Why Linux will never replace Windows (for now)

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

The Unix community could do the entire world a huge favor and spend the day or two it would take to implement a case-insensitive file system. Then we wouldn't have to remember crap like this:

www.foo.bar/home/AnotherLevel/mumbleGrumble/ABC/Snork.htm

Sorry. Lost it there for a moment.

~~ Paul

 

[Beanbag]

Congrats! Welcome to the Linux club! We meet once a week, and all we do is sit around and laugh at those poor schmucks who are still using Windows.

I used to be the lone Windows programmer in a Mac shop. They brought me in so they could service the other 90% of the market, and maybe become profitable,

Maybe if the Linux club spent more time assisting the newcomers, it might increase the number of Linux users. I went to the local Linux users group meeting yesterday. It consisted of the old-timers huddling together and pretty much ignoring the twenty or so first-timers like myself. The situation reminded me of the conventions I've been to where the older watchmakers didn't want anything to do with people who had gotten in the industry after 1960. I spent about fifteen minutes waiting for some indication that something was supposed to happen (no schedule or announcements anywhere), talked to a cople of newbies who'd managed to get Linux installed successfully, then left and bought the SuSE distribution on the way home. So. at least it wasn't a total waste.

Regards;
Beanbag

 

[shanek]

Re: While we're on the subject...

Been looking at what I can download. I am guessing that YaST can install the downloadable as an executable on my machine. Is this correct?

Yes, as long as it's packaged as an RPM. YaST will even take care of dependencies for you. Coolness!

Second off, I notice that some of the software is listed as running on X11 (or maybe XII -- can't tell from the font used). So what is this X11? Some version of XWindows?

Protocol 11 for XFree86, an open source version of XWindows. XWindows is actually a client-server network-capable model, and X11 is the protocol it uses to communicate.

I'm guessing I already have it on my machine, since I read somewhere that KDE uses XWindows.

Yes, you'll habe it.

On the hardware side, how does Linux recgnize new hardware? Do I just plug it in and it will recognize it (al la Windows), or is there some setup program I need to run?

It's plug-and-play. As long as you have the drivers, you're cool.

What about a USB CD-RW drive? Does it need to be plugged in before booting, or will it hot-swap?

I've never had any trouble hotswapping USB devices.

 

[shanek]

EDIT: Word of warning: In the X.11 world, a "server" is the client PC and the "client" is the server host! Neh!

Or, to make it clearer: The server is where the display hardware is. It makes sense if you think about it.

 

[iain]

Re: While we're on the subject...

Been looking at what I can download. I am guessing that YaST can install the downloadable as an executable on my machine. Is this correct?

Pretty much. SuSE comes with a huge amount of software on the CDs/DVDs and you can install any of that through YaST. A little icon at the bottom of the screen tells you if there are updates for your installed software : it goes red if there are, I think. Then you click on it to get the updates.

There's lots of other software you can get, which I think you can choose to do through YaST or not : just things you find on the Internet.

Second off, I notice that some of the software is listed as running on X11 (or maybe XII -- can't tell from the font used). So what is this X11? Some version of XWindows? I'm guessing I already have it on my machine, since I read somewhere that KDE uses XWindows.

In addition to what Zep and Shanek have said, it's worth explaining a small difference between Windows and Linux. In Windows, the graphical interface is part of the OS. In Linux, the kernel does not have a graphical interface at all. All the graphical stuff is software running on top of Linux. X11 is the basic graphics layer. On top of X11 you will run a graphical desktop such as Gnome or KDE, which are other bits of software.

On the hardware side, how does Linux recgnize new hardware? Do I just plug it in and it will recognize it (al la Windows), or is there some setup program I need to run? What about a USB CD-RW drive? Does it need to be plugged in before booting, or will it hot-swap?

USB stuff should definitely hot-swap, as should firewire. In terms of initial configuration, a surprising amount of hardware already has drivers in Linux so works right away (versus Windows where you have to install a driver supplied by the vendor). Of course some stuff doesn't work at all because no driver has been written; or not a very good one. If you're buying new hardware, it's worth searching on the web to find someone else who is using it with Linux.

 

[iain]

The Unix community could do the entire world a huge favor and spend the day or two it would take to implement a case-insensitive file system. Then we wouldn't have to remember crap like this:

I think it would be more like a year or two to make that change; and those of us who are used to it rather like case sensitivity.

 

[richardm]

I think it would be more like a year or two to make that change; and those of us who are used to it rather like case sensitivity.

I dunno, I've used various types of Unix for over 15 years now, and I've never known the case sensitivity to be useful. I have, however, seen it cause the occasional odd problem where a file has been copied from another system with a slightly different case than was expected (e.g. rhubarb.obs vs rhubarb.OBS). Nobody spotted the discrepancy when the file was copied, but they sure noticed when the supposedly-fixed bug was still extant.

I wouldn't miss case sensitivity at all.

I would miss long filenames though, but since all the mainstream OSs seem to support them these days, I'm happy.

 

[Philip]

I had been considering SUSE Linux, but another grad student here expressed concern about what Novell will do with it.

Does anybody think there is any reason to believe that Novell will stop offering updates and new versions of SUSE Linux for home users?

 

[Cleon]

I had been considering SUSE Linux, but another grad student here expressed concern about what Novell will do with it.

Does anybody think there is any reason to believe that Novell will stop offering updates and new versions of SUSE Linux for home users?

I really doubt it; SuSe's fairly popular, and they don't want to mess with a good thing. If I had to guess, I'd say that if Novell does *anything* to it, they'd (at most) change the name and market some more server-end solutions (a la Redhat).

 

[Philip]

I really doubt it; SuSe's fairly popular, and they don't want to mess with a good thing. If I had to guess, I'd say that if Novell does *anything* to it, they'd (at most) change the name and market some more server-end solutions (a la Redhat).

I'm afraid Novell will stop the low-end support, too.

I'm using Red Hat Linux 9 now on the Linux partition on my laptop and, before the Red Hat support stops, I want to switch to something that I can confidently expect to have continuing support and upgrades.

 

[shanek]

I had been considering SUSE Linux, but another grad student here expressed concern about what Novell will do with it.

Does anybody think there is any reason to believe that Novell will stop offering updates and new versions of SUSE Linux for home users?

Nope; just the opposite. They'll want to encourage enough people to use SuSE to make it a viable alternative to Windows. Remember that their bread and butter is NetWare and eDirectory technologies; an alternative to Windows would help more people get off the Microsoft bandwagon, and therefore increase their market share with their backend technologies.

 

[aries]

Hello !

As I see it Linux is a least 10-15 years after the technology that works in Windows XP.

And just as I suspected before reading this thread; Linux is for computer nerds and geeks...

Nothing wrong with that I myself is one of them

But the recent changes in the windows operating system is actually a great help to peole who aren't geeks --- but only want computer that works fairly well...

For instance women...(who at least in my country, Denmark, Europe, for the most part could not care less about the technical stuff; they just want it to work when it is switched on.)

They do not want to be troubled with go in here and download this, go to this configure menu etc. etc.

owever, I'm certain that Linux maybe welcomed by some big coorperations/business in Denmark --- as it is Open Source Software --- and as it allows these businesses to write Computer solutions that are fitting for their computer technological skills.

Karsten

 

[Beanbag]

Hello !

As I see it Linux is a least 10-15 years after the technology that works in Windows XP.

And just as I suspected before reading this thread; Linux is for computer nerds and geeks...

Nothing wrong with that I myself is one of them

But the recent changes in the windows operating system is actually a great help to peole who aren't geeks --- but only want computer that works fairly well...

For instance women...(who at least in my country, Denmark, Europe, for the most part could not care less about the technical stuff; they just want it to work when it is switched on.)

They do not want to be troubled with go in here and download this, go to this configure menu etc. etc.

owever, I'm certain that Linux maybe welcomed by some big coorperations/business in Denmark --- as it is Open Source Software --- and as it allows these businesses to write Computer solutions that are fitting for their computer technological skills.

Karsten

If you can get a distribution of Linux that installs as cleanly as SuSE 9.0 did for me, then Linux will work for the average non-geek. A better set of new-user documentation will be needed, though. All the current "getting started in Linux" guides have been written by experienced Linux users, who quite frankly have forgotten exactly what it's like to start out with no knowlege on the subject at all. They spout some technical gibberish and assume the reader has the technical background to understand it and put it in context. What is needed is a guide written by a literate but Linux ignorant author who can take the newbie through the whole experience.

Regards;
Beanbag

 

[Beanbag]

Re: Re: While we're on the subject...

In addition to what Zep and Shanek have said, it's worth explaining a small difference between Windows and Linux. In Windows, the graphical interface is part of the OS. In Linux, the kernel does not have a graphical interface at all. All the graphical stuff is software running on top of Linux. X11 is the basic graphics layer. On top of X11 you will run a graphical desktop such as Gnome or KDE, which are other bits of software.

Oh. You mean it's kinda like Windows 3.1? It ran on top of a non-graphic OS as well.

Regards;
Beanbag (who expects his house to be firebombed by outraged Linux users everywhere)

 

[iain]

Re: Re: Re: While we're on the subject...

Oh. You mean it's kinda like Windows 3.1? It ran on top of a non-graphic OS as well.

Yes, that's the one.

Although we sort of hope that the Linux kernel might be a tiny bit better than MSDOS.

 

[iain]

Hello !

As I see it Linux is a least 10-15 years after the technology that works in Windows XP.

Not sure that can be justified. There's probably a good argument for Linux being four years behind Windows in terms of usability for non-technical folk - on a par with Windows 98.

Certainly as a reasonably technical person I often have problems getting things to work on my mother's Win 98 PC : drivers won't load etc. I recently had to search the Internet for a new device driver for my Grandma's Win 98 laptop (having previously tracked down the problem on a bulletin board). There's no way in a hundred years that my Grandma would have solved the problem on her own.

Of course in many other areas you could argue that Linux is ahead of Windows; but agree that it has a way to go for non-technical users as a home PC before catching up with the latest Microsoft OSs.

 

[TillEulenspiegel]

Re: Re: Re: Re: While we're on the subject...

Yes, that's the one.

Although we sort of hope that the Linux kernel might be a tiny bit better than MSDOS.

OK I'm pissed . The only reason Billy boy is the richest man in the world is because he bought the rights to DR dos for ..I dunno 50k or so so the guy who developed it Tim Paterson of Seattle Computer Products got the bum's rush and billy got the $$.
HE also stole the GUI from Jobs and Woz..altho they stole it from Xerox PARC as well as the mouse.

The MS backwards compatibility of legacy software based on DOS existed until the dedicated Kernel of NT.

Bill sux and that's all I have to say about that.

 

[Beanbag]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: While we're on the subject...

OK I'm pissed . The only reason Billy boy is the richest man in the world is because he bought the rights to DR dos for ..I dunno 50k or so so the guy who developed it Tim Paterson of Seattle Computer Products got the bum's rush and billy got the $$.
HE also stole the GUI from Jobs and Woz..altho they stole it from Xerox PARC as well as the mouse.

The MS backwards compatibility of legacy software based on DOS existed until the dedicated Kernel of NT.

Bill sux and that's all I have to say about that.

Bill's rich because his company delivers a product that people want. He got it by building off the work of other people -- that's called progress. His firm is shrewd and competitive, and will respond to any perceived challenges -- just like IBM. It's not personal -- it's business, as it is done all over the world.

We can speculate on what the world might be like now if Microsoft wasn't around. We'd probably still be using the command line interface, and Linux wouldn't be as well-developed because there wouldn't be so many programmers itching to stick it to Bill.

Learn to respect your enemies. A good enemy makes for a good soldier.

That said, I don't care for all of Microsoft's policies. My personal opinion is that Windows XP should be priced at $49.95, just like Borland Turbo Pascal used to be. At that price, everybody bought a legit copy because they thought it was fair. I'd buy a copy for every machine I own, and religiously buy a copy of the latest version every time it was upgraded -- even full price.

Regards;
Beanbag

 

[iain]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: While we're on the subject...

Bill's rich because his company delivers a product that people want. He got it by building off the work of other people -- that's called progress. His firm is shrewd and competitive, and will respond to any perceived challenges -- just like IBM. It's not personal -- it's business, as it is done all over the world.

We can speculate on what the world might be like now if Microsoft wasn't around. We'd probably still be using the command line interface, and Linux wouldn't be as well-developed because there wouldn't be so many programmers itching to stick it to Bill.

Learn to respect your enemies. A good enemy makes for a good soldier.

Regards;
Beanbag

True to some extent I think. Certainly it's worth respecting what Microsoft have achieved, and not underestimating it. I don't agree that we wouldn't have a GUI without Microsoft. Lots of other companies were involved in GUIs before MS or at around the same time (e.g. Apple, IBM (OS/2), UNIX CDE, Commodore).

Yes, Microsoft have given people a product they want, but remember that they have also used illegal business methods to restrict competition and drive competitors out of business (and they were found guilty in court).

It's worth noting that of all the products that Microsoft makes, they make significant profits on two : Windows and Office (both have about 80% profit margins). Most other things are making big losses.

 

[shanek]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: While we're on the subject...

We can speculate on what the world might be like now if Microsoft wasn't around. We'd probably still be using the command line interface,

I disagree with this. Even before Xerox made their GUI, individual programs were being made with a point-and-click interface. It was Apple that made it popular, and if anything Microsoft delayed implementing the GUI on the IBM clones. They only did so because they saw themselves starting to lose market share to Apple.

and Linux wouldn't be as well-developed because there wouldn't be so many programmers itching to stick it to Bill.

That is NOT the motivation behind Linux programming. Lunix programming is there because they want certain tools that work a certain way. Microsoft wasn't delivering the goods to their satisfaction, so they started writing alternatives. Without Microsoft, there STILL wouldn't have been Microsoft delivering the goods (duh), so this is hardly an argument.

You COULD make the argument that, without Microsoft, WordPerfect and the others would have maintained their dominance and therefore the Linux people might not have seen the need for an alternative, but there's no reason to assume that they necessarily would have altered the motivations of Linux programmers.