XP,Vista Verses Ubuntu ?

[Leythos]

Linux supports online and offline games perfectly fine. It simply does
not support WINDOWS online and offline games.

LOL - yea, um, just how many current games that kids are playing on their
XP boxes are going to run on Linux - not many. So, lets not play word
games here, ok.

If developers, who really have it much easier writing cross platform
code (no native UI to deal with), would not stick their head up so far
DirectX's butt that they haven't seen sunlight in years...there would be
much more out there for linux.

You can do a lot without DX and I write code in 12 languages still,
mostly machine control systems, but a lot of ASP.Net and even PHP, but I
still like the tools I have on my XP boxes better than those on FC.

As far as newer hardware goes. Does my fully supported 8800 GTX qualify
as newer? Not only is it about as new as it gets, it is also a video
card.

There you go again, playing the game - I bet I can find newer that is not
supported - what do you want to bet that Linux has LESS newer hardware
support than XP does? Stop playing the Zealot game.

The entire lines of ATI and nVidia video cards are supported by Linux. I
think that covers like what, almost all of the video card market out
there that any consumer needs to worry about?

About the only thing I will actually partially agree on is Wireless. It
still is a problem with some manufactures chipsets who absolutely refuse
to support linux in any way. However, chipsets (such as intel chipets)
are fully supported all various feature acronyms that are popular these
days included.

Even when supported the wireless often lags, many months or longer.

So, when you start looking at "Popular" items, linux still lags behind
the Win world.
--
Leythos
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling
a drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(e-mail address removed) (remove 999 for proper email address)

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

What I'm saying is that for some users the switch to Linux might be
possible but for most that switch is not possible. I'm not a big MS
fan, in fact I don't use any MS products to do development in, but the
reality of my world is that if I want to continue to make a living then
MS is really the only path I have at the time.

Sure. If I were in your situation, I'd do the same thing. But I'm a
"general user," and Ubuntu does the job for me.

I could just as easily keep using 2k or XP for the foreseeable future. I
have switched to Ubuntu to prepare for the time, 3 or 4 years down the
road, when Vista is the tired old warhorse. At that point, I foresee a
fork in the road with two alternate future realities:

1. Microsoft is still hanging on to its hegemony and is about to release
something even more ridiculous in terms of system requirements and
license restrictions.

2. The desktop OS is fading into the background as web applications,
device interfaces and other cross-platform software become the focus of
what people see and work with when they boot up their computers.

If scenario (1) comes to pass, I will be glad not to be riding the
Microsoft train. If scenario (2) comes to pass, I will not be paying
Microsoft for a layer of software that resides beneath whatever I am
working with directly, and I will be running an all-around leaner, more
nimble system than I would be if I used Windows.

Charlie

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Anyway, I reccommend using Windows 98, 98SE, Me or 2000 on older
computers. Windows 2000 is more stable than XP. However, I am very happy
that Microsoft finally will make XP history, I never get to like it! I
even think that XP Home is more unstable than Me. If I have an old or
current computer, I'll stay with Windows 2000 till I buy a new one with
the fantastic Windows Vista!

This is one aspect of the Microsoft business model that bothers me.
Windows 98 SE is a good operating system, but Microsoft no longer
develops it, and there is no community of enthusiasts to keep developing
it as there would be if it were open source.

Win2k is a good OS also, but it too suffers from an orphan status and is
not compatible with certain newer printers, cameras, software etc.

I have a machine that I use for DOS games and applications. I have it
set up with 2 partitions... a "pure DOS" partition and a Windows 98
partition. The hardware is an AMD k2 400mhz with 160mb of RAM (exactly
the right amount to optimize w98 speed).

Windows 98 is as fast or faster on that machine than XP is on an almost
new machine. And for about 90% of what I do, it doesn't make one bit of
difference whether I use 98se, XP, 2k, or Ubuntu.

I understand why Microsoft operates the way it does... they don't make
any fresh money off an OS they sold 6 or 8 years ago (which is one reason
they have tethered Vista to a license server, so people will have no
choice but to upgrade at some point). But the whole closed-source OS
model is incredibly wasteful. It encourages people to junk out machines
that really don't need to be replaced. It also imposes a "tax" on new
PCs, because nearly all of them come with a Microsoft OS license that the
buyer pays for whether he wants it or not.

Charlie

 

[Stephan Rose]

LOL - yea, um, just how many current games that kids are playing on their
XP boxes are going to run on Linux - not many. So, lets not play word
games here, ok.

A sad fact but yes, that is unfortunately true. It is one of the very few
reasons I keep XP around.

You can do a lot without DX and I write code in 12 languages still,
mostly machine control systems, but a lot of ASP.Net and even PHP, but I
still like the tools I have on my XP boxes better than those on FC.

Didn't say it is needed to use linux as the environment to do your work in
if you prefer to XP tools. I write windws & linux cross platform compatible
software right from XP all day long. Reason being that I am a software
developer after all and as such I need to target the widest audience. That
is still windows, so I develop natively within the environment I primarily
need to support. Doesn't stop me from being linux compatible however, and
in my line of development I actually do have requests for linux support.

There you go again, playing the game - I bet I can find newer that is not
supported - what do you want to bet that Linux has LESS newer hardware
support than XP does? Stop playing the Zealot game.

So stop threatening and find it. My system is built with the newest
components I could only get my hands on and it is fully supported. Ranging
from my Dual Core processor to nVidia's latest and greatest video card to
my japanese keyboard (which XP never learns to get 100% right and randomly
forgets the layout) to my plasma TV to my monitor to every peripheral I
have connected to it.

I am not playing the zealot game as I am not a zealot. If I ever was a
zealot, it was a MS zealot believe it or not. I simply don't like it when
people attempt to state "facts" that I am disproving in my very own living
room.

I am sure there is some device out there that doesn't work. Matter of fact,
I have one sitting on my table in this very room. The wireless broadcom
chipset in my laptop which has no linux support. There, I said it! Do I
care? No. At my earliest convenience it will receive an intel card and
problem will solved.

However when it comes to Windows, and Vista in particular, I have not just
one wireless card that is not supported. No. I have an entire office
building filled with perfectly fine working equipment NOT supported by
Vista.

Dunno about you but I rather replace a wireless card than several perfectly
fine working, but inadequate spec for Vista, computers.

Even when supported the wireless often lags, many months or longer.

Due to the very proprietary nature of laptops I honestly don't doubt that
one bit. And yes, that is one problem that still exists. Linux is not
perfect and I know that.

So, when you start looking at "Popular" items, linux still lags behind
the Win world.

Yea it lags behind in some things. So does Windows. Both have their own
advantages and disadvantages.

My multimedia, e-mail and general use system at home is Linux. I can play
all my DVDs and such without worrying about region coding, CSS, etc. Also
Linux properly (unlike windows) supports my attached plasma monitor so that
I can have a movie running on the plasma and still use the computer for
other stuff if I want. At this point in time, I *cannot* do this under
windows as it does not support multiple independant desktops and there no
longer is support in the video driver for full screen video overlay.

Windows on the other hand I keep around for gaming and my 3D software I use
for mechanical design which has no linux version. There are commercial
alternatives for the latter for linux but the companies are honestly a pain
to deal with. One of the companies actually wanted me to attend a 40 hour
course for 2,000 bucks before even thinking of giving me a trial copy.
Umm...yea, right!

So ya see, I have my reasons to use both and am a fanboy of neither.

I can tell you one thing though, Vista is one operating system I will
absolutely refuse to use until I absolutely have no other choice anymore.
It's ridiculous hardware requirements are not even the reason. The reason
simply is an EULA which feel I cannot accept unless I am left with no other
choice.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Leythos]

So ya see, I have my reasons to use both and am a fanboy of neither.

I can tell you one thing though, Vista is one operating system I will
absolutely refuse to use until I absolutely have no other choice
anymore. It's ridiculous hardware requirements are not even the reason.
The reason simply is an EULA which feel I cannot accept unless I am left
with no other choice.

We're in the same boat, we both use multiple platforms and find the
strengths in each. I appear to have confused you with another one of the
many linux zealots here instead of a rational computer user - sorry.

I won't me using Vista on business systems until we can find an ROI for
it, so far there is no ROI.

--
Leythos
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling
a drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(e-mail address removed) (remove 999 for proper email address)

 

[Stephan Rose]

I understand why Microsoft operates the way it does... they don't make
any fresh money off an OS they sold 6 or 8 years ago (which is one reason
they have tethered Vista to a license server, so people will have no
choice but to upgrade at some point). But the whole closed-source OS
model is incredibly wasteful. It encourages people to junk out machines
that really don't need to be replaced. It also imposes a "tax" on new
PCs, because nearly all of them come with a Microsoft OS license that the
buyer pays for whether he wants it or not.

Wait a moment. This is something new I am reading here. License server for
vista?

I mean, I was aware of Vista calling home for anti-piracy reasons. But are
you saying what I think you are saying? Can MS actually, legally, whenever
the release the next monstrosity, remotely disable the Vista license to
force upgrades?

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Frank]

Stephan Rose wrote:
...Can MS actually, legally, whenever the release the next
monstrosity, remotely disable the Vista license to force upgrades?

<--------------------------------------------------------------


Only in your wildest linux hopes & dreams!
Frank

 

[Leythos]

I mean, I was aware of Vista calling home for anti-piracy reasons. But
are you saying what I think you are saying? Can MS actually, legally,
whenever the release the next monstrosity, remotely disable the Vista
license to force upgrades?

Unless you're behind a firewall and don't allow updates, they can do that
with ANY of their software.

--
Leythos
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling
a drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(e-mail address removed) (remove 999 for proper email address)

 

[Nina DiBoy]

Charlie,

These might all be valid reasons, however the Linux desktop market at
the current time is a niche market. If you want to play you have to pay.
I've been in this game as a developer of a commercial product for 15
years and I have a total of 25 years in the industry in various development
roles. In all this time I've never once had a customer ask me if I
could write an application for Unix or Linux. We do use Linux and
Solaris for
our database servers on some customer sites, however I've never been
asked to write a Linux application front-end. All of the products that we
are required by our users to interface with are all Windows based
products, some by OCX and other's by web services. The web services could
run on any platform but the OCX's can only run on MS OS's.

What I'm saying is that for some users the switch to Linux might be
possible but for most that switch is not possible. I'm not a big MS
fan, in fact
I don't use any MS products to do development in, but the reality of my
world is that if I want to continue to make a living then MS is really the
only path I have at the time.

BTW, I have 2 machines that are running Vista, one with Business and one
with Home Premium. Both run just fine with Vista installed. Both are
newer machines (Opterton 175 dual core) and AMD Turion X2 - TL 52 and I
will agree with many that you must have the hardware to run Vista.
I've sent newsletters to all of my customers and tell them to stick with
2000 or XP if they have equipment that is over 1 year old.

Best Regards,

Michael Gould

Let me chime in here by saying I have found a completely ligament
purpose for running windows. I have windows on one of our spare
machines here, the one my teenaged sons use for internet access. If
they sneak to adult content websites, the machine gets incredibly
infected with malware and nasties which makes it alot easier to tell
they have been at disreputable sites. If I ran linux on it, It would
not have the same obvious indicators.

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

Most recent idiotic quote added to KICK (Klassic Idiotic Caption Kooks):
"Very simple Nothing I like better than insulting Linsux losers, fanboys
and trolls like you."

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

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Wait a moment. This is something new I am reading here. License server
for vista?

I mean, I was aware of Vista calling home for anti-piracy reasons. But
are you saying what I think you are saying? Can MS actually, legally,
whenever the release the next monstrosity, remotely disable the Vista
license to force upgrades?

It's nothing new. It's an extrapolation of what everyone already knows.

Here is how Microsoft addresses this point in the Vista license agreement:

"The software will from time to time validate the software, update or
require download of the validation feature of the software."

http://tinyurl.com/yhmyjk

"From time to time"... what exactly does that mean, eh? With w2k or XP,
users could decide whether or not they wanted automatic updates. With
Vista, updates are required.

If you look at this useful lever from the standpoint of Microsoft and its
interests, it seems obvious they won't flat-out disable Vista at some
date 6 years down the road. Why pick a fight? What they could do
instead, once they have released a new OS to replace Vista, is force
Vista updates that have the effect of making Vista less and less pleasant
to use. They could be as inventive as they need to be, with regard to
what they put on people's systems and how they explain it in the copy
they put out to the press.

I mentioned that I have a Windows 98 box with an 400mhz AMD K series CPU
and 160mb RAM. It's a sweet little machine, very handy if I wanna use a
laplink cable to rescue files from an ancient laptop, or burn a
customized DOS boot CD with diagnostic utilities, or something similar
that comes up once every few months. But imagine if that machine were
tethered to a "Windows update" server... think how easy it would be for
Microsoft to design Windows 98 "security patches" that would destabilize
and or bog it down until I threw my hands up in disgust.

I may be borrowing trouble... but the one thing I know about the future
is that it will bring change, and at this point, I feel I will have more
control over how change affects me by migrating to an open source OS.

Charlie

 

[Frank]

Charlie Wilkes wrote:
I feel I will have more

control over how change affects me by migrating to an open source OS.

Sounds like a real false sense of security if you really think about it.
Open source...everyones got the code and anyone can write anything they
want and put it up for distribution. Open source and closed security
don't seem to go together in my way of thinking. It's like everyone has
the combination...and it's only a matter of time before....
Then all one ever hears about linux is how secure it is...then I dl
unbuntu and it ask if I want to dl some 122+ security updates and I'm
going...what the hell is that all about.
To me, linux security it is only a perception, especially with the
proliferation of rootkits...it seems only a matter of time...especially
with the high number of enemies penguinetist seem to be making.
No, I'll stick with something I know security has it eyes on cause they
know it's a target.
I don't like being blindsided, do you?
Frank

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Charlie Wilkes wrote:
I feel I will have more

Sounds like a real false sense of security if you really think about it.
Open source...everyones got the code and anyone can write anything they
want and put it up for distribution.

I am not qualified to evaluate the relative security of various operating
systems. Security is not my complaint with Windows, and it is not what I
was thinking of when I made the statement above. I was thinking in terms
of migrating to an OS that will evolve in accordance with the real,
expressed needs of its user base, and won't be replaced arbitrarily with
something that is radically different, simply because a big corporation
wants to freshen its revenue stream.

Charlie

 

[Stephan Rose]

Charlie Wilkes wrote:
I feel I will have more

Sounds like a real false sense of security if you really think about it.
Open source...everyones got the code and anyone can write anything they
want and put it up for distribution. Open source and closed security
don't seem to go together in my way of thinking. It's like everyone has
the combination...and it's only a matter of time before....

It actually is not *that* easy. Yes, anyone can contribute to open source.
However, I cannot go ahead and just write a random piece of code, and add
it to Ubuntu. It does not work that way.

If I want to make a change to Ubuntu, I have to explain what I did. Why I
did it. What I changed and where I changed it. It has to be submitted for
review and testing. Something you may not know but Ubuntu for example is
actually owned by a company who is in charge of it. So any changes I want
to make to Ubuntu, has to go through the people that are responsible for
reviewing and testing these changes.

So bottom line, there are plenty of checks in place to ensure quality and
security and nobody can just randomly modify the Ubuntu release.

Then all one ever hears about linux is how secure it is...then I dl
unbuntu and it ask if I want to dl some 122+ security updates and I'm
going...what the hell is that all about.

Well first off it is about reality. I can easily consider Linux more secure
than windows. It is not however, invulnerable. Only thing that can ever be
invulnerable is a system with absolutely no connection to the outside world
running nothing but proprietary owned software. Expecting any type of
software that is subject to be hacked and broken into by thousands of
people on a daily basis to be invulnerable is ridiculous.

However, that 122+ number is likely not the number of actual security
updates. The number of actual security issues was likely far lower when you
did that update. I can also explain to you why.

When you do an update in the package manager, that 122+ or whatever it may
be is actually the number of total packages that have changed. I have seen
it happen plenty of times, that I log on and, for example, I see 8 new
updates. I go look what they are, the 8 updates address *one* security
issue. It just so happened that this one issue affected 8 packages, hence
showing as 8 updates.

Also, the update manager does not make a distinction between security fixes,
non-security related bug fixes, feature additions, etc. Any one of those
type of changes can also cause multiple packages to change and is reflected
in the total # of updates shown.

So bottom line, you may have seen 122+ package changes. But the actual
number of security fixes, bug fixes, feature changes, etc. all added up
more than likely totalled far less than half that.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Stephan Rose]

Nina DiBoy wrote:

Let me chime in here by saying I have found a completely ligament
purpose for running windows. I have windows on one of our spare
machines here, the one my teenaged sons use for internet access. If
they sneak to adult content websites, the machine gets incredibly
infected with malware and nasties which makes it alot easier to tell
they have been at disreputable sites. If I ran linux on it, It would
not have the same obvious indicators.

ROFL!!!! I love it!!!

Btw, what's so bad about them checking out some naked girls??

Sometimes I think you americans need to spend more time in europe. Our
newspapers and TV magazines can sometimes be more explicit than your
playboy magazines!

Nobody thinks anything of it here...

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Stephan Rose]

It's nothing new. It's an extrapolation of what everyone already knows.

Here is how Microsoft addresses this point in the Vista license agreement:

"The software will from time to time validate the software, update or
require download of the validation feature of the software."

http://tinyurl.com/yhmyjk

"From time to time"... what exactly does that mean, eh? With w2k or XP,
users could decide whether or not they wanted automatic updates. With
Vista, updates are required.

So I suppose the only way to describe someone with limited or no internet
access is: screwed?

This EULA just sickens me...

And to think I actually used to enjoy using MS' products...

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Frank]

This EULA just sickens me...

Did you ever read the back of a parking garage ticket?
Frank

 

[DanS]

I even think that XP Home is more unstable than Me.

What ?!

You have got to be kidding.

 

[Stephan Rose]

Did you ever read the back of a parking garage ticket?

http://www.somrek.net/MyR6.jpg

At least here in Germany, I am not even allowed to park in most parking
garages.

On the other hand...I *am* allowd to park anywhere I want as long as I don't
obstruct anything. =) Perk of the vehicle!

So I don't care what it says on the back of that parking garage ticket.

Regardless of that, I have a choice if I park in a parking garage or not. If
I don't like what it says on the back of that ticket, I can just park
somewhere else.

With regards of Vista, since I can't unfortunately use linux for everything
yet, and due to my line of work, I ultimately do not have a choice in the
matter. Eventually XP will no longer be feasible and I will be forced to
use Vista regardless of what the EULA says. I can only try to prolong it as
much as possible.

Significant difference there in my opinion.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Frank]

Frank wrote:




http://www.somrek.net/MyR6.jpg

At least here in Germany, I am not even allowed to park in most parking
garages.

On the other hand...I *am* allowd to park anywhere I want as long as I don't
obstruct anything. =) Perk of the vehicle!

So I don't care what it says on the back of that parking garage ticket.

Regardless of that, I have a choice if I park in a parking garage or not. If
I don't like what it says on the back of that ticket, I can just park
somewhere else.

With regards of Vista, since I can't unfortunately use linux for everything
yet, and due to my line of work, I ultimately do not have a choice in the
matter. Eventually XP will no longer be feasible and I will be forced to
use Vista regardless of what the EULA says. I can only try to prolong it as
much as possible.

Significant difference there in my opinion.

Nice R6!
In fact I had one for lunch this weekend going up Stunt Rd, two up on my
VFR.
Very tastie!
Frank

 

[Stephan Rose]

Nice R6!

Thank you! =)

In fact I had one for lunch this weekend going up Stunt Rd, two up on my
VFR.
Very tastie!

Haha I know that feeling. Nice job. =)

I've eaten up a few liter bikes with my R6 too on twisty roads. =)

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