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.'"
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.
We've quietly replaced his copy of Windows XP with Folger's Coffee Crystals. Let's see if he notices any difference.
You can't talk about Wikipedia's flaws on Wikipedia
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.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
Are the configuration files in either a text format, or a well documented format?
Does have a normal UNIX shell environment?
Then it's got all the control you need.
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
What's really needed is some 'professional' IT organisation to sell a definitive Linux solution for a whole workplace. And support it. And point out that actually it a) costs less to support and b) is way cheaper.
Personally, I think it's viable, and I can see IBM gradually moving that way, and perhaps Sun too. But they'll have a lot of work to do to overcome the 'No one ever got fired for buying Microsoft' attitude that's ingrained into most of the workplaces in the world. (I'm still somewhat stunned at the complete lack of understanding of the mere existance of Unix that I see in my current, IT company).
*shrug* I look forward to a day when every business desktop runs Linux. I think there's a lot of people who's talents are wasted being support monkeys for cranky windows bogosity. But at the same time, I can't see it happening, simply because it'll put a lot of people out of work.
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.
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.
"Frankly, I'm perplexed that anyone would pass on the opportunity to try out a free (as in beer) OS. "
Changing OS is too complicated for most people, and there's not enough payback. If it works, why break it? If you can send email, and look at the web, and write a letter, and it took a lot of pain to get that far, why change the system you use and have to learn all over again, maybe losing your old files? That's how most people see it.
Changing OS may cost nothing financially, but for many people, their time isn't free. The time required to install the new software, get up to speed using the new tools and assuring yourself that you can access your old files and all your other hardware (printer, digital camera, internet connection, etc) is either lost business time (=costs money) or lost personal time (=time away from more pleasant use of leisure time). It's only "free" if you were going to spend that time messing around with a computer anyway. For many people that's not the case.
I have been meaning to try out Linux for years, but never ventured. Thanks to reading /. (can't remember how long; should be 3+ years) I finally decided to take the plunge two weeks ago.
I chose openSUSE, simply because it got some Press(Read: Novell).
I have XP on Toshiba Laptop and wanted to have a dual boot on it.
I used GParted for partition, though openSUSE came with partition manager. GParted was very easy and "Windows like"
The installation went smooth and openSUSE recognized all hardware. I chose GNome as the desktop, simply because Firefox came with it.
I played around and customized to my liking. Opened the Terminal and played with the vi editor. It seems like vi skills are etched in memory(I used to program in C years ago).
I hit the road block with wireless network. The installer recognized Intel 3945 wireless card, but would not connect.
Doing a Google search(are you happy now Google lawyers?), I found I am not alone. I tried ALL solutions offered on various forums.
1. Using Intel's Linux driver - This required a kernel version of 2.6.8 or greater. openSUSE 10.2's kernel is 2.6.16 or something. It is only sensible to use the native driver right? I hit the wall again and again.
2. ndiswrapper - Grudgingly I tried this as a last resort. Same result.
Time spent: Few weekday evenings and a weekend (to the dismay of spouse)
I absolutely love the shiny OS. Unfortunately I can not use it without an wireless internet connection.
So it sits there unused.(I changed the default OS to Windows in GRUB).
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).
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.
.net framework on ubuntu ? no virtual machine if possible, no emulation, just run .net framework on ubuntu ?
.net, I don't think its possible otherwise but that's why im asking to people who knows more about this.
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
I know its pretty contracdictory but i dont want to install overhead on my server just for the benefit of running
So, is it possible ?
If you look like your passport photo, you're too ill to travel. - Will Kommen
Yeah, I never understood the appeal of Ubuntu and am diehard Fedora. The sudo business was very odd to me. You can run a command as root by using "sudo", but you enter your *own password? What gives?
Sudo gives you root access for the purpose immediately at hand, and then takes you back to your account. It lets you get in, get out, and not have your fanny hanging out there on the net in admin mode for someone to burn you.
Oh, and:
5) If you act like a spoiled jerk on a community-driven forum, stamp your little feet, and absolutely refuse to try any of their troubleshooting ideas or provide them with the information they repeatedly ask for, then they probably won't help you.
Yeah, I read the thread where you "tried" to get help. Your take on the episode doesn't have a lot to do with what you actually posted at the time.
Moderators, before you mark me down, actually read the Slashdot thread he linked to. I'm not the one who initially pointed out his tantrums and complete refusal to help fix his own problem. I can't believe that he uses that thread as supporting evidence of why Ubuntu is broken.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
It also means that if you're an admin and there are many users, you can avoid giving out the root password. You can set it so only specific people can use sudo, and you can monitor everything they do while in sudo mode. So, if something goes wrong, you know which person did it rather than a general "someone with the root password did it" and every guy's pointing to the guy next to him going "he did it!"
look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's....a girl? yes, a girl browsing Slashdot on Linux
(Not the caulking...)
http://www.mono-project.com/
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
Sim City 3000 (happy penguin pay)
Tremulous: http://tremulous.net/ (Repositories free)
Legends: http://legendsthegame.net/ (download free)
Uplink: http://www.uplink.co.uk/
Darwinia: http://www.darwinia.co.uk/
Defcon: http://www.introversion.co.uk/defcon/
Don't assume they're all rubbish till you've actually played them. Preferably on Linux. (Except Sim City. Thats rubbish.)
I recently decided came to the exact same conclusion as the article supposes some people will--Vista was not getting on my computer and I didn't want to continue patching XP for the next 5 years. I have almost no Unix experience and the command prompt is something that I have never been comfortable with. But I had a lot of faith in The Community since I'm a regular /. reader and I figured that I could learn.
I use my computer for a couple of things:
Setting up Linux was difficult, I won't lie. I went with Fedora 6 after not really finding any distro review sites that I could understand what they were talking about. I don't "blame" the setup difficulty on anything--I expected it to be difficult for me. Configuring a dual-boot system took me 4-6 hours to figure out, setting up the right partitions (making sure nothing on my windows partitions got erased) took me wayy too long (screwed it up twice). Figuring out how to move from firefox 1.5 to firefox 2.0 was surprisingly difficult. I don't really understand why that particular thing isn't part of the yum update process but that's just an outsider's perspective. The other thing that was surprisingly hard was the browser plugins--I have an x64 chip and none of the plugins have x64 versions that I could find. So I had to install some firefox extension that creates cross-compatibility.
I haven't figured out Samba yet--this seems like it should be easy but so far it's not. Honestly, I'm inclined to believe that this is the fault of Windows Networking. Regardless, it's hard. As for Warcraft III, one day I'll set it up to run under Wine, but for now I'm happy dual-booting. It encourages me to play much less, which is definitely a very good thing.
Everything else has been pretty reasonable. It hasn't been easy, but it was more or less what I would expect moving from one platform that I've been using for 8 years to a totally new one. After 2 months, I'm now up and running and can use my computer for basically everything I want. I love the feeling of security I have in the system. File security is so easy and I love the fact that everyone doesn't log in as administrator. And I'm no longer terrified of viruses.
I'm very glad I invested the time and would encourage others in my position to do the same. Just keep at it--the answer is always there on a message board somewhere :)
actually you can get quite a few newer games to work. Unreal has had Linux distros for a while. Wow can be made to work under WINE. The problem with most of these games is the setup time required to get it to run. Why spend an hour or two attempting to get WoW set up under linux when you can spend 5 minutes installing it under windows?
It's a catch 22. More people would use Linux if the games were there. But the games aren't there because not enough people use linux.
For the record (before I get poo pood) I've had ubuntu and mandrake on 2 seperate comps. My laptop (3-4 years old) runs everything just fine. My desktop (2 years old) did not have driver support for what I have in it, and most likely will not receive driver support (Soundblaster X-fi sound card). Not to mention the config editing I had to do to get the Nvidia 6800 to work.
As a hobby Linux is fine. You won't get the gaming freaks to switch over any time soon.
I'm also trying Ubuntu Linux on my desktop. I'm liking it a lot, although I didn't remove Windows yet. This is my 3rd install (1st one got wiped when my previous HD crashed, 2nd one I managed to destroy by running Nautilus sudoed and making all the files owned by root.root), and after some tweaking with Automatix and Automatix Bleeder, and uninstalling the older OpenOffice available in Edgy and installing the newer 2.1.0 one, everything so far is working well.
:)
What I really miss in Ubuntu is a good and simple file manager. Nautilus is okay, but doesn't work in the intuitive way Windows Explorer works. Some annoying usability problems I have with it:
a) The tree view on the left panel doesn't answer to keyboard commands that work on folders and files in the right panel, such as pressing Del to delete a folder. Windows Explorer is consistent in this regards.
b) It doesn't get updated properly if I use a bookmarked folder to jump to a folder, I must press the Reload button for the tree structure to appear correctly. The same feature in Windows Explorer works as intended, with the tree instantaneously opening to where I jumped.
c) When I delete a folder I'm inside by right-clicking it in the tree folder and choosing Remove, it moves both the folder and the fact I'm inside it to the trash, thus making me lose the position I were in the tree. Windows Explorer deletes the folder and put me in the folder directly below the one that was deleted.
d) I can't move a file or folder with the mouse right-button. Windows Explorer allows this by showing me a context-sensitive menu when I release the button, offering options such as move, delete, create link, and other features integrated into the shell.
e) Lastly, even though Nautilus recognize some oddly named text files as such, double clicking them is an exercise in guessing: sometimes it will offer me a window asking me whether I want to run it (when it doesn't have the executable attribute set) or open it, other times it'll simply open it in GEdit, and others still it won't allow me to open them in GEdit, forcing me to right-click and choose the "Open with Text Editor" option. Windows Explorer, on the other hand, allows me easily select a default action for files with this or that extension, and it simply works.
If someone knows of a Linux file manager that works in intuitive ways, if possible a Windows Explorer clone with Gnome integration, please tell me. I'll start using it right away.
PS.: Interestingly enough, I play World of Warcraft, and while it started breaking in my Windows XP installation, showing latencies of up to 15000ms and disconnecting, in Ubuntu with Wine it works almost flawlessly. One more reason to keep Ubuntu running.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
Procrastination -- because good things come to those who wait.
OK, let's see how you acted on the Ubuntu free support forums:
Before you make this even more frustrating for me:
Nice way to ask for help. Sure makes me feel like giving you a hand (or maybe a boot up the ass). Mm-hmm.
I should never have believed all that crap about "providing access to all".
Useful information? Missing. Needless slagging off of OS you're purportedly trying to convert to? Check.
Thanks for any assistance you can provide in helping undo the damage Ubuntu has done.
I guess there wasn't quite enough needless slagging off yet.
I thought -- probably because of all the liberation/openness rhetoric of Ubuntu -- I wouldn't need Microsoft software to get Ubuntu to work.
And I guess he thought you were actually interested in recovering your PC instead of trolling the forums.
So in other words, you didn't read my first post, in which I said that the disc is fine and I've tried reinstalling multiple times. This just makes my day.
If this is how you act towards people you've never met who are trying to help you, I'd hate to work with you.
Don't see what difference that makes, given as I can't even get into Windows, and the problem is obviously due to GRUB. Seems like a fishing expedition there.
How about just giving him the fucking information he asked for? Too much to ask for some people, I guess...
Just yesterday I thought I knew what chutzpah was.
