Re: [News] Another Fine Example of the Secret Life of Linux on the
PNutts wrote:
> "NoStop" wrote:
>
>> PNutts wrote:
>>
>> In any case, it might be worth your time to learn that setting up a RAID0
>> on a desktop computer is a very silly thing to do.
>
> Your opinion, but I don't agree. My system is smokin' fast and my data is
> stored on RAID1. It is common for high-end MBs to offer RAID, so it
> appears the industry doesn't think it is silly, either. Or it is a
> conspiracy to sell more hard drives.
>
I agree with you that it certainly can increase throughput. It is still
FakeRAID on those "high-end" motherboards. SoftRAID on Linux will easily do
as well.
>> But you seem to be the kind of guy that likes to learn the hard way.
>
> What is the "easy" way to learn Ubuntu when nobody I know has any interest
> in it? I grew weary searching forums with Linux users arguing amongst
> themselves which way to do something and the dangers of doing it wrong.
> The advice is not targeted towards new users. Answers that only other
> Linux users understand isn't much help.
>
Most of my associates use Linux and I belong to a Linux Users Group, so I
don't have any shortage of folks to discuss this OS with. I have found that
the Ubuntu online help is very good and really geared to newbies.
>> We'll see how much time you waste
>> and what it's worth to you when one of those drives in that stripe go
>> south. Have fun!
>
> Your assumption that I can't restore my system quickly (from an image) is
> incorrect. Having used multiple PCs and servers at home since the '70s, I
> can tell you I've never had data loss from a failed hard drive. And that
> includes restoring from a cassette tape backup.
>
I'm sure our computer experience goes back to the same time frames. I'm
hearing you. And I agree that imaging the hard drive is a nice way to have
an easy way to restore. All the boxes on my LAN are automatically backed up
daily and incrementally so I know that data loss doesn't need to be an
issue. I guess I was talking in far more general terms as to where most
computer users are at in this regards.
>> Most Ubuntu users have managed to install the OS themselves as it doesn't
>> come preloaded on very many systems.
>
> I agree, but that wasn't what was stated. The graphical installer for
> non-RAID systems looks great.
>
It certainly is and very simple to do.
>> Of course there are some Wintards out
>> there that are so intimidated by the thought of having to run something
>> different than what they're used to, the only way they'd install it is if
>> there was someone with experience there to help them.
>
> I agree that Windows can be installed and run by people with no
> discernable technical skills. With that said, most people are resistant to
> change in any form. Especially when they already are able to do everything
> they need to do and question the value of learning completely new skills
> of a niche product to do almost the same thing. Personally, the older I
> get, the less inclined I am to learn a new boot loader.
>
The older I get the more positive I feel in my abilities to explore the
world of computers further. I guess I find that I've always appreciated a
challenge and learning new things, so the customability and scalability of
Linux I find rather exciting. I'm not suggesting that that is for everyone.
>> The very fact that millions of Windoze users are trying to get out from
>> under the Microsoft control of their desktops by moving over to Linux
>
> LOL
>
>> speaks volumes about how far Microsoft has overstepped the bounds in this
>> regards. End-users are simply getting fed up with the insecurities of
>> running Windows, the "genuine advantage" nagging, the instability of
>> Windows with "updates" that screw up their systems and the gross
>> restrictions of DRM.
>
> Well, for me I'm just curious and open minded. If I find something is
> better, I'll stick with it. I, along with most people, do not agree with
> your FUD assessment. The main insecurity of Vista is the user behind the
> keyboard and I have never had a Windows system compromised. I am not
> nagged for anything. My Vista is stable as a rock, more so than any
> version of Windows before it. I have no DRM issues with my 30+GB of legal
> music files.
>
Sorry, but I'm sick and tired of the end-user always being blamed for the
inadequacies of Microsoft's operating systems when it comes to security.
The attacks against that OS is so large and growing at such an astounding
rate, that there is no way AV software to possibly keep up. AV software is
always 10 steps behind the threats in the wild and the need to bog down a
system with multiple layers of protection (condom on top of condom) is
something I'm not longer prepared to live with. I've seen too many Windows
systems over the years so compromised that it is not a laughing matter. It
is sad and costing all of us tremendously in terms of just the bandwidth
stolen each second on the Net.
>>
>> Why should you be so intimidated by this?
>
> I'm not intimidated as I made the initial effort. I just choose to spend
> my time differently. It wasn't worth the time to spend a few evenings just
> learning how to install.
>
Fair enough. Linux is not everyone's cup of tea the same way that Windows
isn't for others. To each his own.
>>Do you hold Microsoft shares?
>
> No, but I wish I did. With that kind of scratch I wouldn't visit
> newsgroups for entertainment. )
>
>> Do you make a living cleaning malware off of Windows boxes?
>
> No. I'm not sure what this has to do with installing Ubuntu on RAID0.
>
Nothing really, just a challenge to your negativity. I know many around here
that have ulterior motives for slamming Linux.
>> Or are you so incompetent that you can't imagine leaving the security
>> blanket of an OS that locks you into the Microsoft-way of running a
>> computer?
>
> No. I'm also not sure what you mean by the "Microsoft-way". Menus, icons,
> clicks... I see more similarities than differences. I spend most of my
> time in applications. I just bought the wifey a new Mac, which to me is
> more different from Windows than the latest Linux releases.
>
Linux is based on a server/client model that is completely different than
Windows. It is also built on discreet small applications that each do their
jobs very well and can be harnessed to work together to get tasks done. So
past the desktop view with it's icons and apps that a Windows user is
familiar with, is also a whole other world of computing based on the *NIX
model, which offers incredible and efficient power to get tasks done. So on
face value to the uninitiated, it has the look of Windows, but that is
really only about 20% of the power of the system. The other 80% consists of
these multitude of individual apps that through things like piping can be
used to build extremely powerfull "applications". The basic commands can be
found here and in the case of Ubuntu, even more exist through builtin
python, perl, etc.:
http://www.oreillynet.com/linux/cmd/
The ability to harness these through bash scripts for example and then to
create desktop launchers for them, makes the system incredibly powerful way
beyond just the desktop/packaged apps available of which there are 25,000+
software packages.
>> The big question ... why did you even try to install Ubuntu if you're so
>> convinced that Windows is so much better?
>
> I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion as I never made that
> statement. I wanted to see what all the buzz was about.
>
I'm sorry that you didn't get the chance and got stymied at the get-go
because of your RAID0 setup. Of course, there are ways around it, but you
have already said your interest doesn't warrant the effort.
>> Why, having been unsuccessful in
>> installing Linux and hence not ever really running it can you come to the
>> conclusion it's "a hobby OS"?
>
> To say I have never run Linux is incorrect. To say it is not a hobby OS is
> disingenuous. Google is your friend.
>
Firms like IBM, HP, Intel, etc. don't pour billions of dollars into a hobby
OS, my friend. Nor do they setup whole Linux development departments if the
OS is only something for hobbyists. I think you're simply misinformed.
>>A closed mind is such a waste.
>
> You demonstrated that in abundance. Instead of insults and assumptions,
> you could probably do some good with actual advice. But that isn't your
> purpose here, is it?
I have tried to offer a positive alternative to those seeking a way out of
Vista. I'm not here to educate people on the use of Linux. There are plenty
of places to seek that kind of help and I contribute to those discussions
in many ways and places on the Net. I've been attacked as a "troll" because
I dare to mention an alternative. These attacks have always come from Vista
Fanboys who want to hide the fact that a viable alternative exits.
Nice chatting with you.
Cheers.
--
What does Bill Gates use?
http://tinyurl.com/2zxhdl
Proprietary Software: a 20th Century software business model.
Be Afraid ... Be Very Afraid ... of Francis' RELATIVES!
Frank, hard at work on his Vista computer all day:
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/compost.htm
