Re: [News] More New Evidence of the NOT Readiness of Linux
"John Locke" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 14:04:08 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
>>Is Linux really ready for Simple Users?[/color]
The article mentioned clearly shows that linux is NOT ready for new users.
Some real gems in here.
They say Linux can give older PCs a new lease of life but so far, it looked
more like the kiss of death.
My tourist guide said: 'You're about an hour away from having a working
Linux system' but, after my first hour with Ubuntu, I was staring at a blank
screen and a hung installation.
Little brother Xubuntu was my next attempt. It took 20 minutes to reach the
install option... I witnessed the strangest thing I've ever seen a PC do:
Xubuntu just drifted away from me
I keyed in 'root', but the word in the panel said 'r66t'. It was clear that
too much Zen had scrambled the Thinkpad's keyboard. I felt like a man who'd
built a new house and couldn't get in the front door.
After playing with num locks, caps locks and various key combinations, I
struck it lucky: if I held down the 'Fn' key while typing, the problem went
way but now I was playing piano with one hand tied behind my back. I didn't
persevere for long because Zenwalk performed like an arthritic waiter on
Next I tried Slax, a mini version of Slackware. It came up with a promising
cloverleaf but, after a few false starts, it went all droopy and left me
staring at a blank screen.
Further down the list was Damn Small Linux. True to its name, DSL is a 50mb
download that will run from a USB stick. It installed in a relative flash
but came up in colours that made my eyes water: lime green on a light yellow
screen. I couldn't read a thing even when using two sets of glasses, trying
different angles or turning the room lights off. Somewhere in there was a
setting that could make DSL intelligible but it only a Guild Navigator from
the planet Dune could've found it.
As it happened, there were more villages offering small, light or tiny
versions. Puppy Linux sounded cute and supposedly bounced into life straight
from the CD, but it refused to wag its tail on the old Thinkpad.
BFX put up an epic struggle to install itself on the Thinkpad: rows and rows
of lines kept flashing up the screen and among them I saw the curious
message 'irq15. Nobody cared.
Try booting with 'irqpoll'. I stared at the passing code like an
archaeologist trying to decipher the Dead Sea Scrolls, until I saw that the
lines on the screen were repeating themselves - this puppy was chasing its
own tail and would drop dead if I didn't stop it.
(Ubuntu) A second reboot opened the dusty highveld, but the pleasant welcome
music struck a sour note: the letters on the screen looked like they'd been
borrowed from a Flintstones cartoon, and the pictures were stretched like
those on a T-shirt that's too tight across a beer gut.
The internet revealed that I wasn't the only dummy looking for a resolution
to the widescreen problem.
The geeks who inhabit the forums offered fixes involving command line
acrobatics and driver hacks that were beyond this fresh-faced penguin. The
short version went something like: 'Use Kernel 2.6.12+ (compile in AGP/DRI
support) and Xorg 22.214.171.124+ (use i810 driver, change /etc/X11/xorg.conf to
1280x800).' My mission was to check if Linux was ready for users of average
skill. Ubuntu failed the test.
Like Ubuntu, SUSE took her time to offer her services, and once again I
found myself staring at a scene from the Flintstones.
A quick check on the internet revealed that SUSE had a problem with Intel
graphics cards as well.
Even after doing the "distro shuffle" the poor reviewer couldn't get
anything to work.
Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]