Windows 7 vs. Ubuntu 10.04 702
Barence writes "PC Pro has performed a comprehensive test of Windows 7 vs Ubuntu 10.04. They've tested and scored the two operating systems on a number of criteria, including usability, bundled apps, performance, compatibility and business. The final result is much closer than you might expect. 'Ubuntu is clearly an operating system on the rise,' PC Pro concludes. 'If we repeat this feature in a year's time, will it have closed the gap? We wouldn't bet against it.'"
Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:2, Insightful)
Because when it comes to software for most home users, well, the games won't work on Unbuntu without trying to use Wine, etc, etc.
And your typical home user won't want it.
Nothing to see here.
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:5, Insightful)
the games won't work on Unbuntu without trying to use Wine
Since when do SWF games such as FarmVille and Tetris Friends not work on Ubuntu?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I have to say that Adobe Flash is horrible on Linux, it uses far more CPU time and its not as smooth either.
That said, there are plans (according to another /. article) for Steam to move into Linux too. And not even home user is there to play games.
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:5, Informative)
Unfortunately Valve say there are no plans for a Linux version of Steam.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/23/valve-denies-having-a-linux-version-of-steam-in-the-works/ [engadget.com]
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately Valve say there are no plans for a Linux version of Steam.
But Steam runs in Wine and so do a surprising number of Steam games; I was playing Left 4 Dead and Fallout 3 at the weekend in Ubuntu, for example.
And given the vast variation in Linux distros, you're probably better off releasing Windows games that are Wine-compatible than a Linux binary that won't run on Ubuntu 12.04 or Redhat 6.3.
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:4, Funny)
Cyclic Logic. Move up 3 parents [slashdot.org].
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:4, Informative)
What you propose there is ludicrus. Native clients will always run faster than Wine. Not to mention that if a game is properly ported you don't have to worry about what distro you run. Go get a copy of Unreal Tournament, and install it on Ubuntuu 10.04. It installs just fine, and is 11 years old.
There is no need to make a "wine-compatible client" when OpenGL is just fine, will run better, and will be supported longer. Wine has gone through more fundamental changes than the basic structure of Linux. So while it might seem like a good short term idea to just make "wine compatible" games, what happens when the next wine version hits, and things aren't working properly anymore. Anyone who has used Wine enough will tell you that some older versions work better for certain games, etc.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Native clients will always run faster than Wine.
Why?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Second, even if a game has an OpenGL renderer (Like World of Warcraft), you still have issues like the hardware cursor to deal with.
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:5, Informative)
I've tried Left4Dead 2, and Team Fortress 2 in Wine, and both of them run about 25-35 fps slower than the native Windows client. That simply doesn't cut it. It's putting good hardware to waste. What you propose there is ludicrus. Native clients will always run faster than Wine.
The difference is not because you're running a non-native game, it's because Microsoft has put a lot more resources into DirectX than the open source community has been able to put into reimplementing D3D and 3D game optimizations in OpenGL. WINE is not an emulator, code runs at native speed so if you optimized the native performance to be on par with DirectX so would WINE. No, don't hold your breath for that though.
So while it might seem like a good short term idea to just make "wine compatible" games, what happens when the next wine version hits, and things aren't working properly anymore. Anyone who has used Wine enough will tell you that some older versions work better for certain games, etc.
WINE has to support many binary applications that depend on all sorts of quirky behavior in Windows, and that is hard. Also they're often doing black box debugging trying to figure out what went wrong. If someone takes a little effort with the source code, making it do things the "right" way and being able to trace what happens in the application too they can achieve much with little effort.
Don't get me wrong, I don't suggest WINE is a good place to start. But very often you have an existing Windows code base, or cross platform support has been scrapped in the initial release. I can kinda see they want to know if it's a hit or flop first in order to commit as little as possible, rather than having spent money on a flop and ports of it.
At least if you're talking about somewhat older games it's possible you have a newer graphics card where it doesn't matter that Linux is 30 fps slower because it's 30 fps slower than 200 fps. Not so great if you want the latest FPS to run at max speed, but many RTS/TBS/adventure/sim other games do fine with reduced performance.
Don't get me wrong, I want native games. But having some semi-official or official WINE support is a huge step up from not recognizing other OSes at all. Don't chew out the people that are at least trying to make a little effort for not doing enough.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Performance is not a priority for Wine
Makes you wonder exactly what IS a priority for Wine ?
Hell, if we're playing that game, I have an artificial intelligence program that 100% mimics the human brain. It might take 25 years to emulate 1 microsecond of REAL brain activity, but performance is not a priority with my software. "Buy One Now (tm)".
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:4, Informative)
And given the vast variation in Linux distros, you're probably better off releasing Windows games that are Wine-compatible than a Linux binary that won't run on Ubuntu 12.04 or Redhat 6.3.
I currently use Arch Linux, and I've previously used Ubuntu and Linux Mint. Every single Linux game I've tried, even the Humble Indie Bundle as well as windows games using Wine, they all work exactly the same on each platform. Linux distributions aren't all that different as you'd think; they all have the same basic things like ALSA, X, some desktop environment like GNOME or KDE or XFCE, usually OpenGL/SDL support, and Python. Have all of that, and virtually every game for Linux will run on any type of setup you have so long as you have these basic things.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So you buy something like CrossOver, which is WINE internally but with nice UI tools and stupidly simple setup.
There's a reason why CodeWeavers can stay in business selling WINE (and donating some profits to WINE/hiring WINE devs).
It was pretty trivial to set up last time I tried it - install their package, run it and I had Steam running in no time at all. Ditto getting HL/HL2 running.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Configure? There is nothing to configure. Yes, I know winecfg, but I've never needed it. Just install it and double-click an EXE like you would on Windows.
Hell, it even integrates itself as binfmt_misc or whatever it's called: I can call Windows programs from the command line as ./foo.exe.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Depends. For a lot of non-gaming backward compatibility purposes Wine is darn spiffy and works great out of the box.
Even in Gaming a lot depends on what you're running; again older retrogaming is good.
All that said, it's a nice tool that drastically expands the software available in Linux, a particularly useful tool when there's a nice utility from Windows that you're used to and want to stick with till you see something better, not an all around solution. If bleeding edge gaming is your priority, assuming
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
DRM is here to stay... Intrusive DRM is not. The reason why Steam is successful is because it gives loads of advantages over previous delivery methods. I had windows go all blue screen on me, complete reinstall needed, a while back (it was my fault, I was running Europa Universalis, and the entire OS went kaput... I wondered what had happened, until I noticed I'd pulled out one of the SATA data cables of my striped primary drives with my toe - the case is open because cooling is not optimal for the graph
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:5, Insightful)
> I have to say that Adobe Flash is horrible on Linux, it uses far more CPU time and its not as smooth either.
Flash is no worse on Linux than any other platform. This includes Windows despite all of the nonsense about how
the new versions of Flash allegedly are better at supporting things like PureVideo. I was trying this out for
myself just last night and was sorely disappointed by all of the hype that led me to believe that Windows would
do better in this regard.
It does not use far more CPU and it is not any less smooth.
Linux is also far less likely to completely freeze as Flash is having it's usual problems.
Yes, I decided to go back to playing Hulu in Linux because doing so in Windows 7 was becoming painful and annoying.
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:4, Interesting)
>>>Perhaps they should do a Mac OS vs. Ubuntu Linux comparison.
Heck I'll do it myself. Ubuntu 10.0 and Mac OS 10.6
usability - 7 - 7 (tie)
entertainment and bundled aps 8 - 6 (Mac scores same as WIN7)
performance and mobility - 9 - 9 (tie)
drivers and compatibility - 7 - 7 (tie)
business - 7 - 6 (mac not as good as ubuntu)
TOTAL 38 Ubuntu 35 Mac
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:5, Interesting)
It would be interesting to see some proper statistics on how many home users actually buy/run games on windows.
From my gut feeling it might fall both ways - it may be that a lot of people need the home computer to support DirectX games, as it is a must-have feature for myself.
Or it may be just as likely that most typical home-users actually just use the computers for Web+Word, and quite likely get their gaming done on sites like facebook (which has more daily-active players than the entire PC FPS+RTS+MMORPG sales combined) or on consoles - in which case they don't really care about the PC games and Wine.
Re: (Score:2)
Because when it comes to software for most home users, well, the games won't work on Unbuntu without trying to use Wine, etc, etc.
And your typical home user won't want it.
Nothing to see here.
I'ts not just the games, though they are important (certainly to me! I live on Chessmaster, Realflight and MS Flightsim). It's the entire myriad of software. That's what's got the PC such incredible sustained market share. You can do a busload of things with it and there are less things you can run with Linux but not WIndows than vice versa. ...and as a geek I HATE Ubuntu. I like to be able to build kernels etc. I want the best of both worlds - a system that you can tweak, but that works right out of the bo
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:5, Informative)
I support Unix professionally (RHEL), and my work laptop is Ubuntu 10.04.
My home machine is Win7. Why? Flight Simulator, LOTRO, SimCity, Civilization, and several other games that either don't play at all or are a freaking pain to make work. CS4. A properly working scanner. Portable Apps (ironic, huh? Most are linux apps!). TrueCrypt (which works in Linux but is a PITA to deal with). HDMI support (including sound).
I like Ubuntu 10.04 a lot, and for me it's ideal for my laptop needs. Just doesn't hack it on my desktop. Funny how times have changed.
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:4, Informative)
I have a very large family
I suppose this is typical.
What I'm inferring here is that you believe users simply don't care what OS they run. I agree, to a point. They care as much as it will be able to run things properly and without issue. The malware, well that's surely a point in Ubuntu's favor, for now. But what about the users that want to run some kind of specific app? Sure, there are often Linux replacements for things, but not everything is accessible from Ubuntu's repository. This leads to downloading arcane file types that need to be installed by typing a cryptic command into a terminal. Your typical home user is simply not going to do this, period. It's like a jump back to... heck, I dunno, it's more arcane than installing DOS programs (minus the TSR memory management thing).
Don't get me wrong, I run 10.04 netbook edition on my Eee, and I like it for the most part, but even as a savvy user, I have many more issues with it than I do with Windows. Flash pages crash more than occasionally, WiFi is still kind of weird, Most of the games won't even fit on the screen (seriously, why bother releasing a netbook edition with games if they aren't able to fit on a netbook screen?). Ubuntu has a very apparent lack of polish, and this is what will turn most users off.
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:4, Funny)
Well, unfortunately the writers of most malware won't give us the source, so we can't just do a recompile, but you could try running it under Wine if you really need it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There is very little that is not in the Ubuntu repos.
This leads to downloading arcane file types that need to be installed by typing a cryptic command into a terminal.
Download a debian package or a binary installer and double click on it in the file manager.
If that fails download the binary and click on it and it runs (Skype for those versions of Linux for which a package is not provided, for example)
The remaining stuff that needs to be compiled is usually aimed at geeks anyway.
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:4, Interesting)
The only real barrier at this point to having your average n00b run Linux is probably lack of support from Apple.
The fact that Apple is actively hostile to accessing their devices outside of iTunes means more people are driven to keep WINDOWS around.
Not being able to deal with their iPod or iPhone is more likely a show stopper than games at this point.
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I converted my wife to Ubuntu after the 8th virus in 3 months.
So now she can't contact her friends and get more viruses?
Oh, you meant _computer_ viruses......
(sorry :P)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes they do.
A huge percentage of PCs aren't sold to homes, but to businesses. While Ubuntu may not be attractive to businesses tied to Windows-specific software, it could be extremely attractive to businesses mostly run off of web applications. Corporate IT departments who are considering making the switch for some of their users would be able to make use of studies like this to help convince upper management that there's little downside and a significant cost savings.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The real kicker about this is that Microsoft identified this exact issue about a decade ago, when they realized that web applications would eventually make their dominance of the desktop less useful than it once was. So far, they haven't been able to do anything about it, for several reasons:
- Firefox largely put an end to the IE-only websites that were popular back in the day. This stunted Microsoft's attempts to control HTML and Javascript and add incompatible extensions to it.
- Linux+Apac
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't understand how this comment is in the least bit Insightful. It's incredibly poor and short-sighted.
Sometimes it's useful to know what it's like understanding the Linux experience in fresh eyes. There are things that pop out that you wouldn't really consider if you're too used to Linux or too unfamiliar with Windows. Say, for example, what popped out at me was when they mentioned that they had a hard time because they couldn't maximize windows by dragging them to the top of the screen (which must be some new-fangled Win7 functionality and is completely foreign to me as I haven't touched Windows since XP SP2). They went so far as to take off major points for this at the end when they would easily have adapted away if they bothered using it for more than a month but is still important in the first impressions of a complete newbie. Or how they actually were impressed with Rhythmbox and the fuctionality which surprised me. Or how they said it was impressive how easy it was to install, which is definitely worth a few bonus points for Ubuntu. Or how Ubuntu provides some nice features (Ubuntu One, Software Center) which new users seem to like and don't have alternatives for on Windows. Or how they easily adapted to new software alternatives (like Evolution vs. Outlook or Rhythmbox vs. WMP).
There's actually a ton of useful information for understanding what it's like for new users. In fact, they never even once lamented that they couldn't run games on it, which just goes to show that it's not the end-all-be-all for every user as you suggest. Try opening your mind a little.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
LoB
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm late to the party here. But as far as the usability issues, at least the first part, he was wrong on all counts. When I try to run adobe AIR on any computer I have to first install it after downloading. If Adobe can't get their system set up properly and provide a proper .deb file that's not Ubuntu's fault. That is after all a 3rd party proprietary product. When it comes to workspaces that is pure preference. He tries to make it out as if that's a usability feature but in reality you can just shut
Re:Comparisons like this don't mean squat... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sad, but true.... I am not regular home user, i am actually a developer, but nevertheless, i also play a lot of games, and thus i am forced to have both OS........ In fact, i solved my problems by having a lots of VM's. Windows, Linux, you named it, i have it.
I'm a developer too, but I just have either another computer, or a removable drive with Windows on it that I can pop in when I need to use Microsoft's stuff.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:And if you want a business comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
It's also nice that the package manager in Linux keeps everything up to date. Having 5 or 6 updaters always running in the background is a waste of resources and a massive security hole. That's a non-starter.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
> Usability: The need to use the command line for installing custom proprietary software is a shortcoming ...and what would those be?
Skype?
2nd Life?
Osmos?
Bridge Construction Set?
Oracle?
Nero?
Robin Hood?
2011 the year of linux on the desktop? (Score:2, Funny)
2099 year of linux on the desktop? ;)
one day...
This (Score:4, Funny)
is clearly the year of the linux desktop commercial success
and this post was brought for you to test your sarcasm-meter!
I've heard of this "Windows" before (Score:5, Funny)
I remember hearing about this "Windows" thing back in the early part of this century and that it and another OS called "OS/2" were once competitors. I like antique software. It shows our humble beginnings.
They have their uses (Score:5, Insightful)
I have Windows 7 on our gaming boxes just to keep things simple...but I run Ubuntu on our laptops, for size and speed considerations. We also run Ubuntu on our HTPC.
They have their purposes...I couldn't imagine exclusively using only one or the other.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No Drivers for Windows (Score:5, Interesting)
My wife got a Win7 x64 laptop and none of the older Canon hardware (printers and scanners) supported this OS. After 2 hours of trying to make it work with all sorts of hacks posted in the bowels of the internet support forums, I tested the devices on my Ubuntu desktop. They worked fine.
The only app that she uses is Picasa and that works on Ubuntu. So I installed Ubuntu on her laptop and it works great. In the last 10 years, we've come full circle. If you want hardware support, you need Linux.
I just wish that I could have paid less for the laptop without the Windows tax.
Re:No Drivers for Windows (Score:5, Insightful)
At this point, most devices have been updated to at least officially support Vista (and, by proxy, 7)...how old is your Cannon stuff?
I wouldn't use your experience as a condemnation of Windows 7 so much as a reason why, in your case, ubuntu is a better choice. Still, how old is your Cannon hardware?
Re:No Drivers for Windows (Score:5, Funny)
how old is your Cannon hardware?
About 700 years. [wikipedia.org]
Re:No Drivers for Windows (Score:5, Insightful)
At this point, most devices have been updated to at least officially support Vista (and, by proxy, 7)
In general, yes that is true. However, printer and scanner manufacturers have been notorious with their lack of legacy support for Windows 7/Vista, let alone 64 bit versions. Sure, their new scanners and printers have full support and work fine, but if your printer is more than a few years old (released before Vista) you're very lucky if you 32 bit drivers which enable even half the functionality.
I wonder if this is a conscious decision by the manufacturers, who think you'll blame the OS for your problems, and that you're more likely to buy a new printer than convert to an entirely new OS. After all, the printer worked fine until you got a new computer! Honestly, that doesn't seem so far fetched to me.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Hardware support has definitely become a positive aspect of Ubuntu, no longer the pain in the ass that it used to b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
yet my WIndows 7 desktop and laptop seems to work with the 10 year old laserjet 4 printers on our network using ancient drivers
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's because the HP LaserJet 4 was built during a time when the art of using standards such as PostScript and PCL had still not been forgotten. Anything from the past 20 years will work with that printer...
Taking bets? I'll bet against it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Keep marketing linux as a "replacement" for windows and you guarantee to always fail. Market it for what it is - better for many types of situations, but definitely not a rsimple eplacement for windows any more than osx is.
Otherwise you're fighting the battle on the other side's home turf - and they're bigger and more entrenched.
And when people try ubuntu and realize that it is not necessarily a matter of it being a replacement os, they tar all linux distros with the same fail.
Re: (Score:2)
I know, we should go back to marketing Linux as a replacement for Solaris instead. Isn't that what Sun ended up doing, anyway? And why they're irrelevant and dead now.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It probably did more to kill Sun than anything else, because the revenue streams it brought in weren't big enough in relation to dev costs. It also diverted attention from the core business, and let other people make more money off
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why is Sun dead because they invented a wildly successful programming language and virtual machine? I don't get your logic here.
Re:Taking bets? I'll bet against it. (Score:4, Insightful)
Keep marketing linux as a "replacement" for windows and you guarantee to always fail. Market it for what it is - better for many types of situations, but definitely not a rsimple eplacement for windows any more than osx is.
Otherwise you're fighting the battle on the other side's home turf - and they're bigger and more entrenched.
And when people try ubuntu and realize that it is not necessarily a matter of it being a replacement os, they tar all linux distros with the same fail.
Well, as more and more applications that people typically use start moving off the computer and into the "cloud" (whatever the hell that means at any given time) the superiority of one desktop OS over another will be less of an issue. Take my girlfriend for instance: she basically uses a lot of online services of one kind or another, although she prefers Thunderbird for her email, doesn't really care for Chrome so I leave her on Firefox. So far she's been through Windows 98, Windows 2000 and Windows XP, Mepis, OpenSUSE and Ubuntu ... and barely even noticed it. "Dear, did you upgrade my computer again? It looks a little different." Granted, I made the effort to port all her bookmarks over and make her desktops look similar, but the point is that for a lot of people the operating system is starting to become transparent, or nearly so. If she can get to her browser and her email, she's a happy person. God help me if she can't.
That is what has always terrified Microsoft: the true commoditization of the desktop operating system.
Re:Taking bets? I'll bet against it. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's like for me - I can't see myself switching to Windows because I have a lot of those "one applications" that work far better under a *nix environment. And even if Windows were to eventually offer "equal functionality", why should I change. If someone says you should switch restaurants because some other one is "just as good", that's not a reason, and you'd tell them as much - and it cuts both ways.
Slowly, the areas where Windows is better are being whittled away, and the superiority of linux in other areas will make a difference, but for many people it has to be a significant advantage, or they won't do it because (1) they have better things to do with their time, and (2) the perceived benefits are less than the perceived risks. Inertia is more than a law of physics.
Your gf wouldn't have switched on her own - you had to do it. That sort of proves my point, no?
Re:Taking bets? I'll bet against it. (Score:5, Funny)
Take my girlfriend for instance: she basically uses a lot of online services of one kind or another, although she prefers Thunderbird for her email, doesn't really care for Chrome so I leave her on Firefox. So far she's been through Windows 98, Windows 2000 and Windows XP, Mepis, OpenSUSE and Ubuntu ... and barely even noticed it. "Dear, did you upgrade my computer again?
Good god, man! You've had a girlfriend through Windows 98, 2000, XP, etc. to present? And she's still your girlfriend?!?1!?
I think you need to pull the trigger: Marry that poor girl!
Re:Taking bets? I'll bet against it. (Score:5, Funny)
I think she married him already but he barely even noticed it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But windows does, for the most part, what 90% of the users out there need, even if it doesn't do it so well. If Linux doesn't replace this functionality, they won't want it.
Graphic cards are a recurring problem, though largely not the fault of linux devs. But heavy reliance on the CLI keeps out most out. Even with ubuntu you'll likely need to do something that requires the CLI, my current ubuntu headache is changing the
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
N00b grandparents aren't going to tweak X anymore than they are going to re-install Windows.
It doesn't matter how easy it is. They won't even be able to find the GUI in Windows.
99% of Windows users probably never alter their video configuration regardless of how you might sneer at it.
Whether or not they can safely surf the web is a far more meaningful question.
Summary. (Score:5, Funny)
In case of tl&dr, here's the summary:
Ubuntu wins by 3.04.
Go back to your Cheetos and WoW.
TFA is BS (Score:3, Informative)
Of course, the default install of Ubuntu may be less useable than Windows 7, but kubuntu has win 7 beat hands down. It took me months to figure out how to disable the Acer's stupid "tap to click" feature in Windows, less than two minutes in kubuntu. TFA laments not being able to pin items to the taskbar, perhaps that's because IIRC the default Ubuntu uses Gnome. I've always preferred KDE. Clicking on the taskbar's pinned wifi icon gives you a lot more control than Windows does, while being easier to use. TF
Missing in the comparison (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
*cough Business section cough*
Re: (Score:2)
Most people end up with Windows by virtue of buying a computer. Unless they don't want "home premium" or whatever, it gets marked as "included in the price." Since most people don't know what the OEM actually paid for that license (I know I sure as hell don't, and don't particularly care), it doesn't matter to them. It's as good as free. The price difference only becomes an issue if you're building your own system, and if you're able to do that successfully, chances are you have a reasonable chance of n
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Another thing that's missing: security.
Who's technically literate at PC-Pro? (Score:5, Insightful)
Even among PC Pro’s technically literate readership, only 4% are running a Linux OS[...]
[...]then venture into Ubuntu’s equivalent of the command line – dubbed Terminal – and enter a couple of lines of code to start the installation. Hardly a user-friendly experience, and an unwanted throwback to the days of Windows 3.1.
Yeah...technical literacy at its finest...
Re:Who's technically literate at PC-Pro? (Score:5, Insightful)
Eh, more technically literate than the general population for sure.
Maybe that puts into perspective what you're up against.
Re:Who's technically literate at PC-Pro? (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh sorry, does the population not meet up to your exacting standards of technical literacy? Do you think everyone should be able to build a computer form components, write a simple program, debug a make files and so on? If so, then you are dreaming.
It wouldn't take me long in looking at your life to find something you are not literate at. Being a Linux geek type, I'd look at cooking first, my guess would be you can't even put together a simple meal, much less bake yourself a loaf of bread, something that would be required to be considered "literate" at food preparation. Now you shouldn't have to, unless you are a chef, however it is just to demonstrate that we aren't all good at everything. Even that would just be the basics, you are up to the "Run a make based installer," there. Far more knowledge and skill is required to truly be a culinary expert.
Most people are good at the areas they need to be, and the areas that interest them. The rest, they leave up to someone else.
Same shit with computers. Most people are not at all literate. They have never seen a command line and shouldn't have to. If you can use a command line to do installs, well guess what? You have a good deal more literacy than most of the population. You are no computer grand master but then that wasn't what was being talked about.
The reason computers have grown in use is not just because they are useful, but because they are getting easier. The more someone has to know to operate them, the less people that can do so. Yes, using a commandline requires more knowledge, especially since things there aren't guided. In the GUI you can have plenty of hints and directions in a commandline you need to know what to do already. Is it hard? Well not sometimes (other times it is) but even then, it is still memorizing the commands that must be executed.
You just have to accept that being technically literate means understanding the basics of something and being able to trouble shoot a bit on your own. It does not mean being able to do everything, it does not mean being an expert at things. Technically literate doesn't mean "Competent programmer," or "Expert technical support."
Re:Who's technically literate at PC-Pro? (Score:4, Informative)
Even among PC Pro’s technically literate readership, only 4% are running a Linux OS[...]
[...]then venture into Ubuntu’s equivalent of the command line – dubbed Terminal – and enter a couple of lines of code to start the installation. Hardly a user-friendly experience, and an unwanted throwback to the days of Windows 3.1.
Yeah...technical literacy at its finest...
Not very accurate either. The last four distros I've installed recently (OpenSUSE, Ubuntu, Kubuntu and Mepis) didn't require any command line operations at all. I just booted their Live CDs, clicked on the Installer icon and went from there. Not sure where they're getting that from. I find that the typical Linux graphical installer wants a little more information than Windows usually does (partitioning, for example, but they all offered reasonable defaults and didn't require the user to know anything about it) but not by much, and found it generally painless.
Sounds like they were just making stuff up to make installing Linux sound more difficult than it is. No, I didn't RTFA.
Quality of Comparison (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm used to various flavours of Linux, and Windows 7 seems impressive in some respects, but strangeness makes it feel awkward sometimes.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
While I agree that Windows 7 is superior to Ubuntu in many respects, this comparison is weak because it's a Windows 7 user in a relatively foreign land.
I'm used to various flavours of Linux, and Windows 7 seems impressive in some respects, but strangeness makes it feel awkward sometimes.
