And your post was so stereotypical jackass to begin with.... that's why I posted. You just put it in context exactly how I quoted you. You feel that you shouldn't have to learn anything. That's the common response from people like you. You say there is absolutely no reason for you to learn Linux. The parent post had a pretty good reason, since it was about resurrecting an old PC as a server. If you want to use Windows on an old PC, go right ahead.
The point to the post was that old PCs make good machines for Linux servers. If you are going to get some use out of an old PC by putting Linux on it, you should be willing to learn a little bit about Linux. This isn't just me being a stuck-up Linux user. I can do anything I want in Windows too, but I found a use for Linux and I was willing to learn how to use it. Just like I found a use for a car so I learned how to drive. I found that I loved music so I learned an instrument. When I was a child, I found that shitting in a diaper was at all comfortable, so I learned how to use the toilet.
If you feel you could benefit by putting Linux on your old PC and making it a server, then get ready to learn Linux. If not, put Windows on it or throw it away, and try to stay away from making insulting posts explaining why Linux is beneath you. There are many things that you have learned to do that others would see absolutely no reason to learn. Do they come to where you work and throw rocks at you while you are mowing the lawn?
I'm still a little concerned that if something goes wrong I'll have to go on IRC or something equally unappealing just to get it fixed, as opposed to WinXP where I just 'know' how to fix it.
If everyone is so afraid to READ these days, why are posts so high on sites like Slashdot? Are you using the Opera text-to-speech engine to read Slashdot? All sarcasm aside... Googling any Linux prob you may have as a beginner will yield an answer 99% of the time, and anyone who feels the need to reply to me saying that they've tried this method and spent 2-5 hours trying to find an answer should really devote 2-5 hours learning how to use a search engine.
If MS would trim some of the fat(like the GUI) off it's OS it could have a much better server edition. Put a windows server edition on that old PC and see if it's very useful. You can get a lot more power from those older PCs with a slimmed down server install of Linux or one of the BSDs. Of course, this may require you to learn something. Heaven forbid anyone try to learn something in this day and age. That would be so unamerican.
I love having 100's of distro's to choose from personally. It helps move things forward. Everyone is competing. Competition spurs innovation. You want to talk about ego....look at Microsoft. That's ego. Linux users creating new distro's is just nerds being nerds and friendly(sometimes not-so-friendly) competition.
Put an Apple on the back of it.
Oh and make it very easy to scratch.
Actually if they wanted it to be successful they'd make it easy to change the firmware. That's all it would take. It may even be this way but if so I'm unaware of it. Kids like stuff they can mod.
Well you probably got into IT when it didn't necessarily require a degree. These days it's pretty difficult to land even an interview without a degree.
I don't feel that a college degree says that you are qualified. I'm currently working on earning a BS degree at the ripe age of 29. I can tell you that, though a degree doesn't make a person qualified, the lack of a degree mostly means you won't even be considered. At least with a degree you'll get an interview.
Debian->Ubuntu
Chicken-$gt;Chicken
You can eat them both, but when you eat mountain oysters you don't say "damn this tastes like chicken". Point being....they're both good but you can't beat the original. Oh and we can argue about which came first the chicken or the egg.....it'll be about as productive as comparing Debian and Ubuntu.
Yeah, that's one of the biggest draw to Debian for me. The release scheme is great. I can run stable on my server and it's exactly that....stable. It's older software but I'm not using it for a desktop, I'm running webservers, ftp, and the likes on it. All controlled via ssh. For this situation, stable is a great choice. On my desktop at home, unstable or testing is usually running the bleeding edge stuff and it does this with some good stability. I don't understand comments about the 'age' of Debian releases and comparing them to Fedora or some other bleeding edge distro. Some Distros are made for the desktop, others are better for a server....with Debian you have both and all it takes is to change the word "stable" to "unstable" in the sources.list file. I like that convenience.
The politics of the Debian development is sad to hear. It's always bad news. It's a shame because Debian is still a great distro. Even with all the internal conflicts, it's still my favorite distro.
