What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
139 Comments
- Yaki, on 10/12/2007, -15/+65What is the point of this story? We get it, Linux is cheaper than Windows, stop rubbing it in peoples' faces.
- bacon_skoda, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25with a minimal budget, you DON'T UPGRADE!!!
- InsomniaSlim, on 10/12/2007, -7/+29This article was terribly biased. I'm pretty agnostic when it comes to operating systems; each has it's strengths and weaknesses. I'd have preferred a side by side comparison with a minor recommendation.
This boiled down to a tirade pretending to be a comparison. Boring. - rickbauls, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22Yea, Vista is missing a lot. Most prominent being the absense of WinFS.
- elnerdo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19Agnostic?
You don't know whether or not operating systems exist? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+23Vista vs. Linux - Mac vs Vista - Linux vs. Mac - BSD vs. Linux - Dick vs. Pussy
Digg has become a fuking WWE cage match.
LAME!! LAME!! LAME!! - Muyoso, on 10/12/2007, -8/+25Why is the question that we face on March 1, 2007, WITH A MINIMAL BUDGET for an upgrade, what do we do? If you think that you will magically see millions of people switching to linux because windows isnt cheap, you do not have that large of a brain. 99% of people who buy the OS, have it preloaded on their computers. DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUH.
- monergism, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19I laugh. I work in the SMB market and when recommending upgrades, the biggest concern is the use of existing applications.
Let's use my Wednesday client for example.
1. Some apps still run DOS or some 16-bit apps. Yes, this is a problem but it's worked (and will continue to work) on XP for the next >5 years.
2. Some apps are only avaliable in Windows. These apps are required by the contracts that the client has with their client.
3. This "Linux expert" they speak of is going to be remote and/or expensive. There are many SMB consultants that my clients can use but when it comes to *nix support, the selection isn't that great.
4. I'm sure 98% of software will work with Vista. The article claims that "you'll also need to upgrade at least some of your software".
Linux has a place but unless there is a decent support staff and a real reason to switch, most companies won't. - InsomniaSlim, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Amen. Every version of Windows has been "expensive." Yet we're approaching the 8th iteration of a Microsoft operating system.
People need to stop looking at the "quality" of the operating system being sold as the primary argument for which to buy. Microsoft has the clout (not necessarily earned, mind you) and the brute-force savvy to keep it's market share. Bottom line.
Fact is, most casual computer users don't care. It boils down to what comes with the machine and will the cheap peripherals they buy at Best Buy work? - rasterbator, on 10/12/2007, -9/+19I think the point is: Microsoft is getting it in both ends.
Apple Macintosh and OS X growing in popularity, so if you want Vista which will most likely require the purchase of new hardware anyway, why not Apple? THe OS is superior and you can open all of your Office files in NeoOffice or OpenOffice.
On the other hand, if you want to stay with your existing hardware, why not choose SLED or another Linux flavor, and run OpenOffice for office compatible documents?
Either way, it is a win-win for users and a lose-lose for Microsoft. - Cmain, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13I agree with you 100%. While reading this article I couldn't help feel that the write was extremely biased.
- Kittyflipping, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10I don't see the point in this story either. We all know linux is free and so is NOT upgrading to Vista (which is realistic, unlike the apocalyptic windows virus that is impossible to recover from), and even with a support contract it can be cheaper than windows. The fact is most companies that use Windows have lots of reasons that Linux just won't work for them, including; compatibility with the software they need to use on a daily basis, support for customers on Windows, and the fact that all of their users and their IT staff already know how to use Windows.
I'm not pro-windows, I'm just saying it's a much bigger investment than a dollar value, and this article seems to think that all most companies do is use Outlook and Word. If that were true then this article would have some merit. - QuimZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I run both linux and Windows, I am starting to prefer linux more and more everyday, that being said, this article is pretty moot. The general population of users that you want switching to Linux don't have to, because their systems they buy from OEM manufacturers, come pre-loaded with Windows..The computer savvy niche' (us) doesn't need an article comparing the two. On another note, even in terms of Ubuntu, I wouldn't have someone like my mom using it..It's seriously, not near as friendly as windows is for her. If all she did was surf the net, and email, then yes, but she likes dabbling in a little of everything, and she doesn't want to play guessing games with installing software (can I use the install utility or can't I?), getting drivers to work right with her new hardware, etc.
