Open source takes advantage of abandoned hardware

Of the popular desktop operating systems (Windows, Mac OS, and Linux), Windows has a commanding lead. Mac OS is a distant second, and Linux -- on the desktop -- is a far distant third. Yet Linux has one advantage over Windows and Mac OS.

This advantage was made real to me when I dusted off an old 2006-era MacBook. It is in good condition, and due to Apple's design, still serviceable. Yet it ran Mac OSX 10.4 "Tiger", an operating system that Apple abandoned several years ago. Not only has Apple abandoned the operating system, they have abandoned the hardware. (The good folks at Apple would much prefer that one purchase a new device with a new operating system. That makes sense, as Apple is the in the business of selling hardware.)

Microsoft is not in the business of selling hardware (keyboards and Surface tablets are a very small part of their business) yet they also abandon operating systems and hardware. An old Dell desktop PC, sitting in the corner, runs Windows XP and cannot upgrade to a later system. Microsoft has determined that the processor, memory, and disk combination is not worthy of a later version.

So I have an Apple MacBook that I cannot upgrade to a later version of Mac OS X and a desktop PC that I cannot upgrade to a later version of Windows. While the MacBook was able to run a later version of Mac OS X, those versions are not available. The current version ("Yosemite") won't run on it. The desktop PC is "maxed out" at Windows XP.

Here is where open source has a foothold. Apple will not supply an operating system for the MacBook -- not even the original version anymore. Microsoft
will not supply and operating system for the old Dell desktop PC -- not even the original version. Yet Linux can run on both machines.

I have, in fact, replaced Mac OS X on the MacBook with Ubuntu Linux. I'm using the new combination to type this post, and it works.

Many people may casually discard old computers. Other folks, though, may revive those computers with open source software. Over time, the market share of Linux will grow, if only because Apple and Microsoft have walked away from the old hardware.

Installing Windows 8 is not always easy

I think Microsoft is missing a useful tool for would-be Windows 8 users.

The tool I am thinking about is a compatibility checker for PC hardware. I have an old PC and I am considering Windows 8 for it. My big question is: Will Windows 8 run on it?

I would prefer an answer to that question before committing to the purchase of Windows 8.

The Microsoft web site is very good about listing the requirements for running Windows 8. They specify a processor speed, memory, and disk space. Those are easy (for me) to verify. Microsoft also mandates that the graphics card be a "Microsoft DirectX 9 graphics device". That requirement is not so easy to verify.

The PC in question is a vintage Dell Optiplex GX-280 desktop PC. I'm pretty sure that it predates DirectX 9.

Given the difficulties in verifying hardware, I would think that a utility would be available. Something small and simple, that would run and say "yes" or "no". Yet I find no such utility.

Now, there are utilities that you can run on existing Windows systems and these utilities check the hardware and your current applications. They assume, however, that you are already running a version of Windows.

Did I mention that my PC is *not* running Windows? Did I mention that my PC is running a variant of Ubuntu Linux?

That means that I cannot run the Microsoft-supplied, Windows-only, compatibility checker utility.

From what I can see, my only option is to attempt to install Windows 8, use the activation code (it's the first thing that the install program requires), and hope that Windows finds my system acceptable. That's a risk (in money and time) I would rather not take.

This approach is very different from most Linux distros, which allow one to run Linux in "live" mode from the CD (and not touching your hard drive) to verify compatibility.

I don't know that Microsoft needs a "run off the CD" mode for Windows. The option to verify hardware would be nice -- perhaps as the first step of the install, and before the activation code. Such an option would let me confirm my installation before committing.

If not part of the install program, perhaps a stand-alone utility that runs under Linux. (Perhaps even an open source utility!) Something one could build with gcc and run from the command line. It doesn't have to be fancy -- since anyone using it would be a Linux user with sysadmin experience. (If you're installing a new operating system, you're a sysadmin.)

Perhaps Microsoft considered this capability, and decided against it. Such capability does add to the complexity of the setup disk. As a practical matter, most PCs will be running Windows, and configurations such as mine are a very small minority. I could easily see Microsoft choosing to invest the effort in other directions.

Yet I cannot help but think that in today's market Windows must compete against Mac OS and Linux. Tools to assist people converting from non-Windows to Windows might be a good idea.

The post-PC era is about coolness or lack thereof

Some have pointed to the popularity of tablets as the indicator for the imminent demise of the PC. I look at the "post PC" era not as the death of the PC, but as something worse: PCs have become boring.

Looking back, we can see that PCs started with lots of excitement and enthusiasm, yet that excitement has diminished over time.

First, consider hardware:

• Microcomputers were cool (even with just a front panel and a tape drive for storage)
• ASCII terminals were clearly better than front panels
• Storing data on floppy disks was clearly better than storing data on tape
• Hard drives were better than floppy disks
• Color monitors were better than monochrome displays
• High resolution color monitors were better than low resolution color monitors
• Flat panel monitors were better than CRT monitors

These were exciting improvements. These changes were *cool*. But the coolness factor has evaporated. Consider these new technologies:

• LED monitors are better than LCD monitors, if you're tracking power consumption
• Solid state drives are better than hard drives, if you look hard enough
• Processors after the original Pentium are nice, but not excitingly nice

Consider operating systems:

• CP/M was exciting (as anyone who ran it could tell you)
• MS-DOS was clearly better than CP/M
• Windows 3.1 on DOS was clearly better than plain MS-DOS
• Windows 95 was clearly better than Windows 3.1
• Windows NT (or 2000) was clearly better than Windows 95 (or 98, or ME)

But the coolness factor declined with Windows XP and its successors:

• Windows XP was *nice* but not *cool*
• Windows Vista was not clearly better than Windows XP -- and many have argued that it was worse
• Windows 7 was better than Windows Vista, in that it fixed problems
• Windows 8 is (for most people) not cool

The loss of coolness is not limited to Microsoft. A similar effect happened with Apple's operating systems.

• DOS (Apple's DOS for Apple ][ computers) was cool
• MacOS was clearly better than DOS
• MacOS 9 was clearly better than MacOS 8
• Mac OSX was clearly better than MacOS 9

But the Mac OSX versions have not been clearly better than their predecessors. They have some nice features, but the improvements are small, and a significant number of people might say that the latest OSX is not better than the prior version.

The problem for PCs (including Apple Macintosh PCs) is the loss of coolness. Tablets are cool; PCs are boring. The "arc of coolness" for PCs saw its greatest rise in the 1980s and 1990s, a moderate rise in the 2000s, and now sees decline.

This is the meaning of the "post PC era". It's not that we give up PCs. It's that PCs become dull and routine. PC applications become dull and routine.

It also means that there will be few new things developed for PCs. In a sense, this happened long ago, with the development of the web. Then, the Cool New Things were developed to run on servers and in browsers. Now, the Cool New Things will be developed for the mobile/cloud platform.

So don't expect PCs and existing PC applications to vanish. They will remain; it is too expensive to re-build them on the mobile/cloud platform.

But don't expect new PC applications.

Welcome to the post-PC era.

The Future of your Windows XP PC

Suppose you have one (or several) PCs running Windows XP. Microsoft has announced the end-of-life date for Windows XP (about a year from now). What to do?

You have several options:

Upgrade to Windows 8: This probably requires new hardware, since Windows 8 requires a bit more than Windows XP. If you want to use a touchscreen, you are looking at not upgrading your PC system to Windows 8 but replacing all of the hardware.

Windows 8 uses the new "Modern/Metro" UI which is a significant change from Windows XP. Your users may find the new interface unfamiliar.

Upgrade to Windows 7: Like Windows 8, Windows 7 probably requires new hardware. You are replacing your PC, not upgrading it. (Perhaps you keep the monitor, mouse, and keyboard.)

The UI in Windows 7 is closer to Windows XP, but there are still changes. The user experience is quite close to Windows XP; the system administrator will see the changes.

Switch to Mac: Instead of upgrading to Windows 8 or Windows 7, you can switch to an Apple Macintosh PC running OSX. This requires new versions of your software. Now you are replacing hardware and software, hardly a simple upgrade.

The user interface and administration of OSX is different from Windows, another cost of conversion.

Switch to Linux: Instead of upgrading to a version of Windows, you can switch to Linux. This is one option that lets you keep your current hardware. There are several Linux distros that are designed to run on limited hardware.

The Linux UI is different, but closer to Windows than Mac OSX, and can be tuned to look like Windows. Software may or may not be a challenge. The major browsers (except Internet Explorer) run on Linux. LibreOffice can replace Microsoft Office for most tasks. Commodity software be replaced with open source packages (GIMP for PhotoShop, for example). The WINE package can run some Windows applications, so you may be able to keep your custom (that is, non-commodity) software. (Or perhaps not; some software will run only on Windows.)

Keep Windows XP: This option may be missing from some consultant recommendations, but it is a possible path. There is nothing that will prevent you from running your existing hardware with your existing software. Windows XP has no self-destruct timer, and will continue to run after the "end of life" date.

But staying with Windows XP has costs. They are deferred costs, not immediate costs. They are gradual, not sharply defined. It is the "death by a thousand cuts" approach. You can keep running Windows XP, but small things will break, and then larger things.

Here's what will probably happen:

You get no updates from Microsoft, and you don't have to apply them and reboot Windows. You may think that this is an improvement. It is, in that you don't lose time applying updates. The downside is that your system's vulnerabilities remain unfixed.

As other things in your environment change, you will find that the Windows XP system does not work with the new items. When you add a printer, the Windows XP system will not have a driver for the it. When your software update arrives (perhaps for Adobe Acrobat), the update will politely tell you that the new version is not supported under Windows XP. (If you are lucky, the update will tell you this *before* it modifies your system. Less fortunate folks will learn this only after the new software has been installed and refuses to run.)

New versions of browsers will fail to install. Stuck with old browsers, some web sites will give you warnings and complaints. Some web sites will fail in obvious ways. Others will fail in mysterious and frustrating ways -- perhaps not letting you log in, or complete a transaction.

Problems are not limited to hardware and software -- they can affect people, too.

Job candidates, upon learning that you use Windows XP, may decline to work with you. Some candidates may decline the job immediately. Others may hire on and then complain when you direct them to work with a Windows XP system.

Windows XP may be a problem when you look for system admins. Some may choose to work elsewhere, others may accept the job but demand higher rates. (And some seasoned sysadmins may be happy to work on an old friend.)

It may be that Windows XP (and corresponding applications) will act as a filter for your employees. Folks who want newer technologies will leave (or decline employment), folks who are comfortable with the older tech will stay (or hire on). Eventually many (if not all) of your staff will be familiar with older technologies and unfamiliar with new ones.

At some point, you will want to re-install Windows XP. Here you will encounter difficulties. Microsoft may (or may not) continue to support the activation servers for Windows XP. Without an activation code, Windows XP will not run. Even with the activation servers and codes, if you install on a new PC, Microsoft may reject the activation (thinking that you are attempting to exceed your license count). New hardware presents other problems: If the PC uses UEFI, it may fail to boot the Windows XP installer, which is not signed. If the PC has no CD drive, the Windows XP CD is useless.

You can stay with Windows XP, but the path is limited. Your system becomes fragile, dependent on a limited and shrinking set of technology. At some point, you will be forced to move to something else.

My advice: Move before you are forced to move. Move to a new operating system (and possibly new hardware) on your schedule, not on a schedule set by failing equipment. Migrations take time and require tests to ensure that the new equipment is working. You want to convert from Windows XP to your new environment with minimal risks and minimal disruptions.