Anyone updated to Windows11 yet ?

Your original post said: 'Linux is very definitely not free for you to do what you want with..' I say the statement is misleading because most of Linux is freely available. While there are exceptions, the kernel and most applications are open - millions of lines of code.

The owner of proprietary code can apply terms and conditions or remove the software from the market. Open software really is different. Anyone can fork an open software project from the source code. If a vendor withdraws, someone else can pick up the reins.

Proprietary software is unusual on Linux. I currently only have one, which is QCAD Pro. QCAD Pro isn't locked down in the same way as, say, Fusion360, because Ribbonsoft maintain an Open Community Edition of QCAD, and LibreCAD is an independent fork of it. Everything else, Word Processor, Spreadsheet, Databases, IDE, compilers, firewall, 3D CAD, you name it, is open. I can choose to install software by compiling it from source code, rather than a binary package, and the source code can be modified by me.

Open source freedom is something of an Achilles Heel on the desktop because it leads to multiple distributions for which not all software has been compiled and bundled, plus cosmetic differences. New users are liable to be confused.

On the other hand, Open Source is brilliant for developers of Media Centres, Network Equipments, Mechatronics, Super-computers, process-control and other forms of embedded computing. Everyone reading this post probably does so thanks to a Linux-based Router connected to the Internet: it contains a stripped down version of the operating system with some core networking and management software. Sits in a box and just works. Other routers available, they too are mostly Linux, source code available. Ordinary users don't care what's in our Router, or Engine Management Unit, but freedom matters to the developers...

Dave

Dave (S.O.D.)

Following up on your comment...

"Proprietary software is unusual on Linux"

As a long time (1985) mech engineer working for CAD software vendors I can tell you that there are really good reasons for this.... And our software is (and has been) built on most flavours of Unix inc Linux (nor forgetting Primos, Dec VMS, OSF, Sunos, Irix ) as well as lot's of versions of Windows.

1. The expectation of Linux is it's free (everyone needs some return on investment)
2. The variations in the many Distros of linux (and their piecemeal installation) means that it's a nightmare to support (and you need to do this for free)... Expect O/S based support calls to be 300-500% higher than for a proprietary O/S
3. There are no (nearly) no commercial users of Linux for User applications (Loads of servers)
4. We have commercial unix users, none of them plan to move to Linux despite it being functionally identical.
5. Opensource is fine (In theory), but how many people really have the skills to build large applications when there are platform and compiler evolutions? We have a few computer science (double tefal head) folk who do this stuff

We use linux internally a lot, but it's got few commercial possibilities outside of the server world (at the moment)

Linux, great for servers and personal use (if you've got the time) commercial applications non starter (at least today)

Mark

Almost all TV Set Top Boxes and many routers/modems have a Linux base, although ARM cores get waves of popularity. Often it starts in a product because the sort of person who does the software development is also the sort of person who downloads a new version of Linux at home every week.

Having spent a good deal of my professional life developing embedded products, working on both hardware and software, from 8-bit microcontrollers without an operating system to complex products running embedded Linux, I can assure you in every single case where embedded Linux was used, it was almost always because it made solid business sense.

Despite many years of concerted effort Microsoft has failed to capture the embedded market with the various versions of embedded Windows it has released, including for ARM processors. Instead, Linux has captured the lion's share of that market because of a combination of technical and commercial merit, and not because some spotty nerd in his mother's basement enjoys playing with it.

As for the assertion by Mark that there are no commercial users of Linux for user applications, again that is not really true. One of the first applications I installed after switching to Linux some 10 years ago was Eagle CAD for PCB layout, which was a commercial product that I bought and paid for.

The main reason for a lack of commercial software on Linux has nothing to do with the expectation by Linux users that they want everything free, in my experience Windows, Mac, and Android users are no different, but instead, because the Linux desktop with a smaller market share offers less opportunity for profit-driven commercial software companies
- a bit of a catch-22, Linux market share on the desktop is hampered by a lack of commercial software, and commercial software is not being developed for Linux because of the smaller potential market.

Clive

Edited By clivel on 05/11/2021 20:17:40

Bazyle, I accept your TV Set Top Boxes on linux as an application, but IMO it's acting as a server perhaps? its certainly a very specific application, nothing like the Linux v Windows on desktop or laptop (which is where this started..)

Clivel: I did not intend to totally discount Linux as an "desktop/laptop" environment, I have a desktop with it on as well as a Windows laptop (works)... I was trying to say that we, and most of the bigger CAD vendors with any history in Unix, have offered our products commercially on Linux and found few or no takers; annoying when you've spent the money to build, test and deliver it...(but that's the software business)
There is a ton of linux embedded in things and web servers are surely one of the biggest applications - the lack of a software license cost is a significant factor in these things.

My best guess as to why it's unpopular commercially, except for very specific applications, is the fragmented nature of Linux. The distro's come and go really quickly and what runs on one particular installation will nearly run on another, then you spend some time on forums deciding to add this or that package. The differences are smaller than the differences between say the Solaris and Irix of 20 years ago, but companies hate uncertainty and want to reduce risk...

Whatever I don't think that Bill Gates et al need to worry about their superyacht mooring fees just yet!

Mark,

I cannot argue against you about the usage of Linux, but what I can say is that ever since I migrated to Linux, I have had very little trouble with my computers. Furthermore, with one exception, an ageing HP printer, I was, until relatively recently, using old equipment, some of which Microsoft said wouldn't run on W7. In other words, scrap your perfectly good equipment, buy new, and then install Microsoft's rubbish.

Over the years before moving to Linux, I used Windows 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95OSR2, W98 & 2000. All of these at various times gave me the infamous BSOD. XP, I found very good, and worked well as long as I did not go poking about too much in the Registry.

However, I objected to being told by Microsoft that my equipment was too old or that my software was out of date, especially when it was doing all that I needed. Also, I did not like Microsoft's business practices, something which the EU and others with more clout than me, also appeared to dislike, witness the hefty fines sustained by Microsoft.

Thus, when XP stopped being supported, I seriously started looking at Linux, and eventually ended up with Mint 13 which met all my requirements. Prior to that, I had dropped Internet Explorer in favour of Firefox, Outlook Express in favour of Thunderbird, I had never used Microsoft's Office Suite for the simple reason that I could see no reason for paying for facilities which I would never use, hence opted for Lotus Smartsuite as being a cheaper option, but then dropped Smartsuite for Open (later Libre) Office, all of these being the Windows versions. In effect, I did a partial transfer to Open Source before fully migrating to Linux. Doing it this way, made the transfer much easier as the major components were already compatible in that all I had to do was download & install the Linux versions followed by transferring the data across.

Since then I have watched, and read about, all the shenanigans caused by Microsoft's updates. With one exception, a kernal upgrade, none of my Mint upgrades have caused me any problems. With the duff kernal upgrade, I think I ended up reloading the OS.

I have had problems, caused in the main by my refusal to change two programs to Linux versions. These are a DOS based database which even Microsoft won't allow to be easily used on the home versions of W10, but I've now got running satisfactorily via DOSEmu under Linux; and secondly an ageing, eg 2006 version, of a W32 bit CAD program which initially had problems under Wine, but now runs almost perfectly since Wine was upgraded to v.5. In both these instances, the programmes do everything that I want, and I cannot see any justification in scrapping them in favour of something more modern.

The final comment is that under Windows, I was forced to run security programs for the safety of my machines and data. This no longer happens, in part due to the method by which Linux works. I do, now, use GUFW (Graphical Uncomplicated FireWall) but only because I was given Facebook's Portal last Christmas by my elder son, and having a deep distrust of Facebook, I took steps to prevent it accessing my computers.

I don't like Microsoft, or indeed any of these American Corporations, I simply don't trust their motives. Linux may not be perfect, but in my opinion its a darn sight better than the alternative.

Regards,

Peter G. Shaw

Much depends on perspective! Aristotle wrote that our understanding of the world was as if it was based on watching shadows on the wall of a cave. Clues and hints, not absolute truths. Today moderns say we have letter-box views, also recognising the risk of drawing conclusions based on only some of the facts.

I suggest this months graph of operating system popularity tells another story:

Linux appears twice. The red line at the bottom is Desktop Linux, which supports Mark's comments. However, the Orange Line shows Android to be about 10% more popular than Windows. The next graph shows Android's astonishing growth. 350 billion users at the end of last year.

What's going on? Android is the most popular user operating system in the world, supporting lots of money making Apps. And it's based on Linux. You might think of operating systems fighting a war on many fronts. Microsoft won the battle for the Desktop but - so far - they've lost the battles for supercomputing, servers, embedded devices, and - most important - mobile computing. Microsoft's attempts to get into mobile telephony and smart computing failed. A major source of profit is out of reach.

At the moment Microsoft are making money, but - like everyone else - the future is challenging. For a long time desktop made big money. Not so today because the market is saturated. New money has to come from something else and at the moment the growth is in mobile computing, the Internet of Things and the Cloud.

Linux has a big advantage in these new markets. The operating system is almost irrelevant to Cloud users, who won't know or care if Linux is behind the scenes.

There's no particular shortage of developers: most of academia teaches and develops code with one of the UNIXs. Many programmers start by learning Linux and transfer their skills to Windows or iOS later.

Don't underestimate Double Tefal Heads - even I can program in Windows, Linux, and MacOS. Its not difficult to write new programs that will run on all three: converting old code is harder...

Dave

It would have been interesting to have seen what would have happened if linux had been the first OS on out computers would it have gone the same way as Betamax I think it would have what most people want is simplicity

H ( Linux user)

Dave S.O.D. the original poster was asking about windows 11... so I was replying about desktops and laptops...
at least we can agree that in that domain Windows (with all of its faults) has the biggest raft of applications. Embedded in things, and as Virtual Servers, there is lots of linux it's just not commercially replacing windows on desktops and laptops...

Using Android to expand the Linux User base is kind of sneaky... The same compiled code does not run directly on both because Android has a (significantly) modified kernel, Google release some of it under their AOSP (Android Open Source Project) but great chunks of phone related stuff is missing.... It's "kind of Open Source" but not really; google want their slice of the action (and get it) it's certainly some kind of Unix.

Trying to release stuff on IoS (apple) is as far from open source as you can get... If apple don't approve it then it doesn't get out there...

I would disagree that Linux distros come and go quickly. I started using Red Hat in the mid 1990s and it is still in existence and regularly updated. It is however a commercial paid version but the earliest distro was Debian which still figures in the top ten of dstros and like most distros is free. I currently use Mint and have done for about 10 years.

As far as uncertainty and risk is concerned I am running two of my computers as dual boot machines with both Windows 10 and Linux Mint available. I have had far more crashes and bad updates with Windows than Linux. When problems with Linux do occur I can pose a question on the Mint forum and usually get a solution within the hour, that is if Google search doesn't find it.

Russell

Russel: I am not trying to knock Linux, I use it and like it for many things, including some commercial work.

All I am recounting is my experience from several years of offering free and commercial versions of software on Linux; alongside a Windoze offering. You get lots of interest on Linux, lots more support calls about install issues and little commercial interest... This could be because our software is crap, but the same lack of linux support from the biggest cad vendors suggests that it's not commercially exciting. PTC offered Creo(Pro/Engineer) on linux for a while but dropped support after a few years.

I bow under the weight of opinion, but respectfully suggest that the lack of big applications on desktop/laptop Linux must have something to do with it's commercial viability as a platform; it's nothing to do with capability or performance.

Cheers, Mark

Apologies for returning to the original topic, but has anybody else's W11 taskbar moved to the left and been left blank apart from the corner icons? This happened to me this morning after a Windows update, and as Clive Brown pointed out back on page 1, W11's UI customisation doesn't include relocating the taskbar.

A quick search revealed that the taskbar position can be changed in the registry, but this prompts me to wonder if it is still there because it was easier not to remove it, or whether Microsoft intend to bring the customisation option back in future?

If anybody else finds the same problem, there are instructions here HowToGeek

Brian G

Edit:  I'm starting to regret switching this early, my machine has locked up three times since "upgrading" and I have had several graphics card crashes.  These are particularly annoying as I cheaped out when I built this PC and bought a I5-10400F processor which doesn't have functioning UHD graphics.

Edited By Brian G on 07/11/2021 09:39:17

No apology needed Brian. We have drifted a bit!

I currently have Windows 10 on two computers and XP on another and have no intention to convert to W 11. When or if W 10 stops working I will just stick to my favourite operating system and look for alternatives to the few Windows apps I currently use.

Bon chance with W 11!

Russell

AIUI the registry hack in the link does indeed move the taskbar, but also breaks it, so there doesn't seem much point.