File Sharing Options In Ubuntu

Since October was my last post on this blog I thought it was about time I posted something at least somewhat useful. As someone who owns several PCs something that interests me is networking those PCs together so that they may share files and common resources. This is actually something many people struggle with all the time. For those who can't solve the problem they may resort to cumbersome methods like using USB sticks. So what are the file sharing options available to Ubuntu users?

Well as I've just mentioned, you can use USB sticks. It's a reliable method guaranteed to work. It is not however terribly efficient. The next option involves networking and there are 3 main ways to share files over a network in Ubuntu. We have Samba, which is an implementation of Microsoft's networking protocols for Windows. Next we have NFS which is commonly used in most POSIX compliant OS's. The third and final option in the "cloud".

Samba
Samba is great. When it works. Not only does it allow other Linux machines to share files and other resources like printers. It also allows both Linux and Windows machines to share the same resources on the same network. Which is great. When it works.

And that is the biggest con for me when it comes to Samba. Not only did the Samba developers succeed in developing software that could network both Linux and Windows PCs together on the same network using Microsoft's SMB protocols. They also succeeded in reproducing the reliability of Microsoft's networking protocols. It could just be my incompetence. But frankly I've never been able to get a home network to actually work reliably with Windows and Samba has never work consistently and reliably for me in Ubuntu either.

I will however concede that there are many people who do appear to have Samba working just fine. Another advantage is that shares are dynamic and browse-able. By that I mean a new share will appear on the network as they are made available.

So Samba is flexible but not reliable.

NFS
NFS or Network File System on the surface looks a bit scary. Setting it up requires using something called the "terminal" and editing "configuration files" with "root privileges"! For the purposes of a home network based on Ubuntu machines it's actually very simple. Install 3 packages and reboot the PC. Then you can start sharing stuff. Which is where you need to start editing files. Well actually you don't.

Ubuntu has a GUI that lets you select shares for either NFS or Samba. It can be found in System>Administration>Shared Folders. In the case of NFS this will create all the entries in the /etc/exports file for you. All you need do is supply the basic information. The folder to be shared and the clients (other PC's) who have access to it. Editing the /etc/exports file directly does however give more flexibility and certainly isn't something any home user should shy away from. Simply make a copy of the original file. That way if you screw things up, it's easy to fix.

One of the biggest draw backs for me using NFS is that it's static or not browse-able. At least as of yet I haven't found a way to browse through a PC's NFS shares. Each and every share on the network needs to be "mounted" manually or via the fstab file for automatic mounting at boot time. Which can be inconvenient if you can't remember the exact name of the share. I also haven't yet figured out how to share a printer with NFS. If it's even possible.

NFS server and client software is available for Windows. However I've never used it and therefore can't vouch for it.

So NFS is reliable but inflexible.

The Cloud Services
There are at least two "cloud" based file sharing services that spring to mind when it comes to Ubuntu. The first is Canonical's own service. Ubuntu One. This is installed by default in Ubuntu 10.10 as part of Canonical's "social from the start" initiative. You do however still need to create a user account.

The other service and probably more popular service is DropBox. DropBox is the more mature and better established of the two services. Which means more of the bugs have been ironed out. I've used both services and DropBox is definitely my choice for the moment.

The thing that interests me most about these services is the ability to share files securely wherever there is an Internet connection. Not only do they share files but they synchronise them as well. Which means the latest version of a document should always be available. There is a significant limitation however. Cost!

Unlike using Samba or NFS to share resources on a home network using a cloud service limits the amount of data you can share at any given time. That's because the cloud services operate by copying the files to an on-line storage space and then to each client. This on-line storage needs to be paid for by someone.

Users do however get some free storage space. With DropBox it's 2GB and with Ubuntu One it was 1GB when I tried it. Which in today's world of massive MP3 libraries, digital photos and perfectly legally ripped DVDs isn't much. Once you've reached your reached the limits of your on-line storage capacity you must move files out of the shared space or pay up actual real money for more space. On a monthly or annual basis. Which means you're actually paying good money to access your own files.

On the plus side however these services do tend to "just work". Which is why they are popular and why people are actually prepared to shell out money to get that extra storage capacity. Cloud services are also said to have another important function. Off site back up. In reality this only works if you go to the trouble of setting it up that way. Remember these services automatically synchronise their shares. So if you delete a file in the shared space on your laptop. It will be deleted in the shared space on your desktop as well. However as a cheap off site back up option it's not a bad idea.

So cloud based file sharing services are reliable, flexible, browse-able but potentially expensive.

The Conclusion
Each file sharing option here has it's pros and cons. The important thing for people to realise is there are options out there. You don't have to stick with a one size fits all and doesn't actually work properly for anybody solution. My solution is to use a combination of services. I use DropBox for files I need access to when I'm not at home and can't connect via my own home network. And I use NFS for my home network.

I have chosen these options for their reliability and simplicity. They both "just work" and very rarely throw up any problems. Not having figured out how to share a printer with NFS at the moment if it's even possible isn't a huge issue. In the modern age why are we still printing stuff anyway? There's no real "need".

