PDA

View Full Version : OT:PCLinuxOS Gnome, any users?



Pirschjaeger
10-09-2007, 03:41 PM
Yet another Linux thread. Time for some honest modding. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Normally I use Ubuntu but Bazzaah introduced me to PCLinuxOS. The only real issue I've had with Ubuntu was getting my mic to work on Skype. IIRC, I had solved the problem by removing my sound card and using the OSS audio drivers rather than Alsa. Not much of a solution since I paid for the Audigy SB. Believe it or not, Skype doesn't, or at least didn't work with Alsa.

I found that with PCLinuxOS my pc worked much smoother with the exception to "me" having to use KDE. Although KDE is popular, I found it just didn't suit my way of thinking. I prefer Gnome.

For the Gnome fans, the good news is a Gnome version of PCLInuxOS has been released and thanks to Bazzaah I have the download link. According to the reviews, many KDE users are quite happy with the Gnome version.

Has anyone here tried it? Were there any issues?

PClinuxOS Gnome (http://www.linuxgator.org/Gnome/gnome_page/gnome.html)

Fritz

The Top 12 Myths About Linux

Myth 1: Linux is too difficult for ordinary people to use because it uses only text and requires programming.

The truth: Although Linux was originally designed for those with computer expertise, the situation has changed dramatically in the past several years. Today it has a highly intuitive GUI (graphical user interface) similar to those on the Macintosh and Microsoft Windows and it is as easy to use as those operating systems. No knowledge of programming is required. This ease of use is evidenced by the fact that more and more people, including elementary school students and others with no previous computer experience, are starting to use it every day. Moreover, once people become familiar with Linux, they rarely want to revert to their previous operating system.

In some ways Linux is actually easier to use than Microsoft Windows. This is in large part because it is little affected by viruses and other malicious code, and system crashes are rare.



Myth 2: Linux is less secure than Microsoft Windows because the source code is available to anybody.

The truth: Actually, Linux is far more secure (i.e., resistant to viruses, worms and other types of malicious code) than Microsoft Windows. And this is, in large part, a result of the fact that the source code (i.e., the version as originally written by humans using a programming language) is freely available. By allowing everyone access to the source code, programmers and security experts all over the world are able to frequently inspect it to find possible security holes, and patches for any holes are then created as quickly as possible (often within hours).



Myth 3: It is not worth bothering to learn Linux because most companies use Microsoft Windows and thus a knowledge of Windows is desired for most jobs.

The truth: It is true that most companies still use the various Microsoft Windows operating systems. However, it is also true that Linux is being used by more and more businesses, government agencies and other organizations. In fact, the main thing that it preventing its use from growing even faster is the shortage of people who are trained in setting it up and administering it (e.g., system engineers and administrators). Moreover, people with Linux skills typically get paid substantially more than people with Windows skills.



Myth 4: Linux cannot have much of a future because it is free and thus there is no way for businesses to make money from it.

The truth: This is one of those arguments that sounds good superficially but which is not borne out by the evidence. The reality is that not only are more and more businesses and other organizations finding out that Linux can help reduce the costs of using computers, but also that more and more companies are likewise discovering that Linux can also be a great way to make money. For example, Linux is often bundled together with other software, hardware and consulting services. The most outstanding example is that of IBM, which has invested more than one billion dollars in Linux and is already making substantial profits from it.



Myth 5: Linux and other free software is a type of software piracy because much of it was copied from other operating systems.

The truth: Linux contains all original source code and definitely does not represent any kind of software piracy. Rather it is the other way around: much of the most popular commercial software is based on software that was originally developed at the public expense, including at universities such as the University of California at Berkeley (UCB).



Myth 6: Linux and other free software are a kind of socialism and they destroy the free market and intellectual property.

The truth: No, quite the opposite. Free software helps prevent software monopolies, which destroy the free market and result in high prices and shoddy quality. It does this by fostering competition among products and companies based on quality, features and service. Free software, which is also called open source software, is software that is free both in a monetary sense (i.e., it can be obtained by anyone at no cost) and with regard to use (i.e., it is permitted to be used by anyone for any purpose, including modifying, copying and distributing). Interestingly, some of the harshest critics of free software actually incorporate it into some of their products.



Myth 7: There are few application programs available for Linux.

The truth: Actually, there thousands of application programs already available for Linux and the number continues to increase. Also, the quality of these applications is typically as good as, and often better than, their commercial counterparts, and most of them are free. Moreover, some of these applications are so popular that versions have been developed for use on Microsoft Windows and other operating systems. For examples, see Best Open Source Applications for Microsoft Windows.



