Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Steve_Barker

Greener Computers

As a green(ish) person, I believe it is important to be as green as I can, and computing obviously should be no exception.

Having read this blog for a while I have been intending to post, but have been prompted by this Press Release from the Green Party:

http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/3128

also related:

http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2851

Personally I believe that when mesuring a computers 'greeness' the origin of the operating system/software is important. MIcrosoft has a huge influence upon computing, and it is geared to making money for Microsoft. For years Microsoft have produced programs that waste computing power, and PC manfactures keep selling new bigger/faster PCs to accommodate.

This post is written on a 11 year old PC which I was advised to throw about 5 years ago because it no longer was viable for modern computing/surfing. Its still going strong because I ditched Microsoft, and it currently runs Sam Linux / Opera, and is as fast as my year old Dell with XP work inflict on me. Sticking with the Microsoft spiral this fine old computer would probably been replaced twice by now.

Further, reliance on Microsoft increases our reliance on the whims of one company, for the IT systems that control our world, and monitor our lifestyle.

Thus, I believe that Linux should be the green operating system of choice, and would encourage everyone who can to add Linux to their system, run linux from a live disk, or better still, just bin windows as their OS and use an alternative OS.

The more that Linux, and other OSs such as RISC OS, and OS2 are used, the more provision there will be for alternatives to Windows, and computing/the web will have real standards, and not just the thinking of one company.

Steve B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Linux (in one form or other) will run just about any computer going. Anything from Sega Dreamcasts, through to modern hi spec machines can all be run on LInux. Most people have a Linux machine or two about their house, most routers, many mobile phones etc. use Linux.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Linux (in one form or other) will run just about any computer going. Anything from Sega Dreamcasts, through to modern hi spec machines can all be run on LInux. Most people have a Linux machine or two about their house, most routers, many mobile phones etc. use Linux.

Yes I am aware of that. But if you look at the operating systems like Ubuntu you can clearly see they have a long way left until they can work for the average computer user.

I for example cant use Ubuntu because I need Adobe Photoshop, Macromedia Dreamweaver and InDesign in my work. And Ubuntu (for example) don't support these softwares...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if you look at the operating systems like Ubuntu you can clearly see they have a long way left until they can work for the average computer user.

Ubuntu has all the average computer user needs, it has all the things you need from an operating system, and there is software available for most tasks. I have Ubuntu on one PC, and I set it up from scratch without a problem, I do not feel it needed any technical skills, although a bit of patience was needed. Ubuntu comes as standard on some PCs now, which saves having to set it up yourself:

http://efficientpc.co.uk/

Sam Linux, which I use on this old PC set itself up without any assistance whatsoever, and comes complete with OpenOffice, Opera, FireFox, Skype, Real Player, and loads more:

http://www.sam-linux.org/

For someone wants to try Linux without commiting it to their machine I'd reccommend Sam as a live disk, running from memory only:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Sam-Linux-2007-Fa ... dZViewItem

I need Adobe Photoshop, Macromedia Dreamweaver and InDesign in my work. And Ubuntu (for example) don't support these softwares...

I would argue that it is Adobe, and Macromedia who do not support LInux. Hence, the more usage there is of LInux, the more that will be written for it.

We took the decission some years ago to not use any windows software, although some Linux users dual boot with windows for the odd piece of software they "must" have. We have found ways to do everything we need to do. I think the only Microsoft software we have is a copy of Explorer 4.5 for Mac, on our G3 which we have never opened. Some people use a program called Wine to run windows software in Linux, I have never tried this.

http: Bluefish does not have all the features, and ease of use Dreamweaver does, but it does enough for most people, and for free.

The problem is that Microsoft writes to exclude others, and keep its monopoly. The more people use non-MIcrosoft products, the more non-Microsoft products there will be:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6983196.stm

From the above news item I would guess that 2-3% Linux use on the internet would be enough to get the BBC to make a viewer, but is shying away for 0.8%.

Hence, even if you have to use Windows sometimes, the rest of the time its worth using Linux.

Steve B

PS Last weekend had a look at the brother in laws PC, it is weighed down with trojans, adware pops up constantly. For what they (a average family) use the internet, Ubuntu / Fedora SuSe etc would do everything they need and be free of such irritation.

PSS 15 years ago I did development work in the useage of GIS, and have not used GIS since, I guessed it would be a Windows/Mac thing only, but having recently looked I found good software is available. It is supprising what is out there....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ubuntu has all the average computer user needs, it has all the things you need from an operating system, and there is software available for most tasks. I have Ubuntu on one PC, and I set it up from scratch without a problem, I do not feel it needed any technical skills, although a bit of patience was needed. Ubuntu comes as standard on some PCs now, which saves having to set it up yourself:

http://efficientpc.co.uk/

Sam Linux, which I use on this old PC set itself up without any assistance whatsoever, and comes complete with OpenOffice, Opera, FireFox, Skype, Real Player, and loads more:

http://www.sam-linux.org/

For someone wants to try Linux without commiting it to their machine I'd reccommend Sam as a live disk, running from memory only:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Sam-Linux-2007-Fa ... dZViewItem

I would argue that it is Adobe, and Macromedia who do not support LInux. Hence, the more usage there is of LInux, the more that will be written for it.

We took the decission some years ago to not use any windows software, although some Linux users dual boot with windows for the odd piece of software they "must" have. We have found ways to do everything we need to do. I think the only Microsoft software we have is a copy of Explorer 4.5 for Mac, on our G3 which we have never opened. Some people use a program called Wine to run windows software in Linux, I have never tried this.

http: Bluefish does not have all the features, and ease of use Dreamweaver does, but it does enough for most people, and for free.

The problem is that Microsoft writes to exclude others, and keep its monopoly. The more people use non-MIcrosoft products, the more non-Microsoft products there will be:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6983196.stm

From the above news item I would guess that 2-3% Linux use on the internet would be enough to get the BBC to make a viewer, but is shying away for 0.8%.

Hence, even if you have to use Windows sometimes, the rest of the time its worth using Linux.

Steve B

PS Last weekend had a look at the brother in laws PC, it is weighed down with trojans, adware pops up constantly. For what they (a average family) use the internet, Ubuntu / Fedora SuSe etc would do everything they need and be free of such irritation.

PSS 15 years ago I did development work in the useage of GIS, and have not used GIS since, I guessed it would be a Windows/Mac thing only, but having recently looked I found good software is available. It is supprising what is out there....

I don't have anything against Linux or open softwares. But, I just can't use it today.

I cant do the work I need on a Linux OS. I cant play any kind of "good" and modern games on a Linux OS.

Yes, it's true that if more people use Linux more and more companies and sites will make their products compatible with Linux. But unfortunately it will be years until that happens. And it doesn't help when the above stated things doesnt work.

It is also true that Linux/UNIX operating systems are safer and has far less viruses etc. But, if you just use common sense and a good antivirus/firewall program and an up-to-date Windows OS you can feel safe. I have never had any big problems with my windows powered computer because of viruses etc.

Also, when more people use Linux/Apple more viruses will come to these aswell. Sure Windows will always be more extreme when it's built so poorly...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for the lack of reply. Just noticed this question on the end of this topic.

I like the Apple opperating system (s) both classic and OS X. I especially like the way the machine, and the OS blend to become one product, rather than having such and such a machine running....

However, I dislike Apples bussiness practices, just as much as M/soft - these become very visible where Apple has a good market position:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7011772.stm

I would rather the use of Mac software than M/soft, because it adds to diversity of software. I would not buy a new one myself, and would opt for Linux every time.

We do, however, have a high spec iMac G3 which I paid 55 GBP (111USD) - it is a good machine, and I would say third hand (possibly 4th) is Green.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I am aware of that. But if you look at the operating systems like Ubuntu you can clearly see they have a long way left until they can work for the average computer user.

I for example cant use Ubuntu because I need Adobe Photoshop, Macromedia Dreamweaver and InDesign in my work. And Ubuntu (for example) don't support these softwares...

Me too. Why are there all these different flavors of Linux anyway? Can't they settle upon 1?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Windows is the operating system Microsoft want it to be. With linux there will be a distro for whatever purpose / style you want. If you want a special job doing, adapt one.

I run Sam Linux on this 11 year old AMD because it is a light distro, Ubuntu on the Core Duo because it is a slightly fuller bodied distro, and Yellow Dog on the Sega Dreamcast, because the distro was adapted for that machine.

See Distro Watch for news and Distros:

http://distrowatch.com/

If you are looking to try Linux try Sam or Vector as Live disks, or to install try whatever is on the cover of Linux Magazine. If you are not too keen on the first distro you try, tthere are plenty more to go at!

On the issue of Software:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7143912.stm

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over the long term, processors might need to be redesigned fundamentally. Currently, processors use too much electricity. Also no one has really figured out what to do about the heat being generated, so more electricity is used to cool down heated up processors. Unless processors start consuming energy very differently, I don't think that computers can truly become eco-friendly ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0