Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
TurboLinux Businesses

TurboLinux 10f Review - PowerDVD on Linux 32

Posted by michael from the vroom-vroom dept.
BootLinux writes "The first review of TurboLinux 10f has been posted by Flexbeta. TurboLinux 10f is the first Linux distribution to include a commercial DVD player, PowerDVD. It also bundles Microsoft licensed media codecs and the ability to connect with Apple's iPods. With the addition of these and other multimedia applications is it safe to say that Linux is finally a conteder in the desktop market?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

TurboLinux 10f Review - PowerDVD on Linux More

TurboLinux 10f Review - PowerDVD on Linux

Comments Filter:

  • Now (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ann Coulter ( 614889 ) on Thursday July 29, 2004 @10:39AM (#9831418)
    all we need is for games to be available for Linux. I would very much like to play Far Cry on Linux. That is about the only thing, oh and Diablo 2, that I use Windows for. I wish they would support multiple channel audio output on more Linux media players. I brought a Klipsch 5.1 and I get the feeling that I'm only using a 2.1. Anyway, I hope that PowerDVD has multiple channel support. I wonder if UT2004 can be made to do multiple channel audio with an Audigy. I would pay big money, $200, to be able to use the extra 3 channels.
    • Well, UT2003 uses OpenAL (i assume UT2004 also uses OpenAL)

      OpenAl can be made to use 5.1 with something like:

      (define devices '(alsa))
      (define speaker-num 5)
      (define alsa-out-device "surround51:0,0")
      (define alsa-in-device "hw:0,0")

      in your ~/.openalrc file.

      • OpenAL configs are in scheme? Sweet jesus.
      • Putting my windows hat on here, and looking at the subject, "Is linux ready for the desktop?"...

        When you have to write that many lines of configuration data in a text file to do something that windows does out of the box, linux is not ready for the desktop.

        • Re:Now (Score:1)

          by torpor ( 458 )
          When you have to write that many lines of configuration data in a text file to do something that windows does out of the box, linux is not ready for the desktop.

          duh. all that is needed is for a linux distro vendor to set that up for you, then linux will do it out of the box.

          windows has just as many 'weird config item options to be put into files' as linux does. the difference is, microsoft makes the assumption that you want this done for you ... linux distro's typically don't make this assumption.
          • Yes! All that is needed is a linux distro vendor to set that up for you. That would work.

            But you're acknowledging my point and ignoring it all at the same time (something quite common in the linux arena).

            So what you're saying is : Microsoft does all the config work for you, and it works most of the time. Linux doesn't do any of the config work for you, the Linux developers assume you want to wade through lines of text files instead.

            Why do you think Microsoft is winning with people advocating such god

            • Re:Now (Score:1)

              by torpor ( 458 )
              Microsoft is "winning"?

              Seems to me, a common characteristic of Windows weenies is to miss the point completely.

              This is not a football game.

              Windows vs. Linux is a straw man ... Linux exists for its own sake, not to defeat Windows, not to compete with Windows, not to have, really, anything to do with Windows at all.

              That commercial technology press and other enterprises choose to pitch things in this dialectic light doesn't detract from the fact, at all, that Linux exists entirely for its own sake.

              Yes! A
              • These are all valid points. Linux is an excellent operating system in it's own ways, it has some very good strengths in the server space. But you're completely ignoring the original assertion, which is, "Is linux ready for the desktop?"

                When we ask this question, we are immediately asking whether Linux can compete with Windows for the desktop real estate. The question is all about whether Windows or Linux is a more suitable desktop operating system. To suggest otherwise is to suggest to people that they

                • Re:Now (Score:1)

                  by torpor ( 458 )
                  is linux ready for the desktop?

                  linux is ready for the desktop. it can be used, on the desktop, by users, to productively work.

                  distributions of linux, may or may not, be appropriate for the desktop.

                  there is a huge difference. as long as folks ignore the technological facts and continue to base their evaluation of linux as a productive system on substantive 'communal reality', then linux may not be used so much on the desktop ...

                  once you set linux up, and it is running, it works. and works. and works

  • Jesus man (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by override11 ( 516715 )
    Linux has been a contender in the desktop market for a long time now.
    For anyone with more than 2 brain cels to rub together....

    There has been software to real DVD's on linux for a long time now, and if you really want to download and get all your media files in a cruddy DRM file format from Microsoft, then you deserve your fate. Make OGG files and live free. :)

    • Re:Jesus man (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Ann Coulter ( 614889 ) on Thursday July 29, 2004 @11:04AM (#9831723)
      This is different. I think that having corporate support behind DVD viewing in Linux legitimizes it more. No longer are we using DeCSS based software in this case. We are now using a commercial product that even the media companies (film studios) support to a degree. I think this is a very good thing that Linux is getting support in an area where it has become criminal in the past. I would recommend the preexisting media players, such as mplayer and xine, over PowerDVD because of stability, ease of use, and performance. Of course, I've never used PowerDVD on Linux before. In any case, I hope that more companies back up Linux in these ways, instead of excluding Linux because of whatever reasons they might have.
      As for two brain cels, I can tell you that that's almost enough for a motile being. I forgot the exact number, but some worms have very very small central nervous systems indeed. You can't do anything with only one, but with two, you can communicate and control even more nerve cells. Heck, a jellyfish doesn't have a brain, just a nerve net.
      • This is different. I think that having corporate support behind DVD viewing in Linux legitimizes it more. No longer are we using DeCSS based software in this case. We are now using a commercial product that even the media companies (film studios) support to a degree.

        The problem with viewing DVDs is not the lack of proprietary applications playing them but the lack of legal Free Sofware DVD player. One proprietary app isn't what I call support behind watching DVDs on a Free OS. I continue to use illegal
    • it's about legality, the dvd players available for linux may work and be excellent but that doesn't make them anymore legal, at least not enough for anyone with 2 brain cells to take the risk that they don't get squashed for _selling_ an unlicensed dvd player.

    • "For anyone with more than 2 brain cels to rub together...."

      These are exactly the type of comments that can keep people away from Linux. Don't remember the Mac vs. PC wars before Windows 95 came out? I do. Every time some smug Mac fanatic had some smart ass comment to make, it drilled another nail into Mac's coffin. Nobody wanted to be like those elitist Mac fanatics. The jerks.

      Piece of advice to Linux fanatics out there: Don't promote the stereotype that non-Linux users are stupid. Not everybody
    • Linux has been a contender in the desktop market for a long time now.
      For anyone with more than 2 brain cels to rub together....

      I remember back when I had an Amiga, writing scripts in arexx, working with the CLI. I went to a Commodore users group, and some people didnt even know what the CLI was. They could load games from floppy and play, no setup, no tweaking drivers, etc. They didnt even use the desktop, it was a game machine only.

      This is the original joe six pack/mom test, and to be honest, Linux/BSD
      • Truthfully, in our business why would we care if we have DVD capability? We have 40 LTSP network boot workstations that run great sans-dvd support.

  • No. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ArmpitMan ( 741950 ) on Thursday July 29, 2004 @11:15AM (#9831819) Homepage
    No! It's not! Stop! Please, God! No more!

    "It plays my DVDs out of the box" is not what will make Linux on the desktop work. What makes the desktop work is the antithesis of open-source and UNIX philosophy. The desktop is not about describing your task with small tools that do one thing well, it is about performing your tasks with large tools that are designed around performing related sets of tasks. Linux hackers are bored with this problem. They don't want to bother.

    What Linux needs to succeed on the desktop is a thriving community of user interface hackers led by a Steve Jobs visionary-type. Linux has nothing to attract such people. Linux, in fact, has plenty to turn these people away, from a community that thinks the Gnome and KDE wars are good because it promotes choice, and that X is a good UI solution because you can download window manager themes with penguins and hot anime babe backgrounds. These people run screaming to their Macs. Their Macs understand them.

    What is missing from the Linux desktop is not features. Linux does a tremendous job of having lots of features. What it does not have is any concept of the situations in which its users might use these features. It doesn't care; if you can do something, how can it be broken? You're just too lacking in hacker spirit to figure out how it works.

    Uncle Grandma is never going to have enough hacker spirit to figure out how it works. If Free Software is to solve every problem in the world, it will recognize that. But -- here's a radical idea for you -- maybe Free Software and the Hacker Ethic aren't good at everything! Maybe it shouldn't solve every problem in the world! Perhaps some problems just don't fit will with the Open Source philosophy! Perhaps Linux will never catch on as a mainstream option for the desktop! Perhaps this isn't even a horrible, blasphemous thing!

    • While you make some great points, I must point out that some open source project [gnu.org] don't even try to be small , do-one-thing-well programs.

      Free software doesn't necessitate programs or projects being small. Just look at the freaking kernel. The strength in free software is flexibility.

  • No. (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by windside ( 112784 )

    Is it safe to say that Linux is finally a conteder in the desktop market?

    Absolutely not. It may, however, be a contender.

    [Cue rotten tomatoes]

  • *NOT* the first review by far... (Score:3, Informative)

    by LinuxLasVegas ( 680130 ) on Thursday July 29, 2004 @11:39AM (#9832136)
    Mad Penguin [madpenguin.org] holds that honor. They published back on the 25th [madpenguin.org]. Better review IHMO.
  • No, not unless Microsoft bought TurboLinux and released it. Folks, this is a classic monopoly, there is no way to compete against it. If you start to make inroads they will either (1) buy you out and flush you, (2) lower the prices to the point where you cannot possibly compete, (3) intimidate their existing customers to think that there will be retaliatioins if they go with you. Forgetaboudit, M$ won, get over it.

    • (1) buy you out and flush you

      Okay. Hard to buy out that which isn't proprietary and, thanks to the GPL, can't be retroactively closed.

      (2) lower the prices to the point where you cannot possibly compete

      a) It's hard to beat free, although they're trying to do the TCO dance and make it look not-free. But apples-to-apples, Linux is free, Windows aint.

      b) According to Linus, Linux already isn't competing. It's just trying to be the best little OS that it can be for whoever uses it. In fact, in the lon

  • I agree that a better "desktop" linux will give more users the possibility to try it and will get more developers in the future, and so on.

    The problem is that Linux is not only "a free alternative to windows". Thanks to the open source philosphy we had better software for "free" (as in beer).

    The problem is not the availability of software. There's plenty of commercial software or free software that plays dvds. The problem is that software has to be free as in beer. No free software means monopolization of
  • What linux really needs to succeed on the desktop is mainstream OEMs selling preconfigured machines. I'm not talking about walmart, i mean Dell, HP, hell even Emachines need to sell linux based computers, and i'm not counting servers. Then we will have truly taken off

  • This version seems to run exactly like the Windows version. The only differences I found between the Linux version and the Windows version are that I cannot get the custom skins from Cyberlink's website to work on the Linux version, and double-clicking on the screen in Windows will switch the window to fullscreen, whereas in Linux, clicking on the window will hide the controls (under Windows, you cannot hide the controls).

    This is a bunch of hooey. On windows, clicking the window does hide the controls

  • Not a Contender for the Desktop (Score:3, Insightful)

    by b-baggins ( 610215 ) on Thursday July 29, 2004 @02:36PM (#9834701) Journal
    As long as reviews contain lines like this:

    Fortunately, TurboLinux utilizes the /etc/sysconfig directory to hold most of the system settings, so it is very easy to configure the network by just using a text editor.

    Linux is not ready for the desktop.

    As long as reviewers keep saying that it is very easy to configure the network by just using a text editor, Linux will never be ready for the desktop.

  • This is *it*! Linux is finally ready for the desktop.
  • is it safe to say that Linux is finally a conteder in the desktop market?

    What and just THROW away hundreds of upcoming Year of Desktop Linux stories?
  • I know I'm a day late, and I don't care. I clicked through to this article, something I didn't find in the top two or three screens of comments I browsed. The site hosting this "review" formats their pages with banner ads (bearing scantily-clad women, advertising some "matchmaking" service), then about a 3" deep layer of article content, then a discussion thread. There were 8 pages, but I only saw the first few. In three pages, I saw about 5 short paragraphs of text (the size of this comment), no pictur

Slashdot Top Deals

Two can Live as Cheaply as One for Half as Long. -- Howard Kandel

Close