Realitycheck Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 My gosh, this was too easy. This was a Windows installation and it's very user-friendly. I'm fairly new to Linux, but I thought I had it made with Suse, even though I have not tried the latest version. I've only used the command line once, to get this radio station to play that Mplayer will not pick up by default.
1veedo Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 My gosh, this was too easy. This was a Windows installation and it's very user-friendly. I'm fairly new to Linux, but I thought I had it made with Suse, even though I have not tried the latest version. I've only used the command line once, to get this radio station to play that Mplayer will not pick up by default.Yeah, I'm using ubuntu right now. I just switched from using crosscompiled gentoo LiveCDs for about a year (my personal projects, I have about 5) and it's amazing how everything works automatically instead of you having to make everything work yourself. Making liveCDs of Ubuntu is even easier -- just copy the CD it came on, modify the filesystem, and make the new ISO (while at the same time you can delete a bunch of the extra stuff you dont need). Btw you'll learn to love the command line. it does so much more and is so much easier to use then cmd in Windows (which is practically useless). If you program you'll find it a million times easier on Linux too. I don't see how people can develop on Windows, I guess none of them realize how cumbersome it is (of course then again I don't see how people can use VB either). Microsoft is actually doing away with VB if that's any indication of how horrible it is. But yeah it's very user friendly. Have you tried amarok for your music? About the only problem people have with Linux is finding the right apps to use. VLC and Xine are two really good movie players as well. I don't have much experience with Mplayer but it seems to be the most popular because it's a "traditional" app. The only reason I like VLC more then mplayer is because it can play slowmotion and speed up the video. If you have a graphics card you might want to check out beryl. it has lots of neat effects for your desktop that will make all of your Windows Vista friends jealous.
Klaynos Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 woooooo ubuntu... (Yes that's all I have to say on the issue)
Realitycheck Posted June 4, 2007 Author Posted June 4, 2007 The deal with Mplayer is that it is extremely complete when it comes to playing a large variety of different types of movie files. I wasn't able to locate the win32 codec package in the package manager, which Mplayer draws largely from, though it is probably available somehow. It is supposed to play music files and music radio station files, as well, but those codecs are probably in the win32 package. I was using Amarok with Suse, ever since I somehow royally screwed up my ability to use Mplayer. It is alright, but I have been able to to get this default player, Rhythmbox, to do everything I need it to do. Now, I am going to start trying out some of this music composing software that Linux has to offer.
insane_alien Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 the win32 package is in a different repository. go look in the community documentation for a walkthrough.
1veedo Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 Yeah Rhythmbox is pretty nice too. You can get codecs from the Ubuntu guide. You probably already know about this but just in case you dont: http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu:Feisty#How_to_install_Multimedia_Codecs Most video players use the same codecs that mplayer uses. The only exception is real media which you cant even install from the repository -- you have to download realplayer. Btw Klaynos I know you're a debian guy but that doesn't make us much different. We just like our debian painted brown the win32 package is in a different repository. go look in the community documentation for a walkthrough.The latest Ubuntu has all the ["standard"] repositories enabled by default. They should have been doing this for a long time but they wanted to be biased towards gnu and other free software. Everyone just enabled them anyway because they contain a lot of packages that people want.
Klaynos Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 I use mplayer aok with the win32 codecs from an ubuntu repository
Dak Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 The only exception is real media which you cant even install from the repository -- you have to download realplayer. iirc, i got realmedia files playing on either mplayer or totem on my computer. (i can't check, because i exploded my wifi card, so i'm not actualy using my pc for now )
Klaynos Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 iirc, i got realmedia files playing on either mplayer or totem on my computer. (i can't check, because i exploded my wifi card, so i'm not actualy using my pc for now ) Same here with mplayer... Infact every media file I've ever tried to use works on mplayer, because I installed 2 or 3 extra packages when I installed it...
1veedo Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Same here with mplayer... Infact every media file I've ever tried to use works on mplayer, because I installed 2 or 3 extra packages when I installed it...Some .rm files run but I had to download real player to get a couple files on my computer to play. On gentoo I never had to do that. The rm files in question would play the audio but never the video so there is at least partial support.
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 I installed Ubuntu a few weeks ago and love it. It's so nice not to be forced to restart any time any program updates itself
Ice_Phoenix87 Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 I quite liked ubuntu, i must say it was a great OS. my lappy seems fine with it though its big brother, my gamer desktop runs XP. I wonder if they have arguments on which is better... did anyone here find it hard to change from a Microsoft OS to a linux based OS?
Pangloss Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 Not really. The main thing for me was figuring out how to install programs and having to think back to the old days of command-prompt execution. That situation is much improved over the last couple of years in most distros, but I still think Linux needs more work in the area of tool placement in GUI menus, for example (though I find it easier to find things in KDE than I do in the ridiculous Office 2007 ribbon bar!).
Dak Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 did anyone here find it hard to change from a Microsoft OS to a linux based OS? barring a few accidental ctrl+alt+del restarts, and continually typing dir rather than ls, the only problems i had was that i needed to configure lots of things (mainly wifi card and mouse) as soon as it was installed; but, i didn't know how to use linux as soon as it was installed. which was annoying. still, i found it a much easyer OS to learn than windows.
Klaynos Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 Not really. The main thing for me was figuring out how to install programs and having to think back to the old days of command-prompt execution. That situation is much improved over the last couple of years in most distros, but I still think Linux needs more work in the area of tool placement in GUI menus, for example (though I find it easier to find things in KDE than I do in the ridiculous Office 2007 ribbon bar!). Yes, synaptic is very complicated.... One of the big things gnome wants to work on is GUI standards, which I think is what your getting at. The problem most people have in changing to linux is that they are so used to windows they try and do things the same way. Which either wont work or in the case of installing apps there is a far far better way in managed distributions. Personally I dual boot both my laptop and my desktop and have done for a few years now, I went from using windows all the time to the 3 months after I installed ubuntu using it once....
Pangloss Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 I ran into an interesting example of that last term when I taught a class on web servers, which is an elective in our IT program. Most of the folks in the program are planning to be network administrators and will likely pick up certifications such as MCSE, A+ and/or CCNA, etc. These are the kind of people you expect to become core Linux constituents -- the "base", if you will. I don't normally teach networking classes, although I used to do corporate MCSE and Network+ training, but it was many years ago, so what happened was a bit of an eye opener. Windows has become so prevalent in the K-12 arena that they typically come to college having zero command line experience these days. It's like a foreign language. They prefer to run the GUI and configure everything with the mouse, and they get really discombobulated when I make them configure IP addresses and basic Apache stuff through the INI files. It works out fine in the end (I'm quite the taskmaster -- "Would you rather get a zero, Mister Smith?"), and as teachers I guess we just have to view it as an opportunity and a challenge. But it's important because command line efficiency (and low RAM profile) is one of the areas where Linux is most effective and useful.
insane_alien Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 the command line is simple once you've used it a bit. i tried on windows but its not the same. its like dropping from a bugatti veyron to a reliant robin with a puncture in the front wheel and only firing on one cylinder. its a damn shame what MS have done to it.
Pangloss Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 Well they haven't really done anything negative to it, it's just no longer bolstered by up-and-coming programmers like in the old days. You used to be able to download a dozen different shells and text editors just like with Linux. Today's Windows programmers focus on GUI. Ironically, Microsoft has had to go back and essentially reinvent the command line, adding new commands and functionality in a very old-fashioned shell concept. They call it "Monad", or "Windows PowerShell", and you can download it and throw it into Vista, Server or XP. Where you typically see it used is in Exchange administration, or scripting server admin tasks in a DB cluster or VM farm. It seems crazy, but more and more often Windows administrators are staring at blanking cursors again.
Realitycheck Posted June 7, 2007 Author Posted June 7, 2007 But it's important because command line efficiency (and low RAM profile) is one of the areas where Linux is most effective and useful. Hmm. I have 256 MB of RAM and they're telling me that is what is making this garbage show up on the screen. Also, have not been able to access that other repository because supposedly apt-get, aptitude,and synaptic are not all turned off, though as far as I can tell, they are. I am guessing that it takes a command to do this, of which I have not found. Is there a good place to find commands indexed by what they do? This is probably why a wise man once said, " Stability is a virtue."
Klaynos Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 Hmm. I have 256 MB of RAM and they're telling me that is what is making this garbage show up on the screen. Also, have not been able to access that other repository because supposedly apt-get, aptitude,and synaptic are not all turned off, though as far as I can tell, they are. I am guessing that it takes a command to do this, of which I have not found. Is there a good place to find commands indexed by what they do? This is probably why a wise man once said, " Stability is a virtue." How are you trying to add the extra repository? Do you have update manager running, or is it trying to do it's daily check to see if there's updates? Also 256MB is not much RAM for any modern GUI OS that isn't really trying to conserve system resources, which is not one of ubuntu's aims... xubuntu might be a faster option for you...
Dak Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 Ive only got 256MB ram, the usage is almost always < 50% (running xubuntu). my 900MHz processor, otoh, tends to get maxed out quite often
insane_alien Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 you could always give DSL or Puppy. they're tiny distros. 64MB of ram and your sorted.
Dave Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 fluxbuntu would be even better You can always just install ubuntu-minimal and configure flux from there.
Dak Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 you could always give DSL or Puppy. they're tiny distros. 64MB of ram and your sorted. I prefer the feel of xubuntu over those two (tho admittedly i haven't used DSL that much) and, tbh, the processor is just about coping ok.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now