What is Windows?

What is Windows? Yeah, I know, it's supposed to be an operating system, but I'm completely confused as to what is Windows.

Here's the situation. My work laptop is back. Of course, I promptly installed Ubuntu 8.04. Now, Ubuntu, like most Linux distribution is much more than an operating system. You get the rock-solid Linux kernel, the GNU tools, and a full-fledge desktop environment. By full-fledged, I mean that I have my office suite, Internet browser, email program, photo management and photo editing software, games, and other miscellaneous doodads. The whole thing takes a little over 2G. Oh, and none of those programs are crippled trialware.

Now comes the fun part: installing Windows Vista Ultimate!

Installing Vista is actually straight forward. Similar to Ubuntu, you just pop in the installation CD and reboot. Unfortunately, there's not 'live DVD' for Windows, so you can't try it on your hardware before you install it. That would have been really nice, as you'll see later.

Moving ahead, I went through the necessary motions (like entering the insanely long activation code). Vista installed. Vista rebooted. Vista came up. It took a little longer to install than Ubuntu but not too much, especially considering that the whole thing takes 10G of disk space already!

Now, for the fun part: Pop! pop! pop! pop!

That's the sound of all the popups that came up after the installation — or at least that would be the sound if my sound worked.

Windows Activation was one of the biggest annoyance. It complained that it had to phone home and validate with Microsoft that I'm allowed to run Vista — but it cant! Why? Well, both my wired and wireless network cards do not run.

Now, I should specify that the laptop is about half a year old. The version of Windows Vista comes with SP1, which means that it should be up to date, right?

So, here I am with 10G of hard disk space eaten up by an operating system that threatens to cripple its functionality if I don't phone home, but the operation system cannot phone home. Ouch! I can't even download the drivers, since I can't connect to the Internet.

We'll skip over the hunt for drivers and move ahead to the next interesting part about Windows Vista Ultimate. For the price, it contains remarkably little. I mean, I've got a web browser that passes as a poor imitation of Firefox, a crippled word processor called WordPad that supports only RTF or plain text and a paint programs that reminds me of my DOS days. My computer is barely powerful enough to support the whizzbang visual effects and is better without it.

(Do I need to mention that the 'whizzbang' effects are turned on in Ubuntu?)

So, here's my question to anyone who wishes to answer it: what the heck is Windows? What is the 10G for? What am I paying so much money for?

I mean, it can't be for the glitzy user interface, since that's been available long before Windows Vista (Mac OS X, XGL). It can't be for the load of default applications that are installed on it, since it's pretty naked for an operating system. It can't be for development purpose since I can't seen to find a single compiler on it, much less a decent text editor. It can't be for its hardware support since it was missing drivers for at least 7 devices on my older laptop. It can't be for it's performance, since Ubuntu is more responsive, boots faster and uses less memory.

I'm starting to suspect it's for games, since a lot of games are written for Windows. Is Windows Vista a really, really expensive virtual game console? Actually, I just learned that it's probably not the case. I just tried to run Civilization IV on Vista, and it told me that it had compatibility problems. It doesn't sound like it's the best operating system for games.

The other possibility is that people want to run Microsoft Office. Yes, Microsoft Office is a nice office suite, but I've been using OpenOffice.org since the StarOffice days. True, OpenOffice does not have all the features of Microsoft Office like talking paper clips or online activation, but it serves me marvelously well — and it has a real drawing toolbar instead of the silly ribbon. That ribbon may be great for Office neophytes, but is a total hindrance for power users.

But I digress. Let me close by saying that it's true that the best things in life are free.

Windows Vista is No Help

Since my work laptop is being repaired, I have the pleasure to work on another laptop running Windows Vista. I feel like I'm working on a poor imitation of Mac OS X that has been designed by a marketing committee. Actually, the whole thing feels like it was designed by multiple committees, each striving to do their best job, but always having to compromise to meet the needs of another committee. Unlike the Mac OS, or a Linux Desktop, it has no personality — no soul. I think that Vista should win the Best Jumble of Ideas with the Worst Implementation Possible award.

Here was my surprise this morning. I was working in Microsoft Access 2007, when I accidentally hit F1. For those who may not know, the F1 key is typically used to bring up the help.

And help it did bring me indeed. Here's the screenshot:



Wow. So, I can't open Office 2007's help on Windows Vista. Did two committees forget to meet?

Here's the official reason why Windows Help is no longer included in Windows:

Ever since Windows 3.1, Microsoft included the Windows Help program (WinHlp32.exe) with new releases. WinHlp32.exe is used to view 32-bit Help files that have the .hlp file name extension. Starting with the release of Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008, Microsoft has decided to no longer include in WinHlp32.exe as a component of the Windows operating system. Microsoft made this decision because WinHlp32.exe has not had a major update for many years, and it does not meet Microsoft’s standards for all new Microsoft programs. Microsoft realizes that this may cause some difficulties for customers who want to upgrade to Windows Vista or to Windows Server 2008 but still rely on 32-bit .hlp files. Therefore, Microsoft is making WinHlp32.exe available as a download from the Microsoft Download Center. (Source)

So, an incomplete product is considered a higher standard than a product that is used by millions of people but has not been updated by the very company that made that product. Wow. I'm sure if I were a Microsoft customer, I'm sure I would feel content knowing that Microsoft is watching out for my best interest. I mean, I'm sure glad Microsoft invested in transparent title bars (that I had to turn off) instead of updating such a crucial component to Windows.

Which brings me back to an earlier question: What the heck is Windows anyway?

Microsoft Windows for (Nearly) Free?

This is a follow up to Microsoft Windows for Free?

Shortly after I wrote this entry, a couple of interesting events occurred. As I predicted, Microsoft went ahead to compete with Linux on ultramobile PCs (UMPC) like the Eee PC. They are now offering Windows XP Home for $32 US. It's not free, but it's getting close to cheap. Actually, it's not free in either sense of the word, since Microsoft dictates what it considers a UMPC. The maximum specs are: 1G of RAM, 80G of hard disk space, single-core processor running at 1Ghz, screen size of 10.2 inches and no touch screen capability. Anything higher than that requires the vendor to buy Windows XP at their regular price.

That's fair. It's their product, so they can choose how it's licensed. However, I fail to see how they plan to compete with Linux on this field with those restrictions. Furthermore, the $32 US is only for Windows. This means that if you want Word or Excel, be ready to fork out more money. I'd be surprise that Microsoft would allow the vendors to ship Windows with OpenOffice prepackaged. Have fun playing Minesweeper!

With Ubuntu, I have a full fledged desktop with my office suite. The full install that takes up less disk space than Windows — And the $32 stays in my pocket.

Another interesting event is the fact that One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) recently announced that they would support Windows XP on the XO laptop. What a shame. To me, that alienates the whole concept of the XO — learning. How can they learn in a closed, controlled and censored system that greatly limits their freedom. Some of those children who are growing up in a dictatorship are denied yet another freedom. That is a massive loss for them.

Those poor children are denied freedom in the world of computing to further entrench the monopoly of an American company. I cannot help but wonder what goes on in the mind of folks who are more concerned with buying yet another, bigger yacht on the back of those children.

I remember in the early days that OLPC decided that the XO should only use free software (as in free speech). Thus, both Windows and Mac OS X were refused early on. Steve Jobs, president of Apple, went as far as offering Mac OS X for free (as in beer) for the XO, but was denied, since he would not free (as in speech) the software.

In their 'philanthropic' move, Microsoft is charging about $3 for Windows XP. Of course, that does not include Office or anything like that. Just Windows (Yay! Minesweeper!). Furthermore, to allow the XO to dual boot between Windows and Linux, the machine will cost an additional $7 to make.

Since Microsoft is all about their image, I was surprised that they did not offer Windows for free as Steve Jobs did with Mac OS X. I mean, $3 per copy isn't going to register a blip on Microsoft's revenue radar. So, why?

The only thing I can see is anti-thrust. Microsoft is having enough problems with the EU and the Department of Justice, that they may be reticent to offer Windows for free out of fear that it will be perceived as an anti-competitive move.

