By the time Longhorn comes out I’m sure everyone will be sick of the subject “windows vs linux.” Will longhorn finally destroy that pesky linux and mark another decade of Microsoft’s monopoly, or will the underdog come out with a stunning upset and send a multi billion dollar company to it’s grave?Although both those views are pretty far from reality, at least in my opinion, that’s what you’ll hear a lot of. But this article isn’t about that, it’s about one side effect of longhorn which I don’t think has been considered enough…
In the countless articles and reviews of the longhorn builds I’ve noticed one thing people complain about. It’s that side bar. Nobody seems to like it. It’s a practical idea, but it’s said that it takes up too much screen real estate, that it’s an eyesore, and frankly you just don’t need it. Microsoft fires back with the argument that by the time longhorn rolls around everyone will have thirty five inch widescreen LCD monitors, and it won’t be an issue then.
Another issue is the system requirements. I read on one review that they were running a 3.2 gHz processor and it was still a bit sluggish with all the bells and whistles enabled. Generally progress should mean that not only does something look better, the performance is snappier as well. Although I realize it is a very early build with debug symbols in it, and that the screws will be tightened and the lines will be trimmed, it will still take a bit of computer to run.
Saying “a bit of computer” isn’t very objective though. So, for the sake of argument, let’s say that Longhorn will run comfortably on a 3.0 gHz processor and somewhat uncomfortably on a 2.5 or 2.7. This is just for the sake of argument, mind you, a complete ballpark figure, with absolutely no evidence to back it up.
In any case the point is simply this: to run longhorn it will require new hardware. Which might not be that big of a deal for a home user who upgrades every couple of years anyway, just another box and a shiny new LCD monitor. But for any kind of business it’s a bit more of a problem.
Working as a tech for a small computer shop, which has quite a few small business clients, I have a good view of how small bussinesses buy computers. The fact is, if they don’t absolutely need to, they usually don’t. I know of businesses still running 233’s and 366’s on desktops, with 64 megs of ram, and windows 98 as their operating system. Yet they probably won’t replace those computers until the processors finally fizzle out. It’s just smart business; why pay more for something new when what you have does everything you need?
And so we come to Longhorn, an operating system that, if you wish to buy it, you must either already have a nice computer, or you must be willing to pay for a new one. Which is, needless to say, something that many businesses (not just small ones, but enterprises as well I believe, and of course universities and government insitutions) will not be willing to do. What is to be done?
So far I’ve talked a lot about Longhorn and really nothing about Linux. This is where Linux comes in. By the time Longhorn comes out Windows 98 (the latest Microsoft operating system that will run on sub 600 mHz machines comfotably) will be almost a decade old. And will have no longer been supported by Microsoft for a quarter of that time. If a company wants these computers to be anything more than junk, they will have to look for an OS that will run on it, and in that search they will find an obvious answer: Linux.
There has always been a little bit of emphasis in Linux on supporting old hardware. Call it nostalgia, call it being cheap, or, as I prefer, call it good business. Whatever you call it, the point is that you can have a modern operating system on top of outdated hardware and still have a machine that will do exactly what you want, and not be prey to all the viruses and worms that are sure to crop up on an OS which is never patched again.
Some of my very first experiences with Linux were on a Pentium II 166, with 64 megs of RAM. It didn’t run KDE great, but with XFCE, firebird, and abiword I could do everything I need for school no problem.
I’ll admit, when I write I get caught up in the subject matter and sometimes forget to make points, so I’m going to sum it all up for you. Businesses don’t like to spend money. New computers cost money. Therefore it makes sense to try and make the computers you have work. Using ten year old software simply won’t cut, in terms of interoperability and just plain productivity. Therefore you must find software which is modern, will work with the newest software, is cheap enough to warrant not just buying a new computer, and yet will still run on your AMD 333s. The obvious answer to that is linux. With a light window manager and good software it will more than suffice. Especially since by the time Longhorn comes around windows emulation should be much better supported in linux, but mainly, much easier, so you’ll still be able to run that old proprietary software which your company relies on, just in a much better environment.
So who will win? Longhorn or Linux? The answer is neither, there is a place for everything. I can’t predict the future. Maybe a huge hardware breakthrough will happen and a new computer (including monitor) will cost twenty bucks. Maybe when people start putting linux on their old computers they’ll love it so much they’ll become addicted and forget all about windows. And maybe scallops are flyin’ outa me pants.
As is usually the case in this type of article, the author is obligated to give either the Linux community or Microsoft some advice on how to conquer the world. And so in keeping with tradition I’ll dispense the advice presently. For Linux to gain desktop space they have but one obstacle in my mind: make it easy. If you can get Linux installed and everything working absolutely properly it’s great, and I actually prefer using it. However, that is not such an easy thing right now. I think projects like Ark Linux are heading in the right direction, although perhaps taking things to a bit of an extreme. Perhaps the best installer is just a Live CD, like knoppix, with merely the option of copying it to your hard drive. So I don’t actually have any advice I guess, just keep up the good work, and be sure you’re ready when your chance comes.
To Microsoft… I have no advice. If they want advice, they can definitely afford it, and that fact means that they probably don’t need any of mine since they’re doing okay right now.
I don’t expect either OS to “kill” the other, really. In a month and a half I’m leaving on a mission for my church; I’ll be gone for two years with almost no updates on how they computer world is doing, but when I get back, I expect things will be quite different.
About the Author:
Joshua Boyles is a 19 year old computer tech, with intermediate linux skills and a lot of windows experience, who lives in the USA. He’s dabbled with Linux for a couple of years, and hasn’t destroyed anything, so he still likes it. He’s dabbled in windows for about seven or eight years, and has
destroyed some things, but he gets paid for it, so he still likes it.
Longhorn will run on medium range computers of today, however, you will get stuck with none of the features taht make it longhorn including Aero. rather, you will have a win 2k look and feel.
I don’t want to buy new hardware just to run stupid lONGHORN and I don’t care about these graphical effects. I think that you’ll need 10GB of RAM and some GeForce 10 to run pacman, in few years time
Micro$oft is seeing its end days as a software company. They know this, which is why they are branching out into new markets like games and hardware.
Linux is moving forward very quicky. I don’t expect it will completey take over the Desktop market, but I bet it will put a huge dent in it.
Moreover, Legislation is being drafted right now to protect free software. At his point, any move that MS makes against Linux will be seen another reason to get away from the Monopoly.
This is where Linux comes in. By the time Longhorn comes out Windows 98 (the latest Microsoft operating system that will run on sub 600 mHz machines comfotably) will be almost a decade old.
Uhm, I’ve been running XP/Server 2003 on a 400 MHz Pentium II with 256 quite comfortably…
Microsoft is influencing the product lines of companies that base their product lines on Linux such as Suse and Sun. It would be imposible for Longhorn to whipe out Linux willingly especially for people in Asia, China, and Europe, however Longhorn might dominate North America, although not completely. Longhorn does not give you any control, so it is inferior technology, but Microsoft relies heavily on entertainment, and most people want nothing more than to be entertained, and most people make bad choices for themselves, it’s their lifestlye, the majority of people are not owners.
Am I the only one that thinks the rest of the OS is ugly … and not JUST the sidebar?
First – fine and interesting piece. I like your advice to Linux community: “Make it simple”. I want Linux to succeed – not necessarily destroy Windows, do we want choice or not?!? – but frankly Windows is often easier. Even faster. And it is hard to argue with Server 2003!
Second – with regard to Win98 actually WinXP Pro runs quite nicely on several sub-600 Mhz machines we use around here. My P3 450 at home. A P2 400 laptop. A Celeron 400 desktop. And so on… As long as it has plenty of RAM WinXP runs if anything faster than Win98. (RAM not speed is more important, I think.)
The author is right that Linux will run more than acceptably on older hardware. I am running Mandrake Linux 9.1 on a Compaq Presario 1255 laptop. It has an AMD K6-2 333MHz processor and (I think) 32 Meg of RAM. It installed flawlessly and recognized all the laptop’s hardware. It is slow starting up, but once booted, the speed is more than adequate.
The “requirements” are not correct. They are projections on how a computer might be configured in 2007. The requirements will probably be much lower. I would be surprised if Longhorn doesn’t run perfectly well on my current machine, a 2,8 ghz P4.
Generally progress should mean that not only does something look better, the performance is snappier as well.
What causes you to think this? It has never been the case in the past. Never. Pick any operating system, Windows, Apple, Solaris, Linux, AIX, Netware, any one. With every new version of every one of these operating systems there has been an increased system requirement, most especially with Windows. Windows 3.1 required a 286 with 4MB of RAM and 20 MB of disk space. Today you would be crazy not to have at least a 800MHz Pentium with 128MB of RAM and preferably more more more for Windows XP. As for disk space, most opearting systems today, want at least 2GB for a basic installation. All this and XP on a 2GHz processor is slower than Windows 3.1 on a 386.
Netware 3.x would allow you to serve files and printing for 25-50 users with 8-16MB of RAM. Today, Netware 6.5 won’t even install with less than 100MB and good luck serving that many users with so little RAM. 500MB is more realistic.
Even Linux once famous for its stingy use of system resources, increases its system requirements with every iteration. Where once a 286 and 16MB was quite adequate today a 500Mhz Pentium and 128MB is the sane starting point. Some systems won’t even start X11 with less than 92MB and at 92MB the performance will be very frustrating. Disk space? For a desktop system you better have at least 2GB but 10+ is a better start.
The fact of the matter is that with each new version of todays operating systems, new features and services are added. Naturally, these features and services consume more resources thereby requiring better hardware. Then there is the fact that developers are using higher level languages today that are less resource efficient. Where once developers would go to assembly and optimize to make the code as compact and fast as possible, today they produce bloatware and say things like “disk space is cheap” or “RAM is cheap”. The hardware may indeed be cheaper than it use to be but, I don’t think that this is an excuse for a web browser or mail client to require 40 megs of disk space and I won’t even go into the bloated and slow office suites.
The biggest hole in the author’s argument is the fact that most people will only go out and buy a new OS when their old computers are shot. They will run Win98/ME/XP until the computer dies. When that happens they will buy new computers with Longhorn installed. That’s they way it has happened in the past and I see no reason for that to change in the future. The only way for Linux to displace MS is if Linux comes preinstalled on computers from a big manufacturer, and not just from a special page on their website. When a company like Dell allows you to not only configure the hardware but pick the OS too, then you will see Linux gain a considerable marketshare, especially if having Linux preinstalled cost less than getting the computer with Windows preinstalled.
As for running win2003 or winXP which is it? They are two seperate products. Also Linux allows(most of the time) to leave the eye candy turned on, something you probally don’t have running. Win XP will run on that if you turn off just about all the toys that make it XP.
Uhm– no you are wrong there. I always install WindowBlinds or StyleXP. Still, XP/Server 2003 run mighty fine on the 400 MHz Pentium. Try to be more informed next time; it’s mostly RAM that matters, not the processor speed. Antoher example: My parents’ 500 MHz AMD K6 runs XP Pro just fine, it’s mainly Office 2003 (they don’t do much more than Outlook/Word/IE) slowing this machine down. And yes, this machine runs WindowBlinds as well (I didn’t want my parents to experience Luna
)
And my next test will come after I upgrade my notebook’s memory; right now it’s a 366 MHz Pentium 2 with only 64 MBRAM, running NT4.0, but I want more
Well, I personally think Longhorn is not going to go well for MS. It is already Over Budget and Delayed… I have been using Debian as my primary system for a year. Ohh also I work tech support for Clayton College and State University. I work with windows on a daily basis. I see longhorn making more problems then It will be fixing. But I do not see Linux gain the majority of the desktop market. I think it will win the server market, and development platform.
Last post, continued:
It appears to me a lot of people are misinformed about XP’s system requirements… Probably has to do with the “M$-is-always-bad-and-the-devil-and-bill-gates-eats-children” thing.
Seriously, I see a desktop like KDE, the easy development and scripting features, toolkits like Qt (the Qt 4 plans are interesting), development environments like Mono or Java, the good work on freedesktop on the X server, D-BUS, Cairo and HAL and I have come to an inescapable conclusion.
With the right level of vision and integration work (and that’s the killer) we can have much of what Microsoft claims is innovative in Longhorn up and running, on today’s hardware (there’s a lot of really redundant 3D hardware in many organizations), today. Not in two, three or four years time – now. That’s no joke, because the infrastructure is actually there.
Since many companies are still using NT 4 and 2000 (which Microsoft hailed as the technology for the next ten years) and are grappling with support issues for their existing VB5 (Microsoft withdrew support and that was bad enough) and VB6 apps, they’ve got more than enough on their plate than looking at the swish new Windows with features that they’re just not capable of using. I don’t just mean that in a hardware sense, because there is a serious amount of core business logic that no one is going to move. Longhorn may sound swish, but if the responsibility fell on your shoulders to move all of the custom applications over could you be bothered?
IT has reached a critical mass in terms of being part of the infrastruture of an organization. How often does your employer rip out all of their phones, replace the photocopiers and fax machines and replace the furniture? They do it very sparingly, if ever, and they never do mass big-bang migrations or updates. That is what Microsoft is facing, because upgrades in this environment are better suited to support and services deals and contracts, not mass sales of boxes of software. As well as the software, Microsoft is asking companies to fund support, upgrade and development contracts, all to upgrade to a new OS? It may have been realistic five or more years ago, it isn’t now.
If Microsoft were a bit disappointed with XP they’ll be really disappointed with Longhorn. It is not that people don’t want to, it is just that the pace of change is much slower (we have phones from the 1980s in our place and they work fine), people can’t be bothered and in many cases, people just can’t.
