Searching \ for '[EE] Taking the fun out of computers - Windows Vis' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=taking+fun+out+computers
Search entire site for: 'Taking the fun out of computers - Windows Vis'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[EE] Taking the fun out of computers - Windows Vis'
2007\01\24@071429 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
It looks like the PC is becoming a "closed box". And it seems the time is
near that I have to move away from a Win-based computing infrastructure...
__________________________________________________

<http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html>

A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

By Peter Gutmann, spam_OUTpgut001TakeThisOuTspamcs.auckland.ac.nz

Executive Summary

Windows Vista includes an extensive reworking of core OS elements in order
to provide content protection for so-called ´premium content¡, typically
HD data from Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sources. Providing this protection incurs
considerable costs in terms of system performance, system stability,
technical support overhead, and hardware and software cost. These issues
affect not only users of Vista but the entire PC industry, since the
effects of the protection measures extend to cover all hardware and
software that will ever come into contact with Vista, even if it's not
used directly with Vista (for example hardware in a Macintosh computer or
on a Linux server). This document analyses the cost involved in Vista's
content protection, and the collateral damage that this incurs throughout
the computer industry.

Executive Executive Summary

The Vista Content Protection specification could very well constitute the
longest suicide note in history [Note A].
__________________________________________________

Gerhard

2007\01\24@083447 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 1/24/07, Gerhard Fiedler <.....listsKILLspamspam@spam@connectionbrazil.com> wrote:
> It looks like the PC is becoming a "closed box". And it seems the time is
> near that I have to move away from a Win-based computing infrastructure...
>

What can you do to avoid those DRM stuff? Even if you move
away from Windows, you are still facing DRM "since the effects of the
protection measures extend to cover all hardware and
software that will ever come into contact with Vista, even if it's not
used directly with Vista (for example hardware in a Macintosh computer
or on a Linux server)" according to the original quote.

I think the best way to avoid these copy protected "premium content"...

2007\01\24@085458 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> The Vista Content Protection specification could very well
> constitute the
> longest suicide note in history [Note A].

One can hope


       R

2007\01\24@094043 by dvanhorn

picon face
Within the next few days, ms will deliver a box to my door, with 10 or
so copies of vista.  Even though they are no cost to me, I don't
anticipate using any of them.

i've been running the betas, and it's a total pig.  i can't see
anything that is a real improvement over xp.

I anticipate moving to linux if xp starts to fade.

On 1/24/07, Russell McMahon <apptechspamKILLspamparadise.net.nz> wrote:
> > The Vista Content Protection specification could very well
> > constitute the
> > longest suicide note in history [Note A].
>
> One can hope
>
>
>         R
>
> -

2007\01\24@102706 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
I am a Linux maniac, right? However, I would still say that Linux is not for
an ordinary user. No matter what distribution you use, either you have to
customize the kernel or sometimes even have to patch it to get similar
results on your hardware to Windows. It is because most of the hardware
manufacturer does not care about Linux and even refusing giving out
information of their products to the kernel developers. And also because
many advanced features cannot be included in the kernel as Torvalds or other
chaps just does not like it.

For example I could not get work properly the suspension on my laptop, and
also the hibernation (suspend to disk) feature that existing in the current
kernel. Just does not do a good job -- with a patch I had a very good
hibernation feature though. Also had many problems with the video driver
that has already solutions for that but refused to be included in the
official kernel (and in the Xorg distributions). Yet more had to find a bug
and modify the source code of the sound driver by myself to be able to use
it on my laptop. That's definitely not for Mr and Mrs Average User.

Maybe MacOS X would be better as an alternative, maybe...

Tamas



On 1/24/07, .....dvanhornKILLspamspam.....microbrix.com <EraseMEdvanhornspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTmicrobrix.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

2007\01\24@114246 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 15:27 +0000, Tamas Rudnai wrote:
> I am a Linux maniac, right? However, I would still say that Linux is not for
> an ordinary user. No matter what distribution you use, either you have to
> customize the kernel or sometimes even have to patch it to get similar
> results on your hardware to Windows. It is because most of the hardware
> manufacturer does not care about Linux and even refusing giving out
> information of their products to the kernel developers. And also because
> many advanced features cannot be included in the kernel as Torvalds or other
> chaps just does not like it.

I run linux, and I don't run a custom kernel.

I believe you are approaching things the wrong way. You are trying to
get hardware to work with Linux. What you should be doing is buying
hardware BASED on it working on Linux.

While many manufacturers have no clue what Linux is, some do, and
support it VERY well. As long as you stick with hardware that has Linux
support you will have LESS problems then with Windows (since many
drivers are built into linux, no need to futz with a crappy driver
disk).

Every piece of hardware I've bought in the past few years, even hardware
initially destined for a windows machine (my laptop) has been checked to
ensure linux compatibility first. It's not hard to do.

The best recent example was a laser printer. Having gotten completely
sick of the inkjet ripoff, I started looking for a VERY basic mono laser
printer. I found two, an HP and a Samsung. The HP was cheaper by about
$10, but after investigating I discovered it had NO manufacturer support
for Linux. While some people reported getting it working, I wasn't
willing to be the guinea pig. The Samsung OTOH had a Linux installer on
the driver disk. I bought the Samsung, and it works wonderfully. No
custom kernel, just an install GUI and that's it.

Now, is Linux ready for the "normal" user? Nope. It still is something
that sometimes needs tweaking at the command line, and that's beyond the
majority of the computing public.

So, what do I recommend? Windows? Absolutely not.

I recommend Macs. Yes, they are more expensive then they should be, yes,
I've never owned one, but heck, they sure are simple to get going. They
just work. They are limiting compared to Windows, but so what, most
computer uses don't use their computers for much more then word
processing, email and the web.

Just my opinion. TTYL

2007\01\24@122344 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
On 1/24/07, Herbert Graf <@spam@mailinglist3KILLspamspamfarcite.net> wrote:

> I recommend Macs. Yes, they are more expensive then they should be, yes,
> I've never owned one, but heck, they sure are simple to get going. They
> just work. They are limiting compared to Windows, but so what, most
> computer uses don't use their computers for much more then word
> processing, email and the web.
>
> Just my opinion. TTYL

Same opinion here Herbert.  And my "family tech support" calls from
family and friends have all but dried up since I started recommending
same.  Their machines "just work" now, and they never call, which is a
wonderful thing.

I like Linux, been using it for both home and work for years, as well
as Solaris, HP-UX, etc... but in reality -- Mac OSX is the best
"consumer Unix" ever created, so far.

Nate

2007\01\24@141331 by John Ferrell

face picon face
Just another:
   lock to pick
   puzzle to solve
   Hacker challenge

John Ferrell    W8CCW
"My Competition is not my enemy"
http://DixieNC.US



Executive Executive Summary

The Vista Content Protection specification could very well constitute the
longest suicide note in history [Note A].
__________________________________________________

Gerhard

2007\01\24@143653 by David VanHorn

picon face
>
>
> Now, is Linux ready for the "normal" user? Nope. It still is something
> that sometimes needs tweaking at the command line, and that's beyond the
> majority of the computing public.


Have you tried Ubuntu?
I just installed it, and the process was far LESS involved then installing
XP on the same machine.
Even my networked color laser was able to be installed with drivers already
on their disk.
Apps are installed from a menu, and it's completely seamless.

2007\01\24@151000 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 14:36 -0500, David VanHorn wrote:
> >
> >
> > Now, is Linux ready for the "normal" user? Nope. It still is something
> > that sometimes needs tweaking at the command line, and that's beyond the
> > majority of the computing public.
>
>
> Have you tried Ubuntu?
> I just installed it, and the process was far LESS involved then installing
> XP on the same machine.
> Even my networked color laser was able to be installed with drivers already
> on their disk.
> Apps are installed from a menu, and it's completely seamless.

Yes, most linux distros these days are very seemless from an install and
"staying in the borders" point of view.

However, with every linux distro I've seen, eventually the user is lead
to the command line for something.

Take firefox and Java. Many (most?) distros include firefox, but not
Java. If you want java for firefox you go to Sun's site. There is an
"installer". You download it, and run it, and it "installs" a bunch of
stuff. If your distro is set up correctly you wouldn't have had to do
anything at the command line, yet.

However, after the files are installed Sun directs the user to the
command line to add a sym link in the plugin directory for you browser
pointing at the java install. Sun COULD have easily added this step to
their install script, but they didn't. So, if you are a new user who
doesn't even KNOW what a command line is, never mind a "symbolic link",
you're completely stuck.

Other examples can get much worse (i.e. having to load kernel modules,
or compiling the app from scratch). Not a big deal for a person used to
linux, a horror to a person new to linux.

THIS is what I mean. The distros have done a WONDERFUL job of keeping
the user in a point and click environment. The problem is there are
still major apps out there that people WILL want that are not so simple.
To people like us it's no big deal, we often prefer the command line,
and like the flexibility, but to your general computer user they'd be
completely stuck and frustrated.

TTYL

2007\01\24@173009 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Russell,

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 02:48:32 +1300, Russell McMahon wrote:

> > The Vista Content Protection specification could very well
> > constitute the
> > longest suicide note in history [Note A].
>
> One can hope

Hear Hear!  And the hardware requirements mean it should put off 90% of people considering "upgrading" to Vista...

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2007\01\24@173343 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Gerhard,

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 10:14:12 -0200, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:

> It looks like the PC is becoming a "closed box". And it seems the time is
> near that I have to move away from a Win-based computing infrastructure...

I did that a long time ago (as much as I can - some things require Windows, so I use Win2k then).

I'm not advocating that everyone moves to OS/2, but it is much easier/more intuitive than Linux, and it's infinitely more secure than anything beginning
with "Win" !  :-)

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2007\01\24@174405 by Bob Blick

face picon face

> I'm not advocating that everyone moves to OS/2, but it is much easier/more
> intuitive than Linux, and it's infinitely more secure than anything
> beginning
> with "Win" !  :-)

Hi Howard,

Isn't OS/2 way too old to support things like PCI bus and USB? What about
drivers for 10/100/1000 ethernet? Even BeOS is newer than OS/2, and not
much modern hardware will run it.

Cheerful regards,

Bob


2007\01\24@183258 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 1/25/07, Herbert Graf <KILLspammailinglist3KILLspamspamfarcite.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 15:27 +0000, Tamas Rudnai wrote:
> > I am a Linux maniac, right? However, I would still say that Linux is not for
> > an ordinary user.
> > ...
> > That's definitely not for Mr and Mrs Average User.
>
> I run linux, and I don't run a custom kernel.
>
> I believe you are approaching things the wrong way. You are trying to
> get hardware to work with Linux. What you should be doing is buying
> hardware BASED on it working on Linux.
>custom kernel, just an install GUI and that's it.

Yes this is the correct way but Mr and Mrs Average User will not know
how to choose the correct hardware in the first place. Only when there
is a critical mass of Linux user, the hardware vendors will provide the
driver or the information to write a driver.

> Now, is Linux ready for the "normal" user? Nope. It still is something
> that sometimes needs tweaking at the command line, and that's
> beyond the majority of the computing public.

I believe command line is not a big problem. The hardware driver
is a big problem. The incompability between different distributions
is a big problem.

> So, what do I recommend? Windows? Absolutely not.
>
> I recommend Macs. Yes, they are more expensive then they should be, yes,
> I've never owned one, but heck, they sure are simple to get going. They
> just work. They are limiting compared to Windows, but so what, most
> computer uses don't use their computers for much more then word
> processing, email and the web.
>

That is a very strange recommendation since you have never owned
one Mac...

I do not have a Mac. However, take a new PIC hobbyist, what can
he do with a Mac? There is no MPLAB. He needs to build gputils
and sdcc. Does gpsim work under a Mac? Does piklab works under
a Mac? At least MPLAB/gputils/sdcc/gpsim work under Windows.

I will say all Apple product are over-hyped. Windows XP is pretty
solid if used wisely. Linux is also getting better and better. Mac
will only be a niche player. And Apple has dropped the"computer"
from its name.

Just my opinion.

Xiaofan

2007\01\24@185432 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 07:32 +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:

> Yes this is the correct way but Mr and Mrs Average User will not know
> how to choose the correct hardware in the first place.

Which is yet another reason I don't recommend Linux to an average user

> Only when there
> is a critical mass of Linux user, the hardware vendors will provide the
> driver or the information to write a driver.

But many hardware vendors are already doing that. Most of the "big ones"
do for much of their hardware (either supply a driver, or supply the
info needed to write a driver).

> > Now, is Linux ready for the "normal" user? Nope. It still is something
> > that sometimes needs tweaking at the command line, and that's
> > beyond the majority of the computing public.
>
> I believe command line is not a big problem.

For an average user? It's a HUGE problem. Most average users are
completely terrified of the command line, they don't know what it is,
they don't WANT to know what it is.

> The hardware driver
> is a big problem.

Not anymore, almost any type of hardware you want these days comes in a
form compatible with Linux.

> The incompability between different distributions
> is a big problem.

It used to be a huge problem, these days most distros are largely based
on a very small subset of distros. Incompatibilities still exist, but in
my experience are pretty minor these days. Certainly for "average" users
these incompatibilities are handled by most install scripts without
issue.

{Quote hidden}

Just because I've never owned a Mac doesn't mean I have alot of
experience with them, and know enough to recommend them.

> I do not have a Mac. However, take a new PIC hobbyist, what can
> he do with a Mac? There is no MPLAB. He needs to build gputils
> and sdcc. Does gpsim work under a Mac? Does piklab works under
> a Mac? At least MPLAB/gputils/sdcc/gpsim work under Windows.

Due to MacOS now being very *nix based (and even better, the hardware
now being x86 based), the porting of Linux type tools has become very
easy. As such PIC support in MacOS is very good. No MPLAB though, but
that doesn't bug many.

That said, we are talking about average users, and average user isn't
going to be programming a PIC.

> I will say all Apple product are over-hyped.

How so? In what way are their PCs over hyped? They are more pricey then
I think they should be, but the hardware and software is pretty darn
decent, and very easy to use.

> Windows XP is pretty
> solid if used wisely.

But we're talking average user. Average users aren't very wise very
often and will click on this "here's a photo of Britney Spears"
attachment. Have you ever supported Windows for an average user? It can
be beyond frustrating. MacOS support OTOH is pretty minimal (more
pointers on where to get stuff, less figuring out what button they
clicked to screw everything up).

> Linux is also getting better and better. Mac
> will only be a niche player. And Apple has dropped the"computer"
> from its name.

The amount Linux has improved these past 5 years is astonishing. Every
new drop has been better. It's not there yet for the average user, but
for most advanced users it's advantages over Windows FAR outweigh what
you give up, IMHO.

TTYL

2007\01\24@185620 by Mark Rages

face picon face
On 1/24/07, Herbert Graf <RemoveMEmailinglist3TakeThisOuTspamfarcite.net> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Java is a special case because the distributions haven't been able to
package it as they'd like due to Sun's licensing.

The latest version of Java is GPL so this problem should soon be history.

Every year it is said "next year is the year of the Linux desktop."
But I've used Linux exclusively on my desktop for eight years.  I
guess everyone has a different idea of what "desktop" means.  I will
say I've seen it get better and better for ease-of-installation and
hardware support.

I'm typing on a MacBook now. It's nice, but I'm going to put Linux on
it because that's more productive for me.

Regards,
Mark
markrages@gmail
--
You think that it is a secret, but it never has been one.
 - fortune cookie

2007\01\24@185802 by Cristóvão Dalla Costa

picon face
www.reactos.org/

ReactOS <http://www.reactos.org/en/about.html>(r) is an advanced free open
source <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOSS> operating system providing
a ground-up
implementation of a Microsoft Windows(r) XP compatible operating
system<en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system>.
ReactOS aims to achieve complete binary
compatibility<http://www.reactos.org/support/>with both
applications <www.reactos.org/support/index.php/comp/cat/id/2/>
and device
drivers <http://www.reactos.org/support/index.php/comp/cat/id/1/> meant for
NT and XP operating systems, by using a similar architecture and providing a
complete and equivalent public interface.

2007\01\24@190734 by Harold Hallikainen

face
flavicon
face

>
> The amount Linux has improved these past 5 years is astonishing. Every
> new drop has been better. It's not there yet for the average user, but
> for most advanced users it's advantages over Windows FAR outweigh what
> you give up, IMHO.
>


I agree there have been MAJOR improvements. If the hardware is directly
supported, it's a matter of booting off the install disk and letting it
go. On my new HP laptop, I had to mess with ndiswrapper to get the 802.11
working, but everything else just worked (though the TV video output and
SD card interface aren't working, but I have not missed them). I'm about
to move from Fedora Core 4 on one system and Fedora Core 5 on another to
Fedora Core 6. These are a whole lot better than the Red Hat 7.x I started
with!

I wonder how Walmart is doing with their Linux (Linspire) based computer
(http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=3762912).

Harold


--
FCC Rules Updated Daily at http://www.hallikainen.com - Advertising
opportunities available!

2007\01\24@194908 by Neil Baylis

picon face
> I do not have a Mac. However, take a new PIC hobbyist, what can
> he do with a Mac? There is no MPLAB. He needs to build gputils
> and sdcc. Does gpsim work under a Mac? Does piklab works under
> a Mac? At least MPLAB/gputils/sdcc/gpsim work under Windows.

I was a new PIC developer about 2 years ago. Never owned a PC. I do
all my PIC development on a Mac using gputils and xcode. I built my
own programmer. It's not rocket science by a long shot. I don't know
whether gpsim works on a Mac, but I wouldn't be using it if it did.

>  And Apple has dropped the"computer" from its name.

What is that supposed to mean, exactly? Is there a secret rule about
the names of computer companies? If it doesn't have 'computer' in the
name then it's not to be taken seriously? Where does that leave HP?
Where does that leave Microsoft?

2007\01\24@210030 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 1/25/07, Herbert Graf <spamBeGonemailinglist3spamBeGonespamfarcite.net> wrote:
> > I do not have a Mac. However, take a new PIC hobbyist, what can
> > he do with a Mac? There is no MPLAB. He needs to build gputils
> > and sdcc. Does gpsim work under a Mac? Does piklab works under
> > a Mac? At least MPLAB/gputils/sdcc/gpsim work under Windows.
>
> Due to MacOS now being very *nix based (and even better, the hardware
> now being x86 based), the porting of Linux type tools has become very
> easy. As such PIC support in MacOS is very good. No MPLAB though, but
> that doesn't bug many.


> That said, we are talking about average users, and average user isn't
> going to be programming a PIC.

This is PIClist...

> > I will say all Apple product are over-hyped.
>
> How so? In what way are their PCs over hyped? They are more pricey then
> I think they should be, but the hardware and software is pretty darn
> decent, and very easy to use.
>

To me Windows XP is very easy to use. Apple mouse is pretty to use...

> > Linux is also getting better and better. Mac
> > will only be a niche player. And Apple has dropped the"computer"
> > from its name.

> The amount Linux has improved these past 5 years is astonishing. Every
> new drop has been better. It's not there yet for the average user, but
> for most advanced users it's advantages over Windows FAR outweigh what
> you give up, IMHO.
>

That depends on what you do. I use Linux at home. I can not imagine
using Linux at work with so many applications only for Windows.

Xiaofan

2007\01\24@211714 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 07:32:56AM +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On 1/25/07, Herbert Graf <TakeThisOuTmailinglist3EraseMEspamspam_OUTfarcite.net> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 15:27 +0000, Tamas Rudnai wrote:
> > > I am a Linux maniac, right? However, I would still say that Linux is not for
> > > an ordinary user.
> > > ...
> > > That's definitely not for Mr and Mrs Average User.
> >
> > I run linux, and I don't run a custom kernel.
> >
> > I believe you are approaching things the wrong way. You are trying to
> > get hardware to work with Linux. What you should be doing is buying
> > hardware BASED on it working on Linux.
> >custom kernel, just an install GUI and that's it.
>
> Yes this is the correct way but Mr and Mrs Average User will not know
> how to choose the correct hardware in the first place. Only when there
> is a critical mass of Linux user, the hardware vendors will provide the
> driver or the information to write a driver.

>From the original article that started the thread, this may in fact become
more difficult. Vista proposed DRM implementation will fundamentally NDA all
drivers and any information to write drivers that have the potential to
show premium content.

So it looks like the days are coming where new audio/video hardware will
be unable to have Linux drivers for them.

Looks like tough times ahead if this comes to fruition.

> > Now, is Linux ready for the "normal" user? Nope. It still is something
> > that sometimes needs tweaking at the command line, and that's
> > beyond the majority of the computing public.
>
> I believe command line is not a big problem. The hardware driver
> is a big problem. The incompability between different distributions
> is a big problem.

I understand the first, but not the second. How exactly is there a negative
impact between different distributions in terms of an individual user?

I snipped the rest.

BAJ

2007\01\24@214643 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 06:54:29PM -0500, Herbert Graf wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 07:32 +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>
> > Yes this is the correct way but Mr and Mrs Average User will not know
> > how to choose the correct hardware in the first place.
>
> Which is yet another reason I don't recommend Linux to an average user

I think that even in today's environment you underestimate user resiliancy.
Over the last 25 years of personal computing, users all over the world had
to, and in some ways still have to, jump in, over, and around a ton of
hoops. Truthfully I feel it has the vast majority of users so beaten down
that they think that computers issues are 1) the norm, and 2) somehow their
fault.

The true reasons for the lack of switchover is because there's no significant
pressure to do so. Windows XP works for the vast majority of users and the
way the cost is structured, the users don't really feel how much it costs.

The question is whether or not Microsoft will start solid implementation
of DRM measures to secure IP content. Registration with teeth, content
resolution reduction, and a more normalized pricing structure could create
enough negative pressure to get folks to consider switching.

And Macs aren't really an option because it'll require buying new hardware.

> > Only when there
> > is a critical mass of Linux user, the hardware vendors will provide the
> > driver or the information to write a driver.
>
> But many hardware vendors are already doing that. Most of the "big ones"
> do for much of their hardware (either supply a driver, or supply the
> info needed to write a driver).

But if the original article's premise comes to fruition, this practice will
come to an end. The proposed Vista DRM scheme for premium content will require
digitally signed drivers and no release of information of how to bypass those
drivers.

What then?

> > > Now, is Linux ready for the "normal" user? Nope. It still is something
> > > that sometimes needs tweaking at the command line, and that's
> > > beyond the majority of the computing public.
> >
> > I believe command line is not a big problem.
>
> For an average user? It's a HUGE problem. Most average users are
> completely terrified of the command line, they don't know what it is,
> they don't WANT to know what it is.

It's funny that users felt exactly the same way about graphical interfaces
in the late 80's and early 90's in the nacent days of Windows. Guess what?
They adapted.

I usually point out that point in click interfaces reduce fully functioning
adults to the level of a 2 year old, which points to what they want.

I'll admit that the traditional command line with no guidance can of course
be daunting. However any well layed out howto with instructions to "Click
this", "type that" generally do not phase the average computer user.

Also my feeling is that there is a misperception of how much administration
needs to be done on Linux boxes. Generally once a Linux box is set up, it
becomes quite limited in its administration tasks. I think that technically
savvy folks like ourselves tend to think that ordinary Joes and Janes are
interested in mucking around and tweaking systems like we tend to do. They
aren't. Average Joes and Janes will leave systems that work alone, and ask
for help for systems that are having problems, just like they do with
Windows and Mac boxes.

Another point is that one can generally admin a Unix box remotely without too
much hassle.  My late father was a complete computer phobe until the last 5
years of his life. He finally came to the realization that computers and the
internet were excellent tools for commincating ideas and he finally warmed up
to their use. He could care less about configurations as long as he could
access his E-mail and scan/fax his papers. The upshot is that I administered
his machine though I was 500 miles away from it. Also he was fine with
walking through the occasional bootup fsck (he was running ext2 filesystems
at the time) through a phone conversation when it was warrented.

I teach an Intro to Unix class at my University. My first task is to poll
students on the activities they actually use their computers for on a daily
basis. I almost always get the following consensus list:

1) Web Browsing
2) E-mail/IM
3) Office Suite
4) Gaming
5) Media (music, movies, graphics)

I then proceed to outline what types of tools are available on Linux boxes
for those activities. Trust me if you set up the average Joe/Jane with

1) Firefox
2) Thunderbird
3) Open Office
4) Gaming is always an issue see below
5) xmms, totem, GIMP

on a properly configured box with Internet, you'd be hard pressed to find
a user that couldn't function effectively. For games I point out the
following site as a sample:

http://techgage.com/article/top_10_free_linux_games/1

pointing out that while you won't find commercial games, there are different
types of entertainment programs available.

My students usually come out of the session both surprised and impressed with
the toolsets that are available. I also give each of them a Knoppix CD to
boot on their own laptops so they can experience it first hand.

Is it perfect? No. Functional? Definitely.

> > The hardware driver is a big problem.
>
> Not anymore, almost any type of hardware you want these days comes in a
> form compatible with Linux.

I agree. However, the migration problem stems from the fact that a migrating
user will come with hardware sets geared for Windows computing. For example
I took a flyer and bought a Brother MFC 7300 Color Inkjet all-in-one at
the thrift store. While Brother is working on Linux drivers for many of their
products, this particular model doesn't have one.

One challenge I'm still finding under Knoppix for example is wireless support.
It's simply not as mature as the rest of the hardware driver sets. Also it
doesn't autoconfigure. Both are challenges.

> > The incompability between different distributions
> > is a big problem.
>
> It used to be a huge problem, these days most distros are largely based
> on a very small subset of distros. Incompatibilities still exist, but in
> my experience are pretty minor these days. Certainly for "average" users
> these incompatibilities are handled by most install scripts without
> issue.

And most distros work real hard to make RPM or dpkg bundles available. In
the package management game I still find getting all the right sets of
libraries from the repositories can be a challenge.

SNIP

BAJ

2007\01\24@234100 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 10:00 +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:

> That depends on what you do. I use Linux at home. I can not imagine
> using Linux at work with so many applications only for Windows.

At work I actually run both. This has more to do with needing two
machines at the desktop then wanting two OSs.

I sometimes do FPGA work which requires running pretty heavy apps on my
machine. Most of the time I use one of our servers to run the job, but
sometimes it's just easier to run it on the desktop. For that I use my
Windows machine. Why? Because the FPGA tools are windows only? Hehe,
nope, it's just I prefer using my linux machine, so when I have a job
that loads a machine for an hour I throw it on the Windows machine and
go ahead with my work on the linux machine! :)

I am the "go to" person for linux issues in my group, which is another
reason I like running an active copy at my desk, lets me look things up
or compare things very quickly.

Really the only apps that keep windows on my desktop are the PCB apps we
use. I'm sure there are linux versions of both by now, thing is I've
only see the windows versions available for install, hence the keeping
of the windows box. Otherwise I'd probably be running two linux boxes at
my desk! :)

TTYL

2007\01\24@234821 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 21:46 -0500, Byron A Jeff wrote:
> > But many hardware vendors are already doing that. Most of the "big ones"
> > do for much of their hardware (either supply a driver, or supply the
> > info needed to write a driver).
>
> But if the original article's premise comes to fruition, this practice will
> come to an end. The proposed Vista DRM scheme for premium content will require
> digitally signed drivers and no release of information of how to bypass those
> drivers.
>
> What then?

The "DRM" issue has been with us for a long time.

The solution is the "DVDJon" type thing, if users aren't "allowed" to
use their machines in the way they want, they'll find a way around it.

At one point NOBODY thought you'd EVER be able to watch a DVD on Linux,
these days it's easier to watch a DVD on Linux then it is on Windows
(since the software is usually built in with Linux, while with Windows
you have to pay for DVD software, a default install of windows has ZERO
DVD player support).

My PERSONAL opinion is DRM is doomed. The whole concept is moronic since
it punishes honest people and does nothing to stop dishonest people.
It's a crapload of money thrown into something that will always be
defeated (just look at the DRM on HD-DVD and BluRay, both have been
bi-passed, and they're barely out in the market).

Already there is a growing "annoyance" at current DRM measures, and some
studios are already talking about releasing music with no DRM. Instead
they are watermarking their music so that if you farm out the copy
they'll know it was you. A MUCH better solution IMHO.

Just my opinion, I guess we will see. Me personally, I've never bought a
DRM track online, and I probably never will.

TTYL


2007\01\24@235136 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 21:17 -0500, Byron A Jeff wrote:
> >From the original article that started the thread, this may in fact become
> more difficult. Vista proposed DRM implementation will fundamentally NDA all
> drivers and any information to write drivers that have the potential to
> show premium content.
>
> So it looks like the days are coming where new audio/video hardware will
> be unable to have Linux drivers for them.

Why? On the video side both nVidia and ATI/AMD have Linux binary drivers
available now. I don't know why Vista DRM requirements will impact the
release of drivers for Linux systems. It's proprietary and closed
source, so no "leakage" of information.

Even if the manu supplied drivers stop it won't change much, people have
been "figuring out" hardware in order to write linux drivers from the
start, they'll figure out these new pieces of hardware too.

TTYL


2007\01\25@000736 by Vitaliy

flavicon
face
Herbert Graf wrote:
> a default install of windows has ZERO
> DVD player support).

What about Windows Media Player?

2007\01\25@001309 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face

On Jan 24, 2007, at 3:32 PM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:

> this is the correct way but Mr and Mrs Average User will not know
> how to choose the correct hardware in the first place. Only when there
> is a critical mass of Linux user, the hardware vendors will provide the
> driver or the information to write a driver.

Huh?  Major "vendors: like Dell and Wal-Mart sell PCs with linux
based OS pre-installed these days...

BillW

2007\01\25@003359 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face

On Jan 24, 2007, at 4:48 PM, Neil Baylis wrote:

> I do all my PIC development on a Mac using gputils and xcode.

Oh!  Could you do a quick write-up of how to match up gputils
with xcode?

Thanks
Bill W

2007\01\25@005827 by Alex Harford

face picon face
On 1/24/07, Vitaliy <RemoveMEspamspamTakeThisOuTmaksimov.org> wrote:
> Herbert Graf wrote:
> > a default install of windows has ZERO
> > DVD player support).
>
> What about Windows Media Player?

It doesn't play MPEG files unless you install a third party codec.

2007\01\25@032327 by Luis.Moreira

picon face
I started looking at Linux a year back and in fact have a machine
running it, but the learning curve is very large. I can deal with the
command line fine, but the main problem is always the same, the machine
I have for Linux is just a spare machine some one gave me and if I
install windows on it, it just runs, everything in it just runs, sound
card, video card, no problems. I installed Linux and I can not get the
on board sound card to work at all, and getting new hardware in it is
something that I know will take a lot of time to sort out.
The problem for me at the moment is that it seems that when I try to
change to Linux I am compromising and wasting more time with it than I
do with Windows. Don't get me wrong, I hate windows, But as an Engineer
in practice I could live without using Linux, I am buying a new machine
in the future just for Linux to see if that improves maters, but at the
moment it is just a hobby for me and I can not see it replacing windows
for me in the near future.
Best regards
               Luis  

 



{Original Message removed}

2007\01\25@032634 by Rob Hamerling

face picon face

Hi Bob,

[Howard Winter]
>> I'm not advocating that everyone moves to OS/2, but it is much easier/more
>> intuitive than Linux, and it's infinitely more secure than anything
>> beginning with "Win" !  :-)

Bob Blick wrote:
> Isn't OS/2 way too old to support things like PCI bus and USB? What about
> drivers for 10/100/1000 ethernet? Even BeOS is newer than OS/2, and not
> much modern hardware will run it.

You're not well informed (and I'm afraid you're not alone!).  I'm
running OS/2 since its first pre-release and I'm still happy with it
(although today under the name eComStation, a sort of repackaging of the
orginal IBM OS/2 by Serenity Systems International). My current
hardware: AMD64 dual core, PCI(express), SATA drives, 100 MB LAN, etc.
Applications: e.g. Firefox, Thunderbird, Open Office, Gimp, etc. etc.
And also runs DOS and most Windows (16 and 32 bits) apps.

Regards, Rob.

--
Rob Hamerling, Vianen, NL (http://www.robh.nl/)

2007\01\25@040851 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Mark Rages wrote:

> I'm typing on a MacBook now. It's nice, but I'm going to put Linux on
> it because that's more productive for me.

Would you mind expanding on this a bit? I thought that Mac UIs were
traditionally good, and that OSX is Unix under the hood. So what's less
productive on OSX?

Gerhard

2007\01\25@042834 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 1/25/07, William Chops Westfield <westfwEraseMEspam.....mac.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 24, 2007, at 3:32 PM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>
> > this is the correct way but Mr and Mrs Average User will not know
> > how to choose the correct hardware in the first place. Only when there
> > is a critical mass of Linux user, the hardware vendors will provide the
> > driver or the information to write a driver.
>
> Huh?  Major "vendors: like Dell and Wal-Mart sell PCs with linux
> based OS pre-installed these days...
>

How many they sell?

I've read before that a Dell PC with Linux costs more than one
installed with Linux.

Regards,
Xiaofan

2007\01\25@043035 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 1/25/07, Alex Harford <EraseMEharfordspamgmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/24/07, Vitaliy <RemoveMEspamEraseMEspamEraseMEmaksimov.org> wrote:
> > Herbert Graf wrote:
> > > a default install of windows has ZERO
> > > DVD player support).
> >
> > What about Windows Media Player?
>
> It doesn't play MPEG files unless you install a third party codec.

The reality is that the DVD player/writer vendor will bundle a third party
DVD playing software like WinDVD or PowerDVD.

Xiaofan

2007\01\25@043800 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 1/25/07, Luis Moreira <RemoveMELuis.Moreiraspam_OUTspamKILLspamjet.uk> wrote:
> The problem for me at the moment is that it seems that when I try to
> change to Linux I am compromising and wasting more time with it than I
> do with Windows. Don't get me wrong, I hate windows, But as an Engineer
> in practice I could live without using Linux, I am buying a new machine
> in the future just for Linux to see if that improves maters, but at the
> moment it is just a hobby for me and I can not see it replacing windows
> for me in the near future.

I do not quite understand why so many people hate Windows. I have
both Linux and Windows installed in my home PC. I use mostly Linux
at home but I do not have problems with running Windows at work.

For engineers doing engineering work, I think most of the people
can not really avoid Windows at work. Windows XP is very solid as
far as I see. My Linux installation is pretty solid as well. So I like my
Linux (Ubuntu 6.06/6.10/FC5) but I have no problems with Windows
either.

Regards,
Xiaofan

2007\01\25@044123 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>Hear Hear!  And the hardware requirements mean it should
>put off 90% of people considering "upgrading" to Vista...

I've already been thinking about going round the local computer faire and
nabbing as many XP disks/licences as I can ...

2007\01\25@051149 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Alan,

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 09:41:16 -0000, Alan B. Pearce wrote:

> >Hear Hear!  And the hardware requirements mean it should
> >put off 90% of people considering "upgrading" to Vista...
>
> I've already been thinking about going round the local computer faire and
> nabbing as many XP disks/licences as I can ...

Do you mean there are still some computer fairs running?  Whereabouts?

Around these parts (Hertfordshire) they all disappeared about 6 months ago.  I used to haunt them regularly, so it's been a dreadful wrench...

I believe there is still one that happens in London, just off Tottenham Court Road, but I tend not to travel into London these days.

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2007\01\25@053443 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:46:41 -0500, Byron A Jeff wrote:

> Over the last 25 years of personal computing, users all over the world had
> to, and in some ways still have to, jump in, over, and around a ton of
> hoops. Truthfully I feel it has the vast majority of users so beaten down
> that they think that computers issues are 1) the norm, and 2) somehow their
> fault.

BAJ, you've summed it up beautifully.  When I started in the computer business people had the attitude that computers were there to help them do
their job, and that they shouldn't have to change the way they worked to suit the computer, and every system I designed was based around that
idea.  But then Windows came along, and gradually people got used to the idea that things went wrong as a normal part of everyday computing, and
that you just had to put up with it.

This is far and away the biggest criticism I have of Microsoft - not that they made huge fortunes, or forced other decent software off the market, or
even that they treat their customers as a potential threat to their profits, but that they have made people lower their expectations of how computers
should work, and other software writers have fallen in line with this.  The average quality of software these days is nowhere near as good as it was
ten years ago, and that's MS's doing.

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2007\01\25@060641 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 14:44:04 -0800 (PST), Bob Blick wrote:

>
> > I'm not advocating that everyone moves to OS/2, but it is much easier/more
> > intuitive than Linux, and it's infinitely more secure than anything
> > beginning
> > with "Win" !  :-)
>
> Hi Howard,
>
> Isn't OS/2 way too old to support things like PCI bus and USB? What about
> drivers for 10/100/1000 ethernet? Even BeOS is newer than OS/2, and not
> much modern hardware will run it.

Sorry Bob, but your information is way out of date.  While BeOS was created after OS/2 (as was Win95 onwards) OS/2 has been continually updated,
and while it won't run all the hardware there is (largely due to some manufacturers ignoring industry standards and designing things that would only
run with their own drivers, which rely on Windows) pretty much anything that conforms to the standards will work.  The only exception is Firewire,
which seems not to have caught anyone's attention, and no drivers have been written for it as far as I know.  But the mainstream stuff, PCI, USB,
dual-core processors (they are treated as a multi-processor system), all the versions of ATA, SATA, Ethernet and so on, are all there.  Sometimes
you have to choose hardware that is known to have drivers (RealTek are a favourite for ethernet chips up to Gigabit speeds,  for example).  WiFi is a
bit of a lottery because of the non-standard nature of the PC side of it, but there is work ongoing on this - at a recent conference in Cologne I used
my Thinkpad with its built-in WiFi facility with no problems (once the organisers got the system working, which took them some time! :-)

There is a small army of people doing ports of things that are written only for other operating systems, and an awful lot of Linux compatible stuff is
available for OS/2 too.

I have been using OS/2 and its descendant, eComStation, since before Win95, and it has been my main daily operating system for about 10 years (I'm
using it to type this :-)   I must declare an interest: I'm the UK reseller of eComStation, but I don't "push" it because of that, rather the other way
round: I sell it because I like and believe in it (and because nobody else in Britain is daft enough to try to sell it :-)))

Rob Hammerling has done some great work creating OS/2 versions of PIC software (free!), so even the small niche of PICsters can us OS/2!

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2007\01\25@090819 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 22:06 -0700, Vitaliy wrote:
> Herbert Graf wrote:
> > a default install of windows has ZERO
> > DVD player support).
>
> What about Windows Media Player?

No support for playing DVDs with the default install.

You need to install a DVD player to get the codec. Most DVD writers and
many video cards come with this codec, so many people don't notice that
windows has zero built in support for playing DVDs.

TTYL

2007\01\25@092217 by David VanHorn

picon face
On 1/25/07, Carl Denk <RemoveMEcdenkTakeThisOuTspamspamalltel.net> wrote:
>
> For those in the North Central USA check this out in Dayton, Ohio
> http://www.hamvention.org/


About 90 minutes away for me.  :)

You cannot bring too much money to Dayton.
And you WILL be amazed at things you see there.

2007\01\25@092319 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
Actually, is there any software like DVD Shrink for Linux or MacOS X for
Intel?

Tamas


On 1/25/07, Herbert Graf <EraseMEmailinglist3spamspamspamBeGonefarcite.net> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

2007\01\25@103438 by Tony Smith

picon face
{Quote hidden}

I'll agree with the first paragraph, but not the last two.  The argument
should not be CLI vs GUI, but good vs bad interface.  (There's also text
screens, eg mainframe, as well).

There's no such thing as the average user.  'Computer literate' should not
be used as a guide when designing the interface.  The interface needs to
take into account how good the person is doing their job.

I do a lot of contract work, and my first day/week is always the same.
People explain to me what they do, and I look at them blankly.  Every
industry or company has their own jargon, so I rarely have a clue regarding
what they are talking about.  "Um, can I have that in English please?"

That doesn't make me a moron, that makes me a beginner.  A week later it
starts making sense, a month later I'm an expert.  (Then I leave for a new
job....)

The interface needs to cater for these phases.

While I vastly prefer a GUI, I'm not adverse to the command line.  I wrote
an ordering system where a CLI was the central feature.  This was an Access
database, so it was a GUI.  However, at the bottom of the screen was a CLI.
The people using the system took a lot of telephone orders.  So, rather than
have the usual 'click thru list boxes', they just typed the order in as the
customer relayed it, something like "bananas, apples, beans".

The system parsed the command, and added the 3 items.  Actually, in this
case, it displayed a list of all possible products since multiples existed.
The user could either click the ones they wanted, or typed in the code for
the item.  The list would show "A - Jonathan apples; B - Fuji apples" etc.
Simply typing "A" added Jonathan apples to the order.

The users eventually got smart, and would simply type something unique, eg
Fuji or the item code to skip the list.

It handled quantity too, so "bananas, fuji 6, beans 1kg" showed a list of
bananas & beans (while keeping the 1kg qty), and added 6 fuji apples to the
order.  They could then ask the customer "suger or cavendish" as well as
qty, then deal with the beans, "today we have..."

This way it catered for the rank beginners, and the old codgers who knew
every item code as they'd worked there for 10 years.

The CLI did other tricks too, eg typing "calc: 1+2" or "post: 2000" did what
you would expect.  Thinking about it, Google stole my idea.  Bastards.

For another system I simply did two interfaces.  They were linked, so you
could switch between them.  The 'beginner' interface was as you'd expect,
lots of hand holding.  The other was more advanced, but required you to know
the various shorthand codes.  Rather than put up message boxes for errors,
it would just highlight the fields.  In many cases, the users would know
they typed something wrong, but would keep typing, and 'go around again' to
correct the errors.  This way it didn't interrupt their 'flow'.  It also did
things like automatically skip to the next field, saving you having to hit
the tab key.  This drives beginners nuts, but cheers up the old farts no
end.

A few people never moved off the 'beginner' screen, but most did after a
while.

Design for the job, not the technology.

Tony

2007\01\25@103907 by Alex Harford

face picon face
k9copy is what I use to back up my video DVDs.  It works very well,
and it can also export them to .avi files, although I never do that.
I just back them up to a blank single layer DVD.  If that dies, I
always have the original.

On 1/25/07, Tamas Rudnai <RemoveMEtamas.rudnaiKILLspamspamgmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, is there any software like DVD Shrink for Linux or MacOS X for
> Intel?
>
> Tamas

2007\01\25@105350 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
Thanks Alex, that's exactly I would need.

Tamas


On 1/25/07, Alex Harford <harfordSTOPspamspamspam_OUTgmail.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

2007\01\25@111218 by David VanHorn

picon face
Interesting development:

http://cooltech.iafrica.com/technews/597889.htm

Microsoft announced on Wednesday that it will extend technical support of
its current Windows XP operating system, ahead of the imminent release of
the new Vista platform.

Hmm.. Maybe they are feeling the tsunami of upgraders was not as high as
they hoped?

2007\01\25@113949 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face

On Jan 25, 2007, at 7:33 AM, Tony Smith wrote:

> The argument should not be CLI vs GUI, but good vs bad interface.

There are things that you need to accomplish that are going to be
"obscure."  I don't see any difference between having to issue an
obscure CLI command vs following a obscure GUI path, except that
the former would seem to be a lot easier to document and less prone
to errors of interpretation.  GUIs are a bear to document...

BillW

2007\01\25@120733 by Bob Blick

face picon face
> Actually, is there any software like DVD Shrink for Linux or MacOS X for
> Intel?

K9Copy attempts(and mostly does OK) to be the DVDShrink for Linux.



2007\01\25@133010 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Dave,

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 09:22:15 -0500, David VanHorn wrote:

{Quote hidden}

I'd love to go one year, but it's a bit far from my usual landing places in the US (NYC & SoCal), sadly.

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2007\01\25@135852 by David VanHorn

picon face
>
>
> > You cannot bring too much money to Dayton.
> > And you WILL be amazed at things you see there.
>
> I'd love to go one year, but it's a bit far from my usual landing places
> in the US (NYC & SoCal), sadly.


I don't know what the record is for furthest distance traveled to the
hamvention, but you wouldnt' be a threat.
I've seen many guys from Japan, Germany, Sweden, you name it.

I don't know how they manage to get their toys home though, Dad and I
usually fill whatever vehicle we brought, explorer or expedition usually.

2007\01\25@142611 by David VanHorn

picon face
> >
> That's not the real problem..... the real problem would be dealing with
> all the things you buy... "Sir, you can not take that 18foot radio mast
> as hand luggage...."


I know a guy who took a rocket as hand luggage.

Very similar to the one on this page, http://www.mbrocketry.com/
but made from carbon composites.  It was knocked down in sections, and not
fuled of course.
I was kind of amazed that he pulled that off, but of course him being him,
he showed up at the airport with it fully assembled.

2007\01\25@173008 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
On 1/25/07, Rolf <EraseMElearrspamEraseMErogers.com> wrote:

> That's not the real problem..... the real problem would be dealing with
> all the things you buy... "Sir, you can not take that 18foot radio mast
> as hand luggage...."

Last year (and for many years, I'm told), UPS had shipping facilities
right in the Flea Market.  Buy your toys, walk them over to the booth,
figure out how to package them up, and they're on their way back to
"home" before you are.

Nate

2007\01\25@183052 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 1/26/07, David VanHorn <@spam@dvanhorn@spam@spamspam_OUTmicrobrix.com> wrote:
> Interesting development:
>
> http://cooltech.iafrica.com/technews/597889.htm
>
> Microsoft announced on Wednesday that it will extend technical support of
> its current Windows XP operating system, ahead of the imminent release of
> the new Vista platform.
>
> Hmm.. Maybe they are feeling the tsunami of upgraders was not as high as
> they hoped?

That is actually a very good thing. You can still use Windows XP
for a long time. You will most likely get Windows Vista on new
PCs soon but you can stick to XP with your existing PC.

Long term support for Linux is not that good. The paid support
for Redhat RHEL are actually quite expensive. Anyway I do not need
RHEL and the company will not move to RHEL anytime soon.

2007\01\25@200322 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 07:30 +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On 1/26/07, David VanHorn <spamBeGonedvanhornspamKILLspammicrobrix.com> wrote:
> > Interesting development:
> >
> > cooltech.iafrica.com/technews/597889.htm
> >
> > Microsoft announced on Wednesday that it will extend technical support of
> > its current Windows XP operating system, ahead of the imminent release of
> > the new Vista platform.
> >
> > Hmm.. Maybe they are feeling the tsunami of upgraders was not as high as
> > they hoped?
>
> That is actually a very good thing. You can still use Windows XP
> for a long time. You will most likely get Windows Vista on new
> PCs soon but you can stick to XP with your existing PC.
>
> Long term support for Linux is not that good. The paid support
> for Redhat RHEL are actually quite expensive.

Every looked into how much MS charges for "support"? Trust me, RHEL will
seem like a BARGAIN when you tally how much getting support direct from
MS costs.

It's amazing that a company can provide a product, and then provide
almost zero free support for it.

2007\01\26@000220 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 1/26/07, Herbert Graf <.....mailinglist3spam_OUTspamfarcite.net> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

The thing is that most of the people know how to use Windows. At least
the coprate IT guys know Windows. They just need service packs or bug
fixes which is free.


Regards,
Xiaofan

2007\01\26@001034 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 1/26/07, Xiaofan Chen <TakeThisOuTxiaofancKILLspamspamspamgmail.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

The main point I want to make is that I am against the blind anti-MS
sentiment. In my perosnal opinion, I think it is not very nice to use
"WINDOZE" to refer to Windows.

I like Linux since it gives people another choice. I am pro-choice. Why
can Linux/Windows coexist? In fact, they already co-exist and both
are doing well.

Regards,
Xiaofan

2007\01\26@104143 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
> > > It's amazing that a company can provide a product, and then provide
> > > almost zero free support for it.
> >
> > The thing is that most of the people know how to use Windows. At least
> > the coprate IT guys know Windows. They just need service packs or bug
> > fixes which is free.
> >
> >
>
> The main point I want to make is that I am against the blind anti-MS
> sentiment.

Let me correct something there, my anti-MS bias is FAR from blind.

Also note, that I'm not necessarily against MS itself, they DO make some
good product. Their hardware (computer mouse) are IMHO the best
available, and Microsoft Streets and Trips is a wonderful piece of
software.

My bias is against Windows. I started with windows in the 3.1 days. At
the time it was a wonderful product, far ahead of anything else. It had
it's issues, but the issues were far outweighed by how much more useful
your computer got.

Shortly thereafter they introduced 3.11 for workgroups, a wonderful step
forward.

Then came win95, a truly wonderful redesign of the whole system. FAR
better then win3.11. It's at this point that things started to stagnate.
Microsoft realized it HAD the market, so why keep pushing so hard? They
came out with win98 and win98se, both decent, but not much better then
win95. Then came winME, I think the opinion of this OS is universally
bad.

Win2k was then released, FAR better then the win9x series, but also WAY
late.

Then came winxp, which offered basically nothing over win2k except a
cartoonish theme and some minor feature additions.

Now we have vista, a product WAY overdue, a product that's basically
win2k, with a crapload of fluff. I've used vista, it's nothing special.
Sure, it has some neat features, but these are features the competition
has had FOR YEARS.

My "problem" with windows is it's now rubbish. 10 years ago it was the
leader, it offered features and usability that basically wasn't
available on the x86 PC side of things. These days it's a piece of old
bloat, so behind the times that people working in their free time are
adding features that are years away for windows. By today's standards
(OSX, Linux) it's horribly unstable, horribly "quirky", horribly
expensive and a security nightmare.

It's similar to what has happened in the car industry in North America
over the past two decades. 20 years ago the domestics ruled. Their cars
were affordable, reliable, and at the leading edge. These days many of
their cars are outdated, unreliable and stuck in the past. Fortunately
the domestics are starting to realize this and are starting to come
around (Chrysler being the forerunner with great product like the 300C).

> In my perosnal opinion, I think it is not very nice to use
> "WINDOZE" to refer to Windows.

Why not? When someone considers something rubbish an appropriate "name"
is often assigned. Consider the Mercury "Mistake" (Mystique to those who
don't know). Windows WAS good, these days it's not, IMHO.

> I like Linux since it gives people another choice. I am pro-choice. Why
> can Linux/Windows coexist? In fact, they already co-exist and both
> are doing well.

The only reason windows is "doing well" is up until recently there
really WASN'T any other choice. If you wanted a computer, you basically
had to use windows. MacOS (before OSX) didn't offer enough advantage
over windows for most people to consider it, and Linux was NOT fun to
run back then. These days OSX is a KILLER of an operating system, and
Linux is getting closer to being appropriate to mainstream. Most users
still don't really have a choice, but that is changing.

As a last "stab", my BIGGEST beef with Windows is the fact that over the
years I've basically been forced to pay for two copies of windows that
I've NEVER used. Microsoft is such a monopoly that they basically force
computer vendors to sell their computers with windows, whether you want
windows or not. Even today, try buying an x86 computer from a major
vendor WITHOUT windows.

TTYL


'[EE] Taking the fun out of computers - Windows Vis'
2007\02\04@191905 by peter green
flavicon
face
> Huh?  Major "vendors: like Dell and Wal-Mart sell PCs with linux
> based OS pre-installed these days...
iirc Wal-Mart have done a few experimental lines on thier website only (not in stores) with linux but nothing major.

with dell in some cases the without windows has been more expensive than the with windows in others i belive that the price for equal spec machines was considerablly lower with linux but the lowest spec linux box had a lot more other extras than the lowest spec windows box.

i also saw people report on /. that it wouldn't let them order the linux boxes because they had specced them in a way that wasn't vista compatible.



More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2007 , 2008 only
- Today
- New search...