No problem glad I could help.

 

We use Linux based systems in my computer science department at school and I will admit that they are better for programming, but I get so frustrated for the lack of commercial programs available for Linux users. And the fact that most of the programs for Linux are free, means that support is minimal and the programs can be ridden with many bugs. This has been my experience using Fedora at school, that programs crash OFTEN.

As for 64bit Vista: I could be wrong here but I thought they already released 64bit Vista. I had a long talk about 64bit systems with my coworker the other day (very knowledgeable guy with computer systems) and his impressions from a 64bit system is that it is completely USELESS. Yeah it is supposed to run faster and it is rated to handle more calculations than a 32bit processor, but generally programs do not take advantage of the 64bit capability, not to mention that program support for 64bit systems is next to none... I think if you build a good strong 32bit system you have NOTHING to worry about.

I just looked on newegg and found that YES, 64bit Vista DOES exist:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16832116215

I would advise against 64bit systems, but that is just my professional/unprofessional opinion

 

That is one of the biggest misconceptions about 64 bit OS'. Your applications have to be able to take advantage of the 64 bit processor. Otherwise you are paying for something you are not using. I as well would advise against 64 bit.IMO

 

I knew someone would throw Linux in the mix. Great OS, especially considering the price.

 

I been around since before digital computers - and these arguments are the same ones everyone used against all bus widths, from 4 bits up. Perhaps the most bitter was when we went from 16 bits to 32 bit buses. 16 bit programs were fast (at that time) and did everything we needed - and no one knew how to use the 32 bit system.

The following year we got floating point math, and everyone was throwing rocks at 16 bit machines and even the general public was buying faster and faster processors -

I have a magazine article quoiting Bill Gates before he left IBM - he was saying that you just were not a good programmer if you couldn't get the job done using 64 K of memory. Somebody above was saying their Vista machine need 2 gigs of memory to turn on and 4 gigs to run programs. . . . . . . . . how times have changed, even for the big boys.

Frankly, we are in the middle of an industry wide change - and any time or money spent on upgrades is wasted until we get both hardware and programs that take advantage of the 64 bit system.

 

Yes, and worth every penny! We ran an engineering server with it for over a year, but that was 10 years ago. Come on, it is like any other DOS software - you might as well go back to Microsoft DOS 7.0 - or whatever IBM was selling before Microsoft came out with a Windows based system.

I like the Ford Model Ts - they are neat to look at and fun to drive - but for a daily driver I would chose any car built today over a new Model T.

Linux is great for a beginning programmer or a hardware guy who wants to get a feel for how a system works - but that is all it is, a learning tool for someone not very advanced!

It is like not letting school kids use electronic calculators until the show they can add and subtract for themselves!

 

Linux has never been anthing like DOS. The only thing they had in common was a command line interface --- but guess what? Windows still has a command line interface, just as Linux does.

Linux:
- It ran pre-emptive multi-tasking long before Windows did.
- Its virtual memory system blows away Windows
- Its file system support blows away Windows
- Its stability blows away Windows
- It can run many different graphical windowing interfaces, including a Windows VM and Windows emulator!
- Linux is used on all the major server platforms
- Linux runs on platforms from cell phones to mainframes
- Linux is used on the majority of supercomputers
- Linux supports more processors per machine than Windows
- Linux bugs, because they are subject to peer review, are corrected much faster.
- Linux and its cousin BSD have served as the platform for many, if not most, of the innovations that Microsoft has borrowed.

As someone who as used and programmed both platforms for many, many years... you're dead wrong about its capabilities. It far outstrips Windows in every aspect, including security. The sole difference is it is more difficult to install and device driver support isn't as extensive.

Contrary to your statements... it takes brains to run Linux while any moron oftens run Windows. Just take a look at how many people get virus infected Windows systems as evidence of this.

 

Jeez, we talking about the same system? I will not apologize for or defend Windows, I just recognize that it is dominate, and installed on over 98% of all new computers. If you are going to play in the desktop market, you have to be windows-based.

And yes, any dummy can run windows. That is what the desktop market is all about - dumping workstations accessing a single mainframe computer in favor of a stand-alone system that does everything an office worker needs to do. Why would you want a system that requires an experienced programmer to track a sales order? Why not build something the sales clerk can use?

And it is a foolish argument to mention virus infections - if you were writing a virus program you would go after the most popular OS, and the one with the least defenses. It is sort of like a terrorist - they don't go after the special forces hidden aboard a well defended military base, but instead old ladies and children in a public park. Of course viruses are programed for Windows!

But Linux? The Linux I know does not have the capabilities you mention. Either I have the name wrong (old age does make you forgetful) or things sure have changed since I retired.

Do the FTE servers run Linux?

 

Probably, but I try to stay out of religious arguments. I've been doin' this stuff for about 20 years and they all have their place. There is no "better", just different. When we meet this weekend, I'll tell you who I work for. It's pretty geeky. I really don't have an overall favorite. I do have preferred choices for specific applications.

If the only tool you have is a hammer, everything starts looking like a nail.

 

Which is a better car? A mass produced Escort, or a top-of-the-line limited Mercedes?

Linux does run a windows-based interface. Two major interfaces, as a matter of fact, plus it still gives several standard, powerful Unix shells.

You are comparing client-server to stand-alone models, a completely different thing from comparing Windows to Linux. Both Windows and Linux can run either client-server or stand-alone. Linux systems are running on desktops, not accessing mainframes. The vast majority don't access mainframes.

Macintosh can be run by anyone, is far more powerful than Windows due to its Unix kernel (Linux runs a kernel very similar to Unix, but was designed from scratch for the most part), doesn't have security issues like Windows.

You don't need to be an experienced programmer to run book-keeping on Linux. There are accounting packages available for its graphical interfaces, some of them free.

You're right on that one. Windows has the least defenses. Windows is insecure to say the least.

I'm not sure that's really a good analogy.

A better one would be to say a political assassin is more likely to go after someone driving in a pickup (Windows) than an armored car (Linux).

Then you never knew it.

Linux was doing pretty much all those things 10 years ago, except Windows emulation. Back then, the best way to emulate Windows on a Linux box was to hit the reset switch, simulating a Windows crash. Actually, that's still a good way to emulate Windows.

Yes.

So does the router/firewall (such as a cable-modem, wireless router or DSL router) you're likely using. That's the wonderful thing about it... you can use it for small "appliance" applications, desktops, servers, mainframes, movie production (Pixar), supercomputers. It runs on pretty much all platforms with all models (stand-alone, client-server, etc.)

Go to the uptime web site. Guess who ranks last? BSD and Linux systems rank at the top for continuous run-time without a reboot.

Windows... a hacked to run on top of DOS, then migrated to run on top of a very poor and unstable kernel. Then work-arounds in the kernel to detect faults and recover, rather than having a kernel that doesn't have the faults. I've programmed and used both platforms for many years.

Theme song for the majority of Windows users: Hammer Time

 

No, I have no intention of arguing. Ken is apparently a programmer who knows both systems. I am not a programmer, and have not thought about Linux in years.

Besides that, I am not blind to Microsoft's faults - it is everything I dislike in a program. It is, however, the best choice, and the one selected by the overwhelming percentage of computer users.

My experience with Linux is totally different than his - but I have been wrong before, and may well be remembering a different OS. I remember it as one program at a time, unable to share data across applications, and text based commands that had to be memorized.

On Edit:
Guess our posts crossed in the mail - I bow to your experience, except to say I hated UNIX, and only ran it when management forced me to!

 

Now that Mac OS runs on Intel, and several people have hacked it to boot on standard PCs, I'll be running it next week full time.

 

I might suggest the one that best serves your requirements. It might be an escort. It might also be a custom built street rod.

We're heading back to mainframes, but that is a much longer discussion.

You need to take a breath. You seem pretty tense. If I am required to support web servers (I really like xen based clusters) I prefer linux. If I have to support 100,000 people trying to read their email, I'll go with windoze or apple cider. It really doesn't matter.

 

Hey Ken, I have heard rumors about the hacked Mac OS for running on non-mac machines but I never found any solid answers on how it's done and how stable it is. Can you point me in the right direction? Is there a sourceforge site for it somewhere? I have the bundled copy of the Intel-Mac OSX that came with my Macbook although I'm not sure it could be used for this particular exploit. Any info is appreciated. Thanks buddy.

 

Clint, your opinion of Linux isn't very accurate, to say the least - and I think I'm being very diplomatic when I say that. It is an insanely powerful operating system that eclipses any MS product in every area except one - ease of use.

If you consider yourself a power user, then the only reason to use Windows is for games.