Myth 8: Linux has poor support because there is no single company behind it, but rather just a bunch of hackers and amateurs.

The truth: Quite the opposite: Linux has excellent support, often much better and faster than that for commercial software. There is a great deal of information available on the Internet and questions posted to newsgroups are typically answered within a few hours. Moreover, this support is free and there are no costly service contracts required. Commercial support is also available, if desired, from major computer companies such as Red Hat, Novell, IBM and HP. Also to kept in mind is the fact than many users find that less support is required than for other operating systems because Linux has relatively few bugs (i.e., errors in the way it was written) and is highly resistant to viruses and other malicious code.



Myth 9: Linux is obsolete because it is mainly just a clone of an operating system that was developed more than 30 years ago.

The truth: It is true that Linux is based on UNIX, which was developed in 1969. However, UNIX and its descendants (referred to as Unix-like operating systems) are regarded by many computer experts as the best (e.g., the most robust and the most flexible) operating systems ever developed. They have survived more than 30 years of rigorous testing and incremental improvement by the world's foremost computer scientists, whereas other operating systems do not survive for more than a few years, usually because of some combination of technical inferiority and planned obsolescence.



Myth 10: Linux will have a hard time surviving in the long run because it has become fragmented into too many different versions.

The truth: It is a fact that there are numerous distributions (i.e., versions) of Linux that have been developed by various companies, organizations and individuals. However, there is little true fragmentation of Linux into incompatible systems, in large part because all of these versions use the same basic kernels, commands and application programs. Rather, Linux is just an extremely flexible operating system that can be configured as desired by vendors and users according to the intended applications, users' preferences, etc. In fact, the various Microsoft Windows operating systems (e.g., Windows 95, ME, NT, CE, 2000, XP and Longhorn), although they superficially resemble each other, are more fragmented than Linux. Moreover, each of these systems is fragmented into various versions and then further changed by various service packs (i.e., patches which are supplied to users to correct various bugs and security holes).



Myth 11: Linux and other free software cannot compete with commercial software in terms of quality because it is developed by an assorted collection of hackers and amateurs rather than the professional programmers employed by large corporations.

The truth: Almost all software, including that at large corporations, is created at least in part by people who might have beards and look slightly unconventional. However, Linux and other free software has been created and refined by some of the most talented programmers in the world. Moreover, programmers from the of the largest corporations, including IBM and HP, have, and continue to, contribute to it. For more information, see Incentives to Develop Free Software.



Myth 12: Linux is free at the start, but the total cost of ownership (TCO) is higher than for Microsoft Windows. This has been demonstrated by various studies.

The truth: A major reason (but not the only one) for Linux's rapid growth around the world is that its TCO is substantially lower than that for commercial software. This has been demonstrated time and time again. Reasons that it is lower include not only (1) the fact that it is free but also that (2) it is more reliable and robust (i.e., rarely crashes or causes data loss), (3) support can be very inexpensive (although costly service contracts are available), (4) it can operate on older hardware and reduce the need for buying new hardware, (5) there are no forced upgrades and (6) no tedious and costly license compliance monitoring is required. The only studies that show that Linux's TCO is higher are those sponsored by Microsoft.

A major reason provided for the supposedly higher TCO of Linux is that Linux system administrators are more expensive to hire than persons with expertise in Microsoft products. Although this is generally true, it overlooks the fact that Linux systems administrators are usually much more productive because there are relatively few viruses to deal with, security patches to install, system crashes to cope with and licensing issues to contend with.

Xiolablu3
10-09-2007, 04:26 PM
Hi Pirsch http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Very interesting read mate, thanks!


I have been thinkijng of trying out Linux for the first time once I get my new buyild up and running. I am going to install windows for gaming on the new Athlon 64 system , and thought about putting a version of Linux onto this computer I am using now, which will be my 2nd PC.

DO you have any suggestions for a Linux build which is free (of course http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) and would be good for me to learn and get my teeth into Linux for the first time?


Thanks in advance.

triad773
10-09-2007, 04:36 PM
I've had a lot of fun with Ubuntu- think Pirsch there may have tried it also.

http://www.ubuntu.com/

Enjoy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Triad

Pirschjaeger
10-09-2007, 04:42 PM
So far, in my experience, Ubuntu has been the easiest and has a lot of support. But I think PClinuxOS might be a better start as many programs are already installed in the OS.

The best way to start with Linux, in my opinion, is to download a Linux version and burn it to cd/dvd. Then just run the live CD OS. It won't touch or change anything in your whatever you are using now. On a good pc it takes about 3 mins to install (virtual) and start playing with it. When you are finished simply reboot your pc and it's back to Windows as if nothing had happened.

I found the greatest difficulty in getting used to Linux was forgetting everything I had learnt using Windows. It's a different way of thinking and sometimes the simplicity is confusing.

I started a thread before with details about how to start out with Linux and get used to it. I'll search for it and post the link here.

BTW, when downloading, all Linux distros I've seen are free.

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
10-09-2007, 04:44 PM
Originally posted by triad773:
I've had a lot of fun with Ubuntu- think Pirsch there may have tried it also.

http://www.ubuntu.com/

Enjoy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Triad

Ubuntu is still my personal favorite but my soundcard (Audigy SE 7.1 24bit) just doesn't agree with it. But from my experience Creative's support sucks big time. I won't buy anymore of their products.

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
10-09-2007, 04:50 PM
Ok, here's my thoughts the morning after my first time.

Linux Cherry Popped (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7301076155/p/1)

Love or lust, it worked for me. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif

Fritz

na85
10-09-2007, 04:51 PM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
Myth 12: Linux is free at the start, but the total cost of ownership (TCO) is higher than for Microsoft Windows. This has been demonstrated by various studies.

The truth: A major reason (but not the only one) for Linux's rapid growth around the world is that its TCO is substantially lower than that for commercial software. This has been demonstrated time and time again. Reasons that it is lower include not only (1) the fact that it is free but also that (2) it is more reliable and robust (i.e., rarely crashes or causes data loss), (3) support can be very inexpensive (although costly service contracts are available), (4) it can operate on older hardware and reduce the need for buying new hardware, (5) there are no forced upgrades and (6) no tedious and costly license compliance monitoring is required. The only studies that show that Linux's TCO is higher are those sponsored by Microsoft.

A major reason provided for the supposedly higher TCO of Linux is that Linux system administrators are more expensive to hire than persons with expertise in Microsoft products. Although this is generally true, it overlooks the fact that Linux systems administrators are usually much more productive because there are relatively few viruses to deal with, security patches to install, system crashes to cope with and licensing issues to contend with.

True.

I'm currently running Gentoo on an old PC I found in my basement. I uninstalled windows 98 that was on it and popped in some spare SDRAM I had lying around.

Total install cost: 0$

When I had problems installing a printer driver, I went to Google and searched for an answer.

Total support cost: 0$

Pirschjaeger
10-09-2007, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by na85:

I'm currently running Gentoo on an old PC I found in my basement. I uninstalled windows 98 that was on it and popped in some spare SDRAM I had lying around.

Total install cost: 0$

When I had problems installing a printer driver, I went to Google and searched for an answer.

Total support cost: 0$

The look on Bill's face: priceless

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Pirschjaeger
10-09-2007, 04:55 PM
Ok, and here's a very noob friendly thread I started for those who have no experience or ideas on how to start with Linux.

Noob Lingo (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9621051355?r=9621051355#9621051355)

Enjoy the freedom.

Fritz

Korolov1986
10-09-2007, 06:54 PM
Currently taking a course for running Linux in a server environment (officially supposed to train UNIX - but thus far the differences are supposedly minor) and I have to say, it's a excellent option if you're skilled with it's operation and strapped for cash. There's nothing like pulling out that old piece of junk from '95 and setting it up to run DNS, DHCP, etc.

Linux was easy to set up, and pretty much any idiot can work it in a workstation environment. The problem is though, like it or not, Windows is the standard by which most folks (at least in the CONUS) operate on. Server-wise, I find it vastly superior to "other" options, but as a workstation OS I find it merely average - you still have to train people how to use it. Remember, most people don't know a damn thing about PCs, and that makes my job (network administration) a real pain in the *** even WITH people familiar with it.

Overall, I really like Linux in a professional environment, but for home use I find it lacking - I'd go mad with only KGoldRunner to play all the time!!!

(Exaggeration, but you get my point. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif )

Pirschjaeger
10-10-2007, 12:43 AM
I've downloaded, burnt, and installed PCLinuxOS Gnome and I am very impressed.

Skype worked right away with no issues, even on live cd. I tried it on my Dell Vostro 1000 first.

Then I tried the live cd on my pc. To be honest, I didn't expect much because of the problems I've had with my sound card. As expected, it didn't work right away. My mic has to come from my onboard sound while the speakers come from the Audigy. One small adjustment in the Skype settings and everything worked fine.

PCLinuxOS Gnome looks a lot like Ubuntu but I think it's even more logical.

PCLOS Gn is my new favorite. I'd recommend this one over Ubuntu now. So far it seems easier and has more default programs.

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
10-10-2007, 12:45 AM
Korolov, if you like Ubuntu I think you'll like PCLinuxOS Gnome more.

Give it a try. I'd like to hear your comments.

Fritz

B16Enk
10-10-2007, 02:57 AM
There is another way to dip one's toes into the Linux world too, popular but often overlooked unless you know of it.

This method is also non-destructive (it makes minor changes to your OS by way of network additions but is easily un-installed).

It allows you to run Linux in a virtual machine, within your normal Windows environment.

This allows you to experiment with Linux, and have easy recourse to a web browser for assistance should you break something in the Linux machine, as you will be running Windows to host the Linux machine.

If you then decide to jump ship and run Linux natively you can turn the tables, and install your Windows into a virtual machine that runs within Linux.
And then install your Windows applications in said Virtual Machine (VM) - but don't expect games to perform well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

The tool?
VM Ware Player (http://vmware.com/download/player/) - runs pre-made VMs.
Version for both Linux and Windows.

Pre-made images (appliances) Are Here (http://www.vmware.com/appliances/)
Includes various Linux builds, and even trial ware of Microsoft OS.

Want to create your own virtual machine?
Vm Ware Server (http://www.vmware.com/download/server/) - runs pre-made VMs and allows you to make your own.

Cost of the above?

0c...http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Pirschjaeger
10-12-2007, 02:42 AM
Xiolablu, have you tried it yet?

Fritz

ploughman
10-12-2007, 06:27 AM
Forgive these questions if they're entry level moronic.

So does Linux, will Linux do DX 10 and all that stuff, or run the new Open GL thingy?

Could I build a machine, forget the Vista OS install, and us this Linux thing instead?

Basically could I ditch MS and still do everything I do now?

Lubcke
10-12-2007, 06:48 AM
linux is not for gaming, not yet

Lubcke
10-12-2007, 06:49 AM
and dx10 is something what has only windows

triad773
10-13-2007, 12:49 AM
*BUMP*

Haven't tried it (IL-2 on Linux), but it's way cool I know. 8)

Cheers and G'Nite

Triad

xf86config
10-13-2007, 01:53 AM
Great initial posting Pirschjaeger.

Thought it worth mentioning that the latest revision of Ubuntu is due out in 5 days time.

I remembered looking at PCLOS a while back, unfortunately the distribution website's were down at that point, ended up looking at PCBSD, a similar distro based on BSD.

A point worth mentioning with regard to all the many different distributions of Linux and Unix like operating systems, is that once you have familiarised yourself with the basic commands, the filesystem structure and the security model, to a great extent, it does not matter which one you use.

Ubuntu is great for a general purpose desktop environment for those dipping their feet in the non-microsoft waters.
BSD's are great for servers which will live constantly with very heavy loads.
That is not to say that almost any linux/unix/unix like OS can be configured for almost any task.

Alas, gaming is not quite there yet, but i hope with the emergence of Ubuntu as a platform increasing in popularity that game developers will take a lead from companies such as ID software, who have actively promoted their linux versions of the games they release.

On this machine I dual boot XP and Ubuntu, XP for IL2 , anything else gets done in Ubuntu.

I have a couple of other machines running Ubuntu flavours as well, a Dual p3 raid 5 server running Ubuntu server LTS and my laptop, an Apple g3 500 ibook running Xubuntu PPC. Made sense for me, was not paying MS for a server class OS, and the ibook ran real sluggish with any apple OS after system 9.2.

XF

Flying Online as EAF602_Sporran

sdcruz
10-13-2007, 02:34 AM
Pure Linux user here 100% no dual boot - no viruses and no worries! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

Ugly_Kid
10-13-2007, 06:27 AM
Same here 64bit Edgy and Gentoo, although mainly I use Edgy now - it being more compatible with wife and so...

Gaming? Everything that I want to play runs fine...IL-2 among the other things BTW

Xiolablu3
10-14-2007, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
Xiolablu, have you tried it yet?

Fritz

SOrry mate, I have been away for a few days.

I havent tries it yet as I havent got my GFX card for my new system yet.

Once I get my new PCI-E gfx card to go with my A8N-SLI skt 939 board and A64 4000+, I am going to gut this comp and put in the new parts. I thought as A64 4000+ chips are going for 30 on ebay and the mobo for the same, I thought it was time for an upgrade from my 2500+ Barton. I always say you should double your CPU power when you upgrade otherwise its not worth it. I figure a 2500+ barton to a 4000+ A64 is about double the speed as BArton CHips were rated very generously with their '+' ratings. An Athlon64 3200+ is quite a lot faster than a Barton 32 bit 3200+

I will then see what I need to put togther a system using my old parts from this system and put Linuz on that, so it may take a while.

I will contact you for advice once its done, but it may be quite a while yet.

I need to get my upgrade done, then get a system togther from the parts that are left. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Thanks for the good advice so far tho chaps http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Loco-S
10-14-2007, 08:11 PM
I have been using Kanotix for almost three years now, it rocks, detected all my hardware first time, installed in 14 minutes flat, runs from CD ( live distro) and with klick.atekon.de programs, install is just download the file to desktop and run, no mistery code to type in terminal, currently Im experimenting to run PF on wine, but still have trouble with stuttering sound, I bet this issue will be resolved as soon wine evolves more.

Pirschjaeger
10-14-2007, 10:24 PM
Hi guys,

sorry for my late reply but I've been really busy these days.

A lot of interesting posts in this thread and Ploughman, there are no stupid questions; only stupid answers.

My wife is totally computer illiterate. She uses her pc to check her emails and surf the web for pics of cats. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Anyway, she's Chinese so she surfs the Chinese web. This means constant viruses and spyware resulting in having to do a fresh reinstall often. I got fed up with it and an IT buddy gave me a copy of RedFlag. It's a Chinese Linux and comes with Dell products here.

One day, she asked me to fix her pc, coincidentally, just moments after her latest surfing session. I handed her the RedFlag cds and manual and told her to start learning. Of course this resulted in a bit of a tiff but my stubbornness won the day. About an hour and a half later, she was back online surfing for pics of dogfood,....um, I mean cats.

Six months later, her pc still works fine and she hasn't had a problem.

Using Linux is more a thing of "just doing it" rather than studying as MS would have you believe. Of course, as with anything, there is some learning necessary. This has caused a few problems for me as I have little free time.

As for gaming, I've talked to a few guys who use Linux for gaming and they all have positive things to say.

But a word of caution: unless you know what you are doing, don't enable 3d graphics. Although the 3d desktop cube may look really cool, I've found both my computers freeze up from time to time. I'm not sure why as I'm still a noob, but I've had to reinstall.

Does anyone with knowledge on this subject have any advice?

Since there are so many distros available, I'd suggest anyone wanting to try Linux should post what they expect from their pc and what they want to do with it in here. Then those with the experience can make recommendations.

Linux geeks tend to be very supportive and patient. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

BTW, I'm running dual boot XP/PCLinuxOS Gnome on my desktop and XP/PCLinuxOS KDE on my laptop. I look forward to trying the new Ubuntu.

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
10-14-2007, 10:26 PM
Originally posted by Loco-S:
....currently Im experimenting to run PF on wine, but still have trouble with stuttering sound, I bet this issue will be resolved as soon wine evolves more.

I think Bazzaah is running PF on Wine with no issues. Next time I talk to him I'll point him toward tis thread.

Fritz

Loco-S
10-16-2007, 10:05 PM
Im happy with kanotix, solid, once I left the computer on for two months straight, then I had to turn it off because the psu fan died..he he..., no viruses, no spyware ( I use clamav) just in case, this OS detected my frankenware the first time, other distros required tweaking to detect settings, Open office is (imho) better than M$ office ( more features, like print to PDF and the likes), I have a amd athlon 1.4 ghz, with 512 mb SDRAM, ATI 9500 non pro 128 mb, with a US robotics lan card 10T, ECS k7s5a mobo from 2001, and a 350 watts PSU, runs PF like a champ on high settings ( I cant use perfect because it turns into a black and white slide show..he he) also runs half life 1 on wine, quake 1 and 2, flight gear flight sim, I like ice weasel ( firefox renamed), thunderbird ( mail similar to outlook) K3B burns everything ( still I have to buy nero to be able to burn DVDs tough) Beryl rocks, and I havent had any freeze ups ( other than when the PSU fan died)VLC media player, for videos, Amarok for music, the only program I run on emulation because I havent found a good substitute is ashlar cobalt ( auto cad proggy)

re: stuttering sounds on PF, I dont know what it could be, I use the ECS mobo sound output, sometimes it goes OK, but most of the time has like a time lapse and then goes stutter, I think it may be related to the sound card, but again, I havent tested it on any other machine, alsa works fine with me, the other issue I had is when I tried to install a program, I had to search for dependencies, now if I want to test any thing, before installing it I go to click ( click.atekin.de), and download the program to desktop, if I like it, I can erase it ( no apt-get-uninstall XxXX) and nothing happens, its a great way to know if you want something before going to town..

so far I have tried Red hat 6.2 red hat 7.0, suse linux, ubuntu, beos, freebsd, gentoo, debian ( pure), damn small linux, libranet, and a couple others I cant remember, and at the end I liked Kanotix the best ( personal opinion...dont get frisky)