SillyDog701 • Changing OS from MS to Linux ??

by Al » Thu 30 Dec, 2004 2:40 pm

you know after your third and final warning you will be banned. I have never tried Linux before but I know I really prefer SuSE Linux for novice users. I like it due to it uses KDE as a default because it looks a lot like Windows. If you have used the Firefox theme Mostly Crystal you will be suprised that it looks at like that. root is very dangerous, that is what happened to Wellendar back when he was using Red Hat. Red Hat uses GNOME, I think it is too user unfriendly. (Please note that public message will be edited or deleted if necessary. We respect your opinion, however, we do not accept any abusive behaviours.)

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041108 Firefox/1.0

by **DJGM** » Thu 30 Dec, 2004 3:27 pm

Al wrote:you know after your third and final warning you will be banned.

Al,
Only forum moderators (such as myself) and admin (Antony) can issue such warnings against
other forum members. Since when did Antony appoint you as a SillyDog701 forum moderator?

As for Linux desktop environments, both SUSE and Mandrake have KDE as the default, but
they can easily be changed at anytime to use another desktop environment like GNOME.
In contrast, RedHat and Fedora both use GNOME as the default desktop environment,
but they can also be changed at anytime to any other one, such as KDE.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 - DJGM.co.uk (ax)

by **Mandrake** » Thu 30 Dec, 2004 6:16 pm

Al wrote:you know after your third and final warning you will be banned. I have never tried Linux before but I know I really prefer SuSE Linux for novice users. I like it due to it uses KDE as a default because it looks a lot like Windows. If you have used the Firefox theme Mostly Crystal you will be suprised that it looks at like that. root is very dangerous, that is what happened to Wellendar back when he was using Red Hat. Red Hat uses GNOME, I think it is too user unfriendly. (Please note that public message will be edited or deleted if necessary. We respect your opinion, however, we do not accept any abusive behaviours.)

Before you go trying to warn other members perhaps you should learn to type in compelete sentences with punctuation :!:

I, personally, have never used Linspire, but I've tried Fedora, Mandrake and SuSE. SuSE is the only distro that works out of the box with my Netgear Wi-Fi card, so using it over the others is a no-brainer.

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)

by **DJGM** » Thu 30 Dec, 2004 10:00 pm

izanbardprince wrote:It doesn't do that anymore.

It doesn't do what anymore? Please elaborate . . .

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6 (Compatible with Netscape/7.2)) Gecko/20041027 Debian/1.6-5.1.0.45.lindows0.69

by **Thetargos** » Fri 31 Dec, 2004 1:10 am

AI wrote:you know after your third and final warning you will be banned

Was that targgeted to me?

Yes, you have exposed one of the main reasons for people NOT to use Linux and (IMO) the biggest of its problems: Hardware support. This is a complex and passionate issue on its own, which I won't go into much detail here. Suffice to say that HW manufacturers have to start to realize there are other operating systems than Microsoft's (it's even hard enough to find Mac-friendly mainstream consumer hardware that will work for both mainstream OSs, happily the compatibility list is increasing towards Mac). Anyway, the way I see it, is that manufacturers (core component developers) should take into account Linux when they release whitepapers and specs to their contractors (the final product assemblers) so they could [also] provide Linux drivers.

However in this approach there's still another downside: Distribution/Kernel-specific compatibility. Let us face it, while mainstream Linux distributions are just a handful, they don't even remotely represent the totality of distributions, kernel versions and flavors of Linux there are... It is just a too chaotic and wild environment out there!! However, they can resort to use a mechanism similar to the nVidia Linux driver installer, so they wouldn't be tied to any particular distro/kernel (even though they may supply prepacakged-prebuilt-binaries and only build the drivers if your kenrel is not supported). I think that what still scares too many of the hardware manufacturers is the fact that they will be operating in an open environment, and their products will be using proprietary algorithms, API's and techniques to get the products to work right, which usually means, they are closed, they are protecting their IP.

Against Linux is an aura of myths that many have perpetuated, amongst them is the widely spread one that every Linux user is an experienced computer hacker (I use term here as it should, as synonim for tweaking programmer) that could easily do reverse engineering to a driver/software component to then either incorporate it or use it as a base for another software project/product... The truth is that in the growing community of Linux users those kinds of users are an endagered species, actually. As more people use the system, it is far more common to find equivalent users to Windows' power users or hardcore users; who know a lot of tricks and secrets of the OS, but are not necesarily programmers or hackers (in this case I use the term lightly, reffering to the [wrong] term of cracker, or a person that uses a computer to gain access to other computers on the Internet, to potentially do harm). Obviously companies don't want that... However that has more to do with comercial software solutions than hardware components, though companies may feel this market to be risky and that it also means more money invested in a product than what they may have originally expected, since they should (at least at first) train their personnel or hire trained personnel, plus they might not consider the Linux user as a viable (or rentable) market [ATi, anyone?]. To add yet another level of complexity to this mixture, is the common misunderstanding of the phrase Open Source... especially towards Linux.

Far too many people think that in order to have any product, it has to be Open Sourced or have at least a GPL'ed license. That's plain untrue. You can have as much comercial software (device drivers or otherwise) as you want in a Linux system and you will not violate any license, as long as you as a developer know what would be considered exclusive in the GPL, for instance (like you can't have any GPL'ed program that links to any non-GPL library, otherwise you will be requiring a proprietary library to run your program. Of course restrictions apply even in this scenario). The fear is to have the source open and viewable for anyone. This should not necesarily be the case, since there is no such restriction that you cannot use comercial, proprietary software under Linux. In any case, the responsibility for better and improved hardware support should not only rely on the Kernel developers or a bunch of Open Source developers who try their best to get A or B device working under Linux. The companies that produce such hardware should be the ones that in the end either supply enough documentation for their products (so the community could develop drivers) or directly develop their own drivers (ATi, nVidia, Linuxant, etc)... I told you this was a complex issue, dressed with all sorts of economic and legal aspects, plus the cost/profit ratio, etc.

My 2Â¢

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041111 Firefox/1.0

by Al » Fri 31 Dec, 2004 1:27 am

Thetargos wrote:
AI wrote:you know after your third and final warning you will be banned

Was that targgeted to me?

That was to the guy with 2 warnings....

and my name is not Ai it's Al...

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041108 Firefox/1.0

by **Thetargos** » Fri 31 Dec, 2004 1:31 am

Oh, Ok. (didn't see a guy with two warnings...)

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041111 Firefox/1.0

by **izanbardprince** » Fri 31 Dec, 2004 9:17 am

DJGM wrote:
izanbardprince wrote:It doesn't do that anymore.

It doesn't do what anymore? Please elaborate . . .

http://opensource.weblogsinc.com/entry/ ... 020024535/

"Linspire got a lot of negative press when it first came out - it encouraged users to run as root, among other boneheaded moves - but itâ€™s definitely gotten a lot better over time..."

It doesn't set you up as Root by default anymore.

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)

by **izanbardprince** » Fri 31 Dec, 2004 9:18 am

Thetargos wrote:Oh, Ok. (didn't see a guy with two warnings...)

That would be me, and I think his tone is fairly belligerant.

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)

by **DJGM** » Fri 31 Dec, 2004 12:59 pm

izanbardprince wrote:
DJGM wrote:
izanbardprince wrote:It doesn't do that anymore.

It doesn't do what anymore? Please elaborate . . .

http://opensource.weblogsinc.com/entry/ ... 020024535/

"Linspire got a lot of negative press when it first came out - it encouraged users to run as
root, among other boneheaded moves - but itâ€™s definitely gotten a lot better over time..."

It doesn't set you up as Root by default anymore.

Well, I've downloaded and installed the very latest version of Linspire on my testbed PC, and guess what?

Linspire was still boneheaded to have me "run as root" by default, and there were still no options
whatsoever on the Linspire installation program to enable me to create a standard user account.

So, I suggest you do a bit more research in future (like actually installing Linspire on a secondary
machine) and get your facts right, before you post misleading info on an internet message board.

And if you think I've got those screengrabs from elsewhere and modified them, check my UA . . .

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6 (Compatible with Netscape/7.2)) Gecko/20041027 Debian/1.6-5.1.0.45.lindows0.69

by **Antony** » Fri 31 Dec, 2004 2:32 pm

Thetargos wrote:Oh, Ok. (didn't see a guy with two warnings...)

izanbardprince was warned firstly in [sdp=49936]his unacceptable tone in post[/sdp], and again in [sdp=49946]his non-contributive, but bad intention post[/sdp] (simply ranting).

izanbardprince wrote:That would be me, and I think his tone is fairly belligerant.

Who's tone?

We do welcome all opinions, and welcome good debates.
Argumentative? You'd better come out with fact to back you up.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/125.5.5 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/125.12

Changing OS from MS to Linux ??

Who is online