Unix Popularity [Archive]

Oko

07-02-2008, 02:32 AM

I think it is really hard to say what part of the market share belong to Unix and Unix like system due to the fact that most of them are not proprietary therefore unreported.
Also personally I could only talk about U.S. with some degree of competence where I have been leaving for the past 13 years.

In my personal experience the Unix market share on the desktop is big 0. The only places in U. S. which still use Unix for desktops are some of the Research Universities stuck with old SUN thin clients and Ultra workstations which run SUN OS or some version of Solaris (ok I have seen few blades but that is it). I still have to see a single place which runs any BSD on its desktops and trust me I have been on lots of Universities in U. S. The BSD market share on the desktop in private hands is no more than 10-20 thousands. That has not been the case when I moved to U. S. In mid 90s
most universities where running SUN OS , Digital Unix, or Irix (O happy days!!!). They started switching to Linux and Windows in late 90s.

The Linux market share on the desktop overall is no more then 0.5%. It is true that
nearly 100% research labs at research Universities in States run Linux. The problem is that there are fewer than 100 Universities in U. S. that could be considered research.
All other 2400 institutions of higher education in U. S. which are not research mostly run Windows. Even Research Universities mostly run Windows on desktops of its non research stuff, libraries, and business offices.
Linux on the privately owned computers is more often than BSD but I would estimate that less than 200 000 privately owned desktops in States run Linux( I do not count multi boot). The Linux desktops in corporations with the exception of proprietary RedHat and some OpenSUSE installations is rarity.

The servers are the other story. U.S. server market is probably at least 60 billion dollars. I would guess that 50-60% of servers in this country run Linux and BSD. Solaris is probably 20%. The other servers are happily running Windows. Linux in U. S. is much more popular and
if I would have to make a wild guess only 10-15% of non Windows non Solaris servers are on BSDs based
and the rest is Linux. Most Linux corporate servers in my experience run proprietary RedHat.

I think that this estimates vary a lot from country to country. I have heard stories that nearly 85% of all servers in Russia run FreeBSD. I am ready to believe it as I have never seen any Russian guy running anything else but BSD. This is Wester Europe based forum so there are much more competent people to give estimate for those countries.
If I have to guess the Linux runs probably on 80% of servers in countries like Germany. I think that the market share of BSD is probably less than 5%. I have no clue about the desktop market.

In countries like Serbia where I was born nearly 95% of all servers run Windows. The rest is Linux. The BSD community in Serbia mostly consist of compatriots who live elsewhere like me. On the Desktop I would guess than there are no more than 300 BSD machines in Serbia. I think that 99% desktops in Serbia run Windows. I think that the same can be said for most Serbia like countries in Europe and probably elsewhere.

ninjatux

07-02-2008, 04:13 AM

In my personal experience the Unix market share on the desktop is big 0.

I find this hard to accept because Mac OS X market share is roughly 8%, unless people don't want to count that as Unix. And, I always thought about 4 to 5% was divied up among the traditional Unix. Now, the server market stuff is no surprise. That's one way Unix survives, the other is being Open Source. The mobile and embedded sectors are Unix's.

And, yeah I know statistics can lie, which is why I don't care so much. I see all the activity around Open Source and have a good grasp at how popular this stuff is and how much potential it has.

Oko

07-02-2008, 04:34 AM

I find this hard to accept because Mac OS X market share is roughly 8%, unless people don't want to count that as Unix. And, I always thought about 4 to 5% was divied up among the traditional Unix. .
Sorry, I do not count Mac as Unix due to the fact that an average Mac user is about as computer literate as Windows user. Most people whom I know, who use Mac can not even find the shell (Hint: Check utilities). I completely agree with your estimate of the Mac desktop market share but I respectfully disagree with your estimate of traditional Unix. At the University of Arizona where I work out of 15-20 computer labs that I have seen with probably no less than 1000 desktop computers only one in the engineering building has
one SUN Ultra 10 workstation and two SUN blades 100 running Solaris 9. Hardly 5% of the market.

In the last year on bi-weekly auctions of old computer equipment from University of Arizona I have seen two O2 SGI work stations and one DEC alpha station. I have not seen a single SUN machine. So much about non
Intel hardware and traditional Unix. As I said before I still have to see a single i386 desktop running BSD other than the one in my office:D

Since I am mathematician and computer enthusiast I can give you one real information not just my story.
I have personally checked the servers at top 30 U. S. mathematics departments. With the exception of math department at Berkeley which has 4 FreeBSD, 2 Solaris, and one Linux server everyone else is running Linux. Mostly Ubuntu or Fedora on desktops and mostly Debian on Servers.

I forgot. Yes, Stanford math department runs Solaris besides Linux.

scottro

07-02-2008, 05:42 AM

Technically, yes, you'd have to count the Mac. However, a.) there is Oko's point, that the average Mac user isn't really computer literate, and b.) it's not going to help in the sense of adding numbers to Linux/BSD users to impress hardware/software manufacturers.

That's the biggest point (to *me*) about the numbers game. The more people using Linux and BSD, the more likely hardware makers are apt to say, gee, well, OK, we better make this part usable for them.
Even if it's a server market, it's numbers, and it means that part X is usable with Linux and so you can probably get it for your workstation.
So, in that sense, I don't think of Mac. (Actually, I didn't think of it till you, correctly, mentioned it, as it is a certified Unix, for better or worse.)

However, in the context of this discussion, I would say its numbers don't really count to our advantage--and, again, Oko's comment about Mac users.

ninjatux

07-02-2008, 05:44 AM

I guess the reason I count Mac OS X as Unix is because I use it as such. Right now, I have five zsh sessions running in screen in a fully customized Xterm on my MacBook Pro. I testing pkgsrc yesterday. Right now, I'm adjusting the Gimmix configure script to look for intltool in the right place.

Well, that's truly reassuring, the information about the math departments. If it's hardly five percent of the desktop market, then that's still very good, considering who Unix is going up against, a thousand pound gorilla that can start its own facts campaign that's based on crap.

I value the information you've presented. I'm going by statistics because I haven't had much chance to see what's actually going on out there. I'm heading off to college in August, JHU. I'll see what goes on there. I saw a lot of Mac users on campus when I was there for the tour. The only real experience I've had is from what my Dad tells me about his work as an Oracle DBA at the NJ state government. They use RHEL and Sun Solaris for their mainframe, and he's been trying to get some of the lesser machines converted to Linux too because they don't scale well under load on Windows.

I forgot to ask, but you said that server industry is about $60 billion dollars, at least in the US. I'd imagine that the desktop market is smaller no?

BSDfan666

07-02-2008, 05:57 AM

Oko

07-02-2008, 06:43 AM

I forgot to ask, but you said that server industry is about $60 billion dollars, at least in the US. I'd imagine that the desktop market is smaller no?

You would have to check about desktop market. I would be just guessing.

I think somebody mentioned but I definitely should repeat. Unix and *BSD in particular are masters of appliance market. Probably 70-80% of code in Cisco routers are from BSD. Most embedded device that you find anywhere from washing machine to your car run BSD code. You should check but I think that appliance market is bigger than server market. Probably about 100 billion dollars a year in U.S. alone I am sure that server and appliance market dwarfs desktop many times over.

I agree that Unix is on the rise but not on Desktops and Workstations. Twenty five years ago when there were 200 000 machines in this country 60% were Unix and the rest VAXs with its native VMS. Today is just Windows and little bit of OS X.

Best,
OKO

P.S. I apologize to a power Mac user. Yes body, you are running Unix but 99% of Apple users run GUI:rolleyes:. As I grow in the former socialist
country it took me a while to understand church of Apple as its hardware was always TOO EXPENSIVE for us. Unfortunately after Apple has switched from PPC architecture I can not say that I understand you any more. Paying
premium price for commodity Intel hardware with Ubuntish version of BSDs
seems like a very stiff price for a few extra drivers comparing to vanilla *BSDs. On another hand once I got to U.S. and to graduate school Apple was like a toy to me. I was surrounded by DEC, SGI, and SUN stations and I will cherish those times till the end of my life.

Oliver_H

07-02-2008, 12:08 PM

People who claim Mac OSX isn't Unix because it's users aren't aware of it being Unix is the worst reason ever.

Mac OS X is Unix, so the percentage of Unix workstations should include it...

I would have to agree scottro, Solaris is quite common on servers.. sill, BSD(Yes, OS X too..) and Linux are on the rise.

The Internet owes it's existence to Unix... ;)

Actually _using_ UNIX _as_ UNIX is something different than using a nice desktop and _advertising_ with UNIX '03 conformance. Apple hasn't been a UNIX or 'console'-company, it has always been a company which adheres the desktop.

---

The 8% market share (http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2008/07/01/mac-os-x-approaches-8-percent-market-share-in-june) _is not_ because of UNIX. By the way Apple market share in the early 80s was about 15%, with a steady decline until Jobs return in the 90s. The market share of Apple Mac OS is because of the desktop, the 'usability'. You wouldn't call Solaris a desktop-sucess because of its market share and the fact it's delivering a desktop too. So you have to differ between causes.

I don't know whether there is a domination of Solaris servers, we are using some of it and we're using some Apple machines for different work. In the end you will allways find heterogeneous environments and some business guys playing with numbers to sell their precious product. But we are using e.g. OpenBSD (firewall) too, like many companies I know of. But OpenBSD developers and users aren't very vocal, so you will hear about Mac everywhere, Linux this and that and of course Bills nightmare Windows. Different point of views to consider and if you don't want to sell something, burn the numbers and the marketing. Just use it, be happy and maybe flame for fun :D

scottro

07-02-2008, 12:09 PM

In answer to Oko's question as to, Why a Mac? I know that I've given this reason and others have said, 'Yes, me too."
In my case, I use Linux and FreeBSD for my desktops. (With a Win2k VM, only used to access my company's VPN.)
However, I steered my wife towards a Mac, despite the extra cost, because it's easier to support than is Windows--fewer viruses, trojans and the like. In this case, the extra cost probably saves me hours of time.

It's not completely safe of course, but it is still safer than Windows as malware writers still aim at MS targets--which makes sense, since it's almost certainly still 90 plus percent of the desktop market in the US.

Mac is making inroads and Vista is hurting them, but they are still the dominant desktop, as you've mentioned in your posts.

The only thing that really bothers me about Mac is that people forget their basic geometric proofs, if A=B then !A=!B is not necessarily correct. That is, MS is evil, Apple isn't MS, so people think Apple isn't evil. In some ways, they're even more evil than MS, they're just not as skilled at it, and are a bit better at hiding it.

For instance, their lower echalons are all quite nice and helpful--when we went to get her Mac, (at a flagship NYC store) we got a personal shopper, Mike, who was extremely helpful. The personal shopper was free of charge.

So things like that help their public image, though, as they increase in popularity, people are realizing it. Still, whether they're evil or not, it's (in general) easier to support a family member's Mac.

No, I don't have the time or energy to try to turn her towards Linux or BSD. Every time something didn't work, it would have been a major issue---as we all know, family members are the worst users.

Nirbo

07-02-2008, 12:31 PM

Even being a true UNIX, I would also be reluctant to include Apple market share in with Linux/BSD. particularly on the desktop.

In the end, it's all up to people's opinions though. It can be argued all you want, I'll probably not accept OSX as a "Desktop UNIX" unless I get much smarter (or much stupider.)

But when OSX makes up 8% of market share, and that number doesn't change when you remove or add all of the BSD/Darwin users it's simply not accurate to say, "UNIX makes up 8% of the desktop market." It's arguably correct, but it's still not right.

Just because 9/10 dentists recommend using a certain type of toothbrush it doesn't mean that the other one recommends eating rocks.

lvlamb

07-02-2008, 02:13 PM

Desktop statistics ...
what I see in large companies or administrations (and I don't think I exagerate) 80% of the screens run the screensaver 80% of the time.
These are run on complete PCs with floppy drive, HD, many with CDROM while these could run on thin clients.
Thin clients would spare fortunes in energy bills.

Now, seen frome the side of the employee, would he be given a keyboard, mouse and monitor, with a thin client integrated in the furniture or the display his first question will be to ask if he is considered inferior as he does not receives a "computer" like other people. Maybe his union has requirements.

Then, there are the licenses: most hardware manufacturers signed an agreement with MSFT to be authorized to install Windows. This agreement is binding a fee per CPU the manufacturer sells. So, the Windows license has been paid for in any case. Why not use it?

One license fee per CPU is the way MSFT gained dominance.
The fun is that it is completely illegal as, even if you build machines typically for other OSes, you still pay an unneeded license, and this is enrichment without a cause. Has been going so for more than 20 years.

ninjatux

07-02-2008, 04:36 PM

scottro, I do agree with you that in some ways Apple is worse than Microsoft. Apple tries to exercise control over its users in ways that Microsoft hasn't even tried, probably because it hasn't needed to. Forcing hardware on people who are only attracted to the operating system is pretty dirty tactic. This really confirms to me that Apple is a hardware company. They have the benefit of being able to market a good operating system and making it compatible with only their own computers, which really helps them in the hardware business.

Also, I do agree that Apple's market share didn't increase because OS X is Unix. Apple hasn't heavily marketed it as Unix because it doesn't matter to their current users or to their target customers. All most people need to know is that OS X is more stable than Windows and is easier to maintain than Windows. The usability bit would be nice to mention as well, but it's usually a hit or miss with people.

Like I said, I consider Mac OS X to be Unix because I use it as such, but saying that it isn't Unix because they user don't know that it is or they don't use it as such causes some more questions. Is Ubuntu really Unix (Unix-like...) since it really is the OS X of Linux? If you go on Ubuntu forums, you'll see so much misinformation and n00biness. I saw one thread in which Ubuntu users were arguing with a Debian user about how a GUI actually has a place on server, how a server should be running a GUI.

ocicat

07-02-2008, 05:03 PM

Also, I do agree that Apple's market share didn't increase because OS X is Unix.
The fact that OS X has roots in FreeBSD is incidental. Apple was in dire need of a stable operating system as they had a string of failures (First, Pink & Blue farmed out to Taligent, followed by Symphony...) throughout the '90's. One of the things that Jobs brought with him from NeXT was their hybrid Unix system based upon Carnegie-Mellon's Mach kernel with a FreeBSD 4.0 userland. Moreover, Jobs brought a number of NeXT employees who were knowledgeable about its inner workings, so this group formed the core of Apple's new OS group.

There was something of an effort in the earlier releases of OS X to attract technophiles given that the basis was essentially Unix, & it worked to a degree. A number of standard Unix applications still run on OS X, but Apple's culture is based on trendy stylistic issues rather than geeky internals. As long as it works, they are happy.

Given that Apple had the resources to pay for the certification, they are officially recognized as being an official Unix vendor by the Open Group:

www.opengroup.org/openbrand/certificates/1190p.pdf

...so they can pull out a pedigree if need be, but the company's goal is to perpetuate its brand of coolness, not technical focus.

scottro

07-02-2008, 06:18 PM

As for that thread on Ubuntu forums you mention, I believe that our own windependence was involved in that one--there's a thread about it somewhere on these forums.

drhowarddrfine

07-02-2008, 07:25 PM

Forcing hardware on people who are only attracted to the operating system is pretty dirty tactic.It's not.This really confirms to me that Apple is a hardware company.This is true, and they always have been. Some on Wall Street think this is a problem, though.
All most people need to know is that OS X is more stable than Windows and is easier to maintain than Windows. The usability bit would be nice to mention as well, but it's usually a hit or miss with people.The 'usability bit' IS the main feature of Apple and their main selling point.
If you go on Ubuntu forums, you'll see so much misinformation and n00biness.Any forum about a hobbyist accessible, popular topic will get such a collection. All the web development forums I visit, I can count on one hand the number of truly professional users that are there.

revzalot

07-02-2008, 07:38 PM

BSDfan666

07-02-2008, 07:47 PM

Well said revzalot :)

I had a brief stint with DOS in my early years, but I also played around with Minix and 386BSD. :)

revzalot

07-02-2008, 07:54 PM

Well said revzalot :)

I had a brief stint with DOS in my early years, but I also played around with Minix and 386BSD. :)

Now that's OG. It's unbelievable how unix evolved throughout the years and I still feel we haven't reached the top of its evolution. As hardware continues to improve, I feel unix will become more organic in the upcoming years. Come on we all watched the Matrix. ;)

Carpetsmoker

07-02-2008, 08:45 PM

This is a BSD/Unix forum ... and even here 50% of the visitors use Windows ...

ocicat

07-02-2008, 10:55 PM

Probably 70-80% of code in Cisco routers are from BSD. Most embedded device that you find anywhere from washing machine to your car run BSD code.
I suspect you are basing your assumption simply on the friendliness of the BSD license to business ventures, but these numbers are way off. A lot of commercial embedded work is done using vendors like Wind River, Green Hills Software, QNX, LynuxWorks, etc. As for Cisco's IOS, it is a monolithic proprietary layer which is not based on any of the *BSD's.

You may be thinking of Juniper who does base the underlying "OS" found on their routers on FreeBSD.

ninjatux

07-02-2008, 11:12 PM

For the unix minded, this a great era of Unix we are in now. We have so much flavors to play with and Apple of all companies has done an awesome job disguising unix in their OS. I'm glad they're going the Unix way because it just goes to show that Unix can also be used for non technical people. I remembered I started with DOS and I thought it was cool but when I discovered unix, it was like wow! I was in awe of the power, control, and complexity and I'm still learning new things everyday. I really don't care on the popularity as long as unix is here to stay and continue evolve.

I agree with you about Apple. I have some respect for Apple and some feelings of dislike for the too. Plus, they have cleverly disguised it. Some of the Unix elements to show. For example, the memory management system obviously has to be visible to the user. The lack of a registry among other things also make the experience great. There's just enough of Unix on the surface to give Mac OS X a good deal of credibility as a better alternative to Windows. Apple's use of Unix shows how flexible it is and how much longevity it has. I'm happy that Mac OS X is Unix, but many of the users don't do it justice. I know that bit, and it doesn't make me happy...oh well.

This is a BSD/Unix forum ... and even here 50% of the visitors use Windows ...

Well, that's sort of expected though. I'd imagine some of those users are just curious. Some of them might just be starting their Unix journey. I surfed forums much the same way when I started hunting back in late 2003.

QNX is a Unix. I'm not familiar with the others.

Oliver_H

07-02-2008, 11:30 PM

>QNX is a Unix.

It's UNIX-like and today as much UNIX as Solaris is BSD (it was a fork in the early 80s - SunOS).

>Well, that's sort of expected though.

I don't think many users with Windows are looking for a UNIX like BSD or Solaris or they even know the term. But some users of this forum probably have to use Windows at work or they are using it at the laptop. I have to use Mac OS X, well so we will see sometimes Safari in the stats. I have been a member of DesktopBSD team for several years and I can tell you something: people are looking for the term Linux or desktop-os most of the time. Nobody asks about BSD, most of them even think about DesktopBSD/PC-BSD as some kind of a Linux-distro.

ninjatux

07-02-2008, 11:34 PM

Oliver_H

07-02-2008, 11:36 PM

>The BSD community is in a way, quite conservative and fairly small,

Yeah I like it, but it's time to break it. Would be a pity to see the decline of such a nice free UNIX derivative.

TerryP

07-03-2008, 01:09 AM

That's the biggest point (to *me*) about the numbers game. The more people using Linux and BSD, the more likely hardware makers are apt to say, gee, well, OK, we better make this part usable for them.

In all fairness, this more likely means available to Linux only without mucking around and more likely then not in the coming years to be binary only, like many drivers for Windows NT or OSX.

As stupid as it is, if most of the world would make like extremely stubborn GNUs and refuse to use any non-free as in 'freedom of speech' software, the world would be a much better place because companies would have to comply or go bankrupt.

Well, once society rebuilt itself from the inevitable collapse from removing most computers in the world from active service, the world would be a better place hehe lol.

Every time something didn't work, it would have been a major issue---as we all know, family members are the worst users.

I know that problem and feeling by heart ... And I'm single :\

JMJ_coder

07-03-2008, 01:19 AM

Hello,

I can tell you something: people are looking for the term Linux or desktop-os most of the time. Nobody asks about BSD, most of them even think about DesktopBSD/PC-BSD as some kind of a Linux-distro.

I would imagine that the vast majority of computer users think that there are three types of computers - those that run Windows, those that run Mac, those that run Linux. They are oblivious to other operating systems and probably even more oblivious to other hardware platforms than the i386 (though many Mac users will probably still be familiar with the ppc).

Think of what most computer users use their computers for: word processing, spreadsheet, presentations, web surfing, email, multimedia. They could care less about the underlying systems that make their modern computing possible. They could care less about the UNIX servers that allow them to download song after song and movie after movie. For the office applications, they only care about whoever they send it to being able to open it. They use their computers as a tool to work or play with and don't care how that tool is made or alternative tools.

I therefore think that *BSD popularity should be measured among those who don't merely use computers as a tool for something else, but among those whose pursuit is computers. And I think that UNIX popularity among that demographic would be at least 50% - but I am no statistician.

TerryP

07-03-2008, 01:53 AM

I would imagine that the vast majority of computer users think that there are three types of computers - those that run Windows, those that run Mac, those that run Linux. They are oblivious to other operating systems and probably even more oblivious to other hardware platforms than the i386 (though many Mac users will probably still be familiar with the ppc).

Outside of *nix or programming related circles, I've generally found most of the world to live in a "whats an operating system?" world -- or one in which computers means

Dell, Gateway, HP, etc running Windows XYZ and Mac suxors.

Actually find smart people and you will probably find people that understand what a punch card is, whether or not they used one.

(maybe my experience is this way because I mostly deal with non tech savory bunches rather then people who could out think me any second of the minute)

At the end of the day, most users just want it to freaking work without having to kick the sucker and could care less.

I do agree with the rest of your post though JMJ_coder.

Oliver_H

07-03-2008, 08:46 AM

>I would imagine that the vast majority of computer users think that there are three types of computers - those that run Windows, those that run Mac, those that run Linux. They are oblivious to other operating systems and probably even more oblivious to other hardware platforms than the i386 (though many Mac users will probably still be familiar with the ppc).

It depends on your surrounding environment. Of course I have something to do with beginners (DesktopBSD; teaching), but beginners who at least do know what they want. So apart from my mother I have usually nothing to do with people using their computer like some Gucci-bag. Even the Mac OS X users I work with are more scientifically orientied :-)

But it doesn't matter, important is their wish for knowledge. Then you can do something more and push them to a proper direction (Linux, BSD). In the end I just care about a *free* operating system, whether it's Linux or BSD. 'Free as in BSD' is my credo and proprietary software really sucks :-)

drhowarddrfine

07-04-2008, 04:20 PM

This is a BSD/Unix forum ... and even here 50% of the visitors use Windows ...

I have 5 computers running all the time. 4 use FreeBSD. The one I'm on now is a laptop with Windows. I just did that a month or so ago and the only reason is so I can watch Netflix and Hulu online, along with the occasional YouTube someone sends me when I go out of town. I have cygwin on it where I spend a lot of time.

Otherwise, I would have left FreeBSD on the notebook and that is the same reason I think you'll find a lot of Unix people running Windows.

drhowarddrfine

07-04-2008, 04:24 PM

Just to continue my thought. I consider Unix/BSD to still be the professional's operating system while Windows is the consumer operating system. Just like on a construction site you'll find Mac trucks and big Ford's doing the heavy lifting; not the little pickups or vans.

DrJ

07-04-2008, 06:01 PM

I consider Unix/BSD to still be the professional's operating system while Windows is the consumer operating system.
I think this is not right. Windows has professional tools that simply are not available on *nix. For example, try to find advanced image processing tools, proteomic spot-picking routines (and computational biology in general), good PDF manipulation tools (and that does not include pdfedit), electronic laboratory notebooks and lab automation, or even numerical simulation packages. Some are available on *nix, but the coverage is pretty spotty.

I'm not defending Windows, but *any* application area has good Windows software for professional applications. *nix cannot claim this with any honesty.

Carpetsmoker

07-04-2008, 06:19 PM

DrJ

07-04-2008, 06:23 PM

Agreed. I'm afraid that *nix gaining desktop traction is pretty much a lost cause (even though I use it personally).

BSDfan666

07-04-2008, 06:25 PM

DrJ

07-04-2008, 06:33 PM

If any of you have seen behind the scenes documentaries of movies, a lot of the people working on the CG effects are using Unix systems.
And how do I get those tools?

If one has the money to write software for one's application of choice, sure, go for *nix. If you rely on existing applications you are not well served by *nix on the desktop unless you use only comparatively simple software that is covered by OSS. Linux does have some more sophisticated things, but the coverage is still spotty.

JMJ_coder

07-04-2008, 06:35 PM

Hello,

That's stupid, UNIX isn't a single entity, a lot of Unix systems are designed for workstations... and Unix has always been and still is used on high power workstations. :rolleyes:

Yup, can anyone say CDE. :D

BSDfan666

07-04-2008, 06:39 PM

And how do I get those tools?

If one has the money to write software for one's application of choice, sure, go for *nix. If you rely on existing applications you are not well served by *nix on the desktop unless you use only comparatively simple software that is covered by OSS. Linux does have some more sophisticated things, but the coverage is still spotty.Unix has been historically proprietary, those applications are for in-house development, but that doesn't mean "Unix isn't a suitable operating system", It simply means you need to seek out the software you require.. because.. there is bound to be someone else with similar needs taking appropriate action. (Shut up and hack!). ;)

And why do you keep mentioning Linux?

Linux be damned! :cool:

Carpetsmoker

07-04-2008, 06:44 PM

That's stupid, UNIX isn't a single entity, a lot of Unix systems are designed for workstations... and Unix has always been and still is used on high power workstations. :rolleyes:

If any of you have seen behind the scenes documentaries of movies, a lot of the people working on the CG effects are using Unix systems. (If you have the Transformers movie, watch disk 2.).

I use OpenBSD on all my desktops, people may think it's strange.. but It's not, if anything it's improved my skills maintaining the OpenBSD servers at work.

I said desktop, not workstation, which is not the same.
I also didn't say unix os's are totally useless on the desktop, just that this is not what most unix systems are designed for.

I said desktop, not workstation, which is not the same.
I also didn't say unix os's are totally useless on the desktop, just that this is not what most unix systems are designed for.

JMJ_coder

07-04-2008, 06:48 PM

Hello,

I think this is not right. Windows has professional tools that simply are not available on *nix. For example, try to find advanced image processing tools, proteomic spot-picking routines (and computational biology in general), good PDF manipulation tools (and that does not include pdfedit), electronic laboratory notebooks and lab automation, or even numerical simulation packages. Some are available on *nix, but the coverage is pretty spotty.

I'm not defending Windows, but *any* application area has good Windows software for professional applications. *nix cannot claim this with any honesty.

And most of them aren't using Windows, either. Most graphical and artistic work is being done on the MAC (which is based on *BSD UNIX). ;)

DrJ

07-04-2008, 06:49 PM

Unix has been historically proprietary, those applications are for in-house development, but that doesn't mean "Unix isn't a suitable operating system"
I never said it was not suitable. My initial response was to the claim that Windows is a consumer operating system, whereas *nix is for professional applications. I disagree.
It simply means you need to seek out the software you require.. because.. there is bound to be someone else with similar needs taking appropriate action.
What you find is that applications are available when that is what interests the people who write applications. The more specialized those applications are, the less likely you are to find them.
(Shut up and hack!). ;)
Sorry, it is far more cost-effective to purchase an application for $10K than to try to write it myself.
And why do you keep mentioning Linux?
Simply because Linux has a much more complete software infrastructure. You can get things like LabView, VMware, Comsol Multiphysics and the like on Linux. You can't on BSD, or even Solaris unless you are running a SPARC.

DrJ

07-04-2008, 06:55 PM

And most of them aren't using Windows, either. Most graphical and artistic work is being done on the MAC (which is based on *BSD UNIX). ;)
Look at the applications I mentioned. They are heavy-duty scientific things, and not artistic ones. The Mac has penetrated some of these, but very incompletely.

Look, I have used BSD for over 25 years on a variety of workstations (and minicomputers!). I love the system. The lack of specialized software is a real problem for me, and it simply is not cost-effective to write my own for everything I need.

JMJ_coder

07-04-2008, 07:08 PM

Hello,

Look at the applications I mentioned. They are heavy-duty scientific things, and not artistic ones. The Mac has penetrated some of these, but very incompletely.

You mentioned both "advanced image processing tools" and "PDF manipulation tools" both of which are would be used primarily in artistic type environments (video editing labs, advertising firms, etc.). At least where I am, the printing business (that is advertising, book publishing, etc.) is almost exclusively MAC. Sure, they are using proprietary products (i.e., Quark Xpress), but they are running them on MACs.

And maybe this is a misconception on my part, but I also thought that the highest level of scientific computing, in Universities for Mathematics departments and NASA and nuclear physics labs, etc., ran UNIX - usually in huge superclusters - to do the heavy number crunching their disciplines required (think of where UNIX was first developed and evolved).

DrJ

07-04-2008, 07:19 PM

You mentioned both "advanced image processing tools" and "PDF manipulation tools" both of which are would be used primarily in artistic type environments (video editing labs, advertising firms, etc.).
Fair enough. The image processing I'm talking about are high bit-depth photomicrographs. The PDF files come about from using the scientific reference literature, which is exclusively PDF. Also, many of my grant applications require quite some massaging of the PDF files to fit with the submission packages (which do not run on BSD, BTW).
I also thought that the highest level of scientific computing ... usually in huge superclusters - to do the heavy number crunching their disciplines required (think of where UNIX was first developed and evolved).
That's right, but that is a very small part of what scientists of any flavor use computers for.

Unix was sold initially as a text-processing system for Bell Labs on the powerful PDP-7. The tools for that purpose are really very good, and I still use them.

ninjatux

07-05-2008, 12:06 AM

I don't agree with a lot of what's been said here, but people can use anything they want. To me, an operating system is software that provides a sound, correct framework to do anything you want. Most Unix flavors do provide such a framework, whereas Windows provides a broken one. Also, I'm not sure what your experiences have been DrJ, but most of the media industries around this area use Macs exclusively. That counts for something.

scottro

07-05-2008, 12:23 AM

Not that DrJ needs my support, but he is a real doctor involved in research, so I don't think he's speaking from ignorance here.

There's media and then there's biological research type media, which is a completely different thing.

ninjatux

07-05-2008, 12:30 AM

I must have missed that, but if DrJ's comments were referring to biological research, then I have absolutely no experience in that within the context of Unix or Windows. I can't speak accurately on that. Although, my goal is to work as a medical scientist, when I grow up, so we'll see what my experiences are then.

scottro

07-05-2008, 12:31 AM

I should add that that fact that I owe him money has nothing to do with my support of his views. :)

Anyway, to be serious...
Mac has always been the favorite of the multimedia--though ironically, often various TV station music videos wouldn't play on Mac. (Hi MTV? You fix that yet?)
I think that MS and Apple are probably equally evil--Apple's more insidious because it denies that it's evil.

Unfortunately, in the world, much of the time you will come across a situation where you have to use some sort of commercial software. The Shut up and hack answer is ok for hobbyists, but not for professionals who don't have the time or knowledge to do so.

ninjatux

07-05-2008, 12:36 AM

I don't have a problem with using commercial software. I'll do that on Unix if I have to, but I'd like to use a Unix as my operating system. I have a specific style of computing, and only Unix fits that style.

drhowarddrfine

07-05-2008, 12:37 AM

I think this is not right. Windows has professional tools that simply are not available on *nix.[I was talking of a user's point of view. In my example above, you won't find soccer mom taking the kids out in a Mac truck. Nor will you find soccer mom trying to install FreeBSD so she can shop online.

drhowarddrfine

07-05-2008, 12:48 AM

And how do I get those tools?

If one has the money to write software for one's application of choice, sure, go for *nix. If you rely on existing applications you are not well served by *nix on the desktop unless you use only comparatively simple software that is covered by OSS. Linux does have some more sophisticated things, but the coverage is still spotty.

Many of those tools are readily available off the shelf. Maya is the only name I remember off the top of my head but high level apps have long been available on Unix only. Also, most, if not all, high-end CG apps had their start on Unix.

phoenix

07-05-2008, 02:55 AM

In general, UNIX and UNIX-like OS's are more of a server OS, while Windows is more of a desktop OS.

This doesn't mean you can't use Windows as a server, or UNIX as a desktop, but it's not what it's optimized for.

Until you get into educational or enterprise settings, where you can dictate the software that the students/employees get to use; and where the software available on Unix-like systems covers what you need. ;)

Then, the network features of Unix-like systems, and X11 in particular, really come in handy.

For instance, the local school district doesn't run Windows in the elementary schools (with the exception of the odd office computer). And we have 4 secondary school that are Linux everywhere (with a couple of Windows VMs for Simply Accounting). With two more secondary schools going all Linux over the summer.

In total, we have around 5000 desktops in the district, and about 4000 of those are Debian, with the remaining slated to be converted to Debian over the next two years.

We put 1 uber-server (or two for the secondaries) into the school (dual-Opteron 2 GHz CPU, 4-8 GB RAM, 4x 500 GB HDs in RAID5 or RAID10, 2x gigabit NICs bonded together). Then put in $150 diskless workstations (no HD, no floppy, no CD-ROM, onboard graphics/NIC) for the staff and students. These boot off the network, mount all the system partitions read-only via NFS, and mount the /home partition read-write via NFS. Everything loads off the network, but runs locally. We can outfit a complete elementary school for under $20,000, including a computer lab, a library mini-lab, a computer in every classroom, the office computers, an LAT mini-lab, etc. All it requires is 100 Mbps from the client to the switch, gigabit between the switches, and dual-gigabit to the server (the secondaries have multi-gigabit links between switches).

All the software we need is available for Debian (CAD, programming, office apps, web browser, e-mail, educational games, etc), 95% or more with is zero-cost. Administration is all done via the network, to a single server in each school. Upgrades are done on the server, and all the clients pick them up automatically. Wake-on-Lan and SSH access allows us to turn on or off clients automatically. CUPS handles printing. We even have VNC enabled on the clients so that we can monitor their screens during helpdesk calls, or for teachers to monitor student stations (and we're working on broadcast VNC in the labs to replace data projectors).

It's taken 6 years to get to this point, starting with the elementaries, but this coming September will be the third year it's been in the secondaries, and by Sept 2010, there will be fewer than 100 Windows licenses in the district, mostly in virtual machines (and <60 Novell client licenses by the end of this month, with 0 by June 2009).

Unix-like systems may not be ready to take over the consumer/home desktop markets (although they have their uses there as well), but they are definitely ready to take over the educational desktop market. At least here in BC, Canada. We were the pioneers, but several other districts are following in our footsteps. :)

Just google for "diskless" "thin client" and "school district 73" for more information. ;)

BSDfan666

07-05-2008, 03:09 AM

That's really cool phoenix :)

Have the students had trouble adapting to the new environment? :)

EDIT: Seriously, love the last name... it has value. ;)

phoenix

07-05-2008, 03:42 AM

Nope. In fact, when we put it into the first elementary school, the grade 6 and 7 classes did English and Computer projects where they developed manuals and tutorials for the younger students. Some classes went so far as to make pamphlets and booklets (using screenshots, digital photos copied from cameras, Scribus for page layout, OpenOffice for text, GIMP and Krita for drawings, etc) that the school sold to other schools. Very, very, very few students complain ... as they now have working computers in the lab, with a helpdesk that the teachers can call when there are issues, and remote help via VNC. Problems are usually fixed while the student is still in the class, instead of waiting a couple weeks for one of the 2 elementary schools techs to get to their school (2 techs for 37 schools).

The students took to it like fish to water. They figured things out right away. It was the staff that had "issues" adapting (especially those who had developed software-version-specific curriculum and assignments, who didn't think it was their job to change/update it to work with OpenOffice or KOffice or whatnot).

My favourite story from that time deals with my sister (she's a penguin fanatic) and her discovering Tux as the Linux mascot. She went nuts over Linux (and Tux in particular). Then she graduated and moved on to grade 8, where everything was Windows XP. After the first week of school, she called to complain about the computers, about how they kept crashing, they never had 30 working computers in the lab, how she kept losing work in MS Office XP, and how boring everything was. And she demanded to know when we'd be bringing Tux into the school! Unfortunately for her, the summer after she graduated from grade 12, we converted her school to Linux. She still hasn't really forgiven me for that. :) And she still calls every now and then to complain about the college computers (running XP) and how she misses the Linux desktop she had in elementary school. :D She's very much a Windows user, now, though. I put together a laptop for her, and offered to put Linux on it, but she wanted Windows, as that's what they use at the college, and what's on the home computer.

TerryP

07-05-2008, 07:25 AM

That poor woman :\

silverback011

07-05-2008, 03:16 PM

I also thought that the highest level of scientific computing ... usually in huge superclusters - to do the heavy number crunching their disciplines required (think of where UNIX was first developed and evolved).

I am a little late into this discussion.

I am one of those persons who carries the title of nuclear physicist. I have the piece of paper collecting dust somewhere.

I work with a few labs. Specifically, Notre Dame, Yale, Berkeley, and Argonne National labs. I will get to add Pacific Northwest National Labs to that list if my trip next week goes well.

All of these labs use mostly Linux. In particular Red Hat variants. Some use enterprise (Yale) others use Scientific or Fedora. There are still some machines that run some older version of Unix that are being phased out. Argonne was using Solaris, but now they are migrating to Red Hat Enterprise the last time I was up there.

Yes, all of our processor intensive applications are run on Linux clusters. We are fortunate to have one here. These are generally used for theory modeling calculations.

From what I have seen is the main reason we use Linux is cost, and the availability of developer tools. Most of our software is custom made. We are not a large enough market to justify forming a company to make it for us. Also most of it was originally written in Unix, and we want to continue to use it instead of investing the time to re-write the code. In addition to that we would be very hesitant to spend money on software versus a new piece of equipment. To complicate things even further we often have to modify our programs to analyze the data for different situations. Although that situation is improving (see Root, no not root user it is a software program). Another thing you may notice is they generally install a version of Linux and leave it. I am using Red Hat 5.1 (not sure about that version number it uses Nautilus 1.0.4) on one of my work machines.

I should also mention that the vast majority of people still use Windows. Most people have a laptop that runs Windows or dual boots with Linux. Then there is the Linux desktop used for analysis and work. Windows is mainly used for Power Point and the Adobe products for work items.

I should also mention due to the power and affordability of laptops more and more people are shifting all their work with the exception of intensive calculations to exclusive use on their laptops. That way you can carry your work with you.

The secretarial and support staff all run Windows. In the administrative area is Windows dominant. Those admin guys insist on sending me Microsoft Word documents and then get irritated when they don't print out like they should, even though all I have is a Linux machine with a very old version of Open Office.

The bottom line is that we have to get work done and publish results. We use whatever will help us achieve this the best. In general we don't care about the software or who makes it as long as we can afford it and it gets the job done. We want it to work as quickly as possible as cheaply as possible.

Oko

07-05-2008, 05:28 PM

I think this is not right. Windows has professional tools that simply are not available on *nix. For example,
.
.
.
or even numerical simulation packages.

You do not know what are you talking about. There are four major numerical analysis packages out there. MatLab, Mathematica, FreeMat, and SciLab. First two are proprietary and the last two are open source. All four work far better on Unix than on Windows.

The most famous computer Algebra software of general nature is Maple which is coded on the base of Maxima (original 1969 MIT project).
Guess what. Maxima is developed before Windows even existed and it is released under GPL2 licence now. Maple again runs far better on Unix.
More specialized projects like GAP (computational group theory) REQUIRE
Unix to run.

100% of all machines used by faculty, researches, and graduate students
at the research Universities in U. S. run Linux, Solaris, and BSD (I listed them in popularity in descending order).
Are you saying that we do not use professional numerical tools?

Carpetsmoker

07-05-2008, 05:48 PM

There are also people who smoke and live to be 90.
So smoking isn't bad for your health?

ninjatux

07-05-2008, 05:48 PM

By the way, there's GNU Octave, which aims to be compatible with MatLab. It's really nice and easy to use, in my opinion.

DrJ

07-05-2008, 05:59 PM

By the way, there's GNU Octave, which aims to be compatible with MatLab. It's really nice and easy to use, in my opinion.
Right -- a friend of mine (Rawlings) wrote that package. Well, at least the initial versions, as it has grown substantially since he started it.

lvlamb

07-05-2008, 06:36 PM

Have a look at UWIN
http://www.research.att.com/sw/tools/uwin/
(internal development, now on Common Public License, is almost UNIX but they don't care about certification)
further,
WinXP and lower can download SFU for free from MSFT,
Server 2003, Vista Business|Premium have the SUA, just need to be enabled (both bsd44 based).

No need to dual boot a laptop to get both worlds.
Need Linux, have a look at coLinux: any Linux.
So, you boot Windows? Big deal :)

DrJ

07-05-2008, 06:37 PM

You do not know what are you talking about.
*sigh*

I do know what I am talking about, but this discussion is getting too personal. My initial response was prompted by the claim that Windows is for consumers, whereas *nix is for professional applications. My claim simply is that there are many more professional applications, on the desktop at least, on Windows than on *nix. That's true for OSX too, but it still does not have the penetration into many more specialized areas that Windows has. It is certainly true for the areas where I practice, and in spite of that I still use *nix for many things.

I grant freely that *nix can be sufficient for many endeavors, and if it is, more power to you. It simply is not for the kinds of things I do. And whenever I mention this, the chorus comes out of the woodwork, saying "you can too do this" or that, while overlooking the integration of the whole package.

For me, that is making 2D and 3D CAD drawings, solving rather large sets of PDEs (say, a few hundred) using the CAD drawings as the geometry input, optimizing the device through this, submitting the drawing to a clean room and to a laser fabricator to make the gizmos, obtaining real-time laboratory data (including photomicrographs and videos) to get the device performance, abstracting items from and rearranging PDF documents, writing the grants, and submitting grant applications through grants.gov. There's lots of other tasks involved, but this is the core of what I and my people do.

The software available for Linux can *almost* do the entire chain, but not quite -- there is nothing that I am aware of that is really comparable to SolidWorks or AutoCAD, its integration into PDE packages and acceptance by various fabrication shops. Solaris on SPARC is in the same boat, but not on Intel architectures. BSD has nothing that is native (well, the OSS stuff works, but that is not enough), and Linux emulation does prove to be a challenge (see the lists for constant references to getting Mathematica to run, for example).

And none of these other than Windows or OSX really work that well with grants.gov, though some have gotten the software to run in Wine (*ugh*). (The Citrix backdoor does not work that well, either).

I agree with the earlier post that one should use the tools one needs using the lowest-cost route. It is also important to keep in mind that time has value, something that anyone who is responsible for paying employees' paychecks knows all too well.

richardpl

07-05-2008, 06:40 PM

Well, having unix/bsd/linux userland is not really important, higher priority is in kernel.

DrJ

07-05-2008, 06:40 PM

Have a look at UWIN
I use it and like it, but it is rather unstable for me when I use it with the X11 package from xming (or whatever it is called). The X packatge that comes with UWIN is pretty slow and dated.

Carpetsmoker

07-05-2008, 06:59 PM

Well, having unix/bsd/linux userland is not really important, higher priority is in kernel.

I don't use the kernel, I use applications.
Applications is what is important, the kernel is just a facilitator for applications.

Oko

07-05-2008, 07:15 PM

*sigh*

For me, that is making 2D and 3D CAD drawings, solving rather large sets of PDEs (say, a few hundred) using the CAD drawings as the geometry input, optimizing the device through this, submitting the drawing to a clean room and to a laser fabricator to make the gizmos, obtaining real-time laboratory data (including photomicrographs and videos) to get the device performance, abstracting items from and rearranging PDF documents, writing the grants, and submitting grant applications through grants.gov. There's lots of other tasks involved, but this is the core of what I and my people do.

The software available for Linux can *almost* do the entire chain, but not quite -- there is nothing that I am aware of that is really comparable to SolidWorks or AutoCAD, its integration into PDE packages and acceptance by various fabrication shops. Solaris on SPARC is in the same boat, but not on Intel architectures. BSD has nothing that is native (well, the OSS stuff works, but that is not enough), and Linux emulation does prove to be a challenge (see the lists for constant references to getting Mathematica to run, for example).

First of all I mean no offense by my previous post. I was strongly disagree with your ideas but I would not attack anybody personally. You obviously talk from your professional experience I talk from mine.

Yes there is NO AutoCAD for Unix and if I had my own shop I would run Windows for CAD. AutoCAD is arguably one of the best applications written for Windows OS. Guess what. When the NASA needs CAD, 2D, and 3D animations do you think that they use Windows. NO, they use Silicon Graphics (Irix in the past now Linux) but I guess price tag of couple hundred thousand dollars for complete systems is little bit to much for an average Joe:)
We have quite a few of those at U of Arizona but you have to deserve the access to them.

I also happen to work at the math Department (U of A) which is world known for its applied mathematics and although my field of expertise is Dynamical Systems based on ODEs I happen to know people who work on PDEs, Fluids,
Turbolence, and similar things. For small numerical computations of the type couple hundred PDEs they use Linux clusters (DeLL PCs). For big one they use Cray 3 and Los Alamos PPC based machines (we have joint program with them). I guess you are well aware that Cray 3 doesn't run Windows.

I have to repeat something that somebody already said. People needs to get the job done and they will run whatever it is necessary, cost effective, and do the work. They do not care about BSD vs GPL (unless there are afraid of legal problems) , they do not care if it is Windows, Unix, or VMS. They do not care if it is MIPS, Sparc64, Motorola, or i386. All they care is to do the work.

P. S. By the way my friend who is one of the principal coders of GAP (he is German mathematician but lives here in Arizona) uses OpenSUSE for the past ten years. He used NetBSD in 90s but it was not user friendly for him. I also never said that BSD is very popular as a Desktop, Workstation platform. See one of my first posts. I still have to see anybody at my department running OpenBSD like me on his desktop. It is mostly Ubuntu and Debian around me.

ninjatux

07-05-2008, 07:43 PM

DrJ

07-05-2008, 07:46 PM

First of all I mean no offense by my previous post.
Then you should avoid telling someone that they do not know what they are talking about. Chances are very good that I have been solving PDEs longer than you have been alive.
When the NASA needs CAD, 2D, and 3D animations ... they use Silicon Graphics (Irix in the past now Linux) but I guess price tag of couple hundred thousand dollars is little bit to much for an average Joe:)
NASA has the budget for a bespoke application, and they have been developing these since the 1960s.
I also happen to work at the math Department (U of A) ...
Check to see what the faculty in Chemistry, Biology, EE and so forth are using, both personally and in their labs. I know many of them rather well, actually (I was at ASU for many years, and set up some collaborative grant applications with the photochemistry/optical sciences people at UA).

To be clear, I have never claimed that Windows is an outstanding system. I don't really care much for it, but it is boatloads better than running VM/CMS on a 3270 EBCDIC terminal. I do claim that the range of specialized professional applications is unmatched, and that this will not change in the foreseeable future. To claim otherwise only speaks to a lack of familiarity with the marketplace, and the scientific/engineering marketplace in particular. Of course these are bested by bespoke applications for the really really tiny, high-performance niches most of which have been developed continuously over many years. That too will not change.

richardpl

07-05-2008, 08:13 PM

I don't use the kernel, I use applications.
Applications use kernel.
Applications is what is important, the kernel is just a facilitator for applications.
I said that having unix utilities is completly irrelevant if kernel is in simple words - crap.

Oliver_H

07-05-2008, 08:33 PM

Guys, let's all calm down. One of the reasons that Unix has been gaining marketshare is because some people couldn't fit their needs with Windows or didn't feel comfortable with it. As much as we respect those people for our commonalities, we have to respect those people who continue to use Windows as well because they don't want to switch for one reason or another or can't switch. After all, F/OSS is about choice.

In my opinion, Unix rivals Windows in every area except gaming and possibly ease-of-use depending on the flavor. Specifically, as far as CAD is concerned, the Ashlar-Vellum catalog is available on Mac, and their software is quite popular. For a competent free alternative, BRL-CAD is available for Unix. In addition, VariCAD, which is compatible with AutoCAD, is available for Linux as well. I guess it comes down whether you're willing to use something that isn't a mainstream solution, but compatible nonetheless.

And except prof. graphics and prof. audio - okay the Mac is UNIX somewhere below the surface, but Windows has got a plethora of applications and hardware important for most work in the real word and even the creative business! And yes we do have the Adobe line of applications and some other goodies, but in the end it's just a fraction of the Windows world - and I'm not telling you of some home applications. It doesn't count what you think is available as viable option, it's important what application and hardware we need to get the work done. And in the end you'll find heterogenous environments most of the time - some Windows machines for special applications and hardware, some cheap UNIX-machines for the hard work (internet, intranet, render queues and so on and yes even some Apple machines. That's the reality out there in the wild. Fanboyism is something for the pleasure at home. My home is my castle and my personal data center ;-)

So in the end I can say 'to hell with the wanna-be UNIX machines from Apple' at home, but I have to work with those at work. I can even say 'to hell with shitty Debian', but again I have to cope with it at work. At least we're using Solaris too, thanks God ;-)

ephemera

07-05-2008, 08:56 PM

The bottom line is that we have to get work done and publish results. We use whatever will help us achieve this the best. In general we don't care about the software or who makes it as long as we can afford it and it gets the job done. We want it to work as quickly as possible as cheaply as possible.that reminds me of an article i read somewhere where this guy David Chisnall talks about the difference b/w an astronomer and a telescope builder (though in a slightly different context):

There’s a difference between a telescope builder and an astronomer, of course. A telescope builder is likely to know more about the construction of telescopes and less about the motion of stellar bodies. But both will have a solid understanding of what happens to light as it travels through the lenses and bounces off the mirrors. Without this understanding, astronomy is very difficult.
For an astronomer, celestial bodies are studied using a telescope. A telescope is an important tool for a scientist—but is merely a tool not the focus of study.

here the telescope builder can be a metaphor for a computer programmer or IT professional and the astronomer a metaphor for a scientist.

i am just glad the scientists are using (or atleast try to use wherever they can) linux/unix. :)

ninjatux

07-05-2008, 09:10 PM

It doesn't count what you think is available as viable option, it's important what application and hardware we need to get the work done.

What? This statement doesn't make any sense. Of course it matters what you think is available as a viable option. You generally will consider all options before making a final decision, which suits your budget and needs equally.

Heterogeneous environments are fine if they fit your needs the best.

That's the reality out there in the wild. Fanboyism is something for the pleasure at home.

And, if you had read the first paragraph of my post that you quoted, then you wouldn't have made such a ridiculous statement. Remember, I never really gave commentary on Windows. I don't use it because I don't need to or want to. I steer away from that.

scottro

07-05-2008, 09:24 PM

Hrrm, I think at this point on the Fedora or Ubuntu forums, the thread would be closed by moderators (hint, hint).

Carpetsmoker

07-05-2008, 09:32 PM

Or we could just appeal to all participants to take a step back, take a deep breath, and leave it alone at least for a few days ... So that things can calm down ...

ephemera

07-05-2008, 09:38 PM

Hrrm, I think at this point on the Fedora or Ubuntu forums, the thread would be closed by moderators (hint, hint).
maybe moderator intervention if this goes out of hand but please don't close it just yet.

Oliver_H

07-05-2008, 10:35 PM

What? This statement doesn't make any sense. Of course it matters what you think is available as a viable option. You generally will consider all options before making a final decision, which suits your budget and needs equally.

Heterogeneous environments are fine if they fit your needs the best.

And, if you had read the first paragraph of my post that you quoted, then you wouldn't have made such a ridiculous statement. Remember, I never really gave commentary on Windows. I don't use it because I don't need to or want to. I steer away from that.

>What? This statement doesn't make any sense.

Are you working in such an environment or are you just dreaming at home? If we have a certain task to fulfill we are looking for the proper tool, not the other way around. There is no dogma to fulfill like 'be free or die'. So we're a not going for Apple, we're looking for the proper tool and it can be Apple, but most of the time it is something PC with Linux, BSD or even Windows on it. Do you get it?

>then you wouldn't have made such a ridiculous statement.

Young padawan you should think first then speak, it's nothing to boil up your blood it is just a common experience, an analysis of some part of the real world. I'm not married with my hardware or software, I'm married to a nice woman - so maybe there are some hot tempered sayings, but nothing personal if you aren't a stock-holder of some company ;-)

>Fanboyism is something for the pleasure at home.

>That's the reality out there in the wild. Fanboyism is something for the pleasure at home. My home is my castle and my personal data center ;-)

You are able to read sentences in context? Yes? Then please do so, it's nothing about _you_ it's a common saying on the topic.

@scottro, at this point there is nothing to close imho, just some realistic point of view.

ninjatux

07-05-2008, 11:02 PM

Are you working in such an environment or are you just dreaming at home? If we have a certain task to fulfill we are looking for the proper tool, not the other way around. There is no dogma to fulfill like 'be free or die'. So we're a not going for Apple, we're looking for the proper tool and it can be Apple, but most of the time it is something PC with Linux, BSD or even Windows on it. Do you get it?

You're looking for a proper tool. Sometimes there are multiple tools that will allow you to do what you need to. Hence, you have viable options. Therefore, you consider the cost and whatever other factors before you purchase. Note, once again, that I never said a single thing about Windows.

What did I say two posts ago that's so different from what you're trying to say now about practically fulfilling your needs?

Guys, let's all calm down. One of the reasons that Unix has been gaining marketshare is because some people couldn't fit their needs with Windows or didn't feel comfortable with it. As much as we respect those people for our commonalities, we have to respect those people who continue to use Windows as well because they don't want to switch for one reason or another or can't switch. After all, F/OSS is about choice.

Sunnz

07-06-2008, 03:26 PM

And except prof. graphics and prof. audio - okay the Mac is UNIX somewhere below the surface, but Windows has got a plethora of applications and hardware important for most work in the real word and even the creative business!

So what can you make on Windows that you can't with OS X? (I am just wondering.)

Nirbo

07-06-2008, 04:51 PM

So what can you make on Windows that you can't with OS X? (I am just wondering.)

An .EXE :D

But seriously, in regards to how popular UNIX is, I like FreeBSD a lot.

Sure, you can make arguments that apples are better than bananas (They're not, BTW.) but people are ALWAYS going to argue.

It's nothing to get excited about. I was born in 1986, Didn't start using FreeBSD until probably 5-6 years ago, back in my high school days. I think it quite suits my needs on a system that is powerful enough to run Vista without a hitch.

I run into a program that I cannot run on FreeBSD. Do I troll the forums until everybody knows my anguish? Do I rend the shirt from my chest and scream into the night?

Yes, but for other reasons (don't worry, they're equally asinine.)

I've got about a hundred (i.e. 9) PCs here from various upgrades over the last 10 years. 1 runs FreeBSD, one runs OpenSuSE, 2 run Windows and the others are just sitting there collecting dust.

Variety is the spice of life!

The most important thing to remember is that computers can be coerced into talking with eachother. It's by no means impossible to run what you want to run and still accomplish things.

Unless you run your mouth :O.

I find it amusing that no one is here to offend anyone and you still have the moderators gunning for you :O Just remember, if they get a taste for human blood, none of us are safe!

BSDfan666

07-06-2008, 04:54 PM

Technically, You can make a PE executable (EXE) file on Mac OS X if you build a cross-compiler... ;)

Nirbo

07-06-2008, 05:23 PM

Technically, You can make a PE executable (EXE) file on Mac OS X if you build a cross-compiler... ;)

You win this round, BSDfan666!

Sunnz

07-06-2008, 05:53 PM

And actually, there IS a cross compiler, it is on the official Apple web site as well, I think it was for Ada... something like Gnat Win32 Cross compiler.

DrJ

07-06-2008, 06:25 PM

So what can you make on Windows that you can't with OS X? (I am just wondering.)
Here's one example, though you may think the application obscure and not quite what you had in mind:

http://www1.dionex.com/en-us/data_management_systems/Software/lp3268.html

Click on the specifications link at the bottom of the page for details.

This is rather typical, in that it is control and database software for scientific instruments.

Oko

07-06-2008, 07:05 PM

Here's one example, though you may think the application obscure and not quite what you had in mind:

http://www1.dionex.com/en-us/data_management_systems/Software/lp3268.html

Click on the specifications link at the bottom of the page for details.

This is rather typical, in that it is control and database software for scientific instruments.

I was wondering if you could explain to me one thing. It seems to me, based on your posts, that you are an avid and very, very competent Windows user.
What do you try to achieve by hanging on a forum for Unix enthusiasts (OK there are few professionals around here but most of us a hobbyist like me).
Windows needs no popularization. 99% of all Desktops and probably close to 50% of servers run it.

Are you just trying to annoy us? If you are unhappy that mail server at your
University runs Linux you should take that issue with your IT department.
If you are unhappy that some of you colleagues do not use word for publishing (I am mathematician so 100% of us do NOT use MS Word) that issue should be taken to editors of the journals.

I am way too old to be a graduate student but even if I was the one you could not bully me into using the tools I am not comfortable with. I am competent enough to code the application which I need if there is none already. I have been using Unix for too long (since late 1980s) not because it was free or not proprietary but because the alternative was VMS and lousy
OS/360. I do not hate Windows, its users, and M$.

I just love Unix like most people on this forum and you can not question man's heart. :)

ninjatux

07-06-2008, 07:08 PM

I am way too old to be a graduate student but even if I was the one you could not bully me into using the tools I am not comfortable with. I am competent enough to code the application which I need if there is none already. I have been using Unix for too long (since late 1980s) not because it was free or not proprietary but because the alternative was VMS and lousy
OS/360. I do not hate Windows, its users, and M$.

Ditto, although in my case, I don't think the code part applies. I can do scripting and some Java, but hope to learn C/C++ in college. Then I do a real job and volunteer my time with these projects, but you said it very well.

DrJ

07-06-2008, 07:37 PM

I was wondering if you could explain to me one thing. It seems to me, based on your posts, that you are an avid and very, very competent Windows user.
Well, I'm a Unix head. I have used BSD for over 25 years, and it is wired into my fingers. So I use it where I can, but there are many places where I cannot.
What do you try to achieve by hanging on a forum for Unix enthusiasts (OK there are few professionals around here but most of us a hobbyist like me).
Windows needs no popularization.
Simply because I use FreeBSD for about 80% of the things I do. Many everyday tasks are done quite nicely on *nix.
If you are unhappy that mail server at your
University runs Linux you should take that issue with your IT department.
I *am* the IT department. As well as the president and stock-room clerk. My servers run FreeBSD, FWIW.
If you are unhappy that some of you colleagues do not use word for publishing (I am mathematician so 100% of us do NOT use MS Word) that issue should be taken to editors of the journals.
I use groff for most things, and latex for submission to journals. I don't care much for Word, though I can do simple things with it. I have to, since I collaborate with people in the outside world, and that is all that most of them know.

You probably know that journals are extremely inflexible. You submit in the formats they accept, or your article will be rejected. A few will take PDFs, but most want source in either Word or latex. That's workable enough for me.
I just love Unix like most people on this forum and you can not question man's heart. :)
I'm with you on that.

Simply, many people get taken with the idea of OSS, and think it should be placed on every desktop and server, and should be used for everything. That is more common in the Linux community, but it is pretty common here too. That just is not going to happen any time soon. There are many parts of the world that most people who post here simply are not aware of. Taken together, these are large and important areas.

I admit that I get irritated when people look down their noses at Windows (or whatever OS you choose). For me they are tools to accomplish certain tasks, and not the end in and of themselves. If an application runs only on Windows, well, OK. If they can run on BSD I'd prefer it, but beyond serving and simple desktop stuff there really isn't much. That's OK too.

phoenix

07-06-2008, 08:03 PM

I was wondering if you could explain to me one thing. It seems to me, based on your posts, that you are an avid and very, very competent Windows user.

Wow, all I can say is "you must be new here". Otherwise, you'd know better, as you'd know DrJ as one of the biggest Unix geeks on this board, who just happens to be forced into using Windows systems for some things at work.

Sunnz

07-06-2008, 08:23 PM

DrJ

07-06-2008, 08:39 PM

The program you cite does one of the many functions of Chromeleon. There are a few things to keep in mind for these sorts of tools: a typical biotech or pharma company has hundreds of these instruments. Heck, even my very small company has an HPLC (it runs under NT of all things). They are also the analytical backbone of the chemical, petroleum, polymer, consumer products, food and environmental testing companies. They are even used in wine making and quality control. There are likely more of these instruments installed than the sum of all the BSDs world-wide. I'd wager that 98%+ are controlled by Windows applications. The only ones that are not are those that are old enough that they have no separate control computer, and use on-board devices where the OS is not clear.

