Page 12 of 15 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 141

Thread: GNOME Will Move Full-Speed With Wayland Support

  1. #111
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    Come to think about it, a lot of windows xp features haven't been surpassed even to this day by linux. A great example: games.
    You mean Minesweeper and Solitaire? Or the pinball version that came with some Windows versions? Those games are delivered by default with KDE (I think Gnome has also a number of games, I think).
    All other games are third party software and not a Windows feature.

  2. #112
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    In fact the more I look at online stores in my country (Romania) the more I see that Ubuntu is quite well represented. There are a lot of laptops that come with Ubuntu by default or Windows 8. From well known vendors not no names. I think Canonical's push to default OS for laptops is actually working.

    Windows since windows xp is pretty good. Back in 2001 there was no equivalent to it in the linux world in terms of user experience. Come to think about it, a lot of windows xp features haven't been surpassed even to this day by linux. A great example: games.
    Really man, you're just digging yourself a bigger hole. Maybe you should go find different forum? Try to find one with like minded individuals.. You arent going to find many people who agree with you here.

  3. #113
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    In fact the more I look at online stores in my country (Romania) the more I see that Ubuntu is quite well represented. There are a lot of laptops that come with Ubuntu by default or Windows 8. From well known vendors not no names. I think Canonical's push to default OS for laptops is actually working.
    Not to sound like an anglo-centrist, but this is certainly not the case in North America or in the UK. In most of the western world the only two visible options commercially are Windows in most places and Mac OS X at the Apple stores, and this has not really changed, despite Canonical's deals with vendors like Dell. Only specialty vendors like System76 really make an appearance, and you have to find them first.

    Not dismissing the changes you may very well be seeing in Romania, but I have been hearing stories about Linux doing well outside of the narrow anglo-sphere I happen to live in for fifteen years, well before Ubuntu showed up. In fact, Linux was more visible in the late nineties here when you could go into a Best Buy and buy a boxed copy of Red Hat Linux. Case in point, when I did my Cisco IT course (which was getting a little old in places) for Linux they showed a box of Red Hat 8. I think we have actually lost some representation in this part of the world when it comes to most stores.

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    Windows since windows xp is pretty good. Back in 2001 there was no equivalent to it in the linux world in terms of user experience. Come to think about it, a lot of windows xp features haven't been surpassed even to this day by linux. A great example: games.
    Don't make me laugh, Windows XP was a horrible desktop operating system. It's GUI was far worse than what was offered by Gnome2 or KDE3 in terms of flexibility (seems very much like LXDE today), had a horrible networking stack that made Windows for Workgroups look easy to use in the name of false security benefits that pale to SSH anyway, the horribleness of all the third-party firewall and antivirus stuff that was needed to make it barely safe, and it would always die within six months to a year of active usage. These are all places Linux did better that definitely did affect end users, and not just the technically savvy. Games are an entirely separate issue, and just like your mp3 examples in another thread are based primarily on us being forced to play in a different playing field.
    Last edited by Hamish Wilson; 03-14-2013 at 03:05 PM.

  4. #114
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,446

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamish Wilson View Post

    Don't make me laugh, Windows XP was a horrible desktop operating system. It's GUI was far worse than what was offered by Gnome2 or KDE3 in terms of flexibility (seems very much like LXDE today)
    Nope, not even that good - LXDE is way more flexible and powerful than windows XP.

    I can actually compare these quite well, I have this one 10-year old HP laptop with 500MB RAM and (I think 1.7GHz) crappy Celeron singlecore CPU, which has had both. So, the OEM version of XP Pro that came with it ran horribly on it - I couldn't even use the windows version of GIMP because it wouldn't run it well enough, and I couldn't use pretty much any two programs at the same time. Not to mention the weekly antivirus sweeps - oh god, those took aeons. So I installed Lubuntu on it, and it worked much smoother. Boots in seconds instead of minutes. Doesn't hang up or slow to a crawl even when there are multiple windows open.

    But this was about flexibility - and LXDE beats XP in that regard too. Windows XP doesn't even have custom themes. You can install some 3rd-party themes that may or may not be malware, but other than that you're stuck with the 2 or 3 themes that ship with the OS. LXDE can use all Metacity and GTK2 themes. XP doesn't allow changing the panel widgets, you can switch the panel on any edge of the screen but can't have multiple panels or do anything about the start menu. LXDE allows you to have 1-4 panels in any edge of the screen, and the start menu is just a widget that you can move freely, as is every other widget - you can arrange the panels and widgets in whatever way you choose. LXDE is actually surprisingly flexible for such a lightweight DE.

  5. #115
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    728

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    Yes I know. I was too. And it was shit. Ubuntu was clearly the way forward. They did a big push towards usability for the end user. And they still do. But now they have to leave some parts of the community back since they are no longer contributing to the end user but holding them back. So they have to roll on their own. Of course that means taking control of more and more technology from the linux stack. The direction the community is going isn't the one that the end user likes and wants. And Canonical knows it.
    if you really dont care about respect lisenses and stuff but only "Linux", google is the one that did 1000x more for making linux coming onto the desktop... all this guys who even hate ubuntu and would never touch it, use android handies and most of them dont even know its linux.


    So if its only the quantity and not the quality that matters, fuck ubuntu they did nothing compared to google.


    And btw, Canonical can do what they want, but its not nessecary for them to shit on peoples work, insult them, shit them in the face and so on... they just can say hey we are making somthing different than wayland, we think it fits more our goal, we will release that in 6 months or so or in 1-2 years. But their backstab tactic, doing like they like wayland and want to use it, and then out of nothing there is a complete alternative... not even the try to send patches because they dont belive in sending patches...

    Hopefully the fork soon the kernel, then they fall 100% shure on their nose, will then have security bucks worse than windows...


    UPDATE:

    And why was ubuntu a good thing at that times, because they were the only distri that focused on the gnome-desktop and was not like 1000 years old like debian. (yes there is unstable, but even that gets way to old in freeze times).
    So and now they give away the only reason why ubuntu was good, because the focused on gnome.

    If Ubuntu would not be there, maybe most of this users maybe with a small delay till novell sold opensuse would be opensuse users, and even with that less users opensuse does a real good job compared to ubuntu. Think what would happend if they would have 10 times the users the last 5 years.

    Ubuntu also killed much stuff, gentoo is now basicly dead or not in the state it was before ubuntu was out... shure for total noobs that distri was never something but for tech sawy it was. I think ubuntus sucess has something to do with it.
    And yes sadly fedora is in a bad state. should be the alternative to ubuntu a bit more unstable... but it isnt, its not even in a good desktop state compared to debian, did get yesterday a ssl handshake error in a browser, shure its the unstable tree but such basic stuff has to work.

    I personaly have to bad experience with the old suse, and have big problems installing such a total-noob distri. Arch is often to stable, AUR is not on the same level than ppas.


    But most of that is because I am a geek, for the normal noob you talk about... opensuse would be today probably the better solution. Or at least would he have no disadvantage over ubuntu, except if he really likes this buggy beta exclusive software canonical throughs unasked out in the world...
    Last edited by blackiwid; 03-14-2013 at 06:49 PM.

  6. #116
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,525

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackiwid View Post
    If Ubuntu would not be there, maybe most of this users maybe with a small delay till novell sold opensuse would be opensuse users, and even with that less users opensuse does a real good job compared to ubuntu. Think what would happend if they would have 10 times the users the last 5 years.
    Sold? What? You're confusing something here. OpenSUSE was the idea of Novell themselves - an open development and testing process, managed entirely by the community. And you can't sell a community, now can you?.. So this sentence makes little sense to me.

    But yes, openSUSE is pretty good as an alternative to Ubuntu. Though I suppose it's not as much friendly to beginners, but it sure works very well for the medium tech savvy people, given the wealth of repositories, YaST and such.

    And for beginners we have Mageia. Does all of what Ubuntu was mentioned for here - driver detection, easy way to install them, ease of use etc.

  7. #117
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    728

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    Sold? What? You're confusing something here. OpenSUSE was the idea of Novell themselves - an open development and testing process, managed entirely by the community. And you can't sell a community, now can you?.. So this sentence makes little sense to me.

    But yes, openSUSE is pretty good as an alternative to Ubuntu. Though I suppose it's not as much friendly to beginners, but it sure works very well for the medium tech savvy people, given the wealth of repositories, YaST and such.

    And for beginners we have Mageia. Does all of what Ubuntu was mentioned for here - driver detection, easy way to install them, ease of use etc.
    you really think, that ubuntu is more focused on total retard windows noobs? I have the feeling that there is no noobisher distri than opensuse. Or does Yast for its shitiness still hinders it to be a distribution for noobs?

    You have to bring some technical heavy users to a distri + noobs only than it works. We have seen many linuxers before ubuntu that focused only on retards... like easylinux and stuff like that if there are no people in the forums that can answer questions except the developers that create the distribution the distribution dies...

    So I dont think a distribution for total noobs only can work...

    ok not easylinux thats only a magazin, but something like Lindows, hah there is also a distribution with that name easylinux ^^
    Last edited by blackiwid; 03-14-2013 at 07:31 PM.

  8. #118
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee. View Post
    Nope, not even that good - LXDE is way more flexible and powerful than windows XP. .
    Well, that was never meant as a slight against LXDE, which is a project I have come to rely more and more for older machines.

    Quote Originally Posted by dee. View Post
    I can actually compare these quite well, I have this one 10-year old HP laptop with 500MB RAM and (I think 1.7GHz) crappy Celeron singlecore CPU, which has had both. So, the OEM version of XP Pro that came with it ran horribly on it - I couldn't even use the windows version of GIMP because it wouldn't run it well enough, and I couldn't use pretty much any two programs at the same time. Not to mention the weekly antivirus sweeps - oh god, those took aeons. So I installed Lubuntu on it, and it worked much smoother. Boots in seconds instead of minutes. Doesn't hang up or slow to a crawl even when there are multiple windows open.
    I still have a similar Dell laptop hanging around. Probably going to set it up with Fedora LXDE when I finally get around to getting it's power problems solved.

  9. #119
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    Anyway Windows XP was a real step forward compared to the Windows 9x line and most users perceived it as such.
    But not all. My uncle for one was dubious of XP for a long while. And I hung out with a lot of Dos gamers, so...

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    I remember trying a red hat back in 2000 and it was much more terminal based than windows xp (which basically didn't need any). I remember that networking didn't work and back then there was no network manager and had to go with terminal or something like that. The feeling was that the UI was just a thin layer over and for real work you had to go to console. I didn't get that feeling with Win XP. And that has to do with it's success compared to Linux.
    2000 was before Windows XP was released so the comparison is a bit skewed, but it is true that NetworkManager did not come out of Red Hat until 2004. However, I do not think it was people's conceptions that mattered but what shipped on PCs, which is why I have recognized getting vendors to ship Ubuntu as a potentially promising step, although I have debated it's success thus far.

  10. #120
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    728

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    How exactly did Canonical shit on other people's work? That thing with wayland seems more like a communication issue not malevolence. If I say I like Ogre (a renderer) while I also create my own renderer and than decide on using my own instead of Ogre even though Ogre is older and has more lines of code and functionality does that make me a traitor? They didn't contribute anything to wayland, how exactly did you think they were supporting it? They didn't, never did.
    didnt you read about what they did to the compiz developer, they said they want to use this, he developed half a year, now he deletes his work and stopps developing for now... if thats not shiting on somebody what then?

    Same with wayland, first they cant wait nearly early enough to include it to ubuntu and then they lie about wayland maybe just because this devs are stupid but, they even did say that they have no idea about it, and still stating some stuff they dont have even the abilities to understand it seems.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •