Re: Major interview

[Ray Olszewski <ray@comarre.com>]

At 05:02 AM 9/8/99 -0700, PP Jose C. Lacal wrote [in part]:
>My point is that
>pre-Pentium PCs (486s and even 386s), with the proper
>(available) DOS- or Linux-based software, are quite
>usable still.
....
>Or are you saying that such "old" PCs are only good
>for the dumpster, and that everybody must go out and
>buy a new eMachine, for example? Please help me
>understand your point

No, I'm not saying that at all. Actually, I suspect we agree more than we
disagree ... but that shouldn't obscure the ways in which we do disagree.

In a **Linux** context, I see older ('386, '486) machines best used in three
roles:

        -- limited, specialized servers (e.g., routers, dedicated DNS,
                dedicated mail relay -- of course, '486s can serve
                more of these roles than can '386s, due both to faster
                CPU and, typically, more RAM).

        -- dedicated XTerminals, running apps that reside remotely on 
                fast, share-use app servers.

        -- desktop applications that do not use X (e.g., e-mail with
                pine, the limited Web use that is possible with lynx).

Generally speaking, what makes it tough to use older machines productively
with Linux is the demands of the X server. Even when run in the leanest ways
I've been able to work out -- for example, with a lightweight WM like
blackbox -- performance still lags, especially performance with Netscape
(important because the other GUI-based Web browsers aren't ready for general
use yet). 

Except for Monkey Linux (which I admit I haven't tried - I will, perhaps as
soon as today), your suggestions for use of these older computers involve
DOS, DOS-based apps, and Win 3.1. I will later discuss these ideas with you,
either privately or on the openclassroom list -- a Linux list isn't the
place for that discussion. 

In a more general sense, though, you are correct here in one important
observation that you only imply -- the usability of these older machines
rests on the availability of good software for them that does things that
schools need. In that context, I wonder about the extent to which Edsoft
developers are writing programs that run under DOS or Win 3.1 these days. I
very much doubt we can convince Edsoft publishers that '386s and '486s
running Linux are viable platforms for porting or developing educational
apps ... I personally wouldn't even try (except in an XTerminal context).

As to EMachines ... I see the emergence of low-price, high-performance
computers mainly as a great opportunity for both Linux and schools. Schools
can build or update labs at much lower cost than they could a year or two
ago, and these computers come equipped in ways that are almost ideal for
conversion to Linux workstations (only their Winmodems present real problems
at home, as does the absence of NICs in LAN contexts). They represent the
kinds of desktop systems that Edsoft developers can look at and see as solid
platforms to use in converting software to, or developing new software for,
Linux.

I'm currently using an Emachine to beta test wholeLinux, one of the
soon-to-be-released "easy install" distributions (others are Corel Linux,
easyLinux, and maybe SEUL's own Project Independence - will OpenClassroom
server also fit in this category?). Allowing for a bit of beta-level
roughness in the package, it seems almost designed to do a quick conversion
of an EMachine to Linux. Since the traditional Linux systems houses, like VA
Linux Systems, focus on high-end workstations, servers, and laptops, this
development can be very valuable to promoting growth and improvement of
Linux on the desktop.

So my general view is that today schools have more and better choices than
they did in the past. I hope I, seul-edu, and others can find ways to
enhance these choices by promoting Linux for schools and improving Linux in
ways that matter to schools. 

------------------------------------"Never tell me the odds!"---
Ray Olszewski                                        -- Han Solo
Palo Alto, CA           	 	         ray@comarre.com        
----------------------------------------------------------------