Intrepid Ibex

SkyHog

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
18,431
Location
Castle Rock, CO
Display Name

Display name:
Everything Offends Me
I just downloaded and installed the final release candidate for Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid Ibex. Its pretty slick, its pretty. I haven't run into any issues yet. Seems like a lot of things that did not work properly out of the box in Hardy Heron have been fixed.

I am about to install the restricted driver for my video card, so lets see if that flips like Hardy Heron did. The only way around it was to use the generic driver, which didn't provide for 3d support...

Here goes nothing.
 
And it works beautfifully :D

I'm happy. Lets see how X-Plane does.
 
Up late are we?

I couldn't sleep. I tried and failed.

Update on Ibex: I can't get it to run the executable on the X-Plane cd from either the GUI or from the console....I'm sure I'm being dumb.
 
Weird issue #2 (fixed the last one). Manually opening the CD-ROM makes it open and close right away.

Ejecting through Gnome works fine.
 
Well, with the official launch of Intrepid Ibex (8.10) upcoming, I decided to do some pretty serious testing today to determine the use of Dual Booting, and I think I've determined that the new version of Ubuntu is ready to take over my entire 1.5TB of disk space among multiple drives. I have yet to find anything that won't run:

Games:
X-Plane: it runs beautifully, even faster on this build than previous versions of Ubuntu, and much faster than Windows Vista or XP
World of Warcraft: yes, I'm a dweeb sometimes, but WoW is something that has always been a bit of a pain to configure and run in Linux. Now, installing Wine (not really a Windows emulator) is easy as pie, and WoW runs with very little configuration, only one change to the default setup to use OpenGL instead of DirectX.
Joystick Support: Previously, it was a bit of a convoluted process to get multiple joysticks running simultaneously. Now, as many joysticks as you want to plug in seem to work fine (I have my CH Products Yoke, my CH Pro Pedals, a Saitex Cyborg Joystick, my X-Box Controller and my PS2 controller working, and all work fine).

Applications
Microsoft Office 2007: Yes, I know that openoffice.org beats the heck out of Microsoft Office in almost every way, but in all reality, Microsoft Office is the standard, and it actually works flawlessly in Wine. This is the first time I've seen Microsoft Office install without any crazy Wine registry hacks or anything. It was quite simply a matter of installing it exactly the same way you would in Windows.
openoffice.org: Obviously, for those people who don't want to use Microsoft Office, openoffice.org is a real, viable, free solution, with the entire suite of products available matching Microsoft Office, and the latest version will even open docx and pptx files!
Flash support: Previously, in Firefox, it was a giant pain in the butt to install flash. Unlike in other browsers and operating systems, one could not automatically install a flash plugin by following the onscreen prompts, as the user was always given a message saying that the necessary plugin was not available. Not anymore, now, just like in Windows and Macintosh (presumably) browsers, simply going to a site with Flash content will prompt you to install Flash, and when permission is granted, it automatically installs without complication.
Media Support: This is something that was fixed many, many builds ago. When opening MP3s, WMVs, etc. one only needs to open the file, and he is prompted to install the necessary codec without any additional necessary input from the user.

Now, the one big thing that has always plagued Ubuntu installs previously was wifi support. I'm not a computer noob by any stretch of the imagination, but setting up wifi on my router was a giant pain in every other build of Ubuntu, and every other flavor of Linux as well. Not anymore! Wifi worked out of the box on my Laptop, for the first time since Edgy Eft (6.10).

This bodes very well for Ubuntu's future, IMHO. Dell is still selling the N-Series laptop, I figure it will only be time before more OEM manufacturers follow suit! The important thing is that Ubuntu is no longer an alternative to Windows. It now stands on its own on its own merits. As more people try it, I think more people will finally make the jump.

The only thing that is left before Ubuntu is ready for primetime to everyone is a data migration system, where the user can keep their favorites, emails, and documents from a previous Windows or Macintosh installation, via some sort of wizard. Sure its possible, but for the complete novice this is the deal breaker still.

Since I'm bored, and I have nothing better to do, I'm willing to test drive any software someone wants, and I'll give a blow by blow on how it works!
 
Last edited:
I don't know if Ubuntu will ever break Microsoft's stranglehold on the desktop market, but it's long been a viable platform that, in itself, lacks very little other than ease of configuration for the technologically challenged. The main problem in achieving greater acceptance of desktop Linux in general has and continues to be users' reluctance to migrate from proprietary third-party software.

I have been running Ubuntu on my work laptop for years. I also run it on one of my office desktops, as well as the computer in my guest room (guests tend only to want to check their email and surf the Web, which they can do perfectly well in Ubuntu without much coaching). And I installed Ubuntu on my mother's laptop, which she uses mainly to surf the Web while eating breakfast (the nearest place to buy a newspaper being about 15 miles away from where she lives).

