Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
Win95 will run on a 386. I dont know if it will install on a 386 through. I once had 95 running on a 386 with 8 mi ram. I got the hard drive second hand with windows on it. Then I just had to put it in and turn on. - Original Message - From: Mark Hillary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2000 2:26 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please > My install of mandrake 7.2 with KDE2 and stuff was about 400Mb. 400Mb, for > 400mb I had a system that booted into a GUI (KDE), and office package and a > second word prossecer (Koffice and abiword). Loads of games and internet > stuff. Compare that to windows for 300mb you can install a bear system, then > add office on that and all of the other little programs that you like and > you can see that for systems of comparable usablity that linux is smaller. > You have to remember that linux is a network and develporer OS so when you > look at that download size you have to realise that there are loads of > develpoment tools (devel libaries), server programs (Aphace), and loads of > other times that the normal desktop user will never need. > > The other reasons for using it is that it is more stable (as long as your > not a kernel developer or such like), and to be free of the closed source > compaines (Its that moral bit). Also if you want to see the insides of your > system you can do that. > > When you read things saying linux can be run on i386's you have to remember > that when refering to linux you are talking about the kernel, and yes the > kernel (and other programs) can be run on a i386 but not all of them. Linux > is great for reusing old bits of hardware, setting up firewalls or just a > computer that you can attach extra stuff to. It is great for stuff like > that. With win 98 the install program won't even allow it to be installed on > a P166. > > Any I will stop rambering now > > Mark Hillary > - Original Message - > From: "Romanator" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 7:58 PM > Subject: Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a > straight answer please > > > > Paul wrote: > > > > > > > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > > > > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be > used on > > > > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the > download > > > > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > > > > > > > David and Alicia > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Most people that 'try' running linux have probably not read enough about > it to know what > > > is possible and how to do it. > > > Millions of people run Linux and are happy with it. > > > > > > Progress is made in all areas, in the development of linux, Windows, and > hardware. If the > > > hardware gets more potent, then the OS's of that timeframe will grow > along with that. > > > You can indeed run Linux on a 386, but you can not expect to take all > the advantages of > > > the new OS-technology using old hardware-technology. > > > Mandrake is optimized for Pentium class processors, not i386. > > > Redhat is compiled for i386, and when you use RH5.2 (from which, if I am > not mistaken, > > > Mandrake originated) or RH6.0, that will run nicely on an I386. You can > not install > > > everything, but a basic system with some Xwindow support should be > possible on your specs > > > of i386 with 540mb. Even with 8 megs of RAM, this should function. (Not > 'run', but > > > 'walk'.) > > > > > > Compare what you need for a basic mandrake installation with a bare > Xwindow system, and > > > windows95, and you may not find much difference. Using Linux made me > microsoft > > > independent, free of blue screens of death, DLL's in all forms and > shapes and versions, an > > > uninterpretable registry file, and the power to influence the system and > repair it when it > > > breaks down. Windows does not let me do that. > > > If you seek the ease of windows, being taken by the hand by wizards > which make all the > > > decisions for you, then windows is what you want. If you want to be able > to use your > > > computer by what you put in it yourself, then you can go with Linux. > > > (My expression of thoughts entirely of course.) > > > Paul > > > > Good ol' DLLS. Once of the major causes of many Windows crashes. > > -- > > Roman > > Registered Linux User #179293 > > > >
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
Its also more stable ebcause a small crash in windows will take the system with it. Under linux the same small crash will take down the application but will leave everything else untouched. If you accidentially put your program into an endless loop you can just switch console and kill it. - Original Message - From: Revenant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2000 12:37 AM Subject: Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please > Tom Brinkman wrote: > > On Friday 29 December 2000 04:41 am, David and Alicia wrote: > > > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > > > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be > > > used on older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i > > > saw the download size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > From zero (you can run Linux on a floppy) to as much as you care to > > let it have. Keep in mind that only the kernel is Linux, everything > > else is (GNU) applications and the various configs, libraries, etc, > > that they need. Read /. and you'll hear of people running Linux on a > > wristwatch ;) > > Some bloke got it going on a Dreamcast too. > > My reasons for running Linux: > > (1) It's free (as in beer, not speech). And not just the OS, but > the software. The GIMP alone saves you $1,000+ over using > Photoshop. > > (2) It's free (as in speech, not beer). > > (3) "It's more stable". In my experience, what this has meant is that > the OS won't glitch or die on you for no discernable reason - but > it can and will glitch or die on you for reasons that are obscure > at best to the newbie. Essentially, Linux will let you into its > guts to fix the problem when something goes wrong while Windows > doesn't. I hope to learn enough to take advantage of that. > > > Society Design Mailing List http://www.egroups.com/group/Society_Design > For any and all aspects of designing societies, from discussion of real- > world utopian ideas to fantastic fictional or roleplaying worlds. > ---Revenant [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- >
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, you wrote: > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > David and Alicia > yep. But dont expect to have a lot. You probably wouldn't be able to fit in xwindows. The smallest linux will run on a 386, 4mi ram and no hdd. > Would mandrake run on a p60, 540 mb hd, ? > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Revenant > Sent: 29 December 2000 10:24 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [newbie] basic question > > > Define "faster than windows". Using KDE I've noticed there is quite > often a noticable delay waiting for windows to appear - far longer than > in windows. > > > Herman Christiani wrote: > > Hi, > > Yes, you can and it will run faster then windows, > > but you forgot to mention the amount of ram? > > Linux likes it's ram, the more the better. > > On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, you wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > Can i install mandrake on my (shame) p200mmx 3.3gig machine? > > > will it run apps faster than windoze bloatware? > > > David and Alicia > > > > Society Design Mailing List http://www.egroups.com/group/Society_Design > For any and all aspects of designing societies, from discussion of real- > world utopian ideas to fantastic fictional or roleplaying worlds. > ---Revenant [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- -- == Goldenpi - linux user, unreal editor, programer in 3 languages and all round geek.
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
I have to jump in to this discussion, because I just can't help myself. I have used windows for as long as it has existed. Started with the DOS boot up before Windows 3.1 and right on up to 98. I got so tired of the blue screen and system freezes. I took Norton Antivirus off of our home computers because it caused crashes at random. None of these things were readily fixible. I have two Windows books, 2 inches thick each, they didn't help. I decided to try Linux, couldn't get caldera to load went to Mandrake, voila! it blew me away. For the bucks spent (including books) and the functionality recieved there is no comparison to windows. I can have 4 screens running at the same time and no effect on speed or other performance. I would be looking at the blue screen in windows if I tried some of the things I do in linux. I have learned so much on my own and with the help of this mail list in the past 6 months that it amazes me. When you get to be my age the affirmation of the ability to continue to learn is comforting. No Senelity showing yet. That's my dollar 295 cents worth. So now I gotta go and see what I can fix or break and then fix in my linux system. Happy New Year! On Friday 29 December 2000 06:11 pm, you wrote: > Joseph Red wrote: > > Well, for myself, I got sick of rebooting whenever I wanted to play > > a game. And the crashes. Since I was rebooting for games anyway, why > > not dual-boot? > > Then I started discovering how far Linux has come (the last time I > > used it was a pre-1.0 version of Slack). Heck, there was support > > for my USB webcam, and my digital cam. The only thing I haven't > > found a replacement for is my Timex Datalink watch software (to > > be fair, I haven't looked:). And since I've started running > > Linux (4-5 months) I've booted Windows about 5 times. > > Mainly to double-check hardware IRQs & I/Os. > > Joseph Red > > Okay, explain this to me: You switched from Windows to Linux because > you wanted to more easily play games? Surely this is one of Linux's > weakest areas? (Well, that and its font system). Didn't you find > yourself unable to play the games you wanted to under Linux? > > > Society Design Mailing List http://www.egroups.com/group/Society_Design > For any and all aspects of designing societies, from discussion of real- > world utopian ideas to fantastic fictional or roleplaying worlds. > ---Revenant [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] --
RE: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
iSNT A P60 A PENTIUM THOUGH? David and Alicia -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Herman Christiani Sent: 29 December 2000 20:52 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, you wrote: > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > David and Alicia > > Would mandrake run on a p60, 540 mb hd, ? Hi, Not likely, Mandrake needs a Pentium to run well, you are better off with something like Red Hat 5.2 for this machine. Cheers, Herman > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Revenant > Sent: 29 December 2000 10:24 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [newbie] basic question > > > Define "faster than windows". Using KDE I've noticed there is quite > often a noticable delay waiting for windows to appear - far longer than > in windows. > > > Herman Christiani wrote: > > Hi, > > Yes, you can and it will run faster then windows, > > but you forgot to mention the amount of ram? > > Linux likes it's ram, the more the better. > > On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, you wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > Can i install mandrake on my (shame) p200mmx 3.3gig machine? > > > will it run apps faster than windoze bloatware? > > > David and Alicia > > > > Society Design Mailing List http://www.egroups.com/group/Society_Design > For any and all aspects of designing societies, from discussion of real- > world utopian ideas to fantastic fictional or roleplaying worlds. > ---Revenant [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] --
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
Hello, I don't blame linux for not having drivers or surport for my hard ware. I believe that the company that makes the device should do this not mandrake or any other distro. Like you said M$ put the companies on the spot and they should not be aloud to do this. If only our politations would do the right thing and look after the people. My video card has linux drivers on the cd. But I did not need them as mandrake 7.1 worked first time with no problems at all. I have three distros and am playing around with them to see which one I like. Why use linux cause windoze costs heaps and crashes heaps. I am going to learn linux even if it kills me. I am having fun trying to upgrade kde 1.x to kde 2.01 I have all the files on cd for suse 7 but now the fun begins how do I use them. I did try kpackage but it won't look at the rpm files, I think it might be me not knowing how to use it, but I'm not complaining about this as this is part of the learning curve. And having a lot of fun learning. Anthony Daniell Tom Brinkman wrote: > > On Friday 29 December 2000 11:57 am, Hipolito Lopez wrote: > > That's a fact. > > I don't have anything against microsoft, but the reality is that the > > windows based operating system (win2k, win9x) it doesn't deserve to > > be called operating system. > > Leaving out Win2k, you're right as far as you go. WinX.x -> Win ME > is a GUI that runs on top of DOS. The combination can be just as > effective for many users, as using KDE or Gnome (and other GUI's) on > Linux. The caveats are the same with either GUI/OS, including Win2k. > The user must take reponsibility for learning and maintaining both his > hardware and software. For most Windoze users this is actually easier > than for most Linux users. Usually revolves around keeping the > Registry cleaned and optimized using native DOS tools that come with > Windoze. EG, scanreg /fix and scanreg /opt run from a pure DOS > environment, no Win GUI overhead active or present (ie, NOT an on > boot). Most all Windoze users don't/don't know how to do this. There's > similar situations with GUI/Linux users. > > The main problems for M$ users is the binary only, closed source, > proprietary nature of the device drivers, many of which aren't M$ > certified, and the system problems and security issues they introduce. > But guess what, this is also becoming a similar situation and large > problem for the GUI/Linux community. Actually, it has been for some > time now. > > M$'s real disservice is not the quality of their software, but the > influence they exert on hardware manufacturers. The result has caused a > quick deteriration in the quality and capability of available hardware. > 'Specially from the manufacturers and venders most often pressed the > hardest by M$, the big ready mades (Dell, Gateway, Compaq, etc.). It > also is extended upon high volume specialty manufactures (motherboards, > modems, video/ sound cards, etc.) This deterioration is also a large > problem for Linux users, particularly the ones that blame problems they > experience on the distro they just failed to install/setup. Those that > say "but it works fine with Windows", or complain when they have to d/l > binary drivers for their new video card, and blame Mandrake for not > providing them when they can't get 'em working properly. > > Oh, well... another of my hardware, user reponsibility rants ;> > -- > Tom Brinkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Galveston Bay
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
Tom Brinkman wrote: > On Friday 29 December 2000 04:41 am, David and Alicia wrote: > > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be > > used on older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i > > saw the download size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > From zero (you can run Linux on a floppy) to as much as you care to > let it have. Keep in mind that only the kernel is Linux, everything > else is (GNU) applications and the various configs, libraries, etc, > that they need. Read /. and you'll hear of people running Linux on a > wristwatch ;) Some bloke got it going on a Dreamcast too. My reasons for running Linux: (1) It's free (as in beer, not speech). And not just the OS, but the software. The GIMP alone saves you $1,000+ over using Photoshop. (2) It's free (as in speech, not beer). (3) "It's more stable". In my experience, what this has meant is that the OS won't glitch or die on you for no discernable reason - but it can and will glitch or die on you for reasons that are obscure at best to the newbie. Essentially, Linux will let you into its guts to fix the problem when something goes wrong while Windows doesn't. I hope to learn enough to take advantage of that. Society Design Mailing List http://www.egroups.com/group/Society_Design For any and all aspects of designing societies, from discussion of real- world utopian ideas to fantastic fictional or roleplaying worlds. ---Revenant [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] --
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
Joseph Red wrote: > Well, for myself, I got sick of rebooting whenever I wanted to play > a game. And the crashes. Since I was rebooting for games anyway, why > not dual-boot? > Then I started discovering how far Linux has come (the last time I > used it was a pre-1.0 version of Slack). Heck, there was support > for my USB webcam, and my digital cam. The only thing I haven't > found a replacement for is my Timex Datalink watch software (to > be fair, I haven't looked:). And since I've started running > Linux (4-5 months) I've booted Windows about 5 times. > Mainly to double-check hardware IRQs & I/Os. > Joseph Red Okay, explain this to me: You switched from Windows to Linux because you wanted to more easily play games? Surely this is one of Linux's weakest areas? (Well, that and its font system). Didn't you find yourself unable to play the games you wanted to under Linux? Society Design Mailing List http://www.egroups.com/group/Society_Design For any and all aspects of designing societies, from discussion of real- world utopian ideas to fantastic fictional or roleplaying worlds. ---Revenant [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] --
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
Hi Herman My Mandrake install CD's have a kernal for a 486 installation as well as the pentium optimised kernal James > On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, you wrote: > > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on > > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download > > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > > > David and Alicia > > > > Would mandrake run on a p60, 540 mb hd, ? > Hi, > Not likely, Mandrake needs a Pentium to run well, > you are better off with something like Red Hat 5.2 for this machine. > Cheers, > Herman > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Revenant > > Sent: 29 December 2000 10:24 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [newbie] basic question > > > > > > Define "faster than windows". Using KDE I've noticed there is quite > > often a noticable delay waiting for windows to appear - far longer than > > in windows. > > > > > > Herman Christiani wrote: > > > Hi, > > > Yes, you can and it will run faster then windows, > > > but you forgot to mention the amount of ram? > > > Linux likes it's ram, the more the better. > > > On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, you wrote: > > > > Dear all, > > > > Can i install mandrake on my (shame) p200mmx 3.3gig machine? > > > > will it run apps faster than windoze bloatware? > > > > David and Alicia > > > > > > > > Society Design Mailing List http://www.egroups.com/group/Society_Design > > For any and all aspects of designing societies, from discussion of real- > > world utopian ideas to fantastic fictional or roleplaying worlds. > > ---Revenant [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- >
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
Paul wrote: > > > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on > > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download > > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > > > David and Alicia > > Hi, > > Most people that 'try' running linux have probably not read enough about it to know >what > is possible and how to do it. > Millions of people run Linux and are happy with it. > > Progress is made in all areas, in the development of linux, Windows, and hardware. >If the > hardware gets more potent, then the OS's of that timeframe will grow along with that. > You can indeed run Linux on a 386, but you can not expect to take all the advantages >of > the new OS-technology using old hardware-technology. > Mandrake is optimized for Pentium class processors, not i386. > Redhat is compiled for i386, and when you use RH5.2 (from which, if I am not >mistaken, > Mandrake originated) or RH6.0, that will run nicely on an I386. You can not install > everything, but a basic system with some Xwindow support should be possible on your >specs > of i386 with 540mb. Even with 8 megs of RAM, this should function. (Not 'run', but > 'walk'.) > > Compare what you need for a basic mandrake installation with a bare Xwindow system, >and > windows95, and you may not find much difference. Using Linux made me microsoft > independent, free of blue screens of death, DLL's in all forms and shapes and >versions, an > uninterpretable registry file, and the power to influence the system and repair it >when it > breaks down. Windows does not let me do that. > If you seek the ease of windows, being taken by the hand by wizards which make all >the > decisions for you, then windows is what you want. If you want to be able to use your > computer by what you put in it yourself, then you can go with Linux. > (My expression of thoughts entirely of course.) > Paul Good ol' DLLS. Once of the major causes of many Windows crashes. -- Roman Registered Linux User #179293
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, you wrote: > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > David and Alicia > > Would mandrake run on a p60, 540 mb hd, ? Hi, Not likely, Mandrake needs a Pentium to run well, you are better off with something like Red Hat 5.2 for this machine. Cheers, Herman > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Revenant > Sent: 29 December 2000 10:24 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [newbie] basic question > > > Define "faster than windows". Using KDE I've noticed there is quite > often a noticable delay waiting for windows to appear - far longer than > in windows. > > > Herman Christiani wrote: > > Hi, > > Yes, you can and it will run faster then windows, > > but you forgot to mention the amount of ram? > > Linux likes it's ram, the more the better. > > On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, you wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > Can i install mandrake on my (shame) p200mmx 3.3gig machine? > > > will it run apps faster than windoze bloatware? > > > David and Alicia > > > > Society Design Mailing List http://www.egroups.com/group/Society_Design > For any and all aspects of designing societies, from discussion of real- > world utopian ideas to fantastic fictional or roleplaying worlds. > ---Revenant [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] --
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
civileme wrote: > > On Friday 29 December 2000 11:41, you wrote: > > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on > > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download > > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > > > David and Alicia > > > > Would mandrake run on a p60, 540 mb hd, ? > > > Yes it would, a stripped-down version. Just because we have 2000 packages in > the application doesn't mean you need to run them all. > > For example there are about 20 computer languages, some compiled, some > interpreted, in that distribution which are mainly of interest to programmers > or people who want to learn programming. > > There are also three web servers, 20 text editors, 14 window managers (for > different graphical user interfaces), a Scanner interface program, four IRC > chat programs, ICQ and AIM clones, a complete office suite, a word processor, > ten publishing programs, several electronic books, one of them numbering over > 2000 pages if you print it (HOWTOs), two or three web browsers, at least ten > graphical editors ranging from paintbrush clones to Photoshop workalikes. > > Why use it? Read the license agreement you have for Windows. Then read the > COPYING file in any of our distribution directories. > > If you want to own your own computer and be free to use it as you choose. If > you want to change how it works, if you want to share your changes with > others, our licensing permits that, and in fact takes it one step farther by > requiring you pass on those basic rights to those you choose to share it with. > > This is the GNU General Public License, which covers all but one of the > distributions of the GNU/Linux system. > > Yes, you can use WindowMaker, Gnome(heavy), KDE(heavy, but with a lot of > apps), BlackBox (simple and fast, and runs most Gnome and KDE apps), IceWM, > and many others. > > You are unlikely to need drivers for most aftermarket hardware. Only a few > manufacturers keep their drivers secret and therefore do not get distributed. > Linux will come up first time most likely running your modem (unless it is a > new, cheap software modem), your sound card (older ISA cards may require you > to run sndconfig), your video (not in 640x480 and 16 colors as with a windows > install, but fully configured) Also, unlike WindowsME and the NT-series, > GNU/linux still has support for ancient hardware, like the non-ATAPI CDROMS > that ran from sound cards and gave PC users win3.1 nightmares. > > But the real issue is "freedom". I remember planning once to be an ISP and > buying WindowsNT workstation to run my server. In the blink of a Microsoft > attorney's eye, it became a criminal act to use NT Workstation for more than > 10 simultaneous connections--yes they changed the license after I bought the > software, and by clicking on agree or typing Yes, I had given them permission > to do that. I instead had to buy the NT Server, which came equipped with the > "Free" IIS rather than the competing number from Netscape I was planning on > using on my NT workstation. "Had To?" I ended up with Mandrake 5.3 running > Apache, and I could change it as I saw fit. If Linux weren't here, I would > have had only the choices Microsoft offered for the use of my computers, and > I would have specifically been prohibted from changing it. > > Civileme Thank you for one of the best responses to that fundamental question, "Why use Linux?". Occasionally you get a post that is a keeper and this definitely falls into that category. Barry :-)
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
Hi David and Alicia > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > David and Alicia > > Would mandrake run on a p60, 540 mb hd, ? > I've heard more so for stability than most other things but have yet to make up my own mind there. Also you can custumise Linux far more than Windows by being able to recompile the kernel for your particular system it would appear. James > > > Define "faster than windows". Using KDE I've noticed there is quite > often a noticable delay waiting for windows to appear - far longer than > in windows. > > > Herman Christiani wrote: > > Hi, > > Yes, you can and it will run faster then windows, > > but you forgot to mention the amount of ram? > > Linux likes it's ram, the more the better. > > On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, you wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > Can i install mandrake on my (shame) p200mmx 3.3gig machine? > > > will it run apps faster than windoze bloatware? > > > David and Alicia > > > > Society Design Mailing List http://www.egroups.com/group/Society_Design > For any and all aspects of designing societies, from discussion of real- > world utopian ideas to fantastic fictional or roleplaying worlds. > ---Revenant [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- > >
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
Well, for myself, I got sick of rebooting whenever I wanted to play a game. And the crashes. Since I was rebooting for games anyway, why not dual-boot? Then I started discovering how far Linux has come (the last time I used it was a pre-1.0 version of Slack). Heck, there was support for my USB webcam, and my digital cam. The only thing I haven't found a replacement for is my Timex Datalink watch software (to be fair, I haven't looked:). And since I've started running Linux (4-5 months) I've booted Windows about 5 times. Mainly to double-check hardware IRQs & I/Os. Joseph Red [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "David and Alicia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 2:41 AM Subject: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > David and Alicia > > Would mandrake run on a p60, 540 mb hd, ? >
RE: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
LM7.2 is a "Full-Featured" release. There are tons of things in there that you probably will never use (drivers, alternatives to other applications, etc), thus the size of the download. Want a small release (not LM)? Try "Peanut Linux" from http://www.ibiblio.org/peanut/ . It's a 50MB download, and less than 150MB installed. Kinda short on drivers, but if you have common stuff or don't mind finding a driver or two, give it a try. It even offers a method of installing on a DOS partition (ran great on my meager laptop!). Rather than a "lighter OS", I would describe Linux as a "more flexible OS". You can put together a tiny OS for a server or older machine and have it only run in console and it will fit on a floppy . Or, you can put together a huge release that includes drivers for just about everything, tons of apps and window managers, and a great installer and have it take 4 CDs (LM7.2 Complete). Depends on what YOU want to do. Check the "Distribution Watch" at Linux Planet (http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/). There are TONS of flavors out there! -Carlton -Original Message- From: David and Alicia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 3:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download size. How much disk space will a bare install need? David and Alicia Would mandrake run on a p60, 540 mb hd, ? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Revenant Sent: 29 December 2000 10:24 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] basic question Define "faster than windows". Using KDE I've noticed there is quite often a noticable delay waiting for windows to appear - far longer than in windows. Herman Christiani wrote: > Hi, > Yes, you can and it will run faster then windows, > but you forgot to mention the amount of ram? > Linux likes it's ram, the more the better. > On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, you wrote: > > Dear all, > > Can i install mandrake on my (shame) p200mmx 3.3gig machine? > > will it run apps faster than windoze bloatware? > > David and Alicia Society Design Mailing List http://www.egroups.com/group/Society_Design For any and all aspects of designing societies, from discussion of real- world utopian ideas to fantastic fictional or roleplaying worlds. ---Revenant [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] --
RE: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
Nice summation Paul! -Carlton -Original Message- From: Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 4:58 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > David and Alicia Hi, Most people that 'try' running linux have probably not read enough about it to know what is possible and how to do it. Millions of people run Linux and are happy with it. Progress is made in all areas, in the development of linux, Windows, and hardware. If the hardware gets more potent, then the OS's of that timeframe will grow along with that. You can indeed run Linux on a 386, but you can not expect to take all the advantages of the new OS-technology using old hardware-technology. Mandrake is optimized for Pentium class processors, not i386. Redhat is compiled for i386, and when you use RH5.2 (from which, if I am not mistaken, Mandrake originated) or RH6.0, that will run nicely on an I386. You can not install everything, but a basic system with some Xwindow support should be possible on your specs of i386 with 540mb. Even with 8 megs of RAM, this should function. (Not 'run', but 'walk'.) Compare what you need for a basic mandrake installation with a bare Xwindow system, and windows95, and you may not find much difference. Using Linux made me microsoft independent, free of blue screens of death, DLL's in all forms and shapes and versions, an uninterpretable registry file, and the power to influence the system and repair it when it breaks down. Windows does not let me do that. If you seek the ease of windows, being taken by the hand by wizards which make all the decisions for you, then windows is what you want. If you want to be able to use your computer by what you put in it yourself, then you can go with Linux. (My expression of thoughts entirely of course.) Paul
RE: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
Well, I don't know if you are like me, I give to my computer a lot of use; through the years almost always work with microsoft os(ms-dos, windows 3.x windows 9.x, windows 2k ... ) and always I got problems, always!(I compile a program that run fine in my machine, but in another don't work. A lot of blue screen that freeze your computer, without any reason. and always microsoft os requires more power for your pc, a better processor more memory, more disk space, ... for what? for freeze your computer when you are doing a important work? for have program that always cause problem? But, one day I begin to work with unix os, and I saw what is really good... Operating system bases in unix are the best. Linux is a operating system(os) based in unix, that can run almost in any pc, o computer, it's free and open source, there is not monopoly. That's a fact. I don't have anything against microsoft, but the reality is that the windows based operating system (win2k, win9x) it doesn't deserve to be called operating system. --Abe At 10:41 AM 12/29/00 +, you wrote: >ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the >impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on >older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download >size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > >David and Alicia > >Would mandrake run on a p60, 540 mb hd, ?
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
On Friday 29 December 2000 04:41 am, David and Alicia wrote: > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be > used on older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i > saw the download size. How much disk space will a bare install need? From zero (you can run Linux on a floppy) to as much as you care to let it have. Keep in mind that only the kernel is Linux, everything else is (GNU) applications and the various configs, libraries, etc, that they need. Read /. and you'll hear of people running Linux on a wristwatch ;) -- Tom Brinkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Galveston Bay
Re: [[newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please]
"David and Alicia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > David and Alicia > > Would mandrake run on a p60, 540 mb hd, ? == Don't confuse the OS with contemporary distributions that include much beyond just the kernel or OS. Most people today use linus with a GUI: some just a lightweight window manager like windowmaker, XFCE, or Blackbox. Others like the more heavy duty wm's like Enlightenment, or an entire environment like KDE or Gnome. Linux w/o a GUI will run on a true minimalist machine yeah, i386 w/ 4M, I hear - but have never tried) and obviously won't need much hd space. But with GUI (some distros include several) and apps (like office suites and editors, and Netscrape) you'll need much more space and much more RAM. On one of my laptops (PII 233 w/96M of RAM and 2gig partition) I run Caldera Open Linux 2.2 (kernel 2.2.5) and KDE 1.1.2 w/ no problems whatsoever. And yes it runs that faster than Windoze 98. HTH, Mike "Always remember that I have taken more out of alcohol than alcohol has taken out of me." --Winston Churchill Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://home.netscape.com/webmail
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
When I was just about getting fed up with how Visual C++ fails to compile simple bits of code, I read somewhere that the best C compilers run under unix [and that sort of includes linux, doesn't it?]. I got LM 7.1 more than 2 months ago, and now I'm still learning to use gcc and cforge, which I just downloaded yesterday. So finally, my learning C++ can now proceed, after that long of being on hold. --Abe At 10:41 AM 12/29/00 +, you wrote: >ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the >impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on >older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download >size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > >David and Alicia > >Would mandrake run on a p60, 540 mb hd, ?
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
On Friday 29 December 2000 11:41, you wrote: > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > David and Alicia > > Would mandrake run on a p60, 540 mb hd, ? > Yes it would, a stripped-down version. Just because we have 2000 packages in the application doesn't mean you need to run them all. For example there are about 20 computer languages, some compiled, some interpreted, in that distribution which are mainly of interest to programmers or people who want to learn programming. There are also three web servers, 20 text editors, 14 window managers (for different graphical user interfaces), a Scanner interface program, four IRC chat programs, ICQ and AIM clones, a complete office suite, a word processor, ten publishing programs, several electronic books, one of them numbering over 2000 pages if you print it (HOWTOs), two or three web browsers, at least ten graphical editors ranging from paintbrush clones to Photoshop workalikes. Why use it? Read the license agreement you have for Windows. Then read the COPYING file in any of our distribution directories. If you want to own your own computer and be free to use it as you choose. If you want to change how it works, if you want to share your changes with others, our licensing permits that, and in fact takes it one step farther by requiring you pass on those basic rights to those you choose to share it with. This is the GNU General Public License, which covers all but one of the distributions of the GNU/Linux system. Yes, you can use WindowMaker, Gnome(heavy), KDE(heavy, but with a lot of apps), BlackBox (simple and fast, and runs most Gnome and KDE apps), IceWM, and many others. You are unlikely to need drivers for most aftermarket hardware. Only a few manufacturers keep their drivers secret and therefore do not get distributed. Linux will come up first time most likely running your modem (unless it is a new, cheap software modem), your sound card (older ISA cards may require you to run sndconfig), your video (not in 640x480 and 16 colors as with a windows install, but fully configured) Also, unlike WindowsME and the NT-series, GNU/linux still has support for ancient hardware, like the non-ATAPI CDROMS that ran from sound cards and gave PC users win3.1 nightmares. But the real issue is "freedom". I remember planning once to be an ISP and buying WindowsNT workstation to run my server. In the blink of a Microsoft attorney's eye, it became a criminal act to use NT Workstation for more than 10 simultaneous connections--yes they changed the license after I bought the software, and by clicking on agree or typing Yes, I had given them permission to do that. I instead had to buy the NT Server, which came equipped with the "Free" IIS rather than the competing number from Netscape I was planning on using on my NT workstation. "Had To?" I ended up with Mandrake 5.3 running Apache, and I could change it as I saw fit. If Linux weren't here, I would have had only the choices Microsoft offered for the use of my computers, and I would have specifically been prohibted from changing it. Civileme
Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
> ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > David and Alicia Hi, Most people that 'try' running linux have probably not read enough about it to know what is possible and how to do it. Millions of people run Linux and are happy with it. Progress is made in all areas, in the development of linux, Windows, and hardware. If the hardware gets more potent, then the OS's of that timeframe will grow along with that. You can indeed run Linux on a 386, but you can not expect to take all the advantages of the new OS-technology using old hardware-technology. Mandrake is optimized for Pentium class processors, not i386. Redhat is compiled for i386, and when you use RH5.2 (from which, if I am not mistaken, Mandrake originated) or RH6.0, that will run nicely on an I386. You can not install everything, but a basic system with some Xwindow support should be possible on your specs of i386 with 540mb. Even with 8 megs of RAM, this should function. (Not 'run', but 'walk'.) Compare what you need for a basic mandrake installation with a bare Xwindow system, and windows95, and you may not find much difference. Using Linux made me microsoft independent, free of blue screens of death, DLL's in all forms and shapes and versions, an uninterpretable registry file, and the power to influence the system and repair it when it breaks down. Windows does not let me do that. If you seek the ease of windows, being taken by the hand by wizards which make all the decisions for you, then windows is what you want. If you want to be able to use your computer by what you put in it yourself, then you can go with Linux. (My expression of thoughts entirely of course.) Paul
