# Do you use a UNIX based OS?



## Kumiko_Fox (Nov 30, 2007)

I was just wondering how many people here use a UNIX based OS such as Linux or Mac OS X.  I use Mac OS X on my main computer, my MacBook Pro, and Ubuntu Linux 7.10 on my anime PC.  They both work great, and its awesome not having to worry about viruses or stability problems, and especially not having to worry about BSODs.  Anyway, as the title asks, do you use a UNIX based OS?


----------



## net-cat (Nov 30, 2007)

My server runs FreeBSD.

I also use XP x64 on my home computer. While not a Unix-based OS, it's fairly virus free because next to nobody uses x64 Windows outside of servers.


----------



## DavidN (Nov 30, 2007)

I'm slightly familiar with Linux, have tried it on my home PC and have been scared off by it fairly quickly - however, if the time ever comes to upgrade from Windows XP (in which I'm not unduly worried about BSODs, incidentally - I've had two since I got it in 2003 and both of them were when people other than me were using it) I'll definitely go the Ubuntu route rather than Vista, especially as Windows compatibility is getting stronger by the day.


----------



## Eevee (Nov 30, 2007)

I have a macbook, which I am considering at the very least dual-booting with Ubuntu.  Maybe when there's a release with KDE4 in it.

My desktop runs XP, alas.  I blew a lot of cash on a nice video card so I could play TF2.


----------



## Tachyon (Nov 30, 2007)

Debian Lenny (i.e. testing). It's awesome, and I'm doing things with it (custom PVR) that I'm completely convinced I would not be able to do in Windows. The wacom drivers are broken at the moment, though, and that ticks me off.


----------



## Rhainor (Nov 30, 2007)

No.  I tried running Ubuntu on my spare comp, but I found it nothing but a pain in the ass.

Also, I know it *technically* is, but I personally do not consider OSX to be a UNIX system.


----------



## Kumiko_Fox (Nov 30, 2007)

Rhainor said:
			
		

> No.  I tried running Ubuntu on my spare comp, but I found it nothing but a pain in the ass.
> 
> Also, I know it *technically* is, but I personally do not consider OSX to be a UNIX system.



OS X is based on UNIX, so therefore it is a UNIX based OS IMO anyway.  If you prefer there is a lot of power in terminal, some of the most fun things are when you type "emacs", then hit esc and then type "x" and then type "doctor" (all lower case), that's a lot of fun, that and going through the same process but typing "tetris" instead of "doctor".


----------



## DavidN (Nov 30, 2007)

It's not much fun when you try and use EMACS as a text editor, though.

I'd better hide.


----------



## Eevee (Dec 1, 2007)

Rhainor said:
			
		

> Also, I know it *technically* is, but I personally do not consider OSX to be a UNIX system.


What?  Why on Earth not?  Do you not consider BSD to be a UNIX system either?


----------



## sabrinageek (Dec 1, 2007)

I don't have the time or patience to learn *nix enough to be proficient;  I know enough to stumble my way around a directory structure, run commands, etc..  I've installed different distro's in the past.. However,  what I find is that Unix based systems are never as user-friendly as they claim to be;  I'm more concerned with making my computer -do- what I want it to do than fighting with it.

As an example, my best friend (who does web/java development) and who knows Unix much better than I do ran Linux variants almost exclusively for quite some time.  Every time I came over, if I wanted to have him watch a video file,  something broke -- either the media player program didn't work, or the sound didn't work..   Even something simple like printing directions from mapquest never worked.  

I appreciate what linux is accomplishing as an O/S.  I like that there are options besides Mac and Windows.  I like the ideas of an open-source free community.  However, I think there are problems with open-source that aren't easily addressed (too many options available to handle a single task with no standardization.  Do I use Beta or VHS?  which printing system?  Which desktop environment?  Which shell?)  

After years of fighting with Linux just to do basic tasks and functioning, my friend gave up and reinstalled Windows on his laptop.    And then went and bought a Mac Mini. 

With all the things I do (dvd burning,  dvd authoring, video editing,  video capturing,  Second Life, DJing, podcasting,  audio editing, etc.. )  I can't afford to fight with the O/s just to make all the applications work.  I can't afford to fight with the printing system or the sound system;  I just want it to -work-.  

Now, keep in mind, I'm not knocking Linux systems.  I know that Linux has applications to handle everything I've mentioned and more, I'm sure.  It's just not for me.  However, I admire and respect those that do use it on a daily basis and make it work, because I feel that it takes dedication to learn Unix enough to be truly proficient in it.

-Sabrina


----------



## Eevee (Dec 1, 2007)

sabrinageek said:
			
		

> However, I think there are problems with open-source that aren't easily addressed (too many options available to handle a single task with no standardization.  Do I use Beta or VHS?  which printing system?  Which desktop environment?  Which shell?)


Do you use Blu-Ray or HD-DVD?  RealMedia, Quicktime, or WMV?  Flash or Java or Silverlight?  Difference with these is that they're all little black boxes and tend to exclude interoperability with something else.

Answer: use whichever you prefer.  If you have no preference, grab a distro that has one of everything built in, and use whatever it gives you.  This is pretty much how it works with any OS.  The difference with open-source software is that if you don't like something, you can always fix it or replace it.  You even have a choice of _bootloaders_ if you're that picky -- or you can use the one that comes with your distro.


----------



## Oni (Dec 1, 2007)

----- mispost -----


----------



## Ron Overdrive (Dec 1, 2007)

XUbuntu 7.04 with the 2.6.22 kernel on my laptop. Ditched Windows after I got fed up with the annoying performance degration. I've used Mac OS X before and I generally don't like it too much. I guess it just feels a little too clunky with a single mouse button that teeters for a right click. If it was a bit cheaper and had more game support I'd probably switch to a Mac OS X and buy a 3 button scroll wheel mouse for it. Even though the tech support is awesome, I can't justify paying $2500 - $3000 for a Mac when the PC's go for half with identical hardware. If my job gave me one for free I'd use it though.


----------



## Rhainor (Dec 1, 2007)

Eevee said:
			
		

> Rhainor said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It just doesn't feel like one to me.



			
				Eevee said:
			
		

> Do you not consider BSD to be a UNIX system either?



I know exactly enough about BSD to consider it "some *nix OS that I don't wanna mess with".



			
				sabrinageek said:
			
		

> I don't have the time or patience to learn *nix enough to be proficient;  I know enough to stumble my way around a directory structure, run commands, etc..  I've installed different distro's in the past.. However,  what I find is that Unix based systems are never as user-friendly as they claim to be;  I'm more concerned with making my computer -do- what I want it to do than fighting with it.
> 
> ...



Agreed on pretty much all counts.


----------



## Kumiko_Fox (Dec 1, 2007)

Rhainor said:
			
		

> Eevee said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Is it because Mac OS X is extremely user friendly?



			
				Ron Overdrive said:
			
		

> XUbuntu 7.04 with the 2.6.22 kernel on my laptop. Ditched Windows after I got fed up with the annoying performance degration. I've used Mac OS X before and I generally don't like it too much. I guess it just feels a little too clunky with a single mouse button that teeters for a right click. If it was a bit cheaper and had more game support I'd probably switch to a Mac OS X and buy a 3 button scroll wheel mouse for it. Even though the tech support is awesome, I can't justify paying $2500 - $3000 for a Mac when the PC's go for half with identical hardware. If my job gave me one for free I'd use it though.



Ok, there is a major problem with your comparison between Mac and PC prices, you really overinflated the price of a new Mac.  I can prove to you that a new Mac is very close in price or even cheaper than a brand new PC.  (I used Dell as the comparison because they are the #1 PC vendor in the world, just as Apple is the #1 Mac vendor in the world [obvious though XD])

(The best version of Windows Vista is used in every comparison because the best version of Mac OS X is used)

MacBook comparison - http://i6.tinypic.com/6td8pac.jpg
The MacBook is several hundred dollars cheaper with nearly identical specs.  plus the MacBook is thinner.

MacBook Pro comparison - http://i16.tinypic.com/6tdec6q.jpg
The MacBook Pro is only 13% more, but it is a lot thinner, has an LED lit screen, which is much, much better for the environment and uses a lot less power.  Has a much higher resolution screen, gives you the choice between a matte and a glossy screen, looks a ton cooler, and has a higher capacity battery.

Mac Mini comparison - http://i15.tinypic.com/71n5bhg.jpg
The Dell is faster but also over $100 more than the Mac Mini, and the next step down for the processor on the dell would have made the dell just about $25 more than the Mac Mini, but also a lot less powerful (Pentium D vs. Core 2 Duo).  The Mac Mini is also only 2 inches tall and 6.5 inches wide and deep, so that is many, many fold smaller than the dell.

iMac comparison - http://i13.tinypic.com/725pts3.jpg
The iMac is just as fast as the dell, it even has a faster video card, just as much storage, plus wifi and bluetooth, but the dell is FIVE HUNDRED dollars more, now come on, I could get an iMac with a core 2 extreme (yes those really expensive processors), 24" HD screen, and a much faster video card for that price.

That just leaves the Mac Pro which far outclasses any of dell's desktop offerings with it's 8 core processor, up to 32GB of RAM, 3 terabytes of hard drive space, etc.  I don't see any $3000 dollar Macs where you can get it for $1500 from dell.  That went a bit off topic, but I felt it needed to be said before people just throw out random "facts" and other people accept them as truth.


----------



## Rhainor (Dec 1, 2007)

Dell is overpriced.  I can build a comp with a nearly identical configuration to your Mac-Mini-competitor for around $400 in parts, plus maybe $100 for labor -- and that's a more powerful computer than most people need.  Most could get by with a much smaller hard drive (100GB, or even smaller, instead of 250GB), and a less powerful processor (1.66GHz dual-core, instead of 2.2GHz d-c).


----------



## Kumiko_Fox (Dec 1, 2007)

Rhainor said:
			
		

> Dell is overpriced.  I can build a comp with a nearly identical configuration to your Mac-Mini-competitor for around $400 in parts, plus maybe $100 for labor -- and that's a more powerful computer than most people need.  Most could get by with a much smaller hard drive (100GB, or even smaller, instead of 250GB), and a less powerful processor (1.66GHz dual-core, instead of 2.2GHz d-c).



And I could get a refurbished Mac Mini with a 1.66GHz dual core processor for $430 when it occasionally shows up on the refurbished section.  And I gave you the reasoning for using dell as a comparison, they are the #1 PC vendor, so therefore they are the one that should be used as a comparison.


----------



## Rhainor (Dec 1, 2007)

Regardless, Dell *is* overpriced.  And if you're getting similar prices for Apple computers, then those are overpriced too -- which is one of the reasons I don't like Apple.

/it should be noted that I don't like Dell either.


----------



## Kumiko_Fox (Dec 1, 2007)

Rhainor said:
			
		

> Regardless, Dell *is* overpriced.  And if you're getting similar prices for Apple computers, then those are overpriced too -- which is one of the reasons I don't like Apple.
> 
> /it should be noted that I don't like Dell either.



Several hundred dollars cheaper is similarly priced now?  I always thought that it was a less than $50 difference meant they were similarly priced.


----------



## Eevee (Dec 2, 2007)

Rhainor said:
			
		

> sabrinageek said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Strange.  My reason for wanting to switch to Linux is exactly the same.


----------



## net-cat (Dec 2, 2007)

> Idiotic bickering about Mac vs PC.



I have a Mac Mini. It sits in my closet and collects dust. (I drag it out on the rare occasion I write something that I actually care if works on a Mac.)

The two computers I use are a frankenputer and a Gateway tablet PC.
I didn't consider either a Mac _or_ a Dell for the former because frankenputers are cheap.
I didn't consider either for the latter because neither sell tablet PC's.

Answer: Buy the product that will do what you need at a reasonable price.


----------



## Oni (Dec 2, 2007)

*Learns from your discussions* cool cool.


----------



## sabrinageek (Dec 2, 2007)

Eevee said:
			
		

> Strange.  My reason for wanting to switch to Linux is exactly the same.



And again, that's fine. As I pointed out,  I respect and admire those that can make Linux work for them.  I can't.  It's a personal thing.  I don't want to get into a "which is better" discussion, because we can already see where that will go.   All have strengths and weaknesses,  all are 'different,'  and every person's gonna find what works for them.

In my case,  I can load up winamp or media player and it works.  I can plug in a printer, load a driver, and it works.  I don't have to fiddle around with lpp or ghostscript or what-not.   I originally replaced my Amiga in 1995 with a PC because I was a comp. sci major and needed to be able to run the College's crappy software for programming.  Since then, it's just been easier/cheaper for me to just continue to upgrade/rebuild with new mobos/cpus etc and have a frankenputer of my own. 

I've acquired everything I need to do what I want;  dvd burner, flatbed scanner, webcam,  video capture card, etc..  

Could a mac do all that?  Probably.  Would it work better or quicker?  Maybe, I don't know.  But it's a matter of reinvestment.  Why change to another platform when what I have does what I want it to do, and I've already got the investment made in knowing how to use what I have, and the investment of having the equipment in the first place?  

I still stand by my original statement that it's just not for me.. but that YMMV.  And if Linux rocks your socks,  hey, go you!  

-Sabrina


----------



## Rhainor (Dec 2, 2007)

Eevee said:
			
		

> Strange.  My reason for wanting to switch to Linux is exactly the same.



CLI != "user-friendly", and when the CLI is the only way to do half the stuff I want to do, I'm looking elsewhere.

...but that's just me.



			
				sabrinageek said:
			
		

> And again, that's fine. As I pointed out,  I respect and admire those that can make Linux work for them.  I can't.  It's a personal thing.  I don't want to get into a "which is better" discussion, because we can already see where that will go.   All have strengths and weaknesses,  all are 'different,'  and every person's gonna find what works for them.
> 
> In my case,  I can load up winamp or media player and it works.  I can plug in a printer, load a driver, and it works.  I don't have to fiddle around with lpp or ghostscript or what-not.   I originally replaced my Amiga in 1995 with a PC because I was a comp. sci major and needed to be able to run the College's crappy software for programming.  Since then, it's just been easier/cheaper for me to just continue to upgrade/rebuild with new mobos/cpus etc and have a frankenputer of my own.
> 
> ...



Again, agreed on all counts.


----------



## Ron Overdrive (Dec 2, 2007)

Kumiko_Fox said:
			
		

> Rhainor said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sorry maybe I should have stated I build my PC's. And besides.. the Mac Pro I built at Apple.com actually went for close to $4000. Only options I chose were the 2 gigs ram, 1 750gig HD, 2 Geforce 7300GT's, and the smallest screen I could buy which was the 20" wide screen. The only thing that the Mac Pro offers me over other cookie cutter PC's is the dual Zeon processors. What pisses me off about their offerings for it is the fact they only offer budget video cards for them. Being that I'm a gamer its kinda an insult to charge me $4000 and not have the latest generation video cards available to me as an option.

Here's what I built at apple.com: http://www.mediafire.com/?0mdniaj4090

Here's what I can put together myself for a similar price: http://www.mediafire.com/?3mjybmoostb

When I can put together something like this for a similar price I kinda feel like I'm getting ripped off. Thats just my personal opinion. And again, sorry for not stating I build my PC's. I know you can technically "build" a Mac these days, but it requires a hacked copy of Mac OS X and compatible hardware to do it. And of course its illegal because you need a modified copy of Mac OS.


----------



## net-cat (Dec 2, 2007)

sabrinageek said:
			
		

> Could a mac do all that?  Probably.  Would it work better or quicker?  Maybe, I don't know.  But it's a matter of reinvestment.  Why change to another platform when what I have does what I want it to do, and I've already got the investment made in knowing how to use what I have, and the investment of having the equipment in the first place?
> 
> I still stand by my original statement that it's just not for me.. but that YMMV.  And if Linux rocks your socks,  hey, go you!



Funny. I'm the same way.

I've got nearly a terabyte of drives that would need to be converted from NTFS to ext3/HFS+. I would have to go out and track down another copy of Office and/or figure out OpenOffice. (Or run it under VMWare, but what would be the point of that?) I would have to spend several hours to several days tweaking everything to make it work the way I want. Getting Steam to work under Wine would likely be a several day project in and of itself, and may not ever work at all.

Why would I put myself through all that when what I have now works?

Incidentally, I had many of the same sorts problems with Vista. It came down to the fact I'd have to spend several days fucking around with it to get it to work the way I wanted, or I could revert back to XP and be back up and running in an hour or two.


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Dec 2, 2007)

Well, being a hardcore mac user since 1995...

My older iMac uses Mac OS 10.4.8, my newer one uses 10.4.11, my iBook uses 10.4.11, and my PSP used OS 7.6.1.


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Dec 2, 2007)

Ron Overdrive said:
			
		

> ...and the smallest screen I could buy which was the 20" wide screen...



As much as I love Apple, I definately recommend buying a third party monitor. The Apple cinematic displays are cool, yeah, but IMO overpriced. You could get a junk 18" flatscreen display for about $400, and it would be fine. But then again, it all depends on what you need it for. If you use you Mac as a TV and NEED a 30" screen, by all means. My iMac's a 30", and I use it for my video editing work and the huge screen helps when you have multiple windows going on a huge resolution. But, for example, when doing something like playing WoW, it's too big. Gives me a headache to look at it too long.

All you need is an adapter for a new monitor (available anywhere, for cheap), and it's fine. Saves a lot of cash, too.


----------



## Eevee (Dec 2, 2007)

sabrinageek said:
			
		

> In my case,  I can load up winamp or media player and it works.  I can plug in a printer, load a driver, and it works.  I don't have to fiddle around with lpp or ghostscript or what-not.


My last foray into Linux gave me sound and printing that worked out of the box.  I even kinda miss Amarok.



			
				sabrinageek said:
			
		

> I still stand by my original statement that it's just not for me.. but that YMMV.  And if Linux rocks your socks,  hey, go you!


It would _like_ to be for you, though.



			
				Rhainor said:
			
		

> CLI != "user-friendly", and when the CLI is the only way to do half the stuff I want to do, I'm looking elsewhere.


The CLI is rarely the only way to do what you want to do.  Even the X config has GUI editors now.

However, it is frequently the only way to do what _I_ want to do -- on any platform -- and is a complete joke on Windows.



			
				net-cat said:
			
		

> Why would I put myself through all that when what I have now works?


Possibly for the same reason I learned Vim when I knew standard editors, or Python when I knew Perl...


----------



## Pi (Dec 2, 2007)

Eevee said:
			
		

> Rhainor said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Exactly. How do you do 
	
	



```
tail -n1 *.log | grep -v '100%' | sort | uniq  | pee cat "wc -l"
```
 in a GUI?


----------



## Tachyon (Dec 3, 2007)

Pi said:
			
		

> ```
> tail -n1 *.log | grep -v '100%' | sort | uniq  | pee cat &quot;wc -l&quot;
> ```



I must confess I've not come across the pee command before...


----------



## Pi (Dec 3, 2007)

Tachyon said:
			
		

> Pi said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's in the Debian package "moreutils". It's like tee but for pipes.


----------



## FF_CCSa1F (Jan 25, 2008)

Ubuntu 7.04 and XP.


----------



## theg90 (Jan 30, 2008)

I'm currently running openSUSE on my own PC.  I like it, its so way much better than some sh*t like OSX or whatever its called.  I  have a mac as well, and its so incredibly weird to use, I wanna screamï¿¸l


----------



## Rayne (Jan 30, 2008)

Nope. I have Ubuntu 7.04 installed on an extra hard disk in my machine, but I haven't touched it in awhile. Not because I don't like it or anything, but my wireless network card refuses to work under Ubuntu. Which really prevents me from being able to do a lot of what I normally do with my computer.


----------



## Ron Overdrive (Jan 30, 2008)

Rayne said:
			
		

> Nope. I have Ubuntu 7.04 installed on an extra hard disk in my machine, but I haven't touched it in awhile. Not because I don't like it or anything, but my wireless network card refuses to work under Ubuntu. Which really prevents me from being able to do a lot of what I normally do with my computer.



Have you tried using ndiswrapper and the windows drivers for it?


----------



## Rayne (Jan 30, 2008)

Ron Overdrive said:
			
		

> Have you tried using ndiswrapper and the windows drivers for it?



Yep. Ubuntu knows my WMP54g is there. The issue is that I can't actually connect to my network. I can see it, but the connection always times out.


----------



## Devinion (Jan 30, 2008)

Oh my yes. Can't trust XP to do everything, can I?

My PC Dual Boots Windows XP Professional Service Pack 2 and Ubuntu 7.1 (Gutsy Gibbon)

Currently running on XP because uTorrent works better than BitTorrent (Linux ver) But I switch between the two often.


----------



## Ron Overdrive (Jan 30, 2008)

Rayne said:
			
		

> Ron Overdrive said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Try cleaning up 7.04 and upgrading to 7.10 then. I've worked on a few laptops where upgrading to 7.10 corrected the drivers. Also give WICD a try as I've also found it to work in some situations better then the built in stuff.


----------



## amtrack88 (Jan 31, 2008)

I've been rather happy with Windows NT based operating systems. Had relatively few problems. Never felt the need to use something totally different.


----------



## Zero_Point (Jan 31, 2008)

Ron Overdrive said:
			
		

> Try cleaning up 7.04 and upgrading to 7.10 then. I've worked on a few laptops where upgrading to 7.10 corrected the drivers. Also give WICD a try as I've also found it to work in some situations better then the built in stuff.



Indeed. I'm running Kubuntu 7.10 right now, and it's actually not too bad. Installing the nVidia drivers have proven to be a bitch and a half because it doesn't properly edit the xorg.conf file, but other than that, it's peachy-keen.



			
				net-cat said:
			
		

> Getting Steam to work under Wine would likely be a several day project in and of itself, and may not ever work at all.



Hey, if a *nix-tard like me can get Steam (and so far Portal and Darwinia) to work, so can you.


----------



## Ron Overdrive (Jan 31, 2008)

Zero_Point said:
			
		

> Indeed. I'm running Kubuntu 7.10 right now, and it's actually not too bad. Installing the nVidia drivers have proven to be a bitch and a half because it doesn't properly edit the xorg.conf file, but other than that, it's peachy-keen.



Get yourself a copy of Envy. Its a set of python scripts with a GUI interface that will download the latest version of the nVidia or ATI OSS drivers, covert them into deb files, compile the kernel modules, and configures the x.org scripts perfectly with a push of a button.


> net-cat said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Heh yeah I got Steam running under WINE as well. Everyone seems to put WINE down when it comes to gaming, but the sad truth is the Cedega programmers do unofficially contribute to the WINE project and has gotten better at compatibility then Cedega has. Hell not only have I gotten Steam installed, but I also have WoW installed and running full speed. Wine's AppDB is also a good resource to getting your games installed, running, and slightly optimized.


----------



## net-cat (Jan 31, 2008)

Heh. I'll give it a try when Radeon HD 2000 series sees Linux/amd64 support. (ATI released a driver, but I couldn't get it to work. Yay 320x240.)


----------



## Eevee (Jan 31, 2008)

amtrack88 said:
			
		

> I've been rather happy with Windows NT based operating systems. Had relatively few problems. Never felt the need to use something totally different.


"Relatively" few problems?  Relative to what, if you've not used anything else?

Windows has never been anything less than a pain in the ass for me.  Built-in software sucks horrendously, window manager is a joke, theming is pathetic, CLI is nearly useless, etc etc..



			
				Zero_Point said:
			
		

> Hey, if a *nix-tard like me can get Steam (and so far Portal and Darwinia) to work, so can you.


My roommate, who had zero prior Linux experience, installed Ubuntu on an old box on a whim one afternoon and was playing TF2 by the end of the day.  (wine-doors is your friend.)  He is currently lamenting having Windows on his shinier new box, as -- like me -- the only reason he uses it is for the better 8800 drivers.


----------



## net-cat (Jan 31, 2008)

I don't mind having Windows on my laptop.

It has things like "tablet pc support" and "LCD backlight support." (Both things I haven't been able to get working in Ubuntu on this thing...)

For my desktop, it makes little difference. Just driver support issues...


----------



## Eevee (Jan 31, 2008)

I am pretty sure I have seen some Linux work fine with a backlight.

The tablet functionality, though: is that part of Windows or provided by the manufacturer?


----------



## net-cat (Jan 31, 2008)

See, that's the weird thing. It works when it's plugged in, not when it's on battery. It's also something I couldn't fix with a Google search.

As for tablet, the tablet manufacturer provides the driver. But most of the tablet functionality (handwriting recognition, speech recognition and the WinTab APIs) is built into Windows. (XP Tablet PC Edition or any version of Vista except Basic.) It also requires a slightly modified video driver to support the "rotate screen" button.


----------



## Zero_Point (Feb 1, 2008)

Ron Overdrive said:
			
		

> Get yourself a copy of Envy. Its a set of python scripts with a GUI interface that will download the latest version of the nVidia or ATI OSS drivers, covert them into deb files, compile the kernel modules, and configures the x.org scripts perfectly with a push of a button.



Thanks, I'll have to try that.


> Heh yeah I got Steam running under WINE as well. Everyone seems to put WINE down when it comes to gaming, but the sad truth is the Cedega programmers do unofficially contribute to the WINE project and has gotten better at compatibility then Cedega has. Hell not only have I gotten Steam installed, but I also have WoW installed and running full speed. Wine's AppDB is also a good resource to getting your games installed, running, and slightly optimized.



Well, granted, Portal doesn't run PERFECTLY, you have to force it into DirectX 8.1 mode to get it to run faster than 7 FPS, and the portal textures glitch every now and again (sometimes rendering the wrong ROOM altogether. Fun time...).


----------



## sgolem (Feb 1, 2008)

Running Ubuntu 7.10 right now.  I love it.  I also have a Powerbook G4, but it's proven to be the worst computer I've ever owned.  Already had five hardware failures, partly because Apple didn't believe me the first two times I sent it in (North Carolina residents: avoid The Apple Store in Durham like the plague).  It's also made of easily-dented and warped aluminium, which hasn't helped.  Not a big fan of OS X anyway (the dock and the random copying of files particularly annoy me).


----------



## indrora (Feb 1, 2008)

Personally, i use anything with a bash style shell availible. If i cant run Linux/Unix, i pull out Cygwin. on a stick.

Linux is my main operating system of choice. Debian/GNU Linux, and its derivatives are my main attachments. I however will very often run an LFS (linux from scratch) install when i want a high power customized distro (ie when i JUST need Apache and some low level tools.


----------



## CaptainSaicin (Feb 4, 2008)

Strictly speaking, Linux is not UNIX-based.

I run Windows, Linux and Leopard (UNIX)


----------



## Armaetus (Feb 4, 2008)

Ubuntu 7.04 on secondary drive.


----------



## arcticsilver (May 8, 2008)

I use Kubuntu 7.10 most of the time but I still have a partiton around for a few windows games that don't want to play in wine.


----------



## Aurali (May 8, 2008)

Kubuntu 7.10, Solaris 10 

:3 fun fun fun!


----------



## MetronomeCat (May 14, 2008)

OH HO HO Linux.

I don't like people who use Linux. They tend to hate me for using XP. It bugs me.

I would like to point out however, that I have been running Windows since 95, withOUT virus and spyware scanners. Guess how many viruses I've got. ZERO. Unless

Unless you count the common cold. I get that a lot >:

But yeah srsly, common sense goes a long way in using Windows. Sadly, some people are so stupid though that they download and run "VIRUS.EXE"

And stability problems? 

Only time I've had my comp get a BSoD was when I was working on writing something for DirectX and I (read: ME) fucked up and wrote to video memory while it wasn't locked. Long story short, I don't use error checking whilst debugging |3


----------



## WarMocK (May 15, 2008)

MetronomeCat said:


> OH HO HO Linux.
> 
> I don't like people who use Linux. They tend to hate me for using XP. It bugs me.



Let me get this right: You have prejudices against EVERY linux user because SOME of them have prejudices against you?

pitiful ...

PS: I use both Windows XP (2 PCs) and Linux(6 PCs). I am neutral. B)


----------



## Aurali (May 15, 2008)

MetronomeCat said:


> OH HO HO Linux.
> 
> I don't like people who use Linux. They tend to hate me for using XP. It bugs me.


 I don't like linux users who brag about how "superior" their OS is.. and how I'm wrong for still running windows as well XD 

And as I told my other friend last night.. The only difference between an egotistic Linux user and a Mac user is that the earlier actually _thinks_ they know something XD


----------



## net-cat (May 15, 2008)

Server: FreeBSD 6.2
Desktop: Ubuntu 8.04
Laptop: Vista Business

*insert statement about using the right tool for the job here*


----------



## Eevee (May 15, 2008)

CaptainSaicin said:


> Strictly speaking, Linux is not UNIX-based.


Not in the strict sense, no, but it is based on UNIX in the same way Eragon is based on Star Wars inspirational sense.



MetronomeCat said:


> I don't like people who use Linux. They tend to hate me for using XP. It bugs me.


I don't hate anyone for running anything.  I think a lot of software choices people make are terrible, yes, and occasionally I would go so far as to call them downright stupid, but it doesn't inspire _hatred_.



MetronomeCat said:


> I would like to point out however, that I have been running Windows since 95, withOUT virus and spyware scanners. Guess how many viruses I've got. ZERO.


Same, until recently when I got fed up and moved to Linux.  It is not difficult.



net-cat said:


> *insert statement about using the right tool for the job here*


I'll get you off Vista yet.  8)


----------



## net-cat (May 15, 2008)

I've told you exactly what needs to happen for me to not use Windows on my laptop. And yet you're not writing that functionality.


