EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
General => General Technical Chat => Topic started by: jadew on January 18, 2015, 11:59:23 am
-
If you switch between them often, please explain why.
-
Main OS is Linux Mint, I switched over when MS Windows Vista appeared. I retain a copy of Windows XP because one of my pieces of test equipment still needs it but that's now its only purpose.
-
Same here. My primary OS is Linux with Windows in VMs for software for which no Linux alternative exists.
-
Same here, use a VM. This helps as disk space is cheap, and you can then have a bare image that you copy as needed and install software on as needed. That way you have less issues with driver conflicts and with it becoming unstable with time. Update the image once a month with windows update and use that as the master for the next image, keeping a backup copy to roll back if needed. Sparse containers of ca 4G are simple enough ( if slow over USB2.0 to back up to a drive) to handle, though transferring them on a flash drive not formatted as NTFS ( for compatability with NT systems) or EXT2 will be a problem.
-
My choice is "switch often" and here is why:
All my works stuff is on Linux (was Solaris previously - though we still have a license server on an Ultra 10 workstation). I also have an always-on, rather powerful Linux server at home (my personal cloud and a Windows VirtualBox for heavy lifting).
However, my laptop PC is on Windows for documents and stuff. I have VNC windows to everywhere and I massively use putty and screen.
-
Linux, to be exact, Arch Linux running i3 as a window manager (no desktop environment). Windows 7 sits in a VirtualBox instance for when I need to use Windows software.
-
Windows. Why? The simple reason is that most programs work with little fuss. Most programs are written to work in Windows and most do so without any problems or needing to tweak things. Yes, things have been getting alot better for programs with Linux, but Windows still reigns at the moment.
In the next couple years or the computer after the next one I get, I will likely think of switching to Linux.
-
Ubuntu Linux with a Windows XP VM.
-
Windows - because it works.
-
I have a comment about running Windows in VMs to run software. I found that some software with copy protection breaks in a VM, in my case VMWare Workstation, because it regularly changed the MAC address of the network adapter, a feature that some licensing systems use. I had to get my license reset, which took some time, but not as long as it took to figure out why something, that was working perfectly, suddenly broke.
While it is possible to fix guest MAC addresses in VMWare, it is a manual edit that you need to do, and if you fiddle about with guest network settings it's all too easy to break it again. I went back to running Windows natively, it was just too flakey, and one of the software vendors simply said "we don't support it running in a VM".
The packages in question were all the Microchip XC series compilers, and Marmalade (a cross platform mobile development environment). They both use the same licensing system.
-
My everyday always on OS is crunchbang linux ( #! ) with Windows 7, Windows XP in VirtualBox. I also run Ubuntu 14.10 in VirtualBox for some opensource work I do that must support Ubuntu Linux.
-
Windows - because it works.
Yep.
Win 7
Some recent HW, SSD for OS, plenty of RAM and it flies.
For any old stuff, an XP VM and every thing works. :-+
-
MacBook Pro 13" with maximum specs. I switch between oses regularly (I use all three basically every day) and have many vms under VMware.
VMware never changes my MAC addresses. Not sure why that is happening to you. All commercial licensing systems work fine as well as all usb hardware.
-
Windows as well, I did try linux many times since I started with Unix systems but Windows is the most supported OS.
My current system only cost me $139.80 with taxes.
(Open Box) HP DC8000 Desktop Computer Off Lease Refurbished; Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 Processor 3.0GHz; Microsoft Windows 7 Professional 64bit; 4GB DDR3-1333 RAM; 160GB Hard Drive; DVD-RW Drive; Display Not Included
A friend of mine gave me a 500 GB drive he didn't need anymore because he upgraded his system to 1 TB drives. I already had the monitor and an extra 2GB stick from upgrading the wife's computer.
-
Windows 7 for my desktops, Windows Server 2013 for servers, Hyper-V for my main servers, everything running on it virtualized. VirtualBox on my dekstops for running older Windows versions and Linux when I need to or to have sacrificial machines when dealing with unknown software. I'll delve into Linux on my NAS and on various appliances when I need to.
I tried Macs years ago and never could get to grips with the UI, so have never looked at OSX since. Linux generally drives me nuts with everything spread all over the place, but there again I've never needed to get to grips with it for what I do. As a server, it's great.
-
Windows on a refurbed 2012 MBP (directly on the metal, no hypervisor) because the vast majority of software I need supports Windows as the primary platform. EE is also just a hobby, and my "day job" involves desktop/server/mobile software development, so no matter what I need a Windows box somewhere even if just to run Visual Studio.
I also keep a headless Mac Mini (also refurb) on my desk for when I need to deal with iOS builds/debugging or the occasional software that works better on OS X. I connect to it using NoMachine.
I've really not found a reason to introduce Linux into my current mix. I've used Linux in the past (several distros) and have no problem with it. But right now I have no pressing need for it.
Also have a Windows tablet (Surface Pro 2) in my lab that is mounted to a shelf and runs all of the equipment in there - 3D printers, my ReLoad, USB endoscope, etc. I keep my main dev tools installed on the tablet but it's not as convenient (my eyes aren't great) as my main system in my office. I use private repositories on GitHub to share code and other files between the two desks.
-
I use private repositories on GitHub to share code and other files between the two desks.
Please have a look at Bittorrent Sync. I have around 250 GB of stuff shared between Windows and Linux clients and works really great. Real-time sync but no revision control.
-
11" MAC OSX ultrabook for personal stuff (including electronics, EAGLE, Arduino, Eclipse, Saleae and 3D design and slicing) and 30" Linux desktop for work (mostly software).
-
Win 7 SP1 pro X64. Wanting to learn linux, but Vbox had some snafu and is now useless even reinstall fails.
-
I don't know what I run. I downloaded it from Piratebay, it appears to be Win7.
-
The last few boards I designed were done on a FreeBSD (http://FreeBSD) system (I use it for other things, and because I could). No, it is not a flavor of Linux.
-
The last few boards I designed were done on a FreeBSD (http://FreeBSD) system (I use it for other things, and because I could). No, it is not a flavor of Linux.
Sure it is. It looks just like it! ;)
-
whatever let's me run the application i want to use.
Sometimes windows, sometimes OsX , hardly ever anything *nix or *ux ...
-
Company laptop and test computer run Win 7 Enterprise. Personal computer runs Win 7 Ultimate 64 bit with a Win XP 32 bit VM only for running MusicMatch jukebox. Personal laptop runs Win 7 Ultimate 32 bit.
-
I added to the Windows statistics. I use Win7 Pro on all my computers, only one only has 32 bit. Why only windows? Well I do many things that are not easy to do or were not easy to do in the past on Linux. I tried to run a distro exclusively back in 2006 because I wanted off the Windows train. For my uses it was impossible. All the types of software I wanted to use eventually caused dependency errors and I always ended with a broken OS and needed to go back to Windows to get my work done.
Nine years is a long time and I know things have changed. So I am starting to pay with a distro or two again to see what can be done but I have so much and money invested in Windows programs it would be more work to change than it is worth IMHO, even if Linux did everything I want without problems. I am willing to guess it is not problem free however.
-
Windows Vista 32 bit...
-
I use private repositories on GitHub to share code and other files between the two desks.
Please have a look at Bittorrent Sync. I have around 250 GB of stuff shared between Windows and Linux clients and works really great. Real-time sync but no revision control.
Thanks for the suggestion, but I do also occasionally publish things to public domain on github. I also never write code or documents without version control in place.
I also run crashplan for backup to both a local NAS drive and online (for all three systems) - one can never be too cautious when it comes to source code.
-
I use windows to program microcontrollers and arduino and to do school work, use my ipad to buy components and find schematics and I use Linux (well, raspbian) when I use my raspberry pi.
-
Slackware. Since '95. Had to use XP and 7 on my last job. Glad that's over with!
-
my main computer is Linux
but I have a host of other computers
a couple with Linux, the rest are Windows.
I've got a win98se on an old laptop, the bigger machines run XP, XPsp3, Vista, 7 and 8
-
I run Windows 7 Ultimate. x64. Every now and then if I need an older version of Windows or DOS, I'll fire it up in Oracle VM VirtualBox.
-
whatever let's me run the application i want to use.
Sometimes windows, sometimes OsX , hardly ever anything *nix or *ux ...
LOL.... OsX _IS_ unix .. its a BSD variant :)
cheers
Tim
-
I run Windows 7 for Diptrace, Labview, GPIB toolkit, MACH3 and others.
I run Ubuntu 14.04 Linux for InkScape, OpenCAM, PCBtoGCODE and others.
I work with Solaris all day long cause that's my day job ;)
cheers
Tim
-
My desk has 3 monitors on it, a 30" and a 24" which are connected to my windows 7 box as dual monitors. The 3rd monitor is a 24" connected to my linux box running ubuntu and lightdm.
The linux box is linked to the windows box using synergy. This way i can use one keyboard/mouse and the cursor can move between all monitors.
-
At home I've got 2 OSX boxes , 2 Windows 7 boxes and 2 XP boxes running at any one time and occasionally a Raspian Pi. By necessity it seems most of my electronics is done on a Windows 7 laptop and an older XP tower that lives in my lab. I wish I could do it all in OSX.
Oh and at work I'm trapped in a crappy VMware Windows 7 thin client running Epic (an electronic medical record) with my dictation being screwed up by Dragon voice recognition... :rant:
-
Switch often. My "system of choice" is MacOS, but of course many IDEs and EE-like tools don't run on Macs, so I have numerous Windows VMs (one for ARMs, one for PICs, two for AVRs, one for the digilentInc Analog Discovery, and a W8.1 and W10 VM to make sure things still work there.) There's also the linux VM for ESP8266, and various experimental linux variants; Even a W98 VM.
There's also a W7 laptop that gets carted to seminars, and the kids are all using Windows 7 or 8.1 (Each with a desktop and a laptop.)
And an ancient Dell2400 (XP) running the LPKF and the Needham device programmer. (then there are the "basically unused" systems. Some people just shouldn't be given access to eWaste bins. Although I *did* take back all the 386 systems :-))
-
I'm an Arch Linux user with i3 as my window manager.
Until recently my computers were always made from scavenged parts. Around 2007 Vista made me try out alternatives and I stuck with Ubuntu/Debian until gnome 2 dissipated.
My steam-powered parents have been on Linux Mint for a few years. Linux is neither this nor that for most people -- it's the software stacked on top that makes the experience. If it doesn't crash and has everything they want, they're fine with it. If it breaks and it confuses them, it's no good. When you hear "Evolution is having a spaz attack!" for the many-eth time, it's worth dumping the IMAP client and moving them to gmail, for example.
-
I use Linux on my server, along with some Linux VMs for various things that run on it, but all my PCs are Windows 7. IMO using Linux for an everyday PC is just generally slightly more painful than it should be as something always doesn't quite work correctly - usually Ralink drivers |O |O. Windows just works, and I have zero problems with 7.
-
on my own gear it's : Ubuntu 14.10 with UEFI boot in my lab (cute little miniITX with 4cores and 8G ram) , Debian 7 on my HP microserver , windows 8.1 and android on my tablets.
on my work laptop: windows 7
so i'm using more operating systems (as anyone else)... linux for SW and HW development , windows for office and all of them for browsing ;)
-
Linux Mint for desktops & laptops.
Debat 7 for servers.
One laptop is Mint/win7 dualboot , but rarely booted onto win7.
I also Fame from ubuntu but switched when they made Their new desktop , and close Linux Mint mate,to get back gnome2
/Bingo
-
Ubuntu with i3 window manager. Sometimes use windows when I want to use something like SolidWorks which does not run well in a VM.
-
I didn't realize i3 was so popular! :-/O
-
Primarily run Win 7, 64 bit, but I also run Ubuntu on occasion.
-
My main machine has Debian GNU/Linux with a desktop environment consisting of a combination of Fluxbox and Rox Filer. It also has Windows XP and FreeDOS partitions for the rare occasion I use them.
I have some older desktops running Windows 2000, MacOS 9, and Windows 95. My laptops have Windows 95 and MacOS8.6. My other older computers are Amigas and have either Amiga OS 2 or 3 :).
-
I switch often because my work requires what I write to work on Windows, OS X, iOS and Android.
So my main machine at work runs Windows Server 2012 R2. My secondary machine is a Mac Mini. Then there is a scattering of Windows laptops and Android tablets.
FWIW, it is more reliable to develop for Android on the Mac Mini than Windows - at least native mode debugging works with Eclipse/ADT which is more than can be said for trying to run it under Windows.
Of the current operating systems, I prefer Windows 7. The Windows 8 UI is a joke (I immediately install "Classic Shell" on any Windows 8 or greater machine) and I really don't know what they were thinking when they used that ridiculous UI theme for server management.
Linux as a desktop OS isn't really a player for me at the moment, though I have run it in a VM for some online classes.
-
One that makes it possible to perform the task at hand with as little pain as possible. Not necessarily on a physical machine.
-
One week I decided to try Ubuntu full time on a laptop I use for electronics only (I can't risk my main editing rig)
OS installed fine, but so many gaps. I shouldn't have to do 10 sudo commands to install something that should be two clicks away.
I think the best thing is that Ubuntu(and the like) dies, so that people/someone will come up with something that is actually usable. As it is Ubuntu devs wont let go of the sudo command. Nerd cred I suppose.
My suspetion....It's literally there so that they sill have credibility as a nerdy OS.
-
One week I decided to try Ubuntu full time on a laptop I use for electronics only (I can't risk my main editing rig)
OS installed fine, but so many gaps. I shouldn't have to do 10 sudo commands to install something that should be two clicks away.
I think the best thing is that Ubuntu(and the like) dies, so that people/someone will come up with something that is actually usable. As it is Ubuntu devs wont let go of the sudo command. Nerd cred I suppose.
My suspetion....It's literally there so that they sill have credibility as a nerdy OS.
Why should I have to go to ten different websites and tell my computer yes, I do want to download this, yes, I do want to run this, yes, I do want to let it make changes to my system, just to get a few programs installed?
-
As it is Ubuntu devs wont let go of the sudo command. Nerd cred I suppose.
My suspetion....It's literally there so that they sill have credibility as a nerdy OS.
Yes, as opposed to Windows, where to get the same effect you click "run as administrator" and then give a password.
Much less nerdy when the button for the same exact procedure is on the mouse instead of the keyboard. So nerdcred. Much sudo. Wow.
And you were probably doing it wrong, as it'll happily take that password via a GUI and has GUI configuration tools for nearly everything. Were you following instructions found online, perchance? Those are typically given for the command line because it's easier that way to make sure the person following them is doing the right thing.
-
One week I decided to try Ubuntu full time on a laptop I use for electronics only (I can't risk my main editing rig)
OS installed fine, but so many gaps. I shouldn't have to do 10 sudo commands to install something that should be two clicks away.
I think the best thing is that Ubuntu(and the like) dies, so that people/someone will come up with something that is actually usable.
Buy an Apple with OSX. OSX is Linux which works out of the box >:D
The reason I'm using Linux is because it works and keeps working. In many ways it is also much faster than Windows and stays that way. The biggest slowdown in Windows is it's memory management. Windows tries to keep as much of the precious memory unused. This means that it will start putting things into swap (on the hard drive) the minute you start it.
-
I didn't realize i3 was so popular! :-/O
It probably isn't. This is a skewed sample of users. More than average technical literacy and willing to respond to such a survey. I am not surprised i3 users are more likely than others to be vocal about it. Particularly if they weren't happy with changes to their previous window manager. Any long time forum member would have easily predicted the responses. We've seen them before.
Oh, I know, but I still wasn't expecting that. We haven't heard from users of xmonad, dwm, ratpoison, or any of the other tiling WMs - I didn't realize i3 was more popular on average than they were.
-
I've been running some form of *nix for my work environment for 30+ years.
At the moment I'm running Centos 6.5 with fvwm on several machines, and before that Fedora. I got off Fedora because I needed stability. I'm currently evaluating Mint because I'll need to move off CentOS eventually and I'm tired of working around RedHat's software policies of what they'll include.
Why fvwm? Again, stability and consistency, but it's also highly configurable and programmable. It's tailored to *my* look and feel over the years, and not to the latest new paradigm that someone else thinks will "enhance my work experience". I take fvwm with me from distro to distro.
I don't run windows and I don't have a machine that even boots it. But it seems I still pay my involuntary microsoft tax with everything I buy. Irritating, but it's a reality.
Edit: Fix typo.
-
Buy an Apple with OSX. OSX is Linux which works out of the box >:D
no it's not. it is based on BSD but uses the MACH kernel. it is much closer to nextstep than to linux.
OsX is to linux as water to oil. it's closed as can be and can only run on sanctified hardware ( ok ok you can make a hackintosh but it's not really official , nor easy to do )
That being said : it is solid and works , although it has its quirks ( screenshot hotkey is finger cramp inducing )
Linux is not finished. too many distro's too many incompatibilities. x uses a as installer , y uses b as installer. at least in windows and OsX that idiotry doesn't exist.
the same goes for all that ui stuff. why do we need twenty different window managers ? this one uses gnome, that one kde another one something else. why do we spend such effort on make duplicating something that already exists and works ? it's like make a photocopy of a photocopier ... that effort woudl be better spent making things compatible, having solid drivers and stability.
-
Linux is not finished. too many distro's too many incompatibilities. x uses a as installer , y uses b as installer. at least in windows and OsX that idiotry doesn't exist.
Huh? Install via the distribution's package manager. and it's all the same installer. Pick a Debian-based distro and a huge number of third-party software will provide .deb packages for you. Download and install. You could also go with something like Arch, which has the AUR (Arch User Repository) where users have created packages for everything under the sun - though Arch is definitely not a beginners' system.
As for Windows - everything uses a bloody different installer, what the hell are you talking about?
I'll give Mac points for a consistent installer setup. Haven't used it in years, but I remember it being generally pleasant.
the same goes for all that ui stuff. why do we need twenty different window managers ? this one uses gnome, that one kde another one something else. why do we spend such effort on make duplicating something that already exists and works ?
Because twenty people decided to make a window manager. You can ignore them. The major ones are KDE and GNOME, how bloody hard is it to pick between them?
The GNOME guys even decided to make that decision easy for you by making GNOME suck. >:D
that effort woudl be better spent making things compatible, having solid drivers and stability.
"That effort" is spent by different groups of people. It's like complaining that artists' time would be better spent performing surgery.
Linux is not an operating system, it's an ecosystem of many different software packages that operating system builders can use to make a system. The operating systems are the distributions. Want a shiny, prepackaged solution? Pick a nice distro like Ubuntu or something that made all the choices for you. You get all the software selected, some nice interface candy thrown on top to tie it together, a unified support system, etc etc.
Don't like Linux? Fine, use Windows or Mac or whatever, nobody's forcing you to use it. But don't bitch that it gives you too much choice. Do you also complain that the supermarket stocks more than one brand of beer? More than one type of breakfast cereal? Do you pitch a fit when a restaurant presents you with a menu? "Just bring me food, dammit!" :palm:
-
Linux is not finished. too many distro's too many incompatibilities. x uses a as installer , y uses b as installer. at least in windows and OsX that idiotry doesn't exist.
the same goes for all that ui stuff. why do we need twenty different window managers ? this one uses gnome, that one kde another one something else. why do we spend such effort on make duplicating something that already exists and works ? it's like make a photocopy of a photocopier ... that effort woudl be better spent making things compatible, having solid drivers and stability.
Odd seing this argument on an electronics forum. :palm: Why are there a gazillion different power supplies, after all, a good power supply has been constructed decades ago already, why doesn't everyone standardize on that? What's worse, some people even build their own!
Same for microcontrollers really, there thousands of different models, all incompatible to each other of course, the manufacturers must be crazy. The effort would have been better spend on developing just one single chip, but making that one really good... ::)
-
Good thing about Linux is window managers (mostly) work together. I have some KDE mixed in with GDM, and in general it mostly is only visible by a colour change and slightly different icons and themes. I could get them the same with a little work, but it really is not a problem in most cases. Slightly more memory use, but other than that no problem.
-
Linux is not finished. too many distro's too many incompatibilities. x uses a as installer , y uses b as installer.
You mean, like on Windows? Where there are a wide variety of installers, in various versions available? Where some packages use the Windows installer with .msi packages, others their very own installer, and even others use one of the many installer programs out there? Where you can have fun stuff like installing package X, which uses Y as installer, which in turn also installs the uninstaller stuff. Now you install Z, which uses the same installer stuff. Next you uninstall X, which also uninstalls it's uninstaller. Leading to you no longer beeing able to uninstall Z, because now some components are missing?
Yea, totally easy, unified and logical. Oh, did i mention that quite some stuff doesn't even show up in Window's installed-programs-controlcenter? And the stuff that shows up can't always be uninstalled from there? And if stuff is uninstalled, it more often than not leaves files and registry entries on the system?
the same goes for all that ui stuff. why do we need twenty different window managers ? this one uses gnome, that one kde another one something else. why do we spend such effort on make duplicating something that already exists and works ? it's like make a photocopy of a photocopier ... that effort woudl be better spent making things compatible, having solid drivers and stability.
Neither KDE nor Gnome are window managers. They are complete desktop environments, which happen to have their own window manager by default. Which can be changed, if one wants to.
See, that is the difference: One can try and chose the WM that best suits the needs and workflow, instead of beeing tied to a single way of doing things for all programs. But then, this isn't really the case on Windows either. Lot's of programs that have their very own look&feel, their own UI paradigm. It's not as if everything on Windows has a unified style/look. Some use the GUI elemts that Windows provides, others implement their own. Same for window-decorations. Input methods. Etc.
Oh, and it is no problem to run, lets say, a Gnome application under KDE, or vice versa. And neither of which really demand a specific WM to make their apps work. Plus, the machine running the application and the machine where the user actually is at can be different ones, and that functionality has been in there for decades.
Greetings,
Chris
-
Linux is not finished. too many distro's too many incompatibilities. x uses a as installer , y uses b as installer.
All i have to say is have yo used linux for more than a day... Just go look up Windows apis for setting an ip address in windows... There is a half dozen of them and most wont work it some random case. As someone who has to automate windows install from empty disk to ip setup, updates installed and RDP working, its is a mess, and can take hours. Vs Debian where it installed the updates as its doing the intial disk install and wiring to 2 text files(settings)..
Anyways i use a mix of windows and linux, and this makes it very convenient to work on both:)
http://synergy-project.org/ (http://synergy-project.org/)
I will say in general when i need to get work done I am in linux terminal, or in notepadd++ in windows.
As a side bar X11/Xorg is annoying in a lot of linuxes especially when it is automagicly setup... then breaks, when you switch gpus or a driver updates etc.
-
Linux is not a product. It's a kernel. GNU/Linux isn't a product either. If you rant about "linux not being finished", it's a very good indicator that Linux isn't what you're looking for.
As for Ubuntu, I believe it's a pretty horrid poster child. I'm a veritable UNIX nerd, and can install ArchLinux as a free action (yes I'm a DnD nerd too), but I've never had much luck with Ubuntu. It installs fine, but when I get to using the damn thing, it always makes my life miserable.
Imagining what it must be like for people with no UNIX background, I have to admit it's not ready for widespread use.
Anyway, currently I'm using OSX, but am kind of unsatisfied with the direction Apple (or, more generally, the world) is headed in, and have been eyeing PCs for some time now... also, Windows 8(.1) is an atrocity against mankind, so if I ever go PC, it will be a Linux boot with Windows in a vbox for Windows only stuff.
-
Linux, I'm a codemonkey and *nix's are just a better environment for the task. Generally Ubuntu just because it's the distro most tools are aimed at now.
I do have Windows for gaming though, but I'm not having to use it as much since Steam hit Linux.
-
For those who feel like ubuntu is close but not perfect, I'm quite fond of Xubuntu, it's Ubuntu without gnome and XFCE added. I can run many VMs of the OS at the same time without the graphics chopping up in them, I can't say the same for plain ubuntu. And you get all of the packaging and compatibility goodness that comes with ubuntu.
I've also heard interesting things about elementary os (it's based on ubuntu iirc)
-
MacBook Pro 13" with maximum specs. I switch between oses regularly (I use all three basically every day) and have many vms under VMware.
VMware never changes my MAC addresses. Not sure why that is happening to you. All commercial licensing systems work fine as well as all usb hardware.
It's surprisingly easy to accidentally and inadvertently change MAC address, it doesn't always happen, but it can:
o Move guest;
o Fiddling with guest virtual network assignment;
o Fiddling with host's virtual networks in the Virtual Network Editor;
o Upgrade VMWare Workstation (this reinstalls all the virtual networks);
o In VMWare Fusion, switching between running as a VM in OSX and natively in Bootcamp always messes with the MAC address, quite understandably!
I still run VMWare Workstation on Windows primarily for cross-platform testing among eight different Windows versions and two Linux versions. For OSX, I reboot and test natively. One further reason for running natively in Windows is that M$ use Hyper-V for cross-platform development which doesn't play at all well with VMWare. I have to do a fair bit of fiddling around if I want to switch between using VMWare and developing cross platform stuff for M$, but that's a whole other story.
-
MacBook Pro 13" with maximum specs. I switch between oses regularly (I use all three basically every day) and have many vms under VMware.
VMware never changes my MAC addresses. Not sure why that is happening to you. All commercial licensing systems work fine as well as all usb hardware.
It's surprisingly easy to accidentally and inadvertently change MAC address, it doesn't always happen, but it can:
o Move guest;
o Fiddling with guest virtual network assignment;
o Fiddling with host's virtual networks in the Virtual Network Editor;
o Upgrade VMWare Workstation (this reinstalls all the virtual networks);
o In VMWare Fusion, switching between running as a VM in OSX and natively in Bootcamp always messes with the MAC address, quite understandably!
I still run VMWare Workstation on Windows primarily for cross-platform testing among eight different Windows versions and two Linux versions. For OSX, I reboot and test natively. One further reason for running natively in Windows is that M$ use Hyper-V for cross-platform development which doesn't play at all well with VMWare. I have to do a fair bit of fiddling around if I want to switch between using VMWare and developing cross platform stuff for M$, but that's a whole other story.
Well specifically, the MAC change will only occur if you copy the vm, not move it. It even asks you "did you copy or move it?". Anyway, in fusion I regularly fiddle with the networking, and I have been using it since version 4.0 (now 7) without an upgrade ever messing with my mac addresses. Must be a workstation thing.
Can't help you with the bootcamp one though ;)
-
maybe i'm expressing it wrong as i don't know all the 'nix' jargon but here is my gripe with the thing.
download altera software and look at the install notes. only supported on red hat yadda yadda
get some other program : only installed on distro y
sometimes installing the required patches to run one program breaks another.
as for different installers : in windows there is always a setup.exe that does the rest. Same on mac. it's a dmg file.
In linux if the program is not packaged with an installer that your system has you are shit out of luck. there are competing installers, not all of em are avaialble on all flavors and not all programs are available with all installers.
i had a linux install (suse) and wanted to install Cinellera. sorry bub. no installer for suse. ( this was a couple of years ago)
And whenever you get some real piece of software it is almost always : red hat only. we don't support other distro's . There is a reason for that. becasue suppporting 25 different flavors is just too much overhead.
that is why i claim that linux is not 'ready'. choice is good. too much choice is problematic. i get pissed off if at a sandwich place they guy in front of me stalls the line for 15 minutes cause he can't decide out of the 300 different sandwiches. It's all bread with meat and veggies dammit. we're hungry. want food . now. i don't need to hear that a spoon is not compatible with my soupbowl.
-
maybe i'm expressing it wrong as i don't know all the 'nix' jargon but here is my gripe with the thing.
download altera software and look at the install notes. only supported on red hat yadda yadda
get some other program : only installed on distro y
sometimes installing the required patches to run one program breaks another.
as for different installers : in windows there is always a setup.exe that does the rest. Same on mac. it's a dmg file.
In linux if the program is not packaged with an installer that your system has you are shit out of luck. there are competing installers, not all of em are avaialble on all flavors and not all programs are available with all installers.
i had a linux install (suse) and wanted to install Cinellera. sorry bub. no installer for suse. ( this was a couple of years ago)
And whenever you get some real piece of software it is almost always : red hat only. we don't support other distro's . There is a reason for that. becasue suppporting 25 different flavors is just too much overhead.
that is why i claim that linux is not 'ready'. choice is good. too much choice is problematic. i get pissed off if at a sandwich place they guy in front of me stalls the line for 15 minutes cause he can't decide out of the 300 different sandwiches. It's all bread with meat and veggies dammit. we're hungry. want food . now. i don't need to hear that a spoon is not compatible with my soupbowl.
Frankly, all these problems are caused by gross incompetence and ignorance on the part of the developers of the software. They simply do not know what they're doing.
How did I know you'd manage to turn this thread into yet another argument?
-
I think if software devs provided an RPM for RHEL/CentOS/Fedora and a DEB for Debian/Ubuntu, then you would cover 95% of users. You can't cover the Gentoo-style users if you're these companies I guess.
The other option is just to open source the software (doesn't necessarily have to be GPL). Then people can package it themselves.
and for the record, I run Xilinx Vivado/ISE, Altera Quartus and Lattice Diamond in separate Xubuntu 14.04 virtual machines without any issues. I would actually like to share them to saveothers the work, but I don't think the companies would be very happy with me.
-
download altera software and look at the install notes. only supported on red hat yadda yadda
get some other program : only installed on distro y
Supported, not compatible. If you run it on something else and it doesn't work, it's not their problem. That doesn't mean it won't work.
Hell, here on Arch I can just install the "quartus-free" package from the AUR and it pulls down everything automatically. Wraps it in a nice package so I can uninstall it the same way, and handles upgrades. If I don't want to do that, I grab the Quartus package directly from Altera, and guess what - it's a single-file installer, much like your favorite "setup.exe". I just run it and it figures out where to put everything. Same with Xilinx ISE - I'm happily running both packages here on a quite "unsupported" system, no trouble whatsoever. I also work on about 45 machines at school running Debian, also unsupported by Xilinx, on which a few hundred students manage to operate ISE with no trouble.
-
that is why i claim that linux is not 'ready'. choice is good. too much choice is problematic. i get pissed off if at a sandwich place they guy in front of me stalls the line for 15 minutes cause he can't decide out of the 300 different sandwiches. It's all bread with meat and veggies dammit. we're hungry. want food . now. i don't need to hear that a spoon is not compatible with my soupbowl.
Frankly, all these problems are caused by gross incompetence and ignorance on the part of the developers of the software. They simply do not know what they're doing.
I agree. Linux is a bit of a showcase of what happens when programmers get to decide what to do. Backwards compatibility is often broken. Most commercial Linux software comes with it's own set of libraries just to make sure there is no chance to run into an incompatible library. And even then things can break. But... these kind problems are easier to fix on Linux than on Windows.
-
that is why i claim that linux is not 'ready'. choice is good. too much choice is problematic. i get pissed off if at a sandwich place they guy in front of me stalls the line for 15 minutes cause he can't decide out of the 300 different sandwiches. It's all bread with meat and veggies dammit. we're hungry. want food . now. i don't need to hear that a spoon is not compatible with my soupbowl.
Frankly, all these problems are caused by gross incompetence and ignorance on the part of the developers of the software. They simply do not know what they're doing.
I agree. Linux is a bit of a showcase of what happens when programmers get to decide what to do. Backwards compatibility is often broken. Most commercial Linux software comes with it's own set of libraries just to make sure there is no chance to run into an incompatible library. And even then things can break. But... these kind problems are easier to fix on Linux than on Windows.
And just to be clear, I was talking about the proprietary devs trying to release software, not the distros..
-
download altera software and look at the install notes. only supported on red hat yadda yadda
get some other program : only installed on distro y
Supported, not compatible. If you run it on something else and it doesn't work, it's not their problem. That doesn't mean it won't work.
Hell, here on Arch I can just install the "quartus-free" package from the AUR and it pulls down everything automatically. Wraps it in a nice package so I can uninstall it the same way, and handles upgrades. If I don't want to do that, I grab the Quartus package directly from Altera, and guess what - it's a single-file installer, much like your favorite "setup.exe". I just run it and it figures out where to put everything. Same with Xilinx ISE - I'm happily running both packages here on a quite "unsupported" system, no trouble whatsoever. I also work on about 45 machines at school running Debian, also unsupported by Xilinx, on which a few hundred students manage to operate ISE with no trouble.
Great (built my share of working, but unsupported systems). :-+
Just keep in mind not everyone wants to/or can deal with the problems an unsupported system carries with it when things do go wrong (perhaps they don't have the time, don't want to spend it on software issues, or just don't want to deal with the aggravation involved regardless of the time it takes to fix).
-
...
Most commercial Linux software comes with it's own set of libraries just to make sure there is no chance to run into an incompatible library. And even then things can break. But... these kind problems are easier to fix on Linux than on Windows.
To be fair, almost all installers on windows package a version of at least one of the following:
- MSVC runtimes
- VB runtimes (old style)
- .net runtimes (many different versions)
- directx (many different versions)
- java (many different versions)
-
Frankly, all these problems are caused by gross incompetence and ignorance on the part of the developers of the software. They simply do not know what they're doing.
Where is this "gross incompetence"?
There are two reasons to choose a Linux distribution. One is because it contains what you want built in and you feel comfortable it will continue to. Not certain by any means. The other is to learn about life away from the mainstream. Where it is more difficult than just going with the flow. You carve out your own niche lifestyle. A more independent frontier life.
I look at Linux as a Darwinian experiment in evolution. Lots of mutations all competing for supremacy. Don't like one distribution? You can try another. Don't like one window manager? Try another. Don't like one file system? Try another. Don't like one package manager? Try another.
Don't like Windows 8.1? Tough. Get used to it.
What else in the world would you be happy with if you had no choice. Cars? Shoes? Ink colour? Pencil lead hardness? Food? Restaurants? ISP? Phone company? Political party? Christmas trees? What? An OS perhaps.
About 90% use Windows and probably 90% of Linux users also keep a toe in the Windows pond. I know I do.
Why even bother complaining. Don't like Linux? Don't carry on like you feel your missing out. Just make your choice.
Who's complaining? Once again, not talking about the distros, talking about the poorly packaged, distro-specific proprietary software..
-
MacBook Pro 13" with maximum specs. I switch between oses regularly (I use all three basically every day) and have many vms under VMware.
VMware never changes my MAC addresses. Not sure why that is happening to you. All commercial licensing systems work fine as well as all usb hardware.
It's surprisingly easy to accidentally and inadvertently change MAC address, it doesn't always happen, but it can:
o Move guest;
o Fiddling with guest virtual network assignment;
o Fiddling with host's virtual networks in the Virtual Network Editor;
o Upgrade VMWare Workstation (this reinstalls all the virtual networks);
o In VMWare Fusion, switching between running as a VM in OSX and natively in Bootcamp always messes with the MAC address, quite understandably!
I still run VMWare Workstation on Windows primarily for cross-platform testing among eight different Windows versions and two Linux versions. For OSX, I reboot and test natively. One further reason for running natively in Windows is that M$ use Hyper-V for cross-platform development which doesn't play at all well with VMWare. I have to do a fair bit of fiddling around if I want to switch between using VMWare and developing cross platform stuff for M$, but that's a whole other story.
Well specifically, the MAC change will only occur if you copy the vm, not move it. It even asks you "did you copy or move it?". Anyway, in fusion I regularly fiddle with the networking, and I have been using it since version 4.0 (now 7) without an upgrade ever messing with my mac addresses. Must be a workstation thing.
Can't help you with the bootcamp one though ;)
VMWare aren't so keen to back that up, although I agree that in practice you are right. http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&cmd=displayKC&externalId=507 (http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&cmd=displayKC&externalId=507)
To be fair I am not criticising VMWare, I'm really criticisng the way that flakey licensing managers break software so often.
-
Just keep in mind not everyone wants to/or can deal with the problems an unsupported system carries with it when things do go wrong (perhaps they don't have the time, don't want to spend it on software issues, or just don't want to deal with the aggravation involved regardless of the time it takes to fix).
Well, it's not as if everything is rosy on Windows either. Having some version of a driver or certain apps installed can make the program to refuse working properly. Good luck with customer support then ("Oh, you have X and Y? Well, we can't have that if you want to run our great software!"). In other words, you won't get any software vendor to tell you that your specific machine and windows plus all the apps you ahve installed is supported, either.
Would be fun though if they add phonebook sized "compatibility lists" for systems and software combinations they support :P
Greetings,
Chris
-
Well, it's not as if everything is rosy on Windows either. Having some version of a driver or certain apps installed can make the program to refuse working properly. Good luck with customer support then ("Oh, you have X and Y? Well, we can't have that if you want to run our great software!").
Definitely not perfect (wasn't my intent to indicate Windows comes up all roses, so I apologize if that was the impression you got :-[). But there's the potential for support in instances that aren't possible/realistic under Linux IMHO, especially when it requires detailed investigation (bug report).
And I'd love to see a compatibility list like that. :-+
-
Home server is running CentOS 6.6
Laptop is running OpenSUSE 13.1
Work machines are running various versions of CentOS, and a few Fedora.
I have one work machine running Windows XP. I use it for Windows-specific things, and I hate it. It's the least stable system of them all by at least an order of magnitude, and it runs at 1/4 the speed it should given its hardware (the hardware is XP-era, there are no driver incompatibilities at play). I has to be restarted at least once a week for random software bullshit.
I have a Windows 7 system at home that is rarely turned on, and when it is it's only because we want to watch a web-based item and it's the only computer hooked up to the home theater system. It's also an obnoxious PITA when I do decide to turn it on, which is why I hate doing it. Like the work XP system, it runs at 1/4 the speed it should given its hardware. It's sad, really. My laptop also has a Windows 7 installation in dual boot, which I boot into about 3 times a year to apply updates, other than the rare instance when I need some Windows-specific software when I'm on the road. I have a Windows 7 VM installation on the CentOS home server for those rare Windows-only items when I'm at home.
That about covers it.
I see a few people here mentioning something akin to the following: "Linux doesn't work for me 100% of the time, Windows does, therefore I use Windows". Frankly, yes, most of what I do could be done on Windows as well. The difference is Linux makes it easy, it welcomes it, whereas Windows fights it at every opportunity. Most generic tasks that take me xx seconds to do in Linux would usually take xx MINUTES to do in Windows. Something I do quite often, and is a good example, is manipulating figures. Rotating/resizing thousands of images, merging them into a movie, etc. These tasks literally take seconds in Linux, and they take minutes/hours in Windows.
So yeah, while Linux might occasionally be a PITA to install some software on, the difference is once it's installed and working, it's ready to go forever. Windows quite often is also a PITA to install on (I'm looking at you, 3rd party driver downloads for every god damn piece of hardware ever created), but yes, most of the time installation is straight forward, the problem is that even once something is installed, Windows just gets in your way at every turn and keeps you from being productive. Random pop ups, GUI-based interfaces EVERYWHERE, lack of a decent shell, etc. Linux might take 30 minutes to install a piece of software, and 5 seconds to start it up from then on, while Windows takes 5 minutes to install a piece of software, and 30 seconds to start it up from then on. After just a few tens of uses, the positions have swapped. After a year or two, it's a no brainer which one was the better choice.
It is unfortunate, though, that there are still too many pieces of proprietary software that don't run natively on Linux (or have crappy Linux ports that require ONE version of ONE distribution, etc.). This means that even if you do make the switch, you STILL have to have a Windows installation in your back pocket for those rare occasions. I still feel it's worth the tradeoff, but that's because the majority of my uses do not require Windows. I could definitely see that if I was made to use a big block of software that was Windows-only, I would be forced back into the Windows world, probably kicking and screaming the entire way.
-
Are you sure it's not a little to do with your unfamiliarity with Windows?
I feel exactly the same every time I boot up Ubuntu to do something, maybe once every couple of months. Same security updates to do. Same uphill struggle to do something that I find second nature in Windows. Usually end up going round in circles, a seemingly simple thing to achieve takes you into a miriad of apparently inconnected steps, several dead ends, and half a day of your life wasted.
Is not the same thing? :scared:
-
Here's an analogy: Most of us are right handed. Imagine being forced to perform some tasks with your left hand. That's Windows to me. Not comfy, not efficient.. but workable. Under protest.
OS X? Elbows..
-
Are you sure it's not a little to do with your unfamiliarity with Windows?
I feel exactly the same every time I boot up Ubuntu to do something, maybe once every couple of months. Same security updates to do. Same uphill struggle to do something that I find second nature in Windows. Usually end up going round in circles, a seemingly simple thing to achieve takes you into a miriad of apparently inconnected steps, several dead ends, and half a day of your life wasted.
Is not the same thing? :scared:
No, I've regrettably spent the majority of my life using Windows. I'm verify familiar with its ins and outs, it's just not a quick OS to use. It's not a matter of trying things and failing, it's a matter of the right way to do something takes a solid order of mangitude (or more) longer than it does on Linux. It's a simple byproduct of the GUI, button-clicky, appeal to the masses approach versus the "let the operator do what they need to do and get the hell out of the way" approach.
There is a steep learning curve to Linux, no doubt about it, the difference is there's room for growth. GUIs are great for beginners, they're fantastic for fumbling your way through a program and getting to the solution. The problem is no matter how well you know the system, no matter how familiar you are with the interface, you can only go as fast as the GUI will let you go. You can only move a mouse so fast and retain accuracy, then you have to wait for the next window to pop up and scroll over to the next button, etc. With Linux there are generally two ways to do things, the same intuitive but slow GUI way as windows (which, admittedly, is often buggy because few people actually use it), and the CLI way. The CLI way has a steep learning curve, but the payoff is dramatically higher productivity. It's an option that you can take advantage of if you want, but you're not forced into it. Windows doesn't even have the option, and that's the problem.
-
I do agree that the dumbing down is not to be applauded, you just have to look at Windows 8 to see that. They did make an attempt around Windows 2003 to make everything available from the command line that could be done in the GUI, and that has filtered through to the desktop OSs too. Trouble is knowing the command, as we'd all been weened off it.
Good luck when you next switch on your Windows 7 machine by the way, I spent a day updating all the machines here a few weeks ago, 1.5GB updates on average.
I still think there's an element of what I mentioned before, I've been on *nix on and off for almost 20 years, I've just never used it enough to keep reasonable currency.
-
*presses escape*
:wqa
-
Here's an analogy: Most of us are right handed. Imagine being forced to perform some tasks with your left hand. That's Windows to me. Not comfy, not efficient.. but workable. Under protest.
OS X? Elbows..
LOL, I remember being asked to fix my neighbour's Mac about ten years ago. I hadn't touch a Mac since about 1988. I was lost. A problem syncing her IMAP mail folder, with 2GB of emails held remotely. Got her up and going, but it took several days to sync her up.
So no, it doesn't just work after all, I thought.
-
windows 8.1 since I was curious as to why people were griping so much, since I was upgrading my system's components anyways. it's not bad after installing classic shell, almost win7-like.
-
Ok... didn't want to get involved in this discussion and I sure hoped it won't degenerate into an OS fight, but here's the thing:
1) Users that chose Windows, don't do it because they hate choice, they do it because it works.
2) Users that chose Linux don't do it because it's better, they do it because it's free and no, nobody (99.9999% most likely) gives a shit about opensource, because they either don't have the skill to change software or they just can't be arsed.
Now, there are several points of view on linux and all its relatives:
1) From a user's perspective, the lack of standardization and the fact that everything is everywhere, the various kinds of configuration files, the need to manually configure things and read tons of manuals/forum posts is a drag. Also the fact that most stuff isn't working properly or that it's very hw configuration dependent, is another big issue.
Yes, all this choice and flexibility comes at a cost - both in quality and user experience.
2) From a developer's point of view (one that doesn't do it for kicks), linux is a nightmare because there's complete disregard for backward/forward compatibility, so on the next version of whatever-lib, your program could stop working. Not even static linking can save you in some cases, because X version of whatever-lib is only compatible with a specific range of kernel versions.
Add to that the GPL infestation danger and the fact that most libraries (or almost everything opensource for that matter) are written by novice programmers and idiots and you have a recipe for alienating most decent development from the linux world.
Don't get me wrong, there are good applications on linux & co, but they're not made by joe-nobody-who-just-learned-how-to-code, they are made or are getting contributions from pro developers that get paid by their companies to do it. As it happens, those are the applications that get thrown in your face in a discussion like this one, but because of their nature, they present very little interest to your regular user.
Points 1 and 2 add up to a desktop environment that's unstable, high maintenance and with software that's limited or buggy.
3) From a company's point of view, that needs servers, you get a very stable OS that when you control the hw environment, it's very easy to set up or to develop a setup procedure that works. It's easy/costs very little to remotely manage and you have to spend very little to nothing on software. If you're not happy with the hosting company anymore, you can easily find another one that offers the same thing. If there is an issue, you fix it on one machine and deploy the fix on all the other ones with little effort. It works.
These are the users that drive/make the good quality software that makes linux worthwhile, but as it happens, they don't care about the things the regular user needs, because they have no need for desktop environments.
I would like for nothing else than a linux desktop environment that works. I've been writing servers and daemons for linux for the past 10 years and the desktop side of things has always been a disappointment. Currently, only 2 of my 3 monitors are working, because the new kernel does something that the nvidia drivers doesn't like. It's almost a rule that on each update, something in the kernel or X changes in such a way that the nvidia drivers stop working and everything gets messed up. In contrast, Windows had proper multi-monitor support that worked, since Windows 98 - and it has never stopped working, it just got better.
Anyway, there are lots of things wrong with linux and I won't get into all of it, but I think it all boils down to one thing: it's very hard to write/maintain desktop software for linux and it's even harder to write proprietary & commercial software. Stop changing everything, every 6 months, possibly drop GPL and it might eventually stop being a turd.
That being said, I'm not trying to piss off linux users, since I have nothing against them, in fact I sympathize with their needs and problems because I'm a linux user myself, but I think that linux was always a subpar desktop operating system and since not much progress was made in so many years, I can only conclude that this will never change unless there are some drastic changes in the mentality of the developers.
Edit: Yes, there are exceptions to all 3 points of view, but they pretty much hold true for the majority of the users they're about.
-
1) Users that chose Windows, don't do it because they hate choice, they do it because it works.
Choosing A from A and B when both work isn't done because A works.
2) Users that chose Linux don't do it because it's better, they do it because it's free and no, nobody (99.9999% most likely) gives a shit about opensource, because they either don't have the skill to change software or they just can't be arsed.
Explain dual-boot systems.
Edit: Yes, there are exceptions to all 3 points of view, but they pretty much hold true for the majority of the users they're about.
There are a lot of dual-boot systems.
-
1) Users that chose Windows, don't do it because they hate choice, they do it because it works.
2) Users that chose Linux don't do it because it's better, they do it because it's free and no, nobody (99.9999% most likely) gives a shit about opensource, because they either don't have the skill to change software or they just can't be arsed.
As a former network engineer, I absolutely agree with this statement (generally). Well said.
However using OSX and Windows 8 is analogous to using crayons. Reminds me of this classic:
Mac Parody (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yg7Xh0m_Oco#)
-
@c4757p
1) As I was saying in my post, B doesn't really work.
2) In my case I dual boot because I have to write software for linux. Some people do it because gimp is free, photoshop isn't, other people do it for fun, because linux can be fun if you have the time.
-
...most stuff isn't working properly or that it's very hw configuration dependent...
...linux is a nightmare because there's complete disregard for backward/forward compatibility...
...GPL infestation danger and the fact that most libraries (or almost everything opensource for that matter) are written by novice programmers and idiots...
...they don't care about the things the regular user needs...
I've been writing servers and daemons for linux for the past 10 years...
I see a pattern emerging right there...
Greetings,
Chris
-
@c4757p
1) As I was saying in my post, B doesn't really work.
Huh. Works for me :-// Am I doing something wrong?
-
@c4757p
1) As I was saying in my post, B doesn't really work.
Huh. Works for me :-// Am I doing something wrong?
That's highly irrelevant. If it doesn't work on 1 pc, it doesn't work.
(http://www.edsquared.com/content/binary/Windows-Live-Writer/dbb6c39a79dc_68DE/WorksOnMyMachine_3.png)
-
Then please advise how I should go about breaking it so I can see it from your perspective!
Will a hammer suffice? Do I just whack the RAM a few times?
-
That's highly irrelevant. If it doesn't work on 1 pc, it doesn't work.
I hope you're just grasping for something to use as a verbal cudgel here, because if you truly believe that then you must be a complete idiot. If it doesn't work on one PC? Surely you don't think there's nothing that's broken on a Windows box somewhere? Damn, I should introduce you to some of the ones I've worked on...
-
Then please advise how I should go about breaking it so I can see it from your perspective!
Will a hammer suffice? Do I just whack the RAM a few times?
Just have a decently complex system. I remember when I did a fresh linux install, right after they made the switch to udev. They were still using the /dev/sdX links in fstab so the damn thing ended up trying to boot from one of my RAID HDDs (just one of them), because udev discovers them in the order in which they respond. Needless to say, that screwed up my RAID 1 and I had to spend several hours in Windows while the RAID was re-generating.
That's highly irrelevant. If it doesn't work on 1 pc, it doesn't work.
I hope you're just grasping for something to use as a verbal cudgel here, because if you truly believe that then you must be a complete idiot. If it doesn't work on one PC? Surely you don't think there's nothing that's broken on a Windows box somewhere? Damn, I should introduce you to some of the ones I've worked on...
No need for verbal abuse. The point I'm trying to make is that everything linux doesn't get tested properly. The developers use the "works on my PC" approach and are baffled and indifferent to the fact that it might not work on other/more complex configurations.
Edit: I'm sure it works for most, but some of us don't have 1 HDD, 1 video card and 1 monitor. Some of us also don't need only the stock software, we may need the newest version of whatever, which doesn't work with the whatever-lib you currently have installed and the new version of that library doesn't work with everything else you have. It's very easy to think of ways in which a linux desktop can fail you. Most of the time, for me, all it takes is to hit the update button and I end up with a system I can't use.
Edit 2: Please stop taking offense in a discussion about operating systems and better yet, let's stop it altogether, because it rarely leads anywhere. The point of this thread was to establish the user distribution in the EE field and the usage scenarios, not to insult each other.
-
Heh. View from afar: "The majority of the people run Windows. The rest (a vocal minority) are have arguments about which flavors of unix suck less." :-)
-
No need for verbal abuse. The point I'm trying to make is that everything linux doesn't get tested properly. The developers use the "works on my PC" approach and are baffled and indifferent to the fact that it might not work on other/more complex configurations.
Have you tried saying the point you're trying to make? From here, it looks like you're just slinging random shit at Linux and Linux users.
-
No need for verbal abuse. The point I'm trying to make is that everything linux doesn't get tested properly. The developers use the "works on my PC" approach and are baffled and indifferent to the fact that it might not work on other/more complex configurations.
Have you tried saying the point you're trying to make? From here, it looks like you're just slinging random shit at Linux and Linux users.
I am slinging shit, but it's not random and it's not at the users, none of this is their fault. I think the point was very clear, I was underlining the reason users avoid linux and why linux is the way it is.
-
Well as of today I'm about to setup my first dual OS PC since Win 3.11 & 95 days.
In my game I have to have the latest for product support, but it's still a PITA.
It'll be Win 7 & Win 8. :-\
Lucky I have a buddy that is a PC tech. ;D
-
@Halon
LOL @ the mac parody. My wife has a mac and she's pretty fond of it, but personally I never managed to get used to some of its quirks. I think it focuses a bit too much on the wank factor and loses some functionality because of it, but given that the majority of Mac users are happy with their choice, I suppose they're doing something right.
-
Then please advise how I should go about breaking it so I can see it from your perspective!
Will a hammer suffice? Do I just whack the RAM a few times?
Just have a decently complex system. I remember when I did a fresh linux install, right after they made the switch to udev. They were still using the /dev/sdX links in fstab so the damn thing ended up trying to boot from one of my RAID HDDs (just one of them), because udev discovers them in the order in which they respond. Needless to say, that screwed up my RAID 1 and I had to spend several hours in Windows while the RAID was re-generating.
That's highly irrelevant. If it doesn't work on 1 pc, it doesn't work.
I hope you're just grasping for something to use as a verbal cudgel here, because if you truly believe that then you must be a complete idiot. If it doesn't work on one PC? Surely you don't think there's nothing that's broken on a Windows box somewhere? Damn, I should introduce you to some of the ones I've worked on...
No need for verbal abuse. The point I'm trying to make is that everything linux doesn't get tested properly. The developers use the "works on my PC" approach and are baffled and indifferent to the fact that it might not work on other/more complex configurations.
Edit: I'm sure it works for most, but some of us don't have 1 HDD, 1 video card and 1 monitor. Some of us also don't need only the stock software, we may need the newest version of whatever, which doesn't work with the whatever-lib you currently have installed and the new version of that library doesn't work with everything else you have. It's very easy to think of ways in which a linux desktop can fail you. Most of the time, for me, all it takes is to hit the update button and I end up with a system I can't use.
It sounds to me like you're doing it wrong.
You're prototyping on bleeding edge software and expecting it to work like a hardened server. Do what the rest of us do, use a real server OS (Debian, Cent, RHEL, etc.) on bare metal, and use VMs for your bleeding edge development. From the sound of it, what you're doing is akin to running Windows X.X developer-only alpha release to run the actual machine and getting pissed off when it breaks.
Bleeding edge Linux distros don't get tested properly, that's the point, they ARE the test beds. If you need something that's tested and proven then don't use them. If you need bleeding edge libraries for your development, do it in a VM where a crash won't shut you down. This approach to software development is independent of the OS you choose.
All of that said, I do agree with you on the video/monitor situation in Linux, it's crap. Even dual monitors rarely work properly outside of the standard same-size-landscape-orientation setup, and when you get to 3+ you can forget about it. I really wish developers would focus more on this than on adding more flash to KDE 4 or Gnome 3 or whatever new spinning wheel impress the ladies DE they come up with next. Give me a Gnome 2-esque DE with proper multi-monitor support (including multiple resolutions and orientations) and I'll be happy for life.
-
(http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver/Breitbart/Breitbart-London/2014/09/07/Picture-17.png)
-
This thread is now pointless.
-
that is why i claim that linux is not 'ready'. choice is good. too much choice is problematic. i get pissed off if at a sandwich place they guy in front of me stalls the line for 15 minutes cause he can't decide out of the 300 different sandwiches. It's all bread with meat and veggies dammit. we're hungry. want food . now. i don't need to hear that a spoon is not compatible with my soupbowl.
It's not Linux that's "not ready", it's the half-arsed Linux versions of the software in question. If you come across a piece of software that fails to install under non-RH systems, you probably don't want to use the Linux version of that software to begin with. (In 90% of all cases, it'll be a catastrophe.)
There are dozens of ways you can reliably release proprietary software for Linux. There are many companies that do it right (Steam for Linux is pretty much a breeze for instance). Most companies provide a tarball download, and shell script installers or manual installation instructions.
Also, oftentimes, it's just a matter of a little work to get a RH package installed and running in a random distro of your choice. So things are by far not as bad as you are stating.
Ok... didn't want to get involved in this discussion and I sure hoped it won't degenerate into an OS fight, but here's the thing:
{insert usenet-level OS fight assholery}
Congratulations.
-
There are a lot of dual-boot systems.
? i don't have any. Where i used to work there were none.. where i work now there are none. in fact of all the people i know (in context of work) none of em has dual boot. i wonder why ?
and yes, they had huge linux farms but people would connect through exceed or similar software running on win.
the farms were VERY tightly controlled running very specific installs that did not get patches installed or any other fidgeting-around-with until a project was done and out the door.
The deployed versions were often several years old. Only when the software rolled a revision and they got the go from the software maker did they patch the installs. actually the software install typically came prepackaged with the os it was supposed to run on. deploy and run. hands off the os install.
linux can and does work but it needs careful monitoring. there is simply too much stuff in the wild that is not sufficiently tested.
-
...because you work primarily with Windows-only software?
-
There are a lot of dual-boot systems.
? i don't have any. Where i used to work there were none.. where i work now there are none. in fact of all the people i know (in context of work) none of em has dual boot. i wonder why ?
I haven't seen a dual boot system since around the time computers became powerful enough to run virtual machines without a noticeable performance hit on everyday jobs. I sure haven't had one since 2000.
-
Ok... didn't want to get involved in this discussion and I sure hoped it won't degenerate into an OS fight, but here's the thing:
{insert usenet-level OS fight assholery}
Congratulations.
@Sigmoid
I didn't know that pointing out the flaws in something makes you an asshole. I guess it's perfectly fine to bash Windows and its users tho. Also, I can't help but notice that you're the second person that actually acts like an asshole towards me, but fails to bring any kind of contra-arguments.
Please stop getting butthurt over criticism brought to the things you like, it's childish.
-
I haven't seen a dual boot system since around the time computers became powerful enough to run virtual machines without a noticeable performance hit
Good point. I'd amend my initial suggestion by including virtual machines as well as dual-boot systems.
-
This thread stayed pretty civilised for a long time. It's still not too bad, even occasionally insightful, considering the topic.
I use linux. I don't care what you use, or why.
For what it's worth, my major gripes:
1) nvidia
2) gnome 3
Minor gripes:
I miss outlook and advanced excel.
Apart from outlook's insane top-posting, it did feel snappier than thunderbird.
I miss excel less and less, especially after the (old rant) introduction of the ludicrous, mandatory, office ribbon.
It is my choice to have these gripes.
-
...because you work primarily with Windows-only software?
i'd love to jump on the free bandwagon ( free as in zero-paid , i don't care about 'open', 'source code' , ' share' etc. i got work to be done , use screwdrivers, not make em you know. no interest in learning how to make screwdrivers either ). free is good.
but, i have not found 'worthy' alternatives for the stuff i frequently use to make the full switch to linux.
i have tried. i still do once in a while. i play with things like inkscape (its not quite the same as illustrator yet ... 50% at most). i love notepad++
There is good 'free' software , but the one that is out there tends to exist both for win and linux. In short the linux world has NOTHING ( for me) that requires me to have a permanent install. if it were a 50/50 (like 50% of the stuff i use exists on linux unaltered ( not a copycat , but the real deal )) i might switch. right now it's 0/100 %
openoffice is 'not quite' microsoft office. like it or not. if i send a native openoffice document somewhere it will come back. 'can't open that.'
inkscape is not quite illustrator
gimp is not quite photoshop. ( there is thousands of 3d party plugins for photoshop )
aperture is not quite lightroom ( in fact i'm pissed at apple they pulled the plug on aperture . i paid for that ! , fortunately i discovered lightroom )
altium ? no contest
Various toolchains like Keil / IAR ? (i'm playing with a few processors form infineon and TI right now and the delivered toolchains / programming software is win only...
Quartus/Modelsim. ? from the official quartus install: RHEL5 or RHEL6 anything else ? sorry we don't guarantee it'll work or even install. you can fidget with it but if goes wonky don't come crying ...
well bugger that !
like i said : i have not encountered anything i need (professionally) that exists on linux only ( apart form when i messed around with silicon. those are *nix tools only because of the legacy coming from Sun. but even there the user environments run on a windows box. due to the other software people need like outlook , word, excel, powerpoint , and other stuff.
again : my world , not someone else's. but when i look around in my world i don't know of anyone that uses a dualboot system. if they do have a need for both linux and win it is either a dedicated machine or they run it in a vm. rebooting to swap programs is just too annoying.
-
Heh. View from afar: "The majority of the people run Windows. The rest (a vocal minority) are have arguments about which flavors of unix suck less." :-)
where's the 'like' button if you need one :)
reminds me of unix vs windows airlines.. windows airlines gets you there most of the time , on time. once in a while there is a hiccup and you end up late, in the wrong spot or very rarely dead. ( flying is very safe)
unix airlines : the pilots crew and mechanics walk onto the runway carrying various bits and pieces of metal and hammers . vigorously arguing what plane they will build , what colour it should be and how many seats it must have. meanwhile the passengers are mulling around aimlessly in the terminal wondering when they will take off .. .
-
Most of the time, for me, all it takes is to hit the update button and I end up with a system I can't use.
The same goes for Windows. I don't update my Windows machines because experience has thaught me that an update is very likely to break a system.
-
It's a shame that Notepad++ is Windows-only, it is a good editor. That said, there are a lot of cross-platform editors.
OpenOffice/LibreOffice suck. I run MS Office via Crossover - works nicely, for those times when I absolutely must use it (can't stand MS Office either).
Don't do graphics stuff, so can't comment on Inkscape/Illustrator. If you do a lot of that, then I'd guess that yeah, Linux ain't for you. There's not much in the way of creative software. I don't touch that shit anyway, though ;D
MCU toolchains are often Windows-only, but a few have quite competent cross-platform toolchains; for this reason I tend to stick to AVR and ARM. (And I don't really ever have much reason to use anything else, between the two of them the cover just about anything.) But again, yeah, most purpose-built engineering toolkits are Windows-only, so if you insist on using some obscure chip you're stuck.
Quartus, again, works perfectly. So what if they don't guarantee it? ISE does as well.
In the end - yeah, unfortunately, a lot of engineering toolkits only run on Windows. I still vastly prefer Linux, mostly due to the configurability - I like to tinker. I spend a lot of time on my computer, I want it to bend to my work patterns, not the other way around! And I want to be able to import all this customization to another system very easily (I can just download and unpack the config files from my $HOME). I've tried to get all my various customizations (tiling window manager, lots of keyboard remaps, a sophisticated command shell - zsh - configured just right, access to all the system internals via said command shell, smooth and seamless interaction with multiple systems via SSH including GUI tunneling, etc) running on Windows and while I could get most of them to have some semblance of working, it was hardly a "just works" setup.
But then, that's just me. Some people like doing things the Windows way. Personally I'd rather gouge out my eyes with a deflated balloon...
-
I ran Linux full on my daily driver in 2006, but got sick of dual booting for games. I dumped it for Vista, and although horrendous I put up with and on 7 it's sorta okay.
I still have a dual boot system because I run Linux Mint on it. Some software development runs so much nicer on Linux. But I use Win7 now daily..
I would love to run Linux as my daily driver again, but primarily some alternatives (like Altium or an IDE that matches Visual Studio + ReSharper) and games are holding me back.
I did compile a list of programs I frequently use and alternatives, and was surprised to find many games on Steam now run on Linux.. but it's not there yet. I still need to see my racing simulators to go, but I'm afraid that's not happening anytime soon (probably because the simulator market is too much of a niche to spend time on multi-OS support, whereas they are too great fun for me to give up entirely). Yes I did look up all programs on natively and Wine support, but no dice.
So.. last christmas I got myself a PS4 instead and we'll see if I can suffice my gaming needs on that machine.
Unfortunately the biggest pain (IMHO) is graphics card drivers on Linux. AMD sounds like the holy grail for most because their open source support is better than NVIDIA, but in general the quality control of AMD drivers sucks. Most precisely, Windows drivers tend to be very buggy and years behind NVIDIA, and I experienced that the Linux drivers are even worse. (I run a HD 7850 card)
I have an old laptop (6 years) with Xubuntu on it, and a Nvidia 9200M GS card. It runs sorta OK; but the machine is too slow to function as a development machine for today (Even with a relatively light WM etc.).
-
Just to add my little contribution :), I use Ubuntu Linux as my main system along with the Cinnamon desktop. I also have Windows 7 partition to play some games, but I only use it about once a month if not less. I feels like every time I start windows I enter update hell. I also use a Macbook Air as a portable device. It's nice and lite, and runs all tools and software I use on Linux.
For me the main reason I use open source tools is the feeling that when I create something with them I truly own what I've done. To take the screwdriver analogy, It's like owning it, opposed the renting a screwdriver from a company that may tomorrow go out off business.
Ill admit that it's probably a different situation if you are a company that works just for money and doesn't care as long as it works, but for the hobbyist, open source and Linux is a wonderful thing.
On the other hand I use Sublime Text editor and that is not open source.
-
The CLI way has a steep learning curve, but the payoff is dramatically higher productivity. It's an option that you can take advantage of if you want, but you're not forced into it. Windows doesn't even have the option, and that's the problem.
Err, yes it does. It's called Powershell. Similarly steep learning curve. And many Microsoft server products use this extensively - for example, you can only do basic stuff through the Exchange GUI tools - everything else is in Powershell. Same with Hyper-V.
Anthony
-
@c4757p
As an alternative to notepad++ you can try geany. It's based on the same editor control (scintilla), so it feels pretty much the same.
-
The CLI way has a steep learning curve, but the payoff is dramatically higher productivity. It's an option that you can take advantage of if you want, but you're not forced into it. Windows doesn't even have the option, and that's the problem.
Err, yes it does. It's called Powershell. Similarly steep learning curve. And many Microsoft server products use this extensively - for example, you can only do basic stuff through the Exchange GUI tools - everything else is in Powershell. Same with Hyper-V.
Anthony
And let's not forget to mention that powershell kicks ass.
-
@c4757p
As an alternative to notepad++ you can try geany. It's based on the same editor control (scintilla), so it feels pretty much the same.
Ah, I forgot that it is, I'll keep that in mind. I don't use notepad++ personally, I use vim almost exclusively, but a lot of people like notepad++ so it'd be helpful to keep around as a recommendation. I have used it and it's rather nice.
-
The CLI way has a steep learning curve, but the payoff is dramatically higher productivity. It's an option that you can take advantage of if you want, but you're not forced into it. Windows doesn't even have the option, and that's the problem.
Err, yes it does. It's called Powershell. Similarly steep learning curve. And many Microsoft server products use this extensively - for example, you can only do basic stuff through the Exchange GUI tools - everything else is in Powershell. Same with Hyper-V.
Anthony
And let's not forget to mention that powershell kicks ass.
It sure does, Long training course from MS for those who want to learn it:
http://www.microsoftvirtualacademy.com/training-courses/getting-started-with-powershell-3-0-jump-start (http://www.microsoftvirtualacademy.com/training-courses/getting-started-with-powershell-3-0-jump-start)
-
It's a shame that Notepad++ is Windows-only, it is a good editor. That said, there are a lot of cross-platform editors.
OpenOffice/LibreOffice suck. I run MS Office via Crossover - works nicely, for those times when I absolutely must use it (can't stand MS Office either).
Don't do graphics stuff, so can't comment on Inkscape/Illustrator. If you do a lot of that, then I'd guess that yeah, Linux ain't for you. There's not much in the way of creative software. I don't touch that shit anyway, though ;D
MCU toolchains are often Windows-only, but a few have quite competent cross-platform toolchains; for this reason I tend to stick to AVR and ARM. (And I don't really ever have much reason to use anything else, between the two of them the cover just about anything.) But again, yeah, most purpose-built engineering toolkits are Windows-only, so if you insist on using some obscure chip you're stuck.
Quartus, again, works perfectly. So what if they don't guarantee it? ISE does as well.
In the end - yeah, unfortunately, a lot of engineering toolkits only run on Windows. I still vastly prefer Linux, mostly due to the configurability - I like to tinker. I spend a lot of time on my computer, I want it to bend to my work patterns, not the other way around! And I want to be able to import all this customization to another system very easily (I can just download and unpack the config files from my $HOME). I've tried to get all my various customizations (tiling window manager, lots of keyboard remaps, a sophisticated command shell - zsh - configured just right, access to all the system internals via said command shell, smooth and seamless interaction with multiple systems via SSH including GUI tunneling, etc) running on Windows and while I could get most of them to have some semblance of working, it was hardly a "just works" setup.
But then, that's just me. Some people like doing things the Windows way. Personally I'd rather gouge out my eyes with a deflated balloon...
i can see how, if your job is writing code that linux gives you a much larger ecosystem and playground. linux is by coders for coders.
as soon as you leave the 'text' world and start doing graphical / visual things ( CAD ) or hardware things , it deteriorates very quickly.
my code writing is 5% of what i do. the rest is all graphical stuff ( whether photo editing, drawing documentation, schematics, pcb ).
i don't give a rats ass about the os i run on. i want my three 30 inch monitors , my spacenavigator and have my nose in altium, rhino , solidworks, catia without fuss. if i need to send a letter or spreadsheet i need it in a format that the most people can read. i hate powerpoint for example. i do not understand how people can make diagrams in powerpoint. that tool is horrid. but, that's what people can read.
so word/excel/powerpoint are default standards. historical.
as for manufacturer toolchains : i do not want to get locked in to one chip or one chip family because their tools are not compatible with my Os.
if i need an industrial temp range chip that is certified to SAE i can hardly tell my customer : i can't do the work because they don't have a toolchain for linux and i refuse to run windows. i'd be out in the street with an accordeon and a trained monkey as opposed as to in my lab and comfy office with fireplace. i am working on a design right now that will use an infineon xc1300 series cpu. why ? because it has exactly the right mix of peripherals and is automotive grade ( no, this is not daytime job related ). this app is a smart sensor that needs to be rugged.
the only devtools for that thing come from infineon themselves. windows only.
and it is the same with most devtools. you can do any chip manufacturer. atmel, microchip,ti,infineaon, st , it's all a windows only show.
ANother funky thing i am working with is a chip from Silego ( programmable analog chip ). same for theose cypress psoc's... windows only.
so linux has zero appeal to me. it has nothing i need , and would only restrict my options.
again ,were i a programmer that may be different. i am not. i do hardware.
-
Ok... didn't want to get involved in this discussion and I sure hoped it won't degenerate into an OS fight, but here's the thing:
{insert usenet-level OS fight assholery}
Congratulations.
@Sigmoid
I didn't know that pointing out the flaws in something makes you an asshole. I guess it's perfectly fine to bash Windows and its users tho. Also, I can't help but notice that you're the second person that actually acts like an asshole towards me, but fails to bring any kind of contra-arguments.
Please stop getting butthurt over criticism brought to the things you like, it's childish.
OMG, you were the one who started with the ad hominem, and now you're actually feeling insulted because people called you out for it.
Come on, re-read that post, just once!
Really now, are you expecting me to bring a counterargument against how "Linux users just use Linux because it's free, most of them couldn't give a shit about open source" or somesuch?!
-
OMG, you were the one who started with the ad hominem, and now you're actually feeling insulted because people called you out for it.
Please quote me.
Edit: And yes, I expect you to at least voice an opinion that makes sense and contradicts mine if you don't agree with it. Or are you afraid that it will sound too much like bullshit if you start talking about how users chose it because opensource is awesome and they care about freedom and crap like that?
-
Edit: And yes, I expect you to at least voice an opinion that makes sense and contradicts mine if you don't agree with it. Or are you afraid that it will sound too much like bullshit if you start talking about how users chose it because opensource is awesome and they care about freedom and crap like that?
You clearly have no clue what the concept of open-source, and the freedoms that come with it, is about.
Greetings,
Chris
-
Edit: And yes, I expect you to at least voice an opinion that makes sense and contradicts mine if you don't agree with it. Or are you afraid that it will sound too much like bullshit if you start talking about how users chose it because opensource is awesome and they care about freedom and crap like that?
You clearly have no clue what the concept of open-source, and the freedoms that come with it, is about.
Greetings,
Chris
The concept of opensource and its licenses as found in linux, have nothing to do with freedom and they don't benefit the end user in any way. In fact, they're meant to take away freedoms from developers.
The whole point of GPL was to make sure that everything available was free and opensource, so anything you write, that uses in any way or form a piece of GPL code - be it a snippet from the net or linking against a library, turns your entire project into free and opensource code. Turned out that everything free and opensource kinda sucked, because the programmers that could actually produce quality stuff, didn't really have time to code for free or didn't want their code to be forked. Because of that they introduced the LGPL, which is a bit more permissive, in the sense that with it you can dynamically link against LGPL libraries and can still keep your code closed source.
Needless to say the LGPL didn't have much success until recently and there are still tons of GPL traps in the linux environment.
None of this benefits or affects the end user in any way, in fact it helps keeping companies and programmers that can bring value to the OS, at bay.
Did I miss anything from the concept of opensource and the freedoms it offers?
-
I don't think people use Linux because of freedom or whatever. I think people use Linux because it works better for a lot of things.
For example: Every now and them I develop Windows software. I do that on Linux because for some reason it takes the exact same source minutes to compile on Windows versus seconds on Linux. Yes, I tried several Windows machines and versions (including a freshly installed Windows in a VM on the Linux machine) to rule out the 'problem' is in a particular Windows machine.
-
I don't think people use Linux because of freedom or whatever. I think people use Linux because it works better for a lot of things.
For example: Every now and them I develop Windows software. I do that on Linux because for some reason it takes the exact same source minutes to compile on Windows versus seconds on Linux. Yes, I tried several Windows machines and versions (including a freshly installed Windows in a VM on the Linux machine) to rule out the 'problem' is in a particular Windows machine.
That's interesting. What compiler(s) did you use?
-
GCC version 4.x in both cases.
Actually I did some interesting teaking on my new Linux machine recently which could be related. The 3.x kernels have different default options for handling the CPU idle state and task switching latency. This resulted in my new Linux PC compiling considerably slower than my old Linux PC even though the new PC has 30% more CPU power and twice the memory bandwidth :wtf: .
Google found this for me: http://serverfault.com/questions/530944/mysql-5-5-degraded-performance-in-linux-kernel-3-2-compared-to-2-6 (http://serverfault.com/questions/530944/mysql-5-5-degraded-performance-in-linux-kernel-3-2-compared-to-2-6) After adding some of the command line options the compile time on my new PC was less than half of what it was before.
-
On compilers, it's hard to beat the free Visual Studio Community 2013.
And you can put your own toolchain because it's the full Visual Studio Professional.
-
I hope you like coffee a lot because VS is horribly slow:
http://www.yosoygames.com.ar/wp/2013/12/microsoft-we-need-to-talk-about-visual-studio/ (http://www.yosoygames.com.ar/wp/2013/12/microsoft-we-need-to-talk-about-visual-studio/)
-
I hope you like coffee a lot because VS is horribly slow:
http://www.yosoygames.com.ar/wp/2013/12/microsoft-we-need-to-talk-about-visual-studio/ (http://www.yosoygames.com.ar/wp/2013/12/microsoft-we-need-to-talk-about-visual-studio/)
Pretty fast for me for big projects on a good machine, but if you need more performance get your company to get incredibuild. And by a big program I'm talking XB1 and PS4 big. Edit: of course not with the default toolchain, but even the native compiler is on par if targetting the PC.
-
The whole point of GPL was to make sure that everything available was free and opensource, so anything you write, that uses in any way or form a piece of GPL code - be it a snippet from the net or linking against a library, turns your entire project into free and opensource code.
Most libraries (and the kernel) are licensed with the linking exception, there are even variants that allow static linking as long as you supply back any changes to the library. And trying to make you use an OSS license for taking a trivial snippet wouldn't be legal. The GPL v3 is a joke for most casses and most devs don't use it.
Wrangling licenses is a pain in the arse on every platform whether it's a copyleft license or not.
-
I have only two hard requirements from my OSs, they should come with a native bash shell and should use forward slash for file separator. Everything else is optional.
:)
-
I don't think people use Linux because of freedom or whatever. I think people use Linux because it works better for a lot of things.
For example: Every now and them I develop Windows software. I do that on Linux because for some reason it takes the exact same source minutes to compile on Windows versus seconds on Linux. Yes, I tried several Windows machines and versions (including a freshly installed Windows in a VM on the Linux machine) to rule out the 'problem' is in a particular Windows machine.
Wouldn't the difference be more likely a compiler issue than an OS issue? Perhaps differences in optimisation options. I can easily accept a 10-20% time difference due to OS and not compiler things but minutes vs seconds sounds not at all like an OS issue. My prev Linux kernel would use a lot of CPU when writing to USB flash drives. But it is much better now. So I don't eliminate the possibility of a bug.
I think - bear in mind I haven't investigated this much - it's a compiler architecture issue. *n?x buildchains tend to use a massive number of processes executed in series, as launching a process tends to be very efficient on those systems and it's a nice way to segregate the different stages. Windows takes fucking forever to launch processes, especially if the program is written to do it the unix way with fork/exec. It can still be fast, you just need to not launch a million processes.
-
The concept of opensource and its licenses as found in linux, have nothing to do with freedom and they don't benefit the end user in any way. In fact, they're meant to take away freedoms from developers.
[...]
None of this benefits or affects the end user in any way, in fact it helps keeping companies and programmers that can bring value to the OS, at bay.
Thanks for confirming again that you have no clue about this.
Did I miss anything from the concept of opensource and the freedoms it offers?
Yes. You missed pretty much everything, and twisted whatever you heard about it into something that has nothing to do with the freedoms that open-source is supposed to offer.
You may want to get some clues about the issues here: https://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html (https://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html)
And you may want to watch this video as well, so that the guy who came up with that concept can explain it to you in more detail: http://media.ccc.de/browse/congress/2014/31c3_-_6123_-_en_-_saal_1_-_201412291130_-_freedom_in_your_computer_and_in_the_net_-_richard_stallman.html (http://media.ccc.de/browse/congress/2014/31c3_-_6123_-_en_-_saal_1_-_201412291130_-_freedom_in_your_computer_and_in_the_net_-_richard_stallman.html)
Really, it would look good on you if you educate yourself about the issues, before you complain about them. Because so far your twisted interpretation makes you look just like an idiot.
Greetings,
Chris
-
1 laptop running Windows XP service pack 3 (i think).
1 laptop running a minimal Debian OS that boots straight into EMACS.
1 Android phone.
Oh yeah, a couple of Raspberry Pi's; 1 running RISC_OS, and 1 running Raspbian.
That's all folks :)
-
There are a lot of dual-boot systems.
? i don't have any. Where i used to work there were none.. where i work now there are none. in fact of all the people i know (in context of work) none of em has dual boot. i wonder why ?
I haven't seen a dual boot system since around the time computers became powerful enough to run virtual machines without a noticeable performance hit on everyday jobs. I sure haven't had one since 2000.
In the past I used to dual boot ALOT ... but I agree with Sigmoid here. My desktop has 3 screens, 32GB of memory and 8-cores, and I haven't needed to dual boot for many years now. My main OS is linux and I just run Windows in a virtual machine full screen on one screen to the far right and two linux desktops on the other two screens. So I run them both at the same time, full screen on one PC.
The only improvement I MIGHT make in the foreseeable future is to boot into a small hypervisor at the start, and then boot linux and Windows using two video cards with VGA passthrough mode. This can allow each OS to appear to have the bare metal with it's own video hardware. But it's working good enough as it is now using just host based virtualization, so I admit that I have not really looked into this option yet. I may never, as I'd rather be doing real work then waste time tearing down and restoring my PC while trying to get a new configuration running. Right now it works, and works well.
-
a native bash shell
i wonder if it would be compatible with my box of hammers ?
-
@mamalala
Whatever, keep being a zealot. I don't care.
-
I use GNU/Linux because I happen to have a computer running it as a first computer. I tried switching to windows. Never made it. When I have to work with windows is hard for me.
My instalation (Archlinux) is more than 6 years old. In the mean time I changed 4 computers. I just copy pasted the system.
For Notepad++ have a look at Notepadqq.
Alexander.
-
Mostly Windows 7 here. I have a few Windows 8 laptops/etc kicking about because that's what they came with - works well enough so i can't be bothered converting them to 7.
I used to run Linux on my fileserver but I went back to Windows because it got annoying not being able to easily exchange harddrives between it and windows boxes.
-
One thing that is still missing from Windows is an always on top button. Nvidia Nview can add one, but only if the PC has a Nvidia GPU and it takes two clicks to turn on/off as opposed to the one in Linux that only takes one and works with any GPU. It also doesn't work on terminal windows for some reason - one of the biggest use cases!
Also, getting adb (Android debugger) to work on Windows (especially with custom/hacked target hardware) often involves installing custom drivers. Contrast that to Linux where adb never needs custom drivers.
My main PC runs Gentoo.
-
your twisted interpretation makes you look just like an idiot.
Actually, it makes him sound like the legal departments of most largish companies that produce proprietary SW who have studied the matter. :-(
-
@NiHaoMike
Been there, done that. I also use it for terminal windows, particularly when connected to several servers at once.
Attached is a program I wrote a long time ago that does exactly that - not as easy as adding a button to the windows, but it works and it also allows you to change the transparency of the window in question (another useful thing when you have many connections opened).
Edit:
1) If SHIFT is on when you start dragging the target, it won't try to locate the parent window.
2) If CTRL is on when you start dragging the target, it will hide the window.
-
Sabayon Linux (a binary overlay on Gentoo) with a KDE desktop. Full-time at home and at work.
I used to occasionally boot a Windows VM for various things and dual boot for games but have pretty much entirely eliminated that at this point. With Steam now working on Linux my infrequent gaming needs are more than satisfied, and for everything else I mostly was using open-source software that works better in Linux from the start.
-
It also doesn't work on terminal windows for some reason - one of the biggest use cases!
Huh? Window layering position is handled by the window-manager, unless something interferes. This is very odd.
It might be your terminal emulator -- what are you using? xterm, rxvt, gnome term, kterm, sakura, ... ?
-
It also doesn't work on terminal windows for some reason - one of the biggest use cases!
Huh? Window layering position is handled by the window-manager, unless something interferes. This is very odd.
It might be your terminal emulator -- what are you using? xterm, rxvt, gnome term, kterm, sakura, ... ?
For some reason, Nview doesn't put the extra button on either Powershell or the classic shell. And neither let you expand the width by resizing, only by editing the preferences. Fortunately, that's only a minor annoyance unlike the lack of an always on top button.
On Linux, I use Yakuake so the terminal window just appears and disappears by pressing F12.
-
Ah - yakuake has to do its own magic to make it 'slide down' from above, which probably involves taking over some of the control your window-manager has. If you can't even see the 'always on top' button or title bar it's because this application has problem hidden it for extra quakey authenticity.
-
Windows 7 here. (Not touching Windows 8.x with a 10yard pole).
However there is one requirement: Total Commander. Place me in front of a Windows box without Total Commander, and i am lost and frustrated. ;D
VMs for everything else i want to poke a finger at like Gentoo or Ubunt-uhh. Some years ago for some iOS-related work i also ran Mac OSX in a VM (and thereby violating Apples T&C, yay!) but haven't used it ever since.
I run a NAS with FreeNAS, so technically i also use FreeBSD.
Oh, and then i also have a smartphone with a smartphone OS for smartphoning...
-
:-+ and +1 for total commander. I have been using it for years and can't imagine a computer without it. It is even installed on my company computers.
-
Total Commander alternative: FreeCommander.
-
Total Commander alternative: FreeCommander.
There are a number of different orthodox file managers out there.
But being a user of TC for about 18 years (oh god, i get old :o ), i have not met an alternative that rivals TC's keyboard-warrior slickness.
That doesn't mean that other file managers are not excellent on their own merits. But for daily use and with regard to efficient keyboard handling nothing out there (currently) beats TC on the Windows platform.
-
Windows 7 here. (Not touching Windows 8.x with a 10yard pole).
However there is one requirement: Total Commander. Place me in front of a Windows box without Total Commander, and i am lost and frustrated. ;D
On Linux I can't do without Midnight Commander ^-^
-
Midnight commander is also my friend :)
-
I can't do without Midnight Commander
Interesting. I feel about the same way about a unix shell (and standard cli utilities: things like "find" and "grep") One of the reasons I like my Mac is that it comes with "bash", a full set of unix CLI commands, and "easy" access to most of the CLI commands that might be missing. (nominally, I have a preference for tcsh, but I've mostly given up on it and accepted that eventually bash can be convinced to do my bidding.)
-
Windows 7 here. (Not touching Windows 8.x with a 10yard pole).
However there is one requirement: Total Commander. Place me in front of a Windows box without Total Commander, and i am lost and frustrated. ;D
+1, sometime I think I use Windows just because there is Total Commander there.
-
... Total Commander. Place me in front of a Windows box without Total Commander, and i am lost and frustrated. ;D
+1, sometime I think I use Windows just because there is Total Commander there.
I'm in the this club as well gents ;) TC is a must on Windows (twin panel, queue copy commands, dir compare, zip/unzip, crc compute & check, plus your own shortcuts, ALL IN ONE PLACE).
Although I must say that I got to like Linux command line as well...