Linux - Is it a viable alternative?

**silkstone** · 22-09-2007, 16:21

Dave's post about a cheap laptop for web access got me thinking that maybe it would be useful to have a (reasoned and flame-free

) discussion on the pros and cons of different operating systems. I've been using Linux since February and perhaps the following may help anyone who is thinking of trying it.

Why?

Until last October my main PC was a three-year-old Fujitsu-Siemens Scenic P - P4 2.4GHz, 1.5MB RAM and a huge 40GB hard drive.

I'd stuck with this machine (using external drives for most storage) because it had been ultra reliable and was also silent. But it was time for an upgrade so I bought a dual-core machine with two 320GB drives and all the bells and whistles, running XP again.

The new machine was a lot faster although very noisy by comparison. I didn't want to discard the old PC so I decided to dabble with Linux which had intrigued me for a while. I cloned the 40GB hard disk to a 200GB drive in a USB enclosure, swapped the drives over and then installed Ubuntu Linux 7.04 as dual-boot with XP Pro.

At first it was all very strange. Linux is not Windows - some things are similar but others are not. It took me a few weeks to get used to it, and then I found I was using the old PC and Linux more and more, and the new XP machine less. Nine months down the track the Linux box is now my main PC, and the XP machine is switched on for a couple of hours a week for the things I can't do on Linux.

The Good...

There is a perception that Linux is for computer geeks who want to do everything by terminal commands. It can be that if you like, but the latest versions ('distributions') of Linux are designed to be very user-friendly. It helps to know some terminal commands for set-up and configuration, but once it's all up and running you can do everything from the GUI. The terminal commands that are useful are all available from the user forums - you can just copy and paste them even if you don't know exactly how they work. In many ways it's like going back to DOS, and some commands are identical.

My desktop looks like...

You can configure it more-or-less as you want, with different themes and screen layouts. By default, Ubuntu Linux has top and bottom panels which you can use for program shortcuts and to switch between open applications. The boxes at the bottom right switch between different desktops - you can have up to 64 of these I believe! I have two 'OFF' buttons - top right and bottom left - in case I get confused.

On my old machine, Linux applications run quicker than their XP equivalents. There are many different Linux flavours, but Ubuntu Linux comes with Firefox, Open Office, the GIMP, various applications for photo browsing, music recording and playing, CD/DVD burning, games, etc. I have also installed Thunderbird + Lightning (for diary and e-mails), and Bibble Pro for RAW processing.

One thing you don't need is a virus scanner. At the moment, there are no known Linux viruses, rootkits or other nasties. You can surf in safety, and the machine doesn't spend the first 20 minutes phoning home, scanning and updating things before telling you to reboot.

Linux doesn't have a registry to get in a mess or be attacked by script kiddies. The OS is inherently secure, and you need to enter a password to make any changes, including updates. You can also back up the system and create a disk image simply by copying the whole lot to another drive, as a compressed file if you wish. You can copy files that are in use, including system files, and they don't have to be in a specific location on the back-up drive. A typical Linux system can be copied/imaged to a 2GB pen drive.

You can set it to check automatically for updates for both the OS and installed software. Unless there's a kernel update, you don't need to restart after updating.

The Bad...

Although there are Linux equivalents to many Windows and Mac applications, proprietary software companies have not rushed to bring out native Linux versions. You can run some Windows apps under 'Crossover Linux' or 'WINE' which are (sort-of) emulators, but you are often restricted to older versions. For example, Paint Shop Pro 7.04 will run under Crossover, but later versions won't. Photoshop 7 is supposed to work, but not CS or later. Bibble is one of the few multi-platform applications, and luckily I like it.

So unless you're happy with these old versions or the GIMP, you still need Windows/Mac. Ditto for UK accounting software - the programs available for Linux don't handle UK VAT.

The Ugly...

Dell in the US are now shipping machines with Ubuntu Linux pre-installed, so hopefully everything will run OK. Usually, however, you're installing Linux on a machine designed to run Windows, and hardware compatibility can be a problem.

Some people have no problems at all - everything works straight out of the box, and the install routine picks up the graphics card, wi-fi, etc. That was the case with both my old PC and a newish Acer laptop which needed virtually no tweaking to run Ubuntu. However, other people have a nightmare getting things to work, especially with some ATI graphics cards. Nvidia cards are generally a better bet and the Linux drivers are readily available.

Printers can be a problem too. HP printers are well supported, and some Epson, but you can forget about most Canon printers because there are no Linux drivers. I use a somewhat aged HP 970Cxi which works a treat, but my Canon i9950 needs Windows.

Worth the effort?

It depends on what you want to do. Most of my work involves getting info off the web and writing articles for people. Linux is perfect for that, and Open Office will save as .doc so everyone can read it. Bibble is great for RAW conversion and most editing, gThumb is good for browsing, slideshows, resizing for the web, etc, and the GIMP is OK for most things but not as full-featured as Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro.

The Rhythmbox music player is a lot simpler than Windows Media Player but does the job, there are video editing packages but I've not tried them, and (very importantly) the Linux version of Solitaire is much better than the Windows one.

So if you're fed up with being hemmed in by Gates and Windows, don't want to spend a fortune on a Mac, and are willing to give Linux a fair chance, it may be a pleasant surprise.

Any questions? I will do my best to help anyone who wants to have a go.

lcraft · 23-09-2007, 04:40

I've messed with Linux ever since 1994 or so before they had a 1.0 Kernel release. Since that time I've become more of a fan of BSD systems but that's another discussion..

I would say Ubuntu is the most 'Mac-like" operating system out there that I've seen without buying a Mac as far as system install and upkeep goes. I am fairly impressed by that and their update system works well. So does their packages/software installer system for adding software from the repository.

That said I could never see myself using it day to day as my desktop machine. I like my Mac - I like Photoshop, Aperture and my other commercial + shareware apps way too much.

If my only options were Windows or Linux, I would use a Windows machine offline for photo and do my web browsing/email/etc with an Ubuntu machine.

Currently I do have a machine running Ubuntu with Vuescan to run my Coolscan LS-5000. I did give Gimp a try to do simple retouch/editing on scanned images but it declares that it does not support the 16 bpp images I have scanned and downsamples them before opening so that did not work out. Files get transferred via ethernet to my Mac. Unfortuantely, last I checked, Bibble will not open the DNG Raw files that vuescan can create, either or I would explore that route more. (though it would most likely work on the .TIF files I create)

Anyway, my take is it's not ready for prime time for many things. But depending on your needs it can be pretty useful. IMO, when companies like Adobe take note and start supporting it, then it will be ready. Some day the Linux Kernel and the standard libraries are going to have to mature to the point where commercial developers have a more stationary target to aim at for development. It's just such a mess right now trying to make a complex app that runs well under every Linux distro out there..

If you are happy though - I'd suggest you look into a copy of vmware to run your windows apps in a window on your Ubuntu machine.. Maybe then you would find yourself moving your copy of Ubuntu over to the newer, faster machine and become even happier.

***Steve*** · 23-09-2007, 08:44

My experience with Linux is both limited and holds no fond memories; although I have to say it was a few years ago. Like you I was drawn towards it as an experiment when I had a spare computer available to play with. I duly downloaded the iso disto and burned it to cd. Installing the basic OS was simple and ran with absolutely no issues at all but after that I found I had hit a brick wall.

The system had not installed drivers for much of the hardware and that left it crippled. As well as that there seemed no easy way of installing those, unlike Windows XP (which I was running at the time) were it guides you through options to find and install missing drivers, in linux it not only didn’t tell me what was missing, but also once I had found that out myself, didn’t give me an easy way to install them myself to solve the problem. The whole environment was alien and for someone who has not used dos extensively or who is not familiar with command line instructions, it was fast turning into a nightmare just to get the system to recognise the hardware. The last thing anyone needs when using a PC is to be stumped at the setup stage. Having hardware driver issues added to that rapidly helps you form bad first impressions.

I spent the next few days…and I do mean almost every hour of each day, attempting to find answers and solutions to my problems. In the end it was just too much trouble and I gave up. If I felt that way when I still had another fully functioning PC complete with internet access to use for research, I do fully understand how confusing, annoying and frustrating it must have been for others that either had only the one PC (possibly dual booting) or god forbid, one with only Linux installed. Can you imagine having no internet access due to using linux for the first time and not being able to find out how to archive that..its a catch 22 situation.

I guess that Linux distros have moved on greatly since then though, but do note, that there are still many hardware and driver issues to overcome when starting plus unless they have altered the user interface to make it both intuitive and usable without the need of command prompt, then yes Linux will always be regarded as a geek OS.

On top of that you then have to look at what you actually use your pc for, as you have already pointed out many of the software packages that myself (and probably the majority of our users being that they are photographers) rely on will not currently run on Linux. Most users don’t have the benefit of two pcs to have access to Windows on one and Linux on the other, plus speaking for myself, since I am already dependant on Windows for certain things (and therefore ditching Windows is not an option), I see no point in battling through the issues already discussed to use Linux to do tasks that my Windows machine performs perfectly well.

I cut my teeth and was introduced to both computers and the internet in a Windows environment, and while I will be the first to admit that I am not a great fan of Microsoft or for that matter, Bill gates, for the most part Win XP is a very polished piece of software that does everything I require with little to no issues and doesn’t force me on a learning curve to remain productive. Linux developers have to take that into account before it will begin to erode the main stream strangle hold MS has in the OS market. Once they are able to do that, and I begin to read from reliable sources that everything is plain sailing installing and getting software to run on a Linux OS system, then I may dip my toe in the linux waters once more to see how it feels.

orangepeel · 23-09-2007, 10:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

I spent the next few days…and I do mean almost every hour of each day, attempting to find answers and solutions to my problems.

I had a very similar experience but with dual monitors. Even had a guru come sit with me and we still couldn't get it working to my satisfaction. I have 3 screens now so I'd guess it'd be even worse!

I also have a PCI RAID controller which I try out with various live CD's every now and then. Still no joy with it being recognised.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

I guess that Linux distros have moved on greatly since then though,

Indeed. A LONG way. Latest ubuntu is chalk and cheese with what I tried a few years ago. As long as you're on fairly mature and "normal" hardware then it's very pain free to install.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

there are still many hardware and driver issues to overcome when starting

I found this too however I believe it's actually our pre-learned behaviour that's the problem. The whole hardware/driver model is completely different in *nix. Therefor our knowledge built from windows tends to be a hinderance. AFAIK there are no drivers as such. So when we run around looking for them we are wasting time

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

Win XP .... and doesn’t force me on a learning curve to remain productive.

I don't think you can use that as a comparison tbh. How many years have you spent building that Windows knowledgebase? Do you not think if you'd spent that time on Linux you'd probably find it just as easy?

For the record, it's the learning curve which is one of the things stopping me too. Plus I'm a Windows developer - A job made very difficult when you don't use Windows

That said, I am in the throws of retraining myself as a web developer which would mean I'd no longer have to rely on having a Windows box for my work.

I think the moment Ubuntu works with my RAID card are 3 screens I'll be jumping ship.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

Linux developers have to take that into account before it will begin to erode the main stream strangle hold MS has in the OS market. Once they are able to do that, and I begin to read from reliable sources that everything is plain sailing installing and getting software to run on a Linux OS system, then I may dip my toe in the linux waters once more to see how it feels.

Photography (software) aside, get yourself the latest ubuntu live cd. Boot from it. If it runs, it'll install. It's that simple.

**silkstone** · 23-09-2007, 11:53

Linux certainly has changed a lot in recent times, and the emphasis with distributions such as Ubuntu is on user-friendliness. Provided your hardware is supported, everything should be picked up during installation (or by the live CD) and you are then invited to download and install additional 'restricted' drivers and codecs to increase functionality. These aren't included in the CD for copyright reasons.

If you need to run Windows software, as I guess most photographers do, you can dual boot into either Windows or Linux rather than having two machines. I fully understand the reluctance to learn another OS if XP does everything you need and you are happy with it, but having climbed this learning curve I now find Linux easier and prefer it for general use. It is also a good way of giving a new lease of life to an older machine which will run Linux much faster than Windows.

It's not for everyone, and I'm not intending to be evangelical about it, but it may be worth trying especially if you aren't happy with Windows and/or you want something inherently secure. Also it's 100% free - no registration codes or 'Genuine Advantage' authentication checks, and you can install it on as many machines as you like. If you don't like it you can have a full refund.

***Steve*** · 23-09-2007, 14:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangepeel

I found this too however I believe it's actually our pre-learned behaviour that's the problem. The whole hardware/driver model is completely different in *nix. Therefor our knowledge built from windows tends to be a hinderance. AFAIK there are no drivers as such. So when we run around looking for them we are wasting time

That still cuases a delay and forces you to go off and look for a solution to the issue that (at the time I tried it) Windows just quietly got on with solving by itself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

Win XP .... and doesn’t force me on a learning curve to remain productive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangepeel

I don't think you can use that as a comparison tbh. How many years have you spent building that Windows knowledgebase? Do you not think if you'd spent that time on Linux you'd probably find it just as easy?

I absolutely agree with you, when I first was exposed to Windows I had a steep learning curve to go through, my point is not that but since I already have that knowledge why should I then have to devote effort and time to get back to the point of being productive? I am already at that stage with Windows. I really couldn’t care less if I am copying/pasting and storing my files, reading my emails and processing my photos on a Windows or a Linux OS, what I do care about is that it works and that I don’t have to spend time learning the OS before I can be productive again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangepeel

I think the moment Ubuntu works with my RAID card are 3 screens I'll be jumping ship.

Photography (software) aside, get yourself the latest ubuntu live cd. Boot from it. If it runs, it'll install. It's that simple.

Yes I can see your point here, but again I will say that its certain that Linux cannot run all the software that I need to, and won’t play nicely (according to Silky) with my Canon printer, that means that I am forced to have Windows installed and there is absolutely no point in browsing the web, reading emails and writing word docs in a Linux environment and then having to boot into Windows to carry on my photography work. It is actually counter productive for me. Free or not, if it can’t do what I require I am forced to make other choices.

orangepeel · 23-09-2007, 19:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

why should I then have to devote effort and time to get back to the point of being productive?

Well that's the million dollar question

For me it's a question of 3 things. Money, security, politics.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

Yes I can see your point here, but again I will say that its certain that Linux cannot run all the software that I need to, ... Free or not, if it can’t do what I require I am forced to make other choices.

Absolutely and this should be the core of anyones decision. If it doesn't run your software then there is no point using it.
But given the thread was started with Daves' requirements for a laptop for his sultanas' web browsing then I can't really see any reason not to go for Linux.

For the average home user who limit themselves to browsing, email and a letter to the bank every now and then, they are insane paying the MS tax. That said, they keep me in beer tokens, fixing their infected PC's so I shouldn't complain too much.

sejanus · 24-09-2007, 18:37

As a Unix hacker from wayyyy back, you'd think I'd be all for Linux. Well, I would be, if it weren't for Apple.

OS-X shows just how to integrate Unix with a really friendly GUI. What's more, it's well documented and pretty reliable (that'd be the FreeBSD underneath).

I do have a couple of disks with Linux on them (both my PCs have cartridges, so I can just wack in the boot disk I want at the time) but I tend to only use Mr Torvald's baby for a few (work related) things. Ninety per cent of the time I'm on the Mac and much of the rest, I have a Micro$oft OS in the PC.

The trouble with open source projects is that it's like herding cats. In the day job, I've just been told off to sort out a piece of open source code. I refuse to give my opinion on an open forum!

Still, as OrangePeel so rightly says - think of the money.

lcraft · 25-09-2007, 05:45

Quote:

As a Unix hacker from wayyyy back, you'd think I'd be all for Linux. Well, I would be, if it weren't for Apple.

OS-X shows just how to integrate Unix with a really friendly GUI. What's more, it's well documented and pretty reliable (that'd be the FreeBSD underneath).

Amen!

Also - between Macports and Fink you can have JUST about any opensource app that the Linux kids are playing with. Plus they make Photoshop/etc for it..

I'd say I spend about 20-30% of my time at the command line. When I was using Windows full time I kept a FreeBSD server on my LAN and stayed telnettedinto that just so I had a proper shell environment..

If I have to use a Windows machine these days, Cygwin gets loaded on it...

**silkstone** · 25-09-2007, 08:59

I could cheerfully be a Mac convert - as you say, OS-X has the same roots as Linux and should be more secure and less resource-hungry than Windows - but I have a problem convincing myself that Apple's heart is in the right place. Products like the iPhone don't help here, and I get the feeling that you're paying a high price for fashion, especially on this side of the Pond.

Rob Barron · 28-09-2007, 14:41

Ok, I think I get it....

For FREE, I can get an operating system that is going to give me a headache setting it up and at the very least require a major investment of time to learn a load of new codes. It might or might not configure all of my hardware... well, most of it. It definitely won't run my printer and will probably have me pulling out the little hair I've got trying to set up a dual monitor system.

After all that pleasure it will allow me the joy of more frustration trying to run programs I rely on. I can use Photoshop.... if I ignore the great advances of the CS system and go back to the tools of PS7. I can then forego the pleasure of using Word because there is a freebie that can make .doc files, ignoring the fact I have spent hundreds of pounds on Microsoft Office. It hasn't been mentioned but my guess is I'll have the same problems with Dreamweaver and a few other programs I use.... not to mention the AOL internet software that has served me perfectly well (not everyone's favourite but for me it works) for over 11 years will not allow me to connect to the internet.

No web-creating, no photograph processing, no video editing, no internet....

Hey, where do I sign?

Sorry Silky, only being facetious matey, just not been oversold so far. I don't like the billions Bill gates has earnt from a crummy invention of his any more than anyone else but hey, I've got it now and it's working. Linux is now, has been for ages and as far as I can

22-09-2007, 16:21	#1 (permalink)
silkstone Pixalo Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Silkstone Common, Yorkshire, UK Posts: 2,983	Linux - Is it a viable alternative? Dave's post about a cheap laptop for web access got me thinking that maybe it would be useful to have a (reasoned and flame-free ) discussion on the pros and cons of different operating systems. I've been using Linux since February and perhaps the following may help anyone who is thinking of trying it. Why? Until last October my main PC was a three-year-old Fujitsu-Siemens Scenic P - P4 2.4GHz, 1.5MB RAM and a huge 40GB hard drive. I'd stuck with this machine (using external drives for most storage) because it had been ultra reliable and was also silent. But it was time for an upgrade so I bought a dual-core machine with two 320GB drives and all the bells and whistles, running XP again. The new machine was a lot faster although very noisy by comparison. I didn't want to discard the old PC so I decided to dabble with Linux which had intrigued me for a while. I cloned the 40GB hard disk to a 200GB drive in a USB enclosure, swapped the drives over and then installed Ubuntu Linux 7.04 as dual-boot with XP Pro. At first it was all very strange. Linux is not Windows - some things are similar but others are not. It took me a few weeks to get used to it, and then I found I was using the old PC and Linux more and more, and the new XP machine less. Nine months down the track the Linux box is now my main PC, and the XP machine is switched on for a couple of hours a week for the things I can't do on Linux. The Good... There is a perception that Linux is for computer geeks who want to do everything by terminal commands. It can be that if you like, but the latest versions ('distributions') of Linux are designed to be very user-friendly. It helps to know some terminal commands for set-up and configuration, but once it's all up and running you can do everything from the GUI. The terminal commands that are useful are all available from the user forums - you can just copy and paste them even if you don't know exactly how they work. In many ways it's like going back to DOS, and some commands are identical. My desktop looks like... You can configure it more-or-less as you want, with different themes and screen layouts. By default, Ubuntu Linux has top and bottom panels which you can use for program shortcuts and to switch between open applications. The boxes at the bottom right switch between different desktops - you can have up to 64 of these I believe! I have two 'OFF' buttons - top right and bottom left - in case I get confused. On my old machine, Linux applications run quicker than their XP equivalents. There are many different Linux flavours, but Ubuntu Linux comes with Firefox, Open Office, the GIMP, various applications for photo browsing, music recording and playing, CD/DVD burning, games, etc. I have also installed Thunderbird + Lightning (for diary and e-mails), and Bibble Pro for RAW processing. One thing you don't need is a virus scanner. At the moment, there are no known Linux viruses, rootkits or other nasties. You can surf in safety, and the machine doesn't spend the first 20 minutes phoning home, scanning and updating things before telling you to reboot. Linux doesn't have a registry to get in a mess or be attacked by script kiddies. The OS is inherently secure, and you need to enter a password to make any changes, including updates. You can also back up the system and create a disk image simply by copying the whole lot to another drive, as a compressed file if you wish. You can copy files that are in use, including system files, and they don't have to be in a specific location on the back-up drive. A typical Linux system can be copied/imaged to a 2GB pen drive. You can set it to check automatically for updates for both the OS and installed software. Unless there's a kernel update, you don't need to restart after updating. The Bad... Although there are Linux equivalents to many Windows and Mac applications, proprietary software companies have not rushed to bring out native Linux versions. You can run some Windows apps under 'Crossover Linux' or 'WINE' which are (sort-of) emulators, but you are often restricted to older versions. For example, Paint Shop Pro 7.04 will run under Crossover, but later versions won't. Photoshop 7 is supposed to work, but not CS or later. Bibble is one of the few multi-platform applications, and luckily I like it. So unless you're happy with these old versions or the GIMP, you still need Windows/Mac. Ditto for UK accounting software - the programs available for Linux don't handle UK VAT. The Ugly... Dell in the US are now shipping machines with Ubuntu Linux pre-installed, so hopefully everything will run OK. Usually, however, you're installing Linux on a machine designed to run Windows, and hardware compatibility can be a problem. Some people have no problems at all - everything works straight out of the box, and the install routine picks up the graphics card, wi-fi, etc. That was the case with both my old PC and a newish Acer laptop which needed virtually no tweaking to run Ubuntu. However, other people have a nightmare getting things to work, especially with some ATI graphics cards. Nvidia cards are generally a better bet and the Linux drivers are readily available. Printers can be a problem too. HP printers are well supported, and some Epson, but you can forget about most Canon printers because there are no Linux drivers. I use a somewhat aged HP 970Cxi which works a treat, but my Canon i9950 needs Windows. Worth the effort? It depends on what you want to do. Most of my work involves getting info off the web and writing articles for people. Linux is perfect for that, and Open Office will save as .doc so everyone can read it. Bibble is great for RAW conversion and most editing, gThumb is good for browsing, slideshows, resizing for the web, etc, and the GIMP is OK for most things but not as full-featured as Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro. The Rhythmbox music player is a lot simpler than Windows Media Player but does the job, there are video editing packages but I've not tried them, and (very importantly) the Linux version of Solitaire is much better than the Windows one. So if you're fed up with being hemmed in by Gates and Windows, don't want to spend a fortune on a Mac, and are willing to give Linux a fair chance, it may be a pleasant surprise. Any questions? I will do my best to help anyone who wants to have a go.

23-09-2007, 04:40	#2 (permalink)
lcraft Quite Chatty Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 92	Re: Linux - Is it a viable alternative? I've messed with Linux ever since 1994 or so before they had a 1.0 Kernel release. Since that time I've become more of a fan of BSD systems but that's another discussion.. I would say Ubuntu is the most 'Mac-like" operating system out there that I've seen without buying a Mac as far as system install and upkeep goes. I am fairly impressed by that and their update system works well. So does their packages/software installer system for adding software from the repository. That said I could never see myself using it day to day as my desktop machine. I like my Mac - I like Photoshop, Aperture and my other commercial + shareware apps way too much. If my only options were Windows or Linux, I would use a Windows machine offline for photo and do my web browsing/email/etc with an Ubuntu machine. Currently I do have a machine running Ubuntu with Vuescan to run my Coolscan LS-5000. I did give Gimp a try to do simple retouch/editing on scanned images but it declares that it does not support the 16 bpp images I have scanned and downsamples them before opening so that did not work out. Files get transferred via ethernet to my Mac. Unfortuantely, last I checked, Bibble will not open the DNG Raw files that vuescan can create, either or I would explore that route more. (though it would most likely work on the .TIF files I create) Anyway, my take is it's not ready for prime time for many things. But depending on your needs it can be pretty useful. IMO, when companies like Adobe take note and start supporting it, then it will be ready. Some day the Linux Kernel and the standard libraries are going to have to mature to the point where commercial developers have a more stationary target to aim at for development. It's just such a mess right now trying to make a complex app that runs well under every Linux distro out there.. If you are happy though - I'd suggest you look into a copy of vmware to run your windows apps in a window on your Ubuntu machine.. Maybe then you would find yourself moving your copy of Ubuntu over to the newer, faster machine and become even happier.

23-09-2007, 08:44	#3 (permalink)
*Steve* Pixalo Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: An Englishman living in Germany Posts: 15,643	Re: Linux - Is it a viable alternative? My experience with Linux is both limited and holds no fond memories; although I have to say it was a few years ago. Like you I was drawn towards it as an experiment when I had a spare computer available to play with. I duly downloaded the iso disto and burned it to cd. Installing the basic OS was simple and ran with absolutely no issues at all but after that I found I had hit a brick wall. The system had not installed drivers for much of the hardware and that left it crippled. As well as that there seemed no easy way of installing those, unlike Windows XP (which I was running at the time) were it guides you through options to find and install missing drivers, in linux it not only didn’t tell me what was missing, but also once I had found that out myself, didn’t give me an easy way to install them myself to solve the problem. The whole environment was alien and for someone who has not used dos extensively or who is not familiar with command line instructions, it was fast turning into a nightmare just to get the system to recognise the hardware. The last thing anyone needs when using a PC is to be stumped at the setup stage. Having hardware driver issues added to that rapidly helps you form bad first impressions. I spent the next few days…and I do mean almost every hour of each day, attempting to find answers and solutions to my problems. In the end it was just too much trouble and I gave up. If I felt that way when I still had another fully functioning PC complete with internet access to use for research, I do fully understand how confusing, annoying and frustrating it must have been for others that either had only the one PC (possibly dual booting) or god forbid, one with only Linux installed. Can you imagine having no internet access due to using linux for the first time and not being able to find out how to archive that..its a catch 22 situation. I guess that Linux distros have moved on greatly since then though, but do note, that there are still many hardware and driver issues to overcome when starting plus unless they have altered the user interface to make it both intuitive and usable without the need of command prompt, then yes Linux will always be regarded as a geek OS. On top of that you then have to look at what you actually use your pc for, as you have already pointed out many of the software packages that myself (and probably the majority of our users being that they are photographers) rely on will not currently run on Linux. Most users don’t have the benefit of two pcs to have access to Windows on one and Linux on the other, plus speaking for myself, since I am already dependant on Windows for certain things (and therefore ditching Windows is not an option), I see no point in battling through the issues already discussed to use Linux to do tasks that my Windows machine performs perfectly well. I cut my teeth and was introduced to both computers and the internet in a Windows environment, and while I will be the first to admit that I am not a great fan of Microsoft or for that matter, Bill gates, for the most part Win XP is a very polished piece of software that does everything I require with little to no issues and doesn’t force me on a learning curve to remain productive. Linux developers have to take that into account before it will begin to erode the main stream strangle hold MS has in the OS market. Once they are able to do that, and I begin to read from reliable sources that everything is plain sailing installing and getting software to run on a Linux OS system, then I may dip my toe in the linux waters once more to see how it feels. __________________ The sooner you fall behind, the more time you will have to catch up

23-09-2007, 11:53	#5 (permalink)
silkstone Pixalo Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Silkstone Common, Yorkshire, UK Posts: 2,983	Re: Linux - Is it a viable alternative? Linux certainly has changed a lot in recent times, and the emphasis with distributions such as Ubuntu is on user-friendliness. Provided your hardware is supported, everything should be picked up during installation (or by the live CD) and you are then invited to download and install additional 'restricted' drivers and codecs to increase functionality. These aren't included in the CD for copyright reasons. If you need to run Windows software, as I guess most photographers do, you can dual boot into either Windows or Linux rather than having two machines. I fully understand the reluctance to learn another OS if XP does everything you need and you are happy with it, but having climbed this learning curve I now find Linux easier and prefer it for general use. It is also a good way of giving a new lease of life to an older machine which will run Linux much faster than Windows. It's not for everyone, and I'm not intending to be evangelical about it, but it may be worth trying especially if you aren't happy with Windows and/or you want something inherently secure. Also it's 100% free - no registration codes or 'Genuine Advantage' authentication checks, and you can install it on as many machines as you like. If you don't like it you can have a full refund.

24-09-2007, 18:37	#8 (permalink)
sejanus Been here a while Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 267	Re: Linux - Is it a viable alternative? As a Unix hacker from wayyyy back, you'd think I'd be all for Linux. Well, I would be, if it weren't for Apple. OS-X shows just how to integrate Unix with a really friendly GUI. What's more, it's well documented and pretty reliable (that'd be the FreeBSD underneath). I do have a couple of disks with Linux on them (both my PCs have cartridges, so I can just wack in the boot disk I want at the time) but I tend to only use Mr Torvald's baby for a few (work related) things. Ninety per cent of the time I'm on the Mac and much of the rest, I have a Micro$oft OS in the PC. The trouble with open source projects is that it's like herding cats. In the day job, I've just been told off to sort out a piece of open source code. I refuse to give my opinion on an open forum! Still, as OrangePeel so rightly says - think of the money. __________________ Still trying, or at least, that's what my wife says about me.

25-09-2007, 08:59	#10 (permalink)
silkstone Pixalo Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Silkstone Common, Yorkshire, UK Posts: 2,983	Re: Linux - Is it a viable alternative? I could cheerfully be a Mac convert - as you say, OS-X has the same roots as Linux and should be more secure and less resource-hungry than Windows - but I have a problem convincing myself that Apple's heart is in the right place. Products like the iPhone don't help here, and I get the feeling that you're paying a high price for fashion, especially on this side of the Pond.