On Tuesday 13 November 2001 01:22, Karol Pietrzak wrote:

On 12 Nov 2001, Wojtek Malinski wrote:

...

Is there a web site which compares Linux vs Windows. I need that info since I'm trying to convince some people to make a switch but I need to be well prepared. I need that comparison on server as well as workstation level. <snip>

As for workstation comparisons: you won't find any, I don't think. Linux software is extremely limited and most would say it can't really compete. That is, unless all your apps have adequate Linux equivalents.

*Grin* I feel a Holy War coming on..... Gr. Hertog

On Tuesday 13 November 2001 01:46, Karol Pietrzak wrote:

On 13 Nov 2001, Gert-Jan Rodenburg wrote:

Yes, I already felt the heat when posting the message. I specifically didn't specify myself as holding those opinions (e.g. "most would say...").

I do, however, feel I am correct when I say that Linux workstation software is limited. It's almost a fact.

We have all seen Samba and Apache benchmarks, but a desktop workstation comparison... Windows would win _completely_, especially with Windows 2000.

What do you think?

Can I translate your observation into "There is more software available for windows then there is for linux" ? Then you are completely correct. KOffice and StarOffice are getting there, slowly and steady, but are not yet on the level of Office. But this is for just 'Office work'. This is just for an administrative organization. On the other hand, there are 'development organisations', these can greatly profit from a linux-desktop. With the QT cross-platform libraries, and/or Java, a lot van be done. Thinking of it... Once KOffice and StarOffice get up to par, it will be a very good replacement for windows-desktops, since most PC's that are beeing used are overpowered typewriters... I agree with you that linux has quite a way to go before it is ready to fight microsoft for the desktop-supremacy. Untill then, I just tell everybody not to mail me word-documents or powerpoint presentations. It cuts back the amounth of spam too :) Gr. GJR

----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon Pennington" To: "SuSE-Linux List" Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 8:20 PM Subject: Re: [SLE] Linux vs Windows

--- Karol Pietrzak wrote:

...

I do, however, feel I am correct when I say that Linux workstation software is limited. It's almost a fact.

Okay, I'll grant this one. What do you want to do, though?

...

We have all seen Samba and Apache benchmarks, but a desktop workstation comparison... Windows would win _completely_, especially with Windows 2000.

I'm not sure about that at all. Hell, Win4Lin makes win32 applications run faster on my Linux box than Win98SE/98Lite runs them NATIVELY on the SAME hardware. Win2k is fast, but it ain't all that. Are you sure that your Linux box is tuned properly? This is one thing that Linux could sincerely benefit from...automatic hardware tuning for things like disks and such; hdparm is really a bit too cumbersome, even though it's a set-and-forget tweak.

StarOffice sucks, KDE sucks, but they're each getting better and faster by the day. If Rasterman's proposed OpenGL tweaks (to his own software like E and EFM) were to be effectively implemented on KDE (using the hardware 3D engine to do things like drawing windows, placing text and icons, et cetera), I think that KDE's overhead would increase but performance would improve significantly for those of us with modern hardware.

There are really a very limited number of things you can test apples-to-apples, even in the UNIX world. Take Blender, POVRay, and GIMP for example; they do run on all three platforms ("Real" UNIX, Linux, and Win32), but how many people have taken the time to test them head-to-head? If I were to venture a guess, I'd say that Linux could hold it's own in tests of these applications, since they all started as semi-POSIX-compliant code. Last I checked, there was no performance testing routine for StarOffice, either, so WinBench-type numbers are hard to come by. What exactly do you want to see performance numbers on?

Keep in mind, folks that, in the hardware/software world, there are three kinds of lies; lies, damned lies, and benchmarks...

I don't personally care too much for benchmarks. If one is ten seconds faster than the other, who cares? I look for usability. Can I use this to get what I want done in a manner pleasing to me? Even though I am a Linux newbie, I love the command line and drop down to it regularly. So what is pleasing to me would suck to a Windows XP user. I will agree that Star Office and KOffice have a hell of a long way to go before catching up to MS Office or for that matter MS Works. Feature for feature no Linux "Office" app can compare. However, Star Office handles my needs quite nicely. I have no use for all or even fifty percent of the goodies in MS Office. Try using MS Office for a couple of weeks, then write down all of the features you use. I bet that 90 percent or better of what most of us use is already included in Star Office. I know that there are somethings that just can't be compared, Power Point, Access and really detailed spreadsheets. For those people, Hanscom's Office based on QT will be the answer and at one third of MS office's price... In any case, I think it boils down to, what is pleasing to you and what shortcoming are you willing to put up with.

On Monday 12 November 2001 18:46, Karol Pietrzak wrote:

On 13 Nov 2001, Gert-Jan Rodenburg wrote:

...

...

As for workstation comparisons: you won't find any, I don't think. Linux software is extremely limited and most would say it can't really compete. That is, unless all your apps have adequate Linux equivalents.

*Grin* I feel a Holy War coming on.....

Yes, I already felt the heat when posting the message. I specifically didn't specify myself as holding those opinions (e.g. "most would say...").

I do, however, feel I am correct when I say that Linux workstation software is limited. It's almost a fact.

Really? In what way? I've been using Linux (SuSE) exclusively for almost two years. At work I have to use W2K. I find my SuSE box at home more liberating and useful than the W2K, and certainly more stable. It can't be on office suites. I have several good ones and two excellent ones to choose from in Linux and essentially only one choice in WinXX. (Software 602 can't really count because it doesn't behave like Office. That's the problem when one says that LInux office packages don't count because they aren't like or compatible with Office - it eliminates all office packages on any platform.) It can't be graphics. Gimp or Blender, to say nothing of Maya, is as good as they get. Krayon will get there. What's ya got it windows beyond Photoshop? Paint? :) It can't be accounting software. MoneyDance is as useful as Quicken for home use. GNUCash will do small businesses fine. Then there a dozen BIG5 packages. It can't be math or science. With MuPAD, or Maple, or Mathmatica available in Linux what does WinXX offer that's any better. Can't be MathCad - that uses the Maple engine. At can't be audio tools. Linux has it in aces there. Flight simulator? Flight Gear does nicely. Microsoft attacked and nearly destroyed Street Atlas. It is attacking RealPlayer and QuickTime by rolling its video offerings into the kernel. Same with Netplayer, ICQ, etc... In fact, in its greed Microsoft is destroying most of its formerly dynamic 3rd party markets. They keep that up and Microsurfs will have EXTREMELY LIMITED choices in software - Bill's way or the highway. "It's almost a fact" only counts in hand gernades. Jerry

We have all seen Samba and Apache benchmarks, but a desktop workstation comparison... Windows would win _completely_, especially with Windows 2000.

What do you think?

-> The one thing I might throw in that seems to be missing is a decent ->Publisher-like DPI program. LaTeX might be nice, but when you just want to do ->some light publishing - make a banner, a card, a label, etc. - there just ->doesn't seem to be anything that exists for Linux. MS Publisher is the one ->and only thing that makes me log into Windows occasionally. You could try sketch. I hear it's coming along nicely. -----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====----- Ben Rosenberg mailto:ben@whack.org -----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====----- "Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal" -AE

Hi Jerry,

I don't consider KOffice even close to being ready for prime time.

You are right, but I put it on my list as the long run contender for moving Linux into the "office age." :-) It's the first office suite I have used in Linux that *feels* good. It doesn't feel like a cheap MS copy, nor does it take such a radically different approach that it feels uncomfortable. In essance, it feels just like the rest of KDE.

But, I can see from your remarks that you have not taken either SO 5.2 or 6.0 for a *serious* spin.

I tried 5.2 for a long as I could tolarate it, and then ran to the quasi-comfort of WordPerfect 8. I was one of the first to download SO 6 Beta, but sadly it crashes whenever I try to do anything on the toolbars or menus. :-\

SO has a great vector graphics package and an excellent presentation manager package. Your light publishing can be handled well.

Actually, I did try SO for light publishing, but I couldn't figure out how to do a greeting card in it. I also dispised the bloat of 5.2, which, frankly made MS Office seem like it hadlost a few hundred pounds. Also, I should point out that a word processor and publisher are pretty much exclusively what I use an office suite for. For the most part, I do not use presentations software (although I hear KPresenter is quite good), and generally I stick to a bitmap or bitmap-vector hybrid for graphics.

Grammer checking isn't in the package, but Microsoft's grammer checker isn't that great. You end up ignoring most of it's recommendations - don't you just get tired of it telling you about the passive voice. -- and just not using it.

Well, I admit it was annoying at times, but overall I came to really appreciate the grammer checker. I'd rather hear about five passive voice problems, and then have it catch a stupid mistake (like their needing to be they're, etc.) then to publish something that has incorrect grammar because I typed it at 12:50 a.m. one night. Granted, it does making you lazy when it does stuff like this for you, but if I doesn't have a grammar checker, for most purposes KWrite fulfills most of my other requirements. To be honest, if Microsoft was ever to release Microsoft Office for Linux, I would line up at CompUSA at the midnight launch to get a copy. Microsoft has two strengths, IMO - intuitive interfaces and the Office division. Office may be bloated and buggy, but it's an office suite that - simply put - has what people want. This is not something I say lightly, since I am actually more in the free software (versus Open Source) camp than probably the majority of active posters on this list.

With PostgreSQL attached via ODBC SO allows for some serious tables, queries, reports, forms and other database manipulations. All smoothly integrated. JLK

That sounds pretty cool too - although once again I don't use that kinda stuff. See I'm a pretty hard sell on an office suite, ain't I (opps, the grammer checker should have caught that <g>)? -Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============== "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

Hi Ben,

It's a KDE 2.2.1 issue as far as SO6.0 is concerned. It works fine with KDE 2.1 and below. Sun knows about it and it's suppose to be fixed in the next build. I had my office mate download SO 6.0 for Wintendo and it's NICE. He's been using it for about a week. He likes it better because it's faster...go figure :)

Ah, good. I'm looking forward to getting my hands on SO6. I'm glad to hear that Sun is fixing the problem - I couldn't figure out what I was doing wrong. Thanks, Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============== "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

Il 04:01, martedì 13 novembre 2001, Timothy R.Butler ha scritto:

Hi Jerry,

...

It can't be on office suites. I have several good ones and two excellent ones to choose from in Linux and essentially only one choice in WinXX. (Software 602 can't really count because it doesn't behave like Office. That's the problem when one says that LInux office packages don't count because they aren't like or compatible with Office - it eliminates all office packages on any platform.)

I wish I didn't have to disagree, but I would have to say Office is much better than our suites. Yeah, it crashes. Yeah, it has activation. But most importantly, yeah, it does everything most everyone needs to get stuff done. Corel Office probably had the best chance, but that is dead... StarOffice is getting there, but still lacks basics like grammar checking...

That's good! Maybe you find grammar checking useful because english has a quite simple grammar. I am italian, and M$ Word grammar checking has always been a nightmare. Completely unusable... I do not know who is the idiot who programmed that shit. It does not understand 95% italian grammar, and sometimes it wants to help you with style too. After grammar checking your document will look just like translated by altavista, or something weird like that. Grammar checking... go away! Praise

This is where I jump in. The only reason I still have W$3.1 on my system is M$ Publisher. I do a 20page 1/4'ly bulletin with it. I need a usable DPI that uses frames. Kword is getting there but I've not been able to get it to work because there is no docs at all for it. The guys working on it have great software, but no docs at all.

I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one who has to boot into Windows for publishing work. I knew there had to be *someone* else on this list that did. :-) -Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============== "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

On Wednesday 14 November 2001 04:49, Bryan Tyson wrote:

On Tuesday 13 November 2001 14:33, Jim Hatridge wrote:

...

This is where I jump in. The only reason I still have W$3.1 on my system is M$ Publisher. I do a 20page 1/4'ly bulletin with it. I need a usable DPI that uses frames. Kword is getting there but I've not been able to get it to work because there is no docs at all for it. The guys working on it have great software, but no docs at all.

I agree. Linux needs an application like MS Publisher. It lets me do relatively complex layouts with amazing ease and speed.

Right now the best contender does seem to be KWord. Its capabilities seem rudimentary compared to MS Publisher, but I think it's off to a nice start. For such a young application, KWord is really nice. I have already used it a few times for some of the simpler uses I previously used MS Publisher for. With time I hope it will gradually rival the power of MS Publisher.

*************************************************** Powered by SuSE Linux 7.2 Professional KDE 2.1.2 KMail 1.2

Bryan S. Tyson bryantyson@earthlink.net ***************************************************

HI Bryan et al.... OK, I've got Kword on my system but can't figure out what to do. So here's my question. I want to print landscape with two frames on each page. In each frame should be 2 columns. It should print like this #1 pg 20 pg 1 #2 pg 2 pg 19 #3 pg 18 pg 3 #4 pg 4 pg 17 #5 pg 16 pg 5 #6 pg 6 pg 15 #7 pg 14 pg 7 #8 pg 8 pg 13 #9 pg 12 pg 9 #10 pg 10 pg 11 Of course I print #1 on the back of #2 etc, the staple together and have a nice little bulletin. Can you give me an idea on how to do this with Kword? TIA! -- Jim Hatridge ------------------------------------------------------ BayerWulf The Recycled Beowulf Project Looking for throw-away or obsolete computers and parts to recycle into a Linux super computer

On Tuesday 13 November 2001 19:33, Jim Hatridge wrote:

This is where I jump in. The only reason I still have W$3.1 on my system is M$ Publisher. I do a 20page 1/4'ly bulletin with it. I need a usable DPI that uses frames.

This is a really interesting discussion. Personally, I can't stand Publisher - it has the most awful interface I've ever seen, especially if you're trying to edit someone else's document. And I have even come across misguided individuals doing webpages with it! It either produces a page with lots of nested tables, which is as slow as tar to load, or it transfers images+text into one big image, and makes that the webpage, and then you can't edit it with anything else.... (And they won't be told, either, you know - I've tried!) The only reason it is popular (IMHO) is that it was bundled with so many PCs, people started using it, they got used to the interface, and then they find other interfaces "difficult" (as one does). A far better app for the same purpose, IMHO, is Greenstreet's (formerly GSP) Power Publisher - made in the UK (I recognise this doesn't count much for US colleagues on the list), and far cheaper to boot. Serif's PagePublisher is also good, but didn't suit me as well as PP. I also think the points about the Office interface are related to the same phenomenon. You get an app, tussle around with the interface for a while, finally figure out how it works, and then everything else seems to have a "weird" interface. I came to Word via WordStar (sadly no longer in existence) and various wps on other platforms, and believe me, Word's "intuitive" interface is anything but. (Aside: I've never yet come across a wp with WS's clever trick of 1 click to position the cursor in a word, 2 to select the word, 3 to select the word's sentence, and 4 to select the word's paragraph - any takers?) For instance, to really confuse a new Word user, in a numbered list of text paras, get him to manually change one of the paras to bold or italic, and then watch him scuffle around for the next hour trying to figure out a way to stop the para number also showing up as bold or italic. (This applies in Word97 - I'm not sure about later releases.) "Hardened" (I use the word advisedly) users don't really notice things like this, or find the work-around obvious, but that isn't the same as an intuitive interface. So I think that even if Office competitors implement a sizeable subset of the features, many Office users will continue to use Office. The reason is that human beings take the line of least resistance, and here that means "keep using the apps I'm used to unless something else (stability of platform, cost of licenses, lack of interoperability, etc) forces me to relearn some of what I already know." This will be rationalised as Office has better features, a more intuitive interface, etc than other office suites, but that isn't the real reason. It really all comes down to grabbing eyeballs - MS managed to leverage their OS with big system builders to get them to bundle in a copy of Office, and the average user, rationally enough, will say "why go out and BUY another office suite, when I have one sitting right here - I might as well use that one". They've used the same approach with Winsock (remember Trumpet, anyone?), the browser, connection sharing, etc, and they're now doing the same with sound software and CD-burning software. Moreover, the early versions of MS stuff focus a lot on interoperability - "you don't need to buy that - we have something here that does 85% of what you want, and it's free with the OS, and it'll read that file format" - and only after they have got a good foothold in the market do they then scale back on this so that people are locked into their formats (RealPlayer, anybody?). There's no doubt that in the short run this is great for the consumer - they get a bundle of stuff that will probably work very well for basic purposes, AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY EXTRA FOR IT - "Gosh, Margaret, look at all this stuff we get for free!". (And let's face it, that is Linux' initial attraction for many people too.) What isn't immediately clear to Margaret and Geoff is that they ARE paying for this in the longer term, by getting tied in to one company's way of doing things, and all that that implies. If you told Geoff, for instance, that he could have a new family saloon with lots of trimmings for the same price as a standard small car, and that this family saloon was the equivalent of a Merc in its performance, safety, etc, he'd probably slap his wad down on the table then and there - he'd think it was a great deal. But if you told him that he could only get tyres for it from authorised partners, and that it used a special kind of petrol that was only available from a chain of authorised partners, and that there were some roads that it could not go down because the wheels weren't built for that, and that the engine would need to be upgraded in two years, necessitating an upgrade of the transmission as well, and possibly the petrol tank, and that he might in future have to put 50p a week in the CD player before it would let him use it, and that the safety features could only be activated if he stripped down the engine himself and added a couple of missing components .... well, Geoff might think that the inital package was pretty good, but he would be starting to have his doubts about the phrase "long-term value for money". My apologies for departing from the initial "Publisher" point, and I have no hassle with anyone using that or other MS sw (I've been there myself for the four years prior to this one), but I would say that whether or not Office gets replaced on people's desktops will have very little to do with features, but a lot to do with awareness of an alternative that is a lot less costly, doesn't close off options for use in particular environments, and does most of what is needed. Once that gets through to businesses and users (at least, those who aren't using warez copies), precisely the same effect as helped Office (no "end-user" cost, interoperability with other things) will help the competitors. Kevin

This is a really interesting discussion. Personally, I can't stand Publisher - it has the most awful interface I've ever seen, especially if you're trying to edit someone else's document. And I have even come across misguided individuals doing webpages with it! It either produces a page

Ack! Never do webpages in Publisher. :-)

The only reason it is popular (IMHO) is that it was bundled with so many PCs, people started using it, they got used to the interface, and then they find other interfaces "difficult" (as one does). A far better app for the

Not for me at least. I *picked* Publisher when I was still in Windows, because it simply did what I needed. I can pop out designs that make people say "wow" (not trying to brag here) in just minutes on Publisher. My purchased a different low end DTP for her home computer a while back and nearly gave up on it. However, I talked her into getting Publisher, and now she loves working on DTP again.

I also think the points about the Office interface are related to the same phenomenon. You get an app, tussle around with the interface for a while, finally figure out how it works, and then everything else seems to have a "weird" interface. I came to Word via WordStar (sadly no longer in existence) and various wps on other platforms, and believe me, Word's "intuitive" interface is anything but. (Aside: I've never yet come across

I might argue here again. Please show me a modern word processor that you can set someone in front of (who has never used it) and can learn it as fast as Word. Honestly, I started out with WordPerfect, and HATED it. But I started using Word, and things seemed much better. :-) Remember, I'm saying this all as a person who grubles constantly when I'm stuck in Windows for more than a few moments. I am no fan of Microsoft, yet they do do somethings right.

So I think that even if Office competitors implement a sizeable subset of the features, many Office users will continue to use Office. The reason is that human beings take the line of least resistance, and here that means "keep using the apps I'm used to unless something else (stability of platform, cost of licenses, lack of interoperability, etc) forces me to relearn some of what I already know." This will be rationalised as Office has better features, a more intuitive interface, etc than other office suites, but that isn't the real reason.

You may have a point, but first show me a decent word processor with a more intuitive interface, that can do the kinda of things Word can do. Mail Merge? Grammer Checking? Light Publishing? A dozen different ways to format typefaces?

well use that one". They've used the same approach with Winsock (remember Trumpet, anyone?),

Well that one only makes sense. If Microsoft *didn't* integrate winsock, I can just hear all of us sneering right now at how Microsoft's OS doesn't even have built in internet connectivity! Seriously, every modern OS has an IP stack built in.

the browser,

Uhhhh, are you saying KDE shouldn't have Konqueror?

connection sharing, etc, and they're now doing the same with sound software and CD-burning software.

I agree with these, especially the latter two.

added a couple of missing components .... well, Geoff might think that the inital package was pretty good, but he would be starting to have his doubts about the phrase "long-term value for money".

I'm with you fully here.

My apologies for departing from the initial "Publisher" point, and I have no hassle with anyone using that or other MS sw (I've been there myself for the four years prior to this one), but I would say that whether or not Office gets replaced on people's desktops will have very little to do with

Trust me, if StarOffice or any other Linux wp or DTP program was 85% as good as Microsoft Word and Publisher, I wouldn't complain. Granted the WPS's are approaching that realm, but DTP is still a vacuum in Linux. -Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============== "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Kreps" To: ; Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 9:38 PM Subject: Re: [SLE] Linux vs Windows

On Monday 12 November 2001 18:46, Karol Pietrzak wrote:

...

On 13 Nov 2001, Gert-Jan Rodenburg wrote:

...

...

As for workstation comparisons: you won't find any, I don't think. Linux software is extremely limited and most would say it can't really compete. That is, unless all your apps have adequate Linux equivalents.

*Grin* I feel a Holy War coming on.....

Yes, I already felt the heat when posting the message. I specifically didn't specify myself as holding those opinions (e.g. "most would say...").

I do, however, feel I am correct when I say that Linux workstation software is limited. It's almost a fact.

Really? In what way? I've been using Linux (SuSE) exclusively for almost two years. At work I have to use W2K. I find my SuSE box at home more liberating and useful than the W2K, and certainly more stable.

It can't be on office suites. I have several good ones and two excellent ones to choose from in Linux and essentially only one choice in WinXX. (Software 602 can't really count because it doesn't behave like Office. That's the problem when one says that LInux office packages don't count because they aren't like or compatible with Office - it eliminates all office packages on any platform.)

Well, I like Linux as much as the next person, but MS Office simply blows away Open Office, Star Office and Applix. While I agree that it is overkill for most, the fact is that MS Office has what you want when you need it. Excel power users would be limited in any Linux spreadsheet. Excel is no longer just a number cruncher. I may not be crazy about MS, but I will admit they make a fine product in MS Office, though a tad bloated. (smile)

It can't be graphics. Gimp or Blender, to say nothing of Maya, is as good as they get. Krayon will get there. What's ya got it windows beyond Photoshop? Paint? :)

Dude, Windows has Ventura. Gimp is nice but when compared to the heavy weights... Then again, when Windows Graphic apps are compared to MAC apps...

It can't be accounting software. MoneyDance is as useful as Quicken for home use. GNUCash will do small businesses fine. Then there a dozen BIG5 packages.

No, here I disagree. I am a registered user of Moneydance and I think Sean is doing a fine job on it, but a replacement for Quicken? No way. I like the looks of KMyMoney2, but it is barely useable. GNUCash doesn't even come close to Quickbooks or Peachtree. Fact is the only reason I keep Windows around is for Quicken, TurboTax and Agent (news reader)

It can't be math or science. With MuPAD, or Maple, or Mathmatica available in Linux what does WinXX offer that's any better. Can't be MathCad - that uses the Maple engine.

Agreed there.

At can't be audio tools. Linux has it in aces there.

I think Linux is equal to Windows in audio but behind in video. Xmovie, Xmps, AviPlay are all fine but lack the stability and features found in numerous Windows video apps. Though for my taste, I like AviPlay. I think it is a great product even if it does use Windows binaries.

Flight simulator? Flight Gear does nicely.

Yes, it does! I was really impressed. It is a very well coded program.

Microsoft attacked and nearly destroyed Street Atlas. It is attacking RealPlayer and QuickTime by rolling its video offerings into the kernel. Same with Netplayer, ICQ, etc... In fact, in its greed Microsoft is destroying most of its formerly dynamic 3rd party markets. They keep that up and Microsurfs will have EXTREMELY LIMITED choices in software - Bill's way or the highway.

Well, with a Tiger in the midst, companies can't afford to rest on their past success. Novell lost it's place in networking, Netscape lost the browser war when they when to that crap, Communicator, RealPlay and their stupid business decisions costed them the lead and now Quicktime is in sight. I don't think ICQ is worried at all at this point. Messenger has come a long way, but ICQ just plain ROCKS!!

--- Jose Mirles wrote:

I may not be crazy about MS, but I will admit they make a fine product in MS Office, though a tad bloated. (smile)

My complaint about MS Office is that there are so many bells and whistles that I have a hard time trying to use them. I get dizzy. Oh, and $600US for a word processor and a spreadsheet? I THINK NOT. Part of the reason that Excel is so feature-rich is that Access isn't good enough for regular people to use. They wind up using a spreadsheet when a database would do 500% more good. I work for one of the largest telecom companies in the US, and you should see some of the 30MB (feels like, anyway) spreadsheets that the morons around here pass about all day. >:(

Then again, when Windows Graphic apps are compared to MAC apps...

I wondered when somebody was going to bring this up. :]

Fact is the only reason I keep Windows around is for Quicken, TurboTax and Agent (news reader)

That sucks. I was hoping to talk my brother-in-law into converting to GNUCash, but it looks like QuickBooks is still his answer. Agent rocks, too. Why can't some of the brilliant KDE team figure that out? ;)

I think Linux is equal to Windows in audio but behind in video. Xmovie, Xmps, AviPlay are all fine but lack the stability and features found in numerous Windows video apps.

MPlayer (http://mplayer.sourceforge.net/) will spank them all, as soon as they get the UI part figured out. It's not exactly intuitive at this point, but it's the fastest, most compatible (codecs and renderer), and lowest-overhead I've used yet.

Yes, it does! I was really impressed. It is a very well coded program.

Well, dammit, go out and buy some Loki games. :) Companies that make games for Linux should be financially supported so that other games are ported! I don't game, but I have been known to buy products based on principle rather than consumtion before... On that note, I can see in my crystal ball that The Kompany will be receiving multiple checks from me made out to them for their software products, assuming that they work anywhere close to as well as they claim...

I don't think ICQ is worried at all at this point. Messenger has come a long way, but ICQ just plain ROCKS!!

They should be. I've already converted to Yahoo! ===== -- -=|JP|=- Hit me! - http://www.xanga.com/cowboydren/ Jon Pennington | Debian 2.3 -o) cowboydren @ yahoo . com | Auto Enthusiast /\\ Kansas City, MO, USA | ICQ UIN 69 67 29 31 _\_V __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals http://personals.yahoo.com

On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 10:58:17PM -0600, Timothy R.Butler wrote:

And I've converted to Gaim and can use every single major protocol all at once - see http://www.uninetsolutions.com/tbutler/misc/contact.html .

I can't seem to get Gaim to install, it looks like it has a nice feature set though. Does SuSE Pro 7.2 have an RPM of it? (For now I have Personal...)

On Monday 12 November 2001 22:58, Timothy R.Butler wrote:

...

On that note, I can see in my crystal ball that The Kompany will be receiving multiple checks from me made out to them for their software products, assuming that they work anywhere close to as well as they claim...

Well, I'm not so impressed with theKompany at the moment. They have aligned themselves in direct competition with open source products that already were quite good while leaving places where commercial products are needed completely void, and also failed to make good on promises on parts of KDE they said they would work on. And the office suite they are working on with HancomLinux (HancomOffice) isn't very good from what I can tell either. *sigh*

Kompany will have to go some to outdo KDevelop! The html editor in HancomOffice, called Quanta+, is very good. It is in the SuSE distro as a GPL app. HancomOffice is added some more 'features' and integrated it with their office suite. JLK

...

...

I don't think ICQ is worried at all at this point. Messenger has come a long way, but ICQ just plain ROCKS!!

They should be. I've already converted to Yahoo!

And I've converted to Gaim and can use every single major protocol all at once - see http://www.uninetsolutions.com/tbutler/misc/contact.html . ;-)

-Tim

Hanscom v1.5 is pretty good. V2.0 will be native Linux, so I will be buying that one for sure.

Well, I plan to play with it some more but the beta of 2.0 didn't seem very impressive. I hope it improves though...

I was using Everybuddy, but ICQ changed their protocols so it made things somewhat rough. I have found KXICQ2. So far, I like it!

I use Gaim. It looks a lot like Everybuddy, but the developers are continually improving it at a very rapid rate (new versions every two weeks!). Gaim also has very good ICQ support using either native ICQ protocol, or (believe it or not) the OSCAR protocol. I highly recommend Gaim. -Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============== "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

Jerry Kreps wrote:

On Monday 12 November 2001 22:44, Jon Pennington wrote:

...

--- Jose Mirles wrote:

...

Well, dammit, go out and buy some Loki games. :) Companies that make games for Linux should be financially supported so that other games are ported! I don't game, but I have been known to buy products based on principle rather than consumtion before...

I am a proud owner of SimCity 3000 for Linux! Got it for my grandson when he comes over, but I have as much fun as he does! Love to get those meteors going! :) JLK

I have been wondering about SimCity 3000. I don't play games. I really suck at them. But I would like to try something like SimCity. Where do you buy Loki games?

...

On that note, I can see in my crystal ball that The Kompany will be receiving multiple checks from me made out to them for their software products, assuming that they work anywhere close to as well as they claim...

Kompany is beginning to display some cool tools...

I am somewhat intereseted in their checkbook program. It looks nice, but I havent heard a single nice thing about it. Hopefully it will be something with much of Quicken's functionality in it.

They have several products that look very interesting to me. Again, I haven't heard much positive except for Quanta, but if they can

Yeah, and theKompany hired away the Quanta developers, leaving the open source Quanta orphaned, so that they would work on the proprietary version. I'm glad the KDE developers adopted Quanta+.

afford to keep at it, the products will mature. Let's just hope that, unlike Office97 and MS Media Player 6, they don't get really good and then start to suck again (OfficeXP or MPlayer7, anyone?). :)

Watch out! Shawn Gordon is already exhibiting Redmonian aspects. He has deliberately slowed KDE development by promising support in areas and then failing to come through, attacked open source development, and particularly saying that KOffice would never be able to amount to anything. Furthermore, as freekde.org has reported, theKompany is positioning itself as a competitor to open source KDE apps in numerous areas. This company is not your friendly neighborhood Linux company. TheKompany has set their sights on things other than KDE and Linux (cross platform Windows/OS X/Linux apps), and I would be very cautious with them. -Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============== "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

...

Yeah, and theKompany hired away the Quanta developers, leaving the open source Quanta orphaned, so that they would work on the proprietary version. I'm glad the KDE developers adopted Quanta+.

That is good news!

Yes, especially since it needs the polishing touch of those amazing KDE developers. It will be part of KDE 3.0!

There was a big discussion on LT about this. I wished Kompany well, but didn't see how they could compete against KDevelop, KDE and KOffice. I still don't.

Yes, there was a similar discussion on KDE Dot News. Shawn posted numerous anti-KOffice remarks on the Dot. I must say unless theKompany starts supporting open source at least somewhat again, or makes something really spectacular - I will never buy their commercial products. -Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============== "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

Penquin suit and being a Penquin. The SourceForge (VA sans "Linux") and CDDB thing come to mind.

I'm not sure if SF is as bad as it seems. According to the company they do not plan to quit offering the free SF.net hosting to OSI-approved licensed OSS projects, nor will they quit offering the open source SourceForge code (SourceForge EE is something different). I hope at least... SF.net would leave a big void in the community if they ever change their mind. -Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============== "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

Actually I like the idea of cross platform. According to Lux Magazine, Hanscom Office Suite will come on a CD (or two) and be cross platform. So even if a retail store doesn't like stocking Linux software, you would still be able to buy it.

I thought it was a good way of getting Linux stuff out there.

It is, but it isn't. :-) Here is my complaint with it in this case. theKompany uses QT for their apps, so they *could* integrate very nicely into KDE. However, since they didn't link the programs to KDE (so that they are cross platform), they do not use the KDE dialogs, the KDE print system, the KDE styles, or anything else that would make them seem integrated. And, I also question, unless HancomOffice gets a lot better than the beta, why would anyone *want* to use it outside of Linux and UNIX? -Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============== "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

I have been wondering about SimCity 3000. I don't play games. I really suck at them. But I would like to try something like SimCity.

Where do you buy Loki games?

They are pretty cheap over at Amazon.com... I might buy myself a Linux version of RR Tycoon II and SC3K (I have the Windows versions of both). I have a SimAttack coming on. ;-) -Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============== "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Jose Mirles wrote:

----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Kreps" To: ; Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 9:38 PM Subject: Re: [SLE] Linux vs Windows

...

On Monday 12 November 2001 18:46, Karol Pietrzak wrote:

...

On 13 Nov 2001, Gert-Jan Rodenburg wrote:

...

...

As for workstation comparisons: you won't find any, I don't think. Linux software is extremely limited and most would say it can't really compete. That is, unless all your apps have adequate Linux equivalents.

*Grin* I feel a Holy War coming on.....

Yes, I already felt the heat when posting the message. I specifically didn't specify myself as holding those opinions (e.g. "most would say...").

I do, however, feel I am correct when I say that Linux workstation software is limited. It's almost a fact.

Really? In what way? I've been using Linux (SuSE) exclusively for almost two years. At work I have to use W2K. I find my SuSE box at home more liberating and useful than the W2K, and certainly more stable.

It can't be on office suites. I have several good ones and two excellent ones to choose from in Linux and essentially only one choice in WinXX. (Software 602 can't really count because it doesn't behave like Office. That's the problem when one says that LInux office packages don't count because they aren't like or compatible with Office - it eliminates all office packages on any platform.)

Well, I like Linux as much as the next person, but MS Office simply blows away Open Office, Star Office and Applix. While I agree that it is overkill for most, the fact is that MS Office has what you want when you need it.

I can't agree with this. I work part-time writing and editing documentation in a Windows environment, and Office's facilities for outputting in HTML suck the big one. (Sorry, there's JUST no other way to put it.) We have a new full-timer working on documentation who's more experienced than I am, and both of us are pushing for a move to purely open-source tools that support a variety of standards and output formats, not the broken HTML that Word outputs. So for us, MS Office certainly does *not* have "what [we] want when [we] need it." -snip- Regards, Tim Sunrise in Stockholm today: 7:37 Sunset in Stockholm today: 15:25 My rail transit photos at http://www.kynerd.nu

On Tuesday 13 November 2001 09:53 pm, Jose Mirles wrote:

Well one can argue that for HTML use FrontPage which comes with the MS Office suite and not a wordprocessor. I mean, I would not write a memo with an HTML editor.

FrontPage makes pretty bad HTML too; though of course not as bad as MS Word. Not only that, sometimes other browsers besides MSIE don't parse it right. Really coding by hand with a good HTML editor is still the best way to go, though for Linux one can use several WYSYWIG editors such as Amaya or Mozilla/Netscape Composer if one is so inclined.

Hi Tim You are of course right in what you say, but you are an expert and can afford to take that route. For me computing is not my job, and to have a site designed costs a fortune and you still do not end up with what you want. I know from my Brother's experience. I know Frontpage does not produce good code, but for me it did the job and I have control over it. The site loads as well as any other site I visit, better in many cases. David On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:37:17 -0600, Timothy R.Butler wrote:

...

FrontPage makes pretty bad HTML too; though of course not as bad as MS Word. Not only that, sometimes other browsers besides MSIE don't parse it right. Really coding by hand with a good HTML editor is still the best way to go, though for Linux one can use several WYSYWIG editors such as Amaya or Mozilla/Netscape Composer if one is so inclined.

Well at the cost of sounding like those long time UNIX'ers who think you should draw an image by typing in binary ;-), I would tend to agree - coding by hand is the *only* way to go if you want a decent site. Infact, I've even penned a number of columns on why one shouldn't use a WYSIWYG HTML editor.

-Tim

-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============== "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

Regards, David

On Wednesday 14 November 2001 06:55, David wrote:

Hi Tim

You are of course right in what you say, but you are an expert and can afford to take that route. For me computing is not my job, and to have a site designed costs a fortune and you still do not end up with what you want. I know from my Brother's experience.

I know Frontpage does not produce good code, but for me it did the job and I have control over it. The site loads as well as any other site I visit, better in many cases.

David

David, I use Quanta+, which comes on the SuSE Pro CD set. It is a great html WYSIWYG editor, including upload functions to the website. Jerry

However, as I'll repeat ad nauseam, producing long documents in HTML format for reference purposes is a different matter: there, you definitely want a tool that will automate as much of the process as possible.

Right. Typically I will load the document in KWord, or some other app, convert it to HTML, and then clean up the code to my specifications on jobs like this. -Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============== "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

Hi Jose, On Tue, 13 Nov 2001, Jose Mirles wrote:

Tim Kynerd wrote:

...

On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Jose Mirles wrote:

...

----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Kreps" To: ; Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 9:38 PM Subject: Re: [SLE] Linux vs Windows

...

On Monday 12 November 2001 18:46, Karol Pietrzak wrote:

...

On 13 Nov 2001, Gert-Jan Rodenburg wrote:

...

>As for workstation comparisons: you won't find any, I don't >think. Linux software is extremely limited and most would say >it can't really compete. That is, unless all your apps have >adequate Linux equivalents. > *Grin* I feel a Holy War coming on.....

Yes, I already felt the heat when posting the message. I specifically didn't specify myself as holding those opinions (e.g. "most would say...").

I do, however, feel I am correct when I say that Linux workstation software is limited. It's almost a fact.

Really? In what way? I've been using Linux (SuSE) exclusively for almost two years. At work I have to use W2K. I find my SuSE box at home more liberating and useful than the W2K, and certainly more stable.

It can't be on office suites. I have several good ones and two excellent ones to choose from in Linux and essentially only one choice in WinXX. (Software 602 can't really count because it doesn't behave like Office. That's the problem when one says that LInux office packages don't count because they aren't like or compatible with Office - it eliminates all office packages on any platform.)

Well, I like Linux as much as the next person, but MS Office simply blows away Open Office, Star Office and Applix. While I agree that it is overkill for most, the fact is that MS Office has what you want when you need it.

I can't agree with this. I work part-time writing and editing documentation in a Windows environment, and Office's facilities for outputting in HTML suck the big one. (Sorry, there's JUST no other way to put it.) We have a new full-timer working on documentation who's more experienced than I am, and both of us are pushing for a move to purely open-source tools that support a variety of standards and output formats, not the broken HTML that Word outputs.

So for us, MS Office certainly does *not* have "what [we] want when [we] need it."

Well one can argue that for HTML use FrontPage which comes with the MS Office suite and not a wordprocessor. I mean, I would not write a memo with an HTML editor.

Does FrontPage create HTML from Word files? I'm talking about software manuals that can easily run to over 100 pages, and they need to be provided in both HTML and PDF formats. Can FrontPage do that from Word files? There's no way I'm going to write and develop large manuals using what is essentially an HTML editor, obviously. BTW, AFAIK, my Office installation does not include FrontPage, so my statement remains true.

Again, I am simply saying that in some areas Linux is lacking. Linux has some great features. Heck, it is what I use, but really, saying that HTML in WORD sucks so Office sucks is not very bright. (Sorry, there's JUST no other way to out it.)

What I said was that "Office's facilities for outputting in HTML suck the big one." I did not say that Office sucks, even if I was thinking it at the time. :-)

Use the right tool for the right job.

If Office provided it, I would!

But read my entire message.

But you said, "While I agree that it is overkill for most, the fact is that MS Office has what you want when you need it." That is, at best, a gross overstatement, and at worst simply an untruth. MS Office DOES NOT have what we want when we need it. THAT's a fact. -snip- Regards, Tim Sunrise in Stockholm today: 7:40 Sunset in Stockholm today: 15:23 My rail transit photos at http://www.kynerd.nu

Hi, Being an advanced linux user and administrator for many years, I'd like to tell you that your'e right - but I can't. On Tuesday 13 November 2001 02:38, you wrote:

On Monday 12 November 2001 18:46, Karol Pietrzak wrote:

...

On 13 Nov 2001, Gert-Jan Rodenburg wrote:

...

...

As for workstation comparisons: you won't find any, I don't think. Linux software is extremely limited and most would say it can't really compete. That is, unless all your apps have adequate Linux equivalents.

*Grin* I feel a Holy War coming on.....

Yes, I already felt the heat when posting the message. I specifically didn't specify myself as holding those opinions (e.g. "most would say...").

I do, however, feel I am correct when I say that Linux workstation software is limited. It's almost a fact.

Really? In what way? I've been using Linux (SuSE) exclusively for almost two years. At work I have to use W2K. I find my SuSE box at home more liberating and useful than the W2K, and certainly more stable.

In the aspect of user-friendlyness, Linux software has a very long way to go. The sheer design issues of software, interoperability and useability is still flawed within the LInux/GNU design model, and having everyone fighting over which way to go, and what methods to adhere to will keep this model broken for some time to come.

It can't be on office suites. I have several good ones and two excellent ones to choose from in Linux and essentially only one choice in WinXX. (Software 602 can't really count because it doesn't behave like Office. That's the problem when one says that LInux office packages don't count because they aren't like or compatible with Office - it eliminates all office packages on any platform.)

What Office suites are you referring to ? It can't be KOffice, as that is incomplete in all aspects. StarOffice has been the closest M$-Office contender, but buy its parameters of design, it's too bloated ( at least M$ Office keeps every module separate ) and too slow to use on small hardware. What's left ? Corel Wordperfect Office ? Bugridden, bloated and so badly written that it couldn't spell horse even if one sat down on it.

It can't be graphics. Gimp or Blender, to say nothing of Maya, is as good as they get. Krayon will get there. What's ya got it windows beyond Photoshop? Paint? :)

Gimp is good, Photoshop is still better. There is no such thing as "better because it's free" in the commercial world, and Gimp lacks mileage before it can stand up to Photoshop. Photoshop has its stronghold in advertising and graphic design. If Gimp is to succeed, it has to gain a leverage over Photoshop, delivering something these markets need. Maya ? You won't be needing that neither on Windows nor Linux unless your'e a true big-bucks movie company. And by golly, your'e not :)

It can't be accounting software. MoneyDance is as useful as Quicken for home use. GNUCash will do small businesses fine. Then there a dozen BIG5 packages.

GnuCash is good for very simple home bookkeeping. Kapital is yet good for nothing. MoneyDance falls into the same category as GnuCash does. Have you ever used ( seriously ) accounting programs ? M$-Money is by far the best home accounting package available, with forecasting, visual output on almost any category, online link to your bank etc. Quicken isn't visually as appealing to some, but it's about as strong. Behind each of these packages lies many years of development, and tens if not hundreds of man-years of work and research. I have been monitoring the progress of Kapital ( which is for the unöinitiated, a commercial home-accounting package for Linux, from The Kompany ) and my belief is that although their efforts are admireable, they will only succeed if they manage to keep the project running for many years to come, and are able to keep R&D going full-steam. Will that happen if people give up on it and go back to Winders like they have been doing ? )

It can't be math or science. With MuPAD, or Maple, or Mathmatica available in Linux what does WinXX offer that's any better. Can't be MathCad - that uses the Maple engine.

This is one field where Linux *almost* excels. Almost. In medical research about half of all tools written are for Winders and MacOS ( pre MacOS-X ). In geophysics/geoscience and hydrology there are still proprietary tools that are Winders-only.

At can't be audio tools. Linux has it in aces there.

Quantity isn't the same as quality, and neither equals accessability nor useability. Linux audio tools tend to be raw and basically address the needs of the author, not the needs of the audience. That has to change. Both Windows AND MacOS offer better tools wich address specifically the needs, wishes and dreams of their respective audience.

Flight simulator? Flight Gear does nicely.

Flightgear is a very admireable project, with very ambitious goals. Still, for real pilot training, it can't offer anything. It's nothing more than a fancy toy yet. M$-Flightsimulator actually offers real-life situations which have truly proven life-saving. ( My brother is about 1 week from getting his JAR certification and is starting his training for commercial airliners, and having trained landing on our home airfield in FS, with 0 visibility saved him when there was a very unexpected 0V situation which not even the tower foresaw ). One day FlightGear will get there, but they still have a long way to go.

Microsoft attacked and nearly destroyed Street Atlas. It is attacking RealPlayer and QuickTime by rolling its video offerings into the kernel. Same with Netplayer, ICQ, etc... In fact, in its greed Microsoft is destroying most of its formerly dynamic 3rd party markets. They keep that up and Microsurfs will have EXTREMELY LIMITED choices in software - Bill's way or the highway.

The fact that M$ does not play fair does not take away their credit ( and the credit of other companies, writing programs FOR the M$ operating systems ) for having products FOR winders, far better than any offered on the Linux desktop today. The one thing that accounts for as Linuxes strength may well become its own downfall, if things keep going like they have. We say competition is good, and I agree to that - up to a point. When the competition has become fighting amongst our selves over desktops, their bound applications ( KDE, GNOME ), we lose. When it comes to ignorantly bashing Winders and praising what we've got, we've already lost. I once heard these wise words: Embrace your friend, but keep your enemy close to your heart. Only by impartially comparing what options you have can you make a wise choice. By making a (impartial) choice, you have also accepted that a certain product is the best fit for the job. Having made a choice, if the choice does not fit your operating environment, you have the option to change that. If tens of thousands of people were to contact Quicken, and plead for a Linux version of their package, they WOULD at least consider porting. If only one or two contact them, theyr'e recommended to install Winders. Having worked in software development, networking, customer relations and system administration, I have seen the high priests of MAC, the warlords of Linux and the prophets of Windows engage in holy war time upon time. Ultimately, they are the ones that lose out. The users still consider that the tool best fit for their daily work is the tool they've got now, and if ( any of - ) you are going to prove them wrong, then better provide them with something better. For now, I will use the best of both worlds. My users keep using what they want without me telling them, and we're all happy. I hope you find happiness is your (newfound ?) OS religion :-) Signing out tosi

"It's almost a fact" only counts in hand gernades. Jerry

...

We have all seen Samba and Apache benchmarks, but a desktop workstation comparison... Windows would win _completely_, especially with Windows 2000.

What do you think?

hi, im shortening the original mail a bit, since i only want to say something 'bout specific parts .... ok lets go : Am Sonntag, 25. November 2001 21:12 schrieb Timothy R. Butler: [....BIG SNIP....]

...

Gimp is good, Photoshop is still better. There is no such thing as "better because it's free" in the commercial world, and Gimp lacks mileage before it can stand up to Photoshop. Photoshop has its stronghold in advertising and graphic design. If Gimp is to succeed, it has to gain a leverage over Photoshop, delivering something these markets need.

Actually, I would disagree here. Perhaps not in the advertising industry, but in your average IT department things like initial cost savings and total cost of ownership are very important. For anything but the most serious graphics design, I think Gimp wins this round.

well, gimp is _almost_ a professional tool. all tools and filters that one knows from a (default !) photoshop install are there, plus a lot others. weired about the key bindings of gimp ?? make them like in photoshop: stay with the mouse on a menu item an press the key shortcut you want to have for that...voila... show me that in photoshop, no go !! BUT !! to make gimp a bit more professional, it needs one very, very important thing. no, not a different gui, and also not a interface to use photoshop plugins. it needs professional color systems to work on !! CMYK is a _MUST HAVE_ in professional image aditing. not to say that you need more colordepth than 32bpp ...

...

Maya ? You won't be needing that neither on Windows nor Linux unless your'e a true big-bucks movie company. And by golly, your'e not :)

Well, that just means that Linux covers all the bases, doesn't it? You don't need an IBM S/390 unless you are a big bucks corporation, but that doesn't mean we don't like to talk about 'em.

hmm.... i know alot of people that buyed maya (hey, its not that big-$ software as you may think ...) to make their 3d/gfx jobs. whats missing on linux is a software like 3dstudio, lightwave or the like. i know, i know, there is moonlight creator, blender etc. but none of them i would consider usable for professional day-to-day work .... usability of software is a big lack in linux. the software itself (if we look at it as simple routines) is all there, but there is no good/usable interface for the most of them. at least no inteface that makes it real usable and smooth to work with .... windooze software has a big plus there. but what do you expect from a _programmer_ ??? writing _user_ friendly software ?? ;-)) [....small snip....]

...

...

At can't be audio tools. Linux has it in aces there.

Quantity isn't the same as quality, and neither equals accessability nor useability. Linux audio tools tend to be raw and basically address the needs of the author, not the needs of the audience. That has to change. Both Windows AND MacOS offer better tools wich address specifically the needs, wishes and dreams of their respective audience.

What about Broadcast2000 for highend stuff? What about the integrated CD ripping in KDE for the lowend stuff? What about Gramofile for Record recording and sound noise removal? And everything inbetween...

bcast 2k is dead for now, and the future is unknown. apart from that, i tried to actually use it. forget about it. its nice, its powerfull, but again lacks usability in the user-interface. and hey, please, you all should not forget that multimedia is _NOT_ only a highe collection of players, encoders and the like. the underlying sytsem (linux) needs improvements in multimedia handling, too. think about realtime audio, the latency there is really high with a standard installed linux system. and also introduces a lot of lag too. nice api design, but not performant as it should be. there are low-latency patches out for linux. why dont the major distro makers include them in their kernels ??? _this_ would help to recon linux as mm platform ! also graphics .... hey, x may be nice, but its overbloated to program, and its fairly slow ..... try to play a fullscreen video .... watch your sysload. play the same, but with a smaller window .... you can clearly see that it is not the decoding that takes the most cpu power...... and again, there are solutions available to these problems (kgi.sf.net) , but none of the distro makers care about that. _thats_ a real pain. esp. when you try to add these patches yourself. and hey, im a programmer, but fail to apply some of them..... thanks suse for messing up with the kernel sources .... [...last small snip...]

...

We say competition is good, and I agree to that - up to a point. When the competition has become fighting amongst our selves over desktops, their bound applications ( KDE, GNOME ), we lose. When it comes to ignorantly bashing Winders and praising what we've got, we've already lost.

That's true. Linux is to partisan within it's ranks, and that could be it's downfall - I certainly hope not.

yea, thats a pain too. instead of beeing happy what we have we start wars about our own app's .... hey, wasnt it in the past that open source development was about having "forks" of some particular projects, and let the forks die that showed to go in the wrong direction ??? why we are not simply quit, use either gnome or kde, and wait what will happen ?? meybe gnome dies, mybe kde dies, maybe booth co-exist nicely in the future ?? why arent we glad to have that choice, but rather start holy wars about what gui to use ??

Best, Tim

me too, and why not moving such discussions to lx-talk@mamalala.de ?? ;-) chris -- visit me at http://mamalala.de

hi jerry, 2d-graphics != 3d-graphics !!! you would never use blender to make a photo colage, while at the same time you wouldnt use gimp to create you 3-d (animatd?) pod vehicle ..... so, if one talks about photoshop and gimp, one can not say "huh, but we have blender [mlcreator, whatever...]" and, 2-d graphics works is the biggest portion of the graphical workday ..... greets, chris Am Sonntag, 25. November 2001 23:46 schrieben Sie:

When discussing graphics in Linux everybody mentions GIMP but no one seems to be aware of Blender or Midnight. ??? JLK

-- visit me at http://mamalala.de

On Sunday 25 November 2001 20:12, you wrote:

...

In the aspect of user-friendlyness, Linux software has a very long way to go.

The sheer design issues of software, interoperability and useability is still flawed within the LInux/GNU design model, and having everyone fighting over which way to go, and what methods to adhere to will keep this model broken for some time to come.

Really? Have you taken a look at KDE lately? I find it's layout to be as friendly or friendlier than Windows. And distros such as SuSE and Mandrake make installing Linux so easy that I can't imagine anyone who wants to install it, not being able to.

Actually, I'm already using SuSE 7.3 with KDE 2.2.1 ( soon to be upgraded to KDE 2.2.2 ). In comparison to XP Pro, it leaves some to be desired, and yet surpasses XP in some aspects ( like themes - M$ won't allow you to install themes that are not signed by them )

...

What Office suites are you referring to ? It can't be KOffice, as that is incomplete in all aspects. StarOffice has been the closest M$-Office contender, but buy its parameters of design, it's too bloated ( at least M$ Office keeps every module separate ) and too slow to use on small hardware.

What's left ? Corel Wordperfect Office ? Bugridden, bloated and so badly written that it couldn't spell horse even if one sat down on it.

I'll give you that one. Although you might checkout OpenOffice, it seems very nice, and so does KOffice (I estimate what should have been KOffice 1.0 should arrive sometime next year).

They still leave much to be desired, esp. when compared to M$-Office which just about everyone and their mother use. Unfortunately, compatibility with this package is a must.

...

Gimp is good, Photoshop is still better. There is no such thing as "better because it's free" in the commercial world, and Gimp lacks mileage before it can stand up to Photoshop. Photoshop has its stronghold in advertising and graphic design. If Gimp is to succeed, it has to gain a leverage over Photoshop, delivering something these markets need.

Actually, I would disagree here. Perhaps not in the advertising industry, but in your average IT department things like initial cost savings and total cost of ownership are very important. For anything but the most serious graphics design, I think Gimp wins this round.

The average IT department does not need the advanced functions of Photoshop or Gimp. What the average IT department needs is a go-between, well integrated into an Office package ( maybe Krayon will get there first... )

...

Maya ? You won't be needing that neither on Windows nor Linux unless your'e a true big-bucks movie company. And by golly, your'e not :)

Well, that just means that Linux covers all the bases, doesn't it? You don't need an IBM S/390 unless you are a big bucks corporation, but that doesn't mean we don't like to talk about 'em.

Talking about them serves no practical purpose other than to look smart. They're not of any value to the average user ( and not even accessible ). We could just as well speculate about living on the moon - well possible, but way out of reach.

...

full-steam. Will that happen if people give up on it and go back to Winders like they have been doing ? )

I'd be interested in knowing where people are "giving up on it and go back to Winders." I haven't heard anything like that...

Join the kapital mailing list. You'll notice the frustration.

...

In geophysics/geoscience and hydrology there are still proprietary tools that are Winders-only.

Well, Linux can't have tools for every highly specialized field, I think most of Linux' scientific programs are more general purpose.

Actually, unixes have had the scientific edge for decades. Only lately has Winders been moving into that sector ( unfortunately ! )

...

...

At can't be audio tools. Linux has it in aces there.

Quantity isn't the same as quality, and neither equals accessability nor useability. Linux audio tools tend to be raw and basically address the needs of the author, not the needs of the audience. That has to change. Both Windows AND MacOS offer better tools wich address specifically the needs, wishes and dreams of their respective audience.

What about Broadcast2000 for highend stuff? What about the integrated CD ripping in KDE for the lowend stuff? What about Gramofile for Record recording and sound noise removal? And everything inbetween...

Last time I checked, BC2k was discontinued due to fear of DMCA litigation. For other apps, make a fair comparison. Look at what you have side by side, not individual components. Then look at the level of knowledge the user has to have to use each app, and what level the user has to reach to do all the "everyday" ripping/burning/composing stuff. Winders wins this round.

...

Flightgear is a very admireable project, with very ambitious goals. Still, for real pilot training, it can't offer anything. It's nothing more than a fancy toy yet. M$-Flightsimulator actually offers real-life situations which have truly proven life-saving. ( My brother is about 1 week from

I could be wrong, but I suspect that most people don't buy Flight Simulator to get a license.

You can't use FS without a license anymore ( since FS2k ). Perhaps you might find a crack, but I think the hassle isn't worth the ~$50

...

We say competition is good, and I agree to that - up to a point. When the competition has become fighting amongst our selves over desktops, their bound applications ( KDE, GNOME ), we lose. When it comes to ignorantly bashing Winders and praising what we've got, we've already lost.

That's true. Linux is to partisan within it's ranks, and that could be it's downfall - I certainly hope not.

Neither do I, but like many, I've grown weary waiting for "that killer app". And a miracle sure isn't waiting around the corner. Now the DOJ has sold out, so for now, I have stepped down from my high horse, and try to see what practical solution there is to a users particular problem, rather than finding a scredriver and teach the user to use it as a hammer....

Best, Tim

Regards, tosi

I hope you and the M$-thinks-you-are-a-thief registration wizard get along ok.

Hehehe, I gotta wonder exactly how much Microsoft actually gained from this (since even the generally pro-MS press came down hard on MS for this one). BTW, I read somewhere the other day that fair use laws at least seem to indicate that it's perfectly legal to install copyrighted works on multiple PC's in a household... anyone else here this?

"Desire" is an individual thing, Tor. Requiring compatibility with M$-Office is a myth push by M$ "Developer Evangelists" who also have a Linux background. (You didn't accept employment from MS as one, did you? :) For the 13,000+ folks were I work you better be sending documents as Word Perfect compatible. Besides, with SO import-export

That brings up an interesting point... why don't Linux developers make a WP filter? It wouldn't be a moving target, and Word generally can open and save WP documents beatifully. It might be better than a Word-filter...

working as well as it does, it would take no effort to switch from one 'standard' to another as the need arises. We do it all the time at work. That is why I have installed SO 6.0 at work. It's TCO is beginning to makes sense to the computer illiterates near the top of the company food chain. Especially in these high license costs, low opportunity business times.

I can't agree more. Hehehe, care to write a StarOffice TCO article for OfB.biz? <vbg>

Seasons greetings,

Ah, it's that time of year, isn't it? :-D Merry Christmas to you too Jerry! -Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============= "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

On Sunday 25 November 2001 19:05, Jon Biddell wrote:

...

Hehehe, I gotta wonder exactly how much Microsoft actually gained from this (since even the generally pro-MS press came down hard on MS for this one). BTW, I read somewhere the other day that fair use laws at least seem to indicate that it's perfectly legal to install copyrighted works on multiple PC's in a household... anyone else here this?

Generally, the legal position has always been thus; Examine the EULA for (probably) any M$ product, and you will see words to the effect that the software can only be EXECUTED on one CPU at a time (let's not go near dual-CPU workstations for the moment). Therefore, according to the law, I can install (for example) Office 2000 on 5 machines, as long as only ONE of them is running it AT ANY ONE TIME. This is LEGAL. Multiple installation/single execution is largely the norm in business (.e. I have Office 2K at home and at work - the work machine is running it when the home machine isn't).

Jon

If you are practicing that interpretation, and M$ or their lap dogs find out about it, you may find yourself paying treble "damages" for past offenses and more for a five year license. JLK

On Sunday 25 November 2001 14:12, Timothy R. Butler wrote:

...

In the aspect of user-friendlyness, Linux software has a very long way to go.

The sheer design issues of software, interoperability and useability is still flawed within the LInux/GNU design model, and having everyone fighting over which way to go, and what methods to adhere to will keep this model broken for some time to come.

Really? Have you taken a look at KDE lately? I find it's layout to be as friendly or friendlier than Windows. And distros such as SuSE and Mandrake make installing Linux so easy that I can't imagine anyone who wants to install it, not being able to.

...

What Office suites are you referring to ? It can't be KOffice, as that is incomplete in all aspects. StarOffice has been the closest M$-Office contender, but buy its parameters of design, it's too bloated ( at least M$ Office keeps every module separate ) and too slow to use on small hardware.

What's left ? Corel Wordperfect Office ? Bugridden, bloated and so badly written that it couldn't spell horse even if one sat down on it.

I'll give you that one. Although you might checkout OpenOffice, it seems very nice, and so does KOffice (I estimate what should have been KOffice 1.0 should arrive sometime next year).

...

Gimp is good, Photoshop is still better. There is no such thing as "better because it's free" in the commercial world, and Gimp lacks mileage before it can stand up to Photoshop. Photoshop has its stronghold in advertising and graphic design. If Gimp is to succeed, it has to gain a leverage over Photoshop, delivering something these markets need.

Actually, I would disagree here. Perhaps not in the advertising industry, but in your average IT department things like initial cost savings and total cost of ownership are very important. For anything but the most serious graphics design, I think Gimp wins this round.

...

Maya ? You won't be needing that neither on Windows nor Linux unless your'e a true big-bucks movie company. And by golly, your'e not :)

Well, that just means that Linux covers all the bases, doesn't it? You don't need an IBM S/390 unless you are a big bucks corporation, but that doesn't mean we don't like to talk about 'em.

And, we could start listing Linux apps for which there are no equivilents in the WinXX world....

...

full-steam. Will that happen if people give up on it and go back to Winders like they have been doing ? )

I'd be interested in knowing where people are "giving up on it and go back to Winders." I haven't heard anything like that...

Like any physically dynamic system you will find that there is a forward rate and a backward rate. The question is not that the backward rate exists (that could only happen if M$ disappeared) but what is the ration of Kf/Kb ? If you say it is less than or equal to 1.0 or that it is greater than 1.0 but diminishing toward one then we disagree. All the evidence is that Kf/Kb is > 1.0 and increasing.

...

In geophysics/geoscience and hydrology there are still proprietary tools that are Winders-only.

And visa versa. Being primarily a winders player, and the fact that GPL and OpenSource and BSD projects don't carry big advertising budgets you probably don't hear about them as much.

Well, Linux can't have tools for every highly specialized field, I think most of Linux' scientific programs are more general purpose.

...

...

At can't be audio tools. Linux has it in aces there.

Quantity isn't the same as quality, and neither equals accessability nor useability. Linux audio tools tend to be raw and basically address the needs of the author, not the needs of the audience. That has to change. Both Windows AND MacOS offer better tools wich address specifically the needs, wishes and dreams of their respective audience.

Won't give an inch, eh? If Linux has WinXX beat in coverage the story is that the coverage isn't as good as WinXX poorer coverage. You are a true believer, that is for sure. But, I contest you conjecture. Eye-candy doesn't substitute for quality. Besides, how good can an app be if the platform it is standing on collapses all the time. Don't give me that saw about W2K or XP being 'as stable as Linux'. I program using W2K 40 hrs/week and I know differently.

What about Broadcast2000 for highend stuff? What about the integrated CD ripping in KDE for the lowend stuff? What about Gramofile for Record recording and sound noise removal? And everything inbetween...

...

Flightgear is a very admireable project, with very ambitious goals. Still, for real pilot training, it can't offer anything. It's nothing more than a fancy toy yet. M$-Flightsimulator actually offers real-life situations which have truly proven life-saving. ( My brother is about 1 week from

God bless your brother. I hold a private pilot license. One can use only 10 hours of time 'under the hood' via a flight simulator, and the M$ simulator doesn't have a lock on that market. The only effective simulation is flying vector paths and doing standard turns. Even when you use three CRT's, foot peddles and a yoke, a PC based flight simulator isn't even close to setting in the cockpit of a real plane. Hearing and feeling the gurggling sound that air makes over the wing when you have passed the critical angle of attack, then having the high wing lose lift and dip sharply as the craft rolls over into a spin cannot be simulated on any PC based flight sim. You cannot feel your turn in the seat of your pants, and you butt won't slide out of your seat when your turn is not coordinated in a sim.

I could be wrong, but I suspect that most people don't buy Flight Simulator to get a license.

As my instructor said, "There are old pilots, bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots."

...

We say competition is good, and I agree to that - up to a point. When the competition has become fighting amongst our selves over desktops, their bound applications ( KDE, GNOME ), we lose. When it comes to ignorantly bashing Winders and praising what we've got, we've already lost.

The reverse is also true - WinXX has no desktop competition to fight over, and when it comes to ignorantly bashing Linux and praising Winders we lo....... no, they lose. They lose stability, growth, excitement, and lots and lots of cash. JLK

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

The sheer design issues of software, interoperability and useability is still flawed within the Linux/GNU design model, and having everyone fighting over which way to go, and what methods to adhere to will keep this model broken for some time to come.

A disagreement of approach or mismatch of ideas is not "fighting". There is no one-true approach in Linux and the broader scope of free software. You may be experienced in Linux and free software in general, but you may have missed it's ideals.

What Office suites are you referring to ? It can't be KOffice, as that is incomplete in all aspects. StarOffice has been the closest M$-Office contender, but buy its parameters of design, it's too bloated ( at least M$ Office keeps every module separate ) and too slow to use on small hardware.

Star Office became OpenOffice as free software and already it has lost it's monolithic nature. What is "bloat" anyway? I'm always suspicious when someone uses "bloat" in an argument. Does "bloat" mean it has too many features for you? :)

What's left ? Corel Wordperfect Office ? Bugridden, bloated and so badly written that it couldn't spell horse even if one sat down on it.

Bloat, bloat, bloat... By it's nature, an office package will tend to be large since it is a collection of many components and interoperating programs. BTW, many users are quite happy with WP. I for one, didn't find any problem with it right back to 4.x. StarOffice (and OpenOffice as it matures) will be perfect for Typical User. It may even be perfect as a replacement for the MS office package in general. Is there a feature in MS Office has I can't live without that StarOffice doesn't have? Poor interoporability between StarOffice and MS Office? How about *this* for poor interoperability: MS Office and the *next* version of MS Office (and vice versa). Besides, I know instances of where small to meduim sized corporations have dumped MS Office for StarOffice entirely. The future looks damn good for StarOffice/OpenOffice.

Gimp is good, Photoshop is still better. There is no such thing as "better because it's free" in the commercial world, and Gimp lacks mileage before it can stand up to Photoshop. Photoshop has its stronghold in advertising and graphic design. If Gimp is to succeed, it has to gain a leverage over Photoshop, delivering something these markets need.

For the Typical User, the GIMP is perfect, while Photoshop is a waste of money.

GnuCash is good for very simple home bookkeeping. Kapital is yet good for nothing. MoneyDance falls into the same category as GnuCash does.

You said it: GnuCash is perfect for the Typical User. I have no experience with Kapital or MoneyDance, so I don't compare here -- but I assume they're target toward Typical User as well.

In geophysics/geoscience and hydrology there are still proprietary tools that are Winders-only.

Typical User doesn't need geophysics programs.

useability. Linux audio tools tend to be raw and basically address the needs of the author, not the needs of the audience. That has to change.

Does Typical User need high-powered recording tools?

Flightgear is a very admireable project, with very ambitious goals. Still, for real pilot training, it can't offer anything. It's nothing more than a fancy toy yet. M$-Flightsimulator actually offers real-life situations which have truly proven life-saving. ( My brother is about 1 week from getting his JAR certification and is starting his training for commercial

Typical User isn't going for his/her pilots license either :)

We say competition is good, and I agree to that - up to a point. When the competition has become fighting amongst our selves over desktops, their

I'll take my chances with competition and a community with several ideas than a single corporation dictating it one idea. So StarOffice/OpenOffice, GIMP and GnuCash (and others) are perfect for Typical User. Who's Typical User? He's your home/office Windows-using person. Thanks to Typical User, all those high-end apps Typical User will never use exist on Windows. As Typical User realises Free applications like StarOffice, OpenOffice and the GIMP (just to name a few) exist on Linux, he'll switch to save a bundle. As this happends, and the typical user on Linux market grows, more and more of those high-end software manufacturers will target the Linux platform. This happened for Windows, this will happen for Linux. It's not ideology, or religion. It's economics and pure greed of individuals and corporations that will ensure Linux distributers succeed in opposition to MS. </ramble> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8AcyyvtD4juu5kxARAlwKAJ4/ZFvMsoK5JDw91vr/nMHNcYaY5wCfe8SV j7u4IKzdqRxY0ODL45E6VcQ= =AbcQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

8<----------------------------------------------------------------->8 8<----------------------------------------------------------------->8 Ralph, How does staroffice 6 handle macro's from ms-weird? I ask this because the company I work for, has some custom macro's that have always screwed up the docs when opened in staroffice. The things create word-documents that have acces implemented within the document (at least that is my perception of the bloath they putted into it, there are no actual active links to any other office apps in the docs) And, does it still try to take over your desktop? I really hated that part. Gr. GJR

On Mon, 2001-11-12 at 19:52, Gert-Jan Rodenburg wrote:

8<----------------------------------------------------------------->8 8<----------------------------------------------------------------->8

Ralph,

How does staroffice 6 handle macro's from ms-weird?

I ask this because the company I work for, has some custom macro's that have always screwed up the docs when opened in staroffice. The things create word-documents that have acces implemented within the document (at least that is my perception of the bloath they putted into it, there are no actual active links to any other office apps in the docs)

And, does it still try to take over your desktop? I really hated that part.

Gr.

GJR

The good news is that the desktop in staroffice 6 is dead. After installation there is a new item added to KDE menu for staroffice 6. This staroffice 6 item lists: writer, spreadsheet, HTML document, presentation, template, drawing and 3 additonal sub-menus. If you click on 'writer', you just get a window for 'writer' and your KDE destop is still accessible. The loading time for 'writer' is not much quicker than the loading time for the entire desktop in staroffice 5.2, but at least all you have to deal with is a window. I can not give you a good or knowledgable answer regarding macros from MS to staroffice. Two of the files I routinely access may have macros embedded in them somewhere, since when I open these files in MSoffice there is a warning about macros. When opened in staroffice there is no such warning and I can not see any difference in the files. Not knowing what the macros are supposed to do makes spotting any problems difficult. If you are truly curious and if your files are not confidential you could email me a copy of one of your files, tell me what the macro is supposed to do and I could open it here and tell you what happened or did not happen. I would be surprised if a significant macro (visual basic ?) were to be imported and properly converted into staroffice. -- Ralph Sanford - If your government does not trust you, rsanford@telusplanet.net - should you trust your government? DH/DSS Key - 0x7A1BEA01

Hi I must disagree with ease of installation (but that is just my computer) I have Matrox G450, USB, Ensoniq sound card, 512Mb RAM and a cheap 10/100 NIC (realtek) SuSE 7.2 installed okay, found USB and sound and network card without problems. When I for "fun" installed win-98 to this same computer to a empty HD that was lying around, I found that Win-98 failed miserably to detect 3 things: USB: Was quite hard to get working. Had to install/remove it several times, and finally got it working by doing some tricks that an average user could never have done. NIC: Same thing. There was just no "normal" with that setup. A lot of tweaking and testing before I got it to work. Sound: Win-98 just could not find any soundcard. I had to "force" that one too. So in this case I would say that Win-98 installation is a nightmare! No average user could install Win-98 to this computer. Linux on the other hand installs by accepting just defaults, and start working. Even dual-monitor is supported, sound came up without doing anything special, same goes with USB-mouse and NIC. Only setting USB-scanner to work has been a little tricky, but all the instructions can be found from documents, it was just to find the correct document. Jaska. Viestissä Tiistai 13. Marraskuuta 2001 04:40, Ralph Sanford kirjoitti:

On Mon, 2001-11-12 at 17:46, Karol Pietrzak wrote:

...

On 13 Nov 2001, Gert-Jan Rodenburg wrote:

...

...

As for workstation comparisons: you won't find any, I don't think. Linux software is extremely limited and most would say it can't really compete. That is, unless all your apps have adequate Linux equivalents.

*Grin* I feel a Holy War coming on.....

Yes, I already felt the heat when posting the message. I specifically didn't specify myself as holding those opinions (e.g. "most would say...").

I do, however, feel I am correct when I say that Linux workstation software is limited. It's almost a fact.

We have all seen Samba and Apache benchmarks, but a desktop workstation comparison... Windows would win _completely_, especially with Windows 2000.

What do you think?

-- Karol Pietrzak PGP KeyID: 3A1446A0

Time to review your opinion.

Assuming a windows workstation in an office environment where the most commonly used applications are MS Word, Excel and Outlook; then compare to StarOfice 6 beta and Evolution. The differences between the systems are not that significant.

StarOffice 6 can import and export MS Office documents at about 98 to 99 percent correctly for difficult documents and almost perfect for less complex items. Considering that between MS Office 97 and 2000 the compatibility is also not perfect then StarOffice is a contender and can be used to exchange documents with all those who use MS Office. Previously one of the most common complaints about StarOffice was the mediocre MSOffice filters. With StarOffice 6 the filters are very good and possiblly extremely good when used against MSOffice 97 and 2000.

While I may have some issues with Evolution and its method of dealing with certain items (particularly PGP and SuSE support); I have less issues with Evolution than I do with Outlook. As a MS Outlook clone, evolution is a good option.

The often raised concern that Linux is more difficult to get running is based upon a comparison to a preinstalled windows system. Over the last few months I have helped 2 people that lost their windows system (poor virus management and responses) reinstall windows on to reformatted hard disks. My condition to help these lost souls was that Linux be installed as a dual boot. SuSE 7.2 was installed and running in about 1 hour in each case. Windows took 4 hours and 6 hours. Remember SuSE Linux includes most of the drivers you will need in the distribution and installing a recognized sound card or printer is only a couple of seconds with Yast2. A network card, scsi card, sound card, printer, or scanner in windows 'may' be better supported but that means a separate driver disk and separate installation for each device. BTW the issue both of these people had with Linux after the installation was the StarOffice overbearing desktop and the mediocre MS ofice filters (both resolved with StarOffice 6).

Is Linux ready for the desktop?? Well let us ask the other question, is MS really ready for the desktop? Blue screen of death, bloated licensing, closed proprietary system that is only marginally compatible with the previous version and automated 'user friendly' features that will fight any changes that you the ignorant user want to introduce to your computer.

By the spring of 2002, my business partner and I expect to have our new company up and running and barring unforeseen circumstances we will be using Linux on our computer systems. Of course by that time we are expecting that SuSE 7.4 will include StarOffice 6 (GA) and Evolution 1.0 or greater will have a spell checker for SuSE.

Hello, I have install the kernel 2.4.7, as SuSE explain in his security mailing-list. But after install the RPM, all my users quota are away ... Quota don't wan't to reboot any more and /usr/sbin/repquota -a say's : repquota: Quotafile format detected differs from the specified one (or the one kernel uses on the file). Is there any solution to correct this SuSE RPM misconfiguration ? Thanks for your help. Regards. Eric

On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:17:38 +0200 Jaakko Tamminen wrote:

Maybe people are saying that Linux (SuSE?) is more difficult to install,

because it gives You the freedom to choose how You want to set things up.

"Freedom to choose" is an argument I keep hearing time and time again. It may be true for Linux experts, for laymen like myself this freedom is yet to be discovered. Right now I feel much more freer setting up and controlling Windows than SuSE. Contrary to what you are saying I didn't find SuSE more difficult to install, even though I still can't get my sound card working. The difficult part (... to accept) was the 900 MEG required by default system without Office. Furthermore, I find SuSE very slow as compaired to Windows, especially file search which is not only slow but unacceptably slow. This was by far the greatest surprise and disappointment. /e

The 900 MB is because a default install is about the same what you would get with a Windows-installation with all bells and whistles from third

On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:18:28 +0100 Gert-Jan Rodenburg wrote: party's on

it (cd-writers, REAL-players stuff, you know what I mean.)

Don't know how much a minimal install is, for I always do select a big

Standard installation of Windows 98se requires max 350MB. I always thought it was a lot but now it doesn't seem to be all that much. part

of the devel-tools, and documentation. But it keeps the HD relatively clean.

180MB-400MB which is still way too much. My first 'encounter' with Linux was approx 10 year ago. All you needed then was one floppy disk. (10 only few months later) /e

On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:26:52 +0100 Praise wrote:

Il 16:38, martedì 13 novembre 2001, Eva von Pepel ha scritto:

...

180MB-400MB which is still way too much. My first 'encounter' with Linux was approx 10 year ago. All you needed then was one floppy disk. (10 only few months later) /e

Cool:-) The GUI was great and it was full of programs I suppose:-) Have you tried to build up a distro by yourself? You have save so much space:-)

Surprise, surprise. There were quite a few applications on those 10 floppies, including X and 3D-studio /e

On Tuesday 13 November 2001 16:38, Eva von Pepel wrote

180MB-400MB which is still way too much. My first 'encounter' with Linux was approx 10 year ago. All you needed then was one floppy disk. (10 only few months later) /e

Whow, aprox ten years, you must've lived next door to Linus :) My first encounter was 6 years ago, and boy was it a b*tch :) I had to copy the stuf at the Uni (a lot of disks), go back home, find out that disk D2 was broken, and wait for the next day... :) Ah, those where the days. But what I tried to say was: Don't compare a fresh install of linux with a fresh install of windows. Compare a fresh install of linux with an install of windows with Office2000 Visual studio (Full of cource) and another gazzillion programs with it. I just got my company laptop back, fresh install of win2000,+ Office (only word PP and Excel), that is it, nothing more nothing less, it takes up a friggin 2G! Those are the things you need to compare.. But as I said, I don't do any of the install options anymore. I go to the minumal install, then deselect a lot of things (and add all the development stuff I need) and then run the thing, and add it as I need it. Gr. Hertog

On Tuesday 13 November 2001 09:38, Eva von Pepel wrote:

On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:18:28 +0100

Gert-Jan Rodenburg wrote:

...

The 900 MB is because a default install is about the same what you would

get

...

with a Windows-installation with all bells and whistles from third

party's on

...

it (cd-writers, REAL-players stuff, you know what I mean.)

Standard installation of Windows 98se requires max 350MB. I always thought it was a lot but now it doesn't seem to be all that much.

...

Don't know how much a minimal install is, for I always do select a big

part

...

of the devel-tools, and documentation. But it keeps the HD relatively

clean.

180MB-400MB which is still way too much. My first 'encounter' with Linux was approx 10 year ago. All you needed then was one floppy disk. (10 only few months later) /e

And you could run KDE too, right? :-}

Hi You are right about file-search, if You are talking about first time building the search database. It takes quite a long time in Linux. My Linux system involves over 250.000 files, but windows includes fraction of that amount. But when You have once build the database (or let the automatic update do it), finding files is much much faster in Linux.. It will find any file in less than 3 seconds. To find a file, I press Alt-F2, and write "xterm" (1.5 sec.). Then write "locate <file>" (1.5 sek), so I have found the file in less than 6 seconds. In windows I would have the search windows perhaps open in this time. There is GUI also in Linux, that equals to "find files" in windows, but it is soooo slow... :_) (like in Windows) That is the reason I say Linux gives You more freedom. There is always multiple ways to do things. In Windows You usually have only one way to do it. If there is no "button", then there is no way to do it. So it is like comparing a truck to a catepillar.. there is no point... If You feel like having more freedom setting up Windows, then You are a windows user. Period. And I don't mean it in a bad way, it is just the way people are different. Some do buy ready-made pizzas, some goes to a restaurant and gets them with what they want. There is no correct answer which is better. For me Linux gives much more freedom. I like to run multiple tasks, and as I have dual-monitor with Matrox G450, I have actually 8 virtual desktops, where I can have different types of tasks running.. That is impossible in Windows. You need to browse thru overlapping windows in single screen, loosing information because one covers the other etc... You end up with a messy screen. For me that would be a nightmare. Also building advanced networking setups (VPN, VCN, routing and sharing) is quite impossible in Windows. Or lets say, I need to spend thousands of dollars to be able to that.. And all is virtually included in Linux itself. Because I like Linux, I do work with StarOffice, and I like it. There is sometimes lack of function that can be found in M$ Office, but that is no big deal. I can always find a way to do it. Even creating PDF is already there... In M$ world one need to buy quite expensive SW to do it. Never have I been forced to boot to Windows to be able to do some task. But then again, there is no button to click for some functions in Linux... It needs knowledge how to do it in text-mode. In Linux there is also always good documentation. But because there is so much of it, sometimes it takes time to find the correct one. But it is there. In Windows the documentation is like "is the power-chord connected?" type of help. It is worthless except for a beginner. No real help there to a real problem. This is my opinion.. there is good and bad things in both. For me there is just no way I'm getting back to M$.. It is just too poor OS for me, even with all Office & stuff... And maybe that is why it does not require so much HD space??? (But why StarOffice installs in 3 minutes, and Office-2000 takes over 2 (TWO!) hours to install???) Sorry that I sound a big negative here, it is not my intention. As said, both have their places. Like with cars, there is not one best for everyone. Ferrari-guys shut up!.. Lamborghini is the right one! :-9 Jaska. Viestissä Tiistai 13. Marraskuuta 2001 14:56, Eva von Pepel kirjoitti:

On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:17:38 +0200

Jaakko Tamminen wrote:

...

Maybe people are saying that Linux (SuSE?) is more difficult to install,

because it gives You the freedom to choose how You want to set things

up.

"Freedom to choose" is an argument I keep hearing time and time again. It may be true for Linux experts, for laymen like myself this freedom is yet to be discovered. Right now I feel much more freer setting up and controlling Windows than SuSE.

Contrary to what you are saying I didn't find SuSE more difficult to install, even though I still can't get my sound card working. The difficult part (... to accept) was the 900 MEG required by default system without Office. Furthermore, I find SuSE very slow as compaired to Windows, especially file search which is not only slow but unacceptably slow. This was by far the greatest surprise and disappointment. /e

On Tuesday 13 November 2001 16:55, David wrote:

There are usually 3 ways to do things in Windows. I have been stuck in Linux when the mouse has stopped working and there are no underscore commands to get around with

ctrl-alt-F[1-6] is your friend

* Joshua Lee (edlin@mochamail.com) [011113 17:37]: ->On Tuesday 13 November 2001 03:07 pm, Gert-Jan Rodenburg wrote: ->> On Tuesday 13 November 2001 16:55, David wrote: ->> > There are usually 3 ways to do things in Windows. I have been stuck in ->> > Linux when the mouse has stopped working and there are no underscore ->> > commands to get around with ->> ->> ctrl-alt-F[1-6] is your friend -> ->How do I get back to Xwindows after pressing that? ctrl-alt-f7 which is where X lives most of the time. -----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====----- Ben Rosenberg mailto:ben@whack.org -----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====----- "Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal" -AE

Il 02:36, mercoledì 14 novembre 2001, Joshua Lee ha scritto:

On Tuesday 13 November 2001 03:07 pm, Gert-Jan Rodenburg wrote:

...

On Tuesday 13 November 2001 16:55, David wrote:

...

There are usually 3 ways to do things in Windows. I have been stuck in Linux when the mouse has stopped working and there are no underscore commands to get around with

ctrl-alt-F[1-6] is your friend

How do I get back to Xwindows after pressing that?

alt+F7

Il 13:56, martedì 13 novembre 2001, Eva von Pepel ha scritto:

"Freedom to choose" is an argument I keep hearing time and time again. It may be true for Linux experts, for laymen like myself this freedom is yet to be discovered. Right now I feel much more freer setting up and controlling Windows than SuSE.

This is because you know better Windows than Linux. Now I think I know both in the same way... Linux wins.

Contrary to what you are saying I didn't find SuSE more difficult to install, even though I still can't get my sound card working. The difficult part (... to accept) was the 900 MEG required by default system without Office. Furthermore, I find SuSE very slow as compaired to Windows, especially file search which is not only slow but unacceptably slow. This was by far the greatest surprise and disappointment. /e

Have you turned UDMA on? What version of SuSE do you have? Praise

On 13 Nov 2001, Timothy R.Butler wrote:

As far as app speed though, unfortunately for now, Linux has some performance bottlenecks. :-(

You must be referring to Linux's GUI applications, not console apps. The Linux console is, I feel, very clean and standardized, but X isn't. Linux GUI apps can't be fast (most are, like gaim and ksysguard), but some really suck bad (e.g. YaST2). -- Karol Pietrzak PGP KeyID: 3A1446A0

On 13 Nov 2001, Timothy R.Butler wrote:

Right, I'm referring to the gcc linking bottleneck due to some flaws there (which *could* affect console apps, but generally doesn't). All the linking that a modern desktop needs makes gcc's flaws woefully apparent. I think this might be fixed in gcc 3 though, or with the prelinker...

I don't consider myself ignorant, but I haven't heard of this flaw. Could you please point me to some documentation or webpage explaining this in more depth or something like that? Thank you. I've read the prelinker web page, and the results it claims are impressive. I have not heard it used, however, in any production systems. Any distros using it? Any reasons why not? -- Karol Pietrzak PGP KeyID: 3A1446A0

Hi Karol,

I don't consider myself ignorant, but I haven't heard of this flaw. Could you please point me to some documentation or webpage explaining this in more depth or something like that?

http://www.suse.de/~bastian/Export/linking.txt is a good start, a bit deep though - I didn't get the full drift the first time.

Thank you. I've read the prelinker web page, and the results it claims are impressive. I have not heard it used, however, in any production systems. Any distros using it? Any reasons why not?

I think SuSE 7.3 might... I also believe RedHat was either pondering, or infact did, use it in RH 7.2. -Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler | Universal Networks | http://www.uninet.info tbutler@uninetsolutions.com ICQ: 12495932 AIM: Uninettm Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============== "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============

On November 13, 2001 03:13 pm, Ben Rosenberg wrote:

You don't need to install all of what the little default check box says is default. I am pretty sure if your not that familiar with Linux then you wouldn't need things like Sendmail and many other things which are

I wonder about this one. What happens if you don't install sendmail [or something similar] and the system tries to send you an email? [cron stuff or whatever] OTOH I agree nothing is stopping anybody from taking the time and just installing what you want. Nick

On Tuesday 13 November 2001 21:38, Nick Zentena wrote:

On November 13, 2001 03:13 pm, Ben Rosenberg wrote:

...

You don't need to install all of what the little default check box says is default. I am pretty sure if your not that familiar with Linux then you wouldn't need things like Sendmail and many other things which are

I wonder about this one. What happens if you don't install sendmail [or something similar] and the system tries to send you an email? [cron stuff or whatever] OTOH I agree nothing is stopping anybody from taking the time and just installing what you want.

Nick

That's what procmail is for. -- When someone tells you that Linux isn't user friendly, just tell 'em that it is, but that it is really picky in who his friends are. Gert-Jan Rodenburg. http://members.home.nl/hertog

On Tuesday 13 November 2001 21:38, Nick Zentena wrote:

On November 13, 2001 03:13 pm, Ben Rosenberg wrote:

...

You don't need to install all of what the little default check box says is default. I am pretty sure if your not that familiar with Linux then you wouldn't need things like Sendmail and many other things which are

I wonder about this one. What happens if you don't install sendmail [or something similar] and the system tries to send you an email? [cron stuff or whatever] OTOH I agree nothing is stopping anybody from taking the time and just installing what you want.

Nick

That's what procmail is for. -- When someone tells you that Linux isn't user friendly, just tell 'em that it is, but that it is really picky in who his friends are. Gert-Jan Rodenburg. http://members.home.nl/hertog

On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:13:40 -0800 Ben Rosenberg wrote:

As you learn more about the system it will be easier to optimize to your liking. BTW..what kind of hardware are you running this on ..just curious.

I am well aware that my system is as good as I am but it will *soon* improve, I hope. As for the hardware - it is Dell Latitude Cpi A366TX, 256 RAM and NeoMagic video/sound that gives me a headache. /e

On November 13, 2001 09:38 pm, Karol Pietrzak wrote:

The Linux ones are free, and the Microsoft ones are shoddy at best. Take a look at a few Windows XP reviews. That's why 3rd party vendors (e.g. Symantec, Powerquest, etc.) are not worried that MS keeps adding features to Windows. The default

Then they should be. The majority of people don't need all the features of most programs. Microsoft doesn't need to add a great program into the OS to cause problems. Just something good enough that people decide to not spend money on something better. Anybody seen a disk cache program for windows lately? How about all the other utilites that Microsoft has added to the OS? Are the Microsoft versions better then the 3rd party ones? What happens is the majority of people stop buying the 3rd party stuff. That leaves just the people who really need the features but often they aren't a big enough market. Think motherboards. We used to have a whole bunch of companies making add on cards. Almost all those functions are on the M/B now. Nick

I think Palm is holding its own. Or maybe better than. Wordstar shot themselves in the foot, as far as I can tell. I used it until Win 3.1, and their version of a GUI word processor was junk. I went to WP 5.1 as soon as I could, and I wish we could have that version today. Or 5.2. I still have the disks, but it can't deal with MSWord. And the latest Corel is not nearly as friendly, and you can no longer get free telephone help. I don't think Be was ever a contender, even tho it was interesting. DeLorme has very good map software, and I doubt that MS is up to it. It also supports GPS. Quarterdeck is obsolete. I don't think MS put them under, it just wasn't necessary anymore. AFAIK, RealAudio is still around. I don't know how they make any money on free downloads, tho. At 22:50 11/13/2001 -0600, Timothy R.Butler wrote:

...

That's why 3rd party vendors (e.g. Symantec, Powerquest, etc.) are not worried that MS keeps adding features to Windows. The default

If those guys don't fear Microsoft, then they get what they deserve. However, first they should talk to Novell, Corel, Lotus, Netscape, Sun, Apple, Intuit, Palm, Be, Oracle, Digital Research, Quarterdeck, Geo, Real, Roxio, WordStar, and many more. Also should I mention those that gave up and sold out to Microsoft? AutoMap, Fox Systems (I think that was the name), Visio... All of these companies are either currently in nasty wars with, or have lost such wars with Microsoft (even if their products were better).

And even more importantly, most of them lost by resting on the laurels while Microsoft slowly drained their marketshare...

Timothy R.Butler wrote:

Hi Doug,

...

I think Palm is holding its own. Or maybe better than.

True - but they certainly aren't doing great either. :-\ I'm hoping they will be able to hold their own, or maybe get bought by Sony (Sony is doing a really good job with PalmOS stuff).

...

get free telephone help. I don't think Be was ever a contender,

No, although Microsoft killed them with their OEM licenses.

BE just didn't catch very many interested people.

...

even tho it was interesting. DeLorme has very good map software, and I doubt that MS is up to it. It also supports GPS.

...

Quarterdeck is obsolete. I don't think MS put them under, it just wasn't

Well Quaterdeck had DESQview, which was killed by Windows, IIRC.

DESQview was kill more by OS/2 than Windows. Back in the good old BBS days, many sysops ran DESQview until OS/2 came out. You could run multiple instances of your board very smoothly under OS/2. Windows 3/3.1 choked on one instance.

...

necessary anymore. AFAIK, RealAudio is still around. I don't know how they make any money on free downloads, tho.

True, but like Palm, I think they are suffering. I'm glad Real is still around though. :-)

Real created a lot of their own troubles with their dumb licensing schemes.

Overall, I was just listing the injured and casualities of war with Microsoft. NEVER, EVER think you can sit back with a better product and beat Microsoft - you must do much much more.

The same could be said about any line of business. IBM was once the king of PC's, then along came a little company called Compaq...

I still have those floppies, and it still runs on current Windoze, as well as working with more recent WP linux versions. However, when I was out of work and took care that my resume displayed correctly under both Word97 and WP8, when I sent it to linux shops, they rejected it and said they wanted a pure Word 95/97 version, not one which had been touched by linux. How could linux office applications ever be taken seriously when linux shops don't accept their use by job applicants?

Never had that problem with this to any place. Actually, see if they take PDF... Matt

No way. Not easy to spin .pdf or read it without linux.

Actually PDF is universal, you can read it on any OS nowadays. One thing I did notice is that Kword makes it easy to print directly to PDF. Pretty useful, espeically if you need to take any documents to a commercial printer. Unless you're sending soemthing that needs to be modified. Matt

On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:20:54 -0500, Doug McGarrett wrote:

AFAIK, RealAudio is still around. I don't know how they make any money on free downloads, tho.

Spyware ?? or have they cleaned their act up. If I have it on my machine it is securely locked up. David

At 22:50 11/13/2001 -0600, Timothy R.Butler wrote:

...

Regards, David

Timothy R.Butler wrote:

...

That's why 3rd party vendors (e.g. Symantec, Powerquest, etc.) are not worried that MS keeps adding features to Windows. The default

If those guys don't fear Microsoft, then they get what they deserve. However, first they should talk to Novell, Corel, Lotus, Netscape, Sun, Apple, Intuit, Palm, Be, Oracle, Digital Research, Quarterdeck, Geo, Real, Roxio, WordStar, and many more. Also should I mention those that gave up and sold out to Microsoft? AutoMap, Fox Systems (I think that was the name), Visio... All of these companies are either currently in nasty wars with, or have lost such wars with Microsoft (even if their products were better).

If a company does nothing to ensure their market share, like Novell did, they get what they get. Business is about making money. Novell was making money hand over fist and got lazy, MS simply took advantage of their stupidity. As for the others, some like GEO never had a chance. Vendors never supported GEO. It was far more stable than Windows 3.0 which came out about the same time. Netscape? Blame that crap, Communicator for their loss. 3.03 was rock solid, rather than build on the good, they decided to bloat. Digital Research had the best DOS out there. Novell acquired them and ruined the product. In fact most of the companies listed above have no one to blame but themselves. Intuit stands out in that it is fighting for its life and doing quite well, I may add. Sun? Oracle? I don't think they worry too much about MS. They have other battles to worry about.

And even more importantly, most of them lost by resting on the laurels while Microsoft slowly drained their marketshare...

-Tim

Which is why I like Linux's chances so much more than any company listed above. Linux developers are constantly developing new and improved softwares. From a laughable "Geek" only OS to a robust and full featured OS in ten years mostly done by a large and somewhat disorganized community, is remarkable.

Nick Zentena wrote:

On November 13, 2001 09:38 pm, Karol Pietrzak wrote:

...

The Linux ones are free, and the Microsoft ones are shoddy at best. Take a look at a few Windows XP reviews. That's why 3rd party vendors (e.g. Symantec, Powerquest, etc.) are not worried that MS keeps adding features to Windows. The default

Then they should be. The majority of people don't need all the features of most programs. Microsoft doesn't need to add a great program into the OS to cause problems. Just something good enough that people decide to not spend money on something better. Anybody seen a disk cache program for windows lately? How about all the other utilites that Microsoft has added to the OS? Are the Microsoft versions better then the 3rd party ones? What happens is the majority of people stop buying the 3rd party stuff. That leaves just the people who really need the features but often they aren't a big enough market.

Well, anyone that has ever used Defrag in Windows, would RUN to the store to purchase Speed Disk. All Defrag did, was ensure that Norton Utilities would have a future.

Think motherboards. We used to have a whole bunch of companies making add on cards. Almost all those functions are on the M/B now.

The companies are still out there. It's just cheaper to buy a complete system now then building one.

On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:33:11 -0600 Jerry Kreps wrote:

File searching? Are you saying 'locate <filename>" or "whereis <filename>" takes a long time?

There is no problem with locate/wheris. I was referring to Kongueror. Bad Windows habit? /e

Since this debate is going, I thought I would add some fuel to it. I have only been using Linux for a couple of months and am still struggling with it. I did play around with RH and Mandrake before choosing Suse 7.2 as it seemed the better distro. My main complaint is that it runs like a dog on 3 legs. Just so slow. I am using it on my old machine which is a K6 233, 128 mb, acres of hard disk, nVidia card. With Win 98se on that machine it runs reasonably, but compared to Linux it flies. I have tried the settings with hdparm but they do not improve it at all. I would not install it on my main machine because of this performance hit. Win 98 runs well on it. As for applications there are just none I have found that are acceptable. I don't particularly like MS but Office suits the way I work. I have tried other WP's but none of them support the formatting I do, which seems strange. I have tried them all. I did upgrade to Office 97 but went back to '95 because I prefer it. Other apps that do not have an alternative, Photoshop, PagePlus, Quickbooks, Turbocad. When you load programs, there does not seem to be any control of where they go. In Win you are given a choice of where they install, and which program title they can be located. Do it in Linux and it just disappears. I spend ages looking through the menus (and they are so complicated in KDE) and you don't find it. I do not see why a simple install manager cannot be created. Doing a search for a file takes for ever, I am talking hours. I have left it running to have my dinner, and it still is not finished by the time I return, and sometimes it will crash doing this. The directory structure is another. To me the /bin, /etc, etc are meaningless and are so deeply nested. No doubt this is for ease of use when using the command line. For years everyone complained about the 8.3 naming in Windows, I know they have kludged it, but at least now you can go through the disk and know what you are looking at. I am not really knocking Linux, although it seems so, just giving my views coming from Windows, and if you want to encourage Windows users it should be made easier. I think that Linux is a geeks paradise, and I don' t knock that, but I feel that more money needs to be invested in it if it is to compete with MS, and that means paying for programs which goes against the spirit of Linux. So it is a vicious circle. David On Mon, 12 Nov 2001 19:46:05 -0500, Karol Pietrzak wrote:

On 13 Nov 2001, Gert-Jan Rodenburg wrote:

...

...

As for workstation comparisons: you won't find any, I don't think. Linux software is extremely limited and most would say it can't really compete. That is, unless all your apps have adequate Linux equivalents.

*Grin* I feel a Holy War coming on.....

Yes, I already felt the heat when posting the message. I specifically didn't specify myself as holding those opinions (e.g. "most would say...").

I do, however, feel I am correct when I say that Linux workstation software is limited. It's almost a fact.

We have all seen Samba and Apache benchmarks, but a desktop workstation comparison... Windows would win _completely_, especially with Windows 2000.

What do you think?

-- Karol Pietrzak PGP KeyID: 3A1446A0

Regards, David dg@stanwater.fsnet.co.uk on 13/11/2001

Thanks Geoff I am not knocking Linux, just saying how it works for me. Comments in line On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:23:21 +0000, Geoff wrote:

I confess that I am simply baffled by this. I have installed SuSEs since 6.3 on a variety of machines, mostly dual-boot. I have never seen it run slower than Win 98 - usually the opposite. I would expect some of the more knowledgeable contributors to have some suggestions to make.

Well reading around the various newsgroups and asking questions, this is not an uncommon problem and no one has a cure for it, apart going down to a minimal X interface, which is not what I want.

This is obviously a matter of choice. I have the same "problem" with WordPerfect which I have been using on a daily basis since 4.2 under DOS and which I cannot live without. I have a huge legacy of files in WP format and I also have to be able to supply documents in Word and WP format to my clients. For the time being therefore, I use vmware, which is an excellent piece of software for just about anything but game. Going back to your performance point, running Win 98 in linux under vmware is hardly any slower for business applications than running it native on the same box.

Yes it is personal, especially when you can customise the appearance. Many years ago I used to use Wordstar, which was a fine program but very weird keystroke combinations. Then I managed to do x-upgrade to Word 2.0 and it was just so much easier to use and more productive. I have Word so customised now that I find it difficult to use anyone else's setup.

...

Other apps that do not have an alternative, Photoshop, PagePlus,

Quickbooks,

...

Turbocad.

None of these is really my thing - but doesn't Gimp do most that Photoshop will ? I bet that there are substitutes for the others. One mistake I made at first was to think that version numbers below 1 should be avoided on the ground that the software would be unstable. There are, however, very many pre -v1 applications in linux that are far better and more stable than supposedly "mature" Win applications.

I have tried other photo progs (PaintShop, Micrografx) and although they are good, Photoshop is way better. As you say there is Vmware. I haven't used it, but any emulator is going to slow the machine down. It comes back to the speed thing.

...

If you stay with linux and do some research you will find that you are wrong here - especially if you make the small effort needed to learn how to compile things yourself. You usually get almost complete freedom over installation locations. Further, because there is no "Registry" (a loathsome thing in my view), you can unistall with confidence that a mass of irrelevant garbage is not still lurking somewhere, slowing down your system and waiting to cause all -but-untraceable problems later. You may be right. Fine if you want to play but it doesn't put money in the bank. The time I spend trying to get it to work, the less time I have to do what brings the bread in.

The only plan I have for Linux at the moment is to use it as a better firewall, but I still have to configure it for that.

I know it is an obvious point, but they won't be meaningless for long if you do some reading and navigate around the system a little.

Again time & speed. The file managers are pretty klutzy things - slooooow

...

I think that most linux users simply want a better, more controllable, OS - and they get one. They are pleased when Windows users adopt linux, but they absolutely do not want to compromise a single one of linux's virtues to attract Windows users into the fold. As I said, geeks paradise

...

Have you got a copy of "Running Linux" by Welsh & Kaufman (O'Reilly). I found it invaluable and still do. Rather than the common type of book that is full of screenshots and quick fixes, it provides a coherent and detailed explanation of many of the questions that puzzle you (and did me). Give it a try. Pictures speak a thousand words. To see on screen what is in the book I find reassuring.

Regards,

Geoff

Regards, David dg@stanwater.fsnet.co.uk on 13/11/2001

Thanks Geoff On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:30:17 +0000, Geoff wrote:

What window manager / desktop do you use? I do not know how fast the current kde or gnome feel because I decided long ago that I did not come to linux looking for a win-alike desktop and installed Afterstep instead. It is not minimal, but it is fast - and there are plenty of similar alternatives - there is a good overview at http://www.plig.org/xwinman/.

KDE at the moment. I see Afterstep is on the Suse disk - I'll have a look at it.

<snip>

This is probably the difference between those who stay long enough to love linux and those who don't. I imagine that you do take *some* time off - the question is whether you want to spend it playing on linux and co -incidentally deriving some practical benefits - or whether you would (for reasons you and my wife would probably agree on) rather be doing something healthy in the open air. I will admit that it is probably not possible for most ordinary mortals (me), to get to the point at which linux is a better alternative than Windows without devoting a serious amount of free time to it for a few months - it then gets easier and easier.

You are ignoring the Wife factor :)

<snip>

...

...

I know it is an obvious point, but they won't be meaningless for long if you do some reading and navigate around the system a little.

Again time & speed. The file managers are pretty klutzy things - slooooow

Not all file managers are. If you can be bothered, try (eg) emelfm - fast, pretty and configurable - http://emelfm.sourceforge.net/

Right, I'll give that a go

<snip>

But less necessary / reassuring if all you are seeing is command line / console stuff - and an awful lot of useful things in linux are best done that way.

Maybe, but I got out of DOS a long time ago and don't really want to go back to that, though admittedly it is sometimes the easier way to do things. It could be a memory thing, if you work on the command line you have to remember or look up the commands. In a GUI you know you can usually find the bit you need. Being self employed, sitting in front of a computer is not my job, it is in the workshop. Computer business work has to be fitted around that.

One final comment. I do not know how long you have been subscribed to this list - but you may have noticed (or will see if you hang around), that there are people here (*far* more knowledgeable than me), who will help with any problem you may have - and will keep on helping 'till it is fixed. That depends, of course, on you thinking it is worthwhile to keep asking.

I wouldn't have forked out 50 odd quid if I was going to chuck it. I try to keep an open mind, but to date I am disappointed. Just been downloading some pics of Afterstep whilst writing this - looks very impressive. Have to see how it goes. Regards, David dg@stanwater.fsnet.co.uk on 13/11/2001

* David (dg@stanwater.fsnet.co.uk) [011113 11:12]:

Any ideas anyone please.

What does ~/.X.err say? -- -ckm

* David (dg@stanwater.fsnet.co.uk) [011113 11:59]: ->Sorry you will have to explain that. If you mean is there an error message, ->then no, you are just taken back to the X login screen. -> ->On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:30:59 -0800, Christopher Mahmood wrote: ->>* David (dg@stanwater.fsnet.co.uk) [011113 11:12]: ->>>Any ideas anyone please. ->> ->>What does ~/.X.err say? ~/ is a Unix reference to your home directory. If you were in an xterm and in the directory /opt and you typed cd ~/ then you would return your home directory. .X.err is the error file in your home directory for X. If you type this then you should see it. ls -la | more :) Cheers! -----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====----- Ben Rosenberg mailto:ben@whack.org -----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====----- "Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal" -AE

Just a quickie on this before I go to bed. I am referring to the Login screen at which you choose the type of window manager you want to use. Afterstep is listed and when selected goes through the motions of loading, and then returns to the X login screen again. David On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 20:52:12 +0000, Geoff wrote:

On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:09:42 +0000 David wrote:

...

Just tried to load Afterstep. I installed off the Suse CD. Logged out and

...

changed to Afterstep and it won't load, keeps coming back to the login screen whether in root or user. Rebooting does not change anything. Other window

...

mangers load ok.

I assume that your login screen is the console and that you are entering "startx afterstep". I am using 7.0, so things may be different for you, but I am surprised that it just goes back to login. Under 7.0, even if YAST had not created an entry for afterstep, it would just default to the system wide WM, not go back to the login screen.

If your version does not start X in a different way to mine, then one crude but effective, thing you might try would be as follows.

(1) Check that you have got the afterstep executable in /usr/local/bin. If not run "updatedb" as root then "locate afterstep".

(2) Back up your the hidden file .xinitrc which is in your home directory to somewhere safe (maybe twice), and replace it (for the time being), with a new file named .xinitrc that just has the following contents :x

#!/bin/bash export TERM=xterm exec /usr/local/bin/afterstep

You could just cut and paste the above into something like kedit and save as .xinitrc in your home directory. Obviously you will change the exec line to point to wherever the afterstep executable is if it is not in /usr/local/bin.

(3) You need to make the file executable. Whilst in your home directory "chmod u=rwx, o=rx .xinitrc".

Every time you run startx from the console afterstep should now be initiated. You can just restore your backup of the original .xinitrc when you want to use other WMs.

There is a smoother way to do all this, by editing the existing .xinitrc (or maybe wmlist would be better, I can't recall just now), but this is, I think, the easiest way for the moment.

If anyone reading this can see that I am dangerously wrong for post 7.0 versions, please correct me.

Geoff

_________________________________________________________

Do You Yahoo!?

Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Regards, David

Thanks Geoff I tried Yast but it did not seem to change anything, the fault was still there. I have d/l the latest afterstep. It's a tar so probably won't install knowing my luck :) I'll let you know how it goes David afterstp-1.8.4-22 On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:18:47 +0000, Geoff wrote:

I am afraid that beats me, I have never used the graphical login. One point that does occur to me though is that in my version of YAST there is an option under System Administration > Configuration of Susewm to create default configuration files for various WMs, including Afterstep. If your YAST has that option you might try checking to see that the Afterstep option is checked. As a rule, however, if Afterstep does not find a configuration file in the useres /home it uses its own default, so that may not be the problem.

Also, you might want to check which version of Afterstep is on the CD. The format of the configuration files changed radically at (as I recall 1.4.4). If the CD version is earlier than that I would not bother with it anyway. The current version is 1.8.10. The Afterstep site is www.afterstep.org.

I have a feeling that the steps I recommended in my earlier post, involving ..xinitrc, would probably work even though you have a graphical login, but I really don't want to make things worse for you by recommending that you go ahead without being certain.

Sorry I can't be more help.

Geoff

_________________________________________________________

Do You Yahoo!?

Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Regards, David

Thanks Comments in line On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:37:36 +0000, Geoff wrote:

On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:03:58 +0000 David wrote:

Forgive me if I am telling you things you know, but ff you d/ld the AfterStep -1.8.10.tar.gz then you will need to :

You don't have to worry about that, there's a lot I don't know and it can always bear repeating .

(a) Use YAST to uninstall the existing afterstp-1.8.4-22 rpm Yes did that - ok

(b) untar and unzip it the new version you downloaded "tar -xvzf AfterStep -1.8.10.tar.gz"

(b) change to the AfterStep-1.8.10 directory that will be created.

(c) run "configure"

(d) run "make"

(e) if you do not see any errors, change to root and run "make install". I found the install text and followed that. It said it was ok.

HOWEVER I very much doubt that the difficulty you are experiencing arises because your existing rpm of Afterstep is defective. The problem is that you cannot just run a window manager directly - the X server has to be initiated first - your setup is not recognising the installed afterstep and properly integrating it into this process. Thomas Adam's suggestion may well work - I don't use the script in question but it appears to embody the smoother approach I mentioned in last night's post. I do suggest that you try the approach I mentioned (using a subsitute .xinitrc), or try his method, put a question to before you go to the trouble of compiling your new tar.gz of Afterstep. Whilst experimenting I would use YAST to get rid of the graphical login and use the console - it is very easy you just type "startx" after you login and has the virtue that you can see any error messages.

I realise that now. It was installed on the start menu with all the other window managers, so I assumed that it was just point and click. I did a bit of what Thomas suggested and sort of stumbled into it.

One last thing - to save further disappointment - WMs such as afterstep do not come with all your software immediately available on menus the way that KDE does - you will still have some (fairly easy) work to do to make it as usable as KDE.

It is a weird interface and of course a lack of software does not help. Haven't yet worked out how to get apps into it. Followed some instructions to get Gnome installed, but that did not seem to introduce anything new. One of the reasons for choosing this, though I suppose I could have chosen any other, was to see how it performed without KDE or Gnome. Having installed StarOffice, I logged out and in again (don't know it caches programs like win does) and loaded S/O again. Came up in 12 secs. That is within 4 secs of Kword in KDE. The problem is to get the functionality of KDE without the overload. Couldn't find a file manager anywhere - any suggestions

Regards,

Geoff

Geoff

_________________________________________________________

Do You Yahoo!?

Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Regards, David

Hi, I have a 'new' Compaq ProLiant 6500 that I am trying to install SuSE7.1 on; I cant get it to work. Here is what is happening: The 6500 has the following hardware: - quad-PentiumPro 200 processors - 1.5G RAM - SMART-2DH Array Controller - Cirrus GL5420 w/ 512K video - 1x4G SCSI drive When I boot with the SuSE7.1 cdrom #1, the correct screen comes up. On the monitor I see what looks like the typical stuff scrolling by. Then the screen shows the "Looking for Braille Display" part. After this the screen goes black and nothing more happens. I believe the next part is for the Xwindows section to come up. More Info: I also tried installing RedHat7.1, which seems to be working this morning. RedHat did not like the video, complained an error and required install in text mode. I have had similar video problems with RedHat and Compaq before with Cirrus GD5420. But SuSE7.1 has not given me any trouble so far with this card (on other machines.) So I dont think I am having video problems. I read about problems with different array controller, SUSE7.0 and 6500's. So I am suspicious that I may be having some difficulty here - but I have not found hard evidence this is the case. I also tried using "mem=exactmap mem=0x9f000@0 mem=0x60000000@0x100000" at the initial linux prompt. In fact, this is how I have RedHat7.1 installing. Specifying these parameters is often required to get the Xwindows installer to initialize (never mind get the OS installed;) But this time it is not working. Compaqs usually informative site has changed for the worse, so I hope someone has a suggestion or experience with this. Thanks in advance for anything you can give me. Kendall Carpenter __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals http://personals.yahoo.com

On Tuesday 13 November 2001 06:23, Geoff wrote:

On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:05:41 +0000 David wrote:

Hi David, I have responded to some of your points (in a spirit of helpfulness), below.

I switched almost entirely to linux a year ago and (apart from the slowness thing), I have experienced most of your frustrations. They have all gone away now. I would not dream of returning to Windows. I have been enthusiastic about computers for years - but I had no linux or sysadmim background at all.

I've been using SuSE exclusively going on two years, for two years prior to that I was dual booting. Linux has brought the joy back to using a computer. I program at work all day on a W2K (crashed twice today) and find myself right mousing for a feature that isn't on W2K. I'm back in control with Linux.

...

My main complaint is that it runs like a dog on 3 legs. Just so slow. I

I am running SuSE 7.2 on a 1996 P166 Sony VAIO with 64MB of RAM into a 4 and a 6 GB HD. It runs kdm into KDE and is reasonably fast. I put a swap partition on an HD different from /, /bin /sbin/ or /usr, and make it twice the size of my RAM. It's an old rule which some say isn't necessary, but then.... I don't have any speed problems. That Sony is my wife's workstation and also doubles as our home network firewall and connects to our Cisco 675 DHCP server. My 1GHz Athlon with 512MB RAM and a 1GB swap file connects to her box via a Netgear EN104 passive hub, which is connected to her second NIC. We can both surf the web at the same time with about the same speed. We download email at the same speed. But when it comes to running apps I am at least 10+ faster than her machine. (SO 5.2 takes 75 seconds to load the first time, 20-30 seconds each time there after. The Athlon takes 5 seconds and a half a second. JLK

am

...

using it on my old machine which is a K6 233, 128 mb, acres of hard disk,

nVidia card. With Win 98se on that machine it runs reasonably, but

compared to

...

Linux it flies. I have tried the settings with hdparm but they do not

improve

...

it at all. I would not install it on my main machine because of this performance hit. Win 98 runs well on it.

I confess that I am simply baffled by this. I have installed SuSEs since 6.3 on a variety of machines, mostly dual-boot. I have never seen it run slower than Win 98 - usually the opposite. I would expect some of the more knowledgeable contributors to have some suggestions to make.

...

As for applications there are just none I have found that are acceptable.

I

...

don't particularly like MS but Office suits the way I work. I have tried

other

...

WP's but none of them support the formatting I do, which seems strange. I

have

...

tried them all. I did upgrade to Office 97 but went back to '95 because I

prefer it.

This is obviously a matter of choice. I have the same "problem" with WordPerfect which I have been using on a daily basis since 4.2 under DOS and which I cannot live without. I have a huge legacy of files in WP format and I also have to be able to supply documents in Word and WP format to my clients. For the time being therefore, I use vmware, which is an excellent piece of software for just about anything but game. Going back to your performance point, running Win 98 in linux under vmware is hardly any slower for business applications than running it native on the same box.

...

Other apps that do not have an alternative, Photoshop, PagePlus,

Quickbooks,

...

Turbocad.

None of these is really my thing - but doesn't Gimp do most that Photoshop will ? I bet that there are substitutes for the others. One mistake I made at first was to think that version numbers below 1 should be avoided on the ground that the software would be unstable. There are, however, very many pre-v1 applications in linux that are far better and more stable than supposedly "mature" Win applications.

...

When you load programs, there does not seem to be any control of where

they go.

...

In Win you are given a choice of where they install, and which program

title

...

they can be located. Do it in Linux and it just disappears. I spend ages looking through the menus (and they are so complicated in KDE) and you

don't

...

find it. I do not see why a simple install manager cannot be created. Doing a search for a file takes for ever, I am talking hours. I have left

it

...

running to have my dinner, and it still is not finished by the time I

return,

...

and sometimes it will crash doing this.

If you stay with linux and do some research you will find that you are wrong here - especially if you make the small effort needed to learn how to compile things yourself. You usually get almost complete freedom over installation locations. Further, because there is no "Registry" (a loathsome thing in my view), you can unistall with confidence that a mass of irrelevant garbage is not still lurking somewhere, slowing down your system and waiting to cause all-but-untraceable problems later.

...

The directory structure is another. To me the /bin, /etc, etc are

meaningless

...

and are so deeply nested. No doubt this is for ease of use when using the

command line. For years everyone complained about the 8.3 naming in

Windows, I

...

know they have kludged it, but at least now you can go through the disk

and

...

know what you are looking at.

I know it is an obvious point, but they won't be meaningless for long if you do some reading and navigate around the system a little.

...

I am not really knocking Linux, although it seems so, just giving my

views

...

coming from Windows, and if you want to encourage Windows users it should

be

...

made easier.

I think that most linux users simply want a better, more controllable, OS - and they get one. They are pleased when Windows users adopt linux, but they absolutely do not want to compromise a single one of linux's virtues to attract Windows users into the fold.

...

I think that Linux is a geeks paradise, and I don' t knock that, but I

feel

...

that more money needs to be invested in it if it is to compete with MS,

and

...

that means paying for programs which goes against the spirit of Linux. So

it is

...

a vicious circle.

Have you got a copy of "Running Linux" by Welsh & Kaufman (O'Reilly). I found it invaluable and still do. Rather than the common type of book that is full of screenshots and quick fixes, it provides a coherent and detailed explanation of many of the questions that puzzle you (and did me). Give it a try.

Regards,

Geoff

_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com