why so much schism?
location: ubuntuforums.com - date: February 1, 2013
Well, that's actually a dumb question. There would be no schism whatsoever if everything hadn't changed with the advent of gnome3. At the end of 2010, there was gnome 2.3 and it was awesome. It was light, attractive and extremely customizable.
With the introduction of Gnome3, from the very get-go, we had no less than 4 options: Gnome Shell, Unity, Unity 2D, and gnome classic. Despite all of the choice available, many users (myself included) found themselves as desktop refugees, forced from their familiar stomping grounds to new, strange territory where things that used to work didn't work anymore. Things that you used to be able to change, you couldn't change anymore. The Gnome desktop lost virtually all of it's customizability, making simple things like changing your metacity theme nearly impossible.
In response, the community of users fired back by doing one of two things: either jumping ship and crossing over to another DE like XFCE, KDE, LXDE or Enlightenment. And in tu
why so much ado about packet management?
location: linuxquestions.com - date: December 27, 2005
i can't understand where all this ado about packet management comes from.
i can understand people moan about rpms and their dependencies trap and dispersion, about sources and the need of compiling everything and so on. but there are ports or apt-get for rpms, there is the portage, there is the alien and many other programs.
after all installing is just copying the right files in the right places, sometimes preceded with compilation, isn't it?
why can't one distribution support many packet management methods?
could you please explain it to me or tell me where i could find the answer(s)?
So much Slackware love...
location: linuxquestions.com - date: March 9, 2014
It warms my hear to see such a busy forum for an old friend. I started using Slack back in the 90's. Here recently, I read some articles explaining it was a less relevant distro today. Given the number of posts here, that's clearly not the case. Some of it appears to be collateral damage from hasty decision making in other distributions, that's okay though... More people will just see why Slack is near and dear to a lot Linux users.
Anyone who remembers 1.x Kernel days.
How do you know so much about Ubuntu?
location: ubuntuforums.com - date: July 22, 2010
I see so many posts getting solved every day by you guys. How did you learn so much about Ubuntu? The terminal must have thousands of codes that are usable. Do you have a file with all these codes? Just interested in how you guys/girls know so much.
what is trackerstore (and similar names) doing taking so much CPU time
location: linuxquestions.com - date: February 4, 2011
what is tracker-store (and similar names) doing taking so much CPU time
top -5 shows high CPU usage
what does tracker-store (and similar) accomplish.
I didn't see tracker-store on the services list
Why does Apple charge so much?
location: ubuntuforums.com - date: October 24, 2008
2000 for a laptop that can't even play games well?
Their pricing is insane.
LXer: What Red Hat Has Done is Worth So Much More Than a Billion
location: linuxquestions.com - date: March 29, 2012
Published at LXer:
Red Hat is widely expected to crack a billion dollars in revenue in todayís earning call. This achievement will finally put to bed the argument that "nobody can make money with open source." I want to congratulate Red Hat for this incredible achievement. However, I would also like to use this occasion to show that there is significantly more at play here. It isn't just the billion dollars Red Hat is making with open source; there are many more reasons why Linux and open source are fundamental building blocks of the future:
How did you people manage to be successful with Linux? It is so much trouble. (Try no
location: linuxquestions.com - date: May 18, 2005
Ever since I switched to Linux my computer has wasted away because I can do nothing productive with it, I cannot get on the internet even though I have tried very hard to, I cannot use my Bluetooth hardware and I cannot use my internal wireless. I have no idea how you guys managed to get Linux to be a fully functioning OS, how? Especially since all hardware seems only to be compatible with windows and not with Linux. My computer has so many cool things to utilize but Linux canít seem to like windows could. I now think that Linux is not ready for the standard home computer. I know I sound like I'm just complaining and I sound like a child but I have to know how Linux is ready; a lot of you say it is, so please tell me how itís ready. Look Iím not trying to take cheap shots at Linux but Iím just trying to put things the way I see them, so donít get mad at me, just tell me how something that is so difficult is ready for an average person.
I hate to say this but I think I might go back
Several Distros not recognizing network adapter AND so much more...
location: linuxquestions.com - date: March 31, 2012
Why is everybody hating on officers in Linux distros?
Every time my computer starts a LiveCD, it says "booting the kernel". What did the poor guy do?
But, seriously folks.
I have been a Windows user for a lot of years.(with the exception of the past seven or so when I was out in the bush with basically no modern conveniences, so I am relearning A LOT) and now I get the feeling that Linux is a much more no frills way of handling many applications.
I have attempted a simple burn and load(to cd) operation of a bunch of distros most have not been successes. Tried PCLinuxOS(all four of 'em),AntIX ,Mepis,DebianLive. Of these; all loaded with not much more than "vga=0x314 nomodeset" as a modification pre-boot(that idea I found here,gratefully) BUT no wireless networking detected.But a least they finished a boot to a desktop. Still, I am cluelessly green here
Next was Fedora 16(booted[some of the time] then froze after stating "bad t
So much memory is lost... or maybe not?
location: ubuntuforums.com - date: August 10, 2010
You don't believe the "free" command? It says: your system (without Buffer/Cache) is consuming more than a gig?
You run some "ps aux"/"ps -eF"/Ö and can't believe all those tiny pits are "more than a gig"? There's only firefox with >100mb, this is not plausible?
sum=0; for i in $(ps -eo rss); do sum=$[$sum+$i]; done; echo $sum
I didn't believe either. I summed up (mental arithmetic) the bigger ones... ~200mb. free said: 700MB... wow...
But this way I know now: Yes. 700MB is indeed plausible. And without shared libs it would be "more than a gig"
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10