ANNOUNCE:-- TimingAnalyzer Free Version -- Draw timing diagrams

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:

> On Jun 7, 12:13 am, Randy Yates <ya...@ieee.org> wrote:
>> rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> writes:
>> > [...]
>> > But if I want a laptop, I won't have much choice but to run Win XP
>> > (for the next few weeks) or Vista.  I only wish I had a choice.
>>
>> You do. I have successfully installed Fedora 8 on an HP Pavillion
>> DV9620US.
>>
>> However one thing to be careful of in running linux on laptops is
>> Broadcom's stubborn refusal to open up their wireless card
>> specifications so that open source drivers can be developed. Translated:
>> don't buy a laptop with a Broadcom wireless card (or chipset) if you
>> want to run linux on it. Atheros I've heard is very good and supported
>> by madwifi.org.
>>
>> But, even though Broadcom is stubborn, I have still been successful at
>> getting the card to work on my home network. Unfortunately the reverse
>> engineered drivers (b43-fwcutter...) do not seem to support the Master
>> modes used in public hotspots.
>
> I knew someone would mention Linux.  Linux is still an alien platform
> to me and there is any amount of software that is not supported under
> it... or I should say that there is any amount of software that is
> only supported on specific versions of Linux.  If I run Fedora 8,
> maybe vendor X gives me support and vendor Y doesn't.  I run Redhat
> and vendor X gives me support and vendor Z doesn't... etc, etc, etc.
>
> The reason that I still run windows at all is because for me, it is
> the only option.  Currently Win2000 is the best that runs the minimum
> required set of software.  If I want a laptop, my only choice
> currently is to buy a machine running XP which I can do for the next
> few weeks.  After that there will be no choice on a new machine except
> for Vista.  With a number of vendors not supporting that still, I will
> not have the option of buying a new laptop with an installed OS that
> runs the software I need.

I have been able to operate just fine for 3 years without most of the
Microsoft-specific software. Most notably, OpenOffice replaces Microsoft
Office. And for those occasions that I do need a MS-based OS, such as
once a year to run TaxCut, or when I need to run TI Code Composer
Studio, I use Win2000 running in a virtual machine under a linux host.
I previously used VMWare and currently use VirtualBox for this.

What software do you use that demands a MS OS?
-- 
%  Randy Yates                  % "She has an IQ of 1001, she has a jumpsuit
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC            %            on, and she's also a telephone."
%%% 919-577-9882                % 
%%%% <yates@ieee.org>           %        'Yours Truly, 2095', *Time*, ELO   
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

On Jun 7, 2:29 pm, Randy Yates <ya...@ieee.org> wrote:
> rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Jun 7, 12:13 am, Randy Yates <ya...@ieee.org> wrote:
> >> rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> > [...]
> >> > But if I want a laptop, I won't have much choice but to run Win XP
> >> > (for the next few weeks) or Vista.  I only wish I had a choice.
>
> >> You do. I have successfully installed Fedora 8 on an HP Pavillion
> >> DV9620US.
>
> >> However one thing to be careful of in running linux on laptops is
> >> Broadcom's stubborn refusal to open up their wireless card
> >> specifications so that open source drivers can be developed. Translated:
> >> don't buy a laptop with a Broadcom wireless card (or chipset) if you
> >> want to run linux on it. Atheros I've heard is very good and supported
> >> by madwifi.org.
>
> >> But, even though Broadcom is stubborn, I have still been successful at
> >> getting the card to work on my home network. Unfortunately the reverse
> >> engineered drivers (b43-fwcutter...) do not seem to support the Master
> >> modes used in public hotspots.
>
> > I knew someone would mention Linux.  Linux is still an alien platform
> > to me and there is any amount of software that is not supported under
> > it... or I should say that there is any amount of software that is
> > only supported on specific versions of Linux.  If I run Fedora 8,
> > maybe vendor X gives me support and vendor Y doesn't.  I run Redhat
> > and vendor X gives me support and vendor Z doesn't... etc, etc, etc.
>
> > The reason that I still run windows at all is because for me, it is
> > the only option.  Currently Win2000 is the best that runs the minimum
> > required set of software.  If I want a laptop, my only choice
> > currently is to buy a machine running XP which I can do for the next
> > few weeks.  After that there will be no choice on a new machine except
> > for Vista.  With a number of vendors not supporting that still, I will
> > not have the option of buying a new laptop with an installed OS that
> > runs the software I need.
>
> I have been able to operate just fine for 3 years without most of the
> Microsoft-specific software. Most notably, OpenOffice replaces Microsoft
> Office. And for those occasions that I do need a MS-based OS, such as
> once a year to run TaxCut, or when I need to run TI Code Composer
> Studio, I use Win2000 running in a virtual machine under a linux host.
> I previously used VMWare and currently use VirtualBox for this.
>
> What software do you use that demands a MS OS?

Various CAD/CAE tools.   I am sure that it is possible to run most of
them under WINE or something similar, but they are not supported that
way.  I am very happy with Win2000 and I see no need to switch to a
*nix flavor.  Even if I buy the *nix version of the various tools,
they only support the version of *nix that they indicate.  The CAE
tools are pretty flaky compared to general software and I don't need
the headache of trying to get support while running under an
unsupported OS.

My only problem is buying a laptop.  You can't build one yourself and
the vendors don't offer Win2K anymore.  Next month even Dell says they
will no longer offer XP.  This is a double whammy because most of the
tools are not supported under Vista yet AFAIK.

On Jun 6, 11:46 pm, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> rickman wrote:
> > moja...@mojaveg.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com (Everett M. Greene) wrote:
>
> ... snip ...
>
> >> Who considers anything but the "latest and greatest" to be
> >> outdated?  This group is supposedly intelligent and familiar
> >> enough with computing to make decisions about "upgrading".
> >> If newer products don't offer anything in valued improvements,
> >> ignore them.
>
> > You seem naive.  I am very happy with Windows 2000 on my desktop
> > computer.  If I build another it will also run Windows 2000.  But
> > if I want a laptop, I won't have much choice but to run Win XP
> > (for the next few weeks) or Vista.  I only wish I had a choice.
>
> Seriously consider Linux, especially Ubuntu.  You do have a
> choice.  A better choice.

Only if I want to run programs without support.  Most CAD/CAE tools
are unsupported under *nix or only supported on a single flavor and
version.  The vendors don't even agree on the flavor and version
supported.

But there is also the issue of knowledge.  I have *no* experience with
*nix... well, no good experience.  Some years ago I bought a $200
Walmart machine which came with Lindows, a version of Linux.  It had a
number of apps which were flaky and I didn't see much utility to it.
I couldn't figure out how to do a lot of things and I ended up
installing Win2000 over it.  The company was also pretty poor about
meeting the license requirements.  I thought they had to make the
sources available in the same manner that they distributed the
binary.  When I first asked them about it they feigned ignorance.
After nagging they shipped me a hand copied CD.  When I received an
update there were no sources.  This time I was told that they were
available on the web site.  Yes, they were there, but as individual
files which had to be downloaded one at a time.

I have just never had a positive experience with linux.  I don't know
how much time it would take, but I can't see spending the investment
to convert and I seldom have the time to investigate.  There is also
the research I would have to do to figure out *which* version of Linux
I would want.  How can Linux be standard if there are so many versions
and each software vendor only supports a few?

So what exactly is better about Linux?

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:

> On Jun 6, 11:46 pm, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> rickman wrote:
>> > moja...@mojaveg.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com (Everett M. Greene) wrote:
>>
>> ... snip ...
>>
>> >> Who considers anything but the "latest and greatest" to be
>> >> outdated?  This group is supposedly intelligent and familiar
>> >> enough with computing to make decisions about "upgrading".
>> >> If newer products don't offer anything in valued improvements,
>> >> ignore them.
>>
>> > You seem naive.  I am very happy with Windows 2000 on my desktop
>> > computer.  If I build another it will also run Windows 2000.  But
>> > if I want a laptop, I won't have much choice but to run Win XP
>> > (for the next few weeks) or Vista.  I only wish I had a choice.
>>
>> Seriously consider Linux, especially Ubuntu.  You do have a
>> choice.  A better choice.
>
> Only if I want to run programs without support.  Most CAD/CAE tools
> are unsupported under *nix or only supported on a single flavor and
> version.  The vendors don't even agree on the flavor and version
> supported.

I don't doubt that - I don't think Orcad runs on any linux platform.

> But there is also the issue of knowledge.  I have *no* experience with
> *nix... well, no good experience.  Some years ago I bought a $200
> Walmart machine which came with Lindows, a version of Linux.  It had a
> number of apps which were flaky and I didn't see much utility to it.
> I couldn't figure out how to do a lot of things and I ended up
> installing Win2000 over it.  The company was also pretty poor about
> meeting the license requirements.  I thought they had to make the
> sources available in the same manner that they distributed the
> binary.  When I first asked them about it they feigned ignorance.
> After nagging they shipped me a hand copied CD.  When I received an
> update there were no sources.  This time I was told that they were
> available on the web site.  Yes, they were there, but as individual
> files which had to be downloaded one at a time.

That was probably a bad way to experience linux. These days, for
evaluation, you can install it (whatever flavor) in a virtual machine
and play with it that way. The VM takes a piece of your hard drive (10G
would be plenty), but in today's world that's largely negligible.

> I have just never had a positive experience with linux.  I don't know
> how much time it would take, but I can't see spending the investment
> to convert and I seldom have the time to investigate.  There is also
> the research I would have to do to figure out *which* version of Linux
> I would want.  How can Linux be standard if there are so many versions
> and each software vendor only supports a few?

Well, those are all valid reasons to stick with Windows. But that's not
what you said; you said you didn't have an option. The truth is, you
do have an option, but it doesn't seem very appealing to you.

Also note that there are a set of open-source EDA tools available called
gEDA - check then out.

> So what exactly is better about Linux?

1. It's free.

2. It won't watch over your shoulder (Big Brother):

   a. You can watch whatever videos or audios you want whenever and
   make all the copies you'd ever want.

   b. No "phoning home" to tell the Corp. what your spending habits,
   eating habits, sex habits, surfing habits, etc. are.

   c. No checking to see if this is a valid installation.

3. It's built for global access.

   a. It is based on the X11 windows system, which means that you
   can run any application (X client) anywhere in the world from
   your desktop.

   b. It comes with ssh and ssh server out-of-the-box. That means that
   you can access (securely) any file on your system from any point on
   the internet.

   c. It's easy to install Apache (a web server), postgresql (a database
   server), subversion (version control software), and a myriad of other
   things and access these servers from anywhere there's an internet
   connection.

4. It's beautiful. There are several window managers that can be
configured any way you want. I use Gnome.

5. It's fast. The newer linux distros, along with your video card's GL
driver, makes fast work of graphics. 

6. It's fun. It comes with a ton of utilities, games, programmer
utilities, a Web server (THE web server - Apache), etc. out-of-the-box.

7. You only have to reboot once a month (if that).
-- 
%  Randy Yates                  % "So now it's getting late,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC            %    and those who hesitate
%%% 919-577-9882                %    got no one..."
%%%% <yates@ieee.org>           % 'Waterfall', *Face The Music*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

rickman wrote:

> I couldn't figure out how to do a lot of things and I ended up
> installing Win2000 over it.

> So what exactly is better about Linux?

I second your opinion regarding Linux. It is a toy of students and 
enthusiasts who are enjoying the process of configuring the computer 
instead of getting the actual job done hard and fast.

BTW, why do you prefer Win2k rather then XP?


Vladimir Vassilevsky
DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant
http://www.abvolt.com

rickman wrote:
> 
... snip ...
> 
> I have just never had a positive experience with linux.  I don't
> know how much time it would take, but I can't see spending the
> investment to convert and I seldom have the time to investigate. 
> There is also the research I would have to do to figure out *which*
> version of Linux I would want.  How can Linux be standard if there
> are so many versions and each software vendor only supports a few?
> 
> So what exactly is better about Linux?

I think you will find that switching from Winders is much easier
now.  Also, you have much less disturbance of your existing system
to simply try it out.  If you get the free CD from Ubuntu.com you
will find you can install a working system without using your hard
disk at all (some penalties, obviously), or a dual booting system,
with no penalties except gobbling some disk space, or a complete
replacement.  Just fill out the order and wait three or so weeks
for a CD delivery.

The unixy variations are largely in the GUI programs.  The old
fashioned easy linkage of CLI programs remains available, largely
unchanged.  Ubuntu 8.04 is a long term maintenance version (3
years).  I am still running the previouss long term version (6.06).

Expect to invest one to two hours.  Also see alt.os.linux.ubuntu. 

-- 
 [mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net) 
 [page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
            Try the download section.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

rickman wrote:
(snip)

> But there is also the issue of knowledge.  I have *no* experience with
> *nix... well, no good experience.  Some years ago I bought a $200
> Walmart machine which came with Lindows, a version of Linux.  It had a
> number of apps which were flaky and I didn't see much utility to it.
> I couldn't figure out how to do a lot of things and I ended up
> installing Win2000 over it.  The company was also pretty poor about
> meeting the license requirements.  I thought they had to make the
> sources available in the same manner that they distributed the
> binary.  When I first asked them about it they feigned ignorance.
> After nagging they shipped me a hand copied CD.  When I received an
> update there were no sources.  This time I was told that they were
> available on the web site.  Yes, they were there, but as individual
> files which had to be downloaded one at a time.

That is what wget is good for.

> I have just never had a positive experience with linux.  I don't know
> how much time it would take, but I can't see spending the investment
> to convert and I seldom have the time to investigate.  There is also
> the research I would have to do to figure out *which* version of Linux
> I would want.  How can Linux be standard if there are so many versions
> and each software vendor only supports a few?

I like scientific linux, see http://www.scientificlinux.org/

In article <LOd3k.9642$Ri.1039@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com>,
Vladimir Vassilevsky  <antispam_bogus@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>rickman wrote:
>
>> I couldn't figure out how to do a lot of things and I ended up
>> installing Win2000 over it.
>
>> So what exactly is better about Linux?
>
>I second your opinion regarding Linux. It is a toy of students and
>enthusiasts who are enjoying the process of configuring the computer
>instead of getting the actual job done hard and fast.

The OP has not so much on opinion about Linux as wel as bad
experiences, and is willing to learn.

The only hindrance to getting my job done on Linux is
when I meet deliberately created incompatibilities and
deviations from standards originating from you know who.

>
>BTW, why do you prefer Win2k rather then XP?
>
>
>Vladimir Vassilevsky
>DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant
>http://www.abvolt.com

Haven't we met? (I'm the guy of the ESO optical delay line
in Paranal Chile, meeting the requirements of 14 nanometer
deviation RMS.)

--
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- like all pyramid schemes -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

In article <e4bae6ce-2596-4010-83a2-1e8790d98478@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
rickman  <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 7, 12:13 am, Randy Yates <ya...@ieee.org> wrote:
>> rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> writes:
>> > [...]
>> > But if I want a laptop, I won't have much choice but to run Win XP
>> > (for the next few weeks) or Vista.  I only wish I had a choice.
>>
>> You do. I have successfully installed Fedora 8 on an HP Pavillion
>> DV9620US.
>>
>> However one thing to be careful of in running linux on laptops is
>> Broadcom's stubborn refusal to open up their wireless card
>> specifications so that open source drivers can be developed. Translated:
>> don't buy a laptop with a Broadcom wireless card (or chipset) if you
>> want to run linux on it. Atheros I've heard is very good and supported
>> by madwifi.org.
>>
>> But, even though Broadcom is stubborn, I have still been successful at
>> getting the card to work on my home network. Unfortunately the reverse
>> engineered drivers (b43-fwcutter...) do not seem to support the Master
>> modes used in public hotspots.
>
>I knew someone would mention Linux.  Linux is still an alien platform
>to me and there is any amount of software that is not supported under
>it... or I should say that there is any amount of software that is
>only supported on specific versions of Linux.  If I run Fedora 8,
>maybe vendor X gives me support and vendor Y doesn't.  I run Redhat
>and vendor X gives me support and vendor Z doesn't... etc, etc, etc.

Officially Dutch tax forms runs only under certain brands of linux,
not my brand. Guess what? The windows software is reasonably cross-
platform (withing windows that is).
Bottom line, the *windows* version of the tax forms installed and run
under wine on my Ubuntu 64 bit 7.03. (12 Megabyte to fill in 12 zero's
in a a form, but anyway). Including sending the completed form over
a safe channel.

>The reason that I still run windows at all is because for me, it is
>the only option.  Currently Win2000 is the best that runs the minimum
>required set of software.  If I want a laptop, my only choice
>currently is to buy a machine running XP which I can do for the next
>few weeks.  After that there will be no choice on a new machine except
>for Vista.  With a number of vendors not supporting that still, I will
>not have the option of buying a new laptop with an installed OS that
>runs the software I need.

My guess:
Windows package intended for XP run better on Ubuntu/wine than
one Windows Vista.
At least you can check it out at no cost.

>
>Rick


--
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- like all pyramid schemes -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst