[ale] Linux the $400 Operating System

Geoffrey esoteric at 3times25.net
Wed Aug 21 12:28:30 EDT 2002


Drew, I'm sorry to say, that is a poor slam at Linux.  We have had a 
good time attempting the conversion of your tape to cd, and although we 
weren't successful, I recall you were otherwise. I think you're a better 
man then this posting shows, but I'm disappointed.  I'm not sure who the 
'staff writer' is, or what the publication is, but it's full of glaring 
inaccuracies.  I wasn't going to do this, but I've changed my mind...

ChangingLINKS.com wrote:
> For over a half decade, a new Unix variant offers users more speed, stability 
> and security than MicroSoft Windows. The variant's name is Linux. Currently 
> Linux has grown into an operating system that comes with thousands of free 
> programs and an install (with all it's upgrades) can use 6-8 times more space 
> than Windows 98.

That is a crock of shit.  If you installed the comparable software for 
Windows 98 on the same amount of disc space, you'd be no better off.  On 
the other hand, I've installed a fully blown Linux installation on a 100 
meg drive.  Further you can get a fully functional Linux on a floppy. 
Do that with windows.

> 
> Most people believe that since it's beginning's, Linux has been "free," at 
> least insofar as being able to download and use the operating system on a 
> daily basis. However, what many users are finding, is that there are costs 
> that can be incurred after committing to the operating system.
> 
> "In the beginning, I tried to fully install Linux - and just couldn't. I ended 
> up paying a company called "Onyx" $90 to install it for me - and they refused 
> to help with data encryption or playing DVDs," a spokesman from 
> ChangingLINKS.com. He went on to say, "As time went on, I shelled out other 
> varying amounts of cash to "Linux gurus" in an effort to learn how to use the 
> operating system better."

You are one of the few.  There are a huge number of people who have done 
this with the support of the community.  I've never paid anything for 
the Linux knowledge I have.  No, I don't know it all, but I do have a 
relatively complex Linux network and work from Linux on a daily basis. 
The fact you paid the cash you did implies you were either impatient or 
didn't make the effort.  Granted, if you're trying to get a business 
going you may cut the time corner by dropping the cash.  If this is the 
case, I'd suggest it was a poor decision to go the Linux route with no 
experience and tight time constraints.

> 
> In all fairness, he did mention that he got lots of help from the Linux 
> community - including encoding a video tape for playback on a CD which would 
> have cost a couple hundred dollars to create using a graphics company. 

So you regained 50% of the $400.  Let's see, What's windows 98 full 
version cost these days?  ~$200 retail.  So now you're in a break even 
situation.

> Still 
> on the downside, is the countless hours spent trying to understand various 
> programs and features. "You come across some topics, like security - and it 
> seems like there is only one or two guys that can help. In windows encrypting 
> a filesystem 'on the fly' and using it daily is easy. My data is still 
> unencrypted to this day," the spokesman said.

All I can say is all OS's have a learning curve.  You didn't learn 
windows over night either.

> 
> But what of the price tag that entitles this article? It is spent on data 
> loss. After calling around to various data recovery companies, the minimum 
> estimate for recovering data for Linux was $400. The price includes a 
> standard diagnostic charge.

I've never priced it, so I don't know.

> In Windows, data recovery is relatively easy. 
> There are programs like "Recover" and "Winhex" that will undelete your data 
> with a few simple clicks.Don't make the same mistake with Linux though- it
> could cost you hundreds, especially if you are using the "ext3" filesystem.

The glaring difference here is that you're comparing apples and oranges. 
     Any tool that permits you to recover files from a windows 
environment relies on one of two facts.  One, the file was not deleted 
and it was placed into a 'deletion storage area,' ie, recycle bin.  If 
the file was truly deleted, then you have a chance to reclaim the data, 
if the OS has not overwritten it. Both scenarios exist in the Linux 
world as well.  Various Linux desktops offer the same 'deletion storage 
area' solution which would have easily permitted you to retrieve the 
data you lost.

I don't know worker as I don't use it, but apparently it's not such a 
tool.  I also believe that when a person shoots themselves in the foot, 
they have little excuse to blame the gun.

> 
> "In my 12 years of using Windows, I have never lost a 100,000 byte file - and 
> my first Windows box was was installed (and reinstalled) on a computer with a 
> defective hard drive. For years, each time I booted the compter, some of the 
> hard drive medium would be permanently damaged and unusable. But, I still 
> never lost mor than a screenfull of data."

I find this completely impossible to believe.  In my 20+ years in 
software development, I've seen more trashed windows drives and files 
then anything else.  I routinely reload the two windows machines I have 
in my home, because the OS just plain quites working.  Right now, if you 
select the solitaire or hearts game on my wife's win95 computer, the 
windows open and then disappears.  Then the totally useful 'this program 
has terminated' window appears (not sure of the exact message).  So, why 
did this happen?  This is a common occurence with every windows 
environment I've used and I've used plenty (win3.11, 95, 98, NT (both 
abortions), 2000).

On the other hand, I posted the uptime of my two linux firewalls to the 
list just the other day, both of which exceeded 200 days.  I'd like to 
see a windows box just stay up for a continuous 200 days...

> 
> The spokesman was using Worker on Linux, and accidentally deleted an directory 
> tree. Next, he spent day and night trying to learn how to undelete the data 
> from the ext3 partition, and is currently looking a Windows solutions to 
> recover the data. "I'm just hoping that Windows can bail me out, because I 
> have not been able to understand the results from the Linux based tools. For 
> data recovery and encryption, Windows is simply the way to go."

I'd suggest you delving into dangerous territory expecting Windows to 
muck with an EXT3 file system.  I've seen your posts regarding this 
issue, but do not have the knowledge to assist, nor the time to research it.

> 
> So before downloading your next distro or using programs that automate 
> deletion of files on Linux, at least be careful. The mantra that you will 
> hear from the Linux community is "restore from your backup" but that is 
> useless when you do 8 hours of work - and your back up was not sceduled until 
> 12 hours have elapsed.

So Drew, is this true?  Is this one of those unique situations where you 
  started from scratch and built all this stuff, and then accidentally 
deleted it within that 8 hour period.  Granted, it could happen, and 
does happen, but you'd been in the same shape with a windows 
environment, if, as I noted earlier, you were comparing apples to apples.

> 
> All in all, the real Losers (of data) are the Lusers that end up having to 
> spend $400 to get their data back. In some cases the only "freedom" about 
> Linux provides your computer is "freedom from important data."

Did you drop the $400 for this and did you get your data back?  I 
suspect that you could have done better, but I've not researched this 
effort.

> 
> staff writer


-- 
Until later: Geoffrey		esoteric at 3times25.net

I didn't have to buy my radio from a specific company to listen
to FM, why doesn't that apply to the Internet (anymore...)?


---
This message has been sent through the ALE general discussion list.
See http://www.ale.org/mailing-lists.shtml for more info. Problems should be 
sent to listmaster at ale dot org.






More information about the Ale mailing list