After 7 years of linux

mauvebic · 2012-05-24 14:50:43

Im ready to buy a mac. If i add up all the hours i spend ripping my hair out at shit that doesnt work, i would have probably afforded a few of them by now.

Its not arch, arch is the best of a bad situation. Its mostly OSS apps i think are getting worse, much worse.
examples?
VLC -> audio stream cuts out randomly. re-init roughly every 10-15 minutes. (great work)
GIMP -> toolbars disapearred, sortof managed to get some of them back, though now i cant move them.
Chrome -> more then two tabs open and i cant do anything else. wtf? is chromium using my CPU to look for intelligent life in space or something?

I used to be able to do these very basic things six months ago and that was before i upgraded my ram and gfx card. (i wont bother telling you how *well* VDPAU works...)

pablokal · 2012-05-24 15:10:58

Sorry to hear that.
Maybe you should go back to older, more stable versions of the programs you describe.
And to a less cutting edge distro. Try Crunchbang for instance.
I don't recognize the problems you describe with the programs.
For video playback I use smplayer and vlc and both together play everything I want in the most perfect way.
But of course you can be unlucky with hardware.
As webbrowser I use a sandfoxed firefox and chromium if some page doesn't render as I like.

Anyway going to a user enslaving company as Apple will never be an option for me.

oliver · 2012-05-24 16:34:07

mauvebic wrote:

Chrome -> more then two tabs open and i cant do anything else. wtf? is chromium using my CPU to look for intelligent life in space or something?

I'm sorry to hear it's not working out for you, but I have to say, this made me lol - I, too, have sat there thinking "what are you possibly doing? Just render the page!"

That was on my older h/w though

pablokal · 2012-05-25 02:15:52

That was on my older h/w though

I recently installed the March iso on a 10 year old pc and where the old XP installation is really slow in everything I hardly notice a difference with my newer pc when using AB for browsing or watching videos there. It is my favourite demonstration to show how much software can make the difference. But again I use firefox there.

mauvebic · 2012-05-25 06:46:23

I dropped XP because my CPU fan was always on, seems the linux kernel caught up to XP though. sucks. I dont need a kernel that can wipe my ass while i check my email, i just need a kernel that works.

ianno network manager has *never* worked properly on any of my computers for the past two years? yet every other support forum i visit discourages wicd, even though its the *only* thing that works every time when i want to connect.

When they leave bugs like this in for so long you almost get the impression they design faulty shit to guarantee linux jobs lol. Some people seem to get a kick out of constantly tweaking and fixing their systems. Personally im little sick of abstraction layers being piled upon each-other, each one more buggy than the last.

And believe me, i dont fix what ain't broken, after 7 (nearly 8) years, updates make me cringe. But you know how it goes: you want the new VLC, then youre forced to update a bunch of dependencies, which breaks other apps so you have to update those too, and by the time youre done with all the forced updates and find yourself with a broken system, you realize it would have been much quicker to download the latest image, install it and start from there.

And its not that i want to be oppressed by apple or microsoft, i just want to get some work done. And i want updates to actually be updates, but they remind more of viruses right now.

oliver · 2012-05-25 07:28:23

pablokal wrote:

But again I use firefox there.

I had a ton of extensions which I'm sure were the cause... TBH, I've switched back to FF now too. Going 'incognito' in Chrome never gave me any performance issues

handy · 2012-05-25 19:46:50

@mauvebic: I've been on Linux since October 2005 & Arch since March 2008, there have been occasional problems that come with an upgrade, whether it be with another distro or with Arch (which as you know has upgrades throughout every day). Though really, I have found them to be few & far between (especially on Arch which is quite amazing considering the rolling release system that it uses).

I don't have the problems that you are having. VLC uses more CPU than smplayer, but VLC (& smplayer) both work fine. I don't use wireless, as I don't have to & have always preferred the reliability, security & speed of cables (I'm obviously not a mobile user).

I think that you have been one of the unlucky ones that still exist even in these days with Linux, that has had a run of computers that have very Linux unfriendly hardware.

I also have a Mac which until some months ago, was used to dual boot both OSX & Arch. A lightning strike power surge caused a blackout which corrupted my Linux root partition (first time in my storm prone area). Now I can't use live media to repair or install Arch, as the optical drive had previously failed (2nd time; out of warranty this time & NOT due to a power surge) & Apple want to charge ~$160 for the drive plus installation on top of that & they refuse to sell the part (Sony/NEC Optiarc AD-5630A) separately.

I consider this to be highway robbery & therefore I refuse to pay it (Apple have lost me). When using an external USB optical drive (Buffalo $30- retail I paid $25- !!!) I can install OSX but as previously stated, the iMac won't recognise & boot Linux USB attached live media (I tried flash memory).

So I installed OSX 10.6.8 on a 36GB Raptor, set it up just how I like it (software, configuration & all that) then used clonezilla to clone it onto another identical 36GB Raptor (using my other machine) then installed the newly cloned drive back into the iMac (to be sure it worked) & that is what the iMac is currently using.

I also made an image of my finalised installation (using clonezilla) in an effort to never have to go through the process of setting up OSX from scratch to be just how I like it again. The 3TB drive that was in the iMac is now in my other machine where I can access the large quantity of data that is on it, thankfully the data was undamaged, even though it is all backed up on the ReadyNAS.

These days the iMac (my 2nd machine) is only used for web reference when I need it, or under certain circumstances, playing a video (using OSX VLC) from my little ReadyNAS box.

There are many reasons why I don't like using OSX, a primary reason being that I can't adjust the size of all of the fonts, & the few that I can adjust are limited to 16 point, which is particularly uncomfortable for my eyes on a 1920x1200 24" screen.

The OSX Finder is a horror, I find it hard to believe that it has been carrying so many bad methods of doing things for so long (search up on that one if you are interested in other people's points of view). If you do go for a Mac machine I highly recommend using Path Finder: http://cocoatech.com/pathfinder/ as it gets past many of the Finder's problems & is quite reasonably priced.

Anyway, I'll end my rant now, good luck with whatever your choice is, at least if you go with a Mac, your hardware should be compatible with OSX.

Last edited by handy (2012-05-26 02:51:31)

scjet · 2012-05-27 11:26:33

"...Linux unfriendly hardware..."
I can sadly say that atleast 30% of all PC's/(but moreso Laptops), over my years, have "always" failed the Linux install test, (with lots of headaches, just to get them going).
It's really very simple. -> Oil-Corp's "control" the way automobiles(ICE's) are made. And therefore, it should also NOT be a surprise to know that corps' like "Microsoft" have to try, and control the hardware/software manufactureres', just to justify their never-ending greed !

Hence, I must say: "... give me Linux/BSD Unix freedom, OR, give me NOTHING..." !

One day, hopefully ALL hardware manufactures' will see the "real" light. ?

Last edited by scjet (2012-05-27 11:29:49)

handy · 2012-05-27 18:00:22

@scjet: I don't agree with you that MS has that much control over the chip manufacturers. At least not as much as it used to have. MS exerts what control it can over the motherboard manufacturers, most particularly computer house brand names (Dell, HP, Asus, Toshiba & so on).

I haven't been following it lately but I'm under the impression that the motherboard/computer manufacturers (Asus for example) have said stuff you to MS & build their business plans accordingly. This also gives them more bargaining power as MS tries to lure them into using their products by offering them at ridiculously low prices so as to limit the store options that may attract people to go over to the dark side, or Apple.

Intel, AMD/ATi nVidia, VIA etc... these companies have all fought off the impositions of MS in the past. They have such huge multidimensional businesses that they make short term agreements with other companies in one department whilst another department (different dimension) is in court against the same company!!!

I've found that using very old hardware is always a lottery with Linux, also unpopular hardware is more unlikely to have support. Then there is just the stuff that is incredibly difficult to reverse engineer...

& sometimes you just get a bunch of things that have a collection of versions/revisions of firmware that make life a total nightmare with Linux. (Naturally all of this stuff relates to the other "alternate" systems too in greater & lesser degrees.)

axel668 · 2012-05-28 02:44:27

those were the 7 bad years, prepare for the 7 good years now
no seriously, if you want things to "just work", go for Mint ... Mint 13 has just come out.
on older hardware (>3 years) Crunchbang is an option, too

ArchVortex · 2012-05-28 09:34:00

17 years on Slackware, 10 years on Gentoo, 6 years on Arch. What is Mac and Windows? Something like Mac and Cheese?

If you're looking for a solid stable Linux then use Slackware. Rolling distros are not for everyone, especially if you don't have the time or desire to tweak and fix. Not every user is meant for Arch. I run ArchBang with testing repos just to see if something will break so I can warn AB users. Personally, I could never use Windows or Mac for my daily computing, ever. Too confining and restrictive for my personal needs and taste but for others it's just what they need.

moravec · 2012-05-28 11:03:33

I got into arch and archbang partly because I needed a modern operating system that would work on my old dell c640 laptop. I have been running archbang for several years now and have had only minor hardware issues (network card) which were quickly resolved. My laptop runs great, and faster than it did with it's original os, xp. I know that latitudes are fairly common, but I wouldn't be afraid to try archbang on other older hardware knowing that it might take a little tweaking.

handy · 2012-05-28 17:47:47

In the past I used to get computers when they came into the rubbish dump/recyclers. They cost me $5- each. Their spec's ranged from PI/Cyrix/K6 CPU based systems to fast PIII's.

I found that quite a lot of them would not accept Linux. I tried various combinations of IPCop (specialised standalone Linux firewall/router which was my primary reason for acquiring these machines); Arch; Ubuntu; Mint.

The failure was a profound show stopper occurring quite early in the installation. I expect that it was a lack of support for hardware at the kernel level, but I don't really know (or remember the details these days).

Last edited by handy (2012-05-28 17:48:30)

mike4ca · 2012-05-28 19:52:48

These are always interesting conversations. Over the weekend I listened to a podcast that talked about a open source survey for enterprise applications. You can see the results here: http://northbridge.com/open-source. Check out the 2012 survey, both the press release and the slideshow. There is a trend towards open source and some of the top reasons are avoiding vendor lock-in, innovation, and quality. Quality? Yes quality. The stable versions of open source usually are very stable. Most of the problem comes from us users always wanting the latest. What is wrong with a 3 year old application that works? Nothing.

Over the years of using closed source "solutions" at work I noticed that companies that sell software are always dreaming up new features. Why? So you pay for yearly maintainance agreements or buy upgrades. Many times we don't even use the new features. IMO they are created just to spark interest and to generate more revenue.

Are the programs fully vetted of problems? Usually not. Some software I have been forced to use have had way too many updates/patches. So we the customers are the testers?

So what is my point of this rant? That here in open source we are still the testers, but we also get to be the contributers. Some coders, some documenting, art work, expressing opinions, ideas, etc. And we have choices, bleeding edge or slow and stable.

On an additional note, I read Phoronix a lot. I found it interesting that the new Ivy Bridge processors worked out of the box on the Ubuntu release that came out within a week of the chip release! Not that I am a proponent of Ubuntu, but this is a 5 year release. I am not sure if it was luck or good planning, but obviously Intel got their code into the kernel far enough in advance for it to be in a kernel that Ubuntu used.

scjet · 2012-05-29 07:42:26

handy wrote:

In the past I used to get computers when they came into the rubbish dump/recyclers. They cost me $5- each. Their spec's ranged from PI/Cyrix/K6 CPU based systems to fast PIII's.
I found that quite a lot of them would not accept Linux. I tried various combinations of IPCop (specialised standalone Linux firewall/router which was my primary reason for acquiring these machines); Arch; Ubuntu; Mint.
The failure was a profound show stopper occurring quite early in the installation. I expect that it was a lack of support for hardware at the kernel level, but I don't really know (or remember the details these days).

I agree someahat, (if it's really old), but that;s why there is a Linux distro for almost every PC. My friend won't even pay the $5-each, but he does find "Puppy" Linux perfect for these Dumpster-Edition PC's. whereas "Arch; Ubuntu; Mint" ... doesn't always work as well on those 'ole-timers, OOB.

Last edited by scjet (2012-05-29 08:14:48)

handy · 2012-05-29 18:40:33

IPCop uses an old (it has been upgraded since I was doing this) kernel. In the interest of security, the kernel has absolutely NOthing in it except the very barest of essentials to allow it to run on a machine with multiple NIC's as reliably as possible. IPCop is most often used on dumpster PC's, as that is all you need to look after a network with 150+ bums on seats reliably.

PII's are the ideal when it comes to initial cost/horsepower/power consumption. I've used PIII's for some years, though currently I can't use IPCop because my modem is incompatible! (Only modem in town after a power surge took the previous one out, it is actually a modem/router but you turn the router off & run in bridge mode when you use IPCop.)

Last edited by handy (2012-05-29 18:42:41)

kazuya · 2012-06-01 08:56:00

Tempting to do mac, but too in love with the flexibility, customizability, and freedom I get with linux. I would give the bsds a chance before making that leap. I do understand some reasons and respect his move to a mac though.
It just works and does what it is intended to do. My preference for linux is that it evolves with my new tastes or interests where other OSes do not.

BaronOfBrains · 2012-06-05 15:30:43

I've been with linux about five months.

I'm learning to love Linux, but hate the distos.

My internet requires a passkey so I don't know how to do netinstalls and customize the installation. Otherwise, I would have done a net install of a distro that offers more packages.

So I inevitably end up with junkware i don't need like QT LBV$R (Video4Linux?) whatever that doesn't work all because I removed xfburn and then brasero and then nobody knows what the package is for in the first place.

Bodhi Linux was SO CLOSE... anybody who provides THOSE FEW PROGRAMS TO START with a FAMILIAR desktop environment, insted of that butt-awful Entlightenment, will become very famous very quickly. They will sing songs about him in church and build statues to him.

If I go with Bodhi bare desktop, there is no status bar with a network icon to launch the network manager and connect. The network manager exists under layers and layers of menus... I haven't found it.

There are at least two Bible software packages for Linux. NOT ONE WORKS IN ARCH.

Would you like to see a list of the packages available for Puppy Linux? Well... SO WOULD I! I might actually take a look at it if it provides the packages that I need. If I can't see what packages offered, then Puppy is for the dogs.

So they either put in too much junkware that is very problematic to remove, or they don't provide enough packages.

Some where, some place, there is a Linux for me.

Last edited by BaronOfBrains (2012-06-05 15:35:54)

oliver · 2012-06-05 17:09:18

BaronOfBrains wrote:

Some where, some place, there is a Linux for me.

linux from scratch
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/

ArchVortex · 2012-06-05 17:21:55

BaronOfBrains wrote:

There are at least two Bible software packages for Linux. NOT ONE WORKS IN ARCH.

I don't have any problem with Xiphos and Bibletime (Linux) and I also run LOGOS and E-Sword using WINE with Arch.

pablokal · 2012-06-06 02:50:58

Some where, some place, there is a Linux for me.

I'm not trying to offend you, but maybe you also should consider the fact that maybe you still lack some skills or knowledge to run a rather difficult distro like Arch.
And Arch offers with the terminal output and great Wiki and forums the opportunity to learn a lot of how it works below the hood. But you have to pay a price.
The people that seems to run against the brick wall using Arch seem to me people who lack the time or attitude to quietly research a problem and solve it experimentally (trying this or that).
I would recommend linux mint lxde or crunchbang.

handy · 2012-06-06 03:41:12

BaronOfBrains wrote:

I've been with linux about five months.
I'm learning to love Linux, but hate the dist[r]os.

Well there are over 500 of them to learn to hate, you certainly have been busy.

BaronOfBrains wrote:

My internet requires a passkey so I don't know how to do netinstalls and customize the installation. Otherwise, I would have done a net install of a distro that offers more packages.

That is obviously of course a problem with Arch/ArchBang & all of the other distros that you have tried that also provide the net install option...

BaronOfBrains wrote:

So I inevitably end up with junkware i don't need like QT LBV$R (Video4Linux?) whatever that doesn't work all because I removed xfburn and then brasero and then nobody knows what the package is for in the first place.

Which is "again" obviously a problem of Arch(Bang)...

BaronOfBrains wrote:

Bodhi Linux was SO CLOSE... anybody who provides THOSE FEW PROGRAMS TO START with a FAMILIAR desktop environment, insted of that butt-awful Entlightenment, will become very famous very quickly. They will sing songs about him in church and build statues to him.

I certainly doubt that they will make hymns to Bodhi! (He's actually a Buddhist you know - & from my experience a terrific piece of humanity. lol )

BaronOfBrains wrote:

If I go with Bodhi bare desktop, there is no status bar with a network icon to launch the network manager and connect. The network manager exists under layers and layers of menus... I haven't found it.

So, you haven't researched & learned any of the ways to sort that one out? ...

BaronOfBrains wrote:

There are at least two Bible software packages for Linux. NOT ONE WORKS IN ARCH.

That is NOT a problem belonging to Arch it is most certainly a problem that belongs to you.

BaronOfBrains wrote:

Would you like to see a list of the packages available for Puppy Linux? Well... SO WOULD I! I might actually take a look at it if it provides the packages that I need. If I can't see what packages offered, then Puppy is for the dogs.

You should read this:

https://support.google.com/websearch/bi … wer=134479

If you had done then you probably would have been able to find the page on the following link inside of a minute & a half, as I did:

http://puppylinuxfaq.org/bundled-software.html

BaronOfBrains wrote:

So they either put in too much junkware that is very problematic to remove, or they don't provide enough packages.

Again, what has that got to do with Arch(Bang)?????

At least most people who reads what you have posted here would be thinking much the same thing;- which is that you are someone who doesn't know how to search for information & then if you do find it, you don't know how to apply it; you need other people to do everything for you & if they don't do it for you then you throw a tantrum & blame them for not handing what you want to you on a silver platter; you also seem to obviously make snap judgements to protect yourself from facing either the fact, or the possibility that you are (like the rest of us) ignorant in some way or another... <shock/horror>

Or of course you could just be a troll entertaining yourself at our expense.

BaronOfBrains wrote:

Some where, some place, there is a Linux for me.

Somehow, I doubt that very much, but I do live in hope.

I'll show my hope by stating that I still hold out for humanity being able to get out of the huge environmental/socio-political hole that we have spent some hundreds of years digging for ourselves & continually passing on to our children, who of course have to pay the ever accumulating interest on our environmental ignorance & wanton neglect.

See, I belong to the hopeful minority of humans who actually care.
______________

NOTE: Sorry mods, you know that I don't get personal here, but this guy just had to be told (& believe it or not I held back).

Last edited by handy (2012-06-06 05:16:30)

scjet · 2012-06-07 18:22:57

..count me in, on the "...minority of humans who actually care..."
Linux distro's are like driving "FREE" cars from every manufacturer, and manufacturer's to come on the planet. It sometimes may end up a "raw" deal, but it never ends up a co$tly deal, unless you don't care, or don't want to learn how to "drive" ? -then accidents will happen dudes'.
Get it ?!
good, ... I thought so.

Last edited by scjet (2012-06-07 18:33:10)

BaronOfBrains · 2012-07-07 22:22:55

Again, what has that got to do with Arch(Bang)?????

Look at the topic title.

It doesn't read "7 years of Archbang", it reads "7 years of Linux".

At least most people who reads what you have posted here would be thinking much the same thing;- which is that you are someone who doesn't know how to search for information & then if you do find it, you don't know how to apply it; you need other people to do everything for you & if they don't do it for you then you throw a tantrum & blame them for not handing what you want to you on a silver platter; you also seem to obviously make snap judgements to protect yourself from facing either the fact, or the possibility that you are (like the rest of us) ignorant in some way or another... <shock/horror>

There are so many varieties of keywords and combinations thereof. How much time is satisfactory to YOU?

Since I am using Mint Debian Edition now, tracking UNSTABLE AND EXPERIMENTAL, I find you other statement presumptuous.

Or of course you could just be a troll entertaining yourself at our expense.

Oh, no. I wouldn't try to rub your rhubarb.

Somehow, I doubt that very much, but I do live in hope.

You learned so much about me so fast, huh?

Were ALL my posts so blatantly trollish?

http://bbs.archbang.org/viewtopic.php?id=2837

http://bbs.archbang.org/viewtopic.php?id=2847

http://bbs.archbang.org/viewtopic.php?id=2849

http://bbs.archbang.org/viewtopic.php?id=2885

http://bbs.archbang.org/viewtopic.php?id=334

Your doubt is GROUNDLESS.

NOTE: Sorry mods, you know that I don't get personal here, but this guy just had to be told (& believe it or not I held back).

Sorry mods. You get some guy with a funny hat and a cocky attitude, and I just thought I would straiten out the record.

DING! "Next..."

Last edited by BaronOfBrains (2012-07-07 22:24:47)

BaronOfBrains · 2012-07-08 00:01:49

POST SCRIPT:

Were it not for the links on your profile, I would accuse you of being a sleeping, "chemically castrated", worthless piece of turd.

As it is, you are only the latter.

Good day, sir.

BaronOfBrains · 2012-07-08 00:56:51

POST POST SCRIPT:

Because of your "hand holding" comment, I am going to take... NOT CTKArch... NOT ArchBang... or other "hold your hand while we configure the install for you"... NOT even Arch... I am going to take GENTOO Linus, install that, come back here and make you eat it,

It may not be next week. It may not be next month, but you will consume what I will do "until it come out at your nostrils, and it be loathsome unto you"

Arch Linux

Announcement

#1 2012-05-24 14:50:43

After 7 years of linux

#2 2012-05-24 15:10:58

Re: After 7 years of linux

#3 2012-05-24 16:34:07

Re: After 7 years of linux

#4 2012-05-25 02:15:52

Re: After 7 years of linux

#5 2012-05-25 06:46:23

Re: After 7 years of linux

#6 2012-05-25 07:28:23

Re: After 7 years of linux

#7 2012-05-25 19:46:50

Re: After 7 years of linux

#8 2012-05-27 11:26:33

Re: After 7 years of linux

#9 2012-05-27 18:00:22

Re: After 7 years of linux

#10 2012-05-28 02:44:27

Re: After 7 years of linux

#11 2012-05-28 09:34:00

Re: After 7 years of linux

#12 2012-05-28 11:03:33

Re: After 7 years of linux

#13 2012-05-28 17:47:47

Re: After 7 years of linux

#14 2012-05-28 19:52:48

Re: After 7 years of linux

#15 2012-05-29 07:42:26

Re: After 7 years of linux

#16 2012-05-29 18:40:33

Re: After 7 years of linux

#17 2012-06-01 08:56:00

Re: After 7 years of linux

#18 2012-06-05 15:30:43

Re: After 7 years of linux

#19 2012-06-05 17:09:18

Re: After 7 years of linux

#20 2012-06-05 17:21:55

Re: After 7 years of linux

#21 2012-06-06 02:50:58

Re: After 7 years of linux

#22 2012-06-06 03:41:12

Re: After 7 years of linux

#23 2012-06-07 18:22:57

Re: After 7 years of linux

#24 2012-07-07 22:22:55

Re: After 7 years of linux

#25 2012-07-08 00:01:49

Re: After 7 years of linux

#26 2012-07-08 00:56:51

Re: After 7 years of linux

Board footer