30 Days With Ubuntu Linux

jkwdoc writes "Vexed by Vista's hardware requirements and product activation issues, many have claimed on various boards that they plan to 'switch to Linux.' [H] Consumer spent 30 days using nothing but Ubuntu Linux to find out if this is truly a viable alternative for the consumer. Linux has indeed become much more than the 'Programmer's OS.'"

Comments

Misguided or simply lazy

[suso]

From the article: But what about power users, such as the typical audience of HardOCP - those who know how to build their own computers, but not compile their own programs?

IMHO, anyone who wants all the control of building your own computer, reads a website which has overclocking in the name and thinks Linux/FreeBSD/Open Source is either misguided about the benifits of Linux or is just lazy. Putting your own computer together these days with all the options, choices to make, etc. is getting harder than it was 10 years ago. Meanwhile, Linux has been getting easier. So I don't see where the challenge is for these people.

It is nice to see that non-Linux people are continuing to give Linux a try. Most things in the world only get one chance and then its over.

Re:Misguided or simply lazy

[CPNABEND]

I have been building my own rigs for more than ten years, and I have KUBUNTU up on one of the boxes on my LAN. I have a stumbling block trying to understand the LINUX file system. It's like I download something like Firefox - and can't find where it went. I have been searching for a book that could walk me through everything, sort of like a translation of M$-speak to LINUX-speak. Then, I would be more than happy to kiss Windoze g'Bye.

Re:Misguided or simply lazy

[Anonymous Coward]

>>That config is seriously outdated.

Who gives a fuck, it's new and it's cheap. Cheaper with XP or Linux instead of Vista, which I spent a good 3 hours setting up for someone yesterday (on a Dell) and was underimpressed. It sounds cliche, but there really are a lot of people who just want to use their computer to check email, surf the Internet and watch youtube videos. Call his suggested configuration outdated if you will, but it is adequate for a large group of users. I would also suggest that this configuration may actually boot up faster and run just as quickly as the average Dell because it won't come preinstalled without the megabytes of crap software that Dell likes to include with thier OEM and run at boot time. Ironically enough, looking through the invoice, they listed and charged $.01 per peice of crap software preinstalled. I can only guess it's for accounting/inventory purposes that they would do such a thing. I would hope that if they are going to charge for crap software that I don't want, even if it is a penny, I should have the opportunity to opt out when ordering.

Re:Misguided or simply lazy

[nostriluu]

Mac doesn't manage dependencies at all. So everything is a monolithic glob, or you have to manually install some other required piece of software.

Mac doesn't manage system wide updates at all. For every app, you have to hope it has a "check for update" option, somewhere. With Linux package managers, it's across the system, for all applications. Mac will never do this, because Apple vs Mac developers is a dysfunctional relationship, Apple wants to make it awkward so they can unfairly compete when they feel like it.

Finally, Mac apps and updates are often lazy, and request the system is restarted. Linux packages rarely do this.

I don't know what your Linux package management experiences are, but I've rarely had any issues installing, updating and removing apps, although granted on systems like Debian they are not the most up to date, which rarely matters over the advantages of everything being managed.

Who the hell is this end user that edits DVDs?

[parc]

I switched my 80 year-old grandmother to Ubuntu 6 months ago. I won't pretend there were no problems, but they all revolved around user interface. Specifically, things didn't EXACTLY match Outlook/Internet Explorer's interface. Once I explained that and she used it for about 2 weeks, she has no problems whatsoever.

She DOESN'T do any DVD editing. She DOES use digital photography (in that I send her pictures of her great grandson and she views them). She's even managed to solve minor problems on her own. She writes documents, receives documents (both word and excel), and has had no issues to date that could not be solved in 10 minutes on the phone.

Her only major complaint? It's not the user interface. It's not the multifunction printer/copier/scanner. It's not the funky colors. It's not the email. It's that she can't make the computer wit more than 2 hours before hibernating.

Perhaps these "reviews" of "typical users" should evealuate what a real "typical user" actually is.

It's the Internet!

[frieko]

I 'switched' to Linux several times in the past, only to get frustrated and switch back. But Kubuntu has stuck. I'm Windows free for a year now. The reason it stuck this time is simple - with Firefox, Flash 9, Acrobat Reader, and w32codecs, the WWW is now as good on Linux as it is on Windows. I'm surprised more people don't make a bigger deal about this. For me it's huge.

I switched to Debian desktop in 2005

[br00tus]

Ubuntu is derived from Debian. I had qualms about making my main desktop Linux for various reasons, but in 2005 an attempt to have my Windows do wireless screwed up the whole system, and then I needed to use that OEM Windows CD crap, which not only mucked with my C drive but erased my whole D drive for some reason. I got tired of it and switched to Debian.

I thought I would miss some things in Windows but I didn't. The thing I thought I would miss most was Microsoft Word, but Abiword did fine. I was always concerned I would have to modify my resume and send it out in a nice Word format that Linux wouldn't have, but that was never a problem. I never missed Windows for anything. They talk about Windows having better hardware support, but my (then) 802.11b wireless was a hell of a lot easier to install on my system then Linux. I also liked the ability to open a shell and just be able to do stuff - do an awk or sort or whatever on a file, have multiple windows and so forth. It had all the nice user brain-dead stuff of Windows, but I could drop to a shell and actually do stuff, instead of getting some MS-DOS prompt crap. It's much better nowadays than my old days when I had a Linux kernel version 1 running fvwm as one of my work desktops (the other desktop at that time was a Sun IPX running SunOS 4.1.3_U1).

My question to Ubuntu/linux preachers

[Programmer_In_Traini]

I'm a long time windows user, from the DOS days and I've always remained on the windows side of things mainly because at work its all we use. I never saw any point of switching of linux at home knowing that knowledge would not serve me at work.

I'd usually spend efforts trying to improve on things that would help me at work.

Anyway, now im starting a web hosting and web design (very) small company. I'm not really impressed by the direction MS is taking nor by the fees its charging. Vista smells like a truckload of overhead shit that i have zero interest in even trying out. The 2003 line of servers from MS is just too expensive just to avoid mentionning i hate the notion of online activation/tracking.

I've installed Ubuntu and other distros of linux at the time and while I've always got stuck with the file structure and various command lines to learn, i feel this is something i could get the hang of over time.

But what brings me back everytime to windows are my own limitations regarding programming. At work, we do ASP and ASP.net. Not c#, vb.net. I can read c# but i don't really program with it.

I have no interest in learning php, ruby or other languages despite all their advantages. Because at work that's not what we use and I'd rather re-use my skills rather than split into a new branch just because im having something on the side.

so, my question is, is there any (easy) way i could be running the .net framework on ubuntu ? no virtual machine if possible, no emulation, just run .net framework on ubuntu ?

I know its pretty contracdictory but i dont want to install overhead on my server just for the benefit of running .net, I don't think its possible otherwise but that's why im asking to people who knows more about this.

So, is it possible ?

Re:I remember similar stuff said about XP

[ukemike]

I remember similar stuff said about XP. Look what happened there. People that might be interested in Linux or OS X will try Linux or OS X. People who aren't, won't. In the end, very little will change. Not entirely true. Windows XP was actually eagerly anticipated by most of the windows using world. The possibility of a stable OS that would work with existing applications, games, and be compatible with the stuff we use at work, was exciting. It's easy to forget the dark years of Win9x (especially for me since I held out using DOS/Win3.1 until 1 year before XP came out) but they were terrible with BSODs every day. I remember how a computer could not be left on overnight and be expected to run well in the morning. I remember that even if you setup password protected logins you could bypass all of that by clicking 'cancel' at the login prompt. Windows XP was a HUGE improvement. It was massively adopted upon release.

Now Vista on the other hand has elicited nothing but hand wringing for several years. For what I can tell it has little good to offer except eye candy. On the downside the OS has DRM in it's DNA, it has a ridiculous security sceme. It fails to run lots of current software. It claims but fails to be more secure (can't use 3rd party anti-virus). It has extreme hardware requirements. I built my last new PC within months of the release of XP. I will not build a PC for Vista. I will not buy a PC with Vista. I do not look forward to the day that I must start using Vista at work.

The big question is this: Linux or Apple? I have an older PC in the house running Ubuntu. It's great, and it also sucks. It has tons of free software. It can't legally play DVDs. It is supremely stable and runs really fast on very antiquated hardware. Getting it to do something out of the ordinary (like using the midi keyboard I got for my son) requires navigating a byzantine maze of forums, scripts, command lines. It fit nicely with my philosophy. You can build your own. On the other hand, Apples "just work." They cost more. You don't get to build your own. Since I don't have as much time as I used to I'll probably buy an Apple for 90% of my use, and I might have a 2nd PC with linux for doing stuff that requires high end software that I don't care to buy.

That being said, am I a typical user? Hardly. I've been on the internet since 1988. I built my last computer myself. I know enough to know how little I know. Lots of people think I'm some sort of computer guru. I realize that I am just barely competent. I would never recommend linux to my Dad or a computer-clueless friend. I tell them, "Go buy a Mac. They just work." When they get their Apple, they are happy. I'd rather USE a computer than ADMINISTER one.

Re:ya but

[Carik]

Not necessarily true:

It may simply be spoken by someone who values big explosions and flashy effects over playability. (Face it... Nethack IS ugly. It also happens to be a good game, but that doesnt' change the fact that it's ugly.)

Re:ya but

[mcvos]

blockquote> And here you have stated the problem perfectly.... Linux is for the guy who has no problem spending a few HOURS to get something working. People who want the machine to just do it with a minimal amount of effort use something else.

Not true. Ubuntu installs very smoothly, and if you don't mind paying for Cedega, Cedega and the games it supports also install very quickly, easily and smoothly. Installing firefox was a lot harder. Or installing WinXP. Or those very same games on Windows, even. Seriously, for gaming, Ubuntu+Cedega is as easy as you could hope for, annd it gives you a lot more control than you'd have in Windows.