In reality, software installation in Linux can be even easier.  It can also be much harder.  It depends on what level of responsibility you want to take.

As I see it, there are currently four ways of installing software in Linux.  I'll look at each of them in turn.

1. Use the distro's package manager.  Virtually every major distro uses a package manager associated with repositories of software that can be installed.  The graphical tool used for it may be called Synaptic, or Yum, or RPMdrake, or any of many other names.  But they all work in pretty much the same way.  The user selects one or more repositories from which to download software.  He then uses the tool to search the repository for desired software.  Once found, he selects it for installation, and then clicks an 'Apply' button.  The package manager then downloads the requested files, resolves any dependency issues, installs the software, and finally updates its database of what is currently installed on the machine.

Updates are handled the same way.  Since the tool keeps track of what is installed on the machine, all it takes is a refresh of the repository data, and it knows what software needs to be updated.  Click to select, click 'Apply' and it's done.  What could be simpler?

Of course, some people (correctly) point out that the software in a given distro's repositories isn't necessarily the most current version of the software.  Or it's not available for their specific distribution.  What to do?  That leads us to our second method.

2. Directly install the package from an outside source.  One can search for software online, just like Windows users do.  Sites like rpm.pbone.net, and rpmfind.net can point you to packages for rpm-based distros like RedHat/Fedora, Mandriva, and PCLinuxOS.  Similar tools exist, I am sure, for debian-based distros, like Ubuntu and Mepis.  There are even tools, like alien, for converting one package format to another.

Once the package has been downloaded, it needs to be installed. For rpm-based distros, this is done with the rpm command in a console window.  Alternatively, there are some guis available for it.  I use kpackage to install non-repo rpms.  But, command-line or gui, it is up to the user to resolve any dependencies the package may have.  Fortunately, whether I use kpackage or 'rpm -i', the package gets added to my package database, so Synaptic knows it's there.

There is a third method of installing software that is used primarily for commercial products.

3. Non-package-specific binaries.  These are installers that are bundled with the software (usually).  I have used these to install Sun's Java, ATI drivers for my video card, and some commercial Linux games.  With these, the software is downloaded (or the CD inserted), the file may have to be made executable, and the file is then run.  The install may run strictly on the command line, or it may pop up a simple gui dialog box to show progress and ask questions, much like a Windows install.  All dependencies must be either met prior to installing, or are included in the installation file(s).  If they are included, they are normally written to 'non-standard' locations, like a sub-directory of the installation location, so as to not interfere with the existing 'standard' versions.  Some of these installers are even smart enough to insert entries into the 'Start' menu.

One thing these installers do not do, however, is tell the package manager that they are there.  It is up to the user to track updates, and manually install them, if necessary.

There is one final method for installing software in Linux.

4. Install directly from source.  This is the one that gives Linux a 'bad name'.  A lot of us old heads know the mantra of "./configure; make; make install".  This is useful if one really, really wants the most recent, bleeding edge version of a given open-source package.  But this should be done only if one knows how to resolve make/compiler error messages.  The appropriate compiler must be previously installed (probably gcc, but occasionally something else).  All necessary libraries must be pre-installed.  And, if all works well, nothing is put into the menu system.  The package manager knows nothing about what was done.

(To be fair, some distros, like Gentoo, install everything from source.  But its 'emerge' program is designed to act like a binary package manager in all other ways.)

So there are the four primary means of installing software in Linux, ranging from the easiest, to the hardest, most demanding of user knowledge and interaction.  Which method(s) to use is up to the individual user, and how much effort they want to put into maintaining the health of their system.  Using the package manager is the safest, most stable way to install software and keep it up to date.  But if that isn't sufficient, then there are other ways, as well.

A final caveat: installing anything outside the distro's repositories can cause problems for the system.  In particular, the libraries needed by the 'strange' software may clash with the pre-existing libraries and programs installed by the package manager.  So you may have the latest version of 'Program X', but now 'Program Y' no longer works correctly.

Anyone who has used Linux for any length of time has done the distro hop. And from hopping around, with each distro, we can find things in one distro we like better than another, yet it never seems that one single distro has all the qualities you like. Well, for me, that ended when I tried PCLinuxOS just a couple of years ago. It just seemed to combine all the elements I like from various distros into a very well put together distro. It's almost like the developers read my mind when I was thinking about what a perfect distro would be like. Spooky...

One thing that completely turns me off of a distro is a lack of a control panel type application. That stops me dead in the water. Yeah, I've hacked configuration files and brought up a terminal and entered countless commands to configure things (you couldn't avoid that back in the 90's) but why are distros still requiring this? Some distros have automated scripts to setup your system, but many times they get it wrong. I like to have the control that a control panel application gives me. Essentially, there are 2 applications of this type out there: the Mandriva Control Center (MCC) and Suse's YaST. PCLinuxOS uses the Mandriva Control Center, renamed the PCLinuxOS Control Center and modified for the differences between the two distros. It's the best application of its type in the land of Linux.

