What OS/Browser are you using at AR? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : What OS/Browser are you using at AR?



nightflier
05-02-2007, 09:21 AM
I thought I would start a poll asking what people were using to post here. Specifically:

1. What OS/Desktop?
2. What browser?
3. What Audio player?
4. Sound Editor?
5. Any other interesting computer-AV integration (light controls, Logitech Harmony, etc.)?

My answers:
1. OS: MS WinXP during the day, Xubuntu Linux in the evenings
2. Browser: Firefox
3. Player: Quintessential & Amarok
4. Editor: Audacity & Ardour
5. Other: none yet, but that may be coming.

Rich-n-Texas
05-02-2007, 09:52 AM
...But I'll tell you anyway. ;)

1. XP @ work and home.
2. Internet Explorer @ work and Crippled IE at home.
3. WMP, or iTunes, or my soundcard's s/w.
4. N/A
5. N/A at this point.

My next computer upgrade will be integrated with my TV & AV receiver.

kexodusc
05-02-2007, 10:07 AM
I thought I would start a poll asking what people were using to post here. Specifically:

1. What OS/Desktop?
2. What browser?
3. What Audio player?
4. Sound Editor?
5. Any other interesting computer-AV integration (light controls, Logitech Harmony, etc.)?

My answers:
1. OS: MS WinXP during the day, Xubuntu Linux in the evenings
2. Browser: Firefox
3. Player: Quintessential & Amarok
4. Editor: Audacity & Ardour
5. Other: none yet, but that may be coming.

1. OS: I use Ubuntu Linux in three varieties, and in in this order of frequency of use: Ubuntu (Gnome) Kubuntu (KDE) and Xubuntu (XFCE). Mostly Ubuntu and Kubuntu. For the non-Linux users, you can set up your system to intall multiple OS's yet share the same settings and files on the same machines without much fuss - uses less disk space than Vista, too! I also use a few other Linux distros to tinker around with when I have time just out of curiousity, but I'm satisfied with Ubuntu. At work I use both Mac OSX, and WIndows XP. My wife's new computer has Vista on it, and I use that once in a blue moon.

2. Browser: Mostly Firefox, some Opera and as little IE as possible.
3. Player: Amarok and VLC
4. Editor: Audacity - not very often though
5. Nothing yet.

nightflier
05-02-2007, 10:54 AM
I think I'm being set up...But I'll tell you anyway.

I'm not trying to judge anyone here - just curious about what's out there with the AV crowd. I'm a big Linux fan, that's no secret, but I know it's not for everyone. The OS debate can go on elsewhere; live and let live...

Rich-n-Texas
05-02-2007, 11:19 AM
You forgot to include the wink icon when you quoted me...

I'm completely unfamiliar with Linux; I use XP only because, in my case I have to, so there's no debate from my POV.

Feanor
05-02-2007, 12:34 PM
I thought I would start a poll asking what people were using to post here. Specifically:

1. What OS/Desktop?
2. What browser?
3. What Audio player?
4. Sound Editor?
5. Any other interesting computer-AV integration (light controls, Logitech Harmony, etc.)?

....

My answers:

WinXP SP2, day and evening
IE 6 daytime; IE 7 evenings
iTunes latest version, or Foobar2000 v0.9.4.2
Nero OEM -- haven't really used it.
None

herm0016
05-02-2007, 01:20 PM
1. XP pro
2. firefox 2
3. itunes, windows media
4. logic or wave burner ( at the studio on campus)
5. not really. hooked up with digital to a yamaha receiver.

emorphien
05-02-2007, 01:33 PM
1. What OS/Desktop?
Well that's a bit tricky. I have a number of computers at my disposal. My new home desktop is a homebuilt running Vista 64 Ultimate. I also use XP Pro on laptops and have OSX Tiger on my Mac in my office.

2. What browser?
Firefox for the most part, but I am starting to play with Opera more. I don't think I'll be switching fully but it may be a good secondary browser.

