Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Is Linux just a hobby?
Edvard:
+1 what 40Hz said
Before we go any further, can i ask who that Joyce is or was?
-dantheman (July 16, 2012, 04:32 AM)
--- End quote ---
James Joyce, but that quote may or may not be his; the last word in that quote has been rendered 'chance' and 'choice' as well, and earlier than Joyce was writing, but I digress...
But I get the sense that the Linux crowd intentionally prefers things to be more complicated, even if it doesn't have to be.
-superboyac (July 16, 2012, 01:06 PM)
--- End quote ---
I used to think the opposite; that it wasn't the Linux crowd making things more complicated, it was the outsiders pointing out how complex it was, and they would say that only because they simply didn't know how to run a decent compiler.
Then I saw this:
http://dwm.suckless.org/
Because dwm is customized through editing its source code, it’s pointless to make binary packages of it. This keeps its userbase small and elitist. No novices asking stupid questions.
--- End quote ---
Thankfully, the only group that would label itself 'small and elitist' are exactly that; small and elitist, so you can safely ignore them. :P
FTR - I use Debian; ergo the easiest package manager on the planet: Apt
... and if I want to get adventurous, there's always the "configure -> make -> make install" dance (quite the jig, I assure you...).
:Thmbsup:
Tuxman:
I use Debian; ergo the easiest package manager on the Planet
-Edvard (July 17, 2012, 12:53 AM)
--- End quote ---
Debian uses yum? :P
barney:
I use Debian; ergo the easiest package manager on the Planet
-Edvard (July 17, 2012, 12:53 AM)
--- End quote ---
Debian uses yum? :P
-Tuxman (July 17, 2012, 01:39 AM)
--- End quote ---
No, thank God and the developers :P!
Tuxman:
There was a time I shared your POV. Then I found the yum history command. :D
bobc4012:
For me, mainstream Linux use hinges on one factor:
being able to install third party software on any (or most) distros without much noodling or programmer-skills necessary. like Windows or something as easy.
Most people will argue, however, that that is fundamentally opposed to the Linux way of life. i don't agree. I think if people really wanted to, it can be done. But I get the sense that the Linux crowd intentionally prefers things to be more complicated, even if it doesn't have to be. This will all happen naturally when the time comes, most likely. PC users will never become apple users, except for the most light-users. So the only alternative to hardcore windows users is Linux. And if Windows continues to piss people off, they'll see more converts to linux. And as the linux community grows, then this whole fragmentation issue will start getting resolved.
-superboyac (July 16, 2012, 01:06 PM)
--- End quote ---
Actually, in the Ubuntu (and some of the other distros), installing S/W is as easy as on Windows. There are a few ways of doing it. One way is to install via the Synaptic Package Manager - search for what type of function you want, check the box and then click on apply and it installs. Another way is via the Software Center. You can set up "Software Sources" to include "proprietary 'freeware'". A third alternative is to download a Debian package (.deb) and use GDebi to install it (GDebi is a GUI to install .deb packages). You don't get the numerous messages that you get when you install a Windows application (e.g., a typical ".exe" file), so in a sense it is easier than Windows. In Ubunti (and erlated) erlease prior to 11.04, the desktop Environment was much like Windows XP. Clicked on Menu (vs Start) and select the category and the installation method.
Now, granted, you aren't going to install Windows apps this way, just any comparable (or Linux only) apps. If you have Window apps you wish to install, you need to install WINE. It handles a significant number of Windows applications - BUT NOT ALL (you can use VirtualBox to install Windows and run Windows apps that won't run under WINE). Old DOS only apps can also be run in DOSBox or the DOS Emulator. Their is a glitch with the DOS Emulator that stops it from running after you install. I did report the problem a couple of years ago, but it has not been fixed. The Config file needs to be tweaked. I do it by going to /usr/bin and executing dosemu (or xdosemu) in the Admin ID (you set one up when you install Linux, just like you do with Windows). When you execute dosemu, you get an error message telling you how to correct the problem (usually copying the "fix" text, opening a terminal window and type sudo followed by pasting the "fix" text. You will be prompted for the admin password, the fix made and then the DOS Emulator can be invoked by clicking on the icon.
BTW, I disagree with your statement that most Linux users prefer the hard way of doing things. In the early years, there wasn't much of a choice - X WIndows was the only way to get Windows (as I recall) back in the early-to-mid 90s). It was still in the primitive stages like MS-DOS and eventually Windows 1. Windows 3.1, was the first (IMO) significant improvement to Windows. Unlike Windows, Linux has come a long way with GUI environments. You can choose from a number of them with most distros. With Windows, you are stuck with the one that is shipped. Yes, there are a few open source Windows GUI environments (e.g., Classical Explorer for Windows 7 and maybe another or two). ut you have to search for them on the internet, download them and install them. With packages like the Synaptic Package Manager or Software Center, you can just select those you want (click on the check box), click apply and let them install. Next time when you log on, you will see an icon to click on and select the desktop you want.
After a while, you may find Linux to be an enjoyable "hobby".
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version