Redo
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2006
- Posts
- 2,294
- Likes
- 11
Fedora Core
Favorite Distro
- Thread starter srozzman
- Start date
srozzman
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2007
- Posts
- 576
- Likes
- 10
Just an update on my situation.. i think im going to quad boot XP, PCLinuxOS, DreamLinux, and ubuntu... Dont worry, XP is going on a seperate hard drive
Honken
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- May 9, 2007
- Posts
- 160
- Likes
- 0
Arch, minimalism is winnage. Never really liked Xbuntu, Fedora or SuSE. Gentoo is alright, actually better than Arch IMO, but the compile times just take too long. :/
I'm on XP (nLited) now though, can't live without Foobar2k and Miranda.
I'm on XP (nLited) now though, can't live without Foobar2k and Miranda.
HFat
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2005
- Posts
- 1,061
- Likes
- 10
Slack!
Quote:
It's more like the unstable version... the main free version is called CentOS.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by koike /img/forum/go_quote.gif Isn't Fedora a free version of Redhat? |
It's more like the unstable version... the main free version is called CentOS.
HFat
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2005
- Posts
- 1,061
- Likes
- 10
Quote:
Maybe that staff is the problem... does "pro" mean that they always know better than their customers and that they're not afraid of being fired? Maybe you even work in the public sector.
Quote:
You're running a two-year old kernel? It figures: that must be how long FC4 has been unsupported.
| Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have daily issues with XP SP2 at work (maintained by a pro IT staff, too) |
Maybe that staff is the problem... does "pro" mean that they always know better than their customers and that they're not afraid of being fired? Maybe you even work in the public sector.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif my Fedora Core 4 machine has over two years of uptime. |
You're running a two-year old kernel? It figures: that must be how long FC4 has been unsupported.
varro
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2005
- Posts
- 169
- Likes
- 0
I like gentoo as server distro and suse for desktop the best. Ubuntu has some great potential to be near suse, but I dont think it will be very soon.
Ubuntu.
Again, linux n00b.
Again, linux n00b.
psychogentoo
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- May 27, 2004
- Posts
- 337
- Likes
- 12
I'm starting to like Ubuntu a lot more. Maybe I'll ask Jude to change my name on the forums. ^_^
Jon118
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2007
- Posts
- 850
- Likes
- 10
Quote:
Perhaps I'm just lucky but Windows rarely crashes on my, and I've never lost anything important due to a Windows crash. Again, that might be just me, but hardware issues are the only problems I've had with XP SP2. That said, over the past few months my Linux machine has literally locked up on me daily while using Firefox, usually I can tell when it is going to happen (after watching pretty much any video), and this isn't much of a problem, but it has never happened on Firefox on one of my Windows machines.
That said I will agree that Linux is good on older machines and servers. The only reason I'm using it is because my current rig has a lot of older or low-end hardware in it and basically ran Windows 2000 slowly, so Linux is about all that will run, and it does run well.
That said I've had a lot of experience with Windows and I'm very meticulous about maintaining my Windows machines just so they will perform well, but I've only used Linux for about a year now, so I don't know it as well as Windows, but as it stands I do prefer Windows for those reasons.
Again, this is in no way saying that Windows is the amazing end-all to end-all or trying to start a flame war, I'm just expounding on what I said earlier. Linux does have some pluses, like being free and very resource efficient.
| Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Not crash and ruin what you've been working on, for one. Not to start a flamewar, but I have daily issues with XP SP2 at work (maintained by a pro IT staff, too) while my Fedora Core 4 machine has over two years of uptime. You tell me which is preferable. Granted, I don't care about Flash- 99% of the time it's used for annoying ads. |
Perhaps I'm just lucky but Windows rarely crashes on my, and I've never lost anything important due to a Windows crash. Again, that might be just me, but hardware issues are the only problems I've had with XP SP2. That said, over the past few months my Linux machine has literally locked up on me daily while using Firefox, usually I can tell when it is going to happen (after watching pretty much any video), and this isn't much of a problem, but it has never happened on Firefox on one of my Windows machines.
That said I will agree that Linux is good on older machines and servers. The only reason I'm using it is because my current rig has a lot of older or low-end hardware in it and basically ran Windows 2000 slowly, so Linux is about all that will run, and it does run well.
That said I've had a lot of experience with Windows and I'm very meticulous about maintaining my Windows machines just so they will perform well, but I've only used Linux for about a year now, so I don't know it as well as Windows, but as it stands I do prefer Windows for those reasons.
Again, this is in no way saying that Windows is the amazing end-all to end-all or trying to start a flame war, I'm just expounding on what I said earlier. Linux does have some pluses, like being free and very resource efficient.
HFat
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2005
- Posts
- 1,061
- Likes
- 10
I don't get this business about using Linux on old boxes... you're talking about GUI-endowed workstations, right? If you're content with a command-line shell, Linux rules but otherwise I've been quite happy with the performance of 2000 or XP on old hardware. You do need to configure Windows properly though so I can see something like Xubuntu doing a better job out of the box.
Maybe I don't know how to configure Linux workstations or maybe I don't know what GUI to pick... what are you guys using that makes Linux so snappy?
Maybe I don't know how to configure Linux workstations or maybe I don't know what GUI to pick... what are you guys using that makes Linux so snappy?
sensurround
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2007
- Posts
- 4
- Likes
- 0
Try Debian (support the GNU folks) w/ fvwm2
http://www.us.debian.org/
http://www.gnu.org
I used Slackware and fvwm with my Pentium 100. Smooth.
Multiple desktops (defaults to 9) and point-to-focus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fvwm
Ubuntu is based almost wholly on Debian.
Debian (and Ubuntu) also give you the choice to only upgrade packages for security reasons.
Testing 1 2 3 ...
http://www.us.debian.org/
http://www.gnu.org
I used Slackware and fvwm with my Pentium 100. Smooth.
Multiple desktops (defaults to 9) and point-to-focus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fvwm
Ubuntu is based almost wholly on Debian.
Debian (and Ubuntu) also give you the choice to only upgrade packages for security reasons.
Testing 1 2 3 ...
Ligeia
Head-Fier
- Joined
- May 14, 2007
- Posts
- 55
- Likes
- 0
I really only have experience with Ubuntu and it does the trick well enough.
I have never had a single issue with SP2 nor Win98 when I was using that, so I never feel overly motivated to make the switch on all my computers; I just have a dual boot available on the desktop upstairs.
I have never had a single issue with SP2 nor Win98 when I was using that, so I never feel overly motivated to make the switch on all my computers; I just have a dual boot available on the desktop upstairs.
HFat
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2005
- Posts
- 1,061
- Likes
- 10
Alright, fvwm.
But do you install the latest and greatest packages for everything or do you downgrade some packages to old versions? Maybe you even install old versions of the distros?
Is it fast out of the box or do you need to configure some things?
But do you install the latest and greatest packages for everything or do you downgrade some packages to old versions? Maybe you even install old versions of the distros?
Is it fast out of the box or do you need to configure some things?
Honken
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- May 9, 2007
- Posts
- 160
- Likes
- 0
The WM/DE is quite important for the speed, WindowMaker is pretty fast. ^__^
Nah, I usually use FluxBox as my WM, it's not as fast but it's a lot prettier and easier to use. DEs like GNOME and KDE are really sluggish by comparison. Though there are faster ones, like XFCE & Enlightenment (does the latter count as a DE?) but they still come with to much crap IMO.
Another thing that counts, is the number of installed packages, obviously, and how many daemons that starts on boot. That's why pre-configured distros like buntu and SuSE always felt sluggish to me, I guess.
Nah, I usually use FluxBox as my WM, it's not as fast but it's a lot prettier and easier to use. DEs like GNOME and KDE are really sluggish by comparison. Though there are faster ones, like XFCE & Enlightenment (does the latter count as a DE?) but they still come with to much crap IMO.
Another thing that counts, is the number of installed packages, obviously, and how many daemons that starts on boot. That's why pre-configured distros like buntu and SuSE always felt sluggish to me, I guess.
sensurround
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2007
- Posts
- 4
- Likes
- 0
Quote:
Hi HFat:
I'd try fvwm2 first. Better support.
It's definitely fast out of the box.
It comes up as a blank light blue screen with just a mouse cursor.
Just use the right and left mouse keys to get menus to do something like get an XTerm.
It should install w/o problems on a clean install. If you're moding a cur config then you may have to do some research.
If you're using a Debian platform I'd get out of X into a console and use aptitude.
It should (package managers are like cassette tapes) take care of the dependencies automagically.
ii fvwm2 2.3 F(?) Virtual Window Manager, version 2.xx
| Originally Posted by HFat /img/forum/go_quote.gif Alright, fvwm. But do you install the latest and greatest packages for everything or do you downgrade some packages to old versions? Maybe you even install old versions of the distros? Is it fast out of the box or do you need to configure some things? |
Hi HFat:
I'd try fvwm2 first. Better support.
It's definitely fast out of the box.
It comes up as a blank light blue screen with just a mouse cursor.
Just use the right and left mouse keys to get menus to do something like get an XTerm.
It should install w/o problems on a clean install. If you're moding a cur config then you may have to do some research.
If you're using a Debian platform I'd get out of X into a console and use aptitude.
It should (package managers are like cassette tapes) take care of the dependencies automagically.
ii fvwm2 2.3 F(?) Virtual Window Manager, version 2.xx
Users who are viewing this thread
