[Coco] Re: OS Vulnerabilities

[Theodore Evans (Alex)]

On Feb 28, 2004, at 2:51 PM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:

> Clearly, based on your list, Plan 9 is out of it (heck, I don't even 
> know
> what that is).

Plan 9 is Bell Labs developmental OS inspired in part by Unix, but not 
really derived from it.  It is intended for distributed hardware 
systems.  Definitely not a normal personal OS.  It is a modern OS that 
I am familiar with.

> My questions were definitely biased, because I intended a system that 
> is,
> as shipped, ready to go with all those features available as part of 
> the
> OS, or available as consumer or professional products. I should have 
> made
> clear I wasn't talking about the hobbyist or geek levels. Are these 
> OSes
> really functional with a wide variety of products and activities? 
> Heck, any
> OS that supports and is supported by hardware/processors can be clubbed
> into functionality. My use of "modern" meant, essentially, 
> plug-and-play
> operation for software and hardware.

Some of the features you mentioned don't ship with any OS.

> So the problem for me is that you show Linux as doing all these. 
> That's an
> evaluation difference for sure! I know that Linux might be able to do 
> some
> of these higher-level tasks, but only at a "toy" level. Yes, there are
> expensive dedicated systems (such as Hollywood video production) that 
> have
> Linux under the hood. But such custom systems are pretty much 
> irrelevant to
> the OS anyway, so long as the OS doesn't choke. In fact, the 
> repertoire of
> Linux programs in some areas is quite poor (audio and graphics in
> particular). If, for example, there aren't drivers for 90+% of the 
> high-end
> audio cards, the OS is functionally debilitated in that area.

Almost all of the support that ships with windows for the tasks you are 
talking about are at the "toy" level if at all.

> I'm also interested to know that those systems are supposed to handle 
> Type
> 1 and OpenType. Does this support come installed, or are you talking 
> about
> add-ons? My year-old Red Hat Linux sure doesn't have Type 1 or OpenType
> support.

Pagestream (the Linux port having just shipped) has Type 1, and I 
believe if you use OpenStep for you windowing manager you will have 
Type 1 support.  Since you were talking about this in reference to DTP 
(which is supported out of the box by no OS that I know of), then this 
is more than sufficient to cover your question.

> What GUI ships with FreeBSD, by the way? It isn't one of those 
> "pretend" X
> GUIs, is it? ;)

X is only part of a GUI.  You need a windowing manager which runs on 
it.  Strictly speaking the phrase "ships with" hardly applies to either 
Linux or FreeBSD as it is related to the distro that you are talking 
about.

> Just a few particulars...
>
>>> Does it have a MSWord-compatible text editor?
>> Sleazy question.  Is it able to handle this proprietary format?
>> Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Some	Yes	Yes
>
> This is not a sleazy question at all. MSWord is the default word 
> processing
> format, squall though you might about that. There is no
> business-to-business trade that does not use MSWord for its document
> creation and exchange, save for a few niche areas (mostly in techdom 
> and
> [decreasingly] music production and print shops).

Documents for publication are still occasionally exchanged as PDF or PS 
files.  It is _still_ a sleazy question.  It isn't a standard.  In any 
case it is widely supported by non-MS software.

>
>>> Is there a musical notation program for it?
>> Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
>
> Now that's stretching it *very* thin. Composition (including 
> engraving) is
> my field, so I know that answer. What passes for a music notation 
> program
> in some of these (such as LilyPond or the MusicTex) is either hobbyist
> software or failed software. Heck, you can always find hobbyist-level
> stuff, including for the CoCo. :) Hardly anybody is even using Score
> anymore because, despite its nice output, command-line scoring was not 
> for
> engravers or musicians.

TeX based stuff is hardly toy stuff.  It doesn't do GUI, but it is very 
well implemented for serious use.

>
>>> Have digital camera interfaces and software?
>> Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
>>> Firewire?
>> Yes	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
>
> Interesting conflict, as Firewire is the only interface for many (if 
> not
> most) DV cameras.

You said digital camera interfaces.  The natural assumption was that 
you meant digital _still_ cameras, most of which currently use USB.  If 
you meant video you should have said so, and whether it has firewire or 
not is pretty much immaterial as to wether it has the software or not.

-- 
Theodore (Alex) Evans | 2B v ~2B = ?