At 02:52 morn 9/5/02 -0600, JTD wrote:

the less informed said

as I was about the only one talking about X, and as I am one of the less informed anyway, let me take this up... '-)

1. X gui is bloated

More precisely, that X GUI suxx ;) - i.e. for the uninitiated, it is not (very) sophisticated. For those who dont read complete threads, Note I was talking about the GUI only. Not the underlying architecture. And further, considering only the *GUI* aspect - I have used X servers available from 96 onwards (svga, accelerated Mach64, XFree86), QNX, BeOS & M$ Windows 3.11/95/98/98SE/NT/2000/XP. The fastest I have used was X+fvwm2 (used to run on a 386 without a FPU and with only 8Mb of memory), and it was way, *WAY* better than win 3.11/95. The flashiest/eyecandy were X+gnome+enlightenment and XP. The smoothest/fast/crisp/stable I have used is the win98 SE GUI.

3. users want something that works

GNU/Linux works. In fact it works very well. Even X *works*. If some user wants something that does not work, I think he is ready for the straight jacket.

Seems that the issues were mixed and arguments against linux were not in context.

(it would have been better if you had quoted the contexts.)

1. X was designed with networking in mind. It is ideal for a thin client

environment and will outperform the windows gui (which in fact cannot operate as a thin client) by miles not to mention issues of maintainence and upgradation.

I completely agree.

2)total number of non i386 processors sold is higher by several orders of magnitude.

eh? if you are meaning Intel 80386 processors, you are probably right. But if you meant processors of the x86 family, I must say you are completely off the mark here. The *powerful & complex* machines you talk about have pitiful tiny numbers compared to the cheap & generic x86 processors. Also as of today, IMHO, if you consider pure computing power, the best of the x86 family must be the most powerful.

They run customised software which makes it possible for crap like windows to exist in the first place. (Power, railways, mining, communications, manufacturing, medical tecnology). 3) If u think that windows works ur idea of "works" needs corrective education (a stint at gulag microsoft might be in order). If u are an engineer please dont mention the two in the same breath.

Windows does work. If your idea of "works" is a huge complex system running huge complex custom software, you should buy a PC, maybe.

Unix (traditional or Linux) has almost no competition in the *huge complex* world. But isnt that completely besides the point?

4. Refer 2. One single contract in one of the above fields will provide

you enough work to last a life time. If u so much as mention windows in these circiles u would be thrown out pronto (presuming you managed to worm ur way in in the first place).

refer above.

But the above completely misses out on something very basic "what is good for u and ur business" U may be a business end user or a professional in the computer industry, the basics are the same.

[this is getting off topic, nothing to do with X - but maybe "Interesting topic" includes all :) ]

Lets talk only of a business providing software to another business. Basic principles are

1. reduce the cost of your input raw material (best if free)
2. deploy your manpower effeciently (debug your code instead of M$ code)
3. Focus
4. Reuse (possible in the above industries only if complete processor

cross compatability exists) So what would you do fatten microsoft and waste time finding uncorrectable bugs or use GNU/Linux

w-w-wh-h-ha-t ??!! context-where-what??

With the advent of the latest Open office suite, the last hurdle has vanished (a very small number of issues remain with some complex M$ documents).

Consider this, (if you can) : My father (a real person) is an cartography expert. He used to makes maps by hand in his younger days. Today he makes them with the aid of a computer. They have spent ~7 lakhs on a software called MapInfo. Runs on windows {grin}. He has minimal computer background. I had been trying to con him into installing GNU/Linux with X. But he asked me : - 1. Will my software run on Linux or is there a equivalent s/w on Linux? 2. Will my HPDeskjet blah blah printer run on Linux (print manager, et.al)? 3. Will I be able to use Linux with my current knowledge, as I have minimal time? 4. Will *I* be able to manage Linux as I am the most computer savvy person in my whole department? 5. We have about only 10 PC's, so we cannot afford an engeneer/sysadmin. 6. When we have spent 7 lakhs on MapInfo we did not mind spending 5-10Kz on Windowz. -- and most importantly -- 7. It works fine on windows, what advantage will I get on Linux ?

I think we were trying to discuss ways to promote Linux? But promote where ? Most of the developer open community already uses Linux. Most of the closed people too use Linux, if not professionally. But once we get out of the "software developer" domain how many do? If we want to make a foray into these domains where people are not worried about what technology they are using, but are worried with getting their *job* done, then we have to consider their expectations/requirements. Most of the non-software-developer community wants (intelligent) black boxes which help them be more efficient in what they do best. And if you[1] want GNU/Linux there, then imposing ones' idea of cool isnt about "choice" - the touted mantra.

[1] "you", because I have no such particularly burning desire. I love it and I would not mind if it remained the exclusive domain of geeks/nerds/developers/students/free-souls. The whispered truth of the matter is that if *all* the users are your own community then where will your chapati+bhaji come from?

So IMHO stop thinking about windows. It is irrelevant in 99% of microprocessors.

So IMHO, try to get out of the well. There are many wells all around. We should keep our mind open enough to swim in any of them whenever we choose & need. Closing an option or not seeing the enemy's sword is not very wise ...

rgds jtdsouza@softhome.net

sincerely, quasi