Apple Ruins Microsoft's New Ad Campaign

This paragraph describes Ubuntu to a tee, but it is true that you have to click a few buttons to install the illegal codecs. It's easy to do, but then different people have different levels of technical skill.

Tom

 

I love Apple. So you know. But I happen to agree, I have no problems with Vista. I have had a Vista machine for a year, for simple work, and not one issue, not one.

Sorry Apple. But it's true.

 

"Just have to click a few buttons..."

Have they made it a lot easier since I tried it? I read that the codecs were out there, but I could find no specific, detailed instructions. E.g., Go to www.illegalcodecs.gnu and scroll halfway down the page and click on "codecs" ... etc., etc., etc...

In fact, when I tried to download legal (i.e. open source) programs, I could not figure out how to make them install, since I don't know how that's done in Linux. This is not a trivial matter. You really have to understand the bowels of your OS. As a garden-variety computer slob, I'm used to running an "installer" that does it for me. What I liked about Linspire was that the media codecs are legal because you pay a license fee, and it has a system which I think was called "Click-n-Run" or something like that, which was an installer. We can argue about the morality of downloading and using software illegally, but it is illegal. Proprietary codecs are not a life-saving drug that people have an inalienable right to. Somebody invented and patented them, and providers of streaming media choose to use them. I have no problem paying the license fee, but as of a year or two ago, when I was trying to get Linux onto my computer, Linspire was the only Linux distro that provided them legally.

And does Ubuntu now work on all hardware? When I tried it, there was not even a list of laptops on which it would definitely work. You bought a laptop, crossed your fingers, and then searched for work-arounds for the stuff that didn't work.

Open source is a marvelous idea, and I applaud the selfless people working on it. But commercial operating systems have the capital to provide support for a wide range of hardware, and licensing for codecs.

Right now I'm not in the market for an OS. I have Linspire on the laptop which I only take with me on driving trips. When I fly I take the N800. And I like my Mac, so I'm not in the market for a new desktop system. I would like a one-pound full-feature laptop, but that does not seem to exist yet.

 

Ubuntu is based on debian Linux. All debian distros have a package installer that works just like you would expect. You double click on the debian package and it does the installation. Usually you don't even have to do that. You just go to "Add/Remove..." on the Applications menu and pick from the list. The download and installation is automatic after that.

What you say about the codecs is true. It can be a bit of a hassle, since many of them are copyrighted. Typically you have to check one box in the Software Sources screen to tell Ubuntu that you want to use copyrighted software (see the attached screen shot).

Pretty much all new hardware supports Ubuntu. I can't say all hardware, because things are changing all of the time, but I don't know of any major holes in support.

The main problem with Linux is the same problem as with the Macs. Some applications just aren't available on anything other than Windows. I run several Windows applications in Wine, and generally that is as easy as loading the CD and double clicking the setup file, but there are exceptions. If you have to, you can get around that by dual-booting or running VM software, just as you would with a Mac.

Tom

 

If what you say had been true before I bought my Mac, I'd be running Linux on my old PC now. That computer is long gone, however. Hopefully, by the time I need a new computer, Linux will have come further yet. Maybe there'll even be a program that can manage the iPod.

 

Rhythmbox Music Player
Hipo iPod Management Tool
Amarok
Banshee Music Player
Exaile Music Player
gtkpod
gPodder Podcast Client
GPixPod

I am sure there are more, but these are the iPod programs included in the standard sources found in "Add/Remove..." programs.

Tom

 

The only one of those that was in the list of available programs when I was trying Linux was Amarok, which did not work with my iPod.

Another issue is lack of information: There was no place I could find information about what programs might work. I posted to a Linux user group, and three programs were suggested, one was Amarok, and the others I forget. None of the three worked. One was able to see the files on the iPod, but not manipulate my play lists, and none of them was able to add or delete cuts to/from my iPod.

I think Linux is a great OS. But if you do not know its ins and outs it is frustratingly difficut to get a computer set up to meet your needs. I would have paid a "consultant" to set up my system for me, but I could find nobody. I went to a Linux club meeting in Spokane, but nobody there was interested in setting up a system for me in return for money.

I would not be surprised if there is an iPod program now. The open source people are constantly innovating. But at the time I was looking, I was unable to find anything. Information was very hard to get.

 

You hit the nail right on the head. Certainly there are several working iPod programs now. I imagine Amarok works fine now too. The open source world runs a few months behind the rest of the world. A product like the iPod hits the market, and only then do open source developers start working with it. The first few releases will be flawed or stripped down, but eventually you end up with some really nice software.

Edit: As for finding software, to find the above iPod compatible applications, I opened the "Add/Remove..." dialog and typed "iPod" in the search field. If I want to install any of them, all I have to do is put a check mark next to the ones I want.

Tom

 

So... in the new "Bake Sale" advertisement... do ya think the pie is Apple?

.

 

Daniel, I wanted to add one more comment about Linux, which is to say that I agree with you on ease of setup and use. I was making the point that it is much easier than it used to be, and this is one of the top goals of Ubuntu, but it still can be frustrating.

Open source programs lag behind commercial software, and less effort is put into documentation. When an open source program installs and works as expected, the documentation is usually adequate, but when there is a problem you find yourself on an Internet scavenger hunt looking for bits and pieces of the puzzle. It's this part that turns away uses like yourself.

It is better than it used to be, and the online support is much better, particularly with Ubuntu, but there are still pitfalls.

Tom

 

A footnote: I use NeoOffice (the Macintosh version of OpenOffice) and Firefox and Thunderbird. On ICC I use Jin, which I think is open source. I think there are a few other open source things on my computer. One of the things I really hate about Apple is their refusal to support Linux with a version of iTunes. (See, I'm not an Apple "fanboy.") I'm a big fan of open source, and use it whenever possible, and I donate money for the programs that work for me. The iPod is a special case because I know Apple has not been friendly to open source programmers. Apple could have given out the protocols of the iPod, making an open source version of iTunes easy to write. But in the end, my iPod is too much a part of my life to be without a program for it. It's good to know there are some now. I travel several times a year and I cannot read on a plane, so the iPod (audiobooks, music, lectures) makes the time go much easier; and at home I never use the radio anymore: I listen to my radio programs via podcasting, on the iPod, and I listen to The Teaching Company lecture series around the house or when driving.

 

Open source has been the dominant threat for a long time in some areas. Most web servers run open source code. Apple will never be a threat in the server area, but Linux is and will continue to be a threat.

Not all software for Linux is open source or free. There is a small but significant amount of professional code available in the Linux world.

What you say is probably true for the desktop environment. There is a chicken and the egg effect, where not enough users use Linux to support major development, but most users need the professional development before they can adopt Linux. Still, I wouldn't count out Linux/Unix, especially since now Apple uses nothing more than Unix with their own shell.

Tom

 

This was actually the reason I decided to switch to the Mac, rather than continue my frustrating search for a Linux distro that would work for me.

 

Yes, BUT people will still heckle you if you are a Mac user. If you want to really get heckled from all sides, try being a Mac user, a Prius driver, and Mormon..... Helps you learn to become quick witted and in a clean way to boot.... :^) .... jf

 

How can they tell you're a Mormon, unless you come calling, trying to convert them? I've had a few Mormons try to convert me. I thought their religion was pretty wacky (the stuff about a vanished civilization in the Americas that worshiped Jesus, and the business with the golden tablets) but as people I quite liked them, and I enjoyed disputing with them.

One thing I liked about their religion: They said that you didn't have to be a Mormon to go to heaven; that you just had to be a good person, and that if you were a really really good person, you'd become a god; and that god was just some guy who lived on another planet and was so good that he (like others good enough) became a god and got to built a planet and be the god of it. His planet was built by some guy who had become a god the same way, and if I was good enough (no chance of that, BTW!) I too could become a god after I died, and build a planet and be the god of it.

Caveat: This is what they told me. I have no idea if they were representing Mormon beliefs as other Mormons understand them, or if they recognized me as a hopeless case and were pulling my leg. (Which, if the case, would raise my opinion of them even further.) They gave me a copy of the Book of Mormon, which I read a few pages of, and then abandoned it as too boring. I've read about half of the Bible (including Genesis and Daniel (of course!) and the Gospels and Acts, and other books scattered about) but the Book of Mormon just couldn't hold my interest.

On another occasion I sat next to a Mormon on an airplane, and when he asked me my religion I said I was a Pastafarian, and I told him about the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the beer volcano in heaven and the noodly appendages, etc. I couldn't tell if he thought I was puling his leg.

 

Really, that's news to me... I guess all those people using google must be using Linux then, ditto for yahoo, youtube, myspace, etc.

And .NET web development? Really. Isn't that being crushed, hugely, by java based web development.

Here's a hint: Servers don't give a crap bout their clients. That's the reason web services and XML have become so ubiquitous, any client can consume the data provided by any server.

 

Really the only place where server and client compatibility is an issue is with Microsoft products. Microsoft has a long and sordid history of making web extensions that only work with their products. Fortunately, most of them either died on the vine or support was back fitted into other servers, such as with FrontPage Extensions. It was fairly obvious that Microsoft was trying to capture the web server market by working backward from Internet Explorer.

Tom

 

There are exceptions, such as the one you point out, but when it comes to dancing bologna 3D spinning user interfaces, the Linux world is way out ahead of Microsoft and Apple. Vista rolled out with its much vaunted compositing user interface, but Linux had Compiz long before that. With Linux you get to pick your window manager and desktop system, and you can use more than one if you wish. The modular design of Linux makes this sort of thing easy, unlike the monolithic bloatware approach from Microsoft.

Tom