Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

TurboLinux 10f Review - PowerDVD on Linux

Posted by michael on from the vroom-vroom dept.

BootLinux writes "The first review of TurboLinux 10f has been posted by Flexbeta. TurboLinux 10f is the first Linux distribution to include a commercial DVD player, PowerDVD. It also bundles Microsoft licensed media codecs and the ability to connect with Apple's iPods. With the addition of these and other multimedia applications is it safe to say that Linux is finally a conteder in the desktop market?"

32 comments

  1. Now by Ann+Coulter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    all we need is for games to be available for Linux. I would very much like to play Far Cry on Linux. That is about the only thing, oh and Diablo 2, that I use Windows for. I wish they would support multiple channel audio output on more Linux media players. I brought a Klipsch 5.1 and I get the feeling that I'm only using a 2.1. Anyway, I hope that PowerDVD has multiple channel support. I wonder if UT2004 can be made to do multiple channel audio with an Audigy. I would pay big money, $200, to be able to use the extra 3 channels.

    1. Re:Now by arcanumas · · Score: 1
      Well, UT2003 uses OpenAL (i assume UT2004 also uses OpenAL)

      OpenAl can be made to use 5.1 with something like:

      (define devices '(alsa))
      (define speaker-num 5)
      (define alsa-out-device "surround51:0,0")
      (define alsa-in-device "hw:0,0")

      in your ~/.openalrc file.

      --
      Slashdot Sig. version 0.1alpha. Use at your own risk.
    2. Re:Now by CableModemSniper · · Score: 1

      OpenAL configs are in scheme? Sweet jesus.

      --
      Why not fork?
    3. Re:Now by obeythefist · · Score: 1

      Putting my windows hat on here, and looking at the subject, "Is linux ready for the desktop?"...

      When you have to write that many lines of configuration data in a text file to do something that windows does out of the box, linux is not ready for the desktop.

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
    4. Re:Now by torpor · · Score: 1

      When you have to write that many lines of configuration data in a text file to do something that windows does out of the box, linux is not ready for the desktop.

      duh. all that is needed is for a linux distro vendor to set that up for you, then linux will do it out of the box.

      windows has just as many 'weird config item options to be put into files' as linux does. the difference is, microsoft makes the assumption that you want this done for you ... linux distro's typically don't make this assumption.

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    5. Re:Now by obeythefist · · Score: 1

      Yes! All that is needed is a linux distro vendor to set that up for you. That would work.

      But you're acknowledging my point and ignoring it all at the same time (something quite common in the linux arena).

      So what you're saying is : Microsoft does all the config work for you, and it works most of the time. Linux doesn't do any of the config work for you, the Linux developers assume you want to wade through lines of text files instead.

      Why do you think Microsoft is winning with people advocating such godawful development practices?

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
    6. Re:Now by torpor · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is "winning"?

      Seems to me, a common characteristic of Windows weenies is to miss the point completely.

      This is not a football game.

      Windows vs. Linux is a straw man ... Linux exists for its own sake, not to defeat Windows, not to compete with Windows, not to have, really, anything to do with Windows at all.

      That commercial technology press and other enterprises choose to pitch things in this dialectic light doesn't detract from the fact, at all, that Linux exists entirely for its own sake.

      Yes! All that is needed is a linux distro vendor to set that up for you. That would work.

      Thats how Linux distro's have been, from the start. Linux is not its distro.

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    7. Re:Now by obeythefist · · Score: 1

      These are all valid points. Linux is an excellent operating system in it's own ways, it has some very good strengths in the server space. But you're completely ignoring the original assertion, which is, "Is linux ready for the desktop?"

      When we ask this question, we are immediately asking whether Linux can compete with Windows for the desktop real estate. The question is all about whether Windows or Linux is a more suitable desktop operating system. To suggest otherwise is to suggest to people that they use a less appropriate tool for a particular job.

      Which is the most appropriate tool for the desktop, then? Is it a tool that requires users or administrators to manually edit text files to allow common hardware devices to work? Or is it a tool that configures itself transparently to the end user?

      If we look again at the question, "Is linux ready for the desktop?", we can gauge this to some extent by the market penetration of Windows vs. Linux on the desktop arena. Which operating system has the highest penetration? Which is most appropriate, most ready for the desktop? Which is winning?

      I think that whether an OS is winning market share is completely within the point, in the context of this topic.

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
    8. Re:Now by torpor · · Score: 1

      is linux ready for the desktop?

      linux is ready for the desktop. it can be used, on the desktop, by users, to productively work.

      distributions of linux, may or may not, be appropriate for the desktop.

      there is a huge difference. as long as folks ignore the technological facts and continue to base their evaluation of linux as a productive system on substantive 'communal reality', then linux may not be used so much on the desktop ...

      once you set linux up, and it is running, it works. and works. and works. at that point, linux is ready for the desktop. that you can do that, means that linux is ready for the desktop.

      if you want to generalize and say 'its not ready for the seething mass of consumerican robots to use', fair enough. go ahead.

      but i know for a fact that linux is ready.

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  2. Jesus man by override11 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Linux has been a contender in the desktop market for a long time now.
    For anyone with more than 2 brain cels to rub together....

    There has been software to real DVD's on linux for a long time now, and if you really want to download and get all your media files in a cruddy DRM file format from Microsoft, then you deserve your fate. Make OGG files and live free. :)

    --
    No I didnt spell check this post...
    1. Re:Jesus man by Ann+Coulter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is different. I think that having corporate support behind DVD viewing in Linux legitimizes it more. No longer are we using DeCSS based software in this case. We are now using a commercial product that even the media companies (film studios) support to a degree. I think this is a very good thing that Linux is getting support in an area where it has become criminal in the past. I would recommend the preexisting media players, such as mplayer and xine, over PowerDVD because of stability, ease of use, and performance. Of course, I've never used PowerDVD on Linux before. In any case, I hope that more companies back up Linux in these ways, instead of excluding Linux because of whatever reasons they might have.
      As for two brain cels, I can tell you that that's almost enough for a motile being. I forgot the exact number, but some worms have very very small central nervous systems indeed. You can't do anything with only one, but with two, you can communicate and control even more nerve cells. Heck, a jellyfish doesn't have a brain, just a nerve net.

    2. Re:Jesus man by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      it's about legality, the dvd players available for linux may work and be excellent but that doesn't make them anymore legal, at least not enough for anyone with 2 brain cells to take the risk that they don't get squashed for _selling_ an unlicensed dvd player.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    3. Re:Jesus man by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "For anyone with more than 2 brain cels to rub together...."

      These are exactly the type of comments that can keep people away from Linux. Don't remember the Mac vs. PC wars before Windows 95 came out? I do. Every time some smug Mac fanatic had some smart ass comment to make, it drilled another nail into Mac's coffin. Nobody wanted to be like those elitist Mac fanatics. The jerks.

      Piece of advice to Linux fanatics out there: Don't promote the stereotype that non-Linux users are stupid. Not everybody on this planet things computers are the neatest coolest thing in the world and wants to devote their life to learning a bunch of badly spelt commands. There are a lot of people who just want to turn it on, go, and maybe add new stuff along the way. Understand that. Respect that. Then, suddenly life's not so unfair.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    4. Re:Jesus man by BrookHarty · · Score: 1

      Linux has been a contender in the desktop market for a long time now.
      For anyone with more than 2 brain cels to rub together....

      I remember back when I had an Amiga, writing scripts in arexx, working with the CLI. I went to a Commodore users group, and some people didnt even know what the CLI was. They could load games from floppy and play, no setup, no tweaking drivers, etc. They didnt even use the desktop, it was a game machine only.

      This is the original joe six pack/mom test, and to be honest, Linux/BSD isn't there *YET*. Mac OSX is pretty good about setup and ease of use, but they install on limited hardware.

      But that being said, this is major piece to getting Linux as a desktop replacement, license software.

    5. Re:Jesus man by override11 · · Score: 1

      Truthfully, in our business why would we care if we have DVD capability? We have 40 LTSP network boot workstations that run great sans-dvd support.

      --
      No I didnt spell check this post...
    6. Re:Jesus man by latroM · · Score: 1

      This is different. I think that having corporate support behind DVD viewing in Linux legitimizes it more. No longer are we using DeCSS based software in this case. We are now using a commercial product that even the media companies (film studios) support to a degree.

      The problem with viewing DVDs is not the lack of proprietary applications playing them but the lack of legal Free Sofware DVD player. One proprietary app isn't what I call support behind watching DVDs on a Free OS. I continue to use illegal (at least in USA) CSS decrypters because I don't infect my computer with non-free software.

  3. No. by ArmpitMan · · Score: 4, Insightful
    No! It's not! Stop! Please, God! No more!

    "It plays my DVDs out of the box" is not what will make Linux on the desktop work. What makes the desktop work is the antithesis of open-source and UNIX philosophy. The desktop is not about describing your task with small tools that do one thing well, it is about performing your tasks with large tools that are designed around performing related sets of tasks. Linux hackers are bored with this problem. They don't want to bother.

    What Linux needs to succeed on the desktop is a thriving community of user interface hackers led by a Steve Jobs visionary-type. Linux has nothing to attract such people. Linux, in fact, has plenty to turn these people away, from a community that thinks the Gnome and KDE wars are good because it promotes choice, and that X is a good UI solution because you can download window manager themes with penguins and hot anime babe backgrounds. These people run screaming to their Macs. Their Macs understand them.

    What is missing from the Linux desktop is not features. Linux does a tremendous job of having lots of features. What it does not have is any concept of the situations in which its users might use these features. It doesn't care; if you can do something, how can it be broken? You're just too lacking in hacker spirit to figure out how it works.

    Uncle Grandma is never going to have enough hacker spirit to figure out how it works. If Free Software is to solve every problem in the world, it will recognize that. But -- here's a radical idea for you -- maybe Free Software and the Hacker Ethic aren't good at everything! Maybe it shouldn't solve every problem in the world! Perhaps some problems just don't fit will with the Open Source philosophy! Perhaps Linux will never catch on as a mainstream option for the desktop! Perhaps this isn't even a horrible, blasphemous thing!

    1. Re:No. by Enrico+Pulatzo · · Score: 1

      While you make some great points, I must point out that some open source project don't even try to be small , do-one-thing-well programs.

      Free software doesn't necessitate programs or projects being small. Just look at the freaking kernel. The strength in free software is flexibility.

  4. No. by windside · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Is it safe to say that Linux is finally a conteder in the desktop market?

    Absolutely not. It may, however, be a contender.

    [Cue rotten tomatoes]

    --
    ...Whether my Maker is prepared for the great ordeal of meeting me is another matter.
    Churchill
  5. *NOT* the first review by far... by LinuxLasVegas · · Score: 3, Informative

    Mad Penguin holds that honor. They published back on the 25th. Better review IHMO.

    1. Re:*NOT* the first review by far... by TheMadPenguin · · Score: 1

      <grinning>Thanks!</grinning>

      --
      Linux with kernel panic...
      MadPenguin.org
  6. Is it a contender? by mknewman · · Score: 1

    No, not unless Microsoft bought TurboLinux and released it. Folks, this is a classic monopoly, there is no way to compete against it. If you start to make inroads they will either (1) buy you out and flush you, (2) lower the prices to the point where you cannot possibly compete, (3) intimidate their existing customers to think that there will be retaliatioins if they go with you. Forgetaboudit, M$ won, get over it.

    1. Re:Is it a contender? by duggy_92127 · · Score: 1
      (1) buy you out and flush you

      Okay. Hard to buy out that which isn't proprietary and, thanks to the GPL, can't be retroactively closed.

      (2) lower the prices to the point where you cannot possibly compete

      a) It's hard to beat free, although they're trying to do the TCO dance and make it look not-free. But apples-to-apples, Linux is free, Windows aint.

      b) According to Linus, Linux already isn't competing. It's just trying to be the best little OS that it can be for whoever uses it. In fact, in the long run, MS will find it VERY hard to compete with that attitude.

      (3) intimidate their existing customers to think that there will be retaliatioins if they go with you.

      Yea, the FUD. Well, they're well into this, and from what I can tell, that didn't seem to slow Linux down in the server market. When the desktop is "ready", and it becomes more so every day, slowly, slowly, then all the FUD in the world won't be able to hold it back.

      MS is on top, by a long, LONG shot. But to say they've "won" implies that the game is over. It's not. Keep your eyes open, and watch over the next few (5? 10? 15?) years as a bona-fide monopoly gets eroded down to nothing, with no government help whatsoever. Exciting times.

      Doug

  7. what about the philosphy behind it? by kipple · · Score: 1

    I agree that a better "desktop" linux will give more users the possibility to try it and will get more developers in the future, and so on.

    The problem is that Linux is not only "a free alternative to windows". Thanks to the open source philosphy we had better software for "free" (as in beer).

    The problem is not the availability of software. There's plenty of commercial software or free software that plays dvds. The problem is that software has to be free as in beer. No free software means monopolization of the market, which means lesser quality on the long run.
    Think about what did the DeCSS case to the open source world.

    --
    -- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
  8. WAL-MART by wed128 · · Score: 1

    What linux really needs to succeed on the desktop is mainstream OEMs selling preconfigured machines. I'm not talking about walmart, i mean Dell, HP, hell even Emachines need to sell linux based computers, and i'm not counting servers. Then we will have truly taken off

  9. The review contains at least one error by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    This version seems to run exactly like the Windows version. The only differences I found between the Linux version and the Windows version are that I cannot get the custom skins from Cyberlink's website to work on the Linux version, and double-clicking on the screen in Windows will switch the window to fullscreen, whereas in Linux, clicking on the window will hide the controls (under Windows, you cannot hide the controls).

    This is a bunch of hooey. On windows, clicking the window does hide the controls; clicking again will display them. You can also redisplay them by clicking their entry on the task bar.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  10. Logo Sucks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe its just the slashdot icon? I want a distribution with a cool logo! Like maybe a rainbow colored apple, or maybe even a four different colored squares placed together like a window!

  11. Not a Contender for the Desktop by b-baggins · · Score: 2, Insightful
    As long as reviews contain lines like this:

    Fortunately, TurboLinux utilizes the /etc/sysconfig directory to hold most of the system settings, so it is very easy to configure the network by just using a text editor.

    Linux is not ready for the desktop.

    As long as reviewers keep saying that it is very easy to configure the network by just using a text editor, Linux will never be ready for the desktop.

    --
    You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
    1. Re:Not a Contender for the Desktop by TheMadPenguin · · Score: 1

      To the contrary... our review of this release from the 25th describes how *difficult* it was to get the network working properly. Not good at all...

      --
      Linux with kernel panic...
      MadPenguin.org
  12. Yes! by autarkeia · · Score: 1

    This is *it*! Linux is finally ready for the desktop.

  13. But YODLing is fun by Curtman · · Score: 1

    is it safe to say that Linux is finally a conteder in the desktop market?

    What and just THROW away hundreds of upcoming Year of Desktop Linux stories?

  14. not worth reading by jbeamon · · Score: 1

    I know I'm a day late, and I don't care. I clicked through to this article, something I didn't find in the top two or three screens of comments I browsed. The site hosting this "review" formats their pages with banner ads (bearing scantily-clad women, advertising some "matchmaking" service), then about a 3" deep layer of article content, then a discussion thread. There were 8 pages, but I only saw the first few. In three pages, I saw about 5 short paragraphs of text (the size of this comment), no pictures, and who-knows-how-many boobs.

    Does anybody even preview these things? That article, and this post of that article, consist almost entirely of people commenting on their opinion of TurboLinux or some other distro that makes TurboLinux sux0rz. I'd pay a quarter to shake hands with one person who actually read the so-called review.

    --
    -j