Linux Thread, Penguins unite!

[vanpaun]

Yeah, if you use linux, post your machine and distro. If you have problems we can work on those too. I will start: Lenovo T61 running Open Suse 10.3. Problems: cant get sound driver to work :mad:.

EDIT: if you just like penguins (habbywall) ummmmmmm................ this thread isn't for you?

[habbywall]

I like penguins.

[1-wheeled-grape]

if you just like penguins (habbywall) ummmmmmm................ this thread isn't for you?

I like penguins.

hahahahahahahahaha very good habbywall, i like them too:D . linux's are computers right? so how does this relate to penguins??

[habbywall]

What makes you think I just like penguins?
I may like running linux from time to time too.

[vanpaun]

linux is an operating system. Mac OS symbol is an apple, the universal linux symbol is penguin.

[Det-riot]

the computers at my school are linux....

[burjzyntski]

My Laptop (Compaq Presario, AMD Sempron 3000+, 1.8GHz, 128KB L2, 1600MHz FSB, ATI Express 200M) is the only machine that I have dedicated to linux (Ubuntu 6.06 LTS).

My Desktop (I can't remember exactly what's in it, as it's a slur of parts :rolleyes: ), on the other hand, dual boots WinXP Pro and whatever else I want it to; preferably Slackware 9 as I don't much like 10.

I'm really looking forward to trying KDE 4.1+, but I don't feel much like messing with it until it's more stable (than 4.0 or 4.0.1).

Current problem:
My laptop doesn't like plug-n-play mice. I have an external keyboard (usb) plugged into my laptop, and the keyboard has extra ports on it for additional peripherals (which the mouse is plugged into), but the mouse isn't working properly. I can move the mouse around (moving the cursor), but I cannot LEFT CLICK. Right clicking works, but not left, so I have to use the touchpad :o.

NOTE: My laptop is setup near my desktop, so I've got an external monitor plugged into it, an external keyboard, and, hopefully, an external mouse. It's just awkward reaching over the desk to the touchpad :rolleyes:.


@vanpaun:
Are you using the snd-hda-intel driver ? have you run alsaconf ? Does SUSE even use ALSA, or does it just use YAST ?

[vanpaun]

suse uses yast.

Lenovo Thinkpad T61
Configured as sound card number 0
Driver snd-hda-intel

thats what it says.

[gkmac]

Gentoo Linux all the way for me.

On my desktop PC: KDE 3.5.8 running on an Athlon XP 2000+, a Gentoo first installed in 2003 and still going strong. Dual boots with Windows 2000, so far I haven't this year.

On my laptop: KDE 3.5.8 again, running on an Intel Celery 2.4GHz.

On my server: Apache, exim, ntpd, samba and a few other things running on an Intel Celery 700MHz.

On my lounge PC: MythTV running on a dual-core Athlon AM2 5200+, remote controlled with a cool text display (http://www.soundgraph.com/Eng_/Products/imon25.aspx?topMenu=2&subMenu=1&leftMenu=25) on the front - tells me what it's recording without having to turn the TV on.

[tobbogonist]

lounge PC
:eek: :eek:

[jamessd]

All this linux stuff sounds like way too much trouble to me. None of it is user friendly, and it seems that if you want it you need to understand a whole bundle of jargon and random bits to get and run it properly - it's so inaccessible - why shouldn't I just stick to vista? It's not like I have any problems with that, what's the big deal guys?

[kombi]

1 gz Gateway laptop: Unbuntu 7 w/ Enlightenment(e17) window manager
1 gz piece meal computer / server: Engarde Linux

I played around with mutiple distros: redhat, gentoo, centos, debian, elive

[surndr]

i have linux mint its pretty neat my Dad stuck it on my computer the last week i like the cube effect and how its is a lot quicker...my brother likes to spam it with tux the penguin... lucky me:eek:

[vanpaun]

All this linux stuff sounds like way too much trouble to me. None of it is user friendly, and it seems that if you want it you need to understand a whole bundle of jargon and random bits to get and run it properly - it's so inaccessible - why shouldn't I just stick to vista? It's not like I have any problems with that, what's the big deal guys?
Windows is EVIL GAHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! No, really open suse, pclinx, and Kubuntu are very user friendly. + no one botheres to make viruses for linux. I mean, most "haxors" are linux users.

[legtod2]

I have a pentium 4, 3 ghtz, 1.5gig ram.

I'm running ubuntu 7.04 Linux, also I'm running VMWare Workstation.

The VMWare workstation lets me run Windows O/S inside the Linux.

Linux rocks

[vanpaun]

oh yeah Heres my specs:
2.5 ghz centrino vpro
3g ram 6mbl2
opensuse
14.1 screen like about 1400 by 1050

[AlanChambers]

Ubuntu 7.10. When I performed all the available upgrades, I got a Black Screen of Death after rebooting. :-( I suspect it does not really like my ancient Radeon 8500 card.

This is the only distro that has ever let me down, aside from the often poor user interface applications that have been developed to sit in front of the generally excellent command line tools.

Much as I dislike M$ for its monopoly, business practices, and conflation of OS with PS, it has to be said that working on Windows has paid for most of my meals, wheels and vices for the last fifteen years.

Now working on embedded Linux, which I find fascinating. Imagine: UNIX, on a phone!

A penguin has stumpy little legs: how can it reach the pedals?


Al

[vanpaun]

oh yeah! it works!
somthing fixed on windows: FREAKING FINALLY YOU SH*TTY OS
somthing fixed on linux: YES! I AM GREAT BOOM SHACKALACKALACKA BOOM. I AM GREAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[johnfoss]

All this linux stuff sounds like way too much trouble to me. None of it is user friendly, and it seems that if you want it you need to understand a whole bundle of jargon and random bits to get and run it properly - it's so inaccessible - why shouldn't I just stick to vista?
WOAH! You had it all summed-up very concisely there until you mentioned Vista. Yes, Linux is still more for people who like to tinker around with their computers than people who just want to get stuff done with them. But Vista? Eww. If you want user-friendly you need a Mac (which runs FreeBSD Unix under the hood). :)

[vanpaun]

ya, its like saying, instead of ncotine gum, ill just chew tobbacoo. I still get the nicotine right? but not really. Still james is missing the point VISTA IS MADE FOR EVIL

edit why is it evil? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx5QvHvzWZY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QmUW42ziGg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4iyksLeo7w&feature=related
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QmUW42ziGg&feature=related)
You cannot upgrade your computer without Microsoft's permission. Not the RAM. Not the hard drive. Not the processor.
You cannot make more than one backup copy of Windows. What if the backup copy is corrupt or lost? You are out $300-$500.
Microsoft Windows Defender presents itself as a spyware and virus protector. Guess what? IT defines what is spyware and virus. That may include free software, freeware, and even software you may have written yourself. Yeah, liberty. Oh wait, what liberty?
If your hardware is not 100% Vista Approved, Windows can automatically make your audio and/or video sound/look much crappier than it should. By playing it legally on legal hardware, it may be crippled, degraded, and altered, even though you own it. Awesome.
Your computer will run slower than under XP. In fact, you may need to buy a new computer just to browse the web and check your email: something you've been doing for years.
You may not alter any of this evil. By installing it, you have agreed that "you may not work around any technical limitations in the software".

[jamessd]

No, really open suse, pclinx, and Kubuntu are very user friendly.
Oh yeh, great, of course everybody understands that gibberish! I spose most people are born already knowing what it all means? Do you know what user friendly is? To me, it's being able to turn on my computer and do everything I want to be able to do without worrying about all that jargon you just came out with.

[vanpaun]

okay, its the same as saying vista and mac. those are the OS name. No coding. look them up. it works much more eficiently than vista. And im sorry, i know its tough for you but if you dont get it, dont dis it

[jamessd]

if you dont get it, dont dis it

I didn't dis anything, I'm just saying I don't like the way people blab on about it just ranting about how much better than everything else it is, without saying why or explaining how to get it and run it etc, without all the jargon that your average bystander does not understand.

About all that I have ever grasped, is that it's another OS.

[evil-nick]

My work box is a P4 2.4Ghz machine, 768M of RAM, with an 8G boot drive, anda 250G data drive (separate drives). It used to dual-boot with Windows, but I took the 30G XP drive out when I realized that the reason I couldn't find the drive was 'cause it had been sitting in the computer for 6 months and I hadn't booted XP off it.

That 30G drive is now in my gaming computer, which has a 160G drive for XP gaming, and the 30G is for if I need to work. Gaming system is a dualcore AMD64 something... I used to know the part number, all I know is that Crysis looks sweet... I should know though, I built the damn thing (both computers). 2 G of RAM. Fast.

The P4 runs XP inside VMware for when I need IE or Safari for work (web consultant), but I work in Linux. Work machine is running Ubuntu 7.10, the gaming machine has 8.04 Beta installed now.

I've been using linux for over a decade now, started with Redhat, went to Gentoo, settled on Ubuntu for now. It's all good :)

[vanpaun]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux

http://www.opensuse.org/

http://www.ubuntu.com/

http://www.pclinuxos.com/

they all share the same basic kernel. One major reason, which you will understand right off the bat is, WAY LESS LINUX VIRUSES. Alot dont work. Others, just arent made for linux users. This could be because A) people who write them use linux. B) companys who do install viruses, consider linux not important. I use open suse and LOVE IT! :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

EDIT: btw, i am not an advanced user. i just installed it this weekend, but my big bro is advanced. However i pretty much set it up myself.

[_Ground_Zero_]

If you could ever manage to get a game to run in Linux, could it run DX10 settings if you have a good enough video card?

[vanpaun]

i dont paly games :). but i bet i could..... W00T past 500 posts

[AlanChambers]

Oh yeh, great, of course everybody understands that gibberish! I spose most people are born already knowing what it all means? Do you know what user friendly is? To me, it's being able to turn on my computer and do everything I want to be able to do without worrying about all that jargon you just came out with.

I totally sympathise with your views. Most advanced Linux users seem to be much more command-line based than under Windows, and there used to be a bit of a culture of not helping newbies who had not tried absolutely every other avenue before asking. This makes for a steep learning curve if you want to become competentineverythingrightnow. I found this intimidating at first, because everything is different, but Googling usually turns up answers.

But really it's just a case of taking time to get used to a different environment. You don't need to know everything immediately. In any case, just about everything these days has a simple GUI front end, including the system administration, which I used to find quite daunting.

On the down-side, the GUI applications are often a little bit primitive, or not as slick as Windows offerings, or the web-browser doesn't play flash, or there is no driver for your card's 3D acceleration, or something. In that sense, Linux is still catching up. But it's catching up fast, and it's free.

I use Ubuntu for most things these days. Since it will happily install a dual boot on a machine that already has Windows on it*, and if you want to give it a go, visit this site http://www.ubuntu.com/GetUbuntu/download, copy the image onto a CD, boot the PC from the CD. You can install, or just run Linux from the CD. It should automatically detect your Internet connection, so make a post. Also look at this https://help.ubuntu.com/. Have fun.


Al

* It seems that installing Linux over Vista might have some M$-induced issues, but they are easily resolved. http://apcmag.com/how_to_dualboot_vista_with_linux_vista_installed_first.htm. I've never had the slightest trouble installing any Linux distribution over Windows XP.

[john_childs]

You cannot upgrade your computer without Microsoft's permission. Not the RAM. Not the hard drive. Not the processor.
You cannot make more than one backup copy of Windows. What if the backup copy is corrupt or lost? You are out $300-$500.
Microsoft Windows Defender presents itself as a spyware and virus protector. Guess what? IT defines what is spyware and virus. That may include free software, freeware, and even software you may have written yourself. Yeah, liberty. Oh wait, what liberty?
If your hardware is not 100% Vista Approved, Windows can automatically make your audio and/or video sound/look much crappier than it should. By playing it legally on legal hardware, it may be crippled, degraded, and altered, even though you own it. Awesome.
Your computer will run slower than under XP. In fact, you may need to buy a new computer just to browse the web and check your email: something you've been doing for years.
You may not alter any of this evil. By installing it, you have agreed that "you may not work around any technical limitations in the software".
You could not be any more wrong or intentionally ignorant.

You do not need Microsoft's permission to upgrade the computer. I have upgraded the video card, RAM, hard drive, moved the OS to a different partition, and never had to ask Microsoft's permission or have any kind of authentication issue.

I have audio and video hardware that is not Vista approved and I have never experienced a degradation of audio or video quality. That is a situation that nobody has ever experienced because it cannot happen. It's a situation that can only happen if you have a HD-DVD that is specially encoded and restricted, and those disks do not exist yet outside of the labs, and may never exist outside of the labs.

As a surprise, Apple is going to have to enable the same exact "degradation" for untrusted video channels when they add Blu-ray playback support.

Vista runs plenty fast and some of the new features actually make it more convenient and efficient to use compared to XP.

I had Linux dual booting on my previous computer. Linux doesn't like the setup on my current computer. It doesn't like the partitioning for some reason. I haven't gotten around to figuring out what the problem is. Getting Linux running is a low priority and I only consider Linux a curiosity to tickle with. Not worth the effort yet to get working.

Windows has all of the software and utilities that I need to do what I need to do. Some of the software I use is freeware, some free as in speech while other is only free as in beer. Other software I use is commercial. Funny that some of the commercial stuff I use beats out the free stuff by a wide margin. Too bad there is no commercial incentive to make better software for Linux. Oh, and Windows has all the support for the hardware I want to use as well. If I switched over to Linux I'd have to say goodbye to my $300 M-Audio audio interface and I'm not sure how well my scanner would work in Linux.

[AlanChambers]

You could not be any more wrong or intentionally ignorant.

I found the source blog for this disinformation. http://groundstate.ca/node/1160. The first reply tries to put the author straight.

To be fair, Linux is much more than a curiosity. I am currently working on a mobile phone that uses embedded Linux as the OS: it's good.

But I do find it frustrating that support for PC hardware is lagging, or depends on whether someone is motivated enough to provide it. For example, the latest from Compiz is wonderful (http://compiz.org/Home/Screenshots), but alas does not seem to work with my card. Irritating.


Al

[Smilymarco]

Im using Ubuntu 7.10 at work all the time and at home i have a dual boot with Windows XP for games and stuff like that and Ubuntu Studio (just for a test)

[gkmac]

Oh, and Windows has all the support for the hardware I want to use as well. If I switched over to Linux I'd have to say goodbye to my $300 M-Audio audio interface and I'm not sure how well my scanner would work in Linux.If I switched over to Windows I'd have to say goodbye to my Hauppauge PVR-150 video capture card. Every single time I've tried to install the driver on my Windows installation, my PC is sent on a BSOD-reboot loop as soon as the drivers have finished installing. With the drivers on the supplied CD and the latest ones downloaded from the Internet. Every time. A full reinstall of Windows never helps.

My dad's computer has a peculiar motherboard which worked well in Windows 98, but when I upgraded it to Windows 2000 (by a clean install) the on-board USB ports stopped working altogether and when you shut down the PC, it freezes saying "It is now safe to turn off your computer". No drivers I could find on the Internet helped. And yet both my Linux live CDs were always able to talk to whatever was connected to that USB interface, and "poweroff" really did turn the power off.

"Windows has all the support for the hardware I want to use"... I trust you're not running 64-bit Vista then. We're all at the hands of the hardware manufacturers who are having to recompile their drivers in 64-bit; lots of people will be left with old useless hardware. Useless not because it's old, but because the hardware makers can't be bothered to recompile the drivers and realise they can make more money by obsoleting their old hardware simply by not bothering to recompile the dirvers.

Whereas my 64-bit Linux installation on my lounge PC can still use everything, simply because the open-source code of the drivers is home-compiled straight into 64-bit.

[burjzyntski]

If you could ever manage to get a game to run in Linux, could it run DX10 settings if you have a good enough video card?

I've had Steam (namely CS), WoW, and Worms (the game :rolleyes: ) running through Wine 'just fine' before.

Oh, and my mouse's Left-click is working just fine now ;)

I'd like it if everybody that uses Linux describes WHY they like it.

I'll go first:
Linux uses far less processing power than Windows -so it processes things quicker. Windows may *look* nice (in some senses), but Linux has many (many) desktop environments to choose from and manipulate in any way that you prefer. I like everything about Gnome's UI in general - the transitions, icons, flexibility, widgets, buttons, everything. KDE is like XP & Vista. Fluxbox/Blackbox are very simple and very fast, but nice looking - no clutter. Running programs, making changes, or executing from the terminal is much quicker than navigating with the mouse. Linux is much more stable than Windows, and is ideal for computers that are left turned on for extended periods of time. I prefer Linux over Windows because if there is anything that is not working properly, you can make it work properly. It's not the same as applying a patch or downloading an update as much as it's forcing a change. Anything you want to be done on a computer can be done in a *nix distro.

[john_childs]

I found the source blog for this disinformation. http://groundstate.ca/node/1160. The first reply tries to put the author straight.
Those kinds of rants by Linux users just serves to make them look like rabid idiots. You can compare the benefits of Linux of Windows without resorting to such outright idiocy.

To be fair, Linux is much more than a curiosity. I am currently working on a mobile phone that uses embedded Linux as the OS: it's good.

I call it a curiosity because I'm not going to switch to it. The only reason I want to run it is to play with it and see what it is like.

I have worked on projects using Windows XP Embedded and others using Windows CE. Linux, XP Enbedded, and Windows CE all have their place in the embedded OS market. Once you get beyond the basic OS, the aspect that makes an OS successful on a consumer device (like a phone or GPS or media player, etc.) is how the interface is designed, how smoothly the interface works, and how pleasing it is to look at and use (eye candy). Those features aren't so much the OS as the hard work of application and UI developers. That work is mostly the same whether it is Linux, XPe, or Windows CE.
[/QUOTE]


But I do find it frustrating that support for PC hardware is lagging, or depends on whether someone is motivated enough to provide it. For example, the latest from Compiz is wonderful (http://compiz.org/Home/Screenshots), but alas does not seem to work with my card. Irritating.

It is things like Compiz that make me want to try to get Linux working as a dual boot. Otherwise I'd just play with Linux inside a VM within Windows.

[john_childs]

"Windows has all the support for the hardware I want to use"... I trust you're not running 64-bit Vista then.
I don't see the need for a 64-bit OS for home use and business desktop use. I don't use any applications that require a 64-bit OS. I see no benefit to running a 64-bit OS unless you really need it (and you'll know if you need it because the software you want to use will state that it needs a 64-bit OS). 64-bit is still going through growing pains. I don't want to subject myself to that.

[AlanChambers]

Those features aren't so much the OS as the hard work of application and UI developers. That work is mostly the same whether it is Linux, XPe, or Windows CE.


Quite so. I've used many Windows application frameworks over the years, and now look forward to getting my teeth into Qtopia. There is a WinCE project in the pipeline which I might be part of, too. I don't understand why the debate has to be so polarised.


Al

[gkmac]

I don't see the need for a 64-bit OS for home use and business desktop use. I don't use any applications that require a 64-bit OS. I see no benefit to running a 64-bit OS unless you really need itSo why are a lot of PCs you can buy nowadays 64-bit? If you've paid for 64-bit hardware you might as well use it, otherwise you might as well buy a Porsche and never use top gear.

As for not seeing the need for a 64-bit OS, a very rich man once said that "640k should be enough for everyone".64-bit is still going through growing pains. I don't want to subject myself to that.Well my MythTV lounge PC is 64-bit OS, libraries, drivers and programs from top to bottom, and the fact it's 64-bit has caused absolutely zero extra problems.

[johnfoss]

So why are a lot of PCs you can buy nowadays 64-bit?Why do people use Hummers to drop their kids off at school? Why drive a Ferrari to work if your commute is always on crowded, stop-and-go roadways (Ferraris are not known for their comfort). Why own a $4000 mountain bike if you only ride it every third weekend?

Because you can.

[gkmac]

Perhaps I was a little unclear when I said "a lot of PCs you can buy nowadays are 64-bit". If you want a decent performing PC these days you will have to buy a 64-bit one, because they're the only decent performing ones that are available. Some time from now, only 64-bit PCs will be available full stop.

john_childs says he doesn't see the need for a 64-bit OS. Well, many Windows users don't really have a need for Vista, and yet very soon Vista is the only version of Windows that you will be able to get. And when 64-bit PCs are the only ones available, will the next version of Windows after that be available for 32-bit PCs at all?

[psbagumba]

I'm running Debian 4.0 on an old machine that no longer runs Windows ME.
128 meg and Debian runs fine (and free)

[john_childs]

What does going to a 64-bit OS gain the average user, other than bragging rights?

Most operations and applications aren't going to be any faster or have a visible positive change. Most likely you're going to notice the things that no longer work.

Most people aren't doing workstation class work on a computer even if the computer is powerful enough to be considered a workstation. If you work with huge data files you might get some benefit. If you work with 4GB+ image files or large video files or other large file based operation you might see some benefit, but no guarantee. The advantage with 64-bits is that you can use memory mapped file operations to manipulate large (4GB+) files, but that's an issue that developers get to play with while writing software and not something for end users.

We may be moving in the direction of 64-bit OSs becoming the standard. But that's still going to be a ways off. And even when we are there it will still be useless fluff for most people. You don't need 64-bits to run productivity applications, view video, edit pictures, browse the web, play games, and do most things that typical people use the computer for. Even power users don't need 64-bits for much of what they do unless they are a special case where they work with large data files regularly.

[evil-nick]

Agreed. The only thing 64-bit is really good for is making sure that you can address enough RAM to make Vista usable ;)

Joking aside (I meant that as a joke, any resemblance to actual facts is purely a fluke), I like Linux because it gives me higher performance than either XP or Vista, without needing to upgrade as much. My work machine is more than fast enough to do everything I need it for, and will be for some time.

I'm currently using my gaming machine for work (long story involving random hardware failure on my work box) and I've noticed that it's not much faster, even though it has more than twice the RAM, dual cores, and a modern (not 6 year old) video card. And that's running the accelerated graphics on both machines.

One thing I do like about Linux is that I have more options for just about everything, except games and video editing. For games, I use XP, and video editing I use iMovie (until I have time to figure out Final Cut Pro ;))

Now that I think of it though, 64-Bit computing isn't important for what we can do now, it's what we *will* be able to do in the future. What could we do in Windows '95 that we couldn't do in Windows 3.1?