Rayman Pirate-Community

Posted: **Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:58 am**

that3Dguy wrote:i guess only he knows that any way linux is the kernal for mac so is-it mac basically linux?

No, absolutely not. Mac OS X uses a kernel called XNU, which is a hybrid of Mach and BSD components. Tightly built around it, there's Darwin as userland, that provides access to shell and unix-resources. It's fully POSIX-compliant on x86 instruction set. Its primary binary format is Mach-O. Linux is not fully POSIX-compliant, because it follows the Linux Standard Base instead, while its primary binary format is ELF.

Posted: **Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:25 am**

PowerPatrick wrote:
RayFan9876 wrote:The key to conversation: brevity. That was a needlessly long post, said in a very non-user-friendly manor that could have been shortened down to one, maybe two paragraphs if you wanted to get your point across. this was just overkill beyond the max
That's a shame then. Just read the 4th and 6th paragraph.

RayFan9876 wrote:because I'm a told a blatant liar lie

RayFan9876 wrote:You can prove me wrong, but you don't need to spend an hour telling me every aspect about how the system works.
Believe me, that was far, far from it, because I could make a 10-hour technical lecture about highly in-depth perspectives and history of the operating system, if I would.

that3Dguy wrote:i see some one knows how to copy and paste
RayFan9876 wrote: I highly doubt that's copypasta, it's probably just an eager knowledge outlet he was able to fill over the top.

Yay you morphed my post. I only said it because I was in a previous conversation and someone else told me they had no dev team. Sorry boss.

Also it seemed like a ten hour lecture. Me, obviously not being very educated Linux-wise, finds reading almost ten paragraphs of technicalities a little overwhelming, considering I don't really care that much. Also I would appreciate it if you were a little kinder than to call me an ignorant blatant liar. I would have much rather you simply told me where I went wrong in my post without stuffing loads of paragraphs to do with technicalities down my neck just to show how little I know on the topic.

Posted: **Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:34 am**

RayFan9876 wrote:Also I would appreciate it if you were a little kinder than to call me an ignorant blatant liar.

Sorry for that. Sometimes I let myself get carried away. It was also rather something I was referring to in general, not directly at you.

Posted: **Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:37 am**

PowerPatrick wrote:
RayFan9876 wrote:Also I would appreciate it if you were a little kinder than to call me an ignorant blatant liar.
Sorry for that. Sometimes I let myself get carried away. It was also rather something I was referring to in general, not directly at you.

Thanks.

Posted: **Sun Jul 31, 2011 11:50 am**

Any Linux users still here? I have 2 questions.
1. How are GPU drivers lately?
2. My motherboard finds all of my pendrives HDDs, so I must go to BIOS any time I wanna boot somthing from pendrive. Can I configure GRUB/whatever to launch, check is there a pendrive, and launch either it or MS bootloader?

Posted: **Sun Jul 31, 2011 11:55 am**

stan423321 wrote:Any Linux users still here? I have 2 questions.
1. How are GPU drivers lately?
2. My motherboard finds all of my pendrives HDDs, so I must go to BIOS any time I wanna boot somthing from pendrive. Can I configure GRUB/whatever to launch, check is there a pendrive, and launch either it or MS bootloader?

im a windows mac and linux user and for the gpu drivers there still glitchy and yes you can

Posted: **Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:28 pm**

stan423321 wrote:1. How are GPU drivers lately?

For Nvidia cards, the proprietary binary blobs are quite stable as always. Otherwise, they doesn't support Kernel-Mode Setting. Third-party Nouveau (with Gallum3D) is also getting promising. You can even use Bumblebee for Nvidia Optimus support. For AMD/ATI cards, there are open source drivers integrated to the kernel, but you can always switch to FGLRX for more performance. For Intel cards, all the latest should be well-supported as of now, unless it's a third-party manufacturer with the same chipset specifications. I would recommend you to read http://phoronix.com for general benchmarks, comparison and analysis of Linux/Unix systems and other related.

stan423321 wrote:2. My motherboard finds all of my pendrives HDDs, so I must go to BIOS any time I wanna boot somthing from pendrive. Can I configure GRUB/whatever to launch, check is there a pendrive, and launch either it or MS bootloader?

In GRUB, you can chainload indirectly to the bootloader of the USB flash drive. Put this on "/boot/grub/menu.lst"

Code: Select all

title USB drive
root (hd1,0)
chainloader +1
boot

In GRUB2, you can do the same as above. Put this on "/boot/grub/grub.cfg" and use the "update-grub" command.

Code: Select all

menuentry "USB drive" {
set root=(hd1,0)
chainloader +1
}

In GRUB4DOS and NeoGrub, you can chainload directly to SYSLINUX. Put this on "C:\menu.lst"

Code: Select all

title USB drive
map (hd1,0)+1 (fd0)
map --hook
root (fd0)
chainloader +1
boot

Finally, why not boot ISO files directly from GRUB2? Otherwise, this doesn't bother me, as I set USB-devices as first priority in the boot sequence when attached.

Posted: **Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:35 pm**

PowerPatrick wrote:Finally, why not boot ISO files directly from GRUB2? Otherwise, this doesn't bother me, as I set USB-devices as first priority in the boot sequence when attached.

You seem to not get the problem.
I started by setting my priorities to 1. USB 2. DVD 3. Seagate HDD. It didn't work. I later recognised that my pendrive becomes separate entry when I plug it (Kingston HDD), which of course disappears when I disconnect it and is different for different drives. There is no way I can start with USB Linux like this.

Posted: **Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:41 pm**

stan423321 wrote:I started by setting my priorities to 1. USB 2. DVD 3. Seagate HDD. It didn't work. I later recognised that my pendrive becomes separate entry when I plug it (Kingston HDD), which of course disappears when I disconnect it and is different for different drives. There is no way I can start with USB Linux like this.

Yeah, ok. That depends on the BIOS version itself. But I often use a boot menu that can be triggered by keys such as F12, F11, F10, etc. which is pretty quick and easy.

Posted: **Wed Aug 03, 2011 3:49 pm**

Posted: **Wed Aug 03, 2011 5:09 pm**

Hi Thingamajic, can you introduce yourself here please?

:

http://raymanpc.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1616

Posted: **Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:27 pm**

PC with Windows installed on it, I don't think Macs are worth the money they cost.

Posted: **Sat Aug 20, 2011 11:04 pm**

IMO, from a regular consumer's point of view, a Mac product is vastly superior to a PC, with it's greater usability, reliability and of course aesthetics (

)

Currently I use a 13" 2.26Ghz core duo MacBook Pro, which is enough for most everyday uses, but I'm in the process of upgrading to an iMac with a 3.4Ghz quad core i7, 16GB RAM, 2TB HD, 27" screen with 2560x1440 resolution and Radeon HD 6970M 2GB graphics card, which should run OSX like a beast, and support a huge amount of multi-tasking with programs such as Logic Pro, Final Cut Pro, Pro Tools etc and make them a joy to use

Once you go Mac, you never go back*

*In my experience anyway

Posted: **Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:28 pm**

Still this is quite "imaginary" in my case, Macs are just F***ING TOO EXPENSIVE for my family. And my parents, while not rich, help me a lot on computer-related stuff, so that's saying something.

Aesthetics? Well, taste discussion here. Usability? Far less fancy programs work on Mac, and included software is also not so interesting; additional Mac software is expensive too. Reliability... now I believe you may be right here, but I'm not going to pay 2k PLN for that.

Posted: **Mon Aug 22, 2011 12:37 am**

stan423321 wrote:Still this is quite "imaginary" in my case, Macs are just F***ING TOO EXPENSIVE for my family. And my parents, while not rich, help me a lot on computer-related stuff, so that's saying something.

Aesthetics? Well, taste discussion here. Usability? Far less fancy programs work on Mac, and included software is also not so interesting; additional Mac software is expensive too. Reliability... now I believe you may be right here, but I'm not going to pay 2k PLN for that.

As I said, I was speaking my own opinion only, and basing it on what the average consumer wants.
Personally I plan to make use of the Mac-only programs Logic Studio 9 and Final Cut Pro X
Regarding usability I was referring to ease of use, and intuitive controls (such as gestures)
Aesthetics are of course a matter of taste, but I would question the sanity of anyone who thought this:

(the closest competing all in one PC)
was nicer looking than this:

but that's just me

Posted: **Mon Aug 22, 2011 7:27 am**

I actually think of it as a tie between the two in those pictures. The Mac looks slick, and the PC looks nice.

Posted: **Mon Aug 22, 2011 9:15 am**

Wireless mice? I wouldn't buy any of those computers

Also gestures turn out to NOT be intuitive for a lot of people. I use them all the time in Opera and tried to recommend it to 15 different people. None of them use gestures even in FF though some switched to Opera for different reasons.

Posted: **Mon Aug 22, 2011 10:21 am**

stan423321 wrote:Wireless mice?

I use one in both desktop PC and in the laptop, both are Logitech brand.

My desktop one works great but I hate the ocasional times that decides to stop working for 10 seconds or lagging for a quick moment. You can see how troublesome it is when you are playing Ultra-Hard mode in Rayman M's battles.

Posted: **Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:12 am**

RayFan9876 wrote:I actually think of it as a tie between the two in those pictures. The Mac looks slick, and the PC looks nice.

To each his own I guess, I did try and find the nicest looking PC all in one, although I still don't think it stands up to the Mac.
And wireless mice are great, had a logitech one for a few years as well, but will soon have an Apple magic mouse.
@Stan some people don't find gestures intuitive? That surprises me I have to say, I find them incredibly useful, and for that reason can't stand using my Vaio anymore after using my MacBook for several years.

I suppose what I was trying to say was that there are two main reasons people don't buy Macs:

1 Price

2 Windows incompatibility (although this is available through bootcamp and parallels, and I run windows 7 64bit very smoothly, it's mostly gamers, who prefer to build their own PC rather than own a Mac based computer

Posted: **Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:37 am**

Your last paragraph is the answer.

From my view, Macs are used by people for three reasons:

1) For the computer dummies, it looks nice.

2) They want to use Mac specific programs

3) They want something smooth, reliable and user-friendly, and something that pretty much runs itself.

(Although the user-friendliness is debatable. Personally I'm too much of a techy to be able too use of Mac's "user-friendliness." The way they work is completely nonsensical. For example, I asked my brother (who's a Mac guy) where the program files are installed to, and he said "oh, the applications all get put in one folder. That's what makes Macs so simple." I then continued to try to make sense out of what I was saying, but he didn't seem to grasp the fact that all programs have an install directory. When I found out how it works, the inner workings are a lot weirder than a PC's.)

Rayman Pirate-Community

Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?

Re: Mac or PC?