Slashdot Mirror
After Ubuntu, Windows Looks Increasingly Bad
mrcgran writes "Sys-Con has a look at some advantages of using Ubuntu over Windows. 'My recent switch to a single-boot Ubuntu setup on my Thinkpad T60 simply floors me on a regular basis. Most recently it's had to do with the experience of maintaining the software. Fresh from a very long Windows 2000 experience and a four-month Windows XP experience along with a long-time Linux sys admin role puts me in a great position to assess Ubuntu. Three prior attempts over the years at using Linux as my daily desktop OS had me primed for failure. Well, Ubuntu takes Linux where I've long hoped it would go — easy to use, reliable, dependable, great applications too but more on that later. It has some elegance to it — bet you never heard that about a Linux desktop before.'"
who do i thank for that?
...vividly encapsulates that post-Watergate/pre-punk/coked-up moment when you could trust no one, least of all yourself.
I'd flag this as off topic, but that's the worst, adblock plus-evading website I've come across in a while. If that's the destiny of the web, then thanks, but no thanks, from me.
Ever wondered whats wrong with the world? http://www.ishmael.org/
Print version. The page is really ridden with ads (including a popup and a flash video).
I've been using it at work for the past several months, it accomplishes everything I need. I miss Trillian, Gaim is a mediocre substitute IMHO. I've been very impressed with how good the experience has been, I have yet to find myself thinking "Damn, I wish I had my windows box back."
Now, I'm looking forward to UbuntuDupe's post about how Ubuntu sucks because nobody helped with his troubles using Ubuntu, despite his tantrum on the forums.
Yes, I am a smart ass; it's better than the alternative.
... with the Linux vs. Windows chenanigans.
:s
Flamebait I say
...or the user?
"...a long-time Linux sys admin role puts me in a great position to assess Ubuntu. Three prior attempts over the years at using Linux as my daily desktop OS had me primed for failure."
If a Linux sysadmin can't use Linux on the desktop, it must be a terrible desktop OS! Right? Right? *looks around frantically*
Come on, man. There are plenty of people who have been using Linux as their daily desktop. That would be why there have been so many "desktop" versions of Linux over the years.
Here is the print version to avoid the ad junk that sys-con is: http://linux.sys-con.com/read/382946_p.htm
"Fresh from a very long Windows 2000 experience and a four-month Windows XP experience along with a long-time Linux sys admin role puts me in a great position to assess Ubuntu."
TFA reads less like a comparison of two OS's than an Ubuntu sales pitch. Granted, I use and love Ubuntu, but I like my side-by-sides with a little less bias from the get-go.
compared to the Ubuntu experience. And I'm a Mac fanboi! Nice f-ing pup up and audio on that site, by the way. Might be the only time I ever visit.
- Nucklebone
along with a long-time Linux sys admin role puts me in a great position to assess Ubuntu.
no, it puts him in a horrible position to assess Ubuntu.
windows is still better for the clueless n00b, which is about 98 percent of computer users.
I am currently dual booting Kubuntu on my G4 iBook - cannot shell the dough for a leopard upgrade for this and mini..will get an MBP once 10.5 comes in.. It really surprises me with the usability.. It has been quite a while since I have used Linux. Coming from mac world, I can say that (K)ubuntu is really ready for prime time.. All my hardware supported.. Most of the apps work well.. Importantly for me, configuring for java and eclipse needed very less tinkering.. Just need a good photo management app.. Can't use picassa as wine is not available.. it is very unfortunate though that PPC version is only going to be community supported now.
Reliable. Locked down by default. Runs all the apps, games and multimedia Linux may never have. MS's first good OS deliverable.
I guess they may have compared 2003, but I guess he is just finding out about XP, so he is a little behind the times.
I've used KDE as my primary work desktop for 5 years. Sometimes there were limitations, but those were easily overcome. Things got even simpler when we switched to terminal services for some of our corporate desktops. E-mail was always an issue with an exchange backend, but Kontact has filled that void since we migrated to Exchange 2000. OpenOffice handled all the spreadsheets, and the applications that I could not run via wine were first handled by an old box using VNC, then remote desktop once that was rolled out.
There were some things that I couldn't do, but there was a lot more that I could do to offset that. With the extra flexibility that linux gave, and the ability to show off an alternate desktop, I would not go back.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Linux better than Windows for sysadmin tasks!
News at 11.
For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
I switched one of my computers to Ubunutu after my Windows 2000 got yet another set of spyware/virus files that could not easily be removed. For the basic mundane stuff I love it, web browsing especially. I can't tell you how nice it is to know that the probability of getting some spyware or virus or whatever is virtually zero. Will this change as Ubuntu becomes more popular, who knows, but for now, I use Ubuntu for 90% of my web browsing, even on my dual-boot laptop.
Is that a new window cleaner?
I've always found it easier to install linux than windows or at least for the past few years and for the same reasons listed in the article. No virus scanner, no serial numbers, fewer cds, more included software all make it very nice. Installing software is easier in ubuntu too.
I'm not sure if the writer was intentionally attempting to jinx the Windows install, but who in the right mind still installs or recommends Symantec/Norton when great products like Kaspersky now exist?
Ever try removing Norton from a system? It's like pulling wisdom teeth!
I understand that virus protection wasn't the main focus of the article, but he did make reference to it, and in the defense of Windows and giving the article a bit more of a balanced test, the testers should at least make sure they are using good 3rd party products.
h
Valkyrie is about to die! Wizard needs food -- badly!
"...along with a long-time Linux sys admin role puts me in a great position to assess Ubuntu"
I find sys admins often don't make the best user-friendly assessments of desktop software and OSs, especially from average Joe's point of view. No offense to the author, who makes many valid points, but I'd rather see a comparison of Ubuntu, Vista, and OS X from a school teacher or small business owner.
- For every action, there is an equal and opposite criticism.
...long with a long-time Linux sys admin role puts me in a great position to assess Ubuntu. Right. Can you imagine the response had someone said "As a long time Windows server admin, I'm in a great position to assess Vista". Seriously, how many more articles about long time linux users "discovering" they love this or that distro are we in for?Abandon All Hope, Ye Who Enter Here
that is what is wrong with windows and oems they should give free disk and stop useing restore partitions.
If you typed all that by yourself I'm impressed, especially since you wrote it standing up (I hear you're chair-hostile) and I don't care what anybody says about monkeys and typewriters.
I will get bashed since slashdot is linux fanboy heaven but this is my experience. Ubuntu will not become mainstream until most isntals work with no command line needed what so ever. i have tried ubuntu on my laptop and on a p3 450 hp comp and both required command line help to get the basic system working.
For system admins linux might be good but if 30 min of fiddling with the command line to just get the system working is needed then it will not become mainstream.
Also on that hp comp ubuntu takes n15 min to boot up. I am not lying. Xp on the same machine is much faster.I tried getting help on some linux boards and all I got were nasty replies.
So there is a lot of things that have to be done before linux becomes mainstream and really fights microsoft.
Go ahead and bash me all you want butthis is true.
nobody gives a fuck what operating system you're using.
I loved Ubuntu when I tried it, but I still use windows a lot, why? Because of some pieces of software that lock me into it and WINE being essentially unable to run them.
But, I'd like to be realistic about this, setting up a printer was still very bad for me in Ubuntu, although that was probably HP to take the blame, the worst thing is that there is no way to make my scanner work on Ubuntu.
There were plenty of good things, OpenOffice in linux is just too good and responsive, I tried it in windows and it is not as good (sorry), I also liked some OO features that I could not find in MSOffice, for me it was a lot easier to make my usual homework in openoffice than in MSWord, seriously.
There are a lot of things that work better in Ubuntu, mainly Web development and CD burning, are things in which Windows is Horribly lacking.
It was also fun (but harder) to try more and more free software everyday, getting free games and emulators was easy, and the package manager made most of the process painless, since often even if you had to compile it, there was no need to compile the libraries, the package manager almost always had the required libraries available to install in few clicks, thus the whole ./configure make make install thing was not as painful as it used to be when I first tried linux.
A downside thus is the default appearance, the good news is that Linux is amazingly friendlier than windowsXP in personalizing aspects (aka, it is actually possible without extra downloads) , I could severely change the look of everything to something more appealing.
And if Linux doesn't sound like a productivity suit, you should try using windows after getting used to exploit the multiple desktops taskbar feature, I miss it so much when I am on windows...
Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
these people who can't use Linux distros? I've been using Gentoo for a several years now as my primary OS. My desktop only boots it, and my laptop dual boots since some of our customers are lamers in windows.
But when I read summary's like that "Linux is finally ready for the desktop!" it makes me think what fucking rock were they hiding under? I've been using Linux distros to browse the web, develop software, write books, use my PVR hardware, listen to music, play video games, host my websites, etc, etc, etc for years now.
Yeah, sure I hit snags here and there, but I work them out, I don't just throw my hands up in the air and go "oh noes!"
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
FTFA:
"2) Vulnerabilities - Windows is like Swiss cheese with so many vulnerabilities that it's sick - you can't connect XP to a public Internet connection (i.e., behind a router is OK but direct to the net isn't). Ubuntu? It's Linux - no worries."
I call bullshit on the author being a Linux admin. I'm not trolling and this certainly isn't flamebait, only truth: "It's Linux - no worries" is a load of crap and everyone here knows it.
Sincd around 2001-2002 I've heard this from Linux people every 6 moths or so (about this distro or that), and each time I try said distro. Each time I was dissapointed, and went back to windows. Last time was last July/August, so I'm actually a bit overdue. It was the latest Ubuntu/Kubuntu then (def an improvment), and I actually went to FreeBSD instead... More typing, more work for my computer, less work for me.
Should I give Linux another try? Maybe when I build my multimedia system, I'll give Kubuntu a try, if it works out, keep it, otherwise go to FreeBSD 7.0, which should be out by then...
But wow I got sidtracked. Regarding the initial quote, again, yes, I've heard that every six months, though the distro will vary, since 2001-2002...
Linux is about as easy to use for new users as a helicopter is to operate. I'm using Ubuntu at work atm and I am a long-time Windows user. I hate having to do things through the terminal and VI is horrible compared to the advanced GUI editors I am used to. Linux still has a long ways to go before it is easy enough to use for the masses (ie you don't have to memorize a lot of crap or mess around in a terminal to do anything). Ubuntu is a step forward though, I've seen older Linux iterations that make me want to cry :O.
I don't know why or what for people uses Windows. As the author of article said, on Windows you have to: 1) buy all the thing 2) install them ( each app in another way ) 3) update them, after paying for the possibilty of update Windows is terrible thing and I ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY TO USE LINUX, especially so grate as Ubuntu.
How is Ubuntu not the best Linux distro?
For godsake, Mr. Dell uses it!
I have both windows XP Pro and Ubuntu on my laptop.
Ubuntu boots and shuts down much faster than Windows.
The wireless driver is more robust. I have a fairly poor wireless connection in my apartment, and under Windows the best setup I can manage still loses the connection for a few seconds every few minutes - and that screws youtube and all sorts of other programs.
There's no such problem in Ubuntu. The driver probably doesn't time out as quickly.
I could list other things like that where the Ubuntu drivers are more flexible than the windows ones or where there are more options available like traffic shaping etc...
But it does take more expertise to install some things or fix problems in Ubuntu.
I can't read what it says there. There is a huge advert on the screen suggesting that I click on it to close it. I do not click on popups!
I had to turn off my speakers as well. It would appear that this site has been put together at the design of someone who wants to keep informed users away from it...
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
From TFA:
That's FANTASTIC! Who is this guy and what's his IP?
Yes, MS sucks, Windows sucks, bugs galore and all that, but all nontrivial software is going to have bugs, and some of those bugs will lead to vulnerabilities, and some of those vulnerabilities will lead to viruses, attacks and so on. The reason that there aren't a lot of Linux viruses/attacks prawling around the net is because the Windows population is orders of magnitude larger than than the Linux population, making the choice obvious for any would-be parasite. Maybe Ubuntu is way better software than Windows in any number of ways - ehm, I mean, of course it is, but if it were to sweep Windows clean off the face of the Earth and take its place, you'd be installing Symantec for Ubuntu and worrying about script kiddies, trojans and the like. If Ubuntu is better then it'll be harder to exploit, but exploits will happen - the perceived calm right now exists because too few people are trying to attack the platform.
Even as you read this, your pants are strangling your loins! Aaa!
The joy of figuring out how to use a computer all over again?
:-o
Only Vista can make this experience a 'joy'.
With each Windows release, Linux seems more and more pointless.
I use OSX and Xfce on linux, both are superior to Windows. I wouldn't wish Gnome or KDE on my worst enemy, that's because I'm the malicious sort and Vista is exactly what the bastards deserve
2) Vulnerabilities - Windows is like Swiss cheese with so many vulnerabilities that it's sick - you can't connect XP to a public Internet connection (i.e., behind a router is OK but direct to the net isn't). Ubuntu? It's Linux - no worries.
