# Linux???



## tankgirl (Sep 25, 2009)

Well, Windows has annoyed me for the last time. XP was fruity enough. But Vista is a *&%*^$&^%* abomination. Should have been an abortion.
I don't WANT to know what they've done in Seven. I'm DONE.
So linux is the answer, as I'm stuck with the laptop I've got and configuring a dual boot system is cheaper than buying a new one.

The only question is: Which distro?
So I'm asking if anyone here acutally uses it, which flavor? Why? How advanced a user are you?
Or does anyone have a friend with an opinion?
I've narrowed my ideas down a bit, but I NEED some input from USERS, not people who heard sommat from someone. So I can figure out which one will do what I want, not what it wants.

I'm not a guppy when it comes to computers, not really a noob. Vista confuses me, but I'd swear on a stack of bibles that it's an evil Windows imitation that TRIES to kill itself- it's NOT because I don't know what I'm doing. I got all my training when ME/2000 were new. Most familiar with 98SE, XP, and DOS. I liked and miss DOS, but I like my GUI too, to...an... extent.... Uhm... well, in XP I liked the GUI, but I like 98SE's style.
Candy coated OSs are NOT my gig.

I am SO weird.


----------



## Hozay J Garseeya (Sep 26, 2009)

tankgirl said:


> Well, Windows has annoyed me for the last time. XP was fruity enough. But Vista is a *&%*^$&^%* abomination. Should have been an abortion.
> I don't WANT to know what they've done in Seven. I'm DONE.
> So linux is the answer, as I'm stuck with the laptop I've got and configuring a dual boot system is cheaper than buying a new one.
> 
> ...



So . . . my roommate went to school for computer science and he builds comps and all that jazz, and of course he's a big linux guy. I personally Ubuntu because of him, BUT just thought I'd throw this out there. We were talking the other day and he was saying that Window's finally came through with Window's seven. He's been using it for about two months now and really likes it. When He said that, I looked at him and said "are you fucking with me or are you serious, you're always going on about using Linux." and he was competely honest, he really liked Windows 7.


----------



## tankgirl (Sep 26, 2009)

I'm not going to fund the MS monster any more. 

They could make it sing and dance and I'd still not pay for it. I'm not going to hack it either. It's too shiny. I don't like it and I don't want it. It's tacky.
Stop looking at me that way.

(wonder who got that....)

Anyway, I've thought about it. I'd rather not, mostly because I can't get any decent support for this thing (the idiot techs keep telling me to restore windows, and that is NOT the answer folks), there aren't any good programs (for what I want to do), and I can't get drivers for Vista for half my equipment- and I'm not getting another $1000 all-in-one printing genius box just because Vista doesn't support the blessed thing.
Unfortunately, what I want is an operating system that operates... You know, does more than go online and look pretty. Which is what windows is good for, unless you want a very expensive TV.
Maybe I'll upgrade Vista-- LATER-- after I've got the dual-boot in place.... but I'm not thinking so. I'm actually thinking that after the warranty expires, I'm nuking Vista and installing XP. We'll have to see though.
I'll keep that vote for Seven in mind.


----------



## djudex (Sep 26, 2009)

I've found the best Linux flavour for the novice user to be Fedora

http://fedoraproject.org/

It's as easy to install as Windows and it's pretty much plug and play. Burn the ISO to a cdrom using Nero or whatever program you have and load the OS just like you normally would with Windows. The GUI is pretty decent and as long as your willing to go along with the fact that there may not be the latest and greatest drivers for all the newest hardware out there it's a perfectly suitable alternative.


----------



## desertcheeseman (Sep 26, 2009)

tankgirl said:


> I'd rather not, mostly because I can't get any decent support for this thing (the idiot techs keep telling me to restore windows, and that is NOT the answer folks), there aren't any good programs (for what I want to do), and I can't get drivers for Vista for half my equipment- and I'm not getting another $1000 all-in-one printing genius box just because Vista doesn't support the blessed thing.



I hate to burst your bubble, but you could say the same thing about Linux too. I've installed Linux on a number of desktops and laptops and always there is one piece of hardware that I can't figure out how to work: a video card in one, a wireless card in another, sound in most of them. The only computer I've managed to make everything work in is my MacBook and I use Mac OS X 99% of the time on it, so it doesn't count. Before you take the plunge, you should investigate your laptop's hardware on Linux forums to see if anyone's had any issues with it already. A search such as "[laptop model number] linux compatibility" or "[peripheral name] linux compatibility" on Google will turn up a number of different useful answers.

As far as software is concerned, while there are a lot of excellent open source Linux programs that cover a wide range of uses from office functions (OpenOffice) to web browsing (Firefox, et al.) to graphic design (GIMP, Inkscape) many genres of software are poorly represented (games) or not available at all (CAD software). What do you intend to be doing in Linux? If what you need is only available in Windows, then you're screwed. There is a Windows compatibility program called Wine but it does not support everything. Your mileage may vary.

As far as support is concerned, pretty much every distro has a forum where you can post questions about Linux. It's not like the old days where the Linux gurus responded to all newbie questions with a grunt and a reply of RTFM. Especially on the Ubuntu forums, you can get a lot of good advice. However, if you are looking for one-on-one talk with a live tech support representative, that usually doesn't exist unless you purchase a business license for distros such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux and SuSE.

As for me, I've used Linux, FreeBSD and various Unix-like systems for about 10 years and I've found you can get a lot done with them. It takes more work sometimes than in Windows, but once you get everything working it's more or less smooth sailing. I wish you success in your journey


----------



## BigChaz (Sep 26, 2009)

I'm a software developer and I work everyday with Linux and Windows desktops. Linux is awesome for certain tasks, Windows is awesome for certain tasks.

Being an every day desktop? I can't imagine how Linux can be considered superior to Windows for someone who is not an expert and who doesn't keep up with the latest and greatest. Especially compared to Windows 7. God damn is Windows 7 amazing. It is the Windows that the world has been waiting for.

If you are dead set on using Linux, go for Ubuntu. It's pretty solid for an everyday desktop.


----------



## tankgirl (Sep 26, 2009)

Far as software goes, I'm looking for a better graphics package. And windows doesn't have CRAP that isn't fucking PHOTO editing, unless you like the idea of paying $600 for a program that draws instead of manipulates. Mac has some good graphics progs, but linux is cheaper. I don't even know if I could load mac os and progs on this thing.
And for some reason- maybe I'm not looking in the right places- I am NOT finding a lot about compatibility topics for a toshiba. *shrugs* Not like I'm trying hard right now, not much time, but nothing sceraming at me "This is it!" I'll try agian later.
As for "latest and greatest" this thing almost is. I just got it in march. I hate it.

So what the smeg is up with seven? It's just another version of windows that's gonna seem neat until you let it restart after its' first update and then it'll puke, like friggin always.
Or does this one actually do what you say, and not what it wants to?

And the windows only thing is why I'm going dual-boot instead of a complete rewrite over windows.


----------



## tankgirl (Sep 26, 2009)

BigChaz said:


> I'm a software developer and I work everyday with Linux and Windows desktops. Linux is awesome for certain tasks, Windows is awesome for certain tasks.
> 
> Being an every day desktop? I can't imagine how Linux can be considered superior to Windows for someone who is not an expert and who doesn't keep up with the latest and greatest. Especially compared to Windows 7. God damn is Windows 7 amazing. It is the Windows that the world has been waiting for.
> 
> If you are dead set on using Linux, go for Ubuntu. It's pretty solid for an everyday desktop.


 
Simple. Very simple.
If I ever see that "total security center" thing pop up again, I am going to turn this thing into an explosive and send it to the MS offices.

I have kaspersky 2009 AV and windows keeps telling me that I have no AV, and it won't give me an option to turn notifications off, it just tells me to pay $80 for some damn thing I don't need. I have service pack 2, I have all the damned updates, and I am about to kill someone over all those stupid "you don't have permission to do that" and "u ned 2 senz uz moneez" messages.
I have to ctrl-alt-del -> task manager -> END PROCESS TSC.EXE every fucking time I have to restart to make it quit scanning and hogging my sysres.

I want an OS that just does what I tell it to. If I fuck up and tell it wrong, that's my fault. It should not be trying to make ME do what IT wants: IT is the COMPUTER, I am the HUMAN BEING.
And if it's an AI thing, it needs to speak up and say hello and we'll start cooperating. But in the meantime, it's a stupid BOX, it's not alive, and I am VERY tired of arguing with inanimate objects.
Besides. Linux is, from what I hear, more likely to come alive than any windows version out there. ^.^


----------



## desertcheeseman (Sep 26, 2009)

BigChaz said:


> God damn is Windows 7 amazing. It is the Windows that the world has been waiting for.



I'm afraid I haven't been following all the Windows 7 hype. What makes it better than, say, XP?


----------



## deepreflection (Sep 26, 2009)

The central points I got from your posts Tankgirl were...


> To paraphrase:
> I want a graphics program! What's up with 7? What Linux Distro? How much support will I get?
> 
> I'm out of time right now. I need some facts and some easy to cope with information sources.


I'll first offer that support in Linux is just as bad as Windows. It's different in that you don't get an outsourced support person on the phone grilling you for your marketing information to then NOT answer your windows question. Instead you get zealots on a linux forum bashing one choice over another because they have a favorite and a personal agenda.

I think you'll have to install a couple distros to see what kind of support you get out of the box. It's true that some devices rely on a windows driver and in linux they're nightmares. Wireless cards are renown. You have a Toshiba and that's good. They are popular and so lots of posts about the models and support you can expect. 

I think you could download the Ubuntu Desktop DVD/CD and give it a shot straight out of the box. It's target audience includes "normal people" who do not want to go Windows. They put in extra effort to achieve that depth. I give this Ubuntu the nod. It has multi-media codecs for MPEG and AVI etc. When this is built into the package management it's an easy win. Here's the hardware compatibility database for Ubuntu http://www.ubuntuhcl.org/

If you don't get good milage there, Fedora or CentOS is the next to try. Fedora is more the future/experimental branch of the Red Hat Linux world. So I have had problems when upgrading from one edition of Fedora to the next. For that reason I like CentOS better because it's closer to the stable Red Hat than Fedora is, on purpose.

I am not sure what you want to do with graphics but The GIMP is versatile albeit not as refined as Photoshop. You can try that on Windows before you get Linux up and running. The other programs you'll have to try in linux.

Here's a link to various graphics packages on linux. You can take them for a test drive, too. If you're not an expert building the software yourself will require a HOWTO/recipe to follow and may be quite challenging (fun?). To keep it easy look for instructions or prebuilt packages that match your distro or best yet, the package is already included in the package management system.

http://www.linfo.org/software_artists.html

As for Windows 7, it's much much better about reducing the UAC Security prompts. It feels faster. Is it worth the $? I wouldn't go there until you can try it for 30 days yourself. I am liking it a lot and watching for a "cheap" way to obtain a license for my home computer. Right now I'm on the last RC.

Any way you go it's going to be more DIY in the linux world. Backups of your data become so incredibly important at that point.


----------



## likeitmatters (Sep 26, 2009)

I have not had a problem with vista at all though it is a memory hog and since I knew that I had dell install the most memory it would fit and then some. vista is a good os and some ways better than xp but overall it is a good os for me at least.

:bow::bow:


----------



## BigChaz (Sep 26, 2009)

tankgirl said:


> Simple. Very simple.
> If I ever see that "total security center" thing pop up again, I am going to turn this thing into an explosive and send it to the MS offices.
> 
> I have kaspersky 2009 AV and windows keeps telling me that I have no AV, and it won't give me an option to turn notifications off, it just tells me to pay $80 for some damn thing I don't need. I have service pack 2, I have all the damned updates, and I am about to kill someone over all those stupid "you don't have permission to do that" and "u ned 2 senz uz moneez" messages.
> ...



You sound pretty biased against Windows so I'm not sure what I could tell you about Windows 7 to make you not rail against the man. It just works, really. It's fast, stable, driver support is the best it's ever been for any version of Windows, etc etc. And like Vista, it looks like it's using a lot of RAM, but that is how Vista and 7 work. They pre-allocate.

As for your problems: 

1) the security center can be disabled extremely easily in the control panel security center settings. If you are turning yours off and it is not actually turning off, you are the first person I've ever seen encounter that and I don't know how to fix it. 

2) If it is asking you to send money, then you probably have spyware installed on your computer that is styled to look like security center and it is trying to get you to buy their software

3) If you are tired of the prompts for needing permission, you need to disable UAC in your control panel.


I mean this in the nicest way, I really do, so don't take this like I am putting you down, ok? But the problems you listed above are novice level compared to the issues you will run into with Linux. I am not saying Linux is bad, but there is a HUGE learning curve and a lot of curveballs that can get thrown your way.


----------



## Jackoblangada (Sep 26, 2009)

He is right about the anti-virus issue. MS does not sell a consumer a/v product. They don't ask for money. You have one of those clever spyware pieces. I would download Malwarebytes and run that and see what it tells you. Keep a good track of the errors and then head over to bleepingcomputers.com, they have for my time, the best forums around on fixing computer issues.

It is also the reason it is not allowing you to disable the security prompts in the security center. There is an option to disable prompts for a/v, firewall etc.

As for Windows 7, I am running the Enterprise edition right now and am mostly very happy with it. Ironically enough though the Microsoft Lifecam doesn't have a driver ready for Windows 7 yet. Should be ready by General Release Oct.22, I hope.


