Re: I've dumped Linux and moved to Windows XP.
From: Hugh O'Hare (hugh.ohare_at_btinternet.com)
Date: 06/26/04
- Next message: Doug Smith W9WI: "Re: how VCR clock setting works?"
- Previous message: Tim Shoppa: "Re: How to measure sub micro amps."
- In reply to: Curtis Bass: "Re: I've dumped Linux and moved to Windows XP."
- Next in thread: Curtis Bass: "Re: I've dumped Linux and moved to Windows XP."
- Reply: Curtis Bass: "Re: I've dumped Linux and moved to Windows XP."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 12:51:24 +0000 (UTC)
On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 17:01:57, cmbass_us@yahoo.com (Curtis Bass) wrote:
> > >> "Windows had TCP/IP stack support back in *'89*.
> > >> (Trumpet Winsock was a 3rd party addon product
> > >> that filled the bill in the 3.1 days.)"
We know how good that was!
> > >> Well, out of the box, OS/2 does lack local file system security and
> > >> multi-user access, and the 3rd party add-on that provides it is a beta
> > >> port of Linux code. Which, of course, leads to the obvious question:
> > >>
Partly correct. multi-user access is there. Protection limiting what
those users can do on a workstation once they have logged in is
another matter. Windows is no better than OS/2 in this regard. In both
environments, once you move to the server platform things change with
the server providing the security. But that's how client server
mechanisms were originally intended to work. You could scale down the
terminal unit to the bare minimum with the server doing all the hard
work and providing client level security.
> > >> Why not just use Linux, instead of porting all of this Linux/GNU code
> > >> over to the OS/2 kernel?
Lot's of reasons. In fact, I use both and like each for its strengths.
> Well and good, until you consider that the Workplace Shell (WPS for
> short) is not supported by its vendor, and rendered more irrelevant
> with each passing day.
Utter crap!
> The point I am making is that much "development" on OS/2 seems to be
> little more than porting OSS/GNU code
You like to reinvent the wheel? That's a real waste of time.
Thankfully scientists and engineers spend their time trying to learn
from each other, preventing mistakes recurring and building on what
they get right! Real progress is made that way.
, and little of what I see is
> WPS-specific, or even WPS-integrated, which, again, translates into
> the WPS becoming more irrelevant. Also, those native WPS-aware OS/2
> applications that do exist are, for the most part, frozen and stagnant
I doubt Lotus would be too pleased to hear you say that.
> The WPS is Just A Shell, after all, no matter how fancy or polished it
> may be. It's just a tool, not nirvana.
How integrated does a shell have to be to be useful? In Lotus
Organiser e.g. I can drag and drop an address onto the printer object
(note the legitimate use of the term object) and have it print
instantly on a label or any other form of stationery I wish. The
reason being that the desktop layer in the WPS is itself an object and
hence complies with all the rules of inheritance as with all the other
objects on the desktop. They are far more than just icons where under
windows the links break if you change a file name or move it to
another location. In Lotus Organiser I mentioned, try the operation I
just described. You'll be waiting a long time. What you must do is
open the print dialogue window, manually select the entry or range you
wish to print followed by print. Very unweildy!
The WPS is rather more than 'just a shell' as you state and if it
seems to be nirvana to you, it may be you set your personal sights too
low. Fot those of us who use it regularly, there is nothing to match
it for simplicity in use and effectiveness in operation.
> And yes, I used it exclusively for several years, and no, I don't see
> it as anything special.
You are either lying or you have never tried to use it to its full
potential.
>As far as I'm concerned, the Windows shell
> has caught up to the WPS in the important areas
Firstly, by the windows shell, I presume you are referring to explorer
which is integrated with the core OS. You have one choice. Use
explorer or have a dead and utterly useless system. Nice choice! With
OS/2 WPS like other OS runs as an application and you can run any
other shell you like. That means choice and scope for development e.g.
multiple desktop applications, remote access working capability across
platforms etc. Yes Windows is really flexible. Do it the MS way if
they allow it or don't!
So given that explorer is not a shell and it has in any even caught up
with WPS, tell me directly how you reach that conclusion. Where are
the similarlities, the equivalent functionalities, the flexibility and
the cross platform compatability.
> and GNOME/KDE are
> closing in.
Gnome and KDE are at least shells and very good ones. KDE won the
award for the best desktop recently but while infinitely better than
explorer, does not come close to WPS.
Personally my preference is for KDE although aesthetically Gnome has
improved greatly.
> Frankly, advocating the WPS is nothing more than
> religion,
Now where have I heard that one before?
> as I see it. I see no rationale behind using it when it
> means doing without so many things that Windows and Linux provide,
Are we talking about the WPS as a shell here or have we diverted into
a discussion of operating systems and applications?
> such as good development tools and environments, full exploitation of
> current hardware, and yes, the wide choice of applications (not just
> MS-Office).
As it happens OS/2 is a very capable OS with a wide range of
applications available for it and in the case of Linux it can run MS
Office very nicely under WINE. It's becoming more the case that there
is very little of a compelling reason to run windows except in a few
niche areas for specialised software which at the moment is configured
only for windows. Have you considered what happens to those
applications as windows is overtaken and forced actually into the
position you imagine for OS/2 at the moment?
> My understanding is that the knowledge to do effective WPS programming
> is evaporating
Really! Where did you source that infomation, or is this another
figment of your fertile imagination.
> The flipped question, obviously, is why those couldn't be ported to
Linux.
> > I do not know the answer to that, as I'm not familiar enough with OS/2.
But you used the WPS exclusively I heard you say! Changing you tune
now, or is the truth beginning to appear...another Windows evangelist.
> Much of OS/2, including the WPS, was written by third parties
> (including Microsoft, MicroGrafix, and Adobe, I believe) and licensed
> to IBM for inclusion into the product.
Well that's original! Considering Microsoft and IBM were originally
partners. Most of the current MS application offerings are rebranded
products which MS is now offereing under MS labels. An example would
be Visio.
> This licensing prevents the
> porting of many sections of code, and what can be ported may not be
> functional without that which cannot be ported.
Exactly the problem with MS which has led them to so much trouble in
recent years. That and their rip off pricing policy.
> Also, there doesn't
> appear to be any business reason for IBM to open what source it can,
> and frankly, I doubt that there is enough programming talent in the
> active OS/2 community to do anything with such code even if it _were_
> made available. This isn't a slight against OS/2 programmers, btw;
> I'm not saying that OS/2 programmers aren't talented, only that there
> aren't enough of them to make a difference.
So! How many do you need?
> Frankly, all things considered, to me it simply makes more sense to
> take the best concepts of WPS and OS/2, and re-implement them on
> Linux, and I view GNOME (for example) as a decent start.
Well, at least you didn't advocate Windows!
Hugh
- Next message: Doug Smith W9WI: "Re: how VCR clock setting works?"
- Previous message: Tim Shoppa: "Re: How to measure sub micro amps."
- In reply to: Curtis Bass: "Re: I've dumped Linux and moved to Windows XP."
- Next in thread: Curtis Bass: "Re: I've dumped Linux and moved to Windows XP."
- Reply: Curtis Bass: "Re: I've dumped Linux and moved to Windows XP."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
