Board index » kylix » Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!


2004-01-24 02:41:28 AM
kylix1
Quote
www.users.on.net/hyadsl1/linux/Linus.jpg
Too much becon and eggs
Kostya
 
 

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

Quote
>What unfair in it?
>>IBM does not profit from Linux except from services, hardware sales,
>>and support. MS is total Windows or they are nothing at all.
>MS has plethora of products. Just check their site.
p>All of which MUST RUN AND ONLY RUNS ON WINDOWS... That is the point
p>is it not? Without Windows=no MS.
Guess why they rich? ;-)
p>Every other major player in the IT world, it multi-platform. Be it
p>Oracle, IBM, CA, Peoplesoft, SAP, Sapient, Sony, etc.
Each sale of Oracle is significant, so they should grab as much as possible
platforms. They _must_ to be multi-platform.
Quote
>>What does Oracle have to do with OS profits? Answer=none.
>Even if Oracle sell OS with prices on their products, part of OS
>would be miserable. From point of view of client who have to buy as
>fast as possible (and probably high-cost) hardware and Oracle
>Database Server practically there is no difference between Linux and
>Windows prices.
p>???? That doesn't make a lot of sense. I do not know what point you
p>are trying to get across. I am guessing that you are saying because
p>you are paying for Oracle, you need to pay for an OS that is not as
p>secure or efficient as the one(s) Oracle recommends.
And of course Linux is not significantly efficient than windows (if it
efficient than windows at all) when Oracle is working.
p>Just stop and think about that for a moment, it makes absolutely no
p>sense.
p>Even if Windows was cheaper (which I do not understand where some
p>people went to school when hundreds to thoduands of dollars is
p>cheaper than free <G>),
Time is never free.
p>it does not make sense to use an OS for a high powered and priced system
p>that the creators and distributors do not recommend.
Please reference me to document where Oracle does not recommend use of
Windows with Oracle. I'm working and contacting with Oracle enough long but
i never heard such words from any Oracle distributor or their technical
staff. They usually indifferent about OS matters.
 

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

Ender wrote:
Quote
>>pNichols wrote:
>>>Does IBM own Linux? Does MS own Windows? Unfair comparison.

>>What unfair in it?

>>>IBM does not profit from Linux except from services, hardware sales,
>>>and support. MS is total Windows or they are nothing at all.

>>MS has plethora of products. Just check their site.

p>All of which MUST RUN AND ONLY RUNS ON WINDOWS... That is the point
p>is it not? Without Windows=no MS.

Guess why they rich? ;-)

And IBM is not? Oracle is not? I suggest that you check and you find IBM is
a much bigger corporation than Microsoft. They have more profits, more
revenue, and their stock shares are certainly much higher.
The very fact that IBM (the technology leader for decades), would recommend
Linux over Windows, ought to say quite a bit. Oracle, who has much more
Enterprise marketshare than MS (Oracle is not concerned about the home user
at all), recommending and PUSHING Linux, ought to say a great deal as well.
I realize it may not say anything to you, but that is most likely due to the
fact that you do not live in the Enterprise IT sector. At least your
responses do not suggest that you do. No offense meant, BTW, it just
implies that your target is smaller shops, not Enterprise wise solutions.
Quote
Each sale of Oracle is significant, so they should grab as much as
possible platforms. They _must_ to be multi-platform.

That is because they are an ENTERPRISE company, and yes, I certainly agree
that marketshare is IMPORTANT. Isn't that precisely what I have been
saying?
Quote
And of course Linux is not significantly efficient than windows (if it
efficient than windows at all) when Oracle is working.

Sure Linux is both more secure, reliable and scalable than Windows. That
evidence is everywhere.
How many large clusters do you see running on Windows? Contrast this to
Linux clusters that are supplying the human Genome project, the nuclear
testing labs, Google, Amazon, Nasa, etc.
Quote
p>Just stop and think about that for a moment, it makes absolutely no
p>sense.

p>Even if Windows was cheaper (which I do not understand where some
p>people went to school when hundreds to thousands of dollars is
p>cheaper than free <G>),

Time is never free.

