Hewlet Packard and Linux

Sat Aug 25 10:59:55 EDT 2001

Charley,

For those who want it easy, we can make it easy.  Before windows crashed
on to the scene, dos was beginning to take a form that did not force
anyone to know a whole lot about it to drive it and you could even do it
yourself.  I configured several machines such that the first thing that
was seen was a menu to select what you wanted to do.  I even set up
machines so that you booted directly to dial up or wp.

You already know this though.  Well, with shell commands in the boot, we
can do the same for users of linux who are not into arcana

I am personally into it but still have a lot to learn.
.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Crawford" <ccrawford at acb.org>
To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2001 8:42 AM
Subject: Re: Hewlet Packard and Linux

Well said Rodney and it truly appeals to the programming part of me.  I
guess my concerns are that there are many who just want a computer that
offers them flexibility without as you say getting under the hood.  If
our
workplaces, educational institutions, and other main stream parts of
life
are off with Windows, then resources get targeted there and a really
good
thing gets marginalized.  I would be interested to hear from others and
maybe I am just getting too esoteric?

-- Charlie.
At 01:32 AM 08/25/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Could not agree with you more.  In the real world there are mechanics
who
>love the joy of building a fine running engine and getting under the
hood
>to fine tune it.  Then there are most people who could care less what's
>under the hood as long as it's pretty, it runs and gets them from point
a
>to point b.  Likewise with Linux.  There are those who love to write
>software without restraints and those who love to configure that
software
>to their style and taste.  That's the beauty of Linux and the thousands
of
>text based programs.  Yes every text based program has to be learned
and
>configured but that's the fun of it.  A blind person can configure
Linux
>however he pleases and yes it's a greasy job but at least we'll know
how
>to make it run like we want it and not like somebody else tells us how
it
>should be.
>I'm learning the ropes of alsaplayer, freeamp, alsamixer, pmidi, play,
>sfxload, etc:  I'm also learning about the many powerful features of
the
>Sound Blaster Live card.  I'm able to do things I could never do in
>Winblows or a stereo player.  I can configure these command line
programs
>to play whatever songs I want to hear.  I can name my files whatever I
>want to allow for better archiving for easier retrieving.  For example
I
>just figured out a few minutes ago that I can save my irish bagpipe
.mp3
>files by adding an extra extension to the end of .mp3 like for example
a
>song named  < sailer's lament.mp3.bp >  I added an .bp at the end of
.mp3
>so that when I want to play all my bagpipe mp3 files which may be in my
>music directory I just simply type freeamp *.mp3.bp and bingo all my
>bagpipe songs will play until all of the files with the extension bp at
>the end of .mp3 are finished playing!  Now that's the joy of Linux!
Linux
>allows me to listen to music in a way that's virtually impossible using
>Windblows or a fancy expensive stereo equipment.
>I just thought of another idea while I'm typing and that's the another
>beauty about Linux if you can think it you can do it. Suppose you have
>your favorite country music among others.  Just add fc to the end of
the
>mp3 extension and you can create a script that runs freeamp that allows
>you just to type myfavoritecountrymusic and bingo all your favorite
>country music starts up!  The possiblity are endless and that's why
it's
>hard to find a pre-configured Linux box to do everything like you want
it
>because every Linux box is probably configured to that person's taste.
>We are a Linux community and we share our configurations and ideas with
>others.  It's all about sharing.  We will never need the commercialized
>version of Linux to fit our needs.  The blind linux community has all
the
>tools we need to share and to explore the endless possiblities.  We
have
>the tools to make the best speech interface computer this world has yet
to
>see.  We are just getting started.  We have not yet begun to fight. And
in
>accordance to a famous line "Give me liberty or give me death!"  "Give
me
>Linux or give me Windows!" Take your pick. <grin>
>Rodney
>The Weaving Beaver
>rclowdus at kcnet.com
>"Chop your own firewood and it will warm you twice."
>"Weave your own cloth and it will reward you twice."
>
>On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
>
> > Linux is not a comercial product
> > in the way that macroslop windows is.
> > So, I don't think you have anything to worry about.
> > There will always have to be a text console on a system, and you can
> edit init scripts
> > to provent xwindows from starting up.
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 09:33:46PM -0400, Charles Crawford wrote:
> > > Liz,
> > >
> > >          I think you are wise to get ahead of the game by doing
the stuff
> > > Linux can do without the heartaches of configure configure
configure.  If
> > > Linux is to make the mainstream or at least a brook, then it has
to work
> > > for the average person without too much of the configuring issues.
I
> know,
> > > its kind of plug and play, but why not have our cake and eat it
too?  We
> > > get the ease of setup and the power of Linux.  What's not to
> like?  Smile.
> > >
> > >          My bigger concern is the Xwindows problem of a repeat of
what
> > > Windows did to DOS.
> > >
> > > -- Charlie.
> > > At 04:12 PM 08/24/2001 -0400, you wrote:
> > >
> > > >>"no market," but the radical truth is more like "We haven't a
> > > >>clue of how to get money for it."
> > > >
> > > >Forgive a comment from an extreme newbie who doesn't even *have*
> Linux yet.
> > > >
> > > >I've been looking at the companies who make Linux preinstalled
systems
> > > >(there's a long list at linux.org), and they seem to have some
kind of
> > > >market niche because some of them use hardware that has been
tested
> and is
> > > >known to be Linux-compatible.  With the Windoze dominance of the
entire
> > > >computing market, it's attractive to me to buy a system whose
components
> > > >are known to be compatible with Linux.  It seems better than
ordering
> > > >elsewhere and not being sure the different parts of the system
will work
> > > >well with Linux.
> > > >
> > > >any comments or thoughts?
> > > >
> > > >Liz
> > > >Liz Hare, Ph.D.
> > > >Research Associate
> > > >Animal Breeding and Genetics Group
> > > >B47 Morrison Hall
> > > >Cornell University
> > > >Ithaca, NY 14853
> > > >(607) 255 2380
> > > >eh51 at cornell.edu
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >Speakup mailing list
> > > >Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > > >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Speakup mailing list
>Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup