Wishlists for Linux AND Windows 2000 (was Re: Wishlists for Linux (vs) Windows 2000)

Wishlists for Linux AND Windows 2000 (was Re: Wishlists for Linux (vs) Windows 2000)

Post by Lucius Chiaravigl » Tue, 23 Nov 1999 04:00:00



[Why was this thread in the CD-ROM and CD-R newsgroups and NOT in a Windows
NT newsgroup?  I am also redirecting followups out of the Linux hardware
group.]

"Jim Ross" <jktr...@cw-f1.umd.umich.edu> wrote:
>lkl;; <kj...@hjkhk.com> wrote in message
>news:382ea3e2.32359792@news.wt.net...
>> I wish someone would generate a wishlist to heat up the competion
>> between Linux & Win2000

>Linux

        Some of the following stuff is really for a GUI on top of Linux, but
keep going . . . .

>    KFM showing clear fonts as a web browser.  Oh javascript would be nice.

        Actually, to get this, how about a near-clone of Internet Explorer,
but without the security holes?  Say what you will, but it is fast, and with
respect to crash frequency, it (version 4.01 SP1, anyway) seems to be a lot
more stable than the underlying Windows NT 4.0 operating system (haven't tried
it much on Windows 98).  Note:  this is not intended to be in general defense
of Micros~$1E11 or their software, but more an indictment of the competition.
(By the way, NetScape Communicator 4.x crashes more under Windows, too,
although though not as much as people on some of these groups indicates
happens under Linux or FreeBSD.)

>    Speed up KDE, dialogs too slow

        Haven't tried KDE yet (although I'm looking forward to doing so when
I get a chance), so I can't help you there.

>    Stabile all the X stuff, speed it up.

        As someone else posted, XFree[86?] 4.0 will do this and more.  The
multi-monitor support will be welcome too.  (Actually, I haven't tried that
under Windows, either -- only on a Mac, LONG ago.)

>    Easy support  for my scanner, ditto drives, cd-rw, etc

        For scanners, make this a wish for broader device support under SANE
(http://www.mostang.com/sane/).  I haven't tried it yet, but that is what I
found in the course of searching for support for essential services under
Linux.  I can't help you with the other devices, but check on Tucows Linux
(formerly Linuxberg, still at http://bluep.linuxberg.com/) for this -- they
have lots of essential odds and ends like that.  CD-R mastering programs
(although this probably isn't quite what you are looking for) are specifically
listed at

        http://bluep.linuxberg.com/x11html/sys_cdr.html
        http://bluep.linuxberg.com/kdehtml/sys_cdr.html
        http://bluep.linuxberg.com/gnomehtml/sys_cdr.html

        These are all links for GUI CD-R mastering programs, but if you read
the program descriptions, some of them have the names of the command-line
programs that the graphical programs are front ends for.

        By the way, horror of horrors, while I was looking up the above URLs,
I stumbled upon a CD AutoRun program for Linux, and it rates *5* penguins.
The disease spreads . . . fortunately, one doesn't have to install it . . .
YET.  (I have already run into CD-R/RW recording software for Windows that
won't work correctly without AutoRun at least partially enabled:  Adaptec
DirectCD 2.5.)

>    Journaling filesystem included in RedHat 6.X
>    Read/write support for NTFS in RedHat 6.X

        Why restrict these to RedHat?

>    Working drag and drop between KDE and Gnome apps please....

        Can't help you there.  Sounds like a good idea, though.

>    Mozilla finished

        Or a good clone of Internet Explorer (but without the security holes).

>    A quicken port

        Somebody posted in one of these newsgroups about a GPL competitor to
Quicken, but I can't remember the name or a URL.

>    God dvd support

        Not a prayer, not a prayer . . . .

>    Imap support from linux email clients
>    Good gui pgp port like the windows version

        Can't help you with those yet.

        Another thing that would be good:  an option for rm so that rm -rf
will refuse to operate on the top level of a file system, even when run as
root.  (Even the most experienced Unix guru could make a fatal typing
mistake.)  (I have a vague memory that someone may have actually implemented
this protection, but I don't have a clue where to find it.  So far, I just
try to make sure I am careful typing into the command line on our Cobalt
Qube 2's, especially whenever what I am typing includes the sequence "rm".)

