debian is way ahead

[jjmac]

The strength of Debian is that it is so comprehensive
that one can easily fork something based on it,
witness the derivatives we have.

Yes, deb doesn't intrude on the user, as others
will. So ... in a nut shell


If a person wishes to use
the debconf
facility, they may of course.

It has a very straight forward generic
approach, which tends to give me a lot of faith
in the overall direction of the industry, in a way.

Computing generally seems to get bogged down with
advertising and corporate scamming a bit to much for
my liking. But i suppose thats true for most everything
really.

I like the simplicity of the deb package. After all, it's just a
couple of tar.gz
files that have been archived via
"ar". Allowing them
to easily be used outside of the packaging system.

Even the flatness of debs' packaging system
is a plus.

It allows a user (admin) to have easy access.
While maintaining a good level of security via the
standard, and excellent unix styled permission/ownership
system.

In short, you can tailor and use deb in any way
you like. It becomes not only a stable working
environment, but also an excellent educational vehicle.

It's a curious thing though, that deb has such a
techi reputation for some reason.

Iv'e found it to be the simplest to
use and maintain
myself, mainly due to the the reasons mentioned
above concerning package/config management.

Is it because deb doesn't make a lot of noise,
In that, it's the person who just sits there and
gets on with their thing, while all the people around
get it in their heads that they must be an
intellectual of soughts, deep in thought.

Narhhh, just trying to figure out what's making their
toes wiggle

I think a lot of people also tend to mistake their
WM for their distro. Once debs been updated, it will do
the latest kde/gnome too ...

Anyway, enough plugs , as mentioned, a lot
depends on what a person takes to. I did find RH
the hardest distro to use myself though. I like to
do "fvwm" as a WM, RH's Anotherlevel, well,
now there's a good example of how "out of space"
M4 scripting can get.



hmmm, i'm just thinking out load a bit here.

I wish i had the time to give other distros the
time they deserve. It's a little hard to
properly evaluate a system after only a few
months, or even after only a year, really. The more
familiar a person gets with a distro style,
well ... dosen't their whole approach to
it change as well, and so their opinion.

I would guess most people would come in on
a esthetics base really, rather than functionality.

hmmm, must admit, the guy with the red hat irritated
me, and the guy with the wand made me feel like
someone was trying to treat me like a fool, which i
can be really, but don't like to be treated as such , ...
debs swirl seemed very non-threatening ...
maybe that was it, after all.

Anyhow, bye for now

jm







jm

[Cuddles]

jjmac,

For me, it wasnt even the "Debian Swirl" that attracted me, it was the "Digitized Eye" of Knoppix. I started out with Knoppix v3.2, and the big thing was the digital eye. I booted the Live CD, while still keeping my Win98 safe-and-sound in the background, and that was all it took...

I started to boot the Live CD more and more, than using my Win98 boot, and then dedicated a complete hard drive for an install. At that time, Knoppix v3.3 was out. After a few months of running v3.3 on my "older" system, I decided to buy a newer system, one specifically designed to run Linux ( which is the system I still have ).

Both systems have Win98 installed on them, only the "bare minimum", just for Wine support. This system has gone through one more "install", it was gutted and installed from Knoppix v3.3 to v3.4 ( with the experimental 2.6.6 kernel ).

My next "big" thing is going to get two NIC's into both systems, then they both are going to get Kanotix BH9a installed on them. I've got the two NIC's in hand now, I still need the cable, but, the big stopping point now is, time. I need to take down "the tower of computers" to get to there cases, install the NIC's, replace out a defective CD-ROM in the older system, and get the cable between the systems in place, before I want to install the OS's on both. "The tower of computers" is a result of the fact that my system is on the floor, as well as the older system, with a UPS inbetween the cases, then a shelf unit is on top of the cases, a board, and the "older" systems monitor, mouse, and keyboard are on this board. To get to the cases, the whole "tower" needs to be dissasembled. If I was smart, I'd redesign the complete arrangement, so that the "desk" encorporated the cases under it, and the desk would hold both systems on top of it, so that you could get to the cases easier, but, havent gotten to that designing yet...

I wanted to work out the "network" idea, having one system control internet access for both, but, didnt think that Win98 would serve the purpose, it always needed rebooting, ( system resources always leaked, and the only way to get them back, was to reboot ). Now, with Linux, the "dream" can be fullfilled. My system will not only be the "internet server", but will also be the "printing server", and both systems will have "shared" resources between them. With the experiance I have with Windows, it would have choked on the internet, and the printing would have only drove it further into the ground...

