http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/business/11ubuntu.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=t\

echnology



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 10:25:49PM -0500, Jye Nigma wrote:

>

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/business/11ubuntu.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=t\

echnology

>



Yes, that was a pretty good article. One problem is that they glossed

over, in a sentence, the fact of how updates can wreck video or sound.



The trouble is that if MS or Mac does that, the user is usually more or

less resigned to it.  If Ubuntu does it, and they do it too often at

this point, the user goes back to Windows or Mac.



Fedora is more or less broken by design, considering itself a testing

distro--the trouble is, that they ignore the many users who test it for

them and tell them what's wrong.



Ubuntu is a bit more responsive, but some of their decisions border on

moronic.



I saw an interesting example the other day.  Researching why my computer

clock kept getting set back to UTC, (which, AFAIK, doesn't use daylight

savings time) it turned out to be a Ubuntu install. Researching a bit

further (eventually I found that one edits /etc/default/rcS) I saw a

developer saying, "It's the only sane way to do it, and we're not going

to change it."



I had to laugh.  Errm, in the US, which probably has at least 100

computers, they do, for better or worse, Daylight Savings Time.  There's

probably at least 50 servers in the US.  (Yes, I'm being a bit sarcastic

about the numbers.)  For them, it's not the sane way to do it.

(Granted, most servers will have a time server, but regardless).  It

struck me as a rather poorly thought out statement, and the type of

attitude that will help ensure that 2009 is not the year of the Linux

desktop.



I'm assuming that when I installed that particular Ubuntu setup, I

simply overlooked an option to tell it that the system doesn't use UTC.

Fedora has it, and it's easy to skip if you're in a hurry. (I'm not

going to bother going through an Ubuntu install to see if that's the

case, but I'd be surprised if they didn't offer the option.)



My point here isn't that its default is UTC, it was the developer's

attitude that it's the only sane way to do it.



Ubuntu, especially, since it aims to be a Linux for human beings, as

they say, has to consider some of their updates.  I have to laugh that

they put in the still horribly buggy pulse audio, but feel OpenOffice 3

is too new.  OO 3 works, pulse audio often doesn't.  Again, easy enough

to fix, but not for my mom.



That all being said, last month, my wife had to take a trip and took my

Aspire One laptop.  I set it up for her with Ubuntu and she had almost

no problems using it.  Afterwards, she said, It's almost the same as the

Mac or Windows.



Of course, I'd made sure to set it up for her, but it was pretty

straightforward.  The only real customization I did was ensure that her

favorite freecell version was on there and that Japanese input was set

up properly.  (She said I didn't have to bother with Japanese input, but

after being married many years, I know that what she says isn't

necessarily what she means--sure enough, she called me in three days to

say, "Can I do Japanese on this?"   Had I not set it up, we would have

wound up in a fight, I'm sure.  :)



As it was, I said, Yup, hit control + space.  See that little thing on

the lower right?





Anyway, pardon the long winded digression, it is a good article and

worth reading.  The fact that it's the business section of the New York

Times is also a good thing.





--

Scott Robbins

PGP keyID EB3467D6

( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6





  Colonel: Every inch of this installation is under constant, 24-hour

surveillance.

  Willow: Including the secret lab?

  Colonel: Everything! (pause) What secret lab?

--- In linux@yahoogroups.com, Scott <scottro@...> wrote:

>

> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 10:25:49PM -0500, Jye Nigma wrote:

> >

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/business/11ubuntu.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=t\

echnology

> >

> [...]

> Ubuntu is a bit more responsive, but some of their decisions border

> on moronic.



I wouldn't be so harsh as to call some of their "decisions" moronic

but I would say some are not well thought-out -- they seem to overlook

the concerns, needs and wants of their user base.



> I saw an interesting example the other day.  Researching why my

> computer clock kept getting set back to UTC, (which, AFAIK, doesn't

> use daylight savings time) it turned out to be a Ubuntu install.

> Researching a bit further (eventually I found that one edits

> /etc/default/rcS) I saw a developer saying, "It's the only sane way

> to do it, and we're not going to change it."



Now THAT decision is moronic. :-)



As an astronomy buff for nearly 60 years, I use UTC in my programs

because that's what is used as a time base for astronomical calcs.

But I do not use, or want, UTC for anything else, especially the

clock on a system that multi-boots.



The Ubuntu team has made some other recent questionable assertions and

assumptions. I now have to manually update /boot/grub/menu.lst because

it's no longer done automatically for kernel updates in 8.04LTS.



And the wireless fiasco with the recent 8.10 release is legion.



And the absurd 6-month release cycle with its incompatibilities just

boggles my mind. Compare that (Ubuntu) with Arch's "rolling release

model" which truly makes sense to me, and is akin to Sun's Solaris.

Solaris programs I wrote and compiled 10 years ago still run fine on

the latest Solaris 10u6 released in October 2008.



With that written, I use Ubuntu 8.04LTS for all my astronomical apps,

but when support for 8.04LTS ends in April 2011 I may move the apps

to another distro if things haven't improved with Ubuntu's policies.

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 08:56:10AM -0000, Thad Floryan wrote:

>

> The Ubuntu team has made some other recent questionable assertions and

> assumptions. I now have to manually update /boot/grub/menu.lst because

> it's no longer done automatically for kernel updates in 8.04LTS.

>

> And the wireless fiasco with the recent 8.10 release is legion.



The trouble is that they all seem to make stupid decisions.  Fedora is

worse, both as far as ignoring their users and their decisions.



They call themselves cutting edge, but they're one of the few distros

that make changing password hashing to blowfish difficult.  (In Ubuntu,

aptitude install pam_unix2 or a similarly named package, edit a few

files in /etc/pam.d and you're done.  In Fedora, there's no pam_unix2

package, for starters.



Now, blowfish isn't some shatteringly new technology.  Fedora would be

better off putting at least some of its efforts into things like that

rather than things that no one really likes, needs, or wants, such as

pulseaudio and package kit.



At least with Arch and the other smaller distros, one can easily get in

touch with developers, and unpopular decisions can frequently be

changed.  (Although, perhaps because there's less of a distinction

between them, there are not too many unpopular or outright stupid

decisions.)



I remember reading someone's blog about how their 8.04 LTS install was

broken--again--after an update.  The blogger wrote that it wasn't

difficult to fix, but the whole point of using 8.04 was to avoid garbage

like this.



It's not that MS and Mac updates don't break anything--it's just that

when they do, they have enough of a grip on the their market so that

people will take it.  In other words, they can get away with it.



Ubuntu (and other distros) can't.







--

Scott Robbins

PGP keyID EB3467D6

( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6



Xander: So, Buffy, how'd the slaying go last night?

Buffy: Xander!

Xander: I mean, how'd the laying go? No, I don't mean that either.

** Moderator note: trimming done and top-posting corrected. Signature

** delimiter added. Please do this yourself in future.



Thad Floryan wrote:



> The Ubuntu team has made some other recent questionable assertions

> and assumptions. [...]



I read the article mentioned earlier in the thread, and it fit right

in with the problems I've had.



I just wonder what you think of Fedora? It, too, had had issues. Just

when I finally learn how to do something, they change how it's done.



Is there an easy to install Linux Distro like Fedora or Ubunto? I do

favor Gnome over KDE, and I like the Fedora layout. I'm willing to

try other makes. RPM based is best for me, but I'm not totally

against learning new tools.



--

<><Steve/WM5Z><>

Location: Las Cruces, NM: DM62oh

No one can change the past, but we all influence the future.

Remember, you too can have a computer like a wigwam, No windows, no gates.

Linux User Number 481782 <http://counter.li.org/>

Steve Friis wrote:

> ** Moderator note: trimming done and top-posting corrected. Signature

> ** delimiter added. Please do this yourself in future.

>

> Thad Floryan wrote:

>

>  > The Ubuntu team has made some other recent questionable assertions

>  > and assumptions. [...]

>

> I read the article mentioned earlier in the thread, and it fit right

> in with the problems I've had.

>

> I just wonder what you think of Fedora? It, too, had had issues. Just

> when I finally learn how to do something, they change how it's done.

>

> Is there an easy to install Linux Distro like Fedora or Ubunto? I do

> favor Gnome over KDE, and I like the Fedora layout. I'm willing to

> try other makes. RPM based is best for me, but I'm not totally

> against learning new tools.



FWIW, I've been messing with CentOS 5.2 and I'm liking it very much.

I've been messing with Ubuntu but CentOS so far seems to be working a

bit better. http://www.centos.org/

--

Allen D. Tate

Head of Computer Services

Ohio Township Public Library System

4111 Lakeshore Dr

PO Box 850

Newburgh, IN 47629

(812) 853-5468 x 313



http://www.ohio.lib.in.us/ (Library Home Page)

http://www.opensourceinlibraries.com/ (Open Source In Libraries)



The views expressed in this message are not necessarily

those of the Ohio Township Public Library System.

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 10:00:22AM -0600, Allen D. Tate wrote:

> > Thad Floryan wrote:

> >

> >  > The Ubuntu team has made some other recent questionable assertions

> >  > and assumptions. [...]

> >

> > I read the article mentioned earlier in the thread, and it fit right

> > in with the problems I've had.

> >

>

> FWIW, I've been messing with CentOS 5.2 and I'm liking it very much.

> I've been messing with Ubuntu but CentOS so far seems to be working a

> bit better. http://www.centos.org/



Despite being a server O/S, if you're not really into having the

absolute latest, greatest, only works sometimes (oops, I didn't mean

that) type stuff, CentOS is quite good.  Its documentation team has some

pride in their work, unlike Fedora where it seems to be done with an

attitude of "It's my turn????".





They have a helpful forum, but you are expected to do your homework

first.   So be sure to read Ned's Read This First if you join.  :)



It's a relatively quiet forum--I think one reason is that many of the

members are system admin types, and usually solve their troubles on

their own.  Don't let that scare you, there are some brusque folks there

but also some very nice ones.





--

Scott Robbins

PGP keyID EB3467D6

( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6



Angel: The Master arose. He let me live... to punish me. I kept

hoping you'd come. My destiny...

Buffy: Is this a get-in-my-pants thing? You guys in Sunnydale

talk like I'm the second coming.

> Despite being a server O/S, if you're not really into having the

> absolute latest, greatest, only works sometimes (oops, I didn't mean

> that) type stuff, CentOS is quite good. Its documentation team has some

> pride in their work, unlike Fedora where it seems to be done with an

> attitude of "It's my turn????".

>

> They have a helpful forum, but you are expected to do your homework

> first. So be sure to read Ned's Read This First if you join. :)

>

> It's a relatively quiet forum--I think one reason is that many of the

> members are system admin types, and usually solve their troubles on

> their own. Don't let that scare you, there are some brusque folks there

> but also some very nice ones.



Brusque, indeed. I have seen them rag on someone, even after they claim

to have done their homework. They are, however, no more brusque there

that I've seen some folks be on here. I think part of that is because

some folks forget what it's like to have been new to the Linux scene or

maybe it's because they "picked it up" much easier than others. :~)

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 10:57:34AM -0600, Allen D. Tate wrote:



> >

> > It's a relatively quiet forum--I think one reason is that many of the

> > members are system admin types, and usually solve their troubles on

> > their own. Don't let that scare you, there are some brusque folks there

> > but also some very nice ones.

>

> Brusque, indeed. I have seen them rag on someone, even after they claim

> to have done their homework. They are, however, no more brusque there

> that I've seen some folks be on here. I think part of that is because

> some folks forget what it's like to have been new to the Linux scene or

> maybe it's because they "picked it up" much easier than others. :~)



Yes, there's a few like that.  :)  There's also the very nice Toracat

and Alan and Ned are pretty nice as well.  Those three do far more than

their share of answering questions.



I can't recollect seeing someone who did their homework getting  really

flamed--I have seen things like I've googled but found nothing and still

posting a question that would require a psychic to answer.  :)



Something like, I can't get wireless to work--I've googled but haven't

found anything.  A question like that is probably going to get rude

answers if it gets an answer at all.





--

Scott Robbins

PGP keyID EB3467D6

( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6



Jonathon: You think I just want attention?

Buffy: No, I think you're up here in a clock tower with a

high-powered rifle because you want to blend in.

--- In linux@yahoogroups.com, Scott <scottro@...> wrote:

> [...]

> I can't recollect seeing someone who did their homework getting

> really flamed--I have seen things like I've googled but found nothing

> and still posting a question that would require a psychic to answer.

> :)

>

> Something like, I can't get wireless to work--I've googled but haven't

> found anything.  A question like that is probably going to get rude

> answers if it gets an answer at all.



More people should read:



<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>



so that relevant info is in the first post for help (thus not requiring

eleventy-seven back-and-forths to simply determine which distro and

hardware in involved).



:-)

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 06:20:04PM -0000, Thad Floryan wrote:

> --- In linux@yahoogroups.com, Scott <scottro@...> wrote:

> > [...]

> >

> > Something like, I can't get wireless to work--I've googled but haven't

> > found anything.  A question like that is probably going to get rude

> > answers if it gets an answer at all.

>

> More people should read:

>

> <http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>

>

> so that relevant info is in the first post for help (thus not requiring

> eleventy-seven back-and-forths to simply determine which distro and

> hardware in involved).



Yes, that's in this list's faq.  :)  Although, the chances are, when

it's on the CentOS forums, that at least we know the distro if not the

version.  :)





--

Scott Robbins

PGP keyID EB3467D6

( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6



Jonathon: You think I just want attention?

Buffy: No, I think you're up here in a clock tower with a

high-powered rifle because you want to blend in.

Thad Floryan wrote:

> --- In linux@yahoogroups.com, Scott <scottro@...> wrote:

>

>> [...]

>> I can't recollect seeing someone who did their homework getting

>> really flamed--I have seen things like I've googled but found nothing

>> and still posting a question that would require a psychic to answer.

>> :)

>>

>> Something like, I can't get wireless to work--I've googled but haven't

>> found anything.  A question like that is probably going to get rude

>> answers if it gets an answer at all.

>>

>

> More people should read:

>

> <http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>

>

> so that relevant info is in the first post for help (thus not requiring

> eleventy-seven back-and-forths to simply determine which distro and

> hardware in involved).

>

> :-)

>

That would be great for you geeks :-)    Who have been using Linux for

years. For some of us, this is a whole new world. Where do we begin?

Even the names were changed to confuse us innocent. I wish I had a

command of just the language you people use.



I am what you would call a feeble desktop exploiter. I use Linux because

I hate the way Windows treated me when I had to reload it and couldn't

find the correct license. At the time, we had 5 Windows XP computers.

Now we have none.



I am willing to put up with a lot, but there are a great many here who

you guys scare off because you demand us to start with the correct

terminology.

If we already had the correct verbage in the correct sintax, we would

have probably found the answer using Yahoo or Google search.



Steve

Las Cruces, NM

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 05:32:59PM -0700, Steve Friis wrote:

>

> Thad Floryan wrote:

> > --- In linux@yahoogroups.com, Scott <scottro@...> wrote:

> >

> >> Something like, I can't get wireless to work--I've googled but haven't

> >> found anything.  A question like that is probably going to get rude

> >> answers if it gets an answer at all.

> >>

> >

> > More people should read:

> >

> > <http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>

> >

> > so that relevant info is in the first post for help (thus not requiring

> > eleventy-seven back-and-forths to simply determine which distro and

> > hardware in involved).

> >

> > :-)

> >

> That would be great for you geeks :-)    Who have been using Linux for

> years. For some of us, this is a whole new world. Where do we begin?

> Even the names were changed to confuse us innocent. I wish I had a

> command of just the language you people use.



Thad's link is written by someone who's more or less a Linux rock star.

:)  It's still excellent, even for beginners, though it can scare them

off.  The list faq, outdated though it is, still has good points about

how to post... http://home.roadrunner.com/~computertaijutsu/linfaq.html.

There's a link there to a FAQ or howto by Godwin that's also quite good,

even for the beginner.



> I am what you would call a feeble desktop exploiter. I use Linux because

> I hate the way Windows treated me when I had to reload it and couldn't

> find the correct license. At the time, we had 5 Windows XP computers.

> Now we have none.



Yes, back when Mr. Raymond wrote his essay, the bar was higher, so

to speak--you had to know more about your computer to get Linux to work

at all.  Knoppix, I think, was one of the first to change that, but

anyway...



Yes, it can be intimidating.  However, we (and I think most mailing

lists and forums) are quite tolerant of people who aren't quite sure

what to ask and who feel lost.  Sometimes, the information is right out

there, and we get irked that they didn't even try, other times, googling

simply doesn't help.  As one friend wrote on another list--to be pointed

to a cryptic howto that says enable smtp authorization on postfix, as if

it were a self standing instruction, was beyond his ability and beyond

what he was willing to do for what he wanted.



He's right--some howtos simply assume too much knowledge on the part of

the reader, sort of like giving a Ph.D DNA thesis to some 5 year old

asking where babies come from.



>

> I am willing to put up with a lot, but there are a great many here who

> you guys scare off because you demand us to start with the correct

> terminology.

> If we already had the correct verbage in the correct sintax, we would

> have probably found the answer using Yahoo or Google search.



Hrrm, I don't think that's quite fair.  We usually point out what needs

to be asked.  Of course, we have moods too, some of us are grouchier

than others, and the grouchiest one can change at any time.



My own feeling is to be tolerant as long as I see someone is making

effort--I truly understand that it can be overwhelming.  The information

may be out there, but it's scattered all over the place.



Just hang in there, and soon you'll be intolerant too--no, no, I meant

to say, and soon you'll be one of the ones giving the answers rather

than asking the questions.

Just take a look at Godwin's articles though, to make sure to post your

questions in a way that the geeks types don't mind reading--mostly being

sure to trim unnecessary stuff, and try to not top post, and you'll

probably be fine.  You also, if you're going to go with Fedora, might

consider their forums, which can be quite valuable, though it certainly

has its share of grouchy people.  However, a good 95 percent of the

time, you'll get some sort of answer--not always of course, sometimes,

it's one of those weird things that no one knows.







--

Scott Robbins

PGP keyID EB3467D6

( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6



Cordelia: Hi! You having fun?

Angel: Sure. This is, uh...

Cordelia: Your idea of hell.

Angel: Actually, in hell you tend to know a lot of the people

--- In linux@yahoogroups.com, Steve Friis <wm5z@...> wrote:

> [...]

> That would be great for you geeks :-)    Who have been using Linux

> for years. For some of us, this is a whole new world. Where do we

> begin? Even the names were changed to confuse us innocent. I wish I

> had a command of just the language you people use.



I understand your dilemma. The situation is similar for almost any

(new) hobby or field of technical endeavor, and is compounded by the

"alphabet soup" of acronyms and "in" words and phrases which have

different meanings depending on context. "Boot" is footwear, the

process of starting a computer, or even being RIF'd (Reduction In

(work)Force) in business. "Shell" is a command line interface, ammo,

what's found by the seashore, forking over money, or even a company.

Probably not the best examples, but I hope you get the picture. :-)



The following may prove helpful, found using "introduction to linux"

to Google:



<http://tldp.org/LDP/intro-linux/intro-linux.pdf>

<http://www.tldp.org/> [the Linux documentation project]

<http://www.linux.org/lessons/beginner/index.html>

<http://www.linux.com/articles/113155>



> I am what you would call a feeble desktop exploiter. I use Linux

> because I hate the way Windows treated me when I had to reload it

> and couldn't find the correct license. At the time, we had 5 Windows

> XP computers. Now we have none.



That's good (I think :-).



But that's a bummer. If you ever encounter that problem again, the

free "Belarc Advisor" <http://www.belarc.com/> retrieves product keys

and totally characterizes one's system(s).



> I am willing to put up with a lot, but there are a great many here

> who you guys scare off because you demand us to start with the

> correct terminology.

> If we already had the correct verbage in the correct sintax, we

> would have probably found the answer using Yahoo or Google search.



You'd be surprised how well Google does with a full sentence as a

question expressed in general terms. This example input to Google

"how do I create a root login on my Ubuntu system?" provided the real

answer as did this "how do I install Linux on my laptop?" and this

"how do I login to Linux if I forgot my password?" (without quotes).

One or two word searches are likely to prove frustrating with page

after page of irrelevant "hits".



But the real problem is that some people do absolutely no research,

barge into a group or forum, post a one or two liner question, and

expect everyone to stop what they're doing and help them exclusively.

They frequently provide no context (Linux distro and version or

anything describing the hardware they're using when relevant); such

questions will either be ignored and/or the poster will be flamed.



Just to give you an example of what I mean, it took about 30 seconds

to find the following real postings in Usenet's comp.os.linux.* groups

and several other Yahoo groups. Salutations and poster's signatures

have been removed, otherwise the postings are in their entirety via a

copy'n'paste:



" We are going to shift windows pc to linux. How i will migrate mails

" of MS-Outlook to evolution.



and



" how and where do delete the linux temporary files(like internet

" files)?



and



" Need a document on installation and configuration of SARG



and



" how to check when the O/S users (other than default) have been

" created in Linux server. how to check when the Linux o/s is

" installed.



and



" i want to configure mysql n php in rhel 5 so plz help me. give me

" some links to study for mysql and php



There are 1000s of such postings. Do you see a trend? Seldom is the

distro mentioned. "Please" is rare, "Give me" or "gimme" is common.

"Texting"-style writing is common (and an instant turn-off for many).



Often the answers could have been found simply by entering the name

of the relevant program to Google. Look at the "SARG" example above;

simply typing "SARG" or "SARG documentation" to Google would have

provided the poster with the info s/he wanted. Needless to say, that

question was never answered in the forum where I found it.



I think it's safe to say most people are tolerant of typos and the

like, and if anyone makes an effort to explain their problem, even in

simple words, answers will be forthcoming.  It's a lot easier today

with the Internet and forums such as this. When I started using

computers back in the early 1960s, I literally had to do "dumpster

diving" to get program listings to teach myself assembly language and

Fortran programming from the examples I found.

Steve Friis wrote:

> Thad Floryan wrote:

[snip]

>> More people should read:

>>

>> <http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>

>>

>> so that relevant info is in the first post for help (thus not requiring

>> eleventy-seven back-and-forths to simply determine which distro and

>> hardware in involved).

>>

>> :-)

>>

> That would be great for you geeks :-)    Who have been using Linux for

> years. For some of us, this is a whole new world. Where do we begin?

> Even the names were changed to confuse us innocent. I wish I had a

> command of just the language you people use.

>



I think the names have been around since 1969 or so. I've been using

Linux since 1995 and find Wikipedia extremely helpful, but I still

embarrass myself. I'm just an old man that likes to own the things

he breaks -- far from a geek.



> I am what you would call a feeble desktop exploiter. I use Linux because

> I hate the way Windows treated me when I had to reload it and couldn't

> find the correct license. At the time, we had 5 Windows XP computers.

> Now we have none.

>



You takes the King's shillings, you live by the King's rules.



> I am willing to put up with a lot, but there are a great many here who

> you guys scare off because you demand us to start with the correct

> terminology.



No one has ever flamed me for using the wrong word, though I've been

gently corrected now and then. If you are having severe problems

with terminology, read the RUTE like I did. Look up the HOW_TOs that

come with your distro with Wikipedia open in another window. Take

the time to google the specs on your machine if you can't open the

case and copy down numbers off of chips.



I had a problem setting up my home network. I knew nothing about

networking. Still know very little. But, before coming to the list,

I started with a google on "home network" and branched out. I was

still pretty ignorant, but the list was kind and helpful. At least

I knew some of the basics when they answered.



Would you go to a restaurant in a foreign land and complain because

their menus weren't in your native tongue and they demanded you

order your meal in theirs?



Had you read the referenced link thoroughly, you would have known

not to insult the experts you depend on with your first paragraph,

and realized that the second paragraph (though nice to know) is

irrelevant. The third paragraph, you would have re-worded to read

    I've tried to read "this" and "that" but there are too many

    words that I don't understand, such as ...list... Can

    someone point me to a newbie's introduction?

Then I would have replied

    RUTE at http://members.toast.net/art.ross/rute/

    Intro at http://www.tldp.org/LDP/intro-linux/html/intro-linux.html

and may have taken the time to Google a few more.



I believe the first thing any newbie has to realize is that

Fedora, Ubuntu, Mandriva, Slackware, SuSE, and others are quite

different from each other. From what I've recently read, one

version of Fedora is just as different from another as it is

from Slackware. Though I can read minds, I'm very new at it and

my distance is limited to just a few inches. I need the common

words used by the geeks to understand the questions, if I'm to

offer anything useful. And, the more detail about your machine,

distro, and symptoms, the better I can answer.



/herbc

--- In linux@yahoogroups.com, Scott <scottro@...> wrote:

>

> On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 10:00:22AM -0600, Allen D. Tate wrote:

> > > Thad Floryan wrote:

> > >

> > >  > The Ubuntu team has made some other recent questionable

> > >  > assertions and assumptions. [...]

> > >

> > > I read the article mentioned earlier in the thread, and it fit

> > > right in with the problems I've had.

> > >

> >

> > FWIW, I've been messing with CentOS 5.2 and I'm liking it very

> > much.

> > I've been messing with Ubuntu but CentOS so far seems to be

> > working a bit better. http://www.centos.org/

>

> Despite being a server O/S, if you're not really into having the

> absolute latest, greatest, only works sometimes (oops, I didn't mean

> that) type stuff, CentOS is quite good.  Its documentation team has some

> pride in their work, unlike Fedora where it seems to be done with an

> attitude of "It's my turn????".



It seems it's time again to mention CentOS is essentially an unbranded

RHEL. Based on that, it seems a good choice for a stable workhorse

system without all the bleeding-edge gotchas (re: wireless, movies,

and audio).

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 06:13:06PM -0000, Thad Floryan wrote:

> --- In linux@yahoogroups.com, Scott <scottro@...> wrote:

> >

> > pride in their work, unlike Fedora where it seems to be done with an

> > attitude of "It's my turn????".

>

> It seems it's time again to mention CentOS is essentially an unbranded

> RHEL. Based on that, it seems a good choice for a stable workhorse

> system without all the bleeding-edge gotchas (re: wireless, movies,

> and audio).



Although you can get all that running.  I watch movies with mplayer on

it.   On the laptops, I have wireless working, though I had to install

MadWifi drivers from MadWifi's site.  Sound on many of these laptops

won't work with the CentOS alsa drivers, but in each case, I've gotten

it working with the atrpms.  Same with webcams, and actually, I think

Ned just did a wiki article on them, he's gotten really into them

lately.  :)





(Sound and wireless CentOS wiki articles are also there, depending upon

hardware--Most of the Acer stuff is mine.)





--

Scott Robbins

PGP keyID EB3467D6

( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6



Buffy: People to see, demons to kill.

--- In linux@yahoogroups.com, "Allen D. Tate" <atate@...> wrote:

> [...]

> FWIW, I've been messing with CentOS 5.2 and I'm liking it very much.

> I've been messing with Ubuntu but CentOS so far seems to be working a

> bit better. http://www.centos.org/



Be aware the CentOS 5.2 Live CD won't boot on a system with SATA drives.

I had to file a bugzilla about that and last I read (November 27, 2008)

it hasn't been fixed yet.

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 06:05:51PM -0000, Thad Floryan wrote:

> --- In linux@yahoogroups.com, "Allen D. Tate" <atate@...> wrote:

> > [...]

> > FWIW, I've been messing with CentOS 5.2 and I'm liking it very much.

> > I've been messing with Ubuntu but CentOS so far seems to be working a

> > bit better. http://www.centos.org/

>

> Be aware the CentOS 5.2 Live CD won't boot on a system with SATA drives.

> I had to file a bugzilla about that and last I read (November 27, 2008)

> it hasn't been fixed yet.



That's interesting, I had no trouble installing the normal CD on SATA.



My problem was with the Aspire One's realtek (wired) NIC.  I have that

detailed on the CentOS wiki.  That is the type of problem one can run

into on CentOS, hardware support, though it's usually fixable.





--

Scott Robbins

PGP keyID EB3467D6

( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6



Willow: Everything seems normal. Not a snake, not a wasp.

Cordelia: Yup. School can open tomorrow.

Xander: Explain to me again how that's a good thing?

Cordelia: I'm drawing a blank.

--- In linux@yahoogroups.com, Scott <scottro@...> wrote:

>

> On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 06:05:51PM -0000, Thad Floryan wrote:

> > --- In linux@yahoogroups.com, "Allen D. Tate" <atate@> wrote:

> > > [...]

> > > FWIW, I've been messing with CentOS 5.2 and I'm liking it very

much.

> > > I've been messing with Ubuntu but CentOS so far seems to be

working a

> > > bit better. http://www.centos.org/

> >

> > Be aware the CentOS 5.2 Live CD won't boot on a system with SATA

drives.

> > I had to file a bugzilla about that and last I read (November 27,

2008)

> > it hasn't been fixed yet.

>

> That's interesting, I had no trouble installing the normal CD on SATA.



As I cited in the bugzilla, the CentOS Live CD problem originated as

far back as Fedora 7, and probably earlier. Whatever it is that collects

everything together for the live CD is including ages-ago software

that is not current with the latest release.



A copy of the bugzilla I filed can be read here:



<http://thadlabs.com/FILES/CentOS_5.2_Live_CD_problem.txt>



I suspect the driver(s) in the Live CD ISO simply don't support SATA

whereas the ones on the install CD do support SATA.



I've tried the CentOS 5.2 Live CD on over 10 other new desktops since

filing the bugzilla and experienced the same problem with all. The

CentOS 5.2 Live CD does boot and work fine on any of my old Dell

laptops.

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 06:30:01PM -0000, Thad Floryan wrote:

> --- In linux@yahoogroups.com, Scott <scottro@...> wrote:

> >

> > >

> > > Be aware the CentOS 5.2 Live CD won't boot on a system with SATA

> drives.

> > > I had to file a bugzilla about that and last I read (November 27,

> 2008)

> > > it hasn't been fixed yet.

> >

> > That's interesting, I had no trouble installing the normal CD on SATA.

>

> As I cited in the bugzilla, the CentOS Live CD problem originated as

> far back as Fedora 7, and probably earlier. Whatever it is that collects

> everything together for the live CD is including ages-ago software

> that is not current with the latest release.



>

> I suspect the driver(s) in the Live CD ISO simply don't support SATA

> whereas the ones on the install CD do support SATA.



Yeah, looking at the bug report--hrrm, can't find my CentOS bugzilla

information, but got in anonymously--it looks as if it's known and

they're not going to do anything about it.





--

Scott Robbins

PGP keyID EB3467D6

( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6



Kendra: I call it Mr. Pointy.

Buffy: You named your stake?

Kendra: Yes.

Buffy: Remind me to get you a stuffed animal.

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 07:15:54AM -0700, Steve Friis wrote:

> ** Moderator note: trimming done and top-posting corrected. Signature

> ** delimiter added. Please do this yourself in future.

>

> Thad Floryan wrote:

>

> > The Ubuntu team has made some other recent questionable assertions

> > and assumptions. [...]

>

> I read the article mentioned earlier in the thread, and it fit right

> in with the problems I've had.

>

> I just wonder what you think of Fedora? It, too, had had issues. Just

> when I finally learn how to do something, they change how it's done.



Yes, that's Fedora--cutting edge, except for the important things.





>

> Is there an easy to install Linux Distro like Fedora or Ubunto? I do

> favor Gnome over KDE, and I like the Fedora layout. I'm willing to

> try other makes. RPM based is best for me, but I'm not totally

> against learning new tools.



Well, there's Mepis.  However, it's KDE based.  There's Mint, but it's

based on Ubuntu.  There is Blag, which is usually a single CD based on

Fedora.



There is also CentOS, based on RHEL5 (RedHat 5's server edition) but it

will usually have outdated packages--outdated in the desktop user sense.





The trouble is that so many distros are based on Ubuntu especially, that

it's hard to find one that doesn't imitate its mistakes.





--

Scott Robbins

PGP keyID EB3467D6

( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6



Anya: Men like sports. I'm sure of it.

Xander: Yes. Men like sports. Men watch the action movie, they

eat of the beef, and they enjoy to look at the bosoms. A thousand

years of avenging our wrongs, and that's all you've learned?

--- In linux@yahoogroups.com, Steve Friis <wm5z@...> wrote:

>

> Thad Floryan wrote:

>

> > The Ubuntu team has made some other recent questionable assertions

> > and assumptions. [...]

>

> I read the article mentioned earlier in the thread, and it fit right

> in with the problems I've had.



When I read the release notes for Ubuntu 8.10 (the latest), it was

clear I was going to remain with 8.04LTS for as long as I use Ubuntu.



My primary work Linux laptop is running Red Hat 9. Yes, I know it's

ancient (circa 2002-2003), but it's stable and I manually update

requisite programs as necessary. I still have and run some UNIX and

Solaris systems from the 1980s and 1990s which perform their tasks

well -- no need to force-update the systems every 6 months. I maintain

critical software current by compiling from source.



> I just wonder what you think of Fedora? It, too, had had issues.

> Just when I finally learn how to do something, they change how it's

> done.



That *IS* annoying. Seems the Fedora folks haven't really bothered

to read the File Hierarchy Standard <http://www.pathname.com/fhs/>

among other things.



With that written, I have Fedora Core 2 here at home running a

complete asterisk VoIP system (except for the PRI), and Fedora 8, 9

and 10 on multi-boot systems so I can see what they've been changing.

Other than the sometimes bizarre changes between releases, these are

fairly robust systems for everything I do with them. There are many

sites "out there" running, say, Fedora Core 3 for their web servers

and it seems to perform that task well. Frankly, I use FreeBSD. :-)



FWIW, Red Hat Enterprise Linux seems popular with the US Government

and even the NSA has a guidebook how to operate and secure a RHEL

system:



<http://www.nsa.gov/snac/os/redhat/rhel5-guide-i731.pdf>



> Is there an easy to install Linux Distro like Fedora or Ubunto? I do

> favor Gnome over KDE, and I like the Fedora layout. I'm willing to

> try other makes. RPM based is best for me, but I'm not totally

> against learning new tools.



Depends on one's requirements. Seriously, I've found Fedora and Ubuntu

easy to install and use on desktops, but then I don't use wireless or

play music or movies on them. Laptops seem to be a moving target and

that's where most of the (new) problems seem to appear since each new

day's laptop production introduces a new chipset (slight exagerration)

for which drivers are lacking. Older laptops seem well supported.



Best general solution is to try a Live CD/DVD of a distro before

committing to it, and stick with the "main" distros for better support

and repositories.  I submit there are far too many Linux distros, and

bad experiences with the "minors" leaves a bad taste in one's mouth.

Thanks for all the responses.



All the concensus points to me staying with Fedora. I appreciate all the

feedback.



<><Steve/WM5Z><>



>

-------Original Message-------



From: Jye Nigma

Date: 01/11/2009 10:25:55 PM

To: linux@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [Linux] Ubuntu vs M$?



http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/business/11ubuntu

html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=technology





>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Niranjan<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<



That is wonderful article.

I hate the words towards the end, "he’s going to have a crisis of faith at

some point" said by Matt Asay.

I am really curious to see how the vision of Mr.Shuttleworth works out.

I will be the biggest believer in his ideology if this ideology gets

successful.



- Niranjan.