Slashdot Mirror
The Road to Linux: The Descent (Part One)
So the Road to Linux, it turns out, isn't exactly an Interstate. There's all sorts of potholes, construction delays and unmarked turns. I can't say I wasn't warned, only that I was too dense to quite get it.
First, I had to survive nearly getting roasted alive for weeks, after I posted the first mysterious question-mark and apostrophe-filled columns from my Power Mac 7100/80 using Microsoft Word 8. After years of writing online, my technology as well as my opinions had suddenly become controversial. People were not simply disagreeing with me, but challenging my techno-identity and geekhood, in some cases demanding that I go away, urging Slashdot to make me go away. One thread actually took up the question of how to stop publication of my next book, which is about geeks.
I also got several thousand pieces of advice, much of it conflicting, from friendly, generous, sometimes impassioned Linux advocates suggesting programs, approaches, systems and techniques I didn't understand and had never heard of.
Jeff wrote that I should do what he did, get a clone. "A K6-300 mhz machine with 32 megs of memory, a 4GHD, etc., $479 at a computer show. I used an old svga monitor," he wrote. He urged me to undertake four tasks. One: Install Linux. Two:Get the Xwindows (GUI) working. Three: Get it on my home network. Four Get it on the Net. Others wrote of their own Linux experiences, nightmares and triumphs and urged me to hang in there: "I know it's hard," wrote Sam - in a message I've since posted above my monitor, "but believe me, it's worth it. It's about knowledge, freedom and getting to the next place. Be patient. Ask for help. Take it."
Okay. My house is now crammed with fat, ugly Linux guides that my wife and kid stare at in mistrust and confusion. On the floor is "Linux for Dummies," which, despite its name, is even more incomprehensible than the two-pound "Secrets of Linux" I keep around, largely unread, as a potential weapon against intruders.
At my elbow is "Linux in 24 Hours," ("when you only have time for the answers: 24 proven one-hour lessons"). Despite its alluring title, and the promise of answers, I, like Gertrude Stein, am still trying to figure out the questions. I got in trouble in Hour Two: "If you already have Linux on your system, an install using partitions will overwrite all the data currently there." I surrendered by Hour 18: "Scheduling Personal Reminders and Tasks with the "at" Command. It was the "car pool" example that finished me off:
# at 16:15
X message - display: 0.0 "The car pool is leaving in 15 minutes."
EOT
Job 4 will be executed using /bin/sh
I put this book aside. I wondered if this wasn't merely a ruse to lure hapless newbies onto Linux sites, where the secret agenda was to sufficiently discourage them, preserving Linux as yet another big but exclusive club. The idea is brilliant, really: You create something new and collaborative and demand that everybody use it; when they try, they find it impossible and run away, or are chased off for being dumb.
But fortunately for me, I am as willful as I am technologically-impaired. I needed to use Linux. And, after nearly a decade on the Net and the Web, no ill-mannered geeks were chasing me anywhere. I went to O'Reilly's much praised "Linux In A Nutshell" by Jessica Perry Hekman.
It's not only written in something I more or less recognize as English, but it alone mentions some of the many powerful reasons for taking Linux on: "Linux revises the grand creativity and the community of sharing that UNIX was long known for. The unprecedented flexibility and openness of UNIX - which newcomers usually found confusing and frustrating, but which they eventually found they couldn't live without - continually inspired extensions, new tools like Perl, and experiments in computer science that sometimes ended up in mainstream commercial systems."
Such analysis is critical in books like this. It gives people some context, some rationale for why they should endure what they're about to endure.
"Linux In A Nutshell" is exceptionally well-organized and designed --- logical, coherent, even patient. I learned a lot from it, including the broad outlines of how an operating system like Linux works - something I never got even the slightest sense of after nearly 10 years as a Mac loyalist. In an odd sort of way, that was the appeal of Macs for people like me: you never have to really learn much about the computer. I was slow to consider the implications of that. The toughest thing to grasp is what you don't know.
In fact, I didn't know how much of my computer I'd never seen or how much of it I could control, personalize or change if I were willing to take the time. That I was buying so much junk I didn't want, was completely at the mercy of greedy corporations, using so much memory and speed on things I didn't need, was a shocker. If I were willing to take the trouble, learn the language, computing would become an utterly different experience.
Unfortunately, even this cogent book was too much too fast. And I'd skipped over the caution in the prologue: "If you haven't obtained Linux yet, or have it but don't know exactly how to get started using it, buy the O'Reilly &Associates book ?Running Linux,? by Matt Welsh and Lar Kaufman. This will give you everything you need in order to install your Linux system, configure it, and start becoming productive. The book you're looking at will now prove useful."
So back to Amazon. "Running Linux" is now at the top of the pile.
Meanwhile, most of my helpful e-mail advisors came to the conclusion that I should get a pre-configured Linux Box. A gentle way of telling me I was a long shot to make it through installing Linux myself. Geeks can figure this out in about two e-mails. That message was disappointing, but it was also true.
The processing of installing Linux was likely to discourage, not empower me. As a professional writer, the technics were less important than the result, and less important to me than the politics and symbolism. I couldn't really afford - either in time or money - the long and often bruising process that installing Linux from scratch can be. (Although not always: Davin Hills messaged that a friend handed him a CD and he installed Linux in about an hour.)
So, a Linux box. I went to a Virginia company called International Information Services (www.iisworld.com), which five or six /. regulars had recommended highly.
The people at IIS had been reading Slashdot, it turned out, and recognized my name when I called. They knew the spot I was in. Matthew Shields was calm and patient. I told him I had to get up and running early, or I'd bog down. My hard drive is filled with aborted programs and games I've never mastered and quickly abandoned.
Matthew said he would build me my own machine, assembling the parts from different places. He suggested a Pentium I, or to be more precise, an Intel Pentium 233 MMX, with 32 MB Ram, a 1.2 GB HB, a Floppy and CD-Rom drive, a 2MB PCI video card, and a 56kbs modem, with a refurbished 15" Sony Trinotron tube.
This would cost, he figured, somewhere in the range of $600, by half the least amount of money I'd ever spent on a computer. The box would include Redhat, a word processing program, and IIS would even configure my ISP for me if I gave them the numbers. I should be able to plug the box in, turn it on, and start running Linux, with a desktop that would be familiar and coherent to a Macman. Then, I could move along at my own pace, learning as I went.
I admit to fantasizing a bit about posting my first column using Linux. Even though my box was assembled by somebody else, it would still be an achievement, a landmark. I'd please all the people who supported this trip, and who obviously care deeply about the Net, the Web and OSS, and I could give a delicious digital finger to all the arrogant creeps who had been jeering along the way. I would be practicing what I preach, earning spurs, controlling my technology, breaking free of corporate marketmeisters.
Matthew was out sick, which delayed things a bit. Then there were various snowstorms. My current ISP doesn't handle Linux, so I had to get another one. The holidays intervened, then some traveling for work. Finally, last Saturday, the two boxes arrived on my front porch.
[ CT : Tomorrow, Part 2, where Jon's Linux box is savagely beaten, eaten, and maybe even repaired ]
a Linux Box was delivered this week to my house this week.
And you do this for a living?
Why is he telling us this ? Who is this man ?
"Hi. I'm Typo Flamer. Yeah, all I do with my life is flame people when they type something wrong. So watch out. Wherever there are misspellings, I'm on it. Wherever there is bad grammar, I'll be there. Wherever there is a repeated word, you will find me: Typo Flamer!"
It didn't take me long to ditch Netcom's NetCruiser package and use straight PPP. When I set up Prodigy for my future in-laws, the AOL wannabe software crashed and burned, so I had to get rid of it. In neither case was it easy to discover the correct settings.
I've never used AOL, but I think that it requires you to use their proprietary front end.
What is the deal? If any other new user has questions on how to get things set up, their post would be completely ignored; yet this new user gets to bore everyone with the same story that we all went through.
I'm happy to help, but I don't want to see this wasting space in the main article list.
My 'Road to Linux'.
6 Months Unix experience (newbie)
I took a class, I got a distribution as part of that class (RH4.2) I used said distribution. Simple like 3.1459.
Note that I was not (and am not) a Unix Guru, and that I din't write ANY long articles detailing how hard it was.
I Maintain that installing Linux is JUST AS EASY as installing WIN95. I feel that I can say this (having worked in several IS depts over the last 5 years)simply because I've done both. Installing WIN95 requires a lot of guess-work. A Linux install will require about the same amount of guesswork for someone who is "technologically-Challenged" Once you've got it installed GLINT or RPM puts installing packages on approx. the same level as using the standard SETUP.EXE that we all know and love. A Jon Katz is not going to begin mucking about with his inittab within the first month any more than he is going to muck about with the WIN95 registry. Learning curve my ass.
*The Confident AC, secure in the belief that he has made a valid and well reasoned argument, Thinks silently "Proofreading is so Passe" and foolishly clicks "Submit"*
It seems a peculiar expectation that the :)
geeks reading Slashdot would care about
the trials and tribulations of some neophyte.
Isn't this fodder for comp.os.linux.*? I come
here to read about cool stuff, and if it's not
cool I don't give a rat's ass
This guy has a resume showing a spiraling career going from wide circulation to rags I've never heard of. Now he's back to having circulation via Slashdot, but he gets paid what his writing is worth.
This man is not a geek. But he makes his money writing about geek topics from an outsider's perspective. He should be writing articles in some other circle of interest because I have yet to see anything worthwhile from him with regards to geek issues.
For some reason the powers that be who run Slashdot (it *is* their site but I'll gripe anyway) seem to think this guy has something important to say. He's gone on and on about how totally helpless he is with a PC in more articles than I can count with my shoes still on but he still hasn't really told us anything new. Duh.
Rob, lose this guy; he's dragging you down. You want a geek commentator to write articles for this site? Grab someone with at least half a clue. Heck I'd love to see Dvorak writing here. He's not always popular but at least he's a geek.
Human experience is something Linux has historically ignored really. Consider this kind of article to be a Translation of one world-view to another. SlashDot may have begun as a purely insider space, but it has morphed into somthing far bigger.
Don't exclude the real world.
I have to disagree. Linux is getting easier and easier all the time, true. Red Hat 5.2 was delightful and Linuxconf is getting to be world class. But just try and get a PnP Creative Labs sound card to work.... Windows 95 is SO much easier in that respect. I am eagerly awaiting Red Hat 6.0 with Linux 2.2 to see if the many kernel improvements will make my sound card come to life for the first time or not. Even after going through the HOW-TO's it just will not work on my Red Hat 5.2.
Never mind the Part Two, I dont think you are cutout for linux, go write a penthouse letter.
Linux is NOT difficult to install, I think it is as easy if not easier to install than Windows 95 and NT. I installed all four in the last month and Linux was responsible for the smallest amount of aggravation.
A few hours with RedHat's User Manual (free in html form) will make the installation of their distribution a simple task. I took the time to read it, and my attempt at installing was successful the first time. The configuration of the OS is time consuming but logical, there is hardly need to plead with computer as is necessary with the M$ OS. With Linux if an approach works one time it works everytime, no fancy blue screens or little error dialogs.
When you make Linux appear to be more difficult to install than it actually is you make it more difficult to convince Windoze users to switch. And the theory about the exclusive club is ridiculous. I am a Linux newcomer and everyone has been quite helpful.
blakdogg@bigfoot.com
xyzzy is from the "Origional Adventure" game.
It's a secret word that transports you from
the well house to the cave.
polite? considerate?? Those ideas are way outdated. Get with the program, life is about making oneself feel good, above anything else. So we have these people that hate everything that doesn't interest them. And all web sites had better only contain content they like, or else!!
Pour les francophones (french speaking people),
une chronique du meme genre:
http://www.mmedium.com/dossiers/linux/
--
PC
Here's an interesting take on Linux...
m l
http://www.indiatimes.com/news/more990110-01.ht
There is alot to be done when it comes to Linux "ease of use factor" and I think that is the greatest obstruction when Linux tries to take on the world.
;)) is good at!
There are literally thousands and thousands of cryptic Linux utilities that can do this and that, shipped in a tarball with some make file tweaking required if it should ever even almost work on your own system.
But why doesent these idealistic geeks put some effort in making Linux easier to use? Answer: They dont want to!
There is no glory in the geek community to make, say a modem connection utility that can handle all kinds of modems, systems and ISPs. Its not fun either, its just hard work and lots of testing.
Linux is Unix and Unix is a geek OS. And geeks dont want things to be easy and self explaining because then anyone can use Linux and that really hurts the Linuxgeeks ego, because using Linux is the only thing he (no point writing he/she
If I want to find a file in a standard Linux/Unix system then I have to write:
find / -name myfile -print
That is really stupid!
Im not saying no work is done in this field, but theres not enough. Macs and Windows can be a stuggle too. But you usually dont get stuck doing routine stuff. In Linux that happens all the time.
I love Linux because of its stability and network capabilities, and the fact that even though its made by non profit progammers it outshines commercial server OSes in many aspects.
But as a everyday desktop OS? Forget it! I dont have the time to waste. Leave it to the geeks for now. Thats what they want as well, right?
/Patrik, Sweden
Personally, I enjoy reading Jon's articles and since /. isn't a formal place, occasional typos don't bother me. I assume he's getting paid for other work, not for this.
If you do not know who jon is .....
you must be new to slashdot.......
I thought we were a little harsh to this guy initially, since he was trying to find his way around and fit in with the crowd. But now that he has had time to adjust, I'm getting really sick of the "I'm a geek and proud of it" attitude. In my book, the only people that call *themselves* geeks are the ones who just don't get it. Kind of like calling yourself a hacker. If you are a geek and/or hacker, theres no need to proclaim it to everybody. Your actions, attitudes, and lifestyles speak for you.
So please, Jon, enough with the pleading for all of us to believe you're a geek. Just tell your story (however long winded) and leave out all the self referential stuff. It would make for a much easier (and shorter) read.
Mac installation instructions:
1. Put in the disk
2. Launch the installer
3. Click where it says "OK"
4. Reboot.
5. It works.
I heard on the net that driving a car could be a liberating, exhilirating experience. These people with their cars are a free breed, going where the road takes them. They can put their own air in the tires, fill up the tank when it gets empty, and all sorts of empowering things. I decided that I, too, wanted to experience driving, because at heart, I am truly a gearhead.
I read all I could - about internal combustion engines, hydraulic systems, durometer ratings on various sorts of tire rubber, paint additives, etc. I was somewhat daunted, but I kept reading. It took months!
Finally, I decided that I wanted to experience a drive firsthand.
And you know what? It was easy! I just called a cab company, paid them some money, and off we went! Now I hang out at car rallys and racetracks with my fellow gearheads, discussing the finer points of THE DRIVE.
Jon - come on, buddy. PLEASE just start PLAYING with Linux! It won't hurt you! Don't write your next book with it yet, or save your important email there, in case you mess something up. But for god's sake, if you want to experience the things you've been waxing eloquent about, you have got to go get yourself an old computer, install Linux yourself, and just start exploring.
Getting a pre-installed system is fine, and that's a way that some people can get up and running quickly. But you talk about wanting to be part of the community, to really understand what this is all about. Flipping the switch on a box just isn't going to get you there.
Jon is like my little buddy. He promised to direct all unix grrlz to me too (or naive wanna-be unix grrlz for my personal one on one training).
though he hasn't yet
im sure he will
rpm -i packagename.rpm
the i is for install
rpm -U packagename.rpm
the U is for upgrade
i don't blame you, i had to consult the elders for this wisdom
But what's it GOOD for? *smirk*
B) OSS works, lot's of good projects prove this. The concept can be applied to other things like the Open Searcher thing on mozilla. Is it time for an Open Support group? When you post to usenet, you often get a lot of responses, sometimes you're made to feel like an idiot, sometimes or even a lot of the times you're responded to in a hostile way. I've got multiple degrees in computer science, I've been using UNIX for well over nearly 15 years and I'm having trouble make linux use my sound card. I post a message on usenet and I'm belittled by some punks because I don't know what I'm doing!?! I love linux but there are definitely some bad apples in the community when it comes to interacting with others. It seems like a volunteer support organization could be put together where users could go fill out some forms on a web page and have the question forwarded to a volunteer. Ultimately the fruit of such a group might be improved HOWTOs and or an expert system for providing linux answers. Is this crazy?
My own personal story:
I have been using linux for a couple of years. Using linux, I learned lots of things and so my girlfriend's father asked me to take care of his new pc's setup. So I found myself installing W95 on his K6-2 300 with 7 Giga of HD from a pirate cd (I know, I know...). It all worked on the first try, so I said to myself "After all, it's not so bad. It seems to work". After this success, I decided I would make my mother happy (she wanted Word at home) and install the thing on my pentium 100, with 200 spare Mb on two dos partitions. The first attempt aborted near the end. I tried again, changed parameters, formatted one of the partitions and after five or six attempts gave up (sorry, mum). Not a question of space, though.
Now don't you come and tell me installing W is easy. I never had such problems with RedHat (not even the first time, I think with release 3.something).
Mr Katz,
/. These are tools of people with a brain who just happen to be interested in computers moreso than the average win95 or macOS jockey.
/.
I have read every article you have written for slashdot so far. I truly appreciate the idea that you're trying to understand what you call "geek culture". However, I think it might be a better idea to post articles of such an untechnical nature in a place other than the headlines on slashdot.
I dont like the word geek to be tacked on to everyone who uses linux or reads
I appreciate your efforts to understand, the mainstream press thinks us hackers and computer terrorists. But these articles would be of most interest to people who are linux clueless, not those who know the stuff and read a page like
Just my 2c... nice work Katz, but wrong forum.
t0ast.
1. Your statement is not a correct sentence.
2. The article needs proofing, of course.
3. The mistake did not prevent you from understanding, did it?
4. Fuck off.
You're giving the impression that you have't actually got round to installing a distribution yet. Is that the case?
If so, you're making a bit of a meal of a 20 minute job.
Get it installed, break it, then decide if you need to read all these books!
No.
MHO if you have your own proprietary front end you're more than just an Internet Service Provider.
s/more/less/
:)
Running Linux and Linux in a Nutshell are indispensable. If you use Red Hat, the RH Install Guide has come a long way since 4.1 (which was my first crack at this) and now is quite good. I find man pages tend to give me a headache -- terse to the point of being inscrutable, and usually worse than useless for newbies. HOWTOs and the documentation that comes with various programs are sometimes excellent, sometimes a lot less. But the main thing is to get some dirt under your fingernails. Jon, if I were you I'd learn what I could from the pre-built Linux box but I'd also try to get another old box to play with and install the OS yourself. I personally have learned a lot from doing repeated installations, especially regarding disk partitioning and setting up X Window System (by far the two hardest parts of the process, at least under latter-day versions of RH). On my first Linux box I'd mess around and mess around until I screwed something up good enough that I'd find it prudent to reinstall from scratch. After about a dozen times I felt pretty comfortable with the install routine ;) ... and before long I was learning how to recompile the kernel, compile Apache/PHP/MySql to all work with each other, etc etc etc. Now I've installed RH 5.1 on two servers at work and the process was smooth as can be. Good luck!
You are a freakin' retard. Your words try to portray you as high and mighty, above others comments. There you sit, correcting other peoples errors -- passing judgement upon them -- and you can't get it right yourself. Of course we expect journalists to write correctly, but when they slip up it doesn't mean we should be asses about it, as you so eloquently were. Before you go correcting me: This is a disclaimer for anything grammatically incorrect or misspelled. Happy now? Get a clue.
Or just expressing an honest opinion about the ill-written drivel this guy belches out.
in fact, he writes reasonably well. he's not john mcphee, but he's clear and coherent.
maybe he's just here to set a good example of competent prose writing. slashdot could use one. you seem capable of expressing a simple thought effectively, but you're just about the only one.
Step 1: Abandon said "ISP" in favour of one with
a clue.
That's it.
I agree with your point of view but...(and I don't intend to flame here)
With all those skills, I can't believe you couldn't figure out how to unpackage an RPM or DEB package.
I entered "RPM +tgz +convert" into a search page and found two ways to do it.
Not to mention that a man page isn't much good if you don't know the name of the command you are looking for. Even experienced computer users coming from other OS's (windoze and OS/2) may know exactly what they want to do, but not the command to do it to do more research.
.wav file to a .au in linux?" man sox. Not exactly obvious to someone who hasn't been here before, is it?
Example: "how do I convert a
I think, this applicable to ISP who use prop. interfaces only (to show their ads at our expense).
call netcom and get the specs from them, here is what you need
/etc/ppp/ ppp-on and ppp-on-dialer like the howtos say with your name, password and phone number, you put in the dns ip addresses in /etc/resolv.conf file
/var/log/messages file
/sbin/route to see if your ppp interface is connected.
you need to know the
phone number, obvious...
dns ip addresses,
also need smtp, pop and nntp address for ix.netcom.com they are smtp.ix.netcom.com, popd.ix.netcom.com and nntp.ix.netcom.com
you set up the
run ppp-on script if you got problems connecting then watch
using tail -f to see where you are failing.
once connected ping one of the dns ip addresses to see if you can get out, if not type
if you are connected then ping www.slashdot.org to see if they address resolves, if it does, you're set, if not then your resolv.conf is not setup correctly...
Hey Rob can we boot this guy off of here? This kind of absolutely useless drivel needs to be on Katz website and not yours.
You could have used that ~9K of space to say something USEFUL, like 'proofread' you dolt. technics != techniques, and actually mean different things.
Joe Robertson
jmrobert@ro.com
Come on, Macs aren't "real computers," because they're too dang easy. Only Linux has the manly ingredients to be called "real computin'," and damn you if you don't believe it.
..."
And forget about Apple's OS X Server, built on Mach. That ain't Mach, because it's too damn easy. It's Mac, therefore not manly, therefore not "real computin'" or a "real computer."
By the way, geniuses, stop wasting your time here and make a real installer for Linux if it's so great. And idiot who says "trust me stuff can go wrong with the Mac install
Real tough. Stop install. Boot from system CD, re-install by clicking "click me to install." Not tough, not manly, not "computin'" or "computer," but effective.
Look at the subject line...
Codifex sans a password.
Ever try sb awe 64 under windows nt same problems.
I got it working under linux about the same quality of sound as under windows nt, 95 does better though.
I am Gonad the BallBearing. Kneel before me knave. Know my power knumbknuts.
teasea@work... knot actually at work presently.
"When you make Linux appear to be more difficult to install than it actually is you make it more difficult to convince Windoze users to switch."
I would rather see what the process is like from a new user's standpoint and know what the potential caveats are than receive the same hype of any OS maker: "it's easy, just do it!"
I enjoy reading Jon's articles, none of the content I have seen so far in any of them has given me reason to *not* want to run Linux sometime in the near future. In actuality, it is the attitude that I read in most of the posters here that is turning me off from this "glowing beacon of computing freedom."
And on goes the story of the wannabe geek.
Jon decided to punt and let someone else install Linux for him. So for all his political posturing, he seeks recourse to a corporation.
If, as he believes, Linux is all about freedom and empowerment, he should have toughed it out and actually learned something about his computer. Instead, he learned that the way you get something done is to pay someone else to do it for you.
Personally, I have no problem with that, but then, I like capitalism.
On the other hand, I was able to go from abject cluelessness to a login prompt in less than two hours.
I think this whole thing throws doubt on Jon's credibility as well as his motivation. Is he running Linux because it will give him better control over his computer, or is he running it because it's the techno-chic and politically correct thing to do?
I can't believe Rob puts up with this poseur.
-Joe Merlino
I'm ashamed to admit that it took me 2 weeks to install RH Linux 5.0. This was back when RH 5.1 was the current release. I read how easy it was going to be and it still took me 2 weeks. Keep in mind, my first computers were Atari 400, commodore 64's and I now am a professional software engineer writing Windows software.
/mbr and lilo.
So where did I have problems?
Well, first off I was trying to do a dual-boot setup with Windows and Linux. I got it to work, but I will never attempt this again. The expensive partitioning software I bought PQ Magic 3.0 wouldn't recognize the Linux partitions and would crash. I was forced to use RedHat's disk druid for my partitioning and was never really succesful until I started playing around with fdisk
But probably the biggest area of difficulty was with hardware configuration. It would not recognize my Intel E100 network card which worked fine under Windows 95 but not in Linux. Neither did the drivers for my AGP video card work (making X-windows impossible), apparently these weren't supported until a later release of Xfree and Redhat 5.1. I was told I could dowload the video drivers from xfee, but since my network card wouldn't work I couldn't get on the net. Catch-22. I ended up having to toss the network card for an Intel E100B, which did work. I posted this network problem many times to newsgroups and no one helped.
Eventually, I got it all working after buying a new network card, waiting for the next release of RedHat which included the new Xfree drivers. But this process still took 2 weeks.
Next time I install Linux, I am doing the following:
1. Only using hardware I have previously checked for compatability with the specific distribution I am installing.
2. Installing on a fresh hard disk. Forget dual-booting. It's not worth it.
3. Using the most recent release of the distribution. Many times, you will need the newest drivers included on the distribution and this won't be obvious until something doesn't work for some unexplained reason.
baah, people are for wimps! Machines are the way.
dpkg -i blah.deb
maybe it took you so long because you refused to look at any docmentation??
I have heard SOOOO many places people complaning about how dselect is "impossobile" to learn.. ALL YOU DO IS READ THE FSCKING BUILT IN HELP BEFORE YOU TRY TO DO ANYTHING. Apparently people don't like having to learn things... even if it takes all of 2 minutes.
