Slashdot Log In
Vista Vs. Gutsy Gibbon
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Oct 23, 2007 05:22 PM
from the difference-in-philosophy dept.
from the difference-in-philosophy dept.
ricegf writes in with the account of one Rupert Goodwins writing in ZDNet UK. Goodwins has 7 computers running various versions of Windows and Linux, and explains why he chooses to do most of his work on the Gibbon. "So here's the funny thing. I've used Windows since 1.0. I've lived through the bad times of Windows/386 and ME, and the good times of NT 3.51 and 2K. I know XP if not backwards, then with a degree of familiarity that only middle-aged co-dependents can afford each other... Then how come I'm so much more at home with Ubuntu than Vista? It boils down to one abiding impression: Ubuntu goes out of its way to get out of your way... Vista goes out of its way to be Vista and enforce the Vista way."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Vista Vs. Gutsy Gibbon
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 806 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Re:Another one (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Another one (Score:5, Funny)
(http://gmail.com/)
Geesh, it even says it on the top of the page.
Re:Another one (Score:5, Funny)
http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/dvd/current/ [ubuntu.com]
Disclaimer: My download will get faster if you do this.
Re:Another one (Score:5, Funny)
(http://jeffd.ca/)
I agree (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I agree (Score:5, Funny)
Windows Vista video ad playing under a slashdot article favouring Linux over Windows: Priceless
There's an ad? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I agree (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I agree (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not confusing at all. What you're seeing is the direct result of Microsoft really being in a monopoly position. People can deny it all they want ("Microsoft doesn't have 100% of the desktop, so they can't be a monopoly!!"), but Microsoft's ability to bend the market against the wishes of the customer and the retailer is precisely what makes them a monopoly.
Your observation is just confirmation of that.
Re:I agree (Score:4, Funny)
(http://www.umcs.maine.edu/~err)
(Kidding...sort of.)
Re:I agree (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.lpcollier.net/vitalsigns)
His point isn't that he couldn't figure it out, it's just that things were "arbitrarily different" - changed for the point of change rather than any great enhancement. Sure he could figure out a different Control Panel, but it's annoying to have to do that for no actual gain.
I think what we're actually seeing here is people who don't have any particular need for the unique strengths of Windows (and it does have some) and could do well with any of the alternative mainstream OSs. See, they already "switched operating systems" going from XP to Vista, and the feedback I'm hearing is that the effort of relearning familiar things makes the jump from XP to Ubuntu seem no worse. Actually, I even get the impression that for some the idea of injecting some excitement into their computer usage by exploring a new OS with different strengths and weeknesses is quite attractive compared to relearning Windows in order to go back to what they already new.
Am I way off the mark here? I've been using Debian then Ubuntu near exclusively for 6 years so I'm actually quite looking forward to having a play with Vista just to see if there's anything about a new Microsoft OS that I find attractive. I installed XP on a machine for my sister 3 weeks ago and it took 4 hours worth of downloading drivers and updates just to get to the stage where I could start installing apps (c.f. Ubuntu less than 1 hour for a fully loaded OS+apps) so I'm pretty sure XP is of no value to me from the 'enjoying using the computer' viewpoint unless I need to run some Windows-only software.
If you use a computer for fun, or for work but like to have fun, Ubuntu is great. Quick to install on new hardware, new release every 6 months with new features, improvements and eye candy if you like that sort of thing. Loads of little apps to choose between for virtually any task, all ready to install from official repositories, properly signed etc.
Re:I agree (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.lpcollier.net/vitalsigns)
Well, a slipstreamed disk is a third-party modification, so I think it's a little bit shakey using it as a comparison. I did try to create one a year ago but found it tediously difficult command-line sourcery (ironically what people often accuse Linux of) so I gave up. I've found a little utility now so I'll give it a go. I do appreciate that if I walked into a shop and bought a boxed XP I would get an SP2 disk, but then that would cost me a lot of money to be able to easily install and OS I already own.
