Linux: lacks attention to detail - Linux

This is a discussion on Linux: lacks attention to detail - Linux ; "Downloaded Freespire but won't boot. BusyBox message and /bin/sh: can't access TTY; Job control turned off ??????????????????????? Also in Muppy. Some sub menus are in German. Did I mention attention to detail somewhere?" http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtop...5e5c61d9daf887...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Linux: lacks attention to detail

  1. Linux: lacks attention to detail

    "Downloaded Freespire but won't boot. BusyBox message and
    /bin/sh: can't access TTY; Job control turned off ???????????????????????
    Also in Muppy. Some sub menus are in German. Did I mention attention to
    detail somewhere?"

    http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtop...5e5c61d9daf887



  2. Re: Linux: lacks attention to detail

    On Wed, 7 May 2008 08:50:09 -0400, DFS wrote:

    > "Downloaded Freespire but won't boot. BusyBox message and
    > /bin/sh: can't access TTY; Job control turned off ???????????????????????
    > Also in Muppy. Some sub menus are in German. Did I mention attention to
    > detail somewhere?"
    >
    > http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtop...5e5c61d9daf887


    That's the problem with Linux, no testing, no attention to the little
    things, a **** help system and so forth.

    You can bet it has 10 different editors and 5 different sets of development
    tools.

    Oh well, at least the end user has all of the tools, in triplicate, to fix
    Linux, should he have nothing better to do.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  3. Re: Linux: lacks attention to detail

    Moshe Goldfarb writes:

    > On Wed, 7 May 2008 08:50:09 -0400, DFS wrote:
    >
    >> "Downloaded Freespire but won't boot. BusyBox message and
    >> /bin/sh: can't access TTY; Job control turned off ???????????????????????
    >> Also in Muppy. Some sub menus are in German. Did I mention attention to
    >> detail somewhere?"
    >>
    >> http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtop...5e5c61d9daf887

    >
    > That's the problem with Linux, no testing, no attention to the little
    > things, a **** help system and so forth.


    Sometimes I have to wonder just how many people really USE some of the
    distros. Almost *every* time I tried a less than "big" distro I had to
    bin it real quick. Why? Simple - almost nothing outside of the default
    install worked. When I raised them it was "oh, thanks for letting me
    know" and then nothing getting done. It would appear that the distro
    makers needs are all that is catered for.

    >
    > You can bet it has 10 different editors and 5 different sets of development
    > tools.
    >
    > Oh well, at least the end user has all of the tools, in triplicate, to fix
    > Linux, should he have nothing better to do.


  4. Re: Linux: lacks attention to detail

    On Wed, 07 May 2008 17:35:32 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb writes:
    >
    >> On Wed, 7 May 2008 08:50:09 -0400, DFS wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Downloaded Freespire but won't boot. BusyBox message and
    >>> /bin/sh: can't access TTY; Job control turned off ???????????????????????
    >>> Also in Muppy. Some sub menus are in German. Did I mention attention to
    >>> detail somewhere?"
    >>>
    >>> http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtop...5e5c61d9daf887

    >>
    >> That's the problem with Linux, no testing, no attention to the little
    >> things, a **** help system and so forth.

    >
    > Sometimes I have to wonder just how many people really USE some of the
    > distros. Almost *every* time I tried a less than "big" distro I had to
    > bin it real quick. Why? Simple - almost nothing outside of the default
    > install worked. When I raised them it was "oh, thanks for letting me
    > know" and then nothing getting done. It would appear that the distro
    > makers needs are all that is catered for.


    Linux gets TRIED quite a bit which is evidenced by the large number of
    downloads that many of the sites report.
    Linux is not USED much on the desktop because these same people tend to
    dump Linux very quickly because it doesn't work as well for them as Windows
    does.

    >>
    >> You can bet it has 10 different editors and 5 different sets of development
    >> tools.
    >>
    >> Oh well, at least the end user has all of the tools, in triplicate, to fix
    >> Linux, should he have nothing better to do.



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  5. Re: Linux: lacks attention to detail

    Moshe Goldfarb is flatfish (in real life Gary Stewart)

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html

    Traits:

    * Nym shifting (see below)
    * Self confessed thief and proud of it
    * Homophobic
    * Racist
    * Habitual liar
    * Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related newsgroups
    * Frequently cross posts articles originally not posted to COLA

  6. Re: Linux: lacks attention to detail

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb

    wrote
    on Fri, 9 May 2008 11:20:50 -0400
    :
    > On Wed, 07 May 2008 17:35:32 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb writes:
    >>
    >>> On Wed, 7 May 2008 08:50:09 -0400, DFS wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "Downloaded Freespire but won't boot. BusyBox message and
    >>>> /bin/sh: can't access TTY; Job control turned off ???????????????????????
    >>>> Also in Muppy. Some sub menus are in German. Did I mention attention to
    >>>> detail somewhere?"


    No doubt /dev/tty, /dev/console, and/or /dev/ttyN is
    missing in the boot image. There is, however, a bigger
    problem; it probably either can't find a driver in the
    kernel needed to access the hard drive, or the root was
    misspecified.

    >>>>
    >>>> http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtop...5e5c61d9daf887
    >>>
    >>> That's the problem with Linux, no testing, no attention to the little
    >>> things, a **** help system and so forth.

    >>
    >> Sometimes I have to wonder just how many people really USE some of the
    >> distros. Almost *every* time I tried a less than "big" distro I had to
    >> bin it real quick. Why? Simple - almost nothing outside of the default
    >> install worked. When I raised them it was "oh, thanks for letting me
    >> know" and then nothing getting done. It would appear that the distro
    >> makers needs are all that is catered for.

    >
    > Linux gets TRIED quite a bit which is evidenced by the large number of
    > downloads that many of the sites report.


    An interesting and mostly correct observation. How can
    we tell the difference between:

    [1] WinXP preinstall -> Linux
    [2] WinXP preinstall -> Linux -> back to WinXP
    [3] WinXP preinstall -> Vista -> Linux
    [4] WinXP preinstall -> Vista -> Linux -> back to WinXP
    [5] WinXP preinstall -> Vista -> Linux -> back to Vista
    [6] Vista preinstall -> WinXP
    [7] Vista preinstall -> WinXP -> Linux
    [8] Vista preinstall -> Linux -> WinXP
    [9] Vista preinstall -> Linux -> back to Vista
    [10] Vista preinstall -> Linux

    (And this is before one gets into areas such as dualbooting,
    emulation, and disk-to-file imaging.)

    > Linux is not USED much on the desktop because these same people tend to
    > dump Linux very quickly because it doesn't work as well for them as Windows
    > does.


    Overgeneralization.

    [rest snipped for brevity]

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Useless C++ Programming Idea #992398129:
    void f(unsigned u) { if(u < 0) ... }
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  7. Re: Linux: lacks attention to detail

    On Fri, 09 May 2008 13:14:49 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb
    > wrote
    > on Fri, 9 May 2008 11:20:50 -0400
    > :
    >> On Wed, 07 May 2008 17:35:32 +0200, Hadron wrote:




    >> Linux is not USED much on the desktop because these same people tend to
    >> dump Linux very quickly because it doesn't work as well for them as
    >> Windows does.

    >
    > Overgeneralization.


    And Flatfish can prove this, can he.

    --
    Mandriva 2008.1 64-bit.
    This message was sent from a
    computer which is guaranteed
    100% free of the M$ Windoze virus.

  8. Re: Linux: lacks attention to detail

    On Fri, 09 May 2008 23:03:26 +0100, William Poaster wrote:

    > On Fri, 09 May 2008 13:14:49 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >
    >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb
    >> wrote
    >> on Fri, 9 May 2008 11:20:50 -0400
    >> :
    >>> On Wed, 07 May 2008 17:35:32 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    >
    >
    >
    >>> Linux is not USED much on the desktop because these same people tend to
    >>> dump Linux very quickly because it doesn't work as well for them as
    >>> Windows does.

    >>
    >> Overgeneralization.

    >
    > And Flatfish can prove this, can he.


    In another post you say you ignore flatfish...
    So you too are a hypocrite Willy "Filters" Poaster...

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  9. Re: Linux: lacks attention to detail

    Moshe Goldfarb is flatfish (in real life Gary Stewart)

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html

    Traits:

    * Nym shifting (see below)
    * Self confessed thief and proud of it
    * Homophobic
    * Racist
    * Habitual liar
    * Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related newsgroups
    * Frequently cross posts articles originally not posted to COLA

  10. Re: Linux: lacks attention to detail

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, William Poaster

    wrote
    on Fri, 09 May 2008 23:03:26 +0100
    :
    > On Fri, 09 May 2008 13:14:49 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >
    >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb
    >> wrote
    >> on Fri, 9 May 2008 11:20:50 -0400
    >> :
    >>> On Wed, 07 May 2008 17:35:32 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    >
    >
    >
    >>> Linux is not USED much on the desktop because these same people tend to
    >>> dump Linux very quickly because it doesn't work as well for them as
    >>> Windows does.

    >>
    >> Overgeneralization.

    >
    > And Flatfish can prove this, can he.
    >


    I'll believe it when I see good, reliable stats. Not sure
    how he'll get them unless he engages an impartial polling
    firm (Gallup, perhaps?) asking questions such as:

    [1] Have you tried Linux?

    [2] What distribution(s) have you tried?

    [3] What is your opinion of Linux?
    ( ) Absolutely useless crude
    ( ) Interesting curiosity, good for tinkering
    ( ) Specialized tool
    ( ) Reliable and useful, I like it
    ( ) Nothing else works nearly as well

    etc.

    Perhaps someone can point me in the right direction
    for such a poll; I'm feeling a bit lazy today...? :-)

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    /dev/signature: Not a text file
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  11. Re: Linux: lacks attention to detail

    On Fri, 9 May 2008 17:24:44 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, William Poaster
    >
    > wrote
    > on Fri, 09 May 2008 23:03:26 +0100
    > :
    >> On Fri, 09 May 2008 13:14:49 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >>
    >>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb
    >>> wrote
    >>> on Fri, 9 May 2008 11:20:50 -0400
    >>> :
    >>>> On Wed, 07 May 2008 17:35:32 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>> Linux is not USED much on the desktop because these same people tend to
    >>>> dump Linux very quickly because it doesn't work as well for them as
    >>>> Windows does.
    >>>
    >>> Overgeneralization.

    >>
    >> And Flatfish can prove this, can he.
    >>

    >
    > I'll believe it when I see good, reliable stats. Not sure
    > how he'll get them unless he engages an impartial polling
    > firm (Gallup, perhaps?) asking questions such as:
    >
    > [1] Have you tried Linux?
    >
    > [2] What distribution(s) have you tried?
    >
    > [3] What is your opinion of Linux?
    > ( ) Absolutely useless crude
    > ( ) Interesting curiosity, good for tinkering
    > ( ) Specialized tool
    > ( ) Reliable and useful, I like it
    > ( ) Nothing else works nearly as well
    >
    > etc.
    >
    > Perhaps someone can point me in the right direction
    > for such a poll; I'm feeling a bit lazy today...? :-)


    No....

    The stat that is really way out in space is:

    "Do you use Linux"?
    Do you plan to use Linux in your organization? "

    Of course most places use Linux in some form or fashion....The Linux dweebs
    take this as Linux is taking over....

    Using Linux can mean one server locked in a closet....
    Planning to use Linux can mean "we are testing it"....

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  12. Re: Linux: lacks attention to detail

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb

    wrote
    on Fri, 9 May 2008 20:36:34 -0400
    <1jg3c1t8zpoca$.1wh4rj5ceqkoe$.dlg@40tude.net>:
    > On Fri, 9 May 2008 17:24:44 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >
    >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, William Poaster
    >>
    >> wrote
    >> on Fri, 09 May 2008 23:03:26 +0100
    >> :
    >>> On Fri, 09 May 2008 13:14:49 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb
    >>>> wrote
    >>>> on Fri, 9 May 2008 11:20:50 -0400
    >>>> :
    >>>>> On Wed, 07 May 2008 17:35:32 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>> Linux is not USED much on the desktop because these same people tend to
    >>>>> dump Linux very quickly because it doesn't work as well for them as
    >>>>> Windows does.
    >>>>
    >>>> Overgeneralization.
    >>>
    >>> And Flatfish can prove this, can he.
    >>>

    >>
    >> I'll believe it when I see good, reliable stats. Not sure
    >> how he'll get them unless he engages an impartial polling
    >> firm (Gallup, perhaps?) asking questions such as:
    >>
    >> [1] Have you tried Linux?
    >>
    >> [2] What distribution(s) have you tried?
    >>
    >> [3] What is your opinion of Linux?
    >> ( ) Absolutely useless crude
    >> ( ) Interesting curiosity, good for tinkering
    >> ( ) Specialized tool
    >> ( ) Reliable and useful, I like it
    >> ( ) Nothing else works nearly as well
    >>
    >> etc.
    >>
    >> Perhaps someone can point me in the right direction
    >> for such a poll; I'm feeling a bit lazy today...? :-)

    >
    > No....
    >
    > The stat that is really way out in space is:
    >
    > "Do you use Linux"?
    > Do you plan to use Linux in your organization? "
    >
    > Of course most places use Linux in some form or fashion


    No they don't. They use applications, daemons, utilities.
    Linux is a foundation that is rarely seen.

    > The Linux dweebs
    > take this as Linux is taking over....


    Microsoft is taking over. Linux is trying to hang on.
    This is not necessarily a bad thing, but for the fact that
    Windows has a number of holes. To its credit Microsoft's
    UAC (in Windows Vista) papers over some of them.

    >
    > Using Linux can mean one server locked in a closet....


    Using Linux means int $0x80, register manipulation,
    assembly code. Most people write to the library (libc.so
    et al), and can port a suitably written program anywhere
    that library is supported, which includes Microsoft Windows
    (if one can stand the POSIX module, or includes something
    like Cygwin), FreeBSD, MacOSX, Solaris, or even HURD.

    > Planning to use Linux can mean "we are testing it"....


    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Windows Vista. It'll Fix Everything(tm).
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  13. Re: Linux: lacks attention to detail

    On Fri, 09 May 2008 20:28:13 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb
    > wrote
    > on Fri, 9 May 2008 20:36:34 -0400
    > <1jg3c1t8zpoca$.1wh4rj5ceqkoe$.dlg@40tude.net>:
    >> On Fri, 9 May 2008 17:24:44 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >>
    >>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, William Poaster
    >>> wrote
    >>> on Fri, 09 May 2008 23:03:26 +0100
    >>> :
    >>>> On Fri, 09 May 2008 13:14:49 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb
    >>>>> wrote
    >>>>> on Fri, 9 May 2008 11:20:50 -0400
    >>>>> :
    >>>>>> On Wed, 07 May 2008 17:35:32 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>> Linux is not USED much on the desktop because these same people tend
    >>>>>> to dump Linux very quickly because it doesn't work as well for them
    >>>>>> as Windows does.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Overgeneralization.
    >>>>
    >>>> And Flatfish can prove this, can he.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> I'll believe it when I see good, reliable stats. Not sure how he'll
    >>> get them unless he engages an impartial polling firm (Gallup, perhaps?)
    >>> asking questions such as:
    >>>
    >>> [1] Have you tried Linux?
    >>>
    >>> [2] What distribution(s) have you tried?
    >>>
    >>> [3] What is your opinion of Linux?
    >>> ( ) Absolutely useless crude
    >>> ( ) Interesting curiosity, good for tinkering ( ) Specialized tool
    >>> ( ) Reliable and useful, I like it
    >>> ( ) Nothing else works nearly as well
    >>>
    >>> etc.
    >>>
    >>> Perhaps someone can point me in the right direction for such a poll;
    >>> I'm feeling a bit lazy today...? :-)

    >>
    >> No....
    >>
    >> The stat that is really way out in space is:
    >>
    >> "Do you use Linux"?
    >> Do you plan to use Linux in your organization? "
    >>
    >> Of course most places use Linux in some form or fashion

    >
    > No they don't. They use applications, daemons, utilities. Linux is a
    > foundation that is rarely seen.
    >
    >> The Linux dweebs
    >> take this as Linux is taking over....

    >
    > Microsoft is taking over. Linux is trying to hang on. This is not
    > necessarily a bad thing, but for the fact that Windows has a number of
    > holes. To its credit Microsoft's UAC (in Windows Vista) papers over some
    > of them.
    >
    >
    >> Using Linux can mean one server locked in a closet....

    >
    > Using Linux means int $0x80, register manipulation, assembly code. Most
    > people write to the library (libc.so et al), and can port a suitably
    > written program anywhere that library is supported, which includes
    > Microsoft Windows (if one can stand the POSIX module, or includes
    > something like Cygwin), FreeBSD, MacOSX, Solaris, or even HURD.
    >
    >> Planning to use Linux can mean "we are testing it"....


    So the Flatfish troll *can't* substantiate its "claims", & woffles.
    What a surprise.

    What I an tell you is, that in this neck-of-the-woods the local LUG has
    promoted linux using Live-CDs (over quite a few years now) for anyone
    wanting to try a Linux distro. As a result, we've been asked to
    install Linux on dozens & dozens of machines for individuals & small
    companies (the majority of which dual booted with XP or Fista) in oder
    that they could properly assess it.
    After a period of people trying & using a Linux distro on their machine,
    we've been called on to remove an OS.
    Take a wild guess which was removed.
    (Clue: it was *not* the Linux distro).

    --
    Mandriva 2008.1 64-bit.
    This message was sent from a
    computer which is guaranteed
    100% free of the M$ Windoze virus.

  14. Re: Linux: lacks attention to detail

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, William Poaster

    wrote
    on Sat, 10 May 2008 11:15:48 +0100
    :
    > On Fri, 09 May 2008 20:28:13 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >
    >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb
    >> wrote
    >> on Fri, 9 May 2008 20:36:34 -0400
    >> <1jg3c1t8zpoca$.1wh4rj5ceqkoe$.dlg@40tude.net>:
    >>> On Fri, 9 May 2008 17:24:44 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, William Poaster
    >>>> wrote
    >>>> on Fri, 09 May 2008 23:03:26 +0100
    >>>> :
    >>>>> On Fri, 09 May 2008 13:14:49 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb
    >>>>>> wrote
    >>>>>> on Fri, 9 May 2008 11:20:50 -0400
    >>>>>> :
    >>>>>>> On Wed, 07 May 2008 17:35:32 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> Linux is not USED much on the desktop because these same people tend
    >>>>>>> to dump Linux very quickly because it doesn't work as well for them
    >>>>>>> as Windows does.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Overgeneralization.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> And Flatfish can prove this, can he.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> I'll believe it when I see good, reliable stats. Not sure how he'll
    >>>> get them unless he engages an impartial polling firm (Gallup, perhaps?)
    >>>> asking questions such as:
    >>>>
    >>>> [1] Have you tried Linux?
    >>>>
    >>>> [2] What distribution(s) have you tried?
    >>>>
    >>>> [3] What is your opinion of Linux?
    >>>> ( ) Absolutely useless crude
    >>>> ( ) Interesting curiosity, good for tinkering ( ) Specialized tool
    >>>> ( ) Reliable and useful, I like it
    >>>> ( ) Nothing else works nearly as well
    >>>>
    >>>> etc.
    >>>>
    >>>> Perhaps someone can point me in the right direction for such a poll;
    >>>> I'm feeling a bit lazy today...? :-)
    >>>
    >>> No....
    >>>
    >>> The stat that is really way out in space is:
    >>>
    >>> "Do you use Linux"?
    >>> Do you plan to use Linux in your organization? "
    >>>
    >>> Of course most places use Linux in some form or fashion

    >>
    >> No they don't. They use applications, daemons, utilities. Linux is a
    >> foundation that is rarely seen.
    >>
    >>> The Linux dweebs
    >>> take this as Linux is taking over....

    >>
    >> Microsoft is taking over. Linux is trying to hang on. This is not
    >> necessarily a bad thing, but for the fact that Windows has a number of
    >> holes. To its credit Microsoft's UAC (in Windows Vista) papers over some
    >> of them.
    >>
    >>
    >>> Using Linux can mean one server locked in a closet....

    >>
    >> Using Linux means int $0x80, register manipulation, assembly code. Most
    >> people write to the library (libc.so et al), and can port a suitably
    >> written program anywhere that library is supported, which includes
    >> Microsoft Windows (if one can stand the POSIX module, or includes
    >> something like Cygwin), FreeBSD, MacOSX, Solaris, or even HURD.
    >>
    >>> Planning to use Linux can mean "we are testing it"....

    >
    > So the Flatfish troll *can't* substantiate its "claims", & woffles.
    > What a surprise.


    I'm surprised you're surprised. ;-)

    >
    > What I an tell you is, that in this neck-of-the-woods the local LUG has
    > promoted linux using Live-CDs (over quite a few years now) for anyone
    > wanting to try a Linux distro. As a result, we've been asked to
    > install Linux on dozens & dozens of machines for individuals & small
    > companies (the majority of which dual booted with XP or Fista) in oder
    > that they could properly assess it.
    > After a period of people trying & using a Linux distro on their machine,
    > we've been called on to remove an OS.
    > Take a wild guess which was removed.
    > (Clue: it was *not* the Linux distro).
    >


    I doubt it was FreeBSD or HURD either. :-) Granted, I'm
    not at all sure what will happen to the desktop market
    generally anyway; it's getting a bit odd, and not just
    because of a certain software maker in Redmond.

    In particular, cell phones can understand SVG and Java, and
    probably Flash as well, with varying amounts of capability.

    Most of Linux's capabilities thereon are of course hidden
    under a shiny GUI, for those phones that use Linux (Windows
    doesn't hide quite as much, possibly because the marketeers
    think everyone recognizes those silly icons of Windows
    Mobile Edition nee WinCE, I suppose).

    The LiveCDs are quite nice, if a bit limited (changing a
    password is an interesting exercise unless someone reburns
    the LiveCD with the new password, or implements something
    along the lines of LDAP or the now-ancient NIS+. I could
    see either of the two used in a corporate network.

    A dual-booting mobile phone might show up any day now. ;-)

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Windows. Multi-platform(1), multi-tasking(1), multi-user(1).
    (1) if one defines "multi" as "exactly one".
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

+ Reply to Thread