The big news is that I’m leaving tomorrow, and will be gone until July 18th. Thanks to the wonders of Akismet, blog maintenance hasn’t been a problem recedntly: hopefully it won’t become one.

In other news, I’ve been having an epic struggle with the Thinkpad. Ubuntu and CrunchBang are way too slow. SliTaz and USE won’t recognize my wired network card. Arch flatly refused to make X cooperate, although I’m wondering if that wasn’t a human-based error…I might try that again once I get back. And currently it has Ubuntu GTK 1.2 Remix, which does recognize the network card, and let me very easily install Wine–let there be much LANing.

I’ve also been plugging away at Twirminal, a terminal-based Twitter client written in Python with curses. It’s looking kind of promising–if it enters Alpha, I’ll either make a Subversion branch here, or else just host it on Launchpad. And even if it doesn’t work, it’s very nice to be writing in Python, not Java. My brain is smiling.

I’m sitting here watching the Stanley Cup finals (Go Pens!), and I just saw a new Microsoft ad, in the same series as the one with Lauren. I missed the girl’s name–it was something foreign and politically correct–but she went to the store and said she was looking for a good video editing laptop for less than $2,000. There was one Mac that made the price cutoff, and it had less RAM (only 2 GB) than a comparably priced PC.

I have two main issues here:

1. For video editing, what I’ve heard is that Mac OS X is a LOT better than Windows Vista. That sounds reasonable to me–I’ll confess I don’t have any firsthand experience. And if the only issue the girl has is a few GB of RAM…I’m not sure that’s decisive. Further reading here and here.
2. Note the lack of Linux. I’m not even sure I’m outraged–I’ve also heard that video editing is Linux’s Achilles’ Heel–and maybe this is one of those times were Linux is legitimately not the best option. But it’s also a very conscientious point on the part of Microsoft: mentioning Linux–however negatively–would expose the name to people who’ve never heard of it, and it would also legitimize it as a valid choice of OS. (Eh, guess I am outraged).

Think about it: the average hockey fan does not read techy magazines and blogs, does not care about the freedom of his software, has misguided notions about security and performance, and assumes that if there’s anything “new” he should know about, he’ll hear about it. Quite frankly, I don’t blame him. And from a marketing standpoint, Microsoft is right to avoid it. The mere use of the word “Linux” would make a few people wonder what it was, do some research, and–at best–convert, or at least realize that Windows is not the only solution for their PC.

That’s not all though. I have a sticker on the lid of my laptop that says “Ubuntu: Linux for Human Beings” with the Circle of Friends logo. I’m sure a few people have seen it, and it may’ve been their first exposure to Linux. But seeing a random sticker on someone’s laptop–especially if they’re a geek like me–isn’t the most inspiring reference. People will probably assume that it’s something that’s not meant for them, much like esoteric three-letter vacation destination abbreviations on the back of cars: a reference designed for the “in” group (yes, we know OBX, but MDI? BB? SWH?)*.

But if Microsoft said “Linux” on the television, and put it in the same category as Apple, maker of the sexiest laptops on the market*…Linux is something real, it’s something major, and it’s something you should learn about. We’ll know Linux adoption is really making progress when Microsoft gets more proactive about shooting it down. I can’t wait.

——-

*That would be Mount Desert Island, Bethany Beach and Southwest Harbor.

**[citation needed] I really like Thinkpads right now.

There are hundreds of stories about people who pulled an old Windows 95/98/ME computer out of their basement, put some kind of Linux distro on it, and are in a computing heaven, blissfully unaware of the age of their computer. And you never hear about people pulling the same computer out and saying, “Wow! Windows 95 solves all of my problems! Good bye, modern computing!” Why is Linux so dominant in this category? Here are a few reasons.

1. Release date. Microsoft has a finite budget. The portion labeled “OS Development” needs to go to a new OS that will pack in hardware-hungry features. The modern businessman doesn’t give a darn about how much money his computer costs, he just needs the latest and “greatest” software on it. So old computers are stuck with old MS operating systems, which lack the development techniques and consumer needs of 2009. Since Linux either has an infinite or non-existent budget (depending on how you look at it) some people decide to focus on lightweight distributions. 2009 software on a 1995 machine is much better than 1993 software on a 1995 machine. For example, would you rather use Abiword 2.6.8, or MS Word ‘97?
2. Cost. Linux is free. Windows isn’t. Linux lets you burn bootable .iso’s, Windows doesn’t–if you can’t find your Windows 98 installation disc, it will never get reinstalled. This is pretty straightforward.
3. Support. Windows XP, Vista and (soon) 7 have  a number of support options, either from Microsoft, local geeks, or internet forums. They’re also too slow. Windows 95, 98 and 2000 are faster, but their support is limited to a few nice people dredging their memories to help you. On the other hand, Linux has tens of thousands of people willing to help you through forums (ubuntuforums.org (which helps you with any distro), linuxquestions.org, SliTaz forums, Puppy forums, DSL forums…) as well as comprehensive documentation and wikis.
4. Specialization. Since there’s only supposed to be one main version of Windows in use at a time, by necessity it has to be a Swiss Army knife of an operating system. Linux, on the other hand, has a whole bunch of options. A lot of people are happy with a terminal-only system. Some must have package management, other don’t need it. Some want a themeable desktop with pretty colors, wallpapers and icons. Others would rather have a sparse desktop and use the hardware savings elsewhere. And then you get nutcases power users who make a torrent slave, file/print server or media streamer. Have fun making that without Linux.
5. Hardware Support and Variety. As I pointed out a few weeks ago, sometimes hardware just doesn’t work. This problem is also present in Windows: OEMs have no reason to be polite and leave vintage drivers up on their website. Even if they do, making things work in Windows 95 is a nightmare: you have to burn a CD (or sometimes a floppy(!))with the USB drive driver, install that, use the USB drive to transfer hardware for the network card, the sound card, the USB mouse (if it works at all), and any other peripheral. It’s very hit-or-miss, and if you miss, you’re done. And don’t forget there’s no Plug and Play. Install. Reboot. Install. Reboot…aack! It doesn’t work!* With Linux (and especially with Linux on older hardware), the odds are that everything will work as expected on a vanilla install. And if DSL doesn’t recognize it, use Puppy. If that doesn’t work, go with SliTaz. Failing that, install ubuntu-minimal and put Openbox on top of it. If all else fails, maybe Ubuntu GTK 1.2 Remix** will work. I have a network card that works in DSL, Puppy and UGTK1.2R, but not in SliTaz and Ubuntu Server. I hardly care–there’s too many alternatives available to let these things get you down.

So really, there’s no excuse for not putting Linux on your old computer. Try it–you might be surprised by how usable it becomes–after all, your current hardware is probably overpowered.

Have fun.

—-

*Clarification: Installing hardware drivers on an old Windows is guaranteed to be tedious and time-consuming. With Linux, hardware will probably work with the first distro you boot up, and almost certainly with the second or third. I would rather swap CDs (bring a magazine to read in the three minutes it’ll take to boot up), than track down and install individual Windows drivers.

**Clarification #2: UGTK1.2R is the only distro mentioned here that uses GTK 1.2. And note that it’s mentioned as a last resort. Consequently, it’s the only distro on which Abiword 2.6 doesn’t work.