View Full Version : Sell me linux!!
I'm in the process of building a mid-to-high spec pc and was planning on installing XP on it, although I'm becoming increasingly interested in Linux.
Can anyone tell me the pros/cons? How user-friendly is it? Are there any good sites for screenshots so I can see what I'd be getting myself in for?
I think it is like everything Russ it is all a matter of personal choice, but personaly I would go with XP so far more people seem to have that
Pros
-----
Shorter development lifecycle than Windows
Virtual Desktops and remote desktops
Is true multiuser
Has support for RAID
Choice of filesystems including 2 journalled file systems which are more resilient in the (very unlikely) event of a crash
Does not slow down substantially after adding new software
Has far more control over the firewall
Has far more free games than Windows
Has support for MSN/AOL IM/ICQ
Does not run Windos Viri and trojans
Does not run Windos Spyware
Can be made to look and work like Windos
The Start button has been replaced with either a Foot or a K
It's free as in beer.
The native kernal supports a lot more hardware than windos
Cons
------
Shorter development lifecycle than Windows
Takes longer to become an expert
Will need to learn lots of mysterious new things
Support for MSN/AOL IM/ICQ is not as good as the windos version
You'll need to built/install DVD support from source code
Can be made to look and work like Windos
Configuation tools harder to use than Windos, you may find yourself prefering to edit the files manually
You'll need to keep up to date with security bulletins if allow external/3rd party access to the machine
Bill Gates will no longer be able to buy the rest of the world
A friend of mine had a very good screenshot site, but unfortunately freenetname have taken it down :(
Originally posted by Russ D
I'm in the process of building a mid-to-high spec pc and was planning on installing XP on it, although I'm becoming increasingly interested in Linux.
Can anyone tell me the pros/cons? How user-friendly is it? Are there any good sites for screenshots so I can see what I'd be getting myself in for?
i think one of the major problems you will encounter is hardware and software compatibility although support is increasing for it i would stick with xp its stable and fast enough and and all programs and hardware i have tryed to run work so why change have you had problems with xp ?
Tried Mandrake 9.1 a few weeks back and never again. I like my games and applications. Finding something that works on Linux is murder
Originally posted by kronas
i think one of the major problems you will encounter is hardware and software compatibility although support is increasing for it i would stick with xp its stable and fast enough and and all programs and hardware i have tryed to run work so why change have you had problems with xp ?
Just fancied a change - and something free :D
Originally posted by Russ D
Just fancied a change - and something free :D
well you could always change the layout of xp :)
and IMHO you would be better sticking with xp :)
Originally posted by Defiant
Tried Mandrake 9.1 a few weeks back and never again. I like my games and applications. Finding something that works on Linux is murder
Considering Mandrake 9.1 comes with over 1500 applications you sure you don't need to visit an opticians?
Stuart W
29-06-2003, 13:57
I don't think the two OS's compare realy.
The biggest plus points for *nix would be internet use (better firewall control as standard, most viri are writen to take advantage of Microsoft related "undocumented features") and the plain and simple fact that you know what you're getting. The kernal is OPEN SOURCE which means you can reverse-engineer and view the actual source code. If reverse engineering isn't your thing, the source code is FREEly available on the net.
Can you see Micro$oft making their code available???
Oh, and the BIGGEST advantage of all is....... it's not Micro$oft!!!
More info about Micro$oft & Linux here.... http://www.mslinux.org
[User Edit] It also scares the pants of Bill ;)
From The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/22770.html)
"Linux is the long-term threat against our core business. Never forget that!" Microsoft Windows Division Veep Brian Valentine exclaims in a confidential memo to his Sales Brownshirts obtained by The Register.
Richard M
29-06-2003, 15:03
The best thing (IMO) about Linux is it's memory management, you don't get that delay when running loads of programs.
There is also loads of free software available.
For a good tutorial on installing, see here:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=6162
For screenshots, see here:
http://www3.mandrakelinux.com/en/fscreenshots.php3
The bad thing is the games availability, although several have been released, including UT, UT2003, Quake III and Doom III.
I would not recommend Red Hat for a beginner, something like Mandrake 9 would be better.
Maelstrom
29-06-2003, 15:19
The best place to start is with a Live CD distro like Knoppix or Morphix. that way you get good hardware detection, and you get to see if you like the Linux way of doing things:) (these are often available on the front of various pc and Linux mags - I think two of the current one have either Knoppix or Morphix)
Then I think the best place to visit is distrowatch.com - it has useful honest reviews and a myriad of links.
There are plus and minus points for each of the distros, and it's best to assess what you want to do with it. Mandrake is easily available and would probably be a good intro, although if you can stand the wait the ftp install of Suse 8.2 would also be worthwhile.
I don't think anyone gets everything with linux right first time so your best bet is probably to dual boot with a version of windows, and play with Linux intil you hit on the right distro for you.
If you're feeling adventurous, and don't need the pc to be up and running straight away, go for one of the source distros (I recommend Gentoo because their installation instructions are some of the best), you'll learn more about Linux that way:D :spin: :spin:
Linux - the second most fun way of breaking your pc (after an axe that is)
Like others, I tried Mandrake 9.0, had to manually mount cds, couldn't get supermount to work. Mandrake 9.1 sorted that problem but both seemd slower on my PC than Win XP Pro.
Windows is more user friendly, but Linux is getting better, but there are so many flavours that you have to get the correct addin programs for them to install as per Windows.
May be immune from Windows viruses, but you can bet that when it becomes more common, the virus writers will find a way to attack Linux.
paulyoung666
29-06-2003, 19:12
if you have time to spare then give it a go , but i do mean time ;) , i got it to work but it can be a fu**ing pain to sort :mad: :mad:
Thanks to everyone for your opinions - I'm not really one for worrying about the ins and outs of operating systems, as long as it works easily and is secure then I'm happy.
Think I'll still give it a go though - what browsers are available for it?
paulyoung666
29-06-2003, 20:24
imo opinion if you want something that works easily then forget it , it can be a right **** to sort out , my opinion only ;) :)
Originally posted by Russ D
Thanks to everyone for your opinions - I'm not really one for worrying about the ins and outs of operating systems, as long as it works easily and is secure then I'm happy.
Think I'll still give it a go though - what browsers are available for it?
Mozilla / Netscape / Opera / Lynx / Links / Konquorer and you can run IE under wine.
wunderlust
01-07-2003, 01:27
I like it - although in the past it's ****ed me off - cos I feel I'm learning something, I could sit and point and click all day and know bugger all about about how windows works, mainly because it is so transparent it will not unveil it's inner workings unless you take a crowbar to it. Linux is a challenge, it's interesting, it's surprising, it's very capable, it's a learning experience - and it certainly won't bore you.
Lord Nikon
01-07-2003, 02:11
Originally posted by wunderlust
I like it - although in the past it's ****ed me off - cos I feel I'm learning something, I could sit and point and click all day and know bugger all about about how windows works, mainly because it is so transparent it will not unveil it's inner workings unless you take a crowbar to it. Linux is a challenge, it's interesting, it's surprising, it's very capable, it's a learning experience - and it certainly won't bore you.
you could also look to the "best of both worlds" and check out Lindows
IMHO though the easiest, friendliest linux Distro to install has to be SuSE (always go for the professional version though) although you will have to get a retail pack (7+CDs )
Originally posted by wunderlust
I like it - although in the past it's ****ed me off - cos I feel I'm learning something, I could sit and point and click all day and know bugger all about about how windows works, mainly because it is so transparent it will not unveil it's inner workings unless you take a crowbar to it. Linux is a challenge, it's interesting, it's surprising, it's very capable, it's a learning experience - and it certainly won't bore you.
You've managed to use Linux very successfully posting here without noticing you was doing so ;)
I worked with (against?) MSDOS et all for 25 years. I switched to Linux 2 years ago and it took me most of the first year to unlearn MSDOS and get into the *nix mind-set.
Now I love it. Started with the easy one (Mandrake) and now moved onto Gentoo which I think is the bees knees.
Anything worth-while is worth working at. Keep at it and dual-boot until you get the hang of it.
MrSums
TigaSefi
03-07-2003, 13:30
using red hat 9 here and it been absolutely trying lol.... the thing p***es me off most is dependencies..... u'll soon know what I mean.... anyways off to install apache/php/mysql tonight lol.
I've tried Mandrake and Red Hat, but they both disappeared from my machine. I've had serious worries dual booting with win2k. Mandrake was more user friendly than Red Hat, but whichever you choose prepare yourself for a steep learning curve. In the end, I found Windows does everything I need, and I can't be bothered to spend a day figuring out how to tell Red Hat what a double click is.
Richard M
03-07-2003, 13:39
Dual booting can be a nightmare, it's best to have one machine as Linux only and one as Windows only so if one messes up you are still able to use the other to get help on the net.
eddie00001
04-07-2003, 00:04
Russ, you may want to take a look at this site (http://www.linuxiso.org/distro.php?distro=29) for Mandrake and make full use of your cable modem :D
edgerobber
04-07-2003, 01:00
I think the big question is what do you want to use your computer for, if its games or writing word documents, then XP is probably the best bet.
On the other hand if you want to do something like programming, then Linux looks alot more attractive, due to its flexibility and the fact that you can get alot of useful software for free.
Using Linux is also a great learning experience and using it has given me a very different perspective on computers.
That said, I use windows at home mostly, though I do have RedHat 8 on dual boot, but it is rarely used as I use Linux at work and after a day of it, then coming back to Windows is a nice change.
I prefer red hat as a distro, as I found mandrake "too" user friendly because you can do too much through the Graphical interface. IMHO to get the most out of Linux, then you have to become familier with the command prompt / text file environment, which is hard and I am still not an expert by any stretch of the imagination, but it is incredibly flexible when you get into it.
Alan Waddington
04-07-2003, 08:09
Linux is the best choice if you want a always-on home webserver, email server etc. Over recent years it has also made inroads into the Desktop market with StarOffice & OpenOffice providing useful word processing capability & file exchange compatibility with ms office. This is actually a pretty good cheap home-office solution.
Installation is much easier these days, but I would steer clear of dual booting if possible this can have problems if windows & linux fight over the disk structure (had this 5 yrs ago with Redhat5.1 - may be easier now).
Linux *is* different & is much like Unix under the hood. I like this as it broadens my skillbase. Keep a windows computer too, as most apps are still written primarly for it.
Linux comes with a wide range of programming languages & is ideal if you want to broaden your programming skills at little cost. There are also lots of obscure apps for free, so its worth getting a full distribution & having a ferret around.
My favourite feature is Xserver/Xclient, which allows you to run a remote desktop on another computer. That way I can play with both my windows comp & linux comp without having to get off my backside ;) The main drawback with this approach is the required Xserver software for the windows machine. I did use a free Xserver for a while but it wasn't much cop, & in the end spent money on a decent package. No saving there:(
(The Xserver is confusingly the app that displays the desktop, whilst Xclient is the bit that goes on the computer you want to access)
So... Why not give it a go. If it doesn't work out then install XP instead.
TigaSefi
04-07-2003, 10:41
RussD, I got a bargain for ya, all Red Hat 9 discs on 5 discs.... free on the internet but I'll give ya the discs for a bargain price of £50.
Is that what u mean by selling you linux ? :P
I tried Linux ages ago and it was pretty much OK, but I'm a stickler for Windows so soon went back to MS.;)
Originally posted by TigaSefi
using red hat 9 here and it been absolutely trying lol.... the thing p***es me off most is dependencies..... u'll soon know what I mean.... anyways off to install apache/php/mysql tonight lol.
I agree dependencies are a pain, but these have been largely cured - by urpmi in Mandrake, apt-get in Debian and emerge in Gentoo.
For those who have not tried a "modern" distribution, give it a whirl, you'll be amazed how much they have moved forward in the last couple of years. And dual-booting is no pain at all.
MrSums
IMHO absolutely anything that breaks Bill Gate$' stranglehold on your desktop is a very good thing indeed, even if it takes a little more thought to implement it.
