To badly go where no OS has gone before.....

[Dale]

That's a great link! Thanks. I may make the leap yet!

Dale

 

[arachnid]

That's a great link! Thanks. I may make the leap yet!

Glad it helps.

I don't know if it has everything you want, but Ubuntu is a LiveCD so you
may be able to just fire it up and try it with your equipment without
having to do a HD install.

It's a little harder to find but there's also a LiveDVD that comes with a
whole lot more applications than the CD.

 

[Gordon]

But I thought there were common Linux download sites that had everything.
Having to go to the forum for my particular distribution is no different
from going to Microsoft for Windows.

It's HUGELY different . For a start, the repository for your distro will
have THOUSANDS of applications for download from many sources - MS has only
a few and they are all MS applications....

 

[Dale]

The biggest help was the link to MythTV but the whole article was pretty
informative.

Dale

 

[Nina DiBoy]

I would make the switch to an alternative OS for my media center
applications if there was an alternative OS that could play high quality
media on a high quality device. If the Ubuntu gurus are smart, they'd
focus on media. As it is now, I don't see the support to make it worth
while.

Dale

Have you looked at MythTV, Freevo, or SageTV?



--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

"Good poets borrow; great poets steal."
- T. S. Eliot

 

[BillW50]

Glad it helps.

I don't know if it has everything you want, but Ubuntu is a LiveCD so
you may be able to just fire it up and try it with your equipment
without having to do a HD install.

It's a little harder to find but there's also a LiveDVD that comes
with a whole lot more applications than the CD.

I downloaded Ubuntu and I don't know why? As I know I can't use it
anyway. But it ended up being a small ISO file about 270MB. Burned it to
a CD and booted and the menu works, but nothing but the memory tester
works. I'm guessing, but it seems like I got an incomplete download.

So why am I changing over to Linux again? Since Linux has no drivers for
my VTech Yahoo phone (VoIP), nor any drivers for my KWorld
(KW-TVUSB506RF-PRO) TV card! Plus I need a zillion of other things like
stream rippers, antivirus, disk utilities like HD clone software,
drivers for my wireless, etc.

So if I figured right, 2 years from now I will have 90% of the ability I
have with Windows XP now. Umm... so why is this worth it again? :-|

 

[BillW50]

Would you like to give some URLs for windows "approved" repositories?
The ONLY "windows approved repositories" AFAIK is Microsoft, and that
only has maybe two dozen applications ? Approved Linux distro
repositories have literally THOUSANDS of applications available for
download.

I have 6 Commodore computers in the closet that runs tens of thousands
of programs. But you don't see me pulling them out of the closet and
bragging how many programs I can run on them, do you? And let's not
forget about the other 6 machines I have that can run CP/M software.

Like I just stated in another post in this thread, there isn't anything
that Linux does that Windows doesn't, for me anyway. Although it isn't
true in reverse. Lots of drivers are missing for the stuff I have if I
wanted to run Linux. For me, this is stepping down and not up.

And I don't buy the belief that Linux is free bit. As it would take me
at least 2 years to even get cozy with Linux and still have less than
what I am doing under Windows right now. Why would it be worthwhile to
spend all of that time for less?

Sometimes I believe those that brags about how wonderful Linux is, are
people who can't think clearly. As the only people Linux is good for is
those that can totally avoid Windows and be happy. Well since 95% of PC
desktop computing is done and supported by Windows machines. Very few
can isolate themselves without the frustration of things just not
available under Linux.

 

[Nina DiBoy]

Those are maintenance tasks that, once configured, you don't have to
worry about much.

What is easier is installing software, finding software, selecting
hardware accessories, etcetera. I don't have to think about whether or
not the hardware I order will work with Windows and I barely have to
think about the software- a quick glance on a box to see if my version
is listed.

There have been, and will be more, Linux viruses. And spyware is
spyware. Most free software is spyware. The prettier and more
sophisticated the free software is, the more likely it is spyware or
adware. That applies to whether or not that software is for Windows or
Linux. The difference is, I can easily find easily-to-install and
easy-to-update anti-virus and anti-spyware software for Windows.

Hi Dale, I disagree with one thing. FOSS is not spyware, and that is
the majority of software available for linux.

Windows works for every one. And I am a techie. I am a MCSE, MCDBA,
MCAD and make my living developing web applications in C#. I certainly
have the intellect and ability to learn to use Linux. In the past, I
was an AIX (IBM's Unix) administrator. Even at home, I use Windows
because it is easier for me. I don't have to think about it.

Windows may work for the most or for the largest majority, but I think
saying it works for all is too much of a sweeping comment. The DRM does
not work for me (the typical paying consumer), it works against me. And
so does all of the other proprietary, monopolistic, buggy DRM in windows.

Linux on the desktop is mostly for hobbyists and techies - and the
French Parliament. If you like thinking about it and like getting into
the nuts and bolts, Linux is a good choice. Even MacOS hides the Unix -
as it should - for most Mac users. Unix is not an OS for the masses.
That doesn't make it bad and it doesn't make Unix users bad. But
Microsoft's market share just shows you that most users don't want to
know that much about what goes on in their PC.

Dale

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

"Good poets borrow; great poets steal."
- T. S. Eliot

 

[Alias]

Windows may work for the most or for the largest majority, but I think
saying it works for all is too much of a sweeping comment. The DRM does
not work for me (the typical paying consumer), it works against me. And
so does all of the other proprietary, monopolistic, buggy DRM in windows.

I don't see anything wrong with using both Linux and Windows. That way
you have the best of both worlds ;-) I'm setting up all my computers to
dual boot between the two. Course, I mean XP. Vista has a few years
before it'll be up to its own speed as will all the third party providers.

Alias

 

[Nina DiBoy]

If any of you Linux
guys know of a media player even comparable to WMP 11, as bad as that
is, feel free to show us why we should consider Linux to get around the
DRM in Vista.

Dale

I do like XMMS, looks like winamp which is what I use in windows, but
no, I do not know of any media player in linux that has as much drm in
it as wmp11. Sorry, can't help you there.

I think as long as you use linux, you can't play "premium content" like
wmv files. has not caused any problems for me to use linux as my one
and only media center in the house.

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

"Good poets borrow; great poets steal."
- T. S. Eliot

 

[BillW50]

I think as long as you use linux, you can't play "premium content"
like wmv files. has not caused any problems for me to use linux as
my one and only media center in the house...

Can't play WMA files? Wow! I would be screwed royally without that
ability! Some DVD players and portable MP3 players can play WMA files.
Why can't Linux?

 

[Nina DiBoy]

Would you like to give some URLs for windows "approved" repositories? The
ONLY "windows approved repositories" AFAIK is Microsoft, and that only has
maybe two dozen applications ? Approved Linux distro repositories have
literally THOUSANDS of applications available for download.

IBM has approved repositories for their thinkpads for windows. But
linux has much better repositories (with standards, updates, and many,
many more applications)!

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

"Good poets borrow; great poets steal."
- T. S. Eliot

 

[BillW50]

IBM has approved repositories for their thinkpads for windows. But
linux has much better repositories (with standards, updates, and many,
many more applications)!

I guess if you run Linux, you probably require "approved repositories".
For Windows users, we just look for the Windows logo.

 

[Nina DiBoy]

And where are those Linux repositories? I am still looking for a Linux
package to replace WMP as my primary media player. I use WMP controlled
via COM in an application I wrote myself for listening to music and I
use Media Center for playing DVDs both on the PC and on my television.
MPlayer doesn't meet my needs. So where can I find a Linux media player
that can play DVDs, audio, and can be controlled externally so that I
can write my own shell around it if I don't like the one that comes with
it? Oh, and since this whole thread has recently revolved around high
definition media played through digital outputs, where is the Linux
media player that will do that?

While this post may sound like an argument, it is really not. If I can
find something in Linux or any other operating system that does all
that, my Media Center PC will become my Linux Media PC. With all the
DRM and quality issues resulting from DRM, I am convinced that I don't
want to continue using Windows for my media player. Of course, if I
can't find that, it will remain my Media Center PC because, until I find
that, I have no alternative to using Windows.

Dale

I only use the red hat respositories for fedora core, and I think they
need to be accessed from within fedora core. Mabey not. Here it is:

http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

"Good poets borrow; great poets steal."
- T. S. Eliot

 

[caver1]

I don't see anything wrong with using both Linux and Windows. That way
you have the best of both worlds ;-) I'm setting up all my computers to
dual boot between the two. Course, I mean XP. Vista has a few years
before it'll be up to its own speed as will all the third party providers.

Alias

there is nothing wrong with it. The only thing wrong is the zealots on
both sides thinking that the other side are demons. I have a Pontiac and
Ford. The only thing wrong with MS is there want of total control of
their customers. Sounds a little like Stalin.

 

[caver1]

Can't play WMA files? Wow! I would be screwed royally without that
ability! Some DVD players and portable MP3 players can play WMA files.
Why can't Linux?

I've never had the URGE, pun intended. I convert everything either to
wav or ogg.

 

[BillW50]

I've never had the URGE, pun intended. I convert everything either to
wav or ogg.

I never used ogg in my life, so I have no clue. But WAV is uncompressed
(well at best barely) and is at least 10 times larger than MP3 or WMA
format. Actually WMA is smaller than MP3 as well. And IMHO sounds much
better too.

 

[BillW50]

there is nothing wrong with it. The only thing wrong is the zealots on
both sides thinking that the other side are demons. I have a Pontiac
and Ford. The only thing wrong with MS is there want of total
control of their customers. Sounds a little like Stalin.

I disagree! MS wants software that anybody can use. To some that looks
like total control over their customers. But power users knows
differently. There are tons of ways to get around MS so called control.
Some of it even on MS' own knowledge base.

 

[caver1]

I never used ogg in my life, so I have no clue. But WAV is uncompressed
(well at best barely) and is at least 10 times larger than MP3 or WMA
format. Actually WMA is smaller than MP3 as well. And IMHO sounds much
better too.

Ogg Vorbis is free compression that gives you better quality than Mp3.
You can control how much compression you want. Which you can also do
with Mp3 if you have the right program.

 

[BillW50]

Ogg Vorbis is free compression that gives you better quality than Mp3.
You can control how much compression you want. Which you can also do
with Mp3 if you have the right program.

Oh... why not use WMA instead? I have programs that can convert to OGG.
But I have no idea what player plays them. I suppose if you have the
codec, anything, eh?