-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

ProfGene wrote:
> linuxlover66@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Sep 8, 5:18 pm, wrote:
>>> I am currently running XP MCE SP2 without any problems at all. AMD
>>> 64bit
>>> 3200, 2 GB RAM, nVidia 6600 GT Video, 250 GB SATA HD. Hauppauge
>>> tuner card.
>>> Vista upgrade advisor says everything is supported and all device and
>>> apps
>>> are fine. My typical work is in SQL Server 2005, VStudio 2005 and
>>> Office
>>> 2007. I use Media Centre occasionally. I am wondering if it is
>>> actually
>>> worth upgrading to Ultimate. I have read about a lot of issues... it
>>> doesn't seem that many peole are very happy with Vista. Any feedback?
>>
>> You should upgrade to Linux and fully utilize the excellent hardware
>> you have.
>> Running total OpenSource software is really the only way to get the
>> freedom from proprietary constraints.
>> Why pay $200 for Vista when you can get Ubuntu for free?
>>
>> Your hardware will scream with Linux.
>>
>>
>>
> If you don't have any problem stick with what you have until you do have
> problems. You should only upgrade if you think there is a real benefit
> from it. XP is fine until you need something else in the future which
> might not be supported by it.

I don't agree fully, but I do in part. There is very good reason to move
to a platform that is free. It sounds like the author is a programmer,
and as such would benefit from the abundance of programming tools
available to UNIX-like systems.

If the user is using visual sudio, then going one of two ways would be
ideal, either Eclipse or gcc/gdb/gvim might suit the user.

Obviously if the user is only making windows software then it's ideal
for hir to continue with a windows testing platform somewhere. Depends
on the user. If it's college work then I suggest the UNIX-like approach.

Also, on another subject of testing. The multi user capabilities of
ctl-alt-fN makes multiple sessions very usable.

But looking to the future, saving 200$ every couple on years ON JUST the
OS makes the free systems very feasible.



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHSfQw4dyr7s6PRYgRAnRAAJ4oxBZhye8cd4//f9RwpShRiXMX7gCfYT+r
wpSjqJGXD5s0wh2AYIB/xfM=
=aBYL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

ed writes:

> ProfGene wrote:
>> linuxlover66@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Sep 8, 5:18 pm, wrote:
>>>> I am currently running XP MCE SP2 without any problems at all. AMD
>>>> 64bit
>>>> 3200, 2 GB RAM, nVidia 6600 GT Video, 250 GB SATA HD. Hauppauge
>>>> tuner card.
>>>> Vista upgrade advisor says everything is supported and all device and
>>>> apps
>>>> are fine. My typical work is in SQL Server 2005, VStudio 2005 and
>>>> Office
>>>> 2007. I use Media Centre occasionally. I am wondering if it is
>>>> actually
>>>> worth upgrading to Ultimate. I have read about a lot of issues... it
>>>> doesn't seem that many peole are very happy with Vista. Any feedback?
>>>
>>> You should upgrade to Linux and fully utilize the excellent hardware
>>> you have.
>>> Running total OpenSource software is really the only way to get the
>>> freedom from proprietary constraints.
>>> Why pay $200 for Vista when you can get Ubuntu for free?
>>>
>>> Your hardware will scream with Linux.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> If you don't have any problem stick with what you have until you do have
>> problems. You should only upgrade if you think there is a real benefit
>> from it. XP is fine until you need something else in the future which
>> might not be supported by it.
>
> I don't agree fully, but I do in part. There is very good reason to move
> to a platform that is free. It sounds like the author is a programmer,
> and as such would benefit from the abundance of programming tools
> available to UNIX-like systems.

Not for developing commercial Windows SW it wouldn't unless its all
server side via LAMP. He could use some of the existing OSS stuff such as eclipse
on Windows too though. Although even with Java apps I would still
develop on the "majority" target platform to be on the safe side.

>
> If the user is using visual sudio, then going one of two ways would be
> ideal, either Eclipse or gcc/gdb/gvim might suit the user.
>
> Obviously if the user is only making windows software then it's ideal
> for hir to continue with a windows testing platform somewhere. Depends

And a Windows compiler and debugger. But you knew that.

> on the user. If it's college work then I suggest the UNIX-like
> approach.

Depends what that work is.

>
> Also, on another subject of testing. The multi user capabilities of
> ctl-alt-fN makes multiple sessions very usable.

As do Gnome/KDE multiple logins.

>
> But looking to the future, saving 200$ every couple on years ON JUST the
> OS makes the free systems very feasible.

Not for a professional where that amount is probably half his daily
programming rate. It *might* cost him more in his time to get used to
Linux than it is worth to him. Yes, Linux can be a great development
system though especially for stuff like LAMP development.

And lets not forget he CAN run Windows XP under VirtualBox or similar
too.

--
When in doubt, do what the President does -- guess.

Hadron wrote:
>
> And lets not forget he CAN run Windows XP under VirtualBox or similar
> too.

An excellent point. I've been a happy vmware user for years and find it
a great environment for Windows software development, especially anything
that might hang, crash, or otherwise corrupt your system. Much easier to
restart a VM session than the entire computer, and restoring a file system
snapshot is likewise easy. The only exception I can think of is
Windows video game development where your 3D rendering speed would
suffer under virtualization. Even then, virtual machines can come in
handy when you want to cross compile to multiple targets.

Cheers,

Thad

AZ Nomad wrote:

> That is no accident. You're supposed to replace not only your OS
> every few years, but all your applications as well.

I don't see new Linux distros shipping old versions of apps.

Moron.

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 11:21:22 -0500, DFS wrote:

> AZ Nomad wrote:
>
>> That is no accident. You're supposed to replace not only your OS every
>> few years, but all your applications as well.
>
> I don't see new Linux distros shipping old versions of apps.
>
> Moron.

I don't see them demanding coin for the new versions. What was your point?



--
This message is brought to you by your Department of Redundancy Department.

* dennis@home fired off this tart reply:

> "Linonut" wrote in message
> news:Tez2j.3083$k27.2596@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
>> * dennis@home fired off this tart reply:
>
>> Linux is getting nowhere? Where do /you/ work?
>
> Where there are a *lot* of xp machines.

Me too. In fact, the official desktop infrastructure is all XP.
That doesn't mean the Linux usage isn't increasing significantly here.

It is.

> There is a lot of inertia when a few thousand employees have to be retrained
> even for something simple.

That's always an issue. However, it begs the question of how the few
thousand employees got their retraining when the company migrated from
their Mac/Novell infrastructure to Windows.

> If companies are adopting linux it isn't anywhere I see.

Chat with your sys admins.

> Even the engineering side don't use linux for their unix on PCs.

That's cool. Any UNIX is a good UNIX I say.

> It didn't really have the response characteristics need for real-time jobs
> despite what was said and its much too late for anything we do now even if
> it is better. We use a real-time kernel with a unix subsystem but I forget
> its name.

Check this out:

http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9892

After plugging this interface in to my laptop and configuring it
properly, I have a multitrack hard disk recorder that can
simultaneously record 24 tracks at a maximum sample rate of 96KHz,
well above the maximum available sample rate on far more expensive
commercial HDRs, with more available input tracks.

For realtime, try Ubuntu Studio (for example) or roll your own
realtime.

--
Tux rox!

* Hadron fired off this tart reply:

> I would be seriously interested to see how you build and link Windows
> win32 apps on Linux. I already (elsewhere in my reply) acknowledged that
> LAMP type apps/java yes. I ask because I have never done it. I can
> understand you can get the win32 libraries and headers - but how legal
> is that? And how upto date?

Check out the Mingw project. I'm just getting into it, so I don't know
a lot about it. As far as legality, there's no problem with the
headers, and the DLLs you should have anyway. As far as up-to-date?
That's always a crap shoot with Microsoft. They churn for business
reasons.

>> So it can be more of an issue than you might realize.
>
> As can getting used to a cross compiling set up on Linux with NO visual
> studio to help you.

True. But then you don't /need/ VS anymore. At least, if you're doing
a certain category of apps.

One of our managers told me a bit about our Microsoft-using group. He
said (and maybe this is just manager-speak) that that group used a mashup
of about 6 Microsoft languages to build their product. I doubt Mingw
would help them at all.

--
Tux rox!

"Linonut" wrote in message
newsDD2j.20335$L%6.13707@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
> * dennis@home fired off this tart reply:
>
>> "Linonut" wrote in message
>> news:Tez2j.3083$k27.2596@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
>>> * dennis@home fired off this tart reply:
>>
>>> Linux is getting nowhere? Where do /you/ work?
>>
>> Where there are a *lot* of xp machines.
>
> Me too. In fact, the official desktop infrastructure is all XP.
> That doesn't mean the Linux usage isn't increasing significantly here.
>
> It is.
>
>> There is a lot of inertia when a few thousand employees have to be
>> retrained
>> even for something simple.
>
> That's always an issue. However, it begs the question of how the few
> thousand employees got their retraining when the company migrated from
> their Mac/Novell infrastructure to Windows.
>
>> If companies are adopting linux it isn't anywhere I see.
>
> Chat with your sys admins.
>
>> Even the engineering side don't use linux for their unix on PCs.
>
> That's cool. Any UNIX is a good UNIX I say.
>
>> It didn't really have the response characteristics need for real-time
>> jobs
>> despite what was said and its much too late for anything we do now even
>> if
>> it is better. We use a real-time kernel with a unix subsystem but I
>> forget
>> its name.
>
> Check this out:
>
> http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9892
>
> After plugging this interface in to my laptop and configuring it
> properly, I have a multitrack hard disk recorder that can
> simultaneously record 24 tracks at a maximum sample rate of 96KHz,
> well above the maximum available sample rate on far more expensive
> commercial HDRs, with more available input tracks.
>
> For realtime, try Ubuntu Studio (for example) or roll your own
> realtime.

You misunderstand.. its 24x7x365 real-time high availability computing that
does cost lives if it fails.
There is no comparison to a sound recorder.
I can do 24 tracks on windows so it isn't much of a computing problem, more
of a cost problem as 24 channel firewire interfaces aren't cheap.
That's one of the big problems.. people always think they have done
something similar and that it is easy.. I have broken many Unix machines in
the past where the manufacturer was 100% certain it would work.
Its quite funny when you go to a manufacturer and tell them what you need
and then tell them what they will have to provide to make it work. They
usually start by saying that their machine is the best around and that I
don't need so much power. They usually (as in all but one) look very
sheepish when they fail miserably.

* dennis@home fired off this tart reply:

>> For realtime, try Ubuntu Studio (for example) or roll your own
>> realtime.
>
> You misunderstand.. its 24x7x365 real-time high availability computing that
> does cost lives if it fails.
> There is no comparison to a sound recorder.

I do agree, then. Although I suspect you could whip Linux into that
kind of shape, you definitely want a system tailored to such a strict
task.

And long experience with a given platform outweighs a lot of opinion.

> I can do 24 tracks on windows so it isn't much of a computing problem, more
> of a cost problem as 24 channel firewire interfaces aren't cheap.
> That's one of the big problems.. people always think they have done
> something similar and that it is easy.. I have broken many Unix machines in
> the past where the manufacturer was 100% certain it would work.

They were bluffing. Nothing is 100%.

> Its quite funny when you go to a manufacturer and tell them what you need
> and then tell them what they will have to provide to make it work. They
> usually start by saying that their machine is the best around and that I
> don't need so much power. They usually (as in all but one) look very
> sheepish when they fail miserably.

If you can say it, what kind of product do you do that is so demanding?

--
Tux rox!

"Linonut" wrote in message
news:MjI2j.20507$L%6.10570@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..
> * dennis@home fired off this tart reply:
>
>>> For realtime, try Ubuntu Studio (for example) or roll your own
>>> realtime.
>>
>> You misunderstand.. its 24x7x365 real-time high availability computing
>> that
>> does cost lives if it fails.
>> There is no comparison to a sound recorder.
>
> I do agree, then. Although I suspect you could whip Linux into that
> kind of shape, you definitely want a system tailored to such a strict
> task.
>
> And long experience with a given platform outweighs a lot of opinion.

I find the ones calling linux a toy amusing as I feel os x, linux and
windows are all toys.
They are what you use for quick and dirty when the application is
unimportant i.e. anything internet related, office apps, financial trading,
etc. No matter what people say nothing really bad happens to people if they
fail.
>
>> I can do 24 tracks on windows so it isn't much of a computing problem,
>> more
>> of a cost problem as 24 channel firewire interfaces aren't cheap.
>> That's one of the big problems.. people always think they have done
>> something similar and that it is easy.. I have broken many Unix machines
>> in
>> the past where the manufacturer was 100% certain it would work.
>
> They were bluffing. Nothing is 100%.
>
>> Its quite funny when you go to a manufacturer and tell them what you need
>> and then tell them what they will have to provide to make it work. They
>> usually start by saying that their machine is the best around and that I
>> don't need so much power. They usually (as in all but one) look very
>> sheepish when they fail miserably.
>
> If you can say it, what kind of product do you do that is so demanding?
>
> --
> Tux rox!

* dennis@home fired off this tart reply:

> I find the ones calling linux a toy amusing as I feel os x, linux and
> windows are all toys.

Well, what do you run at home then, that is so /hot/?

> They are what you use for quick and dirty when the application is
> unimportant i.e. anything internet related, office apps, financial trading,
> etc. No matter what people say nothing really bad happens to people if they
> fail.

If you can say it, what kind of product do you do that is so demanding?

Or, at least, what OS does it use?

--
Tux rox!

"Linonut" wrote in message
news:MjI2j.20507$L%6.10570@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..


> If you can say it, what kind of product do you do that is so demanding?

The one thing essential to modern society and responsible for all the major
breakthroughs we use these days.. communications.
Start as telephony and went on to routers, switches, etc. I do like it when
some young upstart tells me how kit I was part of the design team works and
why I am wrong. What these computer whiz kids forget is that it isn't the
kids around know that designed this stuff. ;-)

In article <#8Kz2WMMIHA.2140@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>,
dennis@home wrote:
>
>The one thing essential to modern society and responsible for all the major
>breakthroughs we use these days.. communications.

When I worked on Datakits they ran a stripped unix kernel. They
still use those things, don't they?

Anyway, it's hardly fair to compare a dedicated embedded system
with a general purpose operating system. Might as well criticize 5ESS's
because they don't run X windows.

* dennis@home fired off this tart reply:

> "Linonut" wrote in message
> news:MjI2j.20507$L%6.10570@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..
>
>> If you can say it, what kind of product do you do that is so demanding?
>
> The one thing essential to modern society and responsible for all the major
> breakthroughs we use these days.. communications.
> Start as telephony and went on to routers, switches, etc. I do like it when
> some young upstart tells me how kit I was part of the design team works and
> why I am wrong. What these computer whiz kids forget is that it isn't the
> kids around know that designed this stuff. ;-)

People tend to have a narrow view of coding. But it ranges from
microcode to middleware, and we each have our own sweet spot.

--
Tux rox!

dennis@home wrote:
>
> Hardware upgrades are capital..
> software upgrades are revenue.
> There are ongoing costs with software whether its free or not.
> The customer has to decide which will cost him more over the time period he
> deems to be suitable.
> This doesn't always work out to be the free software.
> If you think it does then I wonder what your credit card balance looks like?

Actually you can treat software as a capital expenditure, though it
is often expensed (I assume that is what you mean by the cryptic
'software upgrades are revenue'). And yes, deciding which software
to purchase is more about long term costs than initial purchase.
In my case, Linux wins on both counts. In my experience, Windows
requires more effort to maintain and secure than Linux. Upgrades
are more difficult in Windows and result in more downtime. I've
converted the entire office and my home to Ubuntu desktops and it
has been smooth sailing ever since.

And for those that worry about retraining... our system
administrator used to be a Windows only guru. She had no trouble
moving to Ubuntu and is now a bigger Linux advocate than me.

Oh, and I don't carry balances on my credit card. :P

Later,

Thad

"Linonut" wrote in message
news:vnL2j.3167$vt2.2169@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
> * dennis@home fired off this tart reply:
>
>> I find the ones calling linux a toy amusing as I feel os x, linux and
>> windows are all toys.
>
> Well, what do you run at home then, that is so /hot/?

Its obvious what I run at home.. windows, Linux and something I have
forgotten the name of. I have already stated these.

>> They are what you use for quick and dirty when the application is
>> unimportant i.e. anything internet related, office apps, financial
>> trading,
>> etc. No matter what people say nothing really bad happens to people if
>> they
>> fail.
>
> If you can say it, what kind of product do you do that is so demanding?
>
> Or, at least, what OS does it use?

Something proprietary.

"the wharf rat" wrote in message
news:figisv$klm$1@reader1.panix.com...
> In article <#8Kz2WMMIHA.2140@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>,
> dennis@home wrote:
>>
>>The one thing essential to modern society and responsible for all the
>>major
>>breakthroughs we use these days.. communications.
>
> When I worked on Datakits they ran a stripped unix kernel. They
> still use those things, don't they?
>
> Anyway, it's hardly fair to compare a dedicated embedded system
> with a general purpose operating system. Might as well criticize 5ESS's
> because they don't run X windows.
>

Why is it unfair?

dennis@home wrote:

>
>
> "Linonut" wrote in message
> news:vnL2j.3167$vt2.2169@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>> * dennis@home fired off this tart reply:
>>
>>> I find the ones calling linux a toy amusing as I feel os x, linux and
>>> windows are all toys.
>>
>> Well, what do you run at home then, that is so /hot/?
>
> Its obvious what I run at home.. windows, Linux and something I have
> forgotten the name of. I have already stated these.
>

It is obvious that you are lying

You run Windows and Vista
You have never run anything else
--
Warning: 10 days have passed since your last Windows reinstall.

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, dennis@home

wrote
on Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:33:15 -0000
:
>
>
> "the wharf rat" wrote in message
> news:figisv$klm$1@reader1.panix.com...
>> In article <#8Kz2WMMIHA.2140@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>,
>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>
>>>The one thing essential to modern society and responsible for all the
>>>major
>>>breakthroughs we use these days.. communications.
>>
>> When I worked on Datakits they ran a stripped unix kernel. They
>> still use those things, don't they?
>>
>> Anyway, it's hardly fair to compare a dedicated embedded system
>> with a general purpose operating system. Might as well criticize 5ESS's
>> because they don't run X windows.
>>
>
> Why is it unfair?
>

It may depend on what one considers "fair". Microsoft,
presumably, would love to ensure that all systems run some
variant of Windows, which is flexible enough (barely) to
come in all sorts of editions:

- Windows Vista Embedded Edition (hypothetical; for non-network
devices such as cheap dictionary lookup units and toasters)
- Windows Vista Mobile Edition (hypothetical; for phones and such)
- Windows Vista Starter Edition (low-cost, low-capability; get them
hooked early and often)
- Windows Vista Home Basic/Home Premium/Media/Ultimate Edition
(home user, if one can consider these usable)
- Windows Vista Business/Enterprise Edition (business desktop)
- Windows Longhorn xxx Edition (servers)
- Windows Longhorn SQL Server (hypothetical)
- Windows Longhorn IIS
etc.

and that Microsoft tracks each and every file -- sorry,
document -- that goes through any of their systems, for
proper remuneration.

That would be very fair (read: favorable) to Microsoft;
of course others such as the EU and Richard Stallman might
have a slightly different opinion, of course. :-)

So what, precisely, does "fair" mean in this context?

As it is, the comparison may or may not be meaningful --
but one can compare, say, a transistor to a supercomputer
along the lines of Deep Blue, by using a metric (size,
power consumption, number of switchings per second, RAM
storage capability, ambient noise, cost, etc.).

The microprocessor in particular is embedded into all kinds
of products, such as microwaves, phones, and coffeepots;
it turns out this is cheaper than custom circuit design
at the discrete or the SSI circuit level.

In an ideal (for Microsoft) world, Microsoft would reap
the difference between that cost and the cost of a custom
circuit design, for each such designed product, minus a
tiny stipend to make it worth the manufacturer's while.
Microsoft would then grant a license to use Windows Vista
whatever Edition on each unit of that product, and the
manufacturer would then install an image thereon.

And Microsoft would live happily ever after (until the
microwave crashes and cannot be rebooted, perhaps).

Additional considerations such as recipe downloading,
coffee brewing habits, toaster settings, and TV shows
viewed might be useful to Microsoft as well, or to
vendors looking to pay advertising revenue to targeted
markets, and then placing ads for those markets (e.g.,
"Buy So-And-So's Pies" on the microwave display[*] every
time one closes the door).

Does Linux allow for such a model? No. It's not
controlled tightly enough, outside the kernel level.

(Good thing, too!)
[*] assuming pixel-based displays a la mobiles become
cheap enough to replace the 8- or 16-segment affairs now
in common use.

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
"Woman? What woman?"

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com