* Sunny Dubey (dubeys@bxscience.edu) [010923 19:17]: > First, please note that using Gnome will not help you because it is no where > near "ease-of-use" as KDE is. Browsing the web is no big deal because just > about any browser can browse the web. However, you might seriously consider > Konqueror. Unlike Mozilla, or Mozilla derivatives, Konq is pretty stable, > and does one amazing job on the internet when it comes to rendering HTML and > CSS code. (please note that Mozilla et al are progressing rapidly, however > there is no way to tell when they will reach a stage of prefect usablity. > > For checking mail there are various clients. I myself use Kmail (for KDE) > however, there are the clients packaged with Mozilla, and Evolution for Gnome. > > > I know it might seem great and all to have them using Linux and most likely > KDE ... however remember one key word ... interpolaritability ... dude ... that is so NOT a word! As to your points regarding application software, I'd tend to agree with your description of word processors, but I think you were a bit harsh on your treatment of browsers: Mozilla is very usable and very stable. Please don't wait for it to reach "perfect usability," as there is no such thing. And when it comes to DEs, K does still feel like a much more "complete" environment, but gnome is getting there. I find gnome with enlightenment to be prettier, and it can be set up to be very easy to use for users; just stick familiar launchers on a panel and it should be enough for them to get the job done. > This network is pretty easy to maintain, however it does require lots of > licenses ot be purchased, and the amount of money spend adds up fast. Well, as a novel idea, in order to avoid exorbitant software licensing fees, I might invite the reader to check name of this mailing list and follow up to find out what they can about the debian project. =) > > I'm looking for a setup that's easy to admin remotely and involves zero > > fiddling with the individual boxen. Well, if you've got one/some machine(s) powerful enough to provide the backend, you could set up the multiple boxen as thin clients. That's really the zero-fiddling solution. The other way (which admittedly involves some fiddling) would be to just mount home dirs from a fileserver and have individual machines running potato for the less-fiddling solution or woody for a more up-to-date environment (this will be nice for things like mozilla, kde, and gnome without hassle). In short, the 2 ideas you already had are good ones; the decision comes down to just how little tolerance you have for individual fiddling. The thin client solution is definitely less maintenance at each individual machine; once they're set up, users really can't easily mess things up. Application maintenance would be zero, and OS maintenance only requires a reboot so that the new kernel can be tftp'd in. > > look into an application called Norton Ghost. What this app will let you do ... is this: for OTHER_HOST in `cat otherhosts.txt` ; do dpkg --get-selections | ssh $OTHER_HOST dpkg --set-selections done I guess, to be fair, I should acknowledge that maybe it duplicates some /etc files as well. Sorry, buddy, I don't mean to be a punk and/or flame you, but recommending non-free software on this list is one of my pet peeves, and really pretty heretical! -- Vineet http://www.anti-dmca.org Unauthorized use of this .sig may constitute violation of US law. echo Qba\'g gernq ba zr\! |tr 'a-zA-Z' 'n-za-mN-ZA-M'
Attachment:
pgpISJ7Nvr8yU.pgp
Description: PGP signature