• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

M$ Strong Armed Dell to Drop Linux

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
Its not about getting a free ride for me. I just like it better. If I wanted to stick for Windows, I could get most software I wanted for little or no cost anyways, and yet, for some mysterious reason, that Windows partition kept going unused for long periods of time, until it finally wasn't worth the disk space it was on.

Anyways, I'm not really interested at all in watering down Linux for the unwashed masses - let them keep Windows. I want just enough people using Linux so I get enough game ports and other forms of commercial support, and I'll be happy.
 
Well, I could get my stuff free for windows also. But I get peace of mine knowing I am getting Linux free and not having to worry about licensing. Any Joe can look on the Internet or on a P2P program for software and get it free.

I am liking Linux more every second. Knowing I can use OpenOffice for all MS Office documents makes me miss Windows even more. It can even open and work on my spreadsheets with tons of formulas. How sweet is that. Bugs that it is a tad slow to open tho :(
 
i have no complaints about Linux....it picked up my C-Media Chip and my Webcam no problems....something Win98 couldnt even come close too...and i stillk cnat get my webcam to work on 98SE....
 
I am very content with my 98se though I would like to play with Linux, if for no other reason than to be a better informed user. Now the usb and 98se (especially my camera) what a nightmare getting it to work.
 
Cooler666 said:


Bring it on :cool: , i'm downloading Mandrake 8.2 right now :bday:

are you sure it works with normal wine? and i don't need winex?
Yes normal wine, winex is for gaming implementation :)

J :cool:
 
nihili said:


I have installed numerous versions of Linux (Redhat, Corel, Debian, Slackware, Mandrake) on numerous computers (6 that I can think of right off the top of my head) and have yet to have a perfect install. On the other hand most versions of Windows installed fairly easily on these same machines. You can scream that it's hardware fault if you like, but it's just empty words. If Windows installs and Linux doesn't, that's a problem for Linux. If it's so sensitive to hardware problems that I can't ever install it, then it's not a viable mainstream OS.

If the hardware is defective then its not linux's fault. It is probably similar to 2k/xp - it will pick up things that 9x would miss.



Yes, Linux is getting better. Believe me, I'd love to get rid of Windows and move to Linux. I'm even happy with StarOffice for the most part. But Linux, even Mandrake, is a PITA to install. And even when I do finally get it installed, the configuration is byzantine at best. Now I may not be the world's foremost computer guru, but I'm a darn site better than most. If I can't get it to run acceptably, despite many hours and numerous attempts, then it's just not ready for primetime.

nihili

True, the configuration is difficulr - I occasionally get lost in /etc.
The truth is that less and less config work is necessary with each new release. You are just used to windows so find linux's config methods strange - its natural.
 
David said:


If the hardware is defective then its not linux's fault. It is probably similar to 2k/xp - it will pick up things that 9x would miss.

I haven't had similar problems with 2k. It has installed flawlessly on every box I've tried, including the boxes that Mandrake 8.1 barfed on.

My point is that if Linux barfs on hardware problems that Windows takes in stride, then it *IS* linux's fault. It's Linux's fault because it's obviously possible to run on the hardware and Linux isn't doing so. Now you can sit there and blithely insist that Linux is only failing because of the hardware. But if Linux is *that* picky and will only accept an incredibly narrow range of hardware, then Linux is not ready for mainstream. Frankly I doubt that all of these machines had hardware faults. Unless you just define "hardware fault" as anything that Linux won't run on. But if that's the way you want to define it, then all you've said is that Linux installs perfectly on every system that Linux installs perfectly on. So what?



True, the configuration is difficulr - I occasionally get lost in /etc.
The truth is that less and less config work is necessary with each new release. You are just used to windows so find linux's config methods strange - its natural.

Yes, I'm used to Windows configuration. Also used to Mac configuration. Also used to Dos configuration. Also used to CPM configuration. etc. It's not just a matter of style here. It's a matter of either not being able to find the appropriate configuaration points despite hours of searching through the docs, or a matter of having Linux barf on the configuration settings that are clearly set out in the docs.

If a computer literate PhD with more than 20 years of computer use on at least 10 different OS's can't get Linux up and running on a normal machine within 5 days of trying, the Linux isn't ready for prime time. Period. End of story.

I'm sorry for the ranting tone, but I get a bit tired of people extolling how easy and perfect Linux is while they simply ignore the couterevidence or reject it out of hand. Yes, it works great for some people. For other people it's utterly unusable. And the failures of Linux are not universally attributable to user error and hardware error any more than those of Windows are.

nihili
 
nihili said:


I haven't had similar problems with 2k. It has installed flawlessly on every box I've tried, including the boxes that Mandrake 8.1 barfed on.

