Vista, is just a phase

[uselessmind]

Lots of things.

So if i wanted to change to another OS and keep my current hardware, can i run Cubase and all my plugins under Linux without any problems?

[warp x]

pfff, just read the whole thread..
I got a spare laptop a couple of months ago, its's a PIV 2.8, 1.25 G RAM.
I installed Ubuntu Feisty and XP on it. Both work beautifully, and seem to have comparable speed. (And a comparable number of issues btw)
It's a nice addition to my G4 Powerbook that is my main machine.

As for voting with your wallet, I can only say that for me as a professional musician Linux is no option at this point. Some software seems to have a lot of potential (EXT, Ardour, Canorus, Zyn, ReZound) but they are simply not at the point where I could use them for all my needs.
Point is; I like to tweak a little bit, but in the end you have to get your work done, so you don't want to invest too much time in making stuff work.
So, if I would go for audio on Linux, that would be voting against my own wallet.
OTOH, I do do almost all my mail, webstuff etc etc on Feisty; I would never use XP to go on the net, with all the protection that it needs. Way too much hassle for me.
Also, I don't understand the "can I run Cunbase on Linux" attitude. If you change OS, you're probably going to have to change apps here and there.

[hseiken]

...uselessmind...it's not just a clever handle...

"Can I put silverware in the microwave?"

[uselessmind]

Also, I don't understand the "can I run Cunbase on Linux" attitude. If you change OS, you're probably going to have to change apps here and there.

Ok, so what about Logic, Sonar, Samplitude or Live, any of those?

"Can I put silverware in the microwave?"

Wow, the great microwave analogy.
Here's mine then:
Dude1: "Hey Dude2 your Microwave is shit."
Dude2: "Actually it works just fine."
Dude1: "Shut up, if you use it nonstop for a year it will blow up"
Dude2: "Wow, that can't be good, i'll better get one just like yours.I can still do the same things with it as i could with my old one, right?"
Dude1: "Idiot! Of course not, its only compatible with a bowl half filled with water. But that's all you need anyway and it is technically much better than your old Microwave."

[warp x]

Also, I don't understand the "can I run Cunbase on Linux" attitude. If you change OS, you're probably going to have to change apps here and there.

Ok, so what about Logic, Sonar, Samplitude or Live, any of those?

none of those

[stk]

..and out come the hippies and the Gates apologists. Somebody, please, release the lions already.

[duncanparsons]

...uselessmind...it's not just a clever handle...

"Can I put silverware in the microwave?"

hmm...

how do you boil an egg in a microwave?

You wrap it in silverfoil, put it in a glass of water so that it is completely covered, cook on full heat. You'll have to experiment to get the timing right.

The wife of a friend of mine wrote the microwave cookbook for Toshiba in the 80's, and that was the way they recommend to do it...



DSP

btw: Linux won't boil an egg, but excess heat from your CPU from Vista will happily fry one

[legendCNCD]

"actually used vista.." well I worked a couple a weeks ago at worlds largest supplier of magazine/printing software firm.
We did tests because Vista is the next target, actually the speed varies between platforms. For some reason, newest dualcore athlon64's were dog slow in some operations, compared to this laptop, which is much slower in cpu.

It is coming, maybe usable in SP1 (or SP2 ), but it is and I hope the drivers do get mature soon..

[Lunch Money]

Wow, the great microwave analogy.
Here's mine then:
Dude1: "Hey Dude2 your Microwave is shit."
Dude2: "Actually it works just fine."
Dude1: "Shut up, if you use it nonstop for a year it will blow up"
Dude2: "Wow, that can't be good, i'll better get one just like yours.I can still do the same things with it as i could with my old one, right?"
Dude1: "Idiot! Of course not, its only compatible with a bowl half filled with water. But that's all you need anyway and it is technically much better than your old Microwave."

Not bad as far as retorts go.

I hope most people know that 80 percent of windows products will run in linux under WINE (a windows emulator). You can always do that.

Well, WINE is NOT an emulator, first of all. (just being smartarsed... even though it's true...) and there's a discrepancy right there: "80%" and "you can always" -- always is 100%, not 80%.

Linux is absolutely bombproof. It doesn't need anti-virus software. Everything that modifies the kernel require a user adim password. I've never seen linux crash. Every update of the different linux distros require LESS memory to run than the previous...that's the whole point.

More prepackaged and misguided Linux rhetoric, I'm afraid. Linux isn't absolutely bombproof-- I've had it crash plenty. But if you're talking strictly about viruses, there simply hasn't been the "will" yet. You give someone the will (a huge userbase) and they'll find a way. Linux-based servers have not been impervious to mischief in the past, and I daresay they're more secure than a desktop. I'm quite positive that you're correct that Linux is MORE secure than Windows, but it's a false logic to say that it's "bombproof". There are ways to obtain admin privs remotely, and there are scripts/viruses which do not require admin privs to be disruptive.

"Every update..." is just pulled out of your butt, I'm afraid. Linux distros are as prone to bloat as any piece of software, and you can see this in Ubuntu amongst other distros. I have second-hand information (I couldn't be arsed looking for a citation because it seems self-evident) that Linus has remarked on the growth of the kernel. If the kernel is growing, it can't take up less memory....

I mean dude, come on. It's one thing to notice Linux's comparative efficiency (though, throw Beryl on there and watch your crap slow right down) but it's another thing to make nonsensical and unsupported claims. Linux distros, especially the popular ones, are growing, not shrinking.

Every new version of windows requires more memory and system resources than the previous version to run properly (if you can call anything microsoft does "proper"). I feel bad for the children of people who work at microsoft. They must live in some distorted micocosm of software stupidity.

Well, I'm quite positive that "software stupidity" isn't genetic or even social. Working for a stupid company doesn't make one stupid. If it did, well over half of KvR would be f**ked. In any event, Linux is definitely much more efficient with resources. You can probably still throw a modern distro onto a P3 machine (without Beryl) and expect it to run. On the other hand, you will NOT get satisfactory performance out of Mandriva, Ubuntu, Fedora, or other alternatives on a P2 or a P1. You could, with older distros. So it's obviously requiring more memory, resources, and muscle, too. Which is only natural. So, I'm not suggesting that MS and Linux are equal in this regard (Linux ftw), but you're not going to score any points by disseminating pure rhetoric without evidence or critical thought.

Greg

[Radek]

Wow, the great microwave analogy.
Here's mine then:
Dude1: "Hey Dude2 your Microwave is shit."
Dude2: "Actually it works just fine."
Dude1: "Shut up, if you use it nonstop for a year it will blow up"
Dude2: "Wow, that can't be good, i'll better get one just like yours.I can still do the same things with it as i could with my old one, right?"
Dude1: "Idiot! Of course not, its only compatible with a bowl half filled with water. But that's all you need anyway and it is technically much better than your old Microwave."

Not bad as far as retorts go.

I hope most people know that 80 percent of windows products will run in linux under WINE (a windows emulator). You can always do that.

Well, WINE is NOT an emulator, first of all. (just being smartarsed... even though it's true...) and there's a discrepancy right there: "80%" and "you can always" -- always is 100%, not 80%.

And this number for Vista is 100 percent?

From every version of MS's os a backward compatibility never has been
staying 100 percent.

Linux is absolutely bombproof. It doesn't need anti-virus software. Everything that modifies the kernel require a user adim password. I've never seen linux crash. Every update of the different linux distros require LESS memory to run than the previous...that's the whole point.

More prepackaged and misguided Linux rhetoric, I'm afraid. Linux isn't absolutely bombproof-- I've had it crash plenty. But if you're talking strictly about viruses, there simply hasn't been the "will" yet. You give someone the will (a huge userbase) and they'll find a way. Linux-based servers have not been impervious to mischief in the past, and I daresay they're more secure than a desktop. I'm quite positive that you're correct that Linux is MORE secure than Windows, but it's a false logic to say that it's "bombproof". There are ways to obtain admin privs remotely, and there are scripts/viruses which do not require admin privs to be disruptive.

Not entirely true:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/security/s ... nux/#myth1

Considering Apache is dominating over IIS in absolute numbers why it's the latter is much
more compromised?
There are structural advantages why Unixes (including Linux) are more robust.

"Every update..." is just pulled out of your butt, I'm afraid. Linux distros are as prone to bloat as any piece of software, and you can see this in Ubuntu amongst other distros. I have second-hand information (I couldn't be arsed looking for a citation because it seems self-evident) that Linus has remarked on the growth of the kernel. If the kernel is growing, it can't take up less memory....

My root directory contains 3.3GB of data as now. That is having lots of applications installed.
What the hell a Linux can be run (and functional) from a just CD. This is showing bloat?

I mean dude, come on. It's one thing to notice Linux's comparative efficiency (though, throw Beryl on there and watch your crap slow right down) but it's another thing to make nonsensical and unsupported claims. Linux distros, especially the popular ones, are growing, not shrinking.

Nothing is forced thought - you can have a distro without any web browser installed for an example.
(unlike windows where you got IE put into os itself basically - how great for a security...)

[Lunch Money]

And this number for Vista is 100 percent?

Never said it was. I countered an argument; I did not put forth a new one. Especially not about Vista, which I've already said I'm going to avoid like the plague.

Straw Man #1

Not entirely true:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/security/s ... nux/#myth1

Considering Apache is dominating over IIS in absolute numbers why it's the latter is much
more compromised?
There are structural advantages why Unixes (including Linux) are more robust.

First of all, you need to quote from an unbiased source if you're going to quote. Second of all, I already agreed that Linux was more robust. My complaint was with the word "bombproof", not with the fact that Linux is more secure (which I believe it is). FWIW, though, try Googling a bit as though you're trying to prove MY point-- "Linux virus myth" or somesuch search term. I can't remember what I entered (it was going to be a list of links in my last post, but I didn't want to have to read them so I just didn't bother) but there were a few, at a glance, who supported exactly my statement. And the statement, to reiterate, wasn't that Windows is glorious or equal, but simply that Linux isn't "bombproof".

Straw Man #2

My root directory contains 3.3GB of data as now. That is having lots of applications installed.
What the hell a Linux can be run (and functional) from a just CD. This is showing bloat?

Maybe, if that same distro once occupied only 1.5 GB of data, including apps. And Linux distros that can be run from CD are analogous to Windows "lite" installs that can be run from CD. I was clearly talking specifically about "mainstream" desktop distros. Which are growing. You really need to learn to read what people write.

Straw Man #3

Nothing is forced thought - you can have a distro without any web browser installed for an example.
(unlike windows where you got IE put into os itself basically - how great for a security...)

Of course, but the point isn't that you're "forced." "Forced" is just semantics. To run a desktop distribution of Linux with all the expected features, you're going to have to go a lot further than a "minimal" install. I mean, I don't give a crap if IE is forced onto every Windows install since I use Opera-- but in any event, security issues aside (red herring #1) many Linux distros come bundled with not one but two or three browsers, not one but two or three office suites, not one but two or three image editing apps, etc.

You're not "forced" to use them or even install them, but we're trying to compare apples to apples here. I have never denied that Linux has more potential for compactness, I have simply argued that the poster I was addressing was using rhetoric and nothing more. And I especially didn't say anything about Linux "forcing" anything on you (straw man #4). If anything, I wish they would include MORE things, as long as they would therefore work properly with my hardware.

---

Your post didn't actually address anything I said at all, and yet you presented it as though it did. That's a mighty collection of straw men... I'm sure there are no crows raiding your crops.

Greg

[warp x]

bombproof

I just had a crash with Feisty 1 hour ago

[Radek]

First of all, you need to quote from an unbiased source if you're going to quote. Second of all, I already agreed that Linux was more robust. My complaint was with the word "bombproof", not with the fact that Linux is more secure (which I believe it is). FWIW, though, try Googling a bit as though you're trying to prove MY point-- "Linux virus myth" or somesuch search term. I can't remember what I entered (it was going to be a list of links in my last post, but I didn't want to have to read them so I just didn't bother) but there were a few, at a glance, who supported exactly my statement. And the statement, to reiterate, wasn't that Windows is glorious or equal, but simply that Linux isn't "bombproof".

Nothing is "bombproof" it's just a claim of being more robust in the case of Linux.
There are very good architectural reasons why it can be.

Bigger absolute numbers of Apache are a fact:
http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_s ... urvey.html

Yet it doesn't get hacked as much as IIS - where goes the claim of something being less
of a target because of its smaller absolute numbers? Perhaps things aren't such easy
and there is more to that?

Of course, but the point isn't that you're "forced." "Forced" is just semantics. To run a desktop distribution of Linux with all the expected features, you're going to have to go a lot further than a "minimal" install. I mean, I don't give a crap if IE is forced onto every Windows install since I use Opera-- but in any event, security issues aside (red herring #1) many Linux distros come bundled with not one but two or three browsers, not one but two or three office suites, not one but two or three image editing apps, etc.

No. You are forced to have IE loaded even if you aren't using it for your personal
web browsing. You shouldn't give "a crap" because if IE get compromised then possible a whole
os gets compromised. It's a situation which can not happen on Linux because apps aren't
tied so much to an os.

Why it's so? Because MS has to defend against claims of monopolistic practices hence
IE has to (albeit it's technically a nonsense) to "start be a part of windows".

I see politics in GNU and Linux words as well however there is much more done on
technical merits than just one's company politics. And in the end a company if it
can use its power to extract more money from its customers (lack of competition,
lock ins, forced hardware and software upgrades) it will do.

The difference is there are dozens Linux vendors and there is always an ability
to fork. How it does look in Windows world?

[glokraw]

@ lunchmoney, and other brave souls with linux on a second machine: a treat...

open 3 instances of zynaddsubfx, in the first, one of the Rhodes
patches, in the second, one of the Pad patches, and in the third, one of the Arpeggios...connect them with qjackctl, now play some music on your midi keyboard, or vkeybd

EDIT to get to the banks, click the 'Instrument" menu, choose "Show Instrument Bank", and click the little black triangle widget that shows up atop the screen that opened, its next to the 'Refresh Bank' button, 19 banks will be listed, each with a dozen or so sounds, give or take...END EDIT

the Rhodes gives you attack, the pad gives you sustain, and the Arpeggio fills in the release, post if you like the sounds, or ones you devise, from different banks...

For newbies, the two simple commands

jackd -d alsa -r 44100& vkeybd

qjackctl& zynaddsubfx

will start this off. qjackctl is just a nice visual patchbay, with a pane for audio, and another for midi. (and zynaddsubfx also has its larger built in keyboard, press the VK button)

A way to defeat command-line phobia is to have a couple extra shells on your taskbar, with differing icons as desired, and just hit the up-arrow key to load the above commands, as they will be remembered, after using them once.

For example, one of my shells up-arrow-key-presses just starts the command

jackd -d alsa -r 44100& wine REAPER/reaper.exe, the second press is

qjackctl& vsthost highlife.dll

so I can have two different hosts at once, and route their output through jack...

simple enough, since my degree is not in rocket science

[hseiken]

okay, so here it is, again! No details, this is fact, of which you're free to look up:

Linux has better performance, Windows looks better. The End. Everyone agrees.

Also, Windows has the edge of familiarity. Today, I had mentioned (I'm in the military, btw) that I couldn't believe the military relies so much on Windows to a girl in my division, while she was fiddling around with Outlook (look up security issues that have been fixed and still exist with THAT one...). She said, "What do you mean?" I was like, "Well, you'd think that the military would take their security and stability a bit more seriously and use something more industrial and practical with high response time and efficiency along with better security, if not outright their own custom OS for inter-military operations." She said, "You don't think windows is good?" I had to be honest. "Nope, I the military really missed the boat on that one." "Do you use windows?" "Nope, not anymore." "What do you use?" "Linux." "Oh my god, linux?! What can you do with that? Isn't that like just a bit of text on screen or something?"

She seemed completely suprised and probably didn't believe me when I said that it did have a windows-like interface and you could do any daily task on Linux that you can on Windows...maybe a misconception by the majority of the 'light' user public is that there IS NOTHING ELSE out there except windows...