What Next?

[Computer Hobbyist]

After abandoning Linux for about a year I recently reinstalled ubuntu (Feisty Fox) on my Athlon64 -- my principal home office computer. It does everything I need, and does it well. I am entirely satisfied. It runs as well as XP professional on my laptop, XP home on my wife and daughter's machines and windows 2000 on my office machine. It works so well it is boring.

I have even found it runs some really fun and useful applications including google earth and flightgear.

I have been thinking about trying FreeBSD or something else. Any suggestions? What is the next OS frontier? Are the OS wars over? What are the advantages of some of the other distributions? Any thoughts? Are any of the other distributions showing any maturity?

[glc]

Ubuntu is the closest thing you are going to get to Windows besides MacOS - FreeBSD has always been outstanding, but it's a lot more work to get it where you can use it as a daily driver, so to speak.

[cmillar6]

PCLinuxOS is in my opinion the best distro. Multimedia support is better than Ubuntu's (it will play movies and mp3's by default without the need to install codecs). Additionally, it makes it really easy to enable 3d desktop effects like Beryl, you still need to use the comand line in Ubuntu to install Beryl.

http://www.pclinuxos.com/

[faulkner132]

Sounds like you are looking for a challenge. If so, try Gentoo Linux... and good luck!

http://www.gentoo.org/

[ghost2003]

The BSDs will not disappoint. Just don't expect any hand holding.
You could also try out Solaris.

[Computer Hobbyist]

I have tried Gentoo before. In my experience when it comes to Gentoo the expression "good luck" is apt. The last time it simply refused to recognize my network card. I spent the better part of a week trying to configure it. Nothing. I hope it has improved since then. I has always seemed a very promising idea to me.

This time I am bringing home an old server that is being replaced at my office. There is nothing wrong with the server. It is just an old PIII. My idea is to install some additional memory, a wireless card, a new OS (it has NT which can't handle some of our new network office apps), put it in my workshop and use it as a network server. I really don't want to pull wire. All it has to do is run Samba. I would really like it to have a light gui but that isn't really necessary.

I have been thinking about one of the BSD's, but it is going to have to be handle a wireless networking card.

Solaris might be a good alternative.

[mikeL]

I've always been hooked on Slackware.

[Captn]

I like Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/ and the forums is here http://www.fedoraforum.org/ Enjoy

[Computer Hobbyist]

I have used and like Fedora. I think I prefer Ubuntu for ease of use.

What has amazed me is that Linux hasn't taken off among builders and especially gamers. I know that now there are Linux versions of some of the more popular games, but it seems to me that the gamers who absolutely love ultra high performance would be screaming for Linux or maybe BSD versions of their favorite games.

What is the state of Linux gaming?

I mentioned BSD because with BSD developers don't have to worry about the GPL's viral licensing that scares shrink wrapped software writers away from Linux.

[glc]

The reason Linux hasn't taken off is the "geekiness" of having to deal with a command line for some stuff. I took one look at what I have to do to get a HP Color Laserjet 2600N installed in Kubuntu and said fuggedaboutit. Nobody has a compiled driver in a package - the only way you can get it is as a tarball with a LONG list of things you have to do on a command line to unpack it, make it, install it, configure it, etc. etc. Screw that. I'll print to PDF and shove it over to the Windows box to print. When Linux can install drivers without having to use the console, then maybe I'll take it more seriously.

[hitchface]

Some people like geekiness. That's part of the attraction to Linux. Of course, different distros will include the ability to install drivers in a simplified manner later on, but that was one of the first warnings I had heard about Linux. "Be prepared to geek out a little." That sentence right there sold it for me.

Aside from that, the command line isn't all that tough. http://forum.pcmech.com is a command.

[glc]

I'm not resisting the command line - I know DOS like the back of my hand. I'm just saying that requiring the use of a command line in the 21st century is inhibiting wide acceptance. These days, even "average" users don't even know what a "command line" is, much less know how to use one.

[hitchface]

Good point.

[glc]

At the risk of appearing to hijack this thread, I'm going to ramble a bit here. I welcome any input from CH - I get the impression that he is an experienced *nix user and I'm interested if his thoughts parallel mine in any way.

Several years ago, Linux was the exclusive territory of command line geeks. Yes, there were windowing systems, but to do almost anything other than simply run applications, you had to use the console. It wasn't anywhere near as friendly as even DOS with Windows 3.1 running on top of it. Since then, things have come a long way. A couple years ago I decided to throw a Kubuntu box together - the reason I chose Kubuntu over Ubuntu is I prefer KDE to GNOME. I was frankly amazed how easy it was to do a LOT of things - connecting to my Windows shares was a piece of cake, almost easier than doing it with another Windows box. Konqueror is a even a decent file manager. Today's package managers take the tedium out of researching and installing dependencies to get software working. The only issue I had was with my video setup - it saw my Matrox video card fine but it did not know what my monitor was capable of. In order to get it out of 640x480 I had to use the console to manually edit a .conf file. No biggie, the instructions I was able to find were written well. Next project was to connect to my shared Epson C86 on my Windows box, this was simple but getting to actually PRINT correctly took me 2 HOURS to accomplish. The C86 was not an available preinstalled printer so I had to go out and find a driver. The only one I found was a Foomatic. The only way it's distributed is in a tarball. I finally found a post in a forum that spelled out how to install it in a manner that was understandable to someone that speaks English instead of geek as a primary language.

The Matrox was only a 4 meg card - in order to run it at full color depth I was limited to 1024x768 at 75 Hz. My 19" CRT was capable of 1280x1024 at 85 Hz. So, I upgraded it to a 64 meg Radeon 7000. No sweat - but I again had to edit the conf file to get it to run at that res and refresh.

Well..........the CRT died. I replaced it with a 19" LCD. Guess what? It can't handle 85 Hz - only 60 Hz. Problem - how to reset it.......no safe mode or VGA mode. I screwed with it for HOURS - finally found out how to do it. Had to boot with a live CD and go through the rigamarole of editing that damn conf file yet again.

I got pissed off at the Epson and tossed it out the window. Now, in order to install the 2600N (and it's REAL easy finding it this time - it's has an internal Jet Direct, connected to my router with a static IP) I have to go through all this Foo nonsense again. I downloaded the driver, untarred it, and went to the next step. Now it can't find "make" - screw it. I'll print to the builtin PDF driver and shove the PDF over the wire to the Windows box, open it, and print it. Maybe someday when I feel masochistic I'll try installing that stupid printer driver again.

For you experienced Linux users, doing these things are probably second nature. However, to an average user, having to do things this way just to handle video and printing issues is not reasonable. M$ Windows makes these tasks simple and seamless - and very understandable to a layman. When Linux (actually the addon GUI) reaches this point, I hope acceptance takes off because I actually do feel the underlying architecture is superior to anything M$ has ever done and probably will ever do.

[faulkner132]

It's easy to "blame" Linux for the shortcomings when it comes to driver and device support, but keep in mind the bulk of development for these drivers comes from the community because the manufacturer simply will not do it. As a result, you are using a generic driver for X device or having to edit Xorg.conf to specify resolutions.

Windows is undoubtedly the leading OS in terms of desktop use, but none-the-less it is not free like Linux. In paying for Windows, and the inevitable support of the hardware world, you get lots of conveniences which get taken for granted.

When you mention the architecture, lets look at the biggest fundamental difference between Windows and Linux:
- Windows (as we know it now) is built from the ground up as a GUI driven OS.
- Linux is built as a command line OS with any GUIs (GNOME/KDE/etc.) simply being "overlayed" as an interface to the command line. Much like what 3.1 was to DOS.
Linux's architecture is what contributes to it's stability (i.e. a graphical "mishap" only crashes your GUI instead of the OS itself).

All in all, Linux needs backing from hardware developers other than those designing RAID cards to get into the desktop market, but that won't happen until more people start using Linux. Catch 22.

In my experience (using Ubuntu exclusively on my home machine for 1.5 years), I never had a complaint, but I knew what I was getting into. I did have to edit my Xorg.conf file (which took 10 minutes), but my digital camera and printer (Epson CX-4200) all worked fine with the detected drivers.

If you are going to run Linux you have to make sure your devices are supported. Yes it is more work, but again, you have to know what you are getting into.

[glc]

the bulk of development for these drivers comes from the community

Then the "community" needs to consider less "informed" users and maybe package these drivers in a way that make them easy for the layman to install? I get the distinct impression that these developers do not CARE about helping people that are not "geeks" and want to keep everything in sort of a private "club". I'm sure that if the driver were offered as a .deb it would install very easily.

[faulkner132]

It's hard to direct people who are doing work on an "as available" basis.
Additionally, it is equally hard to fault them when they are doing free work.

My opinion is Linux would really take off if the "hackers of the World unite" and focus their efforts on a select amount of distros instead of having 132,000 forks. This, however, would kind of defeat the whole idea of open source...

[glc]

They may be doing "free" work, but if they took a little extra time to make things more friendly, don't you think that this would help recruit more members into the community who might actually be able to help when they gain skills?

[Computer Hobbyist]

Here is my take on Linux. I played with it for years. I really worked to learn the command line, but I have always installed on my home computer. Right now I am typing on my current Linux box. About 2 years ago I installed Ubuntu. I have an old Canon printer. I was never able to get that damn thing to work on Linux. It works like a champ on my windows box. If you look around you will find that the evaluation of the driver built for my printer is that it "mostly works." When you read "mostly works" you damn well know the driver needs professional help.

Ultimately I came to the conclusion that any operating system worth a damn should do some things well. One of them is make sure the most common hunks of plastic hanging off the computer function out of the box. A printer is a pretty darn standard piece of equipment.

I got mad and pulled Ubuntu out of my box all together.

As I often do a few weeks ago I got bored. I downloaded and installed the current version of Ubuntu. Right off I had a video problem. It didn't take long for me to figure out that I needed to install the latest NV driver. I discovered that for some reason having to do with GPL licensing it is a "restricted driver" which required special treatment. Ok I figured it out and got it installed.

The current version of Ubuntu is much better than the one I pulled off my computer a year ago. It does damn near everything. i was able to find a pretty decent flight simulator. It handles my digital camera and my CD RW right out of the box. In fact it handles both much better than Windows or the standard Windows based apps. Ubuntu networks like a champ. It is pretty damn solid.

I encountered a browser problem because I have an Athlon64. Firefox's most important plugins don't easily handle 64 bit processing. You have to install a 32 bit version of firefox to get flash and java to work. That wasn't a big draw back for me last year but it was annoying, This year I looked around and found something called swiftweasel which is a tweaked version of Firefox designed to handle the plugins. The result is a real improvement over both firefox or IE in windows 2000 (which I had been using), and firefox in the old version of Ubuntu. The new release slated for October 15th is supposed to solve the Athlon64 problem right out of the gate.

For me the real problem with Linux is its licensing model. Stallman has never really understood the mass market. His model was that people give the software away and make money on support and maintenance. If you are Sun or IBM (the world Stallman inhabits) that is a damn good model. Lots and lots of big integrators follow that model. The software is cheap but installation and support is expensive. Sadly what works for big business doesn't work in a mass market. Making money on shrink wrapped software is all about licensing and copyright. A lot of shrink wrap software makers are leary of Linux because of the GPL. They think it is viral. They are afraid they will lose their license. I know I have been in meetings an heard real honest to god application designers complain about losing control of their source code. As much as anything else the fear of the GPL has really held Linux back. You don't make much on support when you sell a $59.00 copy of Turbotax. Video games, forget about it. You have to make your money right now or never. The problem is not insurmountable, the BSD license and its derivatives, such as the Mozilla or Apache licenses, don't threaten shrink wrap writers.

That brings us to the second problem with Linux that scares the **** out of shrink wrap software writers. This problem is really harder to solve than fear of the GPL. It is the absolutely mind numbing number of Linux and BSD distributions. Everybody has his own distribution. Everybody thinks his is going to rule the world. Just think about all the software distribution variables each intended to make sofware distribution "easy" for the average user -- ports, RPMs, Synaptic package managers all in varying flavors. All with their positives and negatives. On top of that you have Gnome and KDE competing with each other. Don't forget about all those other lesser GUIs either. From the viewpoint of the application manufacturer the fewer variables the better.

Don't tell me about Linux needing to reach a critical mass to attract software manufacturers, from the point of view of Linux, it already has. That is why many of the applications having to do with running hardware are so damn good. The applications that handle my photos or the operation of my CD Rom are world class. I would bet some world class coders working for some of the hardware manufacturers have had a hand in those products, and they weren't working in their spare time.

For some reason second line printer manufacturers like Canon haven't jumped in, but HP has a pretty darn good set of drivers to handle HP products. They handle the newer product with ease. Of course they will all claim to be from the Linux community, but I bet that a lot of the coders work for HP. HP is in the business of selling hardware. They want to make sure Linux users buy their copiers.

Sadly the critical number for each of the various even major distributions hasn't reached a critical mass. There just aren't enough Ubuntu users to support the effort necessary to produce a product tuned to Ubuntu. The same with Fedora and all the rest.

There you have it. Nobody has figured out a way to make money off of mass produced Linux software and there are too damn many distribution forks to make the effort worthwhile.

Sorry for the ramble, but it is late at night and I am tired.

[glc]

HP sure isn't bothering to support my color Laserjet 2600N. This isn't exactly a low production specialty printer.

[Computer Hobbyist]

HP says it is providing Linux printing and imaging support for over 200 copiers. You might want to look to see if your machine is one of them. The point is that HP has put up a site touting their efforts to support Linux. That shouldn't be surprising. Outside of America Linux is a really, really big deal and HP makes its money selling hardware.

[faulkner132]

Originally Posted by Computer Hobbyist You don't make much on support when you sell a $59.00 copy of Turbotax.

Keep in mind too, the _vast_ majority of computer users (in the US at least) have no idea what an "OS", much less Linux is. Most people think you either buy a PC which runs Windows or a Mac and that's it.

When these people go to buy a new Dell/etc. and they see the choice for OS:
1. Windows XP
2. Windows Vista
3. Ubuntu Linux

The overwhelming majority are going to say "Ubuntu Linux, what is that? Some different version of Windows?"
I think a lot of readers of this board take their computer "IQ" for granted and assume everyone knows the "basics" of computers.

[Captn]

Very nice post I want to thank you all for all your input. But Im personally thinking about making Vista Home Premium 64bit my last OS from Microsoft, its getting way to expensive. Fedora 8 will be out very soon and I'll dual boot it with Vista for a while then possibly make my switch. I personally think the command line just shows us how lazy Microsoft has made everyone.

[glc]

http://hplip.sourceforge.net/support...lor_laser.html

The 2600N is not on the list. It uses ZJS, not PCL.

http://foo2hp.rkkda.com/

[Computer Hobbyist]

glc, if you read the website the fact that your printer isn't on the list (the printers with numbers just before and after you printer are) probably means you are SOL. As the website says some are not supported because of licensing concerns which is probably why your printer isn't supported.

[Computer Hobbyist]

My personal opinion is that google desktop or something like it is going to become far more important than any current os desktop. With it riding on top of Windows or Linus or MacOS or whatever, all the concerns of the gaming and other shrink wrap writers go away. Imagine every computer in the world as a thin client to some bunch of giant Google super computer servers.

[glc]

Right. That's why the only game in town is that foozjs driver, which I gave up trying to install.

[Computer Hobbyist]

Originally Posted by glc Right. That's why the only game in town is that foozjs driver, which I gave up trying to install.

glc, I have never seen you so grumpy, but I feel for you man.

[mojo]

G, you could just share the printer from your windows box and access it in linux using samba/cups.

[glc]

Accessing it is not a problem either way - share or direct TCP/IP - you still need the correct driver for the thing to print something readable.

CH, looks like grumpiness is no stranger to you either -

I got mad and pulled Ubuntu out of my box all together.