|
On August 25 2009 15:41 uberMatt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2009 11:03 ven wrote:On August 25 2009 06:52 uberMatt wrote: i like unix. i use unix. windows is perfectly fine for an average user. i would like to think that their time is important enough to not have to learn a new os for no gain. never understood why people try to get others to try unix. who cares? :3 Compassion. We don't like other people to suffer through the unimaginable terror that is Windows. ive never had a problem on windows seems like a fine, gentlemenly os to me either im extremely lucky or everyone else complains way too much dont get it No, you already are in what I call the "spiral of terror" (actually this is the first time I called it that). In case you haven't noticed, Microsoft is bullying you into using and staying with Windows. There's nothing "gentlemenly" in that.
|
Windows is fine. NT kernel is mature and well tested; I think everyone would agree that on a technical level the modern Window OSes are at least as good as any other out there.
The problem is their methodology. problems and blue screens are never easy for users; I'm not saying that Linux or OS X is better at coming back from errors but how many times do you see a message on your screen in Windows and wondering what is the point of that message?
I still don't understand why Windows don't include something like the unix syslog in their stock installation. I guess they are just doing market separation so power users buy their server product -_-
Personally I don't consider Linux guys to be more smarter or something but at least it's easy to find help on errors (If you actually try to read them, most of the man pages actually make sense). I would think someone who have access to Window's architecture and code can do the same on Windows but hey you probably have to pay for the code. Pretty much for every feature outside of their standard install you have to pay extra for. So wait a minute, I have to pay cash for a missing feature in a product?
Windows 7 is coming out with more tools etc but I would think that most people would still need to buy a few apps to ACTUALLY make the OS useful.
That's my biggest beef with Windows. The whole OS is designed to suck you dry. As soon as you buy Windows, you have to buy more and more things. You can call me a commie but I just don't like to ripped off like that.
|
On August 25 2009 20:24 haduken wrote: Windows is fine. NT kernel is mature and well tested; I think everyone would agree that on a technical level the modern Window OSes are at least as good as any other out there.
The problem is their methodology. problems and blue screens are never easy for users; I'm not saying that Linux or OS X is better at coming back from errors but how many times do you see a message on your screen in Windows and wondering what is the point of that message?
I still don't understand why Windows don't include something like the unix syslog in their stock installation. I guess they are just doing market separation so power users buy their server product -_-
Personally I don't consider Linux guys to be more smarter or something but at least it's easy to find help on errors (If you actually try to read them, most of the man pages actually make sense). I would think someone who have access to Window's architecture and code can do the same on Windows but hey you probably have to pay for the code. Pretty much for every feature outside of their standard install you have to pay extra for. So wait a minute, I have to pay cash for a missing feature in a product?
Windows 7 is coming out with more tools etc but I would think that most people would still need to buy a few apps to ACTUALLY make the OS useful.
That's my biggest beef with Windows. The whole OS is designed to suck you dry. As soon as you buy Windows, you have to buy more and more things. You can call me a commie but I just don't like to ripped off like that.
Well, when you buy Mac, you have to buy stuff too. And it's not cheaper.
|
Not the things that I've mentioned.
The only program you have to buy is MS Office for MAC (And that is because of Microsoft's monopoly) Adobe CS4 and else are not really for what we consider the majority of users. When you really get into it I believe the total cost of ownership for a MAC is not significantly more than a Windows PC.
Mac even include their ILife suite for free these days. System management tools etc are included by default (It is a unix clone after all).
|
On August 25 2009 20:21 ven wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2009 15:41 uberMatt wrote:On August 25 2009 11:03 ven wrote:On August 25 2009 06:52 uberMatt wrote: i like unix. i use unix. windows is perfectly fine for an average user. i would like to think that their time is important enough to not have to learn a new os for no gain. never understood why people try to get others to try unix. who cares? :3 Compassion. We don't like other people to suffer through the unimaginable terror that is Windows. ive never had a problem on windows seems like a fine, gentlemenly os to me either im extremely lucky or everyone else complains way too much dont get it No, you already are in what I call the "spiral of terror" (actually this is the first time I called it that). In case you haven't noticed, Microsoft is bullying you into using and staying with Windows. There's nothing "gentlemenly" in that.
i don't use windows at home i have used windows at school and work its seems perfectly fine as an os i am certainly not on a spiral of terror also i love the condescending tone of your post my dad's os could beat up ur dad's os nerd
|
Canada9720 Posts
On August 24 2009 06:53 Railz wrote: Regardless, I have nothing against Linux - it does exactly what it sets out to do which is the give the user full access. Still as far as applications go and stability with hardware and applications there still isn't much it has on top of SP2. I can't go from an IDE to gaming for a break on a linux kernal without some grease work.
just wanted to point out that that's the opposite of linux's intentions. use of the root account for anything other than administrative work is really discouraged, and in ubuntu, you can't even log in as root (the root password is disabled by default). contrast this with your average XP installation, where every user has administrative privileges
|
On August 26 2009 00:29 CTStalker wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2009 06:53 Railz wrote: Regardless, I have nothing against Linux - it does exactly what it sets out to do which is the give the user full access. Still as far as applications go and stability with hardware and applications there still isn't much it has on top of SP2. I can't go from an IDE to gaming for a break on a linux kernal without some grease work.
just wanted to point out that that's the opposite of linux's intentions. use of the root account for anything other than administrative work is really discouraged, and in ubuntu, you can't even log in as root (the root password is disabled by default). contrast this with your average XP installation, where every user has administrative privileges
if i'm right, Vista actually tried to prevent users from being root.... and everyone yelled. So root is back in W7 :D
|
Well yea, only beacuse stuff didn't work if you didn't run programs as an administrator. :D
|
I will make a new comp and i don't really want to buy a vista licence.
Just wanted to know if there are some versions not too hard to use compatible with bw / poker softwares and basic stuff like that.
That's a really nooby question i know :D
TL;DR: I want a linux version for newbies.
|
United States47024 Posts
On August 26 2009 07:21 Boblion wrote: TL;DR: I want a linux version for newbies. Ubuntu
|
On August 26 2009 08:30 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2009 07:21 Boblion wrote: TL;DR: I want a linux version for newbies. Ubuntu It is better ( for noobs :o ) than Mandriva / ArchLinux / Suse ?
I'm asking this question because i have read stuff and all those versions are labeled as "noob friendly". Just wanted to know the differences :p
|
arch is in no way noob friendly
|
|
I was reading something wrote by Neal Stephenson, he is a programmer and a SciFi writer
This is from 1999, so this discussion is everything but new. Is long, but is good, i recomend it to anyone who wants a professional opinion, these are some quotes selected by myself.
MGBs, TANKS, AND BATMOBILES + Show Spoiler +
Imagine a crossroads where four competing auto dealerships are situated. One of them (Microsoft) is much, much bigger than the others. It started out years ago selling three-speed bicycles (MS-DOS); these were not perfect, but they worked, and when they broke you could easily fix them.
There was a competing bicycle dealership next door (Apple) that one day began selling motorized vehicles--expensive but attractively styled cars with their innards hermetically sealed, so that how they worked was something of a mystery.
The big dealership responded by rushing a moped upgrade kit (the original Windows) onto the market. This was a Rube Goldberg contraption that, when bolted onto a three-speed bicycle, enabled it to keep up, just barely, with Apple-cars. The users had to wear goggles and were always picking bugs out of their teeth while Apple owners sped along in hermetically sealed comfort, sneering out the windows. But the Micro-mopeds were cheap, and easy to fix compared with the Apple-cars, and their market share waxed.
Eventually the big dealership came out with a full-fledged car: a colossal station wagon (Windows 95). It had all the aesthetic appeal of a Soviet worker housing block, it leaked oil and blew gaskets, and it was an enormous success. A little later, they also came out with a hulking off-road vehicle intended for industrial users (Windows NT) which was no more beautiful than the station wagon, and only a little more reliable.
Since then there has been a lot of noise and shouting, but little has changed. The smaller dealership continues to sell sleek Euro-styled sedans and to spend a lot of money on advertising campaigns. They have had GOING OUT OF BUSINESS! signs taped up in their windows for so long that they have gotten all yellow and curly. The big one keeps making bigger and bigger station wagons and ORVs.
On the other side of the road are two competitors that have come along more recently.
One of them (Be, Inc.) is selling fully operational Batmobiles (the BeOS). They are more beautiful and stylish even than the Euro-sedans, better designed, more technologically advanced, and at least as reliable as anything else on the market--and yet cheaper than the others.
With one exception, that is: Linux, which is right next door, and which is not a business at all. It's a bunch of RVs, yurts, tepees, and geodesic domes set up in a field and organized by consensus. The people who live there are making tanks. These are not old-fashioned, cast-iron Soviet tanks; these are more like the M1 tanks of the U.S. Army, made of space-age materials and jammed with sophisticated technology from one end to the other. But they are better than Army tanks. They've been modified in such a way that they never, ever break down, are light and maneuverable enough to use on ordinary streets, and use no more fuel than a subcompact car. These tanks are being cranked out, on the spot, at a terrific pace, and a vast number of them are lined up along the edge of the road with keys in the ignition. Anyone who wants can simply climb into one and drive it away for free.
Customers come to this crossroads in throngs, day and night. Ninety percent of them go straight to the biggest dealership and buy station wagons or off-road vehicles. They do not even look at the other dealerships.
Of the remaining ten percent, most go and buy a sleek Euro-sedan, pausing only to turn up their noses at the philistines going to buy the station wagons and ORVs. If they even notice the people on the opposite side of the road, selling the cheaper, technically superior vehicles, these customers deride them cranks and half-wits.
The Batmobile outlet sells a few vehicles to the occasional car nut who wants a second vehicle to go with his station wagon, but seems to accept, at least for now, that it's a fringe player.
The group giving away the free tanks only stays alive because it is staffed by volunteers, who are lined up at the edge of the street with bullhorns, trying to draw customers' attention to this incredible situation. A typical conversation goes something like this:
Hacker with bullhorn: "Save your money! Accept one of our free tanks! It is invulnerable, and can drive across rocks and swamps at ninety miles an hour while getting a hundred miles to the gallon!"
Prospective station wagon buyer: "I know what you say is true...but...er...I don't know how to maintain a tank!"
Bullhorn: "You don't know how to maintain a station wagon either!"
Buyer: "But this dealership has mechanics on staff. If something goes wrong with my station wagon, I can take a day off work, bring it here, and pay them to work on it while I sit in the waiting room for hours, listening to elevator music."
Bullhorn: "But if you accept one of our free tanks we will send volunteers to your house to fix it for free while you sleep!"
Buyer: "Stay away from my house, you freak!"
Bullhorn: "But..."
Buyer: "Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?"
all the next is from chapter 11
+ Show Spoiler + Back in the days of the command-line interface, users were all Morlocks who had to convert their thoughts into alphanumeric symbols and type them in, a grindingly tedious process that stripped away all ambiguity, laid bare all hidden assumptions, and cruelly punished laziness and imprecision. Then the interface-makers went to work on their GUIs, and introduced a new semiotic layer between people and machines. People who use such systems have abdicated the responsibility, and surrendered the power, of sending bits directly to the chip that's doing the arithmetic, and handed that responsibility and power over to the OS. This is tempting because giving clear instructions, to anyone or anything, is difficult. We cannot do it without thinking, and depending on the complexity of the situation, we may have to think hard about abstract things, and consider any number of ramifications, in order to do a good job of it. For most of us, this is hard work. We want things to be easier. How badly we want it can be measured by the size of Bill Gates's fortune.
...
The overarching concept of the MacOS was the "desktop metaphor" and it subsumed any number of lesser (and frequently conflicting, or at least mixed) metaphors. Under a GUI, a file (frequently called "document") is metaphrased as a window on the screen (which is called a "desktop"). The window is almost always too small to contain the document and so you "move around," or, more pretentiously, "navigate" in the document by "clicking and dragging" the "thumb" on the "scroll bar." When you "type" (using a keyboard) or "draw" (using a "mouse") into the "window" or use pull-down "menus" and "dialog boxes" to manipulate its contents, the results of your labors get stored (at least in theory) in a "file," and later you can pull the same information back up into another "window." When you don't want it anymore, you "drag" it into the "trash."
...
So GUIs use metaphors to make computing easier, but they are bad metaphors. Learning to use them is essentially a word game, a process of learning new definitions of words like "window" and "document" and "save" that are different from, and in many cases almost diametrically opposed to, the old. Somewhat improbably, this has worked very well, at least from a commercial standpoint, which is to say that Apple/Microsoft have made a lot of money off of it. All of the other modern operating systems have learned that in order to be accepted by users they must conceal their underlying gutwork beneath the same sort of spackle. This has some advantages: if you know how to use one GUI operating system, you can probably work out how to use any other in a few minutes. Everything works a little differently, like European plumbing--but with some fiddling around, you can type a memo or surf the web.
...
Most people who shop for OSes (if they bother to shop at all) are comparing not the underlying functions but the superficial look and feel. The average buyer of an OS is not really paying for, and is not especially interested in, the low-level code that allocates memory or writes bytes onto the disk. What we're really buying is a system of metaphors. And--much more important--what we're buying into is the underlying assumption that metaphors are a good way to deal with the world.
...
So we are now asking the GUI to do a lot more than serve as a glorified typewriter. Now we want to become a generalized tool for dealing with reality. This has become a bonanza for companies that make a living out of bringing new technology to the mass market.
There is plenty more where this came from. http://www.cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html
enjoy!
edit:cut some things, was too long...
|
I have ubuntu on dual boot. But since bw cant run smoothly on it, im in XP all the time.
|
On August 24 2009 06:14 vAltyR wrote: So, I pose this question to TL: How many of you use either Mac OS X or Linux on a regular basis? I use Solaris 10 regularly. I can safely say that I prefer Windows 7 for daily usage. :D
|
On August 24 2009 06:14 vAltyR wrote: For those of you who haven't tried either OS X or Linux, I definitely encourage you to do so. What do you have to lose? Time (which you mentioned).
I say this as someone who used linux (Debian: Sarge to Squeeze now) exclusively for 3 years. I haven't had to reinstall, the OS I installed in 2003 is still on my machine, through several upgrades, moves to different hard drives and two new machines (I moved the already installed OS rather than install from scratch). Despite it's ability to continue running longer term without needing a reinstall and other positive factors, I rarely use it today.
See this thread on OSnews for why: http://www.osnews.com/thread?363568 or check out these paragraphs out of context: + Show Spoiler +And really it was symptomatic of the whole constant reinvention thing that has been bothering me. I went through supermount and dev to udev/hal/hotplug. I went through OSS to ALSA. Now hal is being replaced, PulseAudio is stuffing things up, and I have to wonder about a resurgent devfs, all the while waiting for the DE I use to regain some features that were in its previous incarnation years ago. This is to say nothing of the glacial pace of GEM/DRI2 (stuff that's meant to bring the free stack into more feature parity with the nVidia proprietary stack. OpenGL 2+? Memory management? whoo!) and the horrible performance regressions currently reigning in Intel Graphics Decelerator land as a result.
Add to that frustrations with a USB hub not working with mixed 1.1 and 2.0 devices until I got a new kernel. This new kernel however has broken drivers for my webcam, and my previously working *driverless, hardware* RAID device (which works fine on OSX and Windows and why shouldn't it) broke forcing me to roll my own kernel despite getting reassurances from the responsible kernel dev that it would be fixed only for it not to be and I got sick of wasting my time. One of the replies: + Show Spoiler +Heh, I feel your pain. I've gone through those changes just like you, and some of them gave me the same pain they gave you. I must say the current graphics situation is the worst I've seen in years. The previous changes (from supermount to hal & friends) were clear improvements which took about a release to work out - while this is taking longer already. And they should kill Pulseaudio right away.
Well, I guess that's the nature of a FOSS world - many changes with temporary regressions. Then again, I just bought a laptop with Vista, and despite some nice features it regresses in many ways compared to XP and linux. So maybe it's just a software thing... So yeah, software regresses and crap happens. My favorite OS right now is Windows Server 2003. Solid, faster than XP, runs everything I want it to. Any free software I care about can be made to run on it too.
/edit: version fail
|
I wrote a wall of text and then I realized it could be summarized in about ten lines.
Facts: - Win7 boots in about 15s on my not-so-recent computer, and gets the job done for just about everything I encountered so far, ranging from old games to recent 64-bit software - I use Unix systems at work and it fucking rocks, I'd take it over Windows any day So basically it all depends on what you want to do: - Do you want to only do one or two things, but do them perfectly? Then use some Unix-based OS and tailor it to suit your precise needs - Do you want to be able to do and run about everything ok-ishly? Then use Windows
I never installed any modern Linux distribution on my home computer because I can't see how any of them can beat Windows at #2 (do and run everything ok-ishly), especially since Win7.
|
On September 02 2009 21:29 MamiyaOtaru wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2009 06:14 vAltyR wrote: For those of you who haven't tried either OS X or Linux, I definitely encourage you to do so. What do you have to lose? Time (which you mentioned). I say this as someone who used linux (Debian: Sarge to Squeeze now) exclusively for 3 years. I haven't had to reinstall, the OS I installed in 2003 is still on my machine, through several upgrades, moves to different hard drives and two new machines (I moved the already installed OS rather than install from scratch). Despite it's ability to continue running longer term without needing a reinstall and other positive factors, I rarely use it today. See this thread on OSnews for why: http://www.osnews.com/thread?363568 or check out these paragraphs out of context: + Show Spoiler +And really it was symptomatic of the whole constant reinvention thing that has been bothering me. I went through supermount and dev to udev/hal/hotplug. I went through OSS to ALSA. Now hal is being replaced, PulseAudio is stuffing things up, and I have to wonder about a resurgent devfs, all the while waiting for the DE I use to regain some features that were in its previous incarnation years ago. This is to say nothing of the glacial pace of GEM/DRI2 (stuff that's meant to bring the free stack into more feature parity with the nVidia proprietary stack. OpenGL 2+? Memory management? whoo!) and the horrible performance regressions currently reigning in Intel Graphics Decelerator land as a result.
Add to that frustrations with a USB hub not working with mixed 1.1 and 2.0 devices until I got a new kernel. This new kernel however has broken drivers for my webcam, and my previously working *driverless, hardware* RAID device (which works fine on OSX and Windows and why shouldn't it) broke forcing me to roll my own kernel despite getting reassurances from the responsible kernel dev that it would be fixed only for it not to be and I got sick of wasting my time. One of the replies: + Show Spoiler +Heh, I feel your pain. I've gone through those changes just like you, and some of them gave me the same pain they gave you. I must say the current graphics situation is the worst I've seen in years. The previous changes (from supermount to hal & friends) were clear improvements which took about a release to work out - while this is taking longer already. And they should kill Pulseaudio right away.
Well, I guess that's the nature of a FOSS world - many changes with temporary regressions. Then again, I just bought a laptop with Vista, and despite some nice features it regresses in many ways compared to XP and linux. So maybe it's just a software thing... So yeah, software regresses and crap happens. My favorite OS right now is Windows Server 2003. Solid, faster than XP, runs everything I want it to. Any free software I care about can be made to run on it too. /edit: version fail That kind of thing is bound to happen with every development progress, you just won't see it unless its development is open. If you don't like it stay with stable software until the development on the new features reaches stability itself.
|
i'm using windows xp sp3 right now. i used to use ubuntu but there were so many issues with drivers+compatibility stuff that i switched back to windows. it's not hard to fix all these problems but it's a little troublesome having to troubleshoot a problem like once a week though.
|
|
|
|