Re: Linux is not...

From: Ed Cregger (ecregger_at_homtail.com)
Date: 06/24/05 

Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 10:09:22 -0400

"Tommi Jensen" <tommi@nee.dk> wrote in message
news:42bbf468$0$78286$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk...
> Ed Cregger wrote:
>> Linux is not the viable alternative to Microsoft's nonsense that many of
>> we Windows users had hoped.
> "All OS'en suck, it's the suck-factor that distinguishes one from the
> other" - ASR
>
>
>> I have been gaining experience with various Linux distros over the past
>> few months. It has become abundantly clear that this is not the operating
>> system that myself and many other disgruntled Microsoft users have been
>> looking for.
> That is most certainly true. While lots of zealots tend to claim that
> `Linux can do everything for everyone, better, faster, more colorful, with
> more caffeine and less calories - at no cost' - it's not the truth.
> Linux/*BSD/HURD and the likes are for those who either know what they are
> doing (in that particular environment, not flaming qualified microsoft
> administrators and the likes - they have a harder time than us). The
> factor that many people forget to mention is the fundamental approach
> difference there is in those two environments thwarting otherwise skilled
> people in their efforts. Knowing that most things are configured by a
> plaintext editor, and by reading a manpage in linux - and not least of
> all -HOW- this is done, to quickly achieve useful functionality is one of
> those major differences - seeing as `the other side' uses GUI that does
> things with pretty step by step-ok-cancel buttons. preference is left up
> to the reader.
>
>> We are looking for something less complicated and easier to use than
>> Windows. Linux ain't it. We are looking for an operating system that
>> takes care of trivial issues by itself and that doesn't bother us with
>> stupid questions all of the time. Linux surely ain't it. We do not wish
>> to know anything about the internal workings of a computer. We could care
>> less. Linux ain't it.

> That certainly depends on perspective. Speak for yourself. (no, you're
> speaking on behalf of a `we' that which specification is vague at best).
>

***I can speak for a majority of users that just want the computer to work
and do what the installed programs require. This is not rocket science these
days. Used to be and with the small systems and little precious memory,
decisions by the operator had to be made, but not today. I don't want to
hear about IRQ's. The OS should handle that without requiring my attention.
Same with USB connected devices. Why bother me? I have work to do.

>>
>> Now, for some enterprising group of brilliant minds, somewhere in the
>> world, including here, get busy working on a Window's replacement right
>> now. Make it so that I don't have to ever worry about a virus or worm
>> crashing and defiling my computer. Make it so that I can still remain
>> connected to the internet, but make it so that no one can put anything on
>> my computer, or take off anything from my computer, that is not to my
>> advantage. Screw the data gatherers and their merchant buddies. My
>> computer does not exist for them to make profit.
> Viruses: how would you distinguish between malicious binary
> user/administrator tells the OS to execute - while maintaining an open
> development model, where every programmer or programmer wannabe can
> scratch their own itch and still contribute to everyone at their leisure?
> Possible solution: eliminating remote exploits and the likes, remove all
> user privileges to execute binaries beond those installed by an
> administrator. Mind you - the administrator will still be capable of
> running/installing malicious programs.

***The fact that viruses are finding a way into my computer IS the problem.
Same with hackers, trojan horses, worms, etc. Close down the ports that
Windows provides for stealing user data to sell to their colleagues. These
do not benefit the end user. Anti-virus/hacker/firewalls should be part of
the OS and constantly updated. I should not even be aware of its existence
as an end user. If I have to give up the flashing whirly-gigs on my screen,
so be it.

>> I once was a computer hobbyist. I studied reams of books that taught the
>> Basic programming language and learned DOS until I became fairly
>> proficient. In less than a decade, all that I had learned became obsolete
>> and irrelevant. I said "never again" and now I only learn the minimum of
>> what I have to know to use my computer as a productive tool. But, alas, I
>> am growing tired and weary of trying to keep up with an ever expanding
>> amount of data to learn. It must stop now.

> I think MacOS, QNX or the likes is what you're looking for. mind you,
> there's virtually no applications available for the latter.

***Truthfully, I am looking for something well past the ones that you have
mentioned. I want a major paradigm shift in how the PC is presented to end
users. I want the OS loaded into an EPROM, with no access to the outside
other than by the OS manufacturer. I want the OS manufacturer to be
responsible for data loss/corruption due to their incompetence. If someone
breaks in to my computer, it should be the responsibility of the OS
manufacturer to fix it/compensate me for the inconvenience. My computers are
tools that I cannot get along without. It is time that they be constructed
in a fashion that favors serious business usage and not just a toy for the
teenager to play with.

>> My microprocessor controlled automobiles, microwave ovens, television
>> sets, etc., never once tell me that I must update my antivirus files, or
>> that I need to install a new operating system upgrade. Yet, they work
>> without complaint. That is what I expect of my home/office computers. It
>> can be done, but it will only be done by those programmers/coders that
>> have a new vision of what a PC should be. These are the folks that I will
>> support. Even if it is Microsoft that does the deed, at a fair price.
> Is your microwave network connected? didn't think so. (and -IF- there is a
> security issue, which Romanian kiddiot will try to exploit it, and how?)
>
> the paradigm is simple: Simple systems are easy to program virtually
> flawless, complicated systems aren't.

***The only reason that our systems are more complicated than those I
mentioned previously is because they are set up to milk us of personal data
on the fly for the benefit of themselves and their compatriots AND they are
set up so that the OS/accessory manufacturers can constantly stick their
fingers into our pockets. This will continue until we force the change.

>
> What you're asking for is relatively simple to make. Just make sure you
> delimit your wants from this system to the functionality available in a
> microwave oven.
>
> The PC is an abomination, designed to do everything relatively well,
> cheap. Don't look at the PC for a possible solution to this problem.
>
>> Thanks for the help that many of you have given. It is appreciated.
>
> /Tommi

***Tiger Direct has a PDA with a keyboard that comes close to doing what I
want. Unfortunately, it lacks wireless capability and USB ports. Not bad for
$119. Since all of the software is burned into PROMs, no one online could
mess with it, including the operating system. For many of my business uses,
this would be the perfect machine.

Yes, I do like having computers that are traditional for gaming, net
cruising, etc., but there are times when something simple, with a real
keyboard, would excel in my day-to-day business operations.

Thank you for the polite and informative conversation.

Ed Cregger