Sign In
Register
Help
If you are attempting to run one copy of the desktop version of windows on the server and attempting to avoid the Windows license fee on all the desktops in the location, Microsoft would not consider you a client. You only become a client if you purchase a site license with a volume equal to or greater than the number of machines that will be running the Windows OS, or an individual license for each machine, such as you get when you purchase a machine with Windows pre-installed.
If the desktop machines are already running a legally licensed copy of windows, then you do not have a problem. However, if you have 500 desktop machines that have no Widows license and are running another OS, and you are attempting to distribute a desktop version of Windows from the server to avoid the fees, then you have a legal problem.
Most corporate installations I have seen, and I admit it has only been a few, are using PC's running Windows as smart terminals. The applications are on the desktop and the data on the server. They do this to reduce the network flow as it is better to have a 2 MB data file pulled down from the server than a 30 GB application followed by the 2 MB file.
However, this whole question could be better answered by asking the legal staff at Redmond if it is legal or not. My feeling is that they will say no. If they say yes, then have at it.
The desktop version of Windows was designed and licensed for installation on one machine and used by one person at a time. Yes the NT based version of Windows is designed as a multi-user OS, but not at the same time.
Linux useful(less)ness
MultiQuote
#102
CharlesB 
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 31
- Joined: 11-November 08
Posted 21 December 2008 - 12:40 AM
rgreen4 said:
The desktop version of Windows was designed and licensed for installation on one machine and used by one person at a time. Yes the NT based version of Windows is designed as a multi-user OS, but not at the same time.
Na-Na-Na-Na-NAH! Linux can! :-P
Linux was designed and licensed to be used by one or many people at any one time. Linux is a true multi-user platform.
#103
JaywalkerExtraordinaire
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 227
- Joined: 11-December 08
- Location:crossing street
Posted 21 December 2008 - 01:10 AM
{quote}If you are attempting to run one copy of the desktop version of windows on the server and attempting to avoid the Windows license fee on all the desktops in the location, Microsoft would not consider you a client.{quote}
I'm not talking about using thin clients to avoid license fees. I was addressing your statement about Microsoft not allowing Windows to be distributed via the network.
{quote}Most corporate installations I have seen, and I admit it has only been a few, are using PC's running Windows as smart terminals. The applications are on the desktop and the data on the server. They do this to reduce the network flow as it is better to have a 2 MB data file pulled down from the server than a 30 GB application followed by the 2 MB file. {quote}
I think that's a typical setup. However, more and more companies are finding that the expense of the extra energy required by those smart clients offsets any cost savings from reduced network traffic. There are other advantages to thin clients, but high energy costs are helping to drive the trend towards green computing, and thin clients are one of the solutions being implemented towards that end.
While internet speeds are not yet fast enough to support large scale migration from local applications to web based applications, intranet speeds often are sufficient to allow people to do real work from thin clients without any significant reduction in productivity. If Microsoft stands in the way of that progress, companies will migrate away from Windows, largely towards Linux.
I'm not talking about using thin clients to avoid license fees. I was addressing your statement about Microsoft not allowing Windows to be distributed via the network.
{quote}Most corporate installations I have seen, and I admit it has only been a few, are using PC's running Windows as smart terminals. The applications are on the desktop and the data on the server. They do this to reduce the network flow as it is better to have a 2 MB data file pulled down from the server than a 30 GB application followed by the 2 MB file. {quote}
I think that's a typical setup. However, more and more companies are finding that the expense of the extra energy required by those smart clients offsets any cost savings from reduced network traffic. There are other advantages to thin clients, but high energy costs are helping to drive the trend towards green computing, and thin clients are one of the solutions being implemented towards that end.
While internet speeds are not yet fast enough to support large scale migration from local applications to web based applications, intranet speeds often are sufficient to allow people to do real work from thin clients without any significant reduction in productivity. If Microsoft stands in the way of that progress, companies will migrate away from Windows, largely towards Linux.
#104
CharlesB
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 31
- Joined: 11-November 08
Posted 21 December 2008 - 01:30 AM
rgreen4,
Here's a little tidbit to chew on:
"Targeting multi-user public computing environments, Userful enables a Linux PC to connect up to ten monitors, giving each user the experience of being connected to a standalone computer. Using Userful's "1-Box" approach, up to ten users can browse the Internet, send email, and run applications from one computer, with each user's monitor-based "workstation" behaving like an independent PC."
I have no idea who "Userful" is, but the point is Linux can do this and has been doing it for sometime now. It's 2008, almost 2009, and Microsoft Windows cannot accomplish this yet? What about Windows Server? Can it handle that kind of tasks? And people PAY for this software? O_O
CharlesB
Here's a little tidbit to chew on:
"Targeting multi-user public computing environments, Userful enables a Linux PC to connect up to ten monitors, giving each user the experience of being connected to a standalone computer. Using Userful's "1-Box" approach, up to ten users can browse the Internet, send email, and run applications from one computer, with each user's monitor-based "workstation" behaving like an independent PC."
I have no idea who "Userful" is, but the point is Linux can do this and has been doing it for sometime now. It's 2008, almost 2009, and Microsoft Windows cannot accomplish this yet? What about Windows Server? Can it handle that kind of tasks? And people PAY for this software? O_O
CharlesB
#106
dragon69
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 361
- Joined: 03-February 07
- Location:SK. Canada
Posted 21 December 2008 - 07:12 AM
but in linux you never get the patented ( by micro$oft lol) BSOD THAT IS A WINDOZE ONLY EXPERIENCE
just kidding but in linux i have not had 1% of the trouble i have had with micro$oft products (weather it by hardware
or software as they tend to push everything out early to save money and get you to work for them for free to fix their buggy products )
so your point of
just kidding but in linux i have not had 1% of the trouble i have had with micro$oft products (weather it by hardware
or software as they tend to push everything out early to save money and get you to work for them for free to fix their buggy products )
so your point of
#107
BAMT
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 262
- Joined: 25-June 08
- Location:United States
Posted 21 December 2008 - 07:21 AM
rgreen4 is correct. It is in violation of the Windows license for more than one user to use the same "Software" at the same time; I had once read the XP Pro license. Very boring, but important. Therefore, you cannot use the same image, with the same license key, to boot more than one machine at a time.
#109
Evildave
- Expert
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,549
- Joined: 24-January 08
Posted 21 December 2008 - 03:06 PM
A couple of things after reviewing this topic.
1. The OP mentions he upgraded from Win98! Vista, and probably even XP would be a hopeless for that upgrade, but Linux seems to run OK on that hardware. What is 'useless' about getting all the most 'modern' OS features on your existing computer, and software updates that Microsoft terminated long ago for Win98? Especially when many of these 'modern' features, like security were already there for decades?
2. A quick web search turns up suppliers of pre-assembled, tested Linux machines. I like the EEE PC for a 'real' portable. Lightweight, tiny, long run time, robust and cheap as dirt. Something most notebooks are not. If you just check your email and browse the web on the road (or in bed), $300 will get you a computer. Ships with Linux. Only the newer, far more expensive versions come with a stripped-down version of XP. Of course, Linux isn't stripped down, and Ubuntu will run on them if you don't like the Linux they come with.
Open the box, plug it in, and go.
www.google.com/search?q=Linux+Computer
3. Sure, you lose some 'compatibility' using Linux. According to Symantec, 65% of software 'in the wild' that is deployed on Windows machines is now malware. Over a million different kinds to choose from. You know, I don't mind 'not being compatible' with that particular 2/3 of Windows applications.
[http://www.pcworld.com/article/144279/malwarecountblowspast1millionmark.html]
4. SUPPORT? Google is your SUPPORT. Free. If you can type your error into a web search, or describe the problem/symptoms with keywords, you can almost always find the solution without ANY delay. No waiting on a call list. No hearing about what a 'valuable customer' you are in a recorded loop, no getting charged dollars a minute to listen to some guy in Asia slowly read a checklist at you in Engrish. If you can't find it, ask on an Ubuntu forum. People answer.
5. That multiple keyboard/mouse/monitor client actually does sound sweet. If you have 100 people on phones just pecking crap into forms, you could buy, maintain, supply uninterrupted power and administrate ten PCs, or 100 PCs. A class of 30 students, buy three or four computers, or 31. Take your pick. Web client terminals in a coffee shop? Heck, 10 little flat screen monitors cost less than one PC. For the cost of two or three workstations, get ten. You could buy the 15" TFT monitors in bulk for less than $75 each. USB keyboard/mouse for $20 each if you're a spendthrift. 20 ports worth of USB hubs for the seats for $50~$75, versus 10 ports' worth of LAN switch. So all you need to do is make one big PC box full of monitor outputs. I see many multi-head video cards, and even some 4-head video cards, and motherboards that support multiple PCI/PCI Express cards. You'd probably want to go for a multi-core CPU at the same time, and good cooling. You could probably build the core box for $2000, including a fat UPS to keep the computer 'safe'. Compare that to ten UPS or a big, central UPS, and the power requirements of running 10 separate PCs in a room would need two circuit breakers, because that's over 2KW versus 500 watts for one computer and 10 small LCD monitors. Cheaper power bill. About $3,000 to build it, and throw in a fat power strip. Any way I work out ten seats, even with EEE PC computers, it ends up costing more or doing less for the same cost. Probably set large groups up around a single round table. Fewer desks.
Another significant use would be 'sharing' one computer between two people. A notebook has a mousepad and keyboard. It is often plugged into an external monitor, mouse and keyboard. Someone comes to visit, one can use the external KVM and one can use the built-in KVM. Flip the notebook around and pull up a chair on the other side of the desk. 'Share and enjoy'.
...
Nope, the topic will never, ever end, because the ignorance of Windows users is boundless, and us cool Linux users are elite. :)
1. The OP mentions he upgraded from Win98! Vista, and probably even XP would be a hopeless for that upgrade, but Linux seems to run OK on that hardware. What is 'useless' about getting all the most 'modern' OS features on your existing computer, and software updates that Microsoft terminated long ago for Win98? Especially when many of these 'modern' features, like security were already there for decades?
2. A quick web search turns up suppliers of pre-assembled, tested Linux machines. I like the EEE PC for a 'real' portable. Lightweight, tiny, long run time, robust and cheap as dirt. Something most notebooks are not. If you just check your email and browse the web on the road (or in bed), $300 will get you a computer. Ships with Linux. Only the newer, far more expensive versions come with a stripped-down version of XP. Of course, Linux isn't stripped down, and Ubuntu will run on them if you don't like the Linux they come with.
Open the box, plug it in, and go.
www.google.com/search?q=Linux+Computer
3. Sure, you lose some 'compatibility' using Linux. According to Symantec, 65% of software 'in the wild' that is deployed on Windows machines is now malware. Over a million different kinds to choose from. You know, I don't mind 'not being compatible' with that particular 2/3 of Windows applications.
[http://www.pcworld.com/article/144279/malwarecountblowspast1millionmark.html]
4. SUPPORT? Google is your SUPPORT. Free. If you can type your error into a web search, or describe the problem/symptoms with keywords, you can almost always find the solution without ANY delay. No waiting on a call list. No hearing about what a 'valuable customer' you are in a recorded loop, no getting charged dollars a minute to listen to some guy in Asia slowly read a checklist at you in Engrish. If you can't find it, ask on an Ubuntu forum. People answer.
5. That multiple keyboard/mouse/monitor client actually does sound sweet. If you have 100 people on phones just pecking crap into forms, you could buy, maintain, supply uninterrupted power and administrate ten PCs, or 100 PCs. A class of 30 students, buy three or four computers, or 31. Take your pick. Web client terminals in a coffee shop? Heck, 10 little flat screen monitors cost less than one PC. For the cost of two or three workstations, get ten. You could buy the 15" TFT monitors in bulk for less than $75 each. USB keyboard/mouse for $20 each if you're a spendthrift. 20 ports worth of USB hubs for the seats for $50~$75, versus 10 ports' worth of LAN switch. So all you need to do is make one big PC box full of monitor outputs. I see many multi-head video cards, and even some 4-head video cards, and motherboards that support multiple PCI/PCI Express cards. You'd probably want to go for a multi-core CPU at the same time, and good cooling. You could probably build the core box for $2000, including a fat UPS to keep the computer 'safe'. Compare that to ten UPS or a big, central UPS, and the power requirements of running 10 separate PCs in a room would need two circuit breakers, because that's over 2KW versus 500 watts for one computer and 10 small LCD monitors. Cheaper power bill. About $3,000 to build it, and throw in a fat power strip. Any way I work out ten seats, even with EEE PC computers, it ends up costing more or doing less for the same cost. Probably set large groups up around a single round table. Fewer desks.
Another significant use would be 'sharing' one computer between two people. A notebook has a mousepad and keyboard. It is often plugged into an external monitor, mouse and keyboard. Someone comes to visit, one can use the external KVM and one can use the built-in KVM. Flip the notebook around and pull up a chair on the other side of the desk. 'Share and enjoy'.
...
Nope, the topic will never, ever end, because the ignorance of Windows users is boundless, and us cool Linux users are elite. :)
#111
CharlesB
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 31
- Joined: 11-November 08
Posted 21 December 2008 - 09:27 PM
Evildave said:
"Nope, the topic will never, ever end, because the ignorance of Windows users is boundless, and us cool Linux users are elite."
Those goofy Window's users think it's an insult calling us that. I for one like being part of 'the elite'.
#112
Evildave
- Expert
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,549
- Joined: 24-January 08
Posted 21 December 2008 - 10:22 PM
Oh, and don't forget 'smarter'! They always complain what 'rocket scientists' we have to be to download and burn a 'live' ISO image, boot it and click 'Install'.
And we're frugal, though the word I usually hear is 'cheap'.
Like someone offers something for $500, with several $500 upgrades, and strict licensing to only use it ONCE, when right next to him is someone else giving away something better in every way for free, with free upgrades, and you can give it away for free yourself.
It is such a difficult choice.
I hope all those Windoze Lusers enjoy paying to 'Upgrade' to Windows 7 to fix Vista's bugs. Heck, most of 'em will just buy another whole PC and chuck the 'old' one into the trash. Can't be bothered to figure out how to boot an update disk, and the update probably won't work with their 'old' system, anyway. Some of them will doubtless PAY for the Windows update DVD, then PAY for another computer when they foul the first one up and believe it's 'broken', because Microsoft can't help them bring it back because something went off the Asian guy's checklist where he could 'blame hardware'.
You have to admit, Microsoft's business model of pandering to clueless, ignorant fools really pays off. Just herd the sheeple towards the shearing stations and crank up the music to drown out the screaming. The sheeple have been through this horror so many times, they think it's the only natural way.
And we're frugal, though the word I usually hear is 'cheap'.
Like someone offers something for $500, with several $500 upgrades, and strict licensing to only use it ONCE, when right next to him is someone else giving away something better in every way for free, with free upgrades, and you can give it away for free yourself.
It is such a difficult choice.
I hope all those Windoze Lusers enjoy paying to 'Upgrade' to Windows 7 to fix Vista's bugs. Heck, most of 'em will just buy another whole PC and chuck the 'old' one into the trash. Can't be bothered to figure out how to boot an update disk, and the update probably won't work with their 'old' system, anyway. Some of them will doubtless PAY for the Windows update DVD, then PAY for another computer when they foul the first one up and believe it's 'broken', because Microsoft can't help them bring it back because something went off the Asian guy's checklist where he could 'blame hardware'.
You have to admit, Microsoft's business model of pandering to clueless, ignorant fools really pays off. Just herd the sheeple towards the shearing stations and crank up the music to drown out the screaming. The sheeple have been through this horror so many times, they think it's the only natural way.
#113
CharlesB
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 31
- Joined: 11-November 08
Posted 22 December 2008 - 12:18 AM
Evildave said:
Oh, and don't forget 'smarter'! They always complain what 'rocket scientists' we have to be to download and burn a 'live' ISO image, boot it and click 'Install'.
And we're frugal, though the word I usually hear is 'cheap'.
Like someone offers something for $500, with several $500 upgrades, and strict licensing to only use it ONCE, when right next to him is someone else giving away something better in every way for free, with free upgrades, and you can give it away for free yourself.
It is such a difficult choice.
I hope all those Windoze Lusers enjoy paying to 'Upgrade' to Windows 7 to fix Vista's bugs. Heck, most of 'em will just buy another whole PC and chuck the 'old' one into the trash. Can't be bothered to figure out how to boot an update disk, and the update probably won't work with their 'old' system, anyway. Some of them will doubtless PAY for the Windows update DVD, then PAY for another computer when they foul the first one up and believe it's 'broken', because Microsoft can't help them bring it back because something went off the Asian guy's checklist where he could 'blame hardware'.
You have to admit, Microsoft's business model of pandering to clueless, ignorant fools really pays off. Just herd the sheeple towards the shearing stations and crank up the music to drown out the screaming. The sheeple have been through this horror so many times, they think it's the only natural way.
And we're frugal, though the word I usually hear is 'cheap'.
Like someone offers something for $500, with several $500 upgrades, and strict licensing to only use it ONCE, when right next to him is someone else giving away something better in every way for free, with free upgrades, and you can give it away for free yourself.
It is such a difficult choice.
I hope all those Windoze Lusers enjoy paying to 'Upgrade' to Windows 7 to fix Vista's bugs. Heck, most of 'em will just buy another whole PC and chuck the 'old' one into the trash. Can't be bothered to figure out how to boot an update disk, and the update probably won't work with their 'old' system, anyway. Some of them will doubtless PAY for the Windows update DVD, then PAY for another computer when they foul the first one up and believe it's 'broken', because Microsoft can't help them bring it back because something went off the Asian guy's checklist where he could 'blame hardware'.
You have to admit, Microsoft's business model of pandering to clueless, ignorant fools really pays off. Just herd the sheeple towards the shearing stations and crank up the music to drown out the screaming. The sheeple have been through this horror so many times, they think it's the only natural way.
Preach it, Brother!! Tell it like it is!! AMEN! Hallelujah!!!!
Repent Window-sinners! For the trash pile of wasted computers upon this earth is blood on your hands. Repent Window-sinners, and accept Linux into your heart drives!
#114
jimric
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 05-December 08
Posted 22 December 2008 - 05:02 AM
CharlesB wrote:
"Preach it, Brother!! Tell it like it is!! AMEN! Hallelujah!!!!
Repent Window-sinners! For the trash pile of wasted computers upon this earth is blood on your hands. Repent Window-sinners, and accept Linux into your heart drives!"
Those Window -sinners have a very short "window of time to repent"make the switch before it's too late!!!!!!
I for one have been using Linux for several years now and love it!
I started using yellowdog linux on a mac,then switched to ubuntu and have been using it since.
"Preach it, Brother!! Tell it like it is!! AMEN! Hallelujah!!!!
Repent Window-sinners! For the trash pile of wasted computers upon this earth is blood on your hands. Repent Window-sinners, and accept Linux into your heart drives!"
Those Window -sinners have a very short "window of time to repent"make the switch before it's too late!!!!!!
I for one have been using Linux for several years now and love it!
I started using yellowdog linux on a mac,then switched to ubuntu and have been using it since.
#115
CharlesB
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 31
- Joined: 11-November 08
Posted 22 December 2008 - 05:35 AM
No, Linux will be around for them for a long time. Linux isn't going away. I have a cd-burner, and I'm not afraid to use it. I have a 100-pk of cd-r discs, so if anybody wants a free Live CD of Linux (in my local area), they can have one. It's never too late. Got and old PC, don't throw it away. Put Linux on it, and let your kids use it, or give it away to some low income family.
#116
dragon69
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 361
- Joined: 03-February 07
- Location:SK. Canada
Posted 22 December 2008 - 07:14 AM
jimric what version of yellow dog did you last use ? have you tried version 6 ? what are the pros and cons of yellow dog?
i have not rtied yellow dog yet ( their is a local computer store that has classes in it but) and was thinking of trying it out and i have a decent computer so it should handle it easily ( x2 4200 with 2 gb ddr2@667 on a msi motherboard). think i will check out the yellow dog web site
good luck and take care
chuck
i have not rtied yellow dog yet ( their is a local computer store that has classes in it but) and was thinking of trying it out and i have a decent computer so it should handle it easily ( x2 4200 with 2 gb ddr2@667 on a msi motherboard). think i will check out the yellow dog web site
good luck and take care
chuck
#118
Evildave
- Expert
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,549
- Joined: 24-January 08
Posted 22 December 2008 - 11:14 AM
Yellow Dog seems to specialize in the non-Intel CPUs.
Yellow Dog, Ubuntu, Fedora and OpenSUSE also run on the PS3. Just be sure and track down the PS3 build, not the PC build. So if you want to use your PS3 as a desktop machine, burn that ISO, install it to the hard drive and get busy. (Yes, it still plays PS3 games just fine, and doing this is fully supported by Sony, though the OS its self is not.)
That's one 'problem' with Linux, admittedly. So many platforms to specialize in. Different versions have been 'top dog' for the PC platform at different times, too. So there's a lot of noise about which one to get that confuses people.
Ubuntu/Debian is on top now mostly because Ubuntu has gone out of their way to market their branch of Debian and make it easier for the 'normal folks' out here, and still kept it free.
Picking a Linux is sort of like buying a GMC truck versus a Chevrolet one. They both come off the same assembly line, but have different default badges and factory installed options. Exactly the same thing under the hoods, and any version can be configured up just like any other if you want to spend the time doing it.
The difference comes in Linux versions is all in how they elected to configure it and what kinds of tools are installed by default to manage that. Some leaner versions have just the one tool, 'vi' for the configuration, and an assumed knowledge of where the configuration scripts are.
This is one reason why Linux is so embeddable. It can be stripped down to a floppy disk size and still be functional. Can you boot a windows floppy disk and start browsing the web and downloading files? With some of these floppies, you can. Admittedly you're browsing with 'lynx', and downloading with wget, but that's WAY better than nothing. Heck, if you're a Windows user who uses the command line, get WGET. It rocks.
www.linuxlinks.com/Distributions/Floppy/
Many current Linux distros (such as Ubuntu) will boot directly off the CD. Download an ISO, burn it to a CDR, boot it, and there's Linux right in front of you, fully running in all its glory, without installing anything. See how much of your PC will work without touching a thing. Go into Mozilla and google any issues you see for simple solutions. Decide whether it's worth your bother. The main thing that 'goes wrong', especially on notebook PCs is the wireless card will have proprietary drivers (i.e. LOCKED INTO WINDOWS ONLY). This isn't much of an issue. Install 'ndiswrapper' and download the Windows driver and tell ndiswrapper to install the Windows driver, and most retarded wireless cards will start working. Or spend $20~$75 on another wireless adapter. They're not very expensive, if you made an unwise purchase. Even if you don't install Linux, you can use it as a 'rescue disk' to get your files next time Windows craps its self.
And you'll discover that you free up a LOT of space on older machines. A relatively small Linux partition will run Linux and a ton of the productivity software, because everything is smaller. You don't get DVD installations of open source software. It takes a bloated company like Microsoft or Adobe to make something as trivial as a PDF reader consume 100MB. OpenOffice is 'huge', consuming almost 100MB for a full install, but compare that to the multiple GIGAbytes that M$ Office needs for a full install, and doesn't really do anything more.
This is why getting an EEE PC with a SSD is a waste if you get it with XP (this is a STRIPPED DOWN version of XP!). The computer will boot, but there's really not any room to install any bloated 'popular' Windoze software on it and have room for your own files, too. Install Office? What are you going to UNINSTALL to make room? Whereas the Linux version comes with a ton of applications installed, many more available, and has tons of free space for your work and music, on exactly the same SSD.
Yet another reason (besides pure performance and compatibility) that Linux is great for your older PC. Got a 'tiny' 20GB hard drive that Windows alone takes half of before you can install your first app? Linux will be SWIMMING in free space with all of the productivity apps installed by default. Only have 256MB of RAM on that old VAIO? Not a problem. You can make it a speed demon. Got 32GB of RAM and 8 CPUs? 64 bit Linux will make use of that, AND all of the APPS will, too. And it will still cost you ZERO.
Heck, let's take it a bit further. Need to host a web site? Linux has NO upper limit on users and sockets and CPUs and storage for that FREE price.
Microsoft Server 2004 by 'connections'. What's that mean? They charge for internal network server accounts. Do you want to spend $4,000 to have 25 users connect to your server, when you could have unlimited ones connect for free with Linux/Samba? And don't forget paying for your 'upgrades' and 'support'. What kind of RETARD would go for that 'deal'?
[http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/pricing.mspx]
Microsoft has 'such a deal' for Internet connectivity at $399 because they need to broaden their horizons to the less mentally disabled to sell Windows as an OS on the web. After all, they can show an ignorant moron what a deal it is compared to the internal networking product. Never mind if they 'win' they'll just crank the price up and change the licensing so your next 'upgrade' to fix all those security holes will cost a fortune once you're locked into their garbage. It's easier to spread FUD and talk 'compatibility' when the price SEEMS lower. Of course, all those hidden costs start mounting up right away. Gotta buy the server for EVERY instance of server. You need to set up a blade server to keep up with traffic, you need to buy that OS for EVERY BLADE. Gotta buy Microsoft's proprietary scripting and database software. Gotta buy however many seats of Microsoft's proprietary 'development kit' for your web developers. Gotta get everybody 'Microsoft Certified' and buy the support contract! Next thing you know, you're laying off productive bodies because you're paying THEIR wages to Microsoft! Just keep throwing money at the problem! That will fix it!
Then of course, you have 'Windows Terminal Server'. That's right. All the crack heads who complain about Linux having a nice command line without 'X' running at all, or that works equally fast within X, unlike Microsoft's command prompt, neglect to mention what a 'Premium' Microsoft thinks a Windows server without a GUI desktop (i.e. without the Windows) is.
Yellow Dog, Ubuntu, Fedora and OpenSUSE also run on the PS3. Just be sure and track down the PS3 build, not the PC build. So if you want to use your PS3 as a desktop machine, burn that ISO, install it to the hard drive and get busy. (Yes, it still plays PS3 games just fine, and doing this is fully supported by Sony, though the OS its self is not.)
That's one 'problem' with Linux, admittedly. So many platforms to specialize in. Different versions have been 'top dog' for the PC platform at different times, too. So there's a lot of noise about which one to get that confuses people.
Ubuntu/Debian is on top now mostly because Ubuntu has gone out of their way to market their branch of Debian and make it easier for the 'normal folks' out here, and still kept it free.
Picking a Linux is sort of like buying a GMC truck versus a Chevrolet one. They both come off the same assembly line, but have different default badges and factory installed options. Exactly the same thing under the hoods, and any version can be configured up just like any other if you want to spend the time doing it.
The difference comes in Linux versions is all in how they elected to configure it and what kinds of tools are installed by default to manage that. Some leaner versions have just the one tool, 'vi' for the configuration, and an assumed knowledge of where the configuration scripts are.
This is one reason why Linux is so embeddable. It can be stripped down to a floppy disk size and still be functional. Can you boot a windows floppy disk and start browsing the web and downloading files? With some of these floppies, you can. Admittedly you're browsing with 'lynx', and downloading with wget, but that's WAY better than nothing. Heck, if you're a Windows user who uses the command line, get WGET. It rocks.
www.linuxlinks.com/Distributions/Floppy/
Many current Linux distros (such as Ubuntu) will boot directly off the CD. Download an ISO, burn it to a CDR, boot it, and there's Linux right in front of you, fully running in all its glory, without installing anything. See how much of your PC will work without touching a thing. Go into Mozilla and google any issues you see for simple solutions. Decide whether it's worth your bother. The main thing that 'goes wrong', especially on notebook PCs is the wireless card will have proprietary drivers (i.e. LOCKED INTO WINDOWS ONLY). This isn't much of an issue. Install 'ndiswrapper' and download the Windows driver and tell ndiswrapper to install the Windows driver, and most retarded wireless cards will start working. Or spend $20~$75 on another wireless adapter. They're not very expensive, if you made an unwise purchase. Even if you don't install Linux, you can use it as a 'rescue disk' to get your files next time Windows craps its self.
And you'll discover that you free up a LOT of space on older machines. A relatively small Linux partition will run Linux and a ton of the productivity software, because everything is smaller. You don't get DVD installations of open source software. It takes a bloated company like Microsoft or Adobe to make something as trivial as a PDF reader consume 100MB. OpenOffice is 'huge', consuming almost 100MB for a full install, but compare that to the multiple GIGAbytes that M$ Office needs for a full install, and doesn't really do anything more.
This is why getting an EEE PC with a SSD is a waste if you get it with XP (this is a STRIPPED DOWN version of XP!). The computer will boot, but there's really not any room to install any bloated 'popular' Windoze software on it and have room for your own files, too. Install Office? What are you going to UNINSTALL to make room? Whereas the Linux version comes with a ton of applications installed, many more available, and has tons of free space for your work and music, on exactly the same SSD.
Yet another reason (besides pure performance and compatibility) that Linux is great for your older PC. Got a 'tiny' 20GB hard drive that Windows alone takes half of before you can install your first app? Linux will be SWIMMING in free space with all of the productivity apps installed by default. Only have 256MB of RAM on that old VAIO? Not a problem. You can make it a speed demon. Got 32GB of RAM and 8 CPUs? 64 bit Linux will make use of that, AND all of the APPS will, too. And it will still cost you ZERO.
Heck, let's take it a bit further. Need to host a web site? Linux has NO upper limit on users and sockets and CPUs and storage for that FREE price.
Microsoft Server 2004 by 'connections'. What's that mean? They charge for internal network server accounts. Do you want to spend $4,000 to have 25 users connect to your server, when you could have unlimited ones connect for free with Linux/Samba? And don't forget paying for your 'upgrades' and 'support'. What kind of RETARD would go for that 'deal'?
[http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/pricing.mspx]
Microsoft has 'such a deal' for Internet connectivity at $399 because they need to broaden their horizons to the less mentally disabled to sell Windows as an OS on the web. After all, they can show an ignorant moron what a deal it is compared to the internal networking product. Never mind if they 'win' they'll just crank the price up and change the licensing so your next 'upgrade' to fix all those security holes will cost a fortune once you're locked into their garbage. It's easier to spread FUD and talk 'compatibility' when the price SEEMS lower. Of course, all those hidden costs start mounting up right away. Gotta buy the server for EVERY instance of server. You need to set up a blade server to keep up with traffic, you need to buy that OS for EVERY BLADE. Gotta buy Microsoft's proprietary scripting and database software. Gotta buy however many seats of Microsoft's proprietary 'development kit' for your web developers. Gotta get everybody 'Microsoft Certified' and buy the support contract! Next thing you know, you're laying off productive bodies because you're paying THEIR wages to Microsoft! Just keep throwing money at the problem! That will fix it!
Then of course, you have 'Windows Terminal Server'. That's right. All the crack heads who complain about Linux having a nice command line without 'X' running at all, or that works equally fast within X, unlike Microsoft's command prompt, neglect to mention what a 'Premium' Microsoft thinks a Windows server without a GUI desktop (i.e. without the Windows) is.
