OT: OS/2, Linux and Windows (was Re: TZ)

[Trevor Smith]

On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 14:23:50 -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:

>Quite frankly I find "apt-get update ; apt-get dist-upgrade" much more
>friendly than the service packs.  "apt-get install" is much nicer than trying

Fair enough. I think you're out to lunch with your overall point that
Linux is more user-friendly than OS/2, but you're right on this one
point: OS/2's FixPaks are *atrociously* unfriendly. Badly thought out
from an end-user perspective. But, they weren't designed for
end-users, so I guess that explains it.

>    GUI != user friendly.  CLI != user-unfriendly.  Simply put I find "cat
>mainlog.1.gz | gunzip | eximstats | less" to be more friendly than having to
>use 3-4 GUI tools to do the same job.  I also find the idea of controlling

Steve, come on now, let's all use the same language here. I'm sure
you will concede that the COMMON usage of the term "user friendly",
when applied to modern computers, is "easier for a non-technical
person to use". What you are referring to is probably more properly
referred to as "more efficient" or "more powerful" and you may be
right, Linux may be both those things, when compared to OS/2.

And, for the non-technical person, I suggest that GUI *does* = user
friendly and CLI *does* = user-unfriendly.

>    To be blunt, stop talking out your ass.  The /only/ thing I have compiled
>under Linux in the past *two years* has been the kernel.  Something you cannot
>do with either Windows or OS/2 but I really wish you could.  Unlike you, I
>/KNOW/ my kernel isn't loading anything that isn't required.  I /KNOW/ exactly
>how much memory it is taking up.  I pared it down to exactly what I needed.

Hence the need for an open-source OS/2 clone. :-)

>IBM has done its best to kill OS/2, it has been a dead platform for years.

I think you're probably right there (at least with how I interpret
your use of the word "dead"). Again, that's why an open-source OS/2
clone would be nice. Wouldn't it be nicer to have an open-source OS/2
*and* an open-source Linux around?

>The only OS/2 users that remain are of the same mindset as the people who
>cling to their aging Amigas and state emphatically to one another that it
>outperforms the P2's of today, it was that advanced.  IE, only the blind
>fanatics without a shred of factual evidence and only a lot of hype.

Wow, talk about the pot and the kettle. That last paragraph sounds
like a pretty extreme denunciation to me. I think what you might have
meant to say is that *many* remaining OS/2 users might fit that
description.

Personally, I still use OS/2 the majority of the time and I don't
have the mindset you describe. I realize there are different
alternatives for different situations. I use Windows98 occasionally
to play games. I use Linux occasionally when I get horny for techno
immersion. But mainly I use OS/2 (about 90% of the time) because it
does the basics well, and because I prefer the interface.


-- 
 Trevor Smith          |          trevor@haligonian.com
 PGP public key available at: www.haligonian.com/trevor

PGP Public Key Fingerprint= A68C C4EC C163 5C0A 6CFA  671F 05D4 0B30 318B AFD6