----------



## MetronomeCat (May 15, 2008)

WarMocK said:


> Let me get this right: You have prejudices against EVERY linux user because SOME of them have prejudices against you?
> 
> pitiful ...
> 
> PS: I use both Windows XP (2 PCs) and Linux(6 PCs). I am neutral. B)



Everyone one I've met so far, and you're just backing it up XD

And in this sense, I used the term hate as in "looks down upon", and since Eevee kindly stated that it's "downright stupid", that only furthers my point.

And Eli, you and I are to be good friends. WANNA YAFF? à²*_à²*


----------



## Kimmerset (May 15, 2008)

32-bit Vista kinda has me fed up with windows.  Seeing as I'm probably gonna be a programmer in the near future, I figure I'd give Linux a try.  I... kind of have to make a point of backing up all my data before screwing around with anything, though.  Although it's mostly my inexperience that's holding me back. 

Vista's been giving me a lot of trouble, so it's either a reformat or a complete swap with Linux.  Thankfully I have a laptop or two with XP still, so I won't be completely out of familiar territory. >_>


----------



## WarMocK (May 15, 2008)

MetronomeCat said:
			
		

> Everyone one I've met so far, and you're just backing it up XD


Hehe, that's good to hear. ^^


			
				indrora said:
			
		

> I however will very often run an LFS (linux from scratch) install when i want a high power customized distro (ie when i JUST need Apache and some low level tools.


Cool. Are you using something like ALFS to speed up things a little, or do you it the old way and go step by step? And how complicated is it to build a complete system from scratch? I'm experimenting with several distros and try to combine them to a small but extremely fast basic GUI-driven system I can customize depending on what I want to do on the systems. And I'm not quite sure if it wouldn't be better to rebuild the core components from scratch instead of taking them from Slackware, Debian and Co.


----------



## Eevee (May 15, 2008)

net-cat said:


> I've told you exactly what needs to happen for me to not use Windows on my laptop. And yet you're not writing that functionality.


I mean more in the sense of "wait until someone else does the work and then tell you about it"  B3



MetronomeCat said:


> And in this sense, I used the term hate as in "looks down upon", and since Eevee kindly stated that it's "downright stupid", that only furthers my point.


I didn't call Windows "downright stupid".  I didn't call any _specific_ software anything.


----------



## Aurali (May 15, 2008)

MetronomeCat said:


> And Eli, you and I are to be good friends. WANNA YAFF? ï¿½*_ï¿½*



lesbian hun.



Eevee said:


> I'll get you off Vista yet.  8)



you know.. I find it funny how I'm possibly the only one alive who moved from linux to vista o.0;


----------



## net-cat (May 15, 2008)

Eevee said:


> I mean more in the sense of "wait until someone else does the work and then tell you about it"  B3


Fair enough. Although by the time that happens, that laptop will probably join my old C640 in my "hall of antiquities." 



Eli said:


> you know.. I find it funny how I'm possibly the only one alive who moved from linux to vista o.0;


I moved from RedHat 5.2/6 to NT 4 back in the day...


----------



## Aurali (May 16, 2008)

net-cat said:


> I moved from RedHat 5.2/6 to NT 4 back in the day...



out of everything I know about computers.. I learned 95% of it in the past year and a half o.0; (when I got my first PC internet bound :3)


----------



## net-cat (May 16, 2008)

I'm the same way, actually.

Except I got my first internet connection in 1996, instead of 2006.


----------



## Aurali (May 16, 2008)

net-cat said:


> I'm the same way, actually.
> 
> Except I got my first internet connection in 1996, instead of 2006.



oh.. I had internet before hand.. but I also had parents that restricted everything XD 15 minutes a day isn't enough to do much but school projects..


----------



## indrora (May 17, 2008)

well, i've done plenty of work on UNIX based systems: Linux, some BSD and plenty of (if you can call it Unix) Cygwin...

theres no real way either any more to do

```
pyqq.py -src=`tail -l 1 /proc/temp/cpu0` -o=ctemp+$DATE.txt
```
in an interface unless you're using some kind of REALLY well made frontend... like GTKMame. or MameQT... because 
	
	



```
/usr/bin/mame/mame.x86 /usr/share/games/mame/pbro.zip
```
 is sooo error prone.


----------



## pitonpeludo (May 22, 2008)

I'm currently reading up on UNIX, and hoping to install Ubuntu soon. But I don't have anything to test it out on. Is there an option available where I can install an application that will simulate the UNIX environment on a Windows XP?


----------



## net-cat (May 22, 2008)

http://wubi-installer.org/

Doesn't run it within the XP environment, but it doesn't require repartitioning your drive. If you want to get rid of it, it's a simple matter of removing it using the Add/Remove Programs control panel in Windows.


----------



## pitonpeludo (May 22, 2008)

net-cat said:


> http://wubi-installer.org/
> 
> Doesn't run it within the XP environment, but it doesn't require repartitioning your drive. If you want to get rid of it, it's a simple matter of removing it using the Add/Remove Programs control panel in Windows.



Am I correct to assume it's a boot OS?


----------



## net-cat (May 22, 2008)

Yeah. Basically, what it does is it create a large file on your Windows partition and installs Linux in that. I believe it installs GRUB and gives you a choice between Windows and Linux when it boots.

You could also use VMWare or VirtualPC, but that's not really a fair comparison.


----------



## Aurali (May 22, 2008)

go download Ubuntu, then put it on a CD... it will live boot, and not damage your harddrive.


----------



## MetronomeCat (May 22, 2008)

*Installing a hacked copy of XP over OpenSUSE as I type this*

:3


----------



## Kimmerset (May 22, 2008)

Had a fun few hours restoring Windows to its former "glory" after reformatting and I still have so much to do.  The after that, it'll be all ready to have Ubuntu installed on it.


----------



## WarMocK (May 22, 2008)

pitonpeludo said:


> I'm currently reading up on UNIX, and hoping to install Ubuntu soon. But I don't have anything to test it out on. Is there an option available where I can install an application that will simulate the UNIX environment on a Windows XP?


The best way to test it is to use a harddisk you can spare. Put it in your computer, start the live cd, and install it to the second hdd, among with GRUB. Then you only have to change the boot priority to the second hdd, and youmay choose what OSto run from the bootloader. ;-)
A little hint for safety reasons: disconnect your XP harddrive from the system to prevent Ubuntu from trying to install there, otherwise you might shred your Win XP. And use the customized installation, the auto-install option is crap.


----------



## pitonpeludo (May 22, 2008)

Eli said:


> go download Ubuntu, then put it on a CD... it will live boot, and not damage your harddrive.



One step behind you; I've download the ISO. It'll probably be June before I can do anything. My computer is running Premiere Pro, and I don't want to risk loosing my video files.


----------



## Aurali (May 22, 2008)

ubuntu uses a system that won't touch your files unless you specifically say "Hey! go rape my C drive!" it will run directly from your cd drive til your ready to put it on your hard disk. and it's got a built in shortcut for that too..


----------



## net-cat (May 22, 2008)

Whatever you do, don't do this:


```
sudo dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/hda bs=512 count=1
```

Seriously don't do it. It'll zap your MBR.


----------



## Eevee (May 22, 2008)

The LiveCD boots and runs a full Ubuntu installation directly from the CD and RAM.
Wubi shouldn't make any irreversible changes either, and will run way faster.

edit: ^ yeah don't do that.


----------



## arcticsilver (Jun 5, 2008)

MetronomeCat said:


> *Installing a hacked copy of XP over OpenSUSE as I type this*
> 
> :3



?eikooc a teg i soed sdrawkcab depyt uoy tahw daer nac I


----------



## pitonpeludo (Jun 5, 2008)

I just installed Ubuntu on my PC, and, yes it does run awesomely. But I didn't realize that it was pretty straight forward. Are the other distributions like this?


----------



## dietrc70 (Jun 6, 2008)

WarMocK said:


> A little hint for safety reasons: disconnect your XP harddrive from the system to prevent Ubuntu from trying to install there, otherwise you might shred your Win XP. And use the customized installation, the auto-install option is crap.


 
That is VERY good advice. Always remove the XP drive before installing Linux. I certainly haven't used every distro, but more than once I've had the installer screw up the MBR of the XP drive even though I told it to put the bootloader on a different drive.  I think it was Fedora that had a tendency to do that.


----------



## pitonpeludo (Jun 6, 2008)

dietrc70 said:


> That is VERY good advice. Always remove the XP drive before installing Linux. I certainly haven't used every distro, but more than once I've had the installer screw up the MBR of the XP drive even though I told it to put the bootloader on a different drive.  I think it was Fedora that had a tendency to do that.



Wow, I got lucky. I didn't even think about seperating the XP drive. It all went through!


----------



## WarMocK (Jun 6, 2008)

pitonpeludo said:


> Wow, I got lucky. I didn't even think about seperating the XP drive. It all went through!


Disconnecting the XP drive is just a safety measure, and, as you can see, for a good reason. I never installed Fedora because the distri was too experimental and too big for my taste. ;-)

EDIT: I don't want to say that Fedora is bad, just in case someone needs a reason to start a flamewar about linux distris again. -.-


----------



## Eevee (Jun 6, 2008)

pitonpeludo said:


> I just installed Ubuntu on my PC, and, yes it does run awesomely. But I didn't realize that it was pretty straight forward. Are the other distributions like this?


Until somewhat recently, the Real Man's Way to install Gentoo was something like this.

Of course, there were also both a much simpler console way and a graphical installer (which are now the only supported ways, really), but those are lame.  8)


----------



## WarMocK (Jun 6, 2008)

Eevee said:


> Until somewhat recently, the Real Man's Way to install Gentoo was something like this


Oh no, not Gentoo again! 
I had a stage 1 installation for two years, but in the end I never really liked it desppite its speed, since I never really managed to customize it to fit my needs completely. There were simply too many ways to tweak it.
After I used a Puppy Linux live-CD to fix my system (that I had tweaked to death ^^) I reallized that there are other ways to customize my system. It might not be as fast as a system built with an optimited toolchain, but it still beats every OS that I had before (show me a system that boots in 10 seconds and takes less than 200 Megs of disk space. B-)).
Gentoo is a good choice for people who want to learn how Linux works, but for people who just want a good and fast OS for their daily work, Gentoo is massive overkill.


----------



## pitonpeludo (Jun 7, 2008)

Does anybody know of a true distribution that is just angry UNIX command prompt? No windows or GUIs whatsoever!


----------



## WarMocK (Jun 7, 2008)

pitonpeludo said:


> Does anybody know of a true distribution that is just angry UNIX command prompt? No windows or GUIs whatsoever!


For what purpose? Server or desktop? Or anything special?
In case of a server or desktop, take a look at Debian. ;-)
If you need something special: www.distrowatch.com


----------



## Eevee (Jun 7, 2008)

Uh, I imagine you can get pretty much any distribution to be like that without much difficulty.  Use ubuntu and remove ubuntu-desktop; use Gentoo stage1 and don't install X; use LFS and don't add X; use Knoppix or another livecd and just don't boot X; etc.


----------



## WarMocK (Jun 7, 2008)

Yeah, but imho it's easier to use something where you can add what you need instead of using something that has too much and you have to throw out things to make it fit your needs.


----------



## pitonpeludo (Jun 7, 2008)

WarMocK said:


> Yeah, but imho it's easier to use something where you can add what you need instead of using something that has too much and you have to throw out things to make it fit your needs.



This is what I'm looking for, probably for a server in the end. Something very similar to the prompt used in the movie _Pi_, if that helps.

Edit: Don't blame me, it was the first thing that came to mind.


----------



## WarMocK (Jun 7, 2008)

pitonpeludo said:


> Something very similar to the prompt used in the movie _Pi_, if that helps.


Do you have a link to a screenshot? That really would help. ^^


----------



## pitonpeludo (Jun 7, 2008)

WarMocK said:


> Do you have a link to a screenshot? That really would help. ^^



It doens't require a screen shot, I'm just looking for the stand alone prompt. Something like the original BSD UNIX, with no windows what so ever.
Why? I don't know, grins and angry giggles, I guess.








Note: ^this^ isn't from _Pi_.


----------



## WarMocK (Jun 7, 2008)

One word: DEBIAN! ^^


----------



## pitonpeludo (Jun 7, 2008)

WarMocK said:


> One word: DEBIAN! ^^



Awesome.


----------



## WarMocK (Jun 7, 2008)

Oh, I forgot Eisfair. If you are going for a server anyways .... ;-)

www.eisfair.org
However, Eisfair also provides a CLI, hope that wouldn't be a problem. After all, a CLI eades the work on the system without having to install X.


----------



## pitonpeludo (Jun 7, 2008)

WarMocK said:


> Oh, I forgot Eisfair. If you are going for a server anyways .... ;-)
> 
> www.eisfair.org
> However, Eisfair also provides a CLI, hope that wouldn't be a problem. After all, a CLI eades the work on the system without having to install X.



All I know is I've got a lot of reading to do this summer.

Edit: Damn it, the website is in German. *babelfishes*


----------



## Eevee (Jun 7, 2008)

WarMocK said:


> Yeah, but imho it's easier to use something where you can add what you need instead of using something that has too much and you have to throw out things to make it fit your needs.


"aptitude remove ubuntu-desktop" isn't exactly difficult.  You could just as easily install Ubuntu server, but then you'd have to remove whatever it comes with too.


----------



## Aurali (Jun 8, 2008)

:3 why do all that? is your server really that needy on it's hdd? can't you just run the prompt and let the window server hold until you need to do work?


----------



## KusacWolf (Jun 10, 2008)

I have one laptop that uses Windows XP, and an ASUS EEE laptop, that has Xandros Linux installed (and modified by me with some help, gotta love wiki.eeeuser.com). I know I'll have to replace the XP laptop sooner or later, but it looks like my next laptop will unfortunately have Vista on it. When that happens, I'll be scrapping the whole Windows direction, and start using Linux full time. I've been learning how to use Xandros Linux, and it's not really so hard, especially when there's websites completely dedicated to the EEE laptops.


----------



## WarMocK (Jun 10, 2008)

KusacWolf said:


> I've been learning how to use Xandros Linux, and it's not really so hard, especially when there's websites completely dedicated to the EEE laptops.


Pssssst, don't say that too loud, you might make the hardcore Linux fanatics very angry. ;-)


----------



## Eevee (Jun 10, 2008)

Why would anyone WANT Linux to be difficult?


----------



## Aurali (Jun 10, 2008)

Eevee said:


> Why would anyone WANT Linux to be difficult?



to drive away normal users so they can stay "1337" ?


----------



## WarMocK (Jun 10, 2008)

Eli said:


> to drive away normal users so they can stay "1337" ?


100% ACK!!!


----------



## Pi (Jun 12, 2008)

Eli said:


> to drive away normal users so they can stay "1337" ?





WarMocK said:


> 100% ACK!!!



There's a big difference between "driving away normal users" and "not spoonfeeding complete retards". The linux community in general expects people to be able to research their own problems and ask smart questions, as well as not spout off on topics they know nothing about as though they're experts. Cough.

I've been pouring too many years of blood and tears into my terminals to let my skills be impugned by people who think they know what they're doing. Cough twice.


----------



## nrr (Jun 12, 2008)

I ditched UNIX last year in favor of NT.  Before that, I ran IRIX from 1993 until 1998 and Linux from 1995 until 2007.  At work, I ran Solaris and Linux.

Why did I do this?  Does it really matter?


----------



## Pi (Jun 12, 2008)

nrr said:


> I ditched UNIX last year in favor of NT.  Before that, I ran IRIX from 1993 until 1998 and Linux from 1995 until 2007.  At work, I ran Solaris and Linux.
> 
> Why did I do this?  Does it really matter?



BECAUSE YOU THINK YOURE REALLY LEET LOOLL!~~*(())


----------



## nrr (Jun 12, 2008)

Pi said:


> BECAUSE YOU THINK YOURE REALLY LEET LOOLL!~~*(())


OMFG U HACK MY GIBSON!!!!1!1!1!limx->0sinx/x


```
idiot:
    .byte 0x59,0x49,0x46,0x46,0x20,0x49,0x4e,0x20,0x48,0x45,0x4c,0x4c
```


----------



## Tycho (Jun 12, 2008)

Pi said:


> There's a big difference between "driving away normal users" and "not spoonfeeding complete retards".



I wouldn't consider myself a complete retard, but even Ubuntu puzzled me at times.  I chalked that up to having become used to Windows for so long that I'd lost most of my ability to learn new stuff.  Learning BASH also flustered me a bit.


----------



## Pi (Jun 12, 2008)

Tycho The Itinerant said:


> I wouldn't consider myself a complete retard, but even Ubuntu puzzled me at times.  I chalked that up to having become used to Windows for so long that I'd lost most of my ability to learn new stuff.  Learning BASH also flustered me a bit.



Which is fine, unless your first step was to get on irc and whine about how lunix is so hard because all the good documentation is with the 'l33t' and they won't share it.


----------



## WarMocK (Jun 12, 2008)

Pi said:


> There's a big difference between "driving away normal users" and "not spoonfeeding complete retards". The linux community in general expects people to be able to research their own problems and ask smart questions, as well as not spout off on topics they know nothing about as though they're experts. Cough.
> 
> I've been pouring too many years of blood and tears into my terminals to let my skills be impugned by people who think they know what they're doing. Cough twice.



Thank you for proving me right why people ask me when they have problems with their system instead of a linux "pro" like you. ^^
In case you haven't noticed: people usually don't like to be called retards when they run into problems and ask for your help, as well as they already form their opinion about linux if they are greeted by an intro text in a channel saying:"We don't need you here! go away and read $insertuselessmanualhere!"
Users need a system that simply works. And if there is a problem at all, they either need a bunch of good and simple tools and scripts to fix that problem themselfs (including a SHORT overview about the most important basics of a linux system), or if the problem is a big one, they need a community of skilled and polite admins that give them a hand.
In other words: quite the opposite of the arrogant Gentoo channel I ran into (can't say that I feel sorry for that distro being in trouble because their users run away and use Sabayon instead.).


----------



## Eevee (Jun 12, 2008)

WarMocK said:


> In case you haven't noticed: people usually don't like to be called retards when they run into problems and ask for your help, as well as they already form their opinion about linux if they are greeted by an intro text in a channel saying:"We don't need you here! go away and read $insertuselessmanualhere!"


And, see, this is exactly the problem.  All you can think about is how the poor damn users feel, boo hoo.  Has it occurred to you that most Linux questions are trivial to answer with Google, and that perhaps everyone else has something better to do than hold your hand and/or play twenty questions?

When people ask me focused, specific questions, I am happy to answer.  When people IM me with "my printer doesn't work" and leave it at that, they can fuck off.  The problem is that most people think that _is_ asking for help: they don't try to describe the problem, they don't try to figure it out, they don't try to even collect any useful information.  This is a wee bit annoying for people with more training than a tech support monkey to deal with on a nearly constant basis.



WarMocK said:


> And if there is a problem at all, they either need a bunch of good and simple tools and scripts to fix that problem themselfs


you sure have a lot of faith in users



WarMocK said:


> (including a SHORT overview about the most important basics of a linux system)


http://www.google.com/search?q=linux+basics



WarMocK said:


> In other words: quite the opposite of the arrogant Gentoo channel I ran into (can't say that I feel sorry for that distro being in trouble because their users run away and use Sabayon instead.).


I'm sure Gentoo is terrified of a distro I'd never heard of before.


----------



## Xenofur (Jun 12, 2008)

WarMocK said:


> Sabayon


 This thread needs more funny. 





			
				Sabayon said:
			
		

> sabayon
> arte: essenza libera
> 
> If *Art* had a name, its name would be _*Sabayon*_. The most advanced, scalable and community driven Linux distribution of this odd world, brought to you from a *fashion-leading country*.


 (emphasis not mine)


----------



## Tycho (Jun 12, 2008)

Pi said:


> Which is fine, unless your first step was to get on irc and whine about how lunix is so hard because all the good documentation is with the 'l33t' and they won't share it.



LOL, no, I used the magic of the Internets to conjure written guides to using BASH onto my screen.  Initiative, initiative, initiative.


----------



## Pi (Jun 12, 2008)

WarMocK said:


> Thank you for proving me right why people ask me when they have problems with their system instead of a linux "pro" like you. ^^



People ask me when they want the _right_ answer. 



			
				Warmock said:
			
		

> Users need a system that simply works. And if there is a problem at all, they either need a bunch of good and simple tools and scripts to fix that problem themselfs



I'm not sure why you keep talking about users like you've ever supported them professionally, because if you've spent 5 minutes on the other end of the phone line you wouldn't come up with such garbage. Repeat after me: Users do not want to fix their broken computers themselves. Users do not want to program. Users do not want to learn bash. Users want their computers to work, and when they do not, they want you to fix it and not understand what is going wrong. This is why they are users and you are the admin or tech support or "the computer guy". (I'm using the general you, since obviously some of us are none of the above).



			
				Tycho The Itinerant said:
			
		

> LOL, no, I used the magic of the Internets to conjure written guides to using BASH onto my screen. Initiative, initiative, initiative.



Awesome. You score 5 points.


----------



## Pi (Jun 12, 2008)

Eevee said:


> I'm sure Gentoo is terrified of a distro I'd never heard of before.



Sabayon is a genpoo fork that ships with compiz enabled by default (insert finger-spin here) and has a horrible track record of passing patches back upstream.

Of course, gentoo has always been FreeBSD for dumbasses anyway, so the sooner they disappear the better.


----------



## Hakumei Ookami (Jun 12, 2008)

I'm not sure how much it matters in this thread anymore, but I run Linux Mint. I don't have any reasons for it, but I also have no reasons to change to Windows or Mac OS X.

I used to use Sabayon, and I enjoyed the distro, but I'm a lot more suited to Mint with its Ubuntu/Debian base and Gnome desktop. It's my way of saying "Yeah, I'm a retard. I don't need no KDE".

Mint has a KDE edition too, though.


----------



## nrr (Jun 12, 2008)

Tycho The Itinerant said:


> LOL, no, I used the magic of the Internets to conjure written guides to using BASH onto my screen.  Initiative, initiative, initiative.


You win five points from me too.



WarMocK said:


> Thank you for proving me right why people ask me when they have problems with their system instead of a linux "pro" like you. ^^


Wait for it...



			
				WarMocK said:
			
		

> In case you haven't noticed: people usually don't like to be called retards when they run into problems and ask for your help, as well as they already form their opinion about linux if they are greeted by an intro text in a channel saying:"We don't need you here! go away and read $insertuselessmanualhere!"


Wait for it...



			
				WarMocK said:
			
		

> Users need a system that simply works. And if there is a problem at all, *they either need a bunch of good and simple tools and scripts to fix that problem themselfs (including a SHORT overview about the most important basics of a linux system),* or if the problem is a big one, they need a community of skilled and polite admins that give them a hand.


Way to backpedal.  Cue "ONE OF US," etc.

As Pi said, your users want you to fix their problems for them.  Frankly, in a lot of cases, you would want to fix their problems for them because of security concerns, etc.

Better yet, your users are probably experts in their own fields, and operating a computer for them is only a secondary function of their respective jobs.  They have no need to learn how to be proficient at system administration because their concerns lie only in how to get their work done.


----------



## Eevee (Jun 12, 2008)

nrr said:


> They have no need to learn how to be proficient at system administration because their concerns lie only in how to get their work done.


Entirely missing that being proficient at system administration can often help them get their work done.


----------



## nrr (Jun 12, 2008)

Eevee said:


> Entirely missing that being proficient at system administration can often help them get their work done.


Haha, the military doesn't think so. :V


----------



## WarMocK (Jun 12, 2008)

Eevee said:


> you sure have a lot of faith in users


I know, I'm an optimist, but if you even lost hope, is life still worth living? ^^


----------



## Kimmerset (Jun 12, 2008)

Windows/Tiger/Leopard/whateverthefuck is like a car.  People merely use it until things start to break, then send it to a mechanic because they don't want to have to deal with it themselves.  Carefully watch the look on the mechanic's face when they ask you what the problem is and you say "something's broken."


----------



## WarMocK (Jun 12, 2008)

nrr said:


> Better yet, your users are probably experts in their own fields, and operating a computer for them is only a secondary function of their respective jobs.  They have no need to learn how to be proficient at system administration because their concerns lie only in how to get their work done.


That`s right, they are engioneers just like me, using their PCs to control and monitor machines and processes, do research and stuff, but they don't need to be professional admins to run a self-written program they manually installed on their systems.


----------



## net-cat (Jun 12, 2008)

Pi said:


> Of course, gentoo has always been FreeBSD for dumbasses anyway, so the sooner they disappear the better.


Hah. I've never heard that one before.


----------



## Pi (Jun 12, 2008)

net-cat said:


> Hah. I've never heard that one before.



I say that a lot. And for the most part it's true. Except FreeBSD doesn't give you a little pretty colorful annoying program that doesn't quite know how to resolve dependencies, since someone in FreeBSD land knows how Make works.


----------



## net-cat (Jun 12, 2008)

Heh. Ah, ports.

Klunky and awkward, but exceptionally effective!


----------



## Pi (Jun 12, 2008)

net-cat said:


> Heh. Ah, ports.
> 
> Klunky and awkward, but exceptionally effective!



I've never had ports generate an invalid dependency tree halfway through an operation. And I think that ports (actually, pkgsrc, since I'm a netbsd wonk) is rather elegant.


----------



## net-cat (Jun 12, 2008)

I have. But it's fixed easily enough with cvsup and maybe a portupgrade. (Or I guess the svn equivalent now.)


----------



## CyberFoxx (Jun 12, 2008)

Pi said:


> Of course, gentoo has always been FreeBSD for dumbasses anyway, so the sooner they disappear the better.




Here, let me fix that for you:
"Of course, cars has always been vans for dumbasses anyway, so the sooner they disappear the better."

Hope I kinda made my point clear, different tastes for different people, and the right tool for the right job. Plus name-calling is very, juvenile, as well.

I will freely admit that I do run Gentoo. In the beginning I did use Slackware, but I was always finding myself having to install stuff from source anyway, instead of being able to find a binary package already built. So I thought: "Hey, why not go all the way and just switch to a source-based distrib?"

First, I did look at the *BSDs, and I did like what I saw. Sure, there was similarities to what I already knew from Slackware Linux, but it was just too different for me. Sure, I admit that if I gave it a bit more time there's a good chance that I would've stuck with a *BSD. But at the time, I wanted something that I felt comfortable with, felt more like what I knew from Slackware, and so, I choose Gentoo.

Sure, every couple of months I'll run into a circular dependency, but I'm not one of those "Damnit! Even though a computer is an insanely compilicated device, I expect it to work perfectly and instantaneously 100% of the time!"-type people, so I can take the few minutes to analyze just why the circular dependency happened, and what I need to do to get around it.

Then again, if I would've been more stubbern and stuck with a *BSD, I bet I would've ran into a *BSD hating person sooner or later as well... And that's actually fine, differnet tastes for different people, different opinions for different people.


----------



## net-cat (Jun 12, 2008)

Actually, in the 5+ years I've been running FreeBSD, I've never encountered anyone who hates it...


----------



## Pi (Jun 12, 2008)

CyberFoxx said:


> Hope I kinda made my point clear, different tastes for different people, and the right tool for the right job. Plus name-calling is very, juvenile, as well.


Gentoo no longer has any redeeming advantages over any of the BSDs. This is the general consensus of most of the people I've dealt with, even previous die-hard Gentoo fans.



> I will freely admit that I do run Gentoo. In the beginning I did use Slackware, but I was always finding myself having to install stuff from source anyway, instead of being able to find a binary package already built. So I thought: "Hey, why not go all the way and just switch to a source-based distrib?"


So my binary debian packages just come into existence on their own? Pro tip: A distribution is by definition source-based, even if the package manager doesn't deal directly with source tarballs. Pick a different straw-man argument, thanks.



> Sure, every couple of months I'll run into a circular dependency, but I'm not one of those "Damnit! Even though a computer is an insanely compilicated device, I expect it to work perfectly and instantaneously 100% of the time!"-type people, so I can take the few minutes to analyze just why the circular dependency happened, and what I need to do to get around it.



I'm not either. Circular deps aren't my only complaint about gentoo.


----------



## CyberFoxx (Jun 12, 2008)

Pi said:


> So my binary debian packages just come into existence on their own? Pro tip: A distribution is by definition source-based, even if the package manager doesn't deal directly with source tarballs. Pick a different straw-man argument, thanks.



I'm sorry, I wasn't using the availability of binary packages for Slackware as an argument, just explaining what the catalyst was for the reason I decided to switch to a source-based distrib those many years ago. At the time, I had just thought "Well, what use is this great simple tgz package system, if I'm rarely using it to begin with?"

I do still think that Slackware is a great distrib. *Ahem* It was my "first" as it were. And I have been meaning to give it another go one of these days. I've heard that it's package library has gotten huge over the years. ^_^


----------



## Pi (Jun 12, 2008)

CyberFoxx said:


> I'm sorry, I wasn't using the availability of binary packages for Slackware as an argument, just explaining what the catalyst was for the reason I decided to switch to a source-based distrib those many years ago. At the time, I had just thought "Well, what use is this great simple tgz package system, if I'm rarely using it to begin with?"
> 
> I do still think that Slackware is a great distrib. *Ahem* It was my "first" as it were. And I have been meaning to give it another go one of these days. I've heard that it's package library has gotten huge over the years. ^_^



No package library can compare to debian's.  It has the massive wang of packages.


----------

