Don't overlook Linux as a windows alternative

[sophtpaw]

Don't overlook Linux as a Windows alternative

I read with interest Clive Longbottom's opinion column about Linux as a viable alternative to Windows.

I fear he is taking an outdated and narrow-minded view of desktop use, certainly as far as larger IT departments are concerned. In my experience, most end-users need just three utilities: e-mail/a calendar scheduling tool; a web browser; and productivity tools, such as a word processor and spreadsheet. Evolution, Firefox and OpenOffice.org adequately fulfil these requirements.

Longbottoms cites three applications that are "not going to be ripped-out" - Quckbooks, Sage and Maximiser - but what percentage of end-users actually use these tools? Is he saying no-one can use Linux because a small percentage do not want to migrate to an alternative application?

Linux is surely a biable alternative for most desktop users, offering potential cost savings and easier maintenance (in my experience at least). I can also vouch for its greater reliability as a server-side operating system.

Longbottom needs to look at the greater good, not just one small aspect of IT usage.
-Paul Ashbrrok- IT consultant (Bolton)

copied from Computer Weekly (letters section


Welcome the GNU generation

--
sophtpaw

[npaladin2000]

Actually, with the number of people using products such as Microsoft Money and Quicken (not to mention TurboTax and other tax prep software) this sort of app has become critical. There's only a couple of competitors in Linux and one of them (Moneydance) is commerical. The other option, GNUCash, is a decent program saddled with a primitive-looking GTK1 interface which makes it look REALLY out of place.

I haven't tried Moneydance yet, but from the feature list, I'd still say it's not quite up to the level of Money or Quicken. Not to mention the fact that the OFX standard needs to be opened a little, as banks are being pushed into that over the QIF format (which was definitely getting dated and needing a replacement).

Come to think of it, I'd feel better if Intuit just ported Quicken to Linux/GTK. You don't want to screw around with finances...

[Brunellus]

Actually, with the number of people using products such as Microsoft Money and Quicken (not to mention TurboTax and other tax prep software) this sort of app has become critical. There's only a couple of competitors in Linux and one of them (Moneydance) is commerical. The other option, GNUCash, is a decent program saddled with a primitive-looking GTK1 interface which makes it look REALLY out of place.

I haven't tried Moneydance yet, but from the feature list, I'd still say it's not quite up to the level of Money or Quicken. Not to mention the fact that the OFX standard needs to be opened a little, as banks are being pushed into that over the QIF format (which was definitely getting dated and needing a replacement).

Come to think of it, I'd feel better if Intuit just ported Quicken to Linux/GTK. You don't want to screw around with finances...
yeah. but then RMS and his myrmidons would throw well-publicized hissy fits, and the media will see that linux is full of disgruntled hippies who don't want to pay for accounting software.

[npaladin2000]

yeah. but then RMS and his myrmidons would throw well-publicized hissy fits, and the media will see that linux is full of disgruntled hippies who don't want to pay for accounting software.

True, but sooner or later RMS & co. will have to learn how to coexist with closed-source, proprietary software without throwing a hissy-fit. Insisting all software be open is just as bad as insisting all software be closed. [-X We need to be one happy family of ones and zeros :grin:

After all, can't we all just get along?

[Lord Illidan]

I also think that when coming to finances, RMS should stop throwing hissy fits. After all, which business is going to play around with an open source program for their finances, when nothing is known about the program and its features are out of date.

Closed source is not evil, and sometimes we need it.

[Brunellus]

True, but sooner or later RMS & co. will have to learn how to coexist with closed-source, proprietary software without throwing a hissy-fit. Insisting all software be open is just as bad as insisting all software be closed. [-X We need to be one happy family of ones and zeros :grin:

After all, can't we all just get along?
not according to Stallman.

People, RMS is not going to 'coexist' with anyone but himself...and if the Linux community wont' do it for him, he'll march on over and try to get HURD moving.

[sophtpaw]

Actually, with the number of people using products such as Microsoft Money and Quicken (not to mention TurboTax and other tax prep software) this sort of app has become critical. There's only a couple of competitors in Linux and one of them (Moneydance) is commerical. The other option, GNUCash, is a decent program saddled with a primitive-looking GTK1 interface which makes it look REALLY out of place.

I haven't tried Moneydance yet, but from the feature list, I'd still say it's not quite up to the level of Money or Quicken. Not to mention the fact that the OFX standard needs to be opened a little, as banks are being pushed into that over the QIF format (which was definitely getting dated and needing a replacement).

Come to think of it, I'd feel better if Intuit just ported Quicken to Linux/GTK. You don't want to screw around with finances...

Hadn't thought of financial programs like the ones you mention. Well, i don't use or need a program like that. I don't have any money and i don't need a piece of software to tell me that.
Having said that Moneydance at $15 wouldn't break the bank. I wonder how much the equivalent in Microsoft would cost.
Also wonder how many people use such software. Spreadsheets can serve for simple account keeping, nay?

--
sophtpaw

[Knome_fan]

yeah. but then RMS and his myrmidons would throw well-publicized hissy fits, and the media will see that linux is full of disgruntled hippies who don't want to pay for accounting software.

Right on!
Just like they did with opera, textmaker, oracle, nero, sap, doom, maya, etc.

Oh wait, they didn't.

Could it be people like you throwing hissy fits, though nothing, null, nada, nichts even happened?

[Brunellus]

Right on!
Just like they did with opera, textmaker, oracle, nero, sap, doom, maya, etc.

Oh wait, they didn't.

Could it be people like you throwing hissy fits, though nothing, null, nada, nichts even happened?
Stallman's implacable opposition to *any* sort of proprietary software is pretty well-known.

Of course the cognoscenti (relatively few in number) know the difference between free and free; but that's a distinction that's lost when the mainstream pick it up.

[Galoot]

You've got to admit that linux is full of disgruntled hippies who don't want to pay for any software. The thing is, Windows is full of disgruntled non-hippies who don't want to pay for any software, too. The difference is that we have some reasonable legal choices, while Windows users have astalavista.box.sk. :D

[Knome_fan]

Stallman's implacable opposition to *any* sort of proprietary software is pretty well-known.

Yes, so?
RMS wants software to be free, news at eleven.

But your point was different, wasn't it?

yeah. but then RMS and his myrmidons would throw well-publicized hissy fits, and the media will see that linux is full of disgruntled hippies who don't want to pay for accounting software.
As I tried to show with my examples, this is simply untrue, to put it mildly.

I also simply don't understand the need of some people to bash RMS absolutely unprovoked. It's just amazing.

[Brunellus]

Yes, so?
RMS wants software to be free, news at eleven.

But your point was different, wasn't it?

As I tried to show with my examples, this is simply untrue, to put it mildly.

I also simply don't understand the need of some people to bash RMS absolutely unprovoked. It's just amazing.
It's a question of tone. To most end-users, RMS sounds rather too strident to be taken all that seriously. He, and a lot of activists, come off sometimes as street-corner prophets more than anything else.

I have enormous respect for the movement that he's built; I am somewhat less enthralled by some of the rhetoric.

[geekchic9]

About RMS:

RMS wants software to be free as in speech, not as in beer. He's OK with charging for software; he's done it himself. I highly recommend that you actually read what RMS has written at http://www.gnu.org. His positions make a lot more sense than his detractors want to admit. I know this because I used to be one of them.

Disclaimer: I am a member of the Free Software Foundation.

[Brunellus]

About RMS:

RMS wants software to be free as in speech, not as in beer. He's OK with charging for software; he's done it himself. I highly recommend that you actually read what RMS has written at http://www.gnu.org. His positions make a lot more sense than his detractors want to admit. I know this because I used to be one of them.

Disclaimer: I am a member of the Free Software Foundation.
speech versus beer is understood by the Movement but not by the people. So RMS's stumping for FREE, as easily understood by US, comes off as something rather different to the uninitiated.

[geekchic9]

speech versus beer is understood by the Movement but not by the people. So RMS's stumping for FREE, as easily understood by US, comes off as something rather different to the uninitiated.

OK. To the uninitiated:

Free beer = gratis. You don't have to pay for the beer.

Free speech = you have certain rights with the software, namely:

0: The freedom to run the software for any purpose.
1: The freedom to modify it to suit your needs. This means you need to have access to the source code, the code that makes the program run.
2: The freedom to distribute it (pass it on to help your neighbor.)
3: The freedom to release it back into the community so others can modify and distribute it. This also means you need access to the source code.

Does that make sense to the uninitiated now?

Ok, now you're probably asking, "Why do we need these freedoms?" There is a relatively short explanation given at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html.

Morgan

[az]

FLOSS advocates are not against paying for software. We are opposed to the notion that software is property.

Is it black and white for everybody? Probably not. Is there a need to proprietary software? Probably not. It would depend on your needs. I would say that more and more applications are available in FLOSS that surpass their proprietary equivalents.

I do not think that I have a right to tell you what is morally right or wrong when it comes to your choices of software. I can say that there will only be more and more choices for people to have. Proprietary software is not going to be a sustainable developmental model for very long.

It used to be that FLOSS was viable only to a very specialised group of people, like computer science and artificial intelligence. Nowadays, it is the opposite. users of super-specialised hardware find it difficult to use FLOSS. Most other users have more than adequate free-libre software to suit their needs.

[gflores]

Although I do like GNU/Linux and see it as a worthy OS, I see Apple as a greater competitor to Microsoft's dominance in the OS market. What do you guys think?

[aysiu]

Although I do like GNU/Linux and see it as a worthy OS, I see Apple as a greater competitor to Microsoft's dominance in the OS market. What do you guys think? I don't know if they directly compete. Windows you can buy as an operating system you can put on any number of generic PCs. There's no point in buying Mac OS X unless you have an Apple computer to put it on.

[poofyhairguy]

Although I do like GNU/Linux and see it as a worthy OS, I see Apple as a greater competitor to Microsoft's dominance in the OS market. What do you guys think?

I think Apple is more a competitor to Dell than a competitor to MS. Apple sells hardware just like Dell- MP3 players just like Dell and computers just like Dell. For a market advantage over Dell, Apples ships with its own operating system (that only works with Apple computers) and tries to have more "style." Dell competes by being boring cheaply.

MS is not a competitor to Apple, they are partners. Thats why OSX has an Office. Office some quarters makes way more money than Windows. MS is a big company. Everyone focuses on their OS, but they do a lot more. Apple is a hardware and software company- but they use the software (OSX, iTunes on Windows) to sell the hardware.

MS and Apple don't compete in my mind until OSX can be on Dells legally (I don't see this happening) or until Apple releases a game console.

Sure, one of MS's products can do the same thing as a subset of one of Apple's products (Windows VS. OSX sold as a part of the package for Apple computers). But they don't compete in the same market because OSX is tied with another product.

[aysiu]

Just to illustrate the point a bit more clearly, take a look at a Microsoft site search for Mac (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Amicrosoft.com+mac&btnG=Google+Search) and a search for Linux (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Amicrosoft.com+linux&btnG=Google+Search)

Even if Apple and Microsoft are business partners on some products, they're definitely not buddies, though. Otherwise, this page (http://www.apple.com/switch/) wouldn't exist.

[poofyhairguy]

Just to illustrate the point a bit more clearly, take a look at a Microsoft site search for Mac (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Amicrosoft.com+mac&btnG=Google+Search) and a search for Linux (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Amicrosoft.com+linux&btnG=Google+Search)

Even if Apple and Microsoft are business partners on some products, they're definitely not buddies, though. Otherwise, this page (http://www.apple.com/switch/) wouldn't exist.


Thats funny. First three links for Apple:


Internet Explorer 5 for Mac

Download Center for Windows Media Player for Mac

Mactopia (MS page on Mac)

First three links for Linux:


Get the Facts Home

How to Remove Linux and Install Windows XP

How to Remove Linux and Install Windows on Your Computer

Home run.