[crosswordbob]

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 10:50 AM, said:

Linux is not good enough because you invested $10,000+??

Of course you are going to think Linux is not good enough, it justifies you wasting $10,000+

Same argument the for the OSX users.. They paid all this money so they must have the best OS.

If you spent $10k+ on software it is your own damn fault. Don't change, stay with your inferior M$ gimmick. But don't say Linux is "barely good enough". It runs the world wide web.. It is plenty good. Maybe you should rephrase that you on the other hand are just barely good enough to run Linux.

So you see no difference between a web server, that has no real world interaction with people (on the OS level), and a desktop/workstation user with the exact opposite usage scenario.... I hope you didn't expect anyone to take you seriously. Because there is nothing in your post to hint at you being serious.

This. Lots.

Whatever your opinion of Linux on desktops, citing its success in server environments is utterly irrelevant to the desktop and betrays an extremely naïve view of software engineering. It's like claiming you're a Michelin-quality chef just because you've flipped burgers for years—doesn't mean you're not, but it's no kind of proof.

[RickDobbelmannqbtt]

crosswordbob, on 02 May 2012 - 11:56 AM, said:

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 10:50 AM, said:

Linux is not good enough because you invested $10,000+??

Of course you are going to think Linux is not good enough, it justifies you wasting $10,000+

Same argument the for the OSX users.. They paid all this money so they must have the best OS.

If you spent $10k+ on software it is your own damn fault. Don't change, stay with your inferior M$ gimmick. But don't say Linux is "barely good enough". It runs the world wide web.. It is plenty good. Maybe you should rephrase that you on the other hand are just barely good enough to run Linux.

So you see no difference between a web server, that has no real world interaction with people (on the OS level), and a desktop/workstation user with the exact opposite usage scenario.... I hope you didn't expect anyone to take you seriously. Because there is nothing in your post to hint at you being serious.

This. Lots.

Whatever your opinion of Linux on desktops, citing its success in server environments is utterly irrelevant to the desktop and betrays an extremely naïve view of software engineering. It's like claiming you're a Michelin-quality chef just because you've flipped burgers for years—doesn't mean you're not, but it's no kind of proof.

Nice analogy

Like I said, of those companies and government institutions, NONE of them use desktops or work stations. According to your logic, they use servers only.. lol

lol, lemmings will always be lemmings, mindlessly following the behaviors and actions of the masses.

Good luck

This post has been edited by RickDobbelmannqbtt: 02 May 2012 - 12:08 PM

[crosswordbob]

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

lol, lemmings will always be lemmings. Keep on mindlessly following the behaviors and actions of the masses.

Good luck

You want to back up your dumb insults with any sort of refutal of my comment or justification for deeming me a lemming? All bluster and no argument just reinforces my charge.

To which behaviours and actions do you refer?

This post has been edited by crosswordbob: 02 May 2012 - 12:07 PM

[RickDobbelmannqbtt]

crosswordbob, on 02 May 2012 - 12:05 PM, said:

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

lol, lemmings will always be lemmings.

Good luck

You want to back up your dumb insults with any sort of refutal of my comment or justification for deeming me a lemming? All bluster and no argument just reinforces my charge.

Insult?

I didn't call you anything..

I just said lemmings will always be lemmings.

You assumed you were a lemming.

FACT!

This post has been edited by RickDobbelmannqbtt: 02 May 2012 - 12:08 PM

[crosswordbob]

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 12:07 PM, said:

crosswordbob, on 02 May 2012 - 12:05 PM, said:

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

lol, lemmings will always be lemmings.

Good luck

You want to back up your dumb insults with any sort of refutal of my comment or justification for deeming me a lemming? All bluster and no argument just reinforces my charge.

Insult?

I didn't call you anything..

I just said lemmings will always be lemmings.

You assumed you were a lemming.

FACT!

You accused me of "following the behaviors and actions of the masses". That is insulting and clearly indicates that your lemming comment was directed at me. Your clumsy attempt to squirm out of it yet further undermines your credibility in this thread. I'm done with you.

This post has been edited by crosswordbob: 02 May 2012 - 12:15 PM

[Evildave]

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 11:41 AM, said:

Valve is porting Steam and the Source engine to Linux

...
-----
I wonder why Valve is porting Steam to Linux? It must be because Linux desktop is a flop, lol

I think because they can port it set top boxes, TV sets, and other devices cheaply.

Valve has had Linux ports of various things in the past, too. Any game that's been ported to OS X will go to Linux with relatively little tweaking, since it's 99% OpenGL and 1% 'system' calls to port. The opposite is also true.

It would also make producing a cheap 'Valve Box' a relatively straight-forward thing to do. In case they wanted to get involved with gaming console hardware. Or perhaps a 'Valve Box' standard, the way the XBOX was supposed to go before Microsoft decided to copy Nintendo and Sony's business model.

To a degree, however 'floppy' Linux is for the current desktop mass-market, the 'desktop market' its self is consistently moving towards the margins.

Developers and professional users will still need desktops, and if you look at web development statistics, Linux and OS X show a disproportionately high rate of use among web developers, compared to common web users. This disparity will most likely continue to grow across the board. Professionals (a tiny minority) will adopt what works best for them, while end-users and casual web consumers, and worker-bees in various business environments (the vast majority) will adopt what works best for them, which will NOT generally be a general purpose desktop OS.

http://www.w3schools...browsers_os.asp
http://marketshare.h...t.aspx?qprid=9#

Even as Microsoft chases the tablets with Windows 8, dumbing down the OS by leaps and bounds, the 'market' for professional OS that doesn't make compromises for all of the clueless idiots in the world will continue to gradually grow. Because if there's one thing that's distracting when doing 'real work' on a computer, it's animations and cartoons and 'effects' and repetitive things made to make it 'easy to learn'. Just the things that casual users love. Easy to learn is not the same as efficient to use.

Scripting and shortcuts and all manner of 'advanced' things make a computer efficient to use, but hard to LEARN to use.

Groping on it with your fingers, over and over again is 'easy' to figure out, but very repetitive and time consuming when you have to do a lot of 'real work'.

The 'open source compromises' that clueless casual users complain about being 'hard' in Linux and other open source projects are generally the things the professional users who develop it WANT FOR THEMSELVES.

This post has been edited by Evildave: 02 May 2012 - 12:20 PM

[RickDobbelmannqbtt]

crosswordbob, on 02 May 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 12:07 PM, said:

crosswordbob, on 02 May 2012 - 12:05 PM, said:

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

lol, lemmings will always be lemmings.

Good luck

You want to back up your dumb insults with any sort of refutal of my comment or justification for deeming me a lemming? All bluster and no argument just reinforces my charge.

Insult?

I didn't call you anything..

I just said lemmings will always be lemmings.

You assumed you were a lemming.

FACT!

You accused me of "following the behaviors and actions of the masses". That is insulting and clearly indicates that your lemming comment was directed at me. Your clumsy attempt to squirm out of it yet further undermines your credibility in this thread. I'm done with you.

That means I win!

YAY!

[RickDobbelmannqbtt]

There is a reason why Joe Q Public voted the way it did.

Would you recommend this story? YES 6 NO 38

[ricegf]

JuliusBumaatndw0, on 01 May 2012 - 07:36 PM, said:

Happy Ubuntu Linux user for more than 4 years :-)

Congratulations. Isn't freedom grand? :-)

I started using Linux in 2000 with the old Mandrake product (bonne pour les débutants), used various other products (Red Hat, SUSE, Linspire, and Mint), and switched to Ubuntu back at the Warty Warthog / 6.06 release. While I also use SUSE and Red Hat (and Windows 7), Ubuntu is my favorite environment at the moment. I've even grown fond of Unity now that it has matured a bit (though OpenSUSE KDE 4 is pretty slick as well).

A few of my favorite things: Ubuntu One, with live off-site backup of files as I save them; the new Software Center, with ratings, reviews, and click to purchase (if not free) and parallel installs (look, Ma, no stinkin' wizards!); workspaces (seriously, Windows still doesn't have this incredibly useful innovation?); and problem-free updates that I control (seems like every Windows app does it differently, and worse). But best of all, I can freely install it on all of my computers without typing a single 40-character string of random letters and numbers!

Life is good. :-)

[crosswordbob]

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

crosswordbob, on 02 May 2012 - 11:56 AM, said:

This. Lots.

Whatever your opinion of Linux on desktops, citing its success in server environments is utterly irrelevant to the desktop and betrays an extremely naïve view of software engineering. It's like claiming you're a Michelin-quality chef just because you've flipped burgers for years—doesn't mean you're not, but it's no kind of proof.

Nice analogy

Like I said, of those companies and government institutions, NONE of them use desktops or work stations. According to your logic, they use servers only.. lol

First, thanks for editing your post to add an actual argument to accompany the trolling.

Unfortunately, however, it is a spurious argument. I quite specifically stated in my post the very opposite of what you call my "logic", as highlighted above. I did not suggest in any way that Linux is not used on the desktop. I merely stated that citing the fact it is used to good effect on servers is not, in itself, any sort of indication as to its efficacy in a completely different environment.

[waldojim]

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 10:50 AM, said:

Linux is not good enough because you invested $10,000+??

Of course you are going to think Linux is not good enough, it justifies you wasting $10,000+

Same argument the for the OSX users.. They paid all this money so they must have the best OS.

If you spent $10k+ on software it is your own damn fault. Don't change, stay with your inferior M$ gimmick. But don't say Linux is "barely good enough". It runs the world wide web.. It is plenty good. Maybe you should rephrase that you on the other hand are just barely good enough to run Linux.

So you see no difference between a web server, that has no real world interaction with people (on the OS level), and a desktop/workstation user with the exact opposite usage scenario.... I hope you didn't expect anyone to take you seriously. Because there is nothing in your post to hint at you being serious.

lol you must have over paid for your soft and hardware too..

To be honest, IDGAF what you think.

A server can do the same damn thing a desktop can do.

Just because a server doesnt have a GUI you think it cannot do what a desktop can?

Really?

I suppose the following companies and government institutions do not have any desktops or work stations and they probably also think Linux is "barely good enough".

US DEPT of DEFENSE, NASA, US NAVY Submarine fleet, The City of Munich Germany, Federal Aviation Administration, French Parliament, U.S. Postal Service, U.S. Federal Courts, Government of Mexico City, German Universities, Switzerland Schools, Indiana Schools, Novell, Google, IBM, Panasonic, Virgin America, Cisco, Amazon, Wikipedia, New York Stock Exchange, Burlington Coat Factory, Toyota Motor Sales, Travelocity, CERN, Internet Archive, IBM iDataPlex in Canada, Disney, DreamWorks, Pixar and on and on and on..

You don't understand the difference. That is ok. When you are all growed up, and realize there is a difference in needs between the professional world, and your world, then just come on back.

[waldojim]

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 11:41 AM, said:

Evildave, on 02 May 2012 - 11:34 AM, said:

If you don't like 'WINE', run some version of windoze in VirtualBox (available for all the common Linux variants). If you have '$10,000 worth of software', you probably have a windoze media+key lying around to install into a VM, along with whatever other over-priced crapware you need.

VirtualBox is pretty portable, though I had to consistently do some hand tweaking of XML to move things from one machine to another. VMs are also somewhat sensitive to the CPU architecture, so a VM made on AMD might not work on Intel, and vise-versa. Parallels has been a 'dream', as far as migrating.

I don't even know what I'd do without virtual machines. Even when I ran windoze (before M$ Shista made me swear off the stinking pig OS forever), I ran virtual machines. It's the best way to encapsulate development and testing tasks, and especially test client/server apps. I have one that's got a 'windoze XP' setup on it, with a crappy VPN client that only works under it, that I'm forced to use, that's been used on several computers over the years, working for the same idiots who require those tools (CVS+SSH+ODDBALL VPN = RETARDS). It's nice just copying it over and pointing the VM software at it. 'Setup complete', back in business with the new computer. Boot up the VM to commit over their network, sometimes to test on some windoze browsers. I used to do some other tasks with it, but over time the various development tools migrated elsewhere. Though it does have STEAM on it, and runs the 'windoze only' games just fine.

Every sign indicates Windoze 8 will see a fresh spike in new Linux converts, just as Ubuntu's Gnome 3 mess is pushing users away to other Linux variants. If you don't have a tablet, compromises for pretending to be a 'touch device' suck.

Valve is porting Steam and the Source engine to Linux



Valve’s digital distribution service Steam has been offering up games for almost 9 years now, and yet until May last year it remained a Windows-only service. Then Valve made Mac gamers happy by porting not only the service, but its back catalog of games to Apple’s platform. Now, it looks as though the long rumored Linux port is finally going to happen.

Michael Larabel, the man behind the well-known Linux website Phoronix, was invited out to Valve’s offices in Bellevue, Washington. He has now returned and started sharing the details of what they showed him.

Apparently Valve has been working towards a Linux port of both the Steam service and Source engine for quite a while. The reason it has taken so long is there has been no real direction and focus on the project: developers there just work on it when they can and when they want to. That has now changed, with Gabe Newell taking the lead on pushing the project forward.

While at Valve, Larabel got to load up Ubuntu and launch a working version of the Steam client without need of Wine (used for running Windows apps on Linux). He has also confirmed that Left 4 Dead 2 is the game being used to test development/porting because it offers both a stable and up-to-date implementation of the Source engine. Once that is ported other games from Valve’s back catalog will follow, meaning Half-Life and Portal on Linux will be released eventually.

Based on Larabel’s account of what he saw and what he talked about with Newell, Linux users are likely to see a release at some point this year. It may be beta, and it may be limited to one Valve game, but that’s a great start. Larabel also believes Valve is going above and beyond what other services and games companies are doing on Linux, and that they will become the “most Linux-friendly game company.”

Read more at Phoronix





-----
I wonder why Valve is porting Steam to Linux? It must be because Linux desktop is a flop, lol

We have been seeing this news for 8 years, and it has yet to happen.

[waldojim]

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 05:09 PM, said:

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

RickDobbelmannqbtt, on 02 May 2012 - 10:50 AM, said:

Linux is not good enough because you invested $10,000+??

Of course you are going to think Linux is not good enough, it justifies you wasting $10,000+

Same argument the for the OSX users.. They paid all this money so they must have the best OS.

If you spent $10k+ on software it is your own damn fault. Don't change, stay with your inferior M$ gimmick. But don't say Linux is "barely good enough". It runs the world wide web.. It is plenty good. Maybe you should rephrase that you on the other hand are just barely good enough to run Linux.

So you see no difference between a web server, that has no real world interaction with people (on the OS level), and a desktop/workstation user with the exact opposite usage scenario.... I hope you didn't expect anyone to take you seriously. Because there is nothing in your post to hint at you being serious.

lol you must have over paid for your soft and hardware too..

To be honest, IDGAF what you think.

A server can do the same damn thing a desktop can do.

Just because a server doesnt have a GUI you think it cannot do what a desktop can?

Really?

I suppose the following companies and government institutions do not have any desktops or work stations and they probably also think Linux is "barely good enough".

US DEPT of DEFENSE, NASA, US NAVY Submarine fleet, The City of Munich Germany, Federal Aviation Administration, French Parliament, U.S. Postal Service, U.S. Federal Courts, Government of Mexico City, German Universities, Switzerland Schools, Indiana Schools, Novell, Google, IBM, Panasonic, Virgin America, Cisco, Amazon, Wikipedia, New York Stock Exchange, Burlington Coat Factory, Toyota Motor Sales, Travelocity, CERN, Internet Archive, IBM iDataPlex in Canada, Disney, DreamWorks, Pixar and on and on and on..

You don't understand the difference. That is ok. When you are all growed up, and realize there is a difference in needs between the professional world, and your world, then just come on back.

Just in case you don't understand WHY this was said:

Quote

With more than 200 Linux desktops and 400 Linux servers, DreamWorks SKG is not only a leading producer of animated motion pictures but a major user of Linux as well.

source: http://www.linuxjour...om/article/4803

DreamWorks has followed three paths to Linux: new development, porting and third-party-vendor porting. Head of technology Ed Leonard says, “To dramatically reduce costs was one of the big motivating factors in moving animators to Linux. But, it is our animators' productivity that really counts.

An animator's desktop is not the same machine that an executive or secretary would have. The animator needs a high-performance workstation with a dual-head, high-performance graphics system and specialized software for motion picture production.

Then, an animatic movie is created by artists using custom plugins in Alias|Wavefront's 3-D animation package Maya.

For character animation, a scan of a paper sketch is done using ToonShooter. Production software lead Derek Chan explains, “ToonShooter is an internal tool we wrote for Linux.

There is more of course, but the point here is simple. Those are all custom tools for a custom system. This is no different than SGI custom tools on SGI OS. Linux is nothing more than a means to an end. Linux was not a key factor here, nor the software available for it, as it was all ported or written to accomplish the specific task at hand. Most of this software is unavailable to the general public. NONE of that was open source.

[linuxrants7xpg]

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 07:34 PM, said:

“ToonShooter is an internal tool we wrote for Linux.

There is more of course, but the point here is simple. Those are all custom tools for a custom system. This is no different than SGI custom tools on SGI OS. Linux is nothing more than a means to an end. Linux was not a key factor here, nor the software available for it, as it was all ported or written to accomplish the specific task at hand. Most of this software is unavailable to the general public. NONE of that was open source.

If Linux wasn't a key factor, why didn't they write ToonShooter for Windows?

[waldojim]

linuxrants7xpg, on 02 May 2012 - 07:42 PM, said:

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 07:34 PM, said:

“ToonShooter is an internal tool we wrote for Linux.

There is more of course, but the point here is simple. Those are all custom tools for a custom system. This is no different than SGI custom tools on SGI OS. Linux is nothing more than a means to an end. Linux was not a key factor here, nor the software available for it, as it was all ported or written to accomplish the specific task at hand. Most of this software is unavailable to the general public. NONE of that was open source.

If Linux wasn't a key factor, why didn't they write ToonShooter for Windows?

The processing backend. Why was SGI so popular? Massive parallelism that allowed for fast video production. Windows was not designed for that. In this case, the Linux desktops were put into place to deal with a specific problem that Windows could not handle. Nothing more, nothing less. However, this has NOTHING to do with Linux being "ready" for the mass market. Once more, 100% of the applications in use were CUSTOM APPLICATIONS. Applications either not available or viable for the average person.

[linuxrants7xpg]

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

Once more, 100% of the applications in use were CUSTOM APPLICATIONS.

Not true. "Then, an animatic movie is created by artists using custom plugins in Alias|Wavefront's 3-D animation package Maya." Maya is now owned by Autodesk, and is available for Windows, OSX, and Linux. It's not a custom application.

[waldojim]

linuxrants7xpg, on 02 May 2012 - 09:16 PM, said:

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

Once more, 100% of the applications in use were CUSTOM APPLICATIONS.

Not true. "Then, an animatic movie is created by artists using custom plugins in Alias|Wavefront's 3-D animation package Maya." Maya is now owned by Autodesk, and is available for Windows, OSX, and Linux. It's not a custom application.

OK, so sorry - 99% of them. Your point was so well received.

This post has been edited by waldojim: 02 May 2012 - 10:38 PM

[nonseq]

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 10:38 PM, said:

linuxrants7xpg, on 02 May 2012 - 09:16 PM, said:

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

Once more, 100% of the applications in use were CUSTOM APPLICATIONS.

Not true. "Then, an animatic movie is created by artists using custom plugins in Alias|Wavefront's 3-D animation package Maya." Maya is now owned by Autodesk, and is available for Windows, OSX, and Linux. It's not a custom application.

OK, so sorry - 99% of them. Your point was so well received.

Of course back then, 2001, they were using custom plugins in maya and not just an off the shelf version. It's true that the animation special effects houses that I have visited and consulted for all use Linux. But that is not to say that any of them use Maya, off the rack. Besides the port to Linux should have been fairly easy in that Maya (and its predecessors) were UNIX based.

But, in my opinion, it's disingenuous to conflate custom implementations of Linux with those distros available for the desktop. High end animation houses have millions invested in making Linux/Windows/OSX work with their proprietary and third party tools to achieve specific applications.

[nonseq]

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 10:38 PM, said:

linuxrants7xpg, on 02 May 2012 - 09:16 PM, said:

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

Once more, 100% of the applications in use were CUSTOM APPLICATIONS.

Not true. "Then, an animatic movie is created by artists using custom plugins in Alias|Wavefront's 3-D animation package Maya." Maya is now owned by Autodesk, and is available for Windows, OSX, and Linux. It's not a custom application.

OK, so sorry - 99% of them. Your point was so well received.

Interesting note from the fine folks at Autodesk about Maya 64 bit (Maya 32 bit will not run on Linux as I understand it.)

Quote

Note
Maya 2013 is also capable of running on other configurations such as boutique distributions of Linux. However, enumerating systems that are not tested and cannot be supported or that fall below the requirements for a productive user experience is beyond the scope of the online certification charts.

http://usa.autodesk....m-requirements/

http://usa.autodesk....&linkID=9242259

This post has been edited by nonseq: 03 May 2012 - 06:20 AM

[Nuke61]

I think what Linux is missing most of all for the desktop are some compelling applications that are NOT available on Windows or OS X. Top notch applications, for my needs, were the driving force behind my switch from Windows to OS X. I didn't switch because I liked Apple, or liked Steve Jobs, or hated Microsoft -- computers are a practical matter for me, and I couldn't care less if something I'm using is Open Source or not. I still use Windows in a VM for the same reason... there are some applications that are on Windows that do not have good OS X alternatives. There are OS X alternatives that are "good enough" -- but that's not good enough for me. Additionally, a great deal of good Linux software is also available for Windows and/or OS X, so even then, it's not really a reason to switch to Linux. For example, for sound file editing I use Audacity in OS X. A few years ago I installed and ran a Linux distro along with building a Hackintosh to try out OS X, and simply found software bundled with OS X to be superior to what I could get for Linux at the time, with some exceptions that were available cross-platform (Audacity being one example). I just don't think many people will switch their OS based on the OS itself. They switch, like me, because there's software on the other platform that fits their needs better than what they're using today. Even being free, with free software, wasn't enough of a factor to switch from Windows when I was LOOKING for a change. If cost were a large factor, I probably would have switched to Linux, but frankly, it wasn't, so I went with what I thought was the best software for my uses.