TALK STORY

Windows Linux or Mac?

POSTED BY: HAZE
UPDATED: Friday, April 7, 2006 20:42
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 12437
PAGE 3 of 4

Wednesday, March 22, 2006 12:55 PM

SNEAKER98


Quote:

Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
I'm talking about continuing with facts and references. Which I've done. Which Sneaker98 seems incapable of doing. I await to be proven wrong.


Apparently you didn't get the memo, but I'm not stretching this debate. I don't give a crap what a *nix fanboy has to say, and that's all there is to it.

I don't take the high road. I take the correct road.

Go play with your OS, kiddo. Leave the debating to folks who can keep it in their pants.

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 22, 2006 1:25 PM

SIGMANUNKI


Quote:

Originally posted by sneaker98:

Apparently you didn't get the memo, but I'm not stretching this debate. I don't give a crap what a *nix fanboy has to say, and that's all there is to it.




Apparently, you have not learned anything about being a gentleman as well (or lady depending on your gender).

You really should learn to give proper references that support your argument. I don't think many here will be willing to believe anything you have to say without them. In fact, I've proven that everything in the above is false in past posts.

Basically, you can keep singing the same old tired tune. You just have to understand that just because you say it doesn't make it true. Also, saying it a lot doesn't make it true either.




Quote:

Originally posted by sneaker98:

I don't take the high road. I take the correct road.




Well, isn't this just obscenely arrogant of you to say


Quote:

Originally posted by sneaker98:

Go play with your OS, kiddo. Leave the debating to folks who can keep it in their pants.




Um, you are aware this tantrum that you just had, proves everything that I've conjectured about you, right?



On behalf of Canada, I apologize for Sneaker98's behaviour (and any part that I had in this). I don't know what happened to him/her to become the aggressive, bitter, unforgiving person (s)he is, but I apologize.


Hopefully, (s)he is mature enough, to walk away and cool down before replying. Because if it is of the same type as the above, I won't be speaking to him/her anymore, here or else where as I have no time for such immaturity.


@Everyone:

I found this interesting:

http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/06/03/22/1418210.shtml

Comments...

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 22, 2006 1:28 PM

SNEAKER98


Too late to take the high road, kiddo. I'll keep saying that until you get the message. But in the mean time I'm sure as hell not going to get into a silly pissing contest.

Now begone from this thread, and stop baiting me.

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 22, 2006 1:32 PM

SIGMANUNKI


Quote:

Originally posted by sneaker98:

Too late to take the high road, kiddo. I'll keep saying that until you get the message. But in the mean time I'm sure as hell not going to get into a silly pissing contest.

Now begone from this thread, and stop baiting me.




Not baiting you or any such thing at this point. Just making sure that these posts stay around that prove everything that I say.

Good-day.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 22, 2006 1:33 PM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by sneaker98:
A third problem, and mostly applies to larger businesses: who exactly is going to support your product? For a home user, it may work out provided the answer to your question is in a newsgroup somewhere. But your best bet is to cross your fingers and hope to god Google finds the answer. And that's really not good enough sometimes.


So basically the same as MS technical support then...




More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 22, 2006 1:40 PM

SNEAKER98


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:

Originally posted by sneaker98:
A third problem, and mostly applies to larger businesses: who exactly is going to support your product? For a home user, it may work out provided the answer to your question is in a newsgroup somewhere. But your best bet is to cross your fingers and hope to god Google finds the answer. And that's really not good enough sometimes.


So basically the same as MS technical support then...


Lol, sometimes, yes.

Or you get a fellow with an Indian accent saying his name's Mike. *sigh* Why must they hide outsourcing? I don't care if I'm talking to someone halfway across the world, I just want some help with the product!

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 22, 2006 1:51 PM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
[B]@Everyone:

I found this interesting:

http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/06/03/22/1418210.shtml

Comments...


I knew it...



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 22, 2006 11:32 PM

RETROVERTIGO


Quote:

Originally posted by sneaker98:
Lol, sometimes, yes.

Or you get a fellow with an Indian accent saying his name's Mike. *sigh* Why must they hide outsourcing? I don't care if I'm talking to someone halfway across the world, I just want some help with the product!

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds


YES!!! That's why I hate calling SBC Yahoo! DSL support, it's always some guy with an indian accent saying, "Thank you for contacting SBC Yahoo! DSL Support, my name is Jeff..."

And not a one of them knows jack squat about what they're supporting. I had to talk to 3 different people there one day, and didn't get a single one of them that understood what port forwarding was. The crappy DSL modem/wireless router SBC gives out doesn't do port forwarding, even though I set it all up properly it just doesn't forward traffic properly. Spent a bloody hour on the phone with those tards and never got any closer to a solution because none of them knew what the hell I was talking about.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 22, 2006 11:39 PM

N0SKILLZ


I'm all about doing something with my computer (gaming wise) besides Halo (bleeck)and WoW , which is good but not enough to make me use a mac.

So i use Windows XP Pro with SP2. Never had a stablitiy problems with it. and of course I'm using a replacement computer (while my computer gets shipped here) and i had ot install Home edition, never had a comupter crash and freeze so gorram much! Cant even get FFXI installed. *sigh*

-------------------------------
RAF Lakenheath
Security Deputy of the Sereni-Tree

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 23, 2006 2:16 AM

STDOUBT



EDIT: Some of the links included here, I had to 'wrap', so copy/past accordingly thx!

@Sigmanunki
I just love ./

Some of the comments are priceless.
If I had a Mac, the last thing I'd do is torture it with Windows.:shudder:

@Anyone interested in the state of Linux gaming:
http://linux.strangegamer.com/index.php?title=Game_List
http://happypenguin.org/
A special version of the "Spanish ubuntu", known as LinEx (it's not ubuntu), has been released and is dedicated to gaming. It has a GUI-based installer and allows easy installation of 3D accelerated drivers. It's called JuegaLinEx.
Where to get:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http:
//juegalinex.linex.org/&prev=/search%3Fq%3Djuegalinex%26hl%3Den%26hs%3DyYi
%26lr%3D%26client%3Dfirefox%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:unofficial
List of included games:
http://apt.linex.org/dists/cl/juegalinex/binary-i386/
You'll have to install things like Wolfenstien -Enemy Territory- yourself since all the games on 'Juega' are "educator approved" (i.e., no blood-n-guts).
Linux got game baby.

@All
This thread would not be complete without:
http://www.ubergeek.tv/article.php?pid=54

@Sneaker98
Learn the ways of your SunOS young padawan for
"Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly."
~Henry Spencer

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 23, 2006 12:36 PM

SNEAKER98


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:
[B]@Sneaker98
Learn the ways of your SunOS young padawan for
"Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly."
~Henry Spencer


I'll have time eventually, but not just yet. When juggling classes and work, miscellaneous knowledge isn't really priority :-\

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 23, 2006 1:05 PM

EVERYWORLDSPINNIN


Quote:

Originally posted by Haze:
Here’s a question. If I where to go with Linux what version would you recommend?


--------------------------------------------------
Who do you suppose is in there?



Depends on what you are looking for. If you want one that just works, go with PCLinuxOS. If you don't mind some tweking, go with Ubuntu or Xandros. I'm currently building a dirtibution of Linux myself, and I'm using PCLinuxOS as my benchmark for out of the box usability.

--------------------------------------------------
Child One: "Republicans aren't real."
Child Two: "Full well they are!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 23, 2006 1:56 PM

EVERYWORLDSPINNIN


Quote:

Originally posted by Tiger:
I've been watching this thread with great interest. I'm no expert in operating systems, but I've been curious for a while about experimenting with something new, strictly from a user's perspective.

Unfortunately, in this thread one guy says "A" and the next guy says "B". Maybe it would shed some light on the subject if you have a more specific, real-world example, namely me. Should I try Linux or a Mac?

My current system:
Windows XP sp2
1 gb RAM
200 gb storage
2.4 mhz Pentium 4
dual monitors

Normal usage:
Firefox & I.E.
Email with Thunderbird
Graphic/web design with Dreamweaver, Photoshop/Illustrator, Flash
Hauppaugge TV tuner with Beyond TV to watch TV on one monitor while working or surfing on the other
Bittorrents
DVDs/music with Windows Media or VLC
Microsoft Office
DVD burning with Nero

Do you think I'd get along alright with Linux or a Mac? Would it be worth the trouble of switching and relearning?



I've come up with what *might* be some suitable replacements for your software under Linux:

Normal usage:
Firefox & I.E.
You can still use Firefox. Run IE under the wine program for Linux
Email with Thunderbird
You can still use Thunderbird
Graphic/web design with Dreamweaver, Photoshop/Illustrator, Flash
These can be a little tricky. They all appear to run using the wine program listed above. Check the link below.
Hauppaugge TV tuner with Beyond TV to watch TV on one monitor while working or surfing on the other
For this, use tvtime. It has no recording features, but viewing works fine with tuners that can watch channels below 125.
Bittorrents
Azureus is the program for bit torrents. Requires java.
DVDs/music with Windows Media or VLC
You have your pick here. Xine, mplayer, kaffeine, and many others will work.
Microsoft Office
OpenOffice.org 2.0 fits the bill nicely
DVD burning with Nero
You can use either K3b (recommended) or NeroLinux. Try K3b though. Works VERY well.

Links:
Wine
http://frankscorner.org/
http://winehq.org
OpenOffice
http://openoffice.org
I STRONGLY suggest using PCLinuxOS to run all of this. Super stable, and very user friendly. You can download a LiveCD version that you can load on your computer that does not require you to load it on to your hard drive.
http://www.pclinuxos.com/
I hope all this helps.


--------------------------------------------------
Child One: "Republicans aren't real."
Child Two: "Full well they are!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 23, 2006 9:42 PM

SIGMANUNKI


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

@Sigmanunki
I just love ./




Isn't it just the bestest though:

http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/06/03/23/1717259.shtml

LOL!


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

@All
This thread would not be complete without:
http://www.ubergeek.tv/article.php?pid=54




Oh my... that's just the most beautiful thing ever

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:24 PM

TIGER


EVERYWORLDSPINNIN,

Thanks a lot for that list, it was VERY helpful.

I took your advice and spent most of the evening trying to download, burn, and boot from the live cd with no luck. Constant problems.

So I took a break and looked into what might be required to get working the other stuff I need. The 'fix' to get my dual monitors running was 2 pages of some kind of code I'd have no idea what to do with. All the software for my TV tuner card doesn't record at all and some say they don't even play live TV (which seems very odd - I mean, what's the point?). I'd have to trade in my wireless mouse and keyboard.

It seems like Linux requires a whole lot of knowledge that most people, even a pretty experienced computer user like me, just don't have and probably don't have the time to learn.

Maybe Linux is fun to play with, but I really can't see the advantage of fewer viruses and (supposed) more stability, if I can't even get the thing to start.

Am I missing something?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 4:29 AM

EVERYWORLDSPINNIN


Tiger,
What type of hardware are you running? If you could, post your system specs such as the type of video card you have and TV Tuner type (I know you said Haupage, but is it a PVR-250 or WinTVGo or something)etc. I'll see what I can dig up for you if you are still interested.

--------------------------------------------------
Child One: "Republicans aren't real."
Child Two: "Full well they are!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 4:56 AM

TIGER


Quote:

Originally posted by everyworldspinnin:
Tiger,
What type of hardware are you running? If you could, post your system specs such as the type of video card you have and TV Tuner type (I know you said Haupage, but is it a PVR-250 or WinTVGo or something)etc. I'll see what I can dig up for you if you are still interested.

--------------------------------------------------
Child One: "Republicans aren't real."
Child Two: "Full well they are!"

Video - nvida geforce5500
TV - Hauppaugge PVR250
Sound - some cheap Creative SoundBlaster, I think

I'm sure I downloaded the correct PCLinuxOS version for the video card, not that it mattered. I never got past 'press F1 to retry boot' at start up. It's possible I misunderstood the stuff for the TV card, there was a lot of info I didn't understand.

A big concern for me are the dual monitors. I MUST HAVE DUAL MONITORS..... once you've had two for a while it is physically impossible to work on one again. It's like trading in your Tivo for a VCR, or your Hummer for a rusty tricycle, get it :-)

I appreciate any help you can give. I'd really LIKE to try a Windows alternative, even it's just so I can argue from experience in threads like this...

Just had a thought - how easy is it to get the DSL and printer up and running? DVD player and burner? I hope that stuff takes care of itself.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 5:21 AM

STDOUBT


Heya Tiger,
Quote:


It seems like Linux requires a whole lot of knowledge that most people, even a pretty experienced computer user like me, just don't have and probably don't have the time to learn.

Maybe Linux is fun to play with, but I really can't see the advantage of fewer viruses and (supposed) more stability, if I can't even get the thing to start.

Am I missing something?


You certainly are.

Linux does take alot of time to learn. Even the "easy" distros can give you fyts when you want/need to tweak something.
But it sounds like you're just having problems with your CD burner?
When I started out in computing, it took me a long time to "learn" Windows and beat it into submission. It wasn't worth the grief.

The weeping and gnashing of teeth I went through learning how to admin a Linux workstation however was well worth the pain. I'd never go back. Won't even switch to Mac -don't need it. Already got a real OS (plus it's cheaper!)
Sounds like you have some expensive HW there -I recommend you give Linux the good old "college try" before you chuck it and buy Apple HW.

Once you learn how to manage a Linux box, the freedom and control you find are simply unmatched.

If you're really interested, I recommend this:
Since you're a self-described "experienced computer user", have a look at the well-established distros. Slackware/Fedora/Debian.
These newcomers like PCLinuxOS and Ubuntu, while worthy projects, are variations on variations of a theme. Slack, Fedora* and Debian are highly mature and reliable. These 3 are really the precursors of all distros. *(actually Fedora is the testing ground for Red Hat's beta. RH is for business now & costs money, so Fedora is the free version of RH).

I don't do dual-monitor or TV (yet) but Hauppage is definately Linux-friendly, and getting two video cards working under Linux is old-hat.
Have a look at MythTV. If you can get MythTV running on Fedora (for example), you'll be recording/playing back all kinds of TV. I've seen it done!
While I do recommend older/established distros, sometimes upstarts do better at certain things. For example:
http://www.elivecd.org/gb/Download/0.4.2/
There is no distro I've seen with better HW auto-detection than elive (it's Debian-based live CD with an option to install).
elive is very much worth the d/l.
Good Luck to ya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 5:38 AM

TIGER


All great info STDOUBT, thanks.

Maybe you could elaborate on the "freedom and control" you mention is such a plus with Linux. What do you mean exactly? What freedom do I have and what can I control with Linux over Windows? That's one of the big questions I've always had about Linux.
Quote:

But it sounds like you're just having problems with your CD burner?
A dvd burner actually. A new one. That's ok, right? To burn the image to a DVD then boot from the DVD drive? The impression I got from PCLinuxOS FAQ is that it's actually better.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 7:29 AM

STDOUBT


Quote:

Originally posted by Tiger:
A dvd burner actually. A new one. That's ok, right? To burn the image to a DVD then boot from the DVD drive? The impression I got from PCLinuxOS FAQ is that it's actually better.


Well, if it's a combo drive I'd use a CD-R if the .iso is CD-sized. There shouldn't be a problem either way though. Avoid re-writable disks though.
what kind of errors are you seeing, and where/when are you seeing them?

Freedom and control. Hmm. Well, keep in mind that Linux is only 'the kernel' not the OS. All the *stuff* in the kernel is basically HW-related.
The OS that is built up around the kernel is made up of a base-system (which varies per distro), and then on top of that you have userland software.
You can change, add or remove any userland software. You can alter much of the base-system. You can completely reconfigure (and recompile) the kernel to match your unique HW.
You can run a userland made up of just the software you want. For example, a bare-bones Debian install weighs in at about 120MB. That's kernel, base-system, and minimal command-line userland. Add to that a window manager, and a web browser and you have a modern, secure OS in 250MB of HD space.
On the flip-side, install a full-blown Fedora, and you have more apps than you will ever use. Plus CD/DVD burner apps, Graphics editor, Office suite, Email/groupware, server apps, development apps, and dozens of games. There literally thousands of userland software packages for Linux systems that come for free with no strings attatched.

Basically, if there's anything in your Linux system you don't like you can change it.
Another great advantage is this:
No company can say to you "buy *yadda* if you want to keep using *blah-blah*" or "if you install Y, or tweak X, you'll void your support contract" or "you have to upgrade your blank or you can't access the whatzit" -pfft.
With Linux you are 'on your own', and it's a PITA to get a grip on but the Freedom is worth it.
If you have hi-speed check out http://www.linuxreality.com/
I haven't heard the shows myself but it's had good reviews.
EDIT: Almost forgot to mention: no "even though you paid our corporation $100+, this OS will self-destruct in 29 days unless you upload the specs of your base-station to our Borg cube's master cylinder-all your base are belong to ZZzztTT!-error detected! send error report!ZZzZtT!" LOL

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 7:51 AM

TIGER


Quote:

Well, if it's a combo drive I'd use a CD-R if the .iso is CD-sized. There shouldn't be a problem either way though. Avoid re-writable disks though.
what kind of errors are you seeing, and where/when are you seeing them?

During start up I hit F12 to get to the boot options, then I choose the IDE CD option. Right after that I get the error (I believe it says) "Boot failed, press F1 to retry ESC to cancel", or something close to that.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 8:18 AM

STDOUBT


Quote:

Originally posted by Tiger:

During start up I hit F12 to get to the boot options, then I choose the IDE CD option. Right after that I get the error (I believe it says) "Boot failed, press F1 to retry ESC to cancel", or something close to that.


I sense you're speaking of the boot options offered by your BIOS and not the boot options from the CD?
If your drive is actually IDE and not SCSI or SATA, (do they even make sata optical drives? -i'm so damned oldskool) then it looks like you burned a coaster :-\ That's all I can think of atm.
Can you try setting that drive to be the default boot device within the BIOS (so you won't need to bring up the boot menu)? If that doesn't work, I'm thinking coaster.
BTW - up a few posts you mentioned how you're now addicted to 2 monitors? hehe -how about 6?
http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 9:05 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

do they even make sata optical drives? -i'm so damned oldskool

Yes, but they're not worth it. It's barely worth buying a SATA HDD for a desktop for most people.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 9:15 AM

CITIZEN


Tiger:
Sounds like your CD is non bootable. How did you burn it? At a guess I'd say you had an .iso image and burned that straight on to the cd with something like Nero?

