Stop Microsoft
Operating Systems => Linux and UNIX => Topic started by: WaWAR_FA on 29 June 2002, 14:25
-
out of the 118 different opperating systems offered on this site which is the best alternative to windows?
i am trying to find a Os similar to XP(bleh)
1. the ability to load programs with out recompiling the kernel everytime(or atleast somewhat automated)
2. support for most name-brand hardware. (i hate surfing the web trying to find drivers for my crap, and i dont want to use old crap)
3. some thing that wont fuck up every 3 hours like XP does.( or something will a kill command so i can stop it before it takes everything down. something that wont try to throw everything in the kernel)
4. did you say free?(better than paying out 300$ for XP pro full version)( for 300$ bill gates better send a hot chick to my house and have her suck me off)
5.mutiple monitor support.(dosent work for XP thats for damn sure. of course ive tried red hat 7.1 and mandrake 8.1 and neither of them worked either.....)
post comments of suggestions on which is the best here.
post your critisims of my choice in leaving windoze at www.go-fuck-yourself-because-windoze-sucks.com (http://www.go-fuck-yourself-because-windoze-sucks.com)
-
hmmm, "which is the best" is not a very good topic title and subject. a better way to ask the same question is to say, how do the 118 os's on this compare, what are there features and stuff. a question asking which is the best will a best draw personal opions and worst draw shitbrained responses from some of the "less disirables" on this site. sorry if i sound harsh but to many good meaning posts have been screwed by these jerks
-
ok, of the 118 alternatives to windoze how do they compare to each other?
from experence of use what are your thoughts on each of them?
-
good, my experiance with linux is that it have very good performance and reliablity. my experiance with *bsd is that they require a bit more advanced user but are awsome at servers and ass-end systems. from the powerbook i have learned that macos pre X is that it is usable and functuaning and VERY fast. though macosx would probably have the best ease of use and compatibilty with odd hardware. it would also be better at video editing and such
-
ok let me do it this way.
1800meg athlon xp
1024 meg DDR ram
ati all in wonder redeon 7500 video
sound blaster audigy mp3+ sound
running DSL connection so i can d/l any of the OS and burn straight to disk to install.
should i just d/l them all and try them out one at a time?
-
one 20gig 7200 maxor drive
one 80gig 7200 maxor drive
-
hmmmm, redhat 7.3 would be my choice, some of the os's listed are like h4k3r os's, like complicated/simple beyound THE MORTAL REALM/*my way of saying if you don't like playing with endless setting's some just aren't for you*/. redhat 7.3 has great support around the board and i have managed to hook a few "odd" items up to it. includeding my $10 gamepad, my $20 lexmark printer a $7 CPiA netcam $20 yahoo interenet keyboard/*i wanna take a razor blade to the yahoo logo*/. also for different os you could try freebsd. i don't know what would work and what wouldn't on freebsd so i would say linux would be the best choice. another good linux choice might be the latest version of SuSe or Mandrake. all three of the linux distros that i have mentioned work quite well in compariosin to X-traProblems. you could try all the os's that are meant for your platform if you wanted to but as i said, some just aren't probably what you want./*then agian id take minix over windows anyday ;) */ so i in the end i would recomend try both redhat 7.3 and mandrake 8.2 becuase you have to pay for SuSe.
-
i recently heard something about AOL and red hat getting together and putting out an OS.
the reliability of redhat with the ease of use of AOL.
its linux for retards. :eek: :eek:
-
they kinda stoped talks or are hiding them. besides, aol being easy to use, is a bit on the suckky side. and no, lindowsos is linux for retards, partialy becuase it trys to be like what weir trying to escape. then again, aol linux would help to get rid of microsoft, but then wheir putting aol-time warner in charge, hardly a difference in my opionion
-
im trying to find something with the functionality of windoze without the bugs.
-
hmmm, funcionabilty, like what kinds of things are you looking to do/do with xp right now, and for crashing, i have linux machines with 15+ days of uptime and they still run like a fresh boot.
-
like be able to host my shoutcast broadcasts.
be able to serve pages
be able to install a probram onto my computer without wading through 20 different steps.
im lazy i want plug-and-play programing. i dont have time from crap.
-
hmmm, theres always the unix version of shoutcast, or icecast, never played with either of them
for serving pages, linux/apache is one of the best and most popular webserving solution's out there, and it works great
simple one clicks games, like what kinda games are we talking about here. all the quakes are supported nativly, so is RTCW, and they all run fast and more stable under linux then windows, there are a few others
and for installing software its not twenty steps its just a few
heres an example of installing software using a terminal, you see, alot of software for linux is in the sourcecode form, its really only a few commands to install software from source code, and when its done, its compiled for your system, which can lead to some insane optimazations that make things run fast as hell. also if you go with SuSe, Redhat, or mandrake, all three of those distibutions offer a package format called a .rpm file. easy to install and theres even several gui's for installing rpm files.
o and for windows games, WineX might be your best answer if theres no native port, it works great for me and i only had to change 4-5 configuration options, and i changed them for mainly asthetical reasons. well have fun
-
i want to be able to click a buton labeled install and not have to worry about compiling the kernel.
i play Ultima Online. linux take UO at all?
-
hmmmm, i don't know about about UO, i never got into UO/*it costs money*/ though, WineX might be able to help you, what WineX is, is a fork of Wine, which is a win32 compatiblity layer. WineX has a bunch of features that wine doesnt'/not allowed to. as for one click installs, at one point i even had the windows version of AIM working under linux with it.
i have done that before. i would also recomend getting a book on linux and reading through it a bit before you install and try to rember a few odd commands.
o and heres the transgaming website, from what i have read, you might have to go through a bit of directy creation for ultima.
http://www.transgaming.com/gamepage.php?gameid=139 (http://www.transgaming.com/gamepage.php?gameid=139)
o and by the way, a comment on WineX, its not a product, its a subscribtion that enables you download the product, sounds kinda odd. but the going rate is about $5 per month, and you can buy in blocks of 3 months, and what your actally paying for is devlopment of WineX, it sounds odd but it works
-
http://elxlinux.com/index.php (http://elxlinux.com/index.php) and http://lycoris.org/ (http://lycoris.org/) are supposed to be the most windows like. Although, i have never tried either.
-
quote:
Originally posted by WaWAR_FA:
out of the 118 different opperating systems offered on this site which is the best alternative to windows?
i am trying to find a Os similar to XP(bleh)
My only comments are as follows:
Why did you start a thread about "which is the best" when you clearly state that you want a system that is similar to XP? if you want one similar to XP, then use XP, or possibly windows 2000.
Sorry, but if you want to use a non Microsoft OS, they will not be similar to XP. Why there are legions of people out there who want a different system, that still acts like windows is beyond me. If you want windows, use windows. If you don't, then be prepared for it to be different.
That said, different does not mean difficult. After using windows, i would be very very surprised if you could not work Solaris, MacOS, MacOSX or any version of linux running KDE or GNOME (or a bunch of other systems too).
Decide for yourself. I'd suggest SusE, Mandrake or Red Hat though, like i do every couple of days when somebody starts a new "which is best" thread.
-
calum you missed my point.
i dont like windoze because of the spyware and the bug that are inherent in teh fuckedup coding m$ uses.
i like windoze because of the simplicity of use.
-
sorry to burst the bubble of fun but the only other "easy" platform is a macintosh, and since you obvuiosly have a brand new x86 machine that defintaly not an option. all i have to say is to try linux, and whichever os you think sounds cool.it doesn't not hurt to try new things./*well thats not the only thing i have to say but it sounded good*/. so just try all the different os's listed until you find on you like.
-
quote:
Originally posted by choasforages:
sorry to burst the bubble of fun but the only other "easy" platform is a macintosh, and since you obvuiosly have a brand new x86 machine that defintaly not an option. all i have to say is to try linux, and whichever os you think sounds cool.it doesn't not hurt to try new things./*well thats not the only thing i have to say but it sounded good*/. so just try all the different os's listed until you find on you like.
Agreed 100%. Linux isn't plug'n'play, nor is it ever likely to be. My personal preference is Debian, but that's 'cause I'm a control freak; Debian is by no means plug'n'play. I think you're looking at the wrong operating system. You might want to hang on until OpenBeOS is out, that's gonna be plug'n'play (as long as your hardware is compliant).
-
i didn't mean to be negative in that last post of mine there,
i would say mandrake, red hat and probably suse, are at least as easy to use as windows.
Installation, of the system and of programs, is however a bit harder than windows.
This is fine if you are just a user of a system, but if you own the machine, you will probably be system admin as well, ie you must keep your own config files up to date and know how to install and uninstall stuff.
Luckily there's a lot of easy to use documentation about system admin of linux and GNU, so if you can be arsed to look something up whenever there's an admin job to be done, then you're good to go. In that case you may as well get one of the major distros since the actual user part is a lot more stable than windows, and as i say is as easy to use.
If you buy a licence from a main vendor like red hat or mandrake, you can be entitled to all sorts of tech support as well, for added benefit if you are having problems with the system admin part...
-
i got mandrake 8.1 redhat 7 and 7.1 and have never been able to quite figure them out.
im a noob at this stuff.
which os is noob friendliest?
-
hmmmm, the one that you buy a book for/*i know i siad it someplace else too, buts it vital to have a good linux book to start with*/
-
quote:
Originally posted by WaWAR_FA:
i recently heard something about AOL and red hat getting together and putting out an OS.
the reliability of redhat with the ease of use of AOL.
its linux for retards. :eek: :eek:
It was just a rumor.. AOL was actually going to use Red Hat on their new servers, so they met up, and people started a rumor. And it's pretty old news, too..
[ June 30, 2002: Message edited by: TheQuirk ]
-
ok, ive now been forced to use xp on this piece of shit box. i know exactly what you guys mean when you say crashes. i goint to get my webcam and point to at teh monitor while i use my laptop to record video. this thing goesdown like every 30 seconds!!
anybody got a copy of redhat 7.3 they could mail me? ill pay postage.