Welcome to my 'news' page. This has actually been written over the course of a few weeks so please forgive the hodgepodge of information. Think of it more as a preview of the long overdue overhaul of this web site.
I've been thinking about the Wine project and figured that, at this rate, Wine should be finished in about 45 years. Hmmm... I'm starting to hope that Caldera will lower the price on WABI or start packaging it with OpenLinux, or I may just switch to Solaris x86 [if I can find someone to sell it to me].
With Red Hat Linux 5.0 it's a love-hate relationship. It's easy and fun to install, configure, and administer, but it has its share of bugs.
I finally managed to get X optimally configured under Red Hat Linux 5.0. Xconfigurator has problems setting up my mouse and doesn't make the symbolic link from dev slash mouse to dev slash cua1. I had to use xf86config at first to be able to work with X, but now that I've found the problem, X is now configured optimally. I am really quite impressed with video performance under XFree86. It simply whips video performance under NT.
However, RH5.0 annoys me from time to time. Graphical configuration tools exist, but these often lack the polish of, I dare say, their Windows equivalents. RH5.0 also has quite a number of minor bugs, none of which really affect performance or stability but are annoying nonetheless. In addition the inclusion of some packages, namely Arena beta 3, and the exclusion of others, such as the JDK, are confounding. The inability to choose from installation sizes is definitely a weakness. The use of AnotherLevel as the default window manager and the Windows 95 look is almost insulting. The default menu items are haphazardly arranged and programs that could be more useful if accessible from the menu, such as xplaycd or, err, Arena, the only graphical web browser included, are mysteriously omitted from the menu. There is no way to easily configure the screensaver or the menus, nor is the desktop saved automatically on exit. RH5.0 also uses the more resource wasteful nxterm instead of rxvt as the default terminal emulator in X. Unfortunately, Red Hat hides so much of the complexity of Linux that it would be very difficult for the more casual computer user [without prior Unix slash Linux experience] to get around these slight annoyances. But, at least in Linux, problems can always be solved because of the level of configurability and availability of source code. More significant "problems" involve the use of glibc as the primary C library, and also the use of libc 5.3 instead of libc 5.4, requiring that many if not most programs be recompiled under RH5.0 to work optimally.
It's actually quite impossible to get StarOffice 3.1 working with Red Hat Linux 5.0. So don't bother - I've wasted enough time for the both of us. Yes, I've read the HOWTO, but the [somewhat disorganized] information in it is only relevant to RH4.2. Red Hat 5.0 changes all the rules [with glibc]. I just wish Red Hat Software warned us ahead of time. But still, gotta love them. Anyway, StarOffice 4.0 has been out for Linux for a while, and it reportedly works with Red Hat 5.0. I'm just sort of ticked because I got StarOffice on CD instead of just downloading it.
This magazine sucks. Anyone who wants to try it out should think twice about taking 2 minutes to fill out a card or survey - IMO it would be a total waste of time. I think the most useful information I found in this mag were in the advertisements! I guess if it sells... BYTE is so much better - I think the editors at BYTE actually have brains. Well, maybe I shouldn't be so harsh so allow me to restate the last sentence: the editors at BYTE probably are NOT brainwashed. Gee, PC World is one of the reasons the general [computing] public still thinks Windows is the only OS for, or being used on, PC's: perpetuating ignorance is, IMO, a capital offense. There is a viable alternative to Windows, contrary to popular belief. It's called Linux.
Note: I have noticed PC Week is also just as bad.
Well, I managed to install UnixWare on my PC. I say it is just about as easy to install as Windows NT or Red Hat Linux 5.0 (being a $1,700.00 commercial UNIX it better be). Actually the installation program is very similar (it is an OS installation, after all), and I also found it uncanny that the default [Motif based] graphical interface heavily resembles the Windows 3.1 interface, or for that matter, the Windows NT 3.51 interface. It'd be much better if the CDE was the default desktop. Unfortunately UnixWare insists on being on the active partition to be bootable and does not have a boot manager of its own. Needless to say, it refuses to get along with the Windows NT boot manager. Additionally, I found it interesting that the $1,700 UnixWare Application Server 2.1.2 doesn't support my video card, S3 Virge, but freely distributable Red Hat Linux (actually XFree86) does and has for some time. I've found the appropriate driver at SCO's ftp site, but it is very unlikely that I will install UnixWare again unless I obtain a copy of System Commander [which is doubtful because I can't afford it, and I don't feel like putting in a bootdisk each time to change the active partition to be able to switch OS'], and Wine is at least in beta since I need a word processor for regular use. UnixWare also doesn't support either my NIC or my printer, but I think Linux does. Linux most likely, if not definitely, supports my NIC; but printer support is limited but is still better than UnixWare (how many hackers do you know still use paper?). Time to revisit the ftp site...
Last minute update: I have an idea on how to get UnixWare working with NT - use LILO [installed in the MBR and with UnixWare installed on the first primary and active partition] instead of the NT boot manager! Duh! I wonder if it will work... just love the fact that Linux likes to get along with other OS'.
However, something good has come out of this fiasco: I no longer have Windows 95 installed on my system and never will again! So I am proclaiming January 31, 1998 to be ... Day. I will personally call it my Liberation Day. That is, liberation from the fear of crashing at any time. But if you have a better name for it, you are welcome to e-mail me with your suggestion. The best entries will be posted on a separate page with links to the authors' homepages.
I know. I'm still using a Microsloth products on my computer. But, for now, I can't help it since no one in the Linux community has written a driver for my Canon BJC-250 printer yet, and Wine is still in alpha development. At least I'm in the position to advocate Linux over Windows NT, or vice-versa. Yeah right. So here we go.
Since I only have 32 MB of [SD]RAM, multi-tasking is quite limited in Windows NT. I can't really run too many applications at one time without taking a serious performance hit. I'd run into an out of memory error long before I am performing at my peak; the bottleneck is actually the system and not me. In Linux, on the other hand, I have tried loads that would cause a complete systems crash in Windows 95 and then some (the actual number I tried is close to about 4-5 times the load - I ran every application I had in my menus and then tried to do something productive, and I could!), but still Linux would continue to multi-task better in this state than Windows NT under what I'd call a moderate load (6-8 applications and whatever number of processes). Gee, it almost makes me wish I only had 16 MB RAM. Linux is so efficient that I don't believe I'd ever need more than that since it's possible to have a 128 MB swap partition or a couple of 128 MB swap partitions and no thrashing. With Linux my brain is the bottleneck. I still hate doing compiles, however. They take sooooo long, but at least I can still do other stuff in the background (yes, on my computer!) - try this with any version of Windows! WAIT!!! Maybe you shouldn't...
I'm also quite concerned about security [or, in other words, lamerz who have nothing else better to do than mess with my system]. Since Windows NT is a proprietary system, only Microsoft can fix security problems. Yeah, like I have a real lot of confidence in Microsoft (may I remind you that technically, but not 'officially,' IE4 is still in beta or even alpha a la Windows 95). This is the company that, upon the discovery of a security hole or bug, more readily denies or ignores it and calls the problem a 'feature,' often refusing to do anything about it. Linux, because it is freely available in source in addition to much of the software that is distributed with it, doesn't have anywhere near as many security problems. With a large, educated user base and the availability of source code, problems are identified quikly and fixed even quicker. What's that? Three hours for the TearDrop Attack? I can see Windows boxes going down all over the Internet...
Yeah, go ahead and use Windows NT. Do less with more, more hardware, that is. The first stable Linux release probably has more features and is more stable than NT now, or for that matter, NT into the next century. And that was what, more than five years ago, when Linux could run more comfortably with 2 MB's of RAM than NT now with 32 MB's of RAM? Ha, ha. I'm starting to think NT advocates just have as much brains as MacOS advocates. At least I'm sure they have at least one thing in common: they're both brainwashed by a monopolistic company.
I've been doing fairly well on my tests. Well, except my lab test, which I worked pretty hard for both in and out of lab but still managed not to be prepared for [along with 100% of my classmates]. I got a 76%, and I'm quite happy with it considering that 83% was the highest score. Otherwise I'm doing quite well. I haven't gotten less than an 'A' in my other tests. I just have to remember to avoid first-year faculty at all costs in the future (short of dropping ;-).
As for my future plans, I hope that I will be accepted for readmission to Valparaiso University in the fall. I'll be reapplying next month. If I am not accepted at Valpo, then I will be attending Millikin University in Illinois, which may actually be a better school for me to attend.
If you're looking for a PC, then you really can't go wrong unless you choose Packard Hell, err, Packard Bell or a Compaq. If you're looking for a real computer, then get an Alpha and a screamin' 64-bit 533 Mhz processor. If you're wondering what you'd do with it... well, you can probably just do anything you can with a PC but more. Windows NT is available for the Alpha and thus supports the overwhelming majority of Windows [and DOS] software, but, of course, you'll probably want to run a real 64-bit operating system on it like Unix or Linux. A PowerPC may be advisable only for running BeOS, Rhapsody, MkLinux, or even Windows NT, but these operating systems will also be available and more likely to be better supported in the long run on Intel.
It was Seymour Cray who said, Anyone can build a fast processor. The trick is to build a fast system. He was right on the money IMO. Really, a processor is pretty useless without an [good] operating system. All a processor does is vibrate back and forth. It's the software that allows you to do actual work. Get it??? This is as much as you'll ever read from me about hardware.
Well, I lied. I have a complaint. It seems it's impossible to buy anything slower than a Pentium 166 now-a-days. What's strange is the majority of new computer buyers don't need that kind of speed. The only programs that need a processor faster than Pentium 133 are games, and possibly multimedia applications that a relatively small percentage of computer users need to do work. If one is going to buy a high-end computer just to play games, IMO he's better off buying a Playstation or an N64. It would be much less expensive, and the market for games on these platforms is considerably larger than that on the PC. On the other hand, if one is actually going to do work... well, just consider that SmartSuite 97 runs on a 486-50 with 8 MB's of RAM, a system that was considered high-end a half a decade ago. But to be practical about it though, I recommend the slowest Pentium, or better yet a Pentium clone, you can get your hands on with 16 MB's or more of RAM [and putting Linux on it]. You can probably get one with a monitor and printer for under $1000 [from someone stupid enough to think that the latest is always the greatest who'll sell one to you]. A 33.6 modem or faster is nice to have as is a video card that's capable of doing 1024x768 in true color. A sound blaster compatible card and a CD-ROM are must-haves. An older sound blaster card is better because it's more likely to be supported by whatever OS you choose to run. For a CD-ROM drive, you're going to want a 4x or faster with an IDE interface. A 17 inch monitor is really nice if you can afford it. As for a hard drive, try 500 MB's to 1 GB with an SCSI interface. 2 GB's is good if you plan on having more than 1 OS. Anything more is overkill for most people (I have a 3 GB HD and 3 OS' and still have plenty of room to spare).
Funny. KDE beta 3 is presently more stable than any version of Windows, and it's more configurable and definitely much easier to work with. Installing the main KDE packages gives you more software than comes with Windows 95. But it's all free, except Qt, that is. Troll Tech needs to do the Linux community a favor and GPL Qt. Yeah, and Red Hat will port Opera to Linux and adopt the Debian packaging system, and Sun will GPL WABI. It probably won't happen unless Troll Tech goes out of business. Even then, they could probably sell the technology to somebody who'll also restrict its use. Hmmm... where's the link to the FreeQt Project? Gotta love the Free Software Foundation, err, Open Source Software Foundation.
I've already ordered CDE for Linux from Linux Systems Labs. This means I'm broke again. But that's okay ;-). I just can't wait for KDE or GNOME to be finished. Sorry, I'm a GUI kind a guy.
I am very glad the BeOS Preview 3 for Intel will be released next month. I am also impatiently waiting for the release of Debian 2.1, with a new dselect and libc6 (glibc2), FreeBSD 3.0, with SMP [better than Linux?], and Red Hat 5.1, hopefully with Netscape, libc 5.4, bug fixes, [a new default window manager?] and the latest kernel (2.0.34). I wonder what the next version of Caldera OpenLinux will be like, or more appropriately, whose distribution will they use as their distribution of Linux. I have no intention of supporting Caldera in any way, shape, or form (at least until OpenLinux is POSIX-certified, they package WABI with COL Standard, and they decrease the price of COL Standard significantly or include Netware support in their 'base' distribution). They are the MS, or SCO, of Linux distributors, IMO. Unfortunately and somewhat unsuprisingly, Caldera's the only way to get StarOffice [non-commercial] on CD.
I'd love to try out a finished version of Stampede Linux. I like their philosophy, which is really the only difference between Linux distributions.
I'm definitely getting Applixware once it's updated along with Red Hat Linux. Why? It can import slash export the most common file formats. It's a compatibility issue, plus it will run on Red Hat Linux 5.0. This is my priority after BeOS. It will actually let me do something besides Internet-related work on my PC [which isn't all that bad]. I have SmartSuite 97 on NT, but it can't import/export Word 97 documents [I think].
Wing Commander Prophecy is going to be real cool. I'm definitely getting it once it's released for PlayStation. Hopefully by then I'll have an analog controller. I absolutely love the Wing Commander series.
Oooh, Rhapsody... is BSD Unix with the NeXTStep interface with a MacOS sandbox... I thought MkLinux [with AfterStep and Executor?] already did that! Wait - even Apple can't make Linux propriety. Is this why they bought NeXT - to make a propriety system a la monopolistic company like Microsoft? Rhapsody is Yet Another Unix VariantTM. But perhaps Apple may yet bring Linux, err Unix, to the masses. Wait again. Didn't Red Hat and it's 36 employees already do that? Besides, now Apple is backing off and calling Rhapsody a server and/or power user's OS instead of a replacement for the MacOS. Maybe it gives them reason to charge more for it a la M$ and NT Server. I'm not buying it literally or figuratively. If I wanted to use a BSD Unix, then I'd use FreeBSD that I have on CD that I bought for $5 from Cheapbytes. This is considerably less expensive than the $250 Apple will probably be asking for Rhapsody, which is, by the way, still inexpensive for a commercial Unix. Anyway, by the time Rhapsody is released, Wine, which works on most, if not all, x86 Unix-compatible OS' including FreeBSD and SCO UnixWare, may be stable enough to use occasionally and thus will allow me to run Windows apps in a Unix environment. This is the only reason I'd want Rhapsody. Like I said, I have a BSD Unix, and AfterStep, which emulates and improves on the NextStep interface, is available for FreeBSD. FreeBSD can also run well enough on 8-16 MB of RAM unlike at least 48 MB's for Rhapsody.
BSD Unix's include: FreeBSD and BSDI, NetBSD and OpenBSD, SunOS slash Solaris, and NeXTStep slash OpenStep. SCO's UnixWare and OpenServer are System V (Release 4.2) Unix's. Then there's Linux, and err, BeOS?
Is Unix dead? Hmmm... with the increasing popularity and continual development of Linux and the free *BSD's, the upcoming releases of BeOS (at least partially POSIX compliant, fairly extensive utilization of GNU utilities) and Rhapsody, the perpetuation of companies such as SCO and Sun... Well, you'd just have to pretty stupid to say something like that.
Oooh, BeOS. Can you say Apple? Can you say will be synonymous with 'make stupid decisions?' I have a feeling people will be saying on the Internet in the near future 'Hey, he pulled an Apple' instead of 'Man is he stupid.' Now it's quite evident that if Apple wanted a replacement for the MacOS, a 'desktop' OS, it should have gone with Be instead of NeXT. Let's change the subject a little bit (I can feel the flames coming): isn't it cool that BeOS is mostly POSIX-compliant? And doesn't it suck or isn't it ironic that 'OpenTM' software costs money? Yeah, makes a lot of sense doesn't it?
First: 90% of the current code in Netscape Communicator will be completely rewritten or discarded by the Openscape Group.
Another one: Linux will continue to grow exponentially (duh!), and there will be more commercial software available for it. 1998 will be the year that the number of Linux installations will exceed the number of MacOS installations. Yeah, I know, one doesn't need a brain to figure this out. But, hey, it's a sure thing considering all that Linux will continue to grow despite the amount of publicity it gets (a la Opera web browser) or success in the commercial world, though it has been getting more and more publicity especially with the not-so-recent Netscape announcement. However, I'm not betting that people in general will come to the knowledge that Linux is probably the most supported and most documented operating system available as well as easy to install and use as any other commercial OS'. Don't forget that I'm quite a connoisseur when it concerns Windows software and actually 'grew up' with Windows 95, and I've found that Linux meets all my needs and use it as my primary desktop OS (yes, you read it right, a desktop OS, though quite a few of my friends also use it as a server - I would too, but I don't have a 24/7 connection to the Internet anymore).
Mark Santos mark.santos@usa.net http://www.oocities.org/SiliconValley/Peaks/1370/ Whip me. Beat me. Make me administer Windows NT.
I must contend (since I have both) that Red Hat Linux 5.0 is easier and much more fun to administer than Windows NT. But that's just one aspect of why Linux is better than Windows Nice Try or even other (commercial) implementations of Unix...
Actually, the last line now reads: 'Fear the penguin.' And maybe in the future it will read, 'Born with BSD Unix,' since I was born the same year BSD Unix was first released. That is, of course, if I switch to a BSD Unix.
Your description of Linux is equally applicable to Windows: *I* often feel like I am groping in a dark cellar with a single flickering candle, *PLUS* the fear that if I bump into a support, I might cause a complete and fatal cave in. . .
The first night in his new house, Gates told Walters, he watched a big-screen TV that pops up out of a console in his bedroom. But things went awry when he tried to go to sleep.
He couldn't get it to go down, he couldn't get it to turn off, so he just put a big blanket over the thing,' she said. Gates has joked that everything from light switches to music speakers goes on and off unexpectedly in the house, which is run by a high-end PC network built on Microsoft's Windows NT system.
I'm only trying to figure out why a PC network run by Windows NT is high-end. Otherwise I'm dying from laughter. I suppose Mr. Gates hasn't read any Windows NT code recently or else he would have probably have picked Unix or Linux for use in his new house.
I like the sound of bundling an OS with your software. There's a certain irony to it.
Funny thing is, Red Hat has been doing this with Applixware for a while now.
Copyright © 1997 Mark Santos. All rights reserved.