The need for an OEM Install!

The need for an OEM Install!

Post by Donn Mille » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00





> > Windows keys configured.

> As what by default?  

Well, when I set up XFree86, I chose "Microsoft Natural Keyboard", although
it's merely a generic Windows 95/98 keyboard, and not a Microsoft Natural.
The "Windows" key gets mapped to the Meta key in X.  For example, when I want
to enter M-x in xemacs, I type [Windows key] x instead of [alt] x.  Now, if I
could only figure out what [alt] does in X now that the [Windows key] is
meta...

- Donn

 
 
 

The need for an OEM Install!

Post by Donn Mille » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> The "Windows" key gets mapped to the Meta key in X.  For example, when I want
> to enter M-x in xemacs, I type [Windows key] x instead of [alt] x.  Now, if I
> could only figure out what [alt] does in X now that the [Windows key] is
> meta...

Of course, what a dumb-ass...  The [alt] key works for things in WindowMaker,
such as holding down Alt and right clicking on a window to move the window.
Also, Alt + [numbers at the top of keyboard] switch between workspaces.  The
Windows key gets mapped to Meta.  [Alt] gets relieved of its duties as Meta.

Well, I guess that Windows key won't go to waste, because I don't have Windows
installed.  (I gave Windows 98 the boot, if you know what I mean.  I view
Windows 98 as a virus, and I don't trust what that damned thing is doing to
my system...)

--
- Donn

 
 
 

The need for an OEM Install!

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



Quote:

> A buddy of mine and I have been toying with an idea. As you all may have
> seen in the news lately, MS is putting pressure on the "mom and pops" to
> ship genuine "from approved distributors" MS products. The Mom and pops
> have been shopping gray market, trying to save money on expensive MS
> product. Sometimes, inadvertently, they get counterfeit.

> We need to setup an OEM CD toolkit and support network. (We can charge
> money for the service)

(I don't see what these two observations have to do with each other, but no
matter. There is no "counterfeit Linux" as far as I know, is there?)

Quote:

> Collect a whole bunch of XF86Config.monitor.videocard files. Just
> download the ones the stores need.

> Custom create bootable CD-ROMs for the independents, that can take an
> empty system and install a user level system (with no user interaction).
> Do a good install. All products should be installed and ready to go.
> "post tweak"

> [Base OS Config]
> KDE (IMHO gnome is not stable enough)
> StarOffice
> 128 Bit Netscape (Fully configured, fonts, plugins, applications, etc)

Why 128 and not just 56? Aren't there issues with export of the 128 bit
version? You'd have to take care not to inadvertently send any of these CDs
overseas.

Quote:> AdobeAcrobat Reader
> Real plugin
> Voice & FAX
> Gimp
> MP3 Player (kjukebox?)
> XAnim?
> ppp dial-up
> Some cool screen savers
> Some good FONTS!!!!
> PostgreSQL, supply ODBC driver.
> Java JDK
> TIK, Gaim, or Java AIM.
> Windows keys configured.

> [options]
> CD-READ/WRITE utilities
> CodeCrusader (kdevelop?)

> [Network & Services]
> The system should ship secure! No ftp, no httpd, no telnet, etc. These
> should be easy to activate when the user wants too, but not by default.

What you need _as an option_ is a Linux clone of Wingate, with secure
services to allow the Linux machine to do what it excels at: be a front end
for a home network. Set up SECURE, simple implementations of squid, dante,
and smail, qmail or the like to do http, ftp, mail and news proxying for
other (presumably windows) clients on the network. Wingate is not inherently
any more secure than any of the *nix proxies, and they explain in a few
simple steps how to make the network secure. We should be able to do the
same.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> An ssh daemon should be installed and started at boot time if an
> "internet support" option is desired.

> Samba should be installed, SWAT should be enabled for localhost.

> [misc]
> A pseudo admin user should be created "wizard" perhaps. The wizard
> password will be given to the user on the printed sales certificate. As
> well as stored at the store. The user will be instructed to change the
> password, but as well all know wont.

> [Needed tools]
> An administration "wizard" that will allow users to do admin-ish sorts
> of things without ever having to use the shell. The utils that come with
> RedHat are "good" but, a full working session for root is a bad idea.

> [Legal services]
> We need a release, written by a good lawyer, that the purchaser must
> sign stating that they understand that the system is a Linux system, not
> a Microsoft Windows system, and therefor only runs Linux software. This
> is sort of cheesy, but the little guys are going to want this
> protection. Although we all know that Linux is better, there needs to be
> some recognition that the system will not run "Wing Commander."

> Comments, suggestions?

> --
> Mohawk Software
> Windows 95, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
> Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com

 
 
 

The need for an OEM Install!

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





> > A buddy of mine and I have been toying with an idea. As you all may have
> > seen in the news lately, MS is putting pressure on the "mom and pops" to
> > ship genuine "from approved distributors" MS products. The Mom and pops
> > have been shopping gray market, trying to save money on expensive MS
> > product. Sometimes, inadvertently, they get counterfeit.

> > We need to setup an OEM CD toolkit and support network. (We can charge
> > money for the service)

> (I don't see what these two observations have to do with each other, but no
> matter. There is no "counterfeit Linux" as far as I know, is there?)

No, this is to help the small "independent" mom&pop shops sell computers
with Linux.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> > Collect a whole bunch of XF86Config.monitor.videocard files. Just
> > download the ones the stores need.

> > Custom create bootable CD-ROMs for the independents, that can take an
> > empty system and install a user level system (with no user interaction).
> > Do a good install. All products should be installed and ready to go.
> > "post tweak"

> > [Base OS Config]
> > KDE (IMHO gnome is not stable enough)
> > StarOffice
> > 128 Bit Netscape (Fully configured, fonts, plugins, applications, etc)

> Why 128 and not just 56? Aren't there issues with export of the 128 bit
> version? You'd have to take care not to inadvertently send any of these CDs
> overseas.

This isn't a distribution as much as it is an OEM tool for configuring
new machines. There will be no case where the CD goes somewhere unknown.

--
Mohawk Software
Windows 95, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com

 
 
 

The need for an OEM Install!

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






> > > A buddy of mine and I have been toying with an idea. As you all may
have
> > > seen in the news lately, MS is putting pressure on the "mom and pops"
to
> > > ship genuine "from approved distributors" MS products. The Mom and
pops
> > > have been shopping gray market, trying to save money on expensive MS
> > > product. Sometimes, inadvertently, they get counterfeit.

> > > We need to setup an OEM CD toolkit and support network. (We can charge
> > > money for the service)

> > (I don't see what these two observations have to do with each other, but
no
> > matter. There is no "counterfeit Linux" as far as I know, is there?)

> No, this is to help the small "independent" mom&pop shops sell computers
> with Linux.

I see.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> > > Collect a whole bunch of XF86Config.monitor.videocard files. Just
> > > download the ones the stores need.

> > > Custom create bootable CD-ROMs for the independents, that can take an
> > > empty system and install a user level system (with no user
interaction).
> > > Do a good install. All products should be installed and ready to go.
> > > "post tweak"

> > > [Base OS Config]
> > > KDE (IMHO gnome is not stable enough)
> > > StarOffice
> > > 128 Bit Netscape (Fully configured, fonts, plugins, applications, etc)

> > Why 128 and not just 56? Aren't there issues with export of the 128 bit
> > version? You'd have to take care not to inadvertently send any of these
CDs
> > overseas.

> This isn't a distribution as much as it is an OEM tool for configuring
> new machines. There will be no case where the CD goes somewhere unknown.

Yes but how is this tool to be distributed? Over the 'net? If you include
the 128 bit version, you need all the security and legalese associated with
it.

--
Rich C.
"Have you supported a new Linux user today?"
To reply by email, remove the "abc_" from my address.

