Subject: Re: Linux laptops
From: Eric D. (liriodendron@mac.com)
Date: Wed Mar 13 2002 - 09:20:22 MST
on 6/3/02 14:54, Ferwerda Darren (app3dxf) at app3dxf@ups.com wrote:
> I understand your pain. It can be EXTREMELY frustrating. I stayed away
<snip>
> I know this is long, and wasting everyone's bandwith, but I try to give back
<more snip>
Thanks for the thoughtful response. It's long, but not a waste of my
bandwidth. What would've been nice though is a few paragraphs to make it
readable :)
PS I think a lot of the disillusionment some of us feel with Linux (YDL in
this case) is that the hype does not live up to the reality. Users (not
necessarily this group, but the ones that speak to the computer/online
media/are the media) make the claim Linux is ready to go head-to-head in the
realm of the Desktop user with Mac OS and Winblows.
I run a stock B&W G3/450 with modifications that are hardly worth mentioning
(64 + 128 MB Apple RAM + 128 + 256 MB non-Apple RAM, Apple ADB Ext. Kybd. II
+ ADB TurboMouse + USB Micro$oft Intellimouse).
Sound doesn't work on an install (kind of an important feature), the ability
to change video resolutions does not existent (aside from some command-line
magic (my solution is to re-install the OS and let the installer set the
resolution (less time consuming and aggravating than figuring out how in
@#$!!@ hell to use XConfigurator (I don't trust it not to screw up the
settings) ;)), and HFS+ support is either mostly broken or non-existent.
These are pretty _basic_ functions for which no simple solutions exists
(using man pages is Ok for programmers or hackers but not for people who
need to use their computer as a tool to augment real-world work).
It's a great system for stability but stability doesn't do much for me if I
can't use it (besides, I have OS X for that ;).
That said, I think Linux REALLY has the potential to compete with the
commercial OSes for the Desktop (excuse the capitalization) user/computer
with a bit of tweaking. I recently read an on-line article which claimed M$
Windows wouldn't be profitable at current prices when computer hardware
dropped below $300. Of course, functional used computers are under $300
(free if people simply want to get rid of them). I've started using a P/166
40 MB/2GB Win 95/Office 97/Explorer 5.5 system (was free) and it's MORE than
fast enough (can't really detect any visible difference in responsiveness
from a G4/800 OS X or PIII/900 XP Home Ed.) to run everything WELL and
without crashing (no three finger salutes YET (& I'm accessing a Novell 3.1
network)). I also presume an Intel-based Linux would run quite happily with
GNOME or KDE on a 40 MB RAM P-166 with a 2 GB HD.
Having IBM (they had a hand in developing OS/2 after all which was an OS
ahead of its time) and Sun delving into the fray may really prove to be the
catalyst that is needed to work on building an interface to make the guts
accessible to computer "illiterate" people (like Apple has done with BSD,
but without the proprietary interface). I suppose the one thing that might
not help the Linux interface is if IBM or Sun build their GUI from scratch,
thus making it proprietary rather than working on refining GNOME or KDE.
L8r, Eric.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Wed Mar 13 2002 - 09:34:54 MST