PDA

View Full Version : Ah, if only Linux wasn't based on Un*x!



mingle
July 19th, 2008, 05:58 AM
Hi,

If only something like BeOS or even better, AmigaOS had been the basis for Linux...

A proper desktop OS without having ancient Unix lurking under the bonnet. I think of it like a nasty old Troll lurking under the Billy-Goat's bridge in the old Fairy Tale! Waiting to jump out and frighten innocent Ubuntu users! :-)

Take a look at things like Haiku and AROS to see the sort of performance and snappiness you get from a proper desktop OS...

Don't get me wrong - I think Ubuntu is great and my current (8.04) install is 80% of the way to being a true Windows XP replacement, but if only it was a bit slicker and purpose-built as a desktop OS...

I know it was never intended to be for the desktop, but I can dream!

Cheers,

Mike.

wolfen69
July 19th, 2008, 06:37 AM
the fact is that BeOS and AmigaOS are not the basis of linux. things happen for a reason. maybe those OS's werent as good as they thought. you know you've become big when people bitch about you. i dont hear anyone bitching about beos and amigaos. sorry.

Canis familiaris
July 19th, 2008, 07:35 AM
The fact that Linux is based on Unix, makes me use Linux at the first place. :D

hyper_ch
July 19th, 2008, 11:05 AM
Linux is not based on unix... Linux is unix-like ;)

bmac
July 19th, 2008, 11:39 AM
Don't get me wrong - I think Ubuntu is great and my current (8.04) install is 80% of the way to being a true Windows XP replacement

In my opinion it's a >100% replacement and no need for spyware, adware or antivirus software... No corrupted registry... Open Source.... Hmmm, let me think.... :rolleyes:

lisati
July 19th, 2008, 11:42 AM
If Linux didn't get its inspiration from Unix it would be something else.

Canis familiaris
July 19th, 2008, 11:53 AM
Linux is not based on unix... Linux is unix-like ;)

My bad!

loneowais
July 19th, 2008, 11:58 AM
First of all...Linux is not based on Unix...It does not contain even a single line of unix code...

Its just unix like...It was actually meant to be a UNIX replacement for students who could not afford the UNIX OS.

mingle
July 20th, 2008, 08:56 AM
Hi All,

Okay, it's not based on Unix CODE, but it's a close to Unix as makes no difference (ie: same arcane and obscure console commands, etc).

The killer for me - well, the reason it can't replace XP - is that it simply doesn't have the apps I need. I've tried using Wine, but that's just too buggy and unstable with my programs (VSTis, soft-synths, MIDI sequencers).

I'm sure (hopefully in the not too distant future) it'll be a real Windows replacement one day, but at the mo I have to keep my XP box - which has been reliable and rock-solid for over 5 years now.

Cheers,

Mike.

hyper_ch
July 20th, 2008, 09:39 AM
what arcane and obsucre console commands?

sure it can replace XP and has done so for a lot of people :) it is a real windows replacement already today.

ibutho
July 20th, 2008, 09:51 AM
Hi All,

Okay, it's not based on Unix CODE, but it's a close to Unix as makes no difference (ie: same arcane and obscure console commands, etc).

The killer for me - well, the reason it can't replace XP - is that it simply doesn't have the apps I need. I've tried using Wine, but that's just too buggy and unstable with my programs (VSTis, soft-synths, MIDI sequencers).

I'm sure (hopefully in the not too distant future) it'll be a real Windows replacement one day, but at the mo I have to keep my XP box - which has been reliable and rock-solid for over 5 years now.

Cheers,

Mike.

Are you speaking for just yourself here? For many people, myself included, Linux is a very good XP and VISTA replacement. Whats obscure and arcane about the commands? They are not included just for the sake of it although you don't have to use them if you wish (especially if you use openSUSE or Mandriva which have very good system config tools). Even in Windows, the CLI is still seen as important and thats why they still ship a terminal program.

Sef
July 20th, 2008, 09:58 AM
Moved to Community Cafe.

fatality_uk
July 20th, 2008, 11:05 AM
If you want alternatives to XP software, you only have to look!!!

perce
July 20th, 2008, 11:18 AM
OS X is based on Unix, it has obscure command line, and yes, when things go wrong you need to use it. Why don't you go please to complain in an Apple forum?

mingle
July 20th, 2008, 11:25 AM
Hi,

I guess I just lament the fact that other OSes (BeOS, AmigaOS, etc) that were built from the ground up for the desktop never took off. The also had very decent CLIs. AmigaOS in particular was very nice. Either of the aforementioned OSes would've been far better suited to the desktop environment.

As far as the obscure commands and syntax - isn't that what Unix was (in)famous for? I used to work on OpenVMS systems (DEC VAX and Alpha-servers). That's what I call a nice OS! The commands were all (well, mostly!) easy to remember and very logical. I remember when I saw the HP-UX version of our application - the command line was a nightmare - all 2-letter abbreviated commands - nightmare!

Plus it had the best online help system I've seen. Why didn't Linus try to build a VMS-like OS? :-)

As for the alternatives to my apps on Linux, it's a shame but they just don't exist (yet?).

Don't get me wrong - I'm definitely an Ubuntu fan, just my daydreaming about what could've/should've been!

Cheers,

Mike.

mingle
July 20th, 2008, 11:26 AM
@perce,

Relax! I'm not having a go, just my opinion...

As for Macs - I wouldn't waste my time!

Mike.

Barrucadu
July 20th, 2008, 11:30 AM
The UNIX is the best bit :D

perce
July 20th, 2008, 11:32 AM
@perce,

Relax! I'm not having a go, just my opinion...



Sorry, my anti-Apple sentiments come to the surface from time to time.

ghindo
July 20th, 2008, 11:32 AM
What about Minix? :(

zipperback
July 20th, 2008, 11:44 AM
The fact that Linux is based on Unix, makes me use Linux at the first place. :D

It is a "Unix Like" operating system.

Linux was modeled after Minix and this is also where the operating system got its name from.

Linux was created and is still developed by Linus Torvalds.

The name Linux comes from "Linus' Minix" which was shorted to be just "Linux".

- zipperback
:popcorn:

songshu
July 20th, 2008, 11:53 AM
OS X is based on Unix, it has obscure command line, and yes, when things go wrong you need to use it. Why don't you go please to complain in an Apple forum?

eeuuuhh dejavu ;)

OS X comes from Darwin, which is a port of FreeBSD which in its turn is originally based on BSD Unix which was based on Unix.


not saying your worthing is not true, i just wanted to complete it ;)

Closed_Port
July 20th, 2008, 11:59 AM
Hi All,

Okay, it's not based on Unix CODE, but it's a close to Unix as makes no difference (ie: same arcane and obscure console commands, etc).

I don't want to flame you, but you seem incredibley uninformed.
First off, as has already been mentioned, there's another desktop OS out there that's based on UNIX (and this one is really based on UNIX), namely OSX. Now, no matter what you think of it personally, it is considered by a lot of people to be the best desktop OS around.

Second, the arcane commands don't have anything to do with the UNIX or UNIX-like underpinnings, but with the shell you use. You find bash to be obscure? Try an other shell.



The killer for me - well, the reason it can't replace XP - is that it simply doesn't have the apps I need. I've tried using Wine, but that's just too buggy and unstable with my programs (VSTis, soft-synths, MIDI sequencers).

Now, what does this have to do with your original point? Nothing?
So why bring it up? Don't you think people might get the impression you are just out to cause a stink?

About the apps you need, you may of course be right that the apps or the kind of apps you need aren't available on linux, however, I think it would be a lot more productive if you actually told people what functionality you are missing. Who knows, maybe some people will be able to give you hints about programs you haven't thought about yet?

jomiolto
July 20th, 2008, 12:40 PM
Second, the arcane commands don't have anything to do with the UNIX or UNIX-like underpinnings, but with the shell you use. You find bash to be obscure? Try an other shell.

The command line utilities are their own programs, and have very little to do with the shell (even if you use some other shell, you will still have the same utilities with same names).

And the utilities actually have a lot to do with UNIX. Many of them are specified in the Single UNIX Specification (http://www.unix.org/what_is_unix/single_unix_specification.html) and are standard on every UNIX system (which is a real blessing, because it would be rather inconvenient to have to learn different command line utilities for AIX, Solaris, BSD, Linux, etc.).

Sealbhach
July 20th, 2008, 01:08 PM
Why didn't Linus try to build a VMS-like OS? :-)


Why don't you do that?

Bestow a boon on humanity like Linus and all the Linux devs have done....?



.

billgoldberg
July 20th, 2008, 01:26 PM
Linux is not based on unix... Linux is unix-like ;)

I was just going to mention it.

bilijoe
July 20th, 2008, 01:31 PM
(ie: same arcane and obscure console commands, etc).
Mike. Arcane and obscure console commands huh? I cut my teeth on truly arcane and obscure (and minimally documented) console commands--those in MS and PC DOS, before the days of GUIs and Windowed OSs. When I grew up a bit, and discovered Unix, I rejoiced at the exceptional documentation, and incredible power and flexibility contained within that set of commands.

If truth be told, even though I'm an old command line geek, when I use Ubuntu (which is the only OS I use any more) I rarely use console commands. I find that virtually everything I need to do with my computer (and, aside from playing games, I do just about everything with a computer that computers do) can be done easily and conveniently via the GUI. The few things that really require a command line are well documented in the very accessible MANual, and, if I'm too lazy to look in the manual, I make a post to one of the forums and, usually within minutes, some up to date guru hands me the exact arcane and obscure commands I need, on a silver platter. All I [usually] have to do is cut and paste (my oh my, what a pain in the a** :wink:.)

What you folks with command line phobia don't realize is that the GUI will do everything most people need a computer command system to do. The secret that we who aren't afraid of the command line have kept from you folks, all these years is that, though the GUI will do all the things a computer is normally expected to do, there is tremendous power lurking behind that oh so intimidating command line. If you'd take the time to read a book or two, and consult the MANual, once in a while, you'd find that that horrible command line is really the key to unlocking abilities you never knew your computer had.

Have a look at some of the more arcane, obscure, and intimidating commands like grep/egrep, and awk. With a little imagination, you should realize, that with the power of commands like those at your fingertips, the console can truly give you command of all kinds of data (which is what a computer does--store and manipulate data). You can glean all kinds of statistics, generate automated reports, keep tabs on all kinds of things buried within the massive amount of data stored on most computer systems, and much more. Yes, you can use database engines, and spreadsheets, and the like to analyze data, and generate reports, as well, but, if you really get to know that mystifying and intimidating command line, you might just find, as I did so many years ago, that the command line is really your friend. It is much closer to the heart of the beast than any GUI, and far less complicated to use than spreadsheets and databases.

Over the years, I've had to learn to do all this same stuff using point and click applications (because that's the way most of the [modern] computer-using community expects to have things done), but I really wish I hadn't let my command line skills wither in the meantime. I remember what I used to be able to do from the command line, and yearn for the days when I had the stamina to stay up all night learning those oh so well documented, arcane and obscure commands, and honing my skills at extracting all the power hidden within them. Truth is, I use Linux (Ubuntu), primarily because it is not a Microsoft product, but the fact that it is very much Unix-like, makes me long for the days when I was an active programmer, and command line guru, and had the ability to tap into all the power the console provides.

Don't be so quick to condemn, or write off that which you don't understand. All this crap about Linux being hard to use, or in some way inferior, because its command line is more high profile than some other OSs we know of, is simply fear of the unknown. Windows has a command line interface too, you know. And there are some things that can only be done through it. If you don't believe me, watch the screen closely when you install new software and hardware. If you're attentive enough, you'll periodically see a terminal window blink open and close. That's because the install routine for that new piece of software or hardware (usually it's hardware) needed to accomplish some task that could only be done from the command line.

Don't let fear of the unknown cloud your thinking, or inappropriately prejudice you against something that is actually a benefit, rather than an encumbrance. Knowledge is power, my friend, and a little knowledge about the command line, quickly turns into power, in the hands of an imaginative user. If you think about it, I'll bet you'll realize that experienced Linux users aren't heard grousing about the arcane and obscure console commands, but rather are found helping newbies overcome some highly perplexing problem by giving them just a few specific examples of those arcane and obscure commands which, when copied to the newbie's computer and executed, suddenly make that gnarly problem vanish, as if by magic.

I'm afraid it's been so long, that I'm not in a position to recommend a good book, but go to a bookstore with a well stocked computer books section, and look around. I'm sure you'll find a book that will amaze you, by giving you the knowledge you need to understand and utilize the magic and power that is the command line. Don't forget, most GUIs still sit atop a command line interface, and derive all their lovely and picturesque abilities from translating mouse movements and clicks into console commands, saving you the trouble of having to acquire all that power and control for yourself. No, the console window is not a weakness of the Linux-based GUI-driven OSs, but rather, it is the true source of the power and grace that make Linux the superior OS that it is.

steveneddy
July 20th, 2008, 03:21 PM
Sounds like the bottom line is that you really just don't want to memorize a few CLI commands.

I wonder if you ever use the CLI anyway.

I also see that you can't go without your Windows programs.

So instead of a thread about how to find a replacement for the Windows programs that you want to use, you bash Linux/Ubuntu.

You know, if you have to use a few commands to get something done and you find the commands on the Forums or the Internet, then just copy and paste.

It's so easy that a noobee can do it.

Highlight in one window, click (press down on) the scroll wheel to paste.

Yes
July 20th, 2008, 03:30 PM
The killer for me - well, the reason it can't replace XP - is that it simply doesn't have the apps I need. I've tried using Wine, but that's just too buggy and unstable with my programs (VSTis, soft-synths, MIDI sequencers).

How would that be fixed if Linux were based on BeOS or Amiga OS?

FYI, BeOS development started the same year as Linux development did.

eldragon
July 20th, 2008, 03:41 PM
your complain seems to be based on 'app x doesnt run on linux natively' for what ive read so far.

if thats the case, well, being NOT inspired by unix, wouldnt do any good. if anything, it would have made things even more difficult since not only windows apps wouldnt run, but unix apps (or posix compilant code for that matter) wouldnt,....

arcane and obscure cli? like someone else pointed out. its really documented and easy to understand if youve got the patience and RTFM.

im not expecting you to learn how to use the CLI, but because you dont have the time or willpower to read a couple of manpages doesnt make it obscure, arcane and imposible to use. heck, most of these forum walkthroughs are done through the CLI.

lukjad
July 20th, 2008, 03:55 PM
Ubuntu is not a replacement for XP. It is an alternative. Just like 7-Up is not a replacement for Pepsi, Ubuntu is not a replacement for Windows. They cannot be compared since they are not in the same league. Wayne Gretzky cannot be compared to Babe Ruth, they don't play the same game. Sorry if this seems to be laid on a little thick but I just wanted to get my point across.
Post Scriptum
Terminal commands are not arcane. DOS is arcane.

Saint Angeles
July 20th, 2008, 05:19 PM
@perce,

Relax! I'm not having a go, just my opinion...

As for Macs - I wouldn't waste my time!

Mike.but you'll waste time with XP?

[hugelaugh]

check out ardour

the_darkside_986
July 20th, 2008, 05:26 PM
What's worse than an OS built on top of Unix?

An OS built on DOS :)

(I know, Windows is no longer built on DOS but it shares enough code to run older Win9x programs.)

ryaxnb
July 20th, 2008, 05:45 PM
What's worse than an OS built on top of Unix?

An OS built on DOS :)

(I know, Windows is no longer built on DOS but it shares enough code to run older Win9x programs.)
Well, the actual part of Win9x that ran Win9x programs was 32-bit and not DOS based at all. Only the compatibility DOS driver and program subsytem and parts of the kernel (VERY small parts) were DOS based. And NT threw all that out. You might say it's based on kludgy code however, because Win32 is largely a quick-and-dirty port of Win16 to 32-bit, and Win16 was a quick and dirty way to build a GUI on DOS.

MaxIBoy
July 20th, 2008, 06:27 PM
Let's not even go there.

ice60
July 20th, 2008, 06:39 PM
i love how everyone becomes an expert in these kinds of threads and corrects everyone else on points no one cares about lol

anyway, i'm an expert too! and you're all wrong. linux is based on windows that's why Ballmer is making all those patent infringements claims!!!!!

Vorian Grey
July 20th, 2008, 06:53 PM
A good little read, with a Ubuntu Hardy Heron picture and everything..


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix

FuturePilot
July 20th, 2008, 06:53 PM
Hi All,

Okay, it's not based on Unix CODE, but it's a close to Unix as makes no difference (ie: same arcane and obscure console commands, etc).



Well I consider the Windows command line arcane and obscure. ;)

Twitch6000
July 20th, 2008, 07:35 PM
i love how everyone becomes an expert in these kinds of threads and corrects everyone else on points no one cares about lol

anyway, i'm an expert too! and you're all wrong. linux is based on windows that's why Ballmer is making all those patent infringements claims!!!!!

Wow talk about a laugh :lolflag:.

Really though to the OP,it seems your problem is just like alot of other dual booters.A few programs don't work and you wanna complain and not ask for help.

DeadSuperHero
July 20th, 2008, 07:39 PM
Er, isn't complaining technically a way to BEG for help? As long as he lists out what's wrong, that's good enough for me to offer advice.

the8thstar
July 20th, 2008, 07:44 PM
Linux is not based on unix... Linux is unix-like ;)

Beyond the semantic difference, are there functional differences between the two notions?

koenn
July 20th, 2008, 07:51 PM
Beyond the semantic difference, are there functional differences between the two notions?

Linux is modeled after Unix, and designed to behave like Unix. To me, that counts as "based on", even if there's not even 1 line of shared code between the two.

pofigster
July 20th, 2008, 08:00 PM
So, is Windows GUI based on Apple's GUI? It was modeled after it, designed to behave like it...

days_of_ruin
July 20th, 2008, 08:01 PM
Hi All,

Okay, it's not based on Unix CODE, but it's a close to Unix as makes no difference (ie: same arcane and obscure console commands, etc).

The killer for me - well, the reason it can't replace XP - is that it simply doesn't have the apps I need. I've tried using Wine, but that's just too buggy and unstable with my programs (VSTis, soft-synths, MIDI sequencers).

I'm sure (hopefully in the not too distant future) it'll be a real Windows replacement one day, but at the mo I have to keep my XP box - which has been reliable and rock-solid for over 5 years now.

Cheers,

Mike.

what a bait-n-switch.What apps it has has nothing to do with being unix-like.

Ioky
July 20th, 2008, 08:19 PM
Well, I use Linux as it is, I really don't mean to use Linux as some kind of replacement of windows xp or vista. When I first install Linux, I though it is just a pure command line system, I don't even know it is so user friendly. I feel sorry for M$ for letting it's fan down, But I feel like, using Linux is not meant to replace windows. In fact, there is no way windows as what it is today, can be replace Linux. Did it make you feel so much better? haha

Get back to the talk, Linux is really Linux/GNU. It come from unix, what I mean is if there is no unix, Linux wouldn't be the way it is today. But it is really not UNIX, Just like When you try to be like your friend. and do everything as he did and etc. You still you, not your friend.

It is not possible for Linux to base on those OS anyway, They are close source. But for a even more interest question, whatever Linux is base on windows(NTs) haha

koenn
July 20th, 2008, 08:23 PM
So, is Windows GUI based on Apple's GUI? It was modeled after it, designed to behave like it...

You're talking about the look-and-feel of a GUI. I'm talking about the interfaces between programs and the system.
Linux was designed to have the same (program-, system-) interfaces so that programs written for Unix would run on it (or could at least be compiled on it, then run).

cookieofdoom
July 20th, 2008, 09:43 PM
I think I might have some idea of where you're coming from about Linux being based on UNIX. Operating systems in general are all written to be compatible with hardware so old that no one uses it. UNIX's way of doing things with hardware is really old... There are still some basic principles that should be applied everywhere, though. Modularity, and crashing as loudly (but quickly) as possible come to mind right off the bat.

I'm not sure what the differences between Haiku (or AROS) and UNIX/UNIX-like operating systems is, though. I mean, I know they're completely different from the ground up, but how so? What makes them better? You said they were snappier (and having not tried them I can't argue) but why are they snappier?

Again, I'm not trying to argue, and I think I know where you're coming from... I'd just like some more information.

david_lynch
July 20th, 2008, 09:56 PM
Hi All,

Okay, it's not based on Unix CODE, but it's a close to Unix as makes no difference (ie: same arcane and obscure console commands, etc).

I came to linux precisely because it's in the unix family! I loved unix and linux seemed to be the fastest developing flavor of it, so I jumped on board.

The debate about what can be legally called "Yoonix (TM)" boils down to financial terms, it bores me, and is a conversation for lawyers in any case.

For us techies, unix - not "Yoonix (TM)" - is a family of operating systems which share a common basic design, and linux is unix, no question about that.

I don't know of any obscure or arcane unix commands, since it is quick and easy to find out about any unix command does (man pages, --help option, google, o'reilly books) and the basic unix commands have been common knowledge for some years among power users.
:guitar:

Arcane? Hello, ever edit some arcane, obscure windows registry entry? I've been using linux for years now, but I have a hard time figuring out how to get anything done in ms windows. ](*,)