Miscellaneous > The Lounge
switch to......
lazygamer:
quote:Originally posted by fett101:
Is it just me who sees them as making fun of Linux and Mac?
--- End quote ---
Oh, ummm that too! ;)
Yah I can tell they are poking fun at some of the downsides Linux has over Wind0ze, even with all the progress that had been made compared to a few years ago.
At the sametime, they are poking fun at the mentality of stereotypical Mac users.
Note:Is it me, or is that "Henchman with bad teeth" susposed to be Stallman?
Also check out the Intellitoast video.
Faust:
ROFL!
Yeah that henchman had to be RMS. They kind of exagerated the "all you have to do is partition, compile binaries, do virtual linking bit..." but hey it's a spoof. Come on, Red Hat / Mandrake / Lycoris are nowhere near as bad as that. Still funny.
"My mac... I just wan't to hug it!"
Faust:
quote:Everyone always says "how much more powerful their PC's are than Macs"... I mean, they don't even match your socks!
--- End quote ---
:D
Calum:
quote:Originally posted by lazygamer:
Yah I can tell they are poking fun at some of the downsides Linux has over Wind0ze, even with all the progress that had been made compared to a few years ago.
--- End quote ---
name one.
i have yet to hear of a downside that linux has compared to windows (other than purely psychological ones, like companies being too scared to admit they use linux in house, so they release only windows binaries of all their stuff). Go ahead, name one.
In my opinion, they are poking fun at the stereotypical geek linux user, and they are poking fun directly at Apple for making commercials so obviously aimed at the less intelligent end of the "whatever" generation. At NO POINT did i see ANY indication that windows was IN ANY WAY advantageous over either of the two main alternatives, in fact i have yet to see any evidence of this on any site ever.
[ May 29, 2003: Message edited by: Calum ]
lazygamer:
I cannot name a downside directly(well I can easily name one, however it's gonna get into some retarded debate, I'll name it anyways), but I have gotten the indication that Linux is not all it's cracked up to be(not that Linux is hype, but there are things that no one ever talks about).
For example, my bro is taking his first steps with Redhat 9. Quite a new experience for him, but he's having problems installing those Linux drivers from Nvidia. I can't remember all the details, but it's as simple as it was in Windows. To do it, he has to do SOMETHING(s?) that you would not do in Windows. Or maybe he did as he was susposed to, and there was a problem(probably not this). Perhaps he should check on Nvidia's website for support(if that exsists)... or maybe he did. Whatever the case, he probably has to learn more about Linux, although he can probably get some help on the net.
MES thread...
This thread is a perfect example.
quote: You cannot install a package for SuSE on Red Hat without worrying whether it will be compatible with other packages or not. Even apt-get does not solve this; it has to be all the same distribution. Even apt-get repositories are not completely compatible with each other (ex. fedora).
Another problem is that when you install a package, you don't know where to find it, especially if it comes from another distribution. The program does not always appear in the menu. This is without mentioning the different desktop environments (KDE menu, GNOME menu, Windowmaker menu, etc.)
--- End quote ---
quote:Right now rpm is the easiest way to install, but an easier way (GUI) needs to be made to install packages and take care of dependencies. Other than that, everything is ok.
--- End quote ---
quote:And jeez, how sloppily some so-called "desktop" distributions are put together, and then you use the programs and find the GUI text is full of typos, poorly constructed sentences and misspellings. And the missing software. I'd like to set up a dial-up account oh yea go to bash shell root vi /etc/ppp.00da ... hmh? Why isn't it printing this text? Ahhh... Or how about changing the resolution... /etc/X11/xf86.. oops, the GUI doesn't start up anymore....
Then try installing some software for Linux. No I didn't say Red Hat or Debian, Linux. Oh yea, there's no standard installer, let's compile from source.... what a pain!! Y'no I think source installation might be the way forward but we need alternatives to GNU make, so that there is a definate procedure for compiling, and copying, and installing and integrating.
--- End quote ---
quote: RPM is not the easiest way. As mentioned above, OS X has the lead in software installation. There's NO WORRIES of dependency. OS X apps don't run at the UNIX level, they run much higher up, and include all required support files inside a private folder tree. You see an icon that really contains the entire app, never having to worry about whether it put a bunch of bullshit in /bin or /lib or anything like that. You can move the icon around, you can toss it in the trash to get rid of it. How is RPM better than that?
The thing I've always said is that to succeed, Linux is going to have to not just hide, but supplant all of its UNIXness. Just as OS X is five or six layers all atop Darwin, there needs to be someone develop a layered system atop Linux. Users should be fully shielded from ever having to see a console message or a terminal screen. The option should still exist to use it, but that's all it should be... an option for those of us that are competent enough to use it.
something has to be made that's noticably better than Windows, not just "as good but different"... it has to be better at the same things.
--- End quote ---
quote:Compiling from source is a pain, RPM's don't allways work, dependancies suck, and you never know when a package is gonna work on your distro or not.
Linux needs to modularize the installation process of applications so that you can move them around, and deinstall them simply.
--- End quote ---
And it's not just this thread, I remember from awhile back making a thread about "What are Linux's downsides?", as I had a few suspicions. Of course I can't remember a damn thing from it.
All this stuff is meaningless to pros, as it becomes easy. The point being is that it's alot of totally new things that need to be learned eventually. However, it's not an excuse to stick with Windows.
About that "downside I can name offhand". I'll just sum it up like this: Wine, Games, and Linux newbies. Can a Linux newbie, who is good enough to partition drives and install Linux, setup Wine and play some of his favorite Wind0ze games without alot of hassle? That is one helluva can of worms, but I don't care(and know exactly where I stand on this can's contents), it's a challenge(not to debate the can, but to answer the question)...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version