Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 13:26:58 10/24/03
Go up one level in this thread
hello Christophe, as a big linux expert, and me a very poor amateur there, i have next problem. my monitor broke down. 19'' IIYAMA (saw some postings from Bob here and while laughing for them my head danged against the monitor). under linux i had running 1280x1024x100Hz vertical. my temporary replacement monitor cannot handle this frequency and tomorrow (so in 10 hours) i want to play The King under linux and after that against Tiger. In windows it is very easy. i bootted and pressed while booting f8. then i used 'boot VGA mode' and then i set there a new resolution, rebooted and it booted fine. In linux i have no clue what to do. it automatically starts X here of course. On October 24, 2003 at 13:36:06, Christophe Theron wrote: >On October 24, 2003 at 10:27:16, Anthony Cozzie wrote: > >>On October 24, 2003 at 03:26:00, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On October 23, 2003 at 19:42:59, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On October 23, 2003 at 05:55:12, Daniel Clausen wrote: >>>> >>>>i've tested so many toolkits and environments and really >>>>very *little* even *works* both in linux and windows. >>>> >>>>when something works great for linux and also works for windows, then usually >>>>that allows, to say very kindly, at most year 80s software to be produced for >>>>windows. >>>> >>>>This where we live 2003. You can't sell something years 80 now. Not even to a >>>>big bank organisation who works currently years 70... >>>> >>>>then possible sales under linux. >>>> >>>>Yes linux is great, but selling something under it???? >>>> >>>>It's simply NAIVE to guess that porting an application to *nix will sell some. >>>>All what happens is that your helpdesk will get flooded for 99% by questions >>>>about linux and how to install it and why it doesn't work and what they have to >>>>type. >>>> >>>>Even experienced linux users when i ship them a default diep version, they >>>>simply do *not* get diep to work without extensive instructions. >>>> >>>>The same users *do* get diep to work under windows. >>>> >>>>Why? >>>> >>>>Because everything runs there simply. >>>> >>>>coming weekend i plan to play diep under linux at the dutch open championship, >>>>but saying that linux is a commercial succes. No way. It's for nerds and very >>>>experienced users only at the moment. >>>> >>>>That's very sad. >>>> >>>>All my hope is pointed towards the Japanese/chinese/korean government who are >>>>creating a new OS that should go compete against microsoft. >>>> >>>>Linux has come a long end, but to get commercially interesting to use for mass >>>>market products, it has a LONG way to go. >>>> >>>>At the moment it's only cool for companies who have system administrators and >>>>who want to save out for simple database stuff and online stuff a lot of money >>>>by using a linux platform + MySQL, to give a popular example. >>> >>> >>> >>>What I see is that I have a very capable operating system packed with loads of >>>software that comes free, works, and replaces almost everything I was using >>>under Windows. >>> >>>It is not much harder to administrate Linux than to administrate Windows on the >>>desktop. Many Windows users are anyway absolutely unable to administrate their >>>desktop computer. >>> >>>Those who are would not find much more difficult to administrate a Linux >>>desktop. >>> >>>In the end the Linux user's experience is very similar to the Windows user's >>>experience. I have been using Linux for a year now and when I work I completely >>>forget that I'm using Linux and not Windows. >>> >>>I just work on my stuff, the system is stable and does not crash, so I don't >>>even notice that I'm using that scaring geeky stuff that Linux is supposed to >>>be. >>> >>>I think that's an important message to pass: Linux looks and feels like Windows. >>>People that just use their PC for email, Internet surfing, word processing, >>>spreadsheet and so on would not notice much difference. Those who do more and >>>want to install programs and tune their system would have to learn a few tricks, >>>but who could do that under Windows without first learning how to do it anyway? >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >>IMO, there are several big differences between Windows and Linux: >> >>1. Most people learn to use a computer on Windows; the Windows GUI is what they >>are used to. > > > >The Linux GUI I have in front of me at this time looks exactly like Windows. > >Somebody used to the Windows GUI will simply feel at home in front of a Linux >PC. > >I could even make it look EXACTLY like Windows. > > > > >>2. Linux apps don't present a uniform look/feel. You can run any of 30 window >>managers and 15 GUI toolkits. Cdbakeoven looks vastly different than gaim which >>looks different than openoffice etc. > > > >That's true, but that's getting better. > >And it is not worse to the point that using those apps is a pain. > >It is not. The difference between apps will be for example that buttons will >look slightly different. > >It will not stop you from using the application. > >And anyway, many Windows programs have a different look and feel anyway. For >example I have installed a CD-burner management program on my mother's Windows >box that followed none of the Windows GUI guidelines. There was no window frame, >buttons were pictures, combo boxes looked weird... > > > > > > >>3. Microsoft spends billions in usability testing. Linux geeks are much more >>likely to do "cool stuff" than write documentation or worry about >>userfriendliness. The Linux program will contain awesome configurability and >>run in 241kb of ram, while using 2.3% of your CPU - if you spend 5 hours reading >>newsgroups. The MS program will just work. > > > >My experience is that Linux program also "just work". > >They might be a little bit more difficult to install sometimes, that's right. >But not that hard. For example, in order to install the latest Mozilla I had to >install 5 packages instead of one. But installing each package was easy. And the >documentation told me to install them all, one after the other. > >So I agree that it is not really state-of-the-art in term of user friendly, but >you do not have to be a geek either. > >I would not describe myself as a Linux geek. > > > > >>Linux has made a *lot* of strides in usability. When I first installed linux 4 >>years ago, I had to hand-edit my XF86Config file. There was no Mplayer or XMMS >>or whatnot. In a year or two, you might be right. But I think you are vastly >>overestimating the computer expertise most people possess. >> >>anthony > > > >I know most people do not know how to administrate their system. > >So they have to ask expert friends. > >Most people do not know how to install Windows programs and will have it done by >somebody else. > >If I had installed Linux on my mother's PC, she could use it every day without >even noticing it's Linux. > >I have not installed Linux on her PC because we are several thousands miles >apart. So if there is a problem on her machine I could not fix it myself, and as >there are at this time more people able to fix Windows than people able to fix >Linux, I have decided that it was safer for her to continue with Windows. > >So the problem is not that Linux is more difficult to use. It is not. > >It is not that it is harder to administrate. It is indeed a little bit harder to >administrate but not really a problem for somebody who can administrate a >Windows system. > >The problem is lack of availability of trained technicians. > >It is a problem, but it will get better with time. And I would not say it is a >problem related to the quality of the product. > > > > >>P.S. When is CT for linux coming out? > > > >Some day... I cannot give you a release date because it is not my highest >priority, so other projects are advancing faster. > > > > > Christophe
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.