> > > Yes, as a server, Linux is successfully competing against > > > WinNT and others. I personally don't believe Linux is ready for > > > Joe Blow the average Win user, however. > > > > Depends on your definition of a Joe Blow user. > > The definition of Joe Blow user I'm using is a person who > doesn't care > about the software on his system. He only cares about getting his work > done and doesn't care about the software he uses to do this. This > person, more than likely, thinks MS stuff is best because 'their the > only game in town' and 'you can't go wrong with M$'. He doesn't know > about Linux or other OSs besides Win, because, since he got Win with the > machine, he thinks Win *is* the only OS that runs on his machine. This > person will flee screaming from a CLI.
Yep, but this kind of person is the easiest to make switch to Linux, once it has understood that there is something else. At first, when you said Joe Blow, I was thinking about someones like my one of my pair of grandparents. One his highly interested administering his locality and golden age reunions, and the other one wanted to do genealogy. They called me, and we discussed what they needed. Ended up with a powermac. > Were you you using slink at the time of the infamous 'locales' > problem? I can vaguely remember 2 other problems that plagued slink Yep, I have. I also faced the GTK+ thingie (but since I'm doing my finals right now, I haven't even corrected that one... just plain too lazy) and those other bigs things. Okay, I'm no Joe Blow user, and I can face a command line. (For example, don't event hink about my grandparents using command-line things) That means me to say one thing: You were right about the use of Hamm for the basic user. It *never* crashes (users of the frozen/unstable dists already solved bugs for ya, unless for EXOTIC hardware combination). > recently. This mailing list made fixing the problem relatively easy (I > got the solution to the problems from this list), but I was still forced > to spend a significant amount of time fixing these problems. > I think its very reasonable to skip 'unstable' all > together, and only > update against the latest 'frozen' or 'stable'. On the other hand, one > of the last problems occurred after slink went frozen. All I'm saying > is updating against 'unstable' will likely cause many people grief and > frustration. Once again depends. I am pretty new to Linux itself, but I got a good background of Win95 and DOS administration. So I installed Linux, and jumped in the early frozen dists to face troubles. I wanted to. But I agree, I can't think of a really good reason to update a whole system on an unstable branch. You're guaranteed to crahs the system at one point or another. (Or at least to have half of it stop working overnight) ---- Christian Lavoie [EMAIL PROTECTED] 947212
BEGIN:VCARD VERSION:2.1 N:Lavoie;Christian FN:Christian Lavoie NICKNAME:The Moose ORG:LogInnovation;Administration, Personnel et Production TEL;HOME;VOICE:(514) 746-7830 TEL;WORK;FAX:(514) 746-7521 ADR;HOME:;;5620 Louis-Hémon;Tracy;Québec;J3R 4Y3;Canada LABEL;HOME;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:5620 Louis-H=E9mon=0D=0ATracy, Qu=E9bec J3R 4Y3=0D=0ACanada BDAY:19810807 EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] REV:19980709T012239Z END:VCARD
