Linux or Windows?

Beta Ray Bill

Hey All

I have been using Linux Mint 4.0 now for a few months and I must say its really top notch stuff. I actually want to make a donation!

why on earth are we all paying for windows when Linux distributions such as Ubuntu, Fedora and Mint are free.

And I personally feel that in the case of Linux Mint it performs BETTER than windows. AND ITS FREE!

When I first made the transition I thought Linux was going to be difficult to work with ans use. boy was I wrong. Easier to install. all the codec's etc are installed by default, (Ideal for a home PC or Laptop) while the Linux Terminal is far more powerful than CMD could ever be. The whole lot just works out of the box! its fantastic and has really made me want to never use windows again.

Just my 2 cents

Mach

The reason is that people are afraid of change , if they know one way of doing things and it works , they will stick with it. Also you must remember until recently it wasn’t that easy to install Linux and it was a “geeks OS”. For most people the only OS the know is windows, until Apple switch over to UNIX under the hood for OS X, windows basically had monopoly. Just go into any PC world or and computer shop and see how many have Linux per install and you see that it an uphill battle. People should have a choice, the HD I believe should be blank and when buy the PC you asked if you want windows or Linux or both.

probe

The tide is turning. Linux is as easy to use as Windows for most tasks – surfing the web, creating web content, email, word processing, spreadsheet, and similar and it is all free. And web-surfing on Linux is generally much faster because the Linux operating system is far less bloated, and was written for network based use from the outset.

Google offers free web based word processing, spreadsheet and presentation software as an online service, which you can access from anywhere, and save as a MS Ofice compatible file on your PC, just in case you are afraid that Google will go out of business in the morning.

It would be nice if Openoffice.org moved to / offered a web based alternative package (like Drupal), which would enable everybody in a household, school, office, whatever, use a web based interface to do office word processing and other office tasks, using a Linux server to host the service. Eliminating the need to buy/install software on each PC, and allow documents to be kept on a central server.

I’ve been using SUSE linux for about a year [ http://www.opensuse.org/ ] (v 10.3) on one of my machines, and I increasingly find myself spending more time on the old machine that I installed Linux on (after its useful life as a Windows machine expired) compared with a new high end workstation running Windows! One of the advantages with SUSE linux is that they have a copyright agreement with Microsoft, so Microsoft’s threat to use the “he who has the deepest pockets wins” antiquated backstreet common law system litigation threat to shut down linux won’t prevail against this distribution. SUSE is “made in Germany” and it shows in that it is more refined than other linux offerings in my view.

.probe

patrickolee

Mach wrote: »

The reason is that people are afraid of change , if they know one way of doing things and it works , they will stick with it. Also you must remember until recently it wasn’t that easy to install Linux and it was a “geeks OS”. For most people the only OS the know is windows, until Apple switch over to UNIX under the hood for OS X, windows basically had monopoly. Just go into any PC world or and computer shop and see how many have Linux per install and you see that it an uphill battle. People should have a choice, the HD I believe should be blank and when buy the PC you asked if you want windows or Linux or both.

Hmmm, wouldnt agree with that at all. Its ten years now since my first Linux installation and I can tell you it's come a long way. 13 years since I started programming for the Mac... But I still use Windows. Why? Well for one thing, my business banking wont work on any other platform. Secondly my spades and poker sites only work on Windows! So to say that its because people are 'afraid' of change, is simply incorrect. It's because they are tied in by their applications... although this is getting better, we're still not there.

wasim21k

well first time i ever use linux on my 486-DX4 in 1996(i think), it wasnt easy to install like now a days. behonest i dont like windows at all but i have it as second os as my work related apps are on windows otherwise i use linux.

Linux is getting more generally accessible but I can't imagine my grandmother whizzing around the bash shell and compiling the latest version of Apache from source :rolleyes:
That's the way I'd explain why Windows is more used

oscarBravo

My girlfriend has been using Linux for the past six months or more, since I installed it on her old laptop. She never uses the bash shell or has any desire to compile Apache (or anything else for that matter).

Linux is perfectly usable for anyone who isn't stuck with Windows-only applications, and there are ways around most of those.

oscarBravo

oscarBravo wrote: »

My girlfriend has been using Linux for the past six months or more, since I installed it on her old laptop. She never uses the bash shell or has any desire to compile Apache (or anything else for that matter).

Linux is perfectly usable for anyone who isn't stuck with Windows-only applications, and there are ways around most of those.

I wasn't actually saying you can't use Linux for everyday tasks, in fact I love Linux. I was trying to point out (but didn't succeed) that there is a stereotype that Linux is only for tech-savvy super nerds.
Obviously there are great desktop environments, office programs and even games on Linux. Not many people know this though.. sorry for the ambiguity

mneylon

Deleted User wrote: »

Linux is getting more generally accessible but I can't imagine my grandmother whizzing around the bash shell and compiling the latest version of Apache from source :rolleyes:

A "normal" user doesn't have any need to know about compiling anything from source on *nix, much as most users won't go near a dos shell or use powershell on Windows

FruitLover

Deleted User wrote: »

Linux is getting more generally accessible but I can't imagine my grandmother whizzing around the bash shell and compiling the latest version of Apache from source :rolleyes:
That's the way I'd explain why Windows is more used

Why would she ever need to compile apache from source? Assuming a desktop user is even going to want to run a web server, apache is available in packaged format. In Ubuntu or other Debian derivatives, this is a simple installation.

This is a bad example.

ethernet

FruitLover wrote: »

Why would she ever need to compile apache from source? Assuming a desktop user is even going to want to run a web server, apache is available in packaged format. In Ubuntu or other Debian derivatives, this is a simple installation.

This is a bad example.

You can usually install the package from your distro's repos but, in some cases, it will not have been configured to meet the users' needs. As an example -- with Apache -- perhaps granny needs to compile it from source to enable support for a specific feature, such as the shared object module.

mondeo

Does yahoo messanger work on mint 4.0? I'm thinking of getting mint and installing it but i like yahoo messanger to be usable on it..

Thanks

ethernet

mondeo wrote: »

Does yahoo messanger work on mint 4.0? I'm thinking of getting mint and installing it but i like yahoo messanger to be usable on it..

Thanks

I found this link. It's a guide for getting it to work under Ubuntu, upon which Mint is based. I also found a Unix version of it on Yahoo's site but it seems quite old. You could try running the Windows version under Wine in Linux. For a better experience though, you could use a native Linux app, like Kopete or Pidgin. For web-based IMing, try Meebo.

FruitLover

ethernet wrote: »

As an example -- with Apache -- perhaps granny needs to compile it from source to enable support for a specific feature, such as the shared object module.

If she's using a Debian-based distro, mod_so is already built in. Any other module is available as a package. I'd imagine other standard packages (Suse, RH, etc) would probably be the same, and for pretty much any other software.

ethernet

FruitLover wrote: »

If she's using a Debian-based distro, mod_so is already built in. Any other module is available as a package. I'd imagine other standard packages (Suse, RH, etc) would probably be the same, and for pretty much any other software.

Fine, while we're picking at this issue , let's say one wants MythTV configured without LIRC. Most packages have support for it enabled. This is only one reason for compilation -- customisation. But you're right in saying that the 'average' user will rarely have need to compile software as opposed to simply finding it in their distro's repo and installing.

[-0-]

If you're not into gaming (I know Cedega has come a long way) then I think linux is great for general Internet usage - browsing the web, email, instant messaging, downloading stuff... it's perfect. You can do all of this without worrying about getting viruses and/or spyware/malware - and it's free. AmaroK kicks ass, thunderbird is fine, aMSN isn't the worst either and azureus is the exact same.

I would rather set Linux up for a family member who isn't very computer literate because it would be a lot easier for me to maintain - no anti virus required, no spyware scanners and I know it would run really smoothly.

I think Dell are releasing (if they haven't already?) Ubuntu on their systems in Europe too.

Orion

Dell have already - but it's hard to find on the site. iirc HP are starting to as well. But Windows has such market penetration that a lot of people don't even know about Linux. IT people do but the general user - 90% of the market - don't. But now with things like the Eeepc coming with Linux pre-installed it's starting to get more coverage.

imo education is the way forward. Schools (primary and 2nd level) still use Windows because the computer teachers are stick-in-the-muds. And when children are taught one thing it's hard to get them to change when they become adults. Get 'em young is what I say. I'm on the board of management for a new primary school hopefully opening this September and I'll be doing my best to ensure that the computers in the school are Linux. I'll be using the money angle to propose it. Edubuntu using LTSP = mucho cheapo. There's nothing that is required in a school that needs Windows. Student records can be kept in OO.o Database just as easily as in an Access based solution. And the educational software in Edubuntu is excellent. My two 4 year olds don't know what Windows is yet and during the summer I'm building an old PC with Edubuntu on it just for them. They won't have any fear of Linux when they're older.

[-0-]

I think Linux has come a long way since when I started using it back in the mid 90's both with regards to ease of use and also awareness. Lots of people are annoyed with Vista and won't switch to it from XP. When Microsoft stops supporting XP in 2009 some people will switch over.

I agree about the eeepc. I have one myself and a couple of my mates who were strict windows heads bought them and they're now running Ubuntu on their home machines as well. There's a new eeepc coming out in q3 / q4 of this year with a better screen and better specs.

velocirafter

i'm looking at switching to linux, is ubuntu the best way to go? I'm fairly familiar with linux and the bash shell but nothing special. i dont want to spend more time trying to set up applications than i will using them.

i mainly surf the web, play movies, mp3s, bit of word processing.

i had fedora 6 but it didnt support mp3s and i couldnt for the life of me get the wireless to work.

ethernet

velocirafter wrote: »

i'm looking at switching to linux, is ubuntu the best way to go? I'm fairly familiar with linux and the bash shell but nothing special. i dont want to spend more time trying to set up applications than i will using them.

i mainly surf the web, play movies, mp3s, bit of word processing.

i had fedora 6 but it didnt support mp3s and i couldnt for the life of me get the wireless to work.

Ubuntu is very user-friendly. Getting mp3 files playing shouldn't be a problem -- you'll be prompted to download codecs when you try to play it.

There are several guides to getting wireless cards working. There's nearly always someone who's tried to get the same card working. When all else fails, you can use ndiswrapper with the card's Windows driver to get it working.

Orion

mp3s are not supported natively because of the licensing but it's just a matter of enabling a repository to get the codec. Some distros like new Suse (iirc) will prompt you to grab the codec. For Ubuntu you just tick the box for the Multiverse repository and install it.

Installing software is easier that Windows - for debian based ones like Ubuntu - apt-get install programname - done! It really is that easy.

As for wireless seemingly, the new version of Ubuntu has much greater wireless support than earlier versions. It's out next week. But even worst case, using ndiswrapper is easy to set up.

Oh and for movies - apt-get install vlc. It installs all the codecs you need by default and will play pretty much anything. or you can use Totem but I don't really like it personally.

croo

@velocirafter
and a nice plus is you can run it first as a live CD to check what does and doesn't work... then when you're ready simply select the Install to Harddisk icon on the desktop!

re: apt-get install appName
yeah it is really great. even still some people don't like going to the shell prompt, in which case there is the GUI Synaptic available so you can search the respository of programs and simlpy select what is required (it will find what dependant application are required and get them too).

I installed ubnutu on my seventy year old father's machine. He uses email, browsing, skype, photo editing & the odd letter and he hardly noticed the difference. It would be no more different than going from XP to Vista! He did miss photoshop a little to begin with but now happily uses GIMP but I have since discovered there is a plugin for gimp to make it look like photoshop.

