Think ive ben spoiled

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

I recently reformatted a HD with redhat 7.0 and to be honest it took me ages to get the thing to actually work. If it was windows i know it would automatically set things up for me, but this linux makes you actually work.

Is this the case with all linux's operating systems??? Only asking as i need to get into linux in a bigger way than i am now if i want to have any chance of being employed in the IT field

Eddie

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

That last part is not entirely true
there are many many MANY true windows houses out there still, and even those that use OSS tend to keep the maintenance of the sytems seperate

Try Ubuntu

or one of the more recent linux distros

Red Hat 7 is YEARS old and Linux has made leaps and bounds since then, especially in hardware and application support

Red Hat 9 was the last consumer flavour of Red Hat before it became pure Enterprise Server and the consumer product was spun off as Fedora Core, Fedora is currently working on FC 7 if that gives you any idea of the age of RH7.0

 

cheers for that phoenix, ill give that a shot

Eddie

 

Good grief, man! Why Red Hat 7? Try something a little more recent. If you are interested in a "Red Hat" experience, try Fedora Core 6. If you are interested in learning Linux server and desktop administration, I strongly recommend you pick up a copy of Linux Administration: A Beginner's Guide, 4th Ed and Linux Administration Handbook, 2nd ed. I've reviewed them both and they are excellent.

My favorite distro for "learning Linux" is Debian but that's probably because I'm most familiar with it. Debian also has the rep for being "old school Linux" but pick the distro that "floats your boat". They all have the Linux kernel so the vast majority of commands will work the same way. The differences will be mainly in the "look and feel" department, how software packages are managed, and the installer.

You can download the install ISOs and burn a boot disk to do the installation. It's free so the price is right. Right now, I have Debian and Ubuntu 6.06 running on test boxes and Ubuntu running as a VM in VMWare Workstation 5.5 on a Windows XP Pro host.

The best way to learn Linux is to use Linux all the time.

One more thing, The Linux Tutorial site has some very good tutorials. If you knew nothing about Linux, you could just start working your way through the tutorial modules and pick up quite a bit.

Hope this helps. Keep in touch.

 

Quoted for Truth.

99.9% of companies will use Microsoft for some part of their IT infrastructure... but not that many use Linux, and most that do use it sparingly. I rarely use my Linux knowledge; it's not a huge requirement the past few places I've worked.

 

Cheers for your feedback , most helpful

Eddie

 

Just recieved this from Comptia in a newsletter re:
Linux Training Important to IT Industry
By Kristin Clifford, staff writer

The majority of respondents to a recent CompTIA survey feel that it is important for a person supporting Linux to complete training. Nearly three-quarters (72%) believe a vendor-neutral Linux certification is valuable to them/their organization.

The survey was conducted in order to better understand the usage of Linux in organizations, and the amount of IT worker support given to it, a Web-based survey was launched internationally on Dec. 6, 2006 to CompTIA IT Professional Access subscribers, randomly chosen CompTIA Network+ and CompTIA Security+ certified people and CompTIA Research panelists.
here is the link to the rest of the artical
http://www.comptia.org/pressroom/get_articles.aspx?prid=112

 

Here's another article, just to keep things interesting:

http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/10310/1090/

 

CompTIA doesn't provide training, so whatever point they were trying to make was completely lost on me.

See supplement included with latest (Feb. 2007) Sys Admin magazine for a "who's who" in Linux training. Article is currently available online too:
http://www.samag.com/documents/s=10113/sam0713c/0713c.htm

 

Linux gives you greater control but obviously Windows is more user-friendly for the average user. Take a look at Ubuntu or Mandrake, they're much more user friendly than the average Linux dist

 

I don't know of a Linux distro that isn't user friendly any more. Even Debian, that bastion of the text file and reputed to be extremely hard to install and noob unfriendly, is just as easy to install as Windows is anymore. When I first install Woody back in 2004 it was very difficult for a Linux noob to install, but I just sort of guessed as to what made sense to me, and after 3 tries I got a working install. Today, all those options are taken care of by the installer, unless you use the "expert" option during install. If a noob uses that he's in for quite a ride, but only only a noob stupid enough to consider himself an expert when he's never touched Linux before would consider using an installer that has the word "expert" in it. The only questions asked by the installer are the same ones that Windows asks, such as "what partition do you want to use, do you want to format that partition, what file system do you want to use, etc.... It just isn't very hard.


As far as the normal user is concerned, my wife uses Debian almost every day, and she's far from being a computer guru. In almost 20 years of office work she never figured out how to drag and drop so that will tell you her level of interest in knowing how a computer works, and her level of skill.

As to the comment about the RedHat Package Manager, well, Debian, and all of the distributions built using it as a base, have RedHat's system beaten with respect to ease, and quality, of package management systems. The Apt system is just far and away the best package management system around. There are no such things as dependency problems, and gui installers such as Synaptic are built on top of Apt making all software installation simply point and click.

The latest version of the APT system even cleans up all the dependencies a package uses that are not shared dependencies. It's a pretty impressive system.

Updating/patching your system? That's as easy as clicking on an icon that appears on your screen whenever there are any updates available for your system, and that includes all software that you have installed using the Apt system, not just your OS. Windows has nothing like it, and never will.

 

I still consider Debian to be "old-school" Linux but agree that it's a lot easier to work with than in previous years. Slackware is probably the one that Linux newbies would have the hardest time with and is still considered a "developer's distro".

 

Well, there's three distros I wouldn't recommend to a newbie: Slackware, Gentoo, and LFS(Linux From Scratch). I wouldn't recommend them to a noob who just wanted to learn to use Linux, but for someone with a solid knowledge of computing, who really wanted learn Linux from the ground up, then I don't see why even they couldn't manage any of them except LFS. That's one I haven't had the guts to try yet.