It sucks! It's slow! It uses a lot of RAM!
PCLinuxOS has two menu editors, its own and KDE's, and neither of them
works properly, so I can't add items to the menu. Removed items keep
coming back.
Booting results in an ever increasing stream of error messages.
Sound card is not recognized, neither are all resolutions and
refreshment rates of the monitor.
Installing applications is not half as easy as with Window$ and often
there is no control over where they go.
Installing other languages for the spell check failed.
It comes with a lot of unwanted sofware which is installed
automatically and has to be removed, but that applies to all
disctributions afaik.
I've looked at other distributions too but they did not recognize my
monitor or other hardware. The Ubuntu install window went right off
the screen so I could not even install that distribution.

As things stand now Linux is not a serious competitor. It's only for
hobbyists who like to play with an OS, I don't. If the Linux community
does not get their act together and develop a good and reliable Linux
GUI and stop this distribution **** with dozens or hundreds
automatically installed unwanted programs, Linux will remain something
for the sectarians only.

I've given up on Linux for now, after having tried for a few weeks.
Back to Window$ :-(

Yrrah

Yrrah wrote:
> It sucks! It's slow! It uses a lot of RAM!
[...]
> I've given up on Linux for now, after having tried for a few weeks.
> Back to Window$ :-(

Linux isn't for everyone. Be thankful that Windows suits your needs.

--
Mark Warner
Ubuntu Dapper 6.06
Registered Linux User #415318
....lose .inhibitions when replying

Yrrah wrote:

> Installing applications is not half as easy as with Window$ and often
> there is no control over where they go.

On Unix like operating systems programs are installed to /usr/bin and
if you compile a program from source yourself it generally goes to
/usr/local/bin this keeps the system clean and tidy plus /usr/bin and
/usr/local bin are in the path so you can easily execute programs from
the command line just using their name.

If you install third-party proprietary software then you normally
install it to /opt/appname

It is the a way of structuring the system so you know where things are
and is similar to the program files directory in windows.

> Installing other languages for the spell check failed.
> It comes with a lot of unwanted sofware which is installed
> automatically and has to be removed, but that applies to all
> disctributions afaik.

User friendly distros tend to install a lot of things that they think
you want. There are more advance distros that allow you to install
only what you want.

> I've looked at other distributions too but they did not recognize my
> monitor or other hardware. The Ubuntu install window went right off
> the screen so I could not even install that distribution.
>

You must have some wierd hardware I have installed linux on many
computers without issue.

> As things stand now Linux is not a serious competitor. It's only for
> hobbyists who like to play with an OS, I don't. If the Linux community
> does not get their act together and develop a good and reliable Linux
> GUI and stop this distribution **** with dozens or hundreds
> automatically installed unwanted programs, Linux will remain something
> for the sectarians only.
>

Like I said before there are distros that don't install hundreds of
programs by default but they don't tend to be designed for the new user.

As for a gui I can think of 5 that work flawlessly for me and as for
hobbyists well I and many other people work on linux systems as their
job and I have not seen a windows computer in over a year so not sure
what you mean.

Kind Regards,
Anthony Irwin

Anthony Irwin <nospam@noemailhere.nowhere>:

> It is the a way of structuring the system so you know where things are
> and is similar to the program files directory in windows.

Which I don't use. I install applications on a separate partition with
my own directory/folder structure.

Yrrah

Yrrah wrote:
> Anthony Irwin <nospam@noemailhere.nowhere>:
>
>
>>It is the a way of structuring the system so you know where things are
>>and is similar to the program files directory in windows.
>
>
> Which I don't use. I install applications on a separate partition with
> my own directory/folder structure.
>
> Yrrah

Hi,

The system is layed out the way it is for a reason. If you would like
to know more about it then check out the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard
below.

http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html

Kind Regards,
Anthony Irwin

Anthony Irwin wrote:
> Yrrah wrote:
>> Anthony Irwin:
>>>
>>> It is the a way of structuring the system so you know where things
>>> are and is similar to the program files directory in windows.
>>
>> Which I don't use. I install applications on a separate partition with
>> my own directory/folder structure.
>
> The system is layed out the way it is for a reason. If you would like to
> know more about it then check out the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard below.
>
> http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html

You'll never convince some people that not working like Windows isn't a
Linux failing.

--
Mark Warner
Ubuntu Dapper 6.06
Registered Linux User #415318
....lose .inhibitions when replying

Mark Warner wrote:

> You'll never convince some people that not working like Windows isn't a
> Linux failing.

A triple negative. . . arghhhh. . . I can't hardly not disagree with
what you didn't seem to say. . . ;)

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group....comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)

Susan Bugher wrote:
> Mark Warner wrote:
>
>> You'll never convince some people that not working like Windows isn't
>> a Linux failing.
>
> A triple negative. . . arghhhh. . . I can't hardly not disagree with
> what you didn't seem to say. . . ;)

It seemed appropriate. The OP was multiply negative to begin with. My
triple was a sign of restraint.

--
Mark Warner
Ubuntu Dapper 6.06
Registered Linux User #415318
....lose .inhibitions when replying

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 03:41:43 +0100, Yrrah wrote:

> It sucks! It's slow! It uses a lot of RAM!
> PCLinuxOS has two menu editors, its own and KDE's, and neither of them
> works properly, so I can't add items to the menu. Removed items keep
> coming back.
> Booting results in an ever increasing stream of error messages.
> Sound card is not recognized, neither are all resolutions and
> refreshment rates of the monitor.
> Installing applications is not half as easy as with Window$ and often
> there is no control over where they go.
> Installing other languages for the spell check failed.
> It comes with a lot of unwanted sofware which is installed
> automatically and has to be removed, but that applies to all
> disctributions afaik.
> I've looked at other distributions too but they did not recognize my
> monitor or other hardware. The Ubuntu install window went right off
> the screen so I could not even install that distribution.
>
> As things stand now Linux is not a serious competitor. It's only for
> hobbyists who like to play with an OS, I don't. If the Linux community
> does not get their act together and develop a good and reliable Linux
> GUI and stop this distribution **** with dozens or hundreds
> automatically installed unwanted programs, Linux will remain something
> for the sectarians only.

That is total B.S. I would venture to guess that you'd have difficulty
installing MS from scratch as well. I'll grant that Linux can be a bit of
a bother to install and set up properly - but in my experience it's still
easier and faster to do than MS. Once it is properly installed and set up
it is no more difficult to use than MS is, it's only a little different -
AND I have living proof of that.


>
> I've given up on Linux for now, after having tried for a few weeks.
> Back to Window$ :-(
>
> Yrrah

Yrrah wrote:
> Anthony Irwin <nospam@noemailhere.nowhere>:
>
>> It is the a way of structuring the system so you know where things are
>> and is similar to the program files directory in windows.
>
> Which I don't use. I install applications on a separate partition with
> my own directory/folder structure.

If you don't like the default location, you can tell rpm to install in other
places too, just read the man page.

--

//Aho

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 21:51:27 -0500, Mark Warner wrote:

> Yrrah wrote:
>> It sucks! It's slow! It uses a lot of RAM!
> [...]
>> I've given up on Linux for now, after having tried for a few weeks.
>> Back to Window$ :-(
>
> Linux isn't for everyone. Be thankful that Windows suits your needs.

I guess the bigger question is: Wy respond to a post that isn't a
question, a constructive criticism or information pertinent to the group?

Perhaps the OP should have posted to alt.linux.sucks or some other
imaginatively titled group.

paul_s

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 07:30:24 +0100, "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net>
wrote:

>If you don't like the default location, you can tell rpm to install in other
>places too, just read the man page.

Are you sure he knows what that is? :o)

Ivan.

--

Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF
chown -R you ~/base

http://hlloyge.kickme.to/
delete _system_ to mail me

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 04:25:05 +0100, Yrrah
<Yrrah.YrrahYrrah.Yrrah********.com> wrote:

>Anthony Irwin <nospam@noemailhere.nowhere>:
>
>> It is the a way of structuring the system so you know where things are
>> and is similar to the program files directory in windows.
>
>Which I don't use. I install applications on a separate partition with
>my own directory/folder structure.

Why, on earth's name? I can't think of any reason for that. Those
green apps (which don't use registry) can be instaled wherever you
want; but others... when you reinstall, you'd have to reinstall most
of them, because you don't have nececary registry keys.

Ivan.

--

Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF
chown -R you ~/base

http://hlloyge.kickme.to/
delete _system_ to mail me

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 03:41:43 +0100, Yrrah
<Yrrah.YrrahYrrah.Yrrah********.com> wrote:

>It sucks! It's slow! It uses a lot of RAM!

Linux? I had Fedora Core 6, and with 3D desktop turned on, and with
system fully booted up, it took 120 megs of memory.

>I've looked at other distributions too but they did not recognize my
>monitor or other hardware. The Ubuntu install window went right off
>the screen so I could not even install that distribution.

Why would monitor have to be recognised? If not on list, select
Generic, and with max resolution it supports.

As far as instaler is concerned, if your graphics card isn't supported
properly, you can install in text mode.

>As things stand now Linux is not a serious competitor. It's only for
>hobbyists who like to play with an OS, I don't. If the Linux community
>does not get their act together and develop a good and reliable Linux
>GUI and stop this distribution **** with dozens or hundreds
>automatically installed unwanted programs, Linux will remain something
>for the sectarians only.

:o))) well, it has it's purpose. I'd rather setup
Linux+MySQL+Apache+PHP server FOR FREE, than buying MS Server 2003.

>I've given up on Linux for now, after having tried for a few weeks.
>Back to Window$ :-(

There is a problem here, and it is not Linux. It's you and your
unwillingness to learn something new and totally different. For people
like you, there is Microsoft.

Ivan.

--

Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF
chown -R you ~/base

http://hlloyge.kickme.to/
delete _system_ to mail me

Ivan Tisljar wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 07:30:24 +0100, "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net>
> wrote:
>
>> If you don't like the default location, you can tell rpm to install in other
>> places too, just read the man page.
>
> Are you sure he knows what that is? :o)

Most likely he didn't know about GNU/Linux until last weekend when he read a
little bit at PCLinuxOS and then wrote his post.


--

//Aho