PlaneShift
Fan Area => The Hydlaa Plaza => Topic started by: Induane on July 07, 2005, 12:46:12 am
-
1.) Choice. I shop for linux distro\'s like shopping for a car, I can find one tailored to my needs instead of overgeneralized.
2.) Freedom. I can do more, more easily with linux, and I have the freedom to use the software in any way I like.
3.) I rarely have to sign any EULA\'s
4.) The EULA\'s I do have to agree to are designed to protect my rights, not the rights of a large company.
5.) Power. Power. I can do all sorts of interesting things: ala:
(http://www.geocities.com/brantwatson2002/multitasking.png)
(http://www.geocities.com/brantwatson2002/MT1.png)
(http://www.geocities.com/brantwatson2002/Screenshot.png)
6.) Peace. I can freely use my linux distro without fear of viruses malware or spyware. I have no annoying messages in my system tray informing me of expired software, \'windows updates\", out of date virus protection, or even from programs I have no idea how they got there. I never reboot.
7.) Value, under linux I can run many open source programs whose windows equivilants cost tons of money.
Photoshop - The Gimp 2.2
3DSMax or Maya - Blender
Microsoft Office - OpenOffice
Dreamweaver - NVU
Visual Studio - EMACS
Easy CD Creator - K3B
+ Plus windows itself costs money. Sure it comes bundled with machines but you still pay for it.
I think OSX would be cool, but I can\'t afford a nice mac.
-
Amen. I also like the way it deals with hardware: It is much easier to build a device driver into the kernel than it is to struggle with installing a garbagey windows driver. And iwconfig is far easier to use than window\'s stupid wireless networking setup. OSX is cool, I have it on my janky $50 mac that I upgraded from a 233 mhz G3 to a 500 mhz G4, along with a few other upgrades. Still not linux, though.
-
/me thinks about trying linux...but from past experience thinks that Mac is crap...well, we\'ll see...
-
And mac is the coolest system...you can put it into code too...Shame about the price though, it is excessive at best
-
One of the things I have noticed with Macs is not that their software is bad but I think they have problems with inferior hardware - which is probily what is driving their shift to intel based machines.
I have a P4 1.8 Ghz with 256 ram - it is my crap machine. It runs SuSE Linux. I use wine to run iTunes with it. My friend Chris has a Mac with dual G5 processors and 512 ram. He has a 128 MB ATI card as well, my P4 only had a 32 meg Geforce2. Despite that I was using wine to run iTunes and he was running it natively with dual processors, I could still encode the same audio file much faster. My guess is that the IBM PPC line just couldn\'t keep up, and so they tried dual processors just to help things. They looked good in paper but lagged in performance. They even lost the edge that the macs used to have on video and graphics stuff. Too bad, as they always were leaps and bounds ahead of windows as far as interface.
-
..... *starts wanting it*
-
....give into the temptation
-
Why i dont like linux:
1) Driver support for everything is crap. Not the fault of the people who make linux, but i cant get half my stuff to work with it. My wireless card is not supported, and my ADSL modem is not supported either, so i cant get the internet. Which pretty much instantly rules linux out.
2) Even drivers that are supported are a pain in the ass to get working. I had to update my BIOS to get my screen drivers to work. Thank god i use a laptop and have a battery, theres no way in hell i would have updated my BIOS on my PC without a uniterruptable power supply.
3) Not optimal support for windows programs: i know its bad, but the majority of developers write stuff for windows, and so it works. Wine is ok if you can get it to work but it dosnt support everything.
4) Everything you download is in source code and you have to compile it yourself. Now, i program c++ so this isnt a huge problem but theres sometimes you just want to be able to download and run something without having to go through the friggen build process. Half the time when i download something i find all these other dependencies that i then need to download (and build again) and it turns getting anything to work into a major hassle.
5) The supposed fact that linux never crashes and is error free is bull. My windows XP almost never crashes (i think i\'ve had 3 blue screen of deaths in the past 18 months) and i have hardly any problems. Of course you get errors sometimes like explorer freezes here and then but i get errors like that on linux as well- often when im just browsing my harddrive and error will come up and the window will close.
6) The fact that linux is \'safer\' and less prone to viruses is only really relevant if you\'re an idiot who opens email attachments without thinking and downloads dodgy software using peer to peer or off russian websites. I have no anti virus software, no firewall (apart from the default windows one) and i havnt gotten a virus on this computer in 18 months. Of course i use firefox, if you use IE then you\'ll probablly get a virus in 10 mintues.
7) Its free? I paid what, $100 for my copy of windows. $100 isnt that much people, stop being so god damn cheap. $100 for not having to download 3 dependencies and compile them to get anything to work, or for not having to update my BIOS at 3am in the morning to get my screen to work, i think its a pretty good comprimise.
Those are my gripes about linux. I think i\'ve installed 8 different distros (red hat two different version, fendora, ubuntu, mandrake, others) and i\'m yet to find one i like. Primarily because none support my wireless card and thus i have no internet, and a computer without internet is pointless. Couldn\'t get NDisWrapper to compile either (its an app thats meant to use your windows drivers to run your wireless card on linux) so i havnt tried since.
-
actually my wireless card is not supported either, so I\'m using ndiswrapper and it works fine for me. dependencies aside, how hard is it to compile something?
./configure
make
make install
It\'s three lines of code. Sure, you have to wait a while, but you get a piece of software that is compiled on, and is therefore optimized for your machine. You can usually get binaries for linux, but why would you want to? Unless your hardware is really, really new, it is supported in linux, and is easier to get working via kernel config than by messing with a bunch of dumb windows drivers that just don\'t want to get installed. I don\'t know about the specifics of your hardware situation, but there is a whole linux community out there willing to help with almost any problem. Sure, it\'s a pain to get started, but it is a far more stable, more free OS. 3 blue screens of death in 18 months? I\'ve had . . . none! no crahses whatsoever. In many years as a linux user.
PS: In gentoo linux, you just type emerge program, and it downloads the source to the program as well as all of its dependencies, and builds them. Two words, dependencies handled.
-
./configure
make
make install
Lol thank you, i am already familiar with how to build an application. The big problem is
dependencies aside, how hard is it to compile something?
Dependencies are never aside. They are always there and always have to be figured. The actual compiling obviously isnt that hard.
PS: In gentoo linux, you just type emerge program, and it downloads the source to the program as well as all of its dependencies, and builds them. Two words, dependencies handled.
Well i havnt tried gentoo linux. Sounds brilliant. Red hat linux also sounded brilliant and easy to Dual Boot until i realised it couldn\'t resize partitions and so i had to mess around with partition magic to get it to work. Automatic driver configuration also sounded brilliant until i had to update by BIOS to get it to work. Hell, even windows sounds brilliant when you view their little presentation thingy. Im sure one day ill once again get pulled into my \"wow lets see if i can finally get linux to work properly\" phase, and ill try gentoo and see if is that simple. Lets hope so.
3 blue screens of death in 18 months? I\'ve had . . . none! no crahses whatsoever. In many years as a linux user.
Gee, so in all your years of linus you havnt had a single error. Not even one. In what 4 years of computing you have never witness a dialog box with the error symbol come up? I find that hard to believe. I had 5 in the first few days of trying linux. That not many- but i get hardly any on windows either. On the whole, i dont get anywhere near enough errors to base my choice of OS on them.
-
Would you please stop complaining about compiling things under Linux is hard - it\'s even harder under Windows, just the step of getting hold of the source is way too hard, and then you need to buy the correct compiler and so on...
Which is of course why most people just download the binary installer under Windows, just like under Linux.
As for lack of hardware support - I bought a machine for running Linux, and everything works. You bought a machine \"built for Windows XP\", and everything works under Windows.
Now, lets try the other way around. I have a machine that runs Linux without problems (although a bit slow by current standards), although it was built to run Solaris. You have a Machine \"built for Windows XP\". So, let me try installing Linux on your machine, and you try installing Windows XP on mine, and see who has the best hardware support... Hint: You are not going to find Windows drivers for anything in that machine, except the harddrive (but not the controller).
In short: You can basically forget about installing Windows on anything without the \"Built for Windows XP\" sticker. Linux on the other hand will run on just about every machine on the planet newer than an Amiga 500, although not every card is supported. Usually because the manufacturer don\'t WANT it to be.
-
Would you please stop complaining about compiling things under Linux is hard - it\'s even harder under Windows, just the step of getting hold of the source is way too hard, and then you need to buy the correct compiler and so on...
Compiling things under windows isn\'t hard. You dont even have to buy a compiler. Just use dev c++. Or use the Windows Visual c++ compiler which is released free. However the point is i dont need to compile things under windows, i only do that out of interest. Under linux i have to compile anything to get it to work, so one would expect it to be reasonably easy.
In short: You can basically forget about installing Windows on anything without the \"Built for Windows XP\" sticker.
In short: you can forget about installing windows on anything with the Built for windows sticker? Hmmm? I can install windows easily on my \"Built for Windows XP\" computer. You just contradicted yourself.
Linux on the other hand will run on just about every machine on the planet newer than an Amiga 500, although not every card is supported. Usually because the manufacturer don\'t WANT it to be.
I dont care if the manufacturer wants it to be or not- the point is it dosnt work. If something dosnt work i dont say \"Oh well its the manufacturers and evil Window\'s fault that it dosnt, and in the perfect world it should so ill just use it anyway\", i say \"This dosnt work, im going to go use something that does.\"
As for lack of hardware support - I bought a machine for running Linux, and everything works.
Yes, but comprimises will of had to be made to get everything to work on linux. There is absolutly no chip in existence that i would prefer to my current setup that dosnt work on windows. There are many chips i would like that dont run on linux.
-
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
Compiling things under windows isn\'t hard. You dont even have to buy a compiler. Just use dev c++. Or use the Windows Visual c++ compiler which is released free. However the point is i dont need to compile things under windows, i only do that out of interest. Under linux i have to compile anything to get it to work, so one would expect it to be reasonably easy.
Not true, most projects offer binaries if you ask for them, either staticly linked or if any developer have the computer.
Oftenly sent the same day or the day after (From experience).
About linux hardware support, pfff. Just to prove it, i went around the house and booted knoppix on every single one. Guess what? Eveyrthing, EVERYTHING except a buetooth thingy who barly work in widnows worked, even our aiinctent printer.
Linux rocxkors the big one one one111!!!
-
Not true, most projects offer binaries if you ask for them, either staticly linked or if any developer have the computer.
Oftenly sent the same day or the day after (From experience).
All well and good, i just dont consider having to ask developers to compile binaries and personally send them to me as a very viable long term prospect. Plus, if i have a project that has 3 dependencies.. go figure. Its not impossible, but its not exactly that easy or fun.
About linux hardware support, pfff. Just to prove it, i went around the house and booted knoppix on every single one. Guess what? Eveyrthing, EVERYTHING except a buetooth thingy who barly work in widnows worked, even our aiinctent printer.
Im happy for you. On my one computer that i tried the wireless card wasnt supported, the network card wasnt supported, modem wasnt supported and the screen wasnt detected. Thats just my experience.
-
Be nice people. The only problem ramlambmoo has is hw support. Keep in mind that linux has high multiplatform aspirations and vast hw support, but it takes time. There will always be some new/rare hw that won\'t work or won\'t work fully. Too bad you have such a combo. New kernel, new drivers - give it a periodical try with some competent distro.
Now the compiling/binary stuff is just funny. All the distros you mentioned use binaries (red hat two different version, fendora, ubuntu, mandrake,) and have them available for most of the software out there. Sure, they can\'t handle dependencies that well, but there are others...
Of course there are errors, bugs and crashes. Now, linux itself never crashed for me, while windows did. It\'s a difference if your system crashes or just some overlaying application.
Compiling things under windows isn\'t hard.
haha, did you try to compile ps? The mingw people are the saddest cases that come for build help.
-
Now the compiling/binary stuff is just funny. All the distros you mentioned use binaries (red hat two different version, fendora, ubuntu, mandrake,) and have them available for most of the software out there. Sure, they can\'t handle dependencies that well, but there are others...
Um maybe you misunderstood me. I didnt try compiling the actual O/S. Im talking about programs that you download to run on it. Of course there are binaries for the actual O/S.
Of course there are errors, bugs and crashes. Now, linux itself never crashed for me, while windows did. It\'s a difference if your system crashes or just some overlaying application.
Well, as i said, i\'ve had 3 windows crashes in 18 months. I can put up with one every 6 months. However i also took into consideration things like explorer.exe crashing and system errors on linux, which for me were about equal.
There will always be some new/rare hw that won\'t work or won\'t work fully. Too bad you have such a combo. New kernel, new drivers - give it a periodical try with some competent distro.
Which would you advise? The main thing i want working is the internet, I.E my wireless card. Has anyone here actually got NDisWrapper to work? If so which distro did you use and which dependecies did you have to download?
haha, did you try to compile ps? The mingw people are the saddest cases that come for build help.
Yup, i Built ps with mingw just from reading the instructions. It wasnt that hard. I had to exercise some creative use of the delete key to get CS to compile but everything was fine. Obviously people using linux have alot more experience with computers and compiling things and thus will have less trouble compiling it because they understand how it works. You\'re always going to get idiots who think \"wow PS is open source! so i can download and click compile wow!!!111\". And those people use windows and mingw. Go figure :P (No offense to anyone who does use Windows and mingw apart from myself).
-
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
In short: You can basically forget about installing Windows on anything without the \"Built for Windows XP\" sticker.
In short: you can forget about installing windows on anything with the Built for windows sticker? Hmmm? I can install windows easily on my \"Built for Windows XP\" computer. You just contradicted yourself.
No. I didn\'t contradict anything, you missed the \"out\" part of \"without\".
Linux on the other hand will run on just about every machine on the planet newer than an Amiga 500, although not every card is supported. Usually because the manufacturer don\'t WANT it to be.
I dont care if the manufacturer wants it to be or not- the point is it dosnt work.
And my point is that on this fine machine with works perfectly under Linux, Windoes does NOT work. It doesn\'t support ANY of the hardware, except the harddrive, which happens to be regular SCSI.
As for lack of hardware support - I bought a machine for running Linux, and everything works.
Yes, but comprimises will of had to be made to get everything to work on linux. There is absolutly no chip in existence that i would prefer to my current setup that dosnt work on windows. There are many chips i would like that dont run on linux.
So, basically you\'re saying that you only WANT \"designed for Windows\" hardware, and then you complain that it only works with Windows. Compromises have to be made to get everything to work on Windows too, it\'s just that you already made that compromise.
I can think of lot of hardware that I would like to have (if I had a bigger home and infite money), none of which works with Windows.
-
So, basically you\'re saying that you only WANT \"designed for Windows\" hardware, and then you complain that it only works with Windows. Compromises have to be made to get everything to work on Windows too, it\'s just that you already made that compromise.
I dont only want designed for windows hardware. I dont even have to think about what o/s my hardware was designed for because i\'ve never come across anything that windows dosnt support. If my hardware supports linux, that\'d be cool too. But it dosnt. If i were only choosing configured for linux hardware would i be able to use the new GeForce 7800 GTX?? (No seriously? Would I? Im not sure if it has linux drivers). My point is that pretty much everything is configured for windows, unless you go out of your way to get a configured for linux setup. You dont have to make comprimises if you want configured for windows hardware. What new hardware would you like that only runs on linux? I\'ll be suprised if there isnt anything better that window will run. Unless you\'re running a server or something, but im talking about general computing here.
And my point is that on this fine machine with works perfectly under Linux, Windoes does NOT work. It doesn\'t support ANY of the hardware, except the harddrive, which happens to be regular SCSI.
Can you get support for it? You do realise windows doesnt have most of the drivers magically pre-installed. You get a disk from the manufactor for the drivers. If you go out of your way to buy a setup that will only run perfectly on linux, well dont complain it dosnt run windows. But the difference here is i didnt go out of my way to buy a windows configured machine: i just bought the best avaliable for my budget, and that machine runs windows, and not linux. If you look at the top chips avaliable, nearly every single one will have windows drivers support. Can you say the same for linux? I think perhaps the only instance where i can remember in recent history that linux has had more support has been 64 bit chips. However windows has shipped Windows XP Proffesional 64 bit edition now, which is free if you already had windows XP Pro.
-
\"Fighting\" about what operating system is better is just a plain waste of time.
Though, I must agree:
1) Driver support for everything is crap. Not the fault of the people who make linux, but i cant get half my stuff to work with it. My wireless card is not supported, and my ADSL modem is not supported either, so i cant get the internet. Which pretty much instantly rules linux out.
2) Even drivers that are supported are a pain in the ass to get working. I had to update my BIOS to get my screen drivers to work. Thank god i use a laptop and have a battery, theres no way in hell i would have updated my BIOS on my PC without a uniterruptable power supply.
3) Not optimal support for windows programs: i know its bad, but the majority of developers write stuff for windows, and so it works. Wine is ok if you can get it to work but it dosnt support everything.
4) Everything you download is in source code and you have to compile it yourself. Now, i program c++ so this isnt a huge problem but theres sometimes you just want to be able to download and run something without having to go through the friggen build process. Half the time when i download something i find all these other dependencies that i then need to download (and build again) and it turns getting anything to work into a major hassle.
5) The supposed fact that linux never crashes and is error free is bull. My windows XP almost never crashes (i think i\'ve had 3 blue screen of deaths in the past 18 months) and i have hardly any problems. Of course you get errors sometimes like explorer freezes here and then but i get errors like that on linux as well- often when im just browsing my harddrive and error will come up and the window will close.
6) The fact that linux is \'safer\' and less prone to viruses is only really relevant if you\'re an idiot who opens email attachments without thinking and downloads dodgy software using peer to peer or off russian websites. I have no anti virus software, no firewall (apart from the default windows one) and i havnt gotten a virus on this computer in 18 months. Of course i use firefox, if you use IE then you\'ll probablly get a virus in 10 mintues.
7) Its free? I paid what, $100 for my copy of windows. $100 isnt that much people, stop being so god damn cheap. $100 for not having to download 3 dependencies and compile them to get anything to work, or for not having to update my BIOS at 3am in the morning to get my screen to work, i think its a pretty good comprimise.
Amen brother!
:D
Linux is mostly used by people who think they\'re the rebel type, who hate the society which in their opinion kills them, meh, they use Linux, because they just want to \"look\" different. (okay, the use of Linux by smaller/bigger companies is understandable, but that\'s another thing)
That\'s still a huge waste of time.
:rolleyes:
I personally am very pleased of my Windows Server 2003 os. It never crashed until now, and I have it for more than one and a half year. Powerful, stable, fast, and yeah, it can compete with any Linux distribution when it comes to \"network/server\" management or security.
And don\'t start with \"it\'s an expensive os\" because it\'s given for free by Microsoft, of course, for evaluation (for 6 months I think).
It has to be a little \"optimized\" if you want to run all games on it, but after, uh... it\'s a dream. Tell me, why having Linux without any specific purpose. Just because you want to be different? That\'s crap. What if you want to play a new game? To try a new software? For god\'s sake how can you even compare Maya with Blender? And no, emulation is not a bright idea, not everyone have high-end computers. Not to mention that not everything works through this method.
And most of what I\'ve said about Windows 2003 also goes for Windows XP (I have it installed in the bedroom computer, and it didn\'t make any problems until now, and hell yeah I have it for a long time). And don\'t forget, relative soon Longhorn will be out.
would i be able to use the new GeForce 7800 GTX?? (No seriously? Would I? Im not sure if it has linux drivers).
No, it hasn\'t.
Anyway, I\'m not saying \"Uhh! Use Windows, is the best!\" and I\'m also not saying that Linux is crap. Because it isn\'t. But I\'m also not saying it\'s a masterpiece that everyone must use. Some, are just not meant for that os. And come one, you have to be a freak to say those things, to promote Linux like hell.
After all, it\'s just a matter of tastes.
;)
PS - If anyone is interested, I can make a thread of how to optimize the Windows Server 2003 operating system, to run games on it, or to resolve any other minor problems.
:)
-
OpenOffice sux comparing to Office, vi is simpler to use than that thing..
unfortunately we will never have a version of Office for Linux. :(
Sure it is for free, but if you want to put it in your company you have to hire an
army of people who will example average Mrs. Mary how the fu* use that thing.
Same goes for GIMP...it is made for some god dang graphics h4x00rZ, maybe
Moogie could underestand a word it says, like rastring, script-fu(ck), fast
masks, channels...rasting is for me an unknown word, script-fu reminds me
about script kiddies and when I read about fast masks first and last thing that
come on my mind is IP masquerading and channels are on IRC. ;> But I don\'t
want to make an opus of artistic quality that can be compared to Mona Lisa,
I would like to make a small logo with a nice title to put on my site with hiper
h4x00r bash scripts on it. ;>
And there are no RPG/MMORPG games for Linux...ok there is six of them:
two of them sucks, three are paid alot and one is under development and has
status of tech demo. ;>
Besides that Linux is nice. ;) But let\'s not forget words of Linus Torvalds, the
most famous (after B. Gates) MCSA (Minesweeper Certified System Enginer):
Linux is an operating system not religion.
Regards.
-
Linux is a respectable OS. An honorable adversary to my beloved Mac OSX :D .
-
actually my wireless card is not supported either, so I\'m using ndiswrapper and it works fine for me.
Has anyone here actually got NDisWrapper to work? If so which distro did you use and which dependecies did you have to download?
Why do I get the feeling that you\'re not reading that carefully?
Yes, I have gotten Ndiswrapper to work. Several times from the source tarball they offer, and once via the gentoo ebuild. Distros would be Fedora Core 1 and 2, and Gentoo. Ndiswrapper has no dependencies to run, but you\'ll need recode to convert the windows driver from hex to ascii.
Gee, so in all your years of linus you havnt had a single error. Not even one. In what 4 years of computing you have never witness a dialog box with the error symbol come up? I find that hard to believe. I had 5 in the first few days of trying linux.
What dialog box? Linux on its own has no dialouge boxes, sounds to me like your having a problem with your desktop environment. That is not Linux\'s fault. My window manager (fvwm) has no dialogue boxes, but yeah, no errors.
I think the main point is that linux takes forever to configure and it takes a pretty comprehensive understanding. So no, it\'s not for everyone, you have to be willing to struggle with it. But once you know it, it is a far more flexible, customizeable, and stable OS.
EDIT: Spelling, content
EDIT: Whoops. Some things I forgot to mention about ndiswrapper, that really need to be said, both in the interest of complete honesty and of helping you out should you ever elect to give it another shot:
1. ndiswrapper requires a 2.6 kernel
2. ndiswrapper requires that you have kernel source installed. You do not have this by default in many distros, which may be why you could not get it to build.
3. /usr/src/linux must be a symbolic link to the source of the kernel that you are using. I think something else has to point there, too, but I forget what. It\'s in the ndiswrapper documentation, anyway.
4. While I never had any trouble compiling it, (until recently, see 5) for the longest time any version of ndiswrapper past .08 (including the gentoo ebuilds) would give me a run-time kernel panic when I tried to modprobe it. For that reason, I used .08 for a very long time.
5. When I upgraded my kernel to 2.6.11, my version .08 would no longer build. I crossed my fingers and held my breath and tried the latest gentoo ebuild, and it worked.
6. You will need both the .inf and the .sys part of the windows driver. Use recode to convert the .inf file to an ascii file, and it must reside in the same directory as the .sys file. When you give ndiswrapper the path to the driver, give it the ascii file.
-
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
Which would you advise? The main thing i want working is the internet, I.E my wireless card. Has anyone here actually got NDisWrapper to work? If so which distro did you use and which dependecies did you have to download?
Then your wireless card must be a real crap! :D, because i have a lynksys WMP11 pci, really cheap, and queen of windows-only crap, and works flawless in debian with ndiswrapper.
Sorry my bad english.
Salu2.
-
First at all, it must be some hiper weird card on some hiper weird chipset...
I have a crappy D-link card long with same crappy Belkin wireless card and
these works perfectly on drivers for Realtek cards. ;) Get hotplug and see what
modules it will load, then make sure you added these modules in right order to
your startup script and shut down that terrible thing.
Regards.
-
Then your wireless card must be a real crap! , because i have a lynksys WMP11 pci, really cheap, and queen of windows-only crap, and works flawless in debian with ndiswrapper.
Read what i wrote. The problem isnt my card, its the fact i couldnt compile ndiswrapper in the first place.
What dialog box? Linux on its own has no dialouge boxes, sounds to me like your having a problem with your desktop environment. That is not Linux\'s fault. My window manager (fvwm) has no dialogue boxes, but yeah, no errors.
Well explorer.exe is just the windows desktop environment too, you know. While your statement is technically correct, for the user whether the error is in the linux kernel or the interface dosnt make much difference really. Just the kernel on it\'s own would be rather useless to me, so when i talk about linux i mean the entire thing. I think i was using gnome or something.
2. ndiswrapper requires that you have kernel source installed. You do not have this by default in many distros, which may be why you could not get it to build.
3. /usr/src/linux must be a symbolic link to the source of the kernel that you are using. I think something else has to point there, too, but I forget what. It\'s in the ndiswrapper documentation, anyway.
Cheers for your help. I think these two would have most likely been the cause of the problem (even though i thought i had the kernel code there its possible i didnt).
-
Originally posted by Annah
For god\'s sake how can you even compare Maya with Blender? And no, emulation is not a bright idea, not everyone have high-end computers. Not to mention that not everything works through this method.
1. Blender is just as fair compared to 3Ds/Maya as the MSVC compiler is to GCC.
Blender is a very professional program and is used in maaany movies since it\'s free.
2. Emulation, no that\'s slow. Wine/Cedega isn\'t.
WINE (Wine is not an emulator) is not an emulator.
WINE maps the instructions the exe file does to the equal functions of the linux system, making games sometimes run FASTER if you use stuff like OpenGL
Originally posted by Annah
would i be able to use the new GeForce 7800 GTX?? (No seriously? Would I? Im not sure if it has linux drivers).
No, it hasn\'t.
Well well, what have we here? A person who doesn\'t know what he\'s talking about no doubt.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp_2k_77.72.html
http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux_display_ia32_1.0-7667.html
\"# Added support for GeForce 7800 GTX.\"
vs
\"# Support for GeForce 7800 GTX and GeForce 6200 AGP\"
LOOOOOOK! SAAAAMEEEE release date. Perhaps we should look stuff up next time huh?
So, Linux was given support for the card the same time windows, so what\'s your point? nVIDIA has released drivers to linux even before the ones to windows once or twice because of problems with them not working good enough in Windows
Originally posted by Platyna
OpenOffice sux comparing to Office, vi is simpler to use than that thing..
unfortunately we will never have a version of Office for Linux. :(
Sure it is for free, but if you want to put it in your company you have to hire an
army of people who will example average Mrs. Mary how the fu* use that thing.
The whole muncipity I live in switched from Office to OpenOffice and saved loads of money. Noooobody complained except the first grades who couldn\'t use their nice \"WordTexts\" or whatever those sinrkly things are called. It doesn\'t require any training, perhaps 1 hour to relocate where stuff is. Again, another person who doesn\'t know what he/she is talking about
blue out
-
You sure are one of those Linux maniac fans. Chill.
:P
* points to:
Linux is an operating system not religion.
-
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
I dont only want designed for windows hardware. I dont even have to think about what o/s my hardware was designed for because i\'ve never come across anything that windows dosnt support.
Well, if you only shop in a Windows only store, that\'s all you\'ll ever come across. Not much chance of coming across a Mercedes at the local Ford-dealer either, but that doesn\'t mean they don\'t exist.
You dont have to make comprimises if you want configured for windows hardware. What new hardware would you like that only runs on linux?
Some time ago I wanted one of those beautiful iBooks. If I had room for it, and a shitload of money, I would want one of those great graphics machines, you know, Silicon Graphics... Soon I\'ll add a Playstation 3 to that list (I already have a PS2, but the lack of a hard drive prevents me from running Linux on it).
Requiring that it works with Windows would basically limit me to two companies - AMD and Intel.
And my point is that on this fine machine with works perfectly under Linux, Windoes does NOT work. It doesn\'t support ANY of the hardware, except the harddrive, which happens to be regular SCSI.
Can you get support for it? You do realise windows doesnt have most of the drivers magically pre-installed. You get a disk from the manufactor for the drivers.
I can\'t get Windows support for it, and no I didn\'t get a Windows disc from the manufacturer. I did get a Solaris disc though.
If you look at the top chips avaliable, nearly every single one will have windows drivers support.
You must be looking at the top \"made for Windows XP\" chips there. Go take a look at the real top hardware - SGI/MIPS, SUN/Sparc, IBM/Power/Cell, HP/PA-Risc... None of it has Windows support. Nearly all of it supports Linux to some degree.
-
Some time ago I wanted one of those beautiful iBooks. If I had room for it, and a shitload of money, I would want one of those great graphics machines, you know, Silicon Graphics... Soon I\'ll add a Playstation 3 to that list (I already have a PS2, but the lack of a hard drive prevents me from running Linux on it).
Hmm, so linux is good when you want to run High performance graphics rendering, and when you want to install an operating system onto a computer which wasnt designed for it. Oh and also if you have nothing better to do than try and install and o/s onto a Console. Well, thankfully my computing dosnt cross into that territory, like 98% of the other people out there, so im content with windows.
Well, if you only shop in a Windows only store, that\'s all you\'ll ever come across. Not much chance of coming across a Mercedes at the local Ford-dealer either, but that doesn\'t mean they don\'t exist.
Yes, but you\'ll see mercedes when you drive around, and if you read a car magazine.. going into a store and looking around isnt the only way to find something, you know. As i said before, all the hardware you have mentioned is for obscure purposes which i will never cross into. The only thing i came close to being tempted by Were the SGI products, but i dont really have any need for \"Scientific visualization, Geospatial imaging, Multidisciplinary Design Optimization\" or even the fabulous \"Data fusion: command-and-control centers\". So i think i\'ll pass, thank you.
I can\'t get Windows support for it, and no I didn\'t get a Windows disc from the manufacturer. I did get a Solaris disc though.
Uh hu. And what do you use the computer for again? Is it better and faster then a current windows configured computer at ordinary tasks? Keeping in mind i dont do much Multidisciplinary Design Optimization, so that stuff dosnt really count.
You must be looking at the top \"made for Windows XP\" chips there. Go take a look at the real top hardware - SGI/MIPS, SUN/Sparc, IBM/Power/Cell, HP/PA-Risc... None of it has Windows support. Nearly all of it supports Linux to some degree.
In case you missed the running theme for me here, im an ordinary user. I use the internet. I play some high performance games occasionly. I dont run a Web Server from my bedroom for my website displaying my wonderfully rendered 3D images while using my dreamcast to run the linux kernel. If i did, im sure i\'d be very impressed with linux. The way it is, im not.
-
3ds Max and Maya are both considerably more powerful than Blender. They do cost a helluva lot more though.
Blender is a very professional program and is used in maaany movies since it\'s free.
Err...are you sure? Generally movie producers dont like to skimp on their equipment. Not that Blender is bad, it\'s just that it isn\'t the best, and the best is what movie producers go for.
-
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
I dont run a Web Server from my bedroom for my website displaying my wonderfully rendered 3D images while using my dreamcast to run the linux kernel. If i did, im sure i\'d be very impressed with linux. The way it is, im not.
Actually.... :rolleyes:
/me whispers \"I do those things except the dreamcast thingy :)\"
-
3.) I rarely have to sign any EULA\'s
4.) The EULA\'s I do have to agree to are designed to protect my rights, not the rights of a large company.
Hmm, lets look at a sample Linux Software license shall we. Oh well since GeForce 7800 GTX has been discussed lets see how their linux Software license is designed to protect you, and not the rights of a large company (them).
No Reverse Engineering. Customer may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the SOFTWARE, nor attempt in any other manner to obtain the source code.
All title and copyrights in and to the SOFTWARE (including but not limited to all images, photographs, animations, video, audio, music, text, and other information incorporated into the SOFTWARE), the accompanying printed materials, and any copies of the SOFTWARE, are owned by NVIDIA, or its suppliers. The SOFTWARE is protected by copyright laws and international treaty provisions. Accordingly, Customer is required to treat the SOFTWARE like any other copyrighted material, except as otherwise allowed pursuant to this LICENSE and that it may make one copy of the SOFTWARE solely for backup or archive purposes.
Oh and gotta love this bit of looking out for you:
6.2 No Liability for Consequential Damages. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL NVIDIA OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF BUSINESS PROFITS, BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, LOSS OF BUSINESS INFORMATION, OR ANY OTHER PECUNIARY LOSS) ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF OR INABILITY TO USE THE SOFTWARE, EVEN IF NVIDIA HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
Wow, thanks nividia for looking out for us, protecting us from evil reverse engineering, and protecting their precious copyright, and making sure they\'re not responsible if anything happens. Linux Software lincenses are so much better!! [/sarcasm]
Note: I dont really give a fig about software licenses, and i dont think they are any of a consideration in choosing an o/s, or that windows licenses are any better. I just thought the statement that linux software licenses are looking out for your well being was kinda funny.
/me whispers \"I do those things except the dreamcast thingy \"
And thats why you like linux.. i can understand that. Oh and the dreamcast thingy is real, i didnt make that up. I\'ve seen pictures of someone doing it. People have way too much time on their hands.
-
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
No Reverse Engineering. Customer may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the SOFTWARE, nor attempt in any other manner to obtain the source code.
All title and copyrights in and to the SOFTWARE (including but not limited to all images, photographs, animations, video, audio, music, text, and other information incorporated into the SOFTWARE), the accompanying printed materials, and any copies of the SOFTWARE, are owned by NVIDIA, or its suppliers. The SOFTWARE is protected by copyright laws and international treaty provisions. Accordingly, Customer is required to treat the SOFTWARE like any other copyrighted material, except as otherwise allowed pursuant to this LICENSE and that it may make one copy of the SOFTWARE solely for backup or archive purposes.
Oh and gotta love this bit of looking out for you:
6.2 No Liability for Consequential Damages. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL NVIDIA OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF BUSINESS PROFITS, BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, LOSS OF BUSINESS INFORMATION, OR ANY OTHER PECUNIARY LOSS) ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF OR INABILITY TO USE THE SOFTWARE, EVEN IF NVIDIA HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
Wow, thanks nividia for looking out for us, protecting us from evil reverse engineering, and protecting their precious copyright, and making sure they\'re not responsible if anything happens. Linux Software lincenses are so much better!! [/sarcasm]
Wierd, I always thought the windows license said exactly the same thing
-
Wierd, I always thought the windows license said exactly the same thing
Yes, try reading my post, thats exactly what i said. Im just responding to the claim that linux licenses are better.
-
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
Hmm, lets look at a sample Linux Software license shall we. Oh well since GeForce 7800 GTX has been discussed lets see how their linux Software license is designed to protect you, and not the rights of a large company (them).
Very, very bad example. The license of NVidia software has nothing to do with the GPL license (here is the link to the text of GPL license (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html)), which covers the linux kernel and most of the user programs. Linux community doesn\'t like NVidia because of the license You gave as example.
Other good examples of licenses for Open Source software:
LGPL license (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lesser.html)
BSD license (http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php) (You will find plenty of links to other licenses there)
-
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
What dialog box? Linux on its own has no dialouge boxes, sounds to me like your having a problem with your desktop environment. That is not Linux\'s fault. My window manager (fvwm) has no dialogue boxes, but yeah, no errors.
Well explorer.exe is just the windows desktop environment too, you know. While your statement is technically correct, for the user whether the error is in the linux kernel or the interface dosnt make much difference really. Just the kernel on it\'s own would be rather useless to me, so when i talk about linux i mean the entire thing. I think i was using gnome or something.
Yeah, gnome kind of sucks. KDE is better, but it also has some issues.
The point, I think, is that it is fairly easy to opt out of these big, buggy, bloated all-out Desktop Environments whose basic function is the misuse of resources, in favor of something lighter. It is true you can get alternate window managers for windows, but not nearly as simple. (two words in gentoo: emerge fvwm).
KDE, I should address. I actually don\'t think I ever got one of those dialogue boxes in all my years of running KDE, or at least it was never KDE\'s fault. Meaning it did happen a few times, but it was always something stupid that I had done, and it was always something that was easily reperable. Actually the only one I can think of is when you start kde without a sound module probed, it doesn\'t really like that. But that\'s easy enough to fix. My point is that things do go wrong in linux and in its component parts, but it is always the fault of the user, and it is always fairly easy to figure out what is wrong and to fix it. It is a lot easier to fix a problem in a .conf file then in a .dll file. When something goes wrong in windows, you\'re pretty much just screwed in my experience.
@Wired: This is the real, that other world is the wired, I\'m sure of it.
EDIT: spelling (sigh)
-
wow, there is so much bigotry here, for both sides. I personally use linux, stopped using windows when I worked all summer for xp, and when I went to install it, the code was used.
The geforce 7800 has drivers for linux, as nvidia uses a unified architecture, so one driver for all cards, read the f*** up! that isn\'t being a windows user hater, that\'s using my brain.
And it is obvious that most of you who didn\'t like linux because of dependancy issues when you tried it tried noob distros, ever tried debian? or archlinux? or gentoo? these distros are prettymuch built without dependancies.
This is turning into a flame war, and it is my guess that it will soon become like the thread about the peta sponsored racoon beating.
Edit: Annah: Have you looked at longhorn lately? Thye have cut out everything worht upgrading for, who want to pay $200+ to find files slightly faster and some new eye candy?
-
ooh yeah, the console thing was fun. I remember a video with the that winning music, showing first a console, then zooming on the screen. You could see linux running. And as the cherry, the guy started msoffice on it. :D
-
Originally posted by JellyWerker
wow, there is so much bigotry here, for both sides. I personally use linux, stopped using windows when I worked all summer for xp, and when I went to install it, the code was used.
The geforce 7800 has drivers for linux, as nvidia uses a unified architecture, so one driver for all cards, read the f*** up! that isn\'t being a windows user hater, that\'s using my brain.
And it is obvious that most of you who didn\'t like linux because of dependancy issues when you tried it tried noob distros, ever tried debian? or archlinux? or gentoo? these distros are prettymuch built without dependancies.
This is turning into a flame war, and it is my guess that it will soon become like the thread about the peta sponsored racoon beating.
Edit: Annah: Have you looked at longhorn lately? Thye have cut out everything worht upgrading for, who want to pay $200+ to find files slightly faster and some new eye candy?
Amen brotha. This says pretty much my thoughts.. Androgos made alot of good points too. Seems alot of these windows users bashing on linux can\'t tell the difference between closed source, open source, GPL vs closed source code liceneses etc. If your gonna bicker about something stupid at least build a decent foundation on which you base your opinions so that we don\'t laugh at you at the start. Gotta get at least halfway thru the arguement, I mean com\'on.
Personally I use linux 99.9% of the time because that\'s what serves me best. Do I hate windows, no. Do I dislike windows because of certain functionality they\'ve put into it, sure. I\'m sure if I had alot of free time I can look thru the linux kernel and find alot of implementations I disagree with there as well.
Sometimes linux is the best tool, sometimes windows is. Sometimes neither are and Solaris, a *bsd, one of the mac os\'s could be, etc, etc... you get my point. :) Really why bicker over something so silly and in a mmorpg forum of all places, rofl. Where\'s the love? Where\'s the peace? No seriously where is it?
Sorry, had to. :) Peace be with you my fellow computer users. Now let\'s find something worth arguing about like IE vs Firefox, or red vs blue. How about the color of the sky? I\'m out, gl with this.
-
Amen brotha. This says pretty much my thoughts.. Androgos made alot of good points too. Seems alot of these windows users bashing on linux can\'t tell the difference between closed source, open source, GPL vs closed source code liceneses etc. If your gonna bicker about something stupid at least build a decent foundation on which you base your opinions so that we don\'t laugh at you at the start. Gotta get at least halfway thru the arguement, I mean com\'on.
Personally I use linux 99.9% of the time because that\'s what serves me best. Do I hate windows, no. Do I dislike windows because of certain functionality they\'ve put into it, sure. I\'m sure if I had alot of free time I can look thru the linux kernel and find alot of implementations I disagree with there as well.
Sometimes linux is the best tool, sometimes windows is. Sometimes neither are and Solaris, a *bsd, one of the mac os\'s could be, etc, etc... you get my point. Really why bicker over something so silly and in a mmorpg forum of all places, rofl. Where\'s the love? Where\'s the peace? No seriously where is it?
Sorry, had to. Peace be with you my fellow computer users. Now let\'s find something worth arguing about like IE vs Firefox, or red vs blue. How about the color of the sky? I\'m out, gl with this.
Ahem?? Some of these windows users bashing linux?? If you\'re referring to me perhaps you might want to give some quotes instead of making unbased claims? I\'ve been programming for 5 years and i find the claim that i dont know open source from closed source personally insulting.
If you think this is turning into a flame war, then dont participate. From my view we\'re just having a discussion about the differences between the o/s because we want to. We\'re allowed to disagree. I havnt seen anyone flaming me, and i dont think i\'ve flamed anyone in return. If you dont like the conversation, dont participate.
Oh and btw, I.E vs firefox is just stupid. Firefox wins hands down.
And it is obvious that most of you who didn\'t like linux because of dependancy issues when you tried it tried noob distros, ever tried debian? or archlinux? or gentoo? these distros are prettymuch built without dependancies.
This is turning into a flame war, and it is my guess that it will soon become like the thread about the peta sponsored racoon beating.
Noob distros? This is the one thing i hate above almost everything else about linux: No matter what distro you use, whenever you talk to a linux user they\'ll tell you its the wrong one. I have tried debian but it didnt work well for me. Never tried archlinux and gentoo though. Personally i dont have the time required to install every single linux distro. But i mean the fact that you have o rely on knowing with distros are \"noob\" distros and thus choosing other ones is just another reason not to use linux, personaly.
My point is that things do go wrong in linux and in its component parts, but it is always the fault of the user, and it is always fairly easy to figure out what is wrong and to fix it. It is a lot easier to fix a problem in a .conf file then in a .dll file. When something goes wrong in windows, you\'re pretty much just screwed in my experience.
Yeah, but same for windows. Most of the errors i get are from me doing something really stupid or from my programming. Though your point about .dll files is indeed valid.
-
Admittedly when I first install Linux on a machine I have a long routine I go through to get it just perfect. In windows I have no such routine but its partially because most of the software i\'d wan\'t isn\'t free or its just not a configurable.
I tend to
Install Wine, and cedega CVS, download all the backgrounds I can find that I like, install WindowMaker, as I tend to like that one alot, configure KDE or GNOME to look really cool so that when I\'m gone anyone can use my computer with no problems and also go \"Wow!\" Karamba and Desklets help in this department. Then I find the WindowMaker theme I like - blue rose personally. Then I install SDL libraries and OpenAL libraries if not installed. I\'ve gotten attached to Ubuntu and its good package management but I may try Gentoo soon.
Then I install all the games that I like to play, Age of Empires II - The Conquerors, Warcraft III, World of Warcraft ---> for my roomate - it performs better in cedega linux than windows, Starcraft, Diablo II, and finally Cube. Then I get the latest nvidia drivers loaded and setup. Occasionally I play with adding \"allow composite with glx\" so I can do cool composite rendering engine stuff. Then I get firefox updated to the latest binary build so I can get all my nice cool extensions and such, then I am done and I never have to touch the system again.
My windows trend seems to be (partially do to my own fault I\'ll admit)
Install -
Figure out why it halts at loading agp440.sys
recovery console disable agp440 and disable mup
yay - it boots, install 3D driver as it wasn\'t detected. Use debug to locate what my modem is as my memory can\'t seem to conjur up that data, then install drivers for it just so when I go to hardware manager I don\'t see all those yellow excalmation points. Figure out what USB adapter controller I have and install the drivers for it as they wern\'t detected either thus limiting me to an old PS2 mouse, then changin from the default blue theme to Olive, adding a different background and installing my games. Then I install firefox, Later I wonder why MSN messenger and iexplore.exe are listed as running in the processes tab, hmmm . . . regedit blah blah software--->Microsof-->windows-->current version-->run - then delete everything there.
smae for current user.
then msconfig
disable all those pesky startup stuff.
install firewall protection
download spybot and adaware
download clamwin
scan scan scan
eliminate all 3 viruses by deleting the dlls and getting fresh ones from dlls.com allow spybot and adaware to nuke all 15 or so spyware programs that have managed to install themselves already.
Configure firewall so that iexplore can\'t access the internet as just having it running somewhere in the background for no apparant reason makes bad things happen.
take a nap
fresh look all\'s good seems stabile, just don\'t touch anything - games only.
3-4 months. MSN messenger keeps running despite all efforts to prevent its startup. Worse it crashes with weird rundll32 errors for no apparant reason and the computer restarts spontaniously. Oops more services are now causeing the computer to halt. Disable them from recovery console,
then I give up and reinstall all over again. I think I\'ll get it all setup and then ghost it to a new spare hard drive, so I can ghost it back when I need to.
Yes, both windows and linux can be a hassle to install, setup, and use. Windows error reporting isn\'t as helpful for me personally, but maybe someone else can make better sense of it than I. truthfully the only problems I have stem from abusing administrator privlidges or using unstabile bleeding edge packages. I can\'t help it I want to try the new features!!!
-
Someone has forgot not everyone live in the USA, for example in Poland $100
is that what many people has to survive a month for. Anyway that quote:
Originally written by Annah
I personally am very pleased of my Windows Server 2003 os. It never crashed until now, and I have it for more than one and a half year. Powerful, stable, fast, and yeah, it can compete with any Linux distribution when it comes to \"network/server\" management or security.
Is going to be written down for generations to read in my login fortunes file. ;)
When I have read this to my colleagues at work they had a good laugh, even
if majority of them are Windows users. The truth is no one who is sane will run
a production server on Windows. If we have to run Windows because an
application requires MSSQL and there has to be access to that from eg. the
internet we are connecting it behind a Linux machine, cutting all the ports
except MSSQL one and doing tunnels to it via SSH. So, I would suggest reading
first proofs of concept posted on Bugtraq how silly is all that MS security.
Windows is neat OS...for workstation, for the people who doesn\'t do much
besides running Office or playing games and who has a sysadmin smart
enought to put a masquerade and secure them behind UNIX server.
Regards.
-
Someone has forgot not everyone live in the USA, for example in Poland $100 is that what many people has to survive a month for.
Well i dont live in the U.S, i live in australia. The CIA world fact book gave poland\'s GDP per capita (purchasing power parity) $12,000 (2004 est.). That would indicate something like $1000 a month. But anyway im not an expert on Poland. The point is if you\'re living on $100 a month you\'re not going to buying many Computers. If you have enough money to buy a computer package than an extra $100 isnt exactly that much money. Unless you\'re buying an older computer, in which case it would probablly come with an older version of windows or linux. And, after all that, I am not living in Poland, and i do not rate the ability of said product to be distributed and bought by the lower income earners in a foriegn eurpoean country as very high on my list of considerations when purchasing an O/S.
-
Originally posted by Platyna
Anyway that quote:
Originally written by Annah
I personally am very pleased of my Windows Server 2003 os. It never crashed until now, and I have it for more than one and a half year. Powerful, stable, fast, and yeah, it can compete with any Linux distribution when it comes to \"network/server\" management or security.
Is going to be written down for generations to read in my login fortunes file. ;)
When I have read this to my colleagues at work they had a good laugh, even
if majority of them are Windows users. The truth is no one who is sane will run
a production server on Windows. If we have to run Windows because an
application requires MSSQL and there has to be access to that from eg. the
internet we are connecting it behind a Linux machine, cutting all the ports
except MSSQL one and doing tunnels to it via SSH. So, I would suggest reading
first proofs of concept posted on Bugtraq how silly is all that MS security.
Windows is neat OS...for workstation, for the people who doesn\'t do much
besides running Office or playing games and who has a sysadmin smart
enought to put a masquerade and secure them behind UNIX server.
Regards.
I still support Windows Server 2003, and my words said towards this os. Besides, competing with something doesn\'t mean it necessary has to be over it. But through this operating system you have to admit that Windows went very close to Linux\' stability and other \"features\".
Also, don\'t talk for something you didn\'t see how it works for yourself. Never trust only in other\'s words.
;)
Meh, anyway, is good to know it amused you.
:P
-
And my words were about that Windows is not capable to be a server. It
doesn\'t matter if it is Windows called XP or Windows called Server, I can put
an Amiga 500 with Workbench and call it Workbench Server as well.
I have Windows Server 2003 at work on one of my workstations, I am using it
when I have to play with MSSQL and Query Analyzer or Crystal Reports and for
workstation it is ok - it not crashes like ME or 98SE, but I wouldn\'t put it on any
machine that actually does something imporant...
XP (and all these \"servers\" which are based on win2k or XP) is surely more
stable, but this is not comparable for Linux because these two systems were
created for completly different purposes; Windows was a neat GUI for DOS
its role was to make easier everyday life of not so computer literate user while
Linux had been created by a bunch of hackers for being a networking system,
later on server system. So XP is very stable while performing tasks Windows
had been created for - running multimedia, programs, games etc. while Linux
performs better at services. Generally multimedia in the past vere offten killing
Linux not because Linux itself but broken modules. So generally Linux\'s new
realm was user programs while Windows\'s it is server programs. We were
once testing IIS on Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition vs Apache on
Slackware 9.1...we used a program which generates great HTTP traffic and
loads the HTTP server, commonly used by the admins to test performance
both of the servers had, of course connections limits set on them etc., well IIS
first lagged badly while it came close to its limit and after a while we saw a
nice BSOD while Apache just started to give \"Service unavailable\" errors at
new connections. Also you are forced to use GUI on your Windows machine
which eats your CPU and RAM.
Well it is also connected to \"fast\", Windows has nice and fast GUI, which is
surely comparable to KDE and even a little faster, it executes programs quckly
but it is dying when we come at mutiuser and multitasking land, well Windows
at the beggining were designed to be used by one user, sure it has since like
98 login screens etc. but it doesn\'t really make it multiuser system there
comes security, Windows has primitive permissions and users management,
you can use programs like Windows Password Changer to get admin
password at runtime because it is stored in a binary file writable for all (that\'s
how we are recovering forgotten Windows passwords. :D) while Linux uses
process accounting, user and permission management known from UNIX which
is really powerful, simple and fast. Networking in Windows is a great joke,
especially that they are using very offten their own protocols instead using
these commonly used and known, not telling about complying to RFC that are
commonly accepted as proper definitions of Internet standards.
Regards.
-
Originally posted by Platyna
... it not crashes like ME or 98SE, but I wouldn\'t put it on any machine that actually does something imporant...
Regards.
Others do.
:)
-
And others are getting h4x00r3d. ;)
Regards.
-
Originally posted by Nightrogue
3ds Max and Maya are both considerably more powerful than Blender. They do cost a helluva lot more though. Blender is a very professional program and is used in maaany movies since it\'s free.
Err...are you sure? Generally movie producers dont like to skimp on their equipment. Not that Blender is bad, it\'s just that it isn\'t the best, and the best is what movie producers go for.
Did you know that Blender was used in Spiderman 2? It\'s pretty nifty app, too bad I just completely not good at any art based stuff...
-
Did you know that Blender was used in Spiderman 2? It\'s pretty nifty app, too bad I just completely not good at any art based stuff...
Yeah, it was used to make the pre-visual. (The nice images that come up while the opening credits play). Not sure if it was used anywhere else, thats just what i could find out. So it obviously cant be that bad.
From wikipedia
The first large professional project in which Blender was used as the primary tool was the animatics pre-visualization for the Hollywood movie Spider-Man 2.
-
It is probabily a matter of personal preference. I prefer linux, others prefer windows. Linux and Windows are different worlds, and it is tough at times to draw comparisons between the two. Anyone can skew benchmarks one way or another, and there isn\'t any security that can NEVER be broken afaik. Linux may be more inherently secure than Windows, and windows server 2003 might be less secure, but that is not because of stability (i\'ve heard 2003 is quite stabile as well though it is what our work server runs, and its uptime is about 50% - at least the file server part. - It also borks up on using itself as a internet gateway and its DHCP server capibilities are a bit weird. Even though its set to give an indefinate time for the lease, it randomly assigns me new IP addresses at will - not sure why) - the reason it has problems is that it shares some of the same weaknesses as its desktop counterparts. Windows has made leaps and bounds since its buggy ME and 2000 editions, and this is a good thing. Hopefully Linux will become more of a threat than it already is so that both will be improving more quickly. Thats what real competition ensures. With coimpetition, some company can\'t ignore the needs of the user - instead they are forced to constantly innovate, producing better products. Would Intel have processors as fast as they are without AMD pushing the envelope of processor technology?
I\'ll continue to use Linux exclusively, and help get my freinds free of MS not because I hate MS, but because I think they can produce a better product if they put the users first. The only way that will happen is if they have some real competition, not Apples 5% marketshare. Linux may be the best hope for that - the OpenSource community is quite strong and can psuh that. Hopefully competition can drive foreward new interesting things in the broad scope of OS\'s.
-
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
Some time ago I wanted one of those beautiful iBooks. If I had room for it, and a shitload of money, I would want one of those great graphics machines, you know, Silicon Graphics... Soon I\'ll add a Playstation 3 to that list (I already have a PS2, but the lack of a hard drive prevents me from running Linux on it).
Hmm, so linux is good when you want to run High performance graphics rendering, and when you want to install an operating system onto a computer which wasnt designed for it.
I didn\'t say anything about high performance graphics rendering. I wanted the iBook because it\'s cute, the SGI for the geek factor, and the PS3 is of course because of the games primarily.
As for wanting to install an operating system onto a computer which wasn\'t designed for it, well, I basically can\'t install Linux without doing so. Your \"designed for Windows XP\" computer is not designed for running Linux anymore than the PS3 or the Mac is.
I can\'t get Windows support for it, and no I didn\'t get a Windows disc from the manufacturer. I did get a Solaris disc though.
Uh hu. And what do you use the computer for again? Is it better and faster then a current windows configured computer at ordinary tasks? Keeping in mind i dont do much Multidisciplinary Design Optimization, so that stuff dosnt really count.
I don\'t use it anymore, it\'s much slower than my brand new system. I was only using it as an example of a machine that does not have the \"designed for Windows\" sticker, to show that Windows does NOT run on it.
You must be looking at the top \"made for Windows XP\" chips there. Go take a look at the real top hardware - SGI/MIPS, SUN/Sparc, IBM/Power/Cell, HP/PA-Risc... None of it has Windows support. Nearly all of it supports Linux to some degree.
In case you missed the running theme for me here, im an ordinary user. I use the internet. I play some high performance games occasionly. I dont run a Web Server from my bedroom for my website displaying my wonderfully rendered 3D images while using my dreamcast to run the linux kernel. If i did, im sure i\'d be very impressed with linux. The way it is, im not.
I thought we were discussing which OS had best support for hardware that isn\'t designed for the OS. At least that\'s what I was trying to show - that Linux has support for lots of hardware, neither which is designed for Linux, where as Windows basically only supports \"Designed for Windows\" hardware.
-
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
Amen brotha. This says pretty much my thoughts.. Androgos made alot of good points too. Seems alot of these windows users bashing on linux can\'t tell the difference between closed source, open source, GPL vs closed source code liceneses etc. If your gonna bicker about something stupid at least build a decent foundation on which you base your opinions so that we don\'t laugh at you at the start. Gotta get at least halfway thru the arguement, I mean com\'on.
Personally I use linux 99.9% of the time because that\'s what serves me best. Do I hate windows, no. Do I dislike windows because of certain functionality they\'ve put into it, sure. I\'m sure if I had alot of free time I can look thru the linux kernel and find alot of implementations I disagree with there as well.
Sometimes linux is the best tool, sometimes windows is. Sometimes neither are and Solaris, a *bsd, one of the mac os\'s could be, etc, etc... you get my point. Really why bicker over something so silly and in a mmorpg forum of all places, rofl. Where\'s the love? Where\'s the peace? No seriously where is it?
Sorry, had to. Peace be with you my fellow computer users. Now let\'s find something worth arguing about like IE vs Firefox, or red vs blue. How about the color of the sky? I\'m out, gl with this.
Ahem?? Some of these windows users bashing linux?? If you\'re referring to me perhaps you might want to give some quotes instead of making unbased claims? I\'ve been programming for 5 years and i find the claim that i dont know open source from closed source personally insulting.
If you think this is turning into a flame war, then dont participate. From my view we\'re just having a discussion about the differences between the o/s because we want to. We\'re allowed to disagree. I havnt seen anyone flaming me, and i dont think i\'ve flamed anyone in return. If you dont like the conversation, dont participate.
Oh and btw, I.E vs firefox is just stupid. Firefox wins hands down.
And it is obvious that most of you who didn\'t like linux because of dependancy issues when you tried it tried noob distros, ever tried debian? or archlinux? or gentoo? these distros are prettymuch built without dependancies.
This is turning into a flame war, and it is my guess that it will soon become like the thread about the peta sponsored racoon beating.
Noob distros? This is the one thing i hate above almost everything else about linux: No matter what distro you use, whenever you talk to a linux user they\'ll tell you its the wrong one. I have tried debian but it didnt work well for me. Never tried archlinux and gentoo though. Personally i dont have the time required to install every single linux distro. But i mean the fact that you have o rely on knowing with distros are \"noob\" distros and thus choosing other ones is just another reason not to use linux, personaly.
My point is that things do go wrong in linux and in its component parts, but it is always the fault of the user, and it is always fairly easy to figure out what is wrong and to fix it. It is a lot easier to fix a problem in a .conf file then in a .dll file. When something goes wrong in windows, you\'re pretty much just screwed in my experience.
Yeah, but same for windows. Most of the errors i get are from me doing something really stupid or from my programming. Though your point about .dll files is indeed valid.
Well, I wasn\'t specifically meaning anyone in particular but if you think I meant you alrighty.....
I can really just post entire post made by you and their mainly just whining. You complain about an os you obviously made no attempt to learn about before jumping in. You complain that your hardware isn\'t supported, oh wow, on so many other non-windows os\'s alot of the hardware is proprietary or isn\'t supported and the users know this, they research before running the os and don\'t seem to complain about this in a year as much as you did in a single post.
\"Ahem\" .. like your very first post in this thread, lol. And your a programmer?
Hmm, I thought programmers would know more about lisencing then.. because your whole post ripping nvidia\'s *closed sourced* license for their *closed source* drivers was hilarious. You really think you know what your talking about there? Because you can say you did but I\'d like to quote
Originally posted by ramlambmoo Wow, thanks nividia for looking out for us, protecting us from evil reverse engineering, and protecting their precious copyright, and making sure they\'re not responsible if anything happens. Linux Software lincenses are so much better!!
I mean that\'s the \"general nvidia license\" that\'s not linux specific and it\'s certainly not any license written or wanted by either the open source community or anyone doing linux development, ie. kernel writers, distro dev\'s, etc. I could go on and on but this is already me turning this into a flame and setting up some good bait.
Just wanted to point out some funny points about the person targeting me because they thought, in their paranoia, I was referring to them because they\'re special and noone else in this entire post talking bad about linux could I have possibly been also aiming at, lol.
-
\"How a linux thread turned into a Windoze on Linux thread in less than a week\" - My new hit TV series inspired by this thread...BTW...Windows rocks :P
-
Well, I wasn\'t specifically meaning anyone in particular but if you think I meant you alrighty.....
What you said was
Seems alot of these windows users bashing on linux can\'t tell the difference between closed source, open source, GPL vs closed source code liceneses etc.
There are three people who have argued for Windows in the thread at some point: Me, Annah and Platyna. Since you said \"alot of these\" users bashing linux you must be referring to more than one. Saying i wasnt reffering to someone in particular is like me saying \"Alot of people who use linux are \" and then saying oh well i didnt mean anyone in particular. You\'re just resorting to generalisations to try and make your point, because you have nothing objective to say. Either acccuse someone of not knowing something upfront, or dont bring it into the conversation at all.
I can really just post entire post made by you and their mainly just whining.
Im sorry if english isnt your first language (im assuming this based on that sentence) but we cant have a coherent discussion here if i cant understand you. I\'ll have to assume what you meant to say was \"You\'re just whining about linux\". Well, by that logic, you\'re just whining about me whining then aren\'t you? Not only are you whining, but you\'re a hypocrite... I dont see how saying that somebody is whining makes what they say any less relevant or true. Again, come back when you have something objective to say and maybe add something to the discussion.
You complain about an os you obviously made no attempt to learn about before jumping in. You complain that your hardware isn\'t supported, oh wow, on so many other non-windows os\'s alot of the hardware is proprietary or isn\'t supported and the users know this, they research before running the os and don\'t seem to complain about this in a year as much as you did in a single post.
Hmmm so now you have to research linux before trying it? What do you want, a 1000 word essay? Though it\'s true, if i had of researched linux i probablly could have figured out that it wouldnt work using my hardware anyway, and so i shouldn\'t have even bothered trying it. But I thought i should give it a chance regardless.
Hmm, I thought programmers would know more about lisencing then.. because your whole post ripping nvidia\'s *closed sourced* license for their *closed source* drivers was hilarious. You really think you know what your talking about there?
My point was that in order to use linux with a GeForce 7800 GTX you must agree to a license which is not protecting your rights, and not like was stated in the first post of this thread. Open source license agreements are all good and well for linux however the fact remains you must still agree to many of the same types of licenses that windows users have to agree to anyway.
I mean that\'s the \"general nvidia license\" that\'s not linux specific and it\'s certainly not any license written or wanted by either the open source community or anyone doing linux development, ie. kernel writers, distro dev\'s, etc. I could go on and on but this is already me turning this into a flame and setting up some good bait.
Regardless, you have to agree to it to use The chip on a linux machine. It dosnt matter who made it, the reality is you have to accept it, whether its a nice linux GNU license or an evil nividia one. Thus
3.) I rarely have to sign any EULA\'s
4.) The EULA\'s I do have to agree to are designed to protect my rights, not the rights of a large company.
Cannot simultanesly hold true while you are using the state of the art Hardware, or actually anything more Nividia for that matter. And probablly pretty much any other chip maker on the planet, if i bothered to go out and read their licenses. The fact that the core Linux licenses are GPL does not mean others things that you have to agree to are as well.
Just wanted to point out some funny points about the person targeting me because they thought, in their paranoia, I was referring to them because they\'re special and noone else in this entire post talking bad about linux could I have possibly been also aiming at, lol.
As i mentioned before, there have been three people who have stated support for windows in this thread: Me, Annah and Platyna. Put your money where you mouth is (no pun intended) and say something about one of us, or be quiet about it.
I didn\'t say anything about high performance graphics rendering. I wanted the iBook because it\'s cute, the SGI for the geek factor, and the PS3 is of course because of the games primarily.
I dont generally base a $1500 investment in computing hardware on whether something is \'cute\' or not. As for the SGI, what would you use it for? I assuming you\'re going to actually do something with it, and as you will see (or probablly already know) those tasks aren\'t very common. Again, if you\'re just buying something for the \'geek\' or the \'cute\' factor, i dont think it has much relevance in a discussion about o/s. As for the PS3, if you\'re buying it for the games, then it has no relevance to the discussion, because i asked about hardware you would like that runs linux not windows. I\'d also love a PS3, but it just isnt really relevant to what we\'re talking about.
I don\'t use it anymore, it\'s much slower than my brand new system. I was only using it as an example of a machine that does not have the \"designed for Windows\" sticker, to show that Windows does NOT run on it.
Point taken. I was just showing that you could get a windows system that does the same thing, and just as fast anyway.
I thought we were discussing which OS had best support for hardware that isn\'t designed for the OS. At least that\'s what I was trying to show - that Linux has support for lots of hardware, neither which is designed for Linux, where as Windows basically only supports \"Designed for Windows\" hardware.
Yes, however the point im making here is that linux has support for lots of (from a general computing users perspective) useless hardware. Like linux has support for all this hardware used in high detail 3D modelling- but what use is that to the general user? My point is that in the realm of everyday computing used for general tasks and gaming, windows has better support. Linux overall has wider support for hardware- but in the area of general computing and gaming, the amount of hardware supported is less than that of windows. And since general computing and gaming is what i primarily do- and what a majority of other computer users do- thats all that really matters for me. If i were to go beyond the general computing experience- into using servers, using 3d graphics- then my perception of the situation would change due to my needs changing. But I dont forsee that happening anytime soon.
As for wanting to install an operating system onto a computer which wasn\'t designed for it, well, I basically can\'t install Linux without doing so. Your \"designed for Windows XP\" computer is not designed for running Linux anymore than the PS3 or the Mac is.
Well i\'m sure someone here mentioned they had a designed for linux computer, so im sure you can. And yes, my computer is not designed for linux any more than the PS3 or the mac. Thats why my computer running linux is about as functional as a PS3 running linux. Which is why i dont use linux.
-
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
My point was that in order to use linux with a GeForce 7800 GTX you must agree to a license which is not protecting your rights, and not like was stated in the first post of this thread. Open source license agreements are all good and well for linux however the fact remains you must still agree to many of the same types of licenses that windows users have to agree to anyway.
Your fault for going with a nVidia card. The license for the nVidia drivers has nothing to do with Linux, it\'s the same license as for using a nVidia card on Windows.
My current PC has an ATI Radeon 9250, and I never had to agree to such a license to use my card. Look here to see the differences: http://x.org/X11R6.8.2/doc/LICENSE.html. My old computer had a Matrox G200, and I later added a Voodoo 2, no Windows-style EULAs there either.
I do see some of those licenses though, the last one was Doom 3. But Doom 3 is in no way necessary for any hardware to work, I can use my computer perfectly fine without it.
I dont generally base a $1500 investment in computing hardware on whether something is \'cute\' or not. As for the SGI, what would you use it for? I assuming you\'re going to actually do something with it, and as you will see (or probablly already know) those tasks aren\'t very common.
I would use it for the same things as any Linux machine I have. It runs the same software, it does the same things, basically there is no difference. As for the iBook, the advantage is that I could easily bring it wherever I go.
Again, if you\'re just buying something for the \'geek\' or the \'cute\' factor, i dont think it has much relevance in a discussion about o/s.
Say what? Maybe we think of things in different ways, but for me, there\'s the geek stuff (including gaming), and there\'s the work stuff. I buy things for the geek stuff, and I let my employer buy things for the work stuff. In short, if it\'s not for the \'geek\' factor, I won\'t be the one buying it.
As for the PS3, if you\'re buying it for the games, then it has no relevance to the discussion, because i asked about hardware you would like that runs linux not windows.
Your PC is for gaming too, right? So it\'s irrelevant too? Or are you simply declaring the PS3 for irrelevant, because it runs games AND Linux (although not at the same time), but not Windows?
The PS3 is a perfect example of consumer hardware made for gaming that doesn\'t work with Windows. And it does run Linux. I\'m not sure if the Linux disc is going to be included or not, we\'ll just have to wait until the launch to see about that.
Point taken. I was just showing that you could get a windows system that does the same thing, and just as fast anyway.
But I don\'t want a Windows system. I\'m not interested in Windows, why should I limit my hardware choice to fit your OS of choice?
Yes, however the point im making here is that linux has support for lots of (from a general computing users perspective) useless hardware.
Useless because it doesn\'t run Windows, and that\'s what \"general computing users\" use.
My point is that in the realm of everyday computing used for general tasks and gaming, windows has better support.
Of course. Because those tasks are what Windows is used for, of course Windows supports these things, otherwise they wouldn\'t be \"in the realm of everyday computing\".
Basically all you\'re saying is still that Windows is better at supporting \"Designed for Windows\" hardware.
As for wanting to install an operating system onto a computer which wasn\'t designed for it, well, I basically can\'t install Linux without doing so. Your \"designed for Windows XP\" computer is not designed for running Linux anymore than the PS3 or the Mac is.
Well i\'m sure someone here mentioned they had a designed for linux computer, so im sure you can.
Well, there might be one or two shops in the US that does that, but there aren\'t any around here. And even those shops just pick the best supported stuff from the \"Designed for Windows\" hardware, NONE of them design their own hardware. Look inside it, and it says Intel/AMD/ATI/nVidia/Matrox and so on.
And yes, my computer is not designed for linux any more than the PS3 or the mac. Thats why my computer running linux is about as functional as a PS3 running linux.
Wait, didn\'t you say that you had problems with hardware support? Then how can it be about as funtional as a PS3 running Linux flawlessly?
-
i didn\'t read all of the threads but some things i\'d like to say are:
- gentoo is the best. no doubt about it. software management, installation and uninstallation is a breeze. installing gentoo is a bitch, but only if you\'re doing a stage 1 install. the only problem with the rest is just the time to compile the kernel, X, and gnome (yes, gnome), and other system necessities.
- windows sucks
- nvidia > ATI. for a few reasons:
--- nvidia is better for openGL, ATI is better for directx. and if any of you have some sense in you, you\'d know that directx sucks. openGL is so much easier to c0de in, with a much better interface and API.
--- ATI drivers for linux are worse than christ himself.
--- nvidia is a cooler name
- and it doesn\'t matter what computer you have, you can run linux on it. doesn\'t matter whether you have a dell, emachines, or a home built computer, you can install linux on it.
- KDE SUCKS. gnome is better than KDE in every way. no doubt about it. gnome just makes it easier to do what you want, fast. with multiple workspaces you can easily put web surfing in one, play games in another, and have things like BMP/xmms in a third one. the only thing KDE has over gnome is applications. while i like gnome\'s IDE anjuta over kde\'s KDevelop, i like applications like k3b, kate, and.. other stuff that i can\'t think of at the moment :]
-
Originally posted by schloob
directx sucks. openGL is so much easier to c0de in, with a much better interface and API.
DirectX doesn\'t suck, but OpenGL is better IMO.
I think DirectX is actually easier to code in since it\'s a bit more highlevel (or ?)
\"c0de\"? If you want to play cool, you have to act cool too:
c(size_t(~0))de - Hell yea :D
Originally posted by schloob
- and it doesn\'t matter what computer you have, you can run linux on it. doesn\'t matter whether you have a dell, emachines, or a home built computer, you can install linux on it.
Actually, you can install it in cellphones, heck even your microwave
Originally posted by schloob
- KDE SUCKS. gnome is better than KDE in every way. no doubt about it. gnome just makes it easier to do what you want, fast. with multiple workspaces you can easily put web surfing in one, play games in another, and have things like BMP/xmms in a third one. the only thing KDE has over gnome is applications. while i like gnome\'s IDE anjuta over kde\'s KDevelop, i like applications like k3b, kate, and.. other stuff that i can\'t think of at the moment :]
First, I like GNOME better than KDE, but you\'re being unfair.
KDE has multiple workspaces too and you can run gnome programs the other way around too.
[/QUOTE]
-
First, I like GNOME better than KDE, but you\'re being unfair.
KDE has multiple workspaces too and you can run gnome programs the other way around too.
maybe i was being unfair. since i never actually used KDE and i\'m judging solely on screenshots. but still, gnome has a cooler name and therefore is better.
and when i worked with directx, i hated it. i said \"wow let\'s try something new and use directx\" and then i\'m like \"wow this sucks\". because it was just god awful. leave it to microsoft to make a bad interface to a bad library :[
-
Originally posted by Androgos
\"c0de\"? If you want to play cool, you have to act cool too:
c(size_t(~0))de - Hell yea
I bow to your coolness...
Robin bows to the Androgos\' superior coolness
BTW: This thread is really funny for ones not so seriously involved. I\'m laughing the hell out of myself right now seeing you people argue like this.
-
Originally posted by schloob
- KDE SUCKS. gnome is better than KDE in every way.
man whats up with you guys. i\'m getting the impression that the only desktops you can think of are gnome or kde. but remember, those desktops strive to get as closely to the windoze desktop as possible, gnome even wanted to introduce a registry similar to windoze.
ever heared of WindowMaker? if you ask me, thats the desktop of joice. it goes fully with the original spirit of linux - KISS, keep it simple and sexy. its lightweight, starts in about 2 seconds, it\'s highly configurable and themeable with just a few clicks. please stop pretending as kde and gnome are the only desktops for linux, there are many others which do not turn you into a windoze-linux-mutant.
however, never forget to have phun ;)
-
First, I like GNOME better than KDE, but you\'re being unfair. KDE has multiple workspaces too and you can run gnome programs the other way around too.
KDE has one problem with its multiple workspaces. Even when switching desktops, the apps still show up on the taskbar. A new desketop in KDE is like minimizing all the apps you were using and starting some more, then closing them and unminimizing the old apps. The taskbar just stays that much more cluttered. In Gnome, the apps dissappear from the task bar as well, which is a cleaner solution.
WindowMaker is indeed good. Enlightenment is also good as is the new XFCE which is excellent. Also I quite enjoy blackbox as there is a windows port. On the rare occasion I boot to my small windows partition, It looks exactly the same! Since I\'ve themed them the same it works out quite well.
-
I have found this link (http://os.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/05/18/2033216 (http://os.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/05/18/2033216) ) in Linux+ magazine. Read it, the article is funny for both Windows and Linux fans :)
-
You can isolate desktops in kde too. I should know, since I\'m using it. :)
-
To make KDE make windows from other desktops disapear completely, look in the control center. I think its under \"taskbar\" or something (this comp. is running Gnome on Fedora 3 [and it isn\'t mine, I don\'t have a \'puter of my own ;( ]).
I like Linux :) its nice :P and anyway, how could anyone resist Tux?
-
there are many others which do not turn you into a windoze-linux-mutant.
what? i just pick the one that helps me get things done that fastest. i type alt+W to open a terminal which i use 95% of the time, and i can just type whatever commands i\'m going to use in the box above my windows. i have yet to try other window managers because frankly, i think i broke something. what does using gnome have to do with using windows? i\'ll use evilWM if you really want me to.
-
yeah thats exactly my point - and heavy loaded desktops like gnome
or kde do not let you do your stuff in the fastest way. well of course, if you just want to fireup a term you do not need a windowmanager
at all, simply use the x-server build-in xterm.
what does using gnome have to do with using windows?
nothing. i didnt say that using gnome is like using windoze, but that gnome and kde are trying to get the look&feel of windoze. hence you have a \'K\' or \'Gnome-Foot\' button where you find all your programs, categorized into \'programs\', \'configuration\', \'documents\' and so on... sounds familiar?
you say you want todo your stuff fast - this means for me that i dont have to move my mouse to the lower left corner to start the app i want, but simply right-click on the desktop somewhere and start it.
next, i love an organized desktop-environment. this means i have 8 desktops configured, each for its own purpose like mozilla, email, chatting, big-term, double-term, qtorrent, gimp or planeshift. i can choose \'per\' app which icon i want to have in all desktops\' taskbar and which only in the one where the app is running.
thats a different approach then kde, gnome or windoze have. windowmaker gives me that, thats why i love it. i tried many different desktops, from fluxbox, fmvw(95), gnome, kde, icewm or xfce - but when it comes to productivity, windowmaker is the only dekstop where i feel really happy on a long-term-base without feeling the need to constantly change something. plus it has hundreds of dockapps and tousands of all-in-one themes.
the configuration is straight forward, all is done in one configuration dialog - not as in gnome or kde, where you have a dozen configuration menu\'s, one for icons, themes, apps, fonts, languages, and so on... nothing is hidden, i know where to look for something without really \'knowing\' it.
and lastly, together with cygwin i can use windowmaker on my windoze desktop at work ;)
however, use what ever you feel happy with - my point is simply that there are many and probably better desktops for linux than gnome or kde.
-
Originally posted by 1Samildanach
To make KDE make windows from other desktops disapear completely, look in the control center. I think its under \"taskbar\" or something (this comp. is running Gnome on Fedora 3 [and it isn\'t mine, I don\'t have a \'puter of my own ;( ]).
I like Linux :) its nice :P and anyway, how could anyone resist Tux?
Just right click on the taskbar>configure panel>taskbar and right at the top of the list clear the \"Show windows from all desktops\" checkbox and your done. That is one of the reasons that I personally prefer KDE to Gnome you have much more control over the interface (IMO).
regards
John
-
You are right - KDE has a bit more control over the interface, it just has more features. Gnome has fewer controls and features I believe, but that makes it more simple and more lightweight. For someone first makng the switch from windows to linux, its probabily just a little simpler and easier to use. Alot of themes can be added just by drag and drom, something that KDE doesn\'t do nearly as well. It also seems to start faster (unless you are using YOPER linux, which somehow makes KDE start in about 3 seconds.)
Windowmakrs dockable apps are awsome cool, and many friends of mine have commented on my work desktop.