Linux

G

Glenn

John Corliss said:
Mike,
I'm not pointing any fingers at anybody. I just posted my message
as a reply to yours because it was the start of the long acrimoneous
thread. My remarks were directed to everybody in general, nobody in
particular. Sorry that you took it as being directed directly at you.
I should have clarified that better, since any reply is assumed to be
a direct response to the post next up in the thread (paraphrased from
my own recent words.) I hope that everybody will mellow out about this
and begin engaging in constructive discussion.
Regards from John Corliss

As I mentioned in a post earlier, I was programming in a OS called "THEOS"
before DOS came out (and some of you were born) so no one can I don't want
to try another system. I will try anything once. I tried Linux not once
but several times without success. I really wanted to see it. It might
have been fun to program in. Certainly, VB-6 isn't. Also as I said, I
don't need it and I have given up on it. Brick walls and my head just don't
coincide nicely.

Glenn
 
B

bambam

Yes John, but check out who was doing the badmouthing..

The MAIN thing I've got against linux, and why do they think I
keep trying if I don't want to get away from the gates empire, is
that I might turn into somebody like them, spiteful, sneering,
intellectually arrogant and emotionially undeveloped and unstable.

Brilliant though they are, the clild inside is not hard to find,
it's the adult that's invisible.

Who's doing the bad mouthing?
I'm not sure if that's badmouthing or not; their posts say a lot
more about them than I ever could

As do yours.
 
M

Mike Uhl

As I mentioned in a post earlier, I was programming in a OS called "THEOS"
before DOS came out (and some of you were born) so no one can I don't want
to try another system. I will try anything once. I tried Linux not once
but several times without success. I really wanted to see it. It might
have been fun to program in. Certainly, VB-6 isn't. Also as I said, I
don't need it and I have given up on it. Brick walls and my head just don't
coincide nicely.

I tried several distros myself, to no avail, then gave up. Then XP
came out, and the threats that came with that I regarded as extremely
unpleasant, so I decided to try again. I discovered "BasicLinux" and
tried it. It is a tiny, two-floppy distro based on Slackware, with
most of the essential proggies in it, such as a browser, dialer, email
client, and text editor. I got used to it and then gave Slackware a
try. They say that Slackware is one of the most difficult ones out
there, but after plugging along for a few months I finally got a
pleasantly workable system. I am by no means a programmer, and the
best I can do with the compiler is type "make" and "make install" and
hope it works. One day I may study some to learn to create my own
proggies, but for now I'm quite content with what I have. ;-)
 
G

Gary R. Schmidt

Glenn wrote:
[SNIP]
As I mentioned in a post earlier, I was programming in a OS called "THEOS"
before DOS came out (and some of you were born) so no one can I don't want
to try another system. I will try anything once. I tried Linux not once
but several times without success. I really wanted to see it. It might
have been fun to program in. Certainly, VB-6 isn't. Also as I said, I
don't need it and I have given up on it. Brick walls and my head just don't
coincide nicely.
THEOS came into the world in 1977 as OASIS, and it is still available,
see http://www.theos-software.com/

If you have used THEOS then Linux should be a snip. It is basically
just another UNIX implementation, and they've been a round for a long time.

Everytime someone say "Linux (or UNIX) is too hard" I think back to
being introduced in 1980 to BSD 4.1 on a VAX 11/780. Undergraduates
learned about computers on these beasts, and there are few more wilfully
resistant to learning than the average undergrad!

Of course, for those of us who've been around since before the PC, it is
very different, Linux is simply just another Operating System among many
(I've used, um, RSX, RSTS, VMS, pSOS, PICK, OS9, lump all UNIX and Xenix
variants into one, MPE, CPM, DOS, Netware, OS2, NT, ... at least a
dozen), and should be treated as such. It has its good points and its
bad points, and anyone who says that _any_ OS is the be all and end all
of systems is too stupid to be allowed to breed.

