I'm sorry, but saying one OS is easier to install than another is FUD. The fact is a person is going to be more comfortable with installing the OS that they have more experience installing. Personally, I find Linux quite easy. Linux distro's typically come with everything I need. PCI card setup is simple just as it is in windows. Old ISA cards can be a pain because of resource conflicts. And I have had to install Windows more times than Linux because for some reason, I always seem to break it. Linux has better information and install support. Case in point: Just a few weeks ago, I got a new webcam and wanted to get Netmeeting working through my linux Firewall. After trying to forward the correct ports, I posted a question to alt.os.linux and not 4 hours later I had a reply from a person who was in contact with someone working on an ip masqerading module. He even gave me a link to a 3rd party program to gt it to work in the meantime. Now, If I wanted this kind of support from a MS product, I would have to pay out the ass to talk to someone with less experience than I have. And many seem to overlook that the average end user can not even fix, even install windows, when it breaks. The only reason that people say that Linux is hard is because it is new. And most people got into computers today with either Windows or MS Dos. Microsoft was one of the first to break into the home pc market and this is why so many people trust them. People still use it because we are lazy. No one wants to spend the time to learn another OS when all they want to do with it is write documents, check email and surf the net. And I do not blame them. For Linux to overtake Windows, many things will have to change. But IMHO, the most important thing that could happen to boost Linux is more systems with pre-installed Linux disros. Then, the average end user will give Linux brand recognition. BTW, My mom has no problem sitting down in front of a computer that runs Linux and KDE and doing every thing she needs to do. And she can not even install windows. It does not have to do with ease of install. It has to do simply with brand recognition. Not everyone is as insightful as us Slashdot readers and they don't care to be.
So by his analogy a locksmith is a thief? What a bunch of bull. All this to protect something that costs $20 a pop. I get more and more amazed at the lengths hollywood will go to to expand their fortune.
All I have to say is that Quake3 and Linux rocks. A few weeks ago, I got a p133, mainboard and 48 megs of ram for 10 bucks. I figured I'd use it as a masquerading, samba, apache, ftp, etc for my other pc (An AMD 450, with a Voodoo3) hooked to a cable modem. I play games that aren't available for Linux often, so it would be nice to have two boxes instead of having to reboot all the time. I got it all set up, even figured out how to run a Q3 server through the firewall on my windows machine. The bad thing was, that when more than 2 people were playing, the cpu was bogged down and pings jumped sky high. So, I couldn't run a server and play. That sucked. I figured, I'd at least need a PII or AMDK62 to run a server on the linux firewall itself. I tried it anyway. To my suprise, 10 player server, full ran 70-95% cpu, no slowdowns on a P133! Funny, in windows on my K62450, 5 player server runs 60% cpu.
On a sidenote, Quake 3 runs faster (about 4 fps) in Windows because of the beta quality voodoo3 drivers. Hopefully this will change!
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, but saying one OS is easier to install than another is FUD. The fact is a person is going to be more comfortable with installing the OS that they have more experience installing. Personally, I find Linux quite easy. Linux distro's typically come with everything I need. PCI card setup is simple just as it is in windows. Old ISA cards can be a pain because of resource conflicts. And I have had to install Windows more times than Linux because for some reason, I always seem to break it. Linux has better information and install support. Case in point: Just a few weeks ago, I got a new webcam and wanted to get Netmeeting working through my linux Firewall. After trying to forward the correct ports, I posted a question to alt.os.linux and not 4 hours later I had a reply from a person who was in contact with someone working on an ip masqerading module. He even gave me a link to a 3rd party program to gt it to work in the meantime. Now, If I wanted this kind of support from a MS product, I would have to pay out the ass to talk to someone with less experience than I have. And many seem to overlook that the average end user can not even fix, even install windows, when it breaks. The only reason that people say that Linux is hard is because it is new. And most people got into computers today with either Windows or MS Dos. Microsoft was one of the first to break into the home pc market and this is why so many people trust them. People still use it because we are lazy. No one wants to spend the time to learn another OS when all they want to do with it is write documents, check email and surf the net. And I do not blame them. For Linux to overtake Windows, many things will have to change. But IMHO, the most important thing that could happen to boost Linux is more systems with pre-installed Linux disros. Then, the average end user will give Linux brand recognition. BTW, My mom has no problem sitting down in front of a computer that runs Linux and KDE and doing every thing she needs to do. And she can not even install windows. It does not have to do with ease of install. It has to do simply with brand recognition. Not everyone is as insightful as us Slashdot readers and they don't care to be.
So by his analogy a locksmith is a thief? What a bunch of bull. All this to protect something that costs $20 a pop. I get more and more amazed at the lengths hollywood will go to to expand their fortune.
Intel is always putting out crap. They had the same thing happen in their mobil chipsets not too long ago. I'll only buy AMD,
He made a big deal about a billboard in Austin advertising this website too. Its not a parody, but just some criticism. What a jerk!
All I have to say is that Quake3 and Linux rocks. A few weeks ago, I got a p133, mainboard and 48 megs of ram for 10 bucks. I figured I'd use it as a masquerading, samba, apache, ftp, etc for my other pc (An AMD 450, with a Voodoo3) hooked to a cable modem. I play games that aren't available for Linux often, so it would be nice to have two boxes instead of having to reboot all the time. I got it all set up, even figured out how to run a Q3 server through the firewall on my windows machine. The bad thing was, that when more than 2 people were playing, the cpu was bogged down and pings jumped sky high. So, I couldn't run a server and play. That sucked. I figured, I'd at least need a PII or AMDK62 to run a server on the linux firewall itself. I tried it anyway. To my suprise, 10 player server, full ran 70-95% cpu, no slowdowns on a P133! Funny, in windows on my K62450, 5 player server runs 60% cpu.
On a sidenote, Quake 3 runs faster (about 4 fps) in Windows because of the beta quality voodoo3 drivers. Hopefully this will change!
I have had this happen to me lots of times. Press alt esc instead of rebooting and it will go away. I don't know if it is a windows bug though.