I always find it interesting to get current demographics on these sorts of things
You can put more than 1 vote in, if you wish
Printable View
I always find it interesting to get current demographics on these sorts of things
You can put more than 1 vote in, if you wish
Currently XP but switching to Vista in the next couple of weeks.
I've got a triple-boot system, Vista, XP, Linux (Ubuntu), and I use them the most in that order (descending)
I've got an XP laptop for most of my web browsing and music listening, and a Linux desktop for most of my gruntwork (dvd rips or whatever, most programming, etc.) I'm not getting Vista until at least a few service packs hehe.
Blah blah blah Vista, blah blah blah Linux...
I might actually be getting a MacBook when Leopard comes out - Yes I know heaven help me but Apple seems to be the only company who really 'gets it' when it comes to building laptops.
God you're getting paranoid these daysQuote:
Originally Posted by MSG
did I say anything about Vista? :p
Just keeping with tradition, Ynot. I do believe I've exhausted everything I have to say about Windows/Linux in this forum but couldn't bear to make a post that solely covered the dreaded Apple computer. Such a topic cannot be left alone in a post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
Voted XP, use Linux as well.
I like good operating systems, so I voted Mac OS :P I also use Ubuntu occasionally though.
I use Ubuntu only - I never want to use windows again, if I can avoid it.
I'm much more comfortable with Linux. Partly because its just what I'm used to, partly because it isn't insecure by default or a primary target for malware.
But also because I can understand it. I tolerate gaps in the field of GUI, wizards and proprietary compatibility because I'm much more confident that I know what's going on, or can find out. I'm not just curious; if something doesn't work I'm happier reading docs and prodding. As opposed to reinstalling from scratch because I can't find out what's wrong, relying on monopolistic companies to reveal the secrets and defects of their own products, or trying to reverse engineer what I've bought (let's see, if I press this button it doesn't seem to work; what happens if I twiddle this bit first...). I'm not claiming I read the source code of each program before I use it, just when the Source is Open, the software tends to be more open.
Wow I'm surprised at more linux than Mac
Xp here, nothing amazingly fancy but its pretty ok. I am reluctant to switch to vista as i have heard it eats system performance and lowers FPS in many games, mainly because a lot of cards don't have suitable drivers for vista yet. I'll probably upgrade my comp big time or buy a whole new one around the christmas period( cheaper:p), i need a gaming rig for SupCom, this is just a ok cop that can handle most games.
Windows XP
But my hubby loves the networking capabilities of Vista.
where are all the mac people? Come on...
Right here :okbyenow: - votedQuote:
where are all the mac people? Come on...
Very ironic thing, though: I came in here checking to see if anyone had a thread regarding a G5 Pro locking up after 8 minutes or so. Now before all you PC dorks go yelling "ooh, see, Macs crash too... weeeh!" - I'm expecting the issue to be likely hardware related, like overheating rather than the operating system. Still, this is the first time I've seen the clock lock up on a Mac since.... probably system 8.5 or earlier.
PS- aside from my mac at home, I also have a PC partitioned with Wndoze 98 and Linux (neither of which I use much, but it's there).
On my primary computer there's dualboot: Linux (Debian) and Windows XP. I use Linux only :). (Windows is kept just for the case of doing some school projects that must be done in proprietary software, e.g. Delphi and Access.)
My second (old P133) computer is running Deli Linux exclusively (but I've stated conversion to Cross Linux From Scratch).
Both computers are connected together via serial link - I like how simple is controlling the old computer from the primary one in Linux.
Switched to V|ista last night.
I'm currently on Windows Xp Media Center Edition, my old one has XP as well as Linux, don't use it though
let us know how it goesQuote:
Originally Posted by AdamA
It's awesome! So many useful features!! Not I have ironed out all the little teething problems, its running so fast. Re-Formatting the PC too has done it the world of good!!!
Media Centre with my xBox is awesome!
