Messages in this thread | | | From | "Marco Ermini" <> | Subject | Re: Norton Utilities for Linux ? | Date | Mon, 28 Jun 1999 16:40:17 +0100 |
| |
----- Original Message ----- From: Richard B. Johnson <root@chaos.analogic.com> To: Marco Ermini <mail@markoer.org> Cc: <vigorous@iname.com>; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu> Sent: Monday, June 28, 1999 1:46 PM Subject: Re: Norton Utilities for Linux ?
> On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Marco Ermini wrote: > > > IMHO Linux simply don't not need this > > kind of utility, because: > > > > 1) The system simply works as is. I.e, do > > you need a defrag for ext2? > > One exists and I have used it.
But certainly EXT2 *don't need* it. I never needed it. The fact that it exists is just a confirmation about my previous statement: all the tools you need (and even the tools you *don't* need!) already exists.
FAT and FAT32 (and NTFS too) needs it. And good defrag are not provided from Microsoft. And if you want ir, you have to pay it. That's the difference.
> > 2) A Unix-like system is highly configurable > > and programmable per-se. Do you need > > a special tool to schedule an operation at > > a certain time? > > You don't need this and I don't need this, but think about the persons > who are installing Linux as an Internet Communications tool instead > of W$. They don't know anything about the inner workings of any OS.
Setting up a cron job it's not an operation that needs to know the "inner working of the OS". You just needs to change one or two configuration files, and restart the service. As I said, if you don't like to know how to hack this config files, you may have a KDE or Gnome utility that sets it for you (I'm sure it already exists). And this could be applied to every aspect of the Linux OS. IMHO GNU software already provides everything Norton Utilities wants to provide to Windows. As I said, you may want to have a nice picture of a doctor with the stethoscope listening on an animated disk while Linux runs the checkdisk, but the checkdisk *in se* already exists, and you don't want to pay Symantec for it if it already exists.
> I think a 'Peter Norton Utility' for Linux is a great idea and since > Linux has now "arrived", somebody might ask Symantec about it.
Of course you could ask it to Symantec, but I think it could be not worth to buy something that GNU software already provides. That's the difference, Windows is not so configurable as GNU and don't have all the tools that GNU provides (and certainly Windows needs them, much more than Linux).
Regards
Marco
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |