Re: tlug: diald (was: mouse fixed; now what about email)

[Karl-Max Wagner <karlmax@example.com>]

> In some areas that is certainly true, but not all areas.
> Don't get me started about the primitive, mainframe-era
> printing system that gives you practically no control over
> your printer.  The (!')'#! Ghostcript driver doesn't even
> let you choose which print quality level you'd like, even if
Go for max resolution.....What is the rest good for, anyway ?
> your Deskjet has three different ones (mine does), nor does
> the Unix printing system allow for setting your paper size
> in the application, etc.  Even MS-DOS was never this bad in
This definiteley isn't Ghostscript's task. It's the task of the
application. In LyX, for example, you can select paper size. So
where's the problem ? Actually, my Lasejet 2p prints wonderful
printouts that really leave nothing to be desired.
> The GUI is a problem area too, in terms of being fragmented
> with no real standard, in terms of widgets sets that start
This actually is good and everybody can have the look and feel
he wants. I for one wouldn't like to be pressed into a
Procrustes' bed a la Windows or MacOS. Maybe stuff under X is
less flashy, but it's made to work with, not to be flashy.
Again, I also have tried Windows in the past, but I like the
free X style a lot more. Much of the stuff really is INTUITIVE,
that Windows stuff is just confusing.
> niceties and smoothness that you get from some other
This is the stuff that's actually in your way if it comes to the
brunt of daily life !
> >What is difficult with PPP ?
> 
> A great deal, on Linux and FreeBSD.  Lots of people have
> lots of difficulty getting a connection established.  That's
Very funny. It takes me a few minites and up I am.....
> manage than Linux, especially if you want to have multiple
> connections (yes, X-ISP apparently solves this problem for
...which means hardcore routing, and here you are touching one
of the most difficult areas of networking. The you better know
exactly what you're doing or you're in for trouble.
> Linux is designed with networking through an Ethernet card
> in mind, not dial-up stuff.  The configuration software for
Wrong. Linux networks just with anything that transfers data
with an ease that always stuns me. You can do real networking
acrobatics with it without even knowing the details. just
consider IP masquerading, protocol tunneling, radio networking
etc. etc. Unbelievable. With Linux you can even use shoestrings
for networking ( almost ). 
> interface of the software is *done right* (yes, I know how
> rare that is), all you should have to do is type in the
> information your ISP gives you for your DNS servers, userid,
> password, etc., and hit the Connect button.  And you should
Good. Then tell the modem manufacturers to stop interpreting the
standards in their way etc. Actually, most do, I rarely met
modems that don't work with the standard init string of Minicom.
However, it may happen that you want your modem to do special
tricks, e.g. ignoring a dialtone, leaving the speaker connected
all the time etc. etc. It's exactly there where you're hosed if
you have no idea of init strings. Let's face it: either you
restrict your choices for simplicity, or you go for the power.
In the latter case you have to learn the language to sing the
incantations. Quite simply.
> this problem.  Modem init string?  If you know what it is
> and how to use, yes, it's good to know.  But more than a few
> modem makers don't even put this in their documentation
They do. Just they are not in the booklet they provide, but on
the diskettes that come with the modem.
> anymore.  And it shouldn't be something you *have* to know;
> the init string should be something that can be/is looked up
> in your system's modem database, or provided by the driver
> that comes with the modem.  Right now this is still
See above. And about DOS: in the good 'ol times of Fido Modem
incantations used to be a big issue. Well, with most good Modems
an at&f atz puts you in business anyway. So what ?
> printers be the one after that, but I expect printer support
> on alternative OSes to continue to stink for a long time to
Let's face it: the problem are printer manufacturers. Why don't
they agree one (1) either a common standard for printer command
language or (2) use Postscript ? The latter is long overdue
because that would actually remove all problems. 
> come.  I'm just lucky that my home printer is sort of
> supported under Linux (that is, it works, but most of its
> capabilities are ignored by GS).
It won't take long until a suitable driver comes along. However:
due to the fact that many printer manufacturers choose not to
cooperate with free developers and provide them with prototypes
for development, it takes a while until a developer gets hold of
one to develop a driver. I always tell people not to buy the
latest stuff and not be the manufacturer's beta tester. Older
stuff is even cheaper. 
> That's true, which is why this is an area where developers
> need to really excel.  MacOS and Windows95 are most of the
> way there on this.  A person with some experience should
Oh yes ? I was more than once tempted to throw one of these
boxes out of the Window. In most cases no telnet, no nslookup,
no ping, no traceroute. So if you suspect network trouble you
are exactly helpless to track down the trouble. Aaarghhhh!!!!
And the last PowerPC I worked with froze every 15 minutes if you
did heavy surfing. GRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!
> use their computer they would have 90% less trouble.  But
> since we know a lot of people won't, we need to make
Yes I know, because they always find a knowledgeable idiot who
solves the problem for them. That's what happens in reality. I
always fight that. Let them sit in the shit and rot there until
they decide to move their asses themselves ! 
> software that is as hard for them to screw up as possible.
Optimist. There is absolutely NOTHING an idiot is unable to
screw. Don't even try it or you can as well go out and buy
yourself a rope to hang yourself. At least my experience. I have
seen people doing things where I just could bang my head against
the wall.
> the business/enterprise phase.  As it penetrates into that
> area further and further, there is going to be more and more
Guess why ? Because users are loath to reboot their computers
all the time, fed up with constantly loosing their data and with
being held up with tiny little flashy pictures by the dozen they
have no f****ing idea what they are good for
> companies that make them are going to make money (PHT and
> Red Hat seem to know this very well).
I'd like Red Hat a helluva lot better if they weren't so darn
sloppy.
> Right now in the business/enterprise phase Linux is
> primarily being used as a server platform, and is slowly
> making progress toward becoming a business workstation, but
> is still hindered by the relative lack of business apps
Applixware, Star Office, Wordstar etc. etc.....
> and - importantly - the inability of those apps to exchange
> files with popular offices suites for other platforms.  But
No problem: Star Office takes what you throw at it. And it makes
wonderful HTML - quite contrary to that M$ junk.
> begins to get looked at by companies as an alternative for
> desktop use, there will be a lot of demand for things to
> make it very usable for end users.
Not very astonishing: Some users want to work with their
computers and not constantly reboot and untrash their data !
> One point that seems lost on most of the current Linux
> community is that hacking on shell scripts, recompiling
> kernels, and the various other things that a lot of Linux
> users take for granted as a daily activity is *not* using
Daily ? Nope. To compile your kernel, you configure that using a
nice GUI tool ( xconfig ) and then run it. Total effort
invested: 15 min worktime. And then you7re set until you decide
to go for another kernel ( maybe three months ). Scripts ? You
make them once and drag them from installation to istallation.
Setting up a new Slackware on one of my boxes takes me two hours
or so and then everything is set and running smoothly (
actually, most of the time spent is watching the computer doing
the installation work ) 
> everyone else, it is in reality something you have to do to
> your computer to make it so that you can actually *use* it.
Well, there ain7t such a thing as a free lunch.....
> A computer is a tool.  A business tool.  An academic tool.
Academics have lots of time :-))))
> A tool for killing lots of monsters and blowing up
> everything in sight :-)  If  auto mechanics had to spend a
Warmonger !!!! Yuck !!!!! :-)))))
> large amount of his time working on their tools to make them
> function instead of actually using their tools to fix cars,
> they would be unhappy.  When they were working on their
> tools instead of working on cars, they wouldn't be making
> any money.
Hmmmm....that's a bit beside the point: Windows / Mac:
Mechanics have a collection of poppy tools, but when a bolt is
rusted in a bit, they break most of the time. They spend most of
the time replacing broken tools. If they have to repair an
unusual car model they have to buy new expensive tools

