General discussion

All Comments

  • Author
    • #3351203


      by jaqui ·

      In reply to Join the Linux discussion

      it’s out.( if you know where to look 😉 )
      I downloaded it to check it out.
      only found one minor bug. ( menu link broken for one kde control center module )

      definately a smoothly polished system. easily installed, even for newbies.
      the design of the mandrake control center actually makes sense now. and the widards for configuring the servers are smootheer than ever.

      the only real complaint I have is the switch from Mozilla Suite to Firefox & Thunderbird.
      ( I didn’t install them, I snagged mozilla suite and installed it. the only glitch in that is the standard of mandrakes odd menu structure requiring using menu edit to add the symlink to the executable for mozilla. )

      thinking I might submit a config patch to add the mdk specific menu path to mozilla to save that step.

      • #3325553

        funny . . .

        by apotheon ·

        In reply to mdk10.2b3

        Until fairly recently, everyone was using the Mozilla suite as the default, and my main complaint was that they weren’t using Firefox and Thunderbird instead.

        Different strokes . . .

        • #3322603

          I just want

          by jaqui ·

          In reply to funny . . .

          the extra functionality included with the suite.
          the dom instpector, java console / debugger integrated access to the suite tools.

          firefox and thunderbird are completely separate, as ie and outbreak are.
          with the suite I can open moz messenger with the button or menu, instead of having to navigate menues or hit desktop for shortcut

          also, with a lot of linux communication happening on irc channels, chatzilla is a usefull tool for me.

        • #3322587

          You’re just doing it wrong.

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to I just want

          Almost nobody in the world needs EVERYTHING that the Mozilla suite includes, and they certainly don’t need the codebase for it all loaded into memory all the time. You refer to the separation of tasks between browser and mail client as though it’s a bad thing, even comparing it to the separation between browser and mail interfaces in Microsoft applications The truth, of course, is that the MS applications don’t separate the stuff much at all, and that’s part of the problem: when you load even something as relatively innocuous as Outlook Express, you get the full rendering engine of IE loaded into RAM and most of its interface features (and bugs). While the Mozilla suite isn’t nearly that bad, it tends to suck resources a bit more than the independent clients that the Mozilla guys are turning out now.

          Of course, there’s also the simple fact that the configurability of Firefox is unmatched by any other graphical browser. Between plugins and extensions, you can build a browser application that runs anywhere from highly functional but lightweight to the Mecha-Mozilla of browsers, complete with overgrown lightbulb under its head. Even better, when you don’t have some features active, they [b]don’t exist on your computer[/b]. K.I.S.S.

          Bloat and cruft are the banes of my computing existence. I’ll avoid ’em where I can, thanks. The Mozilla suite is an overinflated feature-creep nightmare running a close third to Netscape among major ISP-agnostic browsers.

          In addition to all of that, I’ll present an example of what’s nice about having the separate Firefox browser: I’ve got a Pentium 233MHz Thinkpad 560X with only 64MB of RAM. I need a good graphical browser on the thing because I use it to access my employer’s website when I’m working in the datacenter, so I’ve got Firefox. For a mail client on the thing, I’m currently using MailX at the command line, and for IRC (to convers with the devs while working on servers) I use irssi, again at the command line. Talk about a small memory footprint. . . .

          A Real Linux User uses command line. Heh.

          Of course, all of this is from my own point of view. I have different tastes than others. Considering your attachment to LFS, I’m surprised you prefer the Moz suite over Firefox (or even Lynx), but to each their own. I’m sure your reasons for preferring the Moz suite are perfectly valid. They’re just not applicable for me, and for my purposes Firefox is as close to a “perfect” browser as I’ve ever seen.

        • #3322493

          moz suite

          by jaqui ·

          In reply to You’re just doing it wrong.

          for pleasure browsing and checking site’s under development.
          most of my pleasure browsing is graphics intensive sites, so lynx isn’t suitable.

          and when developing a site that has graphics, to ensure effective layout, it helps to browse with graphic capable browser.

          lynx, links, even emacs. for konsole browsing.

          I’m not really that enthusiastic about irc, so by keeping it limited to only when in a graphic interface I don’t get irritated and throw the computer out the window.

        • #3322491


          by apotheon ·

          In reply to moz suite

          I’m not much of an IRC enthusiast either, but it’s handy for keeping in touch with the devs for work. Actually, it’s kinda NECESSARY for keeping in touch with them.

          I’d be using CLI for IMs on thoth (my laptop) if there was a multi-protocol text-only client, but there isn’t, so I use Gaim. C’est la vie.

        • #3322446


          by jaqui ·

          In reply to IRC

          a multi protocol cli for ims.
          that is an odd request.

          like how to display what services are connected, and what ones are screwing the pooch and disconnecting you.

          which contacts are online.
          which are afk
          which are busy
          which are screaming for conversation 😉
          which are sleeping ya perv leave me alone.
          ( my own custom message in yaheII )

          message pop up to be read or a notifier to let you know it’s there only?

        • #3322427

          well . . .

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to IRC

          There’s naim, for AIM only. I don’t know why nobody has worked out multi-protocol clients for the CLI.

          I haven’t really used naim, so I can’t comment on how well it works, but after seeing how irssi works for IRC, I know that the capabilities to produce a good IM client for the cli exist. Something simple like the multiple screen setup in irssi could easily handle multiple IM conversations the way irssi handles multiple private /msg conversations, with number indicators to show which screens are active and perhaps access to the sound server for audio indicators. I haven’t yet come up with a feature of a graphical IM client that is needed for CLI that couldn’t be done in CLI.

          Hell, I’d write it myself if I knew more C and wasn’t so busy.

        • #3322378

          but it is an

          by jaqui ·

          In reply to IRC

          interesting idea.
          only have to add a conection / account to the existing libs for all of them. then tie together with the interface for chosen client.
          hard part, I don’t think any are plugin capable in design…yet

        • #3048175

          late follow-up

          by apotheon ·

          In reply to IRC

          I’ve been using centericq for a while as a multiprotocol IM client. It’s CLI, and it’s great.

Viewing 0 reply threads