LINUX - Page 2

Thanol · 08-04-2006, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by littleFella

Are you sure Gentoo would be a good idea to a Linux newbie?

Definitely start off with a version of Ubuntu then move on to Gentoo. There is way too much command line...

Radnor · 08-04-2006, 08:22 AM

Knoppix or Kanotix!

Xine nah, I like kaffine better!

Daniel-Z · 08-04-2006, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zap

You can go for a year or more without rebooting Windows too, Daniel.
It's rare, because circumstances don't usually warrant it. But, it's not impossible.
It really depends a lot on how you treat your Windows box.
If you're going to install all kinds of crap on it, then, yes, it's going to be troublesome for you.
I have 2 Windows XP systems that have been running (without reinstall) for almost 2 years and almost 4 years, respectively. Windows is not as bad as you might think.

If you are using the windows box for a tiny task like acting as a gateway or something maybe then I can see it having a stable uptime.

Even at that with the terrible way windows manages memory I see the machine responding very slowly pretty much too slow to do anything with it.

I've heard of a 90 - 120 days uptime with windows XP but not more than that.

Regardless of what you say Windows will never be able to match the stability and reliability of Linux.

I can also install a tonne of software on a linux box with no reboots needed and the softwares wont corrupt the OS or cause it to run poorly.

Is that 2 years and aqlmost 4 years without a reinstall or without a reboot?

dcole07 · 08-04-2006, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zap

You can go for a year or more without rebooting Windows too, Daniel.
It's rare, because circumstances don't usually warrant it. But, it's not impossible.
It really depends a lot on how you treat your Windows box.
If you're going to install all kinds of crap on it, then, yes, it's going to be troublesome for you.
I have 2 Windows XP systems that have been running (without reinstall) for almost 2 years and almost 4 years, respectively. Windows is not as bad as you might think.

umm... windows is ment for the average user not servers... windows can't stand up to Linux! I tried running a windows server and it crashed every Friday within an hour of 8:00, but it would also crash if you used any program from more than 10 mins. I had my windows lover friend look at it and he said that windows was unstable because the hardware was designed for Windows 95 and not 2000.

Linux is a networking OS, in networking it can't be beat... No other OS is better at it in this area. Maybe Unix but I've never heard of Unix being a Networking OS. Mac is a Graphic OS. Window is average user OS...

---- ---

The difference between Windows and Linux is that:
Linux was designed to work on any hardware!
Hardware has to be made so it works with Windows! Not the other way around like Linux...

dcole07 · 08-04-2006, 09:59 AM

I'm keeping my post Daniel-Z... you can just write a min faster than I can.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel-Z

Is that 2 years and aqlmost 4 years without a reinstall or without a reboot?

Now Daniel-Z, this is going to be hard on your ears but you see Windows has to be reinstall to keep the speed and reliablity up. Now I know Linux doesn't have to be reinstall but you can't expect every OS to be like Linux... You see Windows is more human, it ages... as Linux just gets outdates and requires an update, Windows on the other hand is outdated to begin with, so requires attention in another way... called aging. So Windows just wakes up one day and is like "****, I feel old! kid, if you would be so kind as to re-incarnate me... I'd love it."

Zap · 08-04-2006, 10:04 AM

@Daniel: 2 and 4 years without a reinstall. Both machines get rebooted (on average) every 2 or 3 months. I do have a Windows 2000 server that never gets rebooted.

We don't need to turn this into a MS vs Linux war thread. I was just stating that it is not impossible to go without rebooting a Windows box for a year or more. Many thousands (if not millions) of Windows servers are not rebooted often. It's quite common.

For desktops, which typically get a lot more use (and abuse) the stability of the O/S is very closely tied to who is using it and how careful they are about installing things on it. A person who has 20 toolbars will generally need to reinstall much more often than someone who installs Office and a couple of other programs and that's it.

The box that I have had the "virgin install" on for 2 years is quite stable and I use it for everything from watching DVDs/TV to Office programs to burning DVDs to editing video, etc. I get a lot of use out of it and it is very stable.

I think that you guys might find that if the general population were to begin using Linux (mom, dad, grandma and grandpa), then you would see many new viruses written specifically for Linux and many more Linux boxes with stability issues. I think it's just a numbers game at this point. But, we'll see some decent stats if/when Linux ever makes it into 50% of households.

Daniel-Z · 08-04-2006, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcole07

I'm keeping my post Daniel-Z... you can just write a min faster than I can.

Now Daniel-Z, this is going to be hard on your ears but you see Windows has to be reinstall to keep the speed and reliablity up. Now I know Linux doesn't have to be reinstall but you can't expect every OS to be like Linux... You see Windows is more human, it ages... as Linux just gets outdates and requires an update, Windows on the other hand is outdated to begin with, so requires attention in another way... called aging. So Windows just wakes up one day and is like "****, I feel old! kid, if you would be so kind as to re-incarnate me... I'd love it."

Lol I agree with you 100% dcole07 but not really on the being hard on my ears part because I share the exact same opinion as you lol

Daniel-Z · 08-04-2006, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zap

@Daniel: 2 and 4 years without a reinstall. Both machines get rebooted (on average) every 2 or 3 months. I do have a Windows 2000 server that never gets rebooted.

We don't need to turn this into a MS vs Linux war thread. I was just stating that it is not impossible to go without rebooting a Windows box for a year or more. Many thousands (if not millions) of Windows servers are not rebooted often. It's quite common.

For desktops, which typically get a lot more use (and abuse) the stability of the O/S is very closely tied to who is using it and how careful they are about installing things on it. A person who has 20 toolbars will generally need to reinstall much more often than someone who installs Office and a couple of other programs and that's it.

The box that I have had the "virgin install" on for 2 years is quite stable and I use it for everything from watching DVDs/TV to Office programs to burning DVDs to editing video, etc. I get a lot of use out of it and it is very stable.

I think that you guys might find that if the general population were to begin using Linux (mom, dad, grandma and grandpa), then you would see many new viruses written specifically for Linux and many more Linux boxes with stability issues. I think it's just a numbers game at this point. But, we'll see some decent stats if/when Linux ever makes it into 50% of households.

lol I have been stating UPTIME this entire time. I'm not talking about a reinstall of the OS. What did you miss?

Non of the MS Windows OS's can maintain an uptime of more than 90 - 120 days not even Windows 2000.

Linux on the other hand can. Like I mentioned above 377 days without a REBOOT. And at 377 days the OS is JUST as responsive as it was on day 1.

Windows 2000 needs to be rebooted from time to time as well because of the way MS releases service packs. The service packs require a reboot.

Linux can apply patchs without the need of a reboot.

Now remember I have never been talking about how frequent you need to RE-INSTALL an OS here. I have simply been talking about how often a reboot is needed.

Reboot = Turning off and then turning back on the machine not reinstalling the OS.

Zap · 08-04-2006, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel-Z

lol I have been stating UPTIME this entire time. I'm not talking about a reinstall of the OS. What did you miss?

You have mentioned (in the past) that you need to reinstall your Windows XP every 3 months. I was speaking to that point and also to the general point about stability. I thought this thread was about more than just reboots.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel-Z

Non of the MS Windows OS's can maintain an uptime of more than 90 - 120 days not even Windows 2000.

That may be YOUR EXPERIENCE, Daniel. It is not mine. I routinely work with servers that have an uptime of 6 months to a year or more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel-Z

Windows 2000 needs to be rebooted from time to time as well because of the way MS releases service packs. The service packs require a reboot.

The last service pack for Windows 2000 was Service Pack 4, released PRIOR to November 2003. That was almost 3 years ago, Daniel. LOL!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel-Z

Linux can apply patchs without the need of a reboot.

Windows can too. Some updates require a reboot. Some don't.
(You really want the Linux war, don't ya?)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel-Z

Now remember I have never been talking about how frequent you need to RE-INSTALL an OS here. I have simply been talking about how often a reboot is needed.

Reboot = Turning off and then turning back on the machine not reinstalling the OS.

Daniel, if you can continue this discussion without resorting to the condescending attitude, then that would be great. As I said, this doesn't need to be a Linux war thread, and you really don't need that attitude to have an intelligent discussion of these things. I really didn't need you to define a reboot for me. We all know what a reboot is, Daniel.

Daniel-Z · 08-04-2006, 10:40 AM

This is not worth my time.

Next time try addressing what I was actually talking about in the first place.

Peace out.

Zap · 08-04-2006, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel-Z

This is not worth my time.

Next time try addressing what I was actually talking about in the first place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel-Z

LINUX ROCKS! Its the most stable OS I have ever seen aside from Unix

I was talking about stability, Daniel.

I really wish you'd lose the attitude. It would be better for everyone here, Daniel.

littleFella · 08-04-2006, 11:39 AM

Window uptime can be quite long, depending on the function of the Windows installation. If the Windows machine is behind some solid security device then I see no reason for reboots, given that no upgrades are performed.

check this

Daniel-Z · 08-04-2006, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by littleFella

Window uptime can be quite long, depending on the function of the Windows installation. If the Windows machine is behind some solid security device then I see no reason for reboots, given that no upgrades are performed.

check this

Wow I'm impressed LittleFella. Thanks for posting facts

Definitely depending on the function of the installation (Not too much of a load on the server) looks like Windows NT4 and up can be fairly reliable

With no upgrades needed as well of course.

I humbly bow down to you sir

I'd still prefer to use Linux/Unix in a production environment but hey I guess that's my personal preference.

dcole07 · 08-04-2006, 08:32 PM

If we look at that data you will see that Sun's OS has been up the longest... and isn't sun's OS linux... or is that not Solaris?

Also you can't take that data until it's complete... in order for it to be real data we must have downtime to show a "life" span... If you look at the top Windows and Linux you will see the Linux guy didn't join untill a year later.... They both have 100% uptime!

I will try to find the top "completed" person for each group!

Daniel-Z · 08-04-2006, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcole07

If we look at that data you will see that Sun's OS has been up the longest... and isn't sun's OS linux... or is that not Solaris?

Also you can't take that data until it's complete... in order for it to be real data we must have downtime to show a "life" span... If you look at the top Windows and Linux you will see the Linux guy didn't join untill a year later.... They both have 100% uptime!

I will try to find the top "completed" person for each group!

Sun uses Solaris. And thats a good point

Hey I didn't realize that. I look forward to seeing the data you come up with.

I did mention that if the windows box was running a menial task then yes it could have a good uptime but not if it were running a major load.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kristee's Obsession

If you are using the windows box for a tiny task like acting as a gateway or something maybe then I can see it having a stable uptime.

In that list if you look at alot of what the servers are running its not very much really.

Net-Margin · 08-05-2006, 01:01 AM

I'm currently running Ubuntu 6.06 along with Windows XP Home Edition, I installed from liveCD so I could check out all the features and see whats going on. I would suggest ordering the LiveCD's as they are brilliant if you want to get used to the OS before actually running the install.

They may take a long time to be posted but they are sure worth it. Good luck if you run Linux, although the incompatabilities are rather annoying.

dcole07 · 08-05-2006, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Net-Margin

They may take a long time to be posted but they are sure worth it. Good luck if you run Linux, although the incompatabilities are rather annoying.

What incompatabilities? I've never seen any... but then again computers love me best!

All windows programs I've ever seen work on My Fedora Core 5. But then again, I've never installed "Corrupt pack-man verson -5.3.001"

---- ---
Teacher: "Dan, don't use that computer it will not start up!"
Dan: "Dang it, I'm already loged in!"

Daniel-Z · 08-05-2006, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcole07

What incompatabilities? I've never seen any... but then again computers love me best!

All windows programs I've ever seen work on My Fedora Core 5. But then again, I've never installed "Corrupt pack-man verson -5.3.001"

---- ---
Teacher: "Dan, don't use that computer it will not start up!"
Dan: "Dang it, I'm already loged in!"

LOL HAHAHAHAHAHA