SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
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.
When MS came out with Windows 95 it was a big quantum leap in the right direction. GUI was poor in the windows 3.1 days. Something that Windows has going for it is plug and play. It works nicely for the average Joe using Office and doing a little internet browsing.
I am a Windows user experimenting with Linux and having a good time. Linux is certainly not for the average Joe yet. There is still too much text file configuration and programming-like things to make things work well.
With that said, the difference between XP and Vista is not like the difference between 3.1 and 95. As I sit and look at upgrades necessary for Vista I am thinking...Why? My XP box does everything I want it to do, now MS wants me to upgrade to a new operating system for getter graphics and animations, all window dressing IMHO.
Linux will conmtinue to keep it's committed core because that core likes linux for what it does - solid tailor made configuration of the OS the way YOU need it, not the way the average Joe needs it. Don't get me wrong, I am having tons of fun setting up this linux box to be my backup server and proxy server/internet access filter. It has breathed new life in this old 800Mhz box that was running crappy Windows ME slowly. Slackware is so much faster!
Bottom line...Migration will be much slower to Vista because of the cost/benefit balance. It is just not what it was in 1995. Unlike 1995 when the migration happened because it was a better product, Microsoft will force the migration by phasing out XP, not because it represents a big, worthwhile step in the right direction. Also, mark my words, there will be lots of security holes that pop up!
Convince your boss of the wisdom of holding off the upgrade. Microsoft has a long history of releasing defective product and it would be in the company's best interest to wait until the inevitable service pack is in place before upgrading.