Ubuntu For Netbooks

[ericinboston]

Originally Posted by netjunkie

I ran MEPIS Linux on an IBM desktop for over a year with two shut downs when I left for vacation otherwise it ran non stop 24/7 without problems.

Just to be clear and lend an opinion...I have been running XP on numerous personal desktops since it came out in 2001-ish. My machines, regardless of operating system, are on 24x7 because I just don't see the purpose in shutting it down and starting it back up all the time. That's me.

Back to my point...as far back as I can remember, my XP boxes have been on 24x7 (except for a vacation or power outtage)...and literally, I have rebooted each unit 2-10 times A YEAR (much less than once a month)...1-2 times a program may have crashed and the only way to FIX THAT PARTICULAR PROGRAM is to reboot...the other 2-3 times that I rebooted was for testing purposes such as to see if a reboot would clear up a network problem...and if it did help in deducing the problem I knew what path to take.

I just wanted to throw this point out there because there are enough people out there that claim Windows XP needs to be rebooted every 72 hours for <insert 1 of 10,000 reasons here>...and it kills me that they spread such nonsense. Sure, there are certainly cases where people's Windows machine is a piece of junk or corrupted...the same can be said for Mac or Linux or OS/2. All my friends/peers that I have helped setup their XP box I have told them "just leave the thing on 24x7 and shut off your monitor" have had the same experience: XP runs for weeks/months at a time without issue. I've even set up XP boxes at my office acting as File and Print servers and they've been online for years with only a handful of reboots (mainly mandatory security patches required by our IT dept).


My overall recommendation to desktop owners it to keep them on 24/7...and not to use power saving features like Standby or Hibernate...you'll only save $4 a month with these features unless you have some monster with 4 hard drives spinning all night long doing load testing...might as well leave your computer on to save you time booting and rebooting...and while it's on, you might as well put the CPU to good use such as searching for a cure for cancer by connecting to a distributed computing project.

I'm beginning to ramble but hopefully folks don't believe XP needs to be rebooted every few days...even in a "work" atmosphere.

-Eric

[netjunkie]

Originally Posted by ericinboston

Back to my point...as far back as I can remember, my XP boxes have been on 24x7 (except for a vacation or power outtage)...and literally, I have rebooted each unit 2-10 times A YEAR (much less than once a month)...1-2 times a program may have crashed and the only way to FIX THAT PARTICULAR PROGRAM is to reboot...the other 2-3 times that I rebooted was for testing purposes such as to see if a reboot would clear up a network problem...and if it did help in deducing the problem I knew what path to take.

Wow! I mean WoW! It's good to go over the strengths and weaknesses of each OS before making a decision about which to install.

What do you think about the point that Linux distros are free?

[ericinboston]

Originally Posted by netjunkie

Wow! I mean WoW! It's good to go over the strengths and weaknesses of each OS before making a decision about which to install.

What do you think about the point that Linux distros are free?

Well, as a technologist but not a Linux guru here are my thoughts about Linux both in the workplace and the home...and my thoughts reflect/include my peer's views too (some of which are CIOs at large companies as well as IT directors):

Work:
-----
1)The big problem with Linux is there is no support...well, I should say there is no support like coming from a single vendor like Sun or Microsoft or IBM (for IBM's mainframes)...Linux vendors over the past few years have begun to offer pay-for-support for their enterprise class versions, but the problem is that it's still wishy-washy...since nobody owns Linux and everyone owns Linux, the phone-support people you talk to STILL need to post the problem to linux boards/forums to get the answer...unless the problem (rarely) is specific to their particular distro. Companies don't like this...they want to know that if they have chosen Linux to be their app server or other type of "server" for mission critical or even somewhat critical applications, that they can have problems resolved in hours...not days or weeks.

2)It's great that it is free and there are plenty of options...but you feel a bit on your own because everyone offers Linux.

4)Generally speaking...very generally...Linux is just as good if not better than Windows for enterprise stuff like acting as a mail server or app server or j2ee container or what not. It typically has a smaller footprint than Windows and generally does not need to be rebooted as much when patches are applied.

5)Most people have thought (still think) that Linux is just Unix's little brother...but there seem to be quite some major differences (don't ask me for the details)...so there is a bit of miscommunication out there.



Personal:
--------

1)I think Linux was on a good roll to beating Apple at home marketshare and shot their own foot...it's like Linux got 92% of being "user friendly" and then all the developers quit. I am a techie...a diehard techie...have been since 1979...yet I, as a consumer, find it hard to install applications on Linux...I posted my example earlier yesterday. I mean, come on, people are going to want to install their favorite game or utility or cd burner software or whatever. People like my dad or sisters or even somewhat technical people aren't going to understant what a terminal window is, what "bash" is, why they need to alter the file they downloaded to be "executable", why they need to be logged in as a user with enough credentials to INSTALL...and then later RUN. This is my #1 reason why I think Linux has spun down from a Category 5 hurricane to a tropical storm.

2)Installation is a snap...just as easy as Windows (actually Windows 2008 is the easiest OS I've EVER installed...wow...try it out sometime if you want to see easy)

3)User Interface is very similar to Windows...get used to their version of the "Start Menu" and you are golden.

4)Help could be better...how about some sections like "I'm a Windows guru...how do I do these 25 popular Windows tasks in Ubuntu"? Load them up with screenshots. The Help also seems to think you have been using Linux for over a year and are familiar with the terms...wrong.

5)Ubuntu has great support for hardware...I don't get into Bluetooth and some of the other bells and whistles but it sees my network, monitor, USB drives, and cd burner just fine.




Overall I think Ubuntu and other similar Linux distros have a great opportunity to capture more marketshare than Apple. I don't think Linux will ever replace Windows simply based on the fact that nobody owns Linux and there are 900 flavors of it. People want consitency...they want to know someone is there to help them if their $800 purchase doesn't work.

Linux has to step back and look at this from a private company's point of view:

1)How do we price this attractively?
2)How do we CONVINCE people to nuke Windows and install Linux? (This has a lot of sub-questions and answers)
3)How many other competing Linux vendors are there? Will they purposely or accidentally cause confusion or dilute the Linux brand recognition or scare people away from trying Linux?


Currently I think Microsoft is more worried about Apple getting 10% of personal computing OS marketshare than Linux...but if Linux played its cards a bit better, it would easily have more marketshare than Apple...maybe as much as 30% by 2012.

-Eric

p.s. let's see if Windows 7 is a fiasco like Vista. I doubt it, but we'll see.

[fewt]

Originally Posted by ericinboston

Well, as a technologist but not a Linux guru here are my thoughts about Linux both in the workplace and the home...and my thoughts reflect/include my peer's views too (some of which are CIOs at large companies as well as IT directors):

1)The big problem with Linux is there is no support...well, I should say there is no support like coming from a single vendor like Sun or Microsoft or IBM (for IBM's mainframes)...Linux vendors over the past few years have begun to offer pay-for-support for their enterprise class versions, but the problem is that it's still wishy-washy...since nobody owns Linux and everyone owns Linux, the phone-support people you talk to STILL need to post the problem to linux boards/forums to get the answer...unless the problem (rarely) is specific to their particular distro. Companies don't like this...they want to know that if they have chosen Linux to be their app server or other type of "server" for mission critical or even somewhat critical applications, that they can have problems resolved in hours...not days or weeks.

See, this is why a non Linux person shouldn't talk about Linux without researching.

There are TONS of Linux support options.

Canonical
RedHat
System76
Dell
Novell
Oracle

Not to mention hundreds of small companies that will sell you a contract to support Linux. Just google linux support contract purchase for an example.

Uhh Sun supports Linux. IBM also sells Linux contracts. You only need to post on forums if you choose to. There are more forums for Windows support than there are for Linux support, the argument cancels it out when you compare apples and apples.

Phone support people post on forums? Where? examples please.

You state companies don't like this. My career consists of mostly fortune 50 companies, I haven't seen this. I have been using deploying and supporting Linux in large enterprise environments for over 14 years.

Companies hire people that know Linux and can resolve problems without support. The support argument expired years ago. I have rarely found anyone's support to be anywhere near the level of internal staff capability.

Unless you are changing hardware or need to submit a memory dump of your oracle instance, support is practically useless.

Originally Posted by ericinboston

2)It's great that it is free and there are plenty of options...but you feel a bit on your own because everyone offers Linux.

Not sure what this means.

