On 6/19/2014 5:53 PM, DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2014-06-19, mike wrote:
On 6/19/2014 3:31 PM, DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2014-06-19, Karl Townsend wrote:

[ ... ]

OK, I'm looking for a file storage and internet surfer machine, don't
need blazing speed, or a lot of memory.

If you are tired of paying Microsoft every time you change the
color adjustment on your monitor -- let alone make some more substantial
change -- why not go to some version of linux. Nothing you have listed
above seems to exclusively call for Windows -- unlike certain CAD
programs or the like which may only be *made* for Windows.

[ ... ]

Linux certainly has its place.
But
There are serious issues with compatibility with your decades of
previous work.
Sure, you can get MUCH of the functionality you need,
as long as you're willing
to learn new apps, new procedures, new everything, and convert your data
and just say goodbye to stuff
that isn't compatible. The devil is in the details of that small
percentage of stuff isn't supported in linux, but you feel you
MUST be able to do.

Note my text above, which I'll move down here again:

================================================== ====================
Nothing you have listed above seems to exclusively call for
Windows -- unlike certain CAD programs or the like which may
only be *made* for Windows.
================================================== ====================

Nothing that he had listed above as his intended use *required*
Windows, or compatibility with Windows programs. He mentioned nothing
about CAD programs or others which really needed Windows to maintain
compatibility. All he *said* that he wanted was file storage, and
internet surfing. If he is already using Thunderbird, that would not
even require any re-learning. It works pretty much the same on any OS
for which it is available.

Now -- if the "file storage" listed above includes files created
by applications which are not available for linux -- *that* could be a
problem. But for all we know, they are plain text files -- or even
files created by MicroSoft Word (use LibreOffice to access those).

And -- if he had to, he *could* run the current Windows on a
virtual machine inside the linux. Yes, a little slower -- but it could
be recreated (very quickly) from a backup whenever he needs to run it
and then waved goodby to when he shuts off the machine -- thus blowing
away any virus infections from incautious browsing. Just make sure to
back up any newly-crated files that he really *needs* to preserve.

Then there's the issue that every version of every linux distro
seems to feel the need to change everything at each release.
Just as you're starting to get a handle on it, it changes.
Much the same function with different methods. CHAOS!!

So -- don't upgrade if you are happy with what works already.
I've got systems running Sun's Solaris from back in version 2.6, and
some machines which I would have to use SunOs 4.1.1 or earlier to run.

FWIW, MS has never been "on my back." Virtually every computer
comes with it and it just works. But I do ride the linux
mechanical bull when I need amusement. Damn thing keeps throwing
me off.

Have you tried moving your Windows disks to a new machine
without getting Microsoft's blessing first? They are the only ones I
know of who make that difficult on purpose.

I'm itching to assist anyone wishing to convert to linux.
Just send me your old windows install DVD. COA and the license keys.
I'll put 'em to use and prevent you backsliding into windows.
Just doin' my part to speed the world's conversion to linux on the desktop.

For me -- no worry about backsliding into Windows. I've been
using unix (various flavors) since before Windows came out. I've used
it only when I needed a "popular" OS for programs which don't support
less popular ones. Now, for that I have a token Mac Mini. Things like
income tax software and GPS update programs are what cause me to use a
"popular" OS.

Back when I did that with Windows, I typically did not boot that
machine more often than perhaps three times in a year.

Email me them windows license keys you'll not be using.

And, of course, all this linux talk has zero to do with what motherboard
he chooses.
OR metalworking!

Well ... programming in raw machine language is (or was) called
"Programming on the bare metal". But almost nobody does that any more. :-)

Enjoy,
DoN.

We're in high agreement about the state of linux.
Difference is that you ignore the significant effects of those minor
lacks of support.

99.9% of the time I spend at my keyboard is using firefox or thunderbird.
For those, it really doesn't matter which OS I use.
So the 99.9% statistic sounds like a no-brainer...
but
Statistics rarely tell the whole story.

My VOIP system is not supported by linux.
When I run linux, I don't have a phone. Kinda defeats the purpose
of having a phone.

I have four TV cards that I use to time-shift TV.
None are supported by linux.
When I run linux, my TV doesn't record.
Kinda defeats the purpose of having a TV recorder.

If I edit a text file in one system and then another, it inevitably
merges all the lines into one long line. Not cool.

I don't write many programs, but they're all in Visual Basic.
Or PIC basic pro.
Or Palm basic.
NEVER in C.
I've amassed a number of utility programs that I'm not willing to port.

Rebooting doesn't sound like much until you realize that you loose
coherency among
all your bookmarks and history and passwords and all the other stuff
automagically maintained by the OS and apps. No problem, build yet
another linux machine to be a mail server...yeah, right!!

If you're gonna run windows in a VM, you still have all the activation
issues plus another layer of confusion/configuration for the apps.

Remember that most of the really good stuff developed for/by linux
has been ported to windows.

Another way of looking at the situation is exemplified in Firefox.
The user interfaces are different enough to be annoying.
Look at the configuration menu. Different places.
OK, stand on your soapbox and scream that linux does it the "right"
way. That's not the issue. The issue is that the minority linux
version defies convention and thumbs it's collective nose at the
incumbent majority. It may be right, but it's a lousy strategy
if you want more linux desktop users.

The only valid reason that typically shows up is the malware issue.
And it's WAY overblown for those of us with the restraint to watch where
we are and avoid clicking on everything shiny...and use firewall/malware
apps.
I don't think I've EVER had a malware problem. I've had a few alerts
from the virus scanner, but most of them were false positives. The rest
were where expected malware and ran on a separate machine. If linux
ever achieves major use on the desktop, you can be sure that the malware
will catch up. Security of the OS is a minor issue. The careless clicky
finger is the bigger issue. And that's OS independent.

So, if you gotta run windows for anything, you might as well run
it for everything. You can always run linux in a VM if you ever
find anything that must have it.

I boot a live linux CD for online banking.
Otherwise, haven't fired off my linux VM
except when I was really, really bored and needed more
frustration in my diet. Ditto for the other three linux
machines sitting gathering dust. The effort required to walk
across the room to push the power button far exceeds any benefit
to be gained.

Booting a live linux thumb drive is an excellent way to test
used computers. Most people don't do that a lot. Interesting
that I messed with creating that live thumb drive for a long time
using linux. Finally ran the windows utility to do it. click, click,
done! I can multi boot two linuxes, one windows and save a bunch of
files using one thumb drive and a windows utility to make it.
And I had to learn nothing, zero, nada about command line utilities
or partitions or boot flags or boot managers
or anything else operatingsystemy.

Linux on the desktop is so close that we can taste it. But with the current
development infrastructure that lets anybody and their dog modify the code
and add a new distro to the chaos, I don't expect it will ever stabilize
and defragment to the degree necessary to displace MS. There's just too
much linux ego involved and no leadership. There are also problems
with the business model of "FREE as in beer". Hard to make a business
out of that...unless it's a business helping other businesses navigate the
chaos...like redhat.
And, for most of us, windows is "free" too. It comes with the hardware.

But it's only been a few decades...see where it goes.
Maybe MS will commit suicide.

My first home desktop computer was a Unix system in '89.
I've run linux since the days it would fit on a floppy.
I've got more linux distro CD's than I can count...most
have been installed and run over the years.
In all this time, nothing compelling...

Are we having fun yet?