Google behind Photoshop's new Linux compatibility

Angus Kidman18 February 2008, 7:16 AM

Cold, hard cash from Google's war coffers have funded the creation of software that allows Photoshop to run on Linux. Is it a move to undermine Microsoft's Windows cash cow?


Google recently confirmed in a blog posting that it had paid Codeweavers to help develop WINE to make Photoshop usable on the well-regarded but still somewhat unpredictable software package, which aims to replicate Windows libraries to enable popular Windows applications run in a Linux environment.

Woot: Photoshop CS2 running on WINE, thanks to GoogleWoot: Photoshop CS2 running on WINE, thanks to Google
"Photoshop is one of those applications that Desktop linux users are constantly clamoring for, and we're happy to say they work pretty well now," Google engineer and Wine release manager Dan Kegel wrote. "About 200 patches were committed to winehq, and as of wine-0.9.54, Photoshop CS2 is quite usable," Kegel noted in a separate post.

The sponsorship was also mentioned during a Google presentation at Linux.conf.au in Melbourne last month, focusing its Summer of Code student training program. "We have paid for a whole bunch of improvements to a whole bunch of stuff," program manager Leslie Hawthorn said. "We haven't actually talked about it, but we recently paid CodeWeavers to do some work on Wine so you can run Photoshop CS2 and 3"

As such, it's not a big stretch to imagine that prospects for the 2008 program might want to propose further enhancements to the Adobe product line. Coming up with an update process that's not a global embarrassment would be a good start. Patching Acrobat Reader is painful enough on a standard Windows machine; doing so under pseudo-emulation quite possibly violates international anti-torture laws.

Adobe certainly seems to be in Google's sights. "Perhaps not coincidentally, apps like Flash 8 are now starting to work in Wine, too," Kegel wrote. "We look forward to further improvements in this area."

There's a clear parallel between Google's pro-Linux moves (it also sponsored a similar project for its own Picasa image manipulation software in 2006) and Apple's switch to the Intel architecture in 2006. A large part of Apple's user base wasn't interested in making the switch until native versions of key applications -- particularly Adobe Creative Suite and Microsoft Office -- were available in versions specifically recompiled to run Intel-friendly code. Sure, it was possible to run the existing code using the Rosetta virtual machine, but there was a heavy performance penalty, which is the last thing you need when you're running Photoshop.

Google's sponsored tweaks follow a similar logic, though they're necessarily going to be somewhat less effective. Fixing Wine to run particular apps is never going to be as productive as recoding the apps themselves for a particular operating environment (although the latter isn't really an option). Still, making popular applications work via Wine adds extra shine to Linux's longstanding battle for wider mainstream desktop acceptance.

Before we read too much into this, it's worth noting that Photoshop on Wine still involves compromises, unpleasantness and potentially a lot of stuffing around. The release notes point out several of the hazards, including the somewhat surprising outcome that failing to install one crucial font can create major problems: "If you don't have Times32 installed when you first run Photoshop CS2, it will refuse to run ever again, claiming there's a hardware error."

Nonetheless, getting what's still a hideously expensive application to work under Windows seems fairly far removed from Google's day-to-day business needs. (By the way, the Wine code goes out of its way not to work with cracked software, so forget any dodgy piracy plans)

While Google has always encouraged a degree of iconaclism - visible most clearly in its famous edict that engineers can spend 20 percent of their time working on whatever projects they like - actually coughing up cold hard cash makes much more sense if interpreted as a 'screw you' gesture towards Steve Ballmer and the Windows gang. Strengthening Linux doesn't necessarily have to undermine Windows (Vista did that quite well on its own), but it remains a potent side effect.

In the short term, Team MS isn't likely to be publically acknowledge any worries, perhaps reassuring itself that some users of Wine still splash out on a copy of Windows anyway for better reliability. But the company's recent attempts to buy Yahoo! underscore that there's plenty of awareness at Microsoft that the desktop monopoly can't be taken for granted.

Having that monopoly directly undermined by a major rival is not going to go down well. Is the Monkey Dance about to be replaced with tribal war chants? Or will it buy Adobe and work hard on making the code even less Wine-friendly?


