Saturday, August 2, 2008

Dual display under Ubuntu

Well, I have finally obtained a goal I've waited impatiently for over five years to surmount - I'm writing this blog entry on a Linux system with two wonderful displays running as an extended desktop. Windows has done this for me for years, yet Linux has resisted. Ubuntu 8.04 was 'better', yet still created some weird scrolling modes until this morning.

My setup:
1) self-built PC with Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, 2GB DDR2-800, Asus P5K
2) EVGA 8800GT Superclocked with 512MB GDDR3
3) Ubuntu 8.04 which dual-boots with Windows-XP SP3
4) Primary Display via DVI - Samsung 730B (1280x1024)
5) Secondary Display via DVI - ViewSonic Q20wb (1680x1050)

Of course this triumph isn't really mine - I just found the correct pieces to make it work. The process is almost painless, and I think the Xorg folks (or team porting to Ubuntu) have finally got it right. Read any xorg.conf file from last year and it had a hundred lines of bizarre text which didn't belong there ... I mean, why should I include a line saying in an old 2-bit, 4-color video mode circa 1985 I want to support 1280x1024 and so on? The xorg.conf file is now nice and clean, letting the software assume such things.

Step 1) Backup the Working XORG.CONF file
Ubuntu 8.04 installed with basic support for the primary "generic display", which was the 1280x1024 Samsung. Gone are even the struggle to avoid the 800x600 "low-res" mode when displays don't have hardware sync info in the xorg.conf file. So start by saving the known-good file - this is something you should always do as it allows recovery should your x-server crash upon reboot:
  • sudo cp /etc/X11/xorg.conf /etc/X11/xorg.conf.orig
Step 2) Use Synaptic Package Manager to install EnvyNG
I installed both the envng-core and envyng-gtk - not sure if both required, but I have the disk space. This adds the menu Applications | System Tools | EnvyNG. Running this asks for admin password and installs enough packages to rebuild various NVIDA resources.

Step 3) Run nvidia_settings
Well, here is where the magic starts to fall down. After installing those files you will find the option NVIDIA X Server Settings under your System | Administration menu. Run it and you see this magically enticing popup:

Ahh, almost like Windows-XP now, yes? Catch is this method of launching the tool won't have permission to modify your xorg.conf files or even save to /etc/X11. Thus anything you change now will fail to be saved. I can imagine many a frustrated person seeing the error message and just assuming the drivers won't work.

So you need to run this command in a terminal window instead:
  • sudo nvidia-settings
Which launches the same tool with the correct permissions to update your configuration. I chose not to save the changes to xorg.conf, but to xorg.conf.dual. Regardless, the settings won't take effect right away anyway.

Step 4) Organize /etc/X11
Perhaps this isn't required, but it is my habit learned over the years; I used a terminal window to insure I had four versions of xorg.conf:
  • /etc/X11/xorg.conf.orig is a copy of the 'natural' file created during install which I never change
  • /etc/X11/xorg.conf.single is a copy of the xorg.conf active before I ran nvidia_settings with only my single primary display (it might equal xorg.conf.orig - I don't really care)
  • /etc/X11/xorg.conf.dual is the output of nvidia_settings, which at this point might work ... or might not.
  • /etc/X11/xorg.conf, which I manually overwrite at this time by copying xorg.conf.dual over it.
These simple to comprehend names often in the past saved my bacon when fiddling with my xorg.conf created an unusable configuration. A simple file copy from a recovery root login can over-write the bad xorg.conf with a know good one, allowing me to restart the GUI.

Step 5) restart X-server
Log yourself out, then back in to see if your wonderful new dual-display desktop works.

Results:
  • With my 8800GT, results were superb with a nice extended desktop 3000 by 1000 pixels across my two displays (1620+1280 by 1050 & 1024 to be exact)
  • However, I tried a second time with an old gForce 5500 and ended up with a config which never worked quite right. I would set up the two old CRT for a dual x-server side-by-side, try to force both to a modest 1024 x768 and somehow the result is always two x-servers in twin-view mode piled on top of each other at two different resolutions. The side-by-side extended desktop works fine under Windows XP.

Labels: , ,

Saturday, March 8, 2008

I am still here

I am still battling computers, but have found Wiki formats more satisfying than a blog - so you can find me at lynnlinse.wikispaces.com

I have five quad-cores and three dual-cores (plus other misc systems) all slaving away for me, all running in fairly low-cost setups. Ubuntu's up to 7.10 and has literally evolved to the point where anyone satisfied with OpenOffice and internet access will be happy with it. I use OpenOffice all the time - am writing odd fiction (which I'll soon start putting up at my Wiki site).