Originally Posted by ericinboston

4)Generally speaking...very generally...Linux is just as good if not better than Windows for enterprise stuff like acting as a mail server or app server or j2ee container or what not. It typically has a smaller footprint than Windows and generally does not need to be rebooted as much when patches are applied.

It is much better at scaling, running on obscure hardware like your F5 or your Checkpoint firewall, and tons of other places you wouldn't even think about running Windows. All enterprise grades.

I'm a SME for Windows and Linux professionally, so I can compare them fairly. Windows is great for lots of things.

Originally Posted by ericinboston

5)Most people have thought (still think) that Linux is just Unix's little brother...but there seem to be quite some major differences (don't ask me for the details)...so there is a bit of miscommunication out there.

Linux has been eating Unix lunch for years. 5 or 6 years ago, yes. Today not so much.

[QUOTE=ericinboston;1453]
1)I think Linux was on a good roll to beating Apple at home marketshare and shot their own foot...it's like Linux got 92% of being "user friendly" and then all

Originally Posted by ericinboston

Well, as a technologist but not a Linux guru here are my thoughts about Linux both in the workplace and the home...and my thoughts reflect/include my peer's views too (some of which are CIOs at large companies as well as IT directors):

Define user friendly. User friendly to me is getting out of my way, yet providing me with tools for me to get my job done quickly and efficiently. Email is not my first priority. User friendly is different for each user, it can't be rated as "92%" just like Windows can't. If I had to rate Windows for user friendly I would have to rate it lower than 92% because it gets in my way and slows my efficiency. That's not a knock against Windows, its just how I use computers.

Originally Posted by ericinboston

Overall I think Ubuntu and other similar Linux distros have a great opportunity to capture more marketshare than Apple. I don't think Linux will ever replace Windows simply based on the fact that nobody owns Linux and there are 900 flavors of it. People want consitency...they want to know someone is there to help them if their $800 purchase doesn't work.

Did you see the article today about the new Nokia Linux cell phone? Linux is in so many places Windows can't be that it is inevitable.

Originally Posted by ericinboston

Linux has to step back and look at this from a private company's point of view:

Software has to take a step back?

Originally Posted by ericinboston

1)How do we price this attractively?
2)How do we CONVINCE people to nuke Windows and install Linux? (This has a lot of sub-questions and answers)
3)How many other competing Linux vendors are there? Will they purposely or accidentally cause confusion or dilute the Linux brand recognition or scare people away from trying Linux?

1. Anyone in technology knows price is the smallest component when talking TCO.
2. Who cares about convincing people? They will find their own ways there. It's already purvasive enough to be in most peoples homes and they don't know it. Just look at your WIFI router.
3. Competition is good, creating a Linux "monopoly" is bad.

Originally Posted by ericinboston

Currently I think Microsoft is more worried about Apple getting 10% of personal computing OS marketshare than Linux...but if Linux played its cards a bit better, it would easily have more marketshare than Apple...maybe as much as 30% by 2012.

Actually Microsoft just told the SEC that they were scared of Linux.

[ericinboston]

@fewt...thanks for quoting me all over the place...

See, this is why a non Linux person shouldn't talk about Linux without researching.

There are TONS of Linux support options.

Huh? First, don't tell me what I do or not do...I know how to research and have...you simply misread or misunderstood my comments. I don't appreciate your tone. You wouldn't like it if I stereotyped you as the Comic Book Store Owner on Simpsons would you? ( Comic Book Guy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ). Don't state that I don't research before I talk about a topic... I think you misunderstood my statement...nobody OWNS Linux in the sense how MS owns the Windows code or Mac owns the OSX code...therefore you have 900 distributions and downloads of the thing. This is far UNLIKE calling MS for Windows support...or Sun for Unix support. I know there are a billion options for "support" for Linux...but there shouldn't be a billion. Companies do not want to buy an OS whose "option" for support is Frank's Tech Support in Wyoming. It's a cynical example but it is an example. All these Linux distributions just confuse everyone with "who am I supposed to call" type scenarios. I hope I am being more clear. Yes, if your company purchased a copy of Redhat, they likely bought a support contract in some fashion. But the whole idea/concept of Linux trying to become a more mainstream OS (work or personal) is that every end user in the world does not have a different version of "Linux". So the downfall of Linux is that it is very open...that's also its strength.

You state companies don't like this

I am not sure exactly what "this" is you are referring to but let me give you an example...a very very close friend of mine is the CIO of a company that employs over 400,000 people worldwide...they tried Linux to various degrees and basically threw it out for SUPPORT reasons...basically, the support was far sub-par compared to Sun. Reason #2 was the inhouse technical know-how for Linux was not as great as they thought. Reason #3 was that many people who pitched Linux (inside and outside the company) stated that Linux was almost identical to Unix (which it is not)...hence the numerous support issues they had. Call it broken promises...call it misguided...call it making assumptions...the employeese are not dummies and there was no real anger...using Linux instead of Unix or Windows just didn't work out...they tried it for 3 years if I am correct and they were not "pilot" programs.

Software has to take a step back?

I mean Linux Community. If the Community wants Linux to take off in the home market, "they" need to think and act like a single company. Not a community of 3 million "developers" that all want to make their own "flavor" of "Linux". It's one thing to go to an ice cream store and choose from 30 flavors of ice cream...it's not mission critical to your life and you probably don't eat ice cream every single day of the year...so having to figure out how to choose among hundreds of flavors of Linux AND CONTINUE to then use that particular flavor for years in the future is a much more daunting option...an option that the majority of people and companies simply don't want to deal with...and ESPECIALLY if they have well trained staff (or themselves in the case of a consumer) that are currently happy with the 2-3 major OSes that have been tried, tested, and used by Enterprises across the globe for years.



Hey...you may be a Linux guru and that's cool and VERY MUCH appreciated...but you took (or misunderstood) my points out of context...I was clearly talking about Work and Home usage on a computer...not cell phones with tiny Linux editions or Tivo dvr systems. Seriously.

My main point was that as a consumer...Joe Shmoe...who wants to buy a computer system for their home...Linux just doesn't cut the mustard right now...mainly because it's so un-organized that a normal non-techie (and even techie) can't figure out which to choose and how to support it. I don't get the warm and fuzzies if I had to buy a computer tomorrow with XYZ Linux on it...who do I call? What are my support options? Why haven't I ever heard of XYZ Linux? How long has XYZ been around? How long has the company who makes it been around? Why is XYZ better than Windows?...when I buy a Windows based system, I know that I can pick up the phone and call MS for a WINDOWS problem or question...and if it's something more specific like a bad network card or dead monitor, well, I call Dell or whoever sold me the thing and they send a guy out to replace it. Dell and other hardware manufacturers also sell Windows Support..."I know that I can pick up the phone" comment has been drilled into my head for the last 20 years...by who?...a company...a company that employees people and sells a product that I buy...and who advertises in newspapers and tv so I know they exist...a company on the stock market so I can follow their headlines or invest...Seriously...this is the mentality of a consumer.


I am not saying Linux stinks...or that Windows is better...all I'm saying is there is practically no brand recognition for ANY of the Linux distributions in the eyes of hundreds of millions (if not billions) of people on this planet. Please don't reply back stating I can Google this or read PCMag or CIO mag or whatever. I wouldn't tell you to go Google Coca Cola or Honda. If Linux is going to penetrate the consumer market (which believe me they have been TRYING to for 10 years) then "they"...the communities, developers, distribution owners, etc...they need to come up with a plan to offer and advertise the operating system in a way that consumers will have the warm and fuzzies when they compare 2 identical machines yet one is $75 cheaper (or whatever the price diff). "They" have done a FANTASTIC job at getting (for example Ubuntu) Linux a friendly OS for the laymen (but it still needs improvement if you ask me)...it's now time for "them" to figure out if it's truly ready to be packaged, advertised, and sold in masses...to Joe Shmoe consumer...not Eric and Fewt who have known about Linux for decades.

[fewt]

Hmm, sorry you were offended. If your CIO and company of 400,000 couldn't figure out how to use Linux, then I'd question their ability to be successful overall.

I didn't intend to offend, just inform.

I see you didn't counter any of my points though.

[netjunkie]

Originally Posted by fewt

I...intend to...just inform.

You're doing fine. The Linux adoption wiki posts worldwide growth information. I've found, like PCAuthority in Australia, more netbooks in use around the Pacific Rim because they are more adaptable to mobile data.

