Related articles

• Standards My previous guide only referenced the most popular Linux distribution (distro), Ubuntu. To include more than one distro in an installation guide would be too much information for one article while still maintaining the linear path of a How-To. This article, however, is an application roundup. To include the best cross-section of apps (and based on popular demand by you, the Tom's Hardware readers), I've opened up the test bed to include the top three distros: Ubuntu, openSUSE, and Fedora. Free or Open-Source Software (FOSS) applications are always available as source code, but the recent spike of interest in Linux is not because people suddenly want steep learning curves. Quite the opposite. It's because Linux has become easier to use. This is a collection of easy-to-install applications intended for those making, or even thinking about making the switch from Windows to Linux. This essentially means that these applications must fall in line with the realistic expectations of an average end-user in either a home or office desktop implementation. The three main criteria for these apps are: usability, quality, and popularity. The first hurdle that applications had to overcome was usability. For an app to even appear in this article it has to be available in one of the top three distro's official repos or as a DEB or an RPM from the software vendor's official Web site. Several high-quality applications that only exist as source code or as shell installers had to be left out. For Linux to truly be considered for mainstream use, source/shell just won't cut it. "Granny don't makefile," and to most people, the command line is a step backwards. Obviously, apps that had too many bugs or crashes were also left out under this criteria. The quality of an app is determined by comparing its feature set to the industry-leading title in that category (whenever one exists). For example, personal finance software was stacked up against Quicken, while image manipulation apps were compared to Photoshop. While this may not seem fair some of the time, I am not here to convert everyone or play the “it's free” card. I'm here to let new users know what they're realistically dealing with when considering Linux as a desktop option; to help you make an educated decision for yourself. In the event that there are no clear industry-leading apps to compare against, don't worry. Anything that looks like it came out of a Win9x time capsule doesn't pass. The final criteria is popularity. When dealing with Linux software, especially FOSS, popularity isn't simply a badge of honor. It's more an effect of being a good piece of code. The effect of popularity can actually become the cause of an app becoming great. Since FOSS is in a constant state of bug reporting and fixing, the most popular apps will have the most complete sampling of users, in turn producing an even better title. Also, because support is mainly handled by the user community, popular software naturally has more documentation and fewer issues with compatibility. Therefore, popularity greatly influenced the order in which equally usable apps of comparable quality are listed. This includes extra weight given to multi-platform applications. Methodology In order to determine Ubuntu compatibility, I used a fresh and updated virtual machine installation of 32-bit Ubuntu 9.04, with the default GNOME graphical user interface (GUI). To determine openSUSE compatibility, I used a fresh and updated VM installation of 32-bit openSUSE 11.1 with the default KDE GUI . To determine Fedora compatibility, I used a fresh and updated VM installation of 32-bit Fedora 11 with the default GNOME GUI. A fresh and updated VM installation of 32-bit Kubuntu 9.04 was used in order to cover the rare .deb/KDE combination whenever needed. If you need a refresher, please reference my previous article for an explanation of package management. In order to test drive the feature sets of these applications, and to determine 64-bit friendliness, I used a native (non-VM) and fully-updated installation of 64-bit Ubuntu 9.04. When an application was not available for the 64-bit architecture, I used the 32-bit VM installation of Ubuntu. If that failed I would use Kubuntu, then Fedora, and then openSUSE. Test System Specs:CPUAMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2.0 GHzMotherboardBiostar NF61S-M2 TEMemory4GB DDR2-800VideoNvidia GeForce 6100, integrated, 128MB shared memoryStorage250GB SATA 3 Gb/s, 7,200 RPMVirtual Machine Specs:VersionSun Microsystems' VirtualBox 2.1.4 OSECPUAMD-V and Nested Paging enabledBase Memory2GBVideo Memory64MB, 3D Acceleration enabledStorage8GB, dynamically expandingAudioAlsa Audio Driver Legend:    An application's logo links to it's homepage (for example, Firefox = mozilla.com/firefox). indicates availability in the default Ubuntu repos (via Synaptic).indicates availability in the Ubuntu repos if KDE is installed (still runs in GNOME). indicates availability in the default openSUSE repos (via YaST2). indicates availability in the default Fedora repos (via YUM).links to an available .deb package download.links to an available .rpm package download. indicates that the app has no official 64-bit binary (though source/shell may work).links to an available Windows download. links to an available Mac download. indicates that the application is a retail product. After several re-writes, I decided to put the version number that I referenced next to each application's name as well. Note: the deb and rpm icons used in this article are part of the hydroxygen icon set by deviantdark. It is hosted on GNOME-look.org along with a host of other high-quality theming elements.

