Mr. Brockmeier seems to be toeing the Novell line i his comments as well as responses to your questions.

I notice he puts much greater emphasis into listing all the new features/capabilities of Gnome, to the exclusion of similar praise for KDE.

In answering your question, he again placed more emphasis on Microsoft Office "compatibility" against the "generic" greater value of OpenOffice. This attitude reflects the very odious and continuing destructive position that Novell - filtered down to OpenSuse - has that is destructive to general GNU/Linux - particularly "all other distros" - and to their own benefit - in a very specious way.

"Viruses, spyware, and other forms of malware simply don't affect Linux."

The same untruth that Apple spouts all the time about its OS.

I am truly impressed by this release. It is blazing fast, intuitive, stable and visually attractive. Pity that FF 3.0 is not included (I know, I know, one can update from repositories) on the other hand Opera is already on DVD.

Anyway, I can recomend the distro to everybody.

"Among the included applications in the final release distribution -- now available as a DVD image in .ISO format -- are the final Firefox 3.0 release..."

Here's another source of Linux info. Also overshadowed by Firefox's big day was the release of WINE 1.0 — 15 years in the making!

For me, the price. I am not a power user, but I have found nothing windows can do for me that suse can't. It runs falcon 4.0 and Bridge Commander. and open office does everything that MS office does.

Windows Vista:"everyone has a few problems, right Linux"

Windows Vista:"everyone has a few problems, right Linux"

Windows Vista :"everyone has a few problems, right Linux"

LOL

LOL...indeed.

open office does everything that MS office does.

I'm pretty excited about this release.

I used to install Suse 10.3 under Paralles on the iMac, but now that I've gone PC only, I'm hoping I can install something like Virtual PC on my XP rig and install Suse 11 under it.

I do sort of wish that this release included the fully finalized version of the next Open Office release, but hey, beggers can't be choosers.

Cheers!

Its There !!!!!
i have been using it since the first Alpha.

Good Job folks

Ceers

If you're unfamiliar with linux this is not a distro you want as a newbie. There are too many choices for apps. This will almost certainly leave you dazed and confused.

If you want to learn about linux,and are prepared to spend some time with it, this is the best you'll find. The manual that came with the old 6.2 distro is still the best linux instruction book I've seen. Most of the info is still valid.

Too bad this won't get anywhere near the press of the firefox release.

I've got the livecd of the latest RC and it runs pretty well.

Seems more intuitive to me than Ubuntu.

*shrug*

That's the thing about Linux though, there's no "one way" to do anything.

That's also its curse and why it will never ever get anywhere near consumer desktop mass use. Too many cooks spoil the broth. If the community could ever get its act together on one distro...

...waitaminute.

Hasn't *NIX in genreal been trying for that will complete lack of success for over 20 YEARS?

All that being said, if any distro was a candidate for mass use, this would be it, if only because it has a reasonably large company behind it as opposed to all the myriad propellerhead distros.

Heh..

That was kind of my point, just didn't want to be called a troll for being more direct about it. ;)

Ubuntu stands as much as, if not more of a chance.

It wouldn't surprise me if Mark Shuttleworth (Canonical / Ubuntu) had more money in his back pocket than Novells entire market cap.

hah!

That's also its curse and why it will never ever get anywhere near consumer desktop mass use. Too many cooks spoil the broth

Thats not why.

Unless things have changed in the last couple years and its been a couple years since i've been to a Linux support forum but it was nothing but geek speak that the average person wouldn't understand.

They should learn from windows keep it simple with lots of pictures.

That too is part of the problem. It's an enthusiast's medium and has no concept of userkind in general.

No one's going to call you a troll but it takes a lot more than money to get something to gain market share.

It takes a perceived corporate presence and branding and scoff as you will, Novell actually has one.

An unknown doesn't.

http://ubuntuforums.org/

'nuff said

Novell is an unknown. Most non-geeks have never heard of them. They haven't had a successful product since Microsoft killed them off as a competitor ~2000.

Ubuntu and Novell are on pretty level playing ground.

...except that Novell has a brand label and a distribution channel, at least more so than Ubuntu does.

*tilt*

Sure, in your opinion maybe.

The day that Dell did this:

http://www.dell.com/cont...s=19&l=en&s=dhs

Ubuntu desktop marketshare and mindshare grew past Novell, and every other distro builder in it's path.

Distribution channel? WTF? You are still stuck in the proprietary software mindset that software needs a distribution channel?

ISOs, downloaded w/ Bittorrent. Hmm maybe Novells ISOs download faster?

hrmm, maybe you don't know what you are talking about.

I think that's closer to the right answer. :-D

'nuff said

Still for advanced users only.

Spent about 20mins browsing the forum and still think most people would be confused.

Absolute Beginner Talk
The perfect starting place to find out more about computers, Linux and Ubuntu.

http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=73

Boy, this looks so much easier:
http://forums.microsoft....ID=844384&SiteID=17

:rollseyes:

weird double post! this hasn't happened in a while!

"Hasn't *NIX in genreal been trying for that will complete lack of success for over 20 YEARS?"

Actually, no they haven't.

Its only in forums such as this where users have lamented the fact that thee is not some magical ubiquitous single UNIX.

Ironically, the single largest installed UNIX base that comes closest to what your refer is Apple's OSX. Ooops! And we all know this will cause quite a few here to freak.

For the most part each developer has been quite content to live with a version that is closely tied to a particular hardware platform with only minimal attempts to extend their particular platform beyond that.

In fact, Linux has assumed the role of the portable 'baby UNIX' for instances when the full blown power of one of the closely linked implementations of UNIX is not required.

Price / performance, Unix can't touch Linux anymore. Performance of cluster computing, again Unix can't touch Linux. A single image system like a superdome (by single image I mean one partition containing all cells) is slower than a well tuned Linux cluster and it's 1,000 times more expensive.

MacOS has 4% of desktop Unix, but that's not arguable since MacOS on servers has less than 1% where Linux has over 40% on servers and 2% on desktops.

4+1=5
40+2=42

;-)

The Linux propellerheads need to realize that 90% of computingkind barely have a clue as to where the "on" button is.

They can't seem to grasp that simple concept.

Until they do and start designing and coding accordingly, Linux is at best an "also ran" on the desktop.

Companies like Novell, with devs who are infinitely more customer oriented than the average Linux weenie, are the only ones with half a chance of gaining any meaningful consumer desktop market share.

I certainly don't expect many of the readers of this thread to "get it" but those are the realities of life. Windows is in no small part successful because it has a superlative "out of the box" experience which Linux will **NEVER EVER** (did I underscore that enough? probably not) have.

And THAT is...

...'nuff said.

Solaris is much more powerful than Linux for servers and scientific applications. It easily beats Linux in cluster computing performance. It's had the same type of virtualization technology for years that Windows Server 2008 is just now getting. Linux doesn't have this kind of virtualization technology at all. Solaris also has the best file system ever created. There's not a single file system that even comes remotely close to beating ZFS in any area.

Ubuntu is the only Linux distribution suitable for the desktop. It's easier to use and install than Windows Vista is.

Went back to the forum for around another half hour in the absolute beginner talk section mostly looking at trouble shooting issues and seen many posts like this.(taken from the page I was on when i decided to come back here)

Someone who couldn't drag and drop files on an external HD and the workaround given

Use terminal

Code:
cd /path to folder where your file is

Code:
sudo mv /filename /path to hdd

Not exactly newbie stuff most people would most likely type something like this cd/c

Don't believe me tell a normal windows user(as mentioned below can barely find the power switch) to open the command prompt and go to a file after the deer in the headlights look follows by the words huh and what do you mean it's on my c drive you'll see what i mean.

As for the Microsoft forum link you posted 99% of users don't even know about it(so it's meant for more advanced users as well) and rely on things like windows help(which has lots of pictures) and problem reports and solutions.

Linux also has virtualization technology through xen and kvm, it's also had it for years.

Sure Solaris is a great OS but it's on par with Linux, not better. The only benefit zfs has is RAID-Z, as all of the other things it provides are provided through lvm on other platforms. Sun has stated that zfs may be ported to Linux in the future, so we'll see.

It's no different than having to use regedit.

It's a perception, and you are making it sound worse than it is.

I see you like to drive further into the hole. So, everyone realizes that 90% barely have a clue. I suppose you haven't run a Linux distribution in the last 3 years, if you had you wouldn't have posted this nonsense.

Thanks.

Sorry folks, Linux does not have ANYWHERE near the admin capabilities nor the power of the larger UNIXES - in particular AIX or HP-UX.
And ONLY someone who doesn't work with them would EVER dare make such a ridiculous claim.

The irony is that desktop LINUX users compare the big systems to the puny features they think are trendsetting in Linux which at best are puny versions of technologies employed in the big system s over 10 years ago!

And if you had a clue you would know they, AIX and HP-UX and others, have posited and positioned Linux - especially SUSE's 64 bit Linux as a cheap alternative since 1997 if you do not need the power of the full blown models.
And you think virtualization is novel? It was fundamental to AIX back in 1999. That's OOOLLLDDD news! And you have discovered what YOU think is a new filesystem? Really? So AIX has had a choice of how MANY journaled and secure filesystems available for over 10 years? Linux still hasn't caught up to the BASICS of the LVM (Logical volume manager) that has been fundamental to AIX since the mid 90's. And Linux wishes it has he power and elegance of PSSP for massively parallel systems! If only a few more Linux zealots even knew what it was or what it is used for...LOL!

Try remotely administering multiple massively parallel installations concurrently accessing shared datastores configured in a high availability environment each located several continents apart.

Now what Linux package can do that???? Its routinely done with HACMP and AIX.

Its always fun to watch folks whose concept of an OS is limited to the desktop or a print server.

And you can really cry over OSX as "Mac OS X has by far the largest installed desktop user base of any Unix-like system."

I had several domes in my last shop, and RX and RPs in the shop before that.

I've worked with everything from k-class to Ultra IIs.

Sorry, I DO work with them.

"Linux still hasn't caught up to the BASICS of the LVM (Logical volume manager) that has been fundamental to AIX since the mid 90's."

Do tell, what's missing from LVM2?

"And Linux wishes it has he power and elegance of PSSP for massively parallel systems!"

So tell me, where are your OSs in the list of top supercomputers for June 08?

http://www.top500.org/lists/2008/06

"Try remotely administering multiple massively parallel installations concurrently accessing shared datastores configured in a high availability environment each located several continents apart."

CFengine.

Thanks.

See, we were having this wonderfully fact-filled, mostly non-biased conversation, and you had to go and troll it with total BS.

Why?

You are blissfully clueless. But then ignorance is bliss.

CFEngine! LOL!

It doesn't even come close to doing what I mentioned! And what I mentioned was current literally over 10 years ago!

You obviously haven't worked with the upper tier of AIX with your "k class and Ultra ll's" LOL!

And to know what's missing, you would have to be familiar with AIX's LVM. - and what was used by HP in HP-UX when IBM open sourced it.

And LVM2 is a baby LVM that just Barely does the very basics of what LVM did on AIX over 10 years ago!

LVM2:
# create logical volumes, possibly spanning more then one physical disk, and give them any name.
# resize logical volumes.
# delete logical volumes.
# export logical volumes, in order to move them to a separate machine without changing the device names.
# create snapshots (a frozen version of a logical volume) in order to undo many changes in a single operation.
And LVM2 just barely supports mirroring! When AIX LVM supported 3 way live system mirroring 10 years ago in addition to features such as spltlvmcopy command to break off one copy of a 3 way mirror, rename the separated copy, and provide essentially a live backup on a fully running active mirrored system resource. 10 YEARS AGO! And that is but the tip of the iceberg of what was fundamental to the OS - not some addon!

Whoopee! Obviously you have not worked with HP-UX or AIX - and certainly not with PSSP.

And while you worry about pure speed in your supercomputers, why not look at complexity of configurations that do more then attempt to simply number crunch in a dedicated environment. There is more to massively parallel configurations that proof of performance speed metrics. But then if you were as intimate as you claim you wouldn't be tossing this crap out here.

You said MANAGE. CFEngine MANAGES.

AIX is a steaming pile of crap, and it's being replaced by guess what: LINUX.

OH NOES LVM doesn't do 1 feature AIX has, that sure makes it suck.

So, thanks for that wanna-be answer concerning super computing because I'm pretty sure you said Linux couldn't compete, and I've completely put you on your rear.

I obviously don't know what cells are, or partitions, or insf or ioscan or holy crap what's SAM or SMIT?

I bet you have to google HPUX -iS

Thanks. :-D

Manages huh?
I referred to a management layer - system control. But obviously you didn't even understand what MANAGES concurrent access of resources. And obviously you missed the fact that resources were being CONCURRENTLY accessed by multiple sources.

CFEngine doesn't begin to do what is needed to manage such a system. Not now, and certainly not 10 years ago.

And LVM2 is a baby wannabe function that is 13 years late and still doesn't do what AIX did in 1997.

Sorry, I lived in AIX development for too many years, including certifying Intel's RS6000SP!

IBM is the LARGEST Linux developer as well, and they have been busy porting over as much code as they can.

You obviously know MUCH less about massively parallel UNIX than you claim.

And yes, I said "manage". As in manage the resources and functions of the distributed complexes, both at a low and high level in a tightly integrated elegant manner.

So trot out another toy and demonstrate your misunderstanding of how such a distributed complex is managed.

You on the other hand can't even get Linux to dominate the desktop. Applications? We don't need no stinkin' applications! Maybe in another 15 years...

I wouldn't exactly say worse than what it is.

I know i make is sound like computer users are just drooling morons but the majority are just like car owners that just turn the key and go and should anything break they take it to the shop and couldn't bother learning to do it themselves.

So, that's what's kept the industry in business for the last 30 years.

Embracing Linux just helps you make more money.

Where's the problem?

;-)

"Try remotely administering multiple massively parallel installations concurrently accessing shared datastores configured in a high availability environment each located several continents apart."

Better yet: Configure CFEngine so it remotely administers globally distributed massively whatever systems so you don't have to "remotely administer"

See, see where your comment is stupid? You are stuck "remotely administering" where my management engine does that work so I can do better things.

I see how your platform is awesomes. While I'm sleeping you are telnettin *WOOT*.

CFEngine does anything you tell it to, you should try reading up on it before you make silly comments like "doesn't begin to do what is needed".

If you know the state of your systems, and it's enforced by policy hosts, you sleep at night.

So, you keep saying that LVM is 13 years late, and still doesn't do what AIX did in 1997, so what! It does all but one thing (mirroring) which is in testing RIGHT NOW! You don't telnet to Linux either, does that make it suck more than AIX because 23 isn't open? That's the argument you just presented.

I'm glad you lived in AIX development, I live in the real world where adaptability is key. We don't blast things because they aren't what we believe with our blinders on, we use the best tool for the job. Apparently Linux is good at supercomputing, clearly better than AIX. Who knew?

What makes you believe that I do I not know about parallel unix? I've never posted my resume, nor have I ever claimed to be an expert on the subject.

Why in the world would *I* be completely responsible (or even care) if Linux dominated desktops? I live in server worlds, oh wait you can't stay on point long enough to do that because you think I'll lose track of the conversation.

Can you run Word on that S series desktop of yours? Bet you have TONS of legroom with that thing in your cubicle. I bet your AIX is just swell at GUIs too. I'm sure Excel is SPEEDY; oh, wait.

Concerning managing, sounds like you sure do a lot of it. You know what I do? sleep.

So, I guess I'll take my toys and I'll put them away for the night.

Enjoy your telnettin.

zzzzzz

Unfortunately someone like you fails to account for how CFEngine manages both low level and high level concurrent access by various sources of various distributed data stores preventing data corruption - opps, it can't do that.

The fact that you can admin such a complex from a remote control workstation has little do do with the management function to which I refer.

I am not talking about what just what an admin does nitwit! I am talking about the extremely tight integration at the lower level. CFEngine doesn't even know what it is.

Its a shame that what i am talking about is so far beyond the scope of CFEngine is that it isn''t even funny. And the fact that you lack even a basic understanding of the internals of a system employing a configuration such as HA-GEO simply makes your boasts of familiarity hilarious.

LVM2 does all but mirroring? What? Oh, I guess you would need to be familiar with what AIX does do!
Again, you have no clue as to the flexibility that basic LVM functionality in AIX entails. Mirroring is but the SIMPLEST issue where LVM2 is light years behind. It is NOT the ONLY issue! An LVM tightly integrated with both the logical and physical level goes so much further than anything your puny LVM tool can even dream of. But oh, it must be that since IBM developed the term "LVM" that you think if another tool uses the same name and adds a number 2 that it equivalent! Or better. LOL!

So what makes me believe that you don't know massively parallel environments? Oh hell, where do I start! You don't even know the capabilities of the most basic AIX installed on one cpu on your desk! Let alone with AIX with PSSP. Oh, but you don't understand PSSP...Just as you didn't understand that LVM is but the MOST basic integral aspect of base AIX.

You are completely ignorance of even the smallest basic feature of basic AIX for starters - and that doesn't even begin to get into the massively parallel environment! But you aren't even familiar with the capabilities of larger systems ~15 years ago, let alone currently.

And telnet! Even mentioning telnet except to mention that it is not used in secure distributed environments tells us everything. You DON'T have a clue!

And what the hell does telnet have to do with AIX? That hasn't been used in a SECURE environment for >13 years! You see, mentioning things like this simply proves you don't have a clue! Telnet? give me a break!

And an S series desktop? HUH? AIX on an S series desktop running Word? LOL!
You see, its things like this that demonstrate your complete lack of knowledge about a massively parallel installation. We aren't in ANY WAY even getting close to PC AIX!

But if you had a clue you WOULD know this! The version of AIX to which I refer is tightly coupled to Power6 architecture. And you might want to look at the P series.

And AIX has been GUId since the mid 90's - but I guess you don't know that. If you wanted to use it. But its there for those like you who are still looking for telnet (ubut will be introduced to an appropriate secure alternative) if you haven't a clue regarding the granular aspects of the system.

And yup, we sure do allot of managing. We have distributed systems that are brought down ONCE a year for scheduled maintenance - whether they need anything done or not. It sure is a pain. LOL!

But you keep your toys and your telnet - telnet? this guy telnets! ROFLMAO!

...and have fun running your big KOMPLEKATED print servers!

S series???????????? and telnet! I haven't laughed so hard in a year! Thanks for the laugh and the utterly complete demonstration of someone who plays with toys trying to talk about the larger systems far beyond the scope of your CFEngine. telnet...that's a good one!

And to think I was playing with ASCI White and ASCI Blue Pacific 10 years ago and we didn't telnet then either!

telnet? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!

good one dufus!

WOW, I think you are the first AIX biggot I've ever met. So blind to the world that you can't adapt to change even as all the AIX jobs around you are eliminated.

Your constant feeble claims that I know nothing, they are a riot.

OMG AIX AIX AIX MASSIVE PARALLEL 13 YEARS AGO, I SO HARD ON.

Yep, 13 years ago. Now? Where is it? You have yet to tell me where your mighty AIX lies in the super computer list with it's fabled super awesome parallel system support programs, and it's insanely mature LVM.

Tell me oh mighty one, where is it in that list?

Oh, right.

Have a nice life Mr AIX can do no wrong biggot.

OH NOES YOU HAVE NOT CLUE; MEH CDE IT BE TEH AWESOMES AND MEH SMIT IS TEH UNSTOPPABLE ARMOR FOR TEH CONFIGURING!

Funny, I don't recall breaking down a geographically disbursed HA cluster; can you point me to it?

Oh, right you can't.

As for CFEngine, well as you would know if you were 1/100th as smart as you claim; where there's a bit and that bit can be changed well CFEngine can make sure it's changed. Those bits get checked in and out of subversion, which are subsequently pushed out to your entire farm with auditing by a single source. You state "lower level" how much lower does it get than hardware registers? Oh, right. Yep CFEngine can change pointers there too. Beyond the scope? That's a wonderful definition, mystical and magical that one is.

I'm still waiting to hear what else LVM is lacking, I anticipate another 10 page comment light on facts and heavy on fluff.

In a massively distributed system, a single unexpected change can have catastrophic impact to the entire system but well I guess you know that Mr smarty AIX dude. The management functions to which you refer became outdated about 13 years ago, apparently with the rest of your skills.

So smart you are that you completely missed the fact that I was making fun of your AIX and telnet, not claiming that I use it or even recommend it's use. Nice job there sparky, guess comprehension 101 isn't your strong point. Even funnier is that you missed the S series comment which is roughly the size of 2 racks, I suppose if you were a REAL AIX guy you would have picked up on it then maybe you would have caught the smart a** remark targeting that your AIX and it's Power CPUs can't run Wine too. You keep twisting what I said, it just keeps making you look all the more stupid. At least you googled a few big words in your feeble attempt to make yourself look smart. You sure do look smart there sparky.

Tell you what, you go ahead and keep claiming I don't have a clue, posting your ignorance and I'll keep eating your lunch.

You go ahead and log into smitty on those 100 dispursed servers, while you are tied up with that I'll go ahead and meet with your superiors about this little solution I have up my sleeve that will do that same effort across your whole farm, and check every 15 minutes to make sure it always stays set that way.

That's ok, I'm sure they'll find something else for you to do.

If not though, I sure hope the lines not long at the unemployment office, if you need a few bucks I can put you to work on my helpdesk. I bet all my clients would love to hear your war stories.

Gonna chock this one up as yet another troll post from another of our friendly neighborhood trolls.

Well, it's been pretty sad. If I see you on the street, I'll throw you a coin.

Till then, have a nice day.

KVM only virtualizes the CPU. Solaris zones can virtualize any piece of hardware that has a Solaris driver (just like Hyper-Z in Windows Server 2008). Xen may have similar performance but is much harder to set up than Solaris zones are.

Let's see, boot off of the Ubuntu CD, click Install and reboot. Installation of OS and 99.9 percent of all drivers complete. All that's left is to click one more button to install the ATI or Nvidia graphics driver (if applicable).

With Windows Vista, after installation is complete you have to install the chipset drivers, graphics drivers, audio, network and graphics drivers all separately and in many cases requiring a reboot between driver installs. Oh, and on computers that have discrete graphics you usually have to go to Nvidia or ATI's website to download and then install the graphics driver.

Sounds like a lot of extra work just to install an operating system. Installing an operating system should be just as simple as installing an application like OpenOffice.org or Microsoft Office 2007.

With Windows Vista, after installation is complete you have to install the chipset drivers, graphics drivers, audio, network and graphics drivers all separately and in many cases requiring a reboot between driver installs.

Me? Really?

I think I've uncovered the flaw in your logic...

You seem to be under the impression your system=everyone elses?

That's really the only reason I can think of as to why you'd make such a generalized statement ("It's easier to use and install than Windows Vista is. "). (the more general a statement, the more likely it is to be incorrect to a large number of people)

It may be easier to install and use for *you*. Perhaps you should have included that little detail?

(Example: The fact that all I did on my last Vista install was update my ATi drivers, does *not* mean Vista supports more hardware than Ubuntu....in fact, it is completely irrelevant to such a claim as the only test case was *my* system)