MSG is getting a FisherPrice. How sweet :)Quote:
Originally Posted by MSG
lol, So true. The only thing good about Mac is the bouncing icons. For everything else, Vista is better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
Except virusesQuote:
For everything else, Vista is better.
Food Fight!
More like Fool fight. :rolleyes:Quote:
Food Fight!
PS- update on that earlier issue I posted: Turns out all I had to do was hit this little button on the motherboard and all is fixed. They call it the Power Management button... I call it Apple's version of the "Easy Button". (God damn engineering geniuses).
Ynot, if you are going to include GNU/Linux in the poll, you might as well include other popular FLOSS operating systems to get more meaningful results. I would add Solaris (especially now that Java is GPL'ed) and FreeBSD to the list of options. Currently I use a mix of Mac OS X, Arch Linux, and FreeBSD. At school I use Windows XP Professional.
I very much doubt anyone's running sun solaris on their desktopsQuote:
Originally Posted by dsr
this isn't slash
as far as most people are concerned, there's 3 OS's
MS, Mac & Linux
let's not over burden them
Let me just begin by saying that I'll try to refrain from calling the OS "Linux" not only to please the FSF folks but also because it's really just a kernel. Since I don't refer to Mac OS X as "XNU" I think it only makes sense to refer to the OS as GNU/Linux.
Now that that's out of the way...
OK, we're in agreement; I just didn't want to sound biased toward FreeBSD. Don't include Solaris then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
We're in agreement here, too. Nor do I frequent Slashdot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
Who do you mean by "most people"? Most people that I know don't even know what an OS is, haven't heard of Mac OS X, and certainly haven't heard of FLOSS OS's like GNU/Linux. Those who are familiar with both Windows and Mac OS X but do not use GNU/Linux probably have not heard of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
Isn't the point of this poll to determine what OS(s) the techies on Dreamviews use? Your "Linux" option only concerns them if they use a GNU/Linux distro, which implies that they are more skilled with computers than the "most people" whom I have described above. DistroWatch indicates that FreeBSD is an extremely popular UNIX variant, even among GNU/Linux users. If someone browsing this thread doesn't know what FreeBSD is (or even GNU/Linux for that matter), he/she simply won't click on that button. Adding a FreeBSD option has no disadvantage, and it has two advantages. First, it provides more specific polling results than "Other" (which benefits those of us who are interested in what the results of your poll will be). Second, I'll be happy, so I'll shut up. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
P.S. You should also add an option for Mac OS X. The classic Mac OS is even more different from Mac OS X than XP is from Vista. If you are going to make the distinction between XP and Vista, I think Mac OS X should certainly get a mention, considering that it's been the main OS on the Mac platform for the last 6 or so years. At the very least please change Mac OS (which generally means up through Mac OS 9) to Mac OS X, since almost no one uses the classic Mac OS anymore.
No, linux can be used to refer to the linux kernel or a unix-like OS called linux.Quote:
because it's really just a kernel
Pyro: "Linux" is used to refer to the entire unix-like OS, but that doesn't make it any more accurate or justifiable. It originally referred to the kernel and much of the rest of the OS orthogonal and not specific to Linux. GNU is a large part of it. KDE (desktop environment) and the X11 windowing system are examples of Operating System software which are specific to neither GNU nor Linux despite being commonly used with both.
The linux kernel is very important, because the GNU project failed to produce a viable kernel. But the GNU project predates Linux and was responsible for the idea, initial implementation and spread of Free Software. Referring to the entire operating system as Linux "can" be done, because it's convenient and seldom ambiguous. Linux really does refer only to the kernel. The name GNU/Linux is more accurate, and more useful e.g. in an article introducing the operating system.
...the thing is that "Linux" on its own is so convenient, and so more commonly used, that in order to promote the name "GNU/Linux" you need a really strong argument. Which there is... but both the argument and its very existence and strength are counterproductive in terms of getting people to take both the OS and the Free Software movement seriously.
IOW: GNU/Linux is a more accurate name for the operating system as a whole. Linux is really just the kernel (and a cloud of linux-specific tools). People can also use it to refer to the operating system as a whole, and I wouldn't say "there's nothing wrong with that", just that it wouldn't be useful to correct it.
a'course, one of the reasons for the lack of a single useful name for the OS is not just the diversity of the individual components. It's the diversity of the OS itself. If Ubuntu was the only Linux based OS, we could just talk about Ubuntu. But Ubuntu is based on another OS, Debian, which is completely different to and separate from Red Hat, etc. The lack of a single agreed name is a very natural consequence of the nature of the thing: Freedom is a synonym of Anarchy.
We could have a poll :-). I think the splash made by Mac OS X is such that, in general usage "Mac OS" refers to OS X. E.g. awareness that several recent features of Windows were seen in Mac OS X first and arguably with better implementations, e.g. desktop 3D effects, desktop search. I think the assumption that "Mac OS" refers to the Classic versions is likely to be confined to longtime members of the Mac community - because, as you say, no-one uses it any more.Quote:
Originally Posted by dsr
Pyrofan, sourcejedi is right. Linux is the name of a very good FLOSS kernel. OS distributions that combine the GNU system with the Linux kernel are more accurately referred to as GNU/Linux (but Debian is the only mainstream distro that does so); however, as sourcejedi pointed out, "Linux" is used more commonly. Let's not make this thread a debate about which is the correct name. I just wanted to explain why I kept saying "GNU/Linux". I don't mind if you want to call it differently.
sourcejedi, my first Mac ran Mac OS X, so I wouldn't consider myself a longtime member of the Mac community. Wikipedia's article on Mac OS refers to both Classic and Mac OS X, so I guess you're right (although Wikipedia also goes by "Linux" as the OS in most of its articles). If virtually no ones uses classic Mac OS, however, wouldn't it make sense for the OP to rename Mac OS to Mac OS X so that there will be no confusion?
BTW, I just want to throw this out there: I refer to both free software and open source software as FLOSS (free/libre/open source software) to avoid offending anyone (primarily RMS or ESR). GNU/Linux on the other hand makes more sense to me because it's basically the GNU OS with the Linux kernel (since Hurd took a bit too long to make :p). Sure you can install KDE or TeX and its higher-level document markup languages like LaTeX, but the core components of the system and what really defines the OS tend to come from the GNU project.
Ynot, getting back to the focus of this thread (or at least my original post), please add FreeBSD to the list.
You can't edit pollsQuote:
Originally Posted by dsr
I suggest you fork the thread :p
The fact that this is a Tech forum, I assume that most of us have to have fairly new computers for our jobs or (for those of us still in college) major. OS 9 is too old for any of that, it isn't even UNIX and no one I know even remembers how to program it.
No one uses a OS thats more than 2 or 3 versions out of date, there have been 5 versions of OSX. It'd be like using Windows 3.1 (which I still do occasionally :p)
Ynot, I didn't realize that ... *sheepish grin*
ninja9578, that would have been all the more reason to change Mac OS to Mac OS X. It would get rid of any ambiguity, and as you said, having a separate choice for OS 9 would not be necessary because it's so outdated. Nevertheless, it is an entirely different OS, so it might be worth a mention...
1. Vista has MUCH better secuity, and free antivirus will do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyrofan1
2. Don't be stupid! Going to freestuff.com or torrenting stuff is not a good idea.
Is this security through obscurity? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by webmaster
Triple boot Vista, XP and Linux... my Linux is broken though, and I can't bother fixing it.
The "best" feature of Vista's secuity is the god-awful UAC. It makes sure you can't do anything important, so malware can't either. I turned it off...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
I have 3 partitions, one C: for Windows XP MCE, one V: for Vista Home Premium, and Q: for my files.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Jerky
Why do you want Linux? If you have XP/Vista?
maybe he likes itQuote:
Originally Posted by webmaster
I have a microwave, gas oven and BBQ
I like to think of linux as more of a swiss army flamethrower with built in toasting fork.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
Maybe because it's better? It's faster, more secure, more stable, more flexible, more powerful (especially when using the command-line), and all the software is free (usually both libre and gratis). Oh yeah, one more thing: Windows can get viruses (not to mention spyware and all those other nasty goodies). Imagine a piece of technology getting sick. UNIX-like OS's are much better for regular computer usage IMO (and in that of almost anyone who has used a good distro and bothered to learn how it really works). The only real positive thing I can say about Windows is that it runs far more FPS games and MMORPGs than FLOSS OS's like GNU/Linux. Of course, you can always use Wine and WineX (the free source code version of Cedega) to play those few games that "only run on Windows."Quote:
Originally Posted by webmaster
Virus infection is a problem for both Apples and Windows-Based PC's. The problem is that since windows contribute to approximately 90% of the computer using market they are the easier targets since they create the most publicity.
Surely targeting *nix would create the greatest publicity, since the backbone of the internet runs on it
Have you heard of viruses taking down google / the stock exchange / military installations....
no, instead it cripples all the windows workstations in an insurance firm
First, whether or not viruses target Mac OS X is completely irrelevant to webmaster's question about why people would use GNU/Linux. Second, practically speaking, they don't. There have been two (to my knowledge) attempts at trojan horse attacks, but they required the user to decompress a metadata-preserving archive and manually execute the extracted file. Third, your argument that Windows is more popular and therefore a more strategic target has no justification. There are plenty of Windows users (often gamers who call themselves "hax0rs") who seem to have a sort of hatred against Apple products and who would love to write malicious code to attack Macintosh computers. And if you don't mind me broadening your claim to include GNU/Linux and other UNIX-like OS's, as Ynot said, the vast majority of web servers run UNIX derivatives--not Windows. Viruses that target UNIX-like OS's would be much more crippling to the economy and, therefore, more "strategic" (if rational thought can be ascribed to people deranged enough to write viruses).Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamA
Was that the proof of concept trojan, published about 6 months ago?Quote:
Originally Posted by dsr
I think it could only infect other files in the same directory as the virus itself, but I may be thinking of something else
I was thinking more about database servers in data-centres rather than web servers, but point still holds
Write a virus for IBM's AIX Unix to wipe out all data from an international bank
Millions of people suddenly have a zero bank balance - that'd make the papers
I seem to remember there being more than one, but yes to the main one I'm thinking of.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
Well, it could do whatever its creators wanted it to do, only restricted by the user's file permissions. I believe the trojan would spread to other computers via Rendezvous/Bonjour.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
Yeah, the point holds either way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
Gee, why would anyone crazy enough to write a malicious virus target a family of OS's whose exploitation would affect hundreds of millions of people?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
was just a crazy thought, don't read anything into it.....Quote:
Originally Posted by dsr
<_<
>_>
OK, I won't. :D
I'd love to see a major MAC virus take them all down, just to shut up all the people whose understanding of viruses is based entirely on the commercial where "fat pc" has a cold, and "unemployed arts graduate mac" doesn't get colds.
Mac virus.....no chance - especially now the kernel is BSD Unix
Software exploit - all too common, unfortunately
but chances are any malicious code explouts can only affect the buggy software itself, and not be able to affect the underlying OS or any other apps
OS exploit - there's been half a dozen exploits discovered in OS X itself
Eg. http://secunia.com/advisories/11622/
Software is software
mistakes happen
*nix isn't some magical entity that prevents stupidly written software from causing problems
But it does minimize the impact of software bugs and exploits
All it takes is one vulnerable process running as root....
That wouldn't work on a well protected system. A system that is vulnerable would be protected by OSX's security system called File Vault. Each user's files are encrypted and for every user the encryption is different (it's encrypted through the password.) Not even root can access these files, and when Leopard comes out everything will be backed up on a separate hard drive by Time Machine.
OSX is open source, if there was a vulnerability, one of the hard core geeks would have found it and offered a fix, just like Linux.
Afaik, only the kernel (Darwin) is open source
most of the OS components (Aqua, etc.) aren't
*edit*
Just found this
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...chitecture.svg
Doesn't matter if the files are encrypted. You can still delete encrypted files as root ;-)
FileVault is not "OSX's security system"; it's just a service that encrypts your home folder when you log out, and its only purpose is to prevent confidential files from being read by someone who steals your hard drive. FileVault takes up a ton of space on your primary hard drive, which sucks if you're using it on a laptop (and no one uses it on desktops anyway). Besides, FileVault doesn't encrypt your system files, so you'd be just as vulnerable to this hypothetical virus. And lastly, this virus or trojan could log input from the keyboard, so your password that protects FileVault won't remain secure very long.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
I'm sure everyone has the money to buy several external hard drives to continually back up all the data from their laptops, but I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
It most certainly isn't. The Darwin subsystem is open source because it was based on the source code for FreeBSD, and a few other components are open source (probably for similar reasons), but Mac OS X as a whole operating system is not open source. Eric Raymond cautions against using it ("Under Mac OS X [learning to become a hacker is] possible, but only part of the system is open source — you're likely to hit a lot of walls, and you have to be careful not to develop the bad habit of depending on Apple's proprietary code."), and you'll certainly never see an FSF member using Mac OS X.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
Skittles and milk... mmm
Oh right - on topic. Am I the only Windows user who has never ever gotten a virus (with the exception of the ishost/isearch shit that came as a result of running a 'keygen')? I've never ever used antivirus software in the 10 years that I've been on the internet. I used to use ad-aware before I realized it was all BS when all it turned up were about 700 "tracking cookies" every time I scanned. Average computer users (the stereotypical stay-at-home-Mom, the doesn't-know-much-about-computers-but-thinks-he-does-Dad, and the clueless Grandma) tend to think that connecting to the internet without any antivirus or firewall is one of the most unholy sins one could ever commit. However, from my personal experience, this seems to not be the case. Then again, I hardly ever visit sketchy sites looking to pirate software - I get all my shit through a middleman. I'm also careful as to where I get software, and never run random .exe's out of curiosity ...anymore. Anybody else have similar experiences? I'd like to hear from the Windows users themselves for a change, I've heard enough from the Digg sensationalists and Mac commercials.
Have been using Vista now for about 2/3 weeks and its awesome! Being a windows user I'm very impressed and echo the above comments I have NEVER had a virus etc on my PC - I run Norton Internet Security 2007 always keep it up to date and dont seem to have problems...
MSG
just out of interest
how do you know you've never had a virus
(generic name, read "any malicious infection")
contrary to any films you've seen, viruses don't generally advertise their presence
there's no screen corrupting into a skull with a slow menacing laugh....
By far the biggest problem at the moment, are Botnets
These compromised computers periodically check for instructions from the botnet operators
and then carry the instructions out
Usually, they secretly connect to an IRC channel
and instructions are sent in the form of special keywords to the IRC channel
This can be used to send spam emails, start a distributed denial of service attack, or whatever the operator wants
Suddenly there's thousands of machines, all across the globe, doing the operators bidding, all at the same time
All this usually happens without the owner of the compromised machine even knowing
Even if you have anti-virus & firewall software, you may not be protected
As rootkits can easily conceal what's really going on from the OS (and so any software running on that OS)
Anyway, a few links to news items recently
Botnet operation controlled 1.5m PCs
FBI: Operation Bot Roast finds over 1 million botnet victims
XP. I'm waiting until they fix all the bugs in Vista. I set up my father in law's computer that came with Vista. I like it, but had to install XP because the program he needed it for isn't supported by Vista yet. I do like Vista though.