"Starting on the right foot" would include "not getting locked out of my computer because I installed a OS billed as 'Linux for Human Beings' ". "Starting on the right foot" would include finding instructions that answer the frequently asked question of "how do I set up a new partition and install to that partition?". "Starting on the right foot" would include an Ubuntu forum that doesn't take me a week of trying to access from different computers and connections before it consistently loads.
Stop making excuses. So I wouldn't answer what Windows version it is. Can anyone think of any reason why one version of Windows over another would cause GRUB error 25? No? Okay then.
The problem is not the devices, or the Windows version, or getting the latest install CD, or scratches on the install CD. The problem is the boot loader. The problem has already been diagnosed. You just want to chase all these wild geese because you don't want to admit that maybe this "access for all" OS has a serious problem.
Would somebody just tell me how to edit, modify, fix, whatever, the boot loader? That's all. It should be really simple, given the rigorous testing that they would put a software capable of locking you out of your computer through.
Sheesh. You actually expected that to make people want to help you more than they were already?
Well, Ubuntu Dupe, I read the thread.
You were asked what your hardware setup was -- including motherboard. I did not see any answer to this question.
I don't know if this was related to the problem, but I would certainly suspect it could be. You have a 1250MHz Athlon -- that's about a 1400+ or 1500+, correct? The sort of motherboard that would accept such a processor might not have BIOS support for >137GB disks
And you had your installation on a 200GB disk, correct?
So, I don't know if I have hit on the solution. You have not revealed it (why not unless you are just a troll?), but YOU FAILED TO ANSWER A CRITICAL question.
You were also rude, which is hardly a way to get help. In fact, I don't think you really wanted a solution -- you just wanted an excuse to complain about Ubuntu. That's why you have not revealed what the eventual solution was.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
A fair point but my cat can push my PC off the desk, cover it in firewood, pour on petrol and set it alight destroying not just my PC but my house and possibly my neighbours houses into the bargain. I've even caught it dragging a couple of kilos of semtex to my off site backup locations with a joyful gleam in it's eye but luckily I was able to distract it with tuna.
For this reason I've now banned my cat from playing with matches. I had a maths teacher once who claimed his cat could do quadratic equations better than anyone in his class which did make me wonder that if he was able to teach his cat so successfully to do maths why he couldn't teach his class to do it so well, I suggested he may have had a more fulfilling career in a circus at which he looked surprised and said he thought that's what he had done.
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.)
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.
Not to mention Doom 3, Open Transport Tycoon Deluxe, Neverwinter Nights (both) and don't forget Tux Racer :p
Linux used to be a hobby for me. For a few years linux was on the fence and one could fall off quite easily. Today though Linux has really matured. The biggest problem still exists--the linux zealot. They kill Linux, they harm the community, and the completely stifle growth on the desktop. The Linux community should shun them hard. They are like an outdated car. They are more broken than they are worth. It's best to move past them instead of trying to fix them. You can't appease a Linux zealot--they are harmful just by their very existence. I think the BSD community needs them now, and they should relent to the desktop.
You know in reality this fanaticism toward total open source is just ridiculous. On the one hand you see everyone saying Linux is only good if you are true open source while the majority say that they want quality commerical games and apps running under it. You can't have both. No one is going to release a commercial application or game as open source. So just consider the OS open source and get the applications/games running so the market share can grow.
I see the zealots holding everyone in a catch 22 with their false logic. We need development and yes that means comemrcial apps. Linux is just an OS. The applications and games are just applications and games. What benefits the users is more important then even open source. Never relinquish the open source product to the commercial venue but realize that the OS is just that, the OS. It is meant to be installed and forgotten. The users don't interact with the OS they interact with the applications and games. If you can get that through those zealot's thick skulls we'll have growth in the market. But that also means a real stand-alone universal distro applications installer.
It's about the USER not about the OS. Never has. These zealots have the same disease that Microsoft has -- OSitis. We, the users are the king. It is us that make or break you. It isn't about the OS. Your OS should provide the services to the apps and games so that we the users can benefit the greatest in the smallest amount of time.
