[SWLUG] Re: Giving up Windows

[Julian Hall]

Rhys Sage wrote:

>I'm right there with you. I'm giving up Windows too.
>
>Since I came to the conclusion that there really
>wasn't much point in programming for Windows any more.
>I also came to the conclusion that the software I wish
>to use under Windows just doesn't seem to exist and am
>mightily tired of Windows bugs/viruses.
>
Heartily agreed!

> XP Pro is
>without a shadow of a doubt the best O/S that
>Microsoft has ever produced
>
Definitely disagree.  Xtra Panic is a major pain in the rear as far as I 
am concerned.  This business of hardware suppliers not giving driver 
disks because "Oh XP will find the drivers" is a load of cobblers.  In 
my experience XP's own drivers are rubbish and sometimes *not even 
signed by Microsoft* which is laughable when you get the warning "This 
driver is not signed do you wish to continue?"  It's nowhere near as 
secure as Windows 2000 Pro (my personal favourite of the Windows 
stable), for example with 2K, CTRL/ALT/Del and you have to put a 
password in to get access to the system.  XP you press Esc.  Big deal.  
Also in XP you cannot limit shares properly.  In 2K you can specify a 
list of users allowed to access each share and block everyone else.  If 
a hacker managed to get through your firewall etc he/she would still 
face the challenge of faking being one of your allowed users.  I could 
go on but I won't as this is a Linux list :)

>I have considered using Linux but run accross two
>problems:
>
>1. A lack of anything like Windows ease of use. My
>personal use of Linux is restricted to SME Linux which
>I use on my server. I have tried Mandrake 10 and found
>it to be awkward for dial-up access and somewhat
>processor intensive.
>
I use MDK 10.1 and set-up dialup access in minutes.  Provided your modem 
is supported (see 2.) dialup access in MDK10.x is simple.

> In addition the desktop
>environments weren't quite as good as Windows. I did
>find one that I could almost live with though.
>  
>
Personally I don't find much difference.  In Linux I *like* that when I 
put a CD in the drive the icon appears on the desktop.  Windows doesn't 
do that, and for ease of use that wins, in fact I believe it does the 
same for all removable devices, assuming they're configured properly :)

>2. Most of the software seems to be of the
>compile-it-yourself variety.
>
Yes, oh yes indeedy!  While I agree you *can* limit yourself to just 
installing packages (RPMs, DEBs etc) you are doing exactly that.  
Limiting yourself.  The bog standard user of bog standard Office 
Applications can get away with vanilla Linux and packaged 
modules/programs.  The rest of us have our work cut out.

For example I wanted wireless on my laptop (not built in).  Easy peasy 
in Windows, slap in the PCMCIA card, load the driver off the CD and away 
you go.  In minutes.

In Linux, first I had to edit a couple of config files because the 
PCMCIA Cardbus is not supported properly by the default Linux kernel.  
Next I had to download, compile from source and configure the module, 
madwifi.  Then I had to edit a couple *more* config files to make it 
work at boot.  It's still not stable.  In days.

Also my modem is one of those lovely *software* piles of pooh.  Which 
predictablly Linux doesn't want to know about.

> I just want something
>that'll run without having to compile because - let's
>face it - I don't know much about Linux, less about
>programming under Linux and don't have an awful lot of
>interest in doing the fiddly bits.
>  
>
With you there Rhys!

I'm learning more about Linux by *having to*, but not because I want 
to.  The frustration factor of having to compile from source and then 
finding the README assumes knowledge I don't have is extreme.  Currently 
I still do all my video work in Windows as I'm nervous about getting yet 
another capture card only to find this one doesn't work in Linux either, 
or that I have to compile the programs I want to use, when I have a 
perfectly working solution in Windows.  The old maxim "Don't fix what's 
not broken" comes to mind.  Finally a lot of my graphics work is in 
Windows as I'm still not comfortable with TheGIMP after using Paintshop 
Pro for years.

>I'm not even sure which programs will run under which
>versions of Linux. There seem to be so many - ubuntu,
>red hat, mandrake, suse etc. Everybody seems to be
>trying different versions as though they're unhappy
>with the previous version, which is rather
>disconcerting. People have been somewhat disparaging
>about SME Linux too yet it works for me as an offline
>server.
>  
>
The different flavours/distros/versions are a minefield to new users to 
Linux.  In Windows, one standard install program.  In Linux, DEBs, 
RPMs,  apt-get, TARs, source code.... One unified method would be nice.  
Nvidia have done it with their graphics driver (another example of 
having to fiddle with config files even WITH a packaged module), albeit 
closed source, but they've proven it can be done.

>My primary concern is data security on the hard drive.
>I'd hate to lose loads of irreplacable data before it
>could all be archived.
>
Ghost it.  Norton Ghost will back up any kind of partition, mainly 
because it doesn't care about formats or OSs or filestructures - it 
backs up the raw data as it sees it sector by sector, byte for byte and 
creates a highly compressed backup of entire partitions - or even a 
whole disk if you want a HUGE ghost image ;).  Once you have the image 
burn it to a CD (or DVD if it's that big :)).  Then you can either 
recover the partition in its' entirety or use Ghost Explorer to dig out 
the files you want (although admittedly I've not actually used this 
function).  The only thing you *will* need is a floppy disk or CD boot 
disk for DOS with CD access... www.bootdisk.com :)  Remember a lot of 
the time you'll be recovering your OS after it's gone night-night, so 
you'll *need* a boot disk.

Kind regards,

Julian