linux

cross over is hardly a valid comparison to running applications natively. Translators have always had issues and running a game in windows is far superior than on a Linux desktop running some sort of translator like wine, cross over, or cedega.

Also, sure you can develop web from any text editor, so it is not like you need to run any specific OS and web design is probably the most open source friendly environment out there. Graphic design you have GIMP, and it is a good application but you can't compare it to industry standards like Photoshop. Adobe is an industry standard for several reasons, one being that it just works and is easy to install and maintain on work computers.

Linux is not a bad OS by any means and I am not playing favorites over Linux or Windows. I think they both are valid and good OSes but are both far from perfect.

As of late, I really just run OS X on my laptop at work for the most part. I work with technology so I am on my laptop all the time at work so by default I am using OS X the most. The more I use it the more I like it better than any other OS because it makes me so much more productive. Expose' for one thing allows me to multi task a lot. It really just comes down to personal preference in the end.

I will be making a Myth TV box here in the near future I think though, and I will be using the Linux based version for it.
 
Just about everything I use is native, but there are a couple of small apps I use that I run through wine (which isn't really an emulator, more of an api). These are apps by small companies for a niche market, dog breed database, agility course designer, that sort of thing. I run photoshop at times but prefer gimp as I'm used to it.

I haven't had any issues with crossover needing to contact the net when installing btw. Iteresting issue.

But just like some people have an xbox and a playstation, I amd happy to have the linux box as my main desktop and the XP box as a games station and maybe run soe other apps there. The network is well protected on a red-green-purple smoothwall set up, so no issues running XP. SP2 is a reasonable OS for what it does.

OS/X is probably the cream of OS's these days, but I am too long a linux dude to move there I dare day :)
 
The main thing I prefer about Linux here besides the tools available like GParted and now memtest included in Vista is the ability to read and access other platforms as far as different partition types. Linux has also displayed a superior hardware detection process over Windows with only Vista now seeing MS make improvements such drive tools.
 
amosf said:
Just about everything I use is native, but there are a couple of small apps I use that I run through wine (which isn't really an emulator, more of an api). These are apps by small companies for a niche market, dog breed database, agility course designer, that sort of thing. I run photoshop at times but prefer gimp as I'm used to it.

I haven't had any issues with crossover needing to contact the net when installing btw. Iteresting issue.
Click to expand...

WINE is a translator, which is done through a set of APIs. I do agree that Linux is definitely more into the niche type market. Linux is great for background and network services but compared to the average end user OS and the average end user it does lack a lot of simplified features. Not that your average user couldn't learn to use it, they just really don't want to.

But just like some people have an xbox and a playstation, I amd happy to have the linux box as my main desktop and the XP box as a games station and maybe run soe other apps there. The network is well protected on a red-green-purple smoothwall set up, so no issues running XP. SP2 is a reasonable OS for what it does.

OS/X is probably the cream of OS's these days, but I am too long a linux dude to move there I dare day :)
Click to expand...

Yup, a lot of it comes down to preferences.
 
I ran different distros here in order to get familiar with Linux but found it quite limited at times. But in many ways Windows is also found that way at times. For the average user coming from the "point and click" arena the concept of many manual tasks through a console becomes arduent while someone familiar with dos and basic tasks will find it simply a matter of getting familiar with the different methods/processes there.
 
From the other side... I'm not sure what simplified things are lacking in linux at a basic user level.

Many distros are of course very easy to use. I have set up several and put them in front of new users and they are able to do the tasks they want with no issues. It's only when you get an intermediate user who thinks they know something and they want to install something or whatever. The real 'ordinary' user will see it as a black box appliance the does email when you click that button and plays cards when you click the other button.

My 52 year old sister certainly had no issues with 'linux' on her first computer she had ever used. It was all just point and click. Sure, it was all set up for her, but that is no different to her getting a windows PC from a shop which is all set up. She might want help to install new software now and then, but I also have to help people install windows software on a regular basis.

My wife eventually demanded that I put linux on her PC several years ago as 98 was locking on a regular basis. She is a complete non-tech person, but had no trouble moving to linux. Her PC requires no real 'tech suport' either, tho I upgrade the OS maybe once every year or two. She just clicks the buttons to make it do email, browse, whatever... She won't touch windows now. Her preference.

Seriously I see a near future when the concept of the branded OS is gone (again) and the PC will just go back to being an appliance like a phone rather than this branded OS stuff... windows, linux, whatever.

