What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
My wife likes to take pictures of everything. Got any ideas? view!
bestbuy.com - With a Kodak(r) EasyShareTM 3X Zoom, she'll have impressive 10.2-megapixel performance, right at her fingertips
65 Comments
- jarvuss, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21wine = free too
and so does just a plain old dual boot system - drizek, on 10/12/2007, -9/+24Linux is way more polished than windows is. Everything is much better integrated. You dont have to use some shareware app to open .rar files for example.
- schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18It might just be easier to use CrossOver Office, Win4Lin, Codega or Wine (among others). Less memory-intensive and more properly integrated. No need for Windows license either, AFAIK.
- usernameistaken, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16before that, there was VMWare
- jasmin888, on 10/12/2007, -6/+19Because some essential apps don't exitst for linux yet. And the beryl-linux interface is os much cooler. Who could ever WANT to use windows after that? may have to.
- MrBabyMan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11Parallels = $49.95, 2X ApplicationServer for Windows Terminal Services = Free
- geoken, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10None of the above mentioned apps are as stable as running a VM. When I needed to run Flash 8 in Ubuntu I explored both options (VMWare & WINE). WINE was far harder to set up (I had to use a windows install of Flash and manually copy files and registry settings into WINE). Even when I did get it running in WINE, it was extremely buggy and had a 100% success rate for corrupting files that were saved with it. VMWare, on the other hand, worked flawlessly.
- jambarama, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7@crazybrit
You are close, but not quite right. WMWare is a virtual machine, as you said. But it doesn't emulate the OS, it "emulates" the hardware, so the OS thinks it is running straight on hardware without the in between layer (the OS is not emulated, it is the full real deal).
WINE stands for "Wine Is Not an Emulator." WINE is NOT emulating anything, it is (like ReactOS) a closed-book rewrite of the Win32 API. It is only a partial implementation, but it is pretty darn good.
So your implication is right, VMWare (or any virtualization) runs Windows apps as well as Windows, WINE isn't as good; but for different reasons than you cite. - tpink, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Actually, it's far more practical in a real world, large scale example. A company can setup one Windows machine with Office installed, then a bunch of thin clients can connect and use the applications. The "complex configuration" would be done by your company's sysadmin and the end users' thin client machines would come pre-configured. Then you only need one copy of Windows, one copy of Office, and you don't have to re-image all your company machines when a new version of Office comes out. In general, if you don't break stuff, it doesn't break on its own so I don't see how you would need to "constantly maintain this complex configuration".
- jambarama, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I think all of you are right. Linux CAN be much more polished than Windows. AIGLX/Compiz or Beryl really (IMHO) does look neater than even Vista. But that stuff doesn't come installed & working by default on any distros I know. So while Linux CAN be much more polished (and my setup is), most Linux user's desktops are not even close to as polished as Vista, and never will be.
If you don't think that Linux CAN look more polished than Windows, look at these:
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=beryl
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=compiz - cyberwiz01, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Try SWScanner, its basically NetStumbler for KDE. It even has GPS integration, and can open and output to netstumbler saved files.
http://www.swscanner.org/ - technoboi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'd be happy to ditch windows and stick with Linux but for one thing.
I use my mobile (cell) phone for lots of things and I need to be able to synch and load stuff up to it from my PC.
If anyone could come up with some software, that does what the Nokia PC suite does, I could say goodbye to Windows. - cptchaos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think this is a very cool idea for cross-os-interoperability - while maintaining a consistent look&feel.
Way better than Wine: Wine is a nice idea too, but it just works with roughly 20% of windows applications and even those are often buggy. Trust me I tried it often enough. Those that are suggesting that you just use wine/cedega/crossover obviously dont know what they're talking about - wine will never replace the need for an proper emulation. even if it someday (I doubt it) releases v1.0. its just too buggy - I dont blame the developers, its not their fault, they just do the best they can with what they have - but unfortunately thats not enough. Thats the reality of wine.
Using VMware/qemu ist obviously way better in terms of compatibility - but the handling/usability suffers because just to use ONE Windows-app you have to fire up your VM and then always switch between VM-window and Linux-GUI etc...
THIS SOLUTION on the other hand seems like the best of both worlds: windows-apps running in their native environment (windows inside vm) and projected (per terminal service) onto a Linux-GUI. VERY COOL.
The only downside I see is that you always have to run a Virtual Machine with Windows in the background. So you basically have two OSes running and need a fast PC with lots of RAM. - Goner, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4But wine isn't this compatible...
- jasmin888, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ScottMaximus1
"A big spinning box gets you hard?"
If that one was for me - yes it does get me hard - It's eye candy - yes, but it's usability too.
Nothing wrong in something nice to look at while you work and if it makes your work easier then what's the problem?
I would love to see some real 3d coming along - and I expect it will pretty soon but Beryl is quite an impressive beginning - and don't forget the effect it has on your fellow windows users (those who do all their file handling through Word), they sure as hell want one too.
I know that for a fact ;D - MrDo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I have been running Linux on my desktop for 3 years now. Because all of our office applications are served to all users via Citrix it was easy for me to switch. But since it isn't the company standard I can't get help from the help desk, not that I need it. I have dual boot so I can switch back if needed but I haven't had any reason too.
The reason for me running Linux on my desktop is that I only work on Linux/UNIX servers so it makes a lot of tasks easier for me + I get a much faster workstation because it doesn't gets dragged down with antivirus programs and a bundle of different management/inventory/patch tools.
(the antivirus setup does a mandatory full disk scan every day which takes 2-3 hours, so some of my co-workers moves the clock one hour forward just before the scan is scheduled and then back again to avoid the 2 hour slowmo, but that's another story) - geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7Because of this: http://www.tatanka.com.br/ies4linux/page/Main_Page I no longer have to use windows. In fact, I have faster access to IE 5, 5.5 and v6.. Just type in ie5 or ie55 or ie6 at the linux prompt and voila, instant access to how windows users view everything, it's even faster than using windows and testing everything out on different IE versions.
- Kujila, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wow! So is this like Coherence mode but for Linux? I was hoping something like this would come up...
Could one pop on an XP theme from Windowblinds to match a GNOME/KDE/XFCE theme for total integration?
Maybe I should just switch to Linux as my primary desktop...
I'm just afraid that running games through a VM would suck too badly. - johnnyhay, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I prefer CrossOver Beta. It's free and simple to use.
@jambarama
Sabayonlinux has AIGLX and XGL preinstalled and comes with everything else you need.
However, you have to select agree before you can use properitary drivers and codec.
@Somniis
Have you even tried linux based distro? - ebob9, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Um, unless I'm misunderstanding you, you're gonna have problems with that WinXP install pretty soon. Flash Memory, like in ThumbDrives have a limited number of writes to sectors before they go bad. Some are better than others, distributing the writes to different sectors of the drive to extend life. However, the swap file on that WinXP image will quickly toast your ThumbDrive if you aren't careful..
- TheDarkestStar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What about Qemu? It's free too, runs without any problems whatsoever. I just created a hard drive file on a USB thumbdrive and voila, a full version of WindowsXP installed on there in no time... doesn't waste hard drive resources and is just as fast as running apps over a network, if not faster.
- jasmin888, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@twinklyJesus
Agree completely - I myself do not recommend it for my workplace either - as much as I would like it.
In my view linux _for the desktop_ in many ways is where windows was at the early w95/w98 days (not talking about security etc. but usability for the general user):
Important apps are missing or working poorly, an intermediate level user needs to do some tasks at the command prompt once in a while. Lots of minor things do not necessarily work out of the box.
There are two problems here: one is that software and hardware simply have to work on/with windows - which means that any vendor will do what ever it takes to make sure it does - this is an ongoing process - that only recently is extended to linux (hardware and software vendors are increasingly acknowledging linux as a market).
The second problem is that most computer users know next to nothing about what they are doing on the computer. The majority of those users do all their file handling through word's 'open' menu!!!
Think about it for a second. Even quite experienced general users have an extremely limited knowledge of the system (windows 90% of the cases) they are working on. They are completely depending on their system being preinstalled.
Therefore almost all those users wouldn't care one bit if they were handed a preinstalled linux box instead that would do all their normal computer needs. Almost all they know how to do they learn during the first few hours of using it - so they wouldn't know the difference - it would just be 'switch on' openoffice/internet/mail rather than word/internet/mail.
My point is that as linux becomes an interesting market (a niche perhaps) the first point will be of less importance. And similarly when the linux market grows there will be demand for preinstalled boxes.
To those who say this will never happen: It is happening. The open source/free software model has this interesting dynamic that it does not easily loose market share as long as the products can compete on quality. Therefore it tends to grow. Take a look at the server market to see that dynamic. - ebob9, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@CircleFusion: I wonder if you copy the windows TTFs to your Linux installation, so that wine can access them - will it fix it and allow them to render the same. I've done that for other apps, and it's worked.
- CircleFusion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I found that ie4linux did not display things exactly the same as on an IE browser running on windows. I did a side by side test and there are some font-rendering differences. That won't affect most website designs, but I don't want to take my chances. I do not use ie4linux for cross-browser testing of websites. Instead, I use a separate windows computer or VMWare.
What ie4linux is good for (imo) is to access websites that are designed to use activeX heavily (where the basic activeX plugin for Firefox won't help). I have used it for accessing my school website, which somehow requires IE for their forum interface. It worked like a charm. - nailer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11. Almost every PC is sold in a bundle that includes a Windows license
2. 1GB of RAM isn't much
3. Yes, some processor. Depends what the VM is doing really.
4. How often do you reboot Linux hosts? Windows XP doesn't take long to start. - MichaelJN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I have been using this solution for several years now with good success. It works particularly well on dual core machines.The only limitation I have noticed is not being able to run netstumbler or other apps that require direct access to hardware.
- alx242, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@crazybrit:
WINE = Wine Is Not an Emulator.
It re-routes the library calls to native Linux ones. It has done it from the ground up so you can even insert a third party dll (such as VBasic dll) and get all functionality of windows. Its a great but very tedious way as everything must be reversed engineered and this takes time to figure out each and every step MS has done to make it work perfectly. But the 1.0 release isn't that far away right now.
dang, jambarama beat me to it...:) - Stonekeeper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I'm just afraid that running games through a VM would suck too badly."
It would. - GreenStar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Is there any solution for windows 2000 professional as VM? I think terminal services are not included in win2k pro, so this solution doesnt work!!
- rafelbev, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The same NX server is also provided by 2X. This is all about seamless windows. If you just want RDP functionality, rdesktop is just fine.
- DrDabbles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Um, by my calculations, Dual Booting isn't free. In fact, dual booting will now cost you up to $399 here in the states. Certainly not free.
- dnatural18, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0use the -o3 flag to get debugging and error output.
- crossmr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is pretty lame. Why would anyone want to do this? It makes more sense if you want to buy a larger license and run this on a single server and have everyone to connect to it, but
1)You need a windows license anyway to do this for each machine
2)You're probably going to want to give this thing 384 MB of ram at least. So you'll probably need a 1 GB system to be comfortable here.
3)a virtual machine chews up processor
4)if you reboot, you have to load up vmware again before you can access your programs, leading to a loss in productivity. - diggapleaze, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2tpink that was brilliant
- spoon42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@crossmr
Actually, it does run on XP. You should read the article again. I believe the section you are talking about is...
"The VM was Windows XP SP2... Also, the 2X Application Server product is meant for Terminal Servers running Windows 2000 Server or Windows Server 2003 and is not officially supported with Windows XP Remote Desktop. Both Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP use the same version of RDP, so it would stand to reason that the 2X Application Server product could work on a Windows XP machine. Perhaps if enough people find this solution useful, 2X software might consider officially supporting it in a future product."
This whole article is about accomplishing this on Windows XP. Not officially supported is not the same as not possible. Please read carefully before you spread FUD.
I have this solution running at home right now with Windows XP as a VM on Ubuntu 6.10. Also, did you miss the beginning of the article where it said:
"Also, did I mention that the following solution can be set up using free software?"
Doesn't seem too expensive to me.
Besides, this is not meant for wide scale use or even as a server client model. The solution runs locally on a few desktops or laptops. Or, did you miss the following parts of the article as well:
"Want to give your IT security or administrator staff access to Windows applications right in their preferred Linux desktop environment?" and
"However, Citrix is expensive and seems to be overkill for just a few network/security administrators' laptops or desktops." - mraustin1337, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Yes. It is into a vm machine running on your local computer. Doesn't seem too insecure to me. Now if it is over a network I guess it would be bad.
- Giga, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4"You've got to be joking. I use all 3 OS (win, osx, and linux). Linux is many things, but polished is not one of them. Yes linux is faster, more stable, etc but too many things break too quickly if you don't use the package manager of your distribution. If there's a program you need and for some reason isn't available as a binary, then you're very quickly going to spiral into dependency hell..."
...Unless, of course, you run Gentoo. However, Linux is horribly unpolished in comparison to the proprietary OSes. Ubuntu has a fair amount of polish for a Linux distro, but I really don't like it as it isn't as customisable as Gentoo and it attracts way too many ignorant fanboys who are probably getting ready to bury me as we speak. Please, if you like Ubuntu, don't bury me. Bury drizek instead as he gives you guys a bad image. - Giga, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Am I the only one who cringed at the huge security vulnerability at the suggestion of putting the password in plain text into a bash script or alias?
- spoon42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Actually,
It will do single applications. That is what is shown in the article. Take a look at the screenshot with the winver showing Windows XP professional, solitaire, and cmd.exe. - crossmr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0and read it again yourself. The article doesn't give any indication that he actually attempted to run it on XP. "so it would stand to reason that the 2X Application Server product could work on a Windows XP machine" if it "could" run on xp that means he hasn't actually tried it, otherwise he would say "it DOES run on XP".
Either way, even in a small office you're looking at $139 for xp pro oem + an office license ($209 for retail according to newegg) which works out to about $350 in licenses per machine. While the 2x terminal for 5 or fewer connections is free and the linux client is free, the windows license and the office licenses are not. And if for some crazy reason your business is already running a windows 2003 or 2000 server it only costs you at most $965 + 209 for an office license to run this for unlimited users. Putting the cut off point at about 4 users. or just $595 for the server for 25 users since you only want to cover a small amount, putting the cut off at 2 users. Infrastructure or otherwise, this is a waste of money and time. Its neat, but pointless. - crossmr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0And you can give them access without Citrix using that same software. Dell sells computers without operating series. They're the n series, they've been selling them for at least a year and a half. Lets go over it again:
We'll ignore copies of office since either solution requires the same number of copies and focus solely on windows licenses.
An OEM copy is $139. However on slashdot the n series of dell computers was just discussed and it seems you save about $180 by getting an equally equipped n series machine.
If you have a windows 2003 server and you only want to give this to a "few" people, you can get a 25 seat 2x license for $595. Which means at 4 users you break even, at 5 you're better off getting a 25 seat license for the application server. You have to have a very small administrations/developer staff to make that financially viable.
If you don't have a 2003 server, the licenses total will cost you about $1600 for windows and a 25 seat license for the application server. This puts the break even point at 11 users and if you have 12 you are better off getting the server. You still need to buy the server, but lets be realistic if you've got an IT staff of more than a couple of people you've got a fair number of users on windows machines and you're probably using active directory and 2003 already.
You also need to look at the load that having the VMWare server running on their machines will cause, as well as the difference in hardware (namely ram) that may be required on the end machines. What if the developers actually need all their system resources and can't give up 384 MB of ram as well as CPU to the Virtual machine? While the target is "few" the size of your systems administration team and developers team is likely going to fluctuate. Few could be 2, but it could also be 15.
While Citrix may be expensive, 2x really isn't that expensive of a program. Its an interesting and novel solution. It also got me to look at a piece of software which I hadn't previously heard about. But even for narrow deployment its almost always going to be better to get the application server license (financially). Things do change if your company happens to have a volume license for office and XP (which most large companies do) but even if you are a large company with a volume license, its going to be more efficient to buy an application server. Why have 10 machines running virtual machines to run office when you can have them just all tap a single server which just has to run some instances of office? - smoli, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Thanks for the reply. Yes it is a member of an Active Directory Domain. Perhaps that is the problem. I'll look over our group policies and see if I spot anything.
- crossmr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Does work in Media Center edition. It installs says its running fine, but when I attempt to run the app from my linux VM, it just doesn't happen. Pauses like its going to load it then nothing. Log doesn't indicate any errors or problems
Can't post on the 2x forum because their login script is broken. - rafelbev, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I would install this centrally and have multiple users login to the same installation. If you do not have Terminal Server licenses, just copy over each individual XP machine and run them on a powerful server. You can then start dedicating a Terminal Server specifically for one or two applications based on load when you want to scale things up.
- HarleyStagner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Is the XP Pro VM you are using a member of an Active Directory Domain? I have found that sometimes (probably due to certain group policies) if the VM is a member of a domain, you will experience this problem. I will have to investigate this further and see if I can track this down.
-Harley Stagner
http://www.harleystagner.com - smoli, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It doesn't work for me using XP Pro. All I get is the windows desktop.
Someone else has the same problem on the 2X forums: http://forums.2x.com/viewtopic.php?t=864&highlight=windows - HarleyStagner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@crossmr
I am the author of this article. First, thank you for reading it. I would like to clear up some things based on the comments that I have been reading.
First- This setup was done using Windows XP. I merely said that the only "supported" means of running 2X Application Server was through Windows 2003 or Windows 2000 Terminal Services. This is evident by the screenshot of a "winver" command showing Windows XP SP2 on the Ubuntu Desktop. So, it does work on Windows XP, which was the point of the article.
Also, I cannot speak for all businesses. However, most businesses that I have worked at receive a windows license with new hardware. Especially if they are ordering standard builds through Dell or HP. So, the Windows License is not an issue. Also, those who need to use Microsoft Office in a business (if that is what they are standardized on) get it. Volume licensing and the purchasing power of some companies means that these licenses are deeply discounted.
I believe that you also said:
"And if for some crazy reason your business is already running a windows 2003 or 2000 server it only costs you at most $965 + 209 for an office license to run this for unlimited users. Putting the cut off point at about 4 users."
This is an invalid argument considering the way that Terminal Server licensing works for Microsoft Applications. You cannot legally buy one Office license and install it on a Terminal Server for everyone to use. You need an Office license for each machine or user who will be running Office (even if it is installed in a Terminal Server environment). So, the cost for "unlimited users" would either be "unlimited" or would involve a site license.
However, that is neither here nor there:) The point of the article was to give a few key people (i.e. Developers, Security Administrators, Etc.) access to windows applications on their Linux desktops without the need for a full blown Citrix environment. It has been my experience that some developers and security administrators in the companies that I have worked for may prefer to run Linux as their main OS and they do not like it when they have to leave their OS environment just to run a few Windows Applications. This is not meant for wide scale deployment. That is what Citrix and Terminal Services is for :).
Again thanks for reading the article.
-Harley Stagner
http://www.harleystagner.com - HarleyStagner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@crossmr
I don't disagree with you that a central server is the best overall solution IF your company would support such a plan. The sad fact is that many companies just don't "get it" and the managers who don't "get it" are calling the shots. They are stuck in the if it ain't broke, don't fix it mentality and would not invest in a Terminal Server. In a perfect world, IT departments would not be run on a shoestring and a prayer. However, many are. It is in these companies that you must find unorthodox ways of introducing new technology.
As far as the load on the computer goes, I was running this setup at work on a modest P4 system with 512MB of ram with no problems. The fact is at the companies that I have worked for, you get a Windows XP license with your computer. That is how the standard image is ordered through Dell (no haggling).
Also, some applications simply do not play well in a Terminal Server environment. They need to reside on a dedicated OS. You can think of this solution as a local Virtual Desktop Infrastructure.
To sum up, thank you for your comments. I will agree that both solutions have their place. In an ideal world, I would much prefer to have a central server. However, for "unenlightened" IT shops and for the occasional home user who wants to set this up, I believe that it is a valid option.
-Harley Stagner
http://www.harleystagner.com - crossmr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This doesn't run on XP. you need a Windows 2003 SERVER license. He mentions in it that he hopes someone could hack it to get it going on XP. That is $1000 a head.
Also if you're going to run Linux on all the desktops in your company you can order them without windows on them, even from dell. Ever been to linux.dell.com? Ever seen the stories dugg on here on how to order your dell without an OS?
1 GB of ram on 100 computers starts to add up. Its much more economical to build a beefy server and use 2x to allow unlimited connections for $995 since the linux client is free.
In short its a really expensive solution ($1200 per computer just for licensing) + 50 a computer in extra ram. When it would cost $2200 to put this on a server for unlimited connections. - spoon42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@crossmr
you said:
"4)if you reboot, you have to load up vmware again before you can access your programs, leading to a loss in productivity."
Well, I would encourage you to read the article more closely. At the end it reads,
"If you want this capability every time you boot your Linux machine, just set the VM to start when the host machine starts"
This essentially runs the VM as a service that starts automatically when your machine boots. You never have to use the VMWare console at all once the VM is set up. -
Show 51 - 65 of 65 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is