From: shenton@troll.gsfc.nasa.gov (Chris Shenton) Subject: Re: From your friends at UNIXWorld Date: 29 Jul 1993 15:05:53 GMT
In article <1993Jul28.071054.24227@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
abulhak@nyx.cs.du.edu (Andrew_-_Bulhak) writes:
> >If you don't like the lack of a slick installation procedure, what are
> >you doing with Linux? People who can't hack Unix should stick with
> >OS/2 and DOS.
In article <23794r$7r7@nwfocus.wa.com> danubius@halcyon.com (Joseph
R. Pannon) responds:
> That's one of the silliest arguments I've read in this group. How is
> one to learn to be a Unix hacker if he already has to be one to install
> a Unix?
There isn't anything to install for DOS: it's a non-OS. (The argument
I can hear people composing right now is: ``oh yeah? then how do you
explain the millions of copies they've sold?''. Sounds like justifying
that McDonalds must be the best food in the world: 90 billion sold :-)
DOS doesn't have anywhere near the size or complexity of
UNIX/Linux. Therefore, it's not got the configuration hassles
associated with UNIX/Linux.
I've installed Linux a couple times, and a variety of UNIXes: SunOS,
Apollo DomainOS, and Interactive Systems 386. The SLS installation was
much less painfull than Interactive's or Apollo's, and only slightly
harder than the Sun. My gratitude to the Linux and SLS folks!
All complex OS's, though, need substantial configuration to tailor
them to your environment, eg: your mailer gateway and UUCP/SLIP,
networking, nameserver, user accounts, etc; these things don't even
exist on DOS.
There are a few minor SLS annoyances like file permissions and config
file locations, but Linux is maturing. The recent announcements of
tools to check and fix these type of problems is encouraging. Realize
that commercial UNIXes have some of these problems too!
I have no doubt that Windoze EmpTy will have it's share of
configuration nightmares; unfortunate, the users won't have the wealth
of knowledge to draw on as Linux users do from the UNIX community.
> You obviously haven't the foggiest where many of the Linux enthusiasts
> are coming from. It's from the DOS world for whom the installation has
> to be something they find familiar from there. SLS is a step toward
> that, but it's not quite there yet.
DOS users: glad to see so many of you getting into a real OS; it great
to see the enthusiasm. It's encumbent on you, however, to learn the
UNIX stuff yourself -- the stuff that's not specific to Linux. The
Linux newsgroups should concentrate on linux issues, not how to program
csh, create undelete aliases, etc... (Plug for the O'Reilly books :-)
That way, Linux can mature faster, become stable, and therefore get
rid of more of the installation and configuration problems...
Ciao!