Linux SUCKS and should never be used by human beings.

[Robor]

When was the last time an OS thread hit 400 posts? This thing was in the 'Hot Topics' list for a while! :Q

 

[SoundTheSurrender]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
My only gripe with Linux is that there is no standard. Someone needs to set a standard so people can grow. I don't want to have to compile a program to run it. Why can't they follow the trends that Windows and OS X offer. You double click a App and it helps you install something. I don't want to run the terminal type it a bunch of crap only to see I forgot a part and it didn't install.

Why can't they unite Linux to a select few distros and create a universal package style installation or at least make them all use a universal package system.

Purple is the best color in existance, and no one will convince me otherwise.

COool, compile your own code and use it then!

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
COool, compile your own code and use it then!

That's my point. You want there to be a select few distros with a universal package system, but don't say how that should be done. There are a number of issues, some technical and some social. There are a lot of opinions on the best way to do things, and they often get in the way of having one single solution.

Come up with a plan. If it solves all of the issues we'll see about getting it implimented.

 

[Nothinman]

Sure...full hardware acceleration support in driver for GUI, video overlays, codec acceleration. Also the graphical subsystem in X is far from optimized for being high performance, such as giving programs direct access to video functions. People rag on how bad GDI is for 2D GUI stuff...but X has nothing like DirectX when it comes to games and multimedia.

From the end user's perspective all of those things exist and work perfectly fine. I can watch videos with hardware accelerated overlays via Xv and I can use a fully accelerated GUI via XGL or AIGXL. You might be correct about codec acceleration, but the only thing that really matters for right now is really large H.264 files and those are rare enough that no one seems to care. And the fact that X isn't optimized for performance and can still get over 100fps at 1680x1050 in a game is a pretty good achievement. As for DirectX, SDL implements most of it's functionality.

Nvidia's drivers use the shared code base to reduce costs, not necessarily to boost performance. Keep in mind that X was designed for remote GUI functions and not intensive graphics or multimedia.

Who cares what the reasoning is, it works and their drivers performance are virtually the same as they are on Windows. And again who cares if X wasn't designed for high speed graphics since they found away to make it work with DRI and AIGLX.

I've never had permissions problems on any Windows system. Windows is pretty good at delegating services' security settings. Linux requires quite a bit of manual intervention, and if you mess up your box can fall apart pretty quick. Not just that, but running programs on Linux can be quite tedious since the game will most likely want access to resources that it doesn't have high enough "clearance" to access. No such problems on a Windows system.

The problems don't exist for you because you probably run as admin all of the time. But I don't think I've ever had a game require manual intervention to fix permissions on my part, pretty much every distro sets up audio, video, etc permissions correctly at installation. I've had to debug some permissions issues with things like Apache and Subversion but never a game.

 

[SoundTheSurrender]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
COool, compile your own code and use it then!

That's my point. You want there to be a select few distros with a universal package system, but don't say how that should be done. There are a number of issues, some technical and some social. There are a lot of opinions on the best way to do things, and they often get in the way of having one single solution.

Come up with a plan. If it solves all of the issues we'll see about getting it implimented.

I'm not a good programmer, I just know that there should be a universal package system that should be easy to use. I find it hard if I have to jump hurdles just to install a program only to see that I'm doing something wrong because I either have to type numerous code to get it to work or I'm missing gcc or something. This would be a big leap for the linux world. People would actually use it if it was more user friendly. Ubuntu distro is probably the ones that will be leading it hopefully.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
COool, compile your own code and use it then!

That's my point. You want there to be a select few distros with a universal package system, but don't say how that should be done. There are a number of issues, some technical and some social. There are a lot of opinions on the best way to do things, and they often get in the way of having one single solution.

Come up with a plan. If it solves all of the issues we'll see about getting it implimented.

I'm not a good programmer, I just know that there should be a universal package system that should be easy to use. I find it hard if I have to jump hurdles just to install a program only to see that I'm doing something wrong because I either have to type numerous code to get it to work or I'm missing gcc or something. This would be a big leap for the linux world. People would actually use it if it was more user friendly. Ubuntu distro is probably the ones that will be leading it hopefully.

What distro were you using?
It was a LONG time ago since I had to compile anything but extremely exotic, or pre-release software.

 

[Nothinman]

Ubuntu distro is probably the ones that will be leading it hopefully.

Ubuntu won't be changing their package management system any time soon because they're just reusing the Debian system, if they were to drop that and come up with a new one that would increase their development workload at least 1000 times. And as Sunner said, you only have to compile software in extreme cases these days so it's not really an issue any more.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
COool, compile your own code and use it then!

That's my point. You want there to be a select few distros with a universal package system, but don't say how that should be done. There are a number of issues, some technical and some social. There are a lot of opinions on the best way to do things, and they often get in the way of having one single solution.

Come up with a plan. If it solves all of the issues we'll see about getting it implimented.

I'm not a good programmer, I just know that there should be a universal package system that should be easy to use. I find it hard if I have to jump hurdles just to install a program only to see that I'm doing something wrong because I either have to type numerous code to get it to work or I'm missing gcc or something. This would be a big leap for the linux world. People would actually use it if it was more user friendly. Ubuntu distro is probably the ones that will be leading it hopefully.

Again, it's rare that you have to 'jump hurdles just to install a program' - especially if you're using the official repositories. If you're using Synaptic it's a matter of selecting a clicking a program to install in the GUI and it will auto-select the additional required programs (dependencies). If you're on the command line it's just as simple (or even easier) as apt will auto grab the dependencies and get them for you.

Yes, it is *different* than Windows or OS X but just because it's different doesn't mean it's *difficult*.

 

[NamelessMC]

Originally posted by: Markbnj

Originally posted by: NamelessMC
You know what the sad thing is?

This thread has actually fed and peaked my interest for learning and using Linux. Hearing about using Apt-get, Wine and being able to customize your GUI on the fly only makes me want to use Linux even more.

And that is sad... why?

Can't believe this thread steamrollers on.

Because the thread is working in the opposite faction of what the original poster wanted?

Think about it, if someone made a Vista sucks thread or a Windows sucks thread, like 7 people total would rush in to defend it. The other 250,000+ people that use it wouldn't care either way, because Windows is an Operating System that naturally caters to laziness. So really, you just sit there and not care because you figure someone else will take care of it anyway.

Where-as there's a large community waiting to catch the first stone thrown. It just shows how powerful the Linux community is. I mean if you really think about it, the fact that there's this many people in the thread posting arguments and solutions to problems with Linux goes to show you that any fault of Linux can be made up by community. (Except game support... That's always going to be fishy but I think that's going to change if ID software keeps up) The faults of Windows though can't really be long term solved because they require constant attention.

You're ALWAYS going to need extreme security measures for a Windows partition because of how much the viruses on the web feed off it.

All I was saying is it's sad, in retrospect of the OP, because he intended to thrash Linux and all his thread did was reinforce my decision of wanting to use it in the first place.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: NamelessMC

You're ALWAYS going to need extreme security measures for a Windows partition because of how much the viruses on the web feed off it.

All I was saying is it's sad, in retrospect of the OP, because he intended to thrash Linux and all his thread did was reinforce my decision of wanting to use it in the first place.

If Linux, MacOS, FreeBSD, or Plan9 became the OS installed on the vast majority of systems, you'd see a large increase in the number of attacks on those systems. It probably wouldn't be as bad as Windows, but it would happen.

Of course, Vista is so locked down by default that it boggles my mind. I'm sure there's a nice, easy way around it for any interested system cracker.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
I'm not a good programmer, I just know that there should be a universal package system that should be easy to use. I find it hard if I have to jump hurdles just to install a program only to see that I'm doing something wrong because I either have to type numerous code to get it to work or I'm missing gcc or something. This would be a big leap for the linux world. People would actually use it if it was more user friendly. Ubuntu distro is probably the ones that will be leading it hopefully.

You don't have to be a good programmer. Design it. If it makes EVERYONE happy it'll get programmed.

Appease 1000 huge egos.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: NamelessMC

You're ALWAYS going to need extreme security measures for a Windows partition because of how much the viruses on the web feed off it.

All I was saying is it's sad, in retrospect of the OP, because he intended to thrash Linux and all his thread did was reinforce my decision of wanting to use it in the first place.

If Linux, MacOS, FreeBSD, or Plan9 became the OS installed on the vast majority of systems, you'd see a large increase in the number of attacks on those systems. It probably wouldn't be as bad as Windows, but it would happen.

Of course, Vista is so locked down by default that it boggles my mind. I'm sure there's a nice, easy way around it for any interested system cracker.

installed base does not mean more attacks...Check out (prior to IIS6) the installed base of Apache versus IIS, and then check the vunerability list, and tail a few log files to see how often folks ignored my headers showing I was running apache on linux and STILL tried to exploit the web server (good luck finding the cmd.exe on my linux box)

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: nweaverinstalled base does not mean more attacks...Check out (prior to IIS6) the installed base of Apache versus IIS, and then check the vunerability list, and tail a few log files to see how often folks ignored my headers showing I was running apache on linux and STILL tried to exploit the web server (good luck finding the cmd.exe on my linux box)

I've seen this too. I ran an Apache server to host my tiny website for a game server I was running at the time, and the log had literally thousands of entries where people were trying to access things like cmd.exe
It was on a windows server too. The only reason I didn't use IIS is because XP Home does not come with it.

 

[hasu]

Because the thread is working in the opposite faction of what the original poster wanted?

Think about it, if someone made a Vista sucks thread or a Windows sucks thread, like 7 people total would rush in to defend it. The other 250,000+ people that use it wouldn't care either way, because Windows is an Operating System that naturally caters to laziness. So really, you just sit there and not care because you figure someone else will take care of it anyway.

I couldn't stop laughing sitting in front of my Microsoft forbidden (Microsoft aka god with small letter g) PC.
Specs: Celeron 1.1 GHz/512 MB SDRAM/40GB HDD/Intel 815 EGEW (for $35 from this thread) and an old case with 200W PSU. In fact I built this for my toddler to play songs and games from www.pbskids.org, but it is good enough to meet my day to day home computer requirements with Ubuntu Edgy! Only thing I had to tinker with was a few lines in the command shell for ndiswrapper (or something like that) to get my wireless working with windows compatible driver files and a little more to make a better looking font. I wish if linux comes with better font rendering by default.

May God (God with capital G) help everyone!

[Edit spelling: GB to MB for SDRAM]

 

[drag]

May God (God with capital G) help everyone!

Exactly. (ever look at gnomesword or bibletime before?)

Also for little kids they've created Edubuntu for 'educational ubuntu' that seems targetted for smaller kids. I haven't looked at it personally yet though so I don't know if it's any good or not. http://www.edubuntu.org/Screenshots

And for the Vista. Yep, Vista kicks ass.

For the longest time you could tell people were starting to get a bit worried with how much resources the average linux distro started to take up on it's default install. But here comes along Microsoft making Linux run realy great on cheap hardware again! It's great.

 

[SoundTheSurrender]

Look at what I have to do to get my wireless card to work.

http://ipw3945.sourceforge.net/INSTALL

This is insane.

 

[Nothinman]

Odd, if I had one of those cards I'd just install the two packages below.

http://packages.debian.org/unstable/net/ipw3945d
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/admin/ipw3945-modules-2.6.18-4-amd64

 

[Sylvanas]

3000 VIEWS WOOT ;/

 

[Doom Machine]

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: Doom Machine

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

if you like things dummified down and easy to use because it's easy to learn, that's one thing, I call that a user (in my opinion, an individual who has no real interests in computers). They generally don't care to learn more then they have to. However, calling yourself a enthusiast contradicts your attitude towards computers.

your definition of enthusiast is very linear.

why cant an enthusiast enjoy the easy way of doing things and still learn beyond that
i've enjoyed that learning since my first 1985 tandy through today's complexities yet still enjoy the simplicity of flipping a switch and clicking an icon.

for instance, if i play a game, i like the simplicity of the installer and just click an icon, yet i still learn how to make the game play and look beyond its default wether it be tweaking an .ini file or altering memorypaths.
i learned registry and other things that enable me to change my os to do whatever i want and after thats done...i enjoy the simple click and go

most enthusiasts are like that, some still prefer command lines but most will make everything how they want as well as easy and quick to get access too, thats not contradictory, what is would be to learn as much as you can just to make it harder or slower on yourself

you don't learn half as much sh!t that way as you could other ways.

I'm getting the feeling most enthusiasts that I know are old school. And you and the others you refer to are new school. bleh.

learn what exactly and in what way?

then explain why in most users lives, do they have a need to learn that particular and in that particular way.
get them a job in computer industry? not without a degree i doubt

 

[alm4rr]

this thread sums up why linux won't go mainstream

 

[postaled]

Tick, did you ever lets say try using a tutorial if it was your first time using a linux distro? I mean at least give it a chance, and try to figure how you were screwing up. I think I installed linux my first try and that was red hat a while back.. wasn't hard at all to get an ftp server running, also installed ntfs drivers because it isn't natively supported, but I guess we should just not use it because its just tooooo hard. To me it seems you were just mad that you probably get most things done on your machines without a problem and you finally hit a speed bump and just got mad.

 

[Nothinman]

this thread sums up why linux won't go mainstream

Yea because installing Windows is so seamless and effortless. Whenever I install XP and it doesn't have drivers for my NIC, video, wifi, sound, etc who is to blame? MS or the hardware manufacturers?

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

this thread sums up why linux won't go mainstream

Yea because installing Windows is so seamless and effortless. Whenever I install XP and it doesn't have drivers for my NIC, video, wifi, sound, etc who is to blame? MS or the hardware manufacturers?

Hardware folks, because MS can't be to blame. It's only the fault of Linux that it doesn't have drivers...


On common theme I have seen lately is that missing and/or crappy vista drivers are the fault of nvidia/creative/hardware, where as in linux, those same folks take the stance that the crappy drivers/installs for 3rd party stuff is the distro's fault.

 

[Nothinman]

Hardware folks, because MS can't be to blame. It's only the fault of Linux that it doesn't have drivers...

So MS can't be to blame because the drivers aren't available but Linux can? That makes very little sense and I would say that MS should be more at fault for XP's crappy default set of drivers because they have them available and could easily bundle more.

On common theme I have seen lately is that missing and/or crappy vista drivers are the fault of nvidia/creative/hardware

And others would probably say that it is MS' fault because they totally changed the driver models for video and sound with Vista.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Hardware folks, because MS can't be to blame. It's only the fault of Linux that it doesn't have drivers...

So MS can't be to blame because the drivers aren't available but Linux can? That makes very little sense and I would say that MS should be more at fault for XP's crappy default set of drivers because they have them available and could easily bundle more.

I think ya need to tap your sarcasm meter there, Nothinman.