help required.

kaps said:

Hello

What is the best IDE to use for C/C++ languages?
Previously I used "turbo c" compiler on Windows XP.

But now I switched to Windows Vista where I cant use it.

You seem to have got things the wrong way round.

First decide the software that you want to use. Then choose an operating
system that can run that software. If Vista doesn't run the software you
want it to run, why bother to buy it at all?

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

Jun 27 '08 #6

Richard Heathfield wrote:

kaps said:

>Hello

What is the best IDE to use for C/C++ languages?
Previously I used "turbo c" compiler on Windows XP.

But now I switched to Windows Vista where I cant use it.

You seem to have got things the wrong way round.

First decide the software that you want to use. Then choose an operating
system that can run that software. If Vista doesn't run the software you
want it to run, why bother to buy it at all?

Maybe the OP likes paying for polio :)

--
Ian Collins.

Jun 27 '08 #7

santosh

kaps wrote:

Hello

What is the best IDE to use for C/C++ languages?

Depends on what you mean by "best", doesn't it? Many people developing
for Windows like Microsoft's Visual Studio IDE. Free to use versions of
Visual C++ are supplied by Microsoft. Visit their site.

Previously I used "turbo c" compiler on Windows XP.

But now I switched to Windows Vista where I cant use it.

Why not? From what I have heard from others (I have yet to touch Vista
myself), DOS programs can still work under Vista. except for fullscreen
ones.

I tried to
setup CDT eclipse but could not compile C program.
Can somebody please tell me which IDE is best and from where to
download?

My personal choice is the Vim editor, but that's not for everyone.
Otherwise there are some good IDEs like Dev-C++, Code::Blocks etc.

Have you done a Google search. Usually such simple queries can be
answered just as well by Google. Also your question is, strictly
speaking, off-topic here. You might also want to try a group like
comp.programming, comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32 for more
recommendations. Also try a group under the comp.os.ms-dos category for
help with trying to get DOS applications running under Vista. Also you
might want to ask in groups under the microsoft.public category for
more help with Windows and DOS based problems. You find all the above
mentioned groups by using the search facility of Google Groups, but I
recommend posting through a regular news server, as Google Groups is
taking no action to prevent their users from abusing Usenet with spam.

Jun 27 '08 #8

Bartc

"Richard Heathfield" <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote in message
news:pu******************************@bt.com...

kaps said:

>Hello

What is the best IDE to use for C/C++ languages?
Previously I used "turbo c" compiler on Windows XP.

But now I switched to Windows Vista where I cant use it.

You seem to have got things the wrong way round.

First decide the software that you want to use. Then choose an operating
system that can run that software. If Vista doesn't run the software you
want it to run, why bother to buy it at all?

That's easy to say. But for someone with few resources, there are limited
choices of hardware and OS.

Windows machines are easy to buy, and they work out of the box. And they
will run a huge choice of software, including plenty of C systems.

If you're talking about Linux, that's more difficult to buy. It's possible
install it yourself of course, but I'm guessing the OP wants to do some C
programming not devote his life to fiddling with Linux.

-- Bartc

Jun 27 '08 #9

Bartc wrote:

>
If you're talking about Linux, that's more difficult to buy. It's possible
install it yourself of course, but I'm guessing the OP wants to do some C
programming not devote his life to fiddling with Linux.

Why does everyone assume the only alternative to windows is Linux?
There are plenty of options for those of us who prefer to spend our
limited resources on tools rather than an OS.

--
Ian Collins.

Jun 27 '08 #10

Bartc said:

>
"Richard Heathfield" <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote in message
news:pu******************************@bt.com...
>kaps said:

>>Hello

What is the best IDE to use for C/C++ languages?
Previously I used "turbo c" compiler on Windows XP.

But now I switched to Windows Vista where I cant use it.

You seem to have got things the wrong way round.

First decide the software that you want to use. Then choose an operating
system that can run that software. If Vista doesn't run the software you
want it to run, why bother to buy it at all?

That's easy to say. But for someone with few resources, there are limited
choices of hardware and OS.

Yes. Windows XP is still available, and runs Turbo C just fine.

A friend of mine, who is completely and utterly non-technical, put up with
Vista for almost a year, by the end of which time she was sick to the back
teeth of it. No prompting from me - I didn't even know she was running
Vista. On her own initiative she had contacted Dell and told them how
furious she was with Vista for so many reasons - and they sent her a
complimentary copy of XP. She then said "Richard: laptop; XP install disk;
go do it"... so I did, and now she is happily running XP and is perfectly
content once more.

Windows machines are easy to buy, and they work out of the box. And they
will run a huge choice of software, including plenty of C systems.

The last machine I was responsible for selecting was a Win32 laptop, and
the choices were XP and Vista. I chose XP. It's a *CHOICE*.

If you're talking about Linux,

I wasn't.

that's more difficult to buy.

Yes - buying free stuff can be a complex business.

It's
possible install it yourself of course,

It's trivial, nowadays.

but I'm guessing the OP wants to
do some C programming not devote his life to fiddling with Linux.

There's more to Win32 than Vista.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

Jun 27 '08 #11

santosh

Bartc wrote:

"Richard Heathfield" <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote in message
news:pu******************************@bt.com...
>kaps said:

>>Hello

What is the best IDE to use for C/C++ languages?
Previously I used "turbo c" compiler on Windows XP.

But now I switched to Windows Vista where I cant use it.

You seem to have got things the wrong way round.

First decide the software that you want to use. Then choose an
operating system that can run that software. If Vista doesn't run the
software you want it to run, why bother to buy it at all?

That's easy to say. But for someone with few resources, there are
limited choices of hardware and OS.

Huh? Windows Vista demands more hardware resources out of the box than
any other operating system.

Windows machines are easy to buy, and they work out of the box. And
they will run a huge choice of software, including plenty of C
systems.

True to an extent.

If you're talking about Linux, that's more difficult to buy.

True.

It's
possible install it yourself of course, but I'm guessing the OP wants
to do some C programming not devote his life to fiddling with Linux.

And here you are wrong. Something like Ubuntu works from the word go.
Absolutely no fiddling is required, unless you are doing advanced
stuff, in which case you should _know_ what you are doing.

The great thing about UNIX and Unix-like systems is that almost always
their default install included development tools for a wide variety of
languages. C of course was, and is, the most supported of PLs under
Unix.

Systems like Ubuntu, Debian, [Free|Open|Net]BSD, are, in my experience,
great for programming. For general use Ubuntu is frankly easier to use
than the Windows versions I have used in the past (3.1/95/98/XP).

C programming involves a lot of low level fiddling in practise, so if
the OP is allergic to fiddling then he might want to reconsider C
programming.

Jun 27 '08 #12

santosh

Richard Heathfield wrote:

<snip>

The last machine I was responsible for selecting was a Win32 laptop,
and the choices were XP and Vista. I chose XP. It's a *CHOICE*.

Not for long if Microsoft has it's way.

<snip>

Jun 27 '08 #13

santosh

Ian Collins wrote:

Bartc wrote:
>>
If you're talking about Linux, that's more difficult to buy. It's
possible install it yourself of course, but I'm guessing the OP wants
to do some C programming not devote his life to fiddling with Linux.

Why does everyone assume the only alternative to windows is Linux?
There are plenty of options for those of us who prefer to spend our
limited resources on tools rather than an OS.

Yes, I can also recommend OpenSolaris (just tried it out a few days
back). Though it's still in beta it's a nice alternative to Linux and
the BSDs, as long as you're not a Free Software zealot. Sun also has
a "Solaris Developer Edition", a tested Solaris version and I believe
the only free OS with a fully conforming C99 compiler.

Jun 27 '08 #14

santosh said:

Richard Heathfield wrote:

<snip>

>The last machine I was responsible for selecting was a Win32 laptop,
and the choices were XP and Vista. I chose XP. It's a *CHOICE*.

Not for long if Microsoft has it's way.

Microsoft may be big enough and powerful enough to enforce Vista's
acceptance - or it may not be. Time will tell. My non-techie friend's
negative experience with Vista is by no means unique. (Personally, I've
never used it and never plan to, so I don't care either way.)

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

Jun 27 '08 #15

Flash Gordon

Richard Heathfield wrote, On 03/05/08 13:40:

santosh said:

>Richard Heathfield wrote:

<snip>

>>The last machine I was responsible for selecting was a Win32 laptop,
and the choices were XP and Vista. I chose XP. It's a *CHOICE*.
Not for long if Microsoft has it's way.

Microsoft may be big enough and powerful enough to enforce Vista's
acceptance - or it may not be. Time will tell. My non-techie friend's
negative experience with Vista is by no means unique. (Personally, I've
never used it and never plan to, so I don't care either way.)

To kill XP and force people who need Windows to use Vista instead all MS
have to do is refuse to sell licences for XP and then stick to their
guns and wait.

I use Vista on my company notebook specifically to hit problems before
customers. I have hit problems with some specific pieces of SW, but not
had major problems with the OS itself. Well, not more than with any
other OS. Maybe I am just good at not breaking things.
--
Flash Gordon

Jun 27 '08 #16

CBFalconer

Bartc wrote:

>

.... snip ...

>
If you're talking about Linux, that's more difficult to buy. It's
possible install it yourself of course, but I'm guessing the OP
wants to do some C programming not devote his life to fiddling
with Linux.

No buying necessary. Just attack shipit.ubuntu.com and ask for a
CD. It will be shipped to you, free.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.

** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Jun 27 '08 #17

Eligiusz Narutowicz

ro******@ibd.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca (Walter Roberson) writes:

In article <14**********************************@y18g2000pre. googlegroups.com>,
kaps <ka******@gmail.comwrote:

>>What is the best IDE to use for C/C++ languages?

FIG-Forth.

>>Previously I used "turbo c" compiler on Windows XP.

>>But now I switched to Windows Vista where I cant use it. I tried to
setup CDT eclipse but could not compile C program.

>>Can somebody please tell me which IDE is best and from where to
download?

Code listing is available in the August 1980 Byte Magazine.
By the way, next time you might want to supply some kind of objective
meaning for "best" instead of leaving it up to *my* interpretation
of "best".

I think it ok to ask for best from other peoples points of view. You are
clearly not a very helpful person.

Jun 27 '08 #18

Richard Heathfield wrote:

santosh said:

>Richard Heathfield wrote:

<snip>

>>The last machine I was responsible for selecting was a Win32 laptop,
and the choices were XP and Vista. I chose XP. It's a *CHOICE*.
Not for long if Microsoft has it's way.

Microsoft may be big enough and powerful enough to enforce Vista's
acceptance - or it may not be. Time will tell. My non-techie friend's
negative experience with Vista is by no means unique. (Personally, I've
never used it and never plan to, so I don't care either way.)

<OT>
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/192372/d...p-cut-off.html
</OT>

--
Ian Collins.

Jun 27 '08 #19

santosh wrote:

Ian Collins wrote:

>Bartc wrote:
>>If you're talking about Linux, that's more difficult to buy. It's
possible install it yourself of course, but I'm guessing the OP wants
to do some C programming not devote his life to fiddling with Linux.

Why does everyone assume the only alternative to windows is Linux?
There are plenty of options for those of us who prefer to spend our
limited resources on tools rather than an OS.

Yes, I can also recommend OpenSolaris (just tried it out a few days
back). Though it's still in beta it's a nice alternative to Linux and
the BSDs, as long as you're not a Free Software zealot. Sun also has
a "Solaris Developer Edition", a tested Solaris version and I believe
the only free OS with a fully conforming C99 compiler.

An excellent everything's there out of the box choice for the serious
developer.

--
Ian Collins.

Jun 27 '08 #20

Bartc wrote:

But for someone with few resources, there are limited
choices of hardware and OS.

That's as may be, but shelling out several hundred dollars for Vista
seems an odd way to conserve money.
More likely he bought a new machine with Vista pre-installed. Right
about now, I'd be getting my XP install disk out.

If you're talking about Linux, that's more difficult to buy.

Well, yeah - since its free.

It's possible
install it yourself of course, but I'm guessing the OP wants to do some C
programming not devote his life to fiddling with Linux.

Not wanting to drift offtopic, but you've __CLEARLY__ little experience
with modern Linux distros. They're essentially download, burn to DVD and
install.

--
Mark McIntyre

CLC FAQ <http://c-faq.com/>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>

Jun 27 '08 #21

Flash Gordon wrote:

>
To kill XP and force people who need Windows to use Vista instead all MS
have to do is refuse to sell licences for XP

To sell Edsels, all Ford had to do is stop selling Mercurys.
And /that/ strategy worked well didn't it?

and then stick to their guns and wait.

For sales to fall, consumers to bide their time waiting for the price to
drop, consumers to decide they don't need a new PC just yet, OEMs to
start hollering for XP licenses etc etc.

Remember, nobody /has/ to buy a new PC, not even in the US. Its not like
water or bread.
--
Mark McIntyre

CLC FAQ <http://c-faq.com/>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>

Jun 27 '08 #22

Flash Gordon

Mark McIntyre wrote, On 03/05/08 23:43:

Flash Gordon wrote:
>>
To kill XP and force people who need Windows to use Vista instead all
MS have to do is refuse to sell licences for XP

To sell Edsels, all Ford had to do is stop selling Mercurys.
And /that/ strategy worked well didn't it?

I wouldn't know, I can't remember that :-)

>and then stick to their guns and wait.

For sales to fall, consumers to bide their time waiting for the price to
drop, consumers to decide they don't need a new PC just yet, OEMs to
start hollering for XP licenses etc etc.

Well, that is what happened...

Remember, nobody /has/ to buy a new PC, not even in the US. Its not like
water or bread.

If MS hold out until the PCs are broke...

Note that I only said that people who need Windows would have to use
Vista, people who don't need Windows could choose another OS instead.
--
Flash Gordon

Jun 27 '08 #23

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Flash Gordon said:

<snip>

>Note that I only said that people who need Windows would have to use
Vista, people who don't need Windows could choose another OS instead.

This isn't actually true. There are brazillions of perfectly legal Windows
non-Vista 32-bit OS licences out there that were originally on machines
that have been discarded. In many, if not most, cases it is legal to
recycle them, assuming that the original hardware was in fact destroyed
(or the disk formatted, at least). There's nothing in the rules that says
you *must* buy an OS when you buy a computer.

Try telling that to Dell, at least for laptops.

There is certainly a LinuxInstall-shaped gap in the
market, for example - for people who want to use Linux but can't seem to
work out how to install it (or who don't see how to get it to work with
all the hardware that comes with the machine).

Linux isn't the only alternative...

--
Ian Collins.

Jun 27 '08 #24

Ian Collins said:

Richard Heathfield wrote:
>Flash Gordon said:

<snip>

>>Note that I only said that people who need Windows would have to use
Vista, people who don't need Windows could choose another OS instead.

This isn't actually true. There are brazillions of perfectly legal
Windows non-Vista 32-bit OS licences out there that were originally on
machines that have been discarded. In many, if not most, cases it is
legal to recycle them, assuming that the original hardware was in fact
destroyed (or the disk formatted, at least). There's nothing in the
rules that says you *must* buy an OS when you buy a computer.

Try telling that to Dell, at least for laptops.

You missed my point, which is that companies aren't *required* to sell you
an OS when they sell you a computer. The fact that they generally choose
to merely reflects current practice, not necessarily best practice. (And
incidentally, Dell *do* sell laptops with Linux pre-installed, according
to their Web site.)

>
>There is certainly a LinuxInstall-shaped gap in the
market, for example - for people who want to use Linux but can't seem to
work out how to install it (or who don't see how to get it to work with
all the hardware that comes with the machine).

Linux isn't the only alternative...

I agree. It is merely an example.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

Jun 27 '08 #25

Flash Gordon wrote:

Mark McIntyre wrote, On 03/05/08 23:43:
>Flash Gordon wrote:
>>>
To kill XP and force people who need Windows to use Vista instead all
MS have to do is refuse to sell licences for XP

To sell Edsels, all Ford had to do is stop selling Mercurys.
And /that/ strategy worked well didn't it?

I wouldn't know, I can't remember that :-)

Nice try... :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edsel#End_of_the_Edsel

>>and then stick to their guns and wait.

For sales to fall, consumers to bide their time waiting for the price
to drop, consumers to decide they don't need a new PC just yet, OEMs
to start hollering for XP licenses etc etc.

Well, that is what happened...

Indeed, I direct you at
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...stomer_demand/
and
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04..._quarter_2008/

>Remember, nobody /has/ to buy a new PC, not even in the US. Its not
like water or bread.

If MS hold out until the PCs are broke...

See above...

Jun 27 '08 #26

Richard Heathfield wrote:

There is certainly a LinuxInstall-shaped gap in the
market, for example - for people who want to use Linux but can't seem to
work out how to install it (or who don't see how to get it to work with
all the hardware that comes with the machine).

These people must be severely cranially challenged - the last three
linux installs I did involved inserting the dvd, rebooting and answering
a few simple questions (what is your name, what is your quest ^w sorry,
country, and so forth). Almost exactly identical to installing XP or
Vista in fact.

--
Mark McIntyre

CLC FAQ <http://c-faq.com/>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>

Jun 27 '08 #27

s0suk3

On May 4, 4:02 am, Mark McIntyre <markmcint...@spamcop.netwrote:

Richard Heathfield wrote:
There is certainly a LinuxInstall-shaped gap in the
market, for example - for people who want to use Linux but can't seem to
work out how to install it (or who don't see how to get it to work with
all the hardware that comes with the machine).

These people must be severely cranially challenged - the last three
linux installs I did involved inserting the dvd, rebooting and answering
a few simple questions (what is your name, what is your quest ^w sorry,
country, and so forth). Almost exactly identical to installing XP or
Vista in fact.

Easier, actually. I've installed a couple of Linux distros; but I
don't know how to install XP (and I also use it) (not that I really
care...). The sad thing is that while installing Linux is so easy,
there's a lot of trouble with the hardware. I once couldn't get the
modem to work with Mandriva on a PC, and another time I couldn't get
the monitor (!) on a Mac to work with Fedora...

Jun 27 '08 #28

Richard Tobin

In article <Dt******************************@bt.com>,
Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:

>There is certainly a LinuxInstall-shaped gap in the
market, for example - for people who want to use Linux but can't seem to
work out how to install it

Something that would make it as quick and easy to install as Windows,
you mean?

-- Richard
--
:wq

Jun 27 '08 #29

Eligiusz Narutowicz

Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.netwrites:

Richard Heathfield wrote:
>There is certainly a LinuxInstall-shaped gap in the market, for
example - for people who want to use Linux but can't seem to work
out how to install it (or who don't see how to get it to work with
all the hardware that comes with the machine).

These people must be severely cranially challenged - the last three
linux installs I did involved inserting the dvd, rebooting and
answering a few simple questions (what is your name, what is your
quest ^w sorry, country, and so forth). Almost exactly identical to
installing XP or Vista in fact.

This is true in some of the cases and not in many.

There are still many wireless problems. There are still many video
issues especially with people having to manually editing xorg.conf. There
are still many issues with freezes and lockups. There is still no UI for
changing details in xorg.conf for the "free" nv driver - otherwise in
ubuntu you must compile manually the driver for hw support.

But I am in agreeing with you that Linux is much better. The problem is
that you must cross compile. I use Linux for Pything development and its
good for me too. But lets not tell lies about installing. In some cases
it is installing very good indeed but in many cases this is not so.

Jun 27 '08 #30

Richard Tobin said:

In article <Dt******************************@bt.com>,
Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:
>>There is certainly a LinuxInstall-shaped gap in the
market, for example - for people who want to use Linux but can't seem to
work out how to install it

Something that would make it as quick and easy to install as Windows,
you mean?

Most people I know can't install either Linux /or/ Windows. The only reason
they can run a Windows machine is that Windows was pre-installed.

Actually, most people I know don't know how to run Windows, either. They
can just about launch applications from the desktop or start menu, but
that is the extent of their knowledge. Windows Explorer, for example, is a
closed book, locked in a steel cabinet, buried at the back of the library
cellar and covered in coal.

Most people, in fact, should not be permitted to touch a computer, for much
the same reason that most people should not be permitted to play the
drums.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

Jun 27 '08 #31

Bartc

"Mark McIntyre" <ma**********@spamcop.netwrote in message
news:ON*******************@en-nntp-03.am2.easynews.com...

Bartc wrote:
>But for someone with few resources, there are limited choices of hardware
and OS.

That's as may be, but shelling out several hundred dollars for Vista seems
an odd way to conserve money.
More likely he bought a new machine with Vista pre-installed. Right about
now, I'd be getting my XP install disk out.

>If you're talking about Linux, that's more difficult to buy.

Well, yeah - since its free.

I meant machines preinstalled with Linux, where everything works as
expected. For years there was always one essential component not supported
(like a floppy, usb, or modem) if I tried to self-install.

>It's possible install it yourself of course, but I'm guessing the OP
wants to do some C programming not devote his life to fiddling with
Linux.

Not wanting to drift offtopic, but you've __CLEARLY__ little experience
with modern Linux distros. They're essentially download, burn to DVD and
install.

There're much better but still not problem-free. I'm not an MS fan but it's
always a relief to reboot back into Windows.

-- Bartc

Jun 27 '08 #32

Flash Gordon

Bartc wrote, On 04/05/08 15:26:

"Mark McIntyre" <ma**********@spamcop.netwrote in message
news:ON*******************@en-nntp-03.am2.easynews.com...
>Bartc wrote:

<snip>

>>It's possible install it yourself of course, but I'm guessing the OP
wants to do some C programming not devote his life to fiddling with
Linux.
Not wanting to drift offtopic, but you've __CLEARLY__ little experience
with modern Linux distros. They're essentially download, burn to DVD and
install.

There're much better but still not problem-free. I'm not an MS fan but it's
always a relief to reboot back into Windows.

Then there are the people who bought PCs with Vista pre-installed only
to find that it did not support all of the HW on the machine! Even on my
Dell notebook which came pre-installed with Vista after a Windows update
it was complaining about a HW compatibility problem for a few months!

Or the server build I've done recently where we had to download drivers
for Windows 2003 Server before we could install Windows (yes, we
sometimes get the same with Linux).

These problems come and go with all OSs as the HW moves on.
--
Flash Gordon

Jun 27 '08 #33

Eligiusz Narutowicz wrote:

Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.netwrites:

the last three
>linux installs I did involved inserting the dvd, rebooting and
answering a few simple questions (what is your name, what is your
quest ^w sorry, country, and so forth). Almost exactly identical to
installing XP or Vista in fact.

This is true in some of the cases and not in many.

There are still many wireless problems. There are still many video
issues especially with people having to manually editing xorg.conf. There
are still many issues with freezes and lockups.

I disagree. Perhaps you're using the wrong distro, or have a somewhat
out of date one? I'm using FC6 for goodness' sake, and it works
perfectly on every computer I've tried it on.

No more to say, this is wildly off topic here.
--
Mark McIntyre

CLC FAQ <http://c-faq.com/>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>

Jun 27 '08 #34

Eligiusz Narutowicz

Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.netwrites:

Eligiusz Narutowicz wrote:
>Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.netwrites:

the last three
>>linux installs I did involved inserting the dvd, rebooting and
answering a few simple questions (what is your name, what is your
quest ^w sorry, country, and so forth). Almost exactly identical to
installing XP or Vista in fact.

This is true in some of the cases and not in many.

There are still many wireless problems. There are still many video
issues especially with people having to manually editing xorg.conf. There
are still many issues with freezes and lockups.

I disagree. Perhaps you're using the wrong distro, or have a somewhat
out of date one? I'm using FC6 for goodness' sake, and it works
perfectly on every computer I've tried it on.

No more to say, this is wildly off topic here.

It is a thread people can ignore it I think.

But I use Linux and I know it does cause problems on install. Even a
quick look at forums tells you this.

I find it hard to believe you on FC6. There is too much new HW out there
and I know from experience that I must get more modern kernels unless
you only try it on very old hw? Then I do believe you.

Jun 27 '08 #35

Bartc wrote:

"Mark McIntyre" <ma**********@spamcop.netwrote in message
news:ON*******************@en-nntp-03.am2.easynews.com...
>Bartc wrote:
>>But for someone with few resources, there are limited choices of hardware
and OS.
That's as may be, but shelling out several hundred dollars for Vista seems
an odd way to conserve money.
More likely he bought a new machine with Vista pre-installed. Right about
now, I'd be getting my XP install disk out.

>>If you're talking about Linux, that's more difficult to buy.
Well, yeah - since its free.

I meant machines preinstalled with Linux,

Agree with that point.

where everything works as
expected. For years there was always one essential component not supported
(like a floppy, usb, or modem) if I tried to self-install.

You are a tad behind the times. Both my usb modem and usb scanner work,
much to my surprise. Stuff like printers is very much out of the box.

It would help of course if makers included the linux drivers on their
otherwise-useless install CD. Half of them don't even bother with MacOS
drivers. And the linux ones woudl cost them zero pence to include.

I'm not an MS fan but it's
always a relief to reboot back into Windows.

I /am/ a relative MS fan, I actually like XP quite a lot, but its always
a relief to boot back into Linux where i can do some work without
waiting for the OS to spin its wheels. 3Ghz Athlon, 1GB memory in case
you're wondering.

--
Mark McIntyre

CLC FAQ <http://c-faq.com/>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>

Jun 27 '08 #36