Linked by Jeremy LaCroix on Thu 3rd Jun 2004 07:02 UTC
During the majority of my time working with computers, Windows was the operating system of choice. Reason being, it's all I've known. In 2002, I took a college course titled "Linux Administration" which entitled me to a few cd-roms of Redhat 7.x. While this course was nothing more than a few extra credits for me, I fell in love with Linux and went through the entire textbook a week into the class. It was a nice feeling to use something "different" than what I was used to.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
I don't get it. What is so difficult in installing rpms?
If you use yum, apt-get or some similar tool its much easier than windows. You don't get asked one single question like where you wan't to install, if you want to customize your installation or to enter a cdrom into something called E:
In Linux the software just gets installed for the user to use no questions asked.
Sure, you need internet to do this, but in my experience many windows installers use internet too. They often asks you to upgrade other programs like internet explorerer so I wouldn't say that Linux is any worse than windows in that respect.
The main problem with software installation in Linux today is not how you do it, but that the software you need may not yet be available for the Linux platform. This is what keeps Linux from expanding on the desktop market. This is where I actually see the problems with RPMS. They are not standardized. If at least the stuff in LSB was packaged in RPMS with standard names and contents, regardless of distro, it would be much easier for venders like Macromedia or Adobe to support Linux