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

what about real alternative OSs

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Roof Jumper

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2002
Location
In a spider hole
Now that Linux is getting more mainstream and is grabbing a nice share of the server market, have any of you guys taken a look at other operating systems to get that thrill of "living on the edge of society" that running linux used to give? Basically I am asking, if someone could come up with a new OS with great potential(a POSIX/UNIX buster), would you go try it out and try to improve on it(like people did with linux), or would you be like the majority of people that stuck with windows because it is what they had and gave them what they wanted?

I personally would go and try the other operating system. IMHO Linux is getting too bogged down that the only form of it that I even care for are the embedded linux distributions. I miss the days of an operating system that might at most take 4-8 MB of memory to run instead of Linux which with QDE or GTK takes ~220-280 MB.

NOTE: I am not seeking a flame, I am just asking a theoretical question.
 

ObnoxiousFrog

Registered
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
I think alot of us don't think of it as "Living on the edge of society". I'm personally glad that linux has become more mainstream so I can have my games and a quick and easy install with the stability, configurability and much better support than windows.

But yeah, I'm willing to try other types of OS because they all seem to have something that they are better at.
 

dyefade

Registered
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Location
UK
I don't think that's the reason most linux users stick with linux. I for one use it because I prefer it to Windows (actually, I just really like it, I prefer it to anything).
Obviously the bleeding edge-kernel people are going to share your sentiments, but I prefer to use an operating system that actually works, and is useful to me. I like the openness of Linux, the fact that you can go and look at what's making it tick whenever you like, but that's not the reason I use it, that's just a happy bonus.
I would also agree with ObnoxiousFrog, I'm really glad Linux is becoming more mainstream. I use Linux so much that it seems like a huge chore whenever I have to use Windows... just don't understand why people choose to stay with Windows (beyond the obvious reasons: relatively more difficult/hardware& game support).
Maybe the culture of Linux is part of what's making it more popular? I do try to avoid senseless M$-bashing though.
 
Last edited:

LiGhTBoY

Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2002
I don't think that a new person to alternative operating systems will enjoy working on a new OS... I mean the average user can't really use linux without a gui, let alone use unix.

But if the new OS was user friendly, fast, open source and not bloated, then they might (including myself) choose to use that OS.


Sorry if my post doesn't make sense, I'm really hungry right now, and I can't think clearly when I'm hungry.
 
OP
R

Roof Jumper

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2002
Location
In a spider hole
I would also agree with ObnoxiousFrog, I've really gald Linux is becoming more mainstream. I use Linux so much that it seems like a huge chore whenever I have to use Windows... just don't understand why people choose to stay with Windows (beyond the obvious reasons: relatively more difficult/hardware& game support).

they stay with it for the percieved notion that it is more supported/mainstream. In a way, most linux users are like windows users, they like sticking with a tried and true platform.

I for example always try to use the latest linux kernels when possible, for stability on my development computer, but who honestly needs all of the extra "junk"(a GUI, for example).

I dont know... maybe I am just an elitist prick, but I prefer a system that has total stability, but also isnt a memory hog, and is more like Unix than trying to cater to the demands of the masses for something easy.(In case you cannot tell, I dont play games, with the exception of chess,solitaire, and old arcade games on emulators).

NOTE: I still am not trying to spark a flame, I am just pretty blunt with my opinions. I sort of mean this thread to be an actual discussion piece on why people here go to Linux instead of say AtheOS, or another open-source system.

P.S. On a side note : what do you guys see as missing in Linux operatively as a system(as in, things that cannot be implemented without jumping through hoops). This thread was also for me to grab some ideas for an operating system I plan on programming sometime.
 

Mr.Guvernment

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
I would also agree with ObnoxiousFrog, I've really gald Linux is becoming more mainstream. I use Linux so much that it seems like a huge chore whenever I have to use Windows... just don't understand why people choose to stay with Windows (beyond the obvious reasons: relatively more difficult/hardware& game support).
Maybe the culture of Linux is part of what's making it more popular? I do try to avoid senseless M$-bashing though.

Installed Fedora Core 2 - am a fairly new user to linux - took me a while to fifure out how to install an .rpm file in the terminal window, logging in udner amind etc!

after that - it ran crap on 128mb of ram - as i had to use the GUI - but is better now with 512.

Now what gets me - people says windows is bogged down with patches - the up2date - said there were 178 updates after i installed it! and then the up2dat e does not even work and kept giving me errors about the updates ot be installed - now THAt was a chore!!!

windows - click - next, next - done :D


So yeah - i am for a new O/S as well that is not becoming more and more like windows everyday!
 

dyefade

Registered
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Location
UK
Mr.Guvernment said:
Installed Fedora Core 2 - am a fairly new user to linux - took me a while to fifure out how to install an .rpm file in the terminal window, logging in udner amind etc!

after that - it ran crap on 128mb of ram - as i had to use the GUI - but is better now with 512.


Now what gets me - people says windows is bogged down with patches - the up2date - said there were 178 updates after i installed it! and then the up2dat e does not even work and kept giving me errors about the updates ot be installed - now THAt was a chore!!!

do not confuse "linux" with <whatever distro you're using>. That's an important distinction. Fedora is a modern distribution, of course there are lots of updates! Windows does just as much updating, but because it's one product, it does it all in one go, rather than Fedora's many small updates.

Mr.Guvernment said:
windows - click - next, next - done :D

So yeah - i am for a new O/S as well that is not becoming more and more like windows everyday!
well if you pick a distro that's been designed with migrating Windows users in mind what do you expect...
 

dyefade

Registered
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Location
UK
To Roof Jumper: good thread! I think you're gonna be doing a bit of moderating for yourself if you want to reduce the flames though (from me for one! :p )

anyway, in response to your second comment, I think the greatest thing lacking from Linux is commercial developer support (and don't tell me "but Red Hat, Novell" etc, they're all (mainly) making the actual OS), what is really missing is 3rd party home user support, and multimedia (IE GAMES) support.
There is really nothing missing from Linux (for me), which sort-of answer's your first post more concisely: Linux just happens to fit in perfectly with me at the moment.
 

Titan386

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2002
Roof Jumper said:
I dont know... maybe I am just an elitist prick, but I prefer a system that has total stability, but also isnt a memory hog, and is more like Unix than trying to cater to the demands of the masses for something easy.(In case you cannot tell, I dont play games, with the exception of chess,solitaire, and old arcade games on emulators).

I don't think you need to look elsewhere to get those things. Sure, Fedora might not be the best choice, but there are Linux distributions that are stable, don't hog memory, etc. You might want to try Debian stable, if you haven't already. There are countless other distributions that may suit your needs; try checking the list here:
http://www.linux.org/dist/index.html

IMO, you can still "live on the edge" with Linux. You just have to get a distribution that allows you enough control over your system, and you have to pursue it yourself. Also, I think there is still plenty of room for improvement in Linux. Just look around this forum and see the problems people have to see what can be improved.

Roof Jumper said:
Basically I am asking, if someone could come up with a new OS with great potential(a POSIX/UNIX buster), would you go try it out and try to improve on it(like people did with linux), or would you be like the majority of people that stuck with windows because it is what they had and gave them what they wanted?
It seems to me that if an OS gives you what you want, then you aren't really "stuck" with it. I think there's a considerable number of people who find that Linux gives them what they want. While Linux is good, but far from perfect, why reinvent the wheel when you could be enhancing what we already have?
 

Dylruss

Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2002
Location
SKI Utah
I vote for something like David suggested, you can use things like Freebsd, it is an excellent variation of Unix although not quite what you may be looking for. You can always use something like Knoppix if you are worried about storage space or what have you. I love to use different disros all the time to keep it interesting. I have used Freebsd w/kde, Redhat (many versions), Mandrake, Suse, Debian, Lindows, Fedora Core 1 & 2, and now trying Yoper. I suggest using different ones and seeing what each of them have to offer. IMO I think that they are getting better and better when it comes to support and drivers, etc with Linux. It is a lot easier to use today then when I first started playing with it 5 years ago.

I understand what you are getting at, but people like you is needed if you want to get something like that off the ground.
 
