SuSE 7.3 vs XP

rutledjw writes: "This should be good for some flame wars. A story on HPWorld that I read about on NewsForge gives an interesting comparison between XP and Linux. I personally think the story wanders a little and wouldn't call it comprehensive, but it is interesting. It does point out a particular bottleneck in how the 2.4.x kernels handle asynchronous IO. Apparently this is being addressed in the 2.5 kernels..." It actually appears quite low-flame and balanced, and unlike some Linux vs. Windows comparisons, goes into decent detail rather than just glib generalizations.

Comments

Suse go bad

[Graspee_Leemoor]

I stopped using Suse when they kept releasing broken distros- e.g. gnome apps have user-interface issues in 7.2...

graspee

Re:Suse go bad

[AgTiger]

The 7.2 SuSE Distribution had definite problems. At our company, we kept all of our servers at 7.1, after hearing about and then experiencing problems with upgrades and installs with 7.2.

Because we waited a bit, and did some tests first, we weren't bitten.

However, seeing these kind of "not quite ready for prime time" errors ALMOST soured us on SuSE. Almost.

We concluded that from time to time _every_ distribution is going to have a less than stellar release, and well, that's just life and business. We concluded that we'd follow the same cautious pattern where 7.3 was concerned when it came out.

When 7.3 was released, we purchased it and did a bit of initial testing. We waited until it was available via rsync from the major mirrors and set up an in-house mirror of the 7.3 tree, and waited a bit longer to allow many more users to install from the ftp sites. Then we waited to see what kind of horror stories about installs/upgrades would show up on the SuSE mailing lists or the usenet news groups. There were very few.

We upgraded most of our main servers to 7.3, all of our workstations, and so far, everything's been running _really_ nicely.

Now for the fun part: Using VMWare 3.0 Workstation for Linux, we can run Windows operating systems like Windows 2000 Professional or Windows XP Professional if that's what a project we're working on for a client calls for. We refer to it as "Windows, in Jail", complete with the jokes to "Hi Dad, I'm in Jail" from the Was-Not-Was song. :-)

For us, it can be SuSE 7.3 and XP at the same time, but we let Linux control the underpinnings.

Oh: Tip to those wanting to go this route: Use the IDE-SCSI module, and configure your CDRom and DVD-Rom drives as SCSI drives and access them as virtual SCSI devices in Raw mode. This solves the infuriating problem of horridly slow access to the drives under VMWare when accessing drives in raw mode.

Re:Suse go bad

[DocSnyder]

SuSE's success is based on the distribution's quantity, not its quality. A few years ago, my coworkers and I made industrial servers based on
SuSE.

Very soon it was quite clear that you can't rely on any release of SuSE's distributions. Good choices in 1998/1999 were 5.3 and 6.2, in between that there was a major libc change (6.0 to 6.1) which messed everything up.

My nowadays coworkers tried SuSE 6.4 to 7.3, with especially the 7.3 sucking hell. They complained about (GNU/)Linux being slower on a P800 than Windoze on a P100. As I know that in such case something must be wrong, I checked it. After startup, "updatedb" was running, eating plenty of system ressources away from the user's frontend while indexing a 20 GB harddisk. After about 20 minutes ("updatedb" was still running), the user gave up and rebooted into Windoze... After me stopping that job, the box was about as fast as it is on Redmondware.

Our old file servers still run SuSE (dunno which version), with the system being about in the same state when the box was installed. No matter how easy it could be to upgrade the packages to current versions, nobody dares to risk fscking up a box with inconsistent packages obtained through auto-upgrade.

Now I'm using Debian and the problems are gone. You can rely on _any_ release, that is, from the stable (Potato) branch and in most cases from testing (Woody). Even the Unstable branch is more consistent than some SuSE distributions I used to play with. Debian is more difficult to install than SuSE, but it is much more easier to maintain if you know what to do.

People migrating from SuSE to Debian is only bad for SuSE, but people migrating vom SuSE to Windoze is bad for us all.

Re:Suse go bad

[xtremex]

Can't you just disable updatdb? It's a cron job. mandrake 8.1 does the same thing. You only need it if you use the locate command. I do my own updatedb if I need to.

Re:Suse go bad

[DocSnyder]

Can't you just disable updatdb?

I know how to disable updatedb, but John Doe certainly doesn't.

Re:Suse go bad

[woolite]

This comment is right on the spot.

We are running SuSE 7.0 on file servers and workstations and there is absolutely no trivial way to upgrade without breaking the system. I even went as far as creating an identical copy of the running system on fresh hard disks on a different machine to migrate while the old system keeps running. No way could I get it to work without investing a week to get into every issue which needs to be solved on upgrade.

As far as I am concerned money invested in a new SuSE distros is wasted - the 7.1 is sitting here idle already.

With the same time effort one might as well install everything from scratch from any distro to stay reasonably uptodate with Linux.

On the Linux based firewall we have now switched to IPCop, after running briefly Mandrage SNF and discovering that it stops the intrusion detection every other day and is impossible to update too. On the Mandrake forum the developer even went as far as saying that the 8.1 SNF will be a completely new product and not some update of the current version. This is fucking great - another reinstall from scratch.

One really has to wonder what some of these Linux distributors are up to these days. One gets the distinct impression that they are more interested in churning out a fresh release every other month than getting their systems stable and serviceable.

The attitude is already worse than Microsoft's - at least their updates don't usually screw up the system.

Re:Suse go bad

[glumchum]

Heh, this box had anacron installed. Updatedb normally runs from cron at 4 AM when everyone is in bed. But anacron tries to "catch up" when you boot any crons that were missed when the box was asleep. I just don't install anacron, since I have no cron jobs which absolutely have to run every day.

Re:Suse go bad

[Rydia]

I'm using SuSE 7.2 right now... have been since its release, and have had about as many user-interface issues as I have with my toaster.

better?

[spottedkangaroo]

Who cares which one is faster, or better, or more stable. Seriously. I just plain don't like Windows. I dare them to address that. I think I can sum it up: I was typing the other day... a window poped up. Something had happened. I inadvertantly hit enter (since I was already typing) and as a result, still don't know what the message said... Well, that and I lost what I was typing. The irritation factor was a 9.6.

Cygwin almost works... I use that at work. But it's all slow and icky. I've known for a million years that ext2 is slow, but I like that filesystem a shatload more than some of the faster ones... Mostly, I think that's because I know how it works. I can look it up. ls -l shows me a bit more under linux, ya know?

Re:better?

[alsta]

I thought ext2 was pretty fast. How you've known this for such a long time is beyond me, but obviously you know something that I don't.

And which one is faster, better and more stable seems to count quite a bit. If the tables were turned and Linux cost lots of money but Windows was free, and stability issues and things were solved, I would probably be a Windows user today. What you complained about, some message popping up and you losing all your text, tends to be a stability issue. No?

Re:better?

[silvaran]

Microsoft addressed that in Windows 2000 - the dialog must have popped up as a child of the active window. In 2000 and (I believe) ME and anything later, the window will appear in the background, while its title bar and taskbar will flash indicating that there's a new window that needs addressing.

You'll get the same problem in X apps under Linux - provided the dialogs popup from the active application; other than that you can always adjust your window manager preferences so new popups don't get the keyboard focus.

I had an identical problem back with Windows NT4; I was typing in ICQ and two dialogs, entirely separate from ICQ, popped up. I incidentally hit the spacebar in the midst of typing and dismissed both of them without reading what they were.

Essentially, if dialogs are popping up while you're typing, it's probably an interface issue with the application, not with Windows XP. I'm not a GUI wizard or anything, but I prefer text entry fields to validate when you click "OK" as opposed to while you're typing.

I dislike Windows as much as the next person, but I need it for development. If it wasn't for my job, I'd eliminate it entirely. But putting up with Windows is less grief than going without a job, especially with the current economy.

Other than that, complaining about intermittent dialogs is just nitpicking, and shouldn't decide your final decision on any OS.

Re:better?

[spottedkangaroo]

No, I was saying that linux is stable enough, it's fast enough, and windows irritates me to no end.

I can't really tell which one is faster... and for me, windows crashes a lot, linux stays up forever... I keep hearing that XP is more stable...

Who really cares was my point. Windows irritates me and I'm happy with linux. *shrug* So I keep reading these blurbs and wondering ... who really cares? Use what ya like.

Re:better?

[CatherineCornelius]

I think I can sum it up: I was typing the other day... a window poped up. Something had happened. I inadvertantly hit enter (since I was already typing) and as a result, still don't know what the message said... Well, that and I lost what I was typing. The irritation factor was a 9.6.

This is a serious usability problem in my view, and one that isn't restricted to Windows. With task bars and all manner of other ways to display important information nowadays, there really is no excuse for a GUI system that permits applications to grab focus for a modal dialog whilst the user is typing.

Re:better?

[iapetus]

You think that's bad - a friend of mine borrowed his brother's PC to check his e-mail. While he was typing a response, the huge download his brother had been carrying out in the background finished, and IE popped up the dialogue copying the file from its temporary location to the selected download location - of course, this appeared over the telnet session my friend was using, and the next time he hit space the cancel button was pressed, resulting in the whole download being lost (no it wasn't cached - the file was much larger than the maximum cache size). A triumph of good user interface design. :)

Re:better?

[Troed]

Uh no. I run Win2K both at home and at work and this happens all the time. It has to be application-dependant.

Re:better?

[h2so4]

Not totally sure if it's what you want, but TweakUI (part of XP Powertools) handles something like this.

In the General->Focus screen there is an option "Prevent applications from stealing focus".

According to this, MS has decided to pull them for now though (speculate speculate :)
You can still get them at the usual places, download.com etc.

Re:better?

[lunatik17]

Well the thing is, under Linux this would be handled by the window manager. Window focus is highly configurable, and if you don't like how it's handled you can change it. You can specifically set whether a child window can grab focus or not. It's not really a user-friendliness issue, just a misconfiguration issue. As with most problems people have with Linux, it's not really a problem with Linux itself, just a problem with the default configuration.

Re:better?

[LoonXTall]

Something had happened. I inadvertantly hit enter (since I was already typing) and as a result, still don't know what the message said... Well, that and I lost what I was typing. The irritation factor was a 9.6.

What do you call a 10.0 then? Having Javascript steal focus from a password box so you unwittingly end up as user "loonxtallssword" with pass "pa"?

AIM's annoying like that, too. And UNIXen aren't necessarily better--Slowlaris likes to put things on your current workspace when they raise themselves. Stay where I put you! I guess my main gripe in UI design is that they aren't designed to respect the user's wishes.

Re:better?

[spottedkangaroo]

I do in fact have that set... it's a kludge, works most of the time; but doesn't work for modal windows and free dialogs.

Nice try.

Re:better?

[WhiteKnight07]

If you don't like ext2 then use something else, its not like linux only supports 1 good file system like some other os's. *cough*windows*ntfs*cough* Take RiserFS for example, it has excelent performance and is journalizing.

Re:better?

[madmaxx]

Modality is an incredibly evil paradigm ... but removing it entirly (which I do using Gnome or *step) has some reverse flaws. When want a dialog to take focus, it doesn't - it is really a context thing (file open, vs. a message dialog).

I really think that message boxes for information are a twit's solution. The framework should support some flexible non-modal way of informing/querying the user. I want the information, but it can f*cking wait until I am finished what I am doing now.

Re:better?

[iapetus]

No, it is not always there. Obviously, because it wasn't in this case. If you look at the internet options in IE you'll see that there's an upper limit on the size of that folder - this file was about an order of magnitude larger than that size. Hence the insta-delete.

Slashdotted already?

[/ASCII]

Can't read the article. That was quick!

Re:Slashdotted already?

[leuk_he]

OK, then we have only the article subject:

-Everyone who thinks XP is best post on the left.
-Everyone who thinks Linux suse with patch xxx.xx is just as fast post right.
-Everyone who thinks DMCA is bad post on an other article. 8)

By the way, the article loads, but some link on the page fails. just press cancel and the text is there. or disable images and it goes fine

Don't mod this up(i am already karma capped), just post a good mirror
------------

Home >
Publications >
HP World >
Lab Report
Volume 5 Issue 2
Wizards and Windows
XP and Linux Go Head
to Head on Two HP OmniBook 6000s

by Jack Fegreus
While releasing Windows NT 4.0,
Redmond's Hexenmeisters were already dreaming of code convergence
with Win9x. But such black magic often goes beyond what apprentice sorcerers can handle.
Long, long, long before that
upstart Harry Potter, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe wrote "Der
Zauberlehrling," a poem about a sorcerer's apprentice. Just
over 100 years later, that poem would inspire Paul Dukas to compose
his tone poem, the "Sorcerer's Apprentice." And some
50 years after that, Walt Disney, Leopold Stokowski and Mickey
Mouse would forever immortalize the tale of the hapless student
of the black arts in Fantasia.
It's a tale now playing out in
real life with the release of Windows XP, which for the first
time extends the reach of Windows NT technology into the consumer
market via the Home Edition. Like all good Gothic tales, this
one begins with the protagonist being driven from his home in
a swirl of deep and murky politics. As the Hexenmeister of DEC
West walked away from the Prism debacle, he turned his attention to the even bigger mess with OS2 at Microsoft. Once again, the
wizard worked his magic, and there arose an extraordinary, modern
IT operating system that evolved into the utterly rock-solid
Windows 2000.
Nonetheless, the success and
extraordinary adoption of Windows NT technology by IT is hardly
resounding compared to the mass consumer market for games and
other entertainment. And so the keepers of Windows 9x lusted after the stability of Windows NT just as Goethe's sorcerer's apprentice longed for the power of his teacher.
The Linux revolution greatly
exacerbated the Windows 9x problem as the master's thesis project
of Linus Torvalds turned first into a cult phenomenon and then
into a successful commercial OS. Now, with open source rising
up as the business-alliance tsunami of the century, Microsoft
for the first time in a very long while faces both fundamental technology and business model challenges.
The Convergence Challenge
The technical challenges to converging
Win9x and WinNT were prodigious. Just consider the polar-opposite, fundamental assumptions that underpin both architectures. Win9x
was designed for just a single hardware architecture: Intel.
As a result, it was also designed to permit driver developers
to tweak the underlying hardware right down to the iron. And
that's just what all those makers of the video, sound and game
port cards that proliferate in the home computer space did.
On the other hand, Windows NT
was born in an IT market that was trying to rationalize an explosion
in RISC technology that seemed to be racing away from Intel.
The problem was not how to get down to the iron but, rather,
how to avoid getting near it. The solution was to create a Hardware
Abstraction Layer (HAL) that would prevent any software--especially
drivers--from directly manipulating physical hardware. In this
way, Windows NT could be easily ported to Alpha, MIPS and PowerPC,
as well as Intel. It is, therefore, not without some irony that
Windows XP runs on Intel, while Linux runs on everything from
handheld PDAs to classic mainframes.
So the first major technical
hurdle was to create a unified driver model. To gauge Microsoft's
success with this part of the challenge, OpenBench Labs set up
a pair of identical HP OmniBook 6000 systems, which are representative
of typical high-end business laptops. Each system was powered
by an Intel Pentium III CPU clocked at 700 MHz. Each was configured
with 256 MB of PC133 SDRAM and an IBM TravelStar Ultra ATA disk
drive. In addition, technicians further complicated the equation
by setting up three hardware configurations for each laptop:
standalone, a simple port-replicator dock and a fully equipped
dock with embedded SCSI and ATA adapters.
On one OmniBook 6000, lab technicians
installed Windows XP Pro, the successor to Windows 2000 Professional
for business client computers. On the other OmniBook 6000, they
installed SuSE Linux 7.3, which is the latest distribution from
SuSE and is built on the Linux 2.4.10 kernel and version 2.2.1
of the KDE desktop.
Good News for SuSE
This HP World Lab Report
will be looking at SuSE 7.3 and RedHat 7.2 in much greater detail
in a future review. For now, simply running the various OpenBench
Labs benchmark programs on each OS allowed technicians to gauge
how closely Linux and the open source business model have evolved
in providing OS distributions with equivalent performance at
a fraction of the cost.
As a side note, SuSE 7.3 installed
effortlessly and, more important, flawlessly on the OmniBook.
No need for an exhausting "installfest" with the latest
version of SuSE--if you have a DVD drive, the installation is
downright trivial.
A lot of this good news is a
direct result of a number of enhancements to YaST2, SuSE's configuration
tool. A number of the noteworthy additions include a Logical
Volume Manager for partitioning an active system and ISaX for carrying out windows configuration while the X Windows system
is active. (Microsoft has touted similar features in Windows
NT since the launch of the OS.) For IT, there is support for
a second journaling file system, JFS, as well as ReiserFS, which
has long been a SuSE staple. There is also a new module for software
RAID support. Not to slight home users--after all, the big seller
for Microsoft will be Windows XP Home--SuSE has included a setup
for TV cards and the automatic detection and configuration of
IDE-based CD burners.

CPU Benchmark
With both laptop systems configured,
lab personnel were ready to calibrate the OmniBook's base CPU,
memory and streaming I/O performance under each OS. Technicians began with their CPU benchmark, which executes 34 numerically
intensive kernels, both integer and floating point. The results
here were very much in line with OpenBench Labs' first tests
of the Linux 2.4 kernel near the beginning of the year.
At that time, HP found the performance
gap between Linux and Windows 2000 to have been closed to about
18 percent from previous observations, which had been in the
range of 20 to 25 percent. Once again, the difference between
the geometric means for the 34 kernels was on the order of 18 percent, with Windows XP Pro clocking in at 240 and SuSE 7.3
clocking in at 203. Nonetheless, within a 95 percent confidence
interval, performance was almost identical. This is a function
of more variability in performance among the 34 kernels when
run on Linux. The variability is especially prevalent on the
high end since a number of kernels execute significantly faster
on Linux than Windows XP.
On SuSE 7.3, technicians utilized
a logical volume formatted with the Reiser File System (ReiserFS),
which is a journaled, extent-based file system. In theory, a
journaled file system should have an edge in performance when
checking the file during boot-up and when issuing writes. Reads
are supposedly more vulnerable to degradation due to fragmentation
of the extents. Nonetheless, for small block transfers, Linux
now held an advantage over Windows XP Pro. For sequential disk
I/O, it was Windows XP Pro that rapidly converged on SuSE 7.3,
which delivered throughput on the order of 15 MB per second as
read sizes grew larger than 8 KB.
I/O Benchmark
The final benchmark characterizes
the system's capabilities for transaction-processing database
operations. The fundamental goal of the load benchmark is to
determine how many I/O requests per second a given disk subsystem
can reasonably support.
The OpenBench Labs' load benchmark
suite systematically launches an increasing number of I/O-intensive
daemon processes that read data in 8-KB blocks from a physical partition rather than from a file. I/O operations are performed on both hot-spot regions, which simulate database indices, and
randomly across the volume, which simulates a large database.
When the average access time of all of the processes exceeds
100 milliseconds, the I/O subsystem is deemed saturated and the
benchmark terminates with a report to the user.
As the graph shows, large volumes
of asynchronous I/O requests are currently a weakness in Linux
performance. On the OmniBook's simple ATA drive, Windows XP Pro
was able to deliver 70 I/Os per second with an average access
time of only 40 milliseconds. In comparison, Linux was able to deliver only about 32 I/Os per second. With hardware RAID and
storage on a SAN, this performance differential worsens dramatically.
The problem lies squarely within
the block I/O layer of the Linux kernel. In the current version
of the Linux kernel, 2.4.x, the I/O subsystem works with a single
spinlock, called io_request_lock. As a result, in a TP scenario
with hundreds of independent I/O requests queuing up, this spinlock serializes operations that have no dependencies and creates a
significant bottleneck.
This is all being addressed by
those working on the I/O subsystem in the 2.5 kernel now under
development. The new block I/O code eliminates the central spinlock
and provides each request queue with its own lock. In addition, the new kernel will work more with page structures, which can
be particularly advantageous when handling clustered requests
from the raw I/O layer.

The Dangers of Wizardry
The labs' experience in actually
using Windows XP Pro was not unlike that of Goethe's hapless
student. The problems all stemmed from Microsoft's "soft"
problem in converging Win9x with WinNT: How do you give naive
home users an OS as powerful as WinNT and expect them to properly configure and manage the system? The answer from Redmond's Zauberlehrlingen
was to create automatic wizards to take care of all the problems.
These wizards should work nicely in a simple SOHO environment;
however, in a complex, heterogeneous business network, they can become a very dangerous bunch.
A prime example of a wizard run
amuck is the upgraded Connect-to-the-Internet wizard. Once a
very innocuous fellow, this wizard has been put on steroids in
Windows XP. The new wizard looks for multiple Ethernet connections,
such as the built-in 100-Mbit port and the wireless Ethernet
PC Card that are in each OpenBench Labs OmniBook 6000. Once a wizard finds more than one NIC, the fun really starts. Without a moment's hesitation, the wizard assigns one address to all of the NICs and proceeds to bridge the offending LAN segments.
Imagine the effects of that cavalier action as the desktop PC
tries to build bridging tables for the LAN. On HP's network,
which has a number of Macs running AppleTalk in the art and production
departments, all of the Macs were instant goners.
While dramatic, that was the
least of the problems. At least that could be fixed by blowing
up the bridge. Not all of the wizardry was so easily reversible.
On each laptop, technicians had installed AT&T WorldNet for
dialup Internet connectivity while on the road. All configurations
were explicitly set to "Never dial," since most of
the time these systems are used in the office with a LAN connection. Unfortunately, Windows XP, quite unlike Windows 2000, treats
"Never dial" as merely a suggestion that can be ignored.
Whenever a networking application is launched, the OS may--or
may not--decide to launch the dialup application.
Another annoying gotcha for business
users is the dropping of support for Netscape-style plug-in modules
in the XP version of Internet Explorer 6.0. Just try to download
a PDF file from any site on the Web. It's easy as long as you right-click on the link and choose the option to "Save target as." The alternative is to make Opera your default Web browser.

Unfortunately there are even
more bundled add-ons, such as the home movie maker and the MS
Passport Messenger app, that make no sense whatever on a business
laptop and that you can't get rid of no matter how hard you try. Compounding the annoyance factor of these indelible programs
is the need to conserve disk space with Windows XP.
One of the really useful add-ons
for IT is the ability to checkpoint files under Windows XP. Once
again, however, there is a problem with introducing a sophisticated
IT tool to home users. Once again, XP is back to the mystical wizards. Worse yet, the checkpoint wizard, which should be on
steroids, is on sedatives. The only parameter that can be set
for this important function is the maximum amount of disk space
that will be made available for this feature to consume. When
the system creates checkpoints and when the system purges those
checkpoints is pure black magic on Windows XP.
Not-so-simple Solutions
For Goethe's young student, salvation
from the golem brooms came only upon the return of the great
sorcerer. Only the sorcerer knew how to stop the brooms in their
tracks. For Windows XP Pro users, the solution is not quite so
simple. To avoid the chaos of having a robust WinNT system that
is as quirky as Win9x, your best hope is to exorcise every automated
wizard that can be found.
That solution, however, raises
an intriguing issue concerning Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)
for Windows versus open source systems. Until now, conventional
wisdom held that Windows wizards were a key factor in holding
down TCO by countering the initial licensing costs with lower
maintenance costs and lower skills requirements for the maintainers. OpenBench Labs' initial foray into the unconventional world of Windows XP puts that conventional wisdom about TCO into serious
question.

Home |
About Interex |
Press Room |
Volunteers |
Contact |
Media Info |
Management Services
©Copyright 2001 Interex.

All rights reserved.

Privacy Policy.

Contact the Webmaster.

*

Interestin part about TCO at end of the article

[NewbieSpaz]

"That solution, however, raises an intriguing issue concerning Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for Windows versus open source systems. Until now, conventional wisdom held that Windows wizards were a key factor in holding down TCO by countering the initial licensing costs with lower maintenance costs and lower skills requirements for the maintainers. OpenBench Labs' initial foray into the unconventional world of Windows XP puts that conventional wisdom about TCO into serious question."

Why SuSE?

[Lumpy]

I guess you have to pick one, but RedHat, has a more Windows-esque hardware detection system. Hell I can yank out the video card and change it and on reboot the RedHat 7.2 machine will autodetect it and change the X config for it without asking for any technical information. something that SuSE, Mandrake and the likes dont have yet.

Granted a RedHAT install is really bloated compared to the others but if you want to compare apples to apples.....

The whole article could have used a second going over before it was released.

Re:Why SuSE?

[joestar]

For your information, Mandrake Linux 8.1 has the same autodetect mechanism at boot time.

Re:Why SuSE?

[StarTux]

That is very true...Does it reconfigure the Nvidia driver if you upgrade the kernel? Not nit picking as you're updating the kernel and should really know how to do this fix it step...

I prefer SuSE for all the other things it offers, but thats a good point :).

Matt

Re:Why SuSE?

[noodlez84]

As Linux becomes more and more popular, the question becomes more and more important: which distribution should I use? I use SuSE Linux for several reasons. Firstly, it is the most LSB-compliant distribution. It comes with huge amounts of software (6 CDs of binaries for the Professional version, and (arguably) SuSE has the largest security team. SuSE updates are free and released often. Announcements are even GPG-signed. According to LWN.net research, SuSE has the best security after TurboLinux (which much less security-related bugs than RedHat.

On a more subjective note, many consider SuSE to be the most polished distribution, and YaST2 is considered one of the best all-around system configuration utilities.

Re:Why SuSE?

[CynicTheHedgehog]

SuSE prefers KDE, which is arguably more "window-esque" than Gnome, in terms of integration and user interface (Specifially DCOM, and applications such as Konqueror, KOffice, and KDevelop). Furthermore, RedHat lacks GUI tools such as YaST2 (SuSE) and Control Center (Mandrake).

And probably to be fair they picked the distro that you have to pay for (if you want the pretty install).

I've tried all three of the latest offerings from RedHat, Mandrake, and SuSE. In terms of desktop use (not server use), RedHat is seriously lacking in comparion to the latter two, and SuSE is beating Mandrake by a narrow margin with all of its YaST2 modules (NIS, NFS, and LDAP setup wizards, especially).

Re:Why SuSE?

[Pengo]

No, it's just all the support, development and resources come at a cost. If you want free use Debian. They have a true non-profit approach to Linux. Freedom does come at a price though, debian is a little harder to use and the current distribution (stable) is not always the most secure. (They do not always seem to be lightning quick to get a updates into the stable tree).

Anyway, if you want things like that .. you might end up having to pay for it. Do you like Ximians Red Carpet service? Yes.. you are one going to have to pay for it.

God, but calling a boycot on Suse because they want to be compensated for their work is just lame.

Re:Why SuSE?

[cyclist1200]

Please come up with a better argument. Only an idiot would install every package.

Re:Why SuSE?

[Mister Snee]

I remain a Slackware addict as of 8.0 and the only hardware autodetection it handles is for network cards (which is undeniably handy for getting a new box online quickly), which is implemented basically through a crude "modprobe *" which ends when a module loads happily.

Everything else -- configuring X, compiling 3rd-party drivers, hunting down the module and parameter combinations for sound cards, even manually editing isapnp.conf for legacy devices -- somehow feels like a natural part of the process for me.

Of course, I'd probably feel different about it if I spent most of my time setting up desktops rather than servers. Either way, Slackware works fine for me, and it does it without being either presumptious or patronizing. That's all I can ask.

Re:Why SuSE?

[Billly Gates]

SuSe does not seem as polished as redhat or XP and is more buggy on my p700. I had no 3d acceleration for my geforce2 due to some "licensing" reasons. RedHat included the same driver and its free so I wonder what the deal is. Next Gnome was acting strange and was totally unusable. It had a 15 second lag. For example I clicked on home using gnome and had to wait 20 seconds for natulus to open it. Everything else was unbearablly laged. I have no idea what the problem is. I have 320 megs of ram so memory is not the reason. I also had several daemons failed during bootup for some unkown reasons. But what really got my attention was that I could not do kernel compiles without strange things happening and I couldn't get my machine to shutdown properly. I will get to the kernel compile errors in a minute. First, to shut off my system I need to pyhsically unplug it. The off switch will not work. I tried the 2.2 kernels on my system and even without apm support, I could at least hit the power button to shut it down. I tried disabling APM, re-enabling APM with different options and even attempting to recompile the kernel and nothing works. What is weird is that it works fine in failsafe. I fired up vim and changed the default linux entry in /etc/lilo.conf to have the same append arugements as the failsafe option but had no luck. I then even pointed the defualt kernel to the failsafe.SuSE kernel in /boot with the same appends and still no luck. How strange.

Also I have issues when compiling the kernel in SuSE 7.3. Even with a "make bzImage" I always get a "image too big" error when updating lilo or puting it in a deskette. WHen I rebooted I had a big suprise. My system was HOSED! I couldn't even use my orignal "defualt" kernel. All the modules like the "ext3" were not being executed at startup so I couldn't even read the hard drive. My backup could not save me. I had to do a new 2 hour re-install.

It turned out that the "make modules" command currupted all the system modules! Why didn't the recompile place the modules in a new directory under the kernels version number like the other distro's did? Under Redhat or mandrake the defualt kernel modules are placed in a different directory then the default supplied modules so a "make bzImage" corruption would not occur. I read the manual and it mentioned that you NEED TO DELETE ALL THE /USR/LIB/MODULES* FILES TO DO A SUCESSFULL RECOMPILE?? I know this is dangerous and that it may fuck up my system if its not done properly and is quite extreme. I figured what the hell and did and then did a major recompile. Guess what? Image too big error message popped again! I squirmed and did a "make modules" hoping it would place some of the modules back for a successfull Reboot. That went fine and all the modules were copied. I rebooted my machine and I got the chilling "can not find module "ext3" error. I know I compilied "ext3" as a module and yes it was copied! But for some reason it wasn't being used when I rebooted. My system was hosed yet again. At this point I had no idea what the fuck was happening and a whole day had gone by.

How unbelieable it is to suffer through that all because I want to use the "shutdown now -h" command and have a kernel with apm support. WIth this and all the bugs I found in 7.3 I decided to happily put WIndowsXP and Redhat 7.1 back on. Sure redhat may not have a pretty bootup as SuSE but it is sleek, stable, and feels alot more professional and polished. You may hate the distro but redhat goes through great pains making sure its well tested. THe default kernels even used the better VM patch before linus switched to it in the main kernel series. I use to have great respect for suse but I lost it after my 7.3 install. I am not bashing SuSE and trying to start a flame war but just sharing my unfortunate experience with it. No distro is prefect and SuSE has its own problems.

Re:Why SuSE?

[xZAQx]

I'm an ex-SuSE user...it's not SuSE's fault, but I thought I had a memory leak, then I had lockups and I blaimed it all on them...Turns out it was just a hardware issue after all...sorry SuSE. So now I'm using redhat 7.2, and it works great. I do kinda miss YaST2, but redhat has it's own slew of gui config tools, such as Serviceconf..and a whole bunch of stuff under the Utilities->configuration menu of Gnome (I think that's where it is). At any rate, I also wanted to note that I really hate it when people bash SuSE (a lot of super-1337 people on IRC), it's a good distro. Good enough to be a partner of IBM's Linux front, and good enough for anyone else. One big gripe about SuSE: non-standard locations for files, etc. It took a LOT of tweaking/installing to get sourceforge projects to compile because the config scripts could never find the gtk-config script or the QT libraries...big pain...so I had to install gtk+ and QT in order for some things to compile...But at least at the user level, SuSE is Super Easy!

Re:Why SuSE?

[opkool]

When you say that RedHat lacks GUI tools, you probably are talking about old RedHat versions.

I use and like Mandrake. A lot.

But let's be fair. Red Hat Linux 7.2 has GUI configuration tools:

From the "About MySelf" to the "Firewall Configuration", I can count 40 GUI tools under the "System" entry on the KDE menu.

Being a Mandrake User, well, I do not dare to say that Red Hat lacks GUI configuration tools.

Re:Why SuSE?

[dentin]

I have had no problems with any of the things you mention, and your kernel compilation bugs don't even make sense. Barring bad hardware, the most reasonable explanation seems to me to be PEBKAC.

-dentin

Re:Why SuSE?

[CynicTheHedgehog]

I should probably clarify by saying "integrated" or "comprehensive" GUI tools. RedHat seems to follow the traditional Unix philosophy of atomic tools--each is its own separate entity. In YaST2 and Control Center you get more of a "Control Panel" interface where you have centralized control over all of your system settings.

RedHat has a tool for almost anything (i.e. printconf-gui)...they're just not as apparent to me, I suppose.

Re:Why SuSE?

[tomhudson]

Yeah, but the 8.2 beta sucks. It is beta, after all. I was able to get it to kernal panic by sticking a CD with 199 mp3 files into my cd (autodetecton turned off) and then trying to mount the disk. Ugh! Well, that's what betas are for.

Mind you, three things that would make all distros better:

1. give us the option of using the latest 2.2.x kernal
2. get rid of devfs, and give us back MAKEDEVFS (it's in all caps because the original is in all caps - I'm not shouting)
3. get rid of updatedb starting on boot if the machine hasn't run in a few days - 4am is still the best time to run this job.

Re:Why SuSE?

[cascadefx]

I have to agree. I have done the same things in SuSE and never had that problem. In fact, since it is one of the most Linux Standards Base compliant distributions (SuSE is an active member), I have less problems with it when I don't want to use the built-in tools than I do with other systems.

In fact, I recently up graded Mozilla (there isn't a new RPM on SuSE's sight yet) and I used the Redhat RPM from from mozilla.org. To fix any dependencies (since Redhat installs EVERYTHING under /usr), I just linked SuSE's path to Redhats... no problems.

Beyond that... it ships with inetd turned off and a nice interface for dealing with configuration and management of network services. Much nicer than linuxconf.

Re:Why SuSE?

[Isle]

Depends.. Mandrake is horrible unstable.. And behaves generally oddly. In redhat the configuration options you given actually works. Although the need to use nautilus in their default installation makes it virtually unconfigurable on a small machine.

Of couse this is experience from installing on a P133 with 64Mb ram, but I want to scold Mandrake hard for their instability issues. (i had just convinced someone to upgrade their win98 to linux, and decided to try Mandrake on them. That turned out really bad, both with the installation crashing several times and it dialed-up automatically on boot-up no matter what the configuration said.)

Re:Why SuSE?

[xtremex]

Conectiva gives you the option to choose either the 2.2 kernel or the 2.4 kernel. COnectiva is really a mature distro that people should take a look at.

Re:Why SuSE?

[Gizzmonic]

I guess you have to pick one, but RedHat, has a more Windows-esque hardware detection system.

You said it! I switched my home firewall/router
from Debian to Red Hat (just to check it out) and I noticed that RedHat loads the wrong module for one of my ethernet cards and hangs. That's soooo Win95.

I'm not a Linux expert, but I prefer the Debian approach of clearly labeled configuration files that say "Uncomment this if you want it to do X". Windows-type "wizards" exemplify software that thinks it's smarter than its user. I ditched Windows to get away from that, and Red Hat Linux of all places tries to use it? I'm back to Debian, happier and wiser, BTW...

Re:Why SuSE?

[Galvatron]

Except of course, their installer is not GPL'ed. Why escape one proprietary OS for another? Red Hat, Mandrake, and Debian for me, thanks (laptop, desktop, and wearable, respectively).

Re:Why SuSE?

[CynicTheHedgehog]

You have to make money somehow. They have a GPL'd version (YaST1) which isn't pretty, but it's functional. There's nothing revolutionary about YaST2...it's just easier to use. If you like that, then fork over $40 for the system. It's a lot better than the $300 you pay for a comparable version of Windows (as far as features go).

To me this statement is more about free (as in beer) than Free software.

Re:Why SuSE?

[cow ninja]

They don't include the i386 ISO's because they include commerical software. You can download SPARC and Alpha though. This is stated on their site.

Re:Why SuSE?

[penguin_dance]

For your information, Mandrake Linux 8.1 has the same autodetect mechanism at boot time.

FYI: I have used Madrake since 8 came out last May and have upgraded to 8.1. Both had the autodetect for new hardware. I have had no problems using the detection on intstall, but change something out and I suddenly get the "frowny face" when it gets to harddrake in the boot. And it spews gargbage code at me. Now I can configure the hardware fine in KDE on HardDrake, and the machine runs without any problems as far as I can tell, but I can't get rid of the garbage spew at boot up without going through the install process again. The last time I reinstalled (got the 8.1 Transgaming pack for Christmas ;) I've turned off HardDrake running on startup.

YMMV

Re:Why SuSE?

[Sivar]

My mother uses SuSE 7.2. I switched the video card from a Matrox G200 to a G400 and SuSE didn't so much as mention it. It just worked, immediately. (upon reboot, of course)
It may not have better or equal hardware detection compared to RH (I don't know, I don't use RH. Or Linux for that matter) but its hardware detection is there and seems to work pretty well in my experience.
My preferred OS FreeBSD, OTOH, could definitely use some work in the automatic hardware detection front.

Re:Why SuSE?

[Sivar]

As much as I like Slackware (It and Debian are the only Linux distros that I can stand), the reason distros like RH are so popular in servers is because of their tools. When you need to fix a problem "REALQUICK" or need to setup several servers each with a different configuration, it is often quite handy to have such tools.
For those who do not know where to look for every needed option, they are quite handy for configuring now and figuring out later (when needed)
While I definitely agree that manually editing the text files is, in the long run, better--sometimes time constraints make it impractical for all but the most knowledgeable Linux admins. Which I am not. :-)

Re:Why SuSE?

[Tony-A]

What? a beta release doesn't work correctly? And this surprises you?
Try it under a non-beta release before you start whining about something not working.

Hell, we expect alpha releases to work correctly for the most part.

Re:Why SuSE?

[bmeiers]

For your information, Mandrake "is" Redhat.

Re:Why SuSE?

[Cerebus]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Debian *stable* security updates go in the tree maintained at security.debian.org.

They are timely, and sources.apt is by default configured to include it.

Re:Why SuSE?

[joestar]

For your information, you are wrong.

Re:Why SuSE?

[saintlupus]

Much nicer than linuxconf

So is prison rape. I can't imagine anyone using that dreadful piece of shit of their own volition.

GUI tools in general give me hives, so I can't claim that I'm totally impartial, but that one has always struck me as particularly horrid.

--saint

Re:Why SuSE?

[bentterp]

RedHat lacks GUI tools such as YaST2 (SuSE) and Control Center (Mandrake)

IMHO, the fact the RedHat bundles LinuxConf instead of rolling their own GUI admin tool is an advantage. It reduces the administrator headaches, in shops that use more than 1 distro.

It would probably be in the interest of the user community, if the ressources going into making admin tools could be pooled. I suppose that distro creaters' ego's would get in the way, though.

Re:Why SuSE?

[cascadefx]

GUI tools in general give me hives, so I can't claim that I'm totally impartial, but that one has always struck me as particularly horrid.

Again, I have to agree. What I like about SuSE, due to its "Standard" compliance, is that you can use the tools or throw them out the window and the system still works. Some systems don't work if you don't use their tools. I have configure things manually under SuSE and then managed them with the GUI and vice versa and it just works.

The one or two times that I have had problems dealt with loading a "REDHAT X RPM" (side note: why don't projects make LSB RPMs that will work with every LSB compliant distribution) and it loads EVERYTHING in /usr. To fix those, I just lndir the directory structure so that other dependencies don't break... and I can still manage that RH RPM with the GUI or CLI tools if I want. That is why I like SuSE.

Re:Why SuSE?

[leviramsey]

FYI: I have used Madrake since 8 came out last May and have upgraded to 8.1. Both had the autodetect for new hardware. I have had no problems using the detection on intstall, but change something out and I suddenly get the "frowny face" when it gets to harddrake in the boot. And it spews gargbage code at me. Now I can configure the hardware fine in KDE on HardDrake, and the machine runs without any problems as far as I can tell, but I can't get rid of the garbage spew at boot up without going through the install process again. The last time I reinstalled (got the 8.1 Transgaming pack for Christmas ;) I've turned off HardDrake running on startup.

HardDrake is useless and is no longer maintained by Mandrake. 8.2 should be getting rid of it entirely.

Re:Why SuSE?

[leviramsey]

1. give us the option of using the latest 2.2.x kernal

You can install Mandrake with 2.4 and then download a 2.2 kernel from Cooker (currently: kernel22-2.2.20-8mdk). I've never done that, so I can't vouch for the method, but it's there (and based on where it appears in the mirrors, it's also on the first CD of Mandrake. But I agree that, at least in expert mode, it should be an explicit option.

get rid of updatedb starting ob boot if the machine hasn't run in a few days - 4am is still the best time to run this job.

I believe that's part of cron (it's actually a feature....). Mandrake may decide not to run it by default in 8.2 final.

GLib?

[iworm]

I didn't see any generalisations about GLib, and certainly no details on it.

Re:Glib?

[tempfile]

Of course. Windows functionality is one of the main features of glib 2. After all, that's what it's for.

"Netscape-style plug-in modules" - HUH?

[Splat]

A very fair assessment and a good article. One minor caveat - Can someone clarify this quote from the article?

"Another annoying gotcha for business users is the dropping of support for Netscape-style plug-in modules in the XP version of Internet Explorer 6.0. Just try to download a PDF file from any site on the Web. It's easy as long as you right-click on the link and choose the option to "Save target as." The alternative is to make Opera your default Web browser."

The last one or two versions of Acrobat Reader I've used have a little "save" button at the top of the toolbar that the PDF opens inside.

Any clue what they're referring to? Sounds like an interesting UI issue if it exists, but I wonder under what conditions it occurs.

Re:"Netscape-style plug-in modules" - HUH?

[zottl]

It means that IE 6 doesn't support Netscape-style plug-ins anymore, it only accepts Microsofts own ActiveX-control format. So you can't open a .pdf in IE6, you have to download it and then start up Acrobat viewer and open it from your harddrive. Maybe Acrobat is available as an ActiveX-control by now, I'm not sure about that

Re:"Netscape-style plug-in modules" - HUH?

[lyonsden]

I believe that they are refering to MS going with only Active-X style plugins. So, it may be that Adobe hasn't released an Active-X Reader plugin yet (I don't use windows, so I don't know for sure). There was a big hulabulu about this because it broke Apple's QuickTime plugin.

Re:"Netscape-style plug-in modules" - HUH?

[arkanes]

IE 6 under XP must be different than IE 6 under other versions, because my Adobe plugin works fine.

Re:"Netscape-style plug-in modules" - HUH?

[silvaran]

I don't quite understand this, it seems poorly researched. I have NEVER had a problem with viewing PDFs under IE; in fact, I can either right-click and "Save Link As..." or click on the PDF and hit the save button in the title bar, as you mentioned.

I can't remember a time when the save button wasn't there. I haven't used Netscape for a very long time, and I find it hard to believe they would stick with strictly Netscape plugins (I've never heard of a PDF Netscape plugin, but I'm probably uninformed), when the Acrobat Reader has such nice integration with Internet Explorer -- even the Netscape-plugin-less one that comes with XP and is touted on Microsoft's download sites.

Re:"Netscape-style plug-in modules" - HUH?

[necr0m]

I'm running XP Pro w/ IE 6 and have never had any problems viewing PDF's on the fly. And unless my memory fails me (which I highly doubt) I never had to install a plugin.

Re:"Netscape-style plug-in modules" - HUH?

[Chanc_Gorkon]

PDF's work, but not all. We have a issue at work where we have a small (1/2 to one page of mostly 10 point text and a small grey bar background) PDF and it will not open in IE at all. Larger ones, even onse of similar page size, but larger because they have more graphics on them print fine, but the small ones don't. It works perfectly in Netscape, but IE it's a mixed bag. We converted the report to HTML instead since most folks look at this report online anyway.

This is not with any specific version of Acrobat either. It's this way on 4 and 5.

Also, I have noticed that once you view a PDF in IE, the acrord32 (I think that's the name) program is still running even after you close the browser. You have to kill it thru the Task manager. This is on 98 and ME anyway. Not sure about XP but I can't see it being any other way.

Re:"Netscape-style plug-in modules" - HUH?

[Kamel Jockey]

I'm running XP Pro w/ IE 6 and have never had any problems viewing PDF's on the fly.

That was my experience as well. Additionally though, the version IE 6 with XP that I use was the "stock" installation that comes with the software. I'm not sure why everyone else is having problems viewing PDFs in IE6/XP ?

Re:"Netscape-style plug-in modules" - HUH?

[DrWho42]

I think it's great that they removed the stupid PDF plug-in at least.. I almost always just right-click the thing and save it anyways, because Acrobat reader takes so long to load and it doesn't work correctly inside the IE client window.. Just try doing Alt-F-P and see what comes out of your printer.. At least before the acrobat plugin it would default to save as, so I could just left click rather than right click and select from the context menu..

Re:"Netscape-style plug-in modules" - HUH?

[zerocool^]

The alternative is to make Opera your default Web browser.

Why would you suggest that opera is the only alternative to IE? Try K-Meleon for a change. I've been using it for months and it rocks my world.

Re:"Netscape-style plug-in modules" - HUH?

[Rob Y.]

No, No, No!

Acrobat is a plug-in whether the document opens 'in the browser' or not.

The issue here is whether the plugin API Acrobat is coded to is the Netscape plugin API or ActiveX.

MS got rid of NS plugins for no other reason than to attempt to limit the number of plugins available for Netscape. Just like they included it in the first place in order to make sure there *were* plugins available for IE when it was starting out.

The difference is that Netscape and the NS plugin API are cross-platform, while in the case of IE, "monopoly is Job 1".

And the WINE analogy is just plain wrong.

Re:"Netscape-style plug-in modules" - HUH?

[pacc]

I tried to install Quicktime and now internet explorer dies totally whenever I find a page using it.

Opera doesn't sound that bad after all.

I have to give some kudos to IE 6.0 for actually supporting international characters when printing - HTML is a much better and structured way for wordprocessing. Now, whenever it's possible to actually print html pages suited for larger windows than 640x480, it could actually be an improvement over the functionality of NS4.6.

What was interesting...

[StarTux]

Was to say how easy it was to install as Linux is percieved very differently in this case. They even mentioned TV card install on SuSE (with a slight jab to Win XP).

Hopefully 2.6 won't be too long in its incarnation, rather than the 2 years or so with 2.4, but 2.5 doesn't seem to be the huge re-write that took place with 2.3.

Matt

Re:What was interesting...

[StarTux]

Well it was close, check the locations etc in 2.4 and 2.2. More than just recompilation, but perhaps complete re-write was a little extreme. Nevertheless it was a large under taking imho.

Matt

MS Passport Messenger

[imrdkl]

make no sense whatever on a business laptop, and that you can't get rid of no matter how hard you try

Perhaps this says something about the direction MS would like to go with Passport?

Re:MS Passport Messenger

[Anonymous Coward]

Very easy to remove, although the method is a complete 180 to the usual windows check box. Edit a file, remove the word "hide", then you uninstall.

Re:MS Passport Messenger

[ScumBiker]

Well, give us the rest. Edit what file? I'd love to remove that stupid ass messenger thing from my laptop. Frankly, I'd love to install Mandrake on my laptop, but then my boss would be pissed. sigh...

Re:MS Passport Messenger

[Matrim9]

Open up c:\windows\inf\sysoc.inf, and find the line:

msmsgs=msgrocm.dll,OcEntry,msmsgs.inf,hide,7

Remove the word "hide", save, and open up Add/Remove Programs / Windows Components, and you can uninstall that little bugger.

Re:MS Passport Messenger

[opkool]

Install Mandrake 8.1, Texstar's KDE 2.2.2, KDE-Look WindowsXP themes and there you go!

Check it out this theme here with those icons here.

He will surelly be fooled :)

Re:MS Passport Messenger

[ScumBiker]

Damn, those look good. To bad we're still an NT shop. There're people here that would have a cow if I even started to install Mandrake on any work owned machine. If you've ever seen a cow get born, you'd understand where I'm coming from. Then again, I could copme in on a Sat. and install Mandrake on my main workstation, then vmware w/ NT 4 in it so I can run that marvelous M$ product called Outlook. One of the most evil products of human creativity ever assembled under one compile.

Re:MS Passport Messenger

[opkool]

Then try the Win2000 theme plus the same Icon theme mentioned before. Also on KDE-look.

And install Evolution. Too close to the look of Outlook.

But one thing will tell them that you are cheating: No BSOD!!

All the best.
Op

Second hand pitchforks

[Anonymous Coward]

As the battle lines are drawen between the Linux and Microsoft armies I would like to offer our new range of services.
Now in stock are our extensive range of pitchforks, which may be ordered with the Tux logo, Microsoft logo, or if you're in the wrong group BSD logo.
Additionally if you order 5 or more pitchforks we will throw in our newest release of "Flaming and Trolling in the Modern Computer Society".
Our final special offer, exclusivly reserved for moderators who are kind to this message is to go round to the zealot of your choice's house, build a huge bonfire and burn them at the stake.

WinLux inc : Making religous wars more fun

Re:Second hand pitchforks

[einhverfr]

Wouldn't the BSD logos be most appropriate for pitchforks?

I think that given another year or two, Linux will start making serious inroads into the workstation market.

The kicker's in the tail

[Rogerborg]

• Until now, conventional wisdom held that Windows wizards were a key factor in holding down TCO by countering the initial licensing costs with lower maintenance costs and lower skills requirements for the maintainers. OpenBench Labs' initial foray into the unconventional world of Windows XP puts that conventional wisdom about TCO into serious question

Well said. I have to admit, when I moved to Suse7.3 about six months ago, I really missed the handy-dandy pop-o-matic wizards that made Win98 such a no-brainer. It was a bitch having to figure everything out from scratch, with FAQ's either stopping too low down the clue scale or starting too high. I very nearly gave up (as I had done with RedHat 6.x a while back), but I stuck with it, and now I'm starting to get a clue.

Then two months ago, I upgraded from Win98SE to WinXP on another machine. I realised that I was suffering Linux cognitive dissonance (overvaluing the utility of it simply because it was hard to learn), and resolved to come to XP with an open mind. I was particularly looking forward to returning to the "one way to do it, it's our way, and we'll do it for you", which (be honest) is what Jane Homebody or Garry Gameplayer(me on that machine) really needs.

But oh dear. What's with the vile animated crap? How do I turn it off? Stop asking me if I want a passport account. Where's the network info? STOP ASKING ME IF I WANT A PASSPORT ACCOUNT. OK, I've set up TCP/IP, but how do I change the workgroup, it's not on the identification tab any more? STOP ASKING ME IF I WANT A PASSPORT ACCOUNT. Where's my single click interface? Hey, I thought I told you to stop animating those menus. No, I've already set up TCP/IP, stop asking me if I want to set up a connection to the internet. It's right there! STOP ASKING ME IF I WANT A PASSPORT ACCOUNT!

Even coming from Win98SE, it took me a long time to get WinXP set up the way I wanted it. If I'd come in cold, it would have been much worse, because I wouldn't even have known the right questions to ask. In all honesty, it's still a little easier than KDE on SuSE7.3, but it's not much easier. The gap has narrowed significantly, and - significantly - it's narrowing from both ends. Linux distros are getting better, but Windows really has got worse.

By trying to hide the inescapable fact that you do need to know what you're doing with WinXP (as you need to know with Linux), Microsoft has actually made it harder for those who do actually have a clue to drive it. How curious.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[necr0m]

While I agree that the animated crap and super-friendly-bubbly-UI is annoying as hell in XP, anyone with any NT/2000 experience won't have a problem in upgrading to it.

If I'd come in cold, it would have been much worse, because I wouldn't even have known the right questions to ask.

In all honesty, coming in from the cold probably would have been easier as you would not have been looking for settings in the 95/98 locations. Anyone who has ever made the switch from 98 to NT or whatever would probably agree that once you learn where the settings are, they are much easier to maintain.

Oh well, just my opinion.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[larien]

My pet peeve is the bit that keeps asking me to set up auto-update; you actually have to "set it up" to tell it to sod off and not bother you again.

Added to this was the hassle I had getting it to play nice with my iPAQ which ended up with me having to use a serial connection, otherwise it would corrupt the filesystem requiring a reinstall. I still have no idea why an application using USB manages to screw up a computer so easily.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[The Pim]

I realised that I was suffering Linux cognitive dissonance (overvaluing the utility of it simply because it was hard to learn), and resolved to come to XP with an open mind. [And then XP sucks.]

That was a really nice revelation. However, I often develop the opposite illusion. When using Linux, and having to do some tedious, unintuitive tweaking, I can't avoid thinking, "It would be so easy to take care of this with a sane config system. I'm sure I wouldn't have to do this in Windows.". But on the occasions I use Windows, I invariably find myself wasting just as much time tweaking, and further getting frustrated at the many things I can't tweak, and the arrogance of a UI that supposes to know better than I. Sure, the baby stuff is easier and more polished, but every foray into Windows reminds me that providing an enjoyable user experince is still a difficult and unsolved problem. This gives me some hope that the race is just getting started.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[pubjames]

I agree.

I'm an XP user (Linux too!) and one thing that really pisses me off is that they've taken away the little icon that used to be bottom left of the screen that would give quick access to the desktop.

Personally I think that it is a good thing to have a simplified desktop for my old ma and pa, but I am what Microsofties might call a 'power user', or I prefer to call an IT professional. I think it would be simple to make it so that when you set up your account on your machine for the first time they ask you "Do you have difficulty using computers?" or whatever and if you reply yes then they give you the simplifed desktop.

I have Windows XP Professional. When I set up my user account it assigned me an icon of a yellow plastic duck. I mean, a bloody yellow plastic duck on a professional level computer! That will really impress my clients. What are MS thinking? But thankfully, this is one configuration option that is easy to change. I can change it from a bloody yellow plastic duck to a fucking green stuffed frog.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[FyRE666]

Anyone who has ever made the switch from 98 to NT or whatever would probably agree that once you learn where the settings are, they are much easier to maintain.

Well I've moved from NT->2000->XP (what can I say, I need it for graphics/animation apps), and I agree with the original poster, I found it more difficult to set up than either of the previous 2 (and harder than RH7.2, but then I spend more time fiddling there I guess).

The ****ing "idiot messages" popping up all over the place, constant nagging from the taskbar about any trivial thing and needing to reboot when changing a simple network setting all succeed in raising my blood pressure a few degrees every day. Yes, I KNOW I just installed a new program, no need to state the ****ing obvious! Adding a new user, I was somewhat surprised to have to go through the network setup "wizard" to add an email account to a machine already connected to the LAN!? Speaking of which, it always picks up its address via dhcp even though I've set it up with a fixed address about 20 times now.

I hate its dumbed down "My First Windows" style of interface, and having to activate the thing. On the plus side, it does have good hardware support - certainly better than 2000. I still prefer KDE though...

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[cheeto]

"... they've taken away the little icon that used to be bottom left of the screen that would give quick access to the desktop."

To minimize all open winodws, press WindowsKey+M. To restore all windows, press WindowsKey+Shift+M. I use Win2k, so I'm not completely sure that this will work in XP.

P.S. To open Explorer, press WindowsKey+E. There's got to be more that I don't know about.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[Krilomir]

That little icon that used to be a the bottom left of the screen was really just a shortcut to the desktop. It's still here (XP Pro), but try WINDOWS_KEY + D on your keyboard instead. You won't need that icon again :)

Also, I see Windows XP more as a Windows ME replacement than a Windows 2000 replacement. Why would a IT professional replace Win2K with XP? XP is mostly just a 2K, except for more eye-candy, a cd-burner, and a few other things.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[pubjames]

Why would a IT professional replace Win2K with XP?

I kind of assumed that because it was called Windows XP Professional that it would be designed for professionals, and that since it was the version after Windows 2000 then it would be better. I know, I'm a sucker and should have read a few reviews first.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[sheldon]

Anyone who was moving from WinNT/2k experience to WinXP would find it trivial.

"By trying to hide the inescapable fact that you do need to know what you're doing with WinXP (as you need to know with Linux), Microsoft has actually made it harder for those who do actually have a clue to drive it. How curious."

I question whether you have a clue if your only previous experience with Windows is Win98.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[sqlgeek]

Yeah, I just got XP Pro on my new 'puter as well. I agree with the first poster's complaints, but yours are pretty easily rectifiable. Under the properties (right-click) of the task bar is a check box to allow you to show the quick launch bar, which contains the "show desktop" icon. There's also a lock/unlock taskbar checkbox that will allow you to move it to another side of the screen, and perhaps more importantly allow your to resize the amount of task bar allocated to the quick launch bar.

Oh, and as for the little yellow duck, I use that for my sys admin account, which I titled "root". :) And it shouldn't be that hard to figure out what folder those images are in and add your own of a skull if you need to.

cheers,
Scott

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[CrayzyJ]

WindowsKey??? My keyboard does NOT (and will never have) a WindowsKey!

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[kaisyain]

If you were really a power user I would hope you'd be able to figure out how to get that icon back. I have it on my WinXP install.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[jarodss]

Oh come on, every "IT professional" AKA leet haxor knows that Windows XP version is all that matters, Windows XP == Windows NT 5.1.2600
FYI 2000 == Win NT 5.0

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[SPiKe]

It is so intuitive to turn off msn messenger.

Go to Start->Run. In the dialog box type "msconfig".

Go to the tab that pertains to start up services. Uncheck msim, or something along those lines.

Enjoy a .NET passport asking free environment.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[Gossy]

Some more I know from the top of my head..

Windows Key + R = Run prompt
Windows Key + F = Find files
Windows Key + M = Minimise all [subtle difference to show desktop]
Windows Key + U = Utility Managager (Narrator etc.)

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[Andrewkov]

Speaking of annoyances in Windows, how the heck do you set it so Internet Explorer always opens new windows maximized? The various browsers on Linux don't have any problems with this, but it's driving me crazy in every version of Windows I use.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[Tony-A]

It's designed for professional suckers!

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[batboy78]

I have never even seen the Narrator until now, that is perhaps the funniest thing I have ever seen. Microsoft just whipped something together to say that they are a friend to the visually impaired. Do people acutally use this?

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[Krilomir]

Excatly. I don't see a reason why to upgrade since they're nearly the same, except for the eye-candy.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[jamwt]

You might want to try <windows-button> m if your keyboard has a windows-button. That's the same feature, "Show Desktop," fast.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[plugger]

On the subject of setup files, I was going to mention the existence of c:/WINNT/system32/drivers/etc in Win2k.

I checked the directory in question, to make sure I had the location right, and found a file called 'quotes'. This file contains 12 quotes, by A.A.Milne, Dickens and G.B.Shaw. Does anyone know of an associated program to show these quotes? Would an XP user care to take a look to see if the file is still present?

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[male]

Speaking of annoyances in Windows, how the heck do you set it so Internet Explorer always opens new windows maximized? The various browsers on Linux don't have any problems with this, but it's driving me crazy in every version of Windows I use.

There may be a better way to do this, but I'm not gonna waste my time figuring it out, I have work to do...

However, I too got sick of this about two or three days ago and installed a program to fix it. It's called 'IE New Window Maximizer.' It is free, of course. There are also programs out there to kill popups, which are equally annoying. I can't wait till advertisers start using CSS popups instead.. it will be harder to kill those without killing lots of other important things.

And for those comments on how XP is the same as Win2k, I guess you have never had a problem with installing old software on 2k. I ran into that problem all the time, but XP has better backwards compatibility. I'm running XP Pro. My only bitch is that you cannot upgrade from 98, you have to reinstall.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[ahde]

if you just clicked:

NEXT->NEXT->YES->ACCEPT->NEXT->ACCE PT->NEXT->NEXT->MASTERCARD->5499840000 000121->billg@microsoft.com->SUBMIT->REBO OT

then you wouldn't have any trouble at all installing WinXP. It's about limiting choice.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[gravygraphics]

You might want to try that swishy windows icon button with the D key. This will show the desktop. Hit it again to get your windows back. I am not sure it works under XP, but it works great under 2000.

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[possible]

My favorite:
Windows Key + Break = System Properties

Also good but not as cool are:

Alt+Space+M = Maximize current window
Alt+Space+N = Minimize current window

Re:The kicker's in the tail

[Rogerborg]

• Anyone who was moving from WinNT/2k experience to WinXP would find it trivial. I question whether you have a clue if your only previous experience with Windows is Win98

OK, you caught me. Note that I said Win98 to WinXP on "another" machine. Off the top of my head I have: 2 x Win98SE/SuSE 7.3 dual boots (one laptop, one 24/7 DSL router/fileserver), 1 x WinME/WinXP games machine (which has previously been Win98, then Win2K, then back to WinME), 1 x Win98SE machine (technically my girlfriends, but I tech support it). My work machine in NT 4.0. I'm a software developer, and I write the occasional winapp.

My point though is that if you come at WinXP through newbie or Win9x (or "other GUI") eyes, it's just not that friendly, and it tries to hide things that you really need to know about like administrator access, a completely new and alien concept to Jane Homebody. You don't even know how much you don't know until something goes wrong.

Don't misunderstand me, I actually like WinXP now that I've turned most of the bells and whistles off, I just think that the retail version is an awkward compromise between fully featured and user friendly - like KDE/SuSE. As I said, WinXP is still just better, but the gap is closing from both ends.

Re:Slashdotted already? {ot}

[ille_pugil]

<flashback>
I belive it was:

The time has come, the walrus said, to speak of many things. Of shoes and ships and sealing wax, of cabbages and kings. if the sea is boiling hot or whether pigs have wings.

Thanks Mr. Wetherell!
</flashback>

+1 Funny on the MQR standard

[MarkusQ]

As the battle lines are drawen between the Linux and Microsoft armies I would like to offer our new range of services. Now in stock are our extensive range of pitchforks, which may be ordered with the Tux logo, Microsoft logo, or if you're in the wrong group BSD logo.

Do you still carry the Basket-o-rott'n-fruit? The three I bought from you at last year's emacs-vi-off were the best purchace I made all year!

-- MarkusQ

Linux vs everything....

[ACK!!]

I am not sure where these comparisons are going.

Each major operating system has its advantages and disadvantages depending on how it is implemented.

Listen there is no way I would want to move a brigade of secretaries over to Linux. I remember how much trouble my wife's law firm had getting those folks off of WordPerfect 5.2 for god's sake!

However, if I want a solid inexpensive server with lots of GUI tools to help me set things up then I go with Linux any day of the week. If I have a bunch of sysadmins, developers and geeks and I want to stop the endless bitching over the limits of WinNT as a desktop environment I tell them to install linux on their own and don't call IT when they screw it up. They love it. They get all the power they want and the corporate IT boys get a whole group of people they can tell to screw off when they call in for support.

Each OS has its own set of issues and strengths. Listen, if I had a rich aunt who never used a computer before and wanted to get on the internet I would tell her to get a mac.

Everything has its place. The trick is for Linux to clue in on its target audience of small server implementations and geek IT desktops.

________________________________________________ __

Re:Linux vs everything....

[Anonymous Coward]

moving a herd of secretaries to Linux is easy. you just have to have management behind you and some guts. make the change, and help them through the tiny differences. but not put up with crap.

Office workers are the laziest people on the planet. if something changes a tiny bit, they whine and bitch, and whine more.. you need to tell them that this is the way it is and if they dont like it there are many temp companies that would like them to work for them.

Basically, I had to tell them to "SHUT UP, this is the way it is and get used to it. I will start calling you a STUPID MORON if you whine about something stupid like the color of your desktop or your screensaver." gladly I had a upper management person that backed me up and we now save Tens of thousands every year. and quite possibly saved the company.

Re:Linux vs everything....

[nagora]

The best successes I've had moving people off Windows and onto Linux is with the various secretaries and temps we've had here. I simply don't tell them that they're using Linux and Star/Open Office! It works a treat.

The hard ones are graphic designers and the worst are DTP people who can't handle the Linux command line and automatic document production via piped commands chains.

TWW

Re:Linux vs everything....

[kin_korn_karn]

I just realized something.

Every time an MS story is posted here on slashdot, you can post the exact same message that you just posted, only worded differently, and get to 50 karma in ~12 stories as long as you remember to not use your +1 bonus after you pass [what is it?] 20 or 25.

Re:Linux vs everything....

[kin_korn_karn]

Well, duh. Why should someone who's used to intuitive layout via a WYSIWYG interface suffer with obsolete antiquated shit like LaTeX and ghostscript?

DTP is NOT a good reason to use Linux or any form of Unix. I don't care how pretty it is when you're done, getting there is like SEAL training.

Re:Linux vs everything....

[nagora]

Well, duh. Why should someone who's used to intuitive layout via a WYSIWYG interface suffer with obsolete antiquated shit like LaTeX and ghostscript?

Ghostscript has nothing to do with it; it's just a software RIPper for driving printers. I agree with your pithy review of LaTeX, though. That's why I use plain (real) TeX. Very easy to use, great results.

getting there is like SEAL training

Lots of fish, you mean?

TWW

Re:Linux vs everything....

[Corrado]

Ummm...you really should look here for supplying those graphic designers and DTP people with compentent tools. Linux is not the hammer for that screw.

Re:Linux vs everything....

[fungai]

I am not sure where these comparisons are going.
Each major operating system has its advantages and disadvantages depending on how it is implemented.

I think the point of these comparisons are exactly to teach you what OS will be best for a certain task.

Re:Linux vs everything....

[nagora]

Fuck you are so stupid.

At least I managed to log in.

Thank God MS is here, insted we woulbe forced to draw our diagrams and pictures with nothing but command line if people like you were running the show.

I never mentioned drawing from the command line. I draw on screen. For document production I use TeX and include the drawings, and photographs, into the document.

If you have to produce lots of similar documents using, for example, dynamically generated graphs based on data in a database, and need it to go to a Linotronic Lasersetter and also send sections to newspapers and magazines, then WYSIWYG page layout is useless.

TWW

Two different ball-parks

[JohnBE]

I'm very pro-Linux, biased if you like. However comparing XP to SuSE is a little like comparing a mountain bike to a racer. XP is geared toward home/business use, Linux tends to be geared toward technical and back end users.

They are both good for different reasons, and have a lot to learn from each other. But do we really have to compare chalk and cheese every time?

Can't we just accept things on their relative merits?

I don't see how Linux and Windows can be compared. They are both good, but for different reasons. Everyone should just calm down and do there own thing based on what they need.

right: readahead

[leuk_he]

In the article they are talking about this readahead problem in the kernel. Just something they found. You can work arround it simply by setting you readahead to a higher value. This is not ideal for everyone.

The LinuX(P) convergence

[fluor2]

PERSONAL OPINIONS:

I have noticed that back in the 90's the UNIX OS was the best network operating system.

Nowadays I do not know anymore. I see that most Linux distro's somewhat looks more and more like Windows, thus one can see that the two OS'es are making a convergence, where they finally probably would make the inevitable 99,99% similarity.

I know you guys say that "We'll go for the free OS!", but I allready have Windows XP and it was free for me (I've not payed anything). So untill Microsoft do something really stupid like blocking piracy completely, I guess the normal @home workstation would contain a "free" OS.

The next logical step for Microsoft would be to secure its OS, and the Linux must become more User-friendly and, as some might say, more open. I still would like to see that my 6year-old neighbor able to install Linux like the Windows 2000.

I feel that some people who like Linux really likes that they can use the OS on old boxes like pentium 2 400mhz or similar. This is because Linux is normally an OS that most people actually upgrades every now-and-then. However, when it comes to Windows, Microsoft have seen that they only sell their OS with new PC's (99,9% sales i guess), thus they do not care about older PC's like the P2 400.

Now back to topic,
Cost of Ownership (TCO) for Windows versus open source systems. Until now, conventional wisdom held that Windows wizards were a key factor in holding down TCO by countering the initial licensing costs with lower maintenance costs and lower skills requirements for the maintainers.

My main point was that the relevance of TCO and other stuff is not that high anymore, and in the end we just have to say: Know your OS and do what you want the best way. There is no Best OS and there is no Best Way.

Re:The LinuX(P) convergence

[Technician]

My main point was that the relevance of TCO and other stuff is not that high anymore, and in the end we just have to say: Know your OS and do what you want the best way. There is no Best OS and there is no Best Way.
Back in the 80's PC XT days, friends used to ask which computer should I buy. What I told them still aplies today. I said find the software you need to run and get the hardware that will run it. I have a Linux box for Netscape which is immune out of the box to .VBS scripts. It fits my needs on that count. I have a WIN laptop as the National Goegraphic Topo maps require it. It's the best map interface I have for my GPS. I haven't found a replacement for it in a non-WIN format yet.. I'm still looking. Hopefully soon I'll ditch the requiremet to have 3 computers. (Wildflower/Topo/National Geographic, are you listening?)

Re:The LinuX(P) convergence

[geekoid]

Nowadays I do not know anymore. I see that most Linux distro's somewhat looks more and more like Windows, thus one can see that the two OS'es are making a convergence, where they finally probably would make the inevitable 99,99% similarity.
A nit-pic, but an important one.
with Linux, The GUI is not Linux. I can have several different kinds of GUI, some just like Windows, some real different then windows.

TCO is very important, important in the corporate world. The money spent to "retrain" a usr to a Linux Desktop GUI will be saved in maintainance and upgrade costs.

The people who write free software (bless there souls) need lessons in GUI design, and human/machine interaction. Both real and percieved.

Re:The LinuX(P) convergence

[praedor]

My main point was that the relevance of TCO and other stuff is not that high anymore, and in the end we just have to say: Know your OS and do what you want the best way. There is no Best OS and there is no Best Way.

There's the rub...if only you could get Gates and Ballmer to accept this FACT then the world would be right. Instead, we have the two megalomaniacs seeking to control everything on YOUR computer, everything on the net, every means of doing anything on the net. Given this, there is a war. A just war to eliminate the bastards.

Re:+ & - of linux

[JohnBE]

Win Modems are supported in the standard kernel now. My install is aroun 400mb, I run Debian. Config can be cryptic, it depends purely on your administration style and which distribution you are running. I have a SuSE machine and YaST is a pretty easy admin interface.

Something that isn't pointed out enough

[Flavio]

I can't read the article (it's slashdotted), but there's something about Windows (specially XP) that I rarely hear people talk about: it uses outrageous amounts of RAM. Yes, RAM is cheap, but I find it extremely suspicious when simple applications consume so many resources.

I have 128 MB of RAM and with Linux it's enough for everything I need, _including_ Mozilla (which as we all know, can use a lot of memory).

I find it ludicrous that I can't even boot XP without swapping and it takes forever to open up apps like the media player. Should I face this with a smile and say "well, I'm at fault because 128 MB of RAM clearly isn't enough"?

I can't bring myself to respect an OS which needs this many resources to do nothing. Yet I know people with 64 MB of RAM who praise XP in favor of Linux. I firmly believe that they either don't use their computers for anything productive or they lie.

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[really?]

"I firmly believe that they either don't use their computers for anything productive or they lie."

They lie.

I use XP and Linux daily, among other OSs, and I am sure that XP@64 MB would be unusable. I am not sure you can even install it on a 64 meg machine... let's see ..

IEEXPLORE @ 29.004K
explorer @ 14.404K
Navapsvc @ 10.998K

that's about 55MB for three out of 39 visible processes in the task manager - yes I picked the largest ones, but the point is, XP @ 64 MB would be all but unusable.

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[Cro Magnon]

All I know is that I used to have NT4 on a 64M box at work. It sucked! I currently have Linux on my 64M box at home. KDE2 is no speed demon, but it's still faster than NT4. I'd guess that ex-pee would be fatter and slower than NT4.

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[Tower]

>Navapsvc @ 10.998K

Norton Antivirus seems to take up exponentially more memory each release... kind of a pain it you are memory limited.

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[kaisyain]

Isn't "outrageous" a pretty subjective term? Have you ever tried running GNOME + Mozilla on 32MB of RAM? Not possible due to the outrageous amounts of RAM that Mozilla and GNOME chew up.

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[joshv]

256MB seems to be the sweet spot for XP, but it wants more. I use it on a laptop I share with my GF. We use the multiple logins/switch user feature a lot (something I wish someone would figure out how to do in Linux). The machine can slow down considerably when I leave a ton of programs running and she logs in. Granted, windows 2000 does not have this feature, but with 256MB i've never been able to slow down w2k, no matter how much I keep open.

Unfortunately my Vaio doesn't support more than 256MB, otherwise it'd have 512MB.

-josh

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[jjares]

Have you tried su?

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[BigDaddyJ]

This actually is unsurprising. It's because it keeps all her processes running and starts up a new batch for you.

You can turn off this feature, you know, which will save considerable amounts of RAM.

--bdj

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[hey!]

I disagree. We've long last got past the point of no return in the absurd-amounts-of-ram game. Once upon a time we worked with perfectly usable word processors that ran in 32K of RAM. They weren't WYSIWYG, but they were entirely usable for 90% of what people do with word processors today. We just trained people and, guess what? They were able to use them.

My point is this: a modern word processor takes something like 8K times the memory to run on a modern operating system. Does that somehow make the old software 8192 more virtuous than the new? Especially since that 32K probably cost 10x as much in uninflated dollars as the 128MB we'd need today.

I say if you have a use for it, use it!

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[joshv]

I LIKE this feature, and it's great in a multi-user/single computer situation, just tends to slow the machine down after switching. Seems the switcher could cooperate with the memory manager and force all the other user's processes to swap out. I imagine that would happen eventually as the new user worked, but in the mean time its slow.

-josh

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[joshv]

I meant multiple users with concurrent desktops. XP lets you 'log out' of your desktop, but keep all of your programs running. Then another user can log in. When they log off, you can go right back to where you left off.

I imagine this would be doable in X, perhaps with nested X servers, but noone has put it all together with a nice swapper interface.

-josh

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[jjares]

Actually what XP does is start a terminal server on the local machine and have multiple users connect to that terminal server... I guess you could do that with vnc

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[alanwj]

$startx -- :0 &
$su - otherusername
$startx -- :1 &

Granted, this isn't a "nice swapper interface", but you can certainly have multiple graphical environments active simultaneously.

Alan

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[londenberg]

I use XP on a new laptop. I bought it with 512meg of ram and just recently configured it to stop using virtual memory. It is absolutly amazing how much more responsive it is. It boots faster, programs load faster and if you load a program, close it and reload it, snap your fingers and it's there. I use a cad system (www.solidworks.com) that takes 30-90 seconds to load (I never timed it, just an estimate) on my desktop Win2k and my laptop XP. I can close the program on my desktop machine and immediately restart it, and wait 30-90 seconds again, the laptop has no such wait.

BTW, I love having a ten key pad on the side of my laptop keyboard. You should check out www.sagernotebooks.com I'm very happy with my NP8560.

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[Corrado]

Ask and ye shall receive. Go here for an article from the January 2002 Linux Journal that explains how to use VNC to do exactly what you want.

A snippet from the article:
This two-part series presents a novel way to set up a VNC-based X Window System desktop for your Linux system. By the end of this two-part series, you'll have a configuration that allows users to log in to their X-Window desktop (running GNOME, KDE or other preferred window manager environment) via a display manager (like GDM, KDM or XDM). More importantly, the user will have secure access to the same desktop in the same state from the workstation console and anywhere else on a network.

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[theCoder]

I think you can start multiple versions of X, but, like with XP, it would take God-awful amounts of RAM (so I've never actually done it). You'd think there'd be a cleaner solution...

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[Andrewkov]

Windows still ships with edit.exe...

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[FooBarWidget]

Who still has 32 MB RAM these days?

But seriously... my old computer (Pentium 233 with 48 MB RAM) runs GNOME and Galeon.
GNOME runs at descent speed, Galeon is a little slow, but is still very much useable.

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[jroller]

Actually, this is something pretty easy if you're configured to use startx from the console.

From X you can use the ^M-Fkey combination to switch to a text console. After you login from a fresh console, you can run "startx -- :1" to start from the display :1. Or "startx -- :2", etc for a third.

You can flip between them using ^M-Fkeys.

For example, I'm on a redhat box, which gives me text console on virtual console 1-6, and the graphical login on console 7. I hit ^M-F1 to get to a console, login as some user, startx -- :1 and now have a second X session on console 8.

Hit ^M-F7 to get to the first one, hit ^M-F1 to get to the console again, and then M-F8 to get back to the second login. All pretty standard and easy to do.

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[LadyLucky]

Steady on. As I read this my memory usage in XP is 75 MB. I have Outlook express and 4 IE windows open, with nothing else running.

Windows 2000 which I use at work has some issues with the system cache. If the computer has been up for a while (in my experience, more than say 2-3 weeks) then I found that a lot of memory was being used up in the system cache unecessarily, and a restart improved performance. XP has an option (sorry, i dont have anymore anecdotal evidence :-) ) to tell it how to manage the system cache.

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[Buck2]

My fiance and I do this all the time.

Usually one will login through KDM, then leave the computer and make dinner or something. The other will come to use the computer, press CTRL-ALT-F1,
login at the terminal, and run startx -- :1.

Away you go. CTRL-ALT-F7 to get back to the first
login, and CTRL-ALT-F8 to get to the new one.

Ancient stuff, man.

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[4of12]

I say if you have a use for it, use it!

Your point is well taken. If the RAM doesn't cost a great deal of money, then who cares if the secretary's copy of Word, IE and XP chews up more RAM (and uses a more powerful CPU) than was used to forecast weather on a supercomputer in 1973?

Likewise, if given enough RAM, the Linux kernel will just gobble it up caching for the filesystem and improving performance thereby. That's fine.

But, I would say that having some flexibility is a definite plus, for two reasons.

1. Older hardware, especially in donated computers sitting in the Third World (that would include, of course, U.S. public education).
2. Embedded and application-specific devices.

where you would rather not have a magic frog/prince cut-off value for RAM and usability. A smooth degradation of performance with less capable hardware is classier in my book.

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[talonyx]

Why are you letting Norton Anti Virus run all the time on your machine? If you care at all about performance, ditch the virus killing crap and just get a clue when opening email messages...

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[johnnyb]

There's no "Easy GUI" way to do it, but you can do ctl-alt-SOMENUMBER to change virtual consoles, and then run a new X session on a different virtual console. If you have xdcmp enable, you can simply run X -query localhost and then it will start a new X session. You can now switch between them. Sorry I don't have many details, but I'm on a win machine at work :(

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[really?]

It sure does. :-(

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[really?]

Why indeed? For the same reason I use XP on that computer in the first place ...too lazy to change it. I use that laptop mainly for e-mail, NEED Outlook, and to watch the ocasional DVD, so I don't want to waste too much time "playing" with it. After spending all day performance tuning hard/software at work, the last thing I want to do is start the same process at home.

Re:Something that isn't pointed out enough

[Kiwi]

Who still has 32 MB RAM these days?

Laptop users. My previous laptop, which I finally replaced nine months ago, had only 24 megs of RAM on it, and could only be expanded up to 40 megs of RAM total.

KDE 1.x was too heavy to run on it; I did not even try putting KDE 2.x or Gnome on that beast. In fact, I used FVWM 1.x and Netscape 4.x (Mozilla was also too heavy to run on it) until I finally upgraded my laptop.

- Sam

The biggest difference

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone else may have already pointed this out, but I'd like to stress that the biggest difference between Windows and Linux has always been the licensing -- and that gap has only gotten wider with XP (more favorable to Linux, that is), according to:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/02/09/234525 8&mode=thread

+ & - of windows XP

[Anonymous Coward]

+

• Eye candy (a blue task bar, could be done in 95)
  
• Better kernel (With giant PNP hole)
  
• Lots of features swiped from linux
  

-

• Expensive (£179 compared to about £69 for a boxed linux)
  
• "Big brother" features
  
• MSN PASSPORT crap "forced"
  
• Bloated (1.5 gigs for just basic install)
  
• Uses more memory then it should (128 mbs minimum, linux runs happily with just 64)
  
• BSOD still there, i seen it crash at PC WORLD :)

So there you have it, if you wan't to strain your fast computers and totally laugh about the idea of 640k. If you wan't big brother bill to spy on you and let the hackers put loads of viruses down your computer then go right ahead

Re:+ & - of windows XP

[really?]

"Uses more memory then it should (128 mbs minimum, linux runs happily with just 64) "

Well now, you must mean "happily, for very small values of happily". While Linux is somewhat better at using meager resources, it's not quite that good.

Of course, with Linux you have the CHOICE of not using KDE or Gnome, and so 64 MB is not tooooo tight, but "happily"...

Re:No download version

[humanx]

No ISO for i386?. I Just don't have the time to install it this way.

Can't do without either

[dgb2n]

I've got two computers at home and I currently use both Linux (Mandrake 8.1) and Windows XP Home. I need both boxes to accomplish what I need to do.

The Windows box is still a necessity. I have a 4 year old who likes educational games and without Windows, they simply don't run. Windows XP has also proven very adept at guiding my non-techie wife through moving pictures between the digital camera and the hard drive. XP is a huge improvement over ME in both stability and capability. Before, emailing pictures from the digital camera was an ordeal for her. Now, she just selects the picture out of a "filmstrip" view and clicks "Email the Picture". XP automatically resizes it for her (if desired) and attaches it to an email in her preferred email client.

I also wouldn't do without Linux. I use it as a firewall/proxy/Samba server and occasionally run a webserver on it with DHCP. Windows doesn't come close to being as capable for these services on my home network. I use the Linux box whenever I want to automate something through scripting or to use the superb open source utilities that come preinstalled. Got to automatically crop a bunch of pictures to a specific file size, hard to beat Imagemagik from the command line on Linux. Please don't ask me to get it working on XP.

I don't think of it as an either or. I look forward to the day when Linux can meet all my needs. I've long since given up or even looking forward to the day when Windows can.

Re:Can't do without either

[jtapper]

Let's not get applications for an OS confused with the actual OS here. I haven't actually used Windows XP, so I don't know if the imaging software you are using is installed with XP or not, but this software has nothing to do with the XP OS other than the fact it was written to run on that particular platform. This is more a question of the availability of user friendly software, which is obviously vastly in M$'s favour due mainly to their HUGE market penetration as well as hardware support from the vendors.

There is nothing stopping Linux from having the same easy to use software, it just hasn't been done because almost all Linux users are more technically adept than the average Windows user, and software is made with that in mind. Why spend weeks/months tweaking the UI for your application when you know all your users will be very capable of using your product to its full potential without all the bells and whistles?

Re:Can't do without either

[dgb2n]

The imaging software I'm referring to is built directly into the OS so it appears seamless to the non-techie user (in this case my wife). The digital photography features built into XP were actually one of the main selling points of Windows XP. You can even order hard copy prints of your photos directly through the software that's integrated into the operating system. Now that doesn't mean much to your average technical user but it makes a world of difference to my wife (or mother, grandfather etc. for that matter).

I have not yet seen an imaging application that was able to achieve the level of "user friendliness" that XP has achieved through their tight integration with Windows Explorer.

Re:Can't do without either

[ryanvm]

I don't think of it as an either or. I look forward to the day when Linux can meet all my needs. I've long since given up or even looking forward to the day when Windows can.

That is the truest Linux quote ever.

Re:Can't do without either

[Shiny Metal S.]

The Windows box is still a necessity. I have a 4 year old who likes educational games and without Windows, they simply don't run.

I don't want to start any OS-wars. I'm not saying that you shouldn't use those Windows educational games you have, but you may want to check out these projects as well:

• Debian Jr. Project
• GNU and Education
• Schoolforge
• Linux For Kids
• KDE Edutainment Project
• Organization for Free Software in Education and Teaching
• SEUL/edu

Your kid would be in much better situation when she/he grows up, than other kids of the same age, after playing with few different operating systems and enviroments.

When I was a kid I used my father's computers, but he didn't know much about OSes, he was just buying what they told him in the computer store.

As a resuld, when I was still a kid, I used to know the most important functions of MS-DOS interrupts 10h and 21h by heart. When I was about 12, we were writing programs for computers class, some simple calculations. It was boring, so I wrote a TSR, which after taking over the clock interrupt, and after few minutes from ending, was starting some virus-like visual effects on the screen. My teacher phoned my home that night, asking how to turn it of.

My point is that I really mastered the MS-DOS, and everything I had was a DOS box and lots of free time. I often wonder, what if I had Linux when I was 10 years old, instead of DOS? Would I know Bash and Perl, like I knew Command.com and QBasic? Would I know low level Unix system calls, like I new the DOS interrupts? Would I master Emacs and GCC, like I mastered Borland IDE? Unfortunately, I will never know that. But I would have much easier start as a Unix sysadmin, that's for sure.

Re:Can't do without either

[mangu]

I have not yet seen an imaging application that was able to achieve the level of "user friendliness" that XP has achieved through their tight integration with Windows Explorer.

Have you seen the level of "user friendliness" that KDE has achieved through their tight integration with Konqueror?

- Automatic thumbnail preview of files, including pictures

- Allows disabling of javascript pop-ups

- Allows setting a minimum type size, without having huge letters on large fonts

- Allows drag-and-dropping files from the internet into local directories

- The same program works for both local files and internet sites.

If you start learning from zero, KDE is, by far, more user friendly than anything Microsoft has ever created. The problem is with users who have learned all the stupid little annoyances in using Windows-9x, and think that's the "right way" to do things.

Re:Can't do without either

[tempfile]

And all those things are related to Konqueror's integration exactly how? There's no need for integrating a monster like IE if there's a decent framework.

Re:Can't do without either

[dgb2n]

For Windows, I believe its stable. I'm not running a server, I'm running a desktop so I don't feel qualified to comment on "five 9" reliability" or anything like that.

That said, I had to reboot ME about once every 3 days or it crashed all the time. I do not have to routinely reboot XP. Uptime reaching more than a month is easily achievable.

Re:Can't do without either

[dgb2n]

Have you seen the level of "user friendliness" that KDE has achieved through their tight integration with Konqueror?

Actually yes, I use Konqueror and am aware of those features. It works great.

The level of integration I was referring to was the ability for absolute novices to attach their digital camera, automatically copy the files to a known place on their hard drive (My Pictures), select a picture, automatically resize it for email, and send it.

Keep in mind that I'm talking about your average AOL user. I am fully capable of copying my images from the camera, bringing them up in Gimp to resize them, and attaching them to an email. My 84 year old grandfather doesn't feel comfortable with all those steps. There's no reason a version of Linux couldn't do these things. It just won't be the version that plays particularly well to the /. crowd.

Re:Can't do without either

[sheldon]

"I also wouldn't do without Linux. I use it as a firewall/proxy/Samba server and occasionally run a webserver on it with DHCP."

Wow, that's some heavy duty processing!

"Windows doesn't come close to being as capable for these services on my home network."

Hmm, I bought a Linksys firewall/router last year for $80 which pretty much covers half your use. I don't see why you think WinXP can't handle an occasional web server or file sharing. Maybe you need the Pro version, but other than that.

I use Win2k server at home for these services and much more. It's more than adequate for a home network.

"Got to automatically crop a bunch of pictures to a specific file size, hard to beat Imagemagik from the command line on Linux."

Yeah, Imagemagick is pretty cool for some things.

"Please don't ask me to get it working on XP. "

Why? It works the same on XP as it does on Linux.

"I've long since given up or even looking forward to the day when Windows can."

Weird, because Windows does everything you've talked about in this article and a whole lot more.

Re:Can't do without either

[sheldon]

I guess I should clarify my one statement.

Win2k is much more than just adequate for a home network, it's complete overkill but it is what I use.

WinXP Pro would make a more than adequate file and web server for a home user. Actually with XP's built in firewall and internet connection sharing you wouldn't have a problem with that route either.

Mandrake also does this

[TeaDaemon]

A slight correction, Mandrake 7.2 (and I presume later versions)does this as well (it uses the Redhat hardware detection program, if it works, why invent something different?)

It worked for me going from a Duron 900, Iwill Mobo, Geforce 2 MX400, Realtek 8139 NIC to an old P166MMX, Intel mobo, Ati Rage IIc and Intel nic flawlessly, only asking for the disk when it came to reconfiguring Xfree86 at the end of the process.

Against this, a Windows 2000 Pro installation gave me nothing but blue screen hell after swapping from Abit KT7 RAID to Iwill KT266(I think) mobo with no other hardware changes.

It's taken a while, but now I find I have fewer hardware configuration issues in Linux than I have with any version of Windows I've used.(still not used XP and thankful for small mercies!)

Have you read the article?

[Juju]

They are talking about *laptops*

I don't think they are interrested in changing the video chip ;o)

But I guess the main reason for SuSE is that they have some kind of agreement with SuSE.
Besides, IIRC they also mention something about everything being recognized directly by the SuSE install whereas there were some glitches with Red Hat...

Re:No download version

[Technician]

Hi wish I could say something about Suse Linux. So bad they don't have a downlodable version. :-(
Neither does XP.. So what's the point? ;-)

Uhm ... ?

[Cynical_Dude]

It actually appears quite low-flame and balanced, and unlike some Linux vs. Windows comparisons, goes into decent detail rather than just glib generalizations.

So why exactly is this story on /.?

=)

DOH!

[Anonymous Coward]

That's because when you use another browser you don't have to save!

You just click a pdf link and it opens like a normal page, using the plug-in as a viewer.

People, people! Don't forget to turn your brains on in the morning!

Oh my...

It's impossible to compare these

[qurob]

It'd be like comparing....Mac OS X and Windows XP, or OS 9 and Windows 2000.....

Or a Ferrari and a Mercedes

Or a Honda Civic or a BMW

Re:It's impossible to compare these

[qurob]

Flame bait?! Are you insane?

I'm just saying the operating systems are SO different in purpose and composure, that it's pointless to attempt at comparing.

Re:It's impossible to compare these

[Dionysus]

It is flamebait. You forgot to mention how great Linux is.

Yes, there is a sigh and a smiley here somewhere

Um, right-click on the taskbar...

[Anonymous Coward]

...and select Toolbars -> Quick Launch.

They disabled it because no one but power users use that feature.

Re:No surprise here

[dhfoo]

I suggest you read the interview with Andrew Morton at kerneltrap and read his comments regarding the ext3 file system and study the kernel source before you spout any more bollocks.

I misread it for a sec...

[jtseng]

"...Unlike some Linux vs. Windows comparisons, goes into decent detail rather than just glib generalizations."

For a sec I was thinking "WTF!!! I thought Linux used glibc... And I didn't think anyone could do a comparison of Linux vs Windows libraries..."

Re:No surprise here

[RDskutter]

Please don't feed the trolls

"SuSE has the best security after TurboLinux"

[holstein]

Erwh?!?

Well, it looks like this only because TurboLinux does not release their patches as fast as the others... Read more thoroughly the LWN.net research, you'll see that one of the security bug was in all the distros, but TurboLinux was the last to give a patch for it...

there's more to it than that

[fluor2]

there is a lot of features of windows xp. like it remembers the 8 last bootup sequences so it can boot up faster.

about that 64mb ram stuff, i can just say that i do not have a single friend with less than 256mb. nowadays, ram prices are so low that ram usage can not count as an argument.

Re:there's more to it than that

[C_nemo]

you don't have any friends, rompehull!

Re:No surprise here

[dhfoo]

Sorry, blood got up before I engaged brain.

Comparison bias?

[Dionysus]

No comparisons can be unbias unless the reviewer comes down and admit that GNU/Linux is great, and kiss Linus' butt.

Remember, we're independent and proud. Just tell us what to think.

Not True!!

[floorten]

Of course SuSE have a download version! You can either grab their one-disk ISO or make yourself a boot floppy and install via-FTP. Or install from the one disk version and update with the extra packages you require via FTP.
Check out ftp.suse.com and its mirrors...

Try mandrake?

[Jeppe Salvesen]

I just installed mandrake 8.1 on my laptop, and i was quite impressed by the ease of installation and how well it worked out of the box. The GUI-based configuration system also seems reasonably feature-complete for most use. Most.

Linux and XP - use both

[phoenix123]

Personally, I use XP as desktop OS and Linux for the DSL-router.
XP *really* is a hundred times more stable than the 98se, 98, 95b, 95a, 3.11, 3.1 that I used before. the only thing that sometimes totally crashes it is the damn openGL driver for my old Voodoo3 (a hacked version since 3dfx is dead long before xp was even thought of - 16MB, 350MHz, it still reaches 30fps in 1024x768). everything else is stable, no crash no BSOD, no nothing.
And that *hibernate* feature is nothing less than perfect. xp takes over the powerswitch, one press, system saves RAM to HDD, power off. powerswitch again system loads HDD-RAM back, ready to work.
from power-off to your last edited spreadsheet with continued dvd-rip in background in less than 30seconds. show me that in linux.
press reset on running linux, will check ext2-fs'es forever. press reset on xp, ntfs'es don't even notice. though I dunno how to check uptime in xp like in linux, it must have been at least a week since last real restart (not hibernate). ok, linux servers have months as uptimes. but not on a desktop where you frequently change or tweak something. and if you have to shut it down to have some silence in the evenings

linux is by far the best for servers. linux desktop I tried and it sucked. but as server, its cool. I'm using linux-router-project distribution on the server, fits on one floppy disk and converts 486dx50 junk to a lpd-printserver and dsl-router with ~20W power consumption. (2000/xp can access lpd printers with no problems) Put that onefloppy-distribution on an old 100mb hdd and set hdparm to hdd-off 1 minute and the server boots in 20secs from off to lpd/dsl-online. impossible with windows. (that with stripped down-windows and connection-sharing on pentium 133 was like being in slow-motion-HELL) = router cost: 0.00$

conclusion: use windows for desktop, linux on any other (server, networked, embedded)machine.
that way windows can't be hacked from the internet and can't send anything to the NSA/BSA. Plus the server with the first client starting from off to ready in 30-40secs. All your customers can read your documents. All your family (except grannie) is able to use the desktop.

Re:Linux and XP - use both

[Fjord]

I use the hibernate feature in Windows 2000 on my laptop. It does seem to work perfectly, but one of the things I notice is that it then pretty much simulates a longer uptime. The longer my machine is up, the more RAM it uses, eventually forcing me to do a restart. I haven't tried XP on here (being a work machine) and I'm wondering if the same RAM loss happens over time.

Incidentally, linux has the same hibernate feature.

Re:Linux and XP - use both

[CoreDump01]

You are "loosing" RAM because of caching data into
the RAM

This happens with Linux, too.
And this happens, too if your are not doing anything but boot your computer and let it "sit".

Re:Linux and XP - use both

[CoreDump01]

Im running Linux SuSE Pro and just wanted to add some things:

the only thing that sometimes totally crashes it is the damn openGL driver

Well i have to admit...the lousy NVIDIA driver likes to crash my SuSE, too

And that *hibernate* feature is nothing less than perfect.

AFAIK Linux does not support suspend-to-disk, yet. But you can of course bring your system into the suspend (or was it standby?) mode by entering a single command line apm -s (or create a desktop-menu item which executes this command) When in suspend (or standby?) mode, all fans and disk-drives are turned off so your computer does not make any noise.

press reset on running linux, will check ext2-fs'es forever. press reset on xp, ntfs'es don't even notice.

Well the standart filesystem with most Linux distributions is (sadly enuff) ext2. But of course -since its Linux-- you can install a journaling filesyste like RaiserFS, XFS or JFS without much trouble (SuSE is using RaiserFS as a default since version 7.2). If you press the reset button on my system when its booted (im using RaiserFS), it takes less than 4 seconds/Drive for the filesystem check.

you have to shut it down to have some silence in the evenings

See my first reply (apm -s) :)

linux is by far the best for servers.

Roger That

linux desktop I tried and it sucked.

Just take a look at my current desktop
It may not be "perfect" but it surly doesn't suck hehe
There are a few more screenshots located here

Re:Linux and XP - use both

[Fjord]

Well I wish it would stop, because once it's gotten to a certain point it will always swap when I switch from one appliction to another, thus prompting me to reboot (if it didn't effect the machine, I really wouldn't care). For something that is supposed to speed the machine up, it really drags it down.

Re:better? - not when you need 3rd party crap

[questionlp]

TweakUI and Power Toys are made by Microsoft, not a third-party vendor; only thing is that Microsoft doesn't provide support for it.

Outside of being somewhat incorrect, I do agree that it doesn't make any sense that a separate (and unsupported) application is required to make a change that they hide deep inside the registry.

No, not what he's saying

[Tenebrious1]

We've known IE6 and IE55SP2 don't support Netscape sytle plugins for months. That's old news.

There are two ways to view a PDF in IE. Through Plugins, which open the PDF inline (in the browser window), and through MIME Types, which opens the associated application. Both work with IE6/XP today. For a short time it didn't while Adobe worked to create the ActiveX plugin. While the plugin was not available, you had use the MIME type to open the file in the associated application. No big deal, you click on the link and it opens the file in Acrobat Reader outside IE. It is pretty simple, and I don't believe anyone trying to compare XP and Linux would get slipped up by something as easy as that.

What is he talking about? My guess is he's saying you can't just save PDFs easily to the hard drive without right-clicking. As if you had to download a lot of PDFs from a website, but not actually have to open them and clicking "save" or right clicking the link and hitting "save as". I don't know, sounds pretty lame to me. Either that or there was a legitimate complaint that got hacked to this nonsense paragraph by the editor.

Easy solution

[HMC CS Major]

download a freeware program called tweak ui.

Its a free download microsoft publishes, and its actually very, very useful. Under the "general" tab, click the checkbox that says "Prevent applications from stealing focus." This keeps annoying IE windows from taking over, instant messenger clients from hopping to the front, and pop-ups from jumping up from the non-active application.

correction

[Ironfist_ironmined]

You mean Vi-Emacs-off

You also cant get any kind of decent flame with a pitchfork or rotten vegetables, well maybe in the "Best manure" wars [cow or horse] and the whole "Not in summertime laddy" argument, tho it does provide good use of the more traditional "You stink" style trolling.

What was I talking about again?

Office

[Ironfist_ironmined]

You may not have noticed their office mascot... to be fair tho, it is smarter than some of the other things they thought of...

Best shown on this Flash5 app...

Re:Office

[MSG]

CTRL+ALT+D? What is this, Microsoft EMACS?

Re:Office

[leviramsey]

CTRL+ALT+D? What is this, Microsoft EMACS?

Microsoft's goal is to make Windows as bloated as emacs... *rimshot*

Re:SuSE is fun

[RDskutter]

adding new kernel modules does not require a recompile

Re:A hard look...

[DrSpin]

Well I thing you ahve it all wrong ...

1) You need MS Word (or a DTP package, or both) - so Win is the answer - 98 needs less RAM, and doesnt email your innermost thoughts to Seattle or the FBI)

2) You don't need WP or DTP - *BSD is the answer.

Why would anyone want Linux, unless they have big iron? And why doesnt NetBSD run on my ibm 7090 yet?

Sounds like a good idea.

[tyrr]

For the next Quizno's "Unfair match-up"

Re:+ & - of linux

[betis70]

bloated? I have everything I need on a 300 mb install of Debian on my ancient P75 laptop. It only has 840 mb of hard drive space and 16 mb of RAM but it cooks along pretty well for doing basic computing--writing programs while watching the olympics on a big screen TV, for example.

And the hardware cost me next to nothing. I guess if you did a full install of any of the distros it might be 6 gbs, but who needs all that software?

Obviously

[Flavio]

Of course it's more responsive and it just proves my point.

If you noticed a difference by adding RAM, it means the old amount wasn't enough. If XP boots faster, then this means it either uses outrageous amounts of RAM for itself (and starts swapping even while booting!) OR that it has horrible memory management (meaning it takes too long to reclaim memory that has already been freed and/or that's being used as buffers/cache).

Re:+ & - of linux

[feldkamp]

I would not agree that Linux can be considered "Modern". Most of the crucial components are in fact based on old UNIX ideas and methodologies.

Note, however, that this is usually not a bad thing. Linux is a derivative of many proven and well tested technologies, which lends to its reliability.

Also, your other points do not seem to make much sense... Bloated?, Free (as is Speech?), Cryptic Config? (maybe a few years ago...), Advanced? (how so... in many ways Linux is very simplistic by design)

Re:A hard look...

[Junta]

Well, WP has pretty good *nix applications...

In any case, *BSD lacks a great deal of the Hardware support Linux has. Not necessarily *BSD's fault, but it is true. For example, I don't see drivers for my dxr2 decoder board under *BSD. If you have an nVidia chipset for graphics... well...

You missed my point

[londenberg]

I won't argue that XP does or doesn't need an extraordinary amount of RAM.

I didn't notice the difference after adding RAM. It always had 512. The difference came after disabling virtual memory. I'm not argueing, just adding a workaround for sluggish XP boxes.

Shameless Thread Tie-in...

[Cerebus]

The Windows box is still a necessity. I have a 4 year old who likes educational games and without Windows, they simply don't run. Windows XP has also proven very adept at guiding my non-techie wife through moving pictures between the digital camera and the hard drive.

Sounds like what you really need is...

... a Mac.

8)

Crazy Comparison

[TheLastUser]

This was a very superficial comparison of two operating systems. The disk IO issue is interesting, and the info on wizards is, well, pretty much how I have always viewed them. But, there are a lot more differences between these two OS's that should have been mentioned.

• Linux is considerably easier to upgrade. With services like Ximian, one can upgrade not only bug fixes but also software functionality for 95% of their installed software. This is way easier than going from site to site, and way cheaper too.
• With Linux, the entire user setup can me migrated to a new computer, easily by moving the home directory contents. Windows keeps everything in the registry making an easy migration impossible.
• Linux can be fixed when it is not operating properly. I am not talking about getting into the code here. But simple things like making a scanner work are trivial with tools like deja.com.

etc. etc. etc. Gotta get back to work, but I could go on and on. Windows users have no idea what they are missing. When I hear them complaining about their macro viruses and MS help desk and driver updates and registry detonations and reboot festivals and reinstall the OS time and the unbearable cost of everything, I am so happy that I don't have to deal with that crap any more.

W2K "rock solid"?!?

[srussell]

Once again, the wizard worked his magic, and there arose an extraordinary, modern IT operating system that evolved into the utterly rock-solid Windows 2000.

Rock solid from who's perspective? The only people I've heard using "rock solid" and "Windows 2000" in the same sentance that also doesn't include "not" are Windows 95 users who've upgraded. My wife, who uses Linux at home and W2K at work, still complains about W2K crashing.

I'm not sure the author was completely unbiased, although he did tend toward the center of the road.

once again....

[maxpublic]

I use SuSe 7.3. Installed it many times on many machines. It has always installed easier and faster than Win of any version, without the begging for driver disks and the countless reboots. The autoconfiguration in 7.3 is amazingly better than that of previous versions, and kicks RH all over the playing field in this regard.

For all those people who keep muttering the MS-inspired mantra "Linux isn't ready for the desktop":

Anecdotal Evidence #1: My wife insists on using Linux. She hates Windows. Can't stand it crashing, can't abide the inability to configure it beyond a certain point, claims that Linux is *easier* to tweak than Windows, not harder. I agree with her and my experience at this point includes thousands of machines, not just some fools home system which he seems to think makes him an expert on the subject.

Anecdotal Evidence #2: I've taught middle school students and one thing that was apparent immediately - kids don't give a rats ass about the OS. Windows or Linux, they'll learn either just as easily including tricks that would never occur to the average adult. Furthermore, I've noticed that kids who worked/played on Linux boxes for several months and then were moved back to Windows boxes were disappointed that they couldn't mess with the OS as much as they could with Linux. Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing depends on how enamored you are of order versus learning.

You see, kids aren't sitting around proclaiming that Linux isn't ready for the desktop. As far as they're concerned it's just another way to make the computer do what they want it to do. They have no brand loyalty and haven't yet gotten to the point where they'll go out of their way to avoid learning anything new. So quite obviously Linux might not be ready for *your* desktop, but that little fact has nothing to do with the OS and everything to do with *you*.

Now, there will be some who say "so what? secretary x won't be able to do that" and I say:

a) bullshit. I've set up linux configs for secretaries before and they haven't had any more problems than they do learning a new version of Word. The critical element is "who does the setup and configuration?". If your secretaries are installing and configuring Win2000 on your office computers then the IT team needs to be fired. Same with Linux. A good configuration is a simple configuration, providing the necessary tools without giving the computer-impaired any confusing choices. In Linux this is damned easy to do. Hell, you can not only turn off or restrict elements the secretary shouldn't be messing with but remove them altogether!

b) even if your business employs people so brain-dead that a) isn't possible, you can easily teach kids to use Linux instead of Windows and then guess what? In ten years your secretaries will be using whatever the hell they're most comfortable with - Linux!

The whole desktop argument is a crock. It might apply to individuals but not to the OS itself, or the GUI's that ride it. And that squarely assigns the problem to the individual doing the complaining.

Max

Sure you can

[nullard]

I have a 4 year old who likes educational games and without Windows, they simply don't run.

My 6yr old sister plays educational games on her hand-me-down Performa 6200CD (from 1994). It has a 75Mhz PowerPC 603 processor, 64MB ram, a 1.2GB hd and runs System 7.5.6 (before they started calling it MacOS). She can play all the latest educational games on it w/out Windows. Hell that thing can't even run VirtualPC in DOS mode.

Oh, wait. You were probably assuming that everyone uses PCs.

TOC (yeah right) Where's the software for XP?

[skillrod]

I run XP and SuSE7.2 side by side on separate AMD 1.2G machines. I wanted to test them side by side and judge for myself. Here's my opinion. XP feels like freaky spyware garbage that is no less confusing than Linux and has Dick for software. I bought the XP Plus package for the cool eye candy screen saveers. Wow, you have to go online and buy additional fish for the 3D tank. It's really bad. SuSE is loaded with software and is fun to use. I edit video, watch TV & DVD's, play online games mess with databases, try out frickin hours of eye candy! Seven CD's and one DVD compared to the one XP cd? TOC - One Linux distro can handle your complete desktop needs. XP can't touch this! (unless you're perpared to pay the price:)

uptime for XP

[danonb]

In a .bat file...
@echo.
@systeminfo | @find "System Up Time:"
@echo.
@pause

Daemons go bad

[steveha]

"updatedb" was running, eating plenty of system ressources

I have an old box that is running an older version of Mandrake Linux. The "logrotate" command runs at odd intervals (frequently during the work day, not in the middle of the night) and the computer is extremely slow when that happens. (I'm looking forward to installing Debian on that computer. I understand Debian, and I've never had a problem with logrotate on Debian anyway.)

The worst was when the hard drive filled up. The logrotate command was running continuously; the hard drive was rattling nonstop. I discovered that I had files like this:

auth.log.gz
auth.log.gz.gz
auth.log.gz.gz.gz
[...]
auth.log.gz.gz.gz.gz.gz.gz.gz.gz.gz.gz.gz.gz.gz
[...]

I managed to kill the logrotate process. Then I ran a find command to find all files that had a ".gz" in the name, and delete them. It took over 10 minutes to find and delete them all! There were thousands, many whose filenames were over 80 characters from ".gz.gz.gz.gz..." extensions.

Once /var/log was clean, I nuked some junk I didn't need, and the computer was decently fast again.

(Now I understand well why /var should be on its own partition! When /tmp is full, bad things happen. If you only have one partition, when /var is full, /tmp is full... and when you have too many .MP3 files, you can set off an unpleasant chain reaction.)

steveha

Linux Vs WinXP

[timecop]

Who are you kidding?
Regardless of the task, WinXp always wins.
Why? Because microsoft always does it RIGHT.
Linux takes 3 years to realize their mistakes.