Though I may be painting Microsoft as a nasty, greedy ogre, we have to remember that they cannot force people to buy their products. They are doing a fantastic job of both painting their software as the 'only' option and — more importantly — hiding the true monetary cost of buying (and using) Microsoft software.

As long as the average consumer remains ignorant of both of those aspects, they may never realize that there are alternatives — much less of the need for those alternatives.

Ubuntu Vs. Windows Vista

Wow. What can I say? I actually had a chance to work on Vista. Really! Since the hard disk in my work laptop died, I was given another portable pre-installed with Windows Vista.

What an experience. It's an HP dual core 1.9GHz 2G laptop with an nVidia graphics card. It should fly, right? Well, it flew about as gracefully as a turtle on it's back in the middle of the highway.

For comparison, I'm currently writing this blog from an older Gateway machine running on an AMD Turion 64 (single core), 1G of RAM with a Radeon XPress 200M. running (for now) Ubuntu 7.10. The machine was out of commission since I dropped an entire cup of coffee into the DVD drive. Thankfully, the folks at Farstar Networking in Alexandria did a fantastic job resurrecting it for a fraction of the cost I would have assumed it would have been.

However, back to Vista. For starters, after I had booted, the machine was already sucking up >700MB of ram. That leaves less than 1.3G to run my applications. That's not overly bad, since I've go to 2G on the HP, but my Gateway has only 1G. So, forget about running Vista on it. In Ubuntu, running the Gnome desktop with Compiz, Apache, MySQL, Firefox 2, Thunderbird and a system update, I'm not quite at the 475MB watermark.

I've heard a lot of folks complain about the performance of Vista. I finally had a chance to experience this first hand. Yuk! Is it ever SLOW. I could not even drag a window without the system studdering. Furthermore, I got kind notification from Norton Anti-Virus that my subscription was expired, and I should renew. What's that about my credit card number? I forgot what it's like to run an OS where you need an anti-virus. Let's not get into the endless array of continual popups.

Here's my first major gripe: No package manager. HP installed tons of crap on the laptop, including a (I would assume) redundant wireless connection manager, a trial version of Norton, tons of little application that are — supposedly — there to improve the user experience, and god knows what else. Time to clean the system!

I crack open the Add/Remove program, click on the first application, hold down control, and click on the next. Guess what? You can't! In Windows, you can only uninstall a single application at a time. Furthermore, it takes forever to remove the tiniest of application. Oh, and let's not get into the reboots. Remember, I'm cleaning this up because I need to get some work done. How much fun is it when all of a sudden, all your windows starts to close one after an other, and the machine reboots. Oh, I just love it when my operating system controls me. Sure! I love being a slave to the machine. Kiss your freedom goodbye.

On the other hand, I want to upgrade my Eee PC to Ubuntu 8.04. Unfortunately, I lacked disk space. No problem. I cracked open Synaptic package manager, selected a number of application for uninstallation, clicked Apply, and waited while the applications were removed. By the time the applications were removed, Windows Vista had finished booting, and was almost at the desktop. Of course, that was just one of the many reboots I had to do with Vista. None so far on the Eee PC!

Vista is slow. I asked one of my Windows Guru how I could turn off Areo. After digging around a bit, my guru showed me the option where I could chose the Windows Basic theme instead of Areo. What a difference this makes!!! I can move my Windows without feeling like the system is about to go into terminal shock. Here, on my Gateway, I've got Compiz working with the wobbly windows and all the fun graphic effects. It works great &mdash smooth as silk. Oh, and the Gateway is Windows Vista Capable. Not Ready, which means that Areo would not even work on the machine. My Eee PC is running eeeXubuntu with Compiz as well. It's pretty!

As a last point, one of my coworker asked about an 'upgrade path' from Vista Home to Vista Premium. He needed to upgrade Vista so he could run SQL Server Reporting Services (if I'm not mistaken). The software does not run on Windows Home. Not because Windows Home is incapable of running it, but because Microsoft thinks you should not. That is why I love free software. I come from a country that enjoys freedom of expression, movement, religion, etc. I cannot imagine myself relinquishing any of those fundamental freedoms for any price. It's the same thing with software.

