[Coco] OT: Vista and MS patent application, Linux

[Joel Ewy]

I'll echo what others have mentioned about *ubuntu having very good
hardware support and very good ease-of-use.  I am finding that current
Ubuntu is having installation issues in <=256M RAM using the Live CD
install.  But the alternate installs still do OK, and actually running
in <=256M is no problem.  XUbuntu still has a few little rough edges
when compared to the Gnome-based Ubuntu, but its performance is quite
good on high-end Pentium through low-end PIII systems.

For lower-end Pentia (and perhaps even high-end 486-oid (5x86)) systems
you almost can't beat DSL (Damn Small Linux.)  DSL packs a whole lot of
functionality per megabyte (50) and has a respectable number of MyDSL
apps that can be downloaded and installed with a single click.  And you
ought to see DSL running entirely from RAM on an Athlon 1800 XP+ w/
512M.  You simply can't do that with Windows.  (VMWare doesn't count.)

This brings us to the topic of the diversity of Linux distributions.  I
see this almost entirely as a strength, with maybe a bit of minor
irritation or confusion being the only downside.  In buying into what
the monopoly supplier has been feeding us, we have created an
impoverished computing environment.  The result is, what in the animal
world would be, a profound lack of genetic diversity.  If all the
chickens come from T*son and they're all their own nephews three
different ways, you've got a population susceptible to the rapid spread
of disease.  Lack of diversity = lack of security.  Period.  The viruses
and spyware I clean off people's computers every day is due to no single
cause more than that everybody runs the same dang code on the same
CPUs.  I would not want to see complete standardization among Linux
distributions.  I want to see variety.  I want to see DSL running on x86
alongside Xubuntu running on a hacked G3 iMac.  This here Internet thing
is based on open standards for interoperability, not on a single,
uniform hardware/software platform.  There can be interoperability
without uniformity.

I'm typing this on a system running Windows 2000 (In Portable
Thunderbird -- I won't run MSOE on a system of mine -- what a piece of
trash) mainly because I haven't yet worked up the nerve to try upgrading
my RedHat 8.1 system (K6-450/256M) to FC??, or (even more scary)
switching it over to Xubuntu.  Thunderbird isn't happy with RH 8.1.  But
I don't expect to be buying Vista (or even XP) any time soon, unless I'm
forced to do it in order to support my customers.  And I would be just
as uneasy about upgrading from one version of MS-Windows to the next. 
The difference is I'd have to pay a couple hundred bucks for the
privilege.  No thanks.

JCE

farna at att.net wrote:
> Because of the compatibility, pricing, and hardware issues, my next upgrade will likely be to Linux. I've been meaning to play with a Simply MEPIS or FreeSpire installation for a while now, but haven't found the time. Took the time to work on trying to get a CoCo3 emulator working on my old laptop yesterday instead -- priorities! 
>
> Pricing has been a problem to me with all the MS stuff from the start. They sell enough copies that pricing could be substantially lower and they'd STILL make one heck of a profit -- partially because there would be fewer pirated copies with a more reasonable price. I don't think anyone should work for free or pennies, but that's hardly the case here! It's not like they don't have the OS market wrapped up either, regardless of the failure of the government anti-trust law suit results. One big player and a few strugglers is still pretty much a monopoly. The worst thing is MS tries to compete across the board, not just in the OS field. I have no problem with Windows being packaged with basic to mid level tools to get someone started right out of the box. It's great that you can buy Windows and be able to at least get by without buying a lot of additional software like back in "the old days" when you had to buy a disk defragmenter, telecom program, etc., just to be able to use t
>  he com
> puter. But to package in such a way as to eliminate competition is borderline criminal, and no help. IMHO the full version of Internet Explorer should be an add-on, giving people more incentive to consider what to spend their money on rather than keeping what was provided. I'm sure many would disagree, but tings like that is one reason the price is so high, and security is an issue. If 80% of Windows users also use IE, what would you target if you were inclined to write a virus? If there was a greater spread, browsers would be a little more secure. MS just goes after every somewhat successful competitor in a crushing wave. Redmond can afford to lose money on one or two products for several years while they bleed the competition out, then up the prices. Smaller companies can't. IMHO MS should have been broke up into divisions with specific items (such as IE) split off to encourage a bit of competition in some areas. 
>
> I have to agree with one thing -- we (computer users in general) are so entrenched in Windows now that it would be detrimental to the computer industry to makie Windows a totally open environment. Everyone touts the openness of Linux as a strong point, and it is to a degree, but there are so many distributions that work differently that there is no stable base or standard. There needs to be a *COMPLETE* standard installation that will work for the average computer *USER* that will simply load and run similar to Windows. *THEN* there can be custom distros subtracting and adding to that, NOT the core kernal. 
>
> When there's something I can buy or download and install, then expect it to work with 90% of the software and peripherals I buy without a lot of tweaking and fiddling with settings from a command line, then Linux will take it's place BESIDE windows as a real alternative. But did you catch what Clifford said about his new job with MS, working with Linux/UNIX guys? MS is moving on Linux, I think, because Linux is starting to become something that can eventually be a real competitor. That's there modis operandi -- when something looks like real competition, beat it out or buy it. Linux can't be bought out, so it must be beaten down. 
>
> Might have something to do with the patent application for a modular operating system... like Linux... If MS gets a US patent, that could be a problem. Even if it's not a full patent, but just grants exclusivity to some portions or ideas about a modular system, MS will viciously protect it. They don't have to be right, or to win. They just have ot have enough of a "foot in the door" to have a viable suspicion to claim infringement to get a court order to "cease and desist" then take a small company to court. That will be enough. MS pockets are deep enough to drag a case out long enough to bankrupt the competition, or prevent anyone from even trying to compete for fear of being dragged through court. That's a typical big business practice. There are law firms who have purchased older patents simply to go after infringers that the orignal holder couldn't afford to take to court. We'll have to wait and see what happens here...
>
> The hardware requirements for Vista are way up there. The first articles I read were from PC Magazine, and the writer was obviously a "power user" (I figured that out later!) who just had to have the latest and greatest. His recommendations to "get the most out of Vista" were way up there! I just built two mid level computers. No dual core processors, but bought motherboards capable of supporting dual cores for a later upgrade. There's no way either would run Vista according to that clown! Then Vista was released, and I saw the minimum recommended hardware. That was more like it. I've got more than the minimum, but nowhere near what was recommended to "get the most" out of it. Even to run Aero you don't have to have a dual core processor, but do have to have a graphics card that's on the low side of high end ($150+). Not too unreasonable like the article indicated -- dual core a must, and $200+ graphics cards. 
>
>
> ------------------
> Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 16:37:36 -0600
> From: "Roger Taylor" <operator at coco3.com>
>
> To those who've upgraded to Windows Vista...
>
> The Rainbow IDE and M.E.S.S. emulator system seem to work great.  You should
> be able to upgrade to Vista and continue your IDE projects as usual, but
> with a better experience.
>
> Btw, Vista rocks like no other, but we're in the early compatibility problem
> stage.  Get the Home Premium or above version to experience the Aero window
> effects.  There's a 3-D flip window mode that shows you a 3-D stacked view
> of all open programs and you can see those programs running in the 3-D view,
> even the CoCo window in M.E.S.S.  Also, the program preview thumbnails that
> pop up when you hover over the taskbar is excellent, and the blurred glass
> effect that shows portions of any underlying windows or the desktop is
> pretty cool.  The gadget sidebar feature is nice and I plan to make some
> Rainbow IDE gadgets that can be installed automatically from the IDE, such
> as a mini programmer's calc, and M.E.S.S. emulator tools.  This kind of
> feature will allow portions of the Rainbow IDE to appear on the sidebar of
> Vista so they are always visible if you like.
>
> If I can give my 2 cents about Vista, to get the best deal, buy a new
> computer/laptop with Vista on it, since the price alone of the upper
> versions of the OS is ridiculous considering it has compatibility issues
> with a great number of software titles (at this time).  This was a problem
> with XP as well and it can literally stop you in your tracks if you run a
> business or do a lot of work from home.  Luckily, some versions of Vista
> come with complete multimedia solutions like DVD making/burning, which I
> will have to convert the CoCo TV project to soon.  Vista and Nero don't mix
> at this point unless you upgrade Nero for a cost.
>
> So far, the IDEs that I use for all of my development work well under Vista
> with no changes required.
>
> --
> Frank Swygert
> Publisher, "American Motors Cars" 
> Magazine (AMC)
> For all AMC enthusiasts
> http://farna.home.att.net/AIM.html
> (free download available!)
>
>