----------



## escapist (Sep 26, 2009)

I'm just gonna toss in my 2 cents and say, 1 I like Vista and 7 is even better. I've had a lot of fun with it.

As for Linux, I have to go with Ubuntu, its just easy to use, easy to install, I remember the painful and long installs of the linux distro's years past. The nice thing about linux is if your running a 64 Bit version you can run just about anything via VMware (yes even Mac OSX which I have on my Vista System).

As a gamer though I would never get rid of windows. Not till a good Direct X library is created for other OS's or emulators.


----------



## BigChaz (Sep 26, 2009)

Jackoblangada said:


> He is right about the anti-virus issue. MS does not sell a consumer a/v product. They don't ask for money. You have one of those clever spyware pieces. I would download Malwarebytes and run that and see what it tells you. Keep a good track of the errors and then head over to bleepingcomputers.com, they have for my time, the best forums around on fixing computer issues.
> 
> It is also the reason it is not allowing you to disable the security prompts in the security center. There is an option to disable prompts for a/v, firewall etc.
> 
> As for Windows 7, I am running the Enterprise edition right now and am mostly very happy with it. Ironically enough though the Microsoft Lifecam doesn't have a driver ready for Windows 7 yet. Should be ready by General Release Oct.22, I hope.



When I plugged my Lifecam into 7 a few days ago, it automatically downloaded and installed the driver. Maybe you should try again?


----------



## nolon2020 (Sep 27, 2009)

Hi 
At my home and at my working place Linux all the way
These systems run Linux at home:
63" inch Plasma TV
Digital Cable TV reciever
Sun Ultra 2
Intel NAS
Logitech Transporter
PowerPC RS-6000
10 Laptops Dell, Lenovo, HP
4 PCs
3 Servers
Sony Xperia X1 mobile phone

and for beginners Ubuntu is the easiest distribution to begin with


----------



## chubloverUK86 (Sep 27, 2009)

BigChaz said:


> I mean this in the nicest way, I really do, so don't take this like I am putting you down, ok? But the problems you listed above are novice level compared to the issues you will run into with Linux. I am not saying Linux is bad, but there is a HUGE learning curve and a lot of curveballs that can get thrown your way.



I have to agree with this. I am not a proponent of Microsoft generally, but the faults listed are less about the their product and more about how you're using it and the time you've taken to configure it. If I buy a big Sony TV but I don't like what's on the TV channels, I don't blame Sony. If I buy a kettle and loads of limescale forms on it from my hard water, I don't blame the kettle manufacturer. Etc etc.

Windows can be evil, but it does not take many steps to generally tame it and shape it in a manner that you want it to work. I skipped Vista, because it's a memory hog on the PCs I've used it on, but I've been using the RC of 7 for several months now, and my opinion echoes that of other people on here. It is fantastic. It recognised all of my hardware on install (not even XP did that), it's fast and smooth and many of the complaints people had of Vista have been thoroughly addressed.

I applaud the open development of Linux and free software in general. But really, you'll be causing yourself much more of a headache with the Linux learning and effort curve. And when you run into problems with it, which you undoubtedly will, you won't even be able to cuss anyone for it, because it's free. Where's the fun in not having cause to moan I ask you? 

Apple are no better. Microsoft will openly rob you of money, whereas Apple are sly, and they'll do it in a way whereby you're actually brainwashed into feeling grateful that you're lining their pockets. My advice is to stick with it, and follow the instructions of others on here and with a bit of time and perseverance you'll get your OS behaving.


----------



## tankgirl (Sep 30, 2009)

BigChaz said:


> You sound pretty biased against Windows so I'm not sure what I could tell you about Windows 7 to make you not rail against the man. It just works, really. It's fast, stable, driver support is the best it's ever been for any version of Windows, etc etc. And like Vista, it looks like it's using a lot of RAM, but that is how Vista and 7 work. They pre-allocate.


 
How.... annoying. 



> 2) If it is asking you to send money, then you probably have spyware installed on your computer that is styled to look like security center and it is trying to get you to buy their software


 
Was researching this shortly after that post, and gosh. Guess what I found. More reasons to wish severe necrotizing crotch rot on the people who design crap like this.



> I mean this in the nicest way, I really do, so don't take this like I am putting you down, ok? But the problems you listed above are novice level compared to the issues you will run into with Linux. I am not saying Linux is bad, but there is a HUGE learning curve and a lot of curveballs that can get thrown your way.


 
Well, yeah, they're small, cause I've beat around the windows bush long enough to not need much help with the rest of it, like running DOS progs in windows vista, or resetting my ip or making the dang modem talk to the router when it pitches one of its' fits, or making most of my old progs install on this thing, or any of the hundreds of other things I'm not mentioning. It's the stupid useless candy-and-safety-padding coated crap I get confused over, because I can't see a point to it. *shrugs* And something I suppose no one else has had a problem with, is when I turn off the user account control, I keep getting these silly messages telling me that the UAC is off. It's weird.
There are a large number of reasons I'll probably end up with a dual boot one of these days, but believe me when I say one of them will not be lack of information.


----------



## Horseman (Oct 3, 2009)

chubloverUK86 said:


> RC of 7 ... recognised all of my hardware on install (not even XP did that)



I know my XP at home certainly doesn't. I installed a wireless router six months ago and it seems to work perfectly, I can't tell that I've done anything wrong in setup. But XP tells me every time on startup that I have "new hardware installed."

It's an older machine and needs replaced. But now that the family is all gone, I'll get a Mac. I can be fully compatible with work, get a lot more done at home in my freelancing business, and have far less concern about viruses and such.

There are those who note that a lot of software isn't ported to a Mac, but you can actually install and run Windows on a Mac if you want, via some native tidbits in OSX. In fact, in 2007, wired.com found that the fastest Windows Vista laptop they'd ever tested was a MacBook Pro running Vista as a dual-boot with OSX.

So if I'm really dying to play some game or whatever in Windows, I should still be able to do it.


----------



## Geodetic_Effect (Oct 8, 2009)

Linux is overrated and on a laptop it will cut your battery life almost in half. windows 7 is to vista as windows xp is to millennium edition. vista is basically a beta version of the newest technology like ME was. ME sucked and then xp perfected the new tech and was great. personally i still run xp pro 64bit, which actually has the same core OS as windows server 2003 not xp, and xp pro x86 on the others. but windows 7 really is the tits. i will be upgrading my desktops in the near future when i build my new server which will run windows server 2008. I used mac os all through school and i hate it. linux is only decent because of the price. you get a lot of control over your system through the command line interface but the average end user will never use it. if you are having problems with vista try a good registry cleaner. vista's performance relies heavily on a clean registry. and obviously good antivirus/antispyware. i hate giving bill gates money because that bastard is rich enough, but there is no better option.


----------



## stan_der_man (Oct 8, 2009)

BigChaz said:


> ...
> 
> If you are dead set on using Linux, go for Ubuntu. It's pretty solid for an everyday desktop.



