An Alternative for Newbies
Sidney Lambe
dollars into creating Windows-like user interfaces for Linux, and
into persuading the various major distros to adopt them.
See this article, for example:
http://troy-at-kde.livejournal.com/14690.html
There you have the owner of Slackware and his cronies being
wined and dined by kde at a supposed "conference", which is
just a way of disguising an expensive vacation. A bribe.
Primarily, I'm talking about kde, to a lesser degree, gnome.
There's also one called xfce, and maybe a couple of other even
lesser ones.
Henceforth, I'm just going to refer to kde, but I mean all of
them.
Why are they doing this? Because they are threatened by people
running a free operating system who actually understand how it
works.
By people who don't need _them_. Who aren't _controlled_ by them.
You can let them lead you by the nose to kde and pretend that you
are running Linux, but you won't be. You'll be letting kde run
Linux for you. You'll be letting the corporations _behind_ kde
run Linux for you.
Ironically, it takes just as long to learn to use kde as it does
to learn to run Linux from the shell, the commandline.
Myself and many others do this, and we can do anything that
someone running kde can do. And a lot more.
The kde technocrats want you to think that Linux is so
complicated that no mere mortal can comprehend it, and when you
add kde to Linux (which more than doubles its size) it does
indeed become too complex to deal with. How about that? :-)
But tens of of thousands of ordinary people managed to run Linux
just fine before kde existed. And they didn't have anywhere near
the documentation that's available now. Tens of thousands of
people _still_ run Linux from the commandline.
If you are thinking that running Linux from the commandline means
spending all of your time typing in long commands, then you are
quite mistaken. If you are thinking that it means you won't be
able to run your favorite graphical applications and use a mouse,
you are quite mistaken.
Two parallel courses of study are involved here: Learning the
basics of how Linux works, and learning the basics of the shell,
bash being the most common one these days.
We are all different; we are all individuals. We each need a
unique user interface tailored to _our_ specific needs. And
it is _easy_ to create one with just a little knowledge of
bash.
Here are three excellent documents to get you on the path
of freedom and power, to learning Linux instead of some
artificial user interface:
The first section of this one is actually an introduction to the
real basics of bash, how to use the command line. It's section
on mathematical tools is not so hot.
See: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.linux/msg/208349400085e7a3
http://www.tldp.org/LDP/GNU-Linux-Tools-Summary/GNU-Linux-Tools-Summary.html.tar.gz
How Linux actually works:
http://www.tldp.org/LDP/intro-linux/intro-linux.html.tar.gz
Basic shell scripting, etc:
http://www.tldp.org/LDP/Bash-Beginners-Guide/Bash-Beginners-Guide.html.tar.gz
These are basic reference documents:
This one is dated, but still very useful:
http://rute.2038bug.com/rute.html.tar.bz2
Don't let the word "advanced" throw you. There are
many basic things covered in this fine work:
http://www.tldp.org/LDP/abs/abs-guide.html.tar.gz
These are good reference sites:
http://www.comptechdoc.org/os/linux/
http://www.tldp.org/LDP/Linux-Dictionary/html/index.html
http://linux-newbie.sunsite.dk/index.html
There is a free, online school for newbies out there, but I've
checked it out and wasn't much impressed.
---------------------------------------------------
I'm looking for people to teach the newbies, and for newbies who
want to learn to run Linux from the command line.
I am not interested in getting involved in running arguments
about the points I've raised.
If you disagree with me, simply post your opinions and others
will read them. You are entitled to them.
I will not be responding any more posts of an argumentative nature.
The usenet has thousands of people who will argue anything from
now until eternity. That's their thing. I have better things to
do.
Sid
--
contact: http://tinyurl.com/5jxzoj
googlegroups users see:
http://tinyurl.com/5mbs7c
Tim Greer
> In recent years a number of corporations have poured millions of
> dollars into creating Windows-like user interfaces for Linux, and
> into persuading the various major distros to adopt them.
It's true! It's all true! (sob) I've personally accepted at least $25
million for convincing new Linux users on usenet to use KDE and Gnome.
I feel bad, but I get to feel bad from my mansion overlooking a lake.
I'm only human! Let's see how you react when they start driving money
up to your house by the truckload!
> See this article, for example:
>
> http://troy-at-kde.livejournal.com/14690.html
>
> There you have the owner of Slackware and his cronies being
> wined and dined by kde at a supposed "conference", which is
> just a way of disguising an expensive vacation. A bribe.
It's true! It's TRUE! I was a part of the conspiracy myself, and had
bribes of super models and free beer. After all, we know how much
money the Linux community snatches from poor, helpless elderly ladies.
Linux pretends to be a sick puppy, and as soon as they approach it to
help... SNAP! Linux has you in its filthy, rapid, smelly fangs. Next
thing you know, you're infected with K.D.E. and there's no known cure!
> Primarily, I'm talking about kde, to a lesser degree, gnome.
> There's also one called xfce, and maybe a couple of other even
> lesser ones.
Yeah *pfft*, maybe "lesser of the evils" one's.
> Henceforth, I'm just going to refer to kde, but I mean all of
> them.
They're all the same anyway. You go, girl!
> Why are they doing this?
It's a conspiracy?
> Because they are threatened by people
> running a free operating system who actually understand how it
> works.
Well, that's usually why anyone does anything -- because they feel
"threatened". Wait, wasn't this because of greed and money a minute
ago?
>
> By people who don't need _them_. Who aren't _controlled_ by them.
But, if we're not controlled, how will we know what we're supposed to
think? Oh crap! A black helicopter just flew over my house, and it
said "KDE" on the side... If you don't hear from me again, remember me
as a hero!
> You can let them lead you by the nose to kde and pretend that you
> are running Linux, but you won't be.
Yeah, because once you install KDE on a Linux system, an alert is
instantly sent out over the Internet to Bill Gates himself and next
thing you know, Windows is installed. Gates is CRAZY. All he does, is
sit there all day long watching for these alerts from Linux installs
and counter installs Windows. Uh... Did I just hear footsteps
outside!?
> You'll be letting kde run
> Linux for you.
Right, because once you install KDE, it's _impossible_ to switch to
another GUI, or to drop into a terminal window/shell, or to just boot
out of X or boot the system into run level 1, 2 or 3 and be on a true,
non emulated command line. If people did that, where would your
argument be!?
> You'll be letting the corporations _behind_ kde
> run Linux for you.
Yeah, because we all know how much the "Linux coporations" make off
Linux users, especially those goofy KDE users. I know that have made
at least $0 and 0 cents off me personally, going back as far as the
inception of Linux. Those... greedy... bastards!
> Ironically, it takes just as long to learn to use kde as it does
> to learn to run Linux from the shell, the commandline.
