Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 14th Sep 2002 22:44 UTC
SuSE, openSUSE From SuSE Linux 8.1 on, YaST2 comes with a new, powerful package manager. It supersedes the classic YaST2 single package selection and integrates the YaST Online Update (YOU) and post-installation add-on selection at the same time. It lays the foundation for supporting multiple installation sources like a traditional set of SuSE CDs, add-on product CDs, patch CDs, FTP servers or even local directories - all of which may contain software packages to install. Specially optimized versions were implemented for both graphical user interface (the YaST2 Qt UI) or text interface (the YaST2 NCurses UI), providing each type of user with the tool that best fits his needs. Read more for the commentary.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: RE: Setup.exe
by null_pointer_us on Sun 15th Sep 2002 13:53 UTC

IF it is MS software then before #1 you should have included "Click OK on disclaimer stating you don't own this software" so what you paid is part of a TRO (Total Rental Cost) not a TCO.

You mean I can only use Windows XP for a certain number of months? Shoot...


Which version of XP were you installing the app on? There are 11 versions, or didn't you know that? Is that patch you are installing, one of thousands required to repaire security holes, the right one for your version of XP?

I just use Windows Update, like nearly everyone else has since the release of Windows 98.


Did you see a button that allowed you to accept or reject the fact that MS is storing every website you vist, every email address you have in your address book, and other personal information, in secret hidden files that get up loaded to Redmond? No, you didn't.

Cool. Which secret files are they being stored in?


Did you see a button that allows you not to pay License 6 fees for the next five for essentially the same apps you've always been running? No, you didn't. But, you do.

Ordinarily I try to ignore bad grammar in the interest of getting along, but in this case I cannot understand you. What fees are you talking about?


Did MS ask if you wanted to 'upgrade' to XP or will MS just cut off support for Win9X, NTX and W2K, forcing users to XP (and later LongHorn) or leave users of those platforms twisting in the wind?

You trying to tell me that SuSe still supports version 6.0? That Apple supports OS 8? That IBM supports computers you bought seven years ago?


Your "CORE REASON" argument is ludicrous. There have been OVER 50 versions of the Win32 platform since Win95 first came out. Most of the software written for the original Win95 won't run on later versions.

You need to stop lying before you get slammed. If developers properly targeted Win16 and wrote their programs according to the API, such programs will still run on Windows XP. Ditto that for Win32 apps. Heck, Windows XP still runs some of my DOS games. Do you know how many and how often Linux programs break? Without a large company and hundreds of dedicated programmers, it is hard to create a large collection of Linux apps that don't break each other.


Only a Microsurftie slave would complain about having free access to 'too many apps'.

We can do without the name calling, thank you. Who is arguing against having free access to "too many apps"? I thought that the argument was about how to present those applications in a way that Joe User can understand, not whether to prevent the thousands of Linux software packages from being installed.


If you have installed Mandrake 8.2, for example, you will find out that it is as easy or easier to install than XP.

I did, and it wasn't.


But, since MS contiues their illegal monopoly, with the help of the Bush DOJ team,

It is not illegal to *be* a monopoly; it is illegal to use one's monopoly power to prevent competition from entering the market. Even that is pretty vague, and there are a lot of arguments about whether Microsoft was exercising its power legitimately or not.


you don't have to go through the agonies of installing XP on your box. It comes preinstalled and you have to pay for it even if you didn't want it.

How, exactly? I followed the licensing fiasco for a little bit, but I decided that it was too complicated to make a convincing case either way.


Rest assured, though, XP will crud up enough to eventually force you to reinstall it,

*thinks of all the times I've reinstalled Linux distros because they messed up system files and package databases*


Then you can tell me how easy it is to install XP, IF the Registration Wizard doesn't decide you are a pirate and prevents you from doing so!

Registration is not activation; registration is optional. It cannot decide that you are a pirate, and neither can the activation wizard. The activation wizard can, however, identify whether you are using a pirated copy of Windows XP. I have never heard of a bug with this process - it's far too simple to louse up. And frankly, if you have pirated the software, I would not mind if you were arrested and thrown in jail.