There is no free lunch.

[upriverpaddler]

I don't understand. There must be something more than "down with microsoft" to drive the developers of all of these distros. I mean, there are a lot of good linux goodies to be had for free. And all of these have taken countless people countless hours to put together. Not to mention the effort and $$$ taken to keep up the very nice web pages that most of the better free distros have.

Is this truly a free lunch, or is a big "gotcha" lurking in the future?

P.S. After all of the installation issues, and KDE vs. Gnome, how different are the distros?

 

[HHunt]

Neh, no big gotchas here. The software has been made, small steps at the time, by a huge amount of voulenteers, so while a normal distro contains a fantastic amount of work, it's also from a very large number of sources. The motivation for the "donators" varies, but it's simple things like someone missing an app, having nothing better to do or wanting to fix some existing app (or add things to it). I'm sure some do it for the cred, or the thrill of having people using your software. Some parts are written by companies that find adapting an existing GPLed program to their need is the best solution, and so on.

There's also ways for distros to make money, so good-looking websites can be seen as an investment. While all the components can be had for free, there's no stopping anyone from putting them together, getting them to interact nicely, putting it on a CD, and selling it. They're not selling the software; they're selling their guarantee that it'll work together fairly well. Not to mention support, which is a big income. (And of course, the way to get support is to buy the distro.)

All in all, yes, it's a free lunch. You just have to be prepared for sometimes having to assemble it yourself, and that now and then, the mayo won't play nice with the ham.

The main differences in running different distros are in package handling, and in what extra tools they have (YaST for SuSE is a typical "extra tool"). After all, it's the same OS running the same software, so those are the only main areas they can differ in.
(They also like moving things around inthe KDE/gnome menus and toying with themes, but those are more superficial things.)

As a FreeBSD guy I'll have to say that even if you're using a different OS (but with the same programs), it still feels more or less the same. At least until you have to interact with the OS directly.

 

[Nazo]

I'm not 100% sure there isn't a gotcha. Since their primary income tends to be support, I'm wondering if this is rather discouraging attempts to make linux simpler to work with (and, therefore, closer to the average user.)

Hard to say for certain. If they increase the number of people running it, there's more people to support, but, less need for support. Not sure what it works out to in their eyes for sure.

 

[unhappy_mage]

All in all, yes, it's a free lunch. You just have to be prepared for sometimes having to assemble it yourself, and that now and then, the mayo won't play nice with the ham.

This is only an issue with the new version of ham; downgrade below 1.16 and everything will work. Alternatively, upgrade to the latest CVS glibc and then get the patch for mayo from its website. It supposedly fixes this, but I haven't tried it.

 

[LazyBastard]

The gotcha is you have to catch and kill the pig for the ham and make the mayo and bread from scratch and grow your own lettuce and tomato and make your own cheese. It's only hard the first time.

Don't listen to the Gates. It's not Lord of the Flies.

 

[Nazo]

The gotcha is you have to catch and kill the pig for the ham and make the mayo and bread from scratch and grow your own lettuce and tomato and make your own cheese. It's only hard the first time.

I agree with the first part, but, only hard the first time? For some of us, this isn't entirely true... Some of it can be a real pain. A lot of things just insist on having a huge long line of steps you have to go through to get them to even start to work, and even then you sometimes run into problems because it doesn't get along with a particular version of something you have or that sort of thing. The fact is, they could make a lot of things a whole lot easier, and they don't seem to be trying hard enough if you ask me. Frankly, I tend to think that if MS can do it, it's hard to believe the linux people can't.

I'm not saying people can't do it, and many things even the ordinary person can manage with minimal fuss. All I'm saying is that, in the end, if you want to use it to do everything you can do in windows (except some gaming -- cedega and such still have a long way to go so not everything yet works there,) it's not going to be super-easy. And, this forum is about the only one I've seen where you can ask a question and people don't immediately jump down your throat for not having read over every line of every howto and man page involved in working with something. Apparently people tend to expect you to stare at hundreds of pages of text before you even can ask a question usually, so you also have this to contend with.

It's not Lord of the Flies.

What??

 

[mosin]

My take is that there can be a free lunch, but it has taken an inordinate length of time to acheive. Opensource's poster child, Firefox, is proving that it can indeed happen, though. Linux would have made the big splash already, except that it has so many distros. Had all the Linux developers put their eggs in one basket, like the Mozilla guys did, we would have it now. Hold on...It's coming.

 

[Nazo]

Hmm... Firefox is doing fairly well for itself I suppose. Hadn't thought of that particular example. Still, as far as the features it actually offers, it's still behind Opera. At least it's worlds ahead of IE though. Lol, not that takes much. I haven't seen a REAL feature added to IE since something like 3.0 until finally just recently when they added a few things like popup blocking. I guess, like Linux, it just needs time to catch up since it started out behind them. (My dad tells me Opera was the first browser. I don't remember the history lessons they gave me in an internet class I once took, so I'm not sure. I know netscape was around pretty early in the scene, but, I guess it still remains that Opera had the head start.) Anyone who doesn't believe me about them being behind can just take a look at several things, such as tabbed browsing for an example. Even through plugins made by fans rather than the mozilla team (and they should make such things themselves, not rely on some fan to just happen to make it) tabbed browsing just can't be the same in the latest firefox right now versus even some older versions of Opera.

Thing is, I'm just dissapointed at how little effort they seem to be putting into making linux less of a pain. It's not that they can't or won't do it, just they don't seem to be trying as hard as, for example, MS -- who isn't exactly known for caring about the customer at all... People have said it's coming, and I can see definite progress, but, just how many years are we going to have to wait before we finally get something where it's not a fight to get set up to do more than the most basic stuff.

 

[duby229]

It took me years to become fluent with windows. When I first started I didn't know how to set up domain controller. I didn't know how to set up IIS.....

Learn Bash..... Until you do, you will never be fluent with linux. Linux will never be as "easy" as windows. A better term may be "GUI oriented". Linux will always retain bash. This is where the real power and potential is. Always have, always will. While microsoft crippled their OS when they dropped DOS (which had been neglected for the last 15 years anyhow) Linux continues to promote the flexibility of its command line.

Until you learn Bash you will never fully understand what I'm talking about. I personally feel that Linux is FAR easier to use then windows.

I can install a program with a single command.

You have to go online, find it, download it, click it, click next, next again, type in a keycode, click next agian, click next again, agree to the EULA, click next again, reboot, click next again, click next again, reboot, click finish.... Then figure out why the program doesn't work, fix the registry, find all the spyware it installed with it, remove the spyware, figure out why your PC is suddonly crashing, etc etc.....

 

[Nazo]

No, I don't really mean that. Actually, I was around in the days of DOS and when Windows 95 came out in what was practically 96 (yeah, we had a laugh about that) I found myself still using dos for several years to come. Most things, especially games, would have a DOS version and the DOS version would run faster and smoother. All I'm saying is I'm quite familiar and comfortable with the text console interface and method of doing things.

One command you say, but, I have one question for you. If you are installing something with just one command, how long is that command? That's one of the problems isn't it? The list of paramaters you'll need to know to do most tasks adds up in a hurry. Even the commands themselves are hard to know. There are so many thousands upon thousands that it's almost painful just trying to keep up with a small amount. But, anything considered to be common across most distros you are expected to already know, and if you don't, someone will jump down your throat if you ask for help on how to perform a particular task without having read the howto for that particular program (never mind that you had no way of knowing which of the millions of howtos to read.) So you're expected to keep up with all the programs and all of their paramaters. You speak as if you've been using linux for a while, but, your info there says you only joined this forum in 2005, so, you must know what I'm talking about as you've surely had to get help elsewhere. The fact is, most people just get tired of telling every linux newbie how the heck this or that works -- this forum is just better than most -- and I don't entirely blame them for feeling this way either. But, is it really fair for a person to HAVE to study books upon books, read manpages after manpages, and 500+ howtos to learn how to operate an os properly?

Now, I'm the first person to agree with the idea of seperating each task into a seperate program. I always felt this wasn't just more efficient, but, it also frees up the user to choose what they like best for a particular task. MS wants you to use one program for everything and I wouldn't be surprised if Longhorn expects you to listen to music, burn dvds, do your taxes, calculate math, write text files, and basically every thing else you can think of all inside "explorer" (aka internet explorer integrated because they decided back in 99 or so that it was just so much better to bog down a system by using a web browser to browse their local harddrives.) Thing is, linux has tended to seperate it into just about each concept even. It seems like for every task I do in windows, I have to learn two or three programs for me to get it done in linux... And that's bearing in mind I don't use MS's super-integrated junk any more than I have to (such as I use Winamp for music and music only, media player classic for video files and video files only, windvd for dvds and dvds only, nero for burning and burning only, tmpgenc for encoding mpegs and mpegs only, and so on like this.)

Anyway, it's making progress I will admit. When I first tried linux, I never even got my sound working because the only thing that supported the card I had at the time were some proprietary commercial drivers that I wasn't willing to pay for just to try out linux. Next time I found out that linux ran some simple tasks slower because at the time it had no video acceleration whatsoever from such a well supported card (that god-awful rage pro that pretty well needs all the acceleration you can get out of it due to how slow it is.) I might add, this problem isn't entirely solved. If you have an ATI card, it's a fight just to get it working, and then it's insanely slow and if you have a nVidia card, it's easier, but, still a pain as it won't work often enough. Don't know about matrox, and if you have something else you're probably screwed. Why does it take them so long to do these things? I mean, even simple things. Such as, I got minor acceleration out of my video card for DVD watching in Windows back in the 90s or so when I had a P3 that was pretty well just at the limit of being fast enough to manage dvd decoding (I know this for a fact because later I tried a Voodoo3 and got 0 acceleration and it ended up being unable to decode fast enough at 24-bit mode at all and dropping a few frames here and there even if I watched in 16-bit mode -- which looked ugly. The previous one wasn't that great at all, just the Voodoo3 basically offered no acceleration whatsoever in anything other than Glide.)

