This weekend I decided to download Mandrake Linux 8.0 and install it on an extra 6-gig hard drive I had laying around. First of all, let me say that I am a Windows VFP developer and was only looking at Linux for fun. My comments here are from the point of view of a Windows user fairly new to Linux. I've heard good things in the past about Mandrake, so I chose it, but I really have no idea how it compares to RedHat, SuSE, Debian, or other distros. My last delve into the Linux world was about two or three years ago when we installed RedHat 5.x with KDE 1.x as our file server.

IMO, Mandrake compares well with SuSE and both are well above RH when it comes to GUI user friendlyness. But, that doesn't represent a hugh gap. The next release of any of them could turn the tables. It just depends on how sloppy or good they want to be. I started with RH 5.0, upgraded through 5.1 (a dog) and then 5.2, which was barely better. So I went looking and found SuSE 5.3 and have been with it every since. 7.0 was SuSE's worst release, causing me to look at Mandrake 7.1 but SuSE was still better. Mandrake started out by taking RH distros and fixing what RH should have fixed. Mandrake became very popular on that account, but it wasn't enough to get brand recognition. So, they began what I believe was the first serious GUI install program in 7.0.

Just because a distro is good or bad one release doesn't mean it can't be the best on the next one. But, we're talking relative here, because when all is said and done, KDE or GNOME is what the user is using the most, and they works the same on all distros. Since all distros use a version of the same kernel and versions of the same GNU utlities, when you scratch any of them they bleed the same blood.

> I am totally amazed at the progress that has been made in the Linux world since then.

Me too, and it's getting better at an accelerated rate. Breath taking, and a tribute to the power of the dev tools being used and the skill of the coders.
KDE and KOffice are litterally exploding. I started dual booting Linux in May of 1997. I switched totally to Linux on Jan 1, 2000, and have standardized on KDE2 on top of SuSE 7.1 (7.2 comes out in 4 days! At give the user the ability to repartition HDs by shrinking WinXX partitions, etc...) Michel Fournier asked me to write an article on the Linux desktop and Kylix for the next issue of UT mag, out June 20th.

>
Installation was a snap. Within 30 minutes the entire system was installed, including internet and database servers, KDE and GNOME, and a ton of apps. Plus, it politely coexists with my Win2K partitions. I was worried about losing access to them, but the installation took care of everything for me.

Nice, isn't it! :) SuSE is like that. RH is getting there. Debian will become like that or disappear.

>
I was also undecided about which desktop to use, but it turns out that I don't have to decide. KDE, GNOME, and others are accessible from the login screen. I'm not sure of the extent of this capability, but it appeared I was able to run a KDE app from GNOME. I imagine the vice-versa scenario holds true as well. For the moment, my desktop choice is KDE. GNOME looks prettier, but Eazel's Nautlus file manager was slow on my machine. KDE just feels more stable and lightweight. However, I would not be surprised if GNOME turned out to be the "standard", if such a thing will exist in the Linux world.

KDE started out using TollTech's QT widget set, which was propriatary. Miguel D. Icaza started a counter movement resulting in GNOME, using CORBA because of a future vision of cohabitation with WinXX but primarily because QT was not GPL. Later, QT-Free under GPL was released, eliminating that complaint. KDE has been steadily developing and releasing. GNOME has been going in fits, lots of output, lots of press releases, delays.... Then Eazel came along and lots of money and press was generated. KDE and GNOME began discussions about making co-habitiating applications. KDE responded by adding CORBA for GNOME enteroperability with apps and vias-versa. KDE uses DCOP and KParts, too. Meanwhile, developers using KDevelop and other tools have begun releasing a deluge of apps in all areas that run under KDE, and GNOME.

Eazel and GNOME blew through over $1 Million US with nothing to show for it except Nautilis, which isn't even done, IMO. KDE has dropped CORBA integration, and has moved on to QT-3.0, which includes data-aware widgets and QT-Designer integrated in. Truely amazing. Kylix uses a version of Qt-3.0 too.

>
My major complaint is that application installation is still somewhat of a pain when compared to Windows apps. RPMs help out a lot, but there is still some work to be done in this area. I suppose I am spoiled by the fact that I can download a self-installing executable from the web, or that my wife can pop in a CD and install it in Windows. My experience (or lack thereof) so far, is that it's not that easy in Linux yet, but I don't expect this to be a problem for much longer.

Under KDE, RPM installation is just about 'installshield' as you can get. The program to use is KPackage. As root, double-click on the rpm or right-mouse and select KPackage. When it opens up check the appropriate checkbox (install, upgrade, remove...) and click the install button!

Using tar files is a little more bothersome and not always successful. Tars won't gracefully tell you they can't find a required app unless you do the "./configure" step, whereas KPackage and rpms tell you when something is missing and prevent install.
To install tar files the steps are:
./configure
(some have make info here)
make
make install

To uninstall:
make uninstall

Installing tar files are Klutzy to be sure. That's why I prefer RPM's.

The advantage of tar file installation, as apposed to RPMs, is that apps installed from tar files usually run via dynamic access to the .so libraries, creating small binaries, whereas RPMs usually install large binaries which included static libraries. When you were short on memory and HD space tar files made a lot of sense, but in this age of nearly TeraByte drives and GigaByte memories RPMs are the route to go. RPMs also eliminate the hassle of library two programs trying to dynamically access the same library, but one is looking for one version and the other is looking for a higher version of it. A real rock and hard place.




>
Another small problem is the number of choices available for applications. Mandrake installed four web browsers, two office suites, and at least two of just about every other generic application. I guess this is a good problem to have, and is indicative of the Linux mentality.

Problem? Feature! :)
I have Netscape 4.7, Mozilla 6.0, Netscape 6.0 (now removed), Konqueror, StarOffice's web brower, Lynx and several others. Each has an advantage, but I spend most of my time using Konqueror because it is light and fast and runs 99% of the webs sites I hit, except those with WinXX propriatary asp or some java versions, and has other features I'll mention in my article.

I have three different CAD programs, all great! Two astronomy programs, one world class and the other very good. I love the choices.

>
If you're like me and have been concentrating on Windows development, it may appear that Linux has hobbled along with two minor point releases since 2.0. Nothing could be further from the truth. Linux has come a long, LONG way recently. Don't listen to MS propaganda. Linux has proven to be a formidable opponent on the server, and within the next couple of releases will demand the same respect on the desktop.

You got that right! Some say the server war is over. I don't know. The threat to the desktop is one reason why MS pulled out the big guns in the last three weeks to began a direct frontal assults on anything and everything associated with Linux. But, it's like trying to nail jelly to a wall.
First, MS is fighting against the strategy they used to defeat Netscape: give the software away and 'leverage' their monoply on the desktop. They have nothing to leverage with in Penquin land. Secondly, how do you fight the GPL? Call it communistic and un-American? Like Robber Baron, EULA and the MCDMA is "American"? Confuse it with OpenSource, as Mundie and Ballmer have been trying to do, with little success? Too technical. Folks eyes glaze over when you get into the legal jargon. Call it a virus? Since one doesn't have to assign software to the GPL nor do they have to use GPL software, if there is an 'infection' it is self-administered. Compare that with Kerberos, for example. Now, there is 'virus software' of the kind Ballmer been complaining about. You install W2K and give it some network room and what do you know... it want's to take over the network. "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish"... Now that's a virus. And people understand the difference, too, when they read about it or experience it.

>
Now if we could just get MS to port VFP to Linux... I know, I believe that it is very feasible technically, but politics would never let it happen.

One of my dreams, too. But I agree that it will never happen if it is up to MS. However, there are some GPL projects out there that are attempting to create a DBF dev environment. There is also a QT based KBasic project!

Hopefully, Borland will post a trial version of Kylix so that we MS developers can get a peek at the other side. One thing is for sure, Linux has captured my attention.

I took advantage of their price promotion and purchased the Dekstop Edition for $199. If you like easy 'InstallShield' installs then you will love Kylix's installation app. It is a version of Loki Games install program.

With Data-aware controls available via dbExpress and other widgets, plus the ability to do ODBC connections, plus something like 'intellisense' but not as intrusive, and a ton more... Kylix has leap frogged VFP6 and 7, IMO. It has object menues, object action edtiors (new action existing action -- existing actions are predefined and all code and images pop into your project and form automatically) object image editors, and files are still ascii text for easy version control. The compiler doesn't leak bad code. You can copy, inherit or use objects, and if you use an create a decendent the ancestor chain doesn't pop into your object manager the way it does in VFP's project manager, setting around waiting to be damaged. The CLX widget set (made with Qt-3.0) includes SOURCE and can be edited. CLX stands for Xross platform Component Library.

If you use Delphi6+CLX to write and app Borland guarantees you can compile it in Kylix without code changes, and via versa. In fact, they delayed the final Delphi6 release to make sure it was totally compatible with Kylix.

As an old Pascal programmer I have to tell you I am in love with Kylix!
JLK