LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 09-30-2009, 01:31 AM   #31
jiml8
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,171

Rep: Reputation: 116Reputation: 116

Quote:
Microsoft and Mac both understand that and Mac understood that 10 years before Microsoft. LINUX gurus on the other hand, do not understand that as evidenced by frequent statements on the forums that computer users OUGHT to learn the command line and are lazy and stupid (or something to that effect) if they don't. I've seen this sentiment many times. That is why LINUX is STILL not ready for prime time. I think that its actually going backwards given how I have spent three weeks trying find a distribution that will actually work OOTB!
Windows does not work out of the box either.

You buy it pre-installed, and usually your entire system works. If you build a plain white box and install Windows, you are liable to spend days tweaking to get it all to work. In that regard, no different than Linux.

If you buy a system with Linux pre-installed, then you should expect it to work immediately. If you have to install it on an existing machine, then you shouldn't be surprised at the difficulties.

To use the car analogy again, buying a Windows box and putting Linux on it is akin to removing the car's engine, and dropping in a different engine - not the same part number, but something completely different. Even if it is advertised as a bolt-in replacement motor, you are going to have lots of issues with pulleys and mounting brackets, and wiring harnesses. (been there several times, done that several times).

Given the circumstances, frankly you should expect to have issues you have to solve. To have it work OOTB, buy a system that has it pre-installed. Then someone else (presumably the experts) have already done the work for you.
 
Old 09-30-2009, 10:27 PM   #32
Mikech
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: USA
Distribution: Mint
Posts: 90

Rep: Reputation: 24
123

Last edited by Mikech; 01-19-2011 at 11:24 AM.
 
Old 10-01-2009, 01:40 AM   #33
jiml8
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,171

Rep: Reputation: 116Reputation: 116
Quote:
Windows ALWAYS works right out of the box without tweaking. I have never even heard of anyone having problems installing Windows on a raw machine.
I have also built a lot of Windows boxes, and at one time I suppose I qualified as a Windows expert. I know I have done a lot of programming for Windows, mostly high level stuff, but a significant amount of work in C at medium to low levels in the system. A lot of people still come to me for help with their Windows machines, but I have been doing my best to get away from it.

I also haven't built a box for Windows since Windows 2000. I have never built a box for XP or for Vista, though I did build an XP virtual machine. The XP virtual machine build went smoothly enough but I never could manage to migrate my Win2K environment to it..including all the installed packages...so I never really used that virtual machine.

I have found myself doing a fair amount of maintenance work on Vista machines, mostly for friends; I avoid that OS like the plague for my own purposes.

But, I NEVER had a Win2000 installation go smoothly. The installer was a bit rough and I often had to fiddle quite a bit to get it to install at all. I usually would have to download motherboard drivers; sometimes they were on the CD that came with the mobo but sometimes they weren't. I often had trouble with drivers for SCSI adapters; Adaptec cards were the exception to this. I have had to go through some major contortions with some SCSI adapters to get them working.

I have had problems with video card drivers refusing to install. I have had problems with Zip drives being incorrectly recognized as fixed hard drives (and THAT would cause boot problems because drive order would change depending on whether the system booted with a zip disk in the drive or not). I have gone 'round and 'round with generic sound cards.

I have had problems with ethernet adapters (though, mostly with ISA ethernet adapters...PCI adapters have been much easier).

Win95 and 98 were much easier to install than NT or 2000, but Win95 and 98 aren't real operating systems IMHO, and I avoided them for anything that was supposed to do serious work, though I did deploy a few for kids.

I believe that an XP or Vista install will NOT go smoothly on hardware that isn't nearly "cutting edge" (or cutting edge at the time those OSs were made available). I know of a lot of people who had problems with XP deploys on older hardware because drivers for this and that were not available - and this reality stands in stark contrast to Linux, which has drivers for just about everything. Further, one of the biggest complaints about Vista was that so many drivers for older hardware - even hardware that was only a couple of years old - just didn't exist for Vista, forcing major upgrades of fully functional hardware when some poor slob tried to "upgrade" to Vista.

I have also encountered MAJOR problems moving a Windows installation from one motherboard to another. It doesn't like that, and getting it to work right in its new home is often a royal PITA. Reinstalling the OS, IMNSHO, should not be required...but reinstalling it is the "Windows Way" whenever you encounter a problem.

In the more recent past, I have installed Linux on many many machines, sometimes as dual boot, sometimes on a clean HD. Some installations have had problems with one detail or another, but many of the installations have been flawless. Wireless has been the biggest problem.

Some of these systems were target systems, not full-up desktops. Some had custom kernels. The last full-up desktop system I deployed was for me to use for development of a signal processing system, so I didn't worry about sound and I don't know if sound works on it. But the installation was fully automatic and everything worked straight out of the box, with no tweaking. Networking, video, keyboard, mouse. The box joined my network with no issues. Since then I have tweaked it a lot since I have written a kernel driver for the signal processor and a userspace application to handle the data. But deploying it was a piece of cake. I used Mandriva 2008 Live CD as the source for the system.

My most recent deployment is underway, for a client. It is a Centos 5.3 system with a custom (very stripped) kernel. I am having a lot of trouble with that deployment, but that is because of the kernel mods and because it seems that Centos isn't keeping up with a lot of things. So it doesn't count; it is highly customized.

