OS Combat - Ubuntu Linux Versus Vista

An anonymous reader writes "InformationWeek pits Ubuntu Linux versus Windows Vista in a detailed comparison. They run down a number of points for this comparison, including installation, hardware support, software, and backup. For IW, backup was a crucial feature. As a result, the conclusion are unusual for this type of review because it straddles the fence. The verdict is: 'a tie, but only because both platforms fall short in some ways. Vista's roster of backup features aren't available in every SKU of the product; Ubuntu doesn't have anything like Vista's shadow copy system and its user-friendly backup tools are pretty rudimentary.'"

Comments

Obligatory

[Anonymous Coward]

The obligatory link to the ad free, one page print version.

Re:Obligatory

[VisceralLogic]

Here's another comparison between Ubuntu and Vista for you guys: http://www.bbspot.com/News/2007/04/ubuntu-vs-vista .html :)

Re:Obligatory

[john g the 4th]

Apparently "remastersys" wasn't included in this review. 1 command, with like 2 options.. can backup a system to a liveCD/DVD in a relatively short period of time.

Same old trap

[Anonymous Coward]

The reviewer constantly falls into the same old trap of basing their comments of Ubuntu on how "Windows like" the particular feature is. At that point it's pretty obvious that Windows itself will always win if you're going to use it as the yard stick to measure all others. This isn't a review of both OSes, it's a comparison of Ubuntu to Vista. Take the conclusion for "Software Installation" as an example:

It's a tie. Both operating systems show much the same centralization and efficiency in dealing with applications, protocols, and programs.

Come again? Vista has nothing like the Ubuntu software repository. Just because the two look a little similar in the screen shots doesn't make them the same.

Ho hum. It tries to be balanced, bless it, but its clear the reviewer is just going to go back to using Windows once it's all done. It fails it.

Can we just deal with the obvious trolls now?

[jimicus]

Before we get a bunch of people chiming in to say "but XXXXX is easy in ubuntu, you just open a terminal and type..."

I KNOW.

But the audience this is intended for has no intention of using a terminal. Broadly speaking, they are of the opinion that desktop computing should be easy enough that any idiot can do it without having to spend ages learning the nuances of some command you type in.

They are of this opinion thanks to 20 years of GUI R&D in home computing, from the earliest Apple ][ right the way up to Vista today. That's the whole point of the GUI. You don't have to like it, but at least accept that a lot of people do.

As soon as you say "Open a terminal and type sudo apt-get (package)", you've lost.

Re:Can we just deal with the obvious trolls now?

[vivaoporto]

As soon as you say "Open a terminal and type sudo apt-get (package)", you've lost.

People usually suggests apt-get because it is faster to describe, but there is nothing you can do with apt-get that you cannot do with Synaptics using only GUI and point and click. Only that its description would be "Click on System->Administration->Synaptics Package Manager. Type your password. Click OK. Click on search and type <name of package>. Press OK. Click on the little square next to <name of package> and mark it. Click Apply. Click OK." That's way harder than "click on Applications->Accessories->Terminal. type 'sudo apt-get install <name of package>' without the quotes. Press Enter. type your password. press Y. Press Enter"

Anyway, the kind of people that would need this amount of details is the same people (and I telling that by personal experience, I performed help desk duties on my former programming job) that would need instructions like this, to install a typical setup.exe: "Open the Windows Explorer. No, not the Internet Explorer, Windows Explorer. Click on Start, Programs, Windows Explorer. Can't find it? Press the key with Windows Logo and "E" simulaneously. GO to C:\Program Files\<My Company Name>. How? Click on the little cross next to the folder called C:. Then click Program Files. Tell it to show the content of this folder anyway. Click on <My Company Name>. Double click setup.exe. Click on Next, select I Agree and click Next, Next, Next, Finish"

It took quite a time for the average people to get used to the Next->I Agree->Next->Next->Next->Finish kind of installation, and now it is muscular memory, a simply reflex on most Windows users memory. They don't even read the fine print anymore, and that explains how a lot of people got/get spyware installed along with Kazaa and alike (die Bonzy Buddy, die!). Given enough time, new migrated ubuntu users will get used to synaptics, and "Add and Remove Programs" (that is even easier than Synaptics) and, if the right wind blows, even eventually opening the terminal and making things much easier for them (and for us poor technical people too).

That is not the correct conclusion

[schabot]

The verdict is: 'a tie, but only because both platforms fall short in some ways. Vista's roster of backup features aren't available in every SKU of the product; Ubuntu doesn't have anything like Vista's shadow copy system and its user-friendly backup tools are pretty rudimentary.'"

This is only the conclusion for the backup portion of the review. I looks like the submitter didn't make it to the last page. The actual conclusion?:

Ubuntu's best strength is handling the ordinary task-based day-to-day stuff. Vista has a level of completeness and polish that some people find it hard to do without.

Headline sounded more interesting than article

[Billosaur]

I half expected to see the Ubuntu and Vista development teams engaged in some sort of firefight -- blood, gore, explosions, and the like. Imagine my disappointment.

Commenters so far are missing the point

[Jim Morash]

A tie! This is a big frickin' deal, people! Remember "Linux will never work on the desktop"? And now quasi-mainstream press says it's just as good as Windows Vista?

The Ubuntu team should be very proud.

Aero vs. Beryl, Similar?

[mhall119]

I was tempted to compare Vista's Aero interface to the Beryl window manager (which has a similar palette of visual effects)

If the author means that Beryl has all the same effects that Aero does, then I'd agree. But if he's implying that Aero has all the visual effects that Beryl has, he's lost his f-ing mind.

Re:I would have given Ubuntu the edge

[Knuckles]

Add remove programs in Vista and the package manager Ubuntu work in simila ways

Not even that. I mean, in Ubuntu I can install applications with it, in Windows I just can uninstall them. I think I find Ubuntu's solution much more useful then :)

Re:I would have given Ubuntu the edge

[jonesy16]

Except that this does nothing to protect you from drive failure.

Re:There's nothing to compare

[fineghal]

Has anyone ever actually used Add/Remove programs to, you know, ADD a program?

Re:I would have given Ubuntu the edge

[HoosierPeschke]

I agree, the article seems to be covered in the stink of FUD. I don't like throwing that word at just anything (given my bias towards choice) but this statement from the image gallery pushed me to it:

Vista's Add/Remove Programs panel probably served as the inspiration for Ubuntu's software management console.

This disturbs me as the person who has written the article had not previously used Ubuntu until he/she decided to write this article. Ubuntu, I can firmly say, has been around significantly longer than Vista. Granted he/she could have said the "Windows" Add/Remove.

The section concerning Image-Editing/Picture management being a tie also seems to give more credit to Vista. The fact of having GIMP alone blows vista out of the water let alone the several picture managers available on Ubuntu.

Re:There's nothing to compare

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

I stopped reading after this. Anyone who thinks Ubuntu's package management 'compares favourably' to add/remove programs is not in his senses.

While Ubuntu's package management is technically much, much, much better than that on Windows since it includes application discovery and acquisition and updates, it is in some practical, workflows inferior. No matter how large your software repository is, there will always be binaries distributed via a Website or on CD or via some other mechanism. On Windows this means you do discovery, acquisition, and updates by hand, the same as every other program. On Linux it means you have a special case where you do all those by hand as well as installation and uninstallation by hand. This means users have to juggle two techniques and remember which applies to which software. This is an area where Linux in general could improve. Package managers are built around the concept of open source software and thus everything you need can be in a repository. When software is not in a repository, it is not handled well and I don't know any package manager for Linux that supports using a software package from some random Website, and managing the install, registration, and updates for that application through the standard package manager. Hopefully this deficiency can be addressed if linux ever gains serious market share on the desktop.

unhelpful linux geeks

[amyhughes]

A swap of a SATA cable and my Win XP machine becomes an Ubuntu 6.10 machine. I need to be able to support Linux but don't need it very often.

I was shocked that my network connection Just Worked on first install. But my screen was at the wrong resolution, and I had no 3d acceleration. Time to install nVidia drivers.

A day later, now with experience with run modes and editing config files, I had nVidia drivers installed and my 3d app worked fine. It turned out to be simple, but there are an overwhelming number of bad-advice posts to be found on googling for help. This is A Big Problem.

Google a windows problem and you'll find some easy-to-understand magazine editor to explain it, or something on Microsoft's site. Google a linux problem and you get geek-speak. And most of it is bad advice. Usually the bad advice...

"edit the conflabulating confic spec generator and type '@*$&T IU H@U HR@&*&@BFG @&(G' at the third prompt"

is answered with

"No, don't do that! You'll gaspulate the modulating interferometerizing reverse vectral sync mode!"

so you avoid those. Eventually you end up typing '@*$&T IU *^HC* HR@&*&@BFG @&(G' at the *fourth* prompt, because nobody had a heart attack over that suggestion. But then your modulating interferometerizing reverse vectral sync mode is fubar, anyway.

Anyway, I eventually found a suggestion that looked more elegant than the rest and didn't involve editing any conflabulating confic spec generators, wiped to drive and started from scratch, and the nVidia drivers Just Worked.

If I had the power to Make It So, I'd purge 90% of the online linux discussion, because most of it is crap.

Re:I would have given Ubuntu the edge

[jonesy16]

RAID 1 doesn't protect you from user error, such as deleting your home directory accidentally or file system corruption. Nothing replaces the need for backup solutions, whether they're user initiated or scheduled incremental backups.

Re:I would have given Ubuntu the edge

[PitaBred]

So, when I click on "Add New Programs", it comes up with a list of thousands of programs that I could install? No, you say? I know you were refuting the GPP's point, because you technically can add a program through there, but you almost never do in practice. All programs have their own installers. The Ubuntu package manager takes care of finding the program you want, getting it and installing it. Windows will just install whatever disk or install.exe file you point it at. There is no comparison.

Re:I would have given Ubuntu the edge

[Fred_A]

I've looked around, and have yet to find "Add/Remove Programs", perhaps because I haven't switched to the more Windows-like interface, but "dozens of programs" seems more than a little misleading for the number of packages available in Ubuntu repositories.

According to a quick peek in my package cache, 1777 dozens of packages are available for install. Nothing misleading there, he did pluralize "dozens".
Granted maybe he should have used a better unit, like "almost two kilodozens" ?

Re:I would have given Ubuntu the edge

[delire]

So it is quite obvious that the author has very little knowledge of Ubuntu.

..and this is a good thing. Reviewers that are already an expert of the product they under trial generally have a completely different experience and appreciation of the given product than those they are writing for.

The reviews I've read on Ubuntu that are the most insightful are written by those with very little prior knowledge of either environment: as such they reveal their expectations about those products, expectations that reflect more of the 'average user's' needs than that of the expert.

I've been a daily Linux desktop user for 8 or so years, but only now am I seeing reviews by people that start with "I really like how in Ubuntu I don't have to websites to download and install software" and howtos that begin with "So you've just installed Ubuntu and want to change your theme?".

These are very good signs. People are actually trying out this stuff and getting there on their own. The software is working. Our ideas are good.