Which linux OS?

[ronald911]

I'm thinking of getting an linux os at the end of the month to finish my CAP.

Which OS can you reccomend and have used it, because there are so many?

Which is the best?

Thanks

[jsheed_sa]

For a noob in terms of compatibility / userability / support id say your only choice is ubuntu and even with that you are going to be tearing your hair out if you have any unsupported hardware etc.

Its a big learning curve but a good one.

J

[Moederloos]

Ubuntu - remember a new version is due out next month.

[ronald911]

Ubuntu - remember a new version is due out next month.

Then I will wait another month........ :mad::(:eek:

[ronald911]

I just ordered a free CD from then to test it. otherwise if I hate Ubuntu, at least I didn't waste my cap. I shold get it in about 5 weeks---- its a long time, but i can wait.

[Moederloos]

I just ordered a free CD from then to test it. otherwise if I hate Ubuntu, at least I didn't waste my cap. I shold get it in about 5 weeks---- its a long time, but i can wait.

And when you fall in love with it - it will be around the time of the new version!

I have used it now for 6 months as my only OS - and it is bliss.
Whenever someone complains about some stupid Windows problem, or a new virus etc, I just smile.

[ronald911]

Well doesnt Ubuntu update like other OS?

[Moederloos]

Well doesnt Ubuntu update like other OS?

Yes, it does. And if you mean "like Windows" then no. Windows updates are hopeless.

Ubuntu will update - but it is usually a big download.

[ronald911]

So what do you mean BIG?-200MB? and how often?

[Moederloos]

So what do you mean BIG?-200MB? and how often?

Usually 400-600MB for an upgrade.
Major releases for the desktop version is 6 monthly.

[ronald911]

*****!! How does your cap survive with this? :O

[Moederloos]

*****!! How does your cap survive with this? :O

lol
Add up windows updates and virus updates over 6 months....

[Cadavre777]

It's all the same really, just different package management and minor userland changes. Get a 10 gig local IS account and use the local mirrors, find one that suits you.

[Moederloos]

It's all the same really, just different package management and minor userland changes. Get a 10 gig local IS account and use the local mirrors, find one that suits you.

As to the different versions of linux? Yeah.
It is good to choose one that is "popular" though, if you are a beginner.
Help is easier to come by then.

[Cadavre777]

ronald911, it would be a good idea to find someone locally that uses the linux distro that you will try. Cause if you run into a problem you cant fix and can't go online, you can always give them a shout. This saved my bacon countless times when I used linux.

Never forget to backup, dont learn the hard way

[milomak]

for any distro you choose it is important you find one with at least one forum that is active

General and specific - www.linuxquestions.org
Debian - forums.debian.net
Fedora - forums.fedoraforum.org
(x)ubuntu - ubuntuforums.org

Though I've also used SUSE and Mandriva (Mandrake), I got support for these from linuxquestions.

[ronald911]

How is OpenSuse? I jst discoverd it on a PcFormat cd thats a couple of months old.

[chiskop]

Which Suse? - 10.3 is the current version IIRC. There are a couple of suse users on the forum, and it is a very nice looking distro.

[saffakanera]

thankfully ubuntu updates via a local mirror :D so bombs away...

[Angelus]

hi all , iam also thinking of going over to linux i like the look of opensuse be it just started reading about it last night i figure theres opensuse and opensuse kde and opensuse gnome also found some screenies (http://en.opensuse.org/Screenshots/openSUSE_10.3#KDE_Screenshots) for them and i do like the looks of it. problem is though that all my experience and pc learning was done on windows and so i know absolutly nothing about linux so basically everything will have to change i assume so its a on take of learning a new os and new programs as well which sounds soooo overwhelming not to mention the hardware compatability question. i would like to research the suse/opensuse option thinking would there be some sort of guide or something that would talk someone though the move from windows to suse/opensuse so a person doesnt go into suse/opensuse totally clueless. anyway thanks for the input so far into this thread and thanks for anymore replies that would help us "wanting to leave windows people"

[chiskop]

There is a good article in the latest linux format about moving from windows to linux. Also a cover disc with mandriva on it. Mandriva was my first distro, and though there're not many people here who use it, it's a good enough starter. Mag costs about R150, but it's worth it IMHO.

[Angelus]

There is a good article in the latest linux format about moving from windows to linux. Also a cover disc with mandriva on it. Mandriva was my first distro, and though there're not many people here who use it, it's a good enough starter. Mag costs about R150, but it's worth it IMHO.

hey there thanks for the reply, would this mag be at say cna ?

[chiskop]

hey there thanks for the reply, would this mag be at say cna ?

Should be, but it often depends on the branch. I saw it yesterday at Exclusive Books (Rosebank) and Incredible Connection ( :eek: ).

[lsuacner]

My PC has not been updated for 3 months. I will update when there is a new release. If you are worried about your cap Linux is the way to go. Every 6 months you sacrifice 700mb local bandwidth for the squid proxy, Firefox adblock/noscript combo and from there you can save 30% through squid and through adblock/noscript I suppose just as much. I don't even recognise most sites when I view them anywhere else.

[chiskop]

My PC has not been updated for 3 months. I will update when there is a new release. If you are worried about your cap Linux is the way to go. Every 6 months you sacrifice 700mb local bandwidth for the squid proxy, Firefox adblock/noscript combo and from there you can save 30% through squid and through adblock/noscript I suppose just as much. I don't even recognise most sites when I view them anywhere else.

Yes, or abuse your bosses' bandwidth, :)

FWIW: I've put /home onto a separate partition. Now updating to a new release takes 15min, and all my settings (even my tabs from firefox) are preserved. :D

[Lino]

To be honest it depends how well do you adapt to new things quickly.

Personally I would recommend Ubuntu (as their is TONS of learning materiel out there on it)
How ever PC-Linux is also gaining ground, more of an out of the box experience with it.

[milomak]

thankfully ubuntu updates via a local mirror :D so bombs away...

for the record so do sidux, fedora (core, updates and livna) and debian

[Kasyx]

Personally, I hate SuSE, I hate it in much the same way I hate getting stabbed.

Package management is horrible, definitely not noobie-friendly. I would suggest a Debian-based distro (Debian, xbuntu, etc) as it is easier to find and install packages (applications).
My suggestion for a Linux desktop distro is definitely Kubuntu. Mainly because I hate Gnome.
Your updates won't be too hectic and if you use local mirrors, you can just use a local account.

*KDE Zealout*

[milomak]

i find or rather have found the suse's prior to 10.2 to be a lot more sluggish as compared to its contemporary OSes.

[ronald911]

So what you are saying is that Suse Suck? Well according to everything I have read so far, Ubuntu is on the top of my list followed by Fedora.

[chiskop]

You can't go wrong with either ubuntu or kubuntu.

[Hoof-Hearted]

trying to get 7.10 to boot from disk right now :( fsker just doesn't want to know about moving past initial boot screen :(

[milomak]

So what you are saying is that Suse Suck? Well according to everything I have read so far, Ubuntu is on the top of my list followed by Fedora.

I am currently booting into F8 64-bit. I've been running Fedora since FC4. I like it quite a lot as a distro. Though, the main system OS is Debian 32-bit. I figured if I am going to go the debianised route I might as well go with the proper thing.

[chiskop]

Um, surely if you want to go the debianised route, Debian is the proper thing? :)

[Snake Blisken]

I recommend ubuntu.
Please see the post on the new linux vista. Looks to be promising ;)

[Velenoso]

I recommend Ubuntu. I am new to linux and don't know too much about computer hardware, etc. and I managed to get it up and running fairly easily. Now I am at about 70% linux and growing.

[milomak]

Um, surely if you want to go the debianised route, Debian is the proper thing? :)

perhaps you need to read the post again

[Smiley_lauf]

Here is my bit:
1. If you want support, support, support, then there is nothing better than Ubuntu. For newbie, support is everything, and you get in quick and fast from ubuntuforums.org (absolute beginner).
2. If you want hardware compatability, then Ubuntu it is. I have a moera HP notebook with an irritating ATI card, and issues with rebooting and acpi support. None of the other distro's really worked for me on this hardware, and when I installed Ubuntu Gutsy, I was in linux heaven. Everything works on this old hag: HP Compaq nw8240 full-house specs.
3. If there are packages that are not in the rep, then you will be guarenteed there is a .deb file waiting for you somewhere and it is specifically designed for the recent Ubuntu; e.g. VirtualBox, Opera, etc.
4. Local mirrors for updates/upgrades...so local cap now is std with TELKOM ISP (after cap). Do all your updates then.
5. Enormous amount of HOWTO's on ubuntuforums.org or ubuntuguide.org
6. extensive user-base
7. cutting edge packages every six months
8. DoC South Africa (Meraka Inst.) uses Ubuntu
9. Just the right amount of packages on default install: no-bloatware like Suse, Mandriva, etc
10. Best of all, a SA'can is helping the FOSS movement

Tah,
S

[ronald911]

Well lets say I have a new nVidia 8 Series Card like the 8500 or 8800.
Will Ubuntu be compatible with the card, do I have to downloAD special drivers for it or what?

[Smiley_lauf]

Well lets say I have a new nVidia 8 Series Card like the 8500 or 8800.
Will Ubuntu be compatible with the card, do I have to downloAD special drivers for it or what?

Well, as far as I know, Ubuntu's screen detection should pick it up automatically and recommend a driver for you; if not then it will fall-back to VESA screen (generic, low res screen) and then you could work from there. If this is a new card (i.e. brand new like in last month or so, then I would wait for the new Hardy release of Ubuntu and try that).

I have ATI card and previous version of Ubuntu, I had to manually install the ATI-fglrx drivers; but now it is done thru the "bullet-proof" X
http://arstechnica.com/journals/linux.ars/2007/08/29/ubuntu-xorg-maintainer-demonstrates-bulletproof-x

Also look at this thread in ubuntuforums: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=578130

[ghoti]

Give you an example of why I adore Ubuntu/Kubuntu.

I plugged in my USB bluetooth dongle I had just bought. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

I plugged in an external USB wireless card. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

I plugged in my USB modem. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

I plugged in my skype phone. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

My hard disk on my laptop crashed, so I installed ubuntu onto an external hard drive. And it worked.

The support for ubuntu is amazing (www.ubuntuforums.org ), the step-by-step instructions in the help wiki are fantastic. Updates and installing cant be simpler. It just works (tm).

Ubuntu rawks.

[Kasyx]

I recommend ubuntu.
Please see the post on the new linux vista. Looks to be promising ;)

I would rather eat my own face than use a version of Linux done up to look like Vista.

It's kinda like going into a church with stain-glass images of Satan on the walls.

[BCO]

I would rather eat my own face than use a version of Linux done up to look like Vista.

It's kinda like going into a church with stain-glass images of Satan on the walls.

That's pretty Metal. Me like.

[web]

Give you an example of why I adore Ubuntu/Kubuntu.

I plugged in my USB bluetooth dongle I had just bought. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

I plugged in an external USB wireless card. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

I plugged in my USB modem. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

I plugged in my skype phone. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

My hard disk on my laptop crashed, so I installed ubuntu onto an external hard drive. And it worked.

The support for ubuntu is amazing (www.ubuntuforums.org ), the step-by-step instructions in the help wiki are fantastic. Updates and installing cant be simpler. It just works (tm).


Ubuntu rawks.

After battling for about a week to get my e220 to work on kubuntu I gave up. Ok I know its simple but I just could not get it to work. Saw Mandriva 2008 on the latest Linux Format DVD. Installed it, everything works, I have not had to do one thing in the console.

I just tested your list and it came through with flying colours.
Connected to the windows network at work really easily e220 works straight out of the box.

Must say really impressed the installer was really simple and I wish the other distros dealt with the partitioning the same way was an absolute breeze.

So far so good just now have to find a .dwg viewer then I can be free from windows. :D

[ghoti]

Use which flavour works for you. Ubuntu is my coffee, hehe. The linux user base is growing quickly these days. Faster than I have ever seen it grow.

[Smiley_lauf]

web,
Pity Ubuntu did not work for you. I have the same experience with RPM based Linux distro's--they just do not work on my notebook. I am trying out Ubuntu Hardy 8.04 beta, and it "just works". So as wizard said, just try out other distro's you will be surprised which one just take on to your hardware. Other issue, is regular updates have to be on local server for me, as local bandwitdh is now free. Does Mandriva offer ZA servers for applications and updates?

[web]

Yip there are ZA servers for updates etc. I was keen to use Kubuntu but I am a little stuck without the internet connection through the e220. Was just really suprised how easy it was on Mandriva. I haven't played with Mandriva since it was still Mandrake but must say really am impressed.

[milomak]

So far so good just now have to find a .dwg viewer then I can be free from windows. :D

have you tried a google search for linux dwg?

[web]

have you tried a google search for linux dwg?

I have, I think the message should have been, now all I need to do is find the best one to use.

[Kasyx]

web,
Pity Ubuntu did not work for you. I have the same experience with RPM based Linux distro's--they just do not work on my notebook. I am trying out Ubuntu Hardy 8.04 beta, and it "just works". So as wizard said, just try out other distro's you will be surprised which one just take on to your hardware. Other issue, is regular updates have to be on local server for me, as local bandwitdh is now free. Does Mandriva offer ZA servers for applications and updates?

I HATE RedHat-based distributions. I can deal with YUM, but .rpm? I'd rather just install Vista.

[milomak]

what is it exactly about RPMs that gets to you?

[Skeptik]

After battling for about a week to get my e220 to work on kubuntu I gave up. Ok I know its simple but I just could not get it to work. Saw Mandriva 2008 on the latest Linux Format DVD. Installed it, everything works, I have not had to do one thing in the console.

I just tested your list and it came through with flying colours.
Connected to the windows network at work really easily e220 works straight out of the box.

Must say really impressed the installer was really simple and I wish the other distros dealt with the partitioning the same way was an absolute breeze.

So far so good just now have to find a .dwg viewer then I can be free from windows. :D
This is the biggest thing I have never understood about LINUX. If it works on one distro then why doesn't it work on another if the underlying kernel is the same??

Are they competing so furiously with one another instead of cooperating on a Windows killer app??
[If so, then this is why Linux doesn't work and will never take off properly]

[milomak]

Skeptik, except the point of Linux is not top be a Windows killer. There are those who run to it as an anti-MS type stand for sure. But it's purpose is to provide an alternative OS. Not to become the dominant OS. Though actually that might well be Shuttleworth's aim with Ubuntu. But other distros like Fedora, Red Hat, Gentoo, Slackware or Debian to name a few certainly don't have OS domination as their principle goal. Nor does Linus from what I've read of his statements.

At the end of the day each distro is different and the mainstream distros each make their own changes to the standard kernel. Hence why you can sometimes find hardware working on one and not another.

[Kasyx]

what is it exactly about RPMs that gets to you?

Dependencies :mad:

I have always wondered, philosophically speaking...

If the package you try to install has 6 dependencies, each of which has 6 dependencies of its own, and so ad infinitum, will you get to a point where you have eventually downloaded every package in existence?

[milomak]

Dependencies :mad:

I have always wondered, philosophically speaking...

If the package you try to install has 6 dependencies, each of which has 6 dependencies of its own, and so ad infinitum, will you get to a point where you have eventually downloaded every package in existence?

Not sure I get you. It’s not like deb packages don’t have dependencies (or required packages). Even if you compile you will need to have dependencies/required packages installed.

[Kasyx]

Not sure I get you. It’s not like deb packages don’t have dependencies (or required packages). Even if you compile you will need to have dependencies/required packages installed.

Generally with deb, it downloads the required dependencies for you, rather than just complaining that something is missing, and leaving you to hunt it down as you whimper to yourself in a vain attempt to stop from going insane.

[milomak]

oh i see what you are saying. i find smart to be able to deal very intelligently with dependency issues ie actually pulling them. but yes the deb route certainly less frustrating.

[ghoti]

Im dealing with an OpenSA setup that I have to do RPM builds. Ouch!

[1_Flip_1]

In an attempt to promote all open-source O/S's...

You should also consider one of the *BSD's as well.

NetBSD -- uncommon/old/new hardware
OpenBSD -- focuses on security
FreeBSD -- Workstation/Server

My favorite is FreeBSD which I have been using for years...

Its different to Linux in a number of ways and uses a more steady development approach.

The latest FreeBSD kernel (v7) is also faster than the fastest Linux kernel.

The learning curve is steep but if you are willing to learn you will find that FreeBSD can be used to make a powerful/highly secure workstation or server.

If you are curious about FreeBSD, try google :)

Or ask a question, I'll see if I can help.

However, If one of the *BSD's is not your cup of tea then my vote must go to Debian Linux.

[Kasyx]

BSD is pretty awesome, I will admit, but I wouldn't use it as a workstation myself as it is just too much effort. I can understand using it on one's servers (although OpenBSD is probably a better chocie), but for me I just don't see any reason other than masochism that would lead one to install it on their workstation :D

[ghoti]

Its different to Linux in a number of ways and uses a more steady development approach.



Um. Could you explain what you mean by that? The only reason that I feel that BSD gets released slower is simply because it has a much smaller userbase and therefore less development is done.

[SoftDux-Rudi]

Um. Could you explain what you mean by that? The only reason that I feel that BSD gets released slower is simply because it has a much smaller userbase and therefore less development is done.

No. FreeBSD, or BSD for that matter is UNIX, and UNIX IS NOT Linux, nor is Linux UNIX. Linux comes from UNIX, but has evolved on it's own over the years.

Linux is more aimed at the end user and newbies, and it will more than often support the latest hardware and technologies, whereas UNIX is a much more stable & secure OS, and that's it's main focus. It's made for servers / security / networking / routers / etc

P.S. Have you tried OpenBSD? :)

[ghoti]

No. FreeBSD, or BSD for that matter is UNIX, and UNIX IS NOT Linux, nor is Linux UNIX. Linux comes from UNIX, but has evolved on it's own over the years.

FYI BSD is not Unix, its Unix like. Linux is not Unix and is also Unix like. You dont sound like you are clear on your information from my perspective.


Linux is more aimed at the end user and newbies, and it will more than often support the latest hardware and technologies, whereas UNIX is a much more stable & secure OS, and that's it's main focus.

Are you implying that professionals dont use the latest hardware and technologies and only "newbies" do? Considering that linux makes up most of the worlds internet servers .. I think you are talking nonsense.


It's made for servers / security / networking / routers / etc

You mean like linux? :D I know exactly what BSD is used for thanks


P.S. Have you tried OpenBSD? :)

Yes... but thats not a challenge (I am familiar with iptables and security), try a NetBSD server (make sure you have your calculator around)

[chiskop]

Um w1zard, its not the same guy. :o

It's that reading thing again. :)

[milomak]

he'll hate to delete a post he worked so hard on

[ghoti]

This is what happens when you are working on giptables.conf at the same time while reading a forum :(

[milomak]

at least you were able to salvage most it

[chiskop]

This is what happens when you are working on giptables.conf at the same time while reading a forum :(

You have to set your priorities a little more carefully then, and stop wasting time with those iptables. :)

Though, I do agree with your points esp the difference between unix-like and based on unix.

[ghoti]

You have to set your priorities a little more carefully then, and stop wasting time with those iptables. :)

I know I know... Im trying.

[SoftDux-Rudi]

FYI BSD is not Unix, its Unix like. Linux is not Unix and is also Unix like. You dont sound like you are clear on your information from my perspective.

What is BSD then? Please explain it to me, I'd like to see if you know :)



Are you implying that professionals dont use the latest hardware and technologies and only "newbies" do? Considering that linux makes up most of the worlds internet servers .. I think you are talking nonsense.

Have you tried running a GeForce 9600 or a USB Wifi card, or stuff like that on BSD before? For the same reason why some Linux distro's support all the latest hardware, and some don't, BSD doesn't support all the latest hardware. Bear in mind, the latest hardware is only the latest till something new replaces it. SO, BSD will eventually support it, but it's still not going to concentrate on every 3D card, joystick or steering wheel. It's not meant to be a desktop OS, as Linux is



You mean like linux? :D I know exactly what BSD is used for thanks


No, BSD / UNIX :) UNIX existed on server long before Linux did. Yes, Linux ALSO runs on servers, we use many different linux distro's on servers, as well as BSD




Yes... but thats not a challenge (I am familiar with iptables and security), try a NetBSD server (make sure you have your calculator around)

Why isn't that a challenge? Do you even know what OpenBSD's main focus is? Security, in every part of it. It will work on far less "fancy" hardware that FreeBSD will. Why do you need a steering wheel & SLi GeForce on a server? :)

[sn3rd]

I've been using Debian Etch since I got my most recent notebook (last year June-ish) and I've never had any problems. The Debian forums are super helpful, the apt package manager is super easy to use, and there are plenty of resources available on the net to further your knowledge.

Enter Ubuntu...

About the only reason I haven't installed Ubuntu (and removed Debian) is because Debian is WORKING... it has taken quite a while for me to tweak things to be just the way I like, and to be honest, I'm quite scared of losing it all :P

HOWEVER...

I have worked on several Ubuntu machines and even the "newbies" that have installed Ubuntu have not reported any issues, which makes me think that Ubuntu is probably a good way for the average Windows user to explore and experiment with Linux

[flarkit]

Please, let's not get into a huff about trivialities. There are dozens of Linux distros, meant for different purposes. Some are used for server or enterprise applications (and perform excellently), whilst others are aimed at the end-user or desktop environment (and are becoming increasingly popular as the ease-of-use improves).

For me the main point about Linux, is that the OS itself is free and encourages OSS through collaboration of a global community. If you support that, join in, otherwise go right ahead and use whatever you please.

It's not necessary to nitpick about who knows more than the next. Leave that to the M$-enthusiasts and the script-kiddies please.

For clarifications' sake, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bsd:


Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD, sometimes called Berkeley Unix) is the Unix operating system derivative developed and distributed by the Computer Systems Research Group of the University of California, Berkeley, from 1977 to 1995.

Historically, BSD has been considered as a branch of UNIX — "BSD UNIX", because it shared the initial codebase and design with the original AT&T UNIX operating system.
...
Today, the term of "BSD" is often non-specifically used to refer to any of these BSD descendants, e.g. FreeBSD, NetBSD or OpenBSD, which together form a branch of the family of Unix-like operating systems.

That seems pretty spot-on

[SoftDux-Rudi]

Well, the question was about FreeBSD and why it's being released slower than Linux.

Here's a nice overview of the UNIX history, before Linux came into existence:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix#1980s

Interestingly, that article does touch a bit on how UNIX later influenced other Operating Systems like OS/2, PC DOS, etc. I have a book called "UNIX System Security Tools", which outlines the whole software history and indicates how the founders of C (currently C++ & C#) were the almost directly responsible to software to be portable between mainframes, which also later lead to other Operating Systems to be "evolved"


P.S. Please don't see education as a flame war :)

[Skeptik]

Well, the question was about FreeBSD and why it's being released slower than Linux.

Here's a nice overview of the UNIX history, before Linux came into existence:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix#1980s

Interestingly, that article does touch a bit on how UNIX later influenced other Operating Systems like OS/2, PC DOS, etc. I have a book called "UNIX System Security Tools", which outlines the whole software history and indicates how the founders of C (currently C++ & C#) were the almost directly responsible to software to be portable between mainframes, which also later lead to other Operating Systems to be "evolved"


P.S. Please don't see education as a flame war :)
ROFL.
You're totally correct of course. The Linux folk don't like to see the truth. They even get comments they don't like deleted :rolleyes: bit like the Scientologists eh?

Mention that Apple OSX Leopard IS UNIX and let's see the response.:D

[Skeptik]

BSD is pretty awesome, I will admit, but I wouldn't use it as a workstation myself as it is just too much effort. I can understand using it on one's servers (although OpenBSD is probably a better chocie), but for me I just don't see any reason other than masochism that would lead one to install it on their workstation :D
You might want to try PC-BSD. Their installer is great. There are some issues which are niggling me, but all in all it's a great effort from a tiny community.

[sn3rd]

...
which outlines the whole software history and indicates how the founders of C (currently C++ & C#)
...


er...

[fskmh]

In an attempt to promote all open-source O/S's...
The latest FreeBSD kernel (v7) is also faster than the fastest Linux kernel.


Really? In what respect? Still using FreeBSD 6.1, NetBSD and Slack here.

[fskmh]

No. FreeBSD, or BSD for that matter is UNIX, and UNIX IS NOT Linux, nor is Linux UNIX. Linux comes from UNIX, but has evolved on it's own over the years.

Linux is more aimed at the end user and newbies, and it will more than often support the latest hardware and technologies, whereas UNIX is a much more stable & secure OS, and that's it's main focus. It's made for servers / security / networking / routers / etc

P.S. Have you tried OpenBSD? :)

Yes, I've tried OpenBSD. Was fun to play with and really easy to install. I bet you're not using a wireless card that requires ndiswrapper on it though.

I think FreeBSD, NetBSD and GNU/Linux all have their roots in 4.4 BSD, no? A lot of Linux distros look nothing like UNIX now of course, but Posix is the guiding standard, not leetness factor.

BTW, security and stability are affected by what is actually installed, and how the installer did the job. Comparing a NetBSD ftp and http server with a Linux box that does multimedia, emulation for gaming, wireless, bluetooth etc., (and happens to do ftp, serve a few web pages and host a DC++ hub at the same time), is just plain dumb.
It's like saying MessDOS 3.3 is the best OS cos it is rock solid. Of course it is, it does fsckall.

[The Axe Dude]

Well, I just booted into Ubuntu for the first time...ever :D I like it, and I dont seem to be having any issues *yet*, although it is only the live CD...I might have to install it onto a partition XD

Verrry Nice...Will wait for a final of Hardy Heron maybe though...

[Gunny]

I havent read the complete thread but has any one mentioned that the thread started can go to a freedom toaster.

[The Axe Dude]

Freedom Toasters are a pain in the butt! I tried the one at uni (Monash) and it just keeps giving errors. A great idea, but they should be looked after/maintained more

[fskmh]

Freedom Toasters are a pain in the butt! I tried the one at uni (Monash) and it just keeps giving errors. A great idea, but they should be looked after/maintained more

Yes, I usually get peeved about stuff like that because it reflects badly on open source. Perhaps you should send an email if there's a contact person.
I admin an http/ftp server on our campus (NWU) with a bunch of Linux, *BSD isos and free Windows apps, and I try to keep it functional and up-to-date, although it has nothing to do with my job description. It's strictly intraweb, (thanks Ivy), but now that the community wireless thing is picking up I'm seeing hits from people in town too. (The wireless community consists mostly of staff and off-campus students, and access is limited with no Internet peering of course.)

[The Axe Dude]

The first thing I did was go and speak to whoever I could think of getting it fixed. :D Havent been to check if it is fixed yet :p Decided to just download the iso myself :d

[1_Flip_1]

Really? In what respect? Still using FreeBSD 6.1, NetBSD and Slack here.

You should upgrade to ver 7.0; unless of course you are running special programs on your 6.1 box.

If you do upgrade to v7; and you have the "src" directory for v6.1; then you may be glad to know that you only need to download 49mb of files...

As for FreeBSD 7 being faster than linux;

read people.freebsd.org/~kris/scaling/mysql.html

and have a look at:

people.freebsd.org/%7Ekris/scaling/os-mysql.png

[1_Flip_1]

Um. Could you explain what you mean by that? The only reason that I feel that BSD gets released slower is simply because it has a much smaller userbase and therefore less development is done.

FreeBSD uses development branches; experimental code goes into the current branch; tested, ex-experimental, approved code goes into the stable branch; 1-2 times per year a snap shot of the stable branch is released as a "production release"

If you are adventurous you can install from the current branch; less adventurous, install stable; or alternatively you can install a release.

FreeBSD is source based, and it changes daily. You can download changes from a cvs mirror once per day via the cvsup tool.

FreeBSD uses cvs mirrors located around the world. Last time I checked, two of those mirrors were located in SA.

As for the "smaller userbase", you really should read the netcraft archives: uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html

Yahoo for example has been using FreeBSD for years....

I have it on good authority that the Linux kernel committer will use the FreeBSD development model "sometime soon"...

[1_Flip_1]

No. FreeBSD, or BSD for that matter is UNIX, and UNIX IS NOT Linux, nor is Linux UNIX. Linux comes from UNIX, but has evolved on it's own over the years.

Linux is more aimed at the end user and newbies, and it will more than often support the latest hardware and technologies, whereas UNIX is a much more stable & secure OS, and that's it's main focus. It's made for servers / security / networking / routers / etc

P.S. Have you tried OpenBSD? :)

Technically both Linux and the *BSD's are "Unix". To trade under the name "Unix" though requires the payment of vast sums of money to "The Open Group".

Since neither of the two camp will accede to what is basically "daylight robbery", the term "Unix-like" was introduced.

Then there was that SCO lawsuit...

[1_Flip_1]

BSD is pretty awesome, I will admit, but I wouldn't use it as a workstation myself as it is just too much effort. I can understand using it on one's servers (although OpenBSD is probably a better chocie), but for me I just don't see any reason other than masochism that would lead one to install it on their workstation :D

Read section 2 of the handbook:
freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/install.html

Read section 4 of the handbook:
freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/ports.html

Have a look here:
freebsd.org/ports/index.html

And here:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentoo_Linux

As for "masochism",

Both the *BSDs and Linux has good and bad attributes.

To really get a feel for these technologies you need to install and use
them long enough to form your own opinion.

Having experience with both will only benefit you...

[fskmh]

You should upgrade to ver 7.0; unless of course you are running special programs on your 6.1 box.

If you do upgrade to v7; and you have the "src" directory for v6.1; then you may be glad to know that you only need to download 49mb of files...

As for FreeBSD 7 being faster than linux;

read people.freebsd.org/~kris/scaling/mysql.html

and have a look at:

people.freebsd.org/%7Ekris/scaling/os-mysql.png

Ah, so ULE scheduler is the default now. I did recompile the kernel in 6.1 with it and didn't notice much difference. Interesting stuff, but I'm more interested in HPC than databases. Would be interesting trying out ZFS though.

BTW, benchmarks are like opinions, everyone seems to have one ;):
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/npiggin/sysbench/

[Turtle]

Which OS can you reccomend and have used it, because there are so many?

Debian. (NOT Ubuntu. I recently installed, tested and compared both Ubuntu and Debian - Ubuntu had its plus points, but Debian was definitely better in too many other respects to ignore. That said, I believe the next major Ubuntu release is due next month, so maybe it'll be a big improvement. But one big thing for me is that Debian simply comes with far more software, as it's DVD-based while Ubuntu tries to fit on a CD.)

On the whole though the differences are not terribly huge.

[Turtle]

Technically both Linux and the *BSD's are "Unix".

Actually Linux is not "Unix", because it does not conform to the Unix spec (so wouldn't be able to pass certification anyway) - at least, last I checked. That is the main reason people call it "Unix-like". Check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix-like and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux.

Interestingly Mac OS X *is* Unix, but oddly, in terms of the "spirit of the approach" to overall design/usage of the system, Linux could be said to be more like Unix than OS X, or at least, more in the spirit of Unix.

[Smiley_lauf]

Debian. (NOT Ubuntu. I recently installed, tested and compared both Ubuntu and Debian - Ubuntu had its plus points, but Debian was definitely better in too many other respects to ignore. That said, I believe the next major Ubuntu release is due next month, so maybe it'll be a big improvement. But one big thing for me is that Debian simply comes with far more software, as it's DVD-based while Ubuntu tries to fit on a CD.)

On the whole though the differences are not terribly huge.

A far as I know, Ubuntu Ultimate comes on DVD and has far more packages than the CD versions.

[1_Flip_1]

Ah, so ULE scheduler is the default now. I did recompile the kernel in 6.1 with it and didn't notice much difference. Interesting stuff, but I'm more interested in HPC than databases. Would be interesting trying out ZFS though.

BTW, benchmarks are like opinions, everyone seems to have one ;):
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/npiggin/sysbench/

"benchmarks are like opinions, everyone seems to have one". Absolutely right...

I always find it amusing though when people with agendas would use a benchmark to push a particular product; only for re-test to expose their bias.

Here's a benchmark:
http://new.isc.org/proj/dnsperf/OStest.html

and here's the retest
http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/scaling/bind-pt.png

You should read the thread as well...
http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD/questions/2008-02/msg01906.html

What is clear though is that there is some real competition between Linux and FreeBSD; and for some time to come.

The end result is a win for the users....

[SoftDux-Rudi]

Actually Linux is not "Unix", because it does not conform to the Unix spec (so wouldn't be able to pass certification anyway) - at least, last I checked. That is the main reason people call it "Unix-like". Check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix-like and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux.

I'm glad to see someone agrees with me :)

Interestingly Mac OS X *is* Unix, but oddly, in terms of the "spirit of the approach" to overall design/usage of the system, Linux could be said to be more like Unix than OS X, or at least, more in the spirit of Unix.[/QUOTE]
Interestingly, Mac OS X uses BSD kernel, and If I'm not mistaken a lot of FreeBSD for it's underlaying OS.

[1_Flip_1]

Actually Linux is not "Unix", because it does not conform to the Unix spec (so wouldn't be able to pass certification anyway) - at least, last I checked. That is the main reason people call it "Unix-like". Check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix-like and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux.

Interestingly Mac OS X *is* Unix, but oddly, in terms of the "spirit of the approach" to overall design/usage of the system, Linux could be said to be more like Unix than OS X, or at least, more in the spirit of Unix.

Sorry for the late reply...

Yes you are right -- Linux is "unix-like", however I don't see a problem with using the same name to describe O/S's that are fundamentally similar.

OTOH: You can say with absolute confidence that Windows is not Unix...

[Boodles]

/I have used ubuntu, and its still installed, but feel i need a broadband connection. So its on hold until i move and get a decent connection.

Question is, i can go to ubuntu full time, but, i have one program (legacy) i use regularly, of which their is no linux equivalent, or if there is, its nowhere near qualtiy of what the windows equavalent is.

So, whats the story of running a windows based prog. on ubuntu.

Can i run it through a 3rd party program on ubuntu, or do i need to install windows on another partition (<- this would suck)

[orin76]

Can i run it through a 3rd party program on ubuntu, or do i need to install windows on another partition (<- this would suck)

If the program is reasonably old (2 or more years old), you'll probably be able to run it quite using wine. See http://www.winehq.org for more details.