Windows 7 - Linux Killer?

[staf0048]

no

the people that use linux use it for a reason and wont care

</thread>

Agreed. If you've done any research on Linux and FOSS and agree with what you've learned, then no matter what comes out of Redmond should detract from your use of Linux or FOSS. And it looks like MS is starting to see the advantages this type of collaboration - if only they'd take it to heart.

[sparker1]

If you need a reason not to go back to windows. Read this
http://www.forbes.com/2007/02/10/microsoft-vista-drm-tech-security-cz_bs_0212vista.html
It is based on Vista but DRM will be built into Windows 7. If Microsoft have their way it will be built into hardware.

[Nathan.Flow]

Nope.

Stopped caring about Windows years ago. Don't think many people here use Linux just because they are waiting for Windows to come out of "Alpha".

:lolflag:
Is windows ever out of Alpha, despite its claims to be?

[kfitzenreiter]

I, for one, am looking forward to trying Windows 7 on my more muscular system after I install a graphics card in it. In fact, when funds permit I want to build a core i5 system (or core i7 if I really splurge) and try Windows 7 Ultimate on it. You can install for 30 days without a key and reset the "generic" key several times to try it out.

I understand the gripes people have about microsoft, but deep down I still like windows too. Sometimes I install Windows 3.11 on a "beater" pc I've got around the house, just for kicks. It's kind of like going back in time playing silly reversi and minesweeper or whatever games came on that OS.

Even if I pay the $140.00 U.S. for the OEM version it still isn't that bad if you look at it in terms of how much time I spend using it. I'm on my pc's every day of the week. I use windows every day. So if I keep the OS going for several years it works out to be an insignificant amount at the end of the day.

Sorry to ramble on about windows, but I just don't share the strong disklike of microsoft that some folks have.

[hoppipolla]

If you need a reason not to go back to windows. Read this
http://www.forbes.com/2007/02/10/microsoft-vista-drm-tech-security-cz_bs_0212vista.html
It is based on Vista but DRM will be built into Windows 7. If Microsoft have their way it will be built into hardware.

Yeah I got tired of all that stuff, I like the simplicity, ease and freedom of using Linux :)

[hoppipolla]

I, for one, am looking forward to trying Windows 7 on my more muscular system after I install a graphics card in it. In fact, when funds permit I want to build a core i5 system (or core i7 if I really splurge) and try Windows 7 Ultimate on it. You can install for 30 days without a key and reset the "generic" key several times to try it out.

I understand the gripes people have about microsoft, but deep down I still like windows too. Sometimes I install Windows 3.11 on a "beater" pc I've got around the house, just for kicks. It's kind of like going back in time playing silly reversi and minesweeper or whatever games came on that OS.

Even if I pay the $140.00 U.S. for the OEM version it still isn't that bad if you look at it in terms of how much time I spend using it. I'm on my pc's every day of the week. I use windows every day. So if I keep the OS going for several years it works out to be an insignificant amount at the end of the day.

Sorry to ramble on about windows, but I just don't share the strong disklike of microsoft that some folks have.

I don't hate it either, I find Windows to be quite attractive, quite friendly, and quite well supported.

However, I do just get tired of the restrictive, expensive nature of commercial OSs. I tend to find I switch to Linux, it does everything I want it to do, and I never really find a reason to switch back. Plus I seem to have some kind of inherent love of Open Source and Ubuntu ^_^

Gaming is one of my only draws back sometimes, and a friendly, fully-featured video editing program would be nice :)

[Exodist]

I hate M$. They are not getting my money.

BTW, if you support Windows and M$ you make this guys pocket heavier..

http://www.maximumpc.com/files/u46168/ballmer.jpg

[TeaSwigger]

The worst thing that could happen in a number of respects would be for MicroSoft to get its proverbial act together and actually make a great new OS. And they kind of have to this time. So by work, hook and crook, I'm afraid that's exactly what they have done.

I'm going to resist that business blight masquerading as a responsible entity as a matter of responsibility and use Linux. Fortunately I like Linux better anyway. But it's my guess Windows 7 will be a huge success and MicroSoft will become more pervasive and entrenched than ever, probably to my increasing regret.

[3rdalbum]

Windows 7 doesn't change the game. It's still cluttered, unfriendly, invasive and insecure. The Windows ecosystem still has such annoyances as "shareware" that stops working after 30 days (randomware) or nags you to pay for it (get-the-f***-out-of-my-way-ware).

The Windows community takes a cavalier attitude to security and user education. And a cavalier attitude to putting stuff in your notification area.

There's no reasonable package manager, almost no preinstalled drivers, limited visual effects, behind-the-times 64-bit support. There is not much in the way of preinstalled software either, leaving you to buy software or depend on FLOSS, in which case you might as well just be using Linux.

Why on earth would Windows 7 be a "linux killer"? By the standards of today's Linux distributions, Windows 7 is horrid. Anyone who likes Linux for being Linux, will not prefer Windows 7. And I should know, because I've tried Vista and Win 7. They're virtually the same product.

[Tristam Green]

Why on earth would Windows 7 be a "linux killer"? By the standards of today's Linux distributions, Windows 7 is horrid. Anyone who likes Linux for being Linux, will not prefer Windows 7. And I should know, because I've tried Vista and Win 7. They're virtually the same product.

Oh re-hee-heeally?

From 2005-2009 I was an avid Ubuntu User. I still have it installed on a desktop and two laptops at my home, and even I prefer Windows 7 to any flavor of Linux now, especially on certain machines like Netbooks.

[coffee]

There are those people out there afraid of change and stuck in the windows whirlpool. These people will take allot of convincing to make the change. They seem content to stick with "what they know" and complain about how it seems to always have trouble, while not being willing to look at the better more stable options.

I have played around with the win7 beta in VirtualBox, and while it is a little snappier and more stable the Vista it is still a resource hog. I see the win people sticking with it while some will make a transition to something more stable and resource friendly as they are unable to keep up the upgrade race to have machines capable of running winblots newest and lamest OS.

All in all people that have not seen the light will stay in the dark. For myself I will continue spreading the word about Linux. I have been running Ubuntu since the beginning and loved every minute of it.

[astroorion]

I dualboot both Ubuntu and Window's 7rc reason I play games on Window's which are not yet being supported in Ubuntu one of them is Crysis unless wine one day fully support's it also window's 7 is slated to have DirectX 11.
Ok now for Ubuntu I use Ubuntu because it has better security on the internet over window's which is the reason why I started using Ubuntu about 2 year's ago.
So in a way I like both operating system's.

[MC707]

I hate M$. They are not getting my money.

BTW, if you support Windows and M$ you make this guys pocket heavier..

[IMG]
The last time I paid for a windows licence was windows 98. And I HAVE used every other version that succeeded 98 :twisted:.


Oh re-hee-heeally?

From 2005-2009 I was an avid Ubuntu User. I still have it installed on a desktop and two laptops at my home, and even I prefer Windows 7 to any flavor of Linux now, especially on certain machines like Netbooks.
It is sad but true. Just this afternoon, my netbook's ubuntu already f****d up yet AGAIN. And it was a virtually fresh install. And I did nothing but restart the computer after the machine installed some updates (that WEREN'T new kernels BTW). Oh well, I'll wait 'till the next awesome genious pirate comes up with a windows 7 'solution'. :neutral:

[Chronon]

Discussing piracy is discouraged in these forums, from what I gather.

[ElSlunko]

W7 is cool, but it's not Operating System Killing cool.

[hoppipolla]

W7 is cool, but it's not Operating System Killing cool.

Hehe exactly.

Plus, I find KDE 4.x cooler :)

[MC707]

Discussing piracy is discouraged in these forums, from what I gather.

Oh yes sorry, I forgot #-o. However, discussing piracy or not doing so will in no way affect how much it is practiced. Just a comment, don't argue pls O:)

[Michel1]

Linux is a pain in the neck when it comes to handle hardwares.This is not freedom but slavery.I'll swill switch to windows 7. No reason to spend my free time trying to fix my ubuntu system when you can do it with no hassles with a new system user friendly (windows 7).
By the way, I'm 65 and I just laugh when I read juveniles post and answers.But it make me worry about the future. Ubuntu fans are very blindfolded and are impeding the grow of a system that was based on a openminded structure. The backlash may be coming...:popcorn:

[hoppipolla]

Linux is a pain in the neck when it comes to handle hardwares.This is not freedom but slavery.I'll swill switch to windows 7. No reason to spend my free time trying to fix my ubuntu system when you can do it with no hassles with a new system user friendly (windows 7).
By the way, I'm 65 and I just laugh when I read juveniles post and answers.But it make me worry about the future. Ubuntu fans are very blindfolded and are impeding the grow of a system that was based on a openminded structure. The backlash may be coming...:popcorn:

You realize it's only down to support though right? Many of the drivers we use are not official, and I feel lucky when I have drivers for something - not annoyed when I don't! lol :)

[~sHyLoCk~]

Linux is a pain in the neck when it comes to handle hardwares.This is not freedom but slavery.I'll swill switch to windows 7. No reason to spend my free time trying to fix my ubuntu system when you can do it with no hassles with a new system user friendly (windows 7).
By the way, I'm 65 and I just laugh when I read juveniles post and answers.But it make me worry about the future. Ubuntu fans are very blindfolded and are impeding the grow of a system that was based on a openminded structure. The backlash may be coming...:popcorn:

Spoken like a true n00b! Linux is not for users like you. Linux is for geeks. Even though, no matter how much distributions like Ubuntu and Mandriva try to make it "Easier for the masses" by providing lotsa GUI tools and pre-configured system elements, you will need to configure your system at some point of time according to your needs, that is the basic point of using a Linux system. Don't care about doing so? Don't have the time? just want to blidly click setup.exe without even knowing wtf you just installed an what it actually does and where it went? Then windows is definitely for you.

[hoppipolla]

Spoken like a true n00b! Linux is not for users like you. Linux is for geeks. Even though, no matter how much distributions like Ubuntu and Mandriva try to make it "Easier for the masses" by providing lotsa GUI tools and pre-configured system elements, you will need to configure your system at some point of time according to your needs, that is the basic point of using a Linux system. Don't care about doing so? Don't have the time? just want to blidly click setup.exe without even knowing wtf you just installed an what it actually does and where it went? Then windows is definitely for you.

Heh, there's a fair bit of truth in that, but I don't think Linux necessarily NEEDS to be unfriendly or overly-complicated, I just think it has a little bit further to go before it presents an environment quite as friendly as say, Windows or OSX :)

The Open Source community only provides the raw components and tools, it's up to the distro how friendly it all becomes :)

[Exodist]

Spoken like a true n00b! Linux is not for users like you. Linux is for geeks. Even though, no matter how much distributions like Ubuntu and Mandriva try to make it "Easier for the masses" by providing lotsa GUI tools and pre-configured system elements, you will need to configure your system at some point of time according to your needs, that is the basic point of using a Linux system. Don't care about doing so? Don't have the time? just want to blidly click setup.exe without even knowing wtf you just installed an what it actually does and where it went? Then windows is definitely for you.
Quoted for truth.

@ Michel1,
Honestly at 65 I wouldnt be trying to learn a new OS. If I was 65 I would just stick to winblows if thats all I knew.
That being said if your really 65 then you should have enough wisdom per se to understand the importance of trying to learn a new OS and how important it is to many of us here to see linux gain popularity. You shouldnt be bashing anyone here, you actually should be encouraging many of the younger generation to learn. That and I am a 31year old war vet. So I am decently not a juvee. So please at least have some respect for others.

[Giant Speck]

Honestly at 65 I wouldnt be trying to learn a new OS. If I was 65 I would just stick to winblows if thats all I knew.

Yeah, because starting at age fifty, humans are no longer capable of learning complicated new things.

That being said if your really 65 then you should have enough wisdom per se to understand the importance of trying to learn a new OS and how important it is to many of us here to see linux gain popularity.

Again, you're being ageist.

You shouldnt be bashing anyone here, you actually should be encouraging many of the younger generation to learn.

You're the one bashing him because he had a bad experience with Linux, and you're assuming it's because of his age.

That and I am a 31year old war vet. So I am decently not a juvee. So please at least have some respect for others.

Have some respect for your elders, for God's sake.

[Nicolas.A]

Well, people like free. Honestly, lately I've been really disappointed with a few problems I'm experiencing on linux. I've had a few compatibility issues, even with firefox. I've been using Linux for years and I can't seem to figure out why it keeps freezing and crashing on this laptop. Windows never gave me this problem, so. I may be switching to Windows 7.

[Exodist]

Yeah, because starting at age fifty, humans are no longer capable of learning complicated new things.
No I was stating that I wouldnt because at that point in my life I plan on just being a dirty old man throwing rocks at the neighbors kids. No other reason.


Again, you're being ageist.
How is this stereo typing him? I wasnt stereo typing, I was questioning his true age.


You're the one bashing him because he had a bad experience with Linux, and you're assuming it's because of his age. No I am not bashing him, I am trying to act social like two adults should. This shouldnt offend him or anyone else.



Have some respect for your elders, for God's sake.
Respect is earned. Also I give anyone here at least some respect until they take it away. Respect is what I would like to refer as a Double-edged-sword, especially here on this vast expanse we call the inernet. Its very easy to say one thing and hurt someone else feelings without noticing, its also very easy to get your own feelings hurt when someone says something as well. Even if both parties meant no harm.

So here it is.

I in no means ment to disrespect anyone, if it seemed that way then I honestly do apologize. That in hand I would like to state that many folks here have also had very very bad encounters with Windows. I know I shutter then thinking of running that OS. The day the Linux dies and windows is all that exist will be the day I quit programming and sell my PC. Many folks here are very passionate about GNU/Linux as a whole as it is their own means to take back control of their PC that that the business powerhouse we have come to know as microsoft has been slowly greasing our fingers away from for years. Little by little.


Exodist :KS

P.S. I added a quite little star smiley to show I am happy and mean no wrong.

[ElSlunko]

I've had ubuntu on 5 different systems and they've all worked fine. I bet newer versions of ubuntu would've worked even better on my older installs. So 5 installs for 1 person and not having any issues while my windows installs worked just as well. Well except when windows started to slow down after hours of use and I'd have to restart, that never really happened in Ubuntu. Oh and not to mention that Ubuntu runs faster than Windows.

Like I said, Windows 7 is great! But it has the new product smell that goes away after a while and you realize there isn't much different between OS's. Development philosophy may differ, but you're still just checkin your email and posting your photos of your freaking cats. Same uses.

[spaceboy909]

They seem content to stick with "what they know" and complain about how it seems to always have trouble,.....

This disconnect never seems to go away. "Seems" to always have trouble?

I have been trying to switch to Linux for 10 years! And I consider myself techno-minded! Trust me, it HAS trouble!

It's been over a week now that I've been trying to work the kinks out of my new Mandriva install, and I only installed that because of continual PITA problems with Ubuntu, which I've been using for about 2 years.

'Linux' is an unfinished system for most people. Just because some of you have had little to no problems doesn't mean the rest of us are just lazy 'noobs'!

Those developers that are continuing to work on desktop and GUI improvements, understand the value of that type of machine. Those of you who continue to demean Windows users, do not understand the value of that type of machine, or, you are just simply unaware that 'Linux' actually has real world problems.

The unfortunate reality for me right now, is that if I want the best combination of reliability, predictability, solid resource management, speed, intuitive options, full featured, easy to use software (99% freeware), unrestricted software access (i.e., everything runs on my OS), full hardware support, and even..... more than good enough security plus timeless tech support (meaning the support details don't change every 6 months with a new version release like in Linux.), then........ I have to use Windows.

Windows has it's own issues, but with the release of XP, and possibly Win7, it is still the best OOTB (out of the box) system for most people, after Mac, assuming Mac does what you need.

EDIT: Just to clarify on the security bit....even though I am comfortable using freeware security apps to defend against 3rd party attackers, the built in security of Linux is obviously preferable, especially for those who are oblivious to security issues to begin with, and just as important, the open source aspect of Linux security makes it highly improbable that any government or large nefarious organization could insert something into the code unnoticed.

But for general, day to day security, the Windows freeware cuts the mustard.

[Michel1]

Quoted for truth.

@ Michel1,
Honestly at 65 I wouldnt be trying to learn a new OS. If I was 65 I would just stick to winblows if thats all I knew.
That being said if your really 65 then you should have enough wisdom per se to understand the importance of trying to learn a new OS and how important it is to many of us here to see linux gain popularity. You shouldnt be bashing anyone here, you actually should be encouraging many of the younger generation to learn. That and I am a 31year old war vet. So I am decently not a juvee. So please at least have some respect for others.

Only unexperienced people have a truth.Experienced one knows that there are many truth.
Being a convinced existentialist, I just grade your post as a juvenile one. No disrespect.
I do not bash Ubuntu or Linux. I know the os pretty much and can play with it more than the average.
I have been using ubuntu (Kubuntu) as my primary system on my computers for four years.The upgrade from heron to jaunty did not go flawlessly (even with a fresh install).
Now I don't want to start again with Karmic.(May be I'm too old).
I have the upmost respect for the people using their passion and free time developing the linux system.I understand that they are very passionated and for this reason they need moderation . I am the candid.
I wiil go back to windows as a primary system but I will keep an eye on linux because of its greater potential. ( if unified.)
65 and still a JUVEE......:)

[angryfirelord]

Being an IT student, I've been lucky to grab an RTM edition of Windows 7 from MSDN. I've been using it for some time now and seeing how it differs from Vista.

Unfortunately, I'd have to say I don't see much. In fact, from my experience, it has been worse. The only improvement that's there is the boot-up speed and the look. Aside from that, loading of applications and transferring of files still is about the same, if only marginally faster. Even when I went into services.msc and turned some things off, I still couldn't get a noticeable speed boost.

While stuff like Netbeans, Office, and other day-to-day apps work fine, one really huge negative I could think of is the lack of OpenGL support. This could be ATI's fault, but I cannot use the Windows Update version of ATI's driver without seeing poor OpenGL performance. Using mobility modder with the official ATI driver helped it to an extent, but now anything lower than 1680x1050 is shrunk with a black space around it. With only an X1600, not a lot of games are going to run smoothly at such a high resolution. In addition, MM caused Windows Explorer to crash repeatedly.

Is it a linux killer? Not now. More than likely I'm going to roll back to XP and stick with it until Windows 7 gets its first service pack. Usually by then Microsoft gets most of the serious bugs worked out. :)

[doomsword2001]

Windows 7 actually looks like it might be decent


i firstly used linux 2003 and i said thats decent :)


in my opinion people use windows not because they're better.
because:
1 thats what every1 knows and uses, in business schools or university's
2 cause when u go to buy a pc windows is pre-installed, but most people dont understand they pay $100+ (or whatever the windows price is)
3 and because lot of people still think you have to be a pc expert to use linux

[errigalmarten]

Windows 7 still ain't a free OS. Still an over-priced Microsoft OS. Still limited in the ways you can change it to suit your needs. Still has BSOD. Looks like another win for Linux to me.

[tcoffeep]

How can Windows 7 be a linux killer when Linux still hasn't become a Windows killer?

[mothrock]

seeing how hard it is to install the latest closed-source drivers from vendors and how performance is worse in ubuntu than in windows for me.

problem is, windows stands for everything that i'm not for so i'm with ubuntu right now only because of principle.

word to that. though, it does give your brain a little bit of a workout getting stuff to work.... properly.

I don't get the same sense of accomplishment from windows. I was so proud when I got my dual monitor setup working in ubuntu. simple pleasures.

[mothrock]

Linux is a pain in the neck when it comes to handle hardwares.This is not freedom but slavery.I'll swill switch to windows 7. No reason to spend my free time trying to fix my ubuntu system when you can do it with no hassles with a new system user friendly (windows 7).
By the way, I'm 65 and I just laugh when I read juveniles post and answers.But it make me worry about the future. Ubuntu fans are very blindfolded and are impeding the grow of a system that was based on a openminded structure. The backlash may be coming...:popcorn:

it's the problem of the manufacturers, not ubuntu. for supported hardware, eveything I have works fine. non-supported hardware is usually because the manufacturers won't cooperate with the open source community. their loss.

[Erunno]

How can Windows 7 be a linux killer when Linux still hasn't become a Windows killer?

http://knowyourmeme.com/i/8504/original/Philosoraptor_template.jpg?1250275832

[GepettoBR]

Erunno is too lazy.

http://ubuntuforums.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=130109&stc=1&d=1254172739

[chromerium]

Unfortunately, I'd have to say I don't see much. In fact, from my experience, it has been worse.

After the abysmal failure of Vista, anything is going to be an improvement. Most of the problems people had with Vista was just drivers, and thats not going to be an issue with 7 simply because the industry has had time to write them, or bring out newer hardware forcing people to upgrade to "Vista compatible" devices.

7 is a polished turd. The problem goes deeper than Microsoft is willing to deal with. A refactored UI and slightly better boot times and stability isn't a good enough reason to enter back into Windows hell for me.

[ElSlunko]

LOL at philosoraptor.

[themarker0]

I'm on linux because i hate the vista gui. And virus's. I may still dual boot xp, and maybe now vista is stable enough, i love the plainness of gnome!

[magmon]

Define killer. We have 1% market share. There really isn't much to kill.

[sudoer541]

Define killer. We have 1% market share. There really isn't much to kill.

well said! we are the ones who should be worried , right?
the market share thingy is not even correct! we might have more or less than 1%. Thanks to devs who didn't make this possible!

[mdsmedia]

Define killer. We have 1% market share. There really isn't much to kill.
So the definition of "killer" would probably be...something which stamps out that 1%?

So the question probably is, will Windows 7 wipe out that 1% market share that Linux has (on the desktop)? And my answer would be no, Linux will continue to eat into Windows' market share and Windows 7 won't change that.

[passonno]

Don't know about being a Linux Killer per se, but I have been running the RC of Win7 for months, since I cannot rely upon Linux(especially Ubuntu) to adhere to reasonable audio server standards, and since I do use my computer for making music, I gambled on Win7 not being crap, and I was pleasantly surprised.

I would be open to listening to folks who have been able to successfully use Ubuntu in a music production environment.

Still, Windows 7 is a pretty damn important release for Microsoft, and it looks like they have taken the challenge seriously and have risen to the occasion.

[GepettoBR]

I would be open to listening to folks who have been able to successfully use Ubuntu in a music production environment.

If you do, please let me know. I try each new release, and there's always something wrong with JACK and/or PulseAudio. Not to start the age-old discussion about whether it's the manufacturer's fault for not writing Linux drivers, but there is a lot to be said about knowing that your hardware will work in its full potential (eventually).

[fela]

It won't make any difference. At the moment most people that use Linux use it out of choice, actually pretty much all do. It's not hard installing Linux, so if windows comes installed on your computer, if you're a Linux guy you're gonna install Linux on it.

It being preinstalled for convenience makes no difference.

[fela]

If you do, please let me know. I try each new release, and there's always something wrong with JACK and/or PulseAudio. Not to start the age-old discussion about whether it's the manufacturer's fault for not writing Linux drivers, but there is a lot to be said about knowing that your hardware will work in its full potential (eventually).

There's a LOT to be said about a community that writes its own drivers for hardware, writes its own operating system, writes its own software, without depending on companies to do it for them.

[magmon]

So the definition of "killer" would probably be...something which stamps out that 1%?

So the question probably is, will Windows 7 wipe out that 1% market share that Linux has (on the desktop)? And my answer would be no, Linux will continue to eat into Windows' market share and Windows 7 won't change that.

I can personally say that I will never go back. And all the techy linux geeks wont switch over either :).

[GepettoBR]

There's a LOT to be said about a community that writes its own drivers for hardware, writes its own operating system, writes its own software, without depending on companies to do it for them.

I agree, and that's precisely the reason why I can't wait to dump Windows as soon as this wonderful community can offer me the same functionality. But sometimes you have to choose between idealism and pragmatism, and on the driver field pragmatism means Windows.

[MC707]

I would be open to listening to folks who have been able to successfully use Ubuntu in a music production environment.



Indeed. I made music back when I used windows, but I've been lazy to find a good DAW for linux. I wonder if Ubuntu will do a good job for music production and editing...

[IAmNoodle]

Indeed. I made music back when I used windows, but I've been lazy to find a good DAW for linux. I wonder if Ubuntu will do a good job for music production and editing...

Time to hound Pro-Tools/Properllerhead(Reason)/Logic/Cubase etc then...?

[Bachstelze]

There's a LOT to be said about a community that writes its own drivers for hardware, writes its own operating system, writes its own software, without depending on companies to do it for them.

Haha. FYI, most of the code of the Linux kernel is written by employees of RedHat, Novell, HP, IBM, Intel, etc..

[0100TheGeek]

Not likely. Linux only has about 1% of the market and we have a tendency to be very loyal to our OS.

I waited for years to see some solid results come out for Linux for installation and home user desktops and have been very impressed with the progress in Ubuntu for the everyday user. When you playing against free, it is always an up hill battle. When free is just as good or better, it sucks to be MS.

MS really does have more to worry about from Linux then Linux from MS.

;)

[GepettoBR]

Not likely. Linux only has about 1% of the market and we have a tendency to be very loyal to our OS.

I waited for years to see some solid results come out for Linux for installation and home user desktops and have been very impressed with the progress in Ubuntu for the everyday user. When you playing against free, it is always an up hill battle. When free is just as good or better, it sucks to be MS.

MS really does have more to worry about from Linux then Linux from MS.

;)

We're the ones fighting an uphill battle. Microsoft's marketing is more than enough to keep the Linux desktop at bay for quite a few years still.

[mdsmedia]

We're the ones fighting an uphill battle. Microsoft's marketing is more than enough to keep the Linux desktop at bay for quite a few years still.
On the other hand, from a small base, we're more likely to chew into MS's market share than they are into ours.

People switch to Linux, some quit and switch back. Not many who use Linux for some time switch to Windows. I think it's generally a net gain to Linux and net loss to Windows.

[surfed]

I would Stop using windoze if:

1. Yahoo messenger were available...or Pidgin (or any other IM program would allow this) could do audio and video.

2. The clarity of the type were as good as in XP - I Always notice a huge difference when I return to XP from Ubuntu or other linux/bsd distros.


to 1: Kopete does Yahoo with audio and video

2: install more ttf's?

[nitemann]

Me personally … No… I run XP as a VM Machine under my Ubuntu release (Mint 6.0 ) to keep a jailed working copy while learning VM and not used up a real PC for it and will test Win 7 as a VM just to take it for a drive. Also I plan to teach my daughter Linux and run XP under VM also to keep her Itunes running and her school work that needs Windows.

I agree with other user here, LINUX is the Windows killer. It wont convert those are just want something they already know and what brought them to the dance.They are not interested in learning something new. I for one will never go back, I may retain the win 7 release to learn of it as it will be a requirement of the job. But in the long run many people will move to Linux from Windows because of the support and power and flexibility Linux offers and best of all its FREE… Hard to compete with that. My friends called me an evangelist for Linux coz I preach its over all advantages, power, speed and stability. Many wont convert because they cant see the forests for the trees. Linux is not going anywhere but up, the forums have the best, friendliest and knowledgeable people because they believe in the product, again hard to complete against that. It’s a big world and plenty of room for both.

[MC707]

Time to hound Pro-Tools/Properllerhead(Reason)/Logic/Cubase etc then...?
Thanks, I'll check those.

@ the other users, I can tell you a little experience I had today. I have a friend that sells programs and games in CDs outside (entrance) of my college. He uses windows until now. I've talked to him about linux and Ubuntu, but he has kept himself at bay, however still listening and taking my comments into account. Recently his windows had tons of problems with programs and whatnot, and so he went to a technician. The tech told him linux is tha zits and that he only uses windows to test software for other customers. Wham, he is now waiting for me to download him a copy of Karmic, and he will make the definite switch when I give him the disk. Plus, he will sell copies of Ubuntu CDs to my college's students, since TONS of students pass in front of his little CDs stand. He, like me, will pass the word.

[pwnst*r]

Thanks, I'll check those.

what he meant was, start writing those companies begging for a linux version of their software.

[ErikEhlert]

Anyone worried about this? Windows 7 actually looks like it might be decent. It'll dominate the netbook market and there will be a massive marketing push.

What do you think?

I myself have an Evaluation Copy of Windows 7, its fun, and theres some new bells and whistles, but just like any other new OS, it slowly gets old over time. I like it, and I definitely like it. I just keep one HD with W7 and another with Kubuntu, which I prefer much more.

ScreenShot:


The only thing I don't like, is opposed to the old-school way of showing the main User Folder, your little white guy over the folder is now black, wearing a green V-Neck :l

Does anyone like my background? :D

[Chronon]

Does anyone like my background? :D

I don't think the mods will.

[samirbasha]

Removed by author.

[samirbasha]

Not likely. Linux only has about 1% of the market and we have a tendency to be very loyal to our OS.

I waited for years to see some solid results come out for Linux for installation and home user desktops and have been very impressed with the progress in Ubuntu for the everyday user. When you playing against free, it is always an up hill battle. When free is just as good or better, it sucks to be MS.

MS really does have more to worry about from Linux then Linux from MS.

;)
But will ubuntu remain free? what about "ubuntu software centre" " software store" formerly in karmic?
I really hope that ubuntu will remain free, not become a cheap OS.

[X1R1]

It wont kill linux ever, linux is not just the OS, its about ALL the things you get when you install linux, all the open source software you get, and all in the same place (the repos). Besides, windows is VERY expensive, even the vista to win 7 upgrades are expensive and MS users are complaining.

Only thing that I admit MS makes better than Linux and open source community is the Office Suite, and thats it (but you can install office with wine so....it doesnt matter).

[linux4life88]

Windows 7 is still a Windows product. So no it won't be a Linux killer because you will still have no freedom to use and edit Windows 7 as you please.

[ErikEhlert]

Windows 7 is still a Windows product. So no it won't be a Linux killer because you will still have no freedom to use and edit Windows 7 as you please.

Don't you mean we WILL have the freedom to use and edit Windows Sev... oh I see what you did there.

[lyall]

Windows is killing itself
It alway has and alway will

[passonno]

Well, I am more than willing to ditch the Pro Audio Apps and move to OSS, but, the whole debacle regarding the change to Pulseaudio and compatibility with ALSA, plus the fact that it seems something drastically different happens every single release with Ubuntu means that Ubuntu is not going to be the choice for Pro Audio with Unix/Linux.

[GepettoBR]

Windows is killing itself
It alway has and alway will

So Windows is even amazingly inefficient at committing suicide! :lolflag:

[ursaminor]

From the latest article from CNNTech (http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/10/24/windows7.tips/index.html), it appears that Windows 7 is mimicking Linux OS.

[cusinmex]

lol
true.
as long as the community stays true to itself
then linux will never die :P

[jon66xxx]

Havent missed windows one bit, Thanks Ubuntu

[ap0litist0s]

A great oportunity for reverse enginiaring and pirated copys for the most of you

[JUSTINBEAIRD]

What is Windows? never heard of it

[tcoffeep]

What is Windows? never heard of it

LOL ur funny.

(c wut im doin? im pretending im dumb too)

[vinutux]

What is Windows? never heard of it

It is nothing.... talking about a peace of crap that make millions of people fools

[vinutux]

windows 7 is still a windows product. So no it won't be a linux killer because you will still have no freedom to use and edit windows 7 as you please.

+1 :)

[Tipped OuT]

you will still have no freedom to use and edit Windows 7 as you please.

As if anyone these days care whether or not they can edit their operating systems code. Especially when about 75% of people don't even know what a browser is.

[tcoffeep]

It is nothing.... talking about a peace of crap that make millions of people fools

If you're going to go about calling people fools : try spelling piece right. Your ignorance is appalling.

[mivo]

It wont kill linux ever, linux is not just the OS, its about ALL the things you get when you install linux, all the open source software you get

Most popular open source software is available for Windows, too. 80% of the apps I use on Windows and Linux are the same.

Besides, windows is VERY expensive, even the vista to win 7 upgrades are expensive and MS users are complaining.

Most people get Windows together with their new computer, and it is usually cheaper than a Linux pre-loaded computer. I bought W7 for €125. I don't think it is expensive for an OS I will use on my main desktop for years to come. I don't mind paying for software, because I also want to get paid for my work. Rent, food, etc. are not free. If people only use Linux because it doesn't cost money, well, I think they are missing out on a number of aspects.

If I look at the hours I spent on fixing stuff on my Linux boxes, and getting things like wireless and suspend to work, Linux was more expensive for me.

No, it is not a Linux killer. It will slow down the influx of mew users, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. Bad timing for Cannonical to restrict ShipIt, though.

[falconindy]

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/10/linus-torvalds-gives-windows-7-a-big-thumbs-up.jpg

[hoppipolla]

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/10/linus-torvalds-gives-windows-7-a-big-thumbs-up.jpg

lol it was a sarcastic thumbs up :)


I dunno man, different strokes. I mean I prefer Linux and KDE but whatever, if other people wanna use 7 that's totally cool, they can use what they want :)

I think that both KDE and Ubuntu will improve dramatically in the next year, and I also think open source desktops in general will look much, much better in a year or 2 because of it.

Linux is also now getting pre-installed on more machines. Fingers crossed we should see that market share increase :)

[admelfo]

Nah. I think most people who use Linux choose to -- Windows is prevalent enough that most everyone uses it, too. Everything in my workplace runs on Windows, so I don't have a choice there. I use Ubuntu at home on a laptop -- which used to run Widows NT before the MS OS and apps became so bloated that the hardware couldn't handle it. I got started with Ubuntu simply to try to see if an older machine still had any life left in it -- and thanks to Ubuntu, it surely does. Plus it's kind of fun to learn new stuff.

Let's remember that a lot of people who use Windows don't see it as an operating system -- they just see it as their PC, and as long as it works, they like it. They aren't curious about alternatives -- they don't have a need for them. They're also more comfortable than I am accepting that once perfectly functioning hardware is obsolete, at spending a ton of money on software that -- for the purposes of most home users, at least -- does no more or less than any of the open-source alternatives that are available to anyone for free. I'm sure that a ton of great machines are rotting in landfills because someone told their owners that "if it's more than 3 years old, you probably need a new one."

[fredbird67]

Nope, I have no plans at all to get Windows 7, although I'm sure it will eventually be foisted on me on my computer at work (I don't have a choice in the matter at work). But on my computer at home, I value my freedom too much to even consider going back to Windows, and that's precisely the reason I gave Windows the pink slip on my computer here at home in January of 2005 and replaced it with Mandrake (currently running Mint).

Besides, I greatly resent the way Microsoft strong-arms other companies in order to make money, and in my book, you do NOT win friends or influence people like that (Ballmer ROYALLY needs to read the late Dale Carnegie's book and take his suggestions to heart, for starters).

As for OpenOffice's incomplete compatibility with .DOC and .DOCX files, I've found that Abiword seems to do better than OpenOffice in rendering said file formats in a way that will make them look better when opened in Microsoft Office (Abiword comes with Xubuntu, BTW). It's still not perfect, mind you, but Abiword definitely does a better job than OpenOffice in this regard.

[ricojonah]

This might sound silly, but IMHO, I'm beginning to suspect that when it comes to end-user adoption, Linux (distros) may have more to worry about with Apple than they do with Miscrosoft/Windows 7.

* Apple is pushing a stonger-than-ever campaign to compel Windows users to switch to their product. Given the recent increases in their OS market share, it seems to be working very well for them.

* When it comes to supporting a non-Windows environment, many software vendors and other organizations(banks, schools, etc.) seem to consider supporting Apple's OS a higher priority than Linux in general. There are definitely many instances where this isn't the case, but most organizations consider the market share of their customers'/clients' OS when deciding to support it.

* In the area of mobile devices, Apple has made a very strong brand for themselves. Google, Nokia, and many other large companies have been bringing Linux to the table to build some (admittedly, very cool) mobile devices (anyone seen the Nokia N900?). Right now, these newer devices could be competing more directly with Apple's i-phone marketshare than with Microsoft's CE-based devices.

* Apple obviously benefits from being the largest of the minority contenders with Windows. Like any profit-based competition, Apple's probably not very fond of sharing that territory with anyone else (unless, of course, it can result in a better bottom-line for them).

I could be jumping the gun on this one. Any thoughts?

[konungursvia]

I don't think so. I installed Win7 Ultimate today (someone Swedish gave it to me for free) and it's very crisp, responsive, snappy, pretty. I think it's better than OSX now. So as for the netbook market, one of our big linux opportunities to get on more desktops, I'm not as optimistic any more. MS has really done, it for the first time since Win 98.

[GepettoBR]

someone Swedish gave it to me for free

Yarrr, matey.

[isparkes]

Even if it is the greatest OS of all time (it won't be), I don't think it will make a difference. Just as a side note, Apple don't care either - they normally see no difference or a slight increase in user base after a new release of Windows.

I don't use Linux because Windows is bad (it is), I use it because:

I don't want to spend money continuously on virus scanners and add on applications
I am tired of re-installing Windows every 6 months
want the excellent support that this forum gives
use large Unix boxes at work, and feel much more at home on the command line


Arguing about the best OS is like arguing about religion: you can never reason about faith, because it doesn't allow room for reason. I'm just happy that there is an alternative, and that the alternative works for me.

[mivo]

I don't want to spend money continuously on virus scanners and add on applications

The best virus scanners are free. Most of the popular open source applications that people use on Linux are cross-platform.

I am tired of re-installing Windows every 6 months

This is the reason why I switched my Linux desktop from Ubuntu to Arch. ;) I never had to reinstall Windows to keep it current. I did have to do that with Ubuntu because the upgrade option never worked flawlessly for me.

I agree that an OS is an tool, and that there is no "best" choice that works equally well for everyone and for every situation. That is why I have two Linux machines and two Windows computers. Works for me.

[vinutux]

The best virus scanners are free. Most of the popular open source applications that people use on Linux are cross-platform.



This is the reason why I switched my Linux desktop from Ubuntu to Arch. ;) I never had to reinstall Windows to keep it current. I did have to do that with Ubuntu because the upgrade option never worked flawlessly for me.

I agree that an OS is an tool, and that there is no "best" choice that works equally well for everyone and for every situation. That is why I have two Linux machines and two Windows computers. Works for me.

Upgrading to next version is your choice....and.. 99% of problems related to upgrading to next version is because of third party repos..........

[GepettoBR]

Upgrading to next version is your choice....and.. 99% of problems related to upgrading to next version is because of third party repos..........

In my experience it's about 70%... but the 30% recently has involved important packages like PulseAudio and Xorg getting oinked, so it's a lot of damage.

I'm going to do a clean install of Karmic this weekend, but that's just because I want my root filesystem to be ext4.

[vinutux]

In my experience it's about 70%... but the 30% recently has involved important packages like PulseAudio and Xorg getting oinked, so it's a lot of damage.

I'm going to do a clean install of Karmic this weekend, but that's just because I want my root filesystem to be ext4.

mm... i always prefer a clean install than upgrades....

[deancasino]

Windows 7. Well it'll be cracked and hacked to hell and back in a month tops.

Regarding someone's concern in an earlier post about whether Ubuntu will stay free, well need I quote ubuntu.com?

"The Ubuntu promise - Ubuntu will always be free of charge, including enterprise releases and security updates."

[GepettoBR]

mm... i always prefer a clean install than upgrades....

That would be ideal, but I don't have the time to spare for that every six months. I used to - hence my separate partition for /home and a dedicated 15MB partition for a standalone GRUB so that no mater what OS I break I can still access the other two and fix things.

[epsolon77]

Heh. I vote no.

I like the option of being able to totally change my desktop from gnome, kde, enlightenment etc.

And windows7 steals effects and **** OSX and linux has had for 5 years :p

This is my feeling. Windows 7 only incorporates features already availible for free elsewhere years ago. Microsoft is then calling it NEW and GREAT and charging 200 for the upgrade. I haven't switched from Windows on my desktop yet because of support reasons (people pay me to fix their windows, and as such I need a windows install to play with). Short of dropping the price on Windows to $20, actually selling the ownership to the OS instead of a "lease", simplifying liscencing and keeping an extreamly stable OS, I can't see any version of Windows killing Linux. That being said I don't think Windows is going to die either. Until Linux as a whole gets it's act together and puts out a whole business solution that is easy to configure, windows isn't going away. Currently you can get it done by installing a ton of different apps and configuring each, but there is no slap the disk in and go config that provides everything form mail server to desktop that just works.

[Eddie Wilson]

I do have Windows 7 and just use it for some games. It could only be a linux killer if was driving a truck and running over Tux. Even with that it would miss the mark.

This is a funny thread.

):P

[Twitch6000]

LOL ur funny.

(c wut im doin? im pretending im dumb too)

I c wat u did der :P.

In all honesty though I find windows 7 a great upgrade for vista users.

For xp though, pff Windows Xp will live forever!!

[johnboy1313]

Anyone worried about this? Windows 7 actually looks like it might be decent. It'll dominate the netbook market and there will be a massive marketing push.

What do you think?

windows doesnt dominate the market now?

[julianb]

Windows 7. Well it'll be cracked and hacked to hell and back in a month tops.

Regarding someone's concern in an earlier post about whether Ubuntu will stay free, well need I quote ubuntu.com?

"The Ubuntu promise - Ubuntu will always be free of charge, including enterprise releases and security updates."

Ubuntu and debian are here to stay. Their hardware compatibility is good, and they're compatible with tons of wonderful free software, and the software available for debian-like systems keeps getting better and better. There are lots of people who want useful software at no cost.

[mivo]

There are lots of people who want useful software at no cost.

Most of the top applications are cross-platform. They don't cost money on Windows.

[the fix it man]

;) No doubt Windows 7 is cool and looks flash and that attracts people towards it.

[Zoot7]

A Linux killer... definitely not!

It'll be interesting on Netbooks, considering the Windows installation might very well be the dearest part of the cost, that's going to be a big deficit for it.

[jdunn]

Most people who have Vista probably will not upgrade to Windows 7. Those who have Windows XP as their primary operating system will upgrade.

[wmcbrine]

Windows 7 of course can't kill Linux, because Linux is an idea and a community, not just a product. But anyway... I just got a new Windows 7 system for my mother the other day, and, forcing myself to look at from the perspective of an end user who doesn't care about Free Software, it's really impressive. I think Ubuntu has definitely surpassed Windows XP, in terms of both looks and functionality, but it's a tougher call with 7. I think 7 has the edge on looks now, but Ubuntu still pulls ahead on functionality for the base system -- with things like Evince and OpenOffice included -- unless your focus is on media (since you really need the restricted-extras package on Ubuntu).

[julianb]

They [lots of good FOSS apps] don't cost money on Windows.

You still have to pay for the operating system though... unless you get an illegal copy of windows, and I don't trust bootleg copies of windows nearly as much as I trust my favorite open source OS's.

[cguy]

I just replaced Vista with W7 on my dad's laptop (I'd never pay for it though; I got it free from my uni.) and I must say:
IT IS FRICKIN' BEAUTIFUL! :D

There's so much attention to details...
and that selection of Wallpapers... :rolleyes:

Gotta give Caesar what's Caesar's. :p

--

Ah, and it's really snappy and it installed every driver automatically; almost like Ubuntu


After a quick stroll through it, I think they nailed it with this one. Let's just see how it stands the test of time.

[mivo]

You still have to pay for the operating system though... unless you get an illegal copy of windows

Most people update their Windows when they purchase a new computer (for the past six or so months, even Vista machines included a coupon for a free W7 upgrade). This is a "hidden" expense, though due to the OEM practice and the "add lots of useless stuff like McAfee" approach, it affects the price little. In fact, computers that come pre-installed with Linux usually cost more.

So for most people, Windows is essentially free without them having to pirate it.

[Twitch6000]

Most people who have Vista probably will not upgrade to Windows 7. Those who have Windows XP as their primary operating system will upgrade.

Uhmm how did you come to that conclusion o.o?

Most people who have xp are below what windows 7 requires..

Not to mention windows 7 is geared toward the people who had trouble with vista..

For real man I have xp with more then enough ram and such for windows 7 and I am not gonna upgrade. Why? Simple it brings nothing to the table I need.

[starcannon]

Anyone worried about this? Windows 7 actually looks like it might be decent. It'll dominate the netbook market and there will be a massive marketing push.

What do you think?
Nah, Win7 will be no more trouble to GNU/Linux than any other Windows release has. It's still just MS Windows at the end of the day.

[brawd]

I hate all operating systems in various degrees because none of them read my mind and carry out my intentions. They just carry out my instructions instead. But I hate Windows most because it's let me down so many times.

Plus all the family use it - over 20 of 'em, and I have to sort out their computers when they go belly up.

Linux - I use Ubuntu - never crashes. My sister uses Ubuntu and never crashes, now my sister in law has gone for the duel boot. Progress at last! Lol.

regards,

Brawd

[dzon65]

I'm using ubuntu 9.10 with a wubi install.(yep,wubi)Exept for some initial "buggies" I have no intention to boot in windows anymore.In fact,the only reason vista is still there is because I'm too lazy.

[jeffkrebs]

I just switched to Ubuntu a couple of days ago on a laptop and I'm loving it. My family started using it immediately with no issues. My wife... with basic computer experience (i.e.word, web (facebook with farmville...aghhh), itunes) that's about it, did not even blink. Of course with Firefox, openoffice and songbird. That's what I love about Ubuntu, for 99% of home users it's more than powerful enough for the applications they use all the time. I'm at the point where I may switch my fatherinlaw over, as I have to remove spyware etc every couple of months off of his vista home computer. This of course takes hours. He absolutley need Ubuntu for my own sanity.

My only regret is that a close friend I run with is working the Windows 7 marketing account with a PR firm here in Canada. She admits she's drinking the coolaid. Microsoft has written documents about how to combat the Linux market and put "FUD" in the market place. She talks a good game, and talks up the lack of support.

She does admit that firefox is much more stable than IE. At least there is that.

Cheers
Jeff

[mamamia88]

I like windows 7 better than karmic it seems more polished. I have problems with karmic. for example sometimes when i wake from suspend brightness is turned all the way down. also when i reboot one of my gconf setttings is always reset making the title bar transparent.

[mivo]

I'm at the point where I may switch my fatherinlaw over, as I have to remove spyware etc every couple of months off of his vista home computer.

It may be beneficial to stick with Ubuntu longer than two days before you start converting other people to Linux. ;)

Why not install Microsoft Security Essentials (free), NoScript (Firefox add-on), Adblocker+ (Firefox add-on) on your father-in-law's computer and teach him how to double-click the Spybot:S&D icon every few days? This way, you won't have to spend "hours" removing spyware from his computer. It takes so little effort to secure a Windows box.

(No, I don't believe in converting people. I believe in motivating people. Nor do I believe that Linux is for everyone, and vice versa.)

[zugu]

I just installed Windows 7 Ultimate on my main machine, using a retail DVD a friend of mine bought.

Microsoft allows everyone to install any edition of Windows 7 for free, for 30 days. Of course, assuming one has the original DVD. The 30 days period can be lengthened to 120 days using a simple command. It's perfectly legal and the OS has no restrictions.

I have to say, they definitely nailed it with 7. It's highly polished, extremely stable, supports my old hardware, is faster than XP, and everything is pleasantly solid and integrated.

I mean, Ubuntu's Network Manager can only dream to be like Windows 7's Network and Sharing Center. Everything in the Control Panel has been revamped, and the usability skyrocketed. There are useful links everywhere for common tasks, and every option is just few clicks away.

KDE's K menu is a joke compared to Windows 7's Start menu. In GNOME, everything is all over the place and there's no integration between configuration dialogs.

The taskbar is also revamped and is a joy to use. Windows Update is finally as it should be, and I could go on and on.

Ubuntu ain't got nothing on Windows 7.

[stinkeye]

Ubuntu ain't got nothing on Windows 7.
If your still using dapper your probably right.:confused:
Anyway most linux users don't really care.It's not about what someone thinks is a better operating system
because of what it looks like or any mind blowing effects.
It's about the way microsoft conducts it's business and the freedom in the way you can use your computer.
Anyone who uses linux a for while and does a bit of reading will come to realize this.

I wouldn't care if windows 7 cleaned my house while I was at work because
more likely than not, it wouldn't let me in until I took my shoes off.
:idea: ....could probably get in the backdoor though. :wink:

[MacUntu]

Windows 7 is a solid OS, but it's still Windows in many ways. Is it a Linux killer? I don't think so, because Linux was never alive. They missed two great opportunities to shine: Vista and netbooks.

[t.rei]

I'm running Windows7 for a good time now. On my gaming Laptop. Needless to say: most drivers were a pain in the **** to get. Media Keys still not working properly. Other than that it installed flawlessly. After some time the same thing as with any windows so far happens: booting time goes up. Login-to-desktop time goes up as well.

It behaves about like vista with "Had to change to vista basic look" and all that rubbish. Also larger collections of mixed media seems to occasionally crash the explorer... no worries, it comes back just like on XP and Vista.

I was very pleased at first, as they managed to nail the "new smell" to the desktop. The taskbar is rather good, but not what it could have been (smooth tasks is way better). Internetexplorer is no browser, hence the progress-indicator in the panel doesn't work for anything but file-copy. The only real usable feature on my 1920 widescreen is this window-to-edge-snapping. Thats actually really nice.

Everything else is just ... hype. imho. After a couple of Months it's about the speed of vista. *shrugs*

So...
Win7:
Install - OK but driver issues.
1st Experience - Nice, shiny!
Long time Experience - Meh, about the same old sh*t.

[Chame_Wizard]

I just installed Windows 7 Ultimate on my main machine, using a retail DVD a friend of mine bought.
My Kubuntu x86-64 CD is enough,cause it's comes with a lot of apps ready to use.If you have a DVD version,you can install a lot more things which are ready to use.

Microsoft allows everyone to install any edition of Windows 7 for free, for 30 days. Of course, assuming one has the original DVD. The 30 days period can be lengthened to 120 days using a simple command. It's perfectly legal and the OS has no restrictions.
Linux is free to install,modified,spread around,sell etc etc without any restriction+it's all legal.A lot options,choices and documents are available.

I have to say, they definitely nailed it with 7. It's highly polished, extremely stable, supports my old hardware, is faster than XP, and everything is pleasantly solid and integrated.
Linux is so stable,that only 1 or 2 apps will be crashing sometimes, but not the entire system.
Heck,I use an old P3 Coppermine pc from 2000 with Ubuntu Server 9.10(KDE GUI is temporally installed),which works very fine.

I mean, Ubuntu's Network Manager can only dream to be like Windows 7's Network and Sharing Center. Everything in the Control Panel has been revamped, and the usability skyrocketed. There are useful links everywhere for common tasks, and every option is just few clicks away.Network manager is bad?Sorry,but if I don't like the default network manager,I can install another one.Unlike Winblows CP,system settings in *buntu have a lot of options(too much choices)and is good organized(GUI and CLI).

KDE's K menu is a joke compared to Windows 7's Start menu. In GNOME, everything is all over the place and there's no integration between configuration dialogs.Excuse me,but aren't you still using 6.06 instead of 9.10?The KDE K/DE menus are better handled than all Winblows version (including 7)put together.What the heck do you mean by "no integration between configuration dialogs"?

The taskbar is also revamped and is a joy to use. Windows Update is finally as it should be, and I could go on and on.
I have panels,which I can customize how I wanted to be.Repositories contains a lot of different softwares which are tested,so updates are easy.(Package Managers are great,but if you want the latest versions,just install .deb,rpm,yum etc etc files.)

Ubuntu ain't got nothing on Windows 7.
We are not bound to 1 company,freedom is everything for us.
You still using 6.06,so anything else?

:popcorn:

[Earl_Maroon]

It won't kill Linux. Linux userbase is too passionate to compromise.

But saying that, Windows 7 isn't /that/ bad. Too lazy to dig out my live CD I haven't fixed Grub2 after I broke it a month ago. Sure, I have BSoDs, but it's fast. Faster than Ubuntu, strangely.

If anything is going to kill Linux though, it's Linux itself. Karmic seems to have shattered a lot of people's confidence in Ubuntu, including mine. I'll get around to fixing Grub some time.

[jollysnowman]

I'll always use linux as my everyday, but I have Windows 7 Ultimate installed, and have experienced ZERO problems. I spent a few days getting all the settings right, but I do that with any new install. Drivers were easy to get, the network manager is thousands times easier to use than anything I've used on Ubuntu (and Chame_Wizard, I have Xubuntu 9.10 and Crunchbang 9.04), and the general user experience is very polished and solid.

The cost of Windows 7 to me was only $35 since I'm a student, and my university also provides free anti-virus software (although I admit I haven't installed it yet... waiting to see how long I can last).

The biggest complaints I have about Windows are:
- I can't use two-finger scroll on my touchpad (could with XP) but that's more of a driver issue
- The new Windows Media Player doesn't have a toolbar when minimized
- It's easier to do my programming homework by ssh'ing into a Unix machine than obtaining some sort of IDE
- I can't get less than 250mb memory usage after startup

Things that work great on Windows, but not so much on my Ubuntu/Crunchbang installs:
- Connecting to my University's restricted network (one step in Windows, five in Linux)
- Setting up drivers
- Dual monitor support
- Volume control keys (specifically Crunchbang)

[Diluted]

Windows Vista and 7 has higher RAM usage because of SuperFetch. It loads applications into memory in advance, so it would launch faster than if it was done from the disk. If an application needs more RAM, then the memory used by SuperFetch will be used by the application instead.

So yes, you probably can't get your RAM usage under 250MB, but that doesn't mean all 250MB is actually required by Windows. At least part of that 250MB helps make your applications launch faster. Unused RAM is wasted anyway, since it's just sitting there.

[jollysnowman]

Windows Vista and 7 has higher RAM usage because of SuperFetch. It loads applications into memory in advance, so it would launch faster than if it was done from the disk. If an application needs more RAM, then the memory used by SuperFetch will be used by the application instead.

So yes, you probably can't get your RAM usage under 250MB, but that doesn't mean all 250MB is actually required by Windows. At least part of that 250MB helps make your applications launch faster. Unused RAM is wasted anyway, since it's just sitting there.

Ah yeah, I forgot about that. Good point. I think I disabled SuperFetch at one point (or some similar service that helps apps launch) and didn't notice too much of a difference.

To me, unused RAM is not wasted, but available.

[Diluted]

I'd imagine you'll see a difference when the disk is in heavy use. In other cases, the difference may be imperceptible.

[zagz]

Windows 7 is slower than XP. :(

http://www.overclockers.com/windows-xp-vs-windows-7-benchmarks/

Must be all the resorces in Aero.

[Groucho Marxist]

I'm running Windows 7 at work and I'm not terribly impressed. It feels and acts like a proverbial broken Vista Christmas tree with new, shinier lights. I find that Linux does a marvelous job for day to day and office needs, while gaming and non-linear audio and video editing are broken up onto Windows and Mac machines, respectively.

[Diluted]

Windows 7 is slower than XP. :(

http://www.overclockers.com/windows-xp-vs-windows-7-benchmarks/

Must be all the resorces in Aero.
The benchmark was done with a beta version of Windows 7. It's not representative of how it performs now. Furthermore, the article mentions that the benchmark results does not seem to match with the experience and something may have gone wrong. Unfortunately, I cannot find a more recent report from the website.

Aero does not actually affect system performance. If you have a dedicated graphics card, it will offload graphics processing to the GPU instead of using the CPU to do the work.

[Regenweald]

Installed Ultimate in a VM a few days now. Very impressesd at first impression. Desktop is intuitive and easy to use one you get accustomed to the slightly new layout. Even in a VM, the response is very fast. Honestly I'd call it VistaSP3, but that is just my opinion. Anyhow I look at it, it is a good product.
Building a few machines soon, will see how it behaves on hardware.

As for the OP, Linux Killer ? not on my machine :)

[blackienl]

The thing about W7 or any of the Windows versions is they do run decent fast at first. After adding a few updates and patches, and then the ungodly service packs, it always slows down quite a bit. Why would anyone expect anything different from Microsoft after all these versions? Windows is what it is, love it or hate it. I'm in the camp of "Use what you like". I like Linux and always have, so I use it. For those that like Windows, enjoy! Neither is going away anytime soon. ;)

[Johnsie]

I use Windows 7 at home and Windows XP/Ubuntu/Ubuntu Server at work. IMO Windows XP is the best designed operating system ever because it is simple, works well and has plenty of quality software available. That's why so many people don't want to switch from XP. At the moment Ubuntu doesn't offer anything that would convince me to think otherwise. I've been using Ubuntu since 2005 but over the last year I've found myself using Windows more and more because there are some great applications for Windows that aren't available on Linux.

Windows7 is very pretty, very stable, that panel is great and it runs pretty quickly. When you compare Ubuntu to Windows 7 on looks then Windows 7 wins easily. To me Windows 7 just appears like a more professionally designed product. Ubuntu appears like a work in progress. Some people may consider good looks to be 'bloat', but if you're running on decent hardware it runs pretty quick.

I think Apple are the real Linux killers though... People wanted a cool alternative to Microsoft and Apple had a killer marketing campaign. Apple appears trendy, popular and usable... Ubuntu appears interesting but very little eye candy. It's the eye-candy that wins average joes.

There will always be hobbyists who want to do their own thing and that's why Linux will never die... It just doesn't look like it's going mainstream any time soon. I think the return to seller rate of Linux netbooks also did alot of damage to the reputation of Linux. People bought 'laptops' and got poor quality software on them that they didn't know how to use.

[Fenris_rising]

No chance. It may slow things down for Linux but the tale of the Hare and the tortoise springs to mind.

regards

Fenris

[Zoot7]

there will always be hobbyists who want to do their own thing and that's why linux will never die... It just doesn't look like it's going mainstream any time soon.
qft

[Chame_Wizard]

Irony: everyone is already using Linux/BSD in a form.

[Zoot7]

Irony: everyone is already using Linux/BSD in a form.
Indeed it is ironic! :) The best example I think is simply googling something - all the google servers run Linux.

[zagz]

The benchmark was done with a beta version of Windows 7. It's not representative of how it performs now. Furthermore, the article mentions that the benchmark results does not seem to match with the experience and something may have gone wrong. Unfortunately, I cannot find a more recent report from the website.

Aero does not actually affect system performance. If you have a dedicated graphics card, it will offload graphics processing to the GPU instead of using the CPU to do the work.

:oBut more recent benchmarks offer no real change XP still comes out not as sluggish as 7 with the exeption of file transfer.

[GepettoBR]

My Kubuntu x86-64 CD is enough,cause it's comes with a lot of apps ready to use.If you have a DVD version,you can install a lot more things which are ready to use.

Linux is free to install,modified,spread around,sell etc etc without any restriction+it's all legal.A lot options,choices and documents are available.


Linux is so stable,that only 1 or 2 apps will be crashing sometimes, but not the entire system.
Heck,I use an old P3 Coppermine pc from 2000 with Ubuntu Server 9.10(KDE GUI is temporally installed),which works very fine.

Network manager is bad?Sorry,but if I don't like the default network manager,I can install another one.Unlike Winblows CP,system settings in *buntu have a lot of options(too much choices)and is good organized(GUI and CLI).

Excuse me,but aren't you still using 6.06 instead of 9.10?The KDE K/DE menus are better handled than all Winblows version (including 7)put together.What the heck do you mean by "no integration between configuration dialogs"?


I have panels,which I can customize how I wanted to be.Repositories contains a lot of different softwares which are tested,so updates are easy.(Package Managers are great,but if you want the latest versions,just install .deb,rpm,yum etc etc files.)


We are not bound to 1 company,freedom is everything for us.
You still using 6.06,so anything else?

:popcorn:

You know, he probably just didn't get around to updating his profile info. It is pretty irrelevant, after all.

Also, if I can make a suggestion, avoid saying "Winblows", "Micro$oft" and similar rubbish in serious discussions, since it makes you look like a fanboy.

[HeadHunter00]

Anyone worried about this? Windows 7 actually looks like it might be decent. It'll dominate the netbook market and there will be a massive marketing push.

What do you think?
Who gives windows a damn. Linux all the way baby.:guitar:

[HeadHunter00]

By the way I tried windows 7. It's the same old thing like other versions of windows, but just a little faster, a little. Its improvements are barely noticeable.
Windows vs ubuntu:
On one corner, WINDOWS:
http://www.studyhallmoney.com/nerd%20cartoon.jpg
On the other corner, UBUNTU:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41R3GA9BRXL._SL500_AA280_.jpg
file:///tmp/moz-screenshot.pngfile:///tmp/moz-screenshot-1.png

[Chame_Wizard]

You know, he probably just didn't get around to updating his profile info. It is pretty irrelevant, after all.

Also, if I can make a suggestion, avoid saying "Winblows", "Micro$oft" and similar rubbish in serious discussions, since it makes you look like a fanboy.

I am not an fanboy,at least Apple is way better than MS.:lolflag:

[supermelon928]

:lolflag:

[fela]

If your still using dapper your probably right.:confused:
Anyway most linux users don't really care.It's not about what someone thinks is a better operating system
because of what it looks like or any mind blowing effects.
It's about the way microsoft conducts it's business and the freedom in the way you can use your computer.
Anyone who uses linux a for while and does a bit of reading will come to realize this.

I wouldn't care if windows 7 cleaned my house while I was at work because
more likely than not, it wouldn't let me in until I took my shoes off.
:idea: ....could probably get in the backdoor though. :wink:

Exactly.

[fela]

I am not an fanboy,at least Apple is way better than MS.:lolflag:

Apple's operating system is intrinsically way better than Microsoft's, but only as it's based on UNIX. To be fair to MS, didn't they invent NT from scratch? Apple bought a UNIX distro and fiddled with it a bit, although to be fair to Apple they did add some massive chunks and I have them to thank for things like CUPS in Linux. I'd say Apple's business practices aren't far above Microsoft's lowly activities though.

