*BSD News Article 66577


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!paladin.american.edu!gatech!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!nntp.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!jstern
From: jstern@Primenet.Com (Josh Stern)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Historic Opportunity facing Free Unix (was Re: The Lai/Baker paper, benchmarks, and the world of free UNIX)
Date: 20 Apr 1996 11:27:02 -0700
Organization: Primenet Services for the Internet
Lines: 54
Sender: root@primenet.com
Message-ID: <4lba9m$32d@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>
References: <4ki055$60l@Radon.Stanford.EDU> <tporczykDq3C55.4zE@netcom.com> <4l96pm$mrt@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> <4lan48$j9l@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>
X-Posted-By: jstern@usr6.primenet.com
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.development.system:21969 comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc:756 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:3401 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3245 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:17851 comp.os.linux.advocacy:46610

A Shelton <ashelton@yallara.cs.rmit.EDU.AU> wrote:
>jstern@primenet.com (Josh Stern) writes:

>>Objectively, I think it has to be said that in the main, smooth
>>installations are one of MS's strengths.  One can be a big fan
>>of free (or commercial) Unix and still admire the way that
>>MS installs just run themselves for things like NT workstation
>>and MS Internet Explorer.

>But doesn't this happen because they just bulldoze their way through?
>They don't really allow you to chose a modular install, they will 
>quite happily set your monitor to ridiculous values and rely on vendor
>supplied drivers to get over the exceptions.

The MS installs usually have limited modularity in the sense that
they give you a small range of 'safe' choices, some of which 
can be adjusted later.  If you have run into cases where their
choices were not safe then those are legitimate counterexamples
to the claim that their installs are good.  But that hasn't been
my experience.

>They also don't support third party replacements for system components,
>which is part of what linux is all about.

But that doesn't really have much to do with the install.
That has to do with the fact that they are a hyper-competitive
company that seeks commercial domination.

>Xfree can cycle through modes, so clearly they could simply put all
>the VESA modes there and have a stupid program to allow you to chose
>between them (like the NT one) and return to a known after X seconds.
>But if you suggest it the Xfree guys'll probably go ballistic because
>they are not willing to have their software take that risk.

Both MS and XFree have moved towards the solution of 
having a database lookup of what each monitor and adaptor can
do (for cases where plug and play isn't yet in effect).
I don't see any gaping philosophical chasm between them on
this particular issue ( I would like to see X managers and
apps develop more facility for dynamic interactive adjustments
of resource values and default settings, perhaps with the
aid of Xlib and Xt additions).

- Josh





--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jstern
jstern@primenet.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------