You need to make the comparison between going from Windows XP (still the dominant Microsoft operating system) to either Windows 7 or a comparable Linux distro. Both Windows 7 and Linux are going to be very different from the perspective of that ex-XP user ... but because Windows 7 is so different, either way he's going to hit a significant learning curve. I felt the same way when I first experienced the "Office Ribbon" when I was upgraded at work. It thoroughly irritated me because it was so different and I
Derp derp (Score:3, Interesting)
apple and google seem to get it (Score:2)
you won't beat MS with a direct battle on the desktop. they caught the winds of technological change and are wiping the floor with MS in the mobile space while MS kept on selling the same crappy mobile OS for years while concentrating on desktops, servers and the enterprise space.
my guess is that in 10 years mobile will continue to grow and apple and google will use this as a way to introduce ARM based ^nix desktops or somehow tie the iphone to Mac's and google will do something similar and clean up the des
Sorry, still not the year of Linux (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Sorry, still not the year of Linux (Score:4, Informative)
Tarballs are confusing, that's true. The build-in installer is child-friendly. You just choose the whatever, press install and BAM. You're done.
There are also .deb files which are also the equivalent of the windows 'double click to install'. The tarballs are there because those work across all linux destros.
Then there are also repositories which you can add and which will update themselves using the updater = that doesn't get any simpler.
Gnome and KDE are the interfaces which you use to view your files, the desktop et cetera.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
On the server side the seaming inability to run it with a remote terminal makes it a no go from the start. MS-DOS doesn't seem to have the power of Bash or Korn.
Re:Sorry, still not the year of Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
I also have to deal with a confusing variety of distros
You really only have to deal with the distro you choose.
poor documentation
There's man pages, info pages, --help, and if you need your hand held just google it.
asking how to do something in Linux that you could do in Windows
Try asking on a Windows forum about something you can do trivially in Linux sometime.
And downloading and installing software, even using the built-in installer, is a confusing nightmare.
Ok, now you're just trolling. There's a pretty GUI app installer for every distro.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Under windows, downloading and installing software, even using the built-in installer, is a confusing nightmare.
More to the point, when was the last time you had an application on a Linux/Unix box modify the operating system and break other applications? And that's not counting the number of times I've uninstalled a Windows app and had that break something. Yes, I know, Microsoft finally addressed their self-inflicted DLL hell by allowing side-loading and adding support for manifests as of XP SP2, but there are still a ton of applications out there that do things the old way.
Is this guy taking himself seriously? (Score:3, Funny)
Desktop Linux -- The Next Duke Nuke'em Forever.
Windows 7 user (Score:5, Insightful)
I have a small recording studio in which I run a 16-channel simultaneous recording firewire mixer. I use Adobe Audition 3 for my sessions. I can't really move to another platform because I already have so many recording sessions in this format (although, I don't really want to move, either -- I'm happy with Audition).
I recently purchased an i7 with Windows 7 64-bit. I tell you, it does everything I've ever asked it to do, and it handles the incoming 16-channels flawlessly.
I don't think I would trust this set up on Ubuntu. For one, my firewire mixer simply would not work with Ubuntu (natively). And if it could work in WINE, I don't see how it is better than what I have now. Isn't it just likely to introduce hiccups?
Re:Windows 7 user (Score:5, Insightful)
In my previous job I ran a 32 core SGI box to run fluid dynamic simulations. Of course, with Linux. Would not trust Windows for a moment on that setup.
My point is your case is very specialised and so is mine. We are happy about our respective setups and none is disputing that fact.
The point of this article is about comparing Windows and Ubuntu for a 'normal' user.
The Same Old Arguments (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In my case it's WinXP that wins every time and Win7 that loses, until the software vendor gets off their backside and fixes the problems that prevent this years release from running on Win7.
The only two ways to get people to switch... (Score:4, Interesting)
There's only 2 ways to get people to switch to Ubuntu:
1) (Not likely) Make Windows games playable on it.
2) (Possible!) Change the standard directory names to things longer than 3 letters. Even if you're a hyper-involved PC-user (building and fixing your own and others with tons of tweaks), the dive into the various versions of linux is a complete vocabulary shock simply because nothing says what it is. Programs are oddly named and folder titles are super-abbreviated.
Re:The only two ways to get people to switch... (Score:4, Informative)
c:\Windows\bfsvc.exe is clearly more intuitive and well named. OSX has the same cryptic underpinnings as Linux, and it doesn't seem to be hurting its adoption rate by regular Joes. I'm not sure what being a "hyper-involved PC-user (building and fixing your own and others with tons of tweaks)" has to do with it either. Competence in one area does not imply or guarantee competence in another. If you sat me down in front of VMS today, I might still be able to pull up the editor, and I've been using computers daily since 1982. Is that DECs fault or simply my lack of knowledge? Now get off my lawn.
No Ubuntu iTunes (Score:4, Insightful)
As long as Ubuntu can't use iTunes (and no, not some other content mall that doesn't have all that iTunes has), Ubuntu can't compete with Windows for the home user market, or probably the school market, or even for a lot of the business market.
Yes, Apple's content monopoly is the key to protecting Windows' OS monopoly. The world is as strange as it is round.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's only in recent versions of Windows. More than 50% of Windows users still has Windows XP, which does not have the feature you mentioned. Also, unlike Windows, Linux is much better at the other kind of search: searching for occurances of plain text inside any file, without caring about extension (Windows supports something they claim to be similar to that, but it only works for files which happen to have a certain extension in their filename that is copied somewhere in the registry). And finally, deskt
Re:The biggest missing feature in linux (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
OS X is slick but it runs on very expensive hardware
I love how this myth has continued to exist... Do you people really not know how to do a real hardware comparison? The last 3 laptops I've bought, I go to Dell, HP, IBM, and Apple... I configure the system I "need" (RAM, HD, processor, screen size, etc), then match specs across all vendors as close as possible (IE, maybe one has a 250gb HD, and the other only offers a 300GB HD)... And guess what? Apple, while routinely more expensive, is only slightly s
Re:Windows 7 x64 Is A Great Operating System (Score:4, Interesting)
It's also a question of familiarity. I also think Windows 7 is the best version I've ever used, but I also think Ubuntu blows it away for usability as I've now been using Linux for so long. With Windows 7 the number of dialog boxes that pop up drive me mad, the number of things in the sys tray that keep asking me if I want to update, the number of simple apps that it misses that I can't get without having to pay for (screenshots, etc), the bloated anti-virus/spyware you end up installing, having to hunt around on sites for drivers that don't get found, etc.
If all you know is Windows then Win7 is a great update, but then that is more to do with previous versions not being very good. If you are a gamer, then Win7 is pretty much your only choice. The sheer wealth of free software, coupled with being so customisable, makes Ubuntu already superior for others though. Until Win7 gets the equivalent of apt-get and a similar size software repository, it's not yet there for me in terms of desktop use.
Phillip.
Re:Windows 7 x64 Is A Great Operating System (Score:5, Informative)
the number of things in the sys tray that keep asking me if I want to update
In windows 7 you have fine control over what gets to notify you in the sys tray
the number of simple apps that it misses that I can't get without having to pay for
There is plenty of freeware out there for windows as well. I'm not sure what your problem is with screenshots, but that's what snipping tool is for
bloated anti-virus/spyware you end up installing
Don't go with Norton/Mcaffe. They are indeed bloated and suck. There are a number of free anti-virus solutions which are relatively slim, including MS Security Essentials, AVG, and Avast
having to hunt around on sites for drivers that don't get found
Most drivers are found through windows update these days. If they're not there, Windows Action Center will usually link you right to the MFG download page. If not you can certainly go there yourself and download it. From my experience, I've had more trouble with missing drivers in Linux
Until Win7 gets the equivalent of apt-get and a similar size software repository, it's not yet there for me in terms of desktop use.
People who use windows don't want apt-get. Most of us prefer a GUI to a CLI. Also, the lack of software, free or otherwise, is not a problem Windows has. It might be nice to have a centralized location to find it, but that approach has it's own problems, and it's honestly not something Windows users are clamoring for anyway.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The only way Windows could possibly be considered "cohesive" is when it's the only OS you know. In Ubuntu, you have one menu for your desktop preferences and one menu for system settings. In Windows, these things are scattered around the OS. Sure, the Control Panel groups a
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And that is exactly why you don't like it. There has been a lot of thought put into the UI of Ubuntu. But you need to give an honest effort to actually use it.
I have used all three major OS's a fair bit. And my assessment? Ubuntu has the best UI of all of them. Windows is kludgy, and takes a lot more effort to get to your apps. MacOS makes it easier to get to your apps with the dock, but its really difficult to have multiple windows open.
In ubuntu it seems like they're just sticking stuff in places for no g
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As am I. I have more then a few games that run on Linux, despite that my gaming boxen still runs XP just for sheer simplicity. However my laptop (for travel) and my Media centre run Linux (Ubuntu and Mythbuntu respectively) for the exact same reason. Desktop Linux excels at simple tasks, torrents, web, email, chat, word processing, stuff makes up the entirety of computer use for 90% of people. So it's simpler to run Linux where possible because it does the job and hardly ever has p