3) Thanks to #1 and #2, I'm free from products like Symantec and Norton and the dollar expense, the complexity of administering them (those pop-ups are annoying and a productivity hit), and wondering when they expire next. Wow, I wonder where I've heard this before. Sheesh. Yes, Linux has a better security model than the typical "make everyone administrator" model used on Windows systems, but this does not make Linux magically bullet proof. As for not needing anti-virus or anti-spyware software for Linux.. you don't need them for Mac either. Why is that? Cause no-one could be bothered writing a virus or some spyware for such a minuscule amount of the market.
But look at what happened with Firefox. Initially, just like Linux or Mac, no-one bothered trying to break the security. There was no hacks to get around popup blockers, etc. Now Firefox is just a little more popular and the threat landscape has changed.
This isn't to say that Linux can't be made more resilient to viruses if and when they finally show up. It can, and, more importantly, it probably will. Just don't go around saying that Linux is immune to viruses and spyware. Especially, don't go around claiming that this stuff is impossible, because that's exactly the kind of challenge that blackhats go for.
How we know is more important than what we know.
I second that notion.
I'm also worried about the silly statement about security vulnerabilities. "It's Linux, no worries" is one of those stupidly optimistic statements that make me cringe.
If you pay attention to the security announcements, you know that Linux is anything but secure. Better than Windows might be a reasonable statement. His "no worries" makes me wonder how many of his boxes are running irc and spam bots.
All the technology in the world won't hide your lack of vision, talent, or understanding.
The real problem with ubuntu is not ubuntu itself but all that is around it: frickin windows!
.pps files!
The sole reason why i havent switched entirely yet is for all those family members that knows nothing but windows, feel incapable of re-learning it all and that keeps sending me
They're all on MSN and uses office XP. Of course i have ways to just be compatible with them, like running a virtual machine, or dual booting and all, but that's what the problem is, why should i have to make my life harder if my OS cannot help me communicate properly with the people around me. but im not blaming ubuntu, im blaming windows for having such a large userbase composed primarily by grannies and pappies.
If you look like your passport photo, you're too ill to travel. - Will Kommen
Whenever these discussions come up, I like to forestall some of the repetition by posting my list of wins for OS X, Windows, and Linux. This is a list of the things each OS does better than some others, not a list of problems. Feel free to post and suggest other items, but please know what you;re talking about. I hate getting posts from people who clearly have never used two of the OS's in question and are simply assuming their favorite OS must do it better.
OS X Wins:
Windows Vista Wins:
Hmm. Search and replace:
;)
"So then, what's the advantage if you don't have any security problems with Linux? The joy of figuring out how to use a computer all over again? The excitement of finding shoddy knock-offs of the programs that you're used to on the Linux side? The thrill of having to hire very expensive admins to handle stuff that anybody can do in Linux? With each Linux release, Windows seems more and more pointless."
That's better
Windows Server 2003 makes a better desktop than Vista and that isn't necessarily a recommendation.
I'm a Linux system administrator and I would agree. I'm really not a good choice to evaluate "average joe" usability.
-- Will program for bandwidth
So someone who has dealt with the nightmares of administering servers for many years now thinks Ubuntu is spiffy in comparison? Someone who deals with the hassles of configuring systems likes a system often chastised by some for requiring administration?
So?
Schnapple
Are these supposed to be real questions, or just your personal beliefs in disguise as questions. Nevermind, I think I already figured it out.
I recently ran out of room on my HD for an XP install on my laptop. I bought a new drive and I installed Ubuntu Feisty on it. I was pretty impressed. I was able to do nearly everything I needed, mainly web development stuff. Even the power management seemed to be working. But I could not get the fonts to my liking...for whatever reason they just didn't look right, and they bothered my eyes. None of the settings that I tweaked helped significantly. So for now I'm back to XP, but I will investigate improving Ubuntu's fonts in the meantime.
P.S. One thing I missed from the Windows world was a simple RPN calculator like XCalc.
"Cause no-one could be bothered writing a virus or some spyware for such a minuscule amount of the market."
Myth.
It assumes that all three OSs are designed developed and written the same way. they are not.
The person that writes an in the wild virus for OSX will get a lot of notoriety. Probably enough to get funding for their own anti-virus for the Mac company; which could include a multi-million dollar exit strategy when one of the big names buys the company.
Linux and OSX are inherently more secure due to their architecture design.
Are they bullet proof? not likely, but your statement is based on a logical fallacy.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
It was a while back now but Sys-con allowed Maureen O'Gara to publicly attack PJ of Groklaw fame. I wish I had realized what I was clicking through to before viewing the article. Being bombarded with the ads from their site just helped enforce my dislike of their services. To Sys-con's credit, they did drop O'gara, I guess.
I wholeheartedly agree. When I read that statement, I laughed out loud.
Being knowledgeable about a system that interacts with a user generally puts you in a WORSE position to evaluate it. The perfect tester is a person with no familiarity whatsoever.
Is there an article in there, or is it just all ads and a giant pop-up? The dog commercial is cute too, but what about the article?
And this, people, is why Linux will *never* own significant acrege in the desktop market: The people who drive most Linux development *are not* interested in desktop usability and *user* experience. This is not a troll / flamebait / cut, it's simply the truth, the definition of "usability" is very different from Linux developer to "average Joe User".
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
what's the advantage if you don't have any security problems with Windows?
The joy of being able to use the internet and still have no security problems.
Because I find that systems/network tools are one of Linux's strongest points. I mean let's see what I need for doing the systems support part of my job:
--E-Mail: Check. Linux has Thunderbird, which is what I use under Windows.
--Web: Check. Again, same thing as I'd use under Windows (Firefox).
--SSH: Check. Maybe the command line SSH client isn't quite as pretty, but it works in ever way as well.
--Remote Desktop: Check. Not as slick as the Windows one, but doesn't lack for anything important.
--Text editor: Check. I like UltraEdit better, but there are plenty that work fine for Linux.
--Ability to map SMB and/or NFS shares: Check.
That's pretty much it for the major tools I need. So long as I can check on the problems that need solving, and get to the servers that they need solving on, that's all my system needs to do for that part of the job. Linux does that just fine. Hell, so does Solaris.
However that doesn't carry over to other areas necessarily. A good example of where it doesn't is media production. The tools for Linux are sub par at best in my experience. In theory it might be possible to do what I need, but in practice I have never been able to figure out how and it is just too much effort. For Windows I just install Sony Vegas and go, it makes everything easy. In Linux it is fighting with many different tools, some of which are quite hard to get compiled (no binary distribution) none of which seem to be able to do everything that is needed.
So picking an area that Linux is strongest at isn't necessarily that useful, especially when talking Linux on the desktop. I mean I've known sysadmins that use Solaris as their desktop OS, doesn't mean that anyone would suggest it is intended for prime time desktop usage. Also, sysadmins are (or at least should be) more able to deal with some of the problems you'll encounter. Dropping to a command line it something a sysadmin should be able to do. A normal user? Not so much. If it isn't pointy and clicky with everything spelled out, it may be past their competence.
TBH, I'm not sure if your concept of a Sysadmin and the Author's concept are the same... he's using Symantec software, after all.
You need a spell checker and some Grammar lessons!
Well, centralized updates for all your programs. No need to reinstall ubuntu everytime a new version comes out. Price (even if it is not an issue for some). Elegancy. Linux (more so for user friendly distros like ubuntu), is simply more elegant than windows. The key is getting past the learning curve wich is getting to be really small these days, as opposed to 1998 when I first started using Linux...
Linux expert gives linux positive review and shuns windows on a linux site, as reported by linux-associated news site. Story at 8!
"The need to build the internet comes from something inside us, something programmed... something we can't resist."
So then, what's the point of trolling if you don't have anyone replying? The joy of figuring out how to use a submit button all over again? The excitement of finding shoddy arguments to justify what you're used to? The thrill of having to waste time creatively crafting confusing comments? With each troll post, trolling seems more and more pointless.
I have been running the same setup for 3 months now, and would not use the word "reliable" in a review. Initially I wanted to try Beryl, but after relentless freezes and fuckups I reinstalled Ubuntu with plain old X. But a default install still gives me headaches:
1. firexfox will randomly freeze, often on youtube, but elsewhere as well (Force Quit)
2. after playing a few videos, vlc will start stuttering and dropping frames, requires a ctrl-alt-bs to fix
3. random drops off wifi, can only reconnect after reboot
4. still can't play DVDs (a general disto fault, but not a simple install)
Now, granted, my vid card is an ATI x1400 but come on, are the drivers that bad?! I would go back to dual-boot WinXP Pro if I hadn't wiped the service partition.
Are you sure? The article mentions Symantec more often than Microsoft. I don't doubt the moral of the story--the advantages of Ubuntu over XP--but the body of the article if FUD.
He makes it sound like Symantec AV is a) absolutely 100% required to run Windows, yet at the same time, b) makes Windows 100% unusable. In fact, neither is true. Okay, there is some evidence for point b, but point a is crap. There are plenty of other options for Windows anti-virus. Many are not resource hogs, and some are even free (as in doughnuts).
When he's not complaining about Symantec, he mostly addresses ease of installation. Yes, Windows is pain to install, even before you get to applications, with the patches and security updates and reboots, etc. But that should be a minor point of comparison. Ubuntu beats Windows on day 1, but what about day 2 until day [get new computer/decide to wipe system and reinstall everything]? It's worth my while to put in a few extra hours on day 1 if that effort will save me a few minutes a day for the next few hundred days.
So aside from Symantec and OS installation, what about a comparison of everyday computer use? He addresses several issues that have nothing to with Ubuntu vs. Windows. Backups? Okay, you can use the same backup procedure for your desktop and servers with Ubuntu because your servers are linux. If my servers are Windows, doesn't that same point become an advantage to running Windows on the desktop? And printing from the internet, what does this have to do with desktop OS?
I do not doubt the point he is trying to make--Ubuntu is a good desktop OS and has many advantages over MS Windows--I just don't see much of a valid argument made here to support that point.
Longtime Linux system administrator with supported hardware enjoys Ubuntu Linux!
A page on "linux.sys-con.com" finds Linux superior to Windows! Pardon me while I climb back onto the chair I just fell out of.
After our warranty ran out on our ThinkPad T40, I decided to give Ubuntu a try, and am so far very pleased with it. The install was pretty straightforward, configuration was smooth, and we had no hardware/driver issues to speak of. Connecting up with our wireless router was a breeze, and really the only glitch has to do with our CUPS-enabled printer.
Frankly I was glad to find Ubuntu this easy to install and use because I thought our laptop was done for. Like the author, we had a corrupt Windows partition, and had to start from scratch. After we got everything installed and configured (less than an hour), I was on the deck working on docs and getting things done.
Anyone with a T40 or similar should give some serious thought to at least trying out Ubuntu. While it won't do everything a Linux admin would want, it's more than enough to keep users productive.
- Jack
yes, linux in all it's flavours is amazing and slick and all that and makes windows look like poop. now mix those flavours into one, get rid of the obsessive, "d'uh, don't log in as administrator, moron", elitist knobs, and get all my windows programs to run on it. I'll use it then
One point he doesn't address is that the power of Linux that can be unleashed is equal to the mental power the individual using it possess. Let me repeat that in another way.
Linux is as powerful as you.
That is the greatest difference between Windows and Linux. You can be sure that if you make a computing process in Linux (like opening a file, copying information to your USB drive, starting music) under Linux, all your common and automatic tasks *can* be done for you. But you need to make them. So the limit of your possible work load is very large.
However, if you realize that others can share with you ways to improve, then you take your experience to the next level.
The better you are the better your experience.
But better in this sense is, unfortunately, a relative word. You cannot see an absolutely better, because he must come from imperfect knowledge. Better than you, but not better than you can possibly be. So better is that effort deployed over time. Better is that experience.
I don't want to go nuts thinking about this, but I think that it holds up. Your experience reflects of biases that you learn and unlearn as you get closer to the source.
Why did I just think of Turing?
it was interesting to read. Anyway - when I connected it looked like the ad servers were /.:ed... And by the way - clicking on the ads will cost the advertiser money. Just figure out a way to create an application that auto-clicks all ads and redirect them to /dev/null or something.
OK, back to topic: From what I have seen, Linux is now at par with Windows when it comes to usablity, and it's better than Windows when it comes to drivers (with the exception of advanced graphics drivers and support for USB-connected WLAN devices.)
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
It DOES read like he took a couple of hits off the crack pipe or popped a couple of amphetamines prior to writing up the article.
It does make you feel good reading it. Reading a nice blathering positive Linux review just feels good.
has it already been 12 hours since the last "Ubuntu is great!" article?
Just um, how often do we need to see these, anyway?
I'm pretty certain it was late 2001.
And this guy has only been using XP for four months?
Call me unimpressed with his "great position" to evaluate software.
I don't want this to come off as a flame but it may or at least it may come off as a troll but here goes.
As a unix\linux\windows admin who spent a great deal of time in a windows\linux environment, I find windows to be more difficult to secure. Unix and linux have certain things layered well for my way of thinking.
Common driver locations , common binary locations , no registry that people can bury crap into to auto load stuff. Having to assume everybody who uses the ms machine is an idiot and lock them down in the Ad profile versus the user being told basically your stupid and you can't mess up this system without a major effort. The one thing I usually don't like is not every program loads the config files to a specific folder. I would love to see that but it probably wouldn't happen.
Windows admins are a dime a dozen for a reason , it's easy to find some people who claim to know what they are doing. Not so easy in the unix or linux worlds.But I do believe in using the right OS for the job that needs to be done , and usually that MS for the desktop and Solaris or linux for the servers.
This package Does Not Contain a Winner
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I've got my home router set up to pass the ssh port 22 through to a Linux server sitting in my attic.
This guy talks about how easy it is to backup his Ubuntu box, but he says he stores his backup server in the attic?
If his attic is anything like mine, the average temperature is ~95 degrees!! Why would you store something critical in that sort of environment?!! Something that stupid, coupled with his popup ads and crap, make me wonder if this isn't just somebody trying to drive up their ad revenue by saying what he knows someone wants to hear!
This Ubuntu is the best OS ever shit is really starting to get on my nerves. First of all even in the Linux world Gnome is inferior to KDE and 2nd linux and the OSS world still seem to lack the reliability of some of the programs available for Windows and Mac OS. Sorry but there is still no substitute for MS office and if you think otherwise you are either using under 10% of your office software or are full of s***. I am a *nix supporter and I have tried to even convert friends to it but you can't really do that when Ooo takes 5 times longer to draw a chart and when Ooo is still stuck at the level of office 97. My friends compare Ooo with Office 07 and I gotta admit 07 wins on pretty much every aspect. Not to mention the level of integration that some software companies have achieved within their own software suits ... There isn't a singe software package that can replace any of the Adobe products ( except for Acrobat reader ).
What most linux bigots forget is that people are mostly stuck using Windows not because of the OS itself but because of the software that exists for Windows. Until you get the vendors to start offering the same products for linux, the OS stands absolutely no fighting change. Even Apple knows that. And this has really nothing to do with gaming and such. The fact that many people are willing to pay a pretty hefty sum of money for a Mac rather than installing linux should scream for itself. Yes Canonical has done a lot of good for the linux community but they are still missing the point.
FUI i am a linux user for about 10 years now and I have a pretty good overview of where linux was and where it is now.
In one recent research project, teachers (n=93) where asked what operating system they used at home on one question, with only five choices (Mac OS -any version), Microsoft Windows -any version, Linux -any version, Other, or Don't Know). Nearly 1/3rd of the responses where of the Other and Don't Know kind. Ten people chose "other", with around 20 chosing "don't know". Come on now, if you spend $500-$3000 on a computer, don't you think you should know what OS it runs?
.. and only 19 are above 2. Is that a trollfest or what?
>> "XP couldn't run Firefox, Thunderbird, MS Word, MS Excel, and SSH all at once with 512MB of installed RAM"
Only an ignorant honkey would expect to run all that crap with half a stick of RAM.
Wake up!
Currently, I only have one WinXP laptop at home and a WinXP PC at work - everything else is Linux (plus my son has a Mac Mini, man I wish my boot and shutdown time was even one-tenth as fast as his ...)
Maybe Ubuntu is what I'll use for my next laptop PC.
I already use OpenOffice on the WinXP at home, so it's not like I'll miss anything.
But, and I know this is a silly reason, I like to play The Sims and am looking forward to Spore - if they work on my Wii, or at least on my son's OS X Mac Mini, I guess I can finally ditch Microsoft (been here since MS DOS 1.0, including DOS and Windows versions (skipped WinME)).
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
And this, people, is why Linux will *never* own significant acrege in the desktop market: The people who drive most Linux development *are not* interested in desktop usability and *user* experience. This is not a troll / flamebait / cut, it's simply the truth, the definition of "usability" is very different from Linux developer to "average Joe User".
It's true that the core project may be driven by die-hard techies but there are plenty of examples of other people coming along and deciding to adapt the tool for more widespread use. GUIs for vi and mysql for example. Plenty of people are totally put-off when they visit a sourceforge page and realise they'll need to build the software themselves. Along comes someone else who helpfully creates binaries and puts them in an installer package. Unfortunately, not all projects are fortunate enough to get this kind of attention.
Finding a group interesting in tarting up an entire distro is a hard one. Definitely more work than making some nicely packaged mysql binaries.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Installation. ;)
I do have to say though, linux has made great progress. Still too many chefs (each has their own kitchen) and no one has the recipe book.
Here's a serious question. Do these groups hire usability specialists? This isn't flame bait I'm just curious as to why it's so hard to make linux truly usable on the desktop by an amateur.
"The need to build the internet comes from something inside us, something programmed... something we can't resist."
He gave XP four months, that's more patience than he should have had. So, I give him high marks for objectivity and I don't understand when you say:
TFA reads less like a comparison of two OS's than an Ubuntu sales pitch. Granted, I use and love Ubuntu, but I like my side-by-sides with a little less bias from the get-go.
Are there any specific facts he mentioned that are wrong? Care to poke at some of his opinions on the ease of instal, reliability or anything else he actually said? As a Debian user, I'm not always pleased with the things Ubuntu does but I understand how some people could like those things. Just same, any distribution makes any WinDOS look archaic, from c:\ to the single window GUI and the security model that matches. When you add in the famous M$ attitude and digital restrictions, the difference is as great as having an egg or a horse turd for breakfast. It's almost impossible to describe the difference without ranting about how bad horse turd tastes. Let's try:
It's just hard to compare some things.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Surely you jest!
I've used rsync for backups for years. I back up my mail, my Thunderbird data, and "my document" directory (i.e., /home/xxxx/). One of these backup commands looks like this and sits in a single shell script and runs from cron once a day (I've already sent the ssh key to the backup target server so no need to manually login to the backup server for this command to run):
/home/xxxx/.mozilla-thunderbird/ root@mycomcastipnumber:/hdb/ibmt60-ubuntu-mozilla- tbird/ >> /home/xxxx/backup-.txt
rsync -avgz
I'm sure plenty of linux admins promote the use of both rsync as a backup/restore mechanism and the use of the root login over the internet! They all happen to be 13, but still...
perl -e "eval pack(q{H*},join q{},qw{70 72696e74207061636b28717b482a7d2c717b343 637323635363534323533343430617d293b})"
Before I am convinced I need to know a good program under Ubuntu to:
:-(
Edit photos - I'm currently a user of photoshop and a digital photographer hobbiest, so I would at least like it to include correcting overexposed / underexposed photos in a similar manner to photoshop, and to be able to increase/decrease color channels individually.
Edit music - I am a singer / producer of my own music files who currently uses the outdated Cool Edit Pro, so I need to be able to increase/decrease pitch, blend various mp3, change bitrate, ect.
Emulate windows - Games and some other apps in general are a bit more secondary in general, but I would like to be able to use Rosetta Stone as if I can pass a certification test for a different language in my job my salary can jump about 20k/year+. I would need a decent windows emulator and I hear WINE is pretty picky. Does anyone have experience setting up Rosetta Stone on it? If someone can help me out with these three I would be MORE than willing to switch, but unfortunately windows has slowly created some non-negotiables.
Well, back to rejecting software patent applications.
Doesn't happen in Opera 9.21.8776!
.pac files
= 19410153 & it's methods for layered security outlined therein...
/. even stated it in the past)... & STOPBADWARE.ORG gets its data from GOOGLE (as to sites that bear malicious content & GOOGLE's mantra "Don't be EVIL" is good enough for me I suppose, lol!))
I am doing the following:
1.) Using its built-in popup blocker
2.) Combining that with
3.) Combining THAT even moreso w/ filtering custom css stuff I use
4.) Not allowing JAVA or JavaScript in my webbrowsers on the public internet (some sites I have to make exception to, Opera allows this though, by site in its rightclick on a page "EDIT SITE PREFERENCES" popup menu options)
5.) Disallowing FLASH via registry hacks to the Win32 OS I use (Windows Server 2003 SP #2, FULLY hardened, per this URL -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=237507&cid
6.) & lastly, a custom adbanner blocking HOSTS file (referred to in the URL above)!
(In regards to the latter - I have one built up from years of doing this on my own & lately, from http://stopbadware.org/ , & that has over 90,000 sites in it, as of today that could be banners that suck up my bandwidth, OR WORSE, deliver me "Mal-Content" (pun intended, because this has been shown to be the case sometimes, yes, believe-it-or-not, in adbanners having code that is malicious in them the past 2-4 years now, & articles here on
Anyhow, sorry webmasters of the planet - I am a HUGE fan of HOSTS files that block banners, because of the above, & the fact it's MY MONEY I spend to go online, & I want ALL OF MY POSSIBLE BANDWIDTH!
APK
How about changing the screen resolution? Windows: Right click on desktop, properties, blah. Linux: Edit some obscure text file hidden away in the file system.
I don't respond to AC's.
- Check your e-mail on the corporate server
- Prepare a flawless document in PPT that's going to be emailed to your boss' boss
- Update the project schedule that's maintained in MS Project on the server
- Go to the corporate web site and install the active-X controll used by the payroll program
- Connect to the printer down the hall
Step 3 (this isCome on, this line in context to the GP is freaking perfectly funny.
Yes it is. It cleans windows...... right off your hard drive.
Oops, how did this get here?
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Yet another "Windows is still more popular than Linux so let's bash it" whiner article. How about actual NEWS?
I haven't had any sort of symantec product installed on any of my Windows PCs for the last 3 years.
2) Vulnerabilities - Windows is like Swiss cheese with so many vulnerabilities that it's sick - you can't connect XP to a public Internet connection (i.e., behind a router is OK but direct to the net isn't). Ubuntu? It's Linux - no worries.
Any computer connected to the internet without some hardware firewall is instantly vulnerable. Just because it's Linux doesn't mean anything. If 90% of the world used Linux, then Linux would be just as attacked as Windows with just as many problems. People don't bother writing as many hacks and back door programs for Linux because there's no point- there's not a large enough group of people to spam to.
3) Thanks to #1 and #2, I'm free from products like Symantec and Norton and the dollar expense, the complexity of administering them (those pop-ups are annoying and a productivity hit), and wondering when they expire next.
Like I said, no Symantec software of virus scanning software of any kind has been on any of my machines... I use Windows XP.
4) Software updates for the entire collection of software on the machine are simple in Ubuntu.
They are? The (how many, 4?) programs listed in the article are easily updateable? Amazing! Since when does individual software matter when you're comparing an operating system? When last I checked, updating software on Windows XP was pretty dang easy. Oh look, I just applied a patch for Starcraft in less than a minute! Windows must be better than Linux. But seriously though, are you vouching for Ubuntu, or are you vouching for Ubuntu + Other applications? That's like saying a Dell is great because it comes with Windows and all this other software that's easily updateable.
5) Backups are automatic.
Ever heard of the Windows System Restore? Yeah, it actually works... Backs up your PC automatically, and you can roll back to any date that you'd like, whenever you'd like.
Personally, I'm getting tired of people comparing Windows to flavors of Linux. Not so much comparing, more the ridiculous claims of "Linux is better than Windoze!!111" So you like Linux better... that's nice. I don't prefer it. I use Linux when I need to use Linux for web servers at work, and I use Windows at home because I like it better for my personal use.
Enough with the apples to oranges comparisons and ludicrous claims of superiority.
> GUIs for vi and mysql for example.
That's your examples of tools for "widespread use"?
You are attempting to read sigs. Cancel or Allow?
It's a little unfair to compare Ubuntu 7.04 to Windows XP. XP came out in October 2001; it's ancient.
I've recently upgraded from Ubuntu 6.10 to 7.04, and also installed Vista (in VMWare) just to play with it.
I was pleasantly surprised by incremental but highly visible improvements in Ubuntu usability/friendliness. Particularly, the auto-install of proprietary codecs for mp3 and windows media actually works now, and network-manager being part of the default install has cleared up the usual Linux + wireless headache. It's definitely closer to something that could replace Windows for mom and pop, although overall it still takes some Linux know-how to get the right software installed. The tan-hued default desktop theme is still fugly, tho. (and that's not opinion.. it's objective fact)
But, at the same time, I've been very impressed by Vista's improvements over XP. Everyone is really critical of Vista, but I find it to be a much better experience, particularly for tasks that involve navigating and manipulating the file system. It's also a little less intrusive with the auto-update crap that drives me nuts in XP. Granted, I'm not playing games or using legacy apps; I understand that Vista has issues with these.
I've been using (X-)Ubuntu for a while on home and office pc now. I don't miss anything on Windows.
Sometimes I *need* to start Windows (2k/XP), mainly in the office. I hate it.
- After I log in, several 3rd party programs start. Even for a mouse driver. The odd thing is, that windows has two locations
where programs can be defined to autostart. Most of them are hidden somewhere, not in the easy-accessable autorun folder.
- Several popups appear, like *you don't have a firewall and a virus scanner* or *keep your windows updated*. Firewall? Our network is behind one. Virus scanner? Why? Updates? Why? Not for a few minutes of Windows a week.
- Windows interface could be better. For example, there are no virtual desktops available (except with 3rd party software)
- The default console sucks. Seriously. No auto-completion. The set of command line tools are very limited, for example I miss tail.
- Symlinks are not implemented. Very bad for software development.
- Installing and removing software is a pain. In most linux distributions, a package manager comes with the OS. In Windows there is no such thing. Installers are also not very clever. Double-click on setup.exe -> "Welcome. This installer will install #NAME. Please click on "Next" to continue" -> Step 2 -> 3 -> 4 -> installing -> finished -> "Please click on "Exit" to Exit".
Ugly when installing a couple of programs.
- Sometimes we have an issue with our network or samba server. Then you get popups like "data loss when trying to write on " every 5 seconds until you restart the OS.
Haven't use Vista yet. I just saw it once on a colleagues notebook and before I could do anything on it, it showed a BSOD.
I used to be just like you. Never had a problem with Adware/spyware or virus all those years. Heck, I cleaned viruses and ad/spyware off of other people's computers as a part-time job in college. I'd scoff at the Linux zealots who claimed that XP is riddled with holes. Even though I'd always have a dual boot setup, I'd end up using Windows XP a lot more (games, certain Windows only apps) than the Debian, RedHat, SuSE, and now Ubuntu distribution I installed.
But a couple of months ago I switched over to using my Ubuntu parition 95% of the time due to a Microsoft bug. I had received a free copy of Office 2003 and I decided to replace my Open Office installation. That was when Windows started crapping out. Turned out that there's a bug (that seems to remain unfixed) that forces Windows Update to scan and try to update Office components everytime. That process alone would use up 99% of the CPU processing and last up to half an hour. The only way around it, other than killing the errant svcHost process, would be to go into the Services in Control Panel to disable Windows Update (which gets reset everytime you reboot, so you have to do this everytime).
There are some features that are still not as refined as windows (such as toggling the IME for entering text in other languages that may not always work), but I've gotten used to it.
Now I rarely boot into windows because it's too annoying to deal with that problem everytime I boot into windows. Ubuntu just works. Everything I need is there.
For the love of god, can you NOT link to sites that blast a video commercial on full blast??? Sound spam! Unsolicited spam! Coworkers disturbed! Nerves jarred! Faith in humanity lost! Pants soiled! Mouse broken due to frantic search for "stop" button!
Lawsuit!!!
windows: Start->Control Panel->Display->Settings and select your screen resolution from the slider bar at the bottom left.
I've read TFA, and I was hoping that it would the tale of a MS sysadmin that finally got ubuntu on his work machine. Unfortunatly, he is an linux sysadmin, so the "jump" is somewhat simpler, in my opinion, because his destkop will be in line with the servers. However, a jump from a MS sysadmin work laptop with XP/Vista to an MS sysadmin work laptop with linux won't be as easy, I'm afraid. In my case, I'm a MS sysadmin and, obviously, my daily work revolves around several Windows machines. I've considered using Ubuntu (or some sort of Linux) on my office machine for a while, but never quite made the jump. I'm using the oportunity to expose my concerns and see if anyone in the /. comunity has gone through a similar experience.
My main concerns are:
- Outlook PST files - I have a bunch of these that I sometimes I must consult, to retrive some old email that I need and whatnot. The PSTs I use on my daily basis I can manage (I can adapt to Firebird or some other client), but my "legacy" PSTs are my real worry. I don't want to keep a VM or a second machine with Win+Outlook just to check some storic emails. Any ideas on that? Can I reliably use Outlook with wine, for example, so I can access the PSTs?
- Windows admin tools - most of my work is done with the MS admin tools installed directly on my machine, and then connecting to the servers. Sometimes I Remote Desktop the servers, but I know that linux has that part covered. Again, does anyone use the Win admin tools under linux, with wine or something?
I'm pretty happy with WinXP, and I haven't touched Vista yet (I'll wait for SP1), but I feel that I should take a closer look at that thing that they call linux, but the only way to really do it on a regular basis is use it on the work machine (I game a lot on my home PC, so changing it to linux is not exactly an option for me). But since I'm a MS sysadmin, I don't know if I can make it all work.
Does anyone done it before? Thanks in advance for your help.
"A sysadmin is a cross between a detective, a police officer, a gardener, a doctor and a fireman"
I remember when the Linux user was belittled because the software was all piecemeal. There were dozens of versions of everything. It took too long to find the right applications. Ubuntu provides OS and apps with easy installs, upgrades and add-ons without subscriptions or the revenue extorting upgrade treadmill.
I don't hold much hope for Windows security. Microsoft hasn't ever done it, but they will crush the vendor who does.
Only an ignorant honkey would expect to run all that crap with half a stick of RAM.
I think some whining is in order, because Linux (and probably BSDs, etc.) can do the equivalent just fine with half a gig. Even with Firefox and OpenOffice being notorious memory hogs. There's something wrong with the idea that hardware is used to fix software errors, it should be the other way around.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
Firefox+Adblock Plus+Noscript+Privoxy. One of them got it.
thegodmovie.com - watch it
Just wondering if you were planning on posting a reply to these? Thanks.
I am thinking the writer of the article lacks much technical experience at building a desktop or laptop up from a blank hard drive. All of these things he talks about are simple tasks. Any good tech worth their weight in silicon would already have the appropriate CDs in one place, or on the network. No PC has ever taken me DAYS to build. Maybe an extra hour for a rare driver, but a naked PC to usable workstation in less than 4 hours, including all updates from Microsoft. That is on par with the last install I did of Ubuntu.
Sure, the Linux CD has all sorts of nifty things already installed, but also installs a lot of things that company policy would dictate that I uninstall. I rather prefer just the OS load, and then I can choose what installs. The last time I used the Ubuntu 7.04 install, I did not see an option for a naked load. Maybe I should e-mail them and ask for that option to be added?
Bearded Dragon
Here's another example of a partially quoted sentence from my post.
"plenty of examples of other people coming"
Sounds messy but it wasn't what it meant in its original context, just like your quote.
MySQL and vi are always going to be niche products but take Open Office as a better one. Gimp as well, since it's a lot easier now to to install it via pre-built binaries or via a package manager. Even Apache in OS X is a decent example since it's an apache server but with a very easy to use interface.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
It seems every day there's another "I love Ubuntu" blog post making the rounds on the TGPs.. I mean Slashdot, Digg, Reddit, Technorati whatever. It seems Ubuntu is the hot vessel for ad-whoring these days.
I am personally sick of it. Ubuntu is great, yes, but please people shut up about it! It's all just a ploy to attract eyeballs and bump up ad revenue for these shallow souls. It makes me want to blog about how much I love Windows 2003. Well guess what, I do love Win2k3 because it's stable, fast and runs everything I want, including games. Will it get my article featured on X-Random Link Farm ? No. I'm not saying Ubuntu is any less good, but enough already with the honeymoon articles. This isn't news! Ubuntu is doing what it's supposed to do, which is to make a Linux-based desktop system usable and enjoyable with a minimum of technical savvy. I'm glad that people like it, but people have better things to do than read (and write) love poems about a piece of software.
How about some USEFUL tricks to enhance the Ubuntu experience ? By useful, I mean something that you researched, designed and/or programmed, and that isn't obvious to a moderately skilled user. "How to share files with Samba" is obvious and trivial for anyone who needs that feature. "How to make all your KDE apps load faster" is a lot meatier.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
An article claiming a linux flavor was better than windows was found in a linux 'trade journal', authored by a long-time linux admin?
Stop the presses.
My IP is 127.0.0.1 ... take a run at it. I double-dog dare you.
Pretend there is some witty statement here.
Vista does not rename the Partition per se, it reads the partition that Vista is installed on as the "C:" partition, however if you boot into another OS (like XP), then XP will be treated as the C: partition. It will change drive letter assignments around, but they are easy enough to re-configure in Disk Management. It will not change the way your other OS's view the hard drive lettering.
The really irritating part is that Vista won't let you access any existing drives, depending on what type of security settings they already have (if I understand this correctly). You will need to "take ownership" of the drives, which means giving yourself (Vista) access to the drives. This could take a long time depending on how large the drives are and how many drives you have.
"Dumbshit"
Dumbshit? You have all those wonderful insults to choose from and the best you could come up with is "Dumbshit"?
If you're going to troll, at least try to do a good job of it. "Dumbshit" doesn't even have a good sound, Like "cocksucker" or "asshat". I mean, god damn guy, the least you could do is put some effort into it.
Now go away slut (see simple, visceral, very powerful, not like "dumbshit")
okay!
No support for my vid card, oops, everything runs like a snail, FireFox takes forever to render makes, I have to wait while dragging windows around.
Yah so my video card is old (2004? Who could imagine such an ancient time!) and embedded, so it will likely never get support. But until I get a new computer (with a video card that does work under Linux!) I won't really be having that good of a user experience.
This is one issue that Linux really has to face. Given the right HW support, yes, it flies. Unsupported device? Heh. Poor user.
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
Oh, man, I'm in trouble - ALL my boxes are running irc!
The self-described "Leading Linux Resource in the World" thinks that Linux is good?
Holy sweet Christ... I'm sold. I'll download Linux as soon as I get home from buying a new Chevy... ChevyWorld.com says they're better than ever.
What?
-
Inventor of the term 'pardon my French'.
I'm using Adblock Plus with the US-English filterset subscription and it got through, with popups disabled in Firefox.
I think it got through because it's not really a "popup" window, it uses Javascript and CSS to do its thing.
Disabling Javascript killed it, though.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
OK. The desktop metaphor; you work with documents, files, folders. That isn't what happens on Windows. On windows, you deal with menus and applications then you have to go search for your documents and folders. I can see why it happens, each application needs to make itself the centre of your attention so that you remember to go buy it again when it's time to upgrade. It's job is to make itself far more important than all of the other applications. So it hides your files and documents away and you have to access them through the file->open menu within the application and it sticks an application icon on your desktop... Doesn't make any sense within the desktop metaphor. That's why Windows sucks as a desktop. You can change it of course, and I have, it makes it more usable but it's a pain.
Ubuntu gets it more right than Windows. The applications themselves are less important, partly because they're mostly free, they get out of the way. Then you have the folders right there on the desktop so you can access the documents themselves directly. The application becomes just a tool to work on the information, which is what it's supposed to be. Ubuntu is actually easier to use than Windows. The metaphor makes sense.
Deleted
Windows Vista Wins:
* Application availability - more developers target Windows and eventually a lot of people want to run some niche software that does not work without Windows
Umm, no. EVENTUALLY, that may well be true, but application support for Vista is UTTER CRAP right now. Lots of things "support" Vista, but not many of them appear to actually work. Plenty of apps, like, say, iTunes, can totally hose the system.
(Sorry, but I learned this from painful experience.)
What you say is true, and it's also worth mentioning that many other Linux distros are even better than Ubuntu in this regard. For example, a default Fedora install has no external services and enables the firewall and activates SELinux in enforcing mode. You could set up one of these machines unattended on the internet for years without having the system compromised, even with no updates.
Firefox is probably the biggest security weakness for a typical Linux desktop today, not because Firefox is particularly exploitable in an absolute sense but just because all other avenues of attack are so difficult that Firefox vulnerabilities have become the weakest link.
If you don't want to block Flash completely, adding "*/commercials/*" to Adblock Plus' blocklist gets rid of that hideous thing on the right side (which, if you had your speakers on, comes up with sound automatically).
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Ironically I'm an educational technologist too. I got my teaching license last year but took a job in Instructional Technology Development instead... and "blubbering infants" is a good description of most teachers w/technology.
I'm still working campus tech support part-time nights and weekends to finish up other obligations, and calls from Education undergraduates are often... disheartening.
Older teachers, yeah, but 21 and 22 year old "teachers of the future" who have to call in to find the Print button in Office 2007? Yeah, Office 2007 looks different, but damn, there is Google. Or 2 minutes of searching.
