Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Amiga Kit Amiga Store Iridium Banner AMIStore App Store A1200/A600 4xIDE Interface

AuthorTopic: Why Linux is Not for You!  (Read 4111 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

  • Guest
Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #45 on: April 20, 2003, 04:31:38 PM »
Quote
um, just now


Tutt tutt!! Who's been logging in as root? ;-)
 

Offline that_punk_guy

Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #46 on: April 20, 2003, 06:19:02 PM »
* :oops: *

heh
 

Offline smerf

Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #47 on: April 21, 2003, 05:08:58 AM »
Hi iamaboringperson,

I like this discussion, I have been using linux for the past 3 years on a Amiga 3000 and on various different pc platforms. My favorite is Mandrake, then Redhat and then (look out) Lindows. Of all the ones I used Lindows is the fastest to install and the easiest to use, but it don't come with anything. Mandrake is the most powerful and gives the most for your time. Redhat is easier to install programs with with their RPM pack.

Been using windows for the past 3 years and my vote goes for Windows 2000.  Windows 95 is the crash bash, and Windows 98 is the big freeze. Windows 3.1 I gave up on 5 years ago.

Now yes linux is not for everyone, but then again neither was Amiga dos, I never could understand why I had to type in DF0: instead of A:

or how about format drive df0: name "this is to much typing"

Oh well, I still say that copy protection was the real culprit that killed Amiga, everyone bought hard drives and found out they couldn't put their favorite stuff on the hard drive because of copy protection. I have disk boxes full of Amiga disk games that I still have to use a disk drive for.

Happy compooting,
Smerf
I have no idea what your talking about, so here is a doggy with a small pancake on his head.

MorphOS is a MAC done a little better
 

Offline alx

Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #48 on: April 21, 2003, 10:43:42 AM »
Quote
I never could understand why I had to type in DF0: instead of A:


I actually prefer knowing what kind of device something is :-) Besides, windoze cannot even use assigns.

Offline that_punk_guy

Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #49 on: April 21, 2003, 12:24:57 PM »
'df0:' makes a lot more sense than to me than 'A:', and this way you're not restricted to "only" 26 devices  ;-) And the Amiga's shell is beautiful, you know it!

As for MS-DOS - "Shell? What shell?!"


 

  • Guest
Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #50 on: April 21, 2003, 02:38:29 PM »
Quote
Besides, windoze cannot even use assigns.


SUBST
 

Offline alx

Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #51 on: April 21, 2003, 02:48:26 PM »
SUBST only assigns drive letters - you cannot subst to a word.

Even "un-user friendly" Linux with it's mountpoints organises system files and stuff better than windoze.

The Linux way - all libraries tidied away in /lib.  They all end with .so.0 or .so.1 etc for version numbers

The Amiga way - all libraries put in libs: assign, with the idiot-proof ".library" extention

The Windows way - libraries in c:\windows\system32 (or c:\winnt\system32 sometimes), in various subfolders, in program files etc... Mainly .DLL

"Idiot-proof" Windows has the least logical way of doing it.

Offline bhoggett

Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #52 on: April 21, 2003, 02:50:12 PM »
Quote

mdma wrote:
Quote
Besides, windoze cannot even use assigns.


SUBST


Only in part. It's nowhere near as versatile as an AmigaOS assign.

As for the installer, the Debian and Gentoo solutions are good enough, but the problem remains. Neither is a universal installer/uninstaller for all Linux software, across all distributions irrespective of packaging. Yet that is what you will need if ordinary users are ever to regard Linux as a serious desktop alternative to Windows.
Bill Hoggett
 

  • Guest
Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #53 on: April 21, 2003, 04:13:19 PM »
Quote
Yet that is what you will need if ordinary users are ever to regard Linux as a serious desktop alternative to Windows.


People use linux because it's Linux, not Windows.  If you want to use Windows use it.  Like the author of the article, I couldn't give a toss if Linux becomes dominant on the desktop.  It does what I need, and that's all I care about.

btw There is a universal installer similar to Install Shield/NSIS/WISE for Linux, the Loki installer.  It's very good and open-source too.

http://www.lokigames.com/development/setup.php3

[img align=left]http://www.lokigames.com/development/_img/shots/setup-1.jpg[/img]
 

Offline Hammer

Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #54 on: April 21, 2003, 11:58:31 PM »
Quote

mdma wrote:
Quote
I don't see "GNU" being marketed as "operating system" as in Red Hat and SUSE products.


NT is a kernel, Windows is an Operating system.

Not quite right i.e. specifically "Windows NT Kernel".

Refer to
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/prodtechnol/ntwrkstn/reskit/execmsgs.asp

Quote
The Windows NT Kernel is the part of the Windows NT Executive that manages the processor. It performs thread scheduling and dispatching, interrupt and exception handling, and multiprocessor synchronization. It also provides primitive objects to the Windows NT Executive, which uses them to create user-mode objects.

"NT" label can denote the following
 
1. Windows NT 3.x
2. Windows NT 3.5x
3. Windows NT 4.0
4. Windows 2000 (a.k.a. NT 5.0)
5. Windows XP (a.k.a. NT 5.1)
6. Windows Server 2003(a.k.a. NT 5.2)
7. Australia's Northern Territory (a.k.a. NT) .

The NT label itself is not specific enough.

AmigaForever 2016 with AmigaOS 4.1 FE, AMIDuOS\'s Android 5.01, MS Windows 10 Pro X64
Samsung ATIV Book 8 880Z5E laptop with touch screen.
CPU: Intel Core i7-3635QM, 2.4Ghz base, 3.4Ghz turbo.
RAM: 16 GB PC3-12800 (DDR3-1600)
GPU: AMD Radeon HD 8870M (OC) 2GB GDDR5 VRAM.
SSD: 512 GB Samsung 840
 

Offline Hammer

Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #55 on: April 22, 2003, 12:05:42 AM »
Quote

mdma wrote:
Quote
Yet that is what you will need if ordinary users are ever to regard Linux as a serious desktop alternative to Windows.


People use linux because it's Linux, not Windows.  If you want to use Windows use it.  Like the author of the article, I couldn't give a toss if Linux becomes dominant on the desktop.  It does what I need, and that's all I care about.

btw There is a universal installer similar to Install Shield/NSIS/WISE for Linux, the Loki installer.  It's very good and open-source too.

http://www.lokigames.com/development/setup.php3

[img align=left]http://www.lokigames.com/development/_img/shots/setup-1.jpg[/img]

In what distro?
AmigaForever 2016 with AmigaOS 4.1 FE, AMIDuOS\'s Android 5.01, MS Windows 10 Pro X64
Samsung ATIV Book 8 880Z5E laptop with touch screen.
CPU: Intel Core i7-3635QM, 2.4Ghz base, 3.4Ghz turbo.
RAM: 16 GB PC3-12800 (DDR3-1600)
GPU: AMD Radeon HD 8870M (OC) 2GB GDDR5 VRAM.
SSD: 512 GB Samsung 840
 

Offline jeffimix

Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #56 on: April 22, 2003, 12:10:07 AM »
Ok, why Like the way MS DOS (and compatible really) assigns drive names:
A: B:       'Floppy Drives
C: D:       'Hard Disks   (D: Can be a CD ROM if you hvae only one HD)
E: F:        'Usually CDs
For DOS, it saves a lot of time. Its not really easier to remember,  nor is it difficult to remember IMHO. I though you could rename drives in Amiga though?

But seriously, how many people use DOS on a home computer these days (except for geeks like me)
\\"The only benchmarks that matter is my impression of the system while using the apps I use. Everything else is opinion.\\" - FooGoo
 

Offline bhoggett

Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #57 on: April 22, 2003, 01:04:06 AM »
@mdma

Quote
People use linux because it's Linux, not Windows. If you want to use Windows use it.


I've heard this line before, and while I'm sure it's valid for you, it's not valid for every Linux user. After all, if that was the case why distribute binary packages at all. Surely REAL Linux users compile everything from source and locate their own dependencies, right?

Quote
Like the author of the article, I couldn't give a toss if Linux becomes dominant on the desktop. It does what I need, and that's all I care about.


That's up to you, yet the fact remains that the more users a platforms attracts, the more developers will support it, and the more developers, the better the overall quality and range of available software will become, which in turn brings in more interest from users. Everyone benefits. Frankly,  I don't hold much truck with the elitist "if you're not prepared to get your hands dirty doing things the hard way you shouldn't use  Linux" brigade.

As for the Loki installer, does it support the locating, downloading and installation of dependencies?  I would have thought a game installer wouldn't normally need to worry too much about such things, specially one designed for commercial game distributions.

(Just for the record, I don't expect Linux to work like Windows. The easy installation, removal and upgrading of software is a feature I would expect from any OS.)
Bill Hoggett
 

Offline iamaboringperson

Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #58 on: April 22, 2003, 05:40:15 AM »
smerf,

hows it going?

Quote
I like this discussion, I have been using linux for the past 3 years on a Amiga 3000 and on various different pc platforms. My favorite is Mandrake, then Redhat and then (look out) Lindows. Of all the ones I used Lindows is the fastest to install and the easiest to use, but it don't come with anything. Mandrake is the most powerful and gives the most for your time. Redhat is easier to install programs with with their RPM pack.

yes, it has been a rather sensible discussion! no: "but, you shouldnt use linux because its not as good as amigaOS" type crap
i prefer Mandrake - never used Lindows & Red hat doest work on my machine now, for some reason :(

Quote
Been using windows for the past 3 years and my vote goes for Windows 2000. Windows 95 is the crash bash, and Windows 98 is the big freeze. Windows 3.1 I gave up on 5 years ago.

im fine with 98, i only use it as a games machine anyway!
Quote
Now yes linux is not for everyone, but then again neither was Amiga dos, I never could understand why I had to type in DF0: instead of A:

yes, the worst part about linux for begginers is mounting volumes and adding new hardware - its not quite as automatic as even windows is these days

as others have mentioned up there /\, A: has no meaning - especialy to a begginer! df0: does have meaning
its only 2 extra characters
i dont know how you would do this for FFS floppies, however, if you want, for harddrives you can use single letters, just dont use C: or L:
Quote
or how about format drive df0: name "this is to much typing"

it is a lot of typing, however, AmigaDOS was almost english! it was easy to remember what to type because they were mostly english words
Quote
Oh well, I still say that copy protection was the real culprit that killed Amiga, everyone bought hard drives and found out they couldn't put their favorite stuff on the hard drive because of copy protection. I have disk boxes full of Amiga disk games that I still have to use a disk drive for.

i hated the fact that the amiga always had an excellent 32-bit multitasking OS, but was virtually sold(and seen by most people) as a games machine
so as soon as you inserted the disk, the multitasking ended and most games didnt have a 'exit to dos' type function :(
that showed the majority of people that it wasnt a serious computer - im sure if they switched it on waited hours for it to boot and then were presented with a dos prompt they would of thought of it more seriously! and then it wouldof been more popular perhaps
but im getting a bit off topic now

all OS's have their uses.
and faults, pro's & con's
 :-)
 

Offline Waccoon

Re: Why Linux is Not for You!
« Reply #59 on: April 22, 2003, 08:01:32 AM »
Quote
Quote
NT is a kernel, Windows is an Operating system.

Not quite right i.e. specifically "Windows NT Kernel".

It's all integrated, so who really knows what is what?

Quote
Ok, why Like the way MS DOS (and compatible really) assigns drive names:

Dumbest legacy problem ever.  The real trouble is that drive letters are assigned by the BIOS in the order that drives are detected, so if you switch a few cables, the whole system gets screwed up.  Even DOS should have been using remapped drive letters!

I have to fix an OS/2 system at work because the hard drive is dying.  My solution is to copy one hard drive onto another.  Unfortunately, plugging in a second hard drive messes up the drive letters, because the PC BIOS detects all primary partitions first, then logical partitions.  So, before I had drives [C D E], and with two hard drives installed, I have [C F D][E G H]!  All the user accounts are on the logical partition of the first drive, so when I boot the system with two hard drives, it won't log into the admin account!  I'll have to fix the machine with a bootdisk, somehow, and, naturally, my boss can't find all the documentation for the machine.  I guess I can just delete the primary partition on the second drive and use ONLY logical drives, but...  oh, man.  I just know fixing that machine is going to SUCK.

PC BIOS is crap!  I'm surprised even OS/2 doesn't use remapped drive letters, though.

Quote
(Just for the record, I don't expect Linux to work like Windows. The easy installation, removal and upgrading of software is a feature I would expect from any OS.)

Linux was designed to be a little brother to UNIX, so naturally it lacks all the essentials we take for granted on Windows and Macintoshes.  I like this quote I recently found from a GUI programmer:

Quote
Free Software developers have the ability to start from a relatively cruft-free base, but (as a gratuitously broad generalization) they have no imagination whatsoever. So rather than making their interfaces more usable, they concentrate on copying whatever Microsoft and Apple are doing, cruft and all.

-- Matthew Thomas, http://mpt.phrasewise.com/

Red Hat 7 comes to mind.  It looks just like Win98 (down to the pixel, and a start menu that says "START"), but it's still Linux underneath.