The [Main] What Distro should YOU use? - Page 12


View Poll Results: Best Distro for Low resource PC?

Voters
170. You may not vote on this poll
  • Dam Small Linux

    20 11.76%
  • Debian

    42 24.71%
  • Feather Linux

    3 1.76%
  • Gentoo

    13 7.65%
  • Puppy Linux

    9 5.29%
  • Slackware

    38 22.35%
  • SuSE

    9 5.29%
  • Vector

    10 5.88%
  • Yoper

    0 0%
  • Other

    26 15.29%
Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 2891011121314 LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 198

Thread: The [Main] What Distro should YOU use?

  1. #166
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by saikee
    zugu,

    It is obvious to me that you are an ideal customer for the commercial systems.

    Why bother trying the free Linux at all?

    You should not waste time and life on a system that does not hand everything on a plate to you.

    Spend your time and money to search the one that suit your need.

    I recommend you try the M$ system or Mac forums.
    It was already decided in the previous replies that Linux is not for me, and that I should stay on Windows or buy a Mac.

    I was merely replying to the others who continued to ask me what do I see wrong with the actual software packaging model in Linux.

    loopback48 did not understand how "flexibility" and "Windows" can coexist in the same sentence, and I owed him an explanation. je_fro said that what I want is "flawed", and I outlined what's wrong with Linux software packaging. Also, folkert misunderstood me, and recommended me to install Debian stable and use testing repositories for newer software (not the official way of doing things, surely not the most secure, and definitely what I don't want to do).

    You have to understand that for someone coming from the Windows world, used to what you believe is defective by design, the Linux way of installing software might look crippled.

    Cheers.

  2. #167
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    2,984
    You will be surprised that there are many MS systems experts here too as they maintain and admin all kinds of machines. My own experience is based on 30 years using MS systems and I still have to use it for work. A lot of people here have in-depth working knowledge with many OSs.

    You have to understand that your Linux experience is based on the exposure to one distro and your comments should therefore take this into account.

    It is impossible for others to explain to you the defective aspects of any operating system because you have not used an OS in a security-critical applications. Have you done so you wouldn't have arrived at the view you have now or so anxious to install every latest version of the software you could find.

    I don't think there is anything incorrect in you have said but we are all little flogs at the bottom of a well and the sky we know is the circle at the top.

    My point is the sky you can see at the bottom of the well may be a lot bigger than you think if you come up nearer to the surface.

    Any Windows user needs to check out Linux is a sign that he/she is bothered by about he/she has seen or heard about Linux, otherwise why not just dismiss it.

    It is obvious now you are convinced that there is nothing or very little Linux can offer you and we are happy to leave it just like that.
    Linux user started Jun 2004 - No. 361921
    Using a Linux live CD to clone XP
    To install Linux and keep Windows MBR untouched
    Adding extra Linux & Doing it in a lazy way
    A Grub menu booting 100+ systems & A "Howto" to install and boot 145 systems
    Just cloning tips Just booting tips A collection of booting tips

    Judge asked Linux "You are being charged murdering Windoze by stabbing its heart with a weapon, what was it?" Replied Linux "A Live CD"

  3. #168
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by saikee
    You will be surprised that there are many MS systems experts here too as they maintain and admin all kinds of machines. My own experience is based on 30 years using MS systems and I still have to use it for work. A lot of people here have in-depth working knowledge with many OSs.

    You have to understand that your Linux experience is based on the exposure to one distro and your comments should therefore take this into account.

    It is impossible for others to explain to you the defective aspects of any operating system because you have not used an OS in a security-critical applications. Have you done so you wouldn't have arrived at the view you have now or so anxious to install every latest version of the software you could find.

    I don't think there is anything incorrect in you have said but we are all little flogs at the bottom of a well and the sky we know is the circle at the top.

    My point is the sky you can see at the bottom of the well may be a lot bigger than you think if you come up nearer to the surface.

    Any Windows user needs to check out Linux is a sign that he/she is bothered by about he/she has seen or heard about Linux, otherwise why not just dismiss it.

    It is obvious now you are convinced that there is nothing or very little Linux can offer you and we are happy to leave it just like that.
    I came to Linux hoping for the best. I am a power Windows user, not a programmer, IT technician, network administrator or similar. I am looking for a replacement for my Windows XP, and I put up with frequent (once a year) formats of the Windows partition because it got the work done! It did what I told it to do. But Ubuntu Desktop Linux not only forces me to upgrade every 6 months, it can't even provide me a secure way to upgrade the various pieces it's made of. Trivial things, like the browser.

    I might have been wrong when I said "Linux is not ready for the desktop" but I am very sure when I say "Linux is NOT ready for MY desktop". And there are surely other Windows users who think like me, either because they like this particular design decision, either because of inertia. For people like us, Linux will never be ready for the desktop.

    All in all you people can say you got trolled, since I'm not a beginner in Linux at all, I was merely trying to prove a point to a friend.

    Congratulations to saikee for not losing his/her temper, you are now officially my favorite person on this forum. Most others could be classified as zealots, or at least don't have the will to accept other people's point of view.

    This trolling* experiment was conducted on many other major Linux forums, more or less with the same results. Thanks everyone for participating.

    *I strongly believe in everything I said, and the goal was not to piss people off, but to see how you react. So I do not consider this as real trolling.

  4. #169
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    2,984
    People can approach a forum in different ways.

    There are members who come here to contribute by answering questions to pass on their experience to others.

    There are others who come to learn by asking questions or to read the posts to increase their knowledge.

    Everybody is entitled to his/her view and equally has to respect others' views too.

    If a forum member genuinely wishes to gain knowledge he/she would take care in put the question up is such a way to maximize the input from the others. If one has doubt on the value of the knowledge received then one should not waste one's own time as well as the others who come to ones aid.

    JustLinux is known to be a quality Linux forum because of the high technical content maintained by our super moderators.

    Our reaction is always willing to help because that is what JustLinux is all about.

    In fact that is what Linux is in a nutshell. It is a public system developed by the public, maintained by the public and is for the public. There are no less than 60 countries in the world developing Linux together.

    You can look at it any way you wish to but the volunteers who wrote the software are not after your money. They did so purely because they think their knowledge may be of some value to you. Nobody forces you to use their knowledge. If you try to understand system's intention and be aware of its limitation you can put the knowledge to very effective use.

    This forum is for the public to gain knowledge in Linux. Linux is an operating system volunteers can offer their knowledge freely to the public. How to make use of them is entirely your own choce.

    The important thing to bear in mind is Linux is not a system you can have by only giving up an existing system. Linux can coexist with any PC system and with any number of PC systems in the same box. You cannot possibly lose by having Linux available because it has so many features to complement other PC systems. I fairer view of what Linux is capable can only come from using Linux parallel with an existing system over a period of months or even years if the intention is for comparison.
    Last edited by saikee; 08-02-2007 at 12:02 PM.
    Linux user started Jun 2004 - No. 361921
    Using a Linux live CD to clone XP
    To install Linux and keep Windows MBR untouched
    Adding extra Linux & Doing it in a lazy way
    A Grub menu booting 100+ systems & A "Howto" to install and boot 145 systems
    Just cloning tips Just booting tips A collection of booting tips

    Judge asked Linux "You are being charged murdering Windoze by stabbing its heart with a weapon, what was it?" Replied Linux "A Live CD"

  5. #170
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    59
    Zugu, upgrading isn't that hard.

    On your first install, edit your partitions to have a 5-15GB / partition and fill the rest of the HDD with a /home partition. on subsequent installs, just overwrite the / partition, leaving your /home directory intact with all your documents/media/settings/etc.
    make sure to keep a list of the packages you installed in a text file (all one line), so you remember what they're called...

    Then once you upgrade, just type in yum install / apt-get install then paste in the one line list...

    that's about as easy as it gets when it's time to upgrade, with all your installed programs included.
    - Ryan "Boxxertrumps" Trumpa

  6. #171
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    10
    @boxxertrumps: I'm not going to say again what I've already said, but you missed my point completely.

  7. #172
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by zugu
    This trolling* experiment was conducted on many other major Linux forums, more or less with the same results. Thanks everyone for participating.
    You mean this was the point?
    Or the fact that it's too centralized?
    Older versions of distros don't have newer packages? i gave a way to make this not matter, just upgrade...
    - Ryan "Boxxertrumps" Trumpa

  8. #173
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Republic of Texas
    Posts
    5,901
    heh... I had you pegged for an astroturfer from your second post.
    But that can be solved through optimization and a more intelligent and responsible use of development libraries
    False. You fail
    What point were you trying to prove, anyway?
    Last edited by je_fro; 08-02-2007 at 07:02 PM.

  9. #174
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    517

    intents/aspirations of developers for free versus non-free platforms

    I have only recent seen this thread and have only read the last two pages or so, but I think the experiences of user of free (as in speech) versus non-free platforms stems from the goals of software developers for these two paradigms.

    As Zugu states, when he finds software _which he can use_ with his OS of choice, he gets a binary which was created so as to be easily installed on his OS. This binary was intentionally created by the developers to be so easily installed. The developers may just be trying to help a great deal of people, realizing the tremendous installed user base for Zugu's OS of choice (the open-source community releases many packages for Windows platforms, check out gnu-win). They may also have a commercial motive, where it again behooves them to tailor their release to the largest installed user base, and also, perhaps, to restrict the freedom of others to experience or share these packages. If their interest is commercial, they invest financial resources to do this tailoring, perhaps as their primary vocation.

    Many software developers in the open-source community decided to create a particular package because they desired a solution currently unprovided, or perhaps not provided in an open-source format. Once they created a solution, they wished to share this solution with the world. Their criterion on whether to release this code is not "Will everyone be able to effortlessly incorporate my solution?", but rather, "This solution works well for me. Perhaps there are others out there for whom this solution will also work well." Since he is only working with his particular platform, he does not know if it will, in fact, work well for others. Perhaps he realizes that his solution solves a very small-niche problem, rarely encountered and useful to few. If developing software is not his primary vocation, it is not realistic to expect him to make sure it can run on any system save his own, and certainly not as a binary package.

    It is undesirable for him to release his solution as a binary tailored to a particular software environment if he wishes to share his solution with the entire world. But because he is sharing his solution (the algorithm, the source code) with the world, there is no need for him to do this. If others run into a similar problem, and notice his source code, they can "tailor" it to their systems, or if they have the knowledge and desire to help others, can tailor it to the OS with a large installed user base.

    As noted above, many people wish to make these solutions more accessible to the masses. Mozilla and others release binaries for Windows platforms, because they are interested in gaining interest amongst those in the large installed user base, for whatever reason.

    Because others pick up the solutions and and tailor them to different environments, it may take time for the solution to "percolate" through the community to an easily installable state for a given OS. If the effort is non-commercial, it may take longer. If the solution exists in a non-free format, it may never reach those using a free OS.

    I also do not wish to compile and/or modify others' code, though I can and have in the past, because I desired the solution on my free OS, and it was possible for me to do so. I do not know enough about the internals of operating systems to understand how easy or difficult it would be to have all of the packages installed, removed, and upgraded cleanly if they were all handled as binaries compiled for my particular OS. Given the effort involved for the developers, and the much smaller installed user base for a particular free OS (linux has a much smaller, and fragmented (at least at a guaranteed binary compatibility level installed user base) it may only make sense for a non-free, commercial OS, precisely those for which make use of this software model. I do realize one of Zugu's points, in that the rapid evolution of the more central aspects of the OS that takes place in a typical free OS would make such constant binary support unrealistic for many volunteer developers.

    There is a trade-off being made. The long-term support Ubuntu server OS is intended to be used for years without upgrade. Most recent versions of some software may not be easily integrated. I would guess that integration would be greatly aided with the offered paid support (see how this ties in with previous observations). Individual or client desktop installations can be expected to be upgrade more often and can install newer versions of applications. Many users, myself included, actually look forward to and enjoy that 6-month upgrade event. I must applaud Ubuntu for making it so easy. I installed 6.06 online (humorously using the windows-tailored instlux package), and was then able to easily do online upgrades through 6.10 and to 7.04 using their update manager (I used debian in the past, but I once "shot myself in the head" doing a dist-upgrade, when the more-configurable debian asked too many questions, and I accepted too many default/"safe" suggestions.

    I have never run into a problem for which one of the of the packages in Ubuntu's repositories has not offered a solution. I do make use of some repositories not enabled by default, but have never run into breakage, that I can recall. There was that one X-org update fiasco *chuckle*, but they say never again.

    I should also add that I have always found a solution for these same problems using a windows OS (and in binary format), but often only because the open-source community has tailored free windows solutions from freely available source code. I do find that for some problems, especially those involving compilers and unix shells, I am a bit more efficient using the linux offerings.

    I helped write some code to solve small-niche problems in low-energy nuclear scattering. My advisor and I have agreed that our code will be shared with the world through the GPL (version 3 *chuckle*). Our source code is written in FORTAN-77, and intended to be used with GNU's compilers. That way, anyone in the world will be able to easily make use of it, especially if they come from regions of the world where commercial compilers, commercial code, and commercial OSs are not realistic options. As opposed to commercial alternatives, which may make processes marginally easier for some, this approach is intended to make it possible and still reasonably simple for all.

    It seems to me that the OSs have evolved in the ways they have for good reasons, both valid, as evidenced by their "survival" and growth within their respective niches. Individual users should abide and enjoy life in the "environments" in which they flourish. The point of using an OS is to make use of applications, fulfilling desires and solving problems. It also seems to me that the more "environments" one observes, the greater the likelihood of finding a best fit. I understand the desire to flourish and encourage others to seek "flourishment". In most cases, this is not a zero-sum game, and their achievement of it does not detract from my own.

    What I like about the free software model is the enhanced degree of possibility (yeah, that sounds like freedom to me), the interplay between the complimentary notions of self-actualization and belonging to a community in getting problems solved and desires met. The undesirable outcome noted by Zugu does not seem to have impacted me. A friend once told me that frustration results from desires being impeded (seems simple enough). I suppose you can either change your desires (maybe?) (Buddhism?) or find/create a solution. It seems that in your case, Zugu, since a solution exists, and you have expressed no additional frustrations that would accompany this solution, you should pursue it. As noted, the free software so many of us enjoy will probably still be available to you with that OS, and in your desired binary format. If not, and there is no non-free counterpart, you and others can ask for it from the free software community. In general, they like to help people. I see no downside for you. Go be happy.

    I should add that one can accept the frustration *grin*
    Last edited by ehawk; 08-02-2007 at 09:34 PM.

  10. #175
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1
    Hello to all the gurus out there

    I need your advice on the linux distro to use. The comp spec I am having is
    PIII 1ghz
    512 mb RAM
    40 gig HD Pata
    ATI 9200 radeon video card

    My application on the Linux is:
    Using it as a file server which windows xp can access files
    Load balance the 2 dsl broadband line which i have
    To stop ppl from using too much bandwith like downloading thing from torrent

    Can Linux do this application of mine and it's possible to do it in GUI method cause i am a beginner user in linux but willing to learn. Sorry if i am asking a noob question. Thank you

  11. #176
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    2,984
    CallMeNoob,

    Welcome to JustLinux.

    Try Victor Linux but I think most distros will have no problem on you box.

    You can create a fat32 partition to share data between Linux and XP.

    Alternatively you can load a free software called ext2ifs that enable you to read/write any Linux ext2/3 partition in xp.
    Linux user started Jun 2004 - No. 361921
    Using a Linux live CD to clone XP
    To install Linux and keep Windows MBR untouched
    Adding extra Linux & Doing it in a lazy way
    A Grub menu booting 100+ systems & A "Howto" to install and boot 145 systems
    Just cloning tips Just booting tips A collection of booting tips

    Judge asked Linux "You are being charged murdering Windoze by stabbing its heart with a weapon, what was it?" Replied Linux "A Live CD"

  12. #177
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Republic of Texas
    Posts
    5,901
    CallmeNoob:

    You're going to get differing opinions, but perhaps you could try this:
    http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc/

    My recommendation is to use CentOS (a Red Hat clone) because you can then look at the Red Hat documentation.

  13. #178
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2
    My pc experience is thus... my first machine had the word TANDY in bold letters across the top portion of the monitor. Since then I've used win95 and 98. XP home, XP Pro and Vista. My tower is a Dell Dimension 4600 with my upgrades. I have a 250 gig HD, 1 1/2 megs ram and an Nvidia Geforce 6200 video card. I still use the original processor that came with it, the pentium 4. My machine isn't state of the art but it isn't exactly small either. I completely switched to linux almost two months ago so I'm still a noob where linux is concerned. I've tried so many free OS's that I can't remember them all. freebsd, pc-bsd, knoppix, debian, there's no way I can remember them all. I know that the majority of them were either unstable, not friendly to noobs,or simply didn't give me what i wanted from them. The best ones that worked well for me are Vectorlinux which is slackware with the KDE desktop and Ubuntu 6.0.6 which is debian with the gnome desktop. Ubuntu is easy to install, easy to set up a partition on install if you want to dual boot your windows or whatever you may want to keep. It has the add/remove feature if you're scared of using the terminal as well as the other typical repository features. After the install which takes about 15 minutes you have 146 auto updates. You then have to do a system check to ensure all your hardware was detected and functioning. You also have to figure out where to get your java-runtime if you use that. Hint: go to your add/remove, activate all repositories and do a search for java runtime. Their drawback is that you have to do a lot of searching to figure out how to install or activate tools or features you may need like 3-D. Some things are in the help manual and some aren't. Overall the system is totally stable and supported until 2009 and it took me about a week to have everything i wanted on it. It was as fast as xp pro was and a bit more friendly. My personal choice is the Vectorlinux. It's drawback is the install. If you're afraid of making a mistake, go with Ubuntu. If you don't mind a few trial and errors, go for Vector. If you aren't experienced at partitioning or already have some free space or a seperate partition set aside, don't even bother if you want to keep a current operating system intact. It takes about 15 minutes to install, has a ton of up to date play pretties, and don't even think about trying to update it. You'll screw it up I promise you. Java runtime is already there, 3-d is already there. Want something extra, just click on the package manager that's on the desktop. So far, i havn't had to touch my terminal once. And it's killing me. the only other two drawbacks from my point of view is, if I have something running that connects to the net like pidgin or a weather widget, I gotta shut it down before shutting down or I can't connect to the net when I boot up, and, every time i change a screen the darn thing whistles at me and it's driving me up the wall. so I turn my speakers down. Vector is the fastest system I've ever had bar none and so far seems to be totally stable.

  14. #179
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    2,984
    windtalker,

    Welcome to Justlinux.

    Your scenario is ideal for many newcomers to Linux; by homing into one distro that does most if not all the things that you want. You have found it with VectorLinux.

    With time and more skill you will probably find you can get each many Linux family to give you what you want eventually.

    Few points may be surprisingly pleasant for you when you get deeper into the Linux territory.

    (1) You can keep every distro you install as any Linux can multi boot all of them

    (2) The skill you pick up in Vectorlinux can be applied elsewhere.

    (3) You will see Linux a different animal once you start using the terminal. That is where your mind can be blown off by the true power of Linux. At least that was what happen to me.

    At the end of the day we use a PC to do things for us. The more we know the system the more complicated tasks can be achieved. Thus while a desktop is great with the normal tasks well packaed together for the daily use all the extra bits and pieces that you can't get with a desktop can be done by the terminal.

    This is an example, using one's own one line command for interrogating how much storage is used by all the files ending with .jpg in the PC.

    While people may despise to have anything to do with a Linux terminal I like to say they may be missing out at least 50% of what Linux is capable of.
    Last edited by saikee; 08-09-2007 at 06:24 AM.
    Linux user started Jun 2004 - No. 361921
    Using a Linux live CD to clone XP
    To install Linux and keep Windows MBR untouched
    Adding extra Linux & Doing it in a lazy way
    A Grub menu booting 100+ systems & A "Howto" to install and boot 145 systems
    Just cloning tips Just booting tips A collection of booting tips

    Judge asked Linux "You are being charged murdering Windoze by stabbing its heart with a weapon, what was it?" Replied Linux "A Live CD"

  15. #180
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2
    Thx for the welcome Saikee. I did a bit of reading before plunging into Linux and am well aware of it's capabilities. After I get my internet probs straightened out I'm putting Ubuntu back on here with my Vector. I settled for Vector for the reasons I stated, which is, it does almost all of what I want it to do on it's own and has very little setting up to do. I do want to learn Linux and am not afraid of the terminal in the slightest, especially in Vector. If I can't fix it on my own if I break it, big deal, it takes about 15 mins. to reinstall and about a half an hour to get all my music back in it. I don't need the net for any updates. My main hang up right now is my internet and finding something online that zero's in on slackware specifically. Patience and persistence will prevail. I do know that since my leap I'm like a kid in a candy store and am trying to figure out how to make a package from source. I'm an old Doom junkie and want to put the linux version Prboom on here. (I don't wanna hijack the thread so I don't really expect a reply to that here. I'll figure it out.) One more point for settling on vector,,,Slackware according to my reading is supposedly the most stable of the linux versions.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •