Hardware

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Offical: Linux has finally beat Windows.... 98

0 helpful
40 replies

by Member 19291532 1 view

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

I was booting my Eee PC 701 this evening, and thinking about a "Bake Off" article I recently read in a trade magazine between Ubuntu 8.10 and Vista, and it occured to me...

My response to the article in question was that the author compard Linux to Vista, and determined that Ubuntu had the edge, but only by comparing Ubuntu to the gains it had achieved over *previous* Linux distros.

And if you're *going* to cook the books that way, then, yeah, Linux, you've come a long way baby. If measured against growth from a previous point in time, then Linux has matured rapidly to the point of Ubuntu 8.10, where as the evolution of Win32 has been more... linear.

I run Ubuntu 8.10 on my Eee PC, and I do not have plans to run or install anything else on it. It works. It *just* works. It works in the sense that I don't want to burn a Win32 license on this machine, and it does most everything I want to do on a Atom 1.6ghz processor based machine with a whopping 12gb of total memory and 2.5gb of RAM. And it does it, all importantly, for free. I can live with the oddball Linux behavior that I encounter. Applications that are a bit too rough around the edges for prime time, wireless that is intermittently flakey - and dude, the whole Compiz Cube thing is the BEST eye candy available on ANY OS, bar none. If the Eee PC had a multi-input touch screen and I could flip that cube around intuitively by touch... ooooh... geek O-gasm! And I have no doubt that it'll get there. Compiz has the lead in desktop eye candy for sure. This is one area where Linux has jumped way ahead of Win32 and OS X. Forget Widgets and Gadgets and sidebars and Aero. Compiz 0wNZ!

... well, provided that your system doesn't have an ATI chipset GPU, in which case, unless you're a guru, you better either have Nvidia, or have Vista.

Speaking of Gurus, I sell myself short. I often defer in this industry to people who have more geek industry then I, or who are simply have a higher IQ in all things geeky than I do. But when I boil it all down, I *am* a Linux guru. Tech Republic has brought that home to me like no other pro-linux site. I've got experience with Solaris and CDE, from install to app config, even running a CitUX Internet BBS. I've got Redhat and Debian experience, including custom compiles of notebook kernels enabling wireless. Ubuntu is a walk in the 'effin PARK for me. Especially compared to the relative N00B *nix fanbois here on Tech Republic who want to cop attitude and act like they OWN Linux when they don't even remember the days when editing the Xfree86 config to enable your PS2 mouse was a major undertaking.

In short, I *am* a Linux Guru. I may not know the complete command set, or how to code my own custom C++ code to achive the goal I am after - there are degrees of *nix Guru far beyond where I am at, but for all modern intents and purposes, I've installed IE 5 on a Solaris box and configured the Microsoft TrueType package to support web browsers on Solaris... I've earned my *nix badge of honor.

And based on that, I can say safely, that Linux has made an evolutionary change. It isn't just for the hardcore, basement dwelling, MUD (forget MMUD) playing UberNerd who still knows the Hayes Command Set by heart. (+++ ATH0, ~XooH~!! *CARRIER LOST*)

Nope, now Linux is accessible to the script kiddies, too.

And, the script kiddies, the amateurs, the weekend geek warriors, have adopted Ubuntu and claimed that Linux is ready for prime time, along with their over-optimistic, uber-geek brothers who drank the kool-aide before them.

But they're *wrong*. The other thing I've done for the last 15 years or so, is worked with regular Joes and tried to get them to be useful and productive with these difficult machines. And in the process I learned some hard truths. Sure a DIY machine is more flexible, more powerful, and more upgradable for less money than a Dell, Gateway or other OEM box. But for typical home office business non-geek user, the Dell is the better buy.

And the same thing applies for Linux. It *is* a better bet if you're a geek willing to screw with custom compiles of the broadcom WiFi source and NDISWrapper. It is the better deal if you might have to reboot and tweak a bit *every* time to get your Linux distro to connect to your WPA2 WiFi AP.

But if that last paragraph made no sense to you, and you *don't* know someone who it DID make sense to that is willing to CONSTANTLY hold your hand on this, and a dozen other common Linux issues - then STAY away. It isn't ready yet.

And personally, I don't think it every will be.

Back in the day, during the Linux premiere on the OS scene, Linux was comparing itself with, and competing with, Win 95, and later, Win 98. And that was the bar Linux set for itself, and if it were still 1994, and SlackWare was Ubuntu 8.10 and Windows was still Win95/98, then Linux would be *kicking the arse royale* of Windows.

But, the rub is, Win has evolved into Win32 and Win64in the time that has passed, and the bar is a lot higher now. So Ubuntu certainly exceeds the level Microsoft Windows was at in 1994. But it simply can't even compare with where Win32 is today, in 2009.

And all indications are that by the time Ubuntu reaches the level of Windows 2000 Professional, Windows 7 will be on the market raising the bar even farther.

And that... that is just how it is going to be.

If you have an ideological issue with Microsoft and their business tactics and you would like to see them fail, you may still have a white knight. Google and cloud computing as an "open source" (on Google's terms as an evil empire), is probably the only potential threat to Microsoft dominance.

But Linux is never going to be anything more than it is today. You can take that opinion to the bank, for someone who uses and appreciates Linux on a daily basis.

And I know you pro Linux, Anti-MS haters are going to be all over it - but face it, this is all about rational thought, logic, and honest, fair argument. You can live in your ideological utopia world all you want, drink gallons of *nix Kool-Aide if you can stomach it, but that isn't going to stop me from trying to tell the rest of the world the truth. You guys aren't telling the whole truth - even if the call to prayer sounds so seductive.

Beware of false OS prophets pushing *nix. They lead you down a path of pain, misery, and the constant search for current HowTo: FAQs in order to make your machine do what it was designed to do naturally, with Win32.

40 replies

by saurondor

I have to agree with your post. It is complete and addresses most of the points. But missed one.

Just like a lot of us remember the good old Linux days. Setting your own Xfree86 config and doing text only installs, manually mounting CDs and USB drives among other things that the new distros have so wonderfully overcome. We also remember the good old days of NT.

Your post sounds a lot like a Unix guy from the old NT days. Talking about the virtues of Unix vs this new OS that runs on x86. Saying how NT will never be up to the Unix standard.

Failing to address the same issue you fail to address now: cost. NT prevailed because it was cheaper than Unix. Not because it was better.

The "big iron" of desktop PCs and even laptops is giving way to netbooks and mobile devices. The "mainframe" PC is giving way to the web based, gridded and distributed internet of today. And Microsoft and its Windows product line has absolutely no traction in any of these new departments.

The boom of innovation is happening on the web. Just like the boom of innovation in the 90's happened on the PC and not the mainframe. And once again Microsoft is not leading in web innovation.

What is the relevance of a victory in the desktop market when the desktop market is becoming irrelevant?

by nicknielsen

I don't see the desktop PC becoming irrelevant at all, particularly for SMBs. Local data storage is still the most efficient and effective way to run a business.

Suppose you are a businessperson who needs to open a critical 150MB file [i]now[/i]. If you are working from your desktop PC, you locate and open the file in seconds. If you have been sold the entire cloud computing/wireless bill of goods, you are working from a thin client over wireless. A 150 MB file can take as long as 30 minutes to download and open. In the meantime, the customer you need the file for may have gone somewhere else.

by Member 19291532

The danger with dismissing an emerging technology is in seeing it solely through the limits of the technology available today.

I can remember thinking that 4mb of RAM on my Amiga 2000 was a HUGE amount of memory, an paying dearly for it. I now routinely carry about 100GB of solid state storage memory with me at all times, and I usually have another TB of traditional magnetic media nearby as well (including all devices, my netbook, my iPod, my Smart Phone).

I remember being excited about getting ISDN 128k. Now my Cell Phone delivers broadband speed, to itself, and as a tethered modem.

I also remember telling my wife that delivering entire movies over the Internet was practically impossible and would likely remain so - when she suggested that if someone could figure out how to do it, they would get rich, way back when AOL was the largest ISP in the USA. It is happening right now, but obviously, not without controversy.

I agree with your perspective, though. I don't *see* it happening - but I'm not dismissing it as impossible. I have a COO that really *wants* to outsource as much of our IT as possible - and the concerns that keep her from doing that are real, but someone might figure out how to address those concerns.

At some point, if the security, reliability and availability can be made simply *good enough*, and the cost can be made MORE affordable than having to pay an internal IT staff...

Yeah, I hate to think too much about this, or I end up laying awake in bed at night worrying about my future as an IT professional.

by saurondor

The PC is becoming irrelevant because the identity is becoming more relevant than the hardware your information is stored in.

The Personal Computer in the ol' days was fused to you. In a way your "digital image" was your PC. This image became portable with the laptop. You could now take it with you when you left home or the office.

Now with the proliferation of more devices (netbooks, smartphones, PDAs, etc). Your interaction with information is through many means, but you still want to be "yourself".

Who provides a clear cross platform tool (software and/or OS) to interact with this information that defines you as your "digital self" will succeed.

Microsoft doesn't have a clear strategy nor software stack to encompass the broad variety of platforms. A great deal of competing tools provide me with the same experience on my Mac, on my Dell Studio and on my Nokia N800.

Information locked in proprietary formats on one platform would not be accessible on other platforms. Leaving part of my "digital image" lost for periods of time.

The proprietary format strategy that so much benefited Microsoft in the 90's is coming back to hunt them now. Their lock-in strategies of the past are lock-out effects for them today.

The PC isn't going away anytime soon. But today we place more importance on the tool than the hardware. In the ol' days it was seen as one and the same, but that stands no more. It is now just one of the many pieces of hardware an average person uses today.

Big iron vendors failed because they failed to see the consumer interest in personal computing. Weight moved from the datacenter to the personal computer. Or maybe they saw it, but failed to respond in time due to "corporate inertia".

We see a bit of this in Microsoft. With old corporate habits prevailing in the OS and Office products. While other divisions struggle to get a foot hold in the new markets and new ways of doing business.

by Member 19291532

My post wasn't saying that Microsoft dominance is guaranteed, or that a solution that has superior appeal to the mass public may not come along - I just don't think the underlying foundation at the user end is going to be a Linux OS.

But I am not convinced that Web 2.0 and 3.0 and cloud based computing is going to be able to maintain the momentum it currently has. Google's recent attempt to make Gmail available offline is a small acknowledgment that cloud computing itself faces hurdles to becoming the dominant paradigm of computing. I mean, right now, the *majority* of PCs spend the *majority* of their time surfing, posting forums, updating facebook and reading e-mail - which are all certainly cloud based, and often social computing which have very little relevance to the desktop OS - so we can argue that the cloud revolution is ALREADY upon us and ALREADY established and successful. I'd agree with that, too.

But the places where the cloud exceeds are social areas. Even Google DOCs is generally about needing access to your documents in multiple locations, which is generally driven by some kind of social interaction. But there are still a bunch of isolated activities that do not require social interaction that farming out to the cloud doesn't make a lot of sense. Home movie video editing is one example. I just can't imagine why I would want to use a cloud based app to do that - why I would want all that data to be stored and manipulated at the opposite end. Cloud computing obviously gives up all kinds of control.

I'm getting off on a tangent. I have concerns about cloud computing. There are control issues, there are availability issues, there are privacy issues, there are cost issues - and it is a wave that is out on the horizon, even if rolling in fast. It is too far away still to tell if it is going to be a Tsunami of change or a ripple that simply tickles your feet as it washes ashore.

My argument is that these Linux versus Win32 arguments are futile - but you may be right, Win32 *may* be gasping final breaths unable to respond to a critical inflection point in the evolution of PC use that is coming or already on us.

The Unix versus NT argument with cost...

I see that, and I agree there is a grain of truth to that - and Win32/64 may face a threat on the back end in conjunction with a move to cloud based computing - based on cost. If the cloud can remove the back-office, then the desktop truly becomes irrelevant. But that is going to be the HARDEST fought battle.

But your analogy doesn't always work. A company that can afford a fleet of vehicles and a staff of mechanics may find that having "nuts and bolts" basic vehicles that are very customizable and purpose driven can be the most cost effective solution.

But those solutions do not work for average consumers. Average consumers can't have and maintain a military grade Hummer. You can certainly produce a consumer grade Hummer if there is enough demand, but that really is an entirely different vehicle. And the consumers will *willingly* pay MORE, often for LESS, as long as there are less hassles.

Win32 is a consumer oriented vehicle. Linux is a purpose oriented vehicle. The biggest threat to Win32 in THIS perspective is OS X, not Linux. OS X is, like the Military Hummer reimagined for consumer use, *nix reimagined for consumer use.

I'm not sure if the cloud will really change any of the dynamics in THAT segment. In either case, at this point, Linux is still a non-contender, and not really ready to get in the ring with either of the two who are duking it out right now.

And brining OS X into the discussion is another potentially complete tangent in a different direction...

I think we'll see major adjustments in the focus of all three OSes mentioned here in the next decade. If I *had* to predict, Linux will develop a secure niche delivering cloud based apps, OS X may eventually, once Steve Jobs is truly out of the picture, ditch hardware dependency and become available for all Intel OS machines - with a growing emphasis on being a consumer electronics and digital media content company - and Microsoft is going to begin to focus on growing consolidated consumer delivery solutions for home computing needs in some sort of evolutionary process growing out of their Xbox Live product/service.

And I think Microsoft and Apple have a lead in the arena that is going to be SIGNIFICANT to the evolution of how we use personal electronic devices in the future.

But, my best imagined future of how this will look when it gets here is pretty fuzzy, still. I think things will be a LOT different than they stand today.

by saurondor

I believe the issue with Microsoft is its inability to respond to market changes. It responds very well to market contenders, but after they've laid down the cards. Then they'll huff and puff and reorder the dealt cards. Never mind we end up with five aces, six jacks and three queens of diamonds. ;)

How hard could it have been for them to develop a desktop office suite that mimics the synchronization and collaborative experience of Google Documents? Why are they selling Windows Server 2008 and not Windows Grid 2008. You know. The one in which your local hard drive becomes part of the storage. That way when you log into the AD you have all your stuff as if you were on your PC. Same could be said about email or music. Why does music get authenticated against the hardware and not the user? I might have 5 different devices, but I only have one set of ears. Can't listen to all five at the same time.

I don't see anything new coming along. Just same old refurbished ideas. The most recent is, as you've mentioned, cloud computing. Or rent-a-cluster as I prefer to refer to it. On demand computing. Wow!!! Will that transform my monolithic web app into something new? No. Will it allow it to interact with other company systems? No. Not automatically at least. There is still a great deal of work to be done.

What is cloud computing to me? The situation in which various components connected through a network cooperate to achieve one goal.

For example a while back I had the opportunity to work in a project in which phone calls were relayed to Virginia. Answered there on a server. This server would contact another one in Texas and rely on it for call progress control as the main application was running there. Audio so to speak was in VA. It did all the audio and held the call while TX issued instructions. Finally the call could be transfered to some country to be answered by an operator. Is the application in one particular spot? No. Its all over the place and you can keep integrating more into it. That to me is cloud computing. Otherwise it some glorified hosting.

Where is Microsoft in the picture? Nowhere. It's not in the servers. To expensive just to handle calls. It's not in the phones. It's not in the embedded PBXs. They run Linux.

Certainly this is too specific an application for everyday use, but it tries to prove a point. If it's not on the big server or on the desktop it just isn't.

Cell phones? nope.

Consoles. Consider Playstations use Java. Not .NET

I agree that Linux is in many ways playing catch up to Windows. Particularly application support. But in terms of flexibility Linux blows it out of the water. Windows' 7 big selling point "will run on netbooks". Wow!

Plus if you factor in costs. Like I mentioned in a post regarding piracy and Microsoft. Well there is just no space for Windows. If piracy were banished today, Microsoft's market share would be like 30%. That would do terrible damage to its stock price. More so than Steve Balmer, if you can even come to imagine that :)

To sum it up. Microsoft does dominate in the desktop, but provides only fixed solutions for some segments. Linux provides way more flexibility. Microsoft is not being as innovative as it could be and it shows. There is also a price issue in play here that Microsoft has had trouble competing with. It can't buy it and it can't outbid it. And of course cloud computing is just a power point buzz word for the marketing guys who have no clue that clusters and load balancers exist.

by nicknielsen

Just (hopefully) seeing through the cloud. The only difference between the cloud and thin client/server is in the connection: open internet vs. company network. And, like you, I won't yet trust my data out of my reach.

I think we're more likely to see the "system on a stub", a compact virtual system on a thumbdrive that could be executed on any USB-capable base unit. The user always has his chosen environment and files with him and leaves nothing behind unless he forgets to get his output off the printer.

But in either case, I don't see the desktop PC going away during my lifetime. Mainframes are still around, doing what they do best: crunching massive amounts of data. The desktop PC in some form will still be around 50 years from now, even if the only users are the hard-core gamers.

by Member 19291532

But then again, I would have said that the American public would have never stood by for 8 years of erosion of their civil liberties in the name of a war on terror, when it included things like warrantless wiretapping by the Telcos of all Internet traffic on the behest of the Federal Government. It is surprising what people will give up for convenience and to be told they are "safe" - and it is worth noting that new the administration seems content to keep on pursuing this particular policy, being an advocate of immunity for the Telco's for this practice.

The desire among executive staff to "outsource" the "headache" of IT infrastructure by using cloud hosted solutions cannot be underestimated. It is a knee jerk response - but knee-jerk responses are often among the most devestating.

Content and/or service/app delivery can change radically in a short period of time. Just ask the RIAA, who did everything they could to maintain their power and control of distribution and derail the adoption of remote digital delivery. Now Apple finds itself as one of the most powerful distribution channels in the recording industry - able to effectively dictate terms to labels who are synonymous *with* the recording industry.

Could games conceivably be delivered remotely across the cloud and deliver a rich enough experience to mitigate the advantages of local execution on top of what we currently think of as a "desktop OS"?

Probably. Not right now, but there could be some fundamental change, some "Value Add" (for example, making the games FREE with embedded advertising content)that could disturb the current model.

It is amazing, and frightening what consumers are willing to give up.

by forum surfer

I just don't see where it makes good business sense from a security standpoint. I can see the cloud being used more heavily by the mass market, but business and people concerned with their private data will never accept cloud computing outside of their reach.

The organization I work with is very open minded. We're running vm ware in some places, obviously windows in alot of places, a small helping of linux terminals, a couple of stray macs and a z9 mainframe. Even with this wide array of technology and being open to new things, I'd never dare to suggest we trust our data to the cloud. Until there is some measure of accountability and some way to work it into a DR plan, it just isn't happening.

by charliespencer

"...the identity is becoming more relevant..."
"...your "digital image" was your PC."
"...this information that defines you as your "digital self..."

Sorry, too new "New Agey" for me. I wasn't aware I had a digital self or image, and my identity is definitely not tied to anything electronic.

by charliespencer

As santee suggests, you're using words in ways I'm not understanding. I didn't have any trouble with your first post, although I too question your assertion that the desktop is becoming irrelevant. I'm not following your references to "digital self" or "digital image" at all. The only association I can make is with MMORGs or 'Second Life', and I don't think that's what you meant.

by saurondor

It has nothing to do with alternate egos or similar things(MMORGS and Second Life). But rather the transfer of your environment from one machine to another. To put it simply. Is your experience similar across the board or bound by "ups, I left that on my desktop PC". Do you have to authenticate again and again or are you logged in once and then streamlined across applications.

Synchronization is the key player here. Not all devices will provide the same functionality, but you should be able to access information regardless of your device. This information is your "digital image" so to speak. Your files, your documents, your photos, your videos, your posts, your comments, your email etc etc etc.

It's nearly 1 am here. So I'll get back to this tomorrow. Hope this short post clears it up for the moment being.

by cbalness

I think this poster is making a valid point ... what is happening now, or what I am seeing is that the "connectivity" is changing.

Users are no longer being chained to their desk and the one PC. They are evolving and moving around. You can't keep me in one place ... I need to go to a meeting 2 provinces/states whatever away.

Suddenly there is a situation where a user has a laptop with a docking station as "home base", undock and assume road warrior mode, flick out a BlackBerry and read email on a train, text message your significant other, what else is next ???

How MUCH connectivity do we need ??

by nicknielsen

Two points:

First, I drive as far as 240 miles between calls, and most of my calls are time-sensitive. Even so, if I need to get on line or check a text message, I will stop the vehicle. If I'm going to be on a phone call for an extended time, I'll stop the vehicle. I have no intention of killing myself or anybody else because I'm so stupid as to actually try to multi-task while driving.

How often have you been driving down the road and seen some id10t working on his laptop or Blackberry while aiming his vehicle? Let's get real here--nobody needs to be that connected! If they do, get a chauffeur.

Second, I'm on call pretty much 24/7/364 (Christmas and the occasional vacation off!) and have to be ready to dispatch on a moment's notice.

When am I supposed to get some downtime? Disconnect me. PLEASE!

edit: fix html

by Member 19291532

For a long time I've envisioned an evolution of the PDA to replace all of these myriad devices I find enhance my life, that define my "digital self-image".

I suppose that this gets a little "William Gibson" - but I'll try to keep it tangible and removed from concepts of the "Virtual Self" developing as a single entity of which the physical self is almost an artifact...

I'd like a device, about the size of a pager, no bigger, that could clip to my belt. It would have the power of a modern PC, the storage of a modern PC, and would converge all of my digital needs in that single device.

In the morning, it could interface with my house, setting the heat, turning on lights, checking the inventory of my fridge, placing an online order for milk if the threshold for minimum milk limits has been exceeded.

When I walked into the living room, it would detect the widescreen digital viewing device mounted in that room, and could wirelessly stream live or previously recorded television, or the web, or movies, to that device in HD quality. It would also detect I/O devices in a high speed "personal area network". Do I want to hook up to the d-pads and play a video game, or maybe the keyboard and mouse and do some surfing? The device is the hub.

After I get dressed and ready, I hop down and board the train. No ticket, the device communicates with the train and purchases the ticket as I cross the gap into the carriage - which is automatically deducted from my pay-pal like account.

At that point, I settle into my seat, and I can direct the output to the LCD on the back of the seat, the keyboard in the drop down tray, or I can put on my personal wrap around glasses and direct the output there and engage the HUD device with eyeball recognition and multi-touch aware gesture recognition to get some work done, watch some more TV, play some games, communicate, whatever.

When I get into work, at my desk, it is more of the same.

After working on a presentation, I go into the conference room, where again, my device recognizes and knows how to connect to the devices in there.

And so on throughout the day. No portable DVD device, no phone, PDA, notebook, no device that works with ONE thing, but not the other... complete convergence. Much of if driven locally, but a lot of it accessed remotely, through the ubercloud.

Listen, Palmetto, here is the easiest way to get a sense of the "digital self".

I've never met you, but I *know* you - and I've formed a kind of relationship with you that comes with a lot of the same baggage as if I worked one cube over from you.

There must be some sort of "digital image" of yourself (and of myself), if we can do that. And as the technology matures, the "digital self" will also become far more well defined.

To that degree, yeah, a MMORG or Second Life, if you do those things, contributes to your digital image. So do forum posts, or any place you interact or leave tracks "in the cloud" (a decade ago, we would have said, "in cyberspace", right?)

The "Ghost in the Machine" reference by SanteenWelding was probably a reference to this. You don't just travel through the cloud as a Ghost in the Machine, without leaving some sort of residual image of who you are, without leaving any tracks of your passing. You interact, meet, and have an impact, you contribute to the digital "world". And that defines who you are seen as... Ultimately, that is who you BECOME, virtually speaking.

One more thing...

The digital self is a lot more cerebral, a lot more about intellect, whereas the physical self is more about physical presence (duh, huh?).

But in a chat room or in other online communication medium, if you are witty, engaging, with a charming personallity, you'll find yourself more "popular" and more people seeking to "know" you. In the real world (to keep up the cyberpunk theme, "Meatspace"), you may be ugly, introverted, and unpopular. The point is, your digital image may be influenced by your physical reality, but they can exist at polar opposites (and often do). That would tend to indicate that they exist independent of one another, at least in my opinion. In Cyberspace we effectively exist as "brains in a vat", and when we are separate of our physical identity, it seems that a lot of us become significantly different people. So then, this virtual person is your digital image. I suppose it is possible that you are EXACTLY the same person online as you are in reality, but you don't HAVE to be, and a lot of people aren't.

by Member 19291532

Getting back to the portability of the content that represents your digital image:

The thing about vendors who currently have some sort of system of "lock-in"...

Is that they have the keys...

Easier to unlock your door and let everyone in then to keep everybody out when you've had your door unlocked from the start.

That is... Microsoft could very easily unlock their gates and doors for the sake of content portability if they decided to. I don't think it is really a liability unless they come to a point where they SHOULD unlock, and they drag their feet. (Which is not something without precedent, one need look only as far as the RIAA and how much their industry has bled over the last decade).

Really, the recording industry becomes a model of "locked" content finally being opened up, and may illustrate that you can go a LONG way and make a LOT of mistakes and still probably salvage yourself.

by forum surfer

In that "ideal" situation I'll admit it sounds uber easy and uber tech. But what about security? A device that small can be easily stolen. Maybe an onboard fingerprint and/or retina scanner to authenticate bank charges/drafts/payments and entrances to secure facilities (like your locked house). Of course there's always the option to have it bond with an rf id tag embedded within your body. Maybe I'm too old school, but when it comes to putting something in my body, count me out. I'll take cash and an old fashioned key.

by Member 19291532

On cloud computing:

http://blog.wired.com/business/2009/01/magnolia-suffer.html

On device security:

There was another one about a guy driving around SF and cloning RFID passports as proof of concept at wired, but it has mysteriously disappeared.

When these devices become pervasive enough, it becomes a "school of fish" defense. Certainly some fish get picked off from the school, but overall, there is safety in the overwhelming number, that you *won't* be that fish. Not exactly a security through obscurity argument - but similar.

There are always going to be pick-pockets, and there will always be "easy marks". There will always be methods to try and up security as well, and people trying to break that security also. This applies as surely in the analog world as with a digital device. People spend all kinds of time worrying about digital ID theft and wait days to report their REAL ID and credit cards lost (because they're not certain if they're lost, stolen, or simply misplaced).

I'm sure you would have some sort of security built into devices like these. Secure wireless encrypted tunnels - and I'm sure the bad guys will be trying to hack them so they can ride the subway on your dime. But I don't think that will stop devices like this from eventually arriving - and I doubt the security will require any kind of subdermal implant.

by forum surfer

I can pickup some stuff at newegg that I've been needing finally! All i have to do is drive around the block as opposed to snooping for credit card numbers...

by charliespencer

I may be the only person left on the Internet that generally keeps his work activity separate from his personal life, and never the twain shall meet. TR is about the only resource the two have in common. I have no desire to access data from one area of my life from the system I use for the other, so there's nothing for me to sync. I have no other devices besides my home and work desktop to be concerned with.

Do Luddites have a web site?

by jck

I have installed Windows 98SE and XP Home to the same PC as I use now for my Ubuntu Linux PC (that is attached to my big screen).

Linux installed faster...

Linux has had fewer run-time errors using applictions...

Linux runs apps faster...

and...Linux was free.

For a basic setup, why would anyone want to pay for $600 in software (OS, applications, etc) when you can have it all free.

Linux, I would think, should be the preferred option for small business wanting a way to enable their staff to do day-to-day operations with little or no cost.

by neon samurai

I was actually floored to learn that an exchange server plus hardware was 10 grand only a few years back. Outlook is nice and even nicer when supported by an Exchange back end but most people would be perfectly happy using other solutions.

by forum surfer

Suppose it's a small business with no in house it person/staff. Finding someone to setup, install and maintain exchange is cheaper and easier. There's just more windows admins bidding for side jobs.

I'd be willing to setup alternative email servers for my clients, but I will charge more on the service side because I am admittedly less familiar with it. I'd also be upfront about that fact. I'd also be upfront about the fact that with the majority of my background being windows based, i'll spend less time troubleshooting exchange problems should a billable event arise. TCO should still be cheaper for the client, but that's his decision.

by slayer_

"Linux, I would think, should be the preferred option for small business wanting a way to enable their staff to do day-to-day operations with little or no cost. "

For our small business, I wanted to use Linux, some flavor, any flavor, they worked fine on the system, all hardware worked, it would have been perfect. Want to know the killer???
GE Money prefered we use Quickbooks and the accountants agreed. Quickbooks does not work on Nix (at the time anyways, don't know about now), so we shelled out for Windows.

by neon samurai

Was it an option to have quickbook workstations for the few accountants that needed it? Maintaining two standard system builds can be a pain but it may have balanced out.

by forum surfer

Seems like I went through this when mainframes were the "in" thing. And here I still have a pc. I just don't see where cloud computing is going to replace raw pc power need for games or intense business apps in the next 5-10 years. We need far bigger inbound and outbound pipes available to business and home users. I have kids and I need a dedicated pc so my oldest can play simulators and video games (and I can play the bad, gory ones after hours).

Even if that raw power can be sent over the cloud, am I going to get what they deem necessary? Chances are if this were over a distributed network, I?d get some respectable level that wouldn?t compare to an advanced hardware platform. I prefer to have my own hardware so I can max out my settings on a 24?+ monitor without breaking a sweat.

by Member 19291532

The thing is, since the arrival of P4 PCs in the 1.7ghz area, the extra speed hasn't meant a WHOLE lot. This is one reason that we're seeing Netbooks gain popularity. You don't need that much horsepower from day to day (or, more likely, we haven't found a way to really impact the limits of that horsepower).

Back when we were going from 8mhz to 16, 16 to 33, 33 to 333, 333 - each step was a quantum leap in what the PC could do.

But a P3 1Ghz will run XP, Outlook and a Web Browser with no perceptible difference from a Core Duo Quad.

In the same time, we've seen communication speed go nuts. My Cell Phone literally gets speeds faster than the public DSL line at my office. The demand to move huge amounts of data cheaply around the network will mean that the goal *must* be met. We'll see a huge expansion of broadband speed in the next decade. What we deal with today will look like 2400bps dial up, looking back.

And *that* is what will drive more powerful hardware, because once you get up into hundreds of gigabits of throughput, you need a system that can push that data through that quickly.

And all of that is directly related to delivering cloud based content.

Going back to my universal convergence device - I see the trend going towards console gaming right now, not powerful, multi-core, multi-GPU PCs that you update every 6 months to the tune of $400+. But, there is already huge convergence going on in the console market. They're not just game consoles, they're online community portals, news portals, online stores, and content delivery set-top boxes. It is inevitable that eventually, the convergence device that I'm talking about should replace all of these things, and make whatever you want, accessible, where ever you are, and whenever you want it. Why should I not be able to play my copy of Fallout-12 in the waiting room of my Doctor's office, and have it be as rich of an experience as it is at home? Why shouldn't I be able to grab a resume from the office file server while I am 35k feet in the air on my way to England? Why shouldn't I be able to grab the powerpoint presentation for my Social Sciences 12A class that are on my storage at home.

I'm arguing as devil's advocate here. I *know* the disadvantage of this model - but I fear that the average consumer won't see that, they'll only see the convenience.

And if everyone else goes that way, remaining on a desktop OS may be impossible.

by neon samurai

For most of us, it's a trip to the dealership for a prebuilt ride. Kit cars and custom jobs still exist among the enthusiasts though. You have the prebuilt day to day set of wheels and you have the work of love you take down to Navada for Speed Week.

In the same way, I have to believe that us enthusiasts will continue to have our choice of platforms and hardware until it truly is replaced by some completely different computing paradigm. That's likely to happen long after my lifetime but should it happen within that blink of an eye, I'll always have my install ISOs handy.

by forum surfer

I can see where you're coming from. But I myself prefer overkill, as do many more. Sure, all I NEED in my work laptop would be a Pentium m and a gig of memory. But I can multitask more and everything is just so much more responsive with a high end core 2 duo and 4 gigs of memory.

Yes, console gaming does have the edge. But pc gaming is more popular than ever and not going away any time soon. There are still several big name releases that don't make it to console, or eventually get an inferior version ported to console once sales sky rocket. Pc gamers are a dedicated crowd and I don't see that ever going away.

I myself like to game occasionally and I am for more likely to get on my pc and game. My kid's xbox is ok, but seems constricted somehow. The Wii is an absolute hoot for the novelty, but I don't see either replacing pc gaming in the foreseeable future, he market share is still huge for pc's.

by Member 19291532

Samuri...

I see what you're saying. I don't know, though. When I actually think of where we are today, and look at it from where we WERE, it just blows me away.

I mean, when I was a kid, the Atari 2600 was the height of electronic entertainment. A good modern graphic calculator has more horsepower. :) When the Amiga arrived, I was blown away. Today my phone can emulate an Amiga with incredible accuracy and reliability.

To me, that illustrates that predicting where we'll be in another 20 years is a tough act to perform.

But, I like the analogy.

Surfer - I guess I may just be getting old enough and financially established enough that a lot of the traditional lure of PC gaming doesn't appeal to me anymore. A lot of modern rock just sounds like screaming to me, too. :) But I feel like PC gaming has shrunk in importance over the last few years - that there hasn't really been a half-life, counter-strike, or Quake III Arena kind of game - even the MMORPGs haven't brought anything NEW to the table in recent memory. I mean, the big drivers of PC gaming *remain* the same big drivers.

I guess the real test for me is I've had a powerful gaming rig this whole time, but I've ended up buying consoles because THOSE had the exclusive games I wanted to play - Halo, Gotham City Racing, Guitar Hero... to the point that when there is a choice now, Fallout-3, GTA IV or San Andreas, I buy the console version, just out of habit. On the other hand, there has been no title where I *had* to buy the PC version, because it wasn't available for a console.

by forum surfer

Far Cry
Crysis
F.E.A.R. series
Call of Duty Series

That's just a few off the top of my head, and very popular ones. Most of these were developed for the pc and released for the pc only initially. Then if they sold, they were ported to consoles and/or mac. The pc has always been a proving grounds of sorts. If it sells decently on the pc, it'll be a blockbuster console release.

Of course we pc gamers occasionally get games developed for consoles then ported for pc. Those are always glitchy and leave you feeling like you're missing something...like full keyboard support, lol.

The downside to pc gaming is price. It costs $$ to have the latest hardware capable of running newer high end games on large monitors. I don't see it as being a downfall, but more of a permanent liability.

Consoles have pc beat there. My child is 5 and has a wii. That hopefully won't need replacing for another 5 years. Then after the 10-11 year old replacement console, the next one won't be until he's 16. At which point he has to get a job and learn responsibility...you want it buy it.

By then my brain will be mush from working so long in IT and i'll be mentally incapable of effectively playing "Call of Duty 14:Return to Gaza Strip."

by slayer_

Cause it served as a POS, it was on the front desk, and because it tracked inventory, it was on the parts computer.

So basically the only computer that didn't require it was an old legacy Win95 that was running an ancient version of Partsmart that I figured out the registration codes of and kept making up new ones each time it expired.
They parts guys liked the old one because it had a more button like interface, while the new one had a windows explorer like interface.

by neon samurai

It's amazing how one small decision can dictate the rest of the network but needing that specific accounting package on most of the business machines means they are all going to run whatever is needed behind it. I hear accounting suites are still pretty devided by the data file formats too. One's Quickbooks database is not easily going to slide over ot the other brand name accounting package and inter-format converters never work right.

Theoretically, you could do the accounting pack with WINE. I don't know if the initial setup would justify the changing costs though. On the up side, once it's setup on one machine the rest are easy to add it into.

by slayer_

all systems for 300 bucks including XP home pre installed and licenses, moniters, perpherals, lex printers (cheap crap but effective enough till the business got busy and a laser printer was required), the works. Can't argue with that.

Granted 6 boards actually fried themselves, all replaced under warranty. It wasn't till last year a board died again, and it was about 80 bucks to replace. These systems are by no means power houses, they are AMD's with I believe 800mhz each, I put 512 RAM in the primary accounting machine and front desk machine, and left the others at stock 256, they had 40 gb HDD's.

Our business went belly up however, and now one of the machines just hangs out in the building, and the other has been moved to the house office here, and my folks use it for their internet adventures. It's got enough power for Youtube, word processing and email, and that's all they use it for. They have actually used the system for 5 years, and have never gotten a virus or malware, they safely browse it seems, so I have never the need to change the OS or even reinstall (aside from the mobo failures). The last systems were given to the employees.

Should the need ever arise, I would likely either put XP pro on it using my Bought for then MS declared pirated key, or Ubuntu, and just set up desktop links to the programs they would run.
The biggest trick would be finding a browser that looks and works identical to IE6.

by neon samurai

after the first week, they probably won't have any more questions. The would also be safer if doing banking and such by browser.

Grab portableapp firefox, adjust some of the settings, run through it and answer the major popups and see how they do.

This discussion is closed to new replies.