Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
miminawewe

Maybe it's time to move to Linux

This topic is 4892 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

i didnt need to reboot linux to install new nvidia graphics drivers, if youre rebooting then youre doing something wrong.
but true installing stuff in linux is a PITA

Quote:
The PS3 is designed for the living room, not for the den; it is designed as a consumer entertainment device, not as a general-purpose workstation

true but it has more than enuf IO stuff to make a powerful computer. look at the PSP it recently came out with a internet browser but its a game device!, im betting the same thing will happen with the ps3 (in fact im sure this sonys intent)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
Quote:
Original post by zedzeek
i didnt need to reboot linux to install new nvidia graphics drivers, if youre rebooting then youre doing something wrong.
but true installing stuff in linux is a PITA


I had to reboot because I couldn't find a way to shut down the x-server, install the drivers, and start the x-server again. I couldn't find any documentation to tell me how to do it either.

While I don't mind having to go through that kind of thing to install a driver, being a technical user, I don't think it should be that difficult in an OS that's aimed at non-technical people.

With regards to PS2-Linux, I don't think you can compare it to PS3 coming pre-installed with linux. You had to go out of your way to get PS2 linux, and it was clearly aimed at those who wanted to make their own games, (or just run linux on their PS2 for whatever reason), rather than your average Joe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am an almost exclusive linux user at home (I only dualboot for World of Warcraft).
The reason I prefer linux is because of its huge flexibility.

Here are a few examples I can come up with:

example 1:
The other day at work (platform is W2K) I was getting tired of listening to netradio. So I fired up putty and connected to my home machine running Debian. I wrote a quick little C program who took a path and recursively scanned it for mp3 files while building a m3u playlist (after checking that Windows Media Player could read it) with urls to my home machine.
Then I edited my httpd.conf (apache config file) to point the webroot at my music dir. Copied the playlist file there. Then I restarted apache and could stream all of my music by clicking on an entry in the playlist in mediaplayer at work.

Yes writing a c program for building the playlist was overkill but I ripped the recursive scanner rutine from the net (quick google search). Should have wrote a shell script but I still suck at them :).

example 2:
Another day at work I wanted to show one of my colleagues some screenshots from World of Warcraft. The screenshots are in a subfolder in tga format with the same dimensions as the resolution you run WoW in, huge uncompressed files. Again I fired up putty and ssh'ed to my home machine (again running debian). I mounted my ntfs windows partition (read only of course). Then I used ImageMagick's mogrify command to copy and convert all the screenshots to jpeg format into a subdirectory on my webserver.
My friend was able to watch the screenshots but using a browser.

these are just to examples I can come up with. I am not saying you cannot do stuff like that
on windows it is just so much easier on linux.

Another issue I have with windows is this:
I have a nontech good friend who runs XP. He is not all that good at keeping his machine secure and virusfree, but he is trying.
The other day he wanted me to have a look on his machine. He didn't knew why but all of a sudden xp was crashing to text mode bluescreen with full register hex dump and debugging info. I tried to look the error code up on MSDN and found it, but the "parameter" we got wasn't documented and there sure as hell wasn't any info about what do about it.
The only thing I could do was reinstall his machine.

If something like this happened to my linux box (and it actually does sometimes I admit).
I would probably be able to solve the problem after 5 hours hell of intense googling, looking trough mailinglists etc.

Yes it sucks, but I am able to fix my system without reinstalling (which in my opinion sucks even more, especially if you got a new system going).

To the posters talking about installing linux on their mothers pc (assuming mothers arent tech people): My mother currently run XP but im thinking about installing Ubuntu.
All she does is browse, wordprocessing and occasionally a game of solitaire. If she were to update a graphics driver on a system running linux, she wouldn't have a clue. But then again she wouldm't have clue either how to do it on windows (I can hardly get her to understand the concept of a filesystem). My point is that is she wanted any reconfiguring she would have to get me to do it, no matter what platform.

Then there is usability. For her needs a nice KDE or Gnome desktop configured by me would
be just as easy too use as the equivalent xp. Besides she wouldn't have to pay for MS Office (which she isn't doing anyway, but at least she wouldn't be violating the law anymore).
So yes I would gladly install linux on my mothers PC.

The area where I see linux failing is hardcore non tech users, like my friend mentioned above. He like to buy a new piece of hardware and be able to install it himself. He don't really know what he is doing but with xp it oftens works out pretty well (otherwise he gets me to fix it). If he was to do that on linux I would have to explain so many concepts (that he don't care about) inorder for him to just understanding what he was trying to archieve.

Thats my thoughts on Linux. I love it but I wouldn't recommend it for everything.

to the OP: Don't spell it microsoft with a $ sign it looks stupid and makes people think
that all linux users are little kids.

Don't know why I posted all this crap to an already old thread, guess I just got inspired
or something :).

anyway just my five dollars reading trough the thread.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would just make partitions and install linux on one and windows on the other, that way you can switch back and forth and test your programs out on both. But dont switch just cause people say 'linux is cool, microsoft sucks', remember that in the end it's not about how cool it is, but how comfortable you feel with it, so try it out dude, if you like it, it's your decision! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by brulle
Quote:
Original post by Oluseyi
That said, there is no guarantee that Linux will grow to double-digit desktop marketshare, simply because the system is designed around principles that range from opaque to incomprehensible to most users.


What principles would that be? Sounds like you are talking out of you ***, frankly. IMO Unix is well designed compared to Windows.


For "most users"?
Unix and Linux are basically a command shell where you, if you know what you're doing, can install a graphical interface on top of it. Note that this is only if you know what you're doing, you know how to install programs, where to install them, how to set them up so other programs can find them. And let's not even get started on compiling kernels, shall we?

Compare that to Windows.

Install: Pop the cd in the drive, click ok a few times, and wait 30 minutes.

Install a driver? Doubleclick on it and reboot.

Install any other program? Doubleclick on it.

Windows *is* easier to use for "normal people".
True, Linux can be set up to be easy to use as well, but doing that is way beyond the ability of most people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is becoming quite the contrary, actually. Last week I installed Xandros. It installed seamlessly and easily configured for dual-boot with windows 2000. The installation had options for people to indicate their level of ability, simplifying the process for non-tech users, or giving you extra options if you can handle them. This is my first experience with Linux, but so far has been problem-free. My video card was auto-detected and installed during setup. I found I had to run 'alsaconf' to get my soundcard working, but now it works perfectly.

My whole point is, that I haven't even touched the command-line yet, except once for alasconf. I can do all of my internet communication through Kopete, browse with FireFox, it even comes with Java 1.4.2 (Hey, I'm a java programmer, so I thought that was nice). You can even run windows programs in CrossOver office. This is all right-out-of-the-box. I picked up the Deluxe version because I wanted the full version of CrossOver, but there is a OCE edition that is free for download off of bit torrent. It's only limitations are CrossOver office is only a trial, no DVD burning (within the GUI), and 4x limited CD writing. But for 49.95 you can get the standard version, with no burning limits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:

...

these are just to examples I can come up with. I am not saying you cannot do stuff like that
on windows it is just so much easier on linux.

That sounds to me like something that would have been far less complicated had you used Windows XP's Remote Desktop...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Spoonbender
Quote:
Original post by brulle
Quote:
Original post by Oluseyi
That said, there is no guarantee that Linux will grow to double-digit desktop marketshare, simply because the system is designed around principles that range from opaque to incomprehensible to most users.


What principles would that be? Sounds like you are talking out of you ***, frankly. IMO Unix is well designed compared to Windows.


For "most users"?
Unix and Linux are basically a command shell where you, if you know what you're doing, can install a graphical interface on top of it. Note that this is only if you know what you're doing, you know how to install programs, where to install them, how to set them up so other programs can find them. And let's not even get started on compiling kernels, shall we?

True, Linux can be set up to be easy to use as well, but doing that is way beyond the ability of most people.


This has not been the case for the majority of distros for 7 years, give or take.




Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by The Rug
Quote:

...

these are just to examples I can come up with. I am not saying you cannot do stuff like that
on windows it is just so much easier on linux.

That sounds to me like something that would have been far less complicated had you used Windows XP's Remote Desktop...

windows has a way to batch resize images?

if he had wanted there are ways to get "remote desktop" functionality in linux, that have been there for longer. Notably vnc, but it isn't your only choice [unlike windows where the license says you agree to not install another program to do that kind of thing]

so, I'll point out a few things:
the only way a windows or linux install is useful is with the applications it comes with.

Windows comes with internet explorer, a command shell [which is very annoying in my opinion, but functional], and a way to manage files graphically. Unless you install other stuff [most common would be microsoft office] windows isn't very useful.

Linux can come with as little or as much as you like. Want a gui? want a graphical file manager? want a compilier? ide? web browser? alternate web browser? alternate gui? way to alter images from the shell [console]? a web server? a vnc server? scripting languages [perl, python, ruby, lua, ...]?

A decent linux distro [fedora, mepis, ubuntu, gentoo...] comes bundled with lots of things windows simply doesn't have. That said, in windows there are things you simply don't deal with. In windows you don't have to worry about putting your swap file on another file system, don't have to worry about editing a config file to specify the refresh rate of your display, don't have to worry about the different ways you can have multiple displays configured, don't have to worry about the different ways programs can be packaged or where they can be installed...

Linux gives you a lot more options, which you will probably have to learn use and know if you use linux in the long term. Both have weird quirks [the registry in windows, /proc and /dev in linux, differences in file permissions and where programs and their junk lies, mounting filesystems versus drive letters] which have their own advantages/disadvantages.


I like the 'use both' option


[oh, and I've tried the nvidia and ati drivers. They are about equally difficult to install, in some situations nvidia's are easier. You need to install the kernel source package [assuming you didn't build your kernel], execute some commands as root [readme is very helpful]. Then shutdown your x server [init 3 as root ought to do this], build the module [this is also well documented in the readme] and modify your XFree86Config or xorg.config [or whatever] to load the new module, init 5 [or reboot] and you should be set. Some distros make this easier or harder and there are some very weird quirks on occasion. ]

[nvidia, unlike ati providies prebuilt modules for some versions of some distributions which makes installing their drivers very easy. However, i've never been able to use that approach. ]

[I'll move away from windows entirely when I get too annoyed by cleaning spyware off of friend/family machines. My family is pretty good, and my friends are willing to re-install on their own.... for now]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

GameDev.net is your game development community. Create an account for your GameDev Portfolio and participate in the largest developer community in the games industry.

Sign me up!