(Example: Do we need a Linux version of ArchiCAD?)

[Anonymous]

Is GS trying to tell us something? Or are they just teasing? Anyone have any thoughts or insights to this? I'm all for Linux compatibility.

[Anonymous]

The question is, Stuart, will your photo change color as you attain each new level? (I'm assuming your choice of 'green' was as in 'green beginner' ...)

Of course! I'm looking greatly forward to my next change of colour - can be considered as a hybrid caterpillar/chameleon evolutionary step, I guess ?!

At least all but the truly new members know you to be the expert that you are!
Karl

Thanks for the flowers ... cheque is in the post!

- Stuart

[Anonymous]

ArchiCAD on Linux. . .<shrudder>
That's almost as frightening as two hours after lunch when we had corn and mayonaise day at my gradeschool cafeteria. . .

[Anonymous]

I was posting for this topic as a potential opportunity to not use Microsoft op sys - Since MACs are based on UNIX and Linux is based on UNIX - and they both recognize 64 bit OS - then why should we all be limited by what Bill G has for us? Maybe it's just the annoyances with WIN that are driving me steadily down the track of mental never never land.

I do not know enough about systems, just the results of having to work around them every day - with increasing levels of frustration.

P4 2.53
XP Pro
AC8+

[Anonymous]

<chuckle> I'm an avid Micro$oft Windoze user, so I know your frustration. It's pretty funny with the rivalries of Smackandtoss, and Windoze uzers. I feel that this analogy works best for any operating system. Let's say you have a shelf with 5 levels, on each level is a row of 10 bins, each with a label describing which series of Lego's is in each bin. Now if I were to ask you to get a red 2x6x2 red lego brick, you'd walk over to the shelf, searching through the bins, and in a matter of minutes you'd have the piece in hand. . .Now if you were one of our current operating systems, and I asked you to do the same thing, you'd walk up to the shelf, walk around it, then knock it over, spilling it's contents on the ground, then kick through the Legos with your feet, and bring me a green 2x6x2 brick after a few hours. . .

[Anonymous]

chad.lawson wrote:
<chuckle> I'm an avid Micro$oft Windoze user, so I know your frustration. It's pretty funny with the rivalries of Smackandtoss, and Windoze uzers. I feel that this analogy works best for any operating system. Let's say you have a shelf with 5 levels, on each level is a row of 10 bins, each with a label describing which series of Lego's is in each bin. Now if I were to ask you to get a red 2x6x2 red lego brick, you'd walk over to the shelf, searching through the bins, and in a matter of minutes you'd have the piece in hand. . .Now if you were one of our current operating systems, and I asked you to do the same thing, you'd walk up to the shelf, walk around it, then knock it over, spilling it's contents on the ground, then kick through the Legos with your feet, and bring me a green 2x6x2 brick after a few hours. . .

You are right on target - why must we be limited - is it just plain old greed and no concern for the user?? which I think is the case. OR is there some other hidden agenda???? The big deal is the apparent "freebee" status of most of the distributions and not that one is better, etc.

I guess if someone else came up with a really good OS we would still be stuck with the monopoly. Oh well I'll keep on banging the head against the virtual wall - - -

Lew Bishop
P4 2.53
XP Pro
AC 8+

[Anonymous]

chad.lawson wrote:

I guess if someone else came up with a really good OS we would still be stuck with the monopoly. Oh well I'll keep on banging the head against the virtual wall - - -

Or someone else can do something really like MS and create a really cheesy OS and stifle competition.
What I've experienced is that if you put 2 equally capable AC users head to head one on Windows and one on Mac the Mac user will be much faster navigating through the project everywhere (except in the pathetic library manager which is apparently a Windows Explorer rip off), even the keyboards are more ergonomically friendly on the Mac, MS has only had the advantage in speed of image generation due to the hardware available for it to run on, definitely NOT because it's a "really good OS". Hopefully the new generations of Macs will level the playing field and /or Apple will decide to further develop and release their OS to run on a "PC". Which I've heard but have not been able to substantiate may be available on some new IBM creations.

BTW yet again, it appears as if one must have a MS product to use the spill cheeker in this forum as well? Glad Safari has it's own.

[Anonymous]

Hi Guys!
I found Linux very nice.
It's time to start programming Prof. CAD's for Linux.
And I'm thinking that it will be very nice to have GS products for Linux. And I'm not sure that Windows will be better for AC than Linux. We must test it before.

[stefan]

LewBishop wrote:
The big deal is the apparent "freebee" status of most of the distributions and not that one is better, etc.

I don't think so. The license cost of the OS is only a very small part of the total use cost. When you have your expensive employee losing time on an OS he/she is not familiar with, then you loose money.

If you can get your work done on a more expensive OS, then the cost of the OS is irrelevant. Even when you need 50 licenses.

[Anonymous]

stefan wrote:

LewBishop wrote:
The big deal is the apparent "freebee" status of most of the distributions and not that one is better, etc.

I don't think so. The license cost of the OS is only a very small part of the total use cost. When you have your expensive employee losing time on an OS he/she is not familiar with, then you loose money.

If you can get your work done on a more expensive OS, then the cost of the OS is irrelevant. Even when you need 50 licenses.

Perhaps the cost may be irrelevant, but using one vs the other is related to more than being forced to use one just because it sells the most. Equating that to CAD software is saying that we should only use Autocad because it sells the most. Neither argument makes sense to me. Finding and using the best tools is, for me, the solution.

My original premise was to take advantage of the fastest and less expensive hardware available, which may have too many flaws anyway.

[Anonymous]

even if Mac OS X is the best Unix OS in the world, Linux is a very good investment in the future as the most usefull softs are available on it , an easy to use interface too, and surely to get better and better. Very stable too. A development for Linux will work on both mac and Pc's, will be stable, and the user base is growing very fast because. Of course its independency towards hegemony of Microfsoft and marketing aspects is one of the main points that guarantee its success and quality.