Why I don't play games.

This is another  work-in-progress note.

Especially, online games. Less especially all and any type of game. I  have never owned a console, unless one can include under that banner the Amiga CD32 in which case that is the only one I have ever owned and that was so long ago too. Never since that time, during the 1980's, have I bothered with any of the consoles since. Why? Simply put. I don't play games and haven't since I sold my last Amiga in 2001.

Some of my friends say that the reason I don't play games is because of my choice of OS but that is easily  disregarded as my chosen platform has enough games for anyone. Others  say it is because I am getting on in years but if that was the case how come some of them who are the same, or similar, age as I am still play games? A few say my arthritic hands are not condusive to playing games but my arthritis crept up on me so why did I abandon games in the intervening years?

The real reason I don't play games is that as far as I can see they are all very similar with very very few new ideas. Almost all games nowadays have very little by way of game play instead they have lots of pretty pictures and rolling landscapes and involve lots of shooting of in-game robots or other players. I used to play lots of games back when I had my Amiga's (1986 - 2001) and since that time while games have got bigger and bigger requiring evermore hard drive space they have not got any better, in fact in my opinion they have got worse, with the game play aspect.

New to games these days is the advertising within games. Online games especially  are inundated with advertising. This to me detracts from the over all gaming experience and does absolutely nothing for the game itself and even less for the player of.

Program comparisons.

This is another of my work-in-progress notes.

Being an old Amiga head who now uses a Linux based operating system I can directly compare programs that where available for that most excellent operating system Amiga OS/Workbench and what comparatively is available for a Linux based operating system.

Sure, the Amiga OS programs would in most cases lack the sophistication of there Linux based alternatives but there are some  significant comparisons to be made and in some cases the AmigaOS programs come out on top as being the better program.

One area the Amiga OS programs come out on top is to do with sound. The Amiga had its own internal DSP, primitive as it was, it was, and still is, a powerful chip. This is one area that lets a Linux based OS down even though such powerful add-in cards as a Creative XFI can be added to the mix it is software, both drivers and audio programs where it is let down. On a Linux based OS there is a plethora of sound daemons. ALSA, OSS, Pulse Audio are the main ones then there is KDE's own ArtS and GNOME's own ESD. For my XFI sound card, at this time, OSS (via 4Front) is the only one that works with it. There  were no such issues on the Amiga as the OS itself took care of the details while programs such as the excellent OctoMED  took care of production.

Back when the Amiga was top dog of the computing world, certainly true for those of us who where more technology minded than the rest, we had powerful programs such as OctoMED to drive our audio bent. A comparison can be made between it and  such as Audacity and Ardour for a Linux based OS but they pale into insignificance to the power and ease of use OctoMED gave the user. Of course there where many other audio programs available for Amiga OS but OctoMED was the defacto standard on Amiga and rightly so.

The Amiga OS's Workbench, its GUI (Graphical User Interface), was another area where the Amiga shone. No other GUI for any platform has come close to the blazing speed it had nor its intuitive ease of use. Well, perhaps the ease of use cannot be used as something the Amiga excelled at as most GUI's created since those days follow on, or are catching up to, the Workbench in the ease of use area. But, the one thing that really made the Amiga shine was its pull down screens. One has to see it in operation to fully appreciate what pull down screens means as no GUI since the Amiga has done it as far as I am aware. We Linux based OS users have a desktop shell called by many names, KDE, GNOME, XFCE4,LXDE are just a few. We also have Desktop Managers that aid in the look and feel of the desktop. These types do not have the plethora of programs the full DTE's (DeskTop Environment) have.

At the end of the day I was and still am an Amiga Head so my view of that operating system may be slightly slewed but if it is then so be it. I will say it again. No operating system from the Microsoft world, the Linux based world or the Unix based world or even lesser know ones like the QNX desktop or BeOS. Of all those QNX comes the closest but even that one fails in some areas when ut up against the AmigaOS.

Windows V Linux

As I am stopping doing this I have decided to publish some work-in-progress notes. This being one of them.

I have seen Microsoft Windows 7, as it is currently dubbed, the other day as I installed in in a VM. What I saw did nothing for me that my operating system choice already does in a better way with less resources and has done for at least 2 years or more.

The Linux based platform has come a long long way since it first appeared. The kernel is now more robust than it ever was and the desktop much more user-freindly. The whole experience is quite simply much better than it was only a year or two ago.

I install many operating systems for people I know and for people of people I know who I don't know but now do and many friends and friends of friends etc. Then there are the installs for family added to the mix. Some have a preference for Microsoft  while some prefer a Linux distribution, others ask for a dual boot setup so they "can test the waters". What they mostly all want is something  "that just works for what I need to do" on the system they have and a Linux distribution fits that bill perfectly in 99% of cases.

In years gone by getting a Linux based operating system to play nice with some of the more estoic hardware available could be a challenge but as more and more hardware companies move away from proprietory software standards to a more open standards world this challenge has been almost eradicated. There still remains a stubborn pocket of hardware makers that are going against the flow but as more and more machines are installed with a Linux based operating system they will eventually wither and die away or join the growing band of hardware makers previous mentioned. Installing a Linux based operating system now is as easy, if not easier, than installing a Microsoft created operating system.

Microsoft still hold the top spot in users of their creations but not because of any other reason than they buy their way onto machines sold, thereby creating a false sense of people bying their flagship software operating system. Some call this the "Microsoft Tax". Myself just finds in an annoyance that is swiftly eradicated and replaced by something I call much better but that fact, of course, does not suit everybody and I now appreciate that fact. Another fact I now appreciate is that not everyone wants to rely on someone else to keep their machines running. Microsoft Windows, of any flavour, and a Linux distribution both need someone that knows what they are doing to help them get to grips with the operating system installed be it a Linux based one or a Microsoft based one. What I find now is more people want to become more self reliant in this area. Of course, there are, and probably always will be, some who cannot survive their operating system usage without someone  else who knows what is what and why something happens when it should not.

A Linux based operating system now can be set up in such a way as to keep both sides happy and in some cases can be setup so that it can automatically do everything itself, save for those who are most likely and determined to kill whatever is in front of them on their monitors

If you run a Microsoft based operating system or a Linux based operating system both have the option of running another operting system within their chosen one. These are called Virtual Managers. So. There is a way to run the opposite without the need of a dual boot setup or removing the installed operating system.

So, go on. If you run a Microsoft operating system or a Linux based operating system give the opposite one a go. There is now nothing stopping you installing one of the mainstream Linux based distributions, but remember it is not anything like MS Windows so all the brain washing that that has given you is useless. It is a new and slightly different way to get the same things done. As long as you remember that basic thing then you will enjoy the freedom it offers you.

The major difference between the two option is that of cost. Most Linux based distributions are free while all of Microsoft flavours cost anywhere between 80UKP and 400UKP. If cost bothers you then there can only be one choice. Go for it.

It is getting worse.

It is getting worse and with more and more MS Windows users taking up some flavour of a Linux distribution, usually one of the Ubuntu flavour, we are seeing more and more top posting in the Linux Usenet groups. If you are nterested in checking my statement then just take a look at the last few days in alt.os.linux.ubuntu (Google groups didn't used to take this particular group but I think recently they started taking it).

Things are made worse by google groups as those using it see that the text they are replying to is below where the cursor starts. They  see this and immediately start writing which is exactly how MS Outlook (and MS derivative of) does it without the quotefix patch that forces MS Outlook to do things properly by putting the cursor after the replied to text.

For us old time stalwarts of Usenet there is nothing worse than top posting. Nowadays, those using google groups to post to Usenet suffer the same fate as those top posters.

Google does not care one bit about such things. Many, including myself, have complained time and time again about how they are doing it but thus far we have all been ignored and it is not google themselves who suffer is it those using their services. Many thousands of long time Usenet users, like myself, simply block (commonly known as plonking) ALL google groups using post irregardless of what that post is about and irregarless of who posted it. Of course, there are some using google groups who post properly but because of the blanket googlegroups plonk many are doing those who try to do things correctly are caught in the dragnet.

Those using MS Outlook, and derivatives of it, and not using the quotefix patch mentioned above are also automatically put in the SHUT YA FACE bin.

Myself and many other long time Usenet using people use proper news readers that do things correctly and have thousands of options to cover every possible need when using Usenet so setting up blanket plonk rules is simple. Remember this, in abstract terms if you top post you score 9999 on the scale (0 - 10000). If you are using google groups you score 9999. If you use google groups and top post you score the full 10000. Both those scores of 9999 and 10000 mean PLONK. I and many others will never see what you post to Usenet.

Now you are aware consider what you are doing and correct your actions. Who knows, if you do that you may just find your way out of many peoples bozo bins. Maybe. Then again, maybe it is too late and no matter whether you correct your actions or not you will forever remain in that bozo bin.

For many of us Usenet died a long time ago when MS operating systems (OS) became the dominant desktop OS and those using it started their top posting habits. We still use it but the shine has rubbed of it. Now google with their google groups have infiltrated Usenet and brought along with it more top posing fools this made Usenet a dull place to visit. The blame lays firmly with possibly the two biggest companies on this earth.

The Intenets hidden joke.

If there is one single web site that causes none Microsoft laden administrators, and some hardened Microsoft  administrators, to laugh out loud is is "Shields Up!" from grc.com.

The sheer scale of hyperbole on there aimed not at seasoned professionals but at the all American everyday common and garden Microsoft Windows users is simply stunning. Every facet of that web site is designed and created to scare the Hell out of  Microsoft Windows users. Take a look at  a snippet of text taken from within the "Shields Up!" process and you will see exactly what I see and that is pure unadulterated hyperbole.

"Solicited TCP Packets: RECEIVED (FAILED) — As detailed in the port report below, one or more of your system's ports actively responded to our deliberate attempts to establish a
connection. It is generally possible to increase your system's security by hiding it from the probes of potentially hostile hackers. Please see the details presented by the specific port links below, as well as the various resources on this site, and in our extremely helpful and active user  community." (any and all links removed to protect the innocent).

Now, I run a Usenet news service so of course 1 port is open otherwise noone would be able to connect to it and what is the use of a server if that be the case? So, that said I fail, with huge red banners proclaiming my failure. This is ridiculous but surely scares the uninitiated. If the average person sees something on a web site self proclaimed as the leader in all things security related says you failed the most basic of ping tests what are they going to do? Panic. That is what and that is what Mr Gibson wants them to do.

Some will say that the web site is not aimed at battle hardened administrators but that itself belies what the web site is all about and that after all is securing a connection. All over the site, which is designed in such a way as to scare people, he makes claims  and points out what people should do and some of that advice is plain wrong or if not wrong then ill-advised. As an example he states that to achieve true stealth mode one should disable pings. This is bad practice for anyone connected to the Internet be it via a router or a modem within a computer. A ping test ensures that the Internet runs  smoothly, by turning off pings it creates the illusion that there are huge black holes all over the place when in fact  the computer or router is sitting there connected to the Internet.

Hyperbole is what it is all about. The information a tools available should be taken and used with a large  dollop of salt. We seasoned and in some cases, mine included,  professionals know to ignore  the advice given. It would be better for the whole Internet is the web site did not exist but it does and while it does we will continue to laugh.

I suppose it serves a purpose for the paranoid but other than that I see no reason for its existence unless of course it is meant to be a joke in which case the joke is on us.

Be careful out there.

A nice, gentle walk.

As Autumn has given away to winter the fields around here take on a very different look, not to mention smell as the various foliage gives off that winterly aroma. To my surprise Edward, my 12 year old son, asked if I would take a walk with him last night along the field trail we have walked many times since we moved here. The same trail we walk when we walk our dogs. A gentle walk on a cold and frosty January evening is good not only for the soul but also ones personal health.

He said he had been studying at school how plants, trees etc changed through the seasons and that he wanted to take a first hand look at those changes. Because we knew the paths so well he had decided that that would be the best way to go rather than we two looking for new, different routes to take and new, to us, fields to transverse. While taking this familer walk he could see for himself how nature changes from one season to the next. Autumn to winter he said was probably natures most violent change as the leaves on trees and plants die away to make way for new leaves on trees and plants come spring time.

Suitably enamoured by his enthusiasm with walking stick in hand we set about the walk at 6pm on a wild and windy, but dry, cold winterly Sunday evening. Off we walked down the road to the park area, down the side of where the park is there is a longish field. This field leads to an area free from mans meddling. In other words is it nature at its best. Free to grow as much as it likes and it does.

The whole area of fields is as unencumbered as a field can be so. It is here that my son decided was the best place for what he wanted to see. During our time looking at various flowers, weeds, bushes and trees we also saw some of the lowlifes that make such areas no-go for a lot of people. They did not bother us but the threat was always in my mind. As it turned out they were more interested in their glue or whatever it was that was amusing them than they were us two. Anyway, we carried on doing what we wanted to do as if they where not there. After 3 hours it was by now very dark and very very cold, because there is no lighting in that area very dark it was indeed. My son had the forethought to bring a torch which is how he managed to work in the dark. We also brought with us a digital camera, with flash, and a video camera both of which he used as he moved from patch to patch.

After 3 hours he decided he had seen enough and more importantly he had enough information for the homework he had been set before the Christmas holiday breakup. On returning home we were also very cold as the night air was starting to bite. After getting home he immediately headed for his bedroom, forgoing the hot pot of coffee my wife had made to complete his homework. Very quickly he told me to go away and leave him to it promising to show me it as soon as he was finished. He took the digital camera and the video camera so he had the information with him which he turned into words and pictures via the Open Office suite of programs on his Linux based machine. I know he is my son but the work he produced (which I read as soon as he made it available to me, which was later in the evening just before his bed time) was outstanding for his age group. Time will tell if his teachers agree as the work is to be submitted laater today on his first day back after the holidays. He said he should have his results by Wednesday so he will know what the score is. I can't see him getting any less than 90% but I am not his teacher (at school anyway).

It is nice in this day and age, an age where our youth is often daemonised to the point of total and complete mistrust from those from the older age groups, to see a child of that age actually doing something he plainly enjoys and something that does no harm to anyone. The fact he is plainly taking an interest in his environment is also surely a good thing.

A proud father I surely am.

KDE v Gnome2

It is not often that I spout about    something Gnu/Linux but here is my view of the neverending and utterly boring KDE versus GNOME2 debate. Along the way I will also be airing my  views on the Linux based distribution I have used since 1993,

With the KDE guys now stopping development of the 3.5.x branch working on the shiney new 4.x branch one has to wonder when the Slackware team are going to wake up and realise that while the  3.5.x branch is stable the 4.x one is far from it.

In the latest Slackware release, 12.2,  they continue their age old stance of using, in the main, stable branches of various programs and program sets which means that the 3.5.x branch of KDE is what is included. For a while they had the 4.x branch in testing along with an assorted bunch of support programs. It looked for a while as if they were going to go with the 4.x branch but sanity took hold and the baulked at that plan. What users were left with was the last of the KDE 3.5.x branch.

I am no lover of KDE, in part because of its use of QT but also in part because of it continuance to act, feel and look like Microsoft Vista. The 4.x branch takes this a step further by directly copying  features that are to be found in Microsoft Vista. This is going to continue to make KDE a none choice for this Gnu/Linux advocate that is for sure.

As Slackware moved the current branch into the 12.2 branch the KDE 4.x branch disappeared from testing. It is still in the current branch though so one can safely assume it will eventually make it as the primary desktop environment. This reliance on KDE will end up breaking Slackwares long held, and proudly held hold on the title of the oldest and longest surviving distribution.

There was, and still is, a lot of hot air spoken and typed about GNOME being dropped from Slackware. Myself is included amongst those who despised the fact that they dropped GNOME from their various releases. Thankfully there were several 3rd party people who develop the GNOME desktop environment including myself. My own effort was never, and never will be, released but what these efforts show is that there is still a huge slice of Slackware, and derivatives of, users who want GNOME as their primary desktop environment which seems to show that that slice of users did not like the fact that the Slackware team removed all support for GNOME. Some, a fairly significant chunk of users even went so far as to change distributions so they could get back their GNOME desktops and have it supported by that distributions development team.

Sadly, this removal of GNOME, and the fact that to get GNOME one must use a none supported 3rd party, signaled a move away from Slackware the size of which has never been seen before. Even though the lead developer of Slackware gave the knod to a few of those 3rd party GNOME efforts it was not enough to stop the move away from Slackware.

I use GNOME myself because of my  dislike for QT upon which KDE is built which I have built myself and in all honesty to get a full and proper GNOME desktop it is no walk in the park to build, so in that sense when Slackware was a one man team I can understand why he dropped it, even if I did not like the fact he had dropped it. But now, Slackware consists of several members so it is not a big step to say to one of them "you do GNOME and make it complete" but that is unlikely to happen so why can't the lead developer say to one of the 3rd party guys "we will admit you under our wing so that you become part of the Slackware team and we will use your build of GNOME". That is also unlikely to ever happen sadly. The current selected team of support staff for Slackware are a bunch of arrogant bastards and would never say they got it wrong when GNOME was dropped.

Assuming that the 4.x branch of KDE carries on with the so obvious aping of Microsoft Vista then one can safely  assume KDE will become less and less relevant in the Gnu/Linux desktop wars. And with the   demise of KDE will be the resurgence of GNOME. Once  this starts happening   what will the Slackware team decide to do once the realise that their primary desktop is withering on the vine? They will have to do something about it otherwise Slackware, that lean and mean distribution that has survived the longest out of them all, will die along with KDE as once all your eggs are in one basket and that basket starts to fall apart your eggs along with theirs will fall and break too.

So KDE versus GNOME to me is a none issue. As I have said why I don't and won't ever use KDE I am not going to say it again. i use Bluewhite64 (a 64 bit port of Slackware and in my opinion the best of the 64 bit ports) and even though it mirrors what Slackware itself does i use it because it is an excellent base from which to add whatever I need to add which includes a GNOME2 desktop.

Linux bashing.

Over the last few days a few people on our closed news server have decided to have a go at Linux bashing. More accurately they have been having a go at me directly. As you know by now I am a staunch Linux advocate and live in a world of mostly illegally obtained MS Windows using people. Every now and again their ignorance of what Linux is shines through and they start taking potshots at me whenever I give an opposite viewpoint to their closed mindsets.

First let me dispel the myth that Linux is, well, Linux. Linux is only the kernel. The rest of the programs and utilities that make up the desktop are correctly termed a Linux Distribution or GNU/Linux  distribution. So, comments such as "Linux  sucks" means nothing when discussing the Linux on the desktop as the kernel is only a very small, but important, part of it. And so, these few antagonist that know i am a staunch advocate of all distributions  always get these descriptions of what is what and what part of the whole experience is what always fail in their attempts to rile me. They fail simply due to their wrong calls of what is correctly called what on the whole distribution.

Is it ignorance that makes them have a go at anyone who does not signup to the closed world that Microsoft has created? Or is it because they are incapable of moving away from the handholding that is a Microsoft Operating System? Or perhaps they have never used a modern  Linux based distribution and have their views on it based off an attampt a few years ago?

A modern Linux Distribution has all the bells and whistles that a Microsoft OS has. We lack some of the more recent games but for someone like myself who has not bothered about games since I sold off all my Amiga gear years ago this is not a problem. But those antagonist cannot understand a mindset like that. In an office or   corperate  environment where games are the last thing employees should be playing there is no problem either. Well, no problem beyond the closed mindsets that prevade amongst the directors who know next to nothing about how ANY operating systems. Those kind of people buy a computer from PCWORLD or DELL or HP  that almost certainly comes with an added tax and a Microsoft Windows install and they  do not know alternatives exist that can do everything their pre-bought OS can do without the hidden costs involved and without the OS calling home every few minutes passing the users personal information to Microsoft.

Those antagonists can say whatever they want to say about me and about my chosen OS platform I have not been bothered about such comments for years so while they may think they are clever all they are doing, to me anyway, is showing a total lack of understanding. That is their problem not mine. I cannot remember the last time I bought some hardware or gadget that was not plug in and use on my Linux based OS so while they want to shill for microsoft I sit comfortably knowing that the chances of my Linux based OS getting riddled with Viri and malware or any of the nasties that crawl around the Internet looking for MS Windows hosts are next to nil, while they use all manner of  Microsoft  written tools or 3rd party tools that slow their machines down in their attempts to stop those same nasties invading their machines.

All I do nowadays is laugh at them. Their closed mindsets are their problem not mine. I may from time to time have a go at defending both myself, because of my use of, and the OS of my choosing. They have no idea how pervasive a Linux based OS of some kind is installed in a lot of hardware  that people have around the house. It is not just computers, it is in  mobile phones, in freezers/refrigerators, DVR'ss, PVR's,  washing machines, motorcars. It is everywhere and once these few  dinosaurs realise  this then they will be enlightened as to the power of my chosen platform. Maybe.

Microsoft on the desktop is not going to disappear overnight but its whole business ethic and business model does not sit well in the modern world of open standards. As a company it is a  dinosaur and just like them it will surely, eventually, disappear. As for my personal antagonists well, they are a lost cause I  think so I will leave them to think they have won.

Ubuntu users.

As Linux gains ground on the desktop Ubuntu in particular is gaining in popularity. Partly because it has some ill-conceived helper programs. I say perceived because of they mentality they give to users. Users of the Ubuntu family of distributions are usually refugies from MS Windows so while the two may go together well, in reality those users are prone to giving out some outstandinly bad information when someone, also using Ubuntu, has a problem. What is worse is when I see someone I have known for years who after years and years of using a proper Linux distribution turns to Ubuntu and then ends up passing on bad information because he or she has determined that to get him or her self up to scratch on his or her new install he or she  starts to follow what he or she sees many others doing.

One of the main problems Ubuntu users have is when there is a need to compile something. As rare as this may be it does crop up from time to time. When it does the information given is usually poor at best and downright dangerous at worse.

I have seen it time and time again where a user it told "Do this as root" or "Do it via sudo". This is just plain wrong. No program on the Linux platform has ever needed root privilidges to build. To install system wide, yes, but even that is not always required. One can simply install to ones own home directory but i digress a little. This need to do any building of source code as root is just one of the many bad advice I see given out to Ubuntu users.

And the longer such bad information is given out the more it becomes ingrained that that bad information is correct.  And you wonder why I have a dislike for Ubuntu users even though my wife and eldest child uses it.

I have for a long time said that Ubuntu is dangerous for the whole Linux community and the more people who use it the worse the situation becomes.

Microsft versus Linux

Or more correctly, a Linux based distribution.

As Microsoft's stranglehold on both operating system installs and bundled installs falls we always see a rise in anti-Linux propaganda. This manifests itself across the full spectrum of user access which includes, Usenet, Web based forums and other media. It is tempting to think of these anti-Linux  protagonists as simple Microsoft shills who are paid by Microsoft to propagate as much propaganda as they can across the wide Internet, but, I do not think of that as while it is possible I do not think it true.

No. The problem comes when people try a Linux based distribution and automatically think in Microsoft Windows terms without realising the years, in some cased, of Microsoft Windows learning helps nobody when moving to a Linux based distribution. For a start, a Linux based distribution, of which there are many, is a real operating system designed from the ground up to be secure and multi-user. Microsoft Windows on the other hand is a mass of added on later bits and pieces who primery aim is ease of use. This ease of use forgoes the security that a Linux based operating system was designed around. Sure, there are many other differences, as well as many similarities, but to expect to move across platform and carry across all the baggage one learnt is simply madness.

Whenever I have recommended people move away from the  corporate craziness that signifies a closed source operating system, such as one from Microsoft, to the  standards compliant world, and open systems, that signify a Linux based platform one of the first things I install into them is that it is basically nothing at all like Microsoft Windows and to expect something totally new. The second thing i instill into their minds is to think and work in different ways than they may have worked for years. Lastly, I instill into them that what they will experience is a whole new world.

Some make it, some do not. More and more are making the switch and more and more are  enjoying it. And it is that which is now, more than ever before, frightening Microsoft and the Microsoft loving harcore who cannot handle, nor comprehend, why more and more people and businesses are moving away to a better world that makes up the whole open system that is the Linux based platform and it is those who   spread the FUD we see all over the Internet.

1975 to present day.

Is the length of time I have been working with computers. I present to you a potted history of my computer usage for no other reason than I want to.

It all started for me one not so sunny September morning during 1975 when I was asked if I wanted to join the schools RADAR department. At the time I knew nothing whatsoever about computers and about the same for what the school was doing with a RADAR department. But, have one they did. It sat on the very top of the school and while small space wise was crammed full of computer equipment.

Since the rude awakening to all things computer related I have come a long way. My first real self owned  computer was a Commodore PET which my mother paid an arm and a leg for. My first IBM compatible PC was bought for a not inconsiderable sum during 1981. The vast majority of personal computers I owned over time where Commodore based. The PET, C64, C128, CPlus4 and the entire Amiga range. These were interspered  with IBM compatibles. Over those years I have used just about every OS that became available. From AmigaOS 1.0  through to  3.5 (at which point I never bought any more Amiga hard or software) to MSDOS 1.0 to MS Vista. Currently my OS of choice is a flavour of Linux.

Nowdays since giving up on my beloved Amiga's I build all my own PC's and some of friends and family too. I also set up networks for      companies as well as either install a Linux based OS or ensure they have the required licences for a Microsoft OS and associated programs.
 
Out of all the hardware I have bought over the years and all the OS's I have used my favourite remains, and is unlikely to be surpassed, Amiga OS and the Amiga 3000 tower.

During this time I have taught myself almost every programming language known to man. Of course, some were consigned to the dustbin of computer use a long time ago and some are now fragmented in my head. Today I primarily code in C, Python, Ruby and BASIC. Don't laugh at the last one as it was the first programming language I ever used and still have a place in todays programming world.

I have to say that since those humble beginnings things, and myself, have come a long long way and not all of it for the good either.

Ah, there is nothing better than blowing ones own trumpet. After all, who else is going to it for me?

Operating System market share?

Does anyone really care about OS market share? We Linux based OS users are generally the more informed types. We know why we prefer to be rid of a closed source OS and we know why Microsoft are seen as the devils own company due to being more informed about OS's in general. So while the latest bilge from market research company Net Applications says that Microsoft has an install based of some 89.6%, the MAC OS/X has 8.9% while, presumably because it is not directly mentioned, a Linux based OS has the remaining 1.5%. Okay, there are more than 3 OS's in use so that 1.5% is probably lower still but, there are a few problems with how these numbers are collated and counted.

First, how the data that determines the percentages is open to  question and interpretation so they are not in any way shape or form reliable. Second, because the Linux based OS are not, in the main, sold in computer shops like machines with MS Windows and MAC OS/X pre-installed it is notoriously difficult to keep anything approaching a reliable count of installs. The same also applies if they use the web browsers identification string to count install bases  and web browser take up as many web sites have broken HTML code implementations so many Linux based OS users fake that string to fool the broken web site into thinking that the browser is running on a Microsoft platform.

I have no real idea of what the real percentage counts should be but I do know there are many second and third, fourth,, fifth etc install bases that are Linux based with only the primary machine being the Microsoft based one because the owners of like to play games that are not available for the Linux based platform. Further, there are many machines that act as a firewall built on the Linux based platform that will not be included when collating such data. Other Linux based installs act as file and print servers, these would not be counted either.

Without falling into advocacy mode it is not hard to work out that there are many more Linux based OS installs than any such data gathering exercise could ever hope to evaluate in a fair and none bias manner.

All in all. Such data should be taken with a large dose of salt and as long as one is aware of why that should be so then we can be assured such data is largely ignored for the fodder that it really is.

Directory versus folder

It is directory. A folder is a directory. Always has been.

While taking in my daily dose of Usenet, I came upon this quote.

"Unfortunately, Linux does have its share of obtuse terms that take ordinary terms and applies them in its own peculiar way to its system."

Now, think about that for a second or two and cast your mind back a few years. Before MS rehashed everything standard names for files and directories was the norm. Along came Microsoft and a whole swathe of familier names for files, directories, text files etc suddenly became files, folders, documents all stored under something called My Documents. Some operating systems however still use the old familiar names. In fact, only Microsoft stands out as being the one who decided renaming was a necessity. Of course it isn't but then we are talking about Microsoft who are renown for making standard terms their own to the detriment of everyone else.

Pre MS = Directory
MS WIndows = Folder
Linux = directorydirectorty

Pre MS = text file or word processor file etc
MS Windows = Documents (catch all)
Linux = Text file, word processor file etc

My pre Linux and BSD days was dominated by the lovely AmigaOS which gave the various files and directories their proper names as Linux and BSD do to this day. Then along came Microsoft with their assimilate method of business during which they started changing all the standard file names, directories and common use words and phrases the computer world has used since computers first came to be. The Linux platform still uses all of these common names, words and phrases but MS systems and Microsoft themselves do not, did not and probably never will.

This has lead to a dearth of users coming into the world of the Linux platform and being mystified by name changes. They see this as fault in the Linux platform when in fact the fault lays with years of brainwashing done by Microsoft with their own changes. Nobody is ever born with the knowledge to use a computer operating system. Each one must be learnt of taught. Only then will full enlghtenment behold the user. But when people come from the Microsoft world into the Linux based one they immediately assume all names should be the same as they are under the Microsoft operating system. This of course leads to the now becoming all to familiar cries of "I can't find this and that". Blame Microsoft, not the Linux platform which still calls a spade a spade, unlike Microsoft who calls a spade a shovel.

Here is what someone said to me on this subject not so long ago.

"I used to know what a file is, until Windows came around and gave directories little "file" icons and changed the name to "folder", which sounds too much like "file" for my taste. Files are now called "documents", even though many files aren't documents at all. So Windows is the obtuse one. I'm glad to be back where things are given their proper names, rather than make-believe names that confuse things by making them seem like things that they really aren't."

And that just about sums it up.

Distribution surfers.

A distribution surfer is a person who flits from whatever he/she was using to the perceived latest and greatest distribution, usually a different one It has nothing to do with the merit of. It has nothing to do with anything really except the fact that the new is distribution is...well...new.

We see it all to often in newsgroups and forums where a user has a problem with something not because that something created the problem but because the underlaying cause is the differences in approach to how their previous distribution did things. In the minds of these distribution surfers all distributions should be the same. But, the simple fact is there are almost as many differences in the underlay structures as there are distributions. Trying to get that simple thing across to them is difficult at best and damn near impossible at worse.

Taking as many newsgroups as I do and reading the many forums I do it soon becomes clear the names and on-line nicks that belong to a given distribution surfer. Take as an example Slackware, that venerable distribution that has for years defied the impending doom calls and Ubuntu. Slackware 12.1 came out just before Ubuntu 8.04 (which has recently morphed into 8.04.1). Looking around at the newsgroups when Slackware was released we saw a sudden increase in users, some of which held new names/tags/handles. Then Ubuntu came out and most of those new names disappeared and popped into view on the Ubuntu newsgroup as well as on Ubuntu's main forum. That defines perfectly what a distribution surfer is and what one does as each distribution releases a new version.

Slackware, Debian, Redhat (now Fedora for none business users) and to some extent SuSe and Mandriva (formerly Mandrake) have been around for years and years and are still as relevant in todays Linux distributions world as they where 10 or so years ago. Even though during all those years many other distributions have popped up and in some cases those newer ones have surpassed those older ones where take up by users is concerned. It is not that that is annoying though. It is those damned distribution surfers that annoy the jiggery out of us old timers. Why in the name of $DEITY will they not settle on one distribution and learn it properly?

It boggles the mind it does.

Slackware has rudimentary package management and does not do dependacy tracking, long may it stay that way. Debian does both but because of that has other problems, such as application or library conflicts. Redhat (Fedora), SuSe and Mandriva all do both but uses RPM, which, in Microsoft parlence, if you have ever suffered from a registry botch that stops your system from booting then you will know what RPM Hell means. Because Slackware is much more basic, adhering to the age old KISS principle it is less, much much less likely to be rendered unbootable unless the $USER of that box does something utterly stupid. Because of this simple fact Slackware will probably still be with us in 20 years from now.

If there is a good thing about all this it is that the surfer will invariably return to a good solid distribution eventually as their heads get mauled by the differences between them. But then, this brings its own annoyances such as when they come back they start shouting about how this distribution or that one has so and so so why doesn't this one?

Bloody distribution surfers should be banned from ever running a distribution if they move base more than 4 times in one year or if they are seen or heard to write or utter the words 'Distribution X has so and so, why doesn't distribution Y' once.

Calling all Microsoft users.

And all Microsoft based businesses (Especially those in the U.K.).

Why not? There is a golden opportunity available today for those tied to, or those coming to the end of, contractual obligations. Even those willing to throw money away, money tied into long standing contracts, knowing their future operating system usage will come with no strings attached for years onwards, will come with no forced upgrade migration path mandated in contracts, towards the operating systems in use. To get ahead of the curve. Perhaps to even get ahead of your competitors and certainly to pass cost savings onto their customers. It is not just businesses that can get ahead either. There is much the home user can gain too.

What am I talking about? First, an explanation of why this is possible. I live in a world of Microsoft using friends. My work life is not much different except there I get to put out the word about the Linux platform (LP) and now and again, more often than you may think, get a job transferring systems from a Microsoft platform (MSP) one to a LP one. Here I am going to try and explain how I go about saving single user and multiuser setups a not inconsiderable mount of money.

The LP is not all shiny lights nor the Holy Grail some LP fans would like you to believe. Is it ready for the everyday desktop? Yes, but with some caveats. Is the LP a drop in replacement for an MS one? Yes, with some caveats. Can a MSP fan with 10 or more years make the switch to an LP one and find it easy to use? Yes, but with some caveats. Etc, etc, etc. And so it goes on. One thing that is certain is this: You will save money. There is not the learning curve some would like you to believe.

As someone who installs LP systems as part of my working life I can say with all honesty that the users best suited to it are first time users of a computer. With an LP installation they will fair much better than someone with 6 months or more, of MSP usage under their belt. I say this because while the MSP and LP operating systems offer much the same by way of applications that that is just about as far as it goes. The application names are different, the look and feel of the Graphical User Interface (GUI) is different, though not wildly. Scratch away the surface (GUI) and the two platforms start to differ dramatically. Unless configured otherwise a standard installation of an MSP allows the user to arbitrarily see almost all of the underlaying system and to delete, rename and replace some system files vital to the running of the system. MS Vista goes someway to limiting this sort of thing with it UAC sub-system. The LP allows users to see system files but the user cannot delete, rename or replace any of them without elevated privileges. In fact, one could say in this regard the two platforms are opposites of each other. However, it should not be difficult to see, even with that short and curt description, which of the two methods is the more secure.

Yes, I am aware the Vista MSP negates that scenerio as does a properly locked down XP MSP. But here the differences become more apparent because while using a default Vista MSP or a locked down XP MSP increases the inconvenience to the user, via the MS Vista UAC sub-system, under a LP there is no inconvenience. On an LP system the all powerful 'root' user can do anything it wants to, any file, though even this user can be limited and on a properly configured LP it should be. A user on the otherhand while limited in what he or she can delete, edit or rename will never feels inconvenienced as programs simply run and any work saved lives in the users home directory. A home directory over which the user has complete control.

In the cold light of day the two plaforms are like chalk and cheese, but are similar at the same time. While some users find using the LP after several years of MSP usage quite easy, your average everyday user with the same or similar usage time under his/her belt does not. Office type workers who do little more than email handling or document reading, editing and writing would not notice any difference between the two platforms as they never have the need to go deeper than surface level to do their work. They may notice the GUI looks different and the application used looks different, but with the menu system setup so the names of applications are more intuative, by that I mean more MSP-like, it would be work as normal.

So, that said. What about license costs? There is no comparable license type. One never buys an MSP, one buys a license to use it then if you need support they charge you more for it. An LP system can cost as much as nothing. Yes, really. One can download an LP, install it, use it forever and never pay anybody a single penny for using it. Where they often make money is in support of their operating system but even this can be negligible when compared to an MSP license. LP's like Redhat or SuSE make their monies in this fashion. But, by using someone like me these support costs can be minimal.

When asked to do so, and the number of those asking is growing all the time, I find out what the customer expects from an LP system, then what they want to do, then what programs they currently use to determine if a like for like, insomuch as they provide the same functions, alternative exists and if not a similar one exists, if neither are available then a suitable alternative that while not being an exact match the functions offered are the similar. This many involve several smaller programs that are bound together via scripts to function as one, is found. Once these areas are defined then I explain what I think is the best course of action for a given customer is. These processes can take several meetings, sit down and face to face or via telephone or even email, to be decided but the last one is when I offer my choice of solutions and if possible a live demonstration is performed during which a hands-on experience is offered. This, however, is not always possible. If it is not possible to offer this hands-on demonstration then I talk them through it. Sometimes with slides sometimes not. Each and every discussion is different and each tailored to that user or business.

The basic way I install an LP system is as follows.

I use a couple of setup CD's that I use for installation. Why CD's? Well, there are many systems out there that do not have a DVD drive. By using CD's I can install to systems with either a DVD or CD. But, if I had setup DVD's then I would be limiting myself to those systems with a DVD drive only. One auto installs the base system to the first hard drive it finds. Be it an IDE one or a SATA one with the IDE one having presedence. Once that is installed and working, and the customer has indicated exactly what he or she wants to allow his or her system to function within their environment then the other CD's are brought into play. Once this process is complete a period of familiarisations follows.

And in this short space that is about as much as can be said. A mere scratching of the surface. I will be filing this under several labels but if your interest has been peeked then the one to watch out for is Linux. Any further posts with the same intent will also be filed under Linux. My aim is to provide a series of loosely knitted posts with the same underlaying theme. I.E. Getting you to see an LP for what it is and how by replacing the current MSP you can save lots of money without removing your productiveness.

Oh and these posts will be trumpeting my own business :-) Why not eh?