Do you run Linux - if not why?

onomatopoeia99

Windows 10 now has an openssh server and client. You have to enable them if you want them.

J_Nostin

This:

MoneyMoney wrote: »

It is for advanced users only, why do people keep wanting to push this. It is not a viable alternative despite it being hyped as such for nearly two decades.

Open office is not office, having vms running is not the same as "I can still run my normal apps". 5 hours in the command line to setup normal a thing like 3 screens is not an easy to use OS.

Linux is great as a desktop for some people doing certain things who have experience in it, or as a super locked down terminal for specific functions.

Sudo stop pushing it as a normal desktop.

Believe me I would love a real alternative to WinDoze but MoneyMoney as I quote above is spot on. Mind you I find myself using a "real" computer less and less thanks to the rise of tablets with their Android (yes, I know it's a type of Linux) domination as the OS of choice for phones & tablets BUT for me there are still times when only a computer will do.

Stoke

debitcardmayhem wrote: »

It allows you to log into any box running SSHD. I would assume that you should/could run a SSHD daemon on W10 but why? teamviewer et al are for accessing WinXX, plus “Bourne shell”? You must be talking about bash..not the original Bourne shell. When if/I have time I will try see if you can run X remote programs on W10 using ssh, I remember doing that using putty about 12 years ago to Solaris/Unix servers, but the hows and what with is lost in the depths of my mind

Yeah, you know what I mean. Not the original Bourne Shell, but obviously it has descendants, bash being one.

esuhl

Stoke wrote: »

If your repo list is accurate and up-to-date, you don't even have to do that. Most distros now periodically remind you to update and give you a surprising amount of control, just in case there's a couple of packages you'd rather not update.

Well, in Arch, you'd control the repo list via pacman.conf. Then yay (a wrapper for pacman, the default package manager) can be used to search repositories, installed programs, orphans, etc. synchronise with the repository, and if a full update includes a component you don't want to update, you can use the --ignore option.

It's all very fast, simple, and powerful. No need for nagging to check for updates, or annoying GUI applications.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/pacman

That's one of the great things about GNU/Linux -- you aren't forced to stick with one way of doing things like you are with Windows.

Everything is modular and configurable... and there are hundreds of pre-configured distributions to choose from.

Stoke wrote: »

At the end of the day, it's subjective and most of it comes down to personal preference.... but there are very good reasons to pick Linux over Windows.

I agree. Horses for courses.

Stoke

esuhl wrote: »

Well, in Arch, you'd control the repo list via pacman.conf. Then yay (a wrapper for pacman, the default package manager) can be used to search repositories, installed programs, orphans, etc. synchronise with the repository, and if a full update includes a component you don't want to update, you can use the --ignore option.

It's all very fast, simple, and powerful. No need for nagging to check for updates, or annoying GUI applications.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/pacman

That's one of the great things about GNU/Linux -- you aren't forced to stick with one way of doing things like you are with Windows.

Everything is modular and configurable... and there are hundreds of pre-configured distributions to choose from.



I agree. Horses for courses.

I haven't used Arch for about 10 years. The biggest reason for that is obviously there is some small initial setup compared to other distros and quite often I haven't got the time to really spend on that. However, I could probably do with formatting my current work laptop, so perhaps I can find some time and give it another try?

psychic_teabag

debitcardmayhem wrote: »

It allows you to log into any box running SSHD. I would assume that you should/could run a SSHD daemon on W10 but why? teamviewer et al are for accessing WinXX, plus “Bourne shell”?

It takes rather more resource to transport a gui over the network than it does to just stream stdin/stdout.

Also, I'm sure a lot has changed in windows since I last used it, but you used to only be able to access the screen of the currently logged in user (without the Citrix / terminal server extensions). Connecting to an sshd server ought to give you an independent session per connection.

Stoke

psychic_teabag wrote: »

It takes rather more resource to transport a gui over the network than it does to just stream stdin/stdout.

Also, I'm sure a lot has changed in windows since I last used it, but you used to only be able to access the screen of the currently logged in user (without the Citrix / terminal server extensions). Connecting to an sshd server ought to give you an independent session per connection.

Yup, these are all the things that people who don't use/get Linux really don't know about. Yes, you can use TeamViewer to view a Windows GUI and..... you can also use X11 forwarding over SSH on Linux if you want to view a GUI (albeit a crude method of doing so). This is fine..... Nothing wrong with that.

For me, one of the simple beauties of SSH (as in, not a particularly clever trick) is the ability to open multiple sessions on a correctly configured machine autonomously and allow them to do their own thing. I suspect you've already heard of 'screen'? A problem on a previous project was having to build large repos on my local machine. This is never ideal, so I found an unused Thinkstation in a cupboard at work. Set it up with the git repo, then after finishing my work. I would hop on the train, open SSH from my mobile phone (like you said, stdin/stdout requires limited bandwidth), start a screen, pull the master (or whatever the working branch was) and kick it off. No chance of losing my session, no chance of the connection dropping and things failing..... once launched, you could connect back at any time to just check up on the progress. Usually by the time I was about to get off the train (an hour or so) the build would be almost complete, so I would SSH back in, connect to the screen session and kick off a load of .sh scripts that did all the manual jobs you were supposed to do automatically. All that allowed me to leave work an hour earlier

However, that's just one of many examples of why I prefer it. We haven't even got started on sshfs

Biggest_Mint

Tried it, still have it on a machine, moved back to Windows. Largely because some of the software I use isn't compatible.

tronator

Biggest_Mint wrote: »

Tried it, still have it on a machine, moved back to Windows. Largely because some of the software I use isn't compatible.

For most Windows software there are good alternatives for Linux available


http://www.alternative.to/

2e0arr

my computers are too old and too slow even to donate to africa. but i run mx linux for free. and i use gimp