Operating Systems

Please compose all posts in Emacs.

Moderators: phlip, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Berengal
Superabacus Mystic of the First Rank
Posts: 2707
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:51 am UTC
Location: Bergen, Norway
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Berengal » Wed Jun 11, 2008 4:23 pm UTC

As far as I know there's no easy way to find the mac address in windows either, without opening the command prompt, and given the choice of cmd.exe and bash, I'd choose bash any day of the week.

Usually when I need to do some black voodoo in linux, I look up the gentoo handbooks. Most of it transfers directly to other nuxes as well, and it doesn't take that much know-how to figure out that which doesn't.
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students who are motivated by money: As potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby EvanED » Wed Jun 11, 2008 4:32 pm UTC

Berengal wrote:As far as I know there's no easy way to find the mac address in windows either, without opening the command prompt...

Not true. In Vista, open up the dialog for the given adapter, click details. Physical address is third line down. In both XP and Vista (if you go one dialog further and choose properties) if you go to the dialog where you see the various protocols and such (this dialog), there's a thing at the top that says "connect using"; if you hover over that it opens a tool tip with the MAC address.

I'm not going to claim that ipconfig isn't faster, but you don't need to go to the command prompt by any stretch of the imagination.

TheGZeus
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 3:20 pm UTC

Re: Linux needs to fuck off from the desktop

Postby TheGZeus » Wed Jun 11, 2008 6:46 pm UTC

recurve boy wrote:...
</rant>
...
I want to switch off DHCP, so I guess Windows is going on now.

I agree Wireless is pretty annoying at times. What was the hardware? if it was Broadcom, I say try Gutsy or Feisty, it worked SO MUCH BETTER.

I use sidux now, and the wireless sucks just as much as Ubuntu did. I could do all kinds of manual BS to get it to work (tarballs, compile modules, rip firmware) like I had to do for Edgy, but I don't use wireless much.

Broadcom was just too busy buying coke, meth and probably whores to be arsed to open their firmware.

PS
You DO indeed have a license for that, right?
Just asking...

User avatar
Korandder
Posts: 161
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 6:12 am UTC
Location: LoadingReadyRun Australian Astrophysical Observatory
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Korandder » Wed Jun 11, 2008 8:32 pm UTC

In Ubuntu 7.10 System->Administration->Network Tools will show the MAC address. You likely need to change the 'Network Device' from 'Loopback Interface' though.
Image

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: Operating Systems

Postby aleflamedyud » Thu Jun 12, 2008 4:06 am UTC

Wi-Fi under Linux has always been Epic Fail. For my laptop I was happy to be running ndiswrapper and installing the Windoze driver from my OSX install disk. HAPPY.

Because on my last machine I had to figure out the chipset of my no-brand-name wireless dongle given by my ISP through exhaustive search, manually patch its vendor and device identifiers into the source of the appropriate driver, and manually compile+install from my modified source.

I submitted a patch with those IDs, but I don't think they ever accepted it.
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

TheGZeus
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 3:20 pm UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby TheGZeus » Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:41 am UTC

aleflamedyud wrote:Wi-Fi under Linux has always been Epic Fail. For my laptop I was happy to be running ndiswrapper and installing the Windoze driver from my OSX install disk. HAPPY.

Because on my last machine I had to figure out the chipset of my no-brand-name wireless dongle given by my ISP through exhaustive search, manually patch its vendor and device identifiers into the source of the appropriate driver, and manually compile+install from my modified source.

I submitted a patch with those IDs, but I don't think they ever accepted it.

The thing is, Feisty and Gutsy installed perfectly working firmware for me...

recurve boy
Posts: 353
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:48 am UTC
Location: Sydney Australia
Contact:

Re: Linux needs to fuck off from the desktop

Postby recurve boy » Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:55 am UTC

TheGZeus wrote:PS
You DO indeed have a license for that, right?
Just asking...


Windows? Yeah. Old Dell with XPSP2. The disks are somewhere ...

As for the hardware. I dunno. It's some generic Dell job. But it's irrelevant. This is just wireless. If you know how to set a static IP and what a MAC address is, you expect this to just work.

Thing is, WPA with DHCP worked fine. It was assigning a static IP for my home network that caused all the problems. Which is really really crazy if you think about it. It almost works perfectly. Almost. But not quite. And the lacking functionality is just enough to prevent a lot of people from ever getting things working. The only reason I got my wireless working at all, is that I use the command line everyday and I'm relatively familiar with a few necessary linux command line tools. There were other problems at work with Ubuntu not recognizing widescreen monitors. C'mon, it's 2008. Get with the program.

On another note, I did a fresh install of Ubuntu on my work machine (where I get paid to dick around). When Ubuntu works, it's very nice.



Except for that crazy inexplicable crash when I first logged in.

Xbehave
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:45 am UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Xbehave » Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:38 am UTC

EvanED wrote:
Berengal wrote:As far as I know there's no easy way to find the mac address in windows either, without opening the command prompt...

Not true. In Vista, open up the dialog for the given adapter, click details. Physical address is third line down. In both XP and Vista (if you go one dialog further and choose properties) if you go to the dialog where you see the various protocols and such (this dialog), there's a thing at the top that says "connect using"; if you hover over that it opens a tool tip with the MAC address.

I'm not going to claim that ipconfig isn't faster, but you don't need to go to the command prompt by any stretch of the imagination.

kubuntu, for aslong as ive had a laptop has knetworkmanager which can show the mac address in the addresses tab.
ifconfig/nm-tool also autoputs the information to console, and when your dealing with a text string the only difference between a gui & cli is just a shinney grey interface.
GENERATION 20: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

TheGZeus
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 3:20 pm UTC

Re: Linux needs to fuck off from the desktop

Postby TheGZeus » Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:46 pm UTC

recurve boy wrote:As for the hardware. I dunno. It's some generic Dell job. But it's irrelevant. ...

...On another note, I did a fresh install of Ubuntu on my work machine (where I get paid to dick around). When Ubuntu works, it's very nice.



Except for that crazy inexplicable crash when I first logged in.

That would be Broadcom 90% of the time. I was asking because if you used Gutsy it should work fine. Hardy borked Broadcom by changing the way/version something involving firmware and I had to do all kinds of monkey business to do anything...
I still do, but I don't have to fight with a tray app/daemon combo that won't let me do anything manually. Well, i think there are a couple settings that happen automatically, but most of it is all on me. Working alone VS fighting with a coworker...

Don't blame Ubuntu for the Monitor issue, that's X and hardware driver(video cards) junk. I just read about the cause, and it'll be fixed as soon as everyone gets on the same page.

Yeah, that crash happened to me once or twice, too. No idea why.

User avatar
asmcint
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 1:35 pm UTC
Location: A universe factory.(HELP!)

Re: Operating Systems

Postby asmcint » Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:43 pm UTC

uh just a comment on vista. VISTA SUCKS IF YOU "UPGRADE" TO IT IT'S LIKE A DOWNGRADE INBETWEEN MS-DOS AND WINDOWS 95! thank you for your time
DIE RAP DIE! *shoots the person who thought of rap sometime in the past* YES! that crap is gone! LONG LIVE TRUE MUSIC!(NOTE: rap is NOT music! rap only has a beat and rythm. TRUE music has a beat, rythm, tune, and sense in the frikin' lyrics!

TheGZeus
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 3:20 pm UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby TheGZeus » Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:03 am UTC

asmcint wrote:thank you for your time

You're welcome.
I've not heard good things about the upgrade process.

User avatar
Berengal
Superabacus Mystic of the First Rank
Posts: 2707
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:51 am UTC
Location: Bergen, Norway
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Berengal » Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:40 am UTC

Mine was painless. The only difference I could see between a full reinstall and an upgrade was that the upgrade left me with my user account still intact and all that comes with it such as bookmarks and background.

As for moving from XP to Vista, there were a few bumbs at first, such as lacking driver support, but I found the built-in drivers to be enough until proper drivers were released. I've now moved back to XP (since I didn't have 64 bit Vista, but do have heaps of ram), and I find I prefer Vista. That said, linux tops all flavors of Windows.
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students who are motivated by money: As potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.

User avatar
Anpheus
I can't get any worse, can I?
Posts: 860
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 10:38 pm UTC
Location: A privileged frame of reference.

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Anpheus » Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:52 am UTC

Vista's virtual folder protections on Program Files allows older programs to act as if they're still dealing with free read/write permissions, so long as they don't try to write to any files created by the installer. The caveat is that Vista can't tell which files were created by an Administrator-Installer (TRUSTED INSTALLER or SYSTEM or other super-user) and which files were created by the program.

So when you run the upgrade to Vista, you will notice problems with, for example, saved games that are stored by programs under Program Files (you will not be able to save over games that existed prior to upgrade,) or logfiles that are appended to. This can be fixed by modifying the permissions of course, but is kind of a hassle.

Though it's true of all operating systems that a clean install is preferable to an upgrade. Yes, even Linux distros and Mac OS X. Though Ubuntu's upgrade process has improved enormously, I still notice breaking changes.
Spoiler:

Code: Select all

  /###\_________/###\
  |#################|
  \#################/
   |##┌         ┐##|
   |##  (¯`v´¯)  ##|
   |##  `\ ♥ /´  ##|
   |##   `\¸/´   ##|
   |##└         ┘##|
  /#################\
  |#################|
  \###/¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯\###/

User avatar
socynicalsohip
Posts: 337
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:15 am UTC
Location: Satan's Layby

Re: Operating Systems

Postby socynicalsohip » Sat Jun 14, 2008 9:08 pm UTC

I just got Vista, removed all the Toshiba preinstalled crap and it's been running well for about a month now. No normal windows two week slowdown.

*is impressed*
It's ok I wasn't using my civil liberties anyhow...

Subscribe to my Choon-cast at http://whoheshouldbe.libsyn.com/rss

tylerwylie
Posts: 330
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 4:23 am UTC
Location: Champaign, IL
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby tylerwylie » Thu Jun 19, 2008 2:09 pm UTC

I just wanted to say... after a week of using OpenSUSE 11, (RC1 upgraded to 11 when private goldmaster was released)...

Holy shit...

I no longer see why anyone would want to use Ubuntu, Fedora, or any other distribution like that... it's just mind blowing how well put together this is.
Who are you and who am I
To say we know the reason why?
Some are born; some men die
Beneath one infinite sky.
There'll be war, there'll be peace.
But everything one day will cease.
All the iron turned to rust;
All the proud men turned to dust.

TheGZeus
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 3:20 pm UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby TheGZeus » Thu Jun 19, 2008 5:31 pm UTC

tylerwylie wrote:I just wanted to say... after a week of using OpenSUSE 11, (RC1 upgraded to 11 when private goldmaster was released)...

Holy shit...

I no longer see why anyone would want to use Ubuntu, Fedora, or any other distribution like that... it's just mind blowing how well put together this is.

is the LiveCD indicative of the installed experience? I always found Ubuntu(s) to give a 200% better experience with tweaks that can only be made on an installed system, that's not including proprietary firmware.
I have really hacked-together setup (tiling window manager, high-contrast color scheme, everything works like emacs...) so I'm pretty happy with my sidux-based setup, but I'd like to have something to recommend to the uninitiated.
I've heard mixed reviews on the package management as well, but I also heard that changed for 11. I'll read up on it, but the installation would have to be much much better than 9, which I couldn't get working on this machine(at all) and the partitioner gave me a different "use entire disk" setup each time...

Oh, I have a xubuntu install on a flash drive for one reason: the abundance of packages. DeVeDe isn't in Debian, and there are a number of others.

tylerwylie
Posts: 330
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 4:23 am UTC
Location: Champaign, IL
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby tylerwylie » Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:36 am UTC

I didn't use the LiveCD, I installed onto a spare hard drive I have for my laptop and within 2 days it was on my main drive.
Who are you and who am I
To say we know the reason why?
Some are born; some men die
Beneath one infinite sky.
There'll be war, there'll be peace.
But everything one day will cease.
All the iron turned to rust;
All the proud men turned to dust.

crp
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:17 am UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby crp » Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:30 pm UTC

I'm on my the family compter with XP home edition, but the second I get my own computer i'm getting Ubuntu or OpenSUSE installed immediately

probably Ubuntu, but i'll test them both first

And how the hell did Windows ever get so popular? Linux distributions are by far superior, and that's with about 15 minutes experience in my entire life
Max OSX is pretty tight too

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby EvanED » Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:41 pm UTC

crp wrote:And how the hell did Windows ever get so popular?