People going for what's convenient rather than what's best has in no small measure contributed to M$' market dominance.
Linux is worth installing on a point of principle if nothing else. If I had an IBM-type PC at home I'd be considering it very seriously indeed.
Alternatively you could of course combine the stability of unix with the ease of use of the people Bill robbed his GUI from in the first place ....
http://www.apple.com/uk/switch/ :)
edgerobber
04-07-2003, 23:56
after MrSums comments I was wondering whether anyone has had problems dual booting using recent distros ?
I ask because I have had no problems and I was wondering if that was the exception or the rule. I think the most important thing is to install windows first and then Linux, otherwise windows will overwrite the boot sector and the Linux boot loader won't work.
Another thing I have found with Linux is that Nvidia cards tend to work better, as they have a dedicated driver set, which these days even updates windows style (except it doesn't crash - well not for me ...)
eddie00001
05-07-2003, 00:24
Can any one give me a step by step guide for dual boot with Win XP Home & Mandrake 9.1. Currently XP is on the C drive and I have a D drive (20Gb) free which I'd like to have Maqndrake on, & then have the option to boot either.
hey russ
once i got my head round makein the three partitions the system fell on for me it feels as if you are returning to to the black arts of dos :D but if you have gone to the trouble of downloadin the 3iso files then go for it if nothin else it will be an experiance cant loose nothin by it except some hair:shrug:
Originally posted by towny
IMHO absolutely anything that breaks Bill Gate$' stranglehold on your desktop is a very good thing indeed, even if it takes a little more thought to implement it.
People going for what's convenient rather than what's best has in no small measure contributed to M$' market dominance.
Linux is worth installing on a point of principle if nothing else. If I had an IBM-type PC at home I'd be considering it very seriously indeed.
Alternatively you could of course combine the stability of unix with the ease of use of the people Bill robbed his GUI from in the first place ....
http://www.apple.com/uk/switch/ :)
Macs aren't that brilliant either. I have 4 at work, running OS8 through 10. OS 10 seems pretty stable, but 8 and 9 crash a few times a week. I also find the ease of use of Macs overstated.
Originally posted by danielf
Macs aren't that brilliant either. I have 4 at work, running OS8 through 10. OS 10 seems pretty stable, but 8 and 9 crash a few times a week. I also find the ease of use of Macs overstated.
off topic, but...
I never used a mac before buying an iMac with OS9 3 years ago. Always used PCs before that. I have never looked back and found the GUI to be a lot more intuitive than Windows.
Yes, OS9 can crash, but you have to agree that a Mac crash is a lot less terrifying than Bill's blue screen of death.
And as for osx ... well I never have to reboot unless I've just installed some new software. Othrwise the computer stays on standby when we're not using it and isn't switched off for weeks at a time.
I've only had os x for a week. (Nice machine, dual g4 1.4 gigs, 19" tft screen), and I like it so far. My main GUI irritations have been dealt with, I can now minimise a window (rather than have a stripe on my desktop), and use forward/back in navigating folders). And yes, a mac crash is less terrifying than a pc crash.
Still, I'd choose win2k/xp over Os8/9
Hector's House
06-07-2003, 15:16
Russ
PC Plus has a version of Knoppix (that spelt right?) on their cover cd which can be run from the cd, you could try that out before actually loading a version of linux onto your harddrive
Go on, right click with a mac :D
Russ, definitely try with Knoppix first, it's really cool
Originally posted by Xaccers
Go on, right click with a mac :D
why would I need to right-click in an OS designed for one mouse button?! :D
Originally posted by Xaccers
Go on, right click with a mac :D
If you have OS X and a two button mouse then the second button works starght away
Hmmm, I have 2 weeks to decide and the argument for Linux is getting weaker by the day......
Originally posted by Russ D
Hmmm, I have 2 weeks to decide and the argument for Linux is getting weaker by the day......
Ok as far as i see it the advantages are:
Cheap
Stable
Not M$
Open source
diadvantages:
Not quite as popular
Not M$
Not as well supported
All I'm after is user-friendliness and ease of use. From what I've seen it would appear that Linux has a disadvantage there.
Originally posted by Russ D
All I'm after is user-friendliness and ease of use. From what I've seen it would appear that Linux has a disadvantage there.
I think (I dont have linux yet) that its not quite there yet
Originally posted by Russ D
All I'm after is user-friendliness and ease of use. From what I've seen it would appear that Linux has a disadvantage there.
True, I installed it and it was difficult to get started especially, also can take longer to find & install programs.
However it is more reliable, stable, functional, *free*and can do everything windows can do. Except run your favourite games. So I'm sticking with XP.
Originally posted by Russ D
All I'm after is user-friendliness and ease of use. From what I've seen it would appear that Linux has a disadvantage there.
I'm afraid so. In my (limited) experience, it can take a long time to learn how to perform some of the most common tasks.
Originally posted by danielf
I'm afraid so. In my (limited) experience, it can take a long time to learn how to perform some of the most common tasks.
I'll second that:) I'm far to brainwashed into windows.
wunderlust
07-07-2003, 00:35
I guess you can only try it - probably mandrake 9 with kde as the desktop would be the best for you if you want a really easy passage in, dual boot or standalone - if you've got XP that'll wipe all existence of it from your hard drive when you reinstall if it ain't your cup of cocoa.
Originally posted by Russ D
All I'm after is user-friendliness and ease of use. From what I've seen it would appear that Linux has a disadvantage there.
Russ Like I've said I installed Mandrake 9.1 for the first time a few weeks back. This the first time I had ever used linux. The install was very easy, Broadband worked first time no problem, infact everything was working just fine but I got rid of it because their was no advantage in me having it installed!. I like my application's and game's so I didn't like the idea of constantly looking around for something that would work on Linux. This I think is one of the most inportant things you should be thinking of ;)
DonFluffy
07-07-2003, 01:35
Russ. Why not go Here (http://www.suse.com/us/private/download/suse_linux/index.html) and download SuSE Linux for i386 Live-Eval
SuSE makes the live-eval version of SuSE Linux available for download as an ISO image. This version runs entirely from the bootable CD and is not installed on the hard disk.
And try Linux without the heart ache.
One thing I hate about Linux (there are a few things, but we'll save the other for another time) is the way you have to reinstall or rebuild (!!) drivers every time you update the kernel.
In Windows, I've never had to 'build' a driver. I wouldn't know how to. Just double-click the setup file, maybe reboot, and then it's working, until the next version of Windows, or an updated driver, is released.
With Linux, every time there is a kernel update, you have to reinstall any non-standard driver. If you're lucky, this just means finding updated RPMs. If you're not so lucky, it means you have to go to the (hated) console and start typing 'make' and 'make install' commands. If you're really unlucky, you have to start doing horrible things like the nVidia driver insists you do: edit a config file so the X Server doesn't start. Execute the driver config. Re-edit some config files from the command prompt so that the X Server will start correctly with the new drivers....
And all Windows users have to do is double-click a file, and maybe click 'okay' a couple of times.
Please, please please could somebody tell me how Linux is such an 'advanced' operating system?
Actually, this is fairly cathartic, I'm going to carry on.
Do you know how to install new fonts in Windows? I'll tell you. You go to Fonts in the Control Panel (or open c:\windows\fonts) and drag the new files there. All the fonts are then instantly available to any Windows programme that wants to use them.
Do you know how to install fonts in Linux? No, neither do I. Some programmes will ffind them if you drag them to fonts:/// in Nautilus. This includes the bundled versions of Mozilla (1.2.1), and OpenOffice. And Gnome/Nautilus itself, of course. Other programmes, like newer versions of Mozilla and OpenOffice you might have installed, will not. In fact, it seems to me that the new versions of Mozilla I have installed doesn't seem to display antialiased fonts at all. But guess what: the Windows version does, right out of the box!
And Java. Oooooh, what fun I've had with Java. Now depending on which version you have, Windows might have come with Java preinstalled. If not (or if you don't like the MS version), you can head over to www.sun.com and download the latest virtual machine. Any browser -- any programme, in fact -- that needs it will detect it. Hell, in XP with SP1, you can even choose which JVM you want the system to use.
I bet it will come as no surprise to you that Linux doesn't work anywhere near as smoothly. Firstly, Java isn't included -- well, fair enough, probably licensing issues, or something. So I go to sun.com and download the latest version. Install it as per the instructions. Try to play a Java game in Mozilla. No dice. Reboot. Try again. Same result. Go to Mozilla help, and it starts telling me to make sure that the Java= environment variable is specified in the path. My first thought is 'why the hell didn't the installation script take care of it'. My second thought is 'hwo the hell do I do that'? So start looking things up on Google, start editting some text config files. I think I've cracked it. Reboot, try Mozilla, still doesn't work. It's suggested that is might have something to do with the compiler version that was used to make the version of Java that I'm using... GCC2.3, or something.
Now the point here isn't that I don't have a clue what it's on about. The point is that I shouldn't HAVE to know what it's on about! Windows users can double-click the file, install it and forget about it. Why can't the same be done in Linux?
I've heard that Microsoft are worried about Linux taking over as a desktop operating system. They shouldn't be. I'm pretty computer literate, and I got bogged down and lost in Linux. Somebody like my dad would have no chance. He doesn't understand how Windows works, he just knows how to do the things he needs to do. That includes downloading things from Windows Update when necessary, and installing new fonts and so on. To do those things in Linux, he'd have to become an expert...
No, trust me, the best thing Microsoft could do is bundle a copy of Linux with every copy of XP they sell. Nobody would ever leave them again.
I so want to like Linux. I know that Open Source can work; I'm using Mozilla Firebird to post this, and I love it to bits. But Linux is so utterly frustrating...
I'm sure Linux makes a wonderfully secure server, and that it will give you an uptime of several decades. But I only need my OS to stand up for about 12 hours at a time. I don't care if the web server isn't as secure, because I'm not using one. I just want an easy-to-use base for running my programmes. I don't want to have to spend hours sorting things out every time I update somethign. All it want is for it to 'just work', without any difficulties.
Could somebody please call me when Linux does this?
EDIT: I should have mentioned that I'm using Red Hat 9. Before this, I tried Mandrake 9.0, which was even worse. No, really, it was.
Originally posted by Tristan
I so want to like Linux......
..... But Linux is so utterly frustrating...
Funny how this comment (people wanting to like linux, but...) seems to come up in every discussion on the subject.
TigaSefi
07-07-2003, 11:57
Heheh Linux is great for geeks though, I manage to make an invision board work on my box hehe, only got 7 members but hey that enuff for me line. lol....next is to make a proper website and a eggdrop with a v-host.
Originally posted by Tristan
I've heard that Microsoft are worried about Linux taking over as a desktop operating system. They shouldn't be. I'm pretty computer literate, and I got bogged down and lost in Linux. Somebody like my dad would have no chance. He doesn't understand how Windows works, he just knows how to do the things he needs to do. That includes downloading things from Windows Update when necessary, and installing new fonts and so on. To do those things in Linux, he'd have to become an expert...
You missunderstand what taking over the desktop means.
It means that for large businesses all their users will use Linux for their main E-mail, Web, Office Applications. Most businesses will/do not need extra stuff like Java, Fonts etc.
That's purely a requirement of home users/geeks/specialists.
I agree that the installation process could be made easier, but look what happened to windos when M$ decided to make it easy for all and sundry to install software on your computer. Can you say Gator Spyware?
Please remember that for the most part Linux software is free as in beer. You can't expect the vendors to hand hold you through everything. If you need that buy a supported product and use it.
Raoul_Duke
07-07-2003, 13:33
Linux has a multitude of learning resources on the net. Anyone can learn to use it fairly quickly. Most people's problem is that they get frustrated with Linux because it doesn't behave like windows......and then they give up, saying it's not 'user friendly'
I've been using linux for ages now and i've never looked back.......apart from games (do not use linux if you are a games addict!!) nearly everything is the same standard and higher compared to windows.....and there are many things you can do with Linux that windows just can't do.
