Re: When will Linux distros 'get it'?

From: mjt (
Date: 07/28/04

Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 02:13:12 GMT

George Peatty wrote:

> but it's still a
> bother that one cannot discuss both OSes in an objective,
> dispassionate, logical manner
> here .. or anywhere, it would seem, online.

... the OP didnt fit that description. there was no:
* i've got this setup (you know, h/w specs)
* here's what i have issues with
* here's what i did to attempt a fix at the issues

it was a "i'm a this, i installed suse, rant rant.
purely anecdotal.

shall we be fair and break it down:


> I have been a Linux server application developer for about 9 years,
> but I stopped using Linux on my desktop after 2,

... then that means you've only been developing
on Linux for 2 years, about 7 years ago

> and have been using SecureCRT under Windows ever since.

... not sure how that relates to Linux

> I dont particularly care for X-based workstations,

that means you dont truly develop Linux or Unix apps

> and I like to relieve stress by playing games
> now and then - any game, not just Linux ports.

... first sign of a win-user

> I also have never been much interested in debugging Linux hardware
> installs.

... i have NO idea what that means. "Linux hardware installs"??
does that refer to driver issues? is this about SBC? what?

> system and network administration is something I can do, but
> almost always prefer to page someone else to do it instead. I dont
> find it enjoyable nor do I get paid to do it.

... sorry, that's a typical m$ developer response.
granted, i dont consider myself a sysadmin, but i
dont avoid it because i dont get paid. i do it
because i need to get it done to compliment the
development effort.

the response about this from the OP demonstrates
laziness or a sign of a corporate-mentality developer

> Recently, someone got me to try Suse 9.1, saying it was the cutting
> edge in distros. As I am want to do every couple of years, I tried it.

... every couple of years? if you only try a distro
every couple of years, you're NOT truly a developer
on the Linux platform.

> Boy, not much has changed.

... changed from "what" ?

> The first time I attempted to install it on a second drive as a
> dual-boot system, the boot loader failed to load Windows althought
> Yast identified the Windows drive and offered to add it to the boot
> loader menu during install.

... first issue: not researched.

although i've installed upwards of 200 suse boxen,
i've never experienced this issue. but others have
and it's documented at also, this
is NOT a suse issue, so dont blame suse.

> I dont remember the error but it was completely unhelpful.

... there you go. i dont remember the issue, but
i think it should resolve itself.

let's see ... write it down, ask the group, and
you'll get an answer. but, again, windows mentality.
"i got an error, but dont know what it said, ..."

car owner to mechanic: "hi, my car is acting
up, but i cant remember what the symptoms are".
fix it.

> Something about chainloader +1 (?). I know
> nothing about Grub, except the community and distros seem to like it,
> while all the sysadmins I know dont trust it. No one knew what to do
> with that error.

... asking the rwong people. all the sysadmins
i know prefer grub over LILO. (i wonder why all
the distro vendors prefer GRUB over LILO ???)

> Anyways, I rebooted to Suse and just got a clock icon on a black
> screen - the end. WTF?

... that's probably an issue between
the keyboard and the chair.

> I tried again today on a different machine - a Suse-only install. Yast
> once again locked up, this time while 'analyzing my system'. After
> ripping out and reinstalling every damn piece of hardware on the box,
> I found that it didnt like the existing windows install on the sole
> hard drive, which I expected it to warn me about but happily delete
> and repartition for me (is that asking too much?).

.... that is bull$hit. that paragraph relates to
computer inexperience:

"ripping out and reinstalling every damn piece of hardware on the box"

<< oh, please >> talk about overkill.

> One new hard drive later, I got it to install, and I like the desktop,
> which really works now that Firefox exists.

hahahahahahahhahaha. good one. they like the desktop
because Firefox exists????? what kind of statement
is *THAT* ?!?!??! firefox does not make the desktop.

> Its the first version of Mozilla I like over IE.

anything is better than IE

> Anyways, I was going insane looking at the screen in about 2 minutes
> because it obviously had chosen a 'safe' low refresh rate for my
> unidentified (sigh) NEC CRT. When I found the setup screen to change
> the refresh rate, I changed it to 85 hz, which I know it can do, and

... hehehehe. my eXPensive install chose a WORSE
refresh rate over what suse chose.

> That was the last I saw of KDE - ever. I tried changing the monitor
> settings back with text-based Yast, but I could not get X to start
> again, either on reboot or from the command line (I dunno - kde?
> startkde? startx?).

... see. lack of knowledge or understanding. "changing
back to text based yast and could not get x to start..."
"reboot ... command line ... kde ... startkde ... startx"

completely clueless. and asking noone with knowledge,
i'm sure.

> This reminded me that breaking X by making a seemingly common and
> simple config change which would be trivial in windows was one of the
> irritating linux desktop behaviors which got me off it in the first
> place.

... oh, reaLLY!?!??! change ONE byte in the winders
registry and see what happens to it.

> Anyways, back to Windows.

... ah yes, the 9+ years Linux developer!

<<   >>
"Now this is a totally brain damaged algorithm.  Gag me with a
smurfette." - P. Buhr, Computer Science 354