I'm using Linux
- Thread starter elmo16
- Start date
I received an error message "dpkr failed - use manual upgrade" or something to that extent. At that part I was lost. Decided to go back to Vista. It seems that while Linux has gotten a lot simpler, you still have to know a lot of command line commands, something I haven't had to use since before Windows 3.1. The commands are all in Linux, and you have to install the required files in the proper directories. I guess I'm spoiled by automation and simplicity of Windows.
Speed bump.
The runtime install overlay on the distro failed to complete the automated install process and it gave you the failed warning and told you to complete the install manually.
You might be better off with Red Hat. It costs a few bucks but the install fails on fewer PC's.
What did you decide to use as the GUI, Gnome or KDE?
The runtime install overlay on the distro failed to complete the automated install process and it gave you the failed warning and told you to complete the install manually.
You might be better off with Red Hat. It costs a few bucks but the install fails on fewer PC's.
What did you decide to use as the GUI, Gnome or KDE?
BTW, if you had wiped Windows in favor of installing Linux, and decided to go back to a MS based product, personally I would have gone back to Windows XP Pro SP2.
It's a mature product. Runs substantially faster than Vista currently does, is more stable, and doesn't have all the driver support issues of Vista. [Which was truly not ready for prime time when it was released.]
It's a mature product. Runs substantially faster than Vista currently does, is more stable, and doesn't have all the driver support issues of Vista. [Which was truly not ready for prime time when it was released.]
Last edited:
I bought a Dell desktop computer with Vista Home Basic, just so I could switch back to XP. When I switched to XP, my USB 2.0 ports became USB 1.1 and my dial-up modem didn't work (I now use cable internet and "borrow" very high speed wireless internet access), and I couldn't get XP drivers for these devices. I'm considering getting a Dell XP Laptop to better convert a program I've developed with VB 6 (which won't run with Vista) to VB 2008 Express.
Dell still sells PCs (Desktop and Laptop) with XP installed
Dell still sells PCs (Desktop and Laptop) with XP installed
I've heard that Microsoft is considering building a version of XP into Vista that uses XP dll's and COM. Many programs that supposedly won't run on XP actually will. The only real problem (in many cases) is that Vista won't support Help systems that use Winhlp32.exe. Microsoft has an upgrade that corrects this problem, but doesn't include this upgrade as an automatic upgrade.
Autodesk, who makes AutoCad claims that only the most recent version of AutoCad is compatible with Vista. After downloading and installing the Winhlp32.exe upgrade, my copy of AutoCad 2000 runs just fine (a few Winhlp 32 Macros don't work, but they aren't very important anyway).
I can see why Autodesk, as well as most other software makers would want to force you to buy new versions of their software. Unlike cars, for instance, software doesn't wear out.
Microsoft has to decide if their fate is more important to them then the fate of 3rd. party software makers.
Autodesk, who makes AutoCad claims that only the most recent version of AutoCad is compatible with Vista. After downloading and installing the Winhlp32.exe upgrade, my copy of AutoCad 2000 runs just fine (a few Winhlp 32 Macros don't work, but they aren't very important anyway).
I can see why Autodesk, as well as most other software makers would want to force you to buy new versions of their software. Unlike cars, for instance, software doesn't wear out.
Microsoft has to decide if their fate is more important to them then the fate of 3rd. party software makers.
To Thorn:
I would be interested in knowing more about what you do. I take it you are some sort of Computer Consultant. I've been thinking of getting into some thing like that my self. I know that this board discourages "back channeling" so I won't ask you to do that, but any information you can give me would be greatly appreciated.
I would be interested in knowing more about what you do. I take it you are some sort of Computer Consultant. I've been thinking of getting into some thing like that my self. I know that this board discourages "back channeling" so I won't ask you to do that, but any information you can give me would be greatly appreciated.
You know how when you download windows software, you just double click the Setup.exe file, and the software automatically installs itself including making the proper entries in the windows regerstry, including automatic uninstall? No such luck with Linux. While some software packages (that linux geek talk for setup files) do install somewhat automatically, most do not. You have to use DOS like commands, except you're talking unix, and as Linux is a graphical interface you have to know what directories to install different files in. There are few standards in Linux. A package that works almost automatically in Red Hat won't install automatically in Ubuntu or Slackware, etc. There are several "Standard Installers" in Linux. There are at least three main graphical interfaces in Linux, Gnome, KDE, X-Windows, and many variations between them.
If you think the driver problem is bad in Vista, it's nothing compared to the lack of drivers in Linux. And drivers for your printer might be available for Red Hat Linux, but not for SuSE or Xandros, but fear not, you can always get the C++ source code (provided you have the proper complier with the correct libraries for your version of Linux) and compile the source code down to binaries and then manually install them (provided you have the right installer, and the right version of that installer, this also depends on the Windows Manager your version of Linux uses). If you think I'm bullshitting you, I'm not. The main problem with Linux is that it's free. Why should any developer go out of his way to make things easy for you if he's not being paid for his efforts. As far as he's concerned, he's only working for super-duper geeks like him who can appreciate his brilliance. If you don't know as much as he does, then you not a super geek like him, and he doesn't need you, and you can go fuck yourself (unless you're willing to pay him, then he will like you and be willing to help you).
If you think the driver problem is bad in Vista, it's nothing compared to the lack of drivers in Linux. And drivers for your printer might be available for Red Hat Linux, but not for SuSE or Xandros, but fear not, you can always get the C++ source code (provided you have the proper complier with the correct libraries for your version of Linux) and compile the source code down to binaries and then manually install them (provided you have the right installer, and the right version of that installer, this also depends on the Windows Manager your version of Linux uses). If you think I'm bullshitting you, I'm not. The main problem with Linux is that it's free. Why should any developer go out of his way to make things easy for you if he's not being paid for his efforts. As far as he's concerned, he's only working for super-duper geeks like him who can appreciate his brilliance. If you don't know as much as he does, then you not a super geek like him, and he doesn't need you, and you can go fuck yourself (unless you're willing to pay him, then he will like you and be willing to help you).
The hardware is the hardware. If it is USB 2.0 compliant than that is what it is. So I would gather that you installed an older version of XP, pre-SP1, which didn't have the USB 2.0 support yet. When you update it to SP2 you will find that your USB ports are running on 2.0 drivers.
The only recent devices I have ever seen have trouble running on XP due to driver issues are DirectX 10 compliant video cards. XP is DirectX 9.C in SP2. The roll back can sometimes cause driver issues on cards optimized for 10. Is it a DX10 card you have in that system and was it the video driver you were having trouble with?
[Side note: There is a rumor, but only that, that MS will be moving DirectX 10 support into XP at some time. SP3 would be a perfect time for it but its beta doesn't have it. Yet, anyway.]
Your Ubuntu distro installs Gnome as a default. You can just as easily use KDE.
And yes, there is an under current of dissatisfaction with open source having very wide standards which allow for multiple variations. Some would like to see those standards narrowed. Still, the fact that there is room for diversity in development is part of what makes open source what it is, which is rich and multi-dimensioned. So it is hard to think in terms of doing away with one of its strongest assets. Even though doing so would make the result, perhaps, work a bit better.
???
Vista has, as XP did before it, compatibility issues with legacy software. It also has tools to work around these in many cases.
I have heard, and I do try to keep current, no plans on MS's part to increase the compatibility of Vista by having an XP kernel run on top of Vista [or in any other configuration]. There is emulation, if that is what you are thinking about?
What MS is saying its current plans are [which of course are subject to change on a whim] is to extend the life of XP support well into 2009 [with hints at beyond]. There is already a SP3 release in the works which should be available later this year. I haven't played with its beta because it was suppose to be, for the most part anyway, a collection of fixes already released through the regular updates. Yet my reading informs me that there are early indications that it gives as much as a 10% speed increase on a 2G dual core system when measured while running MS Office applications.
Since Vista SP1 provides only a minor bump in speed over its initial release version, which was a major let down on Vista systems compared with the more mature XP SP2 product, the fact that SP3 may increase XP's speed edge says nothing good about Vista's upcoming business sales.
The only recent devices I have ever seen have trouble running on XP due to driver issues are DirectX 10 compliant video cards. XP is DirectX 9.C in SP2. The roll back can sometimes cause driver issues on cards optimized for 10. Is it a DX10 card you have in that system and was it the video driver you were having trouble with?
[Side note: There is a rumor, but only that, that MS will be moving DirectX 10 support into XP at some time. SP3 would be a perfect time for it but its beta doesn't have it. Yet, anyway.]
Your Ubuntu distro installs Gnome as a default. You can just as easily use KDE.
And yes, there is an under current of dissatisfaction with open source having very wide standards which allow for multiple variations. Some would like to see those standards narrowed. Still, the fact that there is room for diversity in development is part of what makes open source what it is, which is rich and multi-dimensioned. So it is hard to think in terms of doing away with one of its strongest assets. Even though doing so would make the result, perhaps, work a bit better.
???
Vista has, as XP did before it, compatibility issues with legacy software. It also has tools to work around these in many cases.
I have heard, and I do try to keep current, no plans on MS's part to increase the compatibility of Vista by having an XP kernel run on top of Vista [or in any other configuration]. There is emulation, if that is what you are thinking about?
What MS is saying its current plans are [which of course are subject to change on a whim] is to extend the life of XP support well into 2009 [with hints at beyond]. There is already a SP3 release in the works which should be available later this year. I haven't played with its beta because it was suppose to be, for the most part anyway, a collection of fixes already released through the regular updates. Yet my reading informs me that there are early indications that it gives as much as a 10% speed increase on a 2G dual core system when measured while running MS Office applications.
Since Vista SP1 provides only a minor bump in speed over its initial release version, which was a major let down on Vista systems compared with the more mature XP SP2 product, the fact that SP3 may increase XP's speed edge says nothing good about Vista's upcoming business sales.
Last edited:
While there is some elitist BS in the open source world I think you have read the majority of it wrong.
The pinnacle of open source success isn't to write code that only the most studious and "connected" can use. It is to write for the masses.
What really makes an open source code writer's dick get hard is the notion that his code will be operating on millions of machines throughout the world. That his library of intellectual property will have thousands of other code writers paying call to use his/her routines because they have been found useful and have established themselves as the benchmarks in their area.
To be considered "the standard", or best of many standards, is the zenith of open source success.
The pinnacle of open source success isn't to write code that only the most studious and "connected" can use. It is to write for the masses.
What really makes an open source code writer's dick get hard is the notion that his code will be operating on millions of machines throughout the world. That his library of intellectual property will have thousands of other code writers paying call to use his/her routines because they have been found useful and have established themselves as the benchmarks in their area.
To be considered "the standard", or best of many standards, is the zenith of open source success.
Last edited: