What to do??? Need everyones input

[Joe1962]

As a sidenote, any Core Duo chip will beat the pants off a hyperthreaded P4 of 3.2 GHz and more. Now if you were referring to Core 2 Duos of over 3 GHz, that's something else, but I'm not sure right now if the desktop dual core's are already at those clock speeds.

[never_stop_learning]

The MadTux laptop certainly has sufficient processor/RAM/HDD/etc. resources to accomplish the task at hand. I agree with GrannyGeek that you can get more machine for less money at one of the 'big box' outfits.

HOWEVER..... Does it enhance Vector's relationship with MadTux to purchase the laptop from them since they are offering computers with Vector pre-loaded?

[metvas]

I, strongly agree. Cannot ignore those who partner with us. The cost would have to be substantual otherwise. A deal is a deal only when everyone wins.
Regards
Darrell

[GrannyGeek]

I am assuming here but 1.6 GHz should be ancient to them. They will not have to purchase new computers as their's will be, "newer", than my new one. That is the whole idea to show to non-techies a 1.6 GHz can compete with a 3.2 GHz with Linux installed.  That they will understand.

But if they already have 3 GHz computers, why should they care that a slower computer can compete? It's irrelevant to them.

I'd concentrate on showing that they can do the same things on a Linux machine as they can on Windows. Then go into the practical advantages, such as that you don't have those license restrictions that make you buy a copy for every computer and that you have much more safety in the dangerous world of viruses, worms, trojans, and spyware. Stress the multiuser aspect--they can set up user accounts for their children that won't allow the kids to mess up the whole computer if they click on the wrong thing, and the kids can't modify and delete system files.

Do let us know how it goes when you actually make the presentation.
--GrannyGeek

[metvas]

OK here is the beginning of it. They will have their machine on and running probably Windoze XP. I will boot into windows XP in front of them. Then re-boot into Vector wireless working and all.
Ask them to open Word X app. then I open OO. We llookk at the various features each one has and how oo can produce anything Word can.open save and close do this a few times with different apps. Then send them an email it with an oo attachment the attachment probably won't open with XP in any format other than Word format. Then they send the same email but with the .doc in OO format and it opens with OO running Linux. From there they have participated and visually experienced something odd. That is where we can begin to explain some of the features of MS Word as not being open software and proprietary. Vector Linux is open source and  not proprietary. This would make it a lot easier for someone not tech savvy to understand  what is being presented to them. All this on a processor that is half the speed of their own, talk about costs, talk a lot about that ,talk about how they may very well be running Linux based software on their servers, Apache. How Vector Can breath life into machines they would think obsolete. Remember these are businesses even though they may be not for profit or Government, they must perceive this presentation as professional, polished, worth their time and worth exploring further. That will be the protocol they expect to be treated by
That is it.

I have thought about this for a long time. How to communicate a complex subject to a no- tech person. So there I made my first presentation. To you, albeit abridged radically. How did you like it.
Regards
Darrell

[The Headacher]

It is not a slow processor! You can't just trick everybody by saying "hey, this is a 1,6 ghz laptop" without mentioning it's a dual core, that's just not right.

It's like saying "this Mazda Rx-8 has only a 1.3 liter engine" without mentioning it's a Wankel engine, which produces some 250 horse power because it works different than a normal piston engine.

Just because you don't plan on talking to techies doesn't mean you won't occasionally run into one, they might not be tricked by this deceit.
If you want to show them just what VL can really do, compare vl to xp on a p3 700 or something (lower would be acceptable too, but the presentation might take too much time ).

Please understand I do support what you're trying to do, and I'm sure it's going to work out just fine .
You are in a far better position to judge what is needed or not, but you asked for input remember ?

[Triarius Fidelis]

I think in a standard install of VL the cpu speed will be not a factor, everything with more than 1.6ghz and 512mb of Ram will work fast as ligth. May be you should focus in that wireless card and the hole chipset compatibility. Just my 0.00002

My recommendation (if there really will be a full GB of DDR RAM), is to run Xfce4, or something even lighter like IceWM or WindowMaker, and show how many programs can run concurrently without dragging the system down. It's not at all an esoteric metric; there have been instances where I had a number of applications open in XP at school. And in Winders, it tends to slow down pretty fast.

[metvas]

There is no need to apologize for putting your thoughts down here, none. How else could I get a "feel", for all of this without others input. It is not supposed to be the same as mine, that is how you get feedback to examine your original idea with.
If I was fearful of criticism and feedback + or - this forum would not exist. Nor in all probability VL in its present model.
Thanks for taking the time. I would never have thought of that.
regards
Darrell

[GrannyGeek]

Ask them to open Word X app. then I open OO. We llookk at the various features each one has and how oo can produce anything Word can.open save and close do this a few times with different apps.

Be careful about that "produce anything" part. I don't use Word and I have a great dislike of OOo and use it only when I have no other choice, and my uses are not very demanding. However, judging by what I've heard from others who are heavy users of Word and have also worked with OOo, there *are* some things Word can do that OOo can't. Also, OOo users report that OOo doesn't open *every* Word doc accurately, so it's best not to be too emphatic about the equivalence of Word and OOo. Better to say "most" rather than "all."

Then send them an email it with an oo attachment the attachment probably won't open with XP in any format other than Word format. Then they send the same email but with the .doc in OO format and it opens with OO running Linux. From there they have participated and visually experienced something odd.

Here you've lost me. If you send an OOo attachment in OOo's format, Word won't open it. But so what? How many OOo attachments is the average office user likely to get? What they get are DOC attachments, which is why OOo and any other MS Office alternative has to be able to open DOC documents.

The elephant in the room, which you've completely ignored, is that OpenOffice is available for WINDOWS as well as Linux, and I dare say there are probably many more Windows users of OOo than Linux users. So what you're demonstrating is the usefulness of OOo regardless of platform. You're not making a case for Linux by this OOo demonstration. Someone who has OOo installed in Windows can do the same thing.

In fact, as I was thinking about the programs I use most often in Linux, I noticed that most of them are also available for Windows: Opera, Firefox, SeaMonkey, OOo, SoftMaker Office (TextMaker and PlanMaker), Scribus, Gimp, Inkscape, Picasa, RealPlayer, Adobe Reader. If I were not a Linux user and didn't know much about Linux, you wouldn't convince me to take a look at Linux by demonstrating the advantages of applications I can use in Windows if I want to. And unless the Linux application did things my Windows application couldn't, I wouldn't see any reason for changing because I wouldn't want to go through a new learning curve.

The real value of a demo such as you describe is that it shows that Linux is not an alien world, that the user can work pretty much the same way he or she does in Windows, that the screen looks familiar and is attractive, that documents produced in Linux can be easily shared with Windows users and vice versa.

All this on a processor that is half the speed of their own, talk about costs, talk a lot about that ,talk about how they may very well be running Linux based software on their servers, Apache.

Apache isn't really "Linux based software." It's *open source* software, which is not the same thing. There are free downloads of Apache for Unix and for Win32.

It would be dishonest to mislead folks by implying that "open source" means "Linux." Showing that open-source software can do the things they do every day, do it well, and do it in a familiar, non-geeky way is the first step. The next step is explaining why Linux has advantages that make a move from Windows worthwhile.
--GrannyGeek

[Triarius Fidelis]

Ask them to open Word X app. then I open OO. We llookk at the various features each one has and how oo can produce anything Word can.open save and close do this a few times with different apps.

Be careful about that "produce anything" part. I don't use Word and I have a great dislike of OOo and use it only when I have no other choice, and my uses are not very demanding. However, judging by what I've heard from others who are heavy users of Word and have also worked with OOo, there *are* some things Word can do that OOo can't. Also, OOo users report that OOo doesn't open *every* Word doc accurately, so it's best not to be too emphatic about the equivalence of Word and OOo. Better to say "most" rather than "all."

Well, Word can't produce PDF, and PowerPoint can't produce SWF. MS Office is not really a superset of what OO can do.

[metvas]

Hi:
Please try to remember that not a lot of folks even know OO exists, let alone be familiar with it. Little bit like the net. Last time I heard this was about six month ago. "80% of the population of the planet does not even know it exits."
Remember new users. Not experienced in either Windoze or Linux. As for Apache, one quantum technology leap at a time would probably be the best route. No smoke and mirrors here just facts. Shown SIMPLY...
Regards
Darrell

[Triarius Fidelis]

Hi:
Please try to remember that not a lot of folks even know OO exists, let alone be familiar with it. Little bit like the net. Last time I heard this was about six month ago. "80% of the population of the planet does not even know it exits."
Remember new users. Not experienced in either Windoze or Linux. As for Apache, one quantum technology leap at a time would probably be the best route. No smoke and mirrors here just facts. Shown SIMPLY...
Regards
Darrell

Of note:

Apache runs significantly better under the platforms for which it was originally intended.

[rbistolfi]

Another sidenote about the MS Word thing: the scenario will change with the Office 2007 release. This a complete makeover  of the suite with a lot of improvement. I think Office will be the true weapon of MS and not Vista. The more significant change is the famous change in the file format, the great weakness of the older releases, made over the base of open source formats!

[GrannyGeek]

Please try to remember that not a lot of folks even know OO exists, let alone be familiar with it.

I understand that. My point was that demonstrating OOo isn't making a case for Linux because OOo is available for Windows, too. Switching to OOo doesn't mean someone has to change their operating system.
--GrannyGeek

[GrannyGeek]

Well, Word can't produce PDF, and PowerPoint can't produce SWF. MS Office is not really a superset of what OO can do.

Free PDF creators are readily available for Windows and using them is simply selecting the PDF creator printer driver. But even if they weren't, OOo's PDF creation ability is also in the Windows version. It's not just a Linux thing, and thus is not an argument for switching to Linux.
--GrannyGeek