Over Linux? By being clearly better than it until recently. Linux wasn't so hot for a desktop OS even 6 years ago when I first started using it off-and-on. I mean, it wasn't bad, but Windows was better. (Personal opinion, but hey, what's religious wars for? ;-)) Keep in mind that Linux wasn't even invented (or whatever you want to call it) until three years after the release of Windows 3.0, and two years before Windows 95, let alone have decent hardware support, a usable UI, or much software outside of BSD and GNU stuff. Even my first couple installs had GTK 1, which I still assert is butt-ugly.

In general? A combination of a couple factors. First, Apple's insistence that only they produce Apple computers. IBM opened their architectures, and PCs became a commodity. And PCs ran Windows. (I would also say that for some time, especially Win95 until the release of OS X, Windows was also just better than Mac OS.) Second, MS's (in)famous business practices that essentially locked out manufactures from putting anything but Windows on their PCs. Third, MS's commitment to backwards compatibility, which meant that if you upgraded you could keep running everything that you have been. (It's not absolute, but it's close. If you have the 32 bit version, even Vista or Server 2008 will run -- without emulation -- most DOS programs from 2 1/2 decades ago.)

User avatar
Anpheus
I can't get any worse, can I?
Posts: 860
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 10:38 pm UTC
Location: A privileged frame of reference.

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Anpheus » Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:45 pm UTC

It's not even that cut and dry. As you said, five years ago Linux was in a poor state with even worse driver support than it has today, and Mac OS was limited to Apple hardware.

So really, there were only a few choices available to companies like Dell. And the choice was, hm, Windows, which supports modern hardware and drivers and seems to be making pretty decent strides forward, or they can sell... Unix? I mean, what else is there other than Apple and Linux? There were and are a handful of alternative operating systems that simply have terrible support for hardware, whether that's true today and it was true five years ago.

Microsoft build a better widget and then, and only after they had a de facto monopoly on computer sales, start to offer deals to companies like Dell. And Microsoft's deals made Windows cheaper, more accessible and more functional than anyone else's operating system.

That said, that's no longer true. If Apple would open up their OS we'd have three excellent choices available for every computer. As it is, there's Windows and Linux for most of us.
Spoiler:

Code: Select all

  /###\_________/###\
  |#################|
  \#################/
   |##┌         ┐##|
   |##  (¯`v´¯)  ##|
   |##  `\ ♥ /´  ##|
   |##   `\¸/´   ##|
   |##└         ┘##|
  /#################\
  |#################|
  \###/¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯\###/

User avatar
Berengal
Superabacus Mystic of the First Rank
Posts: 2707
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:51 am UTC
Location: Bergen, Norway
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Berengal » Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:10 pm UTC

Windows is still more user friendly that linux. By that I don't mean that it's neccessarily easier to use, because heavens knows windows can be a bitch just like linux and, I'm guessing, every OS out there, but windows doesn't expose the nitty gritty details the way linux does. Doing so can easily scare away the casual users that only use their computer for surfing, word, excel and malware. I've seen it happen several times.
(Going on a tangent here: I've seen the opposite too, in a completely illiterate person. The kind person who's so incompetent he doesn't have any viruses on his computer simply because he doesn't know how to open email attachments. He finally got a virus though, and asked me to fix it for him. I asked him what he used the computer for, and since it was only internet and word I installed ubuntu for him. He's been happy ever since (even though he still runs ubuntu 4.10), with a smoothly running machine and no viruses.)
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students who are motivated by money: As potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.

User avatar
Anpheus
I can't get any worse, can I?
Posts: 860
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 10:38 pm UTC
Location: A privileged frame of reference.

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Anpheus » Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:16 pm UTC

The problem with Windows versus Linux ideologies is pretty well exemplified in Firefox. They have to provide a usable, decent Options panel, and they do that in FF2 and FF3. It's very usable. But it exposes only 1/100th of the possible options and rather than develop a better options/preferences panel or come up with a better interface, every possible configuration shows up in an obscure internal config file accessible by entering about:config in the address bar.

Most of those options are worthless and have never been twerked by anyone, I think, but very little attempt is being made by Mozilla, from what I understand, to add more of the cache, memory, etc, tweaks to the preferences panel.


The Linux way is of course, about:config. Why bother obfuscating the actual options when you can simply expose every single user variable? And the Windows way is the preference pane, wherein you expose options most people use. (Windows does a little of both, admittedly, with registry abuse being a problem with some applications and settings.)
Last edited by Anpheus on Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:47 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Spoiler:

Code: Select all

  /###\_________/###\
  |#################|
  \#################/
   |##┌         ┐##|
   |##  (¯`v´¯)  ##|
   |##  `\ ♥ /´  ##|
   |##   `\¸/´   ##|
   |##└         ┘##|
  /#################\
  |#################|
  \###/¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯\###/

TheGZeus
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 3:20 pm UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby TheGZeus » Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:39 pm UTC

Anpheus wrote:The problem with Windows versus Linux ideologies is pretty well exemplified in Firefox. They have to provide a usable, decent Options panel, and they do that in FF2 and FF3. It's very usable. But it exposes only 1/100th of the possible options and rather than develop a better options/preferences panel or come up with a better interface, every possible configuration shows up in an obscure internal config file accessible by entering about:config in the address bar.

Most of those options are worthless and have never been twerked by anyone, I think, but very little attempt is being made by Mozilla, from what I understand, to add more of the cache, memory, etc, tweaks to the preferences panel.


The Winux way is of course, about:config. Why bother obfuscating the actual options when you can simply expose every single user variable? And the Windows way is the preference pane, wherein you expose options most people use. (Windows does a little of both, admittedly, with registry abuse being a problem with some applications and settings.)

Terrible example.
Firefox is not representative of ANY other application on ANY OS(it makes weird decisions like the one mentioned and how it opens default MIME associations) and what you KINDA ALMOST said KINDA applies to GNOME and to no other D.E.

User avatar
Anpheus
I can't get any worse, can I?
Posts: 860
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 10:38 pm UTC
Location: A privileged frame of reference.

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Anpheus » Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:47 pm UTC

No I'm pretty sure last time I used any desktop environment under Linux more than a year ago the idea was that if you wanted to do anything useful in your config settings, you had to find the right file to edit by hand.

That said, the situation has vastly improved in several distros and I no longer have to do that for a lot of options. And I'm awful proud of the Compiz people for putting nearly all of the possible parameters in their GUI configuration program.

Also, either there's a ninja mod here (way possible) or I seriously typoed and typed "Winux." Just noticed that. Could be a really sneaky ninja though...
Spoiler:

Code: Select all

  /###\_________/###\
  |#################|
  \#################/
   |##┌         ┐##|
   |##  (¯`v´¯)  ##|
   |##  `\ ♥ /´  ##|
   |##   `\¸/´   ##|
   |##└         ┘##|
  /#################\
  |#################|
  \###/¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯\###/

Xbehave
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:45 am UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Xbehave » Thu Jul 10, 2008 3:56 am UTC

Anpheus wrote:No I'm pretty sure last time I used any desktop environment under Linux more than a year ago the idea was that if you wanted to do anything useful in your config settings, you had to find the right file to edit by hand.

That said, the situation has vastly improved in several distros and I no longer have to do that for a lot of options. And I'm awful proud of the Compiz people for putting nearly all of the possible parameters in their GUI configuration program.

Also, either there's a ninja mod here (way possible) or I seriously typoed and typed "Winux." Just noticed that. Could be a really sneaky ninja though...

KDE has very view hidden options, compiz has hiden options if you use compiz=settings-simple instead of cssm. so basically my point is that your entire argument is pure cruft. the generalisation is just to broad.

kde/gnome/e/fluxbox have little in common so any attempt to generalise stuff about the linux UI is doomed to failure
GENERATION 20: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

Strange Quark
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 1:00 am UTC

Re: help me.. [benefits of Linux]

Postby Strange Quark » Sat Aug 09, 2008 1:22 am UTC

Dual boot is the way to go. You can resize an nfts partition with a gparted live CD and have it both ways. There will be days during the learning process when you just want windows for the ease of use. And when you want to change distro (http://xkcd.com/456/) you won't disrupt the rest of your family. Dual booting with Ubuntu is surprisingly pain free.

A benefit I feel I should stress is the command line. Once you learn even a little you will start feeling powerless in windows because it's not there. It's not even the scripting I like (I really should learn bash scripting properly some day), it's the fact that you can start any program or get any peace of information by typing the right word or short phrase.

Want to know what cpu you are using?
Windows: start->control panel (wait for it to load, which seems to take a while in vista)->system.
Linix: type "cat /proc/cpuinfo" enter.

Want to find html files in the os'es "your directory"?
Windows: start->find (wait for it to load).
Highlight the filename box with your mouse.
Move you hands to the keyboard.
Type *.html
Highlight the my documents folder
start the search.
Linux: type cd [enter] find | grep html [enter] //I have a feeling this isn't the way you should use find and I'm about to be made fun of.

What is your ip?
type ifconfig

What wireless networks are available and what are (all) their details?
type iwconfig scan

And so on. In fact, if all you want to do is start something, then usually alt+f2 <type name of program> will let you start it (at lest on gnome and kde). It even auto-completes for you. It's much faster than finding a program on a start menu with fifty items arranged by company name. That's not to say they isn't a start menu clone for when you want it and on ubuntu it's even organized into logical categories such as "internet" and "games" (rather than by software company).

Oh, and if you want to install something (on apt based system such as ubuntu and debian)...
apt-get install <name of program>

If you want to install lots of software at once you just type more names, or use synaptic where you check boxes. When you done, all the software installs in one go without you needing to be eternally clicking next. And when you done, you just uncheck the boxes and click apply. The software will be removed all in one go. Today I had to clean out a relative's PC by uninstalling crap and after having to go though the wizards one by one. How I wished for apt. And updates! apt will update everything on you system in one go, without any more fuss than a nod of approval from you. I don't know how windows users cope with all their applications demanding to be updated in a sightly different way. What! You expect me to go to your website, download the updated version, install it myself and agree to the license terms again. Once you have used a package manager like apt you will soon miss it when it's gone.

Oh, and ssh. Ever wanted to access your PC from anywhere in the world? Or, indeed, your universities, if they have a unix service? ssh may be useless to you or it may be a godsend.

Well, this post has turned out longer than expected. Ah, well. In my opinion, linux has actually reached the point where it is more usable than windows, from the point of view of an experienced user who just wants to get things done. Window's only redeeming feature for me is the software it runs. Basically games for me. You may need office or photoshop.

And you can poke and hack at your computer as a bonus.
I henceforth declare that I will not defend linux on this forum anymore, as life is too short and the subject is too tempting.

User avatar
socynicalsohip
Posts: 337
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:15 am UTC
Location: Satan's Layby

Re: help me.. [benefits of Linux]

Postby socynicalsohip » Sat Aug 09, 2008 3:35 am UTC

Strange Quark wrote:A benefit I feel I should stress is the command line. Once you learn even a little you will start feeling powerless in windows because it's not there. It's not even the scripting I like (I really should learn bash scripting properly some day), it's the fact that you can start any program or get any peace of information by typing the right word or short phrase.

Want to know what cpu you are using?
Windows: start->control panel (wait for it to load, which seems to take a while in vista)->system.
Linix: type "cat /proc/cpuinfo" enter.

Want to find html files in the os'es "your directory"?
Windows: start->find (wait for it to load).
Highlight the filename box with your mouse.
Move you hands to the keyboard.
Type *.html
Highlight the my documents folder
start the search.
Linux: type cd [enter] find | grep html [enter] //I have a feeling this isn't the way you should use find and I'm about to be made fun of.

What is your ip?
type ifconfig

What wireless networks are available and what are (all) their details?
type iwconfig scan


Do remember that windows has a very powerful command line built in. And can also be enhanced with the new coomandline tool called powershell.

Find my CPU on Vista - Click the windows button, Type "System Information" and you get everything you could ever want to know about your system. [not command line really but how simple and straightforward is that?]
Find HTML files in Documents and Settings - Open CMD.exe, type "dir "C:\Documents and Settings\Username\*.html" /s"
What is My IP - Open CMD.exe type ipconfig or for more detail ipconfig /all

I'm sure there is also commands configuring WLANs but really, is it necessary unless you are scripting?
It's ok I wasn't using my civil liberties anyhow...

Subscribe to my Choon-cast at http://whoheshouldbe.libsyn.com/rss

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: help me.. [benefits of Linux]

Postby EvanED » Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:18 am UTC

Strange Quark wrote:A benefit I feel I should stress is the command line. Once you learn even a little you will start feeling powerless in windows because it's not there. It's not even the scripting I like (I really should learn bash scripting properly some day), it's the fact that you can start any program or get any peace of information by typing the right word or short phrase.
I don't dispute that Linux has Windows beat in this area, but I think you overstate differences, especially if you allow the Windows user to install cygwin. And I don't think you chose very good examples, except for arguably the wireless one since I think you may need a dialog for that. (That said, it's really easy to open and provides all the information I've ever needed.)

Want to find html files in the os'es "your directory"?
Windows: start->find (wait for it to load).
Highlight the filename box with your mouse.
Move you hands to the keyboard.
Type *.html
Highlight the my documents folder
start the search.
Start->find can also be done with Win+F, and at least in Vista comes up with the file name box selected. However, selecting the folder to search in *is* rather more complicated.

Alternately on Windows: Win-R, cmd [for me even this is unnecessary as cmd is virtually always the last command started], enter, dir /s *.html, enter. I might be able to do this faster than you can type "find | grep html"

Linux: type cd [enter] find | grep html [enter] //I have a feeling this isn't the way you should use find and I'm about to be made fun of.
find -name "*.html" also works, probably better. That said, I used to use find the way you suggest. (Though I will also point out that your command pulls out too much... you do the equivalent of searching for "*html*".)

What is your ip?
type ifconfig
On Windows you use ipconfig:

Code: Select all

C:\Users\Evan>ipconfig

Windows IP Configuration


Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:

   Connection-specific DNS Suffix  . :
   Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . : [snip]
   IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 10.0.0.100
   Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
   Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 10.0.0.1
...


And so on. In fact, if all you want to do is start something, then usually alt+f2 <type name of program> will let you start it (at lest on gnome and kde).
Win-R brings up the run dialog in Windows. It's rather crippled in comparison though since not much is typically in your %PATH%. However, in Vista, just pressing the Windows key and typing is almost always enough, as it will search the start menu and eventually other things. The times when it isn't is typically when you want to run a command line utility that is in your %PATH% anyway.

Oh, and if you want to install something (on apt based system such as ubuntu and debian)...
apt-get install <name of program>
More realistically you'll be starting aptitude or synaptic so you can search for the program you want, at which point you're not seeing a huge win over the Windows method. And in return, if your repository doesn't have what you need, it's often a PITA to install something on Linux because you have to deal with dependencies, something that doesn't come up much in the Windows world.

Oh, and ssh. Ever wanted to access your PC from anywhere in the world? Or, indeed, your universities, if they have a unix service? ssh may be useless to you or it may be a godsend.
There are ssh servers for Windows as well.

neverender
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:23 am UTC

Re: help me.. [benefits of Linux]

Postby neverender » Sun Aug 10, 2008 11:09 pm UTC

More realistically you'll be starting aptitude or synaptic so you can search for the program you want, at which point you're not seeing a huge win over the Windows method. And in return, if your repository doesn't have what you need, it's often a PITA to install something on Linux because you have to deal with dependencies, something that doesn't come up much in the Windows world.


Windows is full of dependency issues, though they tend to be even more annoying since Linux's aptitude can detect the required dependencies before you install a program and then include them in teh installation (at least it's how it work when using the GUI version of synaptic package manager in ubuntu.)

also, when a program has passed it's usefulness you can remove it easily enough without hunting it down and figuring out where it's planted itself in your system, you just type sudo apt-get remove <program name>

and if you want to remove it's configuration files as well then you use the "purge" command instead of remove, then it's like eth program had neevr existed on your computer

apt-get also takes care of clearing out unused dependencies when needed

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: help me.. [benefits of Linux]

Postby EvanED » Mon Aug 11, 2008 3:47 am UTC

neverender wrote:Windows is full of dependency issues, though they tend to be even more annoying since Linux's aptitude can detect the required dependencies before you install a program and then include them in teh installation (at least it's how it work when using the GUI version of synaptic package manager in ubuntu.)
Not nearly as many as Linux has. Almost all Windows programs come with any dependencies they need. The main exception to this is open source stuff like Gimp, which depends on GTK. Even in this case, there are usually multiple options including one that includes everything you need.

On Linux, a package manager is almost a must (at least IMO; and I was using it without one for a while, and it was a PITA), but Windows gets along fine without. That should give an indication of the dependency stuff you have to deal with on each platform.

also, when a program has passed it's usefulness you can remove it easily enough without hunting it down and figuring out where it's planted itself in your system, you just type sudo apt-get remove <program name>
Not command-line based, but programs that follow the Windows idioms (which is almost anything; the main exceptions I can think of are things like Cygwin) put themselves into the add/remove programs dialog. A lot of things also put an 'uninstall blah' option into the start menu folder.