?? What are you talking about here? I guess you are buying into that only
geniuses can run Linux/Unix, while idiots can administer Windows, put out
by, sponsored by, and written by MS. :)
Those TOC are not very independently minded. However, constrast this to the
IT departments who have or in the process of making the switch to see what
they are saying. It is in stark constrast to what MS is saying.
Duetsche Bank, Federal Express, Wells Fargo, etc. have a much different
opinion. Of course I realize that there findings were not sponsered and
paid for by Microsoft, but rather are based upon their own real world
experiences. That makes is less credible in some people's eyes :)
Quote
Please reference me to document where Oracle does not recommend use of
Windows with Oracle. I'm working and contacting with Oracle enough long
but i never heard such words from any Oracle distributor or their
technical staff. They usually indifferent about OS matters.
They recommend Linux and Unix, and have (Unix wise) for years. Call and ask
them about any major deployment. Windows will never enter into the
discussion. Oracle on Windows is a very small market. Do you see any
adverti{*word*224}ts saying "Oracle on Windows", unbreakable?
Sure, if you are running a small to medium size Oracle installations, you
can use Windows. But for larger deployments, Oracle does not recommend it.
Just ask them.
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

Quote
And of course Linux is not significantly efficient than windows (if it
efficient than windows at all) when Oracle is working.

On what platform? I think Linux running on a MainFrame, Sun Box, or
even an Opteron SMP box will pretty much blow away any WinDoze 32bit
server. It might not be more efficients but it does run on 64bit
platforms.
Quote
Please reference me to document where Oracle does not recommend use of
Windows with Oracle. I'm working and contacting with Oracle enough long but
i never heard such words from any Oracle distributor or their technical
staff. They usually indifferent about OS matters.


We had to move our Oracle database to Red Hat advanced server because
WinDoze keep bluescreening and courrpting our data. I dont even think
we have rebooted our production oracle red hat server in over a year.
 

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

MM>On what platform? I think Linux running on a MainFrame, Sun Box,
MM>or even an Opteron SMP box will pretty much blow away any WinDoze
MM>32bit server. It might not be more efficients but it does run on
MM>64bit platforms.
On exactly same hardware as Windows.
Quote
>Please reference me to document where Oracle does not recommend use
>of
>Windows with Oracle. I'm working and contacting with Oracle enough
>long but i never heard such words from any Oracle distributor or
>their technical staff. They usually indifferent about OS matters.
MM>We had to move our Oracle database to Red Hat advanced server
MM>because
MM>WinDoze keep bluescreening and courrpting our data. I dont even
MM>think we have rebooted our production oracle red hat server in over
MM>a year.
"Keep bluescreening" - it is most likely that your company have buggy driver
or something like this (for example overheating). Three years ago i worked
in company that mainly deploy Oracle on Windows as part of their solution.
It easy to deploy, stable and running for years. And yes, give to them good
hardware. Something like IBM-ish, work good in the overheated environment.
Last year i was in businnes trip. What i see, our clients (it was government
organizaton) deployed on their machines natural computing grid which
consists from Windows NT 4.0 Servers and Oracles 7.3. As they say with pride
it was never stopped since initial run.
No offending Mike, but second time i suspect that your administrative staff
doing their work not good. Two problems you mentioned point at this.
 

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

Quote
>Guess why they rich? ;-)
pNichols wrote:
And IBM is not? Oracle is not? I suggest that you check and you find IBM
is a much bigger corporation than Microsoft. They have more profits, more
revenue, and their stock shares are certainly much higher.
The very fact that IBM (the technology leader for decades), would
recommend Linux over Windows, ought to say quite a bit. Oracle, who has
much more Enterprise marketshare than MS (Oracle is not concerned about
the home user at all), recommending and PUSHING Linux, ought to say a
great deal as well.
I realize it may not say anything to you, but that is most likely due to
the fact that you do not live in the Enterprise IT sector. At least your
responses do not suggest that you do. No offense meant, BTW, it just
implies that your target is smaller shops, not Enterprise wise solutions.
Yes, i'm not do Enterprise solutions. But guys, why you regularly nodding on
the enterprise side? Yes they had tech staff, yes their employees may be
power users. Does it matter anything? IMHO, nothing. Look on the subject
again.
What good for enterprise may be not good for home user. MS perfectly
understand it and claimed the desktop arena. Seems Linux purists does not
understand.
Quote
>And of course Linux is not significantly efficient than windows (if it
>efficient than windows at all) when Oracle is working.
>
Sure Linux is both more secure, reliable and scalable than Windows. That
evidence is everywhere.
How many large clusters do you see running on Windows?
Personally? Hm-m-m... 4. Two in communication companies of my city that
support phone talks. One is tickets selling system on train station (for
city with 1.2 million people). Forensic expertize "Sonda" (dactiloscopy,
was member of team) three years ago... But how many large clusters you see
on desktops? ;-) You telling to me constantly how IBM happy with Linux...
tell to me better how Joe Average happy with it.
Recently my PC was upgraded to 2.4GHz P4. When i selecting something in the
browser or editor, music from XMMS start interrupting... never saw such
thing on Windows. As long as such things can happen on Linux it never win
desktop.
Quote
?? What are you talking about here? I guess you are buying into that only
geniuses can run Linux/Unix, while idiots can administer Windows, put out
by, sponsored by, and written by MS. :)
Most important that idiots can use Windows, but idiots can not use Linux.
 

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

JQP wrote:
Quote
Is there a small, specialized Linux distro that is hard wired to do
nothing but launch Mozilla on startup? I haven't found one. I'm
www.axel.com/uk/prod_ax3.html
The linux is flashed in a little box that allows Netscape, Telnet and
VNC client to a server via the tcp-ip network. Then a server box can
serve a few dozens of clients and the software not require n
installations but only one. Yes, I know this can be called "Thin
client"...
Regards
Pere
 

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

"Pere Martinez" <pere-at-garraf.net>wrote in message
Quote
www.axel.com/uk/prod_ax3.html

The linux is flashed in a little box that allows Netscape, Telnet and
VNC client to a server via the tcp-ip network. Then a server box can
serve a few dozens of clients and the software not require n
installations but only one. Yes, I know this can be called "Thin
client"...
Yes, that's the idea.
I was looking for an easy, inexpensive way to use an old PC (which are
plentiful and cheap) as an alternative to the custom "little box" which is
usually relatively expensive.
 

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

Quote
Personally? Hm-m-m... 4. Two in communication companies of my city that
support phone talks. One is tickets selling system on train station (for
city with 1.2 million people). Forensic expertize "Sonda" (dactiloscopy,
was member of team) three years ago... But how many large clusters you see
on desktops? ;-) You telling to me constantly how IBM happy with Linux...
tell to me better how Joe Average happy with it.

I would agree that the desktop linux experience for a power user
leaves something to be desired. It keeps getting better and better
though. I think withing a year or 2 it will be on par with XP.
Have you ever run Mandrake 9.2? This is pretty darn close to XP in
terms of capability.
Quote
Recently my PC was upgraded to 2.4GHz P4. When i selecting something in the
browser or editor, music from XMMS start interrupting... never saw such
thing on Windows. As long as such things can happen on Linux it never win
desktop.

Sounds like either your drives are running in PIO mode or you arent
running a desktop kernel. In most "desktop" distros using the 2.4
kernel, this isnt a problem anymore.
BTW, win2k by default was running my UDMA drives in PIO mode and I had
the same problem so its not strictly a linux problem. I had to
download Via's busmastering drivers to fix it.
Quote
Most important that idiots can use Windows, but idiots can not use Linux.
Not true at all. I mean what does an idiot user need to do? Click on
about 5 different icons. One for office, one for IE, one for email,
and one for solitaire. Why cant you setup a linux desktop to do this?
I'm starting to really doubt you used linux for more than a day.
As long as they dont have to futz with hardware, linux is a piece of
cake to use at this point.
 

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

"Mike Margerum" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
Not true at all. I mean what does an idiot user need to do? Click on
about 5 different icons. One for office, one for IE, one for email,
and one for solitaire.
The "idiot user" needs to do a few other things ---- like find his files and
occasionally access a floppy or USB pen drive.
There are lots of little usability factors and philosophy that haven't been
fully cloned in Linux yet. Simple things like one central document
repository. It's not just the OS. In order for the whole package to really
gel, applications need to work consistently as well.
Programmers seem to appreciate the value of "abstraction" as it relates to
their work but many seem to have trouble applying the same concept to
computer hardware and usability. Ideally, the typical user shouldn't have
to understand the mechanics of his computer any more than the average driver
understands the mechanics of his automobile.
It's all a matter of philosophy. The "mount" command under Linux is about as
far away from this philosophy as you can possibly get. At the other
extreme, a USB pocket/pen drive under Windows is about as close as you can
get. On an XP machine, just plug the USB drive in and a file list pops up.
Fantastic little devices BTW! I have a 256 Mb one attached to my keyring
and I carry it with me as off-site back up for the source code of the apps
I'm currently working on.
 

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

Mike Margerum wrote:
Quote
I would agree that the desktop linux experience for a power user
leaves something to be desired. It keeps getting better and better
though. I think withing a year or 2 it will be on par with XP.
Maybe yes, maybe not. Currently i too sceptic about that. What linux
lacking, is integrity and common way to solve various problems.
Quote
Have you ever run Mandrake 9.2? This is pretty darn close to XP in
terms of capability.
That letter sent from KMail running on MDK 9.2. :-) Personally i'm think
that MDK 9.2. is the best from new distros. I'm looked at latest RedHat and
ALT Linux, they both worse. In fact MDK 9.2 it is first distro that liked
by me.
Quote
>Recently my PC was upgraded to 2.4GHz P4. When i selecting something in
>the browser or editor, music from XMMS start interrupting... never saw
>such thing on Windows. As long as such things can happen on Linux it never
>win desktop.
Sounds like either your drives are running in PIO mode
/dev/hda:
multcount = 16 (on)
IO_support = 1 (32-bit)
unmaskirq = 0 (off)
using_dma = 1 (on)
keepsettings = 0 (off)
readonly = 0 (off)
readahead = 8 (on)
geometry = 2434/255/63, sectors = 39102336, start = 0
Quote
or you arent
running a desktop kernel. In most "desktop" distros using the 2.4
kernel, this isnt a problem anymore.
Op-s-s! Because default kernel was unable to work with certain hardware on
my new PC i installed latest kernel from our "nuclear departament" :-).
uname -rv shows 2.4.22-ac4 #9 SMP
Seems they also prepared to use hyperthreading.
Quote
BTW, win2k by default was running my UDMA drives in PIO mode and I had
the same problem so its not strictly a linux problem. I had to
download Via's busmastering drivers to fix it.
H-m-m-m... i encountered that situation on older machines.
Quote
>Most important that idiots can use Windows, but idiots can not use Linux.
Not true at all. I mean what does an idiot user need to do? Click on
about 5 different icons. One for office, one for IE, one for email,
and one for solitaire. Why cant you setup a linux desktop to do this?
Because it needed that setup. Why they automatically installing plethora of
text editors? Name few - vim,ed,joe,emacs,kate,kwrite,kedit,mcedit (as part
of mc). I think if i install gnome it add two or three gnome specific. User
needed actually only two editors - one for console and one for graphics.
Quote
I'm starting to really doubt you used linux for more than a day.
I'm use Linux more than two years at my work. From MDK 7.0. The more i use
Linux, the more i respect Microsoft in the area of desktop matters. No
doubt, linux getting better. Mostly they pretend to be simple and user
friendly, but in fact Linux is not simple and not user friendly. This is the
key to desktop {*word*108}.
As an example - menu editor which called from right click on the K-Start
icon. MenuDrake. Default menu editor. Now the questions of average user
that trying to use that typical piece of linuxist_state_of_art.
1. Why the hell structure of menu in the menu editor is different from that
i see when i use menu? There are not visible previously items, some of them
localised some not. I'm really editing menu that i going to use?
2. Why i don't see changes in menu immediately after i save it? Why i cannot
just select program i trying to add to menu? Why i should to type in full
path to executable? If i mistaken by typing file path the program will not
run without any error message - is entered path wrong or program just not
able to start because of some error in it?
3. What is system menu and user menu? What menu i'm editing now - system or
user?
4. Why system menu changes simply ignored without any notice? However editor
allow me to edit system menu.
5. Why i cannot select application specific icon for application that i
added to menu even if i know where that icon located? It just does not have
options to select partcular file, only from predefined.
6. Ok i guess that these icons located in some directory as files. How do i
find that directory? There is no any hint where it may be found. In
addition i cannot see file name fully, dialog not resizeable and 90% of
strings does not fit into listbox.
7. Trying to search a file by it's name i saw in icon selection dialog.
Search program is buried on the third level of menu while in windows it on
the first.
8. Directory found. How to place my icon in that directory. Oops, need root
rights and/or command line.
That is the one of many typical scenarios on Linux Desktop. Here small
problem, here another small problem, here misunderstanding, ... and so on.
And Linux full of it. What i'm developer solve even without notice of a
problem, that may be difficult for average user. Seems guys who screaming
about Linux desktop and how it beat Windows tomorrow, next week, next month
or year really does not understand what is desktop.
They think that if they created something that look like excel they already
have desktop, if they occasionally implemented drag&drop in some programs
they created desktop... it is just laughable.
 

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

Ender wrote:
Quote
>>Guess why they rich? ;-)

pNichols wrote:

Yes, i'm not do Enterprise solutions. But guys, why you regularly nodding
on the enterprise side? Yes they had tech staff, yes their employees may
be power users. Does it matter anything? IMHO, nothing. Look on the
subject again.

What good for enterprise may be not good for home user. MS perfectly
understand it and claimed the desktop arena. Seems Linux purists does not
understand.

Neither Mike, any other persons I have seen posting to this NG, nor myself,
have ever claimed that Linux will replace the average Joe Blow's home
desktop anytime soon. If you will read what I have been writing, that is
not the target market at this point in time for Linux Desktop, Will it get
to average Home User proficiency (actaully we should say the LACK of the
Home user's proficiency), definitely YES. Is it there now? NO.
The corporate desktop is the goal of the Desktop Linux move right now. In
those environments where Word Processing, Spreadsheets, Presentations, Web
Browsing and custom application needs are important (not to speak of much
easier configuration for the Network Services and PC Support guys, in
additon to the security groups), Linux is a better option.
For those Home users who primariuly want to play games, use new multimedia
options, and occasionally browse the Internet, Windows is better. I am sure
that the Penguinistas would be most happy with Corporate Desktops, while MS
keeps the home users for a while.
However, MS would not and is not happy about it. That would cost them 40% or
more of their desktop market, not to mention loss of MS Office sales,
DOT.NET tool suites, etc.
Home users do not usually buy Office, and surely do not buy MS tools.
MS would keep the game sales, Encarta sales, etc. but the loss of revenue
would be phenomenal. Plus, if more corporations move to Linux desktops, MS
can kiss all of the server market goodbye. They are already losing
marketshare on the server and have been for the past two years to Linux.
Of course, you do realize that IF more corporations move to Linux servers
and Linux desktops, MS can kiss DOT,NET goodbye as well. Who would need it
and who would use it? Mono NET might be used, but most corps and
programmers would stick to C/C++, Java, Python, and Perl, with Unix shell
scripting for lightweight work.
What benefit does the home user derive from a DOT.NET application verses a
natively compiled one?
Quote

Personally? Hm-m-m... 4. Two in communication companies of my city that
support phone talks. One is tickets selling system on train station (for
city with 1.2 million people). Forensic expertize "Sonda" (dactiloscopy,
was member of team) three years ago... But how many large clusters you see
on desktops? ;-) You telling to me constantly how IBM happy with Linux...
tell to me better how Joe Average happy with it.

I am not saying that the average Home user would be bettr off with Linux, I
have stated just the opposite.
The only place where the home user would be happier with Linux, is with
Internet experience. Not only is Linux a faster Internet experience
(sockets are much better in Unixworld), but the lack of security holes and
lack of viruses, torjans, etc. would more than please the home user. Not to
mention, lack of having to make constant purchases of software and updates.
{*word*143} experience wise, the average Windows user would not like. Some
multimedia experience would ot be a good either. You can make many Windows
games run on Linux, but it is not for the uninitiated.
Quote
>?? What are you talking about here? I guess you are buying into that only
>geniuses can run Linux/Unix, while idiots can administer Windows, put out
>by, sponsored by, and written by MS. :)

Most important that idiots can use Windows, but idiots can not use Linux.
Look at what class that puts you in :).
Of course, this is yet more FUD... Anyone who can point and click in
Windows, can point and click in Linux.
The average Home user did not set their PC up, and would have the same
problems with Linux. Try telling the "I bought my computer from Office
Depot, Wal Mart, etc, that they need to download and install the latest
drivers, configure their new DVD ROM drives, worry about the "Windows could
not find your software, you wil need to manually install the drivers", etc.
how to do this and it would be an equal experience on Linux.
 

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

JQP wrote:
Quote

"Pere Martinez" <pere-at-garraf.net>wrote in message
news:Usenet.aacgscrj@localhost...
>www.axel.com/uk/prod_ax3.html
>
>The linux is flashed in a little box that allows Netscape, Telnet
>and VNC client to a server via the tcp-ip network. Then a server
>box can serve a few dozens of clients and the software not require n
>installations but only one. Yes, I know this can be called "Thin
>client"...

Yes, that's the idea.

I was looking for an easy, inexpensive way to use an old PC (which are
plentiful and cheap) as an alternative to the custom "little box"
which is usually relatively expensive.
Axel AX3000-75E = 275 Euros ~ 218 $
I have one making tests for defining the "Standard Desktop" for my
little team (7) of developers and some of my clients, and for now is
very pleasant. My stuff:
- Server A. Linux (Database, Email, Web, Projects, Compilers, CVS, etc.
). Now Suse 8.1. In the future Gentoo or Debian
- Server B. Linux (Desktops via vncserver. Web browser, KDE/Gnome,
user's directories, Freepascal+Lazarus, etc. for all the users).
Debian for now.
- Desktop C. Windows stuff. For verify compatibility of our Linux+wine
compiled programs and some external programs only in the windows world.
Server VNC. Nobody stands in front that machine. Disponible for who
need use it via VNC from your desktop.
- Old pc's + Thin Clients for everybody. Accesing Server B and the
windows machine. The old pc's are booted from a Knoppix CD and two are
with Debian installed via Knoppix (see www.freenet.org.
nz/misc/knoppix- install.html)
I think this is a good road for the companies in the 5 - 100 work seats.
.
Regards
Pere
 

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

"Pere Martinez" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
Axel AX3000-75E = 275 Euros ~ 218 $
Not too bad but a low end PC can be bought for about the same. An old,
obsolete PC is essentially free.
 

Re:Re: Desktop Linux any decade now!

Ender wrote:
Quote
Mike Margerum wrote:
>I would agree that the desktop linux experience for a power user
>leaves something to be desired. It keeps getting better and better
>though. I think withing a year or 2 it will be on par with XP.

Maybe yes, maybe not. Currently i too sceptic about that. What linux
lacking, is integrity and common way to solve various problems.

>Have you ever run Mandrake 9.2? This is pretty darn close to XP in
>terms of capability.

That letter sent from KMail running on MDK 9.2. :-) Personally i'm think
that MDK 9.2. is the best from new distros. I'm looked at latest RedHat
and ALT Linux, they both worse. In fact MDK 9.2 it is first distro that
liked by me.

>>Recently my PC was upgraded to 2.4GHz P4. When i selecting something in
>>the browser or editor, music from XMMS start interrupting... never saw
>>such thing on Windows. As long as such things can happen on Linux it
>>never win desktop.

>Sounds like either your drives are running in PIO mode

/dev/hda:
multcount = 16 (on)
IO_support = 1 (32-bit)
unmaskirq = 0 (off)
using_dma = 1 (on)
keepsettings = 0 (off)
readonly = 0 (off)
readahead = 8 (on)
geometry = 2434/255/63, sectors = 39102336, start = 0
[...]
You want unmaskirq turned on. Is this really only a 20GB HD?
If so, it may also not be operating at the highest spec for
the motherboard.
B
--
www.mailtrap.org.uk/