Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:42:11 12/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 16, 2000 at 10:47:44, Peter Skinner wrote: >>They say this because the install GUI is really easy to use. IE it is no >>harder than a normal windows install when using redhat. The reason I use >>redhat is that it is also a very _complete_ package, with all the normal >>stuff I use (compiler, utilities, PVM, etc). > >Interesting. I have the following distrobutions to try: > >Mandrake 7.2 ( Which I have been told is a complete Red Hat ripoff ) >Red Hat 6.2 >Debian > >I am going to try Red Hat first of course. > >>I teach rank beginners how to install and configure linux, and I use redhat >>to do this. The install facility is as good as anything around for this >>purpose. Installing linux used to be a chore, finding the right versions of >>system utilities was another chore. RedHat has simplified all of this to make >>it easy to get it up and running. > >Wow, wanna teach me via phone if possible? I would pay the charges in a heart >beat. I really want to learn Linux. > >Quite a few people tell me the installation, and setting up internet access can >be the trickiest of things, and I honestly only know 3 things about Linux. > >1. It isn't Microsoft >2. I can have interfaces like Windows ie. Gnome, KDE ( Do you use any of these?) I use both. I generally use whatever the default is, which has become gnome since redhat 6.2... >3. When dual booting Linux and Windows, at the prompt at boot up you type DOS to >get to Windows. Other than that.... nothing... you can boot as many different systems as you like.. and on my home machine I made windows 98 (which my wife uses) the default... so I have to type "linux" to get a linux boot... > >>Windows NT was very reliable. Windows 2000 seems a tad less so. I consider >>windows 95/98 to be trash. I don't have any ME machines so I can't comment >>there. If I had to run windows, it would definitely be NT 4, as we have had >>that up in our labs for several years with no problems of any kind. Linux is >>all I personally run on the machines I use, and it is also rock-solid and >>doesn't crash, period. > >I have used Win NT 4.0, and I have used Windows 2000. I like Windows 2000, but I >find that oddly after installing other MS products like Office 2000, the >stability goes down the drain. > >Linux to me, now looks like the OS of the future. I believe quite a few people >are seeing the same thing. One thing I don't like is that there are some really ugly install/uninstall issues with windows. Bugs in the registery management. Etc...
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.