Computing is a political issue. OS Revolution Now!

This rant was begun in a thread in the Lounge (of all places):

I'm 45, have been using computers for most of my adult life, though not at all when I was a kid. I don't know a thing about programming. To me, my computer is like an irritating TV--irritating mainly because it promised to be fast and is soooo fuckin' slow! I mean something is clearly wrong with my Windows XP. I'm ready to chuck the whole computer, but that bugs me because it's not the hardware that's so awful (though it's not state-of-the-art--it's a 2002 Compaq Presario), but the operating system. I really want to scrape it all off and start from scratch with a system that won't make me want to throttle it.

I think a revolution is needed in the way people think about their computers. We think too much about them the way we think of everything else we consume--i.e., as something to consume, as it comes, ready-made, according to the producer's specs. It's supply side consumerism, if you follow me. Most of us live with shitty computers because Bill Gates wants us to live with shitty computers--I mean, he wants us to use his shitty operating system. He doesn't want us to think about why, given about two years, everything stops operating reliably with his system. So we don't. We just take this crap until we can't stand it anymore, and then we buy crap version 2.0.

Am I making any sense?

Computing is a political issue. It's not just for techies anymore.

It's not really feasible for software manufacturers to make programs that can run on more than a couple of operating systems. That's why you really don't have many options. Windows is the Least Common Denominator, and as such, you can get almost any program available for Windows, which then of course compels people to buy Windows OS, which further compels manufacturers to make Windows applications... and the cycle of death continues. If you switch to a Mac, you'll find your choice of applications definitely diminishes. Switch to Linux, and you're further in a hole. Switch to Unix, and you're probably working on custom software.

Unfortunately, I don't see your revolution occurring any time soon.

WE'RE being programmed to think they're for games, so that we keep consuming and consuming and consuming more shit we don't need. Why can't all games be Internet based, anyway? Why do we have to load up our hard drives with that shit? (Of course, I know we don't have to, but try telling that to your nine-year-old everytime you pass a software rack.)

Say you do business with a company that has custom user software. Good luck getting them to do a Linux format. Say your kid takes a computers class and they have a chapter on Word or Macromedia Flash. Looks like your kid is going to be spending a lot of time at the school library, huh?

Most people underestimate just how much they need their computers for. Yeah, some of us can get by with a machine that lets us connect to the internet to check email and write a letter every now and again, but most people can't get by on just that, whether they realize it or not.

what you're saying is:
"i have to use windows, all i run is windows programs"

I am saying "There are too many Windows-only applications that prevent me from switching to another platform."

and capabilities. Gamers just push for more realism, more capabilities and better representation of reality in general, and once the computers are in existence, industry finds out that it can do all sorts of cool stuff with this new power.

Of course, this may be changing now that computers are so mainstream...

Most CPU's are so fast, most PCs have so much memory, and hard drives store so much information, that general business applications don't make a machine work at all. It takes a modern game to make a machine sweat nowadays.

(I know that things like scientific number crunching or network serving also tax todays machines. But those are far crys from Word or Powerpoint.)

and an astonishing number of progs are becoming available for it.

The problem is that the average home user can't cope with it, not yet. They've concentrated on business and server software, and the home user has been kind of an afterthought.

I keep thinking "Gee, give them another couple of years, and we can all dump Windows forever." They keep giving the home user short shrift, and we're all still waiting. And waiting. And waiting.

Linux has found a niche in business and server software. They're breaking into the old Unix crowd because it's far more user friendly. They've broken more ground than the old Unix because it is definitely more useful, but how many people beyond that crowd can it really reach without broad 3rd party software support? It's likely Linux doesn't have a lot of growth left it in, if it hasn't already peaked. For it to go further, some software developer needs to make a product that will appeal to both the business/server user, but also to someone who hasn't given Linux a try yet (perhaps the graphic design field, though I don't believe it's well suited for that type of application).

the facts show there's a lot of growth left in Linux.

Many linux devellopers have made it more appealing to both business- and casual users, by making installing it very easy - as easy if not easier then installing Windows.

for my home computer, and I haven't been disappointed. For one thing, I no longer have to worry about viruses, which were giving me a headache despite my firewalls and uber-virusscan on Windows...

And if all you're doing is playing games, then a Windows box is probably just fine.

As hardware performance improves, developers write software to take advantage of it. It's not really a conspiracy (I'm purposely avoiding any Windows jokes).

www.ubuntu.com

www.mandrakelinux.com

www.fedora.redhat.com

Plenty to choose from.

Even more here: www.distrowatch.com

I have been using computers since I was 5 years old starting with a TRS-80 and I have managed to install several distros of Linux. Can it do most of what Windows does? Yeah, probably, but if it doesn't work immediately upon installation, I don't really have time to search through 1000 man pages just to solve the problem. I have a job. Linux better get easier to use, quickly, or it'll never be more than a pasttime for nerds.

It's just trading some one doomed to be obsolete package for another.

You're late.

it never crashes, my games run perfectly, and the performance is awesome...

Athlon 64 3500+
1 GB PC3200 DDR400 RAM
Asus A8V Deluxe mobo
Geforce FX 6800 256mb Ultra

maybe yall need to get better PC's

I upgrade every year or so... I like having the best stuff. :D

... get tired of having to buy a new pc every 3 years because gates and intel think we should.

XP is "decent", but given it took them 15 years to make it its no great achievement.

I used to run Linux but I got tired of having to wait every time a new file format came along. But I could see myself swithcing back one day.

they simply improve the technology all the time. If you want to stay with that Gateway that is your choice, I am willing to upgrade my hardware every year or 2 to have a better PC experiance.

You like paying thousands every year for new hardware?

That's fine, but is it really necessary?

PC's are upgradeable and modular.. More so than any complex product in human history.

environmental waste just like so many other things Americans consume and then obliviously just throw it away.

to people who can't afford them. Or to agnecies that refurbish them. But I see them on the street with the trash all the time.

where they leave their old computers (& their dang cats) on my doorstep instead of tossing 'em. Get enough of these, eBay a very few parts to upgrade it - voila! Nice little comps for me, the kiddoes, & anyone I run into that can't afford one. Now ... if only the cats (& one time a smelly old goat) were as easy to refurbish & locate homes for!

It's not like I throw away old parts. You sell them, reuse them in another system, or just give them away. Also, Americans are hardly the only ones that have to upgrade all the time; I know many people in other countries that do the same.

and like so many other "appliances" head to a land fill of toxic plastic trash. At SOME point these appliances land in toxic wasteland. So what are we going to do about it?

We have to start looking at ways to stop polluting our planet. It creates so much more toxicity. We have to look at the problems of continuous consumerism and promoting "throw away" items. At the least we should make things more biodegradable.

If you have kids, and even if you don't, you should hopefully want the same environment that you have been able to live with for those that come after us. Its the very base of logic, responsibility and decency.

Unless the parts are really old nobody throws them away. Computer parts, if still usable today, always have some value to them. If anything they are at least saved for future uses. Sure, I see a bunch of old 486s in the trash; if you want to save them let me know, my company has about 100 they will be throwing out (our local charities wouldn't even accept them).

which isn't that hard.

I upgrade about one part a year or year and a half. New hard drive? Less than $100. New processor/mobo combo? Around $200 if you know what you're doing. New graphics card? $150. Sound card will last you a long time. Additional memory? $150. You keep that rotation going, you'll never make a huge initial investment again, yet I'll always have a somewhat powerful rig.

wrong reply

Computers a hobbies for me in many sense. I am also in to music production so I need to be upgrading hardware all the time. And it is not 1000s of dollars; computer are modular and are getting cheapers each day. When I replcae anything it is parts, not the whole things and it never costs me THAT much.

... behind me, I have to disagree with you. It is well known that MS makes no attempt whatsoever to make anything efficient. The whole "registry" scheme they use is guaranteed to slow your system over time. Windows burns CPU and IO cycles like mad. If you ever run a graphical Linux on the same hardware, you will see real quick what a resource hog Windows is.

I've built 10-15 machines over the years, from the motherboard up. It is no big deal to do so, but then you won't really save a lot of money doing it any more, because there are scads of companies that will do it for you for about $100.

"Improving the technology" does not always mean "adding more inefficient features", a real improvement would be to make it not be such a pig.

in 1992 was also the last. Learn to build and upgrade your own stuff. It's more expensive up front but over the long-haul, IMO, it's cheaper. My main PC uses technology that is 2+ years out of the mainstream and I'd put it up against almost any big-box PC for overall performance and stability. If you want a box that you can just plug-in and is useful for more than a few years, it's going to be a dumb piece of crap. I just don't get the whole O/S hating game. Maybe it just took you 15 years to master Windows.

Linux has been under development for just as long by that standard.

Are you aware MacOS is the ONLY operating system that limits its self to hardware? If you want to run the current version of OSX on your G3 or older mac you're shit out of luck.

If you want to run an older Mac OS on newer hardware it's not going to happen either.

Intel and Microsoft in NO WAY require you "upgrade every 3 years". You could have bought an Athlon XP 2000, 512 DDR PC2100 RAM, and Radeon 9700 on an Nforce system board 3 years ago and STILL be flying today at great speeds.

Now, if you let your self be taken advantage of by the likes of Dell and other system manufacturers (read: outdated hardware at massively infalted prices) then yea, expect to be upgrading every 1.5 years. That's the way they want it.