 
 
 

The need for an OEM Install!

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




> Kewel idea, ive got some comments if you're up for them...:)

> > [Base OS Config]
> > KDE (IMHO gnome is not stable enough)

> Agreed wholeheartedly, though the proper gnome libraries and such for
> supporting all those neat gnome toys (gftp, etc) would be nice...

> > StarOffice

> I despise staroffice, but I fear there isnt something better yet...
> Perhaps AbiWord as a partial alternative?

I sort of agree, I use Applix, but StarOffice reads MS documents better
than others. And it is free.

Quote:

> > 128 Bit Netscape (Fully configured, fonts, plugins, applications, etc)
> > AdobeAcrobat Reader
> > Real plugin

> Is this stable yet?  Ive noticed quite alot of flakiness with the
> version im running (I believe its the latest)...

I don't run it, Rock and a hard place.

Quote:

> > Voice & FAX
> > Gimp

> There is no substitute.

> > MP3 Player (kjukebox?)

> The problem with kjukebox is that as of version 1.0, it will only work
> with KDE2.0 and will only look at SQL databases.  If you package a nice
> SQL package (whichever flavor) as well it would be much nicer, though
> I think xmms is perfect for most people's needs.

I actually like xmms better than any kde app, but it does not have the
look and feel.

Quote:

> > XAnim?

> Of course!  Its stock with most distribs anyhow though...

Yes, but one has to download the codecs. Configure the filemanager to
use it when one "clicks" on the files. "post tweak"

Quote:

> > ppp dial-up

> Have you looked at all the neat PPP front ends at www.gnome.org?  Again,
> it would be nice to have the libs and such without having to actually use
> the unstable bits (like the file manager, etc)

I really don't like gnome. It just "feels" wrong. I would have no
problem going Window Maker, which could be very striking. Would a
"different" looking desktop help/hinder sales?

Quote:

> > Some cool screen savers

> Xscreensaver!  But theres lots of 3D stuff packaged with it now, and
> Mesa or Glide has become nessesary...

Yup, people like screen savers. Like pet rocks and cats.
Quote:

> > Some good FONTS!!!!

> Its about time!  SABVGA!  SABVGA!  :)

> > PostgreSQL, supply ODBC driver.

> Ah, theres the bit thatll support kjukebox 1.0...:)

The database is not typically a desktop thing, but I can see it as
making something's better.
Quote:

> > Java JDK
> > TIK, Gaim, or Java AIM.

> *sigh*, if you must.  :P
We must, we must!

> > Windows keys configured.

> As what by default?

The lower left pops up a "program" menu, ala kde button, or window maker
right click. Left button, on the right hand side, toggles processes. Not
sure what the other key should do.

Quote:

> > [Network & Services]
> > The system should ship secure! No ftp, no httpd, no telnet, etc. These
> > should be easy to activate when the user wants too, but not by default.

> Have you seen bastille yet?  Go find it and try it out and tell me what
> you think.

No I have not seen it.

Quote:

> > An ssh daemon should be installed and started at boot time if an
> > "internet support" option is desired.

> I like that idea.

> > Samba should be installed, SWAT should be enabled for localhost.

> Now look if you're going to go ahead with samba you probably should
> also go ahead with appletalk and netitalk...:)

Apple talk.... maybe. This should be a desktop system. It should be able
to share files and printers with other computers. It could be cool to be
plug and play with a Mac as well as Windows. Cool.

Quote:

> > [misc]
> > A pseudo admin user should be created "wizard" perhaps. The wizard
> > password will be given to the user on the printed sales certificate. As
> > well as stored at the store. The user will be instructed to change the
> > password, but as well all know wont.

> I think this is a bad idea.  As soon as you start talking about things
> like this you start talking about things like suid, and if you start
> talking about things like that you may as well enable telnet, ftp,
> fingerd, and all the rpc toys...:)

Not at all. A simple application, which allows the end user (with
correct password) to add users, configure printers, set time, etc.
Nothing more. If they want to do more, log in as root.

