A frightening trend - go get a cofee, it's a long one :)

A frightening trend - go get a cofee, it's a long one :)

Post by Sylvain Demer » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



I've started using Linux about a year ago. I'm not a power user. I had some
dos experience, many years with Windows, which means no computer experience,
since the only thing I've ever been able to do to fix Windows was to turn my
computer off and back on.

I'm a home-base worker. I have a small translation company. So I'm using my
computer a lot. I'm saying that because a lot of people using their computer
as an entertaining device (say, a couple of hours max per day) have a hard
time understanding why some of us are that pissed at Windows. When you use
MS Office with Windows 10 hours a day, you can't possibly be very happy with
it. And I don't mean 9 hours of e-mail and a couple of letters. I mean hours
and hours of writing, editing and dealing with Word, Excel and PowerPoint.
My system started to lock up the first day I upgraded from Win 3.1 to Win95.
And that's around that time I started to buy hardware. A lot of hardware.
Now with a brand new Pentium III 500 Mhz with win98se, I thought things
would change. Not. And Office 2000 (which came with the computer, I wouldn't
have bought it - well I must have paid for it in some ways) is the buggiest
version of Office I've ever used. And I still experiment lock-ups at least 3
times a week, everytime loosing some data and wasting my time and money. And
I'm not even talking about the problems I had with NT when I was working in
a company.

Sorry for the long into, but I wanted to give a little background on why I
decided to search for alternatives to Windows.

So I started with RedHat 5.2. That was hard for a complete newbie. But good
to learn. I must admit I put all Linux aside for a couple of months, cause I
didn't have the knowledge and the time to learn. But then Windows problems
made me reconsider Linux more seriously. Then here's the path I folowed in
short :

OpenLinux 2.2 : Great! A graphical install. Not so great. I 've never been
able to use it. Lizard sucked

RedHat 6.0 - Texte install, a breeze.

Mandrake 6.1 - Text install. Even better. Now I really started to think
Linux could compete on WIndows ground.

And then some experimentation :

Suse 6.3 - Problems with the graphical install.
OpenLinux 2.3 - Problems with the graphical install.
Debian - Never been able to do anything with this one. Way too much for me.
Mandrake 7.0 - Problem with the graphical install. Some device refuse to
work.
RedHat 6.1 - Problems with the graphical install. Extremely disappointing,
many bugs. What the hell's happening?
Slackware 7.0 - A revelation. Despite the fact this distribution is supposed
to be for more experienced users, I found it easier to undestand and
configure than the others, even on the console. My problem with slack is the
lack of support. Man pages are like cerbo-croatian to me. And how-to's are
somtimes pretty technical.

So... do you see where I'm going ? If Linux wants to have its share of the
market, distributions have to make it easier to install and use. Nobody
argue with that. But what scares me to death is that the distributions that
had the best potential for the end-user market are now blindly walking in
the steps of the Redmond monster : they issue new versions at neck-breaking
speed, to the expense of stability and reliability. If there was as many
bugs in the first Linux version I tried than there is in Mandrake 7.0,
RedHat 6.1 and Suse 6.3, I would have laugh at Linux's allegation of
stability. Somebody will have to wake up before it's too late. RedHat's
contribution to Linux visibility is priceless. But if they want to go too
fast, they may turn out to be the company responsible for the raise AND fall
of Linux.

Thanks, if you're still there :)

Sylvain

 
 
 

A frightening trend - go get a cofee, it's a long one :)

Post by Tim Kelle » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> And then some experimentation :

> Suse 6.3 - Problems with the graphical install.
> Mandrake 7.0 - Problem with the graphical install.
> RedHat 6.1 - Problems with the graphical install.
> OpenLinux 2.3 - Problems with the graphical install.

then try the text install!  It isn't any harder at all, the
graphical one is really just there for polish so that the ones
that absolutely insist on it have it.  If you are having problems
with the graphical one, don't use it.  This was my biggest gripe
with corel linux, which would not work for some reason with my
video card, and had no text-based install.

does windows have a text install to fall back on?

Quote:> Debian - Never been able to do anything with this one. Way too much for me.

well, ok

Quote:> RedHat 6.1 - Problems with the graphical install. Extremely disappointing,
> many bugs. What the hell's happening?

Red Hat's releases have always been horrible for me, with the
exception of 5.2, which was the best thing they produced so far
IMO ... usually they get it right by the third point release.

Quote:> Slackware 7.0 - A revelation. Despite the fact this distribution is supposed
> to be for more experienced users, I found it easier to undestand and
> configure than the others, even on the console.

slackware is very simple.  It probably is the easiest in many
ways.
debian is more complicated, but, like slackware, it is very
conservative.  The big corporate distros are very rash with their
releases and release dates.  Debian is ideal in an environment
where you aren't forced to administrate the machine.

Quote:> So... do you see where I'm going ? If Linux wants to have its share of the
> market, distributions have to make it easier to install and use. Nobody
> argue with that. But what scares me to death is that the distributions that
> had the best potential for the end-user market are now blindly walking in
> the steps of the Redmond monster : they issue new versions at neck-breaking
> speed, to the expense of stability and reliability. If there was as many
> bugs in the first Linux version I tried than there is in Mandrake 7.0,
> RedHat 6.1 and Suse 6.3, I would have laugh at Linux's allegation of
> stability. Somebody will have to wake up before it's too late. RedHat's
> contribution to Linux visibility is priceless. But if they want to go too
> fast, they may turn out to be the company responsible for the raise AND fall
> of Linux.

That is why i use debian.  Corporations are all the same, they
don't have anything but profits in mind. So, yeah, I think it is
likely that RH will at some point begin to behave like MS (if not
already).

--
Tim Kelley


 
 
 

A frightening trend - go get a cofee, it's a long one :)

Post by Daniel O'Nola » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> I've started using Linux about a year ago. I'm not a power user. I had some
> dos experience, many years with Windows, which means no computer experience,
> since the only thing I've ever been able to do to fix Windows was to turn my
> computer off and back on.

> I'm a home-base worker. I have a small translation company. So I'm using my
> computer a lot. I'm saying that because a lot of people using their computer
> as an entertaining device (say, a couple of hours max per day) have a hard
> time understanding why some of us are that pissed at Windows. When you use
> MS Office with Windows 10 hours a day, you can't possibly be very happy with
> it. And I don't mean 9 hours of e-mail and a couple of letters. I mean hours
> and hours of writing, editing and dealing with Word, Excel and PowerPoint.
> My system started to lock up the first day I upgraded from Win 3.1 to Win95.
> And that's around that time I started to buy hardware. A lot of hardware.
> Now with a brand new Pentium III 500 Mhz with win98se, I thought things
> would change. Not. And Office 2000 (which came with the computer, I wouldn't
> have bought it - well I must have paid for it in some ways) is the buggiest
> version of Office I've ever used. And I still experiment lock-ups at least 3
> times a week, everytime loosing some data and wasting my time and money. And
> I'm not even talking about the problems I had with NT when I was working in
> a company.

> Sorry for the long into, but I wanted to give a little background on why I
> decided to search for alternatives to Windows.

> So I started with RedHat 5.2. That was hard for a complete newbie. But good
> to learn. I must admit I put all Linux aside for a couple of months, cause I
> didn't have the knowledge and the time to learn. But then Windows problems
> made me reconsider Linux more seriously. Then here's the path I folowed in
> short :

> OpenLinux 2.2 : Great! A graphical install. Not so great. I 've never been
> able to use it. Lizard sucked

> RedHat 6.0 - Texte install, a breeze.

> Mandrake 6.1 - Text install. Even better. Now I really started to think
> Linux could compete on WIndows ground.

> And then some experimentation :

> Suse 6.3 - Problems with the graphical install.
> OpenLinux 2.3 - Problems with the graphical install.
> Debian - Never been able to do anything with this one. Way too much for me.
> Mandrake 7.0 - Problem with the graphical install. Some device refuse to
> work.
> RedHat 6.1 - Problems with the graphical install. Extremely disappointing,
> many bugs. What the hell's happening?
> Slackware 7.0 - A revelation. Despite the fact this distribution is supposed
> to be for more experienced users, I found it easier to undestand and
> configure than the others, even on the console. My problem with slack is the
> lack of support. Man pages are like cerbo-croatian to me. And how-to's are
> somtimes pretty technical.

> So... do you see where I'm going ? If Linux wants to have its share of the
> market, distributions have to make it easier to install and use. Nobody
> argue with that. But what scares me to death is that the distributions that
> had the best potential for the end-user market are now blindly walking in
> the steps of the Redmond monster : they issue new versions at neck-breaking
> speed, to the expense of stability and reliability. If there was as many
> bugs in the first Linux version I tried than there is in Mandrake 7.0,
> RedHat 6.1 and Suse 6.3, I would have laugh at Linux's allegation of
> stability. Somebody will have to wake up before it's too late.
<SNIP>
> Thanks, if you're still there :)

> Sylvain

While I don't know about the other distros, I know that in SuSE 6.3, you
can boot from the second CD, and get a text only YaST 1 installation,
which is, BTW, GREAT.

-Daniel O'Nolan

 
 
 

A frightening trend - go get a cofee, it's a long one :)

Post by pac4.. » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


My first Linux install was a * from hell.  And then I made the
decision that I didn't need Windows at all, trashed the dual boot
crapola, and it's been a breeze ever since.

Although it may not be true in your case, many of the complaints that I
keep reading about Linux installs are really problems trying to make
Windows and Linux co-exist on a single spindle.  And that's not so much
a problem with Linux as it is with whatever boot manager package was
included in your Linux distribution.

Get yourself a second disk and keep the two OS'es separate.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.veryComputer.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

A frightening trend - go get a cofee, it's a long one :)

Post by Terry Port » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 03:10:35 GMT,

>My first Linux install was a * from hell.  And then I made the
>decision that I didn't need Windows at all, trashed the dual boot
>crapola, and it's been a breeze ever since.

>Although it may not be true in your case, many of the complaints that I
>keep reading about Linux installs are really problems trying to make
>Windows and Linux co-exist on a single spindle.  And that's not so much
>a problem with Linux as it is with whatever boot manager package was
>included in your Linux distribution.

>Get yourself a second disk and keep the two OS'es separate.

>Sent via Deja.com http://www.veryComputer.com/
>Before you buy.

Good advice.

Another problem is trying to live with both Windows and Linux. I found when
I trashed Windows in 97, my life became a LOT easier. What I mean is that
just trying to send data between them is a hassle, if you have one app
that runs in Windows, and try and use data from Linux, life can be very hard
because Windows has so much proprietary and non standard stuff.

For instance I had a Dos assembler, but used a Linux C compiler. The Makefile
was a train wreck, including unix2dos, 8 character file names etc.

When a Linux assembler for the target became available life was a LOT easier.
But I still used a dos programmer, and this was a pita also.

So in the end I wrote a Linux programmer for the target chip, and my life
then became as smooth as silk.

The only thing I use Dosemu for now, is reading a DB3 supplier pricelist.

Kind Regards
Terry
--

   My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been  
 up 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours 36 minutes
** homepage http://www.veryComputer.com/~tjporter **

 
 
 

A frightening trend - go get a cofee, it's a long one :)

Post by insecur » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


redhat 6.2 is easy to install.  I don't see what the problem is.

> I've started using Linux about a year ago. I'm not a power user. I had some
> dos experience, many years with Windows, which means no computer experience,
> since the only thing I've ever been able to do to fix Windows was to turn my
> computer off and back on.

> I'm a home-base worker. I have a small translation company. So I'm using my
> computer a lot. I'm saying that because a lot of people using their computer
> as an entertaining device (say, a couple of hours max per day) have a hard
> time understanding why some of us are that pissed at Windows. When you use
> MS Office with Windows 10 hours a day, you can't possibly be very happy with
> it. And I don't mean 9 hours of e-mail and a couple of letters. I mean hours
> and hours of writing, editing and dealing with Word, Excel and PowerPoint.
> My system started to lock up the first day I upgraded from Win 3.1 to Win95.
> And that's around that time I started to buy hardware. A lot of hardware.
> Now with a brand new Pentium III 500 Mhz with win98se, I thought things
> would change. Not. And Office 2000 (which came with the computer, I wouldn't
> have bought it - well I must have paid for it in some ways) is the buggiest
> version of Office I've ever used. And I still experiment lock-ups at least 3
> times a week, everytime loosing some data and wasting my time and money. And
> I'm not even talking about the problems I had with NT when I was working in
> a company.

> Sorry for the long into, but I wanted to give a little background on why I
> decided to search for alternatives to Windows.

> So I started with RedHat 5.2. That was hard for a complete newbie. But good
> to learn. I must admit I put all Linux aside for a couple of months, cause I
> didn't have the knowledge and the time to learn. But then Windows problems
> made me reconsider Linux more seriously. Then here's the path I folowed in
> short :

> OpenLinux 2.2 : Great! A graphical install. Not so great. I 've never been
> able to use it. Lizard sucked

> RedHat 6.0 - Texte install, a breeze.

> Mandrake 6.1 - Text install. Even better. Now I really started to think
> Linux could compete on WIndows ground.

> And then some experimentation :

> Suse 6.3 - Problems with the graphical install.
> OpenLinux 2.3 - Problems with the graphical install.
> Debian - Never been able to do anything with this one. Way too much for me.
> Mandrake 7.0 - Problem with the graphical install. Some device refuse to
> work.
> RedHat 6.1 - Problems with the graphical install. Extremely disappointing,
> many bugs. What the hell's happening?
> Slackware 7.0 - A revelation. Despite the fact this distribution is supposed
> to be for more experienced users, I found it easier to undestand and
> configure than the others, even on the console. My problem with slack is the
> lack of support. Man pages are like cerbo-croatian to me. And how-to's are
> somtimes pretty technical.

> So... do you see where I'm going ? If Linux wants to have its share of the
> market, distributions have to make it easier to install and use. Nobody
> argue with that. But what scares me to death is that the distributions that
> had the best potential for the end-user market are now blindly walking in
> the steps of the Redmond monster : they issue new versions at neck-breaking
> speed, to the expense of stability and reliability. If there was as many
> bugs in the first Linux version I tried than there is in Mandrake 7.0,
> RedHat 6.1 and Suse 6.3, I would have laugh at Linux's allegation of
> stability. Somebody will have to wake up before it's too late. RedHat's
> contribution to Linux visibility is priceless. But if they want to go too
> fast, they may turn out to be the company responsible for the raise AND fall
> of Linux.

> Thanks, if you're still there :)

> Sylvain

 
 
 

1. Linux has a long, long, long way to go

        Lack of vendor support won't help you, regardless of OS.

[deletia]

        Although, on a brighter note, Creative seems to be moving
        in our direction with both officially supported audio and
        video drivers. (slashdot.org)

--
                Herding Humans ~ Herding Cats

Neither will do a thing unless they really want to, or         |||
is coerced to the point where it will scratch your eyes out   / | \
as soon as your grip slips.

        In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com

2. Question about Printing

3. Easy to setup, Easy to go -- Linux... the working mom's OS :) (satire)

4. Jumpstart over different subnets?

5. how does one tell 'man' how long a page is?

6. Problem with iptables and the OUTPUT chian

7. One person's MOUSE problem fixed :)

8. Mandrake 6.0 install problem

9. How would one go about getting DirecPC working ?

10. 'No space left on device' with long filenames, but short ones work

11. A Linux newbie gets his Winmodem going *first* time

12. Getting 'named' to listen to one NIC

13. setup one interface for 'up' and another one for 'down'