Novell Desktop Linux 10: getting closer to a toss up between Linux & Windows?

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 03:46:57 GMT, Robert Redelmeier
wrote:

MS-DOS/Windows has typically does things very differently: packages
are stored in their own directory, all together, like C:\LOTUS123 .
This is great for installs & removes, but is hard for the system
to share libs and even to find all pgm components sometimes.

To be honest, I've always felt this was a better way to do things
compared to the the Linux way or the Windows registry nowadays. Apart
from space saving (which isn't that major a thing nowadays), isn't it
better to have each programs keep their stuff to themselves to avoid
version conflicts, ability to use different versions of the same
prog/lib at the same time without clashes and ease of
installation/removal?

I would not say a GUI is useless. Au contraire -- how better to
do graphical things like drawing layout? The mouse cut'n'paste
is also useful (available for CLI via selection/gpm).

The real problem with a GUI is that it is a menuing system. Very
limited choice, and forced visual memory. Made more confusing by
"Personalized Menus". The cryptic icons are explained by Tooltips.
A more subtle problem is the GUI cannot do pipelines which is
were the real strength of the CLI comes from.

Definitely, there are things I'd rather do with a CLI, renaming a
whole directory of files being the first to mind. Just that I get the
impression that Jan thinks everybody should just use CLI and scrap
GUI. Hence the long point that GUI does have it's place and even he
uses it in some form.

It is a lot easier to click a box and retype or retick an option than
to retype a whole line after discovering you forgot to add a -L or
something. More so for folks who don't work very well with obscure
names and options abbrevations that don't make any sense. :P


--
A Lost Angel, fallen from heaven
Lost in dreams, Lost in aspirations,
Lost to the world, Lost to myself

On a sunny day (Tue, 14 Feb 2006 03:46:57 GMT) it happened Robert Redelmeier
wrote in
:

I would not say a GUI is useless. Au contraire -- how better to
do graphical things like drawing layout? The mouse cut'n'paste
is also useful (available for CLI via selection/gpm).

The real problem with a GUI is that it is a menuing system. Very
limited choice, and forced visual memory. Made more confusing by
"Personalized Menus". The cryptic icons are explained by Tooltips.
A more subtle problem is the GUI cannot do pipelines which is
were the real strength of the CLI comes from.

I think some of the confusion perhaps comes from not understanding Unix X windows.
When you are using a 'xterm' a text terminal in X windows, you are STILL
fully GUI capable.

And the 3 button mouse, 2 left clicks select a word, 3 a sentence, one middle
mouse click pastes at cursor.

Normally I do not run the linux console command line but always an xterm or rxvt.
And very intensively use the 9 virtual screens fvwm gives.
Here are screen shots from some of these, nice big, good readable (in 800x600).
ftp://panteltje.com/pub/d/
(I hope the ftp works for you, just have a new server up).
You will have to look at these files in a real picture viewer, the browser will
not likely be able to show any detail.
I cannot show the other 2 screens because one holds the weblog trace (would
disclose users) and the other the security cam.

Some ask why 800x600? Well you know European DVB (digital satellite TV) is
in 720x576 so fits nicely without being too small.

For HDTV you can simply change resolution in X with ctrl alt + or -

On a sunny day (Mon, 13 Feb 2006 21:10:36 -0500) it happened Keith
wrote in :

And you think that is "backup"? What about a fire in the building?
You are *that* dissatisfied with that job?

Jan Panteltje wrote in part:
I think some of the confusion perhaps comes from not
understanding Unix X windows. When you are using a 'xterm' a
text terminal in X windows, you are STILL fully GUI capable.

Yes, and I frequently see X screens just populated with
a series of xterms. Personally, I prefer using SVGATextMode
and running Linux virtual consoles at 160x73 chars.

And the 3 button mouse, 2 left clicks select a word, 3 a
sentence, one middle mouse click pastes at cursor.

Yes, and gpm does the cut'n'paste in CLI

ftp://panteltje.com/pub/d/ (I hope the ftp works for you,

Nope. Didn't work for me.

-- Robert

The little lost angel wrote in part:
To be honest, I've always felt this was a better way to do
things compared to the the Linux way or the Windows registry
nowadays. Apart from space saving (which isn't that major
a thing nowadays), isn't it better to have each programs
keep their stuff to themselves to avoid version conflicts,
ability to use different versions of the same prog/lib at the
same time without clashes and ease of installation/removal?

Yes, you have a point. A problem might come if you expect
programs to work together.

Definitely, there are things I'd rather do with a CLI, renaming
a whole directory of files being the first to mind.

Yes, this is an excellent example. Actually, renaming is slightly
more difficult under Unix because the shell does * expansion,
not the pgms.

Just that I get the impression that Jan thinks everybody
should just use CLI and scrap GUI. Hence the long point that
GUI does have it's place and even he uses it in some form.

I wouldn't assume that anyone is that closed minded.
Email is known to cause misunderstandings leading to flamewars:
http://www.wired.com/news/technology...?tw=wn_index_2

It is a lot easier to click a box and retype or retick an
option than to retype a whole line after discovering you
forgot to add a -L or something. More so for folks who don't
work very well with obscure names and options abbrevations
that don't make any sense. :P

Perhaps. But that is what command history fixes. Just up
arrow and re-edit the command line. There are other niceties
like command- and filename completion to save grief on typing
long names. `bash` is not COMMAND.COM!

-- Robert

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 03:46:57 GMT, Robert Redelmeier
wrote:


Personally, I find `locate` so useful that I even build and
maintain the database on my MS-Win2k box at work (along with
the rest of the commands). I have trouble remembering in what
sub-sub directory I stashed a file, and `grep target database`
is both fast and intuitive for me. Of course, I did invest some
time years ago learning `grep` and friends. I think it has paid
off well for me, but might not for more casual users.

Hmm, I have to say I've found grep et.al. umm, also easy to forget - I've
invested the "time" 3 or 4 times over many years with each new brush with
Unix *and* had to endure the (x)sh du jour and even had to mess with two
different flavors at the same time at one point... which I found extremely
frustrating.

Ah, but in this case you ARE using a WIMP graphical
interface, albeit with very primitive graphics. You have a
full screen Window, textual Icons, a Mouse and Pointer! See,
it does make sense ultimately to have some form of GUI for
various kind of work.

I would not say a GUI is useless. Au contraire -- how better to
do graphical things like drawing layout? The mouse cut'n'paste
is also useful (available for CLI via selection/gpm).

The real problem with a GUI is that it is a menuing system. Very
limited choice, and forced visual memory. Made more confusing by
"Personalized Menus". The cryptic icons are explained by Tooltips.
A more subtle problem is the GUI cannot do pipelines which is
were the real strength of the CLI comes from.

I've heard people describe Windows menuing interface as intuitive - what
utter tripe!... consistent *can* be its strength if programmers don't
wander too far. While I think we're all aware of the strengths of a CLI,
any suggestion of going without a GUI would be absurd - Jan's GUI avoidance
is err, perverted.:-)

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 13:50:47 +0000, Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Mon, 13 Feb 2006 21:10:36 -0500) it happened Keith
wrote in :

And you think that is "backup"? What about a fire in the building?
You are *that* dissatisfied with that job?

WTF are you on about now? Maybe you Europeons haven't invented fire yet?

--
Keith

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 15:02:24 GMT, Robert Redelmeier
wrote:

Perhaps. But that is what command history fixes. Just up
arrow and re-edit the command line. There are other niceties
like command- and filename completion to save grief on typing
long names. `bash` is not COMMAND.COM!

Hmm interesting! I didn't know the shells can do filename completion
nowadays! That might make things a lot easier. Every year or so, I
make one attempt at setting up a *nix box and it always end up as too
much of a tedium to use :P


--
A Lost Angel, fallen from heaven
Lost in dreams, Lost in aspirations,
Lost to the world, Lost to myself

NOT X Windows.

It is X Window (singular).

"Jan Panteltje" wrote in message
...

I think some of the confusion perhaps comes from not understanding Unix X
windows.
When you are using a 'xterm' a text terminal in X windows, you are STILL
fully GUI capable.

On a sunny day (Wed, 15 Feb 2006 04:06:10 GMT) it happened "Alexander
Grigoriev" wrote in
t:

NOT X Windows.

It is X Window (singular).
Is that so? Did not know... How about XFree? (what I run).