Why Linux is the new Amiga
By James Cornelius
Back in the 90s I was, what would now be called, an Amiga fanboy. In past few months I’ve noticed an uncanny similarity between the old Amiga scene, and the current Linux scene.
For those too young to remember the Amiga series of computers, the first Amiga, the 1000, was released in 1985 by Commodore. It was one of the first true multimedia computers, with integrated sound and graphics. It achieved more of a cult following rather than a mainstream following, but by the time Commodore went bankrupt in 1994, PCs and Macs had well and truly overtaken the Amiga on the technology front.
During the Amiga’s hey day, us Amiga users were convinced that our Amiga computers were superior to the PCs and Macs of that era. What made the Amiga so special to its fans was that models like the Amiga 500 were affordable, the early models had advanced graphics, a multitasking operating system, and perhaps most importantly it had a mythology surrounding its creation.
The mythology developed around the Amiga because it was created by “real people”, rather than faceless cubicle-bound designers working for some big corporation. For example, Jay Miner, the so called ”father” of the Amiga, would take his dog Mitchy to work when he was designing the Amiga 1000. Mitchy’s paw print is visible on the inside of the plastic housing of the Amiga 1000, along with the other engineers who worked on the 1000. You wouldn’t get that kind of thing happening at IBM would you?
Many diehard Amiga fans continued using their Amigas for years after Commodore went bankrupt. There was always the hope that there would be a second coming, when a big company would buy the Amiga technology, and develop new up-to-date machines. That never happened, though many Amiga fans kept hoping for years.
So what was the Amiga scene like?
Amiga users were sure that the Amiga was superior to every other computer - Amiga fans were absolutely convinced that Amigas were better than every other computer, even when it became obvious in later years that they were not.
Amiga users were smug - I hate to admit it, but us Amiga users were smug. It stemmed from our belief that the Amiga’s obvious superiority was a self-evident fact, and that anyone who didn’t agree, or couldn’t see this, was just a stupid. Just owning an Amiga made us part of a special, elite group.
Amiga users were sure there was a conspiracy to keep the Amiga down - We were absolutely sure that the world was against us. For example many believed that there was a Microsoft conspiracy to kill the Amiga by not developing applications for it (though possibly Microsoft didn’t develop applications for the Amiga because it wouldn’t have made money, but that sounds so much more boring).
Nowadays even the most diehard Amiga fan cannot possibly believe that the Amiga will ever make a comeback (yes I do know that Amiga OS 4.0 is out, but please, a come back?).
So what happened to all that angst and smugness that made up the Amiga scene in the 80s and 90s? My contention is that it’s found an outlet in the Linux scene. The proof can be found in the comments I’ve been reading on some of the Linux and Vista-related posts on TECH.BLORGE.com.
Linux is better than the other options - The launch of Vista gave Linux aficionados the chance to tell the world why Linux is so good. For example, here’s what Munkii had to say:
“I don’t understand why nobody is thinks of Linux?!! it’s FREE, people! it’s the most functional and, if you chose the right distro, has the best GUI you’d ever see! FACT! I personally use openSUSE linux, and it has everything that a PC user will ever need, and more eye candy than any vista programmer can ever think of!
And LGR had this to say: “Vista is simply not worth the effort or the money. Microsoft has given people the best reason to switch to a Linux distribution like Ubuntu than ever before.”
Linux users are smug - A couple of articles I wrote about why I would not upgrade to Vista, was enough to give Linux fans enough reason to start commenting.
Gary, for example, wrote “Why would you pay 200 bucks for an upgrade? Give windows the boot…use linux.”
And what about this from Jonny:
“Vista is out? Oh sorry, I’ve been in Linux land, where those transparent windows, and AREO things have been out for years, not to mention 64 bit processing that is actually 64 bit! 90% of the people who bought vista bought is because it looks nice and shiny. Guess what? XP and Linux can do that too! All you have to do is download a free skin, and z0mg!”
There is a conspiracy against Linux - When Dell recently hinted that it would offer Linux preinstalled on its notebooks and desktops, only to change its mind soon after, Linux fans had a field day. Nix had this to say:
“Sorry, but I just don’t care for the games that Dell plays with its customers. OEMs have gotten pressure to have MS installed as a default OS on PC’s. Even after the anti-trust suits; this BS still exists.”
Cuervo73 had this to say:
“Dells latest move away from Linux is undoubtedly due to M$ pressure.”
And Bob had this to say:
“I don’t believe that what you are seeing on Dell Idea Storm is fanboyism. It’s genuine disgust at the fact that some of us have to pay for Microsoft products when we don’t want them. People need a choice.”
Now, please don’t misunderstand my sympathies.
I may have painted Linux fans as the somewhat eccentric, Microsoft-hating, rebels of the computer industry. But it is my belief that that’s exactly what the computer industry needs.
Amiga was always going to fail; its fortunes were tied to one company, which could never hope to prevail over the might of Microsoft, and to a lesser extent, Apple.
But with Linux being open source, and its future and fortunes not tied to one entity, but to thousands and thousands of Linux users and developers, Microsoft will always have real competition. Which, I think, we can all agree is absolutely vital.
The Amiga is dead. Long live Linux.
Related:
Entry was posted
on Saturday, March 17th, 2007 at 2:17 am
under 
Print This Post
Read more entries by James Cornelius.
Stumble It!
March 17th, 2007
Very good, but whereas Amiga gained a cult following - entire governments and other organizations have started switching over to some Linux distribution or another (the latest few have been predominantly Ubuntu). Microsoft is now sleeping with the enemy, and have started threatening developers and users of Linux with court. The similarities are there, yes, but the overall feeling I get is that Linux is actually gaining ground, not losing it. I would say that Linux is more like the Amiga comeback, but here, it’s actually happening. Linux has been pretty much a cult OS for quite some time - whereas now it’s becoming the standard OS for many organizations and home users.
March 17th, 2007
Sorry but I prefer Amiga os than Linux .
March 17th, 2007
unlike the amiga, linux is done my multiple corporations and my thousands of individuals.
linux isn’t “a” company and will not go bankrupt and is legally designed to be open source, the amiga wasn’t.
i know linux users can be smug,and i’ll admit it’s short comings.. but it’s not going anywhere. It’s been steadily picking up steam for the past decade and the market is beginning to take it seriously.
March 17th, 2007
LOL@TOM.
Nothing against Amiga OS, but… if, God forbid, Linux dies an untimely death, I do hope that I’m not still cradling the bones decades later. :)
March 17th, 2007
Yes, I remember the “Amiga Fanboys” and there is a similarity: They couldn’t convince people then to go with the Amiga and Linux fanboys aren’t able to convince many to go with Linux either.
I find it very disturbing on how Linux has the “best GUI” and “more eye candy”, as you quoted someone, yet in reality, the GUI for linunx is clunky, with large icons and everything is different depending on the distro. FACT: If you install an application in Linux, you don’t get shortcuts. That is something the linux fanboys need to fix. Average people don’t hunt around a file system to find their application everytime they need to run the dang thing! FACT: Some installs of software require far too much jerking around to be useful. Case in point, the Cisco VPN client. Not only do you have to know command line install commands, you also need to download binaries for your OS. Now, which OS is archaic? FACT: Compile my what? Nobody in this day and age compiles their freaking kernel! Do linux fanboys actually think your average person gives a rip about kernel version xx.xx.xx.xxxxx? Do you think that the average person is willing to go through the recompile just to install an application?
Come on Linux fanboys. If you want to play with the big dog, you need to get out of the Amiga era and make it easy to use. Its not shiny and polished. Its not easy to find apps you install. Its not easy to install certain apps. Nothing is standard on interfaces.
You can cry “bad Microsoft” and “screw Vista” all you want but people are going to buy it because you don’t offer anything that exceeds Vista. Other than being free, there is absolutely nothing, let me repeat, nothing, that Linux offers that is compelling or innovative enough to make people leave windows.
March 17th, 2007
@Steve
Don’t quite know what you’re on about there, mate. Virtually everything you will install gets automatically put into the menu. The reason ’shortcuts’ don’t appear is because shortcuts suck - they clutter your desktop, and will eventually make launching ANYTHING difficult, as you hunt around for ages to find the damn thing.
Most people do NOT need to compile anything, ever. If your distribution has a sane package management system and decent repositories - you have thousands upon thousands of applications available for free, easily installable by just clicking the check-box. On some occasions, you MAY need to compile something for yourself - but the people who need to do this are generally the kind of people who don’t mind doing it anyway. Yes, it is unfortunate that some people experience problems with Linux, and thus need to go and compile something to get their wireless card working, or something of that nature. You should understand that this is RARE, and at least you have the ability to do so. On other OSs - if something doesn’t work, then you’re screwed. End of discussion there. In short, stick the massive amount of apps available in the repositories - very few people need to look outside of them to get what they’re after.
As for your complaints about the GUI. Well I’m sorry, but you’re being ridiculous. The icons are not all ‘huge’ - they’re pretty much exactly the same size as you would find on any version of Windows. Everything I’m looking at as I type this is smooth, well designed, and very, VERY polished - much more so than the XP machine sitting gathering dust in the corner.
It may interest you to note that everyone I’ve spoken to personally, who has ‘upgraded’ to Vista - has expressed extreme disappointment, irritation, and then proceeded to ask me about ‘that Lunix thing?’. They don’t like the UAC thing, and even though I’ve expained to them they can turn it off, they fear the repurcussions of doing so. They initially like Aero, and then see my Ubuntu machine with Beryl, and ask me how much it cost. When I tell them ‘nothing’, you can see the sheer regret as they realise how much they’ve been conned out of. When they find out I don’t need to worry about virii, spyware etc, well, that’s pretty much the icing on the cake.
I would say that Vista is probably the best thing that’s happened to Linux in quite a while, but that would be elitist, so I guess I’ll just say ‘bad Microsoft, screw Vista’, and carry on using my free operating system, which has yet to crash, rarely needs to reboot, and where everything is free, fast, nice looking, smooth, and is all automatically updated (not just security updates, for those who don’t use Linux yet, but everything on your machine is monitored for updates, rather than you having to click ‘Help > Check For Updates’ in all of your different apps.).
Oh, and did I mention that you don’t need to compile your kernel? Just wait for the update icon in the corner. I get the feeling Steve here hasn’t used Linux in a while.
If you want to continue to use Windows - then that’s all fine, but please get your facts straight before you try to dissuade people from using something which they may prefer.
March 17th, 2007
The Amiga was a great computer hardware and software, however the managers were the worse in the computer world by far.
March 17th, 2007
Linux in itself is just the kernel. Its really the GNU licenced software apps (including the linux kernel) that is important. If linux stays on GPL2 and Sun releases Solaris under GPL3, the importance of the GNU in GNU/linux will be seen - GNU/Solaris. The Freedom offered via the GPL is the central issue in my view.
March 17th, 2007
Commodore failed because because the folks running it weren’t very good at running a company. They couldn’t keep up with the competition. They weren’t competitive and they lost the innovator’s edge. They were more interested in salaries and bonuses than with moving their products from niche status.
You should actually be comparing Apple with Commodore. Same initial corporate culture, same initially innovate product launches. Same small and devoted cadre of users. Oh, also both were hardware and software companies. When Apple tried to “go Corporate” by bringing the ex-head of Pepsi on to run the company they quickly lost focus, market share and also almost went under. Apple was able to recognize their mistakes and correct them. Commodore was not.
Now from a Linux perspective, Linux continues to innovate, continues to gain market share and most importantly continues to gain mind-share. It is successfully transitioning itself from niche status and will therefore continue on for the foreseeable future. Unlike Commodore there is not a “cadre of executives” that are more interested in salaries and bonuses rather than innovation. Don’t get me wrong, there are several companies that are interested in making tons of money with Linux. But they recognize they are competing against both Linux companies and other OS companies. Commodore didn’t think it was competing with anybody. And they, therefore, lost to everyone.
That may be the biggest difference of all.
March 17th, 2007
See the following:
Stating reality does not make one “smug”.
Did Microsoft want to ‘whack’ Dell over its Linux dealings?
http://news.com.com/Did+Microsoft+want+to+whack+Dell+over+its+Linux+dealings/2100-1014_3-6153904.html
Dell’s secret Linux fling
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01/09/dell_linux_china/
Microsoft ‘killed Dell Linux’ - States
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/03/19/microsoft_killed_dell_linux_states/
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Newly_leaked_Antitrust_Memo_How_Microsoft_Created_a_Chokehold_on_OEMs
http://digg.com/linux_unix/More_Leaked_Antitrust_Memos_How_Microsoft_Forces_Everyone_to_Buy_Windows
March 17th, 2007
@Tommy
Actually, I’ve used Linux quite a bit lately. Fedora Core 5 & 6, Red Hat, DSL and other distributions. Why don’t you try taking something like Fedora, install it with default settings, and then without knowing where to find the binaries on the net, install the Cisco VPN client. Oh, suddenly this sophisticated, easy to use OS turns into a complete monster. What takes 2 minutes to install in Windows can take a new or even moderate Linux user days to install. If you completely refute that, then you are one of the Linux diehards that has lost touch with the real world. And yes, compiling the kernel needs to take place to install that. Archaic to say the least.