Yeah, a simple GUI takes _so_ much longer to learn than the command
line. Well, if you mean the command line, it's just right there, so
yeah, no clicking around required. Now what do you do? Well, learn
Linux! Find what the commands are and how to use them, how to
download, install and use other programs and commands (only in the
command line, because KDE is evil, of course). Right, all of those doc
and man files, commands and so on. Then you have things like shell
commands, Perl, sed, awk, and on and on. Wait, it takes that long to
learn KDE? What do you mean "to learn KDE"? It's a GUI. It's
installed, and you use it. There's not really a lot to it. I'm pretty
sure there's more to doing things in the command line, if you really
want to do a lot of things. Of course, having KDE is no different from
any other GUI, and you don't _have_ to use a GUI or X at all. So, you
use *whatever you want* _when_ you want a GUI.
> Myself and many others do this,
Yes, a lot of people that use Linux, use Linux.
> and we can do anything that
> someone running kde can do. And a lot more.
This has to do with the GUI, how?
> The kde technocrats
I like that word... "technocrats". It's fun.... I like "maverick", too.
it's fun. Yaaaaay!
> want you to think that Linux is so
> complicated
Yeah, that's _exactly_ what I've been trying to say for YEARS, too! All
of the Linux "technocrats" (tee hee hee) want you to think Linux is
"hard", so no one uses it and no one makes any money. That's probably
a bad business strategy, but only in theory. Thank God this is a
conspiracy, because otherwise that claim might sound loony!
> that no mere mortal can comprehend it,
That probably explains the 100+ Linux dists, millions of LDP sites and
man pages people painstakingly created, and even this news group! Good
point! If it weren't for hero's like you reminding us who the real
hero's are, and that "the truth is out there", I might almost have
fallen for it myself! But, wait a second, now I'm confused again...
why would they make a GUI for dummies to more easily use, if they don't
want anyone to figure it out?
> and when you
> add kde to Linux (which more than doubles its size) it does
> indeed become too complex to deal with. How about that? :-)
Yes, we should _all_ heed the advice of a self-proclaimed Linux expert,
whom can't manage to figure out the "complexities" of KDE. (zoom!)
> But tens of of thousands of ordinary people managed to run Linux
> just fine before kde existed.
And after, too (in fact, a lot more after), but let's not cover that, it
wouldn't be convenient or on point... and lest we forget the
conspiracy!
> And they didn't have anywhere near
> the documentation that's available now.
Which explains the "technocrats" mission to make it sound too hard to
learn and proves they don't want you to learn Linux.
> Tens of thousands of
> people _still_ run Linux from the commandline.
Yes, that's true. Point being? Hey, by the way, there's this new,
visually appealing thing called a GUI. It's been known to enhance
desktop/PC user's experiences.
> If you are thinking that running Linux from the commandline means
> spending all of your time typing in long commands, then you are
> quite mistaken.
Yeah, you can set up all sorts of aliased commands. Who needs a mouse
to point and click, when you can rub two stones together and create
fire?
> If you are thinking that it means you won't be
> able to run your favorite graphical applications and use a mouse,
> you are quite mistaken.
Exactly, so be gone you devil GUI! I cast a pox on thee! The power of
Bash compells you! The power of Bash compells you!
(Blllaaughhheehhhhguee... pea soup...)
> Two parallel courses of study are involved here: Learning the
> basics of how Linux works, and learning the basics of the shell,
> bash being the most common one these days.
The guru reveals his secrets! If you actually make sense again, I'm
going to have to defect to KDE on a full time basis! I believed in
you, maaaan! Now I don't believe in nothin' no more!
> We are all different; we are all individuals.
We can change that! It's not too late!
> We each need a
> unique user interface tailored to _our_ specific needs.
How, how very...KDE of you to say.
> And
> it is _easy_ to create one with just a little knowledge of
> bash.
"but that's trillions of lines of code... booo.. blah blah".
> Here are three excellent documents to get you on the path
> of freedom and power, to learning Linux instead of some
> artificial user interface:
That might take your bash, but they'll NEVER TAKE YOUUUUR
FREEEEDDOOOMM!!
> The first section of this one is actually an introduction to the
> real basics of bash, how to use the command line. It's section
> on mathematical tools is not so hot.
>
> See: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.linux/msg/208349400085e7a3
There are better links and sites...
>
http://www.tldp.org/LDP/GNU-Linux-Tools-Summary/GNU-Linux-Tools-Summary.html.tar.gz
Not bad, but people should read all of the LDP that apply to them/
> How Linux actually works:
>
> http://www.tldp.org/LDP/intro-linux/intro-linux.html.tar.gz
Be sure to read all of the site.
> Basic shell scripting, etc:
>
>
http://www.tldp.org/LDP/Bash-Beginners-Guide/Bash-Beginners-Guide.html.tar.gz
Reasonably good suggestions. Of course, they lack information about
what *most* people will be running, which is a GUI you don't like.
> These are basic reference documents:
>
> This one is dated, but still very useful:
>
> http://rute.2038bug.com/rute.html.tar.bz2
Again, not a bad link. Be sure to read up on your favorite GUI as
well. :-)
> There is a free, online school for newbies out there, but I've
> checked it out and wasn't much impressed.
Well, when you learn something useful, please come back here and offer
your wisdom to the people coming here for help. Let's hope that
happens some day. In the meantime, if you need any help, Sid, we're
always here for you. Really.
> I'm looking for people to teach the newbies, and for newbies who
> want to learn to run Linux from the command line.
Yeah, and those of us that know the command line and Linux well, are
always happy to help. I hope you can join us some day.
> I am not interested in getting involved in running arguments
> about the points I've raised.
Especially since you attack people for not agreeing with you and 99% of
the people in this group seem to either ignore you or blatantly refer
to you as a troll.
> If you disagree with me, simply post your opinions and others
> will read them. You are entitled to them.
Interesting change of heart. What happened in the last 10 minutes
before you re-posted this self gratification fest of a post to meet
your mission of anti-GUI-ness?
> I will not be responding any more posts of an argumentative nature.
You won't reply to anymore of your posts? Anyway, we'll see.
> The usenet has thousands of people who will argue anything from
> now until eternity. That's their thing. I have better things to
> do.
$pot->{'kettle'}{'black'};
--
Tim Greer, CEO/Founder/CTO, BurlyHost.com, Inc.
Shared Hosting, Reseller Hosting, Dedicated & Semi-Dedicated servers
and Custom Hosting. 24/7 support, 30 day guarantee, secure servers.
Industry's most experienced staff! -- Web Hosting With Muscle!
Peaceful Bill
> <snip irrelevant rant>
>
> I'm looking for people to teach the newbies, and for newbies who
> want to learn to run Linux from the command line.
Why? And who gives a shit but you?
>
> I am not interested in getting involved in running arguments
> about the points I've raised.
Why change at this point?
>
> If you disagree with me, simply post your opinions and others
> will read them. You are entitled to them.
And don't forget it.
>
> I will not be responding any more posts of an argumentative nature.
Promise?
>
> The usenet has thousands of people who will argue anything from
> now until eternity. That's their thing. I have better things to
> do.
>
> Sid
>
>
Pot / kettle.
philo
"Sidney Lambe" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:256at5x...@amma.net...
> In recent years a number of corporations have poured millions of
> dollars into creating Windows-like user interfaces for Linux, and
> into persuading the various major distros to adopt them.
>
> See this article, for example:
>
> http://troy-at-kde.livejournal.com/14690.html
>
> There you have the owner of Slackware and his cronies being
> wined and dined by kde at a supposed "conference", which is
> just a way of disguising an expensive vacation. A bribe.
>
> Primarily, I'm talking about kde, to a lesser degree, gnome.
> There's also one called xfce, and maybe a couple of other even
> lesser ones.
>
> Henceforth, I'm just going to refer to kde, but I mean all of
> them.
>
> Why are they doing this? Because they are threatened by people
> running a free operating system who actually understand how it
> works.
>
> By people who don't need _them_. Who aren't _controlled_ by them.
>
> You can let them lead you by the nose to kde and pretend that you
> are running Linux, but you won't be. You'll be letting kde run
> Linux for you. You'll be letting the corporations _behind_ kde
> run Linux for you.
>
> Ironically, it takes just as long to learn to use kde as it does
> to learn to run Linux from the shell, the commandline.
>
>
<snipped for brevity>
I've been using Linux at least part time for approx. 8 years.
Started with Red Hat 5.2
At the time I knew nothing at all about computers and did not even know what
a partition was.
Over a period of months, I tried and gave up, tried and gave up...
but eventually got it installed. Next I needed to configure the X-server!
From the day I got the CD
until the time I had gotten the system up and running...and all configured
...
was six months!
(No it was not continuous work, the cd sat on the shelf for months at a
time.)
Anyway, needless to say I was proud of myself for sticking with it...
because I learned so much in the process. As a matter of fact...I think by
not giving
up on it...I learned more about computers than I could have learned in a
year (or more) of college!
So it was a great education.
However...I cannot blame the Linux community for making Linux simpler to
install and use.
The last installation of Slackware I did was a few weeks ago ...and though
"Slack" at one time
took a bit of thinking to install, today, it's a pretty simple process.
For those who like to "build their own" I guess there is still Gentoo.
A challenge I have not yet taken.
FWIW: Someone in town here gave me an old Sun Workstation.
Though I was able to install Solaris on it with no problems...
it was like the "good old days" all over again when I tried Linux.
Right now it's running fairly well with the SPARC version of Debian
The machine is 14 years old and has a 110 mhz CPU.
But 224 megs of RAM. It must have cost a fortune back then!
J.O. Aho
> For those who like to "build their own" I guess there is still Gentoo.
> A challenge I have not yet taken.
Don't forget SurceMage which is a debain based meta distribution, which has
adopted a bit different way to handle package than Gentoo, you will end up a
less hard drive space using installation.
> FWIW: Someone in town here gave me an old Sun Workstation.
>
> Though I was able to install Solaris on it with no problems...
> it was like the "good old days" all over again when I tried Linux.
Solaris is lagsih compared to Linux on the same box, did install Gentoo on my
Ultra Sparc and it fells better and was a lot more simpler to install, but the
hardware is quite old so I have used distcc to speed up compiling things and
nfs to get faster file access (the IDE is damn slow on Ultra Sparc).
--
//Aho
Sidney Lambe
:-) Been there.
>
> Over a period of months, I tried and gave up, tried and gave
> up... but eventually got it installed. Next I needed to
> configure the X-server!
Actually, the first step is choosing the right server for
your video chipset, but I know you know that.
>
> From the day I got the CD until the time I had gotten the
> system up and running...and all configured ... was six months!
>
> (No it was not continuous work, the cd sat on the shelf for
> months at a time.)
>
> Anyway, needless to say I was proud of myself for sticking with
> it... because I learned so much in the process. As a matter of
> fact...I think by not giving up on it...I learned more about
> computers than I could have learned in a year (or more) of
> college!
>
> So it was a great education.
You are right about that. Good work.
>
>
> However...I cannot blame the Linux community for making Linux
> simpler to install and use. The last installation of Slackware
> I did was a few weeks ago ...and though "Slack" at one time
> took a bit of thinking to install, today, it's a pretty simple
> process.
I'm with you there, but installation has nothing to do with kde
(and the like). Nor is kde necesary to make Linux easier to use.
It's better to use bash configuration scripts, for example,
than "wizards" (which are just configuration scripts that have
been compiled instead, and dressed in fancy costumes). Shell
scripts are plain text and can be understood and modified by someone
with very basic skills. Can't do that with "wizards".
Let's see, what else does kde have? Oh yeh. A menu of commands
you can run.
With the bash select command you can make a menu in no time at
all with no skill at all:
#!/bin/bash
echo
echo "Ctrl-c to exit"
echo
select command in firefox gimp xpdf vim calendar netconfig
do $command
done
Call the script (file) "m" for menu.
Make the file executable with:
$chmod +rx m
Enter "m" at the prompt and you see this:
Ctrl-c to exit
1) firefox 3) xpdf 5) calendar
2) gimp 4) vim 6) netconfig
#?
Type a number and hit enter and the command runs.
Add submenus at will..
(They need to be a little more complex than that for
practical use, but not much.)
Again, hardly rocket science.
>
> For those who like to "build their own" I guess there is still.
> Gentoo A challenge I have not yet taken .
Not sure what you mean by building your own. That's not what
I'm talking about.
I just run Slackware and know a little bit about how Linux
and the shell work.
I have a basic X install with a window manager and an xterm.
>
> FWIW: Someone in town here gave me an old Sun Workstation.
>
> Though I was able to install Solaris on it with no problems.. .
> it was like the "good old days" all over again when I tried .
> Linux .
>
> Right now it's running fairly well with the SPARC version of
> Debian
>
> The machine is 14 years old and has a 110 mhz CPU. But 224 megs
> of RAM. It must have cost a fortune back then!
Sounds fun, Philo. I could do just fine with 110 and have a lot
less RAM than that. I rarely use more than 40M. But I'm not a
multimedia person. Right now I'm using 7M of RAM.
Sidney Lambe
>
> "Sidney Lambe" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:256at5x...@amma.net...
>
> For those who like to "build their own" I guess there is still Gentoo.
> A challenge I have not yet taken.
I looked into gentoo at one time. The only thing I didn't like
about it was that it used perl or python or ruby (I forget which one)
where bash would work just fine and make for a much more integrated
and user-friendly OS.
[delete]
philo
"J.O. Aho" <us...@example.net> wrote in message
news:6mgc1jF...@mid.individual.net...
Yes , Debian runs a lot better than Solaris.
I did try the Slackware port...SPLACK
but there is currently a bug in the keymap that needs to be worked out
philo
<snipped for brevity>
Well as of late I've been installing Damn Small Linux
on all the P1-s I get.
Hate to take them to the recycler.
In the past, I'd offer them up on the local Craig's list
but no one wanted a P1 with win9x on it.
But by using D.S.L.
I can find plenty of takers.
Even running the GUI does not take a lot of RAM
Sidney Lambe
philo
"Sidney Lambe" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
I just hate to waste things
even a P1 !
Also a good way for me to use up my small HD's !!!!
Sidney Lambe
Why should they be wasted? For ordinary use they'll
work just fine with a nice little Slackware derivative
like DSL.
I looked over the site. Be better to use more cli
apps for older boxes like that. Mutt for mail, etc.
Don't need graphics for mail and news and irc and im.
I do most of my work on the web with a textmode browser,
only bringing up firefox if images are essential.
mount -t iso9660 -o ro,loop=/dev/loop0 dsl-4.2.5-syslinux.iso /cdrom
Interesting. Now to get it on the hdd. I have a spare 1G partition.
Been reading the docs on the wiki. Looks like I'll have to burn
it on a CD first.
Thing is, I don't want to accidentally overwrite the boot sector.
Already got one of those and lilo on this OS.
philo
<snipped for brevity>
Well you can always run DSL right from the cd.
I know there are ways to mount .iso images on the HD
but I always burn cd's
The bootable DSL cd is a pretty useful tool that I use all the time.
The other day, I was working on a machine that I had upgraded the cpu
from a Cyrix 333 to an AMD-500
Though the freq jumpers were marked on the mobo, the
multiplier jumpers were not labeled.
Worst still was the bios had no cpu info...
so I guessed at the jumper settings
and could just boot up with DSL and get the cpu speed identified
early in the boot process.
Luckily my first guess was right
as I saw the CPU speed listed as 500mhz
A nice time saver for me
Sidney Lambe
Given your willingness to get into the hardware at a basic but
very utilitarian level, I'm surprised that you aren't into doing
the same thing with the software.
I burned the dsl cd and booted it up and played with it.
There's something wrong with the video setup and the menus aren't
readable, so I went to a terminal and it wasn't readable because
some idiot (sorry, but that's how I see it) has configured the
xterm with some starry universe scene in the background. So
I decided to go to a plain tty and guess what? There aren't any!
I had to create a new user from the ground up and run a getty
myself and login with a password I created to gain access to
a tty on an OS that allows anyone to acess it with superuser
priveleges!
Unless I chose "expert" mode from the bootup menu. But then
there's no X running and most of the key applications won't work
without it. And without the file manager, which will obviously
take weeks to learn to use, I naturally chose to turn to the
stock utilities found on any Linux/Unix box, but they aren't
there. Just a collection of severely stripped-down utilities
called "busybox".
A pretty disappointing experience. A very elitist/technocratic,
windows-like distro. Made me feel cramped and confined and
railroaded.
Know what I see on my box when I login, whether in console _or_ X
mode? A completely blank screen with a command prompt.
The screen isn't cluttered with icons for people too stupid and
lazy to remember to memorize a few single-letter commands to
bring up applications that they use all the time.
That's what it takes on my box, one letter. If I want to do
mail I enter "m" at the prompt and my mail app opens in another
window. Ooooh. How taxing. How dreadfully demanding and complex!
And if you forget them, "h" to bring up the list of one-letter
commands you use all the time.
Sarcasm:
And how _dare_ anyne ask me to TYPE?! This is outrageous! It
says right there in the Constitution that we have the right
to run a computer by clicking with a mouse so that we have
one hand free for junk food and drugs and our dicks and
the TV remote and our cellphone!
And the 20th amendment says that any screen we look at must
be colored and decorated like a children's book of fairy
tales so that I we don't have to face the fact that we
are using a computer!
/Sarcasm
DSL. What a piece of crap.
Sorry, Philo, but that's what I really think. Perfect little
toy for windows users who want to pretend they are running
Linux.
Sidney Lambe
That really isn't fair. DSL is just a simplified version of
what all the major Linux distros have become or are becoming.
Windows clones. Appliances for ignorant couch potatoes who
want their computers to be interactive TVs and the internet
to be a virtual shopping mall.
jellybean stonerfish
>On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 18:33:44 -0700, Sidney Lambe wrote:
>> Sorry, Philo, but that's what I really think. Perfect little toy for
>> windows users who want to pretend they are running Linux.
>
> That really isn't fair. DSL is just a simplified version of what all the
> major Linux distros have become or are becoming.
Talking to yourself is a sign of dementia.
stonerfish
--
Linux: So easy to use, a stoner can use it.
Tim Greer
He reminds me of this guy on the Perl programming newsgroup that posts a
reply to someone, then gets mad when they don't thank him in less than
an hour (I'm serious) and starts insulting them in the next reply (of
his own reply), and then he correct and argues against his previous
posts. Very strange behavior.
jellybean stonerfish
I see you are stirring the flames again stoner. Into the killfile with
you.....plonk
sf
philo
"Sidney Lambe" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
<irrational rant snipped>
No, that is not the case..you are going delusional.
Time to take your meds there dude!
TJ
Interesting discussion, but it eludes me how this has anything to do
with "An Alternative for Newbies." I remember being a newbie, several
times with several OS's, and I would have no sooner tackled something
like this than I would jump off a cliff. After I have some experience
with the OS, maybe, but this is far from newbie territory.
Or am I missing something?
TJ
philo
<irrational tirade snipped>
> >
> >
>
> Interesting discussion, but it eludes me how this has anything to do
> with "An Alternative for Newbies." I remember being a newbie, several
> times with several OS's, and I would have no sooner tackled something
> like this than I would jump off a cliff. After I have some experience
> with the OS, maybe, but this is far from newbie territory.
>
> Or am I missing something?
>
> TJ
D.S.L. Is a good way for a newbie to start out.
I have gotten quite a few people started with Linux by using it.
Never once saw any of the problems the OP had run into...
and since it's open source, if there is anything about it you don't like,
it can of course be modified as will.
The OP started out rationally, then had some sort of a psychotic break.
I hope he gets back on the program soon
and back to the rational world.
Tim Greer
lol That took me a second to get it. Good stuff!
Sidney Lambe
If you think I'm irrational, you shouldn't talk to me.
