unix n00bs

unix n00bs (i.e. most of you here) make me shit my pants

for the love of god, people, using unix for a month is not enough to make you knowledgeable in its ways and give advice to others. please refrain from making yourself look like complete utter idiots (mind you, this is hard to achieve since idiots are the norm in CS) by giving horribly shitty authorative-sounding suggestions based on shit you read two days ago on linuxtoday and newsforge.

discuss.

>Or, god forbid, they want to use software you buy off the shelf (your mom won't be running Wine to use photoshop or quicken).

OH NOES MY PROGRAMS I BOUGHT FOR WINDOWS WON'T RUN ON LOONIX. No shit? No one complains that their linux programs don't run on windows. If you have a finanicial investment in windows, then you're an idiot for switching over to linux.

As far as non-standard hardware goes, from my experience if it gives linux problems, it's eventually going to give windows problems. As far as the 'compiled into the binary by default' argument goes...what the fuck? If you know enough to care, then you should know enough to know ./configure --enter-a-option-i-read-by-typing-configure-dash-dash-help && make && make install

I've been using linux for years, and I haven't *needed* to recompile jack shit since the 1990's. So, really, I think you're making up excuses out of whole cloth on that one. The only possible exception I can think of is watching dvds; but that's because of legal issues surrounding dvd decryption, not technical issues.

Either you can't read, or you're just too emotionally tied up with linux/bsd/whatever.

WON'T RUN ON LOONIX.

Of course not. Except that John Doe wants those programs. So do I. Strike one.

you should know enough to know ./configure --enter-a-option-i-read-by-typing-configure-dash-dash-help && make && make install

You and I do. I ran slackware for years, and that's how I used to install most my shit. That doesn't mean I want to waste time doing it. And John Doe won't do it, because the command line is scary to him. Strike two.

recompile jack shit since the 1990's.

You haven't compiled anything the entire time? You're full of shit. Even with Debian you sometimes have to compile things. And John Doe isn't going to fuck with apt-get either. Talking about which, apt-get is fugly.

By the way, strike three.

it's eventually going to give windows problems.

Now we know you're full of shit. It might, but it's a whole less likely (and less painful) with windows. Last I checked, my scanner isn't supported by SANE. My graphics cards doesn't have accelerated 3D either. 2.6.11.11 just partially broke my synaptics touchpad. One PCMCIA card doesn't work, and the other took several hours hacking with card services to work. Etc.

This isn't a good desktop experience. Is your head stuffed so far up your ass you can't see this?

>>42 if john doe wants those programs, why are they switching to linux? that's asinine; and -as you point out- you should know better.

You haven't compiled anything the entire time?

I said that haven't *needed* to, not that I hadn't. I have compiled shit either out of curiosity or to do optimisations; but to just have a functional KDE or Gnome desktop that I can surf the web and listen to music with? No, I haven't *HAD* to.

>>41
I don't use windows because it is virtually impossible to automate effeciently and quickly. I can't even string apps together without getting excessively hot and heavy. Even then, next year a new one will come out and break compatibility.

And lunix is much better in the 'break compatibility' bit?

>>45 To the extent that if you want to tie applications together using perl, c or shell programming it's more likely to work linux version to linux version that it will between windows versions.

why are they switching to linux?

I'm not arguing about switching. I'm arguing about whether OSS has a good desktop experience. For most of what counts, it doesn't, and it's not exactly GNOME or KDE's fault either. John Doe won't use it, and a lot of older geeks are fed up with stupid shit too. It's improving... but they were promising the moon back in 97 as well. I'd rather have a Mac for everyday use.

Today I glanced at slashdot, and what do I see? http//linux.slashdot.org/...

Most of the comments reflect exactly how I feel. And then of course there's this guy, who was about as hard-core as you could get, but...: http://jwz.livejournal.com/494040.html

>>47

When you bring up running applications under wine, you're exactly arguing about switching.

The only compelling argument you've put forth is regarding scanners and drawing pads. That point I'll give you, but again, if it doesn't work for you, don't use it. Linux isn't always the answer, neither is windows and I'm not going to comment on the Mac.

And citing comments from slashdot proves little more than does citing articles from adequacy.org; given the intelligence at adequacy, it actually probably proves less.

Did you even read what's in there? I acknowledge slashdot is pretty damn inane by now, but most those comments are valid. Even the village idiot can speak the truth every now and again.

you're exactly arguing about switching.

Not really. I'm pointing out that people buy software and expect it to work. But it won't. This isn't linux's fault, but it still reduces its attractiveness as a desktop. There's plenty of commercial software that has no comparable OSS counterpart (and vice versa, but primarily for server and development applications).

Linux isn't always the answer, neither is windows and I'm not going to comment on the Mac.

That much I do agree with. I just wish linux had less foibles, because, ya know, I'd like it to be the answer more often. Maybe I'm just disillusioned, considering they've been calling it the year of the desktop every year since I started using it. Hasn't happened.

The Mac though... now there's an interesting question. It does most of what linux does, but more elegantly and with less hassle, the price being money and flexibility.

I'm just going to keep on using Ubuntu when I want a good desktop and Gentoo when I want to actually have control over my system. The hell with you guys.

Gentoo is for ricer faggots; use BSD instead.

Can't play games on BSD, I'll use it as a server and maybe for development or something. Which one do you suggest?

>>52
You can play Linux games on FreeBSD if you have a nvidia graphic card.

P.S. this thread is teh suck

>>53
It's sucked since the first post.
Are you saying I could play NWN and Doom3 on FreeBSD?

>>54
Yes. As I said you only need to have a nvidia card and use nvidia's proprietary FreeBSD drivers and they will work fine.
BTW for NWN linux client there is even a port in FreeBSD's port tree.
http://www.freshports.org/games/linux-nwnclient/

The only thing BSD gives you is desktop ready performance (see OSX)

>>52
Use FreeBSD if you want the most apps or if you want a BSD tightly optimised for the x86 platform

Use NetBSD if you want a BSD for your toaster

Use OpenBSD if it absolutely, positively has to be secure

Use PCBSD if you're a retard.

Of course, if you own a mac SURPRISE! You're not running BSD, you're running MACH.

>>34
 > My time is valuable.

Aww Gee, you must be one of those people who didn't need to get a computer.

 > Who is going to reimburse me for the time lost?

Who would reimburse you for the time you'd lost if you couldn't fix the system and just put up with it not working like_nearly_all_laypeople_with_busted_computers?
"One hour becoming familiar with a computer is worth 300 hours of knowing jack-shit about them."

 > Do you know your car inside out?

Motorbike: yes. I do unassisted solo rides across the country, and have done serious roadside repairs in a situtation that otherwise would've meant dumping the bike. (One of my panniers is filled with tools..)

 > Can you fix your cellphone?

Yes, resoldered a memory card socket with a dry joint. "While I had the case open..", I modded it with an external battery tap to improve the runtime, too.

 > Do you do all the electrical wiring and plumbing in your house?

It's illegal to do that here, but yes. (My Mum's place was wired by a dodgy ex-boyfriend of hers. I fixed it from killing people.)

 > Do you do all your taxes yourself, after reading the tax code?

Yes.

 > Do you do your own legal opinions?

I'm not doing 10-15 years for 50 counts of break/enter/steal...

 > Do you give a shit about these things?

"Hmm... My life and/or livelyhood depends on this. Should I take the time to become familiar with the tools I rely on? A tough call.."

I read "Zen and the art of Motorcycle Maintance" when I was a wee tot. Almost everything went over my head at the time, but it did focus my ideals of what a "Professional" was.

 > People who don't need to know the minutiae of some fancy calculator with memory to do their vocation?

How many billions of dollars and man-hours are lost every year through unskilled people using computers? How many people are seriously injured or _killed_ because the employee was not conscientious enough to be an expert at -everything- they needed to be because they're a lazy fuck whose "time is valuable"? ... "A computer on every desk" is a fucking scam, and that's a Computer Professional of 20 years saying that.

>>58 doesn't get it either. Why should someone learn something irrelevant to them when they don't have to? Get an OS that does a better job of fulfilling the needs of the user, and not being a religion.

Your elitist faggotry is idiotic. There's not enough time in one life to learn everything, so people concentrate on what's important to their field and leave irrelevancies to those to whom it matters. Your time must be worthless to you.

>>59
No <i>your</i> elitist faggotry is idiotic.
My OS does do a better job of fulfilling my needs. So does 58's I imagine. Quit telling people what OS they should use you ugly hate-filled man.

>>55
Thanks. I was toying with the idea of trying out FreeBSD as a desktop. I guess I'll put it on my list of things to dual-boot. I still need to decide between Net- and Open- for the fileserver though.

Also: how do I shot italics?

Quit telling people what OS they should use you ugly hate-filled man.

With all due respect, you completely fail reading comprehension and logic. I clearly answer this elsewhere. Reread the thread before going off half-cocked.

If I may quote:
"Get an OS that does a better job of fulfilling the needs of the user, and not being a religion."

That looks to me like it's written in the imperative voice. Did I miss something?

Yes. Yes you did. Quite clearly.

So are you going explain what it is you actually did mean?

Exactly what it says, you just interpreted it wrong.

"get an OS that does a better job of fulfilling the needs of the user" != "telling people what OS they should use"

Like you said, the needs of the user. The irony is you're protecting someone else who is exactly counter to this point. Not everyone wants to learn the arcana of *nix when they can do just as well with another desktop. According to him nobody who isn't a computer expert should touch the things.

I don't know why people think my having issues with *nix somehow means I think they shouldn't use it. I use it too, you know, I'm just aware of the shortcomings. The desktop experience (which is what this whole brouhaha is about) could be a whole lot better.

OK you weren't specifically telling anyone which OS to use, but you were clearly telling people which OS NOT to use.

I'm sorry you interpreted it that way. Perhaps you should reread all of >>59 in context of >>58.

Clueless people should just stick with typewriters for work and TVs for entertainment.

>>69 age for truth, and also 70GET

>>69
Winner.

I just do this:
- I make up my mind on my exact requeriments.
- I see how much of it does every system meet.
- I see how much time would it cost me to adapt these systems to what I want.
- I usually choose Windows for desktop computing (*), Linux for servers.
- I save my time.

I don't religiously avoid Windows (or Linux), doing so is asinine. And of course, if I'm going to use an OS I must have at least advanced used/basic sysadmin knowledge and must deal with all problems myself.

(*): Oh, and just for the record, I'll say I'm working in the commandline for 80% of the time, and even so, I go for Windows. (Of course, it's not "out of the box" Windows, but my heavily tweaked Windows with a hundred of powerful shell utilities and regex integration.)

"I make up my mind on my exact requeriments."
Software houses would love to have you as a customer ;)

"Of course, it's not "out of the box" Windows, but my heavily tweaked Windows with a hundred of powerful shell utilities and regex integration."
This is what you call "saving your time"?

>>72

Well, some of these utilities are as old as Windows NT 3.5, and most of them aren't available as they want them in Linux either, so I take special care to write them in Perl or PHP, so I can have a more "portable" command line environment, which I always carry in a Flash disk for my pleasure on any computer I have to work with. So yes, I can say I'm saving a lot of time, because not being able to do what these tools do - even in your standard Linux distro - would take more time.

>>59 is right. You could do about anything in the middle age, but right now I'll be writing software while somebody else installs my A/C and a different company deals with the SDK I use, because we don't have the time to do everything ourselves, and if we did, any piece of software would cost several grands.


What's fun in this thread is half of us are speaking of using Windows vs. Linux, but nobody dares to write the word "Windows" and mask it as "other desktops", because Linux zealots would cut their throat as Windows = baddy bad, *ix = goody good.

>>74
Actually dumbass, a lot of the discussion about "other desktops" refers to OS X, because the important thing about desktops is usability, something Windows doesn't have.

>>75
You just proved his point.

>>76
WHAT point?

Lol

>>77 is poster child for the statement that half of people are below average intelligence.

>>79 is the poster child for "NO U"