Software installs (not the ones from your little build-in distro menu of software) will *not* create anything in the program groups so I’m not sure what you were thinking of there.
While you compare Linux to Vista, let’s say you are the 90% of people that are happy with XP and have money invested in games and other software for it. Why in the world would you switch? There is nothing that Linux offers that is not present in XP. In fact, maybe Linux would have something that would make someone want to switch if it wasn’t always simply playing catch up to Windows. Where is the innovation? Where is the absolute must have feature of Linux that would make Windows users want to switch? Its not there and all the hype about how “you have to try it” won’t make a bit of difference unless there is something so cool about Linux and is exclusive to it. Right now the only thing exclusive to Linux is the headache you get from it.
March 18th, 2007
Steve
shut up and stop babbling on about what you know nothing about.
March 18th, 2007
@Steve
Innovation is essential. If you want and have enough knowledge you can change GNU/Linux in YOUR own system, make it perfectly suitable to you. Maybe it’s not such important for home users but for business surely it is. If you don’t know how to do it you can hire some computer scientist who don’t have to be connected with any big company. You can do it cheap. Try to do it with Windows. It’s impossible(or very hard) ’cause you don’t have source code. Only M$ has it.
March 18th, 2007
@j:
Your comment is typical when you can’t refute the facts. You all seem to be fairly experienced Linux users. What you completely fail to grasp is that for Linux to be successful, it has to be simple for someone familiar with Windows that has never had to use a CLI.
You can tell me to shut up all you like, but if the Linux community continues with arrogant statements like that, it never will take off. That exact attitude is what has stiffled Linux to this day. Ask anyone about the general profile of the Linux community, and how they react to people pointing out their short commings, and they’ll descibe someone like you who simply tells them to “shut up”. Keep up the good work for the Microsoft Corporation.
March 18th, 2007
As a complete newcomer to Linux (via an Ubuntu CD given to me recently), I have to concur with what Steve is saying.
Sure, it was cool to boot my Windows box from a CD and be presented with a nice clean screen and some basic apps and a functioning internet and network connection.
But his central point is the same as mine - what am I going to do in Ubuntu or any other distro of Linux that I am not already doing in Win XP?
I consider myself well acquainted with Windows and its faults and failings. I have learned how to get by and how to keep myself out of trouble. I just cannot see a compelling reason to learn another OS simply for the sake of being different. I have more pressing demands upon my time.
In my part of the world, anything other than Windows is virtually nonexistent. There is no hardware or software support in my town for any other computing platform. You cannot even buy a Mac here, let alone get one fixed. No local computer retailer sells anything other than the standard PC + Windows package. Even if I demanded it, none of them would sell to me, let alone support, a brand new Linux system.
So to summarise: I won’t be doing anything different, there’s no local support, and most of all, there’s nothing that’s no drop-dead killer app or must-have feature as far as I can see. Why would I change?
March 18th, 2007
dvous: Don’t. :) If you’re happy where you are, there’s no need to switch. Most of us who have switched to Linux just reached a critical point where the negative aspects far outweighed the benefits, and I think there’s little point in trying to “convert” anyone. It’s a waste of effort. Better to just enjoy the productivity I’m getting out of it, and try to be helpful to others when they reach the same point and need some support in learning how Linux is different. While I still have my list of Windows peeves (continuous reboots after software installations/updates, virii, spyware, slow patch releases, having to reactivate Windows with some call center on the other side of the world after upgrading my computer, “Windows Genuine Advantage” [or is that spyware again] :) licensing and upgrade costs, software costs, a bloated system tray, and now [drum roll please] DRM…). I expect that many people can still live with all these issues for the convenience in knowing that all of their ‘new from the shelf’ hardware works mostly-perfectly. I couldn’t. And for the record, I’m still irritated that my dual booting (WinXP / Debian) Dell B130 gets cracking sound while in Windows (using Dell’s designated driver), while the sound is pristine on the Linux side using Linux’s built in driver (in the kernel). :) Fortunately, I almost never have to use XP… maybe 10 minutes a month. So… to the Linux fans: get off the pulpit, ignore the trolls, and we’ll see you back on the community support forum of your choice. Help is best offered where and when it’s asked for. ^_^
March 18th, 2007
Steve, i’ll give you 3 hints: First, Most windows power users are the people who are very reluctant to switch/taste other OS. They love MS Windows enough, because whatever the Windows behaves, its the de-facto Standard, BSOD, malwares etc. its a normal occurrence in the MS Windows platform.
Second, Linux is NOT Windows.
Third, if you do games, Linux is not a place for you.
PS. We have a Windows NT with Exchange Server 5.5 as an email server. We get screwed. There is no update for the said Email server. We get no help. The email server will run today and then tomorrow it will refuse to accept connections because it was screwed as an open relay. We have nothing to do but to delete all the time the long list of spam queued email messages in the system. We decided to use Linux - in my case, Fedora Core 4 was the latest Fedora Core version at that time. After so much hard work, we have a postfix / clamav / spamassasin working perfectly. I installed ClamAv not because Linux needs an anti-Virus but for the sake of the Windows clients. From early 2006 until now, Linux system has no problem for accepting and delivering email messages on time. Just to give you a real-world example why someone like me needs to switch to a Free OS, rather than buying an expensive new version of Exchange Email server with bloated features we do not need. As for the desktop, I find Linux to be more usable than Windows XP out of the box!
March 18th, 2007
@AllanRegistos
You Linux guys need to get off of the BSOD crap because that is from the NT 4.0 and 2000 days and only with crappy drivers or poorly written software with 2000. I have not seen a BSOD with XP or any 2003 server. I’ll pit any Windows 2003 server head to head with a Linux server. We’ve had file servers on 2003 run almost a year before they were rebooted and that reboot wasn’t a result of a problem with the server, it was for a computer room power down event for a new UPS system.
Secondly, how much support is out there for Linux distros from 1994? Come on now, who is actively supporting anything Linux 1994? Actually, was there anything even worth noting in Linux-Land in 1994? Ok then, get off the NT support trip.
You might want to know that I’ve never once since Windows 3.1, been infected with any spyware/malware/virus. If you really want to go head to head on security, take the time and list the Linux vulnerabilities and fixes vs. Windows vulnerabilities and fixes. Suddenly the Windows swiss cheese trumpet gets a flat.
March 19th, 2007
I would take an Amiga over Linux anyday! Linux is a disaster to the computing world just waiting to happen. When/if Linux does become the top used OS hackers of the world will have a field day! Mark my words.
March 19th, 2007
You forgot a very important difference. We now have many times more highly qualified programmers then we did back then. Then, we needed an organization to create and manage a universal OS because we simply did not have enough qualified techies. Now have a globe full of highly creative technical people who are capable of tweaking the OS to match an application. We stand on the shoulders of a giant that had his day.
March 20th, 2007
http://www.putfile.com/Amiga
http://skolman-mws.w.interia.pl/www/amiga.html
:-)
March 20th, 2007
Yes these day you have too put up with fan boy like Killer Gorilla who when some say look at this thread they do so . may less but kissing to bippyM ‘KG :P
March 20th, 2007
“Amiga users were sure that the Amiga was superior to every other computer”
This is presuposition. How can you tell they were sure? You should rather wrote “seemed to be convinced”. Most of them were concious of technical possibilities and barriers of Amiga. However, even the progress of pc platform didn’t do much… Still PentiumII@200MHz under Windows 95 or Windows 98 was a masochistic toy and faster only in decoding MP3’s, while Amiga1200 68040@40MHz was really fast and comfort computer.
Besides, if you knew the idea of Amiga computer, you’d be sure it was and still is brillant. And FACT: this computer indeed IS much better than the other computers that time - not only faster, with better gfx, cheaper, but also more comfortable. And FACT: Amiga1200 can be used nowadays comfortable way too. Pc of that time - can’t. You could pay me a lot to deal with 386 and I’d resign. While it is pleasure for me to deal with my Amiga.
FACT: pc even nowadays, when running under windows, are extremaly slow and do a lot of unnecessary things - can anyone explain me for example why the heck this windows xp (SP2, classic look, no special co-tasks) is shaking heavily my HDD’s heads for 30s just to display a window with configuration panel? Shoudln’t GUI elements be stored in RAM in case of being needed? Windows configuration isn’t the reason. My friends specialists checked this and said there’s nothing more to configure better in it for better performance. This machine and this ’system’ are still MONOtasking, and the ‘multitasking’ is software-emulated.
My A1200 with 68040@40 MHz is faster than my PentiumIII@500MHz in normal use (filemanaging, editing text/html, running Internet applications like communicators for example) and much, MUCH more comfortable - I don’t have to WAIT for the simple “save as” or “open file” requester - it just shows on rapidly!
I haven’t used my Amiga for last year so this is good to remind what comfort of use really mean. No windows ever gave me anything of this comfort in ANY way. And this is FACT. If you wanna your HDD to be overexploated, if you wanna wait ca.10s for a primitive simple-GUI requester to be opened (instead of just having it appeared), if you wanna swear how slow your XXXX MHz computer is - buy windows!
If you wanna a real multitsking machine which is fast and comfortable - put a public demand on creating a NEW computer, based on AMIGA philosophy of computer.
History tells it all:
Amiga is a new invention, pc is a clone of an electornic typewriter.
Amiga has ‘an openminded philosophy of computing’, while pc hasn’t.
Any new computer can be build with this philosophy.
Any new OS can be done with this philosophy.
Most of brillant inventions WERE and STILL ARE blocked by a lobby of companies and people having profits of keeping all of us in primitive state of technology. Just to give Nicola Tesla’s inventions for example. Geo-inductive coils that produce high voltage output are fact. Why aren’t they mass-produced yet? Why electric cars more efficient than Ferrari and Porshe (0-60 km/h in 4 sec) aren’t mass produced yet?
This is a historical FACT that brillant inventions usually die forgotten until, after years, people got interested in them again.
What people need nowadays is to break up with the x86 line and making a new computer and OS, based on Amiga philosophy, probably adequated to actual times and needs.
This could show people how computers should EXACTLY be like.
The old saying says “Amiga is like a wigwam - no gates, no windows”… :)
And this is how this new computer should be. IMO of course.
March 20th, 2007
i agree with steve. First of all the you guys keep mixing the corporate environment with the home users. They are two totally different markets.
I’m only aware with the home market (thats all i care about as a student) and Linux just isn’t ready for prime time. I have been using win xp for 5 years now. Last year, although i was very much satisfied with my windows experience, i installed ubuntu to see what all the excitement was about. Its almost been a year, and i barely go on ubuntu anymore.
I mean the operating system itself is nice, but its just too much work to get off the ground, and even small things require a lot of work…going into command prompt and what not. I’m a very competent windows user, but i just don’t have the time to spend trying to fix my config files to get the right screen resolution after a kernel update or installing a wifi driver with a wrapper. And the printer driver for my printer–that was a nightmare in itself. And when i think about my family and friends, i can’t imagine they will be able to survive linux for a day. They want something easy…click click and done easy.
As for you all of you who like throwing BSOD and crashing and spyware, there isn’t much heft to your claims. Windows stopped having regular BSOD with xp. I mean it was true that every small install or error would give you the BSOD on win9x systems. But in xp, i don’t think i’ve seen a blue screen more than ONCE in five years.
Now spyware and viruses and what not: personally i haven’t had any problems with that with my xp system. But thats because i have a decent, regularly updated anti virus and antispyware solutions installed. This may not be true for other, less competent users (i’ve pretty much done the same with my less adept friends and family members, so they haven’t had problems either)
That being said, Ubuntu isn’t bad at all. And its really great with Beryl. After putting a LOT of work, it works great. But the thing is, my windows does just that too. Sure i don’t have the beryl interface, but convenience wise, its so much better.
March 22nd, 2007
iuqiddis: I agree that the BSOD argument is largely unfounded nowadays (I see it mostly with hardware breakdowns in the computer), but with spyware and viruses Windows is as vulnerable now as it has always been.
Will you be moving to Vista? If not, you may have to give Linux another look (specifically PCLinuxOS 2007, which has codecs and beryl pre-installed — no work required). As time wears on, and your 6 year old OS continues to age, will it continue to remain a better choice than an alternative with a constant development and release cycle? (I gave up for good after 4 years of waiting.)
March 22nd, 2007
correction: beryl isn’t pre-installed. user is required to press a button to have it installed automatically. :)
March 22nd, 2007
I’ll move when i think Windows isn’t the best OS for me. I’m probably going to just stick with Ubuntu or Fedora Core (not a really big fan of it though) as i’m kinda familiar with them.
Right now, i think xp works fine for me. Maybe I’ll move to Vista in a few months. Maybe linux. I’m open to anything really. I wasn’t talking about putting a lot of work just in Beryl, but trying to get every thing to work.
March 24th, 2007
@Todd
Quote: “Will you be moving to Vista? If not, you may have to give Linux another look”
Why is it that everyone in the Linux community thinks that just because someone won’t be moving to Vista that they instantly must think about Linux at all? Nobody has to try Linux at all. If they are happy with XP, they have no reason to move to Vista *or* Linux.
Vista is going to get a shot of nitrous when some of these DX10 games hit the market. I’ve seen some screenshots and they are like nothing I’ve ever seen before. Once again, Linux will have to play catch up because I’ve never seen a game on Linux with anything like this. This has been the story of Linux’s life though. If this were the other way around, I’d be spinning up Linux in a heartbeat. Like I’ve said in the past, where is the killer Linux app/feature to make *anyone* switch from Windows? Its not there, therefore there is no reason to switch. Believe me, I’d switch if this DX10 stuff was exclusive (or even available) on Linux, but once again, Linux is behind the times…
March 26th, 2007
ahhh… i was an avid amiga fan back in the day… and i still miss the transparency (logical) and simplicity of the intuition system.
clean, fast, simple with command line access for those who wanted it.. which could be safely ignored by those who didn’t.
none of the current operating systems come close to giving me that same feeling… maybe it’s just nostalgia talking…
my big beef with linux is not just the dificulty of installing - my very first attempt to run linux ended badly when it refused to talk to my pc monitor
but the real beef is lack of professional-end software. i am a professional musician and use my computer every day for composition and other tasks. at current, there is not available any sequencer/DAW solution that comes at all near to offering the kinds of functionality, stability and all-round usefullness that i expect and require. therefore i can only ever run linux as a hobby.
if this was different - say functional ports of Cubase and Ableton Live for linux, then it’s very likely that i would switch over. but this not only is not the case, but seems like it will never be the case.
Linux to me seems best for large-scale deployment of “simple computing” (governmental), network administration/backend, and academic use where OS configurability is a need.
I think that while the install base will grow as different sectors identify areas where running linux is both functional and desirable, it’s heritage in unix systems will hold it back from ever becoming a mass consumer-acceptable OS solution.
March 27th, 2007
AmigaOS4 (final) XviD - http://intuitionbase.com/multimedia/os4intuition.avi
AmigaOS4 (final) MPEG - http://intuitionbase.com/multimedia/os4intuition.mpg
AmigaOS4 (beta) DivX - http://intuitionbase.com/multimedia/os4bt-march2005.avi
March 30th, 2007
Linux rocks ^_^
March 30th, 2007
Amiga Rules ^_^
http://media.putfile.com/AOS4-Rapide-Test-2k6
April 2nd, 2007
No way! Linux Bah. Amiga is so much better!
Linux = copy of amiga OS
April 11th, 2007
Steve:
“Nobody has to try Linux at all. If they are happy with XP,”
It’s just a suggestion. You’re free to use a 6 year old operating system indefinitely, if you so choose. Or, pay $100 to upgrade to Home Basic (useless - donate the money to charity instead). Or pay whatever they’re soaking people for Home Premium. Happy trails. :)
April 22nd, 2007
“Commodore failed because because the folks running it weren’t very good at running a company. They couldn’t keep up with the competition. They weren’t competitive and they lost the innovator’s edge. They were more interested in salaries and bonuses than with moving their products from niche status.”
Commodore failed because of poor management not because of the lack of innovation, they were so far ahead of the competition at the time, their failure was primarily caused by bad decisions made by the CEO Mehdi Ali & his team who basically ran the company into the ground.
He cancelled the A500, the first most popular Commodore Computer to be discontinued. The A600 replaced the A500 offering users less but nobody wants one because the A1200 is superior, the problem with the A1200 is that there wern’t enough to go around & Commodore had already lost millions. Commodore introduced the CD32 but it was too late as they had only made about 100,000 units which wasn’t enough to save the company & at the time, they owed too much money and couldn’t buy enough parts to build a constant supply of them. Mehdi and his team also managed to sabotage the deal with Sun Microsystems & disuade them from licensing the Amiga UNIX platforms to use as their low-end UNIX solution…
May 13th, 2007
I was an Amiga fan boy!
1. Amiga was cool for it’s time.
2. I don’t ever remember hearing anything about a conspiracy. I just remember thinking business people were dumb because they didn’t think the Amiga would make a better business computer.
3. What you describe is actually the Apple computer user! No wait! It’s the Windows user also! Everyone thinks the OS they us is the best. This is because as individuals we like to think we are the smartest, especially in geek society.
I remember when the Amiga came out. All the magazines were saying that a business computer didn’t need graphics or multimedia support. Now every machine out there plays movies, music, and games. The funny thing is that these same type of magazines and web-sites are saying that Linux isn’t a good choice for the desktop. Who hires these people?! They should hire me. At least my predictions are usually close.
May 23rd, 2007
Personally, I don’t care if the Linux market penetration grows at all if it means turning into Windows. Does Linux have drawbacks? Certainly, I’m unaware of any OS that doesn’t. I agree the BSOD is a relic of pre2000 Windows. However, I would put the need to go to the command line in Linux in the same boat. It’s quite amusing to read about the difficulty folks have installing Linux on their MS rigs. If you want a true comparison, you would need to use a machine with Linux preinstalled from a vendor. Then you can tell me the frequency of the horrid command line. What would happen if I gave you the same machine and told you to install Windows with no driver cd from the manufacturer? I don’t think granny would know what to do when the new hardware found box comes up asking for the driver. I guess she could go to the device manager and stare at the yellow exclamation point. Let’s take one of those “Supercharge your Windows” articles and count how many times you need to edit registry settings. Or going to Symantec’s website and reading about manual removal of malware (remember we are installing Windows from a retail disk, no antivirus). I doubt removing a file from the system 32 folder, going to Regedit and drilling down 30 entries would thrill granny. Is using the run function from the start menu using the command line?
I bet granny would let out a scream and reinstall Linux.
February 2nd, 2008
I’m not going to ask you to shut up, Steve. May I make the suggestion to try some other distros? I recommend PCLinuxOS 2007 and Kubuntu 7.10; both works fine on my aging Toshiba Tecra8000 notebook (I’m going to try it on my Asus F5R when I can find the time). The only reason I still have a WindowsXP partition in my hard drive is to run some of the games that I still can’t play in Linux even with Wine emulator (sorry, I’m not going to suggest Cedega). Apart from that one setback, I find PCLinuxOS 2007 an easy-to-use and reliable OS.
One thing I like about Linux is that it works nicely for both those who prefer command-line and those who prefer GUI.
I like Amiga myself, but hey, let’s face the fact. It’s dead. Let the dead stay dead, and make way for the new generation.
February 19th, 2008
Steve, and all the others that deep inside them stems a more than obvious feeling of bitterness on Linux, face the facts, Linux has the feeling that someone actually controls many more things in his computer, while in Windows there are too many to mention processes, which cause people to think and search and search with no end. Now, would you be using a coffee machine, if you knew that there would be a lead pipe that your nice smelling coffee pours through it? Then why the heck would someone need to find backdoor trojans and other cute little thingies running in your 1000 dollar PC? I don’t know about you, but I like linux :)
As far as the windows-concept is concerned, it has been a while long before Microsoft Windows appeared, so please try to have an open mind in this. What Microsoft does is to have an open eye on the market today and before and add stuff to make things more available to the many, BUT WITH THEIR OWN RULES. And I have only one lifetime, and I don’t want to lose it exclusively learning how to program (!) in .NET. There is just too much out there to be bothered for. Now, I am not against Microsoft in any way whatsoever. I am just against what the guy in his article noted: taking sides. Besides Microsoft people make a living just like any developer out there, indipendant, small corporate etc. It’s good sometimes to remind them, we (the consumers and fans) what offering services is all about, by ‘punishing them’ with searching for alternatives. If not, then it is a one man’s game and the end of civilization as we know it, or a dull life, your pick!
Wonderful article, many thanks!
February 23rd, 2008
I think you all should learn about AROS (AmigaOS Open Sourced).
http://www.aros.org
And try a look at AROS running native, or even running hosted in Linux, or even try LIVE CD AROS (which boots from CD and does not require any insallation)
Remember: Check for correct Installation Image File, or CD ISO (X86 32bit, X86 64bit) in the download list of AROS versions on right top of the AROS site.
February 29th, 2008
I don’t know whether linux is the new amiga or not, but at a very primitive level wouldn’t it be fair at least to say that Amiga had the first virtualisation feature with its RAMdisk facillity? ;)
July 3rd, 2008
No way. The greatest thing about the Amiga, was the very idea behind the machine. It was the result of using NEW ideas. Far from Linux, which recycled an old operating system and concepts. The Amiga was a giant leap forward in both hardware and software design, and it’s user base mostly used this advantage for creative pursuits, an area I find Linux users to be sorely lacking in.
Some Amiga fans may have indeed been smug and arrogant, but they were a lot better educated and informed than today Linux fans, who continually lie, deceive, and badger others. The Amiga is dead, and while it’s a part of my past I look back on fondly, it’s distasteful you would soil it’s name by comparing ANY part of it to Linux.
August 13th, 2008
I knew amiga was going to die. When? The day I saw, in Byte magazine, (Dec 1990) a picture of an amiga 3000 running UNIX