[vdr] Re: VDR on PowerPC (was VDR Mac OSX port?)

[Christian Berger <einStein@donau.de>]

Daniel Schneider schrieb:
> 
> >My syster who don't know anything in computer fails to install OSX (it
> >took me one hour to understand why...) on her iMac, but has installed
> >Mandrake on the PC of her husband without any problem...
> 
> But I guess she didn't have to install dual boot with Windows on her
> PC? This is one example of something no computer beginner could ever
> install without expert knowledge (fdisk, primary partition, extended
> partition...). HD partitioning and Dual boot with Mac OS 9/X is no
> problem to install. Your sister must have done something completely
> wrong if not to say stupid. And she surely doesn't have a 16:10
> monitor with 1920x1200 resolution (how should I install this
> resolution with Red Hat 7.2 ???). Maybe only Red Hat with gnome is so
> stupid, but I simply don't understand why it can't keep a changed
> audio volume after restart! Did your sister try to activate the
> video4linux and I2C kernel support and compile and install a new
> kernel? I could continue this list, but if you're fair, you should
> acknowledge that Linux IS much more complicated to install if you
> have more than only the standard installation to do. I also
> acknowledge that Linux has better performance in some points, that
> there is Dolby Digital/AC-3 support, journaling filesystems etc.
> 
> It's also theoretically clear that Linux has to be more complicated
> to install in some cases because it has to work on much more
> different hardware than OS X.

Well the problem is there are many horribly bad installation programms
like the one from RedHat. SuSE's Yast2 does have it's weaknesses, but,
if you have a well defragmented Windows-partition, I think it can
automatically resize it. Most hardware get's recognized anyhow. Even a
raw Linux system has some advantages, since everything is controlled by
commands, users can simply use "type the text line by line" guides to do
stuff.
 
> Both OS have their advantages, so you're right that I can't say that
> OS X is the best UNIX. But at least Apple succeeded in creating a
> UNIX based OS which even with non standard needs is usable for non
> computer professionals, something that Linux has failed until now.
> But anyway, Linux is a great OS too! ;-)

Well the OS question is a question of what you want to do. DOS is great
for close to hardware stuff. Linux is great for network stuff. Windows
3.11 with TCP/IP is great for decently hardware-near stuff with a bit of
network, and so on.
 
> Greetings Dany

Servus
  Casandro