Linux Back To Windows??

[Tempus77]

hey everyone!

We've been hearing of tons of people making the switch from MS Windows over to various distros of Linux, but has anybody heard of anyone who went from Windows to Linux, then chose to go back to Windows again???

Let's start the stories. :p

[kam]

What're you talking about? Nobody would go back to Windows once they've tried Linux! :D

[carrja99]

Yes. Countless times people will claim they are switching back to Windows because Linux (by linux they mean GNOME/KDE/or any random app they use) crashes too much. Well, I have to say I am baffled over what planet these people are from! I have been running linux for 6 months straight now with no problems at all... KDE never crashes, nor does the X server. I think the majority of people have Mozilla or Netscrape crash and assume that "Linux has crashed." :mad:

Oh! And another favorite is "IE is much more better than anything offered for linux", as well as the "Evolution can't even compare to Outlook" and my most favorite... "Not as stable as Win9x!"

Idiots....

But I think that it is just to hard for some people (some think they should start using Gentoo right away as a nebie instead of Mandrake or Red Hat) and they just give up the first time they try to install a program and can't find "install.exe"!!

I, on the otherhand, had a wealth of problems with my winmodem, my CD-Burner, and a few USB components... but after trying hard I finally resoolved these problems and I can say with pride that I haven't used Windows for 4 months now (except for some usage forced upon me at school). :D

My motto is... don't give up until you've exhausted all your resources! There really is no reason to use Windows except for gaming (where it still dominates, unfortunately). Other than that, every important Windows program has a suitable Linux equivalent, or can be flawlessly used through WINE.

[Dun'kalis]

I switched from Linux to Windows! The freedom! The power! The stability! I really missed my good old friend, the BSOD. I want Bill Gates to spy on me, since he knows best...

Err...I probably made a few typos up there...Try and pick them out.

:D

[Timothy L. Miller]

Actually, on 1 of my computers, I have. Not on purpose. I bought the Xabre 400 graphics card, and since it has 0 support in linux (Hindsights always 20/20, but I've been hounding SIS about when they plan on releasing linux drivers since they have it for all their other graphic chipsets), I've been forced to remove linux from that machine (I got tired of having no 3d). Course, I still have it on my other machine, and should the xabre ever get 3d linux drivers, I plan on putting it back on this one, but, yes, technically, I DID go back to windows. That said, it's actually a much nicer video card then most of the reviewers give it credit for. I'm able to play NFS Hot Pursuit 2 and Madden 2003 at 1024x768 with all options set to max with absolutely NO sluggishness. Now if only SIS would release 3d (linux)drivers for the &^@$ing thing.

[clane]

I did. I installed Mandrake Linux 8.0 last year (almost exactly 1 year ago), and gave up and went back to Windows after a month. I tried to use my usb camera. Couldn't get it to work. I tried to start various applications that were installed during the initial Mandrake install. I would click on their icons. Nothing would happen, not even an hour glass saying that something was trying to happen.

When I tried to get help from Mandrake, most of the time they would reply saying that only installation issues or a few other specific issues were covered under their technical assistance program. My issue usually wasn't covered. When I tried to get help from the Mandrake user community on MandrakeExpert.com, many times my question was ignored. When I got a reply, it was written in such a way that you had to already know something about Linux to use the answer and solve the problem. I experienced occasional crashes with KDE. Overall, it wasn't a good experience. The reason I switched from Windows in the first place was to get away from the constant crashes and lockups. Now with Linux I was not only get just as many lockups, but I wasn't getting any work done either. So I went back.

It's now a year later. I resolved last years Windows lockup problems by wiping the hard drive clean and reinstalling everything. That worked up until about 3 months ago. Then, the same thing started to happen again. So I got pissed off at MS once again and decided to give Mandrake 9 a try.

I loaded it about a month ago. The install went well. I used KDE for the first week or so. It would occasionally crash and lock up, almost as much as Windows.

I then experimented with Xinerama and dual monitors. KDE would crash or lockup almost immediately. I couldn't use my PC for more than a half hour without a lockup. for anyone that says KDE is rock solid and never crashes, I invite you to my house. I will guarantee a lockup before you've had a chance use the bathroom.

Once again I couldn't get an answer from MandrakeExpert and my requests for help from the MandrakeExpert community went unanswered. I also couldn't satisfactory help form KDE either. So I switched to Gnome. It locked up much less, but still occasionally caused me to exit the desktop and log back in.

So now I am using IceWM in single monitor mode. It seems stable so far. I don't plan on going back to Windows this time. They have irritated me once too often. I'm determined to be Windows free. I must say, however, that the level of frustration that I have experienced in the switchover has been higher than most people would probably tolerate. Linux is not a mass user system yet. It's getting close. My opinion is that if you were born and raised on Windows, you'll probably continue to use it. If you are installing your first OS, you may stick with Linux because you have nothing to compare it to. The challenge to the Linux distro developers is to create a truly easy OS that can be installed and used by people that actually think the cd-rom tray is a cup holder. What's that you say? It already exists with the XXX distro, or the YYY distro!!! Then why hasn't the PC buying public heard about it? It's because it takes money to market this stuff, and its tough to make money with free software.

That's my 2 cents....or maybe I'm up to a nickel by now.

[Tempus77]

hey, clane.......if u're experiencing so many problems with Mandrake, and yet still very keen to make the switch to Linux, maybe u should try out other newbie-friendly distros like Redhat or Suse, or even more newbie distros such as Xandros and Lycoris, which are very much like Windows.

Especially Xandros, i've heard extremely good things about it.......and installation seems to be a breeze, with Xandros picking up just about everything!

Despite wat some may say about using a distro like that being unLinux-like, I think distros like Xandros help make it easy for the newbie with limited pc knowledge to learn linux........

So, go on out there and try out the other distros......dun give up!

cheers.

[Samba_man]

Hmmm.....

I know I'm gonna take heat for this......but ....I just will.

---------------------

It seems like the linux comunity is very crazy about being against Microsoft. I'm not against Microsoft. I just want an OS that I don't have to spend all hours of the day messing with.

Right now, Windows XP Pro has been doing that flawlessly for me.
I don't have to learn a crapload of new stuff, just to use it.

I also notice that people rip on Lindows alot here....
Lindows is good. It looks like Windows yeah!......but that's what most linux distro's are trying to do right now anyway to get into the mainstream.

Think about it. Every OS out there has Windows, Icons, Mice, and Pointers. They all have some sort of button that brings up a menu like the "Start" Button does.

The good thing about Lindows is this: It's cheap compaired to Microsoft, and it gets linux into the mainstream.

I think the thing most linux guru's hate about distro's like Lycoris and Lindows is the fact that it makes it soooo easy for a non linux person to use. Isn't that what you all want? Don't you want more people to use Linux?

Or are you afraid that by making it easyer that there will be no need to know all the kool command line stuff that makes most people here unique?

I'm just wondering?

I like Windows, and I like Linux. They both do different stuff in good ways. I just wonder why everyone is all ways so "Anti-Microsoft"?

Hmmm......

Oh well .... :D

Good day all .........:D

No.....this is not me trolling!.....Seriously!

Peace,
Samba_man

[Timothy L. Miller]

Originally posted by Samba_man
Hmmm.....
I also notice that people rip on Lindows alot here....
Lindows is good. It looks like Windows yeah!......but that's what most linux distro's are trying to do right now anyway to get into the mainstream.

Think about it. Every OS out there has Windows, Icons, Mice, and Pointers. They all have some sort of button that brings up a menu like the "Start" Button does.

The good thing about Lindows is this: It's cheap compaired to Microsoft, and it gets linux into the mainstream.

The reason most people here hate lindows is because:
A) They take debian, which is about the most open source OS ever, even moreso than most versions of GNu/Linux, and charge for it. They do not make it possible to get for free in ANY WAY. Many feel that this goes against the GPL that governs gnu/linux. If not against the law, then it is MOST definitely against the spirit of the GPL.
B) They charge for updates (click-n-run). There went the whole "cheaper than windows" argument. Save $100 when you buy it, but then have to pay that back in order to update your system easily...
C) Root privelages. Running only as root is bad. You have no choice but to do so in Lindows.

[Tempus77]

well, distros like Lycoris and Xandros are cheaper alternatives to Lindows, and are just as great........

and Samba man is rite in some ways.........most OSs out there including distros of Linux do have visual similarities with MS Windows XP.

Another point that i agree with Samba man on is the part on people being Anti-Microsoft.......I've got no beef with MS, hence there's nothing to ***** about on MS Windows.......Windows has actually served me quite well over the years.

My point is: If u don't like MS Windows, then don't use it........quit *****ing about it like a child. Doesn't do anybody any good, creates a whole lot of hostility, and certainly doesn't reflect well on the one *****ing as well.

Just my 50 cents worth here.

cheers.

[clane]

re Samba-Man and wanting to dislike Windows/Microsoft....
I don't want to hate Microsoft.
I don't want to hate Windows.
It's just that Micrososft makes it so EASY to do!!! All I want is a computer that's (relatively) easy to use and doesn't freaking crash several times a day. Every MS OS that I have owned or used, regardless of the computer it was installed on has crashed...a lot. It's like a feature for them. And there answer is always, buy the upgrade. Imagine if all of the MS employees went into the car dealer to get their cars fixed and were told, we don't support that model anymore, you'll need to buy the upgrade. That S**T wouldn't fly, but those very same people try to shove that mentality down my throat. I've finally had enough. If they finally got it right with XP Pro or whatever, then they got it right exactly one OS too late for me. I've had enough, but I do offer my congratulations to you.

I feel better now:D

re Tempus77 and the switch to Linux....
Things seem to be relatively stable now that I am using the IceWM desktop. Occasionally something happens that I wasn't expecting, but I haven't had any lockups, and I haven't had to CTRL-ALT-BKSPC since I started with Ice. So thats good. I'm starting to dig into other areas to actually start to become productive. So thats good too. Baby steps, but steps none-the-less. I do plan on trying some of the other desktop environments in the future to see if I find one that I like better, but Ice is good for now. I also plan on trying some of the other distros in the future, but one new OS (or distro) at a time is enough for me. Maybe in a few months.

What I'll probably do is buy a low dollar hard drive dedicated to doing nothing but tinkering with distros. If I hate the distro, then reformat and load the next one. If I screw up, reformat and reload. I currently have a pluggable, hot swappable tray and carrier installed in this PC. When I want to switch back to Windows, I power down, pull the Linux hard drive, insert the Windows hard drive and power up. My MOBO is set to automatically detect the new hard drive, so swapping isn't an issue. I know, I know, I could dual boot, but since I was brand spankin new at this, I didn't want any possibility that I could screw up my existing data and files on the Windows drive. Even if I backed up everything and then screwed up the Windows stuff trying to create a dual-boot system, I'd still need to go through the hassle of disaster recovery. Two hard drives and a couple of swap trays are great.

[Jomboni]

Originally posted by Timothy L. Miller
The reason most people here hate lindows is because:
A) They take debian, which is about the most open source OS ever, even moreso than most versions of GNu/Linux, and charge for it. They do not make it possible to get for free in ANY WAY. Many feel that this goes against the GPL that governs gnu/linux. If not against the law, then it is MOST definitely against the spirit of the GPL.
B) They charge for updates (click-n-run). There went the whole "cheaper than windows" argument. Save $100 when you buy it, but then have to pay that back in order to update your system easily...
C) Root privelages. Running only as root is bad. You have no choice but to do so in Lindows. It's not against the law, or even the spirit!

RMS himself has stated that it's ok for people to sell GPL software without providing the binaries online. The only real provision is: anybody who they give the software, either by selling it or offering it for download, all have to be able to get the source if they want it.

If you're only method of distribution is sales, the only people you need to give the source to are the people who pay for the product. It's pretty fair to me!


Not that I use Lindows or anything, I think it's too expensive :D

[Tempus77]

re Tempus77 and the switch to Linux....

clane, cool....I'm glad u're progressing at least.....I was thinking about the swap tray thingy.......unfortunately my budget didn't allow for it then......hence i had to settle for dual booting, which does create occasional problems.

cheers.

[carrja99]

Originally posted by Jomboni
It's not against the law, or even the spirit!

RMS himself has stated that it's ok for people to sell GPL software without providing the binaries online. The only real provision is: anybody who they give the software, either by selling it or offering it for download, all have to be able to get the source if they want it.

If you're only method of distribution is sales, the only people you need to give the source to are the people who pay for the product. It's pretty fair to me!


Not that I use Lindows or anything, I think it's too expensive :D

I think that Lindows is closed source... if so, that's why Linux fans hate it. Also, logging people in as root forms bad habits!

Personally, I think a good newbie distro would be one that starts off acting like Windows, and then slowly introduces new concepts for the person to learn and eventually transforms into a TRUE distro.

[nuvan]

a newbie distro that starts off acting like windows and slowly acts more and more like linux


windows-like <--- crashes 3 or 4 times a day
|
|
|
|
|
|
V
linux-like <----- you shut it down once a year to upgrade your kernel

[sasKuatch]

Originally posted by clane

What I'll probably do is buy a low dollar hard drive dedicated to doing nothing but tinkering with distros. If I hate the distro, then reformat and load the next one. If I screw up, reformat and reload.

That's a good idea, though you can save some $$$ and just reformat the partition you have it installed on. As time goes on, you will be able to fix those problems and not have to reinstall so often. That's where linux comes into its own. You will finally have a system that you know like the back of your hand, because you've gone through 70% of it and tweaked, customized, trimmed, squeezed, and noodled it exactly the way you want it. That's when linux becomes fun to use just for the heck of it. Windows will never have that, because you have to reinstall every 6 months or so to have it run ok.

[linux12414]

Originally posted by Dun'kalis
I switched from Linux to Windows! The freedom! The power! The stability! I really missed my good old friend, the BSOD. I want Bill Gates to spy on me, since he knows best...

Err...I probably made a few typos up there...Try and pick them out.

:D
:D

I've been without my Linux box for a week and one day (due to a cable modem snafu) and I am suffering *extreme* withdrawal.

Since I have been forced back into my Windoze partition, I have been churlish and very bad to be around (ask my dogs :)).

To date I have had so many lock-ups I cannot count, and I didn't know that trying to get into Control Panel would bring up the BSOD (which I've gotten countless times in the past 8 days).

No choice and with dial-up to boot. I ain't a happy camper.

[Tempus77]

Personally, I think a good newbie distro would be one that starts off acting like Windows, and then slowly introduces new concepts for the person to learn and eventually transforms into a TRUE distro.

carrja99, i think most newbie distros like Redhat, Mandrake, Xandros, etc do achieve this to a certain extent. :)

cheers.

[linux12414]

Originally posted by Tempus77
carrja99, i think most newbie distros like Redhat, Mandrake, Xandros, etc do achieve this to a certain extent. :)

cheers.

Yes, especially if you use KDE to cut your teeth on.

[carrja99]

Well, although I had no trouble using Mandrake when I first switched, apparently alot of other people do. Why they have such trouble with Mandrake or Red Hat is beyond me.

[nextbillgates]

I've attempted to switch to Linux various times using multiple distros, but each time, the pitiful gaming support drives me back to Windows.

I'm looking toward a dual-boot, but since I use software RAID (which requires dynamic disk support), dual booting is not just simply installing Linux and configuring Grub.

While Linux makes a great desktop (yes, you read right), it doesn't meet all my needs. Windows (barely) does.

The only things which would make me go with Linux full time are:

A) Much better gaming support for Linux (all new games with native Linux support and a more mature WineX for the rest)

B) Microsoft stops supporting Windows 2000

C) Microsoft does something and/or something happens with Windows (like a very serious bug) that Windows' gaming support wouldn't make up for it.

B sounds the most likely, and I don't see that happening for a few years :(

[Z28James]

ive been kinda off and on between mandrake and windows, i tried stormix and suse once before but mostly mandrake and recently i decided to try rh8 and i really like it. i tried mandrake 9 and stuff kept crashing and whatnot but ive never had one problem with red hat 8 and i dont see myself going back to windows anytime soon. all the 3d games i play are either linux native or run good under winex. yeah its a newby distro but not enough to where you dont learn anything, ive actually learned a ton from it. someone mentioned gentoo early...yeah it sure does drop your self esteem when ya think you are gettin better and you try gentoo...and get thrown at a promt and its like "time to build a linux system from scratch" =\

[2damncommon]

but has anybody heard of anyone who went from Windows to Linux, then chose to go back to Windows again???
Yes, Bill Gates posts here often.

[JezzerP]

I use both Windows XP and Red Hat 8.0 at home, and Windows 2000 at work. I like them all....they do what I need them to do. I have had Windows XP running on my home PC for well over a year and haven't seen a BSOD once....same goes for my work PC. Windows has moved on since 1998;)

[Tweak]

I am forced to use Windows at the moment, because I'm not familiar with Unix-type systems or Linux enough to switch over yet. (Anyone feeling particularly kind? I could use some pointers on that front) However, I work full time tech support and do a lot of reading on various computer-related subjects, and would say that even if exactly what Linux is capable of is a grey area to me, it can NOT be possibly even close to the issues present in Windows.

Anyone wanting some pointed proof of this follow this link: http://www.hevanet.com/peace/microsoft.htm

If you don't feel like it, I'll summarize some key points:

1. The public is generally uneducated about computers, software, and what to expect in terms of performance, and most of them are frightened enough with a point and click GUI, so a CLI or doing the kind of manual installing/configuring you sometimes have to with Linux would just scare them off completely. Not to mention most people don't know how to get Linux... I hear all too often, "I wish I could get something other than Windows, but I just don't know what to do." Unfortunately I am bound by contract not to mention or recommend software or OSes to customers. Period

2. Since the net has become integral to everyday life for all but the most adamantly tech resistant, there is a bound need for computers for most people. This means that they *will* buy something, even if it doesn't work very well. Software and computer manufacturers take advantage of this by saving money in underdevelopment and under-testing, releasing buggy products, and then charging for "upgrades" which are really bug fixes(and contain bugs themselves), and charging for tech support when the customers find themselves faced with said bugs.
Point: A very small percentage of the customers I assist actually need help with anything other than initial setup, carbon errors, and bits of Windows gone bad. My company is an ISP, so most of what I deal with is networking components, and they corrupt with astonishing frequency.

3. All Windows built on the 9x kernel have a built in, artificial limitation on certain types of system resources so that when those unnecessary and tiny allocations are exceeded the system crashes by default. This is not present in the latest Windows. Presumably a marketing tactic to "encourage" people to upgrade.

4. The latest version of Windows has paging file usage issues, problems with running more than 21 programs at once, and is insecure as hell. Probably so the new "bugs" can become well known amongst Windows users, who will flock to any future releases of the Windows OS that, while containing their own bugs, will specifically address the well-known ones in question as a very sneaky and dishonest marketing ploy.

5. Microsoft is imbedding technologies and protocols more and more deeply into their products that are not in accordance with the world standard and work only with other Windows machines.

That's a very small sampling, the original is far more complete and specific, and I probably made a few mistakes here and there. However, the main idea is pretty clear and one can get the "gist" pretty easily.

[Stween]

Originally posted by Samba_man
It seems like the linux comunity is very crazy about being against Microsoft. I'm not against Microsoft. I just want an OS that I don't have to spend all hours of the day messing with.

Right now, Windows XP Pro has been doing that flawlessly for me.
I don't have to learn a crapload of new stuff, just to use it.
...
...
I think the thing most linux guru's hate about distro's like Lycoris and Lindows is the fact that it makes it soooo easy for a non linux person to use. Isn't that what you all want? Don't you want more people to use Linux?

Or are you afraid that by making it easyer that there will be no need to know all the kool command line stuff that makes most people here unique?

Well said, that man. A lot of people who use linux like to slam Microsoft, because it seems to be acceptable to do so. Now, I'm not a huge Microsoft fan, and I generally don't use windows, but I'm not running around shouting "Microsoft sucks!!" or "Windows is crap!!" - this is uninformed crap just like the same stuff people say about Linux or any other OS.

I think some people hate about Lindows et al is exactly what you say. Trying to get them to admit it is something else, but you are correct.

Personally I installed WinXP Pro next to slackware 8.1 on my laptop last night. Why? Because I've been without windows for around 5 months now, and it's nice to have a change of scenery from time to time. I used it for a few hours last night, and despite being irritated at the windows working differently than those under fluxbox, it installed cleanly without any unusual drivers and nothing crashed while I was running it.

Anybody who says a modern Windows in unstable hasn't used a modern windows :rolleyes:

[gretchen]

A few years ago I installed TurboLinux on a 486 laptop. I couldn't get connected to the internet because it didn't support DHCP. That is a make or break option. If I can't get internet on my computer I don't use the computer. I am working towards getting totally rid of windows, but currently I dual boot because of compliance issues with programs that are required for school. The other thing is I use windows as a test to find out if a problem is hardware related or Linux related.

So basically, the more I learn about how to do things in Linux, the less I use windows.

I dislike windows because they aren't open source and they are gradually moving to taking over my computer more and more. Plus, their prices are outrageous, there is no way I can afford three hundred dollars every two years or so. The liscensing is so strict that barely anything is legal to do with it. I have found getting support for Microsoft products much harder than getting support for Linux software because in general Microsoft support is all dumbed down.

[mrgoodbytes]

I'm about half an inch from dumping Linux and going back to Windows myself, so I'll tell why:

I've been playing with computers for 20 years so I'm far from a computer dummy, but I cannot operate in the absolute absence of information which is what a foray into Linux is. The HOW-TOs are aimed at people who already know Linux and need to tweak, not someone who wants? wanted? to learn it.

I stumbled across this thread using the search string 'disk full' because for some reason Linux, having been installed and running for 2 weeks has filled up a 17.5G partition without my downloading and installing more than Acrobat Reader and Yahoo IM. Is Linux storing swap files? temp files? Basically I have 10-20 times more directories than with Windows and somewhere in that incomprehensible maze is (presumably) a mass of temp files which have maxed my partition out.

My system came with a winmodem; I finally installed the driver after a couple of MONTHS of shutting down Windows, booting into the Linux partition trying three or four likely tweaks, realizing that I did not know enough to get the modem online and that there was no documenataion worth the name, getting frustrated and going back to Windows for the next week.

I read an article the other day that Linux developers want to make the GUI more Windows-like in the hopes of attracting new users. WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! If I wanted to use Windows, I'd USE Windows. Linux will have single digit market share as long as there's no documentation of a level that a newbie can jump in and use it.

Consider: if the limit of the docs for installing a program or driver is 'make Makefile', what the HELL does that MEAN? Where is that explained so that an intelligent, computer literate person knows WHAT TO DO WITH THAT? The answer is 'Nowhere'! Go fish. I'm reasonably certain that the docs I have are in English, because I *do* recognize the occasional English word, but I can't even be certain of that.

Stumble through hundreds of directories the function and hierarchy of which is utterly unexplained. It's frustrating, it's offensive, it's insulting, it leads to the question: Does Linux not crash because it's stable or does it not crash because you can't DO anything with it because it's inexplicable or at least unexplained? If I booted Windows up and couldn't do anything with it, Windows wouldn't crash, either.

A few years ago I wrote a dozen utility programs to expand DOS' capabilities. When I was done with these utilities, I gritted my teeth and DOCUMENTED those utilities, and I freaking HATED it, but I did it anyway because that's what you do if you want people to be able to use your program.
Linux will not be ready for prime time until it's properly documented. Period.

[Resident_Geek]

What distro did you install, and what packages did you install with it? It sounds to me like you have some very thorough logging going on, you'd be really surprised at how much space that can take up. Also, did you happen to see how much free space you had after installation? If you install everything, you can take up 5 or 6 gigs right there. If you started with a distro like Gentoo or Slack or some other advanced Linux distro, that's your problem right there. Start with Red Hat, SuSE, or any of the other newbie distros mentioned in this thread. I can only vouch for Red Hat, but I was able to get a great installation with exactly what I needed with very little Linux knowledge. As to your Winmodem problem, read the name: Winmodem. As in Windows. If the manufacturers released the driver specifications to anyone besides Microsoft, there'd be no problems. But the Linux community does the best it can with what little info it's got. I never did get my Winmodem online, but I probably could have tried a little harder. I congratulate you heartily on that one.

Earlier, someone mentioned that the LInux GUI looked suspiciously like Windows'. There's a good reason for that: Microsoft has billions of dollars and thousands of employees. They try hundreds of ideas per day. If they couldn't come up with the best possible GUI (even if they couldn't implement it properly), that would be pretty pathetic.

[drummerboy195]

i just finished install windows on a friends computer, becuase he was offered a sweet beta testing deal by a leading mfg (i can niether confirm nor deny this), and part of the deal is that he has to run xp or 2000. one of the first things he said when i was loading it back on was......this is frickin slow! hehe, he converted without even knowing it. maybe i will buy me a book on writing linux drivers, pay a visit to the test hardware, and relase the drivers before the product hits the market. hehehehehe.

[retoon]

Hey, why so many people using KDE, huh? Gnome isn't bad you know. Atleast on my machine it responds a lot faster then does KDE, and I haven't had a single crash.

[stumbles]

then you almost for sure have;

An interrupt conflict. This can be determined by using the command lspci -v from a terminal window. That command will show you all the PCI devices you have. While PCI is designed to share interrupts there can be issuses with these due to hardware or driver design. It could also be that you have Plug and Play turned on in your MB's BIOS. Try turning it off.

In every instance I have encountered Linux crashing this has been the case. There is one other item that can cause this is flakey memory. Download memtest86 and run it. Linux is much more demanding of hardware than Windows ever though about being. That is why you can run Linux on a machine you would never consider for Win2k or XP.

[bwkaz]

Originally posted by mrgoodbytes
Does Linux not crash because it's stable or does it not crash because you can't DO anything with it because it's inexplicable or at least unexplained? The former. There are thousands of people that, despite your objections, manage to use it every day. I am one of them.

:rolleyes:

However. Have you looked at the library of Help Files here? Have you looked at www.tldp.org? Have you looked at your distro's documentation? There is also stuff in /usr/share/doc, but that's probably not going to help much. :-/

Thinking back to when I switched over, there was a time when I didn't know what the heck was going on either. One day, though, it just sort of clicked. I can't really explain it very well, but I think that what happened was I finally got enough context information to make the rest of the "harder" docs (the ones you're talking about) make sense.

Knowledge works (at least, this was a theory by some psychologist somewhere) by associating new facts with old ones. The problem may be that there aren't enough places for whatever the docs are talking about to attach themselves. The best way, I think, is to just keep reading, and consciously try to make those associations. If you're reading a man page, take a break (basically, I'm saying come back to the problem a bit later) and read all the pages referenced in the See Also section. That will help.

[Xyrin]

I'm an admin on a 95% windows network of more than 100 machines. We run on an NT Domain controller, b/c our upstream corporate HQ does, and to create our own domain in 2k server means our own forest, which would have to be taken down and redone when HQ makes one.

next:
The day after Microsoft won their recent case with the Java VM, they changed XP SP1 to XP SP1a....so they could give you the version with only the Micorsoft JVM. And if you wanted the old SP1 to recreate an environnment....well from that day on it no longer existed on thier site. No more support.

next:
They, and their channel partners have decided what I want wrt content on my desktop.

I could go on, but I wont.
Lets just say I have an Enterprise level MSDN account, and access to every piece of software Microsoft makes, and Ive recently moved my box to Linux.

P.S. Our network was 100% windows until I recently started using Linux for is port of sockets in Perl. Little by little Im planning to replace all back end servers. Ive had it.


Plus Linux is cool. tinker tinker.

WHew! that felt good . :)

Xyrin

[chatins]

Microsoft sends me a box of cds a quarter to try out. (action pack) I work with the stuff, but I believe in the open source kernel.

[Brocket99]

I never hated windows, either should the majority of 'new age' hackers. Alot of you started off with MSDOS, NT, or Windows. And if you're at all like me, you were very curious about how it all worked. I found it gratifying and exciting/fun to install a tough distro and make myself stuck with it so I learnt from the 'middle' up.
The closest I could come to windows source code, was that exactly, how to make a window.
I heard all the great things about linux, the power and flexibility of it, and just had to try it out. I found out that I liked it, and erased everything on my disc and installed debian.
I didn't know that so many linux users actually used windows in any way, i have linux installed and have no plans whatsoever of installing windows again. The directory structure, as read earlier by someone, is alot simpler than that of windows if you just grasp the logic of it - ask a new or 'half-assed' windows user what the D:\ drive is for? Alot of them don't know they have that drive backing up C:\, and hogging space, especially after a reinstall. With one command you can locate a file anywhere on a hard drive, which in windows takes 20+ seconds to do. To update your database, which I guess could constitute as the 'registry', takes just one command, takes 1-2 minutes, and deletes non-existing entry's.
As for gaming, you have your Direct X in windows, which i think WINE is working on, but also OpenGL, which Linux has. I play UT on my computer, and it runs alot faster than it did in windows. Most of the games coming out today are focusing on not only windows, but also Linux, UT2003 disc 3 is for a Linux install.
The coders for windows applications, windows drivers, and others, probably love using linux. They probably write open source software and support linux thoroughly. They more than likely have software written to be released over the next 10 years, because hackers are progressive and love to make ideas reality. But the truth is that they need to make money, and you can't do that to my knowledge in linux - software writing i mean.
I believe human knowledge should be shared and available to anybody for free. Code is Idea and theory - software is idea and theory working together. The most they should be able to charge for source code is that of a book or good book that any other author would write, HardCover, it's fresh!
If you can write a letter with MSWord, write down notes with - MSNotepad, you can learn linux. I think of it as an unfinished book, you can start a new chapter and modify others.
Making it more windows-like makes it more graphical, which is great, attracting more users to it. These new users will see the beauty of free software, and will love it.
.... now if only CPU companies would charge you only production costs for their CPU's....
I'll look forward to the FHF (Free Hardware Foundation) :eek: :D
It's 5:30, i'm rambling.
Peace everyone,
Travis

[osmocot404]

Well, yes, I remember a long time ago, I had an old computer just sitting on ground and I decided to turn it into a Linux box, but I don't know what happend, too much hassle or old hardware, I didn't want to use links and I wanted a GUI. But, getting the perfect, or at least one that worked, xf86config was sooo hard, after a week of experimenting with all of the S3 video cards I switched back to Windows.

But, after a few months, I decided to go back to linux with another distro, an old one, I finally got the video card to work. Unfortunately, that didn't last long, I am faced with the same problem right now, I installed the newest version of Xfree86 and, well, it doesn't work too well with my vid card. Perhaps, my video card is too old... I just don't know.

[Jo.Mo.]

i had to switch back to windows for about 2 days a week ago, i "accidently" deleted glibc and i couldn't start KDE, and instead of trying to fix it, i just reinstalled the entire redhat distro, and after that i had tons of problems with redhat for some reason, so i got fed up and mad at linux for a bit. after 2 days of windows 98, i came crawling back to a crippled linux. even with it's video problems, odd mouse configuration, and some odd partitioning i don't remember doing, it's still better than windows 98.

[zdude255]

Originally posted by osmocot404
Well, yes, I remember a long time ago, I had an old computer just sitting on ground and I decided to turn it into a Linux box, but I don't know what happend, too much hassle or old hardware, I didn't want to use links and I wanted a GUI. But, getting the perfect, or at least one that worked, xf86config was sooo hard, after a week of experimenting with all of the S3 video cards I switched back to Windows.

But, after a few months, I decided to go back to linux with another distro, an old one, I finally got the video card to work. Unfortunately, that didn't last long, I am faced with the same problem right now, I installed the newest version of Xfree86 and, well, it doesn't work too well with my vid card. Perhaps, my video card is too old... I just don't know.

I reccommend trying a newer RedHat or Mandrake. So far they have been the most hardware-friendly for me. Mandrake is the victor between the two, I was able to install Mandrake 9 on a computer with a USB Mouse (by MS) and a USB Keyboard. RedHat couldn't get past the initial text screens. (I couldn't press Enter)

The greatest thing about Linux is that if it fails you can always just try another distro. (W/O paying $200)

[Brocket99]

Originally posted by zdude255
I reccommend trying a newer RedHat or Mandrake. So far they have been the most hardware-friendly for me. Mandrake is the victor between the two, I was able to install Mandrake 9 on a computer with a USB Mouse (by MS) and a USB Keyboard. RedHat couldn't get past the initial text screens. (I couldn't press Enter)

The greatest thing about Linux is that if it fails you can always just try another distro. (W/O paying $200)
I read somewhere about keyboard freezes during linux installs on systems with usb keyboards. There's supposed to be a switch in the BIOS that can be set to support it.

[2ndsign]

i had tons of problems with linux not because linux was bad, but because i was new to linux

i kept at it and ill always use linux!:cool: :D



i doing just fine in linux now!:D

[pnuts]

To me microsoft is a the computer version of a porshe. If I could afford it I would use it but i can't so I don't.

Think of this;

I want to replace my linux system with windows: I would need windows XP. it costs £120. I want to be able to write things on my machine: I need MS office. It costs 400 pounds. my computer cost just over 400 pounds for the hardware. so I would be doubleing the pirce of my computer. If I had that much money, I would have bought a apple.

i like linux becuase it is easy to use, cheap and comes with the software you need.:D

[Uberclocker]

Userfriendly= Less powerful

That is the bottom line. When you make software super easy to use, your omit many options which make that software as powerful.