I'll second what BigChaz and the others said... If you want to go Linux load Ubuntu.

http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download

It's not perfect but it's the most complete, user friendly incarnation of Linux I've seen to date. With Ubuntu 9.04 you get Open Office (word processing spreadsheets, etc just like M.S. Office...) you will get Gimp (a graphics program, more features than M.S. Paint), the Firefox browser that is very capable, some games, and a load of additional features you can load (such as MP3 players / rippers, etc...which you may have to tweak with to get going depending on your audio and video hardware...) Make a bootable CD from the above link and it will guide you through the process.


----------



## tankgirl (Oct 8, 2009)

Geodetic_Effect said:


> Linux is overrated and on a laptop it will cut your battery life almost in half. windows 7 is to vista as windows xp is to millennium edition. vista is basically a beta version of the newest technology like ME was. ME sucked and then xp perfected the new tech and was great. personally i still run xp pro 64bit, which actually has the same core OS as windows server 2003 not xp, and xp pro x86 on the others. but windows 7 really is the tits. i will be upgrading my desktops in the near future when i build my new server which will run windows server 2008. I used mac os all through school and i hate it. linux is only decent because of the price. you get a lot of control over your system through the command line interface but the average end user will never use it. if you are having problems with vista try a good registry cleaner. vista's performance relies heavily on a clean registry. and obviously good antivirus/antispyware. i hate giving bill gates money because that bastard is rich enough, but there is no better option.


 
It better be the tits. 
....It better be tits AND ass! With a nice figure and a good attitude. *smirk*
I had an opportunity to advance order a copy for about 75% cost, so I took my chances and ordered it. After I get Seven up and running, I'll get the dual boot going.
I HATE WAITING FOR NEW SOFTWARE. >.< But I hate Vista more. And it DOES remind me of Windows ME. Nasty padding filled candy coated smeg.

Computers these days remind me of new vehicles.
Why the hell do we try to hard to make everything safe for everyone? What happened to survival of the intelligent? Why are we trying to preserve the lives of stupid people? Why do we want these same morons who got their license out of a crackerjack box and can't drive safely getting online because it's just as easy as driving is, and cluttering up the space online with their lies and garbage and making GOogle lose the links to GOOD sites because of all the smeg. I don't want that. It's getting harder to research ANYTHING because of all the "keyword" sites that are only there because someone put the words you're looking for on that page... And you make the mistake of going to one and all you find is porn... When you were trying to find a chassis wiring diagram for a 64 Dodge truck....
I don't get it. Oh well.


----------



## chubloverUK86 (Oct 8, 2009)

tankgirl said:


> Computers these days remind me of new vehicles.
> Why the hell do we try to hard to make everything safe for everyone? What happened to survival of the intelligent?



Well, intelligence is subjective when it comes to computer knowledge. It's easy to get mixed up between whether something is intelligent or whether it's intuitive.

Be careful what you say. After all, one could argue that an intelligent user would have known, through research, about the myriad free and effective security programs for antivirus, and wouldn't have been bothered by Kaspersky 2009 telling them to "give them money" because they'd just have uninstalled it and replaced it with something that's free of charge.

Like cars, computers used to be the domain of the rich (and code savvy). Now that anyone can have one, they have to be designed to be used by anyone. Ask anyone... Anyone doesn't know ANYTHING. Are you honestly saying you want to go back to a command line interface? There are numerous arguments that people cleverer than I would make for such a thing. Get's rid of all the candy smeg coating for example and puts you right in control of the machine. Don't diss the stabilisers unless you can ride the bike!


----------



## tankgirl (Oct 8, 2009)

chubloverUK86 said:


> Be careful what you say. After all, one could argue that an intelligent user would have known, through research, about the myriad free and effective security programs for antivirus, and wouldn't have been bothered by Kaspersky 2009 telling them to "give them money" because they'd just have uninstalled it and replaced it with something that's free of charge.


 
.............. :doh:
I didn't say that. 
I said some random smeg-awful thing invaded my box and told me to give it money.
Get it straight.
And with anti-malware software of any kind, you usually get what you paid for.



> Like cars, computers used to be the domain of the rich (and code savvy). Now that anyone can have one, they have to be designed to be used by anyone. Ask anyone... Anyone doesn't know ANYTHING. Are you honestly saying you want to go back to a command line interface? There are numerous arguments that people cleverer than I would make for such a thing. Get's rid of all the candy smeg coating for example and puts you right in control of the machine. Don't diss the stabilisers unless you can ride the bike!


 
Yes. I would prefer the command line interface, with the exception of the graphic programs. Now what.

Oh. And yes. I also dislike softtails and stabilizers for the same reason I hate new cars and dislike new computers and software. 
I ride a hardtail, thanks. It's my first bike, a ghetto little honda CB350 that I put back together myself and it REALLY needs some carbuerator work... and the exhaust needs redone... but I built it, it's a pain in the ass, it's a hardtail, it runs okay on cool days, and I love it.
I also live on a six mile dirt road, with a half mile driveway. There's no electricity. We haul our water to the house. We have a fireplace and go cut up fallen trees ourselves.
So. Now what.


----------



## chubloverUK86 (Oct 8, 2009)

tankgirl said:


> .............. :doh:
> 
> And with anti-malware software of any kind, you usually get what you paid for.



And this opinion is based on? You had Kaspersky, which I assume wasn't free. It let said malware onto your PC. Did you get what you paid for? I think not... If you read reviews, you'll find that you can get a lot and pay nothing.





tankgirl said:


> Yes. I would prefer the command line interface, with the exception of the graphic programs. Now what.
> 
> Oh. And yes. I also dislike softtails and stabilizers for the same reason I hate new cars and dislike new computers and software.
> I ride a hardtail, thanks. It's my first bike, a ghetto little honda CB350 that I put back together myself and it REALLY needs some carbuerator work... and the exhaust needs redone... but I built it, it's a pain in the ass, it's a hardtail, it runs okay on cool days, and I love it.
> ...



So now you should start wondering why you have so many issues with your PC. I mean, if you're as knowledgeable about them as you are the internal workings of a Honda CB350, then you should have no problem whatsoever solving your own issues. Though that doesn't seem to be the case. Truly, it is a mystery.

I was speaking figuratively when it came to the bike stabilisers. What good is knowing how to put a bike together from scratch if, what really narks you about the world is CAR drivers and TEH COMPUTER SMEG? Hint: Sweet Fanny Adams.


----------



## BigChaz (Oct 8, 2009)

This thread is now about smeg.


----------



## tankgirl (Oct 8, 2009)

chubloverUK86 said:


> And this opinion is based on? You had Kaspersky, which I assume wasn't free. It let said malware onto your PC. Did you get what you paid for? I think not... If you read reviews, you'll find that you can get a lot and pay nothing.
> ...
> So now you should start wondering why you have so many issues with your PC. I mean, if you're as knowledgeable about them as you are the internal workings of a Honda CB350, then you should have no problem whatsoever solving your own issues. Though that doesn't seem to be the case. Truly, it is a mystery.
> 
> I was speaking figuratively when it came to the bike stabilisers. What good is knowing how to put a bike together from scratch if, what really narks you about the world is CAR drivers and TEH COMPUTER SMEG? Hint: Sweet Fanny Adams.


 
Dear sir:
If you have nothing to say about linux or windows seven, I'd appreciate you not responding here further. We are discussing windows and linux here- though, I don't mind talking about macs too. My abilities, or percieved lack thereof, are not on the table for discussion or dissection.
Thank you.


----------



## Webmaster (Oct 8, 2009)

Linux has come a long way in terms of user friendliness. And you can't beat the price (free). I've tried several Linux distributions over the years, but always come back to RedHat/Fedora. It's amazing how simple and straightforward a Fedora or Ubuntu installation is these days.

The pros and cons of Linux are very simple. To use Linux, you need to be a bit more technical, and if something doesn't work or needs fixing, it can get VERY deep and technical in a hurry. It can get really annoying when you need help and all you get are snide answers from nerdy tech-bullies who think everyone should know how to compile a kernel and do other arcane things.

One problem with Linux is that sooner or later you'll run into some enormously time-consuming problem or other. In a laptop, power conservation or a digitizer may not work and figuring out what could be done can take forever. Or a graphics card isn't supported, and so on. Often it's a judgement call on how involved you want to get. 

It's a bit problematic when you have to commit to one OS on one system because then you really need for it to be available and do what you need it to do. In my experience, dual-boot is more trouble than it's worth, and it'll eventually come back to bite you.

I am in the fortunate position that I have plenty of machines with all sorts of OS platforms on them, and I use each platform for what it does best.


----------



## tankgirl (Oct 8, 2009)

BigChaz said:


> This thread is now about smeg.


 
I agree.
*grabs the Thread Safety Line and yanks it back out of the mire*

So, what do YOU like about Linux or windows, Mista BigChaz? I was wondering anyway what you do at work, and what exactly linux is good for in your book, since you use it at work an all.


----------



## BigChaz (Oct 8, 2009)

Anyone in this thread not personally running a Beowulf cluster is a scrub.


----------



## tankgirl (Oct 8, 2009)

Webmaster said:


> Linux has come a long way in terms of user friendliness. And you can't beat the price (free). I've tried several Linux distributions over the years, but always come back to RedHat/Fedora. It's amazing how simple and straightforward a Fedora or Ubuntu installation is these days.
> 
> The pros and cons of Linux are very simple. To use Linux, you need to be a bit more technical, and if something doesn't work or needs fixing, it can get VERY deep and technical in a hurry. It can get really annoying when you need help and all you get are snide answers from nerdy tech-bullies who think everyone should know how to compile a kernel and do other arcane things.
> 
> ...


 
Sounds like being able to build your own vehicles from scratch. Depends on what you want, for what you use.
So which OS would you recommend for graphics (not photo) and software design, o mighty Webmaster?
Maybe that should have been my original question in the original post....


----------



## BigChaz (Oct 8, 2009)

tankgirl said:


> I agree.
> *grabs the Thread Safety Line and yanks it back out of the mire*
> 
> So, what do YOU like about Linux or windows, Mista BigChaz? I was wondering anyway what you do at work, and what exactly linux is good for in your book, since you use it at work an all.



I am a software developer; I write all sorts of stuff. Right now I am writing a data dispatch engine for bringing tons of disparate data together in a timely manner. Good stuff.

I use Linux at work for a few things that need Tomcat / Apache and MySQL. I do all of my development (C#) on Windows and mostly MSSQL server and IIS. Linux is great for a development and server environment in my opinion. Rock solid, lots of community documentation, etc etc. We are running Gentoo here, not sure who made that decision though.

As for Windows, I like windows because its easy, relatively stable, tons of software, all my games work on it, it has an amazing development environment (Visual Studio <3), and I am just used to it I guess.


----------



## BigChaz (Oct 8, 2009)

tankgirl said:


> Sounds like being able to build your own vehicles from scratch. Depends on what you want, for what you use.
> So which OS would you recommend for graphics (not photo) and software design, o mighty Webmaster?
> Maybe that should have been my original question in the original post....



Graphics and Software design = domain of the Apple world. Windows is just as good for that stuff these days since all the software is available on both and runs pretty much the same, but the Apple folks have dominated that field forever.


----------



## cheekyjez (Oct 8, 2009)

Geodetic_Effect said:


> i hate giving bill gates money because that bastard is rich enough, but there is no better option.



Just FWIW, I'm pretty sure that Gates isn't salaried anymore - he's pretty much retired. So he'll make money when the stock price goes up, but that's about it.


----------



## ataraxia (Oct 8, 2009)

It sounds to me that your problem here is not that Windows sucks (although it does), but that computers suck. You'll be unhappy in some way or another no matter what you run. Windows is too fragile and stupid. Macs are too confining and expensive. Linux is too fussy and makes you work for your system.

That said, I personally am a long-time Linux user. I've known it for 12 years now, and currently work as a system administrator. I've tried just about every distro out there by now.

If you want it to just take care of itself, and you don't plan on learning about it or doing your own research, go for Ubuntu. They cater to beginners and those who hate Windows rather than those who like Linux. Release cycle is 6 months, so you get a huge, possibly system-breaking, update on that schedule.

If you're a computer head who just doesn't happen to know Linux, and you're willing to get your hands dirty, try Debian. Solid, tried and true. Huge software selection. Once you get your system set up it will never break because you'll rarely see an update other than security fixes - release cycle is about 18 - 24 months. Debian especially shines on not-so-new machines.

If you're a really demanding user who wants to hand-pick every aspect of your system, wants the latest versions of everything, and can give it regular doses of smart maintenance, there's no substitute for Arch. (This is what I use on my desktop machines.) Your software will always be up to date and you won't have anything installed that you don't want. (Arch is mostly a distro for old hands who've tried everything else and found them all wanting. Newbies are uncommon and community members aren't shy about telling them if they just can't cut it.) You might say that Arch is what you run if you have the skills to roll your system from scratch, but can't be bothered to do so.


----------



## tankgirl (Oct 9, 2009)

ataraxia said:


> It sounds to me that your problem here is not that Windows sucks (although it does), but that computers suck. You'll be unhappy in some way or another no matter what you run. Windows is too fragile and stupid. Macs are too confining and expensive. Linux is too fussy and makes you work for your system.


 
Heh, that sounds good at this point. And you're probably right, but if I put it together myself, I can't blame a corporation for doing it "wrong." *snicker* Ah, c'est la vie. Good breakdown on the systems, by the way.



> That said, I personally am a long-time Linux user. I've known it for 12 years now, and currently work as a system administrator. I've tried just about every distro out there by now.
> 
> If you want it to just take care of itself, and you don't plan on learning about it or doing your own research, go for Ubuntu. They cater to beginners and those who hate Windows rather than those who like Linux. Release cycle is 6 months, so you get a huge, possibly system-breaking, update on that schedule.
> 
> ...


 
I might start with Ubuntu or Kubuntu. Maybe, if I get a hair up between then and now, I'm debating between Fedora/Redhat and Debian/whatever that other one was that's in the Debian area. *can't remember, tired, and something in my eye won't leave me alone* 
Actually, the more I read and the more I think about it, I'll probably skip Ubuntu. Get something I'll have to argue with to get right. Probably sounds crazy, but I like learning the hard way.
Really good breakdowns, by the way. You make sense. Nice sig, too.


----------



## tankgirl (Oct 9, 2009)

BigChaz said:


> Graphics and Software design = domain of the Apple world. Windows is just as good for that stuff these days since all the software is available on both and runs pretty much the same, but the Apple folks have dominated that field forever.


 
(whine) Oh, I knoooowwww, it suuuuucks.... (/whine)
So, know any decent WindowsWare for graphics design as opposed to photo editing? Other than Corel Draw, that is. I know of that one.... The trail version was okay, too. Quite spendy, however.
Actually, I'd just about GET a Mac at this point just for that purpose, if I had the money.


----------



## Horseman (Oct 9, 2009)

tankgirl said:


> Actually, I'd just about GET a Mac at this point just for that purpose, if I had the money.




Macs get a reputation for being too expensive. Actually, if you weigh the long-term cost of ownership, it might even out, or perhaps weigh in favor of the (right) Mac.

Example: My parents and siblings decided to buy my son a laptop as his high school graduation present a couple of years ago. Everybody, the boy's mother included, figured on a PC (claiming compatibility and price) and the consensus appeared to be that my Dad should spec one out at Dell.

I suggested a MacBook. Apple had an offer (granted, in this case for students) in which MacBook purchase included a free printer and an iPod.

My suggestion was dismissed brusquely. The Mac would be too expensive.

However, by the time my Dad the engineer-by-trade (so he doesn't cut corners) obtained a list of recommended specifications from my son's future university's computer lab (where the IT person on duty was using a Mac while on the phone with us), and by the time Dad added a necessary printer, and dressed-out that Dell with enough horsepower, RAM and other features to _hopefully_ make it last all four years of my son's college career, wanna guess the final price difference?

Under $75. ... And the Dell of course didn't come with a free iPod.

In two and a half years the Dell has had to be resurrected twice by my son's girlfriend's dad (who owns a computer consulting business in Boston) and by the university computer lab in Japan a couple of weeks ago because it died again the day he got off the plane for his year abroad. ... None of those were particularly Dell problems; they were Windows woes.

Still, regarding build quality, because so many PCs are designed to compete on price-point first and durability/longevity second (if at all), they tend not to last as long. The AC adapters of both my son's Dell and my daughter's Dell laptops have had to be replaced; my daughter's after only four months of use (thankfully still under warranty). And you can buy $299 or $399 desktop systems now; if that isn't getting close to being a disposable houseware, I don't know what is. ... I do know of some Apple-product flaws, but generally speaking, Apple hasn't gone the "cheap" route (yet, anyway).

We've had Macs in my workplace that have been in service for 10 years. They might need to be transitioned from a high-end user to a lower-end user, but they rarely just up and die, and software intended for Macs tends to be admirably backwards-compatible.

The first Mac I ever bought for home, in 1993, was not replaced until 2001. With a PC, because that's what the wife wanted. A PC that was replaced in three years with this one ... which ended up being supplemented by two laptops because the wife and daughter wanted or needed bigger, better and faster already. A PC that will be subbed out for a Mac when I can pay the Mac's ransom. (Because I'd rather wait until I can afford the Mac than buy another price-bait PC that I'll be wanting to replace in two or three years.)

I do realize not everybody thinks the same way.

As for the comment by ataraxia about Macs being "too confining," I'm not a _total_ IT nerd, so maybe I'm missing something. But I don't know how Macs could be any _less_ confining. OS X is a better operating system than Windows. But if you really want or need to run Windows, fine, buy it and load it straight on the Mac. (And as noted, Wired.com's MacBook ran Windows faster than any of the PC laptops tested.) Dying to run Linux? Heck, I'm pretty sure you can do that, too.

Where's the confinement?


----------



## ataraxia (Oct 9, 2009)

Horseman said:


> As for the comment by ataraxia about Macs being "too confining," I'm not a _total_ IT nerd, so maybe I'm missing something. But I don't know how Macs could be any _less_ confining. OS X is a better operating system than Windows. But if you really want or need to run Windows, fine, buy it and load it straight on the Mac. (And as noted, Wired.com's MacBook ran Windows faster than any of the PC laptops tested.) Dying to run Linux? Heck, I'm pretty sure you can do that, too.
> 
> Where's the confinement?



I used to be a Mac person, and I feel that I got to know them fairly well. OS X is great if you have fairly mainstream needs. I'm the sort of person who cares about the exact versions I have installed of many things, and want to micro-manage them. Apple's patches break if you start replacing parts of the OS with your own versions - their use of bspatch for updates guarantees that. OS X is not what you want if you want to take your software apart and put it back together again bit by bit.

I suppose what I'm saying is that I outgrew the point at which I can let someone else put my OS together for me, and Apple is definitely in that business. I'm also the sort of person who modifies code, and a good chunk of OS X source code isn't open.

The hardware is usually very high quality and lasts a long time. I say it costs more because I normally buy cheap hardware. I'd never bother to build or buy a PC that's anywhere near as swank as a Mac - there's just no need for that kind of performance. (What I do care about is durability and reliability, but that's another sort of thing.) There are some issues running Linux on Macs - EFI is not so well supported without weird stuff like rEFIt, some devices (like the iSight camera) require stealing the firmware from the OS X drivers, and you can't do system firmware updates without using OS X. Give me a boring PC where generic drivers work, please.

The final straw that got me out of Apple-land is their shift away from the Mac business toward the iPod, iTunes Store, and iPhone. I don't care about any of those things, and I am starting to feel that Mac OS X has become an afterthought. Look at the small feature list for 10.6. Look at how they changed the company name to remove the word "computer" from it.


----------



## ataraxia (Oct 9, 2009)

tankgirl said:


> I might start with Ubuntu or Kubuntu. Maybe, if I get a hair up between then and now, I'm debating between Fedora/Redhat and Debian/whatever that other one was that's in the Debian area. *can't remember, tired, and something in my eye won't leave me alone*
> Actually, the more I read and the more I think about it, I'll probably skip Ubuntu. Get something I'll have to argue with to get right. Probably sounds crazy, but I like learning the hard way.



RedHat proper is focused on servers and makes a rather lame desktop. It's also on a paid support model, though there are other projects that rebuild/redistribute it for free (legally), like CentOS.

I have no real experience with Fedora. I do know that they are anal about software licenses/patents such that you can't get simple things like MP3 support working without doing it yourself. They're on a 6-month cycle, like Ubuntu. RedHat is the driving force behind this project, and its major goal is to be the guinea pig for new development so it's safe before it goes into "real" RedHat.

Ubuntu (and its variants) _are_ the Debian-like thing you're trying to think of, most likely. I mostly object to the Ubuntu family for its lack of principles. What are their goals? Just to be the most popular Linux, and "take over the world". That means catering to the masses, whether the said masses have any taste or not.

Debian is also anal about political issues like Fedora. They don't make it as hard to ignore, though. The Debian community is rather abrasive, but there's really no need to participate.

Let's see, what else haven't I mentioned...

OpenSuSe is something like RedHat, something like Ubuntu, and frequently poop quality. Plus, it's hard-core corporate-backed, by Novell. Avoid.

Gentoo is the ultimate nitpicker's distro. You get to (and in fact, have to) hand-pick whether to use or ignore every feature for every piece of software. This is accomplished by making you compile from source all of your software (in an automated fashion). For hard-core geeks.

Slackware is the oldest Linux distro out there. Super simple - you install it, and then it leaves you alone. Do whatever you want, it'll doesn't care. It won't help you either. Of course, that means you have to know what you're doing.

There are other free OS's out there as well - the BSD's and recently, Solaris, are the most prominent. I'd say avoid them. They're not bad, but they won't help you get where you want to be.

If you want to do your own research, I suggest you have a look at DistroWatch, which is made to answer your exact sort of question.

Many distros have quite nice forums as well. Some are really nice, some are rude, and some are only nice if you can prove you belong there. Something tells me that you can take it.


----------



## Webmaster (Oct 9, 2009)

Excellent overview and insights, Ataraxia.

A couple of additional comments on picking systems: There are times when I like to tinker and research, and there are times when I just want to get my work done. The latter pretty much determines the type of system I pick. 

Linux is generally stable enough to never interfere and work quickly and efficiently in many tasks. If something goes wrong, it's generally fairly simple to google a fix. I've been really, really impressed at how easy it is to do an entire install of some of the popular distros. Even upgrades are almost as easy as on the Mac. What keeps me from using Linux more on a daily basis is that my industrial-strength tools of choice simply aren't available (like Quark or Photoshop). There's always a way to get things done in Linux, of course, but there are times when for support you need a better security blanket than just Dieter in Leipzig who may or may not still be interested in supporting his program.

Macs will always struggle with price, especially since the price of everything else keeps dropping. But you just get so much more and the stuff lasts and lasts. I am not enchanted with the rather silly Genius bars and their entire store concept, but overall OSX is a dream-come-true for the kind of work I do. Cost... well, I use my car only a small fraction of the time every day as I use my iMac24, and yet the car cost 20 times as much. So I am not complaining. And the only thing that ever goes wrong or causes problems on the Mac is MS Office... 

Microsoft is more like an evil fungus. Just because a shocking percentage of humanity are afflicted with it doesn't make it any better. Microsoft's stunning arrogance, greed and ineptitude have probably cost the world trillions and trillions in lost productivity and caused more anger and frustration than all other annoying evils combined. I mean, I am not sure I'll survive the next time Windows Mobile on some 2009-vintage handheld asks me whether it should use a Hayes-compatible dial-up modem on COM1, or the next time it takes 4-1/2 hours to apply 93 updates to Windows XP. Or Vista needs permission to blow its nose. Anyway, I still use PCs because I have to, but I bet most of the world will breathe a giant sigh of relief and do the happy dance when Microsoft finally goes bankrupt or shrivels into insignificance. So I guess I am not a PC.


----------



## tankgirl (Oct 10, 2009)

Webmaster said:


> Microsoft is more like an evil fungus. Just because a shocking percentage of humanity are afflicted with it doesn't make it any better. Microsoft's stunning arrogance, greed and ineptitude have probably cost the world trillions and trillions in lost productivity and caused more anger and frustration than all other annoying evils combined. I mean, I am not sure I'll survive the next time Windows Mobile on some 2009-vintage handheld asks me whether it should use a Hayes-compatible dial-up modem on COM1, or the next time it takes 4-1/2 hours to apply 93 updates to Windows XP. Or Vista needs permission to blow its nose. Anyway, I still use PCs because I have to, but I bet most of the world will breathe a giant sigh of relief and do the happy dance when Microsoft finally goes bankrupt or shrivels into insignificance. So I guess I am not a PC.


 
Oh, you agree... How nice... You didn't mention heartburn or ulcers on the list of things MS has caused... *giggle*


----------



## tankgirl (Oct 10, 2009)

ataraxia said:


> If you want to do your own research, I suggest you have a look at DistroWatch, which is made to answer your exact sort of question.
> 
> Many distros have quite nice forums as well. Some are really nice, some are rude, and some are only nice if you can prove you belong there. Something tells me that you can take it.


 
Thanks for the link and the breakdown- you are SO good at that....
Fortunately, it's a few weeks before I get seven, so I have time to make up my mind.



> I suppose what I'm saying is that I outgrew the point at which I can let someone else put my OS together for me, and Apple is definitely in that business. I'm also the sort of person who modifies code, and a good chunk of OS X source code isn't open.



I think I'm getting to that point. Which is why Linux interests me so much.
Thanks again for all the info, very enlightening.


----------



## Jes (Oct 12, 2009)

Geodetic_Effect said:


> Linux is overrated and on a laptop it will cut your battery life almost in half. windows 7 is to vista as windows xp is to millennium edition. vista is basically a beta version of the newest technology like ME was. ME sucked and then xp perfected the new tech and was great. personally i still run xp pro 64bit, which actually has the same core OS as windows server 2003 not xp, and xp pro x86 on the others. but windows 7 really is the tits..



there are issues with battery life on laptops with linux, although many 
of them are correctible if you know what you are doing and/or how to use 
google. XP and ME have virtually no codebase in common.


----------



## Geodetic_Effect (Oct 12, 2009)

Jes said:


> there are issues with battery life on laptops with linux, although many
> of them are correctible if you know what you are doing and/or how to use
> google. XP and ME have virtually no codebase in common.



The average user is not going to be able to do that and will be stuck with the problem. ME was a bridge to XP. it used the 4.x code base but had many features from NT. It was basically a hybrid of 4.x and NT. They combined the feature set of ME and windows 2000 to make XP. which code base was NT. vista and 7 are both windows server 2003 code base. the analogy fits because both ME and vista were the first release of changing technology. there is a lot more to an operating system than just it's code base. they both acted as large beta tests of the new direction they wanted to take the software. Both sucked and were succeeded by a much better version.


----------



## Jes (Oct 12, 2009)

ME was broken because the code base was broken, not because the GUI or 
other such things borrowed from 2000 were broken. The code base was 
very, very broken. If you just compared XP to ME, XP was essentailly a 
total rewrite - never mind what other projects the rewrite code was 
coming from.

7 is an upgrade to Vista by way of refinement, not rewrite. It's much 
more comparable to the difference between, say, 95/98/2000 than the 
difference between ME and XP. Which is fine.


anyway, I say and have always said (and the Cypriots agree): Just install linux.


----------



## likeitmatters (Oct 13, 2009)

Webmaster said:


> Linux has come a long way in terms of user friendliness. And you can't beat the price (free). I've tried several Linux distributions over the years, but always come back to RedHat/Fedora. It's amazing how simple and straightforward a Fedora or Ubuntu installation is these days.
> 
> The pros and cons of Linux are very simple. To use Linux, you need to be a bit more technical, and if something doesn't work or needs fixing, it can get VERY deep and technical in a hurry. It can get really annoying when you need help and all you get are snide answers from nerdy tech-bullies who think everyone should know how to compile a kernel and do other arcane things.
> 
> ...



you are right to a point about it being free, but you take your chances when you download it directly to your computer. I prefer to have a disc that I can use over and over and best buy sells the os for a few dollars ok more like 40.00 so it is really not free in that sense.


----------



## likeitmatters (Oct 13, 2009)

From my stand point bill gates took something from literally nothing and made this huge company and I personally feel he has the right to do just about anything he wants with his company within reason.

I have windows vista and before that windows xp and windows 98 etc and I have found that I have never had any complaints with it for what I need. I am not a big computer geek and I want a program to work without all the hassle which sounds like a lot of people in the world and windows does that for me.

if microsoft went out of business, wonder what would happen to all those people and the os? then someone would just take over where microsoft left off and we would be complaining about their operating system..

:bow:


----------



## Webmaster (Oct 13, 2009)

likeitmatters said:


> From my stand point bill gates took something from literally nothing and made this huge company and I personally feel he has the right to do just about anything he wants with his company within reason.



Gates basically conned a small company out of what he then sold as MSDOS, then copied Apple with Windows, and then created a monopoly by systematically destroying all competition. I can remember tons of great products that Microsoft bought just to then kill them. There used to be a great wealth and variety of word processors, presentation programs, data bases and unique specialty programs that did things you literally cannot do anymore. I remember dBase and R:Base and Fox, VisiCalc and Lotus123, Trapeze and Reflex and many more. All killed off by Microsoft in one way or another, and never with better products. Now all we have is Word, Excel, PowerPoint and Access. So yes, Gates built a big company, but I am virtually certain history will eventually see it as a predatory cancer.

I am hugely glad that Linux still exists and Microsoft has not (yet) succeeded in destroying/absorbing it, too.


----------



## likeitmatters (Oct 13, 2009)

Webmaster said:


> Gates basically conned a small company out of what he then sold as MSDOS, then copied Apple with Windows, and then created a monopoly by systematically destroying all competition. I can remember tons of great products that Microsoft bought just to then kill them. There used to be a great wealth and variety of word processors, presentation programs, data bases and unique specialty programs that did things you literally cannot do anymore. I remember dBase and R:Base and Fox, VisiCalc and Lotus123, Trapeze and Reflex and many more. All killed off by Microsoft in one way or another, and never with better products. Now all we have is Word, Excel, PowerPoint and Access. So yes, Gates built a big company, but I am virtually certain history will eventually see it as a predatory cancer.
> 
> I am hugely glad that Linux still exists and Microsoft has not (yet) succeeded in destroying/absorbing it, too.



like I said I am not a computer geek but I think history will think of bill gates the others who started microsoft as revolutionary and he bought the product because the other company did not need it or want it..but that is what I have read or heard. but I could be wrong.


----------



## escapist (Oct 13, 2009)

Webmaster said:


> Gates basically conned a small company out of what he then sold as MSDOS, then copied Apple with Windows, and then created a monopoly by systematically destroying all competition. I can remember tons of great products that Microsoft bought just to then kill them. There used to be a great wealth and variety of word processors, presentation programs, data bases and unique specialty programs that did things you literally cannot do anymore. I remember dBase and R:Base and Fox, VisiCalc and Lotus123, Trapeze and Reflex and many more. All killed off by Microsoft in one way or another, and never with better products. Now all we have is Word, Excel, PowerPoint and Access. So yes, Gates built a big company, but I am virtually certain history will eventually see it as a predatory cancer.
> 
> I am hugely glad that Linux still exists and Microsoft has not (yet) succeeded in destroying/absorbing it, too.



Naw there are alternitives that are totally free: http://www.openoffice.org/

Or Google Docs?

Or how about Word Perfect?


----------



## Wanderer (Oct 22, 2009)

Getting back to TankGirl's question: WindowsWare for art, not photo editing.

GIMP (GNU Image Manipulation Program) is free and (somewhat) easy. It has most of the functions of programs from Adobe, but half the user-friendliness. (Personally, I couldn't get layers enabled on what I was working on.) http://www.gimp.org/

Looking online:

Vector DrawPlus is good... though only the basic SE version is free. Still, the "real" version, with layers and filters, is only $10, so it's not a huge imposition: http://www.freeserifsoftware.com/software/DrawPlus/default.asp

SmoothDraw NX focuses on improving the input process; it can even smooth mouse input. Hm, even the full version is free: http://www.smoothdraw.com/product/index.htm It's strictly a freehand drawing tool, though, no premade shapes. Still, for an illustrator, it's likely a good fit.

Then there's Inkscape; it's a late beta, promising "similar" capabilities to Corel Draw. http://www.inkscape.org/

Any of these look suitable?


----------



## tankgirl (Oct 24, 2009)

*plays with trial versions*

Still forming an opinion, with only a couple hours a day to do it in...


----------



## HereticFA (Nov 28, 2009)

tankgirl said:


> *plays with trial versions*
> 
> Still forming an opinion, with only a couple hours a day to do it in...



It's been a month. Did you decide on a distro?

Linux isn't just an operating system, it's also a journey you must accept on your own. (It's a lot like Fat Acceptance in the "journey" aspect.)

I was a MS customer since their "BASIC in ROM" ca. 1978 (& it had a gravely serious bug in it's garbage collect routine-a portend of things to come). I first tried Linux with Red Hat 5.2 around 2000. After trying a couple of other distros, I settled on Kubuntu 7.04 (Feisty Fawn) in mid 2007 and I've never looked back, despite the difficult climb up the learning curve. I'm just now setting up additional systems with other/newer distros with Debian roots.


----------