PCLinuxOS gives me all the control, without protecting me from myself, while making everything simple to do. How many distros can claim that? This is accomplished by 3 things: The PCLinuxOS Control Panel, pure lack of heavy handed system scripts, and access to the root account at the login screen. The root account is a personal choice for many. The subject of the root account and sudo and system security has been heavily debated, and both sides have very valid points. Personally, I hate sudo but I can turn it on, as in most distros, if I wish. But, PCLinuxOS is designed from the onset with the complete beginner in mind, so everything is just as simple as it gets.

A lot of comments have been made about RPM based distros and dependency hell. Unfulfilled dependencies are still a problem in Debian and Ubuntu, as well. It didn't disappear. What is different is that Apt and Synaptic are far more polite about it. What solves the dependency issue is the package installation system, not the type of package. RPM packages are little different than DEB packages. It's Apt and the repositories that solve the problem. PCLinuxOS uses a modified Apt and Synaptic that allows it to be used on an RPM distro. Not only that, but it goes one step further by providing all the packages you'll ever need in a single repository and they even simplify that by only having main, extra, nonfree, and KDE sections. There are no universe, multiverse, and whatever else confusing sections. They keep it simple.

I love the fact that PCLinuxOS is a rolling release. What they do is freeze the GCC (Gnu Compiler Collection) version and the supporting libraries for several releases. Therefore, all packages are compiled against the same libraries and are compatible. That means that PCLinuxOS 2009 will be nothing more than PCLinuxOS 2007 with a newer kernel and some new artwork. So, a fully updated 2007 release is the same as the newest release. There's no reason to wipe your hard drive and reinstall your distro., which is completely different than every major distro out there. Eventually, they have to do a rebase and upgrade GCC and all the development libraries to gain new functionality, so it doesn't go on forever. But, 2007 was the first rebase since PCLinuxOS started in 2003. It was required to add Compiz to the distro, which required a newer version of GCC.

The developers of PCLinuxOS insist on the highest standards of quality over speed of release. PCLinuxOS is the most rock steady distro I've ever used. It always pains me to read about other distros that are so good, but get released so buggy. I'm not going to point my finger at any certain ones, but many of them have this problem. They insist on a rigid release schedule and many bugs, some even show stoppers, make it into the final release. Not PCLinuxOS. It gets released "when it's ready". That goes for all the packages they release into the repository, as well. Are there occasional problems? Of course there are. But, it's not in the same league as some other distros I've used over the years. It's difficult to test for every possible system it's going to get installed on, but they do an admirable job.

The community at PCLinuxOS is absolutely first rate. The moderators have caught their fair share of criticism over time, but they have done an outstanding job of keeping the forum orderly and void of "RTFM" comments. Also, political discussion is strictly forbidden, keeping it free from angry users. When you want help, its given politely. You don't get nasty remarks about how you didn't word your question correctly, or didn't provide enough info. You get kind, courteous answers and polite requests for more info. Also, when they're working on getting a new release out, it gets kind of hectic, but when you ask for a package, it's usually granted rather swiftly. On top of that, you get answers, sometimes, by the very developers of the distro - even Texstar himself. This is something that only a small distro like PCLinuxOS can do. You can even find them in the IRC chatrooms on Freenode, answering questions and just having general conversations about life itself. That kind of intimacy with the very people responsible for the distro is something that just appeals to me, as a user. They get user feedback first hand and it gets considered in the distro.

On the subject of community, in no other distro have I felt compelled to get involved. In this distro, they have community based projects at MyPCLinuxOS, an advanced "hackers" forum at HackMyPCLinuxOS and other areas such as LinFX to contribute graphics to the cause. If you have any talent at all that can be useful, there's a place for you to contribute, and it's welcome.

MyPCLinuxOS has launched many community built versions of PCLinuxOS. There's PCLinuxOS Gnome, which has a Gnome default environment; EeePCLinuxOS for the EeePC; BEL (Business Edition Linux) for server/enterprise needs; TinyMe, which is a very small version sort of like Puppy Linux; MythTVOS that simplifies MythTV setup; and many more. There's a PCLinuxOS for every need.

Your choice of the distro you use is a personal one. There is no single distro that fits everyone's needs. Also, many people come from different backgrounds and have different appreciations for the various approaches different distros use. That's what's so beautiful about Linux. The choice is there. If you are an Ubuntu, Fedora, Suse, Slackware or any other distro user, and it works for you, great. PCLinuxOS is my choice for the reasons given above, and if any of these traits of the distro appeal to you, I suggest you try it out.

Debian 5.0

I have never installed Debian before, which seems crazy even to me. I think my reasoning was "Well, I've installed Ubuntu, and Ubuntu is Debian, right? Right? Hello? Anyone?"
Anyway, since I've installed almost any well-known Debian derivate, except the all-father itself, that's what I'll do when it comes out. That should be this month.

Mandriva 2009

Mandriva has been a favourite of mine. As a everything-and-the-kitchen-sink, I thought it came very close to Ubuntu. That's why I tried a few betas of the next release, and to my surprise I didn't like them at all. Installing software proved to be impossible, and using the nvidia driver didn't work either. I hope these issues won't show up for me in the final release. It's scheduled to show up on the servers early next month.

Ubuntu 8.10

This one's a given. As I mentioned before, I think Ubuntu does the best job in providing an OS for the "normal" PC user. By that I mean someone who doesn't want to know about computers, and instead just use them. Unlike previous releases, I haven't tried a single alpha. If any of the betas have the final new artwork, I probably will install that. Ubuntu will hit the download mirrors somewhere in the final week of October.

Sidux 2008-04

Another one I haven't tried yet, but a distribution that seems to have a very loyal fanbase, at least judging from the comments on various newsboards. On the surface, it doesn't have any special feature that really grabs my attention, but it's said to be fast and stable. We'll see. Like Ubuntu and Mandriva, it should appear somewhere next month.

Fedora 10

Fedora Core 1 was one of the first Linux distributions I ever installed (and messed up completely). Since then, I switched to other distributions, vor various reasons. One is the love of Fedora for bleeding edge software...I like a bit of stability on my PC. Another is the fact that it's RPM based, which to me has always been slower than pacman or apt. But since it's been a while since I tried Fedora, I'll probably give it a go when it comes out, which should be November 18th.

PCLinuxOS 2008

Ah, the distribution that is slowly becoming legendary by not appearing. In the last month, I've noticed quite a lot of grumbles about the delay, which is a change of pace for the once fan-favourite number one of the Distrowatch rankings. Of course, PCLinuxOS is supposed to be a rolling release OS, but downloading a 600+ MB ISO, and having to download an additional 600 just for updates isn't really everyone's cup of tea. Apparently, it's "very close to release", but it has been very close to release for a while now. Fingers crossed.

And last but not least:

TinyMe 2008.1

Interesting, because it's based on PCLinuxOS 2008 (or 2008.1?), which doesn't exist, and even more interesting because it offers LXDE, which is Openbox made easy. There aren't many distros that offer Openbox as the default WM, because, let's face it, Openbox is for geeks ;) LXDE tries to make it a bit easier while maintaining the obvious Openbox advantages of simplicity, configurability and speed. I'm curious to see how TinyMe holds up against my own Arch + Openbox configuration (which I think is absolutely perfect for me, but did take some time to get right).
The first alpha release of TinyMe has just appeared, so I guess the final release is still some time away.

In any case, I have some busy months ahead of me :)

San

While these posts have a point, they are mssing the larger picture.  PCLOS is a "rolling release" distro.  It doesn't need to be released every six months to fix problems.  Users aren't forced to re-install in order to get the latest and greatest version of anything.  I installed PCLOS 2007 many months ago.  I immediately did a full update, several hundred Meg of patches.  Since then, I have updated roughly once per week, so I have, in effect, the latest and greatest that will be delivered in the next iso put out by Tex and the Ripper Gang.

But let me see if I can explicitly counter some of the points I have seen made:

1. The UI is old. Oh, come now.  It was "fresh" and "new" a mere 18 months ago.  It's still one heck of a nice-looking desktop.  Besides, one of the first things I do, at least, is update the appearance of the desktop to suit my own mood and needs.  I apply different wallpaper, and different icons, and a different color scheme ... Okay, so I don't stick with the default.  Then again, most people I know, don't.  But I just booted the live-CD a few days ago, and I still thought the overall look was pretty classy.
2. The repos don't have up-to-date software.  If you mean "bleeding edge" software, then you are correct.  Everything in the repos is built and tested against the rest of the repos to make sure nothing breaks something else.  If it does, then something needs to be fixed.  This is all done to help maintain the stability of the distro.  Of course, usually this charge is levied when "version 3.7.19 came out Tuesday, and it's not in the repos, yet!"  But if you look at the repos, we currently might have 3.7.17, which probably meets the needs of 99% of the users.  Besides, compiling and testing software takes time, so if nobody points out that a newer version is available, and also why it should be upgraded, it probably won't be done right away.

   The more specific charge, lately, is that KDE 4.1 is out, and everybody else offers it.  Why don't you? The basic fact is, KDE 4.x is not "ready for prime time", even according to the KDE developers.  PCLinuxOS is targeted at new Linux users, offering a stable, high-quality experience.  Why give "newbies" a known-to-be-buggy interface?  KDE 4.x is making great strides, and I am sure will become a very solid product.  Meanwhile, I suspect that 4.1.1. might be offered as an optional item in the soon-to-be-released "2008" version.

3. It's no better than any other distro at detecting hardware. This is a bad thing?  Sure, it doesn't make a great marketing tool, "We're no worse than anybody else!", but it's not really a bad thing.
4. Ubuntu/OpenSuse/Mandriva/et.al. are marketing PCLOS out of existence. Well, a corporate distro, particularly Ubuntu, has much deeper pockets than Tex has.  PCLOS spreads by word-of-mouth.  The "big boys" can afford to put thousands, or even millions, of dollars down for marketing, and maybe to smooth the way into corporate markets, and such.  If Linux were all about marketing, and "sales", then PCLOS would definitely be an "also-ran".

   But PCLOS is really just a distro put out by one man in Texas (admittedly with the help of a small team of helpers from around the globe), who makes a version of Linux he likes, and is willing to share with anyone who wants a copy.  If people like it, that's great.  If they prefer a different distro, that's fine, too.  As he has said, "use whatever distro works on your hardware."

I, personally, don't think PCLinuxOS has gone stale.  It works great on my hardware.  It has stable, reasonably up-to-date software.  Does it need a new release?  Yes, if just to provide a newer default kernel and better hardware detection from the live-CD.  Also to reduce the amount of updates needed to bring the install "current".  It will also generate a little more "buzz" in the marketplace, which, I admit, is not really a bad thing.

On a final note, I will point out that there is a project underway to produce an official remaster of PCLinuxOS on a quarterly basis, bundling all the updates to that point into the system and making a new live-cd.  This will reduce the amount of updates needed to download after an install, and may even help keep the "buzz" going.  All they're waiting on is for the next official release, which should be "Real Soon Now™".

01 Ubuntu
Ubuntu é um sistema operativo Linux completo p/ desktop, livremente distribuido com dois tipos de suporte: comunitário e profissional. A comunidade Ubuntu assenta em ideias enraizadas no Manifesto Ubuntu : o software deve ser disponibilizado sem custos, utilizado por todos em cada linguagem, mesmo quem tem algum tipo de deficiência e que todos devem ser livres de personalizar e alterar o seu software seja de que forma for que melhor se adapte a si. "Ubuntu" é uma palavra anciã do mundo Africano que significa "humanidade para com os outros". A distribuição Ubuntu traz esse espírito para o mundo do software. ♣♣♣♣♣

02 OpenSUSE
OpenSUSE é um projecto comunitário patrocinado pela Novell que visa a promoção da utilização de Linux em todo o lado, acesso livre e fácil numa distribuição completa. Este projecto tem 3 objectivos: fazer do openSUSE o Linux mais fácil, ter o maior número de utlizadores, aumentar a colaboração open source para que seja o mais usável tanto a nível de iniciantes como de utilizadores experientes, simplificar dramáticamente o desenvolvimento e processos de instalação para que seja a plataforma escolhida pelos desenvolvedores e comerciantes de software para Linux. ♣♣♣♣

03 Fedora 
Este Projecto desenvolvido pela Red Hat está aberto a todos para participação geral, liderado por meritocracia, segue um conjunto de objectivos. O principal é trabalhar a par com a comunidade Linux para construir um sistema operativo polivalente, completo, exclusivamente a partir de open source software. O desenvolvimento será feito em forúns públicos e produzirá lançamentos periódicos do Fedora (cerca de 2-3 vezes por ano, com data prevista de distribuição). A equipe de engenheiros da Red Hat continuará a participar na sua programação e irá convidar e encorajar mais participação e exterior. Utilizando este processo mais aberto, esperam fornecer um sistema operativo mais em conta com os ideais do software livre e mais apelativo à comunidade open source. ♣♣♣♣

04 Mint
Linux Mint é baseado na distro Ubuntu e o seu objectivo é fornecer uma experiência out-of-the-box mais completa, includindo browser plugins, media codecs, suporte para DVD playback, Java e outros componentes semelhantes. Adiciona também um personalização ao desktop, menus, e vários utensílios únicos de configuração, o interface de instalação é baseado na web. Os repositórios são compativeis com os do Ubuntu. ♣♣♣♣

05 PCLinuxOS
O Live CD de PCLinuxOS existe apenas em Inglês e é basedo no Mandrake Linux que corre inteiramente a partir de um 'bootable CD'. Os dados são descomprimidos em tempo real, permitindo para cima de 2GB de aplicações incluindo um X server completo, ambiente KDE, OpenOffice.org e muitas outras prontas a utilizar Em adição podemos instala-lo no disco duro de forma bastante rápida e simples. Podem ser adicionados ou removidos programas a partir do apt-get, via Synaptic. ♣♣♣♣

06 Debian
O projecto Debian é uma associação de individuais que partilham a mesma causa a fim de criarem um sistema operativo livre chamado Debian GNU/Linux. Actualmente utilizam o kernel Linux (parte de código criado por Linus Torvalds e mantida por milhares de programadores à volta do globo). Claro que aquilo que os utilizadores querem são aplicações: programas que os ajudem a obter o que pretendem realizar, desde edição de documentos até à gestão de negócios, passando pelos jogos e pela criação de mais software. Debian vem com mais de 20,000 pacotes (software pre-compilado reunido num formato de fácil instalação) - todo ele livre. Tal como um torre que tem o kernel como base. Um nível acoma encontram-se os utensílios básicos para de seguida se posicionar todo o software que corre no nosso computador. No topo da torra está o Debian - cuidadosamente a organizar e a orientar todas as peças para que a seja um conjunto que funcione suavemente.  ♣♣♣♣♣

07 Mandriva
Mandriva Linux (inicialmente Mandrakelinux) foi criado em 1998 com o objectivo de tornar o Linux  mais acessível a todos. Na altura era já bastante conhecido, poderoso e estável mas necessitava de forte conhecimento e técnica, tal como uso extensivo da linha de comandos; A MandrakeSoft via assim uma oportunidade de integrar no Linux, o melhor ambiente gráfico que desenvolvera, contribuindo com as suas próprias utilidades de configuração para se tornar famosa por definir um standard na facilidade de utilização e funcionalidade. Esta aproximação inovadora ofereceu todo o poder e estabilidade do Linux, tanto a utilizadores comuns como aos profissionais num ambiente amigável e agradável. Milhares de novos utilizadores descobriam assim o Linux, encontrando-se um substituto à altura do seu anterior sistema operativo. Um Linux como servidor ou estação de trabalho sem razão para ter ciumes de quaisquer outros sistemas operativos estabelecidos e aceites. ♣♣♣♣

08 Dream Linux
Dreamlinux é uma distribuição brasileira baseda em Debian GNU/Linux. Um live CD com opção de instalação que arranca directamente para um gestor de janelas Xfce ou GNOME e que permite acesso a uma boa colecção de aplicações para desktop, tak como um painel de controlo para confuguração de sistema. ♣♣♣

09 Sabayon
Sabayon Linux é um live DVD desenhado para transformar um computador num poderoso sistema Gentoo Linux em menos de 5 minutos. Gentoo Linux é uma distro apoiada por um gestor de instalação de software denominado "Portage". Além de funcionar como live DVD, pode também ser instalado no disco duro e inclui uma variada quantidade de gestores de janelas e de aplicações open source software tais como KDE, GNOME, XFce, Fluxbox, KOffice, OpenOffice.org, FreeNX, amaroK, Kaffeine, etc. ♣♣♣♣

10 Damn Small
Damn Small Linux empresarial tem o tamanho de (50MB) em live CD. Apesar do seu tamanho minúsculo pode orgulhar-se de ser funcional e intuitivo, um completo desktop, inclui XMMS (MP3 e MPEG), cliente FTP, browser links-hacked, folha de cálculo, cliente email, dicionário (Inglês), processador de texto, 3 editores (Nedit, nVi, Zile [clone de emacs ]), Xpdf, Worker (gestor de ficheiros), Naim (AIM, ICQ, IRC), VNCviwer, SSH/SCP servidor e cliente, DHCP client, PPP, PPPoE, servidor web, calculadora, gestor de janelas Fluxbox , monitorizador de sistema, suporte USB e brevemente terá também suporte PCMCIA. A melhor escolha para hardware pouco recente.  ♣♣♣♣

Friday evening, she opened the lid, and got ... nothing. It was plugged into power, the indicator light was on, but the screen remained totally blank. She tried moving the mouse, clicking buttons, pressing keys. Nothing. Zilch. Nada. Finally, in desperation, she hit the power button.

When she booted it back up, she got the comforting splash screen, then it cleared, and ... nothing. Just a little blinking cursor in the upper left corner.

Saturday, she called me and said, "I need help."

I gathered up my usual live-CDs: Knoppix, PCLOS-2007, Minime-2008, Mandriva One; and headed over to her place. I had her run through the problem once more, and this time she indicated that in the last day's troubleshooting, she had gotten a message once or twice about a corrupt or invalid filesystem. deciding to stick with what I am most familiar with, I pulled out my Minime-2008 CD, and booted her laptop. Same thing: blank screen, blinking cursor. I inserted the CD and rebooted. She watched over my shoulder. I went into the PCC and opened DiskDrake.

"See that large green block? That's your Windows partition. Says its ntfs. Let's see if we can mount it. Hmm. It says it's not a valid filesystem, and can't be mounted."

She told me that she had done a data backup on Thursday, so she would lose no data if we re-installed. Fine. Where's the XP disk? She didn't have one. And we couldn't even get to the repair console on the system. But she needed to get a system up and running, so she could do some newsletters for Monday's Girls Scout meeting, among other things. She also wanted to get online and check her email, etc.

"Go ahead and install that PCLinux thing."

Okay. A few quick checks (What kind of modem? A Broadcom blah-blah-blah. Etc.), and I went back to PCLOS, and installed it on her hard drive, where "C:" used to live. "You now have internet connectivity. Give me a few minutes to do a system update."

After the updates, I installed a few things automatically, like fonts, Win32 codecs, dvdcss, etc. Then I asked her what her immediate needs were. A PDF-generating publishing tool for the newsletter. Scribus fit that bill. A music player: Amarok. "Can this play DVDs?" Kaffeine. MSN/AIM/IRC. I gave her both Kopete and Pidgin. I also installed OpenOffice, since I knew she had had MSOffice on the old system. Firefox3 for a familiar browser. Then I handed it to her.

She opened Scribus first. "Hey, I can use this!" She closed that, and stuck in a DVD movie. A moment later, a dialog popped up asking her what she wanted to do with it. She clicked "Play with Kaffeine", and sure enough, there was her movie. This really started her laughing. Her live-in boyfriend had recently installed Ubuntu 8.04 on his desktop, because he wanted a good multimedia machine, and he thought "Elisa" looked interesting. But he could never get it to work. And now she was playing movies on her laptop, while his desktop system couldn't.

Of course, this morning I learned that she called her tech support friend, who is shipping her an XP recovery CD. A lot of her data is locked up in proprietary format files (not just MSOffice), and she needs to run those programs to get at the data. So later this week, she is going to be reinstalling XP (which should prove to be a lot more work). But, until then, she has a more-than-functional laptop to keep her connected and productive.

And she kept the Minime CD to give to her boyfriend. ;)

Why am I switching? Well, for one, I'm sick and tired of Windows' general futziness. It seems that, even with a new install, there's always something crashing or slowing down. I also hate how Vista treats you like a toddler when it comes to playing with settings. I also don't game near as much as I used to (I'll be keeping a windows partition just in case). Finally, I used to use Linux, and I miss it! Frankly, it's a far superior operating system, even taking into account driver issues and setup difficulty.

For those of you that are curious, I will be using PCLinuxOS, which I found to be very easy to set up and use in the past. So far, working with the live CD, that's been the case here as well.

See you all on the other side!

=^.^= Vel

I’m a distrowhore. Not as much as I used to be before I started working for RGIS again a year ago in February. Nowaways, I ain’t got time to mess around or even fart around. Since 2000, I think I’ve farted around with over 100 different distro releases. I’ve even run Yellow Dog, Mandrake, and Slackintosh on an iBook.

Because I’ve not tried anything SuSe flavored since before Novell gobbled it up, I decided since this was a slow week at RGIS to give the KDE 4 version of OpenSuSe 11.0 a try.

Alas, I wasn’t very impressed. I found it hard to use and counter-intuitive. But it did look great. Others have dissected OpenSuSe 11 in a much more technical matter than I. This is the punter’s eye view.

Networking

Unlike any other distro that I have used, I couldn’t figure out how to change from the wired NIC to the wireless NIC. I could get the wireless NIC to work with ndiswrapper but I could not switch from eth0 to wlan0 with the KDE Network Manager applet. Yes, I know how to do that from a shell. If I wanted to do command line, I would still be using Slackware. I’m a lazy sod.

KDE 4

I could grow to like it. My favie windows manager right now is e17 on Elive Debian. But the box the Lovely Lettuce uses runs KDE 3.5 and PCLinuxOS. Historically, I tended to prefer KDE over Gnome (I like the endless config options) even though I tend to like Gnome apps better.

KDE 4 feels like a new desktop in KDE drag. Even if it looks the same, it just doesn’t feel right. But then I think of the difference between e16 and e17, for all practical purposes the only thing that is the same is the name.

I like change or I wouldn’t be farting with 10 different distros on one box.

Multimedia

For legal reasons, OpenSuSe doesn’t include much multimedia support. One can d/l such stuff from OpenSuSe repositories once the distro is installed if one clever enough.

Conclusion

OpenSuSe 11.0 isn’t the distro for me. But I’m weird. I strongly suspect, nay, I know, that i am not the target audience for the distro.

I used a Canon Powershot A630 and captured the video on an SD card. The video was only about a minute long, just to keep it as simple as possible.

Would PCLinuxOS be able to read the output? Would I be able to edit it with a title and maybe add some music? Would I be able to post my video on YouTube? Let's see.

I was looking for some likely video editors and these were on my list:

Kino

Cinalerra

Open Movie

KDEnlive

I've been using Movie Maker for all of my videos thus far, so anything I used in Linux would at least have to measure up to that. I had not used any of these but did some research on each of these and downloaded everything except Cinalerra. I'm not opposed to Cinalerra but didn't want to spend scads of time learning features I would never use. I wouldn't mind trying it eventually, but this is a basic project. Capture, edit, render and post. Once a body does that, we can experiment and tweak.

PCLOS was able to read my SD card, no problems. That's more than I can say for my niece's laptop which is running Vista. Oh well.

Meanwhile, I'm also playing with Ksnapshot for screen capturing. I'm definitely expanding my skill level with this exercise!

Kino

Kino looked pretty simple until I tried to import my .avi file. Then it acted confused as it wasn't a DV file. I said import anyway, and away it went. It said it might take awhile. Okay. So I waited for a couple of minutes. And then some more. This movie was about 90 seconds long, so I was not going to wait forever. I purposefully made the clip short in order to limit processing and rendering issues.

Finally, it imported, taking a full 3 minutes. Next, I went to the timeline.

This did not look like a timeline view to me. I had a series of clips, each about 6 seconds long. I clicked the Trim button and saw that I could do a little basic editing, but it was not a timeline format I was familiar with using other editors I had fiddle with. Even the editor that comes with Nero seemed more full featured than this!

I looked at the export feature just to see what it looked like and it appeared to support several formats including some DVD options. But I decided to look else where to do this project. I didn't see anywhere to put titles especially in light of not having a proper time line. Perhaps I missed something? I may need to do more research in order to warm up to Kino. NEXT!

Open Movie

For some reason, my package manager did not install Open Movie in the menu, so I ended up searching for it. Then I put an icon on the desktop.

Now here was an editor that I could understand a bit better. There was a more "normal" timeline with multiple tracks with the capacity to add even more audio and video tracks. But I ran into trouble when trying to add any effects other than a title. Plus, the program would simply disappear whenever I tried to preview my movie.

More research needed. I did look at the export options, and those options looked a bit complicated for someone used to using Movie Maker. Lots of promise here, but I need to be able to preview without the thing crashing.

NEXT!

KDEnlive

I'm running out of options, here. Kdenlive came on to the scene relatively recently, and I was keen to give it a try. I had seen some YouTube videos made with this program, so I knew some people were using it. Could I use it?

The default video format stymied me for a bit. ATSC is something I hadn't heard of before. Reading a bit, it sounded like a fancy name for mpeg-2. Okay, moving on...

Next I could decide how many audio and video tracks in my project. Movie Maker only allows one video and 2 audio so the flexibility to add more is nice. I decided to stay with the default of 2 and 2.

Next I was greeted by a screen that looked intuitive as it really seemed to fit with the KDE theme. Perhaps this would be the one.

So I went to Project>add clip and was able to browse for my movie clip. I was able to drag it to the timeline. So far so good! Next, clicked the "play" button in the preview window....

Not good. Not good at all.

So I tried it again, and the second time it worked. I have no idea what I did different if anything. So while I knew I might crash at any time, I also knew this program showed promise. So it was time to save before it crashed again.

Time to add a title, which looked like it needed to be a text clip. So I created and added it...or at least I think so.

It didn't show up in my preview.

Okay, so far so good. Let's render this thing out, shall we?

Under file, I tried "export timeline." Good choice.

I had a lot of choices for high and medium quality. Medium is good enough for the moment so I picked mpeg 640x480 high. So far so good. Lots of audio choices, too. Now I'm starting to feel a bit overwhelmed as there really are a lot of choices here!

I finally clicked the export button and let fly. It said it should be finished in about 5 minutes and had a progress moniter to show me how things were going. This is the furthest I had gone with any of the programs and was looking good.

After rendering, the title still did not make an appearance. I went back and tried to fiddle some more but never was able to make the title appear in the preview window on top of the clip.

There were still choices available in Movie Maker that were lacking here, such as toggling between timeline and storyboard view and number of transiton and effects. But overall, this program is a pretty good fit. Or it would be without the niggling defect of not seeing the Title/text screen I created. I did not play with that many features as I wanted a quick and dirty demonstration just to see if using Linux with TouTube was even possible for a noob like me.

Out of the 3 programs previewed, I liked Kdenlive the best, but not having the Title show up was a real bummer. Kdenlive could eventually become my editor of choice by the time it gets to 1.0 status. The trick is going to be to keep the development moving and thus keep my interest alive. This type of progression is what has helped Linux reach critical mass as desktop choice. It is good enough now to hold the interest of the average user, even if it not totally perfect. Handling video tasks such as screencasting, editing for online viewing and working with webcams are going to be crucial in order to make this OS viable for the future. Video rendering remains one of the most intensive tasks most home computers do and it is becoming more and more necessary for business. The future of computing is in video, and Linux is woefully behind in that area. This is why Macs have seen such a rise in sales is because iLife makes video creation so easy and painless. Most prominent YouTubers are using Macs. It would be nice if Linux could at least make an appearance but right now Linux is in sad, sad shape in the area of allowing average users to generate content.

The finished product isn't anything too special but here it is:

The good news is that I was able to completely capture and render the video and post to YouTube within Linux without having to go into Windows.  And really, that was the ultimate objective.  I'll still use Windows for the majority of my video work, just because it is faster at the present time and plays nicely with my webcam on the laptop.

I'm also in search of screencorder software, similar to Camstudio.  Or it would be cool if Camstudio were ported to Linux. I feel this type of software is crucial to further development of Linux.  That is because no one is going to sit down with a book or manual to learn about Linux or software.  But they will watch a series of short, concise video tutorials on the subject.  I can learn more from 4 minutes of video than an hour of reading a technical manual.  I can't do code, but I could make technical support videos for Linux if there existed the right tools.  The Xvidcapture that I found isn't quite cutting it, even though it's a good start.

D.

]]> http://secarikehidupan.wordpress.com/?p=299 Fri, 08 Aug 2008 09:04:56 +0000 secarikehidupan http://secarikehidupan.pt-br.wordpress.com/2008/08/08/clamav-pclinuxos/ Setelah puas dengan Hardy Heron dilaptopku, giliran komputer kantor aku tanemin sistem operasi linux. Kali ini aku ingin mencoba distro lain, akhirnya pilihan jatuh pada distro pclinuxos 2007 yang menggunakan enviroment KDE sebagai GUI default-nya. Ubuntu mengadaptasi GNOME meski distro ini juga menyediakan versi KDE-nya dengan distro Kubuntu. Tapi karena komputer kantor, ya aku tetep mempertahankan sistem operasi yang lama (apalagi kalo bukan Windows XP), dual booting dech jadinya.

Kalo di Hardy Heron laptopku aku beri avast! Linux Home Edition, di pclinuxos 2007 ini aku juga ingin mencicipi antivirus yang direkomendasikan oleh distronya, yaitu clamav. Antivirus ini dapat dijalankan langsung dengan text mode lewat terminal (semacam command prompt kalo di Windows). Namun, kita bisa menambahkan klamav sebagai aplikasi GUI dari antivirus ini. Kalo kita juga menanamkan dazuko, kita akan mendapatkan fitur tambahan berupa real time scanning seperti antivirus Windows pada umumnya. Dan enaknya lagi, semua itu bisa langsung kita peroleh dari Synaptic Package Manager! hehehe.... :)

(Click to enlarge)

However I have found a promising distribution: Pardus

Pardus is quite low on distrowatch however after managing to find the English part of their website (by default both the website and distro are in Turkish although an English option can be selected) I have found a solid distribution. So exactly one week from now I will post a review of Pardus 2008; this will be my most professional review yet (by that I mean it will be split into categories and have screenshots).

My test machine:

generic Philliips laptop

1.5 GHz core 2 duo

2GB ram

Realtek sound card (older distributions generally do not support it)

Intel GMA 965 graphics chipset (Intel GMA x3100)

Review criteria:

Hardware support

Multimedia support

Speed/Stability

Ease of use

Aesthetics

Si tienes Ubuntu Hardy sigue estos pasos en un Terminal:

sudo wget http://playonlinux.botux.net/playonlinux_hardy.list -O /etc/apt/sources.list.d/playonlinux.list
wget -q http://playonlinux.botux.net/pol.gpg -O- | sudo apt-key add -
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install playonlinux

Puedes ver la gran lista en http://www.playonlinux.com/es/scripts.html

Para instalarlo en otros sistema ve a la siguiente dirección: http://www.playonlinux.com/es/download.html

My theory is that they were waiting for the stable release of firefox 3, since that came out a while ago there's probably some heavy work going on now. Though that said I first theorised that it would be released last march (I expected it to be scheduled for release in January but that was too close to the release of 2007). Later I theorised that it would come on May 20th (exactly one year after 2007). Soooo yeah it's all speculation at the moment.

Anyway to the point, as soon as pclinuxos 2008 is released I will install it and use it for a week before reviewing it here on wordpress.

P.S. A bit of tasty information here: according to this reviewer pclinuxos 2008 will ship with kde 4 but I wouldn't consider this a reliable source so  take from it what you will (source:http://distrogue.blogspot.com/2008/01/pclinuxos-2008-and-we-have-another.html)

Note that I remain a Windows-bred beginner... a noob if you will... and so I'm not the typical linux user who goes to Forums for help. I usually expect things to work, and when they don't I waste time gripping about it in blogs like this! rather than actually finding constructive solutions for myself and others. See, I'm a terrible person, but heck, that's me. So here's my gripe. Read with caution.

Points : 10 (highest) to 1 (lowest). Usually I would never use 1 or 10, except in exceptional cases, so in effect my rating is between 2-9

1. Ease of installation =8

Linux Mint 5.0 was pretty easy to install and apart from a little slow response when I clicked "next", it was painless and error free.

2. Out of the box experience =9

Unlike Ubuntu, which I kept having to install plugins that I desired, I've never had to install any plugin or closed-source device apart from what is already installed.... and yes, everything works. I've watched DVDs, listened to music and even played flash movies with ease. In fact, it's easy to take this for granted... and matches something like my experience with PCLinuxOS. Linux Mint has a stellar "out of the box" experience.

3. Nags (problems (bugs?) in the system) = 3

a. Biggest flaw so far... when I load Linux Mint, I get 800x600 resolution. I then have to log out and re-loggin, and then I get the right resolution I desire. The fact that I use VIA chipset (why, oh, why?) could be the problem, but I certainly didn't face this problem in previous editions.

b. The other biggest flaw is that it doesn't allow me to hibernate, saying that I don't have enough memory. Ubuntu said the same thing. Now if it is a "swap" drive problem, and I have 500 MB for my swap, I would think Linux Mint should advise SWAP size while installing, don't you think?

4. Windows inter-operatability =5

As expected, the GRUB worked perfectly, and recognised my Windows partition. However, like Ubuntu, Linux Mint cannot mount NTFS partitions if Windows is hibernated. Since I usually hibernate my Windows, this is a real pain!

5. Firefox 3 = 5 (but somehow better than Ubuntu)

Perhaps Firefox has updated its Beta version, but somehow the Mint Firefox 3 works better than the Ubuntu Firefox 3. I still find myself longing for Firefox 2+ because so far I haven't seen anything that great about 3, and perhaps that because it's still in Beta (I think). It would have been nice to keep 3 optional.

Anyway, the biggest problem in the Mint Firefox is that it messes with the default Google search engine, customizing the look-and-feel and in the process losing some of the traditional Google search links (like images etc).

6. Operating System Navigation = 6

I like the look, even of the Menu Bar, but somehow it's still difficult to find everything, because of the limited space for each section in the menu bar (we have to scroll down to find what we want, in "system" for instance). This is a pain, and actually makes you wish for more shortcuts (eeks!) or even the Windows 'open-everything' taskbar (double eeks!)

TOTAL: 8+9+3+5+5+6 = 36 / 60 = "6" ... which actually looks worse than I actually found it. Without this mathematical rating, I think my actual new Linux Mint 5.0 experience is about a "7"... or even "7.5" out of 10. Certainly I would recommended it for the easy-solution seekers (like me).