[Coco] OT Linux question

Wed Mar 20 11:29:34 EDT 2013

I don't think the real problem with the new distros of Linux lies with the developers, but with the users and the manufacturers. The more new hardware came out, the more people demanded it. First people wanted to be able to "click" on stuff instead of having to "type" a command... then Harry wanted a driver for his SuperSound sound card and Jack wanted a driver for his 20 million color graphics card... then Jill wanted to use those new fangled CD roms and Susie wanted to watch DVDs.... the Peter wanted it all to install automatically and Paul wanted it to recognize his Tibeten Throat Singing Interface,,, Sound familiar?

Running the latest version of Mint, I put Linux at about the state of Win 95's last incarnation or maybe early Win 98 1st edition. It runs good... just don't throw any monkey wrenches in there. Of course someone with a little knowledge can go in, remove all the fluff, throw away the HouseWifeWare and have a pretty stable, compact operating system.

I have an AMD quad-core running Windows Vista, an old Gateway running Windows Server 2003, and 2 laptops running Windows XP. You can get on any of these machines and you would think you were on a stripped down version of Windows 98 SE. My machines do not even run screen savers or have a desktop or wallpaper. The all have black screens with nothing on them... no burn in. The "Startbar" is on auto hide and my desktop icons all live there. All I have to do is move the mouse to the bottom of the screen and there's all my software. I spent 3 days uninstalling stuff on Vista and finding all the settings that MS had hid (again) so that Housewive's couldn't click on something like "services.msc" and screw up the system and call tech support. They give 'em a way to set that way-cool screen saver and  to change their "pretty" wallpaper, with links for Facebook, Twitter, Online Games, Windows Live, and MSN. At least the AOL and Prodigy links finally went away.... only to be replaced by EarthLink and NetZero..
My main computer runs 24/7/365 with regular reboots about once a day to every other day to clear memory of rogues as I run a lot programs that tax even a quad core system like "Vegas Pro 10" that's usually playing anywhere from 12 to 32 individual tracks (waves) of audio (at 50-150meg per track) at the same time while I add in and adjust VST digital effects (plugins) which can number in the hundreds before I'm done. After operations like that, a good reboot is needed before playing World Of Warcraft. When I run the Coco emulators, a lot of times I have 2 instances of Vcc and an instance of XRoar all running their own instance of Drivewire each with it's own GUI. Talk about the ultimate Coco :-)

Bill P

Music from the Tandy/Radio Shack Color Computer 2 & 3
https://sites.google.com/site/dabarnstudio/
Bill Pierce
ooogalapasooo at aol.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Aldo Lagana <a.lagana at snet.net>
To: CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts <coco at maltedmedia.com>
Cc: CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts <coco at maltedmedia.com>
Sent: Wed, Mar 20, 2013 10:05 am
Subject: Re: [Coco] OT Linux question

There is the Linux Tiny project whose aim is to deflate the size of the kernel.

I too cut my teeth with a disk less Internet gateway in the 90's ;-)

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 20, 2013, at 9:27 AM, Louis Ciotti <lciotti1 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I would love to make the switch to linux as a desktop, especially with what
> Microsoft has done with Windows 8, which I use, but I have "forced" it to
> ackt like what I will call "normal" windows with a start menu and a real
> desktop using "classic shell".  Right now it seems the think to do in Linux
> is to create a new distribution.  I think that has fragemented the
> developement, with each of the major distributions going down different
> paths.  Initially one of my draws to Linux was that fact it was not overly
> bloated.  It has lost that now with each major needing at a minimum
> somewhere around 100mb just for the install media.  My first introduction
> to linux fit onto a hand full of floppy disks, and I used on a headless 486
> to act as a router to share my internet connection, this was before routers
> before those became cheap throw away boxes. It ran flawlessly for 5 years,
> the last 3 months the hard drive failed and I had no idea, it just kept
> running until the power failed.  That worked with noting but a CLI.  Now a
> minimal linux distribution for a CLI only interface would never fit on a
> small mound of floppies.  It seems to me somewhere the idea of tight
> efficient code got lost, but this is coming from someone who has only
> dabbled in writing software code, maybe I am wrong on that.
> 
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:16 PM, Bill Pierce <ooogalapasooo at aol.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Same here, I use professional multi channel audio recording software and
>> Linux just hasn't caught up yet, though Ardour in the 64 Studio 2.1 distro
>> is looking better all the time. The problem with audio software for Linux
>> is (from what I've read) there's so many "plugin" loops that tie various
>> Windows and Mac type drivers into Linux, that real time recording suffers.
>> There is development for "true" drivers in this area, but I need ASIO
>> (industry standard for studios) and Linux just hasn't got the full support
>> yet. I record at 24 bit 48 khz and sometimes 96 khz using up to 8 channels
>> (soon to be 16) simultainiously and the overhead of Linux's audio system is
>> just too much for this kind of recording.
>> 
>> I'm using the Linux box to test my latest Coco creation on the Linux
>> Drivewire server. I needed to see if the program responded the same under
>> Linux as it did in Windows. Now if I could just find someone with a Mac DW
>> server and a 512k Coco 3 running NitrOS9. I really need to test this
>> format. Anyone interested, send me an email
>> 
>> Thanks guys
>> Bill
>> 
>> Music from the Tandy/Radio Shack Color Computer 2 & 3
>> https://sites.google.com/site/dabarnstudio/
>> Bill Pierce
>> ooogalapasooo at aol.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: lciotti1 <lciotti1 at gmail.com>
>> To: CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts <coco at maltedmedia.com>
>> Sent: Tue, Mar 19, 2013 10:05 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Coco] OT Linux question
>> 
>> 
>> For windows print to pdf - have always used the free CutePDF program.
>> 
>> I have never used a linux box as my desktop for very long.  I am always
>> drawn
>> back to windows because of work, and there are some types of programs that
>> either do not exist in linux or the ones that do are so far behind I just
>> can't
>> fight with them.
>> 
>> 
>> Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Frank Swygert <farna at att.net>
>> Sender: coco-bounces at maltedmedia.com
>> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 21:47:36
>> To: <coco at maltedmedia.com>
>> Reply-To: CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts <coco at maltedmedia.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Coco] OT Linux question
>> 
>> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:49:46 -0400 (EDT)
>> From: Bill Pierce<ooogalapasooo at aol.com>
>> 
>> Thanks John
>> I actually have Adobe Acrobat 5.0 for Windows, but it will not install
>> under
>> Windows Vista 64 bit. Too old
>> It allowed me to "print" to pdf from MS word which was great.
>> So this is exactly what I was looking for.
>> 
>> ======================
>> 
>> There are several "print to PDF" utilities for Windows as well. I've been
>> using
>> a product called "PDF995" (www.pdf995.com). Works great. You can go to
>> www.downloads.com and find something as well. PDF995 has you install
>> Ghostscript
>> and works though that. PDF995 installs a printer driver, you just select
>> that as
>> the printer and away you go, just like the Linux PDF printer.
>> 
>> I tried Scribus for DTP but it just wasn't developed enough for me yet,
>> too many
>> changes taking place. I bought a copy of PageStream (PgS) which is a mature
>> product and works well. I don't mind paying for Linux software as long as
>> it's
>> reasonably priced ($100-150 in this case), is supported, and works well.
>> PgS was
>> originally written for the Amiga and was popular on that platform, was
>> ported to
>> Windows and Linux.
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Coco mailing list
>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>> 
>> --
>> Coco mailing list
>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Coco mailing list
>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
> 
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco

--
Coco mailing list
Coco at maltedmedia.com
http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco