[Info-vax] Windows alternatives - Was: Re: HP SAN switch question

[johnwallace4 at yahoo.co.uk]

On Monday, 22 February 2016 15:54:37 UTC, William Pechter  wrote:
> In article <6qkopc-ev6.ln1 at news.chingola.ch>,
> Paul Sture  <nospam at sture.ch> wrote:
> >On 2016-02-16, Hans Vlems <hvlems at freenet.de> wrote:
> >
> >> Umm, don't have OSX Hoff... the other unix flavors are sufficiently
> >> confusing for a simple RT11 guy like me.
> >
> >Linux Mint is a popular alternative at the moment for those frustrated
> >with Windows.  It has the benefit that you can install and run it in
> >dual boot mode alongside Windows.
> 
> Another vote in favor of Linux Mint (and especially the Cinnamon and 
> Mate varients) as well as Ubuntu and Centos.  Any of these will
> run well on most recent pc platforms (*anything in the last 10 years will
> do -- and I'm even running the CentOS6 on a 1999 32 bit PowerEdge 700*)
> 
> I like the Ubuntu varients for ease of admin and huge available software
> libraries of compilers and applications.
> 
> >
> >In other words, you shouldn't need any new hardware to try it out.
> 
> True and if you have a 64 bit pc with 4gb or more of memory you can
> even load it in a Virtual Machine to try to test the install with no risk of
> damage to your system.
> 
> Full virtualization is in Linux without VMware  -- or if you run Windows 8
> or later the Desktop hyper-v works well as a virtualizer.  Also, there's
> KVM in Linux and Virtual Box from Oracle -- as well as VMware Desktop.
> 
> I'm an ex-DEC Field Service guy who's done Unix admin and Linux since the 1987 
> timeframe (1993 or so on Linux -- 0.99.13 SLS 1.05 IIRC).
> 
> If I can do it successfully anyone competant on DEC stuff from the 1980's will
> be successful on getting it up and running.
> 
> Getting good at it requires application of effort and some time and trial and
> error as you see what from your DEC experience (my installs were RT11 and VMS
> 2.x and 3.x).  Sometimes there are major architectural and design differences
> that take some getting used to. 8-)
> 
> >
> >On the OS X front, that would require new hardware.  If the reputation
> >for high prices for Apple kit puts you off, look at the Mac Mini; with
> >those you can use an existing monitor, mouse and keyboard.  User-
> >upgradeable RAM isn't an option on various Apple models, but with the
> >Mac Mini it still is (you don't buy official Apple memory unless you
> >really have to, as it *is* expensive).
> >
> >Back to your "simple RT11 guy like me" statement.
> 
> Hey... if you could do stuff with the limitations of a 2 RX01 equivalent 
> PDT 11/150 this stuff will seem to screem with speed.
> 
> 
> >
> >Please don't underestimate yourself.  In the light of your posts last
> >October about a Java course and looking for a job, please be warned that
> >the Civil Service and HR types (yes I do lump them together) you have
> >probably come across are experts at demoralising you.
> 
> True -- also I had Bell Labs folks with doctorates applying for mid-level
> sysadmin jobs and they hadn't touched the machines in decades.  There's 
> something to be said about keeping your hands in on actually operating 
> machines.
> 
> >
> >In their world you are only as good as your academic qualifications plus
> >"years of service", for that's how their pay scales are calculated. 
> 
> Unfortunate... finally after 10 years of service doing sysadmin I got into 
> Bell Labs -- just in time to see Lucent hit the internet bubble. 8-()
> 
> >
> >Typical damage done by HR:
> >
> ><http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2015/12/22/cios_worst_real_life_disasters/#c_2730073>
> >
> >Link to main article:
> ><http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/12/22/cios_worst_real_life_disasters/>
> >
> >P.S. The reliance on formal qualifications also explains the popularity
> >of Microsoft qualifications amongst HR types, despite much criticism of
> >the worth of those qualifications within the industry.
> >
> >
> >-- 
> >There are two hard things in computer science: cache invalidation,
> >naming, and off-by-one errors.
> 
> so true...
> 
> Bill
> 
> -- 
> -- 
> Digital had it then.  Don't you wish you could buy it now!
> pechter-at-gmail.com  http://xkcd.com/705/

Well, if we're playing "my distro's better than your distro" ;)

OpenSuse rarely gets a mention, yet every time I'm unfaithful I
end up back with SuSe. On a trial basis doing plain ordinary 
end user stuff and little bits of software development, I have
tested RH4, Mandrake (yes that far back), and much more recently,
the likes of Fedora, Scientific, Ubuntu, Mint, and others. No
reason (yet) to move. 

Suse has a generous library of variants for the base OS (x86
(ie 32bit), AMD64, others), lots of packages in the official
libraries, and more elsewhere. And it's hard to see how
sysadmin work could be any simpler than yast2 makes it. 

Back in the olden days Suse even came with documentation that
was known to match the OS, but that's probably not considered
so important in these days of continuous deployment.

Like many (but not all) x86 Linuxes it's trivial to set up on a
dual boot basis, but note that splitting your disk this way has
often been known to break Windows Update in mysterious and
undocumented ways. Maybe that matters to you, maybe it doesn't.

Another approach to start with on a modern system might be to
install it inside a virtual machine. I've used VMware Player
(now Workstation Player) for many years. I think it's still free
(as in beer) for non-commercial use; alternatives exist.

Have a lot of fun.

ps
suse comes with systemd. sorry about that. really sorry.