Linux - the Amiga of the 00's
-
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. :-
-
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 guess now that this thread has exploded it's hardly worth putting in my 2 cents, but that's never stopped me before. ;0) The Amiga WAS far superior to the PC in it's day - can anyone say 4096 colours when PC's had 16 ? The problem was that everyone assumed lots of colours on a Commodore machine just meant better games, the Amiga was never marketed with a clear upgrade path so the core user base continued to have the base model, and Commodore didn't market it properly at all. Oh, and Atari ST's had MIDI built in, which lost the Amiga it's deserved place as the PC of choice for musicians of the time. If Linux was the Amiga of the 00's, I'd be running it. As it is it is a perfectly respectable alternative, but as I program for Windows there's no point me using it. You didn't think you could post what you did and NOT get replies from every Amiga/Linux zealot, did you ? ;0))
-
> 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.
-
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
-
I guess now that this thread has exploded it's hardly worth putting in my 2 cents, but that's never stopped me before. ;0) The Amiga WAS far superior to the PC in it's day - can anyone say 4096 colours when PC's had 16 ? The problem was that everyone assumed lots of colours on a Commodore machine just meant better games, the Amiga was never marketed with a clear upgrade path so the core user base continued to have the base model, and Commodore didn't market it properly at all. Oh, and Atari ST's had MIDI built in, which lost the Amiga it's deserved place as the PC of choice for musicians of the time. If Linux was the Amiga of the 00's, I'd be running it. As it is it is a perfectly respectable alternative, but as I program for Windows there's no point me using it. You didn't think you could post what you did and NOT get replies from every Amiga/Linux zealot, did you ? ;0))
Actually, the Amiga was not the musicians choice even if it had had a MIDI port built in. The problem was that the Amiga interrupt system gave serial ports too low a priority to service MIDI input reliably. This was solved with add-in cards later on, but would never have worked in the A500 or 1000. MIDI worked, but not reliably, and things like hard drives and heavy graphics output in high res would cause packets to be lost.
-
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
>> I've heard that Microsoft uses Apache servers for hosting some of their web pages. Does anyone know if this is true? << A persisent rumour, and one very easy to disprove (visit www.netcraft.com, which does surveys). I heard one varient that, two weeks after the launch of MSN, Microsoft realize the NT wasn't up to it, and switched to UNIX. (The rumourmongers never quite explain how MS was able to pull off such a massive switchover, over night, with no downtime) The truth is, that is MS buys a company which is using Apache for thier webserver, they will leave the Apache server up until they get around to switching the site entirely over to Win2000. For Hotmail, the complete conversion took three years. For LinkExchange (bCentral) the conversion is going much faster.