3. What Audio player?
Winamp & Foobar (sometimes Windows Media Player) in Windows and iTunes (begrudgingly) on my Mac.

4. Sound Editor?
I have used Audacity, that's about it. Forgot about CDEX and EAC for ripping CDs.

5. Any other interesting computer-AV integration (light controls, Logitech Harmony, etc.)?
I do have a Logitech Harmony 880, which I have not installed or setup on my new computer. I would have to wake my old desktop up from hibernation to make changes to the Harmony and I may keep it that way. I'm contemplating some sort of wireless bridge to my stereo. A modded Xbox takes care of playing music on the home theater.

PeruvianSkies
05-02-2007, 04:39 PM
I thought I would start a poll asking what people were using to post here. Specifically:

1. What OS/Desktop?
2. What browser?
3. What Audio player?
4. Sound Editor?
5. Any other interesting computer-AV integration (light controls, Logitech Harmony, etc.)?



1. Mac OSX Tiger
2. Safari
3. iTunes
4. PeakExpress
5. I just use Logitech speakers and sub, they get the job done for work purposes.

nightflier
05-03-2007, 11:50 AM
Wow, are Kexo & I the only Linux users out there? Say it isn't so...

'Nice to see we have an even mix of Win & Apple out there. Anyone running Windows on a Mac?

Feanor
05-03-2007, 12:05 PM
Wow, are Kexo & I the only Linux users out there? Say it isn't so...

'Nice to see we have an even mix of Win & Apple out there. Anyone running Windows on a Mac?

Consider:

Windows = cheaper hardware + expensive OS + largest number of apps
Mac = expensive hardware + OS + a few apps
Linux = cheapest hardware + free OS + a few apps.So where does that leave me vis a vis Linux? Hummm ...

Lack of popular software -- I have to run multiple OS or at least Windows emulator. So does the advantage vanish?
Learning curve, especially stuff like security -- not true? Convince me otherwise.

Woochifer
05-03-2007, 12:33 PM
1. WinXP Pro SP2 at work and on my laptop, Mac OS X Tiger at home

2. Firefox on all, IE only if absolutely necessary

3. Real Player Plus, iTunes (podcasting and radio only), and Winamp on the PCs; iTunes on the Mac; and VLC Media Player on all

4. Real Player Plus (for format encoding and conversion) and Cakewalk Pyro (for editing and crossfading) on the laptop, still trying some of the iLife apps on the Mac (only had the Mac for a month)

5. nothing especially interesting yet, although I have been doing wireless media streaming from the Mac to my laptop since the Mac has a much larger capacity hard drive. Plan to eventually move the media files onto a NAS device and use a wireless media player with my main system.

kexodusc
05-03-2007, 12:46 PM
Learning curve, especially stuff like security -- not true? Convince me otherwise.[/LIST]
Don't think you'll ever hear anyone argue the transition from windows to Linux is simple, fast, and completely painless for every application. Nope, it's going to require hours of learning. How much? Who can say. If you just use email, a web browser, and media player, maybe an hour or two.

You're right, more apps are supported on Windows.

But the learning curve - geez, I cannot think of anything else I've ever done on a computer that was quick and easy to learn really...including OS X or MacOS. After a few weeks of exlusive home use, you're almost as functional with Linux as you were with Windows, and you'll know where to look to get the answers to most of your questions. Put in 1% of the time you've spent working on Microsoft's Operating Systems, and you'll be a wizard.
The desire to learn has to be there. If you get frustrated with Linux because it doesn't work like Windows, well, you should just stick with Windows. If you just want to keep using Windows because you know how Windows works and can't be bothered to learn a new computing methodology, that's your choice. Some people prefer to spend as little time on a computer as possible. I can respect that. Learning a new OS probably isn't high on the priority list.

Before Christmas the only Linux experience I had was an older version of OpenSuse and Novell's proprietary stuff. They sucked so I never really stuck with it. Until the Christmas 2006 incident. Then I put Linux back on the computer. In about 3 weeks I completely replaced 90% of the functions I use my computers for.
There's only a few things I haven't bothered to learn that I still use Windows for are setting up my home network for file sharing (because any wireless connection on my property that visits undoubtedly has Windows, and the rest of the time it's just not a big deal. I could do all the wireless home networking stuff through Linux, just haven't developed a need to bother trying yet. The rest is just 2 programs I run with a Windows Emulator. There are Linux based alternatives to these programs, but I prefer the Windows apps. Not Windows, just the program. But they run fine on my Linux OS using an emulator.

There's an unbelievable amount of quality software available to Linux. Much of it is programs you know from Windows. What specifically do you need that is make-or-break for you?

As for security...if security is a big concern for you than you should ask yourself why you haven't already migrated from Windows to Linux.

For most people, if they wanted to put forth a bit of effort and get off the Windows addiction, they could. In a fraction of the time it took them to become familiar with Windows. But, it's just much easier to not try, or to think up reasons to talk themselves out of it.

nightflier
05-03-2007, 01:19 PM
Wooch,

I didn't want this thread to become an OS debate, but I will say that my personal reason for using Linux at home is the exact opposite of what you always hear about it: Linux is actually far more secure, has far more choices (in apps as well as configuration), and it is easier to install and use. Oh, and yes, I'm also super-cheap, so the pay-as-you-go software model just wasn't for me.

Anyhow, my apologies if I went too far off-topic.

recoveryone
05-03-2007, 01:51 PM
I thought I would start a poll asking what people were using to post here. Specifically:

1. What OS/Desktop?
2. What browser?
3. What Audio player?
4. Sound Editor?
5. Any other interesting computer-AV integration (light controls, Logitech Harmony, etc.)?

1. Win XP home SP3
2. IE 7
3. MusicMatch 10 mainly
4. Roxio Creator 9/MusicMatch 10
5. Squeeze Box 3 wirelessly connected to network and connected via optically to AV with server in garage running Slim server, OS Win NT Pro, wireless connection to network 900+ tunes on 2nd drive 20gighd,

Smokey
05-03-2007, 02:17 PM
Since my computer is 8 years old...

1. Win98 SE
2. IE 6
3. WinMedia Player 9, Real Player 8 (Found later versions of RP too bugy)
4. Computer Speakers: Altec Lansing satellites with 6 inch woofer.

Feanor
05-03-2007, 03:42 PM
Don't think you'll ever hear anyone argue the transition from windows to Linux is simple, fast, and completely painless for every application. Nope, it's going to require hours of learning. How much? Who can say. If you just use email, a web browser, and media player, maybe an hour or two.

You're right, more apps are supported on Windows.
...
The desire to learn has to be there. If you get frustrated with Linux because it doesn't work like Windows, well, you should just stick with Windows. If you just want to keep using Windows because you know how Windows works and can't be bothered to learn a new computing methodology, that's your choice. Some people prefer to spend as little time on a computer as possible. I can respect that. Learning a new OS probably isn't high on the priority list.
...
As for security...if security is a big concern for you than you should ask yourself why you haven't already migrated from Windows to Linux.

For most people, if they wanted to put forth a bit of effort and get off the Windows addiction, they could. In a fraction of the time it took them to become familiar with Windows. But, it's just much easier to not try, or to think up reasons to talk themselves out of it.

I'm not averse to learning stuff but it's worth only so much effort. I've tried Linux three time in the past, but given up each time. The last time it was a the security issue, i.e. not the actually security but the admin of the security. I set up an account under one tool, then another account under another tool. Guess what? The two tools used slightly different security strategies and they weren't quite compatible: it took me about three hours to sort out that mess.

Here's the heck of it: I design computer applications for a living. Nothing as sophisticated as operating systems, of course. However for my audience, they have to utterly intuitive to learn and use. At the end of the day (literally), I lack the patience to learn a new way to do something I'm already doing another way.

kexodusc
05-03-2007, 03:50 PM
I'm not averse to learning stuff but it's worth only so much effort. I've tried Linux three time in the past, but given up each time.
Yeah...me too until this time. You might like Ubuntu..they've really simplified things for dummies like me...

I even run it on my Mac.

PeruvianSkies
05-03-2007, 04:36 PM
Anyone running Windows on a Mac?

Ewwwwww.

Rock789
05-03-2007, 05:39 PM
1. What OS/Desktop? XP professional
2. What browser? FireFox
3. What Audio player? windows media player / winamp
4. Sound Editor? n/a
5. Any other interesting computer-AV integration (light controls, Logitech Harmony, etc.)?
running toslink out to a Denon DA-500

nightflier
05-04-2007, 04:40 PM
Recoveryone,
I've been intrigued by the Squeeze Box for a while now, particularly since it tunes Internet Radio streams w/o a PC. Just out of curiosity, I didn't know it had wireless networking, or did you buy an additional adapter. Also, is the remote RF?

PeruvianSkies,
Ewwwwww? OK, let me rephrase the question, anyone use something besides OS X on their Mac? LOL ;)

Feanor,
If you're a programmer, I can't think of a better platform to program on. There are more programming tools available on the Linux platform than on any other, and most of them are free.

Smokey,
Can you even get online with Win98 anymore? You must have one heck of a firewall.

Feanor
05-04-2007, 05:12 PM
...

Feanor,
If you're a programmer, I can't think of a better platform to program on. There are more programming tools available on the Linux platform than on any other, and most of them are free.

....

I'm not a programmer, I'm a system analyst, so I tell programmers what to do, (sort of). :) :biggrin5: :cornut:

recoveryone
05-04-2007, 09:50 PM
Nightflier, The Squeeze box 3 comes with built in network ablilty and has a cat 5 port if you want to hard line it or use it as jump port to something else. The remote is RF too.

nightflier
05-07-2007, 10:26 AM
Recovery, but how do you make the Squeeze box 3 wireless?

mlsstl
05-08-2007, 05:09 AM
The Squeezebox 3 originally came in a Cat-5 only version that was a bit cheaper than the version that also included wireless. They now sell the combo version only.

When you initially setup the player, you can select ethernet or wireless as well as other variables (such as static IP or DHCP, etc.)

nightflier
05-08-2007, 10:07 AM
mlsstl, recoveryone, thanks for that info. I'll be checking it out. Any suggestions on where to get a good price?

recoveryone
05-08-2007, 10:18 AM
The only places I know is the Slim Device web site or Ebay (thats where I got mine, brand new). I suggest you go read the forums so you will have a ideal of what to look for and ideals on how you may want to have it set up. And most important get inside knowledge of possible problem that you may run into.

mlsstl
05-08-2007, 10:25 AM
The normal price is $300. Right now Slim Devices is selling the white SB3 for $250 and they have a special offer for another $20 off using the promo code "LIVE365" so that's a pretty good deal. I think the deal ends the end of May. (I've come real close to buying a second for backup but just can't quite justify it since I have no immediate use for it.)

Also check out the forums over at Slim Devices - http://forums.slimdevices.com. Pretty much any question you may have about a Squeezebox has likely already been asked and answered.

brulaha
05-08-2007, 02:59 PM
I've always used IE. Why do others migrate to other browsers and say that they only use IE when necessary? I'm just curious. Am I missing out on something, and if so, what?

Woochifer
05-08-2007, 04:57 PM
I've always used IE. Why do others migrate to other browsers and say that they only use IE when necessary? I'm just curious. Am I missing out on something, and if so, what?

I went to Netscape 7 (based on Mozilla 1.7) and then Firefox because they offered up tabbed browsing and built-in pop up blocking, ran faster and more reliably, and they chewed up less in the way of system resources. With IE6, it just ran slower and if some poorly written Active X plug-in or website crashed the browser, it would often take down more than just the browser since IE is so embedded into the OS. If I crash Firefox, I simply restart the program and it gives me the option of restoring my previous session if I want (very handy if you had multiple tabs open when the browser crashed).

The only time I ever use IE is when I need to use a site that has Active X controls (e.g., Microsoft Update). If a site is simply unreadable with Firefox, I might e-mail the administrator and let them know that I ain't visiting their site until I can actually read the content.

Now that Microsoft has finally updated IE to include tabbed browsing and pop-up blocking, they made IE7 more bloated than ever and changed the user interface in ways that make it less intuitive. I never migrated away from IE because I've always used alternative browsers as my default (Netscape, Opera, Mozilla, and now Firefox). Between IE6 and IE7, those browsers simply didn't give me any compelling reason to switch. The constant security concerns about IE give me further pause.

kexodusc
05-09-2007, 12:15 PM
Wooch nailed it.

IE is embedded in the OS, and presents a back door the size of the house to security threats. Boo that.
Reliability, stability, and conformity with internet standards could be a few other reasons to switch.

Besides, Firefox is orange and IE is blue, and everyone knows orange is better than blue

emorphien
05-09-2007, 01:56 PM
I used netscape for years over IE because I liked the interface and security as well as some of the other features. I eventually switched to Firefox when it matured some and have been using it since. Tabbed browsing now in IE (I have to admit I've used IE7 some and it is nice) still doesn't catch it up to all the other features I can add to Firefox.

Opera has a lot built in that Firefox doesn't (and as a result a lot of it works better) but I just prefer Firefox to Opera still.

kexodusc
05-10-2007, 04:00 AM
Opera has a lot built in that Firefox doesn't (and as a result a lot of it works better) but I just prefer Firefox to Opera still.

I dunno if that's really true though. Opera out of the box has a few features that Firefox doesn't, but Firefox seems to offer every feature that IE, Opera, Safari, and other browsers offer with their add-ons (widgets, thumbnail windows, etc) and a lot more.

I use to love Opera back when it was a more compact, streamlined program. Firefox just seems to offer a bit more everything now though.

Feanor
05-10-2007, 05:56 AM
With the number of Linux and Mac, Firefox or Opera users around here I'm feeling like a contrarian using WinXP and IE 6/7. :confused5:

Yet I know it these people who are the contrarians, not I.

emorphien
05-10-2007, 06:11 AM
I dunno if that's really true though. Opera out of the box has a few features that Firefox doesn't, but Firefox seems to offer every feature that IE, Opera, Safari, and other browsers offer with their add-ons (widgets, thumbnail windows, etc) and a lot more.

Uhh, reread it. That was my point. Opera has features built in that Firefox doesn't. I never said you couldn't add them to Firefox. The problem is a lot of the extensions are RAM hogs and not always as elegantly programmed and efficient as Opera which has it all built in and runs a lot of them more smoothly.

kexodusc
05-10-2007, 06:23 AM
Uhh, reread it. That was my point. Opera has features built in that Firefox doesn't. I never said you couldn't add them to Firefox. The problem is a lot of the extensions are RAM hogs and not always as elegantly programmed and efficient as Opera which has it all built in and runs a lot of them more smoothly.

No need to reread anything. You said "and as a result a lot of it works better". I don't find that the case at all, Firefox allows you to use what you want and not bother to install the rest. Less bloated if desired which I find keeps Firefox running faster. This very obvious on my older P3 machine. Guess it depends on the degree of customization you apply. If you're one of those nuts that installs every single add on, well, you're going to get bogged down pretty fast.

As for RAM hogs, a few may be, I've yet to run into that on either browser (except some widgets and 3rd party amateur stuff). The only thing I've noticed is Firefox to consistently run a bit faster and smoother than Opera. Especially with Linux or MacOS.

I loved Opera back when it was a no-frills, slim trim web browser. Now, I rank it somewhere between IE and Konqueror. The only reason I still use it is because I haven't figured out how to save/load mutliple tab-bookmarks like Opera can. Though I'm told Firefox stole that ability in the latest version.

emorphien
05-10-2007, 07:22 AM
You can set your "homepage" to open multiple tabs, bookmarks may be the same way but i haven't tried it (try separating the URLs with the | symbol).

As far as in OSX, I find Opera to be faster/more responsive and even on Windows it's a little smoother at times but not drastically. I have a lot of addons on my Windows systems for firefox, some giving it features Opera has and others being things neither has without extensions. The core of firefox, as with Opera, works quite well (Opera still handles RAM better in my experience, I've never seen anything other than Firefox inflate to 1.5GB ram usage) but Opera includes more clever features out of the box and hardly feels bloated.

Hell opera has a built in mail client but it never gets in your way, in fact a lot of people never notice it being there. I'd probably switch, but I'm more comfortable with firefox. I don't know many people that use Opera, but those that do praise it's responsiveness and page rendering.

brulaha
05-11-2007, 07:01 AM
Okay....wow....based on this lovely community's advise, i switched to Firefox. I'm impressed. It really is a lot faster, and the spell check is pretty cool too, hence why you can read this post with our any of my many spelling errors. Thanks for the advice.

nightflier
05-11-2007, 12:33 PM
Brulala,

Any other cool PC-Audio/Video integration technologies in use?

brulaha
05-12-2007, 05:19 AM
Brulala,

Any other cool PC-Audio/Video integration technologies in use?

No...not really. I did find a cool web site yesterday called last.fm, which if you subscribe to (which is free and painless), will allow you to type in a favorite artist and they will stream music which is similar in content. The track list they played when i typed Elton John was really diverse and intriguing. For example, they played some new Madonna, Old school Stevie Wonder, Lynard Skynard, Beatles, the list went on and on.

Unfortunately, I'm not into this hobby as much as i used to be. I built my system, and now i use it, but I don't seek out new things anymore. So I just cruse by here every once and again to stay up to date.

I do have to say, however that i miss the P&B pub, and watching a beer go through the plate glass window every Friday night. That will take you back for you old timers.

jocko_nc
05-12-2007, 09:53 AM
I've been using Firefox for quite some time as well. I basically hate using any product from MS, their methods are so insidious and they always have an alternate agenda. IE is a bloated pig that I do not trust, from a company that I do not trust.

I cannot stand the fact that my computers have been progressively hijacked over the years. I am still running Windows XP on this computer only because it is quite new, less than a year. Otherwise, its Linux for me and no looking back.

I began using OpenOffice a couple of months ago on this computer and I like it. It feels good to make the break away from MS.

I think the era of monopolistic software and their BS revenue streams is coming to an end.

jocko

audio_dude
05-12-2007, 10:00 AM
1. I use Fedora Core 7, sometimes Ubuntu/Kubuntu. But XP home for gaming.
2. Firefox 2, I won't touch anything else with a ten foot pole.
3. I don't really listen to much from my PC, but I just use whats built into fedora.
4. audacity
5. well, right now our livingroom stereo has a Yammie HTR-5890 hooked up to a pair of Mission m35i's and the source is mostly radio, but the PC for CD's. ( this will change soon as the receiver will be moved to start a hometheatre, and a new amp and CD player will be purchased.)


On the linux debate: well, I started experimenting with linux a couple years ago, got to know it pretty well. tried OpenSuSe, Knoppix, Ubuntu, Fedora, plus about a thousand other specialty ones (BlueFlops, full linux w/graphical browser on two diskettes!) and I eventually settled on Fedora and sometimes Ubuntu/kubuntu. I still have to use winxp for my gaming needs as i really don't have the urge to set up an emulator.

As for the quantity of programs available for linux, other than games, I'm ready to say it outclasses even windows, not in quantity, but for what you can get, especially for free. Sure, sometimes it may take a day or two to hunt down all the nessesary dependencies to install a particular program, but that doesn't bother me. Although this wouldn't be nessesary if I did the full installation...XD

Feanor
06-26-2007, 06:04 AM
Yesterday I download and tried out Apple's Safari 3 (Public Beta) for Windows.

This babe is really fast. Loads snailish AR pages a lot faster that Internet Explorer 7 that I've been using for a while. Problems is that does handle all eBay features or Yahoo Mail Beta which I use.
...
http://www.apple.com/ca/safari/

Robert-The-Rambler
06-27-2007, 10:24 AM
I'm using Windows XP SP2.
Netscape 8.1
Listening to upconverted MP3 with Creative Mediasource Player
(A Zelda 3 remix that sounds great in 7.1 at 24bit 96khz)

I always listen to some kind of music when I check out Audioreview. It is mostly videogame remixes blaring through my Onkyo 804 and 8 Behringer EP2500s. I use my full setup for everything.

emorphien
06-27-2007, 01:15 PM
Yesterday I download and tried out Apple's Safari 3 (Public Beta) for Windows.

This babe is really fast. Loads snailish AR pages a lot faster that Internet Explorer 7 that I've been using for a while. Problems is that does handle all eBay features or Yahoo Mail Beta which I use.
...
http://www.apple.com/ca/safari/
For the most part I've heard it's pretty bad. I'm in no rush to try it because I don't care for Safari on a Mac to begin with.