On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 23:17, John wrote:
> Yes, you're making a BIG assumption. And you're very wrong. In fact,
> and coincidentally, I've fighting with winmodem issues on another
> distro recently,
Distro choice should make _0_ difference when it comes to winmodems.
All Linux distributions have the same driver compatibility potential.
So the only difference is the installer.
Unless you are trying to install a binary kernel-specific driver.
Then that's going to be a much larger issue.
> and since I happen to have a Xandros Deluxe V. 2 laying around, I was
> thinking of buying the upgrade.
Why not just use it instead?
> I generally have extreme contempt for Corel, for their long history of
> sputtering starts and failures in so many different markets.
After they bought WordPerfect, Microsoft cut them off since they were
now a competitor. That drove Corel to Linux, but before they could be
profitable with it. They were optimistic. I would have _not_ gone
Linux, but Microsoft put them in a pickle (which they later bailed them
out of).
So they realized this and got out, and were already on the way out
before the MS deal. In fact, I'm sure the MS deal had everything to do
with MS keeping Corel from suing them. But Corel _did_ do a _lot_ for
WINE -- especially the all-important WINELIB porting kit that has allows
a _lot_ of applications to be ported to Linux. And I will always be
grateful for that work, regardless of the demonizations I hear (I'm not
thinking of you when I say that, but at least one other person).
I don't look back. I just look at what is going on now. Corel recently
released an update to see how many people were interested in a new set
of their Commerceware (closed standard, closed source) products for
Linux. Based on those numbers, Corel is looking to return to Linux in
2-3 years, but believes there is not enough interest as of now.
In a nutshell, of the ~20M current Corel WordPerfect/suite, many are
still Novell shops -- medicine, law and smaller municipalities. As they
upgrade their servers to Novell NLS/NetWare 7+ (a native Linux-based
version), they will look to new desktops. Maybe not the immediate next
round of desktop upgrades, but those in the 2006+ space will be looking
seriously at Linux.
It's all about viability. Corel has some very viable Commerceware
products, but the installed Linux base as of spring 2004 is still not
enough for them.
> But many months back, I thought I'd give their Linux a try. After all, they
> did spin it off (to try to isolate it from the Corel curse, I
> imagine). I did NOT have a good installation experience, and although
> their tech support was very available, they weren't successful.
Corel really wasn't in the game long enough. Every new distribution
typically takes several revisions. Xandros Desktop 2 was probably the
first, best release in the entire lineage.
> However, I better say no more, because in your previous discussions it
> was never made clear exactly how much experience would make one
> qualified to speak out about a distro.
If you've used a recent (like within 1 revision back) for 20 hours, I'd
say you're quite qualified. That's all it takes. A little time and
effort. Although anyone _looking_ for a pre-disposed excuse to dismiss
something will find it.
Don't try to demonize my rationale. As I said before, "everyone's got
an opinion on Fedora." I'm sure if SuSE was dominate, all of these
people would be all over SuSE (there's far more to pick apart there than
Red Hat -- _especially_ before the Novell purchase). And those who have
_not_ worked with a product, or anything within at least the last major
version (let alone 2-3 back) will spew all sorts of technical
falsehoods.
There is nothing more frustrating for an engineer team than someone who
consistently "doesn't do their homework before contributing." We all
have something to contribute, but try to base it on first-hand
experience, because it really helps. A major key to this is sticking to
technology and not brand names. Because technologies overlap
brand-names.
Heck, to given an example taking Linux entirely out of the loop, a
Novell advocate on another list stated that Microsoft "stole"
ActiveDirectory from Novell NDS/eDirectory. By breaking down the
technology I was able to show otherwise -- just by looking at the 100%
technological implementation. [ Heck, Microsoft "violated" some of its
own, contractual agreements with MIT on Kerberos for around 2 years. ]
> For example, yes, I did install Xandros--even tried a couple of different
> machines. But, no, I didn't use the system extensively.
My main thing is that people use apps, not OSes. But people tend to
evaluate Linux almost entirely on the installer, or the OS without the
apps -- or by attempting to run Windows applications "emulated." That's
not Linux at all.
In fact, I would consider myself professionally negligent in promoting
that someone run a majority of Windows applications on Linux -- be it
through emulation or, worse yet, using something sloppy like a remote
framebuffer (RFB**) approach (e.g., VNC). It's best to always run the
OS that runs the majority of your apps, and emulate/virtualize/remote
the few that run on the other.
Because Linux will _never_ be a better Windows than Windows for Windows
applications. Although some emulation (which is not just Linux)
sometimes allows you to run older Windows apps better than newer
Windows (which is another discussion).
[ ** BTW, don't confuse remote framebuffer (e.g., VNC, pcAnywhere,
etc...) with remote meta-display (e.g., ICA/RDP, X11, etc...). The
latter is very useful, although you should still run the "host" desktop
OS that runs the majority of your apps. This is just plain and common
logic for the most productive experience. ]
> Also, it was quite a while ago, so I don't know how much I
> remember.... Nope, I don't dare say more.
Dude, if you want to be argumentative, go ahead.
If you want to base the fact that I asked someone who has _never_ even
used Fedora, and only Red Hat Linux which would be 2 major versions (3-5
revisions) back to stop commenting on Fedora because he was getting his
facts _repeatedly_ incorrect as your argument, then that's your loss.
Try to be respective of _why_ I asked someone not comment. Not that one
has no right to comment because they haven't used an exact version, or
not used it to the same level of anyone else. I typically do _not_ make
a "big hissy" about it until, again, someone repeatedly makes
assumptions on the _technology_ implemented that is wholly incorrect.
But keep being argumentative if that's what you would like. We'll get
no where fast, and I know some people love to push my buttons just to
see how far I'll go.
-- Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith@ieee.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ Beware of advocates who justify their preference not in terms of what they like about their "choice," but what they did not like about another option. Such advocacy is more hurtful than helpful.----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 17:24:35 EDT