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."
Irons with labels that tell you to remove your clothes before attempting to iron them are being truthful, too - but anyone who need a label to tell them that is probably too stupid to be allowed to get near an iron.
American Third Position
Finally, a real choice!
I'm a Mac user, but I certainly wouldn't hesitate to recommend Ubuntu to someone new to using computers. It really is as simple to use as Windows, and repositories are huge win for usability and security.
If you don't change your mind we'll stop providing you with cheap licenses and Gold Partner status and cut off your MSDN subscription. I worked for a couple of Gold Partners and it's the same everywhere, Microsoft uses it's monopoly status and high prices to force people into compliance.
Ubuntu is good enough for most people especially when pre-installed on a computer. Unless you're just plain stupid you will be able to work with it and do whatever you need to do. Sadly Windows is so ingrained in users that are resistant to change that it's hard to change platforms for a lot of people.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
I love the way the Windows screen shot shows the control panel as if Windows' strong point is configurability. Contrast that with the Ubuntu screen shot which shows installed games as if Ubuntu's strength is its games.
Really. It hurts Linux when people log in and ask for MS Word. It is important to be sure your customer is getting what he wants.
The only part that is gonna get flamed is the last bit on Windows Section: "use windows if you are new to using computers". They should have left this bit out of both sides, IMO. Windows is good to newbies because they can get help more easily from friends, but it is not easier to use than Ubuntu. Just the idea of the software center like ubuntu's goes miles ahead for those who are new to computers
-- dnl
I would argue with the "new to using computers" bullet. If you're new to computing, exactly why would it be easier to learn Windows than Ubuntu? Both have their arcane peculiarities and unique paradigms you'd have to get accustomed to.
Hell, if you are totally new to computers and have no interest in learning much of anything about how they work, I'd suggest getting a Mac. Then you need never worry yourself about the internals, it "just works," as they say.
I say this as someone who doesn't use a Mac. Apple built their reputation on being idiot-proof, and as far as I can tell, they live up.
Check out my world simulator thingy.
I set my parents up with an Ubuntu machine. On the desktop are icons for: Solitaire, Google, and Yahoo! Mail. They have not had a problem since I moved them to this setup.
"I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
For most users *any* platform will do. Be it, Windows, Linux or OS X.
Most users will use the computer for Facebook, Twitter, MSN messenger and such. Unless you are a gamer or absolutely need to run a Windows-Only application, ANY OS will be able to get the job done, Windows being the less secure of them for non-techies.
I've got better things to do tonight than die.
Choose UBUNTU if:
That's not 'truthful', that's paid options that are actually marketing.
That's a terrible parallel to Ubuntu vs. Windows. For what it's worth, I'm a long time user of Linux - started off with an early SuSE then moved to Slackware. These days, I use either Gentoo (preferred) or Ubuntu (anything other than my main dev box I can't be bothered setting up Gentoo on). And you know what? I'd recommend Windows 7 to most people. I have it on my laptop and though I personally sometimes run into limitations on it, they're not limitations most people will encounter. I can't see my mother complaining that she can't open a bash shell for example.
Ubuntu is probably the easiest Linux out there, but it's not as easy as Windows 7. Some of that results from the world in general being set up for Windows, rather than for Linux, and some of it is due to Ubuntu not being as slick or hassle-free as Windows 7. If you want security, then people are less likely to hack your Linux box than they are a Windows one, that's for sure, and you're not very likely to pick up a virus or be tricked into running some trojan. So as the summary states, there are arguments for and against. But it's pretty far from the truth to start talking about people who don't know enough to remove their clothes before ironing. I need a lot from my OS so I use Linux. But if I just wanted to surf, write emails and do some light word-processing, I have to say Windows 7 would be fine for me. My laptop which is primarily used for those things, has Windows 7 on it for this reason. If I need to do anything more on it, I just open a remote shell to my main system and use Screens and that's good enough for me.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
At least Ubuntu gets mentioned and it's not only the classic "Dell recommends Microsoft Windows operating system".
The question is, if you have no idea what Ubuntu is, then why did you choose it?
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
I too set my parents up with Ubuntu, and they love it. They no longer get viruses, as my Dad puts it "it's more simple", it makes good use of their old computer's limited hardware and everything they love to do, they can do:
* Web browsing
* Checking email (Mum uses gmail, Dad uses Evolution)
* SIP (We use Ekiga for video chats)
* Storing and downloading photos
* My Mum plays all the games that come bundled with Ubuntu
* [luckily] their Epson multifunction printer / scanner worked out of the box.
* Word Processing
I think Ubuntu is great for uber-geeks and it's great for complete noobs, but it's the people in between it doesn't fit so well - like my sister who needs Photoshop for her college course, and my brother who likes to buy the odd computer game, and expects it to work out of the box.
Ubuntu 9 was fine, but it was missing a couple libraries that were dependencies for Fuse 2.8. Not to mention that SMB is broke in 10, the GUI is just awful because it doesn't allow for easy 'run as root'. Want to edit smb.conf, you are SOL unless you go through CLI or create a custom link to your favorite editor. I have no problem going CLI only either, except that in Ubuntu 10 everything has been moved into a slew of *.d directories. As a newbie to 10, where the hell is anything you are looking for? You use the find command and good ol ubuntu leaves out crucial syntax points in their man pages...Often my biggest issue in Ubuntu is not so much that I dont know what I want to do, but rather, I cant find what I want to do. I ahve pretty advanced knowledge of firewalls and routers but WTF do you do when you cannot find the conf file or force it to reload?
For now I think I am going to be sticking with redhat derivatives...seems to be more support there.
If ubuntu wants to win over more windows folk, they really really need to fix that dammed GUI, or at the least work on encouraging the community to be more active. I have 3 separate threads asking for help on either iSCSI, SMB, or NFS. Only got 2 hits and they only posted twice before going MIA. You would think that Ubuntu would be better at supporting communication between windows and Linux.
CS: It is all sink or swim...oh and did I mention there are sharks in that water?
The extent of the instructions I give guests is, "This is not Windows, it's Linux, but it works pretty much the same. Here's the Firefox icon up here." Family and friends ranging in age from 10 to 70 have used it with no problems. Those who need to are able to work on business documents that they brought on a USB drive and can print to the inkjet and laser printers on our home office network just fine.
I think I detect a little arm twisting on the part of MS here, but nobody is surprised at that.
When Dell came out with their pre-installed Ubuntu machines a few years back, I bought an E520N the day they became available so as to vote with my wallet that this was a very good idea for Dell.
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
Why the heck would they have Macintosh there? They don't sell Macintosh. They do sell computers that run Windows and Ubuntu though.
Must a man seek alternatives with a reason other than a head full of curiosity?
In soviet Russia, God creates you!
The question is, if you have no idea what Windows is, then why did you choose it?
See how everything's different when you switch the question around?
DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
I tried linux distros various times in the past, each time I gave up after a day to a week when drivers and programs wouldn't install, package managers wouldn't work, and I ended up spending more time trying to fix my computer than getting things done.
Yesterday I installed Ubuntu. I can't install the language patch (click on it in Opera, garbage on my screen. right click and save as, now I have it saved but how to install it??) I can't use bittorrent, (can't install wine because I don't know how to install a package handler because of the above problem)
That said, I find Ubintu easier to understand, more intuitive, and friendlier overall than Windows XP. I've used Windows since version 3.11 and never could positively compare Linux to Windows until today. I will now recommend Ubuntu to anyone who asks and I want to thank the linux community for making this OS possible.
tldr: Thank you.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
From my perspective, if all you need to do is surf, write emails and do some light word processing, then Ubuntu is far and away a better choice than windows 7.
I chose to dual boot ubuntu and windows 7 for the following reasons:
It cost me nothing because I had 10 win7 licenses from an MSDN subscription paid for by my previous employer.
I like to play video games, windows has more of them, and wine is generally a painful experience when it does work.
I need to keep my Visual Studio/C#/ASP.net skills fresh in case I need to find a new job and can't find a local java position quickly enough.
One of the 'reasons' Ubuntu (or any Linux) distro won't become a major player in the consumer OS market, is because it is not SOLD in the consumer OS market. Linux will become more of a mainstream desktop/laptop consumer choice (key word, choice) when you can drive down to the 'big box' store and buy a computer pre-loaded with Linux on it. Until then, the majority of people will use windows, not necessarily because it's easier, or better, but because that is what was SOLD to them. For the casual user, Windows == my computer. Period.
On his blog, Ken Rockwell decried the lack of serious photographic hobbyists who actually take pictures. Most of them just buy equipment and geek out over it. He referred to photography as just something that, to paraphrase, "guys do on their computers in between porn sessions."
True that.
How many guys go looking for porn from time to time? A *very* high percentage. And does the search for porn lead to the dangerous back alleys of the 'net? Yep. The relatively lower number of viruses and other malware targeted at all flavors of Linux is a *major* selling point.
If I were setting up a computer for someone who even occasionally looks for porn online, I'd choose Ubuntu over Windows in a heartbeat.
Now, seriously, what percentage of the population do you think falls into that "occasionally looks for porn" demographic? Linux should have at least that big a market share.
A vast majority of the software programs you pick up in Staples, Best Buy, etc are going to be made for Windows. Once hardware gets a bit faster and makes virtualization relatively transparent, this will cease to matter. You'll just optionally buy Windows software support for another $150.
I'm hoping for some badass sandboxing. Imagine automatically launching an entire OS for untrusted operations, like web browsing, or having a few virtual machines running concurrently to provide different levels of access to certain data or hardware. I know some of the features of modern OSs make that a bit redundant, but it's a cool idea nonetheless.
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.
The only problem I have with Dell's EU page is that it's been so oversimplified it loses any meaning.
I find it curious that Ubuntu has two bullet points and yet from Dell's page on Ubuntu they have several positive caveats about Ubuntu that don't even get mentioned here. For example:
6) Ubuntu is secure
According to industry reports, Ubuntu is unaffected by the vast majority of viruses and spyware.
Why isn't there a bullet point for using Ubuntu if you just want a machine to browse the internet? Could Dell at least toss Ubuntu a bone and say "Linux currently suffers from less viruses than Windows"?
On top of that, why can I only pick two laptops with Ubuntu on them?
Why do you even have a page for Windows 7 vs Ubuntu when I have to buying one of these two machines in the first place?
Dell is telling customers which OS they should choose so they are capable to make the choice.
Wrong. Dell is telling people not to use Ubuntu. Walk down the street and pick out a hundred random people and ask them if they are interested in programming open source. They don't even say "if you are interested in free open source software" they say "open source programming." Do you think you'd even find one person interested in actually programming open source? That's basically what Dell's "comprehensive" Ubuntu list amounted to.
My work here is dung.
I think you make a a valid point, in a way, but there are a couple of things to consider. I'm guessing (perhaps wrongly) that you were already pretty familiar with Windows when you started using W7. That makes it seem easier to use than it is. If you are used to something else entirely (Mac OS in my case), or nothing at all, Ubuntu is just as simple. In fact, I find Ubuntu slightly more straightforward than Windows 7, and I dabble in both very casually.
The application management in Ubuntu is superb, providing what I think is exactly the right balance of safety and discoverability for novice and casual users. A huge problem on Windows is people installing malware. How do you provide people with a rule sheet on what is okay to install? I've never been able to boil it down to rules, I just figure it out on a case-by-case basis. With Ubuntu you can just tell people to use the applications in the app menu, of which there are plenty. It's simple, safe, and allows the novice user to have computing independence, because there's no need to consult with anyone before installing an application.
Eh? What exactly is harder in Ubuntu than it is on Windows?
I mean, just consider this problem I had: I was trying to run STALKER: Shadow of Cernobyl on my Windows desktop. It refused to work; my monitor would just pop up an error message saying that the refresh rate was higher than it could display when I tried to run the game. How could I fix that? There were no Windows monitor "drivers" for the monitor (it's old and shitty), so there didn't seem to be any way to force Windows to use a lower maximum refresh rate. I couldn't find an option that would force STALKER to use a lower refresh rate, either.
Eventually I had to download a sketchy third-party program named Reforce that, despite being written for Windows 2000/XP, managed to do its job in Windows 7; I used it to manually set the highest refresh rate to something my monitor could handle, and STALKER finally respected that.
That's not "just works"; other people completely gave up on the problem (STALKER had just been on sale on Steam, so there was a thread about this in the forums). Sure, it was due to a combination of old hardware and missing drivers, but it still stumped quite a few people who otherwise use Windows.
Of course, in Ubuntu this just isn't a problem because there's no games at all, but that's another issue entirely.
It would be stupid and bad service not to tell that to users, especially those who like things just to work and want to play games too.
You seem to agree with Dell. From TFS: People should choose Windows, argues Dell, if: they are already using Windows, are familiar with Windows, or are new to computers
Which would be everybody not using a Mac, and I say poppycock. KDE is very similar to Windows and has a tiny learning curve; it's trivial to switch. As to new users, I've had friends who never had computers before, and wound up infecting them over and over (despite Norton). After getting tired of reinstalling Windows for them I'd install Linux dual-boot and disable networking in Windows and not install Norton. Every single one liked Mandriva better, and they never got another virus.
As to games, there have been games on Linux for a long, long time. Most people don't play anything much more demanding than Solitaire. And guess what? The Megatouch game machines you see in bars use Linux for an OS, and you can buy those games, but they're Apple and Linux only, as they've been written for *nix. They'll run on your iPhone but not your Windows PC.
Most users would feel the same way when they thought that all their programs and games would work.
There are free alternatives to almost all Windows programs. Plus, you can run most Windows programs in Linux through Wine or similar emulators, but you can't run Linux programs in Windows at all, unless you have a Windows compiler to compile the (open) source files with.
I can't think of a single thing that would make Windows superior to Linux. Yes, it would be dishonest to make people think you can run WoW or IE in Linux, but why would anybody tell them that unless they just wanted them to hate Linux?
Free Martian Whores!
Like Windows!=newbie-friendly. The windows taskbar lacks discoverabilty, because practically everything is jammed into one menu (the start menu), or indecipherable little icons (system tray). Ubuntu's menus say what they are, by giving textual clues. For a newbie, it's actually better to have more on the screen with actual writing than a lot of icons.
Many aspects of the Windows interface are a kludge to differentiate it from the classic Mac OS, with many inconsistencies and non-intuitive behaviours. Linux distros should not copy it for the sake of usability.
I helped my 72 year old uncle get started with Ubuntu when his Windows became so badly infected that he couldn't clean it. I used Logmein to remotely control his pc to download the image. I had him put in a CD and then I burned it for him. I had the machine reboot, then talked him through the install. 3 calls later, he's cruising without viruses, doing his banking etc safely and comfortably, and easily handling his email and game needs/wants... Yes, Ubuntu and the rest can be a challenge at times. But when I can get someone who's a complete novice with computers to use it (from over 1000 miles away) and they actually LIKE it, that says something very positive.
but it's not truthful... A new pc user should use ubuntu as it's EASIER than all version of windows.
Install software is as easy as a single click. A proper Laptop or PC requires Zero configuration. Windows pc's come all pre-configured, so to be fair the ubuntu pc should be 100% configured as well.
They can't get infected with 99.97% of all viruses and trojans out there which affect even seasoned professional PC users with multiple PHD's in PC use. Newbie Pc users click on everything and many trojans are designed to fool them. Those trojans are completely neutered under ubuntu.
Plus there is a ton of free software that is a single click away in the application store. Something that Windows lacks. They can find almost everything they need there.
BUT, it all lies on the back of having the ubuntu pc preconfigured like all windows boxes get.
Doing a half assed default ubuntu install is only designed to screw the newbie. Unfortunately dell will give them a half assed install.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
If you look at it functionally, the iTunes app store is little more than a repo, and Linux has repos to beat all. I'm so horribly spoiled by tools like yum that I'm personally very remiss to EVER leave what's available at a click...
Most of good salesmanship in business is in positioning - how you compare your products to others out there can leave a very strong impression as it lets potential users immediately grasp many of the capabilities (and limitations) of your product immediately without them actually having to learn what those capabilities are.
Now that Apple has everybody understanding what a repo is, we should just rename repos to "App Stores" (or whatever Apple hasn't trademarked) so that people immediately get just how easy and capable it is to use. More so, because Linux' "app stores" are open-ended - anybody can add whatever App Repos they want!
The only thing I'd (STRONGLY!) suggest is some way to filter out all the libraries and stuff that only developers care about so that end users can avoid getting confused by 7,000 libraries that they wouldn't understand anyway. My thoughts are that packages need to describe themselves as two-stage categories: EG: Libraries, ProgrammingTools, Applications and divide each of these categories further, EG: Libraries/Graphics, Applications/Office, Applications/Games, etc. with a default of "Applications" showing.
Lastly, building in a SIMPLE payment tool so that applications can be purchased (and licenses tracked) with yum/apt...
Put all this together, and suddenly Linux has an EXCELLENT commercial alternative to the Apple "App Store".
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
> especially those who like things just to work
This pretty much rules out Windows completely.
Once you get beyond the myth of Windows "just working", it's time to consider Linux or Macintosh.
Windows is good for supporting something that is Windows only. This includes a lot of software and a small bit of hardware.
If you are a new user with no legacy expectations, Windows is the worst possible option.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Because all these people told me that Windows 7 was "their" idea.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
So what you're saying is that we need Boobuntu.
I haven't googled yet but I wouldn't be surprised if it exists.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
I don't get it.
If you want security, then people are less likely to hack your Linux box than they are a Windows one, that's for sure, and you're not very likely to pick up a virus or be tricked into running some trojan... if I just wanted to surf, write emails and do some light word-processing, I have to say Windows 7 would be fine for me.
If that's all you wanted to do, any flavor of Linux/KDE would be fine for anybody, without having to worry about your machine being infected like you would with Windows.
Free Martian Whores!
A simple link to whylinuxisbetter.net would have done the job (truth and all).
But if I just wanted to surf, write emails and do some light word-processing, I have to say Windows 7 would be fine for me.
That is because you are a geek. For the average users it precisely the other way round.
Linux gives them something that just works as much as any OS, is secure (and therefore easy because they do not have to think about things like anti-virus), is easier to install software on, and it is safer (you can research whether a download is safe, they cannot)
On the other hand they should use Windows if they need specialist software that is not available for Linux: this could be anything from a Reuters terminal (they do install it on your own PC these days) to an app for running a clinic.
That is why my father and my wife and my daughter use Linux.
The underlying problem is that you are looking at Linux as a Gentoo user: the experience of using Ubuntu or Mandriva is very different.
You typically don't really "choose" Windows when you buy a PC. It's just there unless you ask otherwise (and even know that you can so ask).
I disagree too with the assertion that one should use windows if "You are new to using computers." Gnome on Linux as applied by the Ubuntu distribution is so user-friendly and functional that my very computer-challenged wife picked it up with no problem. If you're new starting out, Ubuntu may in fact be the easiest to learn and effectively employ, since it comes with such a rich application environment. Also, I put 3 daughters through the college with new PC's, and after the 3rd or 4th time I had to reload Windows in their Freshman year, because their machines got corrupted/owned/trashed from the college network environment, Windows would give me crap trying to reload from the OEM disk (probably a run-counter to thwart piracy, but not applicable in my case). So rather than repurchase Windows, I just loaded Ubuntu. All finished college just fine on Ubuntu with no further crashes. The interesting side-effect is that when they graduated, none of my daughters bought a Windows PC, instead going for Macs, the slicker *nix option, but *nix nonetheless. Also, "You are interested in open source programming" should be modified to say "You are interested in open source applications or programming."
It cost me nothing because I had 10 win7 licenses from an MSDN subscription paid for by my previous employer.
So these licenses are owned by a previous employer? It is my understanding that if the company owned it, your rights to use it were lost when you left the company. (from http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&FamilyID=2b1504e6-0bf1-46da-be0e-85cc792c6b9d#Overview )
And playing games on an MSDN OS is explicitly forbidden in the FAQ.
Using the software in any other way, such as for doing email, playing games, or editing a document is another use and is not covered by the MSDN Subscription license.
(from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/cc150618.aspx )
If you're looking for a valid reason to run Windows, "just because you happen to have an (unlicensed) copy" isn't it.
You and I both know that Ubuntu is a far superior operating system on so many levels. It's more secure, it's way faster, it runs on more platforms, you can modify it entirely to your liking, it comes with 'real' software, it's free and it's evolving 2x per year.
For the average user, however, the reality is that many are petrified of their computers. All they know is that it's really bad to screw up and that they will never figure out how to make them run right if they do. They never open manuals or read help files. That is the reality out there - lets' get used to it.
With that said, Lucid Lynx is, arguably, the most user-friendly operating system I have ever used. Coupled with incredible speed, lighting installation and simple interface, it truly stands out for its polish. There's more: getting apps, for the 'newbie' is just a click, a search and a one-click install. Try doing that with a licenced Microsoft Product. You'll be futzing with licence keys and compatibility issues for hours.
Obviously, Linux Mint and others are very polished too, while also taking a run at combining proprietary software with non-proprietary software.
In short, Dell's right: if you're new to computing, install Ubuntu. If you have legacy MS apps, bend over!!
*** Don't be dull.***
From Dell's site: "You are already using WINDOWS programs (e.g. Microsoft Office, ITunes etc) and want to continue using them" Since when is iTunes a WINDOWS program? Damn, Dell will have the boys in Cupertino on their ass next.
"I reject your reality and substitue my own." ~ Adam Savage, Mythbuster extraordinaire.
It's cheaper to install Linux on a Windows system than to install Windows on a Linux system.
Well, there's a difference between a regular newbie and a complete newbie. Lots of people rote-learn Windows; then, anything different, no matter how well designed, is "too complicated".
Circumcision is child abuse.
It cost me nothing because I had 10 win7 licenses from an MSDN subscription paid for by my previous employer.
So these licenses are owned by a previous employer? It is my understanding that if the company owned it, your rights to use it were lost when you left the company. (from http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&FamilyID=2b1504e6-0bf1-46da-be0e-85cc792c6b9d#Overview )
And playing games on an MSDN OS is explicitly forbidden in the FAQ.
Using the software in any other way, such as for doing email, playing games, or editing a document is another use and is not covered by the MSDN Subscription license.
(from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/cc150618.aspx )
If you're looking for a valid reason to run Windows, "just because you happen to have an (unlicensed) copy" isn't it.
That makes it pretty difficult to develop software for an OS if you're not allowed to use the OS.
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
...but even for that relatively simple job there are big problems with Ubuntu.
I've never had a problem surfing the web using any Linux distro, much less Ubuntu. This includes my days as a linux n00b when I had no understanding of the structure of the filesystem, didn't realize the advantages of a package manager, and feared the terminal. Browsing the web is NOT an issue for Ubuntu, and when compared to the heightened risk of malware/virus infection on a comparable Windows machine I find this to be an odd statement.
When I first visited Linux Hater, I thought I was dealing with extreme ignorance.
My first exposure to Linux Hater was your link, which led to a page where a lunatic is ranting about a font and declaring ogg sucks because it isn't mp3. I think your initial thoughts about that blog were correct.
users still need to have in-depth knowledge to do basic stuff, like install new applications
You consider clicking the 'Applications' menu and scrolling to and clicking 'Ubuntu Software Center' in-depth knowledge?
Dell is right.
Wrong. You've failed to measurably quantify what makes Ubuntu unsuitable for web browsing other than pointing to a blog with an anti-Linux agenda and making weird assertions about the level of expertise it takes to read and use a menu. Ubuntu is perfectly suitable for a wide variety of tasks, and surfing the web is certainly among them.
