Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[JimH]

I've been thinking lately about what will happen with Linux next.  Is it a serious threat to Windows on the desktop? 

Here's what I see and I'm interested in what you think.

Pros for Linux
Price
Openness
No Microsoft

Pros for Windows
Clear standard (only a single source)
Developer community
Office is the standard for document exchange

I'm thinking about switching.  The major roadblock is the Office issue above.  I know about OpenOffice (StarOffice).  It comes close, but I'm not crazy about it.

[Matt]

If you go to the software department of any store, the bulk of the shelf space is dedicated to games.  A bulk of the hardware is gaming hardware.  Almost all games require Windows and DirectX.

The solution is a framework that runs anywhere.  Java and .NET are attempts, but can't cope with modern games.

Both Sony and Microsoft have a vested interest in preventing an open standard from catching hold.

It's a tricky situation.

[pank2002]

For documents I use LaTeX. MS Office is rubbish, and OOo is much better IMO. The interface is cleaner. I prefer PDF to doc.

Cons of Linux:
* Everything is complicated; setting up stuff etc. Fx I tried Ubuntu on a laptop and while most of the hardware was installed automatically it couldn't pick up our WLAN.
* From what I understand a lot of tasks has to be performed through the command line interface. I don't know what the proper name is.
* You have to put a lot of time in it. However, once you have done that you will (most likely) have a OS that works just the way you want it.
* JRiver doesn't do Linux-software

Pros of Linux:
* It's free! (As in speech and for the most parts as in beer)
* A lot of great software is developed primarily for Linux.
* Most software is free. Good when  you're a user.
* You can have it as you want it.

As I see it Linux distros such as Ubuntu is a step in the right direction. If it's as simple to use Linux as it is to use Windows I think it will have a chance. As it is now it's mostly for the "super users" and professionals, who are willing to put a lot of time in it. I'm all for GNU and Free Software, but as it is now Linux isn't the OS which let me do my work in the most efficient manner. I don't like to sit in front of the computer more than necessary, hence Linux isn't interesting. It might become, though, if more laptops becomes available without preinstalled Windows...

edit: In my world games dones't belong on a computer but a consol. Computers are for work and medias etc.

[hit_ny]

The time to switch to linux is...

..when JRiver thinks its time to port MC to linux

[jgreen]

I believe I am already on record regarding my enthusiasm for Linux in its current state, so I won't go there.  (Glynor breathes a sigh of relief).  My results trying linux were no better than Pank's, but I would ask him what "great software" is written primarily for linux?  I can think of one or two highly specialized apps, but otherwise it seems that windoz has the great apps.  And even if they can get linux to work right, unless it runs windows apps, what's it there for?

As far as Office functionality, I've already replaced Office with OO.  But all I do is type letters and create very basic spreadsheets.  I don't use any of the high-end connectivity or analytic functions in office that aren't duplicated in OO. 

The Great Satan is really focused on improving Office right now, and I don't think any open-source (rudderless) effort can ever equal or surpass M$$$ when/if they actually give a hoot about their products.  Fortunately for open source (and unfortunately for us customers), this hardly ever occurs.

IMO, in a perfect world, MC would be the desktop/interface for a linux kernel.  I can't think of many things that can't be done in MC, at least the kind of things I want to do. 

I think jriver should offer turnkey media computers, running on whatever OS suits them, but with the interface completely taken over by MC 12.  Music, movies, pictures.  Okay, even documents.   I'd fire up my MC-matic every morning, and the rest of the world could just leave a message at the beep.

[JimH]

IMO, in a perfect world, MC would be the desktop/interface for a linux kernel.  I can't think of many things that can't be done in MC, at least the kind of things I want to do. 

I think jriver should offer turnkey media computers, running on whatever OS suits them, but with the interface completely taken over by MC 12.  Music, movies, pictures.  Okay, even documents.   I'd fire up my MC-matic every morning, and the rest of the world could just leave a message at the beep.

I can feel the tug on my leg, but what a pleasant thought that was for a 1/4 of a second.

[pank2002]

My results trying linux were no better than Pank's, but I would ask him what "great software" is written primarily for linux?  I can think of one or two highly specialized apps, but otherwise it seems that windoz has the great apps. 

