2CPU.com » News » January 2007 » DesktopLinux.com: Top 4 reassons why Windows Wins and Linux Loses

DesktopLinux editor, Steven J. Vaughn-Nichols has posted his opinion about why Windows Wins and Linux loses. He gives four top reasons about this. He discusses,

1) Installed base
2) PC vendor support
3) Hardware Vendor support
4) Software support

I can honestly say as a Desktop Support technician and PC supplier, that I agree with number 4. I can't remember the last time I walked in to a local PC store such as, CompUSA or Microcenter or Fry's and saw a wall or aisle full of Linux applications in retail box. Nor have any of the alternative products actually mimic Windows applications that are readily available from Microsoft and third party vendors who only support Windows platform entirely.

A few examples of high priority software for the Windows platform are:

Office 2000 and 2003 intergration

Video editing, such as Sony's Vegas, Adobe Premiere, Pinnacle Studio.

Windows XP Tablet 2005 edition for mobile products.

Financial applications such as QuickBooks and Tax deduction programs.

Just to name a few areas I've seen lacking on the Linux platform. This isn't to say that Linux on a whole is poor. However, the alternative application availability could use a nice push.

You'll have to read the whole article here to agree or disagree with the author.

guyr Registered User Posts: 253 Joined: 2003-03-22

#39461 Posted on: 01/10/2007 04:35 AM ReMeDy, why would you expect to be able to walk into a retail store and find racks of shrink-wrapped Linux applications? Linux works on a completely different model. The majority of applications are open source, freely downloadable from the net. Open Office, for example, is now a viable alternative to Microsoft Office (even on Windows); witness several U.S. and European governments going the ODF route. Rather than look at the distribution model, look at application availability (which you've done in another part of your article.) I heartily agree that Linux has some gaping holes. One of the worst, and unfortunately most difficult to solve, is in multimedia playback. I'm a software developer, so don't spend any time on the computer for entertainment; but when someone sends me a link to a video clip, I'd like it to simply play without issues. This is seldom the case with Linux; given the large number of players with vested interests in proprietary content, I see no easy solution to this problem. This is the primary reason I've switched back to Windows XP at home; Linux does 99.9% of what I need, but those border cases that don't work are just incredibly annoying. Guy Rouillier

ReMeDy Registered User Posts: 12521 Joined: 2001-02-10

#39464 Posted on: 01/10/2007 05:25 AM ReMeDy, why would you expect to be able to walk into a retail store and find racks of shrink-wrapped Linux applications? Because selling Operating systems is a business. If a person can't have physical contents in their hand, then it's a smoke and mirrors show on the desktop side. You can purchase the box copy of Ubuntu and SuSe @ a reasonable price in store($29). But, when the person starts to journey around the list of Software vendors in the same or another store, the listing is absent. I know it's their model and it's a good one in theory. But, it's not lucrative for the OS's benefit and it's exact thinking that keeps the OS from progressing from its current position. You can purchase PC's with Linspire 5 on it. But, that's where it stops. People aren't familiar with the very routine of Download X this and root command that. It's not the same as using iTunes to download Audio and Video content for the iPod. Apples model is so simplistic, any novice user can learn it in a matter of hours. You mention Open Office being compeitive, but where exactly is OO competitive? MS Office and even Corel Wordperfect have excellent support with Service pack updates and actually someone that is certified for both brands of Applications. So, having someone who is robust with it or even certified makes the support of it even simpler. I can't take OO and integrate into our 70k controlled device database with applications for inventory with barcode devices such as those from Symbol that run WinCE and Palm Treo with Palm OS that syncronizes well with our Desktop and DB applications. Maybe at home a person can get away with OO. But, I don't think many people will be satisfied with the desktop support and learning curve(s). |[size=1][url=http://forums.2cpu.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=279831#post279831][color=yellow]FAQ's[/url][/color][/size]|Heatware-Remedy{WcS}|Dual760|Beerology|

dvlhntr Gigabyte SUCKS Posts: 1990 Joined: 2005-12-29

#39465 Posted on: 01/10/2007 06:19 AM So nothing has changed. Linux Still lacks enough quality apps for desktop/workstation users. and this is the biggest direct reason why you don't see it prevalent for OEM sales and supported hardware. I guess it needs to be said every month. Frankly I think we are going to hear the same "why linux still is not being used more people" for a long time. The MS Office Suite is the gold standard by which all other are going to be judged by. Open Office + Thunderbird works for some people. These are people who don't need 'a lot' from their 'Office Applications'. ReMeDy: add CAD/CAM apps to your list of areas where alt. applications come up short. edit*: and if your one of the people who likes to buy bleeding edge-ish type stuff when you upgrade.... *nix can be one painful bloody mess by comparison. TwinTurbo.net Becuase I like 2 (rigs) E5650 - 12GB of ram. Raid 5 4.5TB. 2 x 285 : 8gb ddr400 ram : Raid5 - 10x500GB Q6600 : 8gb ddr2800 ram: VMs in progress :: R1+0 4x200 9650. (/rigs) my grammar and spelling r bad. SGOI Gigabyte sucks. Do not recommend them to anyone, or buy their products.

proffesso Winner of the Internet Posts: 1532 Joined: 2001-06-25

#39467 Posted on: 01/10/2007 12:36 PM Originally posted by dvlhntr: ReMeDy: add CAD/CAM apps to your list of areas where alt. applications come up short. yeah its an odd situation on linux for 3d / 2d...on the one hand you have the very highend dcc (Flame/Inferno/XSI/Maya/Houdini etc) but on the other hand there is no Photoshop/Aftereffects/NLE etc. I was very interested in Linux at one stage, until I relealised windows has too many 'low end' apps that are pretty essential, even osx is slightly lacking there. chasing tokyo girls

locovaca That's what she said Posts: 176 Joined: 2001-07-17

#39469 Posted on: 01/10/2007 01:26 PM As someone who has almost completely switched to Linux in the last three months (except my HTPC, which runs XP and MediaPortal- Myth TV is relatively crap IMHO), #3 and 4 were probably the most important. For example, I still haven't found a way to get Bluetooth running on my laptop in a user friendly manner like Windows (dropping down to a terminal to create a tty device using my phone's mac address so I can use BitPIM is not user friendly). Power management on laptops is also pretty poor, and forget STR if you want 3d acceleration too. However, the last time I switched to Linux (4 years ago when my university was cracking down on file sharing) it was far, far more painful. Hardware support, while not ideal, IS much better. Open Office, which I believe would've been either at 1.0 or still in beta, was total crap; 2.0 is far more stable and useable for me. Wireless + WPA works, 3d acceleration is less hit or miss, hotplugging and DM integration is improved, and overall the hardware side seems to be better supported for mainstream stuff. But, the software is still a bad situation. I have VMWare installed because several of my apps that I need don't have suitable Linux equivalents or do not run very well under Crossover- Streets Atlas 2003, Quicken 2005 and Outlook (which I use to archive my e-mail). I was using Word under Crossover before I got tired of the 30 second launch time and tried out OO and didn't go back. Evolution, while not as pretty, does the basics well enough that I'm not unhappy with it. I think the biggest problem is that Linux needs to offer something that Vista/OS X doesn't offer. For quite a long time Linux simply tried to match Windows and OS X in terms of features, software, and presentation. "Oh, they have a little menu button that lives in the lower left corner, well we'll make a DM that has a button in the lower left corner." I know that it's to help people ease into things, but it's like trying to sell the owners of a 2006 Car a 2007 model, but with a manual transmission, windows that don't sometimes roll down, headlights that are a little dimmer, and the upholstry worn. Most people look at Linux and say, "Yeah, that's not so different than what I have now, so what's the point?" They don't care about licensing, OSS, etc. Now, that's sort of changing with Beryl. For once there's something you can do with Linux that you can't do with OS X/Windows. Yes, it's a little hokey "beaming up" my windows when it minimizes, but that's what gets people interested. That's what Linux needs to focus on- innovation, not replication.

Lord British Gentoo Folder Posts: 355 Joined: 2004-04-06

#39470 Posted on: 01/10/2007 02:14 PM #3 and #4 are good points against Linux but are becoming more true about Windows 2000 also. I run all Linux systems at home but at work, I have no choice but to run Windows on the computers in my network. I prefer Windows 2000 over XP. I recently had to upgrade my workstation because new programs/hardware either would not work without XP and/or did not run well on Win2k. #3 and #4 also apply mainly to business users and power users. I work on a lot of computers for home users that just want to be able to surf the internet without spam, check their email without worrying about a million viruses, play a couple of games, or type a simple letter. The don't need to sync anything. Thunderbird works just fine and a lot better than Outlook Express. They don't need a powerful image editor. Picasa works for about 99% of them. As for typing the letter, Abiword works just fine. No need for even OpenOffice although I don't mind it. When it comes to games, they just play whatever is installed on the system. Most distro of Linux come with more games than 2k or XP. They don't care what games are on it. Just a variety. folding@home name: _ryecoaaron # systems: 4 dual core, 2 quads, 1 dual quad, and a PS3

gerrynjr Registered User Posts: 8 Joined: 2005-10-16

#39471 Posted on: 01/10/2007 10:00 PM I certainly disagree on number one. Linux does not just run on PCs, the author fails to consider the multitudes of architectures that Linux runs on. This includes routers, wireless gateways, PDAs, Cell Phones, NAS devices, SANs, Clusters, etc. The author seems to just consider desktop usage... Linux is MUCH more than Desktops... Windows is trying to be more than desktops, there's a difference here...

Murdock Captain Posts: 1398 Joined: 2001-07-02

#39472 Posted on: 01/11/2007 05:38 AM ...but the context of the article is desktops. The embeded market is completely different. Very, very few people buy routers, wireless gateways, PDAs, Cell Phones, NAS devices, SANs, Clusters, etc because they run linux. Linux isn't a feature in those devices... Its just there. Linux isn't trying to win in that market. Its already won. Microsoft is all about eyecandy these days, and eyecandy doesn't do much good if you don't have a screen. (note: windows CE is competitive in the PDA/Cell market) The place where linux has the greatest potential to grow is the desktop market. And the author was just pointing out some reasons why that isn't likely to happen in the near future. The desktop market is where the consumers have a choice of operating systems, and consumers (and the enterprise) have overwhelmingly chosen not to use linux up until now. The pathetic state of our government will never change unless we stop electing politicians and start electing public servants. Remember: There was once a time when the term "politician" had a very negative connotation.

Ugly2dog mod this Posts: 72 Joined: 2002-02-03

#39475 Posted on: 01/13/2007 06:12 AM #3 is the biggest issue and #4 is right behind it. In my house we use just about everything {Win95 to XPPro; Mac_OS7-OSX; Linux [slackware]; Solaris X; BSD; DRDOS; scanners; printers, more printers and still more printers; large scale plotters; digital cameras; X10 interfaces; security system; etc...}. IF we could find one OS that supports everything that we use on a regular basis we would switch everything over. The bottom line is that windows wins for the least non-specific general user.

megalex Registered User Posts: 364 Joined: 2000-08-03

#39476 Posted on: 01/14/2007 06:10 PM I've been using Linux for the past 7 years for almost everything. The only two things that i agree linux is missing and they should do better is in Financial software and CAD software. The third Gaming is not Linuxs fault since its the game companies option to use inferior Direct X to OpenGL. Hardware wise windows sucks bad compared to linux. I can have a running Linux system in less than an 30 minutes. In windows i would have to install a shitload of drivers and hope they work right and maybe 2 hours later have a running system. Examples: Windows Hardware support: Opps my raid controller driver floppy is bad.. let me go download a driver.. load it into a floppy so that windows can install. Oh. darn thats my only machine.. let me go to the neighbors.. Wait a minute why am i still using a floppy in linux the installer recognizes everything? WTH? Finally got Windows up and running. now i can go browse the net for drivers.. OOPS I cant I need to install my network drivers.. damn where did i put the disk for my motherboard.. Oh well to the neighbors again.. Wait.. why am i doing this i can just boot knoppix ( linux ) and download the drivers.. How ironic.. We use linux at our work for everything... Connecting to the AD, checking exchange email using Evolution, Writing and editing Word documents, Excel, etc. for MS projects we use codeweavers. All of our servers for web are Linux. I just think how funny it is here at work when people around me are fighting with their spyware and viruses in windows while I'm here working my ass off because i have no excuse.. I guess that if I where a slacker windows would be perfect for me. By the way do you know why you don't find vendors selling the apps on COMPUSA, FRYS etc?? Look at the 4GB of bundled software that comes in many distros. ALOT of crap software is sold for windows that Linux equivalents are more stable + better + cheaper.

locovaca That's what she said Posts: 176 Joined: 2001-07-17

#39477 Posted on: 01/14/2007 11:55 PM I'll give you that RAID and Windows XP is probably the epitome of support, but I'm curious as to what network card you have. You can't fault a 5 year old OS for not support hardware that's 3 years old. Granted, letting it go 5 years is one thing, but I never had that problem after slipstreaming any custom drivers needed into my XP cd. I bet if you booted up Redhat 7.x you'd have problems getting your network card detected. Slipstreaming an XP CD is certainly easier for most people than compiling and installing a kernel. Of course, I also bet that if you booted Vista that everything would work peachy. Yes, it's technically not "released" yet, but when you're talking about searching for drivers it's best to compare apples to apples and compare your Linuces to Vista. As for DirectX being inferior... OpenGL was, at its core, for 3d modeling, not gaming. Thus 3DFX made Glide, and everyone gravitated towards it. When 3DFX died out, all of those Glide developers needed to go somewhere, so Direct3D just filled a void in the field that OpenGL couldn't seize. You might also want to read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Direct3D_and_OpenGL

Murdock Captain Posts: 1398 Joined: 2001-07-02

#39478 Posted on: 01/15/2007 03:42 PM Originally posted by megalex: I've been using Linux for the past 7 years for almost everything. The only two things that i agree linux is missing and they should do better is in Financial software and CAD software. The third Gaming is not Linuxs fault since its the game companies option to use inferior Direct X to OpenGL. Why are games any different than other software? What is stopping developers from writing games that run on OpenGL? Actually nevermind that. It doesn't matter who's fault it is... the fact remains that there are very few games (that appeal to the "gaming" community) written for Linux, and that is a hindrance to the broad acceptance of Linux. Originally posted by megalex: Hardware wise windows sucks bad compared to linux. I can have a running Linux system in less than an 30 minutes. In windows i would have to install a shitload of drivers and hope they work right and maybe 2 hours later have a running system. Examples: Really? No, I'm serious. Really? I've *never* needed 2hours to install any version of windows on known good hardware. Originally posted by megalex: Windows Hardware support: Opps my raid controller driver floppy is bad.. let me go download a driver.. load it into a floppy so that windows can install. Oh. darn thats my only machine.. let me go to the neighbors.. Wait a minute why am i still using a floppy in linux the installer recognizes everything? WTH? So the boxed version of Linux that has been sitting on the shelf at Compusa for the last 9 months is going to have drivers for brand new hardware? That's a pretty neat trick. I didn't know that Linux has the ability to write its own drivers on the fly. Or did you just run over to your neighbor's house to download the latest distro? Originally posted by megalex: Finally got Windows up and running. now i can go browse the net for drivers.. OOPS I cant I need to install my network drivers.. damn where did i put the disk for my motherboard.. Oh well to the neighbors again.. Wait.. why am i doing this i can just boot knoppix ( linux ) and download the drivers.. How ironic.. Right... and where did the mysterious version of Knoppix come from? Didn't cheat and download that from the neighbors too did you? Originally posted by megalex: We use linux at our work for everything... Connecting to the AD, checking exchange email using Evolution, Writing and editing Word documents, Excel, etc. for MS projects we use codeweavers. All of our servers for web are Linux. I just think how funny it is here at work when people around me are fighting with their spyware and viruses in windows while I'm here working my ass off because i have no excuse.. I guess that if I where a slacker windows would be perfect for me. That's strange. We use windows here at work, and since I've been here we haven't had to deal with a single Virus or Spyware problem. I'm curious though... do you think that the proliferation of spyware and viruses for the Windows platform has to do with its security (or perceived lack of) or its install base? Originally posted by megalex: By the way do you know why you don't find vendors selling the apps on COMPUSA, FRYS etc?? Look at the 4GB of bundled software that comes in many distros. ALOT of crap software is sold for windows that Linux equivalents are more stable + better + cheaper. And what sort of support can one expect on the 4GB of software that comes bundled with those distros? If you want to run Linux. Thats fine. I think it is a great OS, but taking cheap shots at Windows, isn't going to fix any of Linux's shortcomings. The pathetic state of our government will never change unless we stop electing politicians and start electing public servants. Remember: There was once a time when the term "politician" had a very negative connotation.

megalex Registered User Posts: 364 Joined: 2000-08-03

#39479 Posted on: 01/15/2007 05:01 PM Originally posted by locovaca: I'll give you that RAID and Windows XP is probably the epitome of support, but I'm curious as to what network card you have. You can't fault a 5 year old OS for not support hardware that's 3 years old. Granted, letting it go 5 years is one thing, but I never had that problem after slipstreaming any custom drivers needed into my XP cd. I bet if you booted up Redhat 7.x you'd have problems getting your network card detected. Slipstreaming an XP CD is certainly easier for most people than compiling and installing a kernel. Of course, I also bet that if you booted Vista that everything would work peachy. Yes, it's technically not "released" yet, but when you're talking about searching for drivers it's best to compare apples to apples and compare your Linuces to Vista. As for DirectX being inferior... OpenGL was, at its core, for 3d modeling, not gaming. Thus 3DFX made Glide, and everyone gravitated towards it. When 3DFX died out, all of those Glide developers needed to go somewhere, so Direct3D just filled a void in the field that OpenGL couldn't seize. You might also want to read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Direct3D_and_OpenGL The point is that for years if you pulled a SuSe out of the shelf and a Windows out of the shelf. Linux will provide more support for hardware that Windows will without requiring you to download or install aditional drivers. Plus it would cover a WIDE range of platforms not just x86-32bit. So the hardware support argument is a mute point in terms of out of the box Linux and out of the box windows. Yes DX is an easy way to write games. OpenGL is not so easy but its portable and more powerful. OpenGL is still superior.

megalex Registered User Posts: 364 Joined: 2000-08-03

#39480 Posted on: 01/15/2007 05:49 PM Originally posted by murdock: Why are games any different than other software? What is stopping developers from writing games that run on OpenGL? Actually nevermind that. It doesn't matter who's fault it is... the fact remains that there are very few games (that appeal to the "gaming" community) written for Linux, and that is a hindrance to the broad acceptance of Linux. Yes games are different than software.Overall Linux has little problems finding replacement windows software. Games is the only category that Linux has a problem but even then I can play most of the windows games i like on linux. This will improve as wine improves. But since i use linux mostly for work anyways its not a big deal. Most of the users out there use linux for web surfing / email / messaging anyways so for most users Linux is ready. Right now its about trying to beat the MS marketing machine and break through the FUD and vendor lockin. Originally posted by murdock: Really? No, I'm serious. Really? I've *never* needed 2 hours to install any version of windows on known good hardware. Then you might need to work as a tech at a big institution supporting multiple hardware vendors. lol I've seen techs trying to get all the hardware configured and running correctly on windows for days. It all works out if you happen to find the right drivers. Really? yes really if you have to go buy a freaking floppy because windows still requires a floppy for drivers then yes. Thats not even funny its embarrassing. A multi billion dollar company that cant rewrite their installer to use new technology is embarrassing. In linux if i need a new driver installed at boot time i could even mount a freaking usb if i needed to. Originally posted by murdock: So the boxed version of Linux that has been sitting on the shelf at Compusa for the last 9 months is going to have drivers for brand new hardware? That's a pretty neat trick. I didn't know that Linux has the ability to write its own drivers on the fly. Or did you just run over to your neighbor's house to download the latest distro? The latest boxed version of Linux and the Latest boxed version of Windows. Linux will run on 98% of current hardware without needing to install additional drivers while windows will run on maybe 30% of hardware and thats just on the x86-32bit comparing 64bit support would be horrible. Yes overall Linux has more hardware support than Windows. Lets not beat the undeniable. We have brand new Dell systems with new hardware here all the time and use Knoppix to run them we ran into 1 problem on one of them and it just required a new version of knoppix to run. Yes it used to be that linux took maybe a month to catch up to new hardware but not for the last 4 or 5 years. The only problem remaining is with video card vendors and some wireless vendors. ATI support sucks (but getting better) but NVIDIA has been very good in supporting Linux. Most of the wireless vendor drivers run on ndiswrapper but takes some configuration. Originally posted by murdock: Right... and where did the mysterious version of Knoppix come from? Didn't cheat and download that from the neighbors too did you? Maybe I had a copy.. maybe I just downloaded it at my neighbors and ran it so that i didn't have to spend an hour in his computer looking for drivers. Originally posted by murdock: That's strange. We use windows here at work, and since I've been here we haven't had to deal with a single Virus or Spyware problem. I'm curious though... do you think that the proliferation of spyware and viruses for the Windows platform has to do with its security (or perceived lack of) or its install base? Good for you. Some people are not that lucky but it tends to be specific to types of users. I ran a little experiment. My dad used to get windows spyware all the time until I switched him to linux. He barely noticed the switch since he only did web and email and maybe word documents. I haven had to clean or upgrade his computer since then. Anyways yes Windows security patches are too many and often times too late and some create other backdoors. Linux does have security issues but patches are released almost instantly. Originally posted by murdock: And what sort of support can one expect on the 4GB of software that comes bundled with those distros? If you want to run Linux. Thats fine. I think it is a great OS, but taking cheap shots at Windows, isn't going to fix any of Linux's shortcomings. Excellent support both from the vendor and the community. I have never run into an issue that there was not a fix or someone had an answer to. The Linux and OSS community in general is very helpful. Try to get support for an Windows/office 200X issue with MS I assure you it will be fun. Can you please list the cheap shots at windows? I don't seem to have taken any.

locovaca That's what she said Posts: 176 Joined: 2001-07-17

#39481 Posted on: 01/15/2007 06:50 PM The latest boxed version of Linux and the Latest boxed version of Windows. Linux will run on 98% of current hardware without needing to install additional drivers while windows will run on maybe 30% of hardware and thats just on the x86-32bit comparing 64bit support would be horrible. Care to back those numbers up with facts? Or are they arbitrary percentages you made up to make your case seem better than it really is? Here's a fact for you: 100% of the hardware you can get at any electronics store comes with a Windows 32 bit driver in some form. 100% of the x86 hardware you can buy at Newegg has a Windows 32 bit driver. So go ahead, let me know your sources for that 30%. The point is that for years if you pulled a SuSe out of the shelf and a Windows out of the shelf. Linux will provide more support for hardware that Windows will without requiring you to download or install aditional drivers. OK, let's compare. SUSE 7.3 came out at the same time Windows XP did. Go ahead, install SUSE 7.3 on your box and let me know how it goes. That's apples to apples. In looking at some of those SUSE 7.3 laptop install guides it doesn't look too pretty. http://www.djaa.uklinux.net/loaa6L.html "When everything freezes (see note) switch it off At reboot on the hard drive, refuse to install X11 When everything freezes again (see note) switch it off At second reboot on the hard drive, refuse again to install X11" http://www.nevada.edu/~dns/linux/linux_on_laptop.html "# Overcoming the freezing during hardware part of installation 1. At boot prompt of installation type "linux hwprobe=-pci.ext, -scsi.geo, -usb.mods, -ignx11, -bios.vbe, -isapnp.old, -isapnp.new hwinfo" # Before you begin you may need the newest tulip 1. First download these files from this website 1. (Most recent)tulip.c or (Older but stable version)tulip.c 2. pci-scan.c 3. pci-scan.h 4. kern_compat.h 2. You should probably move the downloaded files to /usr/src/linux/drivers/net/ to make working on them a bit easier # Compile and insert the new module as follows(replace driver.c with the different c files) in this order using the below command." Not looking too good for SUSE from that era! I mean, compiling drivers? I'd much rather use my floppy which I had in 2001 to load a driver than go to CompUSA to download a network driver so I can compile it by hand. OpenGL is not so easy but its portable and more powerful. OpenGL is still superior. Care to back up that highly subjective opinion with some facts? Being portable doesn't make it more powerful. In fact, portability usually causes performance decreases (Java anyone?), not increases. Then you might need to work as a tech at a big institution supporting multiple hardware vendors. lol Our "big institution" (350 people) uses network installation, setup scripts, and Active Directory to push out needed software and images. Almost all of our servers, including our production servers which millions of people use on a daily basis, run Windows, IIS, and SQL Server. We have servers from HP, Dell, IBM, and some older ones from Compaq. All of our downtime in the last 3 years has been due to network hardware dying- never a Virus, Spyware, Malware, whatever. Our clients include IBM, GSK, Citrix, RBC, Cingular, T-Mobile, Philips, Siemens, NXP, and many more- you might have heard of them. Our IT staff is 3 people. 3 well educated people who don't pirate a copy of 2003 Server onto their mom's 5 year old Dell and then call themselves a Sys Admin. Most of the wireless vendor drivers run on ndiswrapper but takes some configuration. Which means that your Linux distribution does not support wireless out of the box- you have to use a driver CD or download the latest WINDOWS drivers from a manufacturer site. So part of your "perfect hardware support" exists because of Windows drivers. Plus it would cover a WIDE range of platforms not just x86-32bit. And the NT Kernel does as well. Simply because there isn't a market for non-x86 home-user architectures doesn't mean it won't compile and run reasonably well. The current NT kernel is running on PPC via the X-Box (and at one time ran on Alpha and MIPS). And the number of people buying non-x86 hardware so they can simply run Linux is negligible at best. Who the hell is going to drop $10,000 on a MIPS workstation so they can run Linux and the limited selection of apps that are clean enough to compile on MIPS? Very few.

Murdock Captain Posts: 1398 Joined: 2001-07-02

#39482 Posted on: 01/15/2007 07:26 PM Nice circular logic regarding game development. Why are games differerent than other software? You can argue the whys and why nots until you are blue in the face, but the selection of games for linux is nowhere near what it is for Windows. Full Stop. And I love the Knoppix arguement. Let me paraphrase that for you... Since I can download a seperate, 3rd party boot CD, that means that Linux has better hardware support than Windows. Nice. And you just "had a copy" ???? Big friggin deal. Maybe I just had a copy of WinPE laying around. Whoops. Now I can boot from a CD too, and I can include whatever drivers I want. I would have brought that up earlier, but it didn't really seem relevant to a discussion about *installed* operating systems. But I'm curious... How great is Linux if you don't have a second computer, and you don't have a 3rd party disc to boot from, and it doesn't have drivers for your wifi card, and you can't connect to the internet? (you know... those same limitations you used for the windows scenario) As mentioned before, with very little effort, I can slipstream whatever drivers I want into a windows install. No floppies needed. And the fact remains that I can get Windows drivers for whatever piece of hardware I want. Come to think of it, I've never purchased a piece of hardware that didn't come with Windows drivers. Not all of them had linux drivers though. And I have worked as a tech supporting multiple hardware vendors. Never had an issue on known good hardware. Its not Windows fault if a tech can't figure out which drivers to use. lol Wow, its a good thing nobody is using ATI video cards, or WiFi cards these days... sounds like they could really run into some problems. I just love the logic here again... Linux has 100% support for all of the hardware that is supported by Linux, and if it isn't supported by Linux, then it doesn't coun't because Linux doesn't support it. Lucky? No, we aren't lucky. We actively manage our security so it isn't a problem. If anyone is lucky, it is the people using Linux and OSX that take it for granted that no one has bothered to write a virus or spyware for their OS. I'm not virus free by accident my friend, you are. Since I don't have it in front of me, can you give me the tech support number for those apps that come bundled with Linux? Cheap shot? I'd say, "OOPS I cant I need to install my network drivers.. damn where did i put the disk for my motherboard.. Oh well to the neighbors again.. " Would qualify. Yeah... it's Microsoft's fault you lost your driver disk. I'm not saying that Windows is perfect. Far from it actually. But that isn't what the discussion is about. Its about why Linux (given the status quo) won't succeed in the desktop market. The pathetic state of our government will never change unless we stop electing politicians and start electing public servants. Remember: There was once a time when the term "politician" had a very negative connotation.

Lord British Gentoo Folder Posts: 355 Joined: 2004-04-06

#39483 Posted on: 01/15/2007 08:13 PM It is nice that you corporate people have no problems with your Windows setups. That is because there is someone knowledgeable to maintain them and/or call tech support. What about all the home users? And as far as tech support goes, that means nothing. Almost all of the people I fix computers for, try calling their ISP because something doesn't work right. By the time the give up and bring it to me, the damage is done and there are no numbers to call. I have found more Linux tech support forums that Windows tech support forums. Either way, the low computer skills home users is going to do neither making both operating systems about equal. These same users may buy something from the store with 32-bit Windows drivers but can they actually get it to work??? From my experience, about a 1/4 of the time. So, what I am trying to say is if you have knowledgeable users using either OS, you will get a decent running system. Linux on laptops may be the exception with Suspend but not all laptops work perfect with Windows either. The biggest thing Windows have going against it is the whole default admin privileges problem. Yes, I know you corporate people don't give the worker this privilege. Most Linux distros don't do this which would solve quite a few virus problems even if there were some written for Linux. folding@home name: _ryecoaaron # systems: 4 dual core, 2 quads, 1 dual quad, and a PS3

locovaca That's what she said Posts: 176 Joined: 2001-07-17

#39484 Posted on: 01/15/2007 08:29 PM Originally posted by Lord British: It is nice that you corporate people have no problems with your Windows setups. That is because there is someone knowledgeable to maintain them and/or call tech support. What about all the home users? And as far as tech support goes, that means nothing. Almost all of the people I fix computers for, try calling their ISP because something doesn't work right. By the time the give up and bring it to me, the damage is done and there are no numbers to call. I have found more Linux tech support forums that Windows tech support forums. Either way, the low computer skills home users is going to do neither making both operating systems about equal. These same users may buy something from the store with 32-bit Windows drivers but can they actually get it to work??? From my experience, about a 1/4 of the time. So, what I am trying to say is if you have knowledgeable users using either OS, you will get a decent running system. Linux on laptops may be the exception with Suspend but not all laptops work perfect with Windows either. The biggest thing Windows have going against it is the whole default admin privileges problem. Yes, I know you corporate people don't give the worker this privilege. Most Linux distros don't do this which would solve quite a few virus problems even if there were some written for Linux. There are plenty of services created for the unknowledgeable types. Commercially CompUSA, Best Buy, really any technology chain will fix your computer. Local dealers will do it as well. "Wait", you cry, "why should I have to pay someone to fix my computer?" The same damn reason you pay someone to fix your dishwasher, TV, car, whatever. If you don't understand how to wire up an electrical socket, would you try to hook up electricity to your shed? The answer, as any sane person would tell you, is that you wouldn't and instead would call a professional (or at least someone who has a clue) to do it. So why is there this expectation that computers should allow someone with an IQ of 50 to be able to disassemble and rebuild it? I'll be damned if I can wire foglights into my car, so I don't even try. But I can install a video card, so I do. It's as simple as that. If you can't install drivers, etc., don't flipping try- get someone else that can.

Lord British Gentoo Folder Posts: 355 Joined: 2004-04-06

#39485 Posted on: 01/15/2007 10:01 PM There are plenty of services created for the unknowledgeable types. Commercially CompUSA, Best Buy, really any technology chain will fix your computer. Local dealers will do it as well. "Wait", you cry, "why should I have to pay someone to fix my computer?" The same damn reason you pay someone to fix your dishwasher, TV, car, whatever. If you don't understand how to wire up an electrical socket, would you try to hook up electricity to your shed? The answer, as any sane person would tell you, is that you wouldn't and instead would call a professional (or at least someone who has a clue) to do it. So why is there this expectation that computers should allow someone with an IQ of 50 to be able to disassemble and rebuild it? I'll be damned if I can wire foglights into my car, so I don't even try. But I can install a video card, so I do. It's as simple as that. If you can't install drivers, etc., don't flipping try- get someone else that can. Who said it has to be free? I never mentioned that. I know those places and local dealers will do that. That is what I do (about half for charity though) and I will setup a Linux system if they want. I was just saying that support is three of the four points. Yet, very few of the people I deal with have ever used any of it. You can find support for just about anything (Linux or Windows) if you try hard enough. On the other hand, wouldn't you expect someone to just be able to plug in a printer or scanner without having to pay someone to do it? It is not like you are taking the system apart or doing brain surgery. I have seen a plenty of USB printers and scanners that don't play nicely. I used to have that attitude, "If they can't do it themselves, take it to someone who can." After working with so many people who understand very little about computers and can barely afford one, that isn't always the option. So what, they don't get to use a computer??? I just disagree with support being three of the four reasons why Windows is winning on the desktop. It is just easiest to find right now. If you would've told someone in the 70s that Toyota would be the biggest auto maker in the world in 30 years, they would've laughed at you. In my town, there are more Chrysler products sold than anything else. The dealer that sells them has the worst support rating in the area. People buy cars from the dealer because of location and eye candy. Why would the same people want support for their relatively cheap computer and not for their car? Enough, I'm done. folding@home name: _ryecoaaron # systems: 4 dual core, 2 quads, 1 dual quad, and a PS3

locovaca That's what she said Posts: 176 Joined: 2001-07-17

#39486 Posted on: 01/15/2007 10:20 PM Originally posted by Lord British: After working with so many people who understand very little about computers and can barely afford one, that isn't always the option. So what, they don't get to use a computer??? Let's just replace a few nouns in your sentence and retain the meaning. After working with so many teenagers who understand very little about driving and can barely afford to take classes, that isn't always the option. So what, they don't get to use a car? Why is it any different? Yes, using a computer wrecklessly can't kill someone directly (although if you had an infected notebook, took it into a poorly secured hospital and got on their wifi- but that's a little extreme), but the analogy still works. Learn to use the tools before using them! If you can't afford to do both, then you need to learn first THEN buy one. Take a class at a community college then go to the library while working up the dough for a computer. Originally posted by Lord British: If you would've told someone in the 70s that Toyota would be the biggest auto maker in the world in 30 years, they would've laughed at you. In my town, there are more Chrysler products sold than anything else. The dealer that sells them has the worst support rating in the area. People buy cars from the dealer because of location and eye candy. Which goes exactly back to the point I made way at the beginning. Linux needs to offer people something that'll wow them. Beryl is a very good start. Things like "it uses your memory more efficiently, you get support from forums instead of an 800 number (which, if the problem is your network card, that's kind of a poor option, but I digress), it looks the same and almost works the same" don't get people to change. It's got to be something that none of the alternatives can offer. Right now there is no option that a basic consumer cares about. People don't care about freedom to choose a system logger, they just want stuff to work and work easily. Linux has not consistently shown to work smoothly unless you're willing to put in hours of research and effort; PC's with pre-installed Windows generally will work with the hardware that they ship with, which most people end up sticking with. Point in case: my grandfather last fall finally upgraded to a Dell (which he bought off of QVC, but that's neither here nor there )... upgrading the HP K6-2 333 he'd been using since 1998. It had the same install of Windows 98, same hardware, running the oldest version of AOL that they'd support. Not a single problem. He never upgraded the ram, hard drive, 15" CRT, anything- it was as reliable as it could be. That's the kind of people that Linux wants to attract, but why would my grandfather move to Linux? It does the same thing for him, but it's an untested solution, while his current one is going problem free. Going back to your point, Toyota always had a following of people who wanted no-frills cars that were reliable. It wasn't until the gas price hike of late that they really started to get the attention that they have now. And who knows, maybe Vista will be that gas price hike in the computer world that will get people to switch to Linux- but that seems unlikely at this point.

megalex Registered User Posts: 364 Joined: 2000-08-03

#39487 Posted on: 01/16/2007 07:50 PM Originally posted by locovaca: Care to back those numbers up with facts? Or are they arbitrary percentages you made up to make your case seem better than it really is? Here's a fact for you: 100% of the hardware you can get at any electronics store comes with a Windows 32 bit driver in some form. 100% of the x86 hardware you can buy at Newegg has a Windows 32 bit driver. So go ahead, let me know your sources for that 30%. Numbers are my personal and professional experience. I'm not just a Linux Nut, I administer windos, OSX, Freebsd etc. My comparison was like you pointed.. walk into a COMPUSA right now and buy a windows XP vs a Linux both OUT OF THE BOX. Originally posted by locovaca: OK, let's compare. SUSE 7.3 came out at the same time Windows XP did. Go ahead, install SUSE 7.3 on your box and let me know how it goes. That's apples to apples. In looking at some of those SUSE 7.3 laptop install guides it doesn't look too pretty. Again I was going by your walk into COMPUSA right now analogy. Not looking too good for SUSE from that era! I mean, compiling drivers? I'd much rather use my floppy which I had in 2001 to load a driver than go to CompUSA to download a network driver so I can compile it by hand. Im not even going to go into this. We could never end going over hardware issues in both operating systems at that specific time. I've used both OS enough to know both have had major hardware and driver problems. But overall hardware support for multiple platforms and x86 without requiring driver disks or downloads, Linux wins and there is really no discussion there. Care to back up that highly subjective opinion with some facts? Being portable doesn't make it more powerful. In fact, portability usually causes performance decreases (Java anyone?), not increases. What version of java are you refering to I happen to write allot of application in Java and would like to see what mayor performance decreases you are talking about. Java used to have some performance Issues with eary versions but now i can barely tell a java app from a C++ app in terms of speed. I'm also a developer (java,C,C++,C#,PHP,JSP,ASPX)and this portability causing performance decrease statement is BS period. C# is portable? do you think it sucks? It depends what you understand by being powerful. For me being able to use openGL for something other than gaming and being able to compile and optimize it for different platforms with little or no rewrite is more powerful than something that only supports Xbox, Windows and its focus is specific to gaming. Our "big institution" (350 people) uses network installation, setup scripts, and Active Directory to push out needed software and images. Almost all of our servers, including our production servers which millions of people use on a daily basis, run Windows, IIS, and SQL Server. We have servers from HP, Dell, IBM, and some older ones from Compaq. All of our downtime in the last 3 years has been due to network hardware dying- never a Virus, Spyware, Malware, whatever. Our clients include IBM, GSK, Citrix, RBC, Cingular, T-Mobile, Philips, Siemens, NXP, and many more- you might have heard of them. Our IT staff is 3 people. 3 well educated people who don't pirate a copy of 2003 Server onto their mom's 5 year old Dell and then call themselves a Sys Admin. I guess since we are now measuring ourselves. Let me pull out a ruler and measure mine. Work for 2 companies one with 3000 employees world wide one with over 12,000 employees in multiple states. AND MS gives us 2003, Vista , and every single piece of software they make free for research. We have 40 servers some in remote hosting facilities around the world 20% of them running windows 80% running Linux/BSD. Trying to migrate the windows servers because of the constant attention they require for patching and restarting IIS, stuff that barely happens on our Linux/BSD servers shit just runs. Wait I don't live with Mom and i have 4 servers and 7 desktops and 1 laptop. Running Linux,Freebsd,WIndows XP,Windows2003,Vista,and OSX. I'm guessing you run windows XP not 2003 on your mom's old dell right? Most of the wireless vendor drivers run on ndiswrapper but takes some configuration. Which means that your Linux distribution does not support wireless out of the box- you have to use a driver CD or download the latest WINDOWS drivers from a manufacturer site. So part of your "perfect hardware support" exists because of Windows drivers. Never said it had perfect hardware support. But yes if you want to use Vendors that don't provide or use standard specs for their hardware so that people can build drivers for them u can usually load the windows drivers. And the NT Kernel does as well. Simply because there isn't a market for non-x86 home-user architectures doesn't mean it won't compile and run reasonably well. The current NT kernel is running on PPC via the X-Box (and at one time ran on Alpha and MIPS). And the number of people buying non-x86 hardware so they can simply run Linux is negligible at best. Who the hell is going to drop $10,000 on a MIPS workstation so they can run Linux and the limited selection of apps that are clean enough to compile on MIPS? Very few. So i can install windows on PPC out of the BOX? or recompile it for PPC ? The point is not whether the normal desktop user buys the hardware or not is whether the OS supports it out of the box. Now I had 64bit running on my Linux 2 years before XP had a beta 64bit version. Thats what i'm talking about. A new architecture comes out and Linux/BSD has support for it way before windows. What i see happening is that allot of FUD about hardware support and other issues that where once an issue and now they are almost non-existent but keep haunting Linux. Apparently some people had a bad experience and decided that linux suxors 4eva. Times have changed. Linux is ready for the Desktop and the average Joe. If you don't think so then you are either not using it or have a grudge.

locovaca That's what she said Posts: 176 Joined: 2001-07-17

#39488 Posted on: 01/17/2007 01:15 AM Numbers are my personal and professional experience. I'm not just a Linux Nut, I administer windos, OSX, Freebsd etc. My comparison was like you pointed.. walk into a COMPUSA right now and buy a windows XP vs a Linux both OUT OF THE BOX. Yes, and Kobe Bryan could totally kick Larry Bird's ass in a pickup game of basketball today. Your point? Ok, you win. XP is 6 years old. I'll go ahead and write that on a cake and send it your way. If your biggest beef with XP is that it's that old, you must've liked the 95-98-98 SE-ME transition much better. But let's not stop there. Let's go ahead and bash Windows 3.1 for not being able to drive my 1920x1200 screen on my laptop, or support it's wireless functionalities. You're on a slippery slope there, cowboy. Very few people just randomly go out and buy a copy of XP (and heaven forbid someone spend $30 for Linux)- it comes pre-installed, either on a white box or a brand name. Most manufacturers don't even include an install disc now to make it simpler for people who have difficulties with drivers. Like... apparently you? I'm not just a Linux Nut, I administer windos, OSX, Freebsd etc. This isn't about c*ck size. As you might have read before, all of my systems (save one) run Linux. I've been using Linux on my servers since Redhat 5.0. But I digress. What version of java are you refering to I happen to write allot of application in Java and would like to see what mayor performance decreases you are talking about. Java used to have some performance Issues with eary versions but now i can barely tell a java app from a C++ app in terms of speed. I'm also a developer (java,C,C++,C#,PHP,JSP,ASPX)and this portability causing performance decrease statement is BS period. C# is portable? do you think it sucks? First of all, this is a good start: http://www.shudo.net/jit/perf/ Portability is very simple. 1. A common set of instructions is chosen. 2. An interpreter / "Virtual Machine" is written for every machine. 3. Not every machine supports the same instructions, as the common set is not the lowest common denominator among the platforms. 4. Therefore, work arounds and inefficiencies are needed to provide the common set of instructions to platforms that do not natively support it. You might find a great recent example in the Pentium 4 and the Rotate instruction that was emulated in hardware. Coding for native hardware is always faster because it allows optimizations to be chosen at compile time, not run time. There are also differences in the environments- Windows isn't POSIX compliant and does things like threading and process scheduling different than Linux, UNIX, QNX, whatever. On the same hardware and changing only the OS, you will get different performance results. With the same OS but different hardware you will get different relative performance, which is harder to benchmark. The G3 didn't support Altivec, but the G4 did- so on the G4 the java code could call some simple arithmetic functions that would otherwise have to be emulated in the VM when created machine code on the G3. And I never claimed that C# was portable, although 85% of it is via the mono project. The only thing that hasn't gone (to my knowledge) is Windows.Forms, which most likely never be ported. For me being able to use openGL for something other than gaming and being able to compile and optimize it for different platforms with little or no rewrite is more powerful than something that only supports Xbox, Windows and its focus is specific to gaming. And for game development houses that would have to triple their resources in QA, Programming, etc., it's not worth the extra 5% margin you'd get, at most. Hell, most of the games that make it to OS X now aren't even done by the original publishes- Aspyr, Macplay, etc. do the conversion and publishing on behalf of the developers because most companies don't really care about the odd Mac/Linux gamer. You != Gaming Company. Companies generally focus on profits, not principles. If they did, we wouldn't be having this discussion and everyone would be using OS/2. Wait I don't live with Mom and i have 4 servers and 7 desktops and 1 laptop. Running Linux,Freebsd,WIndows XP,Windows2003,Vista,and OSX You took a general comment about a large majority of "Windows Administrators" and applied it to yourself. Never said it had perfect hardware support. But yes if you want to use Vendors that don't provide or use standard specs for their hardware so that people can build drivers for them u can usually load the windows drivers. Neither does Windows, but you seem to put it on a higher pedestal than anyone else would in judging a 6 year old OS. The difference is that Windows will most likely have a driver available, whereas Linux might not. At which point you're running LSPCI and posting vendor and device numbers to a forum in hopes that someone will modify their source code so you can at least have your device detected. So i can install windows on PPC out of the BOX? or recompile it for PPC ? The point is not whether the normal desktop user buys the hardware or not is whether the OS supports it out of the box. Now I had 64bit running on my Linux 2 years before XP had a beta 64bit version. Thats what i'm talking about. A new architecture comes out and Linux/BSD has support for it way before windows. Your confusing "possible" with "realism." Simply being able to run Linux on a Mac doesn't mean that most people do. In fact, a large portion of the population that purchases Mac Hardware do so with the intent of running OS X, otherwise they wouldn't be dropping $3k on a somewhat overpriced desktop with a way overpriced monitor and would just by an HP at a local store. Guess what- I'm running 64 bit Gentoo, and it's still a bitch, 4 years later. What's the point of 64 bit apps when all of their plugins are 32 bit? I have to use firefox-bin so I can play flash content, mplayer-bin so I can view files with win32 codecs. I only run 64 bit so that I can use all of my ram. Also guess what- 64 bit Windows has the same problems. So I guess being first doesn't really mean much, huh? But honestly, who (who being "in the mainstream market") cares if Linux runs on an ARM processor? Nobody is lining up at Best Buy 2 days before the new iPAQ's are released simply to go and dump Linux on it. What about PPC? Well, in a couple of years Linux is all that'll run on them besides old version of OS X, now that Apple has gone the way of x86. Who is running out to buy SPARC hardware to plop Linux on it? My grandparents certainly don't care about all of the architectures that Linux can possibly run on- they would just need it to work. How many users actually run Linux on alternative architectures vs. the native OS? Well, let's consult the distributing computing folk! http://stats.distributed.net/misc/platformlist.php?project_id=8&view=tco The top Linux Architectures and submitted amounts of data 1. x86 (481M) 2. x86_64 (34M) 3. PPC (32M) 4. SPARC (448K) 5. ALPHA (132K) 6. S390 (94K) 7. IA64 (44K) 8. ARM (30K) 9. PA-RISC (23K) 10. MIPS (21K) While that's not necessarily a scientific example, let's assume that the distribution of linux installations is roughly the same as the amount of RC5-72 data coming in. That means the percentage of users relative to X86 is 1. x86 (100%) 2. x86_64 (7%) 3. PPC (6.7%) 4. SPARC (.09%) 5. ALPHA (.027%) 6. S390 (.02%) 7. IA64 (.009%) 8. ARM (.006%) 9. PA-RISC (.005%) 10. MIPS (.004%) Not exact numbers, but they're some sort of numbers to work with. It's easy to make broad statements, but if you don't have any facts behind them they don't really hold water. Fact: Based on RC5-72 data, roughly 88% of Linux RC5 users are on the X86 architecture. Based on RC5-72 data, less than 1% of Linux data comes from an architecture other than X86, X86_64, or PPC. But really, how advantageous is something when it's never used?

megalex Registered User Posts: 364 Joined: 2000-08-03

#39492 Posted on: 01/19/2007 12:04 AM Originally posted by locovaca: Yes, and Kobe Bryan could totally kick Larry Bird's ass in a pickup game of basketball today. Your point? Ok, you win. XP is 6 years old. I'll go ahead and write that on a cake and send it your way. If your biggest beef with XP is that it's that old, you must've liked the 95-98-98 SE-ME transition much better. But let's not stop there. Let's go ahead and bash Windows 3.1 for not being able to drive my 1920x1200 screen on my laptop, or support it's wireless functionalities. You're on a slippery slope there, cowboy. Very few people just randomly go out and buy a copy of XP (and heaven forbid someone spend $30 for Linux)- it comes pre-installed, either on a white box or a brand name. Most manufacturers don't even include an install disc now to make it simpler for people who have difficulties with drivers. Like... apparently you? lol.. My main gripe was the "Linux driver support sux compared to Windows". While that might have been the case back when it certainly does not suck now. It really isn't an outstanding point for Linux adoption. AND Microsoft THE GREATEST commercial software vendor in history can't update a widely used Windows installer to handle more hardware etc( FLOPPY ?? WTH ??). This isn't about c*ck size. As you might have read before, all of my systems (save one) run Linux. I've been using Linux on my servers since Redhat 5.0. But I digress. I've never heard that Windows admin joke.. Sorry about that let me pull my zipper back up. What version of java are you refering to I happen to write allot of application in Java and would like to see what mayor performance decreases you are talking about. Java used to have some performance Issues with eary versions but now i can barely tell a java app from a C++ app in terms of speed. I'm also a developer (java,C,C++,C#,PHP,JSP,ASPX)and this portability causing performance decrease statement is BS period. C# is portable? do you think it sucks? First of all, this is a good start: http://www.shudo.net/jit/perf/ Portability is very simple. 1. A common set of instructions is chosen. 2. An interpreter / "Virtual Machine" is written for every machine. 3. Not every machine supports the same instructions, as the common set is not the lowest common denominator among the platforms. 4. Therefore, work arounds and inefficiencies are needed to provide the common set of instructions to platforms that do not natively support it. You might find a great recent example in the Pentium 4 and the Rotate instruction that was emulated in hardware. Coding for native hardware is always faster because it allows optimizations to be chosen at compile time, not run time. There are also differences in the environments- Windows isn't POSIX compliant and does things like threading and process scheduling different than Linux, UNIX, QNX, whatever. On the same hardware and changing only the OS, you will get different performance results. With the same OS but different hardware you will get different relative performance, which is harder to benchmark. The G3 didn't support Altivec, but the G4 did- so on the G4 the java code could call some simple arithmetic functions that would otherwise have to be emulated in the VM when created machine code on the G3. And I never claimed that C# was portable, although 85% of it is via the mono project. The only thing that hasn't gone (to my knowledge) is Windows.Forms, which most likely never be ported. Good Benchmarks... And we could conclude from this that Portability does not necessarily mean performance decrease. Usually the more mature the language/framework better the performance. OpenGL has been out for a while and used widely for many platforms performance usually depends on the video card hardware & drivers. I wasn't saying u said.. I was just asking. C# is very portable thanks to mono. Its about 95% portable from what i've used and it does have Windows.Forms. They even have software to port C# apps to mono. Portability is a big deal in my field since our customers keep changing their delivery requirements based on hype/marketing and not actual solid facts. It was J2EE now C#.net next year ???? A plus is that thanks to OSS I did not have to buy a windows server or visual studio to host my ASPX.NET app its running fine on Mono even though the customer will be deploying it on Windows. For me being able to use openGL for something other than gaming and being able to compile and optimize it for different platforms with little or no rewrite is more powerful than something that only supports Xbox, Windows and its focus is specific to gaming. And for game development houses that would have to triple their resources in QA, Programming, etc., it's not worth the extra 5% margin you'd get, at most. Hell, most of the games that make it to OS X now aren't even done by the original publishes- Aspyr, Macplay, etc. do the conversion and publishing on behalf of the developers because most companies don't really care about the odd Mac/Linux gamer. I don't agree there. Development houses do not have to triple their resources to write portable code if they know what they are doing. The real issue here is more complicated. MS is trying to capitalize on PC gaming they have spent tons of marketing + buying game developers. They have positioned themselves to where they make it tempting for a company to get into the game console market via Xbox which requires DX. The not enough gamers to sell games to on Linux/MAC is not always an issue either. A good example was Neverwinter Nights. They ran a poll to see what platform support their customers wanted guess what platform won by a big margin? Linux. Still they gave the development to Obsidian wich in turn strapped a quick DirectX rendering engine on the game ( a poor one also ) in hopes that they would cash in instead of improving the current OpenGL rendering via SDL. You != Gaming Company. Companies generally focus on profits, not principles. If they did, we wouldn't be having this discussion and everyone would be using OS/2. And a big factor u missed Trend (hype) & Marketing. A big marketing push does help companies adopt new products over other products not necessarily because they are better but because Marketing does work !! Neither does Windows, but you seem to put it on a higher pedestal than anyone else would in judging a 6 year old OS. The difference is that Windows will most likely have a driver available, whereas Linux might not. At which point you're running LSPCI and posting vendor and device numbers to a forum in hopes that someone will modify their source code so you can at least have your device detected. Windows Has the hardware support that it has because its creator decided that it wasn't going to touch the 6 year old OS. This is the type of support you get when you buy Windows. You mostly have to rely on the vendor's drivers to get by. I did not put Linux on a higher pedestal I just presented the fact that Linux Hardware support is not lacking compared to Windows. Guess what- I'm running 64 bit Gentoo, and it's still a bitch, 4 years later. What's the point of 64 bit apps when all of their plugins are 32 bit? I have to use firefox-bin so I can play flash content, mplayer-bin so I can view files with win32 codecs. I only run 64 bit so that I can use all of my ram. Also guess what- 64 bit Windows has the same problems. So I guess being first doesn't really mean much, huh? Since 9.2 of suse I haven't had any mayor issues with 64bit. You might want to consider switching distros. Suse provides a 32bit environment to run 32bit apps where in Gentoo/Ubuntu you provably have to set up your own. The big difference here is that there are very few apps you need to run in 32bit mode in Linux where in Windows most apps & drivers still need to be ported. At this point 64bit on Linux is solid I don't know of any real show stoppers. Yes being the first means Linux has great 64bit support while maintaining 32bit compat. But honestly, who (who being "in the mainstream market") cares if Linux runs on an ARM processor? Nobody is lining up at Best Buy 2 days before the new iPAQ's are released simply to go and dump Linux on it. What about PPC? Well, in a couple of years Linux is all that'll run on them besides old version of OS X, now that Apple has gone the way of x86. Who is running out to buy SPARC hardware to plop Linux on it? My grandparents certainly don't care about all of the architectures that Linux can possibly run on- they would just need it to work. How many users actually run Linux on alternative architectures vs. the native OS? Well, let's consult the distributing computing folk! http://stats.distributed.net/misc/platformlist.php?project_id=8&view=tco The top Linux Architectures and submitted amounts of data 1. x86 (481M) 2. x86_64 (34M) 3. PPC (32M) 4. SPARC (448K) 5. ALPHA (132K) 6. S390 (94K) 7. IA64 (44K) 8. ARM (30K) 9. PA-RISC (23K) 10. MIPS (21K) While that's not necessarily a scientific example, let's assume that the distribution of linux installations is roughly the same as the amount of RC5-72 data coming in. That means the percentage of users relative to X86 is 1. x86 (100%) 2. x86_64 (7%) 3. PPC (6.7%) 4. SPARC (.09%) 5. ALPHA (.027%) 6. S390 (.02%) 7. IA64 (.009%) 8. ARM (.006%) 9. PA-RISC (.005%) 10. MIPS (.004%) Not exact numbers, but they're some sort of numbers to work with. It's easy to make broad statements, but if you don't have any facts behind them they don't really hold water. Fact: Based on RC5-72 data, roughly 88% of Linux RC5 users are on the X86 architecture. Based on RC5-72 data, less than 1% of Linux data comes from an architecture other than X86, X86_64, or PPC. But really, how advantageous is something when it's never used? never say never.. But the fact that you can do multiple architectures it is a plus not a negative. It proves that Linux is flexible enough. Can i run Windows XP as a router on my 200Mhz P2 ? Can i make the most out of my hardware with each windows release? Can I boot Linux by plugging in a USB in my ASS? Linux is flexible when it comes to hardware/software and is a very good multipurpose operating system. Windows is not so flexible compared. But the real question now is "Linux Ready for the desktop ?" answer is YES !!

locovaca That's what she said Posts: 176 Joined: 2001-07-17

#39493 Posted on: 01/19/2007 01:28 AM lol.. My main gripe was the "Linux driver support sux compared to Windows". While that might have been the case back when it certainly does not suck now. It really isn't an outstanding point for Linux adoption. AND Microsoft THE GREATEST commercial software vendor in history can't update a widely used Windows installer to handle more hardware etc( FLOPPY ?? WTH ??). RAID for a home user wasn't an option until the last couple of years, it was a server or higher end workstation technology, and back then they had floppy drives. I do not fault Windows for being designed for technology at the time. You fault Windows for not releasing a new version every 6 months, ala Linux. Differences include the distribution system (physical media vs. the Internet), QA processes that Linux in many instances forgoes "well, it worked on my 5 machines and Gustav's 3 boxes, it's released!" or "we'll call it a beta, but this is really the version we want everyone on". I have no doubt that Microsoft has thousands of Use cases, UML documents, etc. that they test and design against. Linux has... distribution lists, forums,and Sourceforge. I'm not saying one is better than the other because they both have their strengths, but you do seem to find fault in the former. Good Benchmarks... You must've missed the one benchmark, SciMark, that tested C vs. .Net vs. Java. We'll go ahead and give you that executive summary. Runtime system Composite Score C/Visual C++ 329 Java/Sun JDK 1.4.2 Server VM 324 Java/Sun JDK 1.5.0 Server VM 316 C/icc (-O2) 306 C/gcc (-O2) 266 Java/IBM JDK 1.4.2 250 Java/JRockit (-server) 249 Java/IBM JDK 1.3.1 247 Java/JRockit (-client) 246 C#/.NET (Release) 240 Java/GCJ (-O2 with .java) 218 Java/GCJ (-O2 with .class) 206 Java/Sun JDK 1.5.0 Client VM 199 Java/Jikes RVM 197 Java/Sun JDK 1.4.2 Client VM 195 C#/Mono 1.0.2 (JIT) 163 C#/Mono 1.1.3 (JIT) 162 Java/Kaffe 115 Java/GCJ (-O0 with .java) 98.6 Java/OpenJIT 68 Java/GCJ (-O0 with .class) 63.2 Java/sunwjit 52.7 Java/shuJIT 49.7 Java/TYA 41.2 Java/interpreter 20 C#/Mono 1.1.3 (interpreter) 8.16 C#/Mono 1.0.2 (interpreter) 7.56 So Java is close... except that's the Server VM, which nobody installs on their home computer. You'll see that the VM that most home and business users use, the Sun 1.5.0 VM, at 199. That's less than 2/3 of the performance of C. And you nice Mono project? Well, that needs a little help. Java is over 10 years old, and it still can't keep up with C. And it won't ever be able to, because running in a virtual environment will always, without some sort of hardware assistance, reduce performance. Development houses do not have to triple their resources to write portable code if they know what they are doing. Incorrect as it could ever be. We recently decided to do our testing on both IE and Firefox (which should've all along). That doubles our QA time, because you have to test twice. If you release a game for 3 OS's, you have to test it completely 3 times. It doesn't matter if the code is the exact same to the tee, you test it three times. "Knowing what you're doing" has nothing to do with it. And, if you follow the Use Case/ UML model (which any Computer related degree now teaches), that means going through every Use Case multiple times. You mostly have to rely on the vendor's drivers to get by. No, I always use the Vendor's drivers, period. If I kept the default Nvidia driver that comes with Windows, I wouldn't be playing games. Wait, I have to do the same on Linux, because the nv driver doesn't do crap for 3D. Such different worlds. At this point 64bit on Linux is solid I don't know of any real show stoppers. Depends on your definition of show stoppers. If your goal is to go completely 64 bit, then there are some issues with Linux. Windows has the same problems with plugins as Linux, and all of my devices, save my Logitech Force Feedback joystick from 1999, were supported (which, conveniently, was the reason I got rid of my 64 bit copy and went back to 32 bit because Flight Sim with a keyboard sucks). But that's hardly a show stopper in my view. A show stopper is when your system is non-functional, and my system was perfectly functional and speedy. But the fact that you can do multiple architectures it is a plus not a negative. It proves that Linux is flexible enough. Can i run Windows XP as a router on my 200Mhz P2 ? I never said it was a negative, I was just pointing that it's not as big of a plus and negative towards Windows as you make it out to be. If there were hundreds of thousands of users who were disgruntled because their RISC-based workstation wouldn't run XP, yeah, I'd agree with you. But that demand is not there, so I don't see it as more than a fleeting interest of a tiny minority of the population to run Linux on an alternative architecture. As for your 200 MHz P2, I'd eBay that sucker and make millions because the P2's started at 233. And on that P2-233, yes, you can run XP. http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/upgrading/sysreqs.mspx Can I boot Linux by plugging in a USB in my ASS? I don't know the answer to that question, but if it's yes I'd contact The Inquirer and get someone to write a story about it. Linux is flexible when it comes to hardware/software and is a very good multipurpose operating system. I've never said it wasn't. I have it running off of a CF card on my Gateway Connected Touchpad Internet Appliance, which runs a homemade install with Opera over my wireless lan. On a Transmeta "400 Mhz" processor, which really performs like a Pentium 60. But the real question now is "Linux Ready for the desktop ?" answer is YES !! And as I mentioned way up at the top, it still has problems to figure out, such as power management on laptops (suspending), replacements for some popular apps (Quicken, GPS software- curiously Gentoo is dropping support for GPSDrive which I think is the only GPS software for Linux), more cooperation between developers (X.Org vs X11, Gnome vs KDE (although that's improving), Beryl vs. Compiz, etc.), and making their applications unique, not clones of Windows/OS X apps. On the business side there are some serious shortcomings with global account management, as I'm finding out, as LDAP isn't sufficient (to avoid reposting stuff, just read this: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-3848233.html ). It works enough for me, but I don't think I could seriously expect my fiance to get it installed and set up on her own, although may be an interesting weekend experiment... It's improving, but it's not improved enough for me to say it's ready.

Murdock Captain Posts: 1398 Joined: 2001-07-02

#39494 Posted on: 01/19/2007 06:34 AM Originally posted by megalex: lol.. My main gripe was the "Linux driver support sux compared to Windows". While that might have been the case back when it certainly does not suck now. It really isn't an outstanding point for Linux adoption. AND Microsoft THE GREATEST commercial software vendor in history can't update a widely used Windows installer to handle more hardware etc( FLOPPY ?? WTH ??). For starters, no one said "Linux driver support sux compared to Windows." And it seems that you are confusing the concepts of "driver support" and "driver availability" They are not the same thing. Driver availability means that a driver exists out there, somehow, somewhere. Driver support means that someone out there is willing to help you with the drivers. Linux driver availability is much better than it was several years ago, but it still hasn't caught up with Windows. See Scanners, MP3 Players, MFPs, WiFi cards, etc. Linux driver support is debatedly better than Windows driver support. But it is a case by case basis. With windows drivers, you are much more likely to have phone support available from the vendor. (that may or may not be useful) With Linux drivers you are more likely to have "unofficial" support from the vendor. (aka "here is your driver, now shut up and leave us alone") The plus side for Linux Drivers is, you can probably get on a forum and get useful info from knowledgable people. The downside is, fat lot of good that'll do ya when you can't connect to the internet because your WiFi card didn't come with Linux drivers. Now... here is what really cracks me up. You keep griping about Windows driver support, but all you have done is attack the delivery mechanism. Yeah, I think the fact that the windows installer (on very rare occasion for the typical desktop user... you know... the people that we are actually talking about in this discussion) sometimes makes use of the floppy drive. But that doesn't change the fact that *EVERY* new piece of x86 hardware (again... the stuff that our target demographic actually buys) includes Windows Drivers. On a floppy, on a CD on a DVD, or embedded in flash on a USB device.... EVERY new piece of hardware has Windows drivers. Did I mention that every device comes with Windows Drivers? ...'Cause they do. But my curiosity is going to get the better of me again... I have to ask... What is your fixation with OS Vendors, writing hardware drivers? Who cares if the drivers came from the same guys that wrote the OS or not? Personally I'd rather get drivers from the Hardware vendor anyday. Why not get Microsoft and SuSe to start releasing Motherboard Firmware too? If they have that sort of intimate knowledge of the hardware, and after all... they do write code, why not write a nice SuSe optomized Bios? The pathetic state of our government will never change unless we stop electing politicians and start electing public servants. Remember: There was once a time when the term "politician" had a very negative connotation.

2CPU.com » News » January 2007 » DesktopLinux.com: Top 4 reassons why Windows Wins and Linux Loses