Impressive Linux alternative to Vista - games aside

[squirrel]

Yeah ok, so if you're a single pc user and it's primarily a gaming box ignore this post.

However, if you're using a second pc/server for anything and you can sacrifice gaming capabilities you owe it to yourself to check out Ubuntu. It's essentially a Debian distribution with some really useful features for Linux virgins like me:

* The primary desktop installer is an .iso of a 'Live CD'. Essentially this allows you to boot into the OS before installing to check it out and play with it a bit, and then install through a very friendly (think OS X) GUI.

* It includes a number of very useful, albeit standard, applications such as OpenOffice, GiMP, GAiM etc. More importantly it includes two very sophisticated package managers that allow you to easily install Debian/Ubuntu Linux (or other distro's) apps using a simple Add/Remove application interface. Sophisticated users may revert to terminal "sudo app-update/install" methods but this is really nice for quick installs.

* Fast as hell. Wow, I can't believe the incredible difference in responsiveness over Vista in terms of launching the OS, application launch, window draws etc. (AMD 64+ dual core, 6800GT, 2 GB ram, 1.2 TB SATA storage.) I'll go into the why's of the switch below but Ubuntu is unbelievably responsive on my hardware.

* Stable. I'm running a late beta version (6.10) and it's rock solid.

* OSS. Ya whatever, I'm not a M$ hater, but the lack of DRM, the vast community support network and widely available software and updates has been a welcome change after many years of Win32.

Backstory: I've been running a Windows HTPC (Home Theater PC) for about 18 - 24 months. Essentially this PC is dedicated to serving up ISO's of DVD's I have, AVI's, WMV's, MP3's and DivX/AviX files to my 56" HDTV. Audio is output to a digital receiver via the sounboard's SPDIF connection.

Originally I used XP as the OS and it performed relatively well, although the codec's for DVD decryption were inferior to what I could get out of a dedicated DVD player. But it worked, with some limitations:
* Needed to mount DVD ISO's before playing them. Trivial to do but irritating and an extra step - mount/play as opposed to play.
* Moderate -- Poor video driver support for HDTV applications. Not M$oft's fault but a year or so ago getting overlay, deinterlace and other settings to work so the movie's were optimized with my Faroujda de-scaler was a pain.
* Low customization for HTPC application - I wanted to easily replace each ISO icon with the DVD cover of the film so it was a more 'visceral' experience browsing for a film. That was hard.
* Plus side - I could game on my HDTV, but in reality I never do. When I'm gaming it's primarily because my g/f is watching TV or a film I'm not interested in. If she's not around, I'm on the 360.

Then I upgraded to Vista RC2 to try out the Media Center functionality. Initially I was quite impressed. It was easier to use and more of a Home Theater experience. However it didn't really fix any of the issues I had under XP, and performance degraded noticeably (forgivable though - it was a Release Candidate). However, certain things became very difficult under Vista. The Security defaults in Vista were unmanageable, but customizing them to my needs was also not possible. The machine is firewalled both through a hardware router and through a front end software firewall - but adjusting Vista to accommodate my network was so onerous I gave up. So I had to live with the infamous Vista "allow or deny?" prompt, which is idiotically modal. 

Worse, performance not only degraded but stability started to falter too. Again - it was a RC so I wasn't expecting release level performance, but it would randomly make itself unavailable, refuse to reboot if the TV was connected, randomly refuse to see the network or turn of file-sharing and generally just make itself a pain in the ass requiring constant administration, not fun.

So rather than downgrade to XP I started looking around HTPC forums for an alternative, even considering selling the box for a Mac (not keen on that, they're way overpriced for HTPC duty) when I stumbled on Ubuntu at avsforums. Over last weekend I completely ported the media center to Linux, updated all hardware drivers, setup both local and remote secure admin and filesharing, installed all the applications and codecs required for media serving and then setup a MySQL and Apache server for kicks and to enable control of my media box from my phone. I have no Linux experience (or Unix) although I do use a OS X machine as my main personal computer. Point being the experience was 180 degrees from my last Linux attempt which failed horribly.

I still have a XP machine for gaming, but it's the last M$ OS in the house, and I generally prefer to game on the Xbox unless it's a MMOG (of which Im only playing WoW atm, on the MacBook Pro) or a PC exclusive - Medieval II :TW still has it's hooks in me.

Anyway, if you're looking for an alternative to Win but aren't *nix capable check Ubuntu out. I'm super impressed.

[Xerapis]

Ok, post ignored. :D

[squirrel]

Ok, post ignored. :D

Fecker. Get an edumacation. :P

[sigil]

I run ubuntu on my laptop at work, it's stables, easy to update, and lets me spend more time doing the work I need to do, rather than have an ongoing project of tweaking and installing new drivers through arcane ritual.

If you want true Braindead installation, Adding automatix will download all the things ubuntu won't connect you to (windows codecs, other popular apps) that don't fall under its open source only mantle.

It's still not perfect, but it's a lot better than it was say two years ago.

[Big Gulp]

Fecker. Get an edumacation. :P

I tend to play with OSes, but I've given up on Linux.  Even knowing that I can't play games on it, I still need photoshop for doing up tattoo flash properly (and no, the Gimp is NOT a worthy replacement.  Let me know when you can actually use something as basic as layers.), I still need a fairly decent video-to-DVD convertor, and I need a program that'll let me create menus for those captures.

Likewise, I bet there are a lot of people out there who absolutely must have certain niche pieces of software (CAD anyone?), and Linux doesn't get those jobs done.  It doesn't have the support-base, the user-base, or the general will to get those products on that platform.  It's a good server OS, but as a desktop replacement, it's lacking.

[WayAbvPar]

Gonna move this over to the PC section; seems more appropriate there.

[Samwise]

you owe it to yourself to check out Ubuntu.

I'm not really into Pokemon.

[Furiously]

Can it play WOW?

[sigil]

Actually, yeah it can.

There's a couple of ways to do it, but you use WINE or Cedega or  something similar.

Performance varies, sometimes a little better, sometimes worse.

[squirrel]

Fecker. Get an edumacation. :P

I tend to play with OSes, but I've given up on Linux.  Even knowing that I can't play games on it, I still need photoshop for doing up tattoo flash properly (and no, the Gimp is NOT a worthy replacement.  Let me know when you can actually use something as basic as layers.), I still need a fairly decent video-to-DVD convertor, and I need a program that'll let me create menus for those captures.

Likewise, I bet there are a lot of people out there who absolutely must have certain niche pieces of software (CAD anyone?), and Linux doesn't get those jobs done.  It doesn't have the support-base, the user-base, or the general will to get those products on that platform.  It's a good server OS, but as a desktop replacement, it's lacking.

Hm, I'm not sure I agree. Definately there are specialized fields that Linux doesn't do a good job supporting. But Gimp doesn't have layers? Um, yes it does. It supports import/export of PSD layers. It doesn't have adjustment layers, but to say you can't layers is totally incorrect. When was the last time you actually looked at the software? That said, I prefer Photoshop as well.

The vast majority of people use computers for email, word processing, presentations and spreadsheets. Ubuntu is absolutely capable of replacing windows for those tasks. And it's superior to windows for media tasks generally, although that's dependant on your hardware.

[Big Gulp]

Hm, I'm not sure I agree. Definately there are specialized fields that Linux doesn't do a good job supporting. But Gimp doesn't have layers?

Admittedly, it's been years, but from what I recall there were layers in the most superficial sense, in that they were there.  Your blending options were pretty much non existent.  Interesting that it can import .psd files now, though.

[raydeen]

I'm posting from Kubuntu 6.10 right now. I was having a devil of a time with wireless and 3D drivers but Automatix pretty much solved the 3D problem. I honestly haven't played with the wireless yet (I think it''s better than when I had 5.10 and 6.04 but not sure - I use a little ethernet/wireless thingy from D-LInk to achieve wireless). As for games, I'm playing Savage on it now that it's free on both Windows and Linux. I'm tempted to try WoW but there was that debacle a while ago about Linux users being banned and what not so I'm a little leery of trying it. I might give CoX a go. NWN is supported so that may go on as I don't have room on the Dell for it anymore.

My big thing with it right now is trying my hand at development. I'm futzing around with Kdevelop which is a nice Linux alternative to Xcode or any of the Borland products. It's a nice IDE with support for just about anything you can think of (C/C++, Perl, Pascal, Ruby, etc.)

I like using Linux. I feel like I'm actually using the computer and not just going along for the ride. Maybe it's just the smell of geek. I don't know.

Edit: Oh yeah, theres PlaneShift as well. Yes, it's kinda crappy and unpolished and mired in EQ land, but I kinda enjoy it right now. Feels like EQ did back in '99 so the nostalgia factor is working there.

[naum]

Hm, I'm not sure I agree. Definately there are specialized fields that Linux doesn't do a good job supporting. But Gimp doesn't have layers? Um, yes it does. It supports import/export of PSD layers. It doesn't have adjustment layers, but to say you can't layers is totally incorrect. When was the last time you actually looked at the software? That said, I prefer Photoshop as well.

Unless you're preparing professional print jobs, Gimp is just as useful and powerful as Photoshop. You have layers, channels, etc... ...I've used both and prefer the Gimp for web based photo/graphics editing. In fact, Photoshop is probably overkill for much web work... ...where Gimp is deficient (besides the UI which I believe is more a matter of taste and familiarity -- I find the Photoshop UI to be painful, only usable with 2 larger than average monitors (one for the pallete dealys) is CMYK and PANTONE colorspaces, mandatory for graphic designers producing print...

Some more reading on Gimp v. Photoshop
http://grimthing.com/

Also, an Illustrator "equivalent" for *nix (and it will run in OS X and Windows too...)
http://www.inkscape.org/

It a lot newer than Gimp and missing many many Illustrator features, and gets the same criticism that is tossed at Gimp about UI -- it does have a quirky UI but I've used it to do illustrations and create web widgets...

[Lum]

I run Ubuntu on my file server as well... waiting for some good HD capture cards to come out before trying to put together an HTPC though. Although Apple TV is looking mighty fine.

The latest Ubuntu distro includes Beryl/XGL, which has Vista-level useless eye candy: http://www.biodesign.com.ar/blog/?p=24

[raydeen]

Hm, I'm not sure I agree. Definately there are specialized fields that Linux doesn't do a good job supporting. But Gimp doesn't have layers? Um, yes it does. It supports import/export of PSD layers. It doesn't have adjustment layers, but to say you can't layers is totally incorrect. When was the last time you actually looked at the software? That said, I prefer Photoshop as well.

Unless you're preparing professional print jobs, Gimp is just as useful and powerful as Photoshop. You have layers, channels, etc... ...I've used both and prefer the Gimp for web based photo/graphics editing. In fact, Photoshop is probably overkill for much web work... ...where Gimp is deficient (besides the UI which I believe is more a matter of taste and familiarity -- I find the Photoshop UI to be painful, only usable with 2 larger than average monitors (one for the pallete dealys) is CMYK and PANTONE colorspaces, mandatory for graphic designers producing print...

Some more reading on Gimp v. Photoshop
http://grimthing.com/

Also, an Illustrator "equivalent" for *nix (and it will run in OS X and Windows too...)
http://www.inkscape.org/

It a lot newer than Gimp and missing many many Illustrator features, and gets the same criticism that is tossed at Gimp about UI -- it does have a quirky UI but I've used it to do illustrations and create web widgets...

There's another neat up-and-coming program called Scribus which looks like it wants to be Quark or InDesign when it grows up. It's pretty basic right now, more along the lines of MS Publisher, but a nice addition to the DTP bunch.

[Margalis]

Might I suggest another good alternative to Vista?

XP.

[schild]

XP.

Win.

[stray]

Going back to Macs fulltime myself.


Been dabbling with Linux since the first versions of Slackware. It's remarkable how much the OSS community has accomplished between now and then, but there are key activities that open source software isn't even barely respectable at this point yet (for me, it's pro audio). There's also the other issue of it having no real standards. So much in-fighting about libraries, gui's, audio subsystems..Hell, even directory structure. There's not a lot of interoperability between different distros, let alone other operating systems. Nor is it reliable and cohesive enough to attract more commercial developers (especially the consumer oriented variety).

Otherwise, I'd use it more. Ubuntu is nice, fairly headache free, general home/office distribution.

[squirrel]

The latest Ubuntu distro includes Beryl/XGL, which has Vista-level useless eye candy: http://www.biodesign.com.ar/blog/?p=24

Yeah, I've started playing around with Beryl - it easily wins the useless eye-candy award in my world. Just because my GL card can make the world appear like 1,000 special snowflakes doesn't mean it should. But it is purty!

[squirrel]

Hm, I'm not sure I agree. Definately there are specialized fields that Linux doesn't do a good job supporting. But Gimp doesn't have layers?

Admittedly, it's been years, but from what I recall there were layers in the most superficial sense, in that they were there.  Your blending options were pretty much non existent.  Interesting that it can import .psd files now, though.

GiMP has layer support as a fundamental part of the software now. Layer masking, opacity, multiple layer filtering etc. Check it out.

[squirrel]

Might I suggest another good alternative to Vista?

XP.

Good call. Cause that's a free and supported route to the future. Call me from your Delorian time car would ya?

[Samwise]

You realize that "games aside" is a rather large aside, right?

Last I heard XP will continue to be supported until 2012.  In PC gaming terms that's practically forever.

[squirrel]

You realize that "games aside" is a rather large aside, right?

Last I heard XP will continue to be supported until 2012.  In PC gaming terms that's practically forever.

Yes I do. That's why it's in the in the thread title. I didn't post it in this area, I started it in General. Yes, for gaming xp/vista is better. Please exit to your left.

[stray]

This would be a good year for Apple to try something new. A lot of people sitting on the fence because of Vista.

[Samwise]

Just saying.  If you're going to talk about Linux being the "route to the future" it's worth noting that your future does not include much in the way of games.

Every time I've listened to a wild-eyed Linux weenie about how easy it is to use now, my world ends up being pain for a week until I give up and reinstall Windows.  The last time I tried Linux I couldn't even get X working.  And by spelling MS with a $ you instantly identify yourself as a wild-eyed Linux weenie, so you understand my skepticism.  

It's been a while, though, so maybe it's time to renew my cynicism.  Once I get my new gaming rig assembled I'll throw Linux on one of the old PCs and see how much agony results.

[squirrel]

Just saying.  If you're going to talk about Linux being the "route to the future" it's worth noting that your future does not include much in the way of games.

Every time I've listened to a wild-eyed Linux weenie about how easy it is to use now, my world ends up being pain for a week until I give up and reinstall Windows.  The last time I tried Linux I couldn't even get X working.  And by spelling MS with a $ you instantly identify yourself as a wild-eyed Linux weenie, so you understand my skepticism.  

It's been a while, though, so maybe it's time to renew my cynicism.  Once I get my new gaming rig assembled I'll throw Linux on one of the old PCs and see how much agony results.

Question - did you even bother to read my original post? It's ok if you didn't, I know reading is a skill possessed by fewer and fewer people these days. I'm an OS X user who's failed at Linux several times. But yeah, all your other points are valid. Er, somewhat...or not at all. But yeah, I'm WILD EYED MAN. WILD EYED. LOOK OUT. I HATE THE MAN! or something...

EDIT: By the way - the fact the title of the thread says - GAMES ASIDE - was that unclear to you in some way? I thought it was a pretty clear indicator that i WASN'T TALKING ABOUT GAMES. Fuck.

[Samwise]

That part was pretty clear to me.  The "route to the future" bit not so much.  What futuristic awesomeness do you think someone who sticks with XP for a while longer is missing out on?  Games tend to be the main motivation for home users to upgrade.  But you've put that aside.  So what makes M$ Wind0ze XP such a ridiculous option?

[Margalis]

Seriously, why would anyone want Vista now? They stripped out the interesting features, it hogs even more hardware and has a bunch of DRM shit that helps screw consumers. A bunch of software doesn't work on it including some NVidia drivers and anything from Apple.

The only reason for anyone to get Vista is that eventually XP will stop being supported. That is a fine argument 3 years from now but for now?

The best argument to upgrade is for gaming an DX10 if that catches on. Other than that...Vista offers basically nothing. Why would pay for something when I can just keep what I have when what I have is as good or better?

Edit: This isn't just me. Nobody I know is considering upgrading to Vista, including my workplace or any company we work with.

[Calantus]

Was it just me and the guys I know, or was Vista something everybody was looking forward to? Not what it turned out to be, but for its potential. A few of us have been sitting on money for a while and unwilling to buy new PCs just because we were waiting to see Vista come out. I don't recall thinking the same about any other OS (keeping in mind we only owned PCs after Windows 95). I'm still holding out because there's other things to buy before I need a PC and I want to see how DX10 goes, but the others are all thinking of XP systems. What a waste.

[raydeen]

I wasn't and am continuing to not look forward to Vista. DX10 maybe if MS unbundles it for the rest of us. I've played a bit with Vista on one of the laptops a student brought in and I'm a little put off by it. I was a little put off by Win 95 as well back in the day, so one day I may come around, but right now I see no compelling reason to upgrade or anticipate. It's Windows ME 2.0 as far as I'm concerened.

[Samwise]

Was it just me and the guys I know, or was Vista something everybody was looking forward to? Not what it turned out to be, but for its potential. A few of us have been sitting on money for a while and unwilling to buy new PCs just because we were waiting to see Vista come out.

I too was looking forward to Vista.  After seeing its piss-poor performance relative to XP and hearing about all the DRM stuff lurking in the wings, I'm going to be steering clear of it for as long as possible.  XP I was initially resistant to mainly because the new bubbly colorful look frightened me; once I saw that it actually did some things better than Win2K did, I was happy to move.  I like Vista's aesthetic, with the shiny black and the swoopy and all that, but everything else seems to be a big step down from XP.

[squirrel]

That part was pretty clear to me.  The "route to the future" bit not so much.  What futuristic awesomeness do you think someone who sticks with XP for a while longer is missing out on?  Games tend to be the main motivation for home users to upgrade.  But you've put that aside.  So what makes M$ Wind0ze XP such a ridiculous option?

It's not for many people, particularly if you're happy with it. However to get it to act as a HTPC you'll have buy the MCE - which will likely not get much better as Vista is out now. If you want a OS with 3D capabilities (image scaling, GPU driven windows or the like) you're SOL. I'm not saying XP is a bad option, but it's not really an upgrade from XP. Neither is Vista. For my purposes Ubuntu is. I still have an XP machine that I use primarily for gaming, and in that context I agree with you.

[stray]

There's one possible way I might make the dive into Vista: Through a laptop. Right now, some PC laptop prices are pretty nice. Most of them come installed with Vista 32 bit anyways, which doesn't seem to be that much worse than XP (I think?).

Kind of would like some kind of HTPC setup as well. I wish Apple offered something like that (and wouldn't be surprised if they did, considering that they're trying to enter that market a bit with AppleTV).

[Samwise]

I don't think it's in Apple's best interests to offer a way to have a single machine perform the functions of many (which is the basic point of an HTPC).  They're a hardware manufacturer.  Far better to sell you an iMac, and iPod, an iTV, and an iStereo than to sell you a cheap way to make your iMac do it all.

[naum]

Ironically, one of the big hurdles for F/OSS multimedia applications is the whole DRM/patent entanglement mess. Not as much an issue for experienced tinkerers, but can be daunting for newbies. A few examples:

* I use Audacity for audio editing tasks -- it serves me well for the types of tasks I do (if I did these chores on a full time basis, then I would definitely opt for a more featured commercial version), but to write .mp3, when you install you have to install separately lamelib, as it's not bundled with the software DL. Not that big a deal, but then consider that most folks just make do with whatever comes on the box.

* Whenever I setup a new box (though Mac 2 Mac upgrades are as simple as plugging in a firewire cable from the old Mac into the new Mac), it's a pain to get all needed video codecs and libraries installed. I hate package managers but have given in,  as they make it easy to do this -- for instance, I make use of ImageMagick for a bit of automated graphics massaging and some other esoteric deals, but if you install it, it's useless without all the libraries that enable the compression encoding. Even Gimp, until recent times, necessitated a separate DL to enable GIF writing (because of the Unisys patent that expired in 2003).

No, it's not the equivalent of recompiling your kernel, but again, most users just want to turn on the box and go...