The Free Talk Live BBS

Free Talk Live => General => Topic started by: libertylover on August 20, 2010, 05:34:37 AM

Title: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: libertylover on August 20, 2010, 05:34:37 AM

If Linux is suppose to be a way to get away from MS OS then why does a Linux system need MS OS on the hard drive?  How is that sticking it to the Man Mr. Gates?  Cause you are still stuck buying his software.  Is there such a thing as a purely Linux OS computer?

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: Alex Libman on August 20, 2010, 07:55:05 AM

Linux does indeed need a Microsoft OS on the hard drive - and not just the Wubi installer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wubi_(Ubuntu_installer)) you've probably downloaded, but all Linux.  And Hurd too.  Anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't know what he's talking about.  The only solution for getting rid of Microsoft is installing a copyFREE (http://copyfree.org/) operating system like PC-BSD (http://www.pcbsd.org/).  :twisted:

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: libertylover on August 20, 2010, 09:21:40 AM

Thanks Libman I will have to look into it.  On first impression I noticed it has partitioning.   Does this OS float on top of DOS?
I suspect the reason Linux needs MS is due to most drivers are not written for linux.  Also there isn't a complete list of applications for Linux. 

I suppose I am going to have to save up for an Apple.  I am just so sick of the constant expense of trying to stay ahead of viruses.  As well as the OS extortion ever so many years when MS puts out a new version.  I suppose Apple is just as bad on that score.

What really burned me up is the latest MS scam.  They send you a nice little not a genuine copy message and then proceed to extort 150 bucks.  You tell them you have a disk and read off the number.  Then their goon tells you that the key was a compromised key code.  Bollocks,  It is a hologramed disk.  I managed to eradicate the nagging message without paying the extortion.  I suspect that MS does this randomly to users and pressures them to pay for another license.  I am starting to think most of the viruses originate at MS or with anti-virus companies.  It just seems like a scam.  Really do people have nothing better to do than write virus code? 

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: slayerboy on August 20, 2010, 11:49:24 AM

Um wait...Linux doesn't need Windows to be installed.  Matter of fact, if I get a computer, the first thing I do is wipe the hard drive to get rid of Windows.  I've been using Ubuntu or some other Linux distro for about 5-6 years now without having windows on any computer I use at home.

You might be confused with a software program like WINE.  This allows you to run windows programs in linux.  However, I don't think I ran into any problems with not having a windows installation on any system and running some programs under WINE.  I ran WoW on Linux for about 3 years without touching windows.  That't the only reason I had WINE installed.  Honestly, everyone should switch to Linux if all your doing is surfing the web and email.

As far as buying a computer just to have Linux on it, just about every vendor right now pre-installs Windows.  System76.com and zareason.com are ubuntu-based linux distro vendors that pre-install Linux on their computers.  Dell also can pre-install Ubuntu.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: Alex Libman on August 20, 2010, 12:02:23 PM

Yes, everybody knows Linux is not real UNIX, but is a lot closer to being an MS-DOS hack done by pot-smoking European welfare hippies.  What a lot of people don't know is that Linux is actually a conspiracy by Microsoft to create puppet competition that sucks donkey balls, but does so under a restrictive viral license, which attracts a lot of crummy communist programmers and keeps their code locked away so that Microsoft's competitors (ex. Google, Apple, etc) cannot use it for their benefit.  The only way to get Linux working correctly is to enter the special backdoor command as root:

Code: [Select] rm -rf --no-preserve-root /

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: BobRobertson on August 20, 2010, 02:26:33 PM

Quote from: libertylover on August 20, 2010, 05:34:37 AM

If Linux is suppose to be a way to get away from MS OS then why does a Linux system need MS OS on the hard drive?

Where did you hear this? These are the only three exceptions I can think of:

There are several distributions, such as Ubuntu, which have tools on the install disk to make it easy to repartition your already-running Windows HD into Windows and Linux, then boot into the one you want.

There is, as Libman alludes, a "Wubi" installer for Linux which will begin the process from your existing Windows system, overwriting it in the process.

Back in Win95 days, there were loopback Linux, such as Dragon Linux, which launched from within Windows and over-wrote memory to take over the machine, using a big DOS file as the Linux file system.

But other than those special few, every Linux install disk (or USB stick) boots Linux and then walks through partitioning and formatting the HD for Linux. My last several systems were deliberately bought from whitebox resellers with no OS installed at all.

Quote

How is that sticking it to the Man Mr. Gates?  Cause you are still stuck buying his software.

I couldn't agree more, if it were true. That most shipped PC systems from the more popular OEMs, like HP, Dell, Gateway, et. al., ship with Windows preinstalled, and that Microsoft and their back-pocket OEMs make it extremely difficult to get a refund for unused Windows, are merely annoyances. Nothing to do with Linux at all.

Quote

Is there such a thing as a purely Linux OS computer?

Of course. The system I'm typing on was bought blank and Linux is all it has run. You can also get Linux pre-installed from many vendors, including Dell:

http://www.Dell.com/ubuntu

Here's a list from LXer.com, an excellent Linux news/views/reviews site:

http://lxer.com/module/db/index.php?dbn=14

You might also keep in mind that Linux runs great on SPARC, PowerPC Mac and IBM hardware, and IBM S390 mainframes (the big ones, not the dime-store phonies). Windows does not and never did.

This lists the pre-compiled hardware architectures available from Debian. There are specialty distributions which do other, even more esoteric, hardware.

http://www.debian.org/ports/

So where did you hear this "only works with Windows" crap?

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: Cognitive Dissident on August 20, 2010, 03:31:20 PM

You could always use a Mac-based Linux, or just use OS X (Free BSD.)  That doesn't have any M$ in it (resisting the urge to break into Monty Python "Spam" skit.)

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: libertylover on August 20, 2010, 06:12:27 PM

Every time I have looked into linux it seemed it required partitioning on a MS system.  I want to make an older IBM laptop useful.  I hate how slow MS is on that lap top and thought that it would be nice to have a very low function minimalist OS.  I looked at Mint and Puppy distr. but I am only computer geek literate to a certain point.  I have a friend that use to work for Foresight Linux distribution.  I gave her the lap top and told her to replace MS with a virgin Linux.  When she gave it back it was partitioned and slower than ever.  I had to sign in to MS then the Linux would pop up.  So not only did MS have to load so did the Linux.  If it was going to overwrite the MS I wish she had told me.  I ended up wiping the hard drive and reinstalling MS only. 

And by minimal functionality I mean like internet and nothing else.  All my partner does on the internet is read emails and look at online are gun and ammo or hunting websites.  He thinks youtube is retarded and a waste of time.  This from someone who will watch and entire NASCAR race.  So his requirements are a few drivers, virus protection and an ISP.  He not even all the fussed to have me install open office. 

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: error on August 20, 2010, 06:22:36 PM

Why did your "friend" leave Windoze on the laptop? That's completely senseless. Just install Linux and be done with it.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: libertylover on August 20, 2010, 06:52:03 PM

Well if I get up my nerve I will wipe the drive and reinstall Linux.  The worse that could happen is I have to re-wipe that hard drive and reinstall my MS.  I am so glad I have the disk even if I think Gates is ethically challenged. 

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: voodoo on August 20, 2010, 09:18:27 PM

Pick a download, burn to disk, and boot from the disk (won't make any changes to your hard drive).

http://www.linuxmint.com/edition.php?id=52

Play around.  If you're happy with it, click install.

If not, pick another distro or another os.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: BobRobertson on August 20, 2010, 11:17:51 PM

Quote from: libertylover on August 20, 2010, 06:12:27 PM

I want to make an older IBM laptop useful.

Ah! Very likely all the hardware will be automagically detected and drivers will just work. Really.

As suggested by others, get a LiveCD, boot from the CD, and use that to verify that everything is working.

You can also visit Linux-On-Laptops.com and see if your specific model is listed. You can also just use Google (or Startpage) to search for "linux" and your laptop model, and see what comes up.

Quote

it would be nice to have a very low function minimalist OS.

If I may suggest, unless it has a relatively small HD, like 4GB, that you not focus on minimalist OS, but instead use LXDE or Xfce, rather than KDE or Gnome, as your "desktop environment".

All the applications from KDE, Gnome, etc, all run just fine in any "desktop environment", since what they're really doing is using the X window system to display. The "desktop environment" just give you the application bar, menu, shortcuts, stuff like that.

You can get really minimalist with "Tab Window Manager", better known as twm, which Debian installs by default even if you choose KDE or Gnome or whatever else.

Summer 2008 I finally retired a 1998 K6 350MHz 128MB laptop that ran the full Debian Unstable just fine. I didn't try to run video, or flash, but audio worked fine, along with OpenOffice, Firefox, and all of KDE. I'm pretty sure your IBM laptop is newer than that, so don't worry.

Quote

I gave her the lap top and told her to replace MS with a virgin Linux.  When she gave it back it was partitioned and slower than ever.  I had to sign in to MS then the Linux would pop up.  So not only did MS have to load so did the Linux.  If it was going to overwrite the MS I wish she had told me.  I ended up wiping the hard drive and reinstalling MS only.

Yeah, that was pointless.

But hey, if you're comfortable putting Windows on it, you are free! You have "nothing to lose" by installing Linux yourself! The Worst Case Scenario has already happened!

So really, get Mint, PCLinuxOS, Debian CD#1 Xfce version (otherwise it puts on Gnome by default), and go for it. Really.

Quote

He thinks youtube is retarded and a waste of time.  This from someone who will watch and entire NASCAR race.

I don't mean to be impolite. That is _funny_.

Living in NC, I know lots of people like that. Funny, funny funny.

Quote

So his requirements are a few drivers, virus protection and an ISP.  He not even all the fussed to have me install open office.

1) What kind of network connection does he have? If it's DSL or Cable, you've got it made in the shade. It will "just work". Dial-up, I can't help you with. It's been too long for me.

2) Drivers are all in the kernel, again don't worry unless that laptop has a Broadcomm wireless card, in which case you might have the extra step of finding the "non-free" driver. Linux-on-Laptops, LinuxQuestions.org, LXer.com, and the forums of whatever distribution you decide upon, are your friends.

3) Virus protection is not an issue for several reasons:

3.0) Nothing auto-executes.

3.1) Viruses are almost exclusively Windows binaries. Those don't run on Linux.

3.2) *NIX style user/root separation means that even if something does run, it runs as the user, not root. So the system files don't get touched.

3.3) Distributions maintain known-good repositories. This avoids the "where did you get this?" problem.

3.4) Use Gmail or some other web based mail, FireFox with NoScript and AdBlockPlus, and that should take care of it. Really. Don't bog down your system with anti-virus, since you're not running an open email server.

4) I'd still install OpenOffice.org and Flash, just because. Never know when someone will send him a MS Office document he just has to open.

And like I said already, you've already exercised the nuclear option (reformat and reinstall) on that laptop. You cannot get yourself into any worse trouble than you've already dealt with. Go ahead, try some things out. Freedom to experiment! What a wonderful feeling. :lol:

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: Alex Libman on August 21, 2010, 12:04:56 AM

Quote from: error on August 20, 2010, 06:22:36 PM Why did your "friend" leave Windoze on the laptop?  That's completely senseless.

Windows has value to most people.  It allows them to run what are still leading-edge programs.  It executes many programs and games faster than on Linux.  It had better hardware support.  And, best of all, it doesn't come with a communist license (i.e. GPL).

Quote from: libertylover on August 20, 2010, 06:52:03 PM I am so glad I have the disk even if I think Gates is ethically challenged.

Sure, Gates has gotten into politics due to the need for positive PR and to play defense in Washington after all the interventionism the government started / threatened in late 1990s.  Can anyone name any unethical thing Bill Gates has done aside from that?  As I pointed out on the other thread (http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=28047), Microsoft has been one of the least Washington-mooching companies during its rise to market dominance.  Sure, they play in a government-controlled business environment and use IP laws - a company that wouldn't would be extinct in a nanosecond!  They can still make a good fraction of their money without IP laws, especially now that everything is tied to cellular service or  "the cloud".

Quote from: BobRobertson on August 20, 2010, 11:17:51 PM Ah! Very likely all the hardware will be automagically detected and drivers will just work. Really.

I must be confused.  All those times I had to edit xorg.conf by hand, add restricted repositories, recompile the kernel, etc - that must have been on Windows.  :roll:

Quote from: BobRobertson on August 20, 2010, 11:17:51 PM 3.0) Nothing auto-executes.

Except the code written by tens of thousands of commies who couldn't get a job at Microsoft if their life depended on it, and submitted to thousands of CVS servers, mostly anonymously, with no background checking and no way to hold anyone accountable.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: BobRobertson on August 21, 2010, 12:25:24 AM

Quote from: Alex  Libman on August 21, 2010, 12:04:56 AM

I must be confused.  All those times I had to edit xorg.conf by hand, add restricted repositories, recompile the kernel, etc - that must have been on Windows.

Yes, you're confused. It's not 1994 any more.

The rest isn't worth commenting on.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: TimeLady Victorious on August 21, 2010, 08:44:39 PM

You don't really *need* an MS OS. You can wipe the Microsoft virus off your hard drive if you wish to completely format it.

Is it a better decision than dual-booting with Ubuntu and a pirated version of Windows 7? Probably not. The only reason why I went back was because I had nothing but issues with MythTV recognizing my TV stick. Dual boot for the best of both worlds.

And now that I've actually read through the thread, I have a friend who's run Mint on her desktop since about 2003 with no problems. And there's even a version of Linux compiled for computers as old as 486. There are of course some SEVERE disadvantages to using such an old machine, but if you're a hobbyist you're probably also running Runix - Linux for the PS1 - and you've burned EPROMS to run Linux on your NES, but that can only be useful if you're somehow got your hands on a Famicom Modem...

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: error on August 21, 2010, 10:32:19 PM

Alex trolling for Microsoft? WTF HAPPENED AROUND HERE WHILE I WASN'T LOOKING?

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: TimeLady Victorious on August 21, 2010, 10:33:45 PM

Quote from: error on August 21, 2010, 10:32:19 PM

Alex trolling for Microsoft? WTF HAPPENED AROUND HERE WHILE I WASN'T LOOKING?

There's a thread around here where Alex declares his love for capitalist M$ instead of communist GNU/Linux.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: Alex Libman on August 22, 2010, 07:17:13 AM

Quote from: BobRobertson on August 21, 2010, 12:25:24 AM Yes, you're confused. It's not 1994 any more.

In 1994 Linux was still toy, BSD was serious server UNIX, and Microsoft's desktop operating systems, compilers, apps, games, etc were absolutely unbeatable.  The situation has changed only a little, thanks to Linux support from governments and moocher corporations trying to hurt Microsoft.

Here's a thread about me having to recompile the kernel (http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-830940-view-previous.html?sid=7124ae014f90e9f11e2e5e654ed28331) to get sound working a couple months ago (it only worked on other distros by random chance of kernel load order).  Here's a thread about me trying to get Firefox to scale (http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-831061-start-0.html) without looking like an 8-bit Nintendo - something that's still broken on most distros!  There's a good reason why 4 out of 5 people who try Linux go back to Windows / MacOS (except in countries like Cuba, of course, which is where much of Linux's 1% desktop market share is coming from).

Quote from: BobRobertson on August 21, 2010, 12:25:24 AM The rest isn't worth commenting on.

Yet another Gnoo Loonie running away from the argument lest his blind faith in socialist software is shattered,,,

Quote from: TimeLady Victorious on August 21, 2010, 10:33:45 PM There's a thread around here where Alex declares his love for capitalist M$ instead of communist GNU/Linux.

You mean a thread where I give credit where credit is due (http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=28047) for Microsoft's recent innovations (ex. Win7, .NET 4, IE9, etc).  I mostly troll for copyFREE software (http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=28400.new).

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: BobRobertson on August 22, 2010, 09:23:17 AM

Quote from: TimeLady Victorious on August 21, 2010, 10:33:45 PM

There's a thread around here where Alex declares his love for capitalist M$ instead of communist GNU/Linux.

I thought it was more like 27 threads.

Quote from: Alex  Libman on August 22, 2010, 07:17:13 AM

Yet another Gnoo Loonie running away from the argument...

No, Libman. I said "not worth commenting on" because it's not worth it. It's all already been said, many times and in many ways.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: Alex Libman on August 22, 2010, 10:35:49 AM

You said some stupid Loonix bunker mentality shit, and I debunked it.  Microsoft and other proprietary software does not suck, and it remains the best solution for the vast majority of users - deal with it.  Go get some therapy if you must.  Besides, copyFREE bunker mentality is far more fun - just don't ask me how I compile Chromium or play video files w/o any gnushit.  :lol:

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: BobRobertson on August 22, 2010, 12:26:01 PM

Quote from: Alex  Libman on August 22, 2010, 10:35:49 AM

You said some stupid Loonix bunker mentality shit, and I debunked it.

You didn't debunk anything. I also compile kernels, for fun, because I choose to. Not because it has to be done, as has been reported by everyone else who uses Linux in this forum other than you.

Quote

Microsoft and other proprietary software does not suck, and it remains the best solution for the vast majority of users

It does suck. There, by your own definition you're debunked. Hahahaha.

"Best"? That's a subjective judgement you're making for everyone else.

To use something else you're fond of using on other people, this thread was started (NOT by you for a change) to ask a question concerning Linux. Not to debate the benefit of Proprietary vs. F/OSS. You have established many threads to do that in, where you are welcome to do so.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: Alex Libman on August 22, 2010, 01:41:31 PM

Quote from: BobRobertson on August 22, 2010, 12:26:01 PM Not because it has to be done, as has been reported by everyone else who uses Linux in this forum other than you.

Selection bias.  A lot of people download Linux, have problems with it, assume they're the only ones, and stay quiet about it - the Emperor's New Clothes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor's_New_Clothes) dilemma.  Its desktop market share (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems) speaks for itself - and much of that 1% are people who cannot afford Microsoft software, or aren't allowed access to it by oppressive Communist regimes.

Quote from: BobRobertson on August 22, 2010, 12:26:01 PM It does suck.  There, by your own definition you're debunked.  Hahahaha.

I've spent a lot of time talking about software in great detail, on this forum and others, linking to plenty of facts and objective evaluations along the way.  I can't recall anything factual you've ever produced, just mindless insults.

Quote from: BobRobertson on August 22, 2010, 12:26:01 PM "Best"?  That's a subjective judgement you're making for everyone else.

What I said was that proprietary software "remains the best solution for the vast majority of users".  The vast majority of users run a proprietary operating system (Microsoft 89%, Apple 7%, Linux 1%), even though Linux is the path of least resistance nowadays (thank government funding).

You are a zealot who pushes your restrictive monokernel socialist software fantasies, I go by facts: what is freest (BSD or Haiku), what is most secure (OpenBSD), what is easiest for desktop users (Windows or Mac), what is most interoperable and productive for office tasks (Windows), what provides best Web and game performance (Windows), etc.  I've always admitted the benchmarks by which Linux the #1 solution in terms of server performance (thank Oracle), though it's still inferior in a number of other areas, the most important of which for the purpose of this thread is user experience.  LibertyLover doesn't seem to be the most technically inclined person, so a properly optimized older version of Windows is probably the best option for his needs.  IMHO.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: error on August 22, 2010, 05:15:34 PM

I don't think "user experience" in the way you're using it was the OP's primary concern. Based on his posts, it was being pissed off at viruses and Microsoft's piracy department.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: Alex Libman on August 22, 2010, 05:39:27 PM

Why is it that I have GNU lawyers shaking a fist at me, but zilch aggression from Microsoft - and I've pirated enough proprietary software over the years to buy a small Greek island!  Haven't seen a "Blue Screen of Death" on a production product in almost a decade.  And I've never had a destructive virus, ever!

All this makes me wonder if maybe a lot of people are bashing Microsoft only due to their anti-capitalist bias, and they've peer-pressured the rest of the geeks to just go along with it.  Well, not me - truth is my highest value!

And with that I bid this thread adieu.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: BobRobertson on August 22, 2010, 08:28:46 PM

Quote from: Alex  Libman on August 22, 2010, 01:41:31 PM

You are a zealot who pushes your restrictive monokernel socialist software fantasies

For someone who is so quick to label anyone who dares to disagree with you as offering "just mindless insults", you spend a large part of your time spewing mindless insults.

Quote

And with that I bid this thread adieu.

Drive by trolling. Typical. I'll believe that when I _don't_ see any more postings by you. Go ahead, prove me wrong. Please.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: error on August 23, 2010, 01:09:26 AM

(http://www.sc2pod.com/achievement.php?id=2882)

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: slayerboy on August 23, 2010, 02:57:21 AM

Quote from: error on August 23, 2010, 01:09:26 AM

(http://www.sc2pod.com/achievement.php?id=2882)

:lol:

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: BobRobertson on August 23, 2010, 11:44:21 AM

For the paranoid amongst us, on Saturday I decided to do a little test.

I used the Debian "bootable business card" image, 43MB, very light on the bandwidth for initial downloading. But it requires a network connection to pull down all the initial packages, which really means it needs a full CD's worth of network time anyway. CD#1 or DVD#1 don't need a network connection at all for the install.

During disk preparation, I selected "use entire disk, set up encrypted Logical Volume Manager". I'd heard that full disk encryption like that was easy, but this is the first time I tried it.

It didn't even bat an eye. It asked me for a passphrase, asked me to confirm that I wanted to use a weak one (since this was just a test), and then Just Worked.

The real test was compiling and installing the latest kernel from Kernel.org. As I mentioned above, I do this for fun once in a while. And, I wanted to see if there would be trouble with the new kernel decoding a previously encrypted disk.

No trouble at all.

Caveat: the /boot area, with the Linux kernel and support files, is NOT encrypted. So while encryption will save your files from casual thieves, the FBI could still stick a hacked kernel in place on your disk while you're not looking and get your passphrase when you unknowingly use it.

But as has been said, many times many ways, locks keep out honest people.  The truly paranoid use bootable USB memory sticks that they keep on chains around their necks like ICBM launch keys.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: voodoo on August 23, 2010, 12:55:04 PM

Quote from: BobRobertson on August 23, 2010, 11:44:21 AM

Caveat: the /boot area, with the Linux kernel and support files, is NOT encrypted. So while encryption will save your files from casual thieves, the FBI could still stick a hacked kernel in place on your disk while you're not looking and get your passphrase when you unknowingly use it.

No amount of software/hardware security is effective without complimentary physical security.

But, the attack you describe can be thwarted, also.  Encrypt / on one partition with a flag both allowing an encrypted /home directory to even attempt mounting and visual cue to you, the user.  Then, even if the / passphrase is compromised by logging into the hacked kernel, you won't even have the opportunity to compromise your /home passphrase and/or you will notice the lack of flag and abort.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: libertylover on August 23, 2010, 01:34:31 PM

Quote from: Alex  Libman on August 22, 2010, 10:35:49 AM

You said some stupid Loonix bunker mentality shit, and I debunked it.  Microsoft and other proprietary software does not suck, and it remains the best solution for the vast majority of users - deal with it.  Go get some therapy if you must.  Besides, copyFREE bunker mentality is far more fun - just don't ask me how I compile Chromium or play video files w/o any gnushit.  :lol:

I agree up to a point.  I am stuck with MS on my main cpu.  Some software programs will not operate on a Linux only system.  The fact this is an older slower laptop that I am making into an internet surfing device.  And no one plays online games.  Linux should fit the bill perfectly all on its own. 

Anyone every use the Linus Skipjack-Feisty distro?

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: BobRobertson on August 24, 2010, 09:34:42 AM

Quote from: libertylover on August 23, 2010, 01:34:31 PM

Some software programs will not operate on a Linux only system.

Of course Windows programs don't run on Linux. My opinion is that some applications are deliberately written to ensure they cannot be made to run on WINE or Virtualization.

Linux programs won't run on Windows, either.

There are emulators (WINE) and virtualization (VirtualBox) for running Windows stuff on Linux (and vice versa), but really, I agree with you. If the applications you want to run are Windows only, then for Cromm's sake run Windows!

 :P

What I find most confusing about "the opposition" is their inability to understand that point. The OS is a secondary consideration, applications come first. What you're using to get things done are the applications!

That said, if the applications are not a deciding factor, the benefits of not using Windows, security, simplicity, stability, frugality, arise as excellent reasons to try a Linux-based system and see if it works for you.

Quote

The fact this is an older slower laptop that I am making into an internet surfing device.  And no one plays online games.  Linux should fit the bill perfectly all on its own.

Online games? The web-based ones all work, most Flash games work too, like Runescape and Quake Live. Disney's Pixie Hollow doesn't, but is that such a loss?

Several software producers compile games for both Win and Lin, like Heros of Newearth and Quake. World of Warcraft runs with WINE quite well, by what I've seen.

I use VirtualBox for the applications I need that don't work on Linux. They are Microsoft's Silverlight, so that Netflix streaming works, and HP PhotoPrint for borderless photo printing. And, really, that's it.

Quote

Anyone every use the Linus Skipjack-Feisty distro?

Huh? (picture me thumbing through the phone book)

The only reference to Skipjack is RedHat 7.3, which seems a little old.

Feisty returns Ubuntu 7, which also seems somewhat old.

Am I missing something? The joke, perhaps?

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: libertylover on August 24, 2010, 12:01:18 PM

No, I was just digging through some old software cds and that was what was written on the disk.   It is possible my brother was messing with me cause it looks like his handwriting on the disk.

Title: Re: A Linux question for Linux users.
Post by: Robin Police on August 24, 2010, 01:56:10 PM

Quote from: Alex  Libman on August 20, 2010, 12:02:23 PM

The only way to get Linux working correctly is to enter the special backdoor command as root:

Code: [Select] rm -rf --no-preserve-root /

LOL. Reminds me of high school.