My point is that if Linux barfs on hardware problems that Windows takes in stride, then it *IS* linux's fault. It's Linux's fault because it's obviously possible to run on the hardware and Linux isn't doing so. Now you can sit there and blithely insist that Linux is only failing because of the hardware. But if Linux is *that* picky and will only accept an incredibly narrow range of hardware, then Linux is not ready for mainstream. Frankly I doubt that all of these machines had hardware faults. Unless you just define "hardware fault" as anything that Linux won't run on. But if that's the way you want to define it, then all you've said is that Linux installs perfectly on every system that Linux installs perfectly on. So what?


It all depends on the problems you have had. Maybe it was bad luck.

Yes, I'm used to Windows configuration. Also used to Mac configuration. Also used to Dos configuration. Also used to CPM configuration. etc. It's not just a matter of style here. It's a matter of either not being able to find the appropriate configuaration points despite hours of searching through the docs, or a matter of having Linux barf on the configuration settings that are clearly set out in the docs.

If a computer literate PhD with more than 20 years of computer use on at least 10 different OS's can't get Linux up and running on a normal machine within 5 days of trying, the Linux isn't ready for prime time. Period. End of story.
nihili

Okay, if its so hard, how come a 15 year old guy can install and run linux almost perfectly? It depends a lot on luck, and also how much time you are willing to spend installing and configuring and reading about linux. I had to do a lot of research to get linux to work, but it was worth it.
 
David said:


It all depends on the problems you have had. Maybe it was bad luck.

Okay, if its so hard, how come a 15 year old guy can install and run linux almost perfectly? It depends a lot on luck, and also how much time you are willing to spend installing and configuring and reading about linux. I had to do a lot of research to get linux to work, but it was worth it.

Agreed. I know lots of people who swear by Linux. And I know lots of teenagers who have no trouble with it. I've even had one of them try to help me install his favorite flavor (Slackware). Alas, it didn't work.

I'm not dissing Linux. It seems to be a great OS from all that I can tell. But it's nowhere near perfect. And despite it's much vaunted stability, it's not nearly as robust during setup as recent versions of Windows. I'm not saying that Linux sucks, nor even that Windows is better all around. I'm saying that Linux has a fair ways to go before it will give Windows any serious competition for the average computer user's money. You could have gone to any store and bought a copy of Windows and had it up and running in a few hours. Instead you chose to spend a lot less money, but a lot more time and figured out how to run Linux. The average computer user is far more willing to spend money than time.

nihili
 
nihili said:


Agreed. I know lots of people who swear by Linux. And I know lots of teenagers who have no trouble with it. I've even had one of them try to help me install his favorite flavor (Slackware). Alas, it didn't work.

I'm not dissing Linux. It seems to be a great OS from all that I can tell. But it's nowhere near perfect. And despite it's much vaunted stability, it's not nearly as robust during setup as recent versions of Windows. I'm not saying that Linux sucks, nor even that Windows is better all around. I'm saying that Linux has a fair ways to go before it will give Windows any serious competition for the average computer user's money. You could have gone to any store and bought a copy of Windows and had it up and running in a few hours. Instead you chose to spend a lot less money, but a lot more time and figured out how to run Linux. The average computer user is far more willing to spend money than time.

nihili

True. It all comes back to the same argument - the average user wants a simple to set up OS. Linux's flexibility and stability is a product of its strange ways of doing things.

All we need now is a GU frontend to all the config files :rolleyes:
 
nihili said:


I haven't had similar problems with 2k. It has installed flawlessly on every box I've tried, including the boxes that Mandrake 8.1 barfed on.

My point is that if Linux barfs on hardware problems that Windows takes in stride, then it *IS* linux's fault. It's Linux's fault because it's obviously possible to run on the hardware and Linux isn't doing so. Now you can sit there and blithely insist that Linux is only failing because of the hardware. But if Linux is *that* picky and will only accept an incredibly narrow range of hardware, then Linux is not ready for mainstream. Frankly I doubt that all of these machines had hardware faults. Unless you just define "hardware fault" as anything that Linux won't run on. But if that's the way you want to define it, then all you've said is that Linux installs perfectly on every system that Linux installs perfectly on. So what?

nihili
You keep pointing the finger at Linux and crying foul, you need to look to the hardware vendor themself if they do not release the code in order for the hardware to work you cannot implement it into Linux code. To reverse engineer their coding and software would probably be grounds for a hefty lawsuit. Again I will state if "Hardware Manufacturers" were to release the code the transition from decent hardware support to excellent driver support would be a given.

Then again you could look at this at a different light and say the hardware manufacturers could quit looking the other way at Linux and start coding driver support themselves. The only reason we have gotten this far is due to the fact that there are some really brilliant coders out there doing their best to make Linux one of the best.

The biggest selling point of Linux to me is its a community effort worked on by people all over the world who find errors and take the time to fix them, you don't have to wait for a corporation to release the next version to "fix" what they couldn't fix in the last version. What is ME other than Win95 with all the patches and updates already installed ?

Blaming Linux for bad hardware support is a moot point in my eyes because that is the vendors job to release code. You can't drive a car if the manufacturer doesn't send you the keys now can you?

J :cool:
 
Hardware support is IMO the main hurdle to linux - thankfully more and more hardware is now supported.
 
nihili:
I'm curious, how exactly is Linux screwing up on you? Is the installer just freezing up and crashing, essentially, unable to complete its task, on your machines?
 
SpeeDj said:
You keep pointing the finger at Linux and crying foul(...)

The biggest selling point of Linux to me is its a community effort worked on by people all over the world who find errors and take the time to fix them, you don't have to wait for a corporation to release the next version to "fix" what they couldn't fix in the last version. What is ME other than Win95 with all the patches and updates already installed ?

Blaming Linux for bad hardware support is a moot point in my eyes because that is the vendors job to release code. You can't drive a car if the manufacturer doesn't send you the keys now can you?

J :cool:

SpeeDj,

I agree. Please understand I'm not pointing my finger at Linux and calling foul. I'm pointing my finger at people who claim that Linux is not responsible for any errors during installs. I'm pointing my finger at people who seem to think that Linux is as easy and robust as Windows.

There's good reason why Linux isn't caught up to Windows on dealing with hardware. You've put your finger squarely on it. But the end user doesn't care where the blame ultimately lies, they care whether it works. Linux may have a really good reason for not working with certain hardware, but that just doesn't matter. I tell my students the same thing about late homework. YOu may have a legitimate reason for being late with it, but I just don't care. ( I do have my grades set up so that missing a homework now and then won't kill their grades; I'm not a complete ogre.)

I also agree wholeheartedly about the community effort thing. I even bought a boxed version of Mandrake (7.2) preferring to spend my money on an open source OS rather than padding Gates' coffers. I'd be willing to spend a reasonable about on Winex in order to have games run. But the sad fact is that despite numerous tries and lots of research on it, I'm simply unable to. Perhaps David is right, perhaps I'm just a victim of bad luck. I'm sure I'll be trying Linux again here pretty soon, I seem to do it every time a new version of Mandrake comes out. But I do maintain that any OS that I can't run just isn't ready for primetime. I don't mean to sound conceited in saying so, quite the opposite. There are tons of people in this forum far more competent in this area than I am. But in turn, I'm far more competent and far more willing to spend time on such a project than Joe sixpack is.

You can lay the blame whereever you want, but in the end it comes down to the same thing. Linux just isn't a viable mainstream option at this point. It's not viable because it can't deal adequately with hardware issues. And it's not viable because it's not sufficiently user friendly when it comes to configuration. Of course there's the issue of mainstream software too, but it sounds like Wine may be on the way to remedying that.

nihili
 
This has gotten really off topic but i'll go with it.

I've put linux on two different boxes without any major problems. my aureal sound card isnt supported but that because aureal went out of business and took their code with them. Usually when I buy new hardware I'll check mandrakes compatibility page. Hardware is still a big deal but the newer distros have pretty good support.

I even got my linux box set up to connect through my windows box via a proxy and I'm still a complete newbie with the whole linux thing.

neither windows or linux is perfect. I think I've probably had more issues with installing drivers on windows than I've had configuring linux. whenever i set up 2k on my dually box something goes wrong. 2k totally hates my radeon + via setup.

Do I want linux to be like microsoft? No. Microsoft is like a digital Walmart. They move into communities and force out all of the small players. Instead of having a choice you only have one option.
 
XWRed1 said:
nihili:
I'm curious, how exactly is Linux screwing up on you? Is the installer just freezing up and crashing, essentially, unable to complete its task, on your machines?

It varies depending on the machine and the flavor of linux. Sometimes it freezes, sometimes it installs but won't recognize a crucial piece of hardware. Sometimes it installs but then won't let me use the RPMs for installing other stuff (Mandrake and Redhat). The best I've ever done was to get an install that seemed to work ok, but then be unable to get the web servers to works. Since the whole point of that machine was to be a web server, I count that as a failure.

I can tell I'm getting the itch to try it out again, I just have to figure out which machine to use as a guinea pig this time. WHen that happens I'll let you know.

nihili
 
nihili if you have an old dell pentium 2 or some archaic crap like that then it should install pretty easy. I just put mandrake 8 on a dell p2 300mhz computer. its pretty nice since it runs a lot faster than the windows 95 install that was previously on this machine.

also if your using mandrake then go to their webpage and check on hardware compatibility.

linux is getting more user friendly. I added my nic after my install and set up the card with harddrake. I thought it was going to be a pain but it went pretty smooth.
 
Back