Unix/Linux: They have a huge amount of dirty looking ugly tools
that almost never break and which they can combine like LEGO to
make new, more powerful tools to repair practically everything.
The masters in the shop have developed this into an art and they
even get that occasional Jumbo Jet that finds its way into their
shop repaired with the tools they have - despite being car
mechanics. Everybody wonders how they manage doing this and
considers them wizards.

Now which mechanics are the happier ones ?
> A computer is no different.  It needs to be low/no user
> maintenance to the greatest extent possible, so that the
> user can spend time *using it*, not fixing it.  IS staff
See above.
> will say the same thing about it: they want to be able to
> maintain and update it easily, with minimal fuss.  This is
No. They want to be indispensable. If everything works they are
redundant and will eventually lose their jobs. So....
They also are stupid and unflexible ( not all, but many ). They
proceed according to that "what the farmer doesn't know he
doesn't eat" principle or why do you think that mainframes are
still in use - despite the fact that network clusters are
practically always the better solution.
> The fact that NT and Windows 95 provide a lot more of this
> end-user ease of use stuff and still have a much shorter
> learning curve is a big reason (other than the clout that MS
????? I remember when they started at OberlandNet they did that
under NT. They had no end of trouble and soon threw it out and
switched to Linux and had much less trouble then.
> these days as an alternative to the low end of the
> workstation market, despite the fact that a Linux
> workstation can actually be put together for less money,
Particularly it is much faster and rock solid.
> the ease of use.  The idea that "of course a computer is
> supposed to be hard to use" is strongly rooted in the UNIX
> community, and Linux is no exception.  Indeed, because of
Again that problem: Inorder to make it simple, you have to take
away choices. If you want all the choices, it's complex. 

Example: I am not a native eglish speaker. I could have said:
"Well, learn just basic English and the English speakers have to
scale down their language so that it fits withing my knowledge.
And they ought to throw out all those sophisticated words and
constructs to make things easier." If I came up with such
nonsense you'd probably nuke me, and rightly so. The same
applies to computers. In order to exploit all the capabilities
it is inevitable that you learn the words and the grammar to
tell the machine what you want it to do. 
> its hacker background, Linux might be even worse :-)  As an
> ex-mainframer, I've been there and done that, too.  I still
> have a soft spot in my heart for a big honking IBM 3090 :-)
With VM/CMS ? And YOU find Linux complicated ? The problem with
that is that this stuff is UNNECESSARILY complicated, while
Linux is not. Never was.
> Apple saw that, and the Mac was a huge success despite
> Apple's common incompetence in business.  People really want
Hmmmm....they don't sell their stuff very well and are at
death's door now.....
> a computer like that.  Linux can be a computer like that.
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\ YUCK !!!!          
> Best of all, underneath all the nice tools, the config files
> are all still there, and like you said, you hack on
> TurboLinux that way yourself.  That's a best-of-both-worlds
Know why ? Before I go ahead and learn using the GUI tools I
already have hacked it up the old fashined way. Pure laziness.
Even under TL, you have first to LEARN how to use all those nice
tools. On the long run it sure pays off. If you know what's
under the hood, you just grab there and throw a switch to get
things moving that way instead of learning how to make that
computer at the front panel to throw said switch.

Moral of the story. Whatever you use, it finally comes down to
throwing that switch and it's YOU who has to instruct that
because the computer has no means to read your mind ( however,
somewhere in the Net I heard that some hackers already work at
it. Maybe next year. Stay tuned.... ). 
> but for "where we wanna go tomorrow" :-)
M$: What do you wanna crash with today ?
> Right now Linux is still an OS that I wouldn't recommend to
> anyone who isn't an advanced user, or at least somewhat
You can. If a local guru is around and the user is ready to
learn, no problem. In fact, that applies to ANY system.
> forward to the day when it will be very much a case of "just
> pour it in and it works."  That's one of the reasons I want
It is already too much like that. The problem is much the same
like Windows, MacOS etc.: if real problems crop up, these users
are quite clueless because they NEVER learned the ropes. In the
end they are going to learn them anyway. They have to. It's only
deferred. Let's face it: Knowledge is power. In the computer
case it means: power over your computer. What do you want ? Have
power over your computer or the computer having power over you ?
It's your choice. Already Goethe knew it:

"Was du ererbt von deinen Vaetern, erwirb es, um es zu besitzen"
(What you inherited from your fathers, acquire it in order to
posess it).

Good. Maybe my views are a bit extreme. I have been tinkering
with electronics already in my earliest youth, have been an
active ham for 22 years (DB8CO, ex 7J1ADO), built more than half
of my equipment myself, including my first computers ( yes, I
single stepped my first 8085 experimentation kit in order to
find out why that f*****ing thing recalcitrantly refused to work
just to find out that my CPU chip had a most weird bug ), did
lots of packet radio ( using CP/M and DOS ), learned networking
there and learnt Linux when trying to set up a Freenet a few
years ago etc.....in short, I am a total techno junkie.

Ah, yes, back in the times of that 8085 kit computer I always
wondered why people always gave instructions those funny names
and didn't simply use their hex code instead. I had never heard
of assembly back then. Now that were times.......

                             Karl-Max Wagner
                             karlmax@example.com
--------------------------------------------------------------
Next TLUG Meeting: 13 June Sat, Tokyo Station Yaesu gate 12:30
Featuring Stone and Turnbull on .rpm and .deb packages
Next Nomikai: 17 July, 19:30 Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691
After June 13, the next meeting is 8 August at Tokyo Station
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsor: PHT, makers of TurboLinux http://www.pht.co.jp