Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#17
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() On Wed, 12 Nov 2008, Dan Richardson wrote: Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 14:32:40 -0800 From: Dan Richardson Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Subject: Article about a portable PC that runs on 12v? On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 00:24:01 +0000, Bob wrote: can't understand the reluctance of the Americans to use Linux. There has been no real reason to use Windows for a long time (unless you want to play games, but a PS3 is best for that). Over here in Europe, Linux uptake continues rapidly - as each new Windows virus or worm hits, ever more people and businesses migrate. Maybe it is because it can be very difficult, if not impossible, to find necessary hardware drivers. Especially, if you have some of the latest equipment models. I have found Linux to be more useful on older computers as one is much more likely to find the necessary drivers. For example have recently added a new HP all-in-one laser printer that includes a scanner and FAX. I have it installed on a dual boot (Linux/Windows XP) system. While I'm able to print with the Linux system good luck trying to get the scanner and FAX working. That's just one example. I have a litany of them. I spent a couple of years evaluating Linux here and decided to go back to Windows. I really really wanted Linux to work, but in the end stayed with Windows (98 second edition was best). Here are some of my issues; 1. Hardware compatibility is a major problem, and gets worse the later the distro. Best distros for my hardware were Red hat 5.2 and 6.2, and I could install those distros on any and all of my hardwares (about two dozen boxes), Later distros did not have drivers for earlier CDROM drives where your only other option is boot-from-CDROM, but if your bios does not have that, then you are dead. I have had a lot of experience with installations of Linux that crash before the installation is completed. If you want Linux, start with a shop or company that will sell you all the hardware knowing that that hardware will support the OS. Yes, i spent years on the linux newsgroups reading posts of all kinds of people having all kinds of problems. The multi-boot loaders also have bugs (lilo, grub, etc.) and the books don't tell you what to do if it screws up your box. Also, its a hardware compatibility problem. I had boxes where everything worked fine. Other boxes where the install crashed, the boot manager screwed up, or something else didn't work. YMMV. 2. I like iomega zip disks (100 MB) and the books say the only way Linux can support zip disks is by re-compiling the kernel and I was not about to do that. 3. Especially the later distros: they all need more ram than Windows to work (250 mb, minimum). 4. If you are serious, you need to configure your Linux firewall and the books say if you don't do it right, you're worse off than running without a firewall. I ran Linux for over a year, but got hacked within two months. With Zone Alarm, you just put it into Windows and you get a lot of protection for no work. 5. Unless you have a high spec box (I didn't), all of the aps run slower than Windows. This is because Linux is really multiprocess unlike Windows which is multitasking (via time slicing). This is also true for OS/2 which I also spent a lot of time with. I bought version 8 of Ubuntu a few weeks ago. they cleaned up a lot, but after the install, I got the printer to work fine, but Ubuntu could not find my modem (yes its a _regualar_ modem and that modem worked with everything else) and I don't have any other kind of internet access here besides dialup (unless I want to get one of the satellite dish deals, adding up a ton of fees and a two year contract and the legal disclaimers say they don't guarantee anything). So, I'll give MS credit for an OS that really does install on all of my hardware, and always finds all of my peripherals. One nice thing about Ubuntu is that you can boot up totally off the CDROM and see if it ends up with the gui and you can run the aps without problems. Boot up from the CDROM takes (on my 800 mHz box) about 5-8 minutes. Ap launch is also quite slow, but will work. It absolutely will not boot up on less than 250 mb of ram. Microsoft has become the ultimate robber-barron with its "activation" and I bought one legal copy of XP which I will run as long as I can but if internet web browsing makes any further advances, I'll consider an Apple Mac before I give Bill Gates & Thugs any more money. The other problem is whether Apple supplies distibution disks with their computers (in case you need to re-install the OS because of, for example, a corrupted or hacked OS install). And, if you think OS-X is immune to hacking, then just google on "hack OS-X" and get 30,000 hits. Might be resistant to MS viruses, but there is a lot of other malicious code out there that is bad for your box. Oh, yes, shut off as many of the services as you can or when you re-boot, it may crash (particularly the earlier distros) and make your box unusable without another install from scratch (unless you know how to fix what got screwed up). You could also ruin your RH 5.2 install if you did a shutdown and forgot to unmount a CDROM drive. Happend to me three times. Regards, Danny |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Looking for Code Practice Software That Runs Under XP | Policy | |||
Looking for Code Practice Software That Runs Under XP | General | |||
Looking for Code Practice Software That Runs Under XP | General | |||
BBC runs by buch of STUPIDS | Shortwave | |||
Parallel runs of coax to antenna | Antenna |