linux, too expensive

[kansaibear]

OK, gave it a fair shot but....
ubuntu 5.x on mac wallstreet, 500 sonnet upgrade, 384mg ram.
I told my friend that this was just too expensive an option for us to wring extra life out of our powerbook. He reminded me it was FREE... like my grandma said, 'no free lunches'. Granted, I didnt try a new world mac but I doubt things would be much different. And I suppose that if I was going to set up a low power file or webserver... but then again, apache and SMB comes in mac osx, even 10.2.8 for old world.
Tried yellow dog as well but, when I figure out the amount of time I spent to get the cd working, the video working (never well), get the japanese input working...well, 4 days for yellow dog, which the final result was not tolerable so I tried ubuntu. I do think ubuntu is a better product just because more hardware worked out of the box and the board were more responsive to my inquires which was a big reason things went smoother, but I had 3 days on it and it was not functional for what we needed.
I read several times on these boards how the gui on osx was only marginally better...
I have to ask, is drug use rampant in the linux world?
There is no comparison. Even 10.2.8 is as far ahead of either ydl 3. and ubuntu 5. as osx 10.2 is ahead of windows 3...

Most any open sourse linux product can be compiled for darwin and X11. Might be a little time consuming but...worse than I have already suffered? Most of what I would need is included anyway.
At least the base system works perfectly out of the box on the hardware. Language, Settings(come on, set the trackpad by editing configx file and comand line?), cds, video, audio....
Not to mention how spoiled we have become in our office using ical and isync. ARD works with VNC, and backup keeps everything cool for the occasional burp. It may not be the highest power on the planet but it works, and flawless as we have been using it since 10.2. We have 4 boxes in the center here, a few in different countries and a couple on the road like this powerbook. (pismo by the way, we are a low budget npo so the newest hardware we have are G4s)
The deal breakers were not having ical compatible syncable calendars... seem there may have been some but not configurable by the average person in a short enough time to make it afordable... especially since it is included in OSX and the work around for .mac is simple. It works, on all the computers, here, there, and on the road. I can listen to my favorite jazz, connect to any TV anywhere with S video output for presentations, Airport extreme works with the 15 dollar motorola cards that work off the standard airport software, multiple monitors, even on the wallstreet...

Bottom line, cost for 'free' linux... 7 days x 150 bucks a day (very conservitive labor cost)
the resulting product was barely usable and still days away from full integration into our system which happens to be all mac so we dont have the option of integrating into a windows system, would it be any easier?
Cost for OSX. 10.2.8? 18 bucks at OWC.
Even the Tiger family pack gives you 5 legal installs for 180 bucks with ical, itunes, isync, ilife... software that just works. Even springing for iwork still leaves a guy a clean thousand bucks ahead of linux and pages seems to be everybit or more compatible with office sans the excell clone.
As a good ex member of the financial community I should not that I negleted to figure in the lost productivity that would make the actual cost even greater...
Of course there is the whole idea of not paying the ruling class for software... I was a vegetarian when I was in college, now I eat macdonalds cause the drive thru is convenient.
Guess I am a sellout but will it ever make sense to install linux on a mac?
Lets see, by the time things catch up with jaguar let alone panther or tiger, jaguar will be a buck, panther 15 bucks, tiger 50 bucks and the the corresponding soft will be give aways....

Ya know, I am a tinkerer by nature and I really wanted to make this work but I just dont have the time and money for now. I suppose if we had an IT man but, not at this stage. When I explaned this to my buddy who works as system engineer, he simply said 'why do you think we only sell windows and linux networks?' He has a mac on his desktop at home and a powerbook in his brief case....
sayonara for now, linux

[aysiu]

Bottom line, cost for 'free' linux... 7 days x 150 bucks a day (very conservitive labor cost)
the resulting product was barely usable and still days away from full integration into our system which happens to be all mac so we dont have the option of integrating into a windows system, would it be any easier?
Cost for OSX. 10.2.8? 18 bucks at OWC.
Even the Tiger family pack gives you 5 legal installs for 180 bucks with ical, itunes, isync, ilife... software that just works. Your scientific study of 1 person?

Well, why don't we make it a study of 2 people, then?

For me, cost:

$5 for all the blank CDs I burnt trying out different distros

That's it. All the time I've put into learning Linux has actually helped me be more productive on Windows at work even. When I upgrade to Edgy, the cost will be $0. When I upgrade to Edgy+1, the cost will be $0.

If I were to get Leopard and Leopard+1 or Vista and Vista+1, do you know what the costs would be?

Anyone want to make this a study of 3 or 4?

I love threads like these now. They used to annoy me, but now they just entertain me.

Do you "attempt" to learn a foreign language and then complain about how much work that is, too?

For further reading, try IS ubuntu worth the free price tag? (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=262673&highlight=free+ubuntu+worth+cost)

[ogu]

i've heard these kind of comments before, one of them was at an MSDN convention.

Linux has been quite free for me, i ordered some CDs for ShipIt for older versions and burned one CD of 6.06.

Time? i've actually found i'm more productive in linux, maybe it's a thing about tastes.

Installing the files i use was easy with Synaptic, the community gives better support than Microsoft (besides, most of our problems have already happened and you can quickly find a fix to it), my machine is more secure and more stable.

Sure i wasted time, but no money. I would have waster more time with another OS. Most of the software is commercial and to get it i'd have to do a much longer procedure. Sure, maybe linux isn't free as in "don't waste money or time", but sure as hell it's more free than anything else around.

[spockrock]

Your scientific study of 1 person?

Well, why don't we make it a study of 2 people, then?

For me, cost:

$5 for all the blank CDs I burnt trying out different distros

That's it. All the time I've put into learning Linux has actually helped me be more productive on Windows at work even. When I upgrade to Edgy, the cost will be $0. When I upgrade to Edgy+1, the cost will be $0.

If I were to get Leopard and Leopard+1 or Vista and Vista+1, do you know what the costs would be?

Anyone want to make this a study of 3 or 4?

I love threads like these now. They used to annoy me, but now they just entertain me.

Do you "attempt" to learn a foreign language and then complain about how much work that is, too?

For further reading, try IS ubuntu worth the free price tag? (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=262673&highlight=free+ubuntu+worth+cost)

/agrees


I would like to point out, that you have a bias, remember, I have experienced this when I first started using ubuntu, it wasnt like windows, I would get frustrated, but eventually when I broke away from my mind set I began to really appreciate ubuntu. When I first used OSX I found it incredibly frustrating, I really really hated it, again, windows bias at the time, it wasnt windows its a new environment. yes the first install and trouble shooting can be long and frustrating, but thats true for any operating system.

[spur]

I have never worried about these types of posts. I can't beleive what they say as I have never had much difficulty in getting any recent linux distro to work. Windows takes a lot longer to get how you want and more work to keep going. To go to that much trouble to write the post itself tells me it's a troll at work. Some one scared stiff that linux might actually be better than their present os.

[bodhi.zazen]

kansaibear is correct. Look at his needs: Enterprise level solution and Mac compatibility.

Ubuntu does not fit that bill.

And in business, downtime does cost $$.

He did his homework and found a solution. We should be happy for him.

If he is looking for an enterprise level (Linux) solution SUSE or Red Hat would likely be best.

Ubuntu is fine for home use but we should be honest, it does not fit the bill in this case.

This does not degrade either Ubuntu or kansaibear. At least kansaibear was willing to take a look. How many or us have employers willing to look at Ubuntu in this way?

We should take this as an opportunity to improve Ubuntu.

[bluesphere]

Let's remember kansaibear was talking about ubuntu on PPC which is light years from OS X on the same hardware. The difference between getting a useful linux box on ppc vs i386 is an uncrossable chasm to say the very least. I kill myself getting marginal functionality from ubuntu on my ppc.

