StarDestroyer.Net BBS

sketerpot wrote:

Tech^salvager wrote:

darthdavid wrote:Alot of the percieved problem comes from the two most promenient methods of installing software. RPM and Build From Source. Both rely on manual dependancy management and as such can be daunting. If Apt-Get and other systems that manage dependancies for you would gain promenance then people would find using linux to be alot easier...

apt-get may be powerful but who wants to type that to install something all the time? Instead clicky clicky on the mouse to install.

Look, just use a good distribution. I know that Fedora has a GUI for this, as well as a command line utility (yum, similar to apt-get). Hell, even Gentoo, not famed for its user-friendliness, has automatic dependency management.

Gentoo also has several GUI-based package-management tools (Porthole, Guitoo, Kentoo, etc...)

Tech^salvager wrote:

darthdavid wrote:

Tech^salvager wrote: apt-get may be powerful but who wants to type that to install something all the time? Instead clicky clicky on the mouse to install.

Have you ever seen aptitude? Not exactly a GUI but might as well be...

Nope, but I will check it out. Now if you still have to install it via apt-get then its still not the cliky cliky. Sorry apt-get to me is like going back to the old days of dos

Just type in "apt-get aptitude" at a command line. Then type aptitude at a command line and you'll be all set to get any package you want...

Tech^salvager wrote:Thats a another thing about linux its dependency hell. Btw my fav linux distro is SuSe

Dependency Hell vs DLL Hell...hmmm...

Tech^salvager wrote:Nope, but I will check it out. Now if you still have to install it via apt-get then its still not the cliky cliky. Sorry apt-get to me is like going back to the old days of dos

Ah, I see---you have an aversion to the command line. Even though using apt-get is just a matter of typing "apt-get [insert-name-of-program-here]". Even though the GUI equivalent would take longer. I guess I can vaguely understand that, in the same way I can vaguely understand people who would rather memorize how to do specific things on their computers than get a decent beginner's book and understand what they're doing, or the people who would rather ask questions to other people on the internet than learn to use Google.

Praxis wrote:

Tech^salvager wrote:Thats a another thing about linux its dependency hell. Btw my fav linux distro is SuSe

Dependency Hell vs DLL Hell...hmmm...

At least Windows users don't have to care about the DLL hell thanks to all the wizards and installers and all that, which I hope become more prominent for Linux if they ever really intend to try to take over the desktop market somehow (but also leave the "expert" method in so people who know what they're doing can do it the old-fashion, low-level way.)

Shinova wrote:At least Windows users don't have to care about the DLL hell thanks to all the wizards and installers and all that, which I hope become more prominent for Linux if they ever really intend to try to take over the desktop market somehow (but also leave the "expert" method in so people who know what they're doing can do it the old-fashion, low-level way.)

The reason this isn't happening is because the of the very nature of open source. The people doing the programming are doing it for the benifit of themselves and other's like them. And since they already know how to install by the "low-level" methods then they don't bother putting in wizzards. The only people who are doing things like wizzards are the commercial distros and those who feel the need to pimp linux out to the "uninformed masses".

Shinova wrote:

Praxis wrote:

Tech^salvager wrote:Thats a another thing about linux its dependency hell. Btw my fav linux distro is SuSe

Dependency Hell vs DLL Hell...hmmm...

At least Windows users don't have to care about the DLL hell thanks to all the wizards and installers and all that, which I hope become more prominent for Linux if they ever really intend to try to take over the desktop market somehow (but also leave the "expert" method in so people who know what they're doing can do it the old-fashion, low-level way.)

They will when the system slows to a halt from conflicting DLLs and registry conflicts

Praxis wrote:

Shinova wrote:

Praxis wrote: Dependency Hell vs DLL Hell...hmmm...

At least Windows users don't have to care about the DLL hell thanks to all the wizards and installers and all that, which I hope become more prominent for Linux if they ever really intend to try to take over the desktop market somehow (but also leave the "expert" method in so people who know what they're doing can do it the old-fashion, low-level way.)

They will when the system slows to a halt from conflicting DLLs and registry conflicts

GAh, don't mention the word registry!!!


*has a seizure*



More power to the commercial companies like MandrakeSoft going out of their way to let people have their distros for free.

registry
.dll
C:\
closed source
defrag
muwhahahaha

but really I haevn't seen alot of confilticing .dlls or registry problems lately.

Tech^salvager wrote:registry
.dll
C:\
closed source
defrag
muwhahahaha

but really I haevn't seen alot of confilticing .dlls or registry problems lately.

Have you ever used a Windows computer for more than 1 year without reformatting and seen the effect on speed?

Praxis wrote:

Tech^salvager wrote:registry
.dll
C:\
closed source
defrag
muwhahahaha

but really I haevn't seen alot of confilticing .dlls or registry problems lately.

Have you ever used a Windows computer for more than 1 year without reformatting and seen the effect on speed?

oh yeah its bad if you don't run defrag and keep malware off but other then those things a windows compy does good. Yes I have. Lets see I've used win 95 for 3 years did two reformats in all. 98 for 5-6 years xp the last 2.5 years and win 2000 for about 8months here.

Tech^salvager wrote:

Praxis wrote:

Tech^salvager wrote:registry
.dll
C:\
closed source
defrag
muwhahahaha

but really I haevn't seen alot of confilticing .dlls or registry problems lately.

