On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 15:45, Eli Billauer wrote: > Gilboa Davara wrote: > > >Here's a couple. > > > >A. Development tools and workplaces: > >Low adaptation gives MS power to dictate *bad* (non)standards. MS-Word > >is not the real problem here; MFC, DirectX, Visual Basic, C#, etc are! > >As developers we are forced to use non standard closed tools and > >libraries that can be changed without notice by Microsoft. > > > <snip> > > Agree, but not really relevant, is it? Developers are a small community, > which should indeed be exposed to Linux. As an Elec. Eng. I see several > tools running on Windows which were obviously developed under some UNIX > system. >
Umm... But that's a chicken and an egg situation. If developers (specifically) and most other computer geeks are exposed to MS products and none other, what we've witnessed with Captain (yeah right) Internet will return ten fold... FUD o'plenty. In the long run this may kill the Open Source movement. (Let alone Linux). > > > >B. Non standard shared Web-sites: > >At least half of the sites in Israel don't work right under Mozilla. > >(ynet, walla, etc) Why? cause they are using non-standard IE-only > >extensions. Christ, even the Linux forum in ynet cannot be read using > >Mozilla... I talked to the forum admin and nada... zilch. > > > You have a point there. This could be solved with Internet Explorer > under wine, though, as Shachar demonstrated partially at Haifux > yesterday. Yes, I would be happier too if it was all Mozilla, but if the > Explorer was available for Linux (ran as nobody, jailed with chroot ;), > would we care so much? ran as nobody, jailed with chroot under User-mode Linux, right? :-) > > >C. Windows only access to ISPs: > >Anyone who've were part of the cable modem tests will know what I mean. > >Some ISPs used l2tp instead of the "normal" pptp during the test. Small > >problem: there was no l2tp package back then. I talked to the ISP and > >there was no-one there that even knew what I the hell I was talking > >about! Luckily I found a l2tp source that I could adapt to my needs. > >Anyone here sees any sane ISP doing the same to Windows users? > > > The fact is that we already have one ISP which is Linux-aware: Actcom. > They may not be cheapest, but from my own experience with several ISPs, > when you work with an ISP for the masses, you can't expect much of the > services that you would like with or without Linux. For example, I > recall that Barak's mail relay server denied me to send mails unless the > sender was explicitly a Barak domain (this may have changed). Last time I checked... still there. I should add that at least NV (which I use @home and @work) has improved considerably in this respect. No longer must I hear the tech-support gasp or faint when I say "I'm using Linux!"... > > >And a personal one: > >D. Games!!! God dangit! I want to play HL2 under Linux! > > > Have you tried Wine? Wine is too early in its development cycle to run games. (Direct3D support is shaky at best) WineX is a nice option... but the performance hit is still a major problem. (And less important [at least for me] it's not free) BTW, while not important for most, if ever aim at killing Microsoft, multimedia and gaming support is crucial. If a 14 y/o kid can play games on Linux, by the time he's 30, he won't touch Windows with a 30ft pole. Gilboa > > Eli > > > > ================================================================= > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