ConDem-ed

This is just a quick observation. The other night I was watching the news. There was a report on the cuts the ConDem-ed government intends to make along with the welfare reforms. I couldn't help but notice everything major that has been mentioned so far will not be implemented in this parliament. But in the next parliament.

I'm by no stretch of the imagination a political heavy weight. But that rather seems like an ideologically driven approach rather than austerity measures. The cuts the ConDem-ed government are planning will be intended to last well beyond this and the next government. And there is one more odd thing about this ConDem-ed government.

Details. The devil is always in the detail. But the ConDem-ed government are very light on details. Before the election I was criticised by some for calling out the Conservative manifesto as being utter nonsense. All head lines and no substance. Those who would play devils advocate defended that manifesto, claiming an election manifesto should only set out the "vision statement". Well frankly that's just not good enough for me.

Before the election the Conservatives were pushing out some radical Thatcher-ish sounding policies with no actual meat in them. Today in government they are doing much the same thing. How can a government function for this long after an election and not have actually done anything? Why are the opposition parties holding them to account?

Something has gone very, very wrong in British politics.

deviantArt Munro

There are people in the world who doubt the usefulness of the Internet and the World Wide Web. These same people are the people who are currently talking down the transition from the desktop computing model to the "cloud" model. They are also the same people who stand to lose the most from this transition.

I've read articles in the past that talk about the security concerns related to "cloud computing" or "fog computing". There's a lot of scaremongering going on in the industry and in popular media. And disasters like Microsoft's Sidekick disaster are routinely trotted out to add weight to the claims being made. All of those articles however ignore one simple fact. We already live in the "cloud". As I've said in various forums in the past, cloud computing is simply a return to the client server model where applications are hosted by a server and interacted with via a client. The server does the heavy lifting. The client provides the interface. This is how the web works. It's how it's always worked.

So why all the fuss? Well traditionally web applications have always been limited to the capabilities of the web browser. Primarily Microsoft's Internet Explorer which has been a ball and chain shackled to the ankles of the Internet since Microsoft forced it upon it's customers in Windows 95. But that has changed. Microsoft no longer dominates the web in a meaningful way. It's market share is falling continuously. New versions of IE cannibalise market share from older versions of IE while the over all market share for IE falls. Microsoft's competitors are stealing the march on the web. Apple, Google, Opera and Mozilla have all released HTML5 aware web browsers. And it's HTML5 that will set the web free.

HTML5 is what powers Munro from deviantArt. Munro it's self is nothing special. It's a painting application that allows you to publish directly to your deviantArt account. What is important is how Munro is delivered. It's free to use and is delivered to the user via the deviantArt web site. There's no plug-ins required. No installation required. No configuration required. No lengthy serial number to input for activation. It is essentially the ultimate plug 'n' play application. The only thing the user is required to do is figure out how to use it. Which isn't hard.

Munro isn't the first HTML5 application to pop up. There are quite a few out there now. Discreetly integrated into web sites. Users simply take them for granted without even noticing how painless the whole experience was. Because it was painless. This is how the web was meant to be. Free and easy to use. Simple and transparent. Accessible to all.

Why does Wall Street hate Microsoft?

Why does Wall Street hate Microsoft? is the question posed on the Microsoft Blog. The answer the author arrives at, extremely quickly, is Windows is just not exciting enough. Hmm okay then. I'm no expert on the stock market or on how investors behave. But I think it's a safe bet they're more interested in the profit margins. Not just from one or two products. But from the whole product line. And there in lies the problem. With the exception of Microsoft Office and Microsoft Windows very few Microsoft product lines ever seem to make any profit at all.

Take Bing for example. It was supposed to be the next best thing since sliced bread. It wasn't. Hardly anybody uses it and Microsoft's on-line efforts are haemorrhaging something on the order of $2,000,000,000 per year. Vista was a disaster and despite the supposedly good figures for Windows 7. The business world is sticking with Windows XP. Which is why Microsoft has extended downgrade rights to 2020. And Windows Surface was also essentially still born.

There was Zune. Which only really sold in the USA and even then wasn't so popular. There's the Xbox. Hugely popular, yes. Shame it's a technical disaster with at least half of all units sold at one point being returned as duds. Which one might think was enough disappointment for one product. But no. Microsoft had plenty more disappointment for Xbox fans. First they decided to lock out third party peripheral devices. Then they decided to cut off early adopters by ending support for their version of the console. There was the sidekick debacle. Then there was the still born Microsoft "Kin Phone". Which nobody wanted. And then of course there is a list longer than your arm of product lines Microsoft has recently discontinued.

All of which is very telling about Microsoft's understanding of todays market. They just don't get it. For some unfathomable reason Microsoft thought teenagers would buy a phone like Kin when they could have an iPhone or the HTC Legend, the Google Nexus One or the Motorola Droid. Even Microsoft's own Windows Phone 7 looks like a better proposition. Then there is the way Microsoft treats it's paying customers. People are tired of the 20 character activation codes. It makes people who have bought and paid for their products feel like criminals. So it's understandable then they might consider switching to Apple or Linux.

And speaking of the competition. When Microsoft's competition does something different, exciting or innovative Microsoft's responses are almost non-existent. Microsoft's answer to the buzz surrounding Compiz on the Linux platform was a new task-bar. Windows that minimise or maximise when you shake them or some such. Compiz in comparison has a multitude of features. Some actually useful in boosting productivity like the Negative, Opacify, Enhanced Desktop Zoom or Add Helper. Basically Microsoft are a company that doesn't have anything new to offer and always seem to be late to the party. And not even fashionably late at that.

It's not that Wall Street hates Microsoft. Wall Street just doesn't see any potential. Investors minds have been made up that Microsoft has run it's course. It's time for a change. For something new. Apple are currently storming a head because Apple has proven it's self to be a company that can diversify to survive and fight it's way clear of bad times. Microsoft innovates by buying up an existing company or product and slapping it's own brand on it. Apple innovates by putting a new spin on existing technologies and products.

Then there is the honesty factor. Investors don't like it when people lie to them. Windows 7 is turning bumper profits. Except virtually nobody in the business sector is interested and the whole of Asia is apparently pirating Windows. So who exactly is buying Windows 7? Are these bumper profits coming from consumers alone? Maybe there's some "Hollywood" accounting going on over at Redmond.

Wall Street doesn't hate Microsoft. It just doesn't care any more.

Ubuntu Tip: How To Synchronise Gnote Between PCs

In the great Tomboy vs Gnote debate one of the trump cards Tomboy has is it's ability to synchronise it's database of notes with other PCs. Not that it was ever a feature that worked brilliantly. However none the less it was a feature I used and the only reason I continued using Tomboy over Gnote.

How stupid I was?

Ubuntu as many Ubuntu users will know comes with a "cloud" service called Ubuntu One. Which while isn't that great provides us with the basic inspiration for what we're about to do. You see Canonical in their great wisdom decided it would be a great idea to integrate Tomboy with Ubuntu One. Fine. Excellent. If it works. It did for a time for me. Then sort of went a bit crappy. However there are more mature "cloud services" available for synchronising files between two PCs. And that incidentally is all Tomboy's synchronisation feature does so far as I can see. It simply copies files that have been created or changed recently to the PC that doesn't have the new version.

You see all of the notes you create in Tomboy or Gnote are stored in individual XML formatted files. And the Linux file system has a crafty little feature called symbolic links. Combine this with a service like Ubuntu One or Dropbox and all our notes are synchronised automagically so long as we have an active web connection.

Prerequisites:

1. Tomboy or Gnote. I recommend Gnote. It's lighter and faster than Tomboy.
2. Ubuntu One, Dropbox or similar service. I would recommend Dropbox.

Setup:

1. Creat a new folder for yout notes in your Ubuntu One or Dropbox folder.
   
2. Copy your existing notes to the folder you just created in your Ubuntu One or Dropbox folder. Tomboy notes can be found in /home/your-user-name/.local/share/tomboy. Gnote notes can be found in /home/your-user-name/.gnote.
3. Replace the Tomboy or Gnote folder with a symbolic link. Open a terminal window and enter the following command adjust for your own PC;
   

   ln -vsf Dropbox/gnote /home/your-user-name/.gnote

4. Repeat steps 1 and 3 on the second, third, fourth, etc PC.

NOTES:

1. It's best to have Tomboy or Gnote already setup and working before you attempt this.
2. It's also better to avoid using hidden directories with Dropbox. They don't work very well in my experience.
3. If you're using Tomboy but would like to switch to Gnote that's not a problem. Gnote is a native Linux implementation of Tomboy that is free of all Mono dependencies. Both applications use exactly the same data file formats and both offer almost exactly the same feature set. So all you need to do is copy the Tomboy files to your Gnote folder.
   

Digg Is Dead

For quite sometime now I've had a Digg button imbedded in my posts. News aggrigators like Digg are great for driving web users to your blog. However for some strange reason the digg button isn't working any longer. At least not on my blog. All the posts show the same number of diggs. Clicking the button does nothing.

So what is it about the new blogspot templates that are causing this conflict with Digg? Clearly having a button on your blog or website that does nothing looks bad. So For the time being I've removed the Digg button.

Ubuntu Tip: Split Screen In Nautilus

Way back in the days when I got my first IBM compatible PC running MS-DOS and Microsoft Windows 3.1 there was a feature in the Windows file manager I have really missed over the years since 3.1 became redundant. It's the split screen mode.

Well I shall miss it not a minute more. For Nautilus has just such a feature. Simply open Nautilus and press F3. Each pain can point to it's own directory. Which is handy considering I connect to FTP servers using Nautilus.

Password Protecting A Website

I'm writing this more as a reminder to myself than for anybody elses benefit. Recently I had a request to add a password protected area to a web site I administer, www.aikido-gb.com. For some reason I had always thought this was quite difficult and needed experience in building on-line databases. It doesn't.

Adding password protection to an area of a website is actually pretty easy. Basically all you need to do is create a subdirectory and to it add two files, .htaccess and .htpasswd.

Setting Up .htaccess
The .htaccess file defines access privileges and the location of the password file, .htpasswd. It should look something like the following example;

AuthType Basic
AuthName "restricted area"
AuthUserFile /the-full-path-name-of-your-webspace/membersonly/.htpasswd
AuthGroupFile /dev/null
AuthName secure
AuthType Basic
require valid-user
order allow,deny
allow from all

An important point to note. The variable AuthUserFile must be the full path name of your web space. This will likely not be your domain name. So you may need to contact your ISP to get that information. Alternatively search the ISPs FAQ.

Setting Up .passwd
The .passwd file contains users names and passwords. Nothing else. The passwords must be encrypted. Fortunately there is an abundance of free tools around the web for this task.

userName:passWord

Ditching Ubuntu 64-bit

Since upgrading to Ubuntu 10.04 64-bit my PC became unstable. Most of the time it was just innconveinent minor things. The clock on the top panel wouldn't display properly. However occasionally the whole PC would freeze. Especially when under a heavy work load. Couple this with the fact that Adobe Flash and Adobe Air have never worked to satisfactory degree. I decided it was time to go back to a 32-bit world.

What I had to consider was what I was losing and what I was gaining. My PC has 8GB of RAM. Normally on a 32-bit system 3.75GB is as much as you get. So I'd potentially be losing half of my RAM. But that was it. None of the software I use is exclusively 64-bit. Some of it is however exclusively 32-bit and there are ways around the 4GB memory cap in 32-bit operating systems.

What I stood to gain was a simpler installation procedure for my 32-bit only software and a more stable operating system. I use the 32-bit version of Ubuntu 10.04 on my laptop with no problems. So I already knew it was more stable.

To get past the 4GB memory cap, I intended to install the server kernel which has PAE technology enabled by default. However I found this was totally unnecessary. The desktop kernel in Ubuntu 10.04 comes with PAE support.

In the end up I now have a more stable PC. A simpler installation procedure for my 32-bit software. I still get to use 7.9GB of the total 8GB of RAM in my PC. Which is actually an improvement over the 64-bit version of Ubuntu. The PC does however feel a little sluggish at times. Particularly when launching applications. But that's a small price to pay for simplicity and stability.

Ubuntu Tip: Gnome Schedule

Ask someone in the Linux world how do you schedule tasks to activate automatically and they'll likely start blathering about cron jobs. Now cron is a great tool if you do a lot of task scheduling. But for those of us who want something simpler there is Gnome Schedule. In Ubuntu it's bizarrely not installed by default. Why not? It's an insanely useful little tool that's easy to get to grips with. Luckily installation simple.

1. Open a terminal window.
2. Type sudo apt-get -y install gnome-schedule and press enter.
3. Start gnome-schedule from the Applications > System Tools menu.

That's it. All ready to go!

Why Fire Fox is not Doomed?

Okay I was going to comment on the article it's self. However InfoWorld appear to be afraid of feedback and require some sort of lengthy vetting process after registering. Like seriously!?! What is that all a bout!?!

So Firefox is doomed. I would disagree. Google might cut funding to better support it's own browser. But then again the whole point of Google funding Firefox is to get the default search position in the search bar. So far as I know Google don't intend to exit the search business just yet. So while Chrome is something of a threat or competition at least to Firefox. It's not the end game until Chrome gets significantly more market share.

IE is an immovable object? Clearly Randell is deliberately ignoring the fact that IE is well into decline. It's only actual strong hold now where Microsoft can still feel safe is on the corporate desktop. Everywhere else is up for grabs. Which is why every other major web browser on the market namely Firefox, Safari, Opera and Chrome are all gaining market share while IE is losing market share. What's more these browsers are gaining as much market share between them as IE is losing. Which means they're taking it from IE.

If that wasn't enough at least 3 or 4 countries have advised their citizens to ditch IE and use something else instead. Then of course there are countries like Brazil where significant numbers of people don't even use Windows let alone IE. They're all on Linux. So IE an immovable object? I hardly think so.

As for the critique of Mozillas intention to opt for smaller updates? This is what the Ubuntu developers do. They focus on one major thing they want to make better and by and large deliver on their goals. That doesn't mean other things don't get fixed or don't change. Clearly they do. But the developers do well out of that intense focus. Which is perhaps something Firefox actually needs.

I also don't think it's fair to compare Mozilla to Microsoft or to compare incremental updates to hot-fixes. First of all Microsoft and Mozilla are two entirely different companies with different motivations and goals. They have totally different business models that dictate how much funding they can dedicate to a single project and how the end product is marketed.

Hot-fixes are also intended to be temporary fixes to tide Windows over until the service pack arrives. Again that's a different coding style from an incremental update. A hot-fix is a quick and dirty patch to fix a problem in the short term. An incremental update is something that is integrated properly to the existing code base. That is what Mozilla does at the moment. The fact that it might want to do less but do it better doesn't mean the product will suffer.

Ubuntu Targeted By Malware!

Apparently some malware has been found in both a .deb file claiming to install a screen saver and a theme pack over on Gnome-Look. Which is a shame since I use that site regularly to find new wallpapers and themes.

So Ubuntu is now the target of criminals? All the tech press places all of desktop Linux at 1% of the market and claim in the same breath that figure is a generous estimate. Why then are criminals targeting something that has only 1% of the desktop PC market. It makes no sense unless Linux is much bigger than 1%. It would be interesting to find out what has changed the criminals minds. Are Linux users simply too naive? Too cocky? Too arrogant? Too stupid? Clearly criminals now see Linux desktops as vulnerable targets ripe for the picking.

This is both an interesting and frighting development. However we have at least exposed a vector of infection for Linux systems. Anybody could build a .deb or .rpm package file or even a normal tarball. Clearly without the protection of the community maintained repositories these methods of installation are just as vulnerable to misuse as Windows .exe files. Which is something many people in the Linux community including myself hadn't considered. Normally we tell people an installation script requires permission to run. So we're protected. The trouble is I don't think many people give entering their password a second thought when installing from a .deb package. Most of us simply trust them.

So this is a wakeup call to Linux users and in particular to Gnome and Ubuntu users. Be vigilant. Be careful about your chosen software sources. If you're installing something from a web site be sure to scan it first! Linux has a very good anti-virus application available in the repositories of most decent distributions. It's called ClamAV. While this is a command line application there are several front ends available. The most popular at the moment is ClamTK. Use the following commands to install them to your system. Remember you'll need to enter your password when installing software.

1. Open a terminal window.
2. Type sudo apt-get -y install clamav clamtk then press enter.
   
3. Remember to scan your system regularly.

There are other anti-virus scanners for Linux. They're not hard to install. Most come in .rpm or .deb files. The ones that come as tarballs generally tend to be binaries. So there's no need to compile anything. Check out this article for more info.

Windows 7: Internet Connection Has Died!

Okay for some reason the internet connection on my dads Windows 7 computer has just died. Nothing I do makes it work again. Supposedly this was an issue on Windows Vista as well. Clearly Microsoft really has simply given Windows Vista a new coat of paint and then had the cheek to ask full price for it.

Some people have said Windows 7 is just a service pack to Windows Vista. I've even said as much myself. However the longer my family uses Windows 7 the more I find myself having to try and fix the damn thing. I'd say Windows 7 is actually nothing more than a theme pack for Windows Vista. There is absolutely nothing new on offer here. It's not even as stable as Vista. Why is it that a disparate group of engineers and programmers spread across the world can build and OS as good and stable as Linux but yet all the money Microsoft supposedly throws into R & D can't build a half decent desktop OS.

Yes I am pissed off as I write this blog entry. Just once, just one weekend I'd like to have to myself without having to trouble shoot a Windows PC. I don't get these problems with Ubuntu. Which is what I'm switching my family to even if they don't want it. Either that or they can pay for support from a commercial repair service. I am totally sick to the back teeth of Windows. Even after I stopped using it I still find myself fixing the damn thing.

Microsoft should be ashamed of it's self. It peoples money and delivers piss poor bug infested products in return. The Windows 7 Ultimate costs around £400. For what exactly? It doesn't work any better than any other version of Windows. It's shite! A totally useless pile of shite! The sooner the majority of people stop using it. Stop putting up with piss poor products the sooner the rest of us can move on.

That includes the OEMs! Dell, HP, Lenovo, Asus, Gateway, Acer and the rest. Stop forcing this crap on your customers!

If anybody tells me Windows 7 was their idea one more time, I'm going to punch them square in the face! It seems fair. They inflicted this suffering on me. I shall repay them in kind.

Will Google Chrome OS Fail?

It might just be me. I might be biased because I'm a Linux user sick and tired of hearing Microsoft FUD about hardware support in Linux. But it seems to me as though the pro-Microsoft author of this article is suffering from a sever case of the skitters.

I mean isn't the writing on the wall for Microsoft and it's supporters? Linux is not as they claimed dead in the netbook market. It's flourishing apparently. Googles Android was not a failure as many predicted. In fact Googles smart-phone OS is gaining market share with ever increasing numbers of handsets appearing all the time while Windows is losing market share on the smart-phone.

Social media sites like Facebook are becoming increasingly important to mobile devices. So important in fact apps on smart-phones to access sites like Facebook seem to be essential features to just sell a handset. However Randall C Kennedy seems to think Googles web-centric netbook OS will fail? He thinks Linux is fatal flaw number one? A web based interface is fatal flaw number 2 and an inflexible hardware platform is also a fatal flaw.

For those reasons Googles web based OS will fail.

Personally I say he's wrong and here's why. People love Google for one simple reason. Google provides insanely useful services to people all over the world. And from the point of view of normal web users at least, those services are totally free of charge. No costs involved.

The Amazon kindle and it's ilk are the second reason. The fact that you can't upgrade a kindle the same way you can upgrade a desktop PC hasn't stopped people from buying them. The fact that the Kindle doesn't play with an iPod hasn't stopped people buying them. Even the fact that Amazon can and will delete your purchases at will for whatever reason it sees fit hasn't stopped people buying the Amazon kindle and similar devices. All of which by the way run an OS based on Linux.

But it's not the OS that's important here. It's how useful the device is to the consumer and how profitable it will be for the vendors. Get those two things right and you have a product you can sell to people with confidence. I strongly suspect netbook manufacturers will put their own spin on the basic Chrome OS user interface as they have done with Android.

Linux as a "device" OS has in fact been extreamly successful. Linux powers everything from toasters and satnavs all the way up to DVD players, smart-phones, ebook readers and beyond. None of these "devices" seem to be "failing". Consumers don't care that these devices run Linux. They just want them to work. Which is a key point Microsoft apologisers like Randall C. Kennedy always deliberately miss.

People don't care which operating system is on their PC, their smart-phone or their netbook. What they care about is, does it work? Does it let them do the things they want to do the way they want to do them? Google are answering those questions. Microsoft keep serving up more of the same.

Now it's interesting to note that while Chrome OS isn't even completed yet. Microsoft apologists have it marked as a failure. Could this be to distract attention away from the failure of Windows 7 to convert the Windows XP faithful? Windows 7 has been such a great success Microsoft and it's army of apologetic bloggers are already talking about Windows 8 arriving in 2012 (the end of the world apparently) and even Windows 9!

It's time the Microsoft faithfull woke up to reality. Microsoft just aren't going to have it all their own way any longer. At least not by playing nice.

Ubuntu 9.10: 64-bit Installation

Okay so I've just installed Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic Koala) to my desktop. It's not going great.

The first attempt was an "in place upgrade". The reasoning behind this was simple. I had a lot of notes in Tomboy Notes that I didn't want to lose. Previous experience has taught me that Tomboy Notes doesn't deal with upgrades well. However Ubuntu One has a Tomboy Notes synchronisation feature. So the reasoning was simple. Do an inplace upgrade. Upload my notes. Do a clean install later if I need to.

After the in-place upgrade was done I noticed the PC was very unresponsive. minutes pass by while I wait for the top panel menus to respond. I don't know what the issue is. But the 32-bit version running on my laptop doesn't suffer from this problem. But hey! No problem. I thought I'd just do a clean install. Same problem!

Now admittedly I did preserve my home directory. So perhaps there's some sort of conflict with my old settings. So my next plan of action is to wipe the system clean and start completely fresh. If that doesn't work I'll install the 32-bit version. Perhaps the 64-bit copy is experiencing issues? Who knows.

It's not all bad though. I have an SLI setup. Previously this would mean I'd have to use the text based installer. But this time the standard live CD handled my dual graphics cards with no issues. The installer can even deal with RAID arrays like Nvidia Stripe. It will even offer to install Ubuntu to the RAID array.

Considering very little seems to have changed on the desktop, RAID and SLI support in the installer would suggest all the big changes (if there are any) in Ubuntu 9.10 have taken place under the hood.

Edit 08-11-2009: As I suspected some settings from my previous installation were causing issues. With a 100% fresh install everything seems to be working fine. My advice is, do a 100% completely fresh install. Remember to back up your /home directory first and anything else you don't want to lose.

Ubuntu One: First Impressions

First off, what exactly is Ubuntu One? Well basically it's a file sharing and synchronisation service from Canonical. The basic package is free and provides a reasonable 2GB of storage. Canonical claims it's your personal cloud.

So my first impressions? It sucks. Canonical produces client software for both Ubuntu 9.04 and Ubuntu 9.10. However support for 9.04 seems pretty feeble. There's no Tomboy notes synchronisation for 9.04 as there is in 9.10. Which makes that feature useless if your not the type to dive in and upgrade all your PCs all at once.

Even worse however is the file synchronisation feature. It just doesn't seem to work. This being the basic concept of the whole package anybody would have thought Canonical would have gone out of their way to make this work. But it seems not.

So far I've been able to get files and indeed whole folders to upload my Ubuntu One storage space. But they don't ever seem to download to the other PC. It doesn't matter which PC does the uploading. The other PC just doesn't "synchronise" with my on-line Ubuntu One storage space.

Now the client software isn't the only way to interact with Ubuntu One. There is a web interface. But then again there are loads of places on-line for me to upload my stuff to that I can later download from using a web browser. The point and attraction of Ubuntu One is the desktop integration. Which just doesn't seem to be working properly.

Frankly I get a better service using the 50MB of free web space my ISP provides me with. It's simpler to set up as well. All I need to do is FTP into my web space from Places > Connect To Server. No software to install. No PPA to setup. Just a user name, password and FTP address. It's also 100% compatible with both versions of Ubuntu I'm using at the moment.

Perhaps Ubuntu One will work better when I'm running Ubuntu 9.10 on both PCs.

Ubuntu 9.10: First Impressions

My first impression of Ubuntu 9.10? A whole lot of people are interested. My first few attempts to download the ISO file resulted in a corrupted ISO. After waiting a few days for the traffic to calm down, I downloaded new ISOs and they work fine.

So far I've only just finished the initial installation on my Dell M1330n laptop. Since I want to take advantage of the new ext4 file system this is a clean install. To get all my applications installed and running I've created a script based on this How To from Ubuntu Forums. Personally I feel strong command line scripting is one of the greatest strengths of Linux. It just makes migrating to a new system so easy.

My laptop is equiped with an SSD. Which is why ext4 is so important to me. So far as I can work out ext4 has supposedly been optimised to work better with SSDs. Boot times are fast. Although I'm not sure if they are a massive improvement on 9.04 which was already very fast at boot time on my laptop.

Speaking of impressive boot-ups! The little animation that appears where the grub menu would normally appear is awesome. If that is the effect using Grub2 has on the overall polish to the OS then Canonical and the Ubuntu devs made an excellent choice here. It makes the OS feel like some sat down and made an effort to polish the final product rather than just make it work.

The new login screen is pretty cool. It functions very smoothly indeed. It was also a bit of a surprise. I can't remember anybody mentioning anything like that would be there. The new functionality (that I've seen so far) is purely cosmetic. However good looking OS that operates smoothly does make using PCs less stressful and irritating. It's reasuring to know that Canonical and the rest if the Ubuntu development team understands little tweaks can make a huge difference to the user experience. The fade to the desktop is very cool. Windows 7 does the same sort of thing. But over all I think Ubuntu does it better with the initial animated logo at the very start, through the updated boot screen to the very smooth new log-in screen, to the desktop. The whole thing just feels more polished than Windows 7.

The wider selection of desktop backgrounds and themes is also a welcome addition. Although I do get the feeling some of the wallpapers were grabbed off the web at random at the last minute. For some reason they just don't seem to fit with the prodominantly dark brown earthy window themes. Just five more minutes of effort could have avoided that. But it's easily fixed.

A big dissapointment was the restricted drivers manager. For some reason it just doesn't seem to work. I had to install my Nvidia drivers from Synaptic manually. Something for Canonical to work on for 10.04.

My next task is to migrate all of my personal data back to my laptop. Which won't be too hard as I don't keep much on the laptop anyway.

Update 03-11-2009: Added link to Ubuntu Forums. Forgot to do that. DOH! http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=766683

Update 04-11-2009: Some videos to make life more interesting.

PC Gamers Need To Vote!

I've just been to Dells IdeaStorm web site and submitted an idea asking Dell to help the PC gaming industry establish a long term base level of hardware to help bolster the PC gaming industry and pull it out of decline. I'll post the text of the idea below. But first let me say PC gamers need to do something to push the hardware and software industry together to establish a base level of hardware that will support all games at decent settings.

When developers develop for the Wii or Playstation they know it's a long term commitment. The hardware will be supported for at least the next 5 to 10 years. It takes on average 3 to 5 years to develop, test and polish a major gaming title. If not, then longer. Microsoft want to refresh Windows every 2 to 3 years. As we've seen with Vista there is no guarantee of backwards compatibility.

So a game which started development with one Windows platform in mind might suddenly become usless unless the developers alter the game to support the new platform. This is very costly and time consuming. We need a better solution for PC gaming than Windows!

The Dell IdeaStorm post: Establish A Base Level For PC Gaming Hardware.

Ever since games consoles could hold their own against the processing muscle of the PC, the PC gaming industry has been in decline. There are a number of reasons for this. Which I will detail below.

1) The PC as a gaming platform shifts far too rapidly for games developers to keep up with. There is no base level of hardware to target. This makes it very difficult and costly for games developers to develop for the PC.

When a games developer target the Playstation, they know the hardware spec will be good for at least 5 to 10 years. Typically it can take 3 to 5 years just to develop, test and polish a game for distribution. So an unchanging stable platform is absolutely essential!

2) Security is an issue!!! Increasingly modern games are becoming on-line affairs. We no longer pit our wits against AI. We join virtual battle with each other. However PC gamers are at a disadvantage. Windows.

Making Windows secure for on-line activities can be a costly business. PC gamers take a hit in the wallet and performance of their gaming rigs. As though Windows it's self wasn't enough of a resource hog. PC gamers need to shell out for anti-virus software, anti-malware software, spam filters and firewalls.

Now it's true all this software can be had for free. But the free versions are always crippled in some way. They're never as fully functional as their paid for equivalents. Even worse! Some malware has now started pretending to me anti-malware! Gamers who get duped risk losing their passwords and privet details. Including payment details. Credit card numbers, bank account numbers and the like. The potential for fraud here is massive!

The solution is quite simple and one the likes of Sony has been using for years now. Don't use Windows for gaming. The Sony Playstation doesn't use Windows as it's OS. But the games run just fine all the same. The graphics are excellent and the games have on-line connectivity. Nobody seems to be worried about viruses or malware.

Dell already supports Ubuntu. The World of Goo and the Penumbra Trilogy both run flawlessly on Linux and sold well. It might be an old game now but Doom 3 runs perfect with no loss of detail or functionality. Clearly Linux can handle complex and demanding on-line multi-player games.

A secure PC platform for gamers is essential! That security shouldn't bring with it a performance cost. Gamers should not be installing additional software just to make their gaming rigs secure. Linux is the answer.

3) Performance and Stability. Anybody who has played a game on Windows knows the frustration of BSODs at just the wrong moment. It's unacceptable. All gamers also know the reason they need PCs with fans so loud they are in danger of suffering industrial deafness is because Windows needs a reasonably beefy system just for its' self if its' to be responsive and sprightly.

Adding a demanding game with high resolution graphics and a web connection adds a load Windows often just can't handle. So Windows throws it's hands in the air and hides behind a BSOD. The problem is resource management. Windows just can't do it well enough.

Linux on the other hand does a much better job out of the box. No tweaking. No over clocking to squeeze some sort of performance out of the processors. No industrial refrigeration required. That doesn't mean Linux can run Halo on the BBC Micro. But it does mean more of the systems resources are freed to help the game run smoother with greater stability.

But even Linux software crashes sometimes. So what then? Well Linux crashes in a graceful manner. Normally the app will simply shut down and the user will return to the desktop. In very bad crashes the user will be kicked out to the log-in screen. However the system will almost never lock up completely in a BSOD like scenario no matter how badly the game is written.

A robust OS like Linux is essential for high-end demanding games. Linux is that OS.

Dell needs to serve its' gamers better. Help the PC industry establish a base level of hardware by producing a gaming rig and commiting to that hardware spec for 5 to 10 years. Preferably 10 years.

Choose hardware that is Linux compatible. The XPS 700 series is already Linux compatible. This will allow the industry and gamers to choose their OS. Gamers who want more security and performance can choose Linux. Gamers who want to be compatible with yesterday can choose Windows. Or we can dual boot and be compatible with everything.

Don't be Gartner Sheep!

Okay I'm confused. But since when was it written in law that people or businesses absolutely had to refresh their hardware? Surely it's good business sense to only buy what you need? Right?

Apparently not. Gartner has decided it's time we all bought new PCs. Why exactly? Well obviously because Microsoft are bring out Windows 7. Since nobody bought Windows Vista it's time we upgraded right?

Wrong! The time to upgrade or refresh is when you can predict your current IT investment is no longer going to meet your needs. How close you can wait until that time comes depends on how large your organisation is and how efficently it can move through the refresh cycle. A single person working self employed can make the transition in as little as a few hours. Larger business will take days to weeks. While other will take months or even as much as a year or more for full deployment of a new operating system.

So given that this guilt trip induced refresh can be so costly in terms of money, lost man hours and man hours expended on the refresh, what is the single most crucial question to ask? What's in it for me? What will Windows 7 deliver that other operating systems can't? Is it security? Better resource management? Cloud connectivity and integration?

Do you really want to trust a Microsoft cloud solution after the Sidekick debacle?

One of the most recently touted selling points for Windows 7 has been it's ability to run Windows XP software. This might come as a shock to some. Windows XP runs Windows XP software! But if you're running a business and you're gullable enough to follow the fasion trends the like of Gartner demand then at least look around before commiting all your money to Microsoft.

There are alternative options out there. Some other operating systems also run Windows XP software. Intall WINE on an Ubuntu desktop or laptop and it'll run most XP software just fine. It might struggle with MS Office. However OpenOffice.org comes pre-bundled with Ubuntu. For free!

So please do consider refreshing your hardware and software. But when you do. Ask yourself what your business really needs. Do you need Windows 7? Would a cloud solution be better? Could you ditch the Microsoft lock-in cycle all together and use something completly different? What software do you use? What do you use it for? Is it unique? Could you migrate? Would migration save you money? How much money? Will Windows 7 be good value for money? Windows needs licences, Ubuntu doesn't. Can you reuse your old hardware?

Can you save money on an IT refresh during a recession?

Consider your options people! Don't be sheep!

How Bad Is The Malware Issue?

Okay this is just a quick post to pose the question. Just how bad is the malware problem really? It's a fair question to ask. Indeed a very important question to ask since some pundits claim 9 in every 10 PCs sold in the world has Microsoft Windows pre-installed.

That's a lot of PCs running an OS that is not only the prime target for criminals, but has also been criticised time and again for being too lax with security. As people depend on their PCs more and more for essential basic services in modern life like banking, security becomes a major issue. One that flies in the face of conventional wisdom.

Traditionally home users have taken second place in the security stakes. Especially on the Microsoft Windows platform. Without third-party products, which cost extra to the consumer, Windows is wide open. Windows 7 clearly doesn't address this security issue. If it did Microsoft would be pushing their "Security Essentials" free product. Well at least it's free.

But back to my question. How bad is the malware issue? Well since subscribing to the Avira Anti-Virus update notifications about a year ago I've had 1573 update notifications. The vast majority of which are simply virus definition updates. None of these notifications are duplicates. 1573 from 1st October 2008 until 9th October 2009.

My advice to anybody using the web to do essential things like banking is to use a secure platform. Windows is not that platform. It's just to big a target with too many holes.