http://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/1...-Linux-Is-DeadQuote:
WHat do you guys think?
Printable View
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/1...-Linux-Is-DeadQuote:
WHat do you guys think?
I don't know, I have a buddy in San Francisco that is running office applications in Ubuntu with "Crossover Office" + OWA for email on 10k + desktops across the country.
Linux is dead as far as becoming a desktop operating system that requires no user understanding - but lots of bells and whistles.
If you want to use *nix, then you must have smart admins. It takes a lot of time and trial and error to successfully deploy *nix systems to end users in a way that the end user just has to "click" and not think.
Well, the desktop is dead anyways. Enterprises will increasingly move towards cloud and server based solutions such that all an average user will need on their desk is an intelligent terminal to serve up a page full of links (icons).Quote:
That could work in favour of Linux, as it doesn't take rocket science to run an intelligent terminal. The OS is transparent to the user...........all they see are the apps?
In the home, those home entertainment centres are becoming more and more popular, and once again the OS doesn't really matter so long as it works?
On other fronts, people seem to be going for small portable devices and intelligent phones, or at best, a laptop, which they probably mostly use for synchronisation purposes, and backups?
I suspect that Linux will benefit from this as it is much more flexible and scalable in its deployment. With Windows you pretty much have to take the whole bloated lot or nothing.
We are now entering the era of the server wars, and people will write their apps to run on the winner;)
Anyway, those are my thoughts :)
I still like the idea of being able to use my computer if my internet connection goes out.Quote:
Well, the desktop is dead anyways. Enterprises will increasingly move towards cloud and server based solutions such that all an average user will need on their desk is an intelligent terminal to serve up a page full of links (icons).
That is generally not a corporate requirement, and if it were, you would simply build redundancy into your systems as part of your business continuity planning.Quote:
I still like the idea of being able to use my computer if my internet connection goes out.
As for the home, I am in my living room right now. There are 5 computers in here. If I lost my broadband then two of them have 56.6 dial up modems as well.
If that doesn't work either, then I can go and :drink:or watch TV, Hell! maybe even have a conversation with my wife!!!...........after all, her internet connection would be down as well :D
Nah! I have it sussed, I would take my laptop down my local bar and use their free WiFi.
I see what you are saying though (honest), but you and I actually use a computer as such. My point is that in a lot of environments you don't really need one.
RAMAN Brother!Quote:
Originally Posted by westin
Linux on the desktop always pretty much was a dream.
The reality? Linux has the same problem as OSX: apps. Emulators like Crossover Office go a long way.
Hats off to those who make it happen.
Its a shame but its true; there are still too many areas that Linux lags behind in that prevent it from being a true contender for desktop use. The one that comes to mind is Gaming, I had World of Warcraft running via Wine on an i7 based system with 4gb of ram and a ATI 5730 card and it couldn't make it over like 15 frames a second which is pretty unacceptable given the hardware. iPod support is still hit or miss and often suggests you to jailbreak the device in order for it to work properly.
I bet this story generated all kinds of braying across the blogging universe, and I wonder if RMS realized that the "fierce ideology" statement was more or less aimed directly at him since hes the most vocal (and sometimes outright nutty) zealot in the *nix area.
I totally disagree.
First off, i find it a disgrace that an article like this is posted on slashdot. I would have understood if it were a paid FUD from M$ or something. Fact is, a lot of my customers and friends use linux ONLY. For work as well as for home. True, some jobs/business's require some special application that only windows has, but NOT ALL business's do. I have successfully implemented linux solutions for a variety of schools, universities, cafe internets, restaurants, hotels, and a bunch of private users as Desktops. And guess what... im not talking here about some bubunuti version, im talking about slackware with a customized fluxbox edited for everyone's needs depending on how or what their intention of using it is.
As for games.... i successfully play Lineage2 Freya, Counterstrike, and C&C using wine on my slackware system,and i have no signs of frames, lower quality or anything that disturbs me. Reason i can not give an example of more games is simply that those mentioned games are all that i play.
Another fact is that every time i speak to my customers or friends, and ask them if everything is ok, if they want windows back again... they threaten to rape me if i even think about installing windows again for them. If windows truly is so all-powerfull..... then i wonder why so many people change to other systems.
All i have mentioned here so far is for desktop use. This is not to mention the non-desktop use that i have successfully implemented for various scenarios (servers, firewalls, etc...)
Linux as a desktop is NOT dead. Its the corporate greed and the control of companies that hinder linux becoming more known. And if it takes a bit more brains and time and reading to use a linux system... since that seems to be one of the main excuses that people use windows... then let those people stay with their windows. But articles FUDding linux is wrong, stupid, and will never succeed.
90% of arguments against linux have a simple solution to solve these issues. But people dont want to solve issues.. they just want a big red button that says: "Click me to ready your mails".