Currently booting XP Pro for gaming and uTorrent. I get double the frame rates in XP vs Vista--but then, I've got 64 MB integrated graphics....
Anyway, also booting Ubuntu 7.04, Ubuntu Gibbon Alpha 1, Fedora 7 and Slackware 11 on my three PC's.
Overall, I prefer Linux to Windows, just because I've been messing with some bizarre hardware setups that Windows tends to balk at. Going to start a Beowulf cluster soon, my mom's school's selling off their computers soon. Two or three year old boxes, but they're going for $25 per tower (Pentium 4's, ~2.0 Ghz, 512 MB RAM), $10 per monitor (17" CRTs and a few 15" and 17" LCDs) and $5 for a keyboard/mouse. Needless to say, I'm not passing up an opportunity that good. They're battered, but fully operable.
Vista wont support the program, the program would require a driver/update depending on what it is :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Raven12
off topic but am i the only one missing the good ol DOS?
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snooze
If you'd have said Dr. Dos, however....
There isn't one available yet. I made boot disks with Vista, so whenever they do have one available, I'm switching it back over to Vista. The software company said it may take as long as 6 months.Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamA
Good point, but if you look hard enough, you can find them. I try to keep my startup programs list clean and at a bare minimum (using the classic msconfig->startup, and occasionally SysInternals Process Explorer, looking up unfamiliar processes). (Yeah it's a downside of Windows - making sure your computer doesn't get flooded with crapware, but I'd take this over typing apt-get install update -lkfasdfk chmod /dev/pca/ > /dev/urandom/ every time I want to change my desktop background any day). I can't stand computers that take 5 minutes to boot because their owners have all this crap installed. Ugh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
Yar, that's what the Beta was for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Raven12
Yeah, but there's not much to do in DOS nowadays, sadly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snooze
Im running windows xp
Please, please write one!Quote:
Originally Posted by Replicon
Oh, and what's up with the poll? 73%, 30%, 13%, 7%: doesn't add up to 100...
It thinks there are 52 voters, when there are really more. Administrators can doctor poll results, maybe this is the result of one doing that very poorly :p.
Either that, or there's a bug in the software and someone was able to hit 'refresh' and resubmit the post.
Well you could vote twice for people with multiple computers or dualbootQuote:
Originally Posted by Replicon
Mac OS X Version 10.4.9 (Tiger) and Windows XP.
I like Tiger more.
But doesn't it require you to be logged in, in which case it would base it on your userid?Quote:
Originally Posted by MSG
No I meant Ynot allowed multiple vote entries for this particular poll because some people run multiple operating systems. A few people voted twice, hence the numbers don't match up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Replicon
Me too. I think Macs are the best.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Toaster
Oh duh sorry, I forgot about that possibility (and I remember the checkboxes now from when I took it), thanks for the reminder *smacks self*Quote:
Originally Posted by MSG
In that case, the numbers are correct, and don't need to add up, yay!
I use Windows XP on my laptop, though it's a dual-boot system with Suse 10.0 Linux. I just can't get my screen rseolution to work under Suse, no matter what I try. Plus, this particular laptop's modem isn't supported by Linux, and since I'm stuck with dial-up internet, that pretty much cinches it.
I did put Suse 10.0 on my mother's desktop for her to use, since she was having serious virus/spyware problems with XP. It's also a dual-boot system, but we only use XP on it very rarely, and never to get online.
My old laptop ran Kanotix, 'cause it was ancient and Kanotix is fast. I miss it sometimes.
I use a Mac for most of my work, but I do use Windows XP and Fedora Core 7 to test and deploy applications that I build.
Sorry to be technical (i.e. picky), but Fedora Core 7 doesn't exist. Red Hat dropped "Core" after FC6, so it's just Fedora 7.Quote:
Originally Posted by bitness
Yes true. Very picky though... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by dsr
Vista has a circle instead of the start button :o
@Man of Steel:
I'm assuming you've tried editing your xorg.conf?
