To: Paul Fiondella who wrote (19515 ) 1/10/1998 9:08:00 PM From: Scott C. Lemon Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 42771
Hello Paul, > About your post to VK, I think he has some points worth listening > to I agree ... I'll add comments below ... > I did an autoinstall of 4.11. IT couldn't find my Iomega IDE Zip > drive. NT had no problems with this when the hard drive was a SCSI. > It couldn't deal with it however when the hard drive was IDE but > that's unlikely to be the case if a server system was bought by the > customer. I'm not sure that I understand the issue here ... you are saying that NetWare could not find the IDE Zip at all ... and that NT could not find the Zip if the hard drive was also IDE? I have seen some issues with NT and the "dual-IDE" that is on more current Pentium boxes. I would agree there are some issues with autodiscovering some "workstation oriented" components ... I know that we continue to try and enhance this. Due to limitations in what can be installed on an IDE port, this discovery seems to be somewhat "weaker" than autodiscovery of higher capacity "server oriented" components. But point taken. > VK's point about flashiness is well taken. When my 4.11 install > finishes I have to go to the manual and figure out the command line > commands to use to proceed. When I go to the NT system it gives > me a familiar graphical user interface and prompts me through the > process (to some extent) MSFT understands its important to add > flash to what you are doing. I mean why do you think people go to > the movies. They want to be entertained to some extent. Not > everything has to be work. You can inform people using visuals and > sometimes faster. I agree completely. You'll want to keep watching the Moab betas! I just finished preparing for TechShare and have been playing around with the GUI on Moab. It's almost odd seeing a GUI on NetWare, but I'm also very glad to see it. I think it will continue to get better ... > I frankly don't understand why you guys didn't have somebody just > do a graphics look and feel. Base it on DOS. That's even simpler to > do. Yeah ... I agree with you that a GUI has it's advantages. There have been many experiments over the years ... One thing is that, again, in many ways it's like asking for a GUI on a Cisco router. A GUI adds overhead in processing that is not desirable in a high-performance I/O pump. But like you say, people start to expect some things ... and a GUI is a better interface for numerous tasks. And with the additional processing power that is available now, it seems like the best of both worlds is the option to have a GUI ... something that Moab has! > An even better thing to do would be to make the thing look like a > HTML page. People are getting used to the browser interface, > reinforce that. With the JVM and GUI on Moab, you should be able to run HotJava there ... I might download this and try it! ;-) > THese are simple things that anyone in the PC world understands. > Look I used Teco. I know what command line OS's are all about. But > the message you send out isn't going to appeal to people that > grew up on a visual interface. THe message they get is "plumbing". > You have to make "plumbing" exciting. Agreed. > Even the builders I know like to use 3D design programs to > construct houses before they build them. > > There is so much graphics potential that you guys don't use to > present your products. Come to TechShare! I'll be running a demo of Moab ... with the GUI! Scott C. Lemon