Results 1 to 45 of 45

What is linux ? Its various types

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    19

    Smile What is linux ? Its various types

    Hello To all

    I have an question

    What is exactly Linux? why there are different Linuxes for ex. Redhat ,Suce, Ubantu?? Which is the best one??

    Thanks in advance : )

  2. #2
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    304

    Default

    Give this a read - Linux Online - About the Linux Operating System

    To get started you may try Ubuntu. When you get a feel of things, you yourselves will know which version is right for you.

  3. #3
    The Wizard meetdilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    8,776

    Default

    Linux is just another operating system like Windows. ie, you won't need Windows is you are using Linux. Windows is developed and distributed by Microsoft, Linux is available from different companies. Hence different name. The basic architecture is same.

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    19

    Smile

    Thanks..for information ..Linux website is really good..

  5. #5
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rpha88 View Post
    Thanks..for information ..Linux website is really good..
    Hope by this time you must have tried some flavour of *nix. If not just you can try with live bootable linux, it is free unlike M$$$$$$$$$$$ (MicroSoft), soft cos of the cool $$$$$$... Linux is free and you get everyting from office applications to develpoment IDEs and graphycial and video editing to name a few obsolutely free.

  6. #6
    Junior Member prakash_mvpa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Before Jumping into Linux,I will recommend People Learn What Open Source is:
    The GNU Operating System
    We welcome you to 'Make The Move'
    Check these Sites for Simple Understandings:
    get GNU/Linux!
    Why Linux is better

    and Ubuntu is a good Distribution(Distro) for Starters
    --

  7. #7
    Platinum Member mickey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    6,948

    Default

    Linux is something that is not for common man.
    job takes the child away.

  8. #8
    Junior Member prakash_mvpa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    43

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by mickey View Post
    Linux is something that is not for common man.
    May Be.But,what is wrong with trying.hardware Support and expecting support a la windows like will not work with Linux.the key is to learn about how open source works.
    --

  9. #9
    Platinum Member mickey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    6,948

    Default

    yes its better (only) for learning..
    job takes the child away.

  10. #10
    Junior Member prakash_mvpa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    43

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by prakash_mvpa View Post
    May Be.But,what is wrong with trying.hardware Support and expecting support a la windows like will not work with Linux.the key is to learn about how open source works.
    Linux Today - The Hobbyists OS
    --

  11. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    24

    Cool Flexibility

    Quote Originally Posted by mickey View Post
    yes its better (only) for learning..
    I used Windows for 8 years since I was in class 6th, After coming to college and using Ubuntu, I must say, I'm loving the flexibility it provides. The best thing? I tell Linux what to do, Windows used to tell me "hey you can do this, not allowed to this, this is against EULA and other crap". And "its not for the common man", my dad who knows nothing except clicking some buttons in Word processing, uses Ubuntu and he likes the way it starts up in 20 seconds (beat that) and everything (including HP printer/scanner/copier, his Sony handycam, Sony mobile phone) works without installing *any* driver.
    So, the conclusion? GNU/Linux is better for anything except playing high end games which are generally written to run only on Windows (so yeah, its the developers making it exclusively for Win32/64). And for anyone wondering if GNU/Linux is good for them, check this out (I couldn't post the link, just type "linux is not windows" in Google and hit "I'm feeling lucky") A bit long, but it clears all the doubts.
    In the end, be free to choose whatever suits you, but you'll find that only when you try both without any prejudice/bias.

  12. #12
    Junior Member prakash_mvpa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    43

    Default

    ^But,Many don't prefer to shift from their Current OS.For eg:If I'm asked to move on to Windows 7,I will Politely disagree;I'm Happy with Debian GNU/Linux for years now.as regarding LNW article,It infuriates windows user as WTF ,what this lecturing is?
    There may be a % of users who will take the leap to experiment shifting to Alternative Operating Systems.Even among them,the Financially(and those good in installing OSX pirated) good will go for OS X .Another group who are a little more tech savvy will go for GNU/Linux.
    You may not know- especially those with win programming(.net whatever) just will hate Linux and Open Source the way it is.Live and Let Live.
    --

  13. #13
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Yes, thats right, I didn't say *every* windows user should migrate to GNU/Linux. My point is that computer literate people (that is people who use their computer as a computer, not a gaming/movie watching device) should try it out, because you never know things till you try them out. And anyway, thats what dual boot is for

  14. #14
    Platinum Member talktoanil's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,204

    Default

    i am more comfortable with what windows 7 provides me and hence using it and i see no point why i should even try linux.

  15. #15
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by talktoanil View Post
    i am more comfortable with what windows 7 provides me and hence using it and i see no point why i should even try linux.
    Ya sure, only use GNU/Linux if you need more power and flexibility.

  16. #16
    Platinum Member talktoanil's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,204

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shaan7 View Post
    Ya sure, only use GNU/Linux if you need more power and flexibility.
    that's what windows 7 provides me now and since windows 98..it just got better through its journey from win 98 to windows 7

  17. #17
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by talktoanil View Post
    that's what windows 7 provides me now and since windows 98..it just got better through its journey from win 98 to windows 7
    Yep agreed, Windows 7 is certainly better than its predecessors (especially the resource hog Vista). Miss those days in Win98 where I could have more control over my system, now for everything windows assumes I'm an idiot.

  18. #18
    Platinum Member talktoanil's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,204

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shaan7 View Post
    now for everything windows assumes I'm an idiot.
    may be its what you think..give me an instance where it makes you feel that you are an idiot.....

  19. #19
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by talktoanil View Post
    may be its what you think..give me an instance where it makes you feel that you are an idiot.....
    "This file may harm your computer" , "This drive contains system files, modifying may harm your system", "This driver is not signed by MS" etc etc

  20. #20
    Platinum Member talktoanil's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,204

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shaan7 View Post
    "This file may harm your computer" , "This drive contains system files, modifying may harm your system", "This driver is not signed by MS" etc etc
    yeah. those are warning and not compulsion on user. and those warnings are for novice users so that their PC / hardware/software don't stop working because of their lack of knowledge.

    speaking about advanced users, they are certainly turn off those features once and for all and windows will never prompt it again. simple solution for ALL types of users and not just novice or advanced. i think its smart and better than having system crash just because of end user lack of knowledge.

  21. #21
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by talktoanil View Post
    yeah. those are warning and not compulsion on user. and those warnings are for novice users so that their PC / hardware/software don't stop working because of their lack of knowledge.

    speaking about advanced users, they are certainly turn off those features once and for all and windows will never prompt it again. simple solution for ALL types of users and not just novice or advanced. i think its smart and better than having system crash just because of end user lack of knowledge.
    Yep, so thats how are the two ways of it today
    ->> "because of their lack of knowledge" , so assume that users don't have knowledge

    ->> assume the user is fully aware of things and let him decide whats good and whats bad.

    The former one is for Windows, and the latter is GNU/Linux. Problemo solved. User chooses whats right for him/her Just like you chose Windows is better for you, and I chose GNU/Linux is better for after 8 years of Window-ing
    Oh and btw, don't try to argue on this one point, there are many other things where they're different, and where one is better for particular kind of user. In my opinion its pure personal preference and the way you want to experience technology.

  22. #22
    Platinum Member talktoanil's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,204

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shaan7 View Post
    Yep, so thats how are the two ways of it today
    ->> "because of their lack of knowledge" , so assume that users don't have knowledge

    ->> assume the user is fully aware of things and let him decide whats good and whats bad.

    The former one is for Windows, and the latter is GNU/Linux. Problemo solved. User chooses whats right for him/her Just like you chose Windows is better for you, and I chose GNU/Linux is better for after 8 years of Window-ing
    i don't agree to this. how does an OS knows what the user is capable of ?

    and if you don't like those messages, you can turn if off once and for all so i don't think it makes your an idiot.

  23. #23
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by talktoanil View Post
    i don't agree to this. how does an OS knows what the user is capable of ?

    and if you don't like those messages, you can turn if off once and for all so i don't think it makes your an idiot.
    It doesn't "know", it assumes.
    I know, but as I said thats not the only point why I don't like Windows (emphasis on I, it doesn't mean that you shouldn't like it )
    Oh and by the way, this is an endless debate, so lets not discuss about it too much on a broadband forum (unless you have a very strong urge to)

  24. #24
    m2h_katie
    Guest

    Default

    Hello Vignesh,

    Thanks you for the link. It is really helpful.

  25. #25
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    62

    Wink

    Linux is am open source operating system which comes under the category of "Other Operating Systems" in terms of Hardware......

    It provides both Graphical User Interface(GUI) and Command User Interface(CUI)..

    Where as the Windows comes only with an GUI....

    it is am open source....
    and if u want to learn some thing about Linux ...
    better Get started with Linux ....

    It is hard to use Linux if you think Linux as Windows..

    Linux is Not windows ........

  26. #26
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4

    Default

    try linux on virtualbox first and see if you like it, once you get used to it and select you distro of choice, you can try installing it onto your hard-disk.

    google "install ubuntu on virtualbox", iam not allowed to post links here yet. you find lots of useful links.

    this way you hardly have to bother with drivers etc

    good luck

  27. #27
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KSR1989 View Post
    Where as the Windows comes only with an GUI....
    Windows has a command window --- and pretty much the same not-very-useful collection of commands as DOS always had! But true that Linux's relationship with its gui is different. It should work very well without it!

    The Great Grand Daddy of Linux is Unix. Unix is, like Windows, a proprietary OS, and, if you want to use it, you have to pay for it. Linux follows the same design principles as Unix, without using any of Unix's proprietary code. The Free Software Foundation, and others, gave us the dozens and dozens of useful Unix commands, sometimes under slightly different names, in the same way. Linux, like Unix, is an operating system that comes with a heap of useful stuff. And a powerful shell scripting language to make it all work together.

    Unix was going strong before Windows was even invented. Microsoft even sold a version called xenix. The joke is that, while Windows would grind to a halt trying to execute two copy commands, xenix, on the same hardware, would be supporting half a dozen or more users! This is going back to the time of the very earliest versions of Windows. Microsoft was already selling a multi-user, multi-tasking, stable operating system. How long did it take them to achieve even two of those three? Anyway, that's Microsoft... whatever...

    Oh, and Linux is only a minority interest on office desktops: when it comes to supercomputers, you'll find lots of it!

    Sadly, there is another side to the coin. If I was a real worker, still, behind a real office desk, doing anything else but administering servers and the data on them (which would be Unix/Linix)... I'd still be using Microsoft Office. That's in spite of the fact that I loathe Word for Windows!

    As I'm not, I got over my inertia and moved from XP to Ubuntu earlier this year. There's still stuff I need Windows for, but I don't boot it up very often.

  28. #28
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4

    Default

    You could also try one of the free Unixes - FreeBSD, PC-BSD(which is derived from FreeBSD).

  29. #29
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    391

    Default

    That's true.

    The thing about Linux today (well, I'm talking about the Ubuntu I am looking at, so not all Linuxes, I guess) is that if you use a computer anything like I do, for browsing and email, Firefox is just the same, Thunderbird is just the same; my favoured media player, VLC, is just the same, Google Earth is just the same. The only difference in these, my 95%-of-the-time apps is that they start faster and run without glitches.

    Particular personal Ubuntu upside for me: my obsolete but was-very-expensive soundcard has drivers: the company that made it don't support anything post XP.

    Particular personal downside: my scanner (HP) won't work. I'm assured that most do, but that is not much comfort

    I save electricity. Ununtu boots in a minute or so: my XP takes ten. Therefore I am happy to turn off the PC for an hour or two when I'm not using it, instead of leaving it on all day. When the desktop appears, Ubuntu is ready to go: Windows still has god-knows what to get on with for ages.

    Linux is not complicated. Of course, the complication is there if wanted... but so is the debug command in DOS!

  30. #30
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    34

    Default

    For a beginner:
    LinuxMint==Ubuntu==PClinuxOS-Gnome==Granular>OpenSuse==Mandriva>Zenwalk==Vector >Debian==Fedora==CentOS>Sabayon==Gentoo>CaosNsa>Ar ch

    For an intermediate:
    LinuxMint==Ubuntu>OpenSuse==Mandriva>Sabayon==Gent oo>PCLinuxOS-Gnome==Granular>CentOS==CaosNsa>Debian==Fedora>Zen walk==Vector>Arch

    (In case of PCLinuxOS, instead of Gnome version, installation of Kde version followed by software installation of Gnome Desktop is the better way out; same is for Granular; Once the Gnome is installed this way, the Kde can be safely uninstalled; moreover installation of postgres8.4 (unlike the default deprecated postgres) in pclinuxos and granular is like a puzzle which beginners usually fail to understand and which only experts can do better).

    For an expert:
    LinuxMint==Ubuntu==Sabayon==Gentoo==CentOS==CaosNs a>OpenSuse==Mandriva==Fedora==Debian>PCLinuxOS-Gnome==Granular>Zenwalk==Vector>Arch

    (However Arch has been rated as No1 for experts, and in fact I also tried to install arch/firefly/float/chakra all -- only to find that their installation had always failed much earlier than even a gentoo-installation (both in i586 as well as i686) -- and among these types of os, I found sabayon to be far ahead of gentoo and any arch but this is only my opinion; things might change for Arch in the coming years, since it appears to be the future direction of linux.)

    If you rate purely on installation experience comfort, then:

    All Others>Zenwalk>CentOS==Fedora>Gentoo>Vector>Arch>C aosNsa

    Vector has a huge repository support (of Slackware), a standard installer in slapt, etc but for most of the existing niches, others including its clone Zenwalk haved already fulfilled it; in general installing Gentoo is a better experience than Vector, but of course in any case it will be a better experience than trying out Arch; CaosNsa's default way of completely erasing and destroying the existing partitions of an entire disc before its installation had put it into the last place for desktop but first place for servers.
    However CaosNsa is still a better home desktop than Fedora (though it can fulfill as a server too but not as a workstation; for workstations, Ubuntu and Fedora are very good; for servers, CaosNsa is best example of linux optimized for speed and designed to compete with major servers).

    If you rate it together with its bootloader grub, then:

    OpenSuse>LinuxMint==PCLinuxOS-Gnome==Granular>Mandriva==SimplyMepis>Sabayon>Caos Nsa==CentOS==Fedora>Zenwalk (Lilo)==Vector (Lilo)>Ubuntu==Debian (Lilo)==Arch (Grub/Lilo)

    If you compare ability of grubs/lilos to chainload a MacOSX in an hfs+ partition, then:
    All Others (including Ubuntu, Debian, and probably also Arch)>Fedora (and hence also CentOS and CaosNsa)>Zenwalk==Vector

    (Arch is said to be equidistant between redhat and debian in some of the things)

    If you are looking for a deb os with:

    1) advantage of being ubuntu-based on one hand and
    2) a good graphical grub matching those of the rpm based OS (such as PCLinuxOS-Gnome/Granular and behind OpenSuse but ahead of Mandriva),

    then go for LinuxMint as it is the best one combining the advantages of both Ubuntu and PCLinuxOS-Gnome/Granular.

    (However, I prefer the gnome-desktop to look more like Ubuntu than Windows (of LinuxMint) and so I merely install Grub of LinuxMint (/PCLinuxOS-Gnome/Granular), followed by the latest bleeding edge Ubuntu (minus its Grub), then modify the bootup commands of the LinuxMint Grub).

    If you are looking for huge repository support, then Ubuntu (and LinuxMint), Mandriva, PCLinuxOS-Gnome (and Granular), Gentoo (and Sabayon) are all equally robust; in case of others, CentOS (and CaosNsa, but not Fedora) is another good one.

    If you are looking for speed (gnome-only comparison), then:
    Arch==Gentoo==Sabayon>recent versions (>=9.10) of (Ubuntu/LinuxMint)==CaosNsa>PCLinuxOS-Gnome==Granular>CentOS==Debian==9.04 version of (Ubuntu/LinuxMint)>OpenSuse==Mandriva==(old versions (<=8.10) of Ubuntu/LinuxMint)>Fedora>Zenwalk==Vector

    As you see from the above picture that:
    1) LinuxMint is the best deb based os (Ubuntu's grub2 puts it behind, but with other os' grub configuration it shouldn't be a problem at all);
    2) OpenSuse/Mandriva are tied for the best rpm based os; and
    3) Sabayon is undoubtedly not only the best tbz2 based os, but also the first tbz2 os to emerge out for competence to the likes of Ubuntu, Mandriva, etc -- and I find Sabayon to be better than Fedora.
    4) you have a very old PC machine with a very low ram, then Zenwalk is the perfect choice.
    Last edited by kgkaushik; 20th September 2010 at 10:55 PM.

  31. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    16

    Default

    You can also request Ubuntu CD from its website and thats completely FREE !! I generally order new versions from its site and receive within 30-40 days, they also send various version like 64bit,32bit, server edition or Kbuntu in a single package if you want so. Here's the website shipit.ubuntu.com

    And ofcourse you can download it too...

  32. #32
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    342

    Default

    I have heard of DSL(Damn Small Linux) which is about 50mb and has to be installed on a pendrive

    Linux would not have been complicated had it been the first OS
    (Nowadays we want everything readymade, and we dont want to do anything)
    640K ought to be enough for anybody.-Bill Gates

  33. #33
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    391

    Default

    Depends what you mean by "first" and what you are comparing it to. And, of course, what you mean by "complicated"

    Linux is modelled on Unix. Unix predated not only Windows but DOS too, so if by "first" you mean anything produced by MS, then it was first.

    Unix was actually based on a design philosophy of simplicity.

    Leaving aside history, I do not see a great difference in every-day useage between Windows and the Ubuntu in front of me know. It is a graphical interface that works in exactly the same way as the WinXP that I migrated from. I even chose a desktop style that puts the window buttons and the main menu in the same place, just to help out the memory built into my mouse hand. Of course, it was not difficult to do that.

  34. #34
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    342

    Default

    Complicated means its UI is not user friendly so Windows users cannot adapt to it easily
    640K ought to be enough for anybody.-Bill Gates

  35. #35
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    34

    Default

    Unix was 100% C based, old MacOSX was 100% Pascal based (Symantec Pascal; not the modern freepascal (fpc)), whereas Windows (and Dos) began as a mixture of Pascal, C and C++ (having more C and C++) and later added up C#. (Windows' Clone Reactos uses C and c++ only, no C#)
    Linux was developed on Unix (but based of a mixture of C, C++ and Python), but Windows and MacOSX were not.
    Unix and DarwinOS were developed from FreeBSD, and the DarwinOS developed into MacOSX. MacOSX upto version9 was Pascal+Java-Bean based OS, whereas after the Intel-Mac transisition series (v10.2-v10.5), currently the one after the series (i.e. v10.6) is now C (gcc), C++ (g++) and Python based like the Linux.
    Windows was modelled on FreeBSD in such a way that the features which are common is not so easily obvious at all. People using it can easily mistake it to be DOS based (like Windows3x) parallel to Unix (instead of a binary one modelled in freebsd and extending an MSDos terminal window and a different shell known as Explorer) -- but Dos is a single-user-interface based os, whereas windows is multiuser based os like FreeBSD, DarwinOS and Unix.
    This is especially when the bash shell is replaced with a graphical windows shell, and the terminal process (child process) is replaced with an msdos extension terminal, and now-a-days the windows7 also has a posix-subsystem too.
    If the posix subsystem gets grown to as robust as cygwin, then one can also have a faster solution for applications supposedly dependent on the cygwin (e.g. cygnome, kde-cygwin, cygwin-xfce, etc).
    So, to fully and correctly understand windows' internals w.r.t dos and unix is rather different than merely learning how to use windows (including the networking tasks) -- the latter is the simplest task whereas the former is a task tougher than any macosx and linux, and thus nullifying things especially if we were to consider only the average of the two aspects.
    Last edited by kgkaushik; 25th September 2010 at 05:31 PM.

  36. #36
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    391

    Default

    now that was complicated!

    But I agree with your conclusion. The most frustrating thing about Windows has always been finding out what is wrong.

    Actually, Unix preceded C, which was developed under Unix, and then used to re-write Unix... making it, I think, the first OS to be easily portable to any machine given a compiler for C on that machine. Writing the compiler might not be the easiest thing in the world, but it beats writing an en entire OS.

    That, of course, is all history, and only developers and deeply curious really care what language their OS was written in. I think your history is a little twisted (or maybe a typo creapt in): Unix was and is the original Unix, developed at Bell Labs: BSD (my memory is dim here ...) is based on what Bell gave to Berkley.

    For Gods sake don't ask who owns Unix now, or we might end up in court with SCO for the rest of our lives!
    Complicated means its UI is not user friendly so Windows users cannot adapt to it easily
    1. The Ubuntu I am looking at is almost identical to XP, so it is, in your definition, not complicated.

    2. Since when did Windows define "not complicated". The most intuitive interface in the world, to me, is a book!

    3. ... I admit: Windows is what people are used to and what they will judge by, so GOTO (not popular with C developers) "1."


  37. #37
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    342

    Default

    Since,Windows is used in 96% of Computers and is undoubtedly the leader in OS (Hurts to praise Gates) I compared it with Linux

    In ubuntu, unistallation is very complicated especially it making a separate new partition for itself and removing its MBR is really Painful

    According to me Fedora 13 is the best Linux OS
    and its very similar to windows
    With the addition of WINE software it is just good as a Win OS

    Since LINUX doesnt earn developers money they dont invest much of time in it;thats why
    its distribution is bad
    640K ought to be enough for anybody.-Bill Gates

  38. #38
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    391

    Default

    You'll find a different story on the world's big computers.

    I don't mind the comparison with Windows: it is inevitable. It is also valid, as it is what most people use, especially in the commercial environment. Don't know about you, but I think it will stay that way for quite a while too. Yes, it hurts to praise Gates, but we can't deny him his victory ... for now, anyhow.

  39. #39
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    34

    Default

    Windows' installer was more user friendly upto windowsxp, but right now in case of windows7 even its updates tends to be kind of destructive by overwriting the MBR, and as per the wikipedia this is true especially for 32bit systems because they do no follow the EFI standards.
    Moreover the fact is that windows7 has a new posix subsystem and probably also ironpython, making things appear analogous to linux's python core scripts and macosx's macpython appscripts (a replacement for the previous applescript).
    Now, ironpython is an OpenSource initiative of Microsoft itself; and with the success of ironpython and django.net it was considered to bring the changing general (post-vista) trend returning back to windows -- but the feature of updates with MBR-overwriting inclusion without choice-control provided to user is a thing which I think is a point not realized earlier (but in the present state, that would still not stop me or anyone from using windows7 especially if they know how to use the installed linux/macosx or the BerliOS MBR-recovery-tool, though). However, it would have been still better if the EFI standards (for MBR) for 32-bit systems were also fulfilled in the same way as do the Linuxes and some others.
    But one must not forget that the future developments might bring some more things either for better or worse -- but not known to us yet (such as from the hardware itself).

    Regarding the c and pascal compilers, I personally like the gcc (c) and fpc (pascal) more than the other known ones; and plus otherwise they are also said to be the latest and best c and pascal compilers known, with speedwise, gcc (fltk)>fpc (lptk)>g++ (fltk++), etc (gcc and fpc are still very close in speed). There is another gnu-pascal known as gpc (pascal written in gcc), but then this will take more time to develop; moreover the fpc already has the lptk (pascal equivalent of fltk), gtk, gtk2, wx, qt bindings for all linuxes;

    The three different diversified gcc based os are Linux, MacOSX (and of course also OpenDarwin) and ReactOS, and similarly there are plans for three different fpc based os such as a Linux-fpos, GladiatorOS (an OpenDarwin-fpos) and another one based on ReactOS (fpntos with GreenGnome as the shell-cum-explorer and maybe hopefully also a freedos extension-terminal).
    Last edited by kgkaushik; 27th September 2010 at 10:41 AM.

  40. #40
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    34

    Default

    There are already some branches of fpos -- one is ToroOS (Linux) and the second is GliderOS (another Linux), and a third one as PetrOS (fpc based ArchLinux following the KISS principle), and a fourth one as Onix (fpc based DragonDoslinux), but otherwise fpos by default means fpos (common source code) only, unless specifically mentioned with another name.
    The first two have been classified under Linux-fpos (and not Unix), PetrOS should be like tbz2 type linux, and Onix like the slackware; so the plan for three Linux-fpos, maybe either pc/netbook/palm like roadmap or other variations such as the deb, rpm, tbz2 variations or third way based on toolkits such as gtk2forpascal, gtkpas, wxfp, qtpas, lptk, carbon (objective), rad (delphi), etc.
    Some of the developments offshooting from Onix might then open the doors for dosemu, wine and eventually indirectly into the foss based nt roadmaps.

    For Linux type fpos1, the link for ToroOS is:
    http://sourceforge.net/projects/toro/files/
    For Linux type fpos2, the link for GliderOS is:
    http://sourceforge.net/projects/glider-kernel/
    For Linux type fpos3, the link for fpos is:
    http://code.google.com/p/fpos/downloads/list

    Then there is ClassiOS (delphi based PetrOS), Delphine (delphi based unix), etc but then delphi is outside the domain of fpc.
    For Unix type delphi os, the link for Delphine is:
    http://sourceforge.net/projects/delphine/

    The fpos project may eventually fork two more such as those based on OpenDarwin, and ReactOS. But we will have to wait and see for other ones, since these are also very much in their roadmaps.

    So, it appears that the first fpos likely to be done might be Linux-fpos (ToroOS, Glider-OS, fpos, PetrOS), then Unix-delphios (Delphine) then OpenDarwin-fpos, and only then the others such as ReactOS-fpos (GreenGnome-fpntos), etc.

    However, since the old MacOSX was a pure pascal os based on the old symantec-pascal compiler with carbon toolkit widgets (before the gcc and gcc's cocoa replaced symantec-pascal and carbon respectively), probably the OpenDarwin-fpos can be done sooner but they appear to be moving away from the main MacOSX and towards the Linux type features (and rather fork out from the simple (Linux)-fpos (fpos-common-source-code) instead).

    The works from Onix to GreenGnome-fpntos may be the last one requiring more time to accomplish.
    Last edited by kgkaushik; 28th September 2010 at 08:42 PM.

  41. #41
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    30

    Default

    Linux is an Operating system like windows and different distributions like fedora, ubuntu, Redhat are differs in their features.

  42. #42
    Platinum Member puchu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shaan7 View Post
    Yep agreed, Windows 7 is certainly better than its predecessors (especially the resource hog Vista). Miss those days in Win98 where I could have more control over my system, now for everything windows assumes I'm an idiot.
    he he
    absolutely

    Quote Originally Posted by talktoanil View Post
    may be its what you think..give me an instance where it makes you feel that you are an idiot.....
    Here are a few things I don't want the OS to do for me as the OS has "< 0.0001%" the reasoning power as mine.

    1. Try changing IE security settings, try installing Adobe flash activex when you design and embed a cab file in HTML.I bet my PC if you change and keep them successfully. This is just for starters.
    2. Try changing the theme or keeping an HTML or flash file as background
    3. Try creating a custom partition layout as logical and primary etc
    4. Try custom security settings in windows firewall and keep them and windows not keep me telling that my settings are not right
    5. Try to configure IIS
    6. Why the hell do I need to classify my network as home or work network , every time?
    7. There is a never ending list but I'll conclude with my favorite:

    The "blue screen of death" or "the black screen of death" (for windows 7) saying that "Your computer has been shutdown to prevent further damage as some recently installed hardware or software has malfunctioned" without the clue of what the f** exactly went wrong.
    Well all these things won't affect me unless I have the same level of intelligence as my OS and we live happily ever after.
    Last edited by puchu; 4th September 2011 at 12:38 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

  43. #43
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    29

    Smile linux

    Linux is just another operating system invented by linus torvalds after which it is named as linux.There is no link between linux and unix.Redhat,ubuntu,fedora are just distributors of the operating system linux.Out of which comparing windows and linux,linux is more safer because linux is not prone to virus because every thing is of packages....hope you understood something about linux..

  44. #44
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    391

    Default

    Linux is actually just the kernel, which was designed by said Mr Linus, in accordance with Unix philosophy. The rest of the "operating system" are the various packages and utilities which come from many sources, but the core is the Free Software Foundation. The core utilities all replicate Unix commands and ways of working. Without Unix there would be no Linux as we know it: that is the link between Unix and Linux.

    Consider this question: Sitting in front of a Linux terminal window, apart from using commands that specifically identify the kernel and the operating system ... how would you tell it wasn't Unix?

    According to the the philosophy of Unix, some measure of security was built in in the early designs, rather than wedged in later. It is also part of the same philosophy to protect running programs from each other, and to protect the kernel from user programs. That means that things like the Blue Screen of Death were never a normal part of this sort of computing. However, nothing is perfect and the message "Kernel Panic" is not entirely unknown! Some of this design philosophy may help to protect against viruses --- but the major protection against them remains the fact that Linux, on the desktop, is a minority interest, and the kids like to attack the majority!

    The first ever worm attacked Unix systems. We (and Mac users) should not have a false sense of security.

  45. #45
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Ubuntu Linux is an operating system can be used by any body. It's free and not illegal to be use to operate/work at your computer. Copy of Window operating system is illeage to be use. But everyone can intally copy of linux.

Similar Threads

  1. Which Types Of Games???
    By HunterBran in forum General offtopic discussions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 21st April 2012, 05:53 AM
  2. Different types of Braoad band
    By Narashiman in forum News discussions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 27th August 2010, 02:19 PM
  3. Types of viruses.
    By zoooni in forum Software News, Previews and Reviews
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 28th February 2010, 10:17 PM
  4. Printers and types
    By zoooni in forum Software News, Previews and Reviews
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 28th February 2010, 10:01 PM
  5. Help Needed on Modem Types
    By aruncse30 in forum BSNL broadband
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 30th January 2008, 11:57 AM