Have you found the most recent versions of FF to load slow and be bloated ? I moved over to Opera recently because FF was getting to be slooooooooow and a general PITA with continuous "improvements" that added nothing to my user experience . Loaded v43.0.1 on a laptop (the subject of this and my other recent posts) and several websites said it was "out of date" and refused to function . Opera ain't perfect , but it does do what I need ...
I only go on-line using my Linux machine and indeed found FF problematic until I dumped most of the add-ons etc, Now it seems to work very well.
I started with Linux in the year 2000
from the time I got the CD until I got everything installed and configured was ...six months.
I sure learned a lot though but it was not user friendly at all.
Running 46.01 on Windows 10 - no issues - but I remove virtually all add-ins that I don't absolutely need from any browser (and any program, as far as that goes)
Ah. I started with NetBSD in 1993...
Having a previous System V machine, here, the learning curve was pretty trivial (the differences between a Berkeley distribution and AT&T being relatively minor)
That's why Linux will always be a hobbyist OS. The folks promoting it can't stop tinkering to spend time to make it "friendly".
ISIS-II was used on the MDS-800 development system. One of my first products was developed on one. The floppies sounded like someone grinding the gears on a manual tranny... The prom programmer was the size of a breadbox.
[I still have the sources for the ISIS tools -- but, on paper]I have a box of NOS media. Plus, a pristine 8" floppy drive complete with electronic doorlock. The 512KB system that I used the drive on allowed me to use the large RAM as a disk cache. I would lock the drive door whenever there was live data in the cache waiting to be written back to the floppy. When I wanted to eject the floppy, I'd flush the cache and the door would unlock when the writes were finished.
[Pretty slick for 1980 "home" technology -- classier than the PC's that were just being introduced (and faster, too!)]
This is true of most software. "Software grows to consume the CPU cycles (and memory!) available to it!" It is especially true of larger pieces of code AND projects with multiple, loosely-coupled developers -- no one has "the big picture" in mind. The approach is more like an ant colony: each ant HOPING that his efforts contribute to the Whole but being largely clueless about how he (and his efforts) fits into that Whole.
Depends on what you want *of* a browser. The more you expect it to do FOR you, the more bloated (and brittle) it will be.
ISIS is similar to CP/M because both were written by Gary Kildall. Kildall worked on ISIS for Intel, which was used for Intel development system, later he created CP/M as a commercial product that his company Digital Research sold. Gary couldn't reach an agreememt with IBM when they came a calling for an OS for their first PC. Bill Gates copied CP/M, or enough of it for MS DOS, so that the two were very similar, reached a deal with IBMS and Gary always felt that Gates had unfairly copied from him and cheated him.
You bragging or complaining?
Define "user friendly". If you mean you have a buncha Windows users to give you help/info about yer new system, I agee. I've been using Linux fer almost 13 yrs and never had anyone to help me, so hadda solve all problems by myself (anda lotta O'Reilly books). In that respect, Linux is not real user friendly. OTOH, lotta new Linux distributions (distros) are VERY user friendly. As I mentioned before, Mint is specially user friendly.
BTW, I can have most any Linux box fully tweaked and running smoothly within a week or two. As fer Windows, I barely know how to fly XP, let alone W7-W10. ;)
nb
Define "fully tweaked".
Windows boxes work "out of the box". You're not busy dicking with the window-manager-du-jour or the desktop-of-the-month.
Of course, if you're trying to set up IIS on windows, you're in pretty much the same boat as apache under any of the Eunices.
OTOH, setting up a box to provide *services* (instead of as a workstation) probably is easier in the FOSS world. At the very least, you don't have to go chase down vendors of appropriate "applications" to acquire them! (Though you may have to deal with a package manager and countless dependencies that you'd not envisioned)
Setting up the Apache HTTP server on Windows isn't difficult. While the Apache Foundation doesn't release Windows binaries, they are readily available at sites like ApacheHaus. That avoids CAL hell. Unless you're a lawyer, the CAL explanations are abstruse. One thing is for sure; if you ask M$ if you need a CAL, the answer is yes.
But Apache isn't IIS! :> Frankly, I can't see any reason you'd want to run a web service under windows -- even one of the "server" variants! It wasn't designed with that sort of application in mind (just like you wouldn't use Linux for real-time work).
Saying you *can* do isn't the same as saying it's
*appropriate*!(I can dig a trench with a shovel. But, I surely wouldn't TRY!)
Autopilot, to a large extent.
I don't understand that since most enterprise servers are running it.
"Real-time" requires timeliness guarantees. Linux was not designed with that in mind.
What *guarantees* does an application have that it will complete by a particular deadline? What mechanisms does the OS provide to alert it to the fact that its deadline has passed?
Ask these questions of the OS each time your application requests some "service" from the OS -- read a disk file, request a block of (physical) memory, activate another process/task, etc.
The same is true of DOS/Windows/etc. The "real-time" solution with these systems is "buy a faster computer -- and HOPE!" (cuz some other job can get introduced that eats up resources that you HOPED would be yours!)
Yes.
Yes. I remember using it for my class project (traffic light controller, and unlike a lot of the others I didn't leave out the caution after the left-turn arrow).
[snip]
That, and I often find solutions to my Linux problems on the internet.
in 2010, I heard about he Ubuntu "live CD", and downloaded the ISO, burned it and booted. I was using Firefox MUCH more quickly than with Windows.
Also, I really prefer free software. It's not about the money (despite how many people make up that stuff), but about the impediments they put in commercial software because they ASSUME you're a thief.
[snip]
I have set up an Apache/PHP server on Windows, but I decided to use Linux instead, to make it more like the public server I use (Rackspace, Red Hat Linux). There are several ways PHP is different on Windows.
I don't see that. I can understand them not wanting you to buy one copy and use five -- regardless of the reasoning that might "sound OK" (I like Borland's "like a book" analogy -- so its not necessarily bound to a machine).
Aside from compiler/debugger, most FOSS applications just aren't up to par, in my opinion. They are missing capabilities and suffer from user interfaces that "just happened" instead of "being designed". Too often, the UI is bolted onto something that wasn't designed with it in mind. E.g., automatically rewriting rc files instead of abandoning them (will the app crash if I go in and muck up the file manually?)
I'm presently drafting a technical letter (no, not an email -- one that will actually travel on a plane! :> ). I wouldn't even think of using a "productivity suite" (e.g., MSOffice) -- let alone a crippled FOSS version of same. I'd spend all my time bouncing back and forth between applications trying to piece together the various graphics and inserts that I'll need. Instead, I'll do it all in FrameMaker and have a polished "product", when done.
The appeal free software has to me is that I can *fix* it without waiting for the vendor to decide "my problem" is worth their attention. AND, not have to embrace a bunch of other "fixes"/changes at the same time (which may or may not actually work!).
I can also verify ambiguities in the documentation: "Hmmm... it SAYS that it does THIS. But, the code shows it doing THAT!"
Microprocessors didn't make it into my curriculum when I was in school -- despite the fact that I was developing with them "in industry" at the same time (i4004, i8080, MC6800). Instead, the attitude was "why don't you take one of the VAXEN and use that, instead...?"
While this seemed insane, at the time, it is amusing to realize how forward-thinking the approach was: nowadays, a VAX-equivalent environment is less than a cup of coffee! Why not use them EVERYWHERE?!
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.