When is stable really stable ?

[The PIT]

Sorry dude you're suffering from hyper ego. You know linux I know windoze so you know more about linux than I do fine I'm not going to argue but you can't deny I've come up with one problem that most man in street can't fathom out. Do you know the answer?

[The PIT]

Sorry I missed your reply AlgoRhythm. Star office yep I can remember installing this. Pcplus mag in the uk says you've got install this as a network option if you want to use this as another user other than root. This is crap you've just got to find where it's put the bugger has put the darn thing and I've managed to install this without being root but he bloke in the street has got no chance.

[AlgoRhythm]

The large hard disk problem?...

You need to upgrade your version of LILO. Then add this line to your /etc/lilo.conf:

lba32

Run lilo as root, and it should work fine.


AlgoRhythm

[AlgoRhythm]

But, the dude on the street doesn't usually set up his own machine and install the software.... He usually goes to Dell or Micron or whoever...

I'll concede that it's not the easiest to get up and running if you're not familiar with it. But, when it's already up and running with software installed, it's easy...

The guy on the street wouldn't know how to get all the software working on Windows either (believe me, I work with several that don't know how...)


AlgoRhythm

[The PIT]

The average dude doesn't know how to slap the office cd into the ce drive. Well I got twenty thousand of the buggers and they manage fine. Ojkay they don't always know where there they've but the documents but thats another matter.
Now show me a simple setup from word perfect or star office from internet a download for linux for joe blogs (I can't turn my pc on) it ain't there.

[The PIT]

You've got to upgrade your lilo. Shit your digging your own hole quicker. This is latest version of mandrake 7 so in the laymens term why do we need to upgrade?
I know what you mean but mr joe bloggs in the street. I think you're proving our point.

[The PIT]

Sorry I've got to mention the bios can't see hard disks over 8 gigs but the operating systems win9x winnt win2k can but linux seems to have a prob but my point about office downloads stands

[Liquid Snake]

How did this turn into a Linux vs. Win debate?

I have linux on my other machine running SETI. Also, I use it as a game server for me and my friends from time to time (though being a weak machine, only supports 8 players before lagging to hell). It has been running for nearly 18 days (not long I know, but I only installed Linux on it recently). My main Windows machine can run for about 3 or 4 days before needing a restart. But this is Win9x, not NT/2K, and I'm sure those are as stable as Gurm says. I don't reformat and install very often. I do notice that everything is snappy at first when you reformat and reinstall, but proper maintenance will keep that snappy speed.

Linux and Windows aren't really for the same market. Companies like RedHat are trying to make it easier for newbies, but I think its pointless. Linux is a hobby OS, and its fun to tinker around with and to learn about *nix OSes, but for serious use, I have to use Windows, simply because of the lack of applications.

[Gurm]

Star Office != 100% Compatible

Blender != 3D Studio... not even CLOSE.

Same with Gimp and Photoshop.

I didn't know Adobe had released Frame for Linux, if it has then COOL, that's one more roadblock removed.

For me personally, I might use Linux when the software is there. Not before. But for anyone else, even Julie (who is 100% more computer savvy than your average user), Linux is just not an option due to complexity and lack of compatibility with the rest of the universe.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[fds]

My biggest problem with Linux is the lack of standardization. Having a lot of distributions, window managers, user interface gadgets, etc. Competition and having an alternative is often a very good thing but there's a point when and where it's so excessive it hurts a lot more than helps and is a major annoyance for users.

I don't want to have multiple concurrent standards for installer packages, for desktop environments, on how applications should look, which libraries developers use.

In basic functionality every single application should behave the same way, follow the same interface conventions and have a professional feel to it.

Standards and conventions needn't stay the same forever. Microsoft and Windows have come a long way since the black-and-white toolbar of the original WinWord. What matters is that at any given time the current versions should all have the same look, feel and use.

Open source development and contributions from all over the world definitely makes standardization a lot harder but it still could have been enforced if Linus or a single governor body endorsed by him were interested in more than simply approving kernel revisions.

As it is, the only thing Linux is really good for is server work (but then I would choose FreeBSD over Linux, or Windows 2000 for a company where money is of no concern) and playing the few games which have true Linux versions. Like Quake3. Or IRC, FTP, SSH clients where Linux is as good or even better than Windows. What the heck, you can even use your TV tuner card pretty well. Archivers like ZIP and RAR work nicely.

All this is very impressive and absolutely awesome for something which is given away for free.

Yet it is far from enough. For the Internet enthusiast you need a browser and currently there is only one which still deserves to be called that, Microsoft Internet Explorer. Lynx is cute, fast, responsive and often useful but you can only do that much with a text-based browser. That disaster called Netscape is as good as none. Ok, it's actually worse.

For the gamer, it's obvious Linux is of no competition to Windows 9X/Me.

Office work, developers: again, just not good enough.

Linux is a fun place to tinker around, experiment with stuff or just waste some time in it for a change but so is BeOS, which is quite the opposite of Linux as it is chock full of brilliant design ideas, elegant interfaces but even less useful.

Both are worth your time and a few gigabytes. (And the little money it takes to pick up a distribution to support its development and get a good book at the same time, or to get BeOS 5 Prof., where the best addition is again Scot Hacker's excellent BeOS Bible.)

But then we have Windows 2000. It's nearly everything one could ask for. (As such, the greedy bastards at Microsoft do ask quite a nice price for it. ) There's hardly anything you can't do in Win2k and do it very well.

[spoogenet]

I consider myself a more-proficient-than-average person when it comes to computers. Here are some of the things that I've noticed in my toying with Linux and Windows, et. al.

1. I've got to hand it to MS, they really do have the best support in the industry. Let's not get into an argument/discussion as to why, fact is, they just have the best support. Thier list of hardware is the longest, and their list of software is the longest.

Sometimes it really does amaze me that I can plop something into my box and it will work more times than not. I have had a variety of hardware issues with RedHat (various versions/various hardware/various times) when it all worked perfectly with Windows.

2. Windows configuration is more difficult. Linux has, generally, come a long way. Only playing around with RedHat, then I will limit myself to a discussion of RedHat. But I have had a bunch of problems with getting network/video/sound to work in RedHat. While my sound is TB Montego, RedHat doesn't supply drivers for it. But for my G400 and previous Number Nine, they had the drivers and I still had some issues. Equally my 3Com network card had support with RedHat, but magically I have many issues getting it to work every time I set up the box. (NOTE: I don't have RedHat running currently).

3. I can change my hardware in Windows and not re-compile the kernel. Can't say I've had the same experience with RedHat.

4. BeOs. Love it. But it's got many of the same issues that Linux has, mainly support for varying hardware configs.

5. In general, I find it very easy to make changes to my hardware (from a get-it-running standpoint), while I have had much trouble trying to get things working in RedHat. For instance, I have had many problems with Enlightenment and themes, and GNOME and themes, and trying to update either of them. The POS update program wouldn't even work from behind the firewall, even though it claims to support that.

One way or the other, I still find MS and Windows to have the best support and the generally best-working configs around. While they may crash a lot for some people, I tend to notice that it works more reliably, in general, than it would if they were running something else.

Linux and BeOs and others have a ways to go, but they will continue to develop. I look forward to their development and further support in the industry. But they're still not ready for the average user quite yet.

b