Gnuplot, Emacs, K-Desktop programs are examples. The two former are primarily developed for Linux and later ported for Windows. K Desktop Environment is Linux only. Potrace was also Linux but was later ported. Don't tell me you don't use any ported software?! Maybe it's just me...

[jgreen]

Well, I don't think the KDE counts, as it is an integral part of the linux interface, the same way the Blue Screen is with windows.  As for the others, Gnuplot, Emacs, Potrace, I've never heard of them.  What are they--Lottery Science?  Credit Repair?

[GHammer]

I play with flavors of linux from time to time. Some have lasted 2 entire days before the lack of doing what I want to do interferes.

You'll have to pry Outlook from my dead cold fingers. I have tried (fill in email app) and it falls short. Found a pretty good calendar once, runs on Windows though. The rest of Office I use infrequently so I wouldn't care. But Outlook is a deal breaker. FrontPage too, I like it.

Music? Well... I have most of my library in APE/APL and I have yet to see anything that will play them. Absolutely nothing that has a decent library. Sure, I've seen rumors of an APE library for this or that (GStreamer?), but then again, I don't want to compile this, link that, sacrifice goats at dawn on a full moon...
No music? No way. Convert to FLAC or something? Nope, don't wanna.

Which is the point of most of linux as far as I see. Unless you just want to use a browser, you're gonna have to find apps that run on your build, your chosen environment.

I have a fairly simple machine here. Intel 945 chipset, 2 SATA drives, DVD writer, CD writer, NVidia 6600 video, Realtek ALC882 HD sound. Should be easy to setup, yet I either have stuttering sound or lousy video on any distribution I have tried. Some distros have problems with my external USB2 drive.

Let's not even get to gaming.

In all, linux has a place for itself in the computing universe. That place isn't in my home, and won't be for some time to come. Hobby? Ok. Web server? Ok. Primary home machine? Nope.

[pank2002]

Gnuplot: Used to make graphs and do calculations with a range of data. 
Emacs: It's the best text-editor IMO. Like notepad only bigger and more advance. You can make pretty much everything with it. It has a mail program, usenet, calc etc. I think that you can extend it with a browser  too ATM I'm using v22 so it's not new software.
Potrace: Converts lossy graphics to non-lossy. Just one of those small, useful scripts.   

Well, I don't think the KDE counts, as it is an integral part of the linux interface, the same way the Blue Screen is with windows. 

Do you mean the Blue Screen of Death  Or is this something I'm not aware of?

Anyway, a lot of the free software is made for Linux, and ported to Windows. I use a lot of free software. Actually, I think MC is one the only software I've bought... Except Windows, of course, but that comes with the PC. I have some dictionaries too.

[GHammer]

Free software that I use:

Gizmo (VoIP app) - SpeedFan - Event Log Explorer
GodFather - Tor - Privoxy
eMule - VLC - foobar
uTorrent - Weather Watcher - Free Launch Bar
Rainlendar - Sysmetrix - Windows Live Messenger

Paid software I use:

MC 9,10,11 - Office - XP
True Image - Diskeeper - Directory Opus
Ultra Edit - Nero - Ad Muncher
RoboForm - cFosSpeed - Thumbs Plus

Out of all that, VLC may or may not be a port. And, there are no comparable apps for linux.
I like free, some of my best tools are free. But the fact is I have a HUGE choice of apps and prices in Windows. I have extremely limited choice in linux. Then you get to the usability issue.

[sapnho]

The time to switch to linux is...

..when JRiver thinks its time to port MC to linux

There is a lot of truth to that for many of us probably. I recently switched my server to Linux and have build a dedicated computer to properly investigate over a period of a few months if Linux is an alternative for me on the desktop.

I don't think costs should be at the center of thought if you are thinking about switching to Linux - at least on a home computer. 2-3 books on Linux probably cost as much as a Microsoft upgrade and although most of the stuff is documented somewhere on the web, nothing beats a good book every now and then. I think it boils down more to an attitude thing and possibly to a DRM issue one day.

The transition to Linux is painful and although distributions like Ubuntu (definitely my favorite after having tried Suse, Mandriva, debian, xandros and a few others) make it somewhat easier and absolutely feasible for a computer literate, the comparison on a day to day level is still in favor of Windows. Attached devices have drivers, CDs for electronic gadgets work and you are just used to it much more.

I identified a few killer apps that I need to see in the Linux world first before deleting my windows partition and besides MC, there are quite a few hardware related apps (Nikon Coolscan, ProntoEdit, Phone etc.) and don't forget about girder/netremote. You can install VMWare of course to simulate Windows but that again has a price.

Outlook has a good counterpart with Kontact or Evolution and so do Office and Internet. My personal theory is that the coming of China and India will increase the use of Linux a lot becasue I just can't see the Chinese trusting a US based operating system. I'd be curious to  know Microsoft's revenues in China these days.

In terms of ease of use, a Linux distribution like (k)ubuntu is probably as user friendly as Windows today but since we are all used to Win/Mac, the fact that some things are just different makes (computer) life sometimes pretty miserable...

Will DRM make a difference in our hemisphere and encourage people to migrate to Linux? I doubt it somewhat unfortunately. Even telling people how to install a DVD player on a Linux machine is not allowed apparently. I do not talk about ripping/copying but about playing a legally purchased DVD. Those things do not encourage the use of open source.

It would be great if JR seriously thought about releasing a Linux version even a scaled-down one. It would send a signal.

[JaredH]

I would have to agree with GHammer.

It would take a piece of software as capable and customizable as Outlook to get me to even consider switching. Outlook is just too much a part of my everyday life, and the thought of trying to round up 10 different programs to do the same thing Outlook does makes me nauseous.

[Jaguu]

As an ex-Unix crack for over 14 years I moved do Windows NT in 1998, because I thought it was technically a more mature system than Unix (kind of a next generation Unix) and the author of Windows NT was Dave Cutler, who had already developed 5 or 6 operating systems in his career among them the famous VMS from DEC and the OS for the famous PDP11. Probably no other human being on earth developed such a high number of operating systems in his career.

That was one part of my decision at that time. The other one was that I did not want to waste my time to care about more than one operating system. From time to time I install some Linux OS just to have a look, but almost immediately discard it, the latest try was the free VMware player which plays a ready-made Linux. To me it is simply a waste of time to care about 2 operating systems.

But I also like freeware and the open source idea. But I found out that all important freeware is running on Windows as well. There is not really any piece of highly used freeware not ported to Windows  (even emacs).

During the last few weeks I installed Apache, MySql, PHP, Perl, Typo3, Joomla (2 CMS freeware tools to compose great web-sites), phpMyAdmin and a few other tools all on a simple Windows XP Pro. They are easier to install, configure and run than their Linux counterparts on an operating system I have become very familiar. So, why should I bother to change? And I can still use Office, Outlook, MC11 and the Internet and all the other goodies on the same machine.

Also, if you are going to work for large companies, people expect more and more that you know the main players, not only Office or Outlook, but also MS Project, MS Visio and all the associated collaboration tools. (You get a list of the project team phones ready to download to your mobile or PDA, so you better learn how to do that;-)

About Open Office: It is not really an innovative product, simply a carbon copy of MS Office and under the hook it is still a number of separate applications tied together in a single interface. This is last century technology.

You can also make the famous wife-test: Ask them if they prefer Windows or Linux? They will most probably answer "I need a PC".

[Mr ChriZ]

I've decided that when the clever guys with Linux
makes an OS that has all the same quirks and oddities windows
has then I'll switch to it.
I've grown up with Windows.  I've spent
a couple of years with Unix... and remember a quote
that really summed it up for me
"Computers were made to make things simpler,
some people didn't like this much so they made unix".

I know some distro's of Linux are getting there in the simplicity depo..
but it still just doesn't seem ready for me to spend more time with
than my partner family etc like i do with windows  

[Dutch Peter]

Linux is for Technical Oriented Engineers ....

Microsoft is for Functional Oriented Users ....

I am part of the second breed, so I will stick to Microsoft.

For the same reason I do not use Open Source applications.
There is always something wrong with it, and it takes a lot of technical hassle to get things as you wish.

 

[datdude]

I've only used Linux a few times and it was simply a suggestion since I want to see MC on every possible OS.   Not gonna happen I realise, but one can hope!

I think that Windows has many a problem, but if you are looking for utility, it is the best and really only option.

[GHammer]

Outlook has a good counterpart with Kontact or Evolution and so do Office and Internet. My personal theory is that the coming of China and India will increase the use of Linux a lot becasue I just can't see the Chinese trusting a US based operating system. I'd be curious to  know Microsoft's revenues in China these days.

My own personal experience here in China is every PC I see has Windows 2000 or 98 on them. Some of the newer ones have XP. But revenues for MS? Nope, you buy the CDs on any corner for a few RMB.

I've taken a quick look at the Outlook-like tools you mentioned in the past. They are a collection of apps in one place. And, for my other life as an admin, they have no Exchange ability. None equal Outlook.

[liebls]

I come from way back. 20 years ago with Unix even Ice-Ten from JRiver (couldn't believe it when I made the connection when purchasing MC8) but there's the rub.

We used Ice-Ten way back then to allow us to have the power of the PC for what it was getting good at (desktop/office stuff) whilst retaining Unix for what it was good at (processing huge volumes of data that a PC wouldn't touch in those days).

I'm now IT director of a large retailer in the UK and only a couple of the old faithfuls in my team can remember Unix, the rest are Windows from birth. But the productivity of the new world is less than the old mainly because of the increase in complexity.

My children use Mac because they like the style and the simplicity and they laugh when they see me struggling with some config on a PC because on the Mac they don't try to use anything that doesn't plug'n play (truly) - they can't be bothered to struggle.

So perhaps that's the issue, we have with XP a de facto standard trying to be all things to all men with far too much complexity. It's inherited some "layered" design from the original NT concepts but there is just too much in there.

In an ideal world I think devices should return to a world of built for purpose with the OS built from standard layers stripped and tailored to suit and for simplicity and reliability (Firewalls, database servers, media servers, remote E-Mail/Office etc).

Unfortunately the one place where there is a need for a generic device is on the desktop (physical space/location/cost) and for out of the box Office and Web, although it pains me to say it, MS is the standard and currently the best.

I like the idea of MC in a box (could be a media server with a web server interface built in) but then it'll cost a bit more than $40, won't be as fast and will still rely on the PC to interface.

[Griff]

Hi Jim

Long time no see.

Youre sampling method is tainted.(Sorry)

Matt is right on the gaming, look at the bucks ATI and Nvidea are getting.

But that is only a small part of the Market place.

But you don't need me to tell you about that

Dont know what  flavor you are using, but I'm quite impressed with what I have.

Ya know I downloaded this from WHB site.

I am quite impressed with it.

Every thing is so easy, compared with MS.

Well, I was looking at this for an OS sys. for the HTPC.

But I got caught up in what it would do for the GP. (General Public)

Hope ya have a great New Year.

[JimH]

I come from way back. 20 years ago with Unix even Ice-Ten from JRiver (couldn't believe it when I made the connection when purchasing MC8) but there's the rub.

Hi Griff.  Nice coincidence!  ICE.TEN was one of our first major products.  I think it was introduced in about 1987.  We still sell it.
http://www.icetcp.com/products/ice-ten.html

Happy New Year,

Jim

[Alex B]

I have installed a Linux OS a few times, but never tried it more than some days. The lack of full-blown applications like MC or Adobe's programs has practically prevented me from using it more.

Here's my short OS history:

I started with MS-DOS 3.3. After that I've owned and used DOS 5 & 6, Win 2.1, Win 3.0, Win 3.1, Win 3.11, NT 3.0 WS, Win 95, NT 3.1 server, Win 98, NT 4 ws, Win 98 SE, Win 2k ws and Win XP.

I have had also some sidesteps: NextStep for i386, OS2 Warp, RedHat Linux, Slackware Linux and Mac OS 6-9.

I think the best OS so far has been and still is Windows 2000 professional.

I use XP on my newer P4 PCs only because some new HW functions are supported better, but I like more the straightforward approach W2k has. XP tries to make things easier for users and has more hidden things happening under the hood.

[danrien]

to be honest, i really don't know how to answer this debate.  i've used ubuntu quite extensively (at least in my opinion), and obviously i've used various windows os's quite a lot.  but in the end i just dont know.  the thing is there are comparable apps for linux for most of what you're looking for, and believe it or not, with distribution systems like synaptic, they're usually almost easier to install.

however, hardware support is lacking often in linux.  for example, ubuntu doesn't understand that my old 15" monitor can go to higher resolutions, so it sticks it at 640x480.  and i can't install the nforce audio/network drivers off of the nvidia site onto the os (unless i work some miracles).  these are things that should be standard and simple, but end up being complicated and frustrating.

in the end, what matters about linux is the concept:  freedom to own, modify, distribute, etc.  with windows, you are locked in to a certain extent, which has its downfalls from time to time.

[jgreen]

I believe I've learned a thing or two about linux, thanks to this discussion and others.  Everyone loves the idea, but hardly anyone is actually depending on it on their home systems.  I love the idea, too, for the very idea of "freedom" that danrien mentions.  Freedom to jab certain billionaires with a stick, specifically.

As it is, I have an impending opportunity to try linux for real, if it's right for the job.  I'm building an online backup machine out of spare parts and the cheapest possible purchases.  I want to use my old IDE drives and pile them into a celeron machine and send disk images across 100T ethernet.  With linux, this is a $200 idea, windows $300-$400, depending.  All I want to do is warehouse 1's and 0's on this machine, until the day that I might need to restore from it.  Is the trouble of getting linux to work going to be worth it? 

[JimH]

jgreen,
Here's a limited time offer.  We'll send you a CD or give you a link to download a distribution (your choice).  Then we'll hold your hand while you do it.  If it works, you can send us $40.  If it doesn't, we'll send you $40.

Bob at JRiver is one of our Linux gurus (we have 3 or 4).

[bob]

What I do is to share (with password) important folders on the PC's and pull them down at night with a cron job onto the linux box compressing them on the way (because the server/backup box I'm referring to has only 40 gigs of space). I used smbclient on linux for this though I did run into a password issue on one version of windows which I worked around by simply mounting the folder on linux (it's quite straightforward) and then aggregating and compacting the files. It actually takes more space to describe this that it does to do it

[jgreen]

I'm trying to work this out on my fingers.  Do I make money here?  What if I decide to do it on 10 machines, and you're right on 1 and I'm right on the other 9?  Or is this going to be like that "extra-special upgrade" deal, where instead of the regular $26 price, you offered to do it for $25.95 plus $5.00 shipping and handling?

[JimH]

cron is a scheduler on Linux
smbclient is part of samba, which emulates Windows file sharing

[jgreen]

Sorry for the out-of-sync posting there. 
If I understand Bob, this is not an FTP approach, but rather using file sharing via samba.  Does samba cost $$$?

I was originally intending (dreaming) of using a windows-based program like synchback (thankyou to marko), which is a scheduler and copier, and having it send to the linux box via ftp, I guess.  At that point I went for the blank look.

[JimH]

Samba isn't FTP, and Samba is free.  Good stuff.

[jgreen]

Camper--
Thanks, I appreciate the info.  Possibly this is beginning to sink into my case-hardened skull.  Also, hope I didn't step on any linux toes (webbed or otherwise). 

3ware:  I'd been lusting after their new SATA II boards.  I currently run an adaptec 4-port rig which is highly dated and possibly headed for this linux box, whenever I get the courage.  Tom's Harware rates the 3-ware very high.

So if I give linux another run through, I was thinking of Ubuntu.  Nice words are being said about it, and it's on a single CD.  Any thoughts?

[Robert Taylor]

My opinion only:

Linux is perfectly suited to certain tasks. I've used it extensively at work for such things as:

Email server - Postfix (incl. web interface - Squirrellmail)
Web server (Apache / PHP / MySQL)
System / Network Monitoring (Nagios)

There are also stripped-down / specialised versions of Linux (like e-smith / SMEServer) suited for companies who wish to emulate the functionality of a Windows server (ie. usable as a login server / domain controller for their Windows desktops), but which provide a whole host of additional functionality, such as Intranet / Internet web server, mail server, print server (CUPS), file server (via Samba), central addressbook (via LDAP) etc. All this can be administered via a failry simple web interface, so once installed and initial config performed, most people with half a brain should be able to keep it running perfectly.

The important thing as far as I'm concerned is that the software is opensource (essentially free). It may be slightly more complex to configure than Windows (generally only for people unfamiliar with it), but if it's being used for those "background" tasks described above, then the poor end users don't really get exposed to its quirks (again, for those users unfamiliar with it). This assumes that the place it's being used has access to someone suitably useful to keep things running.

Once you put it on the desktop, typical end users (ie. read non-techy types), seem to find it difficult, for no reason other than it's "different" to what they've been using their whole computer-using lives. Sad to say, but most people (read non-techy types) don't have the time or mental energy required to flip back and forth between two different systems (ie. Windows at home, Linux at work).

I believe that Linux is STILL just that little bit more convoluted to install / configure that it's out of reach for those non-techy types.

If you were talking about a software house where the main focus was on the development of a large unix based application, and the developers did not need any of the Microsoft/Windows centric tools to perform their tasks, then why the need for Microsoft / Windows products at all? In this environment, Linux on desktops would be ideal.

Use the appropriate tool for the job; you don't commute to work in a bulldozer, or expect to move house in a mini do you?

Phew...My 40c worth...

[JimH]

I'd say it's more like $2 worth, Lunch. 

Where've you been, mate?

[Mr ChriZ]

What I do is to share (with password) important folders on the PC's and pull them down at night with a cron job onto the linux box compressing them on the way (because the server/backup box I'm referring to has only 40 gigs of space). I used smbclient on linux for this though I did run into a password issue on one version of windows which I worked around by simply mounting the folder on linux (it's quite straightforward) and then aggregating and compacting the files. It actually takes more space to describe this that it does to do it

Does everyone that gets into Linux start talking like that? 

[Robert Taylor]

Gday Jim, old stick...

I've been around...just been way busy...

I was in San Diego, Califor-ni-a for the first half of last year...now safely back home in Oz...

It's taken me until now to recover from the load of Carl's Jr. 1 pound hamburgers I ate while there (amongst other huge meals)...you Americans sure know how to eat !

I've not been doing much PC / MC stuff for a while...just seem to have many other things to do...

Wishin y'all a happy new year and everything...

[scott_r]

Hi all,

I moved to Linux (Debian Sarge at the time) about four years ago. It's tempting to go on about how much fun I've had with it, and how much pain Windows causes me each time I boot up to play World of Warcraft, however I'll hold back on the zealotry.

Ubuntu is now the only OS installed on my laptop, and my main desktop machine dual-boots Ubuntu and Windows. I only ever use Windows for gaming (and MC when I get the itch), which I don't have a problem with.

Being a Computer Scientist, I'm not worried about getting my hands dirty installing, configuring and using Linux, although I know I'm in a minority of users out there. Having said that, I found that Ubuntu Breezy (Warty and Hoary both had their problems) was extremely simple to set up - much faster to install than Windows even. Another bonus when using a Linux distro like Ubuntu is that as soon as it's installed, you've got a functioning desktop - Productivity tools, a decent web-browser, calendar, etc are already installed and ready to use, whereas installing Windows usually requires several hours worth of downloading and installing various pieces of third-party software to make the system usable. My partner (who is not computer-savvy at all) loves using the GNOME environment, and finds it simple and intuitive to use, and now prefers it to Windows.

I have one problem with Linux though. I am yet to find a decent media organiser and player. After using Media Jukebox/Center, nothing compares. I've found using Amarok the best experience, but it is still so far from using Media Center that I sometimes reboot into Windows just to use MC. It would make my day to see Media Center on Linux, but I know that's probably not going to happen.

Jim, You said that Office is one of your sticking points, and that you're not thrilled about OpenOffice. Fair enough. Have you tried OpenOffice 2? It is much, much better than 1.x. Also, Abiword is a decent word-processor, and Gnumeric makes for a simple, usable spreadsheet application. If that still doesn't tickle your fancy, there are products like the free WINE (www.winehq.org) project, or the not-so-free CrossOver Office project (www.codeweavers.com) , that allow you to run MS Office in Linux. They may be worth looking at.

On the subject of WINE, has anyone had any luck getting MC to run using it? I've tried, but without much success.

Hmm, that was a little long-winded, but if you're keen to give Linux a go on the desktop, then I'd sugest pulling down an ISO of Ubuntu Breezy and giving that a whirl. If you can't live without MS Office, then there's always CrossOver to help you with that as well.

Good luck, and have fun,

Scott.