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Martin Gifford:

What has always surprised me is that Goggle or Adobe haven't invented a new streamlined WORD PROCESSOR aimed at people who only do text.

Non-fiction authors, screenwriters, journalists, playwrights, and letter writers often only need basic text stuff: document map, styles, outlining, templates, spell check, and thesaurus.

So long as it is rock solid stable with large documents and under $30 I would by it instead of Word.

Open Office doesn't work for me because it isn't stable enough and the navigator (its version of document map) requires two clicks and even then the heading doesn't go to the top of the page.

I'd love the feeling of opening an Adobe Word Processor!

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

APC administrator:

Actually, Adobe has...

http://www.buzzword.com/

 

and Google has too...

http://docs.google.com 



29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

itsjustarumour:

Yes, but Buzzword isn't exactly ready for regular use.

"Preliminary Linux Support:
This release of Buzzword provides preliminary support for Firefox under Linux"

"Known Problems:
Copying and pasting fails intermittently.
Printing does not work."

I think that would just about knock it on the head for me for commerical purposes....

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Baz:

Try Lyx, and when you have mastered that, Latex.

Also both are libre and gratis, so you can save your $30.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Duncan:

Open Office isn't stable enough? What platform/version are you talking about? I've been running OO.o exclusively as my office suite in Windows for several years now and it has been more stable than MS Office ever was.

This isn't a flame, I'd love to know, especially as it sounds like you don't use particularly arcane functionality.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

ross_cav:

I have to agree with you, and in fact, I would probably prefer a crash to happen in Open Office [especially under Linux] as it probably wouldn't lock up my entire system as can happen with Microsoft Office.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

TK:

One industry standard is using a type-setting format like *Tex. This makes it easier to concentrate on the text rather than the layout. If a person doesn't want to worry about learning the raw format, they can try Lyx or a number of other "what you see is what you mean" editors for *Tex. There are quite a number of folks that used Lyx for dissertations and books and screenplays and ... you get the idea.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Martin Gifford:

Duncan, Ross, Baz, TK:

I admit I tried Open Office about 3 years ago, but the first day I used it, the Navigator gave a dodgy list of headings. But it was a .doc file not a Open Office file. Word 2007 has been faultless for 21 hours of solid work per week for over 6 months. I dislike the new reduction in customisation ability, but it has been rock solid for me.

Lyx has no document map/navigator, and a document map/navigator is vital to me writing long documents.

BTW, I'd add comments functionality to my list of "basic text stuff" in my original post.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Wunar:

"iconaclism" - a typo for iconoclasm or iconoclasticism?

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

ArtInvent:

I run Photoshop under Wine on Ubuntu. My wife is a pro textile designer and she really needs it and Illustrator. It hardly matters whether Adobe makes another forced upgrade and CS4 no longer works in Wine. Why? Because she happily uses CS2 or even Photoshop 7 - the old programs have plenty of power even for most professionals.

Myself I prefer the Gimp because it starts so quickly and is better integrated into Linux. And the new Inkscape is looking fantastic as well.

Wine is a brilliant project and is probably only a few months out from running all my old Windows programs perfectly. Right now it's about 60% there. Having come from Windows XP, I still have some trusty old Win apps I like to run once in a while. But make no mistake, my days of paying for software with ridiculous EULA's, constant forced upgrades, feature bloat, and planned obsolesence are over.

My long term money is on Free Open Source apps because they are advancing at a much more rapid rate and they have a far more dedicated and helpful user base.

When you spend $3000 on a computer I guess spending another $1000 on software to go with it makes sense enough. However, we are fast entering the computer-as-commodity era when a perfectly usable eee PC or similar costs under $500 and dropping. At this point everyone will be able to afford a computer, and a single software app that costs more than the computer and doesn't work any better than the FOSS equivalents will start to look like a very mystifying and obsolete phenomenon indeed.

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

rob enderle:

Most people DONT "need" Photoshop.

Sure, the guy above has a wife who uses it for work. Fine. I know MUCH, MUCH more people who use Photoshop because they got it from 'their' guy than graphic artists.

