[rescue] Wooohhhooo XP -> 0 to BSOD in 12min23sec

[David Cantrell]

"Braun, Matthew, CON, OASD(HA)/TMA" <Matthew.Braun at tma.osd.mil> wrote:
> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
> this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

Then I suggest that *you* get a better mail client. </flame>

> But the comment about MS products being too "prettyfied" and not "hardcore"
> (my terms) I agree with; they should take a timeout on building the UI and
> crud, and make things more stable. But on the flipside, the open software
> community (well, the Linux/*BSD people) need to hold off on some of the
> hardcore stuff and add the pretty features

The pretty features are all there as far as I can tell.  A recent Gnome,
for instance, doesn't look too bad at all, and neither do apps which use
Gnome widgets.  X (and Gnome and KDE)'s real problem is:
  it's a bitch to set up
  it's a bitch to configure
  apps use random widget sets

The first two are not a problem in a corporate environment.  The IT dept
will set it up and configure it and then lock it down tighter than a
duck's arsehole so that people can't break it.  Ordinary users shouldn't
be adding their own apps, skins, themes, whatever under any circumstances,
regardless of whether you use Unix/X or Windows.  Down that road non-
supportability lies.

The third is a bit of a pain, but have you looked at how divergent the
interfaces for Windows apps are?  Sure they use the same widgets, but
they use them in subtlely different ways to each other.  And in any case,
remember that Joe User is not going to be installing their own apps,
they'll be using the corporate standard apps, which will presumably have
been selected with care and attention, and on which he will have received
the necesary training.

>                                            The server market seems to
> be pretty happy with OSS, but a secretary would crap themself if shown a
> shell prompt and told to get to work. 

Au contraire.  If the box is set up properly for them, just like it would
(should?) be with Windows, they will not have any problems.  At least,
that is how things appear to be at my employer.  Our 'team assistant' does
have a Windows box, cos her counterparts in the New Media and Broadcast
etc divisions do so she needs it, BUT she seems quite content using a
Solaris box with Openwindows for doing things like shouting at us on our
talker, booking us into the leave system, doing expenses, and generally
keeping us in order and making sure we don't forget our own heads.

> Personally, I think that BeOS (RIP) and OS X are ideal middle grounds. I'd
> be all over a Mac like a fly on poo except for the fact that I have a large
> base of PC software and hardware (and DAMMIT, I like more than one mouse
> button). 

Three-button mice work just fine in OS X.  If you run X on X, it will do
what you expect (although the integration between the X and OS X clipboards
leaves a lot to be desired).

If you want to use PC software (and I assume you mean Windows software)
then Softwindows does the trick, I'm told.

-- 
David Cantrell | david at cantrell.org.uk | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david

  There is no sigmonster