I agree with mgkimsal2 on this one. It depends on the size/organization of your company. I know of some companies that fill out 'slot needed' forms and send to the HR department. The HR folks then try to find a best fit of candidates and interview those from the 'best fit' list. To an HR person who isn't knowledgable, StarOffice != Microsoft Office so they would get passed.
I know of lots of educational software titles for Windows. How many titles are available under Linux? How many of the Windows titles will run under Wine?
BSOD are usually caused by crappy drivers of some sort. Get your admin to install WinXP and use updated drivers.
I've run many types of boxes and have found Un*x and Un*x-alikes are very useful in certain roles, typically servers and compute engines, but still are severely lacking in UI design and usability for the masses, IMO. They make great servers but aren't friendly at all to a user, especially non-tech users.
I'll admit I haven't had much experience with a wide variety of Linux distros (I used Slackware for a long time and a year or so ago decided to go with RedHat), but I know that I wouldn't want to spend the afternoon trying to talk my mom through a software install using rpm from RedHat and I'd rather repeatedly throw salt in my eyes than try to get her to compile something.
From a developer standpoint, I don't want to have to spend time getting tools to work rather than working on my problem. Why should I have to spend significant amounts of time dorking with autoconf and makefiles instead of writing software? I've been there and done that and don't want to waste time there again. Also, I like tools like an IDE that automatically incorporates my code into what it already knows like in the intellisense of MS Dev Studio. Leaving one tool in order to go somewhere else to use another tool breaks my train of thought. In some cases, integration of tools is a good thing. Frequently, the tools on Un*x and such have zero discoverability so are frustrating and time consuming to learn. Computer tools should make things easy, not distract.
Anyway, I use RedHat at home some but it is by far my main machine because I can't get it to do many of the things I can on my Windows boxes (or as easy when there is similar functionality -- engineer afterthought GUIs for instance).
With WinXP, my stuff works, the things I need to do get done, and it is easy and efficient. I can do many of the same things on my Linux box, but it takes longer, is more work overall, and is more arduous, in my experience.
1. I haven't seen a BSOD in over 2 years. 2. Viruses will come to Linux as more and more Linux boxes come online. Windows has bugs but it is 90%+ of the computers out there. If you want to do something destructive or 'hackerish', you target what will get you the most bang for the buck. In fact, Linux/Un*x boxes are more security risks because of their great support for multiple users. You may get email viruses and have the machine format it's own harddrive but you won't get box hopping as well. 3. With Windows, any user can keep it up to date (as up to date as Microsoft makes it) by clicking a button. You have to have someone who knows more than that to keep a Linux box up to date. License costs vs. having someone on staff to deal with it. Of course, 'net cafes worth anything will have someone on staff regardless of the OSs present.
- Linux is a lot like Un*x. The type of people who mess around with these type machines are already familiar with Un*x (and many frankly refuse to even try to learn anything else). Stick with what's familiar.
- Un*x type OSs already have time-sharing down (many users on a single machine). While this isn't an issue on a desktop (because everyone has their own), it is an issue when lots of people want to share the $3M machine.
- Un*x type OSs already have remote login capability down (like the previous point). The locality of a machine you are using doesn't matter except for possible latency/bandwidth issues.
- Developers at the respective companies tweak the kernel quite a bit I would imagine. They aren't using the latest RedHat distro ISO they downloaded last night on it.
I've seen a number of MPI distibutions that simply did silly things like
foreach machine in machinesfile
rsh machine command
because it was easy. Of course, these run into problems with many machines (timeouts and takes forever to get started) *but* they wouldn't use anything else because "rsh was standard". This kind of software doesn't work for large systems. The people/companies who support these large systems like this have to solve these types of problems.
The other area of concern is compilers. These type machines have lots of processors but if you have a compiler that produces less-than-efficient code, you are robbing yourself. In a number of cases, GCC isn't going to be your best choice here so you need to find/make good compilers. It doesn't do much good to have a single processor that is capable of 10GFLOPS when your compiler will never be able to get more than 3GFLOPS out of it.
IBM, SGI, and the other companies that are moving to Linux are tackling these types of problems (they have to in order to be successful) and they have their own distributions for their machines.
There is more to a big machine than simply which OS gets the most bogomips. Can Linux be partitioned across a Sun 15K like Solaris can? Can you hot-swap processors/harddrives with it? There are lots of questions like these that have to be answered depending on what you intend to do with the machine.
The IBM 390 machines are not fast. People didn't buy them for their MIPS or FLOPS. They bought them because of their stability and uptime. It's less important that OS1 can serve up X amount of web pages per sec and OS2 can serve up 1.1X web pages per sec when what you want is that the machine *doesn't* go down because a CPU board just burned itself out. *That's* what big iron is about.
Alienware is for people who want high performance and have no idea how to build their own machines. I built my own machines that match Alienware's specs and paid about 1/2 the cost. Of course, I don't have a neon colored case but neither do I want/need one (nor the windows in the side nor the neon lights).
IMO, case mods should be far more personal - individual based on the owner's tastes - not mass produced./shrug
Yeah... imagine that... using such a device as a tool to get things done instead of bowing before it in reverence as if it were a religious figurine =)
(You won't see that much from the fanboys on this board =)
Not really... we implemented MPI on Windows NT and Linux (our own source base) and they were of similar performance at the time (except SMP memory which blew on Linux). I think the SMP stuff on Linux has since been improved from a kernel standpoint so the work that continued has improved performance.
In addition, the compilers at the time on Windows were far better than gcc but that has improved some since then as well (still isn't great).
Since when did I not have a choice? Is that not Linux I'm running on a machine next to this one? Does my friend not have a Mac (it's really a PC running Windows)?
What are the alternatives for workflows that you use now? If there are alternatives on Linux (that aren't too different) then that is one thing. If there are no equivalents, then you are in for a fun time.
Also, what about the work that you do? Are there alternative products on Linux comparable to the ones you use now? If so, then that is one thing. If not, then you are in for a fun time.
Do you own special/custom equipment that is driven by Windows machines/software? Are there drivers/software on Linux that will work with the equipment? If so... If not, you may be sitting high-and-dry if you migrate.
There is a lot more to consider than just the price tag on the OS. It's the applications and the workflows that your users use/have that will make/break your transition.
Using the right tool for the job makes you intelligent in your computing needs. There are plenty of 'computing needs' where Linux AND Windows both are either overkill or otherwise completely inappropriate.
Heh... this moderation finally convinced me that the moderators have no clue.
This post is right on the money. Go ask your family doctor if you want confirmation. I will ignore moderation from now on I guess. You can't trust it anymore.
md5sum doesn't guarantee anything other than saying that the version you downloaded was the one that the author/host put out there for you to download (and not someone else's). If the author/host put a trojan in it, the md5sum will be for the trojan'd software.
In the end, it still comes down to whether or not you (can) trust the author/host.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with mgkimsal2 on this one. It depends on the size/organization of your company. I know of some companies that fill out 'slot needed' forms and send to the HR department. The HR folks then try to find a best fit of candidates and interview those from the 'best fit' list. To an HR person who isn't knowledgable, StarOffice != Microsoft Office so they would get passed.
I know... it's crazy... but it's true!
I know of lots of educational software titles for Windows. How many titles are available under Linux? How many of the Windows titles will run under Wine?
BSOD are usually caused by crappy drivers of some sort. Get your admin to install WinXP and use updated drivers.
I've run many types of boxes and have found Un*x and Un*x-alikes are very useful in certain roles, typically servers and compute engines, but still are severely lacking in UI design and usability for the masses, IMO. They make great servers but aren't friendly at all to a user, especially non-tech users.
I'll admit I haven't had much experience with a wide variety of Linux distros (I used Slackware for a long time and a year or so ago decided to go with RedHat), but I know that I wouldn't want to spend the afternoon trying to talk my mom through a software install using rpm from RedHat and I'd rather repeatedly throw salt in my eyes than try to get her to compile something.
From a developer standpoint, I don't want to have to spend time getting tools to work rather than working on my problem. Why should I have to spend significant amounts of time dorking with autoconf and makefiles instead of writing software? I've been there and done that and don't want to waste time there again. Also, I like tools like an IDE that automatically incorporates my code into what it already knows like in the intellisense of MS Dev Studio. Leaving one tool in order to go somewhere else to use another tool breaks my train of thought. In some cases, integration of tools is a good thing. Frequently, the tools on Un*x and such have zero discoverability so are frustrating and time consuming to learn. Computer tools should make things easy, not distract.
Anyway, I use RedHat at home some but it is by far my main machine because I can't get it to do many of the things I can on my Windows boxes (or as easy when there is similar functionality -- engineer afterthought GUIs for instance).
With WinXP, my stuff works, the things I need to do get done, and it is easy and efficient. I can do many of the same things on my Linux box, but it takes longer, is more work overall, and is more arduous, in my experience.
So.... when Linux and Microsoft switch positions and Linux is on 95% of the boxes... what do we do to break up that OS monopoly?
1. I haven't seen a BSOD in over 2 years.
2. Viruses will come to Linux as more and more Linux boxes come online. Windows has bugs but it is 90%+ of the computers out there. If you want to do something destructive or 'hackerish', you target what will get you the most bang for the buck. In fact, Linux/Un*x boxes are more security risks because of their great support for multiple users. You may get email viruses and have the machine format it's own harddrive but you won't get box hopping as well.
3. With Windows, any user can keep it up to date (as up to date as Microsoft makes it) by clicking a button. You have to have someone who knows more than that to keep a Linux box up to date. License costs vs. having someone on staff to deal with it. Of course, 'net cafes worth anything will have someone on staff regardless of the OSs present.
- Linux is a lot like Un*x. The type of people who mess around with these type machines are already familiar with Un*x (and many frankly refuse to even try to learn anything else). Stick with what's familiar.
- Un*x type OSs already have time-sharing down (many users on a single machine). While this isn't an issue on a desktop (because everyone has their own), it is an issue when lots of people want to share the $3M machine.
- Un*x type OSs already have remote login capability down (like the previous point). The locality of a machine you are using doesn't matter except for possible latency/bandwidth issues.
- Developers at the respective companies tweak the kernel quite a bit I would imagine. They aren't using the latest RedHat distro ISO they downloaded last night on it.
I've seen a number of MPI distibutions that simply did silly things like
foreach machine in machinesfile
rsh machine command
because it was easy. Of course, these run into problems with many machines (timeouts and takes forever to get started) *but* they wouldn't use anything else because "rsh was standard". This kind of software doesn't work for large systems. The people/companies who support these large systems like this have to solve these types of problems.
The other area of concern is compilers. These type machines have lots of processors but if you have a compiler that produces less-than-efficient code, you are robbing yourself. In a number of cases, GCC isn't going to be your best choice here so you need to find/make good compilers. It doesn't do much good to have a single processor that is capable of 10GFLOPS when your compiler will never be able to get more than 3GFLOPS out of it.
IBM, SGI, and the other companies that are moving to Linux are tackling these types of problems (they have to in order to be successful) and they have their own distributions for their machines.
There is more to a big machine than simply which OS gets the most bogomips. Can Linux be partitioned across a Sun 15K like Solaris can? Can you hot-swap processors/harddrives with it? There are lots of questions like these that have to be answered depending on what you intend to do with the machine.
The IBM 390 machines are not fast. People didn't buy them for their MIPS or FLOPS. They bought them because of their stability and uptime. It's less important that OS1 can serve up X amount of web pages per sec and OS2 can serve up 1.1X web pages per sec when what you want is that the machine *doesn't* go down because a CPU board just burned itself out. *That's* what big iron is about.
Sweet. Thanks.
Couple more questions:
What OS and other software are you using?
I haven't played with the LCD you mention, how do you drive it?
Sounds like a great project and a lot of fun.
They have minimal taste =)
Alienware is for people who want high performance and have no idea how to build their own machines. I built my own machines that match Alienware's specs and paid about 1/2 the cost. Of course, I don't have a neon colored case but neither do I want/need one (nor the windows in the side nor the neon lights).
/shrug
IMO, case mods should be far more personal - individual based on the owner's tastes - not mass produced.
This won't be using any distro that you can download an ISO off the web would be my guess. It will be IBM's distro that is 'beefed up' a bit.
Yeah... imagine that... using such a device as a tool to get things done instead of bowing before it in reverence as if it were a religious figurine =)
(You won't see that much from the fanboys on this board =)
There have been numerous articles posted about this... here is one from Tom's (yeah, it's Tom's but it was easiest to find...)
i nd ex.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/mobile/02q4/021107/
which state that it is because the OS and applications weren't compiled to take advantage of the XScale processors or architecture.
Less religion and more real experience.
Yes...
http://www.mpi-softtech.com/news/?id=1037034875
Not really... we implemented MPI on Windows NT and Linux (our own source base) and they were of similar performance at the time (except SMP memory which blew on Linux). I think the SMP stuff on Linux has since been improved from a kernel standpoint so the work that continued has improved performance.
In addition, the compilers at the time on Windows were far better than gcc but that has improved some since then as well (still isn't great).
MPI for Mac OSX Jaguar
http://www.mpi-softtech.com/news/?id=1037037084
Since when did I not have a choice? Is that not Linux I'm running on a machine next to this one? Does my friend not have a Mac (it's really a PC running Windows)?
so... because some technology that people like exists, breaking the law (in this case being a thief) is validated?
Because P2P has become popular does not mean that stealing software/digital information is legal.
Would you walk into BestBuy and walk out with arm loads of CDs and software without paying? Would you call that stealing?
Clock speed in a synchronous (clocked) processor is determined by the longest path in any of the functional units.
What are the alternatives for workflows that you use now? If there are alternatives on Linux (that aren't too different) then that is one thing. If there are no equivalents, then you are in for a fun time.
Also, what about the work that you do? Are there alternative products on Linux comparable to the ones you use now? If so, then that is one thing. If not, then you are in for a fun time.
Do you own special/custom equipment that is driven by Windows machines/software? Are there drivers/software on Linux that will work with the equipment? If so... If not, you may be sitting high-and-dry if you migrate.
There is a lot more to consider than just the price tag on the OS. It's the applications and the workflows that your users use/have that will make/break your transition.
Bzzzt... try again...
Using the right tool for the job makes you intelligent in your computing needs. There are plenty of 'computing needs' where Linux AND Windows both are either overkill or otherwise completely inappropriate.
Heh... this moderation finally convinced me that the moderators have no clue.
This post is right on the money. Go ask your family doctor if you want confirmation. I will ignore moderation from now on I guess. You can't trust it anymore.
md5sum doesn't guarantee anything other than saying that the version you downloaded was the one that the author/host put out there for you to download (and not someone else's). If the author/host put a trojan in it, the md5sum will be for the trojan'd software.
In the end, it still comes down to whether or not you (can) trust the author/host.