From: michaelw@desaster.hanse.de (Michael Will) Subject: Re: WHAT'S THE POINT? Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 08:06:13 GMT
In comp.os.linux you write:
>Recently I found Linux on a local BBS.
Well, what package did you download? There is a package called TAMU-Release
which is said to be wonderful easy to install, there is the SLS-Release
which I used, and which is not quite as easy to install, but very complete,
and there are boot/root-disk-combo which help a unix-crack to install it
as he likes without being hindered by an installation-routine.
I would say you'd better get the tamu-release if you have not had any
experiences with a complex OS before.
(DOS is not an OS but a program-launcher :-))
>Being anxious to run a Un*x box
>for some time I quickly dl it. After reading all the FAQ's and the Docs
>that came with it; and finally finding this net mail conference on Linux
>I am no closer to running it than I was a month ago. What's the point of
>an operating system that is so complex to learn unless you are in 'the
>club' so to speak?
Well, a multiuser-multitasking-OS does require systemadministration, and
therefore must be more hard to administrate than a program-launcher,
but there are ways to make it less hard for the beginner. NeXT has a very
nice interface, and the SCO has got besides many bugs and annoying limitations
a nice sysadmin-tool.
We should make such a tool for Linux as well - the menu of the SLS-Package
is one step into that direction, but since only beginners use it, it
is not very much worked on.
After using such tools for some time you will want to have a shell instead,
because the limitations are rather hard.
>Call this asking for it, but I am no simpleton when it
>comes to computers, in fact I am quite competent.
The fact that you say boldly so makes you win most certainly :-)
> But I think Linux will not reach it's full potential until it's
> as easy to install as DOS (dare I say that?).
Installing DOS does take more than a month too when you never before had
anything to do with it and had years of unix-experience, because the
silly-limitations are hard to deal with, the batch-language in the
1970-style is almost unusable, and the interaction of DOS5.0, QEMM,
WINDOWS and another TSR are not very helpful to optimize your system.
I loose hairs everytime I have to kill myself over DOS, which I must
use because I program for it. HATE, HATE, HATE!
You even cannot set something at the end of your path without writing a
batchscript for this, because the shell does not know how to deal with
enviroment-variables - can this be true? This is not beta dos 0.01?
No, this will still be the same in DOS 6.0, after 10 (!) years of
using this fucking thing!
PATH=%PATH;addeditem does only work in a batchfile, see alt.hackers for
an even worse example, where you need TWO (!) batchfiles because of
DOS-Stupidity.
(It was something like:
for %%a in (*.*) do more <%a
and you had to make it with
for %%a in (*.*) do call display.bat %a
where display.bat contained the more<%1.
DOS wastes my time so often I could shoot the designer if I get hold of
him!
>I can only boot Linux from floppy, when I try to run *any*
>utilities I get bizzare undocumented or poorly documented error
>messages.
hehehe, ever tried DIR /SOD or something like it?
Parse error 4
What do you think this means to me?
DOS choked on it as I choke on DOS.
Ever programmed in clipper? You have to know what dos-error-4 is, or
dos-error-5 - why the fuck do they use these numbers?
Can you tell me why I have an 8MB-386 with MSDOS-5.0 and still can only
use less than 600KB if not using third-party-qemm (630KB) ?
> I have been running DOS for years, and feel that one month is too long
>to take installing an OS!
I installed linux in 30min the first time (more than 3 hours I needed to
install os/2 because of the silly installation routine which needs to
read 12Disks before installing the mouse-driver), it was one year ago
with a boot/root-disk-combo.
One has to read the docs very carefully though...
> Any suggetions? How about some quality
>documentation that non-engineers can understand?
There are (some) FAQ, there is a Linux-for-the-msdos-users-guide, there is a
german 'Handbuch' available, maybe one should translate it to english.
>The public needs a
>powerful operating system like Linux, lets try to make it that way.
Yes, we should improve the tamu- and SLS-release.
Some are working on a network-release of the SLS-System, so that all you need
is to plug a ne2000 in your computer, connect it to the internet, boot from
a disk, and the installation-script gets the data not from disks but through
the internet from a site of your choice (tsx-11.mit.edu or nic.funet.fi),
you do not have to do much more than wait until it is finished :-)
I want to make a bootdisk, which enables you to read a linux-installation
from a tape, but I did not succeed yet (did not have the time to stress it
yet)...
Cheers, Michael Will