Two months ago I finally upgraded my "fun system" away from an AMD A64 solo-core to a Intel Q6600 quad-core. I also abandoned the old XP-OEM license I technically lost the right to use years ago. Instead last year I bought (horded) two legal OEM Windows XP Pro licenses which came with a free VISTA Business upgrade. Cost was $108 each, which isn't bad considering the cost of a "real" VISTA license. Just remember that such cheap OEM licenses don't allow changing motherboards ... which is why I waited until my Q6600 to install & activate.

I did try VISTA again in Jan 2008 when I swapped in the new hardware, but couldn't even last the week as one doesn't expect a quad-core to run slower than a Celeron - plus my backup app hosed the VISTA filesystem - odd, it created a 20GB backup in a portion of the filesystem with PATH NAMES TOO LONG FOR VISTA TO HANDLE! Shocking, I have no clue why an operating system - especially one as over-bearing as VISTA - would allow this. But using VISTA's explorer or even CHKDSK, VISTA just couldn't show, delete or trash the directory created. So I reformatted the VISTA away and went back to Windows XP Pro.

Since all the reviews still say WinXP is 30-40% faster for games anyway, this seems the best answer. I occasionally play Morrowind or Oblivion and see a huge difference in graphics refresh (aka - detect none) compared to my old A64 at 2GHz plus ATIX1600. But, now that graphics are blinding I detect the hiccups where the hard-disk (a Raptor pinging away) needs to thrash in a new game map. Maybe I'll look into RAID 0 some day.

If you're curious, my home play-system now includes (prices as-of Dec-2007):
  • Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4Ghz ($274)
  • Asus P5K with Intel P35 chipset ($126)
  • EVGA/NVidia 8800GT factory over-clocked ($290)
  • 2x1GB Curcial DDR2-1066 RAM ($114)
  • Windows OEM XP plus free Vista Business upgrade ($108)
The case is my old (but beautiful) Coolmaster Wave, and I reused all the drives, fans, power supply etc.

In theory both the CPU and MoBo support DDR3 and faster than DDR2-1066, but the cost of anything above DDR2-1066 was too crazy to consider. As I'm just running Windows XP
Pro (with legal option to run it or VISTA) I've not seen the value in more than 2GB RAM yet either.

Also, this Asus includes some nice auto-over/under clock features ... which is nice since my machine tends to spend more time editing OpenOffice documents than gaming. Thus my Q6600 generally is running down at the 1.4Ghz range and the system chews up about 120-watts idling, whereas the old A64+X1600GPU system idled at 95-watts.

Labels: , ,

Saturday, April 7, 2007

Ubuntu Disti is Amazing

Summary; a lot of water (or bits) have flowed under the bridge since my last post. Since I've started to find my blog in Ubuntu searches on Google, I guess I better keep it up; eh? I now have 10 "working girls" churning billions of floating points ops per seconds and teaching me VPN things.

It is actually ironic - my "fun game computer" is now one of my weakest systems. I now have 3 'servers' for my fun and self-learning which are 2 or 3 time more powerful. Since one can make a nice dual-core Linux system for just $400, why not? I save my money and every few months add a new system. But that will change - my "fun game" system is just waiting for summer 2007 ... I want to see what AMD releases to counter the Intel Core 2 Duo advantage, plus the whole NVidia 8xxx + DirectX10 graphics market should reach a more realistic price point.

So far I have to say the Ubuntu Disti is pretty amazing just because I have YET to find a system I could not boot the Live-CD or install the desktop on. I did find 2 old 1997-circa APGx1 cards it didn't like, but we have a pile of old APG cards at work to chose from. There have been some problems when I change plug-n-play displays with X11 defaulting to ridiculously low-resolutions; I had to learn to go edit /etc/X11 files under recovery mode. Plus I should say I still use Windows XP for my games and media systems so I am not bothering to try & squeeze 3D graphics or even audio out of the Linux boxes. However, the Ubuntu just seems to install and boot ... no hacking required.

Ubuntu Nodes under my command:

Ubuntu Feisty Fawn (7.04) Beta:
  • "Tara" is AMD A64 X2 3600+ (~1.9Ghz), 2GB DDR2-800, SATA 150GB drive on a ECS RS485M-M Socket AM2 ATI Radeon Xpress 1100 Micro ATX AMD Motherboard. Only problem so far is the K8 power/freq control doesn't work under Linux kernel 2.6.19 but since she runs at 100% CPU load on both cores all the time ... I don't really care.
  • "Bela" is a sweet AMD A64 3000+ (~2.oGHz) with 1GB DDR400 on an unusual JetWay 754 NVidia Motherboard. Bela's just a temp Ubuntu worker since soon I'll take her out to California to swap out my daughter's old 1.2GHz Celeron DELL. She has an NVidia 7600 card and Windows Vista upgrade waiting for her in the role of family PC.
  • "Yuna" is an old PIII Coopermine 1Ghz with 512MB PC133
  • "Zefa" is an old PIII Coopermine 650Mhz with 384MB PC100
  • "Saly" is an old PIII Katmai 450Mhz with 512MB PC100
Ubuntu Edgy Eft (6.10):
  • "Nana" is AMD A64 X2 3600+ (~1.9Ghz - twin of Tara), 1GB DDR2-667, SATA 150GB drive on a ECS RS485M-M Socket AM2 ATI Radeon Xpress 1100 Micro ATX AMD Motherboard
  • "Amie" is AMD XP 2400+ (~2.0GHz) with 1GB PC3200 RAM on an ABit KW7 Motherboard
  • "Xena" is a Dell 8200 with a P4-M 1.6Ghz and 512MB
  • "Cali" is an old yet feisty (hot-running) Celeron 2.5Ghz with 512MB PC3200.
  • I should mention I loaded 6.10 or 6.04 on several other old PIII and dual-KII systems just to see, but I didn't keep them running. In fact, I'll retire Saly as soon as I get my daughter's old 1.2GHz Celeron since Saly's PIII probably doesn't justify the power she consumes every day.
Ubuntu Hoary Hedgehog (5.04):
  • "Dora" is HP nc6120 nootebook. She's a bit of an orphan because I use her for GNU cross-compiling for embedded processors at work, so there is strong incentive for me to NOT break what ain't broke and NOT to try to upgrade her - especially since some of our tools like OLD versions of Python and every new upgrade involves pain-to-port. But one of these days soon (once Ubuntu 7.x is fully released) I'll swap in an old spare notebook drive and see if 7.10 installs and how much of the old development system she runs.
To Be Complete: pure WinXP-Pro SP2:
  • "Luci" is AMD A64 3000+ (twin of Bela), 1GB DDR-400, 150GB Raptor, ATI X1600 graphics - handle Oblivion pretty well. Luci can dual-boot to Ubuntu (now 7.04 beta), but she rarely does.
  • "Joey" is Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 (~1.9GHz) with 1GB DDR2-800 on a GigaByte 945P-S3 Motherboard with NVidia 7100GS and Hauppauge PVR-350 video/TV card. I have to say she seems to leave the A64 X2's a bit behind ... but she cost more ...
  • "Feba" is an old broken WinBook C200 notebook which shares a KVM with 3 Linux systems in a DMZ lab and runs some commercial Windows software when required.
  • "????" is HP nc6120 notebook (Twin of Dora) and basically my work computer for MS Office and Outlook, etc. She's the only unnamed computer I have and I fell a bit guilty about that :-). But our IT department gave her a wonderful fixed name - something like mkt-cms1-3029 or so ... I forget. I haven't had the heart to confuse "her" with a 2nd name.
Why do I have so many computers? I guess I'm a quantity not quality folk - haha.

No, really. I work with industrial networking and so have (as an excuse) the need to study and experiment with VPN, complex routing, firewalls and network latency in distributed networks. So much for my pretext ... I also enjoy seeing the little ladies sweat it out running BOINCs jobs in their spare time. Even poor little Saly with less than 10% the horse-power of Nana, Tara or Joey does a surprising amount of work.

Nana, Tara, Amie and Yuna form a 4-node distributed OpenVPN system based on PKI security certificates - pretty amazing and presenting lots of routing and firewall challenges since each node ends up with multiple IP addresses based on interface used. I'm constantly learning and refining how they work.

Joey, Luci, Tara and Xena are my home systems; although I only pay to run 3 of them 24/7 ... Luci normally gets to "sleep" when idle since she lights up like a Christmas tree and the Raptor drive makes a distinct "ping" whenever it seeks. Tara used to be my router/gateway at home until I started playing with XEN virtualization and that pretty much hosed up my firewall until I can better understand how IPTABLES works, so Xena has taken over the gateway role.