The problems come with hardware in my opinion. By and large the main things work... I've had no problems in recent years with wireless, printers, scanners, mp3 player... but a new phone or camera .. while it comes with drivers & software for windows there is nothing for Linux... After saying that though things often work with the standard software. But it's just annoying that you often don't know for sure when you buy if it will work or not. Mention linux to any sales or call centre people and you'll immediately get "we don't support" response (I've notice very recently though that sometimes you can find linux in the supported OS lists on the box! - so things are changing). I've had many conversations, over the years, with ISP call centre staff who insisted the reason their DHCP or DNS server wasn't responding was because I was using linux and if I'd only install windows then all would be ok :rolleyes: Now if I have to contact a call centre I just tell them I run XP

I think is everyone was paying their commerical software licenses for office, outlook, photoshop etc (I get the distinct impression that even businesses have been buying one CD and installing it on all their machines) then things might change quicker!

croo

ps. if you are considering installing ubuntu I would wait just a little longer as the latest (long term support) version 8.04 is about to be released! on the 24th I think? The servers could be very busy for a while so if you find it slow downloading that could be why!

Saruman

Linux is still not user friendly enough for people to switch.
I spent hours yesterday trying to get video on any of my divx/xvid movies. Nothing would give me any video, only sound. In the end i managed to change mplayer to use x11 i think for the display... i can not rememeber.. now i get video but its absolute crap!!!
Now that may be due to the fact its a rubbish integrated video chip on a Dell sc440 server (the bargain from before christmas). However i still have about 4 or 5 other video players.. including VLC which usually plays everything and i get no video on those programs! I would not have that problem in windows. If it played in one application, it would be almost guaranteed to play in the other apps.
If i had problems, and bear in mind im an IT pro (on windows systems). And have had a little experience with Linux on and off from Redhat 4 days, can you imagine your average office worker... who can not even figure out how to set up a signature in outlook, can you imagine them trying to get stuff working?

mathias

The Ubuntu upgrades work , I wouldnt worry about waiting , I first installed Ubuntu ages ago with " dapper drake " , the system in the meantime has updated itself from this to Edgy edge , feisty fawn , and gutsy gibbon , and not once did it have an issue doing so ,

All those funny names are different versions of Ubuntu , you get your version upgrades like an automatic update , and it just works , brilliant.

If ever a version of Windows comes out that can update itself to the next version online I will be amazed !

croo

Saruman wrote: »

Linux is still not user friendly enough for people to switch.
I spent hours yesterday trying to get video on any of my divx/xvid movies.

I think you are the exception to the rule then because besides it always works for me - in recent years anyway.

On the other side of the coin - I have spent many a day (or even weekend) tryng to install windows on machines! Finding the correct drives is always a pain (unless you kept all the original disks to hand) .. the older the hardware the bigger the problem seems to be. While, on precisely the same hardware, installing linux is simply a matter of popping the cd/dvd in the drive. And I too have been working in IT (since 1984) so it's not that I don't know what I'm doing. In fact, I normally install linux just to find out what the hardware is so I can then search for the correct windows drivers online.

The bottom line is windows seems easier because it comes pre-installed.

I think to your average joe bloggs installing something like ubuntu is much easier than windows.

Saruman wrote: »

Now that may be due to the fact its a rubbish integrated video chip on a Dell sc440 server (the bargain from before christmas).

Well how did it look playing under windows?

Saruman wrote: »

can you imagine your average office worker... who can not even figure out how to set up a signature in outlook, can you imagine them trying to get stuff working?

So you think people who cannot setup a signature in outlook could install windows?
You think if you give them any box with a windows cd/dvd they will install windows without problems?

That's not to say the linux situation is perfect either... as I said before when you buy a new printer, scanner, phone or camera, for example, you will get windows software and instructions but none for linux.

FruitLover

I reckon Ubuntu is now easy enough for the majority of regular computer users to use daily. For those that don't have full functionality right off the CD, a quick bit of googling or looking in the Ubuntu forums will solve most problems.

Saruman wrote: »

im an IT pro (on windows systems)

Isn't this an oxymoron?

jedistev

for me i would recommed highly use GOS..sort of Google OS but not owner by Google..it's kind great for Beginner or "dont want freak out if install by shell etc"

for me i use it on old fart laptop..and going older mini laptop called cloudbook..which sell in USA...i hoping get it while my bro in LA for hoilday...

derby7

After messing around with a few distributions, especially Ubuntu, I recently came across one called DreamLinux (www.dreamlinux.com.br) .
I tried it Virtually first, via VMWare Player and the Dreamlinux appliance.
:cool:

cowan

I have been using Linux myself for quite a while, very secure, and with the new Ubuntu 8.04 it seems to be a lot faster. I'm a distro hopper myself, i.e. I'm always changing which version I use, but I always find myself coming back to Mint. If you're considering installing Mint, wait for Mint 5.0 to be released, should be available in a few days/week or two. It's very good. Very very good. Very very very good. I do however keep xp on the computer. I need it for some college stuffs. Linux has become very useable, the first version I used was Ubuntu 6.04 or 6.10 not sure which. Even then I found it to be quite useable, even if setting some stuff up was a pain, you generally only need to do it once. Plus you learn something everytime you use it.

Garth

I installed Ubuntu about a month ago and find myself vary rarely using the windows vista that came installed on my laptop.

I had to get the wireless card working with ndiswrapper but it works perfectly now and is far more stable under 8.04 than under 7.10. I have no problems with mp3, dvd, divx...

I find the support forum for Ubuntu to be brilliant.

And most importantly, my computer runs sooo smoothly compared to Vista. It never overloads the cpu, the memory never gets bogged down. There isn't a mountain of processes running unnecessarily in the background.

I have a new harddrive on order and I will be installing Ubuntu on our home PC as well as soon as it arrives.

I'd recommend people try it... I can't see us going back now.

PS: I'm techy, but not an IT head by any stretch... and I didn't break a sweat. ;-)

rasmasyean

I read some of your posts and I see a few things that may not have been mentioned.

