[Scribus] Scribus on Windows XP

[Craig Bradney]

> and it's more stable.  At least, after a power failure, Windows (with
> NTFS) is more likely to start smoothly than Linux.  IMHO, all that
> boils down to is:  opensource developers need to put more efforts in
> making Linux a better  OS.  It also means that we need to make more

Windows will start much smoother, but only because after doing this enough 
times you will have to reinstall it. Since I moved back to Linux a few years 
ago (from a mix of various OSes) I've never ever lost a file due to Linux 
filesystems. I have had an issue with reiserfs, but I sorted that one out. In 
the same period, based on previous experience, I would have reinstalled 
Windows possibly 10 times, I know I've reinstalled it 5 or more times on my 
laptop in the past 2 years.

> the name of the game in that scenario.  Conversely, Windows-ported OSS
> does indeed help the end-user transition to Linux gradually when s/he
> sees the same OSS running on Linux the same way with the same
> look-n-feel.  However, it must also be taken into account that every
> OSS port to Windows makes their monopoly stronger & sturdier than
> before!

There is some argument for this, however, given most of the market you are 
talking about will have actually bought a machine with Windows already 
installed, don't you think it better they run OSS apps on top, instead of 
having to run the proprietary ones? Most of these people wouldn't have a clue 
about installing an app if the CD didnt autoplay and an installer start up, 
let alone an OS and all those implications. Sure, it would be nice to get 
Linux sold with the PC instead of Windows but thats not quite a reality in 
general.

> Quoting my own example, I have to recommend Windows as a desktop for
> my current project  because my client won't be using UPSes for
> hundreds of computers and I know that Linux sometimes dumps you into
> command-line after a crash due to power-failure, for instance - where
> the user is supposed to manually recover lost fragments using a
> command-line system program.  Although ext3 has matured considerably,
> it still lags far behind when you think about the robustness of
> Windows NTFS filesystem.  I am also thinking about using a Live-CD
> work-around for such as crash-scenario along with ext3.  But NTFS is a
> better option nonetheless.

ext3 certainly is not what it or ext2 used to be, and there are many other FS 
out there, many distros do use reiserfs as standard on install.

Windows will typically hide most of the crash recovery from you, as well as 
the files it kindly forgets about.

Craig
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://nashi.altmuehlnet.de/pipermail/scribus/attachments/20060412/f1ee4532/attachment.pgp