10% i admitt, just wont work with linux.... but that 10% is truly of NO importance for a desktop system.
Linux as a desktop will never die, not even if it became illegal.
Hmmm,
On the other side of the coin, absolutely none of mine do even though I have tried to introduce them to it (the more computer literate ones that is).Quote:
Fact is, a lot of my customers and friends use linux ONLY. For work as well as for home.
The only success I have had is with a guy who works in a local hotel. He is Spanish and really likes Red Star Linux which is Argentinian in origin and based on Debian 5 (Lenny?). To get an English version of Windows to work in Spanish takes some messing about...........this distro is Spanish to the core.
They don't, other than in your dreams perhaps? I doubt if more that 10% of PC users have any choice at all. It is either a corporate dictate or what you were sold in the store. It is simple human nature that once you have paid for something you just go and use it, rather than mess about looking for some free alternative. Hell, you have just paid for something that works..........why bother?Quote:
If windows truly is so all-powerfull..... then i wonder why so many people change to other systems.
Computers are commonplace these days, and MS have positioned themselves to satisfy the dumb user. I know of a fair number of non-computer types who go into a store and buy a PC on price, just like a washing machine, refrigerator, microwave or TV. And they expect it to work like those domestic appliances. They are not interested in OS choices, they just want it to work!
Another aspect is that MS is a multi-billion dollar corporation, and it has a marketing budget to match............... Linux isn't and doesn't.
There are far too many Linux distros........ that makes people nervous. With Windows there is just the current version and older ones that are still supported or not. A much simpler and easier to understand scenario for your average user. And Windows will update itself automatically; Linux doesn't, so the user has to do something :eek:
And each Linux distro has its zealots, fan bois or whatever, so they don't even agree amongst themselves. As Jesus said "a house that is divided against itself will surely fall", and your own comments on Ubuntu do seem divisive to me, to say the least :D
Anyway, I see the thick client desktop rapidly becoming a thing of the past, so Linux is well and truly stuffed in that area.
However, with the advent of thin client architecture, and server/cloud based applications, I see Linux as a winner, because the OS is transparent to the user, and Windows is a very entrenched thick client OS.
Microsoft have won the desktop battle but they have not won the war. They are currently badly positioned because their OS is heavily thick client orientated and inflexible. If Linux cannot take advantage of that situation then you might as well wipe it from your drives and join the herd :(
Just my thoughts :)
EDIT:
Another thing just came to mind........... when you get run down by a short bus; who the hell is going to support these systems you have set up?
Linux is great if you look like Gore but with thick rimmed glasses... and you collect boogers as a hobby.
Hi, Nihil. Is the thick client desktop really becoming a thing of the past? Rapidly? Are there thin client alternatives yet? Netbooks, the closest I've seen to a thinner client, have essentially failed on the home user market. In the enterprise, I see no alternative to more powerful computers yet. I'd like to see Dassault's CAD software run on a thin client.Quote:
Originally Posted by nihil
CAD will never run on a thin client. As BIM architecture becomes standardized (AutoDESK - Rivit leading the way) 3D modeling will increasingly become the standard for global Architects and General Contractors. 2D Drawings are going the way of the dinosaurs.
Though it can be done, I would never do video editing remotely. Sure the hardware is available (Rack Space - Amazon) however, I'm not paying for 20+ M of bandwidth needed to do that efficiently.
In my experience CAD has always been run on dedicated thick clients because that is how the applications are designed and written. You only use hardware and operating systems approved by the vendor of the CAD application.
I have seen both Sun and PCs running CAD applications. The PCs had twin Intel Xeon processors and more RAM than you could shake a stick at.
The operating systems were NT 4.0 SP6a and Solaris.
I "inherited" one as one of my desktops............twin Xeon 998MHz and 8GB of RAM. It would piss all over the PIII and P4s that were standard issue :D
I don't know anything about video editing (and I would imagine music is much the same?) But it would make sense that they were thick client.
Having said that, you can count the number of users of that highly specialist software in thousands whereas users of standard office and business software are counted in their multi-millions. It is those users I am referring to when I predict the demise of the thick client desktop. Sure, the thick client will remain in home and small business environments, but that is not where the money or market penetration really comes from.
In terms of global desktop operating system penetration they are totally insignificant.
Also I doubt if you will find any top range professional CAD system that will even run under Linux or OS-X for that matter.
@brokencrow
Well, I remember working at a client in the mid 1970s who were located just outside London. Their applications and file servers were in Houston TX and belonged to NASA. That was cloud computing as I see it.Quote:
Hi, Nihil. Is the thick client desktop really becoming a thing of the past? Rapidly? Are there thin client alternatives yet?
In the 1970's and 1980s a typical commercial or institutional set-up would have a mainframe or mid-range computer with dumb terminals attached (eg IBM 5250s). And you cannot get a thinner client than a dumb terminal! :D
More recently I have used Citrix Meta-frame (there are others). I was in London and the applications and fileservers were 500 miles away in Scotland. All I had on my desktop was the Citrix software and a few icons.
All the people currently trying to persuade you to use their cloud computing services will supply you with thin client software to connect to them.
Actually, it is very easy to do it yourself. All you need to do in install the apps on a server and create an icon with the network access path, then deploy the icon across the clients.
I totally agree. My point is not to get linux to overthrow windows as a desktop computer, but to just stop trying to kill it off. Linux as a desktop 'can' be just fine in many scenarios. Its true that if you take a windows user and try to convert him to linux, he will spend most of his time comparing the two, and whatever is different from their past experience and knowledge, would be a negative for linux in their point of view. However, if you take 2 people who never saw or touched a computer before, and you give one of them windows, and the other linux (they would both have to learn from scratch), the windows user would at some point start going nuts about all the issues that windows makes you go nuts about. Whereas the linux user, would have to deal with a lot less problems and would be more satisfied with his computer and also save alot of money in the long run.Quote:
Originally Posted by nihil
Yes, there are some categories that do not fit in my scenarios, such as gamers, or graphic designers (although gimp is not too bad for an average home user), and ofcourse some special applications that run only on windows.
However, the point is here, is the linux OS as a desktop really dead? Ofcourse they can not compete with M$ who have the multibillion dollar advertisement and corporate tactics, but linux does have enough advantages to not die out. And its not only about a free alternative. There are also commercial applications in the linux world. Its not about free in the sense of money (although it does play a role to some people), people who need stuff done are willing to pay, be it for software, service, support, that should not be a reason to differentiate these two OSs'.
As for the WHY there are not so many applications or the same ones available for linux, is NOT because linux would not be able to run them (from a technical point of view), but its that the software vendors dont offer their products for a native linux environment. The only company that would suffer if software vendors were to write their apps for linux TOO, and not JUST for windows, would be M$.
Why dont software vendors write apps for linux? It doesnt have to be free, and linux users would also pay the price for applications. I sure as hell would pay for some application if i really wanted or needed it. Heck, they dont even have to make it open source.
So its not about linux not being able to cope as a desktop computer (again from a technical point of view), its about the big and greedy corporations not wanting this to ever happen.
And when it comes to simplicity, linux is really not harder. Take suse, bubunuti, or its sub flavors like linux mint, or some other of those neat desktop distros. Full GUI, much easier to navigate, much easier to add applications to the system, much easier to maintain the systems. Not all linuxs' are like slackware, bsd, gentoo where you need alot more shells and knowledge.
That is not true. You can set a variety of linux distros to automatically update, with official support from the GUI of choice. How ever, in general (no matter which OS) i find that automatic updates are bad. How many times has the auto update messed up a windows box? Not to mention after ever auto update, the windows box wants to reboot itself, sometimes even more than once. I have seen game servers go down during peak hours, wheres the linux counterparts didnt need to reboot after they updated their systems automatically.Quote:
Originally Posted by nihil
Very true, however the reason i hate bubunuti is of a personal nature, which came from a personal bad experience. I hate bubunuti cause it takes you away from having to learn anything. It tries to become dumber than windows is. Installing bubunuti is MUCH easier than installing any windows OS. Working on it is also easier than any windows OS. Dont ask someone who uses windows to make that comparison. Ask someone who started out with linux, and moved to windows (like that ever happened :p). I remember when SuSE was still a german product (before novell bought it), it had the most terrific hardware support any linux had, and it was very user friendly, and very easy to use. Now that novell has it, the hardware autodetection sucks, US laws such as codecs, encryption, etc... have severly crippled it (the security section in the repos of suse are 1/3 of what used to be there before novell bought it). SuSE was the perfect OS for any linux newbie. Ubuntu, just took the menus and some ready scripts and the debian repos, and tries to make it perfect system, whereas the hardware detection and support is very poor.Quote:
Originally Posted by nihil
My point here is, that ubuntu is too confusing, to many different bubunutis, fueling the argument of too many different versions of linux, and to many problems in its functionality to make it 1/2 as good as the bubunuti people advertise it to be, and the truly great linux distros out there are left in the shadow suffering.
Again, you are right, and again, my point was (maybe badly put in my first post) is not to get linux to take over the desktop world. Its about the false and bad reputation given to it with statements such as 'Linux is dead as a desktop', where i can bet that m$ has their fingers in that article somehow. However linux cannot take advantage of that situation, due to the lack of finances, and support since its not a multibillion dollar corporation.Quote:
Originally Posted by nihil
Well.... until their hardrive dies and they need a reinstall, they are pretty much alright. They know how to update and backup their stuff, and apply patches. The systems will never crawl, or crash, or annoy them. However if they systems die (hardware wise), then they are pretty much screwed since they only know me for those issues in the location where i operate. They dont have root access, but only sudo access for what they need to keep their systems patched, updated, and running. Lets hope nothing happens to me, and if something does.... im sure m$ had their hands in it too :DQuote:
Originally Posted by nihil
But its not false. People don't use it.Quote:
Its about the false and bad reputation given to it with statements such as 'Linux is dead as a desktop'
Even computer hobbyists only do so out of peer pressure or pity. Then they spend their time emulating software and devices it doesn't support... or just letting the entire thing lay in their partition practically untouched.
I consider myself a "computer hobbyist," and I use Slackware on a desktop because it comes with everything I need to run a webserver and a secure file server right out of the box. I never used it out of peer-pressure or pity - I began using Linux back in the Windows 98 days because I needed something that wouldn't BSOD every time I looked at it the wrong way.Quote:
Originally Posted by The-Spec
Using XFCE, it provides me with just as comfortable a desktop home-user experience as Windows 7 - and uses less resources.
I have Firefox to browse the web (admittedly, it's not as good as the Windows version, and a bit trickier to install certain plugins) and the Linux version of TeamViewer works great for my support calls. There are multiple multimedia players that run under Linux flawlessly.
Using Wine, I can use my day-to-day Windows applications such as µTorrent and Microsoft Office. I wouldn't mess around trying to play any kind of graphic-intensive games on it though.
Linux can provide a user-friendly desktop experience for the common user. It takes some tweaking... anyway... I've lost my train of thought now... :p
SLACKWARE RULES! :thumbsup:
Look like me with glasses? Really? I don't look like any form of the stereotypical nerd.Quote:
Originally Posted by The-Spec
I also know what a Vagina looks and feels like in person instead of pictures. And I haven't ever lived in my Mom's basement. I also hate Battlestar and... Whatever else star. I hate Star Trek, I hate any movie about space and ships flying around and making up bullshit languages.. (Looking right at YOU **** heads who actually learned "Klingon" before learning how to shower)...
I'm hurt Spec! And after all the times I've stood up for you! I should cry, and moan and...
Yea so anyway, "Linux is dead on desktop" is kinda dumb.... I mean I have a point now:
Let's say that a very average user needs a computer system. They are going to use this system for average uses, like setting up their bills, keeping track of their bank account, "surfing the web" (Which is average user code for "I'm gonna download porn every day of the week and open every ****ing HotGirlsTakeItInTheButt.avi.exe" and wonder what happened)....
And so, the average user needs to have a web browser, an email client, a client for Instant Messaging, and maybe IRC, and they need Office software so they can type out documents, do Spread Sheets, maybe the odd presentation for their kids school, and of course, MP3 players, CD players, CD Rippers, Encoders, video players, and a few arcade games, and in general, not much else.
Well, let's see now:
Spending a down payment on a BMW would get that a Mac, with OS X, but let's pretend they don't WANT to. Of course a Mac can do all of the things listed, and more, but who cares?
They could go to their Super Duper Screw you in the ass mart and buy a brand new top of the line gaming rig they don't need.... Salesmen usually love idiots.... But let's look at the PC option:
The Average user decides to by a Computer from Company "Whatever Inc". They order the machine, and decide that since they need it on a daily basis, and so will their kid to do school work, so they buy TWO computers. (Hey, it's still cheaper than the Mac).
Computer A has the same Hardware as Computer B. Computer A is running Windows, and Computer B, they had it come with Linux pre-installed.
Now we can find out something can't we? With Linux coming pre-installed just like Windows, we've essentially removed the BS lines Microsoft tells people. The machine is running OpenSUSE, and the other, Windows 7.
Both are good OSs, and both can do everything listed and required of them...
So, where's the "Hard learning curve, have to be a virgin that looks like a bridge troll" mentality? The computer's both came with the OS installed, so they both get set up, and both are being turned on for the first time.
Computers A and B, get turned on, and the Linux machine boots up as does the Windows machine. Let's look at a common task or two now:
they both want to try out that new CD burner, and make a CD for the car. They have an external HD full of their music files, and transfer them.
Windows and Linux both do this task, and then they begin:
The Windows user pops in a CD, and starts making the CD after using paid for software.
The Linux user sticks a CD in, and K3B does the same.
OK, nothing there...
Now what if they wanted to take a Linux .iso file and make a bootable CD?
Windows machine cries and says "Buy this and this" or "Well you can use THIS CD burning software, which looks and acts nothing like the other 50 on the shelf, and costs money"...
The Linux user Double Clicks on the ISO file, and K3B opens up, checks the MD5 sum for you, and then you click ONE button, and it's done.
I've personally installed Linux on a lot of machines for people who are **** with computers in general. I got so tired of cleaning up viruses and trojans that I just installed Linux on their machine, put KDE and Gnome on there, told them to use KDE, and made the Desktop have a few Icons on it only:
A Firefox Icon so they would have a browser they already knew how to use, a Pidgin / Gaim Icon to get on AIM, an AMSN Icon for that, just in case they didn't want to use the other one for it, an Email Client,and added a portion of the "K Menu" to the quick launch so they could click on the button, and it would show them all their office and work apps, and then put XMMS on their desktop.
The updates showed up in the taskbar just like on Windows, no change there, and after I did this, I didn't have to ever fix it again.
they had no viruses, no trojans, they no longer had infections, and Xine let them watch all the porn they wanted.
So how is there a difference? The reason people say Linux won't work on a desktop is that they always assume Linux was downloaded and installed by hand, even though a BUNCH of companies will gladly sell you a Linux only preinstalled Computer for a cheaper price than the Windows one, and with only the Web Browser and a few things on the Desktop, there is literally no way to not understand it.
Seriously, if you get a Computer, and see the desktop with a Firefox Icon and it's named "Web Browser" and the Email Client marked as such, and so on, and you think this is a learning curve...
You REALLY need to grab the manual your machine came with, call the tech support number, and when they ask what the problem is and how they can help you, simply say "Yes, I bought a computer recently from you, and would you please take it away from me, as I'm to ****ing incompetent to use it?".
:)
Just for the record...
Before getting my mac I was using Linux as a desktop OS in a generally M$ office environment, and I had been for over 10 years. RedHat, Fedora & CentOS
I could do anything I wanted it to do in the corporate environment and tons of stuff my M$ peers couldn't.
I did use a VM to run the deep and complicated Excel stuff I worked on - Mainly pivot tables hooked to evil database queries.
There is nothing wrong with Linux as an OS for the desktop.
Regards,
Steve
At this point I have only two things to say.
1: HOLY **** nihil - a 5250? I knew you were old but damn man; exactly what did Christ look like?
2: My google language preference is set to Klingon.
:rofl:......... my wife loved that one! :DQuote:
1: HOLY **** nihil - a 5250? I knew you were old but damn man; exactly what did Christ look like?
Back to the subject: I really don't see why people shouldn't use Linux.
1. Most users know nothing about Windows so both OSes are an equal mystery to them.
2. Most users don't consciously interact with their OS, only with the applications that run on it. Sure they learn how to navigate, save, print and so on, but those tasks should be trivial under any OS.
3. The big problem is getting skilled people to do the setup and provide support, particularly out in sticksville, like here.
Kind of on subject. Wasn't the first "user friendly" version of linux - Red Hat? You needed to set up a 3.5" LILO boot disk???
Don't get me wrong, I love Linux. Use it every day. [Along with MS, and OSX] -- But I am getting sick of the 'no malware/trojans' argument. The only reason that there is not any widespread malware, is that 95% of people use Windows. If Linux or OSX could creep up to the 30% market share mark, I am sure that we would see some changes in malware trends. A recent SANS webinar reported that while Windows had the least vulnerabilities in the last year, it had multiple exploits for each vuln. Linux had the most reported vulnerabilities [per distro], but very few exploits. It isn't that they weren't exploitable, but that isn't where the money is.
Well part of that argument doesn't work either because Apache has the very Market share Linux doesn't, and in fact is the leader in Web Servers last I checked. So, Apache, being one of those Open Source projects, and you can get source code for it, and it has the majority of the market share, yet every server running it isn't exploited.
Also, don't those vulnerability reports include more than just base installs? Because that too is different. A boxed version of Windows comes with basically two text editors, a Web Browser, and a couple other small things.
A typical Linux installs comes with thousands of apps. I could grab two disks right now for installs, and if I trim that Linux or that BSD installation down to only what Windows comes with, I'm not going to have those same numbers.
True, but most home users would not do that. They would just install it, and call it a day.Quote:
A typical Linux installs comes with thousands of apps. I could grab two disks right now for installs, and if I trim that Linux or that BSD installation down to only what Windows comes with, I'm not going to have those same numbers.
As far as Apache goes, there have been 38 vulnerabilities this year. [In version 2.2] -- But there really isn't much money in taking over webservers. People can and do throw drive-by malware on them, but they usually use web-app vulns, or poisoned banner ads. [At least from what I have seen] -- I haven't heard about many IIS attacks lately either.
I beg to differ. Most linux distros that I have looked at in the past couple of years were intended for home users not bloody geeks! They install a variety of applications by default......... you are not asked, it just does it and sticks an icon on the GUI. If you don't want it you have to uninstall it yourself.Quote:
True, but most home users would not do that. They would just install it, and call it a day.
By comparison, all you get with Windows is IE, Notepad, Wordpad ( mediaplayer outside Europe) and a defragmenter.
If you buy an OEM box with Windows you will get some "trial software" pre-installed.
I find it amusing when people knock distros that are obviously aimed at non-computer literates. Sure they are made to look like Windows......it is the most popular OS on the planet!
"Vox populi, vox Dei" or "Eat more sh1t, three trillion flies can't be wrong"
:D
nihil - I think you said 'I beg to differ', and then agreed with me? :) I was saying that I doubted home users would spend time going through unchecking/uninstalling apps they wouldn't use. :-P
Sorry Mate!
I misunderstood your post, I totally agree that they will just let it run.
I do not see the average user selecting stuff from what they don't understand, they will just go with what happens.............and probably do nothing more if they don't use it:D My point is that they get no choices at the start?
To those of us who have lived in the era of 256MB hard drives, you did not behave like that.
The oldest HDD I have is in an IBM PC XT (not an AT)......green screen, twin 5.25" floppy drives, and an humongous 10MB HDD!!!!
Basically DOS 3.3 and Wordstar 1.0 :eek:
It still works though...............more than twenty years later? :D
Now, with Windows, you don't even get anything to select from or delete later? Linux is a good OS, other than it is hard to get any support in sticksville?
Just my opinion :)
Linux is great, but it is still frustrating trying to find software occasionally. For instance, I am booted into Windows right now, because I cannot find any good software for loading *.gpx or *.loc files into my Garmin. The closest I have found was a command line utility, but it does not have some of the features that I want to utilize. I loaded EasyGPS up with wine, but it couldn't find the USB device. So after about 30 minutes of mucking about with symbolic links in the wine directory, I booted into Windows, downloaded the waypoints, opened EasyGPS, and sent them over. Thirty seconds in Windows, 30 minutes in Linux. For the most part, I use Linux exclusively, but it is these little things that force me to continue dual booting.
westin - exactly.
That's why I use Slackware on my server, but still opt for Windows 7 on my desktop. Sometimes I don't feel like being an uber-leet geek - I just want to plug something in and have it work without having to find a driver or use wine, etc etc etc...
Since nearly everything you buy is built and coded for Windows, it makes since that it would be easier to install it on a Windows machine.
That being said, it is still possible to use Linux as a desktop quite comfortably - but you'll have to put some work in to get it there. It doesn't make sense (to me) to install Linux on a common user's machine unless you know for a fact all they're ever going to use it for is access the Internet and write Office documents - and then you still need to give them the run-down on it and install TeamViewer or something so you'll be able to provide the support they will inevitably need as soon as you get back home.
My Sis in Law is bringing her friend's computer down this weekend - some "tech-friend" said he'd "fix" this poor bastard's computer. He wiped the drive, slapped on Ubuntu Linux and went on his way... the guy doesn't even know what to do with his computer now! :rolleyes:
Are you kidding me?Quote:
Originally Posted by wiskic10_4
Portable USB devices I can understand but manufacturers are so de'facto standard these days... shouldn't it atleast support hardware better than this?
Why bother then? Hell, just get a windows compile of what little software you use on it and leave the OS behind. I've got install disks on my shelf that are probably twelve years old now that I haven't touched once.Quote:
For the most part, I use Linux exclusively, but it is these little things that force me to continue dual booting.
Spec -
It's been my experience that Linux (Slackware 13.0 at least - I haven't used many other distros) recognizes most devices and is PnP capable - mice, USB storage drives, etc...
I've only had a little trouble using a couple of cheap USB Wireless adapters, which took a little work.
However, if you want to run a desktop server for filesharing and site hosting like I do, you can't beat Linux for what it has right out of the box.
As far as using Linux as a desktop, well, I'm not sure why I ever did other than to learn a new OS... however, as Microsoft gets better at protecting their OSes from piracy, a free OS that can do everything Windows can do (and much more, except for maybe high-end gaming) doesn't sound half bad... even if you have to work at it a little to get it set up for maximum ease of use.
Just my thoughts... :D
Why would anyone install an entire OS just for Apache and PHP?
And ssh/sftp, MySQL, iptables. I also make use of cron to do scheduled backups, etc and I can write my own shell scripts to check my logs. Out of the box, Linux is the superior OS for a personal server. Works nicely as a desktop for most basic computer use too - surfing and office work...Quote:
Originally Posted by The-Spec
I'd just use xampp. You couldn't get any more touch and go than that... even if it came preinstalled with those home edition versions of Windows.
It's funny to think of you of all people being a Windows Fan lol. I mean it's one thing to like Windows, it's another to think Linux is just flat out stupid. It, like most OSs, has it's uses. Although I do have to admit, I've yet to find a better use for VMS than when running out of TP.
The Manuals don't have staples in them, so you don't have to worry about accidentally hitting an artery and ass bleeding to death lol.
@gore,
Not really in IMO, all the freetards that use Linux expect support to be free......... people who have paid for Windows are more amenable to the idea that they are going to have to pay for your services.Quote:
It's funny to think of you of all people being a Windows Fan lol.
Most of the people on this site earn their livings from Windows, apart from those administrating servers. You go where the money is kid! trust me ;)
How come nobody has mentioned "Lindows", later to be called "Linspire", before the scumbags and sh1te hawks bought it up, and killed it because it was just too damn dangerous. It had a huge repository of applications ............. I must dig out all my stuff and install it on a refurb machine .............I have no idea what the underlying distro was?
Linux fanbois had better get used to the real World ($$$$$$$$$$$$$$) and the fact that:
1. They are too fragmented with all their little "pet" distros.
2. They do not have any real funding, or means of getting it.
3. Only nerds and geeks want a command line .............. the rest just want it to work like it says on the tin?
Best attempts I have seen so far, are from Cuba (huge government support) and Argentina (revolutionary movement) the Cuban one is based on Gentoo (yeah, I thought that was a weird choice, given that it is not the easiest of distros?). The Argentinian one is Debian 5, and rather slick .............. the wallpaper is Che Guevara :D
I am still looking at Moon OS (Cambodia?) as it does seem to be a rationalisation of UBUNTU (which I never liked because all the screens seem to be dog turd coloured ?)
The Chinese stuff is pathetic ............. take my word for it. All they are is translations of very old versions of regular distros.......... a bit like SuSE started out?
And whilst I am ranting................ why won't Linux support my very expensive HP Vectra with a 286? ..... Winders does? .................although the Norton product is far better ;) "Disk Commander" or whatever? before they started pimping bloated home security packages?
But I bought a Slackware t-shirt for $30!!! :eek: :D :pQuote:
Originally Posted by nihil
Meh... it's like my Ma says - "it is what it is, and it ain't what it ain't"... Serves my purposes well, and I will probably be a "freetard Slackware fanboi" until I find something that better serves my needs.
Will it ever become a desktop standard? Probably not... but, as I said before, as MS gets better at protecting their OSes from piracy, a freeware OS doesn't sound half bad to some users... and, once a tech (like myself) sets up a Linux box with KDE, XFCE or whatever, slaps Wine on there to run MS Office and puts the "purty little icons" on the desktop, I'm not sure how much more support would be needed for an average home user who uses the computer for little more than getting online and balancing their checkbook...
So long as they're behind a router, there's no real need to update anything but the browser, and Firefox will do that all by itself... very little threat of malware or viruses on a Linux box... no real need to defrag - no need for registry-cleanup...
Know what I'm sayin'? ;)
I have to be Honest here Nihil; I've never seen anyone, regardless of the OS they used, or the software style of development they liked, expect someone to do work on a machine for free.Quote:
Originally Posted by nihil
I sure as hell don't. I'm not super expensive and can sometimes trade services on a Computer for "other" **** I want, but it's not free unless I say so lol.
Sometimes I think you can earn a living on Windows simply because older version a lot of companies still have are just such crap you NEED someone there to watch it. Lol, I'll probably have some **** for that comment, but it's a joke.Quote:
Most of the people on this site earn their livings from Windows, apart from those administrating servers. You go where the money is kid! trust me ;)
I remember that, lol. I think it went to crap when Microsoft started getting mad that it sounded to much like Windows. I don't remember what distro it was based on, but I'm sure google knows... Actually I may look into that, I'm now curious....And being that it's almost 11 AM and I still haven't slept, might as well lol.Quote:
How come nobody has mentioned "Lindows", later to be called "Linspire", before the scumbags and sh1te hawks bought it up, and killed it because it was just too damn dangerous. It had a huge repository of applications ............. I must dig out all my stuff and install it on a refurb machine .............I have no idea what the underlying distro was?
Linux Fanbois, are no different than the Windows or Star Trek or Star Wars Fanbois. Fanbois in general, seem to be annoying.Quote:
Linux fanbois had better get used to the real World
The whole idea if 5,000 distros, is cool from a nerd perspective. And terrifying from the average user's point of view. However, it IS hard to get one's head THAT far up my... You know lol.Quote:
($$$$$$$$$$$$$$) and the fact that:
1. They are too fragmented with all their little "pet" distros.
2. They do not have any real funding, or means of getting it.
3. Only nerds and geeks want a command line .............. the rest just want it to work like it says on the tin?
I see my recommendation for you to try MoonOS went well then? I still remember when I found that one.Quote:
Best attempts I have seen so far, are from Cuba (huge government support) and Argentina (revolutionary movement) the Cuban one is based on Gentoo (yeah, I thought that was a weird choice, given that it is not the easiest of distros?). The Argentinian one is Debian 5, and rather slick .............. the wallpaper is Che Guevara :D
I am still looking at Moon OS (Cambodia?) as it does seem to be a rationalisation of UBUNTU (which I never liked because all the screens seem to be dog turd coloured ?)
I was pretty shocked to see someone take something awful like Ubuntu, and make it look good.
SuSE started out actually as a support / Tech company in general, and they did a German Translation of Slackware Linux. Once Slackware Linux translations were finished, they started adding things, such as YaST and YAST2, and a bunch of other stuff.Quote:
The Chinese stuff is pathetic ............. take my word for it. All they are is translations of very old versions of regular distros.......... a bit like SuSE started out?
Basically they started out with a German version of Slackware, and ended up doing their own product. The first version, by the way, 4.2, was not 1.0 because they wanted 4.2, as in "42"....You know.... The answer to... Ah you know what I mean, you're British ;)
Because Linus only had a 386 ;)Quote:
And whilst I am ranting................ why won't Linux support my very expensive HP Vectra with a 286?
It does??Quote:
..... Winders does? .................
Hahahahahahahahaha! MAN they get on my nerves. I'm pretty sure you know how it is to have to clean up crap left by that son of a bitch. I hate having to deal with that. Resource whore isn't even close to what they do lol.Quote:
although the Norton product is far better ;) "Disk Commander" or whatever? before they started pimping bloated home security packages?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have a Slackware Tee too. It's pretty worn down from a lot of use. I love it lol. I actually shoudl be getting a new one soon. I bought it when I bought my Slackware Mouse Pad, Slackware Case Pins, and like 3 Slackware Buttons. I also got the books they offer and the version of Slackware on CD that was out at the time.Quote:
But I bought a Slackware t-shirt for $30!!!
I ordered it with another order from FreeBSDMall, and oddly enough the stuff all came in the same box lol.
Ah quit being like that. Even BSD people respect Slackware. Believe me, you could do a lot worse. And not just from the Windows arena, which shouldn't be a server in the first place. Wasn't meant to be, wasn't designed to be. The Internet was designed on and for Unix, Windows NT, was partially designed by a VMS **** head. Hehe.Quote:
Meh... it's like my Ma says - "it is what it is, and it ain't what it ain't"... Serves my purposes well, and I will probably be a "freetard Slackware fanboi" until I find something that better serves my needs.
I do this a lot. My Cousin is a Firefighter, and a dribbling moron when you stick a keyboard in his hands. A few years ago, he bought a BRAND NEW Computer. I'm not kidding; In 5 days, he had that thing so screwed up it should have been burned.Quote:
Will it ever become a desktop standard? Probably not... but, as I said before, as MS gets better at protecting their OSes from piracy, a freeware OS doesn't sound half bad to some users... and, once a tech (like myself) sets up a Linux box with KDE, XFCE or whatever, slaps Wine on there to run MS Office and puts the "purty little icons" on the desktop, I'm not sure how much more support would be needed for an average home user who uses the computer for little more than getting online and balancing their checkbook...
He finally brought it over to me, and I hooked it up, scanned it for Viruses and the like, and, no BS, 7 Trojans, 12,000 Viruses, and ... I think 1500 pieces of spyware.
I was shocked. I'd never seen anything like it in my life. Especially THAT scale. And especially in THAT amount of time. The worst part was that I set the damn thing up for him and had auto-update set for EVERYTHING knowing how he was with a Computer.
I got so tired of cleaning up after this (And, I might add, I flat out told him I was charging him extra for a stupidity tax) that I ended up installing Linux on the machine, putting a Firefox Icon, a Gaim / Pidgin Icon, and an XMMS Icon on his desktop, and not giving him the root password.
Problem solved.
Yup =)Quote:
So long as they're behind a router, there's no real need to update anything but the browser, and Firefox will do that all by itself... very little threat of malware or viruses on a Linux box... no real need to defrag - no need for registry-cleanup...
Know what I'm sayin'?
The reason there aren't alot of viruses is because people use a fifteen year old script that... to this day is currently being installed on these machines. Security wise, there are more kernel flaws floating around than the ocean has water. And I couldn't count the failed packages after the fact.Quote:
So long as they're behind a router, there's no real need to update anything but the browser, and Firefox will do that all by itself... very little threat of malware or viruses on a Linux box... no real need to defrag - no need for registry-cleanup...
http://www.zone-h.org/mirror/id/11955998
And just when you think things are finally fixed... I end up doing it agian.