I'm sorry if this all seems like a rant or something. It's just that it's been a long painful process trying to learn linux for me. Even now I can never fully switch because I just can never get quite what I need out of it, most especially when it comes to gaming (though the main problem here is the fact that most of the companies making those games can't be bothered to support linux as they assume no one could ever want to play a game in such an os -- doesn't occur to them that people like me might like to switch to it instead of an OS expecting you to explain to MS why you dared to change your network card and video card at the same time and that it is still your computer so could you please get windows working again...)

 

[duby229]

I think I understand how you feel.

From the sound of things though, you prolly tried the wrong distro. Prolly redhat or suse, or mandrake. These distro's are majorly flawed becouse of RPM. It is what make linux hard. Nothing about it works right.

Check out Debian. It takes a bit of learning though. Your not going to become fluent in any OS without studying. Without reading reading manuals. Without asking questions. Debian is an incredible OS that really makes working with programs easy... For example, if I want install Firefox I simply type this into the command line.... apt-get install firefox.... Or something similar to that...

Or better yet if you really want a great OS that gives you even more control (Of course this is just my opinion so please don't flame me) Check out Gentoo. Gentoo is source base OS which means that you have to compile everything from code... Which really does suck. But it has its advantages. If I want to install firefox without java support, then I can do it. If i want to install firefox with debugger support, then I can do it. If I want to install K3B without KDE support then I can do it. Gentoo gives far more control over the OS then any other Linux on the planet... Ignore the ricers though. Gentoo is not really faster then other distro's, maybe slightly but nothing to brag about. I use gentoo for its USE flags.

OK as far as device compatibility goes... It's getting better. But its still not perfect. However let me just say this. If you want to build a linux box, then it is YOUR responsibility to make sure that your hardware is going to work. Its YOUR responsibility to check the device compatibility list. Buy the hardware that is on the list. Its that simple. If you buy a mac, then you have to make sure that any hardware you buy is supported. Same thing here. If you want to use linux then buy supported hardware...

As far as ATI goes.... Sign the petition.... I can't seem to find it right now, but there is petition on the internet somewhere that essentially asks ATI to get off there lazy asses and give us a decent driver. Don't blaim it on linux. Blaim it on ATI for being lazy.

As far as nvidia goes, there products are supported very well.... In gentoo all I have to do is type this in to the console.... " emerge nvidia-kernel"...... "opengl-update nvidia"..... then restart xorg.... That's it. Nothing more. It's that simple. You can't tell me that it's that simple in windows.

Anyhow. I can see why your frustrated. But you just simply can not expect to know how to do everything magically. You have to read the manuals. You have to read the howtos. You have to ask questions. Otherwize you are not going to learn. Your right that Linux is not ready for mom and pop. But realize that is actually a good thing. Becouse linux is so low on hte totom pole, I don't have to worry about malware as much. I don't have to worry about alot of things that windows users do have to worry about. I like linux just the way it is, and am VERY excited about the future technologies that we will all get to play with.

 

[Nazo]

Firstly, I was just giving examples. Video cards are FINALLY just starting to see proper support (at least, nvidia's...) The necessary steps to get acceleration only a couple or so years ago (maybe three now, I can't quite remember anymore) however went on and on and were still dissapointing results.

Thing is, my point was that hardware support was just painfully lacking. And my responsibility to make sure each little thing works? What the heck? Doesn't this PROVE my point? If you have to very carefully pick and choose hardware just to even try the stinking thing, it really discourages people from trying it now doesn't it? However, I must point out that the soundcard I had at the time worked tolerably in windows without it's official drivers (I lost some advanced functionality, but, the point is, it worked.) That was back in 98 or so, when they didn't have the massive hardware support list they do now in XP. Heck, I'll be honest, when I first tried Win2K, my 100% MS compatible mouse wouldn't even work, so I'm not going to tell you windows is much better, just that I've had a LOT less of a fight getting my hardware working in most versions of windows (I never did like Win2K. I always felt like forcing us to switch to NT was a bad idea. Those of us choosing 9x knew what we were getting into, which was maximum compatibility and speed, minimum stability.) Oh. BTW. The soundcard was a creative labs card... d-:

It's not much harder to install rpms btw. Kind of a pain when dependencies aren't met or conflicts occur, but, the command to install an rpm is "rpm -i file.rpm" You just have to download the rpm first is the main difference.

Anyway, all I'm saying is just that the learning curve is a LOT steeper than it should be. I honestly believe if they truly tried hard enough, they could flatten out that curve a bit more. I know it's not easy by any means, but I believe they could do it.


BTW, I have tried Gentoo. I don't think you want to be using it as an example when talking about how much easier linux has gotten. ^_^ I never really got it to install. I ran into some fatal error trying to compile something. This has always been one of my biggest problems with linux. So many things expect you to compile it rather than simply making a somewhat universal binary (and those binaries I do find have worked on all distros I tried at least) that people can download. If an error occurs, you have to wait weeks upon weeks for some half-hearted attempt to maybe help you get it working and then you'll just run into another error and have to wait again painfully often. I've always had the worst luck at getting things to compile successfully, and I just don't know enough to correct the problems that crop up painfully often. Frankly, I get a little tired of HAVING to ask questions...

 

[duby229]

You'll never be fluent with linux then... It's that simple.

If you don't like the compremises then it's just simply not the OS for you. Stop complaining about it. I never had a single compile error on gentoo.... ever. All of my hardware works. All of my software works. I'm happy with linux.

You have had differant experiences, and that is fine. Linux is not for everyone, and that is fine too.

 

[Nazo]

Ah, so your solution to the problem is... run away...

Problem is, that's just what people more or less expect. If you're not good enough for them, you have no right trying to learn linux... So, rather than help try to fix the error, you simply say "it's not for you." This is the sort of mentality I've seen over the years that has kept the learning curve even steeper because it gets rather hard to ask how to fix something when the only solutions offered are to run away from the problem. Over the years, I've seen almost only this sort of answer when I ask a linux-related question.

Thing is, what I'm saying is that you shouldn't NEED to ask that sort of question. I've never had to with windows... Sure, some things like IIS might be a pain to set up (though I must be honest, I have never used IIS as things like Apache have always been more than sufficient for me) but, those things are EXPECTED to be complicated. If you ask for help configuring it, people won't tell you that it's not for you simply because you didn't immediately figure it out... Mind you, if you ask in the right places, people might remind you that Apache/etc are better choices (at least, assuming you aren't fond of worms and such taking over your system) but, you'll still get an answer in the end telling you how rather than essentially saying go away.

In the end, sometimes the only way for someone to get help with something ends up being through those official support methods that cost money. So, you try out a free os only to find out you're supposed to be paying a lot more than you ever imagined for it. It doesn't exactly encourage people to learn new things...

 

[dan johnson]

P.S. After all of the installation issues, and KDE vs. Gnome, how different are the distros?

Think of them as Storm Troopers named Fedora, SuSE, Mandrake, Ubuntu, etc sharing the same DNA, but having different personalities.

OK, so maybe that's a totally lame analogy, but you get the picture because "Linux" is just a kernel.

 

[duby229]

You've basically more or less said that you don't want to read the manuals, you don't want to read the howto's. You don't want to ask questions.. Well I'm sorry but that is just not how it works. If you don't like it then tough.

If so then linux is not for you. Period. Linux is not a magical OS that will automagically do everything for you. If you don't like it then tough.

I've simply offered advice based on my experience. I think Debian is a great distro. I think Gentoo is a great distro. Try them both. If you don't like it then tough.

The fact is that drivers DON'T exist for every device. There is nothing I can do about it. The ONLY thing you can is buy supported hardware. That is all. If you don't like then tough.

 

[Whatsisname]

...what? Since they dropped the old dos code everything has improved. The windows command line is also very powerful, every configuration dialog has a command line equivelant in windows.

Always have, always will. While microsoft crippled their OS when they dropped DOS (which had been neglected for the last 15 years anyhow) Linux continues to promote the flexibility of its command line.

 

[duby229]

But which one is easier to use? That is the question. Use the command line tool. Then use the GUI tool. Which one is easier?

Do you honestly believe that Microsofts command line even remotely compares with bash? Its crippled becouse they removed an awefull lot of flexibility. Learn it, then learn bash, then you'll know what I'm talking about....

 

[The_Engineer]

TANSTAAFL!






There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

 

[Nazo]

You've basically more or less said that you don't want to read the manuals, you don't want to read the howto's. You don't want to ask questions.. Well I'm sorry but that is just not how it works. If you don't like it then tough.

You misunderstand me. I have nothing against reading manuals. I have something against reading 500 manuals. I must say one thing though. I got no manual with windows. My video card, soundcard, etc had "manuals" that consisted primarily of explanations of how to install the physical hardware itself and then showing pictures of the driver installation process (which consists primarily of clicking next a few times.) My point? That you don't even NEED manuals for most of these things with windows. Anyone who has installed a driver once will know the basic steps to installing another as they are all the same in the end with only minor differences here and there.

If so then linux is not for you. Period. Linux is not a magical OS that will automagically do everything for you. If you don't like it then tough.

And you wonder why I say that the general attitude in this scene is part of the problem... I never asked for magic. I asked that they put a little more effort into keeping things from being quite such a pain in the rear. Now would you stop saying "linux is not for you." Would you allow me to decide what is for me and what is not? Linux is a lot more suited for me than you assume. For one, I love how I can do just about anything I've ever wanted in the console -- once I learn the thousands of commands necessary to do so -- and, not just that, but, it's 100x faster when you don't have to sit there and line up a cursor to a few pixels every five seconds. I'm a keyboard oriented person to an extreme. Linux isn't for me? Guess it isn't for anyone then. I LIKE the way most of it works. I just don't like certain things about it that I have already mentioned.

I've simply offered advice based on my experience. I think Debian is a great distro. I think Gentoo is a great distro. Try them both. If you don't like it then tough.

Wrong. If you don't like them, try another. The answer, "tough," isn't a solution, it's another problem.

The fact is that drivers DON'T exist for every device. There is nothing I can do about it. The ONLY thing you can is buy supported hardware. That is all. If you don't like then tough.

I don't expect universal support. For that matter, I'm not saying support is so bad anymore, I was merely making a point. However, if your idea of a solution to this is for everyone to carefully pick and match their hardware just right simply so they can try linux properly, you can kind of see why linux still isn't more popular huh?

 

[duby229]

I think one of the problems is that you think linux should be "popular"

Popularity has nothing to do with. As soon as linux becomes popular, they become just like microsoft.....

Hey if you insist on buying unsupported hardware, then its your own fault.

hat you don't even NEED manuals for most of these things with windows

HUH? that is a joke right?

Listen if you can't figure out the two best distro's avavilable then I say you got some tough luck... Period.

 

[Nazo]

I think one of the problems is that you think linux should be "popular"

Popularity has nothing to do with. As soon as linux becomes popular, they become just like microsoft.....

The problem is, companies won't support it until it's more popular. For example, ATI. They don't have enough linux customers to truly care. They are more interested in the people who are using Windows. Game makers feel the same sort of way with only a few very rare exceptions. Off the top of my head, UT is the only one that actually comes to mind that starts off with full linux support even. As for programs, most people's solution is to find an opensource solution, which in many cases is of a much lower quality (I'm not insulting opensource, they do quite well. The difference is that when money is at stake, a lot more effort is put into pleasing the customer than when you get a few people saying thank you.)

Hey if you insist on buying unsupported hardware, then its your own fault.

My point is, most people started with one system which came with windows and if they want to try linux, your idea of a solution basically means it's time for them to get rid of most of their hardware and buy new stuff. In other words, you HAVE to start somewhere, and most people aren't going to start from the very beginning with the assumption they'll want linux later.

Listen if you can't figure out the two best distro's avavilable then I say you got some tough luck... Period.

You said it yourself. Your definition of the two best just happens to be the two known to be the hardest to get started with. Need I say more?

 

[LazyBastard]

The Lord of the Flies is a reference to my analogy about killing the pig. You wouldn't understand, I guess, unless you read the book (or the Cliff Notes).

Anything worth learning to do is worth learning to do well. It's only hard the first time if you learn how to automate.

And you don't need to learn BASH. I use TCSH myself.

 

[The_Engineer]

Seriously.
TANSTAAFL

Period.

The design of open source software and the GNU is that EVERYONE involed is able to contribute. While it doesn't say you have to contribute, or support every product you use, it does mean that if you don't, please do not expect there to be 100% stellar support for every product because this product was free to you.

You get what you give, I really think the problem with all these arguments is that some of you still exptect a FREE LUNCH, you can't, not with open source.

 

[duby229]

You said it yourself. Your definition of the two best just happens to be the two known to be the hardest to get started with. Need I say more?

That is just an opinion. I think both are much easier than windows.

 

[duby229]

And you don't need to learn BASH. I use TCSH myself.

And this another valid point. Choice......

 

[Nazo]

Seriously.
TANSTAAFL

Period.

The design of open source software and the GNU is that EVERYONE involed is able to contribute. While it doesn't say you have to contribute, or support every product you use, it does mean that if you don't, please do not expect there to be 100% stellar support for every product because this product was free to you. For now, if you want to learn something like linux, it's not going to be easy at all. You're just going to have to put in enough work to justify the "there isn't a such thing as a free lunch" argument.

You get what you give, I really think the problem with all these arguments is that some of you still exptect a FREE LUNCH, you can't, not with open source.

Ah, I agree with everything but the first A. (You won't catch me dead saying "aint.") d-: This is basically all I'm saying. Maybe someday it will happen, but, right now it's just not there.

And duby229, it's maybe technically opinion, but, it's the opinion of very nearly everyone I've ever spoken to about linux that debian and gentoo are some of the hardest to get started with. I think we can get by without the technicality and just call it fact when the grand majority agree on it.

 

[duby229]

I think we can get by without the technicality and just call it fact when the grand majority agree on it.

No becouse that is assuming an opinion is 100% universal.

 

[The_Engineer]

Ah, I agree with everything but the first A. (You won't catch me dead saying "aint.") d-: This is basically all I'm saying. Maybe someday it will happen, but, right now it's just not there.

...

Maybe I should have provided some linkage for those who haven't read much or any of Robert A. Heinlein's multiverse series.. I was simply bringing to note the wisdom of a legend. Note, the title of the first post.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TANSTAAFL

"Oh, 'tanstaafl'. Means 'There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.' And isn't," I added, pointing to a FREE LUNCH sign across room, "or these drinks would cost half as much. Was reminding her that anything free costs twice as much in the long run or turns out worthless."

 

[XOR != OR]

I think one of the problems is that you think linux should be "popular"

Popularity has nothing to do with. As soon as linux becomes popular, they become just like microsoft.....

Oh? Why? How did you come to that conclusion?

Listen if you can't figure out the two best distro's avavilable then I say you got some tough luck... Period.

Eh...it's a matter of what's easy for you to learn. My bud loves redhat/centos ( hates fedora, and I don't blame him ). I find RH to be somewhat...odd. I use slack ( and love it ).

It's all a matter of what's easiest for you.

 

[Nazo]

No becouse that is assuming an opinion is 100% universal.

Ah, I noticed you edited out the part where you said it was a lie pretty darned quickly there! I never said 100% universal. There's an exception to every rule. But, let me just put it this way. If what you are saying is true, then, everyone who has never tried linux before should be told to try Debian or Gentoo. And, hey, if they don't immediately figure out how they work, tough luck, linux is just not for them.

You know, it's funny, but, for some reason, in all the polls I've passed by where someone asks what you'd recommend to a newbie, gentoo and debian appear to be pretty darned low on the lists... That is, the ones that even have them as options...

All I'm saying with this is just accept the fact that linux is not easy and if it ever will be it's a long way down the road. There's a LOT of trial and error with ANY distro. PERIOD. This is fact, not grand majority opinion and impossible to deny if you expect your denial to hold up. I don't expect it to ever get as easy as windows. Windows is TOO easy. So easy it's at the expense of making it harder if you ever want to do a more advanced task since they dumed everything down so much that it's clear they have the assumption the average user has an IQ of somewhere in the area of 50 (mind you, this assumption isn't without basis, all you have to do is get in a car and pull out into a road to see an example of how this may well be true.) Linux should be complex enough to need manuals. I just don't think it should be complex enough that you have to dig through three different manuals to set up one thing.

 

[duby229]

If every noob did try Debian and/or Gentoo first, alot of these types arguments would be greatly diminished. For those that actually have an open mind, it will prolly be the best thing they did with a computer to date. Also they would have a more profound understanding of the OS.

It is very much clear that you don't have the understanding that is required. Which is fine. Nothing wrong with that. But, instead of complaining how hard it is, lead about how you can make it easier. This is what the GPL is all about.

If you don't like something then you are free to make it better. Try doing that with windows.

 

[Nazo]

If every noob did try Debian and/or Gentoo first, alot of these types arguments would be greatly diminished. For those that actually have an open mind, it will prolly be the best thing they did with a computer to date. Also they would have a more profound understanding of the OS.

Incorrect. Instead, they would have given up because since they aren't omniscient they didn't know how to even get started. The documentation alone isn't enough.

It is very much clear that you don't have the understanding that is required.

Depends. It's true that I don't know every little detail about how to correct it when the compilers throw out 50+ errors on something that all the documentation assumes will succeed without a problem, but, can you honestly tell me you actually think it's right to assume everyone should? Has it ever occured to you that it should maybe be possible for someone to not be omniscient and still use linux? All I can say is, don't ever tell me I'm the one who is close-minded. There are many different linux distros and just because you assume the two known to be the hardest for a person to get started with are the best doesn't mean someone can't use something such as, oh, say Mandriva. Don't be so closed-minded about this, seriously. There are easier better ways than jumping straight into the most complicated stuff, and there's no reason you should honestly assume the person has to do this. Once again I'd like to emphasise the point that just because YOU think those are the best, does not make them so. Frankly, I consider Mandrake/Mandriva to be the best. That's my opinion, and I've a right to it even if you don't agree. Just as every other person has a right to their own opinion and a right to not be expected to know everything about everything simply because you think you do.

If you don't like something then you are free to make it better. Try doing that with windows.

Do I misunderstand you, or are you trying to say you can do that with linux but not with windows? If so, that argument doesn't work. You actually can improve just about every feature of windows. For example, don't like IE being integrated like insane? Try XP-lite or some of the free equivalents. For that matter, switch your shell to litestep and just to heck with explorer at all. Don't like that god-awful windows media player? Use Media Player Classic which is so much like the good old media player that everyone loved (with the single exception of bill gates apparently,) only better. MS may be against users having the ability to do anything outside the box, but, they can't stop it from being done in the end.

You know, if we weren't in the linux forum talking about different linux distros, based on your closed mindedness, I'd swear you worked at Microsoft...

 

[The_Engineer]

... You actually can improve just about every feature of windows. ...

How about you go and fix any bugs in IIS and make it so its got some new features you were looking for but it didn't have already, and see if it gets implemented in the next version of windows, or rolled out on windows update website.

These are the kinds of changes able to be made with Software under the GNU. Making asthetic changes to a media player that happens to be packaged with the OS is far from changing windows itself.

 

[duby229]

Incorrect. Instead, they would have given up because since they aren't omniscient they didn't know how to even get started. The documentation alone isn't enough.

Both of these distro's have FAR better documentation than anything microsoft has to offer. I'm afraid it is you who are incorrect. If you want to learn something, then the only way to learn is by doing it. Period.

It's true that I don't know every little detail about how to correct it when the compilers throw out 50+ errors on something that all the documentation assumes will succeed without a problem, but, can you honestly tell me you actually think it's right to assume everyone should?

Like I said. I have never had any compile fail. Ever. If you had taken the time to read the proper documentation you prolly wouldn't have either. The next time you try, configure it right in the first place.

Has it ever occured to you that it should maybe be possible for someone to not be omniscient and still use linux? All I can say is, don't ever tell me I'm the one who is close-minded. There are many different linux distros and just because you assume the two known to be the hardest for a person to get started with are the best doesn't mean someone can't use something such as, oh, say Mandriva. Don't be so closed-minded about this, seriously. There are easier better ways than jumping straight into the most complicated stuff, and there's no reason you should honestly assume the person has to do this. Once again I'd like to emphasise the point that just because YOU think those are the best, does not make them so. Frankly, I consider Mandrake/Mandriva to be the best. That's my opinion, and I've a right to it even if you don't agree. Just as every other person has a right to their own opinion and a right to not be expected to know everything about everything simply because you think you do.

That is more than half of your problem then. First urpmi sucks monkey balls. Second, you never get exposed to the functionality that the OS provides. Only what Mandrake wants you to see. And it has nothing to with omnisience. If you'd just freakin read the manuals and howtos then you'd freakin know what you are talkin about.

Do I misunderstand you, or are you trying to say you can do that with linux but not with windows? If so, that argument doesn't work. You actually can improve just about every feature of windows. For example, don't like IE being integrated like insane? Try XP-lite or some of the free equivalents. For that matter, switch your shell to litestep and just to heck with explorer at all. Don't like that god-awful windows media player? Use Media Player Classic which is so much like the good old media player that everyone loved (with the single exception of bill gates apparently,) only better. MS may be against users having the ability to do anything outside the box, but, they can't stop it from being done in the end.

You know, if we weren't in the linux forum talking about different linux distros, based on your closed mindedness, I'd swear you worked at Microsoft...

From the context of this entire spat, I'd almost think that YOU worked for microsoft. How in the heck could you miscontrue ME as anything but a linux fan? I've done nothing but defend linux against your attacks....

Very interesting debate anyhow.

 

[Nazo]

How about you go and fix any bugs in IIS and make it so its got some new features you were looking for but it didn't have already, and see if it gets implemented in the next version of windows, or rolled out on windows update website.

These are the kinds of changes able to be made with Software under the GNU. Making asthetic changes to a media player that happens to be packaged with the OS is far from changing windows itself.

You misunderstood. I'm not talking about simple skin changes. I'm saying windows is still customizable. Maybe not QUITE as much as linux (for example, you can't skim out the stuff you don't need from the kernel) but, you can still do a lot. You don't like IIS? Don't use it. Install Apache & co. Don't like WMP? Get media player classic. Don't like MS Office? Get OpenOffice. You aren't improving the program itself in linux either most of the time. I mean, who among us is actually expected to have to have the ability to modify that code to meet all their needs? Do you rewrite bash, or switch to tcsh if you don't like it?

Both of these distro's have FAR better documentation than anything microsoft has to offer. I'm afraid it is you who are incorrect. If you want to learn something, then the only way to learn is by doing it. Period.

I don't deny that most linux distros have good documentation -- better than windows. What I deny is your claim that they are so incredibly simple that anyone unable to figure them out on their first try should give up on linux. Better documentation doesn't make it easier automatically. As a matter of fact, most of the windows things don't need very much documentation... I mean, even I could do things such as set up networking way back when I didn't even understand how the IP addresses actually worked in windows. In linux, I've found that you kind of HAVE to know the underlying methods of configuring things as even the most modern distros have a tendency to forget that many connections run on a lan rather than a modem. (I just tried ubuntu live a bit ago to find that it had no ability to set up the DNS through the normal network setup. You had to get down and dirty into the underlying stuff involving.)

Like I said. I have never had any compile fail. Ever. If you had taken the time to read the proper documentation you prolly wouldn't have either. The next time you try, configure it right in the first place.

Has it ever ONCE occured to you that it's actually possible for a compile to fail for different reasons than because the user did something wrong? Has it ever occured to you that not every single bit of software was made so perfectly that it will perfectly compile on any setup? There are ALWAYS situations in which some dependancy could be improperly met, some bug in the code or your current setup causes a problem, and so-and-so. What I usually run into with compilers not working is that they don't like my distro. As a matter of fact, in these cases I've followed the instructions quite precicely (which primarily consist of simply telling you to run ./configure followed by make followed by make install, so it's rather hard to blame me if ./configure errors out now isn't it?)

That is more than half of your problem then. First urpmi sucks monkey balls. Second, you never get exposed to the functionality that the OS provides. Only what Mandrake wants you to see. And it has nothing to with omnisience. If you'd just freakin read the manuals and howtos then you'd freakin know what you are talkin about.

There you go. You admit it. You're supposed to read everything and know everything. Look, I'm a reader. I read novels all the time for enjoyment value. And when did I say I don't read any manuals? I just can't read ALL of them. Not all of us can. According to you, you shouldn't use linux if it bothers you to read ten novel's worth of flat boring text as well as know everything about how the OS works. Perhaps even most linux people are going to agree with you. I, however, think that someone with an IQ of at least 100 should be able to do it without reading every single manual and howto out there.

From the context of this entire spat, I'd almost think that YOU worked for microsoft. How in the heck could you miscontrue ME as anything but a linux fan? I've done nothing but defend linux against your attacks....

Actually, I'm not attacking linux. I'm attacking distros.

 

[unhappy_mage]

You don't like IIS? Don't use it. Install Apache & co. Don't like WMP? Get media player classic. Don't like MS Office? Get OpenOffice. You aren't improving the program itself in linux either most of the time. I mean, who among us is actually expected to have to have the ability to modify that code to meet all their needs? Do you rewrite bash, or switch to tcsh if you don't like it?

First, those are all free programs. What opportunity would there be to use another web server if the Apache project hadn't ported their program to Windows? Writing your own webserver is a nontrivial task.

Second, if the code doesn't meet my needs, I *will* modify it, because I *can*. With Windows that flexibility isn't there. If MS released their source code, bug fixes would start pouring in from all the jillions of amateurs in basements around the world who run into a little snag and figure out a way to fix it. Linux gives you the ability to fix problems rather than allow Big Brother to fix them when he gets time.

 

[duby229]

In linux, I've found that you kind of HAVE to know the underlying methods of configuring things

That is the whole point of trying a decent distro. I personally would MUCH rather live in a world where everyone understands there computer and how it works.

What I deny is your claim that they are so incredibly simple that anyone unable to figure them out on their first try should give up on linux

I never said anything like that. What I said is that the documentation exists. If you read the documentation, then you can do ANYTHING..... Linux has documentation on every topic imaginable. That does not mean that you have read all of them. It just means that you have to read the ones pertaining to the topic at hand.

 

[XOR != OR]

If every noob did try Debian and/or Gentoo first, alot of these types arguments would be greatly diminished. For those that actually have an open mind, it will prolly be the best thing they did with a computer to date. Also they would have a more profound understanding of the OS.

I don't think you understand how learning works. You need to understand parts of the subject matter for the rest of the subject to make sense. If I have never touched linux before, only windows, trying to install debian/gentoo will amount to me reading the step by step instructions i find without any knowledge of what I am doing. Further, because I didn't understand it, I won't retain it. So the exercise is wasted.

It's all well and good to tell people to start with the difficult distros first, especially if you muddled through them first yourself. However, it is arrogant ( and probably based on pride ) to try to make others see things the same way you do.

In fact, it's pretty much against all things OSS, who's strength is in it's diversity.

However you want to start with linux, as long as you start and are willing to learn.

Like I said. I have never had any compile fail. Ever. If you had taken the time to read the proper documentation you prolly wouldn't have either. The next time you try, configure it right in the first place.

Sorry, I gotta call you on this one: bullshit.

 

[duby229]

I don't think you understand how learning works. You need to understand parts of the subject matter for the rest of the subject to make sense. If I have never touched linux before, only windows, trying to install debian/gentoo will amount to me reading the step by step instructions i find without any knowledge of what I am doing. Further, because I didn't understand it, I won't retain it. So the exercise is wasted.

Opinions vary. I believe the only way to do something is to do it. Period. How can you claim to have done something, if you didn't do it?

I always suggest people to learn a more complex distro first, becouse when they come out of it, they will have a more profound knowledge then what they went in with. Opinions vary and that is fine. If you beleive something differant then me so be it. That is perfectly exceptable.

Sorry, I gotta call you on this one: bullshit.

Are you calling me a liar?

First let me say that It IS true that I never had a compile fail on me. That is every program that was marked as stable.... Never had a stable program fail to compile ever... Hear that? EVER....

I just the other day had a beta version of openmosix fail (which by the way is working now, becouse I went back and read the documentation). But I was expecting it. I once had a beta version of mplayer fail...