The other "working girls" are all at work and doing various other industrial-protocol simulation roles used for testing. In their spare time they churn BOINC projects (Rosetta, Malariacontrol, & Boincsimap) and all told, BOINC claims I have 12 billion floating point ops per second and 25 billion integer ops per second at my command. I probably won't add any more computers to my harem, but by end of the summer I'll probably upgrade at least 3 or 4 of them to dual-cores and retire the 3-4 slowest workers. Specifically, Saly, Yuna, Zefa and perhaps Cali could be replaced.

Labels: ,

Saturday, February 17, 2007

Fedora Core 6 was a bust

Well, my Fedora Core 6 experiment was a bust and waste of 5 hours of my life - my system is back running Ubuntu 6.10. Had I know how rapidly and utterly the Fedora experiment would fail I just would have used a second hard-drive. I downloaded the DVD and had Fedora over-write the functional Ubuntu 6.10 I had on my new Intel Core 2 Duo system. Seemed to install fine - graphics and display was working fine. I had solid hope for some new experiences.

But then when I rebooted, after the initial low-level text messages my 15 inch 1024x768 LCD displayed the "Out-of-Range" warning and blanks itself. This is not me editing xorg.conf. This is the Fedora installer making some mistaken assumption. Yes, I have a simple NVidia 7100GS card and a low-end 15 inch 1024x768 LCD, but Ubuntu-flavor Linux had ZERO problem setting it up in all supported modes so I didn't expect Fedora-flavor Linux to fall down so completely.

Hmm, well I did the typical bunch of web searching one does to solve Linux problems and read a dozen forums threads on fixing Fedora resolution problems during first install. Some of the advice was wrong (ie: people using an older Fedora versions saying how they'd solve it), but nothing suggest worked.

Finally, to paraphrase the threads I read ... the Fedora people blame the X people ... it's not "our" problem, go post bugs in "their" forums. The X people blame "3rd party proprietary drivers" ... it's not "our problem, go bug ATI or NVidia to support Linux better."

But come on - first, Ubuntu (which has a reputation as being less hardware-savvy than Fedora) handled my display fine. Second, which serious Windows PC user doesn't have an ATI or NVidia card? It's not like I'm asking for driver support for some coconut husker & cleaner made in Guam! I never asked for 3D acceleration or video overlays even - just simple 16-bit 1024 x 768 Gnome desktop graphics.

After none of the "edit /etc/X11/whatever" suggestions worked and none of the "use system-config-display" suggestions worked even after hours of goofing around ... I just reinstalled Ubuntu 6.10 and clobbered the Fedora Core 6. I never even got to see the basic Fedora desktop even. I even tried the "system-config-display" command while in single-user mode to force resolution and depth to a low level. Nothing seemed to work.

I have to say - as someone who's been reading Ubuntu forum & help sites for the last 9 months, the attitude and tone of Ubuntu forums is so much different than Fedora. Ubuntu systems tend to be helpful and actually (but not always) helpful. The Fedora forums tended to be terse and rapidly blame someone else. Well, to each their own; so ends my revisit to RedHat technology after being gone for 9 months.

Labels: , ,

Microsoft pulling an IBM with Vista?

(Summary: what I mean by "pulling an IBM" is for a seemingly unstoppable market dominater to so misjudge the market that the market move out from under them and they are left standing on ... well you get the picture)

Another new CPU+MoBo Combo
Well, I did it again ... my fairly newly upgraded A64 server is now an Intel Core 2 Duo E6300. My pretext was "I can use the A64 for my daughter's old Dell!" Last week I was home in Orange County CA and I realized the old Dell is just a 1200Mhz Celeron and just too slow for me. There is surprisingly little difference for 2 year old and 6 months technology. A new A64 with mobo and RAM is about $250-300, the E6300 with mobo and RAM is about $450.

But, wouldn't ya know - Murphy's Law. Windows XP Pro refused to reauthorize. Since I was moving from an AMD to Intel I needed to fix the OS on my hard drive. Perhaps I should have just reformatted instead of "repairing". Anyway, I got that dialog saying to telephone a Microsoft telephone number, wait umteen hours in queue, and talk to a friendly call-center person in a foreign country to obtain new authorization codes. Perhaps this was because this system just moved motherboards a few months ago, or perhaps it is part of a nudge towards Vista ... maybe if I call this number Microsoft will try to entice me with a low-cost Vista-Home CD (wink) knowing I'll later have to upgrade to a more expensive license. It would make perfect business sense.