I know every Joe fancies himself as a 'web creator' because they know a bit of HTML and Swish but 'need' and want are two different things. Most kids have to be taught that at an early age but it seems to be true with adults as well. Especially ones who get distracted by shiny objects.

Browsers are essential. So is some form of word processing. Audio/video players and burning tools are too.
Photo manipulation programs are nice to have but a 1000 dollar program to take out redeye or crop a picture is not a necessity (even less with online correction software now).

I may need the CMYK option because of work sometimes but I know very little family, friends and clients who do.
It is a job specific demand.
And job specific software is NOT for everyone.

Of course my father in law hears the same thing every day in his computer store with people telling him they need more 'power'. Its more often than not, a penis thing.


29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

3_4_ever:

Why not google pay / donate money for developers off GIMP and Inkscape???

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

tin:

Because there's quite a number of people who use "Photoshop" as the excuse to not switch to Linux.
Without that excuse, quite a number of people will have no reason to try switching over.

Most people who "need" photoshop either don't know about GIMP/Cinepaint/Inkscape, or they simply don't spend some time learning them (sometimes for good reason though). There are very few people who actually need the few features not available in those 3 open source programs.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Annonymous:

Even I "need" photoshop, have more then basic training and have worked with photoshop several years. Using mostly key commands and finds what I want when I need it in the menus in a flash.

When I sit down with gimp, the same actions takes 10 times longer, and the learning curve for such a big app is quite hard.

Though I run Linux Ubuntu! (with a virtual machine server)
So crossing over isn't really a big deal even if you depend on some programs - not any more.

And sure this running photoshop directly in wine is great.
But as in the first state, and the statements about its quite unreliable behaviour its certainly nothing for me.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Stomfi:

If you look around all the TAFE courses and the graphics jobs in OZ, Photoshop is what they teach and Photoshop experience is what they want, no matter that you can do just as good with other tools. If you haven't got Photoshop, you won't fit in with the rest of the community because you have to share your files in the preferred format, and be able to use Photoshop plugins.

Photoshop is like MS Office in that it saves files and plugins in a proprietary format. Can you set the default save as photoshop format in the GIMP? Can you use Photoshop plugins?

I know you can reset the default in OO to save as .doc instead of ODF, and also translate 80% of MS Macros but hopefully this can change as International pressure forces MS to phase out their proprietary closed formats.

Graphics is another important area where we need applications to save by default in an ISO standard like Open Office does for ODF, but until that time, maybe Google or the GIMP developers can give us a default Photoshop format save, and a Photoshop plugin translator.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

KristjanS:

//Can you set the default save as photoshop format in the GIMP?//
Not as default, but the support for it is there. It's just two clicks to change the filetype, what's the big problem?

//Can you use Photoshop plugins?//
Not all, but many of them. See http://www.gimp.org/~tml/gimp/win32/pspi.html

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Fain:

Yes, I like the idea of gimp being improved better, screw adobe.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Renegades:

I couldn't agree more, it would have been much better if they had supported The GIMP. But it has a lot to do with stealing Microsoft's thunder.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Me in Australia:

.... Because it doesn't have commercial support !
My wife is a Graphic Artist with a team of about a dozen people and one of the requirements for a position with this firm is that you must have certified training in Photoshop and Quark running on Mac's. This is the industry standard in this part of the world.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Me from Australia:

Just another example reinforcing my belief that Linux is not an OS for the 'Real World' commercial desktop use.
And before the Linux crowd give me a battering, real world doesn't include military, research use etc.
No commercial graphic artist or printer is going to risk running his business using Photoshop through Linux emulating Windows .... "and having some features compromised" !
Keep trying Linux. Maybe in 50 years when all the Linux distros have some coherence and uniformity (along with the aftermarket driver support), we may see a 10% 'Real world' commercial market share. And then the likes of Windows and Mac would be worried.
I'm commenting on Linux for desktops ... NOT Unix for servers !


29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Just me:

The problem is not that Linux is unable to "reliably" run all desktop apps; the problem is that MS has been entrenched for so many years that all the development focus is towards Windows and in a profit driven market change is not worth the risk.

