Picasa2 is a surprisingly capable free photo editor, and I actually use it quite regularly. Granted, I use Photoshop 7 for the majority of my photo editing, but Picasa2 is great for organizing photos and making quick adjustments to color balance and such.
Actually, with Windows XP, you'll typically get at least a maximum of 1024x768 at 256 colors, usually at least High Color, though. And why in God's name would you purchase such a generic Web cam, then blame Windows for what was obviously the manufacturer's fault?
Ha! I can't wait for this! I'll be talking to my mom on the phone, only to have another incoming call, indicated by the usual beep. However, this time, it isn't a person; it's an ad for penis enlargement.
And how would this situation be any different with a Linux distro? Besides, is it really that hard to Google something along the lines of [brand name] [model number] drivers and find the drivers in seconds?
I completely understand that Linux's poor support for new hardware has everything to do with manufacturers' lack of Linux support. However, that certainly doesn't change the OS itself, and no Linux distro operates anywhere near as smoothly and intuitively as Windows. The thing that makes Windows extremely inviting is the fact that you don't need to touch a command prompt to get the functionality that you're looking for.
By the way, don't think for a second that I don't use open-source software. I use plenty of it on my Windows installation, namely 7-Zip, FileZilla, Firefox, The GIMP, and OpenOffice. However, the main problem with open-source software still remains; it simply isn't as user-friendly as most commercial software (or even some freeware). Sure, that has plenty to do with the fact that people are too used to one thing to even want to think of using something else. In my case, I only use The GIMP for its superior compression when using PNG files. Otherwise, I use Photoshop 7, because it's much more intelligently-designed from a UI perspective.
And the point of the article is to accuse the evil Bill Gates of attempting to destroy Linux's growth. Personally, I don't feel that he even needs to consider Linux a threat at the moment; the only true competition is Mac OS X, which actually has a pretty decent market share. Linux is more for people who don't want to purchase/pirate a Windows installation and who will likely never tailor their computer's software to their liking (unless they actually want to learn to do so).
The problem lies in the fact that the included video card drivers in most Linux distributions (as with a base Windows installation) lack proper OpenGL support. Finding and installing Windows drivers for most video cards is quite simply, however, as it merely involves going to the proper Web site or simply putting the included CD-ROM into your computer and having the setup start automatically.
In Linux, however, you're forced to enter some command line commands that no newbie could possibly know about. Or you could track down the proper driver build for your distro, which isn't always necessarily available.
People who want to use Linux shouldn't buy a video or wireless card that came out last week, it's that simple.
And why not? I mean, Linux is über-1337, is it not? I mean, you're trying to say that a superior operating system such as Linux doesn't support the newest hardware out there? Hmm
As for making distros free, I'll tell you what I mean by "under-handed". I consider "under-handed" to be how Red Hat's servers used to have a very small number of simultaneous connections. Or how about Xandros completely copping out and offering a torrent that is long dead? Or Mandriva's Web site's inability to offer an obvious way of acquiring a disc image?
I realize that paying $20 for a disc isn't bad, but when you're testing approximately 10 different distros to see which one you like best, it's normally nice to have an obvious way of acquiring them at no cost.
Do you really think that developers who use the aforementioned "under-handed" tactics really give a rat's ass about Linux's true purpose? No, they want to sell their thrown-together distros in one way or another to put some money in their pockets. And the saddest part about it is that they're merely repackaging what people like you made for the benefit of the community and selling it off to anyone gullible enough to pay for it.
So, Linux - the OS that is playing catchup - is the solution? I realize that most companies don't provide Linux drivers, but claiming that a disorganized throw-together such a Linux is any sort of solution is just crazy. If anyone offers a solution, it'll likely be Google.
I'm not expecting Linux to be identical to Windows; I'm expecting its interface to make as much sense as Windows' interface. I'm not saying that Linux doesn't do some things well. In fact, I think that automating the installation process is a nice step towards user-friendliness. However, if you're gonna streamline software installations, why not go all the way and remain up-to-date on driver installations?
I mean, why can't I easily download and install ATI's Catalyst drivers the way that I can browse for various software in Xandros Network (or whatever it's called)? Is that too much to ask? I mean, you could include two measly driver packages (one for ATI and one for NVIDIA) and make a lot of people happy.
And I realize that you can search for the installation information on forums, but most users (me included) will likely be scared off by some of the drawn-out instructions.
I tried switching to Linux over the course of almost a month. I spent that month experimenting with various Linux distros (including Gentoo - ouch), and I honestly can't say that I absorbed much of anything from my experience.
One more thing to consider: Think of just how many different Linux distros/builds/whatever are in circulation, compare that to the number of different Windows versions, then consider the market share of each. Isn't it just more than a little disturbing how many more Linux distros there are? If there was one (or even two) unified Linux distro (with all Linux software being developed with that distro in mind), I guarantee that Linux could easily snatch a larger market share by at least a few percent.
For many, Vista will be the OS that fixes their problems. I've tried several times (without luck) to switch to Linux, but what would typically be a simple task in Windows (i.e. installing video card drivers) becomes an exercise in frustration in Linux.
Now, before you inevitably mod me down as a troll, hear me out...
You know what the #1 thing is that's working against Linux adoption? Its open nature. Yes, it's fantastic that everyone and their mother can potentially modify it to their liking, but how many different distros are there, and how many of those distros can you typically find easy-to-install driver/software packages for?
Go ahead, I know you want to say how easy it is to install drivers/software in certain distros, but therein lies the problem: There's more than one freaking distro. And you know, the full-auto process of installing software can do more harm than good. For instance, installing Opera didn't result in a shortcut appearing for the application on my Desktop in Xandros, so I had to conduct a search to track down the executable for Opera in that mess of directories. At the very least, most Windows installers at least show you the path upfront.
I don't doubt that Microsoft would like to slow the Linux adoption rate. However, claiming that they're responsible for it not taking off amongst the mainstream is complete BS. If Linux users could truly unite and create a single UI that wasn't so unwieldy, I feel that Linux's market share could very well pick up. As is, no, it's completely ridiculous having to sift through so many distros.
And for something that's supposed to be free, I find it quite amusing how many distros' developers end up devising some under-handed method to charge for their work.
Gahéshould've used the preview button. That one sentence should've read as follows:
Yet it's okay for those 1337_h4x0r Linux users to claim that Windows hasn't improved at all since its initial release back in the day.
Also, I meant to state that I'd attempted to switch to Linux over the course of 3-4 weeks. Do note that I tried a wide variety of distros, including (but not limited to) Debian, Gentoo, Linspire, Slackware, Ubuntu, Vector Linux, and Xandros. It seems that I've taken for granted much of Windows' functionality, namely the extensive use of drag-and-drop (not very reliable in most Linux builds), as well as using Alt key combinations to insert special characters. And yes, that is a major concern for me.
I've learned to expect nothing but such behavior on Slashdot. Any time I talk about how much I prefer Windows to Linux based solely on my opinion, I end up being modded down as a troll. Yet it's okay for those 1337_h4>
Still, I find it rather interesting that Linux users' solutions to making Linux more user-friendly to the mainstream user is to make it look and behave as much like Windows or Mac OS as possible. Even more interesting is the fact that trivial tasks such as resizing windows or editing menus are nowhere near as intuitive in Linux as they are in Windows.
But hey, I'm a Windows user, so I guess I don't know what I'm talking about. (For a period of about 3-4 months, I tried like Hell to switch to Linux, and it wasn't very intuitive at all.) I suppose I'll just wait around to get modded down to my usual troll status. *shrug*
Not only do most Slashdot users hate Windows; they'll hypocritically mark you as a troll for simply saying that you prefer Windows to Linux (no Linux bashing necessary), yet any comment that downtalks Windows (even inaccurate comments) are modded as insightful.
That said, after reading the entire article, I can say that I have a little more respect for Microsoft now. Granted, I'm still waiting for something better to come along (from Google, I hope). For the time begin, Windows gets works just fine for me, and - despite what most people on Slashdot are willing to admit - Windows runs quite well as long as you aren't a total retard that installs every adware- or spyware-laden app known to man.
I, personally, prefer Windows 2000 Professional to any other version of Window, as you can run practically all new Windows software on it, and updates and installations run so much faster than on Windows XP. Furthermore, although Windows XP introduces a lot of (annoying) new "features", it ultimately breaks much of what worked so well in Windows 2000 Professional.
Examples:
Disk Defragmenter (Doesn't compact files very accurately anymore.
RAM Usage (Try copying a bunch of files from a CD-ROM to your hard drive, then - while they're copying - try doing anything else.)
/me attacks UserGoogol while wearing a gigantic rat costume
Actually, it's funny that this should come up, as I just purchased this movie after work yesterday. While it's certainly questionable as to whether or not this bit of "news" should appear on Slashdot, I certainly think it's nice to know that a movie such as this that truly deserves more attention is finally getting its treatment.
You don't need security patches if you simply uninstall the problematic applications and replace them with better alternatives and installing some top-of-the-line antivirus software. And yes, everyone should use some sort of antivirus, as it's only common courtesy, considering the fact that Linux users are bound to have some friends that use Windows and sometimes communicate via e-mail.
Seriously, even something as simple as a.jpg or.png file can cause serious issues in Windows, so why not have the decency to catch such files and stop them from being spread all over?
The number of steps involved in a driver or application installation process doesn't necessarily matter if those steps make more sense to a wider audience. Let's see, which is easier to understand to a complete newbie?
... Google the application name (assuming that you don't know the URL), download the application, then double-click to follow the simple installation process.
... Type some cryptic combination of letters and symbols that represent things that most consumer-level computer users couldn't possibly understand.
And, you know, the least I can say for Windows is that it works quite well, and - other than the operating system itself - you don't necessarily need any commercial software to make it fully usable. I could really care less that most Linux distros are "complete" immediately upon installing them. You know, maybe I don't like Konquerer or Mozilla. For every complaint that IE isn't a complete Web browser, you'll likely get several complaints that Konqueror is excessively bloated.
In fact, KDE itself is so bloated that it comes off as clunky to most inexperienced Linux users who would rather not have to tweak their operating system just to get it running smoothly. Although Windows isn't "complete" immediately after installing it, I can at least take comfort in the fact that the user interface itself works quite well.
Those are the very ads that I dislike so much. Honestly, any person who creates an ad that resembles a Windows dialog box or offers false promises of free gifts/prizes should be staked to a fence and set aflame. Stupid bastards, taking advantage of peoples' gullibility.
And anyone who makes one of those Flash ads that pops up overtop the Web page that a site visitor is viewing deserve the same. The Internet is becoming nothing more than a wasteland where parasites and advertisers (essentially the same, depending on how you look at it) lie in wait for the next sucker.
You know, Symantec wouldn't have anything to worry about if their products weren't such heaping piles of crap. Honestly, the only reason that so many people use it is because it's the brand that most computer stores (including the one that I work for - CompUSA) push so heavily. I typically suggest NOD32 to people, however, so long as they aren't looking at security as an afterthought.
And it is with great pride that I state that I talked a Mac user out of purchasing Norton for OS X one day. I heard the horror stories, and I made a decision to steer people clear of Symantec's treachery.
Same here. And when my cousin bought his mother (my aunt, naturally) a computer, I immediately offered to wipe the hard drive and do a clean install of Windows. I didn't even bother making the restore disc, although it was a serious task finding all of those drivers online.
Heh. And I find it funny whenever I recommend doing a clean install of Windows to somebody who's considering purchasing a computer where I work. Is it just me, or does practically 95% of the consumer world not understand what a clean install is? I'm almost tired of explaining it.
You know, HP, it's hard to market a computer as "fast" or "productive" whenever it's bogged down with excessive pre-installed software. I'm sure that Netscape will also be set to load at startup with everything else that's installed, eh?
Although I don't quite agree with you considering "Home Edition" crippled, I must say that it would make sense to "cripple" a home version of Windows (or a user-friendlier version of Linux) to aid in helping newbies learn the ropes. It may seem a little drastic, but you'd be surprised just how many people honestly don't read the plethora of popup dialog boxes and system tray bubbles that appear.
And - funny as it may sound - you'd be surprised just how intimidated newbies are whenever the Start menu automatically pops up the first time that they boot into Windows XP.
...but wasn't this posted several days ago?
In either case, I don't really mind Ubuntu. It's one of the nicer Linux distros that I've had the [dis]pleasure of using. I just don't feel as though I'm on a level where I can comfortably use Linux as a replacement for Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
Picasa2 is a surprisingly capable free photo editor, and I actually use it quite regularly. Granted, I use Photoshop 7 for the majority of my photo editing, but Picasa2 is great for organizing photos and making quick adjustments to color balance and such.
Actually, if anything keeps him from being modded down, it'll be the fact that he said that he prefers a Linux distro to Windows.
Actually, with Windows XP, you'll typically get at least a maximum of 1024x768 at 256 colors, usually at least High Color, though. And why in God's name would you purchase such a generic Web cam, then blame Windows for what was obviously the manufacturer's fault?
Ha! I can't wait for this! I'll be talking to my mom on the phone, only to have another incoming call, indicated by the usual beep. However, this time, it isn't a person; it's an ad for penis enlargement.
And how would this situation be any different with a Linux distro? Besides, is it really that hard to Google something along the lines of [brand name] [model number] drivers and find the drivers in seconds?
I completely understand that Linux's poor support for new hardware has everything to do with manufacturers' lack of Linux support. However, that certainly doesn't change the OS itself, and no Linux distro operates anywhere near as smoothly and intuitively as Windows. The thing that makes Windows extremely inviting is the fact that you don't need to touch a command prompt to get the functionality that you're looking for.
By the way, don't think for a second that I don't use open-source software. I use plenty of it on my Windows installation, namely 7-Zip, FileZilla, Firefox, The GIMP, and OpenOffice. However, the main problem with open-source software still remains; it simply isn't as user-friendly as most commercial software (or even some freeware). Sure, that has plenty to do with the fact that people are too used to one thing to even want to think of using something else. In my case, I only use The GIMP for its superior compression when using PNG files. Otherwise, I use Photoshop 7, because it's much more intelligently-designed from a UI perspective.
And the point of the article is to accuse the evil Bill Gates of attempting to destroy Linux's growth. Personally, I don't feel that he even needs to consider Linux a threat at the moment; the only true competition is Mac OS X, which actually has a pretty decent market share. Linux is more for people who don't want to purchase/pirate a Windows installation and who will likely never tailor their computer's software to their liking (unless they actually want to learn to do so).
The problem lies in the fact that the included video card drivers in most Linux distributions (as with a base Windows installation) lack proper OpenGL support. Finding and installing Windows drivers for most video cards is quite simply, however, as it merely involves going to the proper Web site or simply putting the included CD-ROM into your computer and having the setup start automatically.
In Linux, however, you're forced to enter some command line commands that no newbie could possibly know about. Or you could track down the proper driver build for your distro, which isn't always necessarily available.
People who want to use Linux shouldn't buy a video or wireless card that came out last week, it's that simple.
And why not? I mean, Linux is über-1337, is it not? I mean, you're trying to say that a superior operating system such as Linux doesn't support the newest hardware out there? Hmm
As for making distros free, I'll tell you what I mean by "under-handed". I consider "under-handed" to be how Red Hat's servers used to have a very small number of simultaneous connections. Or how about Xandros completely copping out and offering a torrent that is long dead? Or Mandriva's Web site's inability to offer an obvious way of acquiring a disc image?
I realize that paying $20 for a disc isn't bad, but when you're testing approximately 10 different distros to see which one you like best, it's normally nice to have an obvious way of acquiring them at no cost.
Do you really think that developers who use the aforementioned "under-handed" tactics really give a rat's ass about Linux's true purpose? No, they want to sell their thrown-together distros in one way or another to put some money in their pockets. And the saddest part about it is that they're merely repackaging what people like you made for the benefit of the community and selling it off to anyone gullible enough to pay for it.
So, Linux - the OS that is playing catchup - is the solution? I realize that most companies don't provide Linux drivers, but claiming that a disorganized throw-together such a Linux is any sort of solution is just crazy. If anyone offers a solution, it'll likely be Google.
I'm not expecting Linux to be identical to Windows; I'm expecting its interface to make as much sense as Windows' interface. I'm not saying that Linux doesn't do some things well. In fact, I think that automating the installation process is a nice step towards user-friendliness. However, if you're gonna streamline software installations, why not go all the way and remain up-to-date on driver installations?
I mean, why can't I easily download and install ATI's Catalyst drivers the way that I can browse for various software in Xandros Network (or whatever it's called)? Is that too much to ask? I mean, you could include two measly driver packages (one for ATI and one for NVIDIA) and make a lot of people happy.
And I realize that you can search for the installation information on forums, but most users (me included) will likely be scared off by some of the drawn-out instructions.
I tried switching to Linux over the course of almost a month. I spent that month experimenting with various Linux distros (including Gentoo - ouch), and I honestly can't say that I absorbed much of anything from my experience.
One more thing to consider: Think of just how many different Linux distros/builds/whatever are in circulation, compare that to the number of different Windows versions, then consider the market share of each. Isn't it just more than a little disturbing how many more Linux distros there are? If there was one (or even two) unified Linux distro (with all Linux software being developed with that distro in mind), I guarantee that Linux could easily snatch a larger market share by at least a few percent.
For many, Vista will be the OS that fixes their problems. I've tried several times (without luck) to switch to Linux, but what would typically be a simple task in Windows (i.e. installing video card drivers) becomes an exercise in frustration in Linux.
Now, before you inevitably mod me down as a troll, hear me out...
You know what the #1 thing is that's working against Linux adoption? Its open nature. Yes, it's fantastic that everyone and their mother can potentially modify it to their liking, but how many different distros are there, and how many of those distros can you typically find easy-to-install driver/software packages for?
Go ahead, I know you want to say how easy it is to install drivers/software in certain distros, but therein lies the problem: There's more than one freaking distro. And you know, the full-auto process of installing software can do more harm than good. For instance, installing Opera didn't result in a shortcut appearing for the application on my Desktop in Xandros, so I had to conduct a search to track down the executable for Opera in that mess of directories. At the very least, most Windows installers at least show you the path upfront.
I don't doubt that Microsoft would like to slow the Linux adoption rate. However, claiming that they're responsible for it not taking off amongst the mainstream is complete BS. If Linux users could truly unite and create a single UI that wasn't so unwieldy, I feel that Linux's market share could very well pick up. As is, no, it's completely ridiculous having to sift through so many distros.
And for something that's supposed to be free, I find it quite amusing how many distros' developers end up devising some under-handed method to charge for their work.
Gahéshould've used the preview button. That one sentence should've read as follows:
Yet it's okay for those 1337_h4x0r Linux users to claim that Windows hasn't improved at all since its initial release back in the day.
Also, I meant to state that I'd attempted to switch to Linux over the course of 3-4 weeks. Do note that I tried a wide variety of distros, including (but not limited to) Debian, Gentoo, Linspire, Slackware, Ubuntu, Vector Linux, and Xandros. It seems that I've taken for granted much of Windows' functionality, namely the extensive use of drag-and-drop (not very reliable in most Linux builds), as well as using Alt key combinations to insert special characters. And yes, that is a major concern for me.
I've learned to expect nothing but such behavior on Slashdot. Any time I talk about how much I prefer Windows to Linux based solely on my opinion, I end up being modded down as a troll. Yet it's okay for those 1337_h4>
Still, I find it rather interesting that Linux users' solutions to making Linux more user-friendly to the mainstream user is to make it look and behave as much like Windows or Mac OS as possible. Even more interesting is the fact that trivial tasks such as resizing windows or editing menus are nowhere near as intuitive in Linux as they are in Windows.
But hey, I'm a Windows user, so I guess I don't know what I'm talking about. (For a period of about 3-4 months, I tried like Hell to switch to Linux, and it wasn't very intuitive at all.) I suppose I'll just wait around to get modded down to my usual troll status. *shrug*
Not only do most Slashdot users hate Windows; they'll hypocritically mark you as a troll for simply saying that you prefer Windows to Linux (no Linux bashing necessary), yet any comment that downtalks Windows (even inaccurate comments) are modded as insightful.
That said, after reading the entire article, I can say that I have a little more respect for Microsoft now. Granted, I'm still waiting for something better to come along (from Google, I hope). For the time begin, Windows gets works just fine for me, and - despite what most people on Slashdot are willing to admit - Windows runs quite well as long as you aren't a total retard that installs every adware- or spyware-laden app known to man.
I, personally, prefer Windows 2000 Professional to any other version of Window, as you can run practically all new Windows software on it, and updates and installations run so much faster than on Windows XP. Furthermore, although Windows XP introduces a lot of (annoying) new "features", it ultimately breaks much of what worked so well in Windows 2000 Professional.
Examples:
Disk Defragmenter (Doesn't compact files very accurately anymore.
RAM Usage (Try copying a bunch of files from a CD-ROM to your hard drive, then - while they're copying - try doing anything else.)
/me attacks UserGoogol while wearing a gigantic rat costume
Actually, it's funny that this should come up, as I just purchased this movie after work yesterday. While it's certainly questionable as to whether or not this bit of "news" should appear on Slashdot, I certainly think it's nice to know that a movie such as this that truly deserves more attention is finally getting its treatment.
MySQL isn't a replacement for Microsoft Access; it's an alternative to Microsoft Access.
You don't need security patches if you simply uninstall the problematic applications and replace them with better alternatives and installing some top-of-the-line antivirus software. And yes, everyone should use some sort of antivirus, as it's only common courtesy, considering the fact that Linux users are bound to have some friends that use Windows and sometimes communicate via e-mail. .jpg or .png file can cause serious issues in Windows, so why not have the decency to catch such files and stop them from being spread all over?
Seriously, even something as simple as a
The number of steps involved in a driver or application installation process doesn't necessarily matter if those steps make more sense to a wider audience. Let's see, which is easier to understand to a complete newbie?
... Google the application name (assuming that you don't know the URL), download the application, then double-click to follow the simple installation process.
... Type some cryptic combination of letters and symbols that represent things that most consumer-level computer users couldn't possibly understand.
And, you know, the least I can say for Windows is that it works quite well, and - other than the operating system itself - you don't necessarily need any commercial software to make it fully usable. I could really care less that most Linux distros are "complete" immediately upon installing them. You know, maybe I don't like Konquerer or Mozilla. For every complaint that IE isn't a complete Web browser, you'll likely get several complaints that Konqueror is excessively bloated.
In fact, KDE itself is so bloated that it comes off as clunky to most inexperienced Linux users who would rather not have to tweak their operating system just to get it running smoothly. Although Windows isn't "complete" immediately after installing it, I can at least take comfort in the fact that the user interface itself works quite well.
Those are the very ads that I dislike so much. Honestly, any person who creates an ad that resembles a Windows dialog box or offers false promises of free gifts/prizes should be staked to a fence and set aflame. Stupid bastards, taking advantage of peoples' gullibility.
And anyone who makes one of those Flash ads that pops up overtop the Web page that a site visitor is viewing deserve the same. The Internet is becoming nothing more than a wasteland where parasites and advertisers (essentially the same, depending on how you look at it) lie in wait for the next sucker.
You know, Symantec wouldn't have anything to worry about if their products weren't such heaping piles of crap. Honestly, the only reason that so many people use it is because it's the brand that most computer stores (including the one that I work for - CompUSA) push so heavily. I typically suggest NOD32 to people, however, so long as they aren't looking at security as an afterthought.
And it is with great pride that I state that I talked a Mac user out of purchasing Norton for OS X one day. I heard the horror stories, and I made a decision to steer people clear of Symantec's treachery.
One of my instructors pronounced it "JIFF", and I wanted to split her head open every single time she did it.
How does it know that the smoke is from a sniper rifle having been fired? I mean, what if somebody's just in the mood for a nice cigar?
Same here. And when my cousin bought his mother (my aunt, naturally) a computer, I immediately offered to wipe the hard drive and do a clean install of Windows. I didn't even bother making the restore disc, although it was a serious task finding all of those drivers online.
Heh. And I find it funny whenever I recommend doing a clean install of Windows to somebody who's considering purchasing a computer where I work. Is it just me, or does practically 95% of the consumer world not understand what a clean install is? I'm almost tired of explaining it.
You know, HP, it's hard to market a computer as "fast" or "productive" whenever it's bogged down with excessive pre-installed software. I'm sure that Netscape will also be set to load at startup with everything else that's installed, eh?
Although I don't quite agree with you considering "Home Edition" crippled, I must say that it would make sense to "cripple" a home version of Windows (or a user-friendlier version of Linux) to aid in helping newbies learn the ropes. It may seem a little drastic, but you'd be surprised just how many people honestly don't read the plethora of popup dialog boxes and system tray bubbles that appear.
And - funny as it may sound - you'd be surprised just how intimidated newbies are whenever the Start menu automatically pops up the first time that they boot into Windows XP.
...but wasn't this posted several days ago?
In either case, I don't really mind Ubuntu. It's one of the nicer Linux distros that I've had the [dis]pleasure of using. I just don't feel as though I'm on a level where I can comfortably use Linux as a replacement for Windows.