>Windows 2000
>    Adopt gnu tools, bash terminal, etc

        At least some of these exist, but I seem to have misplaced the URL(s).

>    Multithread the interface more (i.e. copy to directories to other places
>    at once)

        This is partly accomplished on Windows NT 4.0 SP3 or later if you
install the Windows Desktop Update when you install Internet Explorer 4.01
SP1 or SP2 (must be done before installing Internet Explorer 5.0, which does
not install this update).

>    Run some linux apps with a wine like emulator

        Does anyone here know if the Windows NT Posix support actually works?
If it does, it would be a step (possibly a substantially large step) in that
direction.

>    Less bugs (yes that's a feature)

        Absolutely.  Don't rush some piece of junk out to market.  I'm in no
hurry for Windows 2000 to come out.  Windows NT 4.0 has enough bugs as it is.

>    Do away with drive letters, allow unix notation for partitions, etc.

        Now that's a teaser that has been around for a long time -- Microsoft
and IBM have had drive volume labels ever since the early days, but the
operating systems (DOS, OS/2, and Windows any version) do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING
with the labels except to display them in directory listings.  These should
be made usable for identifying volumes, and named volumes should be found
properly no matter what drive and/or partition number they were, just like
under MacOS since 1984 (or maybe even before, if this was done under LisaOS).
No more drive-letter shifting problems (once applications are updated to use
the volume names -- have to provide old-style drive letters for compatibility
with older applications).  Come to think of it, this would be nice for Unixoid
operating systems also, but I can't think right off hand of a good way for
Unix to use this idea without doing some Really Horrible Hacks(tm).

>    Less dll hell, much better default security

        Windows 2000 is supposed to have actually done some work on the DLL
Hell problem, but I haven't heard much about improvements to security
defaults.  Some of the Windows NT security defaults are REALLY brain-dead,
such as making shares default to giving Everyone Full Control (literally) and
not giving an easy way to turn off the Administrative Shares (you have to hack
the Registry).  (I won't even start on Windows 95/98 non-security.)

        Judging from the postings I have been reading on the Linux newsgroups,
this wish is not entirely unneeded for Linux as well.  I haven't yet tried a
2.2.x Linux, so I don't have experience with this myself.  (I know, the shared
libraries can be upgraded separately from the kernel, but if you are going to
go to the trouble to upgrade one, you might as well upgrade the other so that
you don't have to go through 2 separate major upgrade pains.)

>    Support for ext2 partitions

        Somebody has written a utility to read these (Read-Only as far as I
know), but I don't have a URL.

>    Better info on memory usage

        The System Information tool that you get by doing Help:About and then
clicking on "System Information" in any Microsoft Office 95/97 application is
not too shabby for this, although it is not the most accessible thing.  Some
other Microsoft applications also install this, but I forgot which ones.

>    Let me turn gui off

        Windows 2000 claims to do this, but I won't believe it until I see it.
Does anyone know if the Windows 2000 floppy boot is a true floppy boot (not
needing to execute code from the hard disk), or does it just substitute for
the initial boot files and then do the remainder of the boot from the hard
disk (like a Windows NT "boot floppy" does)?  If the latter, then it still
won't help you if you are trying to check a system for viruses that includes
files on NTFS partitions that are loaded at boot or login.

Both operating systems
----------------------

        Actually use volume labels (see under Windows 2000 Do Away With Drive
Letters, etc. above).

        Provide a file manager like Norton File Manager, but updated to fix a
few bugs and take full advantage of the operating system as I noted in a
recent post.

        Please e-mail any response to me.  I will have usable (although
kludgy) access to web mail after today, but no practical news access.

--
Lucius Chiaraviglio
New e-mail address is approximately:  lucius1@Mail&Newsunuce.com
To get the exact address:           Spell this out^    ^^^^^Lose these chars

 
 
 

Wishlists for Linux AND Windows 2000 (was Re: Wishlists for Linux (vs) Windows 2000)

Post by Joseph T. Adam » Tue, 23 Nov 1999 04:00:00



:>    A quicken port

:       Somebody posted in one of these newsgroups about a GPL competitor to
: Quicken, but I can't remember the name or a URL.

GnuCash.

:>    God dvd support
:       Not a prayer, not a prayer . . . .

I do not *want* Linux to support proprietary protocols that can't be
reverse-engineered.  If it does, people will not learn to avoid them,
as they should.

Of course, being free,* people can do whatever they want with Linux,
other than make it non-free.  Just because they can however does not
mean that they should.

If Linux and other free operating systems start to take a significant
share of the desktop market, hardware vendors will be tempted to write
nonfree binary drivers for their wares, without opening the specs so
that free drivers can be written as well.  This is a danger IMO.  It
creates the potential for security problems (I KNOW and can see the
source of everything running on my Linux box today, except for
commercial packages which unlike a needed driver I can choose not to
run), for upgrade problems (driver foo requires kernel version 2.2.13
and will not work on any other kernel), and, most importantly, for
encumbering the freedom of the OS itself.  (Is GPL'd software that
links to a nonfree driver still distributable under the GPL?  Is it
even legal to link to it?)

Free operating systems need free drivers, or else they are not
genuinely free, and many of the benefits of freedom will be lost.

(Sheesh - I sound like RMS - I think he is right about this though!)

:       Another thing that would be good:  an option for rm so that rm -rf
: will refuse to operate on the top level of a file system, even when run as
: root.  (Even the most experienced Unix guru could make a fatal typing
: mistake.)  (I have a vague memory that someone may have actually implemented
: this protection, but I don't have a clue where to find it.  So far, I just
: try to make sure I am careful typing into the command line on our Cobalt
: Qube 2's, especially whenever what I am typing includes the sequence "rm".)

rm and bash (it is a bash builtin?) are both free.  You can modify
them or write a shell wrapper around rm, and what you're describing
sounds relatively simple.

However, there is a major drawback to using a "safe" rm:  you can get
accustomed to the "safe" behavior, which might make you less careful
than you otherwise would be;  if you then use the standard rm on
another system, or accidentally overwrite your customized version,
disaster may ensue.

My recommendation: find or write a shell script called "saferm" or
something similar, which checks the working directory and then calls
rm if it's safe according to whatever conditions you want to test
against.  Get in the habit of using saferm instead of rm.  Leave the
standard rm alone.  If you're on another system that doesn't have your
saferm, then you know to use extra caution when typing rm.

For all I know someone may have done this already; I'm constantly
amazed by the sheer quantity of free software that I never knew
existed until I encountered a need for it.

Joe

  * I always use "free" in the sense of freedom, not price.

 
 
 

1. Wishlists for Linux (vs) Windows 2000

I wish someone would generate a wishlist to heat up the competion
between Linux & Win2000

One problem I notice is in the CD-RW.
Given that the price of CDRW is what a floppy used to be
only a few years ago, it would seem that it would make sense
if LInux can pick a certain brands and make then act like floppies,
without the need for extra software. In fact they should even skip
CDRWs and go right to DVD-RW  and make them act like floppies.
I can't see any reason why anyone should have to use
additional software & all teh annoyances taht go with it.

2. PCChips VGA IRQ & S3 Virge

3. Linux Advocacy - Linux vs Windows 2000 vs Be vs OS/2

4. Interresting problem with Apache and /etc/passwd

5. Linux, Windows 2000 & Windows 98 on one Disk

6. NFS O_DIRECT clean-up #2

7. Linux vs Windows 2000 for a statewide computer system?

8. USB modems: which ones work under linux?

9. Linux VS Windows 2000 Server

10. Web page rendering Linux (KDE) vs. windows 2000

11. Dual Boot Windows 2000 - BestLinux 2000

12. Windows NT 2000 & Linux (Turbo Linux)

13. Windows NT|2000 Linux 2.2 port (was Linux apps in win2000 port news!)