[techtalk] Desktop OS?

Mon Jun 4 14:59:50 EST 2001

I definitely have to agree with Caitlyn.  I quit using Windows years ago.
The only thing I miss are the fonts, but that's finally coming along.

However, I will say that Linux support for Apple hardware isn't near what
it is for Intel hardware.  And there is good reason for that, being that
Apple hardware is incredibly expensive for what you get, Apple has a
smaller market share, and Apple has marketed their hardware to people more
interested in creative development than technical development.

Most of what you are experiencing with your hardware doesn't exist anymore
on intel platform machines, including notebooks.

I have a dual G4 that I bought in January, and I finally gave up trying to
get Linux into a usable state on it because the support just wasn't ready.
I'm planning to try the newest release of Yellow Dog, but for the past 5
months I have had this incredibly expensive machine that I absolutely hate
because the OS is a piece of crap and I don't know enough about the
platform to develop on it myself.  So I wait until the people who do know
can get stuff working.

Linux itself is incredible.  If you have the opportunity to use Linux on
an intel based machine, you'll see the difference.  Apple's hardware looks
nice, and it runs well when you finally get enough ram in it, but running
anything but MacOS on it takes a lot of patience and work.

good luck.

--mandi

On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 Martin.Caitlyn at epamail.epa.gov wrote:

>
> Hi, Michelle, and everyone else,
>
> > I frankly have *not* liked it at all as an everyday tool, it's
> > been surprisingly hard to get simple things to work, and the fun
> > component is definitely hard to find. Part of this certainly is the
> > laptop itself - sound still doesn't work, of course the internal
> > modem is useless, and the internal NIC card, although I've gotten the
> > drivers, I can't get that to work either. That's part of the problem,
> > though - hardware compatibility.
>
> Actually, I find Linux hardware compatibility, especially with Red Hat, to
> be very, very good.  I have three different models of Toshiba laptops and
> *everything* works.  OK, I had to download some drivers and recompile the
> kernel to make the PCMCIA floppy work on the two Librettos I have, but even
> that wasn't hard with the tools and instructions Red Hat kindly provides.
> Version 2.2.17 and up of the kernel have complete Toshiba support, meaning
> I can control any hardware or BIOS function just as easily as I could if I
> ran Windows, and excellent utilities have been written to do just that.
>
> I know people who have had equally good experiences with IBM Thinkpads,
> Sony Vaios, and Dell Inspirons.  That isn't bad, is it?
>
> Also, your "of course the internal modem is useless" is *not* an of course.
> IBM has released drivers for their Winmodems, and there are other winmodem
> drivers as well.  I know the Lucent winmodem in my Mom's desktop (it came
> with it) *does* work, although I think it negatively affects her system
> performance.
>
> Does Linux work with everything in a Windows-oriented world?  Of course
> not, but it works with most things, and if someone does a little bit of
> smart shopping before they buy, or better yet, buys with Linux preloaded,
> there are a whole lot of options out there.
>
> > And some things (like burning CDs, and a few others) I
> > need to boot up OS 9 alone to get working. But I know that will
> > change (quickly) with time.
>
> It's no problem to burn CDs on my Linux box.  Anyone else???
>
> > I've also been reading a bit, and it seems there is this buzz around
> > about whether or not Linux will make it as a desktop OS - and that
> > the lack of good, solid apps (like an office suite) is limiting it's
> > adoption.
>
> The only area where Linux is still lacking apps is in the area of
> children's education software.  The certainly is no lack of quality office
> suites:  KOffice is really impressive, StarOffice isn't bad (if a bit
> slow), ApplixWare isn't bad either, and the WordPerfect 2000 Suite (the
> standard where I work) is tolerable, though WordPerfect 8 was certainly
> more stable.  The Gnome Office suite is in development, too, with AbiWord
> already quite usable, with Dia as an acceptable alternative to Visio, and
> with a first class spreadsheet in Gnumeric.  By my count that makes five
> office suites to choose from.  The only thing missing for some people is
> the "Microsoft" name on the front of the box, and the matching high price
> tag.
>
> > Linux is a no-brainer on the server side - but will it
> > survive as a desktop OS? I'm really having questions. If I, who
> > describe myself as a total geek, and feel really positive about Linux
> > am generally not happy with it as a desktop, what about people who
> > aren't as geeky? Is there hope?
>
> Linux passed the Mom test for me:  my non-technical Mom could use it and
> have no problems with it.  The thing is she did not have to install it.  I
> set up everything for her.  She hasn't even had to pop up a terminal
> window.  She lives in KDE, and runs her WordPerfect, her Netscape 6.01, and
> not much else.  She uses the character selector applet and the keyboard
> mapping applet, both of which come with KDE 2.  She isn't exactly a power
> user.  Still... it made her system faster and did away with hanging
> problems she had in Windows, so she's happy.
>
> > How many of you don't use Linux as
> > your sole everyday desktop OS?
>
> [Raises hand]  Me, at least at home.  At work I am 90% on an Irix box and
> 10% on Windows (for Lotus Notes and Remedy).
>
> Will Linux make it as a desktop OS?  Yes, if Microsoft gets too greedy and
> more companies switch over.  People use what they use at work, for the most
> part.  Also, it's going to have to get to the point where you can walk into
> CompUSA or even Best Buy and have a choice between a Windows or a Linux
> system.  Honestly, we're a long way from that yet.
>
> All the best,
> Caity
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Caitlyn M. Martin             martin.caitlyn at epa.gov
> Systems Analyst              (919) 541-4441
> Lockheed Martin
> (a contractor for the US EPA)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>                     Michelle Murrain
>                     <michelle at murrain.        To:     techtalk at linuxchix.org, issues at linuxchix.org
>                     net>                      cc:
>                     Sent by:                  Subject:     [techtalk] Desktop OS?
>                     techtalk-admin at lin
>                     uxchix.org
>
>
>                     06/04/01 11:09 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I don't want to start a flame war, but ask a serious question. This
> is not a troll! I promise.
>
> I've been running various strains of Linux on my laptop for about 6
> months (Tried RH, then spent several months using Linux-Mandrake, now
> I'm on Progeny Debian), and although I've *loved* it as a web
> application development environment (it's nice to have all of the
> development tools at my disposal - I don't have to be on line to
> code), I frankly have *not* liked it at all as an everyday tool, it's
> been surprisingly hard to get simple things to work, and the fun
> component is definitely hard to find. Part of this certainly is the
> laptop itself - sound still doesn't work, of course the internal
> modem is useless, and the internal NIC card, although I've gotten the
> drivers, I can't get that to work either. That's part of the problem,
> though - hardware compatibility.
>
> I've spent now about 3 months with MacOS X, which I've been working
> with some on the command line, and am working on getting most of what
> I'm interested in (PostgreSQL, apache, perl) compiled and working - I
> know that all of those things can work on OS X. And, of course
> everything works just fine. No, not everything is OS X native - most
> of my software I'm running in the blue box. It seems to run at the
> same speed, although starting up applications is a bit slower than it
> was before.  And some things (like burning CDs, and a few others) I
> need to boot up OS 9 alone to get working. But I know that will
> change (quickly) with time.
>
> OK, so I like GUI - I spent a lot of time working on Macs. I've come
> to like KDE quite a bit, actually.
>
> I've also been reading a bit, and it seems there is this buzz around
> about whether or not Linux will make it as a desktop OS - and that
> the lack of good, solid apps (like an office suite) is limiting it's
> adoption. Linux is a no-brainer on the server side - but will it
> survive as a desktop OS? I'm really having questions. If I, who
> describe myself as a total geek, and feel really positive about Linux
> am generally not happy with it as a desktop, what about people who
> aren't as geeky? Is there hope? How many of you don't use Linux as
> your sole everyday desktop OS?
>
> (I don't know whether this is better discussed on issues or techtalk,
> so I sent it to both)
>
> Michelle
> --
>
> _______________________________________________
> techtalk mailing list
> techtalk at linuxchix.org
> http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> techtalk mailing list
> techtalk at linuxchix.org
> http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
>