OSS PING
If you are interested in the OSS ping list please mail me
Posted on 06/05/2006 11:30:31 AM PDT by N3WBI3
Love it, hate it, heard lots about it, but still don't have enough of a handle to form a firm opinion? Then we must be talking about Linux, the open-source operating system that's alluring because it's heavy duty and it's free. Simultaneously, it's intimidating to newbies because it's typically more difficult to install and configure than Windows.
However, now is an opportune time to get past those concerns. Interest in Linux is expected to spike throughout the year, thanks to Microsoft's delay of its consumer version of Windows Vista. The hang-up could cast a pall on the year-end PC sales season. Perhaps that's one reason the mainstream media is discovering this "revolution" in software that's nearly 15 years old.
So if you've ever planned on giving the open-source operating system a whirl, but, like the Georgia bride-to-be, got cold feet at the last minute, we've ferreted out six useful facts that'll ease your path when you decide to take the plunge.
1) How many versions of Linux are there?
Lots. At least 350, according to the list maintained by the enthusiast site DistroWatch.com. The site skews toward smaller distributions, with current flavor of the month Ubuntu listed as the most popular among the site's readers. Ubuntu has gained traction recently, garnering an endorsement from Sun Microsystems chief executive Jonathan Schwartz.
Ubuntu also appears to be gaining legitimacy via heavy grass-roots support. User-spawned Web resources include a blog devoted to the distro, a quick-start guide for dummies and a more advanced (how to install anything!) manual. (However, as What PC? points out, despite its funky name, Ubuntu is not noticeably simpler to get going than any other implementation of the OS.)
Ubuntu has a great back story: Its development was funded by South African Internet entrepreneur Mark Shuttleworth as an outgrowth of his efforts to offer improved educational opportunities to his nation's young people.
Another distribution much in demand is SUSE, available for free under the OpenSUSE.org program sponsored by Novell or in a for-pay version that comes with end-user support from Novell.
Originally developed by German vendor SUSE Linux, the software has been heavily marketed to enterprise users ever since SUSE was acquired by Novell in 2004. Since that time, Novell has positioned itself as the main alternative to Red Hat, which is widely considered to be the leader in the enterprise Linux market. (In that regard, Novell CEO Jack Messman predicts that his company will emerge as one of the two dominant corporate suppliers of Linux, alongside Red Hat, as the market for paid open-source shakes out over the next two to five years.)
Other popular distros include Mandriva, Debian, and Fedora. (The latter is a free offering spun out of Red Hat. Don't forget Slackware, Knoppix, Gentoo, Mepis, and others too numerous to mention.)
For those disinclined to deal with challenging installs, the easiest path may be Linspire. The eponymous company was founded by billionaire Michael Robertson, who made his money with the early Internet download service MP3.com. Robertson has positioned Linspire as consumer-friendly Windows alternative that costs a lot less -- it's $50 -- and is bundled with many drivers and a bunch of applications.
2) What applications are available for Linux? And what the heck is LAMP?
The open-source app that gave Linux PCs a raison d'etre -- and the one you need to set yourself up with if you expect to do anything useful -- is OpenOffice.org.
Based on Sun's StarOffice, OpenOffice.org is a suite that's positioned as a free alternative to Microsoft Office (indeed, a Windows version is available). It's outfitted with word processing, spreadsheet, presentation (i.e, Powerpoint-style slides), and graphics programs. OpenOffice comes bundled with many Linux distros, including those from Red Hat and Novell. For roll-your-own types, some CD-ROM versions are available, but the easiest route is to just download the software.
While OpenOffice is the single most important Linux productivity package extant, the rap on the suite is that it has lingering issues regarding compatibility with MS Office file formats.
Other free, though far less popular, Linux office suites are GNOME Office and KOffice.
For the Web browser, Mozilla's Firefox and its companion Thunderbird e-mail client are a safe -- and good -- choice. They're even available on CD (for $6). Konqueror is another popular browser that's bundled with many distros.
The LAMP acronym that's kicked around so often refers to a "stack" of packages. Along with Linux, LAMP encompasses the Apache Web server and the MySQL database. The "P" is variously taken to refer to the PHP, Perl, or Python scripting languages. However, with the exception of the OS itself (and possibly MySQL), all those programs are of interest to developers, not average desktop users.
3) How can I listen to some tunes?
For many home users, once you get past word processing, the most important app is a music player. RealPlayer, famous for burrowing its way deep into Windows systems, is one of the few major players to offer a version for Linux. (It would hardly be fair to expect the same for programs named Windows Media Player and Winamp, though an open-source clone of the former is in the works.)
The Linux RealPlayer is based on the open-source Helix player, which offers downloads here. (However, since the Helix page also points to the Linux RealPlayer, it's easiest just to get that.) Another free player is amaroK from the KDE group.
Where to go to buy music is a tougher question. Neither iTunes, Yahoo Music, nor Urge run under Linux. As for Rhapsody, users can get a subset of the service (basically, online music playing) but you can't buy songs online and you can't install the full version of Rhapsody on a Linux box. Most vexing is that, without persistent searching, it's hard to figure out precisely which pieces of the service work and which don't. A Rhapsody customer service answer attempts to explain; so does this Newsforge article.
One of the few operations that is set up to run under Linux is MP3tunes.com, the 88-cent-per-song online music store set up by the aforementioned Michael Robertson. If you're into artists off the beaten path, another service, called Mindawn, may be for you. While Mindawn doesn't have much music you've heard of, it does eschew DRM and offers its downloads in the FLAC format favored by PC audiophiles in the know.
Folks who store MP3s on their PCs are also often in charge of the family's digital photos. For them, there's late word that Google's Picasa image management and sharing software has just been released on Linux.
4) What "desktop" environment should I use with my distro?
It's important to understand that when Linux people say "desktop," they don't mean your desktop. They're talking about your computer's user interface (UI). Given Linux's historical do-it-yourself culture, it's not surprising that the open-source UI was originally a separate element from the basic operating system. Today, nearly all distros come already packaged with one or both of the two main desktop environments for Linux: Gnome or KDE.
Conceptually, the desktops descended from the X Window system, a 1980s-era GUI from the Unix world.
At their current advanced stage of development, the differences between Gnome and KDE may be more political than technical. KDE is typically said to have more Windows-like bells and whistles, while Gnome is said to run faster. (Here's one user's perspective.)
Gnome benefits from its association with the Linux GNU Project, founded in 1984 by free-software advocate Richard Stallman. KDE, short for the K Desktop Environment, is considered a good choice for beginners.
Here's a list of distros that ship with KDE. Gnome is cagier and doesn't seem to provide a consolidated list. Many Linux distributions allow you to choose either one. That's the case for major Linux vendors Red Hat and Novell, even though both are members of the Gnome Foundation. Some distros do skew toward a single desktop. For example, Ubuntu ships with Gnome; Slackware packages KDE.
5) Linux on the server, Linux on the desktop -- which is it?
Honestly? The server. Linux on the desktop hasn't taken off to the extent its adherents had hoped for. Perhaps it never will, according to noted analyst Rob Enderle, who told ComputerWorld that it's hard to out-compete Microsoft.
According to most authoritative estimates, Linux usage on the desktop hovers beneath 3 percent of all PCs.
However, that hasn't dimmed the expectations of the faithful, who predict wider desktop adoption is imminent. (Here are some presentations from the recent Desktop Linux Summit, which puts some technical meat on the bones of that optimism.)
Apart from the fact that most vendors can make more money with Windows, there are two major reasons more users haven't been convinced to take the Linux plunge. Most importantly, Windows is a one-stop operating system in a box. It ships complete with nearly all the drivers any user could every need, and can be up and running with several mouse clicks, a half-hour wait, and the entry of an annoying license code (which then has to be verified again online within 30 days to prove you didn't steal the thing).
However, for all its "free-ness," installing Linux usually requires more tweaking than most workaday PC users can handle. More of a stumbling block is the fact that drivers in the Linux world still aren't as widely available, nor are they as plug-and-play as their Windows counterparts. However, that situation continues to improve, which in turn accounts for the continued optimism of Linux pundits, who mostly believe that, as the driver and application-availability issues dissipate, users will come.
Perhaps surprisingly, Linux is seriously gearing up in one arena that usually escapes the attention of computer users. That's in the embedded sphere, where Linux is being used to power everything from smart phones to digital video recorders.
"The most visible example of Linux design wins in this area is TiVo and a range of television and video devices from Sony," said Bill Weinberg, senior technology analyst at the Open Source Development Labs (OSDL) in Beaverton, Ore.
Linux is appearing on some surprisingly diverse embedded platforms. For example, Sony's upcoming Playstation 3 will run Linux, in an apparent bid to encourage youthful developers to create games for its console.
Linux is also firmly entrenched as the operating system for point-of-sale terminals (aka cash registers). And here's a lightweight Linux computer for the wrist.
6) You've given me lots of facts, but not much advice. How do I get started?
One pain free way to go (OK, it'll set you back $16, plus shipping) is by reading Test Driving Linux. The book, by David Brickner, includes a CD that allows you to boot Linux on a Windows computer without destroying the Windows install. On the downside, the book's Linux is, like the title says, a "test drive" that runs only off the CD; it won't permanently install the OS to your hard drive. (A further caveat is the CD is a bit fussy; it won't run if you can't get your PC to boot first from the CD drive. It didn't like my old Compaq desktop, for reasons unexplained, but it ran like a champ on an HP Pavilion laptop.)
If you're ready to give Linux a more permanent whirl, go back to Question 1, above, or to this list of distros. (The Wikipedia offers a "Which distro is right for you?" quiz.)
Alas, picking a distribution is easy compared to getting hold of the actual install. Parsing even the simplest Web page offering a free download of Linux is a major pain. The most effective way to download is to grab an ISO image, which is a file that you can burn directly onto a CD-ROM; most disk-authoring programs have an option to handle this. An ISO image to create an Ubuntu install CD is here. Scroll down almost to the bottom of this page and you can get an ISO image of an OpenSUSE boot CD. ISO images for 14 other distros, including Knoppix, Red Hat, Fedora, FreeBSD, and Slackware, are available here. (Many require multiple CDs.)
You can download an evaluation copy of Novell Linux Desktop 9 here.
If you want to avoid the download dance entirely, you can always spring for hard media, though disks are surprisingly difficult to find. A Debian distro is on CD for $10, here. The easiest route is to stop in at LinuxWorld Expo, where a spin through the show floor will net you dozens of free CD-ROMs.
When you're ready to do your install, the most important piece of advice I can provide -- and one that you're unlikely to read upfront in most tutorials -- is DON'T install Linux on the same hard drive on which your copy of Windows XP resides. Why? Because Windows is notoriously fussy about living alongside another OS. It might decide not to work. Plus, you risk erasing Windows entirely if your Linux CD engages in a session of drive formatting gone wild.
Better to dig up a second hard drive, and unplug the drive containing Windows for the duration of your Linux experiment (and, conversely, unplug the Linux drive when you're ready to return to Windows). Of course, if you're firing up Linux on an old machine that comes to you without an OS, this warning doesn't apply.
The other suggestion for prospective new users is to connect with others who are in the process of dipping their toes in the Linux waters. That's not as easy as it sounds. For some reason, Linux experts often can't seem to help themselves from adopting a schoolmarmish tone.
Of course, if you knew which darn distro to use, you wouldn't be trolling a newbie forum, would you?
OSS PING
If you are interested in the OSS ping list please mail me
At this point in time I like KDE better. :)
I have kinda fallen for it too, especially as they say the next version (4) will run on Windows..
hmm thanks for the info, never heard that B4 :), for some reason to me Gnome is a kinda funky..
I have tried Gnome only a few times and granted maybe I haven't given it its due trial time, but something about it seems foreign. KDE seems more "user friendly" or something, maybe because im so used to windows?
thanks for the link noob! oops, N3WBI3 hehe
I managed to get SUSE 9 Linux installed on an old AMD K6 box a while back, but the old K6-500 doesn't have the horsepower to run Linux except at a crawl. I tried installing the SUSE version 9 Linux on my new Dell box, and again it didn't know what the video hardware in the Dell was.
Until the Linux propeller heads can manage to simply create a basic 640x480 16-color graphics screen for the GUI on ANY PC platform, Linux will never take off.
I never had ANY problems with getting good graphic screens on ANY version of Windows or OS/2. By contrast, I've had about a 90% or better failure rate getting a graphic screen on ALL versions of Linux on about five different motherboards and about seven or eight video cards or chipsets.
At the present time Linux resides on an unused drive in an old AMD K6-500 box because that's the ONLY PC I've ever seen it run the GUI on, period.
What graphics card are you using? I have tried several different distros in multiple systems, and I have never had any trouble with video. Try openSuSe 10.1 for free. If you can't get that to work, the problem is probably you (no offense meant).
When the info was available, I laboriously tried tweaking video settings and parameters after laboriously identifying each video chip, each clock chip, etc, etc. I fiddled with settings and parameters and downloaded drivers until I could scream. Nothing ever worked, and I never saw a Linux GUI screen until I installed SUSE version 9 on this old AMD K6 box. Everything went perfectly, but SUSE requires a lot more CPU than a K6-500. I used SUSE long enough to get comfortable with it, but the sluggish performance was agonizing. Sometimes I thought the computer had locked up, but it was just Linux churning and swapping, churning and swapping.
Then I got a new Dell with a P4-2.8 ghz and 1 gig ram. I added another hard drive and partitioned it. The SUSE CD install went perfectly until that first graphics screen and then couldn't go any further since I couldn't read the screen any more.
I'm not going to waste another penny or another second on Linux. The only way I'll ever have a fully functional Linux box is if I somehow acquire the buck$ to go to a computer store and buy a turnkey fast mover with Linux already installed and working like it should.
And I've bought several camper tops over the years and NONE of them fit on my motorcycle. /sarcasm
It's really simple, actually. The X.org folks put out a list of supported video cards. The major distros put out their own list of compatible cards. If you want it to work, buy one on the list. If it's not on the list you might get it to work by accident or by fooling around with it, but no guarantees.
Until the Linux propeller heads can manage to simply create a basic 640x480 16-color graphics screen for the GUI on ANY PC platform, Linux will never take off.
I've gotten X to work on Dell 1U servers, on ancient Sun SPARC hardware and on every laptop I've ovwned in the last 8 years. Some of them had to be whacked on for a bit first, but ALL of them worked. Most recently, I installed Ubuntu on a Dell Inspiron 9200. Not only did it find the video card, it even installed the proprietary ATI drivers for accelerated 3D.
The fact is, if it will do standard VGA and isn't the brand newest card from the vendor, X will run on it. If it's not doing it for you, you probably want to get some assistance.
At the present time Linux resides on an unused drive in an old AMD K6-500 box because that's the ONLY PC I've ever seen it run the GUI on, period.
The answer is simple. You're doing it wrong.
Windows certified video cards. And here's the OS/2 list. That took 5 minutes to find on Google.
Strangely enough, I've had more trouble getting OS/2 to function properly with certain video cards that I've ever had with Linux. I had a Headland Technologies card that would stubbornly refuse to use anything higher than 640x480 at 16 colors under Warp. The Diamonds and Tsengs seemed to work okay, but the 3dfx cards and some of the S3s were particularly difficult to get running at higher resolutions. Likewise, Windows 98SE completely refused to run on a machine with a nVidia 6600GT. Linux, FreeBSD and even Plan9 all came up fine, but Windows booted, the screen went black and never returned.
I'm not going to waste another penny or another second on Linux.
I think we've found the problem here.
Linux is free. If you've been paying for it, you've been paying not for the OS, but for support. Yet in all of your ranting, not once did I see you mention that you had contacted your support organization for help.
Additionally, earlier versions of RedHat didn't have a GUI installer. They had a text-based installer. In face, the most recent version of Fedora and RHAS that I installed (less than a month ago) both had options to use a text-based installer. It would have to, since we often install RH Advanced Server using only a serial console.
This process is devilishly hard to use since one must type the word "text" at the installer prompt.
Xfce4 manages a good balance between functionality and bloat. Also, it uses (or can use) a lot of KDE's widgets, so the ones I was using I can still use.
I agree with both of you that Gnome just seems weird. I've never figured out why I don't like--I just don't.
How the F is it possible to do it wrong when you stick in the install CD, it runs for while, and crashes the very first time a graphic screen is displayed? The install process is automated, no questions are asked, no place to type in parameters or anything, and the video goes haywire at the very first graphic screen DURING THE INITIAL AUTOMATED HANDS OFF INSTALL. If and only if the video hardware is recognized will the automated install continue normally. The install of SUSE 9 went 100% perfect on an old K6 box, but crashed the video very quickly trying to install it on a new Dell Dimension 1100 with an Intel 82865G video chipset.
All the previous versions of Red Hat, BSD, Slackware, etc would install on any PC I tried them on - but - no GUI on any of them because they couldn't recognize my EXACT PARTICULAR VERSION of a Diamond, Cirrus, Creative, whatever major brand video card. As for finding video card lists using Google - doesn't the PC have to have an operating system installed first, before you can Google for video card lists??? Every single version of Windows I've used, starting with Windows 286, never had a single problem with ANY video hardware I've seen, and I've installed many versions of Windows on dozens of different PC's over the years. I've installed several versions of OS/2 and Warp on about a dozen different boxes over the years without ever having a video problem. I've had exactly ONE Linux install come up with a GUI in dozens of tries on every combination of motherboard and video card I've ever had my hands on.
I'm not spending any more money or time on trying to get Linux to run on a fast, modern PC. There's no straightforward way to determine in advance if the video will go into graphics modes properly. Sure, you can Google for video card lists for each and every version of Linux you have or might like to try, and THEN go shopping for compatible hardware. You don't have to do that with Windows. You don't have to do that with OS/2. You have a 99% or better chance of perfectly successful GUI operation. With Linux it's a crapshoot.
I started out back in the CP/M days with S-100 boxes and Z-80's. I've got most of the 8- and 16-bit computers, about 2 dozen of them, and about a dozen 32-bit PC's. I usually have 5 or 6 PC's set up all the time at home, each dedicated to a specific purpose, and spares for all of them. I'm neck deep in computers and have been for a long time. The single biggest computer related problem I've had in nearly 30 years of this stuff is simply getting any version of Linux to recognize very very very common video cards.
If a commercial software package will not install properly and come up running as advertised, it's not something you can sell to the general public. Most of the Linux distros I have are commercial packages bought in a store. They sorta, kinda, almost worked as advertised, and no amount of tweaking would get the GUI's to come up running. Joe Blow off the street runs into this kind of thing, and he's totally screwed. Someone like us can hack at it for hours and days and maybe get something to work, maybe not. Linux authors very badly need to get the "maybe" out of the picture. Everyone else does, don't they?
No clue what happened, but, the Gnome guys decided to take what, in my opinion, were the worst features of existing GUIs and throw them in a pile and call it a release. The KDE guys, on the other hand, kept improving.
Long story short, I've totally abandoned Gnome in the in-house Linux distribution I maintain. Once I let people play around with KDE, no-one really missed it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.