Vlad Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Gentoo is awesome. I've been using it since it was first 'released' (1.0) and have been delighted with it - but like ViMan said, it's definetly not for the linux newbie. Newbs need to stick with mandrake/redhat until they can get a feel for the operating system. I admit, Gentoo's installation is a bitch, but really only if you do a stage 1 install. I used my box to create precompiled packages from source code with various optimizations (including specific architectures) for use on various machines. Burning compiled packages to a cd saves HOURS of potential recompile time if something goes wrong. Now, Microsoft's days might be numbered, but so is the Earth's, for that matter. Microsoft isn't leaving the scene anytime in the foreseeable future. I agree, they have major security issues with IE. There's no way of defending that. As for features inbetween 5.x and 6.0; I'd say there's been several "improvements," some of which actually concern privacy (surprising considering the source) and speed. As far as features go...I'm fairly certain IE has just about every feature you'd need in a browser. So does Mozilla (I think) and Konqueror is quite well done also (not perfect but...). Quality might be a more noble goal, but money is the driving force of the world. As far as Windows going "downhill", I have this to say: if windows is going downhill, then chipmakers wouldn't be working with Microsoft to obtain their support. AMD has been working with MS to get 64-bit support for the clawhammer and Intel is pushing into this DRM (digital rights management) bull**** along with MS to control all media content that (ahem. 1984 springs to mind) plays on a consumers PC. As for Mac's...well, I hate Mac's. I hate them. Nothing anybody says/does will change that, so I'll leave the topic alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KornDogg Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 I thought this was a thread about linux screenshots... Anyway here's my "linux" screenshot.... http://www.korndogg.com/images/linuxscreen.jpg This should be enough to say that I use linux for a server, windows for my workstations, and my personal workstation is a dual boot setup for right now... I like Solaris personally out of all the *nix flavors, you could at least use IE on it (sparc platform only though). Then comes a close draw between the BSDs and Linux distos. Favorite linux distro is RedHat, just because that's what I started with a few years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zivan56 Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Originally posted by azazel- What, is the iBook screen magic or something? Is there special voodoo smoke in there that makes it work? :p No, its just that the fitting 1024x768 in that small of a space is a waste of money, but I guess thats what mac addicts dont mind :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KornDogg Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Speaking of user friendly installs... When I install linux, I always install nothing but the essentials for it to boot, then copy all the RPMS off of CD onto the box, then start installing packages, one by one. Yeah it's time consuming, but it allows me to have only what I want on there... Thought I was going to wear out my r,p,m,-,i and keys some days... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azazel- Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Originally posted by zivan56 No, its just that the fitting 1024x768 in that small of a space is a waste of money, but I guess thats what mac addicts dont mind :D Um...you lost me...would a 640x480 resolution make it somehow cheaper? The reason I want the iBook is because it's small, and it runs at the same resolution as the Dell Inspiron I'm typing this on now... You feeling ok? Take your meds this evening? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViMan Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Originally posted by azazel- Gentoo is pretty incredible. I love how it is so customized to the users wishes. Only complaint is how long it takes to install, which was the major killing factor for me. I tend to flip-flop around too much, installing new distros whenever they are released, and reinstalling gentoo over and over is pretty masochistic. If it's a similar architecture that you're compiling for (all the machines are Athlons or P4s, etc.), you can make binaries so that you don't have to recompile on every machine. Then you can take these binaries and use them to install to any similar machine or if you reinstall on the same machine, thus saving you the compile time. Refer to the portage manual for details (I think it's the -b flag or something). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViMan Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Originally posted by Vlad I admit, Gentoo's installation is a bitch, but really only if you do a stage 1 install. I used my box to create precompiled packages from source code with various optimizations (including specific architectures) for use on various machines. Burning compiled packages to a cd saves HOURS of potential recompile time if something goes wrong. Yeah. Other than the installation (and some of the compilation times), I find Gentoo to be significantly easier to use than some of the other distributions (although I haven't given Debian a try). You don't have to worry about anything to do with dependencies, which is basically the biggest problem that you face with some of the other distributions. Ex. to install KDE 3: "emerge kde" and you're done. So simple... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[LOF]skinnylegs Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Vlad.....why don't you like Mac's? I'm curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zivan56 Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Originally posted by azazel- Um...you lost me...would a 640x480 resolution make it somehow cheaper? The reason I want the iBook is because it's small, and it runs at the same resolution as the Dell Inspiron I'm typing this on now... You feeling ok? Take your meds this evening? It is more expensive to fit 1024x768 in that small of a space, if you want small thats good for you, but your not getting enough for your money. Yes I'm feeling ok, I dont take medicine because i'm normal, maybe you forgot? :cheeky: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K33NU Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Nuggettman ! i know that's completely out of topic but i really need that wallpaper please!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_daemon Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 *drops in to post his Linux workstation screencap* CLICK HERE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacce Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 here's mine.. its Mandrake 8.2 with KDE 3.03 showing Xmms and Gkrellm likey? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroChaos Veteran Posted October 2, 2002 Veteran Share Posted October 2, 2002 Originally posted by JrDZ13 I WOULD LIKE SOME1 TO EXPLAIN TO ME HOW MACS ARE MORE STABLE AND MORE POWERFUL THAN PCS? please, just tell me. I'll switch today. Frankly there is NOTHING i cannot do with PC that I can do with a Mac. My p4 2.8 can outperform every Mac on the market. My pc doesnt crash. Running a BETA, a ***** beta! of windows .net server, I am yet to crash, or experience ANY lack of stability. In fact, I have seen no lack of stability since the release of windows xp. SO PLEASE, JUST 1 THING THAT I CANT DO WITH A PC. JUST 1 NON OPINIONATED IDEA! was this a joke to lighten the mood? cuz it worked ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacce Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 I've noticed that Windows users are more aggressive.. as for Mac, and linux users are more calm and settled.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xe|oN Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 2 words: Debian rocks! :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wired57 Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 no BEOS Rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_daemon Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Man, BeOS IS good. I love the environnement, the shell, the many many many fs supported... I would love it more if it had interesting applications tho... They all suck! :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wired57 Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Originally posted by mr_da3m0n Man, BeOS IS good. I love the environnement, the shell, the many many many fs supported... I would love it more if it had interesting applications tho... They all suck! :( I know but with everyone yelling bout unix linux and windows I though it needed a little air so I tossed beos in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techquilla Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 i never stuck to linux b/c of one reason.....i could never get the ad acceleration to work.....damn it...! i wanted to play tux racer on linux but never succeded,......--.--!! some people say that linux is better because its free....well, tell you want......windows XP is "free" also, at least for me...^^ jk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wired57 Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Originally posted by iomayho i never stuck to linux b/c of one reason.....i could never get the ad acceleration to work.....damn it...! i wanted to play tux racer on linux but never succeded,......--.--!! some people say that linux is better because its free....well, tell you want......windows XP is "free" also, at least for me...^^ jk technically Windows XP Pro Corp is free if you are attending a school that has the MSDNAA membership. I know cause if I wanted it I could go borrow it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azazel- Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Originally posted by zivan56 It is more expensive to fit 1024x768 in that small of a space, if you want small thats good for you, but your not getting enough for your money. Yes I'm feeling ok, I dont take medicine because i'm normal, maybe you forgot? :cheeky: Well, thanks for more "facts" about what my money is worth. I appreciate that. The iBook happens to be one of the more feature-rich portables on the market today, considering the iBook starts at about $1200. Guess that 1024x768 resolution just *drives* that price way up. If it's not too much trouble, could you show me where you discovered this stunning bit of information...as to how screen resolution effects overall price of the product? Here's a simple concept for you; I will pay, whatever the cost, for something that I want. But since you wanna be a cheapskate, find me a major reseller that has a model of laptop with the same features as an iBook, for around $1500. I'd be thrilled to see what you dig up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JrDZ13 Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Originally posted by BroChaos was this a joke to lighten the mood? cuz it worked ;) Hehe, no i was just entering the conversation ;) :rolleyes: But my PC hasn't crashed in a while, lol, thats true. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Originally posted by [LOF]skinnylegs Vlad.....why don't you like Mac's? I'm curious. Long story short: I've always hated the interface, the lack of command line, the lack of programming options, and being forced into proprietary hardware/software that was both difficult to find and expensive to purchase. x86 was simply more versatile (not to mention it could actually play games). I found that the computer ignorant tended to use Macs (such as my teachers...) and that macs networking woes. I've never owned a Mac; and I've never (will never) recommend a Mac to anyone (they might be great for A/V editing, but a PC of equal price with linux can do just as good). It's sort of like peanut butter: after a lifetime (or at least a childhood) of brand X, you have a hard time trusting brand Y. Alright, so that's not the best analogy, but you get my point, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[LOF]skinnylegs Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Thanks, Vlad. As I said, I was just curious. Your points are welll taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zivan56 Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 Originally posted by azazel- Well, thanks for more "facts" about what my money is worth. I appreciate that. The iBook happens to be one of the more feature-rich portables on the market today, considering the iBook starts at about $1200. Guess that 1024x768 resolution just *drives* that price way up. If it's not too much trouble, could you show me where you discovered this stunning bit of information...as to how screen resolution effects overall price of the product? Here's a simple concept for you; I will pay, whatever the cost, for something that I want. But since you wanna be a cheapskate, find me a major reseller that has a model of laptop with the same features as an iBook, for around $1500. I'd be thrilled to see what you dig up. You cant find anything like that, since only Apple has rights to make a MAC laptop :right: . For $1,200 you can get a Pentium 4 2.0Ghz laptop with cd writer+dvd rom+copy of Windows XP oem, and all the rest of the stuff that comes with a normal laptop from a local computer store. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts