Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 79522	2007-05-22 17:46:00	Why Linux Is Going Anywhere Fast....	SurferJoe46 (51)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
552223	2007-05-23 01:51:00	Thanks, it wasn't a name I was familiar with. Ummm....did you quote me instead of 'thingy by mistake???	allblack (6574)
552224	2007-05-23 02:13:00	Ummm....did you quote me instead of 'thingy by mistake??? Not really. I saw his answer to my genuine question just after I saw your response to my genuine question. I just happened to quote your reply. Thingy's answer was more helpful though.:) Being that I am only familiar with Linux but am not a Linux user, I don't know the name of every Linux distribution that is available.	winmacguy (3367)
552225	2007-05-23 03:06:00	Not really. I saw his answer to my genuine question just after I saw your response to my genuine question. I just happened to quote your reply. Thingy's answer was more helpful though.:) Being that I am only familiar with Linux but am not a Linux user, I don't know the name of every Linux distribution that is available. Ummmm....me thinks you may have misunderstood. I could be to blame for that. I wasn't attempting to answer your question. (If I don't know what a "distro" is, I'm unlikely to understand "etch:"...;) ). Nor was I being a smart-ass. My question was genuine, I quoted you merely because I formatted my question in the same manner.	allblack (6574)
552226	2007-05-23 03:21:00	Ummmm . . . . me thinks you may have misunderstood . I could be to blame for that . I wasn't attempting to answer your question . (If I don't know what a "distro" is, I'm unlikely to understand "etch:" . . . ;) ) . Nor was I being a smart-ass . My question was genuine, I quoted you merely because I formatted my question in the same manner . My apologies for any misunderstandings allblack . To get back to the original topic, if Linux can be kept simple, user friendly and sexy, it will make great gains in the market place .	winmacguy (3367)
552227	2007-05-23 04:04:00	if Linux can be kept simple, user friendly and sexy Sounds like the ideal dating material :thumbs:	Shortcircuit (1666)
552228	2007-05-23 04:31:00	Sounds like the ideal dating material :thumbs: Might be why people who use them like Macs so much. As for females, well found my soul mate about 5 years ago so now I have the best of both world's. Maybe MS could learn a thing or two.	winmacguy (3367)
552229	2007-05-23 04:52:00	For Linux to really take off and get mainstream acceptance it would have to be cut down to ONE version that had a modern simple GUI with a plug and play setup that was easy to use for mum and dad consumers, KDE is a user friendly GUI, so gnome, if your used to a mac . But i won't agree with one distro . Some are designed for speed, some work on machines that have been written of as doorstops, some are designed to be slick, and some are designed more for use on a server . The big thing with the variety is that that is how it is developing so fast . each variety or distro represents a new set of ideas . as each set of ideas gets tested, some last, and some are made obsolete . You can of course choose a standard install of one of the few major distros, or choose what apps you want component by component . I chose Debian4 (etch), and typed "apt-get install (program name)" to get the extra apps that didn't come with the standard network install . Guys shouldn't forget that women are smart too . I was going to say "like our Jen?", as an example . However putting aside gender issues, there is an alarming assumption that you have to be smart to be a Linux user, and quite frankly, you don't . A modern Distro, running KDE or similar is as user friendly as windows, and a lot more likely to still be working a year down the track, even with the kids using it and clicking on anything without a care .	personthingy (1670)
552230	2007-05-23 05:14:00	KDE is a user friendly GUI, so gnome, if your used to a mac. But i won't agree with one distro. Some are designed for speed, some work on machines that have been written of as doorstops, some are designed to be slick, and some are designed more for use on a server. I was going to say "like our Jen?", as an example. Aside from having a server version of Linux, why have more than one version of "home user" Linux considering the amount of people who are bewildered and confused by the excess amount of "choice" from all the Vista versions? If you want to have a fully customizable version make it the server version rather than the "home user" version. Mac only has OS X in one size that fits all needs with an additional Xserve if you need it. As long as Linux only serves to appeal to the small "tech geek" part of the market it will never catch on with the limited knowledge user base of the home market. Linux's greatest strength is also it's achilles heel, the fact that it is seen as a totally customizable OS (if you know how) is what puts 95% of home users off using it. This is where Mac has its strength in that the Unix Terminal is there if you want to play with it, but other than that it has a family friendly UI with simple plug and play with the terminal out of site. As for Jen:thumbs: put her out there on a few banner ads or podcasts or something :)	winmacguy (3367)
552231	2007-05-23 06:08:00	. . . . . . . . . . Mac only has OS X in one size that fits all needs with an additional Xserve if you need it . Is OS X truly "one size that fits all"? Would it run well on a machine that is 10 years old, and not the flashiest of it's time? Our network here at cave-personthingy is made mainly of junk, and Ziggy's toys are often unable to run the latest greatest red-racing striped version of what's out there . He has had tremendous success reincarnating machines to something that runs well by modern standards by using "puppy Linux" which was designed to be as light as possible, and yet still have most of the features we might expect . If someone would ask me "What is the best Distro?" i would ask them what they want it for before offering my opinion . Main considerations are purpose, and machine grunt .	personthingy (1670)
552232	2007-05-23 06:14:00	Is OS X truly "one size that fits all"? Would it run well on a machine that is 10 years old, and not the flashiest of it's time? 10 years might be stretching it a bit but I have seen 10.3 running(chugging) on G3 iMacs (circa 1998). My point being that if you want Linux to succeed and multiply you must first find out what it is the easiest setup for the most people to use most of the time by chucking out what you don't need or could do without and just give them what is most usable and put that is some clean sexy packaging designed to appeal to the mass market. Make sure that the consumers also have access to plenty of online or instore support too. This is where Dell stuffed up and Apple is currently succeeding. People have asked me which version of Mac would be the best for them as they are assuming that each Mac machine has a different version of the OS (like MS). I tell them that there is only one version that comes with everything bundled in it like the iLife stuff. They sometimes take a while to get their head around this concept as it sounds too easy. Don't forget that unlike MS, OS X was virtually written from the ground up on a clean sheet of paper so it doesn't carry any of the legacy OS9 code hamper its performance during day to day tasks.(all other factors and conditions not withstanding).	winmacguy (3367)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7