Ubuntu

[Roger Johansson]

I do not know. Here is the link:
http://www.menuetos.net/

I did some research and found that my memory is failing, the name of
the DOS web browser, email client, internet suite, is Minuet.
http://browsers.evolt.org/?minuet/

It looks like there is no connection.

The Menuet operating system is impressive, for a floppy disk.
A just read a little about it.

I started using the internet in 1995 I believe. I was not a very good
PC person then.

My first PC was a Pc/XT 8088 4MHz motherboard and an EGA monitor,
partly home built stuff. Later I got a 286 mb and ran the BBS on it for
a while, until I got a 386 mb and a VGA monitor which ran for many
years and felt like my first real PC computer.

After learning so much about DOS for many years it is natural that I
hesitate to move over to linux, or the XP version of windows. As long
as I am using win98se I still have use for all my DOS knowledge, and
most old programs are still usable.

I slowly realize that I have very little use for that old DOS
knowledge, all I need are tools to handle my data, a paint program to
handle images with, a text editor and a word processor, etc..

So I could just as well use linux, when it becomes user friendly.

If that happened last year, or is happening today, or will happen a
year from now, is a matter of personal taste and hardware limitations.

So much has happened since 1985, it is difficult to understand that it
is only 20 years ago. Many computer generations ago.

The most impressive increase in performance was the move from 2.4kB/s
modem to a 14k4 modem. It was incredible. Today I have a 250kB/s
connection.

Most impressive program ever, PC-Tools. It was the best file manager
for many years. It evolved into a whole desktop system for DOS. Norton
Commander had much less features and remained the same year after year,
but it was also popular.

 

[Anonymous]

Bill Turner laid this down on his screen :

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Moderator"???

LOL. Made my day.

Reminds me of a quote from Mark Twain: "It isn't the things a man don't know
gets him in trouble. It's the things he does know that ain't true."

Case closed.

Bill T.

Ever read the "ignorance is bliss" axiom? You must be a very happy man
now Bill...

 

[Bill Turner]

Ever read the "ignorance is bliss" axiom? You must be a very happy
man now Bill...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Watch out now, or I'll sic the moderator on ya.

Mr Bill

 

[Anonymous]

Watch out now, or I'll sic the moderator on ya.

Mr Bill

Okay, I give...(I can't find a white flag emoticon...) I want to
call a truce.

Help me with a question: I have high spped internet through a cable
modem. Will Ubuntu or "Linux in general" be able to see and use that
modem if I load it into my computer? I'd like to use Linux and switch
over to Linux software, but I have to use the Net. I havern't tried
Linux since I got the cable modem and I don't want to install Linux
without knowing if it will work.

Thanks Bill.

 

[Mark Carter]

Help me with a question: I have high spped internet through a cable
modem. Will Ubuntu or "Linux in general" be able to see and use that
modem if I load it into my computer? I'd like to use Linux and switch
over to Linux software, but I have to use the Net. I havern't tried
Linux since I got the cable modem and I don't want to install Linux
without knowing if it will work.

I don't know the real answer, so unless you're willing to spend time
trawling through Google to get a definitive answer, I recommend trying a
live CD. Ubuntu has a live CD, so if you want to use Ubuntu, that'd be a
tip-top place to start.

Live CDs have some pros and cons. On the plus side, they let you try out
a distro so see if you like it. Their hardware detection is usually very
good. They can usually be installed onto the hard disk if you do decide
to go ahead. On the minus side, IMO, they tend to have a bloated feel to
them, and work slowly. The last time I tried Knoppix I certainly had
that feeling. They do things like have Apache running on them, and KDE
with transparency turned on (a bit daft considering that it's all
working off the CD). I have also found that their detection of hardware
when they're installed onto disk is not as good as when they are run
live. I'm not sure why - presumably some setup quirk.

So, my opinion of live CDs is that they're good for getting someone
interested in Linux who are somewhat reticent of sh4gging their hard
disk. However, if you actually want to use Linux for real, then live CDs
are more trouble than they're worth. As such, live CDs are no longer of
any interest to me personally.

I'm also cagey on the whole multiboot thing, too. I've had Grub hose my
Windows XP drive so many times that I'm kinda fed up with its occurence.
I don't know the particular problem - maybe it's got something to do
with the time I used XP on Fat32 rather than NTFS. I also remember
reading that there is/was a bug in cfdisk/fdisk that meant it didn't
write the partition table quite right. Sorry, I can't quote sources on that.

The upshot is, if you can avoid multibooting, then you'll be doing
yourself a favour. I have a spare machine that I use for Linux, which I
purchased from IT dealers:
http://itdealers.co.uk/catalog/
It's only for UK, and they only sell second-hand machines - so you'll
have to Google to find a suitable substitute. Still, you'll be suprised
at the kind of stuff you can get, all for a very good price - just don't
expect to be able to get hold of the latest and greatest. Needless to
say, the idea of buying a separate machine to run an alternative is
something that is likely to run into resistance; so it is up to the
individual to decide if the expense is justified.

 

[Harvey Van Sickle]

Help me with a question: I have high spped internet through a
cable modem. Will Ubuntu or "Linux in general" be able to see
and use that modem if I load it into my computer? I'd like to
use Linux and switch over to Linux software, but I have to
use the Net. I havern't tried Linux since I got the cable
modem and I don't want to install Linux without knowing if it
will work.

I don't know the real answer, so unless you're willing to
spend time trawling through Google to get a definitive answer,
I recommend trying a live CD. Ubuntu has a live CD, so if you
want to use Ubuntu, that'd be a tip-top place to start.[/QUOTE]

FWIW, Ubuntu -- full install, not a CD job -- located my cable
modem (2MB service) on the first go. (The feed to the computer is
through a wireless router, to which the desktop is connected by a
cable.)

 

[Roger Johansson]

Help me with a question: I have high spped internet through a cable
modem. Will Ubuntu or "Linux in general" be able to see and use that
modem if I load it into my computer? I'd like to use Linux and switch
over to Linux software, but I have to use the Net. I havern't tried
Linux since I got the cable modem and I don't want to install Linux
without knowing if it will work.

The first and only linux version so far that booted without problems
and could handle my cable modem was Mepis live-CD. I have not yet tried
the ubuntu versions.

 

[Anonymous]

Mark Carter expressed precisely :

Live CDs have some pros and cons. On the plus side, they let you try out a
distro so see if you like it. Their hardware detection is usually very good.
They can usually be installed onto the hard disk if you do decide to go
ahead. On the minus side, IMO, they tend to have a bloated feel to them, and
work slowly. The last time I tried Knoppix I certainly had that feeling. They
do things like have Apache running on them, and KDE with transparency turned
on (a bit daft considering that it's all working off the CD). I have also
found that their detection of hardware when they're installed onto disk is
not as good as when they are run live. I'm not sure why - presumably some
setup quirk.

You sound like a man who knows Linux.
I've got two potential distros to load: Fedora Core and Ubuntu. I'm a
newbie to Linux and need a GUI to operate it. In your opinion, which
one should I load?

 

[Mark Carter]

You sound like a man who knows Linux.

Maybe I'd put myself as advanced beginner or intermediate - I guess it
depends on how good the other folks are. I suppose Linux attracts the
nerdy types, so Linuxers tend to have better tech skills. A wry type
might observe that "you sure as hell need to be"

I've got two potential distros to load: Fedora Core and Ubuntu. I'm a
newbie to Linux and need a GUI to operate it. In your opinion, which one
should I load?

Ubuntu - but if you've got both, then you could try both. Fedora took a
hell of a time to install on my machine - and even then I had problems
with the graphics cards. This could be due my fault, though - I was
trying it on an oldish machine with on-board graphics. I had since
bought an el cheapo card, so it would be unfair to compare Ubuntu and
Fedora on the graphics front.

Ubuntu seems a lot faster. Fedora suffers too much from eye-candy
overload IMO - I don't quite like as much hand-holding. I really really
like the apt-get feature of Ubuntu - this means that you can install
extra software very easily from the internet. It is aware of
dependencies, so it automatically downloads any extra bits you need.
Ubuntu is derived from Debian, but knocks off a few of the jagged edges
(e.g. network install is too minimal, but a full set of disks is too much).

Fedora is based on Red Hat, which uses RPM as it's dependency mechanism.
The mechanism has its weak points - and has given rise to phrase
"dependency hell" (which kinda indicates that all is not right down at
the farm). It appears to be a perennial problem with RH distros.
Debian-based distros do not usually suffer from dependency problems, as
everything is set up to work together.

Although I use Ubuntu, and consider it to be my favourite, I wouldn't
want you to think that it is necessarily The One True Distribution (I
also like Slackware, for example). Different people have different
priorities - for some maybe something like Linspire or Xandros or
Mandriva would be ideal. But I wouldn't touch the first two with a
bargepole, and I'm probably not going to try Mandriva again (I say
"again", but I last used it in its incarnation of Mandrake) for a long
long time.

 

[Anonymous]

Although I use Ubuntu, and consider it to be my favourite, I wouldn't want

you to think that it is necessarily The One True Distribution (I also like
Slackware, for example). Different people have different priorities - for
some maybe something like Linspire or Xandros or Mandriva would be ideal. But
I wouldn't touch the first two with a bargepole, and I'm probably not going
to try Mandriva again (I say "again", but I last used it in its incarnation
of Mandrake) for a long long time.

I believe I will try to load Ubuntu based on your opinion (which has
been confirmed by others too). I have looked seriously at Linspire but
something has always held me back and I don't know why.

It's kinda like walking into a church of a morally-opposite religion:
it's okay that you're there, but something is trying to get you to
leave and you really can't explain why you feel that way...you just do.
That's the feeling I've got each time I considered Linspire---like
there are demons flying around the ceiling of my room each time I
pulled out my wallet to buy a copy---so I never bought a copy.

What's your opinion of Linspire? (Or can I ask that question in a
freeware forum?)

Thanks again for the information. You have been very helpful and I
truly appreciate the assistance. I will load Ubuntu.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

Fedora is based on Red Hat, which uses RPM as it's dependency
mechanism. The mechanism has its weak points - and has given rise
to phrase "dependency hell" (which kinda indicates that all is not
right down at the farm). It appears to be a perennial problem with
RH distros.

I think dependency hell in Fedora is largely solved with yum now. But
it's been a long time since I tried Fedora, so ICBW.

<http://linux.duke.edu/projects/yum/>

 

[Mark Carter]

I believe I will try to load Ubuntu based on your opinion (which has
been confirmed by others too). I have looked seriously at Linspire but
something has always held me back and I don't know why.

Linspire costs money - unless you get the free version, which has
restrictions. I've never tried it, but I get the impression that it is
quite "sugary" and overwrought. These two facts alone mean that it is of
no interest to me.

Ubuntu "just works", and is easy to install. Whoever put it together had
thought carefully about what it was they were trying to achieve - a
desktop system that was easy to upgrade, without being too bloaty.

Remember, you're not committed to a distribution for life, you can
experiment a bit and see which you like best. If you look on distrowatch:
http://distrowatch.com/
you can see what the most popular distros are. I'd stay clear of Damn
Small, Knoppix, Debian and Gentoo; Gentoo in particular, as you have to
compile it.

I don't think that there's any "theoretically right" answer to all of
this. Different distros have their followings, so although, for
instance, Gentoo doesn't really work for me as an idea, it obiously
appeals to some.

 

[technomaNge]

What's your opinion of Linspire? (Or can I ask that question in a
freeware forum?)

My boxen at home are all Linspire. I paid for the "one click install"
service called CNR, and that is truly a good thing. Some other program
distribution schemes like RPM exist, but as far as I know, Linspire
is the only truly one-click setup that works.

You don't have to signup for CNR to run Linspire, but for this newby
it is convienent.


technomaNge

 

[Darth Chaos]

My boxen at home are all Linspire. I paid for the "one click install"
service called CNR, and that is truly a good thing. Some other program
distribution schemes like RPM exist, but as far as I know, Linspire
is the only truly one-click setup that works.

You don't have to signup for CNR to run Linspire, but for this newby
it is convienent.


technomaNge

Same here. My desktop runs Linspire 4.5.603 (I have to use 4.5 on the
desktop as I have a Riptide HCF modem, and the drivers for it work with
the 2.4 kernel but not the 2.6 kernel [which Five-0 uses]), and my
laptop has Linspire Five-0 (I got a great PCMCIA modem card that works
out of the box with Linspire). I bought a $20 CNR Basic subscription as
soon as it came out, and I definitely plan on renewing my subscription
in August.