![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/e1e85bc6d7839f17446b29622b6ac6c9.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
finally got time to answer...
From: Timothy R. Butler
Reply-To: tbutler@uninetsolutions.com To: "Purple Shirt" , suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] Linux Commercial Idea Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 18:47:22 -0500 Hi Purple Shirt,
With all respect to your efforts. I don't like it much.
It makes one think people use Linux because Microsoft is no good.
We don't? To be honest, the only reason I use Linux is because Windows isn't as stable as I'd like.
I think that is a pretty bad reason. I mean I had Interdev crash on me yesterday and I lost two hours worth of code because I was so wound up in writing it I had forgotten to save it. I don't want to insult you but I'd like Linux users to be Linux users because they enjoy the freedom the GPL gives them instead of a feature KDE2 has.
In fact I might have had this reason to switch to Linux more than 2 years ago but I changed my mind. I use Linux today because I enjoy the GPL. The GPL is good for the people. I think centering around how Microsoft again is bad doesn't cut Linux any slack.
Well, the GPL is fine, but if GPL'ed software doesn't make my life easier than the non-GPL'ed stuff, I wouldn't use it. To be honest, if Windows never crashed, was fast, and had as nice of GUI as KDE 2.x, etc., I would NEVER use Linux. The simple fact is, I don't mind close sourced software. I'm not on some kind of philosophical battle against the evil copyright holders. I support patents, I support anti-piracy, infact I even support the legal action against services such as Napster. I don't think intellectually property is evil at all. Shocking? No. Personally, I also support open source. As Linus Torvalds once said, "I prefer open source, but I have nothing against close-source." I prefer open source because I feel that the software coming from the oss community is _better_ than the closed source competition. This isn't because I can copy the oss stuff as much as I want, as much as I can count on not seeing any BSOD's. Where am I leading? We need to get past the idea that the philosophical advantages of oss, as espoused by those such as RMS, and move onto the more moderate views of those such as Linus Torvalds. We must accept that the whole world isn't waiting with baited breath for open source for the sake of open source. Computer users only want one word: BETTER. If Linux is better, they'll want it; if Linux is "freer" they could care less. Okay, so you ask, who cares what everyone else thinks? Well let me name a few reasons:
1.) More users = More Support. Yes, the more users, indifferent or not to the OSS philosophy, the more OSS support you will see. I bet if Linux received a 10-15% foothold in the desktop market, companies would scamble to support Linux with more OSS software. 2.) More users = More Software. Another good thing to come of more support and users is more closed source software. This is necessary. Joe Blow isn't going to switch to Linux until the latest games and such are available for Linux. Who cares about Joe? Bringing the Joes of the world will/would bring more support, and more support equals what? MORE OSS SOFTWARE! To be honest, I would be thrilled if Microsoft announced they were porting Office to Linux. This would be good, sure it would be open, but it at the same time would be a huge winfall for the OSS community as a whole. Any major non-OSS developer that makes software for an OSS operating system will increase support for OSS at the same time.
I hate Napster. It's corporate power in disguise. I hope it dies so GPL software like Freenet can take its place. I don't get your support argument. What support are people talking about on this list all the time. I never used any SuSE support. I use google and linuxdoc and this list. Yes I have used SuSE employee input from this list but I didn't personally ask for it. I can live without copyrights. I don't know if I was some smart guy who came up with a great idea others could profit (non-monetary) from why not give this idea away for free and feel good about the fact that you helped people. That is what I hate about humans. They don't trust. I am sure some would be happy enough to reward the creator of this idea with a gift. I also don't care if joe doe switches to Linux. Linux has had everything I need to use since two years. I tried converting people before and it doesn't work. They are usually lazy until the ideology kicks in and hate the console. Well if you don't like the console then why are you using a multi-user network OS with such power? If you want pretty interface and no multiuser then go buy Mac or something. I don't know everybody sees this different. But I am happy the AOLers are far away from me. I am sick of people asking for Samba 2.2 packages and 2.4.4 kernel packages or isos. If you need it so badly compile it yourself. This is the single most point in favor of Linux, but newbies aren't using the resources available. They just arrive and cry "help me". They don't understand the sphere we are working in. A few weeks ago I mentioned that I don't buy SuSE because I am sitting back letting the market play out. I said I don't agree with YaST being closed source. I said something like "how do I know if I buy into this product today that they are using the money in the right fashion and it will go to the projects which need to be advanced?" I also said I see too much funding wasted. I am happy Eazel dies. I gloat over the fact. I am sick of wasted money. Freedom of development is great in Linux but it doesn't mean 50 separate groups have to develop 50 versions of the same thing. The 13 mill Eazel blew could have nicely been used to advanced projects which were already larger and at a stage further down the time scale. So I am waiting to see if SuSE makes it and YaST wasn't a waste of money or if SuSE dies and YaST proves to be another failed project. I wish these companies would get together and develop one or two kickass utilities which work cross-Linux platforms instead of going off on a branch and parting the community feeling. YaST isn't any useful to me when its close sourced and only functional on SuSE Linux. I am bound to run into a RedHat machine or Debian box one day and then I am stuck with not knowing their native utility. What all this means is that if you know SuSE you don't know Linux. To be proficient at Linux you need to know more than one distro. On the other hand LSB should help conquer this and if you know the console then you should be all set for cross-Linux platform work. Further below you say Linux lacks an office suite. Am I the only person who doesn't use office suites? I always wonder what people use them for. Besides Linux is there and its got its own solutions. SGML, XML, DTD. More portable and it looks a lot better in ps or pdf anyhow. It's just people are too lazy or busy to learn how it works. MS Office on Linux wouldn't work. Half of the people wouldn't buy it because the ideology is wrong. Half of the people would buy it because they are actually Windows users never really dedicated to the GPL. How can one expect Office to run any better than on native Windows? I don't see it. All personal opinion....
This is what is wrong with Linux lately. We are getting off track with what Linux what meant for. You see guys like Love talk about how the GPL is not as good for business. http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011,2717264,00.html
I agree with you here. I feel that anyone who makes money of the GPL (i.e. Linux Distros) should support the GPL.
Well damn me. The GPL was not written for SuSE or Caldera to make lots of dough. The GPL was written for the people to become free from corporate power. I don't mind if SuSE makes a profit. But I don't want to replace one corp with another. I favor the non-profit GPL software way.
Profit _is_ necessary, although I feel the GPL can provide profit quite well.
Besides its a commercial in the truest sense. It expresses something which isn't there. Linux has its flaws.
The commercial doesn't lie at all. Think about it: it makes a simple claim: Linux will help you get rid of Blue Screens (lockups in general too). Does it? YES! For the majority of the time, it doesn't crash. Now my system has a probablem causing it to crash, but the simple fact is that overall it doesn't crash.
A commercial with a white vest is an overstatement. That is why I don't try talking people into Linux anymore. People have to make the decision on their own. They have to make an effort to understand the psychology behind free software and why it is good for them. Hmmmm, vmware 2.0.4, pdflib, more problems And I still use it because it is mostly GPL software which I enjoy using. Actually I got no clue why I tried installing vmware on this machine because it doesn't even have Windows on it. Maybe I just wanted to see if vmware would start after installing. It failed. Once again closed source software failing on me. God knows whose to blame.