The fact that you are talking to me indicates that you don't
believe I'm irrational.
Time to make up your mind, Philo.
[delete]
Sid
Sidney Lambe
>
>
>
><irrational tirade snipped>
If you think I am irrational, you shouldn't talk to me.
The fact that you _are_ talking to me indicates that you
Sidney Lambe
I can't tell. What do you mean by "something like this"?
philo
<snip>
> >> > A nice time saver for me
> >>
> >> Given your willingness to get into the hardware at a basic but
> >> very utilitarian level, I'm surprised that you aren't into doing
> >> the same thing with the software.
> >>
> >> I burned the dsl cd and booted it up and played with it.
> >>
> >> There's something wrong with the video setup and the menus aren't
> >> readable, so I went to a terminal and it wasn't readable because
> >> some idiot (sorry, but that's how I see it) has configured the
> >> xterm with some starry universe scene in the background. So
> >> I decided to go to a plain tty and guess what? There aren't any!
> >>
> >
> ><irrational rant snipped>
>
> If you think I'm irrational, you shouldn't talk to me.
>
> The fact that you are talking to me indicates that you don't
> believe I'm irrational.
>
> Time to make up your mind, Philo.
>
> [delete]
>
> Sid
>
>
Ahhh...you're OK
don't worry about it.
Were is not for D.S.L.
I'd still have a basement full of P1's...
I was able to setup a lot of Newbies with it and they seem to be fine with
it...
no problems yet.
An operating system is merely an operating system.
Since I am a refurbisher...I have a whole house full of machines
and most of them have removable drives.
I try to use as many operating systems as I can...
must have well over 25 installations
CP/M, OS/2,ECS, all non-server versions of Windows,
BSD, a handful of different Linux distros...
and more
My background it hardware, so I look at software and operating systems as a
challenge.
Here is one I got going...
took me a while to get it all up and running
along with Internet access
Dare you to try it
http://netlib.bell-labs.com/plan9/
Sidney Lambe
Here's the /etc/inittab from DSL 4.2.5:
id:5:initdefault:
si::sysinit:/etc/init.d/rcS
~~:S:respawn:/bin/bash -login >/dev/tty1 2>&1 </dev/tty1
l0:0:wait:/etc/init.d/knoppix-halt
l1:1:wait:/etc/init.d/rc 1
l2:2:wait:/etc/init.d/rc 2
l3:3:wait:/etc/init.d/rc 3
l4:4:wait:/etc/init.d/rc 4
l5:5:wait:/etc/init.d/rc 5
l6:6:wait:/etc/init.d/knoppix-reboot
ca::ctrlaltdel:/etc/init 0
kb::kbrequest:/bin/echo "Keyboard Request -- edit /etc/inittab to let this work.
"
pf::powerwait:/etc/init.d/powerfail start
pn::powerfailnow:/etc/init.d/powerfail now
po::powerokwait:/etc/init.d/powerfail stop
1:12345:respawn:/bin/bash -login >/dev/tty1 2>&1 </dev/tty1
2:234:respawn:/bin/bash -login >/dev/tty2 2>&1 </dev/tty2
3:234:respawn:/bin/bash -login >/dev/tty3 2>&1 </dev/tty3
4:234:respawn:/bin/bash -login >/dev/tty4 2>&1 </dev/tty4
2,3,and 4 are only available in runlevels 2,3,4, which is
not where DSL operates. It's in 5.
X is booted in tty1, which can't be used for anything
else, so NO ttys.
It's a live CD, so changing that file is a major affair.
And no newbie is going to know how to do it anyway.
So what you have is the ordinary user being denied
access to a plain tty, which is incredibly elitist
and technocratic.
-------------------------------------------------------
Here's corresponding section in /etc/inittab from Slackware 12.0:
# These are the standard console login getties in multiuser mode:
c1:1235:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty1 linux
c2:1235:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty2 linux
#c3:1235:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty3 linux
#c4:1235:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty4 linux
#c5:1235:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty5 linux
#c6:12345:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty6 linux
I only have two tty's that are created at boot, but
they are both accessible in all operating runlevels.
You are out of your depth, Philo.
Sidney Lambe
>
>[delete]
http://netlib.bell-labs.com/plan9/about.html
Oh my. You are a braver man than I, Philo, and
I am impressed like you wouldn't believe that
you actually did that.
Got my hands full with Linux, though, and only so
much time to devote to it. I think I need to create
my own distro: A bash script user-interface that does
everything that kde does. I think I can find out just
what that is from their extensive websites.
philo
<portions snipped for brevity>
I think you missed something major.
I am setting these machines up with HD installs...
and not the live CD.
Plus, they are all for people who would not even know what a command line
is.
Sheesh, the people who have the machines are quite happy with them
and if they progress onto something better...that's what it's all about.
If you don't like the distro...
I don't recall forcing you to use it.
philo
<snip>
> >
>
> http://netlib.bell-labs.com/plan9/about.html
>
> Oh my. You are a braver man than I, Philo, and
> I am impressed like you wouldn't believe that
> you actually did that.
>
> Got my hands full with Linux, though, and only so
> much time to devote to it. I think I need to create
> my own distro: A bash script user-interface that does
> everything that kde does. I think I can find out just
> what that is from their extensive websites.
>
> Sid
>
>
Come on, take the challenge...
I merely blundered through it...
you could excel!!
Sidney Lambe
You are fun, Philo.
>
>
> I think you missed something major.
> I am setting these machines up with HD installs...
> and not the live CD.
That'll help.
> Plus, they are all for people who would not even know what a command line
> is.
That's what we need to do something about.
Here's how you start: Have them click on the firefox icon and
watch firefox come up. Then shut it down.
Now have them bring up an xterm and type "firefox &" then hit
Enter and watch firefox come up. Then shut it down.
Now, put this in the users or systemwide bashrc:
ff () { firefox & }
Then source the file.
Now have them type "ff" at the terminal and enter it and
watch firefox come up....
>
> Sheesh, the people who have the machines are quite happy with them
> and if they progress onto something better...that's what it's all about.
With you there.
>
> If you don't like the distro...
> I don't recall forcing you to use it.
That's a relief. But it has given me some good ideas.
philo
<snipped for brevity>
Sid...
I don't know if you realize what kind of people I am dealing with.
They could never do the simplest thing with a command line...
I setup a friend of mine with a win98 machine many years ago...
he's a bit older...but that's no excuse...
But he was unable to even use a mouse.
He never got the hang of it.
He could not use a word processor, even though he had no trouble
with a typewriter.
He'd ask questions such as "Where the dollar sign?"
I'd tell him: "Same place as it would be on a typewriter."
Another woman I gave a computer to a few years back...
called up almost in tears one day.
She has used a computer in her office for over 20 years.
She was trying to copy a document to a floppy...
but the icon for the A: drive was not in *exactly* the same place on her
computer
as was the icon at her work computer.
I could go on and on.
Sure, of course they'd be capable of opening a terminal and typing in a
command...
but computers give people mental blocks...
and if they think they can't do it...they can't do it.
The fact that I got even a few "ordinary people" to use a Linux
computer of any type...is big progress.
Sidney Lambe
>
[delete]
>
> The fact that I got even a few "ordinary people" to use a Linux
> computer of any type...is big progress.
Okay. I'll give you that. But given the windows-like user interface
of dsl, unless something is done, their next logical step will
be one of the major distros with kde.
And the takeover of Linux by kde is going to be its death. The
kind of people who want that kind of OS (point and click and if
that fails call technical support) are not going to care if the
software is open source or free.
http://www.kde.org/support/thanks.php
There are millions being poured into kde by companies that
never spend a nickel unless they think they will get a dime
in return.
And they can't make that kind of money from open source and free
software.
I'd bet my life that MicroSoft is the main force behind kde.
It's so easy to funnel money down hidden paths. That's a way
of life for big corporations. How many of those sponsors are
given X dollars by M$ (or the Gates Foundation) in grants if they
promise, behind closed doors, to give a big chunk to kde? A lot
of them, I'll bet. And I know that Google paid for a lot of their
most recent conference.
philo
"Sidney Lambe" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
Ah Microsoft is making too much money with their bloatware
to care what the linux people are doing.
To me, a GUI is a GUI
they are all the same to me
Since most of the machines I use are just old junkers
for a gui I just use TWM
Basically I just use the terminal
but can bring up any GUI app I need
But when I am using a high-end junk machine
such as a P-III or above
then I'd use whatever GUI I happen to feel like using that day.
I'd get bored with the same one each time...
that's why I keep popping different drives into my machines
and run different operating systems
I think I am sort of an OS/2 type person though
propman propmeup
> I don't know if you realize what kind of people I am dealing with.
>
> They could never do the simplest thing with a command line...
>
> I setup a friend of mine with a win98 machine many years ago...
>
> he's a bit older...but that's no excuse...
>
> But he was unable to even use a mouse.
>
> He never got the hang of it.
>
> He could not use a word processor, even though he had no trouble with a
> typewriter.
Does this ever bring back memories of one client/friend who I was trying
to instruct in basic computer 'ops......exhibited exactly the behaviour
you described above.....and let me stress this, this lady was in no way
limited in intelligence! Office manager who worked her way up from the
bottom.
>
> She was trying to copy a document to a floppy...
>
> but the icon for the A: drive was not in *exactly* the same place on her
> computer
> as was the icon at her work computer.
One of my favourite horror tech stories (didn't happen to me) was a phone
discussion with tech telling the user to "shut the door" , "open the
door" during a multi-floppy upgrade proceedure. Tech finally figured out
user was opening and shutting office door rather than floppy drive.
.........and of course, mustn't forget the "My coffee cup holder tray is
broken"; tech finally determined that it was the CDROM tray.
Sidney Lambe
Wrong.
>
> To me, a GUI is a GUI
>
> they are all the same to me
Calling kde a GUI is like calling the space shuttle a bottle
rocket.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_GUI
The GUI has been around for about 40 years. M$ created the
first desktop environment, which is a complete user interface
built _on_ the GUI.
Kde is a clone of that interface.
A GUI is a tool. A desktop environment is a crutch...Make that
a wheelchair and a feeding tube and a catheter.
I run a GUI. I wouldn't allow a monstrosity like kde on my box.
>
>
> Since most of the machines I use are just old junkers
>
> for a gui I just use TWM
>
> Basically I just use the terminal
>
> but can bring up any GUI app I need
Of course. That's what I do.
> But when I am using a high-end junk machine such as a P-III or
> above then I'd use whatever GUI I happen to feel like using
> that day.
That you knew how to use. I can teach a newbie to run Linux
from the commandline in less time that you can teach one to
run it with kde.
I mean a _real_ newbie: One with no previous computer experience.
>
> I'd get bored with the same one each time...
>
> that's why I keep popping different drives into my machine ands
> run different operating system s
>
> I think I am sort of an OS/2 type person though
>
>
Don't know OS/2. Heard of it.
Sidney Lambe
You don't understand corporations. Back in the 70's the
MacDonalds corporation sued a little family restaurant owned and
run by a family who happenned to be named MacDonald that existed
long before the MacDonalds corporation ever came into existence.
They forced them to change the name of their restaurant. Linux is
considerably more of a threat to MicrosSoft than that restaurant
was to MacDonalds.
At least it was until kde came along...
Speaking of bloat. I run Slackware 12.0 with a GUI.
If I was to install kde it would more than double the size
of my OS.
[delete]
philo
"Sidney Lambe" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
yep
Slackware has always been my favorite distro...
Let me know if you are familiar with the port to SPARC
known as SPLACK...
I am having some problems with it on my Sun Workstation.
philo
"propman propmeup" <pro...@propmeup.here> wrote in message
news:ge5r1o$kqk$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
LOL///
well in my case, the guy I had mentioned above
was the *one* person I had given a computer to ...who never got the hang of
it.
He has a PHD !!!
Also, FWIW my uncle who is now 91 years old...
got his first computer about 2 years ago.
During his first two weeks he called me a number of times with questions...
then after that he was on his own...he was able to figure things out
himself.
Personally, ...I seem to learn things much better now that I'm close to
60...
then I ever did when I was in college.
My GF and I both do a lot of volunteer work. She does so on a nearly full
time basis...
and I do so whenever I have a few spare hours.
About two years ago I volunteered for a couple of major projects.
One was to edit and compile a very large video slide show...
the other was to lay out a small, but graphics-heavy publication.
Of course I had never before done such a thing...
and soon realized I was in for a lot of work...and there was a lot I had to
learn pretty fast.
It seems that every free minute I had during the year leading up to the
project's completion
was devoted to it.
There were a few days that I thought for sure that I had bitten off more
than I could chew...
but in the end it all turned out great.
I doubt I would have had the discipline to do it if I had been younger
Sidney Lambe
Kind of irrelevant to my point. Kde would also double
the size of any other distro installed with only a
basic GUI.
The main reason I like Slackware is the no-frills but
very usable package manager and the fact that it doesn't
require perl/python/ruby to run.
>
> Let me know if you are familiar with the port to SPARC
>
> known as SPLACK...
>
> I am having some problems with it on my Sun Workstation.
Mucho sorry, Philo. The only sparcs I know come from my
fireplace and my only sun workstation is a mattress pad
on the deck.
philo
<snip>
Ok
thanks anyway.
As to KDE, since I have not had a look at any recent time...
I don't have much to say about it.
But if you say it's bloatware I am sure it is.
Probably runs just fine on a machine with a dual core CPU
and a few gigs of RAM.
I'm pretty sure that it's expected that everyone just runs out and buys new
H/W
once a year or so.
Just open the window and throw you old computer out on the street.
Example:
The last computer I repaired was a couple of days ago.
HD had developed a SMART error and I advised to user to stop using it at
once.
She did not even care if I fixed the machine or not...
she just told me to backup the data if I could ...
then toss the machine.( It was a fairly new P-IV)
Got it on the bench and noticed that it had two HD's.
One was a ten gig drive that had obviously been removed from her
(apparently)
old machine and just slaved to the main drive.
It was the auxiliary drive that had started to fail...as it turned out...
so all I had to do was copy over perhaps 1 gig or so of data to the main
drive...
disconnect the old drive...and the machine is now 100% good.
Of course I am not going to keep it or toss it...
I told her she can have it back.
Yes, she was happy...
but no, it was not a major big deal to her either.
Anyway...back to KDE.
I think that if a person who is now using Vista
would get their hands on a Linux machine running KDE...
they'd probably complain that it wasn't bloated enough!
SINNER
> I setup a friend of mine with a win98 machine many years ago...
>
> he's a bit older...but that's no excuse...
>
> But he was unable to even use a mouse.
>
> He never got the hang of it.
Heh! I have a story like that. I was at my buddies house who had just
bought his parents a PC as a gift. We were watching TV and I noticed out of
the corner of my eye, his dad was moving the monitor, not once, but
multiple times and I could not figure out why so I got up and asked.
The mouse was getting pushed up against the base of the monitor and he
could not get the concept of lifting the mouse and reseting its position,
so he would move the monitor to give him more room to move it.
I dont think we stopped laughing for an hour so we could explain the
concept
:)
--
David
Sheridan Hutchinson
> As to KDE, since I have not had a look at any recent time... I don't
> have much to say about it. But if you say it's bloatware I am sure it
> is.
What defines 'bloatware' is very much a subjective thing, in my opinion
KDE is not something I'd term as bloatware. People can literally spend
just £200 - £300 on a second-hand machine and KDE will perform
brilliantly on that level specification.
That is not to say that KDE is intended to be run well on the old
Pentium 1 machines that you might come into contact with, because the
experience will not be enjoyable. Then again, Pentium 1 based computers
are extremely old and cannot be expect to provide a modern desktop
metaphor with great performance.
> Probably runs just fine on a machine with a dual core CPU and a few
> gigs of RAM.
This is my setup and the speed is phenomenal.
One more thing you might be interested in knowing is that while KDE 4
uses more memory overall than KDE 3.5, the speed of most operations is
much faster.
> I'm pretty sure that it's expected that everyone just runs out and
> buys new H/W once a year or so.
I only change a part in my machine if a.) I need to because my needs
have changed (e.g. for faster gaming or need hard disk space), and b.)
the replacement is 4 times as 'good'. I term 'good' as either a speed
or capacity improvement.
Motherboard changes are something I usually only have to do every 3 - 5
years when my upgrade options are exhausted and my needs are no longer
being met.
Some people however like new computers every couple of years, just like
some people like new cars every few years. In my opinion if that's how
people want to spend their money then it is entirely up to them, because
it is nice having new computer.
--
Regards,
Sheridan Hutchinson
sher...@shezza.org
Sidney Lambe
>[delete]
> As to KDE, since I have not had a look at any recent time.. I .
> don't have much to say about it But if you say it's bloatware .
> I am sure it is .
More than that, it is an artificial interface designed to
obscure the actual workings of Linux.
>
> Probably runs just fine on a machine with a dual core CPU and
> a few gigs of RAM. I'm pretty sure that it's expected that
> everyone just runs out and buys new H/W once a year or so.
:-) Of course.
My main computer is 10 years old and works fine. My backup
box is older than that.
>
> Just open the window and throw you old computer out on the
> street.
Like a good little konsumer.
>
> Example:
>
> The last computer I repaired was a couple of days ago. HD had
> developed a SMART error and I advised to user to stop using it
> at once. She did not even care if I fixed the machine or not...
> she just told me to backup the data if I could ... then toss
> the machine.( It was a fairly new P-IV)
>
> Got it on the bench and noticed that it had two HD's.
>
> One was a ten gig drive that had obviously been removed from
> her (apparently) old machine and just slaved to the main drive.
> It was the auxiliary drive that had started to fail...as it
> turned out... so all I had to do was copy over perhaps 1 gig or
> so of data to the main drive... disconnect the old drive...and
> the machine is now 100% good. Of course I am not going to keep
> it or toss it... I told her she can have it back.
>
> Yes, she was happy.. but no, it was not a major big deal to .
> her either .
>
> Anyway...back to KDE.
>
> I think that if a person who is now using Vista would get
> their hands on a Linux machine running KDE... they'd probably
> complain that it wasn't bloated enough!
Probably. The main thing about kde, besides the fact that it
seperates the user from the OS, from understanding and control,
is that it is not, and for that very reason, a truly functional
interface.
That's the point: If you rely on it and believe you are running
Linux instead of running kde, you will have to rely on the
people who do know how to run Linux. Firstly, level one of
Technical Support are the dumb drones who took a 2 week course
in kde. Then, if kde can't do the job, it's to the second
layer, where all the woo-woo comes into play: The Mighty Wizard
who can actually use the command line.
10 years ago the average Linux runner knew more about Linux
than that "Mighty Wizard" at Technical Support.
If this trend continues, you can look forward to the day when
you try to connect to your ISP and they reject the connection
until you can prove that you have bought a license to run
Linux.
Tim Greer
> If this trend continues, you can look forward to the day when
> you try to connect to your ISP and they reject the connection
> until you can prove that you have bought a license to run
> Linux.
Look out for those black helicopters.
philo
"Sheridan Hutchinson" <Sher...@Shezza.org> wrote in message
news:QpidnVUaBfY1hprU...@pipex.net...
Could you kindly repost in plain text
with no attachments
philo
"SINNER" <arcade...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9B4556AA7C04Dl...@140.99.99.130...
LOL!!!!
I honestly think there was a Dilbert comic once
where the boss was doing something similar!
philo
<snip>
No matter how valid all your points are...
I doubt if most people care.
Do you know how many times I've seen people purchase laptops...
based on the *color* of it!
Once in a while, when I offer up a free computer on Craig's list...
someone will write back and ask me what color it is.
No I do not bother to reply to people like that.
Sidney Lambe
[delete]
>> >
>> > Anyway...back to KDE.
>> >
>> > I think that if a person who is now using Vista would get
>> > their hands on a Linux machine running KDE... they'd probably
>> > complain that it wasn't bloated enough!
>>
>> Probably. The main thing about kde, besides the fact that it
>> seperates the user from the OS, from understanding and control,
>> is that it is not, and for that very reason, a truly functional
>> interface.
>>
>> That's the point: If you rely on it and believe you are running
>> Linux instead of running kde, you will have to rely on the
>> people who do know how to run Linux. Firstly, level one of
>> Technical Support are the dumb drones who took a 2 week course
>> in kde. Then, if kde can't do the job, it's to the second
>> layer, where all the woo-woo comes into play: The Mighty Wizard
>> who can actually use the command line.
>>
>> 10 years ago the average Linux runner knew more about Linux
>> than that "Mighty Wizard" at Technical Support.
>>
>> If this trend continues, you can look forward to the day when
>> you try to connect to your ISP and they reject the connection
>> until you can prove that you have bought a license to run
>> Linux.
>>
>> Sid
>>
>>
>
> No matter how valid all your points are...
> I doubt if most people care.
You are obviously right.
>
> Do you know how many times I've seen people purchase laptops...
>
> based on the *color* of it!
ROTFL
>
> Once in a while, when I offer up a free computer on Craig's list...
> someone will write back and ask me what color it is.
>
> No I do not bother to reply to people like that.
I wonder how long it will be before they start coming out
in different fragrances?
propman propmeup
> Once in a while, when I offer up a free computer on Craig's list...
> someone will write back and ask me what color it is.
>
> No I do not bother to reply to people like that.
Don't blame ya one little bit.....now, I'm *very* much interested in one
of your free computers but I do have a couple of questions:
Is it house broken?
..........and how often do I have to water it?
Ohhhh....ohhhh.....ummm...ummm...almost forgot....does it have one of
those coffee cup trays with the shiny coasters????
....oh darn, sorry, that's three questions, isn't it? OK, forget the
last one then....just remembered that I still have an old one in a system
that I had to retire due to my overwatering it.
Damn this computer stuff is complicated........
philo
"Sidney Lambe" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
I've got that all figured out...
mine smell like dust and a musty basement!!!!
philo
"propman propmeup" <pro...@propmeup.here> wrote in message
Worst still are the folks who want me to deliver it too...
I am not joking, some people expect me to do that!!!
The answer is a firm NO!!!
TJ
> philo wrote:
>> As to KDE, since I have not had a look at any recent time... I don't
>> have much to say about it. But if you say it's bloatware I am sure it
>> is.
>
> What defines 'bloatware' is very much a subjective thing, in my opinion
> KDE is not something I'd term as bloatware. People can literally spend
> just £200 - £300 on a second-hand machine and KDE will perform
> brilliantly on that level specification.
>
> That is not to say that KDE is intended to be run well on the old
> Pentium 1 machines that you might come into contact with, because the
> experience will not be enjoyable. Then again, Pentium 1 based computers
> are extremely old and cannot be expect to provide a modern desktop
> metaphor with great performance.
>
>> Probably runs just fine on a machine with a dual core CPU and a few
>> gigs of RAM.
>
> This is my setup and the speed is phenomenal.
>
> One more thing you might be interested in knowing is that while KDE 4
> uses more memory overall than KDE 3.5, the speed of most operations is
> much faster.
>
installed Mandriva 2009.0 on my 5-year-old computer with an AMD Athlon
XP 1900+ processor and 512MB of RAM a few days ago, updating from
Mandriva 2008.1. Not a new computer, but not a Pentium 1-era machine,
either. 2009 uses KDE 4 by default, and 2008 used 3.5. In my machine, I
find KDE 4 to be sluggish compared to 3.5, especially if I have more
than a couple of apps going at a time. 3.5 could handle several apps at
the same time with no noticeable reduction in speed - depending, of
course, on which apps they were.
KDE 4 may be able to do more stuff than 3.5, but as of now I'm not sure
it's stuff I want to do. So far, most of what I've seen is useless eye
candy. But, I do want to continue using KDE, and 3.5 probably won't be
supported much longer, so I've ordered enough RAM to bring this computer
up to the 2GB maximum it will handle. Fortunately, RAM prices have
dropped from the last time I looked. Maybe that will keep me going a
while longer.
I find it difficult, though, to ignore the nagging observation that many
Windows users were forced into hardware upgrades when XP and Vista each
came out. Sidney, or whoever he REALLY is, may have a point, after all.
TJ
Harold Stevens
[Snip...]
> whoever he REALLY is, may have a point, after all
Perhaps, in the sense that even blind squirrels can stumble across acorns.
--
Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
Really, it's (wyrd) at airmail, dotted with net. DO NOT SPAM IT.
I toss GoogleGroup posts from gitgo (http://improve-usenet.org).
wisdomkiller & pain
......
> Do you know how many times I've seen people purchase laptops...
>
> based on the *color* of it!
>
They will happily buy a new one fitting their new shoes color when the
fashion changes next year, and you get a nice lap back for almost nothing.
You may even spray it that color as well and resell it for much more :))
> Once in a while, when I offer up a free computer on Craig's list...
> someone will write back and ask me what color it is.
>
> No I do not bother to reply to people like that.
Add a fair fee for repainting. But then, the next thing these nuts ask for
is if it comes with vista ultimate ...
wisdomkiller & pain
> philo <ph...@privacy.net> wrote:
.....
>> I think that if a person who is now using Vista would get
>> their hands on a Linux machine running KDE... they'd probably
>> complain that it wasn't bloated enough!
>
Uhm .. maybe, but indeed it is much more configurable than the windows gui,
without having to dig in the registry and/or buy 3rd party tools.
Now, there are really useful programs based on/part of KDE ... which you
won't get with windows out of the box.
> Probably. The main thing about kde, besides the fact that it
> seperates the user from the OS, from understanding and control,
> is that it is not, and for that very reason, a truly functional
> interface.
>
Most users want the computer as a tool to do things without having to worry
about the underlying OS. Of course, there are users and there
are "wizards".
But then, why only bash KDE and not Gnome as well?
> That's the point: If you rely on it and believe you are running
> Linux instead of running kde, you will have to rely on the
> people who do know how to run Linux. Firstly, level one of
Yeah. That's intended. Some people may even want to earn a living based on
linux support or preparing preinstalled machines.
> 10 years ago the average Linux runner knew more about Linux
> than that "Mighty Wizard" at Technical Support.
>
You may be right, but the "average linux runner" base changed over that 10
years. It is hopefully broadening a bit, as well.
> If this trend continues, you can look forward to the day when
> you try to connect to your ISP and they reject the connection
> until you can prove that you have bought a license to run
> Linux.
>
That already should be the case for windows :)