That won't work, as it burns the Image as a file rather than the CD image. The easiest thing to do would be to get Deamon Tools:
http://www.daemon-tools.cc/dtcc/announcements.php
which lets you run the .iso as a CD on a Virtual CD drive and then do a copy CD from the virtual drive to your burner.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 9:59 AM

RUXTON


Because this interesting string is still active, I'd like to ask our computer gurus for help. I am running Windows XP (the best thing I've seen out of Microsoft since DOS, BTW), and just recently some *.mpgs and *.wmv files started playing verry slooowly. No error messages, and some files play fine. Any ideas where to look? Running WMV 9.0, which worked perfectly until a week or so ago, when this problem began.

Ran Ad-Aware to no avail. Went to MS website to troubleshoot, but all questions about WMV 9.0 were "unavailable."

Anyone else run into this?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 10:28 AM

CITIZEN


How big and long are the files?

The only time I've seen it is with uncompressed AVI's where the machine has to load each frame from the disk, but that wouldn't be it as wmvs and mpgs are always compressed (I think).



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 11:46 AM

RUXTON


I have one *.mpg that's 1.1 meg that doesn't play, next to another *.mpg that's 1.7 meg and plays fine.

Both are on the computer. Just upgraded everything I could find from Microsoft website to no avail.

I did install an older sound board that gives me bass & treble controls, but uses an older set of drivers. I suspect this is where the problem lies. The board is an Addonics Soundvision, with drivers for W95....

I put it in because I was going to dual-install Linux on a remaining portion of a new 80-Gig HD. Linux can't find the on-board sound card. But it turns out Linux can't install where I want it by itself, and I don't have time to mess with it, so
Linux won't go on here. I could remove the card, but I like the bass/treble controls....

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 12:16 PM

CITIZEN


Soundcard sounds like a good bet.

Try Windows XP drivers. If you try looking for the drivers for your board on their site:
http://www.addonics.com/

Otherwise if you send me the model number I can try and find them.

Good luck.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 12:38 PM

RUXTON


Thanks, Citizen. I went to the website and left a message, noting they don't support anything over 2 years old, and no sound cards.

I don't have time right now to dig any deeper, there being a crisis in my work that needs immediate attention, but will get back to you shortly, and may have the numbers for the card. But I suspect if I open the box I'll remove the card and go back to what worked before, zinging the bass/treble controls.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 12:45 PM

CITIZEN


You can find most of the details you need from the Hardware managment window. To get to that right click my computer and click manage.

This page seems to have Addonics drivers:
http://www.3dsoundsurge.com/drivers/FM801/index.html



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 12:56 PM

SIGMANUNKI


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

Won't even switch to Mac -don't need it. Already got a real OS




Um, pardon me.


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

Once you learn how to manage a Linux box, the freedom and control you find are simply unmatched.




Why don't we say *nix instead of Linux. For instance, *BSD's give as much freedom of control as the Linux's.

Disclaimer:
The below contains some opinions, that are IMO only. It mainly gets into estetics of system configuration files and the resulting directory structure, not necessarily reflecting any functionality or lack thereof.


Some people (myself included) actually prefer the *BSD's and think that they are easier to configure (though there are Linux's with similar init script setup descibed below).

For instance, Redhat and it's derivatives with that run level crap. Don't like it at all.

What does rc.1 do again? Is it rc.4 or rc.5 scripts that are run if going directly into graphical login, while the other one isn't run? When I have to write my own script to up into whatever rc.? directory, what structure must it have? etc.

And all that rpm mess. *shutter*

That being said, I don't think that slackware has this problem. There are probably other distros that don't have this issue as well.


But OpenBSD with rc.conf (common deamons here), rc.securelevel (run before kernel goes into secure mode), rc.local (run after kernel goes into secure mode) and rc.shutdown (duh!). And that's it.

The docs even state, if in doubt, put it in rc.local.

Also, if you're addicted to the rc.? stuff, then you could just write your own sh scripts to implement it for OBSD. I've seen some people do this, though I have no idea why they would want to do that to there system.


FreeBSD can have a similar setup, though it is angling toward a similar rc.d init. FreeBSD could be described as the end-user BSD whereas OpenBSD is more of a server OS.

And both these guys have the wonders of the ports tree. *warm fuzzy feeling*

End disclaimer.


So, Tiger, if you are looking into Linux, I'd suggest that you also look into FreeBSD as well. It has a tonne of applications and if that app is in the ports tree, installing it is as easy as 'make install'.

MythTV has also been reported to work on FreeBSD.

http://mythtv.son.org/tiki-index.php

And your PVR-250 is listed as a card that works.


See:

http://www.freebsd.org/where.html

For iso's, and docs and:

http://www.freebsd.org/ports/

to search or browse the FreeBSD ports tree.



----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 1:00 PM

SIGMANUNKI


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:

The only time I've seen it is with uncompressed AVI's where the machine has to load each frame from the disk, but that wouldn't be it as wmvs and mpgs are always compressed (I think).




Avi and mpeg is just a container format (I believe). I also remember from reading the file format specs that they do have an option for no compression.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 1:09 PM

SIGMANUNKI


Quote:

Originally posted by Ruxton:

I have one *.mpg that's 1.1 meg that doesn't play, next to another *.mpg that's 1.7 meg and plays fine.

Both are on the computer. Just upgraded everything I could find from Microsoft website to no avail.




I would imagine that the mpg that doesn't play is the result of a missing (or corrupt) codec. M$ doesn't have all availible codec availible through that auto download in there media player. You have to go an manually download some.

To check out which codec (audio and video) an avi needs, you could use:

http://yaai.sourceforge.net/

Though there are many programs that do the same thing.

For mpegs, I found this page:

http://www.masterviews.com/2005/10/18/how_to_find_the_right.htm

Though this is only one possible problem, it is a something to check out. That is, if you haven't already.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 2:03 PM

CITIZEN


AVI is a file format (the RIFF) mpg (I believe) is a file format + codec, though there is a number of different versions of the mpeg codec.

AVI can be uncompressed, you just store the full frame information instead of using a codec. Not sure about Mpeg.

I'm assuming Ruxtons problem could be the Sound card since he said (unless I'm misreading) that the problem only occured after the Sound card was changed and he's using '95 drivers on a XP machine.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 2:19 PM

SIGMANUNKI


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:

I'm assuming Ruxtons problem could be the Sound card since he said (unless I'm misreading) that the problem only occured after the Sound card was changed and he's using '95 drivers on a XP machine.




That probably is the reason for the slow playing, I agree. But, if it still isn't resolved after the drivers are updated, then checking out the codecs would be prudent.

Plus, there is the issue that one of the files just won't play. So, I'm leaning toward codec problem on that one.

Just saying that there might (probably?) be two issues at work here.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 2:28 PM

CITIZEN


Yea sure, I hadn't read the file not playing as not playing...



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 2:47 PM

RUXTON


Actually I misstated the problem above. All WMV and mpg and wav and mp3 files play, but some play VERY slowly. I never get error messages, just a deep, drawn-out bass sound, octaves below where it should be, and images that are usually slow motion, or somewhat jumpy. They are so slow, if they should take 20 seconds to play, they might take a minute or more.

Am about to remove the old sound card. May take awhile, but I'll update all you kind folk on the eventual solution -- or lack thereof -- shortly.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 4:11 PM

FREDGIBLET


Steering this post back on topic:

I use Windows for almost everything. I use Windows for several reasons:
First its what I've always used (technically I started on DOS when I was very young).
Second I know that if walk into virtually any computer store and buy almost any piece of software it will work.
Third I can walk into almost any computer store buy almost any piece of hardware and expect it to work as well.
Fourth, Windows works, you can joke about it all you want but I can pop the CD in and (usually) have a running computer in less than an hour (I've had some bad experiences but the good vastly outweigh the bad).
Fifth, I am a gamer, I want to qualify this though, I spend a great deal of time doing basic video editing, sound editing and network stuff, I by no means play games exclusively on my computer but when I do play games I want to be able to play them without worrying about anything other than whether or not my hardware is up to the task.

I used Windows 98 for about 6 years, I didn't upgrade to 2k until recently because I was running older hardware, I upped to 2k about 2 years ago, and I upped to XP at the beginning of the week.

I would like to address some of the issues brought up by other posters:

Instability:
While Windows is certainly less stable than *nix or Mac there are very good reasons for it.
First off people who code for Windows have to be able to support every piece of hardware in existence, Mac programmers support a much smaller base of hardware to support and people who write for Linux tend to take much greater pride in their work (they do it because they want to not because they are paid).
Second, Microsoft has a history of trying to make things backwards compatible, when M$ made the jump to the NT kernel with 2k/XP, most of the old programs worked natively, when Mac went to OSX (im running off of memory here) they had to have an emulator to run older programs and everything had to be recompiled. Backwards compatibility doesn't lend itself to stability.
Third, M$ has to fight the end user, people who use Linux are generally much more tech-savvy than people who use Windows, they know what to do and what not to do.
Last, the majority of instability is the fault of the programs that people run. For instance, until a couple of months ago we used AOL at my house (my parents fault not mine). That caused more than a couple of problems that have been more or less recitified since its removal.
Finally, I would like to state that M$ has made great strides with the use of the NT kernel, my mom is currently dual-booting XP and 98 beacuse of her work, XP runs like a dream 98 doesn't, I will be interested to see what Vista holds.

Security:
First off almost all of the above reasons also factor into this discussion as well. End users install everything that comes their way, third-party programs have holes in them, and legacy code causes problems. While the number of security flaws certainly is excessive, if the number of people that are now running Windows ran *nix or Mac, there is little doubt in my mind that many holes would be uncovered in them as well. For Mac, having a closed platform helps them keep the problems to a minimum, for *nix, having millions of people across the globe working on every hole that comes up makes it a lot easier to keep secure than Windows which is just one company (albeit a very large company). With SP2 M$ has gotten serious about security, in Vista much fewer programs will have access to the Kernel layer, and IE 7 will NOT be integrated with the OS. These are small steps, and I wont argue with anyone who says that M$ has been ignoring security for a long time but they are moving in the right direction.

Flexibility:
As an earlier poster mentioned *nix is much more flexible than any other OS. But what if all I want is to be able to run my programs? For the most part the people that I know (including me) just want to be able to run their programs, they don't neccesarily care if they can customize everything. Somebody posted that Windows does everything automatically, while Linux lets you do everything manually, certainly a plus, if you want to have to tell your computer exactly what you want it do every step of the way.

Finally I would like to give my opinions on the other choices.

Mac: never felt a need to use it, I don't have stability problems, and I like games so Mac is out.

Linux:
Pros, Extremely powerful, very stable, free software galore, free, can be tweaked to do almost anything you want

Cons, ALMOST anything you want, still not as easy to set up, just because I would like to able to tweak all of those settings doesn't mean that I want to HAVE to set them, you can whine about WINE all you want but nothing beats the real thing for games.

All in all, I'm a Windows man for the forseeable future but I will be dabbling in Linux on the side. If you have read this whole post without falling asleep thank you for your attention and I welcome any comments.

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Code Version: 3.12
GIT d-(+) s+:+ a-- C++>+++$ UL>++$ P L+>++$ E--- W++ N o? K? w+>++$ O--- M- V? PS+@
PE@ Y+ PGP++ t+@ 5>++ X>+ R+>++ tv b++ DI+ D++ G e>+ h!>- !r>++ !y+
Personal Version: 1.1
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 5:58 PM

SIGMANUNKI


k, I don't have the time to proof this post, so the disclaimer is that if you read an aggressive tone or some such, it is not intended. It's just because I'm currently in a hurry and didn't have time to check and modify.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

Instability:
While Windows is certainly less stable than *nix or Mac there are very good reasons for it.




Uh huh.

Let me just say that there are never any good reasons for it aside from user error. And oh do I have a number of stories about creating problems on windows myself (usually due to my learning about the registry ).



Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

First off people who code for Windows have to be able to support every piece of hardware in existence, Mac programmers support a much smaller base of hardware to support and people who write for Linux tend to take much greater pride in their work (they do it because they want to not because they are paid).




The hardware support issue is hardly isolated to just windows. Every OS has to support as much hardware out there as possible.

I'll also mention that although Mac has "less" hardware to deal with, there are now two different hardware architectures to be concerned about.

Also, when it comes to Linux or the *BSD's, they just don't run on PC's like windows. They run on a number of platforms.

For instance, OpenBSD runs on, alpha, amd64, cats, hp300, hppa, i386, luna88k, mac68k, macppc, mvme68k, mvme88k, sgi, sparc, sparc64, vax and zaurus. And that's just the official list. There are a three other porting efforts underway: hppa64, solbourne and romp.

http://www.openbsd.org/plat.html

Which would arguably include a list of supported hardware about or greater than windows.

Similarly for the other *nix's.


And you're going to have to tell me how the "I'm just getting paid and don't actually like it" is an excuse for creating shoddy code.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

when Mac went to OSX (im running off of memory here) they had to have an emulator to run older programs and everything had to be recompiled. Backwards compatibility doesn't lend itself to stability.




Yes, it is an emulation layer in the OS. But, how does that make OSX, not backward compatible? Old programs will still run.

When I click on a OS9 program, it starts up and runs. The programs do not need to be recompiled.

Backward compatibility does not necessarily screw the stability of the system. How it is done, and how it is coded will effect the stability of the system.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

Third, M$ has to fight the end user, people who use Linux are generally much more tech-savvy than people who use Windows, they know what to do and what not to do.




In all seriousness, you're going to have to explain this one to me. I'm tech savy, and so are many of my friends. Yet we all have had, and continue to have (if still running windows), stability problems with windows.

Also, people who run OSX are arguably the same type of person that run windows. Yet OSX is not plagued with stability issues like windows is.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

Last, the majority of instability is the fault of the programs that people run. For instance, until a couple of months ago we used AOL at my house (my parents fault not mine). That caused more than a couple of problems that have been more or less recitified since its removal.




This "majority of instability is the fault of the programs that people run" has yet to be shown.

Sure, I have no doubt that 3rd party software is the cause of a chunk of stability issues on windows. But, I have never have even come close to believing that it is the majority.

Also, this would have mostly ended by M$ move to end the DLL hell. But, stability is still problematic on there OS.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

I will be interested to see what Vista holds.




Well, one things for sure. Spending a lot of money on new hardware to even be able to run Vista is in your future. Or so the articles say.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

End users install everything that comes their way, third-party programs have holes in them, and legacy code causes problems.




I know I wasn't talking about 3rd party software when I was talking about the pathetic security on windows. Just check out the mailing lists at security focus if you doubt the vast array of M$ caused security flaws.

And how does legacy code excuse anything? They didn't do it right then, they still haven't fixed it to date, but it's ok because it's old code?



Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

While the number of security flaws certainly is excessive, if the number of people that are now running Windows ran *nix or Mac, there is little doubt in my mind that many holes would be uncovered in them as well.




Sure there would be more found because more people would be looking at the OS. Apple is experiencing this right now with OSX. But, what is really important is how the vendor deals with the issue.

With just this past Safari critical hole, a work around was filed straight away, and a patch was availible within a couple days.

With M$ it's a wait till the end of the month if we get around to it. Just go and find the list of critical flaws still unresolved in windows. Pretty pathetic from a company that stated that they were making security a priority, what, five years ago?

Also, which *nix are you talking about?

Because from http://www.openbsd.org/security.html:
"""
Our proactive auditing process has really paid off. Statements like ``This problem was fixed in OpenBSD about 6 months ago'' have become commonplace in security forums like BUGTRAQ.
"""

And also, regarding the turn around from OpenBSD with found security flaws (from the above link):
"""
our experience is that coding and releasing of proper security fixes typically requires about an hour of work -- very fast fix turnaround is possible.
"""


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

For Mac, having a closed platform helps them keep the problems to a minimum,




Security through obscurity never works.

Also, if you don't take my work for this, people such as Bruce Schneier amoung others have stated the exact same thing.

M$ uses the security through obscurity. Look how it turned out for them.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

for *nix, having millions of people across the globe working on every hole that comes up makes it a lot easier to keep secure than Windows which is just one company (albeit a very large company).




This is just plainly false. There actually aren't that many people working on any given distro. M$ certainly has more programmers working on its OS than any single Linux distro.

You also forget that the people working on M$ are full time whereas the people working on Linux are pretty much all doing it in there free time.

This is also true of the *BSD's and other opensource OS's.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

With SP2 M$ has gotten serious about security,




Really? I remember them saying that years ago.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

but they are moving in the right direction.




From where they are, the only thing they could have done to make it worse is just plainly ignoring it completely. So, them starting to get better was pretty much inevitable.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

As an earlier poster mentioned *nix is much more flexible than any other OS.




Just because it can be altered this way and every way, does not mean that it has to be done.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

But what if all I want is to be able to run my programs?




It depends on which programs, and if you're willing to learn something. If you already know windows and don't want to learn something new, then sure, windows is pretty much the only choice.

But, if one could use a Linux or *BSD and is willing to learn, then they are just as viable an option.

Also, if one doesn't know any OS, then does it really matter which one they pick as long as it's suitable? Linux with KDE would be a good choice for someone that just wanted to surf and edit documents, just like Windows would be, just like OSX would be, just like...

It's all about the needs of the particular user.

It really seems to me that everyone is assuming that people automatically know how to use windows. Point of fact, my wife has no idea how to use windows.

Another fact, is that she was put in front of a OSX machine and told to play. She figured things out in 5-10 mins and was quite happy with it. This didn't happen when she tried to use windows at the begining of the year. She asked for a Linux machine to be set up for her.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

Somebody posted that Windows does everything automatically, while Linux lets you do everything manually, certainly a plus, if you want to have to tell your computer exactly what you want it do every step of the way.




Just because something lets you do everything manually, does not mean that you have to.

Some Linux distros (Mandrake for instance) is quite happy to be told what to install and then just sit and be used like windows after install. No need to custom anything.

A lot of people seem to be making this jump. Namely, the ability to custom pretty much everything, to the fallacy of being requried to custom everything.

Why?


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

Mac: never felt a need to use it, I don't have stability problems, and I like games so Mac is out.




Although OSX doesn't have as many games as windows, you shouldn't make the mistake that it doesn't really have much (if any) games at all.

For instance, I have:

Black & White[: Creature Isle]
Fallout [2]
Mater of Orion 2 and 3
Snowball Run
Stronghold
Ultima's

Also, World of Warcraft runs on OSX as well. I imagine that this is just the tip of the ice burge. I'm not that much of a gamer (you can probably tell from my list), but IMO, having something like WoW availible is rather telling about the state of OSX gaming.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

Linux:
Pros, Extremely powerful, very stable, free software galore, free, can be tweaked to do almost anything you want




Sorry, but not just for pros. My wife for instance, doesn't even know how to compile and/or install on Linux. But, she uses it just fine and has a great time.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

Cons, ALMOST anything you want, still not as easy to set up, just because I would like to able to tweak all of those settings doesn't mean that I want to HAVE to set them




And you just stated what isn't the case. Just because the option exists, doesn't mean you have to do it.


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:

All in all, I'm a Windows man for the forseeable future but I will be dabbling in Linux on the side.




If that is what you are comfortable with, shiny. But, you really seem to have a wild mis-understanding of what Linux and Mac OSX is/does/etc and what they require of the user, etc.

I was in your shoes once too. In fact, I bought my mini with the thought that I'd just be installing OpenBSD on it and that'd be that. But, I tried OSX, liked it, and found everything I needed and then some (understatment!) was avaible on it as well.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 6:05 PM

RUXTON


PROBLEM SOLVED!

I removed the questionable sound card, not being able to find new codecs for it; turned on the on-board sound; rebooted twice; and now it works just fine again.

Bottom line, because Linux Fedora Core 1 cannot find the on-board sound for some Dell computers, one cannot simply install Linux and have everything work perfectly. One must be prepared to diddle with the box at length.

OTOH, Windows XP refound the correct drivers for that built-in sound device and installed them, and also removed the old, improper codecs, all automatically. Fedora Core 1 cannot do that.

So, I say, use Windows XP with glee, I say.

I don't do any gaming whatsoever. I just don't want to spend any more time mussing with the box than I have to. Got furniture to build and guitars to play, and the new release of "She Spies," Season 1, with Carlos Jacott (one of the few who did the "hat trick" with Buffy, Angel, and Firefly) to watch. Much better'n futzing with recalcitrant boxes.

Immense kind thanks to all who responded, and especially to Citizen for the immediate comeback.

.........Ruxton

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 9:37 PM

RETROVERTIGO


Fedora is ass, I can't stand anything based off of Red Hat. Worthless distro, IMO. I tried out Ubuntu the other day on an old test box and found it to be far superior (though I'm a Slackware geek at heart).

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 9:40 PM

RUXTON


Forgot to mention, Windows XP is okay, but one MUST use Mozilla's Firefox browser and Thunderbird email, which automatically flags spam so you can zing it without ever looking at it or even highlighting it.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 11:35 PM

STDOUBT


Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Won't even switch to Mac -don't need it. Already got a real OS

Um, pardon me.


Argh! I been misconstrued....!
OSX is a real OS. Don't need it 'cuz Linux is a real OS too and I already got it working great for me. So no need for OSX here.
Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

Once you learn how to manage a Linux box, the freedom and control you find are simply unmatched.



Quote:


Why don't we say *nix instead of Linux. For instance, *BSD's give as much freedom of control as the Linux's.


That's certainly true. But, IMO Linux is going to be an easier transition to *nix for a Windows user. Sigma -For the Record, I concede that the Net/Free/OpenBSD's are superior to Linux. Torvalds himself has said he's going for "good enough". The BSD guys tend to go for "make it goddamned perfect or fsck it!". I can appreciate either approach depending on the intended useage of the platform(s) in question. Again, IMO, the "Good Enough" of Linux is still such a damned sight better than anything Microsoft can offer so I feel good about pimpin' it. I can't pimp OSX since I honestly don't know how to admin it.
BSD for a Windows convert? Yes, it's doable, but come on- ubuntu isn't going to scare them with things like partition 'slices' eeeeek! I just think for the purpose of this thread our Windows-using Browncoats will have an easier time learning Linux -I may well be wrong!They'd definately have an easier time learning OSX.
Quote:


Disclaimer:
The below contains some opinions, that are IMO only. It mainly gets into estetics of system configuration files and the resulting directory structure, not necessarily reflecting any functionality or lack thereof.

Some people (myself included) actually prefer the *BSD's and think that they are easier to configure (though there are Linux's with similar init script setup descibed below).

For instance, Redhat and it's derivatives with that run level crap. Don't like it at all.

What does rc.1 do again? Is it rc.4 or rc.5 scripts that are run if going directly into graphical login, while the other one isn't run? When I have to write my own script to up into whatever rc.? directory, what structure must it have? etc.


Agreed: the SysV init style is a bit messy, and managing a linkfarm is not fun unless you're really really bored lol.
Quote:


And all that rpm mess. *shutter*


:whispers: yes, rpm is poop.
Quote:


That being said, I don't think that slackware has this problem. There are probably other distros that don't have this issue as well.


Slackware uses BSD-style init -yessir.
Quote:


But OpenBSD with rc.conf (common deamons here), rc.securelevel (run before kernel goes into secure mode), rc.local (run after kernel goes into secure mode) and rc.shutdown (duh!). And that's it.

The docs even state, if in doubt, put it in rc.local.

Also, if you're addicted to the rc.? stuff, then you could just write your own sh scripts to implement it for OBSD. I've seen some people do this, though I have no idea why they would want to do that to there system.


Nor would I -but people reading this thread aren't going to be worried by their init-style :P Once again, you and I have managed to swing a thread out of userland and into kernelspace hehe.
Quote:


FreeBSD can have a similar setup, though it is angling toward a similar rc.d init. FreeBSD could be described as the end-user BSD whereas OpenBSD is more of a server OS.

And both these guys have the wonders of the ports tree. *warm fuzzy feeling*

End disclaimer.


So, Tiger, if you are looking into Linux, I'd suggest that you also look into FreeBSD as well. It has a tonne of applications and if that app is in the ports tree, installing it is as easy as 'make install'.

MythTV has also been reported to work on FreeBSD.

http://mythtv.son.org/tiki-index.php

And your PVR-250 is listed as a card that works.


See:

http://www.freebsd.org/where.html

For iso's, and docs and:

http://www.freebsd.org/ports/

to search or browse the FreeBSD ports tree.


Yes again -all the BSD's have excellent documentation. Maybe it would be just as easy for Windows converts to pick up *BSD after all. OSX even easier! I just been into the Linux thing so long, that I know it a lot better. *sigh* s'what I get for being such a tweaker;]
Quote:


----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki


Serenity is an Operating System!
http://www.elivecd.org/gb/Download/0.4.2/

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 24, 2006 11:57 PM

STDOUBT


Quote:

Originally posted by Ruxton:
PROBLEM SOLVED!


Glad to hear problem solved
Quote:


Bottom line, because Linux Fedora Core 1 cannot find the on-board sound for some Dell computers, one cannot simply install Linux and have everything work perfectly. One must be prepared to diddle with the box at length.


Mmmmm...diddling ;]
Just so you know, Fedora is on Core5 at this time...bet you a fruity oaty bar that bug is long dead.
Quote:


So, I say, use Windows XP with glee, I say.


Is that really possible?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 25, 2006 12:34 AM

STDOUBT


Quote:

Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Another fact, is that she was put in front of a OSX machine and told to play. She figured things out in 5-10 mins and was quite happy with it. This didn't happen when she tried to use windows at the begining of the year. She asked for a Linux machine to be set up for her.



She have a sister?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 25, 2006 9:31 AM

RETROVERTIGO


Some screenshots of the new Windows Vista beta build have leaked. Looks like MS is doing what they've always done best-- steal other guys' ideas

http://www.win-vista.net/modules.php?set_albumName=Vista5342&op=modloa
d&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_album.php


"Gadgets"... Multiple desktops... wow, never seen any of this before...

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 25, 2006 10:10 AM

SIGMANUNKI


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

Argh! I been misconstrued....!
OSX is a real OS. Don't need it 'cuz Linux is a real OS too and I already got it working great for me. So no need for OSX here.




I thought that it was probably something along those lines. Just had to be and point out the wording

tee hee


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

That's certainly true. But, IMO Linux is going to be an easier transition to *nix for a Windows user.




If you include the install as part of the transition, then I certainly will agree

Jebus, when I installed OBSD 3.8 on my mini I had to put the install packages on one of my servers for http download, and calculate the offsets and sizes myself. Clearly something didn't detect properly

I could work around it, but I certainly wouldn't expect the typical user to.


But, I think I should point out (though I probably should have done this a while ago) that one of my assumptions is that the box is already setup for the user. People tend not to want to try new things unless they have people there to set it up for them and show them things.

So, from an end-user perspective, if either a Linux or *BSD is just sitting there waiting to be used, I'd imagine that they are about the same difficulty. Depending on distro of course (OBSD not exactly the end-user OS).


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

I can appreciate either approach depending on the intended useage of the platform(s) in question.




Can't disagree with that


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

Again, IMO, the "Good Enough" of Linux is still such a damned sight better than anything Microsoft can offer so I feel good about pimpin' it.




Again, I agree


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

I can't pimp OSX since I honestly don't know how to admin it.




Next time you're around a computer store that sells Apple, go in and play for 5 mins. Then you'll be able too


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

I just think for the purpose of this thread our Windows-using Browncoats will have an easier time learning Linux -I may well be wrong!They'd definately have an easier time learning OSX.




If they are doing everything themselves, then OSX then Linux would be my guess as well They should also probably stay away from the *BSD's unless they are of the techie persuasion


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

Nor would I -but people reading this thread aren't going to be worried by their init-style :P Once again, you and I have managed to swing a thread out of userland and into kernelspace hehe.




Well I disagree! I think that everybody should be worried about there init-style

Seriously though, when considering an OS, if people might be expected to tweak, it should be considered just how easy it is to tweak. That being said, there are friends, mailing lists, news groups, etc etc etc to get help from. So, if it's just one or two things, then no worries.

I was also just giving some examples of things that irritated me about a distro of Linux, because I didn't just want to make a statement without support. Even if it is just an opinion.

But, there probably are people out there that think that that init-style is the cat's meow.

Don't know if I'd want to meet any of them though


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

Yes again -all the BSD's have excellent documentation. Maybe it would be just as easy for Windows converts to pick up *BSD after all. OSX even easier! I just been into the Linux thing so long, that I know it a lot better. *sigh* s'what I get for being such a tweaker;]




If we all support the OS that we like, admitting all the pros and cons, then all we are doing is giving people options and enough info to decide what's best for there particular situation.

I think it is also important to make people aware that there are alternatives to windows... viable alternatives. And right now Linux and OSX are two of those alternatives.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 25, 2006 10:14 AM

SIGMANUNKI


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:

She have a sister?




I showed her this post. She seems quite happy about it. I think you just made her day

But no, no sister.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 25, 2006 10:22 AM

SIGMANUNKI


Quote:

Originally posted by Ruxton:

PROBLEM SOLVED!




Excellent


Quote:

Originally posted by Ruxton:

I don't do any gaming whatsoever. I just don't want to spend any more time mussing with the box than I have to.




Though I agree that setting a Linux box up can take quite some time, IMO, it is worth it.

For instance, Xander is running OpenBSD 3.7 and has a current uptime of 210 days and Andrew is running OpenBSD 3.5 and has an uptime of 211 days.

Basically, once you set it up, it's just setup, and it will just run. With windows, in my experience, though it is setup quickly in the begining, it's constant maintenance, in the long run, will require far more time that a Linux/*BSD box. Not to mention the fact that I've yet to see a windows box that can run for a week under any kind of load (even if it's just one constant process).

Just tossing that out there.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 25, 2006 2:07 PM

SNEAKER98


Quote:

Originally posted by retrovertigo:
Some screenshots of the new Windows Vista beta build have leaked. Looks like MS is doing what they've always done best-- steal other guys' ideas

http://www.win-vista.net/modules.php?set_albumName=Vista5342&op=modloa
d&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_album.php



Pfft, stealing from a thief doesn't really count. (If you're referring to PARC here)

Looks like someone at Vista had their eyes on Looking Glass, to me. Perhaps it's just my imagination.

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
10 Years of DVDs
Mon, August 12, 2019 17:24 - 10 posts
Really thought those 2 kids had a shot at making love work.
Mon, August 12, 2019 17:20 - 5 posts
XV Anniversary of Firefly
Mon, July 1, 2019 13:13 - 24 posts
The Century Mark
Wed, August 22, 2018 00:38 - 1 posts
Anybody play Borderlands 2?
Thu, August 16, 2018 02:30 - 2 posts
Badass Infinity Wars Article
Mon, July 30, 2018 00:18 - 4 posts
emoticon sillies
Sat, May 26, 2018 00:40 - 73 posts
Actors discussing the characters they portray.
Sat, March 10, 2018 10:06 - 4 posts
Roman Polanski
Wed, February 28, 2018 20:05 - 7 posts
Purgatory and its mathematical relation to the event horizon
Sun, January 28, 2018 16:28 - 22 posts
Ghosts exist, yes or no? On the fence?
Tue, January 23, 2018 17:41 - 77 posts
Young actors with promise...
Thu, January 4, 2018 14:45 - 26 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL