I completely agree! But why does configurability exclude simplicity? It doesen't! You can have both, and you know what, this is what I would like to see in Linux: A stable OS for ALL.
With a program like XFmail you can either use "normal" POP/SMTP setup, or you can configure it to use exim/sendmail/fetchmail. I chose the latter since I find this to be a good solution for me. Others might find this too complicated. I do NOT want to tell them that they should not use Linux. I do want them to have options no other OS has: Simplicity and configurability at once, and at present Linux is very close to offer this. That is why I called my initial posting: "Getting there" :) On 18-Jun-99 Robert Rati wrote: > I think what you are getting it is one of the biggest problems with Linux, > in a way. Most people like Linux for it's configurability and control > over every aspect of the OS. I know that's one of the reasons I like it. > Problem is, by packaging products like you suggest gets away from that > control and configurability and heads more towards a windows type > environment, which is something almost all Linux users want to avoid. > Linux takes a lot more time to setup than any other OS (maybe BeOS comes > close), but that's because you have so many more options. You can't have > easy of configuration without losing control. Atleast not well. I agree > with most of the posts that say keeping the e-mail pieces separate is a > good idea. It gives you that level of control and configurability you > can't find with any other major OS. Bottom line, to use linux, you have > to WANT to put in the time to learn and configure things. In doing so, > you also gain knowledge of how programs work and how the OS fits together. > Just my two cents. > //////\\\\\\//////\\\\\\//////\\\\\\ Regards, Christian Dysthe Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bigfoot.com/~cdysthe ICQ 3945810 Powered by Debian GNU/Linux //////\\\\\\//////\\\\\\//////\\\\\\ "Clones are people two"
