Feature:Brave new World

Robin V. Stacey has written an excellent feature on installing an alternative operating system, and the troubles he encountered while doing it.

The following is a feature by Slashdot Reader Robin V. Stacey

Brave new World

We've recently taken the plunge and installed an alternative operating system onto my machine. It's not something to be carried out lightly, but I've personally found the effort involved to be most enlightening. Above all, it's convinced me that some things are better left well alone.

My initial impressions were unfavorable. I expected the installation to be tricky after realizing I'd need to re-partition the hard drive to make room. The new OS demands it's own partition on which to reside - it's unable to exist on any other than it's own file system type. Fortunately, here at Computer Solutions, we know what we're doing. The ordinary user would be likely to run into problems from the start. If the distributor had included some sort of repartitioning tool with the startup code, this would be easily solved.

After the repartition we created a blank 500Mb hole for the OS to go on the test 2.1Gb hard drive. We couldn't get the installation CD to boot, despite being detected correctly by the BIOS, so had to use a boot floppy. Thankfully, all went well after that. We told the computer what size installation we wanted, our time zone, and a few other sundry tidbits of information. Most our our hardware was detected automatically, even the network card, but the graphics card gave it a few problems, and we chose to default to standard SVGA while a patch was downloaded off the 'net. A few reboots and the patch applied, and we were looking at a new Operating System. In all, the installation had taken 45 minutes, which is good going for a complete system change. We tested the system for a while, and it was only when we rebooted back into the real world that we hit one big problem. The **** OS had wiped our existing boot manager, replacing it with it's own boot code. We swore, we kicked it, we reached for our emergency boot disk. Saved by our own forethought and the previous OS, the newbie lost valuable points. The boot manager was told about the new kid on the block, and another reboot brought back the smiles.

When inside, you are presented with an uncluttered interface. This particular distribution of the OS automatically boots into a GUI, and requests a user name and password. We'd set these up early on, and (apparently) entered without hitch. Except our network was nowhere to be seen. We'd given the system a name (Medusae - all our computers are named after mythological creatures), we'd given it an IP address and netmask, and set up IPX networking so we could access our Netware fileserver. The network card was happy. The system had thrown us another curve. We changed things. We switched the network card. We altered the frame rate in IPX. We bought fresh coffee. To this day, we're not sure what happened, but after numerous reboots, the network came to life. Consistency is not this system's strong point.

We'd been told that one of the OS's perceived strengths is the sheer volume of available for it. This is good news, because we found our distribution to be pitifully lacking in the software department. Apparently, image manipulation tools, databases, programming tools, games and even word processors can be obtained. Much of it can been downloaded for no cost from the Internet - if you know where to look, that is - or available commercially on CDs. We recommend the latter option. If a company has taken time to produce a product, they deserve payment for it. Most commercial products have free demonstration versions, which are an excellent way to test the water without parting with hard earned cash. Most installations routines are identical, and several programs use a method of installation that makes uninstallation a relatively painless process. We found most software we tested to be adequate for our needs, even good in parts. If this is the shape of things to come, our existing OS had better watch out. Soon this newbie may have software to equal it.

The distributor claims it's the most stable version available, and that gives us cause for concern. Prior to the installation, we lurked around a few newsgroups, soaking up tips and potential pitfalls, to good effect. It certainly helped as we charted this (to us) uncharted territory. We found many users happy with the system, but after 2 week's intensive use, we've grown to wonder what they do on it. This system was tested heavily. We ran a graphic editor, a word processor and Quake at the same time. Crash. We ran Quake and Quake II simultaneously. Crash. Netscape Communicator would go down on it's own. The fact that it isn't just one program causing the problems leads me to suspect that it's the underlying OS at fault. Perhaps the kernel needs recompiling? Your thoughts on this would be most welcome.

During our brief test, we ran into problems with memory management, the network, the print queue, a disappearing CD-ROM drive, and even faults appearing on the hard drive. We found security to be almost non-existent. Possibly the problems were caused by our ignorance, possibly not. In almost all of the cases, we had to trust out own knowledge or reach for the Internet. Support from our particular distributor is known to be weak. We recognize that some of the difficulties we had, namely lack of support and lack of initial software, could be solved by choosing a different distributor. That, in itself, is a problem. We can't find one.

Until these problems are ironed out, this Operating System isn't really appropriate for life in the real world. Windows 95 isn't yet ready for the mainstream. Until it is, stick to Linux.

Robin V. Stacey
17th June 1998