[Stryke 9]

VBS ALLA WAY, BABY!!!


Holy hell these threads are silly. And this one started with a fairly decent premise, too...

[Bobboau]

the one thing I wish Linux (ect) had, was a better 'getting started from a windows install' explaination, I've been wanting to try out Linux for a while now, I have a bit of central HD space reserved for it, but I don't realy know were to start.

[Odyssey]

Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]You know why I've never liked linux; I know this is a fairly shallow thing but I've just never been able to make it look attractive. I find a computer to be much more satisfying if the experience has asthetic, windows is configurable enough to let me do almost everything I need with little effort. There are skins for almost everything.[/color] [/size]

[color=cc9900]Out of the box, Windows versions up to and including 2000 look fairly utilitarian. Windows XP looks like a kids toy. On the other hand, out-of-the-box Linux often looks sleek, modern, and it's even got all the flashy effects. I can't say I've tried skinning in either Windows or Linux, but from what I've seen on the internet, Linux can end up looking pretty damn good, reference:
http://art.gnome.org/screenshots/index.php
KDE purportedly allows even more control over themes. Then there's all the alternative window managers, such as Enlightenment, IceWM, etc. etc.

Bobboau: the best place to start would be Knoppix. It runs off a CD, and loads its core components into RAM. Your computer is left untouched when you log off. That way you can get a good feel for Linux without actually installing anything. If you like that, then google around for installation tips for whatever Linux distro you choose, or alternatively ask one of us.[/color]

[Stryke 9]

WinXP looks like the bastard child of Mac OS X and a Barbie doll.

But I have never had it crash, and it runs MAX with hyperthreading. And can use the drivers for my scanner. And that is all I care about. So HA.

In the end, that's all most anybody's gonna care about. Viruses suck, but most people keep backups. Security just isn't an issue for Joe PC Owner, because since he's got nothing of particular value on his machine he'll only get the most random and hence the weakest of attacks. Windows runs all his peripherals, can use basically all the nice hardware out there today, and it's usually what his computer came with. Sure, fine Linux might be better, but XP does a good enough job for most people that the trouble to install a new OS (with all the inevitable compatibility problems that'd generate with the user's old Windows data, and don't tell me they don't exist at all, that's horse****) is just too much. So, really, going on about how Linux is superior for security and about the same for GUIs comes to naught- all you're really doing is patting yourself on the back for having a very special operating system. Well, good for you. You haven't accomplished anything to speak of.

[Flipside]

I use XP because I am a heavy computer user, and habitually lazy. Linux is probably faster, cleaner and more efficent than Windows by a long way. But the simple fact of the matter is that I use a mixture of stuff, some of which have Linux ports available, others do not.
It's simply easier for me to stick to Windows.

Anyway, isn't this Lightwave vs 3DSMax all over again?

[Kazan]

Maeglamor: when is the last time you played with linux?  what distro?  The Linux GUI is fully skinable - get Fedora, install KDE _NOT_ GNOME for your window manager.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Kalfireth
Explain again why Windows ease of use is a lie?

Here's the deal. Ease of use is purely subjective.

Take a complete novice, someone who has never seen a computer before (like, say, my grandmother) and sit them in front of a Linux box running XFree86 and KDE. When you teach them  about the using GUI windows and clicking the mouse and running programs and stuff, there's no difference between Unix and Windows. Take that same person over to a Win2k box and let them play with it. They'll be confused and disoriented and find it confusing. Why? Because they've learned how to do things in the way that KDE expects them to be done. Its exactly the same thing as when a Windows user tries to play with Unix.

That's why 'ease of use' is a lie. There's no ease of use, there's only headspace inertia.

Now, let's just say that ease of use concerns are real. For example, I have to setup a Unix machine for my wife. She knows Windows2000, but not Unix. So what do I do? I give here FreeBSD, running XFree86 with KDE for the desktop environment. I select the "Windows" style for the mouse handling (single click selects, double click runs the default action, right click for context menus, etc) and the Redmond theme for the GUI skin. She now has a Unix box that looks remarkably like Windows2000 and acts an awful lot like Windows2000. I set her up with Mozilla for her browser and email. If she really needs Outlook or other Office apps, I setup Crossover Office. In other words, the surface interactions remain the same for her.

That's why 'ease of use' is a lie, Thunder.

[Odyssey]

Originally posted by Flipside
Anyway, isn't this Lightwave vs 3DSMax all over again?

[color=cc9900]Not really. Both of those pieces of software evolved from the same principles, do essentially the same thing, and both cost a lot. In this case we have two OS's that have originated from completely different principles (closed source profit, open source hobby (usually)), that can do essentially the same thing but also one offers a little more (Linux offers a command line interface if you need one, whereas Microsoft seems to be working towards the abolition of said), and one costs a lot where the other costs nothing at all.

I just tried to think of a metaphor, but couldn't. Not much is free these days.[/color]

[Flipside]

I suppose that is the only thing that would certainly make me walk away from Windows, if they removed low-level access altogether. The death of the Floppy Disc isn't all that far away, and has only been delayed by Boot Discs. Once Windows does away with these, you effectively lose all system level control of your computer.
Then you would have another Linux user

I suppose Terrestrial ITV and Cable is a good example. You get so many more channels with Cable, but a lot of them are full of crap, and you have to pay for them

[phreak]

Originally posted by mikhael

Now, let's just say that ease of use concerns are real. For example, I have to setup a Unix machine for my wife. She knows Windows2000, but not Unix. So what do I do? I give here FreeBSD, running XFree86 with KDE for the desktop environment. I select the "Windows" style for the mouse handling (single click selects, double click runs the default action, right click for context menus, etc) and the Redmond theme for the GUI skin. She now has a Unix box that looks remarkably like Windows2000 and acts an awful lot like Windows2000.

you can always write a script or something to lock up the computer every 30 minutes or so and she wouldn't be able to tell the difference

[Kazan]

lol phreak!!!!!


mikhael->score++;

[Kamikaze]

Originally posted by Stealth


ummm excuse me, just because i don't have Linux installed on this computer doesn't mean i haven't used it, or don't know how to use it.  i'm sure the computer you're on at the moment doesn't have Linux installed either, and even if it does, i'm sure i've used linux as much, if not more thanyou

Actually, the computer I posted it from had Linux running. In fact, all 4 of the computers I use have Linux running on them (the mac2ci doesn't count ).

[Martinus]

Originally posted by Kazan
Maeglamor: when is the last time you played with linux?  what distro?  The Linux GUI is fully skinable - get Fedora, install KDE _NOT_ GNOME for your window manager.

[color=66ff00]Ummm, redhat was the only release I could get my hands on at the time and yes it was gnome I have to admit.

This still doesn't address the gaming issue though, I spent a lot of money on the machine and I really don't want to have to make a new partition, install a new OS, set it up to my liking, get copies of all the apps I use etc. etc.
It just doesn't make sense to me when what I've got now works so well. *shrugs*

On a related note; is there any possibility that linux can have something akin to DirectX, or is any attempt to emulate it an infringement of intellectual property or some such nonsense?
I believe that this is linux's ultimate crippling factor.
[/color]

[Grey Wolf]

The comment about Windows having the stupid Luna theme? That's relatively easy to fix. Just overwrite the uxtheme.dll with a hacked version, and skin away. Currently using a theme based on the lateset Longhorn release (apparently, unreleased OSes from MS, although hardly working, have fairly nice GUIs.)

But anyway, if it wasn't for the fact that I'd have to go through the pain of repartitioning my drive, I'd probably install a Linux distro in a dual boot setup.  But I don't feel like searching for a utility to do it again, and I'm not sure whether I really have enough space to really think about it (my computer has only 28GB of total HD space).

EDIT: On a side note, Torvalds rocks.

[Kazan]

Originally posted by Maeglamor


On a related note; is there any possibility that linux can have something akin to DirectX, or is any attempt to emulate it an infringement of intellectual property or some such nonsense?
I believe that this is linux's ultimate crippling factor.

WineX -- althought is still costs money, eventual;ly codeWeavers will merge the WineX code into the GPLed Wine and it'll become free, that's just how CodeWeavers works

[Shrike]

Windows runs what I want it to run.  Why should I switch to Linux for MIRC, IE, 3DS, word processing and the occasional gaming?

[Bobboau]

well 3ds and gameing are very proccesor intisive, you would need all the power and stability you can get.

as for word procesing, well doesn't it seem silly that we need a computer capable of doing 2.7 BILLION calculations per second to do the same thing we used to do 20 years ago with a computer only posesing 10Mhz (not I said 10, not 100).
even more should you need to pay, what is is $100 for it?

MIRC and IE, well there isn't realy that much of an improvement, here, other than the fact that you'r useing generaly better designed software (less likely to visit a site that your broswer auto-magicaly DL's a virus that clears you HD and ****s you BIOS)

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Kazan

Originally posted by Maeglamor

On a related note; is there any possibility that linux can have something akin to DirectX, or is any attempt to emulate it an infringement of intellectual property or some such nonsense?
I believe that this is linux's ultimate crippling factor.

WineX -- althought is still costs money, eventual;ly codeWeavers will merge the WineX code into the GPLed Wine and it'll become free, that's just how CodeWeavers works [/B]

I'm going to have to disagree with you here, Kaz. WineX/Wine is a compatibility layer. The proper analog of DirectX is the SDL.

The Simple Direct-media Layer (SDL) gives *nix the kind of framework DirectX provides Win32. Its got the networking framework, graphics framework, sound framework, input framework, etc for creating games and the like. Hell, on a Win32 machine, SDL acts as a go between between the programmer and DirectX, thus insulating the programmer from the horrors of Microsofts abhorrent API. That means that code can bounce between Win32 and *nix fairly easily. I know it works for me when I'm working with Pygame (the SDL bindings for Python).

Kaz already knows this stuff (he's extolled SDLs virtues elsewhere), but I figured the rest of you lot didn't.


And have I trumpetted the virtues of Python lately? If I haven't I really ought to start a thread about it.

[Sandwich]

I Don't have time to read this whole thread, but IIRC the name "Windows" originated from the novel concept of having multiple panes on-screen, each pane capable of showing something different.

Wouldn't that make it, if not illegal, then frowned upon, to sue for something like that? It's like saying that your original car has an ENGINE, so if you nickname the car Engine, then nobody else can say that their cars have engines in them.


Freaking...

[an0n]

IIRC, Windows were an Apple concept designed for Lucy (I think that was its name anyway).