True. Closed source has it's problems, but lets face it, it's also necessary. Sure, some day real soon now (tm) KOffice will come of age and we will have a good office suite for Linux. However, until then, wouldn't it be nice if we could be happily running the highly refined, billion dollar development that is MS Office? Clearly, no one can invest the time and money MS has in Office, into something open source. Closed source might be best relegated to the place of the interim place holder for OSS.
Overall I don't use Linux because Windows doesn't do me any good. I use Linux because of the freedom it gives me through its non-restrictive license.
And how does that benefit you? Let's say Windows worked as well as Linux. Then who cares if you have the source? You don't need the source on something that works right. The simple fact is, Windows _doesn't_ work right, thus the reason you want the source.
I know fewer people will jump ship for that reason but it doesn't matter to the ones who are already sailing on this boat.
Sure it does... less users equals less software, both closed and open.
Basically I am waking up to the idea that SuSE is already doing what Love talked about. Licensing corporate property in a different fashion than the GPL. I am coming to think YaST being closed source is not the way I want it to be. Now people have their own opinions if yast should or should not be GPL'd. It might mean that SuSE cannot sustain a death. Who knows. Fact is I prefer the GPL because we have seen what good it does for the people.
I agree that YaST should be open source. Any advocate of open source (i.e. SuSE) looks rather hypocritical when they can't even make their basic installer open.
You know I love Linux. I got my mother in Germany. She is 51 years old. She only owns a 486 with 8 meg of ram from like 1991. I remember this machine well. It was my first computer when I was a kid. We paid like 5000 DM back then for this thing. I always hated my dad for not consulting me first because I thought we could get it cheaper. She called me the other day and said she hadn't even turned this thing on since Y2K. I was half laughing and said she should try because I'd love to see if it still functions (DOS with fully featured editor and Norton Commander. Hmmmmmm =) But ok so she says that she wants to get a computer next year so she can communicate with me over the net easier. She waited so long because its so expensive in Germany and there is no good net access (broadband). Now she will ask me for advice on what to buy. I probably suggest she get a machine from km-elektronik.de but what OS should I suggest. She hasn't used a PC since
Check out Dell.de!!! :-) I buy my PC's from Dell America, and boy do they make a good PC, and cheap too. You don't get to be the number one computer company in the world without quality...
the DOS (with GUI) days basically. I can't go over there and install Linux for her and much less spend a month or so holding her hand and teaching her how to work that console =) I don't know if I should tell her to get that PC bare and be a rebel and go out and buy SuSE and some German Linux books and install it herself. Or should I revert to the fact that yes Windows may be a better solution in some instances. This is a tough decision for me because on the one hand I got GPL software I love and want to promote but on the other hand I got my mother who I don't want to disappoint either. It's something that bogs my mind.
Go with Linux, IMO. I think KDE is nicer to work in than Windows, and if she can handle DOS, she can handle SuSE's super easy installations...
This is another reason why I wish every Linux software company was bought out by some hardware vendor. It would take care of starter troubles and support by itself. If you buy IBM you get IBM Linux preinstalled. If you buy VA Linux you get VA Linux preinstalled. If you buy HP you get HP Linux preinstalled. If you buy Dell........well then you still get Windows preinstalled. But if this was the case at least I had more trust that Linux would work for a person like my mother right out of the box.
That might not be so good. You'd end up back in the old days when each computer manufacturer had a different system. I personally think the idea solution would be some consolidation between Linux venders so that there were only one or two major distros that all of the OEM's used.
I think this could truly kill Linux. We are in this stage where Linux is slouching at the bottom of the pit. It used to be hacker land. Nobody paid attention. It would improve and nobody paid attention. Today it improves but journalists rip it left and right. It has a tough time holding its water. Every shit Linus takes ends up on the front pages. Every time KDE releases a version we got a war at hand. Every time Gnome releases a version we got a war at hand. What to hell ever happened to freedom and peace?
It's called Miguel de Icaza and the gnomes. ;-) Seriously KDE was just a peaceful project, and although they fight now, they've been provoked for how many years?
I don't think Linux will ever make it this way. I am waiting and waiting and waiting for some company to make a true commitment. A company like IBM. Buy a Linux company and preinstall Linux. I know they spend a billion on development but a lot of shit gets developed these days but never makes it into production. Every one of these hardware vendors is in wait and see mode even IBM. To get to the general public you have to preinstall. It's never going to happen the way we are doing it now. It is
Nooo... Don't have big blue by a Linux distro - they'll kill it!
much rather that it hurts the ones who are already using Linux because they have to read about it every day in the news how "Linux is great but its still not there." Not there? It's there for me since 2 years.
It's been "there" for me since February, when I felt that KDE finally reached the same level of quality of interface and browser design as Windows/Internet Explorer. I've been using Linux since 1998 on the desktop and 1997 on servers, but it only became "ready" recently, IMO. However, I personally think it isn't ready for the general public for one reason and one reason only. The office suite... add MS Office (or something like it), and we would be all set.
Best, Tim
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler Universal Networks Information Tech. Consultant Christian Web Services Since 1996 ICQ #12495932 AIM: Uninettm An Authorized IPSwitch Reseller tbutler@uninetsolutions.com http://www.uninetsolutions.com ============== "Information Powered by Innovation" ==============
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/f99c3d441441b6e7f12a7403b48d1314.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
I think it's amusing that you rant against corporate power and rant for the GPL, wishing everyone was like you, using linux because of the philosophy behind the GPL, but you are doing it using a Microsoft-owned Hotmail account -- ending your message with a cute "get your FREE download of MSN explorer"... ph.
-----Original Message----- From: Purple Shirt [mailto:purpleshirt@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 1:05 PM To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] Linux Commercial Idea
finally got time to answer...
From: Timothy R. Butler
Reply-To: tbutler@uninetsolutions.com To: "Purple Shirt" , suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] Linux Commercial Idea Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 18:47:22 -0500 Hi Purple Shirt,
With all respect to your efforts. I don't like it much.
It makes one think people use Linux because Microsoft is no good.
We don't? To be honest, the only reason I use Linux is because Windows isn't as stable as I'd like.
I think that is a pretty bad reason. I mean I had Interdev crash on me yesterday and I lost two hours worth of code because I was so wound up in writing it I had forgotten to save it. I don't want to insult you but I'd like Linux users to be Linux users because they enjoy the freedom the GPL gives them instead of a feature KDE2 has.
In fact I might have had this reason to switch to Linux more than 2
I
changed my mind. I use Linux today because I enjoy the GPL. The GPL is good for the people. I think centering around how Microsoft again is bad doesn't cut Linux any slack.
