From jimc@MATH.UCLA.EDU Wed Aug 15 11:36:28 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jimc@math.ucla.edu X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 15 Aug 2001 18:36:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 16111 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 18:34:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Aug 2001 18:34:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO simba.math.ucla.edu) (128.97.4.125) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Aug 2001 18:34:40 -0000 Received: from localhost (jimc@localhost) by simba.math.ucla.edu (8.11.2/8.11.2/SuSE Linux 8.11.1-0.5) with ESMTP id f7FIY6P02118; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:34:06 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: simba.math.ucla.edu: jimc owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:34:06 -0700 (PDT) To: John Cowan Cc: , Subject: Re: [lojban] Lojban on UNIX vs. Windowssuggestions?) In-Reply-To: <3B782724.3020904@reutershealth.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "James F. Carter" X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 9656 On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, John Cowan wrote: > pycyn@aol.com wrote: > > If you don't want to use MS products, don't. But there is no stigma > > attached > > to using them (even studpidity is challengeable). > > There most certainly is a stigma attached to using them. There shouldn't be a stigma attached to using a particular brand of software. I think the issue here is that, first, there's a correlation between Lojban interest and UNIX geekitude. Not r==1, of course, but I suspect that while 10-20% of the general computer user population uses some kind of UNIX, a much larger fraction of the Lojban people use it. Then, the UNIX geeks resist vociferously being dragged into the Windows morass because there's important software that only runs on DOS. John Cowan's recent port of Logflash to UNIX/Linux will do much to address that problem. It would be best if all the good software for Windows could also run on UNIX. (To really do this, check out "vmware". You need a legal copy of Windows.) And also, if the good stuff for UNIX could run on Windows. (NT has a "UNIX shell" which you can optionally install if you could ever find it, and for starters you should install PERL and the Cygwin-GNU "C" and C++ compiler.) I recently had to decide whether to put Windows or Linux on an office-type machine, and so I evaluated software for UNIX/Linux. Star Office was excluded for political reasons. Outside Star Office, there was no spreadsheet [that I could find] that could handle the sheets we use, nor was there a database client suitable for the level of expertise of my users. Thus, Windows was chosen. Yes, there are things Windows can do better, but for the kinds of jobs I spend most of my day on, Windows is a stinking albatross, and I avoid it to the maximum possible. It's also **expensive** and going to get more so for enterprise users, with the new licensing paradigm. The status of Star Office is going to be seen in a new light now, since our department won't be able to afford upgrades. I think the conclusion for Lojban is that we should imitate many major software vendors, such as Matlab, Maple, Lotus and Oracle, and offer both Unix and Windows versions of our products. John Cowan and Robin Powell have been doing a good job on that. James F. Carter Voice 310 825 2897 FAX 310 206 6673 UCLA-Mathnet; 6115 MSA; 405 Hilgard Ave.; Los Angeles, CA, USA 90095-1555 Email: jimc@math.ucla.edu http://www.math.ucla.edu/~jimc (q.v. for PGP key)