RoboGeek

Installing Java on Ubuntu, and why Linux? In earlier postings on this weblog I'd described having installed Java 1.5 on Ubuntu 5.10.  There's a page in the Ubuntu wiki site that describes what to do, and I merely followed the instructions there.  I noticed a posting earlier today by TripLeM about his Java 1.5 installation on Ubuntu 5.10.  What he did is exactly what I did and is more-or-less what's on the Ubuntu wiki site.

FWIW, a couple weeks ago I tried the same method to install the current Mustang build.  It failed in the make-jpkg step.  I gather that between "fakeroot" and "make-jpkg" the JDK installer is being run, but in a way that makes it think it's being run as "root".  As "root" the install script tries to touch some files in /etc which it can't do because it isn't really root, and we wouldn't want it to touch those files anyway.  I'm wanting to see if something can be done so Mustang can be installed on Ubuntu.  Ubuntu/Debian is not a supported platform for Java, but it would still be cool if there were a simple way to get it installed there.

I noticed that "ebernie" had followed up to TripLeM's posting, and had asked "Is there a need to move to Linux".  Well, Bernie, I can only give you my answer, but I'll also note that my home computer runs Mac OS X.  I have Linux/Ubuntu for my work laptop, and OS X for my home laptop, and nary a Windows machine in sight.  Why?  Basically because of viruses, instability, fragility, nit-picky little incompatibilities between hardware and software, having to waste so much time learning how to configure BIOS settings, etc...

You might think "Oh, he works for Sun, and he's been smoking what Scott's been feeding him".  Actually, for me it's the other way around.  I joined Sun (and the Java team) because, at the time, it was the home headquarters of the anything-but-Microsoft camp.  My dislike of Windows stems from what I said above, and predates working for Sun.

I've owned several Windows computers, am relatively comfortable using Windows.  Heck, I have even studied the Windows source code (in a former job I was porting bits of Windows source into the MainWin product).  But what really soured me of Windows was realizing how much of my life was being wasted chasing stupid little inconsistencies in the hardware/software configuration of the computer.  I was spending more time keeping my computers stable than getting any work done.  There was something wrong with that picture, and the thing that was wrong is spelled W-I-N-D-O-W-S.

Since switching to this Mac laptop, I've been a zillion times more productive.  The Mac is so completely reliable and has taken zero fiddling because it just works.  I've learned (as a relative Mac newbie) that "It just works" is the Apple mantra.  Call me a satisfied customer.

But that doesn't answer if/why one should switch to Linux.  Actually I have not settled that question myself.  For my needs at work Linux is the fallback choice.  First, I work mobile often enough to need a laptop.  Second, Sun won't buy me a Mac laptop.  Third, even if they did, my job requirements include Solaris, Windows and/or Linux, and we have no need for Mac use in my department.  Fourth, I'm not going to run Windows on the work laptop if I can avoid it, so that leaves either Solaris/x86 or Linux.  Ubuntu Linux is my current experiment, but if I may switch to Solaris or some other Linux distribution.

Actually I have a somewhat hard time recommending Linux.  The problem is largely that the same stupid little inconsistencies that drove me nuts with Windows also exist for Linux.  I think it's partly because of the x86 hardware environment, that the bits and pieces come from so many different vendors and there isn't enough compatibility.  It seems every time you turn around, there's another driver or something to locate and install, which to me just seems to be a total waste.  And this is true regardless of it being Windows or Linux.

But with Linux there's another twist.  All the distributions are nigglingly different.  So when you go looking for advice on how to configure X or Y or Z or whatnot, you'll find a HOWTO or two or three, but none of them will be for the distribution you have.  Instead the HOWTO will be talking about files not present on your system, or configuration tools you don't have, or maybe you do have them but something is different about the way it's handled on your system, etc.  Which just leaves me frustrated to no end.

And it's not like I'm a newbie to Linux.  The first Linux system I installed was in 1993 (downloaded 20+ slackware floppies, and installed them on a laptop, etc).  In those early days there was a consistency that doesn't exist today.


(2005-12-31 22:22:56.0) Permalink Comments [2]