I seldom go anywhere without researching the site to help me identify and appreciate the location. Maps and guides and schedules are downloaded to the netbook for help. The same for pictures from cameras and phones.

That's why long battery life from an efficient OS plus ethical use of a netbook around others is important to me.

[ericinboston]

Originally Posted by fewt

Hmm, sorry you were offended. If your CIO and company of 400,000 couldn't figure out how to use Linux, then I'd question their ability to be successful overall.


I see you didn't counter any of my points though.

1)OMG...seriously...I guess you cannot read...go re-read my part about the CIO and the 400,000-employee company. If you still have the same comment, don't bother replying because you obviously can't comprehend my statements. Your attitude about Linux being the Almighty is NOW starting to offend me...and that you make remarks like this about my close friends who, and their company/business, are extremely successful is just wrong.

2)I countered every point of yours (as far as I know) except for the 1-off statements about MS and the SEC. If there is a particular statement you want me to address, list it and I will address it. I don't always address every sentence of someone's post(s)...just what I disagree with.

3)Let me immitate you and make a comment: I'm guessing you're just like Nick Burns ( Hulu - Saturday Night Live: Nick Burns ) who *knows* everything about computer systems...yet wonders why they still work in Desktop Support at their company. Yeah, you sound like Nick Burns when you write snippy remarks in your replies.

Look...I don't hate you...but take it easy on the assumptions. This topic is much much easier to discuss and debate in person...human to human. I think that you and I agree on about 90% of the Linux topics...it's just some of the wording of our comments and maybe you are taking things a bit literal or out of context (and I may be at fault if I am not clear)....again, this isn't a 300page book where I have years to produce my thoughts and arrange everything in perfect order. Some things will get dropped/lost in a pure-text discussion like this.

[ericinboston]

Originally Posted by netjunkie

You're doing fine. The Linux adoption wiki posts worldwide growth information. I've found, like PCAuthority in Australia, more netbooks in use around the Pacific Rim because they are more adaptable to mobile data.

I seldom go anywhere without researching the site to help me identify and appreciate the location. Maps and guides and schedules are downloaded to the netbook for help. The same for pictures from cameras and phones.

That's why long battery life from an efficient OS plus ethical use of a netbook around others is important to me.

Thanks for the Wiki! Some nice info there.

Yea, I'm itching to put Ubuntu 9.04 (or even the Remix version) on my Dell Mini9 but haven't had time to research it for compatibility.

I am using U904 on my work notebook and for the software that comes with it (FireFox, OpenOffice, etc), it's blazing fast...and I mean blazing. I compared it to a dual-boot with bare XP with the same software just to be sure I wasn't crazy.

[fewt]

Originally Posted by ericinboston

1)OMG...seriously...I guess you cannot read...go re-read my part about the CIO and the 400,000-employee company. If you still have the same comment, don't bother replying because you obviously can't comprehend my statements. Your attitude about Linux being the Almighty is NOW starting to offend me...and that you make remarks like this about my close friends who, and their company/business, are extremely successful is just wrong.

2)I countered every point of yours (as far as I know) except for the 1-off statements about MS and the SEC. If there is a particular statement you want me to address, list it and I will address it. I don't always address every sentence of someone's post(s)...just what I disagree with.

3)Let me immitate you and make a comment: I'm guessing you're just like Nick Burns ( Hulu - Saturday Night Live: Nick Burns ) who *knows* everything about computer systems...yet wonders why they still work in Desktop Support at their company. Yeah, you sound like Nick Burns when you write snippy remarks in your replies.

Look...I don't hate you...but take it easy on the assumptions. This topic is much much easier to discuss and debate in person...human to human. I think that you and I agree on about 90% of the Linux topics...it's just some of the wording of our comments and maybe you are taking things a bit literal or out of context (and I may be at fault if I am not clear)....again, this isn't a 300page book where I have years to produce my thoughts and arrange everything in perfect order. Some things will get dropped/lost in a pure-text discussion like this.

I'm not the one getting heated over nothing.

Your CIO and 400,000 employees could be made up for all I know.

Love the assumptions, but everything I posted is based in fact, you can google all of it or none of it. What you choose to do with it is up to you. Your original post was filled with misinformation, sorry if you didn't know that.