And I'm not very whelmed, to be honest.
Is this the state of the art of Linux or what? It looks crappier than Windows 95.
What am I missing? Can I install some flashy beautiful front end?
Who needs a graphics front end when you have a bash shell?
Plus I thought RedHat was Enterprise whereas for a flashy interface for non power users, Ubuntu might be a better bet.
The shell.. right, when I open a terminal window tab filename completion doens't even work.
is this gear box fixing software ?
Surely you can enable the Gnome desktop for that?
You seem to have installed back end server linux rather than touchy feely linux. Try Linux Mint or Ubuntu or something less IT Crowd than Redhat.
fedora?
The shell.. right, when I open a terminal window tab filename completion doens't even work.
Have you set up a default path?
If you want a beautiful linux desktop you probably want [url= http://elementaryos.org/ ]ElementaryOS[/url]. Nothing else I've seen comes close.
Tried various over the years, most recently [url= http://www.ubuntu.com/ ]Ubuntu[/url] and [url= http://www.linuxmint.com/ ]Mint[/url]. Was using Mint till I discovered Elementary.
fedora?
[img] 
[/img]
What was the reason for choosing Redhat 6 over other distro's?
Brakes...eh? I'm aware fedora is RH, I thought it was the touchy feely, bells and whistles public version. Figured as molly had gone with RH he may want to stick with the same vein.
or am I missing the joke? 😳
If you want a beautiful linux desktop you probably want ElementaryOS. Nothing else I've seen comes close.
Looks a lot like OS X to me (which also happens to be a good answer to unix with a nice front end.)
It's a corporate build*, so it's RH. I'm creating a VM for a project, so it doesn't matter in this case. I was just expecting it to have moved on since I last installed a Linux desktop in about 2002.
Have you set up a default path?
Er dunno, but why would that matter? It won't even find the files in the dir I'm in...
* A corporate workstation build though
I think Brakes meant
[img] 
[/img]
Unless there's another Red Hat spin-off called Fez 🙂
Is this the state of the art of Linux or what?
No it isnt the draw of RedHat is that they support it for a long time. definitely not state of the art.
Ah.. had to redo it and tab completion works this time around. Weird.
Some differences between the last couple of versions are under the hood
You could install KDE on it if that's your thing..
Its not built to be a particularly visually appealing OS. Its built to do work and be stable.
As mentioned, if you were running a RHEL server chances are you would not have any graphical environment...
For messing about I'd of though Fedora or CentOs would be a better bet
Right. This Linux VM is a lot slower than my Windows ones. Copying lots of files from its disk to another mounted vdisk I'm getting 10MB/s and it's hammering the vm so much I can't do anything else. The host is fine though.
Also my heavyweight apps take about 3-4x longer to start up in Linux.
I'm using a single fixed disk file, on a new clean drive (so it's not fragmented) which isn't the host OS drive. VMWare tools is installed. CPU is about 25-30% though but the system is so hammered even the system monitor keeps freezing periodically.
No experience of Linux VMs, but Parallels on OSX runs similar - large disc access kills the VM (and the host).
molgrips - MemberRight. This Linux VM is a lot slower than my Windows ones. Copying lots of files from its disk to another mounted vdisk I'm getting 10MB/s and it's hammering the vm so much I can't do anything else. The host is fine though.
Also my heavyweight apps take about 3-4x longer to start up in Linux.
I'm using a single fixed disk file, on a new clean drive (so it's not fragmented) which isn't the host OS drive. VMWare tools is installed. CPU is about 25-30% though but the system is so hammered even the system monitor keeps freezing periodically.
Which VMWare version - ESXi?
My guess is that VMWare tools is not properly installed, or you've chosen the wrong disk controller in the VM config. It should be close to native if all working properly. As in 90% + of native performance.
How much memory/CPU have you given the Linux VM compared to the Windows ones? I run a RHEL VM (Virtual Box) on my work PC and just a simple update of the VB tools took forever with just 1 CPU and 2GB of memory. I doubled those and no problem.
Lots of I/O = lots of CPU, if you only have one VCPU assigned that could be your problem.
Er.. VMWare workstation 8.
VMWare tools sounds like a reasonable culprit.
Machine has 2x2 CPU and 6Gb RAM. No swapping on either guest or host. On the guest, one VCPU was hovering around 40-50% util, the others maybe 10-20%.
I dunno about disk controller configuration - I selected 'Linux x64' when I did it and haven't done anything else.
The VM is a corporate build, it is intended to be used either normal or virtual, but it does have whole disk encryption on it....
molgrips - MemberEr.. VMWare workstation 8.
VMWare tools sounds like a reasonable culprit.
Machine has 2x2 CPU and 6Gb RAM. No swapping on either guest or host. On the guest, one VCPU was hovering around 40-50% util, the others maybe 10-20%.
I dunno about disk controller configuration - I selected 'Linux x64' when I did it and haven't done anything else.
The VM is a corporate build, it is intended to be used either normal or virtual, but it does have whole disk encryption on it....
Selecting Lin64 should choose the right controller so probably not that.
You didn't mention encryption before. As a quick check, add another couple of disks, format them unencrypted and try the copy. Then you'll know if it's a fault with that or something else.
Also as another quick test try a dd rather than a copy ...
dd if=/dev/random of=/mnt/somepath/somefile bs=1M count=1000
It should come back with bytes written and a time (maybe even do the maths for you depending on version)
Linux isn't about the GUI man!!
Real men don't need GUIs, call yourself a nerd?
Also vi 4lyfe, yo
[img] 
[/img]