Skip to main content
Topic: Linux Stuff (Read 9617 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Linux Stuff

Reply #25
[deleted]

Linux Stuff

Reply #26
I use windows now, but i planned to get into linux. I think I use mandrake distro, tried BEOS once, crashed alot - dont like the interface too. I'm just a homeuser, no server crap, so I think linux will do, I hope, a better job than Win98, which crashes some 5 times a day. (maybe I start too much progs, mostly some 8-10, but it should be multi-tasking, isn't it?)

But: Is mandrake good enough, now, or should i wait until 8.2 (i heard 8.1 is quite buggy) and how long whould that take?

'bout communism/facism: I dont think the dictonary gives also the feeling of both of them. Communism is 'good' - it is meant to equalize all people. of course, this doesnt work in practise, but the idealistic idea of communism whould create a perfect world.
Facism, on the contrary, is based on a dictatorialistic system. the people for the government. communism should have in its final stage no goverment, and in 'the beginning' the government should be there for the people. like in a democracy. Facism just means a totalitarian regime, surpressing all individualistic freedom. (in fact, it is what communism became in the USSR, cuba and korea). and sorry for my english.
[span style=\'font-family:Arial\'][span style=\'color:red\']Life Sucks Deeply[/span][/span]

Linux Stuff

Reply #27
I'm a happy mandrake user. Although my system has been heavily modifed since I installed it.

I found mandrake gave me a working system very quickly when I needed to get work done. Since then I've just played around with it, checked out the various software that comes on the CDs. It's good. It can install down to like 65Mb or something if you want, but really if you plan to use the system for much you need more space.....

My personal experience with stability in regards to NT vs linux is definitely in favour of linux. The NT boxes at uni have all sorts of problems generally. I've had KDE crash on me a few times in the last few months, but the system has remained solid. Serving up internet for my home LAN perfectly.


I can't comment on BSD, my experience is basically nil. But it's so much less acessible as far as I can tell. I have some worries about hardware support and software compatibility, even though I'm sure most software works. I guess the only way I'll find it is to try it. But I really need a second machine, as this one needs to be available for people to use internet.

Linux Stuff

Reply #28
TrNSZ

and the attitudes of the user community.
Well, Master, please tell me what my attitude is.

What do you think of Linux today?
Or didn't you try some newer version of it?
Does, from your opinion, only Linux (Kernel) suck or even the other software that's usually delivered with it?

I'm using Debian with Linux 2.4.20 for some months now and I'm very satisfied with it. Before that I had Windows 98 SE and then Windows XP. When seeing it only from the point of use and leave the ideology  aside, than I can  say that I'm way more satisfied with Linux than I were with Windows systems. I tested FreeBSD a little bit but at that time my soundcard wasn't supported, so it wasn't an option for me. I installed FreeBSD 4.8 some weeks ago but deleted it very soon, because it would have been a waste of time making my way through the system, as I already know Linux and it does what I need. Well, I'm a home user and don't have any servers running, so I can't tell something about server usage of both Linux and FreeBSD or Windows.

Your rants about the GPL are somewhat weird, you'd better cling to reality: It's a license for distribution of software and not a regime/political ideology. But I addmit that there are a lot of folks who seem to be thinking every piece of software must be GPL'd or LGPL'd and everything else would immediately be wrong. Yes, this sucks. At the other side, there's nothing wrong with the GPL, it doesn't enslave it's users. But you have to be sure that it's the license you want to use.

There's nothing wrong with sharing knowledge and software as long it's yours and not "stolen". The GPL and LGPL are simply a possibility for sharing your software while avoiding that someone simply takes your work, makes it closed source and sells it. And for endusers it's a cool license because they don't have to care about it .

I'll stop here.

Linux Stuff

Reply #29
* A linux/*bsd system is not better than the person(s) who installed it.

* A linux/*bsd system is not or more secure/stable than the person(s) maintaining it.

* Even the greatest nerds makes simple stupid mistakes.

* A system that takes 5 minuts to update has a much higher chance of getting updated than a system which takes 2 hours. Especially if the company owns multiple systems that needs update.


I have been working together with many brilliant nerds over the past five linux years. All but one felt the need to recompile everything for security and performance reasons. When these nerds left the company, their systems needed maintenance BADLY. The company suffered from exploited security holes, as the there were no time to update the many servers.

Debian and Gentoo might be excellent distributions if you have a REAL need to manually compile and configure everything. It is my opinion that the vast majority claiming so does not have a REAL need. They just do it because they can or because it is fun. This is okay for a home computer, but very bad for a company.

On the other hand, Red Hat is an excellent choice for a small company with only one or two systems administrators. If the systems only include standard RPMs, the entire server park can be updated in a matter of minutes. It is also reasonable to assume, that the combined knowledge of the team at RedHat exceeds the combined knowledge of any one or two system administrators working for that small company.

Linux Stuff

Reply #30
Quote
Debian and Gentoo might be excellent distributions if you have a REAL need to manually compile and configure everything.


I don't know gentoo but what do you mean with 'configure everything' when speaking of Debian? There wasn't too much I had to configure to have it running. And (security)updates are really the easiest thing with apt-get. But AFAIK you won't get security updates for the testing tree very soon as they usually first go into unstable tree. Before Debian I had Mandrake 9 and Red Hat 8 for a short time, (for me) the easiest setup/configuration was that  of Debian Woody, although the 'knowledge' from using Mandrake and Red Hat weren't of too much  help. Well, I think it all depends on what you like or what you can learn better. I addmit that Debian would be impossible to properly install and configure for a computer newbie but in the end that goes for every system - some OS just make you think you'd know what you are doing.

Linux Stuff

Reply #31
Ok, here's my two cents. First off, you fools, communism is an economic system, not a political system. In the original true marxist sense it described a system in which people contributed everything they could and took only what they needed. In that system there wouldn't be things like starvation and war, but alas, its just a pipe dream and human nature smashes it to peices before it can even lift off. Pitted against capitalism, i think i would prefer communism my self. The traditional "communism" that spawned mcarthyism was not about communism at all, rather it was just a witch hunt for assholes representing dictatorial or oligarchical governments who stole  resources from their own people. I question any source that ties communism with facism.

Ive been hopping around the Operating System carousel quite a bit myself lately and as a fairly well educated yet impatient end-user/tech/administrator i have come to several conclusions. My original os was windows 98 which made me want to pull my hair out. This spawned my interest in linux as i desperately sought an alternative. My first stab at linux was quite awkward and i backed off very quickly because it was "way" too hands on and hardware support was very poor. I next went to win2k/xp and was very happy with these platforms since they offered wonderful ease of use, with modest power-user capability, and for once m$ put out a product that didnt crash every time the wind blew. I then was captivated by the innovation of gentoo linux and ive been using that for well over a year. It did everything i needed, i had full hardware support, but godammit i got tired of editing text files every time i wanted to make a change. Installing a new printer took me 2 days and by the time i was done my sound stopped working. Everytime i fixed something, something else broke. Now make no mistake, i do not blame this on linux, it had more to do with my inexperience as an administrator, but it was still frustrating. At work, i have a workstation running mandrake 9.1 which is a really cool linux distro, as close to windows as you can get with linux. Does everything i need it to and its the only pc in the shop that doesnt crash. Anyways, i know im ranting on and on so bear with me, i decided in the last week to migrate back to winXP simply for the sake of saving time. Ive gotten together a full production ready pc in less than a day, however i delegated my server needs off to a makeshift pentium2 server running redhat 9. The reason i chose redhat 9 was because of the candy like gui configuration tools for the heavy duty server tools like apache and the likes. All of these systems do their job, i dont really prefer one over all versus the other so shut up with your this is better than that.

Here is the cliffhanger ending though. Recently im starting to feel like my favorite operating system has to be Mac OS X (Darwin + Aqua). This is the best of all worlds like you wouldnt believe and i think its potential is far undercut. Here we have a BSD powered unix monster with the most user friendly interface ive ever seen. For the regular joe, he doesnt ever have to know whats under the hood because it "just works". But for freaks like me, i can go in and enable the root account, and wreck havoc with the terminal and all my GNU toys. Its stable as hell, POSIX compliant, server grade/scalable, idiot-proof, and not to mention it comes on very stylish hardware (save for the ugly ass toilet seat laptops and those stupid tv looking imacs). Who wants to deal with linux or raw bsd when apple has done all the work for you. In reality though, i would ideally be running all of the mentioned operating systems, windows for my desktop #1, macosx for desktop#2/laptop, and linux for my server.

So i conclude: personal experience is one thing however people do have to make their own mistakes sometimes (although it doesnt hurt to warn them), however zealots are just downright aggravating and not worth debating with. Keep your opinions to your self unless you are going to follow through with some sound explanation or logical dialogue.

Linux Stuff

Reply #32
Quote
however zealots are just downright aggravating and not worth debating with. Keep your opinions to your self unless you are going to follow through with some sound explanation or logical dialogue.


Who is that directed at?

Linux Stuff

Reply #33
Quote
(re Macintosh)
Here we have a BSD powered unix monster with the most user friendly interface ive ever seen.
           ...
. Its stable as hell, POSIX compliant, server grade/scalable,

It won't be the monster for everybody until they have a 64 bit version out, and can't scale
that  much until it is.

Show me the gigabytes!

Linux Stuff

Reply #34
Using Debian Woody and Sid along with Windows 2000 and XP on one system. Win 2k partition might get replaced with FreeBSD soon (testing purposes).

I think Linux still has much potential. The thing I'm not satisfied with is multimedia.

There is no player I'm aware of that can read APE2 tags or my replaygained MP3s. LAMIP sees dead, too and foobar is closed, that leads to this:

userXYZ, I think everything would be much better without commercial products. OSS is still superior to ALSA in terms of usability. With the OSS/"commercial" being GPLed and built into every kernel, no one would complain about sound that doesn't work. With WineX being GPLed and packed with every distribution, no gamer would complain about bad emulation. Same goes for the NVIDIA drivers, but I have to admit they grew better and better. Don't know if Newbies know what to do to kill X.

Linux Stuff

Reply #35
Quote
There is no player I'm aware of that can read APE2 tags or my replaygained MP3s. LAMIP sees dead, too and foobar is closed, that leads to this:

Your replaygained MP3s can be read by any player/decoder, it's not an special issue. ciber-fred is still working on LAMIP, so luckily it's not dead

Quote
OSS is still superior to ALSA in terms of usability.

You mean installation or what? ALSA will be in Linux 2.6 so at least from then on there will be no hassles with installation. If there's nothing special about one's soundcard then it shouldn't be too much of a problem  to compile ALSA from sources, a little error and try and you'll have it.

Quote
With WineX being GPLed and packed with every distribution, no gamer would complain about bad emulation.

I would always prefer native apps and games.


GNU/Linux isn't perfect but if one's willing to invest some time then it's a good choice. At least in my opinion.

Linux Stuff

Reply #36
Quote
Who is that directed at?


This was directed at zealots of course. 

Linux Stuff

Reply #37
Quote
Linux as a whole sucks. It's only used by elite fascist and communist GPL supporters, aka OpenSource dorks who have no clue, no life, and serve no useful purpose. I could get more into it than name calling, but I don't want to take the time to ramble here, and instead, I'll debate anyone on a point-for-point basis.

BSD is where it's at...  OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, Darwin, BSDI, RTMX, or any other BSD I might have missed.

Pick one and become enlightened. =)

TrNSZ, I couldn't agree more!  I'm quite pissed with Linus too, so pompous and all. His microkernel discussion with Tanenbaum and his opinions on Itanium kind of sums up how much of a computer scientist he is.

But OS X? It is ludicrous Apple is trying to play in the high-end server arena. Darwin might be a UNIX, but I don't think OS maturity wise comes anywhere close to Solaris, BSDs, etc...
The object of mankind lies in its highest individuals.
One must have chaos in oneself to be able to give birth to a dancing star.

Linux Stuff

Reply #38
Quote
TrNSZ, I couldn't agree more!  I'm quite pissed with Linus too, so pompous and all. His microkernel discussion with Tanenbaum and his opinions on Itanium kind of sums up how much of a computer scientist he is.

Instead of senseless name throwing and instead of taking the whole 'this OS is better than that'-thingie on a personal level you'd better make your choice and respect the choices of others. If Linux and/or any other OS sucks in your opinion than that's absolutely right, but please don't play the missionar.

[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']removed useless offense[/span]

Linux Stuff

Reply #39
Quote
Quote
Linux as a whole sucks. It's only used by elite fascist and communist GPL supporters, aka OpenSource dorks who have no clue, no life, and serve no useful purpose. I could get more into it than name calling, but I don't want to take the time to ramble here, and instead, I'll debate anyone on a point-for-point basis.

BSD is where it's at...  OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, Darwin, BSDI, RTMX, or any other BSD I might have missed.

Pick one and become enlightened. =)

TrNSZ, I couldn't agree more!  I'm quite pissed with Linus too, so pompous and all.


Yes god forbid someone has oppinions. Especially if they differ from what you preffer.

Quote
His microkernel discussion with Tanenbaum


After reading on this I found good and bad from both in the discussion. Honestly then and now Minix had/has major problems. There is a reason it is not heard of much any more IIRC. So what if Linux is a so called monolithic system? That discussion is so old that many versions of the then fabled Windows NT have come and gone. And in many instances Linux and related software have kept up and even outpaced NT. Not half bad for a monolithic system. I would take a decent monolithic system over a poor microkernel system any day. In regards to the blurb about being better off waiting for the GNU Micro Kernel by Tanenbaum. Were still waiting. IIRC it is what is now known as the HURD and even after well over a decade has not reached a usable wide spread beta state. Where is the wisdom in that.

Quote
and his opinions on Itanium kind of sums up how much of a computer scientist he is.


Yes he is a rather decent one. Does anyone remember the bruhaha that went on after the release of the Itanic er um I mean Itanium? It was one of the most overhyped underperforming processor launches perhaps with acception to the last couple of motorolla procs. The things on price point and actual performance were real stinkers and for all their advanced design had a hard time keeping up with their archaeic ancestors. You want to talk about a seriously underhyped and underutilised processor? Have you looked at Transmeta's Carusoe? For mobile applications the thing is magnificent. Rather efficient in both power consumption and CPU cycles. A verry innovative design IMO.

Quote
But OS X? It is ludicrous Apple is trying to play in the high-end server arena. Darwin might be a UNIX, but I don't think OS maturity wise comes anywhere close to Solaris, BSDs, etc...


Ummmm. Isn't Darwin off the shelf BSD with Apple extentions? I might agree that the extentions might be immature. But for christs sake. The OS "IS" BSD!!!

I know what crawled up TrNSZ's and others shorts and died. BSD is a great system. And has been around longer than Linux. Yet then and now it has never recieved the same attention as Linux. They mumble to themselves "what kinda thankless world is this?". I got news for you. The story of BSD is not quite as inspiring as the one behind Linux. Strange but true. And from a joe user standpoint alot more work has been put into Linux than BSD. Arguably if someone understood how it was done for Linux it would be insanely easy to do for BSD. Though to my knowledge, no one ever has. Why? I know enough programming to get me in trouble. And I am more savvy at the CLI than most. But I really like the ease of setup of a Mandrake or SuSE. BSD's lack of that is another thing that keeps it from the hands of the masses. Funny how BSDers an Linuxites can find the time to argue over things like kernel minutia and can't find it in themselves to gome together over their considderably larger similarities to make headway against those like Microsoft. If Linux were as bad as some here have made it out to be would companies like IBM and Dell have invested in it as much as they have? Considdering that BSD and the BSD license could quite possibly be more flexible for them. As with everything there are pro's and cons. It just seems like some are hell bent to make much ado over nothing.

Linux Stuff

Reply #40
Well, I dont know much about BSD, but I guess - you can say its 'too free'. If you write code for it, someone can steal it, ask mony for it etc etc - its not true free. cuz it wont stay free. thats why I prefer GPL - thats true freedom!

about usabillity, I guess OS-X rulez. and it is stable, too! But I prefer linux, because it is free, and open for improvement. Dont know any reason to go for winblow$, thats slow, buggy, expensive, and makes you dumb by trying to think for you.

ow, and I went for Debian (yep, long ago I posted in this thread the question what distro I should use - I tried suse, mandrake, and 5 other less known distro's - I even forgot.)

'bout communism, you MIGHT say its an political system too - in a way. It says there should be no-one in charge.... quite stupid, imho ;-)
[span style=\'font-family:Arial\'][span style=\'color:red\']Life Sucks Deeply[/span][/span]

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2020