| |
VK2TV > TELNET 08.07.07 23:28l 79 Lines 3549 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 23602_VK2TV
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: need some help (DJ5UT)
Path: ON0AR<DB0RES<WA7V<KD4YAL<VK2TV
Sent: 070708/2222Z @:VK2TV.#MNC.NSW.AUS.OC #:14756 [Kempsey, QF68JX] $:23602_VK
From: VK2TV@VK2TV.#MNC.NSW.AUS.OC
To : TELNET@WW
# Generated by: TstHWin v2.21b - Registered to VK2TV
# On : 7/9/2007 8:19:17 A
# UTC: 7/8/2007 22:19:17
>VK2TV wrote:-
>> LinKT appears to be
>> the closest thing to a replacement but sadly it isn't supported any more.
>
>It appears to be as dead as Winpack. The only saving grace is that the
>source is available for LinKT whereas I was informed on good authority that
>the source to Winpack was erased upon Roger's death.
>
>Telling people that various Linux solutions will fix their Windows issues
>is not the answer. Viable, seriously viable desktop Linux solutions have
>been available for some time to replace Windows. For free even. Radio
>amateurs, renowned for their spendthrift have flocked in droves to free
>desktop Linux solutions. Not! People want Windows solutions to their
>Windows problems.
I agree with you Andy because you are right, but if the time arrives that
there isn't a Windows solution to a Windows problem, what then?
Linux has earned a reputation for being difficult to install, learn and
use, and not without good reason. In the early days, and I was there using
it, it was certainly the cause of lots of headaches, but times have changed
for Linux just as they have for Windows. The blue screen of death used to
be common in Windows but under XP it is extremely rare, as are lockups.
Just as Windows earned a reputation for being unstable (and maybe
rightfully so), Linux earned a repuation for being difficult. And just as
some people still think Windows is unstable, so there are those who still
think Linux is difficult. Both operating systems have moved forward and
both no longer deserve their reputation of yesteryear.
For those readers who tried Linux "a few years" ago and found it difficult,
I say try it again. You might be pleasantly surprised.
Have I changed to Linux completely? No. The office machine still runs
Windows because I haven't found a Linux replacement for an audio program I
need and use on an almost daily basis, and so far I haven't managed to get
it to work under Wine, but I haven't given up hope.
However, for radio work I wouldn't consider going back to Windows because
Linux provides unbeatable flexibility and multi-tasking.
Having given the impression that I think Linux is the ant's pants, let me
say this. If your Windows machine is doing what you want it to do, don't
change to Linux just for the sake of changing. If you Windows machine is
no longer doing what you want it to do, think about making the switch.
>
>> Perhaps if enough amateurs took the plunge the authors might be persuaded
>> to bring it up to speed.
>
>I doubt it. Packet is a fascinating area and there is good information
>content to be had in the network. But it's a technological backwater for
>development. It's most definitely "Last of the Summer Wine" territory.
You're probably right, Andy, but I can dream, can't I? Sad really because I
still believe packet has so much to offer the amateur service. We just need
to find ways to better utilise it, beyond what we currently do. Those using
APRS would probably argue they've found a way.
>Comments on X running on some dinosaur hardware noted. Memory is the key. I
>wouldn't attempt to run any graphical OS (Windows/X etc) in less than
>512Mb. Life is too short and precious compared to waiting for software to
>load on some clunker PC built from junk box parts for fun. Memory is cheap,
>stuff machines doing anything graphical to gunnels with it!
Couldn't agree more.
Cheers ... Ray
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
