Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kosh on September 03, 2007, 10:14:30 pm
-
http://www.arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070903-linux-marketshare-set-to-surpass-windows-98.html
But also appearently Windows 2000 has a slightly better marketshare than Vista. I guess thats what you get when you try and cripple your products with DRM.
-
On the other hand...Vista's uptake has been higher than with Windows XP.
Good to see Linux moving up in the world. I suspect even OS X will spike a little bit over the coming months...certainly seeing the anti-Microsoft thing start to gain some steam. I'm sort of stuck in the Windows world...heck I just upgraded to Vista...but I'm glad to see things rolling along with the alternatives. I really do enjoy the power of the Ubuntu Live CD actually.
-
It's nice to see Linux doing well but while it's so complex that even computer literate people like me can't be bothered to learn how to use it then it's pointless for Linux users to delude themselves that it will ever be anything other than a server OS with niche desktop use.
-
I use it. And Vista.
-
im about getting ready to pull my legal copy of vista in favor of a pirated copy of xp64. vista is rediculously crippling my computer's performance and **** if i give that asshole company any more of my money.
ive used linux from time to time but as ive said elsewhere, its only useful for uber-geeks. what would be a menial or automatic task in windows, like installing a usb wifi adapter, tends to be a lesson in futility at the terminal in linux. and the instruction usually are written for uber-geeks, and usually dont tell you what to do if something fails.
-
Nuke... XP64 blows donkey dick. Really. It is a horrible OS for anybody to use. Vista64 shines in comparison.
My only problem with linux is that there is no standard set of libraries for the system to use. There are seemingly half a million dev source packages, most of which only apply to one or two programs. It's things like that which make it so difficult to adopt. Why should I use an operating system that requires me to spend more time finding the program's prerequisites than the program itself? And why should I use an OS that requires me to recompile the kernel every time I change hardware settings?
-
ive seen enough of vista, i dont like it. all they really did was rename everything, add more anoyances and call it an upgrade. and if xp64 wont do what i want then i see no reason to continue running windows. the only real way out is to become an uber-geek and use linux.
-
while it's so complex that even computer literate people like me can't be bothered to learn how to use it
ive used linux from time to time but as ive said elsewhere, its only useful for uber-geeks. what would be a menial or automatic task in windows, like installing a usb wifi adapter, tends to be a lesson in futility at the terminal in linux. and the instruction usually are written for uber-geeks, and usually dont tell you what to do if something fails.
Why should I use an operating system that requires me to spend more time finding the program's prerequisites than the program itself? And why should I use an OS that requires me to recompile the kernel every time I change hardware settings?
Are you guys still living in the 1997 or something? :rolleyes:
Firstly, learning linux as they are today is very easy if you already have experience with computers and Windows in general.
Secondly, learning linux is no more difficult than learning Windows would be if you had never used Windows before.
Thirdly, as linux is today you should only have trouble with hardware if your hardware is rare or very new.
Fourthly, you only know how to troubleshoot your problems in Windows because you've used Windows for so long. Or did you magically knew everything about Windows there was to know after one day of use? I don't think so.
Fifthly, you need to select correct linux distro for your needs. This is the only real problem for new users. The top three new-user friendly distributions are Ubuntu, SuSe and Fedora. I heartily recommend trying Ubuntu, it is extremely easy to install, set up and use.
I can back up those claims. One day computer of my parents broke, I set up a "new" one with Ubuntu in it. They have never complained about it and still use the computer as they did before. Same deal with one of my sisters, she didn't have valid Windows XP license (*cough*), so I installed Ubuntu for her. She's using it fine without problems.
Steep learning curve? Bollocks! You complain because you have become Windows uber-geeks after years and years of experience, now you complain because you can't use linux with similar experience on first day.
Get a grip, seriously.
-
I would use Linux for the Server if it weren't for the fact that I also use it as a sub-computer when using Virtual Synths or Rendering, I don't mind if an image takes 24 hours to render on the Server, since I'm not using it for anything else.
I suppose that is my main beef with Linux, and it's a catch 22, I can't use it because the software I use isn't compatible, but there's no impetus to write the software for Linux if no-one is using it.
-
while it's so complex that even computer literate people like me can't be bothered to learn how to use it
ive used linux from time to time but as ive said elsewhere, its only useful for uber-geeks. what would be a menial or automatic task in windows, like installing a usb wifi adapter, tends to be a lesson in futility at the terminal in linux. and the instruction usually are written for uber-geeks, and usually dont tell you what to do if something fails.
Why should I use an operating system that requires me to spend more time finding the program's prerequisites than the program itself? And why should I use an OS that requires me to recompile the kernel every time I change hardware settings?
Are you guys still living in the 1997 or something? :rolleyes:
Firstly, learning linux as they are today is very easy if you already have experience with computers and Windows in general.
Secondly, learning linux is no more difficult than learning Windows would be if you had never used Windows before.
Thirdly, as linux is today you should only have trouble with hardware if your hardware is rare or very new.
Fourthly, you only know how to troubleshoot your problems in Windows because you've used Windows for so long. Or did you magically knew everything about Windows there was to know after one day of use? I don't think so.
Fifthly, you need to select correct linux distro for your needs. This is the only real problem for new users. The top three new-user friendly distributions are Ubuntu, SuSe and Fedora. I heartily recommend trying Ubuntu, it is extremely easy to install, set up and use.
I can back up those claims. One day computer of my parents broke, I set up a "new" one with Ubuntu in it. They have never complained about it and still use the computer as they did before. Same deal with one of my sisters, she didn't have valid Windows XP license (*cough*), so I installed Ubuntu for her. She's using it fine without problems.
Steep learning curve? Bollocks! You complain because you have become Windows uber-geeks after years and years of experience, now you complain because you can't use linux with similar experience on first day.
Get a grip, seriously.
heh, mind you im on a dual boot with an install of fedora 7 (ubunto gave me some problems with my lcd display and my wifi). the reason i dont become a linux super-geek is because i can fumble around in linux, or i can do real work in windows. i have not problem working the command line as ive been doing that in dos for years. you can say im about half way there, but dont accuse me of loosing my grip, i lost that a long time ago before i even started using linux :D
i seem to have problems with thirdly, i like to upgrade my hardware every 2 years, like clockwork. i like to have top of the line video cards. i like usb devices (all 8 of my usb ports are used up, 3 controllers, wifi adapter, bluetooth dongle, track ir, webcam, printer), most of those work in linux, save maybe the track ir though i havent tested my webcam or printer.
i had my mom on fedora 4 for awhile, but the memory failed on it and that took out the file system, and it couldnt autofix because the memory error would just screw it up again. the machine was in its death throes and is currently a dead box in my room. so i just let her use my old computer that i built a couple years ago. i just installed xp and called it a day. that said i think linux is perfect for office or for general non-gaming use. though theres no reason why i should have any problem running games with linux versions.
when i get wine figured out so that i can run photoshop and max under a linux kernal i might give it some more time. but like i said if i want to actually get anything done, im stuck in windows.
-
I've used both Mandriva 10.2 and Debian (3.1a? 3.4a? the two-DVD version)... I gave up... they worked good, it's just that I like to play with the options on my computers to see what they do. And, since the Linux command prompt is so inscrutable when compared with my years of learning the hard way in DOS, I can't undo what I did to crash it. I don't know where the config files are kept, and they are all in weird places. (You thought Windows had bad naming conventions... try /etc/conf/stpdname... FOR FREAKING GOODNESS SAKE, 8.3 WAS BROKEN A LONG TIME AGO, WINDOWS AND LINUX (AND MAC?) FREAKING STOP USING 8-CHARACTER SYSTEM FILE PATHS AND NAMES AND USE SENSIBLE TITLES!!!!... Oh, that's right, I forgot... we are M$, we really don't want the user to know what we're up to. (Or, in the case of Linux, we want to make sure only those worthy of power have the knowledge to configure their systems.. or, in the case of Mac, only those authorized by Apple.)
-
Secondly, learning linux is no more difficult than learning Windows would be if you had never used Windows before.
And that's the issue. If I moved to MacOS I'd pick up how stuff works in a few hours. Days at most.
With Linux I'd be expected to learn pretty much everything from scratch. I simply don't have the time.
Now if you're seriously telling me that an average computer literate person can set up and have a working Linux install in a day, despite having no knowledge of the OS then I might be tempted to try it.
-
Secondly, learning linux is no more difficult than learning Windows would be if you had never used Windows before.
And that's the issue. If I moved to MacOS I'd pick up how stuff works in a few hours. Days at most.
With Linux I'd be expected to learn pretty much everything from scratch. I simply don't have the time.
