Humax video recorder

[tabbypurr]

Linux is the one OS some people do diy. It's the only major one one can.

NT

[Bill]

In message , Mike Tomlinson writes

As is the Welsh relay from Storeton which is in a straight line from Winter Hill to here. The English relay which Storeton was originally built to provide is about a quarter of the power, vertically polarised and points the other way, so that is fine.

I did post there some years ago. The lady with the problem with her set top box that I asked about preferred to give up TV altogether rather than spend any money or look at it further. She remains happy with radio alone.

Hmmm. DiSEqC looks interesting, but the person who wanted to watch different satellites has now left the area, so my incentive has gone.

I have this elderly dish, but I was never sure that the arc it followed was accurate. I even brought in some "professionals" but they couldn't improve on what I'd achieved. So, the mad idea was to build a new drive assembly using stepper motors and set it mapping the sky and recording repeatable positions where it found satellites, then a manual revisit to them all to work out what they were and perhaps even watch something. But, as often happens, I ran out of time and enthusiasm, the receiver became obsolete, and the replacement receiver, LNB's and the printers containing the motors have just gathered dust ever since. Just one more example in my rich pattern of failed useless-but-fun projects. I really must clear out the shed.

[T i m]

Linus certainly did. ;-)

Especially if one is into programming.

The thing (that some of the Linux geeks can't understand) is that I'm not into programming and never have been. Ok, I've done a bit of BASIC on the PDP11 we had a 300 baud model link to when at college and on my ZX81's, Spectrum and BBC B, but it became very apparent very quickly that I was better with a soldering iron than I was with a keyboard.

I have done a bit of (very simple) programming on the Arduinos and I 'like' the way you interface with it (unlike the BBC micro:bit that is a bit weird) and it is a buzz when something works, but I don't really have to time, interest (and therefore) attention span to actually make stuff that anyone else might consider 'good'.

Because so much of the Arduino stuff is already out there as examples or to download, I have found that whilst I can generally make all the different hardware modules work, I can't make the programming work to tie all the hardware together nicely.

Like I was working on a project with a mate that could fade up and down his marine fish tank lights with one set controlled over a bluetooth link. We had the (LED) lamps controlled nicely, the BT link working and, the RTC module set and displaying the right date and time on an I2C linked LCD display, it was just that I didn't have the skills (or time / interest to learn them).

Luckily I have a mate who is a very good programmer who is happy to Teamviewer into my PC and pull all the modules together. He doesn't know much about electronics so is happy for what I can show him in return. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[Mark]

Linux is definitely DIY! Windows not so much.

[T i m]

I think the right answer is a function of what you expect / have to get involved in, so in that respect (and for me and many worse than me), dealing with Windows is about as far as 'most people' care or are able to 'diy' on an OS.

Basically, most of what 'most people' are expected to deal with (in a technical sense) is typically done via the GUI. That means it can be managed by solutions often found by trial-and error.

With Linux and it's greater reliance on the CLI to do such things (and with very little that would be intuitive to anyone who wasn't a programmer or used to dealing with such systems), it is less easy / likely for anyone to fix something using trial-and-error, rather than the '1000 monkeys' solution.

This is coming from someone who built his first IBM PC/AT clone running MSDOS 5 and OS fairly familiar with editing a *couple* of startup batch files and using a few basic CLI commands.

Part of autoexec.bat was to call Automenu.bat and it was all pretty well menu based from then on (for me at home and the 35 users I looked after on the PC's and LAN I built and installed at work).

Installing and maintaining several DOS's ... CPM, OS2, Apples OS / OSX and NOS's like Windows 3.11, Lan Manager, Netware and NT Server, offered very little in the way of preparation for installing and running Linux.

Maybe if I'd ever had to work on a mainframe or a Unix machine over my

40 years in IT support, Linux wouldn't have appeared so different / difficult?

Cheers, T i m

[Mark]

Would you be happy building a house using "trial-and-error" or doing any other major DIY project in this way? I wouldn't.

Again Linux is great for people who are prepared to learn it, not for the monkeys.

Great. But DOS/Windows is limited for DIY'ers since it's all closed source.

Of course, it's a different OS.

It does take some effort to learn, but what doesn't. You can't build Windows kernels yourself or modify the source code.

[T i m]

Do you only do those things you know how to do then?

Ah. So, not a 'pioneer' at any level?

When I was at secondary school in woodwork classes we were given the choice of making book-ends or a bathroom cabinet. Because I didn't read (for fun) I didn't need any book-ends and because I didn't own a bathroom I didn't want a bathroom cabinet either, what I didn't have but did want was a boat. My teacher asked him if I had ever built a boat before and I said I had not. Then he asked how I knew I was able to built one and I wouldn't know till I tried. So, I built the boat (and still have it) because I knew I had the basic skills I needed to do something I had never done before. Same with building the kitcar after doing all the bits individually on different vehicles over the years.

So I did something I had never done before with little in the way of guidance from anyone and by just following some basic plans and general building guideline (like which glue was best and how to bend timber without a steambox etc).

My point was that much of what I had to do was for me and at that time, 'trial and error' as such, because that principal doesn't stipulate the ratio of error to trial. If you read Johns TV Box Wiki you will see he made mistakes because he hadn't made that actual thing before, even though he had done most of the processes before. That was the 'error' in 'trial and error'.

Not 'again', 'exactly'. So, you have to look at the *typical* userbase for most desktop OS's and then consider just how much involvement and 'learning' you might consider to be a minimum requirement. My point was that it *is* (unquestionably) easier to lean something that you can explore than something that heads more traditional study.

But that is just the OS itself, there is nothing stopping people writing other modules like drivers and applications.

But why should it be so different re user-administration, especially in 2017? The answer is 'it shouldn't' and if all the people working on Linux stuff, doing their own thing, forking distros every which way, spent time refining the admin GUI to be more, 'GUI' then maybe my list could include Linux?

And it is my prediction that one day it might, making any counter argument pretty mute?

Something that can be intuitively explored is easier to lean than something that can't.

And most wouldn't want to (including me), ever.

I am talking about just administering the OS from an admin-users POV. So, that's not developer or end user just using what they are given with it all working (as well as it can be).

So I am talking people like me who might like to be able to fix more of the many things that often don't work on Linux with hardware OOTB that work with Windows OOTB because in most cases there is official support for Windows from the hardware manufacturers and software writers.

Linux is currently still that harsh square peg in the generally friendly round hole that is Windows (OSX / Android) world.

Slowly though the square is being rounded (as even I have seen over a good few years now from not being able to install Linux and even get it working, installing it and having some things working (wired Ethernet if not Wireless, some video display rather than none) to it generally working as long as you are a bit lucky).

My point is that *my* low level skills re Linux admin haven't really improved yet my ability to get to a fully working (basic) machine has.

It seems that many of the Linux zealots can't or don't want to acknowledge the weakness at this level and simply think that making people have to do something (learn how to use the OS at a lower level) is a realistic / practical solution to the issue, rather than simply bringing Linux up to speed in 2017. ;-(

Cheers, T i m

[Mark]

It depends on the consequences of getting it wrong. I normally like to be prepared as best I can for a task.

At some levels.

You did have the basic skills so it wasn't entirely "trial and error"

--snip--

I am not talking about the "typical" userbase, but people who want to explore things in more depth. And people can explore Linux.

True.

Why should it be the same? Talking about Windows, Microsoft make changes at every version.

So?

If your talking drivers then I doubt Linux drivers are harder to write than those for Windows (although I've not done either (yet)).

I think we'll need to agree to disagree about this.

FWIW I've not had too much trouble installing Linux.

That's progress :-)

Regards, Mark

[T i m]

Of course, but unless you are skilled / trained / experienced or just naturally good at something, for many there will be an element of 'trial and error' involved.

Nowhere is this more relevant than here in a d-i-y group where many solutions are no more than ideas or guesstimations.

"I've not tried this myself but have you tried doing ... "

Well quite ... so, one assumes if what you are attempting isn't something experienced or skilled at, there will be an element of 'exploration' in it's application? We call that 'trial and error'. ;-)

No, but 'trial and error' isn't a definitive thing is it. My point was I wasn't *fully* conversant with all the steps or the processes required that might be involved.

It's exactly the same as my previous admin exposure to all the OS / NOS's I listed and how *none* of them gave me much in the way of experience when it comes to Linux. I can't think of any other similar experience where doing something similar put me in such an unfamiliar situation?

Ah, you are talking then of those who *want* to take on a new hobby or interest versus those (like me) who are only doing what we have to do because of 'needs must'.

Statement: I have no interested *whatsoever* in any OS.

An OS to me is a means to an end and should, under ideal circumstances, be completely transparent. In the same way I maintain my own vehicles and domestic appliances but I don't do so because I

*want* to, but because I often find it more convenient, cheaper and with a better outcome, than getting someone else to do it.

No they can't, well, not at the level I am talking about and for the people I'm talking about.

Example. Yesterday a mate mentioned a netbook that his Mrs had bought for a grandkid a while ago had been mainly left unused because it was very slow / not working properly. So I brought it home and have been playing with it inbetween other stuff. So far I have installed loads of updates, run various AV / malware scans etc etc but am left with some ~30% background CPU utilisation. I have updated the video driver and checked for updates for the BIOS and other hardware drivers and I've done so without going anywhere near the CLI. Even if I was to screw say the video driver up the chances are I could fix it via some GUI based Safe Mode etc.

Because that is what people want and that is the purpose of a desktop OS isn't it, to serve people?

And the Linux distros don't? And at least any changes made by MS / Apple / Google are done because of some central / organised decision, not because several people in several sheds who in general aren't talking to each other, thought (personally) something would be a good idea? Look at Canonical forcing Unity on all Ubuntu users, even those

*not* using portable devices and touch screens and then insisting it would stay like that for good. Now I understand they are now going to drop Unity and go to something else? And what of all the 'marmite' alternative Linux subsystems that are being argued about within the Linux community?

Well, that counters your entire argument doesn't it?

Agreed. And the point is that you don't generally need to write your own driver for hardware under Windows because the manufacturers know that they really need to supply drivers for their hardware to be sellable to 80% of the market.

I don't think we do, or if we do then may I suggest you don't often mix with real people trying to manage both Linux or Windows PC's?

If Linux was comparable to Windows (or OSX / Android) for the admin-user to manage then surely someone who has worked in OT support and building PC's and networks for over 30 years would have less trouble with Linux eh? Don't you think if I could install Linux as easily as I can install and then make-work with all my hardware (as easily as I generally can with Windows) I would? The answer to that id you are still confused is 'Of course I would'. Who wouldn't want something that was current, 'more secure' and FREE, if it allowed them to do all they want just as easily as they could on something that wasn't all those things?

Nor have I, so much and these days' but I'm not even / really talking about the straight installation on 'Linux friendly' (known or otherwise) hardware. I'm talking about the many million people who take their fully functioning Linux laptop and then try to get it to batch scan from their network printer, or access the iTunes store, or upgrade the BIOS or interface with their GPS or many many other devices.

*Exactly*, but said progress is something that few Linux zealots seem to think is required, until it happens then they boast about it when in many cases it's no more than Linux catching up with the likes of Windows.

'Look at all the games we can run on Linux under Steam!' ...Yeah, great, only 10 years after you could run all the games on Steam on Windows but better late than never eh? ;-)

By comparison, more reasonable admin's who by definition (of reasonable) will use whatever OS best suits them or the needs at the time, do see / admit the limitations of all the OS's and will willingly concede when something is wrong. Like, very few admin-users will say they prefer W8.1 over say W7 or see any real advantage running W10 over 7.

So, in an effort to see if this ~20% (currently) background CPU utilisation is coming from on this Atom powered HP netbook, I'm now going to see if I can boot it from my Linux Mint boot USB stick and then if I can and it actually runs, see if I can find and load a system monitor and see what Linux thinks of it?

There is a possibility that say Mint Mate 32 bit would run better on this 2GB 1.6Mhz dual core atom than W10 64 bit but even if it did, I understand the lad needs MS Office for school ... ;-(

Cheers, T i m

[Mark]

OK. But there's a limit to the amount of "trial-and-error" I am happy with.

--snip--

It's difficult to think of a good analogy for Operating Systems. But there are major differences between them. It's not ideal, but it's the way it is. For my work I've needed to learn (in depth) about several operating systems so I guess I am not a typical user.

But, whatever OS it runs, there must be a way of checking what is gobbling CPU and GIYF ;-)

FWIW: I use Ubuntu but have not installed Unity.

I don;t think so.

But some hardware manufacturers stop support for some products. For example I had a scanner that the manufacturer stopped providing drivers beyond XP.

I think I mix with some real people ;-)

I'm not sure I follow this entirely. I find Linux works with most hardware, as well as Windows does.

Not all these things are trivial to do with Windows either.

Windows has become a "standard" and hence gets the games.

IMHO Win8.1 is better than W7 for performance. As long as you hide the awful default UI.

My instinct would be that Linux would run better on a low-end system like this. If you lad needs an Office application then why not try LibreOffice? I can create/read all MS office files.

Cheers, Mark