...

View Full Version : the practicality of home Linux usage



crmpicco
07-31-2006, 09:31 PM
I am looking to change my home Operating System to a Linux distribution.

My question I have on this are, what is the practicality issues with NOT using MS Win at home for general usage? i.e. surfing, downloading, even development.

TBH, i'm not a great fan of Windows and would prefer a free OS (like Linux).

So what problems do people have when moving to Linux? Drivers for example?

Cheers,
Picco

oracleguy
07-31-2006, 10:18 PM
One of the big things you might miss out on is games. Granted you can try and get them to run under wine or cedega but thats not always a sure thing. If you do play computer games, you can always dual boot with windows.

Spookster
07-31-2006, 11:13 PM
I use Redhat Fedora at home. Most apps that run on M$ Windows either has a free linux equivalent or can be run via WINE for Apps/Games or via Cedega for games. If all else fails you can always dual boot so if there is one app that you just have to be able to use and can't on Linux you can just boot into Windows. You can also install VMWare server and install M$ Windows through that and eliminate the dual booting. I had mine system dual booted for the past few years. Recently though I installed VMWare server since it just recently became free and I installed M$ Windows through that. The problem that can arise there though is that stupid windows activation crap. Because I am running it in a virtual machine it doesn't see the hardware in the same way and of course windows won't see my valid key as being valid because it thinks it is being installed in a different computer. I also installed two other distros of linux through VMWare. And if you are not familiar with VMWare it means I can run another operating system from my existing O/S. So while I am logged into my Linux box I can open VMWare and boot up and use windows as if it is housed on a separate computer. I can even network the two O/S's together as if they were on a real network. It's pretty neat.

About the only other issue you should be concerned with would be support for peripheral devices. Different distros of linux have built in support for different hardware. Fedora has support for a very wide range of hardware. The only I can't get to work on mine is my Canon photo printer because Canon doesn't support Linux.

As for what you described surfing, downloading, development you should have no problems whatsoever.

rpgfan3233
08-01-2006, 02:15 AM
A common problem is files using the Windows Media 9 Series format, such as newer WMV and WMA files. I just recently built MPlayer v1.0pre8 from source on Ubuntu Dapper Drake. It works if you get the right codecs. It also works well for MP3s, which Ubuntu's media players didn't support natively (the rumours I've encountered regarding that topic mainly point to licensing and copyright issues). Overall, I'd have to say other than Windows Media files, MP3s and gaming, you shouldn't have a problem.

Spookster
08-01-2006, 02:45 AM
A common problem is files using the Windows Media 9 Series format, such as newer WMV and WMA files. I just recently built MPlayer v1.0pre8 from source on Ubuntu Dapper Drake. It works if you get the right codecs. It also works well for MP3s, which Ubuntu's media players didn't support natively (the rumours I've encountered regarding that topic mainly point to licensing and copyright issues). Overall, I'd have to say other than Windows Media files, MP3s and gaming, you shouldn't have a problem.

I haven't had any problems with Mplayer and WMV and WMA files. Of course MPlayer is not the only media player available either. I also use Totem which works with WMV and WMA files.

rpgfan3233
08-01-2006, 02:51 AM
I haven't had any problems with Mplayer and WMV and WMA files. Of course MPlayer is not the only media player available either. I also use Totem which works with WMV and WMA files.
I haven't had problems with MPlayer and WMV/WMA files either. I just couldn't get the w32codecs to work with Totem (whether I used gstreamer or xine, it didn't matter; they simply wouldn't work). I tried Kaffeine and amarok, but then MP3s started playing too fast, and I had to reinstall because the dependencies that were installed messed things up. I simply posted MPlayer because I found that it works for me.

Spookster
08-01-2006, 05:44 AM
I haven't had problems with MPlayer and WMV/WMA files either. I just couldn't get the w32codecs to work with Totem (whether I used gstreamer or xine, it didn't matter; they simply wouldn't work). I tried Kaffeine and amarok, but then MP3s started playing too fast, and I had to reinstall because the dependencies that were installed messed things up. I simply posted MPlayer because I found that it works for me.

Yeah Totem and Totem-xine each have their own problems. I've not had any problems setting up the win32codecs to work with Totem. This installation http://stanton-finley.net/fedora_core_5_installation_notes.html#Codecs is for Fedora 5 but it might also work for Ubuntu or you could adapt the instructions for Ubuntu.

Beagle
08-01-2006, 06:32 PM
Cedega is a great product for gaming under linux. Also, Doom and Quake (and maybe unreal) run natively under linux. I've seen linux dual boots machines run games faster on linux under cedega than when booted into windows.

Really, the gap is shrinking, it's just a question of making the shift, and a few quirks, like building mplayer from source (stupid legal licensing crap), and installing good DVD software (again, yay licensing).

Other than that, it's time to switch. Make the move to linux before going Vista!

NancyJ
08-01-2006, 08:21 PM
I'd happily move to linux if I could play my games and run photoshop but neither are possible on Linux. I'm aware of wine and cedega but they're just not suitable for my needs at least.
I'm a very busy and impatient woman, I dont have time to waste on buggy, unreliable software - which laughably means I'm stuck with windows. Not a chance in hell that I'm getting vista though. Until Adobe make a linux version of photoshop and games developers start making games to run natively under linux I'm staying on XP.
Software developers have barely caught on to Macs nevermind linux.

Unfortunately its a circular problem, developers wont spend the money on linux versions of their products unless theirs a market for it, which their wont be if the software isnt available.

Cedega looks more reliable but you have to pay a subscription fee and you can only play the games they have ported - which may not include the games you want to play - with all the linux port solutions you'll never be playing the hottest new releases :(
I'm a get it before release kind of gal ;)

For gamers, the time to switch is a long way off.

rpgfan3233
08-01-2006, 08:31 PM
Linux alternative to Photoshop: The GIMP
The Ubuntu LiveCD/Install CD will allow to test drive Ubuntu without messing with your hard disk and the CD has The GIMP on it already. IMHO, it is a great alternative.

oracleguy
08-01-2006, 09:30 PM
Unfortunately its a circular problem, developers wont spend the money on linux versions of their products unless theirs a market for it, which their wont be if the software isnt available.

Well part of it with games at least is that they are using Direct3D. If games used OpenGL instead, AFAIK it would easier to make the game run on both but that isn't the way that it is.

I've been writing my first fully cross-platform capable application in C++ (so it will run under linux and windows) and really from what I've found, it isn't that hard if you take a little bit of time and want to make it work. Most stuff will compile straight over. Now I'm not doing intense 3D graphics, just regular GUI stuff but still.

Spookster
08-01-2006, 09:36 PM
I'd happily move to linux if I could play my games and run photoshop but neither are possible on Linux. I'm aware of wine and cedega but they're just not suitable for my needs at least.
I'm a very busy and impatient woman, I dont have time to waste on buggy, unreliable software - which laughably means I'm stuck with windows. Not a chance in hell that I'm getting vista though. Until Adobe make a linux version of photoshop and games developers start making games to run natively under linux I'm staying on XP.
Software developers have barely caught on to Macs nevermind linux.

Unfortunately its a circular problem, developers wont spend the money on linux versions of their products unless theirs a market for it, which their wont be if the software isnt available.

Cedega looks more reliable but you have to pay a subscription fee and you can only play the games they have ported - which may not include the games you want to play - with all the linux port solutions you'll never be playing the hottest new releases :(
I'm a get it before release kind of gal ;)

For gamers, the time to switch is a long way off.

For those few apps that don't have a linux equivalent or that can't be run through WINE or Cedega you can install M$ Windows within Linux using VMWare and you can install and run your Photoshop just as you have it now. I couldn't live without my MusicMatch software and they don't make a linux version anymore. With my machine being dual booted I hated having to leave linux to boot into windows everytime I wanted to use MusicMatch so I installed VMWare and can now boot up windows within Linux and play my MusicMatch.

BTW GIMP is a very nice equivalent to photoshop besides the fact that it is free.

As for Linux being buggy and unreliable that really isn't the case. I think probably you meant to say third party software. Linux itself is quite reliable and if any bugs are found they are usually fixed within days or sometimes within hours and the updates are made available soon after. The same holds true for the third party software. Not quite the case for Windows. You have to wait for them to create patches and then distribute them which can take months and in some cases years. Third party windows software doesn't normally get bugs fixed until they do another release which can be months or years.

NancyJ
08-02-2006, 08:06 AM
BTW GIMP is a very nice equivalent to photoshop besides the fact that it is free.

