The train wreck that is X.org
Wataru Tenga
weeks, I've been working very hard to write and complete my thesis. I
performed all the work on Windows 7, but now that the thesis is finally
done, submitted, and accepted, I installed Ubuntu - and immediately I
was reminded of why I do not do any serious work on Linux: the train
wreck that is X.org."
http://www.osnews.com/story/21999/Editorial_X_Could_Learn_a_Lot_from_Vista_Windows_7
--
Wataru Tenga
Rodolfo Raya
>
> "Over the past couple of months, and especially over the past couple of
> weeks, I've been working very hard to write and complete my thesis. I
> performed all the work on Windows 7, but now that the thesis is finally
> done, submitted, and accepted, I installed Ubuntu - and immediately I
> was reminded of why I do not do any serious work on Linux: the train
> wreck that is X.org."
Ubuntu is easy to install, seems easy to use and many people likes it.
But... it behaves like a spoiled child.
A couple of weeks ago several Ubuntu users contacted me asking for
help because Swordfish started doing some unespected things on their
computers. It turned out that Ubuntu installed an update and changed
thier default Java from Sun to OpenJDK. They had to uninstall OpenJDK
and reinstall Sun's Java.
I normally test Ubuntu using VirtualBox in my laptop. It has a
semi-wide screen and was working fine until a few weeks ago. After
installing an update for xorg, screen resolution changed and now I
cannot run it on 1280x800 anymore. It's not funny.
Regards,
Rodolfo
--
Rodolfo M. Raya <rmr...@maxprograms.com>
http://www.maxprograms.com
Keith Wilkinson
entitled "Disappearing files (was: Bizarre powerpoint behavior)".
Keith Wilkinson
with about 260 windows open (Firefox is using more than
1GB of RAM). Firefox is still quite stable and snappy.
Firefox makes it convenient for me to look at recent
browsing history, and I can report "Web Forgery"
(Phishing). And so on...
With Internet Explorer 7.0.5730 (does that mean the
5730th update?) Gmail is almost unusably slow with
only 8 windows open (about 33MB of RAM), and is
sure to crash on me if I open many more. Even IE8
is almost unusably slow with Gmail. If Firefox
crashes, I can still restart it and restore everything--
but if Internet Explorer crashes then it's all gone.
Although I can run even the latest version of Firefox
on LINUX or OS X, I can't run IE. And it's virtually
guaranteed that there will be a new slew of
critical security updates for IE every month or so.
Did you read
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-329645.html
and
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/08/court-gives-microsoft-60-days-to-stop-shipping-word.ars
Wataru Tenga
>
> And I was just reading the posts on the Honyaku Group
> entitled "Disappearing files (was: Bizarre powerpoint behavior)".
Wasn't that about the Mac? And what does it have to do with X.org's
problems?
Wataru Tenga
Keith Wilkinson
another application running on LINUX
or UNIX : If you crash your video,
you do not crash your OS. The
command line is still running.
On the other hand, up to now
graphics on Windows has always
been part of the OS. A video crash
will crash the OS and lose all your
work. (Blue Screen Of Death, or
freeze). So Windows 7 will be
different? That surely is good news.
The article claims to be about X.org problems
that apply to all flavors of LINUX -- but it seems
obvious that this is not the case:
The problems mentioned are
(1) buggy video driver (applies only to a
specific video card). I have to agree that
the recent move, in more than one distro,
not to install proprietary video drivers by
default (or to replace proprietary drivers with
open source ones) has created problems.
But this was probably started by nVidia
creating problems by releasing buggy drivers.
If drivers are open source then you're not
dependent on the maker to fix the problem.
Microsoft tried to eliminate problems with
buggy drivers by requiring that all drivers be
signed -- makers were supposed to pay
Microsoft huge fees to test and approve
all their drivers. The result has been that
almost all drivers released by makers
have been unsigned -- the user has to
OK installing an unsigned driver.
(2) Ubuntu's arbitrary changing of default
settings when an update is done
This is Ubuntu specific, but maybe applies
to some (but not all) other distros. However
a very similar problem occurs on Windows --
each time you update your browser (IE)
(IE6 to IE7 or IE7 to IE8 via automatic
updates, or even just a major bugfix
within the same version of IE) you are
likely to break Flash. Many users are
not going to understand why they can
no longer view videos and most web
sites look funny (another recent
post on the Honyaku Group).
But -- regardless of your platform --
you're asking for problems if you
have automatic updates turned on
and agree to a reboot without
saving work in progress.
Keith Wilkinson
64-bit Adobe Flash Player 10 for Linux
Why hasn't Adobe released a 64-bit Flash Player
for Windows? I think it's very likely that people
who try to push around huge video files on IE
are going to crash IE (locking up memory and
probably requiring a reboot, at least pre-Win7) --
and Adobe will get the blame for the crashes ;-)
Skype is another application that will possibly
appear in a 64-bit version for LINUX before it
appears in a 64-bit version for Windows.
Don't get me wrong. I use XP and I use LINUX.
I hope never to have to use Vista, but will almost
certainly use Windows 7. I don't see any point
in religious wars.
I'm disappointed by the instability of the latest
LINUX distros -- but they are Betas. Surely one of
their main purpose is to enable users to find bugs
with open-source applications that run on LINUX,
and so expedite release of the next generation
of commercially-supported LINUXes. But you're
not forced to buy commercially-supported LINUXes.
You can use CENTOS rather than Red Hat,
and get essentially the same product.
And all the third-party stuff that CENTOS users
port to CENTOS can be used on Red Hat.
Red Hat 5.4 Beta is over, I think, and the final
release should appear very soon. Red Hat 6
is expected by year end. The Fedora people
have started to address the dearth of user-
friendly LINUX documentation
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/
And Windows 7 will be released. I think
that the next few months will be very
interesting for all enthusiasts, regardless
of their religion (or lack of it) ;-)
Wataru Tenga
> Don't get me wrong. I use XP and I use LINUX.
> I hope never to have to use Vista, but will almost
> certainly use Windows 7. I don't see any point
> in religious wars.
I started this list so we could collectively deal with the feasibility
of using Linux as our work platform. In the first year or so of the
list, I used various Linux distros extensively and for a while was
using Linux exclusively, going so far as to uninstall Windows
completely. Along the way, though, I began discovering that I could
not serve my customers' needs adequately that way. Too many issues
arose, most notably with OpenOffice.org, as I have talked about quite
a bit in the past.
I've noticed, though, that whenever I say or post something negative
about Linux, Keith fires back by pointing out some problems in Windows
or Internet Explorer. I appreciate the enthusiasm but I think that
misses the point. I am absolutely not interested in religious wars,
but I am wanting the best environment for meeting the translation
needs of my customers. Since I started using Windows 7 early this
year, I have only gone back to Linux a couple of times, and both times
I have been sorely disappointed. I'm afraid that my experiments with
Linux as a work platform have been largely failures, despite the
promising start. (Those interested in the details can go through the
archives.)
wataru
Raymond Martin
The real problem is a couple of applications and not a whole operating
system. And if you trace backwards to where the root of the problem is it will
always end up being the fault of MS.
OpenOffice.org does not work well with MS doc/ppt because MS will not
open up its file formats (it won't matter if you use OOo on Windows, nothing
to do with Linux). Some driver does not work well for video, the company that
won't let the code be open needs to change the way they work so it can work
properly on Linux, but usually they are locked in with MS so this is very
unlikely. The problem is MS, not Linux.
At some level also it is about the kind of work you either have to or choose
to accept. If it is all MS formats, then you are stuck because of your clients
business practices and over-reliance on non-standard formats (MS formats are
usually not standards, although commonly used as de-facto ones). Thus,
again it is clear where the fault lies and it is not with Linux.
Some of the people I know who have left Windows for Linux have had
little to no problems using it for their professional translation work, but
it depends on the particulars of that work. It in no way can be said that
Linux is unusable for all translation work.
Certain applications will continue to be a problem for some people,
due to lack of support in certain languages and so on. For others it
will be good enough. Overall the situation will take a long time to
change due to one company's attitude towards Linux and FOSS.
It continues to fight against and spread FUD about Linux. So you can
thank MS for any missing functionality that would make your life easier
and better on Linux.
You can still have Linux and MS at once despite all this. Just use VirtualBox,
QEMU, or other emulator. Works fine for me when I have to rarely use Windows.
As for the X.org issue, try a different distro or, gasp, actually try to tweak
the X.org configuration file from a shell once you are sure you have the
correct video drivers installed. It is really not that hard to do and this is
where most of the problems are in my experience. Send me your hardware
details and X.org.conf file (known working versions, non-working) and
I will help you figure it out properly. Then you just need to keep a backup
copy around when you upgrade or install a new distro and check that the
installed one has not changed badly from the settings in your known working
version.
Another issue, the overwriting of Sun Java with OpenJDK or other when
upgrading. This may not be a real problem, just a little configuration change.
Many Linux distros come with a utility called "update-alternatives" that
allows choosing between different versions of a program. Upgrading, if
it did not erase the other version, has only put in the newer version in
a side-by-side manner with the others. For java there can be choices
between different versions (from different vendors) to use when set up this
way. update-alternatives can be run (as root) to change the default
selection of program to run. Thus, you could have Sun Java, OpenJDK, GCJ, or
other Java Runtime Environment or Java Development Kit installed in parallel,
but only one being used to run your applications depending on what default has
been set up by update-alternatives. Also, if someone wants only Sun Java,
they should uninstall the other vendors java versions, then they won't
(or shouldn't) get upgraded/installed the next time an update is done.
Regards,
Raymond
Jim Breen
> "Over the past couple of months, and especially over the past couple of
> weeks, I've been working very hard to write and complete my thesis. I
> performed all the work on Windows 7, but now that the thesis is finally
> done, submitted, and accepted, I installed Ubuntu - and immediately I
> was reminded of why I do not do any serious work on Linux: the train
> wreck that is X.org."
>
My first reaction was: "what the hell is he on about?. I have been doing all
my serious work on X-based systems for 17 years. It's years since X crashed
on me."
Then I read the article and understood his gripe a bit better (I don't know
why he uses Evolution.) I think he missed a major point:
"The Linux desktop needs a modern, robust, and advanced graphics stack,
which makes sure that crashes and bugs remain isolated, without them affecting
the users' work. Microsoft has shown us how it's done, now all the X world
needs to do is follow."
The point is that perhaps in this case, after spending squillions of dollars
on it, Microsoft might possibly have a better and more robust product after
years of making people pay for something quite inferior. To say "all the X
world needs to do is follow" ignores that the X world simply does not have the
financial respurces to keep up in every area. The graphics stack is one. Fully
internationalizing code is another. I think it does very well overall, and
to repeat, I have no problems at all with using Linux for all my serious work.
Jim
--
Jim Breen
Adjunct Snr Research Fellow, Clayton School of IT, Monash University
Treasurer: Hawthorn Rowing Club, VCA Secondary School, Japanese Studies Centre
Graduate student: Language Technology Group, University of Melbourne
Keith Wilkinson
different system languages and have virtually all of
the 3rd-party applications' user interfaces come up
in that same language? Like LINUX has been
able to do for some time? I heard that MS offered
a special Multilingual Windows/Office bundle that
they sold only to multi-national companies with
extremely deep pockets. But surely that's not
available for ordinary users yet? Third-party apps
like Adobe Dreamweaver etc. are single-language.
Don't you think it's funny that the guy has
problems playing videos on a single video
card on a single distro and deduces that
all LINUX and UNIX distros are totally
unreliable and useless for any serious work!
Would you give him a PhD for such "research"?
I wonder how many users consider
playing videos to be "serious work"?
In the server world I hear that uptime of
LINUX servers is an order of magnitude
better than Windows servers. It's quite
difficult to find hosting companies offering
Windows servers because the cost is
so much higher and the reliability is
so much lower than LINUX or UNIX.
Raymond Martin
> > Fully internationalizing code is another.
>
> Is is possible to boot Windows into any of a zillion
> different system languages and have virtually all of
> the 3rd-party applications' user interfaces come up
> in that same language?
No, you have to pay for each separate language version, AFAIK.
> Like LINUX has been able to do for some time?
No. Linux/UNIX has had this kind of thing for more than a decade.
Where is Windoze in all this?
> I heard that MS offered a special Multilingual Windows/Office bundle that
> they sold only to multi-national companies with extremely deep pockets.
> But surely that's not available for ordinary users yet?
Right, separate versions you have to pay the same amount for, even though
it is just changing some localization resource files or related. Ripoff!!!
> Third-party apps like Adobe Dreamweaver etc. are single-language.
>
> Don't you think it's funny that the guy has problems playing videos on a
> single video card on a single distro and deduces that all LINUX and UNIX
> distros are totally unreliable and useless for any serious work!
No, it is quite typical for people that do not know what they are talking
about to make sweeping generalizations based on one instance. They
are not capable of seeing the big picture.
> Would you give him a PhD for such "research"?
A PhD at clown college.
> I wonder how many users consider playing videos to be "serious work"?
Ones that think Windoze is the best! Basically little teenie boppers who
cannot even change directory at a DOS prompt!
> In the server world I hear that uptime of LINUX servers is an order of
> magnitude better than Windows servers.
Not an order of magnitude, "orders" of magnitude.
> It's quite difficult to find hosting companies offering Windows servers
> because the cost is so much higher and the reliability is so much lower than
> LINUX or UNIX.
Exactly. What serious business could really be bothered with MS server
garbage when they can get better software for free? No real tech person
would even bother to consider it after doing their homework.
Raymond
PS. X is not a train wreck. It has features that the other operating systems
do not or only recently started to get. Windoze is the train wreck you keep
paying for every time they make a bug fix, uh, I mean upgrade.
Rodolfo Raya
>
> On Tuesday 18 August 2009 09:48:28 Keith Wilkinson wrote:
>> > Fully internationalizing code is another.
>>
>> Is is possible to boot Windows into any of a zillion
>> different system languages and have virtually all of
>> the 3rd-party applications' user interfaces come up
>> in that same language?
>
> No, you have to pay for each separate language version, AFAIK.
Wrong. You can launch Windows in 32 languages at no extra cost.
Regards
Raymond Martin
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Raymond Martin<las...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 18 August 2009 09:48:28 Keith Wilkinson wrote:
> >> > Fully internationalizing code is another.
> >>
> >> Is is possible to boot Windows into any of a zillion
> >> different system languages and have virtually all of
> >> the 3rd-party applications' user interfaces come up
> >> in that same language?
> >
> > No, you have to pay for each separate language version, AFAIK.
>
> Wrong. You can launch Windows in 32 languages at no extra cost.
You have to buy one version in a particular language first, then apply
language packs to do it. Whoever goes to get windows 7 is going to see they
can only get the beta (still available?) in one of five languages. Later
the other languages will be available. So it is not like they all come with
your purchased version automatically, ready for install.
With most good Linux distros you can configure the installation to install
a selection of language resources. Or you can install while running and
change to that language by closing/reopening an app or logout/login
to X. How do we accomplish the same on windoze?
So basically you do have to pay for a separate language version for
default installation (then mess around with language packs).
Raymond
Wataru Tenga
> With most good Linux distros you can configure the installation to install
> a selection of language resources. Or you can install while running and
> change to that language by closing/reopening an app or logout/login
> to X. How do we accomplish the same on windoze?
>
> So basically you do have to pay for a separate language version for
> default installation (then mess around with language packs).
From an informational standpoint, here is the Microsoft official
explanation of the language support situation in Windows 7.
----------------------------------------------------------
How do I get additional display languages?
You can add display languages by installing additional language files.
When you install language files, you can view wizards, dialog boxes,
menus, Help topics, and other items in Windows in a different language.
There are two types of language files:
Windows 7 Multilingual User Interface Pack (MUI).
Windows 7 MUIs provide a translated version of most of the user
interface. MUIs require a license to be used and are only available in
Windows 7 Ultimate and Windows 7 Enterprise.
Windows 7 Language Interface Pack (LIP).
Windows 7 LIPs provide a translated version of the most widely used
areas of the user interface. LIPs are freely available to download.
Because not all of the user interface is translated, LIPs require at
least one parent language. The parts of the user interface that aren't
translated into the LIP language are displayed in the parent language.
When you download the LIP, you get the parent language requirements for
that language. The parent language pack needs to be installed before the
LIP can be installed. For more information, including a list of
languages available for downloading, go to the Microsoft Local Language
Program website.
-----------------------------------------------
In practical terms, most of us need only an interface in our language of
choice, and the ability to read and write in a number of other languages.
You can do both easily enough in Linux and Windows. Whether a program
can switch languages or not depends on whether the application author
bothered to include that capability, which is true of both Linux and
Windows applications.
I think what Jim Breen was talking about is something different from the
discussion so far, but I'll let him speak for himself on that.
Wataru Tenga
Rodolfo Raya
>> Wrong. You can launch Windows in 32 languages at no extra cost.
>
> You have to buy one version in a particular language first, then apply
> language packs to do it. Whoever goes to get windows 7 is going to see they
> can only get the beta (still available?) in one of five languages. Later
> the other languages will be available. So it is not like they all come with
> your purchased version automatically, ready for install.
Windows 7 is already available in 32 languages. All language packs are
available for the Release Candidate too.
Regards,
Keith Wilkinson
> the application author bothered to include that capability, which is true
> of both Linux and Windows applications.
interfaces
of all popular open-source programs get translated into Japanese (and
other
languages) by volunteers. The really nifty thing about open SuSE is
that the English launch menus contain all the third-party programs
that are included in the distro and that work in English, and the
default
Japanese launch menus contain a sizeable subset -- all the programs
that work in Japanese. And so on for other languages. Of course you
can still run the other programs that come with the distro, and get
their
menus in the secondary language (usually English). With commercial
Windows programs you are dependent on the manufacturer -- and most
will continue to prefer to sell you a separate copy of the program for
each
language that you want. So if your business is making web pages, and
having native speakers translate them into many languages, then it is
probably going to cost a lot more to do it with Windows.