Amarok is currently available but not supported on Windows. Pulse Audio is available on Windows and supported.
Yes Windows support has been added. But it's not anywhere near the stability of the Linux versions since they've been native to Linux a lot longer. Becareful trying them out on Windows.
I'm familiar with Linux TV. There are mythtv distros out there (not that you need them now) setting up myth for the past two or three years is all point and click. I can get one setup in about 10 minutes at this point.I've actually worked with MythTV and IIRC something called LinuxTV which was an Ubuntu distro that included MythTV in it. Never could get it working really and I admit I just gave up. The thing is that I have two Windows Media Centers that work great and spending a lot of time on it just wasn't going to buy me much. Hey, you guys are the Linux gurus!
I understand what you are saying here. It's really about the choice of being able to do such a thing. If you want every solution to be a hammer if you are an avid computer user why not try it out? Plus you learn something along the way I'm sure.We'll there might not be such a thing as a Linux server but there's definitely such a thing as a desktop environment that has different needs and demands than a server. Things like battery power consumption, human machine interfaces, and bluetooth devices don't really apply to traditional servers. Not saying that they can't but why on earth would someone be worried about their web or print server running Call Of Duty (not the server, the actuall game). Not every solution is a hammer nor every problem a nail.
Never said support wasn't more expensive. There's no way that I would say such a thing. However, depending on location that's anywhere from 2 to 3 people which if they are good could support about 100 people each. That's a lot.As far the $100k, where I work hardware and software costs don't even begin to touch development and support costs. Plus where I work we get a super sweet deal with Microsoft so the acquisition costs are MUCH lower than retail. Microsoft's licensing sucks because they do confuse the hell out of people about pricing. But if you know what you are doing the costs are far lower than most Linux people will state in debates like this.
Yes you are correct here. The problem is that unless your medium sized to a large business it's very hard to get those kind of discounts. If you don't every server you purchase is almost exactly twice as expensive.Moral of the story, if you are paying retail price for MS products you are getting ripped off. You can easily get stuff at 20% or less of retail.
Look, people who love Linux love Linux. It's awesome to have such a passionate community that want to do the world a favor. I'm all for it and I have actually donated to a FOSS project, Audacity because its something I use to use a lot and thought I'd throw them $20. People need to get something for their sweat.
I just think that some in the Linux/FOSS community however just blast Windows because its cool or something. I'm all for lowering my costs. I'm all for freedom and choice, but that's just it. If I try something, it doesn't work out I move on. Sure I have my biases because I make a living working on Windows, it pays the bills. But I have to remember to have an open mind and force myself to learn about things I don't know.
So you've pointed me in the direction of Amarock, never have used it but looks kind of cool I and do plan on taking a look. Thanks!
I definitely don't bash Windows for the fun of it. I support both. So I know when to use Windows and when it' s just not worth using for something simple like a file server. The problem for me is MS doesn't realize that they can go too far with their pricing with avid computer users. I've been using their products since about Windows 2.0 / Dos 5.0, probably a little earlier but my memory gets foggy at that point.. so I know how much things used to cost, and I know when certain modules within Windows haven't changed all that much from version to version.
I started using Linux as my primary desktop probably somewhere around SP2 of Windows XP. I just got tired of the Windows Activation crap that was just making things far more complicated than they needed to be, and Vista...well that just sealed the deal for me. I'm not paying money for an OS that's not finished yet. Plus I kind of want to run 100% legal software. I don't want to download illegal software, and I don't want to steal MSDN products, and I'm just not going to pay money on something that I have to wait 6 months to a year after release to use in order to experience the level of quality a person should experience after paying that amount of money. It's a personal preference thing.