- crombenevolant, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8As a long time Linux user in the corporate world I gotta say that this argument is paper thin.....
Even if you are starting from scratch or have few computers, the argument is still irrelevant. The main consideration your going to have will not be the cost of the OS or even which OS people like, but purely "What will run the software I need?"
If the software you need for business is windows only based, or linux/unix based there is no decision.
If by some miracle the software you need is available on both (or reasonable equivalants), then the question becomes one of how much maintenance and user training is involved. If you can save a $100 bucks a box but have to train every user on how to use a new OS/mail/browser/word processor/etc the lost productivity makes up for the difference.
The final thing that is wrong with this is that most large companies (where economies of scale make the cost savings mean something) don't use free linux. They use enterprise versions of Linux that come with support and a higher level of testing (generally older kernels). Since those versions of linux cost every bit as much as windows the argument goes out the window. - Mudcrutch, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Why are these supposed companies upgrading anyway? What's wrong with them keeping XP? In the article it mentions that once Vista is loaded up with a few office apps, etc. it becomes quite sluggish. Well if all you are running is Office apps then there is no need to upgrade to Vista right away.
- kolop1, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Yup over pay for the hardware...get a free OS.
- kolop1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9 Yeah I like Linux and have a dual boot system. Until Linux can play all of my PC games, there really is no issue. Windows (even though I dual boot) comes first.
- jlunski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Two glaringly obvious points that the author glossed over:
1. Nobody NEEDS to upgrade their corporate PC to Vista
2. How much is it going to cost to train an IT department to be able to support Linux or train users how to do the comparable thing in Linux that they're used to doing in Windows?
Should be buried for being LAME! - Edgardo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7AFAIK the Dell Optiplex you mention comes with an intel GMA 950
http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/gma950/index.htm
And yes it supports PS 2.0, that is why Aero is working.
Do you even know whats inside your PC? :) - bcmatteagles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The article is about the SMB market, most companies would prefer that their customers do not play games while at work...
- kolop1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5 Oh one more point. What company upgrades the OS on an old PC? My company still uses computers running NT on the old P3 systems.As well as Windows xp on the newer PCs. They will not upgrade their old Pcs. They will just integrate Vista when is comes shipped on the new PCs.
I can not imagine going to my supervisor. Telling him to over hall his Windows environment, to run Linux. I'm quite sure I would be fired.
Yeah open office is free, but most people used MS Office. try telling your boss that you have to convert everything to open office. Good luck. - brendanc, on 10/12/2007, -7/+12Well for most people... the answer to "what to do on March 1 2007" is, quite simply... "nothing".
Vista is the next version of the OS. Great. It adds more features, blah blah, and yes I'll use it. Most computer enthusiasts will use it too. But if you think for one second that corporate America and all the grandmas and grandpas of the world are going to rush out to buy Vista (or for that matter, any other OS), you are dead wrong.
The problem is that XP isn't a bad OS. Sure, computer enthusiasts like myself are sort of fed up with it. Linux junkies have continuously campaigned against "M$" et al. But the simple fact is that Vista isn't enough of an improvement or change to warrant everyone (or even most people) to go out and upgrade. - ldog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@crab256
Windows doesn't have to run on a partition?
The same question gets asked when installing windows last time I checked.
A non-technical user won't be doing an OS install, windows or linux. - monergism, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7True but all the OEMs will begin shipping the new OS. When someone upgrades, Vista will be the standard.
- InsomniaSlim, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Absolutely. And don't forget: Vista will be familiar. Linux scares some people, including my parents-- They spent $100 on Video Professor to learn how to use Windows, and view everything but OSX an "advanced," daunting environment.
"Point, click, double-click... where's my Internet?" That's all. - kolop1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7 You believe this "unbiased" article?
- mystagogue, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@egisow
what kind of ridiculous, elitist comment is that? everyone has a right to use computers. and those of us who are truly passionate about technology believe in bringing technology to everyone, including InsomniaSlim's parents, and not keeping it away from those whom people like you deem as not worthy. - sporkman, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9hmmm. I can go to best buy, and buy a 200 dollar emachines, or I can build the same computer for 500 dollars. the emachines may suck, but it comes with windows on it, the one I built myself I have to get my own OS... I think that buying a pre-built with windows is cheaper.
- bacon_skoda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4what? are you saying every office doesn't have an linux expert ready to go?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4One place to find a collective of Zealot A-Holes is Digg.
- Ben64, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4You know, USB drives can only handle so much write cycles before they pop.
And certainly the no name $20 for a gig one isnt going to be alive for long with all that swapping going on. - bcmatteagles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4You my friend have clearly not touched linux in quite some time.
1. Users don't setup computers - IT Staff do, so who cares about partitioning, not relevant to users in an SMB environment. And for that matter the Windows XP install requires partition setup as well.
2. In a decent IT environment, the workstation will be relatively locked down. Novell has AutoYAST to help mass install workstations with a pre-built image, and Zenworks to help control what applications and updates get sent to machines on the network.
It's really not that off the charts to think that big customers and possibly some SMB companies would prefer to pay a significant amount less on licensing if their users are able to be just as productive.
I think the article shouldn't be looking at Vista vs. SLED but more appropriately look at paying existing high licensing costs versus SLED - Ademan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@apocalizer
It's pretty clear you have no clue what you're talking about. "and that's not going to change in the near future, and won't change ever until they make a version of Linux that'll run Windows PROGRAMS, not just open Windows Files."
Thats interesting because WINE (for most UNIX systems) does exactly that, run windows PROGRAMS. And it doesn't take anything but knowledge of a file format to open it. What's this business of "just open WIndows Files"?
Quit being ignorant and then people will take your "arguements" seriously. - dmadzak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5This has to be the stupidest article posted in awhile. If you are planning an upgrade a typical migration path for a window shop isn't Linux. Its not like all the money invested in software is going to work on Linux.
Lets be real. Here is how the conversation would play out.
Employee: Hello Mr. CFO I think we should move all computers to Linux, Vista is too expensive.
CFO: Really, what about all the software we currently have.
Employee: Well there are usually open source alternatives that are free.
CFO: Thats nice but we have already paid for the software.
Employee: Its open source
CFO: Who cares?
CFO: How much will it cost to migrate?
Employee: Nothing
CFO: Really what about the time to setup the machines and train the users.
Employee: It is intuitive and doesn't require much training.
CFO: That is why you will not advance at this company you don't understand the needs of employees outside of your little unix world. Also, even if each program only takes a few hours of ramp up speed, multiply that by the number of users times the number of applications and add the time to install all the new software plus help desk training and there is no cost benefit in the near term plus all the non unix employees will most likely reject it lowering morale. Get out of my office. - eqisow, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Umm, same thing she does on Windows, minus the frustration of having her computer "become to slow" and having me reformat it every few months?
- EvilPenguin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3MSwanberg - Actually, you don't need Windows to install wine. From the homepage -
"Think of Wine as a compatibility layer for running Windows programs. Wine does not require Microsoft Windows, as it is a completely free alternative implementation of the Windows API consisting of 100% non-Microsoft code, however Wine can optionally use native Windows DLLs if they are available. "
- http://www.winehq.com/
Also see:
http://www.winehq.com/site/myths#need_win - doodlebumm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@brendanc
"Most computer enthusiasts will use it too."
More like "most computer users." Computer "enthusiasts" know more than the typical user, and a far greater percentage of the "enthusiasts" will be likely to run something other than Windows. Most people that use computers just use what is installed. They don't have a clue that there are really other options. Damn sheep!..... - bacon_skoda, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6linux can work if you are starting from scratch. or with few computers and users.
- bonked, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@skaface
Their - possessive, showing ownership
They're - contraction meaning "They are" - DrBob, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8You must bear in mind that Apple products cost a heck of a lot more than your average PC or Windows license put together, and that might deter people.
- eqisow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3slap them?
- Edgardo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@coredump0x01: yes I know about Mono, but you can't do Microsoft .NET consulting on a linux box, that's just lame. :)
- liquilife, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The basic everyday user is very accustomed to upgrades on their windows system. Most have gone through at least the round from 98 through XP. Moving to Vista will not daunt them.
The big problem with OS's such as Ubuntu (actually it's just a great example): I have a ATI Radeon Xpress 200 graphics card. Sure, it's not the absolute best for hardcore gaming but it serves my multimedia purposes more then fine. Do you think it works with Ubuntu? No, of course not! When researching the issue I am told that I should perhaps get a new graphics card. Excuse me??
Could you imagine a corporation moving to Linux? Sure the upgrade cost may be cheaper but the level of in-house tech/computer support needed would be sure to make up the difference plus more along with a lot of frusterated employees. - llbbl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It depends on what type of applications that I want to run. By 2007 this would be my optimal setup:
Gaming: OSX
Business: Linux (Ubuntu or SUSE or Fedora)
Server: Linux (SUSE or Fedora)
I haven't had much luck in linux with games (using Cedega), although other people have. By 2007 I won't be playing as much games on the PC anyways because the Wii will be out! - Frebis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4There is no question, every "real" company will put windows products on their computers, without thinking about it. With the exception of the Cuban and Indian Governemnts, Google, and a handfull of highschool dorks who think they are computer savy, Eveyrone will run WIndows Vista.
- ThinkFr33ly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I've been running Vista on a VERY old Athlon 1.2 Ghz machine with 512MB of ram and a $50 Radeon 9800. Would I recommend using this machine as your primary machine? No. But if it had 1GB of ram (a $30 upgrade) I definitly would. It's not bad at all... on par with XP, even with Aero Glass enabled.
"The problem with this idea is that almost no PCs have significant amounts of flash memory installed and flash-enabled "hybrid" drives, aren't here yet."
Um, go buy at $20 1GB USB key and plug it in to a free USB port. Done. Not that hard, buddy.
"by saying that it can make use of flash memory for what boils down to the ancient speed-up idea of disk caching. "
Um, except it's not. Nobody has implemented this kind of caching before... including Linux. If it's so ancient, why isn't it in your pet OS?
Seems to me that this is just FUD spread by a Linux advocate who fears that Vista is the final nail on the coffin of deskop linux. - Ademan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3No, VMware requires a windows installation, WINE requires no such thing, thats the ENTIRE POINT of WINE, is to re-implement all of those windows DLLs (And of course, load the windows executable format (PE)).
As far as PROGRAMS, thats the point of WINE, allow you to run windows PROGRAMS. WINE is very good at running most windows programs, most of the times you'll see WINE not working are with dx9 generation games, other than that WINE does a VERY good job of running windows programs. http://winehq.com has a list of apps that people have tried with wine, and it documents the amount of success with each. There are even reports of some programs being FASTER with WINE (note: things in the platinum, gold and silver lists are NOT all of the apps possible, hit browse to see all apps that have been tried)
WINE is far from perfect, but it does a good job for a lot of common programs, and will even suprise you on some obscure programs. And not only that, WINE improves constantly, it's open source after all, each new release gets better and better. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@apocalizer
You can run most windows applications in Linux just fine using the Wine API's. And Wine Is Not an Emulator. Its API's written for linux that allow the Win32 API's to be called and supports windows application headers. Most versions of linux come with Wine as an installable package and runing a program in wine is relatively simply, just "wine program" - liquilife, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yes it does technically. At a resolution lower then 800x600. At least this was the case less then a month ago. If you can show me of any updates that resolved this issue i'd be happy to see it!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 140 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is