Anybody here use Linux?

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 18:28:03 -0700, "ray hartman"
wrote:


I use win2k almost exclusively, mostly because it's what I got my
hands on(free) I also have 98se that I run on some machines.
Don't like Bill either but have geek friends who use both linux and
unix and they spend all their time on source code and kernels just to
try and get windows based software to run on their OS's.
what's that advantage in that?
I'm looking at the prospect of having to switch over to an open source
os for my computing needs and am not looking forward to it.(I do
video/film editing and am going to have to build a cluster farm to try
and get a bit more crunch power for rendering.)
What is everyone's take on unix? I looked at a server farm the other
day running unix and it ran at near gflop speed.
when clustering started back about a decade ago it was done on NT
systems, later win2kpro systems could manage small clusters, but I
can't find anyone who'd be willing to help me get one started using
win2k. $$$$ at play.
Anyone here have any experience setting up clusters on windows early
operating systems?


On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 18:49:32 +0000, GlueGum wrote:

If I ask this question at a Linux ng, they'll say XP sucks. If I ask at an
XP ng, they'll say Linux sucks.

From what I've read Mandrake is the best for desktop apps and for newbies
(like me). I've been using windows since 3.11(currently XP home) and was
wondering if anybody here uses Linux, and how does it compare to XP?

BigGG:

Any *nix is sure a PITA. Figure on 2-3 years climbing the learning curve,
and then you will still know nothing ( but will demonstrate many amuzing
byteboyz_type skills ). You will NOT be a better person. Sound like a waste of time?

Sure would be, except for M$$oft gropy paws trying to own yer
azzwhole. Hollyweird & the Feds, too ... same folks, actually, but you
know that.
SOOOOOO. How else -- beside *nix -- ta bi*chslap Unkil Bill$$ and teach
him manners?

Give Linux 3 to 7 more years and it'll be stealing away marketshare from
Windows on the consumer end. It's already making leaps and bounds on the
corporate/government end. It just needs some more development time in the
application area to really do damage to Windows' marketshare.

Any specific questions I'd gladly answer...



No, what linux needs to be successful is for most businesses to stop using
Word and Excel and switch to something compatible with linux that is
specificially INcompatible with anything that Microsoft ever published. As
long as most businesses are using version X of something published by
microsoft that is incompatible with ALL OTHER VERSIONS of the same software
published by Microsoft, there will never be a viable linux solution that
will appeal to the masses, who often want to use the same apps. at home that
they do at work.

I personally think Microsoft is deliberately making new versions of Word
(for example) incompatible with old Word formats just to slow down the
conversion to linux. I mean, for example, it would be trivial to code a
powerful word processor that runs on linux and is compatible with Word, but
WHAT VERSION of word??? It's that leave 'em guessing factor that is hurting
linux.

Businesses need to wake up and say FU to microsoft, ditch ALL applications
that are even remotely compatible with microsoft (whether published by
microsoft or not) and switch to something else that only runs on linux. At
that point, there will be lots of individual consumers switching to linux,
and market pressure will force game publishers to port to linux. Get the
office apps. and games over to linux, and the market will explode.

But it's got to start with office apps. Find a linux ONLY solution that
will appeal to all current users of all versions of Word and Excel, and
convince most businesses to adopt it. At that point, sell any stock you own
in Microsoft, as it will retain as much value as confederate money
oon. -Dave

BigN::

A bit of story-telling here, eh pad're? But experienced Linux lusrs know
better. So to tell the truth:

1) Only byteboyz can get free *nix versions to run. Everybody else pays
for a lusr-friendly distro.

Actually, the last time I installed linux, it was easier to install than xp
pro. Not to say that xp pro is hard to install. They are both pretty easy.
I'm hardly a byteboy. I repair computers for a living, but have no
professional unix experience. -Dave

"Anon" ) writes:

Give Linux 3 to 7 more years and it'll be stealing away marketshare from
Windows on the consumer end. It's already making leaps and bounds on the
corporate/government end. It just needs some more development time in the
application area to really do damage to Windows' marketshare.

Any specific questions I'd gladly answer...



No, what linux needs to be successful is for most businesses to stop using
Word and Excel and switch to something compatible with linux that is
specificially INcompatible with anything that Microsoft ever published. As
long as most businesses are using version X of something published by
microsoft that is incompatible with ALL OTHER VERSIONS of the same software
published by Microsoft, there will never be a viable linux solution that
will appeal to the masses, who often want to use the same apps. at home that
they do at work.

I personally think Microsoft is deliberately making new versions of Word
(for example) incompatible with old Word formats just to slow down the
conversion to linux. I mean, for example, it would be trivial to code a
powerful word processor that runs on linux and is compatible with Word, but
WHAT VERSION of word??? It's that leave 'em guessing factor that is hurting
linux.

I don't think it's because of Linux. I have some older versions of Word
for the Macintosh, and none of them were useful to open Word documents
from more recent versions (or maybe it was because they weren't from
a Mac version). It is absurd.

I got a hand me down at Christmas, and Windows was gone in a flash.
I had to get a more recent version of the Linux distribution I
was using because of newer hardware, and it came with Abiword.
It opens the Word docs that I had laying around with no problem.
I have mixed feelings about this. Now I have a way of reading
these documents that people send me with the assumption that I
can read them (well, I could read them, but had to wade
through plenty of junk to see the handful of relevant words,
and had no idea of their original layout intent). But, now I
don't have an excuse to tell them they should not be sending
me Word documents. So Abiword (and I gather openoffice) make it
easier for those of us who don't run Microsoft sofware, but it
does nothing to break the dependency on Microsoft standards.

Michael

GlueGum wrote:

If I ask this question at a Linux ng, they'll say XP sucks. If I ask at
an XP ng, they'll say Linux sucks.

From what I've read Mandrake is the best for desktop apps and for newbies
(like me).

Yep, been using linux for about 5 years. I'd suggest mandrake 9.1 NOT 9.2.
9.2 is too flakey... Or try knopix, you run it from a CD.
--

Stacey

on Sat January 24 2004 10:28 pm, Anon decided to enlighten us with:

No, what linux needs to be successful is for most businesses to stop using
Word and Excel and switch to something compatible with linux that is
specificially INcompatible with anything that Microsoft ever published.
As long as most businesses are using version X of something published by
microsoft that is incompatible with ALL OTHER VERSIONS of the same
software published by Microsoft, there will never be a viable linux
solution that will appeal to the masses, who often want to use the same
apps. at home that they do at work.

Well, I would think that any business that doesn't use Office 2003 should
easily be able to migrate to StarOffice or OpenOffice for most tasks. As a
matter of fact, they can just easily ween themselves off Office by
switching to either of Sun's office suites on the Windows side before the
migration to Linux ever begins.

In my opinion, getting businesses to shift to Linux is more like taking a
toddler off the bottle. If it's there, the toddler will suck on the bottle.
Microsoft is familiar and not easy to leave behind for companies that have
relied so heavily on it.



--
Big Daddy Ruel Smith

My SuSE Linux machine uptime:
9:24am up 48 days 18:09, 2 users, load average: 1.18, 0.49, 0.19

My Windows XP machine uptime:
Something less...

on Sat January 24 2004 10:03 pm, JAD decided to enlighten us with:

Not to mention you don't get to put that state_ o_ the_ art vidcard
in either...

Why not? If it's nVidia, usually even the most recent cards will work. Ati
is a little behind on their drivers, but as Linux's popularity grows, so to
will Ati's commitment to it and the driver's will be better supported.



--
Big Daddy Ruel Smith

My SuSE Linux machine uptime:
9:33am up 48 days 18:19, 2 users, load average: 0.24, 0.74, 0.50

My Windows XP machine uptime:
Something less...

on Sat January 24 2004 8:49 pm, ray hartman decided to enlighten us with:

1) Only byteboyz can get free *nix versions to run. Everybody else pays
for a lusr-friendly distro.

You obviously have never installed a free version of Mandrake from their
ISO's, have you? The SuSE FTP install is a little more of a pain, due to
the whole mess of doing an FTP install, but it installs pretty easily too.

2) only uber_byteboyz can read_with_comprehension the *nix source-code.

Never read the source code and never have needed to.


3) *nix is byteboyz-driven, not community(lusr) driven. Thus TUX often
takes the shape of a dweebish electro-mechanic blo-up dolly.

Similar to your current girlfriend, huh?

So do NOT fool yourself. In most ways that count, *nix is even more
"closed" than M$$oft OSs. At best, a casual lusr would hope to balance
the infectious, brainrotting, corrupting, $$lime_ball M$$oft worm against
a wild, strutting, jack-booted penguin. May they eat eachother ....

My Linux OS and every application I have cost me $79. Compare that to what
you have invested in Windows. Hell, my Windows XP Pro cost me $299 when I
bought it. I could have installed the free version with a little more work
and had the very same system. However, I purchase my distros because I
support those that bring Linux to me.

How long has it been since you rebooted Windows? Check out my signature. I'm
on 48 days and counting since rebooting this machine. The distro was
installed and configured 48 days ago and not a single reboot since. Never
needed a defrag. I have 3D video up and running on an nVidia GeForce FX
card. I have 4.1 channel sound on a Soundblaster Live! card. I'm connected
via ADSL. I burn CD's. I watch DVD's. My printer works flawlessly.
Everything works correctly without so much as a hiccup. Can you claim the
same thing? I had to reboot my Windows machine just the other day...

Let's not even get into internet security... )



--
Big Daddy Ruel Smith

My SuSE Linux machine uptime:
9:36am up 48 days 18:22, 2 users, load average: 0.21, 0.49, 0.44

My Windows XP machine uptime:
Something less...

on Sat January 24 2004 8:28 pm, ray hartman decided to enlighten us with:


Any *nix is sure a PITA. Figure on 2-3 years climbing the learning curve,


6 months tops to get around just fine. Hey, what can I say? It's a
completely different OS, just like buying a Macintosh, and it just doesn't
work like Windows (thank god!). You have to learn most things from scratch.
It's like learning to use a computer all over again. But, that's the price
you pay.



--
Big Daddy Ruel Smith

My SuSE Linux machine uptime:
9:47am up 48 days 18:33, 2 users, load average: 0.27, 0.24, 0.29

My Windows XP machine uptime:
Something less...

I got a hand me down at Christmas, and Windows was gone in a flash.
I had to get a more recent version of the Linux distribution I
was using because of newer hardware, and it came with Abiword.
It opens the Word docs that I had laying around with no problem.
I have mixed feelings about this. Now I have a way of reading
these documents that people send me with the assumption that I
can read them (well, I could read them, but had to wade
through plenty of junk to see the handful of relevant words,
and had no idea of their original layout intent). But, now I
don't have an excuse to tell them they should not be sending
me Word documents. So Abiword (and I gather openoffice) make it
easier for those of us who don't run Microsoft sofware, but it
does nothing to break the dependency on Microsoft standards.

Michael


That's my point. There is no incentive for a programmer to tweak abiword or
any other linux app. to make it more Word-compatible, when fixing it for
Word version X will probably break it for Word version Y. If all versions
of Word would open AND SAVE documents in a compatible format, then abiword,
etc., could be tweaked to be compatible and we could all ditch Microsoft
completely. That's why I think it's deliberate on Microsoft's part. They
know that most businesses use Microsoft Office, and they (microsoft) know
that won't change until a viable linux alternative exists. That viable
linux alternative won't exist until all versions of Word are compatible WITH
EACH OTHER. Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.

As I stated before, businesses have to adopt office applications that run on
linux and ARE NOT compatible with Microsoft. At that point, Windows is
dead. -Dave