Windows Linux or Mac?
POSTED BY: Haze
UPDATED: Saturday, April 8, 2006 06:42
VIEWED: 43009
PAGE 2 of 2
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
I'm talking about continuing with facts and references. Which I've done. Which Sneaker98 seems incapable of doing. I await to be proven wrong.
Apparently you didn't get the memo, but I'm not stretching this debate. I don't give a crap what a *nix fanboy has to say, and that's all there is to it.
I don't take the high road. I take the correct road.
Go play with your OS, kiddo. Leave the debating to folks who can keep it in their pants.
"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
Apparently you didn't get the memo, but I'm not stretching this debate. I don't give a crap what a *nix fanboy has to say, and that's all there is to it.
Apparently, you have not learned anything about being a gentleman as well (or lady depending on your gender).
You really should learn to give proper references that support your argument. I don't think many here will be willing to believe anything you have to say without them. In fact, I've proven that everything in the above is false in past posts.
Basically, you can keep singing the same old tired tune. You just have to understand that just because you say it doesn't make it true. Also, saying it a lot doesn't make it true either.
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
I don't take the high road. I take the correct road.
Well, isn't this just obscenely arrogant of you to say
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
Go play with your OS, kiddo. Leave the debating to folks who can keep it in their pants.
Um, you are aware this tantrum that you just had, proves everything that I've conjectured about you, right?
On behalf of Canada, I apologize for Sneaker98's behaviour (and any part that I had in this). I don't know what happened to him/her to become the aggressive, bitter, unforgiving person (s)he is, but I apologize.
Hopefully, (s)he is mature enough, to walk away and cool down before replying. Because if it is of the same type as the above, I won't be speaking to him/her anymore, here or else where as I have no time for such immaturity.
@Everyone:
I found this interesting:
http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/06/03/22/1418210.shtml
Comments...
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Too late to take the high road, kiddo. I'll keep saying that until you get the message. But in the mean time I'm sure as hell not going to get into a silly pissing contest.
Now begone from this thread, and stop baiting me.
"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
Too late to take the high road, kiddo. I'll keep saying that until you get the message. But in the mean time I'm sure as hell not going to get into a silly pissing contest.
Now begone from this thread, and stop baiting me.
Not baiting you or any such thing at this point. Just making sure that these posts stay around that prove everything that I say.
Good-day.
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
A third problem, and mostly applies to larger businesses: who exactly is going to support your product? For a home user, it may work out provided the answer to your question is in a newsgroup somewhere. But your best bet is to cross your fingers and hope to god Google finds the answer. And that's really not good enough sometimes.
So basically the same as MS technical support then...
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
A third problem, and mostly applies to larger businesses: who exactly is going to support your product? For a home user, it may work out provided the answer to your question is in a newsgroup somewhere. But your best bet is to cross your fingers and hope to god Google finds the answer. And that's really not good enough sometimes.
So basically the same as MS technical support then...
Lol, sometimes, yes.
Or you get a fellow with an Indian accent saying his name's Mike. *sigh* Why must they hide outsourcing? I don't care if I'm talking to someone halfway across the world, I just want some help with the product!
"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
[B]@Everyone:
I found this interesting:
http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/06/03/22/1418210.shtml
Comments...
I knew it...
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
Lol, sometimes, yes.
Or you get a fellow with an Indian accent saying his name's Mike. *sigh* Why must they hide outsourcing? I don't care if I'm talking to someone halfway across the world, I just want some help with the product!
"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds
YES!!! That's why I hate calling SBC Yahoo! DSL support, it's always some guy with an indian accent saying, "Thank you for contacting SBC Yahoo! DSL Support, my name is Jeff..."
And not a one of them knows jack squat about what they're supporting. I had to talk to 3 different people there one day, and didn't get a single one of them that understood what port forwarding was. The crappy DSL modem/wireless router SBC gives out doesn't do port forwarding, even though I set it all up properly it just doesn't forward traffic properly. Spent a bloody hour on the phone with those tards and never got any closer to a solution because none of them knew what the hell I was talking about.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm all about doing something with my computer (gaming wise) besides Halo (bleeck)and WoW , which is good but not enough to make me use a mac.
So i use Windows XP Pro with SP2. Never had a stablitiy problems with it. and of course I'm using a replacement computer (while my computer gets shipped here) and i had ot install Home edition, never had a comupter crash and freeze so gorram much! Cant even get FFXI installed. *sigh*
-------------------------------
RAF Lakenheath
Security Deputy of the Sereni-Tree
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
EDIT: Some of the links included here, I had to 'wrap', so copy/past accordingly thx!
@Sigmanunki
I just love ./
Some of the comments are priceless.
If I had a Mac, the last thing I'd do is torture it with Windows.:shudder:
@Anyone interested in the state of Linux gaming:
http://linux.strangegamer.com/index.php?title=Game_List
http://happypenguin.org/
A special version of the "Spanish ubuntu", known as LinEx (it's not ubuntu), has been released and is dedicated to gaming. It has a GUI-based installer and allows easy installation of 3D accelerated drivers. It's called JuegaLinEx.
Where to get:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http:
//juegalinex.linex.org/&prev=/search%3Fq%3Djuegalinex%26hl%3Den%26hs%3DyYi
%26lr%3D%26client%3Dfirefox%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:unofficial
List of included games:
http://apt.linex.org/dists/cl/juegalinex/binary-i386/
You'll have to install things like Wolfenstien -Enemy Territory- yourself since all the games on 'Juega' are "educator approved" (i.e., no blood-n-guts).
Linux got game baby.
@All
This thread would not be complete without:
http://www.ubergeek.tv/article.php?pid=54
@Sneaker98
Learn the ways of your SunOS young padawan for
"Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly."
~Henry Spencer
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
[B]@Sneaker98
Learn the ways of your SunOS young padawan for
"Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly."
~Henry Spencer
I'll have time eventually, but not just yet. When juggling classes and work, miscellaneous knowledge isn't really priority :-\
"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Haze:
Here’s a question. If I where to go with Linux what version would you recommend?
--------------------------------------------------
Who do you suppose is in there?
Depends on what you are looking for. If you want one that just works, go with PCLinuxOS. If you don't mind some tweking, go with Ubuntu or Xandros. I'm currently building a dirtibution of Linux myself, and I'm using PCLinuxOS as my benchmark for out of the box usability.
--------------------------------------------------
Child One: "Republicans aren't real."
Child Two: "Full well they are!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Tiger:
I've been watching this thread with great interest. I'm no expert in operating systems, but I've been curious for a while about experimenting with something new, strictly from a user's perspective.
Unfortunately, in this thread one guy says "A" and the next guy says "B". Maybe it would shed some light on the subject if you have a more specific, real-world example, namely me. Should I try Linux or a Mac?
My current system:
Windows XP sp2
1 gb RAM
200 gb storage
2.4 mhz Pentium 4
dual monitors
Normal usage:
Firefox & I.E.
Email with Thunderbird
Graphic/web design with Dreamweaver, Photoshop/Illustrator, Flash
Hauppaugge TV tuner with Beyond TV to watch TV on one monitor while working or surfing on the other
Bittorrents
DVDs/music with Windows Media or VLC
Microsoft Office
DVD burning with Nero
Do you think I'd get along alright with Linux or a Mac? Would it be worth the trouble of switching and relearning?
I've come up with what *might* be some suitable replacements for your software under Linux:
Normal usage:
Firefox & I.E.
You can still use Firefox. Run IE under the wine program for Linux
Email with Thunderbird
You can still use Thunderbird
Graphic/web design with Dreamweaver, Photoshop/Illustrator, Flash
These can be a little tricky. They all appear to run using the wine program listed above. Check the link below.
Hauppaugge TV tuner with Beyond TV to watch TV on one monitor while working or surfing on the other
For this, use tvtime. It has no recording features, but viewing works fine with tuners that can watch channels below 125.
Bittorrents
Azureus is the program for bit torrents. Requires java.
DVDs/music with Windows Media or VLC
You have your pick here. Xine, mplayer, kaffeine, and many others will work.
Microsoft Office
OpenOffice.org 2.0 fits the bill nicely
DVD burning with Nero
You can use either K3b (recommended) or NeroLinux. Try K3b though. Works VERY well.
Links:
Wine
http://frankscorner.org/
http://winehq.org
OpenOffice
http://openoffice.org
I STRONGLY suggest using PCLinuxOS to run all of this. Super stable, and very user friendly. You can download a LiveCD version that you can load on your computer that does not require you to load it on to your hard drive.
http://www.pclinuxos.com/
I hope all this helps.
--------------------------------------------------
Child One: "Republicans aren't real."
Child Two: "Full well they are!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
@Sigmanunki
I just love ./
Isn't it just the bestest though:
http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/06/03/23/1717259.shtml
LOL!
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
@All
This thread would not be complete without:
http://www.ubergeek.tv/article.php?pid=54
Oh my... that's just the most beautiful thing ever
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
EVERYWORLDSPINNIN,
Thanks a lot for that list, it was VERY helpful.
I took your advice and spent most of the evening trying to download, burn, and boot from the live cd with no luck. Constant problems.
So I took a break and looked into what might be required to get working the other stuff I need. The 'fix' to get my dual monitors running was 2 pages of some kind of code I'd have no idea what to do with. All the software for my TV tuner card doesn't record at all and some say they don't even play live TV (which seems very odd - I mean, what's the point?). I'd have to trade in my wireless mouse and keyboard.
It seems like Linux requires a whole lot of knowledge that most people, even a pretty experienced computer user like me, just don't have and probably don't have the time to learn.
Maybe Linux is fun to play with, but I really can't see the advantage of fewer viruses and (supposed) more stability, if I can't even get the thing to start.
Am I missing something?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Tiger,
What type of hardware are you running? If you could, post your system specs such as the type of video card you have and TV Tuner type (I know you said Haupage, but is it a PVR-250 or WinTVGo or something)etc. I'll see what I can dig up for you if you are still interested.
--------------------------------------------------
Child One: "Republicans aren't real."
Child Two: "Full well they are!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Video - nvida geforce5500
Originally posted by everyworldspinnin:
Tiger,
What type of hardware are you running? If you could, post your system specs such as the type of video card you have and TV Tuner type (I know you said Haupage, but is it a PVR-250 or WinTVGo or something)etc. I'll see what I can dig up for you if you are still interested.
--------------------------------------------------
Child One: "Republicans aren't real."
Child Two: "Full well they are!"
TV - Hauppaugge PVR250
Sound - some cheap Creative SoundBlaster, I think
I'm sure I downloaded the correct PCLinuxOS version for the video card, not that it mattered. I never got past 'press F1 to retry boot' at start up. It's possible I misunderstood the stuff for the TV card, there was a lot of info I didn't understand.
A big concern for me are the dual monitors. I MUST HAVE DUAL MONITORS..... once you've had two for a while it is physically impossible to work on one again. It's like trading in your Tivo for a VCR, or your Hummer for a rusty tricycle, get it :-)
I appreciate any help you can give. I'd really LIKE to try a Windows alternative, even it's just so I can argue from experience in threads like this...
Just had a thought - how easy is it to get the DSL and printer up and running? DVD player and burner? I hope that stuff takes care of itself.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Heya Tiger,
Quote:
It seems like Linux requires a whole lot of knowledge that most people, even a pretty experienced computer user like me, just don't have and probably don't have the time to learn.
Maybe Linux is fun to play with, but I really can't see the advantage of fewer viruses and (supposed) more stability, if I can't even get the thing to start.
Am I missing something?
You certainly are.
Linux does take alot of time to learn. Even the "easy" distros can give you fyts when you want/need to tweak something.
But it sounds like you're just having problems with your CD burner?
When I started out in computing, it took me a long time to "learn" Windows and beat it into submission. It wasn't worth the grief.
The weeping and gnashing of teeth I went through learning how to admin a Linux workstation however was well worth the pain. I'd never go back. Won't even switch to Mac -don't need it. Already got a real OS (plus it's cheaper!)
Sounds like you have some expensive HW there -I recommend you give Linux the good old "college try" before you chuck it and buy Apple HW.
Once you learn how to manage a Linux box, the freedom and control you find are simply unmatched.
If you're really interested, I recommend this:
Since you're a self-described "experienced computer user", have a look at the well-established distros. Slackware/Fedora/Debian.
These newcomers like PCLinuxOS and Ubuntu, while worthy projects, are variations on variations of a theme. Slack, Fedora* and Debian are highly mature and reliable. These 3 are really the precursors of all distros. *(actually Fedora is the testing ground for Red Hat's beta. RH is for business now & costs money, so Fedora is the free version of RH).
I don't do dual-monitor or TV (yet) but Hauppage is definately Linux-friendly, and getting two video cards working under Linux is old-hat.
Have a look at MythTV. If you can get MythTV running on Fedora (for example), you'll be recording/playing back all kinds of TV. I've seen it done!
While I do recommend older/established distros, sometimes upstarts do better at certain things. For example:
http://www.elivecd.org/gb/Download/0.4.2/
There is no distro I've seen with better HW auto-detection than elive (it's Debian-based live CD with an option to install).
elive is very much worth the d/l.
Good Luck to ya
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
All great info STDOUBT, thanks.
Maybe you could elaborate on the "freedom and control" you mention is such a plus with Linux. What do you mean exactly? What freedom do I have and what can I control with Linux over Windows? That's one of the big questions I've always had about Linux.
Quote:A dvd burner actually. A new one. That's ok, right? To burn the image to a DVD then boot from the DVD drive? The impression I got from PCLinuxOS FAQ is that it's actually better.
But it sounds like you're just having problems with your CD burner?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Tiger:
A dvd burner actually. A new one. That's ok, right? To burn the image to a DVD then boot from the DVD drive? The impression I got from PCLinuxOS FAQ is that it's actually better.
Well, if it's a combo drive I'd use a CD-R if the .iso is CD-sized. There shouldn't be a problem either way though. Avoid re-writable disks though.
what kind of errors are you seeing, and where/when are you seeing them?
Freedom and control. Hmm. Well, keep in mind that Linux is only 'the kernel' not the OS. All the *stuff* in the kernel is basically HW-related.
The OS that is built up around the kernel is made up of a base-system (which varies per distro), and then on top of that you have userland software.
You can change, add or remove any userland software. You can alter much of the base-system. You can completely reconfigure (and recompile) the kernel to match your unique HW.
You can run a userland made up of just the software you want. For example, a bare-bones Debian install weighs in at about 120MB. That's kernel, base-system, and minimal command-line userland. Add to that a window manager, and a web browser and you have a modern, secure OS in 250MB of HD space.
On the flip-side, install a full-blown Fedora, and you have more apps than you will ever use. Plus CD/DVD burner apps, Graphics editor, Office suite, Email/groupware, server apps, development apps, and dozens of games. There literally thousands of userland software packages for Linux systems that come for free with no strings attatched.
Basically, if there's anything in your Linux system you don't like you can change it.
Another great advantage is this:
No company can say to you "buy *yadda* if you want to keep using *blah-blah*" or "if you install Y, or tweak X, you'll void your support contract" or "you have to upgrade your blank or you can't access the whatzit" -pfft.
With Linux you are 'on your own', and it's a PITA to get a grip on but the Freedom is worth it.
If you have hi-speed check out http://www.linuxreality.com/
I haven't heard the shows myself but it's had good reviews.
EDIT: Almost forgot to mention: no "even though you paid our corporation $100+, this OS will self-destruct in 29 days unless you upload the specs of your base-station to our Borg cube's master cylinder-all your base are belong to ZZzztTT!-error detected! send error report!ZZzZtT!" LOL
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:During start up I hit F12 to get to the boot options, then I choose the IDE CD option. Right after that I get the error (I believe it says) "Boot failed, press F1 to retry ESC to cancel", or something close to that.
Well, if it's a combo drive I'd use a CD-R if the .iso is CD-sized. There shouldn't be a problem either way though. Avoid re-writable disks though.
what kind of errors are you seeing, and where/when are you seeing them?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:During start up I hit F12 to get to the boot options, then I choose the IDE CD option. Right after that I get the error (I believe it says) "Boot failed, press F1 to retry ESC to cancel", or something close to that.
Originally posted by Tiger:
I sense you're speaking of the boot options offered by your BIOS and not the boot options from the CD?
If your drive is actually IDE and not SCSI or SATA, (do they even make sata optical drives? -i'm so damned oldskool) then it looks like you burned a coaster :-\ That's all I can think of atm.
Can you try setting that drive to be the default boot device within the BIOS (so you won't need to bring up the boot menu)? If that doesn't work, I'm thinking coaster.
BTW - up a few posts you mentioned how you're now addicted to 2 monitors? hehe -how about 6?
http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
do they even make sata optical drives? -i'm so damned oldskool
Yes, but they're not worth it. It's barely worth buying a SATA HDD for a desktop for most people.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Tiger:
Sounds like your CD is non bootable. How did you burn it? At a guess I'd say you had an .iso image and burned that straight on to the cd with something like Nero?
That won't work, as it burns the Image as a file rather than the CD image. The easiest thing to do would be to get Deamon Tools:
http://www.daemon-tools.cc/dtcc/announcements.php
which lets you run the .iso as a CD on a Virtual CD drive and then do a copy CD from the virtual drive to your burner.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Because this interesting string is still active, I'd like to ask our computer gurus for help. I am running Windows XP (the best thing I've seen out of Microsoft since DOS, BTW), and just recently some *.mpgs and *.wmv files started playing verry slooowly. No error messages, and some files play fine. Any ideas where to look? Running WMV 9.0, which worked perfectly until a week or so ago, when this problem began.
Ran Ad-Aware to no avail. Went to MS website to troubleshoot, but all questions about WMV 9.0 were "unavailable."
Anyone else run into this?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
How big and long are the files?
The only time I've seen it is with uncompressed AVI's where the machine has to load each frame from the disk, but that wouldn't be it as wmvs and mpgs are always compressed (I think).
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I have one *.mpg that's 1.1 meg that doesn't play, next to another *.mpg that's 1.7 meg and plays fine.
Both are on the computer. Just upgraded everything I could find from Microsoft website to no avail.
I did install an older sound board that gives me bass & treble controls, but uses an older set of drivers. I suspect this is where the problem lies. The board is an Addonics Soundvision, with drivers for W95....
I put it in because I was going to dual-install Linux on a remaining portion of a new 80-Gig HD. Linux can't find the on-board sound card. But it turns out Linux can't install where I want it by itself, and I don't have time to mess with it, so
Linux won't go on here. I could remove the card, but I like the bass/treble controls....
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Soundcard sounds like a good bet.
Try Windows XP drivers. If you try looking for the drivers for your board on their site:
http://www.addonics.com/
Otherwise if you send me the model number I can try and find them.
Good luck.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thanks, Citizen. I went to the website and left a message, noting they don't support anything over 2 years old, and no sound cards.
I don't have time right now to dig any deeper, there being a crisis in my work that needs immediate attention, but will get back to you shortly, and may have the numbers for the card. But I suspect if I open the box I'll remove the card and go back to what worked before, zinging the bass/treble controls.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You can find most of the details you need from the Hardware managment window. To get to that right click my computer and click manage.
This page seems to have Addonics drivers:
http://www.3dsoundsurge.com/drivers/FM801/index.html
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Won't even switch to Mac -don't need it. Already got a real OS
Um, pardon me.
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Once you learn how to manage a Linux box, the freedom and control you find are simply unmatched.
Why don't we say *nix instead of Linux. For instance, *BSD's give as much freedom of control as the Linux's.
Disclaimer:
The below contains some opinions, that are IMO only. It mainly gets into estetics of system configuration files and the resulting directory structure, not necessarily reflecting any functionality or lack thereof.
Some people (myself included) actually prefer the *BSD's and think that they are easier to configure (though there are Linux's with similar init script setup descibed below).
For instance, Redhat and it's derivatives with that run level crap. Don't like it at all.
What does rc.1 do again? Is it rc.4 or rc.5 scripts that are run if going directly into graphical login, while the other one isn't run? When I have to write my own script to up into whatever rc.? directory, what structure must it have? etc.
And all that rpm mess. *shutter*
That being said, I don't think that slackware has this problem. There are probably other distros that don't have this issue as well.
But OpenBSD with rc.conf (common deamons here), rc.securelevel (run before kernel goes into secure mode), rc.local (run after kernel goes into secure mode) and rc.shutdown (duh!). And that's it.
The docs even state, if in doubt, put it in rc.local.
Also, if you're addicted to the rc.? stuff, then you could just write your own sh scripts to implement it for OBSD. I've seen some people do this, though I have no idea why they would want to do that to there system.
FreeBSD can have a similar setup, though it is angling toward a similar rc.d init. FreeBSD could be described as the end-user BSD whereas OpenBSD is more of a server OS.
And both these guys have the wonders of the ports tree. *warm fuzzy feeling*
End disclaimer.
So, Tiger, if you are looking into Linux, I'd suggest that you also look into FreeBSD as well. It has a tonne of applications and if that app is in the ports tree, installing it is as easy as 'make install'.
MythTV has also been reported to work on FreeBSD.
http://mythtv.son.org/tiki-index.php
And your PVR-250 is listed as a card that works.
See:
http://www.freebsd.org/where.html
For iso's, and docs and:
http://www.freebsd.org/ports/
to search or browse the FreeBSD ports tree.
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
The only time I've seen it is with uncompressed AVI's where the machine has to load each frame from the disk, but that wouldn't be it as wmvs and mpgs are always compressed (I think).
Avi and mpeg is just a container format (I believe). I also remember from reading the file format specs that they do have an option for no compression.
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
I have one *.mpg that's 1.1 meg that doesn't play, next to another *.mpg that's 1.7 meg and plays fine.
Both are on the computer. Just upgraded everything I could find from Microsoft website to no avail.
I would imagine that the mpg that doesn't play is the result of a missing (or corrupt) codec. M$ doesn't have all availible codec availible through that auto download in there media player. You have to go an manually download some.
To check out which codec (audio and video) an avi needs, you could use:
http://yaai.sourceforge.net/
Though there are many programs that do the same thing.
For mpegs, I found this page:
http://www.masterviews.com/2005/10/18/how_to_find_the_right.htm
Though this is only one possible problem, it is a something to check out. That is, if you haven't already.
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
AVI is a file format (the RIFF) mpg (I believe) is a file format + codec, though there is a number of different versions of the mpeg codec.
AVI can be uncompressed, you just store the full frame information instead of using a codec. Not sure about Mpeg.
I'm assuming Ruxtons problem could be the Sound card since he said (unless I'm misreading) that the problem only occured after the Sound card was changed and he's using '95 drivers on a XP machine.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
I'm assuming Ruxtons problem could be the Sound card since he said (unless I'm misreading) that the problem only occured after the Sound card was changed and he's using '95 drivers on a XP machine.
That probably is the reason for the slow playing, I agree. But, if it still isn't resolved after the drivers are updated, then checking out the codecs would be prudent.
Plus, there is the issue that one of the files just won't play. So, I'm leaning toward codec problem on that one.
Just saying that there might (probably?) be two issues at work here.
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yea sure, I hadn't read the file not playing as not playing...
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Actually I misstated the problem above. All WMV and mpg and wav and mp3 files play, but some play VERY slowly. I never get error messages, just a deep, drawn-out bass sound, octaves below where it should be, and images that are usually slow motion, or somewhat jumpy. They are so slow, if they should take 20 seconds to play, they might take a minute or more.
Am about to remove the old sound card. May take awhile, but I'll update all you kind folk on the eventual solution -- or lack thereof -- shortly.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Steering this post back on topic:
I use Windows for almost everything. I use Windows for several reasons:
First its what I've always used (technically I started on DOS when I was very young).
Second I know that if walk into virtually any computer store and buy almost any piece of software it will work.
Third I can walk into almost any computer store buy almost any piece of hardware and expect it to work as well.
Fourth, Windows works, you can joke about it all you want but I can pop the CD in and (usually) have a running computer in less than an hour (I've had some bad experiences but the good vastly outweigh the bad).
Fifth, I am a gamer, I want to qualify this though, I spend a great deal of time doing basic video editing, sound editing and network stuff, I by no means play games exclusively on my computer but when I do play games I want to be able to play them without worrying about anything other than whether or not my hardware is up to the task.
I used Windows 98 for about 6 years, I didn't upgrade to 2k until recently because I was running older hardware, I upped to 2k about 2 years ago, and I upped to XP at the beginning of the week.
I would like to address some of the issues brought up by other posters:
Instability:
While Windows is certainly less stable than *nix or Mac there are very good reasons for it.
First off people who code for Windows have to be able to support every piece of hardware in existence, Mac programmers support a much smaller base of hardware to support and people who write for Linux tend to take much greater pride in their work (they do it because they want to not because they are paid).
Second, Microsoft has a history of trying to make things backwards compatible, when M$ made the jump to the NT kernel with 2k/XP, most of the old programs worked natively, when Mac went to OSX (im running off of memory here) they had to have an emulator to run older programs and everything had to be recompiled. Backwards compatibility doesn't lend itself to stability.
Third, M$ has to fight the end user, people who use Linux are generally much more tech-savvy than people who use Windows, they know what to do and what not to do.
Last, the majority of instability is the fault of the programs that people run. For instance, until a couple of months ago we used AOL at my house (my parents fault not mine). That caused more than a couple of problems that have been more or less recitified since its removal.
Finally, I would like to state that M$ has made great strides with the use of the NT kernel, my mom is currently dual-booting XP and 98 beacuse of her work, XP runs like a dream 98 doesn't, I will be interested to see what Vista holds.
Security:
First off almost all of the above reasons also factor into this discussion as well. End users install everything that comes their way, third-party programs have holes in them, and legacy code causes problems. While the number of security flaws certainly is excessive, if the number of people that are now running Windows ran *nix or Mac, there is little doubt in my mind that many holes would be uncovered in them as well. For Mac, having a closed platform helps them keep the problems to a minimum, for *nix, having millions of people across the globe working on every hole that comes up makes it a lot easier to keep secure than Windows which is just one company (albeit a very large company). With SP2 M$ has gotten serious about security, in Vista much fewer programs will have access to the Kernel layer, and IE 7 will NOT be integrated with the OS. These are small steps, and I wont argue with anyone who says that M$ has been ignoring security for a long time but they are moving in the right direction.
Flexibility:
As an earlier poster mentioned *nix is much more flexible than any other OS. But what if all I want is to be able to run my programs? For the most part the people that I know (including me) just want to be able to run their programs, they don't neccesarily care if they can customize everything. Somebody posted that Windows do
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
k, I don't have the time to proof this post, so the disclaimer is that if you read an aggressive tone or some such, it is not intended. It's just because I'm currently in a hurry and didn't have time to check and modify.
Quote:
Originally posted by fredgiblet:
Instability:
While Windows is certainly less stable than *nix or Mac there are very good reasons for it.
Uh huh.
Let me just say that there are never any good reasons for it aside from user error. And oh do I have a number of stories about creating problems on windows myself (usually due to my learning about the registry
).Quote:
Originally posted by fredgiblet:
First off people who code for Windows have to be able to support every piece of hardware in existence, Mac programmers support a much smaller base of hardware to support and people who write for Linux tend to take much greater pride in their work (they do it because they want to not because they are paid).
The hardware support issue is hardly isolated to just windows. Every OS has to support as much hardware out there as possible.
I'll also mention that although Mac has "less" hardware to deal with, there are now two different hardware architectures to be concerned about.
Also, when it comes to Linux or the *BSD's, they just don't run on PC's like windows. They run on a number of platforms.
For instance, OpenBSD runs on, alpha, amd64, cats, hp300, hppa, i386, luna88k, mac68k, macppc, mvme68k, mvme88k, sgi, sparc, sparc64, vax and zaurus. And that's just the official list. There are a three other porting efforts underway: hppa64, solbourne and romp.
http://www.openbsd.org/plat.html
Which would arguably include a list of supported hardware about or greater than windows.
Similarly for the other *nix's.
And you're going to have to tell me how the "I'm just getting paid and don't actually like it" is an excuse for creating shoddy code.
Quote:
Originally posted by fredgiblet:
when Mac went to OSX (im running off of memory here) they had to have an emulator to run older programs and everything had to be recompiled. Backwards compatibility doesn't lend itself to stability.
Yes, it is an emulation layer in the OS. But, how does that make OSX, not backward compatible? Old programs will still run.
When I click on a OS9 program, it starts up and runs. The programs do not need to be recompiled.
Backward compatibility does not necessarily screw the stability of the system. How it is done, and how it is coded will effect the stability of the system.
Quote:
Originally posted by fredgiblet:
Third, M$ has to fight the end user, people who use Linux are generally much more tech-savvy than people who use Windows, they know what to do and what not to do.
In all seriousness, you're going to have to explain this one to me. I'm tech savy, and so are many of my friends. Yet we all have had, and continue to have (if still running windows), stability problems with windows.
Also, people who run OSX are arguably the same type of person that run windows. Yet OSX is not plagued with stability issues like windows is.
Quote:
Originally posted by fredgiblet:
Last, the majority of instability is the fault of the programs that people run. For instance, until a couple of months ago we used AOL at my house (my parents fault not mine). That caused more than a couple of problems that have been more or less recitified since its removal.
This "majority of instability is the fault of the programs that people run" has yet to be shown.
Sure, I have no doubt that 3rd party software is the cause of a chunk of stability issues on windows. But, I have never have even come close to believing that it is the majority.
Also, this would have mostly ended by M$ move to end the DLL hell. But, stability is still problematic on there OS.
Quote:
Originally posted by fredgiblet:
I will be interested to see what Vista hoNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
PROBLEM SOLVED!
I removed the questionable sound card, not being able to find new codecs for it; turned on the on-board sound; rebooted twice; and now it works just fine again.
Bottom line, because Linux Fedora Core 1 cannot find the on-board sound for some Dell computers, one cannot simply install Linux and have everything work perfectly. One must be prepared to diddle with the box at length.
OTOH, Windows XP refound the correct drivers for that built-in sound device and installed them, and also removed the old, improper codecs, all automatically. Fedora Core 1 cannot do that.
So, I say, use Windows XP with glee, I say.
I don't do any gaming whatsoever. I just don't want to spend any more time mussing with the box than I have to. Got furniture to build and guitars to play, and the new release of "She Spies," Season 1, with Carlos Jacott (one of the few who did the "hat trick" with Buffy, Angel, and Firefly) to watch. Much better'n futzing with recalcitrant boxes.
Immense kind thanks to all who responded, and especially to Citizen for the immediate comeback.
.........Ruxton
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Fedora is ass, I can't stand anything based off of Red Hat. Worthless distro, IMO. I tried out Ubuntu the other day on an old test box and found it to be far superior (though I'm a Slackware geek at heart).
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Forgot to mention, Windows XP is okay, but one MUST use Mozilla's Firefox browser and Thunderbird email, which automatically flags spam so you can zing it without ever looking at it or even highlighting it.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Won't even switch to Mac -don't need it. Already got a real OS
Um, pardon me.
Argh! I been misconstrued....!
OSX is a real OS. Don't need it 'cuz Linux is a real OS too and I already got it working great for me. So no need for OSX here.
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Once you learn how to manage a Linux box, the freedom and control you find are simply unmatched.
Quote:
Why don't we say *nix instead of Linux. For instance, *BSD's give as much freedom of control as the Linux's.
That's certainly true. But, IMO Linux is going to be an easier transition to *nix for a Windows user. Sigma -For the Record, I concede that the Net/Free/OpenBSD's are superior to Linux. Torvalds himself has said he's going for "good enough". The BSD guys tend to go for "make it goddamned perfect or fsck it!". I can appreciate either approach depending on the intended useage of the platform(s) in question. Again, IMO, the "Good Enough" of Linux is still such a damned sight better than anything Microsoft can offer so I feel good about pimpin' it. I can't pimp OSX since I honestly don't know how to admin it.
BSD for a Windows convert? Yes, it's doable, but come on- ubuntu isn't going to scare them with things like partition 'slices' eeeeek! I just think for the purpose of this thread our Windows-using Browncoats will have an easier time learning Linux -I may well be wrong!They'd definately have an easier time learning OSX.
Quote:
Disclaimer:
The below contains some opinions, that are IMO only. It mainly gets into estetics of system configuration files and the resulting directory structure, not necessarily reflecting any functionality or lack thereof.
Some people (myself included) actually prefer the *BSD's and think that they are easier to configure (though there are Linux's with similar init script setup descibed below).
For instance, Redhat and it's derivatives with that run level crap. Don't like it at all.
What does rc.1 do again? Is it rc.4 or rc.5 scripts that are run if going directly into graphical login, while the other one isn't run? When I have to write my own script to up into whatever rc.? directory, what structure must it have? etc.
Agreed: the SysV init style is a bit messy, and managing a linkfarm is not fun unless you're really really bored lol.
Quote:
And all that rpm mess. *shutter*
:whispers: yes, rpm is poop.
Quote:
That being said, I don't think that slackware has this problem. There are probably other distros that don't have this issue as well.
Slackware uses BSD-style init -yessir.
Quote:
But OpenBSD with rc.conf (common deamons here), rc.securelevel (run before kernel goes into secure mode), rc.local (run after kernel goes into secure mode) and rc.shutdown (duh!). And that's it.
The docs even state, if in doubt, put it in rc.local.
Also, if you're addicted to the rc.? stuff, then you could just write your own sh scripts to implement it for OBSD. I've seen some people do this, though I have no idea why they would want to do that to there system.
Nor would I -but people reading this thread aren't going to be worried by their init-style :P Once again, you and I have managed to swing a thread out of userland and into kernelspace hehe.
Quote:
FreeBSD can have a similar setup, though it is angling toward a similar rc.d init. FreeBSD could be described as the end-user BSD whereas OpenBSD is more of a server OS.
And both these guys have the wonders of the ports tree. *warm fuzzy feeling*
End disclaimer.
So, Tiger, if you are looking into Linux, I'd suggest that you also look into FreeBSD as well. It has a tonne of applications and if that app is in the ports tree, installing it is as easy as 'make install'.
MythTV has also been reported to work on FreeBSD.
http://mythtv.son.org/tiki-index.php
And your PVR-250 is listed as a card that works.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
PROBLEM SOLVED!
Glad to hear problem solved
Quote:
Bottom line, because Linux Fedora Core 1 cannot find the on-board sound for some Dell computers, one cannot simply install Linux and have everything work perfectly. One must be prepared to diddle with the box at length.
Mmmmm...diddling ;]
Just so you know, Fedora is on Core5 at this time...bet you a fruity oaty bar that bug is long dead.
Quote:
So, I say, use Windows XP with glee, I say.
Is that really possible?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Another fact, is that she was put in front of a OSX machine and told to play. She figured things out in 5-10 mins and was quite happy with it. This didn't happen when she tried to use windows at the begining of the year. She asked for a Linux machine to be set up for her.
She have a sister?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Some screenshots of the new Windows Vista beta build have leaked. Looks like MS is doing what they've always done best-- steal other guys' ideas
http://www.win-vista.net/modules.php?set_albumName=Vista5342&op=modloa
d&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_album.php
"Gadgets"... Multiple desktops... wow, never seen any of this before...
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Argh! I been misconstrued....!
OSX is a real OS. Don't need it 'cuz Linux is a real OS too and I already got it working great for me. So no need for OSX here.
I thought that it was probably something along those lines. Just had to be
and point out the wording tee hee
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
That's certainly true. But, IMO Linux is going to be an easier transition to *nix for a Windows user.
If you include the install as part of the transition, then I certainly will agree
Jebus, when I installed OBSD 3.8 on my mini I had to put the install packages on one of my servers for http download, and calculate the offsets and sizes myself. Clearly something didn't detect properly
I could work around it, but I certainly wouldn't expect the typical user to.
But, I think I should point out (though I probably should have done this a while ago) that one of my assumptions is that the box is already setup for the user. People tend not to want to try new things unless they have people there to set it up for them and show them things.
So, from an end-user perspective, if either a Linux or *BSD is just sitting there waiting to be used, I'd imagine that they are about the same difficulty. Depending on distro of course (OBSD not exactly the end-user OS).
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
I can appreciate either approach depending on the intended useage of the platform(s) in question.
Can't disagree with that
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Again, IMO, the "Good Enough" of Linux is still such a damned sight better than anything Microsoft can offer so I feel good about pimpin' it.
Again, I agree
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
I can't pimp OSX since I honestly don't know how to admin it.
Next time you're around a computer store that sells Apple, go in and play for 5 mins. Then you'll be able too
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
I just think for the purpose of this thread our Windows-using Browncoats will have an easier time learning Linux -I may well be wrong!They'd definately have an easier time learning OSX.
If they are doing everything themselves, then OSX then Linux would be my guess as well
They should also probably stay away from the *BSD's unless they are of the techie persuasion Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Nor would I -but people reading this thread aren't going to be worried by their init-style :P Once again, you and I have managed to swing a thread out of userland and into kernelspace hehe.
Well I disagree! I think that everybody should be worried about there init-style
Seriously though, when considering an OS, if people might be expected to tweak, it should be considered just how easy it is to tweak. That being said, there are friends, mailing lists, news groups, etc etc etc to get help from. So, if it's just one or two things, then no worries.
