Slashdot Mirror
A Visual Comparison Between XP And Mandrake
Mifflesticks points to this interesting "visual comparison" between Mandrake 8.0 and Windows XP. Even though it's specifically a visual / aesthetic comparison, this piece actually sums up the good things about XP -- good device detection, multiple users set up from the install, improved network configuration -- better than anything else I've seen. The conclusion seems to be that anyone who's set up a modern Linux distro (Mandrake in particular) on supported hardware would find nothing too new in XP.
I'm using XP at work to test our software on. Let me state that XP offers VERY FEW stability or power enhancements over Win2K. The added "features" are purely user interface enhancements, which translates into sluggish performance. It's included firewall is weak (allows microsoft programs full access, so anyone can easily write a trojan that works as an explorer plugin)
As a developer, I've turned off all the user interface enhancements (fading menus, animations, anti-aliasing, etc) for optimal performance, and the result is, a slightly slower Win2000.
Furthermore, the biggest turnoff from XP is that it "calls home". Turn on Zone Alarm or Tiny Personal Firewall, and watch while screensavers try to connect to microsoft.com. Why? I don't know, presumably to send information about the system.
Win2000 is a rock-solid OS; It's stable, easy-to-use, looks good, and most importantly it's fast. XP looks a little nicer, runs a lot slower, and calls home; don't use it if you prefer speed or anonymity.
Windows XP is a HUGE improvement compared to Win9x. The UI is a lot better - and no, I don't mean in terms of looking cool - I mean it in terms of being usable - the way things are organized, etc.
Fully agree with you there; though I think Win2000 does everything that's needed; IMO XP provides the "coolness" factor that I don't want.
I'm using XP Professional on all my Win2K boxes right now and the major things I notice are reliability, not having to reboot every time I install anything and ease of use.
Actually I didn't think about that; That's true, XP can install drivers w/o rebooting. I haven't had to install drivers in a -long- time, so missed that.
The thing I notice most on my laptop is how fast the damn thing boots or resumes from standby. It makes it a whole heck of a deal more convenient to take my laptop to meetings, etc. The other big difference between Win2K Pro and WinXP Pro is remote access. It's awfully convenient for me to work on my desktop at work from home.
Never used either of those, (don't have a laptop, and used Radmin for remote access)...
but you've given some truly good points...thanks
and moderators, mod this up (the parent) please
I've been testing XP extensively for my software company since Beta 1, and at this point (RC2), it is very close to replacing 2K as the OS on my windows box. Your points are totally right, but you miss a couple. First, the OS boots a lot faster. My main windows box is much faster than the test box running XP (athlon 700 vs k6-400) and yet it takes a full 27 secs longer to boot than the slower box running XP. Big deal, I know, but everything about the OS seems much faster to me-- application launch, ui responsiveness, disk access. Second, XP seems much more stable. While Win2k is definitely the most stable released OS from microsoft, I've definitely had a few crashes on it. Yet since installing RC1, I've had 0 crashes on the XP box. While not quite scientific, I've had to use to XP enough by now that I'm almost convinced I'll be upgrading to it because it is already far ahead (or so it seems to me ;) of Win2k in the exact things that made me go from Win98 to Win2k in the first place-- speed and stability.
Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax/ &couldn\'t %get $worse;
Y'all always complain when people who don't understand Linux make poor reviews of it. Well, this guy doesn't understand MS operating systems. Easy networking setup? Been there since 95. 2K will put you on a DHCP TCP/IP network with nothing but an 'ok' click. The 'temptation to use another person's account because the name is already in there?' So tell NT to clear the last user logged in dialog. But I guess things like system policies are a bit technical for this guy; after all, penguins with wrenches are more important to him.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
windows is easy and there is nothing you can do about it :)
Nah - it's not "easy". It's "familiar".
People have been so conditioned to the way that Windows works, and told over and over again that Windows is "easy" - that it has become "easy" for them, in their minds. They know how things work in Windows - not because it's intuitive, but because they've been taught that that's how it works.
I'm fully convinced that in an hour, I could make a complete (non-MS-conditioned) computer newbie pretty proficient with Linux. An MS-conditioned newbie would be harder to teach, because they've been coddled and told that using a computer is "hard" and that the MS way is "easy" -- and they believe it so much that they resist learning anything.