“Which might not be that big of a deal for a home user who upgrades every couple of years anyway”
The average, non-geek, home users I know DO NOT upgrade their systems every couple of years. They are typically still using Win98 on PII or Celeron PCs.
Micro$oft is seeing its end days as a software company.
You really have a weak grasp of reality. They are too powerful to disapear so quickly in the face of what boils down to the Linux hype machine.
They know this, which is why they are branching out into new markets like games and hardware.
Again, wow you’re delusional. They have always tried to branch out when they could or felt the need, and Linux has absolutely nothing to do with this. Big companies don’t stay big by standing still.
Linux is moving forward very quicky. I don’t expect it will completey take over the Desktop market, but I bet it will put a huge dent in it.
In some areas, Linux is indeed moving fast. In others, it will forever lag behind. Patents, the divisive development ideologies, and stubbourn leaders who refuse to simple things like use kernel debuggers to help with the quality control process. Granted, in poorer countries, or those that are only now begining to rise to power, open source software will likely seep into all aspects of computing life, because of the general distrust of Americans, and American businesses, but in North America it’ll be a while before there is any worthwhile dent in the desktop market.
Moreover, Legislation is being drafted right now to protect free software.
It’s a sad state of affairs, but companies like Microsoft own quite a few more politicians than the free software and open source movements can currently muster. Don’t forget that IBM is only in it for the money, and they’d leave you all out in the cold in an instant if it really suited their purposes.
At his point, any move that MS makes against Linux will be seen another reason to get away from the Monopoly.
Business is business, and every one of them takes steps to attack the competition, monopoly or not. I don’t like Microsoft any more than many people here, but you know what they say, survival of the fittest. I’m sure that both proprietary and open software will both be around for a very long time to come, with niether gaining more than a mere temporary advantage over the other.
“It has never been the case in the past. Never. Pick any operating system, Windows, Apple, Solaris, Linux, AIX, Netware, any one. With every new version of every one of these operating systems there has been an increased system requirement, ”
thats wrong. kde mem requirements has gone down
Uhm, I’ve been running XP/Server 2003 on a 400 MHz Pentium II with 256 quite comfortably…
Yer you can run it, but it all depends on whether you do anything with it
.
I agree, this is hardly worthy, but if the same author said he strongly thinks Linux is ready to take on longhorn it probably would have been accepted as a creditable source.
I don’t get why he bothered writing his opinion if he had so few points to convey.
Microsoft is in the computainment industry and it will succeed, that is obvious. There will be millions of victoms, those people that learn to reuse their product line.
Personally I’ll stay with Linux. I will not even try Longhorn because I have no interest in computainment. In fact I’m insulted by it.
Well, 1. people aren’t going to change the OS on their decade old machines any more than they are going to upgrade them. Their old software does what they need. 2. Linux’s minimum requirements aren’t that low. The minimum requirements for Fedora and Windows XP are quite comperable. As Linux progresses toward Longhorn’s release date, it’s minimum requirements will increase to match Longhorns unless it fails to match features. 3. The author suggests a minimal GUI. He then compares this to Longhorn with all the bells and whistles enabled. You can turn off some of the bells and whistles in Longhorn for one. For another, you just can’t compare Windows to a non-Gnome/KDE window manager for Linux. There are many nice window managers for Linux. Many of them are faster than KDE and Gnome, but those are the two that are used because they have the features.
The fact is that Linux has an oppertunity here, but not the one that he is providing. Sure, there are some geeks that will keep their old equipment using minimal GUIs and such, but that’s going to be a small subset of the current Linux group. The oppertunity that Linux has is to catch up to Windows in the areas that it lacks. They aren’t huge gaps. Small things like making package management palateable to novices.
I couldn’t agree more with the rise of bloatware these days.
With around 10 or so tabs open, Mozilla Firefox takes upwards of 70-80 megs of ram. That is simply unacceptable when Opera, a browser with many more features, takes only 34 megs of ram with the EXACT SAME PAGES OPEN. I’m not an opera fanboy, and I’m not a mozilla hater – if Firefox used this little ram, I would use it over Opera any day – but this amount of ram usage is simply unacceptable.
If the developer learned how to build a Linux system from scratch independant of any vendor, than he would have gained much more power than anything that Longhorn could ever provide, because Longhorn does not give you control, and that is the key difference.
Thom wrote
“M$-is-always-bad-and-the-devil-and-bill-gates-eats-children”
This is true Thom and I think you should be ashamed of yourself.
Immidietly nuke all those MS systems you mentioned and install alternative OS’s instead.(read be,sky,bsd,linux)
The dark ages are soon over and liberation will come.
Ziggamon wrote
Basically, all they will have to do, will be to download the latest Fedora Core ~8, change all the logos to microsoft, and distribute it as Windows light… but maybe
that’s not all that bad…
Nooooooo! Even not MS can be this evil.
If this happened I write my own kernel.
[Eclipse] wrote
Micro$oft is seeing its end days as a software company. They know this, which is why they are branching out into new markets like games and hardware.
Hmm.. someone with a clear mind. I like [ECLIPSE], also in developing software that will put Longhorn in Ballmers closet.
thats wrong. kde mem requirements has gone down
Has it? Really? Well, KDE2 could run on a Pentium 90 with 32MB RAM. I’d love to see you run KDE 3.2.2 on such a system.
But, all that aside, KDE is NOT an operating system. My post was about operating systems. KDE is a Desktop Environment that runs on top of X11. X11, by the way is by itself presently occupying 36MB of RAM on the system that this meesage was composed on and there are only two windows open.
“It has never been the case in the past. Never. Pick any operating system, Windows, Apple, Solaris, Linux, AIX, Netware, any one. With every new version of every one of these operating systems there has been an increased system requirement, ”
Didn’t know there was an Apple OS? Damn, all these years I’ve been stuck with the Mac OS….
It doesn’t matter what I believe or fail to believe. Let the marketplace decide on the “other platform” vs. Linux argument.
People don’t change as fast as marketing companies, like the one that produces the “other platform”, would like for them to. Marketing can only go so far as cognitive limits will allow. It’s sort of like the Soda Wars back in the 80s. One person likes one thing while someone else another.
Personally, I like pure spring water with a lemon slice. It’s easier on the kidneys.
Anyways, back to the real subject. Most people, notice I said most, not geeks like us, like sticking with their old equipment. Especially if they built their own system. Sort of like a well cared for Classic car. Most business will, unless they really like spending funds, what I call cash bleed, will adopt the path of reducing total cost of management and ownership.
The CEO of the marketing company that produces the “other platform” sits at the pinnacle of his respective company and has the luxury of “thinking” that everyone “loves” his brand of “soda”. While down in the trenches of the local communites around the world, where money is stretched to the highest degree, reality of licensing is setting in.
So I say, as many have said, “Let the marketplace decide.”
“It appears to me a lot of people are misinformed about XP’s system requirements… Probably has to do with the “M$-is-always-bad-and-the-devil-and-bill-gates-eats-children” thing.”
You seem to come to MS’s defense a lot on this site. I wonder if you’ll still be doing that if MS does to SkyOS what they did to BeOS.
Hey duke, you go to umass eh? i also live in MA =)
You seem to come to MS’s defense a lot on this site. I wonder if you’ll still be doing that if MS does to SkyOS what they did to BeOS.
I don’t come to MS defence (damn, people on OSNews.com have been accusing me of that since day one), it’s just that i try to see everything from an objective point of view. And, when I’m being subjective, I always let that be known. Sometimes I honestly think I’m too “Dutch” for this site… I’m so used to saying what I want I almost forget that in most countries you’re not even allowed to cuss on televison
Whether you like it or not, I’ll be around for a while
Well, I don’t long for the upcoming Longhorn or any Microsoft OS, I am quite happy with Linux/BSD. I recently built a cheap box (1.6 Duron, 256 ddr, 60gb, 32mb ati), and do not plan to upgrade for at least half a decade (barring hardware failure). This system is way more than enough to satisfy my computing needs (development, “light” games, surfing and etc). A system with 3 ghz or more is probably an overkill for me.
Just a thought for those who think Longhorn will be “unusable” on < 3ghz computers. I am quite sure you are wrong, the last part of Longhorns development cycle will be spent doing a lot of optimizations and tweaks, to existing code. So I am betting you can run Longhorn “comfortable” without all bells and whistles on a 1,5ghz system.
You Linux fanboys are so adorable!
I would like to make some points.
I think Linux and windows will have a very different uses in future. I do think that the fair competition will bring a speed on OS development. There is no question that both will make our life easier and better and finally (mean it) finally give a so choices!
Just checked nearest computer store: cheapest desktop computer has 2.7 GHz processor. Today!
I am sure that by 2005-2006 not only 64-bit will be a mantra, but finding anything less than 3.2GHz in big computer store will be similar to finding EISA network cards in it today.
Microsoft is American company. It firstly targets American market. One that today offers 2.7 GHz CPU for email, chat, Web browsing, personal finances management and working with Office software.
The same job I can currently do very comfortable on my P-III 500 MHz with 256 MB RAM running Windows XP.
That is a hint for those who are confused about requirements for XP.
I met many dutchmen Thom and they say what they want.
I don’t think you are an MS puppy but it’s still not going to change my opinion.
It’s just that it is damn hard for some people to discuss MS seriously.(including me)
Good to see that you are not being scared of us.
“Im a windows zealot!! im a windows zealot!!! linux sucks!!! microsoft all the way!!!! go windows!! go bill gaytes!!! yay!!!!!! Linux sucks!!”
Wow, you sound like many Linux zealots I have heard…
Anyways, I find that many people are not very informed on the system requirements of Longhorn… Maybe this is on purpose to spread anti Microsoft FUD, but who knows. I would think that everyone is smart enough to realize that even if you turn off all the GUI effects for slow systems on Longhorn, you will still have a very different OS under the hood. Funny how right now, aside from the start menu, my Windows XP looks almost identical to my Windows 98 box, yet they behave so different. Maybe some are just afraid that Microsoft has a real Linux killer on their hands, and will do what it takes, even skewing some facts to make their Linux religion look superior.
“I don’t come to MS defence (damn, people on OSNews.com have been accusing me of that since day one), it’s just that i try to see everything from an objective point of view. And, when I’m being subjective, I always let that be known. Sometimes I honestly think I’m too “Dutch” for this site… I’m so used to saying what I want I almost forget that in most countries you’re not even allowed to cuss on televison
Whether you like it or not, I’ll be around for a while
”
I wasn’t saying you should get lost or anything, just that you seem unusually sympathetic toward what’s probably your biggest competitor. This could just be a misperception by some of us here. But just out of curiousity, how much space you have on the hard drive of that 433mhz box?
you can correct me if im wrong im not that good with .net.
but it worries me i made a simple window with a button that closes the window when you push it. after running the app it took 12mb ram. and thats much for such simple application.
ofcourse that could be the sandbox maby larger applications dont use that much ram. but if they do longhorn is going to eat alot of ram.
Go mark! Yeah..
This is the last time I will post in a thread that discusses MS products,honestly.
Zealot or not I just can’t be objective.
isn’t this version of windows the one that will be incorporating palladium, which will require new hardware for full functionality anyway?
” When a company like Dell allows you to not only configure the hardware but pick the OS too, then you will see Linux gain a considerable marketshare, especially if having Linux preinstalled cost less than getting the computer with Windows preinstalled.”
Which begs the question of WHY any oem like Dell would be the slightest bit interested in supporting yet another OS?
If you offer it; you also support it…
Dell attempted this with Redhat a couple years ago and absolutely failed horribly at it. It will take a lot of effort to get them to do this again as it likely cost them a ton of cash.
so why dont work with redhat to make a dell specific distro ??
and get a proper linux support team rather then just use the windows support guyz to support linux users can you imagine that,
“hello, i have a problem setting up X, tech guy: restart the computer and press F8” :p
I found the advice and the general arguments extremely weak and obviously biased. First of all, to me, it seems that the author just didn’t get it. He is complaining about the interface, taking space, etc… That’s not a big issue now, we don’t know how the final interface will look like. They are spending billions of dollars for research, I am sure they will have a better idea on usability than the author and me. Obviously for the author there is no risk, he can say all he wants, but he has to make it logical. In this case I think he is focusing on a nonissue. The main issue here is the support for developers, the third party people. Those are the ones who really add too much value to the OS. Also the old hardware will be an issue. I don’t want to upgrade either, but when I realize that I can do certain things much more faster than I do now, I wouldn’t think twice in upgrading. That’s really the rule here. If the productivity gain is “good enough” then why not upgrade. Old hardware will be there always, but noone is going to go with Linux just because it can run on that hardware. I guess people do not realize this, but running open office on that old hardware takes resources.
…but the truth is that Microsoft have too much power.
They can do anything they want, have money, governement help (MS is a big taxes bussines with influences), etc.
Rememeber, MS have recognized it’s use of monopoly. They killed BeOS, said I’m sorry, I shoot you and thats kill you but take this bucks. But the matter is that Be Inc. is death.
Settled or not the result in that point was that there will not be more Be Inc. to compete.
Realy I fear Microsoft use of market position (against consumers, yes the actual state of things are as Microsoft likes). Really they can do this again with any company (kill, buy, silence, etc… -alo alternatives-) it is the MS way.
And for open source, they can’t buy it, but with patents or things like paladium the cusmtomer choice (a la XBOX or modchip to get other thing working) and security will be very compromissed (what your computer do?, you don’t know, you really don’t know, you trusth in the MS tecnology behind it). With open source software at least exist the code review posibility.
For requirements, be realistic, if you want to everything looks better it will increase requirements, on any platform.
Now I work on a PIII 1 GH and 128 Ram win XP, but it feels slow and yerky, I tried install .NET runtime on it and it died, become unusable.
I run very satisfying Mandrake 9.2 on a eMachine 400ix (Celeron 400, 128 Ram and 20 GB hd), but Win XP was unusable there.
I hade noticed that in most of cases the change to Windows or Upgrade come related to a Hardware change (new computer). With old hardware are fewer cases for conscientious Windows Upgrade (atached to a hardware update of course).
The most of people don’t care what are they using, if you puts something that simply works they get happy. I have to reinstall my counsins computer at least 4 times at year every year, they used Windows Millenium, new brand computer with XP and the same thing. They don’t know how to do fix or configure it, even mail, internet and preferences need to be tweaked for somebody else. When they try to do something by themselves (like install some hardware), bye bye computer.
The same is for Linux (some configurations are cruel to do, find, fix).
The advantage difference for Microsoft success rely on their Tactics on market -preinstall and exclusivity enforcements – and the actual general knowledgement about it.
For Linux success the general support and knowledgement for linux everywhere is needed (Everybody know a little about windows -like reboot your box to get it working again -, but for Linux in the real world most lambs don’t even know what it is, means).
You really need internet connection to solve some obscure things in Linux, in the masses or third world countries the internet 24/7 still is not a reality. This also applies to microsoft (windows update) but if you aren’t on internet it’s harder to catch a virus (Cry if you are geting infected files using other media).
Now not to dissapoint several people that have already posted here, I do want to add something….
Out of all the OSes that i’ve tried (eg: linux, beos, macos) Windows has ALWAYS been the OS that has given me the most trouble. When I actually have it on my hard drive WinXP has crashed at least once every 6 months or so. Now with Longhorn comming who knows when, but when it actually does come out I really don’t expect it to be any different. Adding features and flashy interfaces aren’t the ways that oses should innovate. They should have been innovative in usability and stability.
Hopefully Longhorn will be better. The only reason I say that is that because Microsoft has the mojority of the os market share. And because of this I only hope that users can have a better computer experience that Microsoft has yet provided.
“Whatever you call it, the point is that you can have a modern operating system on top of outdated hardware and still have a machine that will do exactly what you want, and not be prey to all the viruses and worms that are sure to crop up on an OS which is never patched again.”
It has already been stated plenty already that you can run Windows XP on older sub 600mhz systems but one thing I didn’t hear mention’d was the whole virus/worm issue.
I am a huge Linux supporter but the one thing I can not stand is to constantly hear fan boys running around yelling that you should use Linux because it’s more safe from viruses and worms. This statement is just untrue. Sure there are a lot of security issues with Windows but what do you expect from an operating system that runs on 70% or more of the worlds desktop computers?
There are tons of holes in plenty of Linux flavors out there the only reason why you don’t hear about them all the time is because Linux doesn’t run on 70% or more of the worlds desktop computers. If it did you would hear just as much of an uproar if not more. There is no perfect operating system. If you are gonna shout to the crowd about why they should switch to Linux OS’s instead of Windows at least give them valid points.
Also until there is one unified Linux OS out there it will just be to confusing for your average business or desktop user to switch. There are just to many choices, to many cooks in the kitchen if you will, which is another reason why Microsoft will remain dominant in the OS feild for the coming years
And personally, Longhorn is really irrevalent as far as I’m concerned. I am currently learning C# and I guess from the point of view of a budding developer, I am excited about having .NET as the main API.
But from a user’s point of view, I could give a shit about Longhorn. I use Windows instead of Linux because I think it has better applications for what I use the computer for, and that’s not likely to change in the near future. So, whether Longhorn comes out 4 months from now or 4 years from now really doesn’t matter to me, because the apps will continue to get better even if the OS stays stagnent. And I don’t care how powerful or elegant Linux becomes in the next few years – unless they get some decent apps or are able to get Wine in shape, I’ll use it for tinkering and server stuff only.
A few things about Windows XP:
– Runs great on my P3-450 w/192MB of RAM. The only app that is slow to me is Firefox (an open source app, go figure)
– I can make it faster and stable than ANY Linux distro running Gnome/KDE
– It is possible (and quite trivial) to run Windows worm/trojan/virus/spyware free.
Linux will always require less hardware and the simple explanation is that unix/linux operating systems are designed in modules:
you want a simple web server:
All you need is a slim kernel (new or old) and apache (new or old) this will run easily on a 32 meg P100
Win 2003 needs at leas a 500 mhz P3 with 256 megs of ram to accomplish this.
But the point of looking at minimum requirenments is to see same performance on a minimum spec.
Now upgrade the server to the a nice server: say a Quad Opteron 2.2Gh with 64 gig or ram.
Now you will see that the the linux on the same setup will be able to hanndle twice as many reqests as Win2003
This is simply because you don’t need a fancy GUI for a web server, Media player, IE, outlook express, activeX, directX, etc etc etc…
With around 10 or so tabs open, Mozilla Firefox takes upwards of 70-80 megs of ram. That is simply unacceptable when Opera, a browser with many more features, takes only 34 megs of ram with the EXACT SAME PAGES OPEN. I’m not an opera fanboy, and I’m not a mozilla hater – if Firefox used this little ram, I would use it over Opera any day – but this amount of ram usage is simply unacceptable.
You’re obviously misinterpreting your memory usage. You need to look at the VIRTUAL SIZE (VSZ) not resident set size (RSZ).
It’s the same on Windows. Enable the virtual size column under the task manager.
The OS will only cease to matter in any significant aspect one crossplatform languages learn to take advantage of native features (IE, not Java) and still run crossplatform with decent speed.
‘Cuz as long as I can code an app on OSX that can do something XP can’t, <yadda yadda here>.
“Has it? Really? Well, KDE2 could run on a Pentium 90 with 32MB RAM. I’d love to see you run KDE 3.2.2 on such a system.”
Yes it has. There were huge memory improvements between the KDE 2.x versions [which i didn’t find very smooth on my P2/400 with 128 MB RAM] and early KDE 3.x versions. IIRC this is addressed in the KDE FAQ too. I cannot speak for the latest KDE 3.x versions though.
The same is true for Mozilla Firefox versus Netscape 7
People avoid change that is all there is to it. My brother has tried for years to get me to go linux so a couple of months ago I said ok. You know what there are too many flavors of linux. It took me for ever to choose one. When I would ask for advice it seemed like people were talking out of their butts. I actuall got “redhat’s awesome” as an answer. what does that say? I installed for different distros each had it’s own quirks so my knowledge of the last one didn’t help with the next. It was so frusterating to not understand it instantly that I would move on to the next distro hoping that it would be more “intuative.” Fact is that to someone who has worked with windows their whole life not much of linux is intuative. It just different enough that you get lost even though to someone who is familliar with it it’s nothing. My point is people aren’t going to just say, “Oh I heard that linux is really good so I’m going to change everything that has been working for me up until now.” I would probably be running linux right now if I had had my brother around to help me. But I didn’t all the conversion stories I have ever heard go something like: “So I installed linux on my grandma’s computer and showed her how to email and write stuff in abiword. She loves it and it’s never crashed.” That’s great but with a one on one requirment it’s going to take linux a while to conquer the world. AS for me I went back to xp which has never given me a problem unless I was messing with something that I no nothing about and shouldn’t have been doing. That’s right no freezes no crashes nothing coming up on two years. Like I said at the beginning people don’t like to change and as a people the change to linux was hard enough that I missed all the benefits that people talk about and was frusterated that I couldn’t do anything. I went from an person who feels in control of his computer to a person who doesn’t know a thing about his computer just by putting linux on it. I’ve been snowboarding for years now don’t expect me to become a skiier and have to learn everything over again because you tell me it’s better.
“Old hardware will be there always, but noone is going to go with Linux just because it can run on that hardware.”
Hello!
(-1 generalisation and you haven’t taken his argument regarding old hardware in account)
“I guess people do not realize this, but running open office on that old hardware takes resources.”
Really? I’d say so too, but then again who’s talking about OO.org? You just mention that, how about XFce4 for example, which the author stated? Abiword? [Because who says the other programs in OO.org are _necessary_? That’s your assumption; and it isn’t true for everyone that’s as clear as you can get it..]
Premise: “People avoid change that is all there is to it.”
Some do, some don’t. We are both human, right? Can you speak for myself allowing me to do so too? Thanks! Or did you meant “most people”? -1 generalisation, again…
Microsoft is really in trouble. If LongWait comes with a lot of new features, it will require education and training to be used efficiently and it will most likely break compatibility with old software. This will make it an expensive regardless what price tag Microsot will put on a licence upgrade. And if they doesn’t put a lot of new stuff into it, there will be no reason to upgrade. Even today people most people don’t upgraade from windows 2k to XP unless they get XP with a new computer, and even then many large companies order that new computer with win2k as the cost of testing and validating XP is too high. The only reason many of those companies doesn’t still run NT4 is that it have become end of lifed and security updates will no longer be available.
As if this wasn’t enough the free desktop gets better and better each day. By the time Longhorn is released we will have sean two or even three releases of Gnome and KDE, a new release of OpenOffice, several new versions of Mozilla and Firefox and all those application will be backed by a new and responsive Linux 2.8. These new free desktops will be highly inspired by the best of Apple and Microsoft so we can expect them to be just as easy to use as the upcomming Longhorn. To make it even worse for MS open source applications will use cross platform toolkits and free software will spread over to the windows platform making a full migration to free software easier. OpenOffice.org, Mozilla and now reasently, the Gimp is just the beginning.
This alone will be enough to get a market share of 10-15%. And when that happens hardware venders will recognize that market and we will probably see preinstalled Linuxes and better driver support.
it will require education and training to be used efficiently and it will most likely break compatibility with old software.
Not so. Although I’m sure it will break some things (as Win9x to WinNT kernel did), most applications should still run fine.
By the time Longhorn is released we will have sean two or even three releases of Gnome and KDE, a new release of OpenOffice, several new versions of Mozilla and Firefox and all those application will be backed by a new and responsive Linux 2.8.
And since neither Mozilla nor OpenOffice runs under Windows, I can see how Linux has the distinct advantage here
If enterprises and universities start switching to Linux so will the users at home. It is too much hassle to have different sytems at home and work. If you use linux all day at work you will be comfortable using it at home. Many Amiga home users switched to PC because of this factor.
Will MS go broke..no. Will MS lose market share…almost certainly.
Ok, Windows XP will run fine on a high end PII or K6-2 if you have plenty of RAM (256MB). Longhorn pre-alpha’s are slow on a P4 3.2. Longhorn releases will probably run that way on a quarter the hardware, so it’s not *that* slow. It will require decent graphics to run the visual effects, duh.
Linux does to well on old hardware. I have it revitalizing an old PII 350, with 256MB of RAM. Yea, I could probably run XP, but it would be sluggish (plus I greatly prefer linux software).
The trouble that Longhorn will run into is the same one XP had. People don’t want to upgrade. Some people want XP, but most people (and this includes businesses) just want to stick with what they have. A majority is averse to change. People upgrade with new hardware. However, I think we have reached that point where it’s getting harder to give reasons to get faster hardware. Anything in the GHz or faster range (x86 compat) seems to be excellent for a desktop for quite a while to come. Niche markets need more power, but people who use their computers largely for documents, e-mail, web browsing, instant messaging, and most other communication tasks have something that should last them a while.
Is anyone else really turned off by the open source community? Maybe it’s just Linux, and not all of open source, but every time I read the comments section of anything about Windows, and see all the bashing from the open source community, I just want to vomit. Why would I want to support something so full of hate and anger? I have enough things in my life to get angry about, I don’t need to invent some windmill demons to slay.
– Runs great on my P3-450 w/192MB of RAM.
BS.(i know people who run it on a 500 mhz machine and its just SO damn slow.
– I can make it faster and stable than ANY Linux distro running Gnome/KDE
BS. Do not try to be a troll.
– It is possible (and quite trivial) to run Windows worm/trojan/virus/spyware free.
BS. You need a lot off EXTRA packages for it. Windows is not secure and very sensitive for virusses/worms etc. i see it every day.
anymore VALID points?
>And since neither Mozilla nor OpenOffice runs under Windows,
>I can see how Linux has the distinct advantage here
You really do not get it, i bet you never been in a production envoirment but just sitting home behind your P3/450 and thinking to whole world is using the fantastic Windows. Get real and know that there are tons of businesses who a switching from Windows to Linux/BSD at this moment. Linux is FREE, Open, stable, virus/trajon/worm free (out of the box), is very scalable, is Unix/Possix, run on almost every platform. Those are things that matter not if Windows can also run Firefox because MS will do everything what they can to prevent you from running apps like OOo or Firefox.
>Is anyone else really turned off by the open source
>community? Maybe it’s just Linux, and not all of open source,
>but every time I read the comments section of anything about
>Windows, and see all the bashing from the open source
>community, I just want to vomit. Why would I want to support
>something so full of hate and anger? I have enough things in
>my life to get angry about, I don’t need to invent some
>windmill demons to slay.
I think that is becuase OSNEWS is full of so called experts who think that the know about an OS once they managed to get it installed. I think that upsets people, i know it does that to me. Anyway OSNEWS is not a reflection of the OSS community, its like everyday people some are zealots others are kind/nice/warm and actually learn you a few things.
“- Runs great on my P3-450 w/192MB of RAM.
BS.(i know people who run it on a 500 mhz machine and its just SO damn slow.”
Interesting… A good friend of mine runs XP on a 400 or 500 MHZ Celeron machine with 128 megs of RAM, and it seems to run fairly decent. Most Linux distros I have tried seem a bit slower and clunkier than Windows XP on my desktop.
– I can make it faster and stable than ANY Linux distro running Gnome/KDE
BS. Do not try to be a troll.”
Hmm… So I wonder what I was experiencing all those times when Mandrake 10 and Fedora (man, am I tired of wasting times with different distros…) Would lock up on me and force me to reboot (and even boot into a GUI if I was lucky!!)? Couldnt be a crash. Heavens no. I could count the number of times that happened to me with Windows XP in the last year on one hand. And thats between two computers running it.
“- It is possible (and quite trivial) to run Windows worm/trojan/virus/spyware free.
BS. You need a lot off EXTRA packages for it. Windows is not secure and very sensitive for virusses/worms etc. i see it every day.”
So you call “BS” on running Windows virus free, then you state that you need extra packages for it… So then it is possible. Last I checked Zone Alarm, a decent firewall was free. That leaves a virus scanner, which there are free ones too. Othewise, you do have a point here… but not for long when Service Pack 2 is released. Besides, a careful user wouldnt have a problem anyways. Now, put more people on Linux, and I believe we will see this more of a problem. Just like much commercial software, Linux or Mac isnt big enough for people to spend their time to write viruses for it.
“anymore VALID points?”
Yes, I would like to add a few of my own:
1. I can run all the software I need on Windows, with no emulators. This ensures that I have a greater chance of running the program, assuming that I have a machine powerful enough for that application and it will work with my hardware configuration (tends to not be a problem these days, but I guess it can still happen).
2. I can pretty much bet that any piece of hardware I buy will work on Windows. Though some stuff may work with Linux, my experiences with my hardware leaves me with reduced functionality than running in Windows.
3. Games. This speaks for itself.
Interesting. My computer specs are already 5x more powerful than needed to run longhorn at its max, and it only costed me 1000 to build it. You guys must suck at building pcs that function at full speed.
“Those are things that matter not if Windows can also run Firefox because MS will do everything what they can to prevent you from running apps like OOo or Firefox.”
Microsoft is a business, so of course they would want you to buy THEIR software and products! Would you expect Ford to just tell customers to use a Chevy? Of course not! Why is so hard to accept the fact that Microsoft does what is good for them, like any other business? Is it against the Open Source Relgion to accept this fact? That what any normal business would do, Microsoft deserves to be bashed for doing the same thing?
Seriously, I could see Linux becoming an official religion. Its god would be the Penguin, who can do nothing wrong. The Devil would be Microsoft, that does nothing but horrible stuff like charging for software to make a profit. People carring around CDs, knocking on peoples doors asking if they would like to convert to Linux. Why? Because its Linux, and not Windows. Just like those who stand on the corner handing out the Bible, we will see various Linux distro CDs being handed out. Next we will see people from Linux boxes trying to screw with someone running Windows, starting what would be viewed as a Holy War of the Operating Systems. I could go on, but I think everyone who actually read this far gets the point.
I don’t know what longhorn sidebar is like but I have universal sidebar on kde and I like it.
But just out of curiousity, how much space you have on the hard drive of that 433mhz box?
Uhm, I can’t recall saying I had a 433 MHz box (maybe a typo on my behalf…?) but the 500 MHz box has 8 GB, I’m not exactly sure about the 400 MHz Pentium box (it’s at my brother’s place right now) and that 366 MHz laptop I was talking about has 4 GB of space. It’s really gonna be cool when I’ll be able to find some cheap laptop memory and then install XP on it
Yes, Linux can run on old hardware if you select the right bits, but it’s not that easy. We need one or two distros that are targeted specifically at old hardware but at the same time are easy to install and use. The hardware recognition needs to be as good as on Knoppix or Mandrake, and it must install all the right lightweight apps by default. You can get any of the major distros to run with low-spec apps, but you have to select them specifically which means you have to know what each package is. But new users don’t have this knowledge, and even then it’s too much work. It must be as easy as Mandrake/Xandros/Knoppix, but install low spec stuff by default. I suspect this is not that hard, but most of the effort is going towards the leading edge stuff.
Puppy Linux is a good start, using IceWM as the only choice, but some of it’s apps are too basic and it requires too much ram (as it runs directly from ram). Vector Linux falls short on hardware detection and slickness during install/config, and already includes too much choice, including heavy stuff like KDE 3.2. I just want a CD that I can give to my friend with her 32MB laptop with a broken/infected Win98, and know that everything will install smoothly (as you can generally do now with say Knoppix on newer machines)
Speaking of sidebars, I have Desktop Sidebar installed on my main machine, and I wouldn’t be able to live without it (on Windows that is, I somehow don’t need anything like that in MDK/BeOS). OSNews.com headlines, weather, command line. etc.
When microsoft does not create something, you say that they are not innovative
When microsoft creates new product, you say that it is not necessary, it is monopoly….
If you don buy microsoft product, how can he be monopoly?
Big market shares means monopoly? i wander
if you don like microsoft, just dont use thier product, don always critisize other people OK?
so tired with all these postings
That’s the main flaw here. The other being that Linux, especially any form of Linux you could make run of legacy hardware, won’t have the software they need.
what linux really needs is standards.. people want somethin easier than to install 1284 programs just to get a chat program installed, where in windows you (almost always) only need the installer for the program.. this is simply because linux developers can’t agree on any programming standard, and all of them creates their favorite.. yet i personally love linux, because it gives you freedom to choose what you want on you system, instead of windows’ 1billion services that all runs unless you choose them not to .. but perhaps this oppotunerty would dissapear if there were more specific rules for programming standards .. or what?
By the time Longhorn comes out I’m sure everyone will be sick of the subject “windows vs linux.”
I’m sick of it already. Where May 2004, Longhorn may ship in 2006. That’s a year and a half I’ll have to read stuff like this on a product that is not for sale.
That’s gonna be a long annoying time !!
For people who thinks than Linux is reaching spaces into the desktop scene, must not forget than: 1. the development core will deploy microsoft with .NET technology (while linux communities is still insisting in already deprecated technology as PHP , etc. Again they are sleeping at the wheel thinking than Longhorn is just a nice desktop, wich is mediocre understanding about ms technology), 2. if linux wants to hit the Desktop market, they must stop to IMITATE windows. and 3. the REAL posibilitie about something microsoft said before “buy linux”, of course that will be the last card microsoft will show. The battle is just starting, but microsoft has the advantaje and the ball is on linux hands.
>
is still insisting in already deprecated technology as PHP ,
>etc. Again they are sleeping at the wheel thinking than
>Longhorn is just a nice desktop, wich is mediocre
>understanding about ms technology),
PHP is very nice but you must not compare apples to pears.
>2. if linux wants to hit the Desktop market, they must stop to IMITATE windows.
I agree but yet all Windows people here find Linux hard to use if the musttype apt-get instead of click > setup.exe.
>Microsoft is a business, so of course they would want you to
>buy THEIR software and products! Would you expect Ford to
>just tell customers to use a Chevy? Of course not! Why is so
>hard to accept the fact that Microsoft does what is good for
>them, like any other business? Is it against the Open Source
>Relgion to accept this fact? That what any normal business
>would do, Microsoft deserves to be bashed for doing the same
> thing?
YEP! If you, the user, are being in someway obstructed in doing your business because somebody want you / forces you to use their product, they deserve to be bashed.
It not about Open-Source bla bla, i am not agianst commercial software but you must understand that if there is only ONE company that is going to dictate what / when or how we are going to use a product., that is bad, very bad for the you, the consumer, and very bad for our ecomomy. Linux is the only real treat of Microsoft today, its keeps things a little bit in balance. You, the consmumer, benefits from that, Microsoft is forced to make better/cheaper products. Please print that in your head and start downloading Linux right now!
And please do not nage about problems here but try and solve
things once. There is google there is msn, search and you will find.
The comments about it being difficult to run Win XP without trojans/viruses etc. are just false.
You need a good firewall, preferably hardware based and some common sense in dealing with your e-mail attatchments. Correct settings in IE and an automatic OS update once a month which can run in the background. That’s it.
Our production machines which run XP have never been infected by trojans or viruses, nor have our OSX machines.
ok, so BAS overshot a little bit with his BS section, i agree, but you also did.. pretty much any hardware works with windows? thats the biggest load of ***** i have read so far..yes everyone has “drivers” for windows but there are plenty of parts out there that are cheap no-name that , if you install the drivers that come with it, will create havoc on your machine… and to boot its different hardware on different machines…
I run both windows and Linux on my desktop and at my work place because personally i am sick of viruses, trojans etc. and they come… eventually something will find its way to your computer.
Now we were talking about average users. and Darius said its trivial to make a windows xp machine secure and virus free… thats complete BS.. you install zone alarm (if the user will even get this far without help) and as soon as the user installs a program or opens a browser etc a nice popup comes saying: do you wnat the service (example) lsass.exe or “simple tcp services” to access the internet… they click ok. well what exactly would a user know about a program called internetbrowser.exe for exampl that could be a trojan?
and about service pack 2 on windows XP…. dont make me laugh , we have been testing it and you BETTEr hope you dont have any other firewall software installed cuz you’re in for a world of trouble. (symantecc live update getting blocked etc…)
So, then my last comment about the “lightweight” linux distro etc? noone has mentioned it so far so i will say it.:
XFCE4, its beautyfull and fast. Now about memory usage here’s the kicker:
System: fedora Core1
DE: XFCE4
open applications: Firefox, GAIM, KMail
memory usage : 92MB!!!!!!
92MB is pretty acceptable i think, and XFCE supports adding parts from KDE or gnome (panels etc) so I am wondering why people dont use that on lightweight machines?
It would be nice to make a fedora deriviate with XFCE as a default DE cuz speedwise its brilliant…
my 2c
>The comments about it being difficult to run Win XP without
>trojans/viruses etc. are just false.
No there are not.
>You need a good firewall,
I agree OpenBSD will do the trick.
>common sense in dealing with your e-mail attatchments.
>Correct settings in IE and an automatic OS update once a
>month which can run in the background. That’s it.
Windows XP targets home users who do not have common sense.
Besides all you nice XPrences, i do not believe Windows is
secure. Its got so many holes they find them almost every single day.
http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/alerts/index.html
My argument was not that it’s easy for a home user to keep their system secure. It was to counter the matter-of-fact statements that it’s difficult to keep an XP system secure. If you know what you are doing it’s not.
I have cleaned enough users private home computers to understand they have problems. On the other hand I would be scared to death to put a linux box in front of any of them, they could do some serious damage. I have even seen them destroy macs 🙂 the risk for infection is less common on mac and linux but home users can do some crazy things to all systems…
well if you know wath your doing then everything is easy.
heck if you know wath your doing writing your own OS would be easy so wath is the point
>On the other hand I would be
> scared to death to put a linux box in front of any of them,
I am not i have transferd a lot, not without problems and not without people who wanted to get back to Windows but in some cases people where so, so satified.
Little example. I have some friend who live in my neighborhood they have over 4 different digital camera’s in Windows they needed to install 4 differnt pieces of software
(about 200mb all toghter) to get it work, start 4 differnet programs etc. Sometimes connection was not possible and Windows XP needed to reboot to finally get the camera work again. I transferd them to Lindows 4.5 and showed them Digikam, digikam reconized ALL of the camera’s instantly
and could even connect to all of them at the same time, that is in the same session. The NEVER want to get back to Windows. Trust me.
> they could do some serious damage.
As long as you do not run as root there is no harm done
>The comments about it being difficult to run Win XP without
>trojans/viruses etc. are just false.
No there are not.
I love blind assertions. It is not “difficult” to run WinXP without trojans/viruses. It is slightly hard to run WinXP without ad-/spy-ware, but it can be done.
To run XP without trojans and viruses simply requires regular updates and user education. This can be helped with decent email and internet browser software and an external firewall. Even Outlook qualifies as decent email software if it’s been updated and configured properly, as most files that can carry a virus or trojan are blocked.
I, personally, don’t use anti-virus software except to occasionally scan my computers when they’re having problems. In 8 years of building and administrating my own computers, I’ve never had a virus or trojan that I did not install expressly to test the anti-virus software.
Ad-/spy-ware requires a little more effort, because it’s installed primarily by internet sites and/or with downloaded software, because people believe that it’s ok to make money off of non-profitable ventures (like mediocre shareware and websites), even at the expense of irritating their users (which is probably why the ventures are non-profitable in the first place). It’s also a fairly young area, so much of the software that combats this problem is incomplete. This means that the best defense is a combination of software, usually ad-aware and spybot S&D, with full immunization enabled, plus a good pop-up blocker which helps stop many of the methods used to install ad-/spy-ware from internet sites (since they usually use a pop-under window that tries to install it).
>You need a good firewall,
I agree OpenBSD will do the trick.
I definitely agree. However, even the simple firewall built into many NAT routers will be enough for most users. On the other hand, if you have an old computer sitting around and plenty of extra time on your hands, configuring an OpenBSD box to sit on your internet connection and do nothing but route and block packets is one of the best choices, regardless of what you’re running behind it.
>common sense in dealing with your e-mail attatchments.
>Correct settings in IE and an automatic OS update once a
>month which can run in the background. That’s it.
Windows XP targets home users who do not have common sense.
Which is why automatic updates are scheduled by default, and MS needs to be pushed into configuring OE and IE correctly by default. If the user has Office, they should be using Outlook instead of OE, and it is configured correctly by default (with extra security options in Outlook2k4 needing a little tweaking, but they are beyond what most people consider secure).
Besides all you nice XPrences, i do not believe Windows is
secure. Its got so many holes they find them almost every single day.