I was also just giving some examples of things that irritated me about a distro of Linux, because I didn't just want to make a statement without support. Even if it is just an opinion.
But, there probably are people out there that think that that init-style is the cat's meow.
Don't know if I'd want to meet any of them though
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Yes again -all the BSD's have excellent documentation. Maybe it would be just as easy for Windows converts to pick up *BSD after all. OSX even easier! I just been into the Linux thing so long, that I know it a lot better. *sigh* s'what I get for being such a tweaker;]
If we all support the OS that we like, admitting all the pros and cons, then all we are doing is giving people options and enough info to decide what's best for there particular situati
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by STDOUBT:
She have a sister?
I showed her this post. She seems quite happy about it. I think you just made her day
But no, no sister.
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
PROBLEM SOLVED!
Excellent
Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
I don't do any gaming whatsoever. I just don't want to spend any more time mussing with the box than I have to.
Though I agree that setting a Linux box up can take quite some time, IMO, it is worth it.
For instance, Xander is running OpenBSD 3.7 and has a current uptime of 210 days and Andrew is running OpenBSD 3.5 and has an uptime of 211 days.
Basically, once you set it up, it's just setup, and it will just run. With windows, in my experience, though it is setup quickly in the begining, it's constant maintenance, in the long run, will require far more time that a Linux/*BSD box. Not to mention the fact that I've yet to see a windows box that can run for a week under any kind of load (even if it's just one constant process).
Just tossing that out there.
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by retrovertigo:
Some screenshots of the new Windows Vista beta build have leaked. Looks like MS is doing what they've always done best-- steal other guys' ideas
http://www.win-vista.net/modules.php?set_albumName=Vista5342&op=modloa
d&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_album.php
Pfft, stealing from a thief doesn't really count. (If you're referring to PARC here)
Looks like someone at Vista had their eyes on Looking Glass, to me. Perhaps it's just my imagination.
"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Really? Am I so unusual? I regularly leave my pc running for a week or more while downlo - er, watching legal DVDs.
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Basically, once you set it up, it's just setup, and it will just run. With windows, in my experience, though it is setup quickly in the begining, it's constant maintenance, in the long run, will require far more time that a Linux/*BSD box. Not to mention the fact that I've yet to see a windows box that can run for a week under any kind of load (even if it's just one constant process).
And while it's true Windows is easy to install/setup, I can't remember ever having to do any kind of 'maintennace' to keep it running. Any problems I've ever had were usually caused by crappy hardware or software, as far as I can tell.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Tiger:
Really? Am I so unusual? I regularly leave my pc running for a week or more while downlo - er, watching legal DVDs.
And while it's true Windows is easy to install/setup, I can't remember ever having to do any kind of 'maintennace' to keep it running. Any problems I've ever had were usually caused by crappy hardware or software, as far as I can tell.
Well, that's just my experience.
I have read on a comment to a torr... web forum posting, that someone has an average uptime of about a month with a modern windows machine.
Still a far cry for my 210+ days without so much as a hiccup (*knocks on wood* as I know Murphy is listening
).That being said, if you don't know the limits of the uptime on your computer because you shut it off before it reaches it, having a machine capable of a longer uptime is rather moot. Basically, if your box is capable of staying up as long as you need it to be, then super
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
Pfft, stealing from a thief doesn't really count. (If you're referring to PARC here)
Looks like someone at Vista had their eyes on Looking Glass, to me. Perhaps it's just my imagination.
"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds
Ya think?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by retrovertigo:Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
Pfft, stealing from a thief doesn't really count. (If you're referring to PARC here)
Looks like someone at Vista had their eyes on Looking Glass, to me. Perhaps it's just my imagination.
"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds
Ya think?
I didn't realize a lot of folks knew about Looking Glass! Used to be Sun's little pony. Partly the reason I started trying out Solaris, was to see what this company could do.
Quote:
Originally posted by Tiger:
Really? Am I so unusual? I regularly leave my pc running for a week or more while downlo - er, watching legal DVDs.
And while it's true Windows is easy to install/setup, I can't remember ever having to do any kind of 'maintennace' to keep it running. Any problems I've ever had were usually caused by crappy hardware or software, as far as I can tell.
Nope, you're not so unusual. That's the experience of 99% of WinXP users.
"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
That's the experience of 99% of WinXP users.
How presumptuous of you to say.
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
That's the experience of 99% of WinXP users.
How presumptuous of you to say.
Yep. I don't really stand for the crap that folks who barely use the OS say about it. There's plenty of legitimate reasons for hating WinXP; pick a real one, and not a grandios exaggeration.
If you're using it for home or office use, and not installing all kinds of crap, you're not going to have problems like the "M$ bashers" claim you'll have. Of course, they're the ones to gain by MS losing its OS majority, so why do you think they're saying this kind of stuff?
"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
and not a grandios exaggeration.
You said, "That's the experience of 99% of WinXP users." and you're charging me with a "grandios exaggreation"?
Basically, where's your support? Or do you know all the XP users so you can make this claim?
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
If you're using it for home or office use, and not installing all kinds of crap, you're not going to have problems like the "M$ bashers" claim you'll have. Of course, they're the ones to gain by MS losing its OS majority, so why do you think they're saying this kind of stuff?
I reference /. with a lot of references to benchmarks, etc that show such things that you don't seem to want to admit to.
Sorry man, but the actual independent studies show differently. Especially when it comes to servers.
You also seem to be assuming that the non-profits that comprise the majority of Linux/*BSD community will actually gain something.
Here's the point, it is a free OS. So, what are people actually going to gain in the end if M$ loses its majority? Certainly not money. So, what then?
But, if not the OS itself, what about the software that runs on it? Again, mostly free and opensource. So what do they gain? Again, certainly not money.
You're claim lacks even motivation.
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
and not a grandios exaggeration.
You said, "That's the experience of 99% of WinXP users." and you're charging me with a "grandios exaggreation"?
Basically, where's your support? Or do you know all the XP users so you can make this claim?
I believe I charged you with general jackassery in a previous post, and it still holds. For instance, you just made a windows XP user feel like a freak of nature above because he didn't have the damning problems you claimed you had when you used it.
I think it's much more on your head to prove that WinXP really does crash on everyone at the fault of Microsoft, then my claim that it doesn't unless you install something stupid. Big suprise. Oh, I read your post saying it was "just your experience", but we all know what you're getting at.
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
If you're using it for home or office use, and not installing all kinds of crap, you're not going to have problems like the "M$ bashers" claim you'll have. Of course, they're the ones to gain by MS losing its OS majority, so why do you think they're saying this kind of stuff?
I reference /. with a lot of references to benchmarks, etc that show such things that you don't seem to want to admit to.
Sorry man, but the actual independent studies show differently. Especially when it comes to servers.
You also seem to be assuming that the non-profits that comprise the majority of Linux/*BSD community will actually gain something.
Here's the point, it is a free OS. So, what are people actually going to gain in the end if M$ loses its majority? Certainly not money. So, what then?
But, if not the OS itself, what about the software that runs on it? Again, mostly free and opensource. So what do they gain? Again, certainly not money.
You're claim lacks even motivation.
The gain? You're actually asking me what kind of gain there is?
Hmm. Lets see. Build an OS, and they will come. But, if they're all tied up on Microsoft's ball field, they're not going to come.
And how about driver support?
And how about software support?
etc. etc.
Or, did you feel like pretending I only meant financial gain just to try to make me look like an ignorant ass?
Yep, I figured. By the way, if you have to have a disclaimer above your post such as,
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
[k, I don't have the time to proof this post, so the disclaimer is that if you read an aggressive tone or some such, it is not intended. It's just because I'm currently in a hurry and didn't have time to check and modify.
then you probably need to look into what the heck you're posting.
"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
I believe I charged you with general jackassery in a previous post, and it still holds. For instance, you just made a windows XP user feel like a freak of nature above because he didn't have the damning problems you claimed you had when you used it.
I think it's much more on your head to prove that WinXP really does crash on everyone at the fault of Microsoft, then my claim that it doesn't unless you install something stupid. Big suprise. Oh, I read your post saying it was "just your experience", but we all know what you're getting at.
I have stated that in my (and everyone I know) experience(s), windows behaves extremely poorly. I have even pointed to a site there there are a lot of references that support my claims. Or didn't you read that far in my posts?
You, well you've failed to do that in any way shape or form.
Also, where do you get the audacity to describe the feelings of Tiger? (S)he only mentioned that (s)he didn't experience the problems that I described. There was nothing in his/her post that even remotely implies that (s)he felt like "a freak of nature."
If you have a problem with me, fine. But, don't distorte reality so that you can use others as pawns in your vendetta against me.
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
And how about driver support?
And how about software support?
etc. etc.
The free OS's already have good driver support. And this, almost all through reverse engineering and sharing of code.
They already have enough free opensource software to be alternatives to windows. What software do people really need that isn't availible? For general use, nothing.
So, your point here, no dice.
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Or, did you feel like pretending I only meant financial gain just to try to make me look like an ignorant ass?
Yep, I figured.
You again put words and my mouth and make baseless assumptions.
My point was that since there is more than enough high quality free software for Linux/*BSD, driver support, etc that this cannot be a motivator. Especially since the GNU foundation is completely against closed source things.
If you don't believe me, lookup the various ports trees, rpm/deb/etc archives, and supported hardware lists for the various OSS OS projects.
Please note that close souce things is pretty much the only thing that a corp would make. Please note that if a corp did make something for Linux/*BSD in this fashion, that you'd be certain in short order, to see an opensource project started. And if it had any real need in the community, this project would flurish. If not, it wouldn't. But, then again, the commercial product would then pretty much die as well.
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
By the way, if you have to have a disclaimer above your post such as,Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
[k, I don't have the time to proof this post, so the disclaimer is that if you read an aggressive tone or some such, it is not intended. It's just because I'm currently in a hurry and didn't have time to check and modify.
then you probably need to look into what the heck you're posting.
Perhaps. But, if you would have read the disclaimer itself, then you'd realize the reason for doing it. And referencing all my previous posts, here and else where, this is hardly a common occurence.
I'll also point out that you are the only one that seems to have a problem with it. And if the person that I was replying to didn't have a problem with it, why are you trying to make it an issue?
Basically, I find you a petty, small, narrow minded person that can't let go of being proven wrong on so many accounts. You also don't seem capable of letting go of any offense that I might have given you in this thread even when I apologized for it.
I hoped that you would be grown enough to put this behind you. But, you clearly aren't.
In a
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
In other news:
I've installed Ubuntu on my Laptop and I'm very impressed, the installation was easier than Windows XP, setting up the wireless and wired networks was a breeze (no drivers even, put XP to shame) even interfacing with my windows network was easier than getting my Windows machines to do it (seriously...).
However...
ATI graphics drivers for my Mobillity 9600 won't even install, I've downloaded them, tried it myself, followed the readmes, the release notes, the community everything but no dice. It complains that the dependencies aren't there, in Windows I'd fix that in seconds, but I'm not so hot on Linux, anyone got any ideas?
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Rather than read over your paragraphs of drivel, I'll just answer a few key points. You really go on and on, and I really don't care enough to read multiple paragraphs of your writing.
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
You, well you've failed to do that in any way shape or form.
Regarding the arguments I've made, I've linked to several articles relating to security concerns. You've linked to what... slashdot?
{snip} (I'm not even going to touch that "vendetta" and "pawns" crap)
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
The free OS's already have good driver support. And this, almost all through reverse engineering and sharing of code.
They already have enough free opensource software to be alternatives to windows. What software do people really need that isn't availible? For general use, nothing.
So, your point here, no dice.
My god! Have you ever tried to run a very demanding game and attempted to squeeze every last FPS you can out of your video card? Good lord, 3rd party drivers only go so far. I'm amazed you could say that with a straight face!
And you realize that gaming applications are.. software, correct? If I wanted to play the new game, Oblivion, on my linux machine, I'd be fairly out of luck wouldn't I? Yet, without a MS dominance, Bethesda would've likely made it for another platform; perhaps a *nix one. Meaning, you folks would benefit.
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
You again put words and my mouth and make baseless assumptions.
My point was that since there is more than enough high quality free software for Linux/*BSD, driver support, etc that this cannot be a motivator. Especially since the GNU foundation is completely against closed source things.
{snip}
You hide your attacks poorly, then feign innocence when I call you out. I doubt anyone buys that crap; and it's insulting that you think I'm stupid enough not to notice.
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Perhaps. But, if you would have read the disclaimer itself, then you'd realize the reason for doing it. And referencing all my previous posts, here and else where, this is hardly a common occurence.
I'll also point out that you are the only one that seems to have a problem with it. And if the person that I was replying to didn't have a problem with it, why are you trying to make it an issue?
I'm merely pointing out that you yourself admitted to the possibility of your coming across as a jackass, as you put it (albeit less bluntly) in your own post.
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Basically, I find you a petty, small, narrow minded person that can't let go of being proven wrong on so many accounts. You also don't seem capable of letting go of any offense that I might have given you in this thread even when I apologized for it.
{snip}(Must you have several paragraphs just for attacking my person? One suffices, and gets the point across quite nicely.)
Apologized? Where might that be? Perhaps, you mean this:
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
On behalf of Canada, I apologize for Sneaker98's behaviour (and any part that I had in this). I don't know what happened to him/her to become the aggressive, bitter, unforgiving person (s)he is, but I apologize.
Well, you'll have to excuse me if that doesn't exactly make me cheery, and eager to move on with our friendly relationship?
Remember that high road we were discussing?
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Now, I'll leave you with whatever you see fit as "the last word." I can only assume, because of your posting history, that it'll be a continuation of this temper tantrum. Please surprise me.
Yep, I get it, you think I'm a child, yadda yadda. Leave it at a few sentences next time, why bore others needlessly? Unfortunately, your prior history of promising to not respond hasn't gone over well.
However, it's quite amazing: you actually accuse me of a temper tantrum after what; three or four paragraphs o
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by sneaker98:
Rather than read over your paragraphs of drivel, I'll just answer a few key points. You really go on and on, and I really don't care enough to read multiple paragraphs of your writing.Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
You, well you've failed to do that in any way shape or form.
Regarding the arguments I've made, I've linked to several articles relating to security concerns. You've linked to what... slashdot?
{snip} (I'm not even going to touch that "vendetta" and "pawns" crap)Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
The free OS's already have good driver support. And this, almost all through reverse engineering and sharing of code.
They already have enough free opensource software to be alternatives to windows. What software do people really need that isn't availible? For general use, nothing.
So, your point here, no dice.
My god! Have you ever tried to run a very demanding game and attempted to squeeze every last FPS you can out of your video card? Good lord, 3rd party drivers only go so far. I'm amazed you could say that with a straight face!
And you realize that gaming applications are.. software, correct? If I wanted to play the new game, Oblivion, on my linux machine, I'd be fairly out of luck wouldn't I? Yet, without a MS dominance, Bethesda would've likely made it for another platform; perhaps a *nix one. Meaning, you folks would benefit.Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
You again put words and my mouth and make baseless assumptions.
My point was that since there is more than enough high quality free software for Linux/*BSD, driver support, etc that this cannot be a motivator. Especially since the GNU foundation is completely against closed source things.
{snip}
You hide your attacks poorly, then feign innocence when I call you out. I doubt anyone buys that crap; and it's insulting that you think I'm stupid enough not to notice.Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Perhaps. But, if you would have read the disclaimer itself, then you'd realize the reason for doing it. And referencing all my previous posts, here and else where, this is hardly a common occurence.
I'll also point out that you are the only one that seems to have a problem with it. And if the person that I was replying to didn't have a problem with it, why are you trying to make it an issue?
I'm merely pointing out that you yourself admitted to the possibility of your coming across as a jackass, as you put it (albeit less bluntly) in your own post.Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Basically, I find you a petty, small, narrow minded person that can't let go of being proven wrong on so many accounts. You also don't seem capable of letting go of any offense that I might have given you in this thread even when I apologized for it.
{snip}(Must you have several paragraphs just for attacking my person? One suffices, and gets the point across quite nicely.)
Apologized? Where might that be? Perhaps, you mean this:Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
On behalf of Canada, I apologize for Sneaker98's behaviour (and any part that I had in this). I don't know what happened to him/her to become the aggressive, bitter, unforgiving person (s)he is, but I apologize.
Well, you'll have to excuse me if that doesn't exactly make me cheery, and eager to move on with our friendly relationship?
Remember that high road we were discussing?Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Now, I'll leave you with whatever you see fit as "the last word." I can only assume, because of your posting history, that it'll be a continuation of this temper tantrum. Please surprise me.
Yep, I get it, you think I'm a child, yadda yadda. Leave it at a few sentences next time, why bore others needlessly? Unfortunately, your prior history of promising to not respond hasn't gone over well.
However, it's quite amazing: you actually accuse me of a temper tanNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
In other news:
I've installed Ubuntu on my Laptop and I'm very impressed, the installation was easier than Windows XP, setting up the wireless and wired networks was a breeze (no drivers even, put XP to shame) even interfacing with my windows network was easier than getting my Windows machines to do it (seriously...).
Awesome
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
ATI graphics drivers for my Mobillity 9600 won't even install, I've downloaded them, tried it myself, followed the readmes, the release notes, the community everything but no dice. It complains that the dependencies aren't there, in Windows I'd fix that in seconds, but I'm not so hot on Linux, anyone got any ideas?
It's been awhile since I've gotten into detail with Linux. STDOUBT seems to be quite knowledgeable, so I'll defer to him. But, since his involvment here seems to be intermittent, I'd recommend contacting him directly.
Hope everything works out for you
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
However...
ATI graphics drivers for my Mobillity 9600 won't even install, I've downloaded them, tried it myself, followed the readmes, the release notes, the community everything but no dice. It complains that the dependencies aren't there, in Windows I'd fix that in seconds, but I'm not so hot on Linux, anyone got any ideas?
Hey there Citizen.
Firstly, nvidia does do a bit better job with drivers for Linux. That's just for future reference. Now to your laptop:
By default Ubuntu steers you toward pure open source packages for installable software. You have a file called sources.list found here: /etc/apt/sources.list. I contains addresses from which your system can grab new software. By default, these addresses point to open source stuff only. The ATI 3D drivers are closed source.
Sounds like you need to either add to or edit that file. I'm assuming you downloaded drivers from ATI? Well, the best way is to download through apt-get which is your systems default package manager. Assuming also you're after 3D acceleration here right? You need to make apt point to "restricted" and "multiverse" software repositories. After making changes to sources.list, run "apt-get update". When that finishes, run "apt-cache search ati". I'm sure it's just a matter of adding the right repository and then updating "apt". Tip: always use the "-s" switch before you "apt-get install", i.e., "apt-get -s install" as this will "simulate" the install and reveal any incompletions or problems before a go-ahead.
Tip(2): at the console run "lspci" -the true name of your ATI chip will be listed there which you can also use to troubleshoot or ask about on the ubuntu forums (really good user forums).
Keep in mind it's not the model name/number of your graphics chip that needs the support-it's the actual chip model (find with lspci).
Good Luck, and do feel free to message me with a ton more detail than your post provided ;]
EDIT: Forgot to mention dependencies. Apt resolves all that automatically. So if you simply d/l'd from ATI's site, chances are you will be missing something like a compatibility layer or some cryptic glx widget.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's just general stuff, I'm working on a website that uses alpha blending which is notably slow when scrolling etc which it wasn't doing under Windows because Windows had the graphics card drivers...
I've downloaded from ATI and through apt though didn't know about the -s switch and I followed something from the Forums which didn't include the cache search. When I run aticonfig which is the last step it complains that a fglx<...>.so file can't be found.
I've played with apt and I think it's pointing to the restricted and multiverse repositories.
I'll give your method a try (if I can, the likely hood of me having an internet connection for the next three days isn't high) and get back to you as and when.
Thing is I've got so far with the ATI install, it's got the Control Panel in and all that old junk, but none of it works. I've had a play and become a bit more competant (Linuxing at a 2nd Grade level, out of Primary school now...) so now that I've managed to install about three versions of the same driver, none of which work, it might be easier to reinstall Ubuntu and do it properly...
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
general jackassery
That's gonna be my new gaming handle.
I can't stop laughing.
--------------------------------------------------
Child One: "Republicans aren't real."
Child Two: "Full well they are!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by everyworldspinnin:Quote:
general jackassery
That's gonna be my new gaming handle.
I can't stop laughing.
It's one of my favs ;)
STdoubt is definately correct, nvidia is far better about linux drivers than ATI. Does the folks who make the Omega drivers for ATI do them for linux as well?
"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
It's just general stuff, I'm working on a website that uses alpha blending which is notably slow when scrolling etc which it wasn't doing under Windows because Windows had the graphics card drivers...
Well, bit of a different animal there -unrelated
to lack of 3d accelerated driver. Has probably to
do with the boot-time use of the framebuffer and a bug with the ATI stuff (hint: change vga=0x317 to vga=normal in /boot/grub/menu.lst then reboot might help, can't hurt).
Quote:
I've downloaded from ATI and through apt though didn't know about the -s switch and I followed something from the Forums which didn't include the cache search. When I run aticonfig which is the last step it complains that a fglx<...>.so file can't be found.
You may need to install "xorg-driver-fglrx".
I do nvidia myself, but I think I can help
you -but we should take it off-thread methinks.
Quote:
I've played with apt and I think it's pointing to the restricted and multiverse repositories.
Knowin' is better'n thinkin' ;]
If the line does not have an '#', then it
is considered "uncommented". Only uncommented
lines are picked up by the prog. After any change
to sources.list run the 'apt-get update' always.
Quote:
I'll give your method a try (if I can, the likely hood of me having an internet connection for the next three days isn't high) and get back to you as and when.
Thing is I've got so far with the ATI install, it's got the Control Panel in and all that old junk, but none of it works. I've had a play and become a bit more competant (Linuxing at a 2nd Grade level, out of Primary school now...) so now that I've managed to install about three versions of the same driver, none of which work, it might be easier to reinstall Ubuntu and do it properly...
Well, ironically, that's the rub. There's really
no need to reinstall to get anything right. Just
a matter of giving the system what it wants. Which
is likely nothing more than the fglrx driver and
a few simple edits to some configuration files.
Feel free to reinstall though -I used to even think it was fun ;] If you do decide to reinstall
for the sheer joy, do give "Serenity" a try first:
http://www.elivecd.org/gb/Download/0.4.2/
Here's a snippet from the changelog for version 0.4.2:
" * All the Bugs listed on the 'Bugs Section' are fixed thanks to the bugs reports of the users on the IRC channel
* ATI works again with the fglrx driver.
* We have now some support for SATA hard disks included on the installer.
* We have also a new feature on Elpanel to configure your terminal.
* Firefox 1.5.
* We have also a better support on the autolauncher for Windows' Type CDs and autodetection for cedega, if you install the games.
* A lot of minor changes not listed, to make Elive better and better."
elive is much less a newbie distro, but it gets
my seal of approval for pimpin' to the masses since it's dead-compatible with vanilla Debian repositories, unlike Ubuntu. Plus it just kicks so much arse (<--that's for all you Brits here ;) The 1 problem with elive is no auto-config for wireless. All has to be "hand installed" with apt. That will change with 0.5 or later (yes it's the sexiest beta you'll ever see).
Citizen -I'd be more than happy to help you get your laptop in top form off-thread since I'd need to see a bunch of command output and file snips from your system. I'll message you my addy -you can take it from there.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I love me some wi-fi! Sittin' in Millenium Park right now enjoying 60 degree weather, and thought I'd show you all how kickass Macs can be. I took a couple pictures with my camera phone, transferred them to my computer using the bluetooth connection icon right in Mac OS's menu bar, then uploaded them to my webspace:
(there were a couple more steps, but you get the idea)
... and here they are!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ahh back to civilisation...
STDOUBT:
I'll send you a mail in a bit thanks.
Couple of things though.
It could be the driver, as the graphics card would also accelerate 2D operations like Alpha Blending. Using generic drivers the Graphics card will be running no acceleration, in Windows moving a window about can be slow when you haven't got your accelerator drivers installed.
Drivers:
NVidia software has always been better, no matter what platform, however once you've got the Software sorted the ATI Hardware (IMHO) is much better and often cheaper...
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Because this thread is still active I decided to post a bit of info concerning Windows XP and Linux that have recently come to my attention.
XP... I decided to see what the "Power Toys" could do for me. Messed with logon defaults, wanting to keep it simple. Then, I started having a problem logging onto my own computer. There is only one user, no one else touches it, and I wanted to be able to simply push the button and turn it on. (The entire system goes OFF at the end of the day, always, for personal reasons.) The problem was that no matter what I did, I ended up having to either push a button to get in, or in the other startup mode, hit Ctl-Alt-Del twice to get to push yet another button to start things up.
Went to Microsoft website, where I found close to 2,000 links to this specific problem. Happily I was able to find the right one reasonably quickly, and fixed the problem through editing the registry, something one doesn't do happily or lightly.
---------------------
Disgusted, I again went looking for Linux aps, only to rediscover Linux never deals with either *.mpg or *.mp3 files, both of which I NEED. Accordingly, I'm stuck with XP. Because of the way I work, I can't mess with dual boot.
The only good thing is that Windows XP and M/S did in fact deal with the problem. The bad part is that M/S created the problem themselves.
So life goes on with XP....
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
Disgusted, I again went looking for Linux aps, only to rediscover Linux never deals with either *.mpg or *.mp3 files, both of which I NEED. Accordingly, I'm stuck with XP. Because of the way I work, I can't mess with dual boot.
What do you mean by, "Linux never deals with either *mpg or *.mp3"?
Do you mean, audio/video editors?
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
Linux never deals with either *.mpg or *.mp3 files, both of which I NEED.
I wish I knew where all this misinformation is
coming from...
Try installing "w32codecs". I know it's not very
straight forward, and it is confusing for new users
but Linux can playback virtually ANY media
file. It's true that most 'big' distros don't
ship w32codecs in the default install since most
of these codecs are proprietary. But they are
available.
But Ruxton, I'd really like to know how you got
that idea into your noggin'.
P.S.I suddenly have a hankering to rip another CD to my hard drive as automatically title-tagged mp3s!!
P.P.S. Elive comes pre-loaded with DVD codecs
and the w32codecs (that naughty Thanny) which
means that if you install it, you can playback
DVDs and virtually any audio/video file out of the box!
http://www.elivecd.org/gb/Download/0.4.2/
Plus it's code-named Serenity
Sigma! Stop me before I pimp again!!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SigmaNunki, "...audio or video editors?"
Yes. I need GoldWave, which doesn't run on Linux. Also, from my brief reading, Fedora Core 5 still has problems with Dell's sound cards.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
STDOUBT,
Here's the thing. I looked at one of the Linux websites and read that Linux cannot deal with MP3 or mpg files because of copyright laws. While it may be true that I can in fact get MP3 files to run, and mpgs, under Linux, I simply don't have time to dig into the Internet and find all the solutions. And I have to do it all myself because of my location.
I find that my favorite CD burner, Burnquick, cannot work under Linux. Just yesterday I tried for over an hour to copy a CD with Windows XP's built-in software. It would not do what I wanted, which was to read from one CD drive and write to another. So I installed Burnquick and did the job, including installation, in less than a minute.
It's largely a time thing. If I spend all the necessary time to get the computer to do everything I want, the cost in time would be in the thousands of dollars. I can't afford that, so make do with the Microsoft stuff…at least until I get pissed off at it again!
Thank you for your time and information.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Took the advice of the masters on this thread and installed dual-boot Ubuntu. As expected, it can't find the damned sound card on my Dell GX1 P3 500 mhz. But the program looks good. Will spend a bit of time fiddling with it, next few weeks.
WHY did I do this, after my last post? Got so pissed with Windows screwing up stuff I carefully set up, and with it not permitting me to do what I want to do that I went back to this thread, read a bunch of it, and popped for Ubuntu. LOOOONggg download. Created boot disk. It all worked, but for the sound card. Why can't they fix this simple thing? More time to dig into it, or else just zero sound on Linux.
Immense thanks to Citizen and STDoubt.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Try some of these links:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingSoundProblems
http://www.archivesat.com/Edubuntu_developer_discussion/thread278571.h
tm
https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+ticket/491
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I've been a long time Linux user, with Linux being the only OS on my main machine for the last few years. I've used Debian mostly, but have recently moved onto Ubuntu.
With regards to getting your soundcard working - log a bug report if it is a genuine compatibility issue; they are always looking to improve the hardware support, but don't know unless someone tells them.
mrben
"Carpe Aptenodytes"
http://www.jedimoose.org
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
My Ubuntu DVD arrived last week. Great except for the fact I cant get the live CD boot up! Very annoying.
--------------------------------------------------
Who do you suppose is in there?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Citizen, many thanks, but now another problem has surfaced, which has taken up my whole afternoon, about four hours now, to no avail. The dual-boot window, "grub," is GONE. And nothing I have done has brought it back, including some very inventive cussing.
I simply put Ubuntu on my D:\ drive, which is a separate hard disk of 80 gig size. Windows XP Home resides on C:\, a small six-gig drive. No matter what I do including trying the "rescue" mode of Ubuntu allows me to reinstall grub. I let Ubuntu set the partitions, which it ought to have done well, including setting the grub screen onto C for selection at boot.
Don't expect any help, but can't afford six more hours to try to access the Linux stuff. This worthless shit pisses me off like you can't believe. All I see on link after link are commands to type, none of which the computer is able to see. Now one suggests downloading a 125-MB fixit disk to solve the problems that NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Thanks for letting me rant.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
That's weird. Though I'm surprised spreading boot systems over two disks even worked. Where is GRUB resident? I assume it's on the same disk as Ubuntu? I'm surprised this worked, since the system can only handle one bootable volume, i.e. you should have all your OS on the same disk, with your bootstrap taking up the first 512bytes of that disk.
It's fine to have seperate partitions, but seperate physical drives shouldn't work.
I sounds like you can boot to Ubuntu, yes? if Grub and Ubuntu are on the same drive that makes sense, because the system wouldn't recognise the Windows drive as a bootable volume. Try taking the power lead of your second drive and seeing if Windows boots.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's the other way around. I can get only Windows XP to run. Some time back I saw a long description that had XP on the C:\ drive, and some distro of Linux on the D:\ drive, which was a second physical hard drive. The guy madethe comment that this was the easiest way to set up dual boot. But I can't find that link again.
I think grub was originally put onto the C drive by Ubuntu. I saw the grub screen once last night (late). Today I put on GAG because it looked nice. But then I never saw the grub screen again, and neither GAG nor "Ubuntu rescue" (boot from CD) give me any options to run Ubuntu. Windows says the c drive is now Disk 1 and is "healthy", as is disk 2 which used to be the D drive. I now have no D drive listed (but do have CD and DVD drives listed as E and F).
Windows will not allow me to rename the D drive to D. So there's no D drive at all. Doesn't show up on My Computer, but does in Disk Management.
NOthing I've found on Ubuntu discussions works to address this.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Right. Maybe I'm behind the times, I really thought you could only have one boot volume. Anyway it sounds like there's something up with your second drive if windows can't mount it.
Since Grub and Ubuntu have disappeared I'd hazard a guess that your D drive was set up as the primary boot volume, and grub was on that. Try looking at your BIOS, specifically which drive is set up as the boot device? Can the BIOS see your second drive? (if windows can see it i'd say the BIOS should).
Try disconnecting the windows drive. If you can boot up into Ubuntu you know that the drives okay, otherwise theres a problem with your D: drive.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh! hang on GAG (Graphical Boot Manager, in Spanish)? I bet that GAG has screwed up the boot sector on D: so that D: is no longer bootable. Since Grub was acting as the bootstrap for Ubuntu that would stop it from working.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Forgot to mention, XP is on FAT 32.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Suspected it (GAG) too. Any idea how to get grub back? Was about to stick in the Windows XP disk and try to fix the MBR, but I doubt it's the problem since XP works just fine.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
No, your XP is fine, as is it's bootstrap (the MBR is windows speak for the bootsector, or the first 512bytes of the disk) the problem is with Grub which was your master boot record which is now corrupted.
Unless someone with more Linux experience wants to weigh in (STDoubt?) I'd say the easiest option would be to reinstall Ubuntu and Grub as before.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
M'usuri sana, bwana.
Suspected as much. However, will mess with BIOS to see if I can default to Ubuntu before dicking away another couple hours.
All best,
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Up and running with Ubuntu, and for those who care, I didn't have to reinstall it. Diddled with the rescue bit of the installation CD, and finally tried typing "su" at the first prompt, WHICH NO GODDAMNED DOLT RUNNING UBUNTU EVER MENTIONED WAS NECESSARY, got to the ROOT and was able to reinstall GRUB. Far, far worse than the shitty writing for Microsoft are the piss-poor suggestions of EVERYONE (except for those on this particular thread) who suggests ANYTHING for Linux, which really doesn't help the folks like me who really don't have a clue how to get stuff to work. What is needed, desperately, is an EDITOR to clear up some of the instructions for installing and troubleshooting ALL these Linux installations. I searched the forums, and poor installer after poor installer had to ask the SAME questions concerning dual-boot, only to have nerd after nerd answer the questions with the most vague and high-tech answers possible. Such piss-poor efforts really gall a professional editor such as myself.
What a cluster-f*&^!! My heart goes out to those who want to try these systems but can't decipher the lousy "help" that is all over the internet. Only one source, a fellow who took immense pains to explain partitions and how the various operating systems use them, was above reproach. He had the clues and clear-cut information that finally led me to the solution. And mind you, I've only got Ubuntu to work again. Haven't yet seen the double-boot GRUB screen, and may have to spend another day dicking with this stuff until I can finally look at both XP and Ubuntu.
All for now. One day shot in the ass.... But I did learn something, I guess.
Kindest thanks to you, Citizen, for pointing me in several right directions. As I grow older I appreciate how much time can mean, one day at a time, and I'm deeply indebted to you for your generous assistance.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Heya fellers-
Sorry I missed so many posts here.
Ruxton, you stop learning you will get old.
;-)
WRT your problem dual-booting, if you're seeing the
GRUB boot prompt, but no listing for XP, try this:
add the following to the end of your
/boot/grub/menu.lst file:
Quote:
title Microsoft Windows XP Professional
root (hd0,0)
savedefault
makeactive
chainloader +1
Save the file then run:
$ sudo update-grub (sudo is the way to get root on Ubuntu -via user password).
If grub comes back without an error then I'll
bet you a fruity oaty bar you'll now see
the XP option when you reboot (unless somehow the
windows install got Borked).
And now an FYI: The best place for GRUB to be
installed is hda1; that is, on the 1st partition
of your primary/master hard drive.
Ruxton, about your D:\ drive; Windows can't see
Linux partitions. Linux can see Windows partitions, but can have problems writing to NTFS.
That your XP is running on fat32 is nice since from ubuntu you'll be able to see and use the C:\ drive.(Edit: "c:\" = hda ;generally, hda1 since XP will make 1 partition on the primary master by default -yes it thinks it's THAT important ;-))
One thing that can throw you off is that GRUB has
its own convention for naming hard drives and
partitions. (hd0,0) = hda1. (hd0,1) = hda2.
(hd1,0) = hdb1 etc.
I'll be glad to help you in more detail if you want.
EDIT: P.S. you wanna stick with GRUB.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Haze:
My Ubuntu DVD arrived last week. Great except for the fact I cant get the live CD boot up! Very annoying.
If you've told the BIOS to boot from CDROM, and the
disk won't boot, sounds like a bad disk. Either
that or you're trying to boot a DVD in a CD drive..
That could stop the show too ;]
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
STDOUBT,
Warmest thanks to you for your kind help (and insight into aging!).
Howsomever... I found Ubuntu was horridly slow, far slower than my XP setup. Accordingly, I have set aside my hard-won Ubuntu disk, all the documentation including your edit notes, and wiped the entire computer clean. I had a mess with multiple XP installs that ended up taking up 50-percent more of the HD than it should have, no idea why, but now I have an absolutely clean install of XP.
I suspect I'll need a faster computer in the foreseeable, and will be sure to use Linux as a dual boot on it.
I was about to install only Ubuntu to see if the problem was installing it on a huge disk (80 gig) by itself. May have been its own failure to set up a swap file, but suspect it was just my 500-hz P3 Dell that was the slowup.
Yet Windows XP seems to run very quickly....
All in all it was an inteesting experience. As you noted, once I figured out how to install GRUB I put it on the main (c:\, or hda1) drive, not on hdb1. But as I noted earlier, I just don't have time to mess with it now, as I needed a computer professionally right away.
Thanks again.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
HAZE,
STDOUBT said,
" Either that or you're trying to boot a DVD in a CD drive..."
There's another thing you might have done, which I did a while back. I have both writeable DVD and CD burners on my box, and generally use the CD because it's physically higher, and therefore easier to access than the DVD drive. BUT...my DVD drive is first in the computer's listing of devices (currently D:\). One day I asked the computer to boot from that CD-ROM drive, but because it was the E:\ drive, not the D:\, the computer could not find it. I had to put the disk into the D:\ drive, which is actually a DVD burner/reader by Lite-On that does everything including dance (but makes lots of noise). And then it all worked correctly.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME