Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:04:12 05/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 22, 2002 at 17:08:55, Christophe Theron wrote: >Vincent your post is excellent. > >I have been able to find in your message most of the points that annoyed me the >most when I tested Linux. > >The most important points that are really a shame are: > >* Lack of standard automount in the kernel. I guess there are compatibility >reasons for not implementing automount for CDs and floppies in the kernel, >because there are no hardware reasons. Standard PCs have the necessary media >insertion/ejection sensors. This is present. On my redhat 7.2 machine, I simply insert a CD and I can then poke around on it without mounting a thing. Floppies are the same... > >* case sensitivity in retrieving files names. What a bullshit! What purpose does >it serve? Can't find any. How many problems does it generate? Many. But here >again I do not see how this problem can be solved, as it is burnt deep into the >system. Storing file names exactly as they were typed is OK, not retrieving a >file because of case sensitivity is a major mistake. You could certainly write a brain-dead shell that could map all unix filenames to lower-case, and map all console input to lower-case, so that there is no more sensitivity in filenames. However, there are perfectly good reasons for uppercase and lowercase filenames being different. You can control which files show up first (or last) in a listing by using the right case. You can use case to indicate other things such as a working directory vs a backup directory. Both have the same name, but the case could be different. Do you not use case-sensitivity in your C programming? I hope so to make it more _readable_. I certainly do. > >And all the points below are valid. > >After trying it for some time I must admit that Linux deserves the 1% of users >it has. It is trying hard to get absolutely unusable by most people, and >succeeds quite well in this area. > >I regret it and hope that this trend will not continue, and that some people >will open eyes will give Linux a real chance. > > > > Christophe > > > > >On May 21, 2002 at 12:07:59, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On May 20, 2002 at 15:41:08, Guido Schimmels wrote: >> >>>On May 19, 2002 at 11:49:18, Christophe Theron wrote: >>> >>>>BTW I'm trying Linux too, but I can't get used to it. I thought it was small and >>>>elegant, but actually it is as bloated as Windows and quite slower. >>> >>>Try WindowMaker or XFCE (which I prefer) as a desktop environment. >>>You can boot in both of them with <30MB total memory usage, which >>>isn't too much nowadays. >>>Then try ROX-Filer as a file-manager and prefer gtk/gnome based apps. >>>Problem is, I admit, there is no real alternative to Star Office/OpenOffice >>>and Mozilla/Netscape/Galeon, which means you still won't get very far with >>>64MB, if you want to do professional text-processing and painless web-browsing. >>> >>>>And too hard to use. The guys who write programs for Linux only have the >>>>experienced users in mind. Fatal mistake. >>> >>>Maybe that's still true for too many open source projects, but >>>in general this is no longer true. Example: >>>GNOME 2 will add lots of support for disabled people. >>> >>>>Shit. I really hoped to get rid of Windows, but Linux is still not ready. >>> >>>Ok, Linux is not perfect in respect to ease of use, like MacOS(X), but not >>>much behind Windows I find. And some things are now even easier in Linux >>>than Windows. >>> >>>Real issues are: >>>1. The latest or exotic hardware will often not work with Linux - and that won't >>>change until Linux is mainstream. >>>2. Lack of apps in some fields >>>3. Proprietary data-formats, like btw. Acrobat Reader 5 for Linux and Solaris >>>has just been announced, one year after the Windows and Mac ports. Again, won't >>>change until Linux is mainstream. >>> >>>> Christophe >>> >>>I'd like to ask, what exactly you found so hard or didn't get working in Linux ? >> >>Ok a lot of things are still solved in a big nerd way in linux. >> >>Let's give some examples. >> >> >>I'm using linux since its first version, nowadays i boot it nearly >>every day. Recently i installed redhat 7.2. Compared to the early 90s >>it's working very well. I used to use linux in the early 90s only >>in textmode. Never got X to work in these days. >> >>Problems a normal user will have with linux: >> - soundcard doesn't install by default, not all >> soundcards are default in kernel. I happen to have a soundcard >> which by accident gets supported now, because it is an expensive >> soundcard. But most $10 to $20 soundcards do not get supported that >> easily. Then if it works the next problem is: HOW do you run your >> MP3s which are on the NTFS partition? >> - NTFS partitions do not get recognized. Someone who installs linux >> in 2002 is very likely to have more than 1 OS under linux. Default >> kernel of redhat doesn't have NTFS. Most kernels do not have NTFS >> support by default, which is pretty idiotic as it is the default >> partitioning format from win2000/XP and a very GOOD file system format >> which both Linux and windows should be able to use. Note that linux >> is doing a read only on NTFS if you compile it in the kernel. >> Compiling the kernel??????? Do you really think a normal user can >> compile a kernel? Though i happily compile kernels. Normal users can >> not. So default kernel MUST have all compatibility inside >> - getting files from and to a floppy drive. >> In windows you click on 'my computer' then on the floppy drive. In >> linux it is NOT so easy to transfer files from and to floppy >> - getting files from a CDrom. Default the cd drives aren't automounted. >> Note it is good the cddrives are installed. I remember a time that >> you had to compile in ISO9660 or whatever the protocol from normal >> cdroms. >> - network (interface) cards do not work. Especially the cheapest >> NICs do not work by default. In fact RH7.2 isn't recognizing my >> NIC. It's a cheap $12 card, which is produced in such quantities >> (zillions) that it is pathetic that it works in all OSes by default, >> except linux. Of course i know how to recompile the kernel and i know >> how to figure out which network card it is. I already did this before, >> but the average user?????????????????? How the HELL do they find out >> which network card they have? Answer: never. >> - Scanner. Could *anyone* tell me how to get to work my HP scanner under >> linux? I do not know it at all. I would appreciate if someone knew. >> So after nearly 10 years of experience with linux, i still don't know >> how to get a scanner to work! >> - capitals versus lower case. This is IMHO the biggest mistake in the >> unix world, which Bill didn't make. Linux sees a difference between >> Linux and linux. It is called linux, not Linux. Because linux sees >> a difference between lower case and capitals. So please spell it as >> linux. Not as Linux... >> - knowing 1000s of commands. I know several thousands of commands under >> linux, but i'm not a holy man. In fact i'm a poor idiot when we talk >> about linux, because i keep forgetting even how to compile the kernel, >> as i don't do it daily. Is it make xconfig; make dep; make modules; >> make; make install, or did i forget something or is the order not >> correct? >> - i regurarly rename files to other files and the 'mv' command AFAIK >> only can move 1 file at a time only. It's sick. Even DOS is better here! >> 'rename a?.* b?.*' works great there. Try this within 1 command >> in linux! >> - default prompt at all distributions sucks. To get technical: >> I want >> PS1="\$PWD/> " >> - yesterday when installing a program i got 4 errors which prevented it >> from getting installed: "missing blabla.so.4" >> Even as a freaking nerd i don't know how to find out which RPM is >> having this file. Yes, with some help i managed to list all files >> in my RPMs at the RH7.2 cdroms, but it simply wasn't there. So i >> need a file which is >> in some for me unknown RPM, but god knows how to find it. This program >> needs it though! >> - Now i talk about Redhat of course, but compared to redhat other >> distributions with exception perhaps of Debian (Suse doesn't count >> as you can't download that for free, i need to BUY it in a shop >> in order to get a legal working copy), they suck ass anyway, but >> there are major problems with the size it needs. >> When i install win2000 i wonder why it is so big, but Redhat7.2 >> default install even needs more from my harddisk and it even complains >> my swap size isn't big enough. >> >> If you have 512MB ram, already the swapsize gets a seperated partition >> which directly is thrown away and eats up 1 Gigabyte. Then another 2 >> gigabyte for install of redhat. That's 3 gigabyte together! >> >> That's pretty much for a free system from which i at most use a few >> command line commands. >> >> Of course i install X-windows too. Only idiots >> nowadays do not install it. That's like getting back to DOS! >> - easy installing applications. In windows you click on the application >> in your email box and DANG it installs, or 'install from location' >> when downloading it from homepage. DANG installed the program. >> >> Not in linux... ...difficult command line commands you need in order >> to install a program. >> >> If i get a new program on a cdrom all i want to do is put in the cdrom >> then it must autostart something which asks to install itself! >> >> Other ideas about how software must install itself for the average >> user is complete nonsense. The average user is still getting overestimated >> by current distribution makers, and we have to say it, they already >> DID a great job. Compared to the mess of installing packages and stuff >> yourself by difficult command line, what they did so far is arleady a >> good job, but it simply is in no way good enough yet for the average >> user... >> >>What the average linux-nerd is forgetting is that basically normal users >>buy software. If those can't work with the software, then forget commercial >>linux plans. >> >>Just a few points where average users will fall over... ...if the above >>points aren't adressed (and another few) then not a single normal sane >>user should get a try at linux. >> >>>Guido >>>e-mail: guido.schimmels@freenet.de
This page took 0.04 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.