OS WARS MEGA THREAD (Now debating proprietary vs. open-source!)

[Ghostrider]

2010 will be the year of desktop Linux. In an alternate reality, of course.

 

[cjp]

Just like how Linux was going to be the end of Windows back in the 90s?

Yeah, something like that. Except Linux in those days only just started to have a decent user interface, was still very quirky, had limited hardware support, and virtually no support for windows applications.

Nowadays, Linux has a very good user interface (though a bit different from what people are used to, but Apple shows that shouldn't be a problem), is still a bit quirky sometimes (but the Ubuntu people do a good job), has a decent level of hardware support, and is slowly starting to support more and more windows applications through Wine.

Basically, I still think that, sooner or later, 'Linux' will take over the desktop OS market from windows. The only part that was too optimistic, was the "end of the 90s" part. And, instead of 'Linux', the winner may very well be another open source OS, such as ReactOS.

ReactOS has a long way to go to even catch up to where Windows is now, and in that time Windows will be continually moving.

True, in both ways: yes, ReactOS has a long way to go (that's why I said 'in the long term'), and yes, windows will be a moving target. But windows can only move when there is still space to move. This space will continuously be annexated by open source software, so windows (as proprietary software) can only survive as long as there is a substantial amount of innovation, which creates extra space.

In all fields of engineering, progress slows down after a booming period, when fundamental limits are approached. For OSes, innovation is already reducing. Windows Vista was a failure, mainly because windows XP was good enough for most people, and there was no real need to upgrade.

Think what will happen to windows when OS innovation stops. What if present-day windows will be perfect for computers in 2050? There will be no opportunity to introduce new proprietary standards, because people will prefer the old standards, which have better compatibility. New versions of windows will only be sold if they do exactly the same as the current version, and therefore it will make no sense for microsoft to develop new versions. They will only add the latest GUI fashion looks to the existing version. As the decades pass, open source will catch on, and microsoft will be forced to make windows licensing costs lower and lower. In the end, even giving it away for free won't work anymore, because people will appreciate the openness of Free software. If they are nice, they will then turn windows into open source abandonware.

If I were to lead microsoft, I wouldn't wait for that day. I would use the companies' resources in the good years to move the company to new markets. There will be a day when investing in windows simply won't be worth the money.

 

[eveningsky339]

Just like how Linux was going to be the end of Windows back in the 90s?

As cjp points out, Linux in the 90's is worlds apart from its modern-day incarnations.

2010 will be the year of desktop Linux. In an alternate reality, of course.

I recently started using the Ubuntu Linux, and quite frankly, it's better than Windows in most areas, with gaming being the exception. It's easier, much faster, and offers a plethora of free, open-source applications which generally exceed payware counterparts. It doesn't come installed with junkware like an XP installation, and of course, malware does not exist. But the Ubuntu folks provide you with an antivirus program just in case a Linux virus comes to exist. I sometimes get kick by downloading infected .exe's and viewing their contents with a smug sense of satisfaction. My machine will never bog down or develop a cluttered hard drive as it did with Vista.

And it didn't cost me a dime.

In fact, I could go salvage one of my older machines (nearly a decade old now), install Ubuntu, and it will more than likely run like new. Try pulling that one off with Vista. I even know of individuals who make this a hobby-- purchase an archaic PC, clear out the hard disk, install Ubuntu, and build a collection.

There are two things that keep me from removing XP from my hard disk-- Orbiter and FSX. And as Wine and other open source OS's continue to develop, there may soon come a day where I can toss XP out the door for good.

 

[kevin1gamer]

I've heard of it but never used it.

 

[computerex]

I haven't booted my XP partition in a while :lol:. Only time will tell what the future holds for us, but I would say that Linux seems to have a bright future. Linux is no longer the pain it used to be to install and maintain. You can get a fully functioning installation within an hour, that is, with all the essential pieces of software already installed such as video and audio codecs, word processors, communication programs, etc. Very, very fast, as opposed to Windows which takes nearly an hour just to install.

And a well configured Linux machine is quite stable. Not to mention the killer desktop effects offered by compiz, that are very appealing to some people. I bet some people upgraded from XP to Vista simply because of the Aero interface and the 3D flip. Compiz fusion makes those things look like Windows 3.1, but requires much, much less resources.

 

[cinder1992]

I'm using it right now. I'm still working out all the kinks with the copy of DirectX I installed, orbiter only gets a frame-rate of Thirty FPS (better than windows :thumbup.

 

[Ghostrider]

I recently started using the Ubuntu Linux, and quite frankly, it's better than Windows in most areas, with gaming being the exception.

And that's quite a lot. People generally do not care about overall stability unless your system crashes twice a minute, but they DO care about what they can do with their stuff. Can Ubuntu run Assassin's Creed? Can it play DVDs or Blu-Ray disks, right out of the box? Can you absolutely guarantee that a document produced with MS Office will be read? Can you have Photoshop, Premiere or any of the most popular image/video editing programs for it?

Yes, I know: there are alternatives. But the majority of users do not care for alternatives and often they are sub-par (see GIMP, it's OK for the average image-manipulation task but any pro will laugh at it) and their user interfaces seem to have been designed for use by Cthulhu himself.

Whether we like it or not, Windows is a standard and will remain a standard for the desktop system for a loooong time, not because it's any better than the competition but because it's an established standard. Just like VHS back in the age of videotape.

I know Ubuntu myself and I quite like it, but we're not going to see it take off. Witness what happened with netbooks where Linux was offered initially as the main OS and then as a cheaper alternative: it didn't work. People wanted netbooks with XP, so the market switched to XP.

 

[computerex]

Can Ubuntu run Assassin's Creed? Can it play DVDs or Blu-Ray disks, right out of the box?

You can after installing some packages. Same thing in windows though, you can't do anything unless you install the right codecs.

Can you absolutely guarantee that a document produced with MS Office will be read?

There are hardly any absolutes in this world, and it is unfair for you to say that. But over 90% of time (I am being very pessimistic here) documents could be viewed without problems.

Can you have Photoshop, Premiere or any of the most popular image/video editing programs for it?

I don't know about Premiere or Vegas, however I do know that many people run Photoshop with WINE. Video editing has always been a pain in linux, video editing applications require a lot of work and that is why we don't have a good solution for it right now.

Yes, I know: there are alternatives. But the majority of users do not care for alternatives and often they are sub-par (see GIMP, it's OK for the average image-manipulation task but any pro will laugh at it) and their user interfaces seem to have been designed for use by Cthulhu himself.

GIMP is anything but trivial...It is a very powerful piece of software, quite comparable to the latest version of Photoshop. Photoshop is simply more popular.

Whether we like it or not, Windows is a standard and will remain a standard for the desktop system for a loooong time, not because it's any better than the competition but because it's an established standard. Just like VHS back in the age of videotape.

Yes, it will be a standard for a long time, but it will, like anything else, have to descend after it's reign of the market. Just like VHS.

 

[Ghostrider]

You can after installing some packages. Same thing in windows though, you can't do anything unless you install the right codecs.

Last time I checked I didn't need any codecs to play a DVD on a fresh Windows or MacOS install. Perhaps Linux changed, but last time I tried it didn't work out of the box.

There are hardly any absolutes in this world, and it is unfair for you to say that.

It's not me who's unfair, it's reality. If one department uses MS Office, and the other switches to OpenOffice or any other solution, and you cannot guarantee docs will be read as they should from one dep to the other, then you have a big problem. Yes, I know, MS Office shouldn't output some vicious files the way it does but it is a standard and we have to deal with it. Fairness ain't nothing to do with it.

But over 90% of time (I am being very pessimistic here) documents could be viewed without problems.

Yeah. Works like a charm with Excel spreadsheet under OpenOffice Calc... NOT.

GIMP is anything but trivial...It is a very powerful piece of software, quite comparable to the latest version of Photoshop. Photoshop is simply more popular.

Can GIMP run my forensic Photoshop filters? No, it doesn't. And its interface needs redesign, badly.

Yes, it will be a standard for a long time, but it will, like anything else, have to descend after it's reign of the market. Just like VHS.

The sooner the better, but it will happen only when there is a viable alternative out there and Linux is not it, at the moment. Where it really shines is in the server department, however. And there's nothing like Ubuntu if you want an Internet Point cheap and effectively.

 

[T.Neo]

Can GIMP run my forensic Photoshop filters? No, it doesn't. And its interface needs redesign, badly.

GIMP is far better then Photoshop in one regard: price.

Although I agree that the interface is horrible.

 

[eveningsky339]

I know Ubuntu myself and I quite like it, but we're not going to see it take off. Witness what happened with netbooks where Linux was offered initially as the main OS and then as a cheaper alternative: it didn't work. People wanted netbooks with XP, so the market switched to XP.

That is a fair point. I'm somewhat active at a free tech support forum, and we often have users who have difficulty with the default Linux installed on their new netbook. However, most of the Linux distro's are, quite frankly, inferior, when compared to distro's such as Ubuntu or Fedora.

More and more, we are seeing Ubuntu replacing Windows. From Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_(operating_system)#cite_note-PCW_Ubu_V_Fed-78

The Ministry of Education and Science of Macedonia deployed more than 180,000 Ubuntu Linux based classroom desktops, and has encouraged every student in the country to use Ubuntu-powered computer workstations.

The French police is in the process of installing Ubuntu on 90,000 workstations, demonstrating a 70% saving on the IT budget without having to reduce its capabilities.

Many people think that the whole "Linux will take over" hype ended in the 90's. But for the increasing number who discover powerful, user friendly distributions (all of which are free, of course), Windows is on its way out in a couple of decades. Case in point: Vista.

 

[Hielor]

I'm using it right now. I'm still working out all the kinks with the copy of DirectX I installed, orbiter only gets a frame-rate of Thirty FPS (better than windows :thumbup.

Better than windows XP? Or better than Vista?

If you're saying that ReactOS is giving you a better framerate in Orbiter than Vista, that's no surprise and has been discussed here many times.

More and more, we are seeing Ubuntu replacing Windows. From Wikipedia:

In workstation and server roles, maybe. As a home desktop? Never. I still don't know why someone would make the choice to use a crippled OS that can't even do the most basic of tasks, like playing modern games.

Many people think that the whole "Linux will take over" hype ended in the 90's. But for the increasing number who discover powerful, user friendly distributions (all of which are free, of course), Windows is on its way out in a couple of decades. Case in point: Vista.

You're right, the hype is still there. And that's all it is: hype. Windows isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Case in point: Win7.

 

[eveningsky339]

In workstation and server roles, maybe. As a home desktop? Never. I still don't know why someone would make the choice to use a crippled OS that can't even do the most basic of tasks, like playing modern games.

ZDnet reports:

"Worldwide, there are 13 million active Ubuntu users with use growing faster than any other distribution."

Ubuntu is particularly popular in poor countries where most copies of Windows are pirated (not everyone can shell out several hundred dollars for an OS).

Calling Ubuntu "crippled" is a little bit extreme, as I think you haven't tried it... I started using Ubuntu after having used Vista for a year, and within a week, Vista was gone. It's fast, lightweight, and has many open source applications which function at the same level, if not better, than Windows payware counterparts (OpenOffice is a good example).

As for modern gaming, you are quite right, many games do not run on Linux. I personally retain XP on my machine because of my Orbiter/FSX addictions. However, Linux is making progress. Many popular games run well under Wine, though I'm afraid Wine isn't the best-case solution.

All that aside, there are many open-source clones of simpler games which keep me quite occupied on a rainy day.

...that can't even do the most basic of tasks, like playing modern games.

Actually, I really wouldn't classify modern games as a "basic task"... Most people I know use Windows for surfing the web, listening music, watching movies, and writing documents. Ubuntu can do all that, and better than Windows. Of course there are occasionally issues, but nothing that Ubuntu's 24/7 free tech support forum can't handle.

You're right, the hype is still there. And that's all it is: hype. Windows isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Case in point: Win7.

As I pointed out, Ubuntu is growing, and fast. It can do all the basic tasks that Windows can in a safer and more user-friendly environment.

Windows 7 is a solid operating system, mostly because it spends most of its time cleaning up Vista's mess. And frankly, that's why most people are going to buy it: it's new and has all the new stuff, but it's not Vista. I stick to my XP, which fits like a comfortable pair of old shoes.

 

[Urwumpe]

I know Ubuntu only as some kind of Linux gadget. It is cool to have it and show it around among other Linux users. and it is good for destroying precious Orbiter meshes (I curse you, Mark Shuttleworth!)

But personally, it is no option for me yet, and I also don't think Linux will ever be really good for games, as long as game development doctrine (ideally single process, all resources) collide with the Multi-User/Multi-System/Multi-Tasking mentality of Linux in general. Ludo ergo sum.

---------- Post added at 07:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:42 PM ----------

Windows 7 is a solid operating system, mostly because it spends most of its time cleaning up Vista's mess. And frankly, that's why most people are going to buy it: it's new and has all the new stuff, but it's not Vista. I stick to my XP, which fits like a comfortable pair of old shoes.

I agree, Skipping Vista and wait for Windows 7 was a good choice by me so far, while I hated the Vista on my brothers PC, Windows 7 on my parents notebook works like charm and has some useful features.

But personally, I think Windows 8 should see a smarter information management strategy in the user interface than the Windows XP-Windows 7 dogma of "The user does not need to know this". I don't want to have to click five menus just for changing the gateway address or the Wifi key.

 

[computerex]

It's not me who's unfair, it's reality. If one department uses MS Office, and the other switches to OpenOffice or any other solution, and you cannot guarantee docs will be read as they should from one dep to the other, then you have a big problem.

Dude, you can't even guarantee whether or not you will be able to read MS Office documents with MS Office! Microsoft seems to have no regard for standardization and releases new document formats like pudding (weird analogy but you get the point). MS Office 2007 for example saves in docx by default. God knows how many times I have had to help people who saved documents in docx but couldn't open it with their older copies of the program. OpenOffice in my opinion does a fine job in terms of reading MS Office documents.

Yeah. Works like a charm with Excel spreadsheet under OpenOffice Calc... NOT.

I personally haven't noticed any problems with opening excel documents with OpenOffice, but I admit my spreadsheets aren't that complex (just a couple of graphs, etc).

Can GIMP run my forensic Photoshop filters? No, it doesn't. And its interface needs redesign, badly.

You realize that you can make custom filters for the program right? And you cannot please everyone with one interface. Every program takes some getting used to. I should also tell you that there are GIMP modifications that give it a similar interface to Photoshop...

The sooner the better, but it will happen only when there is a viable alternative out there and Linux is not it, at the moment. Where it really shines is in the server department, however. And there's nothing like Ubuntu if you want an Internet Point cheap and effectively.

When it will happen, how it will happen depends on your perspective. You gave linux a whirl, and it turned out to be not your thing. This is not the case for everyone. I bet the majority of the computer users haven't even tried one of the distributions.

In workstation and server roles, maybe. As a home desktop? Never. I still don't know why someone would make the choice to use a crippled OS that can't even do the most basic of tasks, like playing modern games.

#1 - Playing modern games on computers is popular, but not basic.

#2 - The problem here is the fact that there are no games for linux because it has such a small market share. Are you telling me that it is impossible to code any games for the operating system? How childish.

#3 - It is already the home desktop for a large number of people.

Why would you want to use it? Maybe because it is not Vista? Honestly, on a "Designed for Windows Vista" machine the OS performs like crap. I have installed/uninstalled Vista multiple times from this machine. I install, like it for a couple hours, then I encounter some strange problem like 100% of my CPU being used and then I would reinstall XP, disgusted.

Windows 7 is a significant improvement and that is why it is being hailed as the "savior". Because its predecessor sucked so much. In terms of innovation and its progress, it has accomplished little.

 

[eveningsky339]

Windows 7 is a significant improvement and that is why it is being hailed as the "savior". Because its predecessor sucked so much. In terms of innovation and its progress, it has accomplished little.

This is something a lot of people don't realize-- 7 is praised because, in essence, it regressed back to the minimalist approach of XP. And, unfortunately for Microsoft, there was so little to improve after XP. This is part of the reason why Vista was such a fail-- they tried to fix what wasn't broken.

Unless Windows 8 is an epic fail (to be followed by a shiny new XP clone, which will be hailed as a savior), Microsoft isn't going to go anywhere.

Heck, they even discontinued Flight Simulator. It's a miracle they have anything left to live for. h:

 

[Hielor]

#1 - Playing modern games on computers is popular, but not basic.

I am a gamer. The ability to play modern games is an absolute requirement.

#2 - The problem here is the fact that there are no games for linux because it has such a small market share. Are you telling me that it is impossible to code any games for the operating system? How childish.

Um, no, that's not what I said. How childish of you to think so.

#3 - It is already the home desktop for a large number of people.

If by "large number" you mean "a significantly smaller number than the users of Windows on home desktops," then yes...

 

[computerex]

I am a gamer. The ability to play modern games is an absolute requirement.

That may be true for you, but not for everyone, in fact I would say the vast majority.

Um, no, that's not what I said. How childish of you to think so.

Simply contradicting someone else's statements without providing reasoning behind the contradiction is childish.

You said:

I still don't know why someone would make the choice to use a crippled OS that can't even do the most basic of tasks, like playing modern games.

To me that (and I am sure the vast majority of the sane population) that sounds as if you are questioning the operating system's ability to play games. That is why I was puzzled, because I would expect a programmer like you to know better. What did you mean then?

If by "large number" you mean "a significantly smaller number than the users of Windows on home desktops," then yes...

What's your point? I wasn't even comparing the linux user base with that of Windows. I was merely saying that linux has already become the operating system of choice for a large number of consumers. That had nothing to do with Windows.

In workstation and server roles, maybe. As a home desktop? Never.

BTW your Boss (Steve, 2:47) seems to disagree with you:

 

[Tommy]

Dude, you can't even guarantee whether or not you will be able to read MS Office documents with MS Office!

LOL! My room mate has to use MS Office for school. She is often given .doc files that her copy of MS Office declares are corrupted and unreadable. She simply opens them in Open Office (they are fine), resaves them, and can then open them fine in MS Office. In their quest to make .doc unreadable by the competition, they've begun making it unreadable even to themselves!

Yeah. Works like a charm with Excel spreadsheet under OpenOffice Calc... NOT.

Calc opens Excel spreadsheets fine - unless there are embedded VB macros. While Open Office has it's own scripting language which can duplicate all the VB macros, at this time that involves converting by hand. If you really need it, MS Office runs under Crossover Office, a WINE fork.

Can GIMP run my forensic Photoshop filters? No, it doesn't. And its interface needs redesign, badly.

Why should it? Can Photoshop run Script Fu? The same functionality is available in GIMP. Photoshop is, IMHO, the best choice for professional photographers only. For making textures and other types of image maipulation, GIMP offers a few advantages over Photoshop. To say that the GIMP isn't professional is just silly. GIMP is the basis of Cinepaint, which is used by every major effects studio for compositing. All the Harry Potter movies, the LOTR trilogy, etc, were all composited using Cinepaint - it even handles the Cineon format.

So far most of the discussion in this thread hasn't really been about the OS's, but about the software stacks available for each platform. Linux falls short of Windows in three main areas. Games. Video Editing. DVD Authoring (for anything fancy it has to be hand scripted).

I still don't know why someone would make the choice to use a crippled OS that can't even do the most basic of tasks, like playing modern games.

This is a shortcoming in the software stack, not the OS. Linux is perfectly capable of playing modern games that are released for it. There just aren't many that are due to Linux's small market share.

To me, a "crippled" operating system is one which prevents you from doing something that the hardware is perfectly capable of. Things like connect more than a half dozen computers without needing a central server. Or have full duplex low latency asyncronous audio IO (not possible in Vista or 7 due to the "protected path"). As a musician, that's a real deal-breaker - it renders the computer useless as a DAW. In both cases this is an artificial limitation deliberately placed on my computer by Microsoft. An OS should enable me to use my computer to the fullest extent possible, not limit my use of it in the name of corporate greed.

I certainly don't expect Linux to make many inroads on the Home Desktop this year, but it's been making quire a few inroads into the Corporate/Buisiness/Government Desktop. And several "Windows vs Mac" studies have shown that people tend to use the same platform at home as they have to use at work. The same will likely hold true for Linux. It's use at home will be tied to, but lag behind, it's adoption in the workplace. In time, as Linux gains marketshare in the home, the software companies will begin releasing more software - including games - for Linux.

 

[Hielor]

Simply contradicting someone else's statements without providing reasoning behind the contradiction is childish.

You said:
To me that (and I am sure the vast majority of the sane population) that sounds as if you are questioning the operating system's ability to play games. That is why I was puzzled, because I would expect a programmer like you to know better. What did you mean then?

Forgive me for assuming that you didn't need help parsing the English language.

What I meant is exactly what I said. Go to the store, grab any modern game, and try to run it on Linux. In the vast majority of cases, it won't work.

What's your point? I wasn't even comparing the linux user base with that of Windows. I was merely saying that linux has already become the operating system of choice for a large number of consumers. That had nothing to do with Windows.

And Windows remains the operating system of choice for a vastly larger number of consumers, despite the "threat" of Linux.