Linux Distro. [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Linux Distro.


syntaxerrorsix
11-26-2008, 17:47
[/SLIGHTRANTON]

I've dual booted 'em all I think.

My first encounter was Red Hat 5-6 years ago, I still have a HUGE reference manual and access it frequently. I re-furbished a new box with XP and Ubuntu and have spent the majority of my time tweaking 8.10 and searching for CL fixes for hardware conflicts and substitutes for flash/internet/video/sound plugins. While I don't have the expertise to compile my own packages or structure new programs to accomplish my goals, I do have enough sense to follow directions and troubleshoot. What I don't know is if I am the only one spending hours hacking around in the dark trying to bring a promising OS into reality.

After a weeks of configuring and researching (this time around) all I can really say is that I have a better understanding to why it won't replace OS X or Windows. I can accept this, but I can't help to feel a sense of disappointment.

I'm fully aware that, "open source" and, "free" are both priceless and subjective but for the love of Dog why hasn't it improved much in 6 years? Has the community collapsed or are we trying to make it more difficult than it needs to be?

I type this under Ubuntu/Firefox and a patiently update/research/yell at the monitor and hope that someday there will be a Distro that will combine stability, usability and a half way decent library of codecs that isn't stumped by 2001 technology.

[/SLIGHTRANTOFF]


PS.

I don't blame hardware.

noway
11-26-2008, 18:00
So what's your questions? or is it why has it not been more easier? It is and let me tell you why.

[counter rant mode on]

My 1st dab at linux was in 1995 when windows 95 1st came out. Back then all you had where windoze 3.0 and 3.1 :crying: . I started with a distro called slackware and the kernel rls has just started with the 1.0 releases.

back then you had no support , you had no wiki, you had a limited internet users with a limit http resources and we where stuck on BBS and maillists or compuserv

No linux forums
No linux groups or clubs
Not any big numbers of pressbooks on linux

all of the above you had no hands over fist over more hands over fists availability ;)


Your complaining about the NOW linux, man go back about 10+years and then you would have an valid complaint.

from the sounds of it , you need a few linux books and then you need to post whatever is the problem(s) with that "flavor" of linux that you want to run.

From my take their's thousands of distro ( and I'm not kidding ) in hundreds of languages and whatever problem(s) you might have , have been ranned across by somebody else. Quickness in finding a solution could be as quick
as inserting http://www.google.com into your browser?

[/counter rant mode off]

lastly,

the biggest problem with convertees ( windows to linux users ) are they are lazy and want everything tobe like it was in windows, and brain wash into Bill's ways.
Will sorry linux is not that way, it does requires some use of the brian power but it's not idiot proof nor is it straight out of the box PnP.

Big Al 24
11-26-2008, 18:53
I have to agree with noway. My first foray into Linux was because of Windows ME. At the time I chose one of the first iterations of Mandrake. It was a little better than it was when noway first tried it, but not much. When you're dealing with Linux it's best to remember that you get what you pay for in a sense. Just have some patience realize that you don't always get some of the instant gratification that windows provides, but you do get much in return. It can lead to just as many headaches- though it's nice to know you didn't pay for them.

syntaxerrorsix
11-26-2008, 18:53
So what's your questions? or is it why has it not been more easier? It is and let me tell you why.

[counter rant mode on]

My 1st dab at linux was in 1995 when windows 95 1st came out. Back then all you had where windoze 3.0 and 3.1 :crying: . I started with a distro called slackware and the kernel rls has just started with the 1.0 releases.

back then you had no support , you had no wiki, you had a limited internet users with a limit http resources and we where stuck on BBS and maillists or compuserv

No linux forums
No linux groups or clubs
Not any big numbers of pressbooks on linux

all of the above you had no hands over fist over more hands over fists availability ;)


Your complaining about the NOW linux, man go back about 10+years and then you would have an valid complaint.

from the sounds of it , you need a few linux books and then you need to post whatever is the problem(s) with that "flavor" of linux that you want to run.

From my take their's thousands of distro ( and I'm not kidding ) in hundreds of languages and whatever problem(s) you might have , have been ranned across by somebody else. Quickness in finding a solution could be as quick
as inserting http://www.google.com into your browser?

[/counter rant mode off]

lastly,

the biggest problem with convertees ( windows to linux users ) are they are lazy and want everything tobe like it was in windows, and brain wash into Bill's ways.
Will sorry linux is not that way, it does requires some use of the brian power but it's not idiot proof nor is it straight out of the box PnP.

I feel maybe you did not read my entire post. I ran Red Hat 6 years ago with the same outcome.

I'm not a window$ user coming to Linux. I'm a DOS user suffering through windows and I'm not lazy nor seeking the easy answer. I'm looking for improvement not change we can believe in.

syntaxerrorsix
11-26-2008, 18:56
BTW

I'm not speaking for the fly by nights one hit wonder kernel changes that define an author a new, "version."

syntaxerrorsix
11-26-2008, 18:58
I have to agree with noway. My first foray into Linux was because of Windows ME. At the time I chose one of the first iterations of Mandrake. It was a little better than it was when noway first tried it, but not much. When you're dealing with Linux it's best to remember that you get what you pay for in a sense. Just have some patience realize that you don't always get some of the instant gratification that windows provides, but you do get much in return. It can lead to just as many headaches- though it's nice to know you didn't pay for them.


I mentioned price and free as beer free and free as libre. I think you are both missing the point.

syntaxerrorsix
11-26-2008, 19:02
There may be more documentation and resources but the product itself as an entity O/S has not improved appreciably.

syntaxerrorsix
11-26-2008, 19:03
I do however get the same responses from die hard Linux fans that accept mediocrity in the name of research and I can respect that to a degree.

Like I said, it was -semi-rant.

Dandapani
11-26-2008, 19:31
Fedora 10 came out this week. Try it, you'll like it. I'm running Fedora 9 and have run Fedora since Fedora 2 when I hopped off RH 9!

syntaxerrorsix
11-26-2008, 19:34
Fedora 10 came out this week. Try it, you'll like it. I'm running Fedora 9 and have run Fedora since Fedora 2 when I hopped off RH 9!
Thanks, I'll look into it. At this rate I'll have all the ISO's for any popular version :) Maybe my first choice was correct all along.

syntaxerrorsix
11-26-2008, 19:39
I had to go look, my last RH edition is 6! Still have the 1200 page book and its supplemental! Always a good CLI reference :)

Big Al 24
11-26-2008, 19:48
I'm not a die hard fan of anything in the OS distribution world. I'm typing this on a Windows/Linux machine with another Linux machine fileserving in the background. There is no panacea. Macs are overly expensive, Macs are limited, Macs can be crashed, Macs have little place in the corporate world, Linux is tough on the non command line initiated, the Linux world is too diverse, too many people don't know what an operating system is let alone how to install it, Windows is bloated, Windows crashes, Windows is like Frankenstein, Windows is as expensive as a decent processor, etc...
I'm no fanboy, and I really think the ultimate OS has YET to be made....
That being said, I acknowledged your frustration with Linux. I just think it has it's achilles heels just like all the other options out there. I also disagreed with you just as noway did because it has improved amazingly. It used to be hit or miss with hardware, now as long as you're not bleeding edge you're probably ok (even macs). There are MANY more features and fuctionality in general compared to the early versions of the few distributions that were out at the time. I would like to send you the first version of Mandrake that I installed so you can really see what I mean. In many ways it's caught up to Windows without any of the funding or resources that companies like Microsoft or Apple have. Don't take for granted many of the features that we have now that weren't around a few years ago which Linux has adapted to fairly readily. 32bit display, ATI video drivers, codecs, decent UI's, etc...
Basically, I have never met a computer or intelligent device that hasn't frustrated me in some way or another. And I cannot count all of the time that has been wasted "learning" my way around a problem which will ultimately be gone in the next distribution or patch. And as long as you stick to more "windows like" distros like Ubuntu, or PCLinux, you'll never get the full benefit of having a stripped down smooth running Linux OS.

syntaxerrorsix
11-26-2008, 20:11
I'm not a die hard fan of anything in the OS distribution world. I'm typing this on a Windows/Linux machine with another Linux machine fileserving in the background. There is no panacea. Macs are overly expensive, Macs are limited, Macs can be crashed, Macs have little place in the corporate world, Linux is tough on the non command line initiated, the Linux world is too diverse, too many people don't know what an operating system is let alone how to install it, Windows is bloated, Windows crashes, Windows is like Frankenstein, Windows is as expensive as a decent processor, etc...
I'm no fanboy, and I really think the ultimate OS has YET to be made....
That being said, I acknowledged your frustration with Linux. I just think it has it's achilles heels just like all the other options out there. I also disagreed with you just as noway did because it has improved amazingly. It used to be hit or miss with hardware, now as long as you're not bleeding edge you're probably ok (even macs). There are MANY more features and fuctionality in general compared to the early versions of the few distributions that were out at the time. I would like to send you the first version of Mandrake that I installed so you can really see what I mean. In many ways it's caught up to Windows without any of the funding or resources that companies like Microsoft or Apple have. Don't take for granted many of the features that we have now that weren't around a few years ago which Linux has adapted to fairly readily. 32bit display, ATI video drivers, codecs, decent UI's, etc...
Basically, I have never met a computer or intelligent device that hasn't frustrated me in some way or another. And I cannot count all of the time that has been wasted "learning" my way around a problem which will ultimately be gone in the next distribution or patch. And as long as you stick to more "windows like" distros like Ubuntu, or PCLinux, you'll never get the full benefit of having a stripped down smooth running Linux OS.


As I have just re-started my Linux approach I'd be interested in which version of Mandrake you are running. I have nothing but time and will be burning Fedora 10 next unless you believe you have an advantage with Mandrake. While I appreciate the xwindows gui I'm not intimidated by command line and spent the first years of my life working in DOS with 8" floppy media and cutting edge, lightening fast 300 bps modems and ATDT code macr0'd into my homemade keyboard while playing Wumpus and Collosal Cave Adventure :)

Big Al 24
11-26-2008, 20:20
No I ran Mandrake almost 10 years ago. Now I run Ubuntu sometimes, Windows mostly, and Gentoo. I'm not saying you should switch to Linux if you like Macs or anything else. It's just when you look at all of them from the top down they all have their headaches and drawbacks.
Now I'd recommend Ubuntu, Fedora, Suse, Debian, or Gentoo. In the past I have liked Mepis, Knoppix, Kanotix, DSL and a couple of others. It really has more to do with what you like to do with your computer that would help me determine what distro you might like. And I know you were ranting, we've all been there.

IndyGunFreak
11-26-2008, 20:36
the biggest problem with convertees ( windows to linux users ) are they are lazy and want everything tobe like it was in windows, and brain wash into Bill's ways.

Will sorry linux is not that way, it does requires some use of the brian power but it's not idiot proof nor is it straight out of the box PnP.

+10000000

I spend a fair amount of time helping out in Linux support channels, mostly for Ubuntu. The most common thing you hear from someone who doesn't know their rear end from a hole in the ground is, "I'm computer literate".... No you're not, you're Windows Literate. Once you convince them that Linux is Not Windows, and there is almost zero comparisons, you can actually get somewhere teaching them. Unlearning Windows is about the hardest thing for a new Linux user. I guess however, if we'd been spoonfed Linux for 30yrs, then someone wanted us to use XP, it'd be hard to unlearn the Linux way.

I really only use Linux, and only have an XP partition to sync my Zune..(one of the few things MS did right... :))

IGF

void *
11-26-2008, 20:43
The lack of codecs is not actually the fault of Linux, or it's being free. It's the fact that they can't really be legally used because most of them are encumbered - they can't be legally distributed for free. This is not a technical problem - if the codecs *could* be used and distributed, pretty much every distribution would have had them years and years ago. They can't, so you're stuck manually installing the ones that you can legally manually install, or doing without.

I do think it's somewhat ironic that someone who claims he can't compile his own packages is claiming to have the knowledge required to accurately assess *any* kernel change as a "fly by nights one hit wonder". I don't know - it's possible you can code like a madman, but never bothered to figure out how to pull source packages and build them - but it seems a little discordant.

Of course, I'm probably biased - I'll take a Linux box with wmaker over a Windows box for pretty much anything other than gaming - and that's only because the games I want to play generally don't have Linux ports. Heck, my (running windows) work laptop isn't much more than a place to run a cygwin X server so I can ssh into the Linux boxen and get what I need to get done done ... but then again, I'm not picky. I mean, I prefer wmaker over more eye-candy laden window managers.

What OS to use ought to be a function of what you use a machine for, and what you are used to, more than anything else. If you need all the proprietary codecs and all of that, then get an OS that ships them. No worries.

IndyGunFreak
11-26-2008, 21:02
The lack of codecs is not actually the fault of Linux, or it's being free. It's the fact that they can't really be legally used because most of them are encumbered - they can't be legally distributed for free. This is not a technical problem - if the codecs *could* be used and distributed, pretty much every distribution would have had them years and years ago. They can't, so you're stuck manually installing the ones that you can legally manually install, or doing without.

I do think it's somewhat ironic that someone who claims he can't compile his own packages is claiming to have the knowledge required to accurately assess *any* kernel change as a "fly by nights one hit wonder". I don't know - it's possible you can code like a madman, but never bothered to figure out how to pull source packages and build them - but it seems a little discordant.

Of course, I'm probably biased - I'll take a Linux box with wmaker over a Windows box for pretty much anything other than gaming - and that's only because the games I want to play generally don't have Linux ports. Heck, my (running windows) work laptop isn't much more than a place to run a cygwin X server so I can ssh into the Linux boxen and get what I need to get done do
What OS to use ought to be a function of what you use a machine for, and what you are used to, more than anything else. If you need all the proprietary codecs and all of that, then get an OS that ships them. No worries.

You gave a great explanation of the codec issue...... :cheers:

Truth be told, most Linux distros, although the codecs aren't preinstalled, usually have an easy way of installing them that is "unofficial"... For example, for Ubuntu variants, you can add the medibuntu repository, and have all the codecs, DVD support, etc.. installed in about 45sec.

http://www.medibuntu.org/

Nothing against the OP, but you're either 1. Getting piss poor help or 2. You're just not looking/trying. You don't need a subsitute for Flash, just use Flash... Most video/sound plugins, are included included in the w32codec pack in the medibuntu repo. Now if you're using 64bit, thats a whole other issue, 64bit, IMO, is not quite ready yet for Ubuntu, to many drivers not available, some programs are not available in 64bit, etc.... Suse or Fedora are probably the best 64bit distros.

IGF

Big Al 24
11-26-2008, 21:39
I would agree with everything that's been said after my last post. He's just frustrated with the Linux.

DoubleWide
11-26-2008, 22:25
What are you looking for?
You say you're a DOS user putting up with Windows, so why don't you go back to the command line completely?

What do you want it to do?
For me, the OS configures hardware and launches programs. When I install Linux, I just install the base Debian (just cli). Setup the repositories then install a basic environment and aptitude. Boot in and use aptitude for whatever programs and codecs I want. The last time I installed Flash Player easily by going to video.google.com (not youtube) and clicking install.

How much do you want it to be like Windows and how much not like Windows? Linux is very Unix with a possible Windows-ish GUI slapped on top. You want command line, it's all there. You want GUI everything, it's knowing what to install and what not to.

Windows-like setup
KDE-core
aptitude
open office
firefox
amarok or vlc
k3b
guarddog

Unix-like
There's tons of compilers if you want to do programming plus much more. Everything is available through the CLI. GUI's just allow people to change things quicker.

Most distros are just slapped together software with some support based on what the group wanted. Last time I looked, 129 distros were based on Debian. I'd just prefer to start with a stripped Debian and add what I want.

Again, what do you want it to do?

noway
11-26-2008, 22:51
+10000000

I spend a fair amount of time helping out in Linux support channels, mostly for Ubuntu. The most common thing you hear from someone who doesn't know their rear end from a hole in the ground is, "I'm computer literate".... No you're not, you're Windows Literate. Once you convince them that Linux is Not Windows, and there is almost zero comparisons, you can actually get somewhere teaching them. Unlearning Windows is about the hardest thing for a new Linux user. I guess however, if we'd been spoonfed Linux for 30yrs, then someone wanted us to use XP, it'd be hard to unlearn the Linux way.

I really only use Linux, and only have an XP partition to sync my Zune..(one of the few things MS did right... :))

IGF


better said then me ;)

But your right linux and windows is not even in the same camp. I find in my current profession, that most people really believe MS/windows is so great and that most Unixes are hard and difficult when in it fact it's the totally opposite.

syntaxerrorsix
11-27-2008, 06:03
No I ran Mandrake almost 10 years ago. Now I run Ubuntu sometimes, Windows mostly, and Gentoo. I'm not saying you should switch to Linux if you like Macs or anything else.

As I stated in my original post, I'm typing this under Ubuntu Firefox.

syntaxerrorsix
11-27-2008, 06:16
+10000000

I spend a fair amount of time helping out in Linux support channels, mostly for Ubuntu. The most common thing you hear from someone who doesn't know their rear end from a hole in the ground is, "I'm computer literate".... No you're not, you're Windows Literate. Once you convince them that Linux is Not Windows, and there is almost zero comparisons, you can actually get somewhere teaching them. Unlearning Windows is about the hardest thing for a new Linux user. I guess however, if we'd been spoonfed Linux for 30yrs, then someone wanted us to use XP, it'd be hard to unlearn the Linux way.

I really only use Linux, and only have an XP partition to sync my Zune..(one of the few things MS did right... :))

IGF

It seems comprehension is at an all time low here or some folks just aren't reading what was posted :)

I have set up and run SEVERAL distros of Linux over the years I don't need to, "unlearn" window$ I need Linux to do a better job handling audio/video codecs commonly used today. I need an O/S and software capable of running at least 2001 technologies with some degree of reliability. All I'm saying is that even today after all these years there is not a distro that can fully replace either of the two mainstream O/S's without settling for mediocrity. Thus I will continue to dual boot Linux for a stable platform and speed and window$ for audio/video and it's comprehensive internet performance.

syntaxerrorsix
11-27-2008, 06:18
He's just frustrated with the Linux.


Yes he is, but not for the reasons expounded by the replies, and not any more so than I am frustrated with window$.

noway
11-27-2008, 06:25
It seems comprehension is at an all time low here or some folks just aren't reading what was posted :)

I have set up and run SEVERAL distros of Linux over the years I don't need to, "unlearn" window$ I need Linux to do a better job handling audio/video codecs commonly used today. I need an O/S and software capable of running at least 2001 technologies with some degree of reliability. All I'm saying is that even today after all these years there is not a distro that can fully replace either of the two mainstream O/S's without settling for mediocrity. Thus I will continue to dual boot Linux for a stable platform and speed and window$ for audio/video and it's comprehensive internet performance.

Then if you are true in what your claiming your are know and experience, then pick up a degree in programming and learn how to use make and a gnu complier ;)

You can't complain about and 1> an OS that free 2> has free compiler lib and components 3> where the source is FREE 4> and only limitation in your mind & thinking and hardware limits, truely limits you.

I can't make the above claims with windows or DOS :whistling:

syntaxerrorsix
11-27-2008, 06:33
What are you looking for?
You say you're a DOS user putting up with Windows, so why don't you go back to the command line completely?

What do you want it to do?
For me, the OS configures hardware and launches programs. When I install Linux, I just install the base Debian (just cli). Setup the repositories then install a basic environment and aptitude. Boot in and use aptitude for whatever programs and codecs I want. The last time I installed Flash Player easily by going to video.google.com (not youtube) and clicking install.

How much do you want it to be like Windows and how much not like Windows? Linux is very Unix with a possible Windows-ish GUI slapped on top. You want command line, it's all there. You want GUI everything, it's knowing what to install and what not to.

Windows-like setup
KDE-core
aptitude
open office
firefox
amarok or vlc
k3b
guarddog

Unix-like
There's tons of compilers if you want to do programming plus much more. Everything is available through the CLI. GUI's just allow people to change things quicker.

Most distros are just slapped together software with some support based on what the group wanted. Last time I looked, 129 distros were based on Debian. I'd just prefer to start with a stripped Debian and add what I want.

Again, what do you want it to do?


I am using a Debian based version (albeit not stripped down). Flash nor Gstreamer and it's associated plugins or Gnash seem to be able to handle half of the video sources I encounter online. Java applets are hit and miss. Resolution in Gnash is awful.

I've used Mozilla mail/browser and OpenOffice for years with little complaint and run small window$ applications through wine when needed.

I would like to be as productive online as other O/S's for one. I understand Flash is proprietary but Gnash just isn't cutting it at this point.

I would like to switch to Linux and not settle with the knowledge if I was using another O/S I would be having a better experience. "Free" only goes so far. I don't need another full time project.

syntaxerrorsix
11-27-2008, 06:35
Then if you are true in what your claiming your are know and experience, then pick up a degree in programming and learn how to use make and a gnu complier ;)

You can't complain about and 1> an OS that free 2> has free compiler lib and components 3> where the source is FREE 4> and only limitation in your mind & thinking and hardware limits, truely limits you.

I can't make the above claims with windows or DOS :whistling:

You have a valid point. However I don't feel that I will be the one fixing problems that a million more experienced programmers haven't accomplished yet.

syntaxerrorsix
11-27-2008, 06:42
You gave a great explanation of the codec issue...... :cheers:

Truth be told, most Linux distros, although the codecs aren't preinstalled, usually have an easy way of installing them that is "unofficial"... For example, for Ubuntu variants, you can add the medibuntu repository, and have all the codecs, DVD support, etc.. installed in about 45sec.

http://www.medibuntu.org/

Nothing against the OP, but you're either 1. Getting piss poor help or 2. You're just not looking/trying. You don't need a subsitute for Flash, just use Flash... Most video/sound plugins, are included included in the w32codec pack in the medibuntu repo. Now if you're using 64bit, thats a whole other issue, 64bit, IMO, is not quite ready yet for Ubuntu, to many drivers not available, some programs are not available in 64bit, etc.... Suse or Fedora are probably the best 64bit distros.

IGF
Thanks for the link I'm d/l the package now. BTW I'm using a 32bit system.
I installed Flash from day one with no appreciable differences.

Dandapani
11-27-2008, 08:02
I really only use Linux, and only have an XP partition to sync my Zune..(one of the few things MS did right... :))

I only use Linux (Fedora 9) at home on my desk machine. I recently purchases an Asus EEE netbook with Linux (Xandros).

I'm forced to use Windblows at work, but I loaded Cygwin and have a complete set of GNU applications at my command line fingertips. I don't run X but do run RXVT command line windows with KSH as my login shell. VI and KSH (in VI mode) is hardwired from my elbows down.

I am currently doing Java/Groovy development all done using VI, and CLI ant. The GUI only guys (Eclipse) are amazed at the speed I can do a change, compile, test cycle.

I've booted Ubuntu a few times. Reminds me of Fedora. I think Ubuntu is the Linux Distro De'jour, especially for beginners. I was happy with the look and feel, but too many years running RH make it my choice of Linux.

(Before Linux, I was running FreeBSD, but it started to lag in desktop support for user things like USB devices such as flash card readers, and such, so I switched to Linux. Ya, I'm a Unix user. Worked for Bell Labs in the late 70's and 80's when Unix was THE OS in Bell Labs. Even had Dennis Ritchie play System Admin for me once on a system I was testing, a CRAY supercomputer running Unix! :) )

d3athp3nguin
11-27-2008, 11:27
I tip my hat to Ubuntu for developing hardware driver wizards and codec wizards, but in an effort to be more "user friendly" and cutting edge, I think they made it less stable. Maybe I just had bad luck, but the only computer I had during college- a toshiba laptop with broadcom/intel chips- did NOT like Ubuntu. Every time I upgraded to a new version, something broken would start working and something else that was working would break.


I actually found Debian's testing branch easier to work with- it's fast as hell, it has pretty recent packages and has been more stable and consistent for me than Ubuntu. I stopped expecting out-of-the-box functionality from Linux a while ago though. I think the biggest sticking points for Linux's approachability are:

1. WIRELESS NETWORKING. If you have a new laptop, good luck and godspeed.
2. Proprietary codecs, Flash, libdvdcss, etc.
3. Learning curve for command line and system configuration when trying to get the above two to work.

Remarkably, Linux found a solid niche in the netbook market- virtually every popular netbook out there has a Linux variant. When pre-configured for a standardized and vendor supported hardware platform, Linux can really shine for the everyday user- it can run more efficiently on the netbooks' toned-down hardware, and companies can make an elegant, streamlined GUI that hides the penguin underneath. The effect is that your portable device "just works" for what it was made for, and geeks can extract tons more functionality from it because of the Linux backend.

As long as M$ can shell out gobs of cash to get hardware support for new devices, then Linux will be behind when it comes to working out of the box with new (or proprietary) hardware drivers.

Big Al 24
11-27-2008, 12:51
I think we were all comprehending you just fine. You were saying that Linux hasn't come that far in the last 5 years, and several people strongly disagreed with you.

DoubleWide
11-27-2008, 17:57
I am using a Debian based version (albeit not stripped down). Flash nor Gstreamer and it's associated plugins or Gnash seem to be able to handle half of the video sources I encounter online. Java applets are hit and miss. Resolution in Gnash is awful.

I've used Mozilla mail/browser and OpenOffice for years with little complaint and run small window$ applications through wine when needed.

I would like to be as productive online as other O/S's for one. I understand Flash is proprietary but Gnash just isn't cutting it at this point.

I would like to switch to Linux and not settle with the knowledge if I was using another O/S I would be having a better experience. "Free" only goes so far. I don't need another full time project.


Well, don't use Gnash for one. Just install flash. Like I said the easiest install is to go to video.google.com when you don't have anything installed. Are you sure it's java applets and not activeX that's the problem? Java should be fine as it's cross-platform. ActiveX is Microsoft, so you have to understand that. I'm not sure of the state of ActiveX on Linux. Mozilla was working on it, Codeweavers (purchase) had something, and there are variations of running lE under Linux.
What video sources are you running into?
Most should be flash, followed by WMV, quicktime, realplayer.

IndyGunFreak
11-27-2008, 20:46
Thanks for the link I'm d/l the package now. BTW I'm using a 32bit system.
I installed Flash from day one with no appreciable differences.

If you're having problems w/ a Site, PM me or Link it here, and I'll look at it, I rarely have issues on multimedia sites, and I'll tell you if you've got a codec missing, etc. Streaming audio/video can be a problem sometimes, but most the time it works fine for me..

IGF

IndyGunFreak
11-27-2008, 20:55
It seems comprehension is at an all time low here or some folks just aren't reading what was posted :)

I have set up and run SEVERAL distros of Linux over the years I don't need to, "unlearn" window$ I need Linux to do a better job handling audio/video codecs commonly used today. I need an O/S and software capable of running at least 2001 technologies with some degree of reliability. All I'm saying is that even today after all these years there is not a distro that can fully replace either of the two mainstream O/S's without settling for mediocrity. Thus I will continue to dual boot Linux for a stable platform and speed and window$ for audio/video and it's comprehensive internet performance.

My reading comprehension is fine, I addressed what you said were issues, as I rarely have the *issues* you describe. I'm not saying there will never be an issue, etc, but I rarely go to a site that doesn't work for me.


I type this under Ubuntu/Firefox and a patiently update/research/yell at the monitor and hope that someday there will be a Distro that will combine stability, usability and a half way decent library of codecs that isn't stumped by 2001 technology.

Again, I think your issue is needing to unlearn windows. Not slamming you, but I probably set up a dozen distros before I finally got that through my head.

As far as 2001 technologies, I realy have no idea what you're talking about. My laptop I bought new about 3 weeks before Christmas 07, other than wireless, everything worked fine out of the box. The wireless chipset was not supported yet, but was supported w/ a patch to madwifi. I didn't figure this out until a couple of months later. The PC I have that I built, and the garage sale PC I have, both run Linux just fine.

IGF

NavyLT
11-28-2008, 01:17
Mandriva ONE 2009, KDE version. Boot from the DVD and just run it from the DVD. If you like what you see, install it to your harddrive. Google for EASYUPRMI. From the EASYUPRMI website add the PLF (Penguin Liberation Front) software sources.

I can do a ton of stuff in Linux especially with multimedia that Windoze won't let me do. With the PLF software sources you can get access to all the codecs for the Mindoze proprietary file types. On my HP Notebook, Linux runs twice as fast and uses 1/4 of the disk space as Windoze.

noway
11-28-2008, 02:10
One other suggestion I would like to thrown in; if you have a hardware item that does not have support in linux, contact the mfg'er.

You might be surprise that they have a driver patch and would love for somebody to install it to get some beta testing. You can also join the linux developer group, to see whatelse everybody is doing and once again find the kernel patch that would allow you to use your card.

Try that with MS and see how far you get :upeyes:

Linux has a good evolution of features, support and ideals and people are quick to getting things movin when enough persons ask for it.

i.e

look at how Open Office got to start and it's nowaday fame & cross platform support.

Unix'N'Guns
11-28-2008, 04:47
...as I rarely have the *issues* you describe...I think your issue is needing to unlearn windows.


No kidding. I, like others here, have been using *NIX for quite some time. I have yet to have any of the problems others flood forums with. I guess I've been lucky...

IMHO, you have hit the problem "dead center". Folks have such a hard time transitioning from windows. They get frustrated with the learning curve way too quickly. The second it does not act in a windows-like fashion, they want to jump ship.

And it is no where near as "hard"* as it used to be. 90% of today's Linux distros sail right through a windows-like installation and hardware config.

To the OP:
Don't give up.
Read, read, and read some more. I'm not being sarcastic, it works for me.

*hard==not like windows.

syntaxerrorsix
11-28-2008, 15:26
Well, don't use Gnash for one. Just install flash. Like I said the easiest install is to go to video.google.com when you don't have anything installed. Are you sure it's java applets and not activeX that's the problem? Java should be fine as it's cross-platform. ActiveX is Microsoft, so you have to understand that. I'm not sure of the state of ActiveX on Linux. Mozilla was working on it, Codeweavers (purchase) had something, and there are variations of running lE under Linux.
What video sources are you running into?
Most should be flash, followed by WMV, quicktime, realplayer.

It appears one of the larger problems was Gnash and a broken version of Macromedia Flash Player that SPM had loaded. Uninstalling the package and d/l straight from the site corrected the majority of my video issues; save for the relatively poor quality of the graphics it does in fact work now. Thanks for the help.

syntaxerrorsix
11-28-2008, 15:30
If you're having problems w/ a Site, PM me or Link it here, and I'll look at it, I rarely have issues on multimedia sites, and I'll tell you if you've got a codec missing, etc. Streaming audio/video can be a problem sometimes, but most the time it works fine for me..

IGF

It's the, "most the time" part I'm having difficulties with :)

I do believe that I have the audio video problem sorted out for the most part. Re-installing a working version of the Flash plugin and disabling pulseaudio seems to have greatly improved performance. Thanks again.

IndyGunFreak
11-28-2008, 20:37
It's the, "most the time" part I'm having difficulties with :)

I do believe that I have the audio video problem sorted out for the most part. Re-installing a working version of the Flash plugin and disabling pulseaudio seems to have greatly improved performance. Thanks again.

When I say "most" of the time, I'm saying I've not had a codec problem in probably 5-6mo.

Regardless, glad you got it figured out.

IGF

syntaxerrorsix
11-29-2008, 08:04
When I say "most" of the time, I'm saying I've not had a codec problem in probably 5-6mo.

Regardless, glad you got it figured out.

IGF

Thanks for the help, rant or not I am committed to doing everything within my skill set to make this work and to learn as much as I can.

Tennessee Slim
11-29-2008, 11:03
In terms of ease of installation, installation of apps management of patches/updates, I'm shocked and appalled how easy (and Windblows-like) Leenuks has become.

Codecs? Oh yeah, I remember what those were. I've been using VLC so long, I'd almost forgotten.

Big Al 24
11-29-2008, 18:39
No kidding. I, like others here, have been using *NIX for quite some time. I have yet to have any of the problems others flood forums with. I guess I've been lucky...

IMHO, you have hit the problem "dead center". Folks have such a hard time transitioning from windows. They get frustrated with the learning curve way too quickly. The second it does not act in a windows-like fashion, they want to jump ship.

And it is no where near as "hard"* as it used to be. 90% of today's Linux distros sail right through a windows-like installation and hardware config.

To the OP:
Don't give up.
Read, read, and read some more. I'm not being sarcastic, it works for me.

*hard==not like windows.

Yeah, I forgot to mention how much of a PITA installation used to be. I'd like to dig out that copy of Mandrake, I think it was 4-6 floppies or something- and just getting it to boot up was hell.

CRANKLIN
11-30-2008, 07:48
I think linux HAS come VERY far.... maybe not as much as you would like in terms of user-friendliness. It will probably never be as "PnP" as Windows or OSX... and I hope it never will. Why? Because that's the beauty of linux... its hackability. It seems more automation = less control.

The question is, what do you wish to use your OS for? If you're a gamer, Windows will probably suit you better than Linux + Wine.

I also noticed that many "dual-booters" tend to neglect their linux partition and/or have trouble breaking the windows habit. I used to dual-boot all of my boxes until Windows Vista finally pushed me over the edge.

Now I ONLY use linux because:
- I am not much of a gamer
- I LOVE the command-line and I hate the mouse.... Matter of fact, I only fire up X for my browser (and even my browser uses the vimperator plugin so I can do everything with my keyboard using VIM-like commands)
- screw eclipse, etc. My IDE of choice is vim.
- I cannot live without gcc, gdb, screen, grep, and the rest of my cli arsenal
- I love my bash scripts, my .bashrc
- I prefer apache, mysql, bind9, postfix, etc... over their windows counterparts.
- ability to "sudo iwconfig wlan0 mode monitor" ;)

... and countless other reasons which I will not get into

Unix'N'Guns
11-30-2008, 19:59
- screw eclipse, etc. My IDE of choice is vim.


WHAT!?!?!?
What about EMACS?!

Just kidding. I'm a Vi man myself. I'm just surprised no one has started that fight yet. (knock on wood).

Emacs: A great operating system; it's just lacking a decent editor. :cool:

noway
12-01-2008, 06:36
I think linux HAS come VERY far.... maybe not as much as you would like in terms of user-friendliness. It will probably never be as "PnP" as Windows or OSX... and I hope it never will. Why? Because that's the beauty of linux... its hackability. It seems more automation = less control.

The question is, what do you wish to use your OS for? If you're a gamer, Windows will probably suit you better than Linux + Wine.

I also noticed that many "dual-booters" tend to neglect their linux partition and/or have trouble breaking the windows habit. I used to dual-boot all of my boxes until Windows Vista finally pushed me over the edge.

Now I ONLY use linux because:
- I am not much of a gamer
- I LOVE the command-line and I hate the mouse.... Matter of fact, I only fire up X for my browser (and even my browser uses the vimperator plugin so I can do everything with my keyboard using VIM-like commands)
- screw eclipse, etc. My IDE of choice is vim.
- I cannot live without gcc, gdb, screen, grep, and the rest of my cli arsenal
- I love my bash scripts, my .bashrc
- I prefer apache, mysql, bind9, postfix, etc... over their windows counterparts.
- ability to "sudo iwconfig wlan0 mode monitor" ;)

... and countless other reasons which I will not get into

also to add;

- linux doesn't blue screen
- most of the programs works, if you want updates, get that pkg ( i.e apt rpm ) and or source code and recompile.
- binaries seem smaller and not as fat as what a window binary would be
- better network supports and more freatures
- add what you need to the OS via compiling the kernel, takenth away what you don't need ( not even remotely possible in MS/windozes)
- quicker upon boot up
- network operation is faster and network support is better
- if your interested in network security and hacks( kinda what I do ) then linux is the best platform for that
- when things break you have the ability to debug what's happening ( try that in windows the best you get is some stupid error code or description that lead to more descriptions ;( )
- and lastly, alot of business are realizing the above and then comparing dollars spent on one of the popular business OS/apps and migrating away, linux admin and support are picking up and a need for knowledgeable admins is on the rise.

FWIW: the PICO/PINE pkg has a editor that's much simpler than learning VI but all unixes comes with VI so that what I think you should learned 1st.

Tennessee Slim
12-01-2008, 15:03
...I'm a Vi man myself....
+1. I know any UNIX box I happen to need to work on is always going to have Bourne shell and vi. Hell, I still do an edlin (http://www.computerhope.com/edlin.htm) refresher from time to time (and yes, it has come in handy).

noway
12-01-2008, 16:31
+1. I know any UNIX box I happen to need to work on is always going to have Bourne shell and vi. Hell, I still do an edlin (http://www.computerhope.com/edlin.htm) refresher from time to time (and yes, it has come in handy).

Now you want a ***** of and edit Mr. ED is it.

CRANKLIN
12-02-2008, 05:26
Emacs: A great operating system; it's just lacking a decent editor. :cool:

:rofl: