If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Verge)   Microsoft has learned their lesson. Canonical, however, still sits there scratching their head asking why they are no longer the worlds #1 Linux distributor   (theverge.com) divider line 75
    More: Hero, Start Menu, Microsoft, linux, Windows RT, Windows Desktop, lessons, Windows Phones  
•       •       •

4981 clicks; posted to Geek » on 25 Apr 2014 at 8:25 AM (12 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



75 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-25 07:50:54 AM
Dear Canonical, I really would like to move the launcher in 14.04.
 
2014-04-25 08:38:40 AM
So, I have Mint Maya on my HTPC, and I'm reasonably happy with it. I'm considering grabbing Trusty for an upgrade, but am wondering if it's nice enough to warrant the PITA of moving data around. (I, of course, wasn't bright enough to partition my HD when I installed.)
 
2014-04-25 08:58:02 AM
They could have just sent everyone a link to the Classic Shell website. It works perfectly and you can even decide what bits of Metro, like the corners etc, to keep or lose.
 
2014-04-25 09:01:12 AM
It looks like a hybrid of the old Windows 7 Start Menu mixed in with some Windows 8 Live Tiles along one side.

No, they haven't learned their lesson. They're still trying to make Metro a thing on the desktop. The fundamental problem on the desktop isn't that the start menu went away, it's that the replacement wasn't any good and they're still trying to make it happen anyway. If they want to replace the start menu, that's fine, it was never a great way to work, but they need to scrap BOTH the start menu and Metro then because Metro is an even worse way to work.

I still don't understand why they don't just make Metro and Explorer on-demand features. On its big brother OS, Server 2012, you can have the full GUI, a CLI-only environment or a minimal UI to support some graphical management tools. I can't imagine it would be that hard, then, to make Metro something that can be turned on and off as a feature.

Regardless, Windows 8 is done. It's too late now to fix it and still get people onto it. At this point the smart money is sitting on 7 until the next version comes out the same way people did with XP > Vista > 7. By the time Vista was turned into a useful OS, it was too late because you could just wait for 7 instead.
 
2014-04-25 09:08:43 AM

skozlaw: On its big brother OS, Server 2012, you can have the full GUI, a CLI-only environment or a minimal UI to support some graphical management tools.


I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but "the full GUI" on a server OS might be the epitome of what I dislike about Microsoft. Just an all-around waste of resources.
 
2014-04-25 09:14:22 AM
Hero tag?  Really??

You're not a hero for bringing back something you took away, just less of an asshole.

Didn't anyone's Dad ever ground them, take something away, then give it back later?
Because this it the digital equivalent of being grounded and getting your toy back.
 
2014-04-25 09:16:31 AM

skozlaw: Regardless, Windows 8 is done.


well, except for it being the second most used OS (8.1) on steam.  yes, 7 is ahead, but second place ain't bad.
 
2014-04-25 09:23:08 AM

Gonz


skozlaw: On its big brother OS, Server 2012, you can have the full GUI, a CLI-only environment or a minimal UI to support some graphical management tools.

I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but "the full GUI" on a server OS might be the epitome of what I dislike about Microsoft. Just an all-around waste of resources.


That's not limited to MS: you can also have "the full GUI" on a RHEL server if you want it.
 
2014-04-25 09:26:44 AM

skozlaw: I still don't understand why they don't just make Metro and Explorer on-demand features. On its big brother OS, Server 2012, you can have the full GUI, a CLI-only environment or a minimal UI to support some graphical management tools. I can't imagine it would be that hard, then, to make Metro something that can be turned on and off as a feature.


^ This.  Whatever committee is running Microsoft's interface strategy needs their blinders ripped from their faces.  And then they need to get smacked around a bit.
 
2014-04-25 09:28:40 AM

Gonz: skozlaw: On its big brother OS, Server 2012, you can have the full GUI, a CLI-only environment or a minimal UI to support some graphical management tools.

I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but "the full GUI" on a server OS might be the epitome of what I dislike about Microsoft. Just an all-around waste of resources.


Try putting a bash shell on your Windows server.  Granted, you can't turn off the GUI, but at least you'll have a decent shell.
 
2014-04-25 09:35:30 AM

Englebert Slaptyback: Gonz

skozlaw: On its big brother OS, Server 2012, you can have the full GUI, a CLI-only environment or a minimal UI to support some graphical management tools.

I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but "the full GUI" on a server OS might be the epitome of what I dislike about Microsoft. Just an all-around waste of resources.


That's not limited to MS: you can also have "the full GUI" on a RHEL server if you want it.


Yes, but RHEL has a crapton of GUI's available.....a "full GUI" with Linux can be Fluxbox with a few apps like GParted and Synaptic (or whatever RHEL uses over Synaptic, Debian user here) to a full on Gnome 3/KDE setup with every GUI app around.

The Windows Server GUI is full blown Metro when it should be a Win2K clone.

Point is, the Linux GUI isn't a defined thing and can be tailor fit to the environment being used whereas ya just have to use what Windows offers or go 3rd party....but I suppose you already know all of this, so here's a picture of a kitten.

www.cat-breed-info.com
 
2014-04-25 09:41:18 AM

Marcus Aurelius: Try putting a bash shell on your Windows server.


I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but I wouldn't have a Windows server.
 
2014-04-25 09:45:29 AM

skeevy420: Hero tag?  Really??

You're not a hero for bringing back something you took away, just less of an asshole.

Didn't anyone's Dad ever ground them, take something away, then give it back later?
Because this it the digital equivalent of being grounded and getting your toy back.


Al Franken speaking against Comcast got the Hero tag.

The word "hero" doesn't mean much anymore.

/Still wish to reintroduce the word "helth" or "hathel" to describe truly heroic people
 
2014-04-25 09:45:35 AM

Gonz: Marcus Aurelius: Try putting a bash shell on your Windows server.

I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but I wouldn't have a Windows server.


I was gonna say "Why bother with that when I can just install Linux and throw Windows into a VM?"....but all I'd need a server for would be home file sharing/media server/backups, and Linux does that just fine all by itself.
 
2014-04-25 09:59:43 AM

Gonz: skozlaw: On its big brother OS, Server 2012, you can have the full GUI, a CLI-only environment or a minimal UI to support some graphical management tools.

I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but "the full GUI" on a server OS might be the epitome of what I dislike about Microsoft. Just an all-around waste of resources.


Know what really hurts? You can install Server Core and lose a lot (well, relatively) of that, but actually then managing the machine is nigh impossible - PowerShell commands are 3 feet long, and all the configuration is tied up in the registry.

You kind of have to manage them remotely...with GUI tools. There's even a hacked-up GUI program Microsoft makes available so you can do initial setup without the PS nonsense locally.

It's just the weirdest damn thing. Core is mostly there to reduce the number of patches, therefore reboots, you'll be doing.
 
2014-04-25 10:11:06 AM
I just installed Xubuntu 14.04 on my development box, so I'm getting a kick out of these replies.

It's a nice combination: the Ubuntu attention to detail without the clusterfark that is Unity. The XFCE desktop has made great strides in recent years.

That being said, I'll probably jump ship when they ditch X11.
 
2014-04-25 10:17:55 AM

Fubegra: .

That being said, I'll probably jump ship when they ditch X11.


Why?
 
2014-04-25 10:19:25 AM
Gentoo or bust.
 
2014-04-25 10:19:43 AM

mark.jms: You kind of have to manage them remotely...with GUI tools. There's even a hacked-up GUI program Microsoft makes available so you can do initial setup without the PS nonsense locally.


I love Powershell. Between a couple custom MMCs, Server Manager and remote powershell commands I almost never have to go into the datacenter for anything short of physical work on the servers and I've almost completely eliminated remote desktop services from the servers. The only thing anybody remotes into anymore is SSH for linux machines and RDP for some legacy Windows servers.

On top of that, we're heavily virtualized and between the WDS server's WIMs and Powershell I've scripted the basic setup of all new servers so that you just launch a PS script, answer some questions (mostly about networking config) and a whole new server is brought to life and accessible in under 10 minutes almost fully patched.

The only thing that irritates me is that some of the older features that Microsoft doesn't maintain anymore still require at least the minimal GUI becasue they haven't undone the old GUI management tools that came with those features.

/ I'm looking at you SMTP server...
 
2014-04-25 10:23:20 AM

Gonz: I realize this makes me sound neckbearded...


No snark, but you are a neckbeard. The "resources" taken up by the Windows GUI is so infinitesimal on a Gen 12 or 13 enterprise grade server as to make even mentioning their usage somewhat comical. This is based on Server 2012 R2 but R1 isn't significantly different to mention separately in this regard.

I think the tired, boring argument of "Linux servers rule! Windoze suxx0rs because reasons! No, Linux suxx0rs and Windows servers rule because reasons!" only happens among people who don't understand that Maslow's Hammer isn't the only tool a good admin has in their toolbox. Personally, I'd take user, group and resource management via AD DS over trying to setup the equivalent in LDAP any day of the week. I find AD DS to be easier to setup, configure, deploy and maintain over LDAP but I state that as preference not as an absolute statement of value. On the flip side, I find setting up nodal VMs using CentOS to do specific tasks to be a much simpler (and FAR less expensive) proposition than doing the equivalent in Windows Server without the GUI installed. With Putty and RSAT installed on my workstation, I have the best of both worlds at my fingertips. If I need to go balls deep in RHEL management, I've got a VM that exists for that sole purpose.

I just don't see the point in being so blindly tied to a "brand" that I miss the opportunity to be able to do my job more effectively and efficiently because a different "brand" offers a different set of tools.
 
2014-04-25 10:34:02 AM
Ironically, it was my use of Ubuntu at work that softened the blow of losing the Start menu in Windows.  I basically use both OSs the same way now, using "Windows Key -> start typing name of thing" to get stuff done.
 
2014-04-25 10:49:53 AM

Caelistis: No snark, but you are a neckbeard.


I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but I greatly prefer HP-UX over either Linux or Windows for a server OS. I think it's a more robust tool.
 
2014-04-25 10:51:34 AM

Gonz: I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but I greatly prefer HP-UX over either Linux or Windows for a server OS. I think it's a more robust tool.


Now I just want to punch you in your backplane.

/ not really, of course
 
2014-04-25 11:34:32 AM

cman: Fubegra: .

That being said, I'll probably jump ship when they ditch X11.

Why?


Mostly because I sometimes remotely run GUI applications on other systems on the network, and neither Wayland nor Mir are willing to support network transparency. No, a VNC-style remote desktop doesn't count.
 
2014-04-25 11:41:45 AM
I bought windows 8 only because was they said the start menu was coming back.

The install was glassy smoothe and so far I love it... Except for the start menu thing. fark that.
Seriously, who thought that people hitting the start menu button wanted advertisements for all sorts of shiat.
I want the farking program list.

/ if you wanted a tablet os then just add a switch.
/really, what's the farking deal here.
 
2014-04-25 11:52:20 AM

Gonz: I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but I greatly prefer HP-UX over either Linux or Windows for a server OS. I think it's a more robust tool.


Spent big on those Itanium systems, huh?

/I kid
 
2014-04-25 12:06:23 PM

way south: Seriously, who thought that people hitting the start menu button wanted advertisements for all sorts of shiat.


I think it was the MPAA when they mandated DVD players be able to disable fast forward when your movie DVD shows previews.
 
2014-04-25 12:07:51 PM
Well, that went wrong.  Ooops
 
2014-04-25 12:13:20 PM

Caelistis: Gonz: I realize this makes me sound neckbearded...

No snark, but you are a neckbeard. The "resources" taken up by the Windows GUI is so infinitesimal on a Gen 12 or 13 enterprise grade server as to make even mentioning their usage somewhat comical. This is based on Server 2012 R2 but R1 isn't significantly different to mention separately in this regard.


I'm not a server admin, but I thought the main argument against running a GUI on a server wasn't resource usage but reducing the attack surface. The fewer unnecessary programs/services running on your server the fewer potential targets.
 
2014-04-25 12:16:48 PM

Caelistis: Spent big on those Itanium systems, huh?


We just migrated a pair of Itanium systems to ProLiant DL 980s. We've got to keep the old ones up for a couple more weeks, and then they're going away.My partner and I have decided that we need to use science when it's time to retire them.

We're going to fork bomb a Superdome, and see what happens.
 
2014-04-25 12:26:05 PM

Gonz: Caelistis: No snark, but you are a neckbeard.

I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but I greatly prefer HP-UX over either Linux or Windows for a server OS. I think it's a more robust tool.


Eh?  Even HP doesn't use HP-UX much anymore - or I should say, most of their customers do not.  Seems to be RHEL and SLES for the most part.
 
2014-04-25 12:33:15 PM
Mitt Romneys Tax Return:  I'm not a server admin, but I thought the main argument against running a GUI on a server wasn't resource usage but reducing the attack surface. The fewer unnecessary programs/services running on your server the fewer potential targets.

As a general rule of thumb, you are correct. I should have been more clear and stated that running a GUI for admin purposes. As I tried to allude to later in the same post, the vast majority of Win servers in my area are Windows Core installs sans GUI.
 
2014-04-25 12:36:19 PM

Gonz: We're going to fork bomb a Superdome, and see what happens.


Oooo, that'll be fun! However, if they're based on the old "Lion" reference chassis, they're basically steel bricks.

I miss both that chassis and that reference system from when I worked at Intel. Those were really fun to work with in a new branch of computing way. The fact that they were Intel's first true 64 bit processors at the time was also pretty exciting.

/We wore onions on our belts, as that was the style at the time.
 
2014-04-25 01:38:49 PM
How about having access to safe mode with F8 again instead of making you trigger it from within normal mode?  The entire point of having it was because you couldn't get normal mode to work right.  You can't even "refresh" the the windows files without being able to access it from metro, yet any time you would need this probably means you can't get to it anyway.  Considering they never give people the windows cd's with computers, It's so much more difficult for someone to fix their own problems.  Well, it brings me more money at least.
 
wee [TotalFark]
2014-04-25 01:38:56 PM

Caelistis: running a GUI for admin purposes


A GUI is not needed on a server for any purpose.
 
2014-04-25 01:51:18 PM

Gonz: Marcus Aurelius: Try putting a bash shell on your Windows server.

I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but I wouldn't have a Windows server.


I cut my teeth on UNIX for 20 years before I was dragged kicking and screaming into Windows.  Because money.

/and that's what i get for being a whore
 
2014-04-25 01:53:43 PM
On the server tangent, we use Windows servers for AD, but I really wish there was a better AD replacement.  It would be awesome if Samba 4 went beyond the current AD implementation and actually added features that weren't there, such as AD Feature and role failover.  I figure an ideal setup you could have a few DCs set up, and have everything be transparently managed.  Use virtual IPs for the various roles, etc.

Unfortunately, Microsoft is moving in the direction of a copy of Windows Server running in a VM for every single separate function.

For file servers, web servers, and anything else we can, we use Linux servers, usually side by side on the same hypervisors running the Windows servers.
 
2014-04-25 02:18:20 PM
IT guy where I work uses Windows for all servers.  Actually said to me that he refuses to use Linux because he "can't trust anything that's that open."

He is either unaware or willfully ignoring the fact that his Barracuda appliance, all the WiFi APs and a couple of his layer 3 switches run Linux.
 
2014-04-25 02:21:54 PM

wee: Caelistis: running a GUI for admin purposes

A GUI is not needed on a server for any purpose.


This. I can accomplish so much more in one or two lines than I can with a hundred mouse clicks.

And I just got news that my current job, which my last day was supposed to be today as a UNIX admin, got extended for another two weeks from today. So yay more money.
 
2014-04-25 02:41:15 PM

Fubegra: I just installed Xubuntu 14.04 on my development box, so I'm getting a kick out of these replies.

It's a nice combination: the Ubuntu attention to detail without the clusterfark that is Unity. The XFCE desktop has made great strides in recent years.

That being said, I'll probably jump ship when they ditch X11.


--Xubuntu is great, hopefully it will keep X11 even after cluster-farkbuntu switcher to Mir.  I like Mint well enough, just like that with Ubuntu I was able to upgrade without a fresh install.

oi58.tinypic.com
 
2014-04-25 02:41:19 PM

wee: Caelistis: running a GUI for admin purposes

A GUI is not needed on a server for any purpose.


In your opinion.
 
2014-04-25 03:11:29 PM
Apparently, Microsoft listened to this guy.....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmPiYZnrWlk   (adult language)
 
2014-04-25 03:14:01 PM

digistil: Gentoo or bust.



Linux or bust.     Gentoo is hard core.  (:
 
2014-04-25 03:15:53 PM

natgab: Fubegra: I just installed Xubuntu 14.04 on my development box, so I'm getting a kick out of these replies.

It's a nice combination: the Ubuntu attention to detail without the clusterfark that is Unity. The XFCE desktop has made great strides in recent years.

That being said, I'll probably jump ship when they ditch X11.

--Xubuntu is great, hopefully it will keep X11 even after cluster-farkbuntu switcher to Mir.  I like Mint well enough, just like that with Ubuntu I was able to upgrade without a fresh install.

[oi58.tinypic.com image 522x208]



Xfce and MATE(gnome 2) are the best combo of speed/eye candy/functionality.   the sweet spot, imo.
 
2014-04-25 03:18:22 PM

frepnog: skozlaw: Regardless, Windows 8 is done.

well, except for it being the second most used OS (8.1) on steam.  yes, 7 is ahead, but second place ain't bad.


For an operating system that's been around for almost 2 years it isn't that great. Especially when the average Steam player likely does BYO and installs the OS by hand. If they have a choice they're usually going with 7.
 
2014-04-25 03:18:37 PM

logieal: wee: Caelistis: running a GUI for admin purposes

A GUI is not needed on a server for any purpose.

This. I can accomplish so much more in one or two lines than I can with a hundred mouse clicks.

And I just got news that my current job, which my last day was supposed to be today as a UNIX admin, got extended for another two weeks from today. So yay more money.



plenty of jobs for Unix/Linux admins.  no worries for you.
 
2014-04-25 03:22:40 PM

Gonz: Marcus Aurelius: Try putting a bash shell on your Windows server.

I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but I wouldn't have a Windows server.



u can do much more at the command line in Linux than in windows.  the difference is night and day.   you can do anything in Linux without a gui at all, even surf the web. check email, etc, etc.

gui's have their place, but the command line is all powerful/ fast as hell, and makes  you look like an uber geek.
 
2014-04-25 03:24:17 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Gonz: Marcus Aurelius: Try putting a bash shell on your Windows server.

I realize this makes me sound neckbearded... but I wouldn't have a Windows server.

I cut my teeth on UNIX for 20 years before I was dragged kicking and screaming into Windows.  Because money.

/and that's what i get for being a whore



yea, money is great. but selling your soul for money is always a mistake.  (:
 
2014-04-25 03:26:54 PM

SansNeural: IT guy where I work uses Windows for all servers.  Actually said to me that he refuses to use Linux because he "can't trust anything that's that open."

He is either unaware or willfully ignoring the fact that his Barracuda appliance, all the WiFi APs and a couple of his layer 3 switches run Linux.



he's a born bred capitalist.  as long as you pay money for it, its good. it can be trusted.  the poor thing has no clue........

i hope he invests in stocks on the New York Stock Exchange. it runs Linux now.  the list goes on and on.....
 
2014-04-25 03:31:44 PM

Mitt Romneys Tax Return: Caelistis: Gonz: I realize this makes me sound neckbearded...

No snark, but you are a neckbeard. The "resources" taken up by the Windows GUI is so infinitesimal on a Gen 12 or 13 enterprise grade server as to make even mentioning their usage somewhat comical. This is based on Server 2012 R2 but R1 isn't significantly different to mention separately in this regard.

I'm not a server admin, but I thought the main argument against running a GUI on a server wasn't resource usage but reducing the attack surface. The fewer unnecessary programs/services running on your server the fewer potential targets.



true. its both.  plus, if xxx admin gets used to using xxx program to do things, and the server he's managing doen't have that program/utility, then he's toast.  if he uses the command line and the standard tools, he can be confident that these tools/programs are the same on every Linux/Unix box.
 
Displayed 50 of 75 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report