Im not saying I like software that is impossible to use, but I dont mind learning a few commands to get things tweaked just the way i want it

[Dr. Shim]

Ah, but that's where Microsoft made their fortune: User friendly. Sure you have to omit many power features, but will grandma, for instance, really want to recompile her kernel? Whenever there's a driver she has to install, wouldn't it be great that some sort of graphical utility compile the kernel with the new module in it? IMHO, Linux will just have to stoop that low in order to attract more customers. :)

[stumbles]

Originally posted by Dr. Shim
Ah, but that's where Microsoft made their fortune: User friendly. Sure you have to omit many power features, but will grandma, for instance, really want to recompile her kernel? Whenever there's a driver she has to install, wouldn't it be great that some sort of graphical utility compile the kernel with the new module in it? IMHO, Linux will just have to stoop that low in order to attract more customers. :)

Microsoft did not make their fortune on user friendlyness. That's pure bunk. They made said fortune by;

1. Catching other OS vendors (of the day) off guard by stirking OEM deals with vendors from day one. During those times NO ONE was providing a PC with an OS (seemingly free of charge).

2. Retaining their grip on OEMS with business oriented perks, benifits, licensing deals, threats (if an OEM did not comply), etc.

3. Microsoft for the most part stole the GUI idea from Apple. And til recently, Apple/Mac had the best user interface.

4. You are completely wrong suggesting the recompilation of a kernel has anything to do with an OSs user friendlyness.

[kingttx]

Oh, this might raise some ire, but I must say it: most people can afford Microsoft, most people don't have the time or savvy to configure, most people could care less what MS is doing as long as their product is easy to set up and use, and those same folks will curse sir Gates when they get their BSoD until the computer has rebooted and starts clicking down until the next BSoD.
I'm one of them, at least until I learn Linux for myself.

I've been a strict desktop PC user from the TI 99/4A days when I had that heater hooked up to ham radio and could only use "command line" to configure the whole outfit. Definitely not easy.

With that background, I don't mind trying, but I've already had a bad experience with Linux after installing RH 6.something which wouldn't even show a decent X. I tried getting help from the LUG, but they had their own agendas and weren't about to stoop down and help a lowly plebe. Sad - I still want to talk the company I work for into switching to Linux, and it would have been nice to know this a long time ago. Well, we start again...

I foresee the Linux desktop along this route: Windows useability in ease of configuring, installing, etc., with Linux's power, stability, control, scalability, etc., WITH the ability to use command line to configure to your heart's content. I believe that's the direction GNOME and KDE are going, but they aren't quite there. The kernel is great from what I gather from researching, but the GUI has too much to be desired. Maybe in about 2 or 3 years they'll reach that level.

In the meantime, I'll be taking computer courses at college for Linux this fall. I plan on starting with RH 9.0. I'm going to talk the roommates into letting me experiment with the home network (I know, way too simple to compare to a business network). I'm going to read. Mostly, I'm going to pray that I don't have the same hangups as the last attempt and won't have to go back to Windows again. With Money-Bags Gates shutting down 98 in a few months, I can see quite a few more hits on Linux websites in the future. Wish me luck.

Oh, and I hope the local LUG is nicer this time. :rolleyes:

[pnuts]

Three points:

1. Most people can not afford microsoft. they get it from their employers or something like that.

2. KDE is becoming more intergrated, better put together and easier to use than It was before. Remember that the first linux kernels would not win awards for anything. Give them time. (I use KDE because I have Mhz to burn)

3. If something works in Windows then it works. If something does not work, then you are up the creek without a paddle. (or phoning a support line at £1 a minute). if something does not work in linux, then with some fiddling, some surfing and some swearing it can be made to work. If my Grandma was using linux and something did not work, I could worry away at the problem until it was fixed. With windows it would be a case of try a few things and then "sorry Grandma It just doesn't work"

[kingttx]

Concerning point 1, most people CAN, and they usually do because they don't know of an alternative like we do. There are still computer shops that sell 98 for $100 legally as long as you buy some computer part along with it (OEM). XP is the same - there are folks at work wanting me to build computers for them, and I can legally buy XP for $100 (full OEM version) along with the computer parts. Yes, most people can afford Windows. However, they cannot afford the rest of the excellent tools that otherwise come with most Linux distros. Office? HAH! I managed to get Star Office just before Sun started charging - there was no way I could afford MS. Even now, Sun's price is a LOT more affordable than MS.

I do agree with KDE and GNOME needing more time to integrate. There have been a ton of articles saying it's not quite there - give them a couple more years. That's why I am convinced they are using the Windows desktop as a template, a standard, to work towards. (Yes, I feel the daggers already :rolleyes: ) There are differences, there will always be, but the overall product has been migrating to that area. Thankfully, we can use managers to make the desktop more to our liking, something I plan on doing once I feel brave enough.

Now, with things not working in Windows, that is usually (stressed) a bad distribution of the software. In all truth, I haven't had one program come to mind that has not worked, although a few freewares and sharewares will crash just for breathing in their direction. (and you wonder why Windows users think "free" = "crap" until they learn better) In most cases, as long as that Windows logo is on the box and you have the right Windows version, it works and works well. That logo isn't given out just because a software company promises it works.

In any case, I am open to using Linux. I want it to work well. I want to learn it. I don't mind taking time to do so. I know I'll have my patience tested, but please imagine that grandmother trying to get it to work and she doesn't have such a grandson or granddaughter that knows Linux. hmmmm....