I hate having to ask this, but how do you install programs?

[slave]

Yeah but most of the "free" apps for Windows either have adware/spyware loaded in them or they nag you to spend $20 to get the "registered" version.  Sorry but I just had to point that out.  For instance, the  first two programs I saw on the tucows link doublefresh posted were shareware apps(which I loathe) and cost $31 and $21, respectively.

Furthermore none of that stuff actually *comes* with Windows; you have to download it, which can be a chore.  Oh, and there is no source code (but who needs that anyway, eh?)

[emh]

quote:Originally posted by Zombie9920:
And to think. In Windows all you have to do is double click the executable, click next a couple of times and click finish then your program(and even some drivers) will be installed.

Even the simplest things in Windows is a chore in Linux.

(EDIT)I bet you don't see many people asking how to install programs for Windows. LoL

[ November 17, 2002: Message edited by: Zombie9920 ]

What if they download a zip file?

You can't exactly double click that and install it, now can you?

Before Winzip came about, people had to rely on pkzip or pkunzip to deal with zip files, which required the command line (aka the DOS prompt).  

So don't bash Linux just because the command line occasionally has to be used.

[Fett101]

quote:Originally posted by emh:


What if they download a zip file?

You can't exactly double click that and install it, now can you?

Before Winzip came about, people had to rely on pkzip or pkunzip to deal with zip files, which required the command line (aka the DOS prompt).  

So don't bash Linux just because the command line occasionally has to be used.

OMG!! You have to doubleclick the zip, then click and drag the files to a folder, and then double click the setup. OH THE HUMANITY!!!

And Windows doesn't require the command line currently for zips, correct. Linux does. Linux will never go mainstream with average consumers until they eliminate the need for the command line. Noobs would take one glance at the command line and crap thier pants.

[voidmain]

And actually you don't have to use the command line in most linux distros as there are graphical archiving tools just like Winzip in most. You click on a zip file and up pops a utility just like Winzip.

[Stryker]

These sort of things bother me. I can install things usually with no problem. But the installers should come in some executable format like most setup programs in other operating systems do. Having to compile a program every time you get one is frustrating. Why do they do this? It's great if you want to have the source code, but what about the simple folk that just want to double click something and have it install? the makers of gcc should consider a deployment tool or something like that to make this easier for developers. But then again there might be some reason that it is necessary to recompile everything, maybe i'm missing something.


(edit)
I do understand that this is not linux's fault but the devopers just don't make them, don't get me wrong.

[ November 18, 2002: Message edited by: Stryker ]

[voidmain]

Have you heard of RPM? RPM is the equivelant of the executable installers you are talking about. You download an RPM you click on it and it installs.  The source distributions have nothing to do with one operating system vs another. I can download source distributions for Windows just like I can for Linux and not only is it not easier in Windows when I do this, it is HARDER.

[emh]

quote:Originally posted by fett101:

OMG!! You have to doubleclick the zip, then click and drag the files to a folder, and then double click the setup. OH THE HUMANITY!!!

No you can't.  Only if you have WinZip installed, which isn't installed by default on any version of Windows prior to XP, which is what the majority of Windows users still have.  Windows doesn't come with this ability by default.  People still have to know that they have to get WinZip.

 

quote:
And Windows doesn't require the command line currently for zips, correct. Linux does. Linux will never go mainstream with average consumers until they eliminate the need for the command line. Noobs would take one glance at the command line and crap thier pants.[/QB]

So how come DOS was used for so long?  Or Apple IIe?  Command line is nothing new, it just has different forms.

For the record, you don't have to use the command line to extract a tar.bz2 or tar.gz file anymore.  You can open it by clicking on it in your file manager, then just copying the directory within and pasting it where you want it to go.

Sometimes, there's an executable installer within.  Sometimes, there's just a bunch of files and instructions on what to do with them.  This is the case in both Linux and Windows.  It's not that hard to follow instructions.  You're making this out to be harder than it is.

[doublefresh]

quote:i'm not gonna waste my precious bandwaith downloading programs taht should have been included with the OS!!!  

Lol, since when did RPM become part of Linux??? It's a program that you can download for Linux just like winzip is a program you can download for windows.

Just because Mandrake or Red Hat include it on a CD of free programs does not mean it was made by the makers of Linux. What I mean to say is RPM is not part of the operating system itself.

Maybe you are one of the people who buy Linux in a box. Not me. I download it from the Mandrake site, and then I download the other programs that I want to add to my OS. There certainly are programs I like to use that are not included on the Mandrake CD.

You may still be on a modem but I've had DSL for years and downloading 50 MB files takes no time at all. I downloaded the entire Gig + of Mandrake 9 in just under 4 hours. A 2 minute program like Winzip is a joke. Get with the times my slow friend Port scanning on a modem suck also. Maybe thats why your windows always locks up on you!

Oh god no! Not shareware. Only Microsoft users would charge for programs!!!! Wrong again. There is a ton of shareware $20 - $4000 programs for Linux as well.

I can find enough quality freeware for windows 2000, xp , 98, 95, NT to keep me busy for the next 20 years. Linux is not the only OS to offer quality free apps.

Linux may be a bit more stable, open source and less spyware but other than that I don't see why so many people here are 100% against something that actually works pretty well.

I hear alot of you bitching about the price of windows. You claim $1500 computers with another $1000 of software on it.

Bull shit. You can buy a used Pentium III 750 in the newspaper for $250 and install a legal copy of XP for another $150 for a grand total of $400
There are free versions (clones) of the microsoft office suite and all the freeware you need to do just about anything you need to do on a computer.

So for $400 an average computer user can have a decent computer.
For $250 they could have the same computer with Linux but have a hell of a time learning the command line entry and how to configure a number of things that XP does automatically.

Again I state I like Linux. I'm learning to use it. I realize it has some advantages over MS products but mainstream america is not ready for it because it is not easy enough yet and saving $150 is not that big a deal.

[voidmain]

quote:Originally posted by doublefresh:
Lol, since when did RPM become part of Linux??? It's a program that you can download for Linux just like winzip is a program you can download for windows.

Just because Mandrake or Red Hat include it on a CD of free programs does not mean it was made by the makers of Linux. What I mean to say is RPM is not part of the operating system itself.

I am beginning to wonder if you know anything at all about Linux, or have ever touched it. Are you sure you are not really Zombie?

First of all Linux is just a kernel, although many people incorrectly use that name generically as the term for a general distribution (or operating system). I am one of those people, because it is easier.  

Linux proper is just a kernel not an operating system, just like the NT kernel is a kernel, not an operating system. All of the other things included with a distro make up the operating system. RPM *is* part of the operating system in RedHat, Mandrake, and SuSe. RedHat developed RPM (That's why it's called the RedHat package Manager). It's equivelant to "Add/Remove Programs in Windows", or is that not part of the Windows operating system?

In RPM based Linux "operating systems" programs are bundled in an RPM. In Windows they are usually bundled in a self extracting/installing executable. In RPM based distros you click on the RPM and it installs very similarly.

Now, do you have any other words of wisdom to teach us about Linux based OSs?

And give me a quote on a cluster of Windows 2000 servers running SQL Server and IIS for serving an busy hosting site. I'll get you a quote for Linux and we'll compare prices. BTW, I'm going to have some developers so throw about 30 licenses in for Visual Studio.NET. Oh wait, we're going to need Exchange so they can collaborate. Get me some licenses for that as well.

[ November 19, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]

[slave]

quote: Lol, since when did RPM become part of Linux??? It's a program that you can download for Linux just like winzip is a program you can download for windows.  

Well, Linux actually is just a kernel, but most people mean Linux as in a Linux distribution.  RPM is the software management system that's a part of every RPM-based linux distribution.  There is never any need to download it.


 

quote: Oh god no! Not shareware. Only Microsoft users would charge for programs!!!! Wrong again. There is a ton of shareware $20 - $4000 programs for Linux as well.

True, albeit not nearly as many, and I've never seen any that are very useful.  I'd also suspect that Linux users are more likely pay for any commercial (proprietary) software they get because they are usually very principled individuals.

 

quote: Linux may be a bit more stable, open source and less spyware but other than that I don't see why so many people here are 100% against something that actually works pretty well.

Hehe, just what do you mean by "less" spyware?  I've probably said this before, but you see a lot of anti-Microsoft sentiment around here because after all the site is called fuckmicrosoft.com.  Most of the people here are against Windows out of sheer hatred for Microsoft and for more practical reasons such as cost effectiveness, flexibility, the appeal of open standards, low suceptibility to viruses, superior programming environment, etc.  I use Windows myself and I can find little wrong with it GUI-wise, but like void main said in some other post, the GUI is not the OS as some people would have you believe.

 

quote: Bull shit. You can buy a used Pentium III 750 in the newspaper for $250 and install a legal copy of XP for another $150 for a grand total of $400
There are free versions (clones) of the microsoft office suite and all the freeware you need to do just about anything you need to do on a computer.

I assume you're talking about OpenOffice?  Linux users would go a step further and tell you paying for the OS itself is uneccesary.  If you're going to use a cross-platform office suite like Openoffice why not just use Linux and save yourself 150 dollars?  I sure wish I had 150 extra dollars right now.

 

quote: Again I state I like Linux. I'm learning to use it. I realize it has some advantages over MS products but mainstream america is not ready for it because it is not easy enough yet and saving $150 is not that big a deal.

Eh, who cares about mainstream america anyway?    

[ November 19, 2002: Message edited by: Windows XP User #5225982375 ]

[Stryker]

quote:Originally posted by void main:
Have you heard of RPM? RPM is the equivelant of the executable installers you are talking about. You download an RPM you click on it and it installs.  The source distributions have nothing to do with one operating system vs another. I can download source distributions for Windows just like I can for Linux and not only is it not easier in Windows when I do this, it is HARDER.

I wasn't sure if this was in any reference to my statement, but i mean... why do you need an rpm format either? And windows executable installers are not run through a program run on windows (except maybe the damned install shield stuff), it's all extracted through a self extracting file pending the answers you give to questions during setup. Why don't any linux developers make something like this? rpm may be easier, .tar stuff may have more flexibility, but nobody ever makes a setup program for linux. I've seen maybe 2. I think sun's java stuff has a program you can just do a chmod on and execute. I'm not bashing linux or anything, i love linux, but i'm just curious as to why nobody makes things that don't rely on other programs for it to install, like tar, or gzip, or rpm, or apt-get, or any other method.

[Doogee]

quote: Eh, who cares about mainstream america anyway?  

Good fuckin call, not everything is america. people that think EVERYTHING revolves around america are asshole. sure its massive and has most of the power but thats from a democratic view.
Were talking about software etc, and a software user in "Mainstream America" is just as important as me. Your average Joe Blow aussie.

[voidmain]

RPM *is* the setup program. Having executable installation programs is one great way of spreading viruses. It's one of the many many ways viruses and trojans make their way into Windows. RPM extracts, checks signatures, installs, etc. Much more than a self extracting EXE files does. You should be asking why these game companies don't put their games out in an RPM rather than having their own non-standard installer. You can only compare self installing (3rd party install shield stuff) with RPM. You can not compare stuff that is distributed via *.tar.gz files because you can download *.tar.gz (or *.zip) files containing source code for Windows as well. The package manager is equivelant to an self installing executable.

Another big advantage of distributing software in an RPM vs an non-standard installer is that the package gets entered into the RPM database. Your system will know exactly what is installed and what is not. Sure the UT installer is nice but it doesn't register the software into the software management system so how do you remove this software or verify it's components after it's installed? "rpm -V packagename" is a great utility. It will tell if any of your files have been tampered with, among many many other things.

I would much rather see all software distributed via RPM. I get RPMs whenever it's possible (which is 99.9% of the time). Very rarely do I have to build a package from scratch, something you *can't* do in Windows without a compiler.

[doublefresh]

Bah! What I meant to say was since when did RPM become part of the kernel? Obviously it's not part of the kernel.

I'm sure if you had a distro that did not include RPM you could install it later. Just like if you installed Winzip later on Microsoft 98.

I would not consider Winzip to be part of the operating system just as I do not think of RPM as part of the operating system. RPM is an add on.

Even though taskman is not part of the kernel most people would agree it's part of the microsoft operating system. Perhaps someone bought Microsoft office with microsoft 98. I would not consider Microsoft office part of the operating system even though the user may have bought the two together for a special price.

I have read a book or two on Linux and I've installed at least 6 different versions of it at one time or another. I do not consider myself comfortable using Linux yet because simple tasks still take me hours and hours. With time I hope to get better. In the meantime when I need to do something quickly I go with what I know, MS. When I have time to burn I try on Mandrake 9

[Doogee]

der of course its not part of the kernel but it is included with all RPM based distros, Red Hat, Mandrake, SuSE and sundry. meaning u dont have to download it, unlike winzip on winders.