On my i386 however it only takes a couple of hours to build a very useable system that's way cooler than my Windex machine. And in a week I am no longer booting Windex and wondering why I am sacrificing that much drive space to a virus, malware & spyware riddled OS.

It's hard to understand the experience without the benefit of all the hardware and os's. I've been lucky enough to run just about every os available in the last 20 years and I've got to say that Apple has an amazing product in OSX. It is rock solid, but only because of Linux and the community. Let's let the Windows guys be the haters and keep collaborating.:twisted:

[kansaibear]

OK, you got me on the study part. Learning new things is cool, it is part of my job. Always been a hobby of mine. And true, if I were in a different line of work, all the study would be quite valuable. I can now install linux of various distros on old world macs in a heart beat:D

However, to compare any linux distro I have seen out there to anything more advanced than jaguar? Is there a distro that even compares with tiger or tiger server for real? Remember, I was talking about mac hardware not dells. And comparing OSX not windows... It would be true that someone that did not put up with the 1 day? learning curve to go from windows to OSX might not appreciate that. Jaguar is 15 bucks. Just flat cheap by any measure given the level of functionality and included software.

Study of one. I will agree that it was a big leap to assume that a large portion of the computing world would be in a similar situation. I have to believe that our situation is not really that unique however. Rumor has that Mac has a 14 percent share of the install base so I think that translates into a lot of people in a similar situation.

One thing that I did notice is that nobody adressed the software issue as to the convenience of calendars, syncing software, etc. Legal downloads for previous versions of non apple software are available on line and dirt cheap as well. Just wanted to compare apples with ...er apples;)

Linux users, I applaud you. It was my own lack of time and resource that led me to my conclusions. And you guys are the ones that will force the mainstream software community to innovate.I do think that the average person should have more than 'linux is great! tastes just like sugar with no calories" message so they can make a reasoned decision. Kind of reminds me of the Olestra scandal. If you can put up with anal leakage, its a great way to trim the waist....

I will give it another shot when I get more time, maybe on a dell next time....

cheers

[WalmartSniperLX]

Your scientific study of 1 person?

Well, why don't we make it a study of 2 people, then?

For me, cost:

$5 for all the blank CDs I burnt trying out different distros

That's it. All the time I've put into learning Linux has actually helped me be more productive on Windows at work even. When I upgrade to Edgy, the cost will be $0. When I upgrade to Edgy+1, the cost will be $0.

If I were to get Leopard and Leopard+1 or Vista and Vista+1, do you know what the costs would be?

Anyone want to make this a study of 3 or 4?

I love threads like these now. They used to annoy me, but now they just entertain me.

Do you "attempt" to learn a foreign language and then complain about how much work that is, too?

For further reading, try IS ubuntu worth the free price tag? (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=262673&highlight=free+ubuntu+worth+cost)

What distros have you tried? which is your favorite? I just want to get an idea of whats out there, and I dont think Im going to switch out of ubuntu for a long time (or untill I actually learn linux completely):D

[bluesphere]

I'm dl'ing the Fedora 5 iso's as I type. I can't wait to try that out on a 450mhz G4 w/scsi that was just donated to me. I hate knowing in advance that I won't be getting RealPlayer or a bunch of other stuff out of the deal since there are no such animals for ppc yet. I hope the ppc effort isn't abandoned because these are awesome cpu's and worth saving. Only something like Xubuntu can do that.

That being said though, a free machine with a free OS will give me another guest box for friends to check their webmail while keeping them off my laptop. Hell with a little work I might even get Mplayer and the plugin working and add a little video to the mix.

My first experience with ubuntu and a 400mhz iMac was a little frustrating but I actually learned how to edit my xorg.conf to include proper v&h sync values and restart gdm. I learned that I loved pico and hated many other editors.

Just a couple of days later I spun that box again, edited xorg.conf, installed
Xubuntu and had a working WEP wireless connection, zippy browser and fully updated OS waiting for me to discover what else I could break or add to the mix.

For my personal edification and use FREE was nice.

I would love to see Xubuntu as a viable solution on old ppc hardware as it is readily available to me and would give me an opportunity to pro bono a solution to organizations and individuals with little if any budget.

The curve is there but I see light at the end of the tunnel and, unlike windows, this time it's not a train. :cool:

[nocturn]

OK, basicly you claim that if I give you a free DVD player, it costs you because you have to unpack it, read the manual, connect it to your TV etc.

I don't buy your line of thinking, sorry.

[asimon]

OK, basicly you claim that if I give you a free DVD player, it costs you because you have to unpack it, read the manual, connect it to your TV etc.

I don't buy your line of thinking, sorry.
Happy new world, were everything is meassured in money.

[bigken]

If I were to get Vista and Vista+1, do you know what the costs would be?


Hears you pricing from pc world (http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0025230309.115925847 9@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccckaddimfgjddlcflgceggdhhmdfhn.0&page=GenericEditorial&genericeditorial=windows_vista) ;)

[xhaan]

I can power a whole city with my whining.

...

[wieman01]

I've been lucky enough to run just about every os available in the last 20 years and I've got to say that Apple has an amazing product in OSX. It is rock solid, but only because of Linux and the community. Let's let the Windows guys be the haters and keep collaborating.:twisted:
It is rock solid, I have to agree. Sadly there hardware is a joke... breaks down all the time. This in combination with poor customer service, I am keeping my distance from MAC. This despite the fact that I love the OS.

[wieman01]

However, to compare any linux distro I have seen out there to anything more advanced than jaguar? Is there a distro that even compares with tiger or tiger server for real? Remember, I was talking about mac hardware not dells. And comparing OSX not windows... It would be true that someone that did not put up with the 1 day? learning curve to go from windows to OSX might not appreciate that. Jaguar is 15 bucks. Just flat cheap by any measure given the level of functionality and included software.
Buddy, the math is simple. MAC OS caters to one hardware manufacturer only. As much as I love OSX, try to run on a standard PC or Sparc, you name it. The problem with MAC is not the OSX which happens to be beautiful, the best operating system I know. The hardware is just rubbish, Apple's customer service the worst on the planet.

It's not a fair comparison because you cannot compare other OS's with OSX without comparing the hardware at the same time. And sorry to say that, but Apple loses out there by all means.

This is definitely NOT apple to apple if you know what I mean.

[ago]

OK, gave it a fair shot but....
ubuntu 5.x

Ubuntu 5.x ????

[kansaibear]

Seems like a lot of people just felt slapped and missed the point.
I wanted to keep an old mac powerbook in service.
What the point is it to point out how much vista will cost?
And is anyone seriously comparing the new OSX 10.5 with ubuntu 6.06? it costs for a reason.
I was putting it on a MAC POWERBOOK G3 Wallstreet II, not a windex box.
In the end, the 18 dollar OSX 10.2. (available today, disks n all for imediate delivery)
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/osx-center/
cd, real player, ical, video chat, mail, airport extreme, sync.... and it syncs in with the tiger stuff no prob. I thought that the nested calendars in tiger would be a probem.
Not a single thing does not work. In fact the only mac software that is out is ichat av.
So skype filled that gap though not quite as elegant.
I did look check out the ubuntu 6.... it is a nice OS.
But simply not in the same league as even Jaguar. not to mention panther or tiger.
Mac hardware problems? hmmmmm
The newest box we have is circa 2001, and every one runs tiger fine.
In fact I was running tiger on the wallstreet with Xpost facto until I tried ydl and ubuntu.
Fact is, it was much faster than the ubuntu 5.10, and all the hardware worked.
I just heard how much faster linux was so I thought I would give it a try.
Maybe on a newer box windex box where drivers are there for everything.
and it is not doubt that it makes win 2000 look like something from playskool.
In the end, I was reaquainted with 10.2.8 and find my self amazed.
I thumbed my nose at it because of all the bells n whistles in tiger but, it is a fine OS.
Rage II pro supported, all the hardware supported, software with no problems.
And to tell the truth, I truley appreciate my old girl once again even though she is lives in the back office now.
Her name is keiko and the first new computer I ever bought.
She was more than 3000 dollars then for 300 mz...
I dont have any friends that have a toshiba sattelite from that era that still work in daily production.
She syncs the mails, runs dreamweaver to update the website, runs fireworks to fiddle with the graphics, camino is quite a smooth browser, connects to the network with with a single click, picks up any wirless network in range....
I will admit that I loved the drums, and after going the fedora route, I think the debian base was slickest and gnome was pretty cool.
And I did download virtual desktops for the old girl because expose is a not in jaguar.
And I got used to using those in just the few days that I was pulling my hair out.
Quite a bit of open source software available for mac I found thru this experience.
When I get some time, I will definitely pick up cheap used dell and do it again.
But for now, I am positive that an old world mac, should just stay that way.

[fuscia]

Ya know, I am a tinkerer by nature and I really wanted to make this work but I just dont have the time and money for now.

where did you ever find the time to post this thread?

[ago]

Not a single thing does not work.

Quite obviously so... You are installing OSX on hardware designed for OSX. If you want to compare apples with apples, try installing OSX on a system76 machine... Right, you can't...

[ago]

Fact is, it was much faster than the ubuntu 5.10
Why not RH6.0?

[Klaidas]

linux, too expensive
Linux is free if your time has no value :P

[ago]

Linux is free if your time has no value :P

I was spending far more time installing and maintaining my Windows boxes...

[xhaan]

Ubuntu wouldn't install on my fondue pot, I had already upgraded my lawnmower and I wasted x time units because the invisible man twisted my arm and I wasn't able to stop at y time units earlier, x time units * z rupees = a whole lot of moolah which I never actually spent but probably could of had and spent on some tasty grumblecakes.

[bluesphere]

Honestly I'm surprised to see such lack of openmindedness and bashing in a forum for community developed software. Everything is one way or the other. Either your with me or your against me. That's a damn shame and definitely not how this product got off the ground. Feel free to trash me too just because I disagree with the overal mood while defending the greater good.

[xhaan]

Sorry if it seems like I'm harsh or bashing, I just don't understand and am a bit frustrated and venting I guess.


OS A works perfectly on my hardware, but:
I want to install OS B which doesn't work well on my hardware but I'll spend a week trying to force it to work, then switch to OS A.

I just don't understand. Why torture yourself?
And especially, why torture yourself and then complain about how you suffered?

[kansaibear]

Xhan, thanks for your comments. I love your caustic sense of humor. I enjoyed reading everyones opinions and ideas.

The deal is that I was running tiger on the old girl and she just wasnt keeping up. I had read so many wonderful things about linux, my buddy who is a system engineer also said it was cool. All the open source stuff looked cool to, I wanted to see for myself how usuable it was. I looked at the sites and though there were some people with troubles, they did not look insurmountable. How many silly posts have we all seen from people that just did dumb things.

As for working with linux, I was programming when computers had no screens and we used punch cards, assembly language, unix and fortran. There were no apples or ibms or cds or floppies... they didnt even have pocket calculators then. Just flashing lights just like on the original star trek : ) I have just grown lazy and appreciate the gui. The sportscar gave way to the 4 door. Us old people are like that.

From reading all the wonderful things about linux, it seemed like it would be a good way to help the old girl spend her golden year or two before she suffered a screen meltdown or something. I would throw these old macs away if they would just die but they just wont.

I just wanted to leave some honest input from my experience for the next person that wanted to try the same thing. The biggest thing that I read in all the linux blogs is how linux is able to make marginal hardware sing. Now I know. It makes old pentium 500 mgtz boxes sing, not old mac ones. That is all. There was no need to slam me, no need to slam mac hardware...

And in the process, I discovered that the previous versions of OSX were being given away for just about the cost of the disk and postage and I thought that was information that people with the same parameters that I was working with would appreciate. A good value is a good value and people that are interested in using their hardware and being productive with what they have would appreciate it.

Is LINUX cool? It sure is. Is it ready for prime time for the average consumer? Not even close. Does working thru the problems make someone a better person and help them become more astute with regards to the fundamentals of their computers, networks and software. Absolutely. Is that a good thing? Absolutely. Does every one have time for that? Absolutley not. And the fact that someone shares his experience honestly should be welcomed by the linux world so they can see the strengths and weaknesses of thier product from the average persons view.

Now you guys just keep on kicking *** and taking names and push on to greater heights.

[aysiu]

Is it ready for prime time for the average consumer? Not even close. Translation: the average consumer never sees a Linux-preloaded desktop or laptop computer.

[xhaan]

Xhan, thanks for your comments. I love your caustic sense of humor.

I'm glad you see it for what it is, it was indeed humor and no hard feelings were ever intended. I guess I was just a little fired up that day. :D


I just wanted to leave some honest input from my experience for the next person that wanted to try the same thing. The biggest thing that I read in all the linux blogs is how linux is able to make marginal hardware sing. Now I know. It makes old pentium 500 mgtz boxes sing, not old mac ones. That is all. There was no need to slam me, no need to slam mac hardware...

I don't mind input but I think the format in which it was initially presented is what got me.

[3rdalbum]

As an Ubuntu/PPC user myself, I can definately tell you that Linux on anything other than 32-bit x86 is not a good indication of where Linux is at. Using Linux for a week is also not a good indication of where Linux is at.

I definately urge you to try Ubuntu on an x86 PC, you'll probably like it. Apple do lock you into their own software as badly as Microsoft does, so you can't expect perfect cross-compatibility, but the Linux community does its best. If you like a more integrated desktop, you might want to check out Kubuntu.

[aysiu]

There's this guy in our IT department at work who uses Ubuntu on an old Mac laptop, and I asked him, "But isn't PowerPC Ubuntu kind of crippled?"

He responded, "Crippled? How so?"

"Well, you can't really view Flash websites in PowerPC."

"I don't really need to view Flash websites..."

"What about Wine?"

"I don't use Wine either."

He's a programmer, and that's his job. So I can sort of understand where he's coming from. But to an end-user like me, PowerPC Linux is crippled. It seems to me people who use Ubuntu on PPC or AMD64 are just asking for trouble.

[prizrak]

Apple support is pretty bad in Linux, you might have better luck with FreeBSD if you want to play with that. Since OS X is based off BSD anyway there might be better compatibility or at least ability to rip the drivers out of OS X and use them. I'm not sure if it's possible just a guess :)

[John.Michael.Kane]

@aysiu I use Ubuntu-64bit with no trouble on my hardware.

[aysiu]

@aysiu I use Ubuntu-64bit with no trouble on my hardware.
No, I'm not talking about the hardware. I'm talking about the software--fewer .debs available in the repositories.

[got_nix]

also if the 64bit ubuntu is giving trouble on your 64 bit arch system why not install the 32 bit version it'll run.. it'll work thats what i did it works flawlessly i have no problems at all. on my notebook

[John.Michael.Kane]

No, I'm not talking about the hardware. I'm talking about the software--fewer .debs available in the repositories.


Well then i guess I'm one of those users who don't have issues with software/hardware. When it comes to 64bit use I have been able to find what i need in the repo's.

When it comes to linux endusers should Improvise, Adapt, Overcome.

Work the problem don't let the problem work you.

[aysiu]

If someone comes in with that mindset--improvise, adapt, overcome, then, yes, I would advise 64-bit. Otherwise, I would think most end-users would be better of with 32.

[angkor]

Well then i guess I'm one of those users who don't have issues with software/hardware.

Me too! :)