My non-vintage computer

[lizardb0y]

Errr, um. I have a desktop computer at home which isn't vintage at all. It's only a year or so old in fact. It's rather nondescript, but connects to the Interwibble, unlike most of my vintage computers. Sometimes I have to open it up and wobble the video card, otherwise it won't boot. It runs Ubuntu 11.04, and I'm rather hesitant to "upgrade" to 11.10, what with the Unity UI and everything. I doubt it will ever be a classic, but it does the job alright.

Not much else to say, really. Anyone?

[Gibsaw]

Errr, um. I have a desktop computer at home which isn't vintage at all. It's only a year or so old in fact. It's rather nondescript, but connects to the Interwibble, unlike most of my vintage computers. Sometimes I have to open it up and wobble the video card, otherwise it won't boot. It runs Ubuntu 11.04, and I'm rather hesitant to "upgrade" to 11.10, what with the Unity UI and everything. I doubt it will ever be a classic, but it does the job alright.

Not much else to say, really. Anyone?

Heh.. an interesting first message, and true to the character of these forums. "Yeah I've got a system.. runs linux.. it's kinda flaky, but it goes... mostly."

If this was a teenage "overclocker's" forum. It would have been more like..

"I've got a mega beast that 0wnz all of j00.I'm getting 667FPS in bioshock and it's got a Intel Core2 i9 with 100,000 cores (c0z AMD sux0rz) and 128PB of RAM and an nVidia GeForce 12000 with 64GB of DDR10 VRAM and 2048 parallel pipelines... it's s0000000 f4st that all j00 n00b's will n3v3r b34t me!!!"

... all while breathing heavily and using the mouse with the LEFT hand, if you get my drift. (no disrespect to actual left-handers intended.)

[tezza]

If this was a teenage "overclocker's" forum. It would have been more like..

"I've got a mega beast that 0wnz all of j00.I'm getting 667FPS in bioshock and it's got a Intel Core2 i9 with 100,000 cores (c0z AMD sux0rz) and 128PB of RAM and an nVidia GeForce 12000 with 64GB of DDR10 VRAM and 2048 parallel pipelines... it's s0000000 f4st that all j00 n00b's will n3v3r b34t me!!!"

... all while breathing heavily and using the mouse with the LEFT hand, if you get my drift. (no disrespect to actual left-handers intended.)

LOL!! Good one.

The two non-vintage computers I interact with are both Windows machines (Windows XP even). My wife has an Imac.

Personally I've never played around with Linux systems? Apart from satisfying curiosity and a different interface, would they offer anything I would't get from my Windows boxes?

[Carcenomy]

That's a good question Tezza. I've asked it myself a few times and decided to take the plunge and try it out on a few of my machines... it's like a compulsion I get every five years or so. Last attempt was to run Linux on my iBook G3. At the time I believe Ubuntu was at 9.1, or somewhere around there. Power control didn't work whatsoever. I tried the other *buntu variants... Xubuntu was the only one that behaved at all well. Still didn't feel right. Tried straight Debian. Ran alright but it just... ehhhh it just didn't work the way I wanted. Plus neither GNOME nor KDE worked nicely at 800x600.

I gave in and formatted it, installed OS X 10.4.11 Tiger instead.

Give it a whirl but if it's a machine you care about greatly, use virtualization instead of banishing your native everyday OS.

As for my non-vintages... where do I start, they account for just as many computers as the vintage machines. The newest is in an old HP Pavilion 8120 tower, but is packing modern gaming hardware and runs 7

[lizardb0y]

I have used Debian GNU/Linux and more recently Ubuntu as my primary Desktop OS for about 12 or 13 years. Prior to that I always had a Windows dual-boot that I would use for software that wasn't available, but I haven't done that for years.

Almost everything I use today runs as well or better under Linux than Windows. On the whole Linux is as easy to install as any other. Occasionally I have challenges getting drivers to install, though this is invariably because the vendor won't maintain their drivers for LInux, and provide source code so that the community can maintain it.

The app store idea - a single place you can get all your apps installed seamlessly and easily - came from Linux. People keep complaining that it's hard to install new programs in Linux; I hear stories that go "I went to a website and I downloaded a `tar' file and I couldn't work out how to expand it and then it wanted to compile something and I couldn't work it our so I gave up." That's the Windows way of doing things. The standard procedure for installing an application in Debian was either "open Synaptic tool, tick the box beside the applications you want, and click `Apply'" or "type `apt-get install [application name]'" if you like the command line. The GUI methods are more polished now, and have names like "Ubuntu Software Centre."

There are still occasionally Windows programs I want to run, and more often than not they run just fine under Linux.

I'm not saying that Linux is for everyone. The application names are a bit odder, because we don't generally have highly paid marketing people deciding what to call our apps. I'm sure some people really do need to run MS Office instead of OpenOffice.org, though it should be pointed out that MS Office runs fine on LInux. I guess some people really do need to run Photoshop instead of GIMP, or InDesign instead of InkScape. Or Lightroom instead of Darktable, RawTherapee, Bibble, or LightZone. I bet the majority of people who use (pirated) Photoshop or Lightroom have no particular reason to use it at all, but some do.

The problem I have is that, under Mac OS (I'm running Snow Leopard still, Lion looks like a dog) or Windows, the majority of software I want to run doesn't, or is a pain in the arse to install. And Apple keep pulling features I was using - anyone else notice that they killed the ability to mount HFS partitions Read+Write in Snow Leopard? I did, and it took me almost two hours before I realised that's what it was. It worked fine in Leopard.

[ZL2AOX]

Primarily, I use OS X on a MacBook Pro (laptop). Not to say I'm a rabid Mac fanboy, I just find the GUI more intuitive and pleasing to the eye - nicer fonts and jellybean buttons!

I can also dual-boot Windows XP but I really only run Windows for games. It has by far the largest pool to choose from.

I also run Ubuntu under virtualization software (Parallels) but mostly to test my software ports. OS X is basically *nix under the hood anyway. And mainstream Linux has become bloatware! I know there are cut-down distributions, but ensuring portability across all of them is a headache for a developer.

So... I've got the "big three" covered, although I should probably upgrade my Windows XP to the latest.

I regularly use vintage OSes too (both emulated and on real hardware) - primarily DOS, but also CP/M, Minix, OS/2 and early versions of Windows. Also TOS/GEM on my Atari ST.

I'm currently developing a DOS-hosted CPU emulator that I'm hoping will allow me to run some of the ancient mainframe OSes & software that's archived on bitsavers.org - initially Control Data, then later perhaps DEC and IBM.

[Gibsaw]

I regularly use vintage OSes too (both emulated and on real hardware) - primarily DOS, but also CP/M, Minix, OS/2 and early versions of Windows. Also TOS/GEM on my Atari ST.

What environment are you using to virtualise OS/2?

I'm currently developing a DOS-hosted CPU emulator that I'm hoping will allow me to run some of the ancient mainframe OSes & software that's archived on bitsavers.org - initially Control Data, then later perhaps DEC and IBM.

Have you had a look at the hercules project?

[gavo]

Personally I've never played around with Linux systems? Apart from satisfying curiosity and a different interface, would they offer anything I would't get from my Windows boxes?

Yes - pain and suffering. Sorry guys, but honestly, Linux is nothing but pain and suffering compared to Windows (ouch!) for the average home user, if it wasnt, people wouldnt be buying home computers with Windows - they would be buying them with a free/cheap Linux distro.

If you want a desktop computer with UNIX like capabilities, MacOS X for the win.

Linux for home use is great if you want to pretend you are a hard code hacker from the 80's but thats about it - imho

Huzah!

[WelshWizard]

Most who use Linux want the Non Bloat wear OS , and also the fact that what's the point of a Virus attack on some thing that free, no challange for the Hackers. but there Arch enemies the Big Corps Like Microsoft , Norton, etc. ( B Gates in particuler)

[lizardb0y]

Personally I've never played around with Linux systems? Apart from satisfying curiosity and a different interface, would they offer anything I would't get from my Windows boxes?

Yes - pain and suffering. Sorry guys, but honestly, Linux is nothing but pain and suffering compared to Windows (ouch!) for the average home user, if it wasnt, people wouldnt be buying home computers with Windows - they would be buying them with a free/cheap Linux distro.

I have to respectfully disagree with you about that. People buy computers with Windows, because that's what shops sell.

I had a technically illterate friend visit a while ago, who had a laptop running Windows XP at home. He stayed for a couple of weeks, and in that time had no problems using my computer. I only told him it wasn't Windows on the very last day he was staying and he professed he didn't notice there was any difference. The barrier to change is that people are used to whatever they're used to. There is absolutely nothing stopping the vast majority of home users using any commonly available desktop environment. There are some peripherals for which drivers are not in the base kernel. These can be problematic, but the device manufacturers are the problem here, not the OS. If more people pressured the manufacturers to even just open their specs they'd be fully supported pretty quickly. This same problem applies to Mac OS to a lesser extent.

If you want a desktop computer with UNIX like capabilities, MacOS X for the win.

I use Mac OS X, Windows and Linux on a daily basis and I can tell you I vastly prefer the ease of use and simplicity of configuration of my Linux desktops versus the rest. Of all of them, I like Mac OS X the least. I'd rather they went back to NeXTstep and started again.

Linux for home use is great if you want to pretend you are a hard code hacker from the 80's but thats about it - imho

It hasn't been that since the 90s. Modern Linux distributions are trivial to install, pleasing to the eye, easy to use and reliable.

[ZL2AOX]

What environment are you using to virtualise OS/2?

I can't say I've ever tried to get OS/2 running under virtualisation.
I've got Warp 3 installed (natively) on a 486 PC.

Have you had a look at the hercules project?

Thanks for that link. No I wasn't aware of it but I'll certainly take a good look at their source code when the time comes. I won't import it directly because of the license restrictions but it'll be a useful reference. Performance is more a design goal of my project (vs portability) so I can optimise my code with assembly language. Anyhow, IBM support is quite some way down the track at this stage. It's a long-term project and I've only just started.

What I'm planning is not an all-software emulator but a small PC inside a box with a connector for plugging in various front panels - each functionally replicating a particular mainframe console. Similar consoles for 8-bit hobby microcomputers can be added, e.g. Altair 8800, IMSAI 8080.

[gavo]

I have to respectfully disagree with you about that.

I will respectfully agree to disagree

[Carcenomy]

Really with Linux, it's fine to give to noobs because they don't want to know how it works. It's fine for the technically capable who are prepared to put in the ground work and learn to use it, but it's the middleground where it pisses me off. You want to make a minor adjustment, and it requires major work. Hey I might be wrong and perhaps it is time for another go at Linux, but realistically for everything I want, I'll keep Windows 7. The only thing I couldn't get to work on my machine recently was the old Duke Nukem 3D screen saver package, and that's because it's a 16-bit application.

And the no 16-bit when in 64-bit native mode isn't a Windows limitation, it's an everyone limitation.

Mac OS X can catch fire too. Let me see, since 2001 we've had what, three major revisions of Windows? And the oldest is still supported. OS X has seen eight! 10.4 Tiger is rapidly decaying too, which leaves Leopard as the only PPC supporting OS, and the number of PPC Macs that can run Leopard correctly is shortening up very very quickly. And DebianPPC is in no way at the same stage that it is on x86. Sucks for those of us with, er, 'middle-aged' Macs, our machines are being forced out to pasture.

[lizardb0y]

... but it's the middleground where it pisses me off. You want to make a minor adjustment, and it requires major work.

Out of curiosity, what kind of minor adjustments are you talking about?

[Gibsaw]

Most who use Linux want the Non Bloat wear OS , and also the fact that what's the point of a Virus attack on some thing that free, no challange for the Hackers. but there Arch enemies the Big Corps Like Microsoft , Norton, etc. ( B Gates in particuler)

Dude, that's seriously naive.

All the major OS's are attackable targets for for remote code execution, including (and some might say, especially) linux - being more often than not a server, it's a useful stepping stone into a network (if not DMZ'd) or at least to useful bandwidth.

These days, only a few egotistical kids give a toss about the big corps... Most run of the mill hackers are after one of two things. Bandwidth or an anonymous relay of some sort... or some combination of the two. (bandwidth AND anonymous relays to control a DDoS attack or deliver lots of SPAM) ... and they don't really care which platform it is.

Windows hosts make good raw bandwidth grunts. Linux hosts are their control host or relay host of choice, but they'll take anything they can get.