I've never tried any other Distro, and I dont feel "left out" either. I think Debian is about the best, especially when compared to Windows, which is the only thing I can compare it with, in my background. Knoppix introduced me to Debian, and Linux, and I have "evolved" into Kanotix. The "Swirl" was never anything but a logo to me, nothing to fear, nothing to get "hyped" about, it was just a logo...

As for why Linux gets the "bad rap" on being "Techie" ? I think it comes down to the CLI, and some of the "cryptic" commands. There have been lots of discussions on this topic in these forums, and most of them come down to the Command Line Interface, and the fact that the commands are "a technophiles wonderland" in trying to understand them; ls is for dir, cat is for type, etc... Linux has its ties to the UNIX command language set, whereas, Windows, has its history in DOS - DOS and Windows being the ones that hit the "user" world, and UNIX was for the "Big" guns, the systems that took complete floors of buildings, kind of thing.

I know some of my information is probably incorrect, and can be disputed as not "factual", as far as historical, but, this is what I think... ( so dont flame me here ) but, I think Bell Labs was working on a release of UNIX that would target the "home user", or the "non-Main Frame" computers, but I think it was Linux that actually made good on that. Linux was the first "non-Windows" OS that looked, and worked, like Windows, but, was completely redesigned with the idea of UNIX behind it, not like Windows. Windows is based, loosely, on DOS, with band-aids into DOS to make a GUI. UNIX was powerful, designed at the mainframe level, servers, and Linux brought the GUI into it, and made it capable of running on something a little smaller than a "whole floor" computer system. Hence, some programs, like AVast, still only see Linux as a "server" and not a "workstation" operating system.

This may also be a reason for the "techie" stigma of Linux, its a server OS. Most of the "common" users of Windows, the "general public" here, are "users" of Windows, and not "servers". These people run Windows as a "workstation", and Microsoft has "pandered" to these people by making all the settings, and configurations, for you, in the background, and "behind the curtain". When you move from Windows into the Linux World, that "curtain" is removed, and you are left to make these settings, and configurations, on your own. In Linux, you need to "know" what you have, at an almost "intimate" level. In Windows, when you wanted to add a modem, you just needed to know make and model, probably, the OS would work everything else out for you. In Windows, if you wanted to install a new video card, you probably just plugged it in, and Windows would do everything for you... Not always the same in the Linux World...

For the same two examples above, In Linux, you want to add a new modem; is it a WinModem, is it supported, what "chipset" does it have, is it internal or external, etc... For the video card; again, is it supported, does it have drivers, what "chipset" does it have, are the drivers included in the kernel already or do you need to locate and compile them into the kernel, etc...

Hate to give a "real life" example of what "some" Windows users are like, but, I think this example will prove a little of where "they" would think the terminology of "techie" means, to them...

Had a man call into Windows Microsoft Network ( MSN ) Internet Service, phone rep at the time. The guy "claimed" he bought AOL for $90, and had the CD to prove it. First thought was, I could have ditched the guy, cause we dont provide support to our compettitor, we were MSN, this was a AOL issue, but, I wanted to help the guy... Chances are, he'd drop AOL someday, and the assistance he got from me, in MSN, could sway him to coming over to MSN, maybe...

So, the second thought was, he "bought" AOL ? You dont have to buy it, you get tons of them in the mail, even when you dont want them, why, and how, did he BUY it? ( must have been a really good sales-person, in my back mind )

Intrigued, I asked him to "explain" how he came to BUY aol... He replied that he went down to the Computer Store, and found it on the shelf, and paid $90 for it ( USD ) - and this was back in, say, 1993, so it was a little expensive. I figured that I'd never get any more information with this line of questions, I went with another theory... I asked the guy, what kind of packaging it came in?

My thought was, if its just a CD, its got to be a small package. He replied it was in a box, maybe about 3" x 5", and about 3/4" deep... Hmmm, thats awfully big for a CD case package, but, at that time, just about the right size for a package that contained a modem, internal one that is... So, I continued... Did anything else come in the box, other than the AOL CD? yes - Did it have any packing? yes - Did this packing have sharp pointing things on one side of it? yes - Was this packing green, and possibly in "bubble wrap"? yes - Did this green thing have a silver, or metal plate on one side, and did it look like you could plug a phone cord into it? yes -=- AAAHAAAA -=- WE HAVE OUR ANSWER

In the best tactful, and non-demeaning way I could, I explained to the guy, he had bought a modem, and AOL came FREE in the package. He didnt buy AOL for $90, he bought a modem for $90. To finalize my hypothesis, I asked him "Why did you call us ( AOL or MSN ), because, up to now, nothing seemed to initiate the call for help, yet?" - He answered, he was trying to install AOL, from that CD, and it reports "it cant find a modem" -=- BINGO ! We have a winner !!!

The next ten minutes were spent trying to find that box, and the "packing" that came in it... What it all boiled down to, was... He threw the box and packing away, figuring it was waste, and the trash-person already came and took the trash away. The guy was S.O.L. - in essence, he had BOUGHT AOL for $90, plain and simple...

So, in the case of this guy, "techie" could have just been the fact that he had to install something inside his own computer. I had another, "funny" story from the case files of MSN Support, about the lady who installed MSN, and after getting online, and checking her "email" - it would report "You've Got Mail!" -=- So, she went out to the end of her driveway, and checked her "snail mail". The "trek" was a rather long one, from what I gathered, because it happened a few times to her, and she figured, someone was playing games with her, someone was removing her snail mail between the time the computer said she had mail, and the time it took her to "physically" check her snail mail box... She finally called MSN Help, and I got her call. I had to explain the whole "email" thing to her. For this person, I would say "techie" was the whole email thing...

Now, if we want to look at the above examples of what "techie" is, and then apply them to Debian, or to Linux, for that matter - WHOA - my only conclusion here is, thank god they are running WINDOWS - can you IMAGINE a Linux Help Phone Support getting some of the CLI calls??? On the reality, I have come to find, and think, that most people who run any variant of Linux, are a lot more intelectual, we dont call Tech Support for printer problems and come to find out we never turned the printer power on, we dont call Tech Support for modem problems and come to find out we never put the internal modem into the computer in the first place, we might fire off a post on not being able to connect to the internet, and come to find out our little "kittie" was playing behind the computer and happened to unplug the phone line from the modem, but that happens... I think the "techie" stigma is good, in many ways, it keeps the "dim bulbs" from attempting to use it, or at least, instills a thought that MAYBE you need to do some learning to run Liunx, and it keeps the "burnt out bulbs" from ever attempting to run Linux in the first place...

Not saying that everyone who runs, or wants to run, Linux, has to have a 500 Watt bulb lit up above there heads, just the idea that they have promise, capable of learning new things, and, possibly, the will to succeed. I have very little knowledge of UNIX, or Linux, I used to do some things on a Sparc ( Sun Microsystems ) workstation, using there variation of UNIX OS, I remembered the ls and cat commands, how they work, and what they do, but, this has all been a learning game. I think I fare well, I've done some learning, and growing, but, I think I have a lot more. ( still a lot of things I dont know )

I have come to think of "Linux", or particularly, the "L" in the front of Linux, to be "Learning". Linux isnt Windows, but, on the odds of where most Linux people are coming from, thats a majority of where they have there experiance at, Windows. The hardest thing to overcome, is, that, that experiance isnt that helpful in Linux. I have run Windows since its introduction of Win3.x, and it is all "basically" useless in Linux. Years and years of knowledge, dont account for much in the Linux World, its still new, its still different, and has just made me humbled to the fact that I have to re-learn something. It is kind of exillerating, in a sadistic kind of way. Its like playing a board game, where you are just about to "win" the game, and someone sends you back to the beginning, to do it all over again. I think this kind of thinking; a challenge, something new, something different, something to learn, has a lot to do with a persons success in Linux, any Distro. If the stigma of being "techie" can keep the people who arent willing to try, or work at it, away, then great - they can stay running Windows - ( and clog up the Windows Tech Support people )

Just my two thoughts of this,
Ms. Cuddles
DISSCLAIMER: The views expessed by this poster are there own, dont flame them for having "free speech", and dont take offense if you feel this poster is "targetting" you, the views are "generalized", and not targetting anyone in specifics. You Run What You Want To Run - For Whatever Reason - No Diss Intended - To Anyone

[gnarvaja]

Wow! I had to stop and take a breath after Cuddles' post.

I have been meddling with PCs for the last 19 years (jeez I'm old), without counting my CPM days. I've been mostly a M$ user for business reasons, but I've had contact with Unix/Linux for many many years too. My first Linux installation was from whatever the 2nd Red Hat distribution was back in the mid 90s (I think). Over these years I learned to be agnostic. Every time I favored A over B for technical reasons, the market (ie: clients) burned me because they liked B better. This was true wether we were talking about 'Lotus 1-2-3 vs Excel', TurboC vs MSFT C, Red Hat vs SUSE, MS Office vs Star Office vs OOffice, etc.

Having learned my lesson, over the past 8 years I've been following very closely the Linux/OSS evolution, in particular regarding usability. I have to say that for the first time I found the right one: Knoppix 3.6. Why? mostly because its powerful autoconfiguration. It was the first time I got Samba, WiFi, X Server, printers, sound and everything else to work effortlessly. I did a PMI install so I could leave my desktop HD untouched (I had an ext2 and swap partition left from previous tries) since there is not proper support for digital cameras and photo printing. As a result, all my kids (the youngest is 10 years old) would rather use the Linux box than the Windows one. That includes using OOffice to get their homework done.

Everybody knows a techie in the neighborhood or within the family. Any of those techies can figure out Knoppix in a couple of hours. In my humble oppinion we're going to see more and more of Linux machines in homes, where stories like the ones in Cuddles' post will become history.

Want an example? TiVO runs on Linux and any couch potato can operate it better than their old VCR, let alone their PC.

--GN
DISCLAIMER: Same as Cuddles'.

[chris-harry]

Debian is EVIL!!! and i love EVIL!!! (because i am a crazzy banana... hence the picture)

[CrashedAgain]

Chris-Harry whatever you been smokin I want some.

and Cuddles, if I ever need a help line, I want you on the other end of it.

like gnarvaja, I've been around for a while. My first experience with any sort of computer was hacking into a mainframe to do some homework in my university days. That was back when ANY computer was a mainframe. It ran 'time-shared basic' and programs were entered via paper punch tape!
I missed out on cp/m but I did have a commodore 64. I still think those guys could really program...a complete word processer plus your document all fit into 32K. I've used MS (DOS & Windows) since but I never really liked them. I use Linux as much as possible because

1) I am really against MS's-corporate-crusher attitude and I don't trust them especially since I found my HP pavilion computer came with spyware installed by the factory
2) I can understand/customize/modify Linux and it's very interesting to learn my way around the O/S
3) Linux is superior...yes, really.... particularly in areas like inherent security & virus resistance, etc.

Knoppix was the first distro I found that would actually install & run & it spoiled me for apt-get. I tried some of the others mentioned ...Yoper wouldn't install, Slackware was a real possibility but installing apps just too much work, Mandrake worked well out-of-thebox but was very difficult to upgrade, Linux-from-Scratch would have been an exercise in self-torture. So I'm back with Knoppix (actually just now installing kanotix BH9) because of apt-get. Rpm's, Rpmdrake, urpmi, yast etc aren't even in the same league.

Proof: look who's adapting apt to their systems now.

[chris-harry]

*hands over the drugs to crashedagain*...

[Markus]

I did have a commodore 64.

Heh, I still have mine complete with C-cassette drive. Although after sitting in a closet for ~20 years the transistors are probably dead.

1) I am really against MS's-corporate-crusher attitude and I don't trust them especially since I found my HP pavilion computer came with spyware installed by the factory

This is no joke? You really had complimentary spyware? Where's the world going to

Knoppix was the first distro I found that would actually install & run & it spoiled me for apt-get. I tried some of the others mentioned ...Yoper wouldn't install, Slackware was a real possibility but installing apps just too much work, Mandrake worked well out-of-thebox but was very difficult to upgrade, Linux-from-Scratch would have been an exercise in self-torture. So I'm back with Knoppix (actually just now installing kanotix BH9) because of apt-get. Rpm's, Rpmdrake, urpmi, yast etc aren't even in the same league.

Proof: look who's adapting apt to their systems now.

Yep, makes one wonder how slackware came to name their new package system slapt-get.

[gnarvaja]

1) I am really against MS's-corporate-crusher attitude and I don't trust them especially since I found my HP pavilion computer came with spyware installed by the factory

This is no joke? You really had complimentary spyware? Where's the world going to

Spyware/Adware companies sueing each other for uninstalling software that the PC users didn't even know it was there in the first place: Two adware firms battling in court

[Markus]

Spyware/Adware companies sueing each other for uninstalling software that the PC users didn't even know it was there in the first place: Two adware firms battling in court

Good one Especially:

"Without any cause or right, we have been severed from our business relationship with millions of customers without their knowledge and consent," Boday said.

Doesn't seem to matter that the customers didn't know they had a business realtionship

[CrashedAgain]

1) I am really against MS's-corporate-crusher attitude and I don't trust them especially since I found my HP pavilion computer came with spyware installed by the factory

This is no joke? You really had complimentary spyware? Where's the world going to

No joke. I would not have known about it but when I first started playing with linux I bought a used 1.1 G HP Pavilion (probably one of the last factory boxes with winME) which I immediately partition the HD & reistalled winME. Then I noticed every time it started up there was a dos app which ran for a few seconds after boot then disappeared. I forget now what it was called but did a google & it turned out to be some kind of spyware that came with certain compaq & hp models of that era. I think it ran for a while after initial install then removed itself.