OEM high-end hardware is available everywhere. All it takes is a little initiative on your part and you'll go years before needing to upgrade.

64-bit XP will be the only exception to this rule. However, that's AMD's game not Intel.

And I disagree that it's entirely a software issue. There is some CRAPPY hardware out there and people just expect it to work with a modern OS. Not easy to do. It's like building a car that runs on every fuel ever created.. Wood, coal, nuclear, oil, hydrogen, solar, etc.. All things being equal, MS has done a pretty good job getting windows to run on the millions of hardware combinations out there. And BTW, most BSOD issues are 100% hardware related.

The moral? Buy quality hardware.. Preferably piece by piece, so you know exactly what you have. If you have a cheapie stock 1995 eMachines box, it's probably not going to run the latest OS well. Buy a quality motherboard, processor, memory and video card and replace the guts in your old box. Windows could certainly be better (same with all OS's), but it's pretty damn nice as is. It performs it's primary function very well.

Unless you want to go with unfriendly and hard to use Linux or unpopular Mac you really don't have much of a choice. It is not about Bill Gates not wanting you to have a good computer; its about all the assholes out there that are developing 'programs' that destroy your windows based computer. If somehow you replace windows with something else these assholes will go after that OS and you will be making the same complaints.

--but it was graphic design, therefore the Mac platform, so I have sidestepped almost all of that Windoze unhappy experience you describe. Since the mid-90s Mac users have been able to swap files with PC users--Steve Jobs made a point of doing that--and there are very few programs, in fact I can't think of any right now, that PC users have that I can't have. I'm not a gamer so the many games on the PC platform wouldn't entice me.

My last computer (G3) lasted me 6 years, unchanged & un-upgraded, and in fact is still going strong. It did get slow, finally, so I did get a new rig. My G5 dual-processor with OSX is so swell God knows how long it will be till it feels slow. I agree, we haven't reached a time yet that computers are truly user-friendly, but at least Apple doesn't use its consumer base as paying beta-testers. This OS is incredibly stable--6 months without a crash, and counting.

Gates did capture the market and now has the advantage of an overwhelmingly huge installed base. But thank God Apple's graphical user interface was adopted by those in my field. Apple is light years ahead in elegant OS design.

OSX is rock solid.

I'm not in graphic design, just the average puter user. I surf, email, and do some writing. From what I have seen so far OS X is an absolute delite to use after my experiences with windows.

Most windows programs, especially those from Microshaft, are what I consider bloatware, and waaaaaay too expensive. I gave up M$ office and now I'm about to download NeoOffice, the OS X version of OpenOffice. It's growing into a very acceptable substitute and it's FREE, it doesn't cost $400. I will no longer finance the Gates lifestyle.

The best thing Apple has done lately is the Mac Mini. I just ordered one with wireless built in, bluetooth built in, 512 meg memory, 1.42 Ghz processor, for $700. This Lil puppy will do anything that the average windows machine will do, and do it quickly and with no fuss. And it's QUIET! No more wind tunnels on the desk, thank you.

As far as gaming is concerned, wait another six months and you'll see the difference in the gaming ability of the two OS's disappear. OS X 10.4 Tiger will be out in April and will add some gaming ability. From what I've read on the forums the next version will make the differences disappear. Don't care for myself, I'm a grown up and left the children's pastimes behind some time ago. Some do care, and Apple is answering them.

Read some of the forums and see just how many have switched to the mini mac. And almost without exception they love it. That's the thing about the Apple machines. They just work. No muss, no fuss, They just work.

Disclaimer: I don't work for Apple in any way, and I don't own their stock (yet). In fact I don't work at all. I'm retired.

Sounds like you need to get with the times. Games aren't for kiddies any more.

I prefer a more intellectual pastime. But whatever your thrill is, more power to you.

Or ANY of the Myst games. You'll be plesantly surprised, I think.

The Myst games (I have the entire series) are logic-puzzle games. No enemies of any kind, although there are some situations in which you can get a "bad ending" and your character gets killed off. But it's pretty easy to avoid that.

The Myst games are great if you like a low-pressure, intellectual game instead of some sort of shoot-em-kill-em-RRRRAAAAAAAHHHHHHH type game.

Also, you may want to try the Maxis software toys, like SimCity or The Sims (and The Sims 2 just rocks. Really).

Sid Meier's games- the "Civilization" series, as well as "Alpha Centauri", are turn-based strategy- no real-time combat at all.

And then there's all the adventure games, like Neverwinter Nights, Baldur's Gate, Morrowind, Evercrackquest, Oblivion (coming soon, and it looks stunningly beautiful), and many, many others.

Game's don't need to be about shooting and killing to be fun. Many of the best are more cerebral than anything. Give one a try, and see how you like it! :)

Just because the ones where you kill things makes the headlines because people like Joe Lieberman throw a fit, there are literally thousands of other games out there. And it's actually quite intellectual, but you've got your preconceived notions and it doesn't look like you'll ever change that.

Why anyone would waste their time with a PC is beyond me.

It's not a political issue - it's a brains issue.

You ought to know better, Jesus.



;)

He just thinks he's Jesus.

I'm running machines with Windows, Mac OSX, and a Linux distrobution called Mepis.

Mepis is interesting, I'm surprised at the quantity of software available under the open source agreements (ie: pretty much free), and, once setup, is very solid. However, it can easily become unstable while being setup, and sometimes installing new software blows things up. I've had to re-install several times.

Mac OSX (which is a shell running on Linux now, btw) is far more stable regarding installing new things. Frankly, it's beautiful. If they'd port it to work on Intel CPU chipsets they'd put Windows to shame. However, it's part of the market share is pretty small, limiting much of its appeal.

Windows is like a big, GM car of the '70's. It's almost rusty right on the dealers lot, but it's cheap, it gets you around, and all the mechanics know how to work on it. It looks like success, but it has failure engraved in its bones.

The car comparison is a good one. We first started driving cars around 1900. By the 20's many people owned and drove cars, but if they wanted to really use the car they needed to be 1/2 mechanic. That's about where we are with computers today. An average PC user is fine until there is a problem. Then they need more knowledgable help.

The car situation today isn't really much different. Average people still use cars, and are still SOL if the car has a problem. It's just that cars are so much more dependable that they don't fail as often. I think PCs will get to this point in 10 years or so. But I'm not sure they'll become a rock solid appliance for another 50 or 100 years. They are too complex and asked to perform too wide a variety of tasks to fully mature any sooner.

All my .02

And helpful. Clearly you know whereof you speak. :toast:

It's tempting to think we've had PC's forever. But in social terms they are still in their infancy.

So congratulations. :toast: We live in exciting times.

of Windows, don't ya think? I install lots and lots of networks. Some of them are small peer-to-peer setups and some of them are larger client server setups. Windows, for me anyway, has gotten to the point where you set it up correctly, the first time, and walk away. To be honest it's never been that difficult to begin with. Yes, if you don't do it right you will have problems. UNIX on the other hand... "Doing it right" means choosing the correct hardware too. There are scads of peripherals that you can buy for i386 machines. Some of them are junk and some work every time. I noticed you didn't give Mepis the same lambasting you gave Windows even though it sounds like any other OS to setup. If you don't do it right you will have problems. I do agree with the rest of your post though. To me, PC's in general just aren't ready for prime-time. Because they are so open they may never be. Heck, Microsoft tried to change that and make PC's a little more STBish and ya know what? Hardcore techies screamed bloody murder. It's one of the reasons that serial and parallel ports still exist.

Mac OS X's core is actually based on 4.4BSD, not Linux.

Actually OS X's core ( Darwin) is based on the openBSD kernel and not 4.4 BSD. There is significant difference because openBSD is layered on top of the Mach micro-kernel and is based on work done in OSF ( open software foundation consortium of DEC/HP/IBM ) in the early nineties.There is nothing wrong with either the Unix/Mac/Linux OS or the Windows XP OS, as both are old and stabilized thru decades of use and fixing. The Unix design is 36 years old (by Ken Thompson in 1969 ) while Windows XP core is 31 years old (by Dave Cutler in 1975 ). Most of the problems arise because of bloated applications developed using inefficient modern languages which supposedly make programming easy.

http://developer.apple.com/macosx/pdf/macos_x_intro_english.pdf

On the first page it says that OS X integrated the FreeBSD 5 distribution, but that Darwin is based on the Mach 3.0 kernel, which is based on BSD. http://developer.apple.com/darwin/ also states that the OS uses services based on 4.4 BSD.

Thanks for the correction. I thought it was Linux under there.

They're both pretty similar in functionality (of course), and Linux is probably pretty close to being SUS compliant anyway.

I've paid to diagnose a hardware issue once or twice, but I've never, ever once had to get tech support for a software issue.

Linux users have an acronym that PC users would do well to abide by.

The acronym is RTFM. Read The Fucking Manual. That said: the Windows XP online help has never actually helped me solve a problem (it only raised the issue of, "but my problem isn't listed on your little list!"). I usually first turn to a 2" thick reference manual (which is NOT meant to be read at all, really, but only referred to, hence its name) or the internet/help forums.

It would behoove PC users to learn how IRC works. Go Googling to find out more about IRC; it's been around for at least a decade, and not many people know about it.

There is actually very, very little that a PC owner ever *needs* to get paid tech support to fix. Including OS issues! One only needs to be willing to read once in a while, now and then.

Trust me- reading about computers helps, and building your own PC once or twice helps even more. I never learned more about my PCs than I did while I was building them.

The average person doesn't WANT to become computer literate.

Just like the average person really can't drive a car. Sure they can get in and guide the thing from place to place. But they don't know how to get the best grip from their tires. They don't know the optimum ways to accelerate quickly, or to save gas. Most don't know where to put in the oil. Many are clueless if a tire needs changing. Filling it with gas is "technical."

They want their PCs to be an appliance. They don't want to deal with IRQ's or setting a drive to be a slave or a master. Keep your ISA's and PSI's and ATA's and IDE's. They want to flip the machine on, read their emails, write and print a letter, then shut it off. That is IT.

It's not that they are stupid. They just have other things they'd rather be focused on. That's a human thing.

PC's aren't ready for them yet. Maybe in a decade or so.

and only RUMORS of OS X being ported to Intel/AMD chipsets..again, just some rumors. If Apple came out with OS X for Intel/AMD, game over! Point, set, and match :bounce:

I'm not sure the Mac OS would instantly trounce Windows. But it might force Microsoft to work on something other than shear profitability.

But there have been rumours of the various Mac OS's being ported to intel chips for as long as the two OS's have existed. There's always a tale of someone who got a tour of the bowels of Apple who has seen, with their own eyes, an Intel machine that boots right into (insert current flavor of Mac OS here.) And of course it runs flawlessly and super fast.

I'd love to see it, but it hasn't happened yet.

You could have spyware that is monopolizing your CPU processing and that would slow your computer down tremedously. I run a small network of XP computers and they all run great. Go to lavasoft.com and download their free spyware program called Ad-Aware. I'd put money that's what it is.

But it's a weirder issue. My "user" cannot access IE--meaning I can open it, but I only get "Page not available" screens. My daughter's can access IE, but she gets a message from the ISP (as she does on Netscape and Firefox) that she is not authorized to use the ISP. My wife's user has no problem whatever opening IE and browsing with it. When I create a new user, it doesn't even know how to find the door to the Internet.

The last tech I talked to said he thinks the OS is corrupt (everything went south after I installed SP2). I've uninstalled SP2 and the computer is running a little better, but the other disparity between the users isn't better. The tech thinks I should just reinstall the OS. I could probably add a new video card and more memory, too.

A link stack protocol re-router. Both are spyware or the results thereof. Get CWShredder and run it. Also, find one of the programs that restores default Windows LSPs in the registry.

That's an angle I haven't explored, mainly because I had no clue what you were talking about until I Googled some of your terms. :toast:

....on this machine for going on four years now without a serious crash or software-related problem and despite the fact that it's only a 1 GHz Pentium III, with 512 megs of RAM and a cable modem, the speed is entirely acceptible so far, as well. I've added all manner of peripherals and additional hardware with very few problems.

In short, I just don't have any real complaints, but then, I do think this is the most stable OS Microsoft has produced yet.

How many people here use their home computer for work? I am not talking about some Word documents or some other stuff, but run Autocad, Photoshop, Illustrator, email huge Autocad drawings, Outlook, the whole schmeer all day.

The whining of the Mac people is just incredible. That "get a Mac...it's a brains issue". What the hell is that?

I work my PC like a plowhorse, and it runs smoothly and clean, opening and closing Autocad and Photoshop,Illustrator and Outlook. And as far as bashing Microsoft, if it was not for their programs, I would not be able to do all the things I can do, that use to take 3 people. I am no super fan of Microsoft, but credit is due them, for making my life easier, and work easier.

Look, Autocad does not run on Macs. And the point of buying "Virtual PC" is absurd, even a Mac pro told me that.

So don't tell me I don't have any brains because I do not have a Mac. I have a PC loaded with the programs that work, and make my living.

Go download some Ipod crap.

that Microsoft treats employees in a democratic way. (read: well) There are much, much worse republican corporations that could be focused on.

When someone tells me "if you don't have a mac its because you're dumb", that isn't going to make me buy a mac. Not that I would anyway, I'm through dealing with their crap.

Yes, windows has some problems, but people act like its not even usable. Generally, I can go months at a time with no problems at all, only occasionally running into an issue. I've experienced much more frequent problems with linux servers at work.

Why should I give a shit what you use? NO Mac user on this thread "whined".

For the record, I photoshop about 15-30 images a day on my Mac. If you're happy with what you got, then whoppie screaming orgasm for you. Obviously the OP on this thread is NOT YOU!

And...the only crap I have on my iPod (not Ipod) is The Waitress' "I know what boys like.", so there!:P

"Most of us live with shitty computers because Bill Gates wants us to live with shitty computers--I mean, he wants us to use his shitty operating system."

Cue Mac people...

You kids with your Rock and Roll, ePids, oPods, pdids, or whatever you call them and the Linus system or whatever you crazy youngsters are downloading is none of my business.

I am going to sit with my PC and rocking chair, stupid old me.

"Whining" is a post GenX reliable standby remark to shut people up. My point isn't what you own, or what you like, but somebody must actually be WHINING for you to throw that around, that's all. :hi:

You don't have to install anything, just set your PC to try to boot from a CD when you turn it on (any modern PC can do this, it's a BIOS setting, usually accessed by pressing the 'delete' key immediately upon seeing a display of some sort when you turn it on), load the Knoppix/PHLAK/Qnx/Whatever distribution into your CD drive, and check it out. It doesn't actually change your hard drive in any way; everything loads from the CD and runs in memory.

These are called "live distributions", I believe. With a broadband connection and a CD burner, you can be trying out linux without changing Windows or your PC at all in less than two hours, start to finish. It's really a very educational experience, especially if you know nothing aboiut linux, but wonder what the fuss is all about. All the nominal command line commands are available, as in any other linux distro; these live distros also have software like Mozilla (read: Netscape) installed, as well as graphics apps like the GIMP (read: open source answer to Photoshop- GIMP is available for XP as well, folks), file system apps, and quite a bit more.

Note: your live linux distro will run painfully slow when you initially run a program. The whole OS will load slow. This is true for any live distro. The reason is because, with this "check it out" method, you're actually running everything from the CD- including the OS itself. It will run slowly if you need to load a program, but this is not representative of linux if you install it to your hard disk.

I must honestly say, even if you have no intention of ever using linux on a regular basis, you should at least check it out once. No, it's not pretty right out of the box, and no, it's not perfectly user-friendly: I would put the user-friendliness of linux on par with the user-friendliness of Windows 3.1, actually. However, in linux you have a great deal more control over the functioning of your PC.

You can run both Windows XP and any of the major linux distributions on the same hard drive. You select which one you want to run from a bootloader menu that pops up when you turn your PC on. To switch, reboot and pick the other one. Eeeaaasy.

Installing linux with Windows resident is another matter. You need to install Windows with some free space left on the disk, and then install linux to that free space. In a nutshell.

There are no drawbacks to running both on the same hard drive that I have ever seen, and I have a box copy of RedHat 5 in a box in the closet if that tells you anything about how long I've been running both. It's very doable, and you don't notice a difference when running Windows.

I think it's worth the drivespace.

Another is Mepis. I've tried both and both ran on a pair of Windows machines pretty well. One had a problem with an old network card, one had a problem with an old sound card.

I'm experimenting now with Mepis because it seemed easier to install when I decided to move beyond just running it off the CD. It's been a bit of a learning experience, but it's far easier than when I tried using Linux several years ago. MUCH easier.

But running either of those from the CD is painless. If you're curious at all it's really worth a try.

My advice is, if one wants a live linux distribution, download the freshest version from the website it comes from. That one will have the latest hardware support, if updated.

PHLAK stands for Professional Hacker's Linux Assault Kit. It contains, among many other docs and tools, declassified NSA docs for securing linux systems.

I like that. :)

Some of us don't have a choice: we're not going to convince our company to switch to Macs, we're not going to convince all our clients to switch to Macs, and so when we work at home, we have no choice: we must use WinXP to insure compatability. We even have a Win 98/2000/NT test station to make sure our stuff is backwards compatible when it needs to be.)
So, some of have little choice but to work on WinXP, and I don't appreciate being called "stupid" because I use WinXP. (And don't kid yourself: stating that choosing a Mac over a PC is a "brains" issue is calling PC users stupid.)

If you work at home, then of course you should use the system your company uses, and your company should also compensate you for your purchase, or buy the system for you. The issue that the OP brought up was personal usage, not overtime work. Two different pieces of fruit. For the record, 95% of computer users do not slog for their companies on their own time, either properly paid, or for "team player for the success of the company" exploitation. They use Windows, because that's what everybody else uses, and have no idea about the alternatives.

For personal usage or small business usage, then the choices would be there. I didn't say anything about brains issue though, so you should direct that to the culprit you have a problem with.

installed Virtual PC on his Powerbook and had me setup XP as a VM on it. I gotta tell ya, it was horrendous. I told him he would be better off running XP on a 486. It was bad magic.

Jay

A 1.25 G4 with a gig of RAM feels like an old P90, I kid you not.

I've got 2 HPs and both with XP. One I gave to my kid when I got this one. The old one I had to replace the hard drive which was fairly easy and still runs great.

This newer one I've had for a while and I work the hell out of it. It runs great and fits my needs. I do a lot of video work on this and still have a ton of programs.

Call me dumb or brainless for having a PC, but what do I care. I've got what works for me and that's what matters.

I will say that I think technical support for XP and HP completely blows. I google my questions and get far more information and help.

-

which blows (I have a beta that is the latest from school).....


I was so unimpressed with it I bought a mac mini., and you know what, I feel awesome now.

Beta software that's several years from gold being unimpressive. Wow that's hard to believe. Thanks for letting me know that Longhorn is sh*t based on your pirated beta copy.

I'll go download an alpha copy of MacOS and post a review too.

betas- legal or not- are not representative of the final product. They are there for bugfixing and hardware testing and development. Nothing more.

They are not for general use. Period.

That said, they're great for company input, if that's why you're running it.

However, I've heard too many DRM and copyright issues related to Longhorn that I'm staying as far away from it as possible for as long as possible. Longhorn, for security advocates (being, your system is yours and it totally blocked from any and all intrusion), is baaaaaaaaad juju from what I know of it thus far.

You need to be motivated to fully install and run linux. I was very nervous the first time I did it, way back when, even though I had my original Windows disk and knew how to use fdisk and sundry to reinstall.

Linux is hard the first time you run it, especially if you want it to do everything you do in Windows. Be prepared to read.

That said, it's worth it in spades if you stay with it.

i'd say auto install / hardware detection of most modern linux distributions is better, and hence installation is easier then say, that of win98.

there are also "live" CD's that require no install: just boot from the CD and a few minutes later you find yourself looking at a linux graphical user interface. excellent for trying it out.

have kids. Takes care of all the computer problems I've had.

She's getting there. She's nine, but she already groks unfamiliar tool bars much faster than her mother and I do.

I recommend it.

I use Debian but others are better for first timers.

If you surf the web and read email it has you covered
with NO virus problems.

You can download Fedora from redhat for free and it is
a very friendly setup.

If you have ever installed Windows then you should have no
problem setting up Fedora.

I suggest NOT dual booting just install on a extra hard drive
so you don't need to deal with dual boot issues which are a pain.

Fedora Core 3 and Windows XP do NOT get along if you install Grub to the MBR instead of the boot partition when installing FC3 to the same hard drive as XP. Your system will hang, and you'll need your original Windows XP disk (OEM copy preferred) to run the MBR recovery tool it comes with (I think that's the tool you'll need to use). There appears to be no lasting issue of any kind after fixing this problem.

THAT is a pain, and took me a minute to figure out how to fix. Fortunately, it was simple to solve.

Question: Why can't ATI get its driver issues fixed?

Why do they still refer to XF86Config-4 instead of xorg.conf?

My head hurts.....

problem solved.

Get Intel E1000 nics and have real peace of mind.

i've done it, on a dual processor dell workstation, with no problems whatsoever.

Ain't that big a thang.

I think Windows is good for becoming computer literate. It sometimes forces you to deal with it's innards.

I think the current state of Linux is still too much for a brand new, unassisted user. Too MUCH dealing with innards.

Macs, on the other hand, are too easy. If I weren't a geek I still wouldn't know much about my iBook, because it doesn't force me to find out about innards unless I want to seek them out myself.

Just my .02

If your Mac is too "easy" try writing some Applescript or some Cocoa. Or even just open Terminal and use that.

No self-respecting geek would say what you just did about Linux!

New computer users have no want or need to write Applescript or Cocoa and generally have no clue why they'd even WANT to open Terminal. They just want to click an icon to surf the web, or click another to read emails, etc.

Macs do an excellent job of hiding the lower level activities from the user. So good that I think they hinder that user from learning anything more than what happens at the surface of the OS.

The OS skin on Windows is thinner. Users see through it in places, and occasionally have to deal with it directly. (Setting up a wireless internet connection, for example.)

Linux forces you beneath it's surface from day 1. You will use Terminal. You will directly edit config files. As a geek that sounds educational, even fun. But to a newbie it's intimidating as hell.

Now, if someones goal was to know computers inside and out, I'd point them at a computer show, help them get all the parts they'll need to build their own, and tell them to slap Windows or Linux on there. They'll learn.

But if my somewhat doddering grandma just wants to trade emails with a great grand daughter? I'd get her a Mac.

(No need to worry about my quick as a whip grandma on my families other side. She's too busy hacking into AARP to bother emailing some kid.)

I open the box, and it installs. I work and make a living.

Seems to me that us "illiterates" could use a person like you. Making Autocad run on Linux, on a Mac, all the printers working without a glitch.

You are more than welcome to come on over and convert me to the better way. I will tell my clients that their work will be on hold for a while though while the geniuses at DU figure out all the bugs, since they have nothing better to do than to tell others what imbeciles they are.

Bring your cell and a sleeping bag. The cell for when you get stuck, and the sleeping bag for the month it will take.

People who do depend on programs that run smooth and with very minor problems for their living BUY the programs for that very reason. Not to ne some Linux/Mac/flavor of the month program. If you went to any architectural/engineering office, or ANY office for that matter, you will see PCs.

Please do not perpetuate the stereotypical geek in his mom's basement image of telling others what they should be using.

Linux is ready for you!!

So many flavors to choose from.
Last month, I installed 11 different flavors of Linux, looking for the best fit.

You can go here and download ISO's of all these versions and try them out FOR FREE!!

http://www.linuxiso.org /


For my rather generic box, only three versions recognized almost all my hardware, and installed without hassles.

SuSE 9.1
Knoppix...Kanotix
Ubuntu

The sole hardware exception common to all versions was my scanner (HPScanjet 4470C on USB). Most versions correctly identified the scanner, but the software interface failed to initialize. In Linux defense, my scanner is NOT on the hardware compatibility lists.

I really like Mandrake, and worked hard to get it installed, but was unable to get my Net Card working. I even bought and installed a NetCard that was on the Mandrake Hardware Compatibility list and no luck. During BOOT always the same error message {NET CARD eth0....FAILED}. I spent several late nights trying to "build a kernal with a tarball"..lots of fun, but no success yet. Someone with more Linux experience could get this working.



I also downloaded and installed :

Mandrake 10,,,10.1...10.2(peek)

Debian 3r4 (over my head)

Fedora Core 3 (Install scare, backed out)

Slackware 10.0 (over my head)

Lycoris (pretty face, install almost a disaster...maybe a bad disk)

Knoppix...cool and easy

Kanotix Bug Hunter(a Knoppix knock off update)

SuSE 9.1 (smooth and easy)

Ubuntu 4.1 (Warty) (my favorite)

Many of these have released a "LIVE" disk that you can run from the CD. Simply boot your box from the CD and get a look at the fully functional distro. Of course, it is slow, but you can get an idea if your hardware is compatible.

Distros known to have a "LIVE disk:
Knoppix
Kanotix
SuSE
Ubuntu


My suggestions for playing with Linux without trashing WinDoze.
I am migrating from WinXP, and will be using WinXP as my primary OS until I am comfortable with Linux.

Partition Magic 8.0 has a tool to partition the HardDrive for Linux installations. I used it without problems.
AVOID LETTING THE LINUX INSTALL PROGRAM PARTITION YOUR HARD DRIVE.

PartitionMagic doesn't run well from within WinXP, so you will probably have to boot from the PMagic floppy to create the Linux Partitions. Put the Linux partitions at the end of your HardDrive (or on a 2nd HardDrive). I am using about 7 Gigs for the Linux partitions and that is plenty.

(I have a small hidden partition with WinME. I can boot to WinME and use PartitionMagic8.0 to set up the Linux Partitions without ANY problems)


Almost all of the Linux Installs recognized the pre-partitioned Linux Partitions and asked if this is where I wanted to Install. Say YES.
(Note: Fedora Core was vague at this point in the install, so I backed out, not willing to risk my Windows partitions).

Linux will automatically install a boot loader (Grub or Lilo) that will let you choose either Windows or Linux at boot.
Both worked on my system without problems.


Removing Linux from your Box without trashing Windows

Easy.

Step 1) Use LILO (or Grub) to boot to your Windoze System and use PartitionMagic to delete the Linux Partitions. If you are using XP, you will probably need to boot from the PMagic floppy (since XP seems to hate PartitionMagic).

Step 2) Boot from a floppy that contains the Dos partition utility FDISK, and type FDISK /MBR. This will remove the Linux boot loader (Lilo or Grub).
My system was ALWAYS restored to the regular Windows configuration after these two steps.

Caution Note: My DOS boot floppy is from WinME and contains the latest preXP FDISK command. I don't believe XP comes with FDISK, so make sure you have a BOOT Floppy that has a functional FDISK utility that can work with large Hard Drives. I KNOW the FDISK in ME will work. I believe that Win98se DOS Floppy will work, but cannot vouch for it. FDISK was unable to read or delete the Linux Partitions, PMagic was necessary.

I have read online that you can use the XP BOOT CONSOLE to restore the MBR (master boot record), but I have never used that method.


Summary: After looking at the versions listed above, I preferred Ubuntu. SuSE was equally as functional, my choice was subjective. I currently use Ubuntu to browse the Internet and play with the Linux system. I am still using XP for my Graphics Software and Games.


Linux has a HUGE online community that is very helpful.
I have bought a How To book on the nuts and bolts of Linux (Inside Linux, Tobler) and am working my way through, learning to work from the command line. The Learning Curve is steep and a little frustrating at times, and I have background in Command Line Dos. But overall, it is fun. I am learning the system of the future and can always boot to WinXP when necessary.