[Cumbria] Re: All that flamefestery

[Ken Hough]

Michael Saunders wrote:

> 
>Lo all!
>
>Some of you may know me, some not, and some would probably never want to
>know me. I'm an LXF writer living in Ye Olde Market Towne of Ulverston,
>and I'm Chris Plant's hero. At least that's what he says.
>
Always buy LXF and LX Mag. Both good. Nice to know that we have local 
representation.

>
>Anyway, to dive headfirst into the fray:
>
>Ken quipped:
>  
>
>>Why should Red Hat 'b*****' about with KDE and Gnome when the rest of
>>the Linux fraternity concentrates on getting the distro right? Probably
>>for selfish (commercial) reasons.  I believe that if this attitude
>>proliferates we'll end up with a lot of different versions of Linux
>>(etc) as happened to Unix.
>>    
>>
>
>Well, we won't see anything like the same kind of fragmentation that
>afflicted commercial Unices many moons ago simply due to the licensing.  
>Forks happen, people split off separate projects, but ultimately there's a
>kind of software Darwninism in place -- thanks to the GPL, if somebody
>adds something great, it'll trickle into the other projects too.
>
>As for Red Hat, many people see them as being overly commercial but as
>others have suggested they need to retain a strong corporate image to
>continue their sales. Despite the impression many get, RH make pretty much
>diddly-squat from selling shrinkwrapped boxed-sets -- their dough comes
>from huge support contracts to megacorps like Shell etc.
>
>There's validity in the argument that RH isn't being entirely fair to KDE
>in their latest release (go on Chris, flame away!) but as a company
>they've been good for the free software community -- even RMS has said so.  
>By funding GCC, glibc, GNOME etc. development they deserve respect.
>  
>
As a non professional user, I'm not up to speed with who does what 
although I do try via LXF etc.  Thanks for info.

>Chris uttered:
>  
>
>>And RedHat can't be that buggy, because it consistant gets good reviews.
>>    
>>
>
>Apart from RH 7.0's slightly problematic release... But I do agree with
>the jist of your argument. RH's .0 jobs tend to be a proving ground for
>new tech, like the hybrid desktop in the latest, and it's not wise to
>commit to it straight away. Fortunately their support is second to none
>and updated errata packages are usually available hours after any serious
>problems are discovered.
>
>As for YaST -- it's a love/hate thing really. Personally I prefer to just
>get my hands dirty in the raw config files, but YaST has attempted to
>accomplish something few other Linux admin tools have: be a one-stop
>solution. LinuxConf was glitchy and limited, and not tried Webmin for a
>while (but it looks decent). So YaST may have its flaws but as a central
>point of configuration, for those who don't know the ins-and-outs of the
>system, it's respectable.
>
>Right, EOT. :)
>
>Mike
>
>  
>
Agreed -- love or hate.
Howver, if Linux is going to take off on the desktop, then the likes of 
YAST are essencial! Desk top users don't know how to get under the 
bonnet and don't want to.
Even the likes of me, who do like to explore, don't have the knowledge 
to go it alone.

Ken Hough