I am still deciding what to do - for now I put Windows 2K back on one partition and am downloading a DVD.iso for Fedora Core 6 Linux. This gives me a good incentive to re-eval RedHat's branch of Linux. At work I started using RedHat 6.x back in 2002 on a second-hand IBM T20 notebook and finally moved to Ubuntu 5.x the summer of 2006 when the T20 died. Work gave me an HP NC6120 notebook; neither my old faithful Red Hat nor the new Fedora at that time could handle the LCD display. So I picked Ubuntu 5.04 because someone was offering a CD image preconfigured for the NC6120 notebook. It loaded sweetly and worked fine.

Does 1 Human need 11 Microsoft Licenses?
But back to Microsoft, lets see ... the licenses I own (or cause to be owned):
1 = Windows XP Pro OEM for my home "fun PC" - it came installed and "COA'd" on a used system I bought. It is now on it's 2nd CPU and 4th motherboard. Was an AMD XP but I upgraded to an A64 since I could reuse the DDR400 RAM and ATI AGP video card. I am waiting to see what AMD's next gen dual-core is like
2 = Windows XP Pro upgrade for my daughter's computer - a Dell which came with Win2000 Home license in 2001 or so. It's still on 1st CPU and motherboard, I'll be trying to move it to an A64.
3 = Windows 2000 Pro OEM on an old Dell 8200 notebook (of course 1st CPu and mobo)
4 = Windows XP Pro OEM on my "server PC" - also a 2nd hand unit which is the one that which won't reload. It's on it's 3rd CPU and 4th mobo (sweet, eh?)
5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are at work ... I have 3 notebooks with Windows XP and 2 desktops with Windows XP. Sadly, 1 notebook and 1 desktop just run Linux so those 2 Windows XP Pro licenses are wasted, but it's not worth buying a small-business package without a Windows license since you don't really save any meaningful money.
Forget all of the old Windows 95 or 98 licenses which I scrapped along with the PC they ran on.

So in total, I have subsidized the Gates family charitable trusts for 9 copies of Windows XP and 2 copies of Windows 2000 (I have one XP upgrade). This isn't 10 computers for a small company of a dozen people ... this is 10 computers that basically "work for me". Some do testing; some development (cross-compiling), some live in various labs and on isolated networks. What more does Microsoft want from me? Well, more money each new year I guess. But the point is (as Sony and other DRM sellers are finding out), there is a fine line between correctly stopping piracy by people who MAY NOT buy your stuff anyway and chasing the people who DO buy your stuff away because they keep "losing" money by having to repay for what they already paid for. In other words, blocking "pirates" doesn't promise to increase your revenue as much as hosing your paying customers may decrease it.

I already STOPPED using Norton Anti-Virus on 3 of 4 computers because I had to telephone some support line in India every time I changed a motherboard. Now only my daughter's Dell has Norton Internet Security - that's the computer I upgraded to XP to gain "Limited Accounts". She is a bit too much like "Hello Kitty in Cyber-Space", if allowed she would go happily skipping along, downloading every flashy piece of spyware offered to her (by the way, she is in college!)

Does New MotherBoard+CPU mean New Computer?
I realize I am a member of a minority here. Most people buy a computer, use it for 3-5 years, and then buy a new computer complete with a new Windows license. I assume they think of the computer as a machine-thingy like a TV or toaster. To them, the idea that one buys a new computer and an new Windows licence makes sense. Come to think of it, I suspect most people don't even realize they paid a percentage of the new computer price for a new Windows license.

But I am one of those crazy fools who think of my computers as "services" or "helpers" independent of the hardware within. In fact they all have cute names (like amie, joey and cali) and cute little logo images cut from computer game screen shots. At home I have 3 systems or little electronic "helpers". I have my higher-wattage "fun PC" for gaming; my lower-wattage "worker PC" or server which runs 24/7; and my broken "portable PC" (a Dell notebook with broken internal fans so I have it strapped to a home-made "notebook cooler" with external fans). I feel that as long as all of my 3 "helpers" is happy with their existing licenses, I should be able to modify the hardware at will and NOT have the licenses stop working.

I've already stopped paying for yearly Norton subscriptions on 3 of my 4 personal computers, havinf switched to 3 different "free home versions". I've also had to find alternatives for 2 shareware packages I loved due to their need to telephone or exchange support email ad-nauseum every time I changed the hardware. Will I stop buying Windows ... err, not likely? With the state of Linux (even in 2007) this would be hard; I need to use too many tools which either don't work in any Linux or only work on "another" distro than the one I am using. But it certainly is giving me a reason to think harder about Linux.

At least I hear Microsoft was wise enough to abandon their first plans for Vista licensing - in which Vista would lock itself to one computer (ie: one Motherboard and CPU) and never be able to "move" to a new or upgraded computer. Sounds like a plan borrowed from Sony music lawyers and managers. Now the rumor is there exists a method to "uninstall" Vista from one computer (or motherboard+CPU combo) and "move" it to another. I haven't seen the details of this, but I wager the process will retain many hurdles and confusing details.

The Microsoft doing an IBM Scenario
I don't think Vista will fall flat on its face and bankrupt Microsoft - even IBM is not bankrupt today. As many columnists and writers suggest, Microsoft will force most new computer buyers to "select" Vista. Like Henry Ford's quip about color, new computer buyers at big-box stores can buy any OS they want - as long as it's Microsoft Vista. So a year from now Microsoft will happily announce how many hundred million people have 'switched' to Vista. Microsoft likely doesn't make that much cash from these OEM sales. Microsoft is betting that average-joes & mollies will use their credit cards to UPGRADE their Vista license online, which likely will give them far more cash than these low-cost OEM licenses.

But as many columnists/writers also suggest, most organizations with more than 100 (or perhaps more than a dozen?) computers will just "ghost" any new Vista-licensed computers back to Windows XP (or even 2000) for at least a year. These big organizations is where Microsoft really makes their cash. My employer pays for a Windows (& Office) license every year for nearly every computer in the building (even many running only Linux!) These licenses "cost" Microsoft only a few pennies each in administer, so is like 99.9% profit/margin. My employer does this just as a cover-thy-butt legal move to prevent a disgruntled employee from sending a letter to Microsoft saying "I know where an illegal copy of Windows is ..."

Future of Vista in hands of MSOffice?
So a year ... or two ... from now when big companies and universities start to take stock of the move from WinXp to Vista, the truth of the matter is that the OS-truths have little to do with the decision. As time goes on, Microsoft will subtly try to nudge organizations to cross the line and start paying for Vista. But how to entice? Security? All big organizations use 3rd party tools. Mouth-watering graphics? All big organizations invest in basic hardware incapable of the fancier Vista interface. The only way Microsoft can "nudge" these groups is with new applications and cost-savings. Microsoft will need to make Vista cheaper than WinXP ... or WinXP more expensive than Vista ... or release critical new applications & services (Office 2009? Windows Server 2010?) that don't work well with WinXP.

So here is the risk ... will alternative applications and services exist that offer an OS alternative to Vista? It is not the operating system enabling this - not XP vs Vista nor Windows vs Linux. It is the question - which OS runs the tools we need to be productive?

Will Apple step in to take this business? Not unless all of their top management retire or die in the next few months. Apple is geared to be a niche-player and profits by being a niche-player targeting just some segments of the computer market. Maybe I show my age, but I remember the whole 1987 Jobs vs Sculley thing when Jobs left Apple to form Next and Sculley promised to help Apple stop thinking like a niche-player and start thinking like a market-dominant player. Well, that didn't happen ... Apple is still a niche player (what is their market share? like 5% even?) The only way for Apple to step into ex-Windows accounts is to STOP making money on hardware and giving the OS away for free. They need to start selling the OS and helping competitors create hardware; shift their profit center away from hardware to software. Do you see this happening in our life-time? Not.

So any person or company which feels threatened by the move to Vista ... or just dislikes Microsoft ... or who wants to see history change should be investing in one of two things:

  1. Invest in making OpenOffice better (and mainly faster to use). I think it is safe to say 95% of computer users ONLY use tools which can be classified: a) an office suite, b) a tool largely OS-independent like a web browser, and c) some semi-custom business application for their boss. So the ONLY real road block to the average corporation moving to Linux is the quality of "office suite" available - we assume programs in class b & c will happen if the OS justifies it. Now, I use OpenOffice ... sometimes ... I am not saying it is bad. I am just saying that the Symantec's and Alex St. John's of the world should be actively polishing and grooming OpenOffice today so that a year or two from now all the big organizations who are pondering the "to Vista, or not to Vista" question will like what they see.
  2. Invest in making the major Linux distributions share a common application "package management" system. That is really the MAIN thing hampering wide spread adoption of Linux. Yes, there are converters (like "alien" to convert RedHat RPM into Debian DEB), but they only work for trivial applications. I know - I've been using Ubuntu (in theory Debian-based) for almost a year and so far the ONLY applications I have been successful in installing come via the buildin Ubuntu Synaptic Package Manager. I'm not saying that artificially limiting of my choices to the 18000+ applications Ubuntu offers is the problem. The problem is that the big specialty tool makers - the Adobe's and Rockwell Automation's and Honeywell's and even computer hardware makers of the world - avoid general Linux support because - well - there is no such this as "Linux" as a market. Linux is a kernel. Instead, to be fool-proof software vendors need to create 40-50 separate & tested application downloads for a dozen different Linux distributions on various generations of kernels. My employer (http://www.digi.com/) has to do that - our list of Linux packages dwarfs our list of Windows packages and it is largely incomplete. We don't even support Ubuntu and the "Debian" packages we off don't install under Ubuntu - I have tried. No company manager with any sanity will commit to doing this. If the "Linux world" can reduce this need for downloads to say 4 or 5 (like Windows), then Linux has a better chance to gain the diverse, specialty tools corporations need to use Linux instead of Windows.
Linux is actually pretty easy to install and use these days ... as long as all of your hardware and desired applications have "native" support within your distribution. Heaven help the average computer-savvy user (forget the novice) if they need to go actually try to recompile some source code to gain a pure "Linux application".

I believe the Linux community has about a year to pull together and clean up this huge waste of duplicated effort related to application package management if they want to offer an irresistible alternative to large organizations to Windows Vista. So I don't think Vista will fail out-right - it will succeed. Early market signs are that Microsoft Office 2007 is doing well compared to Office 2003. However, it is still possible that Vista is part of "the hump" in market dominance; that a larger percentage than normal of big institutions will start to defect rather than move to Vista.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Installing MediaWiki under Ubuntu

File this report under "amazing" - I got MediaWiki installed and working in less than an hour on an old AMD XP 2400+ running Ubuntu 6.10 (Edgy Eft) & slaving through industrial protocol tests for me. I was really shocked - flabbergasted that this worked since this included installing MySql, Apache, and MediaWiki.

It was amazingly easy - any fool with little or no Linux knowledge could have done this.

Step #1 - Install MySQL Server; open the Synaptic Package Manager and select to install the latest MySQL server and any dependencies it suggests. See UbuntuGuide for a few tweaks to set the SQL root password and so on.

Step #2 - Install MediaWiki; open the Synaptic Package Manager and select to install the latest MediaWiki and any dependencies it suggests. This pulls in Apache and a bunch of libraries as well.

Step #3 - web browse to "http://{your-ip}/" - this basically pulls up Apache's default page and confirms your apache is running - it should be. The home page resides in /var/www if you want to change the default home page. Lots of stuff you could tweak here ... but none you need to tweak now.

Step #4 - web browse to "http://{your-ip}/mediawiki/index.php" - pulls up an "Oops - MediaWiki not setup yet" wizard that walks you through setting up the basic accounts and pointing to your MySQL server.

That's it - at this point you'll have a public-editable Wiki ready to edit as you wish. Since my Wiki sits isolated on a corporate intranet for my own notes and TODO tasks I am not concerned about hackers. Of course, just like Apache there are lots of options to tweak - logos, skins, and so on.

Labels:

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Installing Vista Home Premium

I suppose Vista stuff will be blogged ad-nuseum, but I was curious to see how useful Vista may be. I will try Vista for a few weeks to answer ... why? Will I get any value to upgrade one of my Win XP licenses to Vista? I own 3 XP licenses - 2 by OEM computer purchases and 1 by an official upgrade CD for an old Win98 license. I will install Vista Home Premium since that's likely the one I'd invest in.

I am NOT trying to find new things that work - only if the tools I am comfortable with work. For example no-doubt Vista comes with a snazy media player, but I want to use VLC from http://www.videolan.org/ - so if no VLC, then no Vista for me.

The installation:
My system has 1GB DDR400 SDRAM, AMD A64 2GHz, ATI X1600 graphics card (which has modest hardware pixel shaders etc.), dual 1280x1024 LCD displays, and 150GB SATA Raptor 10,000 RPM drive. Since I didn't want Vista to change or "adjust" anything on main XP disk, I disconnected the main drive and just installed Vista onto a fresh 50GB NTFS partition of an old 5400RPM 80GB drive, which already had Ubuntu 6.10 Linux on the rest of the drive.

The first hiccup was Vista refused to install onto the empty 50GB NTFS partition. It detected and showed me the 3 partitions, but declared it "could not find a suitable partition" to install into. Hmm, after some goofing around, I finally deleted the Ubuntu Linux partition and then magically Vista decided the 50GB NTFS partition was suitable and to its liking. So I suspect Vista didn't like the GRUB boot loader pointing to another partition. In the old days, Windows would have just silently over-written the old boot loader ... which is what I had hoped would happen here but didn't. No big deal, Ubuntu re-installs a bit faster than Vista and the new GRUB boot loader happily added Vista to its menu.

A side note - sadly GRUB doesn't seem to like USB keyboards. I have a Saitek backlit USB gaming keyboard which the PCChips BIOS seems happy with. I have no trouble using the USB keyboard in the BIOS setup or F8 boot menu. But sadly to make use of my Ubuntu GRUB bootloader menu I need to plug in a 2nd PS2 keyboard. I hadn't noticed this before because the few time I ran Ubuntu I just left GRUB do its default. Something to solve another day, but this system may be short-lived anyway.

The Result:
Vista now boots fine and actually seems to like my hardware better than I had suspected - rated it 4.0 Windows Experience Index out of 5.0. I had run a Windows Vista tool a few months ago and unless I'm forgetful it had declared it a pretty mediocre 3.x - complaining about the fact that my A64 was a mere 2.00GHz. Overall I'm rated:
  • Processor = 4.0 (AMD Athelon 64 3000+)
  • Memory = 4.2 (1.00 GB)
  • Graphics = 4.3 (Radeon X1600 Series)
  • Gaming = 4.7 (607MB total graphics RAM)
  • Primary HD = 4.2 (39GB free of 49GB)

I was actually a bit surprised it rated my old slow 5400 RPM PATA100 drive as 4.2 ... I cannot begin to convey the performance impact moving to the 10,000 RPM SATA drive had on WinXP. My system which I had seen as pokey for years even after several fresh OS reinstalls was suddenly peppy. Oh well, I'm not looking for Vista to be peppy at present. My plan is still to upgrade this system to a dual-core next summer after AMD's next generation hopefully catches up to Intels Core Duo. At that time I'd also get a better graphics card.

First Impressions:
Well, it looks sweet ... but the way dialogs fade in and out will take getting used to. I mean, my first impression is Vista's pretty poky; but I suspect this is a mental side-effect of the dialogs fading in & out instead of the more traditional "snap" open and closed in older Windows. I guess if they opened too fast, one could not see the way they load my graphics shaders to fade in and out :-) I play around - set Windows colors to cherry red. The claim to support themes, but didn't see fit to offer any beside "Vista" or a Windows 2K look.

To avoid the constant Windows Security warning ... and for fun "to see how" my first program to install was a free 30-day trial of Kaspersky Anti-Virus 6.0. Vista told me I had 5 supported Anti-Virus options: Kaspersky, Symantec, CA, TrendMicro, and MS OneCare. After my giving permission to Kaspersky to install, I received a number of Program Compatibility Warnings about unsigned drivers. I am instructed to uninstall drivers "kl1.sy" and "klif.sy" and go to the vendors web site obtain properly signed code. Well, so their free trial (version 6.0.1.411) doesn't work with Vista and the correct version (6.0.2.614) isn't available as trial. So I uninstall it. Vista is a bit more paranoid about uninstall - I get popups that I must close some tasks I don't see running - but at least they give me the process id :-). I also get more "blocked/failed" warnings as Vista prevents Kaspersky from uninstalling - "avp.exe" is being blocked. Seems a bit odd to squander this promotion by Vista on par with Norton by supplying tools which fail to install.

So far score is 0 of 1 so far:
- Kaspersky Anti-Virus v6: failed to install, but was blcoked from uninstalling also.

What about Drivers:
So far I've been lucky - Vista had no trouble getting my PCChips mobo up - lucky since they do NOT have any beta drivers for Vista for my old socket 754 mobo. but somewhat oddly Vista seemed clueless about my Creative Audigy card - Device Manager shows it as the broken device item. So I get Creative's Beta 2.12.0001 driver. Lets see if it has better luck than Kaspersky did.
Click run and see the "Unknown Publisher" warning - guess Creative cannot be bothered to even self-sign their betas. Our programmers say self-signing makes these Vista warnings less ominous and "unknown", so vendors will need to learn to at least self-sign "unsigned" drivers. You'd think it is to their advantage anyway since self-signing at least makes malware additions to the code bundle less likely. Man, slow to install. Plus at the end CtHelper.exe causes a warning to popup due to non-death after I agree to reboot.

So far score is 1 of 2 so far:
- Kaspersky Anti-Virus v6: failed to install, but was blcoked from uninstalling also.
- Creative Audigy 4 drivers: seemed fine; Windows Media Player works

Labels: , ,