Not even in the same league - seriously. Gimp may be the best damn free grpahics program around but it shouldnt even be said in the same breath as Adobe Photoshop CS2. I have GIMP at work because the technical department doesnt get graphics software. I tried GIMPshop (a gimp mod - they moved all the menus around and put them in sensible places) I liked that a little better but it was buggy as hell and crashed all the time - no good if you're on a deadline. Ofcouse the real killer for GIMP is that theres no 'save for web' Meaning any graphics I make I have to send to the marketting department for them to save out. Comparing gimp to photoshop is like comparing m$ paint to gimp. Dont get me wrong - props for getting as far as they have with it and I'd recommend it to anyone who needed free graphics software but its no substitute for photoshop.



As for Linux being buggy and unreliable that really isn't the case. I think probably you meant to say third party software. Linux itself is quite reliable and if any bugs are found they are usually fixed within days or sometimes within hours and the updates are made available soon after. The same holds true for the third party software. Not quite the case for Windows. You have to wait for them to create patches and then distribute them which can take months and in some cases years. Third party windows software doesn't normally get bugs fixed until they do another release which can be months or years.
I dont mean linux is buggy and unreliable - I run 2 linux servers and they're great, reliable, stable, easy to maintain - much easier in many respects than windows servers but I'm not trying to play games,retouch high res photos or create digital masterpieces.
I'm talking about WINE versions of software, they are buggy and unreliable - particularly for the latest games and MMOs that are patched regularly.
The uptake of linux and the 'home user' friendly distros is encouraging and one day (hopefully before vista becomes mainstream) we'll be able to have everything we want on Linux but for the serious gamer and graphics artist - that time is not now.

Spookster
08-02-2006, 03:06 PM
Not even in the same league - seriously. Gimp may be the best damn free grpahics program around but it shouldnt even be said in the same breath as Adobe Photoshop CS2. I have GIMP at work because the technical department doesnt get graphics software. I tried GIMPshop (a gimp mod - they moved all the menus around and put them in sensible places) I liked that a little better but it was buggy as hell and crashed all the time - no good if you're on a deadline. Ofcouse the real killer for GIMP is that theres no 'save for web' Meaning any graphics I make I have to send to the marketting department for them to save out. Comparing gimp to photoshop is like comparing m$ paint to gimp. Dont get me wrong - props for getting as far as they have with it and I'd recommend it to anyone who needed free graphics software but its no substitute for photoshop.




I have to disagree on it crashing all the time. I've been using it on Linux for years to design graphics for the web and have never once had it crash. So it can't be considered in the same league as photoshop because it doesn't have a save for the web feature? So you'd rather shell out how many hundreds of dollars so you can have that feature? That feature is not something that majority of graphic artists needs so it should not be considered a key feature of any graphics program.

Beagle
08-02-2006, 04:45 PM
Nancy is right. For her, Linux isn't the answer. If she wants games on release date, she's not gonna get that with linux. I mean, even fairly basic software you won't get in a stable form easily on the release date.

As for GIMP. Yeah, every digital artist pretty much agrees GIMP is great for free, but it's no Photoshop. You can do a lot of great stuff with GIMP, but there's an extra edge for the upper echelon of artists that Photoshop provides, and that's absolutely necessary when you're cutting edge.

So if you value stability, you're willing to sacrifice being on the cutting edge. If you want to be on the cutting edge, you're willing to sacrifice stability. It just so happens, that when it comes to games, windows is on the cutting edge. Cest la vie.

Spookster
08-02-2006, 05:04 PM
As for GIMP. Yeah, every digital artist pretty much agrees GIMP is great for free, but it's no Photoshop.

So you've spoken to every graphic artist on the planet and they pretty much agreed? I have a little trouble believing that. I think that it is far more likely that you or maybe a few people you know might have agreed on that.

Now I am not arguing that photoshop is not the tool of choice for graphic artists. It is. But GIMP can do almost everything that photoshop can do. For 99% of the people GIMP will suffice for their needs. Does it have every feature that photoshop has? No. It's not a photoshop clone. I never claimed that. Just because it doesn't suffice for you and Nancy does not justify implying that it will not work for every graphic artist.

NancyJ
08-02-2006, 10:42 PM
So you've spoken to every graphic artist on the planet and they pretty much agreed? I have a little trouble believing that. I think that it is far more likely that you or maybe a few people you know might have agreed on that.

Now I am not arguing that photoshop is not the tool of choice for graphic artists. It is. But GIMP can do almost everything that photoshop can do. For 99% of the people GIMP will suffice for their needs. Does it have every feature that photoshop has? No. It's not a photoshop clone. I never claimed that. Just because it doesn't suffice for you and Nancy does not justify implying that it will not work for every graphic artist.
Seriously mate, there have been surveys ;) He's not just making it up.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/02/06/photoshop_on_linux/ (link to an article about just 1 of them) Photoshop time and time again comes up as the #1 peice of software that linux users want. And as the #1 reason for graphics people for not moving to linux.

The crashing, I was talking about GIMPShop, not GIMP itself. Its very buggy and crashes - which is a shame, since its bearable as a replacement for photoshop when I'm at work. Still cant 'save for web' which is a major pain for anyone working in web graphics. And for serious graphics users, no colour management and no native CYMK support - a must for print work.
GIMP has a fraction of the features of CS2, but what can you expect from free vs $600 a shot?
But on the other hand - time is money and if it takes 3 times as long to achieve the same goal in GIMP as it does in PS then its worth it.
For your average home user then it does more than it needs to (though the interface is clunky and difficult to use for noobs).
Its not like Open Office vs MS Office where OO is as good, if not better - you'd be a fool (imo) to buy MS Office because you can get all the functionality and more from OO, PS is vastly superior to GIMP - and at that price it damn well should be.

Spookster
08-02-2006, 11:44 PM
Seriously mate, there have been surveys ;) He's not just making it up.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/02/06/photoshop_on_linux/ (link to an article about just 1 of them) Photoshop time and time again comes up as the #1 peice of software that linux users want. And as the #1 reason for graphics people for not moving to linux.

The crashing, I was talking about GIMPShop, not GIMP itself. Its very buggy and crashes - which is a shame, since its bearable as a replacement for photoshop when I'm at work. Still cant 'save for web' which is a major pain for anyone working in web graphics. And for serious graphics users, no colour management and no native CYMK support - a must for print work.
GIMP has a fraction of the features of CS2, but what can you expect from free vs $600 a shot?
But on the other hand - time is money and if it takes 3 times as long to achieve the same goal in GIMP as it does in PS then its worth it.
For your average home user then it does more than it needs to (though the interface is clunky and difficult to use for noobs).
Its not like Open Office vs MS Office where OO is as good, if not better - you'd be a fool (imo) to buy MS Office because you can get all the functionality and more from OO, PS is vastly superior to GIMP - and at that price it damn well should be.

I am so tempted to just keep arguing with you simply because I get a perverse pleasure out of irritating you. :D I know realistically that the majority of graphic artists will use photoshop and continue to do so because that is what they are comfortable with and that is what the industry standard is. I've worked with many in that field. Matter of fact many still cling to doing it not on Windows but on Macs simply because Macs originally were the only ones that had the computing power to handle it.

In the end though Linux will become more commonplace as a desktop workstation at work and at home. It is inevitable. All you microsoft drones will be assimilated. :D

rpgfan3233
08-03-2006, 12:02 AM
In the end though Linux will become more commonplace as a desktop workstation at work and at home.
Generally, Linux isn't user-friendly in the same manner that Macs or Windows are, so how long do you estimate that to take? I agree that Linux will become more commonplace, but it will take a decade at minimum to even come close to the degree that Macs are commonplace today.

Spookster
08-03-2006, 12:22 AM
Generally, Linux isn't user-friendly in the same manner that Macs or Windows are, so how long do you estimate that to take? I agree that Linux will become more commonplace, but it will take a decade at minimum to even come close to the degree that Macs are commonplace today.

I dare you to check out Redhat Fedora. Linux being commonplace is closer than you think.

oracleguy
08-03-2006, 12:23 AM
but it will take a decade at minimum to even come close to the degree that Macs are commonplace today.

I wouldn't say that per-se, Macs themselves aren't necessarily that common in a majority of fields. There are some fields where they are of course but in general compared the number of PCs they aren't.

I do agree with you though that finding linux running on workstations at home or at work to be common in general is going to take quite a while. But unlike someone switching from a PC to a Mac, you don't have to buy anything new.

NancyJ
08-03-2006, 08:17 AM
I am so tempted to just keep arguing with you simply because I get a perverse pleasure out of irritating you. :D I know realistically that the majority of graphic artists will use photoshop and continue to do so because that is what they are comfortable with and that is what the industry standard is. I've worked with many in that field. Matter of fact many still cling to doing it not on Windows but on Macs simply because Macs originally were the only ones that had the computing power to handle it.

In the end though Linux will become more commonplace as a desktop workstation at work and at home. It is inevitable. All you microsoft drones will be assimilated. :D
You seem to be a lot more irritated than me. You're not irritating me at all... which is odd for you :p
I'm not a microsoft drone, I wanted debian on the new server at work but the network guy wouldnt let me :( /pout
I dont like being a slave to microsoft but if you're serious about games and graphics, its a just a fact of life.
If GIMP seriously wanted PS users to switch then they would make an effort to make the transition easier - all the menus are in the wrong place and I dont want to open up a million windows to do stuff, I've got enough clutter as it is. GIMPshop is a step in the right direction - if it wasnt so buggy. and just generally the interface is all round clunky and hard to use - things dont work the way a photoshop user would expect them to and theres a distinct lack of GIMP tutorials. If these problems were fixed then it would help the 'just used to photoshop' crowd but its still 4 or 5 years behind PSCS2.

Spookster
08-03-2006, 09:51 AM
You seem to be a lot more irritated than me. You're not irritating me at all... which is odd for you :p
I'm not a microsoft drone, I wanted debian on the new server at work but the network guy wouldnt let me :( /pout
I dont like being a slave to microsoft but if you're serious about games and graphics, its a just a fact of life.
If GIMP seriously wanted PS users to switch then they would make an effort to make the transition easier - all the menus are in the wrong place and I dont want to open up a million windows to do stuff, I've got enough clutter as it is. GIMPshop is a step in the right direction - if it wasnt so buggy. and just generally the interface is all round clunky and hard to use - things dont work the way a photoshop user would expect them to and theres a distinct lack of GIMP tutorials. If these problems were fixed then it would help the 'just used to photoshop' crowd but its still 4 or 5 years behind PSCS2.

Well then I need to work harder at this then. :p

You keep saying that all the menu items are in the wrong spot and things don't work like photoshop. Duh!!! It's not a clone of photoshop. If I took photoshop and rearranged all of the menu items and took away the save for web feature would people stop using photoshop? No. They are just used to the old photoshop. They would eventually get used to the new one. If people tried out GIMP and had an open mind they would get used to it and eventually be able to do everything they need in it.

http://www.gimp.org/tutorials/
http://gug.sunsite.dk/?page=tutorials
http://www.cooljeba.com/tutorials/gimp/
http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/gimptutorials/
http://www.google.com/search?q=GIMP+tutorial&hl=en&lr=&rls=GGGL,GGGL:2006-25,GGGL:en&start=30&sa=N

Your're right there seems to be a distinct lack of Gimp tutorials. :rolleyes:

NancyJ
08-03-2006, 11:01 AM
Well then I need to work harder at this then. :p

You keep saying that all the menu items are in the wrong spot and things don't work like photoshop. Duh!!! It's not a clone of photoshop. If I took photoshop and rearranged all of the menu items and took away the save for web feature would people stop using photoshop? No. They are just used to the old photoshop. They would eventually get used to the new one. If people tried out GIMP and had an open mind they would get used to it and eventually be able to do everything they need in it.
Eventually get used to it?! And how many millions of $$ would be cost in the process of retraining everyone to use the new layout? It just wouldnt happen. They'd just not upgrade to your 'improved' version. Especially those that need to 'save for web'.
Open office is sucessful because you can get into it straight away and do everything you need to do. If GIMP wants to be a serious competitor to PS, it needs to make it possible for PS users to just pick up an use, otherwise the savings for it being free would not be worth the loss in productivity and staff training. Plus - make it possible to do everything you can in PS, which is a major task.

I have GIMP at work and I use it when I have to. I've tried to like it, I really have but its just not as good as photoshop, aside from everything being so difficult to find, and the interface not being as nice / user-friendly, it just doesnt have the features of PS. For starters the biggest softbrush is 19px?! Sorry but I really dont have time to make new brushes every time I want to change size. I work with images that are sometimes up to 3k x 3k px. I have my pen buttons configured to increase and decrease brush size - cant do that in GIMP.
And yes save for web is a very big feature thats missing - files coming out of GIMP are too big because you dont have the options you have in photoshop.
If you're not working for web and you're going for print you need color profile management and CYMK support - that is if you want your printouts to look correct.

IMO, I think a Linux version of PS will come before GIMP can stand in the same league as the latest editions of Photoshop.



http://www.gimp.org/tutorials/
http://gug.sunsite.dk/?page=tutorials
http://www.cooljeba.com/tutorials/gimp/
http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/gimptutorials/
http://www.google.com/search?q=GIMP+tutorial&hl=en&lr=&rls=GGGL,GGGL:2006-25,GGGL:en&start=30&sa=N

Your're right there seems to be a distinct lack of Gimp tutorials. :rolleyes:
...ok do a similar search for photoshop and see how many millions of really good tuts there are.

Spookster
08-03-2006, 11:59 AM
For starters the biggest softbrush is 19px?! Sorry but I really dont have time to make new brushes every time I want to change size.

Not true. The default installation has soft brushes larger than 19px. Besides it takes about 3 seconds to duplicate an existing soft brush and increase the size to what you need. And you don't have to make new brushes every time you want to change size. Create an assortment of brushes of different sizes once and you don't have to do it again.



...ok do a similar search for photoshop and see how many millions of really good tuts there are.

I know there are lots of PS tutorials. That was not my point. My point was just to prove you wrong once again. ;) There are lots of GIMP tutorials and you said there was a lack of them.

NancyJ
08-03-2006, 01:56 PM
Not true. The default installation has soft brushes larger than 19px. Besides it takes about 3 seconds to duplicate an existing soft brush and increase the size to what you need. And you don't have to make new brushes every time you want to change size. Create an assortment of brushes of different sizes once and you don't have to do it again.

I'm using the default (windows) installation and the max default soft brush is 19px. And as I said - I work with images up to 3k x 3k px - To make all the possible brush sizes I need would takes eons.



I know there are lots of PS tutorials. That was not my point. My point was just to prove you wrong once again. ;) There are lots of GIMP tutorials and you said there was a lack of them.
Fine - there are a lack of *quality* GIMP tutorials.


Even if there werent those problems - you're not addressing the fundamental issue of lack of functionality.

Just Some of the things that are lacking:

High Pass filter - couldnt live without it
Layer Styles - very useful for design - great time saver
Dynamic Brush Options - PS has LOADS of options for dynamic brush settings - too many to list here
Median
Surface Blur
Smart Blur
'Sample all layers' on smudge & clone tools
Patch Tool
Healing Brush
Many of the filters - esp 'artistic'
Linear Light
Vivid Light

Thats just to name a handful of the few features I use in PS that I dont have in GIMP.

Spookster
08-03-2006, 02:31 PM
I'm using the default (windows) installation and the max default soft brush is 19px. And as I said - I work with images up to 3k x 3k px - To make all the possible brush sizes I need would takes eons.


Fine - there are a lack of *quality* GIMP tutorials.


Even if there werent those problems - you're not addressing the fundamental issue of lack of functionality.

Just Some of the things that are lacking:

High Pass filter - couldnt live without it
Layer Styles - very useful for design - great time saver
Dynamic Brush Options - PS has LOADS of options for dynamic brush settings - too many to list here
Median
Surface Blur
Smart Blur
'Sample all layers' on smudge & clone tools
Patch Tool
Healing Brush
Many of the filters - esp 'artistic'
Linear Light
Vivid Light

Thats just to name a handful of the few features I use in PS that I dont have in GIMP.

Ahh I see now so if they don't meet your expectations of quality then they must not be *quality* tutorials.

Pretty much all those filters/effects have equivalents in GIMP or could be recreated in one way or another. There are also plenty of scripts/plugins that can be added to GIMP or you can create your own just like PS.

NancyJ
08-03-2006, 03:22 PM
Ahh I see now so if they don't meet your expectations of quality then they must not be *quality* tutorials.
Thats generally how quality is measured.


Pretty much all those filters/effects have equivalents in GIMP or could be recreated in one way or another. There are also plenty of scripts/plugins that can be added to GIMP or you can create your own just like PS.
Workarounds take expensive time
Plugins can be unrealiable and not work with future updates
I know there is a highpass plugin but I have not seen workarounds/scripts/plugins for *most* of those others - these are all *basic* features that PS has natively.

One of my biggest pet peeves is that it doesnt run in a single window and I have found a preference option to change that - its an infuriating piece of software all round.
Dont even get me started on Channels!

raf
08-03-2006, 03:54 PM
maybe you two should get a room and do your digital version of the pilow book so that you can try out all these different brushes ( http://www.cinemaparadiso.nl/pillowbook.html for a few illustrations if you don' know the movie).

but back to the original questins

My question I have on this are, what is the practicality issues with NOT using MS Win at home for general usage? i.e. surfing, downloading, even development.
i ever only used windows OS's on my machines for a number of reasons:
- like NancyJ --> don't want to spend time figuring out what the most suitable linux distro and programs would be
- most client i work with only use microsoft programs or programs for windows, and i frequently need to explain them windows-related stuff or need to do a remote desktop to their machines. so i would always need to have a windows os somewhere and then there isn't much gain in also running a linux
- windows itself is far from perfect etcetc, by in my experience, it does an OK job, as long as you dont have to many third party soft and hardware installed. i've been seriously considering bying another machine (uning winXP) and only install windows, office and my development tools on that so that it keeps running smoothly (i'd then have another machine for all my other soft and harware like for my DVD writers, camera's, printers, MP3 (Sony --> crashes my machine ona daily basis)...)
- there are other people that sometimes use my computer, and that are used to working with windows
- the price isn't a good argument. i would rather install an illegal copy of window then install linux 'because it's free'
- i'm a developper and i just need a machine that is easy to work with and does an OK job performance and stability wise. i'm not interested in learning the in and outs of an OS or the low level processes of an OS etc and i don't need to be able to configer it exactly like i want it etc. so i just pick the OS that doesn't take me any time at all to get started and for which i can find whatever soft and hardware i need without any problem or need to experiment/configure etc.

so for a user that just sees his computer as nothing more then a (fairly uninteresting) part of his working environment, and that isn't realy concerned about paying a few bucks (or installing an illegal copy), i don't realy see any real reason to make the switch.

(i do prefer unix for my production-environments thouh, but that's a completely different story)



TBH, i'm not a great fan of Windows and would prefer a free OS (like Linux).

why? not just because it's free i hope, because that would be a very bad reason imo. windows and msoffice are specifically developped "for general usage"...

oracleguy
08-03-2006, 05:19 PM
or need to do a remote desktop to their machines

Not that I'm arguing with your points at all but just a general tid bit about that. I do something similar some times and I do know there is at least one or two linux programs (I forget their names) that support RDP (Remote Desktop Protocol). I first found out about it when I was using knoppix to fix a computer and they have one of them on there to do it. I thought it was kind of cool when I stumbled accross it.

rpgfan3233
08-03-2006, 06:44 PM
I do know there is at least one or two linux programs (I forget their names) that support RDP (Remote Desktop Protocol).
Very true. A friend of mine is a psychiatrist. His main IT guy set up a Linux server with Windows as the client PCs. This way, my friend would be able to work in a comfortable user environment to which he is accustomed while still being secure with Linux. Unfortunately, I'm not sure which Linux distro is currently running, and I don't know the name of the application.

oracleguy
08-03-2006, 06:49 PM
I was refering to a client application so you can connect to windows computers via remote desktop but if there is a server one too, thats cool.

Spookster
08-03-2006, 07:18 PM
I was refering to a client application so you can connect to windows computers via remote desktop but if there is a server one too, thats cool.

Redhat Fedora comes with remote desktop capabilities. I don't recall the name of the program off the top of my head because im not sitting in front of my linux box right now.

Spookster
08-03-2006, 07:20 PM
maybe you two should get a room and do your digital version of the pilow book so that you can try out all these different brushes ( http://www.cinemaparadiso.nl/pillowbook.html for a few illustrations if you don' know the movie).


I've been trying to get her riled up but she's not taking the bait this time.

GJay
08-03-2006, 07:27 PM
is it like when little boys chase the girls and try to pull their hair?

NancyJ
08-03-2006, 07:55 PM
is it like when little boys chase the girls and try to pull their hair?
ew! Dont even go there....
(no offense spook :p)

raf
08-03-2006, 08:45 PM
I've been trying to get her riled up but she's not taking the bait this time.
you're starting to loose it ...

NancyJ
08-03-2006, 09:24 PM
you're starting to loose it ...
starting?

crmpicco
08-21-2006, 03:53 PM
hi, thanks to all that posted. i am currently downloading RedHat Fedora (core 5), but I have a Ubuntu CDROM on the way. Can anyone tell me what I should install?

I will not be playing games - i never play games on the computer (ever).

Also, i meant to ask - if I put a CD in that has been burnt with windows will Fedora or Ubuntu recognise it? If not, this may be a problem.....

crmpicco
08-21-2006, 03:54 PM
hi, thanks to all that posted. i am currently downloading RedHat Fedora (core 5), but I have a Ubuntu CDROM on the way. Can anyone tell me what I should install?

I will not be playing games - i never play games on the computer (ever).

Also, i meant to ask - if I put a CD in that has been burnt with windows will Fedora or Ubuntu recognise it? If not, this may be a problem.....

Beagle
08-21-2006, 04:38 PM
Yes, a CD burnt by windows or Mac can be read by linux, just like a CD burnt by windows can be read by mac, etc. The CD file system is a standard I believe.

Both FC5 and Ubuntu, straight from the install should be all set and ready to serve you. No need to really go after too much extra software until you find your lacking something. They come with desktop environments, browsers, office suites, the works.

Have fun!

Tristan Gray
08-23-2006, 07:22 PM
If you want to run photoshop and games... there are only really two choices and those are windows and macintosh. The new macs are sweet and will run windows natively now as well which is great for gamers. I used gentoo for my home pc for a while and eventually got frustrated with all the little issues that crept up because of my hardware and updating. I also ran a pure unix esque prompt os for a while and that was neat but got tiresome after a while.

I like carrying a knoppix CD with me at all time in case something with my computer goes wrong and I have work to do because if the boot sequence boots CD first you can log right into the knoppix os without installing anything. Pretty nifty.

crmpicco
08-24-2006, 11:24 AM
thanks to all (again), after using Red Hat (9) i think a few years ago i liked it but didnt have time to get it setup for home usage. but now i am ready to ditch Windows - hopefully for good. unless i need to develop .NET

what is linux like for converting avi to dvd? burning dvds and things like that?

Spookster
08-24-2006, 04:58 PM
but now i am ready to ditch Windows - hopefully for good. unless i need to develop .NET
what is linux like for converting avi to dvd? burning dvds and things like that?

You can use linux for .net development. http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page

As for converting avi files to DVD you can do that. There are several programs available for that.

crmpicco
08-28-2006, 03:33 PM
I have just downloaded and installed Fedora Core 5 from DVD image.

However, I have went through the installation process and when it loads up it does not show the desktop??

I have a Hercules 8500 LE 128MB AGP graphics card and a LG 19" CRT monitor.

Am i doing something wrong?

NB. It does the same with Mandrake 10.

Cheers.

Picco

FishMonger
08-28-2006, 04:11 PM
Sounds like you're in text mode. Edit the inittab file, which is in the /etc directory.

change this line:
id:3:initdefault:

to this:
id:5:initdefault:

Run level 3 is text mode, and run level 5 is graphic mode. You can change back and forth without rebooting by issuing the init command:

init 3

or

init 5

Spookster
08-28-2006, 05:29 PM
I have just downloaded and installed Fedora Core 5 from DVD image.

However, I have went through the installation process and when it loads up it does not show the desktop??

I have a Hercules 8500 LE 128MB AGP graphics card and a LG 19" CRT monitor.

Am i doing something wrong?

NB. It does the same with Mandrake 10.

Cheers.

Picco

I assume since you are looking for the desktop then you must have gotten to the login screen and logged in?

Follow this installation guide. It's basically the FC5 installation bible. Stanton Finley upkeeps it. There is also a wealth of information at the fedora forums. http://forums.fedoraforum.org

crmpicco
08-29-2006, 11:50 AM
i cant even get to the command prompt, cant login. i cant get to the point of changing directories. it just runs straight into the black screen after starting the daemons!!

what am i doing wrong?

Spookster
08-29-2006, 05:38 PM
i cant even get to the command prompt, cant login. i cant get to the point of changing directories. it just runs straight into the black screen after starting the daemons!!

what am i doing wrong?

It's hard to say not knowing what hardware you have or what options and settings you selected during the installation. Try again using Stanton Finleys installation guide.

Ooops. I just realized I forgot to give you the link last time. Here it is:
http://www.stanton-finley.net/fedora_core_5_installation_notes.html

crmpicco
08-31-2006, 10:31 AM
is there anywhere that I can go to check if my graphics card is compatible??

My hardware:
Monitor: LG CS990DC 19" (CRT)
Graphics Card: ATI Technologies Inc Radeon R200 QL [Radeon 8500 LE]

I have to say, switching to Fedora hasn't been easy so far. I mean surely a DVD of over 3GB should have support for graphics cards, even Windows has that!!!

Picco

crmpicco
08-31-2006, 02:50 PM
one thing I may have overlooked....should I have been installing Fedora Core 5? Is that the most stable version? Is it the best for my needs? Bearing in mind i wouldnt be playing games!!

Spookster
08-31-2006, 07:17 PM
Your video card is supported. I've been following your other thread. http://forums.fedoraforum.org/forum/showthread.php?t=122364 And yes you should go with the latest FC5. Windows has wider support for hardware because the companies that make the hardware design it with windows in mind. The more people that start using linux the more these companies will start supporting linux. Sure there will be little bumps in the road along the way but windows went through the same problems. Not all hardware used to work with windows easily or sometimes at all.



EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum