New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Why do people always seem to use older operating systems?
pieman103021
Member
in Help
I see people using and VPS providers having Debian 6 32bit as their default. I was wondering why this is so common, when we are now on to Debian 8. I understand that since Jessie just came out it may not be used in environments where something well tested and very stable is preferred, but why are some still 2 releases behind. Additionally, is there any specific advantage to 32 bit OSes?
Thanks, Peter
Comments
wheezy4lyf
My nearest local ATM runs Windows XP
n-1
You know all the bugs, all the issues, have all the documentation. Everything is tried and tested.
I've noticed this too!
Good thing I updated to 3.1 a few days ago!
I prefer Debian 6 over Debian 7 and Debian 8 isn't available yet for OpenVZ (still in beta). I hung onto Debian 5 until it was EOL'ed.
They use less memory because ints are 32 bits instead of 64 bits. 32 bit OS should be preferred on any VPS with less than 4GB RAM.
Can you elaborate on why it is preferable?
Oh really? I was staying back, I am afraid of this newfangled graphical user interface. I am staying with dos for now, hopefully all of those complex graphics will be phased out in a couple of months.
There are still people using DOS.
I run FreeBSD on my main machine but run 16 bit MS-DOS on a box that I use for writing and file management. Without the MS BS approach it's actually a very nice UNIX like environment with solid networking. Few people ever learned to use it.
I've just had some issues with 7 for a lot of my monitoring scripts. Luckily I've been phasing our Debian altogether so this won't be a problem for me much longer (even though RHEL7 makes me angry thinking about it, I still have many many years before I have to worry about that).
LTS, that's why! A lot of it comes down to "if ain't broken, don't fix it". Unless there's a significant performance gain, it's usually easier to stick to what you've got.
D6/32 LTS is also my favorite one.
Lower memory use, better performance, stable, easier to configure.
I have some D6/64, D7 and D8 too but in my case, I don't see any advantage using them, only drawbacks. KISS.
Software and driver support?
Troubleshooting?
Habits?
OK guys, hands up who has a floppy ?
@Bruce Apple ][ floppy drive, running fine. But this is a bit off topic.
All my old VPS/DS have been updated from D4/D5 to D6 in 2013 (IIRW).
@Nomad configuration and scripts. Literally days of work to upgrade them. Downtime because of the new bugs and so on. Most of the packages won't upgrade nicely (configuration). PHP has new "deprecated" functions, PowerDNS has a new database schema, Apache2 has different module dependancies, etc.
I've got 8" floppies as collector's items, but I've got working (turned on right now and accessible to the network) 5.25" 360K and 1.2M drives, plenty of both types of disks, as well as the super modern 1.4M drives. Plenty of stock too if anybody wants to buy good drives - but I don't suppose there's a lot of vintage buffs on this board.
This isn't actually completely off topic. The idea is that what works is worth keeping. Newer stuff and operating system versions have new features but lose others. I'm no pro, but the value of using a slightly older OS is obvious to me, especially when we're talking about an LTS version.
I used to cut a notch in 5.25" floppies, so I could turn them over and use the other side. twice the storage. back in the day of single sided floppy drives (C64). I'm not old enough to have ever used a 8".
I found a floppy the other day with 6 pics of Cindy Crawford topless.
I'll leave the puns for anyone who fancies an easy set-up.
Not sure I can agree.
MS-DOS's shell (command.com) lacks all the creature comforts of even its contemporaries. ksh88 (ksh circa 1988) is certainly not current bash 4.x, but it's miles ahead of feature-stripped command.com and they shipped in the same time frame. Also, even in the mid-80s Unix had all the basic text editing, text processing, utilities, etc. that DOS never had.
Unix was also more of a scriptable environment. No one would seriously argue that .bat files are better than what you can do with ksh or even plain sh.
DOS also has design limitations that are stupid - e.g., drive letters.
I'm totally fine with a pure-CLI environment...I use virtually all of my boxes that way anyway. But Unix is a better CLI world than MS-DOS.
I used every version of MSDOS and Apple DOS and C/PM and whatever the TRS-80 used...I do miss the simplicity of those early days.
BTW, there is FreeDOS but I've never done more than play with it.
solution to all permutation of your problem can be search via google to point you to the right forum. for new OS, you need to ask and wait someone to reply
I understand.
However, when I mention "MS BS" I'm referring to only using the MS utilities and generally doing things the MS way. If that's what you're talking about, then I agree 100%. You probably know that command.com is not obligatory, I personally prefer it though. The important thing is to go through all the PCmag, Garbo, and Simtelnet collections,) plus whatever else one has collected over the years) and pick what's useful to oneself. I have cut/paste, screen recall, command completion, choice of thousands of editors, and most importantly, cursor control. A UNIX cursor ambling along is most frustrating for a DOS user. The real kicker is that all these utilities and TSRs have been working with rock solid stability for many years now. (Old snapshot here.) And, it didn't take a lot of brain cells to figure it out. I understand the limitations, but a few (important to me) things that DOS can do, UNIX either fails at, or requires a steep learning curve. Put the two together (like I do) and it's heaven. Not being a professional, I have the luxury of running a bunch of machines at the same time just to please my own petty preferences. 
PS: Apologies for getting a little off track, but couldn't resist.
Why do people always seem to use older operating systems?
Because newer is not always better.
So, Debian Lenny ain't the latest?