Re: CP/M Source

Tom Lake wrote:
So why do I keep using Windows? Because it's difficult to use anything else. Try to buy a new computer with anything but Vista already installed. Also, as a writer it's important for me to be able to exchange files with my editors. Like it or not, Windows and its apps represent the Lingua Franca of the 21st Century.

You can use Linux or Apple's OS X and use OpenOffice to read and write Word files. There are a few differences but unless you're producing a complex newsletter or something, most documents go back and forth with ease.

First of all, my livelihood depends a lot on being able to share files with other people, about 98% of whom are using Windows boxes. It may indeed be true that the files transfer between apps with no problems, but I'm not inclined to risk it without proof.

Further, my docs tend to have a lot of figures and equations, for which I use Visio and MathType. Until recently, StarOffice and OpenOffice have not had an equation editor. I don't know what they use for a Visio equivalent. I'm _TOLD_ that the new versions include a MathType clone, which works just like the real deal. I'd have to try it for myself for awhile, to be sure.


If I seemed to be reluctant (as I am) to download yet another app like Cygwin or 7zip, it's precisely _BECAUSE_ of the fragility of Windows. It's already, and always, teetering on the brink of disaster. I've already had to wipe the hard drive and re-install everything, twice. My wife, whose most complex activities are exchanging emails on AOL and surfing the web, had to wipe and re-install Vista. The last thing in the world I need is more apps that don't play nice together.

Have you run good diagnostics on your hardware? I've run Vista for over a year 12 hrs a day 7 days a week with no unplanned downtime at all.

Yep, all of the above. There's nothing wrong with the hardware. The problems tend to be associated with the registry which, as we al l know, tends to rot on the shelf. I've got a full range of virus checkers, spam blockers, spyware bots, and registry cleaners. They all report a clean system. But, as I said, I tend to have a _LOT_ of apps, some of whom don't play nicely with others.

That was before I spent two years surrounded by Unix Wizards -- insufferable, elitist bores whose attitudes rivaled even those of the Multicians. I had another, similar experience, with Linux users in 2001-2006.

You use the OS. Why should you care what others who use it are like?

Um ... because they tell me that I need to use tar instead of zip?
Because they tell me that I should use Cygwin? Because they tell me that I should be using a command-line compiler, like "real" programmers do?


Those experiences reminded me of my experiences in some church denominations: "You know, it wouldn't be a bad place to go, if it weren't for the people in it."

Similarly to the above, I've never understood that attitude. If you go to church at all, it should be for God, not the other people in the church.

Of course. It's not a social club. But many can be very judgmental, and are not shy about telling you that their way is the only way. Sound familiar?


Further, although I know that Linux systems are famous for long uptimes (though I suspect that they tend to depend on command-line, rather than GUI, interfaces), that was not our experience. Our BSD 4.3, running on a VAX, typically crashed on the order of once per day -- sometimes more. In 2005 I spent some time on a dedicated Linux desktop, running the StarOffice tools and one huge, proprietary app. I found at least as many bugs in the StarOffice "Word" as in the Microsoft version, and it crashed pretty much as often. I understand that Linux is becoming more and more reliable and more of an "appliance" OS every day, unlike its main competitor, which seems to be going the other way.

The beta of Windows 7 is more stable than either XP or Vista (for those who claim to have problems with Vista)


But face it: Unix was conceived around 1965, as the third time-share system in the world (after TSS and Multics),during a time when the only terminal was a Teletype ASR-33, and large RAM meant 8k. For someone to try to tell me that a Unix clone represents the bleeding edge of computer technology, strikes me as more than a little odd. Only a couple of years ago, I had a Linux guru tell me, with a straight face, that the only screen editor anyone would ever need, was vi. 'Nuff said.

If you're a programmer, why would you need a fancy GUI?

Er .. because I _LIKE_ a GUI? Or, more accurately, I prefer an IDE to a command line interface. You have a problem with that?


Look, in my career I've written serious programs in 16 languages, for 16 operating systems. That doesn't count different environments, such as multiple compilers and IDEs. I'm about as far from a partisan as you can get. I don't want to join a fraternity. I haven't got time for that "Harley rider" crap. My goal is not be an _ANYTHING_ guru. I just have work to do, and I want to get it done as quickly and easily as possible, using whatever works, and works reliably.


So you don't like Windows and you don't like Linux. What DO you like?

I thought you'd never ask. One of the reasons I look so wistfully back on CP/M is because it's the last system I've used in which all the apps did what they were told, every time. Yes, there were exceptions, but they made the circular file on the first failure.

Moreover, if there was anything I didn't like about the OS or the apps, I could always change them to my tastes.

It's my studied opinion that the right OS for single-user desktop PCs has not yet been written. Linux (and OS X) are based on a time-share system. The architecture of Windows was designed more for shutting out competition than for performance and quality. In other words, it's gratuitously complex on purpose.

I would _LOVE_ to see a new OS be written from scratch, instead of cloning some 60's technology. Each time I hear of a new OS (Be, for example) I find myself hoping that maybe this will be the one. So far, no luck.

Jack

Tom Lake
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OS/2 mentioned in a Vista review
    ... You can also install it in a classic way in 2K (and XP, and 2003 and Vista) by ... That may be a good basis of comparison for you, but to someone who is already displeased with the previous standard of operation of Windows, what should that mean? ... It can be done on XP or OS/2, ... Consider: full-screen apps. ...
    (comp.os.os2.misc)
  • Re: Why Ubuntu (Still) Sucks - Part 2: Compiz Fusion
    ... In the first part of the video, the unseen demonstrator shows-off Windows Vista Aero, including some of the more talked-about UI effects. ... they show Ubuntu with Compiz Fusion enabled. ... Of course, like most attempts by the Linux community to parrot Windows Vista, the aforementioned "eye candy showdown" misses the forest for the trees. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.general)
  • Re: Mac eye for the Linux guy?
    ... > I'm a Unix sysadmin (Linux, Solaris, *BSD) who has been running Linux ... Windows is not an option -- the Windows trolls need not ... GIU apps. ... > Are there any decent programs supporting multiple virtual desktops ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: How to maximize your frustration with computers
    ... are written for Windows. ... and it is not only the engineering apps that are ... Vista, _none_ of the hospitals use Macs. ... I have run the $1,600 Dragon medical version on both ...
    (comp.sys.mac.system)
  • Re: Why Ubuntu (Still) Sucks - Part 2: Compiz Fusion
    ... In the first part of the video, the unseen demonstrator shows-off Windows Vista Aero, including some of the more talked-about UI effects. ... they show Ubuntu with Compiz Fusion enabled. ... Of course, like most attempts by the Linux community to parrot Windows Vista, the aforementioned "eye candy showdown" misses the forest for the trees. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.general)