I'm a free person. I refuse to pay for proprietary software that limits your freedom when there are perfectly good (better!) free solution out there.

In closing, my Eee PC quietly upgraded to Hardy Heron (Ubuntu 8.04). One reboot was all it took. I then reinstalled whatever applications I had removed. No reboots. Everything works. Don't you wish it was the same in Windows? (To be fair, the wireless card did not come back up. But it took two minutes of googling, and found a simple solution)

While I'm writing this on my Windows-Vista-Incapable Gateway laptop running Ubuntu 7.10, I'm upgrading to Hardy Heron. Can you work on your machine while you are upgrading your Windows version?

If the answer is no, I would then ask you: why not?

Oh, and you paid how much for Windows Vista? And that does not even include an office suite???

<SHOCK>!!!!</SHOCK>

Thank you Microsoft!

Microsoft is considered by many open source advocates to be the arch-enemy of Linux and free software. I think it's fair to say that Microsoft fears the success of Linux and the free/open source movement. They are doing their best to make compete. However, free software is not their traditional competitor.

Because GNU/Linux is free (as in speech), and is freely (speech & beer) available to anyone, they cannot buy it out and close it as they have done with some past competitor. Because free software is developed by a (tightly or loosely knit) community that may or may not receive corporate sponsorship, they cannot hinder the development. Because the software is free (as in beer), they cannot compete in terms of price. Even Internet Explorer is more expensive than Firefox. Though it may be a 'free' download, remember that you must buy Windows to have Internet Explorer. Thus, as part of what you pay in Windows, you also get Internet Explorer. In other words, Internet Explorer is just another (unfortunately inseparable) component of Windows — not a free download.

Finally, Microsoft cannot compete in terms of freedom. Their End User License Agreement (EULA) determines what you can and cannot do with their software. In the free software world, the license protect both your freedom to use the software, and the freedom of the software.

So, how is a multibillion dollar corporation to compete against the penguin and the likes? FUD is their answer. FUD stands for 'Fear, Uncertainties & Doubt'. Or, in Microsoftspeak, 'Get The Facts.'

In the hopes of driving people away from Linux and free software, Microsoft created a site called getthefacts.com. The site is a direct attack on free software. Though the so-called 'facts' presented by Microsoft are an assault on both intelligence and reason, I think that the biggest looser of the site is Microsoft and a major victory for Linux. For starters, I think that any reasonably intelligent person understand that asking a Honda salesperson what they think of the Ford Focus over the Civic will not get them an unbiased, objective answer. Why should it be any different with Microsoft?

What MSFT may not realize is by setting up getthefacts.com, they have provided immense exposure to GNU/Linux and the free software movement. The website presented free software as a true competitor and alternative to Microsoft products. Folks that had never heard of Linux before are now becoming aware of it thanks to Microsoft. Furthermore, IT directors who rely on Microsoft to keep them up to date with the industry are kindly informed of alternatives to Windows and Office.

For this, I say Thank You Microsoft. There is nothing like corporate backing to promote free software. After all, it's time that Microsoft catches up with the market, and joins the ranks of Novell, IBM, HP, Apple, etc who are all users and backer of free software.

Glossy or Matte Screens

About two years ago, matte screens on laptops began to be replaced by glossy screens. The difference is that matte screens were non-reflective, while glossy screen were reflective. This meant that an unfortunately-positioned light-source would reflect on a glossy screen, and make the text difficult to read. That has since been addressed, and glossy screens are (mostly) non reflective.

Glossy screens are pretty much standard now. You'd be hard pressed to find a matte screen on a laptop. However, I still hear from users that they prefer the matte screen.

But which one is better?

The last two laptops I've worked with (Gateway & HP) were both glossy. I actually liked the glossy screen. My newest laptop is an Eee PC. I love the little thing, and it serves me marvelously well. However, I'm starting to realize that its matte screen makes the screen harder to read. I think I would have been happier with a glossy screen.

After having used matte and glossy screens, I think that I'm decided: Glossy it is for me. The screen is so much easier to read.