Operating Systems > macOS
Alright Macheads, lets talk real deal here
KernelPanic:
quote:Originally posted by WMD:
[QB]
From Netcraft, right? There's a bug in Netcraft's software that prevents uptimes greater than 497 from showing.
--- End quote ---
It's actually a bug in the kernel. It was fixed in early 2.5.x development, unfortunately that was less than 497 days ago so we won't see any uptimes over 497 on there for a while.
KernelPanic:
quote:Originally posted by Sauron The Deceivenator:
my NIC and sound drivers did not work, and even though the reiserfs driver was selected, and not a module it would not boot, it failed with a kernel panic.
--- End quote ---
It probably would have been a better idea to put your filesystem driver in the initrd, right ;)
And also like WMD said, you had just jumped on the brand spanking new release. This isn't really common among users and is itself evidence that you have a degree of technical confidence.
The average Joe user will not have had any trouble because the major distributors let things settle somewhat before they introduced the 2.6 series into their distributions.
solarismka:
quote:Originally posted by Sauron The Deceivenator:
hmmm.... when I upgraded my box to 2.6.0, right after it came out, even though I had the drivers I needed installed,...or so said "make menuconfig",
--- End quote ---
That kernel is still new. I remeber when the 2.4 came out. I waited a long time before I switched. In the current 2.4 kernel I'v never seen such a thing. I'm using th 2.4.20 kernel and it suits me fine.
quote:
my NIC and sound drivers did not work, and even though the reiserfs driver was selected, and not a module it would not boot, it failed with a kernel panic. I have spent more like in make menuconfig hunting the right module down, then installing drivers. which was completely straightforward, no "hunting for drivers" as you call it.
--- End quote ---
On a 2.6 right? Well yea. Like I've said. Evgen though it has released there are some bugs to work out. Its new with a new setup. But its not the same as windows where it hasn't changed since 1989! To boot no matter what version, it always need some sort of drivers that has to be installed that never work properly. By now you would think they would get it but they haven't thus M$ is nothing more than a marketing machine and has nothing to do with the OS industry. Linux, BSD and Apple do.
quote:
the hardware problems I have had in linux are only in linux
--- End quote ---
Well for me it has been opposit. People always say that "linux has bad driver support." This is infact wrong! The fact is that considering that Linux being Open source, has to rewrite the drivers and may not have a corperation's help. Pluse givin the fact of Linux age. It has WAY better support than windows!
quote:
I have never had a problem with any of my hardware in Windows.
--- End quote ---
Maby for the few. But as someone who is a sysadmin and someone who has worked for tech support I can definnatly tell you that lots of people have and blaming the end user, bad hard ware and or software is not an exuse!
quote:
all of said hardware is well-respected name-brand stuff too, no obscure no-name stuff either.
--- End quote ---
I have a p4 running a radeon7500 with Sound Blaster Live! All quality name brand stuff. Guess what? Linux works! I've even installed it on 'crappy' OEM's that the Windows Zealots claim that windows only crashes on those boxes because of that same 'shitty hardware.' Guess what? Linux runs fine!
quote:
Solaris, in your eyes, is there anything Microsoft can do RIGHT?!
--- End quote ---
Of course they can. Because of windows. Writing a virus, trojan or spyware of some kind has never been easier!
quote:
it seems to me you are just pooh-pooh-ing them for no real reason.
--- End quote ---
Typical Windows Zealot response. These are LEGITIMATE problems but for windows lovers its always the enduserbadhardwaresoftware's fault. Never the OS. No no. M$ is perfect!
quote:
PS. I have never seen a linux box report anuptime of more than 497 days. I have seen windows boxes keep on chugging for longer than that.
--- End quote ---
Well I've never even seen a windows box last longer than 6 months tops. I have seen a Linux box run over 3 years without any stability or security problems and I've seen FreeBSD and BSD/OS last longer than that!
solarismka:
quote:Originally posted by Aloone:
Solaris,
WinDOS (Any version before ME) called the DOS kernel for some things and 95+ had Win32 slapped on top. NT is based on VMS an OS that used to be as good as UNIX , MS did fuck if up a bit though but it is still better than WinDOS.
--- End quote ---
We all know the technical differences between 9x and NT. That was not my point. My point was the actual use with security and stability in mind. In that point. Both OS'es ARE the same.
You can make ME just as stable and just as 'secure' as any other windows. The only difference is that 9x takes a heck of alot less computer power and any program will not run on another version of windows or windows program.
quote:
XP is both better and worse than Win2K, I prefer Win2Ks UI and its faster, but XP boots up quicker and the registry is also journaled.
--- End quote ---
Again you are right when it comes to the technical aspect. No one is going to argue with that. But, I found XP extreamly slow! Not only in the UI but also in the boot up process. Its the same as win2k and NT4. Its the same as 9x if 9x had to boot and go through check all the time.
quote:
Windows can be faster than Linux if you have shit Linux drivers and good Windows drivers. Because of this I run XP on 256MB of RAM and its faster than RedHat 9 on the same hardware, but it still doesn't beat Vector Linux though.
--- End quote ---
Key word, "IF" Thats a big if! The majority of drivers do not work properly with windows and this includes name brand stuff. Windows can be faster if also it boots with no virus scanner, no adware removal scanner, no reset back software, had no updates (Service Packs/virus dats,) had no software but what it came with installed and no fire wall! But if we are going to set up such a system then the stability of windows will also increase greatly.
Linux with all the things it has compared with all the things windows needs, virus scanner, ad remover, firewall etc... boots a heck of a lot faster!
quote:
Drivers run together with the kernel in ring 0 so they have access to the entire system, (greater privilege level than root), and your all programs run at a lower privilege level, thus if you have a bad driver on any OS it can severely fuck it up.
--- End quote ---
To a point yes. But being that its Open Source. I find that a greater care is made when writing such drivers with plenty of tests. Everything avilable thus I see a better quaility job done with the work when it comes to drivers and Linux.
Thus I find that you will not have the same problems under Linux as you do with winows. Because Linux is also modulated it can easily see what drivers it needs, select it and install it without any kind of user intervetion. A great stress releaf when you have to repair 100's of boxes in a week!
Comepare this with windows where you need to find the correct drivers in th first place, limited help avilable and even though you may have the correct drivers for the correct version of windows its STILL fucks up!
quote:I find driver trouble shooting in Windows very easy,
--- End quote ---
I found it to be opposit. Booting into 'safe mode' and/or DOS. Finding out that some software and or hardware install had fucked up the registry or a .dll fil came currupt or is some how 'missing' an extream pain in the ass!
quote: if you install the wrong driver Windows will roll back to the previous one, even in Win95 if you installed the wrong vidio driver it would default to a genercic VGA driver.
--- End quote ---
I know that feature. It doesn't work. When I roll back the system, the problem is STILL there and unreslved. The best way of solving it is to give it a fresh reinstall and hope for the best. Pluse now you have the added stress of putting all your other software back onto the system. The whole thing can take upto 3 days depending what you have and what you use the system for! Also rolling back to a 'standard vga' driver does not help as well. Expecialy when you do have that name brand hardware and a top noch monitor and all you can see is that ugly 16 bit color low resolution setup and the drivers for your graphics card somehow sit silent even though you've tried your hardest to get the damn thing to work.
Personaly I've spent long hours fixing windows where I could of taken that time and spent it on my family. Thats my beef with windows! But the fact that it IS so insecure is great too. If you want to set up your own test box and want to know how an 'explot' works, then its a great learning tool!
quote:
Often Linux drivers are worse thahn Windows drivers , because the hardware manufactures won't write drivers or disclose details about their hardware to protect trade secrets.
--- End quote ---
Actually that right there is WHY linux drivers are better! The fact is not only are the copanies themselves are keeping secrests but so are the people under windows. This lack of communication brings about the problem of windows! The fact is the people under Linux has the whole OS open to them so the can figure the problems out. Pluse even though a corperation does not back them, any errors that the drivers produce can be easily fixed and retested by a large group of talented people. Because the drive is to make a quality driver that is not driven by the hype of marketing and protected by 'trade secrets.'
quote:
Linux drivers are often hacked together by reverse engineering, a classic example of this is the Linux NTFS driver which is no where near as good as the Windows NTFS driver.
--- End quote ---
But why should linux even use NTFS? FAT works great with linux and raiserFS or any othet native file system works great with linux. Linux is not windows and not Microsoft so why should NTFS work as great as windows. The fact that NTFS works under linux speaks volums of linux since windows can't even run a linux file system properly. But then again windows is not linux! Most drivers are not 'hacked together' as you put it, likewize the people who make windows drivers are not 'lazy.' The difference between the to is what the OS strides for. Windows was made in a time when marketing and Licensces rule. That is quickly changing. As we become more dependent on these machines we want better quality than just simple PR and FUD! Thus the days of windows is over.
quote:
This is often also the case with some video card and printer drivers,
--- End quote ---
I disagree! I've gotten may radeon with S-video out to work like a charm! I've gotten my sound card to work with little problems and there has been plent of help. Appart for the simple 'make,' 'make install' to update my printer drivers, yast or any other configuration wizard has worked great at setting up my printer!
quote:
indeed it is the case with my S3 savage pro graphics card.
--- End quote ---
I run that card on on of my older machines. It worked great under Fedora Core 1 and SuSE. Dell Optiplex uses such a card.
quote:Windows driver support is excellent since MS monopoly position forces hardware manufactures to write drivers.
--- End quote ---
Key word here 'forces.' Lack of communication between Microsoft and the copanies that write the drives pluse lack of help for the end user, I feel, is why windows drivers are so bad. If what you say is true then the driver problem in windows would of been corrected and solved by windows 98! It has not! Its the same problem through out the windows family! Thus they have not only failed at solving the problem but these are the same problems since the days of win95! Yet Linux has progressed passed that stage!
quote:But having said that, if you are very careful and only buy Linux compatable hardware you won't have a problem and Linux will run and run.
--- End quote ---
If you buy the correct hardware for windows, then the same should happen. Infact I've seen those machines with the 'offical built for windows blah blah blah' stuck on the side yet I still see the same insecure and unstable troubles.
quote:Anyway this section is ment to be about Macs, not Windows, I know how easy it is to change the subject but thist debate belongs in the Windows/Linux section.
--- End quote ---
Not really. Even though it has alot of windows and Linux in it. Its because the creater of the threat, I feel, had put out some FUD and I felt that should of been corrected. Because anyone reading that would assume that Linux has bad driver support when in fact it does not! Its as bad as me assuming that Mac's are shit because I only tried it once and complain that its hard to use. Its stupid!
Even though I am not a Mac user I can tell you that Macs ARE very secure and VERY easy to use!
You, or I for that matter. May not be used to it, thus may find it difficult in some areas. But its not like windows where instead of getting used to the machine then getting your work done, you are actualy fixing problems!
I don't know about the 'wonky video crashes a mac' but I have never seen such a thing and my friends that DO use that OS do not find such a thing occuring eather. The beuty of a MAC is that you can go out and by a brand new machine that will work for ever, is secure, stable and can install hardware easily!
Because of such things there is no need to spend extra amount of money in tech support, warrenties and the likes thus Macs are cheeper than windows!
The beuty of Linux is that is a cheep afordable OS that can do lots of things on cheep old hardware and the x86 platform without spending a whole lot on warrenties and repairs and hardware can be installed easily!
They both have their strengths an weekness'es but they are good OS'es if you wnat to get your work done!
They are not maketing toys put out by a mega giant that just has no clue about the OS industry!
However, windows does have its place. Its greatist weekness is also its strength! Thus a great OS to tinker with as a hobby!
Aloone_Jonez:
quote:Originally posted by kn0wn:
We all know the technical differences between 9x and NT. That was not my point. My point was the actual use with security and stability in mind. In that point. Both OS'es ARE the same.
--- End quote ---
Yes and its these technical differences that make NT better than Win95 to ME.
quote:Originally posted by kn0wn:
You can make ME just as stable and just as !secure' as any other windows. The only difference is that 9x takes a heck of alot less computer power and any program will not run on another persion of windows or windows program.
--- End quote ---
FUD!
Read my previous post again,the NT kernel was not made by MS, VMS developers were drafted
in, thus it contains some VMS code and is a lot better that Win95 to ME. VMS was an industrial strength
operating system that beat UNIX in someways.
Win95 to ME was shit, the crappy FAT32 file system was unstable and more prone to corruption than NTFS.
quote:Originally posted by kn0wn:
Again you are right when it comes to the technical aspect. No one is going to argue with that. But, I found XP extreamly slow! Not only in the UI but also in the boot up process. Its the same as win2k and NT4. Its the same as 9x if 9x had to boot and to through check all the time.
--- End quote ---
FUD!
Win95 to ME used FAT/F32 which was shit and slowed things down.
XP boots up a lot quicker than Win2k it features pre-emptive booting, meaning that for the first 3
boots XP aranges the File system so that the boot up files are in the correct boot order.
quote:Originally posted by kn0wn:
Key word, "IF" Thats a big if! The majority of drivers do not work properly with windows and this includes name brand stuff.
--- End quote ---
FUD!
Its not unusual for hardware to work under Linux but be far from fully funtional, printer/scanners
often print but don't scan, sound cards often work but the 3D without enhancement and graphics cards often work but the 3D accelerator doesn't. In Windows most drivers work very well often the drivers aren't written by MS at all but funneyly enough by the hardware manufacturer.
For example my printer/scanner came with both Windows and Mac drivers, they were suplied by Leximark so the Windows driver is as good/bad as the Mac driver.
quote:Originally posted by kn0wn:
Windows can be faster if also it boots with no virus scanner, no adware removal scanner, no reset back software, had no updates (Service Packs/virus dats,) had no software but what it came with installed and no fire wall! But if we are going to set up such a system then the stability of windows will also increase greatly.
Linux with all the things it has compared with all the things windows needs, virus scanner, ad remover, firewall etc... boots a heck of a lot faster!
--- End quote ---
True.
I agree, you shouldn't need any of that shit, it should be built in to the OS, but never the less XP still boots faster than Win2K.
quote:Originally posted by kn0wn:
To a point yes. But being that its Open Source. I find that a greater care is made when writing such drivers with plenty of tests. Everything avilable thus I see a better quaility job done with the work when it comes to drivers and Linux.
Thus I find that you will not have the same problems under Linux as you do with winows. Because Linux is also modulated it can easily see what drivers it needs, select it and install it without any kind of user intervetion. A great stress releaf when you have to repair 100's of boxes in a week!
Comepare this with windows where you need to find the correct drivers in th first place, limited help avilable and even though you may have the correct drivers for the correct version of windows
its STILL fucks up!
--- End quote ---
The open source argument doesn
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version