Misconceptions

Protocol Droid · #1 12-02-2002, 06:31 PM

Misconceptions about Linux:

1.) Its hard to install.

How hard Linux is to install depends on the distribution. Mandrake is probably even easier to install than windows.

2.) You have to be an expert to use it.

When Linux was first born, this may have been true, but not anymore. Although still probably difficult for computer illiterates, its definitely not beyond average users. Some things may take a bit more time to learn that they did on windows, but that is the exception not the rule.

3.) Windows documents won't work in Linux.

90%+ will work in Linux. All but the most advanced MS Office documents can be used with Open Office, which runs on Linux. Windows Audio and Video can be run with Mplayer, which runs in Linux (but Mplayer IS hard to configure).

4.) Windows games will not work in Linux.

There is a program called Wine designed to run windows games and other software in Linux, it is free, and can run most windows games. There is another program called wineX which can run even more games (almost all Windows games), but is not free.

Try it!

ESALADUANE · #2 12-02-2002, 08:58 PM

The Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act (CBDTPA), which grew out of Senator Fritz Hollings' Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA) requires that "any digital media device" include government mandated copy protection technology.

If this bill passes computers with Linux could become illegal.

Protocol Droid · #3 12-02-2002, 10:15 PM

5.) Linux is a command line OS.

Linux has a graphical user interface runs by points and clicks just like Windows and Macs do.

If CBDTPA were to pass, then Linux would be legal only if it included DRM technology. Hewlet Packard is currently making a Linux version that has TCPA compatible DRM in it. But the CBDTPA will do alot more than just that, it will make that same DRM technology mandatory in all digital devices. That includes CD players, DVD players, Game Consoles, PCs, you name it. The content providers could licence their content in whatever way they want. They could make it so CDs would only work a certain number of times, or only for a certain time period. However they want really.

The hackers would surely find a way to break it, but average law-abiding citizens would end up paying alot more for a lot less. Also, pretty much every move anybody made on their PC would require approval. Everybody except the top Hollywood and Record label executives stands to lose alot from this. Senator Hollings seems to be willing to take any measure to push this bill through though.

Its unfortunate that people are not more informed about this. The only reason this could pass is because the public generally dosn't know about it, or understand it. And then there are others who read about it and simply pass it off as somthing that would never happen. No doubt people would start looking into Linux alot more if they truely understood the stipulations of TCPA/Palladium, and CBDTPA.

ESALADUANE · #4 12-06-2002, 04:37 PM

Its interesting to note that the most recent attempt to get new users to move from Windows to Linux (Lindows) has a license agreement that looks an awful lot like a Microsoft license.

(in part) "2. Proprietary Rights: All right, title and interest in LindowsOS, including source code, documentation,. appearance, structure and organization, are held by Lindows and/or its licensors and are protected by copyright and other laws. You may not copy or otherwise use LindowsOS, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in this Agreement. "

This particular distribution of Linux (Debian) is proprietary just like Microsoft.

The "no copy, no modification" clauses in the license agreement don't read like their coming from the "open source" community.

Disk_Contented · #5 12-08-2002, 03:08 AM

And there you go... The inevitable will also happen with linux. There will be the "big Guys" selling the top "copyright" versions, or you can have a free "lite" version (no redistributing of course)... A smaller section will still distribute the free ones.

As more users take to Linux, the worse it will get.

Protocol Droid · #6 12-08-2002, 07:17 PM

Disk_Contented, do you know anything about Linux at all? Do you know what the GPL (General Public Licence) is? Its the licence upon which more than 50% of the software that makes up Linux , including the kernel, is based. The GPL states that any code can be freely taken and modified, but after modification, the source must be made publicly available. This ensures that Linux stays open-source forever. Of the packages that are non-GPL, most of them have licences similar to GPL. This means that Even those packages within Lindows can be taken and used freely. What you stated could never happen to Linux because of this (but it could happe to FreeBSD).

Open source software has been skyrocketing worldwide. One by one governments have been moving from Windows to Linux. People don't want to be locked in to Microsoft, and now they don't have to anymore. Being Open-Source dosn't at all mean that a profit can't be made from it. Look at Red Hat, a very successful company dealing only with open source software. Plenty of other companys have hijacked and sold OSes with minor modifications to RedHats, but RedHat has stayed on the ball, always releasing new and improved versions. They are very successful dispite being non-copyright (they even dropped MP3 support because of patents).

The only OS thats going to get any worse is Windows. Can you honestly say that you want to be bound by what Microsoft is calling Longhorn's 'security'? If so, you might want to read up on what its all about and ask yourself with an open mind, "Do I really want my computer to run THAT?".

Disk_Contented · #7 12-09-2002, 08:35 PM

Yes i know what the GPL is.
Open source means you can do what you want with it.
Isn't the whole point of open source to be able to take someone elses work and improve/add to it.
From where i'm standing, that doesn't appear to be the whole story. (tell me why we have linux warez if the whole thing is so free)
While we're on the subject of security, dont be fooled by the "iron-clad" stance when talking of Linux. It's not quite as invulnerable as you may think.

I dont want to argue with you over it... we have our own views as to what is best, but all i hear is "Linux will kill windows. Linux is inpenetrable" neither statement is true.

Windows is overpriced and to be truthfull.. it's crap. That doesn't stop it being top of the pile though. I use it because i have to. In my hobby i need full compatability, something linux can't give me.. probably it never will. So for me and many others, there is no other choice.

You are obviously passionate about Linux, which i respect, but this is starting to sound like a "my OS is better than yours" forum... Methinks

Protocol Droid · #8 12-10-2002, 06:28 PM

I don't mean to come off saying that Linux is impenetrable, I'll agree that it certainly isn't that. It just a stronger security model that windows, as it is run in user mode, and full file access is only given in root mode. This does not prevent viruses or cracks, but limits what all but the best of them can do. Windows, (and Lindows actually) run as if in root more, making it so once a system is comprimised, the hacker can pretty much do what they want. Linux actually has many security holes, but when they are found, they are fixed promptly. Anyone who said Linux was iron-clad secure would be innacurate.

I'm not trying to dis anyone for using windows, but I do believe Linux can do alot more than people think it can. The only thing I have found that Linux can't do is run purely MS software such as activeX, and open some advanced Office documents. There are probably many people who think they have no choice in the matter, but really just don't know how capable Linux is. I was surprised when I found that Linux could play Windows Media files, before which I thought I had no choice but windows for example.

I admit I have become quite passionate about Linux. I wasn't always this way, I used to really like windows. Its just that Palladium scares me. I'm really afraid of what would happen if Palladium really took off, and seeing Linux grow to what it is today, I want to keep people informed that it is a real alternative. I don't think many people will want to stay with windows after becomming informed as to what is planned with Palladium.

I know I can at times come off as zealous about linux vs. windows, but I'll try and keep things objective as much as I can.

Disk_Contented · #9 12-11-2002, 09:54 AM

Your obviously a knowledgeable and fair minded chap

So... perhaps you could recomend a Linux flavour that i could mess about with? (Note that i'm not afraid of the command line)
You never know, i might stick with it.

Glossome · #10 12-11-2002, 05:39 PM

Actually, from reading the last couple of posts along this thread, you both seem like quite knowledgable and fair-minded chaps. I've been hacking away with M$'s products for so long now (mainly because, as Disk_Contented contends, because I more or less have to) that I guess I've almost given up hope of even considering alternatives.

Amusingly enough, I ran across this string via Google whilst searching for UT2003 Skins. I dunno why, but after reading it, I found myself signing up just to reply. <shrug>.

I'll admit, I fall under most of the 'misconceptions' listed above. I knew that most documents would work, and I knew of the WINE GUI, but I'm guilty as charged on the rest. Normally, I think reading something like this would only serve to educate me a bit more on Linux, but I've found myself increasingly irritated all day about something. In particular, it was regarding a certain event at a Windows enthusiast site (http://www.windowsxp.nu/)

Check the site for details if you're interested (it's right on the front page), but suffice to say, I've realized more and more lately that I am incredibly unhappy, discontented and disillusioned with M$. Personally, I don't mind a lot of the actual Windows OS eccentricities (I run Win2K only and refuse to touch XP with anything other than a sturdy baseball bat. I hate that POS for many reasons). It's M$'s stance on a number of issues, their arrogance, invasiveness, casual assumptions, and the way they've managed to make the terms "Client" and "Customer" entirely synonymous with "Rape Victim" (Point in Case: M$'s Licensing 6.0 Pogrom (intentional mis-spelling)).

I know I've probably rambled a bit too much already, but in summary, I think what I want to say is Thanks. I've thought about it a number of times, but have never actually given Linux an honest shot. Well ... I'm about to. I think I'll take Protocol Droid's assertion that Mandrake is probably one of the easiest and go with that.

So, yeah ... Thanks.

G'night.

--Tony

Disk_Contented · #11 12-11-2002, 06:12 PM

WOW!! can you believe it!
Thanks for the link Tony. BTW ramble all you want!
I have to say, this is (in contrast to my earlier statement) turning out to be a damn good thread indeed. It's a pity more members don't join in like this.
I hope the thread does not end yet, but in case, thanks for a thought provoking and informative "discussion" Proto (if i may call you that) and all members involved.

Protocol Droid · #12 12-11-2002, 09:14 PM

Well, I have been using Redhat 8.0 for about a month. It is very powerful and stable. It comes with Open Office 1.0.1, and has Mozilla as its default browser. It comes with the latest version of KDE and Gnome. There's not much of anything bad about Redhat 8.0 as a desktop OS. But, there are some things in redhat that take a bit of getting used to. Mounting for example, might bother new users. It dosn't come with mp3 support either (but it can be downloaded). Installation is easy. I suggest Redhat for anyone who is willing to tinker around and learn a couple of new ways to do things. Its free to download at http://www.redhat.com/download/mirror.html
(you only need the first 3 CDs)

Mandrake (http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/ftp...4f7aa0e213.php )is also good, but most of the software is not as up to date as in Redhat. Mandrake however is easier than Redhat, it auto-mounts everything, like in windows, and its easier to set up a dual boot (having both windows and Linux on the same hard drive) for those not familiar with partitioning (of course you'll have to partition to set up any kind of dual booting system). If your going to dual boot, make sure to backup everything important. Partitioning is not hard, but you can never be too careful.

These are the only two I've used recently. Reviews and descriptions for many of the most popular distros can be found at
http://www.distrowatch.com/
Many people like Suse.

I do not suggest slackware or debian(the completely non-corporate distro), as they are difficult to use. I also don't suggest Xandros or Lindows, they miss out on many of the best features of Linux. I also like the KDE GUI better than Gnome.

Good luck, I'll answer any questions anyone has.

Protocol Droid · #13 12-11-2002, 09:26 PM

To add, if you do go with Mandrake, I strongly suggest doing and expert install instead of a standard install. The only difference between an expert install and a standard is that you have more control over which packages are installed, one certainly dosn't have to be an expert to do it.

Also, Disk_Contented, what is the hobby that you mentioned above? There might be a distro that is better suited for it than the ones I mentioned.

Thank you for reading, I also think you both are quite knowledgable and fair-minded chaps

beeboy · #14 12-14-2002, 03:32 PM

I agree with Protocol. Mandrake and Redhat are the best to start out with. In my case Mandrake has better hardware support and is overall a more diverse and trouble-free distro. I found RedHat to be a little inferior to Mandrake in stability and features - but thats my opinion. I had limited Windows experience when I started playing with linux - so - yes - anyone can install the popular distros. If you are bored with Windows please try linux. It will give you days, months, and years of satisfaction - just watching it evolve and improve. Distros, software, and programs are constantly improving and most of all - becoming more user friendly. Linux is just plain fun. If you are anything of a computer geek - you will love linux. Dont get me wrong, I love my XP too but its boring. Challenge yourself a little. Linux is'nt going to take over the world tomorrow but give it a couple years and Windows look out.

Disk_Contented · #15 12-16-2002, 09:03 AM

Then it's agreed... we're all all damn nice people.
My hobby is old computers... Particularly a pre 286 that i have.
It's unfair of me to expect a growing OS like Linux to support that, even MS resources are scarce.
Still, i tried QNX simply because it can be installed and removed from windows and i remember it from my Amiga days. ( aahhh! if only Amiga OS would run natively on X86 processors)
Unfortunately, my sound hardware is not supported.
How does QNX compare to redhat etc? obviously at 196 megs it is nowhere near as powerfull, but is it representative of the linux world?