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!
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.
I'm an advanced user and I don't every want to know what a repository is. My mom definitely doesn't give a shit.
So call it an "app store", except all the apps are free. Your mom will eat it up.
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.
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.
That's exactly what Ubuntu is moving towards. They're integrating the entire Synaptic Package Manager and Update Manager GUIs into the "Ubuntu Software Center", where you can search for, install and upgrade apps in one place. It's actually not a bad idea, though I still prefer the extra information that Synaptic provides on progress.
I like to think of online DRM as something akin to a college -- you pay for lessons until you learn something.
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
Must a man seek alternatives with a reason other than a head full of curiosity?
In soviet Russia, God creates you!
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.
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.
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 teach computers at the local senior center. They are all running windows and so I get to fix them too. Grandma just can't say no to an install request. Invariably I have to clean off a half dozen tool bars from IE and clean out god awful trojans pretending to be useful tools. I have to lecture about free anti-virus programs (which I install for them) only to find they have later signed up for professional/commercial level AV products they really don't need and can't afford (senior center!).
.
I bought a real nice Dell Inspiron N series laptop with Ubuntu pre-installed. I think I'm starting to win some hearts and minds here. Everyone who uses it, loves it.
:q! Oh crap, not again...
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.
There is one issue with the Ubuntu Software Center; it doesn't always get everything you need. In my case, I wanted to set up Eclipse with the Android ADT plugin. The version of Eclipse that gets installed via the Software Center is missing a ton of dependencies that the ADT plugin needs, and trying to manually get all these dependencies led me down a rabbit hole. The only pain free solution that worked for me was a manual installation of Eclipse, by downloading the 'fully-loaded' version from the eclipse site.
Then again, the average joe probably has no need or desire to install Eclipse in the first place, so maybe that software center isn't such a bad idea.
A simple link to whylinuxisbetter.net would have done the job (truth and all).
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.***
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??)
Um, double-click it? I assume it's a .deb file that you've downloaded, anyway, because if it's something else, then it is not what you need.
Though why not install it through the package manager in the first place? Applications -> Ubuntu Software Center, then use the built-in search to find what you want.
Here is a more detailed treatment of Ubuntu software installation options, though most likely the Software Center will cover all your practical needs.
I can't use bittorrent
If you're using the most recent Ubuntu, you should have a BitTorrent client installed out of the box. It's called "Transmission", look it up in Applications -> Networking.
an't install wine because I don't know how to install a package handler because of the above problem
Again, you do it through the package manager.
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.
...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.