Windows Linux or Mac?
POSTED BY: Haze
UPDATED: Saturday, April 8, 2006 06:42
VIEWED: 42858
PAGE 15 of 20
Fedora is ass, I can't stand anything based off of Red Hat. Worthless distro, IMO. I tried out Ubuntu the other day on an old test box and found it to be far superior (though I'm a Slackware geek at heart).
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Forgot to mention, Windows XP is okay, but one MUST use Mozilla's Firefox browser and Thunderbird email, which automatically flags spam so you can zing it without ever looking at it or even highlighting it.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Won't even switch to Mac -don't need it. Already got a real OS
Um, pardon me.
Argh! I been misconstrued....!
OSX is a real OS. Don't need it 'cuz Linux is a real OS too and I already got it working great for me. So no need for OSX here.
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Once you learn how to manage a Linux box, the freedom and control you find are simply unmatched.
Quote:
Why don't we say *nix instead of Linux. For instance, *BSD's give as much freedom of control as the Linux's.
That's certainly true. But, IMO Linux is going to be an easier transition to *nix for a Windows user. Sigma -For the Record, I concede that the Net/Free/OpenBSD's are superior to Linux. Torvalds himself has said he's going for "good enough". The BSD guys tend to go for "make it goddamned perfect or fsck it!". I can appreciate either approach depending on the intended useage of the platform(s) in question. Again, IMO, the "Good Enough" of Linux is still such a damned sight better than anything Microsoft can offer so I feel good about pimpin' it. I can't pimp OSX since I honestly don't know how to admin it.
BSD for a Windows convert? Yes, it's doable, but come on- ubuntu isn't going to scare them with things like partition 'slices' eeeeek! I just think for the purpose of this thread our Windows-using Browncoats will have an easier time learning Linux -I may well be wrong!They'd definately have an easier time learning OSX.
Quote:
Disclaimer:
The below contains some opinions, that are IMO only. It mainly gets into estetics of system configuration files and the resulting directory structure, not necessarily reflecting any functionality or lack thereof.
Some people (myself included) actually prefer the *BSD's and think that they are easier to configure (though there are Linux's with similar init script setup descibed below).
For instance, Redhat and it's derivatives with that run level crap. Don't like it at all.
What does rc.1 do again? Is it rc.4 or rc.5 scripts that are run if going directly into graphical login, while the other one isn't run? When I have to write my own script to up into whatever rc.? directory, what structure must it have? etc.
Agreed: the SysV init style is a bit messy, and managing a linkfarm is not fun unless you're really really bored lol.
Quote:
And all that rpm mess. *shutter*
:whispers: yes, rpm is poop.
Quote:
That being said, I don't think that slackware has this problem. There are probably other distros that don't have this issue as well.
Slackware uses BSD-style init -yessir.
Quote:
But OpenBSD with rc.conf (common deamons here), rc.securelevel (run before kernel goes into secure mode), rc.local (run after kernel goes into secure mode) and rc.shutdown (duh!). And that's it.
The docs even state, if in doubt, put it in rc.local.
Also, if you're addicted to the rc.? stuff, then you could just write your own sh scripts to implement it for OBSD. I've seen some people do this, though I have no idea why they would want to do that to there system.
Nor would I -but people reading this thread aren't going to be worried by their init-style :P Once again, you and I have managed to swing a thread out of userland and into kernelspace hehe.
Quote:
FreeBSD can have a similar setup, though it is angling toward a similar rc.d init. FreeBSD could be described as the end-user BSD whereas OpenBSD is more of a server OS.
And both these guys have the wonders of the ports tree. *warm fuzzy feeling*
End disclaimer.
So, Tiger, if you are looking into Linux, I'd suggest that you also look into FreeBSD as well. It has a tonne of applications and if that app is in the ports tree, installing it is as easy as 'make install'.
MythTV has also been reported to work on FreeBSD.
http://mythtv.son.org/tiki-index.php
And your PVR-250 is listed as a card that works.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
PROBLEM SOLVED!
Glad to hear problem solved
Quote:
Bottom line, because Linux Fedora Core 1 cannot find the on-board sound for some Dell computers, one cannot simply install Linux and have everything work perfectly. One must be prepared to diddle with the box at length.
Mmmmm...diddling ;]
Just so you know, Fedora is on Core5 at this time...bet you a fruity oaty bar that bug is long dead.
Quote:
So, I say, use Windows XP with glee, I say.
Is that really possible?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Another fact, is that she was put in front of a OSX machine and told to play. She figured things out in 5-10 mins and was quite happy with it. This didn't happen when she tried to use windows at the begining of the year. She asked for a Linux machine to be set up for her.
She have a sister?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Some screenshots of the new Windows Vista beta build have leaked. Looks like MS is doing what they've always done best-- steal other guys' ideas 
http://www.win-vista.net/modules.php?set_albumName=Vista5342&op=modloa
d&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_album.php
"Gadgets"... Multiple desktops... wow, never seen any of this before... 
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Argh! I been misconstrued....!
OSX is a real OS. Don't need it 'cuz Linux is a real OS too and I already got it working great for me. So no need for OSX here.
I thought that it was probably something along those lines. Just had to be
and point out the wording 
tee hee
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
That's certainly true. But, IMO Linux is going to be an easier transition to *nix for a Windows user.
If you include the install as part of the transition, then I certainly will agree
Jebus, when I installed OBSD 3.8 on my mini I had to put the install packages on one of my servers for http download, and calculate the offsets and sizes myself. Clearly something didn't detect properly
I could work around it, but I certainly wouldn't expect the typical user to.
But, I think I should point out (though I probably should have done this a while ago) that one of my assumptions is that the box is already setup for the user. People tend not to want to try new things unless they have people there to set it up for them and show them things.
So, from an end-user perspective, if either a Linux or *BSD is just sitting there waiting to be used, I'd imagine that they are about the same difficulty. Depending on distro of course (OBSD not exactly the end-user OS).
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
I can appreciate either approach depending on the intended useage of the platform(s) in question.
Can't disagree with that
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Again, IMO, the "Good Enough" of Linux is still such a damned sight better than anything Microsoft can offer so I feel good about pimpin' it.
Again, I agree
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
I can't pimp OSX since I honestly don't know how to admin it.
Next time you're around a computer store that sells Apple, go in and play for 5 mins. Then you'll be able too
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
I just think for the purpose of this thread our Windows-using Browncoats will have an easier time learning Linux -I may well be wrong!They'd definately have an easier time learning OSX.
If they are doing everything themselves, then OSX then Linux would be my guess as well
They should also probably stay away from the *BSD's unless they are of the techie persuasion Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Nor would I -but people reading this thread aren't going to be worried by their init-style :P Once again, you and I have managed to swing a thread out of userland and into kernelspace hehe.
Well I disagree! I think that everybody should be worried about there init-style
Seriously though, when considering an OS, if people might be expected to tweak, it should be considered just how easy it is to tweak. That being said, there are friends, mailing lists, news groups, etc etc etc to get help from. So, if it's just one or two things, then no worries.
I was also just giving some examples of things that irritated me about a distro of Linux, because I didn't just want to make a statement without support. Even if it is just an opinion.
But, there probably are people out there that think that that init-style is the cat's meow.
Don't know if I'd want to meet any of them though
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Yes again -all the BSD's have excellent documentation. Maybe it would be just as easy for Windows converts to pick up *BSD after all. OSX even easier! I just been into the Linux thing so long, that I know it a lot better. *sigh* s'what I get for being such a tweaker;]
If we all support the OS that we like, admitting all the pros and cons, then all we are doing is giving people options and enough info to decide what's best for there particular situati
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
She have a sister?
I showed her this post. She seems quite happy about it. I think you just made her day
But no, no sister.
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
PROBLEM SOLVED!
Excellent
Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
I don't do any gaming whatsoever. I just don't want to spend any more time mussing with the box than I have to.
Though I agree that setting a Linux box up can take quite some time, IMO, it is worth it.
For instance, Xander is running OpenBSD 3.7 and has a current uptime of 210 days and Andrew is running OpenBSD 3.5 and has an uptime of 211 days.
Basically, once you set it up, it's just setup, and it will just run. With windows, in my experience, though it is setup quickly in the begining, it's constant maintenance, in the long run, will require far more time that a Linux/*BSD box. Not to mention the fact that I've yet to see a windows box that can run for a week under any kind of load (even if it's just one constant process).
Just tossing that out there.
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by retrovertigo:
Some screenshots of the new Windows Vista beta build have leaked. Looks like MS is doing what they've always done best-- steal other guys' ideas
http://www.win-vista.net/modules.php?set_albumName=Vista5342&op=modloa
d&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_album.php
Pfft, stealing from a thief doesn't really count. (If you're referring to PARC here)
Looks like someone at Vista had their eyes on Looking Glass, to me. Perhaps it's just my imagination.
"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME