I know that we are officially a week away from the end from our 30 Days of GNU experiment, but I think it might be best to call it a day right now. We here at the Free Line have a few big projects in the works, and these “specialized” GPL beauties will just end up interfering with them. With that said, here we go:

Our little pulls into port battered, but still surprisingly resilient. Although there are still some parts of this “test run” that gave us a hard time — Evolution and K-Meleon, I’m looking in your direction — it was still a generally worthwhile endeavor.  That being said, there is still one part of this whole ordeal that still seems to be eluding people, and that is the very nature of the word “free.”

On the surface, the word is simple: if you get a legal, full featured application without having to pay anything, then that application is free. If it costs money, then it isn’t. Things get muddled a bit, however, when the words “how much” are thrown into the equation. In the minds of many, only a program that bares its source can truly be considered “free.” Sure, that shiny new copy of  Windows Live Mail or even Garage Band might appear to be free, but the closed off nature of the code is making you rely on the folks at Microsoft and Apple, respectively. A program like Evolution is free, but that is only because I have the ability to “take a peek under the hood,” as they say. In essence, it all breaks down like this:

When a program is given away at no cost to you, said program is considered to be “freeware.”
When a program and its source code is given away at no cost to you, said program is considered to be “free.”
When an organization and/or corporation charges for an application, but still gives the source code away for free, said program is still considered to be “free.”

While the strategy mapped out above might appeal to a programmer or to a person who likes the idea of “community involvement,” it tends to leave the average user out in the cold. It is our experience that “normal people” prefer performance, not the ability to stare blankly at pages worth of source of code. It is for this reason that we have to call our little “run with the GNUs” a marginal failure. Don’t get us wrong: we fully support of using GPL-supported programs. Applications such as Firefox, OpenOffice.org, and even aMSN are standard tools in our arsenals. It’s just that limiting ourselves to only GNU-approved applications left us angry and frustrated. Our advice is simple: use the free software that appeals most to you. It doesn’t matter if the code for it is kept on a website or on some protected server in Redmond. If you like it, use it. It’s as simple as that. Do this, and you’ll be happy. We guarantee it.

As we mentioned in yesterday’s post, it seems as if 95% of the tech world has two things on their collective minds: smart phones and Twitter. Since I think we have covered Twitter, Twitter clones, Twitter apps, and that goofy “Twitter apocalypse” thing that didn’t really happen to death, we are going focus on the wonderful world of mobile phones. But as you might have already guessed, I am going to do more than just merely “talk” about these phones. I will actually give one of these lucky mobile devices a thorough going over, making sure to tell you everything that you would ever need to know. Let’s face it: “smart phones” such as these could very possibly be the future of mobile computing. If your business isn’t ready for it, you could find yourself in very, very hot water. It is our duty, nay, our mission to make sure that this does not happen to you. Before we begin however, I do have a few notes:

Note #1: While the iPhone is definitely on my “smart phone” shortlist, we will not be doing a write up about it in this post. The reasoning for this is simple: anyone who is anyone already knows about it. We don’t know about any of you, but none of us here are necessarily fans of regurgitating common knowledge.

Note #2: The touchscreen Blackberry that Verizon peddles is all but out of the equation. First of all, it’s a Blackberry. Aside from the touchscreen, there really isn’t much different between the new phones and old “trackball” versions from last year. Secondly, I am not a big fan of Verizon Wireless. While their overall network is a bit better than the competition, it doesn’t justify the bloated, overinflated price that they charge. In short, I can get better equipment at a cheaper price. ‘Nuff said.

…With all of that laid out, here we go…

G1 (Dream)/G2 (Magic)/MyTouch 3G

Manufacturer: Google (OS); HTC (Phone; more phones from other companies will be arriving at some point in the near future)
Cell Network (US): T-Mobile
Open Source?: Yes.
Positives: Having been able to actually use this phone, I have to say that this phone’s biggest asset is the Android operating system. It has more of a feel of a scaled down desktop OS instead one designed for a mobile device. The ability to run a few third-party applications in the background doesn’t hurt things either.
Negatives: there’s something about the physical phone hardware than I just don’t like. It feels “cheap” and really isn’t all that much to look at. If I do decide to go with this phone, I will wait until the myTouch 3G is released in August.

Palm Pre

Manufacturer: Palm
Cell Network: Sprint
Open Source?: Yes
Positives: Palm is finally back. This is the phone that loyal users have been waiting for for quite some time now. While some might be upset at the loss of “classic” Palm OS software library, most will find the available apps to be suitable replacements. (A “classic OS” emulator is available for those who do not.)
Negatives: Not everyone likes the Sprint network.

Remember the email clients from Monday? Let’s see how they are holding up four days later.

Client #1: Evolution

Positives: The account setup wizard is surprisingly intuitive. All you have to do is enter your POP3 and SMTP settings and the program does the rest. Specialized ports? Evolution detects them. Security settings? It picks them up as well. It also runs pretty quick for a program that isn’t a fan of Windows 7.
Negatives: First and foremost, the “included” spam filter simply does not work. If you want spam to “disappear,” you have to program it in yourself. Another thing: the automated “email check” is apparently broken as well. While it might not seem like a big deal, it can be bothersome to a person who routinely forgets to press that dreaded “send and receive mail” button. (If you haven’t guessed already, I am definitely one of those people.)
Overall: 3; “It’s alright, I guess. Could be better though.”
Worth a Download?: Sadly, no.

Client #2: Thunderbird

Positives: The ability to load add-ons is a big plus. Nothing says “try me out” quite like the prospect of total customization. The aforementioned setup is also a nice touch. While it isn’t the easier setup we have run into thus far — that award goes to, of all programs, Evolution — it does make life a bit easier.  And since it’s made by a subsidiary of Mozilla, complete and total compatibility with Firefox is a given.
Negatives: Aside from the much lauded add-ons, Thunderbird comes off as rather “basic.” Yes, it checks, writes, and sends email, but that’s all it does … without modification, of course.
Overall: 7; “It’s nice and stable.”
Worth a Download?: Yes.

Client #3: Zimbra

Positives: Unlike the rest of the clients on this list, Zimbra is more than just a simple “email client.” It’s actually a highly diverse desktop system, designed to eliminate the need for Google Apps a variety of third-party freeware (and in some cases, shareware) applications. Zimbra also gets a few extra points for presentation. As cliche as it might sound, the simple fact that it “looks” nicer than the other clients does wonders for this little underdog.
Negatives: It’s a bit on the slow side starting up. Although the plethora of extra features are nice, they have a tendancy to “get in the way” from time to time.
Overall: 8
Worth a Download?: Yes

Client #4: Sylpheed

Positives: Wait … give us a moment. There has to be something in this program that can be construed as a positive … [Pause] There it is! Sylpheed is the only program that, to our knoledge, allows you look at the source code of your messages. We’re not exactly sure as to why you would want to do that, but it’s always nice to have the option.
Negatives: The words “extremely basic” were bandied about more than once. Furthermore, the following “standard” features are not available in Sylpheed: A spam filter, automatic mail check, the ability to view messages in an HTML format, the ability to send emails at all … I think you get the idea here.
Overall: 3; “Outlook Express 4 that was bundled with Windows 98 First Edition can do more things than Sylpheed.”
Worth a Download?: No

As I mentioned yesterday, I have finally installed KDE onto my laptop. It all seems to be working properly … in a way. Let’s start from the top and go down from there.

Konqueror – It runs, but that’s about all that it’s doing right now. What’s the point of having a “premiere league” web browser when half of the tools and features that users depend upon aren’t available? Take this very post, for example. Usually when I type up this fantastic, award winning (hint, hint) blog, I use the standard WYSIWYG (”what you see is what you get) setup that is provided by WordPress. For reasons that I have yet to comprehend, that very setup is not available in Konqueror. I am therefore stuck using the bare bones HTML editor. I might be able to fix things eventually, but I’m not necessarily optimistic at this point.

JuK (Media player) – Nothing plays. I can see the title of the track scroll back and forth, but I can’t actually hear any music. After checking a few sound card settings, I went back into the program, hoping for a better result. Unfortunately, all I heard was dead air. I looked through the various options, hoping against hope that I would stumble across a “configure player” link. What I did find, however, was an option that allowed me to configure various audio shortcuts. While it’s a nice tool to have on hand, it is not exactly what I’m looking for at the present moment.

Kile (Word processor) – Despite reports to the contrary, KOfiice is not installed by default. In its places sits Kile, a self-described “LaTex front end” with an eye for power. For those of you who have no idea what I’m talking about right now, LaTex is based around the idea that the English tongue should have a programming language of its own. Despite what you might be thinking right now, a “programming language for text” is actually a decent idea. Making that language editor the default word processor, on the other hand, is not. Hoping to salvage my time today, I immediately closed it and started looking for the Windows version of KOffice. Sadly, it isn’t available for Windows users anymore. Oh bother…

Overall: I will be totally honest here: there is a reason why KDE for Windows is not better known. None of these programs have been designed with the “traditional user” in mind. At this point in time, I can argue that almost everyone, even seasoned Linux users, will loathe this collection of programs. Playing with these “applications” isn’t even a good way to pass the time, let alone as a way to get some work done. So as it pains me to say it, stay far, far away from KDE for Windows. You’ll be glad that you did.

After a brief period of contemplation, I have officially decided to bring my “GNU experience” to the next level. By this time tomorrow, I will have KDE installed on my laptop. Why, you ask? Well … it’s all answered below.
What is KDE again? – KDE is a desktop system used primarily in Linux and BSD-based operating systems. The actual design is similar to that of Windows XP.

But you already have a desktop. Why load another one? – I am not loading the KDE for Windows package just so I can have a different desktop. I’m actually loading it so I can have access to the various KDE programs (KWord, Krita, Konqueror, etc) that lie within the desktop.

But you are going to have another desktop, right? – I honestly have no idea. The last time I attempted this, the program actually put the KDE taskbar on top of my Windows bar. I sincerely hope that that doesn’t happen again.

Wait … You have actually done this before? – I tried it a few years ago, shortly after KDE 4 was released. At the time, the Windows package was still using an archaic version of KDE 3. This is a completely different animal here.

You said you are loading this on your laptop. Why not use your main computer? – As I have mentioned before, my main system runs the 64-bit version of the Windows 7 beta. According to the official website, neither Windows 7 nor the 64-bit architecture that my copy is based upon are exactly supported at this time. The laptop, on the other hand, runs on 32-bit Vista. The choice was clear.

Is KDE for Windows a good idea for me? – We are about to find that out, aren’t we?

…And there you have it. Be sure you tune in tomorrow to check out my installation log. I guarantee that it will be interesting, to say the least.

Anyone who has been reading the Free Line in the past few days knows of my love/hate relationship with Evolution. But how exactly does it stand up to other “free” mail clients? We are about to find that out. And before anyone asks, no. We have not forgotten about our “web app” tests. These things take time, after all. Expect to see the results some time within the next two weeks.

Client #1: Evolution

Website: http://www.dipconsultants.com/evolution/
Developer: The Gnome Project (Original program) and Tor Lillqvist (Windows port)
License: GPL
First Impression: “Where did it go? It likes to randomly disappear from time to time.”
Setup: Easier than most, thanks to the built in setup wizard.
Note: We here at the Free Line believe that the following is required reading:

“…Putting the little “browser snafu” behind me, I found myself heading to Wikipedia to research GPL email clients. Thankfully, the choice here was simple: Evolution. For those unaware, Evolution is the email companion to the Linux-based web browser (and Free Line favorite) Epiphany. About a year ago, the folks in charge of the client, along with higher ups at Novell, decided that it was a good idea to port the system over to Windows. While their intentions were  good, the result was anything but. Users who wanted to try Linux’s “best kept secret” had to compile everything themselves from scratch. Extensive knowledge of the DOS prompt was also required, as the newly installed program required it to be running at all times. Not happy with this turn of events, Novell programmer Nat Freidman hired famed Linux-to-Windows programmer Tor Lillqvist to create an easy to use installation file  for people who dislike compiling their own programs. People just like me.

Installing the program was easy: just click a few buttons and I was on my way. Setting up my various email accounts was easy as well. In many ways, Evolution was actually easier to work with than that brand new copy of Windows Live Mail Desktop that I had been previously using. Everything was going fine, until I accidentally closed the program. This is where my troubles truly began.

Before I go into detail, I think it’s only fair to detail the operating system I use. Like our fantastic product tester/guinea pig Angela Smedley, I work with a system that is dependent upon Windows 7 RC 1. Instead of having your open programs displayed in a long, somewhat annoying row like in previous editions of Windows, Windows 7 puts them all in “button” form next to the start menu. If you wish to have access to these programs after you have closed them, all you have to do is right click on the icon and select “pin to the taskbar.” Simple, elegant, and much easier to deal with than the traditional “long bar/quick launch button” combination. Most programs respond well to the new system. Evolution did not. Here comes “Excedrin headache #10” again…

As I stared at the strange, DOS-based error message, I thought about the steps that brought me to this point. Closing the message, I instantly decided to start the program from the shortcut on my desktop instead of from my taskbar. Although the ominous message was gone, I still didn’t have access to my email accounts. Undaunted, I right clicked on the shortcut and chose the “run as administrator” option. Success! After a few more minutes of “administrator-level” tweaking, I finally have things working properly. The shortcut that is currently pinned to my taskbar still isn’t completely functional, but it doesn’t matter. At least I still have access to my email.”

Client #2: Thunderbird

Website: http://www.mozillamessaging.com/thunderbird/
Developer: Mozilla
License: Mozilla Public License (MPL), Lesser GPL (LGPL), and GPL
First Impression: “Hey look! Add-ons!”
Ease of Setup: Three words: Intuitive setup wizard.
Layout: It wants to be Outlook Express in the worst way possible — icons appear up top, file folders on the left, letters on the top right hand side, and the actual letters show up at the bottom. It isn’t “bad,” but it can get to be a tad boring.

Client #3: Zimbra

Website: http://www.zimbra.com/
Developer: Zimbra Inc. and Yahoo
License: Yahoo Public License (YPL)
First Impression: “This one has some neat stuff in it. I sense that they really want to be Google here.”
Setup: Instead of implementing a tabbed system like Outlook Express or a wizard ala Thunderbird, Zimbra prefers the “one lengthy page” approach found in many web email services.
Layout: It’s as if Outlook Express and Google Apps had a baby. The physical mail client appears to be an almost carbon copy of Outlook, with the “standards” appearing in all the right places. Click on the tabs, however, and the user is taken to a Google Docs style text editor, a link to Flickr, and a feed reader respectively. While it doesn’t necessarily add to the “email experience,” the added features are nice to have on hand.

Client #4: Sylpheed

Website: http://sylpheed.sraoss.jp/en/
Developer: Hiroyuki Yamomoto
License: GPL and LGPL
First Impression: “I don’t see anything that really ’sticks out’ about it.”
Ease of Setup: Simple. Just plug in all of your inforation and the program does the rest.
Layout: A tad dated compared to the likes of Thunderbird and Windows Live Mail, but nothing really to write home about.

On today’s special edition of the Showdown, we take a look at four web browsers that are a bit more “specialized” than the average install of Internet Explorer or Firefox. Before we do, however, we should take a look at the muscles behind the browser — the rendering engine. For those unaware, a rendering engine is the program that physically displays a website on a screen. Major engines include:

• Trident – Designed by Microsoft exclusively for Internet Explorer.
• Gecko - Designed by the Mozilla Corporation for Firefox. Several major browsers also employ this engine, including Chrome, Mozilla SeaMonkey, and later versions of Netscape.
• KHTML – Designed by the KDE Team, Apple, Nokia, and Google for use in the Linux-based Konqueror browser. The engine was eventually forked into two separate projects. Project number one kept the KHTML name, while project number two became…
• Webkit – A modified version of the KHTML engine used in Safari. Chrome and Free Line favorite Epiphany also use WebKit, though not nearly to the extent of Safari.
• Presto - Designed by Opera Software ASA for the Opera browser. Unlike the other engines listed, Presto is not usually ported to other web browsers. Instead, developers simply modify Opera itself to suit their own needs. To date, modified versions of Opera can be found in a variety of different hardware and software platforms, including Adobe products, mobile phones, and on various Nintendo gaming consoles.

With all of that said, here we go:

Browser #1: Maxthon

Website: http://www.maxthon.com/
Programmer: Maxthon International Limited
Rendering Engine: Trident
First Impression: “It looks like Lotus Symphony … and the name sounds like a line of bug sprays.”
Originality (Out of 5): 5
Special Features: A Facebook sidebar plugin and an XMarks-style bookmark synchronization service is included in the installation.
Positives: Maxthon is probably one of the most unique browsers we have ever come across. It employs several cutting edge features, including mouse gestures, a built-in feed reader, and a completely customizable interface. It’s also very social media friendly, which could potentially make status updates a breeze.
Negatives: Maxthon likes to refer to itself as “Internet Explorer” a bit too often. While it might be small, it is bound to throw more than a few people off.
Overall (Out of 10): 7;
Final Thought: “It’s a very well put together browser, which is nice. You don’t see that much anymore.”

Browser #2: K-Meleon

Website: http://kmeleon.sourceforge.net/
Programmer: Christophe Thibault
Rendering Engine: Gecko
First Impression: “These tools are interesting.”
Originality: 5
Special Features: Instead of utilizing the “standard” XUL interface, K-Meleon relies on the Windows API. The intended result is an experience closer to Safari in OS X and Konqueror in Linux than the everyday installation of Firefox. Like Maxthon, everything from the tab bar to the menus is customizable. There are also some innovative mouse options, including a tool that modifies the scroll wheel. Users also have the option of “saving” sessions for later use.
Positives: K-Meleon makes Firefox look like Internet Explorer. The browser practically begs the user to fool around with it. Users also have the option to activate Opera’s patented Hotlist technology, which adds an entirely new level of usability to the browser.
Negatives: It’s a tad intimidating at first.
Overall: 9
Final Thought: “If I felt like switching browsers right now, it would be to this one.”

Browser #3: Sleipnir

Website: http://www.fenrir-inc.com/us/
Programmer: Fenrir Inc.
Rendering Engines: Trident and Gecko
First Impression: “This is neat … I wish I could get it working right.”
Originality: 4
Special Features: Before starting the browser, the user is asked if they want to use either the Trident or Gecko rendering engine. Although we really have no desire to use Trident, it’s nice to have the option available. Sleipnir also has the ability to run extensions from both Internet Explorer and Firefox in addition to its own proprietary add-ons.
Positives: It’s fast … really, really fast. The native Sleipnir plugins seem to be a bit odd at first, but are extremely useful and powerful.
Negatives: It claims to be “for advanced users only.”  We suggest that you heed that warning.
Overall: 7
Final Thought: “Make sure that you read all of the instructions first.”