Well, the GPL is fine, but if GPL'ed software doesn't make my life easier than the non-GPL'ed stuff, I wouldn't use it. To be honest, if Windows never crashed, was fast, and had as nice of GUI as KDE 2.x, etc., I would NEVER use Linux. The simple fact is, I don't mind close sourced software. I'm not on some kind of philosophical battle against the evil copyright holders. I support patents, I support anti-piracy, infact I even support the legal action against services such as Napster. I don't think intellectually
evil at all. Shocking? No. Personally, I also support open source. As Linus Torvalds once said, "I prefer open source, but I have nothing against close-source." I
source because I feel that the software coming from the oss community is _better_ than the closed source competition. This isn't because I can copy the oss stuff as much as I want, as much as I can count on not seeing any BSOD's. Where am I leading? We need to get past the idea that the
years ago but property is prefer open philosophical
advantages of oss, as espoused by those such as RMS, and move onto the more moderate views of those such as Linus Torvalds. We must accept that the whole world isn't waiting with baited breath for open source for the sake of open source. Computer users only want one word: BETTER. If Linux is better, they'll want it; if Linux is "freer" they could care less. Okay, so you ask, who cares what everyone else thinks? Well let me name a few reasons:
1.) More users = More Support. Yes, the more users, indifferent or not to the OSS philosophy, the more OSS support you will see. I bet if Linux received a 10-15% foothold in the desktop market, companies would scamble to support Linux with more OSS software. 2.) More users = More Software. Another good thing to come of more support and users is more closed source software. This is necessary. Joe Blow isn't going to switch to Linux until the latest games and such are available for Linux. Who cares about Joe? Bringing the Joes of the world will/would bring more support, and more support equals what? MORE OSS SOFTWARE! To be honest, I would be thrilled if Microsoft announced they were porting Office to Linux. This would be good, sure it would be open, but it at the same time would be a huge winfall for the OSS community as a whole. Any major non-OSS developer that makes software for an OSS operating system will increase support for OSS at the same time.
I hate Napster. It's corporate power in disguise. I hope it dies so GPL software like Freenet can take its place. I don't get your support argument. What support are people talking about on this list all the time. I never used any SuSE support. I use google and linuxdoc and this list. Yes I have used SuSE employee input from this list but I didn't personally ask for it. I can live without copyrights. I don't know if I was some smart guy who came up with a great idea others could profit (non-monetary) from why not give this idea away for free and feel good about the fact that you helped people. That is what I hate about humans. They don't trust. I am sure some would be happy enough to reward the creator of this idea with a gift.
I also don't care if joe doe switches to Linux. Linux has had everything I need to use since two years. I tried converting people before and it doesn't work. They are usually lazy until the ideology kicks in and hate the console. Well if you don't like the console then why are you using a multi-user network OS with such power? If you want pretty interface and no multiuser then go buy Mac or something.
I don't know everybody sees this different. But I am happy the AOLers are far away from me. I am sick of people asking for Samba 2.2 packages and 2.4.4 kernel packages or isos. If you need it so badly compile it yourself. This is the single most point in favor of Linux, but newbies aren't using the resources available. They just arrive and cry "help me". They don't understand the sphere we are working in.
A few weeks ago I mentioned that I don't buy SuSE because I am sitting back letting the market play out. I said I don't agree with YaST being closed source. I said something like "how do I know if I buy into this product today that they are using the money in the right fashion and it will go to the projects which need to be advanced?" I also said I see too much funding wasted.
I am happy Eazel dies. I gloat over the fact. I am sick of wasted money. Freedom of development is great in Linux but it doesn't mean 50 separate groups have to develop 50 versions of the same thing. The 13 mill Eazel blew could have nicely been used to advanced projects which were already larger and at a stage further down the time scale.
So I am waiting to see if SuSE makes it and YaST wasn't a waste of money or if SuSE dies and YaST proves to be another failed project. I wish these companies would get together and develop one or two kickass utilities which work cross-Linux platforms instead of going off on a branch and parting the community feeling. YaST isn't any useful to me when its close sourced and only functional on SuSE Linux. I am bound to run into a RedHat machine or Debian box one day and then I am stuck with not knowing their native utility.
What all this means is that if you know SuSE you don't know Linux. To be proficient at Linux you need to know more than one distro. On the other hand LSB should help conquer this and if you know the console then you should be all set for cross-Linux platform work.
Further below you say Linux lacks an office suite. Am I the only person who doesn't use office suites? I always wonder what people use them for. Besides Linux is there and its got its own solutions. SGML, XML, DTD. More portable and it looks a lot better in ps or pdf anyhow. It's just people are too lazy or busy to learn how it works. MS Office on Linux wouldn't work. Half of the people wouldn't buy it because the ideology is wrong. Half of the people would buy it because they are actually Windows users never really dedicated to the GPL. How can one expect Office to run any better than on native Windows? I don't see it.
All personal opinion....
This is what is wrong with Linux lately. We are getting off
what
Linux what meant for. You see guys like Love talk about how
not
as good for business. http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011,2717264,00.html
I agree with you here. I feel that anyone who makes money of the GPL (i.e. Linux Distros) should support the GPL.
Well damn me. The GPL was not written for SuSE or Caldera to make lots of dough. The GPL was written for the people to become free from corporate power. I don't mind if SuSE makes a profit. But I don't want to replace one corp with another. I favor the non-profit GPL software way.
Profit _is_ necessary, although I feel the GPL can provide
well.
Besides its a commercial in the truest sense. It expresses something which isn't there. Linux has its flaws.
The commercial doesn't lie at all. Think about it: it makes a simple claim: Linux will help you get rid of Blue Screens (lockups in general too). Does it? YES! For the majority of the time, it doesn't crash. Now my system has a probablem causing it to crash, but the simple fact is that overall it doesn't crash.
A commercial with a white vest is an overstatement. That is why I don't try talking people into Linux anymore. People have to make the decision on their own. They have to make an effort to understand the psychology behind free software and why it is good for them. Hmmmm, vmware 2.0.4, pdflib, more problems And I still use it because it is mostly GPL software which I enjoy using. Actually I got no clue why I tried installing vmware on this machine because it doesn't even have Windows on it. Maybe I just wanted to see if vmware would start after installing. It failed. Once again closed source software failing on me. God knows whose to blame.
True. Closed source has it's problems, but lets face it, it's also necessary. Sure, some day real soon now (tm) KOffice will come of age and we will have a good office suite for Linux. However, until then, wouldn't it be nice if we could be happily running the highly refined, billion dollar development that is MS Office? Clearly, no one can invest the time and money MS has in Office, into something open source. Closed source might be best relegated to the place of the interim place holder for OSS.
Overall I don't use Linux because Windows doesn't do me any good. I use Linux because of the freedom it gives me through its non-restrictive license.
And how does that benefit you? Let's say Windows worked as well as Linux. Then who cares if you have the source? You don't need the source on something that works right. The simple fact is, Windows _doesn't_ work right, thus the reason you want the source.
I know fewer people will jump ship for that reason but it doesn't matter to the ones who are already sailing on this boat.
Sure it does... less users equals less software, both closed and open.
Basically I am waking up to the idea that SuSE is already doing what Love talked about. Licensing corporate property in a different fashion than the GPL. I am coming to think YaST being closed source is not the way I want it to be. Now people have their own opinions if yast should or should not be GPL'd. It might mean that SuSE cannot sustain a death. Who knows. Fact is I prefer the GPL because we have seen what good it does for the people.
I agree that YaST should be open source. Any advocate of open source (i.e. SuSE) looks rather hypocritical when they can't even make their basic installer open.
You know I love Linux. I got my mother in Germany. She is 51 years old. She only owns a 486 with 8 meg of ram from like 1991. I remember this machine well. It was my first computer when I was a kid. We paid like 5000 DM back then for this thing. I always hated my dad for not consulting me first because I thought we could get it cheaper. She called me the other day and said she hadn't even turned this thing on since Y2K. I was half laughing and said she should try because I'd love to see if it still functions (DOS with fully featured editor and Norton Commander. Hmmmmmm =) But ok so she says that she wants to get a computer next year so she can communicate with me over the net easier. She waited so long because its so expensive in Germany and there is no good net access (broadband). Now she will ask me for advice on what to buy. I probably suggest she get a machine from km-elektronik.de but what OS should I suggest. She hasn't used a PC since
Check out Dell.de!!! :-) I buy my PC's from Dell America, and boy do they make a good PC, and cheap too. You don't get to be the number one computer company in the world without quality...
the DOS (with GUI) days basically. I can't go over there and install Linux for her and much less spend a month or so holding her hand and teaching her how to work that console =) I don't know if I should tell her to get that PC bare and be a rebel and go out and buy SuSE and some German Linux books and install it herself. Or should I revert to the fact that yes Windows may be a better solution in some instances. This is a tough decision for me because on the one hand I got GPL software I love and want to promote but on the other hand I got my mother who I don't want to disappoint either. It's something that bogs my mind.
Go with Linux, IMO. I think KDE is nicer to work in than Windows, and if she can handle DOS, she can handle SuSE's super easy installations...
This is another reason why I wish every Linux software company was bought out by some hardware vendor. It would take care of starter
support by itself. If you buy IBM you get IBM Linux
buy VA Linux you get VA Linux preinstalled. If you buy HP you get HP Linux preinstalled. If you buy Dell........well then you still get Windows preinstalled. But if this was the case at least I had more trust that Linux would work for a person like my mother right out of the box.
That might not be so good. You'd end up back in the old days when each computer manufacturer had a different system. I personally think the idea solution would be some consolidation between Linux venders so that there were only one or two major distros that all of the OEM's used.
I think this could truly kill Linux. We are in this stage where Linux is slouching at the bottom of the pit. It used to be hacker land. Nobody paid attention. It would improve and nobody paid attention. Today it improves but journalists rip it left and right. It has a tough time holding its water. Every shit Linus takes ends up on the front pages. Every time KDE releases a version we got a war at hand. Every time Gnome releases a version we got a war at hand. What to hell ever happened to freedom and peace?
It's called Miguel de Icaza and the gnomes. ;-) Seriously KDE was just a peaceful project, and although they fight now, they've been provoked for how many years?
I don't think Linux will ever make it this way. I am waiting and waiting and waiting for some company to make a true commitment. A company like IBM. Buy a Linux company and preinstall Linux. I know
billion on development but a lot of shit gets developed these days but never makes it into production. Every one of these hardware vendors is in wait and see mode even IBM. To get to the general public you have to preinstall. It's never going to happen the way we are doing it now. It is
Nooo... Don't have big blue by a Linux distro - they'll kill it!
much rather that it hurts the ones who are already using Linux because they have to read about it every day in the news how "Linux is great but its still not there." Not there? It's there for me since 2 years.
It's been "there" for me since February, when I felt that KDE finally reached the same level of quality of interface and browser design as Windows/Internet Explorer. I've been using Linux since 1998 on
track with the GPL is profit quite troubles and preinstalled. If you they spend a the desktop
and 1997 on servers, but it only became "ready" recently, IMO. However, I personally think it isn't ready for the general public for one reason and one reason only. The office suite... add MS Office (or something like it), and we would be all set.
Best, Tim
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler Universal Networks Information Tech. Consultant Christian Web Services Since 1996 ICQ #12495932 AIM: Uninettm An Authorized IPSwitch Reseller tbutler@uninetsolutions.com http://www.uninetsolutions.com ============== "Information Powered by Innovation" ==============
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com
Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/7be15f4c71a45bbaa6a40011640179d6.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
* Purple Shirt [Sat, 12 May 2001 13:05:16 ]: <soapbox> Please, have a look at http://learn.to/edit_messages . You didn't really have to quote the complete message to make your replies. </soapbox>
What support are people talking about on this list all the time. I never used any SuSE support. I use google and linuxdoc and this list. Yes I have used SuSE employee input from this list but I didn't personally ask for it.
Just don't forget that companies like SuSE, Red Hat or VA Linux pay quite a few people to work on free Software.
I said I don't agree with YaST being closed source.
You haven't really read the YaST license, have you? You may do with it but you want, unless you want to make money with it, It's then that we require you talk with us. Is this the GPL, no. Is it unreasonable, I think no. But YMMV. -- Penguins to save the dinosaurs -- Handelsblatt on Linux for S/390
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/fcd4012789da8eeaa5a42187921e5989.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
With all respect to your efforts. I don't like it much.
It makes one think people use Linux because Microsoft is no good.
We don't? To be honest, the only reason I use Linux is because Windows isn't as stable as I'd like.
I think that is a pretty bad reason. I mean I had Interdev crash on me yesterday and I lost two hours worth of code because I was so wound up in writing it I had forgotten to save it. I don't want to insult you but I'd like Linux users to be Linux users because they enjoy the freedom the GPL gives them instead of a feature KDE2 has.
A bad reason? So in your mind, if I pick Linux because I feel it and it's desktop environment is technically superior to Windows, that is a bad reason? Really, to be honest, I think choosing only because it's GPL'ed is a bad reason. To me, it's more important that it _works_, than how it's licensed. Once agian I quote Linus Torvalds in saying "I have nothing against closed source, I just prefer open source." Not that Linus is some kind of "final authority" for anything, but I like the point he makes here. Now granted, I put a lot of weight on KDE2, but with good reason as you will see. I am a web designer. Web designers need a good browser to work with to do their trade. I absolutely despise Netscape/Mozilla - I'm GLAD Microsoft killed the big old lizard. So, a year ago, where did that leave me in Linuxland? Nowhere. Enter Konqueror, which I feel is the best browser out there besides Internet Explorer, and I'm all set. I also have several other KDE2 features that helped, such as a quality e-mail client (I'm not going to use a console for my e-mail, consoles are for typing commands!). Let's face it, bringing Linux to the desktop doesn't mean having pretty ASCII colors on your BASH shell, but having a quality desktop environment that makes getting work done easier. KDE2 is that desktop, IMO. So in other words, I pick Linux because it makes getting my work done EASIER. If I spend ten hours working in Linux to avoid a crash that would lose two hours worth of work, I'd be silly. So, I don't use Linux because of how it's licensed, but on the technical merits that make it superior to Windows.
1.) More users = More Support. Yes, the more users, indifferent or not to the OSS philosophy, the more OSS support you will see. I bet if Linux received a 10-15% foothold in the desktop market, companies would scamble to support Linux with more OSS software. 2.) More users = More Software. Another good thing to come of more support and users is more closed source software. This is necessary. Joe Blow isn't going to switch to Linux until the latest games and such are available for Linux. Who cares about Joe? Bringing the Joes of the world will/would bring more support, and more support equals what? MORE OSS SOFTWARE! To be honest, I would be thrilled if Microsoft announced they were porting Office to Linux. This would be good, sure it would be open, but it at the same time would be a huge winfall for the OSS community as a whole. Any major non-OSS developer that makes software for an OSS operating system will increase support for OSS at the same time.
I hate Napster. It's corporate power in disguise. I hope it dies so GPL software like Freenet can take its place. I don't get your support
That wasn't quite what I was saying... but I'll drop the Napster argument as it was only an example of mine.
argument. What support are people talking about on this list all the time.
In my usage of the word, I was using support in the sense of "I support this." In other words, I meant more support as more users and developers. More support in this sense means only good things. 1.) That brings more developers who in their spare time (or possibly work time) will be working on open source. 2.) Brings closed source stuff we need or want such as office suites, dtp programs, games, etc. 3.) Helps keep standards standard, rather than having companies such as Microsoft and Apple annoyingly go around trashing standards.
I never used any SuSE support. I use google and linuxdoc and this list. Yes
Neither have I.
I have used SuSE employee input from this list but I didn't personally ask for it. I can live without copyrights. I don't know if I was some smart guy
You can live without copyrights. That's nice, since your not making any money of off them. It isn't that simple for the author who spent years writting a book, the band who spends the same time creating a CD, or even the developer who doesn't have a company willing to pay him to give away his stuff.
who came up with a great idea others could profit (non-monetary) from why not give this idea away for free and feel good about the fact that you
Because you need to eat? Now, let me say I'm an open source developer, and am getting ready to launch a major open source project. HOWEVER, I still can understand that people need to be paid, because you need money to live, in the sense of requiring shelter, food, and transportation.
helped people. That is what I hate about humans. They don't trust. I am sure some would be happy enough to reward the creator of this idea with a gift.
Sure, some would. But, probably not enough to live on. Think about it: I don't know where you work, but if you spent all of your time writting software, and then were expected to give it away, how would you make money to live on? I also might note you seem to be wandering into the wrong conception of free software. Free (according to RMS) is free in the sense of free speech not free beer (gratis).
I also don't care if joe doe switches to Linux. Linux has had everything I
Betcha you'd care if suddenly you couldn't check your e-mail or go on the net. Let's face it, while I like Microsoft, they seem to like to take over standards and change them. If Linux has more support (in the number of users sense), Microsoft will wield less power, and thus prevent them from doing this.
need to use since two years. I tried converting people before and it doesn't work. They are usually lazy until the ideology kicks in and hate the console. Well if you don't like the console then why are you using a
Well, personally I have nothing against the console, but I still have an answer for this question. Let's use the example of a car. Let's say I walk up to you and offer you a $15,000 rusty 1970's Yugo or a free 2001 Toyota hybred gas-electric car. Obviously the new Toyota is waaay more complicated than the Yugo. Now, presuming you are like me you probably don't understand a lot about how either one works, yet you will probably choose the Toyota, even though you will never understand how to go into the Toyota's engine and "optimize" it. Why did you choose that multi-engine computer-based car with so much power? Because, while you can't understand it, it is obviously better. Linux is obviously better than Windows, and with KDE2 is nearly as easy to use (easier in some senses) as Windows. If you never touch a console, you will STILL benefit from Linux's power.
multi-user network OS with such power? If you want pretty interface and no multiuser then go buy Mac or something.
Okay, so what you are saying is, if you like Linux with a pretty interface, you should go buy the obviously inferrior Mac OS? This makes no sense. There are many advantages to a Linux-based system with a pretty interface: - Stability - Price (gratis free) - Redistribution Rights (free speech free) - Easy of use - Power - Helpful community Your argument makes no sense. It seems to me you are saying that you feel that the only advantage to Linux over other systems is that it is open, right? Well then, I might ask, if openness hasn't made Linux superior in anyway to another system, why is open good? Infact, I believe Linux's openness has made it better than other OSes, but I don't use something open for the sake of openness.
I don't know everybody sees this different. But I am happy the AOLers are far away from me. I am sick of people asking for Samba 2.2 packages and 2.4.4 kernel packages or isos. If you need it so badly compile it yourself.
Why? Personally, I love getting the latest packages rather than compiling myself, so that I don't mess up my RPM tree.
This is the single most point in favor of Linux, but newbies aren't using the resources available. They just arrive and cry "help me". They don't understand the sphere we are working in.
A superior operating system, that's the sphere! If you want to help people out by insisting everyone should give out their code, why then not help these people who want to excape the world of instability that is Windows?
A few weeks ago I mentioned that I don't buy SuSE because I am sitting back letting the market play out. I said I don't agree with YaST being closed source. I said something like "how do I know if I buy into this product today that they are using the money in the right fashion and it will go to the projects which need to be advanced?" I also said I see too much funding wasted.
I agree that YaST should be open source, since SuSE seems a little hypocritical saying talking the open source talk, but not walking the open source walk. However, I personally feel I would be hurting myself if I chose to use another Linux distro. I tried RedHat, it's just not as good. Mandrake's installer is so stupid it could even install LILO! Caldera is nice, but it doesn't have the packages, and it's market share is shrinking (so less packages will be available in the future), and so on and so forth.
I am happy Eazel dies. I gloat over the fact. I am sick of wasted money. Freedom of development is great in Linux but it doesn't mean 50 separate groups have to develop 50 versions of the same thing. The 13 mill Eazel blew could have nicely been used to advanced projects which were already larger and at a stage further down the time scale.
I agree, I think Eazel should die too, but I think along the reasons that Dennis "Dep" Powell did in .comment: Wanna invest in a bridge? (http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/opinions/3297/1/). In this article, dep notices the absurdity of Eazel's business model. This is where commercial software is once again necessary. Eazel proves that point that you can't start a business with no profit model and survive. If software companies just gave everything away, where would software come from once they all were six feet under? I think the ideal solution is to use closed source programs when they are better, and use open programs when they are better (i.e. as in the case of Linux and KDE).
So I am waiting to see if SuSE makes it and YaST wasn't a waste of money or if SuSE dies and YaST proves to be another failed project. I wish these
Why would YaST be a failed project? Unlike Eazel's Nautilus, YaST isn't SuSE's goal, it's a step towards the goal of Linux made easy (and powerful).
companies would get together and develop one or two kickass utilities which work cross-Linux platforms instead of going off on a branch and parting the
That would be nice, but then how would the companies make money? And if the companies didn't make money who would pay the programmers (such as SuSE's Keith Packard who made the neat render extension for XF86)? And if the programmers didn't get paid and had to get a job in an IT department some where doing some menial task, who would create the programs?
What all this means is that if you know SuSE you don't know Linux. To be proficient at Linux you need to know more than one distro. On the other hand LSB should help conquer this and if you know the console then you should be all set for cross-Linux platform work.
Well, I personally disagree with this too. I had very little trouble switching from RedHat to SuSE (relatively speaking). Now that I know more about Linux, I can confidently say, the move would have been even easier now.
Further below you say Linux lacks an office suite. Am I the only person who doesn't use office suites? I always wonder what people use them for.
Yes. ;-) What do people use them for? Well for me, I use them for: - Writting my monthly column (and spell checking it) - Reading documents sent to me - Working on press releases - Creating cards, banners, and other dtp things - etc.
Besides Linux is there and its got its own solutions. SGML, XML, DTD. More portable and it looks a lot better in ps or pdf anyhow. It's just people
Sure those exist, but show me a program that works with them that provides a nice WYSIWYG interface and does spell checking, grammer checking, etc. Also, show me a way to exchange a nicely formatted document made with them with a Windows user. Okay, I probably could use XML (or HTML for that matter) and create a nicely formatted page, but how do I then add an image? Opps... now I have to attach two files to my e-mail and explain to the recipient they must place both of them in a directory for it all to work.
are too lazy or busy to learn how it works. MS Office on Linux wouldn't work. Half of the people wouldn't buy it because the ideology is wrong. Half of the people would buy it because they are actually Windows users never really dedicated to the GPL. How can one expect Office to run any better than on native Windows? I don't see it.
It won't run better. But I ask you this, I only use Office for a small percentage of the week. Also, if it crashes in Linux, most likely I can just restart it rather than spending several minutes rebooting and getting all my apps open again. In summary, I think we have two opposite positions on both types of software. You seem to feel that anything that isn't open is bad, but anyone who doesn't full appreciate open software shouldn't use it. I feel that closed software is fine, but everyone possible should be able to use Linux and other open software. My reasoning is simple. I appreciate openness, but I realize even those who don't will enjoy the other benefits of a robust environment like Linux with KDE2, et. al. I also feel that the more closed source software on Linux, the more users and developers there will be on Linux, and thus the more open source software there will be on Linux. Best, Tim -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler Universal Networks Information Tech. Consultant Christian Web Services Since 1996 ICQ #12495932 AIM: Uninettm An Authorized IPSwitch Reseller tbutler@uninetsolutions.com http://www.uninetsolutions.com ============== "Information Powered by Innovation" ==============
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/9f2a393ddceb6d23e79e0360a263a173.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
--- "Timothy R.Butler"
I also have several other KDE2 features that helped, such as a quality e-mail client (I'm not going to use a console for my e-mail, consoles are for typing commands!). Let's face it, bringing Linux to the desktop doesn't mean having pretty ASCII colors on your BASH shell, but having a quality desktop environment that makes getting work done easier. KDE2 is that desktop, IMO.
I use MacSSH to manage my OpenBSD firewall only because I don't want to leave my quality desktop for that ugly beta stuff., besides, there is no such thing as quality e-mail client on any linux/unix. The Bat!, Callypso on NT, Eudora and YA/MT Newswatcher on a Mac. When 30 year old Unix will get anything at least distantly comparable, i'll look at it as a desktop. To call KMail a client even more so - a quality client is a propaganda stretch. I am not touching BBEdit, Macromedia and Adobe products. Databasing is a different matter. Superiority of a true multitasking-multiuser-multithreading OS is striking. The same is true for proxy, e-mail and web serving. File serving and printing are done best by Novell. Nothing comes close in that department. an OS is not a condom, shouldn't fit all. now tell me, why SuSE Pro 7.0 I have prompts for a disk #2 when I try to do a minimal install? is this attention to detail or they want to be sure I have the whole set? Linux commercially will succeed only if a class of self-propagating service professionals is created, like those MSFT drones who don't know how to use text in e-mail yet have MCSE after their names. And it's not possible without real Sugar Daddy like IBM or HP. The latter just announced that they pick Debian. btw. Smart move. Grass roots alone are not enough. it's like in BSD camp: FreeBSD claims to have over 7000 ports now. If you look into it, you may see that some perl script spit-outs calcualting sunset time for a given location is called a port. Yet nobody came up with a nice e-mail client to the day. Big infantile mouths. and if you are happy with this, that's good for you, but not for me. I need to grab a thing , drag it, drop and flip it over ... and be done with it. I don't have time for dissertations in man format on how to do simple things. I am not saying that linux is commercially doomed. Not at all. it has enough momentum to scare all interested parties. Just don't lose the momentum. remember the Java hype? In fact, it's Apple that's dying beautifully at the moment. but if SuSE is packing tons of non-functional shovelware like RealPlayer 5, Lilo circa XX century and waistes resources on ReiserFS just to have something made in non-Amerika that's their problem. I am not going to give them any money. the manual is nice though. may be they should become involved with publishing business instead? Nobody in the industry made ANY money on customer service, nobody even MSFT itself. repackaging in big quantities and marketing brainwashing is the key. Tsch��, Y�rik Vancouver, WA/USA __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/a60e63cedec3ebb432651aeacbd7acf9.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Hi Yuri: On Sun, 13 May 2001, you wrote:
I use MacSSH to manage my OpenBSD firewall only because I don't want to leave my quality desktop for that ugly beta stuff., besides, there is no such thing as quality e-mail client on any linux/unix. The Bat!, Callypso on NT, Eudora and YA/MT Newswatcher on a Mac. When 30 year old Unix will get anything at least distantly comparable, i'll look at it as a desktop. To call KMail a client even more so - a quality client is a propaganda stretch.
You make some very valuable points here. Too many folks react to criticism as though it were flame bait.
Linux commercially will succeed only if a class of self-propagating service professionals is created, like those MSFT drones who don't know how to use text in e-mail yet have MCSE after their names. And it's not possible without real Sugar Daddy like IBM or HP. The latter just announced that they pick Debian. btw. Smart move. Grass roots alone are not enough.
There is some truth to that. However I would not be too sanguine about SuSE's prospects. Nor the ability of KDE or GNOME to galvanize a competitive desktop. I would not be too harsh on Kmail. The chief problem is that software is appraised by computer profesionals. When actually most desktop users want speed, stability and simplicity. IMAP is for computer professionals; your average secretary, or office worker, thinks a port is a place where ships dock. There is an unfortunate tendency to over do things in software. You need to look at computers from the vantage point of a shipping dock worker on Friday. It's a hot day, he doesn't want to do overtime. He wants to enter his bills of lading into the computer, get a beer and go home to his family. If Linux expidites that kind of drudgery, then it is a success. After all that is the real purpose of getting GUI's in UNIX. To allow the unwashed masses to enjoy the benefits of multitasking and stabiity.
I need to grab a thing , drag it, drop and flip it over ... and be done with it. I don't have time for dissertations in man format on how to do simple things.
Preach it brother.
but if SuSE is packing tons of non-functional shovelware like RealPlayer 5, Lilo circa XX century and waistes resources on ReiserFS just to have something made in non-Amerika that's their problem.
Happily, Real Player is gone. However you make a *really* valid point about the inclusion of decrepit software. Most newbies just won't put up with it. Broken apps and half baked stuff are a form of negative advertising. I would not be too quick to shoot down Reiser. It does indeed speed up the computers operation. I have used it in Mandrake, but not in SuSE.
I am not going to give them any money. the manual is nice though. may be they should become involved with publishing business instead? Nobody in the industry made ANY money on customer service, nobody even MSFT itself.
This is very true. Cheers, Jonathan
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/43625a8daa7780ecd89ed2720c881379.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
As a newbie/Linux novice I can agree with the point about not wanting to deal with "broken apps and half baked stuff". I already have a degree in health care and really don't relish returning to school to learn how to setup and run my OS. I chose Linux because a) It gets me away from M$ (don't get me started on XP/.NET/Hailstorm) and b) because I learn something about the thing I spend most of my time with-the computer. Sure, I would like to learn programming. But I don't want to do so to make it my profession. It's just like medicine. You teach your patient about health care and taking care of themselves. However, you don't expect then to mix there own IV solutions or run their own X-ray machine. It's similar with designing an OS that is to be used by the general public. Open Source is wonderful because the makers can design a system to meet their desires. But, if you want the general public to get behind it and support/use it you'll have to make function on their level. Linux is getting close to this and still gets its geek underpinnigs (geek is not to be taken as derogatory). It will become widely accepted when the common user doesn't have to consider taking night classes in comp sci in order to set up a firewall. On Sunday 13 May 2001 02:28, Jonathan Drews wrote:
Hi Yuri:
On Sun, 13 May 2001, you wrote:
I use MacSSH to manage my OpenBSD firewall only because I don't want to leave my quality desktop for that ugly beta stuff., besides, there is no such thing as quality e-mail client on any linux/unix. The Bat!, Callypso on NT, Eudora and YA/MT Newswatcher on a Mac. When 30 year old Unix will get anything at least distantly comparable, i'll look at it as a desktop. To call KMail a client even more so - a quality client is a propaganda stretch.
You make some very valuable points here. Too many folks react to criticism as though it were flame bait.
Linux commercially will succeed only if a class of self-propagating service professionals is created, like those MSFT drones who don't know how to use text in e-mail yet have MCSE after their names. And it's not possible without real Sugar Daddy like IBM or HP. The latter just announced that they pick Debian. btw. Smart move. Grass roots alone are not enough.
There is some truth to that. However I would not be too sanguine about SuSE's prospects. Nor the ability of KDE or GNOME to galvanize a competitive desktop. I would not be too harsh on Kmail. The chief problem is that software is appraised by computer profesionals. When actually most desktop users want speed, stability and simplicity. IMAP is for computer professionals; your average secretary, or office worker, thinks a port is a place where ships dock. There is an unfortunate tendency to over do things in software. You need to look at computers from the vantage point of a shipping dock worker on Friday. It's a hot day, he doesn't want to do overtime. He wants to enter his bills of lading into the computer, get a beer and go home to his family. If Linux expidites that kind of drudgery, then it is a success. After all that is the real purpose of getting GUI's in UNIX. To allow the unwashed masses to enjoy the benefits of multitasking and stabiity.
I need to grab a thing , drag it, drop and flip it over ... and be done with it. I don't have time for dissertations in man format on how to do simple things.
Preach it brother.
but if SuSE is packing tons of non-functional shovelware like RealPlayer 5, Lilo circa XX century and waistes resources on ReiserFS just to have something made in non-Amerika that's their problem.
Happily, Real Player is gone. However you make a *really* valid point about the inclusion of decrepit software. Most newbies just won't put up with it. Broken apps and half baked stuff are a form of negative advertising. I would not be too quick to shoot down Reiser. It does indeed speed up the computers operation. I have used it in Mandrake, but not in SuSE.
I am
not going to give them any money. the manual is nice though. may be they should become involved with publishing business instead? Nobody in the industry made ANY money on customer service, nobody even MSFT itself.
This is very true.
Cheers,
Jonathan
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/fcd4012789da8eeaa5a42187921e5989.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
I use MacSSH to manage my OpenBSD firewall only because I don't want to leave my quality desktop for that ugly beta stuff., besides, there is no such thing as quality e-mail client on any linux/unix. The Bat!, Callypso on NT, Eudora and YA/MT Newswatcher on a Mac. When 30 year old Unix will get anything at least distantly comparable, i'll look at it as a desktop. To call KMail a client even more so - a quality client is a propaganda stretch. I am not touching BBEdit,
Propaganda? Not at all, KMail in KDE 2.1 is extremely useable, dare I say the best e-mail client on Linux (and the only one I've found with a decent address book!). Now if you want something more, both Magellan and Aethera look quite promising.
an OS is not a condom, shouldn't fit all.
Exactly right, the OS as a whole may not fit all. But, in case you must be reminded even though RMS is constantly talking about this, Linux is just a kernel. What we see as the "OS" is much more than simply the Linux kernel. Maybe the home user doesn't need SuSE Pro with enough networking stuff to manage the entire internet, but that doesn't mean that Linux isn't the right system for the job.
sunset time for a given location is called a port. Yet nobody came up with a nice e-mail client to the day. Big infantile mouths. and if
Have you tried KMail in KDE 2.1.x? It is a very good client, comparible to Outlook Express I think. Like I said too, in a few months KDE will have a batch of Outlook-clones in the dual of Magellan and Aethera.
you are happy with this, that's good for you, but not for me. I need to grab a thing , drag it, drop and flip it over ... and be done with it. I don't have time for dissertations in man format on how to do simple things.
Then try KDE on for size. It doesn't require any of that.
I am not saying that linux is commercially doomed. Not at all. it has enough momentum to scare all interested parties. Just don't lose the momentum. remember the Java hype? In fact, it's Apple that's dying beautifully at the moment.
Agreed about Apple.
and waistes resources on ReiserFS
Waists resources on ReiserFS? What's waistful about creating a quality file system that is faster and more reliable than ext2? I use ReiserFS, and it's a dream to work with, you should give it a chance. -Tim -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler Universal Networks Information Tech. Consultant Christian Web Services Since 1996 ICQ #12495932 AIM: Uninettm An Authorized IPSwitch Reseller tbutler@uninetsolutions.com http://www.uninetsolutions.com ============== "Information Powered by Innovation" ==============
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/7ce72c46b6ab41ad3bb822a75c7ea410.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Well, this is a mentality that a lot of Mac users will just have to get over if they are going to MacOSX. It's Unix..full blown...and it's a whole new ballgame now as my wife is finding out. Granted there are programs such as Eudora, Outlook Express and Powermail for OSX which will fit your bill as far as MUA's are concerned, but you fail to realize that Evolution and Aethera from theKompany are soon to be completed and will do what you want as well. If you don't want to use Linux as a desktop..fine but please don't tell me that it's 1/2 baked or whatever. After you have gone to OSX and see how it operates..then talk about it. It sounds like the same ole " I haven't given it a shot since version blah, blah, blah..so it sucks." That's just unacceptable and it's a weak arguement to make. It's all in what you want. BTW..dragging a file such as a jpg to an app such as Photoshop and having it auto open as it does in MacOS 9.1 and below doesn't work..there are a whole slew of things that Mac users are going to get hit in the face with when they go to OSX ..I see it daily with my wife grumbling about it..yet she loves OSX it's just something different and she will get use to it as she says. I will say this..if I drag a text file to my printer icon in KDE2..hot damn it prints..and if I drag a file to an app icon .. it opens it in the app. Guess Apples programmers didn't take that code from the OSS community yet for their new 1/2 open 1/2 closed OS. ;) BTW..just so you know. I think OSX rocks. I am planning to get a G4 as my desktop soon. Also, the most elegant desktop every created in my humble (yeah right ;) opinion was NeXT..it was awesome and Apple would have done well to just update that and make it OSX. It was 10X the desktop that OSX 9.X and below were..or any Windows OS. It was a pleasure to use..and I did so on my P5-100 for about 2.5 years...which was dualbooted with OS/2..another very nice desktop that shouldn't have died. -> ->> you are happy with this, that's good for you, but not for me. I need ->> to grab a thing , drag it, drop and flip it over ... and be done with ->> it. I don't have time for dissertations in man format on how to do ->> simple things. -> -> Then try KDE on for size. It doesn't require any of that. -> -- Ben Rosenberg mailto:ben@whack.org ----- If two men agree on everything, you can be sure that only one of them is doing the thinking.
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/fcd4012789da8eeaa5a42187921e5989.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Hi Ben,
completed and will do what you want as well. If you don't want to use Linux as a desktop..fine but please don't tell me that it's 1/2 baked or whatever. After you have gone to OSX and see how it operates..then talk about it. It sounds like the same ole " I haven't given it a shot since version blah, blah, blah..so it sucks." That's just unacceptable and it's a weak arguement to make. It's all in what you want.
Can't agree with you more. In my opinion Linux's destop is filling in so nicely at such a rapid pace, it will soon surpase the any other desktop ever created in terms on polish. Just look at KDE 1.1.2 from a few years back as compared to KDE 2.1.2 from this year. The difference is amazing. I can't understand those who oppose bringing Linux to the desktop. Even if it gets a pretty face, there is nothing stopping them from continuing to use the same old Linux without a D.E. It's not like the whole OS is somehow being turned into a system that doesn't have a console like is the case (for the most part) in the latest itterations of Windows. -Tim -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler Universal Networks Information Tech. Consultant Christian Web Services Since 1996 ICQ #12495932 AIM: Uninettm An Authorized IPSwitch Reseller tbutler@uninetsolutions.com http://www.uninetsolutions.com ============== "Information Powered by Innovation" ==============
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/9f2a393ddceb6d23e79e0360a263a173.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
--- Ben Rosenberg
my desktop soon. Also, the most elegant desktop every created in my humble (yeah right ;) opinion was NeXT..it was awesome and Apple would have done well to just update that and make it OSX. It was 10X the desktop that OSX 9.X and below were..or any Windows OS. It was a pleasure to use..and I did so on my P5-100 for about 2.5 years...which was dualbooted with OS/2..another very nice desktop that shouldn't have died.
Ben, there was no argument about elegance. There was an argument for functionality and readily available killer apps beyond web/mail servering realm. It's very hard to argue anything when you talk to a bunch of infantile adults who deviate from the topic. I don't mind elegance regardless of platform, in fact not only GUI. Even CUI can be done ugly or elegant. That's where elegant and efficient/functional/optimal meet. Since majority is visual and tactile-kinesthaetic GUI approach is the way to go. This is one of the reasons why speech recognition alone is not going to revolutionise usability of binary processing gadgets. I am glad as well as you are that Linux has such a following and advocacy movement. It's like established and alternative medicine: they fight, learn to co-exist, merge at some point then fight again and so on... Dark Side will have to learn some new surviving skills, and who knows , may be they will stop twisting and diluting standards and pay attention to RFCs at some point? Dream on... :) As for Reiser FS, talk to Oyracle people: they lost a lot of data on RFS. Try XFS, it's sweet. My point was: instead of bringing in the Russian Death Squad to waste resources on RFS, they could finally get a nice and finally functional e-mail program. if you want to win this war, drop this snobbish MUA/MTA lingo - it doesn't help to bring attractive and elegant ladies into Open Source. it's called e-mail program for a normal person. it was an average person who made automobile ubiquitous, not Herren Daimler und Benz or Mr Ford and Dodge brothers. And what is RMS? ... just kidding...Again: stuffing the box with outdated and non-functional software and not making money doing so is lower than to be called Microsoft. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/7ce72c46b6ab41ad3bb822a75c7ea410.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
* Yuri K (koroby398@yahoo.com) [010513 22:33]: -> ->As for Reiser FS, talk to Oyracle people: they lost a lot of data on ->RFS. Try XFS, it's sweet. My point was: instead of bringing in the ->Russian Death Squad to waste resources on RFS, they could finally ->get a nice and finally functional e-mail program. if you want to win ->this war, drop this snobbish MUA/MTA lingo - it doesn't help to bring ->attractive and elegant ladies into Open Source. it's called e-mail ->program for a normal person. it was an average person who made ->automobile ubiquitous, not Herren Daimler und Benz or Mr Ford and ->Dodge brothers. -> yeah, I am not to convinced that ReiserFS is the end all be all. I do believe that once XFS is past the 1.0 stage that it could be the one to go with..IBM does a really good job with JFS though. It's too soon to tell. Your right about the email...I have said over and over again that most email clients under Linux/Unix blow badly as far as the end user is concerned. It's taking longer to get there, because even though Linux has 3.8% of the desktop and Mac has 1.9% (latest study that was on CNN yesterday)..ISV's like Qualcomm don't seem to get it that they could make money from their software under Linux. I know 100's of people who would kill to have Eudora for X..but there is still a free beer mentality in the OSS community..so they won't port the software because they figure it won't sell..even though it would be a simple port of the OSX version to XFree..no problem. You should check out Evolution..it's an Outlook 2000 clone and it has extreme promise. I personally will stick with Mutt, Fetchmail and Postfix. I guess since it's what I do for a living, I can be the doctor of my own computer world and set up my firewalls, MTA's and other such things ;) Have fun.... -- Ben Rosenberg mailto:ben@whack.org ----- If two men agree on everything, you can be sure that only one of them is doing the thinking.
participants (8)
-
Ben Rosenberg
-
Curtis Rey
-
Jonathan Drews
-
patrick hurley
-
Philipp Thomas
-
Purple Shirt
-
Timothy R.Butler
-
Yuri K