Go For Windows 7 or Windows 8.1?

[Win]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
....

There also was another Linux operating system computer being sold but I totally cannot remember the name. ......



Could that have been Lindows, a/k/a Linspire?

I ran across a disk of that when I was looking for my earlier Linux stuff.

Linspire loaded pretty easy and looked pretty good, best I recall. But there wasn't much you could do with it - surf the web and check your e mail, basically.

 

[Mystic]

Win not too long ago there was a Linux operating system computer being sold but I totally cannot remember the name. It was something like $400.00-$800.00. I saw it advertised somewhere-online or in a magazine.

Maybe it did not sell and is gone-I don't know. I will do some searching online and see if I can find the name.

 

[Garak]

That could very well be an enterprise type thing. Anyone who would pay $400 to $800 for a version of Linux to use at home needs a psychiatrist, not tech support.

 

[Mystic]

No, it was a small desktop computer that anybody could buy. I can't remember the exact price. It was fully set up and a person could buy it and use it for the internet. I totally cannot remember the name and apparently it is gone from the market. It looked a little bit like an iMac. I think it was maybe imported from Europe.

It was sort of suggested that it would be a good computer for elderly people who just needed the internet, email, and maybe Facebook and Twitter.

I looked online for a little bit and I can't find it so I guess it is not being sold anymore.

 

[Mystic]

I did find a computer called the telikin. There are two models one of which sells for $699.00 and another for $1079.00. I am not sure if this is the same computer I saw a while back. It looks kind of like it. And I am not sure if The Wow Computer is the same computer with just a different name. These Linux operating system computers were being advertised pretty much for elderly people. I think The Wow Computer is different because I think it was using Ubuntu and the telikin Linux Mint.

The telikin can support 25 users. So it could be used by elderly people in a nursing home, for example.

 

[Garak]

No, it was a small desktop computer that anybody could buy. I can't remember the exact price. It was fully set up and a person could buy it and use it for the internet./quote]
I totally misread your post and ignored the word "computer" and just focused on the notion of a $400 to $800 Linux OS. There still are a few computers that will ship Linux based, with System76 leaping to mind. They have everything from fairly cheap starter systems all the way up (as in way more than I'd ever consider needing in Linux aside from flight simulation).

But again, few people are going to buy something like that. I would if Ubuntu happened to be my favourite distro and I liked System76's offerings and prices and was considering buying online, rather than locally. Generally speaking, though, someone who knows Linux fairly well will often homebuild or (as I did) grab something from a local retailer and install his own OS.

The real irksome thing is that most of the very reasonably priced computers out there (i.e. entry level, which works very well with Linux and for a lot of years) wind up having Windows preloaded, and it really honks me off that even with the very cheap price, some of that would go to MS.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: Garak
The real irksome thing is that most of the very reasonably priced computers out there (i.e. entry level, which works very well with Linux and for a lot of years) wind up having Windows preloaded, and it really honks me off that even with the very cheap price, some of that would go to MS.

Years ago, Dell offered the Dimension line of desktops with an "alternate" OS (typically Linux ready). The cost of the machine was less than half of the cost of the same machine that had Windows pre-loaded on it. Since I already had Windows (I was merely looking to upgrade the hardware) this machine was an obvious choice and to the door the machine was about $250. It was not too long after I purchased one that Dell stopped selling them. A shame really, because it was the perfect machine for someone to upgrade or looking to run Linux. It was a eye-opener to how MS software impacts the costs of a PC from an OEM.

 

[Garak]

Yep, good example. Usually, though, if one goes to Walmart/Staples/Best Buy/random big box one will get a computer with Windows preloaded, cheaper than a non-OS version at a local mom and pop type computer store. As I mentioned earlier, I don't know if the Dell Linux box made it up here. I do know that, historically, pricing a Dell and then upgrading the OS could ramp up the price a reasonable amount. It wouldn't matter much for someone with a big gaming rig and all the bells and whistles, but for someone who wanted something fairly bare bones but wanted the 64 bit OS, or the "Pro" or whatever gimmick/scam they have going, it could be a bit jarring.

Aside from the operating system and its cost, another major issue is all the garbage that gets loaded with it. A clean install of Windows is one thing. However, no one likes to sell a Windows box without preloading it with every piece of crippleware they can find.

 

[JustinH]

I bought a fairly high end tower from Fry's loaded with Windows 8.1 for right around 500 dollars.

The last time I checked a windows 8.1 license was at least $100. Why anyone would put 7 on a home computer today is beyond me?

 

[Mystic]

Heck, they had a gaming computer advertised a while back at Amazon.com that was some incredibly low price. Maybe something like $400-$500 dollars. Anybody who knows anything about gaming computers knows that is low. And it was a big name gaming computer.

And Windows 7 is an EXCELLENT operating system and will likely be supported by Microsoft until at least 2020. It is a great operating system for anybody who actually does something on a computer, such as photo editing, video creation, and computer gaming.

Somehow I think I am a little more productive working on photos than the guys I see next door to me who sit side by side and text each other on their smart phones. And i like my large monitor compared to their tiny screens.

The story is that older people are computer illiterate and young people have incredible computer ability. Well, I would like to see some of these young people who are texting each other all day long do some work on photographs in Photoshop. Or edit photos in Lightroom. As far as I am concerned they can keep their Facebook, Twitter, texting, etc. I tried Facebook for a little while and it is all just an incredible waste of time.

And I think the average business will be staying with their Windows desktop computers. And in my experience businesses tend to like Unix or Windows servers. I know the IT staff where I worked would not touch Linux.

I always go custom built when it comes to Windows computers. You can get exactly what you want and I know a store near me where they build gaming computers. You don't have to buy a gaming computer, of course. And you can have a Windows operating system installed with no junk on it. A pure OEM operating system.

 

[Garak]

Well, you look at Dell or any of the other companies that sell gaming computers, they can start pretty cheap, but things jack up very high once one starts adding second video cards, enormous amounts of RAM, and the biggest flat screen they can find.

Speaking of young people on computers, you're right. My buddy's two daughters have no problems using their cell phones. The minute they have to do something that requires them to migrate away from their phones (including going to a desktop or laptop to reset passwords for one of their services), they're totally lost and screaming for help.

Of course, one can buy a PC with a pure Windows install on it with no bloatware. That's clearly not the predominant business model out there, though.

As for IT people that can't handle (or refuse to handle) Linux, they're not real tech people.

If you can't handle it, you don't know you're stuff. If you refuse to handle it, it's because you don't see it as a bottomless pit of service calls, unlike Windows, and you're a salesman, not a tech.

 

[Mystic]

Well, the IT people I worked with knew quite a lot. We had a woman in IT who wrote software for us. We would tell her what we needed and she wrote entire programs, GUI and all. She could have worked for Microsoft. And they understood Linux operating systems just fine. We started out a very long time ago with a Unix server that cost a fortune. When I left we had Windows servers for the most part. No Linux. The specialized software that we had for the Unix server gradually became more Windows like over time. I am not going to discuss the software we used.

Some of the servers we had in some areas were powerful Dell computers. I guess I should call them sub servers. They were not the main servers.

I know of two computer shops near me where a person can have a custom built Windows computer built. One guy is too expensive so I go to the other place. I have essentially owned the same computer for about six years. I just have whatever needs to be replaced or updated done. The people at the shop build gaming computers that will blow the panels off most computers. But you don't have to buy a gaming computer. A mid-level computer is fine for working on photos and doing a little video. Anybody who has not operated a Windows operating system that is clean and does not have the trash on it like the computers in the stores does not know what they are missing.

By the way in that shop they have Linux laptop computers for sale. So much for the myth that Windows people are narrow minded.

Now not all young people are computer illiterate. My two nephews are very bright when it comes to computers (one of them especially when it comes to networks) and they both were quickly hired by the same company where my brother-in-law works as a senior engineer. They build satellites. If somebody actually knows something they can get a job. Texting on a smart phone is not going to get it done. You need actual knowledge about computers, electronics, math, physics, chemistry, etc. If you actually know something you can build satellites.

And the IT people were definitely not sales people. They had to justify costs and keep costs down just like everybody else.

They could handle Unix just fine (Linux is a branch of Unix). They could handle Windows just fine. They wanted nothing to do with Linux.

 

[Garak]

My last Windows box was made by a computer store owned by a buddy. He wasn't into all the crippleware and other such nonsense, either.

Your faith in techs is admirable. There are only two techs in this city that I trust with anything, and that mostly falls within network hardware, since that's not my forte. When it comes to software, I prefer they (and everyone else) keep their paws off.

As for video editing, is Windows finally up to the level where Amiga was back in 1990?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
Well, the IT people I worked with knew quite a lot. We had a woman in IT who wrote software for us. We would tell her what we needed and she wrote entire programs, GUI and all. She could have worked for Microsoft. And they understood Linux operating systems just fine. We started out a very long time ago with a Unix server that cost a fortune. When I left we had Windows servers for the most part. No Linux. The specialized software that we had for the Unix server gradually became more Windows like over time. I am not going to discuss the software we used.

Some of the servers we had in some areas were powerful Dell computers. I guess I should call them sub servers. They were not the main servers.

I know of two computer shops near me where a person can have a custom built Windows computer built. One guy is too expensive so I go to the other place. I have essentially owned the same computer for about six years. I just have whatever needs to be replaced or updated done. The people at the shop build gaming computers that will blow the panels off most computers. But you don't have to buy a gaming computer. A mid-level computer is fine for working on photos and doing a little video. Anybody who has not operated a Windows operating system that is clean and does not have the trash on it like the computers in the stores does not know what they are missing.

By the way in that shop they have Linux laptop computers for sale. So much for the myth that Windows people are narrow minded.

Now not all young people are computer illiterate. My two nephews are very bright when it comes to computers (one of them especially when it comes to networks) and they both were quickly hired by the same company where my brother-in-law works as a senior engineer. They build satellites. If somebody actually knows something they can get a job. Texting on a smart phone is not going to get it done. You need actual knowledge about computers, electronics, math, physics, chemistry, etc. If you actually know something you can build satellites.

And the IT people were definitely not sales people. They had to justify costs and keep costs down just like everybody else.

They could handle Unix just fine (Linux is a branch of Unix). They could handle Windows just fine. They wanted nothing to do with Linux.



Linux isn't a branch of Unix, Linux is a kernel, developed to provide be what is essentially a free Unix-like operating system. Unix was a project of Berkeley University and AT&T. Both had invested heavily in the product and after the development was finished they discovered they had two very different philosophies as to how they wanted to go about distributing it. AT&T wanted to charge money for the software (like Microsoft) whilst Berkeley wanted to provide it free of charge. The product at that point forked with Commercial UNIX on the AT&T side and BSD on the Berkeley side.

Various commercial versions of UNIX were then developed. HP-UX, DEC Alpha Unix, IRIX....etc. All individual UNIX products.

Various versions of BSD developed in a similar fashion with FreeBSD being Berkeley's product and NETBSD, OpenBSD....etc.

Linux, as a free UNIX alternative, came on the scene much later and began to come into vogue in the late 90's. I was an early user of it but found BSD to have better support and was more stable at that point. I was a big fan of DEC's Alpha UNIX, IRIX and FreeBSD.

Since that time, commercial entities like Redhat have really taken off. Their Linux products are phenomenal for server and workstation use and I have a number of RHEL server boxes operating in a medical facility serving as PACS servers.

I find myself switching between various CLI's and GUI's throughout the course of a week. I have a number of Windows servers I administrate, a number of RHEL boxes, a whole heck of a lot of Cisco gear....etc. As to Garak's point, that's essentially where I am going with this and that is that anybody worth their salt should be able to work with any of the major server OS's to perform at least basic tasks. They may have a preference for a particular one, or their software only works with one, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to handle themselves in a different environment.

 

[Mystic]

I don't know where Amiga was for video editing in 1990, but I do know both Apple and Microsoft make it hard to develop videos that can be put on a DVD and played on a TV set. Apple dropped support for their iDVD software sometime back, and I use software on my Windows computer for producing videos that will work on a TV. I have some software for the same purpose on my Mac but it is not as good. Microsoft had simple software for writing DVDs that would play on a TV set in Windows 7 but they dropped that software. And it was not very good anyway. And Apple's iDVD was not that great either.

Apple still has professional quality software for video editing but a lot of people do not like the changes Apple has made to that software. I do not need their expensive professional quality video editing software.

Apple has photo editing software (Aperture) but nobody knows what Apple is going to do with that software. They may abandon it. They still have iPhoto but iPhoto is not professional quality software. Some people think Apple will drop Aperture and just come out with a somewhat improved version of iPhoto.

Aperture was fantastic software which I liked in some ways more than Adobe Lightroom but now Aperture has fallen behind-no lens correction and so forth. Many, many people who were using Apple's Aperture software have already switched to Lightroom.

I go wherever I need to go to get things done that I want to get done. Even Microsoft is making it difficult for photographers but at least third party software that will run on Windows can get things done. It is harder to find third party software as good as what is available for Windows for Apple Computers. And some of the quality software can run on either Windows or the Mac.

If I was able to get done everything I wanted to get done on my Apple Computer I would probably just run Apple Computers. Too many issues with Apple. Every time they come out with a new O/S my printer and scanner may not work for a while. That is UNACCEPTABLE to me! Some Apple software seems to be going downhill (iWork, etc.), there is less third party software available, and they may abandon Aperture. I can run Lightroom on my Apple Computer but I can also run it on my Windows computer. The Windows computer is cheaper.

And no Linux operating system computer meets my needs. GIMP is useless. Running an old version of Photoshop in WINE is useless. Hardware support for my PHOTO printer and scanner capable of scanning negatives and slides is extremely limited. Linux does not work for me.

I do not have some kind of religious like devotion to any computer operating system. It is all just technology and I use what works FOR ME!

 

[Mystic]

You see, it seems the computer people do not listen to customers and probably consider themselves above and beyond the customers. I sometimes think Apple listens only to billionaires. Apple recently dropped the price of their iMacs by $200.00. Maybe they are not selling all that well? And maybe Apple misinterpreted what is going on and thinks everybody is going mobile. Well, maybe some people would still like to buy a desktop computer. But billionaires are not going to buy most of the iMacs.

Steve Jobs declared that the DVD was dead. But a photographer might want to put photos for a client on a DVD. Millions of people still own TV sets and DVD players. Maybe the photographer's client would not like it very much if the photographer told the client to go to YouTube to see the video.

A lot of photographers are not really too happy with Adobe Software. They would be really happy if there was alternative software. Like Aperture. Apple seems to have a lot of money. Maybe they could use a little of that money to improve their software?

And a lot of photographers would be very happy if their photo printers and scanners worked. And you notice I said photo printers. Not a dinky, trashy, piece of garbage printer that can't product decent prints. If every time a new operating system comes out (about once a year for Apple) if the photographer's printer does not work then for three months that makes for an unhappy photographer.

But I realize all of this is beneath the consideration of the computer people.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
I don't know where Amiga was for video editing in 1990, but I do know both Apple and Microsoft make it hard to develop videos that can be put on a DVD and played on a TV set.

Back in the day, Amiga was pretty much the be all and end all of video editing, including for commercial television. With respect to creating and/or modifying a video that can be put on a DVD and played on a normal DVD player and TV, that's easy in Linux, since there are a couple open source packages that do that. Additionally, one of those packages (FFmpeg with the WinFF GUI frontend) is cross platform, and will do the job in Windows. Give it a shot - it's ridiculously easy. It has "presets" for whatever you want to do.

With respect to printer and scanner usage in Linux, one just has to be a bit cautious. HP develops a lot of stuff they intend to work very well with Linux, and keep updated lists of that. And, it's not like they charge a premium for that stuff. My laser printer was around $100 a few years ago. And it was completely plug and play. What else could I ask for?

Photo printers are a bit different, and you know that from experience. There are way, way too many photo printers out there that are cheaply built and way too cheaply priced and rely on too much proprietary software. Instead of creating proper drivers or support for alternative operating systems, they create abominations of user software that are utterly useless for anything except their own equipment. If I were in the market for a photo printer, I certainly would be checking HP's list first. Some manufacturers are interested in providing cross platform products, others are not.

And, I'd agree that there's nothing wrong with a DVD. There are many times when they are still necessary as a storage medium.

Overkill: A while back, I had to give a tech a hard time when he was setting up the surveillance system (on Ubuntu) at one of my businesses. Actually, I had to give two techs a hard time, and those are the only two techs in this city that I trust. One said that a security camera system couldn't be set up in Linux. It should be only set up in Linux, since that's more crash resistant, and I have it set up in Linux, so it's clearly not impossible. It's proprietary software, but that's fine. If a computer is just sitting there and operating a camera system, it doesn't need Windows in the least.

The second tech got a rough time from me because he didn't realize that the Linux command line was case sensitive, nor could he understand that he couldn't monkey with root directories without root access.

 

[javacontour]

Sun went both routes. Sun OS 4.x was BSD based. It was retroactively named Solaris 1 when bundled with OpenWindows.

When Solaris 2 came out it was SVR4 based, likely due to most commercial Unix going that way as well as AT&T being a major investor in Sun.

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: Mystic
Well, the IT people I worked with knew quite a lot. We had a woman in IT who wrote software for us. We would tell her what we needed and she wrote entire programs, GUI and all. She could have worked for Microsoft. And they understood Linux operating systems just fine. We started out a very long time ago with a Unix server that cost a fortune. When I left we had Windows servers for the most part. No Linux. The specialized software that we had for the Unix server gradually became more Windows like over time. I am not going to discuss the software we used.

Some of the servers we had in some areas were powerful Dell computers. I guess I should call them sub servers. They were not the main servers.

I know of two computer shops near me where a person can have a custom built Windows computer built. One guy is too expensive so I go to the other place. I have essentially owned the same computer for about six years. I just have whatever needs to be replaced or updated done. The people at the shop build gaming computers that will blow the panels off most computers. But you don't have to buy a gaming computer. A mid-level computer is fine for working on photos and doing a little video. Anybody who has not operated a Windows operating system that is clean and does not have the trash on it like the computers in the stores does not know what they are missing.

By the way in that shop they have Linux laptop computers for sale. So much for the myth that Windows people are narrow minded.

Now not all young people are computer illiterate. My two nephews are very bright when it comes to computers (one of them especially when it comes to networks) and they both were quickly hired by the same company where my brother-in-law works as a senior engineer. They build satellites. If somebody actually knows something they can get a job. Texting on a smart phone is not going to get it done. You need actual knowledge about computers, electronics, math, physics, chemistry, etc. If you actually know something you can build satellites.

And the IT people were definitely not sales people. They had to justify costs and keep costs down just like everybody else.

They could handle Unix just fine (Linux is a branch of Unix). They could handle Windows just fine. They wanted nothing to do with Linux.



Linux isn't a branch of Unix, Linux is a kernel, developed to provide be what is essentially a free Unix-like operating system. Unix was a project of Berkeley University and AT&T. Both had invested heavily in the product and after the development was finished they discovered they had two very different philosophies as to how they wanted to go about distributing it. AT&T wanted to charge money for the software (like Microsoft) whilst Berkeley wanted to provide it free of charge. The product at that point forked with Commercial UNIX on the AT&T side and BSD on the Berkeley side.

Various commercial versions of UNIX were then developed. HP-UX, DEC Alpha Unix, IRIX....etc. All individual UNIX products.

Various versions of BSD developed in a similar fashion with FreeBSD being Berkeley's product and NETBSD, OpenBSD....etc.

Linux, as a free UNIX alternative, came on the scene much later and began to come into vogue in the late 90's. I was an early user of it but found BSD to have better support and was more stable at that point. I was a big fan of DEC's Alpha UNIX, IRIX and FreeBSD.

Since that time, commercial entities like Redhat have really taken off. Their Linux products are phenomenal for server and workstation use and I have a number of RHEL server boxes operating in a medical facility serving as PACS servers.

I find myself switching between various CLI's and GUI's throughout the course of a week. I have a number of Windows servers I administrate, a number of RHEL boxes, a whole heck of a lot of Cisco gear....etc. As to Garak's point, that's essentially where I am going with this and that is that anybody worth their salt should be able to work with any of the major server OS's to perform at least basic tasks. They may have a preference for a particular one, or their software only works with one, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to handle themselves in a different environment.

 

[Mystic]

Thanks for that information. You are the one Linux guy here that I really like. I will check out the FFmeg with the WinFF GUI front end.

I have an Epson photo printer and an Epson scanner so I can't change that very easily right now.

 

[Garak]

I don't recall for sure right now, but if my memory isn't failing me, Epson wasn't the most ideal choice for people running Linux. When I bought my printer, HP was way ahead of everyone else, with Brother having some very fine options, too.
The last time I dealt with Epson was back in the dot matrix days and trying to find cheaper, yet equally robust alternatives. And I don't blame you for not wanting to change that right now. For me, I got a fairly entry level HP that HP listed for Linux use, for my home use, the P1505. I don't print a whole bunch at home and I don't print graphics, so it does the trick for me nicely. It is one of those printers where the toner is worth as much as the stupid printer, but in the years I've had it, I only bought toner once.

Not a problem on the FFmpeg and WinFF bit. You'll find it works very well. One of the nicest ones I ever used, actually, was the tovid/todisc suite in Linux. Right from the command line, you could make it take a video file (or several) and it would split them into the proper DVD way, and even set up menuing, should one want that.

I don't know if WinFF can set up menuing (I doubt it, but there should be other cross platform things that do that), but it will take whatever you got and make it DVD compliant. I find that very handy in conjunction with my security cameras. As I mentioned, they're on Linux. Yet, they use Quicktime video formats. And, some of my insurance people aren't very good with computers, so it pays to convert the videos.