Why I love Linux,.

[ramlambmoo]

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  (No offense to anyone who does use Windows and mingw apart from myself).

[Leeloo]

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.

[ramlambmoo]

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.

[Annah]

\"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!

 

 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.

 

[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.
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.

[Rumley Benson]

Linux is a respectable OS.  An honorable adversary to my beloved Mac OSX .

[Ralas]

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.

[Aldaron]

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! , 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.

[Platyna]

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.

[ramlambmoo]

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).

[Androgos]

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

[Annah]

You sure are one of those Linux maniac fans. Chill.

 

 * points to:

Linux is an operating system not religion.

[Leeloo]

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.

[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.  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.

[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.