BTW, you can get all the KDE apps under WM. To get the panel , use kpanel -no-KDE-compliant-window-manager To get the file manager (which makes a nice solid lightwieght web browser ) , use kfm -w Of course, you can use all of the apps and utilities as long as you have kdelibs , kdesupport and QT installed. cheers, -- Donovan
KDE already is themable. see http://kde.themes.org. But there are also many different look and feel options. Have you used any GUI besides windows ? The way I have KDE set up, it looks and feels more like CDE than it does windows.
(a) VA research are a first tier vendor of linux machines. Dell aren't. They offer no support for linux. (b) You can get a dual CPU poweredge for less than $5000- (c) Does this really prove anything besides the fact that the G3 CPU is better for a web server ?
Dell PowerEdge 2300 running RedHat - List price $4200
You could put an extra CPU in it for $800. The problem is, they appear to have fudged it by pricing the Apple all the way up to $5000- and leaving the PC $800 short. The system, is hardly the best for under $5000- since they didn't spend all of their "budget", and the test system could use a few updates. All this proves is that the Apple has a better CPU for serving webpages. We all knew that anyway.
It wants a 4x64 SDRAM DIMM. ( my receipt says so. I guess this means no parity, and no ecc ? )
I tried one and it didn't work. ( Maybe it was faulty ? )
Strangely enough, the ads I see for "memory for Dell dimension" advertise it for an arm and a leg ( $99 on pricewatch ). Are you sure this is standard memory (it's a P133v)... ?
Looks pretty good. LDP keep a list of linux friendly hardware shops. ( http://metalab.unc.edu/LDP/products.html#systems ) It's worth ( IMO ) emailing the maintainer of the page ( as I just have ) with links to these places, as many linux users use this list to hunt for linux hardware on the net.
My Dell is a couple of years old(pentium classic). It uses proprietry memory which has meant that it is almost impossible to get more ( and it is expensive ) To their credit, they made the case reasonably "deconstrubtible", only filled one DIMM slot, and gave me a crappy onboard video card that was nice enough to disable itself when I put my millenium II in.
But I am not impressed with the silly behaviour of my board which is insisting on special "dell" ram
About the ma-and-pop-shops... well the online linux sellers like Va, aslab, etc make it clear what kind of components they are using. Dell provide no such info...
I have no intention of choosing Dell's designed-for-windows machines that just happen to run linux. Why choose a Dell over a product from a linux friendly hardware vendor ?
Some features of your favourite Dell system:
No-name el-cheapo motherboard. They don't even tell you what board is in the system... The linux shops, by contrast, use quality name brand boards
Proprietry RAM. No advantages of this for the customer , (you're a captive market to the select few who make those chips ) Try upgrading your memory in two years. Ive returned three DIMMS already
Video cards that simply do not work well with linux. One of the telltale signs that these are designed for win95. ATI, anyone >
Let's hope that the generic PC shops that "build" cheap computers for home users and the super-cheap PC vendors offer Linux as a option within the next year.
CHeap linux PCs are already available ( eg http://www.sunsetsystems.com, http://www.tcu-inc.com ) Even linux-hw http://linux-hw.com also offer a sub-$1000 model Of course, if businesses like these fall flat, it will not give the other PC vendors much incentive to support linux.
I find it odd that people like you will eagerly buy from the mainsream vendors who are so reluctant to support linux, but refuse to support the people who have been supporting it from day 1.
Why do people keep complaining about VaResearch's prices when several linux shops offer low prices ? if you want to pay the premium associated with VA's fame/mindshare, go for it. Otherwise, be aware that you have a choice.
Try any of these :
http://www.aslab.com ( mid to hi end . Much cheaper than Va ) http://www.tcu-inc.com (a little cheaper. make AMD boxes. ) http://www.sunsetsystems.com (low cost)
I disagree entirely with the reasoning here. I am reminded of the exclusivist proprietism of the commercial players ( such as MS, Apple, Neomagic... ) when I read this. It truely shameful to hear this rhetoric from those who portray themselves as champions of free speech.
They advocate that we make essential libraries ( ie those whose functions are unimplemented in non-GNU software ) inaccesible to anyone who wants to make money from their software products.
The LGPL on the other hand allows commercial software developers to use the toolkits. The point of the (L)GPL was originally to protect the free software authors code from being hijacked and sold. The problem with the GPL is that when it comes to toolkits, it prevents commercial software authors from *using* the free product. Where is the free speech on restricting who can *use* your product ? Doesn't it seem hypocritical to call "free for noncommercial use" a restrictive clause, but then to turn around and make your prodcuts totally unavailable for commercial purposes ?
His declaration of war on commercial software would greatly harm linux if anyone took it seriously, as it would ensure that no company would move their software to linux ( owing to the fact that all the GUI toolkits would have licenses requiring them to release their source... )
Fortunately, most of the world believe that free and commercial software can coexist peacefully.
Until they installed CDE, Openlook was the default on the SPARC stations at my school. I figured it was part of a conspiracy to turn the students into unix haters.
I share your views on Openlook. When it's really dead, I will dance on its grave...
The different gtk libs all have different sonames, so you can safely run them side by side. I just verified that they include the version in the soname of gtk-1.2 ( so , like gtk-1.1 , you can safely install it alongside gtk-1.0 )
Like the other guy says, however, don't try to do concurrent installs of the different header files ( compile time libraries ) unless you know what you're doing...
The fact that the sonmames are different means that the programs link without any problems. As far as the linker is concerned, the different gtk versions might as well be qt and gtk (-;
However, you probably shouldn't install both compile time libraries for gtk ( ie gtk-devel ) as these conflict. Of course, you don't need these installed unless you're compiling -- Donovan Rebbechi
THey weren't going to support linux because they didn't have enough interest from the linux users. They offered to do a port to any OS whose users showed enough interest. The linux user base didn't cut it. However, it's grown since then, and I guess they have decided that it's in their best interests to do a port.
BTW, don't believe everything you hear on newsgroups... (-; -- Donovan Rebbechi
I really wasn't too impresssed with this article. They are really trying to make linux users look like a bunch of foaming-at-the-mouth zealots. Most linux users welcome the commercial players to the linux platform. The detractors are merely a vocal minority. Rob mentions that his quotes are taken out of context.
I really have the feeling that they wanted to create the picture that the commercial players would be chased out by a group of rabid cultists chanting Open source dogmas...
Dissapointing (but not surprisinmg ) .
However, these cultists are doing an awfully bad job at scaring away Oracle, IBM, Sybase, Corel, 3dfx, Sun , Adaptec , et al... -- Donovan Rebbechi
Berst just like posting mildly inflammatory articles that look quite controversial, so that his page gets slashdotted . Good hitcounts, lots of readers == success. Remember "fired for choosing linux" ? this article on careful reading was more of an insult to the pointy-haired bosses of the world, than it was to linux, but after reasoning in a fairly sensible manner, he came to some fairly silly conclusions. This article is quiet similar: balanced and sensible reasoning, but meanwhile, he is trying to make his *conclusion* sound "extreme" so that he can make all the linux users mad.
Jesse IMO is a very smart man. Sometimes, he "plays dumb", if he thinks that will enhance his hit count. Read the article carefully and you'll see that it (mostly) makes a lot of sense, though the title and some of the conclusions are designed to grab attention.
Watch ZDnet get slashdotted. On hits, this article was an outstanding success. Suckers. -- Donovan Rebbechi
The bickering over RPMs vs tar.gz's avoids the real point. Differing package formats are not a major problem.
The major problems running commercial packages are mostly related to the shared libraries ( in particular, libc ) . For example, Applix wants libc 5.3.12 , Star Office 4 wants libc 5.4.x , and you have a glibc distro, where all your other apps want something else. What we are seeing at the moment is a mix of the following: (a) Big statically linked commercial apps (b) Users, often newbies, crying out in pain as they try to configure their system to handle severl conflicting library versions.
I , for one, would be appy to see this stupidity come to an end. Even if the distributors were to do no more than synchronize kernel and libc versions, this alone would be a vast improvement.
I do not see a major advantage in having different libc and kernel releases with the different distros . There are some issues where the users want choice ( say, package management ) , and there are some areas where choice makes life difficult for everyone ( shared library versions and directory structures )
Personally, I'd love to see the distributors standardize on releases of the major ( libc and libg++ ) shared libs, and possibly do the same for the non core libs ( gtk , jpeg , gdbm ,... choose a version of qt, so that *if* qt was shipped, it should be version X ) . Is it too much to ask that linux be binary-compatible with itself ?!?!????
The problem with using the GNU utils is that they don't help much if the bonehead sysadmins whose machine you are using either (a) don't install them, (b) don't install them completely and/or correctly. The GNU utils work just fine on systems that have them. However, shell scripts tend to require some hacking at when their moved from one system to another ( even one *NIX system to another... ) ( esp if you wrote the script in bash2 / ksh / zsh... ) OTOH, perl makes this easy . Of course, for short scripts ( say 100 lines ) , shell scripts are nice. But I cringe at the thought of writing >500 line proggies in shell script ( I've tried, and it worked, but it was unportable, not to mention darned ugly... ) --Elflord -- Donovan Rebbechi
There are several places that will sell you a low cost linux box. For example, sunset systems, TCU-inc, OEMcomputers. See The LDP hardware page for a list of vendors that will preload linux. Some of them have good prices. -- Donovan Rebbechi
Try linux explorer ( windoze explorer clone ). Of course, if you just wanna move stuff around quickly and easily, you can't beat the command line ( bash or zsh... ) -- Donovan Rebbechi
But where can I get oracle on linux ?
on
Free Oracle 8i CDs
·
· Score: 1
I have been to oracle's site and all of their products seem to be NT/UNIX only. Anyone have a pointer for info on getting oracle for linux ?
AFAIK you can do this. At least I can with thew 0.99.7 release. Each window has an entry on the panel (or the taskbar or whatever), which stays there when you minimize the window. Just click on the appropriate part of the task bar to bring a minimized windows "back to life". You can also minimize by midclicking the spot on the taskpar.
Slashdot Mirror
BTW, you can get all the KDE apps under WM. To get the panel , use kpanel -no-KDE-compliant-window-manager To get the file manager (which makes a nice solid lightwieght web browser ) , use kfm -w Of course, you can use all of the apps and utilities as long as you have kdelibs , kdesupport and QT installed. cheers, -- Donovan
KDE already is themable. see http://kde.themes.org.
But there are also many different look and feel options. Have you used any GUI besides windows ? The way I have KDE set up, it looks and feels more like CDE than it does windows.
Cheers,
-- DOnovan
(a) VA research are a first tier vendor of linux machines. Dell aren't. They offer no support for linux. (b) You can get a dual CPU poweredge for less than $5000- (c) Does this really prove anything besides the fact that the G3 CPU is better for a web server ?
It wants a 4x64 SDRAM DIMM. ( my receipt says so. I guess this means no parity, and no ecc ? )
... ?
I tried one and it didn't work. ( Maybe it was faulty ? )
Strangely enough, the ads I see for "memory for Dell dimension" advertise it for an arm and a leg ( $99 on pricewatch ). Are you sure this is standard memory (it's a P133v)
Looks pretty good. LDP keep a list of linux friendly hardware shops. ( http://metalab.unc.edu/LDP/products.html#systems ) It's worth ( IMO ) emailing the maintainer of the page ( as I just have ) with links to these places, as many linux users use this list to hunt for linux hardware on the net.
-- Donovan
it is almost impossible to get more ( and it is expensive )
To their credit, they made the case reasonably "deconstrubtible", only filled one DIMM slot,
and gave me a crappy onboard video card that was nice enough to disable itself
when I put my millenium II in.
But I am not impressed with the silly behaviour of my board which is insisting on special "dell"
ram
About the ma-and-pop-shops
like Va, aslab, etc make it clear what kind of components they are using.
Dell provide no such info
So ... how well is the 3D on it supported ... ?
Some features of your favourite Dell system:
-- Donovan
http://www.sunsetsystems.com
http://www.tcu-inc.com )
Even linux-hw http://linux-hw.com also offer a sub-$1000 model Of course, if businesses like these fall flat, it will not give the other PC vendors much incentive to support linux.
I find it odd that people like you will eagerly buy from the mainsream vendors who are so reluctant to support linux, but refuse to support the people who have been supporting it from day 1.
Try any of these :
http://www.aslab.com ( mid to hi end . Much cheaper than Va
) http://www.tcu-inc.com (a little cheaper. make AMD boxes. )
http://www.sunsetsystems.com (low cost)
They advocate that we make essential libraries ( ie those whose functions are unimplemented in non-GNU software ) inaccesible to anyone who wants to make money from their software products.
The LGPL on the other hand allows commercial software developers to use the toolkits. The point of the (L)GPL was originally to protect the free software authors code from being hijacked and sold. The problem with the GPL is that when it comes to toolkits, it prevents commercial software authors from *using* the free product. Where is the free speech on restricting who can *use* your product ? Doesn't it seem hypocritical to call "free for noncommercial use" a restrictive clause, but then to turn around and make your prodcuts totally unavailable for commercial purposes ?
His declaration of war on commercial software would greatly harm linux if anyone took it seriously, as it would ensure that no company would move their software to linux ( owing to the fact that all the GUI toolkits would have licenses requiring them to release their source ... )
Fortunately, most of the world believe that free and commercial software can coexist peacefully.
-- Elflord
Until they installed CDE, Openlook was the default on the SPARC stations at my school. I figured it was part of a conspiracy to turn the students into unix haters.
...
I share your views on Openlook. When it's really dead, I will dance on its grave
-- Donovan
--
Donovan Rebbechi
Like the other guy says, however, don't try to do concurrent installs of the different header files ( compile time libraries ) unless you know what you're doing
-- Donovan
--
Donovan Rebbechi
libgtk.so.1 =>
bash$ldd
libgtk-1.1.so.14 =>
The fact that the sonmames are different means that the programs link without any problems. As far as the linker is concerned, the different gtk versions might as well be qt and gtk (-;
However, you probably shouldn't install both compile time libraries for gtk ( ie gtk-devel ) as these conflict. Of course, you don't need these installed unless you're compiling
--
Donovan Rebbechi
BTW, don't believe everything you hear on newsgroups
--
Donovan Rebbechi
I really have the feeling that they wanted to create the picture that the commercial players would be chased out by a group of rabid cultists chanting Open source dogmas ...
Dissapointing (but not surprisinmg ) .
However, these cultists are doing an awfully bad job at scaring away Oracle, IBM, Sybase, Corel, 3dfx, Sun , Adaptec , et al ...
--
Donovan Rebbechi
Jesse IMO is a very smart man. Sometimes, he "plays dumb", if he thinks that will enhance his hit count. Read the article carefully and you'll see that it (mostly) makes a lot of sense, though the title and some of the conclusions are designed to grab attention.
Watch ZDnet get slashdotted. On hits, this article was an outstanding success. Suckers.
--
Donovan Rebbechi
The major problems running commercial packages are mostly related to the shared libraries ( in particular, libc ) . For example, Applix wants libc 5.3.12 , Star Office 4 wants libc 5.4.x , and you have a glibc distro, where all your other apps want something else. What we are seeing at the moment is a mix of the following:
(a) Big statically linked commercial apps
(b) Users, often newbies, crying out in pain as they try to configure their system to handle severl conflicting library versions.
I , for one, would be appy to see this stupidity come to an end. Even if the distributors were to do no more than synchronize kernel and libc versions, this alone would be a vast improvement.
I do not see a major advantage in having different libc and kernel releases with the different distros . There are some issues where the users want choice ( say, package management ) , and there are some areas where choice makes life difficult for everyone ( shared library versions and directory structures )
Personally, I'd love to see the distributors standardize on releases of the major ( libc and libg++ ) shared libs, and possibly do the same for the non core libs ( gtk , jpeg , gdbm , ... choose a version of qt, so that *if* qt was shipped, it should be version X ) . Is it too much to ask that linux be binary-compatible with itself ?!?!????
cheers,
-- Donovan
--
Donovan Rebbechi
The problem with using the GNU utils is that they don't help much if the bonehead sysadmins whose machine you are using either ... ) ( esp if you wrote the script in bash2 / ksh / zsh ... ) OTOH, perl makes this easy . Of course, for short scripts ( say 100 lines ) , shell scripts are nice. But I cringe at the thought of writing >500 line proggies in shell script ( I've tried, and it worked, but it was unportable, not to mention darned ugly ... )
(a) don't install them,
(b) don't install them completely and/or correctly.
The GNU utils work just fine on systems that have them. However, shell scripts tend to require some hacking at when their moved from one system to another ( even one *NIX system to another
--Elflord
--
Donovan Rebbechi
There are several places that will sell you a low cost linux box. For example, sunset systems, TCU-inc, OEMcomputers. See The LDP hardware page for a list of vendors that will preload linux. Some of them have good prices.
--
Donovan Rebbechi
Try linux explorer ( windoze explorer clone ) . ... )
Of course, if you just wanna move stuff around quickly and easily, you can't beat the command line ( bash or zsh
--
Donovan Rebbechi
I have been to oracle's site and all of their products seem to be NT/UNIX only. Anyone have a pointer for info on getting oracle for linux ?
-- Donovan
AFAIK you can do this. At least I can with thew 0.99.7 release. Each window has an entry on the panel (or the taskbar or whatever), which stays there when you minimize the window. Just click on the appropriate part of the task bar to bring a minimized windows "back to life". You can also minimize by midclicking the spot on the taskpar.
-- Elflord
cheers,
-- Elflord