Money is being slowly pushed into Linux development and over time it will not be such a scary venture and more corporations will provide native Linux versions of their software.

The shift can already be seen but I believe people on both sides of the fence are getting to excited to quickly. Change is coming but it will be slow and methodical, time will tell.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Jose_X:

Are you talking about "commercial desktop" use (whatever that means though I can guess within the context of photoshop) or are you talking about general desktop use?

This effort isn't aimed at getting the photoshop pros (which are a small minority of desktop users). It's aimed at the amateurs and semi-pros that have learned photoshop and feel comfortable with it.

The focus isn't on the 3-5% of pro desktop users but on Jack/Jill Users.

BTW, when Linux applications, eg, the gimp, surpass in usability and effects what photoshop offers, the pros that take their work seriously will start to sing a different tune much as the pros in military, research, finance, and many other industries today view Linux as a serious contender if not the top dog in their field when perhaps they didn't just a few years ago.

Honestly, in 5 years time will you expect to find more free online video photoshop tutorials or gimp tutorials? Gimp is the $0 one and the one with a community that actually has insight into the software and plugins because of how open it is. Adobe won't be able to keep up. Not that it matters, but the damage may come through youtube which coincidentally is owned by Google also.

Here is an Ok noob friendly Linux distro I came across recently. It isn't aimed at the pros. It's for those that just want the basics from a PC. http://linuxtracker.org/index.php?page=torrent-details&id=7521efbf6e7e6fb7a1cbac220eec0dbe3d87ebd8


29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Me in Australia:

When the average Joe spends $2000 to $3000 on a PC, they don't want to run the 'basics' on it. They want to know what their new quad core cpu and 8800GTS video card is capable of. Unfortunately a linux distro is not going to provide the 'eye candy'. And let's face it, the average Joe brags about what his desktop screen looks rather than what the PC can actually do.
As for the 5 years prophecy for open source apps ? ... we have heard all the same things 5 years ago !

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anoni-mouse:

This coming from someone who OBVIOUSLY hasn't used any Linux distro in years. Eye candy? Have you LOOKED at the "eye candy" in KDE, Gnome running Compiz Fusion? Don't embarrass yourself like that until you actually know what you're talking about. Vista was late to the game as Linux had Compiz a year before Vista was "released".

Also, Average Joe spending $2000-$3000 for a PC???? Maybe the hardcore gamer, but I wouldn't call them Average Joe. Average Joe is going to spend maybe $1000 or less for their PC. Get real and step into the same reality most people live in.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Me in Australia:

Last year I sold well over 100 laptops and 200 desktops.
I work in a large retail company. Therefore I can qualify my comments .... Can you ?
70% ran Win and the rest Mac.
The average laptop retails at $1500.00
and the average desktop at $1800.00 with options for better hardware etc ...
I've seen the latest Linux desktops and both Fusion and Vista have their pros and cons (so don't kid yourself).
Most of my customers ask stuff like "does it run Call Of Duty 4 ?" .... and do you really think I can direct them to ANY Linux distro ? ..... We would go out of business !
I have never said Linux was rubbish in any of my posts. All I've said is that Linux does not have enough commercial and retail support to make it a viable 'everyday' and 'every joe' OS .... Cheers

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Not you:

If you want to talk about Eye Candy in Linux, first get informed and then talk, check this out:
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=E4Fbk52Mk1w

It's called Compiz, much, much better than Vista and Macs effects and can be turned on with a couple of clicks in Ubuntu.

Not you

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

ranonymous:

Please give me a single example of an "average Joe" who would spend $2,000 - $3,000 on a PC in today's market. More like $500-$600, and with nary a thought about the video capabilities. The person you described is a Windows gamer fanatic, a white male in his 20's with 1-2 years college education who eats frozen pizzas 3 days a week and saves what's leftover from his assistant manager's salary for video gaming and cheap beer, eschewing things like getting out of the house, getting a girlfriend or learning anything about the wider world. Not an uncommon animal, but hardly representative of "the average".

NAT


29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Me in Australia:

The average Joe ? ... Me !
Wife, 3 kids, 43 years old, $60,000 a year salary.
Even my uni friends can afford these PC's now ! ... Lets face it ... Hardware is dirt cheap !
Use my Windows PC for everything (including gaming) !
Wife has Mac for her graphic design work !
I upgrade components of my PC yearly.
As an IT and entertainment retailer in one of the largest retail chains in Australia, I consider myself well informed enough to re-inforce my comments.
The PC hardware industry is driven by gamers. Period !!!
Do you really think that we would need Quad CPU's and 8800GTS video cards to run a glorified word processor and programs to rid red-eye out of photos ?
And as for not using a Linux distro for awhile ? ... Correct ! ... BECAUSE it doesn't do what most consumers want ! .... And I should know, I sell a lot of PC's ! .... Do You ?
(This reply is not just directed at NAT) ... Cheers

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Bjorn:

Hmm, I disagree that linux is lacking eye candy. I've had multiple windows users look at my ubuntu desktop and go "wow".

See http://compiz.org/Home/Screenshots

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Me in Canada:

The average Joe doesn't have to spend anywhere near $2000-$3000 to have a very cool Linux desktop today. You surely don't need a quad core cpu and 8800GTS video card to do what you see in that video.

That is a pretty brag-worthy desktop in my book.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Kevin:

When the average Joe spends $2000 to $3000 on a PC, they don't want to run the 'basics' on it. They want to know what their new quad core cpu and 8800GTS video card is capable of. Unfortunately a linux distro is not going to provide the 'eye candy'. And let's face it, the average Joe brags about what his desktop screen looks rather than what the PC can actually do.

What??? Are you kidding? Vista's Aero has nothing on Linux's Compiz-Fusion. If you're looking for 'eye candy', $500 spent on a machine running Linux will blow away that $3,000 Vista machine.

But I will have to agree that Linux isn't for the everyday user yet, though. We still live in a Windows world.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Me in Oz:

Sorry if you have misunderstood. My references to 'eye candy' does not just refer to the desktop (Let's face it, you can look at the desktop for just so long), but refers to apps and games too. My linux fanboy friends weep like schoolgirls when they are trying to get shader model working on their ubuntu rigs, and lets not get started on online gaming with a linux rig !

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Jose_X:

I almost regretted mentioning the "5" year number as soon as I had clicked submit. I am not in the fortune telling business, period. It's too easy to be off, and I am not even perched in a really good spot. Nevertheless, you mentioned "5 years ago". I think Linux has advanced more in those 5 years than has Microsoft (XP is pretty old now).

Linux has nice eye candy though you may not have looked recently. Still that is a weakness. I am huge on getting more artists to learn about Linux. You can never use too many artist contributors. Surely some decent artist wouldn't mind having his/her artwork on millions of PCs. That day is coming. [..and let's not forget what a great business tool a Linux LiveCD remaster can be]

I have never spent that amount of money (2-3 K USD) on a PC. Not long ago I bought a 6600gs (50 bucks), and it does a very good job with the quake 3 engine based open source games (which is as much as I tax this machine today.. a machine bought new for under $300 USD a few years ago and upgraded only with memory and the video card).

The average Jack/Jill is not a serious gamer. The average Jack/Jill is willing to play games one two and even more years old. They even play solitaire some of them! They don't upgrade their machines a few times a year. The will gladly spend below 1000 for a decent machine. Etc.

Linux is not ready to challenge these niche groups you are describing. This can't happen until there grow their market share so that top hardware and application companies refuse to leave Linux out. But the majority of Jack/Jill (the fat part of the bell curve) are not part of these niche groups, and they can give Linux decent market share. A PC a few years old can run many versions of photoshop, for example.

Nvidia, AMD/ATI, and Intel have really changed their tune towards open source in the last few years and months (Intel and AMD are competing to see which opens up their specs more, though of the three, Nvidia has lead with quality *closed* source drivers for some time now: one reason the other two have started to open up more). Naturally, a lot of other hardware companies have also been paying a lot more attention to Linux recently.

Look around youtube to see some Linux eyecandy and use of interesting hardware. The Wii remote was working long ago.. the PS3 runs Linux -- that will do wonders for the gaming scene on Linux in the next few years -- though the PS3 has yet to take off (less familiar programming interface).

Microsoft/Toshiba's HD DVD just lost out to Blue-ray (eg, the PS3).

Things are really looking (cautiously) good, and this quiet effort by Google over the past months is just one of the many examples. Linux is open for all to take advantage of. It is not controlled by one company; thus, you have to expect it will grow faster and with unpredictable spurts.

The key for businesses isn't yesterday or even today. It's tomorrow.



29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Me in Oz:

I appreciate your comments Jose_X, but I can hardly concur with the fact that gamers, photoshop and MS office users are a 'niche' groups. These are the majority, not the minority.
Cheers

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Jose_X:

serious gamers: niche
serious photoshop pros: niche
serious/pro anything: niche
These may take the longest to switch (at least until desktop linux is top notch with apps etc).

everyone else: These are the Jack/Jills that Linux can realistically address in the near term or already does, and Google just made it a little easier.


29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

ross_cav:

Usually any advancement in closed source applications will result in advancement in open source applications. In this case, I hope that having such a major application easily used on Linux will hopefully lead to bigger and better advancements into Linux based applications such as GIMP / Inkscape. As previously mentioned by another poster, due to a wider community with open source the advancement rate can be very rapid.

I do look forward to the time that schools offer courses for apps like GIMP, and the time that employers recognise these qualifications. I know things like this don't happen overnight, but it's good to see that the progress seems to be happening at a rapid pace.

There is a big price tag to go with most software, and many businesses still have a 'get what you pay for' attitude and are fearful of 'free' software, especially for desktop use. I hope this will change, and I'm sure small / medium / big business will reap great financial benefit in the long run. But... good things take time.

Just a note in regards to the PC prices that were listed: even though a lot currencies are pretty even these days, $ can represent a variety of countries. Make sure you check which $ people are talking about prior to gasping at some of the costs.

Plus, didn't really have anything informative in this post, just felt like contributing ;-)

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

DuncanIdaho (New user):

Some of you really need to go back and do you computer homework again. If you think that any Microsoft OS is top notch you need some serious education. Lets start with compatibility, with Vista and any other Microsoft OS you are limited to programs that are written for them. With Linux, I run anything that I want from any OS, Microsoft, Apple, or Linux. You talk about top notch program and apps, I've been running WOW, Gears of War, Call of Duty 4, and Call of Duty: World at War faster then and just as stable as Vista. Lets move to price, what is a copy of Vista now, $250 USD? Man, my Linux distro was FREE. Customization, Microsoft has always limited how you can customize Windows. Linux allows you to customize anything, windows boarders size, shape and color, icons, cursors, color themes, login screens, splash screens, start up screens, all without external programs such as WindowBlinds. In fact my OS doesn't even resemble the Novel distro that I installed. With all the tweaking and modifying that one does to their Linux distro, by the time that they are done the source that's on the computer is totally different. Which brings me to my last point, Virus protection. Microsoft system users spend millions on Anti-Virus programs because a hack only has to write a virus to attack widows for it to possible affect every Microsoft computer. With Linux, there are 100's of different distro's and all the tweaking and modifing of the original source that a user does with in their computer makes us immune. To infect my computer you would have to get my source from my computer and engineer the virus specific for my system. So with all these advantages why is Microsoft so big, because you out there are all LAZY. You all want to just flip a switch and have everything done for you. Well in my opinion you should all just stick to your little game console, because with a Microsoft system that about what you have, a fancy game console. Same with Apple. It's all proprietary. They only run their crap and they want you to buy it. Why when you can run everything for FREE. Oh yea, did I also mention that DOS (where Microsoft got it's start and based everything else they made on) and OS/X (for you Apple users) both were invented because computer programs thought that you all where to stupid to learn how to use UNIX in the first place, and they were both written in UNIX. So you tell me who is the one behind the time. MY OS has been the corner stone of everything that you use. Remember that when your sitting in front of media driven, over priced, limited capability, game console.


21 April 2009, 10:58 AM (11 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user


Tags