I made a live CD of ubuntu 7.10 all the basic things worked well. But then when I tried to actually use it you know like game get my all in one printer working I was like h4×0rz pwn j00! Junk.
Im not a fan-boy of apple,microsoft or linux.
But how can they call this superior?
ITS HALFED BAKED lot of good reading online ~positive~ about it lots of hype…..I just dont get it!
Is it suppose to be this complicated. more time in the terminal then actualy using it. Yes got beryl working cube junk!
Why do you like it?
Thanks.
XP easy
Vista easy
OSX easy
ubuntu or any number of the 1000000 different kinds OMFG! like 0.6% users?
I see linux excellent as a server. But not really for the desktop.
I did like open office but I can get that to work in XP and open office wont do any good in linux because of my all in one problem ;-(
Ok you lil noob! linux does get virues trojans and yes it does crash. now get your head out of the penguins bung!
again i fail to see the superior part about linux….1 it lacks support 2 no drivers for NEW things. 3 complicated. I just like one click not ~ lizard-wang dododod pee my pants-sudo. LOL
Versions of linux are based off the unix kernel - which is far more stable than anything Microsoft ever came up with. It is far more expandable and adaptable than Windows. A lot of your small to mid-sized commercial software is written for unix or linux based computers because they don't crash - they're running 24/7 with very little problems. A Windows NT environment had to be re-booted at least once a week to keep them going - not so with the unix/linux platform. This is because Windows doesn't block off memory spaces for sole use of applications - unix does - if an application in unix should crash - it doesn't affect anything else - you can kill that process and restart it - with nothing else bothered, no reboot necessary, etc.
Apple, to me is the best of both worlds - it uses the solid unix core underneath the OS X operating system, which is very user friendly, more so than linux - although once you spend some time with linux and realize it's power, you can have fun with it - it's sort of combination of PC and mainframe - if you will, which is the environment I work in.
I haven't tried the ubuntu version per se, but have used Red Hat and SuSe. I've also used the SCO OpenServer 5.5 Unix Enterprise version which the GUI was ancient-looking, but extremely powerful in its capabilities, for example, it'd run 64 terminal displays just for the console as a default on my system if I allowed it to.
For ease of use, I'd check out the Apple OS X - newest version is Leopard which is more pure in Unix than their previous OS X versions. Of course, you're stuck running it on an Apple - which I've become a convert to and will never buy another Windows PC again for my own use.
November 18th, 2008 at 2:10 am
certain people like it and most other people should just stick to windows.
i've only used pclinux in some situations where a persons computer wont boot into windows, and also use ophcrack which is linux kernal to crack windows passwords…. thats about it.
References :
November 18th, 2008 at 2:49 am
I like Linux for programming, and I like the power of the command line. I don't find it difficult at all, but I come from a generation that started on VMS and VM/CMS. It's great for safe surfing and email, it has plenty of good, solid apps and applets, and I like the control it gives me over my computing environment.
That being said, I think the Linux fanboys who urge everyone to try it are doing everyone, and the Linux community, a disservice. People who are having trouble adjusting to Vista and think it's hard are not potential Linux users.
References :
November 18th, 2008 at 3:15 am
Linux is free because it was created by a group of people (open-source). Consider it "computer-Utopia" where everyone gets to work together to improve the code.
I've never tried it, as I have no desire to. However, I am a fan of open-source coding. I think it allows coders to search for the "holes" that can be in software…and fix them. Contrast that to a proprietary software, where the team that made it is very protective of their parts, and may not want to tweak their "masterpiece."
On a tangent, I think this style of software development would be a good idea for voting ballot counters, so all parties can make sure there isn't a secret flaw in the program. (That's the premise of "Man of the Year." I know, not a great movie…but certainly possible.)
References :
November 18th, 2008 at 3:22 am
Versions of linux are based off the unix kernel - which is far more stable than anything Microsoft ever came up with. It is far more expandable and adaptable than Windows. A lot of your small to mid-sized commercial software is written for unix or linux based computers because they don't crash - they're running 24/7 with very little problems. A Windows NT environment had to be re-booted at least once a week to keep them going - not so with the unix/linux platform. This is because Windows doesn't block off memory spaces for sole use of applications - unix does - if an application in unix should crash - it doesn't affect anything else - you can kill that process and restart it - with nothing else bothered, no reboot necessary, etc.
Apple, to me is the best of both worlds - it uses the solid unix core underneath the OS X operating system, which is very user friendly, more so than linux - although once you spend some time with linux and realize it's power, you can have fun with it - it's sort of combination of PC and mainframe - if you will, which is the environment I work in.
I haven't tried the ubuntu version per se, but have used Red Hat and SuSe. I've also used the SCO OpenServer 5.5 Unix Enterprise version which the GUI was ancient-looking, but extremely powerful in its capabilities, for example, it'd run 64 terminal displays just for the console as a default on my system if I allowed it to.
For ease of use, I'd check out the Apple OS X - newest version is Leopard which is more pure in Unix than their previous OS X versions. Of course, you're stuck running it on an Apple - which I've become a convert to and will never buy another Windows PC again for my own use.
References :
November 18th, 2008 at 3:53 am
First, you cannot measure quality in terms of money… that's just wrong. If something is more expensive, people automatically think it's better, well. it's not!
Linux is a community, you don't need to pay to different companies to use different programs, you just install them, and use them.
It's more stable and it won't suffer from virus, trojans, etc. because most of those stuff are written for Windows only. So you don't even need a Antivirus program.
If you don't like it, don't use it, but keep your Live Cd, for the next time your Windows doesn't start… or when you start getting blue screens! LOL
References :