Now if you're seriously telling me that an average computer literate person can set up and have a working Linux install in a day, despite having no knowledge of the OS then I might be tempted to try it.
I'm telling you that current up-to-date linux distros require no more knowledge to install, set-up and use than OS X or Windows would.
Get Ubuntu and be done with it. If you need help, just use http://wiki.ubuntu.com or http://ubuntuforums.org/. Better than googling for random websites for Windows help. There is only one wiki-page most people use, and that is https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RestrictedFormats
-
I just wish AMD/ATI would give us all some decent drivers... but other than that I've had very few problems with Linux... it took me a few months to get used to it, but not that much longer than going from Windows 98 to XP really.. DOS vs. Linux shell was a little confusing at first, but there are some good web pages on that.
-
I gave up... they worked good, it's just that I like to play with the options on my computers to see what they do. And, since the Linux command prompt is so inscrutable when compared with my years of learning the hard way in DOS, I can't undo what I did to crash it. I don't know where the config files are kept, and they are all in weird places.
Now, if you really want to get to the bottom of things, all you need to do is give a simple ps -A on a terminal window to get a list of everything running on you comp, then start to man stuff on that list. :D The man pages normally list all the related important conf files too (and their locations). And in many cases you get more info by manning with a conf file name..
Also, in most problem cases, after taking a look at .xsession-errors and stuff in /var/log/ you already have a good idea about what is going wrong.
-
Why should I use an operating system that requires me to spend more time finding the program's prerequisites than the program itself?
This is what package management systems are made for :yes:
And why should I use an OS that requires me to recompile the kernel every time I change hardware settings?
We rarely need to do that anymore (unless you want to, like I do :) ). HW autodetection/automatic kernel module loading should take care of this. Granted, sometimes, with some hardware, there will be problems, then we need to tinker a bit more..
-
while it's so complex that even computer literate people like me can't be bothered to learn how to use it
ive used linux from time to time but as ive said elsewhere, its only useful for uber-geeks. what would be a menial or automatic task in windows, like installing a usb wifi adapter, tends to be a lesson in futility at the terminal in linux. and the instruction usually are written for uber-geeks, and usually dont tell you what to do if something fails.
Why should I use an operating system that requires me to spend more time finding the program's prerequisites than the program itself? And why should I use an OS that requires me to recompile the kernel every time I change hardware settings?
Are you guys still living in the 1997 or something? :rolleyes:
Firstly, learning linux as they are today is very easy if you already have experience with computers and Windows in general.
Secondly, learning linux is no more difficult than learning Windows would be if you had never used Windows before.
Thirdly, as linux is today you should only have trouble with hardware if your hardware is rare or very new.
Fourthly, you only know how to troubleshoot your problems in Windows because you've used Windows for so long. Or did you magically knew everything about Windows there was to know after one day of use? I don't think so.
Fifthly, you need to select correct linux distro for your needs. This is the only real problem for new users. The top three new-user friendly distributions are Ubuntu, SuSe and Fedora. I heartily recommend trying Ubuntu, it is extremely easy to install, set up and use.
I can back up those claims. One day computer of my parents broke, I set up a "new" one with Ubuntu in it. They have never complained about it and still use the computer as they did before. Same deal with one of my sisters, she didn't have valid Windows XP license (*cough*), so I installed Ubuntu for her. She's using it fine without problems.
Steep learning curve? Bollocks! You complain because you have become Windows uber-geeks after years and years of experience, now you complain because you can't use linux with similar experience on first day.
Get a grip, seriously.
I think when normal users are no longer instructed to 'use the terminal to perform steps 2-16', and the word 'compile' disappears from the majority installation instructions, you'll be right. One can be very literate in Windows without ever having to see a command line or C file. In Linux, if the particular piece of software you want to run doesn't happen to be nicely packaged in an RPM or on Synaptic's list, or the binaries that are available don't work with your distribution, or rely on some obscure features in the kernel, or have a dozen dependencies for OTHER things you have to compile and install... well, it doesn't take much deep thought to realise that most people would rather use something without those extra steps.
-
Package management systems do not apply unless the package in question is provided by the distributor. For things such as PCSX2, FS2Open, and every other non-major application, you're on your own. Yum/Portage/Aptget are nice, but this still doesn't excuse the problem behind common libraries. For Windows you need DCOM, Visual Studio/.NET runtime, GTK2+, and DirectX. There is nothing more than that which is needed for almost every program out there, unless they are crappy linux ports. I see no equivalent to this kind of system in any linux distro I've ever used, and I have Ubuntu 7.04 and OpenSuSE 10.2 installed on my system right now.
Also, what's with the lack of API layers in Linux? When I want to install a program from the internet, I want to install it and be done with it. However, with linux, I install it, fix incorrect settings, screw around with permissions, and then clean the nasty mess it left behind. Ick. Why can't there be a commonly adopted universal binary system? InstallShield, msi, and Wise installer are all very decent ways to setup applications, why is none of this on linux? I don't want to download a package, ./configure and hope it works, make install and hope that works, and finally hope the installed product works. It's a lot of crap I dont want to deal with.
EDIT: And I don't mean proprietary things like RPM either. That system sucks just as bad.
-
Now, if you really want to get to the bottom of things, all you need to do is give a simple ps -A on a terminal window to get a list of everything running on you comp, then start to man stuff on that list. :D
:lol:
those man pages are obviously written by people who like to hear themselves type, or who like to show off their uber-geeky perfect grammar and massive vocabulary full of large words. they should at least take a crash course in efficient technical document writing. the man system is pretty good though, its just a matter of the long winded content :D
-
Honestly, get Wubi (http://wubi-installer.org/) and install one of the Ubuntu distributions. The only drawback of a Linux install up till now was the need to modify the partitions. Wubi allows you to install and uninstall Ubuntu as any other application. It creates a virtual disc on your hard drive and it does not require you to use a different bootloader. Currently it supports Ubuntu, Ubuntu Studio, Xubuntu, Kubuntu and Edubuntu I believe. :D
-
I totally agree with Kara, and it's something I've been saying for a long time now - Linux will never go mainstream because it's just too hard to use for the average person, and Linux users don't seem to get that no one else watns to take the time/skill to completely re-learn a new OS (that is written for ubergeeks - I don't care what distro you're using, Linux users = know what they're doing with computers. You never find a person using Linux that doesn't have at least an above average knowledge of computers).
-
using linux isnt my problem, my problem is setting up linux. which in some cases is really really really hard, of course some times you get luckey and everything works right off the bat.
-
Yes. This is why everybody should start using linux ASAP, while still young and enthusiastic!
Nobody will have the patience to learn it it when already old and cranky.
J/K ;)
-
I was looking at the list of screen resolutions on that list, and mine isn't even on it. I had to play with my monitor's display area a lot, but I got 1600 by 1200 to work in the end.
Everything is super tiny ;7.
-
I think several Linux distros are pushing hard to be more user-friendly. Namely Ubuntu, SuSE, and Fedora. Although only the first two I see having the potential to go mainstream.
-
I was looking at the list of screen resolutions on that list, and mine isn't even on it. I had to play with my monitor's display area a lot, but I got 1600 by 1200 to work in the end.
Everything is super tiny ;7.
You mean when you install Linux? There's a config file you can edit manually, IIRC, but it's better to run the config setup or somesuch again... I can't really remember, it's been so long since I forced myself to use Linux. I'm going to be oh so happy when they are done with ReactOS (http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html). :D
-
How to get my adsl modem working under windows :
1. downnload drivers
2. double click on setup.exe
3. reboot
How to get my adsl modem working under Linux :
Prequisites
You will need the modem and the Linux drivers. If You got a real cheap one, you may not have Linux drivers. In which case you can get them from The Mad House. You should have the following list of files either on a directory of the installation CD or downloaded (and unzipped) from the above link...
Tigris_K2.2.16_Driver.zip gcc-c++-2.96-85.i386.rpm libstdc++-devel-2.96-85.i386.rpm
Tigris_K2.4.3_Driver.zip gcc-g77-2.96-85.i386.rpm linuxconf-1.24r2-10.i386.rpm
atm-0.78-1-2.i386.rpm gcc-objc-2.96-85.i386.rpm pppd-2.4.0.tar.gz
cpp-2.96-85.i386.rpm kernel-atm-ppp-2.4.3-12.tar.gz rp-pppoe-3.0-1.i386.rpm
devfsd-2.4.3-12.i386.rpm kernel-doc-2.4.3-12.i386.rpm
gcc-2.96-85.i386.rpm libstdc++-2.96-85.i386.rpm
bold means we really need this package.
Italics means, we need it but Mandrake should have a later version of this package, and use Mandrakes version!
Overview
What we need to do (after we log in as root!) is ...
Install Conexant Scripts.
Get Development Packages (C-Compiler and Kernel Source Code)
Install Conexant Driver.
Install ppp 2.4.0b2
Install pppoe
Test
Install Conexant Scripts.
cd /tmp type
# unzip driverdir/Tigris_K2.4.3+Driver.zip
e.g. # unzip /mnt/cdrom/Conexant/Drivers/Linux/Tigris_K2.4.3+Driver.zip This will give you 3 more files CnxADSL-TgrATM_k2.4.3-6.1.2.007-7.i386.rpm Binaries/Scripts
CnxADSL-TgrATM_k2.4.3-6.1.2.007-7.src.rpm Source
CnxADSL-TgrATM_k2.4.3-6.1.2.007.tar.gz More Source
Install the scripts just using the i386 rpm like this:
# rpm -i CnxADSL-TgrATM_k2.4.3-6.1.2.007-7.i386.rpm
Note it will probably be neater to build everything from the Source RPM. But I'll just document the steps I done before I knew better!
Get Development Packages (C-Compiler and Kernel Source Code)
The previous step would have installed a file called CnxADSL.o in the directory /lib/modules/2.4.3/kernel/drivers/net/CnxADSL.o. This is called a Kernel Module and can (in an ideal world) be loaded to enhance the capability of the Linux Kernel (In this case, so that it can work our modem). Unfortunately, there are couple of problems with this file. Its in the wrong place for Mandrake, and even if it wasn't, Mandrake wont load it because it was built for a different Kernel.
If you trust me (!) and if you have Mandrake 9.0 (Kernel 2.4.19-16mdk), (check by typing
# uname -r
), I have already compiled the driver and you can download it right here and save it to /lib/modules/2.4.19-16mdk/kernel/drivers/net/ on condition that you accept that I cannot be held responsible for anything that happens as a result. No warrantee, or fitness for purpose .. yadda .yadda.... Then you can skip to Testing the module.
If you are still reading at this point then you have opted for longer but more cautious route :)
So we have to create a new one from source. You need to first have the following Mandrake Packages installed from the Mandrake Distribution CDs (gcc and the kernel-source) then ....
#cd /usr/src
#tar xvf driverdir/CnxADSL-TgrATM_k2.4.3-6.1.2.007.tar.gz
#cd CnxADSL-TgrATM_k2.4.3-6.1.2.007
Edit the makefile and change kgcc to gcc. Now type
#./configure
#make
The error messages should be minor. As long as you have a file called CnxADSL.o and the date is within the last few minutes (check using 'ls -l') then everything probably went OK. If this file is missing something is really wrong!
Copy the file CnxADSL.o to /lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/net/.
Testing The Module.
Do a quick test to check everything is in the right place :
type
#insmod -f CnxADSL \
CnxtDslVendorId=0x14F1 \
CnxtDslArmDeviceId=0x1610 \
CnxtDslAdslDeviceId=0x1611 \
CnxtDslPhysicalDriverType=1
You should see messages about a tainted kernel.
now type #lsmod | grep CnxADSL
It should be there!
finally type #rmmod CnxADSL
Modify The Startup Script.
The script supplied with the Conxant drivers is for some kind of ATM bridging mode. I dont think this is useful for PPPoATM but I could be completely wrong on this. All I know is my connection works :) Here's my alternative cnxadslctl startup script. Save it to /etc/rc.d/init.d/cnxadslctl.gz. You will need to uncompress it and make it executable as follows
# cd /etc/rc.d/init.d
# gunzip cnxadslctl.gz
# chmod 755 cnxadslctl
I made it from combining Conexants script with the Alcatel Speedtouch script. Play around with it. Improve it. etc
You will also need to create a file /etc/ppp/peers/pci file to work with this script. Here is an example Note the 0.38 represent MY ISPs VPI.VCI. These should be the values in most of the UK. You should change this if needed.
---CUT---/etc/ppp/peers/pci-----------------
noauth
plugin /usr/lib/pppd/plugins/pppoatm.so 0.38
noipdefault
kdebug 1
nopcomp
noccp
novj
holdoff 4
maxfail 25
persist
usepeerdns
defaultroute
user "[email protected]"
---CUT--------------------------------------
Change the user to the one supplied by your ISP.
This attempts to establish a ppp connection using dhcp. (You ISP assings you an IP address from their available pool.) If you have a fixed IP from your ISP you may find that DHCP works anyway. If not then you need to change the pluging line to read:
plugin /usr/lib/pppd/plugins/pppoatm.so 0.38 local-ip:remote-ip
E.g.
plugin /usr/lib/pppd/plugins/pppoatm.so 0.38 192.2.3.4:192.6.7.8
I havent tested this, but I guess most ISPs would implement fixed IPs by simply reserving them in dhcp so even if you have a fixed IP you may want to leave this for now.
Then edit the files /etc/ppp/pap-secrets and /etc/ppp/chap-secrets and add your username and password with the following format
'[email protected]' * 'myPassword' *
Startup/Shutdown
Now When we boot into Mandrake later on, we want everything to start up in an orderly fashion, but you will find that the Conexant scripts start before the networking. I'm assuming this is because of two things (and I'm not really sure about either)
For PPPoE (rather than PPPoATM), the modem has to be initialised before networking is started???
The startup, shutdown order used by Conexant is unrelated to Mandrake?
In anycase I reckon that the file should be started after networking so
# cd /etc/rc.d/rc3.d
# mv S*cnxadslctl S90cnxadslctl
# cd /etc/rc.d/rc2.d
# mv K*cnxadslctl K10cnxadslctl
Note my shutdown order is still not entirely correct. It complains that /dev/ttyCX is in use. But it works fine if I stop it manually.
Install ppp 2.4.0b2
Nearly there. All the following bits are easy now. We now need to install an older version of ppp. This version comes bundled with the ATM plugin (pppoatm.so) out of the box. If you did not have PPP installed prior to this step you MUST refer to the README.linux! Easier Still, first install ppp from the Mandrake Distribution CDs and then we'll downgrade it.
Guru Note:You may want to get the latest version of ppp and patch it with pppoatm. I didnt spend too long looking but it looks like the patch modified the core ppp code but you still have to compile the pppoatm.so plugin?? If I get time one day, I'll look at this.
Warning: Downgrading from Mandrakes ppp 2.4.1 to ppp 2.4.0 b2 may stop other devices working that rely on ppp. Notably Alcatel Speedtouch.
# cd /usr/src
# tar xvfz driverdir/pppd-2.4.0.tar.gz
# cd ppp-2.4.0b2
# ./configure
# make install
You can try to do a 'make' before 'make install' but for me it didnt compile. I just installed the binaries that are already present in the tar archive.
Also, some (one) have reported back to me that they had better results skipping the ./configure and just doing a 'make' followed by 'make install'
Check by typing 'pppd -v' and you should see version 2.4.0b1 (Yes b1 not b2, I dont know why!)
Also check that /usr/lib/pppd/plugins/pppoatm.so exists. If it doesnt you will have to copy it from the build directory to this location. E.g.
cp /usr/src/ppp-2.4.0b2/pppd/plugins/pppoatm.so /usr/lib/ppd/plugins/.
The location of pppoatm may be slightly different to above. This is from memory again!
Install pppoe
Final step. Install pppoe as follows
# rpm -i driverdir/rp-pppoe-3.0-1.i386.rpm
Guru note: I'm not sure how the latest version of pppoe (from Roaring Penguin) works with ppp 2.4.0 b2 So I though I'd keep everything simple for the time being and use the versions from the Conexant driver cd.
Test
To test it try the following commands:
# cnxadslctl.sh start
# cnxadslctl.sh status
This should tell you if the device is working. If there is no device or no line connected check hardware and cabling and then check /var/log/messages and do an lsmod to see if the CnxADSL module is loaded.
# ifconfig -a
This should tell you if you have connected to your ISP
-
How to get my adsl modem working under windows :
1. downnload drivers
2. double click on setup.exe
3. reboot
How to get my adsl modem working under Linux :
Prequisites
YEARGGGH!
Nicely put. :nod:
-
indeed
by the way, i just gutted my laptop to replace the drives with better ones from my old laptop. now i can burn cds and have twice as much hd space (40 instead of 20). anyway i figure sence i dont really play games on the thing, and the ones i actuallycan play have linux versions, i figure id load up ubuntu 7.04. drop in the cd and it loads the os from the disc, but once i hit the instal icon the installer popps up but i cant see anything and it just sorta hangs there. is there any way to force the installer to come up without loading the whole os?
never mind, fixed the whole problem by creating a swap partition :D