Yes - really. I have piles of old boxes sitting around with XP license stickers on them. Vista will cost me money, big money that I don't have. Remember that I'm talking about what these OSs mean to me. Remember that the convesation started over frustration about articles where people change to Linux because they don't like Vista and I'm trying to explain why, from my point of view, some people might want to do that.
It's not absurd, it's the whole point of the story. Some people feel that Vista has a lot of changes, but not many actual new features from the end-user point of view. Ubuntu cannot be "arbitrarily different" becuase it was never the same in the first place, it's different for at worst historical reasons. Vista started from XP, so each change should be for a good reason, but nevertheless people are looking at XP->Vista and XP->Ubuntu and seeing less difference in the amount of effort each change would take than they had previously believed and seriously thinking of giving Vista a miss.
Don't forget that in my fist post in this thread I said that I'm actually quite excited about giving Vista a go (I'm getting a boxed Ultimate in a couple of weeks time). I am a biased die-hard Linux fan, although my recent frustrating experience of installing XP was for my sister's Christmas present, so I'm not so far down that path that I don't see the need to let people use what they're comfortable with. What interests me is that I'm hearing XP users say they might be more comfortable with Ubuntu than Vista when the time comes to make the switch. Microsoft should be very worried about that.
Defeat in Detail (Score:5, Insightful)
And that's the key. Switching operating systems is a big deal if it means switching your entire personal software collection at once, and that's what a lot of people try to do and fail. They switch, get culture shock, and retreat back to XP.
If you can figure out which applications you use and then convert yourself to a FOSS program, one by one, then by the time you have finished you can install Ubuntu Gutsy and the rest of your problems will be restricted to driver issues. I don't know why I didn't think of doing it like that earlier, it seems so obvious now.
Re:I agree (Score:4, Informative)
(Last Journal: Sunday January 28 2007, @05:20PM)
Aside (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Aside (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://whiskeyandtheweb.blogspot.com/)
Agreed. I used to have a job cleaning viruses and spyware and such off of students' laptops at a university campus, which gave me a lot of insight into what not to buy and which AV programs not to trust. There were soooooooooooo many students, faculty, and staff who had entrusted their box entirely to Norton, and it was just an epic fail every single time—even when it was fully up-to-date. The whole of the entire computer security industry would be in Defcon 4 about some virus that'd been out for a week and Norton would still be on its smoke break. Weak.
"Avast!"? Sounds awesome, if a touch nautical.... What struck me the most when I was working at Resnet was how many free programs there were that were extremely effective (especially if used together), almost always catching files that Norton missed entirely. Side note: it's really scary that a lot of these antivirus programs were web-based, and somehow Windows is perfectly okay having web applications that are capable of deleting files, analyzing the content of local files, accessing the registry.... Really scary. Way to go on that security model thing, Microsoft!
Re:I agree (Score:5, Interesting)
Despite all the talk of new user friendliness with Ubuntu Gutsy I've yet to see it. My MXL USB Mic doesn't just work when I plug it in. I have to fiddle around with settings for a while. At work, I can't just easily interface with our Active Directory(yes its MS, but its what we use). Sure I've gotten all that working, but it took me a lot of searching and tweaking. Vista may have driver problems, but I've never encountered any major ones. With Linux however, every install is a new driver issue. When it comes down to it, Vista just works. Yes, I can get Linux working with everything, but I don't want to have to spend all that time on an OS when I can just use windows.
Also as a gamer I'm also unable to permanently switch to Linux. Wine works for some, but its just not good enough. I love Linux, but for now it just isn't ready to be my permanent OS. Despite all this trouble with Vista I hear about, I've yet to experience any of it. It runs perfectly on my machine.
When Linux has a dominant share of the market place, and games are put out strictly for Linux, then I'll switch.
Until then, Microsoft will still be king.
Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Monday January 08 2007, @02:45PM)
I, for one, was once at a point where I was quite frustrated with my (Windows) experience. Only because people bothered to mention alternatives did I eventually discover that OSX and Linux solved many of the problems I was having.
As you can tell, I'm now a Linux user, so as you say my opinion is inherently biased towards enjoying Linux. So perhaps I gloss over some of the troubles I had along my migration path to Linux. Yet despite that, the experiences (both positive and negative) of people who have legitimately tried multiple operating systems are valuable to others. In fact, it's rather difficult to claim that the majority of Windows users are actually using "the right tool" because very few of them are aware of (much less have evaluated) the alternate tools out there. For many of them, their needs might actually be better served by a non-Windows OS.
I can understand a dislike of evangelical attempts to convert people... but there's nothing inherently wrong with describing, or even advocating, an alternative.
I wanted to say something witty... (Score:5, Funny)
But this insight came out instead.
To the end-user, Windows has "security through obstruction", which annoys and gets disabled. To that same end-user, Linux has "security through obscurity", which stays out of the way.
Yes, I know, open source, all the flaws are right there for everyone to see, not obscured at all. That's not what the end-user sees. The end-user just knows that it's more secure because that's what their geek friend told them; they never see why, they never care why and they never need bother with it. This is a good thing. What doesn't annoy them enough that they go out of their way to disable... I'm sure you see where I'm going with this.
Let's review what we've learned so far this year:
Linux - driver issues. Vista - driver issues.
Linux - learning curve. Vista - learning curve.
Linux - secure until you work around the security in the name of convenience. Vista - secure until you work around the security in the name of convenience.
Linux - annoying until you learn it. Vista - annoying until you learn it AND disable the security features.
My take on it (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyway, I connect my HD which had Ubuntu Edgy installed on it, boot up. X complains about the video card so I change "nvidia" to "ati" in xorg.conf, type: startx, and 2 minutes latter I am reading my mail in thunderbird.
But you know, I'm sure Vista would perfectly well manage me changing ALL hardware except the HD, running on a P4 with 384MB SDRAM, and be up and running without even a reboot. Oh, and does Aero support virtual desktops yet?
Seriously, given the price and system requirements, Vista is a joke.
Re:My take on it (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.lattyware.co.uk/ | Last Journal: Sunday November 27 2005, @05:00PM)
Re:My take on it (Score:5, Insightful)
Now what a remarkable and amazing coincidence that Gutsy has such a fall-back GUI for fixing broken X sessions. It is almost as if they are working to make it more accessible to non-technical users...
Re:Why do they always do this (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.ferrus.net/)
They absolutely can be compared like they were cars.
Vista is like a short bed gasoline pickup truck. You can perform most day to day tasks with it, but it gets horrible gas mileage and can't handle edge cases (4 passengers, seven foot long cargo) very well at all.
A distro like Ubuntu is more like a VW Golf TDI that can transform into a panel van or 18 wheeler when necessary. It's obviously superior in every way, but people complain about stupid stuff like gas stations that don't sell diesel and how hard it is to get through a 10' tunnel when you're in 18-wheeler mode.
Re:Why do they always do this (Score:4, Insightful)
Uh, because if the Linux share of the computing world is going to grow, its got to be at the expense of Windows. There ain't anywhere else for it to come from.
No, its saying that the distro has to provide a reason to choose it over Windows. Now price is one, of course, but often not enough, given the fact that most software that consumers are aware of is written for Windows. So people have to know that what they are doing in Windows can be done in Linux, either with the same software (through Wine or otherwise) or through alternatives which are functionally adequate, and ideally superior in some way (again, price is often one way, but often not enough.)
Windows is the baseline. If people buy computers without actively choosing an OS, its what they are most likely to end up with. It is what most people who might switch to Linux, given an adequate reason, are using now. The facts make it the baseline.
And, ideally, that's what the comparisons show: that the Linux way is better, for which it must first be at least as good and must be usable.
We don't; OTOH, one of the barriers to transition is fear of the difficulty of switching. So demonstrating that things are similar enough that this fear is overblown is a way of overcoming that.
Well, if it doesn't have a windows feature, then people choosing to leave Windows for it will be losing something. So that's a valid reason for it to be rated down. And sometimes missing a bug can result in missing a feature that matters to users, like compatibility with particular software. Though that's, I would assume, less frequently a problem.
Two different cars are different things just as much as two different OS's are; like different cars, different OS's are different tools which can be applied to the same task. Comparing them side-by-side as it relates to that task is not a bad idea, but a good one.
Different experience here (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, I was able to get out of it. That's not really the point. The point is I had to do a bunch of command line hackery just to see the login screen for the first time.
I hate to say this... (Score:4, Insightful)
Before you suggest it, I'm a hardcore geek from way back. Waaaay back. But these days I simply don't have time to spend all day and night just getting an OS to work. I have a wife and kids now, not to mention actual work to accomplish.
There aren't enough hours in a day/night leftover for ploughing through howtos, or trawling usergroups, for the info necessary just to, say, get 7.10 or Mandriva 2008 to connect to the LAN.
On the server, *nix rules, but on the desktop it has a very long way to go before it can compete with XP on an even footing. Vista? Dunno. You couldn't pay me enough to use it.
Yes, I know, I'm going to be modded troll or flamebait or accused of being an MS apologist or fanboy by some raw-nerved *nix zealot. How dare I say such things? Gasp! Shame on me.
Re:I hate to say this... (Score:5, Interesting)
Note: this was an OEM disc, supplied by Dell itself, so I would have to wonder why it wouldn't work..
Bah, I consider Ubuntu more broken than Vista (Score:3, Interesting)
Fill in the blanks and save for future use (Score:5, Funny)
Problems with Ubuntu GUI. (Score:4, Funny)
It's a GUI problem, so I'll just stick to Vista... oh. Never mind.
Why Vista Security is like the TSA. (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.mclure.org)
We use the MKS Toolkit software suite to simplify several tasks while developing on Windows. Everything seemed to work fine, until I had to use patch to apply a diff to some sources. As soon as I typed
patch -p0 foo.diff
at the command prompt I got a pop-up window from Vista asking permission to run the executable. If I answered "yes, go ahead" instead of running the program in the same command prompt window it popped it up in another command prompt which promptly disappeared. And, apparently, did absolutely nothing to the files that were supposed to be patched. Experimentation shows that even
patch --help
pops up the dialog and fails, so it isn't a permissions problem on the files to patch. So I say to myself, "Myself, we're a revision or two back on MKS Toolkit, and this is not the Vista-certified version - let's try another patch.exe." So I go get the GnuWin32 version of patch.exe. I put it first on the PATH, and try again. Another pop-up. I answer yes, and not only does patch run in a window that disappears, but it GPFs as well.
At this point, I'm pissed. But suddenly the penny drops. I rename the MKS toolkit patch.exe to ptch.exe and type
ptch --help
which produces a nice help message. Trying on the original diff causes the required files to be patched correctly.
Apparently the Windows Vista User Access Control considers patch.exe to be a forbidden executable name. I investigated further and the only way to disable this functionality appears to be to completely turn off UAC, which I did immediately.
But there you have it - Windows Vista's vaunted security is about as logical and effective as banning water bottles in carry-on luggage.
Re:Why Vista Security is like the TSA. (Score:4, Informative)
That's a compatibility fudge to run old install programs that don't have a manifest saying whether they need admin privs or not.
Try it with with setup.exe, update.exe or anything that sounds like it might be an installer. Vista assumes it's an installer and tries to run it as admin.
For extra fun rename a text file to be setup.exe. Try to run it. Vista will give you a UAC prompt, then discover it's not a real executable and finally give you a cute little message box saying 'The application didn't install correctly'
Ubuntu gets out of the way (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.bsgprogrammers.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday March 08 2007, @10:23AM)
Try Gutsy Gibbon (Score:5, Informative)
Rdesktop for legacy windows-only apps. (Score:3, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Friday November 02, @02:49PM)
Why not do what my company does: Run the can't-do-without-'em Windows apps on a central Windows server and access them remotely via rdesktop [rdesktop.org]?
Then you have only as many licenses as you actually need and you can migrate as many desktops and laptops as you please to Linux.
(And since it uses Microsoft's own version of remote desktopping they'll have a hard time breaking it without breaking themselves. B-) )
My opinion (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Monday February 13 2006, @07:11PM)
Unfortunately, this seem to be a more common occurence than even in Vista, from my experiences anyway.
But this is not really a blame on just Ubuntu, but on hardware support from manufacturers. Not that it matter who it is to blame for the end user.
Core Values (Score:3, Informative)
This really speaks to the core values and differences between the closed source and open source philosophies as outlined by Richard Stallman [wikipedia.org] (yes, Richard Stallman is different from most of the rest of us and some people just cannot get past the beard and the long hair, but he has some worthwhile things to say if you can get past the charisma issue, -4 reaction adjustment at least if we were playing D&D) among others. The closed source philosophy is really about their way of doings, the experience that they want you to have, and their control of every aspect of that experience whereas the open source philosophy is all about freedom to choose your own experience, the experience that you want to have, and your choice about every aspect of that experience. If you want to take the defaults that is alright OR if you think that something that is not available and should be then you can take the source code and make it happen...it is all good AND other people cannot subsequently take that away from you (the GPL requirement of sharing changes and additions).
Gutsy Gibbon isn't QUITE "there" yet... (Score:5, Interesting)
Ipod? Works pretty well. Basic copying of files works nicely (albeit with a few GTKpod kinks here and there). Mounting and un-mounting usually work automatically without any extra prodding after plugging it in. Usually. Smart playlists are dodgy in GTKpod. Giving Amarok a try, so we'll see. But still... Not. Quite. There. Yet.
Program installation? Well, Synaptic/apt-get are great. You got the right repositories in there, and you know what you're looking for -- works like a charm. Can't see my mom learning how to add repositories and public key signatures. Close. But not quite there yet.
On the other hand, it's leaps and bounds ahead of where Linux-on-the-desktop used to be the last time I went down that path (SuSe 7.something? Mandrake something-dot-something?? Few years ago, anyways...). So progress is definitely being made. It all depends on your personal threshold.
For me, Ubuntu has proven to be quite - QUITE - sufficient. I'll probably be sticking with it for everything except ArcGIS. For all the "moms" of the world, though... I just don't think it's quite there yet. Give it a few more years and it might just make it.
Then we just need a good way of marketing it...
New Laptop, replaced Vista with Ubuntu 7.10 (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.users.qwest.net/~lionlad/)
Problem is, the laptop didn't come with any sort of optical media for Vista. HP puts a partition on the hard drive that is there to allow the user to recover and restore, and they provide software in Vista to burn 2 restore DVDs "just in case." I burned the restore discs and hoped for the best... But as it turns out, Vista's flavor of NTFS doesn't resize properly in GParted (either refuses to resize, or resizes and then becomes unbootable without volume repair). Without genuine Vista discs, I was unable to do any repairs after an abortive attempt to resize the Vista partition, soooo...
I turned the laptop over to the tender mercies of the Ubuntu 7.10 installer off of the Gutsy DVD. Amazingly, sound and networking worked with nary a hiccup, suspend and resume work the way they should, and even the media keys across the top of the keyboard do what you'd expect them to. About the only thing I'm missing support for right now is the SD card reader. (Chipset seems to be unsupported, will have to research.) There's a built-in webcam and stereo microphones in the lid, and I'm going to experiment with them to see if I can get them to work, but it's not a major priority for me.
I would have preferred to keep Vista around -- not because I really like Vista (as I work with XP daily at the office, and Vista really doesn't work the way I think Windows "ought" to), but because theoretically there might be some games or the random app that might not work right / be available under Linux. But this morning, as I started throwing more and more packages on the laptop, I started to realize that maybe this is a blessing in disguise. By Vista not wanting to share and play nicely, I've been forced to decide between Vista and Ubuntu. It wasn't even much of a choice.
