Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by anoncow.. » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00




> Well I have corporate clients running without crashing for 3 years on NT4.

Without crashing and running 24/7 uninterrupted is another thing
entirely.
It has run for _3_years_ without a reboot, uninterrupted?
I know of a Linux install that has... but NT4? No way.
You tell me otherwise and I'm a converted person.

--

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by anoncow.. » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> > Slackware Linux was big in the UK many years ago.

> It's still big with the Linux old garde/hard core group,

Good to hear.

Quote:

> > Nowadays the install programs are vastly superior, with booting CDROMs.
> > There really is no difference between a Windows install and a Linux
> > install nowadays.

> Oh, I disagree with that. You STILL have to know more about your system than
> you do when installing Windows.

You're right, although...
For most modern systems - with PCI I don't think you will need to tell
it too much.
If you've got ISA/PCI then, I admit it takes a bit more - for those
systems it is still better than the Win3.1 days (using isapnptools).

Quote:> Bah, Red Hat! BOOOOOO!!!
> SuSE, SuSE, RAH,RAH,RAH! :-)

LOL, yup gotta love SuSE!
Have you used Mandrake, I'm hearing good things about it. I may switch.

Quote:

> > In fact I consider KDE to be superior to Windows' environment. (the base
> > operating system is, of course, superior.)

> Wouldn't know. As I say, BlackBox is my choice. Small, EXTREMEMLY fast, no
> unnecessary nonsense anywhere.

I hear ya, having grown up on TWM and then FVWM/2 - altX and altM for an
xterm and mail - does it all!
Unfortunately, my wife also uses the machine - so KDE is the logical
choice (staroffice integrates with KDE). Like I said, we don't use
Windows and she isn't really computer orientated. (which proves to me
that KDE, with staroffice, is a viable home setup).
--

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by Rich Cloutie » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> > Wouldn't know. As I say, BlackBox is my choice. Small, EXTREMEMLY fast, no
> > unnecessary nonsense anywhere.

> I hear ya, having grown up on TWM and then FVWM/2 - altX and altM for an
> xterm and mail - does it all!
> Unfortunately, my wife also uses the machine - so KDE is the logical
> choice (staroffice integrates with KDE). Like I said, we don't use
> Windows and she isn't really computer orientated. (which proves to me
> that KDE, with staroffice, is a viable home setup).

I agree. My girlfriend can use KDE with almost no instruction (of course I had to
set up the apps she uses in the menu first.) However, it is _painfully_ slow on
my little 486 DX4-120 at work, and I'm thinking of going back to WindowMaker (I
still like to see my windows open rather than ALT-Fx-ing all the time.)

Rich C.

--
"Beer is God's way of telling us he loves us and wants us to be happy."
--Benjamin Franklin

To reply by email, remove the "abc_" from my address

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by Ben Z. Tel » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


Quote:> Have you used Mandrake, I'm hearing good things about it. I may switch.

No, never. I'ver heard about it (mostly that it is a downloadable
distribution, i.e. that you can download it in finite time; unlike SuSE 6.1,
which ships on 6 CDs). But I just put my SuSE 6.1 through a large upgrade,
new kernel, gcc, Blackdown Java, StarOffice 5.1, etc, so I won't be
switching anytime soon. If only I had a newsreader that I like as much as
Outlook Express, that would be something.

Quote:> Unfortunately, my wife also uses the machine - so KDE is the logical
> choice (staroffice integrates with KDE). Like I said, we don't use
> Windows and she isn't really computer orientated. (which proves to me
> that KDE, with staroffice, is a viable home setup).

Oh yes, quite viable (under supervision of an experienced hand).
However, the fact that your wife uses KDE doesn't have to stop you from
using blackbox (or TWM, etc); just use a

startx WM-executable

to start a different WM instead. Or reconfigure XFree to look at the
.xsession file in the user's homedir.

--
Ben Z. Tels

http://www.stack.nl/~optimusb/
UIN:2474460

"The Earth is the cradle of the mind, but one cannot stay in the cradle
forever."
                                        --Tsiolkovsky

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by anoncow.. » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> Oh yes, quite viable (under supervision of an experienced hand).
> However, the fact that your wife uses KDE doesn't have to stop you from
> using blackbox (or TWM, etc); just use a

> startx WM-executable

> to start a different WM instead. Or reconfigure XFree to look at the
> .xsession file in the user's homedir.

Yes I know... ok,ok.. the truth is out... I kind of like the window list
bar that hides itself at the top left and the MacOS style menus (I'm a
sick, sick person).

I know, I know... shame on me.
There is no hope left for me I'm afraid. (I do use StarOffice too - so
it's in the global menus/setup).
--

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by Maurice le Rutt » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


Ben and Anon,

After a thread full of geek talk, do you still think Linux is an
operating system to be used by *non-professionals* and *non-interested*
people. Or do you think that computers should only be used by the
technical elite?

Many computer professionals forget that 99% of the people have no
interest in computers. They have to work with them and they do so.

Maurice.



> [lots of Linux talk]

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by Ben Z. Tel » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


Quote:> After a thread full of geek talk, do you still think Linux is an
> operating system to be used by *non-professionals*

Absolutely. No reason whatsoever you'd have to be a professional to use
Linux. Hell, Linux was started by a non-professional. In fact, it's a lot
more fun if you're not a professional because there's more of a challenge to
it then.

Quote:> and *non-interested*

That's a trickier one. I certainly don't think a non-interested person would
want Linux as their home operating system. If they did have it as OS on
their home systems, they'd have to be the superuser and I can't see that
working. However, the "non-interested" user might also include the office
worker in the company that standardised on Linux*. In a situation like that,
the non-interested person would not be the superuser, but just a regular
user, supervised by the superuser and supported by the company's IS
department. With window managers like KDE, I don't see why that could not
work.

* This notion is a patented new idea for me (i.e. I'd never thought about it
before). The possibility of a non-technical someone using Linux as a regular
user within a company occurred to me after reading an article about
CorelLinux (link originally posted by Dave, in this thread):
http://currents.net/magazine/national/1720/inet1720.html

Quote:> people. Or do you think that computers should only be used by the
> technical elite?

Stow that bilge, would you? The very idea that computers should be reserved
for the technical elite is thinking that is decades behind us.

Quote:> Many computer professionals forget that 99% of the people have no
> interest in computers. They have to work with them and they do so.

Given the large volume of sales of home systems, I would doubt that that
percentage is still so high. However, please note that nobody is saying
Linux is for everybody (it isn't). It may be for more people than you think,
though.

--
Ben Z. Tels

http://www.stack.nl/~optimusb/
UIN:2474460

"The Earth is the cradle of the mind, but one cannot stay in the cradle
forever."
                                        --Tsiolkovsky

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by JTK » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> Ben and Anon,

> After a thread full of geek talk, do you still think Linux is an
> operating system to be used by *non-professionals* and *non-interested*
> people.

Amen Maurice!  Tell it like it is.
> Or do you think that computers should only be used by the
> technical elite?

> Many computer professionals forget that 99% of the people have no
> interest in computers. They have to work with them and they do so.

> Maurice.


> > [lots of Linux talk]

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by James A. Robertso » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


I have news for you guys - Windows isn't as easy to use for non-tech
people as you seem to think either.  I've seen more than one newbie have
their internet service (or some game, or some application they use)
torched by a DLL hell incident - the problem is that they typically have
no idea what happened, are sure that it's their fault, and ultimately do
one of two things:

1) get a computer savvy person to fix the problem
2) Stop using the PC

Mac enthusiasts should calm down as well, as I've watched my Dad's Mac
suffer from the same kinds of trouble.  

The baseline problem is that PC's (with any current OS) are not reliable
consumer devices at this point.  The only segment that even thinks
through consumer issues is the game industry; the game machines are
simple to use, and have no real setup issues.  Keep in mind how many
people there are who never figure out how to reset a VCR clock before
you get carried away with how easy Windows or MacOS is compared to Linux
- the sad truth is that for the average consumer, all three are
unsuitable.



> > Ben and Anon,

> > After a thread full of geek talk, do you still think Linux is an
> > operating system to be used by *non-professionals* and *non-interested*
> > people.

> Amen Maurice!  Tell it like it is.

> > Or do you think that computers should only be used by the
> > technical elite?

> > Many computer professionals forget that 99% of the people have no
> > interest in computers. They have to work with them and they do so.

> > Maurice.


> > > [lots of Linux talk]

--
James A. Robertson
Senior Sales Engineer
ParcPlace Division of Cincom

Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by Stephen Harri » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00




> > > Slackware Linux was big in the UK many years ago.

> > It's still big with the Linux old garde/hard core group,
> Good to hear.

> > > Nowadays the install programs are vastly superior, with booting
CDROMs.
> > > There really is no difference between a Windows install and a Linux
> > > install nowadays.

> > Oh, I disagree with that. You STILL have to know more about your system
than
> > you do when installing Windows.
> You're right, although...
> For most modern systems - with PCI I don't think you will need to tell
> it too much.
> If you've got ISA/PCI then, I admit it takes a bit more - for those
> systems it is still better than the Win3.1 days (using isapnptools).

> > Bah, Red Hat! BOOOOOO!!!
> > SuSE, SuSE, RAH,RAH,RAH! :-)
> LOL, yup gotta love SuSE!
> Have you used Mandrake, I'm hearing good things about it. I may switch.

> > > In fact I consider KDE to be superior to Windows' environment. (the
base
> > > operating system is, of course, superior.)

> > Wouldn't know. As I say, BlackBox is my choice. Small, EXTREMEMLY fast,
no
> > unnecessary nonsense anywhere.

> I hear ya, having grown up on TWM and then FVWM/2 - altX and altM for an
> xterm and mail - does it all!
> Unfortunately, my wife also uses the machine - so KDE is the logical
> choice (staroffice integrates with KDE). Like I said, we don't use
> Windows and she isn't really computer orientated. (which proves to me
> that KDE, with staroffice, is a viable home setup).
> --

You mean she installed Linux? She ran sndconfig? She found out
what files were needed for SO java and downloaded them? She
could reconfigure the modem if it were not the default com and IRQ?

I don't think so. The average user who outnumbers the geeks by
about 100 to 1 can't install Linux. They can install Windows 98.
This won't change until Corel Linux comes out. And then there
is disk partitioning  which is not exactly intuitive. So maybe your
wife can use the Linux desktop but I think a viable home setup
does not mean hiring or persuading a friend to intall it on the computer.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by bill » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



Quote:>I don't think so. The average user who outnumbers the geeks by
>about 100 to 1 can't install Linux. They can install Windows 98.
>This won't change until Corel Linux comes out.

I agree with you.

Corel linux based on debian, is what the Linux world needs to attract
the window users. The best base distribution (debian) coupled with
east of use and GUI expertise from Corel.

When the rest of the world starts using the superior Unix technology
in GNU/Linux and presented to us by Corel linux, then with time, those
users can become more power users if they want. But without something like
Corel linux, linux will find it hard to become a home user PC as windows
is now.

I've used almost all the distributions so far, and for normal users who
want to just point and click, Linux is still too hard to use.

billy
a Linux user/programmer since 1995.

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by JTK » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


[snip]

Quote:>  Keep in mind how many
> people there are who never figure out how to reset a VCR clock before
> you get carried away with how easy Windows or MacOS is compared to Linux
> - the sad truth is that for the average consumer, all three are
> unsuitable.

I completely agree:

Linux
        - Only usable by the most dedicated of computer enthusiasts,
        even if everything is working properly.
        - Virtually impossible for a non-professional to configure/
        fix/upgrade/add system components/etc.

Mac
        - Halfway usable by pretty much anybody, as long as everything
        is working, but who cares?  There is no rational reason for
        anybody to buy a Mac these days.  Win9x is superior in every
        way.

Windows 9x, NT
        - Extremely usable by anybody as long as nothing goes wrong.
        - Simple maintenance (adding a PCI card and getting it working,
        etc) is within the capabilities of the average slob.  However,
        the success rate of such endeavors still is unacceptable for
        cunsumer goods.
        - Still too easy to get something wedged to the point that you
        need a professional to get things sorted out.  Why2K will be
        a welcome improvement, but certainly won't solve all the
        issues.

So if you're a consumer and *have* to use a computer, which do you
pick?  Lesser of all evils: Windows.

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by JTK » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


[snip]

Quote:> I don't think so. The average user who outnumbers the geeks by
> about 100 to 1 can't install Linux.

Actually, it's closer to 454 to 1 (0.22%).

Quote:> They can install Windows 98.
> This won't change until Corel Linux comes out.

And it won't change then either, knowing Corel.

Quote:> And then there
> is disk partitioning  which is not exactly intuitive. So maybe your
> wife can use the Linux desktop but I think a viable home setup
> does not mean hiring or persuading a friend to intall it on the computer.

Amen.
Quote:

> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by Rosimildo DaSilv » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


Quote:

>I completely agree:

>Linux
> - Only usable by the most dedicated of computer enthusiasts,
> even if everything is working properly.
> - Virtually impossible for a non-professional to configure/
> fix/upgrade/add system components/etc.

>Mac
> - Halfway usable by pretty much anybody, as long as everything
> is working, but who cares?  There is no rational reason for
> anybody to buy a Mac these days.  Win9x is superior in every
> way.

>Windows 9x, NT
> - Extremely usable by anybody as long as nothing goes wrong.
> - Simple maintenance (adding a PCI card and getting it working,
> etc) is within the capabilities of the average slob.  However,
> the success rate of such endeavors still is unacceptable for
> cunsumer goods.
> - Still too easy to get something wedged to the point that you
> need a professional to get things sorted out.  Why2K will be
> a welcome improvement, but certainly won't solve all the
> issues.

>So if you're a consumer and *have* to use a computer, which do you
>pick?  Lesser of all evils: Windows.

JTK, is that really you posting this message !!!! ?

This is the first post that you wrote something sensible !!!.

Rosimildo.

 
 
 

Java w/ Netscape, Linux, Mac?

Post by Mark Smit » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> Lesse: better Interface Design, more controlled set of hardware
> and softare. So, MacOS should manage to be easier on the user
> and explode less, simply from an engineering viewpoint.

Also the Mac's hidden file type/creator IDs, which are far more robust
for non-expert users than relying on visible (and fragile) extensions
to relate files with applications.

--

 
 
 

1. Java, Java, Java, Java, Java, Java .....

In the systems being developed here, everything is coded in Java. There
are about 100 Java applications each running its own virtual machine.

I'm supposed to work with test and performance analysis of these systems
and I'm using tools that log system behaviour on process level.

The problem is that all I see is 100 processes named Java with some
small variations in command line parameters.

Is there a safe way to alter the process names either at startup or at
runtime ?
What could be the consequences of doing such a thing ?

//Hans Hagberg

2. sound and games only work for root on RHL5.0

3. java/47447: linux-sun-jdk1.4.1: java command can't find java.lang.Object

4. NFS problem after NIC upgrade

5. RedHat 6 and Netscape fix for Java for things like yahoo Java chat applet

6. Scrollwheels

7. Mac or Linux for learning Java?

8. impasqadm do not work

9. comp.sys.mac.misc comp.sys.mac.system comp.sys.mac.apps

10. Linux mail server - Netscape (W/Mac) client help?

11. Linux mail server - Netscape (W/Mac) client - help?

12. Java on Linux Netscape Communicator 4.51

13. Help: Java under Netscape 4.5, linux-ppc