• Welcome to Tux Reports: Where Penguins Fly. We hope you find the topics varied, interesting, and worthy of your time. Please become a member and join in the discussions.

Re: Just Upgraded from Ubuntu 9.04 to 9.10...Won't even boot....

D

Dave

Flightless Bird
"Moshe Goldfarb" <goldee.loxnbagels@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:benz0owx3yy5$.1hnrfmnugerxp.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 06:15:57 +0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:37:59 -0500, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>
>>> So now what?
>>> Boots to a CLI.
>>> The person who owns this system is not happy. She clicked update and
>>> that was it.
>>> Gone good bye.
>>>
>>> Yea Linux is great.
>>> Sure it is.
>>> Keep telling yourselves that.

>>
>> And KSODs and BSODs never happen with Windows, either. Get a life,
>> flatline.

>
> Upgraded 12 systems to Windows 7 and not a single problem.
> Everything just works.
> I'm not sure what you and your friends are doing wrong, but it
> works fine for me.
>
> I have a life BTW.
> The reason I have a life is because I don't run Ubuntu which
> consumes time like a cheap whore consumes sperm.
>
> You Linux freaks spend all your time making Linux work.
> It's a losing battle BTW.
>
> Almost 20 years and Linux still is less than 1 percent of the
> desktop market.
> That's a failure in most people's eyes.
>
> It's pretty pathetic when something that is free is ignored.
>
>
> --
>
> 1/24/2010 1:23:43 AM


Starting appx 20 years ago I tried Linux in quite a few different flavors,
including Ubuntu twice. Once when it first came out and then again appx 9
months ago when a huge, new and improved version was released. I bought
books, I read, I experimented, I tried dual-boot systems, I bought more
books and read some more. My experience follows.
Open source so all software is FREE. Majority of it is by amateurs who have
a lot of talent but final result is buggy.
No coordination between flavors, disagreements on who's the best and focus
on causing Microsoft to fail, rather than to make a good product, so one
platform is the same as others. Don't believe me, go to a Linux meet-up and
at almost every one, the conversation will eventually be about which flavor
of Linux is best and whether Gnome is better than KDE.
Lack of support for much of hardware, even some of the more popular
products. The more features your add-on hardware has, the less likely Linux
will recognize it. CIP, a HP printer that I could not even get to run in
post-script mode and a U.S. Robotics modem that would not work in any
fashion. No forum, no techie and no work got them to coordinate with each
other.
When you need tech support, the only place to get help is in forums. If it's
not an easy question to answer, the usual, pat answer is, "Read..." (fill in
the blank). More times than not, you'll get flamed just for asking. (I
suspect that when there's no-one to flame in a Linux forum they look for a
MS forum to flame. I'm just sayin'...) If you persist with your quest for
help, you will immediately be made aware of yours and your ancestor's
character, mental and physical shortcomings. And somewhere in the flames,
someone will tell you to read some more. (Anyone want to buy some Linux
books?)
So, back to Windows, warts and all, and never looked back (except for 9
months ago when I tried the latest, greatest Ubuntu on a spare machine and
found not much had changed, just the visuals). At least when I have a
problem in Windows I can get an intelligent effort to help and MS is
constantly looking to fix problems in their products. Every version I've use
of MS has been better than the previous version and not just eye candy but
in the core of it. Yes, they have problems, but if ANY flavor of Linux was
as popular (as OP stated, they haven't even come close to in 20 years even
though it's FREE), all the village idiot-savants with talent would be
hacking at them instead of MS. Don't say it can't be done, it has and will
continue to be done to Linux, just not as much fun when you can only make a
very small segment of the market mad so it's not as prevalent.
Sorry for my rant, but I get tired of reading all the idiotic postings from
Linux users who can't make a US Robotics modem work and then want to flame
Windows. Yeah, I know I'm stupid, I have to have a platform that will
AUTOMATICALLY support the most well-known modem in the world. (And I'm tired
of reading =D )
 
C

C

Flightless Bird
Dave wrote:

> Sorry for my rant, but I get tired of reading all the idiotic postings
> from Linux users who can't make a US Robotics modem work and then want
> to flame Windows. Yeah, I know I'm stupid, I have to have a platform
> that will AUTOMATICALLY support the most well-known modem in the world.
> (And I'm tired of reading =D )


What do you need the US Robotics modem for?

--
C
 
D

Dave

Flightless Bird
"C" <nospamming@please.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:hji25j$903$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> Dave wrote:
>
>> Sorry for my rant, but I get tired of reading all the idiotic postings
>> from Linux users who can't make a US Robotics modem work and then want to
>> flame Windows. Yeah, I know I'm stupid, I have to have a platform that
>> will AUTOMATICALLY support the most well-known modem in the world. (And
>> I'm tired of reading =D )

>
> What do you need the US Robotics modem for?
>
> --
> C


I don't now, it was in a machine of a customer several years ago before
cable.
 
C

C

Flightless Bird
Dave wrote:
>
>
> "C" <nospamming@please.com.invalid> wrote in message
> news:hji25j$903$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>> Dave wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry for my rant, but I get tired of reading all the idiotic
>>> postings from Linux users who can't make a US Robotics modem work and
>>> then want to flame Windows. Yeah, I know I'm stupid, I have to have a
>>> platform that will AUTOMATICALLY support the most well-known modem in
>>> the world. (And I'm tired of reading =D )

>>
>> What do you need the US Robotics modem for?
>>
>> --
>> C

>
> I don't now, it was in a machine of a customer several years ago before
> cable.


I think there's some licensing problems or some such over win
fax/data/voice modems. I never got one to work either.

--
C
 
J

J G Miller

Flightless Bird
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 11:59:48 -0600, Dave wrote:

> I get tired of reading all the idiotic postings from Linux users who
> can't make a US Robotics modem work and then want to flame Windows.
> Yeah, I know I'm stupid, I have to have a platform that will
> AUTOMATICALLY support the most well-known modem in the world.


The most well known modem is the US Robotics Courier modem

<http://shopping.yahoo.COM/p:3Com U.S. Robotics Courier V.Everything
Modem:1990365496>

and it has worked flawlessly with GNU/Linux distributions since about
1998.
 
M

Moshe Goldfarb

Flightless Bird
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:31:37 +0100, J G Miller wrote:

> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 11:59:48 -0600, Dave wrote:
>
>> I get tired of reading all the idiotic postings from Linux users who
>> can't make a US Robotics modem work and then want to flame Windows.
>> Yeah, I know I'm stupid, I have to have a platform that will
>> AUTOMATICALLY support the most well-known modem in the world.

>
> The most well known modem is the US Robotics Courier modem
>
> <http://shopping.yahoo.COM/p:3Com U.S. Robotics Courier V.Everything
> Modem:1990365496>
>
> and it has worked flawlessly with GNU/Linux distributions since about
> 1998.


Yes.
At one point though they did make a WinModem version which didn't
intially work with Linux.

It was called a Surfer, Sportster or something or other and was
internal.

The Courier modems both internal and external have always worked
with Linux AFAIK.

--

1/24/2010 1:53:18 PM
 
B

Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas don't sleep fur

Flightless Bird
RonB wrote:
>
> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>
> > On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:39:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
> >>
> >>> My own conclusion on this matter is that what really "slows down
> >>> desktop adoption of Linux" is the fact that desktop Linux is full of
> >>> bugs. The bugs turn people away because they cannot fix bugs. If it
> >>> was not full of bugs, we would see use of Linux at least 10%.
> >>>
> >>> As of now, desktop Linux is great, until you encounter some bug with
> >>> zero path to resolution.
> >>
> >> Really? I've been using various distributions of Linux exclusively for
> >> two years and haven't run into any bugs with "zero path to resolution"
> >> -- so, perhaps, you give a couple examples?
> >>
> >>

> > Sure. I will give you one example instead of requested two. It is
> > getting late.
> >
> > Ubuntu Karmic.
> >
> > Firefox browser runs with youtube video open.
> >
> > User leaves and comes back after 1 day.
> >
> > Sound from firefox no longer works.
> >
> > User closes firefox.
> >
> > User starts another firefox.
> >
> > New firefox says "another instance of firefox is running".
> >
> > No way to start a browser now.

>
> Oh really. And this "zero path to resolution" user has never heard of the
> kill command?
>

Another option would be to reboot the machine, a skill likely
finely honed by years of using it with Windows.

--
"Gonna take a sedimental journey", what Old Man River actually
said.
 
J

JEDIDIAH

Flightless Bird
On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus27518 <ignoramus27518@NOSPAM.27518.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:39:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>
>>> My own conclusion on this matter is that what really "slows down desktop
>>> adoption of Linux" is the fact that desktop Linux is full of bugs. The
>>> bugs turn people away because they cannot fix bugs. If it was not full
>>> of bugs, we would see use of Linux at least 10%.
>>>
>>> As of now, desktop Linux is great, until you encounter some bug with
>>> zero path to resolution.

>>
>> Really? I've been using various distributions of Linux exclusively for
>> two years and haven't run into any bugs with "zero path to resolution" --
>> so, perhaps, you give a couple examples?
>>

>
> Sure. I will give you one example instead of requested two. It is
> getting late.
>
> Ubuntu Karmic.
>
> Firefox browser runs with youtube video open.
>
> User leaves and comes back after 1 day.
>
> Sound from firefox no longer works.
>
> User closes firefox.
>
> User starts another firefox.
>
> New firefox says "another instance of firefox is running".
>
> No way to start a browser now.


...now you are just a confirmed troll.

Now this sort of thing happens on occasion in Windows. The Windows way
of dealing with this would be to use the task manager to kill any errant
firefox processes that might be running.

Do the same thing under Ubuntu.

The relevant utility is called "system monitor".

--
On the subject of kilobyte being "redefined" to mean 1000 bytes...

When I was a wee lad, I was taught that SI units were |||
meant to be computationally convenient rather than just / | \
arbitrarily assigned.
 
J

JEDIDIAH

Flightless Bird
On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus12856 <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>
>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:39:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:

[deletia]
>>> The "problem" is that pulseaudio support on ubuntu is full of bugs,
>>> hence disappearance of sound, and another problem is that in this
>>> situation, old firefox does not actually die, though the window goes
>>> away.

>>
>> Applications also do this sort of thing in Windows. The advantage of
>> Linux is that you have a kill command. (Look it up.)

>
> I am not sure whny you insist on comparing to Windows, but, if so,
> Windows does have a kill command, it is called task manager.


...so does Ubuntu.

>
>>> Figuring all of that out requires some googling skills, knowledge of
>>> "ps", "grep" and other general Unix troubleshooting skills. If the user
>>> could do it, open terminal, and type something like "killall firefox",
>>> he or she would be able to continue, but a less skillful person would
>>> just give up.

>>
>> Oh, so you know about the resolution -- and yet you claim that there is
>> "zero chance of resolution." Not very convincing, WinTroll.

>
> I have used Linux since 1995. So I know a few things.


You are certainly good at hiding this fact.

[deletia]

Perhaps you used Linux once in 1995. It would certainly explain your
rather dated view on things.

--
On the subject of kilobyte being "redefined" to mean 1000 bytes...

When I was a wee lad, I was taught that SI units were |||
meant to be computationally convenient rather than just / | \
arbitrarily assigned.
 
H

Hadron

Flightless Bird
JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:

> On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus27518 <ignoramus27518@NOSPAM.27518.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:39:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>
>>>> My own conclusion on this matter is that what really "slows down desktop
>>>> adoption of Linux" is the fact that desktop Linux is full of bugs. The
>>>> bugs turn people away because they cannot fix bugs. If it was not full
>>>> of bugs, we would see use of Linux at least 10%.
>>>>
>>>> As of now, desktop Linux is great, until you encounter some bug with
>>>> zero path to resolution.
>>>
>>> Really? I've been using various distributions of Linux exclusively for
>>> two years and haven't run into any bugs with "zero path to resolution" --
>>> so, perhaps, you give a couple examples?
>>>

>>
>> Sure. I will give you one example instead of requested two. It is
>> getting late.
>>
>> Ubuntu Karmic.
>>
>> Firefox browser runs with youtube video open.
>>
>> User leaves and comes back after 1 day.
>>
>> Sound from firefox no longer works.
>>
>> User closes firefox.
>>
>> User starts another firefox.
>>
>> New firefox says "another instance of firefox is running".
>>
>> No way to start a browser now.

>
> ...now you are just a confirmed troll.
>
> Now this sort of thing happens on occasion in Windows. The Windows way
> of dealing with this would be to use the task manager to kill any errant
> firefox processes that might be running.
>
> Do the same thing under Ubuntu.
>
> The relevant utility is called "system monitor".


Now you're really showing your ignorance. This happens a LOT with
firefox on Linux. Well, Iceweasel on Debian. There are also issues when
you use twinview and profiles - firefox gets confused as to what it
should be doing.
 
A

Andrew

Flightless Bird
"Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hji9fm$ee0$1@hadron.eternal-september.org...
> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>
>> On 2010-01-24, Ignoramus27518 <ignoramus27518@NOSPAM.27518.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:39:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My own conclusion on this matter is that what really "slows down
>>>>> desktop
>>>>> adoption of Linux" is the fact that desktop Linux is full of bugs. The
>>>>> bugs turn people away because they cannot fix bugs. If it was not full
>>>>> of bugs, we would see use of Linux at least 10%.
>>>>>
>>>>> As of now, desktop Linux is great, until you encounter some bug with
>>>>> zero path to resolution.
>>>>
>>>> Really? I've been using various distributions of Linux exclusively for
>>>> two years and haven't run into any bugs with "zero path to
>>>> resolution" --
>>>> so, perhaps, you give a couple examples?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sure. I will give you one example instead of requested two. It is
>>> getting late.
>>>
>>> Ubuntu Karmic.
>>>
>>> Firefox browser runs with youtube video open.
>>>
>>> User leaves and comes back after 1 day.
>>>
>>> Sound from firefox no longer works.
>>>
>>> User closes firefox.
>>>
>>> User starts another firefox.
>>>
>>> New firefox says "another instance of firefox is running".
>>>
>>> No way to start a browser now.

>>
>> ...now you are just a confirmed troll.
>>
>> Now this sort of thing happens on occasion in Windows. The Windows
>> way
>> of dealing with this would be to use the task manager to kill any errant
>> firefox processes that might be running.
>>
>> Do the same thing under Ubuntu.
>>
>> The relevant utility is called "system monitor".

>
> Now you're really showing your ignorance. This happens a LOT with
> firefox on Linux. Well, Iceweasel on Debian. There are also issues when
> you use twinview and profiles - firefox gets confused as to what it
> should be doing.
>


That you Tim?
If so how's it going?

-Andrew
 
F

fucku@googlemail.com

Flightless Bird
You are not stupid. Otherwise you wouldn't know that you were stupid.
+*+=+, +*-=-, -*+=-, -*-=+. Try brainfuck as a programming language :D

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:05:40 +0100, C <nospamming@please.com.invalid>
wrote:

>Dave wrote:
>
>> Sorry for my rant, but I get tired of reading all the idiotic postings
>> from Linux users who can't make a US Robotics modem work and then want
>> to flame Windows. Yeah, I know I'm stupid, I have to have a platform
>> that will AUTOMATICALLY support the most well-known modem in the world.
>> (And I'm tired of reading =D )

>
>What do you need the US Robotics modem for?
>
>--
>C



HELP! I CAN'T STOP TYPING IN CAPITAL LETTERS UNDER WINDOWS!
 
R

RonB

Flightless Bird
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 12:55:19 +0000, Bill Bonde {Colourless green ideas
don't sleep furiously) wrote:

> RonB wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:56:19 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>>
>> > On 2010-01-24, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:39:51 -0600, Ignoramus27518 wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> My own conclusion on this matter is that what really "slows down
>> >>> desktop adoption of Linux" is the fact that desktop Linux is full
>> >>> of bugs. The bugs turn people away because they cannot fix bugs. If
>> >>> it was not full of bugs, we would see use of Linux at least 10%.
>> >>>
>> >>> As of now, desktop Linux is great, until you encounter some bug
>> >>> with zero path to resolution.
>> >>
>> >> Really? I've been using various distributions of Linux exclusively
>> >> for two years and haven't run into any bugs with "zero path to
>> >> resolution" -- so, perhaps, you give a couple examples?
>> >>
>> >>
>> > Sure. I will give you one example instead of requested two. It is
>> > getting late.
>> >
>> > Ubuntu Karmic.
>> >
>> > Firefox browser runs with youtube video open.
>> >
>> > User leaves and comes back after 1 day.
>> >
>> > Sound from firefox no longer works.
>> >
>> > User closes firefox.
>> >
>> > User starts another firefox.
>> >
>> > New firefox says "another instance of firefox is running".
>> >
>> > No way to start a browser now.

>>
>> Oh really. And this "zero path to resolution" user has never heard of
>> the kill command?
>>

> Another option would be to reboot the machine, a skill likely finely
> honed by years of using it with Windows.


You might say it's "intuitive."

--
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581
CentOS 5.4 or Vector Linux Deluxe 6.0
 
J

JEDIDIAH

Flightless Bird
On 2010-01-24, C <nospamming@please.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> Dave wrote:
>
>> Sorry for my rant, but I get tired of reading all the idiotic postings
>> from Linux users who can't make a US Robotics modem work and then want


What's to make work? You send AT commands to it.

I haven't used a "modem" in at least 10 years. A little thing called
broadband came along and made those old things pretty much entirely obsolete.

>> to flame Windows. Yeah, I know I'm stupid, I have to have a platform
>> that will AUTOMATICALLY support the most well-known modem in the world.
>> (And I'm tired of reading =D )

>
> What do you need the US Robotics modem for?
>


Yeah... really.

Talk about a blast from the past...

--
On the subject of kilobyte being "redefined" to mean 1000 bytes...

When I was a wee lad, I was taught that SI units were |||
meant to be computationally convenient rather than just / | \
arbitrarily assigned.
 
J

JEDIDIAH

Flightless Bird
On 2010-01-24, Dave "Crash" Dummy <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> Dabbler wrote:
>> "Ignoramus27518" <ignoramus27518@NOSPAM.27518.invalid> wrote in
>> message news:RtSdnZ_XWMiqdsbWnZ2dnUVZ_hydnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>
>>> Assuming your example from yur original post is true:
>>>
>>> What you had was a person interested in Linux, who used it and
>>> became discouraged due to Linux bugs.
>>>
>>> This was not a person who was not interested. It was a person who
>>> was interested and then turned away because of bugs.
>>>
>>> Now, as a side note, Linux is a huge success in server space. Why?
>>> Because the server parts of Linux are robust, well tested, perform
>>> well, and mostly are free of bugs.
>>>
>>> And yet, it is not as successful in desktop space.
>>>
>>> Why?
>>>
>>> My own conclusion on this matter is that what really "slows down
>>> desktop adoption of Linux" is the fact that desktop Linux is full
>>> of bugs. The bugs turn people away because they cannot fix bugs. If
>>> it was not full of bugs, we would see use of Linux at least 10%.
>>>
>>> As of now, desktop Linux is great, until you encounter some bug
>>> with zero path to resolution.

>>
>> I think the main reason for Linux's success in the server arena is
>> that servers are usually tended to by dedicated system admins who are
>> tech gurus compared to the average desktop users. I've used Linux
>> from about version 0.93 and eventually I gave it up because it just
>> took too much of my time to manage compared to Windows. As you get
>> older, time becomes too precious to waste.
>>

> I think the reason for Linux's success in the server arena is that MS
> servers are so expensive.


....not quite.

In all likelihood they will be THE SAME EXACT SERVER.

Sure, a "Linux server" is going to be cheaper than a Sun box or AIX box.
However, a "Linux server" is just going to be an overgrown PC that can
just as easily run Windows if you were so inclined. So the hardware cost
is going to be the same.

Now admittedly this does not account for relative efficiency at the OS level.

If you account for how effective the OS and software are, then you aren't even
necessarily going to save money running Windows servers instead of Solaris ones.

--
On the subject of kilobyte being "redefined" to mean 1000 bytes...

When I was a wee lad, I was taught that SI units were |||
meant to be computationally convenient rather than just / | \
arbitrarily assigned.
 
J

JEDIDIAH

Flightless Bird
On 2010-01-24, Dave <davidj92@wowway.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> "Moshe Goldfarb" <goldee.loxnbagels@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:benz0owx3yy5$.1hnrfmnugerxp.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 06:15:57 +0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 00:37:59 -0500, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>
>>>> So now what?
>>>> Boots to a CLI.
>>>> The person who owns this system is not happy. She clicked update and
>>>> that was it.
>>>> Gone good bye.
>>>>
>>>> Yea Linux is great.
>>>> Sure it is.
>>>> Keep telling yourselves that.
>>>
>>> And KSODs and BSODs never happen with Windows, either. Get a life,
>>> flatline.

>>
>> Upgraded 12 systems to Windows 7 and not a single problem.
>> Everything just works.
>> I'm not sure what you and your friends are doing wrong, but it
>> works fine for me.
>>
>> I have a life BTW.
>> The reason I have a life is because I don't run Ubuntu which
>> consumes time like a cheap whore consumes sperm.
>>
>> You Linux freaks spend all your time making Linux work.
>> It's a losing battle BTW.
>>
>> Almost 20 years and Linux still is less than 1 percent of the
>> desktop market.
>> That's a failure in most people's eyes.
>>
>> It's pretty pathetic when something that is free is ignored.
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> 1/24/2010 1:23:43 AM

>
> Starting appx 20 years ago I tried Linux in quite a few different flavors,


...starting 20 years ago eh?

You are a very bad liar.

[deletia]

--
On the subject of kilobyte being "redefined" to mean 1000 bytes...

When I was a wee lad, I was taught that SI units were |||
meant to be computationally convenient rather than just / | \
arbitrarily assigned.
 
R

RonB

Flightless Bird
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 07:21:21 -0500, Dave \"Crash\" Dummy wrote:

> I think the reason for Linux's success in the server arena is that MS
> servers are so expensive.


Especially considering that Linux does the job better.

--
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581
CentOS 5.4 or Vector Linux Deluxe 6.0
 
H

Hadron

Flightless Bird
RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 07:21:21 -0500, Dave \"Crash\" Dummy wrote:
>
>> I think the reason for Linux's success in the server arena is that MS
>> servers are so expensive.

>
> Especially considering that Linux does the job better.


What job WronG?

You don't know anything whatsoever about what you're referring to.

How good is it's exchange or iis for example? Like it not, Exchange is
the leading mail/collaboration SW for small to big businesses.

What on earth makes you feel you're qualified to comment on businesses
needs when we have already established that your needs are the odd game
of tetris and gedit?
 
I

Ignoramus12856

Flightless Bird
On 2010-01-24, Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ignoramus12856 <ignoramus12856@NOSPAM.12856.invalid> writes:
>>> I think the main reason for Linux's success in the server arena is that
>>> servers are usually tended to by dedicated system admins who are tech
>>> gurus compared to the average desktop users. I've used Linux from about
>>> version 0.93 and eventually I gave it up because it just took too much
>>> of my time to manage compared to Windows. As you get older, time becomes
>>> too precious to waste.

>> For me, Linux takes less time to manage than Windows. I manage Linux
>> at home and at work with scripts instead of GUI, and it takes no

>
> What scripts do you use to manage your Home linux system? And why
> are they are any quicker than adminning with a GUI? Keeping in mind that
> most is set up once and then run automagically.


I want to preface this by saying that I will only discuss my home
setup, not the machines I admin at work. I have about 9 machines that
I own. They have different "roles", which define somewhat what they
do. For example, they can have a webserver role, or entertainment
role, wifi role (for laptops), etc. They can have any combination of
roles. For example, my personal laptop has entertainment role as well
as webserver role. So the laptop is a webserver. Every role defines
set of packages to install and customizations to apply. So my scripts
run on every machine, determine what role it is, and then perform
suitable actions. The actions, for example, include setting up user
accounts for family members, their faces, setting up websites for
apache2, etc.

So if I set up a new machine, all I need to do is define its roles,
and run my scripts, and it will be fully set up. Reinstall is even
easier, since roles are already defined.

If I learned about some great package, I add it to package list of a
particular role, and it gets installed on the appropriate machines.

It is really great and tremendously cuts down on the amount of time I
spend doing system administration.

> You do know there are solutions for central adminning of windows
> workstations too don't you?


I heard about it, but everything that I heard was not nearly as easy
to set up and it was not as flexible. I am not particularly interested
in Windows, so I may have missed something.


>
>> time. For example, if I find a package that I like and want to add it,
>> I append it to a certain list of packages and it is installed at night
>> automatically on all boxes that I manage that have a proper
>> "role". Works out great, especially if a computer needs a complete
>> reinstall, for example.

>
> This is a great example - but about the only one IMO that is so much
> easier than comparative Windows solutions. If the SW you want is apt
> supported for example it's a breeze. You might also consider centralised
> apt caches so its downloaded only once by your proxy repository.


Some (like XV) are not apt supported. So I have a shell function to
install XV. It downloads the tarball and does make and make install --
all without me doing anything. This is a HUGE time saver for me, and I
also know that when I set up a new machine, I have not forgotten to do
something.

Just because something is not apt supported, does not make it hard to
install. Just a little more cumbersome. The typical install of some
Linux software, is download, configure, make and make install, and can
be automated.

When I install something the first time, I save the commands that I
run, then I generalize them a bit and save them as a shell function.
Then it is ready to run on all machines.

This automation is where Debian/Ubuntu really shines. They spent a lot
of efforts on making their OS more customizable.

>>
>> That automation is great in Linux and much more difficult than in
>> Windows.
>>
>> I also find that Gnome is a great UI that works well in most cases.

>
> Peter Koehlmann says its garbage and only for Window Fanboyz and
> idiots. Linus Torwalds uses it.


I like it, though I use fvwm at work.

>> But the bugs are maddening and they negate the whole experience for
>> users who are not experienced troubleshooters.
>>

>
> Indeed.


What I was getting at, is that if the "Linux desktop community" got
their act together, and fixed those bugs, then Linux would finally
become a very serious desktop OS player, like it is in the server
space and gadget space.

I think that the Microsoft advantages that stem from it being big, and
having marketing money, are real, but seriously overstated.

If Linux could be a reliably functioning desktop OS, like Ubuntu would
be without bugs, very many people and businesses would switch to
it. Maybe not everyone, but a lot more than now. As of now, people try
Linux, get hit with some bug that they cannot fix, and give up.

i
 
R

RonB

Flightless Bird
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 11:59:48 -0600, Dave wrote:

> When you need tech support, the only place to get help is in forums.


So buy a version that comes with technical support -- like Red Hat or
SuSE. Personally I've found better answers more quickly on the Linux
forums than with Microsoft "support." "KSOD on Vista? Reinstall." That
about sums up my support experience with Microsoft. Try to reboot, if that
doesn't work, reinstall."

--
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581
CentOS 5.4 or Vector Linux Deluxe 6.0
 
Top