Deleted. Sorry, didn't know my comment would start a flame.

This post just tells me that you haven't got the idea and the spirit of Linux. Linux is the way I use the computer. I can create the rules e.g. by creating a distro for myself. There is nothing wrong about that. It is not the Linux purpose or goal to compete and overturn MS based operating systems, at least it is not its major task. Linux is a free operating system in several flavours. People are different so people like different distributions for different purposes. If you only look at the home pc market you won't get the idea. Linux is running a lot of mobile devices, controllers, routers and other types of hardware and its market share is growing in that segment. So why narrow the view on Linux only to one area exclusivly?
I am running several high tech pc without any microsoft operating system at all since the year 2000. So don't tell me it isn't possible. It depends on what you are actually doing with your computer and if you find all the software for that needs on Linux. So if you want to switch, discuss this matter more detailed regarding your personal needs and stop trolling by giving such general statements you can read in every simple newspaper where people without insight into the topic are writing.

The majority of Desktop PC users are not interested in using text mode. If this were the case, we would all be using Unix and Dos.

Personalizing ones desktop does not require another distribution. This can be done in any Microsoft or Linux system.


I spoke of choice not dominance.



Unix was designed for these areas where it performs well. Linux was born for the PC market and this is where it falls short.

High tech PC in 2000?

The free market dictates what people are doing with their PCs. Media, editing, email, office and internet plus a whole lot more. When purchasing a computer in 2000, you would tell the computer builder what you intended the computer to do. With the advancements in technology now, people want their PC to do it all. Based on 3 plus years of research, I find most are frustrated with Linux because they only get a portion working. Unable to get true surround sound and fully functional wireless multi-media keyboard and mice are just a couple. In 2001, I built a PC using an Asus A7N8X Deluxe motherbord. I researched posts and worked for nearly six months trying to get the surround sound working properly. I posted a few times and got a couple of replys stating it must be something I was doing wrong, because their Asus A7N8X onboard sound worked fine. The fact is they didn't have it working properly http://leenooks.com/26 I believe if they would stay focused on the base system and not on the eye candy (distribution) we would be more successful in the LInux community.

The only trolling I do, is for posts with a clear solution to problems I'm having in Linux.

Don't misunderstand my post. I'm not insulting Linux or it's many distributions, I just think focusing on the basics would go much further.

You only focus on desktop and windows, I don't. I talkDon't misunderstand my post. I'm not insulting Linux or it's many distributions, I just think focusing on the basics would go much further. [/B][/QUOTE] ed of embedded devices and other stuff but you are not listening.

If choice is good, plenty of linux distros is better :grin:


This is simply wrong. A finish student created Linux to run a UNIX like system on his 386. There was no single word about markets these days. Some years later some companies found out that it might be quite useful for them.

I only said I am running Linux only since 2000, I didn't say on the same hardware. In fact my latest pc is an athlon xp 3000+ from last year.

The hardware support is done by the Linux kernel, which is developed by an independent project and is not bound to any distribution. The eyecandy stuff e.g. kde is done again by an independent project which is also not bound to any distribution. The job of the distributors is simply to put all these things together to make it easier for you to use it. So neither the hardware driver development nor the videoplayer development is delayed by the number of distributions. It doesn't matter how many are out of them, because each project is just focussing on its piece of software. Some are creating packages for the major distributions if they have time and ressources to do so but that doesn't hurt either.

The trolling you do, is by dropping in, telling us that our work is a waste of time and arguing on the base of an hardware incident you had some years ago. It is pretty clear in your statements above, that you do not understand or understood what is the purpose of a distribution and that this has nothing to do with the problems you were talking of. So if you want to know more about ROCK Linux and its purpose so keep asking. If you are just looking for a place to do some general ranting please look somewhere else.

Cheers,

Daniel

Even Microsoft offers more than three distributions of their Windows OS. There's Windows XP Home, XP Professional, Media Center Edition, Tablet PC Edition, Professional x64 Edition, Server 2003, CE, Embedded, Automotive, Embedded for Point of Service, Windows Mobile and Windows on XBox, making a total of 12 contemporary Windows flavors.

Linux/GNU based OS solutions already are a choice for many people. I, for example use Windows only to play games and use scientific applications of which I don't have Linux versions (which doesn't necessarily mean there are no Linux versions of these programs). I can do all the internet, office, multimedia, administration stuff with Linux, much better than with Windows in many cases (e.g. recording from my TV card).

Please also keep in mind that e.g. the Linux Standards Base or FreeDesktop.org do a great job in standardizing Linux across distributions and in improving interoperability between Linux and other Unix variants. Picking a distribution is mainly a matter of taste, and a question of which distribution supports your hardware best out-of-the-box.

Distributions essentially package the same pieces of (independently developed) software, they differ mostly in the "glue" that keeps everything together: the system init style, automated hardware detection (on the user level), installation, configuration and administration tools, ..., and of course the build toolchain by which packages are built from sources.

I think an ueber-distribution that could do anything from embedded devices to cluster servers would be very hard to maintain. Instead different distributions are developed for different purposes. Distribution developers can adapt best practice solutions from other distros. Sad to say it doesn't seem to happen as often as it should.

The problem is about unnecessarily reinventing the wheel, not about the number of distributions,

I can see your problem that Windows supports more and newer hardware (PC-x86 that is) than Linux, but this has nothing to do with distributions! Driver development happens inside the Linux kernel or in some standardized application (e.g. the X11 server). Fact is some hardware manufacturers simply don't bother to write Linux drivers or to support open-source developers by providing technical documentation.

The question is not, if Linux is techologically better than Windows or Mac OS or anything else. In some areas it is, in others it is not. As Linus would probably say: Linux is good enough for many things.

Much more important is the Linux licence, the GPlL. This licences make Linux a democratic system. You aren't satisified with some existing features, or you would like to see additional functions?

Don't hesitate to
- express your needs, even if you feel negative on Linux
- get involved and add to Linux what you are missing, if you are a developer and have the guts
- or find someone to do it for you

The GPL will protect your intellectual property rights as a contributor much more than any other Open Source Licence. The GPL ensures that your ideas won't simply vanish, and it grants for a stepwise progress of the overall development.

And if you ask someone to "customise" Linux for you, and that person or company isn't doing a good job, you can hire someone else. Linux has, what the Windows world will never have: Healthy competition. Between distributors and distributions, between consultants and service providers.

To sum it up: The *good* point about Linux is freedom of decision and freedom of choice. It is up to you if you just want to use Linux or contribute to its development.

Windows, on the other hand, suffers badly from the fact that there is only one distributor, althogh there are much too many distributions that don't have that much in common, BTW.

So, if you find something you don't like in Linux, you don't depend on only one vendor to improve it. You have many options to influence where Linux will be headed in the future. Take your options!

gargamel

I'd appreciate it, if you will stop linux/windows debates on this forum as it was created to talk about ROCK Linux and distributions based on it. I guess you'll find other subforums on this places where these matters are discussed.

Thank you.

You are quite right, daja77, my post was totally off-topic. I therefore just asked the moderator to remove it from this forum. I apologise.

gargamel

I split this off because it was derailing a very good thread. And closed it because we have a multitude of threads like it - no point in keeping it open, eh.