- For every action, there is an equal and opposite criticism.
focus follow mouse, or better, sloppy focus.
Yes, I know that there are programs that will do most of these things for you, but they are far from perfect, don't work with every application (see the system integration in my previous post) and are often unreliable. Besides, why do I have to install (again, there is no easy way to do it) bunch of programs on top of an expensive operating system just to make it usable?
AccountKiller
Someone stopping by and using Linux shouldn't be anywhere near the etc, bin or sbin directories. Those are for an administrator or someone who otherwise knows what's actually going on. The only directories they should be near are the folders on their desktop which contain images and text files and music etc. And they should be able to manipulate their information without having to know which applications are required.
Deleted
Fresh from a very long Windows 2000 experience and a four-month Windows XP experience along with a long-time Linux sys admin role puts me in a great position to assess Ubuntu.
//e. Prodos and the Appleworks UI are simply starting to show their age.
Windows 2000, eh.
Hmmm, yes, I also found using Ubuntu to be quite a bit nicer than using my Apple
I Browse at +4 Flamebait
Open Source Sysadmin
I wonder how many Microsoft fans stopped reading, right there? (their loss, btw).
Enjoyed the article.
VOTE!
I had ubuntu on my T40 for three months - a similar experiment, to see if I could switch - and it locked up regularly. Also, an error in an Ubuntu update package blew away my X windows but hey, what are a few major fuckups between friends?
After the last lockup, I'd had enough, I switched to XP home, loaded the Thinkpad drivers from IBM and haven't looked back - or locked up - since.
Linux is still half-baked for the desktop. I'll try again in a couple years, I guess. Maybe. Who cares.
It's like pulling wisdom teeth!
Yeah, that's right, 2 of them, 1 hour ago. And you also reminded me that my OS X box is ridden with a copy of Nortons that I never figured out how to remove - you insensitive clod!
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
Chances are good, Joe has no experience with W2K, no experience with Linux. He could have ten years invested in Paint Shop Pro and MS Office.
He doesn't want to be a system administrator, as the geek understands the term [which means that the tools he needs have to be designed and presented in a very different way.]
Heck, he doesn't want to be a geek, period.
Yes, Ubuntu won't let us use all the other shit we've been locked into by distasteful business practices, so let's keep our blinders on and pretend that anything different is bad, because it's not what we already have...
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
OMGzorz!!!! A Slashdot Lunix d00d prefers using Ubunghole over using Windows!!! Call Ted Koppel!!! This is amazing, shocking, earth-shattering news!!
I will try to wait patiently for the next amazing Slashdot revelation, like perhaps maybe a report that someone here doesn't actually LIKE Microsoft!!! That would be unbelievable!!!
I think I'll adjust this shootout. I'm assuming the person gets paid $10/hr. as most people low enough on the ladder to be dealing with this crap 100% of their day usually are. We will assume that this is re-worded so that we are working with a homogeneous environment (email, ppt, project, active-x equivalents on linux). We'll also assume you grabbed employees trained with windows, but not linux.
>Check your e-mail on the corporate server
- Windows: 42 man hours.
- Linux: About 14 man hours while you have someone retrain the new person for a day. Multiple people being trained by one would reduce this.
>Prepare a flawless document in PPT that's going to be emailed to your boss' boss
- Windows: 0 man hours, since you already bought office.
- Linux: About another 14 man hours retraining.
>Update the project schedule that's maintained in MS Project on the server
- Windows: 36 man hours.
- Linux: Another 14 man hours retraining.
>Go to the corporate web site and install the active-X controll used by the payroll program
- Windows: About 14 man hours training someone on how to install applications (most office slaves know how to use applications they've been taught, installing them is way outside their abilities).
- Linux: 0 man hours, since a smart office would have given you an Xterm, which means the work is done once by the admin, and never again. I'll say 1 man hours for the admin to do the dirty work.
>Connect to the printer down the hall
- Windows: About 14 hours basic network administration training.
- Linux: Again, it's an Xterm. The admin did it once already for you. I'll give another 1 hour for the admin, but I'd be amazed if it took more than 5 minutes.
Totals!
Windows: 106 man hours.
Linux: 44 man hours.
Winner? Linux.
Step 3 of this is: If you can actually get the company to use linux, make that job completely permanent. Don't tell me it can't be done, because it has been.
Keeping the BSA from EVER busting you and reclaiming productivity by customizing Xterms so they don't have timewasters like Solitaire on them? PRICELESS.
1) Viruses - I no longer worry and I no longer need to check my PC - that's a relief. You can pick nits here about security but the bottom line is Ubuntu is orders of magnitude better.
If Linux were to instantly become the most used OS in the world, there would be viruses. You can avoid viruses just fine in Windows by practicing good habits (not using IE, not running suspicious files, emails etc). I run anti-virus software maybe twice a year on my windows system, and rarely, if ever, do I find an active virus.
2) Vulnerabilities - Windows is like Swiss cheese with so many vulnerabilities that it's sick - you can't connect XP to a public Internet connection (i.e., behind a router is OK but direct to the net isn't). Ubuntu? It's Linux - no worries.
That last line has to be the thing I hate most about Linux newbies. Just because it's Linux does not necessarily mean you are 100% safe. Your data is never completely, entirely safe unless you're not connected to a network of any kind. It's generally good practice to put your system behind a firewall or router these days anyway, regardless of your OS.
3) Thanks to #1 and #2, I'm free from products like Symantec and Norton and the dollar expense, the complexity of administering them (those pop-ups are annoying and a productivity hit), and wondering when they expire next.
Maybe if you'd look for a better third party alternative, there are plenty out there, and avoid putting viruses in your system in the first place, this problem would be moo. That's right. It's a moo point. A cow's opinion.
4) Software updates for the entire collection of software on the machine are simple in Ubuntu.
Synaptic has always ultimately ruined my system, and is one of the things I hate most about Ubuntu. Maybe I'm 'picking nits' as TFA said , but if you're going to use GNU/Linux, you should be prepared to use the command line at some point or another (but I'm biased, as I like Debian a lot more than all the prepackaged stuff that comes with Ubuntu)
5) Backups are automatic.
How? I think this statement is deceiving, because there are many ways that you can make 'backups' automatic, but I highly doubt it's something that's ingrained into the OS. If you're talking about using a separate / and /home partition, you can do that just as easily in windows as you can in a GNU/Linux system.
As another reader on slashdot once said, Windows and Linux are not the same thing. They're alternative means for achieving some of the same ends, but migrating from one OS to the other is never going to be easy. Why do half the computer-illiterate people I know use Windows? Because it's what they already know - they don't have the time or capacity to invest in trying to fix a breaking system, even if it's something they did themselves. And it's a lot easier to break a Linux system when you don't know what you're doing than it is on a Windows platform.
Before I forget:
1) Buy OEM Install disks from Lenovo because my rebuild partition was corrupt - $51.
If you have a legitimate key, it should be legal for you to download an OEM install disc, or make a copy of one if you know someone who has one. Seeing as how just about everyone has windows, I hardly think this is a valid argument.
2) Buy a Symantec subscription because I was done with the 90-day free trial - $49.
Once again, Symantec sucks. Get a better, free (as in beer) antivirus like AVG.
3) Buy an extra 512MB of RAM because XP couldn't run Firefox, Thunderbird, MS Word, MS Excel, and SSH all at once with 512MB of installed RAM - $104.
Turn off the bloat in Windows XP like the graphical themes for the start menu and taskbar, as well as other animations and your Explorer.exe will stop eating up all your ram for more necessary operations. Not having many (or any) icons on your desktop helps, as d
This entire article of Linux praise is blanketed on all sides with windows 2003 server ads.
I've been using Ubuntu whenever I can, my biggest problem from switching completely to Ubuntu is:
:(
1) PC gaming
2) Problems getting my dual monitor setup my ATI x1950
3) A bunch of scripts I wrote that only work on Windows.
And the deal breaker for my fiancée / family:
Thunderbird breaks (seg fault) with Anthy installed, my parents need to write e-mails in Chinese and my fiancée needs to write e-mails in Japanese.
That and the fact that my parents visit Chinese sites that think IE is the only browser available.
Ubuntu's installer and GPartEd don't appear to like my hardware setup (AMD Athlon X2, NForce4, one PATA (Windows), one SATA (Linux)). Mandriva installed on the SATA drive just fine, but either GPartEd or the device driver included with Ubuntu fail to partition/format the SATA drive.
I like Ubuntu's polish a lot more than Mandriva, but Mandriva works.
I'm sure I'll get modded troll, but I speak the truth and while I'm happy to see Linux being sold by Dell and starting to enter the mass consumer market, I just don't want people to set the bar impossibly high while setting themselves up for failure. As Ubuntu becomes more prevalent more and more targeted by hackers, bot writers, scammers, and viruses. Even with Linux's well built defenses any user can be tricked into installing software that compromises the machine, and there's just no defense for that.
- I voted for Nintendo and against Bush
I had her in my office when she was about 1 and 1/2. I had both a linux and a windows box. I figured she couldn't muck up the linux box so I put her in front of that. She starts bawling and tries to take over the mouse and keyboard on the windows box. I was slightly shocked because I didn't expect her to have a preference. I thought if I started working on the linux box she would change her mind and do the same thing, but she stayed happy with windows.
She has good instincts because there is virtually no kids software for linux. Less then half works on macs and about 99% work on windows.
I guess if ease of installation is a big OS highlight for you, then ubuntu is a good choice. I have two machines with ubuntu and four with windows, but 3 of those 4 are used by members of my family. For those of you keeping score, I have 2 work machines and 4 machines at home (one of which runs ubuntu).
I don't game a lot, but one of the 4 windows boxes is a gaming rig. If I had to choose, that would be the computer I would keep. I might consider dual booting it, but since I don't file share, burn cds or visit porn sites, there's not much point. It is pretty good on my laptop, which is pretty old.
Now, please understand that although I mean this in the kindest possible way, your response indicates a complete lack of understanding of the basic principles of software administration. To me, reading your response is like listening to a typewriter user explain why he doesn't need computers because a typewriter does everything that he needs it to do.
I cannot blame you for this failure, because the truth is that Linux's model for managing software is so dramatically opposed to Windows that you cannot possibly appreciate the difference unless you have worked in Linux for some time.
Let's start with the following claim of yours:
I install stuff if I use it in Linux. Sometimes by the package fetcher, sometimes by a downloaded package + manager, sometimes by source. Oh, looks there's lots of different ways there too.
In Windows it usually just involves wisards with extremely similar interfaces, where if you want you can put in the CD and keep clicking "next" until done...
It is true that Linux allows several different methods for installing software. Heck, Linux even allows wizards too (for example nvidia drivers use them). But using this flexibility as a basis for your comparison is a fallacy. In reality, to a 99% approximation, Linux users use the package fetcher, and that's it.
A package fetcher really does make installation easier, because if nothing else it puts everything in one place -- you don't have to put in a different CD or visit different web sites to obtain different programs. However, what you may fail to understand is that a package manager represents a big win, not for installation, but for maintenance of software. To give just one simple example, if I have a shared library (a.k.a. a DLL) and I want to know, right now, what programs on my system use this library, I can type, literally:
and it will show me in less than five seconds all 181 programs on my system that use the library. In other words, bye-bye DLL hell. This kind of information gathering is very very difficult on Windows, and indeed it is easy to argue that any reasonable solution to this problem on Windows would amount to implementing a package system.
Let's look at another of your claims, regarding updating Linux programs:
Yes, because if you have Linux installed, with Xorg 6.9, you will *never* have to upgrade to 7.x to use version 7.x! It's *magical*
Again, if you really think that package management is worthless here, it can only be because you have never learned what package management can do. Imagine for a moment if Windows Update worked for all software that you have installed on your system, including not just Windows and Office but also Firefox and Photoshop and your wireless drivers and the random shareware program you found on the street. While you're at it, you also need to pretend that the updates never break anything, which is palpably false on Windows but is close to the truth on Linux, especially the expensive versions such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux where you are basically paying them money in exchange for them not breaking things.
The point is that in Linux it is actually true that you never have to upgrade to 7.x to use version 7.x. The system by default will automatically upgrade to 7.x for you, and the next time you log in you'll be on 7.x, and it will work.
Unfortunately, even this kind of thought exercise does not truly capture the added capabilities of package management, because it is easy to get the false impression that such a magical system represents the end in itself. The truth is that y
I upgraded my Debian Woody from a few years ago to kubuntu 7 two weeks ago. I've been working on OS X since 3,5 years and now I'm considering to go back to Linux as my main OS. Ubuntu 7 is that good. I've been programming since 21 years and never in my life have had an OS install go that smoothly. Even the Tiger upgrade on my Mac didn't go that easy.
I haven't tried Ubuntu before, but in my book Ubuntu 7 is a milestone in Linux distro evolution.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
run gpedit.msc
Check Local Computer Policy/Computer Configuration/Administrative Templates/System
Set Display Shutdown Event Tracker to "Disabled"
You will get the standard shutdown dialog.
See msfn.org and check running 2003 as a desktop for lots o tips.
And where are you finding these $10 an hour employees? Even outsourced support costs more than $10 an hour. And in what mythical mid- to large-sized company are you finding the homogenous linus network?
The corporate server is Exchange.
The big boss has powerpoint... and a pdf willn't work since she needs to edit the document before sending it on.
And what scheduling program are you using?
The active-x control is signed so all the employee has to do is click on it. And by the way, there isn't an active-x equivalent for linux.
And the biggest example of a linux is envirnoment is a maker of guitar strings...priceless.
1) I can already check my email on an exchange server using mutt, kmail, or the mail reader of your choice. (Exchange supports IMAP just fine). If you want to get rid of exchange, there's alternatives for that too: http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/16/ 1422209g ement_software
2) You'll have to specify which version of Microsoft Office the boss' boss has; without that info, I can't even accomplish this task with powerpoint in windows. If you drop the "flawless" requirement, then OpenOffice will work just fine. Otherwise, I would highly recommend a PDF instead, as it comes with a much higher guarantee of rendering correctly.
3) I've never worked at a company that had shelled out the $4k or so for MS Project server, but I grant that such might exist. For those companies, they are indeed stuck trying to integrate with that single product, and I highly doubt they would ever consider moving to open source anyway. If project management is the goal as opposed to integrating with MS servers, there's plenty of options. KPlato looks decent: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_project_mana
4) Change your payroll software. Seriously, very few websites these days require activex. Alternately you could install IE and ActiveX in linux. It takes a bit of work, but any reasonably competent IT worker should be able to add it to their standard linux desktop image. http://www.gagme.com/greg/linux/activex-linux.php
5) Corporations generally have network printers, which have worked with linux for years. If all you have are printers connected to windows computers, CUPS can deal with that too.
In summary, if you are willing to consider alternatives rather than blindly demanding compatibility with MS products, there's nothing holding a corporate environment back.
Ubuntu on 64 bits works 20 percent faster on calculus
and 60 percent faster on hard drive access.
Ubuntu really can mess up your hardware
Ubuntu firewall is heavy as any firewall, but it can really crash your machine because the kernel is almost generic.
Windoes on 64 bits works 30 percent faster than the other in lists processing
Windes filesystem is slow but really saves data when a heavy crash ocurrs
Windows really can be totally uncompatable with hardware since you cannot programme your own drivers
Windows firewall still sucks, with some aggregated issues like UPNP poisoning and the usual ARP and DNS DoD...
Conclussion: Ubuntu beats Windows by three crashes and two Xwindows Overloads...Windows beats ubuntu in the reinstalling process... Ubuntu beats windows on the bed... Windows beats Ubuntu in Justice. Finale: "I still love the Berkley's OS"
?
I have just recently tried Ubuntu 7.04 and removed it after just 1 day. Prior to that I have tried all the versions since 5.04 and as far as I can tell the most stable and usable release was 5.10. I actually kept that version installed until 6.06 was released and I decided to upgrade. Network drivers wouldn't work, the laptop touchpad was incorrectly identified and needed manual configuration, WebMin was removed, native resolution on Dell 20" wide screen monitor couldn't be set. A disaster. All releases of Ubuntu since 6.06 have same or similar issues. And even when you fix all those after few hours/days of searching through online docs some things still don't quite work as they should (rdesktop front end couldn't set custom resolution I need so I can see the Windows desktop on my laptop screen being the most annoying one).
Then I installed (open)Suse 10. All hardware was recognized correctly on the first go. All apps you needed were on the DVD, including the Midnight Commander which I simply must have for those times when Linux decides to stuff up X configuration and one needs to muck around in console (kernel update with nVidia drivers installed). BTW, default console on Suse looks much better and mc can actually be used where on Ubuntu it all looks mangled. The one area where Suse is lacking is default package manager. Very slow and lacking options. But once you switch over to Smart package manager Suse is equal or better than Debian/Ubuntu in that respect as well. Every time someone posts the "Ubuntu is the greatest" story I can't help but think few Windows people will try it and get disappointed and leave Linux forever. Linux is a good OS and deserves more users but by pushing one distribution and neglecting other that are possibly as good or better Linux community is shooting itself in the foot. If openSuse received as much support as Ubuntu does maybe Linux on desktop would be a reality for many people instead of just dedicated few.
I recently tried the latest Ubuntu and Fedora Core distros hoping to make the long-anticipated switch, however I still cannot successfully resume from a suspend-to-RAM (or hardisk) with either. It's probably that I've got some weird unsupported hardware in my machine, but needless to say, this works flawlessly under WinXP. It's a real a show stopper for me as I hate waiting for my machine to boot up every time and I'm not going to just leave it running when idle. So...until my hardware is supported or I get new hardware that is supported, I won't be switching to Linux on the desktop. It really bugs me that such a small thing is holding me back, but the reality is that WinXP does everything I need right now. I should mention that I've been using Linux on the server-side for many years and am very happy with it there :)
How about changing the screen resolution? Windows: Right click on desktop, properties, blah. Linux: Edit some obscure text file hidden away in the file system.
No, on Linux it's CTRL-ALT-+.
Much faster, much easier.
Maybe not as easy to guess if you don't know, but you are talking usability and not ease of learning so Linux wins hands down on that one.
If Ubuntu "just worked" then it would be alot nicer perhaps.
Like flash in 64bit...
it actually booting with a geforce 8000 class video card...
and the etc, it might be nice, but after fighting with it for a bit just to get it to run some native linux opengl program it wasn't worth my time.
Its alot better than it was a few years ago, but not close to being ready for some people to use yet.
I am leaning alot closer to getting a new macbook than I am trying to fight with linux some more.
Reformat and reinstall the internet.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
You aren't really qualified to evaluate the virtues of Windows vs. Ubuntu. The reason is simple: you are biased and not well informed.
You see windows XP has been available for the last oh, 6 years? Yet you've only "upgraded" in the last 4 months? There is also another completely different operating system with a bunch of new features called Vista, but I don't suppose you'll be getting around to that until about 2011.
Ubuntu does not bother with backwards compatability. Out of commercial necessity Windows goes to great pains (often ours) to stretch in to the past. I myself prefer a system that forces everyone, right from the beginning, to keep themselves up to date, as needed, and thereby enforces the (good) discipline of only ever keeping systems that can always be updated.
But for that you need 'available source' and 'available personel' (as distinct from open source) which carries with it significant cost, for everyone - not just Microsoft. So far history would seem to indicate that lower immediate cost is more immediately attractive, and so backwards compatability, and Windows, is here to stay. In the context of 'lost source', and non-existent personel for proven systems - a reality that the open-source world does not acknowledge - the backwards compatability argument becomes compelling.
And in the meantime comparing Ubuntu and Windows is like comparing pink ladies and egremont russets. I still find the latter slicker and smoother for all its warts.
>>>If I had decided to rebuild my PC with Windows XP - we won't even talk about Vista - this is what I was looking at
I have installed XP and Vista, and the install of Vista Enterprise Edition was pretty effortless. No BS. This was not setup as an unattended install but it sure felt like it was. After I clicked yes to a few of the opening screens I went away for about 30 minutes, came back and it was rebooting. Waited another couple of minutes and it was done. 11 updates via Windows update, that took another 5 minutes.
rsync -avgz /home/xxxx/.mozilla-thunderbird/ root@mycomcastipnumber:/hdb/ibmt60-ubuntu-mozilla- tbird/ >> /home/xxxx/backup-.txt
That little command executes in a few seconds to a few minutes no matter where I am on the Internet and even if I've added some decently sized files to my computer. I've got my home router set up to pass the ssh port 22 through to a Linux server sitting in my attic. Quick and painless backups run without a hitch. It's a thing of beauty.
And you wonder why laypersons like me still haven't switched from Windows to Ubuntu?
>And where are you finding these $10 an hour employees? Even outsourced support costs more than $10 an hour.
What planet are you on? On my planet, you can easily find support worker jobs at that price. That took about 10 seconds to find, btw. No serious amount of effort. Perhaps you only searched for 9 seconds?
>The corporate server is Exchange.
Sure, if the company has chosen Microsoft. In this case the company has chosen whatever works best for them. If you expect a company to choose something because you prefer it, I believe the correct word for that would be "arrogance".
>The big boss has powerpoint... and a pdf willn't work since she needs to edit the document before sending it on.
Same thing again. A company that doesn't choose microsoft would use OpenOffice or something else. Next thing you'll tell me is that if a car part isn't made by Delco, it's not really a car part, is it? Or perhaps if a computer isn't made by Apple, it's not really a computer?
I mean, honestly, are you seriously trying to say "I'd like to see a Toyota take a Delco radio!" Because if you are, I do believe you've lost already. Even more ridiculous, but still on track, would be an argument from you that it's not paper if it's not size A4.
Anyways, the big boss of a real corporation has whatever program on his computer that works for him. And any sane big boss has the program on his computer that the rest of the company is using.
>And what scheduling program are you using?
I don't know, there's just too many to choose from. Evolution, Zimbra, Chandler. It would be up to the sysadmin to evaluate the products and decide the best course of action.
You sir, truly seem to be very misinformed about these things. I'd love to teach you all I know, but I just don't have the time. I suggest trying google next time. Just as before, please spend more than 9 seconds on your search.
>The active-x control is signed so all the employee has to do is click on it. And by the way, there isn't an active-x equivalent for linux.
Wow, your company lets users install things on the computer with just a click? Because they're signed? I mean, just... wow. Do you also let them play games on their computer because they've been signed? Drive the corporate car to the airport to pick up their family from vacation because it accepts keys? Bring hookers into the workplace because they've recently passed an STD test? Puh-leeeze.
>And the biggest example of a linux is envirnoment is a maker of guitar strings...priceless.
Yes, exactly. Or don't you get it? You don't have to be IBM to be able to make Linux work for you. You can be as non-techie as a company that makes guitar strings and find Linux does it all for you. Oh, maybe you assume because they make guitar strings they wouldn't have things like meetings, email, presentations, production management, websites, etc? Well, you know what assume does. It makes an ass out of you. Not really me, because it's pretty clear at this point I'm much more intelligent in this field than you ever will be.
What I mean is a Windows RDC client. All our Windows servers run a remote desktop server, and that's how you get at them without having to go to the server room. The client for Linux isn't as slick as the client for Windows. Given that many important things run on the Windows systems (like our pay for print server) I need access to that. As I said, nothing Linux can't handle.
Microsoft does not forbid OEMs from shipping disks with their computers - instead, they give the OEM an option as whether to ship the disks or provide a Recovery Disk/Partition system of their own design. There are many not-so-large OEM's that ship their computers with a Windows DVD that's only difference from the Retail disk is the label.
As for not being able to give out the disks later, as a replacement? Wrongo! Again, that's OEM policy, not Microsoft's.
Blame the OEM for the crappy recovery process and lack of disks, not Microsoft.
For PC gamers it is harder, but many games have native linux versions if you look around. Also there is always Wine or Cedega you can run the windows versions under.
Also ATI's linux drivers have always been awful to non-existant. I read that they are getting better now but its still true that if you plan to run Linux, you're much better of buying nVidia.
But I agree, linux is a better platform.
Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
Read the article, and as a user pretty familiar with the Linux world, this is what I have to say:
Mass FUD
Every time these articles come out, I cringe in reading them. Everytime I look for something insightful and new, I just keep getting more irrelevant information.
Have not played with the newest Ubuntu release, but a couple of questions come to mind:
1. Does it come with NATIVE codec support, or do I still have to spend some time looking for these?
2. How are the video drivers looking? How well can it pick up a, say, workstation-level ATI Mobility card? (last time I tried, this was the massive point of failure, and wasted time)
3. How's the support for the Intel Centrino Wireless chipset (the new ones, too)?
4. Any new news on usability? Features (any)? I don't care about 3D graphics on my desktop that much...
I ask these questions because the release immediately before this one was a terrible experience for me. No native wireless, no native codec support, bad video support, on and on and on...I know the experience is great for some, but Windows (XP, so far) is good for almost ALL PC configurations (post 1998, at least).
This article discusses the obvious points about any Linux distribution that has fairly decent GUI support. I'm still waiting for the article that REALLY shows a genuine advantage to choose Linux over my Windows Vista installation that will not have me spending days on configuration...
I know, I have been looking into Linux games recently as well (been loving the old-school feel of Battle for Wesnoth) but sometimes I just want to play games my friends are playing. When Starcraft 2 comes out later this year (personal guess), they're releasing it for PC and Mac but not Linux. Unfortunately, I don't love Linux enough to boycott games in protest.
Also, I bought the x1950 before I installed Ubuntu and started using it on a daily basis. In the future I will be buying nvidia though unless AMD's influence can substantially improve ATI's drivers.
Good point - when given a laptop to put on the network that insisted on a graphical login I fired up twm.
The problem with a Vox Pop on the issue is the people you interview may not really know what the options are and may want to stay with what they have been taught to use in school even if there are far better options. It really comes down to the applications anyway - linux was "ready for the desktop" for many the moment a netscape port ran on it. It won't be ready for some until their in-house VB application runs on it.
Not quite school teacher or business owner point of view, but I've tried to be fair to what the Average User can do with Windows versus Ubuntu in this link I'm shamelessly whoring for myself.
And, as an anecdotal aside, I tested my hypothesis after, by bringing my Ubuntu laptop to my mother's house where she humored me for ten minutes by doing things like "Okay, mom, let's say you want to check your email. See if you can figure it out," and "Now let's say you want to surf the web..." and letting her go at it without prompting from me. Once she saw the Applications menu (took her about three seconds) it was no problem. If it weren't for certain Windows-only propietary software she has to use for work, I'd feel perfectly comfortable giving her an Ubuntu CD and knowing that my "family tech support time" would be reduced by 90%. I dont' expect that she could do everything without any prompting from me, but she'd never call me again for "I think I have a virus" or "can you help me clean up my start menu again" or "the computer is being slow" because there's fifty gigaquads of spyware infesting it.
mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
Sorry, that article had no content for me. It was full of praises and light on detail.
Myself, I have nearly 20 years experience in UNIX (scary but true). I'm a Solaris engineer, have run Solaris, Suse, Ubuntu and Windows for my desktop at work and at home.
I work with computers every day but my attitude at home is that I put on my "dumb user" hat and don't want to have to think.
I love Ubuntu, but unfortunately it makes me have to think, so unfortunately at home Windows gets booted more often. If Tux wasn't so cute my kids wouldn't know what Ubuntu was.
If I was not a UNIX engineer my Ubuntu installations would not be running the native resolution of the monitors, dual head monitors would not work, the wireless card in my laptop would not work, the audio drivers would be wrong and the volume control would give bizarre results. The list goes on. All these things required the manual edit of files and/or searching forums for driver information, things that I did not have to do to get Windows to run the same hardware.
Wake me up when I can wear my dumb user hat.
I needed to rebuild my T60 with a fresh OS. Which was easier? MS Windows with a factory install disk, separate disks for Office and for Virus protection and then a lot of hunt-and-peck downloading for various apps like Thunderbird, Firefox, SSH, and Calendar or....Ubuntu with one CD and an OS that includes an integrated, extensible, and slick software package manager where all the software is approved and tailored to the installation?
You are a Linux administrator and you have to "hunt" and "peck" for your common applications? The majority of what you listed, the product names are the domains involved. You consider changing disks or even opening your disk binder some kind of hassle?
2) Buy a Symantec subscription because I was done with the 90-day free trial - $49.
Here we go again. Another "expert" who can't seem to locate ClamAV? I am about sick of articles where the person doing the review claims to have expertise in IT, then immediately turn around and not find one of the most common, cost saving tools you can get for Windows. It's here, for the apparently IT experts who have yet to hear of it: http://www.clamwin.com/
3) Buy an extra 512MB of RAM because XP couldn't run Firefox, Thunderbird, MS Word, MS Excel, and SSH all at once with 512MB of installed RAM - $104.
Ok, show me a screenshot of what happens when you attempt to run these applications all at once. Explain what, exactly, the computer does to notify you of this. I inquire because I ran XP for years with 512MB of RAM and I had OpenOffice, World of Warcraft, cygwin-x, 3-7 rxvt sessions, ssh tunnel to work, and Thunderbird open just about eight hours a day, five days a week. Sure, it wasn't like when the system is running nothing, but it certainly wasn't too slow. Unless you have swap turned off, then there's no reason why the system would magically quit opening new programs.
4) Install all of the above with product keys along the way - four hours? Maybe six? Maybe more because the tools for getting 2GB-3GB of mail data back into Thunderbird in Windows aren't nearly as good as the same tools in Linux.
Well, if you were using TB before, you can just drop your mail folder on the new system unchanged and open the application. Why aren't you more specific here? Is it because you are continuing to try and shed Windows in a negative light without being able to attack it from a technical standpoint? Much like a few of your prior remarks in this story, Linux gets some kind of free pass continually, while the teenies little thing in Windows is a big deal breaker.
1) Viruses - I no longer worry and I no longer need to check my PC - that's a relief. You can pick nits here about security but the bottom line is Ubuntu is orders of magnitude better.
So you said that knowing it is stupid. True, it's better, but you are trusting strangers with your candy any time you have any kind of machine on the Internet. Replies from people who get stuck on this one will be disregarded.
2) Vulnerabilities - Windows is like Swiss cheese with so many vulnerabilities that it's sick - you can't connect XP to a public Internet connection (i.e., behind a router is OK but direct to the net isn't). Ubuntu? It's Linux - no worries.
True, XP SP1 will get destroyed shortly after getting an IP on an open network without security updates. This, too, isn't really a good point of review. Why don't you go grab a Linux CD from October 25th 2001 and install it under the same circumstances you claim XP is so bad for and let's see how long it lasts without updates or securing.
3) Thanks to #1 and #2, I'm free from products like Symantec and Norton and the dollar expense, the complexity of administering them (those pop-ups are annoying and a productivity hit), and wondering when they expire next.
Sounds great. See my responses to #1 and #2, then grab ClamAV. I've never run Norton or Symantec on XP and never had any problems. It's
Oh geeez, get off your high horse and take the blinders off. A handful of UI developers is like a speck of sand on the Linux beach.
Regarding binary video drivers, I've found it works well (with Nvidia, anyway) to install the driver while you are running the live CD OS, then install the system. Configure the monitor correctly, while you're at it (prior to running the install). The card and monitor will be installed/configured with your installation.
I mucked around with the driver install (with limited success) after installing Ubuntu the first time, then tried this method (and reinstalled). Worked like a charm. All resolutions are available; hardware acceleration, Beryl/Compiz work, etc. (~1500 fps in glxgears, ~350 fps glxgears full-screen)
My first-hand experience applies to Nvidia cards; I ditched ATI long ago.
I would recommend trying this if you have other binary-only hardware as well; everything else I have was detected and configured correctly by the live CD. In short, make everything work in the live CD and then run the install.
Just my $.02
P.S. I've been using various distros of Linux for over 10 years. I finally gave Ubuntu a try. It is by far the best one I've seen yet.
I have used many more OSes than I care to remember. Even CP/M.
When you're dead, you don't know you're dead. It only affects the people around you. Same thing when you're stupid.
It's not news that Linux likely could substitute Windows on most household and office desktops if it wasn't for the lack of video game support, and the fact that your average office rat would need heavy retraining to use his, or her, new tools. So to me it frankly sounds like things are looking increasingly bright for lazy Linux fans than bad for Windows, however great it is Ubruntu is still Linux and there is still a wide range of reasons for people not to use it - while saving money is the only real advantage to people who aren't going to use their open source license beyond installing a different skin for hearts.
I had Windows on my T40 for three months - a similar experiment, to see if I could switch - and it locked up regularly. Also, an error in an service pack blew away my Windows install but hey, what are a few major fuckups between friends?
After the last lockup, I'd had enough, I switched to Ubuntu, didn't need to load the Thinkpad drivers from IBM and haven't looked back - or locked up - since.
Windows is still half-baked for the desktop. I'll try again in a couple years, I guess. Maybe. Who cares.
OS X was from 2001, so comparing Vista to OS X is stupid? Seems to be happening more and more. When Leopard ships we will have a more apples to apples comparison. With Windows 2000 I never had major registry corruption issues. At work at we just started in the last 9 months moving from Windows 2000 to XP. This month I have had to fix my laptop several times from registry corruption.
Thinking about putting Ubuntu on my Dell Latitude 820 and running Windows in a VMWare virtual machine. Should not have to re-install XP again.
Your Average Joe
DogShit, your trolls suck like you on a German Shepherd.
...but it's a pain in the ass to find the drivers for it.
I know... I'll create a article that is sure to turn heads on Slashdot, even better than "Switching to OSS", with lots of propaganda to lure the majority of ./ to the aforementioned article. Then I'll load it up with ads and pop-ups and make some money.
/. really
well designed propaganda + ads = $$$$
Man I wonder why no one has ever thought of this concept before it's pure genius!
Oh wait... don't they call that SPAM
SPAM.
No it's
I say don't drink and drive, you might spill your drink. Before you get behind the wheel just stop and think.
The ideal computing experience has been a moving target over the years. I've been watching it from the days of the Commodore 64, when GEOS was the third most popular operating system in the world. Back then, you could predict that if computers could keep up the pace, you'd eventually be able to see pictures, movies, music, and have realistic games. You should be able to communicate with far away computers as well. You should be able to do business on them.
It's been an incredibly complex journey, and it has taken 20+ years to get here. We're not there yet, but we are a lot closer. After a while, people stopped waiting for new "killer apps", and we standardized on the "office suite" that included components including word processing, spreadsheet and presentation software, among a short few others of diminishing importance.
Along the way, security has reared its head as the internet became the killer app. Ultimately, that problem has to be solved for a commodity computer that is "good enough". In much the same way that the problem of small arms started with stones and has been commoditized with the AK-47. Easy to manufacture, simple to operate, kills people reliably at typical combat distances. Security is similar to the reliability component - for a computer to be reliable in the internet environment it has to be secure.
The FOSS approach to commoditize the PC is proceeding on two fronts. The first is to to emulate the latest and greatest features and application set of Windows, like Ubuntu, Fedora and others. The other is a pedantic approach like OpenBSD, where you start from the trivial and work your way outwards, debugging and locking everything down.
I'm amazed at how far Linux has come in the 10 years I've played with it. Ubuntu is quite usable now, and it has to be more secure than MS. But I wouldn't be surprised if the OpenBSD-like approach triumphs in the end.
If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
I'm guessing you don't know much about Macs. OS X (10.0) "Cheetah" was released in 2001, but when you hear anyone comparing OS X to Vista, they're talking about OS X (10.4) "Tiger" which was released years later.
The difference between Cheetah and Tiger is huge. Spotlight and Dashboard, two of the apps that Vista is most accused of copying were released in Tiger.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
I'd say his "long-time Linux sys admin role" puts him in a terrible position to assess Ubuntu vs Windows. His description of the rsync shell script/cron job/firewall config/server setup backup process as "automatic" only gives insight as to how far from mainstream his perspective is. And this is after three previous attempts to run Linux as his everyday desktop? Yes, I actually use rsync in a similar manner on my OS X machine. But I sure don't brag about it. :)
KeS
Fuck yeah! Woo Woo Woo!! Fuckin vendor tied in by the balls looser! You tell 'em!
Just use NoScript... the page looks fine. No pop-ups or flash.
YES.
This is the fundamental problem with most pro-Linux people/discussions, and I say it every time it comes up. Computer people like Linux. A home user who doesn't do anything but type and check email and look at web pages would be fine with Linux. However, people who have actual jobs to do with computers (i.e. the computer is not the job) cannot really hope to get their jobs done with Linux.
Why? Simple. There is virtually no software available for it. "What? No software? Just take a look at SourceForge! There's a nearly endless supply, and the vast majority of it is free!" Yeah, and look at download.com. And Best Buy. And Wal-Mart. In comparison, there is no software available for Linux.
For some reason, IT people seem to think that the rest of the world just uses MS Office for everything they do, and therefore will be fine with OO.org or Crossover, and therefore should move to Linux AND FAST! This is because IT people are some of the most clueless morons on the planet. Their knowledge and experience is so narrow that taking advice from them on general business matters will nearly always end in frustration, if not outright disaster.
Most people and businesses have a number of specialized applications that are required for the jobs they do. They aren't available on Linux. What about clones of those products? Those are no good either. When you have a job, a lot of the work you do requires you to trade data with other people at other companies. If you're using weird crap designed by some guy in his basement, this makes your life very difficult. Software gains value with the number of people who use it. This is why Windows reigns supreme. Very few people actually like it, but that's just what you use.
Windows is the QWERTY keyboard of the OS world. It's stupid and clumsy, but it's what we're used to, and anyone who walks up to your computer can type on it. Linux is the Dvorak keyboard. It's arguably more efficient, rational, and better, but really, who the hell wants to use it and toss all that experience and interoperability? I'll tell you who. Geeks and losers.
And that pretty much sums up the Linux demographic.
Okay, I'm kidding.
...But I'm kidding on the square.
I had a thinkpad R40e with an RT2500 network card. It took me days to get Ubuntu working. This is because 1) Ubuntu does not boot on the R40e without the ec_intr=0 boot parameter. OK it does boot after 10 minutes (after the HAL an acpi modules time out) but then half the keystrokes and mouse clicks are lost, meaning you cannot even log in! 2) WAP/PSK on the RT2500 is not supported by ubuntu's network manager. You have to disable the network manager and use a manual start-up script. 3) acpi was unstable until I ubgraded the thinkpad bios. Now I have sorted this out Ubuntu is great, but I think any "end users" just wanting to give Ubuntu a go would have given up when the "live cd" did not boot.
what is this "popup" you speak of?
"This popup"
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
I had song in some flac format and i really wanted to change them to mp3. So i decoded them flac -d and then piped it to lame and tada! A whole album converted very fast, without annoyingly clicking heaps of stuff and all in one command :) Its VERY simple too if you know about bash.
My windows users were watching and they were amazed and start asking me to get Linux running on their computers lol
I laughed and handed out some Ubuntu cds i got for free..
And NOT your gateway address?
If you knew about networks, you'd know a machine IP cannot end with 0 or 255.
I really want you to bash me for this. Really, I do. Go ahead. This is NOT reverse psychology. Really not!
When I tried to install Linux on my home computer it didn't work and when I wrote to the LKML that they're all gay assmonkeys who should die of AIDS they told me to go away. The Linux community is so rude!Q1
Linux is so bad because you can't install modern hardware like my acoustic coupler for the C64. Also the user interface is ugly because it doesn't look exactly like Windows XP, which is blue, which is good. Also, there are literally no games whatsoever for Linux, especially not from companies like id Software. Man, would I like to play Quake 4 on Linux! Also, my self-written VB6 password manager doesn't work under Linux because Linux isn't good enough to run VB6. Also, on my 486 notebook Linux takes more than five minutes to boot! And I have to use the command line when I want to do simple stuff like copy the boot sector!1 Linux isn't ready for the desktop because only Windows is and that has always been true ever wince there were computers and possibly even before that!.
Now please bash me because I am so great.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
Hello Have you see Ubuntu working with beryl manager? It is really 3D not like MS vista. I ave try this and now I cant work with Microsoft OS.
why are ubuntu users so short sighted? Ubuntu is not immune to virus' - no OS is - it just means that the core of hackers out there can't be ar$ed to write one, but find it more entertaining to make a big corporation look silly by exploiting theirs! It also sounds to me like the ubuntu user trying to install windows needs to maybe look at their skillz on re-installing a machine and change the software they put on afterwards as that is the real problem and not Windows itself! go on - flame me - you're just in denial!
I hate that Microsoft term "user experience". If I'm getting an "experience" from a desktop operating system, it is getting in my way. I don't want an experience. I want the OS to melt into the background so I hardly know I'm even using it. You can see this philosophy in Microsoft products - from the gaudy and "wow look at this" over the top transparency effects in Vista to the annoying bubbles that pop up on XP and badger you to death every time you move the mouse. It's trying to give me a "user experience". No thanks. Windows 2000 was more usable because it wasn't trying to force an "experience" on me.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
... somebody came up with a "Ubuntu isn't Linux!" Website akin to the old "Redhat isn't Linux!" one. Everytime you hear about Linux these days it's really about Ubuntu. That is nice and dandy, but also getting out of proportion. There other distributions, quite on par.
If you want the default/special icons ("Computer", "Documents", your home folder, Network browser, or Trash Can), I know of no easier way to get them than to launch gconf-editor, navigate to /apps/nautilus/desktop, and enable the desired items. There could very well be an easier way, I don't know. There should be. Actually I agree that Ubuntu needs some work, why I stated that it only gets it more right than Windows. The Computer icon should go away, it isn't needed and it purely exists because Windows has one. The network browser should likewise go away, again, it isn't needed there should be no differentiation between network and local files. Network and local filesystems which hold for example group files should appear on the desktop as folders. The default action should be to symbolically link, not to copy or to move files.
Basically, the important bits the information you need to do your job should be sitting there on the desktop staring you in the face, all the techical stuff which frankly just gets in the way should be hidden out of sight. Unfortunately techies and developers with over large egos are overenamoured with software and applications.
Deleted
Can Ubuntu run Never Winter Nights 2, WoW, Planetside, MS Office and Oblivion without a great hassle with video drivers? If so, i will switch as soon as i get home. Until then, linux will be something i point at and say "ooo neat... too bad though". i installed it on my work computer and it was fine until i tried adjusting video settings then it went Tango Uniform.
Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
I am far from being a newbie at linux, since I have used Slackware since it was SLS, and many other distros in between, but my first experimental install of Feisty was such an abortion I ended up throwing it out. I was willing to believe the many who had had positive experience of it, but was eventually put off the whole idea by a series of issues starting with the fact that the apparently smooth and easy installation resulted in a machine that refused to boot without a lot of manual jiggery-pokery.
This was a result of the one-size-fits-all kernel (via initrd) doing stupid things with my multiple disk drives leading to a situation where it didn't know how to mount them at all. I guess that's where Slackware has it down - you just install a kernel that works with your drives, but never mind, I was prepared to live with the difference.
The final straw was when I found that the installation had left me without any of the tools or libraries I needed to build a new kernel, which I thought was a bit tacky. And when I had found them, surprise surprise, my new kernel (with the same config as I had used successfully before) refused to boot.
At that point, I lost interest, since the whole attraction in the first place was how easy it was all supposed to be, and Ubuntu just wasn't giving me that, so I junked it and went back to Slackware.
Any sentient person should be able to evaluate Windows, at the very least the most important features, after that time. Even more so a technically savy person.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
After reading most of this guys article I just get the feeling he's a linux fanboy wanting to join the bandwagon of anti-MS ppl. There are viruses on linux. You can get hacked on the internet on linux. You can get rootkitted on linux. Yes, let me read a 100 page man file to figure out to use a command line argument bc its so much easier and intuitive than a Windows GUI analog. Has this guy heard of ghosting his images? WTF -- a total nub -- GAH! Ya I'll take my free MSDNAA copy of Windows for now. I've run OpenSuse 10.2 on my laptop so I do know that linux isn't THAT friendly.
Ubuntu has been like this. I used Ubuntu in late 2005 and early 2006 on an older dell inspiron laptop, and to DJ music! It was the easiest distro I've ever installed and the most comprehensive (there was less "configuring and less downloading" extra stuff just to play an MP3, AVI, MPEG, or to use certain network devices, etc, etc). It seems now that since a major player in the market is now offering Ubuntu as an alternative, people have to jump on board the bandwwagon to show how great it is. Well, that is why Dell picked it, because for a long time now, they knew this was the best alternative OS. Does anyone remember Lindows (now Linspire)? If you check out their site, they now have a partnership with Ubuntu. . . that is how great Ubuntu is. The so called world's easiet desktop linux partnering up with perhaps the world's actual easiest and best desktop linux. . .
http://developer.kde.org/documentation/design/ui/
- in-firefox-ui.html
http://dot.kde.org/1135283071/
http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/1.0/
http://www.raizlabs.com/blog/2006/08/explorations
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I have installed tens of times both Fedora and Ubuntu, so I have more than anecdotal experience. They are literally hands off installations (at least I don't have to call home to provide an unlocking code to use my computer).
Chose your timezone, your language perhaps, a password for one user, the kind of machine you want (desktop, server, whatever) and little else and you should be ok.
As for taking 15 minutes to boot, sorry, but that is not Ubuntu, it is your machine. Specially with the lastest version you have a login prompt in around 2 minutes (tops). because the Ubuntu team made sure to paralelize as much as possible of the booting process.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
... if most ports are closed by default?
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I can see that Ubuntu is a part of my computing future, no way around that coming, it's arrived. Yet, some windows programs I have invested in I didn't want to throw away, solution: Install 64bit Ubuntu, then installed 64bit VMware Workstation 6 (worth a whole article alone) and then 'inside' the VMware mount installed 64bit XP pro for the had to have programs in the windows environment. Yes, indeed Ubuntu is easy to do, unless of course you try to get your microphone to work(hey, I'm not perfect) but I can hear sound on the guest virtual machine, so I"m close to getting all things in one computer.
GuyRCook
Guy Cook Internet Marketing and Consulting Solutions since 1995.
I see you typed that all with your left hand... Next time try typing "stewardess" into the google search box.
...which is most of the rest of the world:
1) can I install something by either double-clicking the "installer" file, or something equally simple and intuitive (like running some sort of installer application, and pointing it at the install file)?
2) can I run something after it's installed by simply double-clicking the icon for that program?
3) if I plug in a USB device, will it auto-detect, install, and run?
If you don't get it, my point is that nowhere under the definition of the term "easy to use" will one find:
- having to go into shells
- issue lines of command with riduculously long pathnames
- navigating Byzantine corridors of input parameters
I genuinely tried Linux - both Suse and Ubuntu varieties. I don't think I'm COMPLETELY stupid, and I found both of them run WONDERFULLY any of the preinstalled apps. Installing, running, and using anything else? Um, not so much. I would very much like to use linux in preference to MS products....but for now, I'm still running XP because I don't WANT to climb another learning curve to the point where the OS is transparent.
-Styopa
Get it at cinelerra.org
If you "have" to have anti-virus software on your machine, then you are not a computer expert and should switch to using a Mac. I've been using DOS & Windows PC's for over 15 years without a single virus infection. All virus infections are user caused. Every single time that I clear a virus out of a PC at work (because Symantec always fails to remove the virus itself) it has always been the case that the virus infected the system as the result of the user clicking, opening, or installing something they shouldn't have.
Are you joking? Linux' software management can hardly get any easier as it is already. As long as you use that thingy called "package manager", of course.
Want to hear the voice of GOD? cat
Yeah thankfully there are no confusing control key combos in emacs, whew...
http://acs.ucsd.edu/info/emacs.php
Tired of all the isms, don't exploit people as an employer, or a government, mmmmK?
The dynebolic livecd bittorrent listed on that page took me 15 minutes to download. I wouldn't go to the trouble of setting up a system to try it (although the cinelerra package is available from MatthiasSaou's FreshRPMS repository)
A typical XP Home user would be better (notice I did not say a long time Windhose user?). I am so tired of uber-geeks trumpeting Ewbuntu, I hate Ewbuntu, IT SUCKS. Simplicity and user-friendly/intuitive are what make a great OS, not cobbled (yes, Ewbuntu is cobbled in many ways) so STFU until it is. Recommend something like PCLinuxOS instead, at least the user won't have to add cr*p to fstab just to read a drive, etc., gimme a frickin break. Grrrrrrr. Don't get me started, oops, too late! >:-P
Will Linux ever mature? I hope so because I really don't want a Mac. =l
>Oh, man, I'm in trouble - ALL my boxes are running irc!
They have creams for that, you know.
All the technology in the world won't hide your lack of vision, talent, or understanding.
Yes, and in the flavors of linux where it actually *does* update your dependencies, you will likely break something else that had a dependency, and it becomes a manual labor clusterfuck that the average user will *never* be able to figure out.
I just don't have that kind of time when it comes to using my PC, sorry.
"The need to build the internet comes from something inside us, something programmed... something we can't resist."
As an IBMer, I can do that in both Windows and Linux using their "Cleint for e-Business" distro ... and that's on one of the most desktop unfriendly distros of Linux available, RHEL4.
... it's impossible because that's what you believe.
It's not "impossible" because it can't be done
Of all the websites on the internet, I would not expect this to qualify as "news" on slashdot. I recently moved from windows to ubuntu myself. There is nothing I really miss that much about windows except occasionally playing halflife 2 or civ 4. But the lack of spyware, virus checkers and so on makes up for that... When I buy a new PC though, I will want windows, because that will be able to play games whereas this old laptop can't...
I have been Ubuntuing on my stinkpad for over a year. I got rid of my doze partition a while back. Did you know the T43 is actually a very nice and very fast machine? You will never find this out running 'doze on it. I might also mention I function 100% in an environment of colleagues who use doze.
Shut up retard.
Citing Gimp as an example of ease-of-use just indicates why Linux pretty much doesn't have ease-of-use. Linux devotees don't even know what it is, never mind how to provide it.
Gimp is still pretty rough and in all honesty, I won't use it until I leave my job and lose my access to a site licenced copy of Photoshop.
Like with my other examples though, all it takes is for a company or a dedicate group of developers to come together and build a nice front-end for it. Open Office was a better example actually, particularly since there are developers building an Aqua interface.
Once the applications fit in with the rest of the OS, they'll get a lot more business since the transition won't be as painful.
-- Using the preview button since 2005