Has *nix reached the stage where i can pop a CD in my computer, setup as easily as XP, and then use it with equal ease?

[themisfit610]

Ahh. Yes, a whole profile on a network drive would be theoretically possible, but messy. It would be easier to just have a roaming profile, but that's also very messy, considering all of Windows' messy temp files, and cache

~MiSfit

 

[Nothinman]

Ahh. Yes, a whole profile on a network drive would be theoretically possible, but messy. It would be easier to just have a roaming profile, but that's also very messy, considering all of Windows' messy temp files, and cache

It shouldn't be messy at all and mounting /home over NFS is common practice for large organizations with unix workstations. The latency is a bit higher but as long as the network and disks can handle the load it works just fine. Hell there are places that do completely diskless systems with the entire root filesystem mounted via NFS.

 

[Boztech]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

That's EXACTLY how we do it where I work. Right click on my documents -> properties, and change the target to a network drive.

You can automate this on login, though I don't know how to.. We have a special managed workstation image... I would imagine it all happens through AD or GP...

~MiSfit

No, I know you can do that pretty easily. But smack Down said that you can do the entire profile just like mounting /home via the network.

yes, an entire Windows user profile can be mounted on a network share

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/316353

...and the great thing you can do with that is this...

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/243420

 

[Nothinman]

Roaming profiles are different in that when you login it copies the profile locally and when you logout it copies it back to the server, they're not used directly from the server.

 

[pcreso]

I'd say yes, but I've formally given up wrestling with Windows. Now about 7 years since I used it, & every day I'm refreshed with situations which reinforce my decision. So I might be biased.

I also think you should rephrase your question, do you want something you can install & be as familiar with in one week as a system you have been using & working with for perhaps 9 years?
Is this a realistic expectation?

It also depends hugely on what apps you want to run. People (sane ones anyway don't use a PC to run an OS. They want to do things, which require applications. So what do you want to do on your PC? What applications do you want to use? Do you need Word, or the 95% compatability od Open Office? If you don't use features like bibliographies, you're probably fine. Otherwise stick with Word.

If you are into 3D gaming, then Linux is not likely to be as good. Ditto most multimedia, though this is changing. Much depends on whether users play dead over DRM or bend over to be shafted by Sony, Microstoft, etc.

If you want to install an OS, complete with reasonably MS compatible Office Suite, Firefox, and have IRC/email/audio players & good security with virtually no virus or malware problems, I'd say there are several Linux distros which can do what you want.

Install OpenOffice, Firefox & Thunderbird on your Windows box. If they are fine for your needs, your half way to Linux already.


Cheers....

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: Boztech

Originally posted by: Nothinman

That's EXACTLY how we do it where I work. Right click on my documents -> properties, and change the target to a network drive.

You can automate this on login, though I don't know how to.. We have a special managed workstation image... I would imagine it all happens through AD or GP...

~MiSfit

No, I know you can do that pretty easily. But smack Down said that you can do the entire profile just like mounting /home via the network.

yes, an entire Windows user profile can be mounted on a network share

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/316353

...and the great thing you can do with that is this...

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/243420

You guys are just not understanding this.

Creating a mapped drive, and doing path redirection is TOTALLY different then mount /home on a drive. Totally, not even in the same ballpark. I'll tell ya what though, why don't you redirect your documents and settings to Q:, reboot, and come tell us how thats working out for you.

And it's more then just being able to mount SMB shares in the local directory structure, it's the concept that drive letters make no sense. Pop a second disk into any average mom and pop computer users computer, and tell them "start storing your stuff on the D: drive" and they will say "uhh...ok". Now come back in a month, and guess what, the D: drive will likely be blank, and the C: drive full. Users DON'T care what physical/logical volume their data is stored on, they just want stuff to work.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: nweaver

Originally posted by: Boztech

Originally posted by: Nothinman

That's EXACTLY how we do it where I work. Right click on my documents -> properties, and change the target to a network drive.

You can automate this on login, though I don't know how to.. We have a special managed workstation image... I would imagine it all happens through AD or GP...

~MiSfit

No, I know you can do that pretty easily. But smack Down said that you can do the entire profile just like mounting /home via the network.

yes, an entire Windows user profile can be mounted on a network share

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/316353

...and the great thing you can do with that is this...

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/243420

You guys are just not understanding this.

Creating a mapped drive, and doing path redirection is TOTALLY different then mount /home on a drive. Totally, not even in the same ballpark. I'll tell ya what though, why don't you redirect your documents and settings to Q:, reboot, and come tell us how thats working out for you.

And it's more then just being able to mount SMB shares in the local directory structure, it's the concept that drive letters make no sense. Pop a second disk into any average mom and pop computer users computer, and tell them "start storing your stuff on the D: drive" and they will say "uhh...ok". Now come back in a month, and guess what, the D: drive will likely be blank, and the C: drive full. Users DON'T care what physical/logical volume their data is stored on, they just want stuff to work.

The only difference is that in lunix the default path redirection is already pointing at /home. It use path redirection just like windows. I still don't see how your confused about this. /home is meaningless, it is nothing, it is just convention to have a user directory be there and I have used systems where my home directory wasn't there. It made no difference because linux uses path redirection.

No drive letters make sense because, one hard drive is not physical in another so it should not logical appear to be inside another. You think a user doesn't care if they are saving to the local drive or not? How about /tmp how many pissed off users would you have if it was mounted on a floppy drive? Or external drives you don't think a user would like to know if they just saved the file to their USB drive instead of the server before taking the drive with them.

Every single time I have installed linux guess what the installer default extra partitions to /somefolder/partionName because people care where their files are located.

 

[nweaver]

that's just it, it's NOT redirection in Linux, you are wrong. It's mounting that partition right there in the tree. Your filesystem tree should not be tied to physical volumes.

As far as USB drives/floppys go, yes, the user needs to know they are saving it to them, but when you pop it in, it usually automounts and opens a window, just like in windows.

The linux installer defaults to that if you have other partitions you are not formatting (and specifically NTFS/Fat32 partitions) because where else should it put it? It puts physical volumes with existing data that you don't want touched under the /media directory, where it mounts other disks/usb drives/etc. So from /media, you have usbdisk, drive2, etc. This is because they are not part of your OS. Now, if your /media/partitionfromthisdisk is meant for /home, it's pretty damn easy to go and change the mount point, be it during install time, or after install time. Windows won't do it during install time, unless you use various tools to create a customized disk, so you have to do it after install time, and it can be painfull to move the entire Documents and Settings folder to a new drive.


This is all moot though, if you really think that linux making /home on a second partition/network drive is redirection, as it means you do not understand what's happening in the lower levels of the OS.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: nweaver
that's just it, it's NOT redirection in Linux, you are wrong. It's mounting that partition right there in the tree. Your filesystem tree should not be tied to physical volumes.

As far as USB drives/floppys go, yes, the user needs to know they are saving it to them, but when you pop it in, it usually automounts and opens a window, just like in windows.

The linux installer defaults to that if you have other partitions you are not formatting (and specifically NTFS/Fat32 partitions) because where else should it put it? It puts physical volumes with existing data that you don't want touched under the /media directory, where it mounts other disks/usb drives/etc. So from /media, you have usbdisk, drive2, etc. This is because they are not part of your OS. Now, if your /media/partitionfromthisdisk is meant for /home, it's pretty damn easy to go and change the mount point, be it during install time, or after install time. Windows won't do it during install time, unless you use various tools to create a customized disk, so you have to do it after install time, and it can be painfull to move the entire Documents and Settings folder to a new drive.


This is all moot though, if you really think that linux making /home on a second partition/network drive is redirection, as it means you do not understand what's happening in the lower levels of the OS.

Making /home another partition/network is not redirection. Making your home directory on /home/username is redirection.
Maybe if I repeat it a few times
/home is meaningless
/home is meaningless
/home is meaningless
/home is meaningless

Only the value in /etc/passwd tells you where a users home directory.

Do you get it yet. Redirection is used via the $HOME variable to tell the system where to store user's documents.

Edit: I don't even know why you think redirection is bad.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: nweaver
that's just it, it's NOT redirection in Linux, you are wrong. It's mounting that partition right there in the tree. Your filesystem tree should not be tied to physical volumes.

As far as USB drives/floppys go, yes, the user needs to know they are saving it to them, but when you pop it in, it usually automounts and opens a window, just like in windows.

The linux installer defaults to that if you have other partitions you are not formatting (and specifically NTFS/Fat32 partitions) because where else should it put it? It puts physical volumes with existing data that you don't want touched under the /media directory, where it mounts other disks/usb drives/etc. So from /media, you have usbdisk, drive2, etc. This is because they are not part of your OS. Now, if your /media/partitionfromthisdisk is meant for /home, it's pretty damn easy to go and change the mount point, be it during install time, or after install time. Windows won't do it during install time, unless you use various tools to create a customized disk, so you have to do it after install time, and it can be painfull to move the entire Documents and Settings folder to a new drive.


This is all moot though, if you really think that linux making /home on a second partition/network drive is redirection, as it means you do not understand what's happening in the lower levels of the OS.

Making /home another partition/network is not redirection. Making your home directory on /home/username is redirection.
Maybe if I repeat it a few times
/home is meaningless
/home is meaningless
/home is meaningless
/home is meaningless

Only the value in /etc/passwd tells you where a users home directory.

Do you get it yet. Redirection is used via the $HOME variable to tell the system where to store user's documents.

Edit: I don't even know why you think redirection is bad.

redirection is like symlinking, and isn't a bad thing per say....but it's dumb to have Q: and Documents and Settings\Username as a pointer to Q:

/home is not meaningless...and usually you mount /home as a seperate entry...be it NFS, SMB, or another partition.

I have entries in fstab for my media files (they are stored on a central server, so all my machines have my music, videos, etc) inside my home directory, I have the entire /home directory on one partition of one of my disks, I have / mounted on another, /boot on one, /var on another, etc etc....it's more flexible that way.

/home is NOT meaningless....it's where my user's home directories are, what is meaningless (to them at least) is what partition of what disk of what machine that data is actually stored on.

I have multiple setups where /home/projects is mounted, so that we have shared directory space for projects, and maybe /home/templates is a different mount as well, so that all our doc templates are the same. This kind of flexibility in your filesystem is what linux is good for...windows SUCKS at this, as you would have to either a) do redirection (which is NOT something a normal user can do) or they have to remember the T: is templates, or V: is projects, or that \\server\projects is where they store project data, etc.

 

[Nothinman]

Making /home another partition/network is not redirection. Making your home directory on /home/username is redirection.

Actually neither of them is redirection unless you want to count normal directory access as redirecting you to the device that holds the actual data be it the hard disk, network share, data in memory, etc.

Maybe if I repeat it a few times
/home is meaningless
/home is meaningless
/home is meaningless
/home is meaningless

The name itself, sure. But /home is as meaningful as any other directory on the system and any of them can be turned into a mount point for any local or networked filesystem that Linux supports, which isn't possible on Windows.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Making /home another partition/network is not redirection. Making your home directory on /home/username is redirection.

Actually neither of them is redirection unless you want to count normal directory access as redirecting you to the device that holds the actual data be it the hard disk, network share, data in memory, etc.

Explain how $HOME is anyless of redirection compared to windows %USERPROFILE%. Both systems use a variable to point to the location of the files.

 

[Nothinman]

Explain how $HOME is anyless of redirection compared to windows %USERPROFILE%. Both systems use a variable to point to the location of the files.

You're the only one mentioning variables, the rest of us are talking about the act of mounting a filesystem to a directory.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Explain how $HOME is anyless of redirection compared to windows %USERPROFILE%. Both systems use a variable to point to the location of the files.

You're the only one mentioning variables, the rest of us are talking about the act of mounting a filesystem to a directory.

I'm the only one mentioning variables because you can't seem to understand that /home is meaningless to the system. So being able to mount drives in one meaningless folder is no better then being able to mount drives as meaningless drive letters. The only thing that matters to the system is what your variables point at.

 

[Nothinman]

I'm the only one mentioning variables because you can't seem to understand that /home is meaningless to the system. So being able to mount drives in one meaningless folder is no better then being able to mount drives as meaningless drive letters. The only thing that matters to the system is what your variables point at.

Profiles only came up because it's impossible to map %SYSTEMDRIVE%\Documents and Settings to a network drive directly, it's orthogonal to the original discussion.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Explain how $HOME is anyless of redirection compared to windows %USERPROFILE%. Both systems use a variable to point to the location of the files.

You're the only one mentioning variables, the rest of us are talking about the act of mounting a filesystem to a directory.

I'm the only one mentioning variables because you can't seem to understand that /home is meaningless to the system. So being able to mount drives in one meaningless folder is no better then being able to mount drives as meaningless drive letters. The only thing that matters to the system is what your variables point at.

no it doesn't, because $home means "User's home directory"....mounting /home to /dev/sda3 means mounting a partition to the directory /home....totally different.


Where are a users files? In /home (no mention of physical disks)
Where are a users files? In C:\Documents and Settings, which is really redirected to the third partion of the first SCSI disk, so really it's Q:\, but wait, we had to redirect C:\Documents and Settings to Q:

it's much more complicated. In Windows, as if you ask a user "where are your files" they will say "they are on the C: drive" which implies a specific partition.

if you ask linux users, they will say /home, which makes no mention of partitions.

Not to mention, it wouldn't be that hard to setup a linux box to automount your thumb drive, put /home/nweaver as the mount point for your thumb drive, and log off, pull the drive out, walk to another PC, plug in the drive, count to ten (while it's mounted) and then logging in.
Can you do that with windows? without a major dash into the registry and other hacks?
What happens if you don't have your thumbdrive? Linux will still log you in, and create defaults for everything. You won't have your email, browser settings/cookies, but you WILL be able to use your computer. How about with windows?

The bottom line is C:\ is a bad method, as it lacks flexibility.

 

[Boztech]

Originally posted by: nweaver

Originally posted by: Boztech

Originally posted by: Nothinman

That's EXACTLY how we do it where I work. Right click on my documents -> properties, and change the target to a network drive.

You can automate this on login, though I don't know how to.. We have a special managed workstation image... I would imagine it all happens through AD or GP...

~MiSfit

No, I know you can do that pretty easily. But smack Down said that you can do the entire profile just like mounting /home via the network.

yes, an entire Windows user profile can be mounted on a network share

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/316353

...and the great thing you can do with that is this...

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/243420

You guys are just not understanding this.

Creating a mapped drive, and doing path redirection is TOTALLY different then mount /home on a drive. Totally, not even in the same ballpark. I'll tell ya what though, why don't you redirect your documents and settings to Q:, reboot, and come tell us how thats working out for you.

And it's more then just being able to mount SMB shares in the local directory structure, it's the concept that drive letters make no sense. Pop a second disk into any average mom and pop computer users computer, and tell them "start storing your stuff on the D: drive" and they will say "uhh...ok". Now come back in a month, and guess what, the D: drive will likely be blank, and the C: drive full. Users DON'T care what physical/logical volume their data is stored on, they just want stuff to work.

Not understanding what?

I prefer the nix method, but I admin Win2k3 servers for a living. I never really argued theory over either of them. I just provided a little linkage clarify some claims that are being made in here that aren't quite correct.

 

[Boztech]

double post :\

 

[nweaver]

eh....roaming profiles is a TOTALLY differnent thing, and is pretty spendy for a home user to set up for their 2 machines