--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBY00000Date: 07/28/97 From: DJ BUSCH Time: 06:41pm \/To: MIKE SCHMIDT (Read 2 times) Subj: cde -=> Quoting Mike Schmidt to Dj Busch <=- MS> what i went through to get redhat installed was not 'tinkering'. i MS> spent many hours reading the docs and sent out plenty of letters to MS> get help. i spent at least the same amount of time working to get MS> debian and slackware installed and turned up -nothing-. Forgive me for sounding condescending. It really isn't my goal, but I'm not sure there is any other way to explain my thoughts on this matter. When I first installed Linux on my machine about 2 years ago, I went through my share of hair-pulling and tooth-gnashing. It comes with the territory. I also went through the same type of thing when I first installed Windows 95 and again the first time I installed OS/2. Whenever you switch platforms, there are adjustments to be made. The second time I installed Linux, I went with Debian. I had been a loyal RedHat user for over a year, but the newest version of RedHat came with an installation program that, for lack of a better term, sucked. Debian, OTOH, was a breeze to install (they say even a trained chicken could do it; all most people have to do is hit the Enter key repeatedly) and a pleasure to use. MS> once i got redhat installed i spent lots of time reading the docs, but MS> all too often, the docs i needed were not complete, or were far too MS> cryptic. i suppose that comes with the turf of freeware os's. First, I have to agree with you that most docs are rather cryptic and very hard to make any sense of. However, there is a huge difference between docs and man pages. Man pages are much easier to use, IMHO, and more descriptive when it comes to actually using the app. Second, I have to point out that Linux is not freeware, but rather a licensed product covered by the GPL (GNU Public License). This license gives each user the right to install and use Linux on as many machines as he/she sees fit, in addition to the right to modify the OS in any way that he/she may wish, as long as proper credit is given to the original developers in the event that the modified software is released. MS> so now i use win95 with the rest of america. i can play duke and I assume that, by saying "the rest of America", you mean that veryone else in the U.S. uses Windows 95. This is not only untrue, but also rather ridiculous. Windows 3.1x users still outnumber Windows 95 users by a wide margin, and when you add in users of OS/2, UNIX/Linux and DOS, Windows 95 is definately not the most widely used OS in town. This is, of course, not including Mac users, who would add another degree of dominance. MS> quake, dial the inet and bbss, print, -everything- with no trouble. MS> the linux/unix people need to get their act together or it's users MS> will remain a pitiful minority! I sincerely hope that you don't think that's the extent of most sers' expectation of their OS. Playing video games is great fun, but if that's all you want to do, spending $2000+ on a PC is foolish when a $200 video game machine will do just as well. As for printing, they all do it, so that's not a valid argument for or against any particular OS. As a side note, UNIX users have their act together very well. They use the most secure, stable, efficient OS going. UNIX was designed as a network OS with excellent security features. Also, Linux has the fastest growing user base of any OS in the world (or so I've heard once or twice). Can your beer do this? ;) Regards, DJ Busch reinvest@juno.com ... Whips & chains? Sorry, that's a hardware problem. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 --- Shotgun v1.38a * Origin: The SandCastle BBS * Atlantic Bch, FL 904-249-5509 (1:112/50) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBY00001Date: 07/25/97 From: KYLE HEARN Time: 07:15am \/To: MIKE SCHMIDT (Read 2 times) Subj: cde Mike Schmidt wrote in a message to All: MS> i used to run linux redhat. it took me two weeks to make it MS> install on my old pentium/60, since the cdrom was so hard to MS> find. slackware Would Not install at all, it would give MS> 'kernel panic' on the second install disk. debian also MS> refused to install. MS> once i got redhat installed, things didnt go too well. MS> xfree86 didnt like my vid card much. i couldnt get the sb MS> pro to work at all. the printer could not be found. dosemu MS> and other weird programs could not run. i managed to make MS> linux find my modem, and was able to use a lame MS> black-and-white comm program called seyon. i had three MS> other comm programs none of which worked. i could in no way MS> get an inet connection with the dialer included. xfree86 doesnt work very well under any os as far as i can tell. XAccelerated under bsdi installs pretty easily but its expensive. MS> i basically couldnt do crap. the only way i could have made MS> it work was to know c++, edit the Os code, and recompile the MS> whole thing. MS> these days i use aix at school, which i guess has the CDE. MS> i hear newer versions of linux are going to include it. MS> (the old xfree86 was a piece of junk.) if CDE is out, i may MS> get a copy, just to have something compatible with the MS> system at school. MS> -o. mike .o- I used to have a sparc 10 which I later installed CDE on, but I disliked it strongly (ok, its better than openwindows). --- * Origin: Roger Etheridge for ZEC (1:130/911.1008) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBY00002Date: 07/28/97 From: JOHN MEROTH Time: 12:08pm \/To: TIM SPALDING (Read 2 times) Subj: Buggy OS or Buggy apps? Hello Tim! Replying to a message of Tim Spalding to John Meroth: TS> John Meroth wrote in a message to Leon Kiriliuk: LK>> Ever heard of clicking on the files, in explorer and just LK>> moving them to the drive you want? JM>> Do it to a shortcut and see what happens. TS> Well, more to the point, do it to a file that a shortcut points to and TS> see what happens. The shortcut won't change, and will stop working. Thanks, that's what I was getting at. TTYL, John Meroth jmeroth@tbos2cla.com --- FleetStreet 1.19 NR * Origin: Tampa Bay OS/2 -- Clarion BBS (1:377/86) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBY00003Date: 07/28/97 From: JOHN MEROTH Time: 12:17pm \/To: TIM SPALDING (Read 2 times) Subj: OS/2 on a 386 Hello Tim! Replying to a message of Tim Spalding to Leon Kiriliuk: TS> Leon Kiriliuk wrote in a message to Jack Stein: JS>> HPFS. OS/2 ran great here for 4 years on a 486 with 8 megs. Speed LK>> With HPFS and PMShell!? TS> Matter of fact, OS/2 ran great on my system for nearly 4 years on a TS> 386 with 8 megs, at quite an acceptable speed. And yes, I was TS> running WPS as well. Same here! HPFS and a BBS node runniong as I was compiling DOS code. No doubt that I did have to get another 8 meg when I put up the second BBS node just to keep the swapping down to acceptable levels. That was back in my OS/2 2.0 days. LK>> Which makes me wounder how you can judge win95 and its LK>> applications if you can't even run them. TS> Many of the people here that are judging Win95 apps are doing so TS> because they HAVE run them -- on Win95 machines, no less. But you TS> can't rightfully criticize even the ones that don't run Win95 in some TS> fashion, because they are merely doing the same thing you are, to TS> wit, judging applications (for OS/2) that you can't run. JS>> Why is that? Don't tell because you compared them, tell me the JS>> technical reasons why WIN95 multi-tasks faster than OS/2? What is LK>> WIN95 has much faster disk access than OS/2 (just try using LK>> deltree on a directory with 10,000 files, and you'll see it right LK>> away). TS> Proving that you can't give a technical reason. Interesting that the TS> only disk access example you keep giving involves DELETING files. I TS> think you'd find that if you'd turned DELDIR back off, the files TS> WOULD delete much faster. Not a matter of Win95 being faster at disk TS> access than OS/2; more a matter of OS/2 doing more work in the TS> process of deleting those files. LK>> As well, WIN95 isn't limited with the single I/O queue, or LK>> whatever its called.. TS> Yet another Lemming-type argument. You've heard that OS/2 has a TS> single input queue, and that it can potentially cause problems, so TS> you assume you can just magically invoke that for ANY purpose you TS> choose. Guess what? OS/2's single input queue has nothing to do TS> with multi-tasking speed, so I guess you just blew that one, too. TS> Oh, and by the way, look out for that cliff ahead... JS>> about the FAT file system that let's you search for a file amongst JS>> 30,000 files in a file system faster than OS/2 will in a HPFS FS? LK>> Lets see, less RAM!? TS> You're joking, right? Or haven't you seen my messages telling how my TS> 8 meg OS/2 machine ran handily faster than a 12 meg Win95 machine? LK>> Or what about the fact that win95 uses the FAT directly with LK>> conjunction with a new DATA-BASE integrated over the FAT (32bit LK>> FAT, not to be confused with FAT32) which allows the long LK>> filenames, as long as quick lookup and finding of files. TS> Let's have a look at that. "Uses the FAT directly..." Meaningless. TS> "In conjunction with a new database..." So you've got two completely TS> different structures to access and maintain. You really ought to TS> think before charging into these things... Didn't it occur to you TS> that accessing two different structures (FAT and this database TS> thingy) on two different parts of the disk is going to be SLOWER than TS> HPFS, where the directory structure *IS* the database you refer to, TS> and where everything is kept in one place, in the center of the disk, TS> to minimize seek times? No, I guess it didn't. JS>> Why will WIN95 write to 10 files in 10 seperate applications JS>> faster than OS/2 will? LK>> No overhead as found with HPFS. TS> Indeed? And which overhead might that be? Read the above again, if TS> you need help. JS>> How come WIN95 will print faster than OS/2 while doing a laplink JS>> transfer, while doing a tape backup, and D/L'ing files from your JS>> host, and searching for recipies in a recipe app with 20,000 JS>> recipes in it? LK>> Less system resource requirements than OS/2, hence will run LK>> faster. Not only that, HD access is faster than under OS/2 (read LK>> above) hence the speed increases all accross the board. TS> Actually... I suggest you read above again, as you're flying without a TS> net, and falling fast. LK>> As for printing speed, give me a break. That has nothing to do LK>> with the OS.. it depends on the printer. TS> And where is the data coming from to get to the printer? A secret TS> transmitting station on Mars? NO, silly! It's coming from the TS> computer, and hence, the OS. And if you think an OS shouldn't have TS> any trouble keeping up, you're right. It shouldn't. That doesn't TS> change the many times I've seen systems running Win3.1 printing one TS> line every 5-10 seconds, or Jack's stories about the WinNT server at TS> his work, which despite vastly more hardware and less workload, still TS> prints more slowly than the Unix box it replaced. JS>> When you done with that, just tell me why I can't switch the focus JS>> to the background in a WIN95 config LK>> Easy.. YOU'RE USING A 486DX33 WITH 8MB OF RAM!!!! GET A REAL LK>> COMPUTER! TS> Uh... Leon? I've got bad news for you. Having a 486DX33 should not TS> affect whether or not a user can switch the focus away from a config TS> window, under Win95 or any other system. And apparently, Jack TS> doesn't have this problem with any other system than Win95. TS> And as far as getting a real computer... You might consider how much TS> the right OS can optimize that hardware. Case in point, a friend of TS> mine who used to use Photoshop under OS/2 Warp on his 486DX33 with TS> 8MB of RAM. Keep in mind, on a Windows system, Photoshop will not TTYL, John Meroth jmeroth@tbos2cla.com --- FleetStreet 1.19 NR * Origin: Tampa Bay OS/2 -- Clarion BBS (1:377/86) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBY00004Date: 07/18/97 From: MATUS KRAL Time: 11:13pm \/To: LEON KIRILIUK (Read 2 times) Subj: OS/2 Leon ... JM>> HPFS, like several other drivers has 16 bit code, but is written JM>> to run on a 32 bit platform and has quite a bit of 32 bit code. LK> The point remains that it is not 100% 32-bit! Your old remarks and win95 is pure 32-bit. ;))) Matus --- FMail/2 1.20 * Origin: Legalize Spiritual Discoveries (2:422/81) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBZ00000Date: 07/27/97 From: ROBERT WHITE Time: 12:28pm \/To: LEE ROBERTS (Read 2 times) Subj: To Linux or not to Linux, that's the Lee, In Lee Roberts's message to Robert White on <24 Jul 97>, Lee Roberts said: RW> RW>>> There no Software designed to be used for recreational / RW> RW>>> Home use RW>> RW>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ which is written exclusivley for RW>> OS/2. That's an exceptionally ignorant satement. I have dozens of RW>> programs on my system which were written for OS/2 and OS/2 *only* RW>> - there are no Windows versions of any flavor. Note that I'm not RW>> saying that Windows *equivalents* don't exist. Read the my RW>> statement CAREFULLY! if i could circle around it I would. LR> I read it very carefully, and now I'll rebut it with examples. LR> Here are some of the "recreational/home use" apps I use that are OS/2 LR> *only* -- ie, no Windows version exists: LR> Digital Music Player - multiformat audio player LR> MR2-ICE - email client LR> XFree86 - port of the UNIX XWindows system LR> Element-ary - weather tracking program LR> In-Joy - excellent internet dialer LR> IRCii - text-mode IRC client (UNIX based) LR> PMINews - excellent USENET reader (at *least* as good as Agent) LR> VModem - "virtual modem" server, used to run telnet nodes of my BBS LR> InterFTP - GUI FTP client. Full multithreading support LR> PMView - excellent graphic viewer/editor LR> Cron/2 - port of the UNIX cron util, with enhancements LR> Partition Magic (there is no Win-specific version -- it's merely the LR> DOS version with a kludged-on Win95-like interface) IC, and where prey tell do you go to purchase all this software? Certainly not you local Software Store.... LR> That's only the beginning. Want more? I could go on all day on this LR> topic. If you must... Regards, - SHoCK --- FMailX 1.22 * Origin: Terminal Shock; Node - 2; +61-2-9771-1182 (3:712/101) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBZ00001Date: 07/28/97 From: LEE ROBERTS Time: 11:13pm \/To: TIM SPALDING (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: i'm back!!!! Upon hearing what Lee Roberts said about i'm back!!!!, Tim Spalding became enraged, and said: LK> If surfing the net is the only thing you do, OS/2 shouldn even be LK> on your mind!!! TS> TS> LR> If surfing the web is all you do, you don't *have* a mind. TS> TS> Oh... Yeah... That explains so MUCH! Thanks, Lee! I think you've just fo TS> out Leon's secret. Heh... it really wasn't directed specifically at him, but I think the point was made. :) --- Launch Line 6.66 * Origin: The Launching Pad Phoenix, AZ (602)864-6610 (1:114/513) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBZ00002Date: 07/28/97 From: LEE ROBERTS Time: 11:15pm \/To: TIM SPALDING (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: OS'es [1/2] [1/2] Upon hearing what Lee Roberts said about OS'es [1/2] [1/2], Tim Spalding became enraged, and said: LK> how many great commercial games play over the internet under OS/2!?!? TS> TS> LR> Probably quite a few, now that Kali/2 is out. TS> TS> Oh? The last version I heard about was basically for DOS, optimized for th TS> OS/2 sockets. Is Kali OS/2 native now? I'm pretty sure that it was an OS/2 native version that I saw on TUCOWS. I didn't download it and check it out, so I can't be 100% positive. --- Launch Line 6.66 * Origin: The Launching Pad Phoenix, AZ (602)864-6610 (1:114/513) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBZ00003Date: 07/28/97 From: LEE ROBERTS Time: 11:19pm \/To: TIM SPALDING (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: To Linux or not to Linux, that's the23:19:5407/28/97 Upon hearing what Leon Kiriliuk said about To Linux or not to Linux, that's the Tim Spalding became enraged, and said: TS> When you say UNIX, you mean UNIX. It doesn't matter what you also mean. TS> X-Windows is a shell that runs over Unix; it doesn't change the behavior of TS> the operating system. This is unlike Windows 95, which is a shell that run TS> over MS-DOS 7. This proves that Microsoft has no clue how to construct a TS> multi-tasking OS. Multi-tasking belongs in the OS, not the shell. With TS> Win95, as with Win 3.x, if you don't run the shell, you don't multi-task; w TS> either Unix or OS/2, you can take away the GUI and still be left with a TS> multi-tasking system. As for WinNT (which by now you're thinking I've TS> conveniently forgotten about)... Has to be considered a grey area, because TS> you CAN'T boot it to a command line. Sure, the multi-tasking is in the Actually, I believe NT can be booted to a command line by hacking the egistry and changing the default shell from explorer.exe to cmd.exe. I don't recall exactly which reg. key it is, but I've heard of it being done. --- Launch Line 6.66 * Origin: The Launching Pad Phoenix, AZ (602)864-6610 (1:114/513) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: EBZ00004Date: 07/28/97 From: MARK BIRENBAUM Time: 06:49pm \/To: SHEPPARD GORDON (Read 2 times) Subj: Amiga OS > Col Griffiths-Oz Knight-Proudly a member of Team > *AMIGA*\// SG> Oh yeah, a "team" that costs nothing, and that anyone can claim SG> membership to. SG> How utterly impressive!!!! SG> You get what you pay for. ;-> I think I know a few Linuxers who are gonna linch you for that statement. Price and value of purchase are two very loosely related things. This is particularly true when it comes to operating environments, for two reasons. One, there is a massive diversity in people's needs. Every OS satisfies different needs. What may be a great OS for one person can be worthless to another, despite the fact the price tag on both is the same. The second factor is the rather screwed-up economics of operating systems due to the rather limited competitive scenerio. Any economy with a siginficantly limited number of suppliers will fail to follow the basic laws of free market system, which means the results will _not_ results will not be as simple as "you get what you pay for". * Nereid * The native OS/2 message editor. --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: The Foundation - (403) 436-1345 / 437-1617 - (1:342/620)