there is the Linux of the mid '90's, with cryptic installs, mismatched packages, for uber-geeks only, the other end of that spectrum. The Linux community has made good progress from that state, but still seems too tolerant of screwups that some (hopefully simple & cheap) check-outs at the distro level could eliminate or cut down. IMHO, that wouldn't/shouldn't be much of a hurdle, & I place responsibility for that with the distro packagers. They can/should do what they can to assemble their packages from parts that really do match, rather than always striving for highest package/kernel version #'s. The bleeding edge is cool, but only when it works. I realize that the distributed nature of the Linux developement model, as well as the nearly malignant variety of different hardware makes this integration difficult, but it seems that a (hopefully) small amount of extra attention there might clean up a larger fraction of screwups/package mis-matches/etc. SGI & most other high-end builders have sophisticated testing regimes (automated, software based) to verify that all of their stuff not only works, but works together with other included packages. With the increased power of machines today, it seems to me that some of the distro packagers could make some progress in this area, even if only by some brute force methods.
The moment I came in comtact with SGI Workstations at my UNI, there was nothing else ... shame I haven't had the opportunity to use them since :-) But to me, Linux is ready for everyone except the die-hard WIndows user. There are a lot of those, who want nothing but "Outlook", just because it looks cool ... or Word, because it's got a cool "helper" down in the corner, etc. And I too have had problems with SMB browsing, and I tolerate it because I consider SMB to be an "outlandish" environment within Unix-Linux. An NFS/(Yellow pages or LDAP) would be the environment of choice for me, resulting in totally seemless hypercomputing environment. But unfortunately, most users are using desktop calculators and that limits things. And if I were a mere desktop user only, I'd probably be running Mac instead of WIndows ... it's got more style, for my taste. Just a bit too expensive for my pocket.
But to me, Linux is ready for everyone except the die-hard WIndows user.
I'd probably be running Mac instead of WIndows ... it's got more style, for my taste. Just a bit too expensive for my pocket.
Having had my first experience with OSX yesterday and having had a brief tour of an Apple X server today (hang central!), has led me to think
Örn Hansen wrote: that Linux is as ready for the desktop as any of the other "Desktop" OS'es out there. Consider how often a basic install of Windows, OSX, OS2, Solaris etc craps out when abused as a desktop. In my experience, they all have their issues. Where Linux wins out is in the broad platform support and making full use of 64bit processors etc. I think if a few hardware vendors were to take the time to bundle up suitable drivers (open or closed source) for their platforms and load Suse, the end user experience would be every bit as good as any other OS.
And some football fanatics that NEED IE if you can believe it.... (poking at my friend in the CC)... hehehe B-) On Thursday 25 November 2004 04:05 pm, Örn Hansen wrote:
torsdag 25 november 2004 17:15 skrev William A. Mahaffey III:
I have read this whole diatribe with amusement, the guy who started it is obviously a clown, & was tolerated far longer than I would have tolerated him. Kudos to SuSE for that.
I disagree that Linux itself isn't ready for the average user, but I agree that the current level of 'fit & finish' of various distros (SuSE least among them IMHO) is problematic. I have worked on SGIs professionally for about the last 12 years. They are &%$*(&%$ expensive, but smooth as silk, well documented, everything just works, etc. I consider that 1 end of the 'fit & finish' spectrum. Then there is the Linux of the mid '90's, with cryptic installs, mismatched packages, for uber-geeks only, the other end of that spectrum. The Linux community has made good progress from that state, but still seems too tolerant of screwups that some (hopefully simple & cheap) check-outs at the distro level could eliminate or cut down. IMHO, that wouldn't/shouldn't be much of a hurdle, & I place responsibility for that with the distro packagers. They can/should do what they can to assemble their packages from parts that really do match, rather than always striving for highest package/kernel version #'s. The bleeding edge is cool, but only when it works. I realize that the distributed nature of the Linux developement model, as well as the nearly malignant variety of different hardware makes this integration difficult, but it seems that a (hopefully) small amount of extra attention there might clean up a larger fraction of screwups/package mis-matches/etc. SGI & most other high-end builders have sophisticated testing regimes (automated, software based) to verify that all of their stuff not only works, but works together with other included packages. With the increased power of machines today, it seems to me that some of the distro packagers could make some progress in this area, even if only by some brute force methods.
The moment I came in comtact with SGI Workstations at my UNI, there was nothing else ... shame I haven't had the opportunity to use them since :-)
But to me, Linux is ready for everyone except the die-hard WIndows user. There are a lot of those, who want nothing but "Outlook", just because it looks cool ... or Word, because it's got a cool "helper" down in the corner, etc.
And I too have had problems with SMB browsing, and I tolerate it because I consider SMB to be an "outlandish" environment within Unix-Linux. An NFS/(Yellow pages or LDAP) would be the environment of choice for me, resulting in totally seemless hypercomputing environment. But unfortunately, most users are using desktop calculators and that limits things. And if I were a mere desktop user only, I'd probably be running Mac instead of WIndows ... it's got more style, for my taste. Just a bit too expensive for my pocket.
participants (6)
-
Brad Bourn -
Edwin Heath -
Tim O'Neill -
William A. Mahaffey III -
Willibald Krenn -
Örn Hansen