GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
Originally posted by nathanmoorehead I was a 1-and-only-for-ever windows user. Then Windows Media Player 10 from Windows Update literally killed my computer. I mean instant 10-25% constant slowdowns and lockups. WMP after like version 6 is just bloatware. and THEN all my activation hoohaa happened. "Would you like to activate now?" 12 hours later "YOU MUST ACTIVATE TO USE YOUR COMPUTER!" no offense MS but 12 hours isn't 30 days, and I say when and how I use my machine umm NOT YOU. Thank Novell for Linux!
This longhorn will just be worse. It will just be more constricted and babied. I personally like Windows 2000 Pro best out of all the crap M$ has dished out. No fansy blue app, everything could be gutted. Rock hard stability (well as hard as MS stability gets)
That aside, what has Microsoft been doing all these years? Surely the gap should mean something! I mean other than putting a bloated gui. Is it possible to do a comparative analysis of the developments in the Windows vs GNU/Linux OSses?
(This seems like a dumb statement even to me, but why not...)
Btw, is the registry the equivalent of /etc? Someone mentioned that someone is actually selling this thing called regedit because no one knows about it anyway.
Originally posted by liquidtenmilion if Novell made linux, then well i probably would be using FreeBSD
No, Novell didn't make Linux. Thousands of smart hardworking people made Linux. Novell helped developed the distribution of Linux named Suse 9.1.
That however is off topic so let's leave it be.
Anyway, I don't like the direction Microsoft is going in. Today my mom's computer threw out an error, randomly, right in the middle of working on her college homework in Word. That is Word 2000 under XP Home (and I realize neither Word 2000 nor XP Home are the latest from M$ but hey they should still work) Supposed to be a pretty stable combination, right? I don't call random errors stable, and causing her to loose some work a good thing. I hope Longhorn doesn't just add to the GUI, but also adds better stability.
That will be the day, Microsoft NOT randomly crashing for no apparent reason. LOL! riggggght
Distribution: K/Ubuntu 12.04/14.04, Scientific Linux 6.3/6.4, Android-x86, Pretty much all distros at one point...
Actually, SuSE 9.1 is the last release that SuSE made without any real input from their Novell masters,...
Not that Novell is horrible. They are really behind SuSE. But they are still standing BEHIND SuSE...
As for Longhorn (is that a phalllic thing??? I wonder!), looks like crap. I seems to be an interface change,... nothing more. It's another upgrade of NT. M$ thinks that if they change the GUI, they change the guts. Problem is that the people are dumb enough to believe them. Upgrading an OS is about what it can do, not about what it looks like.
I can make my SuSE 9.1 box look like that now if I wanted... IF I WANTED...
I especially like the screen shots showing the crash error in Explorer.EXE and 180 day license agreement (wonder if that will become standard??? The old, "We own your box!!!" software rental thing?!?!?).
I'm just saying that if novell, or any actual big corporation created and maintained linux, i would use it. Not that novell is bad, but that if novell single handedly created linux, then most likely it would be closed source, and i would be using FreeBSD.
Second picture Build ID says 4008. Current (x86) external alpha build is 4074. They ditched that blue in 4074, it's now the very cool slate, and a new Plex, which looks like a frozen version of those screenshots.
Originally posted by liquidtenmilion Nothing wrong with Ramen noodles
Yeah i have the pc i have right now, and i will probably... never upgrade. I will only upgrade when linux won't run on it. I ran the betas of longhorn on my pc, and based on the speed, i will have to upgrade if i want to run it. I mean it literally took 8 minutes to upgrade.
And i do agree with whatever someone said about more optimized should mean lower requirements. A company should first sort out the bugs of the kernel of the old OS, then add new features in it, and THEN they should add a gui that will slow your system to a crawl. The only problem with this is that most people who use windows aren't going to notice the improvements of the kernel, they will just go, "Oooo, this is pretty", and MS knows this, so it's main(obvious) priority is the appearance, not the stability or security.
Okay, I'm going to try to be as balanced as I can be, but bear with me:
Microsoft does a good job at what they do: If they didn't, they wouldn't have the market place they have right now. Granted, a lot of what they're good at is simply destroying competition either through lawsuits, buying them out, or making a product that looks nearly identical, but doesn't have nearly the same functionality (Windows partitioning software, anyone?) Anywho, Microsoft has 1 major flaw, and it's almost like it's too late for them to fix it.
When Microsoft moved from Windows ME to Windows XP, they took a very lazy approach. Rather than rewrite their API's and try to make them
a) more efficient
b) more secure
c) more stable
they simply lifted them from ME over to XP. They probably tweaked them once they copied the section over, but it also means that nobody knows what the hell is in the sections that they carried over. It also means that it's a gigantic web that's been done by a drunken spider on drugs: completely out of control.
If MS would just start a new OS from the ground up, without copying over sections, I'm sure they could make something very powerful and much more secure, stable, and efficient. They have thousands upon thousands of programmers, and if they gave each programmer (or team of programmers) a form of how the API format should be, they could have a new OS up in a relatively short time. However, if they continue with the approach of layering one thing upon another, they will have a hell of a time trying to get any further additions to work with their systems.
Basically, MS should choose the Apple approach: start over, and if need be, have a single program/package (that would be purely OPTIONAL) to emulate the old OS so people can still use their old software.
Sorry, but if Longhorn is going to be Windows XP 2, it's not going to be worth it. They gave up on the new file system, they've renamed the DRM project (and left it in Longhorn), and so for the average user, there's not going to be any advantages, probably not even any eyecandy that they couldn't get with XP and some random eyecandy programs/hacks.