What OS does your phone run, etc...
 
In that situation outlined there no user has to learn how to setup and maintain any OS. That's a far cry from those who custom build their own cases while still being OS illiterate as far as manual dos type environments. When you refer to point and click Linux lacks right click, programmable double click, space, or enter key assigned to mouse buttons, and other options found in Windows while every desktop type OS has a main gui made simokified for ease of use there.
 
Here is another side to look at it. I work IT for a living, maintain 17 xserves, 6,000 mac clients, and like a few thousand PCs. We have some intel iMacs running windows because we got a better deal on the iMacs than any other all-in-one machine. We needed to deploy all-in-one machines because of limited space and power outlets in rooms in some old buildings. Old enough to be historically preserved, so we can't drill holes in walls and run cables with out the historical preservation board's approval. No other company could get us as many all-in-one machines than Apple, so we go Apple's running Windows. It is kind of funny to see a bunch of iMacs being used to solely run windows and windows apps. Anyways, I am getting off topic a bit, so back on topic.

When I look at all the users I support some don't know what they are doing. Others are in the middle, and some are very savy. They have no idea about user, group, and everyone policies and permissions, they have no idea about authenticating as root or admin depending on your distro. Then you look at the redhat based distros which use root accounts where as debian based ones do not need root, because everything is done via sudo against the /etc/sudoers file. On top of that, basic things like video drivers and video settings are not easy to set up and install. I personally have no issue editing my /etc/X11/xorg.conf file in a text editor and manually setting my video settings and rates and then restarting X from the command line so they take. Since, everything in /etc is parsed at boot. However, on an end user perspective where you just download an executable and double click it and run through a wizard and click click done, with no authentication and no editing config files in a text editor, the end user will want the simpler solution. All of this is very confusing to your average user.

On the bright side for Linux this makes it much more secure. Not just anyone can double click an executable (nor can an executable auto run) with out proper authentication to run as a root process. Where as in windows it is just the opposite. So, you do sacrifice some security for functionality. I think that windows users and developers are now seeing that something needs to be done and windows vista I think is the first step towards a more unix like file system set up that would require authentication to install applications.

In the end people just want things to work, even I do. I want them to work my way of course but a lot of times I settle for it just working. Linux doesn't just work out of the box in my experience. Every linux box I have ever touched or built or owned I have always had to go to the command line, always. I am more efficient at the command line now because of it, but there is not always a simple GUI answer for somethings.
 
from your experience you know what is meant by those from dos days learning Bash commands as opposed to those who never knew anything but the point and click concepts seen in Windows/Mac. When comparing OSs you still have to look at what each can or can't do for you.

For all these years you ran Windows for games, Apple/Mac for education all too often, and Windows Server versions as opposed to UNIX/Linux. With newer distros being an open source OS you are starting to see the virtual expansion of running some familiar Windows items in Linux while still being a cross platform intinerary there.

Just like comparing apples to oranges as far as Red Hat to Debian, SUSe, Mandriva, and others the choices of Gnome or KDE as well as any other desktop type themes available comes into play as far as the preferences are concerned. Then there was XP then Vista themes for XP or the Classic Windows to choose for the MS side.
 
PC eye said:
In that situation outlined there no user has to learn how to setup and maintain any OS. That's a far cry from those who custom build their own cases while still being OS illiterate as far as manual dos type environments. When you refer to point and click Linux lacks right click, programmable double click, space, or enter key assigned to mouse buttons, and other options found in Windows while every desktop type OS has a main gui made simokified for ease of use there.
Click to expand...

I am not sure I know anyone who does anything other than use the default mouse options on any PC or OS with maybe a few tiny exceptions. Not sure I know what you mean about right click, but there are some middle click and 3 button emulation options in linux I miss in windows. There aer double clck options in kde, but maybe win has more. Haven't really looked as i don't use an XP box on a daily basis these days... Or weekly basis I suppose :)

But there are very different users out there, that's for sure, and the 'average' user seems to have trouble with most OS issues regardless of the OS they use. Installing, stuffing the machine up, etc. Not sure how they are with a Mac. It might be less stuffable. Certainly the users with no linux admin access stuff up the machines i do for them a little less often :)

I find KDE of mandriva or PCLinux to be an easy gui. Indeed I find it a pain to navigate the windows config. It can often be a matter of what you are used to and so if you are used to win then linux is different and harder. Likewise for me windows is harder and a pain to navigate... But you can certainly do everything with a linux gui these days for most setups. Not that it's not uncommon to have to open a console even in XP to test a few things when having trouble.

And sure, I have had quite a few installs work right out of the box of late. But we all like to customize after that anyway :) Even the wireless laptop was an out of the box install with the right wireless card and the right linux ;)

And it's near impossible to get multiple virtual desktops to work as well on XP (at least for free) as they do on kde et al... That's probably what kills me with XP the most. It's what you get used to.

Price was always a big driving force here of course. I have up to 10 PC's in the house with various server and office software. it would cost a fortune to be all MS.

But the initial move to OS/2 and eventually linux in the past was OS's like the early MS OS desktop offerings, esp 9x. There just HAD to be better than that!
 
Not sure how they are with a Mac. It might be less stuffable
Click to expand...

OS X is pretty much BSD with an Apple touch of a GUI, and then an Apple redesign. Under the hood there is Unix, no doubt about it. I write shell scripts all the time at work and enforce them as a policy through our network policy software suite called Casper. I also push out policies from our OD Master, which is then replicated out to our replicas.

However, Apple, has hidden the under the hood Unix from the end user completely. A user would never have to launch terminal and would never have to even run a script, because Apple scripting can execute other scripted languages.

All user data is under the home directory which would be found in /Users/username instead of /Home. All the Unix directories (/var, /sbin, /bin, /etc and so on) are actually symbolic links to everything which is kept in the /private directory. So, if a user actually does start deleting things, the link will be re-established next reboot theoretically. All preferences are in .plists are also held in the home directory of each user. That way all Applications are self contained (with a few exceptions of those that share library files) and all preferences are kept on the user level, not the application level. So, if one user's prefs crash an Application, the next user most likely won't have that issue since they have a whole different set of preferences. Then you can run maintenance on the user account and not on the application.

So, it is pretty much Apple's version of Unix. Some things they did are pure genious, and others can be annoying or weird. They just got rid of netinfo manager in Leopard their newest OS, and I am learning what they changed in it. They are definitely hard workers though. 5 Major OS releases since 2001! that is a lot of major OS releases.
 
Virtual PC for Windows is now an MS giveaway while it had been a retail option. As far as virtual desktops I can easily run an old 8bit dos app through a virtual dos window even on Vista with a freeware called DOSBox. But again that would still be using a dos emulator not running anything on the native OS there. Here's a look at one old 8bit dos game running on Vista.

 
PC eye said:
Virtual PC for Windows is now an MS giveaway while it had been a retail option. As far as virtual desktops I can easily run an old 8bit dos app through a virtual dos window even on Vista with a freeware called DOSBox. But again that would still be using a dos emulator not running anything on the native OS there. Here's a look at one old 8bit dos game running on Vista.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was just talking about multiple desktops. The windows supplied desktop manager is not that great. The nvidia is a bit better...
 
imsati said:
Ubuntu/Kubuntu, Mint, Sabayon, Mandriva, Knoppix, Mepis (though I've yet to use this one, but am told it's nice)
Click to expand...

And PCLinuxOS seems to have a nice single consistent gui config panel rather than the kde control + MCC in mandriva...
 
amosf said:
Sorry, I was just talking about multiple desktops. The windows supplied desktop manager is not that great. The nvidia is a bit better...
Click to expand...

For the Windows environment I found that the ATI was the leader there. One program looked at about a year ago when someone asked a program was Ultra Mon or some name like that. The default Windows utility no way there.
 
Hmm. That was interesting. I was having trouble getting ubuntu to run on an AMD2800 this arvo so I killed it and installed slack 12 instead. I think it has to be the quickest thing to ever install (I'm used to Mandriva) and dead easy aside from the initial partitioning. Faster than most of the others as well. Worked out of the box, fairly standard machine tho...
 
PC eye said:
When you refer to point and click Linux lacks right click, programmable double click, space, or enter key assigned to mouse buttons,
Click to expand...

I must admit I am still curious as to what features windows has here that linux doesn't. I suppose I will have to have a look. I was just in the kde config and set the mouse wheel to change window opacity and noticed a lot of other options, including keyboard control and assigning buttons for various jobs, double click speed, etc. I just shifted double click on the title bar back to shade the window rather then the default maximize.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top