Should I bother with Linux?

Ximian

GetRealBabe wrote: »

Hi

The only problem I have is I can't print using Linux. Use my Windows 7 PC for that.

Why can't you print from Linux?

GetRealBabe

Ximian wrote: »

Why can't you print from Linux?

Hi

Cups server and my print server seem to conflict. Cups server says it cannot find my printer. Print server software doesn't work with linux. (Maybe if I could change localhost 631 to print servers ip address that might help but I have no idea how to do that)

dannny_2

Uxb wrote: »

Wasn't Gandalf an old communication protocol from the early 1980's.

Gandalf comms boxes. I worked at a site where the computer room had one side lined with them. Number of flashing lights was really impressive.

Ximian

GetRealBabe wrote: »

Hi

Cups server and my print server seem to conflict. Cups server says it cannot find my printer. Print server software doesn't work with linux. (Maybe if I could change localhost 631 to print servers ip address that might help but I have no idea how to do that)

Strange, my printer was plug and play (USB).

What distro are you running, and what model of printer do you have?

GetRealBabe

Ximian wrote: »

Strange, my printer was plug and play (USB).

What distro are you running, and what model of printer do you have?

Hi

Linux Mint 15 and Canon MP810. (Pinter usb is connected to a print server then the router) Am trying to print wirelessly but cannot. Might try attaching printer usb to my laptop.

esuhl

EchoLocation wrote: »

Having recently emptied and formatted my secondary HDD I've been thinking about trying Linux as a dual-boot alongside Windows 7, but the sheer amount of choice is a bit overwhelming.

Any advice or recommendations would be welcome;

Which distribution you go for (assuming you aren't insane enough to try compiling your own Linux system from scratch!) depends on what you want from the OS. Each Linux distribution has its own philosophy, whether that's providing complete control, being rock solid and stable, using the latest (potentially unstable) code available, or being easy for non-techies to use.

Some people like Ubuntu or because it comes pre-installed with many common applications and tries to hide a lot of the complexities of Linux behind GUIs. It's probably one of the best choices for someone who just wants an OS that is easy-to-use and preconfigured... Although it's pretty bloated and you have to wonder why Windows wouldn't be a better choice.

http://www.ubuntu.com/

If you want to learn about how Linux works, or want a fast optimised OS with no un-necessary bloat, then Arch Linux would be a great choice. Arch doesn't try to hide settings behind complicated GUIs that battle with each other to fight for control! Generally in Arch, there's "one way" to do things and that's by editing the configuration file yourself and choosing the correct settings.

Arch doesn't come pre-installed with lots of software -- it's more of a "blank slate" onto which you can install whatever you want. Ubuntu uses the Gnome desktop environment (although you can get variants called Kubuntu which uses KDE or Xubuntu which uses XFCE). By contrast, Arch doesn't have a pre-determined desktop environment -- you can install whatever you want: Gnome, KDE, XFCE, or a more obscure one... or several different ones... or none at all!

https://wiki.archlinux.org/

If you're a control freak and slightly technically-minded, Arch makes life much simpler! If you don't care how your computer works and just want to browse the web and type a letter, Arch would be a nightmare and Ubuntu would be a better bet.

EchoLocation wrote: »

however, before I even start asking the many questions I have... should I even bother with Linux? Is curiosity a good enough reason? I won't be ditching Windows, so is it really worth bothering with a second OS?

Curiosity is a great reason! I had a lot of fun playing around with many different distributions, and have learnt a fair bit about how Linux works. The wiki help pages (on Arch, at least) are great. There's always a way to do something using open source software, unlike Windows where you have to hunt around the web for a suitable program (which invariably has restrictions on the "free version", or is infected with malware or adware or just bloatware).

I also have multiple OSes on my PC -- Windows 7, Windows XP and Arch Linux, but Arch is the one I use 95% of the time because it's faster, looks cleaner, and is easier to use than Windows.

On most Linux systems, you can update every single application with a single command. It drives me crazy when I return to Windows and have to manually run every single program I want to use and check for updates.

And, since Arch is a "rolling release" distribution, the components of the OS are upgraded incrementally. I will never ever have to wipe the drive and install the "latest version" of Arch -- a simple update on my live system updates everything... unlike most distributions (including Ubuntu and Windows, which have completely new versions released every so often).

EchoLocation wrote: »

I like the idea that there is substantially less malware targeted at Linux, and being open-source it's likely to offer better privacy(?). But can it really offer a worthwhile alternative experience to Windows 7?

It can offer a much better experience than any Windows OS... but it really depends on what you consider to be a better experience...

Uxb wrote: »

The "Linux industry" is too fragmented
There are umpteen Linux distributions some even with several totally different desktop GUI/user interface variants you could install within the distribution backend.

But that's the whole point of Linux! You set up your system to do whatever you want it to with no "industry direction" from God or Bill Gates or whoever! The variety of Linux distros (and desktop environments and window managers) is because Linux doesn't try to do everything for everyone in one set way (as with Windows), it can be as flexible as your needs (or preferences) are.

Uxb wrote: »

Personally I don't get the appeal of Linux it just seems everything is so difficult not to mention the obsession with the command line commands to fix everything - it shouldn't need fixing!

If you're used to Windows, it's limited choices, and the way that it hides a lot of complexity from the user, Linux will seem a little baffling at first.

The use of the command line is one of the main advantages of Linux -- it's great for easier and more controlled configuration. It's a lot faster to use the command line (if you know what you're doing).

Anyway, Windows and Linux are geared towards different types of user. It's no wonder than many Windows users find Linux incomprehensible and Linux users find Windows tedious. If you don't care how your computer works and don't want to learn because you want to get on with your life, stick to Windows.

EchoLocation wrote: »

I think an Ubuntu-derived distro looks the best bet for me at the moment, though I've maybe fallen into the trap looking for something that replicates Windows rather than something that offers a different experience.

I think that's why so many Windows users find their Linux experience frustrating/disappointing. Linux isn't Windows. If you want something Windows-like, stick to Windows! It does what it does very well.

Oh, and if you want to test out a few Linux distros, it would probably be a good idea to test them in a virtual machine before you set up dual-booting on your machine.

https://www.virtualbox.org/

Ximian

GetRealBabe wrote: »

Hi

Linux Mint 15 and Canon MP810. (Pinter usb is connected to a print server then the router) Am trying to print wirelessly but cannot. Might try attaching printer usb to my laptop.

Can you ping the printer/router/print server successfully?

Uxb

Moaning at me for objecting to the command line usage in Linux is rather amusing as I was brought up on stuff like the Commodore PET and ICL1900 mainframes, along with the Digital PDP series and Data General's offerings and having to remember the sodding command line syntax for each and all of them at various times ... and on occasions multiple ones at the same time.
Doing all programming/compiling/binding at the command prompt, setting up batch files for data input/output and not a GUI in sight. -in fact at one stage it was punched cards only on the ICL so not only no GUI but no VDU terminal either.

Never ever again thank goodness!

But yes, I'm all for curiosity so as I've previously said go and try out a few Linux distro's.

GetRealBabe

Ximian wrote: »

Can you ping the printer/router/print server successfully?

Hi

Can ping the router, not the printer.

Lumstorm

Uxb wrote: »

The "Linux industry" is too fragmented
There are umpteen Linux distributions some even with several totally different desktop GUI/user interface variants you could install within the distribution backend.

There are actually hundreds of different distros but some are very specialized to one task such as a mail server or firewall. If you stick to the top mainstream distros as seen on http://distrowatch.com/ you can't go far wrong. I would download some live distro discs and take a look at a few before deciding what to try further they will run slower than an install, but you get a look to see what suits you. As for the different interfaces you don't like one you can try another that is the choice you have, how many people would like to change Windows 8 interface for another?

As for JJ Egan's comment about Linux becoming mainstream that will never happen imagine going into PC WORLD and buying a PC without being told you must buy an Anti-virus and you will need to buy Office and Photoshop. Most main distros will include everything most people would need software wise included.