Ubuntu Linux

[hobbes_lives]

I'm partial to openSUSE for Linux on the desktop. Check it out if you get a chance. It's a nicely refined package with better hardware support that Ubuntu, at least in my tests. I was testing both out at work, and openSUSE installed flawlessly on a couple of machines that Ubuntu wouldn't, at least not without jumping through allot of hoops.

[ivconic]

I'm partial to openSUSE for Linux on the desktop. Check it out if you get a chance. It's a nicely refined package with better hardware support that Ubuntu, at least in my tests. I was testing both out at work, and openSUSE installed flawlessly on a couple of machines that Ubuntu wouldn't, at least not without jumping through allot of hoops.

Different opinions? Maybe because of different machines? Maybe one is more suitable for one type of platform and another is for another. Anyhow, Linux is good system.

........

J Player yes i know history. Just ..it was long time ago and i do forget details. First code was written in line editor in Gates garage. He suffered from low memory in comp and than for the first time showed how he was shifty (Bill). His first works under those conditions are real proof he was real genius. I dont have problem to say that. He was and still is genius.

[Qiaozhi]

Different opinions? Maybe because of different machines? Maybe one is more suitable for one type of platform and another is for another. Anyhow, Linux is good system.

You are correct. There are more Linux distributions than you can shake a stick at.

But you have to start somewhere. The easiest and less frustrating route is Ubuntu. Once you become hooked, you will of course want try some of the others, such as these -> http://distrowatch.com/stats.php?section=popularity

This is a really interesting list of Linux distros ordered by popularity. As you can see, Ubuntu has been #1 for the last 12 months.

[Max]

Different opinions? Maybe because of different machines? Maybe one is more suitable for one type of platform and another is for another. Anyhow, Linux is good system.

........

J Player yes i know history. Just ..it was long time ago and i do forget details. First code was written in line editor in Gates garage. He suffered from low memory in comp and than for the first time showed how he was shifty (Bill). His first works under those conditions are real proof he was real genius. I dont have problem to say that. He was and still is genius.

Hi,
but sure he's a genius!

He is really! I laugh at people that everytime compare some windowz bug with his talent...

He's genius at marketing, he's genius as entrepreneur, and also was real genius at beginning of personal computer era!

Dang... I don't know why silly guys told of him like an idiot or something... where exist in all the world a number of really IGNORANT AND ARROGANT TYCOONS that deserve nothing apart some dark jail or worse!

He's a good example of how the american dream works... no matter of silly jokes about that.

Same for Apple people, same for some ex-Xerox guys and many others.

The real suckers are those who don't understand we are talking of true genius here... and before these guys were just IBM and people that still made calculations by hands or some grandpa's slide rule.

I suggest those have a look at the movie "Pirates of Silicon Valley" to have a (distorted) idea of what they realized.

Kind regards,
Max

[Fred]

It seem i should have tried it sooner, i liked very much to have control over the PC with Dos, and not the other way around.
Also even with its limited commands you could often find alternative solutions to resolve problems.

[Fred]

Hi,
but sure he's a genius! Max

That´s true,
the problem is that he was better genius at marketing than making good software.
So he could sell very well a not very good OS.And every new version of windows need one year or 2 before it is usable.
But lately he gave a good use to his fortune, so why not to take money from those who had enought of it to those who don´t ...

[Max]

politics!

That´s true,
the problem is that he was better genius at marketing than making good software.
So he could sell very well a not very good OS.And every new version of windows need one year or 2 before it is usable.
But lately he gave a good use to his fortune, so why not to take money from those who had enought of it to those who don´t ...

"so why not to take money from those who had enought of it to those who don´t"

Uhm... you talk like Lenin now!

I don't know... maybe human beings are not made for that kind of stuff...
communism... I mean.

At least... seems there aren't good examples of it in the practice.

Or not ?

Kind regards,
Max

[ivconic]

Academic question!

If he didn't took the money at the first place...than he wouldnt invest in next of his works. DOS 3.30 was ok...but not perfect. DOS 6.22 was perfect. WIN 3.11 was a joke (but at the time nobody laughed), than WIN95(97) was the REAL THING (my best memories upon that period). Than first version of WIN98 was very problematic. Next i used was WIN98SE - excellent. Than i hated WIN2000 and short time after i loved it much! Now i am very dependant on XP SP1. SP2,3..4...are just the same thing with patches. What i really dont like was Longhorn and now damn, stupid Vista. Looking forward to see something more stabille than Vista soon.
But...in this kind of bussiness money is obligatory and never enough. You cant go further in your work without huge sums of money.
Dont blame Mr.Gates. If i was in his skin i would be much worse rellating to money. Also...put yourself in simillar position and after that you can judge. Remember Biblic story about throwing stones..?
God thank for having Bill Gates - that's all i can say.

[J_Player]

Dont blame Mr.Gates. If i was in his skin i would be much worse rellating to money. Also...put yourself in simillar position and after that you can judge. Remember Biblic story about throwing stones..?
God thank for having Bill Gates - that's all i can say.

Sure he was a genius at making software and at marketing. There is no reason to deny that. The problem is the way he designed Windows, with everything incompatible with non-windows software, and including the browser and music player etc., etc. in the OS. This is what made a slow system that caused lots of crashes over the years. How much money was lost by businesses after buying his Windows because it crashed and lost data, or kept factroies from running, or brought down entire networks? How much money have people spent to hire computer geeks to figure out what is wrong with their Windows? As much money as Microsoft earned in profits by selling Windows and its problems?

Knowing how smart Bill Gates is, I would think he could easily have designed an OS that did not cause the problems that Windows caused. He may have had to sacrifice some of his profits by removing a lot of un-needed code that made Windows incompatible with other software, but that would have saved the consumers billions in repair bills and wasted down time.

This is the attraction of Ubuntu. It is easy for the average person to use like Wndows, and does not have the problem of running slow, or crashing, or needing reformat periodically. And it is free!

But Bill Gates still is a genius.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Fred]

"so why not to take money from those who had enought of it to those who don´t"

Uhm... you talk like Lenin now!

I don't know... maybe human beings are not made for that kind of stuff...
communism... I mean.

At least... seems there aren't good examples of it in the practice.

Or not ?

Kind regards,
Max

Hi Max,
No Lenine,and i agree that even if comunism has a good base is it not compatible with human mentality.But Bill Gates was the RICHEST man on Earth! this is an amount beyond imagination (well...) , even by burning bills he couldn´t spend his fortune for his entire life.
But then he gave the most of it to many humanitarian institutions etc...
So much that he is not any more the richest man.
So after all , it may be a good example, and even if i still don´t like the way he make his business (like JP says), knowing that the money came from people that had enought of it (if you can buy Windows you´re one of them) is like a relief .

About OS, i agree with Ivconic: Dos6.22, win95 (great one), (win98 was barely acceptable from sp2 (usb support)), then XP SP2 and +, wich to be fair is quite good.
Vista is awfull and may be the chance fo linux(es) to emerge.

[J_Player]

I agree with all...
I liked DOS 6.22, and I liked UNIX better, but it did not run on PCs. Windows 98SE was my favorite for a long time until I saw XP SP2. I still am running XP SP3 on most of my business computers. Very nice OS for Windows.

But I use Windows because most of my business associates cannot use anything different than Windows, ie: I must have Microsoft Office to read their files and modify them correctly without errors. If I didn't need to use Windows to conduct business, then I would quickly switch to all Linux computers. Linux for a desktop can do everything Windows can, and more. The only problem is it does not work 100% accurately when working with Windows files that you receive in emails. This means you will send back reply files that are not 100% perfect for your clients that use Windows. In some cases, they will not be able to use what you send them. For example, modify a Microsoft Excel file using Star Office, then send it back to a Windows user. See what kind of comments you receive.. . In order to work well in the busiess world, the people you communicate with should also have Linux on their desktops, so there are no errors due to different OS and software.

With this in mind, there are a number of organizations that have installed Linux on all the workstations in their networks. Many schools are using Linux as well. These systems work well as long as the data movements are kept within the network where Linux is installed. In some cases, provisions are made in the software area to allow outside communications without problems. But for most desktop users, the problem exists ... most of your friends and associates use Windows, and you cannot always depend on the data to be readable that you send them from your Linux PC.

The obvious solution is for everyone to switch to Linux. How long do you suppose that will take? Currently, there are maybe 1% of people using Linux desktops on their PC. The numbers are growing, but it will take awhile before Linux is a serious contender to Windows.

See statistics here for market share of different operating systems: http://marketshare.hitslink.com/oper...e.aspx?qprid=8

It is interesting to note that while Linux has 1% of the market, the MAC operating system has 9.8%. And iPhone has 0.6%, or nearly 2/3 of the users that Linux has. In any case, 1% is not much for Linux users. The low usage of Linux desktops is probably caused partly because there are so many distribution choices, and so much user intervention needed to install and use it. With Windows, there is only one choice, and one system to learn. Maybe in the future, Ubuntu will fill the role that Windows has held for an easy system that any average user can install and use. If enough people think so, then maybe we will have a viable system that does not require dual booting for the "other OS" that most others use.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Qiaozhi]

..... But I use Windows because most of my business associates cannot use anything different than Windows, ie: I must have Microsoft Office to read their files and modify them correctly without errors. ..... For example, modify a Microsoft Excel file using Star Office, then send it back to a Windows user. See what kind of comments you receive..

OpenOffice could definitely improve their Excel equivalent (Calc). It can be extremely slow to load an Excel spreadsheet, and it often fails with macros.
The Microsoft Word equivalent (Writer) also has different default settings to Word, which can cause formatting problems. In general, if you create a document in OpenOffice, it is also formatted correctly for Word, but often the other way round there are problems.

However, to be fair, documents are not freely interchangeable between Microsoft Word and Microsoft Works either ... and I'm not talking about the features. Often a simple letter will look different in these two packages.

[Qiaozhi]

If you find that you're using Ubuntu the majority of the time, and only need to use certain Windows occasionally, then try running these programs in WINE. If that fails, then the best solution is to install Sun Virtual Box, which is free-of-charge for personal use and evaluation. Make sure you download the closed-source version from www.virtualbox.org and not the the OSE (open source enterprise) which gets installed if you use Add/Remove or Synaptic Program Manager.

The cool thing about VirtualBox is that it can run in Seamless Mode. This means that the Windows programs are on the Linux desktop, and appear to be part of the same enviroment. The only evidence of Windows is the Start menu tool bar at the bottom of the screen. The Windows background is completely missing.

Of course you are now running two operating systems at the same time, and you need to have enough memory for both. My laptop has 1GB of RAM, with 384 allocated to WinXP / VirtualBox and the rest to Ubuntu. You should also do the usual tweaks to Windoze to stop the disk thrashing and consequent wasting of CPU time. This solution is very useable, and removes the need for, and frustration of, a dual-boot system.

[J_Player]

Hmmmm...
After reading through all these posts, I feel fortunate that Bill Gates never released MS-Metal detector, MS-VLF, or MS-PI.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Qiaozhi]

Hmmmm...
After reading through all these posts, I feel fortunate that Bill Gates never released MS-Metal detector, MS-VLF, or MS-PI.

Best wishes,
J_P

Or MS-LRL !!