Help
My first poll *LOL*
I prefer the new Linux Mandrake 8.0 distro
Anyone here use Linux as 2nd OS?
#2
clutch 
- Carpal Tunnel
-
- Group: Moderators
- Posts: 3859
- Joined: 29-March 00
Posted 21 April 2001 - 03:41 AM
The poll is cool. I was using Linux on another box in the past (Redhat 6/7, Mandrake 6/7, Storm 2000) but I just never really got into it. It's great as a utility server for hosting small things and for remote admin of a network. But the Win2K came with Terminal Services, and I lost the need and desire to fiddle with Linux anymore.
#3
Brian Frank
- Carpal Tunnel
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3088
- Joined: 21-January 01
Posted 21 April 2001 - 07:40 AM
Sometimes I use Mandrake on my test machine, but right now its not on. Im holding out for Mandrake 8.0 so I can buy it, but Im also looking at SuSe 7.1 pro as thats the only distro Ive seen around town in a long time.
Id really like to see Linux suceed, but there has to be major work on it before I can really see it being a true contender for Windows.
In the server arena, yes, but if its really gonna go places, it needs to be a home desktop OS alternative to the Mac OS and Windows.
Linux is a good OS, but Ive found it much easier to setup hardware under Windows. Plus, Windows is a tad simpler for me, and I consider myself learned in computers, not an expert mind you, but Ive had more experience than the average joe, and I just dont see Linux as a really strong contender for home pc's yet.
Ive yet to experience the 2.4 kernel, but I think that is a major step in the right direction for it with the much needed USB support.
I personally think the biggest problem with Linux is that most manufacturers dont provide Linux drivers, and those that do dont provide support for them. If more manufacturers, ie. nVidia, put out drivers at the very least, that will be another major step forward.
But the biggest obstacle, as Ive stated before, is the ease of use. I would never setup some newbie with Linux in its current state, because Windows, and even the MacOS are more average user oriented.
Love Linux, hate to configure it. Right now, its a hobby OS for the most part.
Id really like to see Linux suceed, but there has to be major work on it before I can really see it being a true contender for Windows.
In the server arena, yes, but if its really gonna go places, it needs to be a home desktop OS alternative to the Mac OS and Windows.
Linux is a good OS, but Ive found it much easier to setup hardware under Windows. Plus, Windows is a tad simpler for me, and I consider myself learned in computers, not an expert mind you, but Ive had more experience than the average joe, and I just dont see Linux as a really strong contender for home pc's yet.
Ive yet to experience the 2.4 kernel, but I think that is a major step in the right direction for it with the much needed USB support.
I personally think the biggest problem with Linux is that most manufacturers dont provide Linux drivers, and those that do dont provide support for them. If more manufacturers, ie. nVidia, put out drivers at the very least, that will be another major step forward.
But the biggest obstacle, as Ive stated before, is the ease of use. I would never setup some newbie with Linux in its current state, because Windows, and even the MacOS are more average user oriented.
Love Linux, hate to configure it. Right now, its a hobby OS for the most part.
#4
INFERNO2000
- old hand
- Group: Members
- Posts: 995
- Joined: 12-May 00
Posted 21 April 2001 - 09:22 PM
by 2nd os, I mean 2nd computer.
I don't do dualboots.
I don't do dualboots.
#5
Down8
- addict
- Group: Members
- Posts: 657
- Joined: 31-July 00
Posted 22 April 2001 - 12:53 AM
I also don't 'do' dual-boots - unless on maybe a second, removable harddrive.
But, I've tried to get Mandrake, Red Hat, and even Corel installed on my 486DX/66 to play with repeatedly to no avail. I think it just doesn't have the power to run the bloated thing that Linux has become. Even when I tried to put Red Hat on my main computer, it had huge problems with the video refresh [and it's not like I've got a GF3, StealthIII S540 is an old enough card].
Because of this, I plan on using SuSE for my next test run, b/c it supposedly has the largest amount of drivers of any distro.
If I can't get it installed easily, I'll probably just wait until I get some extra cash and pick up one of those happy new SunBlade100s and use Solaris for my *nix experience.
