On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 13:59 -0700, Phil Mattison wrote:
> Believe it or not I was in fact attempting to make a constructive suggestion
> in my original post, e.g. to separate the GUI front end from the kernel.
----
It already is separate - always was and always will be. You are stating
what is already the case, tossing it out as a theory of your own to a
list that can do nothing about the situation at all. Somewhat akin to
flailing at the wind.
What you are speaking of is distributions - they handle bundling of
packages and many of them bundle their installs of the kernel with a
kitchen sink of applications featuring an X implementation (your GUI
reference). If you don't like this approach, why not use Linux From
Scratch or Gentoo? Why not use Red Carpet? Why go with the distro bundle
which you seem to equate as Linux, which actually is nothing more than a
distro.
It would surely help if you understood your terms and your reference.
----
> If
> X11 and all the non-graphical services were packaged with the kernel distro
> it should be a fairly simple matter to define the interface between the GUI
> and the kernel package as X11. If everybody thinks that is a stupid idea
> then I guess it won't happen. It's not like you're saving the community by
> shooting it down. No cause for alarm unless you see people getting on-board
> with it.
----
again - it would help if you understood your terms and your references.
I won't begin to debate this statement since it doesn't make sense to
me.
----
>
> I know all the major components of the distros are funded by big
> corporations.
----
You don't know very much at all. This isn't the case - despite the
strength of your assertion, it is wrong.
----
> I should think that would cast a little doubt on some of the
> Pollyanna idealism I see in this forum.
----
I wish you knew what you were talking about.
----
> You just can't get away from those
> evil capitalists, can you?
----
are all capitalists evil? are the capitalists that offer Linux
distributions evil? Is Microsoft evil? Is Apple evil? IBM? Novell?
Are you content to toss out silly generalizations that neither define
your terms or references and expect that people can take them seriously?
----
>
> But maybe Linux will always be a pain in the butt for all but the most
> ardent lovers of computing complexity. After all, there is something to be
> said for job security.
----
If Linux is a pain in the butt, why would you use it? If you think Linux
represents complexity and Windows represents simplicity than why post
here?
None of this has anything to do with complexity or job security. Linux
is a tool which people use by choice. If it doesn't fill your need or
represent your choice, then so be it. That choice would be consistent
with the vast majority of computer users everywhere.
Other than to be negative, you don't seem to have a point at all.
Craig
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)