Have you ever used a Windows computer for more than 1 year without reformatting and seen the effect on speed?

oh yeah its bad if you don't run defrag and keep malware off but other then those things a windows compy does good. Yes I have. Lets see I've used win 95 for 3 years did two reformats in all. 98 for 5-6 years xp the last 2.5 years and win 2000 for about 8months here.

Two reformats in 3 years. How many reformats with 98? XP?

Now ask me how many times I've reformatted my Mac...let me give you a hint...it starts with a z, and it's right above the P key on my keyboard.

Ask the Linux people here how many times they've reformatted due to the computer slowing down.

And btw, killing off malware and defragging isn't always enough. It STILL slows down the more programs you install. Ask the Linux people how many programs their systems have...

yeah fat32 was crap.
Hmm lets see it was about a ratio of 2 or 3 reinstalls to a computer for 98 and 1 for xp. an so far zero for 2k.
NTFS rocks though I wish I was able to use resierFSver4 or skyFS on 2k or xp natively

The filesystem isn't the problem, I find, rather it's that blasted registry. Even people who've worked on Windows don't fully understand how it works.


Thousands upon thousands of nearly meaningless strings of numbers and letters. Bleegh.

And when you have that many programs installed on your system, it gets worse.

Shinova wrote:The filesystem isn't the problem, I find, rather it's that blasted registry. Even people who've worked on Windows don't fully understand how it works.


Thousands upon thousands of nearly meaningless strings of numbers and letters. Bleegh.

And when you have that many programs installed on your system, it gets worse.

True but FAT32 was bad at fragmenation. oh crapin defrag took so long back then.

Tech^salvager wrote:yeah fat32 was crap.
Hmm lets see it was about a ratio of 2 or 3 reinstalls to a computer for 98 and 1 for xp. an so far zero for 2k.
NTFS rocks though I wish I was able to use resierFSver4 or skyFS on 2k or xp natively

1 format for XP in 2.5 years before you dumped it for 2000 equates to 1 reformat every 1.25 years. I think we can assume that you wait until the speed troubles are almost unbearable before you reformat (I know I do)...still not a good track record.

No it wasn't speed troubles it was wait a minute oh yeah it was speed troubles wasn't my fault though cause it wasn't my computer. Is my mom's and see lets my bro and sis on it. I don't remeber exactly thr toubles though It may of been something else.

I didn't dump it infact I want XP. and it was only reinstalled cause the techincal support told them to.

Shinova wrote:The filesystem isn't the problem, I find, rather it's that blasted registry. Even people who've worked on Windows don't fully understand how it works.


Thousands upon thousands of nearly meaningless strings of numbers and letters. Bleegh.

And when you have that many programs installed on your system, it gets worse.

I must be doing something wrong, I can understand most of the Windows registry

On the serious hand, unless your willing to dedicate massive ammounts of time to fixing stuff, then windows is crap.

Sorry, Techie, if you have to spend the time doing all that to have your box running full speed, your screwed.

Praxis wrote: Have you ever used a Windows computer for more than 1 year without reformatting and seen the effect on speed?

Yes, my last XP box went forover a year without a format. No slowdown that I noticed, but then I cleaned the registry frequently.

Sharp-kun wrote:

Praxis wrote: Have you ever used a Windows computer for more than 1 year without reformatting and seen the effect on speed?

Yes, my last XP box went forover a year without a format. No slowdown that I noticed, but then I cleaned the registry frequently.

And probebly the program list didn't pass 3 pages?

Windows XP properly maneged is a work of art, clean running, fast, and reletivly bug free (but what OS is truly bug free?). The problem is that having it reach that state required enough googling and saved pages of config files that your disk gets bloated all by that.

Ace Pace wrote: And probebly the program list didn't pass 3 pages?

Actually there was quite a lot on it, as it was used for gaming, Uni work, video editing and various other things. That was one of the reasons I didn't format it, there was too much effort involved in reinstalling everything and backing up settings. I just was tidy about it.

c:/windows
c:/windows/crash
crash windows crash

Anyway.....
The problem with the registry is that every program has to throw in their 5 lines of code but not a single one removes it. So after a short amount of time (especially if you're like me who installs and uninstalls alot of programs) your windows box drives to a stop. Thats one of the reasons why linux is better. While a program may once in a while not work for some reason, at least I can install thousands of applications without noticing any difference in speed.

Tech^salvager wrote:Thats a another thing about linux its dependency hell. Btw my fav linux distro is SuSe

Sorry to be butting in, but I've another vote for SuSe. My personal computer guru finally made a full shift to Linux after using SuSe. He says it's the friendliest distro he's used. (And he's tried some of the big names already mentioned here.) Carry on.

Linux is aimed at people that know what they're doing, Windows is aimed at the general public, i.e. the people who click twice on links and once on icons... *sighs in desparation*

I know people who say that Microsoft has never been a problem for them. Okay, maybe it hasn't. It has for me. Ever since the early days. Even when everything still ran on DOS, it didn't do what I told it to. And I was only about six at the time...

Essentially, if you find that Windows doesn't do what you need it to, run Linux. If you find yourself lost in Linux, run Windows. Where's the debate? One is better for certain types of people, one is better for others.

CorSec wrote:

Tech^salvager wrote:Thats a another thing about linux its dependency hell. Btw my fav linux distro is SuSe

Sorry to be butting in, but I've another vote for SuSe. My personal computer guru finally made a full shift to Linux after using SuSe. He says it's the friendliest distro he's used. (And he's tried some of the big names already mentioned here.) Carry on.

I've tried suse and hated it. No dependancy management system. Gah, I hate fucking RPM files. They're satan spawn...