ubuntu is a POS distribution

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: postmortemIA
Um, so, you don't have a single point. How OS is not releaased when everybody can downlaod and use it.

Where can I purchase a FINAL RELEASE copy? No, it isn't released until it's released.

No, it doesn't come with XGL cuz 3D accel doesn't work out-of the box.

Ok, whatever.

And it seems that you don't get the point about kernel and drivers.

Explain to me then. Please. I'm n00btastic!

I'm not MS fanboy, just some of you ubuntu supporters know only how to change desktop background in Linux.

I booted the live cd once, saw gnome, and ran away.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: spittledip
Quite honestly, both are cake to install. My problem with Ubuntu is that (as another poster mentioned) I could not figure out how to work the command line. The directions provided for using the command line for installing drivers and some other things were very unclear and poorly written. In my experience with Ubuntu, that would be the major problem. Other than that, it was a nice fast install and a light and quick OS that ran very smoothly. It is just that XP is easier to figure out, even when it comes to command line stuff. I can do command line stuff in windows no problem.

Forget distro specific documentation. Read some general unix and linux books. They should give you a feel for the command line.

 

[sourceninja]

The biggest problem is he tried to use the 64bit install and not 32bit install. 64bit linux is not ready for normal uneducated users.

 

[Nothinman]

Um, so, you don't have a single point. How OS is not releaased when everybody can downlaod and use it. No, it doesn't come with XGL cuz 3D accel doesn't work out-of the box.

So you should be comparing Edgy and not Dapper to Vista then, right?

And it seems that you don't get the point about kernel and drivers.

There is no point, yes the kernel includes most of them but Ubuntu packages the kernel and they do add more drivers on top of that too.

I'm not MS fanboy, just some of you ubuntu supporters know only how to change desktop background in Linux.

So? If some Ubuntu users can get along without knowing anything about the underlying system where is the problem? That just means that the Ubuntu people are doing their jobs right.

The biggest problem is he tried to use the 64bit install and not 32bit install. 64bit linux is not ready for normal uneducated users.

Not really, the only real difference is the lack of flash and binary-only codecs, X should work fine and I believe ATI released 64-bit drivers for their stuff so 3D accel should work too.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: Brazen
edit: By the way, Smilin, can you cite a specific example in this thread where anyone even implies that the OP is stupid?

Sure, no prob

"Linux Gury reply: you're f'n stupid."....

it is not that there's no drivers for hardvare, it is that OMG you have to install them.
I have feeling that most of you ubuntu users don't know even to utilize the terminal.

"everyone knows you do yada yada instead"...

You shoulda gotten the liveCD. Then you wouldn't have even had to install it.

"Hell MS can't even do X. "...

..helping him with a clean install of XP on his GF's pc. When it finally booted to the desktop we realized that we had to download the NIC drivers..

Ok, so the only real example you give is the "OMG you have to install them" which does sound a little condenscending, but that is one post out of many, so I would say it is FAR from "often ring true."

The other two comments you listed are is just asanine on your part. My comment on the liveCD was just being helpful, and the comment on Windows needing a NIC driver was just a fact. So are you complaining about posts that are helpful and factual?! I guess that would explain a lot of your posts :roll:

 

[Smilin]

I can't believe you guys are gonna let an MS dude come into a *nix thread, pop someone a black-eye and not lay the pwnage down on me. I guess if I want my butt handed to me I'll have to go back to slashdot.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: postmortemIA

Originally posted by: Robor
Ubuntu is a great distro and there's plenty of 'how to's' available on getting an ATI card working with it. Unlike in WinXP, everything on my Thinkpad was supported out of the box. The only time I've had an issue with Ubuntu and 'X' is when I muffed it up playing around.

Yeah, unlike xp, that came out in 2001, ubuntu is new...can you really compare it like that?

it is not that there's no drivers for hardvare, it is that OMG you have to install them.

I have feeling that most of you ubuntu users don't know even to utilize the terminal.

I have multiple headless boxes, and actually don't know how to use the GUI tools to do much. Gui is gimpy. And if you want to start that, how many windows users know how to utilize the command line?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Smilin
I can't believe you guys are gonna let an MS dude come into a *nix thread, pop someone a black-eye and not lay the pwnage down on me. I guess if I want my butt handed to me I'll have to go back to slashdot.

Does anyone else hear something? A small buzz maybe?

 

[flexy]

Originally posted by: drag

Originally posted by: unmerited
Sounds like an ATI problem to me but, as others have said try another distribution. You're bound to find one that works.

unmerited

I donno. Maybe he is better off stopping now. Try again next year and it will probably just work.
Hopefully nobody wasted their time helping him on the Ubuntu forums. I am sure that all they would of gotten in return was complaints.

drag,

i was working w/ linux a few times years ago, incl. RedHAT, SuSE etc.

I do NOT like Windows just for Window's sake...but i also do NOT like many aspects of Linux, and one point i was always refraining from having Linux as my MAIN personal system is endles, cryptic installing procedures, configuring X, reading up on Y just to get basic things working.

I am not stupid, no questions i COULD sit down now, print this and this pages-long instruction out to eg. configure etc. xgl on my Radeon under distribution xyz...but that's exactly what i do NOT want and (OBVIOUSLY) rather makes me (annd other people) stick with Windows....whether i like it or not.

I was just VERY disappointed because a HUGE majority of people are raving about ubuntu...so it looked to me it could be a recent distribution which actually WORKS (from a human's perspective and does NOT have the bulk of little "fiddle-there and tweak that by hand" requirements.

Proof (sorry) that Linux still has a LONG way to go.

Btw, ironically, i had NO problems getting a Vista 64bit-BETA running here except that my Audigy didnt want to produce any sound....(yes, we all know it's the creative drivers).

Reagrding the help on the ubuntu forums: I got one saying i should file a bug-repoirt - another one pointing out it's the radeon-drivers.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: Smilin
[flamesuit = TRUE] Biased and generalizing observation that obviously doesn't apply to everyone but does often ring true ....

MS has problem X.
MS Guru reply: yeah, go do yada yada and it will fix X.

Linux has problem Y.
Linux Gury reply: you're f'n stupid. everyone knows you do yada yada instead. Hell MS can't even do X.



Oh, as for me:
Linux has problem Y.
MS Guru (me) reply: Yeah, dunno sorry man.

Myth Debunked

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: flexy

Originally posted by: drag

Originally posted by: unmerited
Sounds like an ATI problem to me but, as others have said try another distribution. You're bound to find one that works.

unmerited

I donno. Maybe he is better off stopping now. Try again next year and it will probably just work.
Hopefully nobody wasted their time helping him on the Ubuntu forums. I am sure that all they would of gotten in return was complaints.

drag,

i was working w/ linux a few times years ago, incl. RedHAT, SuSE etc.

I do NOT like Windows just for Window's sake...but i also do NOT like many aspects of Linux, and one point i was always refraining from having Linux as my MAIN personal system is endles, cryptic installing procedures, configuring X, reading up on Y just to get basic things working.

I am not stupid, no questions i COULD sit down now, print this and this pages-long instruction out to eg. configure etc. xgl on my Radeon under distribution xyz...but that's exactly what i do NOT want and (OBVIOUSLY) rather makes me (annd other people) stick with Windows....whether i like it or not.

I was just VERY disappointed because a HUGE majority of people are raving about ubuntu...so it looked to me it could be a recent distribution which actually WORKS (from a human's perspective and does NOT have the bulk of little "fiddle-there and tweak that by hand" requirements.

Proof (sorry) that Linux still has a LONG way to go.

Btw, ironically, i had NO problems getting a Vista 64bit-BETA running here except that my Audigy didnt want to produce any sound....(yes, we all know it's the creative drivers).

Reagrding the help on the ubuntu forums: I got one saying i should file a bug-repoirt - another one pointing out it's the radeon-drivers.

so, it's creative's fault there are not drivers for Vista, but Ubuntu's fault there arn't 3d drivers for the ATI? Wow, you are an MS fanboi....

 

[flexy]

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: postmortemIA

Originally posted by: Robor
Ubuntu is a great distro and there's plenty of 'how to's' available on getting an ATI card working with it. Unlike in WinXP, everything on my Thinkpad was supported out of the box. The only time I've had an issue with Ubuntu and 'X' is when I muffed it up playing around.

Yeah, unlike xp, that came out in 2001, ubuntu is new...can you really compare it like that?

it is not that there's no drivers for hardvare, it is that OMG you have to install them.

I have feeling that most of you ubuntu users don't know even to utilize the terminal.

There's nothing wrong with those users who don't have the need for the command line. Ubuntu is "Linux for human beings" after all I do a lot of consulting as a linux sysadmin (debian mostly, some gentoo, and even fewer red hat boxes eck) and I had never even used X until probably 2-3 years ago, but I don't feel that it's necessary if all you are using the box for is basic desktop work (Org FF, and Thunderbird etc)

Nice, but look. I do have standard-hardware. Nothing out of the ordinary. I am AWARE it might work with ubuntu 32bit - but the 64 bit version does NOT work out of the box here.
"Linux for human beings" is all nice and good, actually i expected that too from what i heard about ubuntu.

Doesn't invalidate the fact that i got a garbled up ASCII menu half-way into booting saying something about X not working...and AT THIS point i wouldn't even know what to do, how to continue EXCEPT i take the time to read up on a LOT of wikis and guides eg. how to install and configure drivers under X etc..etc. Certainly NOT what looks like the "everyday average desktop-user" is expecting to get an OS working ?

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: Brazen
edit: By the way, Smilin, can you cite a specific example in this thread where anyone even implies that the OP is stupid?

Sure, no prob

"Linux Gury reply: you're f'n stupid."....

it is not that there's no drivers for hardvare, it is that OMG you have to install them.
I have feeling that most of you ubuntu users don't know even to utilize the terminal.

"everyone knows you do yada yada instead"...

You shoulda gotten the liveCD. Then you wouldn't have even had to install it.

"Hell MS can't even do X. "...

..helping him with a clean install of XP on his GF's pc. When it finally booted to the desktop we realized that we had to download the NIC drivers..

Ok, so the only real example you give is the "OMG you have to install them" which does sound a little condenscending, but that is one post out of many, so I would say it is FAR from "often ring true."

The other two comments you listed are is just asanine on your part. My comment on the liveCD was just being helpful, and the comment on Windows needing a NIC driver was just a fact. So are you complaining about posts that are helpful and factual?! I guess that would explain a lot of your posts :roll:

hehe WHUT--EVAR! You wanted some proof and it was sitting right there when you asked for it.

Despite the fact I was half joking to begin with I was right! Even in this tiny little thread it was easy to provide examples. I wasn't complaining about these posts one little bit. I think it's amusing and I could care less.

Go on and bicker, nitpick, deny and :roll: all you want. Not only was I right, I got under your skin with it too!

very amusing.

 

[flexy]

Originally posted by: postmortemIA

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: lxskllr

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: postmortemIA
Yeah, unlike xp, that came out in 2001, ubuntu is new...can you really compare it like that?

it is not that there's no drivers for hardvare, it is that OMG you have to install them.

I have feeling that most of you ubuntu users don't know even to utilize the terminal.

So which Microsoft release should something like Ubuntu be compared to?

Vista?

Has that been released already? Everything I see keeps calling it a beta....

Well there is Release Candidate, but it is more or less Beta too. Still, it has plenty of drivers, for example no motherboard drivers are need to be installed. And pretty much all Aero-capable video cards have included drivers.... Does Ubuntu comes with working XGL?

Also ubuntu doesn't provide most drivers- Linux kernel does.

I had NO problems getting Vista RC1 5728 running, it even had all NF4 chipset etc. drivers working right out of the box ! Mind you, 64bit version !
I only had a problem with my Audigy 2.

ubuntu didnt even finish the boot and couldnt deal with my fairly common Radeon X850.

facts.

 

[xtknight]

Stop beating around the bush and report a bug then. How is it going to be fixed? Chances are somebody else has the problem and just didn't bother to report it. Be the ambitious person and be the reason it'll be fixed in the next revision.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: flexy
I had NO problems getting Vista RC1 5728 running, it even had all NF4 chipset etc. drivers working right out of the box ! Mind you, 64bit version !
I only had a problem with my Audigy 2.

ubuntu didnt even finish the boot and couldnt deal with my fairly common Radeon X850.

facts.

You didn't end up at a text login prompt?

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: nweaver

Originally posted by: Smilin
[flamesuit = TRUE] Biased and generalizing observation that obviously doesn't apply to everyone but does often ring true ....

MS has problem X.
MS Guru reply: yeah, go do yada yada and it will fix X.

Linux has problem Y.
Linux Gury reply: you're f'n stupid. everyone knows you do yada yada instead. Hell MS can't even do X.



Oh, as for me:
Linux has problem Y.
MS Guru (me) reply: Yeah, dunno sorry man.

Myth Debunked

heh really? Despite the fact there are helpful guys in that thread (when is Drag not helpful ) what does the 2nd reply in that thread say?



Honestly though guys ... it was just an observation and although it does happen I was just joking and shooting from the hip. I thought it was kinda fun pwning Brazen real quick but if you guys REALLY want to debate this how about I just give up and let you win?

I've definately got a leg to stand on but it's too wobbly to mount a rational defense from.

 

[flexy]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: flexy
I had NO problems getting Vista RC1 5728 running, it even had all NF4 chipset etc. drivers working right out of the box ! Mind you, 64bit version !
I only had a problem with my Audigy 2.

ubuntu didnt even finish the boot and couldnt deal with my fairly common Radeon X850.

facts.

You didn't end up at a text login prompt?

i ended up in shell...no..no LOGIN as far i remember.

 

[sourceninja]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

The biggest problem is he tried to use the 64bit install and not 32bit install. 64bit linux is not ready for normal uneducated users.

Not really, the only real difference is the lack of flash and binary-only codecs, X should work fine and I believe ATI released 64-bit drivers for their stuff so 3D accel should work too.

My point is that what most normal desktop users want out of a desktop, 64bit linux doesnt' cut it yet. So he added an extra layer of problems on top of his already limited knowedge.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: flexy

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: flexy
I had NO problems getting Vista RC1 5728 running, it even had all NF4 chipset etc. drivers working right out of the box ! Mind you, 64bit version !
I only had a problem with my Audigy 2.

ubuntu didnt even finish the boot and couldnt deal with my fairly common Radeon X850.

facts.

You didn't end up at a text login prompt?

i ended up in shell...no..no LOGIN as far i remember.

Interesting.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: flexy

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: flexy
I had NO problems getting Vista RC1 5728 running, it even had all NF4 chipset etc. drivers working right out of the box ! Mind you, 64bit version !
I only had a problem with my Audigy 2.

ubuntu didnt even finish the boot and couldnt deal with my fairly common Radeon X850.

facts.

You didn't end up at a text login prompt?

i ended up in shell...no..no LOGIN as far i remember.

It sounds like it couldn't start 'X' and kicked back to the command line. I think you probably had a login prompt but don't remember.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: flexy

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: flexy
I had NO problems getting Vista RC1 5728 running, it even had all NF4 chipset etc. drivers working right out of the box ! Mind you, 64bit version !
I only had a problem with my Audigy 2.

ubuntu didnt even finish the boot and couldnt deal with my fairly common Radeon X850.

facts.

You didn't end up at a text login prompt?

i ended up in shell...no..no LOGIN as far i remember.

It sounds like it couldn't start 'X' and kicked back to the command line. I think you probably had a login prompt but don't remember.

Sometimes it kicks you back to a black screen and you need to press Ctrl+Alt+F1 to get the prompt.

 

[flexy]

so..just for the sake of it...how should i continue ? The problem with radeon drivers doesnt seem THAT uncommon
I assume i need the ATI linux drivers....so...how do i go from there ?

 

[xtknight]

Does safe graphics mode boot up for you?

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: nweaver

Originally posted by: flexy

Originally posted by: drag

Originally posted by: unmerited
Sounds like an ATI problem to me but, as others have said try another distribution. You're bound to find one that works.

unmerited

I donno. Maybe he is better off stopping now. Try again next year and it will probably just work.
Hopefully nobody wasted their time helping him on the Ubuntu forums. I am sure that all they would of gotten in return was complaints.

drag,

i was working w/ linux a few times years ago, incl. RedHAT, SuSE etc.

I do NOT like Windows just for Window's sake...but i also do NOT like many aspects of Linux, and one point i was always refraining from having Linux as my MAIN personal system is endles, cryptic installing procedures, configuring X, reading up on Y just to get basic things working.

I am not stupid, no questions i COULD sit down now, print this and this pages-long instruction out to eg. configure etc. xgl on my Radeon under distribution xyz...but that's exactly what i do NOT want and (OBVIOUSLY) rather makes me (annd other people) stick with Windows....whether i like it or not.

I was just VERY disappointed because a HUGE majority of people are raving about ubuntu...so it looked to me it could be a recent distribution which actually WORKS (from a human's perspective and does NOT have the bulk of little "fiddle-there and tweak that by hand" requirements.

Proof (sorry) that Linux still has a LONG way to go.

Btw, ironically, i had NO problems getting a Vista 64bit-BETA running here except that my Audigy didnt want to produce any sound....(yes, we all know it's the creative drivers).

Reagrding the help on the ubuntu forums: I got one saying i should file a bug-repoirt - another one pointing out it's the radeon-drivers.

so, it's creative's fault there are not drivers for Vista, but Ubuntu's fault there arn't 3d drivers for the ATI? Wow, you are an MS fanboi....

Haha, way to throw down the blatantly obvious