Browser #4: Lunascape

Website: http://www.lunascape.tv/
Programmer: Lunascape Co., Ltd
Rendering Engines: Trident, Gecko, and Webkit
First Impression: “Now I know where Sleipnir got its look from.”
Originality: 4
Special Features: Think “Sleipnir,” but with added Webkit support. It makes a bigger difference than one might think. The browser “skin” can be switched out at a moment’s notice — a nifty feature for anyone who can’t decide on the “perfect look” for their browser. Your favorite RSS feed can also be turned into a “news ticker,” which runs parallel to your tabs.
Positives: The rendering engine can be changed on the fly, similar to the IE/Safari Tab extension in Firefox. The actual viewing window can display several web pages at once, making it easy to compare different sites or products.
Negatives: For some reason, all of the proprietary extensions are in Japanese. Like Sleipnir, it ca be a tad intimidating to those unfamiliar with alternative web browsers.
Overall: 6.5
Final Thought: “It has a lot of potential, but still has a way to go.”

The Great Linux Experiment was an astounding success overall. While we here at the Free Line take for granted that you have read it all from “cover to cover,” we know that that isn’t entirely realistic. So to make things easy, we have decided to create a “table of contents.” Everything you need to enjoy The Great Linux Experiment is here. With that, here you go:
Chapter One: Start Me Up

Chapter Two: Don’t You Wonder What We’ll Find, Steppin’ Out Tonight?

Chapter Three: Only the Beginning; Only Just a Start

Chapter Four: I Will Survive

Chapter Five: O Do Not Forsake Me

Chapter Six Interlude: The Waiting

Chapter Six: Problems and Bigger Ones

Chapter Seven: Stuck In the Middle

Chapter Eight Interlude: What the Buzz, Tell Me What’s a-Happenin’

Chapter Eight: Here It Goes Again

Chapter Nine: …And In the End…

Epilogue: I Found a New Way, Baby

The following description of running the VirtualBox virtualization software in Fedora 10 is true. None of the name have been changed, as there were no innocents to be protected. With that, here we go…

The initial installation of the VirtualBox software was surprisingly easy. All we did was go to the VirualBox website, load the file, and run the setup. Yes, we realize that simply going to the developer’s website is an afront to everything Linux stands for, but it didn’t really matter at this point. We wanted everything to be as painless possible, and that’s what we got. A few clicks later, everything was up and running. Next stop: Windows 7.

On the surface, Windows 7 is a rather odd choice for a “test OS.” After all, it isn’t even out of the beta stage yet. The reasoning behind  our choice is simple: we wanted to test the limits of the virtualization software. If VirtualBox can handle a cutting edge operating system like Windows 7, then it can most definitely be able to take on Windows XP. After a few issues with the installation DVD, we were all ready and raring to go. Everything was going smoothly. Now it’s time for Windows.

To truly understand the nature of the following, one must be aware of the test computer’s specs. In many ways, it’s a fairly up-to-date piece of modern machinery — dual-core process, SATA hard drive, higher-end video card … the works. The only real chink in it’s proverbial armor is with its RAM. Unlike most modern system, our test computer only has two gigabytes of RAM. While that minor “limitation” is normally okay for running one OS, it’s a bit of a drawback when running two. In order to make the invading operating system work at all, VirtualBox had to label a fair amount of the RAM as “Windows only.” The rest of it was okayed for use by Fedora 10. The damage? Windows 7 was to be run using only 987 megabytes of RAM. According to the Microsoft website, 7 needs at least one gigabyte of RAM to run properly. We knew right then that we were going to be there for a while.

As you might have guessed, the installation moved about as fast as a Yugo stuck in the mud. This wasn’t Windows fault; it was ours. Our specs were not up to code, and we were paying for it. After what seemed like an eternity, Windows was finally up and running. From there, it chugged along at a snail’s pace. It wasn’t exactly “unusable” by any means. It just was slow at times. Really, really painfully slow. Still, it was functional, and that was all that mattered.

It was around this time that it hit us: this was more than just “running Windows in a window.” As far as 7 was concerned, Linux didn’t exist on the computer. This made moving files a bit of a pain, as the old “drag-and-drop” game plan just didn’t work in this situation. To share files, we needed to have both Windows Networking and Samba working correctly. Windows was easy. Samba, on the other hand was not. We almost had it working, but for some reason it did not believe us when we said that 7 lacked a user password. Thanks to this little setback, we had to improvise: all files had to be transported via a flash drive. To say that moving files between “systems” like that was odd would be an understatement. It might have been odd, but it worked. After a few more “incidental” tests, Windows was shut down and VirtualBox was closed for good.

Our final thoughts on virtualization are simple: it’s well worth the minor inconvenience. Like many of you, we believe that running your favorite Windows applications on a copy of Windows is easily preferable than fighting with WINE. Just remember to make sure that you have enough RAM. For a setup running Fedora 10 and Windows Vista/7, we suggest having four gigs available — two for Linux, two for Windows. If your Windows of choice is XP, then two gigs should be enough.

…And with that, our little trip into Linux comes to a close. We sincerely hope that you had a good time reading out exploits. We certainly enjoyed living them. If you have a suggestion for your own “experiment,” tell us. We’re always open to new ideas.  So on behalf of everyone here at the Free Line, we bid thee a fond adieu from the land of penguins and GNUs.

As sad as it is to admit, this is the next to the last day of The Great Linux Experiment. Since Monday’s post will be dedicated to virtualization services, we will get Angela Smedley’s final thoughts today.

What did you like most about Linux? – “I liked typing things into the command line. I don’t know why, but I liked that. It made me feel like I was doing something cool. I also loved that fact that I was never bored. There was always something for me to fiddle around with. Not everyone will like that [part of Linux], but still.

What did you like the least? – “The command line is an exact science. I was never good at science. The general attitude [of the Linux community] bothered me as well. They get all hot and bothered when I choose an “official” driver over the open source equivalent. It’s like they caught me hitting puppies.”

What will you miss the most? – “Epiphany. Now that is a great browser. I’ll miss the repository system as well. Looking through website after website for programs suck, and the Linux people recognize that. But most of all, I’ll miss that sense of accomplishment I get when I finally get something to work properly. You don’t get that in Windows.”

What will you miss the least? – “Every half-assed program that starts with the letter “K” — KWord, Kopete, KMail, and so on. They just didn’t work properly.”

What is the biggest misconception about Linux? – “People think that Linux is completely different that Windows. It’s really not. It’s like “old Windows” in the sense that [the graphical desktop] is merely there to “compliment” the command line. The overall difficulty of the operating system has been overblown as well. You don’t have to type in every line of code yourself. You can, but it’s not necessary.”

What was the hardest thing to get used to in Linux? – “The default mouse function is single-click. Everything is single-click. The overall file structure is different as well. While it’s easy to navigate through now, it was rather difficult at the beginning.”

So what are your thoughts on the WINE Windows emulator? – “I got it to work once. It’s extremely hit and miss. It definitely needs more tweaking, both from me and the WINE community.”

Are uou planning to stick with Linux? – “Truthfully, no. I might come back to it at a later date, however.”

What about a “halfway” method, like dual booting? -“No. One operating system is enough.”

How about virtualization software? That way, you can run Linux inside a window in Windows. – “I don’t know. It’s a possibility. We will definitely see.”

The KDE team has been working on a Windows port of the KDE 4 desktop for a while now. Older versions featuring KDE 3 are still available. Does something like that interest you at all? – “I’ll give it a try, provided that it works on Windows 7.”

Now for the big question: In your opinion, does it make sense for a business person to drop Windows or OS X for Linux? Why or why not? – “If you don’t need any specialized programs that rely on Windows or OS X, then by all means give it a shot.”

And finally, did you enjoy your stay? – “It was a nice visit.”

Until later, we bid you all a fond adieu from the land of penguins and GNUs.