Mine once froze my accounts because they suspected fraud. (Some over zealous algorithm decided my spending habits had changed too radically one week). I got both a phone call (taken by my answering machine) and an email. I've never been asked for my username, password or credit card number though.
Actually I believe there's a version of tcpdump for windows. It installs drivers and you'd have had to reboot, but its doable and besides now you're talking way beyond basic troubleshooting. It sounds to me like you're just less familiar with windows diagnostics because you're pretty much forced to deal with Linux diagnostics to get anything working in my experience.
I don't accept that it hasn't been a case of having mouse, keyboard and drawing issues for years. I've only just experienced these very things with current distros.
Yes Windows does insane things and I don't love it in the least. I'd really like to see Linux take off. It ain't gonna happen the way things are just now unforunately. Windows for now is just much easier.
Posting as AC to make it look like someone else agrees that I'm a troll is lame and sad. Why don't you grow up a little, or at least learn to word things a little differently when you're posting as AC, so its not blatently obvious its you.
So am I a troll, or a stupid fool who should be ignored because I don't know this. I assumed the best to run would be the stable version. It neither lived up to the tag nor was any good for me. THIS is the sort of BS that's EASILY fixed that would get Linux up to scratch for the desktop. Why don't the Linux zealots fix it instead of fobbing off anyone who complains?
There's a lot of this attitude in the community. Its the RTFM attitude that needs to go. That's what's holding Linux back not anything technical.
I once tried to ask RMS about his view on this. He simply fobbed me off and said he doesn't see a problem. The man's a technical genius, but that's not always going to excuse eccentric behaviour. (He was dressed as the patron saint of Linux complete with halo at the time. I was the only one dressed in a suit at a programming society meeting. I was automatically perceived as the enemy. I had just come from work and wasn't trying to rub the man the wrong way).
Friendly does not mean saying: * RTFM stupid. * Go do your research first otherwise don't expect anything to work. * Installers that tell you what you need to know when its too late. * Distributions with badly named directories and broken desktops but no warning about this.
I'm sorry I offended you, but at least I didn't call you names.
That makes it alright then doesn't it. Calling you a fool is so much worse than you presuming to know what I do or don't do for a living and how competent I am at it, based on a single post. Even your apology implies an "I'm better than you" attitude...and you wonder why I called you an arrogant fool.
Would certainly be nice not to have to be connected to my electronic drumkit by wires. I can already get these for a price but it would be fantastic if they were mainstream. Can't see how it would work with current tech. in a crowded environment (eg. train) though. Maybe someone here who knows more could tell me if this is something that's been tackled. I've not looked into this in any depth.
That is exactly my point - if you don't know what you're doing, you're screwed either way, but if you have some clue you're better off with linux... so where's the advantage for anyone in running Windows? It's no better for any of the users, and for some it's worse.
You rarely need more than the graphical software found in the control panel and start menu to do basic stuff. You certainly don't need to edit config files by hand to get your mouse working if something stuffs up in the install on Windows. (I've never had a mouse go unrecognised on WinXP, and I've never seen the graphics card repaint things funnily because I didn't tell the OS exactly how much video RAM or what graphics card I was using). This is the sort of shit an end user HAS to deal with under Linux, and it doesn't need to be that way!
Similarly, most posts that are fairly off topic and is a rant about a single user's individual experiences should be modded down. If you had written a tirade against your personal experiences with window, I'd expect you to be modded down too
You have serious issues if you think my post is off topic. It dealt with suitability of Linux as a desktop OS and the parent was all about Linux being passed over as a desktop in a large corporation.
You haven't dealt with end users much.
Thank you for telling me what I have and haven't done you arrogant fool. If you deal with end users the way you deal with me, good luck staying employed.
Absolutely not. If Walmart can sell PCs with Linux installed...
If you hadn't noticed a lot of vendors who tried offering Linux as an OS choice on their pre-built machines have pulled back and stopped doing that.
I realize CVSNT is an application. I've used it. You sais Windows had caught up. I don't see that. Linux has been improving more rapidly (and, on the desktop, it had (perhaps you would argue "has") to). My remark on CVSNT was sarcastic--how did you opinion of Linux worsen & your opinion of Windows improve?
Are you sure you've used CVS? What with? (See below)
Well when I started playing with Linux, Windows was still 16 bit, and crashed a lot. You still could only really play games on DOS and multimedia and internet access were basically add ons not built in.
Now stability in Windows has improved, multimedia etc. are all built in, a lot more hardware is supported, the interfaces are more intuitive etc.
Windows has definitely improved VERY rapidly with each generation of the OS adding capability.
Linux has also improved in terms of hardware support and applications but the pace of change has definitely been slower. This is unsurprising as a lot of Linux development is done by people working on a volunteer basis in their spare time. I'm not putting down people's efforts there. But there was no need for Linux not to stay further ahead than it has. Most of the changes in Linux have been behind the scenes from the point of view of an end user. They couldn't care less about whether they're running ext2 or 3.
I don't know why you expect CVS to be ported to windows--what is wrong with CVSNT?
Here you show your ignorance. CVSNT does not exactly match the behaviour of CVS. People running Eclipse have had only limited success with getting it to work. When you can't synchronize with the repository very early on in the project for whatever reason you can't trust your code to the repository server. I tried different verisons of CVSNT and it was too flakey to use. The Eclipse project doesn't support the use of CVSNT, and CVSNT doesn't try to support Eclipse.
Good question. The simple answer is I would like to have X-Windows set up so that certain graphical applications and web admin interfaces can be set up. I'm the only person from my company at the client site where I work that knows Unix/Linux at all well, and I would prefer not to be the only one who can admin our CVS repository, since that's a recipe for being called up to fix things while on holiday, or on the weekends.
The end user who doesn't know a hundred obscure commands, and another hundred obscure config files is just as screwed in Linux as they are with Windows.
ve also installed Gentoo (and still use it to this day). Although Gentoo isn't what you'd call "newbie" user friendly (as far as installing goes) if you follow the installation handbook, everything (with the exception of sound in my case) works fine.
I'd say not only is Linux ready for the desktop, it has been ready for some time now.
This RTFM attitude is exactly why Linux needs to change or die on the desktop. I'll repeat again. Not everyone has the time or interest to RTFM or go out and check every little bit of their hardware to see that its supported. I've seen Linux users suggest that if an end user doesn't like something they can learn to code and change it any damn way they want. Well in the real world not everyone has the inclination, time, resources or aptitude to do that. So if Windows or MacOS works for them they'll stick to it and leave Linux to the "propellerheads".
If people are expected to buy new hardware to run Linux they'll never bother to trash their Windows. When I finally got the opportunity to install Linux at work, I didn't get to pick the specs for the machine. I got the box that could be spared. From a manager's simplistic point of view Windows will happily run on it, so if Linux won't its garbage. (Now a good manager would know that the hardware was bought to spec to support Windows in the first place but not all managers are good managers).
I honestly think this whole situation is a real pity because I'd like it to get to the stage where I could recommend Linux to friends and relatives. Instead of actually addressing it it seems the Linux user community would rather stick their heads in the sand and abuse anyone who points out the problems.
The original discussion was about Linux as a desktop OS for a large organisation.
You made a sweeping statement about end users not administering their machines. I don't know what you think the millions of home computer users do exactly, but that was the statement you made.
I was making a point that in small organisations sometimes end users have to be involved in trouble shooting.
My experiences were indeed in setting up Linux for a server environment. Specifically a CVS server. However in doing that I had trouble with a desktop component - X-Windows, as well as hardware, while CVS was relatively easy to get up and running.
To me this suggests that the distros I was using certainly aren't ready for the Enterprise. While the choice of distros has widened recently the quality has fallen, and yet people rabbit on about Linux being ready for the desktop. If my experiences are anything to go by, its certainly not.
I was not saying that an expert user could not use Linux as a server and I don't know where you got that idea from.
Garden variety end users don't administer, troubleshoot and configure their own boxes. They don't install Windows. They don't even know there is a low level.
These days a lot of systems come pre-configured I grant you. But many non-brand names aren't and windows is a damned easy install compared to certain varieties of Linux. I've known many a non-expert to install Windows. I know few that install Linux, and some of those that have tried have regretted it.
Just a guess but because you KNOW I have valid points and am not a troll.
ok, lets be blunt here. What youb were doing does not count as a typical end-user function. when you do enterprise style work on an OS you absolutely MUST research your OS thoroughly. That doesnt matter if its windows, linux, mac osx, os2, etc. Dont give me the "aww damn, I have to do research.....:-(".
For fark sake man, how is it enterprise work to get the network, XWindows and KDE up and running? I had no trouble whatsoever with CVS, it was the desktop components that didn't work out of the box.
For the typical dumb end-user linux is not ready for the desktop (as I stated in my post before), but for anyone even remotely tech savvy or in this case you and your needs, linux would have/does work admirably.
Linux does not work for "anyone even remotely tech savvy". It works if you know Linux admin well.
If you agree we're its not ready for the "typical dumb end-user" then how do we disagree? I didn't say it wasn't ready for use for experts. I just said it certainly isn't ready for the desktop.
I think that if your organisation lets ordinary users (as opposed to tech staff) troubleshoot their own PC, or even gives them sufficient priveliges on the machines to do so, your troubles are far greater than mine.
I really don't see anything wrong with certain things requiring a certain amount of expertise and hiring experts to do them. I don't do my own plumbing. My plumber doesn't install operating systems. Takes all kinds to make a world.
You don't call your plumber to flush the toilet every day either. System admin is not an infrequent thing. You don't call a mechanic to help you drive your car. You only call him when it breaks down or needs a service.
I'd have to say that depends on what it is you're trying to do, although I personally havn't seen a major distro that requires this in many years, but I've never tried Fedora.
Debian simply didn't work for me out of the box. KDE was broken in 2 out of 2 installs. (I think there are issues with the mouse driver kernel module and devices with the version of KDe. Also seen some redraw issues with the video card but I haven't looked into that). Fedora I'll have to try without VMWare before I comment more.
Since you are an experienced Slack admin setting up a CVS repository (not something a garden variety desktop user is prone to do), why not just use Slack (or Red Hat) like a pro instead of Debian like a newb?
Simply because the last time I ran Slackware was about 7-8 years ago. There'll be a learning curve for me no matter what distro I use.
Here's the thing though. If you want Linux to take off on the desktop, you need a free (as in beer) desktop version that the masses can admin. There use to be one - Redhat was getting there. I haven't tried them all but the ones I'm seeing so far are aweful.
By the way a distro that requires you fix things going wrong that shouldn't is bad no matter what. I shouldn't need to know the guts of XWindows and mouse drivers just to get it running.
Not every opinion that isn't yours is a bad one. I knew I'd be modded troll because of the fanatacism here and because I'm saying something that people here don't want to hear (but I believe need to, because I'd LIKE to see Linux go where it should).
I posted because I had something to say - popular or not.
End users NEED to be able to trouble shoot their OS to some level - otherwise you'll never get people running it at home.
I tried Fedora Core 2. That's probably the best migration path from Redhat. (I've used 8 and 9 but only briefly).
Different people want different things from an OS but apparently a lot of end users are in desperate need of an OS that requires a B.Sc. in comp sci to get it up and running right?
CVSNT is an application - it is not the OS. When's the last time you got MS-Word 2003 running on Linux native? Why can't CVS (pserver) be ported to Windows? It can, but the developers don't want to.
It's a shame you had a bad experience, but when I installed Mandrake for the first time in january, (my first time using Linux) everything "just worked" out of the box, and that's why I started using Linux in the first place.
My first experiences were text installs on a 486, and back then it was an experimental OS and was awesome to play with. No one talked about it being ready as an end user OS. When I was using Redhat 7.x things were much better than they are now. So this talk of Linux as desktop ready is amazing to me. Way to put off your userbase forever.
I'll probably download and pay with Sarge at some point soon. I won't use Mandrake for the simple fact that its not as commonly used, and I'd have little or no support if things go wrong. Other people swear by SUSE as well. Neither distro has a free (as in beer) server version. Part of the problem is the infinite choice of distro. Linux is not the OS, the distro is.
If you could actually cite some clear specific reasons (as opposed to vague "everything is unstable/broken/hard" or anecdotes of something not working right for you that usually works fine for everyone else) people might actually listen.
Typical!!! You don't like my post because its not a detailed but report????
I'm talking vanilla Debian Woody, and Fedora Core 2 under VMWare. Not brain surgery. Picking options from the installer.
I installed on a total of 4 machines, under both emulated and stand alone environments. My experiences were not good. My point was it isn't getting better. Its actually taken a step back in the last few years.
To anyone with mod points, mod me whatever the hell you like. I'm going to call it as I see it. If you think I'm writing this to flame that's your problem.
Just what a desktop end user wants. An OS you have to research thoroughly.
Yes I ran with Woody. Its suppose to be the stable rock solid version at the moment. Tell me that when I have to spend "research time" working out how the !#@$ to get KDE up and running on it.
Slashdot Mirror
....on a tax on air. Better yet separate taxes on Nitrogen and Oxygen.
Mine once froze my accounts because they suspected fraud. (Some over zealous algorithm decided my spending habits had changed too radically one week). I got both a phone call (taken by my answering machine) and an email. I've never been asked for my username, password or credit card number though.
Actually I believe there's a version of tcpdump for windows. It installs drivers and you'd have had to reboot, but its doable and besides now you're talking way beyond basic troubleshooting. It sounds to me like you're just less familiar with windows diagnostics because you're pretty much forced to deal with Linux diagnostics to get anything working in my experience.
I don't accept that it hasn't been a case of having mouse, keyboard and drawing issues for years. I've only just experienced these very things with current distros.
Yes Windows does insane things and I don't love it in the least. I'd really like to see Linux take off. It ain't gonna happen the way things are just now unforunately. Windows for now is just much easier.
Posting as AC to make it look like someone else agrees that I'm a troll is lame and sad. Why don't you grow up a little, or at least learn to word things a little differently when you're posting as AC, so its not blatently obvious its you.
So am I a troll, or a stupid fool who should be ignored because I don't know this. I assumed the best to run would be the stable version. It neither lived up to the tag nor was any good for me. THIS is the sort of BS that's EASILY fixed that would get Linux up to scratch for the desktop. Why don't the Linux zealots fix it instead of fobbing off anyone who complains?
There's a lot of this attitude in the community. Its the RTFM attitude that needs to go. That's what's holding Linux back not anything technical.
I once tried to ask RMS about his view on this. He simply fobbed me off and said he doesn't see a problem. The man's a technical genius, but that's not always going to excuse eccentric behaviour. (He was dressed as the patron saint of Linux complete with halo at the time. I was the only one dressed in a suit at a programming society meeting. I was automatically perceived as the enemy. I had just come from work and wasn't trying to rub the man the wrong way).
Friendly does not mean saying:
* RTFM stupid.
* Go do your research first otherwise don't expect anything to work.
* Installers that tell you what you need to know when its too late.
* Distributions with badly named directories and broken desktops but no warning about this.
I'm sorry I offended you, but at least I didn't call you names.
That makes it alright then doesn't it. Calling you a fool is so much worse than you presuming to know what I do or don't do for a living and how competent I am at it, based on a single post. Even your apology implies an "I'm better than you" attitude...and you wonder why I called you an arrogant fool.
Would certainly be nice not to have to be connected to my electronic drumkit by wires. I can already get these for a price but it would be fantastic if they were mainstream. Can't see how it would work with current tech. in a crowded environment (eg. train) though. Maybe someone here who knows more could tell me if this is something that's been tackled. I've not looked into this in any depth.
That is exactly my point - if you don't know what you're doing, you're screwed either way, but if you have some clue you're better off with linux... so where's the advantage for anyone in running Windows? It's no better for any of the users, and for some it's worse.
You rarely need more than the graphical software found in the control panel and start menu to do basic stuff. You certainly don't need to edit config files by hand to get your mouse working if something stuffs up in the install on Windows. (I've never had a mouse go unrecognised on WinXP, and I've never seen the graphics card repaint things funnily because I didn't tell the OS exactly how much video RAM or what graphics card I was using). This is the sort of shit an end user HAS to deal with under Linux, and it doesn't need to be that way!
Similarly, most posts that are fairly off topic and is a rant about a single user's individual experiences should be modded down. If you had written a tirade against your personal experiences with window, I'd expect you to be modded down too
You have serious issues if you think my post is off topic. It dealt with suitability of Linux as a desktop OS and the parent was all about Linux being passed over as a desktop in a large corporation.
You haven't dealt with end users much.
Thank you for telling me what I have and haven't done you arrogant fool. If you deal with end users the way you deal with me, good luck staying employed.
Absolutely not. If Walmart can sell PCs with Linux installed...
If you hadn't noticed a lot of vendors who tried offering Linux as an OS choice on their pre-built machines have pulled back and stopped doing that.
I realize CVSNT is an application. I've used it. You sais Windows had caught up. I don't see that. Linux has been improving more rapidly (and, on the desktop, it had (perhaps you would argue "has") to). My remark on CVSNT was sarcastic--how did you opinion of Linux worsen & your opinion of Windows improve?
Are you sure you've used CVS? What with? (See below)
Well when I started playing with Linux, Windows was still 16 bit, and crashed a lot. You still could only really play games on DOS and multimedia and internet access were basically add ons not built in.
Now stability in Windows has improved, multimedia etc. are all built in, a lot more hardware is supported, the interfaces are more intuitive etc.
Windows has definitely improved VERY rapidly with each generation of the OS adding capability.
Linux has also improved in terms of hardware support and applications but the pace of change has definitely been slower. This is unsurprising as a lot of Linux development is done by people working on a volunteer basis in their spare time. I'm not putting down people's efforts there. But there was no need for Linux not to stay further ahead than it has. Most of the changes in Linux have been behind the scenes from the point of view of an end user. They couldn't care less about whether they're running ext2 or 3.
I don't know why you expect CVS to be ported to windows--what is wrong with CVSNT?
Here you show your ignorance. CVSNT does not exactly match the behaviour of CVS. People running Eclipse have had only limited success with getting it to work. When you can't synchronize with the repository very early on in the project for whatever reason you can't trust your code to the repository server. I tried different verisons of CVSNT and it was too flakey to use. The Eclipse project doesn't support the use of CVSNT, and CVSNT doesn't try to support Eclipse.
Good question. The simple answer is I would like to have X-Windows set up so that certain graphical applications and web admin interfaces can be set up. I'm the only person from my company at the client site where I work that knows Unix/Linux at all well, and I would prefer not to be the only one who can admin our CVS repository, since that's a recipe for being called up to fix things while on holiday, or on the weekends.
The end user who doesn't know a hundred obscure commands, and another hundred obscure config files is just as screwed in Linux as they are with Windows.
ve also installed Gentoo (and still use it to this day). Although Gentoo isn't what you'd call "newbie" user friendly (as far as installing goes) if you follow the installation handbook, everything (with the exception of sound in my case) works fine.
I'd say not only is Linux ready for the desktop, it has been ready for some time now.
This RTFM attitude is exactly why Linux needs to change or die on the desktop. I'll repeat again. Not everyone has the time or interest to RTFM or go out and check every little bit of their hardware to see that its supported. I've seen Linux users suggest that if an end user doesn't like something they can learn to code and change it any damn way they want. Well in the real world not everyone has the inclination, time, resources or aptitude to do that. So if Windows or MacOS works for them they'll stick to it and leave Linux to the "propellerheads".
If people are expected to buy new hardware to run Linux they'll never bother to trash their Windows. When I finally got the opportunity to install Linux at work, I didn't get to pick the specs for the machine. I got the box that could be spared. From a manager's simplistic point of view Windows will happily run on it, so if Linux won't its garbage. (Now a good manager would know that the hardware was bought to spec to support Windows in the first place but not all managers are good managers).
I honestly think this whole situation is a real pity because I'd like it to get to the stage where I could recommend Linux to friends and relatives. Instead of actually addressing it it seems the Linux user community would rather stick their heads in the sand and abuse anyone who points out the problems.
The original discussion was about Linux as a desktop OS for a large organisation.
You made a sweeping statement about end users not administering their machines. I don't know what you think the millions of home computer users do exactly, but that was the statement you made.
I was making a point that in small organisations sometimes end users have to be involved in trouble shooting.
My experiences were indeed in setting up Linux for a server environment. Specifically a CVS server. However in doing that I had trouble with a desktop component - X-Windows, as well as hardware, while CVS was relatively easy to get up and running.
To me this suggests that the distros I was using certainly aren't ready for the Enterprise. While the choice of distros has widened recently the quality has fallen, and yet people rabbit on about Linux being ready for the desktop. If my experiences are anything to go by, its certainly not.
I was not saying that an expert user could not use Linux as a server and I don't know where you got that idea from.
End of discussion.
Garden variety end users don't administer, troubleshoot and configure their own boxes. They don't install Windows. They don't even know there is a low level.
These days a lot of systems come pre-configured I grant you. But many non-brand names aren't and windows is a damned easy install compared to certain varieties of Linux. I've known many a non-expert to install Windows. I know few that install Linux, and some of those that have tried have regretted it.
I dont know why I'm feeding the trolls....
:-(".
Just a guess but because you KNOW I have valid points and am not a troll.
ok, lets be blunt here. What youb were doing does not count as a typical end-user function. when you do enterprise style work on an OS you absolutely MUST research your OS thoroughly. That doesnt matter if its windows, linux, mac osx, os2, etc. Dont give me the "aww damn, I have to do research.....
For fark sake man, how is it enterprise work to get the network, XWindows and KDE up and running? I had no trouble whatsoever with CVS, it was the desktop components that didn't work out of the box.
For the typical dumb end-user linux is not ready for the desktop (as I stated in my post before), but for anyone even remotely tech savvy or in this case you and your needs, linux would have/does work admirably.
Linux does not work for "anyone even remotely tech savvy". It works if you know Linux admin well.
If you agree we're its not ready for the "typical dumb end-user" then how do we disagree? I didn't say it wasn't ready for use for experts. I just said it certainly isn't ready for the desktop.
I think that if your organisation lets ordinary users (as opposed to tech staff) troubleshoot their own PC, or even gives them sufficient priveliges on the machines to do so, your troubles are far greater than mine.
Have you ever worked in a small company?
I really don't see anything wrong with certain things requiring a certain amount of expertise and hiring experts to do them. I don't do my own plumbing. My plumber doesn't install operating systems. Takes all kinds to make a world.
You don't call your plumber to flush the toilet every day either. System admin is not an infrequent thing. You don't call a mechanic to help you drive your car. You only call him when it breaks down or needs a service.
I'd have to say that depends on what it is you're trying to do, although I personally havn't seen a major distro that requires this in many years, but I've never tried Fedora.
Debian simply didn't work for me out of the box. KDE was broken in 2 out of 2 installs. (I think there are issues with the mouse driver kernel module and devices with the version of KDe. Also seen some redraw issues with the video card but I haven't looked into that). Fedora I'll have to try without VMWare before I comment more.
That should have read:
Typical!!! You don't like my post because its not a detailed BUG report????
Since you are an experienced Slack admin setting up a CVS repository (not something a garden variety desktop user is prone to do), why not just use Slack (or Red Hat) like a pro instead of Debian like a newb?
Simply because the last time I ran Slackware was about 7-8 years ago. There'll be a learning curve for me no matter what distro I use.
Here's the thing though. If you want Linux to take off on the desktop, you need a free (as in beer) desktop version that the masses can admin. There use to be one - Redhat was getting there. I haven't tried them all but the ones I'm seeing so far are aweful.
By the way a distro that requires you fix things going wrong that shouldn't is bad no matter what. I shouldn't need to know the guts of XWindows and mouse drivers just to get it running.
Not every opinion that isn't yours is a bad one. I knew I'd be modded troll because of the fanatacism here and because I'm saying something that people here don't want to hear (but I believe need to, because I'd LIKE to see Linux go where it should).
I posted because I had something to say - popular or not.
End users NEED to be able to trouble shoot their OS to some level - otherwise you'll never get people running it at home.
I tried Fedora Core 2. That's probably the best migration path from Redhat. (I've used 8 and 9 but only briefly).
Different people want different things from an OS but apparently a lot of end users are in desperate need of an OS that requires a B.Sc. in comp sci to get it up and running right?
CVSNT is an application - it is not the OS. When's the last time you got MS-Word 2003 running on Linux native? Why can't CVS (pserver) be ported to Windows? It can, but the developers don't want to.
It's a shame you had a bad experience, but when I installed Mandrake for the first time in january, (my first time using Linux) everything "just worked" out of the box, and that's why I started using Linux in the first place.
My first experiences were text installs on a 486, and back then it was an experimental OS and was awesome to play with. No one talked about it being ready as an end user OS. When I was using Redhat 7.x things were much better than they are now. So this talk of Linux as desktop ready is amazing to me. Way to put off your userbase forever.
I'll probably download and pay with Sarge at some point soon. I won't use Mandrake for the simple fact that its not as commonly used, and I'd have little or no support if things go wrong. Other people swear by SUSE as well. Neither distro has a free (as in beer) server version. Part of the problem is the infinite choice of distro. Linux is not the OS, the distro is.
If you could actually cite some clear specific reasons (as opposed to vague "everything is unstable/broken/hard" or anecdotes of something not working right for you that usually works fine for everyone else) people might actually listen.
Typical!!! You don't like my post because its not a detailed but report????
I'm talking vanilla Debian Woody, and Fedora Core 2 under VMWare. Not brain surgery. Picking options from the installer.
I installed on a total of 4 machines, under both emulated and stand alone environments. My experiences were not good. My point was it isn't getting better. Its actually taken a step back in the last few years.
To anyone with mod points, mod me whatever the hell you like. I'm going to call it as I see it. If you think I'm writing this to flame that's your problem.
Grow up, and look up flamebait in a dictionary while you're at it.
And by the way READ MY POST ***BEFORE*** you trash it. Its 2004. You shouldn't need to be an experienced sysadmin to run a desktop OS.
And by the way if you think only sysadmins troubleshoot windows desktops you're living in fairy land matie.
wow, seems like you didnt do research first....
Just what a desktop end user wants. An OS you have to research thoroughly.
Yes I ran with Woody. Its suppose to be the stable rock solid version at the moment. Tell me that when I have to spend "research time" working out how the !#@$ to get KDE up and running on it.
Modded troll in minutes. Record time. Congratulations to those who choose to cover their ears and chant "la la la la la".