Re: Linux + Win95 simultaneously

linux kernel account (linker@nightshade.z.ml.org)
Tue, 4 Nov 1997 07:01:00 -0500 (EST)


On Mon, 3 Nov 1997, Ken A. Irwin wrote:

> Running dual OS machines is always a kludge, as amazing as insignia is for
> sun and hp workstations (software intel emulater for those who don't know)
> it is too crippled to run anything worth while like Adobe products, video
> capture, or audio editing. Lets face it there are some very nice toys for
> 95 that are a long way off before you'll see them on linux. My personal
> belief is that any one that has one machine thats not 95 (no matter how much
> I hate microsoft) is making a mistake thats where the apps are, however
> any one that has more than one machine and doesn't have a linux box just
> doesn't know what they're missing. I have 2 95 boxes (one for me, one for my
> wife) and a beast of a linux box at home. I have one 95 box and *two* linux
> boxes
> in my office at work. In both places 95 has the best video, and audio products
> on it and linux is the grunt, all the modems jaz drives CD changers, tape
> drives
> etc are on linux, 95 is just an X-terminal that runs nifty apps. Linux does
> all
> the work.

For the most part I agreed with your post.. However, I do have to speak up
here...

*I* do just fine without 95.. True, there are nifty apps for it.. But, I
couldn't afford them anyways, I spend my money on a rare few linux things,
and hardware.... Furthermore, I can find all the software *I* need under
Linux, and when I cant then it's so strange I have to write it myself
(i.e. it wouldn't exist under windows anyways).. I've had to do that
several times when doing audio work (Thank god for Khoros).. The Gimp
handles all my graphic needs..

Not everyone is the same, I dont have any need for 95.. I respect (and
pity) those who do... Dont presume that I'm missing out on anything, my
computing needs arn't yours.. :)