On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 01:56:12PM -0700, Jason S wrote:
> > Because I know many people who have tried to start with Slackware and
> > couldn't get over the speed bump. It takes a LOT of time to get used to
> > Linux if all you've used is point-and-click Windows. It used to be
> > easier for DOS people who had at least written a batch file before, but
> > that is no longer the case.
>
> Someone who is used to point-and-click windows and doesn't drop to the CLI
> or create their own scripts, probably will not like linux anyway.

Untrue. That's the line that the Winbots in comp.os.linux.advocacy use.
Linux has coverage for most of the top ticket items that users want to do:
Web Browse, E-mail, Office apps, Media, and Games (to a degree). And one can
function with these types of apps without ever writing a script or popping
up a shell.

>  For
> example, one of your comments is that most hardware vendors won't supply
> drivers as source code.  What is a point-and-click user going to do with a
> driver source package?

It's only tangentially for the end user. Having the source serves a few
purposes:

1) If it's broke, then someone other than the original author can fix it. I'm
not saying that's the end user's job, but clearly end users can benefit from
such fixes.

2) Coupled with this is that with the source, applications can upgrade when
the kernel or libs are upgraded. I have a couple of binaries compiled with
libX3 or somesuch that I wish I had the source for.

3) No danger of when the author or a company disappears that suddenly there's
no support for the product.

>
> I think my biggest problem with Red Hat and its cousins is that they scatter
> all the config information into hundreds of config files.  A simple change
> might involve changing 10 different files, and chances are half aren't even
> in the /etc directory.  There is a GUI config util for everything that will
> change all the right files for you, but then you're stuck using Red Hat's
> idea of a config tool instead of being able to use your favourite text
> editor or even write your own tool.

Agreed here. It forces a dependence on those tools.

>
> Slackware probably has about 50 config files with logical division, of which
> 10 are important to know right away.  It is daunting to a new users but once
> you know what you're doing, it is a lot simpler.  I think a new user would
> be more frustrated by everything being magic that's hidden from them in Red
> Hat so they don't have a clue what's going on.  That could just be my
> technical backround though, I like to know how whatever I'm using works.

Actually I don't think it's a big deal one way or the other. There's a
misconception that Linux users continually futz around with config files.
There's really nothing further from the truth. Personally I set it and forget
it. And the great thing is that once something is set, it remains stable.

Slack is also cool in that there are simple config tools (netconfig, pppconfig,
xorgconfig and the like) that will walk a user through the process. But
instead of forcing the user to use it, it's just a simple convenience.

>
> > I started using linux in 1995 with RedHat something-or-other for about 2
> > weeks. I decided to go to something else so I tried Debian, and landed
> > on Slackware a short time after.
>
> It seems like all the high-end users land on Slackware eventually :).  That
> could effect my perspective since I started with Slackware and whenever I
> tried something else it seemed a lot worse.

I'm warming to Debian. The apt system, like Gentoo's emerge, is a powerful
motivator. Slack's complete lack of package dependency management is sometimes
quite painful. Wanting to install something from source is a lot more dicey
when upon configure you find that you need 3 or 4 separate other packages
in order to do the job.

I've installed Slack 10 on my laptop. I found this time I was somewhat
annoyed in having to configure X then Knoppix/Debian set it up for you
automagically.

>
> > It wouldn't be a permanent home. Try SuSe instead then, I meant "try an
> > easy point-and-click one then if you feel like hacking try Debian or
> > Slackware"
>
> Then why specifically suggest a dead distro like Red Hat?  The recommended
> migration path from Red Hat is Fedora.  I do think SuSe is a better choice
> than Fedora.

Also add Knoppix/Debian to the list. Instant starting along with a really
easy permanent install path. Be aware that you'll probably need to download
the latest static copy of ntfsresize 1.9.2 from linux-ntfs.sf.net.
(direct link to htfsresize FAQ:

http://mlf.linux.rulez.org/mlf/ezaz/ntfsresize.html)

>
> > I stopped using Windows because I've
> > had the time to migrate to linux as I am a student. It takes a lot of
> > time to learn the whole system.
>
> I was a student when I started with linux.  It was a great choice at the
> time.  We used Solaris on the school computers, and Slackware seems to have
> based itself most closely on Solaris.  It was great being able to run all
> the same software on my home machine.  That was before I started using Linux
> as my main OS, and it gave me plenty of time to get the experience I needed
> to run Linux exclusively.  Around the time I graduated, the school was
> putting together its own distro with all the apps used in courses
> pre-installed.

Cool story. I actually had migrated away from Unix in the mid 80s and started
using DOS machines extensively. In 1993 I installed my first SLS (I was
professoring by that time). Never looked back.

>
> > The main problem with hardware support in Linux is that vendors won't
> > release drivers in source code form so they will build on any kernel.
> > They may only release it for 2 different versions in binary form for
> > RedHat. I only buy hardware that has respectable support for Linux. So
> > far I have been fine.
>
> I never said the problems were the fault of the Linux developers.  It is the
> fault of the hardware vendors, but does that really make a difference to the
> end users?  If I can't use my WiFi card with linux, does it really help me
> to know it's because no WiFi vendor releases linux drivers and the people
> who make linux are even more upset than I am that I can't use it?

Actually it does. It makes you much more picky about hardware. My first
question is "Is there a kernel driver for it?" If the answer is no, then I'm
not buying. And more importantly I inform the Windows users that I know not
to buy it either. PUNISH THOSE HARDWARE VENDORS!

>
> I love Linux.  It is by far the best server OS around.  It is just not
> suitable for the desktop where it will encounter more exotic hardware and
> have to deal with users who can't spend 20 hours trying to figure out how to
> install OpenOffice when they have a report due in 10 hours.

Knoppix dude! Knoppix. Has OO.o 1.1.1 and it's preinstalled. Nothing to set up.

>
> BTW, I haven't used X for years.  Have they found some decent fonts yet? :)

I believe that someone finally donated a collection of TrueType fonts to
the cause.

I can't function well without X anymore. But then again, why would I want to?

BAJ

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body