Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Linux printing

Reply
Thread Tools

Linux printing

 
 
Patrick Dunford
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2004
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) says...
> Hi there,
>
> Patrick Dunford wrote:
> > In article <3Vxyc.1265$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)
> > says...
> >
> >>interesting read ...
> >>
> >>http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cups-horror.html

>
> CUPS is a fine package. MacOS X uses it, as do many sysadmins
> on Linux/Windows shared networks...thats just one story, which
> knockers like yourself will jump upon claiming CUPS is crap...
>
> > Comparing Linux and Windows, the different markets that these products
> > are targeted at is very obvious.

>
> Not really. Windows and Linux are used for many different and common
> purposes across the world. Linux however is trying to get more of a
> foot in the door into areas that Windows traditionally has enjoyed
> more of its monopolistic stranglehold upon...
>
> > so far. If Linux is ever going to have a chance of competing successfully
> > with these established companies the developers of Linux and applications
> > that run on it are, somehow, going to have to leave that geekiness well
> > behind.

>
> Your perception that linux is 100% a geek domain is largely unfounded.
> The linux group guys I've met here in Chch are no more/less geekier than
> the Windows-centric people I've met here. That you perceive them to be
> so perhaps just indicates you don't wish to known as a geek, and that
> you find it convenient that a group exists for you to focus attention
> upon in trying to declare with utmost profanity that you are not what
> you perceive/claim linux people to be...


wrong

The linuxheads vary but the hard core drive behind linux comes from geek
programmers who get a big kick out of writing programme code. I'd suggest
they fit the typical stereotype of a computer programmer.

I'd suggest to you that none of the people you refer to above are linux
programners, just end users.

The fact is, learning how to use Linux is about as easy as learning
another programming language. I'm at the stage of life where I don't need
to learn another language, so Linux has no appeal to me. Compared to
WinXP where I have learned a lot in a short time, the learning curve for
Linux is very steep. It is that because Linux was put together and
designed by hackers who don't really care whether the command lines they
type appear as gibberish or not.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Dumbkiwi
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2004
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 01:52:35 +1200, Patrick Dunford wrote:

> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>> Hi there,
>>
>> Patrick Dunford wrote:
>> > In article <3Vxyc.1265$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)
>> > says...
>> >
>> >>interesting read ...
>> >>
>> >>http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cups-horror.html

>>
>> CUPS is a fine package. MacOS X uses it, as do many sysadmins
>> on Linux/Windows shared networks...thats just one story, which
>> knockers like yourself will jump upon claiming CUPS is crap...
>>
>> > Comparing Linux and Windows, the different markets that these products
>> > are targeted at is very obvious.

>>
>> Not really. Windows and Linux are used for many different and common
>> purposes across the world. Linux however is trying to get more of a
>> foot in the door into areas that Windows traditionally has enjoyed
>> more of its monopolistic stranglehold upon...
>>
>> > so far. If Linux is ever going to have a chance of competing successfully
>> > with these established companies the developers of Linux and applications
>> > that run on it are, somehow, going to have to leave that geekiness well
>> > behind.

>>
>> Your perception that linux is 100% a geek domain is largely unfounded.
>> The linux group guys I've met here in Chch are no more/less geekier than
>> the Windows-centric people I've met here. That you perceive them to be
>> so perhaps just indicates you don't wish to known as a geek, and that
>> you find it convenient that a group exists for you to focus attention
>> upon in trying to declare with utmost profanity that you are not what
>> you perceive/claim linux people to be...

>
> wrong
>
> The linuxheads vary but the hard core drive behind linux comes from geek
> programmers who get a big kick out of writing programme code. I'd suggest
> they fit the typical stereotype of a computer programmer.
>
> I'd suggest to you that none of the people you refer to above are linux
> programners, just end users.
>
> The fact is, learning how to use Linux is about as easy as learning
> another programming language. I'm at the stage of life where I don't need
> to learn another language, so Linux has no appeal to me. Compared to
> WinXP where I have learned a lot in a short time, the learning curve for
> Linux is very steep. It is that because Linux was put together and
> designed by hackers who don't really care whether the command lines they
> type appear as gibberish or not.


When did you last use linux? Get Xandros, and install it. You will
seldom, if ever, need to look at a command line. I've put linux on
numerous family member's computers (Mandrake 10). As long as it's
installed, and setup to work like windows, none of these people have any
trouble using it. I install it, and never hear from them again.
Everything works as expected every time they boot their 'puter. No
unexpected surprises from the last batch of spyware. They have never used a command line, nor have they
ever learned a computer language. You sound like you've been listening
to, and believing the FUD emanating from a certain Redmond based company,
and it's supporters. As the great Chuck D once said: Don't, Don't,
Don't, Don't believe the hype. The command line is there if you need/want
it on linux, but isn't necessary on end-user focussed distros.

Matt

--
Regards Matt

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Dumbkiwi
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2004
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 01:47:13 +1200, Patrick Dunford wrote:

> In article <pan.2004.06.12.10.43.30.59257@TRACKER>,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 22:12:59 +1200, Allistar wrote:
>>
>> >> But that is part of the problem, isn't it. There are so many distros,
>> >> half of them produced by hackers!
>> >
>> > To me that's one of the appeals of Linux - choice.

>>
>> Dunford doesn't understand that. To him there can only be One Way.

>
> the problem, which you must admit David Murray, is that the market is
> divided among itself. There are endless numbers of distros competing for
> a very small market share.
>
> If more energy was put into the issues raised in the OP's post and less
> into creating yet another distro then linux would stand a much greater
> chance.


But that's what the distros do. For example, Xandros, Lycoris, Linspire,
Mandrake etc all address usability issues. Other distros address
server issues, or clustering issues. Remember, linux is not just a
desktop operating system, it runs on big iron and embedded devices.
Rather than making a one size fits all operating system, which doesn't do
anything particularly well, why not take a common set of tools, and tweak
them to a particular purpose, and do it well. Linux has been around for
approx 13 years, and in that time has progressed from a averagely coded
kernel to a stable, and powerful operating system that can run on big
iron, as well as tiny embedded devices and the desktop and has been
ported to a frightening number of architectures. When one looks at the
progress linux has made in that time, when compared to other proprietary
operating systems, I would say that the linux development model is
working, and working damn well. Leave it alone, and just reap the
benefits, if you're not prepared to contribute. Linux doesn't need your
advice. It has done, and will do, better without you.
>
> As it is, the issues raised by having multiple different windows
> managers are starting to be recognised at last by Linux developers.
>


Where is the problem with multiple window managers? I have never come
across a problem caused by the window manager/desktop environment that I
use? What problems are we talking about here?

> The Mac OS.X is an excellent example of how an operating system can be
> developed from opensource code with the strength of leadership that
> comes from having only one goal - to produce one OS rather than to
> produce 10 slightly different ones.


Yes it is, in its own limited field. However, MacOSX is a desktop
operating system written for a single architecture and a limited range of
hardware. Given where linux is today, in terms of diversity of purpose,
and architecture, that model simply won't work. Hence the development
models we have. In fact, it seems to me that MacOSX should be seen as
another "distro" of an opensource operating system. They took the
existing open source tool set, and moulded it to a particular purpose.
Just like Xandros, and damn small linux in the linux world. They are
simply an extension or example of the linux development model, not a
departure from it. The linux development model is working, and working
damn fast. Get over it, embrace it, understand it.

--
Regards Matt

 
Reply With Quote
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2004
Patrick Bold wrote:

>
> "Allistar" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:yCAyc.2056$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Patrick Dunford wrote:
>>
>> > But that is part of the problem, isn't it. There are so many

> distros,
>> > half of them produced by hackers!

>>
>> To me that's one of the appeals of Linux - choice.
>>

>
> Ah, here we go -- bowing before the Great God of Choice again! So what
> exactly is the appeal in having to make a "choice" between distros that
> work and distros that don't work?


It depends who you are. Some people revel in helping out with an open source
project.

How many different distributions of Microsoft Windows (and I don't just mean
"versions") do you have? What about window managers?

Don't get me wrong - some people don't want or don't need the choice. But if
you do then Linux provides a lot of it.

Allistar.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2004
Patrick Dunford wrote:

> In article <pan.2004.06.12.10.43.30.59257@TRACKER>,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 22:12:59 +1200, Allistar wrote:
>>
>> >> But that is part of the problem, isn't it. There are so many distros,
>> >> half of them produced by hackers!
>> >
>> > To me that's one of the appeals of Linux - choice.

>>
>> Dunford doesn't understand that. To him there can only be One Way.

>
> the problem, which you must admit David Murray, is that the market is
> divided among itself. There are endless numbers of distros competing for
> a very small market share.


Are all distributions competing for market share? I highly doubt it.

> If more energy was put into the issues raised in the OP's post and less
> into creating yet another distro then linux would stand a much greater
> chance.


Open source developers will work on prpjects that interest them or that they
need to get working. Sure, pooling all of that resource could lead to great
things but it isn't going to happen in the open source world.

Stop thinking like open source development works the same as commercial
software development - it doesn't.

> As it is, the issues raised by having multiple different windows managers
> are starting to be recognised at last by Linux developers.
>
> The Mac OS.X is an excellent example of how an operating system can be
> developed from opensource code with the strength of leadership that comes
> from having only one goal - to produce one OS rather than to produce 10
> slightly different ones.


Those slightly different ones have different purposes. You can get
distributions solely for network sniffing and routing. You can get one that
is just for playing games using MAME. You can get distributions designed
specifically for operation in a cluster. You can get one that tries to be
as close a match to Microsoft Windows as possible.

That is the sort of choice I'm talking about and in my opinion it is good.

Allistar.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2004
PorkChop wrote:

> Patrick Bold wrote:
>
>>
>> "Allistar" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:yCAyc.2056$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Patrick Dunford wrote:
>>>
>>> > But that is part of the problem, isn't it. There are so many

>> distros,
>>> > half of them produced by hackers!
>>>
>>> To me that's one of the appeals of Linux - choice.
>>>

>>
>> Ah, here we go -- bowing before the Great God of Choice again! So what
>> exactly is the appeal in having to make a "choice" between distros that
>> work and distros that don't work?

>
> More confusion ?


The great thing about choice is no one is forcing you to use a particular
piece of software.

Don't want to use distribution XYZ? Well don't then. No one is making you.
But don't tell other people who want to use distribution XYZ that the mere
existance of that distribution is confusing other people.

Allistar.

 
Reply With Quote
 
whoisthis
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2004
In article <p7Cyc.2071$(E-Mail Removed)>,
"brundlefly" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> "a" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed). ..
> > In article <3Vxyc.1265$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)
> > says...
> > > interesting read ...
> > >
> > > http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cups-horror.html
> > >
> > >
> > > Paul

> >
> > You should have a look at how they do it on Mac OS X. People who know
> > what an IP address vaguely is can setup printers without any problems at
> > all - or restort to appletalk.
> >

>
> OS X uses CUPS
>
>


maybe, but to get a printer working I do not have to go into the web
based admin area to get any printer to work. Apple again have simplified
the interface down to things the user HAS to know and choose (ie USB,
AppleTalk,IP) then the name of the printer.

Yes, I did go into the CUPS admin page AFTER I had set up a printer so I
could modify it behaviour so it would act as a share printer/spooler to
our NT4 box so it could talk to an older AppleTalk only printer.

The article was not complaining about CUPS, I think its a damn great
idea, what he was complaining about was the interface design.

Apple has always been easier for people to use because they have a
corporate ideology about design of both hardware and software. Both
should be easy and elegant. Eeverything from the ground up is designed
to be consistant, understandable, and elegant, with the view that as
little relearning as possible should happen as you go between
applications etc. Linux suffers because there is no drive from a central
body saying "This is how it will be done", there are too many different
ideas all added into the one pot and thus there lacks consistancy.
Windows is no better in many areas !

Mac OSX is where Linux would like to be, but I do not think they will
ever make it.
 
Reply With Quote
 
whoisthis
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2004
In article <HiCyc.2073$(E-Mail Removed)>,
"brundlefly" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Hardly worth reading, you are just trolling.
> I regularly set up CUPS with Debian, Mandrake and Mac OS X with no problems
> at all
> It seems to me that companies like Xandros are rapidly sorting out Linux for
> consumers and companies like Suse are rapidly sorting out Linux for
> enterprises and there is nothing for you trolls to worry your little plastic
> dayglo fluff covered heads about but thanks for your concern. NOT !
>
>


AHH...brilliant, the old "If I do not have a problem it does not exist"
approach. Do you work in our computing support section ?, they too do
that "The email works fine for me", with the implied assertion that is
must therefore be working for everyone, it took 4 days to convince them
that it was NOT working as someone else desk.... then it turned out to
be a faulty switch.
 
Reply With Quote
 
whoisthis
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2004
In article <iJByc.1364$(E-Mail Removed)>,
PorkChop <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> a wrote:
>
> snip
> >
> > You should have a look at how they do it on Mac OS X. People who know
> > what an IP address vaguely is can setup printers without any problems at
> > all - or restort to appletalk.

>
> What is Appletalk ?
>
>
> Paul


Actually it was a very elegant solution dating back to about 1986 that
allowed autodiscovery of printers, servers, etc on a network.
 
Reply With Quote
 
whoisthis
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2004
In article <yCAyc.2056$(E-Mail Removed)>,
Allistar <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Patrick Dunford wrote:
>
> > In article <40cab400$(E-Mail Removed)>, steve@mozilla-tbird0.6.org.nz
> > says...
> >> PorkChop wrote:
> >> > interesting read ...
> >> >
> >> > http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cups-horror.html
> >> >
> >> > Paul
> >>
> >> He must have been using the wrong distro.

> >
> > But that is part of the problem, isn't it. There are so many distros,
> > half of them produced by hackers!

>
> To me that's one of the appeals of Linux - choice.
>
> Allistar.


But that will also stop it going forward too, because you end up with
inconsistancy.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
brochure printing,online yearbook,printing,books printing,publishing elie Computer Support 2 11-27-2010 12:12 PM
brochure printing,online yearbook,printing,books printing,publishing elie Computer Support 0 08-21-2007 05:52 AM
brochure printing,online yearbook,printing,books printing,publishing elie Computer Support 0 08-21-2007 05:50 AM
brochure printing,online yearbook,printing,books printing,publishing elie Computer Support 0 08-21-2007 05:28 AM
brochure printing,online yearbook,printing,books printing,publishing elie Computer Support 0 08-18-2007 10:11 AM



Advertisments