The workstation that I am writing this post on started as a 350 MHz Pentium with 64 Meg of RAM and one 4.3 Gig SCSI hard drive, using an S3 virge video chipset and a soundblaster 16 compatible sound card. It has been through no fewer than 4 motherboards and is now a system that is on an Athlon 2700 with seven hard drives (5 internal SCSI drives totalling about 750 Gigs and 2 external USB drives), an NVidia 7800GS video card, 2 Gigs of RAM. I have NEVER reinstalled it - just updated it as required - and it always has moved from motherboard to motherboard painlessly. Try THAT with any Windows installation. I am contemplating another upgrade to a more modern multicore processor system, but I don't really need to; this system is working just fine.

Last edited by jiml8; 10-01-2009 at 02:00 AM.
 
Old 10-01-2009, 02:53 AM   #34
baldy3105
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
Distribution: Mint (Desktop), Debian (Server)
Posts: 891

Rep: Reputation: 184Reputation: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by chochoms View Post
Windows ALWAYS works right out of the box without tweaking. I have never even heard of anyone having problems installing Windows on a raw machine.
What a load of bollocks. If you've never heard of windows install problems [mod_edit]I must say I find it hard to take you seriously[/mod_edit]

The hours I have spent struggling to get everything from Win3.1 to Vista running in a stable fashion, no, the days!

If you are going to discuss these matters, please don't misrepresent the facts, it makes you sound like a MS fanboy.

Last edited by Tinkster; 10-04-2009 at 03:07 AM. Reason: [mod_edit] language clean-up, unwarranted personal attack.
 
Old 10-01-2009, 09:22 AM   #35
farna
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Gilbert, SC
Distribution: Mint
Posts: 47

Rep: Reputation: 0
Depends entirely on what version of Windows you're using. Minimal problems with 98SE, some with 95 on newer hardware (mainly due to having to add drivers for USB and such), LOTS of problems with ME and 2000, few with XP, LOTS with Vista (mainly due to MS having hid all the tools needed to do even simple tweaking, trying to keep the "stupid users" from messing up the system... it might be good for businesses with IT departments but is hell for individual users). Windows 7 is supposed to have covered most of the problems with Vista, but a lot of stuff is still buried with no documentation, so tweaking is still hard for the average, but somewhat knowledgeable (knows what NOT to mess with if nothing else, and/or how to undo what they did) user. Luckily some of the fixes means there's little tweaking needed. Most of the problems come from running on hardware more than 1-2 years old (2 is probably pushing it!). But then cutting edge software on a less-than-cutting-edge system shouldn't really be considered the OS's fault. Linux is somewhat the exception, but part of it's design philosophy is to run on less-than-cutting-edge systems. MS doesn't take that approach, they seem to want to help sell the latest and greatest hardware.

I'm still skeptical that something in the software or hardware of chochoms hardware isn't causing his problems in Mint 7 (Gloria). I'll find out over the next few months though. Got to get my new family room finished (should be in there finishing drywall now!) so I can get my wife's desktop set up and start using it on a daily basis. If it starts to deteriorate she won't be happy, and I'll know in short order! Then I'll stick MEPIS on it.

Tweaking a bit for drivers and such isn't a big problem with any system, I expect to have to do some.
 
Old 10-01-2009, 06:18 PM   #36
Mikech
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: USA
Distribution: Mint
Posts: 90

Rep: Reputation: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by baldy3105 View Post
What a load of bollocks. If you've never heard of windows install problems [nod_edit]...[/mod_edit]. The hours I have spent struggling to get everything from Win3.1
I thought I would reply despite your extreme rudeness. Most people on this forum are polite and curteous even if they disagree. You might want to try that even if you disagree with someone.

Notice I said since "Windows Me." Windows 3.1 was a continuous struggle for installation and getting it to work and that's where most of us learned to deal with IRQs and ports. Since "ME," I (and other people who that install Windows for users) have had no difficulties at all (with the installation) despite that all my equipment is homemade.

I am not defending Windows but we need to be sure that we tell the truth and not follow the Microsoft lead and not resort to hyperbole. I have not used Vista so I do not know anything about it, though I have heard other people complain about it. I should have mentioned that. But for Windows 2000 (my favorite), Me, or XP I have never encountered difficulties with the installation. Windows 2000 has been, for me, especially bullet-proof.

After installation, there are all sorts of problems due to untrained and illiterate users doing things they shouldn't or installing rogue software. But that's another story about the user having administrative privileges right out of the box. I thought this thread was about installation OOTB. That is all I was referring to.

Having said that, the problems for experienced people like me (albeit not in Unix) to just get basic functionality in LINUX, dwarfs even the worst problem I ever had in Windows 3.1. Despite that, I support LINUX, despise Windows and have a Microsoft-free work place at home. I just like the truth as opposed to hype. I even defend Republicans when they are right.

Last edited by Tinkster; 10-04-2009 at 03:08 AM. Reason: mod_edit (cleaning up quote)
 
Old 10-01-2009, 06:24 PM   #37
Mikech
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: USA
Distribution: Mint
Posts: 90

Rep: Reputation: 24
123

Last edited by Mikech; 01-19-2011 at 11:22 AM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sad sad story, recovery help needed Roland1000 Linux - Hardware 2 02-23-2007 07:23 PM
LXer: OSDL reports on the state of the Linux desktop LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 01-26-2007 02:21 PM
LXer: NSW state govt signals desktop Linux needs LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 09-20-2006 02:33 PM
LXer: The state of the 2006 Linux desktop LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 08-19-2006 04:33 PM
Automating Linux Desktop Installations nkanthikiran Red Hat 5 05-24-2006 08:34 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:57 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration