I'm curious about what truly ends up being the difference between operating systems.
Why might I not want to change to a Linux OS? What makes a home windows product different from a pro version.
Ulimately is there any reason on earth to actually give MS some of my hard earned cash just so I can run my computer (badly)?
Operating Systems
Moderator: Moderators
Operating Systems
The internet gave a voice to the world thus gave definitive proof that the world is mostly full of idiots.
The software that runs on Windows and that doesn't run on Linux and for which there is no decent replacement and which doesn't run under wine (and wine is getting better pretty much daily). If you don't use any windows-only software there is no reason for windows really. Oh, and some hardware doesn't work decently under Linux, but that too is getting rare.
Murtak
Wine?
SO what kinds of programs don't run or don't run well under linux?
What about the interface? Is there much of a learning curve when switching? I always get pissed off when I use a mac because of the minor variations in the OSs
SO what kinds of programs don't run or don't run well under linux?
What about the interface? Is there much of a learning curve when switching? I always get pissed off when I use a mac because of the minor variations in the OSs
The internet gave a voice to the world thus gave definitive proof that the world is mostly full of idiots.
Wine is an emulation layer for windows programs. Actually that is not entirely correct - it is not a separate layer but rather duplicates the kind of system calls windows programs expect, so theoretically there is no speed penalty. Realistically a program running under wine will probably be a tiny bit slower than running natively under windows and exhibit some minor bugs. But a lot of stuff actually runs, and runs well. You can find out more here.
If you are holding our for a "windows, just better" OS though you will be disappointed. After all being better than windows will certainly mean being different at some point - and you state even minor differences already piss you off.
That said, I recommend Ubuntu - it is dead easy to set up, can be started from the installer CD without changing anything on your computer and is probably the linux with simplest interface and best help. But you will still have to drop down to the command line every now and then, you won't be able to install every crap you like just by downloading and doubleclicking it and some of your programs won't run. On the upside though you will get system updates that just work, for your entire installed software, you will get to install literally thousands of apps through single interface (and if those apps need other apps you can automatically install them too) and of course it will be free.
If you are holding our for a "windows, just better" OS though you will be disappointed. After all being better than windows will certainly mean being different at some point - and you state even minor differences already piss you off.
That said, I recommend Ubuntu - it is dead easy to set up, can be started from the installer CD without changing anything on your computer and is probably the linux with simplest interface and best help. But you will still have to drop down to the command line every now and then, you won't be able to install every crap you like just by downloading and doubleclicking it and some of your programs won't run. On the upside though you will get system updates that just work, for your entire installed software, you will get to install literally thousands of apps through single interface (and if those apps need other apps you can automatically install them too) and of course it will be free.
Murtak
-
Absentminded_Wizard
- Duke
- Posts: 1122
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Ohio
- Contact:
Well, here's a massive information dump.
Wine and Program Compatability
WINE = Wine Is Not an Emulator (one of those cute recursive acronyms like GNU). It's a "windows compatability layer" that allows some Windows programs to run on Linux.
Basically, a lot of popular video games don't run on Linux (or so I've heard), even with Wine. So Linux is not a good choice for really hardcore gamers.
A lot of proprietary applications used by businesses are also problematic. For example, you can make Office 2007 run under Wine with a lot of work. However, you don't get all the functions. Adobe products tend not to run at all under Wine. So if you need these or similar proprietary apps for work or school, you'll probably want to at least keep a Windows partition on your hard drive to keep using them.
Equivalent Linux Programs
Now, if you don't have a dire need for a specific program, there are Linux equivalents for a lot of things. For example, Open Office, which is included with a lot of Linux distros, does MS-Office stuff plenty well enough for everyday use. GIMP, while it doesn't have Photoshop's advanced features, is free and has plenty of features for the non-professional. Desktop publishing is probably the only major weak area in terms of "serious" applications, and really all Scribus needs is the ability to work better with PDFs (as in, becoming able to import them at all) to be plenty adequate for anything normal people would use it for.
Linux Interface
What the interface looks like depends on what distribution and desktop environment you choose. The major desktops are GNOME and KDE. I only really have experience with GNOME, which is really customizable. Seriously, what the default interface looks like depends on how the distro decides to set it up.
That said, GNOME probably has fewer counterintuitive quirks than the Mac OS in most distros made for PCs. For example, in the default Ubuntu interface, all the window controls are on the right as usual. Typically, there will be a few things you have to get used to (like having Applications, Places, and System menus instead of one Start menu). However, you can change a lot of these things once you dig around and start figuring things out.
Having only ever used Ubuntu and derivatives thereof, I have to say that Ubuntu is pretty good and works with a surprising amount of hardware right out of the box (though you can never guarantee perfect compatability; testing is one of the benefits of the Live CD).
Wine and Program Compatability
WINE = Wine Is Not an Emulator (one of those cute recursive acronyms like GNU). It's a "windows compatability layer" that allows some Windows programs to run on Linux.
Basically, a lot of popular video games don't run on Linux (or so I've heard), even with Wine. So Linux is not a good choice for really hardcore gamers.
A lot of proprietary applications used by businesses are also problematic. For example, you can make Office 2007 run under Wine with a lot of work. However, you don't get all the functions. Adobe products tend not to run at all under Wine. So if you need these or similar proprietary apps for work or school, you'll probably want to at least keep a Windows partition on your hard drive to keep using them.
Equivalent Linux Programs
Now, if you don't have a dire need for a specific program, there are Linux equivalents for a lot of things. For example, Open Office, which is included with a lot of Linux distros, does MS-Office stuff plenty well enough for everyday use. GIMP, while it doesn't have Photoshop's advanced features, is free and has plenty of features for the non-professional. Desktop publishing is probably the only major weak area in terms of "serious" applications, and really all Scribus needs is the ability to work better with PDFs (as in, becoming able to import them at all) to be plenty adequate for anything normal people would use it for.
Linux Interface
What the interface looks like depends on what distribution and desktop environment you choose. The major desktops are GNOME and KDE. I only really have experience with GNOME, which is really customizable. Seriously, what the default interface looks like depends on how the distro decides to set it up.
That said, GNOME probably has fewer counterintuitive quirks than the Mac OS in most distros made for PCs. For example, in the default Ubuntu interface, all the window controls are on the right as usual. Typically, there will be a few things you have to get used to (like having Applications, Places, and System menus instead of one Start menu). However, you can change a lot of these things once you dig around and start figuring things out.
Having only ever used Ubuntu and derivatives thereof, I have to say that Ubuntu is pretty good and works with a surprising amount of hardware right out of the box (though you can never guarantee perfect compatability; testing is one of the benefits of the Live CD).
I run Windows 7 under a Virtual Machine.
It runs faster in the VM on my NIX than it does native. I kid you not.
I can also cap the amount of RAM and CPU it uses so it doesn't slowdown my work.
On the note of Adobe and WINE: If you install the Adobe suite individually it works just perfectly.
Wine is a god damn hog though.
It runs faster in the VM on my NIX than it does native. I kid you not.
I can also cap the amount of RAM and CPU it uses so it doesn't slowdown my work.
On the note of Adobe and WINE: If you install the Adobe suite individually it works just perfectly.
Wine is a god damn hog though.
-
Josh_Kablack
- King
- Posts: 5317
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Online. duh
Well, I got an el cheapo reconditioned lappy with Puppy Linux 4.0 last year.
All in all it performs well, it's ridiculously small, includes more features standard than I have call to use on Windows and runs acceptably fast on a almost 10-year old laptop - plus it goes out of it's way to have an interface similar to windows.
However, here are the actual issues I have had with the OS (and included software) during the past 10 months:
Of course, not like that doesn't happen with windows.
All in all it performs well, it's ridiculously small, includes more features standard than I have call to use on Windows and runs acceptably fast on a almost 10-year old laptop - plus it goes out of it's way to have an interface similar to windows.
However, here are the actual issues I have had with the OS (and included software) during the past 10 months:
- Version 4.0 has an Archive utility that for reasons unexplained cannot decompress RAR files. A fixed version of the Puppy de-archiver is available on the internet - as a RAR file. Good thing I have a desktop with a different OS on it - otherwise this would be unfixable.
- Puppy does not support linux FMT command. (In fairness, nothing on my Win XP desktop could accomplish the task either and the answer was "learn perl").
- My linksys wireless usb adaptor had great difficulty connecting to WPA encrypted wireless networks. Supposedly there is a workaround, but I could not get it to work - and eventually bought a new network card. It's still not as intuitive as I would like when connecting to new secure networks, but it works for my needs.
- For reasons unexplained, the pre-installed AbiWord word processor sometimes has issues with .rtf files created in OpenOffice - and will not display such files in a readable format. Workaround: save as .txt or .doc. (Or create rtfs using Wordpad) Sometimes even just opening an illegible .rtf then using "save as" to change the extension renders the file readable again on the fly. (In fairness, microsoft has decoupled Word from Windows so Puppy currently includes far better word processing out of the box than Windows)
- So far I have been unable to successfully read .lit files within Puppy.
Of course, not like that doesn't happen with windows.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
-
CatharzGodfoot
- King
- Posts: 5668
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: North Carolina
I'm running a dual boot with XP and Ubuntu, and I've found that in terms of speed, stability, and just about anything else they're the same. I generally use GNU/Linux for programming and Windows for gaming, but other than that I don't really care which I'm running.
I was shocked to discover that setting up a wireless network was easier in Ubuntu.
I was shocked to discover that setting up a wireless network was easier in Ubuntu.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
Frankly questions about OS just boil down to
A) Are you an enterprise user? Here the overall architecture is probably the only thing that matters and that is way more than just the OS.
B) Are you a 'power user' - if so you have a specific application(s) you want to run, and those will determine the 'best' OS and harping about the disadvantages of OSes is just irrelevant. You get whatever does what you want to do best.
C) IF you're not A or B you're a C which is generic home user. Here the only question is 'do you want to play games that are not flash games' If the answer is no, linux is a good choice as is windows.
Any discussion about operating systems is pretty pointless - Linux is cheaper, but defiantly more difficult to handle, especially if you are using 'edge case' functionality or want broader hardware support, but this different is trivial.
They key reason to use Windows, Mac or Linux is you want to use some particular application that only runs on 1 of the 3.
Pratically the core applications that would cause you to use one of the other.
Windows: Computer gaming remains the almost exclusive reserve of of Windows. WINE is getting better yes.. but yeah. Also, the MS office suite is still a jewel in the crown. While open office compatibility with MS office suite is getting better, it still isn't perfect. This doesn't matter if all you do with your computer computer is type up the odd document to print or whatever, but if you work from home extensively or use excel a lot, this pretty much rules out linux.
Additionally, a number of serious CAD/CAM applications will only run on windows. Linux support is improving again.. but yeah.
Mac: Mac still dominates desktop publishing, graphic design and the total stack has an aura of cool. Also, because it is strongly married to linux you can get into the guts of it more easily than windows if you're doing programming or similar.
Linux: Serious programming is done here - the Visual studio suite is good, but so is eclipse. The enviroment is also much more stable for this sort of thing.
It is also much less hardware demanding - so if you have old hardware, Linux gives much more snappy responses and can easily manage basic office automation suite tasks with a minimum of fuss.
Linux also has the most specalist uses - it gives you the most powerful media centres, routers and firewalls.
The biggest problem currently is that Linux wireless networking continues to suck donkey cock. It is absolutely unbelievable how bad it is. To get it to work you need to match your wireless network card to your distrobution. If the match is right, it is relatively pain free. If it is not, you sometimes just cannot get WPA2 to work. Ever. Unless you can write device drivers, and if you could, you wouldn't be asking this.
So yeah, if you're just doing basic word processing, the odd spreadsheet and web browsing, linux is a fine choice. Just be careful when buying hardware.
If you want more than that, decide what applications you want and then match your OS to that.
A) Are you an enterprise user? Here the overall architecture is probably the only thing that matters and that is way more than just the OS.
B) Are you a 'power user' - if so you have a specific application(s) you want to run, and those will determine the 'best' OS and harping about the disadvantages of OSes is just irrelevant. You get whatever does what you want to do best.
C) IF you're not A or B you're a C which is generic home user. Here the only question is 'do you want to play games that are not flash games' If the answer is no, linux is a good choice as is windows.
Any discussion about operating systems is pretty pointless - Linux is cheaper, but defiantly more difficult to handle, especially if you are using 'edge case' functionality or want broader hardware support, but this different is trivial.
They key reason to use Windows, Mac or Linux is you want to use some particular application that only runs on 1 of the 3.
Pratically the core applications that would cause you to use one of the other.
Windows: Computer gaming remains the almost exclusive reserve of of Windows. WINE is getting better yes.. but yeah. Also, the MS office suite is still a jewel in the crown. While open office compatibility with MS office suite is getting better, it still isn't perfect. This doesn't matter if all you do with your computer computer is type up the odd document to print or whatever, but if you work from home extensively or use excel a lot, this pretty much rules out linux.
Additionally, a number of serious CAD/CAM applications will only run on windows. Linux support is improving again.. but yeah.
Mac: Mac still dominates desktop publishing, graphic design and the total stack has an aura of cool. Also, because it is strongly married to linux you can get into the guts of it more easily than windows if you're doing programming or similar.
Linux: Serious programming is done here - the Visual studio suite is good, but so is eclipse. The enviroment is also much more stable for this sort of thing.
It is also much less hardware demanding - so if you have old hardware, Linux gives much more snappy responses and can easily manage basic office automation suite tasks with a minimum of fuss.
Linux also has the most specalist uses - it gives you the most powerful media centres, routers and firewalls.
The biggest problem currently is that Linux wireless networking continues to suck donkey cock. It is absolutely unbelievable how bad it is. To get it to work you need to match your wireless network card to your distrobution. If the match is right, it is relatively pain free. If it is not, you sometimes just cannot get WPA2 to work. Ever. Unless you can write device drivers, and if you could, you wouldn't be asking this.
So yeah, if you're just doing basic word processing, the odd spreadsheet and web browsing, linux is a fine choice. Just be careful when buying hardware.
If you want more than that, decide what applications you want and then match your OS to that.
In my world that's not considered a plus.plus it goes out of it's way to have an interface similar to windows
There are a fair amount of Linux games out there, and all free of course.Here the only question is 'do you want to play games that are not flash games' If the answer is no, linux is a good choice as is windows.
WINE is the only free environment.WINE is getting better yes.. but yeah
Flat out lie.use excel a lot, this pretty much rules out linux.
-
Josh_Kablack
- King
- Posts: 5317
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Online. duh
Fair enough, but for someone who is considering migrating from windows to linux, a reasonably familiar interface does make the transition easier.In my world that's not considered a plus.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
This is true. I'm not sure why I care - I mean the hardware isn't free, GTA 3 isn't free, and it takes much longer to get TF2 & demigod working under WINE that it does on windows.Mr. Bane wrote:
WINE is the only free environment.
Lots of stuff isn't cross compatible yet - so if you're using other peoples excel sheets in open office, they just don't work properly. To use the most recent example that I have encountered, the last financial model I got from work doesn't work in open office, and the shadowrun character spreadsheet doesn;t work properly in open office.
Flat out lie.
If the majority of people you're interacting with are OO users or you don't do anything with anyone else with your excel models then yeah, OO will work perfectly for you. I'm just saying that is not the general rule.
Last edited by cthulhu on Sun May 31, 2009 7:15 am, edited 4 times in total.
-
Draco_Argentum
- Duke
- Posts: 2434
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Now this is true.cthulhu wrote: Lots of stuff isn't cross compatible yet - so if you're using other peoples excel sheets in open office, they just don't work properly. To use the most recent example that I have encountered, the last financial model I got from work doesn't work in open office, and the shadowrun character spreadsheet doesn;t work properly in open office.
If the majority of people you're interacting with are OO users or you don't do anything with anyone else with your excel models then yeah, OO will work perfectly for you. I'm just saying that is not the general rule.
Open Office works adequately underly linux distros. I use Ubuntu 95% of the time. It is annoying as hell to see a file that's messed in ubuntu but when i go to a doze machine and open up OO suite, it works in a fashion that is much better.
Windows front end is strong, Linux back end is strong. and each day linux is getting stronger. WIndows isn't catching up.
But Linux still has a lot of faults that i still bang my head on the table with.
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
Ok, maybe you didn't get it.This is true. I'm not sure why I care - I mean the hardware isn't free, GTA 3 isn't free, and it takes much longer to get TF2 & demigod working under WINE that it does on windows.
http://www.cedega.com/
Windows is probably getting stronger in the midrange server environment. MS SQL/MS Server 2003/7 etc is being priced attractively for enterprise users to the point where it is starting to displace *nixs in some environments.A_Cynic wrote:
Windows front end is strong, Linux back end is strong. and each day linux is getting stronger. WIndows isn't catching up.
But Linux still has a lot of faults that i still bang my head on the table with.
Both platforms are getting better.
@Cedega: Yeah, fair point, but I still think advising people to buy a linux machine to play games on is frikken retarded, given how hard it is to get some stuff to work.
Last edited by cthulhu on Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Absentminded_Wizard
- Duke
- Posts: 1122
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Ohio
- Contact:
A lot depends on which functions you use. I don't really use spreadsheets, so I can't speak for Excel compatability, but I'm pretty familiar with the Word issues.A_Cynic wrote:Now this is true.cthulhu wrote: Lots of stuff isn't cross compatible yet - so if you're using other peoples excel sheets in open office, they just don't work properly. To use the most recent example that I have encountered, the last financial model I got from work doesn't work in open office, and the shadowrun character spreadsheet doesn;t work properly in open office.
If the majority of people you're interacting with are OO users or you don't do anything with anyone else with your excel models then yeah, OO will work perfectly for you. I'm just saying that is not the general rule.
Open Office works adequately underly linux distros. I use Ubuntu 95% of the time. It is annoying as hell to see a file that's messed in ubuntu but when i go to a doze machine and open up OO suite, it works in a fashion that is much better.
Windows front end is strong, Linux back end is strong. and each day linux is getting stronger. WIndows isn't catching up.
But Linux still has a lot of faults that i still bang my head on the table with.
Basically, if your documents are just single- or double-spaced body text with a smattering of centered headings and right-flushed headers and/or footers, OO will probably keep the formatting pretty well when saving as a .doc. However, if you're doing anything with complicated formatting where you will be judged on the indentation of a bullet list, you're better off doing the job in Word.
I think AW, cthulhu, and I just agreed on the same thing. But we either took three different paths or I've completely missed a point somewhere in the conversation back there.
Summary: Complex word suite-like functions are much rather suited for Microsoft's product rather than OO's or any of the other open source equivalents.
Also, Cthulhu, what exact environments are you speaking of when you speak of doze knocking *nix out of the ring. I'm asking this more as a curious person rather than a instigator of a fight.
If you'd rather not as not to start a gigantic 'doze/nix fight that is understandable.
Summary: Complex word suite-like functions are much rather suited for Microsoft's product rather than OO's or any of the other open source equivalents.
Also, Cthulhu, what exact environments are you speaking of when you speak of doze knocking *nix out of the ring. I'm asking this more as a curious person rather than a instigator of a fight.
If you'd rather not as not to start a gigantic 'doze/nix fight that is understandable.
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
I didn't say knock out of the ring! It's not an open and shut decision. Java, Oracle, *nixes etc have really competitive product suites, and lets be honest, Oracle is not going away as part of anyone's architecture any time soon.
Anyway, its large volume services clients who are pretty conservative and value strong support arrangements and scalability over cheapness to deploy. TThey are also jettisoning their mainframe platforms (slowly), and looking to reachitect and transplant the software onto the midrange.
It's not secret I work for the public sector, so that should give you some client context.
Basically it boils down to the MS product stack is getting better
A) Exchange is better than the other options - and this gets AD in the back door.
B) .NET is cheaper than Java. Not because of any intrisic advantage - but because contractors for .NET are 10 dollars an hour cheaper, which is about 18 grand a year. Which is a lot.
C) MS SQL Server is getting market share because people need something that is cheaper than oracle, but with scability and enterprise support deals. Oracle still isn;t under threat because the number of practical altenatives for the really big systems is nil - but the top 5 items in the applications portfolio (typically SAP and some line of business aps) and built on oracle, but the remaining 150 corporate and line of business aps will use MS SQL
D) B & C, as well as a quantum leap in actual product quality is giving MS server traction - and at this space it's competing with *nixes to host enterprise apps.
E) To round it out, MS is coming in really cheap and cutting margins to move volume.
Conversely, Java, Oracle, AIX *nix etc are not going away (Notes and Novell are in their death throes around here though), so its not open and shut. Just that MS is picking up some market share. Lots of people are still going with the other options.
The most relistant offering is Apache, surprisingly. I'm not sure why this is, but sharepoint server sucks.
Anyway, its large volume services clients who are pretty conservative and value strong support arrangements and scalability over cheapness to deploy. TThey are also jettisoning their mainframe platforms (slowly), and looking to reachitect and transplant the software onto the midrange.
It's not secret I work for the public sector, so that should give you some client context.
Basically it boils down to the MS product stack is getting better
A) Exchange is better than the other options - and this gets AD in the back door.
B) .NET is cheaper than Java. Not because of any intrisic advantage - but because contractors for .NET are 10 dollars an hour cheaper, which is about 18 grand a year. Which is a lot.
C) MS SQL Server is getting market share because people need something that is cheaper than oracle, but with scability and enterprise support deals. Oracle still isn;t under threat because the number of practical altenatives for the really big systems is nil - but the top 5 items in the applications portfolio (typically SAP and some line of business aps) and built on oracle, but the remaining 150 corporate and line of business aps will use MS SQL
D) B & C, as well as a quantum leap in actual product quality is giving MS server traction - and at this space it's competing with *nixes to host enterprise apps.
E) To round it out, MS is coming in really cheap and cutting margins to move volume.
Conversely, Java, Oracle, AIX *nix etc are not going away (Notes and Novell are in their death throes around here though), so its not open and shut. Just that MS is picking up some market share. Lots of people are still going with the other options.
The most relistant offering is Apache, surprisingly. I'm not sure why this is, but sharepoint server sucks.
Last edited by cthulhu on Mon Jun 01, 2009 5:02 am, edited 5 times in total.
Oracle can totally package an enterprise edition of MySQL and eat market share off MS, but you are right.
MySQL's main attribute is delivering a quality product at a price of free for small, fast applications so they shouldn't compromise that, but if they can do something like "MySQL lacks the scability or features to meet your growing business? Lets cut you across to Oracle 11g or whatever painlessly and cheaply" that would do a lot.
MySQL's main attribute is delivering a quality product at a price of free for small, fast applications so they shouldn't compromise that, but if they can do something like "MySQL lacks the scability or features to meet your growing business? Lets cut you across to Oracle 11g or whatever painlessly and cheaply" that would do a lot.
Last edited by cthulhu on Mon Jun 01, 2009 8:02 am, edited 2 times in total.