Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Operating Systems Software Windows Linux

Vista Vs. Gutsy Gibbon 806

Posted by kdawson
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Vista Vs. Gutsy Gibbon

Comments Filter:
  • Another one (Score:2, Insightful)

    by xaxa (988988) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @05:25PM (#21092433)
    How many of these articles are we going to get?

    (I'll leave it up to you as to whether I'm just fed up with them, or am pondering the success of Linux)
  • Easy (Score:2, Insightful)

    by El Lobo (994537) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @05:32PM (#21092505)
    You see what you want to see. You want to like Ubuntu (or insert some Linuzzzzz distro here), so this is a good start. We all do. I like Windows (and I damn sure see all it's imperfections). I have used Ubuntu, and it feels very rough to me. But once again: I see what I want to see, and I have no incentive to search some other OS, because in Windows I feel like home. I have a OSX machine at home as well for testing purposes. The system is good but it feels OSX alien to me. Everybody should use the system they like and stop preaching and advocating. use trhe TOOL you like, not the bible you read.
  • And your point is? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by rustalot42684 (1055008) <(fake) (at) (account.com)> on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @05:36PM (#21092555)
    I don't want to be a defeatist, but...
    In my opinion, it doesn't really matter whether ubuntu is better, because Microsoft already has >90% of the market. Be realistic: 2008 will not be the year of the Linux Desktop. Neither will 2009. Or 2010. When a company has that much marketshare and actively tries to keep others from entering the playing field, it's not really going to happen. Most people just want to sit at the computer and do their work. I use the Vista on my laptop only about 3% of the time; otherwise I'm using Kubuntu. When I'm on the bus and the person asks me about compiz, I happily tell them about Linux. But the momentum of Microsoft Windows is so large that Linux will not become a widely-used desktop OS.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @05:38PM (#21092573)
    ...But I'll take XP on the desktop over Ubuntu (or Linux) any day. Ubuntu 7.10 is a pain to install, setup and use compared to XP. Few things I need "just work" in Linux.

    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:Another one (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ramble (940291) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @05:40PM (#21092595) Homepage
    Don't worry, I'm sure we'll get plenty more Compare shitty Windows install by a shoddy minimum wage tech to a souped up customised speedy Gentoo install with all hardware hand picked so it works articles.
  • by pwizard2 (920421) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @05:41PM (#21092609)
    When I'm using Windows, (any version) I really miss having a real terminal (cmd.exe just doesn't do it for me) and apt-get (there is nothing like having all of the software I need available at any time from one central place)
  • Re:I agree (Score:3, Insightful)

    by dedazo (737510) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @05:43PM (#21092631) Journal
    And this is Microsoft's fault, or of the companies who create applications that think they have the go of the entire box? Any application that plays nice with the filesystem/registry ACLs works perfectly well in Vista, the same way they worked on XP under non-privileged accounts.

    I run Vista and quite frankly these alleged horror stories amuse me. It's not "slow", it doesn't pop up permission dialogs every five seconds, it didn't deactivate itself when I swapped the network card. After about three days of getting used to where everything was, I'm pretty much as comfortable using it as I was with XP. The only problem I had was a freeware Explorer clone that required elevated privileges, but I really don't use it that much so that's not a big deal. Vim, Komodo Edit, Visual Studio 2005, all my build/config/testing tools, etc. Everything works.

    The guy that wrote this article should consider working for the Onion. It's hilarious that he can't seem to figure out how to shut down the computer. I mean, it's the first freaking button next to the search box, and it doesn't even ask for confirmation anymore. I leave the thing on all the time so I'm not big on the shutdown shortcuts, but whatever.

    If he doesn't want to migrate to Vista, that's fine. More power to him. But these "opinion articles" with their "I can't be bothered to figure out a slightly different Control Panel - instead, I switched operating systems!" matra are just annoying and stupid.

  • Let me guess (Score:2, Insightful)

    by marcello_dl (667940) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @05:45PM (#21092671) Homepage Journal
    > Then how come I'm so much more at home with Ubuntu than Vista?
    Because a linux desktop has the traditional GUI and sometimes even the windows convert in mind while Microsoft needs to redefine the desktop experience in a different way to maintain an edge. They practically would like people to be hostages of the Microsoft way so that linux will look different to them and discourage the switch. Of course in this first period it's the exact opposite, but they have their dominant position to exploit. This opinion is based on the futility of the changes in ie7 UI, but i guess the philosophy is the same for vista.

    PS: as a former macOS user I felt towards XP the same WTF attitude people experience in vista today, while Linux is more of a Wow/Damn dichotomy, with a refreshing sense of freedom.
  • by sqrt(2) (786011) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @05:49PM (#21092709) Journal
    Not when the average American is still using dial up for internet access, or doesn't even have net access AT ALL. Web apps of that size and complexity require affordable, ubiquitous and always on internet connections. When that's the reality for America, we'll talk, until then your predictions look a little silly when you see the state of things in the real world.
  • Re:I agree (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Zebra_X (13249) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @05:53PM (#21092759)
    The button does what you configure it to do. The other options are available on the right arrow.
  • by ThePhilips (752041) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @05:55PM (#21092779) Homepage Journal

    [...] Microsoft already has >90% of the market.

    Correction: "Microsoft still has >80% of the market."

    Do not make such mistakes anymore! ;)

    N.B. fyi, Ubuntu is distributed freely so it is not part of market.

    But the momentum of Microsoft Windows is so large that Linux will not become a widely-used desktop OS.

    There is a huge difference between "momentum" and "inertia".

    Today you use KUbuntu. You feel like a black sheep. Tomorrow you suddenly find that some other your friend uses . Then one more friend. Then one more. Then you just stop counting.

    That's how it happens - w/o anyone really noticing. I'd place any Linux user over 10 Windows users simply because every Linux user made a choice. While more or less every Windows user have what he got with computer - preinstalled. Choice is a barrier. Choice is important. Choice is all the difference between Linux and Windows.

  • Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kebes (861706) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @05:57PM (#21092805) Journal

    Everybody should use the system they like and stop preaching and advocating. use trhe TOOL you like, not the bible you read.
    Fair enough. However your post is somewhat dismissive, as if you're implying "I don't see the point of these kinds of articles" (if I'm putting words in your mouth, I apologize). To respond to that hypothetical implication: the point of such discussions is that there has to be some way for people to learn about alternatives.

    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.
  • by Dunbal (464142) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @05:59PM (#21092833)
    because Microsoft already has >90% of the market. Be realistic: 2008 will not be the year of the Linux Desktop. Neither will 2009. Or 2010. When a company has that much marketshare and actively tries to keep others from entering the playing field, it's not really going to happen.

          Yeah, they used to say that about hmm let's see, OS/360, VAX/VMS, DOS... etc. Revolutions DO happen. It's up to you if you want to be late to the game or not. The ONLY thing I can't do in linux is play the latest games, or use some "Internet Explorer only" websites. I can do EVERYTHING else just as well or better.
  • by fooDfighter (916234) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:00PM (#21092851)
    What's really sad is that thinking back I've probably spent more time getting Windows to work than linux. The problem for linux is that few people actually install Windows on their machines, it comes pre-installed with all the correct drivers. When you have to install windows on a machine you built yourself though... what a hassle, especially when you're using RAID or SATA drives (with Windows XP at least). Then begins the re-installation of the 100 different apps, games, and patches that you had on your old machine, plus the configuration thereof (which is sometimes hard to transfer since a lot of it is in the ball of string known as the registry).

    For someone who enjoys building their own hardware (for quality and reliability), linux is actually less time-consuming. Especially Ubuntu, which has worked out-of-the-box on the last three machines I've installed it on (including one laptop with wireless, typically a problem case).
  • by im_dan (887241) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:02PM (#21092873) Journal
    I don't like flimsy articles rehashing the same old stuff just because a new distro is out either. It the rest of what you've said

    they are Different Things
    They are both operating systems. They are very much the same thing, we should compare them so we can choose between 2 competing products and decide which would suit our needs.

    as if somehow Window is the "baseline" for this benchmark
    I know you don't agree with that and neither do I, but like it or not Microsoft operating systems are number 1 based on the number of installs and that's why a comparison is prudent.
    A worthwhile review would be one that covers the top 3-4 operating systems and outlines strengths and weaknesses of each, but I think most people on /. have already done that for themselves
  • Re:I agree (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Daengbo (523424) <daengbo@gmSTRAWail.com minus berry> on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:05PM (#21092915) Homepage Journal
    I, too keep hearing stories about how bad Vista is, and not just from Slashdot. Cranky Geeks (not a pro-Linux show) went on for five minutes last week about how useless it is.

    Still, I walk into any computer store and see only Vista machines for meters and meters. The whole thinig confuses me.;)
  • Re:My take on it (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BlueParrot (965239) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:07PM (#21092953)

    The problem with you story is that your average "End LUser" is not going to be able to edit the xorg.conf using vi, and even if they could, probably wouldn't know to change "nvidia" to "ati". The CLI is a bit beyond what most people care to know. ...
    Until Ubuntu or whatever distro user can do every single thing in the GUI that they can do through the CLI, Window will have an advantage. MS writes Windows with a GUI in mind from the ground up. Linux is designed to work with or without a GUI. On rare occasion, such as the one you listed here, there will be an absolute need to use the CLI in Linux. Some people just can't handle that.


    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...
  • Apples and Oranges (Score:2, Insightful)

    by LingNoi (1066278) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:11PM (#21092999)
    By just reading the title I can tell you right now that there is no way you could compare Vista to Gutsy Gibbon. Why?

    Microsoft Windows Vista is an operating system with a Desktop environment and a few extremely basic applications such as a drawing application, web browser and calculator program. Maybe a few other basic programs that I am missing.

    Canonical Ubuntu - Gutsy Gibbon is an operating system with the option of two Desktop environments and over 10,000 applications. I think there are around 45,000 deb files but all of those aren't programs. These applications include a web browser, graphics 3D and sound manipulation programs, games, photo and music management, office suite (out of the box), the list could go on.

    With that in mind any comparison would be useless..

    Measure by security? You can't because Ubuntu has vastly more applications that could have potential holes. I saw a chart that showed Vista with less security problems but look at the information above, it's obvious that Ubuntu has (possibly) more security holes its software is 100's times bigger then Microsoft's offering.

    There are other things that you could possibly compare with but you have to keep in mind the above information and you'll realise that Windows and Ubuntu are quite different even if they are both operating systems. They are both produced, run and distributed in different ways. This means there is a lot of mis-understanding about Linux and distributions in general.

    In any case I hope people who dislike previous versions of Ubuntu try it out again, especially if you downloaded breezy badger or older. If you like a windows look then download a version of Kbuntu. I started using Ubuntu when Breezy came out and not much worked on my laptop, but I am currently running an older version of Ubuntu (Feisty) and my laptop works out of the box. I can't wait to try out Gutsy.

    If you love using software give it ago. ^_^
  • Re:My take on it (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Dunbal (464142) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:12PM (#21093019)
    What non-nerd user wants to do or even would know how to do this sort of thing?

          No, a non nerd would do exactly what they do today. He would take his machine to a computer shop. He would be told to come back in 3 days. The techie would change the xorg.conf line, give the non nerd his computer back 3 days later and charge him $400. So what are you complaining about?
  • Re:I agree (Score:5, Insightful)

    by uglyduckling (103926) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:17PM (#21093083) Homepage

    It's hilarious that he can't seem to figure out how to shut down the computer... But these "opinion articles" with their "I can't be bothered to figure out a slightly different Control Panel - instead, I switched operating systems!" matra are just annoying and stupid.

    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.

  • by DragonWriter (970822) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:20PM (#21093113)

    Personally I don't get it...why do we always have to compare the features of X distro with the latest Windows release?


    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.

    The very fact that we are doing so is degrading to the distro, its basically saying that the distro should be like windows


    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.)

    as if somehow Window is the "baseline" for this benchmark.


    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.

    The whole point of using *nix/*bsd is to be different from the mainstream...be more efficient, productive, whatever.


    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.

    Why do we always have to compare the two OSes as if they should both be the same


    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.

    The linux distro will get rated down because it doesn't have some windows bug/feature. I don't get it.


    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.

    So people, please stop your incessant comparisons and side-by-side screenshot postings...they can't be compared as if they were cars; they are Different Things


    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.
  • Re:I agree (Score:1, Insightful)

    by PitaBred (632671) <slashdot@@@pitabred...dyndns...org> on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:21PM (#21093121) Homepage
    You should blame Microsoft for not allowing Linux to interoperate with it, not support them for their monopolistic behavior. Also, consider using Linux-friendly hardware when you're trying to run Linux. Or do you expect Windows to work on your old Amiga?
  • by Ungrounded Lightning (62228) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:23PM (#21093141) Journal
    I noticed a recurring lament in the comments attached to TFA: Businesses usually have one or a few business-specific and business-critical applications that are Windows-only and that don't run adequately under Wine. Rupert's suggestion was to run Windows under virtualization - i.e. polluting every seat at the shop with microsoft code and licenses.

    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-) )
  • Re:That's because: (Score:5, Insightful)

    by davecb (6526) * <davec-b@rogers.com> on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:30PM (#21093205) Homepage Journal

    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

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:34PM (#21093249)
    Right. Ubuntu is trying to copy windows. Kind of like Windows is trying to copy Macintosh. And how Macintosh copied thier GUI from XEROX. And how XEROX stole the concept of a "file" from "Industrial Paper Products". Lets all ignore the obvious shortcomings of both operating systems and point out how the new Chevrolet Corvette is trying to copy the Ferrari 355. Just like Sears is trying to copy ACE Hardware by selling tools, and K-Mart is trying to copy Time Supermarket by selling groceries. Can we get off the whole COPY trip and realize that there are certain services and interfaces that people EXPECT when they use an operating system - much the way there are certain lines someone expects from a sports car, and certain products someone EXPECTS from a department store. These interfaces ultimately make or break the experiences people have while using an operating system, and straying away from common concepts tends to drive the userbase away from the product, as well as making for a difficult learning curve. A good idea is simply a good idea.

    Now if we want to point fingers at who's "trying to copy" lets look at Microsoft for a moment and see what they've "copied". Flippy triangles from OS-X - Check. "TAB completes file/path in command shell" function from Unix - Check. Spinning wheel wait cursor from OS-X - Check. "Mount volume in folder" function from Unix - Check. Window maximize/minimize animations from original MacOS - Check. Clock in the start bar - another MacOS first - Check. IE7 RSS, Windows "version" of the apple searchlight feature, gadgets/widgets - shall I go on?

    I'm not trying to start a flame war here - I have all of the above operating systems, and I'm the biggest anti-MS-elitist if you listen to the people around me. But if you listen to me, I'm just in search of a good product that doesn't annoy the hell out of me while I'm trying to work. And I think the world is with me when I say - somewhere, someone seems to have forgotten that the purpose of a computer was to SIT QUIETLY BENEATH A DESK and FACILITATE, or at least NOT INHIBIT ME from DOING WORK. Its primary function should not be to bother me about updates to Quicktime, it should not ask me "did you just click this" - I know I just clicked it; You're the operating system - taking commands from me - you don't know what I'm doing? And if Ubuntu, Fedora, Suse, Mandriva, Yellowdog, Redhat, Windows, OS-X, Solaris or anything else can shut up and allow me to work uninhibited, without contributing to spam, botnets, virii, worms, or otherwise destroying the Internet - I'm all in. -=-K-=-
  • My opinion (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Jugalator (259273) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:37PM (#21093291) Journal
    Ubuntu is great, better than Vista in most aspects, when the drivers and lacking hardware support don't get in your way. :-/

    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.
  • by uglyduckling (103926) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:48PM (#21093395) Homepage

    as if somehow Window is the "baseline" for this benchmark

    Yup, it is. It's the most popular desktop OS on the planet. Other than some killer apps (which I admit is a big 'other') and certain hardware, most Linux distros will exceed the baseline of Windows by some margin in a number of areas. It's good to compare and see where Windows is winning or losing. It's certainly not about seeing how far Linux has managed to copy the features of Windows. That's what Wine is for.

  • Re:I agree (Score:3, Insightful)

    by LingNoi (1066278) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:48PM (#21093397)
    You have to consider that for some people it is the opposite.

    For example I have an old TV card. It's the only old thing I have in my machine because well.. why would I throw away a perfectly good TV card. It won't work for me in windows because the company have gone on to produce different TV cards and don't want to write drivers for old products.

    So for me it's the opposite Ubuntu works out of the box with my Hardware where Windows does not. My girlfriend has had real problems getting her Microphone working on windows (opposite to your experience) for use with Skype.

    I think it's just you were unlucky with your hardware configuration working on Ubuntu, just as how my girlfriend is unlucky with her hardware configuration working on windows.

    I am also a gamer but I fail to see your issues, I have never really had the problems you have described getting windows games to work and there are lots of fun Linux games (tremulous, Battle for wesnoth, Warsow), why not try some out? If you look at the new games coming out Rage, Unreal Tournament, Enemy Territory: Quake Wars all have their own Linux binary and there are lots of commercial games on Linux too (Americas Army, RTCW: Enemy Territory, Doom 3, Quake 4). If you look at the major MMOs such as World of Warcraft and Eve Online they're playable through wine. My own experience with getting Guildwars working with wine was very positive.. I downloaded the small Guildwars.exe program and then did "wine GuildWars.exe". It just worked, no configuration problems at all. It downloaded the programs files and popped up the Guildwars login screen, just like windows.

    As for your Microsoft compatibility problems well that is what you have to expect. If you want compatibility with both operating systems with your servers then I suggest slowly replacing your window's server programs with open source programs. You'll find they're more compatible on both operating systems and any staff using windows shouldn't notice any difference if you're changing their server software. Of course this all depends on it being done right. : )
  • Re:I agree (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @06:50PM (#21093415)
    Accept that the shortcuts in the new control panel clearly layout the most direct routes to previously buried items that needed to be drilled down to. The greatest UI improvement over XP being the wireless networking, which is just lightyears better.

    Yeah Ubuntu is great, do I still have to find, download, compile and install READLINE? Yeah, XP, and presumably vista has a lot of drivers to download to get the fullest and latest functionality out of one's hardware. It can take hours even on a cable modem, I have no doubt. But it beats the fuck out of finding obscure items, and their dependancies, then downloading, compiling, installing, and configuring. Off a command-line as opposed to a Setup.exe.

    I like linux (prefer KDE for a WM though, mainly because Konq rocks my socks and Nautalis is ass). And btw, why is linux still a pain in the ass to install on laptops? Really, more than 50% computers sold are laptops, and they don't have a video configuration method that obviates "give up and die" as a solution to little hiccups? But it runs ok, if a little slow, after the necessary setup period for linux in virtual pc 2007 on my vista laptop, so I can't be too mad.
  • Re:I agree (Score:3, Insightful)

    by r3m0t (626466) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @07:15PM (#21093679)
    Well, if you have a legitimate copy of Windows XP or even XP SP2, how are you going to get a new CD? You know, one with the last four years of drivers included? Oh yeah, you can't. Unless you create your own by slipstreaming which is probably more effort than it's worth.

    I have here a legitimate copy of breezy/hoary/whatever. How am I going to get a new CD with all the latest hardware support? Well, I could download it from any working computer I have that also has a disc burner. I could install a just-about-working feisty (networking but not necessarily sound, graphics and other niceties) and then use that to download and burn a gutsy ISO. Or if I have a computer with a CD writer and another disc drive, I can keep the Live CD in one drive and write a CD using the other.

    Or I could buy it from a slightly out-of-the-way location at a nominal cost, or get a free copy shipped in about 8 weeks.

    So in other words, the legitimate comparison is "what you can easily get now to install XP" (i.e. your old discs) against "what you can easily get now to install ubuntu" (i.e. new discs from the internet)
  • by dbIII (701233) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @07:19PM (#21093729)
    The "average" end user is not going to take a hard drive out of a dead machine and put in a new one. Whever does it is going to see the physical hardware in the cases and most likely see "ati" or "nvidia" written on the graphics card no matter what brand the entire card is.

    As for the CLI (command line interfaces) objections - registry or CLI, they are both hard for new users. But now we get to the bit that really puts things in context:

    On rare occasion, such as the one you listed here, there will be an absolute need to use the CLI in Linux

    The above poster appears to have not grasped the idea that sometimes it's better to communicate by writing than to point at pictures. A mixed interface is very useful - GUI only is very limiting as in the imaginary example of a word processor with only an on screen keyboard and mouse pointer to click on it as the input device. The GUI is limited to the items the designer put in with a lot of effort - a decent command line shell can pipe things from one command to the next for a lot of flexability. How much space is used in all directories with names starting with "f"? Where's the document that mentions Mr Whatsit and Mr Whosit by name? Trivial questions to answer from the command line but a lot of effort to make GUIs to cover even a small number of possible cases. Even Xorg.conf has so many options in it that the GUI to modify more than the usual bits done by current GUIs would be even more unweildy than powerstrip on windows has to be to cover so many options. Then we get to the experience of many long term windows and early mac users - they grey menu option that you should be able to get to but the GUI designer missed something so you cannot use it in certain conditions where you should. GUIs are quick and easy ways for the user to select stuff but have to work by limiting options a bit more than if the application can parse text.

    It's a different system that does things differently - and using a command line shell and text editor is part of that just as "C:" the registry hive and even the find tool is part of MS Windows.

  • Re:I agree (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kcbrown (7426) <slashdot@sysexperts.com> on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @07:23PM (#21093771)

    I, too keep hearing stories about how bad Vista is, and not just from Slashdot. Cranky Geeks (not a pro-Linux show) went on for five minutes last week about how useless it is.

    Still, I walk into any computer store and see only Vista machines for meters and meters. The whole thinig confuses me.;)

    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:Ugh iPhoto (Score:5, Insightful)

    by God'sDuck (837829) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @07:48PM (#21094019)
    Simple mathematical transforms, however, can be stored. EG, if you have set the three sliders to "25," "10" and "15," those numbers can be stored (say, 0.5KB of metadata) instead of the resulting file, and then reapplied every time you want to see the changed version. Photoshop calls them filter layers. Much easier on the hard drive and RAM -- but taking that approach means you have to manually export the resulting file to send it to a friend; not necessarily the best approach for consumer software.
  • Re:Another one (Score:3, Insightful)

    by HermMunster (972336) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @07:51PM (#21094045)
    One can only say that about the US. But it isn't that we can't play them legally, it is that no one is selling a package of decoders for Linux.

    In other countries it is legal and hence your point is moot. But yes, because the powers that be are intentionally disregarding the demand for a legal decoder on Linux many in the US have to resort to less than total legitimacy for DVD playback.

    This doesn't mean that the DVDs are stolen, it just means that the codec isn't available, or at least not widely known.

    In XP and some Vistas you still can't legally play a DVD without purchasing a 3rd party decoder. Also, keep in mind that Microsoft has 47 different programs under Vista that collect information about your computer and report that back to their offices. In Linux you don't have those privacy violations. Then, on top of all that privacy violation you still have WGA/WGN, the high price tag, and the true lack of any real reason to upgrade. When you are done considering that you have to consider why those codecs may have been provided--as a means to ensure you use those tools that give Microsoft's DRM and the content creators control of your computer. What I'm saying is you can't trust to use those products and would be better off buying another brand. I won't use the media player in XP or Vista because the license agreement tells me that I must allow Microsoft to monitor the content.

    I'd rather have a small violation of a non-legit codec then to have this ginormous company that was convicted of illegal monopolistic predatory practices telling me what I can and can't do with my computer.
  • Re:I agree (Score:3, Insightful)

    by pherthyl (445706) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @07:55PM (#21094087)
    And this is Microsoft's fault, or of the companies who create applications that think they have the go of the entire box?

    It's mostly the application devs' fault. Not that who's fault it is makes one iota of difference. The end result is that it's incredibly annoying and I wouldn't want to use it.
    Just like no-one cares that lack of driver support on Linux is not really Linux's fault.
  • Re:Ugh iPhoto (Score:4, Insightful)

    by westlake (615356) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @08:06PM (#21094155)
    we are taking an extra 3mb taken up for a simple brightness adjustment

    with the 500 GB SATA HDD on sale for $150 tell me why I should care.

  • Re:I agree (Score:2, Insightful)

    by vux984 (928602) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @08:14PM (#21094211)
    I don't need to compare Breezy with XP because I'm comparing what's available now - the two supported MS desktop OSs and a Linux offering.

    That was my point you weren't. You were comparing an XP SP'zero' to the latest version of Ubuntu. If you had the latest version of XP it would have been a fairer comparison. It takes me less than half an hour to patch from a recent SP2 disc.

    Comparing 'the Live CD doesn't boot' stories is an unfair comparison - there's plently of dodgy hardware that has problems with XP.

    Sorry, but a brand name nvidia 8800GTS is not in the same category as 'dodgy hardware'. I agree there is lots of fringe generic crap out there, and XP has its share of problems. But that's about as mainstream as you can get. It just not the same as not being able to get XP working with some 8 year old Win98 MFP scanner/printer/fax that some company congealed.

    XP (grudgingly) and Vista. XP is old, out of date, a pain to install and keep working properly, Vista is expensive, is a resource hog, and as the article said is different for difference' sake. Ubuntu is up-to-date, easy to install, easy to keep working properly and comes with a ton of applications right out of the box.

    I'm drowning in your bias.

    Your complaint against XP is that its 'old' and 'out of date', yet its been refreshed significantly twice and SP3 is expected to arrive soon. Provided you are working from a recent SP2 disc with USB2, common Gigabit chipsets, common SATA controllers, and other modern hardware support installation is not generally difficult at all. In other words, I call bullshit.

    Your complaint against Vista is that its expensive? Really? Its cheaper than XP, unless you want Ultimate and its not like the price of XP went up recently. And ultimate? Its basically MCE which didn't even exist at retail. XP Home is about the same price as Vista Home Premium, and Vista Business so far seems cheaper than XP Pro. Compared to Ubuntu, maybe its expensive, and I'll give you that, but then so was XP before it, and 2k before that; -- hardly a flaw of 'vista'.

    Your 2nd was that it was a resource hog. And that's valid. Don't put vista on older or marginal hardware. Stick with XP or Ubuntu. But on a new core 2 duo with 2GB of ram, and a fast video card, vista is perfectly snappy. Should it need that much to be snappy? No. Is linux snappier on much less hardware, yes. But if you've got the hardware, Vista runs just fine.

    Your last compaint against vista is absurd: that its 'different than XP'. Well, la-di-da. Ubuntu is arbitrarily different from XP too, yet you don't complain about that. And XP is hardly the ideal we should all be striving for anyways. Personally, I -like- a number of the differences. The add remove programs is -better-, the start menu is -better-, the networking control panel/network places/etc is better although there is a learning curve from XP. The reorganization of the control panels was needless, but 'worse'? No, just different. And is Ubuntu better at control panel/gui configuration organization? Hell no. One can learn it, and get used to it, but its as arbitrary as the others, and lacks the consistency you get in windows. Display settings for example... half of them are X, half of them are in Ruby Compiz, a few more them are somewhere else with no links between them take the user from one to the next... sure it makes sense if you understand the layers and role of each layer in the linux windowing system... but its pretty messed up in terms of being logical from a non-technical end user. And don't get me started on the idiosyncracies of getting multiple monitors working 'just so'.

    And ubuntu? up to date? ok. But so is Vista, and even XP can be brought up to date fairly easily. But sure Ubuntu is the best on this front.

    Easy to install? Have you installed Vista? A 6 year old who'd never touched a computer before could probably make it through. Ubuntu is -great- for anything that just works, but what about stuff that doesn't. Windows pr
  • Re:I agree (Score:3, Insightful)

    by kwandar (733439) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @08:44PM (#21094433)
    Somebody intelligent said it earlier .... the answer is virtualization.
  • Re:That's because: (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JK_the_Slacker (1175625) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @08:49PM (#21094465) Homepage

    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:Easy (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @09:18PM (#21094699)
    >Why it's so hard to accept that other people can like Windows, Amiga PalmOs or whatever?

    Its not hard but this guy is an exception: he has tried all three OS and made up his mind.
    The majority of people only know Windows. Hell, the majority of them only know IE and Outlook.

    When you have a choice and choose one over the other, I have no problem. Its called free will.

    Still, you wouldnt see me troll a Mac forum and tell them how I think their pride is a toy.
    Some people go out of their way to be neutral, hence they feel like trolls.

    Of course, I also only support Linux machines in our extended family, so i dont believe in choice ;-)
    I was sick and tired of cleaning out their crapware problems and told them as much. I know still support 8 machines on top of my 4 and spend about 75% less time on it.... You are free to run a dual boot if you need that specific software or games.
    Out of those 8 that moved to Linux (Kubuntu, PCLinuxOS and Mandriva), 2 didnt like the Linux and I had no problems with it. You tried, you dont like is fine with me.
  • Re:Ugh iPhoto (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cecil_turtle (820519) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @09:38PM (#21094879)
    I don't know where you shop but 500 GB hard drives are $100-$110 [newegg.com]. Anyway, disk storage isn't the (only) problem. Those bits have to be written and read to/from the hard drive (slow performance), stored in memory, sent over the network, sent over the Internet, sent to USB drives, stored on backups, etc. Unneeded / excessive bloat is never a good thing. Attitudes like yours are why computers that are 50 times "faster" than they were 10 years ago perform the same or slower. Have you used Vista?
  • Re:Bundling (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Nevyn (5505) * on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @10:27PM (#21095227) Homepage Journal

    Windows has a monopoly, Ubuntu doesn't. Ubuntu don't "own" the office suite they bundle, in fact you have the exact same rights to it as they do.

    If MS lost it's monopoly, or bundled open-office, noone would have a problem.

  • Defeat in Detail (Score:5, Insightful)

    by turing_m (1030530) on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @10:44PM (#21095377)
    "She was already using Firefox / OpenOffice / Gaim so for her the differences were pretty nominal."

    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:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 23, 2007 @10:46PM (#21095399)

    Your 2nd was that it was a resource hog. And that's valid. Don't put vista on older or marginal hardware.
    You had me nodding until this last statement, which sounds like Vista apologism. Vista is slow on much modern hardware as well.
  • Re:Ugh iPhoto (Score:2, Insightful)

    by scoot80 (1017822) on Wednesday October 24, 2007 @01:30AM (#21096397) Journal
    why do you make the assumption he is in the US?
  • Re:I agree (Score:4, Insightful)

    by uglyduckling (103926) on Wednesday October 24, 2007 @02:29AM (#21096677) Homepage

    If you had the latest version of XP it would have been a fairer comparison. It takes me less than half an hour to patch from a recent SP2 disc.


    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.

    Your complaint against Vista is that its expensive? Really?

    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.

    Your last compaint against vista is absurd: that its 'different than XP'. Well, la-di-da. Ubuntu is arbitrarily different from XP too, yet you don't complain about 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.

  • Re:That's because: (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Imsdal (930595) on Wednesday October 24, 2007 @02:51AM (#21096789)

    For many years I've appreciated a handful of things Microsoft does:

    The important thing you missed is Excel. Excel is, by far and away, the most important reason so few comapnies move away from Microsoft. Yes, there are alternatives out there. Yes, for 90% of all Excel users, the alternatives are good enough. However, for the last 10% of users, the alternatives are simply not good enough. (Pivot tables, VBA, specific add-ins, mainly.)

    And guess what? It's the 10% of users who use this stuff who have the final say.

  • Ah yes... that good ol' Lunix security model we all know... and know. Now that Vista is the most stable and secure OS on the market, the MS haters just have to keep banging the drum about how bad Vista supposedly is.


    Yes, the security of an OS no one uses is pretty good, since you can't hack something that's not running...

    Seriously, though, a server running out-of-date software (your posted example) is eventually going to get borked regardless of operating system. Bad troll.
  • Re:That's because: (Score:3, Insightful)

    by hey! (33014) on Wednesday October 24, 2007 @07:24AM (#21098083) Homepage Journal

    My experience has been that Apple marketing convinces the end user that they have provided all they need.


    Apple marketing may be good, but it doesn't have supernatural powers. It's not as if it is casting its spell over people so they accept music players that are just solid block of plastic, or email programs that don't have the ability to send or receive messages.

    The truth is that a solid block of plastic does everything most people need a music player to do. It just falls short in satisfying their wants. And what they need in a computer does not even include a GUI; folks could get by with vi and LaTex. Who knows? Maybe once they got used to it they'd actually be better off. Having a GUI isn't about needs, it's about experience.

    Marketing's great vice is definitely not minimizing their customers' needs. On the contrary, it strives in the customer's mind to promote whims to wants, and wants to needs. Apple marketing is no different than any other company's marketing. What they've done differently is to offer a different proposition to their customers. Instead of, "we'll do everything you want", it's "we'll do the things that matter most to you better." Naturally they don't dwell on the things that they don't do (yet -- that's a huge ingredient on the Apple upgrade treadmill). To be fair, other companies that have products that do more things don't exactly dwell on how poorly they do them.

    It's all about which proposition you find more credible, which one is more possible to deliver upon.
  • Re:That's because: (Score:3, Insightful)

    by petermgreen (876956) <plugwash.p10link@net> on Wednesday October 24, 2007 @07:47AM (#21098307) Homepage
    I keep seeing this claim but never any real evidence to back it up. In fact the first link you give says "No stats are available on how much work is being done by developers on a payroll as opposed to community volunteers."

    Yes the key developers on some high profile projects get paid by someone to work on thier projects. Linus gets paid by the "linux foundation" (which seems to be a trade organisation of firms with a vested interest in linux's sucess). The core devs of openoffice and java (which isn't fully opensource yet but is getting that way) are paid by sun. The commercial linux distros also put some paid development in the direction of projects that matter to them.

    However I see no evidence that this is typical, all the smaller opensource projects I have been involved with them have been run by people who have a day job doing something else and propietry software for linux seems to be virtually nonexistant.

  • by Bonzodog01 (995533) on Wednesday October 24, 2007 @08:42AM (#21098949)
    It was an example of bad management of high profile websites that caused the breach, not bad security on the OS's behalf. The thing is, these servers were brute forced over sshd - and from what I know, it took the attackers nearly a week of brute forcing to get in, and Windows servers can be brute forced and attacked in very much the same way. What it needs is an attentive admin who keeps an eye on the servers, and keeps an eye on the logs, and should pick up unusual activity on the firewall or ports. So, it was bad administration that caused this, not an insecure OS.
  • Re:That's because: (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Imsdal (930595) on Wednesday October 24, 2007 @09:11AM (#21099333)

    So what's the problem with the 90%? :)

    Pivot tables. Seriously - you will never get a power user to switch from Excel without a good implementation of pivot tables. And again, power users dictate what tools to use (at least in this case). The last few times this has come up, more than one comment has read "what are those? I have never used them!". The obvious answer to that is "small wonder you can't understand why people stick with Excel".

    Also, other power users of Excel may give a different answer to this question, which is why the contenders have such a difficult time getting a foothold. You really have to do very close to 100% of what Excel does at least as well in order to convince the power users to switch. And the perceived loss of giving up known features is larger than the perceived gain from new features, so in practice it's impossible to skip pivot tables and do something else exceedingly well. I have no idea what the alternatives do exceedingly well, my point is simply that that doesn't matter much.

  • by walterbyrd (182728) on Wednesday October 24, 2007 @10:48AM (#21100715)
    I keep seeing these types of posts: "Vista doesn't really suck all that bad. If you have gobs of money to spend on hardware, and gobs of time to spend tweaking, then Vista almost works as well as XP or W2K."

    To msft users, I guess these posts seem logical. But I always think: WTF? why are switching at all?
  • Re:I agree (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Risen888 (306092) on Wednesday October 24, 2007 @04:44PM (#21105691)
    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.


    Good. Call me back in about seven years. I'll be the guy eating your lunch because I familiarized myself with the next big thing instead of burying my head in the sand of the last big thing.

: is not an identifier

Working...