Manager


Manager - N2MG
Manager Notes

Survey Question

Question

Running Linux? Are you using the Linux operating system at home or in your shack? Tell us about your experiences good or bad...

Results (3565 answers)

Take this Survey

Please Login (above) before taking this survey.

Survey Comments

Linux vs. Windows


In my work environment, Windows was the
right path of least resistance. Coming
from Windows: I like KDE. Mac people
will probably prefer Gnome or the Unix
that is the basic OS of their Mac.

Heavy duty stuff moved over to Linux
from Windows without
a hitch. I use Office, LaTeX, graphics
programs, computer algebra, and several
different kinds of electronics modeling.

But, Linux is not ready for prime time.

How does a newcomer find, and then evaluate
Ham programs? How do they find out about
rpm's, etc. They certainly won't be
compiling programs. What happens when during
install the installation asks a guru
question? How do they even get the
bootloader grub to work (it's the greatest
... I use it to multiboot Windows and
Linux)? How do they choose among the
many Linuxes (I use SUSE)? How do they
get their peripherals to work? Who
says CUPS is transparent? How do they
get networking to work or configure
Samba for their home Windows network?
I.e. how do they get past square one?
Anyone wishing to go Linux should know
a guru or have considerable computer
background. (I started in the
Version 7 days.)

So, Windows and Mac folks probably should
stay with what they know and love and
the rest of us can love our Linux.
But, maybe someday ...



Posted by W0LWA on 2007-10-04

Linux

I use Red Hat at home, on the road and in my office. Very stable OS many ham radio applications a bit lean on office apps, however, OpenOffice is a bright star for the Linux community. A lot of scientific applications have been or can be ported over from Unix.
Posted by W8JSA on 2003-12-23

Tried Windows

I tried Windows quite a few times. I've spent over $2000 on Microsoft (software only, multiple versions) and I have yet to see a Windows computer (mine or otherwise) run for 10 hours without incident. I keep coming back to Linux and BSD because they do everything I need, reliably. Linux runs my packet station, keeps my logs, balances my budget and lets me read my mail and news when I want to and without crashing. I have two computers running Linux and one running BSD, with a combined average "up" time (time without failure) of 268 days.

Some people don't mind when Windows or Word or Excel crashes in the middle of a QSO, writing an article, hunting for a job, balancing the budget, analyzing SWR curves... I found the amount of time I lost to Windows is much greater than the amount of time I spend learning and doing the same tasks with Linux and BSD.

I don't know whether I'll try Windows again, but with nothing to show for my $2000+ investment, I'll need a compelling reason to ditch my better, free solutions.
Posted by KD5SBZ on 2003-11-17

Linux don't pay the bills!

Franky, Linux can't make me a living. Micro$oft is where the money is at. Using Linux for a hobby or just toying around is fine. If you are building apps for Linux and planning are making money, you are swimming upstream.

Ronn
AD5JN

Posted by AD5JN on 2003-10-30

linux and the blind ham

well guys, I hear a lot of pro's and con's in here about linux and its usefulness. Frankly, I much preferr it to winblows (sic). I don't have to worry about using a mouse, adaptive software for me is dirt cheap in linux (compared with the cost for s similar windows app at $400+!) and I don't need to have to use the GUI all the time (console works fine for most things, especially packet and aprs).

besides, I like learning how to script, poking around in the system and generally learning from mistakes made. its all part of the fun of linux (and bsd). Besides, how is one supposed to use a mouse when one cannot see the screen?

Eric.
N7ZZT
Posted by N7ZZT on 2003-09-20

Linux difficulties

I commented early on that I am running RH9. I have since tried the KDevelop C++ programming environment that comes with RH9. It turns out that the version of KDevelop that comes with RH9 is version 2.1.5, which is no longer supported, and hasn't been supported for over 8 months, and still has over a hundred documented bugs. Now I have to go to version 3.x which isn't even being released with RH yet. Using the CVS and installing the rpm has been a challenge that I'm sure an expert like L1D could handle, but I can't. I'm going back to Windoze, even if MS and Bill Gates has an evil grip on the universe. At least I can buy MS Visual C++ or Borland's C++ 6, and have them running in 30 minutes, not 30 days. What a joke. The "support department" for KDevelop is a bunch of hack kids that think the product exists for their amusement, not for the end user.
Posted by WA0UDX on 2003-09-18

"Boatanchor" computers

I do run linux (Slackware 9) at home and at work. For ham radio, though, I'm inclined to take a more Luddite approach; must have something to do with all the boatanchors I've got about the place. For ham radio, I'm seriously considering going back to my old-faithful Heathkit H-89. That way I can do RTTY on a green screen :-).
Posted by KG4WKY on 2003-09-12

I Remember When

I ran Linux 0.91 kernel many years ago. It was downloaded by a friend who had Internet access and came on about 18 floppy disks.

I've tried a variety of Linus and BSD distros over the years.

Used Mandrake for a while, but they seem to be too close to the edge of functionality.

I just loaded Red Hat 9, which I plan to buy shortly, and it is the first time I didn't have to go to a command line to complete the installation. Way to go Red Hat!
Posted by K8AG on 2003-09-09

Running Linux?

Yes I've tried Red Hat 7 & 8 and it reminds me of a bad copy of Windows 3.1. I got it to tinker with, unfortunately I don't have the time required right now to do much tinkering. I have seven computers I either built or modified and up-graded so I thought I would install it on one to see if I could escape from my dependency on Mr. Gates. No such luck! I use one of my computers I built from junk parts to run my Ten-Tec Pegasus with Win XP Pro and my dual Pentium with XP Pro I built to run my Kenwood TSB-2000 and many other things. I run a home network with four of the computers, two with XP Pro, one with XP Home and one with Win 98 2nd Ed. They all run great when I don't tinker with them! The problem I have with Red Hat is finding Linux drivers for the components, specifically the modems and network cards. Windows has most of the common ones in residence but Linux doesn't so I can't use it on the Internet or my home network. Then of course there is the terminology that Linux uses, nothing like learning a new language as well as a new operating system and I never was good with languages. Oh I almost forgot, I use Win 2000 at work and it runs great, of course I'm not allowed to tinker at work, but all the IT guys and gals are friends of mine and they gave me Admin privileges on my desktop and laptop so I can do the updates and upgrades (one or two less they have to do). I suppose if I had the time and energy I could learn how to configure Linux so it would work as well as my Windows machines but not right now besides there are a lot more applications and software packages for windows. That’s my 2 cents worth!
Posted by WA7H on 2003-09-08

Re: Still Confused

Yes, I have a computer - several of them, in fact and three are used in connection with amateur radio. No, I don't run Linux, I use another operating system that more than meets my needs.

Imagine that there was only one radio and 95% of the people ownd one because that was the only radio you could buy. QST only had ads for that radio. HRO only sold that radio because they were under contract and would face cost increases if they were to sell another radio because the "that radio" company didn't want them to sell any other radios. Now, Imagine if that radio could only communicate 100% with another radio of the same series, but would sort of work with other radios made by other companies and even radios made by "that radio" company, but different models.

To get a bit silly. Now imagine if just the act of talking with someone would cause your radio to act funny, go out on its own and try to work the CB bands, or even worse crash.

Hopefully I've now described the current state of desktop computers in terms of ham radio.


Posted by L1D on 2003-09-07

Being practical.

All four of my PC's, including my laptop, are dual or triple boot (WinXP, Win2K, Win98SE and or Red Hat Linux). XP and 2K run what I need to run while the optional Linux boot lets me play when I have time. My philosophy in a nutshell: Mac may be better but why fight the system every day. We all know what happened in the Beta vs. VHS days. Windows is everywhere and works for what I do.
Linux is stable, innovative and with a bit more pushing and tweaking i'm sure it will trickle into the home/small business market but right now it seems to be at home and very comfortable zipping away in the air conditioned server room.
Posted by KG4ZPC on 2003-09-06

Say What?

To N3ZKP,
What have you been doing with Amateur Radio for the last oh, say 10 years?
Do you know that in the last 5 years the Personal Computer has changed the way that many Ham's communicate? New modes of emmission like PSK31 etc etc have been invented while you've been asleep! Oh, and there are now so many "utility" programs out there for Ham's like Logging, sat tracking, greyline, rotator control and Packet Radio just to name a tiny portion that it's hard to imagine a modern operator NOT having a computer in his/her shack.
The survey is about the type of operating system modern Ham's are using on their computers.
Andy - VK5LA

Posted by VK5LA on 2003-09-05

Still Confused

Yes, I have a computer - several of them, in fact and three are used in connection with amateur radio.

No, I don't run Linux, I use another operating system that more than meets my needs.


Posted by N3ZKP on 2003-09-05

Re:Confused

"And this has WHAT to do with amateur radio?"




Do you have a computer next to your radio? Do you know what psk31/psk63 are? Etc.



It has a lot to do with Amateur Radio.

Posted by L1D on 2003-09-04

appliance ops

Don't be an appliance operator of your computer. Use an open source operating system (linux/BSD) and get involved!
Posted by N1YRK on 2003-09-04

Confused

And this has WHAT to do with amateur radio?
Posted by N3ZKP on 2003-09-03

Windows = Practicality for Me

I for one certainly do not poke any fun or ill will towards those Hams using Linux.
In fact, I enjoy reading about others' experiences, both favorable and less favorable, with alternate OS's.
Currently I use Win2K Pro for both my 102.11g wireless networked, desktop and laptop PC's.
This is because I simply do not have the spare time to mess around with "installation problems, and drivers problems".
Also, vastly more software is available for Windows, which I greatly appreciate.
73. ---John, K8JS

Posted by K8JS on 2003-09-01

mandrake 9.1

I an totaly sold on linux. Been using it 2 years, will never go back to windows anything. I am not any kind of expert at all, was a great feat for me to be able to switch. for what I can do with linux it is so much easier, I would never have believed it if some one told me this before I started with it. I have a copy of win98 which support is or will be discontinued before microsoft has fixed any of the problems with it, I take it personal when my computer tells me I have comitted an ilegal operation and the last I had windows on it still got the blue screen of death occasionaly.
Posted by JCT842 on 2003-08-30

I use RedHat and FreeBSD

I currently use Red Hat 7.1 [kernel 2.4.19] and also tiny NEC small foot print PC running FreeBSD 4.3 as router/firewall.
Posted by KE6FPK on 2003-08-30

Linux Survey

I use Suse 8.0 at this time on multiple computers in my home & business. I have been using Suse since the 6 series, and love it. The stability,low occurence of virii, and other problems has made using it wonderful. I haven't been a ham long, and have been struggling to get time to put the two together, so I can't comment on the marriage of Linux and Ham radio, but love both.
kd7pxm
Posted by KD7PXM on 2003-08-28

Love 'em all - Except for Windows

- i'm the author of 18 books about Linux, but also have a particular fondness for BSD (it was my first 'real' operating system)...

- Linux is the kernel of a great operating system and i've been Windows-free since 1993...

and never looked back...
Posted by LNXAUTHOR on 2003-08-27

Slackware

I usually use Slackware. I've tried Red hat (and mandrake a long time ago) and just got mad of all the silly things...starting to look and act more and more as windows, and we don't want that.
Posted by SM3WMV on 2003-08-27

Linux & Hams

I'm running RedHat 9.0 along with the Red Hat Network patch/update service. The only problem for me as a ham is the lack of good ham applications. I am using jLog, which does what I want for logging, but now I'm wondering about PSK31 and other digital modes. Most of the apps are for Windows, sadly.

I think that Linux users are to the PC world what hams are to TV/radio users. Unfortunately, a lot of hams don't connect with PCs or Linux. How to fix that?
Posted by AA6E on 2003-08-27

Actually, I use mostly Winows...

Guess you've never run your Microsoft Windows&tm; under any kind of load. Try it once, with NT it is easy, open a bunch of windows, open Word with 50 MB documents, excel with 50 MB spreadsheets and watch your system DIE from being unable to handle the load.

Posted by L1D on 2003-08-26

Slackware

I've used Slackware Linux off and on for a few years. It can be a little fiddly to get it up and running, but the documentation at the Slackware site (www.slackware.com) is excellent. Once you have Linux properly configured (which is often no more and no less difficult than properly configuring a Windows set-up) Linux is pretty much a set-it-and-forget-it operating system.
Posted by W9ZIM on 2003-08-26

Actually, I use mostly Winows...

I tried versions 6,7,8,and currently 9 of Mandrake, the most recent Red Hat and even Lindows, but all of them have given me some sort of problem, from not booting up (i.e., crashing) to not supporting some of the more arcane versions of my hardware. On my home network (six machines for three people(!)), I am currently running Windows XP, Windows 2K and Windows NT version 4--all are rock stable (and all crunching numbers for Seti 24/7) but for the interruptions the power company works in every few weeks. But I would like to switch to Linux -- I'm not happy with the direction Windows has taken, but darnit, if Windows doesn't support all of my hardware. The first distro of Linux with hardware support like Windows will get my vote!
Posted by W2RBA on 2003-08-25

Linux if it's free it's good

I have read through most of the comments about this subject. Some say the word Bash, Some wonder why it's even talked about here and one even said "guy holding the blanket in the Peanuts comic strip". That last one was very good. I have used ALL flavors of Windows, and several distros of Linux but I have not used BSD yet. I do not own a Mac to use OS X. I think ALL operating systems are good if they do what you want them do. We are not here to bash but to learn and by the use of Linux and BSD, one can learn and expand. We as Ham's can produce better software for our hobby on Linux as well as Windows. I have a forum on www.mirazh.net if you want to continue a discussion on this or other Linux or open source topics.
Posted by N8PPE on 2003-08-25

I use LindowsOS!!

It's a great product. It runs well and it's easy to use. It will run any Linux apps. I have installed several apps so far. Lindows has several apps that are designed to be easy to install.
Posted by W2BSA on 2003-08-25

Interesting comparison

I was over at the ARRL Web this morning and noticed that they ran an OS poll recently (now closed). I think the differences in the results are rather striking: http://www.arrl.org/survey.php3?pollnr=198 I'm quite aware that neither of these polls are scientific, but it seems an interesting trend. Perhaps the Eham readers are more "doers and experimenters" than the average ham on the 'Net who is looking for information. Just a thought.
Posted by N0NB on 2003-08-25

Linux Works Great

Linux in and of itself works great.

When adding new programs and capabilities, you need
to look carefully at the documentation and instructions
to make sure that you get all the pieces ( libraries,
additional programs etc.) that you need.

I use RedHat, mostly because of the availability
of patches and support via forums. Other distributions
work just as well and may be prefered by others,
that is one of the great things about open-source
software - there are lots of choices in exactly how
you put your system together and configure it, and
lots of combinations work well.

73
Jim

Posted by WA6FWW on 2003-08-24

Is there anything else?

I've been using it since 1997 when I got a new computer and could not get Win95 or Win98 to run without crashing. Linux has been stable as a rock and I've learned things about networking and communication that go far beyond what I learned back in the packet radio days. The last time I had the unfortunate experience of running windows (XP) it really made me appreciate just how wonderful Linux is. BSD Unix is also a sweet deal. Try one today, don't boot into Windows for 2 weeks. I doubt you'll ever want to boot into windows again.
Posted by N7JCT on 2003-08-24

Mandrake 9.1 here

I've thrown windows out the window ! All PC's run Mandrake linux 9.1 and I won't be going back. If you run the digital modes then there's plenty of good software around, including the excellent gMFSK capable of MFSK16, MFSK8, RTTY, THROB, PSK31 ( bpsk/qpsk), MT63 and FELDHELL.
And as always it's GPL licensed and source code is available, very interesting indeed.
Posted by SM0RWO on 2003-08-24

Linux is outstanding!

After hearing about it since 1995 and checking into it since 1996, I switched over to Linux in 1998 and never looked back. I've used RedHat, Mandrake, and SuSE, and am currently on SuSE since 2000 due to the good documentation and Mandrake 9.0. I ran DOS for years (and still do for some things), and tried OS/2 and Windows. Neither system was open or widely adjustable, and I have never had a version of Windows (from 3.0 to XP) that worked with the always-up reliability and tremendous utility Linux offers. For my purposes, Linux is simply better.
Posted by N5NSL on 2003-08-24

Linux since 1993

I've been using Linux since 1993 and have written quite a lot of amateur radio software for it. This includes JT44?FSK441, satellite tracking and the kernel AX.25 code. I think that Linux fits in well with the amateur ethos of experimentation and investigation of technical matters. If you are just an appliance operator then perhaps Linux isn't for you, and neither is amateur radio.

Posted by HB9DRD on 2003-08-24

Red Hat 9 and packet

I've been a ham for about 25 years and I used unix (sunos) in a previous job, where I came across linux kernel 0.99 I think.

I've tried quite a few distros and Redhat has the edge over mandrake because it seems a bit saner.

I'd love to use packet under linux but there is nothing like winpack and as far as I know, it wont run under wine. Not much on packet in my country area, but I do have wireless broadband from my ISP.

I still use win98b for some apps and the odd game. Am unlikely to fork over the small fortune for XP.
Posted by VK3TK on 2003-08-24

stable secure Mandrake 9.1

how to keep your hardware running like it is built to Step up to Mandrake 9.1 it just runs
and I never have to restart never never never
just spin the trackball and she wakes up leave 50 Mozilla browser windows open no problem
try that with the OS that most people are running it cannot even manage multiple desktops
Posted by KC8UKB on 2003-08-24

stable secure Mandrake 9.1

how to keep your hardware running like it is built to Step up to Mandrake 9.1 it just runs
and I never have to restart never never never
just spin the trackball and she wakes up leave 50 Mozilla browser windows open no problem
try that with the OS that most people are running it cannot even manage multiple desktops
Posted by KC8UKB on 2003-08-24

A Distro for each Purpose

I have used Linux since 1994. Each distribution has attributes. I am or have used the following for various purposes.
Slackware -- Small test systems. Slackware´s current boot disks make an adequate rescue system. Includes midnight commander.
Debian -- best for Ham Radio network and utiltiy stuff
Red Hat -- currently on my main Desktop Computers.
SUSE -- Trying to keep abreast of what they are doing. Support for my Sparc2
Mandrake -- Version 7 replaced RedHat for a while.
Lots of small stuff for routers etc. Mostly Coyote.
Mitel SME server -- great file server for those windoze machines that are still around
Posted by VE3WCE on 2003-08-24

|inux ru|3s

I started playing around with linux (as a personal OS) 5 years ago, I had plenty of experiance with various linux flavors as well as SunOS through my work. I run a combination here, Mandrake, Redhat, and SuSe.

What I love about Linux is that it is much more stable, much more powerful, and much less expensive than Microsh@#. Plus starting out as a DOS user long before winblows was thought of, I like the console workings of linux. Linux is also an open source environment, which means for amateurs who by nature love to tinker, we can tinker with software code all we want. Linux also goes hand in hand as many flavors of linux come packaged with software for amateur radio.

All in all a great deal for amateurs.

73 de Keith
Posted by KC8TCQ on 2003-08-24

What about *BSD

I have been running some version of BSD for the last 20 years. Currently most of my systems are FreeBSD. The makers of Ham equipment and software need to pay attention to users of FreeSoftware. I will not buy one of the new Ten-Tec radios until they come up with a way for users of FreeSoftware to flash them with upgrades. The folks at Ten-Tec told me there was no demand. I think they need to open their eyes and take a look here.

I would also call on the operators of eham.net to add *BSD to the survey!

73

wa3yre
Posted by WA3YRE on 2003-08-24

FreeBSD

Count me in the FreeBSD gang. It has a more mature, simple taste, well rounded without the sharp edges of the other multi-distro *nixes. It never fails to satisfy yet it never leaves one feeling bloated. A smug aftertaste stays with you a long time. Very much a comfort food.

But I do keep a RH box running for the IRLP node.
Posted by W7COM on 2003-08-24

Slashdot

Looks like the slashdot crowd as hit the poll. Expect Linux/Redhat to be 90% by morning...
Posted by L1D on 2003-08-24

Red Hat vs. XP

I was a beta tester for Windows XP Pro and have used Win 95b, 95c, 98SE and Win 2k. By far the Red Hat ran faster and is stable as a rock. While I had good luck with Win 2k, the Red Hat still Multitasks better, runs faster and is more secure.

Adam
Posted by WB8ETHJR on 2003-08-24

Linux in the shack?

I have been running Linux now for 10 years. I got tired of all the problems with the Windows world a long time ago. I found Linux to be much more stable. I used the TLF program for the DX contest a bit over a year ago. It was nice to have something that didn't crash and was rock stable. It was amusing to hear many stations saying 'oops... computer crashed, hang on while I reboot.' That didn't happen here. The lack of worm and virus problems and the better security are worth the learning curve.
Posted by KU4B on 2003-08-24

FreeBSD


Me too!


Joking apart, the *BSDs get a rough ride with people plain forgetting they're there. Fortunately, that also part of their strength. Even sysadmins can forget they're there once they're installed.

Let's see some more applications for amateur radio on the platform, though. XLog in the ports is flakier than a whole box of muesli. Anyone know of a better logging program that runs on BSD?
Posted by G0VNR on 2003-08-24

Okay, I'm surprised

I voted Debian myself as I have four boxes running it in various states of current release. They're all stable as rocks. My first distribution was Slackware and was that a learning experience!



Now, about my surprise. After entering my vote I was expecting something around a 60% response rate for Win whatever, but it's at 37% which indicates that a lot of Win using hams haven't voted (yeah, like putting any meaning to a voluntary internet poll would be smart :-). So, if there were really some solid numbers on the percentage of hams using Unix based systems, could the marketing arm of, say, ARRL be twisted into offering their CD-ROMS in a platform indpendent format?



Things like QST View frustrate me to no end. Perhaps with a bit more foresight the League could have required their contractor to use PDF files rather than TIFF and actually documented the database so independent software could be written to mimic and improve what is on the CD (I am talking about the older yearly issues and the earliest decade volumes, I understand the latest yearly volumes are PDF).

To "scratch that itch" I did write a shell script that uses utilities bundled with Ghostscript and a graphics package (Image Magic?) That allowed me to convert the older QST View TIFF files to one PDF per issue in the same directory structure which I then burned to CD. The advantage is that I can view the resulting issues on any current platform.


In the Internet Age writing to only one computing platform is an unforgivable sin!
Posted by N0NB on 2003-08-24

deja vu

It's great to see something old become something new again. Amateur Radio is alive and well in many incarnations. The Internet and Linux communities certainly qualify. And what is alive is learning, exploring, and experimenting. It is so sad to see posts that rant or rave over one aspect or another and loose sight of the goal. Why expend the energy? What is gained?

Take a look at the July 1995 QST and the article: Amateur Radio on the World Wide Web - Part 2 - The building blocks of a packet radio web.
by Steven Bible, N7HPR and Greg Pool, WH6DT.

Greg and I tell how to use Linux to create a packet radio WWW. We won the QST cover plaque award for the aricle series.

- Steve, N7HPR


Posted by N7HPR on 2003-08-24

Mac OS X

While I do run Red Hat Linux and FreeBSD on my AMD-based PC's -- I primarily run Mac OS X, based on FreeBSD. It's very cool, I can run the Adobe graphics applications I make my living with, and shell out to a Unix command line.

joel / N5LXI


Posted by N5LXI on 2003-08-23

Win2K vs. Linux

Currently running Win2K, with anti-spyware adaware, and spybot. I'm thinking about switching to Linux, since that has an open source code and no hidden spyware files, unlike microsoft which feels the need spy on everyone!
Posted by APPLET on 2003-08-23

Back to the Future

Unix - an operating system developed at Bell Labs during the 1960s to form networks of computers and to run multiple users simultaneously on a single computer
Linux - a version of Unix rewritten by Linus Torvalds and volunteers to run on the 80x86
series of microprocessors

I got a new computer this year and put Win2K Pro on it. Then I put RH 9 on it also. I can now boot either operating system.

I only keep Windows because the Mozilla browser does not do streaming audio off the internet (www.jazzexcursion.com) or play mpeg's. When I figure out to do those two things, I will stop using Windows.
Posted by N3JIY on 2003-08-23

Tried RedHat

I've tried RedHat Linux but it turned out to be a big pain in the butt... Every time I tried to install a new program I would get a compile error because it needed an additional program. If I could find the additional software and try to install it, it needed something else... The system seemed to lock up a lot more than with Windows, so I just went back to Windows 98 second edition.
Posted by KI0HA on 2003-08-23

Plan 9

I actually just switched from redhat to Plan 9
OS. It is somewhat like linux/unix, but better. You have to code your own software though, so I wouldn't reccommend it for newbies.
Posted by THERION418 on 2003-08-23

FreeBSD

Well, FreeBSD as a preference but also Linux (mainly redhat) and Windows in here too.
Posted by N9MVM on 2003-08-23

Slashdot

Seems you guys have just been Slashdotted. I wonder what effect that will have on the statistics.
Posted by GIZONTOAST on 2003-08-23

Use as many as you want

Hey, it's open source!

I have a FreeBSD 4.8 server, a Debian 3.0 database server, a Debian workstation and a Slackware test system running Linux kernel 2.6.0 test 3.

I also have an iMac running OS X, and a Windows 2000 workstation and Windows 2000 notebook.

My point is, there's room for all of them!

For the posters that tried Red Hat, but didn't like the program installation, give Debian a try (or one of the distributions based on Debian, like Xandros, Libranet or even KNOPPIX. Application installation is a breeze, just a simple apt-get install appname away.
Posted by AC4FS on 2003-08-23

slackware

I started out with RedHat 5.2 and worked my way up from there. Switched to Slack after RH7. I do keep a partition with Win98 on it but hardly ever use it.

Best 73s
Posted by KA1DBE on 2003-08-22

FreeBSD :)

FreeBSD :) for over two-and-a-half years now -> I've never looked back. http://www.freebsd.org/.
Posted by KG4IXE on 2003-08-22

Solaris is great

I have been running Solaris 8 and now 9 for 3 years. Unix makes windows look like junk software, which it certainly is.
Posted by FJGH on 2003-08-21

Typical! Mac not even a CHOICE!

Jeez, bad enough us Mac (OS X) users get no respect, now on a Linux poll you still offer Windows as a choice but not Mac? No wonder I'm forced to have a clunky Windows laptop next to my real Mac computer to run most ham software.

Thank god (or at least Dan Agro) for MacLoggerDX!!
Posted by KC2LBO on 2003-08-21

OS Bashing

I can certainly understand someone singing the praises of their chosen operating system - that is natural.

What I don't understand is why some computer users feel the need to trash someone elses OS choice just because it is different.

The psychological term for this is cognitive dissonance. Check this link for more - http://tinyurl.com/kqy1

Use what you like and smile!
Posted by KD5ING on 2003-08-21

Another FreeBSD'er

I've been using FreeBSD for about 5 years and
wouldn't consider using anything else.

http://www.freebsd.org/

Maybe include FreeBSD as an option in your
next survey
Posted by KC7MTQ on 2003-08-21

Linux & Ham Radio

The future in software and operating systems is going to be open source, Linux. This will open up new avenue's in software writen for amateur radio. You'll have ham's writing programs that we'll be secure and open for change. This well allow other's to improve and make enhancements to software making it even better. LINUX IS THE FUTURE!
Posted by N8QXB on 2003-08-21

What are you talking about?

I haven't understood a single post on this topic.
Are we talking about ham radio here??
Posted by WA2DTW on 2003-08-20

I am really having problems understanding why this issue is raised and discussed in such a general way at eHam.
Raising a question like "Started using Linux for radio control og logging by now ? (yes/no/experiences)" seems ok.
Suggest however that we do not turn this site into another general computer discussion site.
Posted by LA1SJA on 2003-08-19

Linux

Linux? I tried Red Hat a few years ago, currently running Solaris 8 on a SUN Ultra 1.

Posted by N8IWK on 2003-08-19

Glory to KnoppiX !

Running mainly Win2000 I was always curious to try out Linuxes at home...spoiling the System
by wrong installations :-( Finally downloaded free 700Mb iSO for burning LiveCD http://www.knopper.net/knoppix/index-en.html#requireme and now enjoing over 2000
applications included = runs from CD leaving
my Win2000 on the hard drive intact !
Posted by VE2XLT on 2003-08-18

To L1D:

Quote: "To K4IQT "Unfortunately, for the average home network Linux is still an answer without a question. Unless I just want to tinker with it, there simply is no need for it in my shack today, and I get to spend all the time I want and more tinkering with Linux, Windows 2000, Exchange, etc., at the office." If there were more people who thought like you, Bill Gates would be a trillionare by now."


My initial post that I don't want to tinker with Linux is a statement of my personal preference, based on the minimal amount of time I have available for hobbies.


It does not express an opinion that nobody should tinker with it. Most of us became hams because we are inveterate "tinkers" at heart, and the only technical progress we really make is by that continued tinkering.


It appears that you are more interested in bashing other people's posts than expressing any considered viewpoint of your own re the listed topic.


Lighten up!

Posted by K4IQT on 2003-08-18

Mandrake

I'm actually running Mandrake Linux on an old Cyrix 200 MHz machine cobbled together from spare parts from around the house, friends and work.

It is actually VERY difficult to install and configure, but once it's done it'll stay working with little maintainence. Now, my friends can access my PC (via a secured SSH connection) from wherever they happen to be which has Internet access.

It's much cheaper than say, Windows 2000 Advanced Server and hundreds of pounds on each Client Access license! With Linux, you can have many people use your PC and have their own desktop at the same time for free.
Did I mention that there are many decent "free" application out there in Linux too?
Posted by M1GGG on 2003-08-18

Windows user since 1997

My wife and I have used various flavors of Windows exclusively since early 1997. I was the last holdout, running IBM OS/2 Warp before that. She has moved through the "consumer" track (Win95, Win98, now Win2K) while I have moved through the "business" track (WinNT, Win2K, now WinXP). Her Win2K box will get WinXP some time later this month (I personally don't like supporting multiple operating systems). Like others, I don't particularly enjoy helping Bill Gates get richer, but think how many OTHER software developers have been able to have a livlihood thanks to the Windows platform. 73 - Jim AD1C
Posted by AD1C on 2003-08-18

Dual-boot

Windows XP professional and RedHat Linux on my PCs. I prefer Linux, the wife likes XP.
Posted by AC0LT on 2003-08-18

Dual Boot

I don't hate Microsoft, or their products. But I am very leary about some of the "phone-home" features in XP...embedded spyware if you will. So....my home computer now dual boots Win98SE and Lycoris Desktop/LX. Lycoris is pretty sweet. Not as leading edge a distro as the latest Red Hat, or SuSE, but very stable, and itr runs well on my PIII/650 with 256MB RAM and 20GB HD. And since it's a version of Caldera, it's immune from legal issues with SCO (a nice feature).

Linux on the desktop isn't quite ready for prime time. But it's getting really close. I'm still going to need Windows for some applications like my digital camera and my document scanner. So I'm probably going to end up with Win2000 as dual boot with Lycoris, but I won't be going any further down the Microsoft trail than Windows 2000, unless they quit with the spyware. Eventually, I'll probably end up all Linux though.

Posted by N8AUC on 2003-08-18

SuSe for PPC

I've had excellent luck with SuSe packages for PPC on various Macintoshes. I'd recommend it to anyone who wants to try Linux on a Mac, especially an older PowerPC.

However, there is no real reason to run Linux on a newer Mac. OS X is real BSD Unix with a very nice GUI. With Fink Commander I can do builds of Linux code to run on my OS X Macs. I even use the KDE desktop for some of the programs.

If you stuck with a Wintel box, turn from the Dark Side and come over to Linux. If you have a Mac, give SuSe a look if you don't want to bother with Fink.
Posted by W3JJH on 2003-08-18

Re: Windows User since 1997

To: AD1C
Making a living is fine, but how would you like it if you were trying to make a living and a company spends millions of dollars to spread Fear, Uncertainity and Doubt about your lively hood? That is exactly who and what you are supporting.
Posted by L1D on 2003-08-18

Re: Dual Boot

To N3AUC:

SCO has no case against Linux. I beg you to please switch to another distribution (try gentoo, it will make your 650MHZ machine screem!). Don't support SCO or anyone doing business with SCO.
Posted by L1D on 2003-08-18

Re: OS X and FreeBSD

No I said FeeBSD not freeBSD.
Posted by L1D on 2003-08-17

Yes

I've been running Linux contiually since RH 5.0 on an old Puckerd Hell 486. Those were the "bad old days" of Linux when installs could drive you up the wall, especially on proprietary systems. Right now I run Gentoo 1.4 and Knoppix/Debian on dedicated drives.


In the "real world" of network administrators where I live and work Windows can't touch Linux in speed, reliabilty, configurability, stability, and security. We didn't have to patch any of our servers this week for the blaster worm. Neither did I have to patch either of my Linux drives. I don't have to run anti-virus software on Linux. Networking Linux machines is second nature compared to windows machines.


The one place Windows has an edge over Linux is the desktop market where your average applicance operator doesn't know there's another choice. Their machines come with Windows installed and for the most part they don't know they don't have to run Windows to do what they want to do. For every application in the Windows world that people use there are Linux alternatives that work just as well or better.


The one place this isn't true yet is Ham Radio applications. There aren't as many good Linux apps for Ham Radio as there are for Windows. I know there are some hard core Linux using Hams will say the opposite but the test is whether you could sit a windows using Ham down in front of a Linux machine and have them start and run the Linux alternative to something like Writelog or DXLab.


This last statement shouldn't be construed to mean I'm not for the Linux OS. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Ham Radio apps for Linux need some serious work. I'd love to see N1MM ported to Linux.

Posted by N0RKX on 2003-08-17

Maybe application developers can take a hint here...

Just a few days into the survey and already 800 votes with about 40% of those responding
say that they are using Linux/unix.
Maybe this indicates to ham radio software authors/developers that they should look seriously at porting their applications to Linux?
Posted by VK5LA on 2003-08-17

Win2K is semi-stable

VE3WMB...
huh? reboot a Win2K machine daily or even weekly?? NOT UNLESS YOU HAVE A flaky computer.

I have servers running Win 2000 Advanced Server that have been online for 30 months now, I have work stations that run win2k that run weeks or months before they get turned off... and that is only so I can open the case and blow out the dust from the location where they are used.

Yes, Win9x had memory leak and needed to be rebooted at least daily, NT is different.
Posted by OBSERVER9 on 2003-08-17

SuSE Linux

I have a internet gateway on 2 meters using an Edge FX U2 rack server running SuSE Linux 8.0. I also use a dual 1Ghz PIII w2k box for most of my Windows based amateur radio software. My experience has been that if you have crappy consumer grade hardware, any OS w2k, linux and even solaris will crash.Spend the money for good hardware and it will last for many years
Posted by N7UQA on 2003-08-17

Bashing OSes never helps...

Well, in my view, which is worth just about as much as the next fella (zilch), a person should use what they like to use. My primary OS is MacOS X. I can use just about any OS I want and this is what I have chosen. If you want to bash what I use, fine. Just remember, I make my choices just as well as you do. I like Linux (RedHat) a whole lot, but it did not have what I wanted for every day stuff. Linux is a great platform for those who need tremendous flexibility or are wanting to dig deeper into how an app/OS works and make it work better for themselves. I even like doing this. And I can do it on MacOS X also, just not with as much freedom as Linux provides....

In my opinion (again it is worthless), I prefer an OS with UNIX (or UNIX like) under pinnings. It provides the most flexibility for an advanced user. MacOS X has this, but does not scare off the lessor skilled users as Linux might. But I think Linux will be getting there (if not already in some cases) very soon....

73 de Jerry N5RV
Posted by N5RV on 2003-08-17

Debian user

Been using Debian (woody) for a few months now on a DIY AMD pc. So far, so good after some minor installation glitches.

Debian just celebrated its 10th birthday on Aug 16th.

Also use Windowx XP-Pro on same pc.

Dave...
Posted by K9JDK on 2003-08-17

SuSE

I've used Linux as my seconday OS for 6 years. Started with RH 5.1 & 5.2 (real bears!), SuSE 6.2, Mandrake 8.2, and now SuSE 8.2 Pro (all three excellent). I even rolled my own kernel between SuSE 6.2 and Mandrake 8.2 (but I have a life, so I went with the ready-made upgrade!). Lots of software becoming available. Lots of beta stuff that works better than the commercial stuff in the MS-Win world. Linux is not for the casual "just word processing and web surfing" computer user. But with OpenOffice (StarOffice) suite, WordPerfect 8 or 9, etc., it is heading rapidly in that direction too.
Posted by N5LF on 2003-08-16

Distros

I've run RH7 as my secondary system. Two friends have recommended Slackware and Debian, respectively.

I have a chance to purchase Suse 7 at a good price...I've read favorable comments on Suse; is this version stable?

Thanks for any help. j c K5DMI
Posted by K5DMI on 2003-08-16

Not until there is a need...

Unfortunately, for the average home network Linux is still an answer without a question. Unless I just want to tinker with it, there simply is no need for it in my shack today, and I get to spend all the time I want and more tinkering with Linux, Windows 2000, Exchange, etc., at the office.

Posted by K4IQT on 2003-08-16

Re: Not until there is a need...

To K4IQT

"Unfortunately, for the average home network Linux is still an answer without a question. Unless I just want to tinker with it, there simply is no need for it in my shack today, and I get to spend all the time I want and more tinkering with Linux, Windows 2000, Exchange, etc., at the office."

If there were more people who thought like you, Bill Gates would be a trillionare by now.
Posted by L1D on 2003-08-16

in the real world

the real world runs on Microsoft products. While I am not a big fan of overbloated, buggy, expensive, trash... but no one in the IT department has ever been fired for buying Microsoft.
Posted by OBSERVER9 on 2003-08-16

RedHat

I stared using Linux back in 1995. By the end of 1996, I rarely used Windows. By 1997, I only used it for games, which is very rare.

I get all my work done just fine.

To the one who said no one gets fired for buying MS products, think again, I personally know of many who have.
Posted by AE6HR on 2003-08-16

I use RH 7.2 and Yellow Dog 2.1

I wanted to configure an older PC as a server for Backups and to act as a print server for my HP LJ1200 Laser printer. I was shocked at the sticker price for WIN2000 and WINNT so I went with RH Linux. My server gets rebooted about once every three months and performs flawlessly.

I installed Yellow Dog Linux on an old PowerMac that wasn't getting much and now use it as a Web Surfing machine on my work Bench in the basement.

I still have a WIN98 PC laptop that I run a lot of Ham specific software on but I hope to pick up a refurbed Pentium class machine to install SUSE 8.2 PRO so I can use it for Ham logging and PSK applications.

The beauty of Linux is it is very very stable unlike most of the Microsoft OSes which require daily reboots (WIN95/98) ,or at best weekly reboots (WINNT, WIN2000) to prevent something really bad from happening to your system. I have no experience with XP because I refuse to spend a fortune on upgrading my hardware just to do so.

P.S. I picked up most of my Linux distributions on
eBay for less than $10 each for the complete set of CDs.
Posted by VE3WMB on 2003-08-16

OS/X and FreeBSD

a nit pick: OS/X is *not* FreeBSD. Check out

http://developer.apple.com/pdf/mactech_darwin.pdf

for details. (Although, it's really more 4.3 than 4.4-lite...)

OS/X uses a mach-derived kernel that had been heavily modified by the NeXT team, above which is an "BSD" personality module, so that they could leverage a lot of the bsd 4.3 programs and libraries at the ap level.

Pretty much all of the above is available as open source. But it's only "really" OS/X with the Apple GUIs and compatibility for MAC OS ADKs
Posted by AE6IP on 2003-08-16

right tool for the job

do you only own one wrench?

then why use only one OS?

anyway, when it comes to ham software, windoze has the widest range, with bsd/linux coming in a low second, and my poor mac running a distant third.
Posted by AE6IP on 2003-08-15

Wrenches??

Yes I use different size wrenches, but they're all Craftman...

Actually I'd be interested to try Linux, but don't really know what I'd use it for. What does it do that XP doesn't?? Pardon my ignorance on this subject.

Note: I'm not a Windows lover, but it does all I ask it to, and it came on my Dell, and on both of my Compaq confusers. And Uncle Bill finally made networking easier with XP. Will all my favorite aps run on Linux? Most likely not. Hard to find out.

Gil, W1RG
Posted by W1RG on 2003-08-15

Red Hat 8.0/9

I too am an old Unix admin. I installed RH 8 on a laptop earlier this year. The only thing I had to do was put in the CDs in the right order. It found all the devices, the sound card works, the CD-R works and the touchpad and mouse work. I haven't tried the scanner. I even got the WINModem to work right but that took a little work. Updating the system for bug fixes and security problems is easy. The unit sits in a docking station and runs 24X7 problem-free. I have a '98 desktop comeing up for replacement later this year and I'll be burning '98 down and putting RH 9 on it as a server. Oh yeah, I'm also running RHDB 2.1 (database) and that went in the same way as the OS. Not at all like putting Informix on Unix System V!
What does Linux do that XP doesn't -- It runs without crashing!

kf4wxd
Posted by KF4WXD on 2003-08-15

What can Linux do...

to W1RG:


Linux doesn't take out your credit card as often as Windows does.


Don't feed the billionare...


Favorite software?
I pick software based on functionality and stability. Linux wins hands down.
Posted by L1D on 2003-08-15

Other not mentioned

Apple flavored Unix otherwise known as System 10.2.6 The most stable op system I have ever used even if the filing and navigation are as poorly done as Windows NT.

73
George
K3UD
Posted by K3UD on 2003-08-15

Re: Other Not Mentioned

To: K3UD

You mean OS X? I like to call it FeeBSD. It is a non-standard Unix clone. A proprietary OS, but this time on proprietary hardware. A single user GUI grafted on a multi-user OS with a kludge to become multi-user again.
Posted by L1D on 2003-08-15

No Linux yet

I've planned to try out Linux for years, but still haven't taken the plunge.

I even have a couple of different flavors, Mandrake, and Debian, I think. I'll knock together an old machine to play with it on one of these days....

73
Dan
Dan Evans K9ZF
Scottsburg, IN 47170
{EM78}
K9ZF /R no budget Rover
ex-N9RLA
Check out the Rover Resource Page at:
http://www.qsl.net/n9rla
QRP-l #1269
Central States VHF Society
IN-Ham list administrator

Posted by K9ZF on 2003-08-15

Mandrake 9.1

I started with Mandrake 9.0 and upgraded when the 9.1 version was introduced I run dual boot Win 98 Se is my default boot because most of my Ham radio digital programs run in Win 98. I use Mandrake 9.1 as a learning experience. I am now starting to find Mandrake 9.1 quite user friendly. I use Mozilla 1.4 also in Win 98 Se. I really think Linux OS will be more popular as time goes by.
73
Gerry
Posted by VE7BGP on 2003-08-15

SuSE Linux

I Installed SuSE Linux, and it worked a treat after install and best thing is it dont crash!.

Peter, M3PHP
Posted by M3PHP on 2003-08-15

SuSE always makes me smile

I have used almost everything, and even worked for Microsoft on the XP project, and I find SuSE Linux to be my pick amoung them all. If you get SuSE, go for the Pro package, as it has all the Ham software one would ever need.
Posted by VE7SQL on 2003-08-15

Actually, I use NetBSD

After using Debian Linux for several years, I've switched to NetBSD. Even more stable, better performance on non-Intel systems (and at least as good on Intel) and capable of running Linux apps.
Posted by WA8TZG on 2003-08-14

Actually, I use FreeBSD

I've never seriously used Linux by myself - I've been raised in the BSD culture so I once run BSD/OS, and now FreeBSD. No problem on running most of Linux apps.

73 de Joe JJ1BDX/3 es K1BDX
Posted by JJ1BDX on 2003-08-14

OS of the future

I have been running a packet cluster node on linux for 6 years now. The quality of the os plus the fact that it is not polluted by commercial pressures (yet delivers the goods faster than commercial products) is the driver. Newest releases have desktop managers as good as the others and productivity suites (OpenOffice) are fantastic. Until DX4WIN and WriteLog get converted, I will still use Win4Lin as a windows environment for these products, although there are limitations on number of com ports, etc.
Posted by K3NC on 2003-08-14

Every operating system has it's place.

I have worked on many different operating systems over the years. I have found that although there is not a perfect system out there, all of them have their place where they shine. I think that linux has became the balance of the PC and the MAC world. It forced mainstream opsystems to get their act together. Look at windows2000, or mac OSX. These are the best systems MS and Apple have put out ever thanks to the linux movement. Linux has also brought mainstream exposure to other PC based unix systems like SCO and BSD to name some. Although this system is making the main stream by storm, it is still not the best operating system for everyone. In order to really get the most out of it, you have to program in at least scripting languages. This would not suite most modern computer users.

Phineas
K0KMA

Posted by PHINEAS on 2003-08-14

Linux

I installed and ran Red Hat V4 several years ago. I am AIX (IBM's Unix) System Admin certified and worked with AIX/Unix systems professionaly for years so Unix flavored OS's are no stranger. The Linux exercise was interesting and educational but at the time and I suspect it hasn't changed much there were limited Linix applications available as compared to the Windoz OS's. Discussions about OS's can border on religon but I use what supports the applications I need/want. For now that is WinXP.
Posted by NA4M on 2003-08-14

Am I missing something?

I tried to install Linux Red Hat 6.5 on a second system I have about a year ago to use it and become accustomed to it, but I ran into problems involved with the set-up. I tried two or three times, every time clearing the hard disk, but ran into the same problems.

Win 98, on the other hand set up and installed itself with no problems on the same system, so I use that. I would still like to try Linux, however.
Posted by K1CJS on 2003-08-14

Swithced to Mandrake

I have used a number of operating systems proffessionally, but it took me a while to ge tup the nerve to try Linux. Having had occasional problems installing different Windows versions, I was afraid of trouble.

I finally took the plunge with Mandrake 8.2. It installed without a hitch, even easier than any Windows install. I did keep my Windows 2000 install so I can dual boot, since I do have some esoteric hardware that only runs under Windows. Unfortunately, my Win 2k install is running into trouble. When I am in Windows the machine will occasionally just decide to reboot itself. I never have any problems in Linux.

Linux is not for everyone. It is faster, runs on a smaller machine and is more reliable (rock stable). There is a ton of software that comes with the package ( actually with any major distro). The delivered SW usually meets my needs. One weekness, if you do need to download SW from the net, its usually free, but the installation procedures for installing programs under Linux are not as easy to use as they could be. Often I find myself searching all ovedr the web to find prerequisites.

Now, if anyone can point me to any radio control software that will run an Icome 756 Pro.
Posted by WA2AEL on 2003-08-14

Peanuts

Isn't Linux the guy holding the blanket in the Peanuts comic strip?
Posted by WB2WIK on 2003-08-14

debian

I've found it hard to get working. I never have got the X window system running.

I am going to try Red Hat next.

Also in reply to HFHAM2, if hams are using it for something having to do with ham radio, lets hear about it here.

Its a hobby dude, get a life.
Posted by WA7NCL on 2003-08-14

SUSE Linux

A perfect install right out of the box!!! This is on the exact same machine on which I tried to install NT4.0 a total of seven times, without being able to get a complete installation. SUSE recognized my dual Pentiums and setup SMP automatically. It found both Hard Drives and my Tape Drive and set them up correctly. NT had problems with all of these and never was able to get the Tape Drive working! ---- Dennis
Posted by KG4RUL on 2003-08-14

Red Hat 9

I run red hat 9 on my notebook and my desktop dual booting with XP (for those couple of aps I can't do without). Both the dell and the IBM are fine either on RH9 or XP and there seems to be little difference in stability or speed. However linux provides free apps for me to use that I'd have to pay for with XP. For programs I use a lot thats fine... for the occasional use it gets expensive. Red hat hasn't really required more time to get up and running than XP or Win2k either (unlike some of the less freindly distros). Mandrake is even easier if you are looking for an easy intro into Linux.



Posted by VK3LZ on 2003-08-14

Never got sound card working in Linux

I bought Red Hat Linux a couple of years ago. I never could get it to set up my sound card, although everything else worked just fine. I have reverted to Windows ME, but refuse to upgrade to XP until they stop it from "dialing the mother ship".
-KR4WM
Posted by WY3X on 2003-08-14

What hat?

I just don't get it.....why does anyone care what color my hat is?.....but if you
really do care.....I have one from Kenwood
that is black, and one from Icom that is
white.
73,
W5EEX
Posted by WA5DGH on 2003-08-14

RH 9

Used to run RH 6.x for a while, then got tired of the hassles of dual and triple boot systems. Now I installed RH 9 on a separate physical drive. That is good now, but I found RH 9 is a real memory hog. I am using the KDE GUI versus commmand line sessions. My 128 MB just doesn't cut it. After opening two browsers and the email client, my hard drive sounds like a percolator coffee pot swapping out memory. After reading the requirements, I see they recommend 256 MB. Considering that Microsoft products just went under attack yet again, I might stick with Linux. I am keeping my eyes open for Ham Radio apps for Linux. That, HFHAM2, is what it has to do with ham radio. I do feel that a lot of hams spend more time talking ABOUT ham radio than they do talking ON ham radio. That's okay though, that's their choice. Talking about it is fun too.
Posted by WA0UDX on 2003-08-14

Linux and Ham Radio

go hand in hand. Here are the apps I use.

kpsk,baudline,tlf,klog and the list goes on. A lot of stuff I've written for myself using perl with a GTK gui wrapper so it has no names to give, but it does stuff like letting me operate my rig from anywhere I can get an internet connection (command line based and yes I can stream the audio).

Imagine being able to open your software and tweek it like you tweek your radio. That is the nature of GNU/Open Source software.

If you want to try Linux now and have a CD burner you can download knoppix. Just download the liveCD, burn a copy and boot off that CD.

To the dude running Windows ME. Get a copy of Windows 98, even the microsoft crowd hates ME.

to the dude who installed RedHat v4 several years ago, don't you mean 8 years ago?

To the dude running NetBSD, good non-intel CPU support, but it is lacking in the desktop.

To K3NC, check out klog. I don't have the link in front of me, but it is being actively developed by an EA station.

To the dude trying to install RedHat 6.5. There is no RedHat 6.5.

To W5EEX, get a life.

To HFHam2, Linux actually supports Amateur Radio. Did you know that one of the head developers (Alan Cox) is a British Ham?

To WA7NCl, Debian is not for the newbies. Try Mandrake, RedHat, or Suse first. When you get the feel for the OS then try Debian (or if you really like to do it from scratch Gentoo).
Posted by L1D on 2003-08-14

Re: RH9

To WA0UDX. If you have low memory, try changing to a low memory requirement window manager. I use one called fluxbox. It supports KDE/Gnome apps (if you have the correct libaries installed, which you do) and doesn't eat your memory for lunch. My K6 366MHZ box with 256MB memory currently runs KDE and also runs a vncserver with fluxbox as the window manager. Windows would die under the load this machine handles.




ps Linux Ham Radio Apps link
Posted by L1D on 2003-08-14