I don't have a system that isn't fully Linux compatible. On my main machine, for instance, I have an nVidia video card...check....wacom graphics tablet...check.....Viewsonic 22" widescreen at 1680x1050 res...check....my thumbdrives automount...check....my dvd drive plays and writes...check...my tv tuner card is made specifically for Linux and worked automatically on first boot....check...HP photosmart printer...check. Of course it's a mutt I put together and made sure to only buy Linux compatible parts for. My old Dell 1.9ghz laptop works great with Linux. Really this argument was valid about 5 years ago, but now I have less trouble getting everything working under Linux than with Windows. An unfair example being my TV tuner. It works great in Linux but there's very limited Windows support. It's harder to get it working in Windows than it is to get my laptops wifi working in Linux. If you truly want to use Linux, buy hardware that supports the OS. Simple as that.
It probably wouldn't last that long. Hero fires a handgun at enemy, take cover behind a overturned table, gets shot because hey bullets can travel through an inch or two of wood with no trouble.
There's a reason that the Marines teach three round bursts...
Easy to teach when that's the limitation of the weapon. The gun is made to shoot three round bursts to limit soldiers from using up too much ammo and from overheating the weapon of course. It's not special marine training on how to shoot three round bursts....its a selector switch on the gun heh.
Nope I'm not limiting anyone's freedom to use the software by my statements. That's ignorant. If they want to use the latest release of software there's usually a SVN system they could use and there are plenty of howto's on google. In your world you would cater to every single user and that's the Windows world. That's why I use Linux. So what if there are 5 different popular package managers. They are all easy to use. All you have to use is one and the choice is yours. What will happen if you try to consolidate everything across the board? You will end up with no reason to choice a certain distro because they will all be the same. You will lose your freedom of choice.
In my world apt does everything I want in Debian. In someone else's world emerge/portage may be their answer. You missed the point. When you want the latest cutting edge version of Photoshop you go to the store and you buy it. You spend money on the product. Since projects like the gimp and so on are free the user should be able to at least invest a little time in learning how to install it. It's free and the developer isn't making jack off it. People act like they are paying for this software. They get pissed when it doesn't install by clicking on it and going through a wizard. Why??? It's free software. Personally I don't care if those people use Linux or any other free software.
As far as your specialized case of inkscape's cutting edge release. What if that unified package manager doesn't include the latest release? Since that's what I was talking about. That's was my whole fscking point. You run into a mess when you try to do different versions of each software across multiple distro's on a single repository. It's possible, but look at what's going to happen when you do this....Later on when it get's too big for the community to handle we'll come up with the bright idea to split everything back up. We'll come back to our 5 or 6 popular ways of package management because it's a better idea. I hate managers who feel things have to change for the sake of changing. Frankly, if it's not broke don't fix it. If users can't be bothered to learn how to click a couple of buttons to install a piece of software, as is possible with synaptic and company, then they shouldn't use any distro of Linux. That's not limiting their freedom....they have every right to use it....they just have to put the same effort into it as everyone else...click click....that's it. Freedom isn't about everyone catering to you.
The USA was a great idea, but it has been slaughtered by morons. The same thing can be said about my OS of choice. So what if there are 5 different ways to install software. Do we really need to dumb it down anymore? You can think I'm being an elitist or whatever, but the truth of the matter is, we don't need to dumb the damn thing down any more than it already is. I mean whether I'm using Fedora or Debian, I can install just about anything by clicking like 2 buttons. Same goes for just about any modern distro there is. We don't need a unified package system. What we need is a unified community that accepts the fact that each distro is different.
In the US we've been slowly taking away our own liberties over the years and most of us don't even realize it. The same can be said with our Operating System. We let idiots come up with bright ideas they feel will make it easier for people to use and what happens is we loose our freedoms. If you want a unified package management system use Mac OS or Windows. Leave my OS alone. I like it just how it is. Thank You!
You forgot to mention the person who's always there to bash the slashdot norm. Like yourself. Not that I disagree with ya. It's just your comment is as redundant as a "I for one welcome our new redundant overlords". :)
Flame flame flame flame....flame flame burn blame flame. In my opinion, flame MS flame flame flame OS X...flame blame burn. Furthermore, burn flame flame flame flame fire Linux. But BSD flame zealot fanboy flame flame flame. Occasionally I like to offtopic flame blah blah.
I think that about sums it up..... I just saved myself 3 paragraphs of typing with the same result.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah no joke....in fact why isn't there any CPUs here at all. I would think the x86 architecture would have at least made the list.
He was asking to be funny. Unfortunately the humor is just flying right over the heads of most this morning I guess.
And your post was so stereotypical jackass to begin with.... that's why I posted. You just put it in context exactly how I quoted you. You feel that you shouldn't have to learn anything. That's the common response from people like you. You say there is absolutely no reason for you to learn Linux. The parent post had a pretty good reason, since it was about resurrecting an old PC as a server. If you want to use Windows on an old PC, go right ahead.
The point to the post was that old PCs make good machines for Linux servers. If you are going to get some use out of an old PC by putting Linux on it, you should be willing to learn a little bit about Linux. This isn't just me being a stuck-up Linux user. I can do anything I want in Windows too, but I found a use for Linux and I was willing to learn how to use it. Just like I found a use for a car so I learned how to drive. I found that I loved music so I learned an instrument. When I was a child, I found that shitting in a diaper was at all comfortable, so I learned how to use the toilet.
If you feel you could benefit by putting Linux on your old PC and making it a server, then get ready to learn Linux. If not, put Windows on it or throw it away, and try to stay away from making insulting posts explaining why Linux is beneath you. There are many things that you have learned to do that others would see absolutely no reason to learn. Do they come to where you work and throw rocks at you while you are mowing the lawn?
If MS would trim some of the fat(like the GUI) off it's OS it could have a much better server edition. Put a windows server edition on that old PC and see if it's very useful. You can get a lot more power from those older PCs with a slimmed down server install of Linux or one of the BSDs. Of course, this may require you to learn something. Heaven forbid anyone try to learn something in this day and age. That would be so unamerican.
I love having 100's of distro's to choose from personally. It helps move things forward. Everyone is competing. Competition spurs innovation. You want to talk about ego....look at Microsoft. That's ego. Linux users creating new distro's is just nerds being nerds and friendly(sometimes not-so-friendly) competition.
PowerPoint was developed by a company called Forethought. The company and the product were purchased by Microsoft in 1987 for 14 million bucks.
Wifi also gives it another advantage.....less people will be tempted to put Linux on it.
Put an Apple on the back of it.
Oh and make it very easy to scratch.
Actually if they wanted it to be successful they'd make it easy to change the firmware. That's all it would take. It may even be this way but if so I'm unaware of it. Kids like stuff they can mod.
One Millllllion Dollars!!!!!!
Well you probably got into IT when it didn't necessarily require a degree. These days it's pretty difficult to land even an interview without a degree.
I don't feel that a college degree says that you are qualified. I'm currently working on earning a BS degree at the ripe age of 29. I can tell you that, though a degree doesn't make a person qualified, the lack of a degree mostly means you won't even be considered. At least with a degree you'll get an interview.
Man slashdot needs an edit button. I hit submit instead of preview and didn't catch all my mistakes....Chicken->Egg....messed up a good post damnit
Debian->Ubuntu
Chicken-$gt;Chicken
You can eat them both, but when you eat mountain oysters you don't say "damn this tastes like chicken". Point being....they're both good but you can't beat the original. Oh and we can argue about which came first the chicken or the egg.....it'll be about as productive as comparing Debian and Ubuntu.
Yeah, that's one of the biggest draw to Debian for me. The release scheme is great. I can run stable on my server and it's exactly that....stable. It's older software but I'm not using it for a desktop, I'm running webservers, ftp, and the likes on it. All controlled via ssh. For this situation, stable is a great choice. On my desktop at home, unstable or testing is usually running the bleeding edge stuff and it does this with some good stability. I don't understand comments about the 'age' of Debian releases and comparing them to Fedora or some other bleeding edge distro. Some Distros are made for the desktop, others are better for a server....with Debian you have both and all it takes is to change the word "stable" to "unstable" in the sources.list file. I like that convenience.
The politics of the Debian development is sad to hear. It's always bad news. It's a shame because Debian is still a great distro. Even with all the internal conflicts, it's still my favorite distro.
I don't have a system that isn't fully Linux compatible. On my main machine, for instance, I have an nVidia video card...check....wacom graphics tablet...check.....Viewsonic 22" widescreen at 1680x1050 res...check....my thumbdrives automount...check....my dvd drive plays and writes...check...my tv tuner card is made specifically for Linux and worked automatically on first boot....check...HP photosmart printer...check. Of course it's a mutt I put together and made sure to only buy Linux compatible parts for. My old Dell 1.9ghz laptop works great with Linux. Really this argument was valid about 5 years ago, but now I have less trouble getting everything working under Linux than with Windows. An unfair example being my TV tuner. It works great in Linux but there's very limited Windows support. It's harder to get it working in Windows than it is to get my laptops wifi working in Linux. If you truly want to use Linux, buy hardware that supports the OS. Simple as that.
It probably wouldn't last that long. Hero fires a handgun at enemy, take cover behind a overturned table, gets shot because hey bullets can travel through an inch or two of wood with no trouble.
We could just cut out the middle man and send Steven Tyler into space to eat it....or maybe Chuck Norris could give it a roundhouse.
Sorry, I'm an early morning drunk. I meant "Essential Text Configurations"
How about "Essential Configuration Texts"
Nope I'm not limiting anyone's freedom to use the software by my statements. That's ignorant. If they want to use the latest release of software there's usually a SVN system they could use and there are plenty of howto's on google. In your world you would cater to every single user and that's the Windows world. That's why I use Linux. So what if there are 5 different popular package managers. They are all easy to use. All you have to use is one and the choice is yours. What will happen if you try to consolidate everything across the board? You will end up with no reason to choice a certain distro because they will all be the same. You will lose your freedom of choice.
In my world apt does everything I want in Debian. In someone else's world emerge/portage may be their answer. You missed the point. When you want the latest cutting edge version of Photoshop you go to the store and you buy it. You spend money on the product. Since projects like the gimp and so on are free the user should be able to at least invest a little time in learning how to install it. It's free and the developer isn't making jack off it. People act like they are paying for this software. They get pissed when it doesn't install by clicking on it and going through a wizard. Why??? It's free software. Personally I don't care if those people use Linux or any other free software.
As far as your specialized case of inkscape's cutting edge release. What if that unified package manager doesn't include the latest release? Since that's what I was talking about. That's was my whole fscking point. You run into a mess when you try to do different versions of each software across multiple distro's on a single repository. It's possible, but look at what's going to happen when you do this....Later on when it get's too big for the community to handle we'll come up with the bright idea to split everything back up. We'll come back to our 5 or 6 popular ways of package management because it's a better idea. I hate managers who feel things have to change for the sake of changing. Frankly, if it's not broke don't fix it. If users can't be bothered to learn how to click a couple of buttons to install a piece of software, as is possible with synaptic and company, then they shouldn't use any distro of Linux. That's not limiting their freedom....they have every right to use it....they just have to put the same effort into it as everyone else...click click....that's it. Freedom isn't about everyone catering to you.
The USA was a great idea, but it has been slaughtered by morons. The same thing can be said about my OS of choice. So what if there are 5 different ways to install software. Do we really need to dumb it down anymore? You can think I'm being an elitist or whatever, but the truth of the matter is, we don't need to dumb the damn thing down any more than it already is. I mean whether I'm using Fedora or Debian, I can install just about anything by clicking like 2 buttons. Same goes for just about any modern distro there is. We don't need a unified package system. What we need is a unified community that accepts the fact that each distro is different.
In the US we've been slowly taking away our own liberties over the years and most of us don't even realize it. The same can be said with our Operating System. We let idiots come up with bright ideas they feel will make it easier for people to use and what happens is we loose our freedoms. If you want a unified package management system use Mac OS or Windows. Leave my OS alone. I like it just how it is. Thank You!
Must..... resist...... Douglas Adam's quote....about as pleasant as being drunk......
You forgot to mention the person who's always there to bash the slashdot norm. Like yourself. Not that I disagree with ya. It's just your comment is as redundant as a "I for one welcome our new redundant overlords".
:)
Flame flame flame flame....flame flame burn blame flame. In my opinion, flame MS flame flame flame OS X...flame blame burn. Furthermore, burn flame flame flame flame fire Linux. But BSD flame zealot fanboy flame flame flame. Occasionally I like to offtopic flame blah blah. I think that about sums it up..... I just saved myself 3 paragraphs of typing with the same result.