Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!metro!metro!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!gatech!news.mathworks.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.missouri.edu!vortex.cc.missouri.edu!rhys From: "Justin \"Rhys Thuryn\" McNutt" <rhys@vortex.cc.missouri.edu> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: Historic Opportunity facing Free Unix (was Re: The Lai/Baker paper, benchmarks, and the world of free UNIX) Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 15:03:32 -0500 Organization: University of Missouri - Columbia Lines: 38 Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.960503145846.916B-100000@vortex.cc.missouri.edu> References: <NELSON.96Apr15010553@ns.crynwr.com> <yfgbuktfn1w.fsf@time.cdrom.com> <4l89ov$g5i@river.biddeford.com> <4lr9al$jea@felix.cc.gatech.edu> <31831544.7E85@vfr.interceptor.com> <DqMCFH.E5E@pe1chl.ampr.org> <4m8c94$1g5u@news.missouri.edu> <31897608.198A@vfr.interceptor.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: vortex.cc.missouri.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII In-Reply-To: <31897608.198A@vfr.interceptor.com> Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.development.system:22933 comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc:917 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:3646 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3487 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:18637 comp.os.linux.advocacy:47905 On Thu, 2 May 1996, Thumper! wrote: > TCP/IP isn't bad, but it's a lot bigger hassle that serves no purpose on > smaller networks. For example, if you're running NT with DHCP and WINS, > and someone brings in a laptop running Win95, they can plug it in, and it's > effectively auto-configured. TCP/IP (particularly in Linux) isn't very difficult to configure at all, and I found it a hell of a lot easier to deal with than Microsft Networking (we set up a 3-node LAN at home). I realize that in reality the second part is mostly opinion, but TCP/IP network software only asks for three things: your IP, your netmask, and your gateway. MS Networking (for example) requires lots of setup through their stupid GUI that just confuses the hell out of [me]. > And inherently the attidtude of "what's wrong with..." or "you just have to > add this..." and "xxx is better anyways, so who needs yyy" is exactly what > keeps any UNIX from being the operating system for the masses. I agree. You don't want me to just forget about MS Networking or AppleTalk "just because TCP/IP already exists (and is better IMHO)". On the other hand, don't discount TCP/IP for the same reason, please. > That's not saying the UNIX is a horrible product, it's just saying that > UNIX remains an operating system for people who spend a substantially > larger amount of time working ON computers than the average guy at home. Only because of the apps and (partly) the way it's implemented. Not to mention that there are zillions of unices with noone to market them on TV... -------- If you can lead it to water and force it to drink, it isn't a horse. Got a Linux problem? Or can you help others solve them? Visit the Linux Common Problems page at http://vortex.cc.missouri.edu/~rhys/linux.html rhys@vortex.cc.missouri.edu