Brian Swale wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>Thanks for all the advice about different programs, which I will follow up
>where
>I have not already been looking.
>
>Operating Systems: I have already tried Linux. I made this machine a dual-
>boot system with Debian Linux a few years ago.
>
>It caused me no end of grief. For a start the only Linux program I could
>reliably get to run was Midnight Commander, equivalent more or less to
>Windows Explorer, XTtree Gold, or PC Tools. The other available programs I
>thought it installed just would not run.
>
>Secondly, when I tried to set the parameters so I could run a GUI screen,
>there was no direct setting for my monitor, and I set what I concluded were
>the correct default settings for my fine-resolution screen. The result was a
>ruined monitor which I could not replace exactly, or even close, at a
>reasonable price. I am now running a second-hand Digital unit which is OK..
>
>Thirdly, Linux, on booting, opens a lot of critical files, which the
>instructions
>tell are ruined if shut-down is done improperly. With Windows, (and DOS) for
>all their imperfections, next start-up might be tricky, but critical files are
>not
>ruined if there is an improper shut-down. To my mind this is a major flaw of
>Linux. One can never tell if something may cause an improper shut-down.
>Get an un-interruptible power supply. Why? They system should have been
>designed from the outset to cope without requiring extra expense..
>
>Also, some people say that once booted-up, machines should be left
>running. To my mind that is a waste of electricity.
>
>Lastly, over recent time the size of distributed systems of Linux has grown
>almost exponentially. Some distributions now require 3 CDROMs or more. I
>think this is ludicrous extravagance.
>
>I know there is a Linux system called Knoppix which runs from a bootable
>CDROM; I might give this a whirl just to see what it is all about.
>
>I have so many Windows programs now that I use regularly, and which I
>understand, that it is difficult for me to see any advantage changing to
>another system for which the equivalent programs may not exist, or which if
>they do I would have to learn.
>
>What a lot of negatives. I must be feeling grumpy.
>
>Cheers, Brian
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
>
>
Linux has improved enormously since a few years ago, there is simply no
comparison. I think if you tried again you would have a completely
different experience. Also the stuff about ruining important files is in
practice not true, if you shut down improperly it will take some time
repairing the file system on the next boot, just like Windows does. If
your Windows system goes bad on you, very often the only recourse is a
complete reinstall, often losing everything on the machine. With Linux
it is possible to boot from CD and repair the system. Being an open
system, all the details of its operation are widely known, which is not
true of Windows.
In my experience, the Linux distributions of today are very easy to
install and very reliable. I have not been able to get my scanner (HP
PSC950) working reliably under Linux yet, but then it is rather a joke
as scanners go :-( Have another go at Linux, you will be surprised at
the difference.
Regards,
Jonas
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.5 - Release Date: 2004-12-26
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|