Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Alternative Operating Systems > XGL Desktop for Linux

XGL Desktop for Linux (Page 2)
Thread Tools
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 21, 2007, 06:26 PM
 
Indeed. With Linux, basic functionality is an unreasonable expectation.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 21, 2007, 10:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Indeed. With Linux, basic functionality is an unreasonable expectation.

Has all of your Linux experience been on PowerPC Macs? Just wondering...
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 22, 2007, 12:57 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
and designed for your hardware, PPC support in Ubuntu seems to be a mere afterthought. I've read reviews of Ubuntu where everything worked like magic out of the book (on a i386 system), and I've read of users having odd problems such as yourself (although perhaps not quite as bad) - your report is not terribly surprising. It sounds like you had some unrealistic expectations resulting in you getting some sort of generic trackpad and video driver, and no bluetooth support...

Not to sound like a complete jackass, but you could have done a little more research and found out that it was likely you'd run into problems such as this on your PPC laptop.
Ubuntu, and Linux in general, is fine so long as you remember it isn't OS X, and it never will be. It takes some getting used to, and you have to be willing to get intimate with the machine's internals.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Aron Peterson
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 22, 2007, 06:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Indeed. With Linux, basic functionality is an unreasonable expectation.
WIth so few PPC computers to support one would at least expect that Ubuntu could detect it is being run on a PowerBook and install a trackpad driver. It doesn't come close. It doesn't detect a computer model or trackpad, and installs a generic mouse driver.

To make thing even more iffy, it's not easy to assign a right-click key. You have to dig around and modify config files manually. Yep, no control panel option. And the default right-click modifier is banally F12!

Ubuntu has years of development behind it if you include the branch of Debian it split from, yet the only improvements it has made this millenium that a user can see on the surface is a better package manager and curved corners. Control panels are still a disaster. Ubuntu's site makes a big deal about Bluetooth support but where is it? There's just too little progress this side of the millenium. Now take a look how much OS X has changed since 2000. It would take Linux years to achieve the same rate of progress.

Back to XGL and Beryl, it goes to show that special effects aren't enough to sell a desktop operating system. Apple has done a very good job at balancing visual technologies with actual usability, that's something Linux (and to some extent Windows) developers aren't coming close to achieving. As a desktop OS, Linux is near useless. Stick it on a server. That's all it is good for.
Web dev, Poe, faux-naïf, keyboard warrior, often found imitating online contrarians . My stuff : DELL XPS, iPhone 6
     
kick52
Baninated
Join Date: May 2005
Location: England
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 22, 2007, 06:14 AM
 
Originally Posted by Aron Peterson View Post
Last I heard neither has been ported to Linux PPC.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 22, 2007, 10:32 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
Ubuntu, and Linux in general, is fine so long as you remember it isn't OS X, and it never will be. It takes some getting used to, and you have to be willing to get intimate with the machine's internals.
No argument there.

OS X is a better Desktop OS than Linux, Linux is a much better server OS.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 22, 2007, 10:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by Aron Peterson View Post
WIth so few PPC computers to support one would at least expect that Ubuntu could detect it is being run on a PowerBook and install a trackpad driver. It doesn't come close. It doesn't detect a computer model or trackpad, and installs a generic mouse driver.

To make thing even more iffy, it's not easy to assign a right-click key. You have to dig around and modify config files manually. Yep, no control panel option. And the default right-click modifier is banally F12!

Ubuntu has years of development behind it if you include the branch of Debian it split from, yet the only improvements it has made this millenium that a user can see on the surface is a better package manager and curved corners. Control panels are still a disaster. Ubuntu's site makes a big deal about Bluetooth support but where is it? There's just too little progress this side of the millenium. Now take a look how much OS X has changed since 2000. It would take Linux years to achieve the same rate of progress.

Back to XGL and Beryl, it goes to show that special effects aren't enough to sell a desktop operating system. Apple has done a very good job at balancing visual technologies with actual usability, that's something Linux (and to some extent Windows) developers aren't coming close to achieving. As a desktop OS, Linux is near useless. Stick it on a server. That's all it is good for.

What's with all of this "expect"? Ubuntu is a community driven project. What comes out of Ubuntu depends on who is involved in the development of Ubuntu.

PPC support has never been a big priority with most open source development. There is a lot of stuff that doesn't compile on PPC within OS X, even after several years of OS X being in use. There simply aren't many developers using PPC Macs that are interested in getting stuff to work on PPC hardware, for one because up until now the people that bought PPC Macs were fully intending to run OS X. With Intel Macs out now, there is very little reason for this to change. However, there is now a lot of interest in getting Intel Macs working. This is far easier.

As far as right click goes, again, the community is not interested in bending over to support Macs in this regard. Refining Ubuntu on i386 (non Mac) hardware is a far more interesting goal to most. However, I'm sure somebody has figured out how to deal with the lack of the right click on Macs, if you were to do a little research here.

Regarding Beryl, is your video card supported? Have you looked into this?

Regarding the rest of your rant, yes, Linux is not as well suited as a Desktop OS for home users. Apple provides a comfortable bubble for its users that is not matched under Ubuntu. However, it is ready to be used in many environments that involve coming up with hardware/software "builds", because it is possible to configure Ubuntu to be an effective Desktop OS on the right hardware, and there are many job environments where computer usage is predictable and fully supported under Ubuntu.

I'm also wondering why you didn't try out the Ubuntu Live CD before actually installing stuff? No offense, but your ranting is hard to take all that serious when it seems like you haven't done some basic research. Linux is not designed to be a drop-in just-add-water replacement for OS X at all. It works on a massive range of hardware (more so than Windows even), and given all that has been said, I'm not clear as to why it seems to come as a surprise to you that it runs on some hardware better than others?
( Last edited by besson3c; Apr 22, 2007 at 11:14 AM. )
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 22, 2007, 11:03 AM
 
I will say, however, that Linux on fully supported hardware offers the following advantages over OS X as a Desktop OS:

- Can be much snappier. As a whole, no matter how you dress things up and spin the truth, OS X GUI operation can still be sluggish even on a Macbook Pro (keep in mind that Linux is not optimized to run on PPC hardware, for those who have only experienced Linux there. Also keep in mind that one can choose which window manager they wish to run, which includes a selection of really lightweight ones, for those that don't need or want all the bells and whistles).
- No crappy Finder to deal with
- Far more configurable, more hands-on access to things
- Free upgrades
- More hardware choice

Of course, OS X does many things better too: power management on laptops (most likely), detection of displays, software availability, more GUI focused design, etc.

I provide this list simply to offer my perspective on the primary motivation of looking into using Ubuntu as a Desktop OS. If nothing in my list appeals to you, you have very little reason to look at anything else.
     
Aron Peterson
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 22, 2007, 11:08 AM
 
[QUOTE]
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
PPC support has never been a big priority with most open source development. There is a lot of stuff that doesn't compile on PPC within OS X, even after several years of OS X being in use. There simply aren't many developers using PPC Macs that are interested in getting stuff to work on PPC hardware, for one because up until now the people that bought PPC Macs were fully intending to run OS X.
Yes, but c'mon, a trackpad driver is hard to write, detect or install? And why isn't there a trackpad control panel? Or a Bluetooth one when Ubuntu are making noise about supporting BT devices?

As far as right click goes, again, the community is not interested in bending over to support Macs in this regard.
It's F12 on PPC and Intel (there's no difference between either builds except the compile). There's no excusing how illogical that is.

I'm also wondering why you didn't try out the Ubuntu Live CD before actually installing stuff?
You know I did. I said so already before I installed it. However, there's no documentation to tell you if the Live CD simply loads a generic install with basic drivers or if it takes full advantage of the hardware.

There's no way of knowing from the Live CD or scant documentation if Ubuntu will install a trackpad driver, if the new GUI effects (very basic ones at that) will run on a Geforce 5x00, if Ubuntu will map right-click properly to the Mac keyboard. For instance, during the Live CD boot it doesn't ask anything about what kind of keyboard you have. During a real installation you are asked what kind of keyboard you are using. It shows a list of keyboards and allows you to choose US Mac Keyboard. Fine. So why not also automatically map right click and activate the Command key which does nothing once Ubuntu boots up? It's bloody easy for a developer to make that happen.

Obviously the Live CD also runs very very slowly because menus, control panels and apps have to load off the CD after the OS has booted. It's not a realistic way to determine how Ubuntu will run on any machine, PPC or Intel. You have to install it and go through the install's set up to find out what Ubuntu really will and won't support, or is unable to do because of bad development.
Web dev, Poe, faux-naïf, keyboard warrior, often found imitating online contrarians . My stuff : DELL XPS, iPhone 6
     
Aron Peterson
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 22, 2007, 11:17 AM
 
- Can be much snappier.

I didn't see it. They're equally fast, except that with Ubuntu you're back to using an interface from 1999.

- No crappy Finder to deal with

How is file management better on Linux?

- Far more configurable, more hands-on access to things

I don't see how considering OS X is a Unix and many developers have hacked into very deep levels of the OS.

- Free upgrades

Obviously. But free also means sh!t most of the time. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys the saying goes.

- More hardware choice

Only CPUs the OS can run on. If you're talking about internal and external peripherals the Mac has far more support. Try setting up video capture cards, fiber channel cars, Blu-ray writers, eight button mice, drawing tablets, etc. on Linux. Macs have far more driver support.
Web dev, Poe, faux-naïf, keyboard warrior, often found imitating online contrarians . My stuff : DELL XPS, iPhone 6
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 22, 2007, 11:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by Aron Peterson View Post
- Can be much snappier.

I didn't see it. They're equally fast, except that with Ubuntu you're back to using an interface from 1999.
Your experience is based on your PPC install, which as I've said, is not particularly optimized. Secondly, there are a myriad of window manager options available, as has also been said.

- No crappy Finder to deal with

How is file management better on Linux?
The fact the Finder locks up and becomes unresponsive when a network volume goes away is completely unacceptable - very 1999.

- Far more configurable, more hands-on access to things

I don't see how considering OS X is a Unix and many developers have hacked into very deep levels of the OS.
OS X is not designed to be open ended in its usage, or else Apple would have provided pluggable architectures for each layer of its OS. Open source communities do not dictate policy the way Apple does. This has its pros and cons, of course, but it really isn't debatable that Linux is more configurable by design.

- Free upgrades

Obviously. But free also means sh!t most of the time. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys the saying goes.
You also get people assuming that the value is there just because it costs money. There are many open source products that work better than their commercial counterparts, and many people who buy things like .Mac assuming that the same features they are interested in aren't available elsewhere at a cheaper price.

Apple develops a good product, but they also benefit from users with poor research skills who are happy to fork over money simply out of trust. Of course, this applies to Windows too.

- More hardware choice

Only CPUs the OS can run on. If you're talking about internal and external peripherals the Mac has far more support. Try setting up video capture cards, fiber channel cars, Blu-ray writers, eight button mice, drawing tablets, etc. on Linux. Macs have far more driver support.
Sorry Aaron, but you don't know what you are talking about.

- Video capture cards? Are you familiar with the Hauppauge product line? Do these products work on the Mac? Where are all the Mac PVRs?

- Fiber channel cars? What are those?

- Blu-ray writers, possibly, OS X is a very content creation centric platform

- 8 button mice, sorry, not giving you that one. A mouse is a mouse, and yes, you can get 8 button mice working.

what about video cards? Storage options (SAN, hardware RAID, etc.)? Why isn't OS X running on any embedded devices?

Linux supports the most hardware out of any OS out there, period. This is not a surprise either, given that it is an open source product. Palm will be running Linux, TiVO already does, many network appliances run OSes such as NetBSD... There are a *ton* of odd appliances and odd embedded devices and such running Linux/Unix, for a reason. If you *really* want to have this argument, you'd fare better arguing for Windows than OS X.

If you want to continue to argue for the sake of arguing, I seriously suggest that you do some homework first.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 22, 2007, 12:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Has all of your Linux experience been on PowerPC Macs? Just wondering...
I was actually just repeating what you said. It was meant as a kind of pointed joke.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 22, 2007, 12:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
I was actually just repeating what you said. It was meant as a kind of pointed joke.
huh? I'm confused...
     
Evoken
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 02:09 AM
 
I have watched a couple of similar videos. The effects may be o.k. for the first minute or two but after that it makes your head hurt and just get in the way.

Effects aside, I see no reason to spend time with Linux nor do I see anything that makes it better than OS X. That and it doesn't runs Adobe's set of creative applications. So, it is not really a viable platform in my view.


Evo
     
Kevin
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 07:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I'm willing to bet there are many more customization options than there are in OS X.

It would be interesting to compare usability testing data between this cube implementation vs. Spaces in Leopard.
That would only matter if what you do on the OS X box can be replicated on the Linux one.

In my case, Linux simply isn't an option. Not even in the ballpark.

If you just use OS X to surf the web or whatever then ok. But if you do anything professional on it as far as graphics or multi-media goes, this having "more options" is pretty irrelevant.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 08:32 AM
 
Here is a fair and balanced Ubuntu vs. Vista comparison:

Ubuntu Linux Vs. Windows Vista: The Battle For Your Desktop -- Ubuntu Linux, Windows Vista

The conclusion seems to be that Ubuntu is not as far along as Vista yet, particularly in hardware detection/support, but may be suitable for some people. The author also seems to feel that Ubuntu is constantly improving and getting better.

I skim read most of the review, but it all seems pretty agreeable.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 08:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by Evoken View Post
I have watched a couple of similar videos. The effects may be o.k. for the first minute or two but after that it makes your head hurt and just get in the way.

Effects aside, I see no reason to spend time with Linux nor do I see anything that makes it better than OS X. That and it doesn't runs Adobe's set of creative applications. So, it is not really a viable platform in my view.
If content creation is your thing, it is not a viable platform. It may be for some others.
     
Aron Peterson
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 08:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
If content creation is your thing, it is not a viable platform. It may be for some others.
Screw that content creation theory of yours, Bess. From a pure usability point of view Ubuntu sucks monkey bollocks compared to OS X. That's probably why you haven't installed it yet
Web dev, Poe, faux-naïf, keyboard warrior, often found imitating online contrarians . My stuff : DELL XPS, iPhone 6
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 08:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by Aron Peterson View Post
Screw that content creation theory of yours, Bess. From a pure usability point of view Ubuntu sucks monkey bollocks compared to OS X. That's probably why you haven't installed it yet

I haven't installed it yet because I still use CS2 and Flash from time to time and don't have Windows versions to run in WINE, because I only have a PPC Mac, and because my OS X workflow isn't broken and I'm reticent to disrupt it. However, OS X is becoming more and more like a pretty xterm and HTML editor to me each day.

However, there are days that the Finder pisses me off enough to entertain this notion some more, there are occasionally some apps and things that I want to run that would run better under Linux, and I'm already using several open source apps such as Thunderbird and Firefox anyway (I retired OS X Mail).

On the other hand, I still need to test Safari, and occasionally support clients with Mac-specific issues. I suppose that neither OS is perfect for me right now. *sigh*

Yes, Linux has some usability issues, but I can cope as an advanced user. As an emerging small business, I also appreciate the economic value of leaning heavily on open source software. I'm sure I've saved hundreds of dollars this way over going with Windows, and OS X server would have been a disaster.


BTW, my name is actually "besson3c", according to my birth certificate.
( Last edited by besson3c; Apr 30, 2007 at 09:22 AM. )
     
Aron Peterson
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 09:02 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I haven't installed it yet because I still use CS2 and Flash from time to time, because I only have a PPC Mac, and because my OS X workflow isn't broken and I'm reticent to disrupt it.
That never stopped me from trying out and install so that I could experience something before talking about it.

However, there are days that the Finder pisses me off enough to entertain this notion some more, there are occasionally some apps and things that I want to run that would run better under Linux, and I'm already using several open source apps such as Thunderbird and Firefox anyway (I retired OS X Mail).
If you think there's a problem with the Finder you'll love file management in Ubuntu, if you can stand the site of it.

Did you enjoy trying to import all your Address Book contacts and old mail into the final release of Thunderbird?

Yes, Linux has some usability issues, but I can cope as an advanced user. A
You're too ironic. Advanced user...
Web dev, Poe, faux-naïf, keyboard warrior, often found imitating online contrarians . My stuff : DELL XPS, iPhone 6
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 09:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by Aron Peterson View Post
That never stopped me from trying out and install so that I could experience something before talking about it.
Assumptions again? I run Gentoo at work, my two colleagues run Ubuntu (I may join them and ditch my Gentoo workstation for Ubuntu), I'm paid to work within Redhat Enterprise and Solaris everyday, and am heavily entrenched in FreeBSD too. I have plenty of experience running Linux/Unix. Hardware detection experiences vary, my colleagues had no problems getting their Desktops to work under Ubuntu, so it isn't a given that my running Ubuntu at work would match your experiences running Ubuntu on your PPC laptop.

If you think there's a problem with the Finder you'll love file management in Ubuntu, if you can stand the site of it.
I don't need much except for performance that isn't pure ass and doesn't wig out all the time. I've been far more impressed with the network connectivity under Gnome so far.

Did you enjoy trying to import all your Address Book contacts and old mail into the final release of Thunderbird?
Didn't bother, still use Address Book. Don't use POP either, partially because it is a PITA. The mail format issue is an issue prevalent across all clients, BTW, seeing how there is no set standard that all clients abide by.


You're too ironic. Advanced user...
Yes Aron, I'm an advanced user. Part of the territory is not being the first in line to try every new distro and to constantly change my setup.

What is with this confrontational tone?
     
Aron Peterson
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 12:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Assumptions again? I run Gentoo at work, my two colleagues run Ubuntu (I may join them and ditch my Gentoo workstation for Ubuntu), I'm paid to work within Redhat Enterprise and Solaris everyday, and am heavily entrenched in FreeBSD too. I have plenty of experience running Linux/Unix.

Caught you lying too much before to believe you now.

Hardware detection experiences vary, my colleagues had no problems getting their Desktops to work under Ubuntu, so it isn't a given that my running Ubuntu at work would match your experiences running Ubuntu on your PPC laptop.
It's **** on any Mac laptop, PPC or Intel and many non-Macs too. Can't speak about the current Ubuntu for desktop yet.


Didn't bother, still use Address Book.
Fair enough. Just wanted you to know that Thunderbird for Mac can't import Address Book contacts, vCard format or email from Mail.app
Web dev, Poe, faux-naïf, keyboard warrior, often found imitating online contrarians . My stuff : DELL XPS, iPhone 6
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 01:17 PM
 
Lying Aron? WTF?

A little PMS this morning?
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 04:48 PM
 
Does this forum LOOK like the Lounge? It is NOT! Let's keep things civil. Aron, how did you "catch" beeson3c "lying?"

And isn't it obvious to the most casual observer that everyone's experience with ANY Linux distro is going to vary depending on what distro version, what hardware, the phase of the moon, and anything else that happens in the general vicinity? I've installed the same distro of Mandrake three times on the same PC (using the default, automated installation) and got three very different results. Your mileage WILL VARY GREATLY unless you use exactly the same hardware AND do your installation in EXACTLY the same way under EXACTLY the same conditions.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 05:15 PM
 
I ate a whale for breakfast.
     
kick52
Baninated
Join Date: May 2005
Location: England
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 06:15 PM
 
ubuntu is trying to make a linux desktop os like OS X and windows, but it just isnt atm. ubuntu is just noob linux with a (not very user friendly) interface. with ubuntu, it doesnt 'just work' normaly, and isnt ideal for anyone that doesnt know about linux etc.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 06:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by kick52 View Post
i think ubuntu is trying to make linux user friendly like OS X and windows, but it just isnt atm.

ubuntu is just noob linux with a (not very user friendly) interface.

Noob Debian, to be precise. It is a perfectly capable and powerful Linux though, unlike Linspire.
     
Evoken
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 06:27 PM
 
besson3c,

What is a good version of Linux to try on an intel iMac using Parallels? I have no previous experience with Linux. I have heard that SUSE is easy to get into, it is quite a large download tho.


Evo
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 06:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by Evoken View Post
besson3c,

What is a good version of Linux to try on an intel iMac using Parallels? I have no previous experience with Linux. I have heard that SUSE is easy to get into, it is quite a large download tho.


Evo


What are your goals and priorities? What kind of computing are you most interested in?
     
Evoken
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 06:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
What are your goals and priorities? What kind of computing are you most interested in?
Well, as I said above, I do not consider it a viable platform. I simply want to try it out and see what it is like, maybe do some web browsing, use the GIMP, OpenOffice, etc all in the spirit of experimentation.


Evo
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 06:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by Evoken View Post
Well, as I said above, I do not consider it a viable platform. I simply want to try it out and see what it is like, maybe do some web browsing, use the GIMP, OpenOffice, etc all in the spirit of experimentation.

I'm assuming that you are a content creation person, and that is why you don't see it as viable? Obviously Linux is viable (and even preferred) in a number of computing areas, as has been discussed here before.

Different Linux distros have different specializations and focuses. There are a number for enterprise/high performance computing and for running as a server (e.g. Redhat Enterprise, SuSE, etc.)

SuSE is designed to work with Novell's stuff, from what I can gather (I've never used it). Novell just worked out some sort of legal patent deal with Microsoft recently, so many aren't completely sure what direction Novell will take the OS at this point.

Some (e.g. Gentoo, Slackware) are designed for power users who want a highly optimized and customized OS.

If you are looking to run a personal small-scale server, FreeBSD may be a very good bet. It is the most similar to OS X out of all options. I run it myself on my own server.

If you are looking for security, there are hardened Linuxes and OSes like NetBSD that would be a good bet.

Ubuntu is the closest thing in existence to a Desktop OS designed for the mainstream, but another option is Fedora. Ubuntu has a lot of momentum and support right now, and is constantly improving. As many here have noted, with Ubuntu and any other Linux, hardware support can be a challenge, but once you have the Ubuntu up and running it would probably be the easiest to cut your teeth with.

Most of these choices should work with the Macbook, but you'll find varying success in getting things like wireless and power management working well. My sense is that Ubuntu would probably be your best bet in this regard for your Macbook, as a number of people have gotten most, if not all hardware supported under Ubuntu on Intel Macs. This seems to be a pretty common combination, and I know there is a lot of help online for setting up a dual booting setup and for getting the Parallels provided hardware working properly.


I would *definitely* recommend that before you install anything that you boot up off the Ubuntu Live CD so that you can get an advanced preview as to what to expect. If things do not work properly off the Live CD, don't bother installing anything, you won't get far.

Another popular Live CD option is Knoppix. It is commonly used as an evangelism tool, as it includes Open Office and a number of other applications right on the CD. You might benefit from giving this a boot and poking around too.
     
Evoken
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 07:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I'm assuming that you are a content creation person, and that is why you don't see it as viable?
Yeah, that is the reason why I don't see it as a viable platform.

Ubuntu is the closest thing in existence to a Desktop OS designed for the mainstream, but another option is Fedora. Ubuntu has a lot of momentum and support right now, and is constantly improving. As many here have noted, with Ubuntu and any other Linux, hardware support can be a challenge, but once you have the Ubuntu up and running it would probably be the easiest to cut your teeth with.
Thanks for the comprehensive overview. I am downloading Ubuntu now and will try to install it under parallels. I will not be doing dual boot or partitioning my HD. Will just create a virtual machine with Ubuntu in it. That way I do not run into the same problems Aron ran into.

I would *definitely* recommend that before you install anything that you boot up off the Ubuntu Live CD so that you can get an advanced preview as to what to expect. If things do not work properly off the Live CD, don't bother installing anything, you won't get far.
Is a live CD just burning the disk image I am downloading and booting from it? Does it matters if I burn the iso using Disk Utility?


Thanks,
Evo
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 07:26 PM
 
Yeah, I believe CD 1 is the Live CD. Give it a try.

It you are downloading Fiesty Fawn (7.04), you probably won't get the XGL/Compviz/Beryl stuff, unless the Parallels emulated video card is beefy enough.
     
Evoken
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 07:29 PM
 
It is the 7.04 version. How much video ram does it takes to run XGL? I installed Vista in parallels and it does not runs Aero. I think the emulated video memory is 32 mb max(?).
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 08:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by Evoken View Post
It is the 7.04 version. How much video ram does it takes to run XGL? I installed Vista in parallels and it does not runs Aero. I think the emulated video memory is 32 mb max(?).
I'm not sure. What card does Parallels emulate anyway?
     
Evoken
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 08:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I'm not sure. What card does Parallels emulate anyway?
I did a quick search and it seems that Parallels emulates a generic 32 MB card. That won't run Vista, even without Aero, at any reasonable speed. It will not run XGL either.


Evo
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 08:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by Evoken View Post
I did a quick search and it seems that Parallels emulates a generic 32 MB card. That won't run Vista, even without Aero, at any reasonable speed. It will not run XGL either.


Evo
That is why OS X really needs a product, such as Xen, that will offer full virtualization, as opposed to para-virtualization.
     
Evoken
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 10:54 PM
 
Well I installed it and got it up and running:

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q...oom/ubuntu.jpg

I am posting from it, no problems so far. Screen resolution seems to be limited to 1024x768 tho.


Evo
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2007, 11:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Evoken View Post
Well I installed it and got it up and running:

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q...oom/ubuntu.jpg

I am posting from it, no problems so far. Screen resolution seems to be limited to 1024x768 tho.


Evo

There was a thread not too long ago in this forum about how to get higher resolution.
     
Evoken
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 1, 2007, 12:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
There was a thread not too long ago in this forum about how to get higher resolution.
Ah, thanks! Found it. Going to try it now.


Evo
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:08 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,