Tsen, yup, didn't help. I got nowhere, even tried some special app supposed to fix a problem with that particular graphics card, but to no avail.
But it's pretty much a non-problem now, since I've got a new laptop now, running Vista. I'll probably eventually dual-boot it with Suse or Kubuntu, as I'm not really terribly fond of Vista after the newness has worn off, but for now, it's cool. I'd like to try Gentoo, but I just don't think I have the tech know-how of Linux to attempt that just yet. Or ever will, in all likelihood. I hear it's a lot of work to set up, with the way it installs and such. Though it has been a while since I looked into it, it may have improved in ease of use by now.
Well, I like Linux quite a bit, but if it's on a laptop, to be honest I'd just stay away. MOST (but not all) modern Linux distros have power management issues that kill battery life. I'd just install XP for a laptop. Meh, that's just me.
Anyway, just got my new computer parts (mostly) today, so I'm putting together a new computer:
Antec Sonata III Case (w/ 500 Watt 80+ PSU)
Gigabyte P5-DS3R MoBo
Intel Q6600 Processor (OC'd to 3.2 GHz)
Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro Heatsink
2 GB OCZ Platinum PC2 6400 (OC'd to 1066 MHz)
BFG nVidia 8800 GTS 640 MB GFX (Will also be OC'd, but hasn't come in the mail, so I can't say how far I'll be able to push it for sure)
Barracuda 7200 RPM 320 GB HDD
Sony 18x DVD +/- RW
Sony 226BW 22" LCD
Not a really high-end build, but more than nice enough.
It'll run XP and Ubuntu initially, but I might install Vista later. Vista has DX10, but XP still has better gaming performance. I'd really like MS to port DX10 to XP, but that's not going to happen, since they're going to pump it for all the Vista market share they can get.
I learned something very sad about Ubuntu: The default installation CD doesn't include gcc, make, and all the standard dev stuff. What the hell is that??? I've got no problem apt-getting that stuff, but my friend ran into the following problem:
1) Her netork adapter wasn't being detected
2) She couldn't build it from source, since she doesn't have the dev packages to do so
Kind of chicken and egg there. The best she could do was to download the necessary packages separately, burn them to CD or something, install them manually, and go from there. That's kind of a serious flaw, and I've NEVER before encountered a linux distro that didn't come with those tools by default.
Try the Ubuntu DVD, it comes with some extra packages on the DVD. The CD contains all the basics, but lacks some of the packages. It is kind of stupid not to include make on the Live CD, though. Did you check to see if the package was on the CD, but not installed by default? I know ndiswrapper is included, but not installed by default. Not exactly user friendly, but, well, it IS still Linux, even if it's more user friendly than most distros.
Ah, you didn't buy SuSE 9.1 Home then. Two disks, a live CD and an install, and no dev tools. Now that was a bad decision (oh, theres the latest edition of the OS I've been using for free, and it's cheap too, why not reward SuSE). Idiots.Quote:
Originally Posted by Replicon
Mind you, theres no guarantee you'd get the dev stuff you need for any particular problem on a single CD. E.g. the average user more likely to benefit from however many megs of binary packages than a complete kernel source package which is either going to be superceded soon or is already a version behind Linus's kernel.
Oh, this wasn't for me. I'm with good ol' Debian right now :). I was just listening to a friend complain about it. While you can argue that the average user doesn't need that stuff, you can also counter-argue that the average user uses windows, and that the user who's tech savvy enough not to be scared of linux won't die from having those things there :).
Well, I don't have another copy of XP handy, and from what I"ve heard, Suse and Ubuntu/Kubuntu are the most laptop-friendly distros. I've ran Kanotix on an older laptop with no problems, but I realize that it'll be quite different with a newer system. I figure it can't hurt to give it a shot, though, and if I have compatability issues or whatever, I'll just stick with Vista.
Windows XP Professional Corporate with SP2 built in. No activation required and all Windows Updates work fine, including any authentication things.