Cheers,
Gary B-)
 
G

Glenn

Gary R. Schmidt said:
Glenn wrote:
[SNIP]
As I mentioned in a post earlier, I was programming in a OS called "THEOS"
before DOS came out (and some of you were born) so no one can I don't want
to try another system. I will try anything once. I tried Linux not once
but several times without success. I really wanted to see it. It might
have been fun to program in. Certainly, VB-6 isn't. Also as I said, I
don't need it and I have given up on it. Brick walls and my head just don't
coincide nicely.
THEOS came into the world in 1977 as OASIS, and it is still available,
see http://www.theos-software.com/

That brings up an interesting question if only to us old timers. Which came
first? The egg or the ............nah. I have an empty binder with OASIS
on it. I'm not sure where or how I came by it. Maybe that is what I had.
What I had, programmed only in black and white. I got a color, albeit poor
color, monitor and it (the OS) wouldn't work. An upgrade color version at
that time cost $2000.00 and I went to DOS. Is your memory better than mine?
Thinking back, maybe THEOS was what I couldn't afford and that is the reason
it sticks in my mind.

Glenn
 
S

Scrubbs

Gary R. Schmidt said:
Glenn wrote:
[SNIP]
As I mentioned in a post earlier, I was programming in a OS called "THEOS"
before DOS came out (and some of you were born) so no one can I don't want
to try another system. I will try anything once. I tried Linux not once
but several times without success. I really wanted to see it. It might
have been fun to program in. Certainly, VB-6 isn't. Also as I said, I
don't need it and I have given up on it. Brick walls and my head just don't
coincide nicely.
THEOS came into the world in 1977 as OASIS, and it is still available,
see http://www.theos-software.com/

If you have used THEOS then Linux should be a snip. It is basically
just another UNIX implementation, and they've been a round for a long time.

And therein lies the problem. I've tried several distros of linux. Boy,
did my fingers ache! Virtually /anything/ that mattered had to be done
as su through the console. And also, did my eyes ache. You bet they did.
Ergonomics was one factor why I went back to windows.

The others were:

(a) time spent configuring: you've only to persue the linux ngs to see
the truth of that

(b) applications: all the apps I'll probably be needing are already in
windows

(c) general dislike of intensive keyboard usage./

Scrubbs
<snip>
 
K

Kram

For me Linux is not ready for prime-time desktop usage (and I'm not ready
for Linux). I'm a heavy GUI user and love being able to double click,
drag, right click to accomplish what I need to do. For me Linux is like
going back to DOS: Tasks that need to be done via cryptic command lines,
folders & files with equally cryptic letters and symbols. Trying to
install many of the programs is tedious and time consuming.

For free it is great, programs to burn cds, surf the net, email, write
letters, spreadsheets, on and on...you can't find a better deal.

But for ease of installing programs, ease of customizing, ease of file
management ... the key word being "ease" Linux just isn't there. Sure
Linux does all this, but not from a mouser's perspective.

It is just not as polished and user friendly and Windows 95 through XP or
MacOS.

FREE, yes, and I've downloaded and installed several types of distros as a
hobby and to learn about them, but none of them are as easy to use as
Windows/Mac, because they lack the ability to point and click like the
other two OS's.

So I play with Linux, but I work in Windows/Mac

Mark
 
A

AUWG

Mike said:
I tried several distros myself, to no avail, then gave up. Then XP
came out, and the threats that came with that I regarded as extremely
unpleasant, so I decided to try again.

I went with Xandros Desktop 2.
It isn't a freebie, but the time saved in a painless installation was
worth it.
It looks and acts enough like Win that I haven't encountered a learning
curve. I played a CD, played some mp3's, made a CD, messed with some
other stuff, and then just fired up the wordprocessor and got to work.
Later, I Mozilla'd onto the net and left a report at the Xandros Yahoo
group.
In short, it installed and ran as advertised and I don't have to be a
Linux guru to run it.
Bye, bye, Microsoft.
Ed Howdershelt - Abintra Press
Science Fiction and Semi-Fiction
http://abintrapress.tripod.com
http://www.fictionwise.com/servlet/mw?t=author&ai=10823&id=95920
 
M

Max

Aha, now I understand. It is a manly and tough culture. No place
for niceties, that is for sissies who refuse to be extremely alert
and defend their manly honor.

I've seen a post or two from you here Roger and they do indeed
contain some rather nifty insights, but I'm thinking you've got some
things wrong here. The terms "manly" and "sissy" and the
distinctions between the two are irrelevant. For the most part, it's
not about dominance or that foul darwin/nietzsche mentality where
only the strong survive. Although core capitalism hammers in on my
theory considerably.

It's about solving the problem at hand. All else that surrounds that
problem means nothing. We can worry about such implications after
we've put the problem to rest. Until we do, diplomacy is nothing
more then overhead. It's secondary.

Most newbie linux users are faced with solving problems. Diplomacy
will only get in the way. This "weak and strong" angle you center on
is plain bullpucky!. Likewise for the 'proper manners' crap too.
I have always wondered why there is so much violence in
television. And so much foul language and rude attitudes in
usenet.

No foul language in my post. Not yet.
So this is what it is all about. A manly and tough culture where
concern for others have no place.

This has political and social implications too. No reason to care
for the weak people, they have to learn to fight or die.

You seem to be at odds with human nature, or existence in general.
Female cats will only defend their cubs up to a point. When death is
eminent, they'll run. Too bad for the cubs. But humans aren't
animals now are they?. Humans are "beings" for crying out loud and
it implies we are better then the cats! Arrogance gets the best of
us now and then doesn't it?
So there is no reason to organize a comfortable society for all
people, that would just encourage the sissies and weaklings.

Humans do possess a trait no other animal does. It's called
compassion. Any response I have here is best left to email. Just add
'[123]' and mix with a subject. Makes a nice glue actually. :)
Okay, then we just have to train our children to fight and get
tough.

Living organisms have been doing this for eons. Roger Johansson is
here because of it!. So am I. So is everything else! So we think. ;)
No reason to help others in this newsgroup, if they cannot find
out things by themselves they should get lost and die.

And how does a baby cat know what to eat and what not to? It's
called instinct. Couple this fact with the rather hard training
program the parents put it thru and it lives. If the cubs internal
instinct is flawed even slightly, or it doesn't get the rough
training, it's going to die. Users of windows (I was one myself) end
up with a minimized instinct. Dealing with other horrible Linux
users gives us the hard training we need.

Man, I gotta be nuts right? ;)
No reason to have any freeware either, people can work and pay for
the software. There is no place for lazy sissies in this world.

Shesh, are you blind? That's exactly what Gates and his ilk want!!!.
Something the Linux and OSS crowd are hoping to thwart. The
embracing of an OS that incorporates product activation, DRM
mechanisms, and directives from Tcpa and/or Palladium (hardware
DRM!) is geared solely towards achieving what you state above. Do
you really think all that crap is relegated to a mere moral issue
such as software piracy? Or even, umm, as you say it, "lazy sissies
in this world?" Heh!

Give it another five or ten years and you'll see. But no, by that
time you will have been socially programmed to simply accept it.

I'm confused as to which side you're on? In the future that is
already being set up, you can't tell me you've managed to safely
stay neutral. Or maybe you have in your own mind, but time will cut
you. Count on it!. Don't faint when the blood flows...
Where does this lead us, and whose purposes does this culture
serve?

A money grubbing capitalist like gates. He ain't alone either. The
RIAA and smurfs like it are doing rather well last I checked. I've
already seen a few com/infomercials(?) on TV describing how horrible
it is to download music (In the USA anyway!). Poor music industry.
It's a shame a billion dollar or more a year industry is being
killed by a minority of low life trash ****s. <-- Oops. Foul
language. Please disregard everything (*everything*) I've just said.

Let the social programming begin...

Max
 
M

Max

The Linux groups are full of arrogant A-holes.

Single line crap like this is bound to get you railed to no end.
Even the best windows advocates I know of (friends and gurus) will
thump you for it.

Tells us why you think so grasshopper? A good discussion usually
starts with more then 8 words.

Max
 
S

SINNER

* donutbandit Wrote in alt.comp.freeware, on 2004-01-10:
The Linux groups are full of arrogant A-holes.

So is the rest of the world, do you just stay home and lock your door?

You have never encountered an A-Hole in here?

If your question shows even the slightest amount of due diligence you
will always get a helpful answer, its in how you ask the question.
 
R

Richard Steven Hack

However, it installed, plays Freecell, runs openoffice, but eveything
*bloody* slowly, and the file system is monstrous and incomprehensible so
far, and I can't work out what "Windows Explorer" shows, or what the tree
pane shows, or filesize, or defrag etc.

I'd like to clean out quite a bit and defrag (I can't see a tool, does it
have to defrag?) to try to speed it up a bit,

You don't need to defrag a Linux filesystem for months or years - and
if you ever do, you just move everything from one partition to another
(or to a backup), then reload it. Linux filesystems are very
efficient at preventing fragmentation.

If it's executing slowly, it may be because you have unnecessary
services running. I don't know what Fedora activates by default, but
there should be a tool there on the System menu somewhere that shows
you what services are running in the background and it may allow you
to turn some of them off. But you need to know which ones to turn off
and which ones to leave on or you'll screw up the system.

There's a list of Linux services here
http://www.mplug.org/phpwiki/index.php/LinuxServiceDescriptions

You can also do a Google for "Linux" and "unnecessary services" and
find a lot of articles and posts on the subject.

Be careful about turning off email services since some system
utilities may want to email the operator (root) when certain events
occur.

This is also part of hardening your system from a security standpoint.
This HOWTO here
http://www.linux.com/howtos/Security-Quickstart-HOWTO/index.shtml
goes into turning off unnecessary services, firewall setup, etc.

Another thing that might be slowing your system is there is a utility
called updatedb that is supposed to run at 2AM which scans your
entire system and indexes the files for the locate command. If your
system isn't running at 2AM, this utility will start running in some
distros around ten minutes after you start up. Naturally, a complete
scan of your system will slow things down. You could turn this off or
simply leave your machine running overnight and let it do its thing at
the proper time.

There may be other reasons for low performance - you didn't specify
your CPU speeds and RAM, so maybe you're on the low side. Some hard
disks may not be detected properly and not utilitized at their full
speed which would slow things down.

The latest versions of KDE and GNOME are heavy-duty desktops and need
faster hardware to perform. You might try using a lighter window
manager instead of a full desktop. This site discusses other window
managers: http://www.plig.org/xwinman/

All in all, Fedora is a new distro and reportedly has a number of
flaws and I wouldn't want to be a newbie using it until it gets a
little older. You might be better off with the current Mandrake.

By the way, Mandrake now has a "live CD" download available from their
Web site called "Mandrake Move". Check it out here
http://www.mandrakesoft.com/products/mandrakemove
 
R

Richard Steven Hack

I went over to one of the ng's recommended and the first answer said it
looked like I'm a troll for asking a question.

If you ever drop into alt.os.linux.mandrake and tangle with Peter
Breuer, you'll know what being treated as a troll really is. Peter is
the biggest blowhard in Linux, BUT he knows his stuff when it comes to
UNIX (just don't ask him his opinion about Linux viruses, he's an
idiot when it comes to opinions.)
Hey, it don't work.

Well, it does for maybe twenty five million people who use it. (Linux
Counter guesses 18 million, I think that's a lowball - there was at
least seven to nine million five or more years ago and Linux has done
much better since then.) Who knows how many Chinese are using it?
 
M

Mike Uhl

I went with Xandros Desktop 2.
It isn't a freebie, but the time saved in a painless installation was
worth it.

I have always tried to stick with the freebies, and if I were just now
starting out (and had a more powerful computer), I would probably go
with Knoppix. From what I've heard, it seems to be the most
trouble-free of the "Try-Me" distros. But all of the newer "Try-Me" types
just simply won't work on my 760EL.
In short, it installed and ran as advertised and I don't have to be a
Linux guru to run it.

As I said, I am far from being a "guru". I am just an earlier
"convert" who was soured on Linux many times before I finally got on
the right track. I don't think any newbie should try to jump in cold
to Linux, and this is where I think the "Try-Me"s like BasicLinux,
Knoppix, and others are essential helps.
Bye, bye, Microsoft.

I wouldn't waste a good "bye, bye" on that. Good riddance, bad
rubbish, flush the toilet. :-D
 
G

Gary R. Schmidt

Glenn said:
That brings up an interesting question if only to us old timers. Which came
first? The egg or the ............nah. I have an empty binder with OASIS
on it. I'm not sure where or how I came by it. Maybe that is what I had.
What I had, programmed only in black and white. I got a color, albeit poor
color, monitor and it (the OS) wouldn't work. An upgrade color version at
that time cost $2000.00 and I went to DOS. Is your memory better than mine?
Thinking back, maybe THEOS was what I couldn't afford and that is the reason
it sticks in my mind.
I dunno. I didn't get exposed to THEOS until sometime in the 1980s, and
that was as just a "another x86 OS," not to use.

But then, I used to have a whole heap of S370 binders that I kept
various non-IBM documents in ;->

Cheers,
Gary B-)
 
G

Gary R. Schmidt

Scrubbs said:
Gary R. Schmidt said:
Glenn wrote:
[SNIP]
As I mentioned in a post earlier, I was programming in a OS called "THEOS"
before DOS came out (and some of you were born) so no one can I don't want
to try another system. I will try anything once. I tried Linux not once
but several times without success. I really wanted to see it. It might
have been fun to program in. Certainly, VB-6 isn't. Also as I said, I
don't need it and I have given up on it. Brick walls and my head just don't
coincide nicely.

THEOS came into the world in 1977 as OASIS, and it is still available,
see http://www.theos-software.com/

If you have used THEOS then Linux should be a snip. It is basically
just another UNIX implementation, and they've been a round for a long time.


And therein lies the problem. I've tried several distros of linux. Boy,
did my fingers ache! Virtually /anything/ that mattered had to be done
as su through the console. And also, did my eyes ache. You bet they did.
Ergonomics was one factor why I went back to windows.
[SNIP]
But... I _don't_ spend any time configuring it. It has just worked out
of the box for me!

Cheers,
Gary B-)
 
R

REMbranded

TOP POSTING THIS ONE TIME:

This is a very nice and helpful post Richard! We could use more posts
of this caliber.

For anyone who missed it:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 04:19:35 GMT, Richard Steven Hack
You don't need to defrag a Linux filesystem for months or years - and
if you ever do, you just move everything from one partition to another
(or to a backup), then reload it. Linux filesystems are very
efficient at preventing fragmentation.
If it's executing slowly, it may be because you have unnecessary
services running. I don't know what Fedora activates by default, but
there should be a tool there on the System menu somewhere that shows
you what services are running in the background and it may allow you
to turn some of them off. But you need to know which ones to turn off
and which ones to leave on or you'll screw up the system.
You can also do a Google for "Linux" and "unnecessary services" and
find a lot of articles and posts on the subject.
Be careful about turning off email services since some system
utilities may want to email the operator (root) when certain events
occur.
This is also part of hardening your system from a security standpoint.
This HOWTO here
http://www.linux.com/howtos/Security-Quickstart-HOWTO/index.shtml
goes into turning off unnecessary services, firewall setup, etc.
Another thing that might be slowing your system is there is a utility
called updatedb that is supposed to run at 2AM which scans your
entire system and indexes the files for the locate command. If your
system isn't running at 2AM, this utility will start running in some
distros around ten minutes after you start up. Naturally, a complete
scan of your system will slow things down. You could turn this off or
simply leave your machine running overnight and let it do its thing at
the proper time.
There may be other reasons for low performance - you didn't specify
your CPU speeds and RAM, so maybe you're on the low side. Some hard
disks may not be detected properly and not utilitized at their full
speed which would slow things down.
The latest versions of KDE and GNOME are heavy-duty desktops and need
faster hardware to perform. You might try using a lighter window
manager instead of a full desktop. This site discusses other window
managers: http://www.plig.org/xwinman/
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top