--- Mike McMullin <__> wrote:

...

On Thursday 10 Jun 2004 09:46, Eugene Lee wrote:

...

At this stage, SuSE can NEVER be a home desktop solution. Why?

Because there is no simple control panel to chage fundamentally

On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 05:17, peter Nikolic wrote: trivial

...

...

settings like switching duplex of the Ethernet card on boot.

Question N� 1: How many times a day do you change switching duplex of the ethernet card on boot? Question N� 2: Where's the "simple control panel" on M$? I know of the Control Panel, but I can't say is "Simple"...

...

...

Here we go again the M$ Corp mentality if windBlows has git it then Linux is no good without it ho Hummmmmm

The reason I went with SuSE over other distro's was YAST. As much as SuSE has refined it, and even deprecated the ncurses version, it is in my experience much easier to navigate than MS's Control Panel.

Mike -- using both the good and the bad, now that's ugly. :)

And I agree that YaST is almost complete as CP, but of course, coming from M$ experiences, is different... you need some time to explore it and adapt to it... what happened when you switched cars? do you expect your new car to have the same exact functionalities in the same exact places as the old one? Then, why switch car at all? buy the same exact model as the new one... (if you can find it) and try to convince the Registration Office to keep your license plate, so you don't even have to memorize the new license. [snip] ===== Riccardo G. Facchini

In a previous message, Eugene Lee wrote:

YaST is far from complete. For example, how do you disable SSH?

If you mean "How do you terminate the SSH server?" or "How do I prevent the SSH server running?", then you want the Runlevel Editor, under the System category of YaST. This lets you control all services that YaST knows about (which should be all of them), including whether they're running or not now and, more importantly, which runlevels they will become active at (or not) in the future. HTH John -- John Pettigrew Headstrong Games john@headstrong-games.co.uk Fun : Strategy : Price http://www.headstrong-games.co.uk/ Board games that won't break the bank Knossos: escape the ever-changing labyrinth before the Minotaur catches you!

In a previous message, Eugene Lee wrote:

On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 02:08:59PM +0100, John Pettigrew wrote:

...

you want the Runlevel Editor

Ahhh, how unintuitive for a user-based control panel.

As with most things, it's *very* intuitive when you think the same way as the system (i.e. "when should this daemon be running?"). Don't forget, also, that YaST isn't a user control panel - it's a system configuration tool. This is a very different concept; the giveaway's the need for admin rights for anythiing that YaST does. If you want a user-level panel, you want something like the control centres of KDE or Gnome. Of course, SUSE make sure that YaST plugs into KDE's Control Centre, but that's just a convenience.

So why isn't sshd listed as a network service, like mail and NFS?

Because it's not something that you configure, at a guess. The mail and NFS components of YaST are to configure *how* these things run. You can use the Runlevel editor to control *when* they run in the same way as you did with sshd (although their separate components of course control whether they run as well as how - anything else *would* be confusing!). John -- John Pettigrew Headstrong Games john@headstrong-games.co.uk Fun : Strategy : Price http://www.headstrong-games.co.uk/ Board games that won't break the bank Knossos: escape the ever-changing labyrinth before the Minotaur catches you!

Steve Kratz wrote:

I've seen the instruction page for installing/using APT.

Could someone supply some sample "safe" config files for use with APT? I don't want something that's going to start upgrading bleeding edge stuff, but I do want some additional packages available that SuSE doesn't specifically supply (or update regularly - ie: Mozilla, Opera, etc.)

Use this source list and you are save: # # Repository created by: aptate (version 0.67) # At: Sun Jun 6 07:56:34 MEST 2004 # More info about aptate at: http://apt4rpm.sourceforge.net # rpm ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/suse/apt SuSE/9.1-i386 update-prpm update suser-rbos usr-local-bin packman packman-i686 security-prpm security base kde gnome xfree86 mozilla funktronics wine kde3-stable # rpm-src ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/suse/apt SuSE/9.1-i386 update-prpm update suser-rbos usr-local-bin suser-scorot packman packman-i686 kernel-of-the-day suse-people security-prpm security base kde gnome xfree86 xorg mozilla suser-gbv suser-tcousin funktronics wine suse-projects kde3-stable Succes GJ 8-)

Ok I have previously taken the steps as described belo, but am getting an unsigned package error, and can't seem to locate the site's public key, any help?? -----Original Message----- From: Ken Schneider [mailto:suselist@rtsx.com] Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 10:06 AM To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] Using APT with SuSE 9.1 On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 11:00, GJ Eldering wrote:

Steve Kratz wrote:

...

I've seen the instruction page for installing/using APT.

Could someone supply some sample "safe" config files for use with APT? I don't want something that's going to start upgrading bleeding edge stuff, but I do want some additional packages available that SuSE doesn't specifically supply (or update regularly - ie: Mozilla, Opera, etc.)

Use this source list and you are save:

# # Repository created by: aptate (version 0.67) # At: Sun Jun 6 07:56:34 MEST 2004 # More info about aptate at: http://apt4rpm.sourceforge.net # rpm ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/suse/apt SuSE/9.1-i386 update-prpm update suser-rbos usr-local-bin packman packman-i686 security-prpm security base kde gnome xfree86 mozilla funktronics wine kde3-stable # rpm-src ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/suse/apt SuSE/9.1-i386 update-prpm update suser-rbos usr-local-bin suser-scorot packman packman-i686 kernel-of-the-day suse-people security-prpm security base

kde gnome xfree86 xorg mozilla suser-gbv suser-tcousin funktronics wine suse-projects kde3-stable

Watch out for line breaks, if necessary use <shift>j to join broken lines. Also you may want to remove any prpm entries as I have not found them to work well with apt. -- Ken Schneider unix user since 1989 linux user since 1994 SuSE user since 1998 (5.2) -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com

make this "file:/etc/apt/apt.conf.d" look like this; // Make RPM::GPG-Check no; to disable gpg checking // It can still be used in combination with --checksig RPM::GPG-Check no; Scripts::PM::Pre:: gpg-checker.lua; Suc6 GJ LeRoy Maxwell III wrote:

Ok I have previously taken the steps as described belo, but am getting an unsigned package error, and can't seem to locate the site's public key, any help??

-----Original Message----- From: Ken Schneider [mailto:suselist@rtsx.com] Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 10:06 AM To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] Using APT with SuSE 9.1

On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 11:00, GJ Eldering wrote:

...

Steve Kratz wrote:

...

I've seen the instruction page for installing/using APT.

Could someone supply some sample "safe" config files for use with APT? I don't want something that's going to start upgrading bleeding edge stuff, but I do want some additional packages available that SuSE doesn't specifically supply (or update regularly - ie: Mozilla, Opera, etc.)

Use this source list and you are save:

# # Repository created by: aptate (version 0.67) # At: Sun Jun 6 07:56:34 MEST 2004 # More info about aptate at: http://apt4rpm.sourceforge.net # rpm ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/suse/apt SuSE/9.1-i386

update-prpm

...

update suser-rbos usr-local-bin packman packman-i686 security-prpm security base kde gnome xfree86 mozilla funktronics wine kde3-stable # rpm-src ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/suse/apt SuSE/9.1-i386 update-prpm update suser-rbos usr-local-bin suser-scorot packman packman-i686 kernel-of-the-day suse-people security-prpm security base

...

kde gnome xfree86 xorg mozilla suser-gbv suser-tcousin funktronics

wine

...

suse-projects kde3-stable

Watch out for line breaks, if necessary use <shift>j to join broken lines. Also you may want to remove any prpm entries as I have not found them to work well with apt.

On Thursday 10 June 2004 19:22, Ed Harrison wrote:

Go to ftp://mirrors.mathematik.uni-bielefeld.de/pub/suse/apt/SuSE/9.1-i386/ to see what is available.

Be careful with the Gnome stuff though. It's very easy to break stuff. Once you upgrade a package that uses any of the new Gnome 2.6 libraries, apt-get upgrades things, but it didn't go well for me. Had to go back to the Gnome version from the installation DVD. Is there a guide or something that tells how to apt-get gnome libs in what order ? Or should we just wait for an officiall Suse gnome update ? Eric -- Running Suse Linux 9.1 Pro

On Thursday 10 June 2004 08:58 am, Eugene Lee wrote:

I never mentioned M$, I am not an M$ person, I don't care about M$. But YaST is far from complete.  For example, how do you disable SSH?

Very simple. YAST --> System --> Runlevel editor --> disable sshd -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 06/10/04 09:10 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ Cafeteria Law: "The item you had your eye on the minute you walked in will be taken by the person in front of you."

On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 01:27:34AM -0700, Riccardo Facchini wrote: : --- Eugene Lee <__> wrote: : > On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 04:06:23AM -0700, Riccardo Facchini wrote: : > : --- Mike McMullin <__> wrote: : > : > On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 05:17, peter Nikolic wrote: : > : > > On Thursday 10 Jun 2004 09:46, Eugene Lee wrote: : > : > > > : > : > > > At this stage, SuSE can NEVER be a home desktop solution. Why? : > : > > > : > : > > > Because there is no simple control panel to chage : > : > > > fundamentally trivial settings like switching duplex : > : > > > of the Ethernet card on boot. : > : : > : Question N? 1: How many times a day do you change switching duplex : > : of the ethernet card on boot? : > : > Never. However, due to the requirements of datacenter, the machine : > must *not* default to slower autonegotiation. I haven't yet found a : > way via YaST to do this. : : Maybe I'm missing something.... are we discussing if SuSE 9.1 is a Home : Desktop Solution or a Datacenter class server? The subject line didn't specify which SuSE 9.1 distribution. I am working with 9.1 Professional version. However, my specific feature request should be, IMO, available on any version of SuSE. : > Also, if the machine is rebooted for some reason, then I would have : > to remember to drive to the datacenter, log in, and change the : > duplex. This is extremely stupid and stands against The Unix Way. : : I repeat myself: : : Maybe I'm missing something.... are we discussing if SuSE 9.1 is a Home : Desktop Solution or a Datacenter class server? My assertion, which is only my own opinion, is that SuSE is not ready to be a desktop solution. My proof points to the fact that user-friendly interfaces like YaST cannot be used to make relatively simple changes such as setting the duplex of an Ethernet card on boot. As to the general question, average Linux users are more intelligent and more persistence if they want to make things work. Average home users are not interesting in runlevels, enabling/disabling kernel modules, building and upgrading tools from SRPMs. Average home users want to browse the web, send email, write Word docs, burn CDs and DVDs, manage photos from their digital cameras, use webcams to do online chatting, transfer files via external USB/Firewire hard/Flash drives. So while average Linux users might share similar needs as average home users, the converse is rarely true. Compared to other home desktop OS platforms (i.e. Windoze XP and Mac OS X), SuSE (and all Linux distros) fulfills some of needs of average home users but misses other needs. At this stage, SuSE can NEVER be a home desktop solution. But maybe it will get better in the future. That's the hope.

--- Eugene Lee <__> wrote:

On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 01:27:34AM -0700, Riccardo Facchini wrote: : --- Eugene Lee <__> wrote: : > On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 04:06:23AM -0700, Riccardo Facchini wrote: : > : --- Mike McMullin <__> wrote: : > : > On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 05:17, peter Nikolic wrote: : > : > > On Thursday 10 Jun 2004 09:46, Eugene Lee wrote: : > : > > > : > : > > > At this stage, SuSE can NEVER be a home desktop solution. Why? : > : > > > : > : > > > Because there is no simple control panel to chage : > : > > > fundamentally trivial settings like switching duplex : > : > > > of the Ethernet card on boot. : > : : > : Question N? 1: How many times a day do you change switching duplex : > : of the ethernet card on boot? : > : > Never. However, due to the requirements of datacenter, the machine : > must *not* default to slower autonegotiation. I haven't yet found a : > way via YaST to do this. : : Maybe I'm missing something.... are we discussing if SuSE 9.1 is a Home : Desktop Solution or a Datacenter class server?

The subject line didn't specify which SuSE 9.1 distribution. I am working with 9.1 Professional version. However, my specific feature request should be, IMO, available on any version of SuSE.

You're right: it does not specify which SuSE 9.1 distribution, but: AFAIK: SuSE SERVER family is still in release 8: http://www.suse.de/en/business/products/server/index.html no mention of release 9 nor 9.1 SuSE DESKTOP family is in release 1: http://www.suse.de/en/business/products/sld/index.html again: no mention of release 9 nor 9.1 SuSE 9.1 is only mentioned on the private (i.e. non business), and it comes in two releases: Personal and Professional: http://www.suse.de/en/private/index.html So: SuSE 9.1 refers to the private user release, and I don't see how this release can get into a Datacenter as a Server. Strict rules are normally only part of the Datacenter "core". and the only thing that gets into the core of a DC is a server or, in case of need, a support workstation that has been certified to enter into the core. Normally, the peripheral network should not be as strict as the core, because of the people that moves in and out. So I see logical that YaST on SuSE 9.1 (either personal or pro) does not give quick access to something as esotheric as the duplex on boot, because SuSE 9.1 is not rated for strict DC work. Anyway, that particular point can be fixed using other tools.

: > Also, if the machine is rebooted for some reason, then I would have : > to remember to drive to the datacenter, log in, and change the : > duplex. This is extremely stupid and stands against The Unix Way.

I personally don't work with SLES 8, but I'm sure that if you buy the support pack for SLES, SuSE will be more than available to answer you about that question.

: : I repeat myself: : : Maybe I'm missing something.... are we discussing if SuSE 9.1 is a Home : Desktop Solution or a Datacenter class server?

My assertion, which is only my own opinion, is that SuSE is not ready to be a desktop solution. My proof points to the fact that user-friendly interfaces like YaST cannot be used to make relatively simple changes such as setting the duplex of an Ethernet card on boot.

Again, what's relatively simple change for a person is a null-requirement for many others. I don't see the average john doe needing to change the duplex of an Ethernet card, because that same avegarge john doe will not live in a Datacenter.

As to the general question, average Linux users are more intelligent and more persistence if they want to make things work. Average home users are not interesting in runlevels, enabling/disabling kernel modules, building and upgrading tools from SRPMs. Average home users want to browse the web, send email, write Word docs, burn CDs and DVDs, manage photos from their digital cameras, use webcams to do online chatting, transfer files via external USB/Firewire hard/Flash drives. So while average Linux users might share similar needs as average home users, the converse is rarely true. Compared to other home desktop OS platforms (i.e. Windoze XP and Mac OS X), SuSE (and all Linux distros) fulfills some of needs of average home users but misses other needs.

I agree with you, average users don't want to know about runlevels... but I beleive that a user curious enough to switch OS (even from windoze to Mac, or from Mac to Windoze, God forbids) is not what I consider "average".

At this stage, SuSE can NEVER be a home desktop solution.

It is. Only, things need to be investigated. M$ and Apple have their manuals and call centers (for what they're worth), and Linux has the web.

But maybe it will get better in the future. That's the hope.

Everithing needs to get better. Sometimes, even life itself. best regards, ===== Riccardo G. Facchini

On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 06:33:11AM -0400, Mike McMullin wrote: : On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 08:58, Eugene Lee wrote: : > On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 04:06:23AM -0700, Riccardo Facchini wrote: : > : : > : Question N? 2: Where's the "simple control panel" on M$? I know of : > : the Control Panel, but I can't say is "Simple"... : > : > I never mentioned M$. I don't care about M$. : : What other OS has something called a Control Panel, which you : mentioned in your article? I used the term "control panel" because other people were throwing the term around in previous posting along this thread. I figured the term had become generic enough for me to use without question, lest someone from M$ gets a patent on the term. Regarding the term's origin, the original OS term "control panel" came from old Mac OS (known as "System" in the older days). : > : > > Here we go again the M$ Corp mentality if windBlows has git it then : > : > > Linux is no good without it ho Hummmmmm : > : > Point #3: You guys need to drop the notion that criticism of SuSE is : > neither constructive nor useful. If you continue to believe that SuSE : > is perfect, YaST is feature-complete, etc. (when in reality it's not), : > then nothing will ever improve. : : SuSE isn't perfect, Yast isn't as full featured as a number of folks : would like, but it beats the pants off of editing all of those : configuration files by hand, and then restarting the appropriate : services by hand. With Novell having GPL'ed it, I expect to see : expanded usability. I hope so too. I'm used to the traditional Unix workflow of editing some config file, saving it, hunting for the daemon's PID, sending a HUP (or just killing/restarting it if it doesn't support that signal), etc. I definitely agree that YaST has made a lot of things much easier.

On Friday 11 June 2004 16.14, Fergus Wilde wrote:

You can still do it the old way, of course - and pretty handy if you are obliged to work over a slow modem connection from another continent, as I can attest. I hadn't realised the SuSE ifconfig isn't able to set the card speed / duplex etc., because I've never wanted to do it, but I strongly suspect that YaST calls ifconfig and ifconfig would need adding to / substituting for before a graphical front end can be constructed.

Most cards support some parameter to the driver kernel module for setting duplex. Some cards can set it using the mii interface, using mii-tool (see 'man mii-tool')

Just weeks before 9.1 was released I finally broke down and purchased SuSE 9.0. The decision to buy SuSE was made after talking to just about everyone I could find for over a year. I had been told by numerous people that SuSE was the best. I have to admit that installation was an absolute breeze. 9.0 found, and installed, everything in my box way better than Windows ever has. Now I'm no computer idiot. My computer experience goes back to TI 99-4A and CoCo days. CPM and DOS were the operating systems of the day. However, I'm not a "programmer" and I think therein lies my problem with Linux. IMHO, for at least the foreseeable future LINUX will primarily be an operating system for "programmers". When I was using DOS I spent an incredible amount of time writing complex "bat" files to make running different programs and keeping things going the way I wanted. If I still wanted to use a command line interface to interact with my computer I would still be using DOS 6. GUI's are just much simpler to operate. Now don't get me wrong. I like Linux. It does things incredibly well. Most of the package applications work better than Micro$oft products. The problems I have/had are with adding things that I want that are missing from the package, and maybe a couple things that are included. "So far" I haven't found any genealogy programs. I would like to use my Window$ program. For that I need Wine, or something equivalent. Wine comes packaged with 9.0 but there is no "intuitive" way to make it operate. By using KDE to search through every directory on the hard drive I did find something dealing with Wine. [A "search" using Yast couldn't return one hit for anything dealing with Wine.] There was also a "html" manual for it that I bookmarked for later. I went to the website and looked for detailed instructions. They talked about the versions that were packaged were sometimes not the latest and greatest so I downloaded and installed the "latest and greatest". Well the manual that I had bookmarked is GONE. Things are scattered all over the hard drive and I can't find anything that makes it run. I absolutely abhor graphical HTML editors. They make pages that are FAR larger and bulkier than needed. I think I have found a Linux application that does things the way I want them done. It's called CoffeCup. No problem, just download and install right. WRONG. Download fine. Install???????? It comes with an installation utility that does nothing. It runs just fine. BUT it doesn't do a thing while it's running, then says installation went just fine. HUH!!!! Right now I just don't have the time to spend trying to figure all this stuff out. We are moving and setting up a new house on our acreage. It's just more trouble than it's worth right now so I'm back to running Window$ for the time being. *<[:o( In a while, when life settles down and I have more spare time I will get back to fighting Linux. IMHO Linux has great potential as an everyday operating system. BUT, until it becomes much more intuitive to use, applications become much easier to use, and there is less reliance on "command line interface" it will NEVER become "everyman's" operating system. As a workstation in an office system where someone keeps it up and running, Fine. As a home operating system for everyday use, Ain't happenin'. Sorry - Just my $0.02 worth. Sorta PS - Someone needs to write a book Linux For Dummies with just BASIC information on how to operate it. Step by step in baby language. (o:]>*HUGGLES*<[:o) Billie Walsh The three best words in the English Language: "I LOVE YOU." Pass them on!

Billie Walsh wrote:

Just weeks before 9.1 was released I finally broke down and purchased SuSE 9.0. The decision to buy SuSE was made after talking to just about everyone I could find for over a year. I had been told by numerous people that SuSE was the best. I have to admit that installation was an absolute breeze. 9.0 found, and installed, everything in my box way better than Windows ever has.

Now I'm no computer idiot. My computer experience goes back to TI 99-4A and CoCo days. CPM and DOS were the operating systems of the day. However, I'm not a "programmer" and I think therein lies my problem with Linux. IMHO, for at least the foreseeable future LINUX will primarily be an operating system for "programmers".

When I was using DOS I spent an incredible amount of time writing complex "bat" files to make running different programs and keeping things going the way I wanted. If I still wanted to use a command line interface to interact with my computer I would still be using DOS 6. GUI's are just much simpler to operate.

Now don't get me wrong. I like Linux. It does things incredibly well. Most of the package applications work better than Micro$oft products. The problems I have/had are with adding things that I want that are missing from the package, and maybe a couple things that are included.

"So far" I haven't found any genealogy programs. I would like to use my Window$ program. For that I need Wine, or something equivalent. Wine comes packaged with 9.0 but there is no "intuitive" way to make it operate. By using KDE to search through every directory on the hard drive I did find something dealing with Wine. [A "search" using Yast couldn't return one hit for anything dealing with Wine.] There was also a "html" manual for it that I bookmarked for later. I went to the website and looked for detailed instructions. They talked about the versions that were packaged were sometimes not the latest and greatest so I downloaded and installed the "latest and greatest". Well the manual that I had bookmarked is GONE. Things are scattered all over the hard drive and I can't find anything that makes it run.

First off, SuSE does not include every possible program that's out there, the same is true of Windows and as a matter of fact SuSE includes a broader range of stuff than is included in Windows. Sometimes you have to look further afield www.google.com/linux is an excellent place to start. On reading this, I remembered seeing "gramps" mentioned many times, searched on freshmeat.net and up it came (the rpm is perhaps only for RedHat - a particular beef I have as long ago any .deb or .rpm would run under any distro, sadly no longer true). I don't know any of the genealogy programs on any platform, but gramps is worth the look, nice GUI and seeminly nice features. Wine ..... may or may not run your program, "man wine". I don't know where you downloaded the updated version of wine from and what format it's in, if it's a rpm file, "rpm -qpl wine---.rpm" will tell you where it has installed the bits, if it was from compiled sources, "make install 2>&1|tee inst.out" and look at inst.out to see where it puts the stuff, I've always found the README and wine HOWTO to be quite straightforward and it has hardly changed in the last decade.

I absolutely abhor graphical HTML editors. They make pages that are FAR larger and bulkier than needed. I think I have found a Linux application that does things the way I want them done. It's called CoffeCup. No problem, just download and install right. WRONG. Download fine. Install???????? It comes with an installation utility that does nothing. It runs just fine. BUT it doesn't do a thing while it's running, then says installation went just fine. HUH!!!!

I just downloaded and installed CoffeeCup on SuSE 9.1, a quick look, it looks like a "graphical HTML editor" plus lots of other cool stuff.

Right now I just don't have the time to spend trying to figure all this stuff out. We are moving and setting up a new house on our acreage. It's just more trouble than it's worth right now so I'm back to running Window$ for the time being. *<[:o( In a while, when life settles down and I have more spare time I will get back to fighting Linux.

IMHO Linux has great potential as an everyday operating system. BUT, until it becomes much more intuitive to use, applications become much easier to use, and there is less reliance on "command line interface" it will NEVER become "everyman's" operating system. As a workstation in an office system where someone keeps it up and running, Fine. As a home operating system for everyday use, Ain't happenin'.

You mileage has varied, but I have at home a XP2800+ tower and a laptop running SuSE 9.1 x86, an Acer laptop running SuSE 9.1 x86_64, another XP2200+ running Mandrake 10.0, another Mandrake 10.0 box that I took the memory out of, soon to be back on and for years, I used a laptop on the go and in offices, before I handed it back, it was running SuSE 9.0. My computing tasks have been many and varied, connecting to Cisco VPN at work, using Citrix client, Notes and MS Office under crossover office for Word docs, spreadsheets and powerpoint presentations, X3270, installing, upgrading, maintaining, etc. Solaris boxes - that's on the work front. At home, amateur radio packet transmission/reception, amateur radio transceiver control, PCB design, circuit design and analysis, amateur radio VOIP, gnomemeeting, Flight Simulation (not as a game), interfacing with GPS for flight planning, plus all the other usual stuff -- without a Windows box anywhere in sight.

Sorry - Just my $0.02 worth.

Sorta PS - Someone needs to write a book Linux For Dummies with just BASIC information on how to operate it. Step by step in baby language.

There is such a book though I've never read it to see just how basic it is. Search on freshmeat.net for "rute", download it or buy the book if you need a hardcopy. Like DOS and Windows, you can learn quite a bit by using Linux, the knowledge portfolio builds without you really noticing. Remember, nearly 100% of us started out using DOS and Windows and of course Mac, strange, I've never seen a Mac running, way back I installed the Mac emulator for Linux (Executor) and I couldn't find out how to use it, I installed a program and couldn't figure out how to run it either, shows what a dummy I am, it's supposed to be intuitive. Some things in Windows mystify me also, I used to look on in disbelief when guys at work put a file on a floppy for me, boy, I could learn which golf club to use much easier. There was also a time at work when we needed to ftp a file down from our corporate server, the guy opened up this Windows ftp GUI and for about 15 minutes we tried to get the file and failed, at which point I asked the guy to give me a DOS window and with command line ftp, we had it down in no time, updated the Mainframe and had the customer back up and running. Good luck with the house move and spare a few minutes occasionally for Linux. Regards Sid.

(o:]>*HUGGLES*<[:o) Billie Walsh The three best words in the English Language: "I LOVE YOU." Pass them on!

-- Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer ===== LINUX ONLY USED HERE =====

Mike McMullin wrote on 11 June 2004 11:21 <Big snip>

I don't find it that difficult. Most of the time it does what I expect and behaves ever so much better than my WinME install on the other hard drive. On those occasions when it doesn't, like getting the 3d acceleration running on an older nVidia graphics card, I realize that if nVidia had produced an RPM for 8.2 like they had for 7.3 life would be a lot happier, but this isn't the fault of Linux, it's a problem with Xwindows and the graphics card, and I've seen Windows fight hardware just as much. That's why there are sites like WinDrivers.com.

Your point about X not being Linux, if accepted, means that you have to accept that Linux is indeed an OS that is completely unsuitable for your average home user looking replace MS Windows with Linux. No home user is likely to have the patience or ability to deal with the command line only operating system that is the purists Linux. X is a part of the 'Linux Experience' to those who have neither the time nor the knowledge to deal with the distinction. Until there is no distinction I believe that Linux remains suitable for enthusiasts on the desktop and is best suited to what it is really good at: servers. Damon Jebb --------------------------------------- Tact is the knack of making a point without making an enemy. Isaac Newton

Mike McMullin wrote on 11 June 2004 23:04

There is actually a choice of X servers, put out by people who may or may not be actual kernel contributors, but it is distinctly separate from the kernel itself, which is actually Linux. As far as not dealing with the GUI, again you have a choice beyond the major two KDE or Gnome. As to how well they suit your needs I cannot say. I'm sure you could find some kind of nice Menu System, like a number of outfits used to use on their DOS boxes, but again it's a question of what you want.

You've missed the point - your own argument that linux is not X, in my eyes, is one that defines Linux as an OS unsuitable for the 'average home user'. The reason is simply that the pure linux is a command line environment that does not permit simple management of the system that is required by a novice home user - this is why windows environments (MS or Linux) are so popular. If X is not linux and we cannot rely on X to deliver the same reliability that Linux does then Linux is not yet a home desktop environment. The choice you are so keen on is what makes Linux less of a home environment and more suitable for the enthusiast - most people only need one X server that works reliably with their equipment. Giving them more to fiddle about with is what makes the systems become unstable.

Perhaps what you'd be more at home with is something along the lines of either Lindows or Xandros, both are aimed squarely at the Windows User market, and both have been well reviewed in terms of out of the box usability.

I'm not looking for or interested in windows environments on Linux, I use it mainly as a server, which is what I am happy with it for. I may soon investigate whether it can replace my Windows XP desktop, but I suspect that the software and OS combination will again prove less reliable than XP and more difficult to manage and setup. I have run this machine constantly with windows XP for many months and the only failure I have had is hardware. It is my 'work' machine and it just runs office and business type applications and surfs the web without being 'fiddled with'. To me the TCO of Linux for desktop use is still too high, I have persistently found that my SuSE 9.0 pro installation has random application crashes and it has even hung solid on a number of occasions (no response to mouse or keyboard). Linux is good, it's fundamentally free, but you have to invest a great deal of time and effort in it to get anything out - hence the high TCO (Total Cost of Ownership). When it comes to doing my work I want something I can install, run and it works, which for me, at the moment, is windows XP, despite all of its security problems. Damon

Damon Jebb wrote:

Mike McMullin wrote on 11 June 2004 23:04

<Stuff deleted >

You've missed the point - your own argument that linux is not X, in my eyes, is one that defines Linux as an OS unsuitable for the 'average home user'. The reason is simply that the pure linux is a command line environment that does not permit simple management of the system that is required by a novice home user - this is why windows environments (MS or Linux) are so popular. If X is not linux and we cannot rely on X to deliver the same reliability that Linux does then Linux is not yet a home desktop environment. The choice you are so keen on is what makes Linux less of a home environment and more suitable for the enthusiast - most people only need one X server that works reliably with their equipment. Giving them more to fiddle about with is what makes the systems become unstable.

I have a different experience, it's colleagues with Windows that experience the crashes and instability. For many years I have used just Linux as my working environment and I've never been in a situation where it was necessary to reboot Linux to be operational. I have never lost work or suffered from viruses. The tools I've used include Citrix client, X3270, Office, Lotus Notes etc., doing all the stuff the Windows users do and more, more flexibility in the admin of Solaris Enterprise servers as I could manage multiple Solaris partitions at the same time via xdmcp. At home I don't have Windows either and I use Linux for the whole range of stuff and the list is quite long and includes amateur radio stuff, electronics design and analysis and flying tasks.

...

Perhaps what you'd be more at home with is something along the lines of either Lindows or Xandros, both are aimed squarely at the Windows User market, and both have been well reviewed in terms of out of the box usability.

Definitely.

I'm not looking for or interested in windows environments on Linux, I use it mainly as a server, which is what I am happy with it for. I may soon investigate whether it can replace my Windows XP desktop, but I suspect that the software and OS combination will again prove less reliable than XP and more difficult to manage and setup. I have run this machine constantly with windows XP for many months and the only failure I have had is hardware. It is my 'work' machine and it just runs office and business type applications and surfs the web without being 'fiddled with'. To me the TCO of Linux for desktop use is still too high, I have persistently found that my SuSE 9.0 pro installation has random application crashes and it has even hung solid on a number of occasions (no response to mouse or keyboard). Linux is good, it's fundamentally free, but you have to invest a great deal of time and effort in it to get anything out - hence the high TCO (Total Cost of Ownership). When it comes to doing my work I want something I can install, run and it works, which for me, at the moment, is windows XP, despite all of its security problems.

Damon

TCO -- let's see, Linux has not cost the corporation a bean, they don't have to pay license fees based on the costly annual software audits they must conduct. Virus cleanups has cost the corporation vast sums of money in lost production, prompting colleagues to remark that PC's are the biggest waster of their time. For work I've been using only Linux since RedHat 6.0 on laptops, Sun workstations and home PC's, switching to SuSE around 6.2 with no stability problems except hardware and I am always up with the latest kernels and apps. A number of colleagues also use Linux at work and their experiece is of a solid and flexible platform whether on PC's, laptops, Sun workstations, Sun servers or mainframes. Some of our customers also use Linux on mainframes and there is one who in a few months will be moving from Solaris on Sun Enterprise Servers to Linux on a cluster. No one I know on the work scene has abandoned Linux or found it not to be production quality. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer ===== LINUX ONLY USED HERE =====

On Saturday 12 June 2004 14.33, Tony Alfrey wrote:

Mac OS-X is Free BSD + X + AppleGUI front-end,

No, MacOSX doesn't use X. There is an X implementation for it, but the default is Apple's own PDF based thing

On Saturday 12 June 2004 14.53, Eugene Lee wrote:

On Sat, Jun 12, 2004 at 02:40:03PM +0200, Anders Johansson wrote: : On Saturday 12 June 2004 14.33, Tony Alfrey wrote: : > Mac OS-X is Free BSD + X + AppleGUI front-end, : : No, MacOSX doesn't use X. There is an X implementation for it, but the : default is Apple's own PDF based thing

I did not interpret Tony's comments as "Mac OS X uses X11R6 by default". To me, Tony simply provided a list of features and implementations.

But X is not a feature of Mac OSX?! Mac uses Quartz. And Tony attributed the Mac's stability to X, I would interpret that as thinking it used X by default There is an X server for windows too, would you say X was a feature of windows?

On Saturday 12 June 2004 15.10, Tony Alfrey wrote:

Oh, well, so much for my argument

I actually agree with the argument, just not that particular example :) X is a very nice platform with some excellent features I wouldn't want to live without, such as network transparency. There are some very stable implementations of it, such as the one for solaris that I've never seen crash. The main problem is the drivers. 99 times out of 100 they're the part responsible for instability