BBC Onlie (sic)

Discussion topics, Linux related - not requests for help

Moderators: ChrisThornett, LXF moderators

is Linux ready for the desktop

yes
20
77%
no
2
8%
maybe
4
15%
 
Total votes : 26

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: BBC Onlie (sic)

Postby andychannelle » Wed May 25, 2005 9:34 pm

Glad to oblige.
andychannelle
LXF regular
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 4:08 pm

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: BBC Onlie (sic)

Postby jjmac » Thu May 26, 2005 1:51 am

What can be said (scratch, scratch) :)


It's on my desktop ... (well , not really a desk. not sure what i would call that really, more of a table ...)

>>
No, no and no again! Sorry but, your mum, landlord etc. wont be able to get stuff working (plugins etc.) on Windows either!
>>

Yep, some will even take their car in for a radiator top-up (grin) ... but, i think the main point is the old one of s/w configurability. Or rather, the default state it presents. And as has been mentioned above, if there is documentation that is actually readable available ... then 'howto-get-it-working' bit should follow. All good in theory i guess, and of course, it is the main goal.

So it really just boils down to s/w issues, as usual ... as far as the stability, and shear sophistication of the backend (Linux will alway refer to the driver in my book) goes, is there doubt.

I guess the Disney thing kinda sums it up. Some sub company called pixelat or something ... I think they went for Linux for their development issues, but decided to stick with windows in the office. Seems it was considered to difficult to retrain all their staff in other doc sw aside from their familiar windows Adobe stuff. And Adobe expressed no interest in porting to Linux.

(big_grin.png) Weeeelllll they wouldn't would they :roll:. The Seattle mob wouldn't be to happy with that idea. And then it would be coytons as far as tech/protocol/special licensing deal/etc goes hmmmmm

That is the big reason ... public confidence.

Going main stream ... well ... it's in this stream to stay anyway, and can only get better .. but, as far as the masses go, i think that may just be one of those compromises that are necessary. Though, being also encumbered with a price. But thats already being going on for a while. Some seem to notice ... others don't.

It always stricks me as somewhat strange in a way. So many ... seemingly well educated, socially/financially competent people, don't seem to be able to think beyond their own ... limited ... little boxes that they call heads.

Might just be me ... hmm, i think iv'e just forgotten what the question was, ..... bailing out.


>>
"...and the fully armed nuclear warheads, are, of course, merely a
courtesy detail."
>>

That would be great to include on the cd, or maybe the dvd (yesss)


jm

Code: Select all

          -|-   If the system is the answer, then the question
                            must have been really stupid               -|-
Last edited by jjmac on Fri May 27, 2005 1:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
jjmac
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 1:32 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: BBC Onlie (sic)

Postby andychannelle » Thu May 26, 2005 8:03 am

"Some sub companey called pixelat or something ... I think they went for Linux for their development issues, but decided to stick with windows in the office. Seems it was considered to difficult to retrain all their staff in other doc sw aside from their familar windows Adobe stuff. And Adobe expressed no interest in porting to Linux."

Disney's CGI animation studio (and other film studios and f/x houses) were actually involved in funding CrossOver's support for Photoshop apparently due to Adobe's slothful attititude to Linux. This will have to change in the film industry because Linux is well on its way to becoming the standard there. It's only a matter of time before admin desktops get switched over too as they can become part of a rendering cluster in downtime...
andychannelle
LXF regular
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 4:08 pm

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: BBC Onlie (sic)

Postby nordle » Thu May 26, 2005 10:35 pm

>>Some sub companey called pixelat or something ..

http://www.pixar.com/index.html
I think, therefore I compile
User avatar
nordle
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1500
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 9:56 pm

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: BBC Onlie (sic)

Postby jjmac » Fri May 27, 2005 1:16 am

Yes, thats it ... love disney, hehe. If it wasn't for Sylvester i would probably know nothing about mieces.


Howdy ... uum .. 'nordle' :wink: was kinda wondering were you got to. As can be said, a new life is as good as a holiday sometimes (grin)

jm



Code: Select all

          -|-   If the system is the answer, then the question
                            must have been really stupid               -|-
http://counter.li.org
#313537

The FVWM wm -=- www.fvwm.org -=-

Somebody stole my air guitar, It happened just the other day,
But it's ok, 'cause i've got a spare ...
jjmac
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 1:32 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby mmm » Mon May 30, 2005 8:51 pm

I will post my view on if Linux is "ready" for the desktop, being as I am virtually a newbie to Linux. I might be "flamed" for what I say, but a newbie viewpoint is no bad thing.

Apologies for the length of my pov.

I have tried one or two installs of Linux a few years back (maybe Mandrake - but don't remember), but didn't like it because they were too complex to install / setup, and was afraid for my data (back when having a backup hard drive was an expensive thing to do).

Left it a bit, found BeOS 5 PE, loved it - but found it was no longer being developed, shame as I did like it very much. I then tried Knoppix (from a cover CD ISO) to see how much better Linux had got, without risking the data on my Windows drives. I liked it, so decided to try Mandrake 9. It was still not totally easy to install, but kept it on the system, hardly ever used. Same went for Mandrake version 10.

I recently (after experiencing a few problems) did a clean install of Mandriva (aka Mandrake 10.3 IIRC). That was very painless in the install routine as it correctly got the previous used Linux partitions correct to install to. It's just all the teaks I did vanished (like background colours / sound etc., had to format /home too).

Leaving aside my choice of Linux (I was toying with buying Suse), I find that the install went pretty painless. Will newbies remember to have enough organised free space on their FAT32 drive for Linux file system on their Windows drive to try out in the first place.

I cannot see anyone picking up Linux and installing it as a newbie instead of something like WinXP. And based on my newbie experiences, I can tell you why.

Most devices have driver CD's for Windows install hardware, Linux may not, and if you don't have an internet connection, or a functioning one, you could be stuffed. Yes, I know that Linux has a large collection of base drivers, and it does very well, but Windows being so dominant, and some manufacturers being so "secretive" or licensing issues, there won't be Linux drivers made.

I can understand the reboot issue that people talk of, Windows is terrible when you install something and reboots multiple times. The last time I did a clean install of Win98 I took about 20 reboots before the system had most of what I wanted installed.

In Windows, you just click "setup.exe" and away it goes and does it's stuff. Linux, apart from getting into root to install, and if not an rpm package, requires unpacking, make, make-install. This is beyond most people who did not at least have some experience as I did with MS-DOS, therefore the command line.

Therefore you'll have to admit that a click on "setup.exe" is a damn site easier for people than having to go to Konsole and type the commands to get the package installed.

Only my persistance with Linux has got me that "far" (still only the basics to most Linux users)... Anyone else would have long given up, and installed Windows.

I cannot fault the programmes that are included with Linux installs, they are mostly fine. It's a shame there are some real good ones that are not being ported to Linux, like Photoshop, and some video editing packages.

What I will say that Linux easily has over something like WinXP (I've used on someone elses system), is that Linux is bang up-to-date on my humble P3 system, and runs just fine. WinXP however, JUST the OS, needs so much processor power and memory it's not funny. So just on the hardware side, Windows will eat your budget up no end just to get it to run at some reasonable speed.

If you have an earlier version of Windows, they no longer give updates to their Internet Exploder browser, much needed as it's so tied into the OS (stupidly). And the OS will not get IPv6 support. There are people out there that prefer Win98 as the last "best" consumer OS M$ made.

If you are looking for an OS that will (at least mostly if not enetirely) work out the box on your machine, then yes, Linux IS ready for the desktop, has been for a while.

If you're a newbie and might want to install other software, it is not 100% ready if you're relying on packages that are not RPM's, and you won't do a bit of research on how to install / configure stuff.

I remember reading the small-ish manuals when I started with Win3.0, and the large one for MS-DOS. Most people will not put up with reading that, they want to install and work straight away. And this could be a problem for people as soon as they stray of the default install and want to put something else in.

Not having DVD playback work by default is not good, esp. having to find the library file you need to install to get it to work.

In some areas, Linux requires knowledge of the OS, like the kernel build number, dependencies hell etc. You don't really get that with Windows, you know which OS it's stated a programme will install on, and away you go.

And finally, from my personal experience, installing the Nvidia display drivers, hell !!! I don't have functioning internet under Linux (DSL PCI card with no Linux drivers). So it asks to downloads the latest packages to build the driver into the OS. Now you have to find out somehow which is the most suitable piece of software for your kernel to download, then find where to actually find it online.

Oh, I nearly forgot, you have to log-out of "x" to do all this, but will most newbies know this? The commands are not helpful "help --help" is no help at all to a total newbie.
mmm
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 6:50 pm

Postby hairymunky » Mon May 30, 2005 9:59 pm

mmm wrote:In Windows, you just click "setup.exe" and away it goes and does it's stuff. Linux, apart from getting into root to install, and if not an rpm package, requires unpacking, make, make-install. This is beyond most people who did not at least have some experience as I did with MS-DOS, therefore the command line.
Therefore you'll have to admit that a click on "setup.exe" is a damn site easier for people than having to go to Konsole and type the commands to get the package installed.

I use Kpackage for installing rpms, although I do quite regularly install from a shell, and I much prefer installing from source.
Theres also Red Carpet from novell and Autopackage although Im not sure how developed these installers are.

Not having DVD playback work by default is not good, esp. having to find the library file you need to install to get it to work.


I'm not sure but I dont think libdvdcss is suppliied by the packagers (ie RedHat) due to legal/digital rights guff. That is one thing that gets my goat up! Its not as if because we use Linux we must be pirating DVDs. Leave that to all the windows dvd-ripper software that does a good job of removing the protection.

In a nutshell Linux IS ready for the desktop and has been for a long time. Ive been a user since PC-Plus had Red Hat 5.2 on its Cover Disc, trust me to install then, then have to build KDE 1.x from source on a 300 Mhz pc was a challenge, especially when I didnt have a clue what the hell I was doing :) but it was worth it and I learned more doing that, than I ever did using windows.

One other thing that sets Linux back (and in my opinion for what its worth) is the way MS has a grip on the market. How many PCs (x86) come with Windows pre installed? 100%?
That sounds like an unfair monopoly to me, and it is probably that single fact that stops Linux getting a bigger user base, Isn't it about choice, all most people see when they go to buy a new machine is "Windows XP Home Pre-Installed" ~ Maybe its about time the computer retail sector did its bit and helped put Linux in the mainstream of desktop computing. (But then I did read somewhere that MS has got their spiney fingers at the retailers so they can't sell other Os'es ...????)

Ahh well leave them to it, maybe once they get miffed with all the spyware/viruses and learn about our little penguin friend they may see the light... :)
Linux powered Astronomy
User avatar
hairymunky
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 5:50 pm

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: BBC Onlie (sic)

Postby donley » Fri Jun 03, 2005 5:46 pm

That programme really pissed me off for a couple of reasons...

1: I have installed Mandrake 10.0 - 10.1 and now 2005LE on around 30 newbies PCs, they did not have a problem.

2: BBC fully support Linux behind the scenes.

I sent a (complaint) email into Click Online about the misleading nature of the announcer and was given the reply that ClickOnline, (note not the BBC), had tried to install a distro, (unnamed) onto their PC, and they borked it. Once they did get it up and running they had a hard time finding out how and from where they get new programs..... hmmmmm maybe Linux is not ready for THEIR desktops... And this seems to be the biggest hurdle Linux will have.

What JOE_USER needs to do, is sit down at his PC and LEARN ! If the PC does not do something EXACTLY like they are used to, they give up saying the new OS or even program is crap.

However, what they fail to see, is that with every incarnation of Microsoft software, things are different and a new way has to be learnt to do things.

Anyway...I replied back to ClickOnline, and said that they should try the Xandros OCE version, they replied back thanking me for the recommendation, so I think when they do cover Linux, xandros will get a mention.

Heres hoping the ClickOnline guys sit down and TRY to give a balanced judgement.
User avatar
donley
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 5:20 pm
Location: Belfast

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: BBC Onlie (sic)

Postby towy71 » Fri Jun 03, 2005 10:25 pm

Well done that man! This is exactly what advocates must do. Even I could install Xandros seemlessly :lol: :lol: :lol:
still looking for that door into summer
User avatar
towy71
Moderator
 
Posts: 4276
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 2:11 pm
Location: wild West Wales

Re: RE: Re: RE: BBC Onlie (sic)

Postby palepaul5 » Sat Jun 04, 2005 8:56 pm

Rhakios wrote:I still find browser plug-ins a major PITA in Linux, getting them set up properly so that they work. With OS X I find they just work. So for those who need their browser plug-ins, I suppose they would say it isn't ready.
It's the only shortcoming I can think of though.

I find pretty well most plugins work fine with firefox(here's my current plugins listed):
Shockwave Flash

File name: libflashplayer.so
Shockwave Flash 7.0 r25

MIME Type Description Suffixes Enabled
application/x-shockwave-flash Shockwave Flash swf Yes
application/futuresplash FutureSplash Player spl Yes
Java(TM) Plug-in 1.5.0_03-b07

File name: libjavaplugin_oji.so
Java(TM) Plug-in 1.5.0_03

MIME Type Description Suffixes Enabled
application/x-java-vm Java Yes
application/x-java-applet Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;version=1.1 Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;version=1.1.1 Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;version=1.1.2 Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;version=1.1.3 Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;version=1.2 Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;version=1.2.1 Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;version=1.2.2 Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;version=1.3 Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;version=1.3.1 Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;version=1.4 Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;version=1.4.1 Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;version=1.4.2 Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;version=1.5 Java Yes
application/x-java-applet;jpi-version=1.5.0_03 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;version=1.1 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;version=1.1.1 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;version=1.1.2 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;version=1.1.3 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;version=1.2 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;version=1.2.1 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;version=1.2.2 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;version=1.3 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;version=1.3.1 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;version=1.4 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;version=1.4.1 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;version=1.4.2 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;version=1.5 Java Yes
application/x-java-bean;jpi-version=1.5.0_03 Java Yes
Helix DNA Plugin: RealPlayer G2 Plug-In Compatible

File name: nphelix.so
Helix DNA Plugin: RealPlayer G2 Plug-In Compatible version 0.4.0.546 built with gcc 3.2.0 on Apr 1 2005

MIME Type Description Suffixes Enabled
audio/x-pn-realaudio-plugin RealPlayer Plugin Metafile rpm Yes
MozPlugger 1.7.1

File name: mozplugger.so
MozPlugger version 1.7.1, written by Fredrik Hübinette <hubbe@hubbe.net> and Louis Bavoil <louis@bavoil.net>.
For documentation on how to configure mozplugger, check the man page. (type man mozplugger)
Configuration file: /etc/mozpluggerrc
Helper binary: mozplugger-helper
Controller binary: mozplugger-controller

MIME Type Description Suffixes Enabled
video/mpeg MPEG animation mpeg, mpg, mpe Yes
video/x-mpeg MPEG animation mpeg, mpg, mpe Yes
video/x-mpeg2 MPEG2 animation mpv2, mp2ve Yes
video/mp4 MPEG4 animation mp4 Yes
video/msvideo AVI animation avi Yes
video/x-msvideo AVI animation avi Yes
video/fli FLI animation fli, flc Yes
video/x-fli FLI animation fli, flc Yes
application/x-mplayer2 Windows Media wmv,asf,mov Yes
video/x-ms-asf Windows Media asf,asx,wma,wax,wmv,wvx Yes
video/x-ms-wmv Windows Media wmv Yes
application/x-quicktimeplayer Quicktime animation mov Yes
image/x-macpaint Quicktime animation pntg,mov Yes
video/quicktime Quicktime animation mov,qt Yes
video/x-quicktime Quicktime animation mov,qt Yes
video/x-theora OGG stream with video ogg Yes
video/theora OGG stream with video ogg Yes
video/ogg OGG stream with video ogg Yes
video/x-ogg OGG stream with video ogm,ogv Yes
audio/mid MIDI audio file midi,mid Yes
audio/x-mid MIDI audio file midi,mid Yes
audio/midi MIDI audio file midi,mid Yes
audio/x-midi MIDI audio file midi,mid Yes
audio/mod Soundracker audio Module mod Yes
audio/x-mod Soundracker audio Module mod Yes
audio/mp3 MPEG audio mp3 Yes
audio/x-mp3 MPEG audio mp3 Yes
audio/mpeg2 MPEG audio mp2 Yes
audio/x-mpeg2 MPEG audio mp2 Yes
audio/mpeg3 MPEG audio mp3 Yes
audio/x-mpeg3 MPEG audio mp3 Yes
audio/mpeg MPEG audio mpa,abs,mpega Yes
audio/x-mpeg MPEG audio mpa,abs,mpega Yes
audio/x-ogg OGG audio ogg Yes
application/x-ogg OGG audio ogg Yes
application/ogg OGG audio ogg Yes
audio/basic Basic audio file au,snd Yes
audio/x-basic Basic audio file au,snd Yes
audio/wav Microsoft wave file wav Yes
audio/x-wav Microsoft wave file wav Yes
audio/x-pn-wav Microsoft wave file wav Yes
audio/x-pn-windows-acm Microsoft wave file wav Yes
audio/x-ms-wax Windows Media wax,wma Yes
image/sun-raster SUN raster image rs Yes
image/x-sun-raster SUN raster image rs Yes
image/x-rgb RGB Image rgb Yes
image/x-portable-pixmap PPM Image ppm Yes
image/x-portable-graymap PGM Image pgm Yes
image/x-portable-bitmap PBM Image pbm Yes
image/x-portable-anymap PBM Image pnm Yes
image/tiff TIFF image tiff,tif Yes
image/x-tiff TIFF image tiff,tif Yes
application/pdf PDF file pdf Yes
application/x-pdf PDF file pdf Yes
text/pdf PDF file pdf Yes
text/x-pdf PDF file pdf Yes
application/x-postscript PostScript file ps Yes
application/postscript PostScript file ps Yes
application/x-rtf Rich Text Format rtf Yes
application/rtf Rich Text Format rtf Yes
text/rtf Rich Text Format rtf Yes
application/x-msword Microsoft Word Document doc, dot Yes
application/msword Microsoft Word Document doc, dot Yes
application/vnd.ms-excel Microsoft Excel Document xls, xlb Yes
application/vnd.sun.xml.writer OpenOffice Writer 6.0 documents sxw Yes
application/so7_vnd.sun.xml.writer OpenOffice Writer 7.0 documents sxw Yes
application/vnd.sun.xml.writer.template OpenOffice Writer 6.0 templates stw Yes
application/vnd.sun.xml.writer.global OpenOffice Writer 6.0 global documents sxg Yes
application/vnd.stardivision.writer StarWriter 5.x documents sdw Yes
application/vnd.stardivision.writer-global StarWriter 5.x global documents sgl Yes
application/x-starwriter StarWriter 4.x documents sdw Yes
application/vnd.sun.xml.calc OpenOffice Calc 6.0 spreadsheets sxc Yes
application/so7_vnd.sun.xml.calc OpenOffice Calc 7.0 spreadsheets sxc Yes
application/vnd.sun.xml.calc.template OpenOffice Calc 6.0 templates stc Yes
application/vnd.stardivision.calc StarCalc 5.x spreadsheets sdc Yes
application/x-starcalc StarCalc 4.x spreadsheets sdc Yes
application/vnd.sun.xml.draw OpenOffice Draw 6.0 documents sxd Yes
application/so7_vnd.sun.xml.draw StarOffice Draw 7.0 documents sxc Yes
application/vnd.sun.xml.draw.template OpenOffice Draw 6.0 templates std Yes
application/vnd.stardivision.draw StarDraw 5.x documents sda Yes
application/x-stardraw StarDraw 4.x documents sda Yes
application/vnd.sun.xml.impress OpenOffice Impress 6.0 presentations sxi Yes
application/so7_vnd.sun.xml.impress StarOffice 7.0 Impress presentations sxi Yes
application/vnd.sun.xml.impress.template OpenOffice Impress 6.0 templates sti Yes
application/vnd.stardivision.impress StarImpress 5.x presentations sdd Yes
application/vnd.stardivision.impress-packed StarImpress Packed 5.x files sdp Yes
application/x-starimpress StarImpress 4.x presentations sdd Yes
application/vnd.ms-powerpoint PowerPoint Slideshow ppt Yes
application/mspowerpoint PowerPoint Slideshow ppt, ppz, pps, pot Yes
application/vnd.sun.xml.math OpenOffice Math 6.0 documents sxm Yes
application/so7_vnd.sun.xml.math StarOffice 7.0 Math documents sxm Yes
application/vnd.stardivision.math StarMath 5.x documents smf Yes
application/x-starmath StarMath 4.x documents smf Yes
Scalable Vector Graphics

File name: libmozsvgdec.so
Scalable Vector Graphics, as handled by RSVG-2.8.1. Views SVG images.

This is alpha software. It will probably behave in many situations, but may also ride your motorcycle, drink all your milk, or use your computer to browse porn. Comments, feature requests, and patches are welcome.

See http://librsvg.sourceforge.net/ for information.

MIME Type Description Suffixes Enabled
image/svg+xml Scalable Vector Graphics svg Yes
image/svg-xml Scalable Vector Graphics svg Yes
image/svg Scalable Vector Graphics svg Yes
image/vnd.adobe.svg+xml Scalable Vector Graphics svg Yes
text/xml-svg Scalable Vector Graphics svg Yes
Default Plugin

File name: libnullplugin.so
The default plugin handles plugin data for mimetypes and extensions that are not specified and facilitates downloading of new plugins.

MIME Type Description Suffixes Enabled
* All types .* No
palepaul5
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 3:50 pm
Location: Scotland

Postby Nigel » Sat Jun 04, 2005 10:06 pm

mmm wrote:Not having DVD playback work by default is not good, esp. having to find the library file you need to install to get it to work.


DVD playback doesn't work by default in Windows either. Not until you install something like WinDVD or PowerDVD.
Windows Media Player uses the codecs/dlls supplied by that software to play DVDs.
Of course, virtually all DVD drives come with a "free" copy of one or the other of these programs...
Hope this helps,

Nigel.
User avatar
Nigel
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1141
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 8:03 pm
Location: Gloucestershire, UK

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: BBC Onlie (sic)

Postby davecs » Sat Jun 04, 2005 10:19 pm

Two days ago my HP3822 printer decided to get broken. Don't ask!

It just so happened that Aldi are flogging a HP Photosmart 7760 this week for less than I could find it on the net, and I found some good reviews, too! When I got one home I found that everything was present and correct, except for some reason, for the CD Rom. Still I got the Windoze 98 driver off the internet. And the other day I also got a new monitor, a 19" LCD job, with a digital input. I swapped monitors over today, and rebooted.

Results:

In Linux with the nv driver, there was nothing to do to get the monitor up and running. With the nvidia driver I got a black screen, I had to add the line: Option "ConnectedMonitor" "DFP" to the Video Driver section of /etc/X11/xorg.conf.

In Windoze it was a struggle. Booting up into the highres screen gave me the black screen. The only solution in the end was to download and install the latest nvidia driver, but even then I had to go into Control Panel and uninstall the old one, reboot more times than I can remember, before being able to reset my screen to its normal res.

As for the printer, in Linux it was just a question of going into KDE Control Centre > Peripherals > Printers > Admin Mode and changing "Deskjet 3822 hpijs" to "Photosmart 7760 hpijs" in the printer setup. In Windoze I had to unplug the printer, run a CD Rom, reconnect the printer half way through installation, and because it wasn't switched on (well I didn't realise) wait for ages then finally take another look and switch it on. It still wanted two reboots (3/4 way through and at end) before the printer was ready for action.

Windows is easier because the "rules" for installing drivers are understood because we are used to them, but to be blunt, dealing with two new bits of hardware in Linux was actually much easier.

And just to make sure that the hplip/hpijs drivers for the new printers weren't second best ones I printed a photo at A4 size by importing the jpeg into scribus and selecting 1200x1200 onto photo paper and the results were as good as anything I have ever seen out of a printer!
Image
Asus Asus M2N32 WS Pro+Athlon AM2/4200+ — GeForce 7600GT — 2Gb Cosair VS RAM — 500Gb WD5000AAKS SATA Drive — PCLinuxOS
User avatar
davecs
LXF regular
 
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 11:13 pm
Location: Dagenham, Essex

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: BBC Onlie (sic)

Postby jjmac » Mon Jun 06, 2005 11:11 pm

>>
Windows is easier because the "rules" for installing drivers are understood because we are used to them,
>>

Well ... yes .... but while it was becoming understood, was it not a struggle. Like ... making sense out of the MS kb pages, good grief, but once a person relises that they don't want to reveal to much, just push a perception ... then it's just a matter of going along with the culture. That is, just install the update and be happy. My "just be complacent" drivers are two out of date for that :)


>>
dealing with two new bits of hardware in Linux was actually much easier.
>>

Yep ... if the explaination exists on how to configure/install a facility is available, and clear ... then most of the problem is solved. An OS doesn't have to be "all enabled" and dangerous to be human friendly .. just to include the docs :)

Like ... even in deb a person just has to run "dpkg-reconfigure <package_name> to go back over a reconfiguration process. But, even though it's mentioned at install .. it's not mentioned again, and so can be easily forgotten. Having its' mention more to the front of "stuff to keep in mind" would probably have made life a lot easier for a lot of people, including me :roll:

Ha ... just remembered a classic windows bugger up (grin) ... when i killed my cdrom, i had accidently ripped the tray out of it :roll:. So i replaced it with a new cdrom ... and ... naively booted up into OSR2. Sounds like it should be quite straight forward really, dosen't it (grin).

I now had two cdroms (eek), according to windows, then i lost my D:\ drive .. It ended up with a reinstall (#$%@), and i ended up in the pub. I kinda lost all faith ...

Linux is definitely ready, it's just that the docs aren't always :roll:



jm
jjmac
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 1:32 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Marrea » Thu Jun 09, 2005 4:05 pm

Hot Picks in LXF 68 gave a glowing report on Album Shaper. So being a photo enthusiast I downloaded the program (I usually do this rather than use the DVD, so I know I've got the most up-to-date version available). It has to be compiled using qmake. My SuSE 9.2 complained. No qmake found. Now, OK, I know this is probably because I haven't got the qtdir variable set, or something like that, and it is not an insoluble problem. But I shall still have to devote a bit of time to getting it sorted out.

By comparison, I also downloaded the Windows version and with a couple of clicks it was installed and ready for use.

I can't remember a single instance in the six or seven years I have been using Windows when I ever had a problem installing anything.

But I can sometimes spend hours, days even, trying to get programs working in Linux. I'm not complaining. In fact, I quite enjoy the challenge and the opportunity to learn more about the operating system in the process.

For this reason, I don't think Linux is "ready for the desktop" in any way, shape or form yet. But, as has been said above, does it really matter? I don't think it does. It was never designed to be a desktop operating system in the first place.
User avatar
Marrea
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1877
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Chilterns, West Hertfordshire

Postby Rhakios » Thu Jun 09, 2005 6:45 pm

For qmake you need qt3-devel and you will probably need to give the full path to call it as it's unlikely to be in your default path.

rhakios@pythia:~> rpm -ql qt3-devel | grep qmake
/usr/lib/qt3/bin/qmake

Incidentally, I find that SuSE usually does set QTDIR:

rhakios@pythia:~> env | grep -i qtdir
QTDIR=/usr/lib/qt3

Incidentally, incidentally, oh look:

http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/sourceforg ... .i586.html

says on the page it's for SuSE 9.2
Bye, Rhakios
User avatar
Rhakios
Moderator
 
Posts: 7634
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 11:18 pm
Location: Midlands, UK

PreviousNext

Return to Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest