Stop Microsoft
Operating Systems => Linux and UNIX => Topic started by: solo on 3 June 2003, 07:56
-
In my growing curiosity I've started a topic to poll the MES crowds on why they still have Windows.
We all know Linux needs more games support, save that one. Any other reason(s)?
-
It needs Adobe Photoshop and Macromedia Flash MX. It needs easier installation procedures with a central applications folder. It needs better usb and firewire support.
Now explanations:
GIMP is not 100% compatible with Photoshop and vice versa.
I have not seen a Flash MX copy worth using and I've heard that people have had trouble getting Flash to work in Wine.
./configure make make install sound familiar. Or rpm's that only work half the time. Then you still don't know where the files are, they are just on your hard drive in some bin or etc folder.
I have a usb memory stick thing, not a card reader. Just a little device with some solid state memory and usb port. I plug it into my RH system. nothing happens. I don't know if it has mounted and I have to go look for it or if I have to mount it, but it aint on my desktop.
-
All the newer distributions are implementing schemes like Debians apt-get, and personally I think apt-get is simpler than Mac OSX method. So software installation is now covered.
Apt-get process:
Go to big menu of software
Choose software you want
Click install and all the config is done for you
Mac OSX process:
Go to big download site / store
Find software you want in invariably poorly organized menus / shelves
Download software / buy software
Unzip/extract
Drag to relevant location where you have space
(Then I guess you need to set up shortcuts too? Or do you just put it in a central location and it runs?)
I mean I don't even need to know where the binaries go because my path handles that all for me. Why are you people still using Macs??? :confused:
-
All it needs is a graphical, easier Debian install for the newbies and a better centralised config menu. That's it.
-
Linux still has no hardware acceleration support for advanced 3d sound API's. Creative was going to make an OpenAL accelerated driver for the EMU10K1 but that kind of died when Loki did...
You could probably group this under gaming support but there are some nice environmental effects which can be done in Windows (through EAX, for example) that can't be done in Linux.
-
I've played with EAX effects in Windows and the distort is shocking. I just don't think that non-hardware solutions are really effective for real time sound work - the best equipment I've seen was a little box in a Melbourne "sound engineering" studio. The dude playing that thing got the most realistic faked piano sound I have ever heard out of an electric guitar and that little black box...
I agree with you 100% about the 3D sound but not about the "special effects."
-
Oh and Debian needs:
"Nicer" looking windows ala Red Hat, (is this GTK2?)
Some pretty default themes (chosen from in the install?)
Incredibly easy Wine / WineX support. Like "automatic" incredibly easy.
XFree86 4.3.0
-
i want to see more apps that are self-contained, so there is no install or uninstall hassle. Like OSX. I would like to see Adobe, Macromedia, & Autodesk software ported to Linux, becuase GIMP is a joke, and i prefer their software to any of the free stuff available. And since i already get to use these in OSX, what it is the point in using Linux? (baiting.....I'm an asshole ;) )
-
The development tools we use at work (Centura Team Developer, Toad, XML Spy and many others) are not available for Linux.
Colin McRae (and about a zillion other games) does/do not work under Linux.
Photoshop is not available for Linux (tell a REAL graphics artist that Gimp has no cmyk support and s/he will laugh at you)
I bet OpenOffice is not fully compatible with MS Office which means that you're not compatible with documents 90% of desktop users send you. While the last bit is easy to overcome when you're sending documents between friends this *IS* a real problem when dealing with customers. They simply do not care if you have a C64, Amiga or a Linux box. They will send you MS Office docs and if I can't read them they I have a problem.
Also, as long as the Office market is dominated by MS I don't see OpenOffice competing. Why ? Because of the closed fileformats from MS. Let's say for the sake of argument that Office 2003 (or whatever they will call it) will have a new fileformat for Word and Excel. It means that several people in the opensource community will have a hard time figuring out that format. It will take months before a new version of OpenOffice appears that will support them. And how good will it support them ? Even right down to the subtropical features that we get from MS : embedded this's and thats ?
We have tight roadmaps for new verions or service updates from our products at work. Keeping in mind that our main development tools have no Linux version using Linux is not an option.
-
quote:
Originally posted by M505:
The development tools we use at work (Centura Team Developer, Toad, XML Spy and many others) are not available for Linux.
Colin McRae (and about a zillion other games) does/do not work under Linux.
Photoshop is not available for Linux (tell a REAL graphics artist that Gimp has no cmyk support and s/he will laugh at you)
I bet OpenOffice is not fully compatible with MS Office which means that you're not compatible with documents 90% of desktop users send you. While the last bit is easy to overcome when you're sending documents between friends this *IS* a real problem when dealing with customers. They simply do not care if you have a C64, Amiga or a Linux box. They will send you MS Office docs and if I can't read them they I have a problem.
Also, as long as the Office market is dominated by MS I don't see OpenOffice competing. Why ? Because of the closed fileformats from MS. Let's say for the sake of argument that Office 2003 (or whatever they will call it) will have a new fileformat for Word and Excel. It means that several people in the opensource community will have a hard time figuring out that format. It will take months before a new version of OpenOffice appears that will support them. And how good will it support them ? Even right down to the subtropical features that we get from MS : embedded this's and thats ?
We have tight roadmaps for new verions or service updates from our products at work. Keeping in mind that our main development tools have no Linux version using Linux is not an option.
i laugh everytime i think about GIMP not supporting CMYK. as for open office, it is very compatable with MS office. I use it at work and our office manager (and everyone else) uses MS office, and i can open and save to their files with no problem. Because i am a "graphics guy", i cannot seriousely use a linux distro yet. I say "Yet", because i have faith that open source software will dominate and be superior to anything the proprietary markets can push out. until then, i will use my mac...
if only i could code, then i could at least contribute to the GIMPs develpment.
-
quote:
Originally posted by M505:
I bet OpenOffice is not fully compatible with MS Office
Hey, man. It's MS Office that's not compatible with OpenOffice.org! :rolleyes:
-
quote:
Originally posted by M505:
I bet OpenOffice is not fully compatible with MS Office which means that you're not compatible with documents 90% of desktop users send you. While the last bit is easy to overcome when you're sending documents between friends this *IS* a real problem when dealing with customers. They simply do not care if you have a C64, Amiga or a Linux box. They will send you MS Office docs and if I can't read them they I have a problem.
This is load of BS. The point of using open office documents is that the document format works with a large number of different office suites. It is actually in M$ best interests to make their document formats compatible with other office suites because if they don't, they are going to lose out. Why wouldn't you want to use a product that is more flexible than M$ office ? An applcation that can cope with documents from many applications has to be a good thing.
quote:
Originally posted by M505:
Also, as long as the Office market is dominated by MS I don't see OpenOffice competing.
Open office suites are going to compete on price alone.
-
quote:
This is load of BS. The point of using open office documents is that the document format works with a large number of different office suites. It is actually in M$ best interests to make their document formats compatible with other office suites because if they don't, they are going to lose out. Why wouldn't you want to use a product that is more flexible than M$ office ? An applcation that can cope with documents from many applications has to be a good thing.
Where did I say it is bad to be compatible with loooots of other Office suites ? Nowhere. Why did you bring this up ?
My point was and still is : as long as MS has 90% of the desktop market and dominates the Office market it will be difficult for OpenOffice to compete. Even your claim to be compatible with other Office suites makes no sense because all the other Office suites together is still only 10% of the market.
I'm just saying that if the competition has 90% market share they can make life very hard for OpenOffice, like I said, by starting to fiddle with their file formats is just one problem for OpenOffice. I've never used OO but I will try it when I get round to it. We have MS Office at work which I *hate*. I don't know why MS needs over 50mb of disk space for a text editor (Word). All it has to do is show the letter on screen that you type. Pretty elementary stuff if you think about it.
That said, they can do some heavy stuff within Office, embedding documents from other applications in their documents, just to name one. I seriously doubt that OpenOffice supports all those gimmicks.
A lot of people here make it look very easy ... Photoshop ? We have The Gimp, solved. MS Office ? We have OpenOffice, solved.
It's just not true : they may come close in functionality, close enough for Joe Average but expert users will laugh at them. The lack of CMYK support in Gimp is one example.
If you take a non CMYK file to a printing company they *will* laugh at you. Deal with it and don't go claiming that The Gimp = Photoshop. It just isn't so.
-
On a more positive note all the programs needed for webwork like html editors, ftp programs etc seem to work fine in my Mandrake 9.1 install. (http://smile.gif)
-
I think you will be pleasanty suprised with OOo once you try it and maybe have to retract some of your post (http://smile.gif) . But I have to agree on the GIMP front as it just doesnt cut it for a pro, even with all the plugins installed.
-
Photoshop is a funny thing. If you tell a pro designer that you use Photoshop under Windows they laugh at you too.
Most of them are Macintosh lovers. :D
-
quote:
Originally posted by M505:
Where did I say it is bad to be compatible with loooots of other Office suites ? Nowhere. Why did you bring this up ?
I brought it up because you are perpetuating the myth that everything must revolve around M$ Office. It doesn't.
quote:
Originally posted by M505:
My point was and still is : as long as MS has 90% of the desktop market and dominates the Office market it will be difficult for OpenOffice to compete. Even your claim to be compatible with other Office suites makes no sense because all the other Office suites together is still only 10% of the market.
And as long as you and people like you buy into this BS the longer the situation remains the same.
quote:
Originally posted by M505:
I'm just saying that if the competition has 90% market share they can make life very hard for OpenOffice, like I said, by starting to fiddle with their file formats is just one problem for OpenOffice. I've never used OO but I will try it when I get round to it. We have MS Office at work which I *hate*. I don't know why MS needs over 50mb of disk space for a text editor (Word). All it has to do is show the letter on screen that you type. Pretty elementary stuff if you think about it.
That said, they can do some heavy stuff within Office, embedding documents from other applications in their documents, just to name one. I seriously doubt that OpenOffice supports all those gimmicks.
I agree with you, most of the office suite applications are full of features that we just don't have a requirement for. Hence, M$ bundles "Works" with their "OS". Excel is a hugely powerful application but most of the advanced features are left alone where I work. You're also correct in a sense that a text editor is a text editor. The only yhing that differentiates one word processor from another is the crap that comes with it. That's why Open Office is appealing, I get what I need, not what M$ thinks I need.
quote:
Originally posted by M505:
A lot of people here make it look very easy ... Photoshop ? We have The Gimp, solved. MS Office ? We have OpenOffice, solved.
It's just not true : they may come close in functionality, close enough for Joe Average but expert users will laugh at them. The lack of CMYK support in Gimp is one example.
If you take a non CMYK file to a printing company they *will* laugh at you. Deal with it and don't go claiming that The Gimp = Photoshop. It just isn't so.
Well I can't comment on those applications but I will take your word (no pun intended) for it. As the Linux platform matures, these issues will become less and less and hopefully, an even playing field will result.
I myself use Office 97 a bit at work. I also use Star Office for documents and spreadsheets too and nobody has spotted the difference when I publish them. Star Office cost me, NOWT ! So that's a good deal.
-
quote:
Originally posted by HibbeeBoy:
Star Office cost me, NOWT ! So that's a good deal.
[off-topic] Americans use the word 'nowt' - hmm I thought that was just a northern colloquial british term.... [/off-topic]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Tux:
[off-topic] Americans use the word 'nowt' - hmm I thought that was just a northern colloquial british term.... [/off-topic]
Read my sig, I only live in America.
As the old saying goes,
"You can take the man out of Leith... etc" javascript: x()
;) ;) ;) ;) ;)
-
quote:
Originally posted by Faust:
All the newer distributions are implementing schemes like Debians apt-get, and personally I think apt-get is simpler than Mac OSX method. So software installation is now covered.
Apt-get process:
Go to big menu of software
Choose software you want
Click install and all the config is done for you
Mac OSX process:
Go to big download site / store
Find software you want in invariably poorly organized menus / shelves
Download software / buy software
Unzip/extract
Drag to relevant location where you have space
(Then I guess you need to set up shortcuts too? Or do you just put it in a central location and it runs?)
I mean I don't even need to know where the binaries go because my path handles that all for me. Why are you people still using Macs??? :confused:
apt-get == win
:D
-
Those of you that won't switch because of Photoshop, you don't have an excuse anymore. ;)
Crossover Office from Codeweavers supports all versions of Photoshop:
http://www.codeweavers.com (http://www.codeweavers.com)
They don't claim to support Dreamweaver yet, though.
-
GIMP, OpenOffice etc is not part of the operating system, but I see your points. It is true that Gimp, OpenOffice sometimes lack things that are needed but when it all comes down to it, such problems regarding porting are the application vendors problems. They *will* port their stuff when Linux makes it into the desktop. Types of issues regarding software like Flash MX etc are not the OS developers problem, they are the marketers problem.
That's not to say I don't agree: the only piece of software that Linux has nothing to compare to in my mind is Macromedia Flash. I can live without Photoshop because I have GIMP and dont require the features you speak of. I can live without Dreamweaver because I am a good coder and believe code is better hand coded anyway. I would absolutely love to see Macromedia Flash MX on Linux, and I've heard rumours that they may have it on their mind.
Better USB and Firewire support: Firewire support I do not know much of in Linux, but as for USB: USB works perfectly in Linux. Maybe we need more USB *device* support, but USB support itself works great and a good amount of devices works fine. How can anyone expect the Linux developers to create device drivers for all the devices? In the Windows and Mac non-standard drivers are written by the device manufacturer. That problem will be solved *when* Linux is adopted.
Some of the arguments posted are true: we need a independent package system that allows software to have their own libraries etc., so dependency problems are nonexistant. Mac's system is nice... I'd like to see our current system RPM evolve some more and get a more universal program based (as opposed to category based /bin /lib etc). GoboLinux and others, including my own Linux are experimenting with software folders, which is a good step in the right direction.
Here's my view on what our problems are:
- Dependency problems can turn into nightmares.
- XFree86 needs to catch up
- 3D sound support, as well as a standard sound system
- Universal toolkit methods
-
I think Solo has it pretty much covered.
Also it seems that Mac OSX is still ahead in the specialist graphics / sound artist stakes... we'll get there. (http://smile.gif) Hell our weak points are better than Windows' strong points. ;)
-
What is CMYK? :confused:
-
Hi All,
This talk about MSOffice compatibility bothers me. MSOffice is not even compatible with MSOffice! I have MSOffice 97 Pro installed on my Win98 box and I got my wife to convert to using my Linux box at home when her office upgraded to M$Office 2000 and she could no longer open and edit documents and spreadsheets on our Windows computer at home. But Open Office could do the job. There must be at least 10 "versions" of MSWord out there, but if you don't have the most current version... you can't open docs created in newer versions. So, you have a choice. Go out and spend a couple of hundred dollars and buy the current MSOffice suite, or get a Linux distribution that has Open Office on it.
Oh, and once she found out that my Linux computers could work with her MSOffice documents, she found out about the Linux web browsers... galeon and mozilla... with no pop-up windows and tabbed browsing. And then both of my daughters wanted to use Linux too. So I have 5 computers in the house, one still has Windows on it, and I have to fight to use my favorite one. It is a dual boot machine... it will boot to both good operating systems; Red Hat 8 and Red Hat 9 :)
Soooo there is only one Linux shortfall (other than games) that I can think of. I need a good Linux replacement for TaxCut or TurboTax and I can upgrade my last Windows box to Linux and the whole family will be happy.
Jim
-
Taxcat sounds like a money program right? (sorry but I dont have much to go on...) Have you tried gnucash?
-
quote:
Originally posted by Faust:
All the newer distributions are implementing schemes like Debians apt-get, and personally I think apt-get is simpler than Mac OSX method. So software installation is now covered.
Apt-get process:
Go to big menu of software
Choose software you want
Click install and all the config is done for you
Mac OSX process:
Go to big download site / store
Find software you want in invariably poorly organized menus / shelves
Download software / buy software
Unzip/extract
Drag to relevant location where you have space
(Then I guess you need to set up shortcuts too? Or do you just put it in a central location and it runs?)
I mean I don't even need to know where the binaries go because my path handles that all for me. Why are you people still using Macs??? :confused:
You can set up shortcuts, but its definitely not needed. I don't use shortcuts. They would just clutter up my desktop.
However, the apt-get thing. You are assuming idealism. First the program has to be in the list, if its not its back to rpm's and source. Second, I messed it up. It wasn't even hard. I went into Synaptic to install Ogle, mplayer, etc. I also decided to update my out of date stuff. Worked perfectly. Then I decided I wanted to install something (can't remember wut it was) So I went to the Red Hat Package Manager. Selected my shit. Clicked next. Dependency problem. Can't find blah blah version whatever. I checked in synaptic. had the package installed. I figured out what was wrong. Synaptic had updated the package to a newer than redhat version. So it decided I had a dependency problem. I posted for help in the linux forum, here (http://forum.fuckmicrosoft.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=001839). No help. No one could fix it. Then I reformatted that partiton for Windows and sacrificed its swap for BeOS. My computer is much happier now.
I don't know about you, but I'm a control freak. I have to know where my files are. Its just me. I have to know where they are, and control over them is also good. So on my mac, I can have a program wherever I want. I don't want it there any longer. Move it. it still runs perfect, with all my prefs and everything. And most OSX programs are packages. They are folders that the system thinks are files. This is good, because they look clean. There is only one file that could possibly execute it, the package file. And all of the code files and picture files and shit are hidden away until I want to see them. And of course seeing them is easy. Right click "Show package contents." Through all my using Linux, I could not say that any part of its installing things is easier than a mac.
-
Yet you said in the aforementioned thread that the stuff you wanted to install installed just fine. What happened?
-
quote:
I agree with you, most of the office suite applications are full of features that we just don't have a requirement for. Hence, M$ bundles "Works" with their "OS". Excel is a hugely powerful application but most of the advanced features are left alone where I work.
That's ok for you then. But keep in mind that there are about 6 billion other people out there. Amongst these there *are* people that use the specialties that MS Office offers. Again : if OO claims to be compatible, it has to be compatible 100%.
quote:
I myself use Office 97 a bit at work. I also use Star Office for documents and spreadsheets too and nobody has spotted the difference when I publish them. Star Office cost me, NOWT ! So that's a good deal.
Well, I don't know about you but I certainly don't care if my boss has to pay for the Office products or not. All that matters is that my boss gives me the tools I need to get the job done and I get my paycheck every month. If he wants to cut costs and go to OO then fine, no problem.
About the backwards compatibility problem ... I understand what you mean and yes : it *is* harsh that you have to have the latest version of Word or whatever but that's not an MS only problem. Think Oracle, think other db providers. These products grow, every version has new features that the previous one didn't have. I'm a fulltime software developer and heck, even *our own* software is not always backwards compatible. For software companies maintenance contracts with customers are a *very* important part of their income.
I *do*, however, acknowledge that there is a difference between a "healthy" maintenance contract and the knife-against-throat contracts that MS uses.
-
There's another reason why we continue to work on the Windows platform at work : our applications "talk" with Office. We create Reports from our applications which automatically start up Word, run Macro's, blabla. You know : the entire DDE and/or ActiveX automation story.
The good news is a lot of people here experiment with Linux after hours. One of them just gave me a bootable cd of Vector Linux 3.2, based on Slackware. (http://smile.gif)
-
quote:
Originally posted by emh:
Yet you said in the aforementioned thread that the stuff you wanted to install installed just fine. What happened?
through some miracle I went to the auto update thing in RH and it fixed it. I don't know how. But I still was not able to do what I wanted to do. RH is no longer on my PC. So I can't elaborate (its been a while).
-
I think think the tight-fisted IT budgets at the moment can only help OOo, although stupid businesses will probably just get warez MS Office :(
-
quote:
Originally posted by M505:
Well, I don't know about you but I certainly don't care if my boss has to pay for the Office products or not.
No, that's right, you don't know about me. I am an IT decision maker and I do care how much I need to spend on applications. So for me, I need to really consider these things. Most of the desktop PC (about 35) are running Win 98 with Office'97 with a few XP boxes starting to creep in. I want to stop that in it's tracks. Our needs, like our users, are simple so OO would probably be a good fit. Hey, it's probably not for everybody but on cost alone, it's very appealing.
I look forward to the day when I can announce the organisation is a Microsoft free zone.
The compatibilty with Office documents can easily be worked around - print a hard copy and mail/fax the bloody thing. There is a dangerous premise starting to permuate throughout corporate culture that in order to do business, it has to be through computers. Too often I see IT being a hinderence to conducting business. Just my opinion, I could be wrong !
-
Well, computers and the internet have evolved very far, so far that e-mail has become a powerful medium to do data exchange.
Reverting to paper/fax is going back years, I think. Seems like a harsh thing to do just to cope with the different between MS and OO.
But hey : if it makes you happy, do it.
That said, this is getting a bit off topic.
-
quote:
Originally posted by M505:
Well, computers and the internet have evolved very far, so far that e-mail has become a powerful medium to do data exchange.
Reverting to paper/fax is going back years, I think. Seems like a harsh thing to do just to cope with the different between MS and OO.
But hey : if it makes you happy, do it.
That said, this is getting a bit off topic.
Aye, you're right, a bit off topic and no, it doesn't make me happy either. If M$ can't make their documents compatable with "standards" then they (in my opinion) have a flawed product. It's M$'s constant hijacking of "standards" that screw everything up.
Still off topic, I remember when I got into IT the hype was "The Paperless Office". What happened to that ?
-
quote:
Originally posted by Faust:
What is CMYK? :confused:
The four colors of ink used in printing. Three are the primary colors of pigment.
Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, and blacK.
This is opposed to the primary colors of light which are RGB (Red, Green, and Blue).
[ June 04, 2003: Message edited by: M. O'Brien ]
-
Well the compatibility problem with MS and OO should not be a problem. At all.
Any good-knowing IT manager who installs workstations with OO and Linux should be prepared for the situation where an employee asks, "I couldn't open the document Joe sent me. He uses MS Office XP" with the answer "Tell him to click on the drop down menu next to Type and choose Rich Text Format from the list, then send it."
OO *does* support RTF doesn't it?
-
Tell a webmaster that you use Windows XP and IIS as a webserver. He will laugh at you. Tell a large web hosting service to switch from linux to Mac OS X, and he will laugh in your face. Windows and Mac OS X are completely impractical for large scale server applications because their cost is way too high. Im not saying that people dont use these two types of systems for this reason, but Im absolutely sure the cost was much higher. Also when was the last time you heard of a Hollywood studio using hundreds of windows or Mac computers in huge render farms to create movies? My point is that there are things linux cant do, but there are also things macs and windows pc's cant do. Im absolutely sick of the comparisons. Use what you need.
-
i don't know what to say.
jeffberg pretty much covered it all for me.
jeffberg = genius
-
This should also apply for all the linux fanatics who want to dethrone Mac OS as a desktop OS (although I perfectly understand why they would want to replace Windoze).