And what happens if you install a program without the help of your package manager? Then it's nearly impossible to remove if you don't bother to keep around the original tarball. On Windows you can delete Program Files\Whatever and you'll have gotten at least most of it.

and if you want to remove it's configuration files as well then you use the "purge" command instead of remove, then it's like eth program had neevr existed on your computer
This is a win for Linux, though some uninstallers offer the choice.

apt-get also takes care of clearing out unused dependencies when needed
Windows also does this somewhat; that's what the "this is a shared file that is no longer needed, would you like to remove it" dialogs that sometimes show up are about.

This thread has become a religious war I fear. ;-) (I realize I've contributed at least as much as anyone else.) If it goes on more I think I'll split it at Strange Quark's post and merge to the OS thread over in religious wars.

wonnage
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:30 am UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby wonnage » Mon Aug 11, 2008 11:16 am UTC

I used to use Linux as my main OS, but I've slowly come to realize that it just isn't suited for desktop/laptop use...examples follow.

Ubuntu locks up because I was silly and tried on a whim to connect my phone to my laptop through bluetooth. Yes, the phone was running WM6. No, I didn't expect this to work at all. However, I still didn't expect it to disable the entire system. Yeah, hard lock. No ctrl-alt-backspace, and didn't remember/care to try the kernel key combo. Apparently on a vanilla Ubuntu 8.04 install from an official CD onto a brand new Thinkpad T61, you can get completely disabled by any random bastard doing a drive by with a bluetooth phone.

The best part is, when this sort of thing happens to Linux it's a part of the experience, nothing new. I would be an angry man if Vista BSODed because of this. But it doesn't, because it's a competent desktop OS. I've grown to expect the worst from Linux.

Need more examples? Flash crashes X sometimes, when used with Compiz. That's just silly. You can blame Adobe all you want, but a browser plugin should not crash X. I could use metacity, but there goes one of the few advantages of desktop Linux. It's even worse than XP's window system thanks to the choppy dragging. At work I use Fluxbox, but that's because at work all I need are terminal windows and Firefox. Hooray minimalism. At least there's nothing to break, and the arbitrary window tabbing is cool.

Linux just wasn't built to be a desktop OS. Run it on your servers, but people are still going to be using Windows or OSX. The supposed superior security is a total sham for desktop users, you can get anyone to run scripts just by posting them as fixes on ubuntuforums. And gksudo won't save you - judging from the way most newbie Ubuntu users are using it, sudo isn't much better than UAC. I can't remember the last time I saw a casual user do a double take on their sudo usage - "it doesn't work...guess I have to sudo it". For personal use, my vote's for Windows - perfect hardware compatibility, best software availability, it's the OS to use when you don't want to dick about writing conf files and ./configure && make && sudo make sandwich whenever something's not packaged.

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: Operating Systems

Postby aleflamedyud » Mon Aug 11, 2008 5:55 pm UTC

You're a new user with only one post (goto intro thread, btw), and that post states all kinds of bugs in Linux that show up in desktop/laptop situations.

Has anyone else ever seen these bugs, or is this guy just astroturfing?

Need more examples? Flash crashes X sometimes, when used with Compiz. That's just silly.

Never, ever experienced that. I run vanilla Ubuntu 8.04 Hardy Heron, and while Flash often crashes Firefox (it's annoying as hell, that), I've never, ever seen it manage to crash X. I think in 8 months or so of use I've only ever seen the system hard-lock once.

Ubuntu locks up because I was silly and tried on a whim to connect my phone to my laptop through bluetooth. Yes, the phone was running WM6. No, I didn't expect this to work at all. However, I still didn't expect it to disable the entire system. Yeah, hard lock. No ctrl-alt-backspace, and didn't remember/care to try the kernel key combo. Apparently on a vanilla Ubuntu 8.04 install from an official CD onto a brand new Thinkpad T61, you can get completely disabled by any random bastard doing a drive by with a bluetooth phone.

Well I've connected my phone to my Ubuntu system, and it worked fine. Maybe it's because my phone didn't run Windows Mobile. If, and that's a big IF IMHO, you really did experience this incident, I'd blame Microsoft for providing a faulty implementation of the Bluetooth protocols, because I've never heard of anyone having trouble with Bluetooth under Linux.

The best part is, when this sort of thing happens to Linux it's a part of the experience, nothing new. I would be an angry man if Vista BSODed because of this. But it doesn't, because it's a competent desktop OS. I've grown to expect the worst from Linux.


Linux just wasn't built to be a desktop OS. Run it on your servers, but people are still going to be using Windows or OSX. The supposed superior security is a total sham for desktop users, you can get anyone to run scripts just by posting them as fixes on ubuntuforums. And gksudo won't save you - judging from the way most newbie Ubuntu users are using it, sudo isn't much better than UAC. I can't remember the last time I saw a casual user do a double take on their sudo usage - "it doesn't work...guess I have to sudo it". For personal use, my vote's for Windows - perfect hardware compatibility, best software availability, it's the OS to use when you don't want to dick about writing conf files and ./configure && make && sudo make sandwich whenever something's not packaged.

And here are the bits that really show you for what you are: a pro-Microsoft astroturfer with very little to contribute to even, reasoned discussion of our preferences in operating systems.

I hate Windows, and I think it's a bloated, unstable peace of crap, but I don't go around saying "Windows just wasn't built to be a desktop OS." or blaming the operating system for its stupidest users.
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

User avatar
ash.gti
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:18 am UTC
Location: Probably a coffee shop.

Re: Operating Systems

Postby ash.gti » Mon Aug 11, 2008 9:18 pm UTC

wonnage wrote:For personal use, my vote's for Windows - perfect hardware compatibility, best software availability, it's the OS to use when you don't want to dick about writing conf files and ./configure && make && sudo make sandwich whenever something's not packaged.


I'd argue against that.... OS X has, in my experience, the best hardware compatibility of any machine I have used. But that is because its a hardware manufacturer on top of being an OS developer. They have better hardware compatibility because they build the hardware. I don't know how many times I have heard people complain about drivers for this, or drivers for that (look at how many Linux users have to use the NSDIWrapper for instance). I don't use Windows anymore, but when I did, I had many hardware issues, like my CD (dvd) drive never really wanted to function properly because of crummy driver support. I mean, it worked, but it was a DVD-RW drive and sometimes wouldn't burn discs right, or sometimes wouldn't be detected on boots, never quite figured that one out...

I'd recommend Linux to anyone I know if Linux had the driver support of a Mac. In most cases, yes you can get the drivers to function, but its not always the easiest thing to do. Whereas with OS X, I have yet to have a hardware related problem with my Laptop in the 4+ years I have used them.
# drinks WAY to much espresso

wonnage
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:30 am UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby wonnage » Mon Aug 11, 2008 10:55 pm UTC

aleflamedyud wrote:Never, ever experienced that. I run vanilla Ubuntu 8.04 Hardy Heron, and while Flash often crashes Firefox (it's annoying as hell, that), I've never, ever seen it manage to crash X. I think in 8 months or so of use I've only ever seen the system hard-lock once.

Cool, works for you. Broke for me. It was probably because I was running compiz and using nvidia proprietary drivers, but considering this comes default in many distros now, it's still inconceivable that youtube can crash X.

Well I've connected my phone to my Ubuntu system, and it worked fine. Maybe it's because my phone didn't run Windows Mobile. If, and that's a big IF IMHO, you really did experience this incident, I'd blame Microsoft for providing a faulty implementation of the Bluetooth protocols, because I've never heard of anyone having trouble with Bluetooth under Linux.

Even if MS hypothetically provided a faulty BT implementation it shouldn't lock my OS up. Just saying. Again, I had no expectation of being able to connect, everyone knows WM6 basically won't work with anything other than Windows.

And here are the bits that really show you for what you are: a pro-Microsoft astroturfer with very little to contribute to even, reasoned discussion of our preferences in operating systems.

I hate Windows, and I think it's a bloated, unstable peace of crap, but I don't go around saying "Windows just wasn't built to be a desktop OS." or blaming the operating system for its stupidest users.


And you're a Linux zealot that rebutted all my statements with "I don't believe you!". Namecalling won't get you anywhere. I actually use Linux at work, and most of our servers run on either Debian or FreeBSD. It's great in that situation, this is what the Unices were designed for. The learning curve required is appropriate here, I would rather make a few quick changes to conf files than trudge through a bunch of settings dialogs. When all I need is xterm, ssh, and vim, there is no reason for us to even consider Windows - there's nothing comparable in that world. But hacking this design into a home desktop hasn't worked so well. It's getting much better, but there's no way in hell you can say desktop Linux is superior to Windows. Not when Pulseaudio randomly craps out and needs restarting, not when DVD playback is still a pain in the ass, not when you have to restart X just to connect a monitor, not when printing to consumer printers is a total crapshoot, and not when the best office suite available is OpenOffice. The EECS department at my school is 60% Linux users, but I have yet to meet one who doesn't dual boot to use Word. I could waste hours and hours trolling ubuntuforums looking for fixes, or weeks trying to learn an entirely new codebase and submit patches. Or I could stick with Windows (or OSX for that matter), and actually be productive.

It's because the people who work on Linux have always been programmers writing code for fun, to make their own work easier. http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/ is a good place to understand this argument more clearly. The name is a bit unfortunate, but the guy who writes it probably knows more about Linux than you and I combined.

User avatar
Anpheus
I can't get any worse, can I?
Posts: 860
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 10:38 pm UTC
Location: A privileged frame of reference.

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Anpheus » Mon Aug 11, 2008 11:09 pm UTC

I'd completely back up what he said about Linux being within a hair's breadth of total system failure at all times. The current state of Linux is very close to the state of Windows and Mac about 10 years ago. You know, when people complained about blue screens and bombs causing their computers to have to restart? When there was literally nothing useful that you could do to recover from a fatal error? When fatal errors caused by drivers written by third party vendors were actually something you dreaded, and unfortunately, expected?

Well, that's the state of Linux. Now, the drivers that tend to be included in a Linux distro are quite a bit higher quality than the drivers that were provided by third party vendors ten years ago to Microsoft, and to a lesser degree, Apple (what with knowing all the hardware that will be used ahead of time.) But even though they are higher quality, you can still get really awful errors or difficulties that lead to a difficult to use system. The percentage of Linux users who are tech-savvy or even programmers is much, much higher than it is for Windows or OS X, so if there's a problem that affects 5% of hardware layouts, that 5% is much more likely to contain tech-savvy or programmer users who can diagnose the problem, and if not solve it, perhaps report it to people who can.

Well, since then, Apple has gotten a lot more picky about drivers that go into their releases, and Microsoft has stepped up their certification programs enormously. Even in the past two years, the Windows logo certification process has gotten much, much better. Not only that, but every user has the ability to report problems, yes at their discretion, and that information can be used by Microsoft to determine who needs to be bitched out for providing shoddy drivers. Whether that's an internal team in Redmond or if that's Nvidia, as was the case this year when Microsoft released, publically, in order to shame Nvidia, figures that showed something like half of the Vista crashes were due to faulty Nvidia drivers or hardware.


And on top of that, because Vista is so abstracted in terms of drivers, even my graphics driver can crash and my PC will be usable within 30 seconds. No, that's not how long it takes to reboot. Windows can recover from pretty much any driver error even if it would have been considered a catastrophic error five years ago.
Spoiler:

Code: Select all

  /###\_________/###\
  |#################|
  \#################/
   |##┌         ┐##|
   |##  (¯`v´¯)  ##|
   |##  `\ ♥ /´  ##|
   |##   `\¸/´   ##|
   |##└         ┘##|
  /#################\
  |#################|
  \###/¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯\###/

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: Operating Systems

Postby aleflamedyud » Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:41 am UTC

wonnage wrote:
aleflamedyud wrote:Never, ever experienced that. I run vanilla Ubuntu 8.04 Hardy Heron, and while Flash often crashes Firefox (it's annoying as hell, that), I've never, ever seen it manage to crash X. I think in 8 months or so of use I've only ever seen the system hard-lock once.

Cool, works for you. Broke for me. It was probably because I was running compiz and using nvidia proprietary drivers, but considering this comes default in many distros now, it's still inconceivable that youtube can crash X.

But the funny thing is that I run the exact same configuration. NVIDIA GeForce 8600 Mobile with the Ubuntu-repo NVIDIA proprietary drivers and Compiz for the WM.

Even if MS hypothetically provided a faulty BT implementation it shouldn't lock my OS up. Just saying. Again, I had no expectation of being able to connect, everyone knows WM6 basically won't work with anything other than Windows.

Unfortunately providing a faulty implementation of any wireless protocol over a low enough range could lock up a system that expects standards conformance. That's how kernel-level device drivers work, and if you don't like it I recommend going into microkernel research so we can finally produce an operating system that doesn't need to keep its most volatile components where they can cause the most damage.

And you're a Linux zealot that rebutted all my statements with "I don't believe you!". Namecalling won't get you anywhere. I actually use Linux at work, and most of our servers run on either Debian or FreeBSD. It's great in that situation, this is what the Unices were designed for. The learning curve required is appropriate here, I would rather make a few quick changes to conf files than trudge through a bunch of settings dialogs. When all I need is xterm, ssh, and vim, there is no reason for us to even consider Windows - there's nothing comparable in that world. But hacking this design into a home desktop hasn't worked so well. It's getting much better, but there's no way in hell you can say desktop Linux is superior to Windows. Not when Pulseaudio randomly craps out and needs restarting, not when DVD playback is still a pain in the ass, not when you have to restart X just to connect a monitor, not when printing to consumer printers is a total crapshoot, and not when the best office suite available is OpenOffice. The EECS department at my school is 60% Linux users, but I have yet to meet one who doesn't dual boot to use Word. I could waste hours and hours trolling ubuntuforums looking for fixes, or weeks trying to learn an entirely new codebase and submit patches. Or I could stick with Windows (or OSX for that matter), and actually be productive.

DVD playback would be much less of a pain in the ass if there weren't legal issues and patents surrounding the algorithms involved. Seriously, don't blame Linux for following the law by default.

Pulseaudio randomly craps out on you? I'm really starting to wonder what kind of system you're running, hardware-wise. If you have strange or cheapy hardware, Linux could fail on you since those manufacturers rarely provide drivers or specs for anything but Windows, forcing Linux developers to reverse-engineer.

What do you need the office suite for? Just a word processor? AbiWord is damn great on that front. Chances are those dual-booters do so to play games, which really do work better on Windows (Direct3D has been one of the things MS got right).

It's because the people who work on Linux have always been programmers writing code for fun, to make their own work easier. http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/ is a good place to understand this argument more clearly. The name is a bit unfortunate, but the guy who writes it probably knows more about Linux than you and I combined.

I've read LinuxHaters on occasion. Of course, he's a troll, and he knows it. He wants to make Linux users/developers angry with his out-and-out flames. You, on the other hand, blithely and matter-of-factly state vast generalizations (such as Linux not working as a desktop system) that simply aren't true for anyone but yourself. Once I introduced her to it, my mother (a social worker and writer) has come to prefer Linux over Windows.

Of course more improvements can be made to Linux. How much time has passed since SDL last released a stable library and API? Why can't the graphics industry invent some API more up-to-date and forward-looking than OpenGL to run on non-Windows platforms? Why can't sound be multiplexed at the kernel level rather than require that applications target their sound output to a user-level sound server, no matter by user configuration or D-Bus? Why can't Linux support a method of adding and removing software more like OS X bundles so that my mother wouldn't have to poke around with Synaptic's search function and ISVs could more easily produce software that will run on Linux?

But these flaws don't stop Linux working just fine as a desktop/laptop operating system for the non-gamer who has a rig slightly less weird than yours.
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

Xbehave
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:45 am UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Xbehave » Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:59 pm UTC

flash + prop drivers are buggy but you choose to run an unstable system when you install proprietary drivers + compiz. I had ati drivers + compiz + flash not rendering full screen verywell, after some idiot denied the problem was with my drivers and had to be with flash (be wary of anybody trying to give you support that intimidatly shifts the blame), i installed ati opensource drivers which has left me with a completely stable system (well apart from when my CD drive falls out but that's a different problem).

The problem is that your graphics stack is pretty fundamental as when it goes down it takes xorg with it (if you know what your doing you can get around your 'crashes' fairly easily by sshing into the box from a second PC though). And the current state of the proprietary drivers is not good so if you want a stable system, switch to the open source drivers (not sure how good they are for nvidia) and while youll loose your compiz etc youll end up with a rock solid system)

your bluetooth stack problems are particularly strange and i dont know enough about bluetooth other than the fact that it can be abit of a PITA to setup sometimes.

with linux you actually have choices, if you want a stable system its not hard to achive (use alsa + open drivers etc) if you want a 'cutting edge system' ( pulseaudio + compiz etc) then you do take a hit to your stability. AFAIK neither mac or win can offer all the features of compiz and pulse audio (hell the reason foobar is so popular is because the windows audio stack sucks so much) neither is windows as stable as a well setup Linux desktop. Im not saying that linux is perfect ofc its not there are plenty of good reasons to use other operating systems, but to make the choice to decrease stability then complain that its unstable is not fair
GENERATION 20: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

User avatar
Neureo900
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:08 am UTC
Location: Bay Area of CA

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Neureo900 » Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:02 pm UTC

I have yet to meet one who doesn't dual boot to use Word.

Seriously? That's weird. I might understand dual booting for, say, Photoshop (since its Linux counterpart still isn't quite up to par), but for Word? That makes absolutely no sense. In my experience, there's nothing Word can do that Writer can't. Heck, IMHO Writer does it better.

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Endless Mike » Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:43 pm UTC

In my experience, Word is much better at not crashing every 15 minutes and fucking up my formatting randomly just because.

tylerwylie
Posts: 330
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 4:23 am UTC
Location: Champaign, IL
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby tylerwylie » Tue Aug 12, 2008 6:44 pm UTC

Abiword!
Who are you and who am I
To say we know the reason why?
Some are born; some men die
Beneath one infinite sky.
There'll be war, there'll be peace.
But everything one day will cease.
All the iron turned to rust;
All the proud men turned to dust.


Return to “Religious Wars”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests