Ubuntu users, unite!

[as2]

That's true, but it's not like there was false information to prove a point, though. Besides, if you are trying to say anything, there's going to be some underlying bias to some degree. I see what you're saying though, but it seems that the article was only for linux users, so it should appeal to the target audience, anyway.

What media (more specifically, music) players do you guys use in Linux? I'm running Banshee, which I prefer to Rhythmbox, but it's not perfect...

Amarok 1.4 is amazing. Works fine in Gnome, too :)

 

[IIMarckus]

I use the mplayer front-end most of the time on Linux, even though I hate it. Oh, how I do hate it. I prefer the terminal version, but I don't know the playback controls (if they exist).

You mean stuff like leftarrow = back, rightarrow = forward, space = pause, etc? Those are all described in the manpage. I've never used the GUI version.

 

[twocows]

You mean stuff like leftarrow = back, rightarrow = forward, space = pause, etc? Those are all described in the manpage. I've never used the GUI version.

I checked (and double-checked) the manpage but didn't see that listed. But now that you mentioned it, I see it. Strange. Thanks anyway; now I don't have to use that fugly front-end.

 

[Zet]

How many of you ubuntu users can go without WINE? if you want to escape from Windows/Mac OSX don't use any emulations or go back to Windows/Mac OSX if you can't handle not using something to emulate another OS's programs. Since you really wouldn't be escaping at all

 

[.little monster]

I actually do not use Wine for anything. Everything I use has Linux versions. I was surprised when I found out my HP printer had Linux drivers and software. :P Well, easy-to-find drivers and software. I assumed I would have to edit them myself..because it's HP like my brother had to do with his HP printer, but the HP website actually had Linux drivers..maybe my brother just didn't look. :|

 

[as2]

How many of you ubuntu users can go without WINE? if you want to escape from Windows/Mac OSX don't use any emulations or go back to Windows/Mac OSX if you can't handle not using something to emulate another OS's programs. Since you really wouldn't be escaping at all

I don't use Wine on my Ubuntu box, but I do have a Windows install for the few games I do play that don't run in Linux (Roller Coaster Tycoon comes to mind!) but OpenTTD works great in Linux natively and I spend most of my time playing that!

 

[Archer]

How many of you ubuntu users can go without WINE? if you want to escape from Windows/Mac OSX don't use any emulations or go back to Windows/Mac OSX if you can't handle not using something to emulate another OS's programs. Since you really wouldn't be escaping at all

Although I have Wine installed, I don't use anything through it regularly. I think the only applications I use through Wine are small standalone apps that people have written in 20 mins. For example, save file converters. Aside from that, everything is native to linux.

It's important to realise, that although the need for a Windows application occurs in some situations, the fact that the developer has decided to go with Windows is not a fault on the part of Linux developers. If people really need to use Windows applications, then they might as well use Windows. As for MacOS, it often faces a similar dilemma to what Linux does. Although it's beginning to shift a little, developers still focus on Windows more than Mac, which is a large contributing factor to people dual-booting Windows on a Mac.

It's a bit like free-to-air and cable TV. Some people are perfectly happy with the free-to-air channels and see no need to pay for a cable service. Other people want to have access to the cable channels, so they pay for it. There's no point paying if you don't want the cable channels, as there is no point complaining that you want access to the cable channels, but refuse to upgrade.

You choose the product that best suits you. If you occasionally want to pick up the odd cable program, but don't generally need it, along comes a 'wine adaptor' that allows the TV to play that program. This isn't about people trying to be stubborn and refuse to get cable, it's an option to access the occasional program.

It's a strange analogy, there's no doubt, but this seems to explain the principal behind my ideas.

It's actually worth noting that Wine Is Not an Emulator. It effectively translates the code and runs it like any other Linux application. As a result, there is usually no performance loss and it can integrate into the Linux environment. This isn't a perfect explanation by any means, but it basically makes Linux able to read the program as Windows does, not emulating it. Virtualisation, on the other hand, is emulation, as you're pretending to be running another system.

I can see what you're saying Zet, and it's a valid point, but to be perfectly honest, it's just the problems of living in a Windows world. That's what happens when a company gets the monopoly on a product.

 

[Zet]

oh god, I was just trying to start a little riot, didn't expect it to turn out like this XD

 

[Bianca Paragon]

is usually no performance loss

Hahahahaaaa
No. Just. No.
Did you even read what you just said? :\

 

[IIMarckus]

How many of you ubuntu users can go without WINE? if you want to escape from Windows/Mac OSX don't use any emulations or go back to Windows/Mac OSX if you can't handle not using something to emulate another OS's programs. Since you really wouldn't be escaping at all

I don't use alternative operating systems to "stick it to Microsoft"—I do it to learn new things, to have fun, and for the practical reason that I don't like to pay for things. I have no shame in using my W2k laptop for things that can't be done with my OS of choice.

This dislike of Microsoft seems to have been in Ubuntu since the beginning. I must say I'm not a fan of it.

there is usually no performance loss

Hahahahaaaa
No. Just. No.
Did you even read what you just said? :\

WINE is not emulation in the typical sense. It's a reimplementation of Windows libraries that remaps Windows system calls to Linux ones. This has none of the performance loss associated with running programs in a virtualized environment, and only a very minor one otherwise (if it can be noticed at all). See the Wine site.

In a similar way, OpenBSD and the other BSDs have compatibility layers that allow them to run binaries made for Linux and each other, with no performance loss. I believe this first came about out of a desire to run Netscape on BSD.

 

[Bianca Paragon]

*Any* overhead means it's not running as well or as fast as the original product on native code. You go on and on and on about how WINE isn't emulation; and it's true ~ it's not. But it IS interpretation and depending on the complexity of the code in question it can mean a small, but noticeable overhead, through to plain out not usable.

Thanks for the rep, btw; I'll make sure to get it removed.

 

[IIMarckus]

But it IS interpretation

It's not interpretation. Wine is not a low‐level or a high‐level emulator.

Wine can also be faster than applications run on Windows. (When it works, of course. It's no substitute for an actual Windows installation.) Compatibility layers like Wine are not necessarily faster nor necessarily slower than native code.

 

[twocows]

How many of you ubuntu users can go without WINE? if you want to escape from Windows/Mac OSX don't use any emulations or go back to Windows/Mac OSX if you can't handle not using something to emulate another OS's programs. Since you really wouldn't be escaping at all

I multi-boot all my machines, so I've never really needed to use WINE.

*Any* overhead means it's not running as well or as fast as the original product on native code. You go on and on and on about how WINE isn't emulation; and it's true ~ it's not. But it IS interpretation and depending on the complexity of the code in question it can mean a small, but noticeable overhead, through to plain out not usable.

I've heard stories of software running faster on WINE than on Windows, though I've no firsthand experience with it (since I don't use WINE).

Thanks for the rep, btw; I'll make sure to get it removed.

I think s/he down-repped because of the delivery of your response, which some might consider a flame.
I'd like to make a "WINE" joke here, but that would just be inappropriate, now wouldn't it?

It's not interpretation. Wine is not a low‐level or a high‐level emulator.

Wine can also be faster than applications run on Windows. (When it works, of course. It's no substitute for an actual Windows installation.) Compatibility layers like Wine are not necessarily faster nor necessarily slower than native code.

That must have been where I saw that.

 

[Bianca Paragon]

It's not interpretation. Wine is not a low‐level or a high‐level emulator.

Interpreter != Emulator.
Hurrrr.
Wine interrupts windows code-base calls and library functions and where possible (ie, where you have a nativelib) it'll call on the native and where not possible (ie, most of the time) it will interprut the call to the equivalent function of the underlying Linux system.
I repeat, for your clarity:

HURRRR DERP DERP.

This means there is OVERHEAD and it is SLOWER and FAR LESS COMPATIBLE in most all situations. Isolated cases of it running Win32 code faster are merely where the underlying Linux system is basically feature-less and the application would ordinary run on a feature-rich OS install such as Windows Vista.

 

[Zet]

Ok, so a lot of people are wondering why cloud.CONNECTED is still posting here. I shall reveal this life long secret that only very few people know in life. And it here it is:

".....People are allowed to have different viewpoints and can say it where they feel like it" and you people may think she is "flaming" but the truth is; she isn't, if you stop for a second and put yourself in her shoes, you'll realise a different viewpoint isn't flaming. I might as well consider anyone posting a different OS that isn't Windows in a "What's your OS?" thread as "flaming" [/grammar fail]

 

[as2]

Ok, so a lot of people are wondering why cloud.CONNECTED is still posting here. I shall reveal this life long secret that only very few people know in life. And it here it is:

".....People are allowed to have different viewpoints and can say it where they feel like it" and you people may think she is "flaming" but the truth is; she isn't, if you stop for a second and put yourself in her shoes, you'll realise a different viewpoint isn't flaming. I might as well consider anyone posting a different OS that isn't Windows in a "What's your OS?" thread as "flaming" [/grammar fail]

It gets a bit boring though, when certain people repeatedly imply that Linux isn't a "proper" OS. Get over it. Lots of people are very happy using these operating systems, even if you prefer Windows or Mac for your own reasons. And simply saying it's crap won't change anyones opinions, which is the point of debating a different viewpoint...

Linux isn't going to replace Windows on the desktop for a long time, despite what a loud minority spouts. It's a different experience, this lot make Linux look somewhat bad too, since I agree, it's certainly not ready yet.

In my experience though, I find Ubuntu and Debian to be amazing, and now I rarely boot back to Windows. For one, I like not being tied to Microsoft; Secondly it find them to be far more flexible for my needs. All I really run is Firefox and Pidgin for example, therefore I don't need to run various security and AV systems that I'd need to on Windows. The command line is awesome, and the available development environments I find to be better (I develop Php/Mysql and more recently Python web apps). But maybe you don't need any of this? Then Windows or MacOS is probably a better solution for you! Be happy with it!

Oh, I do run a Windows server btw. It suits the requirements of running a small office with 10 windows computers! If I could be bothered to figure out Active Directory with Samba maybe it'd be running Linux too. Just an example of different requirements.

IfI could afford a Macbook; I'd have one tomorrow :) Alas, it's not going to happen any time soon! Especially not at £845 for the basic 13" model!

 

[Zet]

You can install the Mac OSX on any computer, just gotta do some tweaking, and you really don't need any antivirus protection if you only visit few sites that are trusted

 

[.little monster]

You can install the Mac OSX on any computer, just gotta do some tweaking, and you really don't need any antivirus protection if you only visit few sites that are trusted

Yes, that is a huge factor in it too. People just want to stick in a CD and play. Either they don't want to tweak, or they think it's incompatible. I actually will try Mac OSX when I get my new HDD, but I will always dual boot with Ubuntu.

 

[twocows]

You can install the Mac OSX on any computer, just gotta do some tweaking, and you really don't need any antivirus protection if you only visit few sites that are trusted

The legality of that in the US is questionable at best. The project itself is legal, but using the OS X software on anything but an Apple-labeled computer is a breach of the End User License Agreement. EULA agreements are enforceable legal contracts in most states, especially so if you're required to click to agree to the terms (clickwrap). I think I already went over this in another thread, so I won't go into more detail.

In the EU, on the other hand, Apple's license agreement is not enforceable as no signing takes place. IANAL, but as far as I know, you're allowed to break their EULA there unless you specifically signed it. Don't take that to court, though.

 

[Zet]

Wouldn't installing Windows on a non-windows endorsed/labeled product be breaking the EULA?