Remember, it's not how much you have to learn.......it's how much you have to un-learn ;-)
SMHarman
07-07-2003, 13:50
Originally posted by cjll3
You missunderstand what taking over the desktop means.
It means that for large businesses all their users will use Linux for their main E-mail, Web, Office Applications. Most businesses will/do not need extra stuff like Java, Fonts etc.
That's purely a requirement of home users/geeks/specialists.
I agree that the installation process could be made easier, but look what happened to windos when M$ decided to make it easy for all and sundry to install software on your computer. Can you say Gator Spyware?
Please remember that for the most part Linux software is free as in beer. You can't expect the vendors to hand hold you through everything. If you need that buy a supported product and use it.
Also means that you dont need your PC to emulate Unix and Mainframe, as it already is one of those.
Originally posted by Raoul_Duke
Most people's problem is that they get frustrated with Linux because it doesn't behave like windows......and then they give up, saying it's not 'user friendly'
But Linux quite simply isn't user friendly!
As Apple taught us all in the mid-eighties, GUIs are nice, user-friendly and easy to use. And yet with Linux you still have to use the command prompt for doing most things.
How is it 'user friendly' to have to know which version of a compiler was used to put together the version of Java that you're using? Or to have to edit configuration files simply to install a new graphics driver?
lol, oh yeah, that was the biggest mess i've ever seen, trying to install the latest nvidia drivers on to red hat, that was a bloody disaster. worked in the end though!
Raoul_Duke
07-07-2003, 15:09
Originally posted by Tristan
But Linux quite simply isn't user friendly!
As Apple taught us all in the mid-eighties, GUIs are nice, user-friendly and easy to use. And yet with Linux you still have to use the command prompt for doing most things.
How is it 'user friendly' to have to know which version of a compiler was used to put together the version of Java that you're using? Or to have to edit configuration files simply to install a new graphics driver?
Haha.....linux IS user friendly, just not as much as windows. We have GUI's for most day to day stuff, you only NEED to use the command line interface for a few things.
Linux forces you to understand more about your OS......when you DO know which compiler you used to build java etc.. you have a much greater chance of fixing any java problems you get ;)
Besides, how is editing config files any different to editing the windows registry :shrug:
I'm not saying Linux is better or more user-friendly than windows but don't dismiss it so quickly. The more that's hidden in an OS, the more that can't be fixed easily.
Plus, complete n00bs don't think it's difficult because they don't have 10 years of windows experience to forget :p
Originally posted by Tristan
One thing I hate about Linux (there are a few things, but we'll save the other for another time) is the way you have to reinstall or rebuild (!!) drivers every time you update the kernel.
Last time I plugged a USB gamepad into an Xp system, it killed it; thankfully it wasn't mine.
In Windows, I've never had to 'build' a driver. I wouldn't know how to. Just double-click the setup file, maybe reboot, and then it's working, until the next version of Windows, or an updated driver, is released.
And reboot and reboot. Earlier today I installed a tape driver onto a linux box, no reboot required and its uptime is now 53 days; and the only reason its uptime is 53 days is because we installed SuSE 8.2 on it.
With Linux, every time there is a kernel update, you have to reinstall any non-standard driver. If you're lucky, this just means finding updated RPMs. If you're not so lucky, it means you have to go to the (hated) console and start typing 'make' and 'make install' commands. If you're really unlucky, you have to start doing horrible things like the nVidia driver insists you do: edit a config file so the X Server doesn't start. Execute the driver config. Re-edit some config files from the command prompt so that the X Server will start correctly with the new drivers....
Personally I've never had problems with nVidia drivers, the only person I do know who had problems with them hated the splash screen prior to X starting. That was solved by adding a line ot the config. Certainly less difficult than diving into the registry in order to deactivate the settings to uninstall IE.
As for the console, well guess what, you dont have to use it, although it certainly makes life easier. As for make, you can use a nice GUI that helps those who dont know or dont want to know what they are doing. Just remember at this point you're not blindly clicking on buttons but actually running compiles of programs.
And all Windows users have to do is double-click a file, and maybe click 'okay' a couple of times.
Guess what many, many linus apps come with install scripts which allow you to do exactly the same thing
Please, please please could somebody tell me how Linux is such an 'advanced' operating system?
Basically it says 'I'm the dumb operating system, your the thinking reasoning human, I have very little reason to question your commands, therefore unless it is an illegal operation I will do _exactly_ what you say'
Linux gives people effectively unlimited choice, you dont like the window manager, change it; you dont like X11, change it; you dont like a particular app, heres the source, re-write it so that you do like it.
With windows your stuck with what some marketroid at MS decides, like no access to serial ports, or having to use NTFS for anything over 35Gig.
Actually, this is fairly cathartic, I'm going to carry on.
By all means, I cant wait to show this to the guys at work
Do you know how to install fonts in Linux? No, neither do I. Some programmes will ffind them if you drag them to fonts:/// in Nautilus. This includes the bundled versions of Mozilla (1.2.1), and OpenOffice. And Gnome/Nautilus itself, of course. Other programmes, like newer versions of Mozilla and OpenOffice you might have installed, will not. In fact, it seems to me that the new versions of Mozilla I have installed doesn't seem to display antialiased fonts at all. But guess what: the Windows version does, right out of the box!
If you want them available to all users then you stick them in the X11 fonts folder, if you want them available to only a specific program then you put them in that program's ./share/fonts folder, if you want them available to only one user of the system (remember Linux is a true multi-user system) you put then in the ./local/fonts folder.
BTW, how did you know to put fonts in the windows\fonts folder? Did you prehaps have to learn thats where they went?
And Java. Oooooh, what fun I've had with Java. Now depending on which version you have, Windows might have come with Java preinstalled. If not (or if you don't like the MS version), you can head over to www.sun.com and download the latest virtual machine. Any browser -- any programme, in fact -- that needs it will detect it. Hell, in XP with SP1, you can even choose which JVM you want the system to use.
Well you could use the non-complient MS JVM, instead of the real one, and live with all the exploits it has.
As for JRE on linux, sun have a nice platform agnostic executable rpm, installs without a problem, although I do admit to having a few difficulties getting the Vm to work with OOo beta 2, meaning that the JDBC was unavailable; but then again, as the OOo team point out, its Beta software.
I bet it will come as no surprise to you that Linux doesn't work anywhere near as smoothly. Firstly, Java isn't included -- well, fair enough, probably licensing issues, or something. So I go to sun.com and download the latest version. Install it as per the instructions. Try to play a Java game in Mozilla. No dice. Reboot. Try again. Same result. Go to Mozilla help, and it starts telling me to make sure that the Java= environment variable is specified in the path. My first thought is 'why the hell didn't the installation script take care of it'. My second thought is 'hwo the hell do I do that'? So start looking things up on Google, start editting some text config files. I think I've cracked it. Reboot, try Mozilla, still doesn't work. It's suggested that is might have something to do with the compiler version that was used to make the version of Java that I'm using... GCC2.3, or something.
BS, the JRE is included in all the commercial distros, you do however have to choose to install it and agree to Sun's license, it doesnt involve GCC at any point as you dont have the source for it, and again, the only problems I've ever had was with Java and Beta software.
Now the point here isn't that I don't have a clue what it's on about. The point is that I shouldn't HAVE to know what it's on about! Windows users can double-click the file, install it and forget about it. Why can't the same be done in Linux?
Guess what, the same is true under the commercial distros of linux, you want to install something via RPM and dont want to check on the dependent libs (which for other readers, are like DLL's, but without the problem of different versions with the same name) install through Yast or another packet manager
I've heard that Microsoft are worried about Linux taking over as a desktop operating system. They shouldn't be. I'm pretty computer literate, and I got bogged down and lost in Linux. Somebody like my dad would have no chance. He doesn't understand how Windows works, he just knows how to do the things he needs to do. That includes downloading things from Windows Update when necessary, and installing new fonts and so on. To do those things in Linux, he'd have to become an expert...
Well guess what, they are because their buisness model cannot defeat it, hence the FUD your parroting. Anyone taking the slightest notice of The Register or linuxtoday will see the inroads its making in desktop, mostly thanks to the work done by KDE and not GNOME which you seem to have used (let me guess RedHat?)
If you want a Distro that you can safely turn your brain off, give it a couple of years, M$ might even try and start up their own unix program again. Of course why anyone who claims to be IT literate would want to do that instead of learning something is beyond me.
No, trust me, the best thing Microsoft could do is bundle a copy of Linux with every copy of XP they sell. Nobody would ever leave them again.
How odd, I've just finnished switching 1500 people from windows to SuSE linux, a friends just done the same for 14,000 people in germany. After a few days of training, and telling them about WineX, none have gone back.
I so want to like Linux. I know that Open Source can work; I'm using Mozilla Firebird to post this, and I love it to bits. But Linux is so utterly frustrating...
Possibly because you didnt put any time into learning the differences, and instead thought that it would be exactly like windows?
I'm sure Linux makes a wonderfully secure server, and that it will give you an uptime of several decades. But I only need my OS to stand up for about 12 hours at a time. I don't care if the web server isn't as secure, because I'm not using one. I just want an easy-to-use base for running my programmes. I don't want to have to spend hours sorting things out every time I update somethign. All it want is for it to 'just work', without any difficulties.
in my experience FreeBSD makes a better firewall, linux doing just about everything else better and more secure. But according to your list of requirements then if you want to pay the £200 for Xp and Office (and if you can keep it up for 12 hours, my best was 5) then your fine. Anyone who wants to control their computer had better look elsewhere
Could somebody please call me when Linux does this?
EDIT: I should have mentioned that I'm using Red Hat 9. Before this, I tried Mandrake 9.0, which was even worse. No, really, it was.
SuSE has been working like this for me from 8.0, 2.2 kernels were somewhat lacking but the 2.4 blow them away. 2.6 kernels with all the additions from IBM will walk all over them.
regards,
BenH
edgerobber
07-07-2003, 23:54
GUI's are massively over rated - they are great for introducing people to computers and for day to day tasks.
I should add that those day to day tasks are what most people use computers for, hence the prevalence of the GUI.
But the command line allows you to tell the computer exactly what you want it to do. The problem is that you have to learn how to do this and that is quite hard. In fact I have to say that my biggest gripe with Linux is that the documentation (man files, info files) are not exactly clear sometimes. The reason for this is that they are written by people who have an intimate knowledge of their program (and probably of Linux), thus their perspective is very different to that of a newbie user.
Anyway, I digress ....
The power of the command line is that once you know what you are doing then with one simple command, then you can perform a task that you would have had to go 5 menus and a dialog box to do.
As for updating, Redhat update is as easy as windows update to use ....
Anyway, despite all that I suspect that Linux is probably not the best bet for Russ D's new machine, though Russ if you have a spare machine at some point then it might be interesting to try.
Edgerobber and Benh:
That's all fine and dandy. However, I just want to run a freeware lisp on my machine, and if I go the (obvious) linux way, I am faced with one impenetrable wall after another. I am trying to do this under Mac OS X ( It was easy under windows, thanks to the Common Lisp Cookbook), and it has taken days to understand the basics of Fink. Edit your .cshrc file (or whatever it's called), but we're not going to tell you it's there unless you ls -al?
Like I quoted before, I want to like linux, but why is it made so bloody difficult?
Originally posted by danielf
Edgerobber and Benh:
That's all fine and dandy. However, I just want to run a freeware lisp on my machine, and if I go the (obvious) linux way, I am faced with one impenetrable wall after another. I am trying to do this under Mac OS X( It was easy under windows, thanks to the Common Lisp Cookbook), and it has taken days to understand the basics of Fink. Edit your .cshrc file (or whatever it's called), but we're not going to tell you it's there unless you ls -al?
Like I quoted before, I want to like linux, but why is it made so bloody difficult?
Not impenetratable, not easy either, but then again what worthwhile is?
It took me 2 1/2 days to learn the console to a reasonable level when first starting out, now I couldn't do without it, its even the first thing I install on my Zaurus after updating the ROM.
Also remember BASH isnt your only choice of shell/console. theres ASH and CSH for the C coders, I'm also reasonably certain theres a console for lisp. End of the day, if you use linux, you will learn more about how computers actually work, and as a result make you a better programmer
Because of this tread I down loaded Linux last night from http://www.linuxiso.org/ . Made iso disks using Nero burning, loaded it in to my other computer and it all went in fine. The computer immediately went on line (via itâ₠¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢s LAN connection) and up dated itself. Touch wood, it seems to be working fine.
wunderlust
08-07-2003, 10:15
Who here knew anything about windows, linux, dos, amiga, mac, vax etc..etc.. the first time they sat down infront of it?
Nobody unless you were born with some incredible insight.
You had to learn it. Even with windows I bet you sat and scratched your head a few times trying to figure out how to do the simplest of things.
Windows isn't Linux and Linux isn't Windows.
If you don't want to learn it then don't, stick with what you know.
timewarrior2001
08-07-2003, 10:21
Personal experiences of Linux were horrendous, I think the software is utter junk and has about a snowflake in hells chance of denting microsofts dominance with Windows.
I actually bought Mandrake linux, had a driver problem, support told me to write a driver!!! wow and to think I paid for the luxury of that support too. If I could write a driver file, I wouldnt have been stupid enough to try and install linux in the first place.....or to even buy it for that matter.
The reason Microsoft became so successful with windows was because they introduced standardisation. Show me that with Linux. The whole idea behind linux is a cool one, but it is sooooooo doomed because theres no standardisation. The different distros all do things differently. Thats why theres so damn many of them.
If the free idea behind linux was abolished sooner or later there would be a linux standard, then and only then could it even begin to compete with Windows.
Originally posted by timewarrior2001
I actually bought Mandrake linux, had a driver problem, support told me to write a driver!!!
ROTFLMAO. That's a beauty!!! I'll remember that...
Originally posted by wunderlust
Who here knew anything about windows, linux, dos, amiga, mac, vax etc..etc.. the first time they sat down infront of it?
Nobody unless you were born with some incredible insight.
You had to learn it. Even with windows I bet you sat and scratched your head a few times trying to figure out how to do the simplest of things.
Windows isn't Linux and Linux isn't Windows.
If you don't want to learn it then don't, stick with what you know.
When I got my first PC (286, 640k ram, DOS 3.2) I spent hours trying to get the games I knew my dad's IT manager has loaded on it to work by typing CHAIN "CHESS", *RUN "GOLF" etc because I had previously been using a BBC .... :blush:
Have to say that I found going from Windows to Mac OS far less stressful ... :D
Can't speak for ease-of-use re Linux, but in answer to timewarrior, in the long term it will dent Windows. Linux can only get better. The more it is used, the more it will be supported and developed. And M$'s commercial business plan has no answer for something that is basically being given away.
It may take a while, but what would people say if you went back to 1995 and announced to the IT world that a free, open source project would soon be getting installed on 100s of 1,000s of computers and servers all over the world?
Give it time.
timewarrior2001
08-07-2003, 10:35
yeah theres a small point, Linux getting on hundreds and thousands of computers and servers. What about the Millions probably billions of computers running windows?
No company in their right mind would go for something that carries little or no support. I have yet to come across any company running Linux. I have seen UNIX in operation and that was worse than linux absolute nightmare, Turned computers off in wrong order the network they were on collapsed etc.
The games industry barely acknowledges Linux.
Eventually given enough time Linux MAY dent windows domination of the market, but remember all the time windows is improving too. Take XP for example, I cant crash it running beta Version games. Windows 98 and ME would crash if a mouse farted 3 miles away.
SMHarman
08-07-2003, 10:44
Originally posted by timewarrior2001
No company in their right mind would go for something that carries little or no support. I have yet to come across any company running Linux. I have seen UNIX in operation and that was worse than linux absolute nightmare, Turned computers off in wrong order the network they were on collapsed etc.
Where I work many of us need Hummingbirds eXceed on our windows desktops to access corporate applications.
A few years ago M$ did not really support Apple OS, now you can get explorer, and the office suite for OS X.
I'm sure in a few years M$ will realise there is money to be made in providing Office for Linux. This will hurt their desktop OS but keep their market share in office productivity software.
Most GUI users will adapt as long as the applications they use do not also require relearning and the files can be shared with other OSs.
Originally posted by timewarrior2001
The games industry barely acknowledges Linux.
From a corporate point this is a good thing
timewarrior2001
08-07-2003, 10:47
But from a sales point its not so good.
Its common knowledge that the games industry is the major driving force behind PC development.
If this section of the PC market can not or will not support Linux it will be massively affected.
SMHarman
08-07-2003, 10:51
We already have XP Pro and XP Home.
I can see a future with Linux Pro in the office and XP Home in the home as two complimentary OSs
Originally posted by SMHarman
We already have XP Pro and XP Home.
I can see a future with Linux Pro in the office and XP Home in the home as two complimentary OSs
I can see a future where a number of different OSs are in common use and they all talk happily to each other, just as it should have been from day one, complementing each other and playing to each other's strengths.
This approach can work - Apple by rights should be long dead, but their system is so darn good at what it does that it is still here, and stronger than ever. OSX nicely supports windows (right down to Apple's own applications now adding filename extensions by default, despite not needing them) And as others have pointed out, M$ has for some time been supporting the platform with IE and Office for Mac (although they have just announced that there will be no new versions of IE for Mac).
There is a clear niche for Linux already - the number of local authorities in the UK that are using it to run servers is steadlity growing, and at the same time they are preventing our council tax from lining 'Dollar' Bill's pockets. Any large organisation that already has to spend large amounts of cash on support for a windows-based network can feasibly spend that cash supporting a Linux network instead. The tools to do your daily word processing, spreadsheets, email and web browsing are already available in Linux, and as there are so few games and other downloadable distractions for the OS, surely it's an IT manager's dream...
Originally posted by SMHarman
Most GUI users will adapt as long as the applications they use do not also require relearning and the files can be shared with other OSs.
Which means that most people can use Linux in a working enviroment.
Clicking on a large K or footprint is no different to clicking on the windos start button.
TigaSefi
08-07-2003, 11:50
Whilst we are arguing with Linux/Windows, I am running a Invisionboard on my linx rh9 and for external users outside the router it is flawless. Pages loads instantly etc but when my lan users i.e. my gf on her Windows XP. try to use it after the initial first page none of the other pages loads up. Using packet sniffers we found that Linux does indeed responds and gives a response but along the line the response gets lost.
if we use my ISP's IP it doesn't work at all BUT if we use the internal LAN IP then only the initial page works but nothing else ? Anyone got any ideas ?
timewarrior2001
08-07-2003, 11:58
I'm sorry, but I dont see any future for Linux. Its probably now towards the peak of its popularity.
Windows.....no more specifically microsoft, have far too many existing customers, I dont think XP is the be all and end all of OS software, its still got faults. But hey, it installs and for me thats a big plus, I have only once managed to get Linux to install on any machine.
Ok so you cant play many games on Linux, but if it becomes more popoular that will change, so the games argument isnt particular valid anymore.
The whole reason Apple are still in existance today is because Uncle Bill fancied a laugh and poured a load of cash into the sinking ship, everyone is entitled to some amusement in their lives.
I stated before and I'll state again, Linux needs standardisation, and to achieve that they need to abolish free distros. When that happens all the people that rave about linux will abandon it for another free product and the rantings and ravings will start all over again.
I want an OS I can use, that I know I can send a file to a colleague and I know they can open and view it. I like to know that when I have a problem, I am not told to "write a driver".
I want an OS that is simple to use, something that doesnt require a degree in computer programming or ultra geek status and never leaving my bedroom to see the light of day, to keep running or to get running.
From my experiences Linux failed, no it didnt just fail, it never started it couldnt do a thing because it couldnt install.
Originally posted by timewarrior2001
The whole reason Apple are still in existance today is because Uncle Bill fancied a laugh and poured a load of cash into the sinking ship, everyone is entitled to some amusement in their lives.
:rofl:
Maybe he has a conscience after all.
SMHarman
08-07-2003, 12:33
Or realised it was prudent to keep competition in the paid for desktop OS market so he would not be a monopolistic supplier with all the regulation that would bring.
At the moment users have a choice Apple OSX or Wintel XP if that choice dissaperars then regulation of M£ will increase.
Originally posted by TigaSefi
Whilst we are arguing with Linux/Windows, I am running a Invisionboard on my linx rh9 and for external users outside the
-snip-
if we use my ISP's IP it doesn't work at all BUT if we use the internal LAN IP then only the initial page works but nothing else ? Anyone got any ideas ?
Invision board works by setting the all the links to the full url address i.e. http://www.yourdomain.com/path/index.php?s=48978t9875897t69587589798575&CODE=01
The effect being that you then end up requesting the next page from the fully qualified domain name, i.e. your external IP address.
You can change this by adding an entry into your hosts file to overide the DNS lookup, explictly setting your proxy in the internet connection settings of IE
TigaSefi
08-07-2003, 12:59
Originally posted by cjll3
Invision board works by setting the all the links to the full url address i.e. http://www.yourdomain.com/path/index.php?s=48978t9875897t69587589798575&CODE=01
The effect being that you then end up requesting the next page from the fully qualified domain name, i.e. your external IP address.
You can change this by adding an entry into your hosts file to overide the DNS lookup, explictly setting your proxy in the internet connection settings of IE
Thanks, we seemed to have configured the config file so the next file it requests it still the internal LAN IP and if it got 3-4 post in the thread then it loads up but any more, it takes years to time out. I'll try and amend the hosts file.
Originally posted by SMHarman
Or realised it was prudent to keep competition in the paid for desktop OS market so he would not be a monopolistic supplier with all the regulation that would bring.
At the moment users have a choice Apple OSX or Wintel XP if that choice dissaperars then regulation of M£ will increase. #
Well, it would have been stupid for MS to let their best R&D department die, eh? ;)
Final attempt to sell you Linux - try knoppix (http://www.knoppix.net/) . Just download a copy, burn it onto a CD and run it from there. No install needed. It really is the easiest route to try and the CD doesn't slow it too much.
Mr Sums
I used Knoppix myself to try and test the water so to speak before trying a distro that I have to configure and install.
Was amazed at how well ALL my hardware worked (Even my Nforce2 onboard sound wich I didnt think would work given the age of this version of Knoppix).
Will be installing Redhat on my laptop soon Just to see how hard it is to set up (I love a challenge, makes me feel like I have earned the right to use my computer :D )
Well BenH, I disagree with you on most points, but you have at least convinced me to give Linux one last try.
I wiped my Linux partition last night, and re-installed Red Hat 9 with the 'kitchen sink' option (as I previously had trouble compiling anything, as I didn't have the development files installed).
The install took ages, but that's understandable given that it was copying 5GB of stuff onto my HDD. Once that was done, I logged on to the Red Hat Network, and downloaded 281MB (:O) of updates.
Then I had to flick back to Windows to download an updated driver for my wireless card, because I had forgotten that it would stop working when I updated the kernel. But no matter.
I can confirm that Red Hat does not come with Java preinstalled, or at least, not that the default installation of Mozilla can see. I went to sun.com and downloaded the JRE 1.4.2 RPM, installed it, and Mozilla still couldn't run any Java apps. So I gave up.
Now as I mentioned previously, I'm a big fan of Mozilla Firebird, so I went to ftp.mozilla.org to download it. I tried the latest release, 0.6, and it looked terrible, with its non-antialiased fonts. This is pretty odd, because the bundled version of Mozilla uses them without any bother...
Well that's as far as I've got so far, anyway. Not as bad as it was last time, but still not an unqualified success...
Raoul_Duke
08-07-2003, 16:15
Redhat is a breeze to install, easier than win2k ;)
As for the other people who complain about Linux:
Why shouldn't you choose an OS, why should we have just one huge dominant company that controls 97% of the desktop. It's not good for anyone except microsoft.
What's wrong with a market that has quite a few different OS's that appeal to different people in different ways.......you know, like everything in life..!!!
And remember, the main reason that there is no standards across OS's is that MS choose to change their formats every 2 years to lock-out competitors. If they didn't do that, Linux would be fully compatible with everything :rolleyes:
Please people, if you don't like Linux.....don't worry. It's not coming after you
Originally posted by Raoul_Duke
Redhat is a breeze to install, easier than win2k ;)
As for the other people who complain about Linux:
Why shouldn't you choose an OS, why should we have just one huge dominant company that controls 97% of the desktop. It's not good for anyone except microsoft.
What's wrong with a market that has quite a few different OS's that appeal to different people in different ways.......you know, like everything in life..!!!
And remember, the main reason that there is no standards across OS's is that MS choose to change their formats every 2 years to lock-out competitors. If they didn't do that, Linux would be fully compatible with everything :rolleyes:
Please people, if you don't like Linux.....don't worry. It's not coming after you
No, there's nothing wrong with Linux existing. But, this thread is about the pros and cons of Linux. So we are discussing it...
Raoul_Duke
08-07-2003, 16:23
Sorry, i understand that......just that some people seem to get very angry about people liking linux because they didn't get on with it themselves.
I think anyone who is interested should give it a go.......but a little homework into what your getting yourself into would be advisable ;)
What window manager is your RedHat installation using, Tristan? We played around with RH9 a while ago at work and it had some lovely anti-aliased fonts (almost as nice as the ones in Mac OS X) using the latest version of KDE. Or is it just Mozilla that won't use them?
Originally posted by Tristan
[B]Well BenH, I disagree with you on most points, but you have at least convinced me to give Linux one last try.
I wiped my Linux partition last night, and re-installed Red Hat 9 with the 'kitchen sink' option (as I previously had trouble compiling anything, as I didn't have the development files installed).
[/QUOTE}
Why do you insist on using RH9? Its not an exceptional distro, rather an acceptable one. SuSE is superiour in all respects as far as I can tell.
[QUOTE]
The install took ages, but that's understandable given that it was copying 5GB of stuff onto my HDD. Once that was done, I logged on to the Red Hat Network, and downloaded 281MB (:O) of updates.
Its an old release, if you installed Windows ME you'd expect a far larger number of updates.
I can confirm that Red Hat does not come with Java preinstalled, or at least, not that the default installation of Mozilla can see. I went to sun.com and downloaded the JRE 1.4.2 RPM, installed it, and Mozilla still couldn't run any Java apps. So I gave up.
Well I can certainly confirm that its there under SuSE.
Now as I mentioned previously, I'm a big fan of Mozilla Firebird, so I went to ftp.mozilla.org to download it. I tried the latest release, 0.6, and it looked terrible, with its non-antialiased fonts. This is pretty odd, because the bundled version of Mozilla uses them without any bother...
Then why not download other fonts, or as your dual booting you can simply drag the windows fonts across the partition and install under X?
Regards,
BenH
Originally posted by Mimizuku no Lew
What window manager is your RedHat installation using, Tristan? We played around with RH9 a while ago at work and it had some lovely anti-aliased fonts (almost as nice as the ones in Mac OS X) using the latest version of KDE. Or is it just Mozilla that won't use them?
The default window manager under RH is GNOME, one thats fallen very far behind KDE in regard to development, to the extent that the facility in Mexico where the FSF launched it have now switched to KDE.
Regards,
BenH
I forgot to mention, Ben, that you'd also convinced me to switch from Gnome to KDE -- and it's much nicer, if a little slower. :)
I have copied over my Windows fonts (after playing about for a bit to get Linux to recognise my NTFS drive, but I understand this is a fault with Red Hat and not the OS itself), and many programmes will now use them, including KDE itself and the bundled versions of Mozilla (1.2.1) and OOo (1.0.2).
Unfortunately, not all programmes do, and Mozilla Firebird falls into this latter catagory. I recall seeing somewhere (and I can't for the life of me remember where) that it's something to with something called Xft -- Mozilla doesn't support it, or something.
Please could somebody enlighten me, I'm feeling rather in the dark! Why would the installed version of Mozilla support something that a newer build doesn't?
That explains a lot. Give KDE a go, Tristan. It's puuurdyyyy! :D
Originally posted by timewarrior2001
Personal experiences of Linux were horrendous, I think the software is utter junk and has about a snowflake in hells chance of denting microsofts dominance with Windows.
Well lets see; IBM, SUN, Novell, Oracle, US DoD and Microsoft themselves all think it does.
I actually bought Mandrake linux, had a driver problem, support told me to write a driver!!! wow and to think I paid for the luxury of that support too. If I could write a driver file, I wouldnt have been stupid enough to try and install linux in the first place.....or to even buy it for that matter.
What version was it? And you are aware that when you buy it you pay for _installation_ support, not device support. They make it rather clear, usually they say they have a premium rate number that you can phone for support or Email a request that will get a response. Try that with M$.
Also as someone who is smart enough to have written several drivers and quite a bit of other code I do not belive that they would have told you to write your own, rather they point you in the direction of people who were and who would be happy to help out.
The reason Microsoft became so successful with windows was because they introduced standardisation. Show me that with Linux. The whole idea behind linux is a cool one, but it is sooooooo doomed because theres no standardisation. The different distros all do things differently. Thats why theres so damn many of them.
If the free idea behind linux was abolished sooner or later there would be a linux standard, then and only then could it even begin to compete with Windows.
Congrats, this paragraph, and the rest of your posts have just won you my Clueless Ignorant Luser of the Day award.
There are two different types of standards, De Facto and De Jure. De facto standards are adopted standards - what everyone uses - they havnt gone through a comittee, they havn't met any technical specification and theres no roadmap for them. They are also closed to external agencies and require licensing fees to be paid. This is why M$ is a big fan of them, and why they change with every release of windows, and why you cannot open an Office Xp file with either Office 2K or '97 without knowing a few tricks.
De Jure standards are the real standards, that are open to all and must be kept to if developers wish to be certified. there is a published roadmap that is kept to so that there are no nasty surprises, and they have no licensing fees applied to them. Examples of this would be MPEG, JPEG and POSIX. The last one being what all major and most minor distros keep to.
Regards,
BenH
Raoul_Duke
08-07-2003, 17:04
Originally posted by Tristan
I forgot to mention, Ben, that you'd also convinced me to switch from Gnome to KDE -- and it's much nicer, if a little slower. :)
I have copied over my Windows fonts (after playing about for a bit to get Linux to recognise my NTFS drive, but I understand this is a fault with Red Hat and not the OS itself), and many programmes will now use them, including KDE itself and the bundled versions of Mozilla (1.2.1) and OOo (1.0.2).
Unfortunately, not all programmes do, and Mozilla Firebird falls into this latter catagory. I recall seeing somewhere (and I can't for the life of me remember where) that it's something to with something called Xft -- Mozilla doesn't support it, or something.
Please could somebody enlighten me, I'm feeling rather in the dark! Why would the installed version of Mozilla support something that a newer build doesn't?
Mozilla firebird is not the same as Mozilla.....firebird is a newer browser.....it's not even up to a 1.0 release yet ;)
edit: Xft is included in the normal release of mozilla but i have no idea about firebird :shrug:
Originally posted by Tristan
I forgot to mention, Ben, that you'd also convinced me to switch from Gnome to KDE -- and it's much nicer, if a little slower. :)
:-) Everything under K is an object, and as a result does take up a fair few clock cycles; but it is very stable and very pretty.
If you want speed, try using ICE or BlackBox, I use both on my P1's with Debian
I have copied over my Windows fonts (after playing about for a bit to get Linux to recognise my NTFS drive, but I understand this is a fault with Red Hat and not the OS itself), and many programmes will now use them, including KDE itself and the bundled versions of Mozilla (1.2.1) and OOo (1.0.2).
Actually its a fault with NTFS, the way that filing system works is a genuine nightmare, not to mention being physically destructive to the HD itself. NTFS read is pretty stable under linux, but its generally kept aside to stop the user from affecting the windows partition. NTFS write is still labled as experimental and dangerous in the latest dev kernel.
Of course windows is completely unable to see an Ext3 or Reiser partition.
Unfortunately, not all programmes do, and Mozilla Firebird falls into this latter catagory. I recall seeing somewhere (and I can't for the life of me remember where) that it's something to with something called Xft -- Mozilla doesn't support it, or something.
There is a Fonts folder, under res if I recall; but I've hacked about so much with my Firebird that I probably wont be of much help. Try Texturizer or the MozDev boards.
Please could somebody enlighten me, I'm feeling rather in the dark! Why would the installed version of Mozilla support something that a newer build doesn't?
Because its 0.6, and therefore Beta software, I have no doubt that release 1.0 will have these features. If you want them before then, go to the discussion boards and ask nicely, if its not in the roadmap for 0.7 they may move it up if theres sufficent demand.
Regards,
BenH
Can somebody please explain Linux/X fonts to me?
I did a bit of Googling, and it turns out that Mozilla.org's builds of Firebird don't use Xft. I found a link to a few sites that have compliled it with this, and woo-hoo, anti-aliased fonts :)
Unfortunately (I bet you knew that was coming, didn't you!) they're still not very good fonts. I tried going in to Preferences and changing them, but it only has fonts listed with odd names, like "adobe-times-iso8859-1". I can't see any of the Windows fonts I copied over.
Strangely though, I also downloaded Mozilla Thunderbird, which is the name they've given to the e-mail client now that it's all been split up. This displays lovely, smooth Windows-like fonts. In fact, if I go to preferences there, all my Windows fonts appear, along with a few others. However, the likes of "adobe-times-iso8859-1" are nowhere to be seen.
Can somebody explain this? It seems as if there are two sets of fonts on my computer, and Firebird is using one (the bad set) and Thunderbird is using the other (the good set).
Also, what are Gtk+ and QT3? These kept popping up in the links about Firebird and Xft.
(I'm trying -- really trying hard -- not to point out that this is all unnecessary under Windows. Okay, so I failed, but I've at least got to get points for effort, right? ;))
EDIT: I don't know what's happened, but it's now doing what I want! I closed it down, restarted it, and now it's using the font set I want it ot use. This is good news! I'd still be interested in a quick explaination of the font system though, if anybody's got a few minutes to spare...
Originally posted by Tristan
Also, what are Gtk+ and QT3? These kept popping up in the links about Firebird and Xft.
These are widget (actual technical term) toolkits for creating the display. Gtk+ is the Gimp toolkit whereas QT3 is a cross platform widget toolkit.
Mozilla uses XUL
EDIT: I don't know what's happened, but it's now doing what I want! I closed it down, restarted it, and now it's using the font set I want it ot use. This is good news! I'd still be interested in a quick explaination of the font system though, if anybody's got a few minutes to spare... [/B]
You didnt need to shut down and reboot, just restart the X server. Go to one of the tty's (ctrl+alt+F1-6) login and drop down to runlevel 3 (init 3), go to X.inetd and enter restart. After the restart reenter the graphical level (init 5)
Regards,
BenH
rockabillybass
09-07-2003, 23:44
Hi,
Just thought I'd add a comment to this debate. I've been running Unix and Linux systems since the early 90's. Whilst Linux has improved beyond all recognition from the early distributions I had (most of which you had to compile yourself!) it can still be difficult for non technical users to set up.
My favourite distibution is currently Suse 8.2 Professional. This is very stable and includes a huge range of software. It also uses the KDE desktop as standard. This is a wise choice for users coming from Windows.
A famous saying about Linux goes something like this:
"With Linux you can set up a corporate level web server in five minutes but find that it takes you five weeks to get your printer working"
Unfortunately this is still true to a point.
I've only had time to skim this thread but have seen a huge range of questions about fonts, compilers and everything else. The best place I know of to get information on Linux is:
http://www.linuxquestions.org
This is a great resource.
I have always been able to find an answer there. If you persevere Linux will reward you but the learning curve is steep. If you formally study operating systems you come to realise that had windows been based on Unix, rather than Dos all those years ago, computing as we now it on PCs would be far superior, not prone to crashes or blue screens of death etc.
Also, guess what's underneath OS X on the Mac - BSD Unix.
Enjoy,
Martin
SMHarman
10-07-2003, 10:00
And Windows NT and XP are both designed by an ex-unix person.
There is no DOS left in XP, only the way people talk about it (open a dos box - not a command line box).
Hence both show the blue screen far less often. In fact my XP machine has never crashed, and my NT one gets cranky if I leave it on for over 2 weeks.
Originally posted by SMHarman
And Windows NT and XP are both designed by an ex-unix person.
WinNT/WinXP were designed by ex-VMS people. VMS != UNIX ;)
Link (http://www.winnetmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=4494)
SMHarman
10-07-2003, 12:05
Good link.
Interesting that HPCompaq now own VMS and HPUX. Wonder how that will pan out in the future being as the Alpha processor can run NT.
timewarrior2001
10-07-2003, 12:08
Originally posted by BenH
Well lets see; IBM, SUN, Novell, Oracle, US DoD and Microsoft themselves all think it does.
What version was it? And you are aware that when you buy it you pay for _installation_ support, not device support. They make it rather clear, usually they say they have a premium rate number that you can phone for support or Email a request that will get a response. Try that with M$.
Also as someone who is smart enough to have written several drivers and quite a bit of other code I do not belive that they would have told you to write your own, rather they point you in the direction of people who were and who would be happy to help out.
Congrats, this paragraph, and the rest of your posts have just won you my Clueless Ignorant Luser of the Day award.
There are two different types of standards, De Facto and De Jure. De facto standards are adopted standards - what everyone uses - they havnt gone through a comittee, they havn't met any technical specification and theres no roadmap for them. They are also closed to external agencies and require licensing fees to be paid. This is why M$ is a big fan of them, and why they change with every release of windows, and why you cannot open an Office Xp file with either Office 2K or '97 without knowing a few tricks.
De Jure standards are the real standards, that are open to all and must be kept to if developers wish to be certified. there is a published roadmap that is kept to so that there are no nasty surprises, and they have no licensing fees applied to them. Examples of this would be MPEG, JPEG and POSIX. The last one being what all major and most minor distros keep to.
Regards,
BenH
:rolleyes:
hope you dont feel to offended by me showing my utter contempt to someone that has to start using insults because they personally dont like windows.
There are two different types of standards, De Facto and De Jure.
Never the less they are infact standards and are recognised as such. So when I say standard because I do not mention the current in word lingo regarding them it makes me a "Clueless Ignorant Luser"
That my friend isnt even worthy of my utter contempt.
For your own information, I work with software coders, ok of the games type but never the less coders. My views on linux are formed from conversation with these guys and my own experiences. I hear the faults these guys pick up on, I also hear and admit myself that windows is far from perfect.
If you honestly want to accuse me of being a liar over what I was told by Mandrake support then fine, but hey one of us knows the truth dont we?
Look at things from all perspectives, Its easier to get support for micorsoft products than Linux ones. I wouldnt know where to start debugging linux, and I would imagine thousands if not millions of other people wont either. The same could be said for windows too. Its just my experience that windows is and will be easier to use, better supported and will remain on top.
Just look at some of the trouble people have getting drivers for linux, ok its a lot better support in that respect now than it was say 3 or 4 years ago when I purchased Mandrake 7.
Like I say, its difficult to want to use something when you hear professional, internationally respected coders pick it apart on a daily basis.
I dont like Linux, if you dont like me because I favour windows then fine, but what I do expect is some common decency and some polite courtious respect off people using this forum.:rolleyes:
Originally posted by SMHarman
Good link.
Interesting that HPCompaq now own VMS and HPUX. Wonder how that will pan out in the future being as the Alpha processor can run NT.
I may be wrong, but I belive MS dropped support for the Alpha processor (as well as the PowerPC processor) after NT4.
SMHarman
10-07-2003, 12:26
From the same source as MnLs link above
NT vs.UNIX: Is One Substantially Better
http://www.winnetmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=4500
Originally posted by timewarrior2001
:rolleyes:
hope you dont feel to offended by me showing my utter contempt to someone that has to start using insults because they personally dont like windows.
Well I'm just all cut up about that, really, mayever recover.
Of course I do note that you've removed your own ignorant ****ging off of linux from this post.
Never the less they are infact standards and are recognised as such. So when I say standard because I do not mention the current in word lingo regarding them it makes me a "Clueless Ignorant Luser"
That my friend isnt even worthy of my utter contempt.
You claimed that Linux does not follow any standards, I showed you that you were wrong. You said that games cant run under linux, well gee I guess that all the staff at TransGaming and Epic may just be hallucinating. Not to mention eveyone playing UT2k3, Enemy Territory and everything running under WineX.
For your own information, I work with software coders, ok of the games type but never the less coders. My views on linux are formed from conversation with these guys and my own experiences. I hear the faults these guys pick up on, I also hear and admit myself that windows is far from perfect.
And who says these guys are compitent to comment on Linux? Most Game's coders are scripters and graphic designers who would come over faint at the sight of C let alone Assembler
If you honestly want to accuse me of being a liar over what I was told by Mandrake support then fine, but hey one of us knows the truth dont we?
I was a 'drake user prior to SuSE, I allways found the support staff helpful and polite. Of course I wasnt trying to get post-installation support out of them for free. Given that you didnt properly reply to my points I can only assume that this is what you tried to do.
Look at things from all perspectives, Its easier to get support for micorsoft products than Linux ones. I wouldnt know where to start debugging linux, and I would imagine thousands if not millions of other people wont either. The same could be said for windows too. Its just my experience that windows is and will be easier to use, better supported and will remain on top.
Its easier to get support for windows because people need more support for windows. A few quick commands to the NNTP server shows that excluding the binaries, the most acvtive groups on usenet are the windows help groups. Cant really say I'm surprised.
Just look at some of the trouble people have getting drivers for linux, ok its a lot better support in that respect now than it was say 3 or 4 years ago when I purchased Mandrake 7.
And heres the real answer, your opinions are (probably deliberatly) skewed. Why dont I compare the very latest releases of Linux to Win3.1 or 95; which is in essence what you've bee doing.
Like I say, its difficult to want to use something when you hear professional, internationally respected coders pick it apart on a daily basis.
names and contact details please, for some reason I just dont belive you.
I dont like Linux, if you dont like me because I favour windows then fine, but what I do expect is some common decency and some polite courtious respect off people using this forum.
Thats right, your the injured party here, you didnt come along and post a whole load of mis-information and FUD and then try and sweep it under the carpet when I called you on it.
I dont like you, not because you prefer windows, but because you posted a whole load of BS about my operating system of choice. Given that this thread was started by someone actually wanting information about Linux rather than the typical wintroll propeganda I felt obliged to reply.
BenH
timewarrior2001
10-07-2003, 15:10
And where exactly do I state that absolutely NO games work on Linux? I said something along the lines of....its not yet been taken wholeheartedly by the gaming studios. And that it was a plus for the OS that it currently didnt have a lot of games out for it, but if it became a huge success this would surely change.
How can I make my comments about linux when I am now told that I cannot draw upon personal experience?
I was wanting installation support, like you would understand if you actaully read my early posts, Mandrake 7 simply would NOT install upon the system I wanted it to run on.
AMD K6-500
256Mb ram
onboard sound
Voodoo 3 GFX card (PCI)
2gb HDD
and CDwriter
I was informed it was a driver error and that I needed to write a driver and rebuild the Kernel or somehting to that desription. To me that defeated the whole reason for actually buying the product in the first place.
So if I am forbidden to pass on my own personal thoughts and experiences of Linux, because I dont like it, then how can the thread starter possibly get any kind of picture of the OS other then a good one by people that like it. Kind of a biased way of portraying something dont you think. Also why is this called a discussion forum?
I am going to go back through the whole of my posts and check that I havent once stated that Windows was actually Better than Linux, I think I have only pointed out that Linux for me wouldnt install therfore didnt work. But windows did.
Hey at least I have tried Linux and have only critiscised it because it wouldnt do what I wanted it to do.......install.
Originally posted by timewarrior2001
And where exactly do I state that absolutely NO games work on Linux? I said something along the lines of....its not yet been taken wholeheartedly by the gaming studios. And that it was a plus for the OS that it currently didnt have a lot of games out for it, but if it became a huge success this would surely change.
you said:
Ok so you cant play many games on Linux, but if it becomes more popoular that will change, so the games argument isnt particular valid anymore.
I have yet to find a game that I cannot run under linux
How can I make my comments about linux when I am now told that I cannot draw upon personal experience?
I was wanting installation support, like you would understand if you actaully read my early posts, Mandrake 7 simply would NOT install upon the system I wanted it to run on.
AMD K6-500
256Mb ram
onboard sound
Voodoo 3 GFX card (PCI)
2gb HDD
and CDwriter
One of my machines is quite happily running mandrake 8.1. Its a 120Mhz P1 with 16 Megs of RAM, 1 Gig HD and a 4 Meg video card. It even manages X with IceWM. Had to do a text install but no major problems.
I was informed it was a driver error and that I needed to write a driver and rebuild the Kernel or somehting to that desription. To me that defeated the whole reason for actually buying the product in the first place.
Driver for what? Were you using a CDM CD drive? Given the mishmash of components you describe above (why waste 256Meg of RAM and a Voodoo 3 on a system without sufficent storage to fully utilise them?) you couldn't get away with the nice simple graphical install so you gave up? Did you even consider asking for help from a LUG or one of the many forums available.
So if I am forbidden to pass on my own personal thoughts and experiences of Linux, because I dont like it, then how can the thread starter possibly get any kind of picture of the OS other then a good one by people that like it. Kind of a biased way of portraying something dont you think. Also why is this called a discussion forum?
You failed to clarify your position, as far as the thread initiator and eveyone on this board would have been concerned, you were talking about the very latest release. Now your trying to worm your way out of the position your in, claiming I'm the nasty brutal one while failing to answer any of my questions.
So come on then, who are these internationally respected coders who you associate with?
I am going to go back through the whole of my posts and check that I havent once stated that Windows was actually Better than Linux, I think I have only pointed out that Linux for me wouldnt install therfore didnt work. But windows did.
Hey at least I have tried Linux and have only critiscised it because it wouldnt do what I wanted it to do.......install.
Let me help:
Personal experiences of Linux were horrendous, I think the software is utter junk and has about a snowflake in hells chance of denting microsofts dominance with Windows.
The reason Microsoft became so successful with windows was because they introduced standardisation. Show me that with Linux. The whole idea behind linux is a cool one, but it is sooooooo doomed because theres no standardisation.
yeah theres a small point, Linux getting on hundreds and thousands of computers and servers. What about the Millions probably billions of computers running windows?
No company in their right mind would go for something that carries little or no support. I have yet to come across any company running Linux. I have seen UNIX in operation and that was worse than linux absolute nightmare, Turned computers off in wrong order the network they were on collapsed etc.
The games industry barely acknowledges Linux.
But from a sales point its not so good.
Its common knowledge that the games industry is the major driving force behind PC development.
If this section of the PC market can not or will not support Linux it will be massively affected.
The last one is exceptional, the major use for PC's is personal productivity - word processing and spread sheets not games. You also demonstrate your ignorance of UNIX. UNIX != Linux, UNIX is _NOT_ an OS for desktops, although it certainly can be used as such.
But you continue:
I'm sorry, but I dont see any future for Linux. Its probably now towards the peak of its popularity.
Windows.....no more specifically microsoft, have far too many existing customers, I dont think XP is the be all and end all of OS software, its still got faults. But hey, it installs and for me thats a big plus, I have only once managed to get Linux to install on any machine.
Ok so you cant play many games on Linux, but if it becomes more popoular that will change, so the games argument isnt particular valid anymore.
BTW managed to get Xp installed on your K6 with a 2GigHD ?
And more:
I stated before and I'll state again, Linux needs standardisation, and to achieve that they need to abolish free distros. When that happens all the people that rave about linux will abandon it for another free product and the rantings and ravings will start all over again.
Guess you've never heared of the GPL then and that Free means Freedom not Zero Cost.
Like I said originally 'Clueless Ignorant Luser'
dilli-theclaw
10-07-2003, 16:40
BenH
Please PLEASE tell me that this is not the typical attitude of the average Linux user.
Because if it is - I think I'll stop using it right now.
timewarrior2001
10-07-2003, 17:41
[QUOTE]Originally posted by BenH
[B]you said:
I have yet to find a game that I cannot run under linux
You have yet to find a game that will not run under linux. Is this running under linux with or without that "wine" or whatever it was called? Wouldnt that make it running on a windows emulator? running in a linux environment, so therefor not actually running on Linux?
One of my machines is quite happily running mandrake 8.1. Its a 120Mhz P1 with 16 Megs of RAM, 1 Gig HD and a 4 Meg video card. It even manages X with IceWM. Had to do a text install but no major problems.
Driver for what? Were you using a CDM CD drive? Given the mishmash of components you describe above (why waste 256Meg of RAM and a Voodoo 3 on a system without sufficent storage to fully utilise them?) you couldn't get away with the nice simple graphical install so you gave up? Did you even consider asking for help from a LUG or one of the many forums available.
FFS If I knew exactly what the bloody problem was dont you think I would have gotten Linux installed? Thats why I needed tech support and was badly let down by them.
You failed to clarify your position, as far as the thread initiator and eveyone on this board would have been concerned, you were talking about the very latest release. Now your trying to worm your way out of the position your in, claiming I'm the nasty brutal one while failing to answer any of my questions.
Ok fine yeah I hold my hands up to that one, I forgot to say I used a 3 year old version of the software that was current at that time.
By that standard though the machine spec I gave ran Windows ME
So come on then, who are these internationally respected coders who you associate with?
That is of no concern to you, this thread or anyone reading this thread. I have no wish to bring names of people and companies into this argument. I certainly am not going to let someone like yourself possibly cost me a job because you dont like me not liking linux.
Let me help:
The last one is exceptional, the major use for PC's is personal productivity - word processing and spread sheets not games. You also demonstrate your ignorance of UNIX. UNIX != Linux, UNIX is _NOT_ an OS for desktops, although it certainly can be used as such.
But you continue:
I think I actually said, the primary driving force behind PC development. I dont think a spreadsheet or word processor requires a DX9 GFFX graphics card do you?
BTW managed to get Xp installed on your K6 with a 2GigHD ?
as mentioned above, theres no comparison between XP and Mandrake 7 as XP wasnt available then, but ME was and that did actually install without any problems
And more:
Guess you've never heared of the GPL then and that Free means Freedom not Zero Cost.
Like I said originally 'Clueless Ignorant Luser'
I aint even going to try to reply to that, I'd be in breach of T&C of this forum and I dont get off on abusing people.
rockabillybass
10-07-2003, 18:18
Originally posted by timewarrior2001
You have yet to find a game that will not run under linux. Is this running under linux with or without that "wine" or whatever it was called? Wouldnt that make it running on a windows emulator? running in a linux environment, so therefor not actually running on Linux?
Actually Wine stands for Wine Is Not an Emulator. Its an open source implementation of the Windows API on top of X and Unix. Linux is a "flavour" of Unix.
Wine does not require Microsoft Windows, as it is a completely alternative implementation consisting of 100% Microsoft-free code, but it can optionally use native system DLLs if they are available. Wine provides both a development toolkit (Winelib) for porting Windows sources to Unix and a program loader, allowing many unmodified Windows binaries to run on x86-based Unixes, including Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris.
This means it can execute code designed for windows. It is not emulating windows in the strict sense of the word.
Martin
Originally posted by rockabillybass
Actually Wine stands for Wine Is Not an Emulator. Its an open source implementation of the Windows API on top of X and Unix. Linux is a "flavour" of Unix.
Wine does not require Microsoft Windows, as it is a completely alternative implementation consisting of 100% Microsoft-free code, but it can optionally use native system DLLs if they are available. Wine provides both a development toolkit (Winelib) for porting Windows sources to Unix and a program loader, allowing many unmodified Windows binaries to run on x86-based Unixes, including Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris.
This means it can execute code designed for windows. It is not emulating windows in the strict sense of the word.
Martin
Now I'm intrigued - given that Mac OSX is built on FreeBSD UNIX, can I get WINE for my Mac?
Originally posted by timewarrior2001
You have yet to find a game that will not run under linux. Is this running under linux with or without that "wine" or whatever it was called? Wouldnt that make it running on a windows emulator? running in a linux environment, so therefor not actually running on Linux?
Emulation is of a CPU, not an operating system. Wine creates an artificial windows directory complete with ported DLLs that allows the game to use its default paths to install. No emulation is involved, hence the name Wine Is Not an Emulator.
FFS If I knew exactly what the bloody problem was dont you think I would have gotten Linux installed? Thats why I needed tech support and was badly let down by them.
Tech support would need to know the exact problem in order to help you. And again did you ask around for help?
Ok fine yeah I hold my hands up to that one, I forgot to say I used a 3 year old version of the software that was current at that time.
By that standard though the machine spec I gave ran Windows ME
So you based your opinions on an obsolete release that although ideal for servers (the 2.2 Kernel is legendary for stability) and people who knew what they are doing for a desktop. It was not ready for Joe Public. The latest releases - ie anyone using a 2.4 kernel - however are, the installs are a dream the desktops are works of art, there is a huge array of software available and tremendous support from all the major companies. Hence M$'s 'Get Linux' campaign. Or did you think Balmer went to Munich for the beer festival.
That is of no concern to you, this thread or anyone reading this thread. I have no wish to bring names of people and companies into this argument. I certainly am not going to let someone like yourself possibly cost me a job because you dont like me not liking linux.
I dont care if you like linux or not, many, many people posted saying
'I tried it I liked/didnt like it but/so I went back to MS because I'm used to it' you came in an said 'I think the software is utter junk and has about a snowflake in hells chance of denting microsofts dominance with Windows.' and then followed up with yet more nonsense.
I am not interested in costing you your job, what I'm interested in is checking out your claims as so far they've been rather lacking.
I think I actually said, the primary driving force behind PC development. I dont think a spreadsheet or word processor requires a DX9 GFFX graphics card do you?
With Office Xp who knows, however thats GFX cards, one part of a computer. Processor development is still in Moores Law roadmap, hence the reason its far ahead of the demands of the latest games. Memory and MOBO development is driven by attempts to keep up with and utilise the processors. Games only really have an effect on Graphics and Sound cards.
as mentioned above, theres no comparison between XP and Mandrake 7 as XP wasnt available then, but ME was and that did actually install without any problems
You were certainly inferring that earlier.
I aint even going to try to reply to that, I'd be in breach of T&C of this forum and I dont get off on abusing people. [/B]
Well lets see, Clueless: you fail to state that the version of Linux you tried to install was one of the older releases, making people suspect that you were talking about the latest release.
Ignorant: You claim that Linux is dead in the water and that Windows has nothing to fear; yet even a brief scan of the jornals and online 'zines show that to be rubbish.
Luser: From the Jargon File - Someone who knows not and knows not that he knows not.
The jackets fitting rather well I think.
Oh and by the way, more critical updates have been released for IE6, and I genuinely hope that these dont crash your systems and install yet more spyware.
Best,
Ben
Originally posted by dilligaf1701
BenH
Please PLEASE tell me that this is not the typical attitude of the average Linux user.
Because if it is - I think I'll stop using it right now.
If your using Linux then you know what the typical linux user is like because you are one.
Linux users are like everyone else, possibly a little smarter or novelty seeking, but they tend to corralate, but their attitudes and opinions are within the typical deviations. take a look at the attitudes of ESR and RMS for example.
My own personal attitudes include a complete lack of tolerance for stupidity, ignorance and a lack of straight talking, all attributes of the good mr Timewarrior.
I also dont think its a smart idea to base your choice of OS off another person, rather based off how well you like it.
Regards,
BenH
rockabillybass
10-07-2003, 18:46
Originally posted by towny
Now I'm intrigued - given that Mac OSX is built on FreeBSD UNIX, can I get WINE for my Mac?
AFAIK Wine is for X86 Intel based chips, so that rules out the Mac, even if OS X is based on BSD. There are some early builds of the wine source for other chips. If you google for wine and OS X you'll find something.
If you've never used Wine its worth knowing that it won't run many windows apps without MAJOR messing about with dlls and configuration on the Unix side. It also needs Windows 98 dlls. The ones that come with XP are no good. If you're going to use it I hope you've got plenty of spare time!
http://www.winehq.com is the best link for further info.
Martin
Originally posted by towny
Now I'm intrigued - given that Mac OSX is built on FreeBSD UNIX, can I get WINE for my Mac?
Now here are one group of people with a serious grudge against M$ :D
The sourcecode for Wine is available and the default package does run off any *nix platform and linux. However as Mac uses the PowerPC arch there will be problems as windows programs are compiled for the x86 arch exclusively.
I know that the port the wine libs to OSX is ongoing, see here:
http://bugs.winehq.com/show_bug.cgi?id=44
and has the highest priority.
In the meantime you might want to check out the YellowDog sites. YellowDog is a port of Linux for PPC's, once its on there, it'll be on OSX soon after.
Regards,
Ben
Originally posted by rockabillybass
[B]AFAIK Wine is for X86 Intel based chips, so that rules out the Mac, even if OS X is based on BSD. There are some early builds of the wine source for other chips. If you google for wine and OS X you'll find something.
We really need to sort out who replies to what :D
If you've never used Wine its worth knowing that it won't run many windows apps without MAJOR messing about with dlls and configuration on the Unix side. It also needs Windows 98 dlls. The ones that come with XP are no good. If you're going to use it I hope you've got plenty of spare time!
Really? I did a dual boot for someone (suse/Xp) a couple of weeks ago, wine config worked out of the box and there have been no probs with any of the wine'd apps.
Was the Xp partition using NTFS? If it was then that would play merry hell with the config script.
Regards,
Ben
rockabillybass
10-07-2003, 20:16
Originally posted by BenH
I did a dual boot for someone (suse/Xp) a couple of weeks ago, wine config worked out of the box and there have been no probs with any of the wine'd apps.
Was the Xp partition using NTFS? If it was then that would play merry hell with the config script.
You had more luck than me then. I found that some apps required dlls in the "fake" windows drive. I can get WinMX and Kazaa Lite to go. I can't get heavyweight packages like photoshop to work. I used to get information from a site called franks corner. This had set ups for most well known windows apps. Everything I've read about this on linuxquestions.org recommends win 98 dlls. Maybe I'm out of date, things change so quick in linux
I haven't tried installing anything new on Suse 8.2 which I notice comes with the CodeWeavers Wine implementation. All my apps were set up when I was running 8.1 and just inherited their settings on upgrade. I think I'll try again, it's just a problem finding the time!
My Xp partition is fat 32.
Out of interest, what apps have you got going.?
Martin
Originally posted by rockabillybass
You had more luck than me then. I found that some apps required dlls in the "fake" windows drive. I can get WinMX and Kazaa Lite to go. I can't get heavyweight packages like photoshop to work. I used to get information from a site called franks corner. This had set ups for most well known windows apps. Everything I've read about this on linuxquestions.org recommends win 98 dlls. Maybe I'm out of date, things change so quick in linux
Well wine is one of the most active projects, and the implimentation in 8.2 is pretty spectacular, and my firm does have a developer working full time on porting DLL's so I'm in a lucky position :)
I dont use P2P apps myself but doesnt Kazaa Lite have a linux version?
I haven't tried installing anything new on Suse 8.2 which I notice comes with the CodeWeavers Wine implementation. All my apps were set up when I was running 8.1 and just inherited their settings on upgrade. I think I'll try again, it's just a problem finding the time!
Well I did a clean install up from 8.0, might explain the difference.
My Xp partition is fat 32.
Out of interest, what apps have you got going.?
Martin
Office 97, Adobe Photoshop, Several RPG programs (although one has difficulty), EditPad Lite and several coding tools such as C2J all out of the box.
Vast numbers of educational programs (most 16_bit) with some tweaking, and Outlook once when we were showing off to a client.
Best,
Ben
wunderlust
11-07-2003, 01:51
If you wanna run windows apps run them in window stuff wine, dodgy, flaky, and can be a bitch to set up and won't run all the apps you want to.
What's the problem?
Stick with windows or don't..
Just a thought but can you play Divx and Xvid movies on Linux ?
Sell you linux? fine... its not made by the evil empire! simple as.
Or you could look at it like being ahead of the game, dualboot and have access to both, that way you can arse about as much as you like on both. I have my gateway/file server as a K6-450 with SuSE 8 on, and it runs like a dream, i can literally control every facet of my net usage and how files run, my printer machine has Windows ME on, because its not bulky like 2k/XP but has advanced print services, doesnt need any more than that, and as for my main PC. XP/SuSE 8.2, simply because i like different things at different times. speed vs. compatibility.
rockabillybass
11-07-2003, 08:13
Originally posted by Defiant
Just a thought but can you play Divx and Xvid movies on Linux ?
Yes you can. There's a DivX player for Linux. but I think Windows does this better at the moment.
I dislike windows but it still is the best choice for things like this.
Martin
Originally posted by wunderlust
If you wanna run windows apps run them in window stuff wine, dodgy, flaky, and can be a bitch to set up and won't run all the apps you want to.
The setup's a doddle, especially on dual boot machines
Stick with windows or don't..
Well as just about all the apps you can get working under windows work better under Linux and Wine; I think I'll keep doing what I'm doing.
Originally posted by rockabillybass
Yes you can. There's a DivX player for Linux. but I think Windows does this better at the moment.
I've found Xine to be the equal of everything under windows, it also handles R1 DVD's rather nicely.
I dislike windows but it still is the best choice for things like this.
Martin
For video processing I agree (Macs still have the overall edge, esp with FireWire) however MainActor has taken a big step towards matching MS in this area.
QuickTime is still a little difficult however :-)
Lord Nikon
11-07-2003, 08:41
hmm windows handles DivX better than linux?
That would be why kiss technology build their DVD players around linux then so they can play DivX, XVid, Mpeg etc as well as DVD, VCD, Audio CD, MP3 etc...
what about xvid theirs allot out their now in that format ?
timewarrior2001
11-07-2003, 11:36
Ok Ben H,
Seeing as you think I am being totally unreasonable, I will bite the bullet and agree to try linux again.
I would like one that I can run alongside XP if possible. One that as a noob to the platform I can setup easily.
What do you recommend?
I'll give it a go, I'll re-evaluate it, and post what I think.
Originally posted by Lord Nikon
hmm windows handles DivX better than linux?
That would be why kiss technology build their DVD players around linux then so they can play DivX, XVid, Mpeg etc as well as DVD, VCD, Audio CD, MP3 etc...
I dont think that its a very fair comparison, yes the core of the systems is linux (as with TiVo's and Archon Jukeboxes) however their are a great many paid for and proprietary codecs included.
Regards,
Ben
Originally posted by timewarrior2001
Ok Ben H,
Seeing as you think I am being totally unreasonable, I will bite the bullet and agree to try linux again.
I would like one that I can run alongside XP if possible. One that as a noob to the platform I can setup easily.
What do you recommend?
I'll give it a go, I'll re-evaluate it, and post what I think.
SuSE 8.2, your local LUGs will have a copy and be willing to install it for you.
Also for gaming check out WineX, it's a lot more functional than Wine, it even runs BF1942, MoH:AA, ASE, etc. You can pay on the site for an rpm of it, or get it for free from CVS. Some games ran better than in Windows, and looked better, using my Ti200.
rockabillybass
11-07-2003, 13:22
Originally posted by BenH
SuSE 8.2, your local LUGs will have a copy and be willing to install it for you.
I agree with you Ben. An installation of Suse 8.2 should be a very easy install. My Suse has never crashed. If an application freezes you can kill it instantly (unlike windows!). The other big difference I notice is that my XP gets slower the longer I leave it on (memory leakage I guess?). Linux performance remains unchanged even if I leave the machine on for a week or more.
Martin
Originally posted by rockabillybass
I agree with you Ben. An installation of Suse 8.2 should be a very easy install. My Suse has never crashed. If an application freezes you can kill it instantly (unlike windows!). The other big difference I notice is that my XP gets slower the longer I leave it on (memory leakage I guess?). Linux performance remains unchanged even if I leave the machine on for a week or more.
Martin
I belive that the Xp slowdown is called by TSR's not being properly killed; given that Xp takes up 120Megs already.
On Linux you of course have Kill -9, which is so much fun to use against remote machines:devsmoke:
Regards,
Ben
To add a confirmation of just how terrified M$ are of Linux, take a look at these courses, entitled 'How to convince people to spend horrendous amounts of money on a broken product when theres a free working one available' or something like that:
http://members.microsoft.com/partner/training/learningcenter/default.aspx
screenshots of the PPT from both courses are available here:
http://www.grayonline.id.au/gallery/WhyLinuxSux
And of course, MS's real plans for linux:
http://www.mslinux.org
Regards,
Ben
Is that MSLinux one real?? Just curious about things like the name of their "Graphical User Interface command-Line Technology" or "GUILT" lol.
Also things like this
We are now offering the MS Linux Introductory CD at a special introductory price of only $249.99 (plus shipping and handling), if you order before it ships.
MS Linux is released under the provisions of the Gates Private License, which means you can freely use this Software on a single machine without warranty after having paid the purchase price and annual renewal fees.
If this is real do you think anyone in thier right mind would pay $249.99 for something you can get for free (OR really cheap if you actually support your Distro, something most people dont do sadly), and if they were retarded enough to do that would they be willing to pay renewal fees??? :eek:
Looking at it I am convinced that MSLinux is a joke, but stranger things have happened :shrug: :eek: :shrug:
Edit:
Microsoft is working to incorporate the well known "Start" button from the Windows Platform into X Windows' Gnome interface. "We just can't figure out how the hell to get that darn foot out of there! The damn thing is like stuck." The team will have this feature ready by product launch
And....
Microsoft Invades Cuba
Microsoft's plan to invade cuba and overthrow the government has succeeded. One Microsoft official said "It's a win-win situation. The US Government is happy and shuts up the DOJ while Microsoft institutes a monopoly within Cuba for everything from computer software to toilet paper. One more step closer to world domination. Heck, we could feed a whole development department for the cost of one developer's salary in the US. They may not know how to create an Operating System very well, but neither do our US developers."
Silly me of course this was a joke :o
SMHarman
11-07-2003, 14:56
Did you not read the hot topics on the right hand side?
Microsoft Invades Cuba
Microsoft Monkey Colony on Mars
MS Linux to have Start button - "We just can't figure out how the hell to get that darn foot out of there! The damn thing is like stuck."
MS Linux faces competition.
EDIT - Aha you beat me - the powers of the edit button...
Lord Nikon
11-07-2003, 16:39
I thought the quotes on the left hand side were funny too
You`d be hard pushed to beat Windows 2000 Professional for reliability IMO and I`d not even consider installing XP.
Don`t ask me why as the time for a reply would probably log me out before drafting. :D
rockabillybass
11-07-2003, 20:28
Originally posted by Karl
You`d be hard pushed to beat Windows 2000 Professional for reliability . :D
I agree that WIN 2000 is rock solid. Far better than XP. Even though I dislike windows and hate Microsoft and Mr Gates (enough of my paranoid ramblings :D )
I've tried to be objective in this discussion. After all it's only an operating system. We should have more important things to worry about :cool:
Martin
Originally posted by Karl
You`d be hard pushed to beat Windows 2000 Professional for reliability IMO and I`d not even consider installing XP.
Don`t ask me why as the time for a reply would probably log me out before drafting. :D
NT5 (run WinVer if you dont belive me) is excellent, in part because if MS had screwed up as much as they did with NT4, no-one in industry would ever trust them again.
However due to the optimisation for industry as opposed to home users theres a fair bit missing, e.g the DVD drivers are stuck in eternal beta.
Regards,
Ben
Originally posted by rockabillybass
I've tried to be objective in this discussion. After all it's only an operating system. We should have more important things to worry about :cool:
Martin
Of course....So, Vi or EMACS :D
Regards,
A Sixer:p
rockabillybass
12-07-2003, 09:46
Originally posted by BenH
Of course....So, Vi or EMACS :D
It's got to be Vi. Try selling that to someone whose only used the windows notepad. Come to think of it, they're both a nightmare to learn :D
Martin
_______________________________
who needs a life when you've got Unix?
BenH: are you the BOFH in disguise? :D
Seriously, I have a request. Since you've managed to get me to hate Linux less (and, though I have to whisper it, quite like it now actually, despite its quirks), I was wondering if you could give me (or point me in the direction of) a step-by-step guide for morons like me, about how to go about getting WineX from CVS.
I'm interested in trying it, just to see how well it can run games. I'm not all that eager to pay for my experimentation though...
Thanks in advance,
Tristan
Originally posted by Tristan
BenH: are you the BOFH in disguise? :D
I'm a pussycat really, sure anyone who crosses me ends up in the ICU, but the near fatal accidents are just that; they in no way can be connected back to me :)
Seriously, I have a request. Since you've managed to get me to hate Linux less (and, though I have to whisper it, quite like it now actually, despite its quirks), I was wondering if you could give me (or point me in the direction of) a step-by-step guide for morons like me, about how to go about getting WineX from CVS.
The CVS man pages are invaluable here. Nice and easy to understand (other *nix uses gasp in the horror of this statement).
I'll contact you offlist with the info, CVS is just abit complex
I'm interested in trying it, just to see how well it can run games. I'm not all that eager to pay for my experimentation though...
Thanks in advance,
Tristan
It really is a superb program, well worth the 15 dollars.
Best,
Ben
Back again. :D
I managed to download WineX from CVS, and ran the installer after finding a guide to it somewhere. It all seemed to compile okay, but when I try and run it it comes up with a message telling me that it cannot change to a particular directory (a subdirectory of ~/.wine) because it doesn't exists. So it looks like something's gone wrong somewhere. But never mind.
In other news, I've been playing about with native Linux games. I downloaded Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory, which runs very nicely, and the Unreal Tournament 2003 demo, which also works with no problems. So thumbs up there.
It's not all trouble-free. I own a Windows copy of Quake 3 Arena, and decided to install the Linux version (download linux binaries, copy across the data files from CD) according to the instructions given on the ID Software site. It runs, but the mouse doesn't seem to work, which obviously makes it impossible to play. It's odd, because I don't have this problem in ET or UT2003...
Lastly, I decided to run a benchmark to compare the framerates of the Windows and Linux versions of Quake 3 (I would have done UT2003 too, but I don't know how). The results were disappointing. With full details on, I got 64.4 fps in Windows, and just 40.1 fps in Linux. Both have the latest version of Quake 3, and the latest nVidia drivers.
I guess, then, that's it's true that Linux is just not a gaming OS. I certainly wasn't expecting Windows to be more than 50% faster though...
Raoul_Duke
15-07-2003, 14:45
Strange, i get approx 20% higher FPS on both Q3 and UT in linux. Never mind though :D
TigaSefi
15-07-2003, 14:48
i am gonna compile Sendmail in Linux tonight whoo hoo... then my box is complete :)
Thought you all might find this interesting:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3067871.stm
:)
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.