No seriously how does all that shit work out to be simpler than double clicking an icon on your desktop
it saves time yes, but the rest of that sounds needlessly contrived
seriously
IT IS VERY SIMPLE
What Nap is neglecting to mention is that Linux-based package managers usually also install dependencies for programs.
In Windows lingo, this would be like trying to install a program that requires the .NET framework and the installer realizing you don't have it and automatically downloading and installing it for you, prior to installing the actual software you initially want to install.
Most times, this goes several levels deep. You want to install A which requires B. You don't have B so the package manager downloads that first and installs it. Upon trying to install B, it recognizes you also need C, D, and E. You have C, an outdated version of D, and are missing E. It installs E, updates D, skips over C (which you have) and then installs B all so you can install A, and all without any interaction on your part aside from trying to install A.
SeñorAmor on
0
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
You misunderstood me. If 1GB doesn't fly with Vista and you aren't gaming, there is something wrong with it. I am sure you would agree with that you being a linux man and all.
I suppose. I mean, I don't exactly know how Vista is supposed to run on 1GB.
But, like Rage, I did disable sidebar/Aero (along with all of the extraneous processes I could find) on one of those 1GB machines. It made a difference, sure, but not enough of one, in my opinion.
Ha ha ha! Man, sometimes we speak a different language I guess. What I am saying is if Vista is commanding more than 1GB of ram to run office and a web browser (which in both of our experiences it does) that is fucked up. You shouldn't need a 2GB system to run the bare essentials.
FramlingFaceHeadGeebs has bad ideas.Registered Userregular
edited December 2007
I seem to remember one of my friends telling me installing many programs on OSX was as simple as Copying the program's folder into an "Application" folder. Is this true? And does it work this way on Linux? And why doesn't it work this way on Windows?
Framling on
you're = you are
your = belonging to you
their = belonging to them
there = not here
they're = they are
0
Options
WeaverWho are you?What do you want?Registered Userregular
edited December 2007
Hey guys I've been trying to get linux to wash my car but it's not working should I try a different distro I'm using suSe right now
And don't even get me started on drivers under linux.
Oh fuck you linux driver management. Fuck you hard.
See, you had me before.
Kind of lost me here, though.
What distro was giving you trouble with driver management? I mean, if you were having trouble with anything from the last couple years, I'm going to assume that it's because you were insufficiently experienced to be using that distro.
I wouldn't go recommending Gentoo to inexperienced users, for example.
the next rig i make will def be linux of some sort im sick of all these unnecessary processes windows puts on their seemingly with every hotfix shimsham
windows defender what do you defend you never find any problems even when they are right fucking there you suck
the os x method of installation is neat but i'm sure it must be deceiving me in some way and it's going to be all GRRRR BROKEN later
Again, it's a matter of how.
If the installation package is configured correctly installation and uninstallation are fucking shit simple in any of the three main OS's.
Ideally, regardless of which OS it is, an installation package will mount properly, install to the proper directory (c:\program files\...; \<user>\applications\...; \sbin\...), remove temporary files, update the libraries/registry, then neatly implement itself. On uninstall it will have a list of where it's libraries/registry keys are and remove them, go to where it was installed (c:\prog...; \<users>\..., etc.) and completely remove itself, then remove any temporary swap files which were mounted for the installation.
Install/uninstall on any of the systems, when done to specifications, is shit simple.
However, when you deviate from that norm is when things become a headache. With windows, I have found that the headache can be significantly less than with OS X and Linux; that isn't to say it is 100% of the time (I've installed off-repository programs in Linux that were a breeze to uninstall and I've installed non-supported software in Windows that made me want to reformat). But that doesn't mean that one's installation method is better than another.
They each have their perks and they each have their downsides.
The end.
Callius on
0
Options
WeaverWho are you?What do you want?Registered Userregular
edited December 2007
also 64-bit vista all my drivers and programs work fine wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
I seem to remember one of my friends telling me installing many programs on OSX was as simple as Copying the program's folder into an "Application" folder. Is this true? And does it work this way on Linux? And why doesn't it work this way on Windows?
yeah you just copy and paste
and since the default action for dragging something out of a .dmg is a copy, it means you can just drag and drop it into your applications folder
bongi on
0
Options
WeaverWho are you?What do you want?Registered Userregular
edited December 2007
Also linux won't fold my laundry right I unpacked the .tar.Z & everything but nope my shirts are still folded all jacked up.
I borked my first committed Linux single-boot by not setting a root password on installation, and deciding that I knew enough to selectively fucking update libraries and dependencies thereon.
What distro was giving you trouble with driver management? I mean, if you were having trouble with anything from the last couple years, I'm going to assume that it's because you were insufficiently experienced to be using that distro.
I wouldn't go recommending Gentoo to inexperienced users, for example.
Ubuntu with an ATI card.
More ATI's fault than Linux, I will admit. But it's pretty much caused me to stop using Linux in favor of windows, for ease of use.
Hell, I actually CAN'T use linux without disconnecting my video card and using on-board video anymore. My X11 server is completely fucked (after doing a barebones install of 7.10 or 7.04) then using the restricted drivers.
See, Weaver is a great illustration of the fundamental difference between folks who describe themselves as "IT", and those who describe themselves as "IS".
So does Linux have any single advantage over Windows or OSX for the common user
from what I'm seeing the answer is a resounding "no"
I would say "no", sure.
But at the same time, I would say that, if I had it to do over again, I would have configured my parents' computer to run Linux, not Windows Vista. If someone with NO PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE in any OS starts on Linux, some things will be more intuitive for them.
See, Weaver is a great illustration of the fundamental difference between folks who describe themselves as "IT", and those who describe themselves as "IS".
Would this make more sense if I payed attention in my Information Technology Acronym class?
Blip2004 on
0
Options
FramlingFaceHeadGeebs has bad ideas.Registered Userregular
the ability to play vidya games, browse the internet, and type papers
The first one, you want windows.
The latter two I have found are actually better under Linux. As an example, a large amount of Linux distributions come with Open Office installed automatically (though I don't believe they come preconfigured to save as .docs, which makes sense but sucks at the same time). Also, in Ubuntu's case, the integration of their mail client with the OS is pretty fucking awesome.
Also, if you prefer typesetting to word processing Linux kicks Windows ass hands down. But I doubt you're looking for that.
Posts
Oh fuck you linux driver management. Fuck you hard.
DRAG THIS TO HERE
installed yay
What Nap is neglecting to mention is that Linux-based package managers usually also install dependencies for programs.
In Windows lingo, this would be like trying to install a program that requires the .NET framework and the installer realizing you don't have it and automatically downloading and installing it for you, prior to installing the actual software you initially want to install.
Most times, this goes several levels deep. You want to install A which requires B. You don't have B so the package manager downloads that first and installs it. Upon trying to install B, it recognizes you also need C, D, and E. You have C, an outdated version of D, and are missing E. It installs E, updates D, skips over C (which you have) and then installs B all so you can install A, and all without any interaction on your part aside from trying to install A.
Ha ha ha! Man, sometimes we speak a different language I guess. What I am saying is if Vista is commanding more than 1GB of ram to run office and a web browser (which in both of our experiences it does) that is fucked up. You shouldn't need a 2GB system to run the bare essentials.
Vista is a system hog and there's no denying it.
your = belonging to you
their = belonging to them
there = not here
they're = they are
Kind of lost me here, though.
What distro was giving you trouble with driver management? I mean, if you were having trouble with anything from the last couple years, I'm going to assume that it's because you were insufficiently experienced to be using that distro.
I wouldn't go recommending Gentoo to inexperienced users, for example.
Twitter | Facebook | Tumblr | Last.fm | Pandora | LibraryThing | formspring | Blue Moon over Seattle (MCFC)
Well, ndiswrapper and NVIDIA's drivers can go straight to hell under 64-bit, but I could say the same about Windows methinks.
windows defender what do you defend you never find any problems even when they are right fucking there you suck
it is nigh impossible to screw things up in osx
I totally forgot about 64-bit.
Ignore my post about drivers being peachy if we're talking 64-bit.
Twitter | Facebook | Tumblr | Last.fm | Pandora | LibraryThing | formspring | Blue Moon over Seattle (MCFC)
oh yes like ATI is so much better
ill never own another ati card
hardware FINE
drivers
HOOKER BITCHES FUCK FUCK FUCK
If the installation package is configured correctly installation and uninstallation are fucking shit simple in any of the three main OS's.
Ideally, regardless of which OS it is, an installation package will mount properly, install to the proper directory (c:\program files\...; \<user>\applications\...; \sbin\...), remove temporary files, update the libraries/registry, then neatly implement itself. On uninstall it will have a list of where it's libraries/registry keys are and remove them, go to where it was installed (c:\prog...; \<users>\..., etc.) and completely remove itself, then remove any temporary swap files which were mounted for the installation.
Install/uninstall on any of the systems, when done to specifications, is shit simple.
However, when you deviate from that norm is when things become a headache. With windows, I have found that the headache can be significantly less than with OS X and Linux; that isn't to say it is 100% of the time (I've installed off-repository programs in Linux that were a breeze to uninstall and I've installed non-supported software in Windows that made me want to reformat). But that doesn't mean that one's installation method is better than another.
They each have their perks and they each have their downsides.
The end.
yeah you just copy and paste
and since the default action for dragging something out of a .dmg is a copy, it means you can just drag and drop it into your applications folder
I borked my first committed Linux single-boot by not setting a root password on installation, and deciding that I knew enough to selectively fucking update libraries and dependencies thereon.
Twitter | Facebook | Tumblr | Last.fm | Pandora | LibraryThing | formspring | Blue Moon over Seattle (MCFC)
More ATI's fault than Linux, I will admit. But it's pretty much caused me to stop using Linux in favor of windows, for ease of use.
Hell, I actually CAN'T use linux without disconnecting my video card and using on-board video anymore. My X11 server is completely fucked (after doing a barebones install of 7.10 or 7.04) then using the restricted drivers.
it's not impossible to fuck it up but i'm still baffled as to how my dad managed to total three installations of os x in about six months
Twitter | Facebook | Tumblr | Last.fm | Pandora | LibraryThing | formspring | Blue Moon over Seattle (MCFC)
But at the same time, I would say that, if I had it to do over again, I would have configured my parents' computer to run Linux, not Windows Vista. If someone with NO PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE in any OS starts on Linux, some things will be more intuitive for them.
Twitter | Facebook | Tumblr | Last.fm | Pandora | LibraryThing | formspring | Blue Moon over Seattle (MCFC)
complete fucking tools
dont release shit and dont work with anyone on a professional level
that's why i won't buy their shit
the SoE of video cards
The question is: What are you looking for in an OS?
Twitter | Facebook | Tumblr | Last.fm | Pandora | LibraryThing | formspring | Blue Moon over Seattle (MCFC)
Not up to snuff, but they've got a lot of ground to cover.
so which ones are the sexy ones
Well...
-Free
-Better support from the community (imo)
-Will work on just about any hardware
-Has the ability to run many Windows apps
-Easier to customize
Um, I'm sure there are more that I can't think of right off the top of my head.
Care to explain, I don't quite follow.
No.
No, Teefs. There's no reason for you to ever use Linux.
You can leave now.
your = belonging to you
their = belonging to them
there = not here
they're = they are
I thought AMD fixed that issue and are requiring the ATI devs to crank out Linux-compatible drivers, at the very least.
The latter two I have found are actually better under Linux. As an example, a large amount of Linux distributions come with Open Office installed automatically (though I don't believe they come preconfigured to save as .docs, which makes sense but sucks at the same time). Also, in Ubuntu's case, the integration of their mail client with the OS is pretty fucking awesome.
Also, if you prefer typesetting to word processing Linux kicks Windows ass hands down. But I doubt you're looking for that.
I describe myself as like a mechanic except with computers.
Windows is the Ford/GMC of the various OSs.
OS X is the Japanese imports.
Linux is the junkie little farm carts that you see people building out of scrap metal and old washing machine motors in India.