For those in biotech or pharma, the data that is stored (which the program you mention cannot do) has to be certified to comply with FDA standards. Otherwise, the data are not sufficiently tracable, and you the company loses your billion dollar investment into your drug because the FDA will not accept your data.

Yes, this is a niche, but it is a huge one.

drhowarddrfine

07-06-2008, 08:48 PM

...a forum for Unix enthusiasts (OK there are few professionals around here but most of us a hobbyist like me).Do we have a poll showing that?
Windows needs no popularization. 99% of all Desktops and probably close to 50% of servers run it.Actually, global server usage is 23% for Win servers.

ninjatux

07-06-2008, 08:51 PM

I admit that I get irritated when people look down their noses at Windows (or whatever OS you choose). For me they are tools to accomplish certain tasks, and not the end in and of themselves. If an application runs only on Windows, well, OK. If they can run on BSD I'd prefer it, but beyond serving and simple desktop stuff there really isn't much. That's OK too.

I'll use Windows if I have to. I have Windows Vista Basic installed on my MacBook Pro just for gaming and if I ever need it for anything else. However, I think the solution for nonexistant applications is out there. I understand that it's just not feasible to code your own applications, but that's where WINE comes in. I think the WINE project has done a great job getting the 1.0 and now the 1.1.0 versions out. Now is that time for Codeweavers to move away from providing a easier to use monolithic WINE. Codeweavers should work on providing WINE-based wrappers for specific programs. I'd imagine that coding an entire API and maintaining compatibility with all applications known to work from releases to release and adding support for more applications at the same time is quite a difficult task. Either Codeweavers does it, or the actual application makers use WINE to port their applications over at least to Linux as Google has done.

DrJ

07-06-2008, 08:59 PM

... that's where WINE comes in.
Ugh. I principle I agree, but in practice that is a painful road. I have found wine to be the most maddening program to use in all of OSS. Applications work one day, and not the next when the program is "improved." Many years ago I had Word 2K and Acrobat 4 running under Wine. Neither do any more. IE is unstable for me, but it is useful once in a while.

Codeweavers' support will help with some mainstream applications, and certainly I will welcome what they put out when they release Crossover on BSD.

For many of the things I do a virtual machine just works better. Of course I only do the simple things there, and no games, AutoCAD or things like that. Those are just done better on a Win box.

Oko

07-06-2008, 09:00 PM

Do we have a poll showing that?

No I do not. You are welcome to start one and prove me wrong.

Speaking of Win servers it was obvious an exertion. The same goes for desktops. Obviously OS X is not Windows and
it has market share bigger than 5%., Linux probably have 0.5% of market share on the desktops.

Oko

07-06-2008, 09:06 PM

Wow, all I can say is "you must be new here". Otherwise, you'd know better, as you'd know DrJ as one of the biggest Unix geeks on this board, who just happens to be forced into using Windows systems for some things at work.

I do not recall my exact registration number but I though that this was couple months old forum? Are you saying that it exists for much longer than that?

scottro

07-06-2008, 09:22 PM

Heh. Well, actually, this is the descendent of bsdforums, which was apparently abandoned by its adminstrator. Although the two remaining moderators put up a heroic fight agianst the spammers, without the admin's help, it became too much, hence these forums were started.

As phoenix said, when I read that, I too said to myself, Wow. Errm, yes, I think that Dr J has proven he isn't a troll over the years--not to mention that along with BSD and LSD, he too came out of Berkeley.

TerryP

07-06-2008, 09:27 PM

Hrrm, I think at this point on the Fedora or Ubuntu forums, the thread would be closed by moderators (hint, hint).

Or we could just appeal to all participants to take a step back, take a deep breath, and leave it alone at least for a few days ... So that things can calm down ...

I think this thread is healthy if not productive, although you could say I prefer to limit my involvement... That's for my own tastes not because it's out of hand or anything.

One thing people have to remember is this is not face to face chat, it is an internet forum -- it's easy to take things a different way then was intended and the like. That's probably one reason at times I tend to be, ehh more careful with my choice of words.

As long as people don't take stuff personally and assume the best intent, the thread will probably stay health.

And any really stubborn people can always meet up later IRL and have a brawl if necessary >_>

Oko

07-06-2008, 09:36 PM

Ugh. I principle I agree, but in practice that is a painful road. I have found wine to be the most maddening program to use in all of OSS. Applications work one day, and not the next when the program is "improved." Many years ago I had Word 2K and Acrobat 4 running under Wine. Neither do any more. IE is unstable for me, but it is useful once in a while.

Codeweavers' support will help with some mainstream applications, and certainly I will welcome what they put out when they release Crossover on BSD.

For many of the things I do a virtual machine just works better. Of course I only do the simple things there, and no games, AutoCAD or things like that. Those are just done better on a Win box.

I have to give you on that one big tamps up. Even though things like Xen might make running a single operating system on a single machine thing of the past I tend to (probably as OpenBSD user) believe that if you need an application which runs only on specific OS you should use that specific OS
and not mess with virtualization.

If they can run on BSD I'd prefer it, but beyond serving and simple desktop stuff there really isn't much. That's OK too.

So what is the "complicated" desktop? I thought that a desktop computer was a computer capable of running Web-browser, an email client, and an office suite + little bit of multimedia. Since when the bioengineering software used in Wine industry is must application for the desktop. The same goes for AutoCAD and MatLab. I have not noticed that the Desktop computers sold in the WalMart come with those application.

The only real deficiency of your FreeBSD desktop is that has no flash plug in
and arguably drivers for USB video cameras so you can not do VoIP with video.

Obviously people who write application are catering their customers and if
wine producers happen to be predominantly Windows users the application
written for them will run on that platform.

You join this thread by arguing that any Unix based application is incapable of solving PDEs (although for practical purposes they can not be solved anyway and even if
they could be solved that definitely would not be using numerical computation over 10^60 rational numbers) despite the fact that you know all too well that most simple numerical algorithms were coded in 50s and 60s using Fortran and God knows what operating system. Now you
are arguing that lack of popularity of Unix among desktop users is due to
the fact that there are no Unix specific application for Wine production.
I do not get it.

Most Respectfully,
OKO

P.S. By the way my grandfather was for 70 years ( he lived to be 87) producer
of fine Serbian wines and the plum brandy called Shljivovica. I do not recall
him ever needing a calculator let alone Desktop computer to manufacture those :rolleyes:

ninjatux

07-06-2008, 09:41 PM

Sunnz

07-06-2008, 09:46 PM

So what is the "complicated" desktop? I thought that a desktop computer was a computer capable of running Web-browser, an email client, and an office suite + little bit of multimedia. Since when the bioengineering software used in Wine industry is must application for the desktop. The same goes for AutoCAD and MatLab. I have not noticed that the Desktop computers sold in the WalMart come with those application.

I don't claim to be a "complicated" desktop user, from what I have seen though, there are little things that make people switch back to Windows... it is those funky custom smilies in MSN; that other super cheap prepaid VoIP plan that they have joined that happens to use their own proprietary protocol and client software that only runs on Windows; they brought a new web cam without any checking with compatibility with the OS... it is the "what is an OS" type of people, and it is just getting them to use Linux, it is not even BSD.

ninjatux

07-06-2008, 11:31 PM

I don't claim to be a "complicated" desktop user, from what I have seen though, there are little things that make people switch back to Windows... it is those funky custom smilies in MSN; that other super cheap prepaid VoIP plan that they have joined that happens to use their own proprietary protocol and client software that only runs on Windows; they brought a new web cam without any checking with compatibility with the OS... it is the "what is an OS" type of people, and it is just getting them to use Linux, it is not even BSD.

Do we actually want those people to use Unix? When I created this thread, I didn't intend for it to become this huge discussion, and people have raised a lot of good points. One of them, which I believe was implied through the criticism of OS X, is that if there were to be Unix for the masses, then it would have to sacrifice or hide much of the Unix functionality, like OS X has done. Yes, I love OS X, but it did take some work to reveal much of the Unix functionality that I'm so used to. If someone can happily fulfill his or her needs with Windows, then there is no point even introducing that person to Unix. The keyword there is happily, which implies that that person doesn't care too much about the operating system. That's not the audience for Unix, and it should never be, because it requires too many changes in Unix.

Sunnz

07-06-2008, 11:36 PM

Do we actually want those people to use Unix?

That's entirely up to the individual to decide, I don't tend to evangelise Unix nor Linux myself for that matter, but many times I see other people try to do so.

Anyway, what I was trying to say was that there were no one big killer application so to speak for "the desktop", it is one or two of the little things that the average joe tend to taken for granted... this was a response to the question of what are the "complicated" features of a desktop, which I would say, "none", it is just MS's monopoly market what a lot of people didn't even know about.

The program you cite does one of the many functions of Chromeleon.

Yes, this is a niche, but it is a huge one.

Ok, what about...

http://mac.sofotex.com/download-134628.html

TerryP

07-07-2008, 12:32 AM

Yes, I love OS X, but it did take some work to reveal much of the Unix functionality that I'm so used to. If someone can happily fulfill his or her needs with Windows, then there is no point even introducing that person to Unix. The keyword there is happily, which implies that that person doesn't care too much about the operating system. That's not the audience for Unix, and it should never be, because it requires too many changes in Unix.

Personally I don't care what OS people use, as long as they are happy with it, as long as it doesn't drive me crazy, and as long as it doesn't cause problems for me. For example, 90-98% of software I need works under FreeBSD.

10-15% would or might be probmatic to use on a non POSIX-related system.

If it would be the otherway around, I'd bloody well have to use something else for my OS, port the apps, or become someone who virtually only runs code they wrote, which is far from practical these days.

forum for Unix enthusiasts (OK there are few professionals around here but most of us a hobbyist like me).

Do we have a poll showing that?
Actually, global server usage is 23% for Win servers.

No I do not. You are welcome to start one and prove me wrong.

I've debating starting such a poll out of curiosity for a few weeks... but have not (yet) out of consideration that it might be taken rudely by some. Maybe it is time?

scottro

07-07-2008, 12:56 AM

A poll of how many Windows servers there are on the Internet? Or who is a professional?

It doesn't mean that much. I am a professional, but I don't consider myself more knowledgeable than many who aren't.

Also, my job these days is almost entirely Linux (CentOS) not BSD, so the fact that I'm an IT professional doesn't mean that much on these forums.

Although, as we all know, as much of any such sysadmin job (vs. developer) concerns the applications that run on the system, the distinction is perhaps less important than it could be.

DrJ

07-07-2008, 02:02 AM

Ok, what about...

http://mac.sofotex.com/download-134628.html
That's another program that lets you interpret the chromatogram. That is the output of the instrument -- you still have to get the data somehow. That's what Chromeleon does (among other things). There are lots of other programs that do the same thing, but this one is pretty good.

Honestly I think this is a dead end for this discussion. The point more was that there are many applications that together have a large markets where there is no *nix, or OSX in this case, penetration. The chromatography instruments are one example. There are many others -- it just happens that I know this area.

ninjatux

07-07-2008, 02:08 AM

Personally I don't care what OS people use, as long as they are happy with it, as long as it doesn't drive me crazy, and as long as it doesn't cause problems for me. For example, 90-98% of software I need works under FreeBSD.

10-15% would or might be probmatic to use on a non POSIX-related system.

If it would be the otherway around, I'd bloody well have to use something else for my OS, port the apps, or become someone who virtually only runs code they wrote, which is far from practical these days.

I don't care either, so long as they are happy with it. Also, I've noticed much like you, although you only mentioned FreeBSD, that a strong majority of software that I need is available in some usable form on Unix operating systems. I can go from FreeBSD to some Linux distribution to NetBSD to Solaris to Mac OS X and still fulfill my needs. I don't even see Flash as a major obstacle. I need Flash just to watch Youtube videos occasionally, and swfdec plays those very well.

DrJ

07-07-2008, 02:27 AM

I thought that a desktop computer was a computer capable of running Web-browser, an email client, and an office suite + little bit of multimedia.
What exactly a desktop is has been discussed with some interest. The best I can tell is that a "desktop" is what people do with their own local CPU running their own local programs, and that this varies a *lot*. And that definition is not that clean either. Your definition fits more or less in the "Is Linux ready for the desktop" sort of threads, but I think it is insufficient.
You join this thread by arguing that any Unix based application is incapable of solving PDEs
Now be fair. I responded to the "Windows is a consumer OS" comment. The rest flowed from there, and I stressed workflow integration when irritations ran high.
P.S. By the way my grandfather was for 70 years ( he lived to be 87) producer
of fine Serbian wines and the plum brandy called Shljivovica. I do not recall
him ever needing a calculator let alone Desktop computer to manufacture those :rolleyes:
I don't doubt that he made great wine. There is a long history and art in the business. The business has changed, though. Did he use yeasts classified by UC Davis or PSU? Everyone here does. Did he use drip irrigation? Did he have moisture sensors in the ground the meter water flow? Which vine pruning method did he use and why? Did he measure Brix, or did he do it by taste?

You would get a kick out of visiting Mondavi in Napa as an example of how the business has changed. Yes, they do produce good wines in addition to their better-known bulk ones. I don't think use of temperature-controlled, stainless-steel fermenters was common in the older days, but they are now. It is a pretty high tech business.

And yes, I know slivovic well. Quite a different product from wine, but quite enjoyable. I'm thinking of having a go at it from a very productive plum tree we have.

drhowarddrfine

07-07-2008, 03:46 AM

I will still argue that Windows is a consumer operating system while Unix is the professional system. The argument is not based on who uses which or what software runs on either. The thought behind the argument is that Windows was created for the every day user. Made simple for the every man user at the expense of functionality and stability. Sure, many top-notch professional, scientific programs run on Windows because Windows is everywhere and people think Windows is the only computer to design programs for. Windows desktop is not designed for the professional environment. I mean, just look at it! :) But even as Dr. J has said, people who know how things work do not like Windows as an OS. Windows, in fact, becomes an eventual destination for marketing reasons alone, whether for money or because people look at you funny if your program doesn't run on Win. The reality is, Windows is more difficult to code for, is more expensive to code for (cost of tools and the OS), and it's a moving target (OS changes, documentation changes, documentation moves and can't be found!).

Sorry for the lack of paragraphs but I'm bouncing between things to do today.

As far as the aforementioned poll goes, I think it should be carefully worded. Do we count professional IT people who only use FreeBSD as a hobby as a hobbyist? How do you rank someone who can outcode Brian Kernighan but is a carpenter by day?

phoenix

07-07-2008, 05:29 AM

I do not recall my exact registration number but I though that this was couple months old forum? Are you saying that it exists for much longer than that?

Ah, see, you are new around here. :) daemonforums is the descendant/continuation/fork of bsdforums.org, which is where most of us (being members of this board) came from. DrJ has shown himself (on bsdforums) to be quite competent in Unix stuff, as well as Windows stuff.

I guess, without the bsdforums history, it would seem that he is a Windows-user pretending to be a Unix user. :) However, nothing could be further from the truth.

Oko

07-07-2008, 05:35 AM

What exactly a desktop is has been discussed with some interest. The best I can tell is that a "desktop" is what people do with their own local CPU running their own local programs, and that this varies a *lot*. And that definition is not that clean either. Your definition fits more or less in the "Is Linux ready for the desktop" sort of threads, but I think it is insufficient.

I like your definition very much. On the another hand do you think in 5 to 10 years people will run their own local programs except for Unix geeks?
I am not so sure. Already today at least 20-30% Linux (not Windows users) use web-based email services like Gmail instead of email clients. At least Gmail unlike Hotmail offers people to download the mail via
IMAP server. You can do text processing using Google documents without having any programs installed locally.
In all fairness, I have to repeat something that was said before. 80% of time 80% of Desktop computers run screen saver and those work pretty well on any operating system.;)

And yes, I know slivovic well. Quite a different product from wine, but quite enjoyable. I'm thinking of having a go at it from a very productive plum tree we have.

I see that you are about to cross to the dark-side of the force :) I have to worn you though. The distillation of the hard liquor is monopolized in U. S. and is illegal for all practical purposes. Last time I was distilling
Slivovica my friends form Cleveland had very hard time convincing police that I am brewing famous Serbian beer:D:D:D.

Best,
OKO

P. S. I have to correct myself. My grandfather produced VINE and he had no
clue what is wine as he never had the desktop computer:rolleyes:

TerryP

07-07-2008, 05:42 AM

@drhowarddrfine

For me, I've always felt that UNIX is designed by developers for the developers and the rest, is just business. If I recall, didn't the great inventors create unix for their own reasons at first?

The groff software that DrJ uses, isn't it very much a descendent of business?

I'm very sure that the early roff and things could have been implemented on whatever DECs OS offerings were for the various PDP-* microcomputers were in use but did the softwares creator want to do that?

Various UNIX systems provide better development tools then any other system I've encountered, while I'm sure many people here would have a _lot_ more weight behind making such a statement then I can claim. The fact still remains, for me nothing has been as good!

A real system should be self sustaining shouldn't it? FreeBSD for example (aside from no svn client, yet) is fully capable of being used to develop software built for users and working on the system itself.

Windows was created by business for business reasons. They wanted to make money, they didn't give a damn about operating system design -- 23 years later it still shows (imho).

The average home user was probably lucky to have an internet connection once upon a time, let a long a bloody computer. Now, why should they need a Ph.D. to use a computer?

My first exposure to computers was via MS-DOS 2.0 on my brothers Tandy 1000, until I started "poking around" a Windows 98 machine many years later, I always considered computers a thing for people in lab coats not Joe blow from cocomo.

UNIX is beautifully designed according to my sense of engineering, because that is what the developers made it and no one else could have done that.

Windows? Is just what sells to the masses.

An operating system for people that don't know computers, don't want to know computers, and don't care about "Source Code" because most of them don't know what it is, don't want to know what it is, and can pay someone else to make the software they want -- as long as in the end it does what they want without more trouble then they care to pay for.

I guess you could say that I view unix as a system for developers and windows as a commercial product.

To me, professional usage means taking care of the business and craft that separates one from people outside of the profession, for which they are usually paid for doing.

A carpenter knows a lot about working with wood, I don't know jack about it, things relating to carpentry makes that person unique in ways that I am not and gives them a bond to others of like-mind.

A poll of how many Windows servers there are on the Internet? Or who is a professional?

It doesn't mean that much. I am a professional, but I don't consider myself more knowledgeable than many who aren't.

As far as the aforementioned poll goes, I think it should be carefully worded. Do we count professional IT people who only use FreeBSD as a hobby as a hobbyist? How do you rank someone who can outcode Brian Kernighan but is a carpenter by day?

Well, I suppose a proper (read fair) distinction would be are you into computers because you want to or because you are paid too.

Some "professionals" love computers. Others, well want to set sale for greener pa$ture$ in the end or maybe work on their golfing.

I don't even see Flash as a major obstacle. I need Flash just to watch Youtube videos occasionally, and swfdec plays those very well.

I've mostly had internet access since WebTV and in probably 10 or more years, I have never really *needed* flash for anything. Sure I enjoy the ability to watch the YouTube videos friends share with me but I only click a very small group of them and can feed most through MPlayer ;-)

Websites that require flash for general usage, can kiss my rebel... eh wait, I can't say that here -- just look up Doc Holiday in Wyatt Earp ;-)

So what is the "complicated" desktop? I thought that a desktop computer was a computer capable of running Web-browser, an email client, and an office suite + little bit of multimedia.

What exactly a desktop is has been discussed with some interest. The best I can tell is that a "desktop" is what people do with their own local CPU running their own local programs, and that this varies a *lot*. And that definition is not that clean either.

What Oko has described is actually what most people I know use their computers for, aside from work/school related stuff and "pleasure" (games, p2p, porn, etc).

My mother only uses her computer for Internet Explorer and Outlook Express, probably doesn't know what they are, and wouldn't care to hear about it either -- as long as it does what she needs, she's happy.

And I'm happy as long as she doesn't try my patience to often....

No operating system should be considered within terms of the/a "Desktop" imho, just a desktop in the sense that people tend to use it at a desk ;-)

I use my computer for things different from my mother and friends use theirs, Oko uses his differently then mine, DrJ uses his differently then Oko and so on.

People can get blue in the face talking about "desktop" stuff and still keep going, it just doesn't serve any real point these days unless you are selling pre-made desktops !