[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Subject Index][Thread Index]

Re: Opinions [WAS] Re: Browser

Lucky..! you find time to write such long mails....

"Ravikant K.Rao" <ravikant@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on 23/05/2000 12:18:53 AM

Please respond to linux-india-programmers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To:   linux-india-programmers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc:    (bcc: Prateek Gera/TMs/TCSDELHI/TCS)
Subject:  Opinions [WAS] Re: [LIP] Browser

>>>>> "Shourya" == Shourya Sarcar <sarcar@xxxxxxxx> writes:

    >> *I* look at things -- Another notable thing is when people
    >> switch to OpenBSD if ever they do -- I don't know how FreeBSD

    Shourya> Do you mean to say that using the bash auto-completion is
    Shourya> weeniesm ?  I particularly find it very nifty and useful

     No no... You're drifting. Let me restate (in a probably better
way) ...

     bash <TAB> complete *IS* useful. The netscape GUI *IS* useful,
at times. Having a PIII-900 MHz CPU *IS* useful.... I'm not denying
that -- you seem to somehow infer that that was what I meant. NO

     What I *am* saying is this: A *real* [ Opinion ] Sys Admin
should *NOT* start complaining if he does not have <TAB> complete. He
should only figure out if he liked OpenBSD as an O/S or if he
doesn't. So what if OpenBSD doesn't have <TAB> complete? Isn't it cool
on many other fronts? My point is this: A System Administrator should
*NOT* be crippled by lack thereof, of certain tools which are
available. He should not be *completely* non-functional, just because
his video card cannot do 1260x1024x64 bpp

     I like using my mozilla and my XEmacs too... but what I am
saying is that, if I can't send out an email or browse the web if I am
not given these, I would never make as much as a semi-decent sys

     All this talk about OpenBSD and Opinions is going really
off-topic -- I guess we shift this to Linux-india-General or take this
to private email.

    Shourya> and hate MS (one of the 1002 reasons) for not having
    Shourya> incorporated this feature in the NT/98/2K versions (DOS
    Shourya> VM/interface)

     There's a patch somewhere which you can run, to enable this on
DOS. Again, this is what I mean ... but I'm not going to rant over and
over again. So if you haven't figured out, so be it, or scroll back up
and read the 3 paragraphs above.

    >> From the sysads pt of view, you have a point when you say that
    >> (s)he should
    Shourya> be comfortable with the console and not feel dazed and
    Shourya> confused if any particular tool is missing.However,

     Thats is. That's all I am saying.

    Shourya> a) A sysad is bound to have favourites.  I feel fine with
    Shourya> joe while my friends wuld swear in vi. But both of us get
    Shourya> they work done.

     Yeah? Again ,... *sigh* Let me rant yet another time.

     Just because you use vi or joe or $editor doesnt mean you are
stupid. BUT -- if a *REAL* sys admin *NEEDS* XEmacs or whatever the
heck, and if by chance, he lost it, and was given vi on a console
.. or joe .. he can't get his work done, then he's useless.

     So whoever said anything about you using joe and not getting
work done or a sys admin not having favourites? Obviously, *EVERYONE*
has favourites. The idea is this ... I don't care what the sys admin's
favourite is. *WHATEVER* it is.. he should be able to function *FULLY*
, to his 100% capability/efficiency given a console/vi/whatever

    Shourya> b) I rather prefer working on netconf than edit all all
    Shourya> those 15 odd files running from the simple /etc/hosts to
    Shourya> the not so nice-looking /etc/sendmail.conf. This does not
    Shourya> mean that I cannot use joe/vi/pico/emacs on those files
    Shourya> (though i admit I am a bogo at m4 macros) but only that I
    Shourya> would rather prefer the ease of a tool to settle those
    Shourya> simple issues.

     You're taking this too personally. And again, read the
paragraph above. Its fine if you like pico .. no one complains about it.

    Shourya> c)What is wrong with a GUI. While I admit that the

     Nothing *Wrong* -- everything isn't a binary value with
"Right" or "Wrong" States -- its about choice/preference. Do you like
a GUI more than a console? You probably like working at a *slightly*
slower pace, browsing on netscape viewing every picture. But due to
several reasons, I like working on lynx on my console.... Thats it. It
doesnt mean you're right and I'm wrong or vice versa. The
object/point-of-discussion here is the sys admin, not you or me.

     Again, I see linux-ing itself as a journey toward ultimately
becoming a BOFH(!) ;) ... and each of us is a sys admin in his own
right ... but given a console and 400 machines ... and *NO* GUI tools,
will your productivity decrease radically just because of lack of GUI
tools? That's all is in intent. And the usage of "you" is not in the
conventional sense here. I dont really mean "you" as in Shourya
... but sys admin joe ... don't take this personally.

    Shourya> lack of it retards the populistic growth of an OS. For an
    Shourya> OS to be successful and accepted by the common masses, it
    Shourya> is quintessential that it has a GUI and "Windowish Auto
    Shourya> features".

     Agreed -- that's where commercialism comes in. How do I care
if Linux isnt "successful" or if OpenBSD isn't "successful" ? *MY* way
of looking at "success" is different from what joe looks at it. I want
my work done, in a secure environment, fully configurable and such
like .. blah blah ... and Linux gives me all of this. so its
successful, as far as I am concerned. Going by your theory, you would
term Linux to be unsuccessful.  I really couldn't care if 84% of the
world's desktop/personal boxes run  Windows and if 92% run MS Office
... what *I* prefer/like is my linux and which I will use, come rain
or sunshine.

    Shourya> d) One can debate forever as to whether the Web should
    Shourya> extend beyond standardised HTML or not. Java/ Scripting
    Shourya> languages and Platform specific components have their ads
    Shourya> and disads but the TRUTH is that they are HERE. We cannot

     Very true.

    Shourya> ignore them. We definitely need low memory footprint
    Shourya> Java(Script)enabled browsers for Linux . {Aside : Have
    Shourya> people checked out HotJava/NetPositive ? } I like kfm the
    Shourya> KDE File Manager which doubles up as a browser, very
    Shourya> lightweight, but lacks Java* support.

     *definitely* ? Why? Am *I* going to perish if I dont have
java/script/whatever ? no. Well, it *will* be useful, in many/certain
situations, yes ... but I won't die if I dont have it.

    Shourya> These are just opinions.  Regards Shourya


Ravikant K.Rao : http://www.symonds.net/~ravi/
Primary Email  : <ravi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
PGP: 9544A4A1   GPG: 1024D/C2FC752D

For more information on the LIP mailing list see: