As requested, I'll try and outline why I am interested in Linux, along with a few first impressions, although I am certainly not a technical person, so I am more interested in what it does rather than how it does it. I like the idea of Linux being open source - in fact I would say it is something I believe in quite strongly, and I used several open source applications while I was running Windows. I was also fed up with the numerous security flaws I encountered in every version of Windows I used, and despite the best protection around, was still plagued with spam, spyware, trojans and viruses. It seems that Linux, for whatever reason, has largely avoided this. If I have a concern about using Linux, it is less to do with it as an operating system and more to do with my inability to comprehend it. While I suspect that this is not uncommon in the first week of use, I have to say that it has seemed fiendishly complicated to do even very basic things like install applications or get the hardware configured - this has necessitated ploughing through long lines of unfathomable code of the kind I usually try to avoid. I am hoping that I will either become used to it, or more likely, that having got the system set up the way I like it, I can have as little to do with opening the terminal window as possible. In short, I'm looking for a smooth and reliable graphical interface that is simple to use, relatively secure, and has the additional benefit of being open source. Jeremy
On Thursday 04 November 2004 9:10 pm, Jeremy Dales wrote:
As requested, I'll try and outline why I am interested in Linux, along with a few first impressions, although I am certainly not a technical person, so I am more interested in what it does rather than how it does it. I like the idea of Linux being open source - in fact I would say it is something I believe in quite strongly, and I used several open source applications while I was running Windows. I was also fed up with the numerous security flaws I encountered in every version of Windows I used, and despite the best protection around, was still plagued with spam, spyware, trojans and viruses. It seems that Linux, for whatever reason, has largely avoided this.
Welcome to the group Jeremy, your reasons for trying an alternative are not that different from most of us here I would guess.
If I have a concern about using Linux, it is less to do with it as an operating system and more to do with my inability to comprehend it. While I suspect that this is not uncommon in the first week of use, I have to say that it has seemed fiendishly complicated to do even very basic things like install applications or get the hardware configured - this has necessitated ploughing through long lines of unfathomable code of the kind I usually try to avoid. I am hoping that I will either become used to it, or more likely, that having got the system set up the way I like it, I can have as little to do with opening the terminal window as possible. In short, I'm looking for a smooth and reliable graphical interface that is simple to use, relatively secure, and has the additional benefit of being open source.
If you haven't come from a Unix background then there are several methods and practices that are going to get you scratching your head. I was the same the first time I played with Linux. However a lot of these things (once you understand them) really make sense and you start wondering why MS decided do do it differently. No one is going to argue that Linux doesn't have a steep learning curve, it does however level out after a while. Ease of package installation really depends on what distribution you are using and whether or not you are trying to run on the bleeding edge by compiling packages from source. I would say that every major distribution has at least one user in this group so hopefully your questions won't go unanswered. With some distributions it is possible to never need to go near the command line (SuSE can sometimes achieve this) However you will quickly learn that the shell is one of Linux's greatest strengths, it is a very flexable tool. You don't mention what distribution you are using. Regards Wayne
On Thursday 04 November 2004 22:08, Wayne Stallwood wrote:
No one is going to argue that Linux doesn't have a steep learning curve, it does however level out after a while.
Ease of package installation really depends on what distribution you are using and whether or not you are trying to run on the bleeding edge by compiling packages from source. I would say that every major distribution has at least one user in this group so hopefully your questions won't go unanswered.
With some distributions it is possible to never need to go near the command line (SuSE can sometimes achieve this) However you will quickly learn that the shell is one of Linux's greatest strengths, it is a very flexable tool.
There are many people who have a fundamental fear of / aversion to command lines, having been brought up on Windows or Mac. More than once I've had to convince people that Windows even HAS a command line, possibly because Microsoft bury it so far down the Start menu hierarchy. There's a deep-seated suspicion that Linux represents a move back to DOS and that Linux experts are only grudging users of GUIs in the first place. (Well, there's more than a grain of truth there.) As you say, some distros are getting close to being fully usable without going near a command line. Depends on what you want to do with them of course, but most of these people rarely need to stray outside KDE, any more than they went looking for the DOS command prompt in Windows. The point I'm getting to is that although many of us see Linux as rooted in the CLI, with a GUI added later, it's quite OK to reverse it. When people want and need to do something the GUI doesn't offer, they'll then have enough motivation to find out how bash works, and use it as a crowbar to open up the system. It's a new way of introducing people to Linux, but a perfectly good one. That's the beauty of the system; it's all things to all (wo)men. -- GT
On 2004-11-04 21:10:29 +0000 Jeremy Dales <jeremy@thepeak.fsworld.co.uk> wrote:
As requested, I'll try and outline why I am interested in Linux [...]
Welcome Jeremy. Thanks for the good introduction! I'm also concerned about security. Recently there have been some interesting claims about the ability of open free software development to fix bugs more quickly than closed proprietary software. The preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0306511 is one of them. You don't say which distribution you installed, if any. Some of them are much easier to drive than others and nearly every distribution has a slightly different emphasis. At least twice, I've chosen a distribution by sitting down with a gift box of CDs and continuing until I find one that I like. I think it was Slackware the first time and Debian the second. The text configuration files aren't usually too difficult and even shell script is fairly easy to start with, but there are good and bad pieces of software. I keep hoping that the worst ones will go away or get fixed, but there's a lot of inertia. Printing and emailing are the two worst categories, in my experience (yes, CUPS has a pretty web front-end, but it's big and not fun to debug). Fortunately, there is a lot of good documentation out there, once you decide how you like to navigate and use it. Start at your distribution's web site, http://webdocs.essex.ac.uk/LDP/ or by asking people. -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know Creative copyleft computing - http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ Unsolicited attachments to the pipex address deleted Will HLF fund tree-killings? http://www.thewalks.co.uk/
On 2004-11-04 21:10:29 +0000 Jeremy Dales <jeremy@thepeak.fsworld.co.uk> wrote:
As requested, I'll try and outline why I am interested in Linux [...]
Welcome Jeremy. Thanks for the good introduction! I share your concerns about security. Recently there have been some interesting work about the ability of open free software development to fix bugs more quickly than closed proprietary software, such as the preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0306511 which may give you some hope on security. Some distributions are much easier to drive than others and nearly every distribution has a slightly different emphasis. At least twice, I've chosen distribution by sitting down with a gift box of CDs and continuing until I find one that I like. I think it was Slackware the first time and Debian the second. (By the way, Slackware users, ftp://ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackware/slackware-current/PAT-NEEDS-YOUR-HELP.txt is an uncomfortable read.) The text configuration files aren't usually too difficult, but there are good and bad pieces of software. I keep hoping that the worst ones will go away or get fixed, but there's a lot of inertia. Printing and emailing are the two worst categories, in my experience (yes, CUPS has a pretty web front-end, but sometimes you still have to wade through reams of config file). -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know Creative copyleft computing - http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ Unsolicited attachments to the pipex address deleted Will HLF fund tree-killings? http://www.thewalks.co.uk/
On Wednesday 17 November 2004 11:33 am, MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-11-04 21:10:29 +0000 Jeremy Dales
<jeremy@thepeak.fsworld.co.uk> wrote:
As requested, I'll try and outline why I am interested in Linux [...]
Welcome Jeremy. Thanks for the good introduction! I share your concerns about security. Recently there have been some interesting work about the ability of open free software development to fix bugs more quickly than closed proprietary software, such as the preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0306511 which may give you some hope on security.
[snip] I am sure I read this post about 12 days ago (apart from the bad news about poor Patrick J. Volkerding) Speaking of which, when reading this does it cross anybody's mind that this guy should really admit himself to ER ASAP. He has already admitted himself a couple of times I know, but on at least one of those occasions he got bored and left without getting attention. The general theme of his post is that he is quite worried about his health, and yet he is using Google of all things for a diagnosis. Google is a great tool for finding out how to configure Postfix or getting some information to help rebuild an Austin 10 carburettor (taking my most recent two searches as an example) but even in those cases I have found misleading and incorrect information. Yet here we have a guy who honestly believes he is in deep medial smeg yet is trying to hunt down a bug in his own body like it is some dodgy code......unfortunately unless you are a qualified doctor, self medication probably won't work. That plea for stronger pills at the end fills me with fear !!
On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 06:41:54PM +0100, Wayne Stallwood wrote:
Speaking of which, when reading this does it cross anybody's mind that this guy should really admit himself to ER ASAP. He has already admitted himself a couple of times I know, but on at least one of those occasions he got bored and left without getting attention.
The general theme of his post is that he is quite worried about his health, and yet he is using Google of all things for a diagnosis.
Given how bad some of the medical attention I have received in the past doing google searches won't do any harm. Quite often doctors are very good at seeing things they know about, but are very often not open to suggestion that it could be a different problem. After all, they are human, and there have been times I have taken my car to an "expert" who was a good mechanic, but he couldn't see the wood for the trees, you also get the same in IT, sometimes people won't consider that X is the problem, because they have only ever seen Y causes similar symptoms before. Thanks Adam -- jabberid = quinophex@jabber.earth.li AFFS || http://www.affs.org.uk/ || Not a filesystem
On Wednesday 17 November 2004 6:35 pm, adam@thebowery.co.uk wrote:
Given how bad some of the medical attention I have received in the past doing google searches won't do any harm. Quite often doctors are very good at seeing things they know about, but are very often not open to suggestion that it could be a different problem. After all, they are human, and there have been times I have taken my car to an "expert" who was a good mechanic, but he couldn't see the wood for the trees, you also get the same in IT, sometimes people won't consider that X is the problem, because they have only ever seen Y causes similar symptoms before.
Maybe Googling about a bit for additional information or to reinforce/dispel a doctors opinion, I've done that for my Dad who suffers from Parkinsons. But to start taking medication and form a complete diagnosis based on this research sounds a bit dangerous. I hear what you are saying about blinkered expert opinion. Thing is that messing about regardless of what the "Expert" is telling you on your Car or your Computer is unlikely to cost you anything other than time and money if you get it wrong. Messing about with medication like that could well cost Patrick his life, or at least make what is sounding like a pretty serious condition far worse.
On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 08:08:57PM +0100, Wayne Stallwood wrote:
I hear what you are saying about blinkered expert opinion. Thing is that messing about regardless of what the "Expert" is telling you on your Car or your Computer is unlikely to cost you anything other than time and money if you get it wrong. Messing about with medication like that could well cost Patrick his life, or at least make what is sounding like a pretty serious condition far worse.
I dunno, you should see some of the places I have known friends to take their cars to.. they were certainly risking their lives ;) Adam -- jabberid = quinophex@jabber.earth.li AFFS || http://www.affs.org.uk/ || Not a filesystem
On 2004-11-17 19:08:57 +0000 Wayne Stallwood <ALUGlist@digimatic.plus.com> wrote:
But to start taking medication and form a complete diagnosis based on this research sounds a bit dangerous.
This misconception seems common, but Patrick posted to slashdot about it: he knows he's not a doctor, so has not and will not take medication not prescribed by a doctor. Mostly, he seems to be looking for doctors who can confirm(/refute?) his hypothesis after some bad experiences. Sorry if the bulk of that email had been sent before. I got a little confused when mailsync-ing a few days ago, but I thought I'd deleted all the postponed messages which had been sent. -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know Creative copyleft computing - http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ Unsolicited attachments to the pipex address deleted Will HLF fund tree-killings? http://www.thewalks.co.uk/
On Thursday 18 November 2004 1:16 am, MJ Ray wrote:
This misconception seems common, but Patrick posted to slashdot about it: he knows he's not a doctor, so has not and will not take medication not prescribed by a doctor. Mostly, he seems to be looking for doctors who can confirm(/refute?) his hypothesis after some bad experiences.
Doctors read Slashdot ? Last time I bothered to check it seemed to be 13 year old geeks and a whole load of trolls :-)
On 2004-11-18 01:46:47 +0000 Wayne Stallwood <ALUGlist@digimatic.plus.com> wrote:
Doctors read Slashdot ? Last time I bothered to check it seemed to be 13 year old geeks and a whole load of trolls :-)
Some of those claiming to be doctors posting about Patrick's appeal seemed to be acting like 13 year-old geek trolls, so I can see why you would think that. ;-) -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know
participants (5)
-
adam＠thebowery.co.uk -
Graham -
Jeremy Dales -
MJ Ray -
Wayne Stallwood