Does Linux provides everything what Windows OS provides?

Discussion in 'Linux Networking' started by tvnaidu, Apr 22, 2005.

  1. tvnaidu

    essteeaenn Guest

    : However, in an office with 5 PCs it is unlikely that there is a
    : "dedicated IT team, well trained or otherwise.

    : The fact is that for such an office Windows is a *disaster*, and
    : Linux is a breeze.

    So typical office workers who don't know how to
    change directory permissions or hwat a firewall is
    are going to install and maintain Linux by themselves?

    riiiight.


    Sorry- either way you need at least someone who knows what they
    are doing. And either way that someone will want to set
    up proper security and whatnot.

    Taking typical office workers ( where's the "any" key? )
    and having them do their own sys admin is a *disaster*
    no matter what the OS is.

    Stan
     
    essteeaenn, Apr 22, 2005
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. tvnaidu

    H. S. Guest

    Apparently, _, on 22/04/05 11:40,typed:
    I am not sure what you mean here. In gnome, e.g., I can switch between
    virtual desktops with CTRL+ALT+LEFTARROW (or RIGHTARROW) keys without
    having the desktop switching applet in the taskbar. Even if I do have
    the applet, it takes up almost the same space as the one in Win XP.
    Moreover, I can also switch just be moving my mouse to the edge of the
    current virtual desktop. There features are there in almost all virtual
    desktops in Linux (KDE, FVWM, etc.). Is this what you mentioned above?

    ->HS
     
    H. S., Apr 22, 2005
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. While we're on this topic!

    I Use Win/Linux in equal measures (If there was a directx for linux I
    wouldnt need windows!)

    Anyone remember windows 98 virtual resolutions?

    Windows XP w/ nvidia cards only supports this on the external TV.

    If anyone knows what I'm talking about and has found a way to do it on
    crt's, PLEASE LET ME KNOW!


    Thanks
     
    Coenraad Loubser, Apr 22, 2005
    #23
  4. While I wouldn't consider zero desktop space much of an
    advantage for virtual desktop managers, I'm positive that fvwm
    can in fact run virtual desktops without using up screen space.
    It could either be not displayed, or displayed only in one
    desktop (leaving the others free).

    It could also probably be made available for display only on
    request via one of the clickable menus.

    In all of the above cases it is possible to move between virtual
    desktops using the keyboard without the mouse.

    My own method is to just minimize exposure to the desktop
    manager, by making it a vertical array of 15 virtual desktops
    and placing the manager at the left side of the screen with a
    width of 64 pixels (on a 1024x768 screen). To make it usable
    with a mouse all that needs to be actually visible is perhaps
    1/16 inch or so. It would be possible to make it only 1/16"
    wide too... but that'd be sorta ugly, eh?

    That's on single monitor systems, such as the laptop. My main
    workstation has a pair of 19" monitors, and the manager is on
    the left side of the right hand monitor. Everything on that
    monitor is sticky, and appears in all of the 15 virtual
    desktops.

    Hence I see no point in hiding a virtual desktop manager, but do
    go to an effort to make it non-intrusive.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Apr 22, 2005
    #24
  5. Yes, crunch them into a little ball and plug some mains power in
    there!!! thats sure to be diskless!
     
    Coenraad Loubser, Apr 22, 2005
    #25
  6. tvnaidu

    essteeaenn Guest

    : While I wouldn't consider zero desktop space much of an
    : advantage for virtual desktop managers, I'm positive that fvwm
    : can in fact run virtual desktops without using up screen space.
    : It could either be not displayed, or displayed only in one
    : desktop (leaving the others free).

    : It could also probably be made available for display only on
    : request via one of the clickable menus.

    : In all of the above cases it is possible to move between virtual
    : desktops using the keyboard without the mouse.

    Great- thanks for the info. For myself I find that losing desktop
    space is extremely annoying, so good to hear that there
    are such options available.


    : My own method is to just minimize exposure to the desktop
    : manager, by making it a vertical array of 15 virtual desktops
    : and placing the manager at the left side of the screen with a
    : width of 64 pixels (on a 1024x768 screen). To make it usable
    : with a mouse all that needs to be actually visible is perhaps
    : 1/16 inch or so. It would be possible to make it only 1/16"
    : wide too... but that'd be sorta ugly, eh?

    Yep- and it requires mouse picks to navigate. Mouse-knocking
    or better yet- keyboard navigation- is a much better solution for me.

    : That's on single monitor systems, such as the laptop. My main
    : workstation has a pair of 19" monitors, and the manager is on
    : the left side of the right hand monitor. Everything on that
    : monitor is sticky, and appears in all of the 15 virtual
    : desktops.

    : Hence I see no point in hiding a virtual desktop manager, but do
    : go to an effort to make it non-intrusive.

    The reason for hiding it is exactly the same as for
    going "to an effort to make it non-intrusive". You
    wouldn't go through the effort if it wasn't intrusive
    in the first place. Your end goal is the same as mine-
    I just get all the way and you stop a little ways off.

    Anyhow- to each his own- good to hear that the option exists.

    thanks for the info

    Stan

    PS- now the thread can get back to Windows FUD-
    that's more fun to read anyhow!
     
    essteeaenn, Apr 22, 2005
    #26
  7. Sorry :p haha

    Not a bad idea... though, the lure of diskless pc's are the silence!..
    Know of any good 3d accellerated terminals?

    OR even better yet, a server that can provide 4 or more VGA out's that
    can be extended over 20M as well as usb keyboard & mice to associate to
    each monitor. Wouldnt that be cool.


    Or what about a linux installation that can boot X in <2GB. Then you can
    load the whole boot image into a 3GB RAM machine, boot over gigabit lan
    from ram, with a diskless ethernet boot terminal, and Hmmm.

    That should go pretty quick.
     
    Coenraad Loubser, Apr 22, 2005
    #27
  8. Or even better yet..

    Arent there LCD's with built in CPU/Ethernet/GFX/USB around?
    Fast enough to run a demanding x desktop with crisp response 'n without
    a glitch?
     
    Coenraad Loubser, Apr 22, 2005
    #28
  9. Hi.

    Yes. Linux does provide everything windows does, and more.

    The installation process is just often slightly more tedious, and there
    is a learning curve if you are going set up mailservers and webservers
    and such - but the same holds for windows.

    I have tried Mandrake, Debian, SuSe, Ubuntu, Caldera, and some others I
    cant recall.

    Out of the lot, Mandrake and SuSe's installations are the most
    straightforward. Mandrake being simpler than Suse. But Suse more powerful.

    Each has its own configuration utility and menu system once youre in
    windows, and you will be better off with someone knowledgeable to walk
    you through the basics. But in short, with a few hours on hand, simply
    by browsing the menus and configs, you should get a webserver up and
    running on Suse or Mandrake.

    haha, The hardest bit will be finding the subdirectory where you should
    put the HTML files! on suse it is /srv/www/html

    Internet Explorer = Mozilla Firefox (which I use on Windows anyways, it
    is identical to IE except you dont get popups and spyware. You can
    enable popups for certain sites. Firefox is really neat! Font smoothing,
    everything, just like IE. Actually, most sites nowadays look better on
    it. Firefox also adds tabbed browsing which is vasly superior to having
    10 or 5 different browser windows all over the screen or the taskbar.

    MS Office = Openoffce 2.0 Beta - which I use on windows anyways. It is
    slightly less responsive than Office 2003, but more versatile and
    powerful, and looks nicer. Just make sure your PC's have at least 512MB
    Ram if you are going to keep mail, spreadsheet, writer, and webbrowser
    all open at the same time.

    Outlook = Mozilla Thunderbird - which I use on win anwyays. Its about as
    configurable and an option I personally LOVE is the threaded view - I
    dump all my sent mail in there, then it is easy to follow email
    conversations as when you receive a response to a previous mail, it
    shows up as a tree, right on top. (if sorted by date). Lovely, neat..
    and as for firefox you can download all kinds of extensions. Be warned,
    it runs best clean with no addons, as do firefox.

    Unfortunately I know of only one linux that comes with all this out of
    the box.

    KNOPPIX!

    The beauty of knoppix is, that you can run it without installing it.
    Thats right. It boots right off the CD. And it is just so cool.

    So, If you want to see what Linux is/can be like, rather download
    Knoppix. I looked at 2.4 and 2.6. Theres probably a newer version out.
    Its even got plugins to use windows drivers for unsupported hardware!

    ...But thats getting into too much detail.

    Do give yourself at least 3-4 days of "down-time" while upgrading and
    installing linux to get everything more or less in place. You are going
    to get stuck and frustrated, and although there is such a volume of help
    available on the internet, you are sometimes going to have to wait quite
    a while until you find the answer.

    But try Knoppix.

    It's got my stamp of approval!

    Coenraad
     
    Coenraad Loubser, Apr 22, 2005
    #29
  10. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Canonical (the folks running Ubuntu) will be happy to sell you support,
    if you would rather pay them for it. Or you can handle it yourself, your
    choice.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFCaUtKd90bcYOAWPYRAhJNAKDuPzN2JiSeNR0CA7O3F7/OmDRQ8gCfT0QN
    77qU7fELUJxczyDffReKSSM=
    =+S2p
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Jim Richardson, Apr 22, 2005
    #30
  11. Out of the box there is *no* Linux distribution that will be
    anything like the disaster that an out of the box Windows is.
    If you know nothing about either one of them... you can
    learn Linux without collecting two dozen viruses in the first
    three weeks of operation, as just one small example of the
    differences. A Linux box might even run for *years* without
    being compromised due to a lack of security. But the time
    to disaster for Windows is measure in mere *minutes* after an
    Internet connect is made.

    The fact is that users do have to learn *something* about either
    system. And the fact is that in the process the Windows machine
    *is* going to become as disaster, while the Linux machine is
    not.
    So they should avoid computers????

    Somebody has to learn something...
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Apr 22, 2005
    #31
  12. tvnaidu

    Dave Uhring Guest

    http://www.cinsa.info/portal/index.php?option=content&task=archivecategory&year=2004&month=11

    '"I hope we turn Canonical in to a sustainable business within the next
    two years," said Shuttleworth.'

    "I am willing to throw a certain amount of money into the project, about
    $10-million over the next two years. If the open-source community does
    not like Ubuntu and Canonical cannot be sustainable, I will switch off
    the money."

    Would you, as a business enterprise owner, choose to risk your investment
    on this operation?
     
    Dave Uhring, Apr 22, 2005
    #32
  13. Sounds a lot better than many enterprises.
     
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Apr 22, 2005
    #33
  14. [ Followup-To -> comp.os.linux.misc ]

    Reasons might include:
    - commercial apps you want/need to run are *only* supported on
    enterprise versions.
    - You want/need the guaranteed live cycle of 5-7 years to handle
    all those systems in your data center(s)?
    - You want someone to blame if something goes wrong?
    - The manufacturer of your high-end 8-way SMP 4U box just won't
    support anything else then enterprise distro on the beast.
    - more...
     
    Michael Heiming, Apr 22, 2005
    #34
  15. tvnaidu

    Dave Uhring Guest

    Agreed, few others are so open about their imminent death.
     
    Dave Uhring, Apr 22, 2005
    #35
  16. Speaking from the conservative POV, I wouldn't switch everyone at once to prevent a mass panic when
    something goes wrong. Start by switching everyone to OpenOffice and firefox for windows. When that goes
    for about a week without excitement then switch one person to Linux. Later on switch everybody else.


    --

    Sincerely,

    Tris Orendorff
    [Two antennae meet on a roof, fall in love and get married. The ceremony wasn't much, but the reception
    was excellent.]
     
    Tris Orendorff, Apr 22, 2005
    #36
  17. tvnaidu

    Carl Fink Guest

    Should this drift over to .advocacy?

    Answer: yes. If Canonical fails, you lose nothing, since you can get
    support from anyone who supports Debian -- a long list.
     
    Carl Fink, Apr 22, 2005
    #37
  18. tvnaidu

    Dave Uhring Guest

    Not really. The question does not at all involve advocacy of Linux but
    rather the viability of support obtained from one Linux distributor vs
    another. Entirely on topic for misc.

    Note: follow up restricted to colm; it is OT in coln.
    Wrong. The enterprise loses the remainder of its yearly support contract
    and has no assurance that another service provider would even support the
    particular installation of Debian.
     
    Dave Uhring, Apr 22, 2005
    #38
  19. tvnaidu

    KG Guest

    KG, Apr 23, 2005
    #39
  20. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    You aren't talking about investing in the company, but about buying a
    support contract. the complaint, was that there was no commercial
    support like RH for Ubuntu, that complaint has been answered.


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

    iD4DBQFCazyZd90bcYOAWPYRAnMIAKDCwSUFvtxe71NsT2FEJcClZAvPMgCYvn/K
    ntbgx0uMbhjq4H0cAWhJUA==
    =5Um/
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Jim Richardson, Apr 24, 2005
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.