BTW: A "wizard" user can be created with user ID 0, which means it will
act as root, but will start in /home/wizard which will have
pre-configured start-up parameters.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> > [Needed tools]
> > An administration "wizard" that will allow users to do admin-ish sorts
> > of things without ever having to use the shell. The utils that come with
> > RedHat are "good" but, a full working session for root is a bad idea.

> Why not some kind of application available only to consoles (konsoles,
> xconsoles, etc) which runs as a special, privileged user?  Something along
> the lines of a cross between freebsd's sysinstall and SuSe's YAST would
> be lovely.

> > [Legal services]
> > We need a release, written by a good lawyer, that the purchaser must
> > sign stating that they understand that the system is a Linux system, not
> > a Microsoft Windows system, and therefor only runs Linux software. This
> > is sort of cheesy, but the little guys are going to want this
> > protection. Although we all know that Linux is better, there needs to be
> > some recognition that the system will not run "Wing Commander."

> Good idea.  You may want to package WINE along with your distribution
> (with the appropriate warnings and disclaimers) should a user or ten
> feel very attached to certian windows applications.  FreeVMWare might
> be nice as well.  I'm certian the fellers at VMWare would love to
> become a bit better known...:)

> p0ok

--
Mohawk Software
Windows 95, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
 
 
 

The need for an OEM Install!

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



> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Rich Cloutier would say:


> >> A buddy of mine and I have been toying with an idea. As you all may
have
> >> seen in the news lately, MS is putting pressure on the "mom and pops"
to
> >> ship genuine "from approved distributors" MS products. The Mom and pops
> >> have been shopping gray market, trying to save money on expensive MS
> >> product. Sometimes, inadvertently, they get counterfeit.

> >> We need to setup an OEM CD toolkit and support network. (We can charge
> >> money for the service)

> >(I don't see what these two observations have to do with each other, but
no
> >matter. There is no "counterfeit Linux" as far as I know, is there?)

> The point here is that it would be valuable to provide a more
> *realistic* alternative to "take the pressure off" the OEMs.

> >> Collect a whole bunch of XF86Config.monitor.videocard files. Just
> >> download the ones the stores need.

> *Un*fortunately, this is all going to change as soon as XFree86 4.0
> comes out.

> >> Custom create bootable CD-ROMs for the independents, that can take an
> >> empty system and install a user level system (with no user
interaction).
> >> Do a good install. All products should be installed and ready to go.
> >> "post tweak"

> >> [Base OS Config]
> >> KDE (IMHO gnome is not stable enough)
> >> StarOffice
> >> 128 Bit Netscape (Fully configured, fonts, plugins, applications, etc)

> >Why 128 and not just 56? Aren't there issues with export of the 128 bit
> >version? You'd have to take care not to inadvertently send any of these
CDs
> >overseas.

> Include the 56 bit version, and give the users the option of
> installing Fortify.

> >> AdobeAcrobat Reader
> >> Real plugin
> >> Voice & FAX
> >> Gimp
> >> MP3 Player (kjukebox?)
> >> XAnim?
> >> ppp dial-up
> >> Some cool screen savers
> >> Some good FONTS!!!!
> >> PostgreSQL, supply ODBC driver.
> >> Java JDK
> >> TIK, Gaim, or Java AIM.
> >> Windows keys configured.

> >> [options]
> >> CD-READ/WRITE utilities
> >> CodeCrusader (kdevelop?)

> If the gentle user wants to develop stuff, it should be
> straightforward to install as many development tools as are desired.

> >> [Network & Services]
> >> The system should ship secure! No ftp, no httpd, no telnet, etc. These
> >> should be easy to activate when the user wants too, but not by default.

> >What you need _as an option_ is a Linux clone of Wingate, with secure
> >services to allow the Linux machine to do what it excels at: be a front
end
> >for a home network. Set up SECURE, simple implementations of squid,
dante,
> >and smail, qmail or the like to do http, ftp, mail and news proxying for
> >other (presumably windows) clients on the network. Wingate is not
inherently
> >any more secure than any of the *nix proxies, and they explain in a few
> >simple steps how to make the network secure. We should be able to do the
> >same.

> I favor the "no telnet" option, and would be pleased to see any of
> such services replaced by "secured" versions.  The only problem, at
> this point, is the factor that some SSH/SSL implementations may not be
> "free enough" to deploy in this manner.

I agree.

Quote:

> >> An ssh daemon should be installed and started at boot time if an
> >> "internet support" option is desired.

> >> Samba should be installed, SWAT should be enabled for localhost.

> Ah, but isn't SAMBA a potential security hole, if not configured
> right?

> And if the idea is to be deploying Linux as the desktop OS, there's
> not much value in pushing SAMBA and in so doing pushing Win32.  That's
> a mixed message...

But the idea of interoperability is not, and, as unpleasant as it may seem,
adding a Linux box to the average household will automatically mean that
there is more than one computer present, with the other one(s) undoubtedly
running windows.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> >> [misc]
> >> A pseudo admin user should be created "wizard" perhaps. The wizard
> >> password will be given to the user on the printed sales certificate. As
> >> well as stored at the store. The user will be instructed to change the
> >> password, but as well all know wont.

> >> [Needed tools]
> >> An administration "wizard" that will allow users to do admin-ish sorts
> >> of things without ever having to use the shell. The utils that come
with
> >> RedHat are "good" but, a full working session for root is a bad idea.

> My "opinionated attitude" is that the *right* way of handling a lot of
> this stuff is to use cfengine, where you push rules into it, and
> cfengine enforces those rules from now on, even forever more.

> The value in *that* being that administration should be automated as
> much as possible.

> Hopefully the set of admin tools out there will get more powerful and
> mature over the next year.  Linuxconf sorta works, but I'm not
> thrilled with it.  I've not seen COAS in action; the *annoying* thing
> is that each of the major Linux vendors are tending to add their own
> non-interoperable tools.

> I'm getting more and more convinced that the right direction in which
> to go is to build distributions based on Debian, with the resultant
> central "store" of packages, and then layer some of the "creature
> comforts" on top of that.

> This resolves the problem with the RPM-based distributions where each
> RPM-vendor gets stuck with maintaining *all* their packages
> themselves.  Even Mandrake seems to be diverging away from Red Hat,
> which hurts the sharing of patches, hurts the flow of code, and
> increases the effort for all of 'em.

Once distributors start developing their own stuff, there becomes a
proprietary issue, in that the distributor does not *want* its admin tools
to be cross-platform, because that is what distinguishes it from all the
other distros out there. Instead, the push should be for the distributor to
try and *make* their tools become "standard." Any packager that is not
developing can help drive the community in this direction by picking the
best tools and promoting them.

--
Rich C.
"Have you supported a new Linux user today?"
To reply by email, remove the "abc_" from my address.

 
 
 

The need for an OEM Install!

Post by Shumway, Gordo » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> >> Collect a whole bunch of XF86Config.monitor.videocard files. Just
> >> download the ones the stores need.

> *Un*fortunately, this is all going to change as soon as XFree86 4.0
> comes out.

Please elaborate on this.  This is what I perceive as a major
shortcoming of Linux, a lot of oddball modelines, but not the one I
needed.


in any modeline database. I finally was able to generate it by using the
read-edid utility.  read-edid queries a plug and play monitor for its
preset modes and generates modelines based on the query results.

 
 
 

The need for an OEM Install!

Post by Tim Kelle » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> Comments, suggestions?

these are great ideas, and (finally) some of the more user
oriented distros are moving in this direction.

The biggest problem?  Netscape.  Freaking piece o' shit!  If
linux had parity with winblows in the area of simple web
browsing, things would be alot better.  Unfortunately, there are
so many proprietary protocols, especially WRT multimedia, and
none of these folks give a hoot about linux.  However, the latest
real player actually WORKS, so maybe things are looking up.

On a dedicated line, linux might be OK for an end user at this
point, but on a typical dial up I don't think it's going to be a
very pleasant experience, what, with netscape locking up if
you're not connected because it's trying to find a name server
(STUPID).

What engineer is responsible for THAT little bit of miserable
code I wonder?

--
Tim Kelley

 
 
 

The need for an OEM Install!

Post by Tim Kelle » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> > Have you looked at all the neat PPP front ends at www.gnome.org?  Again,
> > it would be nice to have the libs and such without having to actually use
> > the unstable bits (like the file manager, etc)

> I really don't like gnome. It just "feels" wrong. I would have no
> problem going Window Maker, which could be very striking. Would a
> "different" looking desktop help/hinder sales?

I agre about Gnome; I think the biggest mistake was no integrated
window manager.  I hate E.

re WindowMaker:  I love it and I think it's awesome, but it isn't
nearly as far along as KDE, and it needs a good integrated file
manager for end users (there are a couple but they are unstable).

Also no one seems to ship a decent collection of WM dock apps.
There are dozens of them.  That would be nice.

People always give me a "wow" response when they see my
windowmaker desktop.  Of course I have all sorts of stupid dock
app thingys running just for that purpose.

--
Tim Kelley

 
 
 

The need for an OEM Install!

Post by Craig Kelle » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00




> > > Have you looked at all the neat PPP front ends at www.gnome.org?  Again,
> > > it would be nice to have the libs and such without having to actually use
> > > the unstable bits (like the file manager, etc)

> > I really don't like gnome. It just "feels" wrong. I would have no
> > problem going Window Maker, which could be very striking. Would a
> > "different" looking desktop help/hinder sales?

> I agre about Gnome; I think the biggest mistake was no integrated
> window manager.  I hate E.

There are several gnome-compliant window managers, just like there
are several kde-compliant window managers.

kwm is no more compliant than others (say wmaker, for instance).

Quote:> re WindowMaker:  I love it and I think it's awesome, but it isn't
> nearly as far along as KDE, and it needs a good integrated file
> manager for end users (there are a couple but they are unstable).

You know, there *is* a difference between a window manager and a
desktop system.  You can happily use wmaker under KDE or GNOME.

--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.


 
 
 

The need for an OEM Install!

Post by Tim Kelle » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00




> > I agre about Gnome; I think the biggest mistake was no integrated
> > window manager.  I hate E.

> There are several gnome-compliant window managers, just like there
> are several kde-compliant window managers.

> kwm is no more compliant than others (say wmaker, for instance).

It's not the same.  wmaker might be "compliant" with gnome or
kde, but the look is jarring, to say the least. E isn't a whole
lot better.  kwm+kde looks very nice.

Quote:> > re WindowMaker:  I love it and I think it's awesome, but it isn't
> > nearly as far along as KDE, and it needs a good integrated file
> > manager for end users (there are a couple but they are unstable).

> You know, there *is* a difference between a window manager and a
> desktop system.  You can happily use wmaker under KDE or GNOME.

AFAIK, WindowMaker was always intended, eventually, to be a fully
fledged desktop system.  It just isn't there yet.

--
Tim Kelley

 
 
 

The need for an OEM Install!

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





>> > I agre about Gnome; I think the biggest mistake was no integrated
>> > window manager.  I hate E.

>> There are several gnome-compliant window managers, just like there
>> are several kde-compliant window managers.

>> kwm is no more compliant than others (say wmaker, for instance).

>It's not the same.  wmaker might be "compliant" with gnome or
>kde, but the look is jarring, to say the least. E isn't a whole
>lot better.  kwm+kde looks very nice.

>> > re WindowMaker:  I love it and I think it's awesome, but it isn't
>> > nearly as far along as KDE, and it needs a good integrated file
>> > manager for end users (there are a couple but they are unstable).

>> You know, there *is* a difference between a window manager and a
>> desktop system.  You can happily use wmaker under KDE or GNOME.

>AFAIK, WindowMaker was always intended, eventually, to be a fully
>fledged desktop system.  It just isn't there yet.

        No, it was intended to be a compliant window manager
        for a particular "desktop": namely gnustep.
 
 
 

The need for an OEM Install!

Post by Christopher Brow » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Tim Kelley would say:


>> > Have you looked at all the neat PPP front ends at www.gnome.org?
>> > Again, it would be nice to have the libs and such without having
>> > to actually use the unstable bits (like the file manager, etc)

>> I really don't like gnome. It just "feels" wrong. I would have no
>> problem going Window Maker, which could be very striking. Would a
>> "different" looking desktop help/hinder sales?

>I agre about Gnome; I think the biggest mistake was no integrated
>window manager.  I hate E.

I'm certainly in agreement on E; I don't like it much either.  Gnome
is basically a set of application development libraries; the whole
intent is to keep things sufficiently decoupled as to leave some
flexibility.

The "error" was in the degree to which they allowed Enlightenment to
"carry the WM torch."  Rasterman was not moving in at all the same
direction as Gnome, which was not helpful.

Quote:>re WindowMaker:  I love it and I think it's awesome, but it isn't
>nearly as far along as KDE, and it needs a good integrated file
>manager for end users (there are a couple but they are unstable).

Name one window manager that includes an integrated file manager.  KWM
doesn't.

The *true* problem is that "GNOME Midnight Commander" wasn't terribly
satisfactory, which quite parallels the problem that kfm was similarly
not terribly satisfactory.

The nearest thing, these days, to a "Gnome standard" for WM seems to
be Sawmill <http://www.dcs.warwick.ac.uk/~john/sw/sawmill/index.html>.
It lacks the WindowMaker "dock," which seems to me to be Well And
Fine; I'd much rather have the "Dock" or "Panel" be a separate
program, and GNOME panel and KDE kpanel satisfy that nicely, as does
TkDesk.

Quote:>Also no one seems to ship a decent collection of WM dock apps.  There
>are dozens of them.  That would be nice.

Debian has a barrel load of them.  What is probably needed is for
someone to construct an application that knows how to look for them
and invoke them.
--
Rules of the Evil Overlord #74. "My five-year-old child advisor will
also be asked to decipher any code I am thinking of using.  If he
breaks the code in under 30 seconds, it will not be used."
<http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html>

 
 
 

1. Need help identifying/installing OEM video card

To anybody who can help...

    I just finished installing Linux and XFree86 v3.1 on my system.  I'm
trying to get it configured for my OEM video card, an Avance Logic
ALG230X 1MB PCI card.  Unfortuantely, I've run into a few problems.  
First of all, I tried running SuperProbe to identify the card's chipset,
which comes back as Avance Logic (I can't remember the suffix off of the
top of my head), but I can't seem to find the server that contains
support for this chipset (I've tried the SVGA).  My first question is -
can anybody identify what this card is compatible with (the manual says
nothing - doesn't even give me their address) and which server package it
would be in.  Also - is there a database with a collection of these
configurations?  Any help that can be provided as greatly appreciated.

                                        Eddy

2. xdm Problem

3. Sol8 full Entire OEM install didn't install sccs & make.

4. Video cards

5. Need help with OEM video card ID

6. UNIX position at INTELSAT

7. Need help with IBM 0664CSH OEM drive

8. Tranfering files from an old web server to a new server

9. Need Help Identifying OEM ATI Video Card

10. Nader: OEMs should offer pre-installed Linux and other OS alternatives

11. Install Tape Drive - Dell PowerVault 120T (OEM Sony TSL-S11000)

12. Thoughts about usability and OEM install

13. Nader: OEMs should offer pre-installed Linux and other OS Alternatives