Linux....

[summerpewp]

Recently I was introduced to linux via a friend, and he told me how great it was, etc.

Are there any pro's and con's to running linux instead of windows. I know windows can be ******, but from the times i used it, and the lack of programming experience i have, I havn't had many issues with windows.

IF you could fill me in on this it would be great.

Just like to know what kind of linux to use if you suggest using linux, why use it, and what u recommend me reading / doing if you think i should decide to use linux instead.

 

[imported_LoKe]

Ubuntu and SLED get great reviews. There are so many distro's, it's really up to you.

One of the downsides is gaming, which isn't exactly on par with Windows, yet.

 

[summerpewp]

what are some related issues with linux and gaming? I tend to be a gamer at times so I would like to know what i'm going to be getting myself into if I install linux.

 

[sourceninja]

Very few games are actually made for linux, so you have to use Wine or Cedega to play windows games, which isn't the best option and can range from perfect to impossible.

 

[Nothinman]

Are there any pro's and con's to running linux instead of windows.

The same pros and cons that come up when deciding whether to run Windows or OS X, there's different hardware and software support and things are done radically different.

what are some related issues with linux and gaming? I tend to be a gamer at times so I would like to know what i'm going to be getting myself into if I install linux.

There's virtually no commercial, native games on Linux. A good number of them run via WINE or Cedega, but it's not perfect or trivial to setup.

If you already know Windows you're going to have to spend a decent amount of time learning how Linux works, but if you stick through it you'll have a lot more control over your computer and in the long run you'll save a lot of time and money because you won't have to pay for and deal with all of those crap programs on Windows. It's up to you to decide whether it's worth it for you or not.

 

[drag]

Icculus gamer FAQ.
(Icculus is a guy that is responsable for things like the ut2004 engine port to Linux.)

http://www.icculus.org/lgfaq/gamelist.php
Their game list.

http://www.linuxgames.com/
Linux gaming news.

http://www.linux-gamers.net/
Linux gaming news.

http://www.happypenguin.org/
Happy penguin aka The Linux Game Tome. New games and game status updates.

etc etc.

If your a 'hardcore' gamer Linux isn't going to work out. Sure you can play World of Warcraft just fine, but most new games you'd run down to Walmart to buy won't probably work.

 

[summerpewp]

the only game i really play now is neverwinter nights...

so i dont know if that would be an issue...

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: summerpewp
the only game i really play now is neverwinter nights...

so i dont know if that would be an issue...

Neverwinter nights has a Linux port. You should be able to use the windows game data and a Linux download from their website to play the game.

I have the game and have played it in Linux, but I don't remember exactly how it goes.

 

[sourceninja]

NWN works perfect in linux. I play it all the time. I'm currently playing the infinate dugeions expansion.

Quake 4, doom 3, UT2004, NWN, savage, x2 the threat, freespace 2 (fs2_open), battle of wesnoth, are all native linux games I play. I use cedega to play starcraft, bf2, guildwars, oblivion, half life 2, counterstrike source, baulders gate 2, and a few other games that I can't think of right now.

 

[summerpewp]

now that we know i can play video games... how hard would it be to learn?

other programs i use are photoshop, microsoft office, and random other programs....

would those be compatible?

 

[hans030390]

Linux will be very difficult to learn, trust me.

I had to spend many hours and many nights just trying to get simple things installed and working.

But after a while, you learn a whole lot, it all makes sense, and it becomes easy.

Gaming though, that will be rather difficult to set up, if you can do it at all...

Photoshop...I don't think you can get that on Linux unless you're really good at using linux. BUT, you can get GIMP. MS Office...Just use Open Office.

Installing programs isn't so bad on Linux, but setting things up, installing drivers, etc can be a pain.

Basically, unless you really want to learn linux, really like the command prompt, don't mind having less software available, don't mind ease of use, or you are an extreme computer user...don't bother with it. If you don't need it, don't get it, unless you really want to learn about it.

Always have an XP OS to go back to.

For me, I wanted to learn linux...it's hard, frustrating...all of that. But in the end, you learn a lot. Yet for how I use computers, I do not see how it is better than Windows...At least for me, Windows is easier and more stable.

Then again, I'm not an uber computer user.

 

[drag]

Linux is fine.

You've just been banging your head against things like Gentoo and Kororaa even when people told you not to bother with that stuff.
It's painfull to use even for advanced users.


Things that make setting up Linux difficult is stuff like if you have a ATI video card or you want to dual boot your machine. It raises the bar on difficulty.

Just wipe out a machine's harddrive. Back everything up so you don't have to worry about a botched install.

install Ubuntu. Head over to places like:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community

The above is a Ubuntu community Wiki. Of course all a wiki is is online user-editable website.

Then there is the unofficial Ubuntu starter guide:
http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Dapper
Lots of documentation on specific issues like setting up this or that paticular type of wireless card, getting java working, and stuff like that.


Especially keep a eye for 'FAQ' pages. These are frequently asked questions for a reason.

Also for Ubuntu specific help check out Ubuntu forums. If you have a problem with Ubuntu there is a 90% chance that people have had it before you and they may have found a good way to solve it. Searching the forums is a good way to learn stuff. Especially reading about what people tried to get the person to do to provide information and troubleshoot the problem.
http://ubuntuforums.org/

Always make sure that when you look and know what your reading about is for your version of the operating system. Ubuntu releases a new version every 6-8 months so old posts may not be relavent.

 

[sourceninja]

I just setup my dell inspiron 6400 with ubuntu, I only needed to use the command line for two things. Everything worked on install except my wireless networking card and my perfered resolution. A quick install from synaptic fixed my resolution. I had to download and compile the newest version of ndiswrapper so I could use wireless and edit a single text file. I now have everything I need to do my job.

Photoshop will work in wine. If you need to use photoshop for serious work, I'd suggest windows or mac. However there are a lot of good replacements for photoshop for non professional users.

I don't really understand what is so hard about linux. To really use windows you need to learn new commands, jargon, tools, methods, etc. The same is true about linux. Just don't expect everything to be like windows, expect to learn about new tools, new commands, new software, new jargon, new methods, etc. There are many ways to look at things, you could look at it as loosing a lot of software, or you could look at as gaining tons and tons of software (a whole world of software that runs on linux).

I've personally found windows frustating to get the things I want done. I have to google, ask questions and find software to install just like you will need to do with linux. Dont be fooled, it is its own beast and you will need to just accept that you have to learn new things to use it. But it is not any harder then windows, only different.

 

[thehstrybean]

Ubuntu is so easy to use, I got Broadcom wireless runnin on my HP lappy in 5 minutes. www.ubuntuforums.org has so many howto guides, that if you ever have quesitons, just run a search, and there WILL be an answer.

 

[unmerited]

It's worth whatever effort you put into learning to use Linux. I have been able to replace all programs I used in Windows with Linux alternatives.

Originally posted by: sourceninja
NWN works perfect in linux. I play it all the time. I'm currently playing the infinate dugeions expansion.

You might be interested in this thread.

unmerited

 

[sourceninja]

Originally posted by: unmerited
It's worth whatever effort you put into learning to use Linux. I have been able to replace all programs I used in Windows with Linux alternatives.

Originally posted by: sourceninja
NWN works perfect in linux. I play it all the time. I'm currently playing the infinate dugeions expansion.

You might be interested in this thread.

unmerited

Very awesome! thanks for the link!

 

[Fallen Kell]

Originally posted by: summerpewp
now that we know i can play video games... how hard would it be to learn?

other programs i use are photoshop, microsoft office, and random other programs....

would those be compatible?

Well, for photoshop, you have "GIMP" (GNU Image Manipulation Program). Cost, "free" as in beer.

MS Office, you have "Open Office" or "Sun's Star Office". "Open Office" is "free" as in beer. Sun's Star Office use to cost money, but I think it is free now, or at least it comes with Solaris 10 which Sun has a free license for use...

Random other programs, well you have /dev/rand, perfect for getting you a random number....


I am going to say this, but you are going to be in for a lot of culture shock. Linux isn't very "GUI" friendly. In other words, you won't have a cute little graphical interface where you click on buttons, radio select elements, and checkboxes to configure your settings. You NEED to edit configuration files and run command line configs.

You also will need to know how to compile software. Because of the way that Linux was started (well, not really started, but maintaned and improved), it was a collaboration effort of coding the software. As a result, it's main way of distributing new programs and updates are with the program sorce code, not executible binary files with menu driven installation methods. You need to run configuration scripts selecting different compile time options (things like static or shared (or both), enable thread support, select library locations, specify library locations, set cpu architecture, specify 32 or 64 bit support, use appropriate library files for 32bit or 64bit, etc., etc., etc....)

Yes, there are distributions out there which have a installation management systems with binary built programs, but not everything will be released in that format for you. For example, take "slashcode" which is the programs and code that run the interface for websites like "http://slashdot.org" (and MANY others). Well, not only are compiled binaries not available, but the source code is only avaiable through CVS (Concurrent Versions System). CVS requires that you to configure yourself to use cvs, setup your CVS root, log into the CVS repository and checkout the code, no simple "click here to download". This is a more extreme example, but not an uncommon one. Again, this is simple for someone who has a solid base in computer programming, but for a regular person... well its as if you are required to walk on water when you bairly know how to keep from drowning...

Some distributions will mitigate the above problems. Redhat Fedora, Novel SuSe to name a couple. I would argue that Fedora is a horrendous distribution with tons of bloat, horrid performance and a idiotic configuration (it is as if they change every "standard" way to configure a linux os just because they wanted to not use the standard way of doing things, this wouldn't be so bad if they had just written a "wrapper" program so that you could still configure the system just like every other system out there by hand if you wanted to, OR use their custom built configuration programs as a GUI interface... but no, they descided to "break" the normal way of doing things). SuSe isn't that bad though, but you will need to watch what binary programs you try to install. It "supports" the RPM system (Redhat Package Manager), but not every RPM will work nicely with you since most RPMs are built with Redhat in mind, and will not always work properly under SuSe.

I don't have a lot of experience with Ubuntu, but I have heard good things about it. Personally I use Debian, but it is not a "user friendly" or more to the point "non-programmer, non-unix, non-troubleshooter" person friendly. For the most part I compile everything from source code, like any good linux user will do. But I also have a BS in Computer Science, and 5 year experience of being a Sun Solaris Unix Administrator, RedHat Linux Administrator, SuSe Linux Administrator, and developer of a customized version of DSL (Damm Small Linux) (well, no "code" change, just configuration). I have compiled customed linux kernels, and customized Xfree86 versions, which are probably two of the most pain in the @$%) programs to compile...

I personnally love linux. I use it everywhere I can. But I don't use it on my game rig or my HTPC. I "could" use it on my HTPC, but the solution I have now gives me more capability then linux has (support for media extenders). But I have the experiences and background needed to easily work and use my linux systems.

I highly encourage you to give it a try, but what I recommend you to do is go download the lates Knoppix CD or DVD distribution and burn it. This will run right off the CD/DVD drive, no installation needed. Play around with it, fool around with setting things up. If you like it, you can even install it (Knoppix is based on Debian by the way, so it is really just a variant of Debian, and acts just as if it was, including the ability to use DEB packages).

 

[cleverhandle]

Originally posted by: Fallen Kell
You also will need to know how to compile software.

Balonius. There are loads of happy Ubuntu users out there that wouldn't know the first thing about compiling source code. 99.99% of what people want is in a repository somewhere.

You need to run configuration scripts selecting different compile time options (things like static or shared (or both), enable thread support, select library locations, specify library locations, set cpu architecture, specify 32 or 64 bit support, use appropriate library files for 32bit or 64bit, etc., etc., etc....)

Does it make you feel smart to rattle off a bunch of technobabble that you know the OP doesn't understand? Are you hoping to intimidate him?

For example, take "slashcode" which is the programs and code that run the interface for websites like "http://slashdot.org" (and MANY others).

Right, because running a slashdot clone was obviously what the OP had in mind.

Again, this is simple for someone who has a solid base in computer programming, but for a regular person... well its as if you are required to walk on water when you bairly know how to keep from drowning...

Gosh, you're so brilliant.

I would argue that Fedora is a horrendous distribution with tons of bloat, horrid performance and a idiotic configuration

Care to provide some specifics about how Fedora breaks standard configuration tools? I've explored it pretty extensively and my impression is exactly the opposite. If I were to make this claim, I'd make it of SuSe, which in my experience allows you to comfortably do whatever is coded into Yast and no more.

For the most part I compile everything from source code, like any good linux user will do.

Then for the most part you're wasting your time.

I have compiled customed linux kernels, and customized Xfree86 versions, which are probably two of the most pain in the @$%) programs to compile...

Yes, back in the day I wrote specfiles from scratch for the roughly 200 RPM's I needed for my entire desktop installation, from glibc and the kernel right up to all the GNOME applications I used. Instructive enough if you're interested in that sort of thing, but utterly unnecessary if you just want to use the system.

 

[Nothinman]

I am going to say this, but you are going to be in for a lot of culture shock. Linux isn't very "GUI" friendly. In other words, you won't have a cute little graphical interface where you click on buttons, radio select elements, and checkboxes to configure your settings. You NEED to edit configuration files and run command line configs.

Apparently you haven't used any recent releases of Linux.

You also will need to know how to compile software. Because of the way that Linux was started (well, not really started, but maintaned and improved), it was a collaboration effort of coding the software. As a result, it's main way of distributing new programs and updates are with the program sorce code, not executible binary files with menu driven installation methods. You need to run configuration scripts selecting different compile time options (things like static or shared (or both), enable thread support, select library locations, specify library locations, set cpu architecture, specify 32 or 64 bit support, use appropriate library files for 32bit or 64bit, etc., etc., etc....)

BS and completely irrelevant. You only need to compile software if you want to move out of the realm of your distribution's supplied software (and Ubuntu or Debian will cover nearly everything most people want) or if you want to change the source for some reason and most people don't want to do that.

This is a more extreme example, but not an uncommon one.

The hell it isn't uncommon, beyond slashdot I can't name a single site that uses slashcode so how do you figure that setting it up is a common problem?

For the most part I compile everything from source code, like any good linux user will do.

Then why in the hell are you even saying that you use Debian? Any good Debian user will stick to the precompiled packages because that's the main advantage of using it, compiling stuff from source is a huge waste of time and even stupider when you're using a binary distribution that actually does a good job with their packages. Any 'good linux user' will use the best method available to them for any given task and for installing software in Debian that's via apt/aptitude/dselect and has never involved any manual compilation steps unless you're a package maintainer or applying custom patches.

I have compiled customed linux kernels, and customized Xfree86 versions, which are probably two of the most pain in the @$%) programs to compile...

Actually compiling your own kernel is cake on Debian, knowing what to select in the configuration can be a pain but the actual compilation is simple and even moreso if you use make-kpkg.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: Fallen Kell
I am going to say this, but you are going to be in for a lot of culture shock. Linux isn't very "GUI" friendly. In other words, you won't have a cute little graphical interface where you click on buttons, radio select elements, and checkboxes to configure your settings.

Like this? If you use GNOME you will have lots of interfaces for changing things. Most are fairly simple. The most complex I've come across are the font settings, and the simplest is the resolution changer.

You NEED to edit configuration files and run command line configs.

I wouldn't say so, unless you break X somehow. There was one conf file I had to edit to get my printer to work, but the bug in the autodetection has been reported and hopefully they will have better printer support in the next release. If you setup servers like ftp you probably will be editing conf files. But just for general use, little to hardly at all.

Eventually it may be nice to learn how to compile software. But the repositories have tons of software tailored to, tested with, and supported by your distro (the official, main ones). I think the only actual software I've had to compile is GIMPshop. Also some really obscure stuff like the latest version of compiz. But they have repos for that too (xgl.compiz.info). Repos are available for the latest gaim 2 beta, and for mplayer as well. You just need to look around. The greatest/latest isn't necessarily in the official. You should stick with the official/main repositories unless you have a real reason to use the latest versions.

I would argue that Fedora is a horrendous distribution with tons of bloat, horrid performance and a idiotic configuration

Fedora is great and very fast for me. It has very nice GUIs for most configuration. Even more so than Ubuntu in some cases. Ubuntu has a bigger community and bigger repos though so that's why I've stuck with it.

 

[doog519]

I would sugguest running a live CD distro just to get the feel of Linux.
That way you can still use windows.
Other option would be to create a dual boot system.

Good Luck and stick with it! Like any new OS there is a learning curve.