Author Topic: Can a Linux man survive in Windows Land? (Read 17609 times)

Edvard · « **on:** January 16, 2009, 05:26 PM »

According to a TechNewsWorld post, around the same time that Ash Pringle dove into Linux for a week, Kevin dean at Monochrome Mentality was doing the opposite:

I'm going to give Windows Server 2008 a spin on my personal computer for the next week or so, full time.
...
So, in the next week or so, I'll be trying to use my computer and relearn a whole new way of doing things. Just as new Linux users balk at the changes, I'm sure I will, and in the process I hope to learn a little bit more about what I use my computer for, what I depend on and what flexibilities I have.

The Beginning
The Windows Seat - Day 0: BIOS
The Windows Seat - Day 0: Virtualization and Bitness
The Windows Seat - Day 1: Shutdown
The Windows Seat - Day 3: Interfaces

A little less reading, and a little less entertaining, but informative nonetheless.
The last one was posted on Jan. 2 so I'm hoping there will be more forthcoming...

How the hell I got to this from Fox News, I'll never know... and WTH was I doing at Fox News??

f0dder · « **Reply #1 on:** January 16, 2009, 07:11 PM »

Heh... "Day 0: BIOS".

The biggest thing that strikes me about the Windows/Linux split is that Linux doesn't ever assume anything about hardware. Sure, it does assume that you're on the right architecture and that you have some way to give the PC information. It doesn't, however, expect you to have a certain BIOS version, a certain graphics card, a special TPM module or the like.

Linux developers learn to deal with the quirks of each system. The odds are that my system really WAS not compliant with ACPI but Linux never complained. It didn't deny me permission to install until it was.

Linux might not "assume" anything about your graphics card, but you still do have to be careful when picking one if you want proper hardware acceleration. And it might not keep you from installing on a system with b0rked ACPI implementation, instead you'll risk random crashes or motherboard devices not working (been there, done that).

Anyway, sleep time - I'll read the rest tomorrow

ilyag · « **Reply #2 on:** January 16, 2009, 11:42 PM »

My suggestion for Linux people (though it's unrelated to what the author of the article cares about): try Cygwin (www.cygwin.com). If you have 2GB free, just install everything. After installing,
immediately do: mount -c /

You'll have all the tools you can imagine without the need to install anything more. (Of course, if you are seriously
needing X, it might be worthwhile the native windows port of X, but the difference is usually minimal) If you copy
the .stuff files from linux, you'll also have all the settings you are used to.

For me, this obviates the need for linux, though your mileage may vary. Of course, the other alternative is virtualization,
but I never tried that, so I can't compare.

Deozaan · « **Reply #3 on:** January 17, 2009, 12:44 AM »

Why would you pick Windows Server 2008 for your personal computer? Nobody uses that on their personal computer.

urlwolf · « **Reply #4 on:** January 17, 2009, 03:43 AM »

I'm considering server 2008 for my personal computer

f0dder · « **Reply #5 on:** January 17, 2009, 03:43 AM »

Why would you pick Windows Server 2008 for your personal computer? Nobody uses that on their personal computer.
-Deozaan (January 17, 2009, 12:44 AM)

Because of misinformed people stating "OMFG VISTA IS TEH SUX BUT WIN2008 IS SO OMG LEAN!!11! one one".

Just run Vista through vLite and remove stuff you don't need (tablet support etc.), don't run the services you don't need, and presto - you get a decent setup (and won't have to bother with free antivirus programs refusing to run, some applications requiring more expensive server licenses, etc.)

zridling · « **Reply #6 on:** January 17, 2009, 05:43 AM »

Man, I understood almost nothing of the author's blog posts there. Meanwhile, one Wall Street Journal blogger and ZDNet's Chris Dawson dropped Apple for Linux this week because of costs. Dawson could no longer afford to pay $2800 for a Macbook and still buy food, surprise surprise.

And Apple seems to be seriously threatened by Psystar with a release of how to install OS X on any regular PC hardware. If they are able to decouple OS X from Apple hardware, then Apple becomes a husk. Android phones will eat into its iPhone market this year for sure.

f0dder · « **Reply #7 on:** January 17, 2009, 05:50 AM »

Day 0: Virtualization and bitness - he says he gets BSODs with "LIRQ_GREATER_OR_LESS_THAN" [sic], and connects it with OS "bitness" - but also mentions that it's happened with VirtualBox. He should've stated which driver causes the crash, as afaik VirtualBox uses a driver for emulation acceleration. If it's that driver crashing, it isn't really "The OS crapping itself", but a buggy piece of 3rd party software that needs fixing

Day 1: Shutdown - again, the troubles he's having seem related to VirtualBox. There's probably a service or driver component keeping the ISO file open.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #8 on:** January 17, 2009, 09:51 AM »

Meh, it's too easy to pick apart the details...and the auther is a Linux guy that is giving Windows a (second) shot. He's aloud to miss some stuff (Hell I do every time I try screwing with Linux).

He seems to be giving it a fair shot, and is actually happy with some of his findings. So it apears that the answer to the Title Question (so far...) is yes.

...Hopefully the story will continue as it should have an interesting ending.

f0dder · « **Reply #9 on:** January 17, 2009, 10:00 AM »

Stoic Joker: it's nice to see that he's giving it a fair shot, yes. And I don't feel that I'm "picking apart the details", I just find it's relevant noting that buggy drivers can bring down an OS whereas a usermode application won't... and I've been bitten by ACPI bugs (I assume

) on linux.

40hz · « **Reply #10 on:** January 17, 2009, 11:25 AM »

Why would you pick Windows Server 2008 for your personal computer? Nobody uses that on their personal computer.
-Deozaan (January 17, 2009, 12:44 AM)

Actually, Microsoft doesn't seem to think it's so odd.

One of the new features added to Server 2008 is an option to install a package called the Desktop Experience:

http://technet.micro...ibrary/cc772567.aspx

Desktop Experience Overview

The Desktop Experience feature is a new feature in the Microsoft® Windows Server® 2008 operating system. The Desktop Experience includes a variety of applications and features that are provided in the Windows Vista® operating system. If you use Windows Server 2008 as your primary operating system you might want to have some of these Windows Vista features available for your daily use.
What’s in the Desktop Experience feature

The Desktop Experience feature includes the following Windows Vista components and features:

* Windows Calendar

* Windows Mail

* Windows Media Player

* Windows Aero™ and other desktop themes

* Video for Windows (AVI support)

* Windows Photo Gallery

* Windows SideShow™

* Windows Defender

* Disk Cleanup

* Sync Center

* Sound Recorder

* Character Map

I think it's a great idea for students; individuals that need regular Windows but also want to become familiar with Microsoft's server product line; smaller businesses that need basic server functionality (i.e file & print services) and could use an additional workstation for occasional use, etc.

You obviously wouldn't want to be doing this on a mission critical server, but there are times and situations where running the server as your desktop OS makes sense.

Many independent MSoft consultants in my area do just that.

Darwin · « **Reply #11 on:** January 17, 2009, 11:58 AM »

Be careful switching to Windows Server 2008... I did it, and overall was very pleased with the result. However, I have 4GB of RAM and never did see much in the way of jump in performance over Vista. The other, more pressing caveat, has to do with shareware licensing. Some of my applications cannot be installed under a server OS without paying a HUGE premium to upgrade to a server license. There are workarounds in the sense that you can spend time looking for FOSS alternatives or competing products with more generous licensing terms, but I didn't feel the benefits of running Server outweighed the cost re: my time and any additional outlay of cash it was going to require to get to where I wanted to go with it.

FWIW, the apps I had trouble with included Acronis True Image Echo Workstation and Disk Director. The straw that broke the camels' back was something else - which escapes me at the moment

No doubt YMWV...

Darwin · « **Reply #12 on:** January 17, 2009, 11:59 AM »

PS I went back to Vista...

40hz · « **Reply #13 on:** January 17, 2009, 12:48 PM »

The other, more pressing caveat, has to do with shareware licensing. Some of my applications cannot be installed under a server OS without paying a HUGE premium to upgrade to a server license. There are workarounds in the sense that you can spend time looking for FOSS alternatives or competing products with more generous licensing terms, but I didn't feel the benefits of running Server outweighed the cost re: my time and any additional outlay of cash it was going to require to get to where I wanted to go with it.
-Darwin (January 17, 2009, 11:58 AM)

Doh!

You're absolutely right. I completely forgot about that little wrinkle in a lot of EULAs
(i.e. 'personal use' ≠ running a server OS ).

If you're not eligible for NFS/NFR pricing on certain software, it can get expensive very quickly.

FWIW, the apps I had trouble with included Acronis True Image Echo Workstation and Disk Director. The straw that broke the camels' back was something else - which escapes me at the moment

Probably most antivirus/antimalware and backup apps?

It usually comes as a shock to most new server owners when they discover that their days of free antivirus and backup software just came to an end.

I get more complaints about the cost of security software for Windows Server than I do just about anything else. Which is to be expected when you consider that many security products for Windows Server are more expensive than Windows Server itself.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #14 on:** January 17, 2009, 03:12 PM »

Stoic Joker: it's nice to see that he's giving it a fair shot, yes. And I don't feel that I'm "picking apart the details", I just find it's relevant noting that buggy drivers can bring down an OS whereas a usermode application won't... and I've been bitten by ACPI bugs (I assume ) on linux.
-f0dder (January 17, 2009, 10:00 AM)

lol I wasn't trying to imply you were wrong for targeting the details, I simply ment I wasn't going to jump into it also (it's too easy at that angle) as any Windows guy knows IRQ_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL is flakey driver issue.

I was just taking a stab at being positive about the article's intent.

P.S. Did you ever get my PM, or are you trying to ignor it?

f0dder · « **Reply #15 on:** January 17, 2009, 03:19 PM »

PM?

Doh! I always overlook those >_<

40hz · « **Reply #16 on:** January 18, 2009, 01:02 PM »

Something just occurred to me:

I'm a 'Linux guy' - and I survive quite well in the windows world. Thrive in fact.

but

I'm also a 'Windows guy' - and I survive quite well in the Linux world. Thrive there too, come to think of it.

So, if somebody like me (who is bright and technically astute, but by no means a genius) can straddle both environments without breaking a sweat - why does the press feel so obliged to continuously harp on the non-existent chasm between the two platforms?

The difference in the userland experience between the two is more a matter of style (and habit) than anything else.

zridling · « **Reply #17 on:** January 21, 2009, 04:45 PM »

...if somebody like me (who is bright and technically astute, but by no means a genius) can straddle both environments without breaking a sweat - why does the press feel so obliged to continuously harp on the non-existent chasm between the two platforms?
-40hz (January 18, 2009, 01:02 PM)

I understand the deeper implications of free software arguments vs. proprietary ones. However, maybe it's a stage the computer world is going through. Other comparisons aren't as intense (BMW vs. Mercedes, for example). Or perhaps it's like addiction vs. a former addict. I used to smoke (use Windows), now I don't; but "I want everyone in the world to know that smokers suck."

Maybe we'll eventually grow out of it.

wreckedcarzz · « **Reply #18 on:** January 30, 2009, 04:32 PM »

Because of misinformed people stating "OMFG VISTA IS TEH SUX BUT WIN2008 IS SO OMG LEAN!!11! one one"
-f0dder (January 17, 2009, 03:43 AM)

I laughed. Hard.

And if your going for whats "new" and "hot", why not just hop on the Windows 7 wagon? It's relatively stable from what I've heard...

40hz · « **Reply #19 on:** February 01, 2009, 11:10 PM »

And if your going for whats "new" and "hot", why not just hop on the Windows 7 wagon? It's relatively stable from what I've heard...
-wreckedcarzz (January 30, 2009, 04:32 PM)

Actually, Win7's remarkably stable from what I've experienced.

Got one oddball lockup (under 64-bit) shuffling multiple ISO images back and forth on a 500GB external hard drive. But other than that, no showstopper issues to date.

But here's something truly weird. (At least for me.)

After running Win7 as my primary OS since the 10th of this month, I finally switched back to WinXP-SP3 and Linux (UbuLTS v8.0.4-2) for day-to-day use on January 31st.

But once I did, I discovered that:

1. I no longer like WinXP anywhere near as much as I used to.

2. I now vastly prefer to use Linux as my primary OS to the exclusion of XP or Win7.

Prior to my 20-day trial of Win7, my 'affections' were divided equally between XP and Linux.

Now I find myself no longer wanting to use Windows (XP or Win7) at all. Suddenly, both are feeling stiff and inelegant.

Somehow I got turned off to the whole Windows 'experience' despite genuinely liking Win7.

Is that happening to anybody else?

Paul Keith · « **Reply #20 on:** February 01, 2009, 11:32 PM »

Is that happening to anybody else?
-40hz (February 01, 2009, 11:10 PM)

I'm not sure if it's the same but it could be a case of moving from an old software to a new software back to an old software. Kind of like using Opera and then back to Firefox and then back to IE. It just feels different.

I haven't tried Win7 though but in the short time I've tried Linux, it really made me want to jump ship to Linux and every flaw of Linux started to get magnified compared to XP because it's all new age especially with major distroes.

The thought of the more you know the OS, the lighter you can tweak your computer because of the terminal
Key-board centric editors
LiveCDs with no registration
Separate user folders
The wonders of multiple file systems and the argument around each one
Software repositories
More modern look and if it's dated, it's usually guaranteed faster than XP

The list goes on and on even though you can get some if not many functionality back in Windows, the whole idea of a guaranteed free OS that's as good as a Mac pre-installed looms over your shoulders.

I think it's for this same reason that many of the press complain about the gap. They are secretly Linux lovers if not at the very least Ubuntu lovers when they try Linux and they often found Linux to be a more comfortable fit to them than Windows and the appeal of constantly testing what new juicy features a distro might have released in the next version tickles their software testing tastebuds. Then the downsides starts to sink in. Hardware detection problems. Lack of professional apps. Weird bugs. Often times just the sheer fact of not just wanting to admit that they didn't look indepth into Linux and just used a virtualized layer or liveCD and that they really aren't the hot shot journalists they think they are when writing the Linux article gets to them. It all culminates to blaming seeing apt-get or typing a pass for sudo/su and seeing the terminal as the core reasons for why Linux isn't for the casual users even though they don't really have a complaint as far as features and it's beyond the core built features and the lack of software support and comfort with the old Windows way of managing things that is getting to them.

Of course, this topic is also talking about Windows Server so I'm not sure if it's relevant to the casual users at all but most press I read often approach Linux on the desktop side since it's generally regarded as a better cheap alternative server OS already.

Ironically this also shows how the modern press is about trying to brainwash society into self-prophecizing society rather than reporting because most of the problems of modern Linux on the desktop is precisely due to the lack of true positive press and not so much the fault of it's current developer base. By true I mean really well-informed and detailed introduction to Linux in normal reporting and not the sort of sensationalistic "self-apologetic" We-tried-it-it-has-problems-but-it's-not-so-bad-pwease-try-it-here's-some-pretty-screenies kind of article writing.

40hz · « **Reply #21 on:** February 01, 2009, 11:55 PM »

Thanks for the input, Paul. I think this is one of those "three pipe problems" I'm going to have to sit down and figure out. There's something about Windows that now has me seriously bugged despite my not knowing exactly what it is.

At least now I have something to ponder if a bout of insomnia hits me tonight.

Still, I hope this 'vibe' goes away. I can't afford the luxury of actively disliking Windows. Especially since a large portion of my livelihood comes from it.