Bad Mojo wrote:
>
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2000, Caitlyn Martin wrote:
> > First, I disagree 100%. To me, taking the monopoly (and the power it inevitably
> > brings) from Microsoft is important. I really would like to take the control of
> > information out of the commercial arena as much as possible so that it can
> > benefit the widest number of people. Mass adoption of Linux is one step on that
> > path.
>
> If you use Linux as a sword to defeat an enemy, when the enemy is slain,
> your sword will be covered in blood. That's all I'll say about that.
To me, mass adoption of linux is a secondary effect. The focus should
be on creating a kernel that is feature rich and free (which linux may
or may not be, depended on what features you want - scalable SMP,
JournalingFS, extensive device support) And applications that run on
linux that are also feature rich and free. The massive increase in
linux users has been due to the fact that linux and the applications
shipped with it on any decent distro, are now a very feature rich
alternative to other systems.. whether it is a unix server or a desktop
OS, linux can be there.
Advocacy has certainly a part, but I think it pales in comparison to the
fact that linux and the applications themselves are becoming more
usable, and they are free and open.
This model is inherently more powerfull than anything microsoft or the
others can put out, and as long as there continues to be open source
development I dont think it will be an issue. Microsoft has certainly
given many headaches with their proprietary standards and such, but this
is already becoming less and less of an issue.
> > Oh, and IMHO, Caldera OpenLinux is easy to install and use. Please remember,
> > most end users couldn't install Windows '9x, Windows NT, or Windows 2000
> > either. The KDE interface is no harder to learn and use than the Windows
> > interface. The only reason people think Linux is difficult is because nobody
> > shows them otherwise. You seem to be happy to let that ignorance be. I am not.
>
> If I was mentioning a technical issue, I didn't intend to. I am speaking
> more about the way Linux is seen when it comes to RedHat vs SuSE vs
> Slackware, etc. That alone is enough to start turning NT sysadmins away
> from trying to use Linux.
A distro is a distro, just pick one. Do some research and choose one
adapted to your particular need. If these admins actually resist linux
solely for the fact that there are multiple compliations of the kernel
and software, then they are either ignorant or masking another issue.
This would be equivalent to saying 'im not going to use version control
because there are 5 different software packages out there for it' it
doesnt make sense.
JMHO
************
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
