-Linux vs Windows-

[gondo]

Well paying for support on free software is a good and bad thing. Which home user wants to pay a company to tell them what to do? They want to learn how to do things themselves? For business this is a good thing, but for home use it will never kick in.

As far as technology goes, 64 bit has been around for years...but windows and software does not take advantage of it. As fast as technology moves...why do we still not have 64bit fully implemented...and windows does such a poor job of it. I can't wait till the day Linux has 100% company support, maintains a high quality top performing OS without compromise, and has ease of use or a GUI for all required features and settings. What pisses me off is that all new intel and AMD CPUs being sold are 64-bit...why doesn't microsoft only sell 64-bit version of vista and force all software companies to upgrade to the 64-bit path. Anybody with an older 32-bit cpu could just keep running xp.

As far as mainstream adoption of Linux goes. When piracy hits an end Linux will shine. People want to copy DVDs so they do a search and find DVD decryptor, dvd shrink, clone dvd, dvd fab, etc.... that all work on windows. They download torrents for Nero and Power DVD that only work on windows. All their games only work on windows. Photoshop and office are easily available via piracy. We can easily mount all our pirated images using daemon tools in windows. Its way too easy to have good easy to use software for free on windows. We live with the performance windows offers and know no better. If we want faster we upgrade hardware. Not many people realize how much faster and trouble free computing would be on Linux based systems.

 

[MU_Engineer]

One thing that I don't think you realize is that a bunch of Linux development is being funded by large companies like IBM and HP, not just by programmers donating time. Why? Because it's the OS that runs on their servers and it's very much to their advantage to have it run and run well. Also, you have the large Linux distributors like Novell and Red Hat that sure as shooting fund development. Also, I'd be very surprised if large application vendors like Oracle, whose products run on Linux, don't fund some Linux development to make their program on Linux run better than a competitor's product on some other OS.

So Linux isn't going to die at all, in fact, it should only get better. Microsoft hasn't been at their "A" game lately with their products, restrictions, and pricing, and that will naturally only lead to competitors being more powerful and popular.

Oh, and about the pirating bit. You or I (well, not me personally, but you get the point) can go to those sites and download cracks and warez to our heart's content and probably not get in trouble for it. But companies can't do that. Why the dichotomy? You or I don't have much for money, so if a program vendor sued us for copyright infringement, they'd be lucky to recoup half of their lawyers' fees. But a company has more money and thus is a much better target. They can pay the $150,000 per violation as they have the money to do so. And it's also well-known that the Business Software Alliance WILL come in and audit if somebody calls them up, so all it takes is one disgruntled employee and your cracks and warez become a much bigger liability than buying legit software. The same is true for schools.

Why am I saying this? It's a generally accepted principle that people tend to use similar machines at home to what they use at work or school because they are familiar. That is why educational software is much less expensive than home software- get them hooked. so to speak. So if the business world and academia decides to largely switch over to Linux, you'll likely see a lot of people start to use Linux machines at home, especially when they replace a computer. Microsoft knows this and is trying to fight this tooth and nail, more with the stick (locking people into file formats to increase migration costs) than with the carrot (better software and better prices.)

 

[gondo]

Time will tell. Microsoft jsut needs to slip and produce a bad performing os and people will migrate to linux. Again if Microsoft comes out with an awesome product the rules people will stick with it and never give Linux a thought.

One thing I realize though is that many people still run P3, P4, older 2GHz and slower computers that run the inter, office, XP, and all applications fine. Its mostly gamers that upgrade like made. So VISTA will not run very good at all on those older systems and linux may be a viable alternative for them.

And its mostly the gaming geek kids that are the techno geeks of the windows world and who provide support for friends and family and tend to keep them on track with windows. I wonder if somehow Linux could break into the gaming world somehow? This would surely hurt windows.

 

[SSS_DDK]

About educational software...there is better yet: if you are a student, you can download full versions of most MS software except windows (MS VS2005 Professional, etc...)
About older systems, well companies won't switch that fast to Vista. For one reason is that they need time to get their administrators used to the new systems. You must remember the Service PAck 2 dilemna and why Windows blocked the auto download feature for a while.

As for Linux, well it is a bit more complicated. Most research takes place under linux coz 1-it's an open community thus a lot of free support and code to copy from 2-because a developer doesn't need highly user friendly interfaces etc..... However, even if Windows sucked, switching OS is not as simple as that....DOS was inferior to the Unix Shell, but people are used to it..

I'm not a very big Fan of either OSs..i just use the one i need when i need it... But as in every case, i thank god there are both coz that prevents either one of charging incredible amounts of money for its system... at least i thought so until Vista Ultimate.

 

[dasickninja]

But thats the thing, no matter how crappy the OS MS puts out its still going to be used by the other 85%, because OEM builders will still put it in there. People are too scared of Linux because they think that using it involves programming and coding, and they hear about "the lack of support" and all of that. It does, but you can do fine without it. Just look and Ubuntu and its various incarnations. But as long as Windows sells its software to OEMs at dirt cheap prices, and still holds the title as the most "user friendly", well you get the picture.

 

[m25]

But thats the thing, no matter how crappy the OS MS puts out its still going to be used by the other 85%, because OEM builders will still put it in there. People are too scared of Linux because they think that using it involves programming and coding, and they hear about "the lack of support" and all of that. It does, but you can do fine without it. Just look and Ubuntu and its various incarnations. But as long as Windows sells its software to OEMs at dirt cheap prices, and still holds the title as the most "user friendly", well you get the picture.

:x ...going to give a try to Linux tonight,... maybe. My connection is too slow for downloading ubuntu today, but I have SUSE 10.1 ISOs on my HD.

 

[zenmaster]

All things being Equal Linux will be faster and more efficient.
I've done most of my training on SUSE and really like it.

You will want to atleast Dual Boot for a while until you are fully comfortable with Windows and find replacements for any Windows programs you can't get working.

WINE is a tool that will help you get many Windows only apps running in Linux.

 

[dasickninja]

You know, the Ubuntu guys will actually send you 10 Linux CD's for free. 5 are live and 5 are actual install discs. That being said, it only needs to install from one disk. /bleeding obvious

 

[m25]

Considering where I live, my only option is DOWNLOADING, and I've had a lot of headaches downloading the 5 SUSE CDs

 

[m25]

All things being Equal Linux will be faster and more efficient.
I've done most of my training on SUSE and really like it.

You will want to atleast Dual Boot for a while until you are fully comfortable with Windows and find replacements for any Windows programs you can't get working.

WINE is a tool that will help you get many Windows only apps running in Linux.

My only two problems are:
1-CAD apps (such as AutoCAD); does WINE run such apps well enough?!
2-modem support; my dialup modem is a fossil from 1999 and it has support only for win 95/98, NOT working on 2000 (no OEM drivers at all), miraculously fine on XP.

 

[zenmaster]

Your modem is something known as a "WinModem".
Linux has added support for "WinModems" and most will now work.

I have no idea if this will work with Linux.

What works with "Wine"?

See Here..........
http://appdb.winehq.org/

There is another emulator similar to Wine but I cant recall its name.
Wine has done what I needed.

 

[CaptRobertApril]

Your modem is something known as a "WinModem".
Linux has added support for "WinModems" and most will now work.

I have no idea if this will work with Linux.

What works with "Wine"?

See Here..........
http://appdb.winehq.org/

There is another emulator similar to Wine but I cant recall its name.
Wine has done what I needed.

I know Cheese works with Wine very nicely, but for my Photoshop-centric requirements, I'd love to run CS3 on Linux but not in emulation. From what I understand it would slow it down to a crawl. But can you imagine CS3 running natively on Ubuntu or something along those lines? I would haul a$$! Oh well, I can only dream!!!

 

[flasher702]

Wine Is Not an Emulator

If you can get a windows app running on linux with WINE it will run at full speed. The application itself shouldn't run any faster or slower, but overhead from the OS and other applications on the system should be lower which might give a performance boost vs. a messy windows system with limited resources. While this certainly isn't as good as running a well-coded "native" linux app I just thought that I should point out that WINE runs windows apps just as fast as windows does and running a well-coded windows app under WINE beats the crap out of a lame linux app.

 

[zenmaster]

And from the Wine Sites - http://www.winehq.com/site/myths

This is a brief FAQ to show that Wine will not slow Windows Applications.

I used the "term" loosely and what WINE does is quite different from what you see when running things such as a "Windows Emulator" on a MAC which have traditionally had to do lots of funky things to make the x86 code run using the RISC chips.

(Yeah, I know MACs are moving to x86 now, but I'm pulling from previous not current experience on Macs.)

Wine Is Not an Emulator

If you can get a windows app running on linux with WINE it will run at full speed. The application itself shouldn't run any faster or slower, but overhead from the OS and other applications on the system should be lower which might give a performance boost vs. a messy windows system with limited resources. While this certainly isn't as good as running a well-coded "native" linux app I just thought that I should point out that WINE runs windows apps just as fast as windows does and running a well-coded windows app under WINE beats the crap out of a lame linux app.

 

[CaptRobertApril]

OK, fair enough. Therefore my question is:

Since WINE has been around long enough (so that it's vintage... sorry, I couldn't resist) that it has been widely used for Photoshop, can anyone tell me if there are any reviews/tests/whatevers showing what various Photoshop functions and how quickly they run under Win XP and WINE on identical systems? My understanding (which is probably wrong) was that XP would obliterate the WINE system on Photoshop.

 

[zenmaster]

Likely because there are better alternatives such as GIMP.

Not every Windows App will run great under Linux.
Nor will every Linux App run great under Windows :>

Trust me there are many Linux apps far better than you will Find in Windows. The reverse also holds true.

One of the reasons for Linux and opensource software is not to just save a little money on the cost of the OS. Software licensing is also a killer. A fully copy of Photoshop is $$$. Deploy that to a staff of 20 engineers/designers. Now we are talking $$$$$!!!!!

Also the Native linux apps will likely be more efficient allowing the developers to do more work in less time.

If you "LOVE" Windows and it does what you need and you are not concerned about costs (which can be valid in many cases) then stick with it. Noboy is denouncing those that use Windows.

However, Linux is becoming a more viable alternative to more people as every day passes. That alternative is the right choice for some. It is not the right choice for others.

 

[CaptRobertApril]

Likely because there are better alternatives such as GIMP.

Gotta stop you right there.

Anyone who can even say GIMP and Photoshop in the same paragraph deserves to be taken out back and administered a severe spanking.

Do not believe for one minute anyone, no matter how dedicated they may be to open source or open zippers, that tells you that GIMP is even remotely in the same league as Photoshop. That has to be THE great myth of Linux.

I've been using Photoshop since v1 Mac. And I've also used GIMP. The difference is somewhat along the lines of comparing Word 2007 and WordPad.

There is absolutely zero chance in hell that any professional who earns his money and has his reputation riding on his work is going to even install GIMP on his kid's computer.

GIMP is a toy. Photoshop is a professional tool. If you would like me to give you exactly 1,000 specific reasons why, I'll be happy to. Warning, I'm gonna charge you $25 for each reason, paid in advance. :lol:

 

[dasickninja]

Gimp is open source... but that doesn't necessarily make it better.

 

[CaptRobertApril]

Gimp is open source... but that doesn't necessarily make it better.

Word.

 

[zenmaster]

Well, I'm not a Graphic Artist so I will not belabor one vs the other.

I do know Graphic Professionals who have migrated from Photoshop to GIMP successfully and w/o issues.

(And no, these are not kiddies working in their house but rather Graphic departments inside of companies that have made the Linux switch.)

 

[CaptRobertApril]

Well, I'm not a Graphic Artist so I will not belabor one vs the other.

I do know Graphic Professionals who have migrated from Photoshop to GIMP successfully and w/o issues.

(And no, these are not kiddies working in their house but rather Graphic departments inside of companies that have made the Linux switch.)

I have no doubt that there are some companies that have made the system-wide switch to Linux and thus their graphic artists have no choice but to GIMP along. And I'm sure that for things along the line of internal graphics for company reports, etc. GIMP is adequate. However, I recently billed a client over $12,000 for a single file. I was able to do things in that file that more than warranted the invoice cost and I would not have been able to do in GIMP.

Therefore, no offense intended to any Linux evangelist, but for my work, I will abandon my Photoshop when they pry my cold dead fingers from my mouse!

 

[shadowed]

Open source is one of the few things M$ can not buy !

 

[m25]

Just gave a try to SUSE on a spare HDD I had and my impressions are:
1-Does not appear to run blender (though it was a zipped package for Linux i386 and I don't know neither what a 64bit SUSE is nor what the i x86 means)
2-Overall reaction seems slower (but I did no tuning etc)
3-SUSE recognized both of the cores and c'n'q worked, because they were both shown at 1000Mhz idle (though that app was just gambling with the multi because OC-ed as is, it should run ~1100+MHz)
4-RAM consumption was shown @ about 90% 8O , with ~40% taken my the system + few utilities I had opened and ~50% as "HD cache" :?: :!:
5-no way I can make my modem work on that system but I knew it way before.
Overall, the interface experience was pretty pleasing and I had the impression that the 'linux alienation' myth is just that; people very used to windows find themselves a bit lost on a new system but the inverse could happen as well.

 

[HotFoot]

I'm pretty sure you don't want to be running the i386 kernel, but then I'm wondering if you can have the i386 kernel and have SMP working. My understanding is that you need the i686 kernel to have two cores recognised.

In any case, if you have the antiquated i386 kernel working, it will surely hamper your work. No support for modern processor features.

 

[pshrk]

Just gave a try to SUSE on a spare HDD I had and my impressions are:

Ack... SUSE?

1-Does not appear to run blender (though it was a zipped package for Linux i386 and I don't know neither what a 64bit SUSE is nor what the i x86 means)
2-Overall reaction seems slower (but I did no tuning etc)

SUSE...

3-SUSE recognized both of the cores and c'n'q worked, because they were both shown at 1000Mhz idle (though that app was just gambling with the multi because OC-ed as is, it should run ~1100+MHz)
4-RAM consumption was shown @ about 90% 8O , with ~40% taken my the system + few utilities I had opened and ~50% as "HD cache" :?: :!:

yes this is because portions of the hard drive are cached in memory that currently isn't used for anything else. This speeds up reads/write operations. You weren't using that memory for anything else, why not use it to make your system faster?

5-no way I can make my modem work on that system but I knew it way before.
Overall, the interface experience was pretty pleasing and I had the impression that the 'linux alienation' myth is just that; people very used to windows find themselves a bit lost on a new system but the inverse could happen as well.

Did you use KDE or gnome? Lots of other window managers to try out too, found this link, Fluxbox, enlightenment, and IceWM seem pretty popular.