I also installed Ubuntu on a laptop my lady friend's grandkids use because they kept trashing her Windows installation. The kids love the games, and as standard desktop users, they can't hurt the system. I've also done this for an increasing number of home user clients with kids: Ubuntu gives them games, Internet, and tools to do their homework, without having to worry very much about malware or user-induced death of the OS.

The biggest potential market for Ubuntu, however, is businesses. Small to medium-sized businesses especially could save enough $$$ on license fees to more than offset the cost of migration, and wind up with faster, more stable systems in the process. The problem is that many businesses are dependent upon proprietary software (especially the bloated crap Intuit puts out) that are impossible (or at least impractical) to install under WiNE, and which the clients are reluctant to ditch, despite free or inexpensive Linux substitutes being available.

In fact, I think it's Intuit more than Microsoft that's holding Ubuntu back from achieving greater acceptance in the small- to medium-sized business market. Most MS-Office users pick up OpenOffice.org pretty quickly, for example, and the overall "feel" of Ubuntu is similar enough that they migrate pretty painlessly. But a lot of accountants insist on Quickbooks, which effectively locks users into Windows.

For my part, I use both Windows XP and Ubuntu. I probably would use Ubuntu exclusively except that I've never been able to get all of Macromedia Studio working to my satisfaction under WiNE. Dreamweaver works pretty well, but Flash and Fireworks are buggy (or at least were the last time I tried to get them to work). I've considered virtualizing, but I have four computers in my one-man office, so I'm not short on hardware. Besides, the exercise moving from one chair to another does me good.

-Rich
 
I don't know if Ubuntu will ever break Microsoft's stranglehold on the desktop market, but it's long been a viable platform that, in itself, lacks very little other than ease of configuration for the technologically challenged. The main problem in achieving greater acceptance of desktop Linux in general has and continues to be users' reluctance to migrate from proprietary third-party software.

I have been running Ubuntu on my work laptop for years. I also run it on one of my office desktops, as well as the computer in my guest room (guests tend only to want to check their email and surf the Web, which they can do perfectly well in Ubuntu without much coaching). And I installed Ubuntu on my mother's laptop, which she uses mainly to surf the Web while eating breakfast (the nearest place to buy a newspaper being about 15 miles away from where she lives).

I also installed Ubuntu on a laptop my lady friend's grandkids use because they kept trashing her Windows installation. The kids love the games, and as standard desktop users, they can't hurt the system. I've also done this for an increasing number of home user clients with kids: Ubuntu gives them games, Internet, and tools to do their homework, without having to worry very much about malware or user-induced death of the OS.

The biggest potential market for Ubuntu, however, is businesses. Small to medium-sized businesses especially could save enough $$$ on license fees to more than offset the cost of migration, and wind up with faster, more stable systems in the process. The problem is that many businesses are dependent upon proprietary software (especially the bloated crap Intuit puts out) that are impossible (or at least impractical) to install under WiNE, and which the clients are reluctant to ditch, despite free or inexpensive Linux substitutes being available.

In fact, I think it's Intuit more than Microsoft that's holding Ubuntu back from achieving greater acceptance in the small- to medium-sized business market. Most MS-Office users pick up OpenOffice.org pretty quickly, for example, and the overall "feel" of Ubuntu is similar enough that they migrate pretty painlessly. But a lot of accountants insist on Quickbooks, which effectively locks users into Windows.

For my part, I use both Windows XP and Ubuntu. I probably would use Ubuntu exclusively except that I've never been able to get all of Macromedia Studio working to my satisfaction under WiNE. Dreamweaver works pretty well, but Flash and Fireworks are buggy (or at least were the last time I tried to get them to work). I've considered virtualizing, but I have four computers in my one-man office, so I'm not short on hardware. Besides, the exercise moving from one chair to another does me good.

-Rich

I see two challenges: Quickbooks and Macromedia Studio. Guess what I'm doing now :D
 
Well, it'd be a hell of a lot easier if it didn't take ages to download packages right now. Apparently everyone and their brother is downloading the new version of Ubuntu right now. LOL.
 
Well, it'd be a hell of a lot easier if it didn't take ages to download packages right now. Apparently everyone and their brother is downloading the new version of Ubuntu right now. LOL.

Yeah, I was getting 13 kB/s earlier on a 10 MB/s connection.

QB is going to be a challenge, if it's possible at all. But hey, give it a shot.

-Rich
 
Yeah, I was getting 13 kB/s earlier on a 10 MB/s connection.

QB is going to be a challenge, if it's possible at all. But hey, give it a shot.

-Rich

Wow, that was a giant PiTA. And I did not succeed. Stumped.

Although, Quasar is an excellend alternative...and there are a few others as well. I didn't think about Quickbooks, finding a good alternative is going to be a requirement before I dump Windows again...
 
Wow, that was a giant PiTA. And I did not succeed. Stumped.

Although, Quasar is an excellend alternative...and there are a few others as well. I didn't think about Quickbooks, finding a good alternative is going to be a requirement before I dump Windows again...

Don't feel too bad. To my knowledge, no one has managed to get QB to work under Linux. It is particularly dependent on MS components, much more so than even MS-Office itself.

A few years ago I tried getting QB to install on a Xandros system on which MS-Office has already been installed using Crossover. I did get it to install, but many of the features wouldn't work and/or crashed the virtual system.

-Rich
 
I used QuickBooks Online Edition with my business-the accountant loved it, and it worked VERY well when I used it 5 years ago. I can only imagine what it's like now. Will it work in the browser on Ubuntu?

http://oe.quickbooks.com/
 
Just run Quickbooks in a virtual machine?
 
Just run Quickbooks in a virtual machine?

The biggest issue with Windows XP VM is you need Windows XP, which costs more than the VM Ware application and Windows application costs combined, even if you fudge and buy an OEM license.

It is good to be a monopoly.

(My buddy just bought VM Ware Fusion for under $40. Windows XP Home OEM? $89.)
 
The biggest issue with Windows XP VM is you need Windows XP, which costs more than the VM Ware application and Windows application costs combined, even if you fudge and buy an OEM license.

It is good to be a monopoly.

(My buddy just bought VM Ware Fusion for under $40. Windows XP Home OEM? $89.)

Virtualbox is free.

License is an issue. My OEM CD doesn't recognize that this is still a Dell computer (of course not). Since its a legal copy of Windows, on the same PC, I have no problem finding a way around their stupid little registration process.

I tried calling them, and they were not very helpful
Them: "A virtual machine is a different computer."
Me: Its the same hardware, same computer, same motherboard, etc.
Them: No, its not
Me: Yes, yes it is.

Sigh.
 
Virtualbox is free.

License is an issue. My OEM CD doesn't recognize that this is still a Dell computer (of course not). Since its a legal copy of Windows, on the same PC, I have no problem finding a way around their stupid little registration process.

I tried calling them, and they were not very helpful
Them: "A virtual machine is a different computer."
Me: Its the same hardware, same computer, same motherboard, etc.
Them: No, its not
Me: Yes, yes it is.

Sigh.
I hear the secret is, at least with a real full copy, Microsoft will let you register it on a second computer after a year.

You know the last I heard they solved that VM issue with Vista by prohibiting in the EULA installing it a virtual machine. :raspberry:
 
Virtualbox is free.

License is an issue. My OEM CD doesn't recognize that this is still a Dell computer (of course not). Since its a legal copy of Windows, on the same PC, I have no problem finding a way around their stupid little registration process.

I tried calling them, and they were not very helpful
Them: "A virtual machine is a different computer."
Me: Its the same hardware, same computer, same motherboard, etc.
Them: No, its not
Me: Yes, yes it is.

Sigh.

Nick--don't explain any of that to them. Simple short answers--tell them what they want to hear--I've never been declined.

"Has this been installed before?"
"No"
"Is this a different computer"
"No"
"Your activation code is....."
 
Nick--don't explain any of that to them. Simple short answers--tell them what they want to hear--I've never been declined.

"Has this been installed before?"
"No"
"Is this a different computer"
"No"
"Your activation code is....."

In all fairness to MS, I've found them to be pretty liberal about activations, too. The only time I was declined was on the key for the original copy of XP I bought when it first came out. According to the lady on the other end of the line, it had been reactivated 17 times, which was probably true, before they finally cut me off.

I'd originally installed that key on an AMD K6-2 machine with a Soyo board with 384 MB RAM, and reactivated many times over the next five or so years as I progressively "upgraded" the system (replaced everything except the case, basically) and after a few crashes when I decided to do clean installs rather than use my Casper backup. Furthermore, toward the end, I was using a slipstream disk to do the reinstalls because the original disk was SP-0; so the key wasn't even really for the version I was installing. But they kept on reactivating.

By the time they finally refused to reactivate the key any more, the original system had morphed into an Athlon 64 with 2 GB of RAM and a Gigabyte mobo, and contained literally nothing from the original machine except the floppy drive.

Having said that, I have an issue with the whole concept of a vendor being able to tell me how many times I can reinstall software that I have legally purchased. As long as it's only being used on one machine at a time (whether physical or virtual), I frankly think it's none of the vendor's business. But the way the EULAs are crafted, the end user basically is not buying the software, but rather is leasing the right to use the software in accordance with Microsoft's stated limitations.

-Rich
 
Back
Top