One of the problems
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| cabreh Oct 16, 2012 4:53 AM EDT |
The biggest problem with DarkDuck's way of "testing" a distro (by doing a live boot only) is you end up with inaccurate reviews like this one. Firefox on SolusOS 1.2 is at 16.0.1, not 14.x. If he ever actually installed an OS, and did the updates, he may then be able to give a proper review. Same for many of the other programs that come with the release. |
| darkduck Oct 16, 2012 6:30 AM EDT |
Firefox 14 is the browser in the distribution, nobody can argue with it. Of course, you can update it to any other version you like, being it FF16 or even Aurora or nightly builds. This is different from the default distribution though. |
| jdixon Oct 16, 2012 6:47 AM EDT |
OK, I normally stay out of the darkduck bashing threads, but in this case, cabreh is absolutely correct. Darkduck, the version of Firefox supplied by SolusOS is 16.0.1. If you're not even willing to run the package system included in the distribution to get the latest updates, then your review isn't worth reading. The first step you should perform for any review is to make sure the system is up to date and that the update process works properly. It makes me very glad Slackware doesn't ship a live CD for you to review. |
| albinard Oct 16, 2012 9:33 AM EDT |
Okay, cabreh, I have now had it about up to here with all the routine bullying that has been going on against DarkDuck. If you take the time to look at Solus OS on Distrowatch, you will see that version 1.2 Eveline SHIPS WITH Firefox 14.0.1. Non-debatable fact, so stated in the review. A LiveCD gives a very limited view of what a distribution can be, but if you are a newbie and want to survey a large number of potential candidates, it is an efficient way to get an overview. It is clear to me, as a relative newbie myself, that a great deal of the community of experienced Linux users is actively opposed to accepting new candidates for membership in their exalted club. There are exceptions (bless you, Ken Stark!), but the climate of exclusivity is both intense and stifling. DarkDuck seems to be serving as a proxy for all this distaste for newcomers. I admire his tenacity for continuing to produce a set of reviews that offer a consistent assessment of a varied assemblage of products. |
| darkduck Oct 16, 2012 9:52 AM EDT |
Thanks, Albinard. To all the rest: The Solus OS site has a post "Firefox 16.0 now available" http://solusos.com/blog/2012/10/firefox-16-0-now-available/ It is dated the 9th of October 2012. The distribution was released in August 2012. It means that the iso file, which I tried, has FF14. All the noise you make here has no sense. it is you, not me, are guilty in providing the wrong information. it is you who do not check the system before making the claim the review is wrong, standing on an assumption that "I am always right, you are always wrong". Enough... Leaving the conversation. Leaving LXer. Bye... |
| cabreh Oct 16, 2012 9:54 AM EDT |
@albinard And I've about had it with people who don't read my posts. The non-debatable fact is if you actually install SolusOS (like I have) and actually do the NORMAL updates (like I have) you'd know that you will be running Firefox 16.0.1 and NOT 14.0.1 Now who, in their right mind, would use a distribution and never update it? Only fools and horses I'd say! If you are purporting to do a review of a Linux distribution then it really helps people reading the review if you can tell them what they would end up with if they chose that version and actually used it. I'm not attacking DarkDuck, I'm attacking (if you must word it that way) anyone who thinks they've done a proper review by simply running a live CD. Now, I don't have any need to write reviews, but even so, I have a computer with a removable hard drive tray so I can properly test different distribution fully. It cost me the equivalent of $30 and an extra HD. If that isn't affordable to someone writing reviews then I don't know how they can afford to even be on the Internet. |
| cabreh Oct 16, 2012 10:01 AM EDT |
@darkduck So, you did a review dated 15 October and somehow the fact that Firefox 16.0.1 was available in the updates on the 9th means you were correct? Yes, I agree that on the CD you get Firefox 14.0.1. So what? That's not what you would have had on the 15th of October if you had installed the OS and updated it. So, saying on the 15 of October that you would be running Firefox 14.0.1 if using SolusOS 1.2 is just plain wrong. And it's wrong because of your testing process. |
| r_a_trip Oct 16, 2012 10:52 AM EDT |
Cabreh is right. The way SolusOS is reviewed here, gives only a glimpse of it based on the LiveCD. While LiveCD's are a great way to check if a distro even runs on your machine and to get a superficial feel of the system, they are simply not representative of the way a bare metal install behaves. In essence, DarkDuck reviewed what to expect from the SolusOS LiveCD, but it in no way represents a complete installation to HDD/SSD. It's unfortunate that newbies, like Albinard, seem to think that writing about what the installer of an OS looks like (Yes, people, a LiveCD is a very fancy installer/rescue system) is representative of the complete experience of a full installation. Not only is the "Firefox is at V14" an artifact of the installer media, but the review of the (near) empty menu entries makes it sound like SolusOS is barebones. since SolusOS is Debian based, it should have a fairly wellstocked repository (App store for the uninitiated), but this only comes in to play when someone actually installs it. |
| dinotrac Oct 16, 2012 10:57 AM EDT |
@cabreh et al ... You seem to be skipping over one important point: a key function of live cds is to sell the distro - try before you buy in. In that regard the contents of the cd actually do matter. |
| jacog Oct 16, 2012 10:59 AM EDT |
dino, isn't that like reviewing the advert for a product though instead of the actual product? |
| jdixon Oct 16, 2012 11:52 AM EDT |
> A LiveCD gives a very limited view of what a distribution can be, Most live CD's I've tried still allow you to run the update process and update to the latest versions. They merely don't store the updated versions. Though if you run a USB based one with persistence, even that works. > ... try before you buy in. ...In that regard the contents of the cd actually do matter. Even then you should check and see what versions the distro is currently offering and note where your image is out of date. |
| Scott_Ruecker Oct 16, 2012 1:41 PM EDT |
@cabreh Everything ok in here? This isn't exactly how our forums should be. If you disagree or just don't 'like' someone then let be, ignore them or something. The two of you, you and albinard obviously don't get along and it is affecting the forums. I know it takes two to tango but I think it would be good for all if we brought it down a notch. Scott |
| cabreh Oct 16, 2012 1:47 PM EDT |
@Scott Sorry, I should not have "replied in kind". Sometimes I forget to wait a while before replying to a post that was accusing me of something I wasn't really doing. Pointing out an improper test method isn't an "attack" on someone else. |
| caitlyn Oct 16, 2012 5:33 PM EDT |
I agree with those who say a live CD review is scarcely better than no review at all. As jdixon points out live CDs usually allow updates. What darkduck often fails to understand is this is NOT a personal attack on him. It never was. What people are doing is pointing out really poor methodology. Unfortunately some people aren't interested in constructive criticism. darkduck writes well enough and is clearly knowledgeable enough to write a very decent review. He CHOOSES not to do the little bit of extra work needed to do so. As far as I am concerned that is fair criticism not bullying or bashing. |
| DrGeoffrey Oct 16, 2012 6:14 PM EDT |
Quoting: He CHOOSES not to do the little bit of extra work needed to do so. Which continues to surprise me. I've installed dozens of distributions, and generally new installations do not cause problems for other installed distributions. The only exception I've seen is the odd overwriting of GRUB (Fedora and related distributions, I'm looking at you), but this is easily corrected with a boot USB. And mind you, in clear violation of all wisdom that is holy, this experience has been collected on production laptops! In short, I think his excuse is lame. |
| number6x Oct 16, 2012 6:28 PM EDT |
I disagree that evaluating live CD's is scarcely better than no review at all. Reviewing the live CD as a live CD is definitely a valuable use of time, as long as you clearly know that just the live CD is what is being evaluated. Evaluating a live CD and presenting it as an evaluation of a fully installed distro is of extremely low value. As with any review of software, the hardware used should also be listed in detail. If a review doesn't list hardware its value also drops dramatically for me We all have to consider that many people use live CD's to evaluate a distro. It is probably the first evaluation and will often be the first exposure a user gets to a distro. The live version of a distro can seal the deal or result in an absolute failure for the distro in a user's eyes. I like to use live distros as a first step in evaluating a distro. If there are problems with the live evaluation, I'm not going to waste time and space doing a full install. If there are no glaring issues, and I like what I see, then I might consider an install to do a shakedown. This will also involve working with the distro on a daily basis for at least a week. Distros that fail to make a polished live CD for evaluation will have a harder time getting their proverbial 'foot in the door'. (Obviously people evaluating distros for server use, or for some specific need will not care about live distros. They will also research other distro attributes more thoroughly as well. They aren't just trying to work through a bad case of distro fever) |
| tracyanne Oct 16, 2012 6:37 PM EDT |
One does not even need a separate piece of hardware to do a full install, any of the VMs will do. Sure it doesn't tell you much about hardware compatibility, but then again installing to my hardware tells me nothing about most other people's hardware. But it will allow one to fully evaluate the distribution. |
| cabreh Oct 17, 2012 3:54 AM EDT |
One problem I have seen, at least in the past, with a LiveCD evaluation is after the real install it doesn't always work just like it did during the live checkout. Hence my reason for getting a swappable drive tray so I can do a full installation and make sure it works properly for my hardware. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!