-bZj
But, I've tried to get Mandrake, Red Hat, and even Corel installed on my 486DX/66 to play with repeatedly to no avail. I think it just doesn't have the power to run the bloated thing that Linux has become. Even when I tried to put Red Hat on my main computer, it had huge problems with the video refresh [and it's not like I've got a GF3, StealthIII S540 is an old enough card].
Because of this, I plan on using SuSE for my next test run, b/c it supposedly has the largest amount of drivers of any distro.
If I can't get it installed easily, I'll probably just wait until I get some extra cash and pick up one of those happy new SunBlade100s and use Solaris for my *nix experience.
-bZj
#6
Brian Frank
- Carpal Tunnel
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3088
- Joined: 21-January 01
Posted 22 April 2001 - 02:20 AM
I had run Mandrake on its own for a while, but I couldnt network the thing and it was just my test system.
But I do look forward to running Linux in the future. I know Im severely incompetant in that arena, but its fun to mess around with. Im sure I'll have a real blast once I know what the hell Im doing.:D
Im looking at SuSe, but Im still waiting for now.
But I do look forward to running Linux in the future. I know Im severely incompetant in that arena, but its fun to mess around with. Im sure I'll have a real blast once I know what the hell Im doing.:D
Im looking at SuSe, but Im still waiting for now.
#7 Guest__*
Posted 26 April 2001 - 02:22 AM
I was running Red Hat 7.0 for a while, and when I couldn't figure out how to do something like change the screen resolution, I got frustrated and formatted.
Tried to get into LinuxConf, but the commands must have changed since Red Hat 6.0. I just didnt see the point of spending so much time to try to figure out all the real basics, when I could be accomplishing so much more with Windows.
If anybody here is a junkie, icq me or something.. i would like to get some clear guidance as to some basic things...
Tried to get into LinuxConf, but the commands must have changed since Red Hat 6.0. I just didnt see the point of spending so much time to try to figure out all the real basics, when I could be accomplishing so much more with Windows.
If anybody here is a junkie, icq me or something.. i would like to get some clear guidance as to some basic things...
#10
TheWhiteRabbit
- stranger
- Group: Members
- Posts: 8
- Joined: 10-May 01
Posted 12 May 2001 - 07:53 PM
I used SuSE Linux for a while, but I got really pissed of configuring it, and I hated the surfaces... so I went to the shop and got myself Win2k ... now I'm happy with my single-boot 
#11
felix
- addict
- Group: Members
- Posts: 691
- Joined: 28-October 99
Posted 20 May 2001 - 05:58 AM
Just finished installing Mandrake 8.0 and I think it's quite good.
It even had my TV Tuner working first time. The only problem I had was with my second network card as it doesn't use DHCP and it had issues on the first boot.
I also am a big fan of the boot loader screen.
It even had my TV Tuner working first time. The only problem I had was with my second network card as it doesn't use DHCP and it had issues on the first boot.
I also am a big fan of the boot loader screen.
#12
Brian Frank
- Carpal Tunnel
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3088
- Joined: 21-January 01
Posted 20 May 2001 - 07:36 AM
Mandrake 8 good for games now? If not, Im looking into SuSe seriously, because Id like to get a head start on moving away from MS OS's if they start trying to tell me when I have to upgrade my system.
Plus, I like the Mandrake install.
MS has plans for computer world domination!.
Plus, I like the Mandrake install.
MS has plans for computer world domination!.
#14
CM
- addict
- Group: Members
- Posts: 440
- Joined: 28-July 99
Posted 21 May 2001 - 02:02 AM
Quote:
Mandrake 8 good for games now?
For Windows games? Try http://www.codeweavers.com/technology/wine
Here a nice linux game (not on the 2 CD Version of Mandrake 8): Tuxedo T. Penguin: A Quest For Herring Funny
Want more linux games? Try http://www.tuxgames.com
#16
shassouneh
- addict
- Group: Members
- Posts: 672
- Joined: 01-July 01
Posted 04 March 2002 - 12:46 PM
SuSE Linux Professional 7.3 All the way!!!
Its GRRRRRREAT, lots of manuals, lots of software, built in features to make add/remove software and hardware easier, built in features to update the OS online, built in features to recover from system errors! for example, u can boot linux (if u have hard drive trouble) from within Linux setup!!!
SUSE ALL THE WAY! REDHAT SUX! MANDRAKE IS OK!
PS: I voted for SuSE above!
Its GRRRRRREAT, lots of manuals, lots of software, built in features to make add/remove software and hardware easier, built in features to update the OS online, built in features to recover from system errors! for example, u can boot linux (if u have hard drive trouble) from within Linux setup!!!
SUSE ALL THE WAY! REDHAT SUX! MANDRAKE IS OK!
PS: I voted for SuSE above!
#17
sapiens74
- Pooh-Bah
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1915
- Joined: 30-March 00
Posted 04 March 2002 - 04:29 PM
Linux was cool during the days of DOS and WIndows 3.11. SOmething to play with, had a command prompt like DOS.
Linux tho was never meant for the desktop. It was meant to be a server OS form the start.
IT will never be a viable alternative to Windows unless the Linux gurus realize how to market it. And we all know the only true geeks to ever market anything are Jobs and Gates. Most of us computer guys just arent great with people.
And with names like 2.4.13 and the like Linux can only be understood by true linux junkies. Intel learned thast using names was better then numbers, Hell why you think we have DNS?
ANyway I like using Linux for servers tho. But only under thew conditions that warrant it, like propietary systems or something. Other then that Linux sucks
Linux tho was never meant for the desktop. It was meant to be a server OS form the start.
IT will never be a viable alternative to Windows unless the Linux gurus realize how to market it. And we all know the only true geeks to ever market anything are Jobs and Gates. Most of us computer guys just arent great with people.
And with names like 2.4.13 and the like Linux can only be understood by true linux junkies. Intel learned thast using names was better then numbers, Hell why you think we have DNS?
ANyway I like using Linux for servers tho. But only under thew conditions that warrant it, like propietary systems or something. Other then that Linux sucks
#18
bobbinbrisco
- enthusiast
- Group: Members
- Posts: 366
- Joined: 30-July 00
Posted 09 March 2002 - 09:47 AM
installing linux as a dual boot is one of the first big steps into using linux. it took me a couple of months to prepare myself for the plunge.
after installing it (i tried countless times) my next step was to network my computers together: connecting a linux box and a windoze box together. although i eventually figured it out (took me a couple weeks of research and trial and error), i have learnt that linux can be a very powerful resource.
i do agree on everyone that there's not enough companies supporting it, (esp canon ) thats y i've stop using linux- i cant do anywork on it since my printer and scanner doesnt work on the OS (yes their both canon's).
what ppl should do is this: newbies learning to use a computer should start out using linux, it will be a hard learning curve. but remember, at some stage ALL of us had to learn how to use windows (dont forget how hard it was). - it's the same thing but with linux.
btw i used redhat 7.0
after installing it (i tried countless times) my next step was to network my computers together: connecting a linux box and a windoze box together. although i eventually figured it out (took me a couple weeks of research and trial and error), i have learnt that linux can be a very powerful resource.
i do agree on everyone that there's not enough companies supporting it, (esp canon
) thats y i've stop using linux- i cant do anywork on it since my printer and scanner doesnt work on the OS (yes their both canon's).what ppl should do is this: newbies learning to use a computer should start out using linux, it will be a hard learning curve. but remember, at some stage ALL of us had to learn how to use windows (dont forget how hard it was). - it's the same thing but with linux.
btw i used redhat 7.0
#19
sapiens74
- Pooh-Bah
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1915
- Joined: 30-March 00
Posted 09 March 2002 - 11:10 AM
Kids now get to use a MAc at school and most likely Windows at home.
THey do not need a third confusing OS that was never meant to see a desktop. Linux represents the stoneage in computers. No standard, non intuitive.
It's a good lesson in how far we've come if you want to see where things used to be.
THey do not need a third confusing OS that was never meant to see a desktop. Linux represents the stoneage in computers. No standard, non intuitive.
It's a good lesson in how far we've come if you want to see where things used to be.
#20
bobbinbrisco
- enthusiast
- Group: Members
- Posts: 366
- Joined: 30-July 00
Posted 10 March 2002 - 10:39 AM
i just believe that children and teenagers at high school should not be exposed to microsoft products (esp windows) their whole time at school. they already have it at home, y not try something else at school? they will be learning how to use different OSes and to use different programs that can do the same job as if it was on windows.
the experience is well worth it.
the experience is well worth it.