The computer (regardless of cost and performance) is really useless without its software. So if you think you might one day “go beyond” email and internet, etc… note that there is MUCH more software and hardware on Windows. Included in this is more “choices”. And by that, I don’t mean fancy customizable settings in Linux. I mean things that you can do with a computer. Maybe Windows is not for everyone, but for that guy who said he’s gonna make his kids use ubuntu, there might be a chance that you can “reduce their exposure” to technology depending on the fate of Linux and other “open source” efforts in the future. I would get my kids Windows machines and if I have more money, get them a Linux one too as a bonus…but not the other way around. Something to consider, that’s all…

One thing that is not as “visible” about Windows and Microsoft in general is that their products penetrate a wide variety of IT solutions everywhere. Most people only use (or are aware of using) at most 5% of Microsoft technology. Even behind the scenes of Vista and XP, (prolly not used) are components that are designed to integrate with so many other computer systems and technology. What is out there are things that tie into Windows in one way or another and you just don’t see it. That also has to do with the massive Windows software compatibility. Even though you are never going to buy these “industrial” software, you will likely work with something that is linked to it that is based on Windows technology. Look at this chart…
http://www.belshe.com/2007/01/04/microsofts-revenue-breakdown-2003-2006/
That’s in 2006 where 33% business is OSes (and only a fraction of those are for home PC’s). And it’s even less now because MS has many more industrial products than 2 years ago. Again…something to consider.

Also, regarding costs and open source software etc., for “most” people the extra cost will be the more powerful hardware required to run Windows. Well, that’s because it simply is more powerful (as mentioned because of stuff you don’t see or use)…but that’s another story. I’m not sure most “home PC” users consider software a cost because from what I’ve gathered, because many Windows software are so widespread, too many people get it for “free” if you catch my drift. LOL Personally, I think MS makes this real easy to get for free so that they will get people hooked and bring preference to industry. Because, not too many people would buy all of these MS products because they are just outrageously expensive for “personal use”. They are good, but it’s just pure overkill outside of a business setting and MS knows this. Well, that’s my conspiracy theory anyway but whatever. Not that I encourage this behavior…but it’s so widespread that it’s also…something to consider.
Anyway, on that note, there is also a LOT of freeware and cheap shareware out there too, because the Windows platform is so pervasive. And if you're into professional crap...MS actually gives it to students for free via Dreamspark.
https://downloads.channel8.msdn.com/
That's a couple of thousand USD there...

Personally, I think Linux at this stage is still in the “specialty use” category. It’s just not developed enough to be a Home PC yet, imho.

Garth

I don't know. In a lot of countries that have emerging economies and are relying heavily on a highly skilled population in the future, Linux is being used in schools.

Several friends of mine have been using Linux on servers for a very long time and for a huge variety of applications.

I'm doubtful as to all this software that I've never heard of. Having worked in the graphic design field, in music technology, retail, IT, and accounting, I've seen quite a lot of software. A lot on Windows, a lot on Mac. Most of the stuff I've used in the past has excellent free alternatives in the "free software" movement.

The single reason I still run windows on my laptop is games. I'm confident, however, that in the next few years there will be popular release games to run on Linux. They might be non-free, but they will run on it. Linux distributions are becoming far too popular for game makers to ignore it. I have a friend in Dell who, a year ago when I asked about it had no idea what I was talking about, and a few days ago commented on how popular Linux is becoming. She's about as non-techy as you can be, and still work at dell!

After my experiences with Ubuntu, I'm pretty sure anyone using it alongside windows will see the difference very quickly.

PS: and as for software, there's the "synaptic package manager" (which they should rename). When I was told I had to start maintaining a website, I went and downloaded a fully featured html editor and ftp program. Not shareware, not cracked. Fully functional and free. That always makes me happy.

croo

>So if you think you might one day “go beyond” email and internet, etc… note that there is MUCH more software and hardware on Windows

I couldn't disagree more!
One of the things I think is great about linux is there are a multitude of open source software options for any task you wish to achieve. Often this is considered a minus by windows fans, then their argument is there are so many options it's confusing. On linux, even something as core as the desktop offers a choice, KDE, Gnome or one of the many others great desktop managers such as Xfce, Afterstep, Windowmaker (one of my favourites), Enlightenment... there are so many. When it come sto with word processor, web browser or graphics tool the same applies.
So to say there is “more choice” with windows is just so wrong!

> depending on the fate of Linux and other “open source” efforts in the future
A bit of FUD there?
Actually I think the opposite *may* be the case. A recent Gartner report (The State Of Open Source 2008) states that “By 2012, more than 90% of enterprises will use open source in direct or embedded forms,”.
So it seems the future for linux and OSS in general is very bright.

> One thing that is not as “visible” about Windows and Microsoft in general is that their products penetrate a wide variety of IT solutions everywhere.

And of course Linux doesn't??? This is more FUD. In fact, you are more likely to find linux, unix or some other non-microsoft software running the websites you visit and the set-top box under you TV. Microsoft was historically strong on the desktop but not so in the server area... though, they have made very strong gains in the last 10 years they are hardly everywhere. And when it comes to embedded solutions linux is becoming very popular but windows will never be (not as windows anyway – perhaps MS might provide something else but I doubt it).

> Most people only use (or are aware of using) at most 5% of Microsoft technology
Yes, well here we can agree ... we call this bloatware!
Meanwhile, that 95% that you don't use which is “designed to integrate with so many other computer systems” is causing you real security issues.

> Even though you are never going to buy these “industrial” software
Linux, of course is probably more “industrial” which again has historically been said to be a negative by supporters of MS & windows.

> for “most” people the extra cost will be the more powerful hardware required to run Windows
No the extra cost is the License!
And I can tell you if Linux had not been around offering real competition MS would be charging a lot more (see below).

> Windows software are so widespread, too many people get it for “free” if you catch my drift
I do. But you can't really suggest as an argument for choosing Windows over Linux is that by stealing the software, it's cheaper to use windows!! But I think, in Ireland at least, you may be correct that many do! But the point is they do not need to.

Until recently I was quite agnostic on the question of MS or Open Source. But now for me the issue is not JUST whether Windows is better than Linux, the question is also one of trust. In the 1990s I was a DR-DOS user. It was compatible with MS-DOS but with many innovative features. Alas, its makers Digital Research never managed to make DR-DOS work with the new Windows and like many I was forced to switch to MS-DOS which was “more” stable. DR-DOS disappeared. Then in recent years, during the Department of Justice investigation into MS's monopoly, we learned that the reason DR couldn't stabilise DR-DOS was MS had programmed windows to randomly crash if it was being run on top of DR-DOS. How can anybody deal with a company willing to lie & cheat so? Did the demise of DR-DOS lead to better competition and more consumer options?
well according to MS's own website (http://tech.msn.com/products/articlepcw.aspx?cp-documentid=6328095) in 1988 a PC cost $1,400 ($2,454 adjusted for inflation) - the “PCs came with DOS; Windows 2.0 was a $99 option” (From memory I think Dos was about $30, or there abouts, “off the shelf”). So the OS required to make the PC useful was 30/1400 = 2.15% of the price of the PC. Today, you can buy a PC for general use for £200 (http://efficientpc.co.uk/desktops/camulus/) and windows costs £100 (£133 is you choose vista Ultimate OEM or £185 “off the shelf”) .. so at best the the cost of the OS is now gone from being 2% to 50% of the cost of hardware on which it runs. This is what you can do when you have a monopoly and this is why it's bad for customers.

There is an OSS solution for most things and most people can achieve what they need without breaking the law and without supporting a proven dishonest and unethical company like Microsoft. The future is Open Source... according the Gartner anyway so it must be true :rolleyes:

rasmasyean

Do what you will based on whatever principles you like. All I’m saying is that if you want to use something that “will be great in a couple of years” to use what it “will eventually have” then by all means go for Linux. When you buy peripherals including software out there now, there aren’t many that are made for Linux.

If you think “open source” is so good, then why do professionals think…”If I get Open Office for free, I can save $100 on productivity. But if I pay $100 for MS office, I can save $300 on productivity.” This goes for a lot of other proprietary software and not just MS stuff. Like if you were a graphic artist, you will use Adobe Creative Suite 3 ($2,500 USD). E.g. Now IF in 2 years the “open source community” will make an Adobe CS4 equivalent competitor…that’s 2 years later…not now. I doubt it though but we’ll see. The way I see it, Linux has its special uses in niche applications, but it’s still a “You get what you pay for” deal. Just keep in mind that you might be stunting your options.

OK well, I’m not much of a fan for anecdotal evidence on trends so here’s a link to research data (that’s a bit technical, but I’ll explain it for those that need).
http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html
Of the major programming languages…
MS-only programming languages C# and VB have been steadily rising.
Linux prevalent Java and C++ have been steadily decreasing. These are in all OS’s not just Linux, btw.
That says that MS products are gaining ground to me. Keep in mind that MS is primarily an industrial solutions provider. What’s more is that these C# and VB languages have enhanced functionality in integration with other MS products, like Office, Sharepoint, collaboration tools, Mobiles, Web Servers, Application Servers, Windows OS’s, etc…because they tie it in with the API really well. So it looks to me that MS has a bright future still. Now you might say that’s an outrageous monopolistic ploy. Maybe, but can you say open source would get to the point where they make everything as integrated? Hmmm… For me, I’m not going to be a crusader about stuff like this. I’ll just use what’s best for me without a “political standpoint”.

rasmasyean

[quote=croo;55843833(http://tech.msn.com/products/articlepcw.aspx?cp-documentid=6328095) in 1988 a PC cost $1,400 ($2,454 adjusted for inflation) - the “PCs came with DOS; Windows 2.0 was a $99 option” (From memory I think Dos was about $30, or there abouts, “off the shelf”). So the OS required to make the PC useful was 30/1400 = 2.15% of the price of the PC. Today, you can buy a PC for general use for £200 (http://efficientpc.co.uk/desktops/camulus/) and windows costs £100 (£133 is you choose vista Ultimate OEM or £185 “off the shelf”) .. so at best the the cost of the OS is now gone from being 2% to 50% of the cost of hardware on which it runs. This is what you can do when you have a monopoly and this is why it's bad for customers.
[/quote]

Not only are you comparing an "upgrade" to a stand-alone full-blown top-of-the-line option, but you haven't considered the tremendous decease in price of hardware. :rolleyes:

croo

@rasmasyean
You answers are laced with innuendo.

>If you think “open source” is so good, then why do professionals think…”If I get Open Office for free, I can save $100 on productivity. But if I pay $100 for MS office.
the innuendo being that only non-professionals choose something other than MS Office? If MS did think Open Office wasn't such a threat they would not have bothered with all the trouble getting ISO certification for it proprietary document format!

The extent of my software use extends further than office suites.
Personally I find I can do, with Open Office, all I ever did with Word & excel. And if I do have a problem I can get actual answers from the open office community. I never managed to get an answer from Microsoft, even when I represented billion dollar firms who were big customers.

As for graphics artists I doubt you'll find that many using Windows either ... while it is changing some that has historically been a Mac only area. I remember, last year the UK magazine Linux Format created a single edition of the magazine using only open source applications and even they were surprised how well it went. Of course Linux format is published by Future Publishers who publish many magazines titles many of them Windows/PC magazines so they felt retooling the entire organisation would not be (immediately) possible but you can be sure their adobe sales rep will have a tough sale when their licenses come up for renewal!

But if linux based software can manage to produce the blockbusters films, including Lord of the Rings, Star Wars: Episode II, Harry Potter, Shrek, and Titanic – it can manage to do the basic artwork in the typical businesses brochure!

> I’m not much of a fan for anecdotal evidence
The Gartner Report is anecdotal evidence?
According to your link c# has not increased ?
This is not a ranking system I am familiar with but if I read it right, all I see is that the MS languages account for perhaps 15% of the ranking. I don't see how that is evidence of anything? The difference in % growth over say java is negligible at 1.3%. From my own personal experience java is much more prevalent in the large enterprise world than MS. MS & VB apps are there for sure, but when it comes to business critical apps then it changes to some flavour of unix & JEE.

> these C# and VB languages have enhanced functionality in integration with other MS products, like Office, Sharepoint, collaboration tools, Mobiles, Web Servers, Application Servers, Windows OS’s,

And of course nobody else but MS has managed to integrate with web Servers, application servers & mobile!??? The fact is the rest of the software industry has moved on to open standard SOA & BPI environments. With the EU breathing down their necks MS's closed environments may turn into more of a burden that a benefit. Just like that other near monopoly before them, IBM, I don't expect MS to disappear .. just to change. It maybe just a blip in a overall negative market place but I thought it interesting that in a year when they released the newest version of their core product (vista) they also announced a Q3 profits fall of 5% and now a profit fall of 11% to end of March 2008. That's also interesting as those figures are in US$ which has depreciated a lot in the last year. So while I admit MS has a huge amount of capital reserves built up and so won't be in financial trouble any time soon (if ever) things are not as rosy as would seem. I remember well people saying the same things about IBM in the 80s that they say about MS today.

And I'm not about “crusading” or “politics” either... I'm simple a customer who was badly treated (but then that's what monopolies do). As such I choose not to spend money with that supplier again if possible. Now with linux I have a real choice so I'm exercising it. Using linux I can browse the web, send emails, edit photos, scan images, create artwork, write documents, track my time, calculate my expenses in spreadsheets, run business software. Run web servers, application servers, databases... design & develop code to run on them. Listen to music, watch DVDs, chat with friends in skype & IRC ... in short I can do all you do in windows. All for free. Ok perhaps you can do this for free too using illegally copies software. I prefer not to break the law. Of course I'm not adverse to paying for software ... if I find I need to use closed source software I'll buy it. But these days I find that less and less necessary... until now I don't think I use any fee based closed source applications.

croo

rasmasyean wrote: »

Not only are you comparing an "upgrade" to a stand-alone full-blown top-of-the-line option, but you haven't considered the tremendous decease in price of hardware. :rolleyes:

How so? A full copy of MS-DOS was only about $30 around that time? And that was the top of the range. And the hardware decrease you point to are precisely my point ... the same should have happened to the software too! It was microsoft's monopoly that ensured it didn't.

Capt'n Midnight

the “PCs came with DOS

yeah there was another court case over that, took 5 years to get microsoft to stop demanding a royalty for Dos for EVERY computer made by any manufacturer that was allowed to pre install DOS.
Dos wasn't free, The consumer had to pay for a copy of it no matter what OS they choose to run later on.

Today it's a little different , a handful of people have gotten refunds of $48 or so by returning windows. But PC's with preinstalled Linux aren't cheaper than windows ones


Why are business using windows ?
Inertial is the main reason.

Training - the time to train employees is expensive when you take into account loss of earning too. Just look at the number of organisations that aren't rolling out Vista yet. It's getting to the stage where going from XP/Office 200 to Vista/2007 might not be all that much more than going to OpenOffice. Also there are a lot of people out there who demand Microsoft apps because that's what they are used to , regardless of the technical merits or cost.

Terminal server licenses, mean that you can't save any money on microsoft apps by using linux clients. In fact if you use microsoft server apps then CAL's are a bitch anyway. And you can't run microsoft server apps unless you have the appropiate server license.

rasmasyean

croo wrote: »

How so? A full copy of MS-DOS was only about $30 around that time? And that was the top of the range. And the hardware decrease you point to are precisely my point ... the same should have happened to the software too! It was microsoft's monopoly that ensured it didn't.

Hardware cost decrease is due to automation and they can make the same amount of stuff much faster. In addition harware is smallere and smaller doing more things so frieght and material is less.
Software keeps growing and requires more and more people to make it because it takes more and more time.

Capt'n Midnight

rasmasyean wrote:

Software keeps growing and requires more and more people to make it because it takes more and more time.

First copy of windows 95 cost $300,000,000
the second copy cost 30c

It's because of the costs that old versions are retired. My Uncle was delighted to find the word processor in Works, because it was the same as the version of Word he used to use on a 486. The only difference was the defult file format had been changed one supposes to prevent inter-operability as there was no technical need to. The point here is that for many people the old version is perfectly adaquate and having to fork out money to buy and then train up on bloat ware doesn't go down well.

Had he bought a later version of word it would not have done anything extra that he needed, would have been slower more confusing and totally unnecessary.

rasmasyean

>Personally I find I can do, with Open Office, all I ever did with Word & excel. And if I do have a problem I can get actual answers from the open office community. I never managed to get an answer from Microsoft, even when I represented billion dollar firms who were big customers.

Maybe so, but “presently”, MS Office is preferred often because it has the hidden collaboration software that is adopted by many firms. And advanced firms have IT created software that integrates with the Office Suite with… C# and VB (a.k.a .NET Office automation) So people like to stick with one Spreadsheet tool that can do everything rather than learn two…especially the latter is inferior. So when you go for a job (excluding programmer, etc.), its likely better to say you know Excel.


> As for graphics artists I doubt you'll find that many using Windows either

I was just making an example of open source versus proprietary. It could be a kid’s educational software on Mac for all that matter.


> Of course Linux format is published by Future Publishers who publish many magazines titles many of them Windows/PC magazines so they felt retooling the entire organization would not be (immediately) possible but you can be sure their adobe sales rep will have a tough sale when their licenses come up for renewal!

It’s also because companies want accountability…someone to obtain support from and yell at when their software doesn’t work. Software in these cases is a “service” (not a product). They don’t want to go to open source forums and make changes by themselves. That’s not reliable and they don’t see that as cost effective overall. But you’re grounding theory is probably right too.


> From my own personal experience java is much more prevalent.

You are right. Java and JEE has years of head start…but what the chart is showing is that it’s losing ground to MS based software in recent years.


> The fact is the rest of the software industry has moved on to open standard SOA & BPI environments.

ARE or WERE? Or maybe TOO? What does that chart show? I’m not saying that MS definitely will dominate…but just that the trend it’s gaining ground. And likely, less Linux and maybe even unix will be used. What MS has as advantage (even in relative instability) is its ease of integration with Office productivity. You can’t deny that there is an overwhelming domination going on here. As for the instability, there is a solution. As mentioned above, hardware is cheaper and cheaper so they have clusters and backups. So when they have a new business idea going…they may be likely to just order 10 MS Server 2008’s versus 4 unix / linux based boxes.

http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS21114208
Top Server Market Findings
• Microsoft Windows servers showed positive growth as revenues grew 6.9% and unit shipments grew 9.8% year over year. Quarterly revenue of $5.7 billion for Microsoft Windows servers set an all-time high for a single quarter and represented the single largest revenue segment in the server market with 36.6% of overall quarterly factory revenue.
• Unix servers experienced 1.5% revenue growth year over year when compared with 4Q06. Worldwide Unix revenues were $5.2 billion for the quarter, representing 33.3% of quarterly server spending and reflecting continued IT investment in this server market segment, with particular strength in the midrange enterprise segment of the Unix market which comprises 53.8% of all Unix spending.
• Linux server revenue reached $2.0 billion for the first time in any single quarter on 11.6% year-over-year growth. Linux servers now represent 12.7% of all server revenue, up more than 1 point over 4Q06.

rasmasyean

>But if linux based software can manage to produce the blockbusters films, including Lord of the Rings, Star Wars: Episode II, Harry Potter, Shrek, and Titanic – it can manage to do the basic artwork in the typical businesses brochure!

I never said linux is not capable of power applications. With low overhead and excellent reliability, it's actually the better system (or unix like SGI back then made Terminator 2) than Windows for certain things. But these are still "specialty usages". You can't have these applications anyway. There's actually an effort to try to port Adobe stuff to Google's Wine, but it still hasn't been able to cut it. And maybe new Adobe stuff will counter that with "subtle sabataging code". MS will, you know it. It happens...not something that concerns me more than the US PTO.

You don't have as many choices for Home PC stuff. And some choices will make you spend hours just to get it working...never for grandma. Whatever choices you do have...maybe it's good enough for some...or maybe by going to Linux, you will never know what you are missing out because you could have had something better to use.

Orion

rasmasyean wrote: »

but for that guy who said he’s gonna make his kids use ubuntu,.

Don't put words in my mouth! What I said was "My two 4 year olds don't know what Windows is yet and during the summer I'm building an old PC with Edubuntu on it just for them. They won't have any fear of Linux when they're older."

Where there does it say I'm gonna 'make them' use Ubuntu. Linux is the OS of choice for me - and that's what it's about - choice. The vast majority of people don't realise there is a choice so they are using Windows as the only option that they are aware of. The key phrase from my post was "They won't have any fear of Linux when they're older."

rasmasyean wrote: »

more powerful hardware required to run Windows. Well, that’s because it simply is more powerfu

You say that like it's a fact. It's no more powerful (apart from using more power) than Linux. In fact imho Linux is more powerful because of that word I used above - choice. Anybody with the know-how can make it do anything they want. Try recoding Windows to streamline it for less powerful pcs - or to customise it for specific purposes - you can't.

The Asus eeepc is running Linux for 2 reasons - 1. it's free and keeps the cost down and 2. Asus have customised the distro they chose for their product. That's just one example. For more examples have a look at the number of Ubuntu clones around - Mandriva, PCLinuxOS, LinuxMint, etc - and they're just customised general purpose distros. Then you have specific purpose distros - Edubuntu (education), Scibuntu (science), MoLinux (Castilla la Mancha local govt. purpose built distro), nUbuntu (network monitoring and penetration testing), Ubuntu Christian Edition (bible bashing), Ubuntu Satanic Edition (bible-basher bashing ).

Yet you say Windows is more powerful.

rasmasyean

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

First copy of windows 95 cost $300,000,000
the second copy cost 30c

It's because of the costs that old versions are retired. My Uncle was delighted to find the word processor in Works, because it was the same as the version of Word he used to use on a 486. The only difference was the defult file format had been changed one supposes to prevent inter-operability as there was no technical need to. The point here is that for many people the old version is perfectly adaquate and having to fork out money to buy and then train up on bloat ware doesn't go down well.

Had he bought a later version of word it would not have done anything extra that he needed, would have been slower more confusing and totally unnecessary.

If that's the case and you know you are going to not want any more...then by all means, cheaper / free / scaled-down...is prolly better...as long as you know that there is more out there but that you definately just don't need or want it. That is my point.

blackgold>>

Just want to add a few words to the debate.
Don't confuse an operating system with an application.

croo

rasmasyean wrote: »

MS Office is preferred often because it has the hidden collaboration software

hmmm hidden collaboration software - Is that MS marketing speak for security holes?

rasmasyean wrote: »

It’s also because companies want accountability…

Aha.. another MS fan that has never read their license. Can you point out to us where on your windows or MS office EULA that MS is accountable?

rasmasyean wrote: »

someone to obtain support from and yell at when their software doesn’t work.

As I said, I have worked for huge billion dollar companies and tried to get support from MS. The best you'll get after a very time consuming discussion is acknowledgment that there is a problem. It's just a waste of time calling. With an Open Source application I can often get an actual fix or if the worst comes to the worst fix it myself.

rasmasyean wrote: »

You are right. Java and JEE has years of head start…but what the chart is showing is that it’s losing ground to MS based software in recent years.

Actually VB has been around LONG before Java! And it's been a while since looked but from memory C# was just the MS name for their own version of Java.
So I don't accept that at all.
And the chart doesn't show Java is loosing ground! According to that Java use increased too!

I should add that Java is not considered a *very* Open product either. Although things there are changing. Many open applications are developed in Java ok, but I would guess (haven't seen any stats) that most are probably written in C++.

rasmasyean wrote: »

Office productivity. You can’t deny that there is an overwhelming domination going on here.

I don't deny MS Office dominates. But I also remember when the same could be said of WordPerfect! Personally, I think MS Office has peaked. And I also think MS believe this too hence their attempts to make OXML an ISO standard. They rightly fear the emergence and acceptance of the OpenDocument standard which would level the playing fields for Office suites.
MS's biggest Office customers are governments... look around the world at how many have either jumped ship are are mulling the idea. This would never have happened only a 10 years ago.

rasmasyean wrote: »

As for the instability, there is a solution.... just order 10 MS Server 2008’s versus 4 unix / linux based boxes.

lol - do you work for MS... this sounds like one of their solutions ok.

rasmasyean

Croo, Dude you’re reaching…
Look past your post-traumatic-stress with MS and notice that I was talking about proprietary software (where MS is not the only company there is here). I also tried to clarify this before regarding another one of your tunnel-vision statements. :cool:

croo wrote: »

Actually VB has been around LONG before Java! And it's been a while since looked but from memory C# was just the MS name for their own version of Java.
So I don't accept that at all.
And the chart doesn't show Java is loosing ground! According to that Java use increased too!

And you might nit-pick about VB, but you KNOW that I’m talking about the .NET framework and its “recent” evolution in relation to integration. There is a movement and you can resist but many .NET jobs are cropping up at an increasing rate. The link I gave of the server market is enough to convince most people that it’s happening. Check this link out where they even give thousands of USD worth of software free to students to prepare them for the workforce? Charity or Strategy…you can decide but it’s real.

https://downloads.channel8.msdn.com/

The .NET tools also make programming a lot easier and you don’t need to be as proficient in Mathematics and Logic and Computer Science, etc. Windows Mobile apps are cropping up all over the place even though they don’t have a decent market share…because the .NET skills port easily between Web/Desktop/Mobile and it’s so easy that people just crank out some pretty useless apps but to each their own…it’s usually free and prolly part of some pet project.

croo wrote: »

I don't deny MS Office dominates. But I also remember when the same could be said of WordPerfect! Personally, I think MS Office has peaked. And I also think MS believe this too hence their attempts to make OXML an ISO standard. They rightly fear the emergence and acceptance of the OpenDocument standard which would level the playing fields for Office suites.
MS's biggest Office customers are governments... look around the world at how many have either jumped ship are are mulling the idea. This would never have happened only a 10 years ago.

OK I’ll give you that WordPerfect argument and fine, it went into oblivion. But back then if you wanted to use the best word processor, what would you have chosen? Don’t tell me you said, "I choose the up and coming MS-Word because even as it sucks now, I know it will be great in 5 years because MS is an up-n coming revolution in the whole industry! Yeah baby!"

croo wrote: »

lol - do you work for MS... this sounds like one of their solutions ok.

The the 10 server comment is not an MS recommended solution that I know of. It’s simple as this... “Penny-wise, Pound Foolish”. The cliché British quote that tells you that sometimes you will loose out on opportunity if you try to skimp.

croo

Reaching!? me!?
You are the one suggesting proprietary software is just as cheap as open source so long as you just copy it from a friend and don't pay for licenses.
You are the one who suggested MS windows is bloat but you can just buy 10 servers instead of 4.
And you think I' reaching... is this a wind up?

rasmasyean wrote: »

Look past your post-traumatic-stress with MS

Actually I don't have any stress with MS it's a free market. But if they break the law I think they should be treated accordingly.
And I do have issues with people who obviously don't know what they are talking about spreading misinformation.

rasmasyean wrote: »

you might nit-pick about VB, but you KNOW that I’m talking about the .NET

Well I am sorry, I forgot to put my clairvoyant hat on.

From your comments

rasmasyean wrote: »

The .NET tools also make programming a lot easier and you don’t need to be as proficient in Mathematics and Logic and Computer Science,

This doesn't strike me as a comment someone who actually develops would make. Are you a software developer?

And you don't need to be a developer to declare you find MS Office user friendly. But to declare .NET makes programming “easier” you should be.
And "easier" than what precisely? Maybe you can give some definitive examples?

I'm sure, too, the other readers here would like to see an example EULA that defines the accountability of proprietary software developers.
Ok, so you admit now that MS does NOT provide any accountability in its licenses but if I understand you, others do? Are you going to provide examples? I assume it's the norm rather than the exception so it will be easy to find examples!?

Capt'n Midnight

croo wrote:

Actually I don't have any stress with MS it's a free market. But if they break the law I think they should be treated accordingly.

agree 110%
IMHO overall microsoft have benefited from repeatedly breaking the law. The fines are large and consititute a loss of earnings, but it's in no way comparable to the loss of earnings of competitors / or market share gained.

If microsoft had realistic copy protection on their products would they have such a large market share ?

Replacing 4 servers with 10 - WTF ??
That' includes at least 50 Windows CAL's , but you would also need CAL's for tany other server apps. We had to replace an accounts system. Because the back end was MSSQL based we had to spend as much on upgrading the existing licenses as we did on the server hardware just so the clients could connect to the accounts package. I'm still not sure the accountants factored in this extra cost. Licensing changes from the older version also complicated the issue, something that you rarely have to worry about with most open source software.

Microsoft are great at dangling the carrot. I guess there are a lot of people running terminal server 2000 because unlike 2003 XP clients don't need an extra CAL / all the hassle of a temporay client / test machine locking out a license for three months.

I love the Cisco ad with the skate board.
It shows what can happen when people are free to use / share information , like open source.

However in the real world you can't do that because each company like Cisco would lock down it's particular improvement for as long as possible. How long do you think it would take to make that skate board if cisco, microsoft, ibm and apple each designed the improvements ? Each company would release skateboards with partial improvements and workarounds, microsoft would probabably buy out a small company that figured out how to do it .

rasmasyean

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

That' includes at least 50 Windows CAL's

Load Distribution and Fault Tolerancing can make it like a “1 virtual server”, etc.