• The new THG video number 8 demonstrates the assembly of a PC compressor cooler. The first THG video, which caused a great deal of controversy in the industry, showed the overheating problems with the AMD Athlon XP/ MP processor. The second was a brief guide for disabling the multiplier lock on the AthlonXP/ MP. The third video showed how to install an effective water-cooling system in a PC case. Here we selected the kind of high quality components that promised to provide a solid, long-term investment. Production number 4 contains highlights of the Intel IDF 2002, and number 5 deals with P4 Hyper-Threading. Here, we compare a 3.6 GHz P4 (without HT) and a 3.06 GHz P4 with HT. In our sixth video we show what's possible with a 4.1 GHz system. This was one of the fastest PCs in the world at the time. Video 7 contains highlights of IDF 2003. The latest video (number 8) deals with the assembly and construction of a highly overclocked, yet stable, compressor-cooled PC system. You can download the new video here! Server 1 Server 2 To Play The Video You Need Divx 5.05 The small file size and data rate of the Tom's Hardware video means you will need a fast processor. It is also important that you have the DivX codec version 5.05 installed on your computer. Download the latest codec from DivX.com . This codec enables you to view the video. Because the audio signal is compressed in MP3 format and this codec is already included in most versions of Windows, you don't need any special driver.

• The GeForce 9400 mGPU is based on the GeForce 9300 chipset, which we reviewed in the fall of 2008. It is based on the G86 core (GeForce 8400 GS), which means that there are 16 unified shaders. The only difference between the GeForce 9300 and the 9400 is clock speed: there is a 450 MHz core clock and 1,200 MHz shader clock for the GeForce 9300 mGPU, while the 9400 speeds up to 540 MHz core and 1,400 MHz for the shaders. Needless to say, this is sufficient horsepower to translate into a nice advantage over Intel’s offering. Chipset Features Although Intel’s G45 consists of the classic two-chip layout (northbridge and southbridge) and Nvidia decided to build a single-chip solution, their technical characteristics are similar. Bus speeds of up to FSB1333 are supported, as are all Core 2 processors including the Extreme Editions this time. Once again, these have to be supported by the particular motherboard, due to the high power requirements. One x16 PCI Express slot will accept a gamer’s dedicated graphics board if he or she gets tired of the integrated unit’s performance. Other features, including 12 USB 2.0 ports, 6 SATA/300 drives with AHCI and NCQ plus RAID support, five 32-bit PCI 2.3 slots, HD audio, and Gigabit networking, can be found on any product starting at the lower mainstream. Nvidia Features There are some good reasons why some users might prefer the Nvidia GeForce 9400 chipset over the G45, despite Intel’s tradition of providing reliable and stable platforms. On the one hand, there is GeForce Boost, which allows plugging in an additional GeForce 8400 GS or 8500, and running it in Hybrid SLI mode, teamed up with the on-board solution. Hybrid Power, which is supposed to shut down graphics cards that aren’t used, didn’t work on our test sample, and it was mentioned as “only available in select designs” in Nvidia reviewer’s guide (Ed.: It's worth noting that this feature is, for lack of a better word, dead following the release of Nvidia's more energy-efficient GeForce GTX 260 and 280 GPUs). On the other hand, there is the option to utilize Nvidia’s 16 unified shaders and their floating point performance to accelerate applications that were adjusted to take advantage of CUDA or PhysX. CUDA is Nvidia’s effort to bring parallel processing to mainstream applications, while PhysX is very much self-explanatory: it is about delivering more realistic physical environments in games and other simulations of reality, by utilizing the GPUs’ processing power in games optimized for the API. PureVideo HD Nvidia claims that 100% of the decoding workload (HDCP and video) can be offloaded to its GPUs, which we found to be very close to correct. Although we used quad-core processors, the CPU load was well below 10% at all times. Intel’s chipset showed increased CPU load on the slower test CPU, while the systems running the GeForce 9400 mGPU remained almost at the same level. The only really confusing thing was our attempt to download the latest drivers, which can be found neither in the GeForce nor nForce 8/9 sections. Instead, you have to select nForce—which alone may be impossible for someone who is not familiar with the Nvidia portfolio—check nForce 7 series and then select nForce 730i/GeForce 9400/9300.