Amen Brother! (or Sister...) I like the insight I get here. I can't understand why people that aren't interested don't just skip the article. It's probably just the obsessive-compulsive people that have to read every message posted on /. that are getting upset.
Also, Katz is twice as interesting because he's coming from a Mac environment--this task probably could only be harder on him if he'd never used a computer ever.
Lastly, I don't feel like spending the rest of my career in a "Windoze Everywhere" world. Before this can change non-nerds need an OS that's easier for them to use. Linux is getting there rapidly, but it's obviously not perfect yet.
KN
I used to do that back in the CP/M days. Had my little handy reference sheets of which hex codes represented which Z80 instuctions. Kinda fun actually. ;-)
BASH RULEZ 4EVER! You want file managers, get a Mac, or run KDE... (hehe hope you have lotsa ram to spare)
locate filename
dumbass
COME ON YOU TECHNO-WIMP!!! INSTALL IT LIKE A MAN. DONT BE AFRAID. JUST DO IT.
push all those books aside. clear your head. put in the redhat CD. you have nothing to fear.
SO GO DO IT ALREADY!!!
There. Maybe you got the message.
Maybe not..........
The best way to learn Linux IS TO USE IT. When I first started with Linux, I knew nothing about it, had never used any kind of UNIX system, and I only got it because I really really hated M$ windoze. It just bought it and installed it. The easiest way to learn about Linux is to use it. Experiment with it. Not read hundreds of books before you even touch it. If you have specific problems there are tons of man pages and HOWTOs to help you out. Quit stalling and just install the damn thing already!
He's talking about the Netcom Netcruiser accounts. I didn't even know they still offered these. Netcruiser is their own proprietary software, and back when I last used it (years ago) it didn't even support 16 bit winsock apps. I think thats changed, however, since its a proprietary internet software package (and it probably doesn't use PPP or SLIP) if you have a netcruiser account it won't work with linux.
:>), and I had no problem getting one working with them.
Netcom offers regular dialup accounts as well however (I think they offer the netcruiser accounts primarily as a compromise to net.newbies, since it IS easy to use with an integrated web browser and email client, just not recommended for anyone who is beyond the stage where they think if the icon dissapears the program has been deleted
If you have a lot of problems I suggest looking around on your Linux CD for a PPP configuration package. If you have XISP I seem to recall it being quite easy to use. If you run debian use pppconfig.
I like his comments. In fact, this shows a possible market Linux could create. For several houses/appartment buildings, Linux could be on one or two computers run by people who know what they're doing. Everyone else has an account on those machines and pays a small monthly fee for it. In return, they can use all the applications and store all their stuff on the servers.
--Eric Guenterberg
*Configuring -- making it work with your system -- is a nightmarish for mere mortals and non-IT types*
...the REGISTRY(tm)
Same with WIN95, how many Start Menus(tm) and Desktops(tm) have you seen cluttered with empty folders name "New Folder(tm)" How many monitors running in the wrong mode causing the display to "look funny"? Nope, Linux(tm) is not easier or harder to install, configure, or use. You get to a point where things can only be cofigured by editing large, complex files (sendmail.cf), there is the same point on a WIN95 system, where there are no more dialog boxes, there is only
-nme
For those who say installing RH Linux is easy:
/usr/doc.
My background: Variety of experience ranging from IBM mainframes down to writing 6502 device drivers. PCs since DOS 3.x, incl C programming low level disk, EMS, XMS interfaces - but no Unix experience.
Problems:
1. Based on old HOWTOs, I gave a 200MB partition to RH5.0 and asked it to install everything. Took me a while go figure out it ran out of space (messages weren't clear).
2. I wanted to setup a dual-boot system. RH5.0 didn't have an option of making a boot diskette. I told the install not to touch my MBR. I couldn't figure out how to boot Linux to get a copy of the boot block to setup the dual boot - catch 22. Eventually I used bootpart (bootpa20).
3. RH5.1 (different machine) assumed my CD-ROM (hdb1) was a floppy. Huh??? I couldn't install until I figured out how to tell it I had a CD-ROM.
4. All the RTFM hints point to the HOWTOs and man pages. Took me weeks to find
Oh, and I had problems with a noname NIC too.
(With apologies to Dilbert)
Technowimps will never put Linux on their systems. At most they'll just flirt with it but never quite do it. Wimps need Linux (or Windows, or whatever) preinstalled, or they'll never use it. Like sheep grazing contentedly in the field, technowimps contentedly use whatever applications and operating systems came with their computer.
Did you know a majority of Windows users have never installed an application? (On the plus side, not converting them to Linux doesn't help Microsoft, since they'll never buy any apps.)
... boy, this Katz guy gets a lot of responses to his posts... i'm looking at an ad banner as i write this response... lots of responses = lots of banner views... methinks Katz will be around for a while.
What?
I'm guessing that his original ISP only supports
Win9x and Mac, not requires them.
Great.
Now all I need is a support group to help me with my german translations
Yes, they could have done that... But only if they were brain dead. Most NT RAS configurations use plain text authentication.
A corporate RAS system, i.e. for employees, may use the encrypted authentication but then they would expect you to be using their laptops, etc.
*SIGH*
I weep for the future......
It was also the name of a chat system on BITNET
far back in the mists of ancient time...
You may have something along the lines of an annex machine that you're dialing into. On my old dialup account, you had to dial in and then log in to the annex machine and type "ppp" at the "annex:" prompt to start a PPP session. You may want to check and see if you can do anything similar.
I had a lot of fun exploring that annex thing, too. You could see stats for the dialup location, a list of users, how long their connect time is. their IP, and other neat junk.
-- Kev Vance (on a laptop with no slashdot passwd)
*sigh*
Someone hits the point right on the dot and he gets flamed to hell...
Worse off, all the flames just restate his points but make him seem like an evil guy...
Interesting that many of these people will then go off and say "Linux will rule the world in a year!"?
DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?
For an OS to be succesful in the mainstream, it must be easy to use. In some way shape or form.
Windows 95's learning curve is very very shallow. It is quick to learn how to do rudimentary things in it
Linux's learning curve is insanely steep for a newbie computer user. To locate a file, a smart newbie might type in:
find blah blah
What they don't know is, they must first find out find's syntax with find --help. And also, the need to put blah blah in quotes. Who's going to tell them that?
Yes it's in the manual. But who reads it? Few people did for Windows 95. For that, you go to start, click whatever... and then click find files or folder. Then you type in the file and hit enter. Very intuitive. Maybe not as fast as typing `find -name "blah blah"` or `locate "blah blah"`, but much simpler.
Am I wrong? Not in my opinion, and probably not in the opinion of the writer of the article I'm responding to. No doubt that person is smart and he seem to see the light his flamers are denying.
Linux users know learning linux is hell. They want to deny it. But for linux to go mainstream, it must be EASIER TO USE THAN WINDOWS 9x. People will not switch because the OS is faster. It must have a distinct advantage, and that advantage must be big because they will have to retrain a whole corporation to take advantage of this new OS.
To train a corporation for linux would take much longer than to train one for Windows. That's because, while doing a simple thing might take a short amount of time to learn, these simple things often make complex problems. To the advanced linux user, solving them could be a cinch, but a newbie would have to wrack their brains to make an educated guess..
It doesn't help when newbie's are asked to RTFM meanly in newsgroups and chat channels. What they need is a nice guy to guide them through things. That's what I would like to be. I know that most other people don't have time to do this, but at least tell them to piss off nicely, or instruct them exactly what to RTFM (Yes I know that sometimes people will tell you what to RTFM, but many times they don't, which can be a roadblock).
My journey through linux has been filled with roadblocks. I played with it for a year, installing and uninstalling it every month or so for various reasons (Last one because Englightenment wouldn't let me access my old WM and I couldn't figure out how to fix it, and neither could anyone else I asked).
I am back with a more advanced knowledge of the OS itself and solving strange problems is no longer very hard. This time linux is here to stay on my hard drive, but the only reason it got there this time was because the red hat install finally worked.
You may flame me for this, but what I say I firmly believe to be the truth. I am an avid linux fan, but my dad won't be using it until some major changes happen.
Adam the Jazz Guy
magicbox@bestweb.net
First I'm glad that Jon is getting closer to running a Linux system. I think he would have been better off with a K6 instead of a Pentium and they could have used the money they saved for a bigger HD and 2 more MB of video ram.
Intel Pentium 233 MMX, with 32 MB Ram, a 1.2 GB HB, a Floppy and CD-Rom drive, a 2MB PCI video card, and a 56kbs
modem, with a refurbished 15" Sony Trinotron tub
However you overly simplify the job of creating a user-friendly environment. In my opinion there are no user-friendly OSes out there (besides maybe an ATM or a playstation). Win98 and MacOS try to simulate what a user-friendly OS would do, but simulation in the end just doesnt cut it (or even come close). The very thought of Linux being termed user-friendly is outrageous, and can only be made by people completly out of touch with the mass population.
Linux can connect to an NT server using PAP just fine.
Oh I'll get out of your way pal. Hell I'm nowhere fucken near ya. Uh... watch out for the cliff!
I flame Katz because I think his unexamined ideas are dangerous.
True, but not as dangerous as Rob Young! Did you know that bastard killed my dog with his black helicopters? Then he sent his Red Hat Death Commandos to kill ME! He's an evil mastermind! He must be stopped!
a lot of people loath the thought of linux installation. i just got $150 for a service call to install redhat. booted off the cd, patitioned, and select "everything". easy enough.
No installation problems? I once tried to install
Slackware 3.2...the distribution I downloaded from
the net was missing some essential libraries. You
can imagine the funkiness, no? In the end, I settled
for a small, UMSDOS dist., then built on it from
there. Don't think that every installation will
be painless.
Wow. You sound just like one of them NT users. They never have any problems either.
Yeah, right.
How much is Rob paying Katz? Maybe I could get a gig a Slashdot.
It always pisses me off; people who get these super computers and end up doing little more than playing Solitaire on the things. Or people whose companies buy them powerful laptops, or Pentium II 400's with 21-inch screens, so that they can do some Word Processing or run mundane accounting applications.
..."
"I got this really cool computer, Pentium II 400, 128 Meg RAM, 12 GB hard disk
and then they say something like
"... Windows98 'n everything! Cool huh?"
Just think of the millions of powerful computers all over the world whose CPU's loads never go above 5 or 10%. And I'm sitting with a crappy Pentium 120, with a CPU that's maxed out more than half the time.
Most these people use multi-tasking OS's, but end up living in a single-app-at-a-time world anyway. What a waste.
- David Joffe (djoffe@geocities.com)
Maybe a 14 year old doesn't know linux can install linux if he knows something about DOS, windows, and such. let's say, if you give a 14 year old a IBM 390, you expect he knows how to install things?
at least he writes better than you do.
I disagree. Sure the bash prompt can be disorienting for someone who's used to a GUI, but with X and the right desktop environment (KDE or Gnome) you don't have to go to the command line if you don't want to.
If I want to find a file in a standard Linux/Unix system then I have to write:
find / -name myfile -print
That is really stupid!
If you want to find a file from the command prompt in Win95 or NT, the command is:
dir filname.ext /s
Is that any better?
There are plenty of GUI utilities in Linux to shield you from the command line, just as there are in Windows.
Brendan Carter
I guess you haven't looked at KDE yet. Check it out at www.kde.org. It includes everything you are looking for - a GUI ppp, a GUI find, a really nice UI, etc.
;)
Linux is not really hard to use. Good window managers such as KDE, GNOME, Enlightenment, etc. can already shield an inexperienced user from the "horrors" of command line. But you know what? Even though GUI file manager is available, I still use command line. Even though GUI ppp is available, I prefer typing "pppd call ISP" (is THAT really hard?). Even though I can look for files using GUI file finder, I still prefer find command. Why? Because it's faster to type stuff in command line then to click around the screen. Besides, if you want to write a script you have to use command line. The beauty of Linux is that it *combines* the flexibility of Unix with ease of use of MacOS (well, that's definitely a stretch, but Linux geeks are working on it
Check out KDE though. I like it a lot. And honestly, it is one of the reasons why I'm switching to Linux on my desktop (I've been using Linux on my server for quite a while).
Well, i have got to say that Red hat users might think they have done installing the Os, BUT! most of them, after talking to them, i found out that they really don't know much. sure you can just get a CD and press buttons. well that will not work in slackware.
YOU GUYS ALWAYS FORGET THAT SWITCHING FROM WINDOWS95 TO LINUX IS SWITCHING OS ON THE SAME ARCHITECTURE. There's a difference. a MAc person don't ever see command lines like windows95 people do.
Linux will be successful only when totally clueless people like Jon can get it done happy. but don't tell me "knowing how to install red hat" means a great deal. it doesn't. it means pressing buttons.
You say you are in law school, and that you installed Linux. How can that be?
I see your posts a lot. Why do you want to use Linux? Can't Windows do everything you need to do with a computer? What's in it for you?
Do you personally know anyone else who is not a programmer or sysadmin who uses Linux at home? Have you tried to get them to use Linux, with any success?
Lots of questions, because you are about the only regular poster who is not a professional programmer of sysadmin here.
Perplexed
I've installed 3 different distros on 2 computers
(Slackware, Debian and Stampede). It took some time, because I downloaded everything from net and used no CD, but it was not too difficult to install AND configure. Configuring Linux, though, never ends if one uses it much and adds new stuff.
This was not too difficult for me because I have a lot of programming experience and spent a lot of time surfing Linux sites before even beginning to install and use it, so I was well prepared.
I'm very curious how well RedHat, and perhaps Suse, install and configure Linux for the home user. Not an idiot, but an above average computer user who is not a programmer or sysadmin and does not want to spend too much time getting a basic configuration for a home user - no network card, simple ppp net connection, etc. Remember, X Windows must also be configured for his video card and no funny stuff with delet4e and backspace key not working right, either.
By configured I mean configured for the default Linux and X-Windows apps that come with the distro on CD, so that he can use them right away as root or some other user. Does configuration with Redhat or Suse also set up a user other than root with permissions correct so that this user isn't locked out of essential areas and tasks need for applications?
Since I've never installed from CD and never used RedHat or Suse, I really don't know, and I need to know so friends don't get mad at me when I tell them to install Linux from RedHat CD and it is not configured adequately.
Also, does RedHat's partitioning also handle non-destructive partitioning with Windows 95 already installed, leaving a Fat32 partition, a Linux partion, and a Linux swap partition? If it can, I will be amazed, but also very impressed.
This is the number one problem for a new user - I was able to do it with fips, but first had to locate all hidden files Win95 put all over hd and unhide them before I could even defrag to move all data to front of drive, etc. That's asking a lot of a home user, but there seems to be no other way to do non-destructive partitioning with GNU software.
Please do not suggest a commercial utility like Partition Magic, which costs too much. Can Redhat do this from CD with its install utility?
Here is an example:
Installer asks: "Which partition do you want to use for your root filesystem?"
Newbie asks: "What's a partition?"
If you don't know what a partition is, no Linux install guide or HOWTO is going to help you.
The majority of computer owners these days really do lack the most basic understanding of how their computers and operating systems work. Believe it or not, many don't even know what an operating system is or does. When a seasoned linux user encounters such a person, the usual reaction is shock and disbelief. It happens to me frequently. When you are used to worrying about about configuring ssh and sendmail, you don't know how to help somebody who doesn't know what a partition is.
For example, I used to work next to a guy who owns an older Mac at home and uses one at work also. One day, he told me he had just called the computer support guys because his Mac didn't power up when he hit the power button on the keyboard - he thought the power supply was bad. A quick inspection revealed that the power switch on the back of the Mac was off. He used Macs at work for ~3 years and owned one himself for ~2 years and HE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THERE WAS A POWER BUTTON ON THE BACK OF THE COMPUTER!!! Believe it or not, this person has a PhD in electrical engineering (albeit a long time ago).
Jon Katz may be technically incompetent compared to most slashdot readers, but he is a computer genius compared to the majority of the population.
Dave K
daking at infinet dot com
Where you been ? Windows users don't worry about burnout of old monitor. They get new monitor, big one with rabbit ear speakers and pnp takes care of monitor config.
Linux is for nerds. You out of touch with real computer users. Windows 2000 here come! Penguins will be pasta!
Katz knows ezactly what he's doing. The whole series follows a formula script, like a bad movie. This is the new journalism at its worst.
You feel sorry for Katz? Get a clue. Boy, are you gullible! He's making a joke of Linux at your expense.
Since the story he tells is about himself, there is no way to check his sources and expose him, without hiring a PI. All we know is that he is familiar with some Linux book titles. I doubt very much that his wife and kids are worrying about him spending too much time with the penguin.
He probably reads these stories and posts we make in response to them and they all have a good laugh.
Katz is taking $lashdot readers for a ride. Of course Rob loves this because it gets lots of posts, which means more ads investors for $lashdot..
Next year's headline:
"ZDNet buys $lashdot" - feature article by Jon Katz.
Power PC is nice, from what I read about it. Better architecture, etc.
PPC too expensive, though. People want off shelf cheap PC, not pay many thousands of dollars for nice machine that runs awful Mac. Nobody cares about PPC vs. Intel, they just want affordable reasonably powerful system. Can't afford expensive RISC system. RISC too expensive cause not enough volume, though cheaper than Intel to acutally make. Tell me different...
Who uses Mac these days, anyway? Mac, rip. Now, if PPC had better support for Win 95, volume would rise and cost drop.
Besides, Katz writing fiction for Slashdot readers. Most use Intel PC. Katz not stupid.
I had this problem with Earthlink, which seemed a great ISP while using Windows, but POP requests would sit and spin under Linux. You could see there was modem activity but email just simply didn't work.
I called them and fell into the OS category "other," always a pleasure, and then some guy attempted to pretend he knew what the deal was. Well, he got points for lifting my spirits for a couple of seconds.
I ended up signing on with local NY ISP bway.net, which I believe runs Linux on at least some of their servers, and everything has gone great. Yes, there definitely are ISP's who "don't do Linux", whether by choice or simply poor infrastructure is beyond me.
Now that I see he is an idiot, I can save time by ignoring whatever he has to say in the future. I generally have no respect for Linux, but installing it is not rocket science. Sure, you have to be capable of reading and following marginally technical instructions, i.e. you have to not be an idiot.
Steve
When I was about 12 or so, I used to use the AppleII+/e and knew enough basic to do a few things. I couldn't comprehend binary at the time (I had no info to help me really)
Well, my Apple took a shit and I got bored with it. I didn't hardly touch a computer untill my dad bought one with win95 installed when I was about 22 or so. I had touched an IBM before only 1 time.
A year later I got my own and for 3 months I used win95 not even realising it sucked so hard (I just assumed crashing all the time was a part of the deal)
Then I read site on Linux. I started reading up on it and printed out INSTALL.TXT. Then my HD took a shit and got replaced under warenty, with a bigger one that had 2 partitions ( I got to avoid FIPS for a few months). I promtly deleted one and downloaded and installed Slackware Linux the next day. It then took me 4 days to get online from Linux and about 3 weeks before I could move around quite competently and understood a few things about the system....now a year and a half later I am rather good with the system, but far from know everything. I had X up and working in a few hours, though it took me a couple more to realise it was working (didn't know the cntr-alt-+ deal)
Seems to me, that this guy hasn't even TRIED to really read the documentation he has. He is obviously loaded with cash, and has bought lots of books and hardware in an attempt to take the shortest easiest route possible. I think it is probably a waste of effort trying to help this person.
First the books are not going to help him any more then the online documents would, which I directed him to in an email letter. I hate to say it, but I am of the oppinion that most Linux books are a big waste of money, they contain to little info on everything instead of enough information on a few subjects.
Second, he seems to want to spend most of his time complaining about how tough Linux is., or talking about how much of a geek he is, and how much people liked his article. I think maybe he needs to just stay with his MacOS and stop bothering everyone, or at least try for a time to figure things out on his own.....I mean, he just gets the computer with Linux already installed and he is already here bitching to us about it....he will NEVER get Linux untill the "utter moron" interface has been designed.
Has he done any web searching? Has he asked in newsgroups or in IRC? Has he ready ANY of the online HOWTOs or the LDP books? Has he used man even ONCE? No, all he has done is buy a dozen books and a preinstalled Linux and now expects all to be easy.....BAH This guy has more money then sence.
READ THE F*CKING MANUAL
Correct. But then you first have to spend some time to find out that to make the locate command work you need to issue: locatedb.
Its soo Unix!!
Same with Windows. Duhh. Don't be a dipshit. Why don't you TRY to read others posts before you reply. Your post was essentially dead air, and now you have 2 dead-air replies pointing out that you're a true moron.
Netcom recently upgraded a lot of their POPs to use PAP (such as the boston,ma,us POP). The PPP faq/how-to has good information on how to set up PAP authentication for isps. It is really really easy. You also need to set your user name like this:
us,ppp,username
if you are in the US and using PPP.
The linux help on their web site does not cover PAP.
Man, this guy is DUMB.
I NEVER EVER had any trouble installing Linux or *BSD on a large variety of machines: Macs, SPARCstations and various PC's with all different kinds of equipment in them.
Come from using MacOS for too long I guess.
And not getting your machine on the Internet is not your ISPs fault -- it is your own.
People that do not know the first thing about computers should not be trying Linux / * BSD. They should stick to stupidOSes.
Maurice
Exactly! Even after all the above posts, I am still lost. Wheere do I find rpm?
I checked out the HOW-TO. It is wrong. The site ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/code/rpm isn't there any more.
I am just as bad as the rest of you, but this little elitist group we've built isn't helping anyone.
Forgive me if this looks bad, I've had to use Lynx, because Netscape segFaults because my libs are "wrong" because I can't unRPM the glib...rpm
ARG!
Joe
Have you EVER even considered reading these fine works from other people that have had problems just like you?
In one hour you could have read an Installation-Howto, and you could then proceed with trying to set it up.
What I can't understand is that you have bought how many books now? and you then cop out and get someone else to do it for you.
In one afternoon, you could have spent reading the HOWTO, even gone onto an irc #linux channel and asked for help and you would be set.
If after doing that, you buy RedHat for example, and you STILL cannot get linux installed, then you should just consider getting another job, because I have never seen someone this clueless in all my life.
Personally, I always heard how difficult it was to use fdisk to make partitions on my harddrive, and I decided to stop listening to other people and try it instead of Disk Druid. After playing around with fdisk and screwing up and learning at the same time, I now prefer it! Disk Druid reports incorrect megabyte sizes when you have very large disks, and this does not happen in fdisk.
What I am saying is, if you do not take the plunge and TRY!!! how the hell do you think you are going to learn anything?? Ever heard of formatting the harddrive if you make a complete balls up of the OS?
And, if you can't fire up your browser, go to Altavista and find the HOWTOs, then you really have no right to call yourself a "tech. journalist".
Point made, enough said, now go and TRY!!!!
From: A Linux Newbie
Took the words right outta my mouth Cobra. AOL is not classified as an ISP, even though ALOT of times people, mainly stupid way-the-hell-less-than-new newbies call it the "Internet," even professional places call AOL the "Internet." I remember seeing a story on channel 13 (upn) where they had a private investigator catch online pedophiles *shudders*, and they constantly said the "Internet" when they would show the meager "chat rooms" from AOL and they anoying little "ring" when you recieve an AOL private message. Ugh... I'm about to puke. Anyways, AOL is in fact, an Online Service (Content Provider). So Cobra, you are right on. Is there a way to run AOL on a Linux system? Because as far as I know, AOL doesn't have a Linux version of it's client software.
- ObsidianGT
Like a glove.
Linux in a Nut is a great reference book. As an equally clueless Linux newbie I found Bill Ball's "Using Linux" a very good walk thru for Red Hat installation. All the files were where he said they would be, and everything worked right. It was only the tenth Linux book I'd bought so I figure this is valuable info.
dm wrote:
Mind you, my computer started up and it presented me with a Microsoft license agreement, which ended with two buttons:
[I accept this agreement] [Shut down computer]
Fortunately, I had a FreeBSD boot floppy handy. That gave me *lots* of choices! All of which I liked better than the two choices Microsoft offered.
Don't forget Febuary 15th, Windows Refund Day.
----
Open mind, insert foot.
Or he can just shut up, go to freshmeat.net, search for gtkfind, install it, and use one of the damn GUI interface that already exists! Now he can click all he wants to.
A voice says "Cretin"
There's alot. Trust me.
Just wondering Jon, did you really mean Johnny Depp, or Johnny Deep? I ask because neither 21 Jump Street nor Ed Wood puts me in the mind of "The Complete Geek."
My Freakin Blog
In that case, check this out. Jon was talking about trying to go down the geek road, and it reminded me of this. That's why I was confused.
My Freakin Blog
That comment struck me as strange since I don't know how you couldn't handle Linux. Maybe he means they don't SUPPORT Linux, which is common. Just because they don't support it doesn't mean you can't use it, it just means their tech support will not be able to help you if something goes wrong, however there are a lot of Linux resources out there that can help you instead*.
* Unfortunatly they are usually on the net.
I read the internet for the articles.
One big problem with the "This modem utility works for every modem in the world" is that most modem manufacturers don't write drivers/give their init strings to Linux developers. That means a piece of hardware is only supported once someone gets it, gets the documentation (which can be very difficult at times), and actually writes a driver for it.
I read the internet for the articles.