OP
R

Roof Jumper

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2002
Location
In a spider hole
While Linux is good, but far from perfect, why reinvent the wheel when you could be enhancing what we already have?
but people like you is needed if you want to get something like that off the ground.

because I would be cropping linux off at the knees right around v2.0 . I have tried almost all of the distros(debian and derivatives,gentoo,slackware,RedHat and Mandrake) as well as FreeBSD and there is something "missing" to me that I see in the latter versions of Linux. People are trying too hard IMHO to get Linux to mainstream users by plundering speed and efficiency that has made it such a good server and development platform.

I might contribute to Linux, but I really need to read through all of the source code several times to check for weaknesses in the system.

basically my current opinion is that OpenSource development and procreation is good, but I don't like to see it get so main stream. I love to see the creation of great software built on other great softwares' source, but am very afraid that the "purity" of code will be tainted when they have to dumb down linux for the masses of people who either can't or won't learn.
 

XWRed1

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2001
Umm, Linux has been getting faster.

2.6 is faster than 2.4, 2.4 is faster than 2.2, 2.2 is faster than 2.0.

If you decide to install bloatware on top, that's your perogative - there's still plenty of fast, lite, NEW software to use instead.
 

diolein

Registered
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Location
/Austria/Styria/Graz
XWRed1 said:
Umm, Linux has been getting faster.

2.6 is faster than 2.4, 2.4 is faster than 2.2, 2.2 is faster than 2.0.

If you decide to install bloatware on top, that's your perogative - there's still plenty of fast, lite, NEW software to use instead.
ack! if kde or gnome sets you up... why don't you try another WM?
 

rogerdugans

Linux challenged Senior, not that it stops me...
Joined
Dec 28, 2001
Location
Corner of No and Where
Hmmm- great thread!

I use linux on a few machines, two of which I usually try to keep in one piece-main rig and LAN gaming rig. The others I freely experiment with.

I have looked into some of the alternative Alternative OSes, but they all seem to be lacking some form of hardware or software support that I want- I am an overclocker and run ALL my machines overclocked- most are also water cooled.

* I refuse to spend days just learning how to install an os that I may not be able to use- a good install routine that gets me to at least a command prompt is needed.
* Fast installation- if the system can't be used to DO things within a MAX of one hour...it's not ready for prime time.
* GUI ability is mandatory. I may not use it, but I INSIST on the option.
*I NEED to be able to monitor temps and voltages.
*I refuse to accept a system that can't run with accelerated 3d graphics.
*Any OS must be capable of running [email protected] or [email protected]

But I am willing to try anything that looks like it will support my hardware and personal requirements- I have seen nothing that does so as well as Microsoft products and the various Linux distributions.
And Linux meets more of my needs better than Windows, most of the time= 5 of 7 computers run one linux distro or another. :)

I just deleted a bunch of stuff that took me 5 minutes to write- I was veering from the topic. ;)

Back to New Alternatives:
Yes, I am sure there are many basic things in linux that could be done better- at least for some people.

NOTHING is perfect though- everything is compromised in some fashion.
For my needs and wants there are no other alternative OSes that cut it right now, at least not that I know of.
Find (or make) one and I will try it out...if it doesn't meet my needs though, it will be replaced pretty quickly. :)

I am not an elitist in any way, so I don't care if the OS I choose is the most or least popular: all I care about is being able to do WHAT I want, WHEN I want.
 

XWRed1

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2001
I'm running Debian w/ Gnome 2.6 on my P3-850 laptop with 256mb ram and it runs just fine.

I switched from their stock 2.4.26 kernel to a custom 2.6.7 I made and it is noticeably snappier. Bloat my foot.
 
OP
R

Roof Jumper

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2002
Location
In a spider hole
I switched from their stock 2.4.26 kernel to a custom 2.6.7 I made and it is noticeably snappier. Bloat my foot.

exactly, one has to cut it down to size to be pretty good. Some people have alerted to me that alot of my anger is not at the kernel itself, but the accessories. The main problem is that alot of the newer distro's automatically install stuff that is quite frankly not needed.

As I said, I might work on the linux kernel in a bit, but I am going to be working on my own operating system for awhile to get more of an idea how to fix some of the problems I see in Windows/Linux.