[Gllug] Linux users - sign petition to say you use BBC web site!

[Christopher Currie]

 On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 12:19:29 +0000: Iain Conochie <iain at shihad.org> wrote:
> >
> > Err....that's just not true any more. Even Windows 2000, which I'm
> > running on my office machine, only seems to want a reboot when it
> > installs security updates.

Shouldn't it be doing that rather frequently? With Ubuntu and SuSe I seem to 
get security updates about twice a week on average, and need to check daily, 
even as an ordinary desktop user.

http://www.computing.co.uk/vnunet/news/2197033/skype-blames-patch-tuesday

suggests that the problem is still much more serious than you and Jason have 
implied.

On  Tue, 06 Nov 2007 20:04:02 +0000 Riq <riq at trw.org.uk> wrote:

>The third client was very happy with Linux, till her daughter found a 
>website which would only work properly with IE. As this was necessary to 
>apply for
>a job, I had to install Windows. In this case a dual boot was chosen and 
>IE only used when unavoidable.

Why not use IE6 over Wine? If you need Crossover, it's cheaper than than most 
modern versions of Windows, especially full, non-upgrade versions which seem 
difficult to obtain retail anyway. I agree if IE7 is essential, there's a 
problem, but I would think few sites are insisting on it as yet. 

If there'a a licensing problem with IE6, it's always possible to install a 
genuine copy of a very old Windows (e.g. W95), which can be obtained cheaply 
and needn't take much disk space, and not use it.

I use Windows XP-SP2 three days a week in the office, and KDE 3.5.x over SuSE 
10.2 here. The two PCs each have a Pentium 4 and 1GB RAM; the home one is 
clocked at 3.20 GHz rather than 2.85, so about 13 per cent faster.

Part of my responsibilities involve data upload & editing on the firm's 
website database, which is remotely housed and runs an M$-based system which 
requires access with IE. Firefox can be used to a limited extent.

For that job, which is done most efficiently with several windows open at 
once, the limitations of XP drive me up the wall -- the functional difference 
in speed and productivity is far greater than 13 per cent. 

I now try to do as much as possible of the work from home one evening a week - 
between days when a colleague works, and a day when we both work. I can 
generally do up to 30 per cent of the work in  up to 3 hours on that evening, 
compared to a notional 18-24 man-hours for two people doing the rest in the 
adjoining days. And that involves using IE and a specialist text editor under 
WINE, as well as running under two users and swapping back from time to time 
to my personal KDE session,  so the home system is at a disadvantage.

For other things, that I do privately, Windows, with properly licensed 
software, would involve far greater cost for the same level of functionality 
(I would need much faster hardware, so the cost of that would add to the 
software fees. I would use freeware and shareware over Windows where 
possible, but if you pay shareware fees, firewall & antivirus subs, etc. the 
cost is still substantial).

So I find it hard to see why any rational person would still use Windows, 
other than 
(i) a few specialist apps for which the Windows version is (still) genuinely 
better, or the Linux one non-existent, and Wine can't be used; 
(ii) the lock-in factor... compatibility is forcing adherence to a grossly 
inferior system (and of course Microsoft's priority is always preserving the 
lock-in; better functionality comes second).

Without the lock-in, and with fair competition, Windows would therefore now be 
a niche system, like the Mac.

The pressure to have OpenXML adopted as an ISO standard, when there already is 
one, is a scandal.

Christopher
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug