New Ubuntu pains

[przyk]

All servers (meaning -> everything that is online),supercomputers and hackers use Linux

I know from personal experience that Linux is quite popular as a workstation operating system with physicists and mathematicians. One research group at my local university has Scientific Linux (a Red Hat based distribution maintained jointly by CERN and FermiLab) installed on most of its PC's (guess what's going to be processing the LHC's readout data by the way). Most of the "public" PC's in the Science faculty have Ubuntu installed (some dual boot with Windows XP, though you still usually see Linux running on them), and I've seen one or two Fedora boxes lying around. Most of the physicists who's offices I've wandered into were either running Linux or Mac OS X.

Linux is supposed to be an ALTERNATIVE to Windows

Well yes and no. Linux is what it is. "Yes" in the sense that some Linux distros are aimed at the "average deskop user" and at attracting current Windows users. But not everyone is an "average desktop user", so "no" because Linux is available as a free Unix-like operating system to those who want one (see the above comment for an example I happen to be familiar with). Unix is a family of operating systems with a history dating back to the late 1960's, and in this regard Linux is an alternative to Solaris and other modern commercial Unices. Windows isn't Unix-like, so they're not competing in this area.

So if geeks want to spend countless hours trying to make Ubuntu work with an average monitor

If you've really had trouble getting your monitor working then you've been unusually unlucky. In Linux the usual hardware compatibility issues are with modems, wireless, webcams, and anything that needs complicated proprietary drivers. Problems using standard devices like mice, keyboards, and monitors are unusual.

At the end of the day you're free (or paying) to use whatever operating system you want. If you keep having trouble with Ubuntu you might like to consider experimenting with another distro - but consider your motivations for this. Linux is a different operating system than Windows with its own philosophy and way of doing things, and this will remain true no matter how much projects like Ubuntu try to dress it up to be Windows-user friendly. There's a project to create a free Windows clone out there. Ubuntu and Linux aren't it. The fact that Linux is "free" and sports "no DRM" aren't the primary advantages for everyone.

Red Hat was actually released back in 1994 so that is a shame not to be able to make a working distro...

Well I wrote my extended essay (which included some Java coding) and various other essays and lab reports under Red Hat 9 throughout my final year of highschool five years ago. It worked for me...

 

[ElectricFetus]

przyk,

OS X is just proprietary BSD, its unix underneath and can be used as such, although most apple cultist if they knew they could pull up a terminal in mac would cause their heads to explode.

I did not think a windows clone was legally possible, has microsoft gotten soft? Still great find.

 

[deicider]

Who the flying fuck cares about servers? I am not running a server, neither does the general population.

/stupid person talking bout computers.


When the FUCK did I said that linux is for general population?
If u had half of the brain of a monkey and read the whole post u'd understand what i meant was:
Linux is not for average shit head (like 95% of world) users who knows only to press the Start button.

But yes a server has different needs than a PC.

its true decider that server have different needs than an end user.

Thats was my point....servers need to be powerfull ,secure,quality etc and thats WHY they use Linux and NOT windows...again,when did i said that average person should use linux? -____-

I used key words Servers,Supercomputers,Hackers...that does this say about
linux?

It shows the difference between,that IF you want to do anything SERIOUS you USE linux and not the Gameboy OS -> Windows.

There a logic in this =
The more u say linux sux,The less knowledge of computers u have.

 

[Syzygys]

TLDR (too long didn't read)

The thread is about the new Ubuntu version's difficulty to install on desktops, not a playground for Linux fanboys (I hate any kind of fanboys) to defend Linux.

Thanks for understanding...

Instead of arguing here, why don't you work on an installable version?

 

[deicider]

download iso,burn on cd,boot,install,login,done.


May Elune be with you,she paid for ur sins.

 

[Syzygys]

It helps if you read the thread before posting. Ubuntu wouldn't even recognize the mouse on one of the desktops. It is kind of hard to mess around when the cursor doesn't move...

Now if you don't mind, I'll put you on Ignore. This thread reached its limits anyway...

 

[ElectricFetus]

TLDR (too long didn't read)

The perfect example of intelligence quotient right there!

 

[przyk]

I did not think a windows clone was legally possible, has microsoft gotten soft? Still great find.

I think it's legal as long as they don't outright copy or disassemble Windows code.

The thread is about the new Ubuntu version's difficulty to install on desktops.

Then by your own standards you're trolling your own thread when you make judgments like:

Linux is supposed to be an ALTERNATIVE to Windows, except it doesn't work most of the time.

Also, it is only worthy to use if it is actually BETTER than the original, otherwise it is just a toy for tinkering geeks.

What do you expect on a forum like this? Since there are examples of individuals and groups who happily use Linux as a workstation OS for serious work, you cannot reasonably expect to avoid being told about them if you start calling Linux a "toy for geeks". It's an invitation for anyone who disagrees with you to say so.

 

[Syzygys]

What do you expect on a forum like this?

I dunno. Maybe ADVICE how to fix the problems? But since the problems have been solved, the thread is ancient....

By the way I liked the 2 opposing views of 2 different Linux fanboys, one said it was for everyone, the other said it wasn't. Time to decide, although LIFE obviously has decided...

P.S.: I am just messing with the fanboys for the pains I had to endure with Ubuntu.

 

[ElectricFetus]

I dunno. Maybe ADVICE how to fix the problems?

yeah, yeah... aaaaah, yeeaaah, this is not the forums for that.

But since the problems have been solved, the thread is ancient....

By the way I liked the 2 opposing views of 2 different Linux fanboys, one said it was for everyone, the other said it wasn't. Time to decide, although LIFE obviously has decided...

P.S.: I am just messing with the fanboys for the pains I had to endure with Ubuntu.

Who said it was for everyone?

 

[noobi]

What an interesting read!!! . I found this thread looking to solve my FLASH problem which was the same as Syzygys .

I was able to easily get youtube running with videos well when I booted from the CD but after installing it properly I get the "Error: Dependency is not satisfiable: libnspr4-dev" when I try to install the adobe download.

I have an AMD Athlon XP 1800+ and 1gb of memory

I read the thread as it headed towards a solution but then went off the track somewhat. It seems that Syzygys only found a solution by loading a 64bit system

Any help would be greatly appreciated

 

[Syzygys]

Let's see if the fanboys can help you out..

I had 2 problems and after the wireless problem was solved, the Flash problem disappeared, so maybe they were related somehow, I was just happy I didn't need to deal with it so I didn't investigate it further...

 

[noobi]

Well I figured it out.. the experts seemed to just use synaptic so I went back to basics and reinstalled everything. I also selected all the repositories available in the synaptic package manager then I found the best download server and let it give me all the regular updates that it considered necessary.

Then I searched for "flashplugin" and found the adobe flashplugin then it loaded without issues. only then I went to youtube to test it... It worked first go

I think that the issue has something to do with not having all the updates and dependencies loaded after the install and also complicated by not having very good access to a server that had all the latest stuff. Perhaps the experts could add some wisdom to my theory.

Thanks all... I like what I see so far.. Maybe I will graduate to fanboy one day

 

[Syzygys]

When you reinstalled it, do you have now 2 versions on the computer? On my older laptop I think I have 3-4, because it doesn't get ride of the old/wrong version...

 

[noobi]

No I only have 1 copy installed.. It gives you the option to install side by side or erase everything and use the whole disk. This would have more tricky if I had stuff that I needed to keep on the machine.

 

[Syzygys]

Well, whatever I did, the Grub menuchoice gave me so many options that the Windows option is not even on the screen, I have to roll down to see it. I think one version is 3 choices and I have 3-4 of those.

Anyway, I am glad it worked out for you, and see how much help you got here from the fanboys? Zero....

 

[ElectricFetus]

Well, whatever I did, the Grub menuchoice gave me so many options that the Windows option is not even on the screen, I have to roll down to see it. I think one version is 3 choices and I have 3-4 of those.

Anyway, I am glad it worked out for you, and see how much help you got here from the fanboys? Zero....

You can edit your grub list, its just a text file.

 

[Syzygys]

It is that time of the year when I have finally forgot all the pains of the past and I am ready to take the plunge again.
So the new LL came out and right now I am testdriving it on my old desktop. If you remember I have a few requests of any OSs, easy to use, faster than the previous and maybe some new features.
Right now it is running from the disc but still faster than XP. I should probably run a cleaning program on XP or something, because it is getting slower. Anyhow, the speedtest gave more than twice faster speed, so that is a bonus. Ubuntu should be even faster from the HD. I might install it on the netbook, although that is extra pain, getting it on a USB stick, but maybe worthy to give it a try.
Well, I will mess around with this and see how I like it. A double boot install shouldn't be a problem.....

 

[Syzygys]

Of course, anyone who says installing Ubuntu is painless is an idiot.

Well, running it from the disc I had problems with the newer desktop. The cursor wasn't exactly where it was supposed to be, making it hard to click. So I tried it on the oldest desktop and it ran on it good, (no cursor problem) although there was a crash report.
Now i decided to install it on this but in a dual boot way. Well, guess what? I got stuck at the partition part and I couldn't pass that. I wanted a dual boot, but I guess I should have used Wubi. Anyhow, since this is an extra machine, I decided on the complete erase and now it is installing OK.
This machine is 8 or so years old and only has half a Giga memory but should be OK for test purposes. If I eventually decide to use it on the newer machine Wubi is the way to go...

 

[CheskiChips]

Of course, anyone who says installing Ubuntu is painless is an idiot.

Well, running it from the disc I had problems with the newer desktop. The cursor wasn't exactly where it was supposed to be, making it hard to click. So I tried it on the oldest desktop and it ran on it good, (no cursor problem) although there was a crash report.
Now i decided to install it on this but in a dual boot way. Well, guess what? I got stuck at the partition part and I couldn't pass that. I wanted a dual boot, but I guess I should have used Wubi. Anyhow, since this is an extra machine, I decided on the complete erase and now it is installing OK.
This machine is 8 or so years old and only has half a Giga memory but should be OK for test purposes. If I eventually decide to use it on the newer machine Wubi is the way to go...

Sounds like you're pretty inexperienced with computers.