Still, it would've been nice to keep Vista around in a small partition, just as a security blanket. But if I can get WoW working under Wine (and reports say that it should actually run pretty well, providing my graphics adapter can keep up), it'd be tough to say just what I'd really need Vista for.
A few years time... (Score:3, Interesting)
In a few years time, even Photoshop will be on the web.
Most of the rest of us will be running Macs or Linux boxes, unless you're a store that needs cash registers. Or webbing in via a PS3 or 360 (or successors thereof).
Windows computers are the mainframes of the consumer computing space. They'll be around for a long time but it'll not be because people want to use them.
Re:That's because: (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/samba/author.html | Last Journal: Wednesday August 24 2005, @03:32PM)
More generally, poor programmers try to make programs so simple that only simple things are possible.
Good programmers, and I'll point at Apple IPhoto chaps just because I saw one lately, make the things people actually want to do easy. In tis case it was having three sliders, labeled "lighten shadows", "darken highlights" and "brightness". Doing those adjustments is downright hard, but the good developers found that is what real live humans wanted to do, and did the work to make it easy.
Linux programmers, go thou and do likewise!
--dave
Re:Ugh iPhoto (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Ugh iPhoto (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ugh iPhoto (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Ugh iPhoto (Score:4, Insightful)
with the 500 GB SATA HDD on sale for $150 tell me why I should care.
Re:Ugh iPhoto (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.portcommodore.com/)
Re:Ugh iPhoto (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:That's because: (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.slaxer.com/)
Intriguing. My experience has been that Apple marketing convinces the end user that they have provided all they need. I see this attitude from several of my classmates, who can't seem to understand that changes in program requirements set forth by the professor require them to change their code. "What? You're making me change my program? But I already wrote it!" The rest of us quietly make the changes and move on with our lives.
Here's the thing though: we see a return on our investment, if you will. Meet the prof's specs, get a good grade, eventually get a degree and a good job. Apple and Windows developers tend to see a return on their investment: Please the end user, they buy the product, money in our pockets, move on with life.
what's the return for a Linux developer? "You flaming tightwad, why doesn't the software you spent the last two years of your life working on do XYZ? You should be more considerate of your end user!" It's of no relevance that the program already does A-R, and that even the big boys of the commercial world are just now getting L and Y working properly. How often have YOU voluntarily donated to the developers of the free software you use? What's the incentive to continue developing that software?
I guess the whole point is: We're working on it, just give us a little more time.
Re:That's because: (Score:5, Funny)
(http://chuzzum.blogspot.com/)
Re:That's because: (Score:5, Interesting)
I fully intend to contribute more to open-source, when I am in a position from which I can do so. Until then, about the best I can do is say, "Keep going! You are doing a Good Thing!"
Re:That's because: (Score:4, Informative)
In the Windows world, I often found programs nutered so they can sell the premium edition. It is so prevelant it has a name... Crippleware and Demoware
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demoware [wikipedia.org]
Pick up any recent HP computer and you will find many installed examples of this broken stuff littered all over it. When I first wanted to try Ubuntu, I downloaded the ISO on my wife's XP dell because it had the CD writer. Guess what, the CD writer program had ISO burning disabled, but they were kind enough to include a software package to offer to download the upgrade, no waiting for about $50. Grr. I never bothered to spend the $50 for a copy of Ubuntu. A search of friendlier software quickly turned up a real CD ISO burner.
Once Ubuntu was up and running, I found the simple task of burning a CD was simple, elegant, without bloat, and worked.
poor programmers try to make programs so simple that only simple things are possible
I find poor programmers try to make programs to extract the most cash possible.
1 Pay to be the default installation
2 Have reduced functionality of an essentual feature such as printing or burning
3 Have built in links to the upgrade fee processing site.
What they missed is The Internet and Google. Crippleware is deadware.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crippleware [wikipedia.org]