Eh? What exactly is harder in Ubuntu than it is on Windows?
Opening a document someone sent you from work in Word 2007 and editing it in Word 2007. Where's the ribbon?
The reply to this is not to say, "well, then, just open it in Open Office." It may look similar to its version in Word, it may not. When Open Office looks exactly like Word 2007+, and works exactly the same way as well, then you can ask your question again.
How about people who have used Outlook for years in an office environment? Nothing, not even Evolution, will look exactly the same and work identically.
You've obviously not dealt with people for whom moving a icon from one place on the desktop to another results in complaints that "my Windows is broken," usually followed by, "I can't do my work until it's fixed."
If you don't change your mind we'll stop providing you with cheap licenses and Gold Partner status and cut off your MSDN subscription
Talk like this wastes time.
Walmart carried the flag for OEM Linux in big box retail for the better part of a decade.
It could not solve the problem of marketing Linux to the masses. It could not consistently undercut OEM Windows on price - and in the end it could not justify maintaining a dual inventory and support structure for a product line whose sales barely showed a pulse.
Heh... I question the mods that marked you "insightful"...
I have in hand a .deb or an installer executable file for a given application. How does one install it?
Open up a file browser (i.e. Explorer window...) and double-click on the package in question. In most instances (including many of the games being ported right now...), at this point the GUI package installer will launch or the installer in the bundle will do the same thing. If it's self-contained (meaning no external dependencies) it'll only need the administrator password to install said app. If it's got dependencies, it'll typically explain those up-front or tell you about what it needs pre-installed, much like the story on MacOS or Windows.
What "in-depth" knowlege, I ask you?
Ditto for pretty much all the other "basic" things you do with computers.
And the same applies for pretty much any mainline and many niche Linux distributions.
You said you've been using it for 14 years? Funny...I would have thought you'd have known this was the case then.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Ya know, I have had that exact same problem using MS Windows since forever. I recommend dropping that from your list of arguments, as it doesn't do what you think it does.
I do volnteer work educating seniors about using computers, and let me tell you, the amount of knowledge required to follow such directions as `right click on the icon and select "Properties" from the context-sensitive menu' is not trivial. These are not stupid people, they just never have been taught before. The real eye opener for me was finding myself teaching a (retired) physicist. I never had to repeat myself, but I still had to explain a lot. Just because you and I know it and consider it basic doesn't mean it's not in-depth.
If opportunity came disguised as temptation, one knock would be enough.
3^2 * 67^1 * 977^1
> AFAIK there should be a training requirement for operating anything other than a kiosk-mode system. _Especially_ basic security.
Not really, this thinking is a result of internalizing the "Microsoft Lie" that all computers (by definition) must be as unreliable and insecure as Windows. Which is forgivable since they have spend Sagans of dollars in subtle campaigns to make this assumption almost universal. But it is indeed a lie. However it is the single most important key to their success. So long as a critical mass believe it they can thrive but should it ever come to be questioned they will fail faster than Enron or Worldcom, two other corporations which became predicated on a lie.
I admin for a public library. We have had Linux deployed in our patron labs now for twelve years. Other than basic *NIX permissions and recently SELinux support in our current load we give the general public the full unlocked *NIX experience. Individual accounts with NFS homes, totally unrestricted desktops, etc. GCC is available, not that many (one or two have apparently done it) of our patrons use it, but just as a statement that this is FULL user level access. The only additional lockdown needed was adding a script to nuke processes like eggdrop bots remaining active after a user logs off. Care to guess how many security incidents we have had in a dozen years with thirty desktops that see heavy use, including teens who google up ways to get em to do all sorts of things? One, the aforementioned eggdrop bot.
Care to bet how long a similarly unlocked Windows (or Mac) workstation would last before needing a wipe and reimage? The only responsible course would be to completely reimage between users to stop keyloggers. And that is the difference.
Democrat delenda est
Sorry, for some reason I thought I was replying to the same person I did above. Please disregard any statements with that implication. :-(
> Even with a user-friendly package manager you are still faced with a huge noise to signal ratio
> created by the large amount of applications that might do what you want, none of which are the
> application you've heard of.
So? Stop thinking in the Windows box. Do what I do in such a situation and just install every app that might do what I want and spend an hour or two playing with them. Once I pick one I remove the others. Doing that sort of promiscuous software installation on Windows would lead to disaster so people quickly learn not to do that, as you apparently have internalized. With Linux's superior package management and the lack of much malware 'in the field', the 'install em all' tactic is rational.
Democrat delenda est
Any comment criticising Linux is bound to be controversial here and I really don't have the energy to respond to everyone who has called me a Microsoft shill.
The people who make a living from Linux, like myself, are those who are best placed to point out where it is lacking. On the server side or for embedded systems, it is great. For me, on my home computer, Linux is also great. Or at least better than the alternatives. But then I have a lot of experience with it, as I said. I'm one of the people who can dump Windows, and indeed that's exactly what I did.
To me, Linux (1996-2010) is a sad story. Both Windows and MacOS have made huge leaps forward in terms of usability, stability and security, and Linux has hardly moved. The "year of the Linux desktop" has turned from something we all hoped for into something that will clearly never happen. In fact, it already happened with those Linux netbooks: but, once again, Linux just wasn't ready to do that. There was no Linux environment ready to go on a netbook that would do everything a netbook user wanted to do, and I'd say there still isn't.
Linux is hamstrung by idiotic free software politics and the problem that nobody wants to do the unattractive but important work, like usability testing or making a stable platform for commercial software. And what do we do when we hear of these problems? We say "That's FUD" or "You're a Microsoft shill". Until we can admit that the problems are there, we are never going to get any improvement.
The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
I don't know how you can honestly say that with a straight face if you've actually used Linux on the desktop since 1996.
We've come a LONG way in terms of the desktop since then. The first "usable" Linux desktop I used was Caldera's Looking Glass Desktop (I think that was the name of it) back in 98-99. And I put usable in quotes for a reason: It was absolutely laughable compared to either current Gnome or KDE desktops of today. I can't speak for KDE's stability - I settled on Gnome quite a while ago, but it's every bit as stable as any current Windows or OSX desktop I've recently used.
Out of curiosity, what huge leaps in security are missing in Linux that are present in either OSX or Windows? I'm asking honestly.
Recommending that people "new to computers" use Windows is the worst advice imaginable. We've given Microsoft over 20 horrible years, and they have managed to make computing almost boring in that time. It is well past time to hand the torch somewhere else...ANYWHERE else. The last thing we need is another generation who thinks Windows is what it means to "use a computer".
Even in 1990, the power and potential of machines was staggering. And I'm sorry, but Microsoft has done NOTHING with that potential. Software is still overly-expensive, locked-in, ugly, and crashing, and impressively it seems that basic tasks are even slower today than on machines of the 80s. It really wouldn't have taken much effort to bring the world way forward, to make PCs absolutely marvelous devices. Instead of realizing the potential, these incredibly sophisticated machines still have pretty basic uses, and I find that sad.
We need another generation, the people "new to computers", to use something new. Let them tinker without the chains of some stupid monopoly, and build a better machine.
"Microsoft killed my company, I hold a personal grudge. I don't use Microsoft products and neither should you."-JWZ
There have been shiny happy installers for Linux since the 90s. If you want a Windows style
installation experience, it's there. Now a lot of the Linux "shareware" doesn't have this
sort of thing. That's where package managers come in. These are great and easy and very
automated.
Sorting out extra 3rd party freeware crap for Windows is a royal pain in the *ss. The sorts
of sites that like to present Windows software seem to be all hip deep in popups and spam to
the point where it's hard to know what link you should click on. It really puts all of that
"curated" experience nonsense with the iPad into perspective.
Macs are a bit better. The websites are not quite as spam infested.
Although both are not nearly as automated.
Not all Mac or Windows shiny happy installers take care of all of the dependent bits.
So you end up search and sorting this stuff out your self.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.