I have no problem paying money for good software, even "free" software. I pay for my Slackware distros. But I'm not comfortable paying for a service like CnR.
I've heard claims that apt-get sometimes borks something on Lindows. I've never used it, so I can't vouch for the accuracy of that, but that's what I heard.
If an OS such as Windows98SE can run on less than P-300mhz/comparative hardware, surely it'd be nice to see Linux + a WM of the same *usability* caliber run on the same hardware, and beat it hands down at speed (and of course stability).
Well, if you're bringing up an obsolete version of Windows, maybe you can find KDE version 1.X. I don't remember any speed problems with it. And it certainly whooped Win 9.X in stability.
IME, though KDE IS fatter and slower than Gnome, neither one is that good on old hardware. My slowest experience was on a K6 with 64M RAM. Win98 sucked, Gnome sucked, KDE sucked. Xfce was the only environment that was fast enough (unless I wanted twm).
Have you tried Xfce? It's more spartan than KDE/Gnome, but better than any other lightweight WM's that I've tried. And it ran fast on my old K6 with 64M RAM (KDE2 was like a snail in molasses on that box).
Ditto! I have control over what I run with Linux. Once, someone remarked that "Linux" was slower on his old hardware than Windows. My reply was "Yeah, KDE's slow on my old box too. Fortunately, I don't have to use it". With Windows, you don't have a choice. You HAVE to run their bloated GUI.
I've frequently had trouble with RedHat/Fedora and older versions of Mandrake (I didn't bother with 9.x/10.x). SuSe worked great on my older box, but choked on my latest & greatest computer.:(
And you don't have to run XP or 2k as admin. You can run as a restricted user. You just have to set one up.
The problem is, a lot of Winblows software won't run without admin priviledges. Also, XP doesn't encourage setting up user accounts. Many people don't even know they exist.
Stable and current is a balancing act. I don't neccesarily want the latest crashware from Fedora's betas (or even their releases), but I also don't want software from 1999. Slackware stays reasonably up to date without sacrificing stability.
If you want to use up-to-date, so-over-the-edge-that-bleeds-like-a-firehose software, use SID (unstable) or Sarge (testing). Stable is meant only for what the name implies: stable environments.
Well, some distros *cough*Slackware*cough* have software that's stable AND current.
Name one other Linux distro (heck, even one other *operating system*) that can do automatic hardware detection on as many different architectures as Debian does.
My distro does decent hardware detection on ONE architechure, but that's still better than ZERO hardware detection on 11 archs.
Not really! All the police can do is show up after the fact. Once, a neighbor was getting beaten up by her live-in BF. I called 911, and it took 15 minutes for the cops to arrive. Do you know how much damage a person can do in 15 minutes? He might have killed her if I hadn't been there.
Community is the late beta. They release it to the fools^H^H^H^H^Hbrave souls, and when they scream that it's destroying their hardware, they fix it (hopefully) and release the Official 10.0.
Out of interest, did you partition your system whilst using 2.6 or not?
Actually, no. After I posted, I remembered that I had previously installed Suse 9.0, which uses a 2.4 kernel. By the time I installed 9.1, the drive was already partitioned.
There's a difference between getting turned off by zealots, and not running a perfectly good OS because you don't like zealots. If you quit RedHat for the latter reason, then you, yourself, are an irrational zealot (against zealots).
But, what about the "Joe User" who's a little more advanced than Aunt Tillie. This Joe is sick of viruses and adware and "one size fits all", hasn't ever used a non-Winodws OS but is willing to learn. So he installs it, thinking that he can dual-boot between systems. It foobars his system, he says "Linux sux", and someone who might have used Linux is lost to the Dark Side.
Well, I haven't tried Fedora on my current box, but I have tried Suse 9.1, and had no problem with either dual-booting or accessing my NTFS partition. Probably the only way to verify your claim is to install Suse or Mandrake on a system that's KNOWN to fcuk up on Fedora and see if the other 2.6 distros have the problem.
Also, if the OP isn't already a K5 member, he's SOL. They've shut down new membership since some bozo posted a porn photoshop of Rusty's wife. And they don't let you post AC like Slashdot does.
Slashdot Mirror
Slackware recommends that you create a regular user. It doesn't FORCE you to do so, but it makes it clear that you should. Does Lindows^H^H^H^Hspire?
I have no problem paying money for good software, even "free" software. I pay for my Slackware distros. But I'm not comfortable paying for a service like CnR.
I've heard claims that apt-get sometimes borks something on Lindows. I've never used it, so I can't vouch for the accuracy of that, but that's what I heard.
Well, if you're bringing up an obsolete version of Windows, maybe you can find KDE version 1.X. I don't remember any speed problems with it. And it certainly whooped Win 9.X in stability.
IME, though KDE IS fatter and slower than Gnome, neither one is that good on old hardware. My slowest experience was on a K6 with 64M RAM. Win98 sucked, Gnome sucked, KDE sucked. Xfce was the only environment that was fast enough (unless I wanted twm).
Slackware, or Debian.
Have you tried Xfce? It's more spartan than KDE/Gnome, but better than any other lightweight WM's that I've tried. And it ran fast on my old K6 with 64M RAM (KDE2 was like a snail in molasses on that box).
Ditto! I have control over what I run with Linux. Once, someone remarked that "Linux" was slower on his old hardware than Windows. My reply was "Yeah, KDE's slow on my old box too. Fortunately, I don't have to use it". With Windows, you don't have a choice. You HAVE to run their bloated GUI.
I've frequently had trouble with RedHat/Fedora and older versions of Mandrake (I didn't bother with 9.x/10.x). SuSe worked great on my older box, but choked on my latest & greatest computer. :(
I've had good luck with SuSe on my previous machine. It's the distro I'm most likely to recommend to "Aunt Tillie".
The problem is, a lot of Winblows software won't run without admin priviledges. Also, XP doesn't encourage setting up user accounts. Many people don't even know they exist.
Stable and current is a balancing act. I don't neccesarily want the latest crashware from Fedora's betas (or even their releases), but I also don't want software from 1999. Slackware stays reasonably up to date without sacrificing stability.
Some time between today and the end of the world.
Well, some distros *cough*Slackware*cough* have software that's stable AND current.
My distro does decent hardware detection on ONE architechure, but that's still better than ZERO hardware detection on 11 archs.
Isn't that expected to happen in 2010?
Not really! All the police can do is show up after the fact. Once, a neighbor was getting beaten up by her live-in BF. I called 911, and it took 15 minutes for the cops to arrive. Do you know how much damage a person can do in 15 minutes? He might have killed her if I hadn't been there.
Well, you're always welcome to clean up your own shit. Personally, I'd just as soon pay someone else to do that kind of shit.
Community is the late beta. They release it to the fools^H^H^H^H^Hbrave souls, and when they scream that it's destroying their hardware, they fix it (hopefully) and release the Official 10.0.
Actually, no. After I posted, I remembered that I had previously installed Suse 9.0, which uses a 2.4 kernel. By the time I installed 9.1, the drive was already partitioned.
There's a difference between getting turned off by zealots, and not running a perfectly good OS because you don't like zealots. If you quit RedHat for the latter reason, then you, yourself, are an irrational zealot (against zealots).
One of my old cow-orkers used to rave about how good the TRS-80 was, and how us "young folks" missed out on a great experience.
But, what about the "Joe User" who's a little more advanced than Aunt Tillie. This Joe is sick of viruses and adware and "one size fits all", hasn't ever used a non-Winodws OS but is willing to learn. So he installs it, thinking that he can dual-boot between systems. It foobars his system, he says "Linux sux", and someone who might have used Linux is lost to the Dark Side.
Well, I haven't tried Fedora on my current box, but I have tried Suse 9.1, and had no problem with either dual-booting or accessing my NTFS partition. Probably the only way to verify your claim is to install Suse or Mandrake on a system that's KNOWN to fcuk up on Fedora and see if the other 2.6 distros have the problem.
Also, if the OP isn't already a K5 member, he's SOL. They've shut down new membership since some bozo posted a porn photoshop of Rusty's wife. And they don't let you post AC like Slashdot does.