Linux hohoho
- Thread starter Bosse
- Start date
well I can back that up sorta, installed Knoppix 3.3 on my pc and sat here for days trying to get Kazaa lite to work under wine, to no avail.... Linux takes alot of work and dedication to get to work to a tee. At least that's my opinion. I have limited experience using HP-UX in the military and have dabbled here and there with various versions of linux, Suse, redhat, knoppix, peanut, vector. And have yet to find anything remotely as CONVIENENT as windows 2000.
Now I'm not a Windows fanboy by anymeans, hell I'll try anything other than windows, but for ease of use, and no hassle program support, I'll stick with Microcrap. Until open source gets global support, I don't see it grabbing ahold of the everyday user.
my 2 cents.
<b>"These are my thoughts, your mileage may vary."
Now I'm not a Windows fanboy by anymeans, hell I'll try anything other than windows, but for ease of use, and no hassle program support, I'll stick with Microcrap. Until open source gets global support, I don't see it grabbing ahold of the everyday user.
my 2 cents.
<b>"These are my thoughts, your mileage may vary."
New releases from Linux such as RedHat 9.0 and Slackware 9.1 have great plug and play capability. Soon, windows won't have anything on ease of use. Remember that Linux is only about 10 years old. Compare that to windows which is over ten years old. Which one has made more progress?
----------
<b>Got any of that beer that has candy floating in it? You know, Skittlebrau? </b> <i>Homer Simpson</i>
TKS
----------
<b>Got any of that beer that has candy floating in it? You know, Skittlebrau? </b> <i>Homer Simpson</i>
TKS
Linux is not the trouble. It is the developers and the zealots (or proponents of it, however you choose to look at it).
Linux as an OS is somewhat weak, slow, buggy, and essentially unstable. An overwhelming number of installs on various platforms over the years has shown me this.
When anyone speaks of Linux issues they speak of the install. As someone pointed out, and rightly so, but only partially correct, is that linux can be installed with a click click click approach if you choose the right distro.
What has not been brought out is the failure of the applications that one would want to install after the OS is up and running.
I did a check of the distros and of the shells. Some of these sites have screenshots. All of them look fantastic. But they all essentially have the same programs running on them. Virtually everyone has exactly the same programs.
I set out to mimmic some of them. Found it incredibly easy to mimmic them because there were so few apps that I had to have up.
See, I love Linux. But well, it just isn't there for most people. It isn't that it sucks it doesn't even hit the sucks meter. It just has a very big problem with drivers and end-user installations of those drivers and the software they would use.
Alot of the applications that you see on Linux are ports from other OSes. Nothing unique is coming out. No killer hardware for Linux that isn't found on other platforms and no killer apps that are unique to linux.
Some say Windows is buggy and unstable. Some say linux is unstable. Those same linux proponents will say tell me what is unstable about linux because it isn't. Yet they won't ask what is unstable about Windows. It's a nightmare. They can't grasp that windows stability is a non-issue these days. Windows stablity beats the pants off linux stability but they will ask what is instable about linux and ask you to prove it but won't support their claims that Windows is unstable.
I can go to the store and buy a software package, or even download a program from the internet. When I click on the installer it prompts me for everything it needs, checks everything out for me, and installs. It tells me if something is wrong. It has a consistent look and feel and I have confidence that the app will put the files in the correct spot and will do what it stated it would do. In linux if you get something to install it with you are lucky if it puts an entry in the gnome or kde menu system. You are lucky if it does complete and if it errors out it is either so cryptic or provides no info.
Linux development is like the flawed perspective that one could put a gun to the head of creation itself just to make linux happen. 10 years of linux and we don't have a consistent cross-distro app installer.
If we took dos and gave it the a low number on a scale and we put win 3.1 in the middle and we took xp or mac osx and put them on the high end, linux would fall just around win 3.1. Even then dos and win 3.1 had consistent installers. Again RPM isn't the tool we should be using.
Linux as an OS is somewhat weak, slow, buggy, and essentially unstable. An overwhelming number of installs on various platforms over the years has shown me this.
When anyone speaks of Linux issues they speak of the install. As someone pointed out, and rightly so, but only partially correct, is that linux can be installed with a click click click approach if you choose the right distro.
What has not been brought out is the failure of the applications that one would want to install after the OS is up and running.
I did a check of the distros and of the shells. Some of these sites have screenshots. All of them look fantastic. But they all essentially have the same programs running on them. Virtually everyone has exactly the same programs.
I set out to mimmic some of them. Found it incredibly easy to mimmic them because there were so few apps that I had to have up.
See, I love Linux. But well, it just isn't there for most people. It isn't that it sucks it doesn't even hit the sucks meter. It just has a very big problem with drivers and end-user installations of those drivers and the software they would use.
Alot of the applications that you see on Linux are ports from other OSes. Nothing unique is coming out. No killer hardware for Linux that isn't found on other platforms and no killer apps that are unique to linux.
Some say Windows is buggy and unstable. Some say linux is unstable. Those same linux proponents will say tell me what is unstable about linux because it isn't. Yet they won't ask what is unstable about Windows. It's a nightmare. They can't grasp that windows stability is a non-issue these days. Windows stablity beats the pants off linux stability but they will ask what is instable about linux and ask you to prove it but won't support their claims that Windows is unstable.
I can go to the store and buy a software package, or even download a program from the internet. When I click on the installer it prompts me for everything it needs, checks everything out for me, and installs. It tells me if something is wrong. It has a consistent look and feel and I have confidence that the app will put the files in the correct spot and will do what it stated it would do. In linux if you get something to install it with you are lucky if it puts an entry in the gnome or kde menu system. You are lucky if it does complete and if it errors out it is either so cryptic or provides no info.
Linux development is like the flawed perspective that one could put a gun to the head of creation itself just to make linux happen. 10 years of linux and we don't have a consistent cross-distro app installer.
If we took dos and gave it the a low number on a scale and we put win 3.1 in the middle and we took xp or mac osx and put them on the high end, linux would fall just around win 3.1. Even then dos and win 3.1 had consistent installers. Again RPM isn't the tool we should be using.
I agree with most of your post, but weak, slow, buggy and unstable????
I am not sure what you mean by weak, but it sure as hell is not slow, unless you mean X (the GUI). However, X is not Linux and most of the systems I have worked on don't even have X installed. It's a faster Database server (Oracle seems to like it), it's a fast web server and its faster in rendering.
Linux does have bugs, but I don't have to patch the system every week for the newest exploit. Many open source apps are unstable, but it's nearly always noted in the docs and man pages. My experience is that a Windows server, unless very carefully configured, needs to be rebooted every two weeks on average. These reboots are either because Windows just slows down inexpicably after about a week. That is not counting "scheduled" patches that need to be installed.
Linux is not as efficient on the client side and the major issues are simple installations of programs, a faster GUI, and drivers.
However I believe that the installation problems will exist for a long time unless a company aims at creating the desktop linux. I know I will ./configure && make && make install for a long time even on debian, and I have no need for an installer to do it.
Dev
---
My Sig:
))
(( ___________________
|||_____________|_____|
I am not sure what you mean by weak, but it sure as hell is not slow, unless you mean X (the GUI). However, X is not Linux and most of the systems I have worked on don't even have X installed. It's a faster Database server (Oracle seems to like it), it's a fast web server and its faster in rendering.
Linux does have bugs, but I don't have to patch the system every week for the newest exploit. Many open source apps are unstable, but it's nearly always noted in the docs and man pages. My experience is that a Windows server, unless very carefully configured, needs to be rebooted every two weeks on average. These reboots are either because Windows just slows down inexpicably after about a week. That is not counting "scheduled" patches that need to be installed.
Linux is not as efficient on the client side and the major issues are simple installations of programs, a faster GUI, and drivers.
However I believe that the installation problems will exist for a long time unless a company aims at creating the desktop linux. I know I will ./configure && make && make install for a long time even on debian, and I have no need for an installer to do it.
Dev
---
My Sig:
))
(( ___________________
|||_____________|_____|
Dev, he's trolling. Bad day or something... who knows?
You guys saw the Windows vs Linux benchmarks for 3D gaming right? Also, make sure you've tried some of the better kernel patches, which are far better for client interactivity. 2.6 incorportes many of these, and runs very nicely on my Gentoo test system.
Re installation/packaging go try RedCarpet, or Up2date, or YaST. What's so hard about this stuff? Seriously, RPM isn't as good as other options like portage or even apt, but it's not rocket science to install an application using the tools that have come with distros for the last few years...
<i>Knock Knock, Neo</i>
You guys saw the Windows vs Linux benchmarks for 3D gaming right? Also, make sure you've tried some of the better kernel patches, which are far better for client interactivity. 2.6 incorportes many of these, and runs very nicely on my Gentoo test system.
Re installation/packaging go try RedCarpet, or Up2date, or YaST. What's so hard about this stuff? Seriously, RPM isn't as good as other options like portage or even apt, but it's not rocket science to install an application using the tools that have come with distros for the last few years...
<i>Knock Knock, Neo</i>
silverpig
Splendid
- Dec 31, 2007
- 5,068
- 0
- 25,780
Heh, got a gentoo system running huh? Pretty neat huh?
About the package installation issue: Linux is a dynamic OS. You have many distros all trying to offer the best in the way of features and ease of use. When rpm came out it was better than most alternatives. Now gentoo has taken portage out of BSD and made it even easier. It's an evolution really. Once linux finds the best way to distribute and install applications, the community will settle for that.
A simple
emerge <program>
at the command line automatically downloads and compiles source and dependencies perfectly every time, and installs all files correctly from a lightning fast mirror. It's an evolutionary process.
Some day I'll be rich and famous for inventing a device that allows you to stab people in the face over the internet.
About the package installation issue: Linux is a dynamic OS. You have many distros all trying to offer the best in the way of features and ease of use. When rpm came out it was better than most alternatives. Now gentoo has taken portage out of BSD and made it even easier. It's an evolution really. Once linux finds the best way to distribute and install applications, the community will settle for that.
A simple
emerge <program>
at the command line automatically downloads and compiles source and dependencies perfectly every time, and installs all files correctly from a lightning fast mirror. It's an evolutionary process.
Some day I'll be rich and famous for inventing a device that allows you to stab people in the face over the internet.
Stick_e_Mouse
Distinguished
- Jun 28, 2001
- 2,302
- 0
- 19,780
Well, I wouldn't say it does it <i>perfectly every time</i>. I don't know if it's just bad luck, but just the other week, I wanted to install the latest Mozilla. I took a look at my portage tree and saw that the latest version I had was 1.4. No problem, I'll just update the tree by doing an "emerge sync". That was all fine and dandy, so I went ahead and did a "emerge -u system" like it told me to do. Next thing I knew, I couldn't startx. "Damn" was my first though. Maybe a reboot will fix things....wrong. I got lots of errors at boot time including: couldn't find /dev/root, /dev/boot, etc. partitions, eth0 and lo couldn't load, and a bunch of ugly stuff. It then prompted me to enter the root password if I wanted to try to solve these problems....so I entered my root password (multiple times), but it wouldnt accept it! So I ctl-D to return to the regular login. Tried my regular username and password....no such user exists!!! Tried root and password, but wrong password!
In short, "emerge -u system" fvcked up my system so bad I decided to reformat and install SuSE 9.0 =)
I ain't saying that Gentoo and portage sucks, but just that it ain't "perfect". However, I really do like Gentoo and might try it out again when I have the time (and when they're in a much higher version release). Portage is great when it works, and I believe with time it will only get better and more stable. Until then, I wouldn't use it on a machine where I do important work.
Sorry for the long and boring post....just ranting. Just note that this is my personal experience and should be taken with a grain of salt.
<font color=blue>
Why do people always insist on insulting drug dealers by comparing them to Microsoft?
Drug dealers offer <b><i>real</i></b> products with <b><i>real</i></b> choice.
Just another note about desktop speed... as well as tricky kernel patches (which folks like RedHat often apply anyway), see if prelink is available for your distro. I run it in Gentoo, but just noticed it RedHat 9 - it makes launching Gnome/KDE apps significantly faster.
<i>Knock Knock, Neo</i>
<i>Knock Knock, Neo</i>
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question Using cloning software for a dying HDD which shows only 10% health ?- Started by Mashuumatics
- Replies: 1
-
-
News Windows 11 will reportedly display a watermark if your PC does not support AI requirements- Started by Admin
- Replies: 22
-
Question Recovering an old version of a Notepad file in Windows 10 ?- Started by MC72
- Replies: 1
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram