my linux box when down a while ago and haven't had the time to fix it,
so I've been stuck using tunder bird for my news reader, today I found that
I can run KDE on winXP using cygwin, now I can run all my favorite apps on
my windows box
I'm a simple man, and simple things make me happy, I'm happy

I'm technically happy. Tom
Richard Clements wrote:
my linux box when down a while ago and haven't had the time to fix it,
so I've been stuck using tunder bird for my news reader, today I found that
I can run KDE on winXP using cygwin, now I can run all my favorite apps on
my windows box
I'm a simple man, and simple things make me happy, I'm happy

On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 21:13:09 -0700, Richard Clements
wrote:

my linux box when down a while ago and haven't had the time to fix it,
so I've been stuck using tunder bird for my news reader, today I found that
I can run KDE on winXP using cygwin, now I can run all my favorite apps on
my windows box
I'm a simple man, and simple things make me happy, I'm happy


Is there any benefit to linux?
I don't really understand whether it is applicable to the home user.
If you have the time, a short brief/tutorial would be appreciated.

Thx

On 2006-11-01, Joe Bemier wrote:
Is there any benefit to linux?
I don't really understand whether it is applicable to the home user.
If you have the time, a short brief/tutorial would be appreciated.


The term 'benefit' is truly in its most subjective in this matter.
I use Linux (Slackware, specifically), and I wouldn't have it any other way.
To use it, I have had to read a lot, do a lot of web searching, lurk in a
lot of newsgroups to get answers to my questions. Gaining the knowledge and
spending the time 'fiddling' with my computer is something I consider fun
(if only slightly masochistic).
The main benefits that I like are price (free!), and the knowledge that
there is probably no program on my computer that is reporting my
usage/habits/whatnot to someone else-be it through a virus, trojan, spyware,
Microsoft "feature", etc.
I also like not paying hundreds of dollars to purchase a 'license' on an
operating system from a company that seems to spend more time on anti-piracy
schemes like Product Activation than making a secure system.

Is Linux more secure? Absolutely, unless you defeat the built-in security
concepts like running as the administrator (root).

Is Linux cheaper? Usually. It is available from many places for free, I
understand there are distributions that provide some sort of customer
service with a purchased product.

Is Linux "better"? Depends. I surf the web, read newsgroups, read mail, do
'office' type stuff. A lot of games and applications are developed for use
only with Windows (oddly enough, they are generally not developed on Windows
machines) and if hardcore gaming is your bag, you will want to look at the
games you want to play to see if they are Linux compatible. Same with
applications. You could always dual-boot windows and Linux to take
advantage of the best of both worlds.

There are zealots on both sides of this debate, best to score the pros and
cons like Olympic Gymnastics-drop the highest and lowest scores and average
the middle.

If you choose to give Linux a go, you will find a lot of resources on the web.
You will also find a lot of 'geeks' who think they are above helping the new
guy. Takes a little time to separate the wheat from the chaff, but all in
all it's a fun ride.

Good Luck

On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 16:00:36 -0600, Dave Sizemore
wrote:

On 2006-11-01, Joe Bemier wrote:
Is there any benefit to linux?
I don't really understand whether it is applicable to the home user.
If you have the time, a short brief/tutorial would be appreciated.


The term 'benefit' is truly in its most subjective in this matter.
I use Linux (Slackware, specifically), and I wouldn't have it any other way.
To use it, I have had to read a lot, do a lot of web searching, lurk in a
lot of newsgroups to get answers to my questions. Gaining the knowledge and
spending the time 'fiddling' with my computer is something I consider fun
(if only slightly masochistic).
The main benefits that I like are price (free!), and the knowledge that
there is probably no program on my computer that is reporting my
usage/habits/whatnot to someone else-be it through a virus, trojan, spyware,
Microsoft "feature", etc.
I also like not paying hundreds of dollars to purchase a 'license' on an
operating system from a company that seems to spend more time on anti-piracy
schemes like Product Activation than making a secure system.

Is Linux more secure? Absolutely, unless you defeat the built-in security
concepts like running as the administrator (root).

Is Linux cheaper? Usually. It is available from many places for free, I
understand there are distributions that provide some sort of customer
service with a purchased product.

Is Linux "better"? Depends. I surf the web, read newsgroups, read mail, do
'office' type stuff. A lot of games and applications are developed for use
only with Windows (oddly enough, they are generally not developed on Windows
machines) and if hardcore gaming is your bag, you will want to look at the
games you want to play to see if they are Linux compatible. Same with
applications. You could always dual-boot windows and Linux to take
advantage of the best of both worlds.

There are zealots on both sides of this debate, best to score the pros and
cons like Olympic Gymnastics-drop the highest and lowest scores and average
the middle.

If you choose to give Linux a go, you will find a lot of resources on the web.
You will also find a lot of 'geeks' who think they are above helping the new
guy. Takes a little time to separate the wheat from the chaff, but all in
all it's a fun ride.

Good Luck

Thanks much, Dave! I just might give it a go - probably on a spare
machine to get started and learn the ropes.


Cheers,
J

Joe Bemier wrote in
:


Thanks much, Dave! I just might give it a go - probably on a spare
machine to get started and learn the ropes.


Cheers,
J


Many distributions allow you to use a "Live CD" so you don't even neeed
to install it. Ubuntu is one such distribution, there are many more.
The reason I mention Ubuntu is that it's probably one of the friendliest
versions of Linux out there yet.

http://www.ubuntu.org

Puckdropper
--
Wise is the man who attempts to answer his question before asking it.

To email me directly, send a message to puckdropper (at) fastmail.fm

On 2006-11-02, Puckdropper wrote:
Joe Bemier wrote in

Many distributions allow you to use a "Live CD" so you don't even neeed
to install it. Ubuntu is one such distribution, there are many more.
The reason I mention Ubuntu is that it's probably one of the friendliest
versions of Linux out there yet.

http://www.ubuntu.org

Puckdropper

Too true. I have Ubuntu (Edubuntu) running on a computer for the kids.

On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 17:25:45 -0500, Joe Bemier
wrote:

On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 16:00:36 -0600, Dave Sizemore
wrote:

On 2006-11-01, Joe Bemier wrote:
Is there any benefit to linux?
I don't really understand whether it is applicable to the home user.
If you have the time, a short brief/tutorial would be appreciated.


The term 'benefit' is truly in its most subjective in this matter.
.... snip of good stuff

Thanks much, Dave! I just might give it a go - probably on a spare
machine to get started and learn the ropes.


Probably not a bad idea. From what I'm reading about the next release
(hesitate to call it incarnation, more along the lines of Dracula would be
more appropriate) of Windows (Vista) is going to be even more onerous in
terms of product activation, phone-home license checking and even tighter
support of Digital Restrictions Management (DRM). Already, the newest beta
for Windows media player will not allow one to back up license files for
downloaded music (or at least it didn't -- by design -- when I was forced
to check it out a couple of months ago).

One of the other advantages that unix systems have is that, should you
have a problem in which you have to restore the OS, but where your data is
still intact, you don't have to re-install your applications, you only need
to assure that the paths are correct and that you have any required license
managers running. I had to reload XP a couple of months ago -- it was a
real pain to have to re-install all of my applications, even though the
application files were all intact on the hard drive. That Msoft registry
thing is an absolutely diabolical (in the biblical sense of the word)
scheme.

I'm currently running Windows XP, but will be very seriously looking at
Linux when I have to upgrade my computer.



Cheers,
J


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 06:17:30 -0500, Joe Bemier wrote:

Is there any benefit to linux?
I don't really understand whether it is applicable to the home user. If
you have the time, a short brief/tutorial would be appreciated.

Thx

When you buy MSFT operating systems, that's what you get ... an operating
system. And a EULA no sane person is ever likely to agree to if they
actually read it. And a needless dependency on anti-virus software.

When you install (purchased or not) a Linux distribution, you get enough
software to gag a maggot.

Operating system, office suites, communication software, graphics
programs, page layout, CAD, checkbook managers, chat software,
compilers, web page editors, web and ftp servers, backup software,
commercial quality databases (usually two of them, not counting the one
inside Open Office) ... you name it -- it's there, the list goes on for
page after page. Seriously. Some distributions offer to install as many as
700 application programs. Whether you use all 700 or just a relative
handful, the price is the same ... next to free.

You can use the GUI of your choice ... or a text-only interface. Your
choice. You can import all of your Windows fonts. You can read a password
protected NT formatted hd faster than if you knew the password. BTDT.
Virtually all of the Windows format data files will open perfectly in
their Linux counterpart application. You'll lose autorun macros ... but
you should have lost those a LONG time ago as they are the source of much
security grief in Windows.

Most (all?) Linux distributions come with a top end firewall that does
what is called 'stateful packet inspection'. Very sexy stuff, very secure.
Free.

You can use the Linux Terminal Project software to beathe new life into
older hardware on your home network. Linux offers comprehensive logging
facilities so you can monitor attempts to turn your computer into a
zombie. Especially revealing is the fact that all the virus attacks you
will log over the course of a year are likely to be directed at either a
Windows machine or a Mac. All. The basic security structure for Linux,
based on the concept of priveleges, makes it a lousy target for extrenal
viruses.

If you are really nervous, you can install Linux with the NSA (seriously!)
security functions enabled. You can encrypt all the files on your computer
and decrypt them on the fly.

After calling me to her machine a half-dozen times to repair crashes,
(and noting that my copy of Linux had never crashed in that time period)
my beloved wife had me take Windows off her computer and install Linux. And
that speaks reams about it. She won't even let me upgrade her copy of
Linux ... she likes it just fine the way it is.

I've been using it for about 12 years, my wife has been using it for about
four years. Twelve years ago it was a real pistol to get to do anything at
all ... like print ... or use a modem. But Linux has come a LONG ways.
Today it is even simpler to install than Windows and when you get done,
you can use the computer instead of having to wait a couple days while you
feed it installation disks for the programs you want to use with it.
Typically, with a reasonably nimble machine, Linux takes about 45-90
minutes to install ... most of which time is spent swapping out cd's. When
you get done, you are ONE reboot from being able to use a fully equipped
computer. I note this because of the seemingly endless reboots it takes to
get Windows marginally functional. Linux proves that those simply aren't
necessary and are a total waste of your time.

A couple years ago my sons and I used a utility called 'rsync' to use each
others computers for backup devices.

One lives in St. Petersburg, FL, the other just outside Minneapolis, MN ...
I live in Detroit. After the first backup, further backups took mere
moments.

An hour after bringing a new computer home, I could have reconstructed all
of my data on it. Now, how cool is that?

I'm just skimming the surface here. Linux and Windows run on most of the
same hardware (Linux runs on more) but that is where their 'under the
hood' resemblance ends although Linux can even be made to look like
Windows.

Give Mandriva or Fedora a test drive on some decent desktop hardware and
you may never pay the 'Bill Tax' again.

Bill (-- the OTHER Bill!)

"Joe Bemier" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 21:13:09 -0700, Richard Clements
wrote:

my linux box when down a while ago and haven't had the time to fix it,
so I've been stuck using tunder bird for my news reader, today I found
that
I can run KDE on winXP using cygwin, now I can run all my favorite apps on
my windows box
I'm a simple man, and simple things make me happy, I'm happy


Is there any benefit to linux?
I don't really understand whether it is applicable to the home user.
If you have the time, a short brief/tutorial would be appreciated.

First thing you have to understand about Linux is that it's like the
Mac--it's a religion to a lot of people. Be very careful what Linux
advocates tell you--their information on Windows is often a decade out of
date. Sometimes they lie without knowing that they are lying.

Major benefit is that it's free and there are a lot of applications. Major
disadvantage is that managing Linux development is like establishing peace
in the Middle East so there are a half a dozen sometimes mutually
incompatible ways of doing things. The advocates will tell you that
everything works wonderfully--if you buy one of the commercial distributions
and only use what's included in that distribution this is to some extent
true but when you start installing software that is not part of that
distrubution you're likely to run into incompatibilities in a variety of
driver models.

The advocates will tell you that "more hardware" is "supported". Hang out
on the Linux groups and see how loudly those same advocates whine about the
poor support for ATI and nvidia video boards.

Many of the touted benefits of Linux are in fact also present in current
releases of Windows and in some cases Windows does a better job of it.

The "free" software is mostly "you get what you pay for" software--it ranges
from fairly decent to pretty poor--there are only a few real gems like knode
and even those are quirky and sometimes poorly documented. Further, much of
that free software also runs fine on Windows.

The virus safety issue is mostly hype--I've never (since Windows 1.0) gotten
a virus on any of my Windows boxen--the "danger" is exaggerated by the
antivirus vendors in order to sell software--the antivirus junk generally
causes more problems than it solves. Usually if you do pick one up it's
from a disk that your kid brought home from school, not from Internet
activity, and if you configure your machine to not boot from diskette or CD
and not autorun CDs and give your kid a user account instead of
administrator even this problem pretty much goes away.

There's also the long-term support issue--many Linux projects have gotten
off to a good start and gotten to where they were almost useful and then the
developer graduated from college and got a job or got married and had a kid
and no longer had time for that hobby and nobody else decided to take over
and so the project went down the tubes.

There are some applications that just plain do not exist for Linux--for
example there's no tax software--some of the Windows tax software may run on
Linux under an emulator but considering how poorly some of it runs under
Windows (the tax software vendors need to put less effort into "protecting
their intellectual propery" and more into "making their crummy code actually
run") I'd expect a real hassle getting it to go under an emulator.

If your need is to use the computer as a working tool and you aren't on a
super-tight budget I'd go with Windows--if you're more interested in the
machine than in the applications then you'll find Linux more rewarding.

"J. Clarke" wrote in
:


First thing you have to understand about Linux is that it's like the
Mac--it's a religion to a lot of people. Be very careful what Linux
advocates tell you--their information on Windows is often a decade out
of date. Sometimes they lie without knowing that they are lying.

True. As a fairly imparital (if you claim absolute nuetrality, you're
lieing) observer of all three "Operating System philosophies" I can see
where every one has it's good and bad points.

I noticed that in Linux and Unix (OS X's base) I tend to have a terminal
window open when in a GUI environment. In Windows, I rarely need to open
the command prompt (terminal window) to do something.

Major benefit is that it's free and there are a lot of applications.
Major disadvantage is that managing Linux development is like
establishing peace in the Middle East so there are a half a dozen
sometimes mutually incompatible ways of doing things. The advocates
will tell you that everything works wonderfully--if you buy one of the
commercial distributions and only use what's included in that
distribution this is to some extent true but when you start installing
software that is not part of that distrubution you're likely to run
into incompatibilities in a variety of driver models.

Some distributions have package managers, which make it really easy to
get new software, if they have it. They'll also download needed
libraries for you. My biggest complaint, though, is the package manager
shows hundreds of things installed and I can't access but a few easily
because I don't know /where/ they are.

The advocates will tell you that "more hardware" is "supported". Hang
out on the Linux groups and see how loudly those same advocates whine
about the poor support for ATI and nvidia video boards.

Hey there's support for my Newton's keyboard in kernel 2.6! (What, you
mean you'd rather spend $35 more on a better ATI card than a Newton
keyboard? Hmph!)

Part of the problem with hardware support is getting manufacturers to
provide either the drivers or information to create the drivers on a non-
Windows system. Some barely get Windows drivers working, so they're not
even going to attempt Linux.

Many of the touted benefits of Linux are in fact also present in
current releases of Windows and in some cases Windows does a better
job of it.

The "free" software is mostly "you get what you pay for" software--it
ranges from fairly decent to pretty poor--there are only a few real
gems like knode and even those are quirky and sometimes poorly
documented. Further, much of that free software also runs fine on
Windows.

Every once in a while you find a real free gem. It's the same way with
most commercial software too... Every so often you get a gem.

The virus safety issue is mostly hype--I've never (since Windows 1.0)
gotten a virus on any of my Windows boxen--the "danger" is exaggerated
by the antivirus vendors in order to sell software--the antivirus junk
generally causes more problems than it solves. Usually if you do pick
one up it's from a disk that your kid brought home from school, not
from Internet activity, and if you configure your machine to not boot
from diskette or CD and not autorun CDs and give your kid a user
account instead of administrator even this problem pretty much goes
away.

Viruses are a real problem, but safe computing and safe surfing can
really minimize your exposure to them. Some things are easy to do, such
as not opening email attachments you weren't expecting and turning on
Windows XP's firewall. (Security experts just hush! I know, but
finding, downloading and installing a firewall is HARD for most users.)
I've been virus free for almost 3 years, longer if I had put the firewall
up before connecting to the school's network.

There's also the long-term support issue--many Linux projects have
gotten off to a good start and gotten to where they were almost useful
and then the developer graduated from college and got a job or got
married and had a kid and no longer had time for that hobby and nobody
else decided to take over and so the project went down the tubes.

There are some applications that just plain do not exist for
Linux--for example there's no tax software--some of the Windows tax
software may run on Linux under an emulator but considering how poorly
some of it runs under Windows (the tax software vendors need to put
less effort into "protecting their intellectual propery" and more into
"making their crummy code actually run") I'd expect a real hassle
getting it to go under an emulator.

Have you looked for tax software? I bet it's out there, just not
Quicken.

If your need is to use the computer as a working tool and you aren't
on a super-tight budget I'd go with Windows--if you're more interested
in the machine than in the applications then you'll find Linux more
rewarding.



For most user-level installs, I'd go with Windows too. It's easier to
let someone else help them. ;-)

Puckdropper
--
Wise is the man who attempts to answer his question before asking it.

To email me directly, send a message to puckdropper (at) fastmail.fm