|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
register |
bbs |
search |
rss |
faq |
about
|
 |
 |
meet up |
add to del.icio.us |
digg it
|
 |
 |
| Technophiliacs & Technophiles The Technophiliacs forum is for discussing any and all forms of tech and other types of social backwardness. Including discussions of strange home-brewed hardware technology. Where to get good tools. How to make fiberglass molds. Computer hardware and software technolgy, including operating systems, applications, networking, hardware, CPU's, disk drives, and other geeky things. Viruses and Artificial Life discussions. How to write HTML. End user tools discussions and support issues. Gating the Internet with other nets. |
 |
|
|
#1
 2001-03-03, 19:21
|
unknownsage 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Linux vs Windows
It seems to some people that linux is winning more and more Battles against the domination of Microsoft.But is this what really is happening.Linux is being used more and more by Businesses and individuals.(obvious isnt it!) Linux is a favourite with people since it is "open-source".All the code is free off the net.Microsoft have already released beta versions of "Whistler" which i think doesnt look that bad.(I still like linux though).This debate has been gone through several times but no real conclusion has been drawn. Post your thoughts on the debate!
|
|
#2
 2001-03-03, 23:53
|
Z3m 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
Support FREE software. gnu.org
|
|
#3
 2001-03-04, 11:54
|
CyBeRNoS 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
In my opinion linux is the better choice. Some weeks ago i tried to partitionate my new hd with Partition Magic (never again!). It destroyed the partition table of my first hd and win didn�t boot anymore. Even a Win/MSDos bootdisk crashed on reading the table. What to do? Formating from Bios? No! I booted linux and was able to access all the data on my windows partition! I created a fat 32 partition on the new hd, wrote all data from the win partition to it, reformated my win partition and wrote all data back. Windows started as if never anything had happened. Without linux, it would have taken days reinstalling(I hate it!) all progs.
I need windows cause i want to use all the nice progs, but linux is the better OS. Unfortunately vmware needs too much performance and wine isn�t wide enough, but some day when all win32-progs run under KDE i�ll put windows into trash!
|
|
#4
 2001-03-04, 22:44
|
Jadedfool 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
why didn't you but a linux partition on your new drive and use LILO?
|
|
#5
 2001-03-07, 20:24
|
Mustard 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
Hi Steven. I presently use windows, as at the time when I first got it I knew little about computers. I am like everyone self-taught and don�t feel like having to learn all over again things I know how to do with windows. I hear that Linux is good and very stable but not as user friendly as windows. But the main reason why i stick to windows is that it can run allot more programs. As most things are released on windows. I would use a free alternative if i could as i dislike Microsoft. But as like most people i know i have an illegal copy of windows, at least i didn't give em any money.
|
|
#6
 2001-03-08, 00:58
|
CyBeRNoS 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
There are 4 partitions on my primary master hd (12GB). One primary 6GB win with lilo on it and 3 logical in the extended partition (linux boot/root/swap). Partition magic destroyed parts of the partition table, but didn�t partitionate my new primary slave hd. I wasn�t able to access my windows partition, but linux did still boot without problems. It even was able to access my win partition! So i used linux fdisk and mkdosfs to create a fat32 partition on my new hd and copied all the stuff from my win partition to the second hd. Then i deleted my old win partition, and created a new one. After writing all data back from the second hd to the new primary fat32 partition, win started as if never anything has happened. Im still thinking about how to use my new 45GB hd best... So many OSs i haven�t tried yet... Any good ideas on how to arange as many operating systems as possible on one pc (Win/Win2K/Linux/Beos/BSD/...)?
[This message has been edited by CyBeRNoS (edited 03-08-2001).]
|
|
#7
 2001-03-08, 08:12
|
Jadedfool 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
Honestly, I'd just use Lilo, stick the system's all on the first hard-drive and format the rest as FAT32 so that you can access the space from whatever OS you choose to run...
|
|
#8
 2001-04-08, 07:44
|
Sirfearoth 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
Behold the power of linux, the power of opensource.
|
|
#9
 2001-04-08, 08:14
|
Z3m 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
Linux isn't the only open source project.
|
|
#10
 2001-04-19, 22:30
|
xengoreth 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
FreeBSD... good stuff...
|
|
#11
 2001-04-23, 00:17
|
Jadedfool 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
OS X really blows a lot...
|
|
#12
 2001-04-23, 06:08
|
Z3m 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
Upgrade to OS/2, homeslice.
|
|
#13
 2001-05-06, 15:07
|
Hackhead 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
I remember my favourite quote about Linux:
"If your VCR is still flashing 12:00, then Linux isn't really for you."
I can't remember who said it, but it's right. It took me a whole evening to get Red Hat running on a dual-boot system and I'm still trying to configure it all with the hardware. Still, it's good if you want a challenge.
|
|
#14
 2001-05-07, 04:25
|
Jadedfool 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
I'm just saying, if you want a *nix on mac, you'd be better off with yellowdog...
|
|
#15
 2001-06-05, 23:32
|
damian 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
IMO, Linux will never be bigger than Windows until Linux can be
- more user friendly
- not as hard to run
- not as hard to setup
- (hopefully) become smaller in size so I don't have to buy a new HD.

So, Linux has gotten quite a ways to go but still, it is the OS of choice by most techies, companies, and hackers(code, computers, or otherwise).
|
|
#16
 2001-06-06, 00:59
|
Z3m 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
If it were more friendly an evil penguin would be a terrible mascot.
It's friendly enough.
Actually, it's very if you just take time to figure it out. 2 hours with bash provides much meditation.
|
|
#17
 2001-06-06, 23:57
|
Jadedfool 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
Damian, a linux distro can be installed off of a single floppy, that isn't exactly a monster OS there...
|
|
#18
 2001-06-09, 08:46
|
FeedTheGods 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
For some reason I can't post under my name (HellswratH) so I just created a new account...anyways...Since the topic here is Linux then I might as well post a question.....I've been thinking about installing Linux, but can't decide on which one. I have 3 choices: Storm 2000, Linux Mandrake, and Walnut Creek Slackware '96. I had Mandrake once before and wasn't too impressed, so I don't really want to go that route, but if it's better then the other 2 then so be it...any suggestions on which I should install? (BTW - the reason I only have 3 options is because these are the ones that I own and don't wanna spend forever downloading)....Any suggestions would be appreciated...
|
|
#19
 2001-06-09, 18:05
|
unknownsage 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
Mandrake definitely. Although i haven't installed it yet ,i've heard it's quite good compared to Storm.
|
|
#20
 2001-06-10, 04:19
|
FeedTheGods 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
I had Mandrake installed once and wasn't too impressed...what sucks about the Storm and Mandrake discs that I have is that they don't come with too much shit, it's basically just the OS. The Slackware that I have, however, comes with all kinds of shit...different programs at my disposal. The only thing I don't like about the Slackware is that it is the '96 addition, so it's kinda old. I guess I'll just test all three and see which one I like the best...
------------------ "Possessed, I feel the conquering will down inside me - Strength, the strength of many to crush who might stop me...." - Mouth for War, Pantera
|
|
#21
 2001-06-11, 04:32
|
Jadedfool 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
I vote for slackware, but the 96 thing is a problem. Maybe shell out 5 bucks at HERE to get the latest version. Honestly you shouldn't install any distro thats more then 4 or 5 months old, less stuff to upgrade and all..
|
|
#22
 2001-06-11, 08:18
|
damian 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
Okay, jadedfool, you're telling me that there is no partitioning involved and creating a linux swap partition and all that is not necessary...bullshit. Not many newbies would want to do all that crap if they can just run linux instead. Plus the only real distros that I can think of that are free off the web and installable off a floppy or cd is redhat. Of course, my ignorance overrules on this subject...
|
|
#23
 2001-06-11, 09:20
|
Z3m 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
quote:
Not many newbies would want to do all that crap if they can just run linux instead.
Eh? quote: Plus the only real distros that I can think of that are free off the web and installable off a floppy or cd is redhat. Of course, my ignorance overrules on this subject...
Yeah, it sure does. Furstly, almost all Linux distrobutions are installable from a cd or floppy. Almost all of them can be run from a cd or floppy. Almost all of them are free on the web on in your local book store or at Defcon or Hohocon or one of those cons. I dunno what the hell you were goin' on about. go to www.linux.org, sucka.
|
|
#24
 2001-06-11, 17:00
|
Jadedfool 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
quote: Okay, jadedfool, you're telling me that there is no partitioning involved and creating a linux swap partition and all that is not necessary
Even though I can think of at least two different linux distros that run off of fat-32 partitions, no, thats not what I'm telling you. What I'm telling you is that you can install the bare bones A and B disk sets for nearly all major linux distro's off of 3 or 4 floppies, and that there's plenty that only need one to install. Considering the fact that Windows, coming fully loaded, takes up about a gig plus of hard drive space, gig and a half for OS 10 as far as I remember. Even when you aren't stripping it down, A healthy linux Distro with plenty of pre-installed software (the Gimp, netscape, 5 or 6 different X servers, plenty of various games and utilties) Your still only taking up maybe 600-800 meg of space. A heluva lot less then either of the alternatives mentioned. as for not being able to get any off the web, lemme pound how utterly wrong you are into your head a little more:
- http://www.beehive.nu/index.php?page=download
- ftp://ftp.bestlinux.net/
- ftp://ftp.calderasystems.com/pub/
- http://en.conectiva.com/download/
- http://www.debian.org/distrib/ftplist
- http://www.elflinux.com/download.html
- http://www.ibiblio.org/gentoo/
- http://www.linuxantarctica.com/
- http://www.libranet.com/download.html
- http://www.slackware.com/getslack/
- http://www.suse.com/us/support/download/index.html
- http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/ftp.php3
and thats not even close to a full listing of downloads, so basically, you can just shut the fuck up...
|
|
#25
 2001-06-12, 09:10
|
Z3m 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
Turbo fully loaded is 1337. Why Turbo, I dunno.
[This message has been edited by Z3m (edited 06-12-2001).]
|
|
#26
 2001-06-12, 19:05
|
FeedTheGods 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
Cool, thanks for the info Jaded...that's the one thing that was stopping me from choosing the slackware - because the version I have is so fuckin' old...I think I can shell out $3.95 at a local book/computer store to get that same slackware that you gave the link too, so that's probably what I'll end up doing...
------------------ "Possessed, I feel the conquering will down inside me - Strength, the strength of many to crush who might stop me...." - Mouth for War, Pantera
|
|
#27
 2001-06-12, 23:36
|
Jadedfool 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
turbo sucks ass hardcore, they still use system V accounting, which sucks so hard it makes my eyes bleed...
|
|
#28
 2001-06-13, 04:24
|
Z3m 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
That's one hard suck.
|
|
#29
 2001-06-13, 06:01
|
FeedTheGods 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
Today I found Linux Mandrake at a local computer store, but this version doesn't require and kind of partitioning or anything - you just put the CD in and restart your computer and it installs, then when you want to run Mandrake instead of Windows you just have the CD in when you start the computer. I guess it installs into the Windows partition, but I'm not quite sure how it works...does anything think this would be worth the money? It's really more of what I'm looking for because it's easy to set up and shit, but that doesn't mean it will be good....what do you guys think? Should I give it a shot or is it shit?
------------------ "Possessed, I feel the conquering will down inside me - Strength, the strength of many to crush who might stop me...." - Mouth for War, Pantera
|
|
#30
 2001-06-13, 08:37
|
Z3m 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Linux vs Windows
In the long run, you'd be better served if you learn how to install and maintain a proper Unix file structure. Who knows. You may work in IT some day. It is in "Bob's" hands.
|
|
 |
 |
To the best of our knowledge, the text on this page may be freely reproduced and distributed.

totse.com certificate signatures
|
 |
 |
About | Community | Bad Ideas | Drugs | Ego | Erotica | Fringe | Society | Technology
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|