What Would You Like To See In Linux? - Page 3

Exactly.

Bingo

And most of this is what I said above, the main difference and what people don't realize is that in most cases Mac OS is a better fit right now for many people than Windows. And in many cases Linux is a perfectly good fit. Again the majority of people still don't game much, and just need something to write email and browse the web, things Linux does extremely well.

I have seen large renderfarms and data processing clusters running Linux myself. It all depends on what your experience is and it can color things greatly, this is why I said above I think you may have had a limited perception on some things. Note that I mention data processing, not desktop, though as I mentioned before desktop can happen and most people would not even notice.

Solaris is now open source last I checked. It in no way surprises me that IBM would use it, as we already established, different tools for different uses.

In as far as why people still dual boot? I thought we already established. Dual booting with windows, ask around on these forums and elsewhere, I would bet the number one reason is for games. Something we already established Linux doesn't do the best as the games are not written for it.

And if you have only noticed the installation process in the last 20 years, I would have to propose you have not used much of linux at all. ext3 FS, resiserFS, XFS is coming, ALSA for sound instead of OSS, hot plugging monitor support recently, I could make one hell of a list.

And not any different from any other OS except in the others if you mess things up to that extent you can't use the OS and have to reformat as you no longer will be able to boot into the OS for Microsoft. And Mac OS it isn't a problem as they only have a few graphics cards available for it.

And I certainly won't say I haven't used the commandline, because i find the commandline much more powerful and efficient in many tasks. But come to think of it I don't think I ever touched it beyond just typing ifconfig on the Linux machine we set up in that public lab I mentioned. And that was only because I didn't know the graphical utility to use as I don't use them much, again I find the command line more efficient in many cases.

And either you get a distribution that detects it to start with, or you compile it in the kernel, or you compile it outside of the kernel. For most distributions it is not a matter of compiling at all though, but of just installing. Lots of choices there. I have plenty of experience with ALSA to be honest.

And you know what? for the vast majority of users on the desktop, if that is what we are still discussing, SAS is not an issue. Graphics usually is NVidia or ATi or Intel, and getting it to work is a non-issue, at least with the open source drivers. Getting it to work with 3D can be an issue, but that goes to your choice of distribution and what that distribution handles or doesn't. Audio cards for most people tend to be either Intel or Realtek, both of which are pretty well supported and I can't think of the last time I had any problems on install with either. If you are referring to pro-audio, like anything else you do your research I would hope and determine if it works with your setup.

Thing is, noone here will argue that there is work still to be done, or even that Linux might not be best for everyone. But some here will say that it is good enough to be used by most people without any problems. When you are talking about SAS you are leaving the realm of most people. And to be honest it sounds like you have had a few specific problems that you don't want to ask for help about and so left them as they were and now say Linux won't work with them.

In the past 20 years hardware has changed DRAMATICALLY. We went from a basic x86 instruction set on a single cpu, to adding co-processors for math, to multiple expansions on that instruction set, to multiple cores. And that is just the CPU. It doesn't even consider that 20 years ago noone had heard of a Graphics processing card. And that noone would consider using a computer to do recording, or edit video.

Those 'basic' functions, like anything else are a fast moving target. And to be honest for 'basic' functions Linux does not have a problem IMO. It is specific functions that it does have a problem, Gaming being the most notable for the desktop.

Which is why I am so curious about the XO project. It is interesting to read some of their test cases and see that there are students that pick up Linux so fast and offer to teach and repair other's laptops in the test cases. Since 6 million of those laptops have now been ordered, it iwll be very interesting to see what happens. I am also curious about the Eee for similar reasons.

No argument here.

Seablade

Totally agree.

Again if Linux so good, why is that the vendor did not try to write game for it ? and it not just game, there are alot of common application that available to Windows or Apple but it won't be available on Linux. Have you ever thought why applications vendor didn't want to bother writing applications for Linux ? that because Linux try to head to all different direction, different distro require different way installation of the package. Why would they want to write something that don't have a large market share and every distro heading to different direction where they can write something for Apple or Microsoft which allow them write once and install in many different version of windows. Sure you can tell me about the open source code and this or that, but the average user or cooperation users don't care about open source code, they just want to know if it work with the application they need to run, that simple.

you right, I may not use much Linux as I would with HP-UX, Solaris, Ultrix, or Digital Unix/Compaq/HP. but in the past I do have to support those Redhat Workstation, and the Ubunto for a few Web developer, web server. So as you can see it is very very small percent of Linux being used in all the previous company I work for. So I know about ALSA sound, I know about ext3, resiserFS, and XFS, if memory service me correctly, I think XFS was open source journaling filesystem from SGI. so yeah I know what I am talking about.


ever since I used Windows XP up until now, I don't remember I have to rebuild something because I mess something up. I only remember a few incident or two at my work where something got corrupt in database then they have to rebuild the server, but I can say same thing about Linux, if the Linux files system get corrupt, it will either need to restore or rebuild, this apply to Windows as well.

sure command line is great, I used it everyday to manage all the Unix server box. But my point with Linux is if I swap out a graphic card. Xwindows will die and ask me to reconfigure the card, some time it give me default GUI resolution for configuration, most of time if won't, and the worst part is some distro as very detail about refresh rate, vertical line, and RAMdac speed...... in Windows, if I swap graphic card, few mouse click, uninstall driver, install driver , reboot then I am done.... no need to go into a geek detail



I am sure you are. but your experience don't mean anything, because you are not there to help them with the install.


my 8800GTS partially working, my ATI 2900 is refuse to work ..... my NIC card say it not support, so I have to get new Broadcom card.

Let say I am not talking about SAS, let say we only talking about audio, NIC, WiFi and graphic card. there are still alot out there not support under Linux,


sure it change alot since I first touch IBM PS1 with Basic programing. but that don't mean you need to ignore what change out there, Windows and Apple try to keep up with it, I am sure the Linux community also try to keep up with it, but I think they head to all the different direction, some maybe right direction some maybewrong direction. At least that what I feel, because, seem like everyone what to push out their own distro. Again, wouldn't you think it better if they put all resource and man power to focus enhance on what out there with lesser distro, maybe then application vendor will look at it as a positive thing? remember cooperation are greedy, they will put their hand on anything make them money.


I like to know this as well, I am not a fan of Windows, but at the same time I don't like how Linux not pick up as fast as I would thought for last 20 years where Microsoft and Apple had done, sure their OS may not be the best, but it did work for alot of people where Linux only make a small percent dent.

But here is the thing, the PRIMARY reason has nothing to do with the technical merits of the system. Ask the devs of BeOS about this. It has to do with marketing. The same reason why games don't get written for Mac OS, even now they get ported by someone else. They are marketing to their user base and the majority of their user base is on Windows, and they don't feel the user base on other OSes would be worth the effort for the limited return to write their app for.

The distribution problem has some to do with this, but a very minor part of it. That is why you find certain aspects of Linux to be strongly supported (Xen, VMWare, SQL, etc.) and others not (Games). The same distribution problems exist, but the user base is there, and that is really the important part.

But you choose to ignore it in your posts.

That is a filesystem issue, I was referring to graphical system issue. The same things exist

Hmm strange, in windows I have the same problem actually. In Linux even before I was to where I am now it was reboot, run Sax(Ran Suse at that time) and get going. In windows I would reboot, have to reconfigure, and keep going. There really isn't much difference in many cases. Aside from this, the people swapping out their video card are not the 'average user' but more along the lines of the tech savy user which would be looking into how to reinstall the driver(Or module).

And in many cases they don't need to do half of what I mentioned. Install for them is a matter of sudo apt-get install, or synaptic as the case may be.

Among other things I wouldn't get a broadcom card myself. But aside from all of that, talk to the manufacturers, get them to provide the same drivers they do for other OSes. MS has nothing to do with Video Cards working on them, that is provided by the manufacturer. Neither does Apple.

And there are many more that do that would be used on the 'average' desktop.

And here you are again confusing different people. People doing hardware support and distribution support are two different groups of unrelated people that are not interchangeable usually.

Seablade

LOL!!! you and I keep going at it forever to point out stuff this and that.... I am going to end this here, because it will be no end to it it I keep come back and point out certain thing about Linux, where the Linux community admit to it or not, it still have a long way to go before it can become a main stream OS for people. in the mean time, Windows still a primary OS for a lot of people, even know it has issued, but MS had been play smart game they gave what average Joe want and need. that how they can get market and vendor support.

If you don't like Linux why are you here craping on it.

Never said I don't like Linux, read my post again, I worked and support Linux at my jobs for Web server and programmer....

doing something for a living and liking something are 2 totally different things. i can be a cabbie to pay the bills but would rather be a professional ninja


very debatable. Have you ever considered that an average user doesn't know there are alternatives even available (besides Apple, which they deem too expensive of an investment compared to say a Dell, to them a computer is a computer, why does one cost so much more?), and I say this from experience where when many of my less than computer savvy friends find out I run linux the most common question i get is "what is that?", and those who have heard of it ask "really? is it really good to use?" and once i got my personal favorite answer (even more amusing b/c it came from my gf...who owns a mac) "is that some kind of virus?" Basically my point is that "the average joe" doesn't know alternatives exist so that even if Windows is less than a perfect fit for his needs, he will keep using it because in his mind he doesn't have a choice (and doesn't have extra money to buy a mac). And it is very easy to argue MS doesn't give a user what he wants. Your average computer user will want a pretty basic set of apps: web browser, IM client, email client, office suite, cd/dvd burner, audio manager, video player, file manager....and quite frankly thats 95% of all usage time right there. MS gives you a really bad web browser, and a file manager (which basically is the same thing as their web browser)...and thats about it. Now most major linux distros include ALL of the above (and then some). Initial installation and configuration of XP takes a good 5 or 6 hours. The same process for ubuntu takes 2 hours roughly (and that includes running Automatix for stuff). Lastly....there is a little thing commonly called the antitrust laws, something MS has shown little respect for in the past. It at least partially justifies why certain PC distributors will only sell you a computer w/ windows pre-installed

The fact that Linux doesn't have a large marketshare is the reason companies like EA and ubisoft don't make games for linux. Economically speaking, they probably wouldn't see profit (probably a huge loss) after developing for the linux platform... It's not that game companies don't want to do it, it's just that they can't consider it a viable option right now. Once linux hits that sweet spot of the market share (I would say 10 percent. might take a while but its gonna get there), then game makers will consider it a viable option because they can actually see profit....

and linux has a bunch of open source games... Don't forget, ID has already ported games like Doom 3 to linux. It's just a matter of time.


We're not doubting your knowledge about computing the OS market. (well maybe some people are, but I'm not), I just think you are mistaken in the fact that solaris, unix, etc. are specifically for servers and specific components that business companies use... Linux is still a strong competetor for the server market, but it has been making most of its headway on the HOME desktop. (aka home users like myself) So it doesn't matter if linux is being used in your company or not... it just matters that it is making headway in at least one department (the home user desktop) ---> which in turn will lead to market share ----> games being developed for linux

I'm not entirely familiar with the server market, so yea my knowledege on this particular subject may not be worthy of a seablade response.

XP probably just as bad as linux with graphics cards. A driver issue (even an extremely minor one) will cause a BSOD and sometimes corrupt specific parts of data in the C drive. At least in linux the data will be secure. True, switching graphics cards will cause the X server to crash, but a reconfigure of xorg has gotten so much easier and you could always reinstall through a live cd (something ubuntu has gotten so good at) which will automatically set up your xorg.conf again. and you can preserve your data and settings in a home folder on a seperate partition. THis process would probably take 20 min, but at least all the data is saved unlike windows where a crash could mean a loss or corruption of files...

2 hours at a ubuntu install *scoffs* it only takes me an hour. 20 minutes to install from the live cd. a check mark next to compiz fusion enable some repos and tick mark all my software which takes about 20 min to install.


its gotten so good....



xp on the other hand, while i like formatting because it pushes me to clean out all my junk probably takes less time than 5 hours... if you have all the software on hand (or at least know where to get it...) i would say 3 hours... working non stop

I will post times this weekend of XP vs Ubuntu.

(Got a new HD so I have a reason)

can't wait for your results...

I am not going to count setting the drive up, just install and patch time. OS only.

Unless anyone thinks different.

here are mine. Linux was on an old, slow machine, Win MCE was on my 1710.

http://www.notebookforums.com/thread200668.html

iD games aren't even ports really. You just buy the regular Windows CD/DVD and download the linux installer they release.

The only real issue is DirectX vs. OpenGL.

believe or not quick format and long format under XP install will give the same perform of the OS once it is install, you can also speed up your installation by roll in the patch with the install CD. Yes the Ubunto have quick install, but that only if every piece hardware is support. it not you may have to pull out your nix skill to get it to work. I believe the installer for Vista is much quicker then XP, last two time I done the test install, it took me like 30 minutes to install. Since I deploy Linux or Windows from image files so I couldn't you how long it will take for each.

Same can be said for Windows. There's been a few times I haven't been able to install just because I didn't have any floppy's around.

Also, a few relatives have bought new computers lately, and they always ask me for advice beforehand and help setting up after they buy it. I stuck a Ubuntu LiveCD in for them and almost all of them had no idea it was Linux. One even asked if it was Vista. A few of them liked it and installed it, only problem I have heard about from them was they couldn't open a document they made at work. Told them how to save as a .doc and they were good.

yet you are still using a sad excuse for a filesystem NTFS. I mean its better than some others but is pretty behind the times when compared to Raiser.

Average user wouldn't know how to do this. Also same can be said for Linux, sometimes even devs do it for you by releasing say 2007.0, 2007.1 and maybe even 2007.2 before 2008.0 comes out. There are also tools out there to make your own custom cd/dvd that includes everything you want and nothing you don't for a painless 15 to 20 minute TOTAL installation time for EVERYTHING.

Can't say I ever had a problem with hardware support on ubuntu. It sure as hell has a better track record than Windows

can't argue with that. my experiences installing vista have also been much quicker than with XP, well under 1 hour. Still doesn't beat Ubuntu's 10 to 15 min install, or PCLOS's 10 min install, or eLive's 10 min install.



***I get it English is not your first language but I will be a spelling nazi about the word "Ubuntu" since it's spelled the same in every language since its a trademark.