Where can we get a free download of Suse 8.2?

cleverhandle

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 2001
3,566
3
81
You can't - they don't release official ISO's. And I assume you'll respect their wishes and not go scraping around for bootlegs. You can, however, do an FTP install. You can get the ISO for a boot CD here.

edit: fixed link
 

EeyoreX

Platinum Member
Oct 27, 2002
2,864
0
0
Have you tried SuSE.com? It looks to me like they have available several versions for download. I don't know if these are full CDs, but you can install from the ftp, so I assume they must be the CD as well.

Guess I was mistaken, per above post.

\Dan
 

hasu

Senior member
Apr 5, 2001
993
10
81
Originally posted by: cleverhandle
You can't - they don't release official ISO's. And I assume you'll respect their wishes and not go scraping around for bootlegs. You can, however, do an FTP install. You can get the ISO for a boot CD here.

edit: fixed link

Thanks for the link.
I still think that Linux was supposed to be free. I have tried Mandrake Linux 9.2 Beta and Redhat 9.0. I think still my Windows XP looks and works better. Even now there are many bugs in linux and its applications. For a desktop OS I feel comfortable to pay M$ rather than Linux, for the present. Only thing I hate in Windows XP is the activation menace. I thought of trying suse also just to see what they have more than ML and RH. I know that they have a live evaluation but it is not a complete package (it's a single CD) and I dont think that it is worth paying $50-$100 to try out Linux!!
 

civad

Golden Member
May 30, 2001
1,397
0
0
Another loser lost his way.
Never heard of distros other than RH / Mandrake/ Suse. Doesnt even have the desire to know.

Good luck with windows XP, dude.


---> My comments weren't addressed to any specific individual, but to the general category of people who want to give Linux a try, end up doing osmething stupid, get frustrated, and go back to Windozzz world.

Nice! And yes, I am in a rotten mood right now.
 

Nothinman

Elite Member
Sep 14, 2001
30,672
0
0
I still think that Linux was supposed to be free.

It is, even SuSe. You can do an FTP install and get all the same software.

Even now there are many bugs in linux and its applications.

I don't see any on my desktop or laptop, but if you say so...

and I dont think that it is worth paying $50-$100 to try out Linux!!

As was mentioned, do an FTP install, it's free and you get the same software.
 

drag

Elite Member
Jul 4, 2002
8,708
0
0
Linux is FREE. Not free from cost. Lots of Linux developers actually do get paid for doing it. Linus is a multimillionare for being in charge of developement of the kernel. IBM, Sun, and a whole host of other companies have full time linux developers on their staff and companies like Redhat and SuSe make a profit from selling Linux.


What you buy when you buy a product from SuSE is their technical support. They will help you install the software and troubleshoot problems. It's not their job to make sure that you get a install CD in the format you wish for a free install.

All that is required to fufill the GPL liscence is to provide the source code, plus any modifications, of any product they sell or distribute. They can even charge you for to covert the cost of the medium. Like if you want it on a CDROM they can charge you for labor and the cost of the manufacture of that CD, but they can't technicly profit from it.

Distros that provide ISO's for install CD's do it at a large cost in bandwidth and server space. Just think, they have to provide 3 copies of each, the source code, the pre-compiled binaries, AND the ISO's. Then they have to do it for each version of OS they sell, plus for each platform. For SuSE you have 8.0, 8.1, 8.3. They also have for each version a different copy for each platform they provide for, x390 IBM's, PowerPC's, i386, Althon 64, Intel 64bit.

So for each and every peice of software they would have to provide at least 45 copies of the software AT THEIR COST. They don't want to provide free ISO's to download, they only have to provide 30 copies of it.

They are only obligated to provide 1 copy of each software and that's in it's source code form.

So instead of providing ISO's to download they provide 1 14 meg CD image. You download that, burn it, and then tell it to get the software off of a mirror close to you. (It's faster then downloading it from ftp.suse.com, which is located in Germany).

You still get to install for free, and they save money and more mirrors are able to support SuSE to make it quicker and easier for you to use their software with out having to pay for it.
 

drag

Elite Member
Jul 4, 2002
8,708
0
0
BTW.

If you still what to give it a whirl, here is were you can easiely download the 14 meg install image

The directions are a link on the same page to directions.

You can find a list of mirrors here

(from the install directions)
basicly when you get the boot up screen you add the path to the install server (in IP number form) to the line at the bottom of the screen.

like if you want to use ftp.oregonstate.edu as a mirror, you add

install=ftp://128.193.0.3/pub/suse/suse/i386/8.2

(paths change from mirror to mirror.)

And then you should be able to install just like if you were using a install regular CD.

If it freezes or something while loading the kernel, (when it's detecting hardware), you may have to select safe mode or something. Some PC's have issues with the advanced power managment stuff.

If you run into issues with your network or hardware you may have to enter some info in manually to start the install... But it should work out ok.
 

hasu

Senior member
Apr 5, 2001
993
10
81
Thank you drag. Your comments were much more positive than others. I heard of ftp install before, but never knew that there is a bootable CD image available to facilitate the task. Actually I work in IT industry and through out my career I have been working with Microsoft products. I heard a lot about Linux but never tried anything other than ML and RH (have been trying ML and RH on and off since two years and have made many of my friends to try them too). They are supposed to be the market leaders (I may be wrong). I am trying ftp install of suse now.

Just a clarification: When I said there are bugs in Linux, I did not mean to say that there are bugs in the Kernel (I do not know where exactly they are!). I used OpenOffice (came with RH) and downloaded Kylix, Mozilla, Mozilla firebird etc. Some of those programs (incl some of KOffice components) crashed in my system. Crash means the application just disappears without any error! Probably the bugs are with those third party applications. As far as I know even such errors in Windows will result in some kind of error message to let the user that something has gone wrong. Also, when I compared the same version of application in Windows and Linux, the versions in Windows looked better. eg. Delphi looks better than Kylix. Mozilla firebird, OpenOffice etc look better in windows. May be linux does not have good fonts or font aliasing built in into it.

civad, what you implied is true, there are very many distros for linux (for intel plat form alone I counted up to 101 in linux.org). But the fact that there are 101 distros for linux need not make it great, because basically every CS dept of every university will have a distro to their credit! As far as I heard, Suse, RH and ML are the market leaders. If what I heard is not right then majority of the people outside university premises might be wrong too.
 

civad

Golden Member
May 30, 2001
1,397
0
0
Just a clarification: When I said there are bugs in Linux, I did not mean to say that there are bugs in the Kernel (I do not know where exactly they are!). I used OpenOffice (came with RH) and downloaded Kylix, Mozilla, Mozilla firebird etc. Some of those programs (incl some of KOffice components) crashed in my system. Crash means the application just disappears without any error! Probably the bugs are with those third party applications. As far as I know even such errors in Windows will result in some kind of error message to let the user that something has gone wrong. Also, when I compared the same version of application in Windows and Linux, the versions in Windows looked better. eg. Delphi looks better than Kylix. Mozilla firebird, OpenOffice etc look better in windows. May be linux does not have good fonts or font aliasing built in into it.

Now that you have specifically mentioned what problems are ocurring, lets see if they can be fixed...I went through a similar process of 'screw-up-and-learn myself.

*Did you download the rpms for the abovementioned apps of did you build them from source?
*Have you tried running these apps from the command line? Usually you will se SOME type of error message in the terminal window.
*There should be a file called core in your home directory. THat should contain information about what exactly went wrong.
*What exactly do you mean by 'look better'? Are you referring to the fonts/ screen resolution, etc?

---> Being more specific always helps. It is understandable that a person gets frustrated while trying out something new altogether.
That doesnt mean one hsould give up.

btw: have you visited any of the following sites for more info?
Distrowatch
Mandrake Expert
Linux Documentation Project

You should also try to the manuals that are installed with the applications (e.g. try 'man mozilla' in a terminal window'
 

drag

Elite Member
Jul 4, 2002
8,708
0
0
Ya well. Nobody ever said Linux was perfect, far from it.

It's flawed software Through and through.

But the real truth is: So is every other piece of software out there.

Software products never get finished, they just get shipped. You work on something for as long as you can, and you test it, but you won't ever know exactly how the public is going to react to it. You can't predict the level of competence in the user.

If you think the user is a idiot. Then you get a stiff and overly complex product that is limited in scope. Just to make it "easy" on a user.

If you think the user is a highly skilled software engineer. You get something simple,flexible, and powerful. But it would seem alien and completely not understandable by a large number of your potential customers.

Microsoft errs on the side that customers are generally unskilled and need hand-holding to accomplish a given task. This makes it easy to use, but it's very limited in scope. As a user you can only use it as much as the original developer envisioned it. To try to be creative you hit a brick wall.

Linux/Unix design acknowledges the fact that in software, "good is good enough". Not because this is ideal, but because it's a fact. There is not enough time in the known universe to make a piece of software that will fulfill the needs of all the customers and making a perfect product. You shoot for 90%, because it's attainable and better then trying for 100%, but failing and ending up at 60%.

The one major advantage of Open Source development is that you enlist the help of your users. Forget traditional customer feedback. In Linux customers change the program for free to how they like it and then tell you about it.

Have you ever dealt with a program that just had that one nagging fault. That one thing that made you spend 15 minutes each day working around? Well if it's a problem and you know enough, well you can get rid of it yourself.

Then you can put it in a patch, send it back. If it gets accepted you've just become a mini-software developer and you can point out to your bosses that you know enough that you fixed a piece of software that gets used everyday and you know what your doing.

The one thing that makes Unix design (which Linux is a extension of) so long lasting (20+ years) is that it thinks that everyone is a software engineer. This makes it adaptable and flexible. You can do things with the tools provided that the original designers never dreamed off.


for example:

You can take a pppd software designed for modems communications, Open-ssh designed for secure terminals, and Bash which is designed for command line environment, and a simple ping command. You combine them you can create Virtual Private Networking program that will automated links and provide encrypted TCP/IP tunnels were you can connect 2 vastly separated LANS into one network through the internet, firewalls, and a whole host of obstacles. And do it completely transparently to the users. That's probably thousands and thousands of lines of code strung together by a bored admin in 15 minutes. In Microsoft land a program doing that would cost maybe 50-70 dollars or take Microsoft engineers weeks to integrate into the OS and debug it.

That's Power. And why Unix has survived at the top of the food chain in terms of server design.

It's just has a steep learning curve so it makes it hard for lay-people to use.

Edit: (tried to fix my abhorrent spelling)