Using Windows w/ 100% Open-Source Software? 63
XRayX asks: "I'm currently installing a Windows 98 PC and I'm trying to install just Open Source Software (except Windows and Drivers). Okay, there's Freeamp, GIMP, Mozilla, OpenDivX, VirtualDub, Audacity, Abiword, Tuxracer and FlaskMPEG for Windows; but I'm still missing some good Open Source Tools for Windows: a picture viewer and a GUI Zip-program. Can anyone help?" While an interesting thing to try, I don't think it will be as easy as it sounds. How many others of you have tried to pull this off and how successful were you?
Image viewers (Score:1)
The Gimp (Score:1)
My question is, unless you are doing as a challenge, why use Windows at all? I thougth the only reason to run Windows was to support all the closed source apps that have no viable alterative in the open source arena. But then again, I'm sure you have your reasons.
Open source GUI zip app... (Score:2)
I've modified my copy to make the toolbar buttons larger and more colorful and fix a few annoyances.
Re:this topic reminds me... (Score:2)
Re:Why not an open source distro for Windows? (Score:1)
#define X(x,y) x##y
Re:thx for the tips and why I'm trying to do this. (Score:2)
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
Mind you, I don't think I would want my mom installing packages on my Linux machine either--though she has done it with help from me over the phone when I needed something remote and I couldn't be there to do it.
When and if we ever get the GNUstep package installation software finished, it should become even easier to install binary software than it is with Windows "wizards".
Re:Why not an open source distro for Windows? (Score:2)
One key point is that many Windows to *nix porting tools exist, including freeware options such as WINE. Not so many Unix to Windows porting tools exist, and fewer are freeware - until they are as good as the Windows to Unix tools, the temptation is for software companies to write to Windows APIs and then port to Unix.
Why not an open source distro for Windows? (Score:3)
I'm thinking about developers and power users here, who might want to experiment with Perl, Unix scripting, GIMP, and other handy open source tools. Of course, it might be better in the long run to just install Linux, but incremental upgrades are a big reason why Windows won over OS/2 (you could try Windows 3.x but retreat to the safety of DOS without problems). Now people are running native mode Windows (NT and 2000) because it is more stable, faster, etc - why not make an incremental 'Linux tools on Windows' setup, allowing upgrade to true Linux later? Ideally, someone would take Cygwin and a bunch of other tools, and put them on a single CD including much of what's in a current Linux distro. I end up doing this on some systems, but a ready-made CD with installer would be much easier and more complete - no more systems with Cygwin but without Perl...
The majority of users in business have to use Windows on their desktop/laptop and would get in trouble if they installed Linux, particularly if the multiboot install messed up and stopped Windows booting. Having an open source distro for Windows would be a great way to provide some benefits... 'Linux for Windows' with an easy upgrade to 'true Linux'.
s/Linux/Unix/ (Score:1)
--
Re:s/Linux/Unix/ (Score:1)
Cygwin isn't about Linux on Windows, it's about Unix on Windows. Anyone who thinks or says otherwise DOES have a narrow and biased view.
Moderation sucks.
--
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
A good way to win someone over would be to take an extra system, or get approval to create a dual-boot box, and demonstrate Linux. Also, you would need to explain the philosophy of Open Source. That should at least get him to approve Linux for your own use, especially if you are passionate about it.
Re:cygwin! (Score:2)
Many tarballs simply work when you configure&&make&&make install, too. I installed CURL without a single problem.
I got X working, but... it's weird. I didn't find it useful enough. I can't run X apps along with Win32 apps like you can with some commercial Win32 X servers.
No biggie. The other thing is that I couldn't compile mc. For some reason, I need GTK installed to compile a console app. There's no configure option for "just compile *real* mc and not that terrible WinExplorer ripoff that shares only a name with mc."
Re:Perhaps a better approach is .. (Score:1)
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
Its possible .. with enough time. (Score:2)
It is possible to install an awfull lot of GNU/Open Source programs on Windows.
The hard part is spending the time to track down clones of the software you want, or software that is good in its own right.
I suppose the biggest thing you need to think about is the kind of software you want:
Start at one of the meta-repositories, such as Freshmeat [freshmeat.net], or GNUSoftware.com [gnusoftware.com] - and search around.
With enough time, and patience, you can go a very long way..
Steve
---
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
Freshmeat & Sourceforge (Score:1)
http://freshmeat.net/browse/214/ [freshmeat.net]
(Microsoft/MS-DOS & Windows Sub-categories)
Sourceforge Category:
http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove_list.php
Of course, where you can't find projects to fulfill your needs, of course one would want to look at Freeware/Public Domain and Shareware programs. Although, I would hope that eventually a number of these programmers would be willing to opensource their projects.
http://dmoz.org/Computers/Software/Freeware/ [dmoz.org]
http://dmoz.org/Computers/Software/Shareware/ [dmoz.org]
I highly recommend the following Freeware (for non-commercial use) graphics viewer/editor:
http://www.irfanview.com/ [irfanview.com]
What about Line (Score:1)
http://line.sourceforge.net
why not just use that for most of what you need.
Nate Custer
Re:this topic reminds me... (Score:4)
I can think of many great Mac and Windows utilities that are no longer available because the original author lost interest. However, if a program is open-source, there's a much better chance that someone will continue to maintain it.
Of course, it's silly to use an open-source program when it's simply not as good as a closed, but free, or cheap shareware program. Support open-source, but don't sacrifice productivity! For example, Audacity, the open-source audio editor I'm developing, is usable now, but doesn't have as many features as CoolEdit (yet). So if you are running Windows, and can afford CoolEdit, you're still better off buying it (of course, I love it if you use Audacity when you can and send in bug reports!).
Can you use NVIDIA at all without "sinning"? (Score:1)
You've already commited "the sin" of using Windows
Is there a way to get a workstation with the quality of a national brand at a reasonable price without committing such sin? Can you use an NVIDIA video card at all without committing the "sin" of installing proprietary drivers? Non-proprietary hardware is quickly becoming too expensive for consumers to afford.
so why not get the best tools that run on Windows
Because GIMP is $100 cheaper than JASC's Paint Shop Pro, its approximate equal. (Photoshop costs so much more because most of what you pay goes toward licensing the PANTONE technology for the Print... command.)
Not for abandonware (Score:1)
you can just as easily as the developer of the program to release a binary with some different feature
It's hard to get a proprietary software publisher to even release an out-of-print title, let alone improve it. With free software, you can fork it and pay a developer to add your feature.
Windows can already do that. (Score:1)
How about something that starts up quickly, allows me to browse all the images in a directory at the same time
In Windows ME, Explorer.exe can already view thumbnails of images in a folder. From the View menu, choose Thumbnails. (On some Windows versions, you may have to enable thumbnail views.)
and doesn't leak memory?
In that case, forget I even mentioned Explorer. Once, on my Windows 98 laptop, it ate 400 MB of RAM.
ImageMagick for image display (Score:2)
Anyway, start at http://www.imagemagick.org/
Star Office (Score:1)
dzimmerm
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
If you AREN'T doing it for political or philosophical reason, but are merely getting the best tools for the job, there are better inexpensive/free, (closed source) tools, so use those.
I don't get it. If open source isn't better, why would anyone want to use it for political or philosophical reasons? It certainly doesn't hurt anyone to use closed source (freeware) programs.
Personally, I try to use as much open source software as is reasonable, even though I run Windows 2000. Actually, the reason I run Win2K is the same reason I run IE instead of Mozilla. I can't stand Mozilla, and I can't stand Linux as a desktop machine. But open source certainly does have a number of *practical* advantages. For one thing, you have much more assurance that there are no secret backdoors. Open source is generally more compatible with extensions and plugins. Future versions of open source software are likely to always be free. Open source is more likely to be cross platform.
Bottom line is that the amount of openness of software is a feature. It's not a black and white issue. I chose MSN Messenger over AOL Instant Messenger solely because MSN Messenger had an open protocol. Has nothing to do with politics or philosophy, I simply prefer using an instant messaging service which I can write a bot for. Eventually I hope someone will write a good open source client for it. That hasn't happened yet, though.
For those of you willing to dive head first into the open source movement, more power to you. Every 6 months or so I decide to give Linux a shot. Usually it takes about 6 months for Win2k to get so corrupted I have to reinstall it, so I install Linux for a week or so, and get so frustrated with it that I go back to Win2k. Maybe someday...
Re: Emacs - gack! Use VIM (Score:1)
imagemagick (Score:1)
PA now shareware (Score:1)
if you've enough space, try loopback (Score:1)
for zip: powerarchiver, free but not open source (Score:2)
Its well (almost) possible. (Score:1)
Embrace and Extend
You want a Cross Platform open source word processor then get Abiword. You need more power then get Star Office (and openoffice) which has all the functionality of MS Office and then some (mmm vector graphics.)
http://www.abisource.com
http://www.sun.com/staroffice
There is a graphical version of Vim availble for windows, but its a command line app so you may as well just use the copy that comes with the (full dowload of) cygwin.
Cross platform: the holy grail of software, the OS becomes irrelavant (it already is to most desktop users).
I also really like Xnview, a file viewer and thumbnail browser. It supports loads of formats (i think it uses some of the IMagick .dlls)
Use CDEX for your ripping needs, yes it supports Ogg.
Need an IDE? Try VIDE for Java or C/C++, it seems okay, have not used it myself though
http://www.objectcentral.com/vide.htm
Best of luck. Try and contribute back to open source software any way you can, most people even appreciate bug reports and criticism (try and be diplomatic).
I quite like Pingus, a lemmings clone. Its quite slow, and not yet complete but the devloper is looking for people to design more levels.
http://pingus.seul.org
Need a telnet client? No really you dont (and im not talking about the one included with windows), you need an SSH client with support for the insecure legacy protocol that is telnet. use putty.
http://www.google.com/search?q=putty
If you want realplayer support, or quicktime support your pretty much screwed. you have to at least install those apps, you could possibly get other media/video programs that use their .dlls.
Is OpenDivX;) really open? I think i heard the license was not really very open.
Wish i'd thought of posting this to Slashdot. Please get your progress included in Slashback.
Perhaps a better approach is .. (Score:1)
At home I simply use a dual boot machine for the odd game or application.
I think you will save a lot of time with this technique. Instead of hunting down older versions of applications - you can grab fairly up to date ones from your favorite distributions CD. (I use Redhat, Suse, and Debian).
Re:this topic reminds me... (Score:1)
Oh yeah?! Mozilla crashes on me all the time...
this topic reminds me... (Score:1)
So what's the point of open source being used on an entry level machine with Windows? It has no benefit to the user, other than taking up space on hard drives and cd roms.
Even if there was a bug that a developer was able to fix in the code, they wouldn't be able to compile it again anyway - they'd have to wait for a binary.
So I guess my question is, is there any benefit of open source to the newbie? Or even an advanced, non programmer type user?
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
Re:this topic reminds me... (Score:1)
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
Are you admitting that Linux is not easy enough / not ideal for the beginning user? If Windows better meets their needs, why try to force them to use Linux?
Re:this topic reminds me... (Score:1)
They might say yes, they might say no, but whether or not you've got the source is irrelevant.
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
Windows at least makes an ATTEMPT to be user friendly (although it frequently fails miserably) whereas with Linux you are really on your own.
Joe Idiot, the computer user, can at least install some programs and probably a printer on Windows by reading a printed page of instructions. I don't think it can be said that Joe Idiot can figure out how to acquire, decompress, compile, and install Linux applications, without a guru looking over their shoulder.
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
My mom is not going to be able to figure that out. She can, however, install simple programs under Windows.
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
Re:this topic reminds me... (Score:1)
No offense but.... (Score:4)
If you are choosing GPL/GNU/Open Source because you are making a political statement, or doing it for philosophical reasons, you shouldn't be using Windows.
If you AREN'T doing it for political or philosophical reason, but are merely getting the best tools for the job, there are better inexpensive/free, (closed source) tools, so use those.
image viewer? (Score:1)
Re:Why not an open source distro for Windows? (Score:2)
Apparently, it needs a free-for non-commercial use unix library and an X server, so no real joy yet. Since the Gimp uses a non-X layer for Windows, it must be somehow possible to port other GDK based stuff to Windows.
Re:rules are rules (Score:1)
Emacs? (Score:1)
cygwin! (Score:2)
HTH...
--
"I'm not downloaded, I'm just loaded and down"
Re:this topic reminds me... (Score:2)
--
"I'm not downloaded, I'm just loaded and down"
Re:cygwin! (Score:2)
Hmmm, now there's a thought - isn't Sendmail ported to win32?
There's a ton of other s/w that will run under win32 outwith cygwin - Bind, for instance, which I'm now running here (as a cacheing only server of course), and the aforesaid Sendmail, Apache, mod_perl, etc. The most frustrating thing is how much of that kind of stuff requires MS VC++; I was most disappointed that moz wouldn't build with gcc , though I suppose it makes sense.
Now all we need is for the FreeNT project to come through and voila, a Microsoft-free Windows... :)
--
"I'm not downloaded, I'm just loaded and down"
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
Now, if only they'd put the RPM browsing/installing features back into Nautilus...
thx for the tips and why I'm trying to do this... (Score:1)
Re:this topic reminds me... (Score:1)
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
Re:this topic reminds me... (Score:1)
Re:this topic reminds me... (Score:1)
Re:No offense but.... (Score:2)
Re:this topic reminds me... (Score:1)
rules are rules (Score:2)
Re:No offense but.... (Score:1)
Re:Its well (almost) possible. (Score:1)