Basil Chupin wrote:

JD. Brown wrote:

...

...

An interesting article about v9.3 to be found at www.theinquirer.net. The article is titled, "SuSE 9.3 fails home-use test".

Yeah, The author to that story is a complete Windows spud. :) He gives no good hard facts, It's just matter of opinion.

I think you ought to reread the article - without blinkers this time.

I reread it and still think the author is a Vole-Mole, as JD (I think) said, a complete Windows spud. BTW, what is "Beagle", which is supposed to be SuSE's "Flagship Product"? We've been using SuSE since 5.3 and I can't say I've ever heard of Beagle. Regards, Lew Wolfgang

Greg Freemyer wrote:

On 4/28/05, Lewis Wolfgang wrote:

...

BTW, what is "Beagle", which is supposed to be SuSE's "Flagship Product"? We've been using SuSE since 5.3 and I can't say I've ever heard of Beagle.

A search engine for searching your own disk drives. New to SuSE 9.3. (I'm still running 9.2, so I have not used it yet, but I hope Beagle is good at sniffing out the data. I do a lot of sniffing in my job and I know it is not as easy as it sounds. Zip files, gzip files, tar files, tgz files, etc. all need to be indexed/searched to do the job right. Handling ISOs, would be great also!!)

Ah, that sounds interesting. I've been using "locate" forever and couldn't get along without it. If Beagle can search and index content it would be a real boon (and maybe a privacy issue for a multi-user system). I purchased four 9.3 boxes yesterday and started an install on an Opteron system last night. I haven't been back to the console yet this morning to see how it went, news at 11:00... Regards, Lew Wolfgang

On Thursday 28 April 2005 09:24, Michael W Cocke wrote:

...

...

BTW, what is "Beagle", which is supposed to be SuSE's "Flagship Product"? We've been using SuSE since 5.3 and I can't say I've ever heard of Beagle.

Regards, Lew Wolfgang

It's the desktop search thing, like the google deskbar, (or was it yahoo?). Looks to me like a feature in search of a problem, but YMMV. The reviewer was drunk - hardly their "flagship product'. Maybe a dinghy...

Beagle is the counterpart of Google Desktop Search. As for it being a "feature in search of a problem," all I can say is: You've got to be kidding! I desperately need this. I've collected hundreds upon hundreds of technical papers and research reports and I can no longer find the ones I need at any given time with any reliability or ease. The version Beagle shipped with 9.3 is a very early version (0.0.8!) and was already out-of-date w.r.t. to the development version when I got my pre-ordered shipment (and recall that I live just a few miles from one of the fulfillment centers used by Novell, so I got mine the very next day). Anyway, I really look forward to this software becoming mature. I need it!

Mike-

Randall Schulz

On Thursday 28 April 2005 1:00 pm, Randall R Schulz wrote: [snip]

I desperately need this. I've collected hundreds upon hundreds of technical papers and research reports and I can no longer find the ones I need at any given time with any reliability or ease.

Use "locate." It's a unix utility and ships with SUSE. It's INSTANTLY available. You build a db first as root using "updatedb" and from then on, it becomes a cron job. Beagle is nice, but locate being instant gives me info. "like now." Fred -- The only bug free software from MickySoft is still shrink-wrapped in their warehouse..."

Scott, On Thursday 28 April 2005 18:35, Scott Leighton wrote:

...

Locate is great, but it is only looking at file names. Beagle indexes contents and things like your email, so it is searching far more than file names.

That said, I'm underwhelmed by the Beagle version shipped with 9.3. It's absolutely not a flagship component, I found it difficult to set up and full of bugs.

True, but it's at an embryonic stage. Give 'em a chance. They're guilty only of promoting something well before it's ready for prime time.

Scott

Randall Schulz

Fred, On Thursday 28 April 2005 15:02, Fred A. Miller wrote:

On Thursday 28 April 2005 1:00 pm, Randall R Schulz wrote:

[snip]

...

I desperately need this. I've collected hundreds upon hundreds of technical papers and research reports and I can no longer find the ones I need at any given time with any reliability or ease.

Use "locate." It's a unix utility and ships with SUSE. It's INSTANTLY available. You build a db first as root using "updatedb" and from then on, it becomes a cron job. Beagle is nice, but locate being instant gives me info. "like now."

The two have nothing in common. Locate finds files by name. Beagle is content-directed search.

Fred

Randall Schulz

On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 01:43, JD. Brown wrote:

...

An interesting article about v9.3 to be found at www.theinquirer.net. The article is titled, "SuSE 9.3 fails home-use test".

Yeah, The author to that story is a complete Windows spud. :) He gives no good hard facts, It's just matter of opinion.

Definitely a problem between the chair and keyboard. :)

On April Thursday 2005 9:55 am, Colin Carter wrote:

On Thursday 28 April 2005 15:43, JD. Brown wrote:

...

...

An interesting article about v9.3 to be found at www.theinquirer.net. The article is titled, "SuSE 9.3 fails home-use test".

Yeah, The author to that story is a complete Windows spud. :) He gives no good hard facts, It's just matter of opinion.

JD

<snip>

Let us hear some technical criticism about what the author said. Remember, he did not say it was difficult for a Linux guru; he said it was not for the average user who is used to an easy to install system. Colin

guys it´s a JOKE ... ;-) just like most of the stuff on the site seems to be ... funny stuff. j

On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 13:16 -0400, Mike wrote:

On April 28, 2005 10:32 am, jfweber@bellsouth.net wrote:

"Not so with Suse. You download a program, extract it yourself and, if you are lucky, you can then use something called Yast to do it all for you. "

Apt-get takes care of the whole thing one site no mess no fuss

BZZT! Try again. Learning apt-get is NOT a "no mess no fuss" thing. I just did it, and it took me a couple of hours to soak the whole thing up and get it running the way I wanted on SuSE 9.3, and I've been running Linux for over 10 years. Then it corrupted my RPM database. Twice. Now look, I'm not saying that there isn't some advantage to such a setup, but until SuSE makes it their official way of distributing packages, it's just not going to be easy. No matter how you slice it, installing software on Windows is easier. HOWEVER, having said that, try UNinstalling it, or try getting it to actually do what you want, and not a dozen other things you don't. There's a big difference after the fact, and that should be pointed out as well. But don't say apt3rpm is easy. Regards, dk

Colin Carter wrote:

On Thursday 28 April 2005 15:43, JD. Brown wrote:

...

...

An interesting article about v9.3 to be found at www.theinquirer.net. The article is titled, "SuSE 9.3 fails home-use test".

Yeah, The author to that story is a complete Windows spud. :) He gives no good hard facts, It's just matter of opinion.

JD

Well now, it appears to me that most replies/comment from the Linux gurus have been along the above lines: that is, comments without substance. How about the following "fact" which the author quotes. It appears to me, from my experience with Linux, that the following paragraph is true: Quote: And don't bother trying to look at the installation read-me notes either. They are just advertisements for the idiots who designed the software and tend to go into great details about the licence agreement, which, as most users tell you, isn't as important as getting the software going. End quote. I don't agree with the 'idiots' dig, but it is true that most ReadMe files contain about what he says.

Let us hear some technical criticism about what the author said. Remember, he did not say it was difficult for a Linux guru; he said it was not for the average user who is used to an easy to install system. Colin

Hmmm this ought to provoke an interesting discussion, though I do NOT want to engage in any flame wars. Speaking as another software engineer with over 35 years of experience I have to come down categorically on the side of the author of this article as well. Now before the Linux zealots get ruffled too much, let me state that I am one of your most fervent Microcrud haters as well and despise much of theirs and their venders software. About 80% of the time I use Linux (mostly SuSE Linux at that) and 20% of the time I use Microsoft Windows. I LIKE Linux because it allows me to adapt and configure my computer to meet my needs, whereas Windows will often prevent me from doing so. BUT I am also qualifying myself AS a computer geek as described by the author of this article, so I have a LOT of technical expertist which IS required if one wants to change/configure a Linux OS and its tool set to meet ones needs. Even though there are some flaws in the article (not sure what Beagle is for example, is this really SuSE's flagship product? if so I don't have a clue!!!) his article goes straight to the heart of what is at issue with the Linux OS's, SuSE's version included. Time and again I hear Linux proponets argue that Linux can compete against Microsoft Windows IF it is initually set up for Aunt Bessie correctly, with all the tools she will ever need. And yes IF that is the case, then Linux OS's can be relatively easy to use. However, this argument misses the point and Aunt Bessie represents only a small subset of the world of real userst! The most essential quality of a computer is it's ability to be changed and rapidly adapted to meet new and changing user requirements. And this is what the writer is essentially saying and where Linux is failing and Microsoft is slowly succeeding! Users want an environment where he/she can go out and get the latest video card and install it and the drivers with no requirement as to understand the technical aspects of how to do so, so they can play their games. Or to install the latest application such as Firefox, or OpenOffice tools so they can have the latest features. OR to even install the latest OS in a reliable and easily understandable way. They want an OS environment that is robust enought to handle such an upgrade AND they want it to be duck soup simple to do! The Linux world is a quagmire of difficult installation procedures and it often requires a user to learn all kinds of geek speak and obtain advance technical knowledge in order to adapt the OS, its tool sets, and third party applications to meet a particular need. It is time that the Linux world comes to grips with this user need, the users are GOING to want to install new programs, hardware etc, and NOT want to wait until the Linux gurus/geeks/gods deem a new OS is ready for them. Time does not stand still for users, and they demand an OS environment that can easily handle upgrades and other changes. How many times do I hear Linux gurus telling a neophyte that he has to untar this or gunzip that or make such an such, or use YAST or rpm -i something? It is only a matter of minutes sometime before talk degenerates into ln's and rm's and grep's and sometimes even sed's etc etc All of which is advance geek speak far far beyond the capabilities or interest of your average user. Simply stated, as this author is trying to point out, Linux/SuSE is flatly NOT ready for the general consumer market. It remains far to difficult to understand and easily model so a user can grasp how to control, adapt and understand it. There are many flavours of Linux out there adding to the confusion, non-standard directory organizations, and non-standardized installation/removal procedures. Go take a look at your average Linux application installation site and see if you really think the average user can actually understand and install something. He has to figure out what flavor of Linux he has (and for SuSE this is a hugh hurdle because even in the Linux circles it is NOT well known or even comes close to being recognized like say Redhat), and he has to understand in incredible detail what and how to do the installation. As much as we like to bash Microsoft for its poor quality of software, I will argue that THEY ARE ON THE RIGHT TRACK! Their goal is to make it as easy as possible for users to adapt their computer to meet their needs. While it is rough, they are striving to provide an environment in which all a user has to do, to install a new program, or a new piece of hardware, will be to simply stick a CD disk in the drive, or download an application and have it automagically self install WITH NO HASSELS and be ready for the user to use in a somewhat standardized fashion. I am not arguing that Microsoft and their vendors have achieved this goal yet, but THAT IS THIER GOAL and it is the right one! Instead of being offended by this article, and name calling the author as some Microsoft moron, listen carefully to the critism! ITS VALID! Until SuSE/Linux can provide an enviroment in which the common user can readily understand, models which are intuitive and easy to grasp, standardized user interfaces for all applications that allow users to easily communicate with their computer and comprehend and use these same models repeatably so a paridgm is reinforced consistantly - Linux will remain strictly an irrelevant OS and a toy of a small subset of computer users/geeks. It cannot become a mainstream OS and WILL lose out to Microsft in the end. And THAT prospect scares me because I firmly believe computers can be wonderful tools for everyone and not a fustrating experience as it has almost universally become. Microsoft has taken the cheap/quick engineering road using a lot of flash and very simple models to sell their OS. Linux has the robustness be be a great OS, but lacks the appeal of simplicity in its user interfaces. I personally am betting on Linux but as long as its supporters and developers continue to ignore such critism, as what this author tried to say, Microsoft will continue to win the hearts and souls of all those vast hoards of computer users because they DO offer the illusion, at least, that their solution is simple and easy to understand.... Apologies in advance if I have seriously offended anyone... Marc...

jfweber@bellsouth.net wrote:

On April Thursday 2005 12:06 pm, Marc Chamberlin wrote:

...

Colin Carter wrote:

...

On Thursday 28 April 2005 15:43, JD. Brown wrote:

...

...

An interesting article about v9.3 to be found at www.theinquirer.net.

Ummm what is so hard about clicking on am rpm file and ¨ install w/ yast"choice pops up... if you stick your cd or dvd into the drive before hand it also will resolve dependencies?

Just asking... it's not so hard to install Linux , once you get past the idea that you reinstall over and over and over what you origionaly installed as a solution to problems. ( it isn´t and doesn´t solve the problem.

Well I will try to respond to your points each - I agree that an installation of Linux is not too bad, provided nothing goes wrong and nothing out of the ordinary is requested by the user during the installation process. The real issue and way to judge an installation is to look at how robust the process is when something goes wrong, as often happens. This is one of the real weaknesses of BOTH Linux installations and Windows installations. If Linux wants to win out over Windows, and truly be perceived as a better operating system then it needs to do a far better job of guiding the user to a solution, not just bailing out and dumping the problem. This is where having a really effective/intuitive model of the Linux OS would be wonderful to have. I would like to see it better modularized with easy to understand components that break down into further easy to understand parts. I have never had the pleasure, so far, of being able to do a SuSE/Linux upgrade on any of my computers without experiencing a great deal of difficulty somewhere. In fact I have given up on doing upgrades, and I hear a lot of others have as well. I now tar up all my data and home directories, or install them on separate partitions, and install each new SuSE version from scratch. There are just too many interdependencies between version levels, modules that trying to untangle the linguine after doing the update is just too daunting. It is a poor trade off however because after doing a new installation I have to go back through all my applications an reconfigure them which is aggravating as well. (and just TRY to talk an average user through the process of re-setting up his firewall remotely!!!) As for your point about simply clicking on a rpm file, sure would be no problem if A it always works without any sort of hassle/problem and B EVERYBODY used rpm files to do their installations. That way there would be a consistent paradigm at least. But the sad fact is neither is true. RPM installations often get into dependency conflicts as you pointed out, sometime a needed module is missing entirely, not even on the distro disks, and sometime it leads to you having to toss out something else that you want. All of these issues are beyond the average home user's ability to correct, and prove difficult even for a seasoned engineer like myself sometime. And, not everyone uses this paradigm. E-gads I have even seen installers require you to jump through the Configure - Make - Make install process so many times it makes my head hurt. IMHO there is no excuse for not distributing the appropriate binaries but that is just my opinion! And what is the poor user to do if that process blows up on him! This is what I am talking about in referring to robustness of an OS and the environment provided to the user. I am quite prepared to argue that it is simply not ready for the mass home/small business market. A user must be able to rapidly understand the models, to a depth that is still intuitive and yet allows him to fix most problems that crop up without requiring the aid of some guru.

THE only scarey part I can see in an install is the partitioning .. until one gets a handle on it and away they go.... the change from the absurd idea ( even for Windows) of having one drive called C:\ no matter how big or small it may be is beyond belief stupid. Everyone should have learned by now, even windows folks to set up a separate drive for their files/data etc. .

I couldn't agree with you more...

stuff deleted....

...

I'm afraid that model is unlikely to happen to Suse, and similar distros, Most of us who are at least semi pro in admin would prefer that the general Joe NOT be able to foul up our systems w/ installing his own chosed stuff... And I believe Ben has spoken in the past about guys who just insist on doing that stuff no matter how many times you take thier intet connection or email account away from them...

Well I think you missed the point of this article. We are NOT talking about some software shop with dedicated administrators to help out. We are talking about the average home user, small business person, etc who is A his/her own administrator muddling his way through the installation processes and B does NOT have a degree in computer science/engineering! There is a vast number of people out there in the world trying to work on their own computers and admin them. THEY DONT HAVE AN ADMIN PERSON to go to! This attitude amongst Linux software engineers seems to be widespread, that it is their job to hand hold everyone through using Linux and that all novice Linux users should have some Linus geek/guru they can go to. It is just not realistic however!!! If the software and/or its environment does not provide an adequate guide to a solution, for each problem that may be encountered, then IT IS BROKE PERIOD and engineers, developers and others in this field should take that as a red flag that their model/software needs fixing. But as far as your point goes, I will argue that the SuSE/Linux OS needs to be robust enough the handle both your needs as a sys admin to control and regulate your users, and it needs to be robust enough to allow a novice user to control and regulate his own computer(s). Neither environment should restrict the user or set of users from adapting their computers to solve their (and in your case - collective) needs/problems. And neither environment should require you to get a PhD in computer science in order to understand how to operate/configure/update your computer as needed.

Suse Pro can be used at home easily, at least my kid and grandkids and her totally non tech husband can as well. OTH it is better suited perhaps to SO/HOs and larger cap companies. Which still takes in a lot of folks who are currently suffering from malware, various virii , and server slowdowns they never can figure out...USing that oh so easy and comforting Windows software.

BTW, IF my Mum were still alive she´d be using Suse too.. <G>

and they would be happy until something new came along that they need to adapt their computer too, and you or some other Linux guru weren't around to help them... THEN they have a problem and will judge the SuSE Linux environment by what will appear to be a failure on its part. Keep in mind Microsoft has LOTS of users and therefore LOTS of "experts" around helping each other. Linux does not yet. It is not enough for the Linux world to say we too can be as bad as what Microsoft puts out. Linux has to adopt the attitude that it can do better if it ever wants to replace Microsoft or seriously compete against her. To get there, IMHO Linux has to adopt the road with the goal of making each of its users self sufficient and that is going to require a LOT of rework in its models, gui's and standards. I realize that "standards" in the Linux world is almost an oxymoron, but I think that until it begins to seriously happen Linux will not be able to compete against the Microsoft mediocre standards. Ergo it is not ready for prime time mass marketing and is only suitable in niches where some guru is handy. Marc...

j

On Friday 29 April 2005 02:06, Marc Chamberlin wrote:

Colin Carter wrote:

...

On Thursday 28 April 2005 15:43, JD. Brown wrote:

...

...

An interesting article about v9.3 to be found at www.theinquirer.net. The article is titled, "SuSE 9.3 fails home-use test".

Yeah, The author to that story is a complete Windows spud. :) He gives no good hard facts, It's just matter of opinion.

JD

Well now, it appears to me that most replies/comment from the Linux gurus have been along the above lines: that is, comments without substance. How about the following "fact" which the author quotes. It appears to me, from my experience with Linux, that the following paragraph is true: Quote: And don't bother trying to look at the installation read-me notes either. They are just advertisements for the idiots who designed the software and tend to go into great details about the licence agreement, which, as most users tell you, isn't as important as getting the software going. End quote. I don't agree with the 'idiots' dig, but it is true that most ReadMe files contain about what he says.

Let us hear some technical criticism about what the author said. Remember, he did not say it was difficult for a Linux guru; he said it was not for the average user who is used to an easy to install system. Colin

Hmmm this ought to provoke an interesting discussion, though I do NOT want to engage in any flame wars. Speaking as another software engineer with over 35 years of experience I have to come down categorically on the side of the author of this article as well. Now before the Linux zealots get ruffled too much, let me state that I am one of your most fervent Microcrud haters as well and despise much of theirs and their venders software. About 80% of the time I use Linux (mostly SuSE Linux at that) and 20% of the time I use Microsoft Windows. I LIKE Linux because it allows me to adapt and configure my computer to meet my needs, whereas Windows will often prevent me from doing so. BUT I am also qualifying myself AS a computer geek as described by the author of this article, so I have a LOT of technical expertist which IS required if one wants to change/configure a Linux OS and its tool set to meet ones needs.

Even though there are some flaws in the article (not sure what Beagle is for example, is this really SuSE's flagship product? if so I don't have a clue!!!) his article goes straight to the heart of what is at issue with the Linux OS's, SuSE's version included. Time and again I hear Linux proponets argue that Linux can compete against Microsoft Windows IF it is initually set up for Aunt Bessie correctly, with all the tools she will ever need. And yes IF that is the case, then Linux OS's can be relatively easy to use. However, this argument misses the point and Aunt Bessie represents only a small subset of the world of real userst! The most essential quality of a computer is it's ability to be changed and rapidly adapted to meet new and changing user requirements. And this is what the writer is essentially saying and where Linux is failing and Microsoft is slowly succeeding! Users want an environment where he/she can go out and get the latest video card and install it and the drivers with no requirement as to understand the technical aspects of how to do so, so they can play their games. Or to install the latest application such as Firefox, or OpenOffice tools so they can have the latest features. OR to even install the latest OS in a reliable and easily understandable way. They want an OS environment that is robust enought to handle such an upgrade AND they want it to be duck soup simple to do!

The Linux world is a quagmire of difficult installation procedures and it often requires a user to learn all kinds of geek speak and obtain advance technical knowledge in order to adapt the OS, its tool sets, and third party applications to meet a particular need. It is time that the Linux world comes to grips with this user need, the users are GOING to want to install new programs, hardware etc, and NOT want to wait until the Linux gurus/geeks/gods deem a new OS is ready for them. Time does not stand still for users, and they demand an OS environment that can easily handle upgrades and other changes. How many times do I hear Linux gurus telling a neophyte that he has to untar this or gunzip that or make such an such, or use YAST or rpm -i something? It is only a matter of minutes sometime before talk degenerates into ln's and rm's and grep's and sometimes even sed's etc etc All of which is advance geek speak far far beyond the capabilities or interest of your average user.

Simply stated, as this author is trying to point out, Linux/SuSE is flatly NOT ready for the general consumer market. It remains far to difficult to understand and easily model so a user can grasp how to control, adapt and understand it. There are many flavours of Linux out there adding to the confusion, non-standard directory organizations, and non-standardized installation/removal procedures. Go take a look at your average Linux application installation site and see if you really think the average user can actually understand and install something. He has to figure out what flavor of Linux he has (and for SuSE this is a hugh hurdle because even in the Linux circles it is NOT well known or even comes close to being recognized like say Redhat), and he has to understand in incredible detail what and how to do the installation.

As much as we like to bash Microsoft for its poor quality of software, I will argue that THEY ARE ON THE RIGHT TRACK! Their goal is to make it as easy as possible for users to adapt their computer to meet their needs. While it is rough, they are striving to provide an environment in which all a user has to do, to install a new program, or a new piece of hardware, will be to simply stick a CD disk in the drive, or download an application and have it automagically self install WITH NO HASSELS and be ready for the user to use in a somewhat standardized fashion. I am not arguing that Microsoft and their vendors have achieved this goal yet, but THAT IS THIER GOAL and it is the right one!

Instead of being offended by this article, and name calling the author as some Microsoft moron, listen carefully to the critism! ITS VALID! Until SuSE/Linux can provide an enviroment in which the common user can readily understand, models which are intuitive and easy to grasp, standardized user interfaces for all applications that allow users to easily communicate with their computer and comprehend and use these same models repeatably so a paridgm is reinforced consistantly - Linux will remain strictly an irrelevant OS and a toy of a small subset of computer users/geeks. It cannot become a mainstream OS and WILL lose out to Microsft in the end. And THAT prospect scares me because I firmly believe computers can be wonderful tools for everyone and not a fustrating experience as it has almost universally become. Microsoft has taken the cheap/quick engineering road using a lot of flash and very simple models to sell their OS. Linux has the robustness be be a great OS, but lacks the appeal of simplicity in its user interfaces. I personally am betting on Linux but as long as its supporters and developers continue to ignore such critism, as what this author tried to say, Microsoft will continue to win the hearts and souls of all those vast hoards of computer users because they DO offer the illusion, at least, that their solution is simple and easy to understand....

Apologies in advance if I have seriously offended anyone...

Marc...

Boy, did you let it out! I wanted to say as much, but bit my tongue because those with lesser experience haven't seen the same range of machines and the years of development/progress. I have a mate who has a similar number of years of experience, with many machines and O.S.s: he still mostly uses M$ Windows because he has too many hassles when he uses Linux and he says he doesn't have the time to waste trying to be a Linux guru. He has decided that it is less time consuming to fight with M$ than to fight Linux. I am finding the same situation, but keep hoping that SuSE will get it right. Regards, Colin

Mark Crean wrote:

Marc Chamberlin wrote:

...

Colin Carter wrote: Hmmm this ought to provoke an interesting discussion

[snip]

Great post, bang on the money in my experience. Well said!

<snip> I'm new to Linux and so far only seen Suse 9.1. But I've been around since CP/M on 2MHz Z80s and 128kb single sided 8" diskettes. I had a great deal of difficulty getting my head around Suse. I installed it only because I wanted to run two applications: 1. Firebird RDBMS server for some Windows based (where all the customers are) client application development; and 2. Subversion source code repository served via Apache2 To cut a long story short, I got Subversion and Apache going and I have to thank this list for helping me when I was about ready to apply a rusty razor-blade where it would do the most good. Firebird is still a work in progress but not a Linux issue. This is my newbie take on Linux ... Linux (or maybe I should be saying Unix or SuSE - forgive my inattention to detail which doesn't interest me) was developed by technical gurus to be a very powerful server. For them, performance was and is everything. Following advice from this list I studied the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard so I could maybe get a handle on things. I learned that *nix/linux (not just the FHS) is entirely aimed at sysadmins who need to keep servers up and performing to the max. Period. New users will become Linux gurus or fall by the wayside according to darwinian self-selection. I'll probably drop off the perch before I learn enough. Linux sux unless you are prepared to devote considerable brainspace to it. Compared to being "competent" in Windows it's a different place. No comparison. This discussion should really be about KDE versus Windows not Linux versus Windows. Don't want to offend any Gnome users out there, I haven't even seen Gnome. Anyway, that is the comparison which mattters. The first thing you need if you are going to take market share from Bill Gates is a strategy which begins with seeing things the way they really are rather than the way you want to see them. That's a reasonable definition of sanity :) Begin with a name. KDE is a marketing black hole. Gnome is a better gname only if the marketing ploy is gnu-based. But even so, Gnome sucks too. Apple is brilliant but it is taken. Windows the GUI has successfully blurred the distinction between the operating system and the GUI. Linux as the OS should be in the background; the GUI (whatever GUI) should be in the marketing foreground. There should be a boot level 6 where you never see the Linux OS booting up - instead you should see your favourite photograph and a progress bar. I reckon the time is right to launch a sharply named GUI to compete with Windows. Longhorn will be released too soon - under the direction of the accountants who need to keep the shareholders happy. It will generate heaps of bad press. Windows users are all savvy nowadays. They know what Bill is like. Just give them something they can hang their hopes on. The big selling point for the GUI is that it runs on Linux which is brilliantly stable and forever being improved and tested by millions more users than Windows is tested by. It is secure and comes out of the box to reveal a fortress against the vandals who understand Windows so well. Everyone needs at least one server and that gives you another marketing point for the (you do need a name!) GUI is that it interoperates with Linux servers just naturally. Finally, it also interfaces with all the legacy Windows systems out there. Bottom line for me is that SuSE Linux is a server not a workstation. To be a workstation it needs a snappily named GUI with simple apps and simple documentation aimed at my simple clients. They are the ones you need to convince. Not me. Regards mike

Mike Dewhirst wrote:

Mark Crean wrote:

...

Marc Chamberlin wrote:

...

Colin Carter wrote: Hmmm this ought to provoke an interesting discussion

[snip]

Great post, bang on the money in my experience. Well said!

<snip>

I'm new to Linux and so far only seen Suse 9.1. But I've been around since CP/M on 2MHz Z80s and 128kb single sided 8" diskettes.

I had a great deal of difficulty getting my head around Suse. I installed it only because I wanted to run two applications:

1. Firebird RDBMS server for some Windows based (where all the customers are) client application development; and

2. Subversion source code repository served via Apache2

To cut a long story short, I got Subversion and Apache going and I have to thank this list for helping me when I was about ready to apply a rusty razor-blade where it would do the most good. Firebird is still a work in progress but not a Linux issue.

This is my newbie take on Linux ...

Linux (or maybe I should be saying Unix or SuSE - forgive my inattention to detail which doesn't interest me) was developed by technical gurus to be a very powerful server. For them, performance was and is everything.

Following advice from this list I studied the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard so I could maybe get a handle on things. I learned that *nix/linux (not just the FHS) is entirely aimed at sysadmins who need to keep servers up and performing to the max. Period.

New users will become Linux gurus or fall by the wayside according to darwinian self-selection. I'll probably drop off the perch before I learn enough. Linux sux unless you are prepared to devote considerable brainspace to it. Compared to being "competent" in Windows it's a different place. No comparison.

This discussion should really be about KDE versus Windows not Linux versus Windows. Don't want to offend any Gnome users out there, I haven't even seen Gnome. Anyway, that is the comparison which mattters.

The first thing you need if you are going to take market share from Bill Gates is a strategy which begins with seeing things the way they really are rather than the way you want to see them. That's a reasonable definition of sanity :)

Begin with a name. KDE is a marketing black hole. Gnome is a better gname only if the marketing ploy is gnu-based. But even so, Gnome sucks too. Apple is brilliant but it is taken.

Windows the GUI has successfully blurred the distinction between the operating system and the GUI. Linux as the OS should be in the background; the GUI (whatever GUI) should be in the marketing foreground. There should be a boot level 6 where you never see the Linux OS booting up - instead you should see your favourite photograph and a progress bar.

I reckon the time is right to launch a sharply named GUI to compete with Windows. Longhorn will be released too soon - under the direction of the accountants who need to keep the shareholders happy. It will generate heaps of bad press. Windows users are all savvy nowadays. They know what Bill is like. Just give them something they can hang their hopes on.

The big selling point for the GUI is that it runs on Linux which is brilliantly stable and forever being improved and tested by millions more users than Windows is tested by. It is secure and comes out of the box to reveal a fortress against the vandals who understand Windows so well.

Everyone needs at least one server and that gives you another marketing point for the (you do need a name!) GUI is that it interoperates with Linux servers just naturally. Finally, it also interfaces with all the legacy Windows systems out there.

Bottom line for me is that SuSE Linux is a server not a workstation. To be a workstation it needs a snappily named GUI with simple apps and simple documentation aimed at my simple clients. They are the ones you need to convince. Not me.

Regards

mike

Linus once replied to an article that said Linux was just a server OS ...that he always used Linux as a desktop, that's the way I've always used it, with the exception of installs on zSeries and on Enterprise Sun SPARC. I went from Win 3.11 to Linux on desktops and Win95 to Linux on laptops with the achieved aim of interoperating in a sea of Windows at work. We never had networking in early Linux, I think we had olvwm working well before we had a proper IP stack, there were battles and the original network maintainer gave up under the weight of criticism, but things got better with the input from Donald becker of NASA. Back then if you wanted a server, you used BSD which was too large for the hard drives available at afordable prices for home use. The good networking stack that eventually arrived drove Linux as a server, but the majority of early users were desktop users like myself. For the length of time I've been using Linux as my only desktop OS and keeping up with my work needs, it arrived a long time ago. If you install Linux on a box and give it to a Windows user, like I did for my daughters with SuSE 9.1, you discover there is not much you have to teach them, plus you have a quiet life - my daughters used Linux to watch DVD's before they bought a DVD player, played music CD's, Word processing, spreadsheets etc., with little input from me at their home, they use Windows at work and the Linux machines at my home for surfing the net and email. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce ... Hamradio License G3VBV, Keen licensed Private Pilot Retired IBM Mainframes and Sun Servers Tech Support Specialist Microsoft Windows Free Zone - Linux for all Computing Tasks

Sat, 30 Apr 2005, by kevanf1@gmail.com: [..]

Ok, number one, I have always been led to believe that Linus Torvalds developed Linux (not his name but given that name by the later developers) as part of his university course. It was first and foremost developed as a secure and stable operating system in a similar way to Unix but for running on IBM compatible PC's. Please, say if I'm wrong.

Not really, in his own words: "Hello everybody out there using minix - I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones" Theo -- Theo v. Werkhoven Registered Linux user# 99872 http://counter.li.org ICBM 52 13 26N , 4 29 47E. + ICQ: 277217131 SUSE 9.2 + Jabber: muadib@jabber.xs4all.nl Kernel 2.6.8 + See headers for PGP/GPG info. Claimer: any email I receive will become my property. Disclaimers do not apply.

"Rikard Johnels" wrote:

On Saturday 30 April 2005 15.21, Theo v. Werkhoven wrote:

...

Sat, 30 Apr 2005, by kevanf1@gmail.com: [..]

...

Ok, number one, I have always been led to believe that Linus Torvalds developed Linux (not his name but given that name by the later developers) as part of his university course. It was first and foremost developed as a secure and stable operating system in a similar way to Unix but for running on IBM compatible PC's. Please, say if I'm wrong.

Not really, in his own words: "Hello everybody out there using minix - I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones"

Theo -- Theo v. Werkhoven Registered Linux user# 99872 http://counter.li.org ICBM 52 13 26N , 4 29 47E. + ICQ: 277217131 SUSE 9.2 + Jabber: muadib@jabber.xs4all.nl Kernel 2.6.8 + See headers for PGP/GPG info. Claimer: any email I receive will become my property. Disclaimers do not apply.

And BOY was he wrong!! I wonder what his thought had been if he'd know the way Linux would expload across the world, taking market shares, BIG market shares from Microsoft... :)

One thing he did say was that if he knew how hard a job it was going to be, he wouldn't have started it. Linus had limited objectives, Linus, Prof. Tannenbaum and just about every other pundit has been wrong in their initial reactions to Linux. Where Linus was right, Linux was not closed off to contributions from anyone, unlike BSD and its chosen few, so it garnered more interest, people said "WOW!, I want that stuff running on my hardware", judging it was too good for just PC's and all sorts of ports developed and were contributed, that's why it runs on about any hardware, imagine sitting at a screen and doing stuff with Linux/KDE on a mainframe and you can't see the difference between that and Linux/KDE on your PC, that's brilliance. People wanted Linux, it wasn't marketed to them, it didn't need billion dollar TV ads, it just sold itself on quality, speed, security, reliability, achieved maturity and the ability to work on hardware that was too slow to run anything else other than gathering dust. Someone says Linux is rubbish, don't take their word for it, bring out an otherwise useless box, install Linux free and judge for yourself -- I think many people did and those people delivered a resounding verdict --- Linux ROCKS! An example of people with hardened arteries ... I had colleagues who worked on mainframes and Solaris servers, in their daily work they used Windows laptops/desktops and they had their Solaris training at Sun, like we all did. Those guys refused to use bash, because on their Sun class they used the Bourne shell, they'd kill any xterm with bash on it, bring up one with the Bourne shell, type "ksh -o vi" and believe me, use vi to edit the command line. Now I've been using vi for about 23 years and I refuse to do such crass assness when there is bash, Tab keys, an up-arrow, backspace and arrow keys on my keyboard. On one occasion we were working on a large SPARC server with my Linux laptop connected and a colleague wanted to use an xterm to talk to the server, but it was in a different KDE virtual screen, when I got back I found my laptop at the kde login screen and colleague exasperated that he couldn't understand my "Linux rubbish", he'd switched it off and on again. If I tell you that one day you will reach a certain age and look at your contemporaries and realise in many of them that they are perfect facsimilies of their grandfathers and they took forty or 50 years to get that far back by the good year of 203x, believe me, they are many well on the way there now at age twenty-something. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce ... Hamradio License G3VBV, Keen licensed Private Pilot Retired IBM Mainframes and Sun Servers Tech Support Specialist Microsoft Windows Free Zone - Linux for all Computing Tasks

On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 05:05, Mark Crean wrote:

Marc Chamberlin wrote:

...

Colin Carter wrote: Hmmm this ought to provoke an interesting discussion [snip]

Great post, bang on the money in my experience. Well said!

The answer to a lot of those who dislike MS but dread tangling with Linux is, I think, "Buy a Mac". Apple are on a roll at the moment and it is Mac OS, not Linux, that is hoovering up MS escapees and emerging reinvigorated by the iPod as the natural alternative to the Beast of Redmond. I'm a Linux user of a few years's standing now and use it as my main desktop OS, but alas Linux still seems so much in the grip of developers and gurus that true ease of use and consideration for the poor old end-user are as far away as ever, imho. Mac OS shows it can be done.

Quite a few posters on this thread have been sayin that their elderly mothers make ideal Linux users. Cue plangent violins. Promoting Linux as the ideal OS for the over-70s is not necessarily a plus point, though. Second, in my experience non-technical friends and relatives are much happier with a nice Mac laptop if Windows has been ruled out, not least because the children can come and play around on it with their mp3s and mini-iPods and you can watch dvds without first requiring a broadband internet connection and a degree in science. SuSE's decision to make multimedia an even tougher challenge in 9.3 is an extraordinary step backwards no matter how convincingly the arguments for their decision are put.

You know that Linux has a problem when Eric Raymond hammers at how difficult some things are. What brought this to mind was his rant on CUPS, and how he'd prefer to see something like what Mac does in terms of greying options and hardware detection. I can see why the likes of Linspire and Xandros have an install base.

On Thursday 28 Apr 2005 14:55, Colin Carter wrote:

On Thursday 28 April 2005 15:43, JD. Brown wrote:

...

...

An interesting article about v9.3 to be found at www.theinquirer.net. The article is titled, "SuSE 9.3 fails home-use test".

Yeah, The author to that story is a complete Windows spud. :) He gives no good hard facts, It's just matter of opinion.

JD

Well now, it appears to me that most replies/comment from the Linux gurus have been along the above lines: that is, comments without substance. How about the following "fact" which the author quotes. It appears to me, from my experience with Linux, that the following paragraph is true: Quote: And don't bother trying to look at the installation read-me notes either. They are just advertisements for the idiots who designed the software and tend to go into great details about the licence agreement, which, as most users tell you, isn't as important as getting the software going. End quote. I don't agree with the 'idiots' dig, but it is true that most ReadMe files contain about what he says.

Let us hear some technical criticism about what the author said. Remember, he did not say it was difficult for a Linux guru; he said it was not for the average user who is used to an easy to install system.

Where do you start with this article (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22756)? Just a few things that leapt out when I read and dismissed it a couple of days ago: - No recent PC takes an hour to install SUSE - I have installed on ancient K6/450s in less than 90 minutes. So what was he using? I doubt he installed on the same machine he quotes a Windows intall-time of 45 minutes for, because Windows actually takes longer to install on any PC on which I have installed both. If not, the install-time comparison is misleading. - Anyone who has installed SUSE knows that the slideshow changes, and you get even more feedback if you change to the package view. So how come he thought nothing was happening? Seems odd, unless there was something weird about his machine, or the method he was using to install. - "Downloads core components". Say what? 9.3 comes with a bootload of stuff on CDs and DVDs - no downloading required. So what does he mean here? You don't get an option to download security updates until later in the install, so it can't be those. So is he using 9.2 for a 9.3 review??? Or some 9.3 hack (maybe a BitTorrent that someone has put up, because FTP downloads aren't available yet)??? If so, the complaints are hardly relevant, since the average user is going to be using CDs. - How could something be downloaded in the middle of a reboot? And how could it be the wrong OS if you have already elected to install Linux? Is there some other thing in the install mix here? And if he means that the install will over-write a Windows partition, this is absolutely impossible unless you wilfully ignore the "going to start partitioning now" warning. I have NEVER had this happen, except once in 1998 when I was new to Linux and didn't know what I was doing (I wasn't too clear about what partitions were, either....) So is he asleep, or what exactly does he think he is doing? I even wondered if he was trying to install SUSE *from* Windows (as if it were a Windows app). - Very occasionally I have had instances with multiple hard drives in the box where the mid-install reboot doesn't work, because SUSE gets mixed up about which drive is which. But the vast majority of installs will just reboot fine. What is the second reboot he mentions? You install the base system, get a reboot, install the rest, and then X gets restarted to log intothe new install. Does he mean the X restart? But this happens automatically, and there is no icon to press. So what stage is his system at here? - The list of software he mentions here may be the security updates, but he mentions upgrades again later, so it may not be. If this is some flavour of YOU, and he's saying that YOU offers boxes to tick etc instead of doing everything automatically, this may be a valid point, but it may also be a valid point that in places where you don't have broadband the Windows "download everything" option may be undesirable too. The two views aren't discussed because he seems to be approaching the "review" with his mind already made up. - Beagle is being developed by Novell developers, IIRC, but "flagship product" seems a bit excessive. And it is not an essential for running your desktop, but ... - Perhaps he was indeed at YOU, and the problem is that he was expecting Beagle to be listed, and it wasn't (I don't have 9.3 yet, so I'm not sure whether it is installed by default). So he seems in that case to be confusing security updates with program installation. Hmm. I think no matter how new a usr he is, he could be expected to read the labels on the icons, window headings, and so on. - As regards the "complex" upgrade (security update?) process, clicking OK is usually ... OK. I suppose SUSE could have an "express" option in YOU which makes a default set of selections and does everything for you, but is someone who needs that really going to be experimenting with Linux, and if he is, will he be the sort to stay with it, or the sort that fiddles about with it for a couple of hours, gets a bit lost, and then tells his mates at the pub "I tried that Linux thing last night, but you know, it's nowhere near as easy to use as Windows"? - You could always choose between a range of desktops on SUSE, not just on "this version". And no telepathy is needed - just the desire to click on a a drop-down list - but maybe he was too distracted for that. - The media issue is an ongoing one - it is fair to say that this needs to be dealt with in a more elegant way. How that is done is the question. I also think that there should be a message to the user telling them *why* things are being done this way, ie that industry groups are hostile to free and open-source software. - The points about installation seem to show confusion between installing from a source tarball and installing from an rpm. It is true that a new user might not be aware of the distinction, and that this would be new territory for them, but surely they might be expected to read around a bit, since this is "not Kansas any more". The SUSE printed manuals, which most new users would be likely to have if they got a boxed set, would also give further help. So again, what is he working from here? And also, when moving from Win95 to Win98, and again from Win98 to WinXP, people had to learn new things. Is he saying that it is OK to expect this for Windows versions, but not for a completely different OS? It's not as if there aren't any number of Linux newby sites where these things are explained. - "Licence agreements" - er, this is the whole point of free software. But perhaps he just wants a safer, better, cheaper, more configurable, minority-langauge friendly version of Windows? Oh ... that would be Linux - with the licence agreements that keep it that way. - Is video the only thing he tried to use the PC for? Apart from it not being the easiest application area ever (you can have glitches even on Windows), I think most new users would be unlikely to move from a specialist platform like the Mac or a consumer platform like Windows just to faff around with video on a Linux box. They're more likely to use office software, browsers, etc. But there's little mention of those. (In fact - see below - this is a powerful indication that SUSE does *not* fail the home user test.) - "Hunt the installed app" disappeared a couple of SUSE iterations ago. I can't believe he didn't think of looking in the SUSE menu, where an entry for Beagle would have been found after the install. Didn't he have a look through the different menu entries, even if only for curiosity? It could be, of course, that there was so much stuff there compared to a default Windows install (where you get a CD player, a browser, an email client, a text editor, and a media player, and that's all) that the intrepid chap was overwhelmed. But any new user that I have seen would have opened every one of those entries at least once - why didn't he? - "What it said on the tin" - anyone who expects to migrate to a new OS without spending a bit of time reading around is fooling themselves. In fact, most new users wouldn't be that naive (or witless). Again, if he was using some hacked version, without manuals, that may have caused problems, but the SUSE and Novell sites are hardly devoid of info. - "No useful help material" - so the browser window that opens on first login is a figment of my imagination? And the SUSE help icon on the desktop and the toolbar are mirages? - "No wizards" - Did he try setting up a printer? Or look at any of the stuff in YaST? These can always be improved, but to say they are non-existent makes me wonder how much time he spent looking around the desktop. - "Insisted on rebooting itself" - Did we perhaps hit the "Restart computer" button on the logout dialogue instead of the one marked "Turn off computer"? Did we even check by going through the sequence a couple of times? I don't think SUSE can be held responsible for fat fingers. I hope the above is enough to give you some idea that this "review" is hardly worth the electrons it is written with. The guy obviously got some version of 9.3 that did not come off a shelf somewhere, or perhaps did the install while he was working on something else and with only 1 of his 3 brain-cells engaged. It is clear that the install process does not mesh with the usual one, so either something went badly wrong or he pressed a few wrong buttons somewhere (in the belief that he was a Windows guru and could show these Linux bods a thing or two). I honestly can't imagine how he got in this state, because for at least 3 years now the SUSE install process (and that of all the big Linux distros) is so simple my 10-year old can do it. He bravely refused to do any research whatever beforehand (because after all he knew that it wouldn't be much cop compared to Windows), even though he presumably reads column-inches of stuff on new Windows versions before he starts using them. He decided to ignore distros like Linspire and Xandros and Lycoris, which are tailored for refugees who want as Windows-like a Linux as possible. However, if you ignore the bias and the lack of concentration on the job in hand (and perhaps the desire to stoke up some righteous indignation from Linux users), something very interesting emerges from between the lines. A few years ago people were happily claiming that Linux would never be widely used outside of a few geek deployments ... well OK, it would, but not for mainstream tasks on a daily basis ... well OK, but not for mission-critical stuff ... well OK, but not for high-performance stuff ... well OK, but not for the desktop ... well OK, but it won't have the hardware support ... well OK, but it won't have decent office software ... well OK, but you couldn't use it for gaming ... well OK, but multimedia is a bit of a problem. That's where we seem to be at the minute, and like all the other things, I'm sure that will get sorted out in the fulness of time - remember that other consumer operating systems have a 10-year head start and lots more marketing cash. And in that context what this review *didn't* say was as imortant as what it *did* say. It obviously installed itself (in spite of whatever he did/didn't do) in a useable state - it found all the hardware with no problem. The browser and office software worked so well that they weren't worth commenting on. It was fast and responsive, and "cleaner than Windows" (in more ways than one, if you think about it!). It even impressed with its good looks. So the real issues highlighted are (1) multimedia, and (2) unfamiliar install procedures. These are not rocket science, and depend a bit at the minute on the user being willing to at least read a few pages. So contrary to what the article suggests, the truth is actually that Linux is now frighteningly close to being a fully viable desktop for the average user, even one as reluctant as this unfortunate chap. Interesting. -- Pob hwyl / Best wishes Kevin Donnelly www.kyfieithu.co.uk - Meddalwedd Rhydd yn Gymraeg www.cymrux.org.uk - Linux Cymraeg ar un CD!

On Friday 29 April 2005 06:15, Jim Sabatke wrote:

<snip everything>

That whole site looks like an editorial for Windows site. Take a look at the one on "trusted systems."

Article "trusted systems" ??? Couldn't see same. I guess it is filed under a different title and one is supposed to search the whole "hard drive", reading everything until one finds it. (Somebody else can explain the joke to you.)

It's all crap.

I hope you don't think we see this as a considered response from a Linux guru!

Jim

Colin

Kevin Donnelly wrote:

On Thursday 28 Apr 2005 14:55, Colin Carter wrote:

...

On Thursday 28 April 2005 15:43, JD. Brown wrote:

...

...

An interesting article about v9.3 to be found at www.theinquirer.net. The article is titled, "SuSE 9.3 fails home-use test".

Yeah, The author to that story is a complete Windows spud. :) He gives no good hard facts, It's just matter of opinion.

JD

Well now, it appears to me that most replies/comment from the Linux gurus have been along the above lines: that is, comments without substance. How about the following "fact" which the author quotes. It appears to me, from my experience with Linux, that the following paragraph is true: Quote: And don't bother trying to look at the installation read-me notes either. They are just advertisements for the idiots who designed the software and tend to go into great details about the licence agreement, which, as most users tell you, isn't as important as getting the software going. End quote. I don't agree with the 'idiots' dig, but it is true that most ReadMe files contain about what he says.

Let us hear some technical criticism about what the author said. Remember, he did not say it was difficult for a Linux guru; he said it was not for the average user who is used to an easy to install system.

Where do you start with this article (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22756)? Just a few things that leapt out when I read and dismissed it a couple of days ago:

- No recent PC takes an hour to install SUSE - I have installed on ancient K6/450s in less than 90 minutes. So what was he using? I doubt he installed on the same machine he quotes a Windows intall-time of 45 minutes for, because Windows actually takes longer to install on any PC on which I have installed both. If not, the install-time comparison is misleading.

- Anyone who has installed SUSE knows that the slideshow changes, and you get even more feedback if you change to the package view. So how come he thought nothing was happening? Seems odd, unless there was something weird about his machine, or the method he was using to install.

- "Downloads core components". Say what? 9.3 comes with a bootload of stuff on CDs and DVDs - no downloading required. So what does he mean here? You don't get an option to download security updates until later in the install, so it can't be those. So is he using 9.2 for a 9.3 review??? Or some 9.3 hack (maybe a BitTorrent that someone has put up, because FTP downloads aren't available yet)??? If so, the complaints are hardly relevant, since the average user is going to be using CDs.

- How could something be downloaded in the middle of a reboot? And how could it be the wrong OS if you have already elected to install Linux? Is there some other thing in the install mix here? And if he means that the install will over-write a Windows partition, this is absolutely impossible unless you wilfully ignore the "going to start partitioning now" warning. I have NEVER had this happen, except once in 1998 when I was new to Linux and didn't know what I was doing (I wasn't too clear about what partitions were, either....) So is he asleep, or what exactly does he think he is doing? I even wondered if he was trying to install SUSE *from* Windows (as if it were a Windows app).

- Very occasionally I have had instances with multiple hard drives in the box where the mid-install reboot doesn't work, because SUSE gets mixed up about which drive is which. But the vast majority of installs will just reboot fine. What is the second reboot he mentions? You install the base system, get a reboot, install the rest, and then X gets restarted to log intothe new install. Does he mean the X restart? But this happens automatically, and there is no icon to press. So what stage is his system at here?

- The list of software he mentions here may be the security updates, but he mentions upgrades again later, so it may not be. If this is some flavour of YOU, and he's saying that YOU offers boxes to tick etc instead of doing everything automatically, this may be a valid point, but it may also be a valid point that in places where you don't have broadband the Windows "download everything" option may be undesirable too. The two views aren't discussed because he seems to be approaching the "review" with his mind already made up.

- Beagle is being developed by Novell developers, IIRC, but "flagship product" seems a bit excessive. And it is not an essential for running your desktop, but ...

- Perhaps he was indeed at YOU, and the problem is that he was expecting Beagle to be listed, and it wasn't (I don't have 9.3 yet, so I'm not sure ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ whether it is installed by default). So he seems in that case to be confusing security updates with program installation. Hmm. I think no matter how new a usr he is, he could be expected to read the labels on the icons, window headings, and so on.

Sorry, Kevin but you just nulled all your points. If you DID have 9.3 and tried to install it then you could make comments but not having 9.3 you just cannot make comments on it because what is in the article may be exactly what is occurring when one installs 9.3. Agree?

- As regards the "complex" upgrade (security update?) process, clicking OK is usually ... OK. I suppose SUSE could have an "express" option in YOU which makes a default set of selections and does everything for you, but is someone who needs that really going to be experimenting with Linux, and if he is, will he be the sort to stay with it, or the sort that fiddles about with it for a couple of hours, gets a bit lost, and then tells his mates at the pub "I tried that Linux thing last night, but you know, it's nowhere near as easy to use as Windows"?

- You could always choose between a range of desktops on SUSE, not just on "this version". And no telepathy is needed - just the desire to click on a a drop-down list - but maybe he was too distracted for that.

- The media issue is an ongoing one - it is fair to say that this needs to be dealt with in a more elegant way. How that is done is the question. I also think that there should be a message to the user telling them *why* things are being done this way, ie that industry groups are hostile to free and open-source software.

- The points about installation seem to show confusion between installing from a source tarball and installing from an rpm. It is true that a new user might not be aware of the distinction, and that this would be new territory for them, but surely they might be expected to read around a bit, since this is "not Kansas any more". The SUSE printed manuals, which most new users would be likely to have if they got a boxed set, would also give further help. So again, what is he working from here? And also, when moving from Win95 to Win98, and again from Win98 to WinXP, people had to learn new things. Is he saying that it is OK to expect this for Windows versions, but not for a completely different OS? It's not as if there aren't any number of Linux newby sites where these things are explained.

- "Licence agreements" - er, this is the whole point of free software. But perhaps he just wants a safer, better, cheaper, more configurable, minority-langauge friendly version of Windows? Oh ... that would be Linux - with the licence agreements that keep it that way.

- Is video the only thing he tried to use the PC for? Apart from it not being the easiest application area ever (you can have glitches even on Windows), I think most new users would be unlikely to move from a specialist platform like the Mac or a consumer platform like Windows just to faff around with video on a Linux box. They're more likely to use office software, browsers, etc. But there's little mention of those. (In fact - see below - this is a powerful indication that SUSE does *not* fail the home user test.)

- "Hunt the installed app" disappeared a couple of SUSE iterations ago. I can't believe he didn't think of looking in the SUSE menu, where an entry for Beagle would have been found after the install. Didn't he have a look through the different menu entries, even if only for curiosity? It could be, of course, that there was so much stuff there compared to a default Windows install (where you get a CD player, a browser, an email client, a text editor, and a media player, and that's all) that the intrepid chap was overwhelmed. But any new user that I have seen would have opened every one of those entries at least once - why didn't he?

- "What it said on the tin" - anyone who expects to migrate to a new OS without spending a bit of time reading around is fooling themselves. In fact, most new users wouldn't be that naive (or witless). Again, if he was using some hacked version, without manuals, that may have caused problems, but the SUSE and Novell sites are hardly devoid of info.

- "No useful help material" - so the browser window that opens on first login is a figment of my imagination? And the SUSE help icon on the desktop and the toolbar are mirages?

- "No wizards" - Did he try setting up a printer? Or look at any of the stuff in YaST? These can always be improved, but to say they are non-existent makes me wonder how much time he spent looking around the desktop.

- "Insisted on rebooting itself" - Did we perhaps hit the "Restart computer" button on the logout dialogue instead of the one marked "Turn off computer"? Did we even check by going through the sequence a couple of times? I don't think SUSE can be held responsible for fat fingers.

I hope the above is enough to give you some idea that this "review" is hardly worth the electrons it is written with. The guy obviously got some version of 9.3 that did not come off a shelf somewhere, or perhaps did the install while he was working on something else and with only 1 of his 3 brain-cells engaged. It is clear that the install process does not mesh with the usual one, so either something went badly wrong or he pressed a few wrong buttons somewhere (in the belief that he was a Windows guru and could show these Linux bods a thing or two). I honestly can't imagine how he got in this state, because for at least 3 years now the SUSE install process (and that of all the big Linux distros) is so simple my 10-year old can do it. He bravely refused to do any research whatever beforehand (because after all he knew that it wouldn't be much cop compared to Windows), even though he presumably reads column-inches of stuff on new Windows versions before he starts using them. He decided to ignore distros like Linspire and Xandros and Lycoris, which are tailored for refugees who want as Windows-like a Linux as possible.

However, if you ignore the bias and the lack of concentration on the job in hand (and perhaps the desire to stoke up some righteous indignation from Linux users), something very interesting emerges from between the lines.

A few years ago people were happily claiming that Linux would never be widely used outside of a few geek deployments ... well OK, it would, but not for mainstream tasks on a daily basis ... well OK, but not for mission-critical stuff ... well OK, but not for high-performance stuff ... well OK, but not for the desktop ... well OK, but it won't have the hardware support ... well OK, but it won't have decent office software ... well OK, but you couldn't use it for gaming ... well OK, but multimedia is a bit of a problem.

That's where we seem to be at the minute, and like all the other things, I'm sure that will get sorted out in the fulness of time - remember that other consumer operating systems have a 10-year head start and lots more marketing cash. And in that context what this review *didn't* say was as imortant as what it *did* say.

It obviously installed itself (in spite of whatever he did/didn't do) in a useable state - it found all the hardware with no problem. The browser and office software worked so well that they weren't worth commenting on. It was fast and responsive, and "cleaner than Windows" (in more ways than one, if you think about it!). It even impressed with its good looks. So the real issues highlighted are (1) multimedia, and (2) unfamiliar install procedures. These are not rocket science, and depend a bit at the minute on the user being willing to at least read a few pages. So contrary to what the article suggests, the truth is actually that Linux is now frighteningly close to being a fully viable desktop for the average user, even one as reluctant as this unfortunate chap.

Interesting.

-- Understanding only begins with the act of perception.

On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 09:33, Ken Schneider wrote:

Can't delete extra stuff from your reply! Give people on dialup a break.

On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 19:48 +1000, Basil Chupin wrote:

...

Kevin Donnelly wrote:

...

{snip} :)

The guy that wrote the article was trying to do an FTP install BEFORE the FTP install was available. So how could he NOT give a biased opinion. He knew in advance it would be hard to install. If he had the CD set or the DVD for install things would have been a little different.

The terminology that was used, if it is the actual way the writer thinks, indicates to me that the writer isn't that computer literate. I've heard quite a few people refer to installing programs as downloading, which makes helping them an exercise in what they actually mean as opposed to what they actually say. I did a 9.3 install and shutdown, and didn't experience the problems the writer had. My system shut down as I told it to, his rebooted, as he probably told it to.

On April Friday 2005 5:48 am, Basil Chupin wrote:

Kevin Donnelly wrote:

...

On Thursday 28 Apr 2005 14:55, Colin Carter wrote:

...

On Thursday 28 April 2005 15:43, JD. Brown wrote:

...

...

An interesting article about v9.3 to be found at www.theinquirer.net. The article is titled, "SuSE 9.3 fails home-use test". <snip> well, it´s become painfully obvious that you guys have never had to read your email from your cell ( mobile) phone,or other small screen thing ( PDA , terminal, etc... )

Please, please, PULeeeeeeze!!!!!! snip out extranious material ... There just is no need to quote every bit of original and reply posts... they get downloaded once... Someone back me up here, but this thread has become a disaster for anyone attempting to read it on any small screen as so many of us must whilst traveling these days...

On Friday 29 April 2005 12:14, jfweber@bellsouth.net wrote:

<snip> well, it´s become painfully obvious that you guys have never had to read your email from your cell ( mobile) phone,or other small screen thing ( PDA , terminal, etc... )

Please, please, PULeeeeeeze!!!!!! snip out extranious material <snip> Someone back me up here, but this thread has become a disaster for anyone attempting to read it on any small screen as so many of us must whilst traveling these days...

This whole thread is OT and should be on the OT list. There's those who still top-post (idiots), and are probably the same ones who refuse to learn to snip also. I'd say plonk the ones who do either, because it'll be the *only* way you'll not see that kind of crap anymore.

On Thursday 28 April 2005 10:55, Colin Carter wrote:

Well now, it appears to me that most replies/comment from the Linux gurus have been along the above lines: that is, comments without substance. How about the following "fact" which the author quotes. It appears to me, from my experience with Linux, that the following paragraph is true: Quote: And don't bother trying to look at the installation read-me notes either. They are just advertisements for the idiots who designed the software and tend to go into great details about the licence agreement, which, as most users tell you, isn't as important as getting the software going. End quote. I don't agree with the 'idiots' dig, but it is true that most ReadMe files contain about what he says.

Let us hear some technical criticism about what the author said. Remember, he did not say it was difficult for a Linux guru; he said it was not for the average user who is used to an easy to install system. Colin

Sincerely, I read the article only until he comments about the time to install both OS. But what the installation of windows do? Nothing comparing SuSE, that install a lot of packages, offices, graphics and more and more. For these is clear to me that the rest of article is not honest. Thadeu

Greg Wallace wrote:

On Wednesday, April 27, 2005 @ 6:12 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:

...

An interesting article about v9.3 to be found at www.theinquirer.net. The article is titled, "SuSE 9.3 fails home-use test".

?Cheers.

...

-- Understanding only begins with the act of perception.

I also enjoyed the article about the hacker deleting his own hard drive! A teeny bit of justice and retribution to the world of hackers!

Greg Wallace

Oh that article about the hacker was precious! I still can't stop laughing. Cheers. -- Understanding only begins with the act of perception.

Sid Boyce wrote:

Basil Chupin wrote:

...

Greg Wallace wrote:

...

On Wednesday, April 27, 2005 @ 6:12 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:

...

An interesting article about v9.3 to be found at www.theinquirer.net. The article is titled, "SuSE 9.3 fails home-use test".

?Cheers.

...

-- Understanding only begins with the act of perception.

I also enjoyed the article about the hacker deleting his own hard drive! A teeny bit of justice and retribution to the world of hackers!

Greg Wallace

Oh that article about the hacker was precious! I still can't stop laughing.

Cheers.

This has to be the best yet! Nor can anyone who has read it stop laughing, beats any comedy act out there, it'll be funny for all time. So well played out, it's a gas. Seen it on slashdot. Regards Sid.

It reminded me of the story/joke about some bird (?goony ?gooley) which keeps doing something until it disappears up its own rectum. I can't remember the details of this story/joke :-( . If someone knows it please relate :-) . (Something at the back of my mind is telling me that this story/joke is of Australian origin and was told by Paul Hogan in one of his movies. But I am probably wrong.) Ciao. -- Understanding only begins with the act of perception.

On 4/28/05, JB wrote:

On Thursday 28 April 2005 08:07, Colin Carter wrote:

...

I also wanted, with all my passion, that SuSE be better than M$. After 40 years of technical programming experience I am still struggling with the SuSE system (eg YAST falling over, chasing / searching for stuff etc) after a year of SuSE.

I'll keep trying with SuSE, but if I want something quick I "fall back" (ie backwards) to my XP laptop. What can I do? My CD burner suddenly produces crap, unreadable disks under SuSE; obviously it is quicker to start up my XP machine and burn it there then to waste yet more time trying to debug the SuSE system. I am tired of fighting modern products. (That applies to choosing a shampoo ...)

I had hoped to drop M$ completely, but SuSE keeps driving me back.

Sorry Linux gurus, but I don't want to be a "Linux guru", I want to write application code on a robust, easy to configure O.S.

Regards, Colin

Yet you're some kind of programmer and can't figure out an OS as easily as many 'non' programmers...regular everyday 'Joes', like my 65 year old mom (who practically begged me to put Linux on her system, that's how sick and tired of M$' shit she was). What great and exciting and field leveling apps have you made that have rocked the computer world anyway? Maybe you should be called 'Stupor Programmer Man'.

Do you really think that being programmer makes it easier to understand Linux then Windows from a user perspective? If anything it makes it harder. Everytime you have a problem your tempted to lift the covers and see what is going on. With Windows, you can far more easily justify giving up. As an example, I use XP at work. The "Start-Search" function just quit working acouple of days ago. I know there is no reasonable way for me to fix that, so I just give up. [I have two choices: re-install XP, or install an alternate program to do the the search. (Beagle for Windows?)] With Linux, I have the blessing/curse of re-installing the rpm, verifying checksums, looking thru the source, etc. The end result is I prefer Linux for production work that I need to work, but for standard desktop use where I don't have to have full functionality, I get into less trouble with XP. Greg -- Greg Freemyer The Norcross Group Forensics for the 21st Century

On Thursday 28 April 2005 22:19, Colin Carter wrote: <snip>

...

Yet you're some kind of programmer and can't figure out an OS as easily as many 'non' programmers...regular everyday 'Joes', like my 65 year old mom (who practically begged me to put Linux on her system, that's how sick and tired of M$' shit she was). What great and exciting and field leveling apps have you made that have rocked the computer world anyway? Maybe you should be called 'Stupor Programmer Man'.

Just as I said: Your Mum had a guru install Linux for her! My 83 year old Dad did him himself on XP. Regards, Colin

My mistake in notclarifying it well...I gave her the DVD and sat with her as 'she' installed it. I wanted to see how she did, and she did just fine. She was using the system to email friends as soon as the installation was finished. When she came to something that confused her, I just told her to 'read' and look at what was on the screen, not just at one line of whatever was going on at the moment. Once she did that, she went onward just fine. My friend, who is extremely computer illiterate and also not schooled well (he dropped out in the 7th grade...long story and kinda sad, but anyway...), I did the same with him, and though it took longer because he doesn't read very well, he also did just fine by himself. Another friend who uses XPee, did that install herself (I wasn't there because I won't help *anyone* that has XPee on their system <shrug>), and she re-installs about once every week or two, just because it gives her so much shit problems, like viruses, crashes, etc. She knows about A-V's and firewalls too, and installs them after each re-installation. She wants me to put Linux on her system, but because she's an AOL'er, I don't know how to get it to connect to AOhHell from Linux. That isn't Linux's fault, but an AOhHell problem as I see it. Oh well.

JB wrote:

On Thursday 28 April 2005 08:07, Colin Carter wrote:

...

On Thursday 28 April 2005 00:11, Basil Chupin wrote:

...

An interesting article about v9.3 to be found at www.theinquirer.net. The article is titled, "SuSE 9.3 fails home-use test".

Cheers.

Yes, this aticle describes how I feel.

I also wanted, with all my passion, that SuSE be better than M$. After 40 years of technical programming experience I am still struggling with the SuSE system (eg YAST falling over, chasing / searching for stuff etc) after a year of SuSE.

I'll keep trying with SuSE, but if I want something quick I "fall back" (ie backwards) to my XP laptop. What can I do? My CD burner suddenly produces crap, unreadable disks under SuSE; obviously it is quicker to start up my XP machine and burn it there then to waste yet more time trying to debug the SuSE system. I am tired of fighting modern products. (That applies to choosing a shampoo ...)

I had hoped to drop M$ completely, but SuSE keeps driving me back.

Sorry Linux gurus, but I don't want to be a "Linux guru", I want to write application code on a robust, easy to configure O.S.

Regards, Colin

Yet you're some kind of programmer and can't figure out an OS as easily as many 'non' programmers...regular everyday 'Joes', like my 65 year old mom (who practically begged me to put Linux on her system, that's how sick and tired of M$' shit she was). What great and exciting and field leveling apps have you made that have rocked the computer world anyway? Maybe you should be called 'Stupor Programmer Man'.

My 30-year old friend "begged" me to replace his OS because he was also sick of how his system was (not) working. What I found is that in the 6 years he's had M$ installed he had never defragged his HD, had never deleted TEMP directory, or TMP, files, had just under 300 viruses and adware/spyware thingies, and had 1200+ crap Registry entries. BTW, I note that you carefully mention "Linux" but not SuSE 9.3. Which specific "Linux" distro are you talking about? Ciao. -- Understanding only begins with the act of perception.

JB wrote:

On Friday 29 April 2005 05:23, Basil Chupin wrote:

...

JB wrote:

<snip>

...

BTW, I note that you carefully mention "Linux" but not SuSE 9.3. Which specific "Linux" distro are you talking about?

This *is* the SuSE mailing list, but if you need more clarification, it was SuSE 9.3.

Being a SuSE mailing list does not automatically mean that only SuSE is talked about :-). We've had questions about Mandrake, for example, asked here. So, OK now I know that it was SuSE that was being discussed. Ciao. -- Understanding only begins with the act of perception.

On Friday 29 April 2005 05:34, Jan Elders wrote:

On Wednesday 27 April 2005 16:11, Basil Chupin wrote:

...

An interesting article about v9.3 to be found at www.theinquirer.net. The article is titled, "SuSE 9.3 fails home-use test".

It's also interesting to see the seemingly "narrow mindedness" of many Linux lovers in this thread. Why such fierce reactions ? What's wrong with some reflection and self-critcism on Linux ?

I myself am a SuSE Linux user for several years now (since 7.3) and will continue to use it, but I also recognize and agree with a lot of the statements in the article. I love Linux when I have it configured correctly,but it takes a lot of effort, time, and perseverance to get the system that you want/need.

Some personal experience examples : * Buying "any" 54Mb wireless PCMCIA card and plugging it in under Linux will hardly ever work right away. In that "other" OS it does, usually. * It requires quite some studying/searching before you get the € (euro-sign) big snip> Nevertheless, although I am many times tempted to return to W$$, I won't give up on Linux. I still like it a lot. But again, some reflection and self-critcism on Linux won't hurt to my opinion.

Cheers, -- Jan Elders the Netherlands http://www.xs4all.nl/~jrme/ "Home of the Network Acronyms"

I agree with you, and have had a great list of problems with Linux. I won't list them all but (a) got three months run-around from SuSE installation support, and ended up buying newer version of OS (b) Yast has totally fallen over - now do everything the hard way (c) under 9.0 HP 6110 scanner worked, not printer, but under 9.1 printer works, not scanner ... so turned to XP machine (I don't have time to be a Linux guru). AND: Take a look at how long some Linux people have been trying to solve their problems: for example, look at the following threads: Re: [SLE] Alert Re: 9.3, usb, scanners And you all know there are many more. *** I am still keeping my chin up for SuSE, but would rather see it made more robust (bugs removed) than see new functionality added, and I want to see it "lick the pants off" M$ Regards, Colin

Sorry Scott, this was meant to go to the list: Pardon the blathering rant, but... Thanks for the link to a report I'm sorry I overlooked earlier -- and probably would have largely ignored anyway, prior to up/degrading from 9.2 to 9.3. Now, I have wonder when we'll start seeing the Novell Linux Desktop in SaiGon's pirate CDs market? (<A quick call to my fave CD pirate and it's on its way...> Just joking. It'll be here soon enough without my help.) Either way, if others' experiences here with 9.3 are anything like mine, I suspect SuSE Linux 9.3 will help push a lot of people either back to Windows or further the trend in Asia towards favouring Debian. (cf "Rising Asian Support For Debian Linux", http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3486921) I was teaching GNU/Linux to folks here, first using SuSE 9.1 and Knoppix or vnlinux (a Vietnamese-localized version of Knoppix). Then i upgraded 18 ancient workstations and an in-class server to SuSE 9.2, rewardingly. Then i upgraded this prehistoric IBM ThinkPad 600x to 9.3, and KDE looked great but USB-drive mounting, sound and networking were all broken. Only a time-consuming set of back-ups and a fresh installation would bring back networking to a state where i could at least download the limited-distribution multimedia "option" packs necessary to at least get *potential* mp3 support, the alsaplayer, etc, etc back. But SuSE 9.3 still can't mount my Kingston USB stick and the only sound i've gotten out of it so far has been from the PC speaker. Windows 2000 and Knoppix 3.7 still work without a hitch on the same box. Soooo..., without even reading The Inquirer's review of SuSE 9.3, I'd have to say, at least the headline (all that most folks will read) is right. Still, i'm no less ready to learn how to fix it and i too still hope SuSE Desktop will rise to challenge both Windows and (pardon the slur) RedSHat. And, like the MadPenguin, i too salute Novell/SuSE for restoring mp3 and other multimedia support to 9.3 after following RedSHat's stance on disabling all mp3 support after RH9.? -- a choice that turned me off R(S)H forever. (See the comprehensive, well-balanced, well-referenced MadPenguin review at http://madpenguin.org/cms/?m=show&id=3851) -- Semiotic Sig' -- AD (Andi) Marshall SighGone, VietNam admarshall@gmail.com *-- Semiotics --* adm@[mp3-ogg-howto - mp3-howto]$ uname -a Linux tpad01 2.6.11.4-20a-default #1 Wed Mar 23 21:52:37 UTC 2005 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux adm@[Alsa-sound-mini-HOWTO - alsa-project.org]$ cat /etc/SuSE-release SuSE Linux 9.3 (i586) VERSION = 9.3 <...> root@[~]# grep -EIri "(error|fail|warn|refus|can't|cannot)" /var/log/YaST2/y2log* | wc -l 404 [Coincidental implication: SuSE Linux 9.3 is 404 -- aka, MIA] Pardon the blathering rant, but... Thanks for the link to a report I'm sorry I overlooked earlier -- and probably would have largely ignored anyway, prior to up/degrading from 9.2 to 9.3. Now, I have wonder when we'll start seeing the Novell Linux Desktop in SaiGon's pirate CDs market? (<A quick call to my fave CD pirate and it's on its way...> Just joking. It'll be here soon enough without my help.) Either way, if others' experiences here with 9.3 are anything like mine, I suspect SuSE Linux 9.3 will help push a lot of people either back to Windows or further the trend in Asia towards favouring Debian. (cf "Rising Asian Support For Debian Linux", http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3486921) I was teaching GNU/Linux to folks here, first using SuSE 9.1 and Knoppix or vnlinux (a Vietnamese-localized version of Knoppix). Then i upgraded 18 ancient workstations and an in-class server to SuSE 9.2, rewardingly. Then i upgraded this prehistoric IBM ThinkPad 600x to 9.3, and KDE looked great but USB-drive mounting, sound and networking were all broken. Only a time-consuming set of back-ups and a fresh installation would bring back networking to a state where i could at least download the limited-distribution multimedia "option" packs necessary to at least get *potential* mp3 support, the alsaplayer, etc, etc back. But SuSE 9.3 still can't mount my Kingston USB stick and the only sound i've gotten out of it so far has been from the PC speaker. Windows 2000 and Knoppix 3.7 still work without a hitch on the same box. Soooo..., without even reading The Inquirer's review of SuSE 9.3, I'd have to say, at least the headline (all that most folks will read) is right. Still, i'm no less ready to learn how to fix it and i too still hope SuSE Desktop will rise to challenge both Windows and (pardon the slur) RedSHat. And, like the MadPenguin, i too salute Novell/SuSE for restoring mp3 and other multimedia support to 9.3 after following RedSHat's stance on disabling all mp3 support after RH9.? -- a choice that turned me off R(S)H forever. (See the comprehensive, well-balanced, well-referenced MadPenguin review at http://madpenguin.org/cms/?m=show&id=3851) -- Semiotic Sig' -- AD (Andi) Marshall SighGone, VietNam admarshall@gmail.com *-- Semiotics --* adm@[mp3-ogg-howto - mp3-howto]$ uname -a Linux tpad01 2.6.11.4-20a-default #1 Wed Mar 23 21:52:37 UTC 2005 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux adm@[Alsa-sound-mini-HOWTO - alsa-project.org]$ cat /etc/SuSE-release SuSE Linux 9.3 (i586) VERSION = 9.3 <...> root@[~]# grep -EIri "(error|fail|warn|refus|can't|cannot)" /var/log/YaST2/y2log* | wc -l 404 [Coincidental implication: SuSE Linux 9.3 is 404 -- aka, MIA] On 4/29/05, Scott Leighton <helphand@pacbell.net> wrote:

On Thursday 28 April 2005 8:40 pm, Colin Carter wrote:

...

*** I am still keeping my chin up for SuSE, but would rather see it made more robust (bugs removed) than see new functionality added, and I want to see it "lick the pants off" M$

Thing is, that's not Novell's vision for SuSE Pro. You want robustness, stability, ease of use, then Novell Linux Desktop is the product you want, not SuSE Pro.

They've articulated their vision quite clearly here....

http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/feature/14736.html

From what I can tell, they are *not* looking to take on M$ in the consumer market. They are after the enterprise market, desktops and servers.

Scott

-- POPFile, the OpenSource EMail Classifier http://popfile.sourceforge.net/ Linux 2.6.11.4-20a-default x86_64

Scott Leighton wrote:

On Thursday 28 April 2005 8:40 pm, Colin Carter wrote:

...

*** I am still keeping my chin up for SuSE, but would rather see it made more robust (bugs removed) than see new functionality added, and I want to see it "lick the pants off" M$

Thing is, that's not Novell's vision for SuSE Pro. You want robustness, stability, ease of use, then Novell Linux Desktop is the product you want, not SuSE Pro.

They've articulated their vision quite clearly here....

http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/feature/14736.html

From what I can tell, they are *not* looking to take on M$ in the consumer market. They are after the enterprise market, desktops and servers.

Scott

Hmmm maybe Novell should rename "SuSE Pro" to "SuSE BETA for PROfessionals" and then qualify it by saying - "This package is for those power users who enjoy debugging our software for us". With the additional caveat - "WARNING! This OS package may NOT be suited for those who want to get real work done. Novell does NOT support it, so buyer beware!"... Might be a bit more honest... Sorry, couldn't resist... I will go crawl back under my keyboard now.... Marc...

Basil Chupin wrote:

[snip] I said in this forum last year that when Novell took over SuSE went downhill.

Sigh, the world these days. We're all going to hell in a handcart. My guess is that once their Netware business folds Novell will turn out to have been only temporary custodians of SuSE and we'll be dealing with IBM. This is, of course, massively off toepic by now. Still, YaST + huge amounts of SuSE'fied software is still numero uno for me. The alternative is Debian. I spent a few months with that last year, and by gad the hour after hour of configuration Debian demands ... :) Fish

Scott Leighton wrote:

On Thursday 28 April 2005 8:40 pm, Colin Carter wrote:

...

*** I am still keeping my chin up for SuSE, but would rather see it made more robust (bugs removed) than see new functionality added, and I want to see it "lick the pants off" M$

Thing is, that's not Novell's vision for SuSE Pro. You want robustness, stability, ease of use, then Novell Linux Desktop is the product you want, not SuSE Pro.

They've articulated their vision quite clearly here....

http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/feature/14736.html

From what I can tell, they are *not* looking to take on M$ in the consumer market. They are after the enterprise market, desktops and servers.

Scott

And it is for this reason that my heart sinks re my favourite distro, SuSE. Novell is killing it. I just cannot understand the logic behind such thinking, especially when IBM committed "suicide" by doing something similar with OS/2 (the best OS I have used) and allowing M$ to run away with the ball. How many enterprises/SOHO are there compared to consumers/people in the streets? The enterprises/SOHOs only exist, and can only exist, because of consumers. Every enterprise/SOHO spends $$$ on advertising to convince the consumer that they cannot do without their product. If I made product X and sold 1 item for $1 to every Chinese person, for example, I would be an instant billionare; and if I tried to sell it to every Chinese company I would be struggling to pay my bills. Very strange logic by Novell. Oh, I have looked at the specs for the Desktop a while back and I wouldn't waste my money on it. SuSE Pro, Yes; Desktop or SuSE Home, No. Ciao. -- Understanding only begins with the act of perception.

...

Hmmm maybe Novell should rename "SuSE Pro" to "SuSE BETA for PROfessionals" and then qualify it by saying - "This package is for those power users who enjoy debugging our software for us". With the additional caveat - "WARNING! This OS package may NOT be suited for those who want to get real work done. Novell does NOT support it, so buyer beware!"... Might be a bit more honest...

Sorry, couldn't resist... I will go crawl back under my keyboard now.... Marc... How many times do we need to see this!

-- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge

Erm, I think there is something that nobody has really said here in relation to the article. It is not a level playing field! The guy says it takes longer to install SuSE 9.3 than XP. What sort of install was it? Even a basic SuSE install gives you a wide range of software besides the OS. By this I mean full office software. Does XP? Nope. Then let's take a look at hardware comaptibility. If the hardware manufacturers wrote drivers for Linux then yes, it could be compared like for like with Microsoft software. Until then it cannot be. This is not SuSE's fault or Novell's it is part of a bigger argument about M$ and their business practises. It affects me as I have hardware that will not run under Linux, I accept this and just look forward to the day that the manufacturers have sense. After all, I have a television which picks up the 5 terrestrial stations here in the UK. If I want SKY I have to buy a SKY box. So I can't compare my tv to a tv that will pick up SKY broadcasts. But this is what so many people do with Linux and M$. -- Take care. Kevan Farmer 34 Hill Street Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS6 7HR

Kevanf1 wrote:

Then let's take a look at hardware comaptibility. If the hardware manufacturers wrote drivers for Linux then yes, it could be compared like for like with Microsoft software.

Funny you should mention that. Just today a work, I was installing Windows 2000 on a Toshiba notebook. Before I could do anything else, I had to download the ethernet and display drivers from Toshiba. Then, once I got the computer talking to the network, the next step was to get the latest updates & fixes from MS. That process barely started, when the computer became extremely slow. Even after rebooting, the computer performance was so painfully slow, that it was unusable! I wasn't able to install the updates. I've never seen that happen with Linux and in all the years I've been running Linux, I've only had to download one driver. That was for the "Winmodem" in my ThinkPad, when I was running RedHat 7.3 on it. Even that wasn't necessary in SuSE 9.0, 9 1 or 9.2.

On Sat, 2005-04-30 at 13:01 -0700, Marc Chamberlin wrote:

Preston Crawford wrote:

...

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Ken Schneider wrote:

...

...

...

Hmmm maybe Novell should rename "SuSE Pro" to "SuSE BETA for PROfessionals" and then qualify it by saying - "This package is for those power users who enjoy debugging our software for us". With the additional caveat - "WARNING! This OS package may NOT be suited for those who want to get real work done. Novell does NOT support it, so buyer beware!"... Might be a bit more honest...

Sorry, couldn't resist... I will go crawl back under my keyboard now.... Marc...

How many times do we need to see this!

-- Ken Schneider

I was wondering the same thing. Wasn't I just villified for positing the same question, essentially? Not that I disagree, but...

Preston

Ken, Preston, all -

I realize this thread has moved on a bit, but sometimes I need to think about something for awhile before I can respond. I lightly monitor this news group from time to time. lurking behind my keyboard, mostly skimming it and following a few interesting threads from time to time. So if this particular issue has been raised before, I wasn't aware of it. I am sorry you feel it was redundant and had to yet again suffer another person whining, about that apparent lack of support that Novel is going to provide its more advance users and developers. But I am not sorry that I posted it.

That wasn't the issue at all, the issue was the same email was being posted multiple times. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge

Ken Schneider wrote:

...

That wasn't the issue at all, the issue was the same email was being posted multiple times.

Hmmm OH!! Gosh you are right! I wonder what happened? I remember having a bit of trouble getting it to post, and got bounce back messages saying it couldn't be posted for some reason. And those attempts didn't show up immediately in the newsgroup so I had assumed those attempts had failed. Apparently they hadn't, and showed up some time later, and I wasn't aware of that... Anywise my comments in general stand, about feedback and I still hope Novell is listening in the background somewhere.. So, I misunderstood you then, I thought maybe others had posted similar complaints before.... My apologies... Marc...

Anders Johansson wrote:

On Saturday 30 April 2005 22:01, Marc Chamberlin wrote:

...

I have looked around on Novell's website for their feedback mechanisms and yes they do provide some, but not good ones really. They like a lot of companies want to tie feedback in with support (for which there usually is a cost) or assume a customer wants to use it for pre-sales/marketing purposes. I would like it to be much easier and more obvious as to how to give them feedback, so as to simply give them a heads up, for example, on some technical issue or idea, rather than having to hunt around so hard on their website in order to find a way to do so.

http://www.suse.com/feedback

HEY! Thats what I wanted to see! Thanks.. Get Novell/SuSE to put that link on their SuSE home page so we can easily find it! I wasn't able to....

...

One thing I want to caution everyone against, is do not discourage people from complaining on a newsgroup, such as this one, about things that are troubling them about the SuSE products. Even if the complaint is redundant and has been raised before, the more people complain the higher it raises the priority to get that issued fixed and/or addressed.

Only if it is phrased rationally. "This is crap" is unlikely to end up anywhere except in a trashcan. "This is wrong because [....]" has a better chance to attract attention.

Yep we engineers often get a response from someone who has become quite frustrated. Computers are like that, they can involve a lot of time trying to find a solution to some problem and end up making someone very angry. But that alone is also valuable feedback and should not be entirely ignored. I again advise to try to look beyond the emotion, it is human nature to want to lash out at something when things go wrong/unexpected. A newsgroup such as this can provide some level of interactivity to get such a user to clarify more about what has gone wrong. Other feedback mechanisms are not so likely to as the overhead costs of producing a personal reply are too high. However, with a good feedback infrastructure in place, if you get an emotional bit of feedback such as "This is crap" then simply sending back a canned letter/response asking the person to elaborate further should not be to costly and may lead to gaining some valuable information... Other power users on a newsgroup such as this one are not so likely to respond to an emotional outburst, but that is the point where Novell/SuSE monitors should step in. Remember, this person is frustrated and wants to find a solution to his problem. He probably is willing to spend time giving further feedback if he thinks someone will at least listen... I kind of think of getting feedback from users is a lot like fishing! Most just suffer in silence or try to hard finding answers on their own. Many think it is they who are at fault because of their lack of knowledge. Others just give up and go looking elsewhere for a solution. And when they finally do communicate, many have become quite frustrated, having tried lots of things that apparently didn't work for them. So their communication attempt starts out poorly. Therefore I like to put out all sorts of VERY EASY mechanisms (bait) to get them to provide me with information on how things are going. When one strikes, you have to set the hook firmly, then reel him in so you can get the information he or she is willing to give up. That is valuable to a company and its engineers as it enables them to improve their products and become ever more competitive. And it is valuable to users also as it empowers them with the feeling that there is a company that cares and they are helping to improve the product.

...

I really hope Novel is monitoring this group for their own sake, having feedback is so darn vital and valuable it is not funny. They would be wise to even have someone officially represent them, monitoring and responding from time to time, on this news group...

There are many Novell/SUSE employees who monitor this list, although not as an official part of the job. But they are here and they do provide answers and input. Just look at the archives of the past month on lists.suse.com/archive/ and you will find several

That too is good news.. Like I said I lightly monitor this group, and haven't seen any one speak up for Novell yet in any sort of official capacity... I assumed they are there monitoring however. I am not asking them to take time to solve problems, but just having someone pop up, every once in awhile and say "I am from Novell/SuSE and I like your idea or understand your frustration and will forward it on to someone to look at" would be very encouraging. All users want to know that someone IS listening, cares, and trying to improve the product in ways that will meet their needs.... Marc..

On 4/30/05, Marc Chamberlin wrote:

Again speaking as an engineer, and a developer of my own products, I have come to the conclusion over the years, that the single most important feature that any company/developer can provide is a feedback infrastructure for their users. How else, as an engineer, can I learn what the problems are that a user is facing? Managers, engineers, and marketeers must all have some mechanism in place to allow them to learn where they have been successful and where they are failing. I believe so strongly in having feedback mechanisms that I will NOT work for any company that does not provide them for its users. And I will not repeat buy a product that does not provide such a feature. I don't expect support to be free, but I DO expect the ability to provide feedback to be. Every product I have developed has that built in as part of its help system and my own product web pages go out of their way to provide feedback forms, wiki wiki sites etc.

Novel/SuSE may provide other alternative means of giving them feedback, but I assumed this news group is also one of the ways to reach them. Since it is being hosted on their domain I presume they have people monitoring this group. Hence I threw this particular rock, in the hopes that either by joining a clamor of voices complaining about their marketing strategy/policy, on SuSE Pro, or by starting such a ruckus, we might eventually get them to reconsider and address this issue. Newsgroups are nice for users who have a complaint as it can serve as a rallying point, getting like minded people together and bring attention to getting a problem solved. Novel is taking advantage of its power users in such a group as this, to offload the need for support back onto the users themselves, but I don't think that should be the soul purpose of this group. We users should take advantage of it as well and let Novell/SuSE know when they are making a mistake or angering us because of their decisions and policies.

I have looked around on Novell's website for their feedback mechanisms and yes they do provide some, but not good ones really. They like a lot of companies want to tie feedback in with support (for which there usually is a cost) or assume a customer wants to use it for pre-sales/marketing purposes. I would like it to be much easier and more obvious as to how to give them feedback, so as to simply give them a heads up, for example, on some technical issue or idea, rather than having to hunt around so hard on their website in order to find a way to do so. If I were in their position, I would have a direct feedback link/form right off of their home page in such an obvious way that it shows that THE COMPANY DEEPLY CARES about how their users are experiencing their products. I know a lot of companies fear being overwhelmed with complaints and people wanting free support, but IMHO it is far better to be overwhelmed than to be in the dark and oblivious. I don't expect them to respond to each person individually, just accept the information, analyze and categorize it, and use it in setting their future goals, products and direction.

One thing I want to caution everyone against, is do not discourage people from complaining on a newsgroup, such as this one, about things that are troubling them about the SuSE products. Even if the complaint is redundant and has been raised before, the more people complain the higher it raises the priority to get that issued fixed and/or addressed. If someone comes on strong, after becoming very frustrated over something, try to look beyond the emotion and examine the root cause. Look for solutions together, and refrain from badgering them.

I really hope Novel is monitoring this group for their own sake, having feedback is so darn vital and valuable it is not funny. They would be wise to even have someone officially represent them, monitoring and responding from time to time, on this news group...

Marc...

Novell officially does NOT monitor this list although several of their employees choose to unofficially hang out here. You need to use the official feedback form (which for SuSE Pro anyone can use.) I just googled for "suse feedback". The very first hit was the official (english) feedback page. http://www.suse.de/cgi-bin/feedback.cgi HTH Greg -- Greg Freemyer The Norcross Group Forensics for the 21st Century

On Sat, 2005-04-30 at 13:01 -0700, Marc Chamberlin wrote:

...

...

How many times do we need to see this!

-- Ken Schneider

I was wondering the same thing. Wasn't I just villified for positing the same question, essentially? Not that I disagree, but...

Preston

Ken, Preston, all -

Turns out Ken had something else in mind and I misunderstood him. I'm going to respond to this all the same, though, because it's an interesting post.

it. I am sorry you feel it was redundant and had to yet again suffer another person whining, about that apparent lack of support that Novel is going to provide its more advance users and developers. But I am not sorry that I posted it.

This is how I feel as well, with regards to the Firefox issue I'm not sorry I raised the issue of SuSE's stability. If we can't have a community where this is possible, then I think we suffer as a community. I was asking to have help with a problem. In addition I raised a frustration with SuSE's of late. I'm sorry for letting myself get bogged down in a flame war and not being above that. I should have shut up. But I stand by my original contention that just throwing RPMs of new software that haven't been tested into YOU is not the SuSE way. Now that I know where to leave feedback properly I will as well. But I've been a SuSE user for years. And I want to continue to be one. But part of that hinges on the community being friendly and helpful. And I have to tell you from experience that (aside from the FreeBSD IRC channel, which is legendary for its surliness) this mailing list last week was as close to as surly as I've seen any *nix support network. And that's sad to me, because we're seem to be pragmatic users here. We use SuSE because it's not bleeding edge. Because it's stable and gets the job done. And when that starts to slip, I kind of thought we'd all be on the same page on that issue. Otherwise we would be using other distributions with less or no quality control, no?

company that does not provide them for its users. And I will not repeat buy a product that does not provide such a feature. I don't expect support to be free, but I DO expect the ability to provide feedback to be. Every product I have developed has that built in as part of its help system and my own product web pages go out of their way to provide feedback forms, wiki wiki sites etc.

SuSE has this, but right now it's quite confusing. There's this list, but the easier to see part is that web-based forum that isn't getting much traffic. And I'm not sure if Novell monitors it.

Novel/SuSE may provide other alternative means of giving them feedback, but I assumed this news group is also one of the ways to reach them.

It used to be one of the better ways, actually. Times have changed.

Since it is being hosted on their domain I presume they have people monitoring this group. Hence I threw this particular rock, in the hopes that either by joining a clamor of voices complaining about their marketing strategy/policy, on SuSE Pro, or by starting such a ruckus, we might eventually get them to reconsider and address this issue.

I didn't have the same agenda, but I thought similarly that by raising the issue here it might get some attention. I didn't expect to get ripped a new one and being called a whiner. That was quite a drag. I push SuSE in people in part because of the community. This week was quite sobering. I actually started to reconsider the distro in part because of this. Because when a distro is largely supported by the community and the community isn't friendly, then it's time to consider a new distro, IMHO. Or else pay for support.

do so. If I were in their position, I would have a direct feedback link/form right off of their home page in such an obvious way that it shows that THE COMPANY DEEPLY CARES about how their users are experiencing their products. I know a lot of companies fear being

I agree with this. There is a feedback link, but it's kind of buried and the site in general is kind of difficult to navigate. Making this friendlier would go a long way towards this goal. ^^^

One thing I want to caution everyone against, is do not discourage people from complaining on a newsgroup, such as this one, about things that are troubling them about the SuSE products. Even if the complaint is redundant and has been raised before, the more people complain the higher it raises the priority to get that issued fixed and/or addressed. If someone comes on strong, after becoming very frustrated over something, try to look beyond the emotion and examine the root cause. Look for solutions together, and refrain from badgering them.

That used to not be the case here. It's changed recently, and I don't know why. It's sad. Because it was part of SuSE's charm. That the community wasn't ideological. Wasn't angry. Wasn't "holier than thou". The community was all about helping people get stuff done, because the OS was all about getting stuff done, without hassle.

I really hope Novel is monitoring this group for their own sake, having feedback is so darn vital and valuable it is not funny. They would be wise to even have someone officially represent them, monitoring and responding from time to time, on this news group...

That used to happen. I haven't seen anyone from SuSE pop on this time, though. The closest we got is James, who is a tremendous contributor to the SuSE community (at least as far as I know he doesn't work for SuSE, although they should hire him) and thus garners the respect of others here for his work providing support. We're lucky to have him. But yeah, having someone from SuSE/Novell monitor the list officially would be nice. Preston

On Thursday 28 April 2005 8:40 pm, Colin Carter wrote:

...

*** I am still keeping my chin up for SuSE, but would rather see it made more robust (bugs removed) than see new functionality added, and I want to see it "lick the pants off" M$ Thing is, that's not Novell's vision for SuSE Pro. You want robustness, stability, ease of use, then Novell Linux Desktop is the product you want, not SuSE Pro. They've articulated their vision quite clearly here.... http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/feature/14736.html From what I can tell, they are *not* looking to take on M$ in the consumer market. They are after the enterprise market, desktops and servers. Scott Scott, I respect your response, and do not mean to be against you, but some of us applications programmers have an issue. Not blaming you... :-) I had a look at your referred site. You are right about the levels offered by SuSE; but there is no level offered for the likes of me: that is a stable, easy to set up O.S. which supplies a good platform for application developers who do not have

On Friday 29 April 2005 14:09, Scott Leighton wrote: the time to "mess around" with systems. Don't miss-understand me because I have been keenly involved in developing compilers et cetera. So you are correct: there is no SuSE level for us. I'll just have to spend more time on the system side. Best regards, Colin

Preston, On Saturday 30 April 2005 01:14, Preston Crawford wrote:

...

What a frustrating time to be a Linux user. All I want is what you want. A stable place to do web/application development.

And you've got it. Several, in fact. Web applications and Web services are what I do for a living, and I and my whole team (and most of my company's developer's) do so on Linux. Nearly all of our deployed services run on Linux. It is far more than stable enough. When something goes wrong in a production system, it's rarely the OS that's to blame. But if you want stability, you don't run the latest release (of anything, generally). Here at home, I stay up-to-date with everything that comes from SuSE (new releases, YOU updates, supplementary updates as well as things I install on my own, because I want to investigate or have a specific need). I have the latest and greatest, but it's sometimes a little rough around the edges. I curse it at times, but I did make the choice to operate not so far from that bleeding edge we hear so much about. At work things are radically different. We run a moldy old release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. It's frustrating to be using KDE 3.1, but it's very stable and predictable, which is more than I can say sometimes for KDE 3.4. And while I long for all the new features when I'm using my machine at work, I really, really dislike it when KMail crashes, which version 1.8 under SuSE Linux 9.3 does.

And that URL scares me to death (http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/feature/14736.html). It certainly does make it look like SuSE is going the way of Fedora.

I don't really see how it can be otherwise, at least not at the price point for which we're now getting SuSE Linux Professional. Nonetheless, if you feel so strongly, talk to Novell.

...

Preston

Randall Schulz

Hi Scott, On Sunday 01 May 2005 02:26, Scott Leighton wrote:

On Saturday 30 April 2005 12:43 am, Colin Carter wrote:

...

Scott, I respect your response, ... snip Colin,

Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying that I agree with Novell's marketing decisions. I'm just pointing out that SuSE Pro is not designed nor marketed to be a windows killer. snip I love SuSE Pro, but it is never going to be suitable for the normal users of the world when the specific niche it is created for is power users who want bleading edge software that releases every 6 months. Scott, it is interesting that you joined the concepts "power users" & "who want bleeding edge software". I only want the first part ... please... ;-) My guess is that they see no profit in trying to address that gap in their product line, taking M$ on directly in that mass market would take a huge marketing investment, they can probably get a much better return going after the enterprise. Maybe they don't, but I do. I am trying to develop some software to market on the SuSE platform. If the O.S. was as easy to manage as XP I would have been six months further down the development trail.

I think that if Linux was as easy to install as XP + Developer Studio then it would be easier for applications programmers and thus the development of "public use" applications would encouraged. Anyway, that's just my idea. Meanwhile, I am committed to SuSE.

Scott Regards, Colin

On Sunday 01 May 2005 19:11, Jos van Kan wrote: Hi Jos,

Colin Carter wrote: (snip)

...

I think that if Linux was as easy to install as XP + Developer Studio then it would be easier for applications programmers and thus the development of "public use" applications would encouraged. Anyway, that's just my idea. Meanwhile, I am committed to SuSE.

First of all, how many users do you know that actually installed XP? If they have to, it is because they hosed their system, otherwise it comes preinstalled. snip Yep, that's me. I've scrunched XP many times, trying to write fast/small mathematical code. Installation of M$ became second nature (but still hated it). Secondly, a preinstalled XP system isn't without its idiosyncrasies. I snip True Jos. Thirdly, not all Linux systems have the same comfort of installation. But SuSE is at the easy side of the spectrum ("Linux from scratch" is at the other side :-)). snip I've no experience about other Linux systems, but after a lot of reading I concluded the above must be true. So I do not agree with you that Windows is easier to install. Maybe it's because I'm a grey-haired old bastard ;-) I'm not sure though, that your commitment to SuSE is a wise business decision. The installed base is very small. I know, and most others would agree with you. However I am betting on SuSE "getting it right".

Best regards, -- Jos van Kan www.josvankan.tk Regards, Colin

Hi Sudhir, On Sunday 01 May 2005 21:00, Sudhir Anand wrote:

Colin Carter wrote:

...

<snip> Maybe it's because I'm a grey-haired old XXXXXXX (censored) This censoring is interesting because in Australia it is considered a compliment to address your friend this way.

wise man? :) Nah, not likely.

<snip> However, any applications developed in SuSE can be used on other linux platforms as well. Any knowledge gained on SuSE can be leveraged on other linux distributions as well. True Sudhir Regards, Colin

On 5/1/05, Basil Chupin <blchupin@tpg.com.au> wrote:

Colin Carter wrote:

...

Hi Sudhir, On Sunday 01 May 2005 21:00, Sudhir Anand wrote:

...

Colin Carter wrote:

...

<snip> Maybe it's because I'm a grey-haired old XXXXXXX (censored)

This censoring is interesting because in Australia it is considered a compliment to address your friend this way.

Bloody oath it is!

:-)

...

...

wise man? :)

Nah, not likely.

...

<snip> However, any applications developed in SuSE can be used on other linux platforms as well. Any knowledge gained on SuSE can be leveraged on other linux distributions as well.

True

...

Sudhir

Regards, Colin

-- Minds and parachutes only function properly when open.

-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com

It most certainly was not a compliment when I was there in 2000/2001. Perhpas it was 50 or 60 yrs ago but Ozzies are no longer Neanderthals, they have even learned how to read now would you believe :-) -- Take care. Kevan Farmer 34 Hill Street Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS6 7HR

On Saturday 30 April 2005 02:43, Colin Carter wrote: <snip>

application developers who do not have the time to "mess around" with systems.

Funny how others who have become so-called "gurus" have found the time to 'learn' the OS they want to use. They had no less and no more time than you...24 hours a day, just like everyone else in the world. If college students (the ones who actually go to *learn* and not fuck around with all their buddy's) are *always* complaining there's 'not enough time', yet they seem to find it and they are the ones who come out ahead, unlike the others who put no time or very little into their learning. So, once it's all said and done with these college folk, you've got graduates who are at the top of their class, know something and won't be half-assed <insert profession here>, whereas those who fucked around a lot are those who barely know their asses from a hole in the ground and *are* the half-assed <whatevers>. Which are you?

On Sunday 01 May 2005 03:01, Ken Schneider wrote:

On Sat, 2005-04-30 at 11:50 -0500, JB wrote:

...

On Saturday 30 April 2005 02:43, Colin Carter wrote:

<snip>

...

application developers who do not have the time to "mess around" with systems.

Funny how others who have become so-called "gurus" have found the time to 'learn' the OS they want to use. They had no less and no more time than you...24 hours a day, just like everyone else in the world. If college students (the ones who actually go to *learn* and not f**k around with all their buddy's) are *always* complaining there's 'not enough time', yet they seem to find it and they are the ones who come out ahead, unlike the others who put no time or very little into their learning. So, once it's all said and done with these college folk, you've got graduates who are at the top of their class, know something and won't be half-assed <insert profession here>, whereas those who f***ed around a lot are those who barely know their asses from a hole in the ground and *are* the half-assed <whatevers>. Which are you?

Profanity is not well liked on this list. Please refrain from using it.

-- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998

"The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge

Thanks Ken. I ignored him. :-) Colin

On Thursday 28 April 2005 22:40, Colin Carter wrote: <snip>

*** I am still keeping my chin up for SuSE, but would rather see it made more robust (bugs removed) than see new functionality added, and I want to see it "lick the pants off" M$

Great. Now, please learn to snip.