That's why "Dummies" books are so popular. People like thinking they're stupid, as it gives them an excuse not to learn. "I can't use linux - I'm stupid with computers" -- yet this same person will spend HOURS learning the MS way of doing things -- because it's "easy". Reality check: If it takes hours to learn, it ain't "easy", no matter what MS tells you.
I run linux for my server for half-empty. I'm far from "too stupid" to run Linux. Regardless, the topic at hand here is ease of use, and ease of use, weither you like it or not, is the concept of making a system that "stupid" people can use.
I said that it would be possible for my Mandrake install to become usable if I tweaked it to hell and back (like I have done in the past with Debian, Slack, Redhat, etc.) but I didn't feel like it this time; I didn't feel it was worth my effort.
The "you don't have to use it if you don't want to" comments here are pretty lame, and in this case, totally inapplicable. Since we're talking about ease of use stuff like network detection (which, despite the authors assertion, as been there since win95) we're not talking about me here, a geek, we're talking about the proverbial Joe Sixpack. It might be hard for you to fathom, but I *would* like to see Linux succeed, and I do feel that is a success in the server world. However, its dillusional to think that XP is copying Linux. It needed to be said, so I said it.
--
The conclusion seems to be that anyone who's set up a modern Linux distro (Mandrake in particular) on supported hardware would find nothing too new in XP
You can't assume that hardware is going to be supported. Every attempt I've made to install any version of Mandrake (or other Linux distros, such as Red Hat) on my apparently non-supported hardware (plug-in PCI Maxtor ATA/100 IDE controller card) has resulted in a system that locks up inexplicably while trying to boot the kernal. On the other hand, every attempt I've made to install any version of Windows on any non-supported hardware has always resulted in a successful boot and an entirely usable system -- minus sound support, minus UltraDMA support, or minus high-resolution video modes, mind you, but still entirely working and usable. When a given GNU/Linux distro can't exactly identify your monitor to feed XFree86 the correct refresh rates, it usually ends up using some defaults that are so non-standard it causes your monitor to display a rolling, flickering, totally unviewable picture -- whereas I've never seen this happen on any Windows system because Windows just defaults to the VGA 60 Hz 16 color 640x480 standard refresh rates, which work on any (S)VGA monitor. Imagine that--handling failure gracefully!
In general, GNU/Linux distributions, drivers, and applications don't handle error or failure cases well at all. Why? Because those developers only care about making the success cases work well. Screw the poor user who can't happen to get everything perfectly right on the first try--it's their own fault for being ignorant, after all, and they should just have to keep doing the entire process all over again until they get it right. God forbid any developer should spend any time, effort, or skill making things easy to use for non-experts.
- "It's just a matter of opinion!" - PRIMUS
How can you possibly do a 'visual' comparison of a linux distro vs. anything? And that begs the question who really cares about a visual comparison? I'd rather see a comparison at how elegantly and efficiently each UI does a particular task. IMNSHO, OS/2's WPS has them all beat, and did it back in 1993 with 486's on 8MB of RAM!
I'm on Mandrake 7.2 here, running Windowmaker + ROX-Filer. I hate any UI that depends on a braindead 'task bar' somewhere on the screen. Either I'm smoking crack, or what I'm running must not be Mandrake, eh?
My preferred UI stays the hell out of my way, but is pretty enough to show off at the same time.
It not the UI stupid, its applications.
We keep comparing Linux and Windows and how Linux is better et. al. But until when the set of available applications that are available for Windows make it to Linux, AND the marketing machine that MS has is used for Linux, I don't see Linux taking over anytime soon.
Think of a "killer app" for Linux and than you will see MS running for its money.
Karma stuck at 50? Add 2-5 inches.. err.. 2-5x Karmas Count to your pen1es.. err.. Karma all naturally and private
Was copied by Mandrake from Neptune and Whistler before they (Microsoft) had a chance to release code based on them to the public. A good chunk of this stuff he talks about is even present in Win2k and NT4.
Lots of FUD.
This is already available in Linux:
Now you have two completely separate X sessions running at the same time. I've no idea if there's a point-and-click (x|k|g)dm way to do this, but the capability is there.
#1. Why Mandrake vs. XP?
Because Windows XP is the Next Greatest Thing from Microsoft, and it has received a lot of press about it's asthetics and usability. Mandrake is widely considered *the* desktop Linux environment to use to switch people from Windows. Makes sense to me.
#2. Who cares if they are similar/different?
The manager who you are trying to convince to move the department to Linux, that's who. Not to mention the users themselves. Helps reduce the fear factor.
#3. It doesn't really say much.
If it doesn't say much to you, then you aren't a network administrator looking to rid your system from as many BSA...er...Microsoft problems as possible.
Seeing how XP Professional is based on a new kernel...
XP is based on the same kernel as Win2k and WinNT before it. Sure there's been some revisions, but hardly even enough to justify a version change - if you look at the versioning it's gone from 5.0 (win2k) to 5.1 (winxp)
I just find it funny that the first time I saw this type of "easy network setup" was in Mandrake.
Guess he never installed a Windows system before. This has been around since Win95 and Win2k. In fact, the XP install is almost identical to the 2k install.
Microsoft has managed to piss off my wife by making her default to a frog icon and has now nearly completely crossed over to the dark side of the "I Hate Bill Gates" club.
She got pissed over the cute green frog, that you could have changed for her to just about anything (note that you can import pictures). Sheesh. Hardly a damning indictment that they kept the install simply by defaulting the user icons.
I actually like this better and it PROMOTES others to not use your account because your name happens to be already typed into the field.
Umm... you can turn this off in profiles if you want?
but I'm sure there's some keystroke out there that changes users easily in XP
Yup - right there in the help on it if you look. Window-L.
The real problem I have with XP is that by default it encourages you to run with root level permissions. This is going to get nasty from a security point of view pretty quickly.
Oh, yeah, you forgot that XP lets you have raw sockets just like Mandrake. Damn those evil Microsofties for implementing a standard!! The world will end! Well, at least according to Steve "Conspiracy" Gibson.
Fear: When you see B8 00 4C CD 21 and know what it means
What this article says to me is that if they can use XP they can use Linux. With the help of a skilled admin I'd say small business stands to save a good deal of money in several areas.
Could be interesting
"Science is about ego as much as it is about discovery and truth " - I said it, so sue me.
Linux is still too hard for the typical Joe while XP will do everything for them
Maybe a year ago this was true, but I really don't think it is any more. I just installed Yellow Dog Linux on my iMac a few weeks ago - I've never seen such an idiot-proofed install. Everything works flawlessly, KDE is up and running fine, the network settings from install are carried over; in short, I couldn't find anything wrong.
Certainly things have come a long way since I watched friends struggling with Yggdrasil and Slackware back in the day. Mandrake is actually to the point that I'm recommending it to my, er, less computationally inclined relatives.
--saintMicrosoft is coming up on a decade of interaction with users and usability testing. I think they're nearing the point that Apple did with OS 9, before they broke all the interfaces for the 'Aqua' look that pervades 0S 10.
In other words, despite all the FUD, marketing, and anti-competitive crap BillCo is engaged in, they're getting their User Interface pretty-damn near perfect in terms of usability. Remember that because a person is employed by MS, he or she is not necessarily a borg. It looks like those who actually get WinXP will be getting a hell of an operating system.
We're seeing a lot of the same application elements expressed in slightly different ways in different OS's now. You can say that someone is copying someone else, but what it really means is that someone has found the 'best' way to do something in terms of usability or security. Take the graphical logins. I think Apple was the first to get the whole 'Icon-Username' setup, but this is apparently the best setup for a multi-user workstation, like most family PC's.
By the same token, I think that we'll probably see MS making their UI/Windowing System skinnable in the not-too-distant future ala Windowblinds to compete with Apple's 'themes', Kaleidoscope and all the different theme-window manager combinations for X.
Now if only their development teams put as much effort into application security as they do into UI. I would really have loved not cleansing my Mom's PC of Code Red II....
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
The conclusion seems to be that anyone who's set up a modern Linux distro (Mandrake in particular) on supported hardware would find nothing too new in XP.
<sarcasm>Oh, I get it. Now they are copying us.</sarcasm>
Timothy, if you're the source of that comment (I can't tell because the site is Slashdotted) - get back in your cave.
I got my Linux laptop at System76.
Having bounced around between many distros the past couple years (slackware, debian, redhat, suse, caldera and mandrake) I found that the most *recent* mandrake 8.0 was actually about the most usable, from an installation and 'login/go' standpoint.
:)
However, during the installation I apparently didn't say I was a developer, so it didn't install ANY compiling tools. OK, OK there may have been *something* there, but about 60% of the stuff I wanted to compiled didn't compile. So, from a 'casual/everyday' Linux user's perspective, it isn't very good. For someone like my wife, who just wants to sit down and type a letter by clicking on an office icon, it's fine.
I'd have commented more on the article itself(!) but it appears to be unavailable. Any mirrors?
creation science book
Have you checked to see whether your hardware was actually supported under Mandrake?
As for me, the Linux hardware support for my home-built PC is BETTER than Windows 98 SE's. Particularly for my HP Deskjet 952: its Windows drivers are utter crap. Modem support seems to be better as well. When I upgraded my modem, Mandrake didn't even hiccup. Windows 98 nearly died.
Jon Acheson
All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
Windows XP has an excellent feature that I have seen nowhere else. The feature is called Switch User, and is available only when the machine is not part of an NT Domain(not sure about AD). The feature is enabled in the Users/Groups control panel by a allow users to switch checkbox.
At first glance the feature was nothing that couldn't be ackomplished with a good X session manager like gnome-session. A user logs out and another users logs in. Go back to that first users and all the programs are restored where they left off. But This is NOT the Microsoft switch user feature. In XP, the user never really logs off. All the programs are left running in the background while another person works. This is a huge contrast to current X windows usage, and is a feature I would love to see on X at some level.
The application specific point I've found is for applications like file sharing. Brother is transfering files on napster, but sister wants to use the computer to check her email and use her Web browser bookmarks. Today in X Windows land, brother would have to close his program and let sister login. But in Windows XP land, he could simply switch users.
I know that all this really equates to is a full GUI version of screen. But Windowing applications are much more user friendly than console applications. Try teaching your mother or grandmother to user screen.
If anyone could come up with a model for allowing X windows to do this, I would love to see ideas. Would this kind of feature be implemented at the Display Manager level, allowing xdm/gdm/kdm to wrap each users session and let them switch?
If any work is being done in this area, please do tell. It is a feature I am most interested in. And with Unix's inherent superiourity in multiple user features, This is something X Windows should be able to do much better than MS Windows(no NT domain support *laugh*)
-j
I'm not even sure this guy understands what he's talking about. The network setup in XP is the same as in Win2k so obviously Microsoft didn't steal anything from Mandrake.
Where Mandrake can truly succeed is in the support of older hardware. The manufacturers and Microsoft are partners, in that they both want to sell new product to consumers. However, the open source philosophy is to use what you've got to it's fullest - new or old. Microsoft can't survive in this model, and many manufacturers of hardware don't understand the impact to their business models.
Microsoft controls the hardware market. No independent firm can develop new hardware without supporting and licensing Microsoft product. It's simply not financially possible, given the control by Microsoft of the marketplace.
Alas, trade secret laws sometimes makes Linux support counter-productive, as reverse engineering become tricky (if not impossible) business. As Ted McFarson said, "Trade Secret encourages Microsoft's Monolopy". How true.
This is the Frankenstein approach to building a monster operating system.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
I use Office 2000 at work, and it makes me miserable. It's just feature landfill.
There are serious bugs in Word that have been there for nearly a decade! Like the section break bug! And there are new bugs with every release! It's gotten to the point where I have to print out my docs and CHECK EVERY PAGE to make sure something hasn't spontaneously broken. It defeates the purpose of using a computer to do the work.
So, if switching to Linux means I have to use something else as my office app, I say bring it on!
Jon Acheson
All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
Finally got through to the article! What was just so surprising about it was this this person seems to have never used an MS OS before. Well, never installed one before, anyway.
/usr/www/users/syslogic/temp/layout/discussions/1. php on line 7
:)
"The first thing that popped up that made me think about this parallel during the set up was the Network Connection Wizard built into the tail end of the set up process. Of course, XP being as new as it is, has a very large database of native drivers for NICs, so odds are that XP is going to find your NIC while it's installing itself on the PC...much like Mandrake 8.0 currently does. Once it finds this NIC, a wizard pops up wanting to set up your network!"
Wow, so Mandrake 8 finally has network card detection, and pops up a wizard. This happened back in Win95, when IIRC, Mandrake wasn't even around - certainly not for sale at Best Buy. Yet the author somehow implies that MS is *copying* Mandrake!
Then we're get to read about which icons he and his wife prefer. Ok, so XP 'chose' his login icon for him - he apparently didn't want to be a guitar, or whatever. *IT'S BETA*. I have a feeling you'll be able to choose your own login icon in the final release.
Warning: MySQL Connection Failed: Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/tmp/mysql.sock' (61) in
Hmmm... perhaps using pconnects isn't such a good idea if you're going to get slashdotted.
creation science book