Thread: Which Operating System do you use at home?

Today, I migrate from ubuntu to Kubuntu. I think, KDE is looks more pretty and it's more comfortable, than Gnome.


Really, not bad Though, Windows Aero is little better.

Windows 7 pirated of course! I would be using Ubuntu if it was supported by America's Army 2 game.

Originally Posted by zzc

Today, I migrate from ubuntu to Kubuntu. I think, KDE is looks more pretty and it's more comfortable, than Gnome.

KDE vs. Gnome - another holywar But I use XFCE (Xubuntu) so I don't participate.

Originally Posted by Johanna

The thing is Robin, I know Windows inside out, from my days as a programmer. I feel in total control and there is nothing I can't do. But on Linux I would be a real noob!

Really? Total control? This is the first time I have heard (or read) anyone say that. I mean, the last time I felt in control was with Windows 3.11 where there still were only text files like win.ini and system.ini to worry about. The moment they introduced the registry I knew that control was being wrested away from me, and it's been going downhill ever since.

Here's an example: how would you solve that? One XP computer in our company suddenly lost the ability to display the graphical login manager. Repair installations from the CD would not help. There was no way at all to log into the computer because even logins to the shell only required going through the graphical login manager. We were reduced to reinstalling. I feel that 'control' in Windows increasingly reduces to 'restart, reboot, reinstall' as the only sequence of steps for finding solutions.

Now with Linux, I still agree there is a whole lot I don't know about the system. But I get the impression that I can find that information if I need it. And that's the difference for me: if I encounter a hard Windows problem I get the impression that Windows keeps me from solving it. If I encounter a hard Linux problem I know it's just my lack of knowledge which keeps me from solving it. I can do something against my ignorance, but I can't make Microsoft create an administrable operating system.

I also was a total Linux noob in 2003 with 13 years of Windows experience under my belt back then. And it was frustrating initially, though most problems I had back then no longer even exist today. Linux develops much faster than Windows. Today I know more about Linux than about Windows, and I get the impression that I even know more about Linux than there is to know about Windows. Administering Linux is like ruling a country, administering Windows is like controlling the inside of a cage.

I love pretty GUIs... what's the best looking Linux available? Can I make it super pretty and customise everything? I use Stardock on my Windows 7 and it looks great.

You can use almost any GUI and customize it so it looks nothing like what you started out with. And it has more eye candy than Windows and Apple combined if that's what you like. Windows that burn down on closing or fold themselves like a paper plane and fly off? Can be done. Just search for 'compiz' on youtube and you can see many of the possible effects.

But I agree that the choice of GUI is more fodder for flame wars I personally prefer XFce because it is less bloated than Gnome. But I like Gnome better than KDE (3 or 4). Enlightenment also looks nice. And you can add any GUIs you like to any distribution and for example use Enlightenment only on Fridays.

One of the things I love about Linux is the lack of restrictions. I used to run a Gentoo system, which is a distribution which is highly comparable and gives you the option to compile everything specifically for your system, but the time spent compiling and tweaking became too much for me, so these days I just take (X)Ubuntu and tweak that.

Robin

Originally Posted by bitpicker

I used to run a Gentoo system, which is a distribution which is highly comparable and gives you the option to compile everything specifically for your system, but the time spent compiling and tweaking became too much for me

Last time I was compiling Gentoo it took me nearly 26 hours. It was like compile... wait for EBuilds... compile... wait for EBuilds... ))) but I know 1 thing that Linux lacks and will never have - Windows PowerShell. Dear Gods, I love this thing!

P.S. And about reinstalling Windows - I've never re-installed it after the initial install. My old XP was installed in 2004 and it runs still.

I took three days or so setting up my original Gentoo.

But don't let any Windows user hear that you are praising it for having a command line again! I don't know what's good in Power Shell what's missing in bash (as in: "I really don't know because I never looked at it", not as in "it puzzles me"), but if I had a penny for each Windows user who said "I'd use Linux if it weren't for the command line, it's a good thing you don't need that in Windows!" I could pay someone else to learn Russian for me!

And here's an article which I found in my RSS feeds today which sums up some things about Windows nicely in my opinion:
http://linuxcritic.wordpress.com/2010/0 ... seriously/

My pet peeves are the first and the last. Especially the last. I give lectures on IT security, and of my four or five hours talk I could make a single hour if Windows were designed securely. But it is and always will be a single-user, single-computer, single-task operating system with user management, networking and multi-tasking tacked on much later. A FrankenOS. Like no matter what car parts you weld onto a bicycle, it'll always be a rikshaw at best, never a car.

Robin

Originally Posted by bitpicker

I took three days or so setting up my original Gentoo.

But don't let any Windows user hear that you are praising it for having a command line again! I don't know what's good in Power Shell what's missing in bash (as in: "I really don't know because I never looked at it", not as in "it puzzles me")

The pipeline of Bash transfers only strings while the pipeline of Powershell transfers objects. And you have the whole might of .Net Framework to process them as you see fit. I can even script a GUI with it. These are the main differences.

While I'm not sure I understand the benefits of objects here, scripting a GUI is possible with bash as well. Not in-built, but .NET isn't exactly an in-built feature either. And then there's PERL.

Robin

Originally Posted by bitpicker

While I'm not sure I understand the benefits of objects here, scripting a GUI is possible with bash as well. Not in-built, but .NET isn't exactly an in-built feature either. And then there's PERL.

Robin

The main advantage of objects is that when you use DIR command (or LS for those who feels more accustomed to *nix commands) you receive not merely a text list of files, but a collection of IO.FileInfo objects and you can access any property of each.
For process list you also receive a collection of System.Diagnostics.Process objects, not merely process names and you can also access any property (and you can sort/filter by any property value even if it won't be shown on screen).
I find this particularly convenient.

Would that be something like editing info in /proc and /sys? Like for instance I can switch off swapping by setting swappiness to 0?

I'm no bash guru at all, but I think you can access files and their properties and I/O, processes etc.using bash as well. They might not come in object-oriented notation, but as in *Nix everything is essentially a file I should think that's possible.

Unless of course I just don't understand what you mean there, which is entirely possible.

What I used to find confusing when I worked with Linux last time were those subtle changes between the distros. Like, you look up a recipe for doing something, and try to apply that in your distro, but it turns out it always should've been done slightly differently. Perhaps, it's not the same now with the modern distros, not sure..

Oh, that is still possible. All the distros have specific things they do like only they do them. Some are even outright alien if you come from a relatively standard compliant distro. But that's a good thing, too. If distro X does not work well with your computer there's always another one to try.

Robin

Originally Posted by Johanna

Pokerstars plays in Win

I have a certain professional insight into this, and I'd say that unless you are a VERY good poker player, do not play poker online! PokerStars is particularly devious at finding new and clever ways of parting you from your money. I work with some people who used to work there and I have heard all about their unscrupulous methods which are notiorious... Btw, I believe the owners are Russian-Israelis.

Please do tell.

Scott

[...]

Originally Posted by Hanna

[...](L.)

Thank you for the response. I don't get why a poker site would have to cheat. Poker is played against other players, not against the house. They get money for every hand dealt. Right now I play there with free money but if I venture back to playing with real money I'll keep your post in mind.

Scott

I am not kidding Scott; if you are going to be involved in that business, work for the house and do not gamble yourself. As business ethics and morals go, these businesses score VERY low, although a few are strictly regulated and work like normal businesses.

I am not saying they cheat in the games, they don't. But they get money from every game you play. Most of their money in Poker, they make is from "side games" the games you see next to the "main" games. Keep track of what you spend and you will see how you lose, lose and lose. Any winnings are marginal and that's how these sites are set up to be.

Gambling is addictive and can really ruin people. There are good reasons it's banned in many countries. Those countries that allow it do it because they can tax the businesses to kingdom come.. and that's an opportunity that is too good to miss. Or they are just corrupt countries. The providers respond by registering the main companies in places like Malta, Alderney, Gibraltar and Curacao.

The house ALWAYS wins. I done a contract for a company like that in the past, and I may or may not be involved in that business right now.

The only way you could make any money was if you found a fool-proof way of cheating the house (this is very unlikely and would soon be detected anyway) or you got incredibly lucky your first time on the site and then never gambled again.

That said, the technology is VERY cool; these types of sites and the software behind them are very cool and the business logic surrounding the operations is very interesting. The industry pays their operational staff as well as banks for equivalent jobs, but require only minumum formality and BS that you can expect at a bank.

But make no mistake, these companies are in it for one reason only: To get as much money off you as they can before you realise you need to quit gaming.

Finally, PokerStars is an Israeli company and their biz in the US is in a very grey area and probably is not legal at all. They should not be allowing Americans to play on their site since it breaks US laws.

Gambling is prohibited in Russia either. BTW, Johanna, why have you changed your nick? I'm not saying I don't like the current version of your name, but I'm rather accustomed to the old one .

Originally Posted by Basil77

Gambling is prohibited in Russia [s:272nugm2]either[/s:272nugm2] too. BTW, Johanna, why have you changed your nick? I'm not saying I don't like the current version of your name, but I'm rather accustomed to the old one .

http://masterrussian.net/mforum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=21147

Originally Posted by Basil77

Gambling is also prohibited in Russia [s:ujx7cia9]either[/s:ujx7cia9]. BTW, Johanna, why have you changed your nick? I'm not saying I don't like the current version of your name, but I'm rather accustomed to the old one .

Originally Posted by Basil77

Gambling is prohibited in Russia either. BTW, Johanna, why have you changed your nick? I'm not saying I don't like the current version of your name, but I'm rather accustomed to the old one .

You meant that it IS prohibited, right?
That's a good thing, I think. That will keep some people away from it.

But I heard about a large European gaming house that wanted to establish itself in Russia ca 2000 or so... The director went there to look into it, but ran into some real gangsters who told him to clear off and never return to Moscow!

If you ask me, Russia ought to ban it (seriously) or tax these business really harshly.

Plus; many of the major gaming software houses do their software development partly in Ukraine and Russia.