The "Windows VS. any usefull OS" thread.

[Master Kenzo]

So I went of Transgaming, and the first thing I saw was "Steam is now supported by WineX." I immediately gasped and burned Mandrake 10 Community, (with 2.6.3 kernel) promptly installing it on 15GB of my 120GB hard drive. I then downloaded WineX 3.3 and installed Steam. It worked perfectly ... not. It was incredibly slow. Turns out my video card is not supported by Mandrake (not really, just Direct Rendering for 3D). So, believe it or not, ATI has a driver called "fglrx" for linux on their site for Radeon and other chipsets, but it required a kernel recompile. If you've heard about linux, you've probably heard about recompiling the kernel. It takes a while and there's a million settings. Half a day later, I am enjoying glxgears (a test program with 3 spinning gears) at 750 fps and Counter-Strike at good speed.

Was it worth it? Oh yes. The chance of me going back to windows is very slim now.

But enough of me...onto Linux. Mandrake 10 is awesome, (I've always had problems with Debian - incompatibilities between programs, but it's just because I'm stupid ) Latest software (March 3 I believe) and really easy to set up.

One of the main things you'll notice when you enter linux is text. There are no graphics in the bootup (except at the top - mandrake star, debian tux with beer, I think Red Hat has a hat?) and all this green text marked [OK] beside undiscriminable markings. Then a click (if you installed it right ) and a nice graphical login screen. Log in, and you get a desktop that looks nothing like Windows. It takes a little while to get used to - and the console!

Linux is geared toward people that know how to type a bit. Once you're logged in (in graphical mode, hereby referred to as "X Windows") you can click a button, and it opens a console. Remember the command prompt in Windows? I used to only use it for "net send * do my laundry" to send messages across the network. In Linux, you use it a lot more, although KDE reduces that. It's easier than DOS to - the dir command (LS in linux - but dir works too) is shorter

If you're concerned about gaming, check out http://www.transgaming.com - for a small fee you can get a program that runs Windows games on linux, with support to boot.

There's my rant. Sorry about the long post.

[BishounenCookie]

ATI has a driver called "fglrx" for linux on their site for Radeon and other chipsets, but it required a kernel recompile.

yes, and it's a darned good driver too I think. I used it for a while but I had to throw my radeon into my more powerful windows box for playing FFXI.

But enough of me...onto Linux. Mandrake 10 is awesome, (I've always had problems with Debian - incompatibilities between programs, but it's just because I'm stupid ) Latest software (March 3 I believe) and really easy to set up.

Debian package system is really nice. I hope I never use a distro where I have to deal with RPM's again. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by incompatibilities... ^^]One of the main things you'll notice when you enter linux is text. There are no graphics in the bootup (except at the top - mandrake star, debian tux with beer, I think Red Hat has a hat?) and all this green text marked [OK] beside undiscriminable markings.[/quote]

Hopefully you see the [OK]!! One of the first times I compiled a kernel, I accidently overlooked the IDE section of the configuration, in which IDE support was for some reason defaultly configured as a module. Needless to say, my next bootup wasn't pretty, and consisted of lots of warnings and a kernel panic. Luckily I hadn't deleted my old kernel yet.

Most of those [ok] tests make sense after a while once you've poked around at stuff and figure out what makes stuff tick, etc.

Then a click (if you installed it right ) and a nice graphical login screen. Log in, and you get a desktop that looks nothing like Windows. It takes a little while to get used to - and the console!

After doing a debian netinst, I was booted to a system with no X interface, it was all console for me until I actually downloaded and setup X/gnome2. But yeah, I love the console. I love the functionality, especially being able to have multiple sessions. I can have IRSSI running on one session, ksmp3play on another, and maybe doing some work on yet another session.

[Fsiphskilm]

You guys are in

[BishounenCookie]

I'd like to give mac a shot once. I was thinking maybe if/when I go off to school I'd get an ibook. One of those sweet clamshell ones.

[Technomancer]

Au contraire, my friend. As a typical desktop user, I find that there is almost always at least one suitable replacement for my Windows ap for GNU/Linux. If not, there is always Wine. ^_^

Is that an emulator or do you mean to say that OS debates really do drive a man to drink?

Seriously, though I use Windows 98 for two reasons
1)I'm lazy and I don't have time to screw around with my system. I need it to work, and I need my data to be immediately accessible.

2)The main application that I use (MATLAB) has "issues" with Linux, something that I found out the hard way once. I could switch to IDL, but I'd loose a lot of the functionality that I need for my current project. In any event, MATLAB\SIMULINK is the industry standard in my field so I'm pretty much stuck with it, and thus Windows.

It'd be nice to have access to Linux, but at the moment it's not worth the hassle. BTW, has anyone ever read Neil Stephenson's "In the Beginning Was The Command Line?"

