[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Back to Windows??

Hans Verschoor and Jennie Kohsiek wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig T. Milling" <c-milli@physics.uiuc.edu>
To: "'Debian-Laptop (E-mail)" <debian-laptop@lists.debian.org>
Cc: "Christopher Wolf" <debianlists@thewolfden.org>; "Craig Milling"
<ctmilling@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 6:44 PM
Subject: Re: Back to Windows??


Here are some concrete positives (in my experience) for why you would
*want* to run Linux as more than just a hobbyist.

(1) You control the interface.  You have a choice of window managers,
GNOME, KDE.  *You* get to decide how you want to interact with the
computer, not Bill Gates.

Hans:
In the first place these window managers are Windows look-alikes, especially
KDE that was intentionally designed to be as Windows as Windows can be
i.m.h.o. In the second place, I do not have this insurpressibke urge to
"decide by myself" if others offer a good solution, named Bill or not.

(2) Stability.  It is a pleasure knowing that I can leave my laptop
running for days/weeks at a time and it won't crash.  Even if there is a
misbehaving application, it can be killed without destabilizing everything
else.

Hans.
I do run KDE, and the browser and office applications crash on a regular
basis and in fact much more often than the Seattle counterparts.

(3) Free.  As in beer.  I really like the fact that the next
kernel/GNOME/gnuplot/emacs upgrade won't cost me $90-$100.  It's free.
Yes it costs some time, but (2) makes up for that.

Hans:
The money issue is relative, Japanese companies are now kicking Linux out
because they discover that they are spending huge sums at "Linux
specialists" maintaining their systems.

(4) Free.  As in speech.  The source code is open, which means no one has
control over your computer.  It also helps combat software obsolence and
forced upgrades by having file formats open.

Hans:
I  don't follow this argumentation. The fact that the source is open is in
no relation that your computer is not controlled. I am not an OS expert, I
don't want to be an OS expert I don't want to look into sources that are not
part of my core business, I want the software to work correctly and
therefore yes: Any software controls my computer.

(5) Unixisms: True multitasking, multiuser capabilities.  You don't have
to worry about nuking important files (as long as your not root!).  You
don't have to worry about being bit by the LOVE BUG.  You can lock down
services to hold script-kiddies at bay.  You can share your computer with
other users w/o them messing up your files and desktop.

Hans:
Misargumentation, the file protection system of let's say NT or W2000 is
much more sophisticated than UNIX, alas for you but that's a fact and I will
not share my computer. And for viruses, yes you have to be a bit more
careful, a bit less naive, that's true.

It is difficult.  It seems everything involving setup and installation is
difficult the first time, but the time spent is an investment, not a loss.
The next time you do something it gets easier.  I would recommend you aim
low.  Set up a dual boot configuration so you can always use Windows.
Then install Linux and work on it a little bit at a time.  Get a command
line going, then X, then compile a kernel specific to your machine.  First
get your NIC going, then sound card, then ... Yes it may take awhile, but
you will find yourself being slowly won over to Linux.  Then the next
computer you get, things will go much faster.

Hans:
Again, from my objectives of using my computer, these investment are pure
losses. I don't want a dual boot system, my computer is a server, so
hopefully boots a few times a year. I have no intention to become a kernel
hacker, an inventoe or a whizkid, my objective is to have a stable simple
server machine on the shortest term possible. And don't forget, companies
switching to Linux usually have exactly this reason.

Don't forget that a computer is just a tool.  If you need all your
hardware, use the preinstalled OS.  If you also need some of the GNU tools
(tar,awk, ...) install Cygwin, or dual boot.


Hans:
Right on !
Linux should not be a cult, but I think it is by now .....

My testimonial:  I got my laptop in Jan,1999 (an ARM TS759.  ARM is very
linux friendly and even offers preinstalled RedHat.  I specifically asked
about Linux before buying).  My NIC (a generic 10baseT) was supported off
the bat.  It took about 6 mos for the soundcard driver to make it into the
stable kernel.  I would still use Windows regularly.  Eventually my
windows use was only for games and all my work was done in Linux.  Finally
I got bored of the games.  The last time I booted into windows was 6 mos
ago, and last week I got rid of the last fat partition on my disk.


Hans:
Mine: I got an all Linux compatible hardware set, because I checked all
components before. Got Debian 2.2.18pre21 and the result: I can't print on a
HP2100 (mentioned to be "perfect" for Linux), I can't tar to a DI-30
tapestreamer (proudly declared: "Linux certified" by the manufacturer), I'm
doubtful if my network will work and it will probable take another year
before I get my ADSL modem working. I will install W2000 in the days to come
and if everything works: "bye bye Linux".

Craig Milling

PS.  If you made it down this far, thanks for reading my rambling missive.
:)


Hans:
As you can see, I made it.

____________________
Dr. Craig T. Milling
c-milli@uiuc.edu
Dept. of Physics, Univ. of Illinois
Phone: 217/333-1930



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-laptop-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmaster@lists.debian.org




flame bait much?

I have debian installed on two laptops, one is my CPiA 400 Dell, works great, took about a week to setup properly (running kernel 2.4.1 and X4.0.2) the second is a new IBM Thinkpad A-series (2.2.18 and X4.0.2) They are great, both of them. I don't give anything up by having linux on them. Now, on to why I am replying to this thread.

In my opinion, there are two types of people; users and tinkerers, users want it to work, they don't care what's inside, how or why it works, they just want it to do a task, the other group, tinkerers, are always trying to find out how things work, or how to make such and such better, how to get something to bend to their will...(if you will) if you consider the computer and the distinct differences between windows and linux you can draw rough parallels to these two distinct personality types. This is not to say that all "users" have to use windows, nor that all "tinkerers" use linux, merely to indicate that people are different, and as such, we have been blessed with having the "choice" to use whichever Operating System we prefer. I am known far and wide as a zealot, specifically a linux zealot, my reasons for this are also known to most of my friends and acquaintances, but in a nutshell, I like linux because if I hadn't started using it, I wouldn't know 1/10th of what I now know about computers, the internet, and networking. Which to me means, I would not hold the job I know hold. If you don't want/care/need to understand what "happens under the hood" then don't go there, continue (or begin...) using your computer however you feel most comfortable, and shame on those who would squash your freedom to make the decision yourself.  I have avoided rebuffing individual comments about this being better than that... It is a moot point,  if you don't believe it's better (for whatever reason) then for you, it's not better, just don't be so closed minded as to think that because it doesn't work for you, it isn't a perfect fit for someone else.
   Now, this is primarily talking about the "user" space, not the "server"
space, where, in my opinion, you should have administrators (regardless of OS)
who are trained, experienced and competent in configuring, maintaining and perhaps even improving the machines they are responsible for. As such, ease of use is not, or should not be, a major consideration to the adminstrators and management of a "server" setting. Security, stability, scalability, cost, and projected lifespan should be the primary considerations. As such, NT /and/ Unix administrators who fit the above description are worth pretty good money. So if japan is indeed moving away from linux, quoting Hans "Japanese companies are now kicking Linux out because they discover that they are spending huge sums at
""Linux specialists"" maintaining their systems" then I can only presume that they are hoping to save money by hiring inexpensive (read, inexperienced) NTadministrators. They'll pay, one way or another... 



                      

                        

-- 


Duane Powers                           __o      __o      __o      __o      __o    
                                     _`\<,    _`\<,    _`\<,    _`\<,    _`\<,    
e-mail:duane@lots_of_places         (_)/(_)  (_)/(_)  (_)/(_)  (_)/(_)  (_)/(_)   
                                       o      _     _         _
   __o      __o      __o      __o     /\_   _ \\o  (_)\__/o  (_)
 _`\<,    _`\<,    _`\<,    _`\<,    _>(_) (_)/<_    \_| \   _|/' \/
(_)/(_)  (_)/(_)  (_)/(_)  (_)/(_)  (_)        (_)   (_)    (_)'  _\o_



                        







Reply to: