5 days wasted installing Linux Suse - Linux

This is a discussion on 5 days wasted installing Linux Suse - Linux ; On 2008-10-21, RonB claimed: > Sinister Midget wrote: > >> Back when I used SuSE I had it on a laptop. At least 2 different >> versions. Didn't have any problems. In fact, it was the first and only >> ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: 5 days wasted installing Linux Suse

  1. Re: 5 days wasted installing Linux Suse

    On 2008-10-21, RonB claimed:
    > Sinister Midget wrote:
    >
    >> Back when I used SuSE I had it on a laptop. At least 2 different
    >> versions. Didn't have any problems. In fact, it was the first and only
    >> one for awhile that found the wireless card and set it up without a
    >> hitch. The other varieties required downloads and compiles, or never
    >> saw the card at all.
    >>
    >> Toshibas used to be known problems. They might still be

    >
    > In my experience openSUSE takes a long time to install (1.5 hours as opposed
    > to about 20 minutes for CentOS), but when it's done it correctly identifies
    > the hardware. I've got "trailing edge technology" so I'm sure it installs
    > much more quickly on new hardware.


    No doubt about it being the slowest, or one of the slowest, at
    installing. It worked fine with everything I had, too. It wasn't my cup
    of tea as far as linux goes, but I sure can't complain about how it
    worked with the hardware I was using at the time.

    The live CDs worked fine with the last machine I was using, and this
    one, too. They're both desktops, though, and desktops are usually
    easier for the distros to configure than laptops. Even so, a guy I work
    with runs live openSUSE CDs on his laptop without any problems.

    --
    Linux: because it's _my_ damn computer!

  2. Re: 5 days wasted installing Linux Suse

    Sinister Midget writes:

    > On 2008-10-21, RonB claimed:
    >> Sinister Midget wrote:
    >>
    >>> Back when I used SuSE I had it on a laptop. At least 2 different
    >>> versions. Didn't have any problems. In fact, it was the first and only
    >>> one for awhile that found the wireless card and set it up without a
    >>> hitch. The other varieties required downloads and compiles, or never
    >>> saw the card at all.
    >>>
    >>> Toshibas used to be known problems. They might still be

    >>
    >> In my experience openSUSE takes a long time to install (1.5 hours as opposed
    >> to about 20 minutes for CentOS), but when it's done it correctly identifies
    >> the hardware. I've got "trailing edge technology" so I'm sure it installs
    >> much more quickly on new hardware.

    >
    > No doubt about it being the slowest, or one of the slowest, at
    > installing. It worked fine with everything I had, too. It wasn't my cup
    > of tea as far as linux goes, but I sure can't complain about how it
    > worked with the hardware I was using at the time.


    Please explain which features of it were not your cup of tea. Also which
    HW it supported better than the other distros you claim you are familiar
    with.

    > The live CDs worked fine with the last machine I was using, and this
    > one, too. They're both desktops, though, and desktops are usually
    > easier for the distros to configure than laptops. Even so, a guy I work
    > with runs live openSUSE CDs on his laptop without any problems.


    Which make of laptop?

    --
    "Unfortunately, once again, the user-unfriendly dirtware sucks so bad it's
    hard to prove how bad it sucks."
    -- "DFS" in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  3. Re: 5 days wasted installing Linux Suse

    Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

    > And only Hadron will claim that someone saying one distro is easier or
    > better than another means that the other necessarily has "issues".


    The main issue, with me, is that I'm still a Linux newbie and the more a
    distribution's install does for you, the easier it is for me to install.
    But I'm experimenting with others. I've got Arch Linux on an older computer
    and it's making me learn a little about Linux. It's fast and I like the
    pacman software management.

    --
    RonB
    "There's a story there...somewhere"

  4. Re: 5 days wasted installing Linux Suse

    Chris Ahlstrom writes:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, RonB belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> How is it "easier" than other distros? Which features of other distro's
    >>> install process has it improved upon? Thus indicating issues with the
    >>> others I am sure you will agree. Well?

    >>
    >> It installs more of the basics, fancy fonts, flash, mp3 player, etc.
    >>
    >>> I expect you to run away again.

    >>
    >> Just because I don't drool here 24/7 (like you) doesn't mean I "run away."
    >> Unlike WinTrolls like you, I've got a life.

    >
    > And only Hadron will claim that someone saying one distro is easier or
    > better than another means that the other necessarily has "issues".


    Because mainly only Hadron tells the truth at times here you little
    fibber. Well others too but few that you shill.

    If someone says "it installed better" or "better matched my hw" there
    were clearly issues with the former version. Lets HEAR what they
    were. Lets hear HOW the later version is better. Hey! Hears a thought!
    Maybe, just maybe those improvements can then be fed back to the other
    distro. You know. Like I do with Debian Testing and Unstable? To *help*
    improve things?

    But oh no. Most of it is hot air and fanboyism from the COLA
    gang. Possibly the most ridiculed group in Usenet history.


    --
    "Every piece of evidence I've heard from developers inside Microsoft
    supports my theory that the company has become completely tangled up in..."
    -- William Poaster boring people again in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  5. Re: 5 days wasted installing Linux Suse

    On 2008-10-21, Sinister Midget wrote:
    > On 2008-10-21, RonB claimed:
    >> Sinister Midget wrote:
    >>
    >>> Back when I used SuSE I had it on a laptop. At least 2 different
    >>> versions. Didn't have any problems. In fact, it was the first and only
    >>> one for awhile that found the wireless card and set it up without a
    >>> hitch. The other varieties required downloads and compiles, or never
    >>> saw the card at all.
    >>>
    >>> Toshibas used to be known problems. They might still be

    >>
    >> In my experience openSUSE takes a long time to install (1.5 hours as opposed
    >> to about 20 minutes for CentOS), but when it's done it correctly identifies
    >> the hardware. I've got "trailing edge technology" so I'm sure it installs
    >> much more quickly on new hardware.

    >
    > No doubt about it being the slowest, or one of the slowest, at
    > installing. It worked fine with everything I had, too. It wasn't my cup
    > of tea as far as linux goes, but I sure can't complain about how it
    > worked with the hardware I was using at the time.


    I'm glad you said "one of the slowest".

    Gentoo takes far longer to install, but when it is installed it fits
    your machine like a kid glove and you only ever do it once.

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  6. Re: 5 days wasted installing Linux Suse

    RonB wrote:
    > Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >
    >> And only Hadron will claim that someone saying one distro is easier
    >> or better than another means that the other necessarily has "issues".

    >
    > The main issue, with me, is that I'm still a Linux newbie and the
    > more a distribution's install does for you, the easier it is for me
    > to install. But I'm experimenting with others. I've got Arch Linux on
    > an older computer and it's making me learn a little about Linux. It's
    > fast and I like the pacman software management.


    Try Slackware for an authentic Linux time-wasting experience and hassles
    galore.

    For the ultimate in Linux crapware pain, you'll want to do Linux From
    Scratch.




  7. Re: 5 days wasted installing Linux Suse

    Gregory Shearman wrote:
    > On 2008-10-21, Sinister Midget wrote:
    >> On 2008-10-21, RonB claimed:
    >>> Sinister Midget wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Back when I used SuSE I had it on a laptop. At least 2 different
    >>>> versions. Didn't have any problems. In fact, it was the first and
    >>>> only one for awhile that found the wireless card and set it up
    >>>> without a hitch. The other varieties required downloads and
    >>>> compiles, or never saw the card at all.
    >>>>
    >>>> Toshibas used to be known problems. They might still be
    >>>
    >>> In my experience openSUSE takes a long time to install (1.5 hours
    >>> as opposed to about 20 minutes for CentOS), but when it's done it
    >>> correctly identifies the hardware. I've got "trailing edge
    >>> technology" so I'm sure it installs much more quickly on new
    >>> hardware.

    >>
    >> No doubt about it being the slowest, or one of the slowest, at
    >> installing. It worked fine with everything I had, too. It wasn't my
    >> cup of tea as far as linux goes, but I sure can't complain about how
    >> it worked with the hardware I was using at the time.

    >
    > I'm glad you said "one of the slowest".
    >
    > Gentoo takes far longer to install, but when it is installed it fits
    > your machine like a kid glove and you only ever do it once.


    Didn't you do a Linux From Scratch install? Is it worth the time?



  8. Re: 5 days wasted installing Linux Suse

    On 2008-10-21, Gregory Shearman claimed:
    > On 2008-10-21, Sinister Midget wrote:
    >> On 2008-10-21, RonB claimed:
    >>> Sinister Midget wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Back when I used SuSE I had it on a laptop. At least 2 different
    >>>> versions. Didn't have any problems. In fact, it was the first and only
    >>>> one for awhile that found the wireless card and set it up without a
    >>>> hitch. The other varieties required downloads and compiles, or never
    >>>> saw the card at all.
    >>>>
    >>>> Toshibas used to be known problems. They might still be
    >>>
    >>> In my experience openSUSE takes a long time to install (1.5 hours as opposed
    >>> to about 20 minutes for CentOS), but when it's done it correctly identifies
    >>> the hardware. I've got "trailing edge technology" so I'm sure it installs
    >>> much more quickly on new hardware.

    >>
    >> No doubt about it being the slowest, or one of the slowest, at
    >> installing. It worked fine with everything I had, too. It wasn't my cup
    >> of tea as far as linux goes, but I sure can't complain about how it
    >> worked with the hardware I was using at the time.

    >
    > I'm glad you said "one of the slowest".
    >
    > Gentoo takes far longer to install, but when it is installed it fits
    > your machine like a kid glove and you only ever do it once.


    I dick around too much to spend the time installing Gentoo. I tried it
    a couple of times when it was new. I actually got through it once. But
    it didn't take me long to mess it up because I can never seem to leave
    well enough alone.

    I actually had better luck with Sabayon (duh!). But I also screwed it
    up faster.

    --
    Welcome to Hell! Here's your copy of Windows.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2