Slashdot Mirror
Windows vs. Ubuntu — Dell's Verdict
Barence writes "Remember how Dell put up a website declaring Ubuntu was safer than Windows, only to later change its mind? Well, the company has gotten right back into the Windows vs. Ubuntu debate with a highly sophisticated website arguing the pros and cons of each OS. People should choose Windows, argues Dell, if: they are already using Windows, are familiar with Windows, or are new to computers. People should choose Ubuntu if they're interested in open-source programming. Brilliant."
Who is sopssa and why everyone seems to hate him? I'm curious.
He's a paid Microsoft shill. You can read his comments and any story with Microsoft he would try to defend them and say it was okay what they were doing. He'll keep starting new accounts and reading with sopssa since it's a paid account he sees the stories early and that's how he gets the first post as SquarePixel. SquarePixel is not a paid account so there's no way they can get first post so often unless they have a paid account to read the plums with (that's the sopssa account). Basically his account went negative karma and kept going up and down as he would post seemingly helpful comments to non-microsoft articles and then step it with sheer stupidity when microsoft was involved.
Long story short: paid shill for MS.
The question is, if you have no idea what Ubuntu is, then why did you choose it?
That is the exact point here. Dell is telling customers which OS they should choose so they are capable to make the choice. Personally I'm a little bit surprised they didn't note the games, but casual people buying a computer don't necessarily know that they need Windows for their apps to work. Dell is just helping these casual users.
Faulty reasoning is faulty.
DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
Your point is more insightful to my mind then they give you credit for. For a 'casual (new) end user', they won't know the value or benefit of either OS. Their needs are more result/goal focused and specific like (I want to play games), or (I wan't to check email and browse the internet), rather than (I'm interested in the philosophy of Open Source and it's associated communities).
The site is simplistic, I'll give you that. Almost too simplistic as it limits the choices users make. I would think an approach with a few simple 'goals' in mind would have been better served, like
Do you intend to play store bought games
Do you plan to use it to check e-mail and browse the internet
Do you plan to use your PC with productivity apps like Office
Do you have plans to use your PC for media applications like authoring music, video, or other artistic applications
Possibly from those, give them the option to browse examples of each, like Office, OpenOffice, various game examples like Bioshock 2 or Halo, etc. New users won't understand anything other than simple goals, and it's not realistic to assume they will quickly grasp everything needed in order to make the right choice.
From those, give certain points based on user goals, where some might be mutually exclusive (for instance, a 'gamer' choice would exclude Ubuntu under normal circumstances, although they could certainly try it later once they have a better grasp, so Windows would be a good fit there), and before anyone goes there, I understand you can get games running under linux, but you certainly wouldn't expect a beginner to do so. PC's can be overwhelming enough to new users.
They could also list the benefits of each in terms the user could understand. For instance, cost of software, software support, availability of software. Each choice represents both pros and cons in each of those areas. Let the user go as deep as they wan't, or leave it as simple as a few questions to be answered and spit out a choice based on those answers.
I see that page as at least a step in that direction. Could have been done better, but I don't think it's a slap on the face of Ubuntu (at least not directly).
That is nothing! My 92 years old grandfather is watching porn on his Ubuntu laptop that he build himself, My 102 years old grandmother is hosting a site on her Slackware server teaching open-source programmers about the joys of sex and my 7 months old niece is a sysadmin for RedHat. Things are changing indeed!
2+2=5 for really big values of 2!
Thanks, Captain Obvious! You saved the day!
Wow. Can anyone say, Microsoft Shill?
If someone wrote a WindowsHater's Handbook highlighting all of Window's weaknesses you'd be accusing them of mindlessly hating on MS, and be using any slur you could think of to discredit the book. Of course that book would of necessity be a few thousand pages long, but that's besides the point. I bet you wouldn't be regretting the fact that MS wouldn't be reading it and responding to it by making changes in their priorities.
Me? I have to laugh at both the Unixhater's handbook and at Linuxhaters.com. A lot of the Unixhater's Handbook is tongue-in-cheek. Many of the supposed problems with Linux are nothing more than the unrealistic expectation that when a user changes operating systems they shouldn't have learn anything new to administer their system, or pretending the Unixhater's Handbook is 100% serious and so hating on Linux for the same reasons, as if MS is the only entity to ever do computing the "right way", and ignoring that fact that a lot of the "problems" with both Unix and Linux have been fixed years, if not more than a decade, ago.
Well, I guess you could figure MS's way is the only way if you agree with the idea that security vulnerabilities should be built into the system and called "features", as that's what MS did for decades and their software still suffers from that beginning vision. (Don't complain about this being from the past as you point to Linuxhater.com as valid and it contains problems fixed long ago.) It still suffers from Gate's idea that the only reason people will buy new software is if it has bloat, err, I mean new features, and so bugs and security are historically relegated to secondary priorities.
"while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville