I remember when the Vatican decided to clean the Michelangelo ceiling and the "art critics" went absolutely nuts!
Basically the slews of commentary from New Yawk and SanFran was "they are RUINING THE ART". and "What about all of the textbooks critiquing the art?"
I remember reading one when I was in the Navy, a learned tome, discussing the highly pregnant shading, and nuances of browns and yellows and all that....with which I ...agreed, because I'm not an arteest critique.
And now we have those wonderful COLOURS and the art critic books are in the dust heap....I just wish all the rest of those people were there also....what drivel.....
Anyhow.....
i installed Scientific Linux on a "spare machine" in the biology department back in 2008 it was cludzy, it was out of the Windows ME era in terms of look and style....
but.....the programs, analyzing different molecules, visualizing them and all that, doing regression analysis on whether or not various PAGE systems were actually giving a good readout.
Anyhow.... the MACHINE finally pooped out a coupla years ago and somebody bought a new machine and installed the latest as of back then.
While fiddling I ran across some artwork for Scientific Linux which looked pretty kewl so I checked out their page and it is basically the same.
I looked at the included software at Distrowatch and it doesn't seem like much because the actual "apps" are stored at places like CERN or Argonne, or whatever. The scientists just d/l what they need, install it, do their work and delete it.
Nowadays the thing is actually run on their "inhouse cloudes".
But, I saw this review and made the mistake of reading it.... i DO NOT KNOW when I read a more clueless piece of drivel ....but he got his cock-a-doodle doo and MAYBE some clicks near his adverts.
Like I said.....I ALWAYS watch the films that are panned by the "critics" (who do not MAKE anything) as soon as I can get to the dvd store. 
The schlockier the better! can ANYONE forget the big flopping rubber snouts on what...Howling 7? lol
_002.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20090930213232)
Which reminds me....is the forum going to host a Halloween Party? lol
PPS: this guy is a great example, tangentially, of why "scientists" stopped "discussion" of evolution with "creation scientists". He wasn't reviewing the OS he was venting about Gnome. And, he has to play to the people in the front pews.
http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/s...linux-7-1.html
woodsmoke
Basically the slews of commentary from New Yawk and SanFran was "they are RUINING THE ART". and "What about all of the textbooks critiquing the art?"
I remember reading one when I was in the Navy, a learned tome, discussing the highly pregnant shading, and nuances of browns and yellows and all that....with which I ...agreed, because I'm not an arteest critique.
And now we have those wonderful COLOURS and the art critic books are in the dust heap....I just wish all the rest of those people were there also....what drivel.....
Anyhow.....
i installed Scientific Linux on a "spare machine" in the biology department back in 2008 it was cludzy, it was out of the Windows ME era in terms of look and style....
but.....the programs, analyzing different molecules, visualizing them and all that, doing regression analysis on whether or not various PAGE systems were actually giving a good readout.
Anyhow.... the MACHINE finally pooped out a coupla years ago and somebody bought a new machine and installed the latest as of back then.
While fiddling I ran across some artwork for Scientific Linux which looked pretty kewl so I checked out their page and it is basically the same.
I looked at the included software at Distrowatch and it doesn't seem like much because the actual "apps" are stored at places like CERN or Argonne, or whatever. The scientists just d/l what they need, install it, do their work and delete it.
Nowadays the thing is actually run on their "inhouse cloudes".
But, I saw this review and made the mistake of reading it.... i DO NOT KNOW when I read a more clueless piece of drivel ....but he got his cock-a-doodle doo and MAYBE some clicks near his adverts.
So is CentOS. And they both try to be fully compatible with RedHat Enterprise,
because after all, that is what they are all about - UMMMM NO..."they" are "all about using a software tool".
. However, while the latter does manage to do this in a rather smooth, pleasant manner AND still be a great candidate for home use, Scientific Linux fails in its mission :0 :0 statement on oh-so-many levels, definitely not helped by using the Gnome nonsense. Oh man how have the tables turned. Gnome 2 used to be my favorite desktop environment, and Gnome 3 is my most hated one.
But even if we ignore the presentation layer completely, Scientific Linux 7.1 is still a poor choice for any kind of home-related use. It's slow, it has no useful software, and worse, you can't get any,
LOL, LOL LOL.... even more....saaaddd LOL.... geeze what an egoist!
even if you want to. It won't even let you print, for pity's sake. It's made zero progress from the previous release, and it's infinitely more retarded than the 6.X family. Fedora 22 is also quite bad, but it's supposed to be a bleeding edge test bed
Ummm no..... you ( I won't put the part of the anatomy here") It is a BED for running TESTING SOFTWARE.... what an #$#$%% ,
and even though it failed me horribly, it still managed to do more, and more gracefully, than Scientific Linux did today.
OH SORRY YOUR SENTENCE STRUCTURE CONFUSED ME....stupid me.
I can't think of a single reason why you should waste your precious time with this distro. Grade wise, 1/10, and I'm being generous. Stay away, go with CentOS, and I'm shelving this for a few years, until and if and when the dev folks decide to be serious about offering a fun, cozy and practical distro like they used to only a couple of years ago. And thank you for ruining my morning. I'm off.
ummmm yep, quite a bit off, the mark that is.
because after all, that is what they are all about - UMMMM NO..."they" are "all about using a software tool".
. However, while the latter does manage to do this in a rather smooth, pleasant manner AND still be a great candidate for home use, Scientific Linux fails in its mission :0 :0 statement on oh-so-many levels, definitely not helped by using the Gnome nonsense. Oh man how have the tables turned. Gnome 2 used to be my favorite desktop environment, and Gnome 3 is my most hated one.
But even if we ignore the presentation layer completely, Scientific Linux 7.1 is still a poor choice for any kind of home-related use. It's slow, it has no useful software, and worse, you can't get any,
LOL, LOL LOL.... even more....saaaddd LOL.... geeze what an egoist!
even if you want to. It won't even let you print, for pity's sake. It's made zero progress from the previous release, and it's infinitely more retarded than the 6.X family. Fedora 22 is also quite bad, but it's supposed to be a bleeding edge test bed
Ummm no..... you ( I won't put the part of the anatomy here") It is a BED for running TESTING SOFTWARE.... what an #$#$%% ,
and even though it failed me horribly, it still managed to do more, and more gracefully, than Scientific Linux did today.
OH SORRY YOUR SENTENCE STRUCTURE CONFUSED ME....stupid me.
I can't think of a single reason why you should waste your precious time with this distro. Grade wise, 1/10, and I'm being generous. Stay away, go with CentOS, and I'm shelving this for a few years, until and if and when the dev folks decide to be serious about offering a fun, cozy and practical distro like they used to only a couple of years ago. And thank you for ruining my morning. I'm off.
ummmm yep, quite a bit off, the mark that is.
The schlockier the better! can ANYONE forget the big flopping rubber snouts on what...Howling 7? lol
Which reminds me....is the forum going to host a Halloween Party? lol
PPS: this guy is a great example, tangentially, of why "scientists" stopped "discussion" of evolution with "creation scientists". He wasn't reviewing the OS he was venting about Gnome. And, he has to play to the people in the front pews.
http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/s...linux-7-1.html
woodsmoke