Should I bother with Linux?

prowla

esuhl wrote: »

Yeah, I've written software that interacts with GUIs and they're a right pain compared to using a proper API!

And yes - GUIs are generally easier for end-users. But many GUIs hide things from users, and if you want to automate things with scripts it will be easier to use text commands.

I certainly wouldn't want to do most things via the command line, but understanding shell commands helps you configure your system and some things are just a lot easier. I always update my system using the command line -- one quick command does it all. If I used a GUI it would probably take longer!

Anyway, part of the amazing way that Linux differs from Windows is that the programs are completely modular and can be put together in novel ways (with scripts or pipes or whatever) to do so much more than you can in Windows. If the commands exist and you can think it, then you can do it in one unattended script. No need to spend hours manually running a file through various different programs' GUIs -- just whack it in a script and come back later.

Don't like one tiny component of the script you've written? Well, there are probably several alternatives to every program you used in your script -- try another one and you've just built a program that does exactly what you want in a single script without having to do any real programming. As I say, it's like playing with Lego!

I'm really no expert in Linux or shell commands, but I do "get" why nerdy Linux gurus love it so much. It's so free and easy, if only you can learn to love the command line just a little bit!

Sure - I don't think we're disagreeing.

(FYI, I've be a UNIX admin since the 80s, so I live on the command line and doing shell scripts.)

GetRealBabe

Hi

Been trying a few Linux distros (didn't like Fedora or Puppy Linux. Think Linux Arch might be a bit advanced for me) Now using Xubuntu and liking it. Using the Terminal is fascinating.

When I know more, I'll probably install Arch Linux.

spud17

GetRealBabe wrote: »

Hi

Been trying a few Linux distros (didn't like Fedora or Puppy Linux. Think Linux Arch might be a bit advanced for me) Now using Xubuntu and liking it. Using the Terminal is fascinating.

When I know more, I'll probably install Arch Linux.

I'm guessing the majority just use 'Puppy' as a rescue distro.

A few have it mounted on a flash drive along with other stuff. (search techie forum for xboot).

If a distro catches my eye, I try it 'live' using a re-writeable disk, (cheapskate), saves burning disks that will never be used again.

I have Xubuntu on 1.3MHz laptop, maxed out with 512MB ram, runs ok, once booted.

Mint is the preferred choice for dual booting one with Win 7, the other XP Pro, using GRUB.

GunJack

spud17 wrote: »

A few have it mounted on a flash drive along with other stuff. (search techie forum for xboot)..

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

...and it still works

spud17

GunJack wrote: »

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

...and it still works

And mine, got quite a bit on there now.
Cloned to second flash, just in case. :rotfl:

Stoke

I_have_spoken wrote: »

Not unless you have a beard, wear sandals, drink copies amounts of home-brew ale and find T-shirts with "There's no place like 127.0.0.1" absolutely hilarious.

What a stupid and ignorant comment.

GunJack

spud17 wrote: »

And mine, got quite a bit on there now.
Cloned to second flash, just in case. :rotfl:

I've rebuilt mine a couple of times, just for the hell of it, and maybe I'm limiting myself by keeping it on a 2GB stick (Puppy, Hiren's and Avira Rescue)....

...However, I've just reclaimed a 16GB stick from Mini-Gun #1 after getting him a bigger xbox hdd, so......

...I feel it may be time to play some more :rotfl:

Ximian

Stoke wrote: »

What a stupid and ignorant comment.

There's no place like loopback address - doesn't make much sense

esuhl

spud17 wrote: »

Mint is the preferred choice for dual booting one with Win 7, the other XP Pro, using GRUB.

Absolute nonsense! Why would one particular distro be a "preferred choice" for dual booting?! (Or do you just mean that it's your preferred choice?)

When booting a PC, the boot loader determines which OS to boot into. It doesn't matter what distribution of Linux you're using or what other OSes exist on your system.

GRUB is probably the most popular boot loader, but GRUB Legacy or LILO or Syslinux, or any one of the many other boot loaders will do equally well. Use whatever you like.

The point of Linux is that nothing is "preferred" -- you do whatever you want; install whatever disto you like (or build manually from source, if you prefer) use whatever boot loader you want, etc., etc.

esuhl

GetRealBabe wrote: »

Been trying a few Linux distros (didn't like Fedora or Puppy Linux. Think Linux Arch might be a bit advanced for me) Now using Xubuntu and liking it. Using the Terminal is fascinating.

When I know more, I'll probably install Arch Linux.

Good idea -- Arch does require a little bit of basic knowledge, but once you've got the hang of the basics, it's quite straightforward thanks to it's incredibly detailed wiki pages and the KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) philosophy.