Linux - the Amiga of the 00's
-
Same old crap we've been seeing for the past N years. A fringe OS develops a cult-like following based on its perceived technical superiority.. they make noise.. Trouble is, this time the mainstream press takes them seriously, therby guaranteeing that it will be years before the world in general realizes that there is no real value in a hobbyist's OS.
Sounds like you have an ax to grind for some reason. Care to elaborate on why you hate everything but what you know how to use
-
Same old crap we've been seeing for the past N years. A fringe OS develops a cult-like following based on its perceived technical superiority.. they make noise.. Trouble is, this time the mainstream press takes them seriously, therby guaranteeing that it will be years before the world in general realizes that there is no real value in a hobbyist's OS.
I am actually dissatisfied with Linux. I have a copy of Mandrake Linux (which has the 2.2.14 kernel) running on a test system here at work, and I have to say that the user interfaces (Gnome, KDE, etc.) are crap at best. My sound card is not supported, the mouse driver gets changed to PS/2 compatbile at boot up, and it doesn't keep the selected monitor (which is in the list of supported monitors) at boot either. I have been running Windows 2000 on my main development machine since Beta 2, and I have to say it's a lot more stable. Yeah, Microsoft has a gazillion dollars to spend on making it right, but I'm not gonna bet the farm on something that has some market appeal
-
I am actually dissatisfied with Linux. I have a copy of Mandrake Linux (which has the 2.2.14 kernel) running on a test system here at work, and I have to say that the user interfaces (Gnome, KDE, etc.) are crap at best. My sound card is not supported, the mouse driver gets changed to PS/2 compatbile at boot up, and it doesn't keep the selected monitor (which is in the list of supported monitors) at boot either. I have been running Windows 2000 on my main development machine since Beta 2, and I have to say it's a lot more stable. Yeah, Microsoft has a gazillion dollars to spend on making it right, but I'm not gonna bet the farm on something that has some market appeal
Please speak the truth. I have installed Win2000 since a week ago but still could not get any of my two MS mice drivers to work. The IntelliMouse with the optical IntelliEye technology! comes with MS IntelliPoint 3.0 on CD-ROM, but will simply not work with the Win2000. The other normal IntelliMouse, with drivers on a floppy also does not work. All these work with Red Hat 6.2 on the same machine. And maybe because I installed on FAT partition (simple the machine carries Win98/WinNT4.0 and now Win2000 too), it is the slowest OS I have ever met. With a Celeron 500 MHz CPU and 128 MB RAM, I click on a menu of an application and have to wait patiently! for it to come up. Why did I even install that non-sense? just to try the content of the .NET SDK. Give it right, I did not need designed for Linux2000 to get my Linux working as advertized. Please for God sake, tell people the truth. Linux is come to stay. Please can you specifically give the reason why you describe the GNOME and KDE as crap? For me the joy of having the two technically different interfaces running side by side is not easy to express in words. With just a dialog, I move from GNOME to KDE, Oh! hold it did I say KDE GNOME applications running under KDE? It is not difficult to see that the Linux guys do not have the gazillion of dollars, but it is easy to see the level of talent they display with great pride. Does this make you envy them? cover the sun :-)
-
I am actually dissatisfied with Linux. I have a copy of Mandrake Linux (which has the 2.2.14 kernel) running on a test system here at work, and I have to say that the user interfaces (Gnome, KDE, etc.) are crap at best. My sound card is not supported, the mouse driver gets changed to PS/2 compatbile at boot up, and it doesn't keep the selected monitor (which is in the list of supported monitors) at boot either. I have been running Windows 2000 on my main development machine since Beta 2, and I have to say it's a lot more stable. Yeah, Microsoft has a gazillion dollars to spend on making it right, but I'm not gonna bet the farm on something that has some market appeal
Have you tried red hat? We have several systems running here with no problems. We are using them to host apache servers with jserv extensions and everything seems to be rock solid
-
Have you tried red hat? We have several systems running here with no problems. We are using them to host apache servers with jserv extensions and everything seems to be rock solid
Thanks for telling the truth, Stuart. I do not use Linux extensively, or program it. However, I simply cannot help admiring the great work of the KDE/GNOME guys. If by their hobby times they can achieve this much, give them 1/4 of the Win2000 budget and the world will appreciate the value of computer! Regards, Paul.
-
Please speak the truth. I have installed Win2000 since a week ago but still could not get any of my two MS mice drivers to work. The IntelliMouse with the optical IntelliEye technology! comes with MS IntelliPoint 3.0 on CD-ROM, but will simply not work with the Win2000. The other normal IntelliMouse, with drivers on a floppy also does not work. All these work with Red Hat 6.2 on the same machine. And maybe because I installed on FAT partition (simple the machine carries Win98/WinNT4.0 and now Win2000 too), it is the slowest OS I have ever met. With a Celeron 500 MHz CPU and 128 MB RAM, I click on a menu of an application and have to wait patiently! for it to come up. Why did I even install that non-sense? just to try the content of the .NET SDK. Give it right, I did not need designed for Linux2000 to get my Linux working as advertized. Please for God sake, tell people the truth. Linux is come to stay. Please can you specifically give the reason why you describe the GNOME and KDE as crap? For me the joy of having the two technically different interfaces running side by side is not easy to express in words. With just a dialog, I move from GNOME to KDE, Oh! hold it did I say KDE GNOME applications running under KDE? It is not difficult to see that the Linux guys do not have the gazillion of dollars, but it is easy to see the level of talent they display with great pride. Does this make you envy them? cover the sun :-)
I have never had any problems with Windows 2000. Windows 98 and ME on the other hand are always crashing. I have only had Windows 2000 crash once in the past 4 months, and I leave my machine running daily. I have installed Linux on the same exact machine (Dell Optiplex Gx1p 500 Mhz PIII) and am constantly having problems (by the way, this is Red Hat compatible, so KDE and Gnome are the same as what you get with the Red Hat release). I have tried updating Linux with all the latest updates and I still get it locking up once per day. I am not using any of the "new" features like hard drive optimizations or DHCP, so I can't explain why it doesn't work well. I have no desire to be working on Linux in my spare time...I have better things to do. I just want to have operating systems that get the job done, and Linux hasn't done that for me...YET! And that is the complete truth..
-
Have you tried red hat? We have several systems running here with no problems. We are using them to host apache servers with jserv extensions and everything seems to be rock solid
-
Please speak the truth. I have installed Win2000 since a week ago but still could not get any of my two MS mice drivers to work. The IntelliMouse with the optical IntelliEye technology! comes with MS IntelliPoint 3.0 on CD-ROM, but will simply not work with the Win2000. The other normal IntelliMouse, with drivers on a floppy also does not work. All these work with Red Hat 6.2 on the same machine. And maybe because I installed on FAT partition (simple the machine carries Win98/WinNT4.0 and now Win2000 too), it is the slowest OS I have ever met. With a Celeron 500 MHz CPU and 128 MB RAM, I click on a menu of an application and have to wait patiently! for it to come up. Why did I even install that non-sense? just to try the content of the .NET SDK. Give it right, I did not need designed for Linux2000 to get my Linux working as advertized. Please for God sake, tell people the truth. Linux is come to stay. Please can you specifically give the reason why you describe the GNOME and KDE as crap? For me the joy of having the two technically different interfaces running side by side is not easy to express in words. With just a dialog, I move from GNOME to KDE, Oh! hold it did I say KDE GNOME applications running under KDE? It is not difficult to see that the Linux guys do not have the gazillion of dollars, but it is easy to see the level of talent they display with great pride. Does this make you envy them? cover the sun :-)
Paul, just because one person has a different experience to you does not mean he is lying. I've been using W2K on my laptop and desktop, both with dual boot win98SE (and the desktop with .NET boot as well) and they are rock solid. I have experienced a few problems when program install scripts decide to replace W2K files with older versions :mad:, but other than that it's been sweet - and this is on a small 450MHz laptop, and a 300MHz celeron desktop (both with 128Mb). Boot up is reasonably quick (compared to 98 :)), and the system responds quite nicely - esp after a nice disk defrag. I've not once had a problem installing peripherals like scanners, mice, monitors, extra drives etc etc etc. People are always going to experience different things with different OS's, and as long as people use the OS that is best suited to them there should be no problems
-
Please speak the truth. I have installed Win2000 since a week ago but still could not get any of my two MS mice drivers to work. The IntelliMouse with the optical IntelliEye technology! comes with MS IntelliPoint 3.0 on CD-ROM, but will simply not work with the Win2000. The other normal IntelliMouse, with drivers on a floppy also does not work. All these work with Red Hat 6.2 on the same machine. And maybe because I installed on FAT partition (simple the machine carries Win98/WinNT4.0 and now Win2000 too), it is the slowest OS I have ever met. With a Celeron 500 MHz CPU and 128 MB RAM, I click on a menu of an application and have to wait patiently! for it to come up. Why did I even install that non-sense? just to try the content of the .NET SDK. Give it right, I did not need designed for Linux2000 to get my Linux working as advertized. Please for God sake, tell people the truth. Linux is come to stay. Please can you specifically give the reason why you describe the GNOME and KDE as crap? For me the joy of having the two technically different interfaces running side by side is not easy to express in words. With just a dialog, I move from GNOME to KDE, Oh! hold it did I say KDE GNOME applications running under KDE? It is not difficult to see that the Linux guys do not have the gazillion of dollars, but it is easy to see the level of talent they display with great pride. Does this make you envy them? cover the sun :-)
IntelliMouse 3.0 was released before Windows 2000 was. You can go to the hardware support site at microsoft and download new drivers (http://www.microsoft.com/hardware). You can also make the 3.0 drivers work by running the setup program (not the one in the root of the CD-Rom, but the one in the setup directory) with the argument "Win2000" (no quotes) Yes, FAT is slower for many things with Windows 2000. Try running your Linux system on FAT (Yes, you can do it) and see if you don't notice a difference. Why is it you Linux advocates always come up with the silliest reasons to reject something? "My mouse doesn't work" and "It's too slow" (nevermind the fact that Gnome and KDE are vastly slower interfaces).
-
Aaaah, I don't think I would call Linux a fringe OS. It's already taken a big chunk of the web server market and has quite a few corporate and goverment sponsors behind it. Linux may stay a "fringe OS" in the desktop market but it and the other free UNIX clones are already well on their way to dominating the server/mini market. P.S. - I've heard that Microsoft uses Apache servers for hosting some of their web pages. Does anyone know if this is true? P.P.S. - Amiga was killed by incompetent management. If they had played their cards right they could have taken over most of Apple's market share
Microsoft has always run the vast majority of it's servers on NT with IIS. There were a few notable exceptions in the past, namely Hotmail, but this was a special purpose system they bought when acquiring the parent company. Hotmail is now running on Windows 2000. I believe currently there are 2 sites running non-Windows. LinkExchange (also known as bCentral) and the msn homepages. LinkExchange, like Hotmail was bought (and somewhat recently at that). The MSN homepages (users home pages that is) are subcontracted out to another company.
-
Aaaah, I don't think I would call Linux a fringe OS. It's already taken a big chunk of the web server market and has quite a few corporate and goverment sponsors behind it. Linux may stay a "fringe OS" in the desktop market but it and the other free UNIX clones are already well on their way to dominating the server/mini market. P.S. - I've heard that Microsoft uses Apache servers for hosting some of their web pages. Does anyone know if this is true? P.P.S. - Amiga was killed by incompetent management. If they had played their cards right they could have taken over most of Apple's market share
Oh, and I think you'll find that Linux is not being used in very many large scale web sites. Large scales sites run mostly NT/IIS, with most of the rest running on servers such as Solaris, or AIX. Yes, Linux has more total web sites, but it can easily be extrapolated that these are mostly small sites. Additionally, the netcraft surveys do not differentiate between two domains running at the same site. It counts them as two different sites, even though it's one copy of the OS.
-
IntelliMouse 3.0 was released before Windows 2000 was. You can go to the hardware support site at microsoft and download new drivers (http://www.microsoft.com/hardware). You can also make the 3.0 drivers work by running the setup program (not the one in the root of the CD-Rom, but the one in the setup directory) with the argument "Win2000" (no quotes) Yes, FAT is slower for many things with Windows 2000. Try running your Linux system on FAT (Yes, you can do it) and see if you don't notice a difference. Why is it you Linux advocates always come up with the silliest reasons to reject something? "My mouse doesn't work" and "It's too slow" (nevermind the fact that Gnome and KDE are vastly slower interfaces).
> You can go to the hardware support site at microsoft and > download new drivers (http://www.microsoft.com/hardware). Thank you. > Yes, FAT is slower for many things with Windows 2000. Try > running your Linux system on FAT (Yes, you can do it) and > see if you don't notice a difference. Made me laugh. For the Linux guys to support FAT is enough achievement. > Why is it you Linux advocates always come up with the > silliest reasons to reject something? "My mouse doesn't > work" and "It's too slow" (nevermind the fact that Gnome > and KDE are vastly slower interfaces). Please get it right. I am not a Linux advocate. As to what you mean be silly reason is up to you. Neither Linux guys designed the MS mice that I use but they work correctly and I not have to go about searching for drivers. If stating this fact is silly to you... I was, however, hoping that with your *non-silly* position you will advice the one who posted the article to be fair.
-
Paul, just because one person has a different experience to you does not mean he is lying. I've been using W2K on my laptop and desktop, both with dual boot win98SE (and the desktop with .NET boot as well) and they are rock solid. I have experienced a few problems when program install scripts decide to replace W2K files with older versions :mad:, but other than that it's been sweet - and this is on a small 450MHz laptop, and a 300MHz celeron desktop (both with 128Mb). Boot up is reasonably quick (compared to 98 :)), and the system responds quite nicely - esp after a nice disk defrag. I've not once had a problem installing peripherals like scanners, mice, monitors, extra drives etc etc etc. People are always going to experience different things with different OS's, and as long as people use the OS that is best suited to them there should be no problems
> People are always going to experience different things > with different OS's, and as long as people use the OS > that is best suited to them there should be no problems. Thanks Chris, please remind the one who posted the article about this too.
-
True, Unlike MS Windows( known to crash frequently ), Linux doesn't crash. MS might learn something...
> MS might learn something... Nice one, but will they ever learn if they have the halleluya singers around ready to praise anything because it comes from Microsoft?
-
Please speak the truth. I have installed Win2000 since a week ago but still could not get any of my two MS mice drivers to work. The IntelliMouse with the optical IntelliEye technology! comes with MS IntelliPoint 3.0 on CD-ROM, but will simply not work with the Win2000. The other normal IntelliMouse, with drivers on a floppy also does not work. All these work with Red Hat 6.2 on the same machine. And maybe because I installed on FAT partition (simple the machine carries Win98/WinNT4.0 and now Win2000 too), it is the slowest OS I have ever met. With a Celeron 500 MHz CPU and 128 MB RAM, I click on a menu of an application and have to wait patiently! for it to come up. Why did I even install that non-sense? just to try the content of the .NET SDK. Give it right, I did not need designed for Linux2000 to get my Linux working as advertized. Please for God sake, tell people the truth. Linux is come to stay. Please can you specifically give the reason why you describe the GNOME and KDE as crap? For me the joy of having the two technically different interfaces running side by side is not easy to express in words. With just a dialog, I move from GNOME to KDE, Oh! hold it did I say KDE GNOME applications running under KDE? It is not difficult to see that the Linux guys do not have the gazillion of dollars, but it is easy to see the level of talent they display with great pride. Does this make you envy them? cover the sun :-)
Your IntelliMouse works with Win2000 if you install MS IntelliPoint 3.1. You can download the software from http://www.microsoft.com/products/hardware/mouse/mouse.htm
-
Please speak the truth. I have installed Win2000 since a week ago but still could not get any of my two MS mice drivers to work. The IntelliMouse with the optical IntelliEye technology! comes with MS IntelliPoint 3.0 on CD-ROM, but will simply not work with the Win2000. The other normal IntelliMouse, with drivers on a floppy also does not work. All these work with Red Hat 6.2 on the same machine. And maybe because I installed on FAT partition (simple the machine carries Win98/WinNT4.0 and now Win2000 too), it is the slowest OS I have ever met. With a Celeron 500 MHz CPU and 128 MB RAM, I click on a menu of an application and have to wait patiently! for it to come up. Why did I even install that non-sense? just to try the content of the .NET SDK. Give it right, I did not need designed for Linux2000 to get my Linux working as advertized. Please for God sake, tell people the truth. Linux is come to stay. Please can you specifically give the reason why you describe the GNOME and KDE as crap? For me the joy of having the two technically different interfaces running side by side is not easy to express in words. With just a dialog, I move from GNOME to KDE, Oh! hold it did I say KDE GNOME applications running under KDE? It is not difficult to see that the Linux guys do not have the gazillion of dollars, but it is easy to see the level of talent they display with great pride. Does this make you envy them? cover the sun :-)
<> Perhaps you should reformat this system someday and reinstall everything. <> I angree that its a crap. It just don't have the feel of Windows. You think that the fonts will fall over from the buttoms, and that the buttoms themselfs are riding one other! <> Great toy. But some people want an enviroment to work at, and not just do 'funny little thinks'.
-
Please speak the truth. I have installed Win2000 since a week ago but still could not get any of my two MS mice drivers to work. The IntelliMouse with the optical IntelliEye technology! comes with MS IntelliPoint 3.0 on CD-ROM, but will simply not work with the Win2000. The other normal IntelliMouse, with drivers on a floppy also does not work. All these work with Red Hat 6.2 on the same machine. And maybe because I installed on FAT partition (simple the machine carries Win98/WinNT4.0 and now Win2000 too), it is the slowest OS I have ever met. With a Celeron 500 MHz CPU and 128 MB RAM, I click on a menu of an application and have to wait patiently! for it to come up. Why did I even install that non-sense? just to try the content of the .NET SDK. Give it right, I did not need designed for Linux2000 to get my Linux working as advertized. Please for God sake, tell people the truth. Linux is come to stay. Please can you specifically give the reason why you describe the GNOME and KDE as crap? For me the joy of having the two technically different interfaces running side by side is not easy to express in words. With just a dialog, I move from GNOME to KDE, Oh! hold it did I say KDE GNOME applications running under KDE? It is not difficult to see that the Linux guys do not have the gazillion of dollars, but it is easy to see the level of talent they display with great pride. Does this make you envy them? cover the sun :-)
I agree with you - mostly. I have been using Linux since late 1996, and have seen it get progressively better and better with each release. I like it very much and have the patience and experience to fix most of the quirkiness with the window managers you describe, but I think Windows 2000 is a tremendous improvement over any other Microsoft OS - I even prefer it to Linux. I certainly don't "envy" other users in the Linux community, but I loathe the anti-Microsoft rhetoric that spews from the mouths of the 13 year-olds at Slashdot. Their anti-social "religion" speaks poorly for the rest of us. I suppose that's what drives people to choose one side or another
-
Your IntelliMouse works with Win2000 if you install MS IntelliPoint 3.1. You can download the software from http://www.microsoft.com/products/hardware/mouse/mouse.htm
Thank you. I have downloaded the version 3.2. The installation keeps popup up message box, one with the caption !"pUnkControl incorrect refcnt" None of the options from the mouse allow you to use the normal IntelliMouse. You only have "IntelliMouse Explorer", "IntelliMouse Optical", "IntelliMouse Web", "TrackBall Explorer", "TrackBall Optical". So the hardware still indicate Logitech mouse
-
> People are always going to experience different things > with different OS's, and as long as people use the OS > that is best suited to them there should be no problems. Thanks Chris, please remind the one who posted the article about this too.
Paul, I've got Mandrake 6.2 on one of my boxes too....and it crashes a lot.....maybe it wasn't installed properly?? Well maybe, but after installing Windows on lots of boxes, I can tell you that the installation of Linux was tougher....and if I missed something and thats why Linux crashes, well thats part of being an OS. I've taken it upon myself to try to learn Linux, but after two months of working with it, I always feel it lacks a lot of the polish that Windows has. You wanted specifics??? Here goes: How about no file find built into the file manager?? How about trying to run software which depends on a package which isn't installed, but getting no error message to tell you that the package wasn't found? How about being unable to sort files based on their attributes (in KDE...I seem to think this is available in GNOME)? How about the boot time?????? Maybe you want the box to run all year long, but I don't -- I can hear the computer running in the next room when I want to sleep so I turn it off. What about developing desktop applications?? Have you looked at the API for GNOME?? Object Oriented C???? Why?? There are SO MANY hard casts going on in there. Maybe its "efficient", but I look at it as risky. Look, Linux isn't really a GUI oriented OS. Sure its a great box for people wanting to port from some UNIX OS and/or to use as a web server, but I sure as hell won't be creating any commercial desktop software for it any time soon. Paul
-
Same old crap we've been seeing for the past N years. A fringe OS develops a cult-like following based on its perceived technical superiority.. they make noise.. Trouble is, this time the mainstream press takes them seriously, therby guaranteeing that it will be years before the world in general realizes that there is no real value in a hobbyist's OS.
Linux is no longer a "hobbyist" OS. In case you haven't heard recently, real companies with real partners are developing the bulk of Linux now. Many projects, such as Gnome, are being developed under the scrutiny of standards commitees. Just because an operating system comes with software that was written by "hobbyist" programmers does not make it a "hobbyist's" OS. There are many programs written by these hobbyist for Windows... It's called Shareware and Freeware. :-