[martinloyola]

*walks back and forth with sign*

"Down with MS
Up with Mac
Down with MS
Up with Mac"

I have a stinkin' 98 system that I pray God will send to a very special corner in hell cuz' its never repentant and I think it worships the devil

No, in all seriousness, I cant stand window cuz it freezes on me whenever I'm running more than like two applications, it retarded when a sytem's very name implies its ability to run multiple windows at once when almost everytime I do it freezes up and I have to reboot,

The thing I don't like about Mac hardware is the mouse, one button yuck!!, and I'm not sure if I like the word processor, I like the bells and whistles on Word Perfect too much, (unless that is, I just don't know where to look for them )

[BishounenCookie]

Is that an emulator or do you mean to say that OS debates really do drive a man to drink? ]

'Wine' is an acronym for something like "Wine Is No Emulator," but an emulator is exactly what it is, actually. It will run alot of Windows programs suitably, provided there are not too many complicated DLL dependencies and such. There is even a variation called WineX which can tackle DirectX games like Warcraft 3.

2)The main application that I use (MATLAB) has "issues" with Linux, something that I found out the hard way once. I could switch to IDL, but I'd loose a lot of the functionality that I need for my current project. In any event, MATLAB\SIMULINK is the industry standard in my field so I'm pretty much stuck with it, and thus Windows.

Haven't heard of that application. But I suppose when you're stuck with windows, you're stuck with windows.

It'd be nice to have access to Linux, but at the moment it's not worth the hassle. BTW, has anyone ever read Neil Stephenson's "In the Beginning Was The Command Line?"

Nope, haven't read that book, sounds amusing though.

[Bobtheduck]

I'd like to give mac a shot once.

I gave mac a shot once. For 5 months. No need to repeat everything I had to say again. I'll just say I don't ever plan on going mac again. Linux, I will try. Mac, never again.

When I get my spizziffy Video Editing suite computer, I'll consider a dual boot just to try out Linux. THat will be several years from now, though.

[shooraijin]

> The thing I don't like about Mac hardware is the mouse, one button yuck!!,

You can use a two-button mouse with modern Macs if you like (I use a standard Wacom Graphire2 touch tablet, and the three button mouse is fully supported in OS X -- even the scroll wheel works). However, since I've used Macs so long, the single mouse button isn't a liability for me , but you can have a right mouse button now too.

> and I'm not sure if I like the word processor, I like the bells and whistles on Word Perfect too much, (unless that is, I just don't know where to look for them )

There was a Mac WordPerfect although I don't think it was ever ported to OS X (probably would run fine in Classic mode, though) -- I actually have it installed on my bedroom IIci. Alas, I am ashamed to admit that I now have Microsoft Word (Office v.X) on my system; although the port is very good and takes advantage of OS X-specific features, there are a lot of security problems *sigh* which required a number of updates. TextEdit does okay for midrange documents, though, and it saves in both plain text and RTF.

[Mithrandir]

The thing I don't like about Mac hardware is the mouse, one button yuck!!

Yeah. That's what $10.00 mice at Fry's are for. Seriously, I can't stand one button mouses. Oh sure, you can try to sweat talk me with all that "Just hold down the control button!" talk, but it's not my thing. I actually use trackballs, though, so I guess the point is moot. However, the trackball that I had on my windows box (triple boot: 98/xp/redhat9) keeps giving me grief if it ever gets unplugged. In OS X, not only does it handle that just fine, it just worked right out of the box. And it's not like it's a "normal" tb either - it some sort of weird turbo-ring thing.

I do keep my windows boxen around, for some very specific tasks. Mainly, playing "call to power" with the wolf. And THAT only because I can't find the mac version for anything under $40.00. Sorry activision, but I'm NOT paying that much for an unsupported, 5 year old game.

[btboy500]

'Wine' is an acronym for something like "Wine Is No Emulator," but an emulator is exactly what it is, actually. It will run alot of Windows programs suitably, provided there are not too many complicated DLL dependencies and such. There is even a variation called WineX which can tackle DirectX games like Warcraft 3.

Actually, WINE is an implementation layer, written with absolutely no Microsoft Windows code whatsoever. Atleast, that's what is said on their website. WINE is quite
useful and makes for a good Windows to Linux migration.

[BishounenCookie]

Well I don't know what an implementation layer is. I figured I was probably wrong. But looking at it from a simple non-technical perspective, WINE is an emulator, by the purest definition of 'emulator.'

[Zedian]

Well I use Windows well...because pretty much 90% of computers at jobs, schools and such run on them. I tend to favor the Unix system; Linux. Sure it's ugly and perhaps to nitty-gritty in the DOS for some I like the customization of it, if you know the proper commands.

I never had the fortunate luck of using a Mac though in my Networking class hopefully we'll get some hands on with Apple Talk.

[madphilb]

Actually, if I'm remembering this correclty, Wine is literally "WINdows Emulator," it acts like the Windows OS so you can run Windows programs on a Linux system. "implementation layer" may be the technical term for it, but it's essentially just an emulator, I think the main difference is that it's only emulating the OS, not the CPU itself.

[shooraijin]

More like the API. I'd call that more of a "simulator" than an "emulator" since it just presents something that looks like a Windows API layer to a Windows application, but it doesn't do any attempt to emulate exactly how Windows goes about its business and the low-level implementation (that's reserved for Bochs and Virtual PC).

[BishounenCookie]

Actually, if I'm remembering this correclty, Wine is literally "WINdows Emulator," it acts like the Windows OS so you can run Windows programs on a Linux system. "implementation layer" may be the technical term for it, but it's essentially just an emulator, I think the main difference is that it's only emulating the OS, not the CPU itself.

Okay, since the issue here is so gray... to satisfy my own curiosity, I'm going to look this stuff up and post my findings if anyone is interested. Let's set this straight once and for all.

Here is what the wine team has to say about wine:

Wine is an Open Source implementation of the Windows API on top of X and Unix.

Think of Wine as a Windows compatibility layer. Wine does not require Microsoft Windows, as it is a completely alternative implementation consisting of 100% Microsoft-free code, but it can optionally use native system DLLs if they are available. Wine provides both a development toolkit (Winelib) for porting Windows sources to Unix and a program loader, allowing many unmodified Windows binaries to run on x86-based Unixes, including Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris.

Here is what wine stands for according to the wine team:

As Wine's name says: "Wine Is Not an Emulator": Wine does not emulate the Intel x86 processor.

And here is what dictionary.com says about emulators:

[quote] 1. To strive to equal or excel, especially through imitation: an older pupil whose accomplishments and style I emulated.
2. To compete with successfully]

[BishounenCookie]

Here's one more extended quote for good measure, taken from http://winehq.com/site/myths#slow

Myth 1: "Wine is slow because it is an emulator"
Some people mean by that that Wine must emulate each processor instruction of the Windows application. This is plain wrong. As Wine's name says: "Wine Is Not an Emulator": Wine does not emulate the Intel x86 processor. It will thus not be as slow as Wabi which, since it is not running on a x86 Intel processor, also has to emulate the processor. Windows applications that do not make system calls will run just as fast as on Windows (no more no less).

I think what they are trying to do by calling wine as such, is to debunk the misconception that all emulators are slow. If the dictionary.com definition is accurate, than I still think that wine is an emulator. (specifically, it allows you to "execute the same programs" as windows)

[shooraijin]

Now, just to confuse the issue, there was some talk (and possibly some actual work) done on uniting the Bochs IA-32 CPU emulation core with Wine to actually make a partial Windows emulator that would run on non-x86 platforms (Mac OS X being the most obvious, and first proposed, candidate). I don't know how much this has progressed.

[andyroo]

I'm not going to state my opinion exactly although I do have something to say on the UI issues. I will just say I use Cygwin alot. *is unable to get a Unix (BSD/Linux) distro-- outdated hardware*

*ahem*

I was wondering how they were going to do the OS X port of WINE. I think that I've got bochs somewhere on my laptop-- never used it much.

WINE (for x86 *NIX systems) is exactly what shooraijin said it is a few posts up. It isn't a true emulater because it isn't emulating a CPU along with the software, but is only mimicking the Window's API. The Wine developers have set up a Wine Myths page for that sort of question at http://www.winehq.com/site/myths . I hope that answers some questions.

[BishounenCookie]

WINE (for x86 *NIX systems) is exactly what shooraijin said it is a few posts up. It isn't a true emulater because it isn't emulating a CPU along with the software, but is only mimicking the Window's API. The Wine developers have set up a Wine Myths page for that sort of question at http://www.winehq.com/site/myths . I hope that answers some questions.

Precisely what I was quoting from a few posts up. I take only the very basic meaning of 'emulator' when referring to it as such, which is really a more linguistic approach, with linguistic implications, rather than a technical. Actually I had no idea an emulator had to emulate a CPU in order to be considered such.



Am I still making sense?
Maybe I talk too much.

[madphilb]

I stand corrected.... been working off incorrect information (as far as what WINE stands for)....

As for the Emulator thing, meh.... it's not, but it kinda is.... but it's really not... you know how that works

[Mithrandir]

I was wondering how they were going to do the OS X port of WINE. I think that I've got bochs somewhere on my laptop-- never used it much.

O.O....!

That's just weird. I stumbled across bochs this morning totally accidentally, and I'm toying with it now. It seems incredibly slow, though. I'm thinking it won't replace my Virtual PC system anytime soon. Then again, I can't get VPC for my G5, so Maybe I'll be stuck with it for quite some time...

INFO:
For those of you that don't know, Bochs (prononunced 'box') is an open source i386 emulator. Slower than concrete off a ducks back, though...

[shooraijin]

Mega-incredibly slow (for one thing, I don't think it has a JIT).

Very unfortunate that Microsoft bought Virtual PC. I don't intend to be upgrading mine anytime soon as a result (staying at 6.0, the last Connectix release).