[ltp] Alternative Operating System ?

[Bill Mair]

EfficientAndSimple Man wrote:
(** Who ever this may be **)

> I said Linux is passive because it is based too much
> on the man experience. Linux is not intelligent enough
> to "self configure" to the hardware but it requires a
> heavy manual configuration. This is not practical
> expecially when you don't know what there's inside a
> laptop, two similar laptops may well contain different
> brand components! I tried RH 6.1 and now things seem
> to be better than before: the installation is
> simplified, although I had to reconfigure manually the
> XConfig because the screen was flashing. That means
> that I have to have technical spec in hand.

XFree is not Linux. There are other alternatives available on the
market if you don't like it.

> If ThinkPads are the *few* laptops worth to run Linux,
> why the installation doesn't reconfigure properly for
> the so famed ThinkPad?

If the display is your only problem then see my statement above.

> I apologize.
> BUT in the case RH Linux doesn't support the TP 600E
> internal ACP modem then that's not ok for me. That's a
> common sense trick. In this case the RH certification
> would mean nothing to me because an OS should able you
> to access everything inside a "certified" computer.

I feel inclined to agree with you here. That is also a reason that I
started the Linux-MWave-Petition.
Have you bothered to put your name on the list ? If not then stop
whining.

> Think a moment: when someone wants a Linux-capable
> laptop, sees the TP600E as RH Linux officially
> certified, then he buys the laptop. Once bought, he
> finds the internal modem not to be working, then what
> would him feel?

He would probably buy a PCMCIA modem and be happy that he is using such
a fine OS on such a fine machine.

> He has even to work around PCMCIA problems!

I never had to..
But at least I can hot swap my Network, Modem, SCSI, FlashRAM, etc. At
least regarding the SCSI and Network cards this is FAR more than I can
do on NT.
Before you say something like "Windoze95/98" think about the following:
    1) 95/98 are extremely unstable. I do not trust these OSs as far as
I could throw them.
    2) NT has even less support for mobile systems that Linux.
    3) The most people who buy ThinkPads are professionals (regardless
of the branch) and demand stability and availability.

> And Linux, in my eyes, suits few needs other than
> server and/or "strict" operations if you can't use
> some parts of the computer ... For example, does USB
> work? Can you easily plug the USB scanner and quickly
> scan?

Yes (if you have an HP or Mustek), more support is coming.

> Can you plug a PCMCIA and quickly play?

See above. Linux handles PCMCIA far better than NT.

> This mail has a twofold criticism toward (1) ThinkPads
> and (2) Linux so I am not pointing directly to IBM, I
> am just criticising.

(1) ThinkPads are excellent machines. End of story.
(2) Linux is a fantastic OS. You should be criticising the HW
manufacturers for being so blind to this up and coming OS. Slowly but
surely the industry is awakening, for example ATI has just announced
that it will release the specs for it's graphics cards AND is financing
another company to write XFree code for the platform.

> Hoping to show that some practicity lacks. We are proud of Linux
> (against
> Windows), but we should realize that also Linux needs some
> improvement.

And Windoze needs a LOAD of improvement.

> I thought the OS definition was:
> a software system that ables you to get the most from
> your machine with ease, stability, security, etc.
> So upon that definition it seemed to me that Linux
> isn't suitable for laptops.

Huh ? Does this means that ease of use, stability and security are not
important for laptop users ???

> Linux had kernel problems towards PCMCIA till very
> recently... May be now things are different?

If you were (actively) following (possibly particpating in) the
development of Linux then you would KNOW that things are very different
since Linux 1.3.

> Can you install Linux on different laptops?

I guess so, otherwise this list wouldn't exist would it.

> And Windows? Why?

Why what ? Why windows ? I've been asking myself that question for
years. Especially when I see the blue screen of death. Here is a
question: Why do windows apps auto-save ? Ans: Just in case another
application causes the OS to crash.

> Any way why does IBM take so long to effectively support Linux on
> ThinkPads?

You could ask that qustion about the whole M$ infected industry.

Q: What is the most widely distributed virus ?
A: When one considers that a Virus destroys data, eats up system
resources, etc, then the answer has to be Windows.

> Win 2000 is a worser devil! I don't want to build bad
> habits upon Windows, but neither to become too
> technical with Linux. I already have many things to
> worry.

Then install OS/2.

> The only prob is that I cannot take the desktop with me when I travel!
> :)

Get a bigger suitcase.

Bill.

----- The Linux ThinkPad mailing list -----
The linux-thinkpad mailing list home page is at:
http://www.bm-soft.com/~bm/tp_mailing.html