Linux Replacements for Your Favorite Windows Apps
Posted 10 April 2008 - 10:05 PM
For that matter, VMware, VirtualBox both have Windows and Linux versions.
There are hundreds of replacements for Notepad. Vim/GVIM is my preference. Why is it even listed? Of course, vim runs over a telnet or ssh session.
Eclipse and jEdit are nice alternatives for Windows based IDEs, and they run in Windows, too.
Adobe Flex and Flex SDK works under Linux just fine. Flash 8 works under Linux under Wine. Several other Adobe CS2 level applications run under Wine.
Visual Source Safe? Utter garbage. Use SVN. It also runs under Windows, and they have a nice shell wrapper for Windows called 'TortoiseSVN'.
GCC instead of Visual Studio? Sure, why not? And gdb is actually quite usable when you get used to it, though there are dozens of GUI wrappers for it.
Windows Server 2008? Windows Web Server 2003? Microsoft SQL Server 2005? ASP.NET? Pay thousands of dollars for Microsoft licenses with limited connections and CPUs, or go with the web standard LAMP (Linux/Apache/MySQL/Perl|PHP|Python) for free with no limits at all, ever.
BASH instead of CMD? Do you have any idea how anemic CMD is compared to even ancient versions of SH?
Replace 'Partition Magic' (RIP - eaten and KILLED BY Symantec) with GParted Live CD
Replace 'Norton Ghost' (Recent version guts came from PowerQuest Drive Image) with CloneZilla Live CD
Replacement for defrag software? YOU NEVER NEED IT under Linux with an EXT2 or EXT3 file system.
Posted 11 April 2008 - 03:00 AM
Posted 11 April 2008 - 03:07 AM
But, OK, for the sake of discussion, I'm a long time Windows user thinking of doing what you suggest, replacing these two major applications
Here's the first thing that hits me on the GNUcash site:
"To install GnuCash on other platforms (other than Windows), users will need Gnome 2, guile, and slib. Neither the currently used swig nor the previously used g-wrap packages are needed anymore when compiling from tarball or when installing a binary."
Huh? I can't imagine what the message is going to say that tells me how to install Linux first.
GnuCash does not seem to have the budget and tax planning features of Quicken either (based on the web site list of features).
Posted 11 April 2008 - 04:25 AM
And there's Gramps, which is preferable, because it's native Linux.
Posted 11 April 2008 - 06:26 AM
Posted 11 April 2008 - 07:10 AM
Thank you, thank you, thank you for including OpenOffice.org!
I would recommend KDE-PIM as a superb alternative to Outlook.
I use the KDE 3.5x version that is bundled with Kubuntu 7.10, but once KDE 4.1 hits the street, KDE-PIM (and other apps, such as Amarok) will have direct Windows ports. Hopefully more people will be introduced to the free/open source alternatives to many native, commercial Windows apps - which will make an eventual switch to Linux all that much easier.
While I think that Amarok is amazing (and is my player of choice), I think Rhythmbox is also worthy of a mention.
Also, for ripping CDs I use KAudioCreator (KDE app, bundled with Kubuntu). It works perfectly for me.
(The tricky part with ripping CDs to MP3 in a Linux environment - or listening to those MP3s - is not the apps used to perform the ripping; rather, it is finding/installing the MP3 encoders/decoders, which, due to licensing restrictions, are often not installed by default and can sometimes be difficult to find. Fortunately, most distros are making inclusion of these encoders/decoders easier and easier.)
I also agree with the previous commenter that Firefox is much preferable for anyone switching from Windows to Linux - or at least, from native Windows apps to free/open-source alternatives in general.
Another pretty important activity in Windows is transferring pictures from a camera, and organizing those pictures. For this activity, I use DigiKam (another Kubuntu-bundled application). DigiKam has a powerful file-transfer "wizard" that is invoked upon connection of a camera (or insertion of removable media) containing pictures, and is a fantastic photo/album organization/management application.
Posted 11 April 2008 - 08:15 AM
Would your definition of "mainstream" not include the many governmental and educational institutions that are implementing across-the-board Linux installations (in many cases, replacing Windows systems in the process)?
Would your definition of "mainstream" not include the many large PC manufacturers who now offer Linux pre-installation options?
Would your definition of "mainstream" not include the low-end PC market, which includes PCs with hardware that is incapable of running Windows Vista, and for which Linux-based PCs have sold very well for Wal-Mart, Sears, etc.?
Would your definition of "mainstream" not include the nascent ultra-low cost PC (ULCPC) market, which not only is growing, and not only represents perhaps the largest PC market segment, by far, but also is absolutely dominated by Linux? The incredibly popular EeePC? Linux (with a WinXP option now available). The OLPC? Linux.
Need I go on?
Linux adoption may take longer in the US, but the US no longer dominates the PC market.
Europe is becoming more and more anti-Microsoft. Asia and South America are already starting to tilt toward Linux. Microsoft is being forced to offer Windows (and Office) licenses in these markets for pennies on the dollar - which means that, with growth in these markets, Microsoft's business model (which absolutely depends upon OEM installations of - and thus, licenses for - Windows and Office) will crumble.
More anecdotally, Linux is already mainstream for me. My transition took place within the past year, and it has been painless. My wife, who is no computer power user, is perfectly comfortable using my Linux machine to do anything she needs.
Your statement may have been true ten years ago, but it is absolutely, almost verifiably false today.
Posted 11 April 2008 - 10:30 AM
I'm sorry, I don't deal in ad hominem. Do you care to add anything constructive to the discussion? My guess is that you do not, given that such logical fallacy is the last resort of one without a substantive response.
Posted 11 April 2008 - 12:03 PM
version of Ubuntu is worse than Windows Vista in terms of stability. Some people have no problems with Linux, but when
you do have problems they are incredibly time consuming to fix.
Posted 11 April 2008 - 12:28 PM
As for time consuming problems, when there is a problem, ANY problem on ANY OS can be time consuming. I used to spend endless hours troubleshooting Windows problems back in the day before I started just backing up the Windows paritition and saving my work to a different partition. All solutions for all OS problems take 15 minutes after that.
Another issue is a new and unfamiliar OS. Sure, you know to launch regedit and search for a registry key named after a bad file extension in Windows, but where to find the identical association in Linux? It can take a little while to track the setting down. This is because you just don't know where it was put or how it was done. Vista moved things around compared to XP and made EVERY simple act annoying as I had to go hunting around for the relevent settings.
One could probably make similar claims that any city they haven't been to before is laid out badly because they can't find their way around.
Another app for Linux: GOOGLE EARTH. Native. Runs great. Who could live without Google Earth?
Posted 11 April 2008 - 12:56 PM
However, I disagree that setting up and using Linux is "not that easy or straightforward." Most of the major distros now have multiple options, the most common being the LiveCD, which can be run as boot medium to allow for test-driving the OS without making any changes to the hard drive. I've only ever run an Ubuntu LiveCD, so if the experience is different with other distros, I am unaware; that said, with the Ubuntu LiveCD, installation is as simple as clicking on "Install Ubuntu", and following on-screen prompts that are easier and more straight-forward than those for a Windows installation.
From that point, it is simply a matter of booting up, logging in, and finding oneself looking at a desktop that is not all that different from the Windows desktop. From there, it is simply a matter of knowing that "Firefox" is the internet browser rather than "Internet Explorer", etc.
Also, relatively speaking, a "whole lot more" people are using Linux. Two years ago, Linux desktop use hardly registered a blip on the radar. Now, at a minimum, Linux desktop use is 2%. That number is no blockbuster, but the growth is both solid and sustainable.