SillyDog701

[Edward]

EDIT Split from Netscape is not really dead. This thread is split from the discussion Free and open source not necessary better at end of that thread.

Regarding Corel, they were recently acquired by Vector Capital Group. Press release link.

For me, I won't switch to Linux anytime soon. Simply I don't have time to learn Linux, why? It is still far less user-friendly than Mac OS or Windows.

If one can use MacOS or Windows without any difficulty, I fail to see how someone cannot use Linux. At least with Linux, one has a choice of different desktop GUI's to use, Windows only gives you that one, and I do not know what MacOS offers.

I consider Linux not for the beginner, and I tell this to everyone who asks me about Linux, but I still fail to see how someone can have a problem using it.

DJGM and Mandrake - Since you both also use Linux, I would like to get your observations about Linux, although this should really be over in MacOS and Linux.

UserAgent: Opera/7.11 (Linux 2.4.20-4GB i586; U) [en]

[Antony]

If one can use MacOS or Windows without any difficulty, I fail to see how someone cannot use Linux. At least with Linux, one has a choice of different desktop GUI's to use, Windows only gives you that one, and I do not know what MacOS offers.

And yes, that's where the problem with Linux is. The many Linux GUI's are not standarised. In Mac OS and Windows, the user interface is pretty standarised, it might seem boring for those who want something different, but a lot easier to get into comsumer market. Also many people find Linux's GUI are somehow confusing to new users.
Linux is still not designed for (average) end-users, but more for computer programmers. Linux, like Unix, still is shell based. The shell is very powerful that takes time to learn and scares people off.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030830 Camino/0.7+

[DJGM]

If one can use MacOS or Windows without any difficulty, I fail to see how someone
cannot use Linux. At least with Linux, one has a choice of different desktop GUI's
to use, Windows only gives you that one, and I do not know what MacOS offers.

And yes, that's where the problem with Linux is.

The many Linux GUI's are not standardised. In Mac OS and Windows, the UI is pretty
standardised, it might seem boring for those who want something different, but a lot
easier to get into comsumer market. Also many people find Linux's GUI are somehow
confusing to new users. Linux is still not designed for end-users, but more for
computer programmers. Linux, like Unix, still is shell based. The shell is very
powerful that takes time to learn and scares people off.

If you want a Linux distro that uses only one GUI, go for LindowsOS 4.0, which uses KDE only.
It even has Microsoft Windows style "My Computer" + "My Documents" icons on the desktop.

The only problem here though is, unlike (proper) Linux distros from the likes of SuSE + RedHat,
an installation of LindowsOS 4.0 sets up the user with full system administrator/root access.
But then, having said that, so too does every default installation of Microsoft Windows!

This post (and also the two before it) needs to be moved over to the "Mac OS and Linux" sub-
forum. I would've done that myself, but I'm not a moderator on the NS/Moz forum, so I can't!

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030804 Mozilla Firebird/0.6.1

[Mandrake]

The Linux GUI *is* standardized, Gnome 2+ or KDE 3+ are very easy to use, no harder to use than Windows XP. As DJGM already mentioned, Lindows has the My Computer and My Documents icons, and the version of Lycoris I tried had these, and a "My Network Places" icon.

As for other OS's, I'm happy with Win2k and WinXP - but Mac OS X crashed three times on the iMac I used it on, giving a bunch of text I couldn't comprihend!

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1a) Gecko/20020611

[DJGM]

Mac OS X crashed three times on the iMac I used it
on, giving a bunch of text I couldn't comprihend!

The type of crash you described there, sounds like what is commonly referred to as a "kernel panic".
As I'm sure you're aware, it's the UNIX equivalent of the infamous "BSOD" in Windows. If you ever
experience a kernel panic in Mac OS X, you should always report it to Apple. All the technical data
from a Mac OS X kernel panic, is recorded to a special logfile, that can sent to Apple, along with
any other relevant information, such what you were doing just as the kernel threw a hissy fit!

Here's some links about Mac OS X kernel panics, and what to do when thy kernel doth panic . . . !

Mac OS X: What is a kernel panic?
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=106227

Mac OS X: How to log a kernel panic.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=106228

Or click below for the Apple Support search results for "kernel panic" . . .
http://search.info.apple.com/?search=Go ... el%20panic

Luckily, my ageing 1998 iMac G3 has never had any kernel panics while running Mac OS X . . . yet!

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030804 Mozilla Firebird/0.6.1

[Mandrake]

It's still very odd, all I was doing was using Internet Explorer to surf the web . . .

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1a) Gecko/20020611

[hartlandcat]

Well, what did you expect.

I don't find KDE 3.1 with SuSE 8.2 any more difficult to use than Windows XP. The GUI is consistant, and if anything it's easier to use that Windows.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (Compact)

[Mandrake]

Internet Explorer on the Macintosh is a fine browser, it's much more standards compliant and secure than it's Windows counterpart - it's just missing features like tabbed browsing and popup controls that are in Mozilla, and of course other browsers.

On Linux, Gnome is better than KDE, IMO! Maybe it's just I've used Gnome for much longer than KDE, I find it more feature rich and powerful, but KDE is still great.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030828

[DJGM]

I've always preferred the KDE3.x UI to that of GNOME2.x. KDE3.x seems more flexible
and is more customisable than GNOME2.x. I even have KDE3.x installed on my iMac!

If there's any other reason to prefer KDE3.x, it's the startup sound . . . !

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030804 Mozilla Firebird/0.6.1

[Antony]

The Linux GUI *is* standardized, Gnome 2+ or KDE 3+ are very easy to use, no harder to use than Windows XP.

The user interfaces in Linux are too flexible, which is good for those who want to have something different, but hard to get into average (non-geek) end-users.
Mac OS and Windows are very consistant and tweaking is not recommended, plus easy to read help files, they are far more user friendly.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030830 Camino/0.7+

[Mandrake]

*Exactly!* They are *are* flexible, catering for both the IT Pro who tweaks his system until it can be tweaked no more, or the end user that has very limited knowledge of a PC.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030828