Linux FTW!

[Alboin]

Linux filetype recognition is horribly broken. But wait ... Linux doesn't have filetype recognition!

Yes! Yes! Let's determine a file's type by it's ending! Brilliant!

GNOME\KDE have wonderful recognition with their respective file browsers.

Linux supposedly has a powerful shell. Did I say powerful??? Bash, the de facto Linux shell doesn't have autompletion of previously typed commands. Cmd has it. The FreeBSD default shell (whatever it is) has it. But not bash.

IIRC, auto completion is done with the history tool, no? Anyway, my bash has auto completion with the TAB key, and a history of previous commands with the UP key.

Oh, and please, next time you compare bash to cmd: don't.

Linux doesn't support every piece of hardware that you have. ...

I've read that Linux actually supports more hardware than any other operating system in history. Granted, much of that hardware is old, and uncommonly used, but nevertheless.

The Linux kernel doesn't have stable ABI. To provide drivers they basically need to be in the kernel source if they should work and get maintained. Instead of vendor lock-in we now have vendor lock-out!

So nvidia doesn't make drivers for Linux? If so, what then am I using, exactly?

This is for Ubuntu 6.06:
So what happens if you install Ubuntu with your USB stick or portable hard drive plugged in? And if it is formatted with ext3? Well, then your Ubuntu installation will not boot.

So.....take....out......your....USB stick......How often is it that you install Ubuntu that this becomes inconvenient?

That's pretty amazing bad in my opinion.

Yeah, sure.

[madeofstaples]

Linux? It sucks. Even if I use it for extended periods of time, and sort of becomes accustomed to it, when I boot windows I just go "ah!!! I didn't remember it was that much better!".

Really? I always find myself trying to switch to a new virtual desktop. I feel so constrained in windows.

Linux filetype recognition is horribly broken. But wait ... Linux doesn't have filetype recognition!

What exactly do you mean?

Linux supposedly has a powerful shell. Did I say powerful??? Bash, the de facto Linux shell doesn't have autompletion of previously typed commands. Cmd has it. The FreeBSD default shell (whatever it is) has it. But not bash.

History expansions introduce words from the history list into the input stream, making it easy to repeat commands, insert the arguments to a previous command into the current input line, or fix errors in previous commands quickly.

Linux doesn't support every piece of hardware that you have. Deal with it and buy something supported. So why doesn't even the supported and recommended chipsets work? While the reported issue is for Gutsy, my card with an rt2400 chipset didn't work in Feisty, Edgy or Dapper. There were comfirmed bug reports for those versions, yet they still keep recommending their users to buy something that they have confirmed is broken.

I've always been able to buy hardware listed as supported and have it work. I think, though, that companies will make different revisions to some hardware but release it with the same major version and branding. Like Intel's HD Audio on the ICH7 chipset. Windows may not support every piece of hardware, either.

Linux is the only desktop OS which doesn't have a GUI toolkit that is both reasonably fast, has good internationalization support and is free to use for commercial applications.

"Linux" in itself, is not necessarily a desktop OS. I haven't had any problems thus far with GTK, and I don't really care so I cannot comment on the "free to use for commercial applications" thing.

The Linux kernel doesn't have stable ABI. To provide drivers they basically need to be in the kernel source if they should work and get maintained. Instead of vendor lock-in we now have vendor lock-out!

My wireless drivers are closed source and must be loaded as a kernel module

Linux is totally unsuitable for desktop users. One major reason for that is that it's not working as advertised:

Yet isn't the use of linux as a desktop OS still increasing?

If you tell me that your car isn't rusty and sell it to me, then you tricked me. It's not the fault of the car manufacturer.
In the Linux world, it doesn't work like that, and as long it doesn't, Linux isn't suitable for the desktop.
The Knoppix website says that "IMPS/2-compatible USB-mouse" are supported. And I have a common brand of IMPS/2-compatible USB-mouse (second page of google picture search for "mouse"). For some reason this mouse doesn't work in Knoppix. Now if I complain about this on some forum, I get a reply similar to "you expect THAT mouse to work?!?". Of course I expect it to work when it's listed on the list of supported hardware!
It's not about the amount of supported hardware, it's about working as advertised.

I've never encountered any problems like yours, but I'm guessing if it's obvious to someone that such a mouse wouldn't work, then there must be something about it which indicates this much. The fact that you could not recognize that something is not the fault of Linux.

my this and that doesn't work BUT SOME SITE SAYS IT DOES etc etc

it sounds like, at least in some cases, you're trying newly-released-not-yet-stable packages and complaining that they don't work. Calm down, geeze, people are giving you this software for free. You know that rusty car you were tricked into buying? Linux is the, in your case, rusty car that you got for free.

[JackScott]

I won't comment on your user experience, but I can comment on mine.

I've been using Debian GNU/Linux on and off for three years. My current installation has been there for at least a year. It supports all the hardware I have put in near. If the hardware change is big enough (change of video or network card) it wants me to run dpkg-reconfigure, but otherwise it just recognises and uses it automatically. I'm in the process of buying a dual head video card. I expect it to work flawlessly. It automatically recognises my obscure el-cheapo wireless keyboard with media keys too.

I almost never have to reboot my computer. Uptime average is about a week, and it only goes down because sometimes the noise of the CPU fan annoys me at night. If I had passive cooling, I wouldn't ever turn it off.

When I want to upgrade all my software, I run a series of simple commands (apt-get update, apt-get dist-upgrade) and an hour later I have some new shiny software. I've used both the stable, testing and development versions of Debian. Never had any problems with any of them (btw, I recommend testing).

BASH seems to do everything I want it to. Like Alboin mentioned, TAB and UP do all the completion I could ever need. It even remembers commands from the last time I logged in (not that I ever use that functionality).

Please note that I regularly use all three common systems (Mac OS X, Windows XP, Linux w. KDE) and I like them all. I don't mind which I use, I feel equally productive in all of them. One last note: The main Debian repository has entirely free software. I like that.

[Steve the Pirate]

..when I boot windows I just go "ah!!! I didn't remember it was that much better!".

I get exactly the opposite... I can't live without virtual desktops... Or all the enhancements of Compiz Fusion.

And windows looks like crap compared to my desktop. I mean, you can't really even change the theme without downloading third party software (eg. Windowblinds), or cracking some dll or something.

And as for hardware: Sound card, wireless card, ethernet card, DVD burner etc. all work out of the box for me, and are fully supported. My video card defaults to an unaccelerated (ie. 2D only) driver, but it's two or three clicks to install the nVidia driver...

[Craze Frog]

Yes! Yes! Let's determine a file's type by it's ending! Brilliant!

So you honestly think that a c source file, a text file and a protracker module should all open in the same program, and that is "excellent"? Well, I don't like that. And to prevent it there's only two things that can be done: Specify filetype in the filename or as metadata. No, you can't "just look at the contents of the file", because those three totally different file formats will in many cases contain information of exactly the same type.

Linux supposedly has a powerful shell. Did I say powerful??? Bash, the de facto Linux shell doesn't have autompletion of previously typed commands. Cmd has it. The FreeBSD default shell (whatever it is) has it. But not bash.

IIRC, auto completion is done with the history tool, no? Anyway, my bash has auto completion with the TAB key, and a history of previous commands with the UP key.

Oh, and please, next time you compare bash to cmd: don't.

But, I don't want a history of previously typed commands, I want aucomplete of previously typed commands. If I type "command 1 ahoi", then "blabbery" I should then be able to type "co", arrow up, and since "blabbery" doesn't match it should go to "command 1 ahoi".

And why can't I compare bash to cmd? Let's see...
Opening a c file in the default editor with cmd:

Code: Select all

mycfile.c

Sorry, but you're right. I can't compare cmd to bash, because bash can't open a file in the default editor. Instead you must specify which editor you want every time.

Code: Select all

mousepad mycfile.c &

Linux doesn't support every piece of hardware that you have. ...

I've read that Linux actually supports more hardware than any other operating system in history. Granted, much of that hardware is old, and uncommonly used, but nevertheless.

Sure, the problem is that supported hardware doesn't work. Including, but not limited to:
IMPS/2 mouse
S3 ProSavage graphics chip
Wacom graphics tablet
rt2400-chipset
Standard USB keyboard

The Linux kernel doesn't have stable ABI. To provide drivers they basically need to be in the kernel source if they should work and get maintained. Instead of vendor lock-in we now have vendor lock-out!

So nvidia doesn't make drivers for Linux? If so, what then am I using, exactly?

You're using a driver that will only work with a particular kernel version, even if the API is the same as other kernel versions.

This is for Ubuntu 6.06:
So what happens if you install Ubuntu with your USB stick or portable hard drive plugged in? And if it is formatted with ext3? Well, then your Ubuntu installation will not boot.

So.....take....out......your....USB stick......How often is it that you install Ubuntu that this becomes inconvenient?

It's inconvenient when you don't know it. This isn't written anywhere and it doesn't give a warning. Like when I installed on an XFS partition, there was no warning whatsoever, the installation just didn't boot. (In the later versions, they fixed this, so that it gave the error "The root partition can't be XFS" even if you were installing to an ext3 partition.)

This is like what I wrote in the previous posts, it's OK once, but not all the time. How often do you think I install Linux? Not very often. Yet twice, completely valid configurations has made the installation unbootable.

[JamesM]

Yes! Yes! Let's determine a file's type by it's ending! Brilliant!

So you honestly think that a c source file, a text file and a protracker module should all open in the same program, and that is "excellent"? Well, I don't like that. And to prevent it there's only two things that can be done: Specify filetype in the filename or as metadata. No, you can't "just look at the contents of the file", because those three totally different file formats will in many cases contain information of exactly the same type.

This is determined by the file browser (of which there are several). The standard ones are konqueror and metacity (?) IIRC, and each has a dialog similar to that in windows explorer that will allow you to change the default editor for filetypes. Failing that you can just go <RMB>->Open With ...

Linux supposedly has a powerful shell. Did I say powerful??? Bash, the de facto Linux shell doesn't have autompletion of previously typed commands. Cmd has it. The FreeBSD default shell (whatever it is) has it. But not bash.

IIRC, auto completion is done with the history tool, no? Anyway, my bash has auto completion with the TAB key, and a history of previous commands with the UP key.

Oh, and please, next time you compare bash to cmd: don't.

But, I don't want a history of previously typed commands, I want aucomplete of previously typed commands. If I type "command 1 ahoi", then "blabbery" I should then be able to type "co", arrow up, and since "blabbery" doesn't match it should go to "command 1 ahoi".

Why? and as already mentioned bash doesn't store any history itself, it uses the history command. Because you haven't RTFM, you probably don't know that you can type CTRL-r and search the history for any string, then edit/execute it. And you'll find that cmd doesn't auto-expand possible commands in $PATH or directory/file names, whereas bash does. If bash added the extra functionality such as you are describing some ambiguity may develop. Which is a Bad Thing.

And why can't I compare bash to cmd? Let's see...
Opening a c file in the default editor with cmd:

Code: Select all

mycfile.c

Sorry, but you're right. I can't compare cmd to bash, because bash can't open a file in the default editor. Instead you must specify which editor you want every time.

Code: Select all

mousepad mycfile.c &

What is a 'default editor'? A GUI app? bash is designed to run on 80x25 character terminals numbnuts, it has no concept of a GUI. And before you say "well then cmd is clearly > bash then, kthxbai!!11111", I'd like to see you run cmd.exe on a headless server boxen.

Linux doesn't support every piece of hardware that you have. ...

I've read that Linux actually supports more hardware than any other operating system in history. Granted, much of that hardware is old, and uncommonly used, but nevertheless.

Sure, the problem is that supported hardware doesn't work. Including, but not limited to:
IMPS/2 mouse
S3 ProSavage graphics chip
Wacom graphics tablet
rt2400-chipset
Standard USB keyboard

Yes, of course linux doesn't support a usb keyboard. Of course it doesn't. How stupid of me.

The Linux kernel doesn't have stable ABI. To provide drivers they basically need to be in the kernel source if they should work and get maintained. Instead of vendor lock-in we now have vendor lock-out!

So nvidia doesn't make drivers for Linux? If so, what then am I using, exactly?

You're using a driver that will only work with a particular kernel version, even if the API is the same as other kernel versions.

I love the way you manage to compare cheese to chalk without breaking a sweat. How is this any different to windows? So because linux can't do this and neither can windows linux is inferior? Tit.

This is for Ubuntu 6.06:
So what happens if you install Ubuntu with your USB stick or portable hard drive plugged in? And if it is formatted with ext3? Well, then your Ubuntu installation will not boot.

So.....take....out......your....USB stick......How often is it that you install Ubuntu that this becomes inconvenient?

It's inconvenient when you don't know it. This isn't written anywhere and it doesn't give a warning. Like when I installed on an XFS partition, there was no warning whatsoever, the installation just didn't boot. (In the later versions, they fixed this, so that it gave the error "The root partition can't be XFS" even if you were installing to an ext3 partition.)

This is like what I wrote in the previous posts, it's OK once, but not all the time. How often do you think I install Linux? Not very often. Yet twice, completely valid configurations has made the installation unbootable.

Yeah, and what would Windows do? "No, what you REALLY want is fat32. You don't? Of course you do! <wipes root partition>"

You invite flamewars with your stupid, misinformed posts. You got me into a flying rage last time with the "C is stupid and everyone who uses it is stupid" thread and I swear the same will not happen with this.

[os64dev]

@crazy frog

But, I don't want a history of previously typed commands, I want aucomplete of previously typed commands. If I type "command 1 ahoi", then "blabbery" I should then be able to type "co", arrow up, and since "blabbery" doesn't match it should go to "command 1 ahoi".

Well since i use the command "make -f makefile.mk all" alot during build i only have to type "!ma" and it does the auto completion for me. Surely you would have know this if you read the manuals. This remark is rather sarcastic as all your posts clearly tell us that you didn't.

And then we have your statement about cmd.exe, did you ever wonder why microsoft introduced powershell? It was due to the restrictions of cmd.exe and as they say powershell has added functionality to match bash. How much more clear do you want it.

Don't get me wrong you are intitled to you own oppinion and therefore i am not bashing you. I hope you extend the same curtesy to the other forum members as they also are entitled to their opinions. Always keep in mind that there are programmers that have way more experience then you have. Not to mention, different coding style, and way of working. By saying that your style, way of working, and tools are the best is somewhat similar to proclaiming that you are god. It is total nonsence and will only provoke people into ranting instead of conversation.

[Craze Frog]

Linux? It sucks. Even if I use it for extended periods of time, and sort of becomes accustomed to it, when I boot windows I just go "ah!!! I didn't remember it was that much better!".

Really? I always find myself trying to switch to a new virtual desktop. I feel so constrained in windows.

Who prevents you from using virtual desktops in Windows?

Linux supposedly has a powerful shell. Did I say powerful??? Bash, the de facto Linux shell doesn't have autompletion of previously typed commands. Cmd has it. The FreeBSD default shell (whatever it is) has it. But not bash.

History expansions introduce words from the history list into the input stream, making it easy to repeat commands, insert the arguments to a previous command into the current input line, or fix errors in previous commands quickly.

History expansions are not the same as what csh does. History expansions doesn't let you cycle between previously typed commands quickly.

Linux is the only desktop OS which doesn't have a GUI toolkit that is both reasonably fast, has good internationalization support and is free to use for commercial applications.

"Linux" in itself, is not necessarily a desktop OS. I haven't had any problems thus far with GTK, and I don't really care so I cannot comment on the "free to use for commercial applications" thing.

When I say Linux, I mean the distros, if I mean the kernel I will say so. GTK is free, but it's insanely slow on my computer. Opening and closing invisible window takes twice the time with GTK compared to Windows, and the main problem with GTK isn't the invisible stuff, but the speed of redrawing. It's just so insanely slow it's hardly usable. QT is lightning fast but not free.

Here someone (not me) finds the file open dialog so slow he thinks it's a bug: http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtopic.php?t=29336 . The GTK version is 120 times slower than when he codes it manually. I can't believe you and everyone else don't notice this, are people asleep at the wheel :p ?

The Linux kernel doesn't have stable ABI. To provide drivers they basically need to be in the kernel source if they should work and get maintained. Instead of vendor lock-in we now have vendor lock-out!

My wireless drivers are closed source and must be loaded as a kernel module

And that kernel module won't work with kernel 2.8.x (it could even break with 2.6). Windows NT drivers still works on XP. If I have old hardware I use an old driver. If there is a driver for Linux 2.4 it won't work with 2.6. So the companies will have to keep working constantly to keep up with a moving target. Obviously they don't really want to do that.

Linux is totally unsuitable for desktop users. One major reason for that is that it's not working as advertised:

Yet isn't the use of linux as a desktop OS still increasing?

Yes, because it's free, and many of the alternatives are quite unsuitable as well. That W sucks is not proof that X is very good.

If you tell me that your car isn't rusty and sell it to me, then you tricked me. It's not the fault of the car manufacturer.
In the Linux world, it doesn't work like that, and as long it doesn't, Linux isn't suitable for the desktop.
The Knoppix website says that "IMPS/2-compatible USB-mouse" are supported. And I have a common brand of IMPS/2-compatible USB-mouse (second page of google picture search for "mouse"). For some reason this mouse doesn't work in Knoppix. Now if I complain about this on some forum, I get a reply similar to "you expect THAT mouse to work?!?". Of course I expect it to work when it's listed on the list of supported hardware!
It's not about the amount of supported hardware, it's about working as advertised.

I've never encountered any problems like yours, but I'm guessing if it's obvious to someone that such a mouse wouldn't work, then there must be something about it which indicates this much. The fact that you could not recognize that something is not the fault of Linux.

The mouse was made by Microsoft, so the poster just assumed that then it wouldn't work. He obviously didn't understand that the manufacturer doesn't matter as long as a standard is followed. And I know for sure that the standard is reasonably well followed, because the mouse works without special drivers in all linux distros except Knoppix.

my this and that doesn't work BUT SOME SITE SAYS IT DOES etc etc

it sounds like, at least in some cases, you're trying newly-released-not-yet-stable packages and complaining that they don't work.

That's wrong. (Unless all stable versions, including the long term support version, of Ubuntu ships with not-yet-stable packags.)

Calm down, geeze, people are giving you this software for free. You know that rusty car you were tricked into buying? Linux is the, in your case, rusty car that you got for free.

Let's say we agree to a contract. You will give me a service for free. I can still sue for breach of contract if you don't give me service.
Besides the car was advertised as a Cadillac, and I'm just saying that it's not, so stop saying it is.

..when I boot windows I just go "ah!!! I didn't remember it was that much better!".

I get exactly the opposite... I can't live without virtual desktops...

Ok, so why don't you use virtual desktops on Windows then?

Or all the enhancements of Compiz Fusion.

Enhancements? Compiz Fusion doesn't even run here.

And windows looks like crap compared to my desktop. I mean, you can't really even change the theme without downloading third party software (eg. Windowblinds), or cracking some dll or something.

Oh really? Now tell me on which OS the font rendering is better, Windows or Linux? Even Linux fans admits that the Linux version looks like crap. However, they claim it's something wrong with the setup. Which is like shooting themselves in the foot, because it's the default setup.

Of course, the font rendering looks different on different distros, but I have tried over a dozen, I've followed a ton of guides, I've downloaded both the bitstream fonts and the Microsoft fonts, and they continue to look really bad.

Yes! Yes! Let's determine a file's type by it's ending! Brilliant!

So you honestly think that a c source file, a text file and a protracker module should all open in the same program, and that is "excellent"? Well, I don't like that. And to prevent it there's only two things that can be done: Specify filetype in the filename or as metadata. No, you can't "just look at the contents of the file", because those three totally different file formats will in many cases contain information of exactly the same type.

This is determined by the file browser (of which there are several). The standard ones are konqueror and metacity (?) IIRC, and each has a dialog similar to that in windows explorer that will allow you to change the default editor for filetypes. Failing that you can just go <RMB>->Open With ...

Metacity is the window manager, Nautilus and Thunar are file managers. And you just underline my point: when you do that it assigns a program to the extension. Which Alboin for some reason or another thought was an utterly silly idea...

Linux supposedly has a powerful shell. Did I say powerful??? Bash, the de facto Linux shell doesn't have autompletion of previously typed commands. Cmd has it. The FreeBSD default shell (whatever it is) has it. But not bash.

IIRC, auto completion is done with the history tool, no? Anyway, my bash has auto completion with the TAB key, and a history of previous commands with the UP key.

How many times do I have to explain that
- I don't want autocompletion of file and folder names
- I don't want a history of previous commands
but I want autocompletion of previous commands with the UP key. I can't believe this is so hard to get. It's a basic feature available by default in other major operating systems (notice the plural, this is not a Windows feature).

Why? and as already mentioned bash doesn't store any history itself, it uses the history command. Because you haven't RTFM, you probably don't know that you can type CTRL-r and search the history for any string, then edit/execute it. And you'll find that cmd doesn't auto-expand possible commands in $PATH or directory/file names, whereas bash does. If bash added the extra functionality such as you are describing some ambiguity may develop. Which is a Bad Thing.

1. Bash stores the history itself. If you had read the manual you'd have known that the history command is build into bash.
2. If tab is used for autocompletion of filenames and UP for autocompletion of history I don't see any ambiguity.
3. Csh has it, so it can't be impossible.
4. Cmd doesn't auto-expand ANYTHING, read the manual again. If you type a * it's up to the program to expand it. Sounds stupid? It's actually an excellent idea if a common library function performs the expansion. The program actually gets the arguments that the user gave it, which is a very good idea right from the beginning.

And why can't I compare bash to cmd? Let's see...
Opening a c file in the default editor with cmd:

Code: Select all

mycfile.c

Sorry, but you're right. I can't compare cmd to bash, because bash can't open a file in the default editor. Instead you must specify which editor you want every time.

Code: Select all

mousepad mycfile.c &

What is a 'default editor'? A GUI app?

If you don't use a GUI you can set the default editor to vim, nano, emacs, pico or whatever you like. Most people use only one editor. And yet they have to type the name of it every time they want to start it.

Running stuff on "a server boxen" (where did you learn English grammar?) is not relevant to this topic, where the original poster uses Linux as a desktop OS. Linux is a great server OS.

I've read that Linux actually supports more hardware than any other operating system in history. Granted, much of that hardware is old, and uncommonly used, but nevertheless.

Sure, the problem is that supported hardware doesn't work. Including, but not limited to:
IMPS/2 mouse
S3 ProSavage graphics chip
Wacom graphics tablet
rt2400-chipset
Standard USB keyboard

Yes, of course linux doesn't support a usb keyboard. Of course it doesn't. How stupid of me.

It's supported, but it doesn't work. Think it's something wrong with it? Then why does it work with another distro? Because in Linux, quality control is null and void.

So nvidia doesn't make drivers for Linux? If so, what then am I using, exactly?

You're using a driver that will only work with a particular kernel version, even if the API is the same as other kernel versions.

I love the way you manage to compare cheese to chalk without breaking a sweat. How is this any different to windows? So because linux can't do this and neither can windows linux is inferior? Tit.

Um, what? Windows has a stable ABI. Linux hasn't. Very simple.

Besides, even if Windows sucks, which I didn't neither say nor not say, that would not make Linux any better. Just because Windows is bad, you can't say that Linux is good.

So.....take....out......your....USB stick......How often is it that you install Ubuntu that this becomes inconvenient?

It's inconvenient when you don't know it. This isn't written anywhere and it doesn't give a warning. Like when I installed on an XFS partition, there was no warning whatsoever, the installation just didn't boot. (In the later versions, they fixed this, so that it gave the error "The root partition can't be XFS" even if you were installing to an ext3 partition.)

This is like what I wrote in the previous posts, it's OK once, but not all the time. How often do you think I install Linux? Not very often. Yet twice, completely valid configurations has made the installation unbootable.

Yeah, and what would Windows do? "No, what you REALLY want is fat32. You don't? Of course you do! <wipes root partition>"

Ok, Windows sucks. So what? I said Linux sucks. That doesn't mean I think Windows is great. It just means that Linux can't boot, which is rather poor performance for an operating system.

You invite flamewars with your stupid, misinformed posts. You got me into a flying rage last time with the "C is stupid and everyone who uses it is stupid" thread and I swear the same will not happen with this.

Stupid and misinformed? Who has no clue how the history command in bash works? Who has no idea who does the filename expansion under Windows? Who doesn't know the name of the file manager?

@crazy frog

But, I don't want a history of previously typed commands, I want aucomplete of previously typed commands. If I type "command 1 ahoi", then "blabbery" I should then be able to type "co", arrow up, and since "blabbery" doesn't match it should go to "command 1 ahoi".

Well since i use the command "make -f makefile.mk all" alot during build i only have to type "!ma" and it does the auto completion for me. Surely you would have know this if you read the manuals. This remark is rather sarcastic as all your posts clearly tell us that you didn't.

Nice, but that's not what I want.

And then we have your statement about cmd.exe, did you ever wonder why microsoft introduced powershell? It was due to the restrictions of cmd.exe and as they say powershell has added functionality to match bash. How much more clear do you want it.

I don't want it any more clear - I can see from the description that PowerShell is a bloated monstrum without basic features - just like bash.

Don't get me wrong you are intitled to you own oppinion and therefore i am not bashing you. I hope you extend the same curtesy to the other forum members as they also are entitled to their opinions. Always keep in mind that there are programmers that have way more experience then you have. Not to mention, different coding style, and way of working. By saying that your style, way of working, and tools are the best is somewhat similar to proclaiming that you are god. It is total nonsence and will only provoke people into ranting instead of conversation.

Sorry, but when an operating system doesn't boot, I find that appalling (most distro's doesn't). If people honestly finds that excellent I actually don't think they are entitled to this opinion. If it doesn't boot then it isn't excellent by definition.

Of course, you are entitled to your opinion that they are entitled to say whatever they want.

[Candy]

Could you guys stop flaming each other?

[Brynet-Inc]

Wow, Craze Frog.. How can you say BS like:

"The mouse was made by Microsoft"

This is a lie, do you just lie to make yourself feel superior?

"QT is lightning fast but not free."

QT is under the GPL, while I don't consider that free.. it's equally as free as the GTK toolkit.

Among other things, you insult people for not reading manual pages.. when you yourself are guilty of the same damn thing.

I'm not a fan of Linux, ...but you're simply an uneducated goof.

[JamesM]

History expansions are not the same as what csh does. History expansions doesn't let you cycle between previously typed commands quickly.

Try the 'up' and 'down' keys. How is that difficult?

When I say Linux, I mean the distros, if I mean the kernel I will say so.

Linux is a kernel. The operating system you refer to is called GNU/Linux. c.f. GNU/Hurd. Please use the correct nomenclature before flaming at other people.

GTK is free, but it's insanely slow on my computer.

Please refer to the bold text for the explanation. Before you go on about your uber gfx card etc, let me say one thing: PEBKAC.

QT is lightning fast but not free.

Refer to brynet-inc's answer.

The mouse was made by Microsoft, so the poster just assumed that then it wouldn't work. He obviously didn't understand that the manufacturer doesn't matter as long as a standard is followed.

Why do you assume that you were talking to somebody knowledgeable and not a flaming loser like yourself?

Let's say we agree to a contract. You will give me a service for free. I can still sue for breach of contract if you don't give me service.
Besides the car was advertised as a Cadillac, and I'm just saying that it's not, so stop saying it is.

So you take my work that I've done for free, and throw it back in my face like a child pushing his toys out the pram, petulant because it didn't work like you wanted it too. Boo hoo. Who would ever sign such a contract?

Enhancements? Compiz Fusion doesn't even run here.

Again: PEBKAC.

Oh really? Now tell me on which OS the font rendering is better, Windows or Linux? Even Linux fans admits that the Linux version looks like crap. However, they claim it's something wrong with the setup. Which is like shooting themselves in the foot, because it's the default setup.

My font rendering is superb. If you bother to set up the xft antialiasing correctly (it's different for different screen types) it looks awesome.

Metacity is the window manager, Nautilus and Thunar are file managers. And you just underline my point: when you do that it assigns a program to the extension. Which Alboin for some reason or another thought was an utterly silly idea...

Sorry, I run KDE. And no, that does not underline your point. It answers your first gripe, but does not underline a point.

How many times do I have to explain that
- I don't want autocompletion of file and folder names
- I don't want a history of previous commands
but I want autocompletion of previous commands with the UP key. I can't believe this is so hard to get. It's a basic feature available by default in other major operating systems (notice the plural, this is not a Windows feature).

Good God man! why do you seem to believe that because something doesn't offer the features YOU want in the way YOU want them, that it must be terribly designed? Grow up and get with the program!

1. Bash stores the history itself. If you had read the manual you'd have known that the history command is build into bash.
2. If tab is used for autocompletion of filenames and UP for autocompletion of history I don't see any ambiguity.
3. Csh has it, so it can't be impossible.
4. Cmd doesn't auto-expand ANYTHING, read the manual again. If you type a * it's up to the program to expand it. Sounds stupid? It's actually an excellent idea if a common library function performs the expansion. The program actually gets the arguments that the user gave it, which is a very good idea right from the beginning.

1. I didn't realise that was a builtin.
2. UP is used for searching through the history and editing it. Have you used it?
3. So use Csh then. That's why it's there, choice.
4. "If you type a * it's up to the program to expand it. Sounds stupid?" No, bash does that as well, although admittedly not as well as zsh. Bash automatically autocompletes directory names and executable files. It can, depending on a certain file (I forget which) query and autocomplete. It actually uses regexp rules I think, as opposed to forking() and exec()ing another process.

If you don't use a GUI you can set the default editor to vim, nano, emacs, pico or whatever you like. Most people use only one editor. And yet they have to type the name of it every time they want to start it.

OK lets take this example.

Code: Select all

#!/usr/bin/perl
print "Hello, World!\n";

Now, How can I run this?

Code: Select all

./script

How can I edit it?

Code: Select all

emacs -nw ./script

If I could edit it without a specific command, how could bash know whether to execute or edit? The answer: it wouldn't. That's why cmd.exe can't execute script files automatically. Oh dear.

Running stuff on "a server boxen" (where did you learn English grammar?) is not relevant to this topic, where the original poster uses Linux as a desktop OS. Linux is a great server OS.

"boxen" is geek slang. "Slang" means a colloqialism. Why is it not relevant? It doesn't matter how you use the OS? It's the same bloody OS!

Then why does it work with another distro? Because in Linux, quality control is null and void.

ARGH! Linux is the KERNEL you idiot! the KERNEL has nothing to do with the MODULES that get loaded into it!

Um, what? Windows has a stable ABI. Linux hasn't. Very simple.

The ABI seems pretty backwards compatible to me. And:

Does a driver for windows 98 SE work on ANYTHING newer? Does a driver for windows XP work on Vista? No.

It just means that Linux can't boot, which is rather poor performance for an operating system.

Boots fine for me. PEBKAC.

Stupid and misinformed? Who has no clue how the history command in bash works? Who has no idea who does the filename expansion under Windows? Who doesn't know the name of the file manager?

I admitted to the first one. I was working, so hard I had to miss my lunch break and was typing the reply in between compiles so I didn't have time to look at the man pages. Why do I care who does the filename expansion under windows? And more to the point, you'll find that your 'opposition' to my point about expansion ("And you'll find that cmd doesn't auto-expand possible commands") actually agrees with me. And "the file manager" as far as I am concerned is Konqueror. I told you, I use KDE.

[Alboin]

Metacity is the window manager, Nautilus and Thunar are file managers. And you just underline my point: when you do that it assigns a program to the extension. Which Alboin for some reason or another thought was an utterly silly idea...

I just renamed a '.jpg' image to '.ieatcats' in Nautilus. Somehow, somehow, Nautilus still figured out that it was a PICTURE! My God! How is that since it determines it by the extension! Wait....This means it doesn't!?

I also tried this with an '.odt' file, renaming it to '.o'. It still opened it with Abiword.

Trying to figure file type based on extension is mundane.

Windows has a stable ABI. Linux hasn't. Very simple.

[pcmattman]

History expansions are not the same as what csh does. History expansions doesn't let you cycle between previously typed commands quickly.

That's what the UP key is for...

QT is lightning fast but not free.

Actually, it is free as long as you make no profit off the software you make. The free version of the development libraries just don't include support for commercial compilation systems (IIRC, the free libraries are made to be used with MinGW).

Ok, so why don't you use virtual desktops on Windows then?

Not built in to the window manager, so you have to install a whole new application (and usually these are slow in comparison to, for instance GNOME's virtual desktops).

Even Linux fans admits that the Linux version looks like crap. However, they claim it's something wrong with the setup. Which is like shooting themselves in the foot, because it's the default setup.

As JamesM said, if I have a CRT and you have an LCD, our fonts will look different and hence a different setup is required. The default is a "just works" configuration and allows you maximum freedom.

And you just underline my point: when you do that it assigns a program to the extension. Which Alboin for some reason or another thought was an utterly silly idea...

Actually, if I make a file "hello.txt" and put a bash script into there, Nautilus will tell me (when I double click) that it's an executable and ask if I want to display it, run it, run it in a terminal, or cancel.

For your C/TXT file comparison, they will both open in the same editor because their contents are the same - plain text.

3. Csh has it, so it can't be impossible.

Then by all means, switch to Csh and stop using Bash. That's the best part about Linux - you have choice!

If you don't use a GUI you can set the default editor to vim, nano, emacs, pico or whatever you like. Most people use only one editor. And yet they have to type the name of it every time they want to start it.

Bash has no concept of a "default program"... In cmd.exe it'll often just do "explorer <file>" and then the proper program will be started.

But, I don't want a history of previously typed commands, I want aucomplete of previously typed commands. If I type "command 1 ahoi", then "blabbery" I should then be able to type "co", arrow up, and since "blabbery" doesn't match it should go to "command 1 ahoi".

I would find that so incredibly annoying. I often am halfway through typing a command when I realize something isn't right and have to execute a previous command instead.

I can see from the description that PowerShell is a bloated monstrum without basic features - just like bash

You know why Bash seems to be featureless? There's a simple reason: IT'S PORTABLE. I could port it to my OS and not have to worry about calls to a file manager that doesn't exist!

Sorry, but when an operating system doesn't boot, I find that appalling (most distro's doesn't).

In the later versions, they fixed this, so that it gave the error "The root partition can't be XFS" even if you were installing to an ext3 partition.

So, install with the later versions.

If you don't like Linux, don't use it! I know I'm extremely happy with my Linux installation (boots in under a minute, runs fast, is stable) and extremely unhappy with my Windows installation (boot takes about 15 minutes, very slow, often locks up).

[os64dev]

Sorry, but when an operating system doesn't boot, I find that appalling (most distro's doesn't). If people honestly finds that excellent I actually don't think they are entitled to this opinion. If it doesn't boot then it isn't excellent by definition

Well i tried about 5 distro's and the all worked in my case. Exept one that was an experimental x86_64 build which was released way before Window x64. But simple looking at the log file enabled me to fix it so it worked after a light fix. As i read this forum it seems that a lot op people here also don't have a problem with the distro's. So it seems to be that the problem of not booting lies with you or unsupported hardware

Now on windows just something that i encountered recently. The installer direcytory: It stores the installer files there which should by default be volatile so i delete them and the result: Outlook does not work, Developer Studio failed and god know what more. What idiot depends on files of the installer directories... *sigh* just wanted that to get of my chest.

I do not favor Linux or Windows. I work for 95% under cygwin so it is two worlds.

@candy
I'll stop the flame bait now.

[AJ]

@madeofstaples: This is why I didn't say more in my original response - absolute dead cert way of starting a flamewar. Tell you what - why don't we just all use the OSes we feel most comfortable with?