Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.co   
   !nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!feeder   
   news-service.com!news2.euro.net!transit.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!po   
   t2.news.xs4all.nl!newszilla.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail   
   From: Goeroeboeroe    
   Subject: Re: My ubuntu experience   
   Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 20:12:58 +0100   
   User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table (Debian GNU/Linux))   
   Message-ID:    
   Newsgroups: alt.comp.freeware,alt.os.linux.ubuntu   
   References: <1ct3eit29ohji$.1fdstpgp7b8w4.dlg@40tude.net> <51806   
   F1j92iaU1@mid.individual.net> <4iArh.32832$k74.3454@text.news.bl   
   eyonder.co.uk>  <519ohvF1jdrt4U1@mid.   
   ndividual.net>  <   
   oq04m$6uf$1@mail1.sbs.de>    
       
   <45b357fe$1@news01.wxnz.net>    
        
       
   MIME-Version: 1.0   
   Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15   
   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit   
   Lines: 51   
   NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.84.233.20   
   X-Trace: 1169579582 dreader25.news.xs4all.nl 30234 213.84.233.20:35079   
   Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.comp.freeware:548577 alt   
   os.linux.ubuntu:8823   
      
   Op Tue, 23 Jan 2007 10:44:12 +0000, schreef Chris Game:   
      
   > On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 10:25:42 +0100, Laszlo Lebrun wrote:   
   >    
   >>> Trying to install such a basic program as Pine - which must be ages old   
   >>> - means one has to compile from source to get a decent working binary   
   >>> with all the features.   
   >    
   >> Due the licence that comes with PINE, distribution of binaries are not   
   >> allowed, hence there are no binary packages for debian.   
   >    
   > Not quite right, there is a debian package on the UW website (this is   
   > fairly recent); the main licensing problem was that UW didn't like to see   
   > modified versions of Pine offered because of support/quality issues, the   
   > next version (called 'alpine' for the moment) will be on an open source   
   > license. Open source/free software obsessives didn't like the current   
   > license conditions so refused to include Pine in distributions.   
      
   >    
   > My point was that to get even such a simple program working well on Linux,   
   > you have to apply various patches then compile from source. This is not   
   > the way to support customers in the 21st C.!   
      
   Sorry, but this is really getting ridiculous. As I noted before: there's   
   not one new Linux user that's going to install Pine. If you really want to   
   use Pine, you already know something about Linux. If you're only used to   
   Windows, there's not the slightest chance you want to use Pine.   
      
       
   > Linux apologists will point out that there are many email programs that   
   > can be used instead. Unfortunately most are unfinished and of poor   
   > quality, not what you want from an important resource. The whole Linux   
   > project suffers from dissipation of effort into too many channels. If it   
   > were better focused Linux could have captured the desktop OS market by   
   > now.   
      
   This is just plain nonsense. You have, for example, Thunderbird for   
   Linux. Are you really going to say this is an unfinished poor quality   
   program? And there are more. KMail, to name another one.   
   I think the average user should wait for a while, but that's not because   
   there are too less programs. It's just because installing is not yet easy   
   enough, I think.   
   But this kind of arguments is ridiculous. I thought you might know   
   something about Linux, but if you even don't know there are lots of   
   excellent mail programs...   
   You can criticize Linux for some things, like lack of documentation on   
   quite a lot of programs, but you shouldn't make up arguments that are just   
   not true.   
      
   Peter   
   --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5   
    * Origin: Omicron Theta BBS (1:261/20)