I don't think Linux is as stable as everyone says it is but still better then windows 7
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 12, 2012, at 8:25 AM, Roy <linuxcanuck@gmail.com> wrote:
> Linux is a choice users make. It is hard to find it pre-installed,
> but if you try hard you can find pre-installed Linux. That means that
> people who come to Linux have made a decision for whatever reason to
> turn away from what they were using. There are lots of reasons to turn
> to Linux. It has an advanced file system that requires no maintenance,
> that logs everything and the new ones have rollback features. The file
> system is faster and more durable which makes it suitable for servers
> and your most precious data. Linux currently has no viruses in the
> wild and security is such that it would hard to get infected and even
> harder for it to spread. Not saying it can't be done, but you would
> need lots of careless people to make it happen. Linux pioneered the
> concept of the app store which everybody is familiar with. We have had
> secure repositories and package lists since the 1990s. Finally Linux
> gives the user ownership and control over the computer. Nothing goes
> in without your permission. It never forces you to update, upgrade or
> nag afterwards. It does not carelessly add icons everywhere, messing
> up your system. It will never check up on you or monitor your computer
> looking for illicit material. There are many advantages.
>
> This also provides Linux with an advantage that new users initially
> find frustrating and even see it as a disadvantage. That is choice. If
> you have never had choice then getting it can be either exhilarating
> or confusing. What choice to make when you have so much?
>
> I can't tell anyone what type of shoes to wear. It is a personal
> thing. Why would I presume to tell them what distribution to run? I do
> not know their past, their habits, their intended use, their hardware,
> etc. That si why Linux has had a hard time making it on the desktop.
> We offer so much choice and many people want to be told. Apple has
> made a killing doing just that. They offer you only a few systems and
> one software choice. They make sure that they work flawlessly together
> and you can do that if you are a dictatorship. You are calling all of
> the shots. Linux is at the opposite end. Nobody is calling the shots
> and we have no hardware made specifically for it. It is a wonder that
> Linux works at all. Buy lots of people work very hard to make it as
> good as it can be under these circumstances.
>
> How to deal with choice?
>
> You computer will determine the number of options you have. A newish
> computer (4 - 5 years old) can run just about everything. An older
> computer reduces choice. You may have to consider a more modest
> desktop environment.
>
> Desktop environment is probably as big a decision as the distribution.
> There are several. Not all are equal. You can run applications from
> most desktop environments in another. There are few exceptions.
>
> The oldest of the big ones is KDE. It has been around for over ten
> years and preceded GNOME. KDE uses a traditional desktop approach, but
> is very configurable and has all of the bells and whistles. It has its
> own applications and is complete. It is comparable to Windows 7.
>
> GNOME is the next biggy. It is the most popular largely because of
> Ubuntu. However, Ubuntu no longer uses a GNOME frontend. GNOME si
> still largely popular, but has undergone a major overhaul. It is
> written in GTK. The previous versions of GNOME used GTK 2 but it
> became maxxed out in terms of what programmers could do so GNOME came
> out with GTK 3 and rewrote their desktop environment, That upset a lot
> of GNOME users who longed for a traditional desktop environment, which
> GNOME abandoned. The new one is called GNOME Shell and it is not what
> most people are used to. It can be configured with extensions to look
> and feel more like a traditional desktop. Only one distro comes
> configured this way, at present, Linux Mint.
>
> The new kid on the block is Unity which is Ubuntu's answer to GNOME
> Shell. It looks similar, but bolder. It takes what GS does and moves
> it to another level. It has upset a lot of people like GS did.
> However, it is answering back with more configuration options and its
> own extensions called lenses and scopes.
>
> GNOME 2.x is the old GNOME it is still around on older versions of
> distros. Debian stable uses GNOME 2, as do older versions of Mint and
> Ubuntu. You can still download them and try them. The problem is they
> have no future as GNOME killed GNOME 2.x
>
> XFCE is a traditional desktop that comes closest to old GNOME. It is
> fast and very configurable. It has been around for a long time and is
> in active (but slow) development.
>
> If you have an older computer then you have other choices. LXDE is
> lightweight and attractive, but low on configuration. Openbox and
> Fluxbox are even lighter and less configurable. There are many more
> such as Enlightenment, but you really have to get into basics to
> configure them.
>
> Distributions choose a desktop environment, window manager, package
> manager and applications and libraries to run on the Linux kernel they
> base everything on. You can often tell how old a distro is by looking
> at its kernel version. That will tell you how up to date it is and
> whether it will run the most recent hardware. So a distribution is a
> package deal (operating system) and the desktop environment is what
> you see up front and use on a daily basis.
>
> What you need to know about a distro that you cannot see on a Live
> DVD/CD is the package manager and how well it works, the number of
> packages available and the size and friendliness of the community.
> There are two main package types: rpm and deb. Distros are referred to
> as being an RPM distro or a Debian distro. RPM packages do not work on
> Debian based systems and vice versa. Debian is widely considered the
> easiest to use, the more stable and has by far the most packages.
> There are more RPM based distros, though. The most popular distros use
> Debian.
>
> The more popular a distro the more users it has and therefore the more
> help available to you. Because Ubuntu has corporate backing they have
> the most online information, the most forums, most web sites, podcasts
> and journals dedicated to it. It also has the biggest repositories
> because it is Debian based. In addition many third party developers
> release packages in Ubuntu format only or Ubuntu first. Ubuntu also
> has PPAs which are personal package archives which you can add to your
> sources and get things nobody else can. Many of these work with Ubuntu
> based distros such as Mint, but that is beginning to change because
> Mint has gone with GS instead of Unity. So Mint users have to be more
> careful than in the past.
>
> The most popular distros are Ubuntu (Debian based, Unity 2 and 3D or
> GNOME classic desktop environment, depending on version), Linux Mint
> ((Debian based, GNOME Shell with extensions or GNOME classic desktop
> environment, depending on version), Fedora (RPM based, with GNOME
> Shell), openSuSE (RPM based with GNOME Shell and KDE versions),
> PCLinuxOS (RPM based but with apt and KDE desktop, only in 32-bit),
> Mageia (RPM based fork of Mandriva, KDE), Mandriva (RPM, KDE), MEPIS
> or SimplyMEPIS (Debian stable, KDE), aptosid (Debian experimental,
> KDE) and Debian (Debian stable, GNOME 2.x).
>
> There are many Ubuntu derivatives which come from Canonical but have a
> different desktop environment. Kubuntu is KDE, Xubuntu is XFCE,
> Lubuntu is LXDE, Ubuntu Studio is for media and it uses XFCE now.
> Edubuntu is for education and uses Unity 2D. Mythbuntu is MythTV with
> an XFCE desktop. Linux Mint is not from Canonical. It is based on
> Ubuntu, but uses GNOME Shell with extensions and they are working on a
> clone of GNOME 2 called Cinnamon. Ultimate is not from Canonical but
> it is Ubuntu (older version usually) with everything but the kitchen
> sink added. Fuduntu has nothing to do with Ubuntu. It is Fedora based
> but took the untu part because it aims to take Fedora and make it easy
> to use like Ubuntu. Unity OS has nothing to do with Unity desktop. It
> is Mandriva based and uses Openbox as its DE.
>
> There are other things such as the installer. Ubuntu and its kin have
> a good one, as does openSuSE. I am not big on Mandriva's or Fedora's.
>
> It is complicated, but you can simply things by asking yourself some questions?
>
> Do you want Debian based or RPM based? That cuts choices in half.
> Do you want a large community or do you care about support?
> Do you want a large number of applications or will you run only a few?
> Which desktop environment suits you best?
>
> Then you match things up and try a few live disks. If you don't like
> one then try another. Use a usb stick or re writable disk. If you are
> like the typical Linux user then you will start with one distribution
> and then change after a time.
>
> A comparison of distributions can be found on Wikipedia at:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Linux_distributions
>
> Somethings to pay attention to in this.
>
> Developer - one person development often means control by one person.
> Development could slow or stop at any time should the developer not be
> able to work. This happened to PCLinux OS when Bill Reynolds, AKA
> Texstar, became ill and MEPIS has been marred by slow development.
> Corporate backing can mean many things, good and bad. Corporations go
> under or are taken over as happened to Novell. Community based distros
> can be good, but they have their own set of problems. Getting
> agreement is hard so things often move at a slow pace and disagreement
> leads to division and forks.
>
> Look at release dates, first and last. It shows how old it is and
> whether it is being actively developed.
>
> Base distribution we have talked about.
>
> Purpose should match your own. Desktop instead of server, etc.
>
> In the Technical section look at Install time desktop environment. You
> can add and desktop you want after in many distributions, but you get
> this one as part of the package.
>
> Architecture means what chipset. Most users will only care about the
> first three columns.
>
> Package Management and installation is important. Pay attention to
> overall number of packages, package management tools and format. Also
> look to see if it has a graphical installer. Some do not.
>
> The last section is Live Media. Green straight across gives you the
> best testing options.
>
> Security features is next to useless info since anything you would use
> would come with either SELinux or AppArmor.
>
> Anybody who says use this or that is basing it on his or her personal
> preference and since you do not know them you cannot know if it will
> work for you. Take your time. Do your home work and try various
> possibilities. All of the major distros are good or they would not be
> where they are. But likely only one is good for you.
>
> Roy
>
> Using Kubuntu 11.10, 64-bit
> Location: Canada
>
> On 12 January 2012 04:16, dvdpst <dvdposton@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Not all are live Distros. Most are but you do not understand what I said. I
> > built the system
> > for that company. It is very security demanding. The system count And times
> > the run time
> > of all drives. Not only the HD but the CD/DVD drives to. Among with any
> > saves and to what
> > drive. Only way I could bid on that contract. Government requirements. I
> > needed some thing
> > that would load to ram and run from ram.
> >
> > I am trying to convince management to switch to Linux as their OS. Will
> > know tomorrow
> > if I have clearance to bring my laptop to do an clean install of Linux. If
> > you have any other
> > suggestions, I am open to them.
> >
> > david
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:49 PM, g.linuxducks <g.linuxducks@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> **
> >>
> >>
> >> All of Linux distros are "Live Distros" meaning they all pop in and run
> >> only the demo mode without installing anything and allow you to use
> >> Linux in a limited fashion to decide whether to install it right from
> >> the demo ' "Live Distro". It is not only Puppy that does that - all of
> >> Linux distros do that in other words. (Either from CD/DVD or from USB
> >> Drives and those also for Netbooks).
> >>
> >> I believe Ubuntu Linux is the best "presentation" of Linux and
> >> especially for Windows lovers. These want a system that can do
> >> everything that Windows does and better. Showing these Users a limited
> >> Linux distro is certainly NOT turning them onto Linux as you think. In
> >> fact they will laugh at you. If those are not presented with good cause
> >> to leave Windows or add Linux they WILL go on their merry way with
> >> Windows with the impression from a stripped down version rather than a
> >> full blown does everything version.
> >>
> >> This is very simple. I can log onto Ubuntu Linux and check just about
> >> all of several email acounts in the same amount of time it takes Windows
> >> to fully load ready for use. That is NO exageration at all from myself
> >> as a Windows lover since year 2001 (XP then Vista).
> >>
> >> I think you would want to show that and a full blown Linux that rivals
> >> Windows. Take it from a Windows diehard.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 01/11/2012 03:59 PM, dvdpst wrote:
> >> > Most people I deal with just want to see what linux is. Most are using an
> >> > company computer when they
> >> > ask to see what Linux is. So I need some thing that will not touch the HD
> >> > as I have developed the programme
> >> > that the IT dept. uses to monitor the systems. And I need some thing that
> >> > will only load in ram.
> >> > No reason to go to time and trouble to install an real system when they
> >> can
> >> > get an idea of what it is from
> >> > Puppy. Plus that is the only one I have on CD at this time. Of the ones
> >> > that went with Linux, they wanted some thing better.
> >> > I always show them Ubuntu and Kubuntu. I do mention that there are
> >> > countless distos out there.
> >> > Of the ones that saw Puppy like it and ask for some thing better since
> >> > Puppy looks and acts so much like Windows.
> >> > Only one that I show it to stay with Puppy. But all they wanted was some
> >> > thing for internet and email.
> >> >
> >> > david
> >> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Roy<linuxcanuck@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> **
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
No comments:
Post a Comment