Readers' Comments

Reader Comments on Aardvark Daily 23 January 2003
Note: the comments below are the unabridged submissions of readers and do
not necessarily reflect the opinions of the publisher.
From: Chris
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Linux, Macintosh, OS2

Having been a techo for some time, spending hundreds of weekends
installing, reinstalling, reinstalling, reinstalling and finally
getting servers and desktop PC's to work, I consider myself fairly clued
up on the good ole Windows (from v3.0 -> XP) and recently downloaded a
copy of Mandrake 9 Linux from the web. OK, so it's 2GB and takes up 3 CD's
(XP still crams onto one!) but it includes all that great software one
usually has to download anyway. So, I installed on a PIII-500 with 512MB
RAM and 32MB AGP video. The installation was a breeze, and although I had
no clue which desktop to use, I stumbled through with no errors. BUT it
runs like a pig. Not just slow, but very very very slow. On several
occasions I thought it had crashed, but was just taking its time! So,
speed (or lack of it) aside, I played around with it and determined that
for those of us who have spent the last decade or more in the Microsoft
camp, it just doesn't stack up. From the moment it's installed, it just
gets more and more confusing and incompatable. From a corporate
perspective, it's a nightmare - incompatibility and usability differences
between apps makes support almost impossible, so it's either ALL Win or
ALL Linux. Now, if someone like me cannot easily make the transition, and
corporates can't migrate nicely across, then Linux will remain in the same
boutique market as the humble Mac. A dedicated and vocal few who will
swear by their machines, but will nonetheless be overshadowed by the real
world of PC's and Microsoft. Having ruffled a few feathers there, I'll go
on to say that the Mac is a great machine, but not for a corporate
network, and Linux is a great OS, just not for the average or corporate
user. Each has it's market, but the PC and Windows has the biggest chunk
of it, and will continue to do so for some time yet. You don’t have to
like it, but please, stop whinging about it all the time!!!!




From: Tim Hill
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Linux support

The most intersting point in your article on linux being
too hard is you reference to there being support services
for microsoft products and none for linux.

 What you have touched on is an area that I would
like to enter commercially. I had belived that providing
support for linux systems in domestic and commercial use
would be a good way of working around the shortage of work
in IT currently and give me an income I could live off.
 This has proved more dificult that first expected
as I'm not as knoladgable about setting up a business i
would like, and have had great dificulty in getting the
information and assistance I need to build a business.
 This is not helped by being told by WINZ that I
was not allowed to do such an activity while unemploied.

 While I still would like to follow this path, I
see 3 problems preventing me. A lack of resources to start
a business, Lack of knoledge on setting up a business and
How to tell people I exist.

 The need for a completely new business is from, as
I belive, the lack of interest of any existing IT support
company in providing those services. it would appear that
any IT department that has examined linux as an
alternitive to windows has done so using their own IT
staff.




From: Richard Busby
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: First time Linux installs

Hi - you were asking for comments on Linux install
experiences.

The biggest problem I've found is the lack of coherent
documentation. Man pages are all very well, if you know the
name of the command you're looking for and understand the
syntax.

The problem comes when I want to know something general -
Under Windows I can ask the (admittedly annoying) help
file. Under Linux, I find I'm stuck searching the net for
documentation that more often than not pertains to much
older versions of the OS.

I know all geeks hate documentation, but Linux could do
itself a big favor by getting someone to maintain up to
date doco.

I guess the biggest problems are deciding on a place to
keep it, and getting everyone else to remove the older
chaff.




From: Paul
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Linux for newbies

At the beginning of last year I decided I was going to
install linux on a spare machine I had just got a hold of. A
mate and I recieved two identical boxes, his had more ram
than mine, but appart from that they were identical.
The first step was -which distrobution?
I had heard of Mandrake, Redhat and Debian. But I was soon
to find there were many, many more out there.
I decided (through discussion through IRC channels) that
since the machine didn't have a lot of CPU power (233MHz) I
would go for a cut down install and non GUI interface. I
chose Slackware.
Since I had no previous experiance with command line
interface in Unix it was a tough battle to get installed and
configured. The machine has since been set up as a simple
Samba file server and has been running for over 6 months
without needing any attention.
It took me about 2 weeks to get it working so I could use it
using Slackware, it took my mate about 90 minutes to get his
one running windows 98 the way he wanted it. His one needs
rebooting every now and then and is not entirely stable.

I moved from Slackware to Redhat late last year (the old
machine is still running Slackware) as the distro of
personal choice, although I have Mandrake and Debian on CD
to try out, I like the ease of instillation of RH.
Linux is not withought it's problems, but I would say that
linux has come a long way in recent months to making it much
easier to install aplications.
Right now I'm in the process of installing Peanut linux onto
an older machine so I can have a play with another distro
and will probably configure it as a firewall in the end.

Linux isn't hard, it's just different, but I wouldn't
reccomend it for a computer user that get's a little scared
every time an error message pops up on the screen.

I have used windows since 3.11 and have XP Pro now on a
fairly powerful machine, but I'm afraid XP may be my last
Microsoft OS that I use, as it is I only use XP for gaming
now, everything else seems to be easier to do on Linux, and
the best thing is it's free.




From: Craig Gerritsen
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: My linux desktop trials

As a continuous dabbler in Linux, I keep finding it much
easier to go back to windows when I hit a brick wall.

I first tried last year with mandrake 8.1, which with a LOT
of hassles I managed to connect to my ADSL internet
connection using a speedtouch USB modem. Then I upgraded to
8.2 and it would no longer work - so i gave up and stuck
with what worked - windows 98.

The graphical configuration tools did not have as much depth
as in windows and did not allow as much control as in
windows - in order to really get things to work properly I
would have had to gain a much better understanding of linux
even to be able to describe the problems accurately for a
linux bulletin board to be able to help me.

Th most frustrating example was that I could never get a CD
to play - I could rip a CD and play the mp3s, yet I could
never get it to play directly - even though sound seemed to
work, and I could view the CD. I couldn't even narrow down
what was causing the problem.

Most recently I have tried a new nz based distribution
called Yoper ( www.yoper.com ). It looks great, but I
couldn't get the screen resolution to change and the advice
on the forum on how to dual boot resulted in my not being
able to access windows! I did get windows to work again, but
I'm starting to realise that being able to get work done on
windows is the result of a lot of learning and familiarity
with its workings. In order to be productive on linux it may
take a bigger investment of time and energy than it is
worth. I may find myself doing it anyway - but I'm certain
it will frustrating at times down the road.




From: thing
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: linux for joe average

While yes I agree, Linux is not that easy, is XP? having
installed Debian and RH on boxes then done win2k for dual
boot I can but say Ive found linux considerably easier than
win2k to install.

Now the wizards in XP/win2k do mean installing new packages
are easy, until things go wrong and then your in the deep
doo doo. While Linux might need more knowledge to get stuff
installed, that I would contend would/could hold you in
good stead in the future.

For instance I have installed Samsung Contact (HP openmail)
on a box and found its install routine faultless, so it can
be done on linux, just lazy software makers not really
supporting the linux market whole heartedly.

The issue you raise is quite valid, I suspect Linux is not
a mainstream consumer product OS, and as applications and
demands get bigger and heavier it might not ever get there,
because the bar gets raised beyond joe average.

Does joe average service his own car?

Maybe its better that a "computer" comes as a dedicted
package and the OS is never seen, we end up with a digital
entertainment centre and it just doesnt matter.




From: Peter Harrison
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Linux on the Desktop

Hi Bruce,

First a disclaimer: I am the president of the NZOSS, so am
not exactly impartial when it comes to Linux and open
source. I will try to stick to the facts.

Over a year ago now I switched my Desktop PC to Red Hat
Linux. At the time I had several important business
applications on Windows, and was scared to move to Linux
because I was not certain that Linux had equal software.
Unfortunatly a virus infection on my Windows box forced my
hand, so I installed Red Hat 7.1 over the top of my Windows
98 install.

To my surprise every application I needed existed in the
default install of Red Hat except for one. My development
environment was Java, so I didn't have to port any code. The
only problem was my accounting system, which ran on Windows
only.

These applications didn't require any command line setup -
everything was installed by default, and easily found on GUI
windowing system that comes with Red Hat.

Dick Smith Electronics now feels so strongly about the
viability of Linux that it is selling preinstalled Mandrake
machines. These machines are perfect machines for connecting
to the net, word processing, spreadsheets, and business use.

Linux use is also moving into the mainstream. This Christmas
when I was at a friends wedding I was talking to a guy who
had just purchased one of the DSE Terminators, and was
really happy with it, despite being somewhat new to computers.

My primary client now operates only on Linux. Many companies
are sold on Linux, and are in the process of making the move
in a managed way, ensuring the impact of changes are
minimized. Other companies, such as Tait Electronics, are
satisfied with leaving Linux in the server room, and on the
occational PC of users who like using Linux.

The real issues now are training and support. The NZOSS will
be developing this infrastructure this year, with projects
to provide phone support via 0800 numbers, and training
programs from novice to fully qualified system
administrators. We will also be involved heavily with
education projects to teach people about the real practical
benefits of open source in all sectors of New Zealand. We
will also be involved in a effort to bring open source
businesses together in the spirit of cooperation that open
source is based.

2003 promises to be a good year for open source, as even in
the middle of a IT slump interest in open source systems and
solutions is growing.




From: mememme
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Linux

What can be done?
The only reason I still use Windoze is games.
When I can play games straight from the box on Linux then
I'll make the move.
Thats it.




From: Allister Jenks
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Rock & hard place

I reckon a seasoned Unix/Linux geek who had *never* been
exposed to Windows of any flavour would have a significant
number of problems getting any version of Windows to work
*how they want it to*.

I think "better the devil you know" would best sum up the
difference.

I've installed RH7.2 twice and the first occasion was a
nightmare simply because it did not like the monitor and
adapter I had (actually, I suspect the adapter was lying
about its capabilities).  The second occasion (same
machine, new adapter) was easy and simple.  That is, until
I tried to install a piece of software.

Here I see the main problem for Windows hacks is, in fact,
an advantage for those who know what they're doing.  I've
found up to 7 JVMs on my Win2K load at work, because each
piece of software that needs the JVM installs its own.
This happens with other resources as well.  In Linux, they
tell you what 'libraries' you need.  Consequently, the
downloads are a lot smaller, but you have *leg work* to do
in order to get the right stuff for it all to work.

Once you've had Linux up and running for a while, you'll
appreciate this feature.  When you're first starting it is
a pain in the neck when it takes a whole lot of searching
and dozens of download and install processes to get a
single app working.

Perhaps I'll just go find me an Acorn RiscPC.  Better than
Windows or Linux any day.




From: Grant
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Windows support

Funny thing that everybody assumes that Windows comes
with "all the support you need".  Try asking around and see
how many newbies have actually obtained support from MS.

As the guy who helps friends, family, neighbours with
computer problems, I can tell you that most people get very
little free support from vendors. Now that most PC packages
only come with restore CD's, typical phone support seem's
to consist of re-imaging the drive and losing all the
newbies stuff (newbies never have backups...)

What I have noticed is that now its getting harder to
simply 'borrow' copies of Windows/Office etc, more home
users are starting to weigh up the cost of there software
and are considering Linux/Open Office more than before.
Even more so after the common problems with virus / spyware
infections..




From: paul W
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Linux for the desktop

Over the past year I have tried various flavors of Linux
with the view of using it in a corportae LAN enviroment.
Impressions.  Linux is easy to set up for a single user  who
only want email, internet, Open Office.   However try and
integrate it to a Novell or M$ LAN and it becomes a real
pig. Tool hard for the average user.  I have about all given
up. Down loading Lycoris Linux  at present to give that a
try next week.




From: Chris Double.
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Linux on bootable CD

For those wanting to try Linux out without having to
reformat or repartition you can use a distribution like
Knoppix (http://www.knopper.net/knoppix/index-en.html).
Burning the iso file onto a CD will give you a bootable CD
that goes straight into a live linux system. Harware
detection is automatic.

It configured my ADSL, USB devices (including USB CD
writer) old graphics card and ran fine on a 333 Mhz PC.
Open Office and other productivity tools are included. The
filesystem on the CD is compressed giving you about 2GB of
tools on the CD.

It's great for working out how well your system will run
Linux.




From: my_turn
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Linux/Windows

As a programmer I am very familiar with computers in
general.  I am not a PC programmer though and so I guess
the familiarity is more along the lines of being able to
hazard "educated guesses" when things go wrong.
Anyway, I have been using Linux off and on for the past 5
years and I have to say it is not that tough.

But I would still never put it on my parents PC.

When things go wrong, you have to be prepared to guess and
research your way through a fault.

I now have three computers of various specs all running
RH7.3 happily.  Each of them are performing server type
tasks and not one of them has a GUI.

I have another machine running RH7.3 and dual booting to
Win98 and I can tell you now - the majority of it's life is
spent in Windows mode.  RH spat the dummy a while back when
I changed video cards, after downloading the Nvidia RPMs
and installing them, I still had to edit conf settings.  I
got it back up for a while then installed a new kernel and
now I am back to having no GUI cause X has barfed once
again on the video settings.

Windows on the other hand said "Oh, new video card.  Right
you are, Sir" and continued on it's way.

I spend 3/4 of my time on shelling into the other servers
in command line, but I do it from windows.  Linux has a
long way to go before being a stable desktop option for
everyone, but in the meantime, I think it's backend and
server market share will only grow.  Mail serving, web
serving, file serving and practically any other back end
service - that's going to be it's position for some time
yet I believe, even providing terminal services for windows
thin clients.
But not the desktop.  Until I can install it on my parents
machine with no fear, it will not be a desktop threat.




From: Maria Welborn
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Linux doesn't like my laptop

While i have had much success with liunx and now presently
FreeBSD as a server, especially to run the squid caching
web proxy to improve web browsing. I haven't had any such
luck with linux/BSD as a desktop OS.

My only machine these days is a compaq laptop, which
supports ACPI only and does not support APM at all and
presently the linux ACPI support is not even able to spin
down the hard drive or turn off the screen let alone
allowing stand by and hibernate modes. This cuts my battery
life from 3-4 hours running windows xp to 1 hour or
sometimes less running linux which is totally useless for a
student such as myself using the machine to take lecture
notes and do work at different places round the campus
where AC power is often not provided for student use.




From: thirdeye
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: YOS - mdae in new zealand

i've been a linux user for the past 5 years or so and my work has
generously allowed myself and my team to use our choice of OS. all of mny
colleagues, bar one, use linux fulltime at work; in fact we couldn't do
most of our work with MS products considerinbg how limiting they are. so i
would consider myself a fairly experienced linux user.

having said that, i completely agree with most comments on here that linux
is not as accessible as say windows or macs are (to a non-unix person).

in the past few weeks however i've started using a locally created linux
distro that is not only extrmely quick (it's compiled for 686 cpus and
above) but the support offered by their technical staff is something i've
not found before. and this is what i believe will set them apart from the
rest of the linux distros.

this distribution is called YOS, which stands for Your Operating System
and is available from http://www.yoper.com. it does require downloading
and burning an ISO image, but this is as complicated as it gets; they do
have a local mirror as well.

the installation is very simple (and fast, on my machine it took around 15
minutes) and once completed the system is blindingly fast and very
stable.

i'm very happy with the way my YOS box performs and the support i've
received from the yoper team has been great. this is simply the best
distro i've ever used, plus it's a kiwi distro!
Hit Reload For Latest Comments
Now Have Your Say