I'd never heard of them, so I went to their page. It struck me as funny that they're mentioning Katz and the computer they built for him on their front page already.
Pi is 3.14159 -- not 3.1459
something clever
From some of the posts that I've read, people are missing the point. This is NOT a newbie user asking for help. On the contrary, it is instead a user writing an editorial on the whole Linux experience. Had this article been posted at any other new site on the net, Rob and the gang would be receiving many a submission email for it. At the point that they would post said link, others would post their comments on it including the inevitable "I'm insulted that he refers to us as GEEKS" or "Why are his Quote marks screwed?"
However, while this is a "professional writer", Jon does not seem to afford his Slashdot articles the same attention that he would other pieces of work. There were several places that were rough at best. This would earn an automatic C if I turned it in to any college level course. Fragments, the infamous typing of the same words two times in a row, and many misspellings such as Trinotron which to the rest of the world is Trinitron.
All in all, I thought it was a good article. It's the type of thing that I actually read when published in PC Computing, PC Week, or any of the hundreds of other PC [fill in the blank] publications that line every supermarket aisle in the United States.
something clever
I added the last comment to First Blood: basically saying 'HA! I beat Katz!'. This _is_ gratifying, but now I'm wondering if it's really worth treating it as a race. I have some advice for Jon if he's willing to hear it...
So you are a Mac dude, Jon Katz? You're in luck- get an extra drive to put in your Mac, and run linux on _that_. I can tell you that it's easier that way. The bootloader is an extension and control panel (BootX, which rocks!) and is totally friendly. You can partition the drive in Drive Setup, _Mac_ style, and then simply copy the numbers for the pre-existing partitions. And you can boot back into MacOS and re-run the RAM disk for reinstalling Linux anytime you like, painlessly. Mac Linux is great, it's very effective.
I really think you should be using Linux from a platform you know...
Ack, don't tell newbies to use 'info'!
What it all boils down to is that people don't want to learn. I don't remember people complaining when they had to edit their config.sys or autoexec.bat on DOS by hand, yet now using a text editor is some horribly barbaric thing? Please. I agree with whoever said that reading books isn't the best way to go about it, personally I read the manpage to find the config file, read the config file manpage if there is one, and try to do it using the manpages and comments in the config file. If that isn't enough for me to understand it, I go read the docs in the source distribution.
The only times I've used a HOWTO have been when I wanted to do something quick and dirty -- my single use has been the DNS HOWTO. (I'll probably use the Coffee mini-HOWTO because I have no EE skills, but I digress)...I'm sure the other HOWTOs are great, but many don't go deep enough to help you *understand* what you're doing, and instead consist of "type this here" and "type that there".
The only thing these "You're all elitists!" whines ever tell me is that there's one more person out there who doesn't want to learn.
"find" works that way because "find" aims to be Un*xlike. BTW, "find" (under a Linux system, at least) is most likely from GNU/FSF, and doesn't have a damn thing to do with Linux.
And you're right, many of us *don't* want to write luser-friendly software because it's NOT INTERESTING. I don't hack on code to bring tons more people into free software, I hack on code because it's REALLY FUN. It also pays back My Debt, which is the debt I owe the community for having all this great software available to me. It's simply not at ALL interesting to write some lame GUI wrapper for every tool that is already out there, duplication of work isn't very cool (isn't that what open software is about?).
You want a GUI 'find'? You've got a few choices:
a) write it yourself
b) convince someone else it's a Good Thing to write (Good Thing meaning it's got hack value or fills a need of theirs -- most hackers I know don't need a GUI find)
c) pay someone to write it for you
You get what you paid for.
And yes, I *am* an elitist. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.
Posted by X-Calibre:
.*.rpm (i.e foo-devel Not foo-devel-0.1.1-1.i386.rpm)
rpm -i {filename} install a package
rpm -U {filename} upgrade a package
rpm -e {packagename} for erase(uninstall)
rpm -q {packagename} for a query(see if the package is installed and what version)
{packagename} does not include the version number or the
Posted by OGL:
I have never, to my knowledge, chosen to comment on anything Katz has said or done, but I think this post is really the final straw. You never even tried to install it Jon. YOU NEVER EVEN TRIED. That's just pathetic. A fourteen year old without a single iota of UNIX experience could install an anchient version of Slackware simply by choosing the default settings and making rational decisions (I did, at least). What is your excuse, after God knows how much time of being a writer about technology, for not having the faintest idea of what a partition is?
I'm sorry if I sound harsh...everyone knows that technical manuals and such can be esoteric at times. But I've never seen such a sincere lack of effort coming from a human being before. I'm picturing you sitting at home and reading through Linux books very carefully, and after each page throwing up your hands and yelling "this stuff is utter nonsense!" Then, having read an entire 500 page book without even having attempted to glean the slightest bit of knowledge from it, you run to your mac and whip up a little piece saying the reason you like it is because you don't have to understand anything to use it.
I'll be honest with you -- Linux is not for everyone. I had hopes for you because of your background, but your recent writings have left me wondering why somone would choose to write about technology for a living, when the slightest hint of it turns him into a blithering idiot.
Really now Katz, buckle up. I don't want to sound condescending or superior, but I'm sure you have at least a bachlors from some university or another. Surely during the course of earning this degree you were forced to actually remember and apply information from something you had read. I realize that for some reason whenever the thing you're reading concerns Linux you lose this ability; but perhaps, given the plethora of material you have scattered about your home, you might take the trouble to learn one, single, tiny thing about it before re-appearing on slashdot and giving us another lectur^H^H^H^H^H^H editorial on what you consider to be "technology."
-W.W.
P.S. If you ever need any help, be sure to ask.
Posted by Long time listener, first time caller:
/.. I imagine I'm not the only non-Linux user who appreciates /.'s articles and opposing viewpoint to the "major media" websites. I use Win95 at work and Win98 and MacOS at home. One of these days I'll get around to Linux (and BeOS, and NT). I like and respect JK as a writer, and I'd like to hear about the Linux experience from someone who (apparently) has a comparable background to my own.
Linux geeks aren't the only folks who read
Besides, if you don't care about the article, skip it.
Posted by HolyMackeralAndy:
Maybe you watch too many movies. I like your message but not your delivery...
Posted by Neophyle:
Since this is my very 1st post since I discovered Slash Dot some 6 months ago, consider my goat got.
I dont understand people who go about attempting to do then drop it at the beginning signs of difficutly. This seems to be a continuing theme throughtout the nineties ( but lets not go there ).
What strikes me is that your finally decision ( and I dont care who told you what, our decisions are our own ) was to get someone else to make you your linux box.
So there you will be, a linux box with some win applications on it, putzing around for a bit, writing up columns for whomever calls upon you, then, most probably, you will go back to your MAC.
So much for your linux experience. I dont profess that linux is an easy task to understand, let alone master, but I would like to spend my time on articles people write, about people who actually do something, instead of trying and finding an quick fix.
There are so many little details in linux that a pre-made box will hide from you. But it is these details that give linux it's charm, regardless what the pundits say.
I do hope you see it ( linux ) for what it is and not because it is the latest fade or a weapon against Microsoft.
My suggestion to you is reformat the box and re-install linux yourself, or dont bother and dont profess ( or in your case, dont defend yourself as a geek when your actions do not dictate such a title ). And I do wish you luck and good fortune if you decide to go about it reinstalling it yourself.
As with everything, the reward is in the quality of the attempt.
Sorry, you cliche-wielding bumblefuck, but spewing out the "you're all nerds with no lives, I'm gonna go get laid!" schtick is moronic. What are you, bOb allisat? You inspire not respect, but instead a tremendous desire to beat you upside the the head with a cloobat.
Of course, I shouldn't give any response other than a carefully wiedled "BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!" to one who claims to have followed Jon "More hot air than Limbaugh" Katz around for eyars.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH!
Posted by posterkid:
Spell lames don't even count on Usenet.
I think he's saying that he ditched Netcom because Linux doesn't work with it.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
I agree...
:)
I've used a RedHat installation to help me with my Windows installation...
I can install RH in about a half hour... Windows... Hours, even days. And I've done numerous installations of both...
Now Slackware 2-3 years ago, downloaded onto floppies via modem... THAT was a bitch. Slack on CD was only slightly better.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
God, I remember trying to get PPP running on my first Linux box a few years ago... That was PURE HELL.
Then I started using pppd/minicom, and then I tried RedHat's control panel... It's sooooo easy with RedHat. Esp. with Earthlink, which automagically sets up your machine for their DNS...
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
>In fact, I didn't know how much of my computer
>I'd never seen or how much of it I could control,
>personalize or change if I were willing to take
>the time. That I was buying so much junk I didn't
>want, was completely at the mercy of greedy
>corporations, using so much memory and speed on
>things I didn't need, was a shocker. If I were
>willing to take the trouble, learn the language,
>computing would become an utterly different
>experience.
umm. exactly. So stop being afraid to try.
Read previous articles by Jon Katz.
Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
Jon seems to be using Bell Atlantic (see the Features section in the top right corner of slashdot's frontpage). They seem to be using some kind of AOL-ish prop software.
Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
a Linux Box was delivered this week to my house this week.
I would think that a PROFESSIONAL journalist, would grammar check their stories before posting them, I guess I was wrong.
If you can read this message, your threshold is too low.
I never claimed to be a journalist for so many years as Mr. Katz seems to reiterate in every one of his posts. He seems to want people to respect him for this fact and regard him as a "techno-geek" writer, but these obvious miscues are tell tale signs of a "professional journalist" that is no professional at all.
If he'd get off his "I've been a geek writer for years" soap box and just write, he's gain much more respect and far less flames for his mistakes.
If you can read this message, your threshold is too low.
Hi Jon!
You really shouldn't post anonymously, it makes you look silly.
Once again, I'll give a rats ass about MY OWN grammar when I start saying that I deserve some sort of respect from people for all my years of journalistic service like you always do.
Until that day comes, I don't give a shit.
If you can read this message, your threshold is too low.
Jon, unsurprisingly, has had editors working over his text for his entire career. It should not come as a shock to anyone that he is out of the habit of performing sufficient cycles of editing to generate polished, publication ready prose.
It is still readable, so give the guy a break.
No.
Well, yes, but that's not where it started. To the best of my knowledge, xyzzy first appeared in The Colossal Cave (aka Adventure), the first text-based adventure game. Xyzzy is a magic word that will move you between the house and a room in the cave. I think that it takes you to Y2, but I don't remember exactly. It's been a while since I've played.
--Phil (plugh)
355/113 -- Not the famous irrational number PI, but an incredible simulation!
"We use Internet Explorer. The DNS is a.b.c.d, the newserver is e.f.g.h, and the mailserver is i.j.k.l" is the extent of what many know (OK, someone knows, but not the fools on the phone).
Details like pap, chap, or whatever are beyond them. THe hardware will talk to you, but you're left to configure by trial & error.
jedi@dementia /home/jedi >apropos sound
pnpprobe (8) - scan ISA bus for PnP sound cards
pvf tools (1) - utilities to convert various sound formats
sfxload (1) - load a SoundFont file on the AWE32 sound driver
sndconfig (8) - configure sound card for use with Linux kernel modules
sox (1) - SOund eXchange : universal sound sample translator
cdrom-record (1) - a small utility to record sounds from your soundcard to a
file.
play-sample (1) - a small utility to play raw files and wave files on your
soundcard.
record (1) - a small utility to record sounds from your soundcard to a
file.
Text::Soundex (3) - Implementation of the Soundex Algorithm as Described by K
nuth
(END)
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Hello, Typo Flamer. I'm Conan the Grammarian -- pleased to meet you.
*grin*
--
W.A.S.T.E.
W.A.S.T.E.
plugh
--
W.A.S.T.E.
W.A.S.T.E.
Good luck!
-----
The real meaning of the GNU GPL:
"The Source will be with you... Always."
Feel free to contact me directly (you didn't leave a contact e-mail) and I'll try and help you get this done. I had the same problem initially, but it all works beautifully now.
--
Matt. Want XML + Apache + Stylesheets? Get AxKit.
Now, there's nothing -wrong- with wanting to learn as much as you can about something. It's a very good idea, and a very worthwhile approach. However, it's important to do selectively, rather than globally.
However, when it comes to Linux, where 90% of it's image to those -outside- of the Linux community has been one of FUD, it's very very important to trust yourself, rather than what you read.
I, for one, would be -more- than happy to step ANY newbie through the installation of Linux, but in the end, however much help I offer, and however much of that help they accept, it's THEIR computer and THEIR installation, not mine. I can give the commands to type and the buttons to push, but unless THEY understand what's happening and at least some of why, they would be playing the part of the trained puppy. I'm sorry, but I am going to do my level best to show any newbie I ever help that it is THEIR system, not mine. The age-old fear of "hitting the wrong key and breaking it", IMHO, comes from a deep, inner feeling that it's not really their computer at all. There is a confidence that you can feel, when it's YOUR computer, that you can NEVER really feel when using anyone elses, IMHO.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I don't know how to unpackage a RPM or DEB package. They are supposed to be simple. I have spent at least 12 hours trying to figure it out. I gave up.
...
Did you try dpkg --help? The first line of the output describes how to install a package:
dpkg -i|--install
Daniel
PS - in Debian, you usually use dselect to install packages, and dselect's interface _is_ a pain. I find it to be useful but it's almost impossible to learn. Hopefully apt will be better, although I tried it from CVS and was very worried at what I saw..
Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
*The Confident AC, secure in the belief that he has made a valid and well reasoned argument, Thinks silently "Proofreading is so Passe" and foolishly clicks "Submit"*
Thus missing the fact that he typo'ed the value of pi (3.14159).
hehe,I agree with the subastance tho. The only killer in RH5.1 was partitioning the HD. Everything else my Mom could have handled. (she discovered the right mouse button on her own a few weeks back. We're all proud of her...
$you = new YOU;
honk() if $you->love(perl)
Wow, someone out there is running Linux?
I'm glad Slashdot is here to keep us on the cutting edge of today's news.
I would think that a PROFESSIONAL journalist, would grammar check their stories before posting them, I guess I was wrong.
would - Future imperfect tense
was - past tense
You sentence should read: I thought that a PROFESSIONAL journalist, would grammar check their stories before posting them, I guess I was wrong.
Not to mention the over use of commas.
It would seem that everyone makes mistakes. Myself included. Lighten up. Grammer and spelling flames are not very impressive.
I would think that a PROFESSIONAL journalist, would grammar check their stories before posting them, I guess I was wrong.
would - Future imperfect tense
was - past tense
You sentence should read: I thought that a PROFESSIONAL journalist, would grammar check their stories before posting them, I guess I was wrong.
Not to mention the over use of commas.
It would seem that everyone makes mistakes. Myself included. Lighten up. Grammer and spelling flames are not very impressive.
Unless you are Rob Malda posting as AC, it isn't your space to waste.
The thing needed to install Linux is a will to Learn, and spend Time and Effort to learn. Without that, you won't be anything more than mediocre at anything you attempt in life.
The people saying that Katz is in the wrong place are right. He seems to be a geek of journalistics and humaniora, not computer science.
My guess is that what he is really doing here is practicing his journalistic skills and getting his name known. This could get him a good job if he's lucky, meaning he'd get paid better.
Most geeks do have good hygiene. Most geeks do have some degree of social skills. Your flame shows a lack of them though.
hey, its not Xwindows! its X, X11, the X windowing system, but its not Xwindows!@#! its not a microsoft product! please remember all, that Xwindows is an improper name, you should be shunned at using it. :)
--
AOL falls into this catagory. And yes, it is an ISP, I've seen people use the internet from AOL.
Most ISP's don't support linux. Silly since most of the people who work at a LOT of ISPs use Linux or worse...Many ISPs run their web servers on Linux....
:-)
Palin...
For your login name in your ppp scripts you may need to add a # in front of them..If your email address is lets say: johndoe@ix.netcom.com then your login for ppp would be #johndoe. I only know this because I recently configured a router for a client (and analog dialup router at that) and had their tech support on the line. The damn sales rep didn't tell the customer that they needed to have a # infront of their login name...
Palin...
If you're looking for evidence for the argument that Linux is _the_ thing, that it's an ideal desktop system for anyone, that installing it is a snap, that one can readily figure it out with the help available from FAQ's and newsgroups - then I don't see why you're doing this the way you are.
/.) suggests that you don't actually believe a word if your own hype.
To me, the way you're approaching Linux (months of preparatory reading, preinstalled system, reliance on tech support from everyone on
You're partly wrong. Installing is not a huge deal. Doing it on a Mac is trivial, at least with MkLinux, if you use SilverLining to do the partitioning. RedHat is also straightforward unless you have really weird stuff in your system. And to some degree, you're right. This is not a Mac, it's not W95, it's not Office and it'll take a fair investment of time before you can do anything productive (with the exception of net stuff, which should look pretty familiar).
I'll be really appalled if after all this, you start writing articles about how easy it is to do all the things that you're refusing even to attempt...
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
I'm not sure I get your point, either. What I was saying is this - Katz is arguing that:
Personally, I think it's neither. But it certainly can't be both.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Try adding "@ppp" to the end of your username when you log on.
I installed linux at a friend's house and got ppp set up. When I dialed in to his ISP on minicom, type the user name and password, you get a whole lot of garbage characters under the login. So, I thought, success!, until pppd wouldn't start.
For some reason, I decided to boot into Windows NT on his machine, and dialed in to his ISP using hyperterminal - well, it brought up a full color bbs screen (presumably the color escape characters were the garbage I was seeing in minicom) with no option for starting ppp.
He had some manuals for his ISP which he'd printed out in something like 1990 which said to type username@slip at the login: prompt. We then tried using username@ppp, and it worked.
Apparently this is somewhat common, as he didn't need to open a terminal window or use a dial-up networking script in Windows NT.
Try downloading ezppp. It's best feature is a debug mode that let's you watch the interaction with the remote computer in realtime. Then, you go back and tweak the settings in ezppp and try again until it works. It worked well for me when I was having problems. I can't recall where to download it, but a search engine should find it pretty quick.
if you had searched the netcom website you would have found that they provide a pretty damn good page on how to get netcom working with linux. I use it and i know that it works!
t s/Other_OS/linux.cfg.html
here is the address of the page:
http://www.netcom.com/bin/webtech/NETCOM_Accoun
Its spelt "L-I-N-U-X", but pronunced as "Free Beer"
I disagree. I write, I've had editors work for me, I still self-edit. Just because we have word-processors and spell-check does not mean that we do not have to read and listen to our own prose. That's a basic task of the writer. I was hoping to email Jon about this, but could no longer find his email address. Perhaps he would like to send the text to one of us for editing. I wouldn't mind.
Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
Yeah, I guess we've arrived: finally, we have our own clueluess Pepys.
Okay, Jon, I realize it's not the easiest thing in the world to do, and I realize that I've been using it too long to really remember how difficult it was when I started to use it, but, Christ, man, you make it sound like you're trying to split the atom.
Yes, it's confusing, with all the talk of partitions and monitor refresh rates and whatnot, but any recent distribution is just as easy to install as Windows (anyone ever install Win95 from scratch on a blank hard drive?), which seems to be the "Holy Grail" of ease-of-install that everyone is always comparing Linux to.
I think one of two things is going on here: either you're overanalyzing this and intimidating yourself, making it harder than it has to be, or you're just not as computer-savvy as you like to pretend.
Installing Linux isn't hard; learning how to use it is the tough part.
I've had this argument with people several times...
Give the average man on the street a *bare* hard drive and a Windows CD-ROM and watch him fall to his knees...
After spending some time in #linuxhelp, I've determined that (I think) the most daunting part of Linux installation for a new user is the drive partitioning. And that's not a Linux thing, that's a computer thing.
Well, Jon's right on the money as far as his assessment of the available linux books. For a really insightful and occasionally scathing analysis of the state of the computer publishing industry, check out The book behind the book behind the book..., on Philip Greenspun's Web Tools Review.
Petty stereotyping of mac users is lame. Of the non-programmers I know who use computers most intelligently in their work, many are hardcore mac power users.
I am no genious, but I never had the severe problems that others had in installing Linux. I put the CD in, I read the documentation, and it worked.
;-) -- When I wanted to be able to share files here at school I was expecting hours of headaches and such. What I found was about 10 mins of ease. I read the documentation, found out how to use passwords, found out how to use smb.conf, etc. I didn't use a GtkSmb, or other GUI, just good 'ol vi and man pages.
:)
I hung out on efnet #linux for a while absorbing and noticing that Samba caused all sorts of problems. Most of the time the response from the community was, "RTFM" or "read the docs" or something of the like.
Now, I only have one Linux book, the one that came w/my original Slackware 3.2 Slackware distrib. To honestly tell you the truth, I never opened it to learn about Linux. -- back to my Samba thing
Here is my problem w/your post sir. You said that you have all these books, and blah blah blah. Thing is that you were looking all in the wrong places. All you need are the HOWTO's, and the man pages.
Maybe I am the one that is wrong
I complained, and after a week or so, the situation suddenly went away.
Go figure...
(There is a small chance this could have been related to the modem speed difference between the boxes, but I doubt it.)
Your Servant, B. Baggins
This guy has had months to figure out how to install linux. He had a group of rabid linux users at his disposal if he needed help. The result? He gave up.
There are three ways you can look at this:
1) For the average person, installing linux is simply not possible - even with the purchase of assorted books and hundreds of linux geeks acting as free consultants.
2) Katz is a quitter who wasn't really that serious about installing linux on his machine.
3) Both of the above.
No matter how you slice it, this is kind of depressing. On the bright side (as others have pointed out) if Katz had to install Windows from scratch he might have had the same problems. Oh, the joys of conjecture...
Personally, I don't think Linux is that hard to install. I managed to do it (with advice from a die-hard user) in a couple of hours. I have had no formal computer training of any sort. Ironically enough, I _did_ go to journalism school.
Once again I have to question Katz's role here. I don't think the average person would fail to install linux over a 2 month period given the resources that Katz has had. I think he is doing the linux community a grave disservice by making the installation process look a lot harder than it really is.
Anyone who really _wants_ to install linux and is willing to invest the time to learn how to do it isn't going to have a problem. It is not easy, but it is not that hard, either. You just need a lot of patience.
All IMO of course. Caveats - I am not a linux expert, nor am I a particularly good journalist... and I really don't know how hard installation would be for the non-geek in its natural habitat. Take with grain of salt.
L. Ron
The most important thing I've learned about installing new or unfamiliar operating systems is not to get discouraged by how it goes the first time. An old saying sums it up best: "You won't know what you did wrong the first time until you've reinstalled N times" where N is an integer usually between 10 and 20. As an added benefit, you will often learn a great deal (if you're patient) in the process. Why do you think nerds "have no life"? It's all the time they spend re-re-re-installing.
I am speaking from experience. I've done this for about 5 years now. In the US, the one of the keys is to add "us,ppp," in front of the username/login id:
jsmith becomes us,ppp,jsmith
As part of the recent buyouts of Netcom (ICG) they were upgrading a lot of servers, with fancy switches/routers to handle ISDN and analog modem on the same phone number. This caused lots of problems because it was looking for PAP authentication. Just follow the howtos (also some pointers in the linux-ppp mailing list) and don't forget the "us,ppp," as part of the username.
Anyone wanting a little bit more info send email to mremski@ix.netcom.com or mremski@aspi.net.
Jon, why another long winded article which basically says "I didn't get around to doing it" ? If you spent half as much time actually *trying* to install, instead of reading a million books about the subject, you'd already be running Linux.
Why do you make it sound that installing Linux is the most complicated thing ever invented? For God's sake I installed RedHat 4.2 for a friend of mine based on the README alone. Mind you, I'd previously installed FreeBSD on my own computer, so I wasn't a newbie at it. Buy a cheap computer, get a Linux CD, install it. It's NOT that hard.
Honestly, you're just psyching yourself out. *sigh*
Katz is useful information for evangalists, and for distribution developers. It is interesting to be reminded of the experience of newbies, too quickly we forget.
I like to read how people become confused and muddled. Why people think Linux is traumatic. I think one thing Katz has exposed is how much garbage is out their for Linux books. I never have a Linux specific book other than a manual from a comercial distribution and by the time I had that it was too late anyway. Sometimes it seems strange that it might be difficult to install linux. I had a laptop with Win95 from work that crashed, I downloaded the install disks on my housemates macintosh, made the floppies booted my AST laptop and let it install over night via ftp, in the morning I had a functioning laptop.
Katz is also interesting in that he is a computing freedom evangalist, who has only gotten to the idea of freedom and not yet experienced it. I hope he can get through his confused, but common, methods of freeing himself from other companies ideas of how he should use information.
"His[Mankind's] heaven is like himself: strange, interesting, astonishing, grotesque." -Satan "Letters From Earth" Mar
Wait...you've never had a problem with a Mac, but most of your problems come from out-of-date software versions? Most of nothing?
The mantra of the pundits for the last few months has been: If Linux is to go mainstream, it must be made easy to use. Everyone's repeating this as if it were ultimate truth, even longtime Linux people. Well, I'm sorry, but I think this misses the whole point.
The reason Linux (and other free software) is appealing is that it provides an opportunity to achieve Computing Freedom(tm). This means being the master of your tools rather than allowing them to control you. This means having full, autonomous control of your computing world.
But it's fundamentally impossible to have it both ways. If you're going to be the master of your tools, you must achieve a difficult, deep and informed understanding of how those tools operate. If you want "easy to use" you are essentially saying you refuse to understand your tools in any detail, you just want to get some other, non-computer-related work done.
But by this refusal to accept responsibility for your own understanding of your own computer, you have essentially subordinated your ability to compute--your Computing Freedom(tm)--to the quality of user interface design provided by some nameless programmer you'll never meet. Your objective at this point is to find the programmers who produce the simplest user interfaces. That ain't Linux.
Perhaps the ultimate illustration of this point goes as follows. What is the fundamental difference between Linux and Windows? With Linux, you get source code. What is the point of having source code if you can't even read it, let alone modify it to suit your preference? None whatever. So what is the fundamental advantage of Linux over Windows or MacOS, for a non-programmer? There isn't any.
So let's focus on our core competency and stop wasting valuable effort trying to make Linux appealing to market segments who don't care about Linux's sustainable strengths. It's like offering jackhammers in designer colors. It makes no sense and it detracts from the focus on things that really matter, like getting the kernel to scale well to higher-end (16- to 64-way) SMP.
-Graham
Installing -- just getting the OS on the system -- is fairly easy. Configuring -- making it work with your system -- is a nightmarish for mere mortals and non-IT types, especially if you don't know where to look for answers. I have examples, but I won't bore anyone (unduly) unless asked.
It seems that most people would rather shell out $x hundred (thousand?) for "repair" or replacement than figure out for themselves what's not working and how to fix it. It's more comfortable and less time-consuming, and for many people, time (and comfort) are more important than money.
Win95 lets them do that with a clear conscience. You can't learn how to fix it; the most MS will even let you do is click a few buttons and reinsert a CD now and then. And people seem to like it that way. (Remember, the grandaddy of Windows was MS-DOS. Back when there was competition, Macintosh was winning it -- by making the first computer for people who don't want to learn anything about computers.)
The masses don't ever want to have to think about their OS. Microsoft knows that -- you can't even think about their OS if you want to.
The sooner this notion becomes widely accepted, the sooner Linux will be a legitimate contender in the marketplace, IMO.
phil
I realize that he is using a mac; there may be serious differences. I began this same quest about 6 months ago in an effort to have an affordable ecommerce solution for myself when I finish school. It's been hard. Prior to that I used W9x for only 2 years. I was really a newbie. I'm in law school with no prior computer background. Yet, I have successfully installed slackware, red hat, caldera, and debian. I now use debian on my box, and red hat on my laptop. What's the big deal John? The book I relied on was Linux Configuration & Installation by Patrick Volkerding, Kevin Reichard, and Eric Foster-Johnson, published by MIS Press. Once installed, I relied on Running Linux published by O'Reilly. Those books helped some. More importantly [read MUCH MORE importantly], was the online documentation you can get from the various websites. Debian.org's install doc is excellent. Every major vendor/distro roller has one. They give detailed instructions. But if you don't have two computers
(one to install on, the other to browse the web for documentation), then I guess you have to rely on the books. I'm sorry to say, the books are not nearly as good as the online documentation. Another avenue that worked for me was to simply let RH5.x do all the work. With RH 5.2 you boot the cd (John you can do that) follow the menus. Finally choose "workstation" not custom, and the install will do everything for you, including partitioning. John, it will work. Am I one of the lucky few newbies who can figure things out on his own? I am not that smart, otherwise I wouldn't be in law school. I would be in the world make big cash at age 24 playing with linux. Hey John, will I wrote this, 2.2.0pre9 compiled after I zcat patched against 2.2.0pre8. Another thing, learn the console.... learn.... the.. conssssssssoooooooole........Yeah, baby, I'm a geek, I'm a geek, I'm a geek.
??? I'm starting to get the urge to write some documentation... from a newbie perspective. I've had linux for 6 months but I still feel like a newbie. But I've got the install process down. I've probably done that 50? times? At least. Sometimes, I do it for or five times a day. I delete my Win partition because I hate it. Then, I try for weeks to get my parallel port scanner going. Failure. I reinstall Win partition; I have to endure all those dialogs again. I installed on my girlfriends 486, made tens of boot disks. Here is my newbie install doc: Go to cheapbytes.com. Buy RH 5.2 for $2 + s/h. Put cd in cdrom drive. Touch power button. Hit , , whatever gets you into bios/setup. Hit right-arrow button until BOOT is highlighed. Read instructions on screen that tell you how to select a menu item. Play with it. Make cdrom be the first boot thingy. Hit [simultaneously]. Red Hat menu should appear. Hit . Keep hitting until you get to the part /usr/doc/HOWTO (I think). If you want me tell you how to do more stuff, install debian. That's what I know how to
where it asks you whether you want Workstation, Server, or Custom. If you are daring choose custom. You can always start over. But this option will tell you all about your hardware. OR. Choose Workstation. BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...... Your harddrive will start humming baby. In the end, it will tell you what kind of mouse you have. Hit . Then, it will tell you what kind of video card you have. Hit . Go ahead and when it asks you if you want to probe or not. Probe. If it locks up, then start over. Next time, don't probe you idiot. Your hardware doesn't like getting probed. Hit enter a couple more times (when you see dialogs that ask you to), sometimes you have to hit tab before hitting enter. Don't worry, it only gets harder after you finish installing. Enter your root password. It reboots, your done. Now what? You want to dial your ISP. Read the PPP howto in
use. I just installed red hat on my laptop after erasing debian, reinstalling Win (to use my printer), and reinstalling linux. I would have installed debian (see the debian.org site for their really good howto on installation), but debian's lilo doesn't like dos partitions and ignores them. I know it can be done, but like all things debian, you have to read the man page and the HOWTOs and the docs. It's linux for the gods' sakes; one must learn to read first.
PEACE
Unless *anything* goes wrong, and trust me, it can.
Such as?
I've gone from System 7 to MacOS 8 to MacOS 8.5 (including going from HFS to HFS+) and I've never had a problem with any of the Macs I've ever owned.
Most of my problems have either come from out of date third-party shareware add-ons, or beta software that still had a few kinks to be worked out. (Well, then there's Netscape Navigator...)
Do I pay more in the first place? Maybe (though I bought my current machine as refurbished) but I think I've more than made up for it in productivity. The most downtime I've had was making the backup, reformatting in HFS+ and restoring.
I'd like to know the kinds of problems that the typical Mac owner has to face, cuz I haven't seen them.
Jay (=
Most people using Linux come from a PC background, where Plug&Pray, ISA, IRQs and windoze have made life miserable for quite a while. The longer you used and added to your PC, the more likely it was that you would be forced to learn some of this stuff (at least that was the case for me.) I'm not a Mac user, but my impression is that Apple did a good job of hiding those kind of details on their machines. My point is that more PC users know about hardware than Mac users (which could be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on how you look at it,) which Mr. Katz is.
Although it may be hard to accept, most people expect their computer to behave like an appliance- all they have to do is plug it in and start computing. Until this type of Linux machine is easily available with the apps people want, it will remain an OS for propeller heads.
Now before some of you get out the flame thrower, let me say that I use Linux and I love it. One of my machines at home is an old 486 that I turned into an ipmasq gateway for my other PCs. If I could use Linux full time, I would. But like the man said, it takes a lot of time learn what you need to know to be able to install Linux, the apps you want and configure your GUI. It took me a whole day to get Window Maker working on my dual boot machine. Now I'm not saying that if I can't do it quick, nobody can, but I am fairly knowledgeable about PC hardware, Windows, and Linux. But damnit, every time I set out to do something new on Linux it takes me a lot of time. Unfortunately, everyone doesn't have this kind of time on their hands.
The common reply is 'Read the FAQ/How-To!' Don't get me wrong- these documents are a critical part of community, but often the document is along the lines of 'this is how I did it, YMMV'. This is OK for someone that knows what's going on, but it's not sufficient for the newbie.
The important thing is that the time is almost here when the average home user really will have viable options for what OS they use on their PC, but at the moment, Linux is an OS for the PC and Unix literate. If you aren't when you start, you will be when you get there.
Thanx for being the only one who did not flame Katz or flame the flamers :)
:)
Your comment was the only one that made sence, without putting anyone down...
And it was phunny!
I work for an ISP, and I can sort of explain why we don't support Linux. While I technicaly can answer most questions with requards to Linux and Dial-up Networking, Management will not allow this. I suppose it may be because Linux still is not "Mainstream". Another problem, is that there is no specific way that will work with all distributions. Oh, yeah I suppose you could use the PPP-ON scripts to handle PPPD, but the average caller who is going to need their handheld, would require 30-40 minutes of tech time when configureing Windows DUN. Interchange that with having to write scripts, and the tech time will at least double.
;)
I have emailed the Owner of my ISP for permission to start providing support for Linux, but I have not received a response yet. We shall see.
!Jason Bell!
--Jason Bell
Faster than the light of speed!
Actually, I think he finds computers (some computers - at least his Mac, apparently) easy to use. For all we know, he may find Linux easy to use, too. I can't explain every piece of technology that impacts my life to the same degree that most Linux users can explain their systems; but that doesn't keep me from using that technology, often very effectively.
/. counts as a hobbyist site, though... you may not like that, but the folks supporting and developing Linux have done a good enough job that people who really don't care about the ins and outs of the hardware and OS are starting to use it. They want something that works as a work processor, or runs a database, or lets them play Quake, and that doesn't demand hours or days of commitment before they can actually do what it is that they wanted to do in the first place.
He apparently finds the idea of assembling and installing a system to be daunting, though. I can understand that, despite the fact that I enjoy doing it. I know someone who's an automobile hobbyist, who thoroughly enjoyed building a kit car, something I'd never consider doing - for me, a car is a means to an end, not an end in and of itself.
So, yeah, maybe Jon's article is inappropriate for a hobbyist site. I don't really think
Sigh. This is flamebait, I know. Have at it...
"Great men are not always wise: neither do the aged understand judgement." Job 32:9
Well, at least Jon is more coherent and interesting to read than most of people who respond to him. Faint praise, I suppose, but there you go.
Always buy the O'Reilly Books first. You save money, sanity and get cute animals a-plenty.
Methinks the "popular press" has a somewhat universal agenda that involves in part keeping the big advertisers happy. And to keep reporting simple, everything gets a stimulus-response pattern associated with it. For example, stimulus: "Linux", response "hard to install". It is important to write stories and show examples that reinforce these responses.
I've been installing operating systems since the days of IBM DOS (that's mainframe DOS) and Apple II. After spending a late night this week getting a friend's Win95 box working again, I'd have to say that ultimately there is no difference between installing RedHat 5.2 and Win95. If the hardware is supported by the OS, the installation goes smoothly. If the hardware is not supported, it does not.
There is the FUD factor to overcome. Once a person *believes* that something is going to be difficult, it usually is. Although experienced in OS installation, I believed Linux was going to be difficult. It was, until I did it. Then it was so simple, I wondered if I had skipped some steps.
The rewards of a dependable and quick OS have led me to convert my work and home computers to Linux. To anyone who would do an install: make sure you have supported hardware and "just do it".
Last week, I installed Linux for the first time. Ingredients:
Computer that was being used as a seat in server room (K6-233,32MB, 4.3GB, 3Com905b, S3VirgeDX)
RedHat 5.2 CD-ROM
Step 1: Read instructions on creating a boot disk for Linux, which were, verbatim:
1. Go to an MSDOS prompt C:\>
2. Type the following: D:\dosutils\rawrite
Enter disk image source file name: D:\images\boot.img
Enter target diskette drive: a:
Please insert a formatted diskette into drive A: - and press -ENTER-:
3. Reboot with the floppy in Drive A: to install Linux.
Followed them.
(I know how to set up PCs, never used Linux farther than staring at Xeyes on my friends box)
Step 2: Read information that appeared on my screen. Followed simple on screen instructions. Installed everything because I didn't know any better.
Step 4: After it was done, I rebooted and up popped a login promt, typed in "root" then my password hit enter. Linux prompt.
Step 4: Called friend, "Ummm, how do I get into Xwindows?"
Step 4: Typed in startx.
Step 5: Have fully working Linux box with internet connectivity already in MS Windows like environment.
Now I just play with it, whats the deal? It took me 45 minutes, 75% of the time was spent re-booting and waiting for the files to be copied off of the CD-ROM. My advantages over Katz:
knowledge of terms like "reboot" and "diskette".
Yes, it was easier for me to get on-line because I have an ethernet connection in my office, but going on-line isn't necessary to learn about it, or to play with it. The next day I installed AfterStep and GNOME with some help at #linuxhelp on IRC (accessable by any box, like my Windows NT one). I also have the capability of reading the FAQs about the things I want to learn about, and have since learned the man and howto commands.
It's so easy. Yes, I am lost, and fear the bash. But I bought one book yesterday (Linux in a nutshell, just like Jon) and have started to learn all of the commands. I think anyone can do this f they aren't afraid to mess up their computer, temporarily. So what if you have to reformat, it's not like you never have to reformat NT or 95 systems after installing it.Just don't be afraid, if your modem doesn't work, go on IRC and ask, immediate gratification. No waiting on hold for tech-support.
Anyway, that was my first endeaver into Linux, it shouldn't be that hard for anyone.
Dinyar Mistry
I'm so very impressed by the gauntlet of flames that Katz is negotiating here, as if he's the new kid at school who doesn't know how to wear his clothes the "right" way or something. From morons like DaBuzz (a SPELLING flame, fahpetesake, for what is ostensibly a casual posting among friends) and "this sentence shows he doesn't know X" or what the f*(&()*&(* ever. Lord, it's enough to make me stay away from Linux forever, if the personalities that use it are about 14 years old on average.
lake effect weblog
{Network engineer in Chicago--looking for work!}
My own bandwith-wasting two cents: ;-) out of starting from a naked HD.
$0.01. My linux box was both cheap and easy: a new internal HD for my Power Mac 7200. It flawlessly dual-boots MacOS and MkLinux. Let me tell ya, having a working OS from which to kick off the Linux install beats the tar
$0.02. I have installed various flavors of Unix about 6 times on 3 different architectures. I have installed Windows NT dozens of times on 4 different flavors of Intel. No way is Windows NT more difficult to install than Unix. Maybe equally so, if your Unix install set and instructions are really good. MkLinux was worse than NT when it came to partitioning the disk, but good once the automated part started. NetBSD 1.2 was bloody awful. I've never done Windows 95.
If you have a question about MacOS or Win9x, you send in an email & a volunteer gets back to you within 24 hours. I've used them a couple of times & they are fast, efficient, and courteous. Best of all, they solved my problem every time.
Speaking as someone who is going to be doing his first RH install in 2 weeks, your idea of a volunteer Linux support site sounds like an excellent idea, and seems like it would be in keeping with the "community".
=moJ
- - - - - -
Member in Good Standing,
Dear Jon,
Having read your latest piece, I am compelled to write. I have enjoyed your writing in the past, and thought, in general, that bunch of the morons on here were simply giving you a hard time. Now I am not so sure.
You have managed to describe your trials and tribulations in great detail, and I am sure a lot of the newbies on here can relate. But your are dragging this along at a snail's pace. Since I also read your last piece, I would think your approach to this one would have been, "confessions of a newbie" or "my first day on the job with the force".
Instead we are still in the "trying to install blah, blah" period leading up to "now I must break down buy it preinstalled". And upon this new and great machine you allude to purchasing, for a modest $600 buckaroos, (good for you!) "I fantasized of foisting my ramblings upon the net on my spiffy little linux box". My, how wonderful.
Linux evolves very quickly, and I fear that at this rate, the next major kernel release will be well into double digits, before you are able to get a linux box up on your own. Or in other words, please don't give up your day job...
You had the answer in your own column. Buy it, try it. Okay, then you brake it. So? Re-install and try it again. (Repeat many times) This would have been one of the main advantages had you taken the trouble and learned how to install it. (its NOT that tough anymore, I mean c'mon!) It'll be a lot tougher to figure out how to use it daily, even with it pre-installed. And some day you may want to try upgrading it or compling a kernel! (Insert a very sarcastic WOW here!)
LB
AOL is an On-Line Service with Internet Access
I do not consider it an ISP
To me, an ISP is just a connection, not a content provider.
Cobratek
DONT TREAD ON ME MOÎΩN ÎABÃ
"There is no glory in the geek community to make, say a modem connection utility that can handle all kinds of modems, systems and ISPs. Its not fun either, its just hard work and lots of testing."
What about X-ISP? KPPP? RedHat's netcfg? All are easy to use and configure ppp clients (GUI)
"find / -name myfile -print"
Compare typing this in to say '95:
1.click Start
2.goto Find
3.goto Find Files
4.type in the name of the file you want to find
5.make sure it is looking on the right drive
6.set other options as necessary
6.click Go
Personally I prefer the command line, but if you really want that GUI extra stuff, tyr KDE. I use it as my full time desktop at work and at home. It is highly functional and professional.
Anyone who is coming from the world of windows should start with KDE and, once comfortable in linux, move on to gnome, afterstep, windowmaker(my personal favorite), or something else.
One last defense of the command line:
rename all files in a directory from name to name.old
GUI - click, rename, type new name, repeat
CLI - #for file in `ls`
>do
>mv $file $file.old
>done
That's all it takes. If you learn to shell program, the GUI tools like "find" and "file manager" becomes less and less important.
--
It's not easy being green. -K.T.F.
When Katz first started posting here, many people complained because his writing style was too slick and professional. So he has eased up and relaxed a bit because /.ers told him to. Now that he has he gets flak for not being professional enough.
Sheesh.
--
It's not easy being green. -K.T.F.
When Katz first started posting here, many people complained because his writing style was too slick and professional. So he has eased up and relaxed a bit because /.ers told him to. Now that he has he gets flak for not being professional enough.
Sheesh.
I think he leaves these mistakes in on purpose to seem more like an average guy. I bet it kills him to hit the Submit button knowing the mistakes are there.
--
--
It's not easy being green. -K.T.F.
Yeah, but remember that the average luser doesn't learn keyboard shortcuts. I have seen far too many people freak out when they get a non-95 keyboard and whine about not having the windows95 key. Ctrl-Esc I tell them, "That's too hard!" they reply. Then rather than using the keys, they go for the mouse.
They both have their pros and cons, but for me, the CLI is the fastest and more powerful of the two.
--
It's not easy being green. -K.T.F.
How many of you have read that Silicon Valley semi-classic of marketing (I will stipulate that there can be no "classics of marketing") called "Crossing the Chasm" by Geoffrey Moore.
/. self-identified innovators are upset that he won't at least behave like a proper early adopter. If he won't hack the kernel or submit a package any time soon, well, by golly, at least he owes it to us to try and install the damn thing. I mean, RH 5.2 practically takes your order and does the dishes afterwards too. I mean, really.
/., consider two things: (1) CmdrTaco puts him there; and (2) the mouse or scroll key on your desk work very well to move right along to the next thing.
Given that it's ancient (predates Linux even), having first been published in 1991, and that it really doesn't break much new ground, it basically makes an important point in an accessible way.
There is the sense that new technology or services or products proceed from initial acceptance to a broad market in a very smooth way. The old marketing paradigm is that it moves from "innovators" to "early adopters" to the "middle market" to "late adopters." What Moore's book clarifies is the "chasm" between the early adopters and the middle market. The early adopters can tolerate less than perfect performance because they don't mind tinkering with parts and getting new features that they want. The middle market wants a "whole product" that comes prepackaged and with sufficient technical support and training to make use of the features without a great deal of digging into the insides.
But Linux is basically just entering the early adopter phase. Along comes Jon Katz, a staunch member clearly identifying himself as part of the middle market. All of the
Well, Jon Katz isn't going to be an early adopter type like some feel he should be. He is an early look-see-er from the middle market -- *across* the chasm from where we are now. There are some important lessons here for those of you who believe, as I do, that Linux and *BSD ought to cross that chasm at some point.
In the meantime, for those who can't tolerate the thought that Jon Katz' ongoing tales don't deserve a featured slot on
--------
Bill Gates Is My Evil Twin.
"*I* didn't have any problems installing Linux."
Well this may come as a shock to some people, but there are hordes of people out there who do not grok tech stuff easily which is why a crap OS like Windows 95 does well due to it's superficial usability and the fact that you don't have to know the brand name of your hard drive controller to install it.
Also, there are people out there for whom technology is not an all-consuming passion and don't want to invest large amounts of time trying to figure things out. I think Unix is fantastic and I'm reasonably technically adept, but the idea of insalling Linux makes me cold. I'll let the tech guy with poor hygiene and social skills take care of that for now, while I go and get a shower before my date tonight.
"Who is this Katz guy? Turn him off!"
The only culture you've ever seen is growing in your fridge. I've followed Katz for years and you should appreciate the fact that he doesn't have to post stuff here when he could be getting paid (and appreciated) elsewhere. No-one is foisting this stuff on you. Grow up.
While linux may be 'Free' in terms of money, it
does demand a certain amount of effort and
patience before it will reveal its powers to you.
Like any quest for knowledge and power, it is
fraught with obstacles and frustrations. However,
the adventurer is not alone. With time and effort,
you will begin to understand the ways. You will
master the powers at hand. There are many people
you will encounter on your journey. Some will be
helpful, some scornful, some will question your
ways. Overall, though, you will find this land
full of those that wish to share in the knowledge.
If you are true in your desire, you will find
the help you need. - Master Switch
-Master Switch, one more element in the machine
Okay, I have to confess (and not anonymously, I might add) that I'm getting really freaking sick of all the obnoxious people who waste their time posting here (and to other discussions)!
I for one happen to be enjoying hearing JonKatz's tale. Believe it or not, there are actually intelligent, sentient, thoroughly competent beings out here reading slashdot who aren't currently running Linux! For those people these postings may actually be valuable and interesting, even if they aren't to you! If you don't find it interesting, why not just move along and read about the latest build or something more up your alley?
For those of us who are learning I can only let JonKatz know that we ARE reading, and appreciating the considerable amount of free time and energy he's putting into sharing (I keep hearing how Linux is all about sharing?) his experience.
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
Oh, I know -- I'm just sick of people acting like he's doing something wrong just because it WASN'T easy the first time.
I myself have installed Linux a half-dozen times, and I wouldn't say it was HARD to install, but those who contend it's easier than NT nead to stop passing the pipe. The main difference is that getting Linux INSTALLED is only 1% of the difficulty -- I've accomplished that several times. Getting it working *properly* with all the hardware, and getting X up and running have been the parts where everything seems to fall apart...
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
I just don't understand the blind doggedness of advocates -- can't we just deal with reality here? We're all technically competent people.
The reality is that NT is more likely to support a given piece of hardware than Linux, just the same as Win98 is more likely to support it than NT. It has nothing to do with superiority.
Linux is no less potent for having even more specific hardware needs than NT, but that DOES make it more likely to install in an unusable fashion on a PC that wasn't purchased with Linux hardware requirements in mind.
And I know how frustrating it can be -- I have to run 98 on my home system rather than NT because I play games and need the expanded hardware support 98 offers. 3d audio? Programmable joystick? NT speaks not these things!
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
One of my ISP's is a little weird and I have yet
to successfully log into it using Linux. It is set up as a BBS as well as an ISP...If you go into it with minicom, you can log in and do plain text stuff like lynx, ftp, etc. If you try to use chat and pppd, it just dies though. I don't know how to fix it. Works fine from my fathers windoze machine though....
In Soviet Russia, hot grits put YOU down THEIR pants.
***I've pondered the whole installing issue many times. My current theory is that the reason so many people are able to "install" win9x is that they buy computers with it pre-installed. I think most people *couldn't* install win9x, nor could they install a linux dist. Hell, I still have problems with Redhats installation and I've been using it for a couple of years***
:)
I don't buy this. In the course of my job I've had to install Win9x and NT 4/5 many times.... in languages I don't understand. If I can install Korean Win95 without even knowing the alphabet (I just kept hitting the enter key whenever there was an option), I find it hard to think than an intelligent user would have a hard time installing. Sure a stupid user might have a problem, but not an intelligent one.
Conversly, there seems to be a general assumption that even for intelligent people, the first time installing Linux is going to be rough. My first time trying to install Linux, it told me "mount failed" after I partitioned the hard drive and I could never get beyond that. I think the problem might have been the hard drive though and I plan to try again this weekend.
There are things that Linux does better than Windows, but - at least the install process for now - is something that Windows does far better than Linux.
Caveat- I am a contractor working at Microsoft. While, I don't have the knee jerk dislike for the company (and think M$ has brought many good things to the computer world), I also am not a knee jerk supporter. I *am* trying to get up a linux box or two after all
i'm using netcom w/ redhat 5.1 and 5.2. no problems here. if you read the README.linux in /usr/doc/ppp-version_num, you should notice a guy from netcom participated in writing it...
If you *really* wanted to get Linux installed, and by yourself, you could have just spend maybe $400
for the same (or similar) hardware that you just bought, and loaded RedHat (or Debian, SuSE, Slack)
and just merely followed the prompts (accepting the defaults) and loaded everything.
No muss, no fuss (unless you bought deviant 3rd world hardware made by Sadam & Co.).
After all, that's what the vendor did when they sold you the "preconfigured/preinstalled" Linux box.
Dreams of writing your first column from the Linux box? Using what editor? I hope you choose vi, the
only *real* editor..
what's that cackling?
-vE
-vE ten.xeh@dloc
It doesn't matter. Period. I've connected to a NT box using RAS with a redhat 5 install. It took about 10-20 minutes to figure out.