All in all, I use Linux as my main box. My favorite game (Enemy-Territory) plays just fine on it. If I want to get any of my other games installed I can. Not that I can get them all but through Cedega or Wine I can. Keep in mind that there are quality commercial games out there such as Doom 3, Neverwinter Nights, Quake 3, UT2003/2004.
The problem here is DX9 and 10. It is a closed environment which requires a sizeable investment to learn and develop for. With Vista discontinuing support for OpenGL (even though OpenGL is still a widely competent and quality product) it makes it hard for developers to choose to target OpenGL even as a secondary target audience. These are efforts of a Monopoly power using tactics to close down its competition, clearly.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
I ask that instead of automatically going "OMG he went with Microsoft he must be stupid / evil / a troll / whatever" - you think seriously and constructively about the pros and cons of each platform and why the MS route was more suitable for me. And perhaps, how Linux can cater to my type in future.
:)
I've been interested in Linux for a long time, but as yet I haven't found it suitable to be a *complete replacement* for Windows; and unfortunately because it's so inconvenient switching back and forth, I might as well use the platform which works for me. I find myself facing Compromises quite a lot with Linux, and this is fine for a secondary machine but not a primary one. The compromises are fully understandable - most of the software is written by unpaid volunteers in their small amounts of free time, there are patent/DMCA issues holding back certain areas and many hardware and software manufacturers simply refuse to develop for Linux. However the fact remains that there are still compromises to be made - and ones which I'm not willing to make when I can pay £67 and do everything and never have any compatibility problems, compromises or headaches.
I have a long log of my experience with Ubuntu somewhere, but basically it boils down to this:
- Installation itself was ridiculously easy - on par with Vista. It was after installation that things went downhill...
- It didn't recognise my 1Gb network port (Asus P5B) so I had to use the 100Mb one until I *recompiled the kernel with patches* (messy, and getting the bits together for compiling it was a bitch)
- I never got wireless networking going, it would see the access points and connect to them but not get any data through and signal quality read '0'. I knew what I was doing and it was clearly a bug. Even ndiswrapper with the win98 drivers didn't work. There were endless other people encountering exactly the same problem in the Ubuntu Forums (network section) but nobody coming up with working answers. I am not willing to accept "well you have a wire connection, use that" as an answer.
- I got bluetooth kind-of working, although it was flaky to say the least (to be fair, the same usually applies in Windows. I only know of Macs and other non-PCs that have decent, reliable bluetooth support)
- Getting something other than 60Hz on my monitor, required hacking xorg.conf manually... I can do this so it's not a problem, but really I shouldn't have had to. A flaw with Ubuntu rather than Linux itself (and a long standing flaw as I had the same problem with early versions) as other distros handle monitor detection and configuration perfectly.
- Getting things like java, flash, etc were a ballache, as ever, due to all the licensing/patent issues.
- World of Warcraft didn't work in WINE or Crossover when I tried it. I didn't get around to messing with it much, to be fair, but I expected the latter to work as it's advertised as one of their primary supported products.
- I'm a keen photographer, and photography in Linux is "pants", to say the least. The only decent, configurable RAW converter (not dcraw, which only does the basics) was the commercial Bibble, and even then - due to it not using Canon's SDK - it's not a patch on Breezebrowser Pro or Canon's own DPP in Windows when the results are put side by side. Photography was essentially the deal-killer with me: there are many things I'm willing to compromise on or 'live with' - but I am not willing to compromise on my photos, otherwise I wouldn't have bought a 30D.
- What with all the other bits of software and games for Windows which are not ported to Linux or supported in WINE, and the sheer amounts of time you *still* have to invest in getting anything out-of-the-ordinary working (not nice after a hard day at work when all you want to do is spend the few available hours having fun) I'm afraid I went with the horned devil. £67 (Home Premium OEM) seems like a very reasonable amount to pay after all the wrestling with Ubuntu
I've not seen any *nix distro use anything but /home for years, with the exception of the superuser wich always uses /root. The last time I did was about the time Microsoft changed from %windir%\profiles (the Windows NT 4 directory) to Documents and Settings.
/bin, /usr/bin, and /usr/local/bin (and then /sbin and it's contemporaries). It boils down to needing to learn the FHS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy _Standard), and then learning the history of the directories. For example, /opt and /srv are still rather new, so a lot of systems still use /var.
Additionally, you can use the '~' shortcut. '~' is current user's home directory. It's equivalent to %userprofile% in Windows. '~fred' is user fred's home directory. Also, 'cd' with no directory always changes you back to your home directory (it's the same as 'cd ~').
Linux's unified directory structure is very confusing especially compared to the Windows system (everything is a file, logical to physical mapping is not obvious), but home directories are one of the easiest things possible. The most complicated thing for me was figuring out the difference between
If you think about it though, Windows's directories are also rather complex. Windows doesn't install in C:\Windows. It's really in C:\Windows\System32. Program Files is supposed to be read only, and it's one of the reasons so many apps only work when you're an admin. Documents and Settings, while an accurate name, is filled with hidden directories where the OS is trying to keep the user from breaking it, but you still need to get into them from time to time. pagefile.sys is the system pagefile, hiberfil.sys is for hibernation. NTLDR is the bootstrap, and the bootloader is kept in the volume MBR and is completely hidden since all it does is find NTLDR and run it. Most systems have an \i386 directory copied from the CD since Windows wants it from time to time. There's also \RECYCLER which is the recycle bin, and \System Volume Information which contains information Windows itself uses as well as where it store the Restore Points. %userprofile%\NTUSER.DAT is the user's registry hive, while the other registry hives all live in C:\WINDOWS\system32\config. %windir%\system32\config\systemprofile and %documentsandsettings%\.Default user also exists on most systems, containing information on the default profiles. %windir%\system32\drivers is filled with kernel-mode code (real mode, mostly drivers) and %windir%\system32\dllcache contains protected-mode code (user-mode apps). Then there's 5 or 6 different temp directories, and storage locations for Group Policy, security objects, system logs, etc.
IMX, none of that is half as well documented as the Linux stuff.
The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
Let me preface this by stating some facts that will provide perspective to my argument.
I am quite used to Linux. I used to help my local University setup Linux in their computing labs. I was also one of those nuts who found it fun to use LFS. I started on Slackware and have since become accustomed to every distribution from Debian to Gentoo. I still run OpenBSD (yes, I know it's not Linux) as my network firewall, and have developed production firewalls using IPTables for government contractors. Nothing is "holding me back" from switching. I switched a long time ago. My statement is that there are still applications, (WoW is just one example) that are good enough and have no comparable replacement on Windows, that I need to keep it around.
Now to address your question of why I would not use Wine for WoW. It's really simple. There is a risk that as long as Blizzard does not produce an official client for WoW that your account may be banned for using "third-party" programs. Notice that I stated there is a risk, not a certainty.
I know what wine is. That is why I prefaced that list of tools with emulation/non-native methods. Wine is most certainly not native in the strictest sense. It is a reimplementation of the Windows APIs. It will never run applications as well as those that are made for Linux. It may run them as fast, but never as well. Please note the difference.
The biggest problem with wine itself is that it lets developers be lazy with regards to Linux. Why would I, a game developer, write any cross-platform code when I know that Wine will run it "good enough"? I wouldn't. And I'm obviously not the only one who thinks this way.
In conclusion, you're preaching to the choir about the virtues of Wine or Linux. I was evangelizing these same things before the turn of the Millennium. The comments I make are not really complaints of Linux, but legitimate observations of the software market.
Blizzard already DID do this. However, they apologized and said that they supported people running WINE under Linux.