[fela]

Also, if I can make a suggestion, avoid saying "Winblows", "Micro$oft" and similar rubbish in serious discussions, since it makes you look like a fanboy.

I disagree. I believe that it is whoever's reading it that makes saying things like that immature. I can call Windows winblows, winsux all I like but only until someone reads it and marks it as immature will people think of it as that. It's just a name, really, I call it that kind of thing to emphasize my point or my opinion that I don't like it, and also to emphasize my lack of respect for Microsoft.

[SouthOfHell]

I disagree. I believe that it is whoever's reading it that makes saying things like that immature. I can call Windows winblows, winsux all I like but only until someone reads it and marks it as immature will people think of it as that. It's just a name, really, I call it that kind of thing to emphasize my point or my opinion that I don't like it, and also to emphasize my lack of respect for Microsoft.

Fanboy logic ftw.

[fela]

Fanboy logic ftw.

It's not very logical saying 'fanboy logic ftw' at someone who isn't at all a fanboy.

I call windows winblows but I'm not a fanboy.

[airtonix]

First Impression Cons
+ no apt-get : check
+ piffy excuse for a composting window manager : check
+ still can't use fuzzy window resizing (not even macos has this) : check
+ still no workspaces (virtual desktops) : check.

First Impression Improvements
+ Powershell

Things I still hate
+ crumbs on my table.
+ howling cats.
+ lack of tabbed file manager.
+ lack of multi-tasking.

3mths later...
back with ubuntu.


note : any claims of 3rd party virtual desktop shall be shouted down with hilarity.

[fela]

first impression cons:
no apt-get: check
it's windows: check
no bash: check
aero now hurts my eyes: check

first impression pros:
errr...maybe lil bit more stable than vista? not saying much though.
Oh yeah, my graphics card was supported without downloading a driver (big plus for first 5 minutes of use).

back to Kubuntu less than a day later.

[hoppipolla]

I've probably already given my verdict of Win 7 here but hell, once again can't hurt!

I think it brings some good things to the table in terms of UI, I'm glad we are getting Quick Tiling in the next version of KDE (we already have a simpler version in Compiz) and we have the superbar in KDE already, albeit without pinning.

Jump lists are also very cool, I hope we get that soon.

I also like Aero personally, but it seems to be a resource hog and I had to switch it off to even get reasonable performance, it was ludicrous.

Overall... my experience was mixed. It seemed intuitive but weak, friendly but shallow. It broke easily on my machine, tripped over itself a little and messed up even it's OWN games, but then when it actually worked it gave me a reasonable desktop, even if it doesn't really compare to KDE.

Not awful, but hardly great o.O


Oh, additionally, it's stubborn just like Vista and capable of damaging a machine without warning (by damaging I mean deleting partitions etc). For the most part using Windows 7 reminded me why I think open source is the future, but I also could see it's (quite small and probably temporary) advantages over modern Linux.

[pedja_portugalac]

Anyone worried about this? Windows 7 actually looks like it might be decent.
It looks nice, it's true + better firewall and free microsoft antivirus but it doesn't change the fact that microsoft and friends secretly spying you. I use it just to update my tomtom GPS device, shame on tomtom.
It'll dominate the netbook market and there will be a massive marketing push.

What do you think?
First you should try Ubuntu Netbook Remix, then you'll probably not be so sure about who's growing and who's loosing netbook global market. Of course, they'll do anything and everything to make netbook manufacturers avoid preinstalling linux based distributions but we can always be payed back, at least in EU, for the OS someone have imposed to us. At last but not least Ubuntu Netbook Remix is far better and easier to use OS for the netbooks then any other OS I have tested.

[KegHead]

yo,

there's a slight chance I'll look at 7.

I'll stay w/ubuntu.

KegHead

[Chame_Wizard]

note : any claims of 3rd party virtual desktop shall be shouted down with hilarity.

It cost you 20$ too have it.:P

Like Virtuawin,Powertoys?!!:o

[JBAlaska]

Getting myself a netbook for Christmas, and since windoze7 winsux, I'm gonna winblows it off...

[sr.vinay]

Well, Windows has always been something used to run a few games that work best on it!
Linux is the powerhouse! It's not going anywhere!

[Frak]

Getting myself a netbook for Christmas, and since windoze7 winsux, I'm gonna winblows it off...
lol

Also, the Linux will never die. There's too much of a rabid, protective community surrounding it. Likewise, that's the same reason why Linux still only holds 1% of the market. You can only stretch a little white lie so far.

[hoppipolla]

lol

Also, the Linux will never die. There's too much of a rabid, protective community surrounding it. Likewise, that's the same reason why Linux still only holds 1% of the market. You can only stretch a little white lie so far.

lol I do like all this junk you spew out xD

You spend most of your posts ignoring EVERY advantage of Linux, Ubuntu, open source, our desktops... everything that we have that is better than Windows, in favour of dwelling on what Windows has to the point of obsession!

Even I openly admit Windows 7's current pros... why do you so completely ignore Linux's?

[Frak]

why do you so completely ignore Linux's?

I acknowledge they make good servers. That's it.

[hoppipolla]

I acknowledge they make good servers. That's it.

hahahaha so... wait... let me get this straight for a second..

you ignore the power of the plasma desktop? You ignore the flexibility of Linux GUIs? You ignore the capabilities of Linux on older hardware? You ignore the ease of software installation and variety of free software? You ignore the flexibility and potential of open source? The modular nature of the OSs? The speed of the kernel? The flexibility of the kernel? The power of GRUB? The variety of filesystems and software components? BASH? The security advantages? The fact that KDE 4.4 will better the Snap feature of Windows 7 and possibly even the superbar as well? Virtual desktops by default?

Well that's cool Frak, good luck with that xD

[wmcbrine]

To be fair to MS, didn't they invent NT from scratch?My understanding is that it was based partly on OS/2 and partly on VMS.

[Frak]

you ignore the power of the plasma desktop?

Yes. It's not that powerful.

You ignore the flexibility of Linux GUIs?

There aren't so flexible if you have to manage a billion of them.

You ignore the capabilities of Linux on older hardware?

I've seen very few implementations of Linux that run well on older hardware.

You ignore the ease of software installation and variety of free software?

I can double click a file on Windows, click next a few times, and have software fully configured. It even asks me if I want to remove components I never use. APT nor RPM give me that option.

As for the variety of free software: Most free software lacks heavily in comparison to it's proprietary counterparts. There are a few notable exceptions, such as ardour, which is WAY better than its proprietary counterparts.

You ignore the flexibility and potential of open source? The modular nature of the OSs? The speed of the kernel? The flexibility of the kernel? The power of GRUB? The variety of filesystems and software components? BASH? The security advantages? The fact that KDE 4.4 will better the Snap feature of Windows 7 and possibly even the superbar as well? Virtual desktops by default?

Open Source != Linux. Even Microsoft has Open Source projects. It's not just Linux that has Open Source software.

Windows is just as modular. Get a friend who has shared source access to the Windows source code, and you'll see how modular it is.

Even Linus knows that major implementations of the kernel are bloated and slow.

GRUB is a bootloader. There's nothing special about that.

Windows has PowerShell, which I feel is superior to Bash for scripting. Besides, ZSH is better at bash at nearly everything.

Windows can be secured down even more than most Linux distributions. Do some reading, possibly become a MCITP, and you'll realize just how secure Windows can be. It comes ready for the System Administrator to mold into the working environment.

KDE is still a bloated mess. It doesn't touch Windows 7 in desktop performance. DWM still beats KWin in compositing performance.

I've worked in a SUSE Enterprise Desktop Linux environment before. While I was there, out of 120 employees, only a couple used the virtual desktop feature. They've recently switched from SLED to Windows 7.

There.

[zugu]

Linux is free to install,modified,spread around,sell etc etc without any restriction+it's all legal.A lot options,choices and documents are available.I know Linux is free, but I don't mind paying for quality. I don't know what documents you're talking about; maybe documentation? Even if that were the case, you should see the Windows 7 documentation, it wipes the floor with man pages, wiki pages and other online documentation put together by volunteers.

Linux is so stable,that only 1 or 2 apps will be crashing sometimes, but not the entire system. Heck,I use an old P3 Coppermine pc from 2000 with Ubuntu Server 9.10(KDE GUI is temporally installed),which works very fine.In Windows land, applications that crash the entire system are a thing of the past. Windows 7 is safer by design, not even drivers can crash the OS because of the new driver model introduced in Windows Vista.

Also, I'm sure Windows XP is much more faster on that P3 machine, with GUI and all.

Network manager is bad?Sorry,but if I don't like the default network manager,I can install another one. Unlike Winblows CP,system settings in *buntu have a lot of options(too much choices)and is good organized(GUI and CLI).I'm sure Canonical would have replaced Network Manager with something else, provided better alternatives existed. Unfortunately, Network Manager is the best of what Linux land has to offer right now and it's light years behind 7's Network and Sharing Center. But, hey! You get to replace an inferior piece of software with an even worse piece of software! Good for you! I, however, cannot picture my grandma replacing network managers on her desktop. Admit it, Microsoft did a good job™ in 7, at least in the networking department.

Excuse me,but aren't you still using 6.06 instead of 9.10? No, I'm not. I actually didn't update my forum info.

The KDE K/DE menus are better handled than all Winblows version (including 7)put together."Handled"? I don't know what you mean by that. Windows 7's Start Menu is very dynamic and allows users to "pin" items, a very nice feature, indeed.

Programs designed with Windows 7 in mind can take advantage of the new Start Menu: clicking on "Steam" (with Steam closed) brings up a menu I can use to launch games, change status, or access major features. Google Chrome has a similar set of features (most accessed sites, history etc.), VLC shows a list of recent files. Extremely neat and useful. KDE has nothing like this.

What the heck do you mean by "no integration between configuration dialogs"?This was not meant as a comment for the Start Menu, but for the Control Panel. Everything in Windows 7's Control Panel is linked together and neatly grouped in related categories. In Ubuntu stuff is thrown together in an alphabetically ordered list. With no integration between items. Clearly inferior.

I have panels,which I can customize how I wanted to be.Repositories contains a lot of different softwares which are tested,so updates are easy.(Package Managers are great,but if you want the latest versions,just install .deb,rpm,yum etc etc files.)Don't even start me on the packaging system used in almost all the Linux distributions. It is my belief that the current packaging model is inherently flawed, defective by design. Gobolinux is the only distro that got it right, IMO (I should also note PC-BSD's PBI system).

We are not bound to 1 company,freedom is everything for us.So using and enjoying a product passes as losing my freedom nowadays? Rest assured, MS is not going anywhere. Should Windows fail one day, I'll use the next big thing. Until then, I'll be enjoying Windows.

[hoppipolla]

HUGE POST!

There.

I dunno man we'll have to agree to disagree... I mean how you can claim that Windows is more secure for day to day users, that Plasma is not more powerful than the feeble widgets of Windows 7, that Grub's capability to boot every OS under the sun (or Linux's capability to read their filesystems), that Windows XP or 7 would get more from a pc like mine (of unremarkable but passable spec), that KDE is bloated, that you can get easy access to Win source code (which is what you would need to make your point worth making)... I just give up man.

If you hate it all so much either ignore it completely or help them work on it. Don't just moan :(

I love it, that's why I use it, why I post on here, and why I mostly ignore Windows and OSX ^_^

[Frak]

If you hate it all so much either ignore it completely or help them work on it. Don't just moan :(

I love it, that's why I use it, why I post on here, and why I mostly ignore Windows and OSX ^_^

1. I don't hate Linux. I don't. Linux has great potential, it's just being exercised in the wrong way.
2. Ignoring Windows and OS X is not constructive. They are great platforms, and ignoring them isn't the answer. Acknowledge and extend them. Use what suits your needs.

[hoppipolla]

1. I don't hate Linux. I don't. Linux has great potential, it's just being exercised in the wrong way.
2. Ignoring Windows and OS X is not constructive. They are great platforms, and ignoring them isn't the answer. Acknowledge and extend them. Use what suits your needs.

I ignore them because I don't like them as much as I like Linux, and I am very content with my choice of OS ^_^


EDIT -- I only really use Windows for games, and I agree we should have the superbar and Snap in KDE (I use both these features when I'm on 7 :) )

[MasterNetra]

Window 7 is alright, though i can't see how it could hold up againest linux on notebooks, I mean it maybe somewhat lighter then vista it still isn't resource light by any means. Plus you still need Anti-Virus/Anti-Malware, and though the default firewall is suppose to be better then its predcessors it still can't beat comodo's firewall.
For me though, I'll stick to ubuntu as it can still serve the purposes I need it for while it continues to grow and improve. And the fact that I don't have to shell out over $200 for a new version each time is nice also.
All and all Windows 7 is alright and both Ubuntu and Win7 have their strengths and weaknesses. In the end though is only a matter of preference and there is no way win7 is a Linux killer.

(Also though I did find snap useful in some instances, it tends to get annoying when all you want to do is move a window off to the side. Snap should require a simple shortcut key like Alt+Drag in Ubuntu for the window dragging.)

[Eagles18]

If your still using dapper your probably right.:confused:
Anyway most linux users don't really care.It's not about what someone thinks is a better operating system
because of what it looks like or any mind blowing effects.
It's about the way microsoft conducts it's business and the freedom in the way you can use your computer.
Anyone who uses linux a for while and does a bit of reading will come to realize this.

I wouldn't care if windows 7 cleaned my house while I was at work because
more likely than not, it wouldn't let me in until I took my shoes off.
:idea: ....could probably get in the backdoor though. :wink:
That's a nice and clever to note the differences :D

[mivo]

Getting myself a netbook for Christmas, and since windoze7 winsux, I'm gonna winblows it off...

Make sure you get one that is fully supported by Linux. Most netbooks are not, especially when it comes to hibernate and suspend, built-in microphone, wireless, card slots, LEDs and special keys. Also, the battery usually doesn't last as long as with XP (I don't know about Windows 7, haven't tried it on a netbook, but I'm quite impressed with how well it performs on my desktop.)

[clanky]

Anyone worried about this? Windows 7 actually looks like it might be decent. It'll dominate the netbook market and there will be a massive marketing push.

What do you think?

Windows 7 certainly is awesome, but that doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing for Linux. The way forward for Linux is not for Windows to suck, it is for Linux to step up to the mark and be counted.

With the disaster that was Vista, many of the Linux fanboys were predicting the downfall of Microsoft and "theyearofthelinuxdesktop TM" it didn't happen because the success of Linux is not linked to the failure of Windows, similarly the fact that Microsoft have released a good stable OS that meets the needs and wants of the majority of computer users will not be the death of Linux.

People who use Linux don't use it just because Windows is rubbish, or at least that is what they would have everyone believe.

So there really is no need for silly comments like

Well, Windows has always been something used to run a few games that work best on it!

or

Getting myself a netbook for Christmas, and since windoze7 winsux, I'm gonna winblows it off...

[Frak]

Windows 7 certainly is awesome, but that doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing for Linux. The way forward for Linux is not for Windows to suck, it is for Linux to step up to the mark and be counted.

With the disaster that was Vista, many of the Linux fanboys were predicting the downfall of Microsoft and "theyearofthelinuxdesktop TM" it didn't happen because the success of Linux is not linked to the failure of Windows, similarly the fact that Microsoft have released a good stable OS that meets the needs and wants of the majority of computer users will not be the death of Linux.

People who use Linux don't use it just because Windows is rubbish, or at least that is what they would have everyone believe.

So there really is no need for silly comments like



or
This, the entire thing, this.

[hoppipolla]

Windows 7 certainly is awesome, but that doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing for Linux. The way forward for Linux is not for Windows to suck, it is for Linux to step up to the mark and be counted.

With the disaster that was Vista, many of the Linux fanboys were predicting the downfall of Microsoft and "theyearofthelinuxdesktop TM" it didn't happen because the success of Linux is not linked to the failure of Windows, similarly the fact that Microsoft have released a good stable OS that meets the needs and wants of the majority of computer users will not be the death of Linux.

People who use Linux don't use it just because Windows is rubbish, or at least that is what they would have everyone believe.

But thing is if that was all true, why did I jump onto 7 with high hopes and then come back within a few days... quite shocked to be frank.

Hmm... never mind. I mean it is MUCH better than Vista I'm sure (I never really used Vista, only when fixing people's PCs) but it still is hardly perfect by any means.

I don't want Windows to be awful, I never did or do. It's just... I'm tired of people talking it up and making it out to be something it's not :(

Overall like I've said many times, I think they're equal. Linux has all those things I stated earlier and is in my experience more stable, powerful and speedy (particularly as it seems better at memory management and multi-tasking, at least to me), but Windows is friendly, a more complete package particularly for a newer user, and has more polish.

Mac, Win and Lin... there's not much in it it just depends what kind of user you are. For now anyway :)

[neerajadsul]

Look at the System Requirements of Windows 7. Every new release needs more RAM and more speed, consumes more power. Netbook market is really out of question (at least for good products).

Even for regular computers it's the same story. Plus look at the cost. Linux use will continue to grow.

However, Linux community has to focus on robustness for a desktop users.

[Frak]

Look at the System Requirements of Windows 7. Every new release needs more RAM and more speed, consumes more power. Netbook market is really out of question (at least for good products).

Even for regular computers it's the same story. Plus look at the cost. Linux use will continue to grow.

However, Linux community has to focus on robustness for a desktop users.
RAM's cheap.

[Tipped OuT]

RAM's cheap.

Yeah.

And Windows 7 actually uses LESS resources then Windows Vista. A lot less.

That's a big plus, because now almost every computer you find at a store is more then capable of running Windows Vista.

[wilee-nilee]

I disagree. I believe that it is whoever's reading it that makes saying things like that immature. I can call Windows winblows, winsux all I like but only until someone reads it and marks it as immature will people think of it as that. It's just a name, really, I call it that kind of thing to emphasize my point or my opinion that I don't like it, and also to emphasize my lack of respect for Microsoft.

So true, do any of us really care what somebody else on line thinks of us, past a emotional moment; can be treated if you get the meds needed.

[hoppipolla]

RAM's cheap.

so are excuses. oh no he didn't! xD

[hoppipolla]

So true, do any of us really care what somebody else on line thinks of us, past a emotional moment; can be treated if you get the meds needed.

i don't understand this post o.O heh

[jollysnowman]

Netbook market is really out of question (at least for good products).

I have Win7 32-bit (using it right now, actually!) on a laptop with a 1.6gHz processor and 1gB of RAM. I'm about to install Win7 64-bit on a desktop with a 1.6gHz processor and 2gB of RAM.

[Frak]

so are excuses. oh no he didn't! xD

That's right, you didn't. Processors are expensive. Motherboards are expensive. Storage is... well, reasonable. RAM is cheap. I say use more RAM to speed up my system. It's a cheap commodity.

[KiwiNZ]

so are excuses. oh no he didn't! xD

Ram is one of the cheapest up grades you can do .

[hoppipolla]

That's right, you didn't. Processors are expensive. Motherboards are expensive. Storage is... well, reasonable. RAM is cheap. I say use more RAM to speed up my system. It's a cheap commodity.

I would still say that excuses are cheaper :D

[Tipped OuT]

Ram is one of the cheapest up grades you can do .

And the best. At least in my opinion. Buying more RAM sped up my system 10x.

[KiwiNZ]

I would still say that excuses are cheaper :D

I have some tools at my disposal that are cheap as well , hint .. hint ;)

[wilee-nilee]

i don't understand this post o.O heh

Why am I not surprised. ;)

[fela]

by damaging I mean deleting partitions etc

You're not seriously telling me you don't make backups of the first 512bytes of your disks every 5 minutes! :lol:

or were you talking about (shiver) things like (chatters teeth) dd (NOOOOO) if=/dev/zero of=/dev/NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOsda ...

:lolflag:

oops, dd doesn't exist in windows...

[fela]

That's right, you didn't. Processors are expensive. Motherboards are expensive. Storage is... well, reasonable. RAM is cheap. I say use more RAM to speed up my system. It's a cheap commodity.

Absolutely disagree to the fullest extent possible.

You should only ever have to upgrade resources such as RAM if you want to do something new such as more powerful video editing, 3D modelling, etc.

NEVER think that an OS upgrade has the right to make you buy more RAM. Not unless its new features actually use the RAM well and for the purpose of usability/good features etc, NOT bloat. You're machine is made to run applications, the OS should stay out of the way. I use KDE because I find it more usable than WMs such as fluxbox/openbox etc, I would use them if I found them as usable as KDE.

[zagz]

:DFor moi Microsoft Windows is a tale of two halfs,

I have experience on Linux (my desktop) iMac (Dad's) Windows 7 (friend)

Windows feels the most snappy when opening and loading windows but has become a ruthless monopoly that has become clouded with making brass and I choose not to be just another face within the Microsoft user base. Win7 was released quickly purely because the business sector would not touch Vista.

The theming on Windows is dreadful, installing 3rd party apps to run boot themes that also installs 101 different toolbars and added programs.
try to do anything and it's :o
"are you sure you want to do this?" - over protective child-proof style access to windows files and installing anything, what were they thinking?! It offers zero security. ;)

The last couple of years it seems every good program for Windows has started shipping with extra toolbars and 3rd party programs that you only know have been installed after the initial program has been installed, again money making advertising by 3rd parties.

I do like a lot of freeware Windows programs such as Foobar, again light and snappy with no extra crap in there. ;)

With Linux the OS feels as though it belongs to me, the whole thing and I like that, with Microsoft and Apple Mac it seems you pay to use their product (borrow).

[vexorian]

It is certainly hyped.

But honestly, beyond all the hype, nothing really justifies moving from XP to windows7 unless you bought a new computer or something, even then the trend to make everything blue is way too retarded... The abuse of transparency effects is also very annoying.


MS should have sticked with XP Service packs, they should have accepted long ago they couldn't possibly do it better than it.

So, I think Linux should worry more about the real competition - that is windows XP - than the much overrated windows 7.

I mean, look at the market share numbers, windows XP still incredibly healthy. That's not going to change in the foreseeable future.

[KiwiNZ]

Absolutely disagree to the fullest extent possible.

You should only ever have to upgrade resources such as RAM if you want to do something new such as more powerful video editing, 3D modelling, etc.

NEVER think that an OS upgrade has the right to make you buy more RAM. Not unless its new features actually use the RAM well and for the purpose of usability/good features etc, NOT bloat. You're machine is made to run applications, the OS should stay out of the way. I use KDE because I find it more usable than WMs such as fluxbox/openbox etc, I would use them if I found them as usable as KDE.

The OS doesn't force you to upgrade the OS either . But if you wish to progress you need to do both.

[Tipped OuT]

The OS doesn't force you to upgrade the OS either . But if you wish to progress you need to do both.

Well said Kiwi. Well said.

[Stosskraft]

It won't kill Linux. Linux userbase is too passionate to compromise.

But saying that, Windows 7 isn't /that/ bad. Too lazy to dig out my live CD I haven't fixed Grub2 after I broke it a month ago. Sure, I have BSoDs, but it's fast. Faster than Ubuntu, strangely.

If anything is going to kill Linux though, it's Linux itself. Karmic seems to have shattered a lot of people's confidence in Ubuntu, including mine. I'll get around to fixing Grub some time.

I fall into this camp. I loved the switch from Xp to 9.04 and learning the new system, but with the new install for 9.10 and the fact that I can't play a simple game with sound, and the large amount of info I have to dig through to find an answer ( I still can't) I am getting frustrated. In the end of the day I want to turn on my computer and use it, not figure out why a new version is not as good at the old one. I am not tied to anyone, I LOVE the linux concept...but get real...I have been using windows for 15 years and never had to spend hours to figure out a crackling sound that was there on 9.04.

sorry rant over

[Frak]

The OS doesn't force you to upgrade the OS either . But if you wish to progress you need to do both.
Right. Well said.

[hoppipolla]

The OS doesn't force you to upgrade the OS either . But if you wish to progress you need to do both.

new Microsoft OSs do though, unless you want to be stuck with XP forever :(

I mean personally I don't think there's anything wildly wrong with a SMALL increased demand for specs, but my problem (well not problem, more "reason for sticking with linux") was that Windows just couldn't get much out of my pc while linux makes it all singing all dancing! That in my mind means Windows get pushed aside for me and used only when necessary... for playing games! :)

I know this is just me, but why spend money that I don't have on upgrades (my pc would need quite an overhaul to get over the next hurdle), when I can have a brilliant and up-to-date OS on it that I prefer anyway?

That's just my take on the matter, I know everyone has different experiences and views on all this :)

[Tipped OuT]

new Microsoft OSs do though, unless you want to be stuck with XP forever :(

I mean personally I don't think there's anything wildly wrong with a SMALL increased demand for specs, but my problem (well not problem, more "reason for sticking with linux") was that Windows just couldn't get much out of my pc while linux makes it all singing all dancing! That in my mind means Windows get pushed aside for me and used only when necessary... for playing games! :)


And that's your opinion.


I know this is just me, but why spend money that I don't have on upgrades (my pc would need quite an overhaul to get over the next hurdle), when I can have a brilliant and up-to-date OS on it that I prefer anyway?


Do what ever you like.

But for those of us who use Windows, and want the latest in technology advancements.... we upgrade.

You should always keep your PC up to date with decent hardware anyways. I don't want to be using a Direct X 8 card with a P4 CPU...

Eventually, there won't be any where for you to go, except a minimal Linux distro.

[73ckn797]

And that's your opinion.



Do what ever you like.

But for those of us who use Windows, and want the latest in technology advancements.... we upgrade.

You should always keep your PC up to date with decent hardware anyways. I don't want to be using a Direct X 8 card with a P4 CPU...

Eventually, there won't be any where for you to go, except a minimal Linux distro.

And that is your opinion!

[KiwiNZ]

You can choose a car that takes 14 seconds to accelerate to 100km (60mph) or one that does it in about 6 seconds. I chose 6 seconds .

[hoppipolla]

And that is your opinion!

haha amen man :)

Thing is, my PC can happily play games from a few years ago like FEAR (I completed that recently!), and chugs along quite happily on Linux with all the effects on and tons of apps open! It certainly doesn't need an upgrade, not unless I develop a severe craving for games sometime soon, or the Linux kernel or KDE teams suffer some kind of midlife crisis! xD

When I have money I may upgrade, but even then it's just more hassle than it's worth, I have a 360 (and Wii) downstairs for games.

This PC will be good for at least another few years, save for hardware failures :)

[joyson]

Windows will definitely have a boost up by Win 7.
May be Linux wont be that affected but
it must do something different now.

Joyson

[sigurnjak]

So we have all these comments about MS OS . Good , i say , they are getting better . I would really worry if they did not .
But what did really change in MS land , frankly not much .


1. Do i still have to defragment my HD ? YES
2. Do i still have to run AV-suite ? YES
3. Does it still have that miserable registry ? YES
4. Do i still get very empty PC after install with barely any software? YES
5. Do i have to hunt my software all over damn internet from god knows where and update OS and apps separately ? YES
6. Do i still have to give them money and agree to their EULA so i can test their unstable OS which can lose all my data ? YES
7. Can I expect them to provide bullet proof OS for money they have received ? NO
8. Does it look pretty ? YES
9. Does MS make PC experience safe , reliable , fast , affordable ? NO

As far as i am concerned i am sticking with Linux , Ubuntu or some other Linux one day . No Mac or MS product for me . They may look better but are expensive, offer no guaranty for safety of my data , do not give me option to tinker and do what ever damn well i please with my data . OS or hardware .

Just my little rant , there !;)

[Regenweald]

So we have all these comments about MS OS . Good , i say , they are getting better . I would really worry if they did not .
But what did really change in MS land , frankly not much .


1. Do i still have to defragment my HD ? YES

Coming to an ext4 and btrfs near you! :D

2. Do i still have to run AV-suite ? YES

Security essentials is a suite of beauty, barely any resources, dependable.

3. Does it still have that miserable registry ? YES

How often do you interact with the registry ?

4. Do i still get very empty PC after install with barely any software? YES

comes with a browser, movie editor, photo management, multimedia player. OpenOffice installs on windows, free to download. Base is covered.

5. Do i have to hunt my software all over damn internet from god knows where and update OS and apps separately ? YES

Most modern apps can check for updates all on their own. So does windows.

6. Do i still have to give them money and agree to their EULA so i can test their unstable OS which can lose all my data ? YES

Linux has no EULA, thankfully, but were you around in the early days of ext4 ;)

7. Can I expect them to provide bullet proof OS for money they have received ? NO

Good point, one of the reasons i prefer Linux/UNIX/BSD on my production machine currently. Indeed a good point!(i can make windows bulltproof though, but not every user is a power user.

8. Does it look pretty ? YES

Ridiculously so! the theme photography is stunning.

9. Does MS make PC experience safe , reliable , fast , affordable ? NO

Mixed bag, I use Ubuntu exclusively, but bought Home Premium. Glad I did.

As far as i am concerned i am sticking with Linux , Ubuntu or some other Linux one day . No Mac or MS product for me . They may look better but are expensive, offer no guaranty for safety of my data , do not give me option to tinker and do what ever damn well i please with my data . OS or hardware .

Just my little rant , there !;)

don't get mad at me, the forum is a bit uninteresting tonight, yours was the only post worth typing for. We both enjoy Linux, but I can see some positives in the new windows offering. (I still say it's Vista sp3! :p)

[Tipped OuT]

And that is your opinion!

I know. :)

[mivo]

Look at the System Requirements of Windows 7. Every new release needs more RAM and more speed, consumes more power. Netbook market is really out of question (at least for good products).

Unlike Vista, Windows 7 works well on the standard netbook (1.6 GHz Atom CPU, 1 GB RAM, 160 GB HDD). Linux had been hailed as the OS of choice for netbooks, and that didn't happen. Quickly, Asus started to put out Eees with XP because the market wanted it, Telco discontinued their Linux netbooks because too many were brought back as "defective" and exchanged for the Windows version, other manufacturers didn't even offer Linux versions of their netbooks.

I was fairly wrong with my expectations, too. I did think that netbooks would become a market segment where Linux would dominate, and that this would be a spring board into higher market share. It didn't happen and the trend continues to be in favour of Windows and OSX.

Even for regular computers it's the same story. Plus look at the cost. Linux use will continue to grow.

The desktop market share of Linux has been stagnant for a while. There was an increase around two years ago, and then a sideway development started. Commercial support has gotten worse in some areas (ATI dropped Linux support for legacy cards, which surprisingly includes cars that were sold even a year ago, id Software won't port their new games to Linux even though they had done this for years, etc), while it increased in others (Adobe).

However, Linux community has to focus on robustness for a desktop users.

It isn't a Linux problem as much as a problem of some popular distros and the release model they use. There isn't enough "consistency".

I don't have a solution, but at the same time I also don't see a dire need for another popular desktop OS. There's W7 and MacOSX, which seem to satisfy the vast majority of people, and trying to sell something in a market that is covered and consists of mostly happy customers, that is hard to achieve. It's much like playing Go stones into an area of the board where your opponent is very strong. It's a bit futile.

I think there is too much fragmentation going on. Too many distros that all do things a little differently. Not enough consistency, with some projects growing too tall without reinforcing their base, while others stagnate and don't make enough progress. Hardware support still lacks. There are too many hangups on counter-productive philosophies and artificial limitations (i.e. codecs and DVD support requiring changes to the repository list, additional downloads) and poor design (the Ubuntu GUI installer not automatically separating /home, so that newer users end having severe trouble when the next release comes out and they want to upgrade).

It's just so many little things that are a bit off. Most of which could be fixed with a little coordination. I don't think the success or failure of Linux on the desktop is tied to Windows or OSX. It's more of a problem of standing in its own way.

Then again, why is market share so very important? I run Linux on two machines and it works just fine for me. I try to buy mostly standard hardware, so support is usually not an issue for me, and I have two Windows boxes in addition. I enjoy the choice and being able to choose the OS and the tools that are best for what I'm doing. So personally I don't need one OS that is perfect for everything.

[sushrut91]

What about the stability that any linux has?
Have you seen that any windows out there has screen lockups and always eats the harddisk page file usage heavily?

Windows 7 will not deter Linux but normal average users will still prefer Win due to hardware compatibility, I guess.

[sushrut91]

What about the stability that any linux has?
Have you seen that any windows out there has screen lockups and always eats the harddisk heavily?

Windows 7 will not deter Linux but normal average users will still prefer Win due to hardware compatibility, I guess.

Why would I pay for an OS when I can do everything free legally ?

[Frak]

What about the stability that any linux has?
Have you seen that any windows out there has screen lockups and always eats the harddisk page file usage heavily?

Remember that high RAM usage you all gripe about so much?

Well, that's keeping Windows from swapping from the page file so heavily. It doesn't swap as much as it used to, because it is now caching RAM instead.

[oohbuntoo]

Windows 7 is NOT a Linux killer. I don't think any OS that COST MONEY will ever kill a 100% free ninety-nine OS. And let's be realistic folks, Windows 7 is JUST Vista II. Gotta applaud the marketing to get folks to believe they are purchasing an entirely NEW OS.

If you are an avid Windows user, Windows 7 is a godsend. It's what Vista should have been.

[SirBismuth]

You can choose a car that takes 14 seconds to accelerate to 100km (60mph) or one that does it in about 6 seconds. I chose 6 seconds .

While I do like this analogy, the difference is that the car taking 6 seconds will cost you more than the car taking 14 seconds.

In the OS world, it's the opposite, which is great I say! :D.

B

[ghostrider117]

all i have to say about windows 7 is it is like all of the other garbage microsoft puts out it's flashy for a sec then is stars to suck and linux rules from day one so i would never quiet useing linux

[KiwiNZ]

While I do like this analogy, the difference is that the car taking 6 seconds will cost you more than the car taking 14 seconds.

In the OS world, it's the opposite, which is great I say! :D.

B

Mine certainly did

There is some exceptions though , eg the Toyota Prius , its cost more than some 6 second 0-100 cars

[Frak]

all i have to say about windows 7 is it is like all of the other garbage microsoft puts out it's flashy for a sec then is stars to suck and linux rules from day one so i would never quiet useing linux
And at the end of the day, people still haven't heard of Linux, and Windows dominates the market with an iron fist. Also, I'll never quiet useing linux either.

[roclinus]

You should all be ashamed of yourselves for your close-minded attitudes.Windows of any kind is far superior to unbuntu. I have completed a random survey of businesses in my area and the results are not shocking.

Not one of the 100 businesses I surveyed uses a *nix of any kind, nor do they intend to. Support for their already purchased, expensive office equipment is not easily achieved because there are not enough trained "expert" users of these *nix systems to warrant the expense they would incur if they were foolish enough to even think about converting to a *nix platform.

Windows 7 could be a linux killer, but I doubt it. There will always be alternatives to Windows, but not one at this moment is capable of more than a niche market.

[mivo]

Windows 7 is NOT a Linux killer. I don't think any OS that COST MONEY will ever kill a 100% free ninety-nine OS. And let's be realistic folks, Windows 7 is JUST Vista II.

No, it isn't "Vista 2". It performs much better, it has been rock-stable on my box for several months now, there have been no slow-downs, no BSODs, no legacy software that didn't work, etc. Windows 7 is a top OS, and people just need to let go off that "versus" attitude. Linux is not "worse" or "not good" only because there are other OSes that are also good.

Windows is not what holds Linux on the desktop back, nor does the failure or success of Windows have any bearing on how well Linux does. If that were so, Vista would have led to a significant increase of the Linux desktop share, and that simply did not happen. So, bashing Windows, especially with inaccurate or dated ME era "facts", misses the point.

As for costs, well, I'm a professional in my field, which means that "time" isn't something that is without value. I didn't pay money for Linux itself (although I did pay money for books and bandwidth), but I have spent a lot more time on tweaking and fixing problems (more so before I switched a machine to Arch) than Windows required of me. So in terms of costs, Linux has been more expensive for me.

The money costs for an OS are marginal for me, almost irrelevant, since $200 every 3-5+ years for something I use every day just isn't a significant expense. Plus, most people get a Windows license with their computer, and since pre-built computers without OS or with Linux aren't cheaper, Windows is pretty much free for most users.

[stinkeye]

The money costs for an OS are marginal for me, almost irrelevant, since $200 every 3-5+ years for something I use every day just isn't a significant expense. Plus, most people get a Windows license with their computer, and since pre-built computers without OS or with Linux aren't cheaper, Windows is pretty much free for most users.
I take it as a significant expense if you take into account the sort of computing environment your funding.

[mivo]

I take it as a significant expense if you take into account the sort of computing environment your funding.

What sort of environment is that?

I may have misunderstood the comment, so please feel free to clarify, but if you were talking about the commercial software environment:

I use mostly open source software on Windows, pretty much the same applications I also use in Linux. OpenOffice, Firefox, Thunderbird, Pidgin, Python, Ruby, SciTE, PuTTY, Netbeans, VLC, Gimp, Songbird, VirtualBox.

Sure, I also use commercial software that I buy, but there are no free/open source equivalents for Linux anyway, like video games, PureBasic (this is for both Windows and Linux), SmartGo.

There are also plenty of free (but not open source) programs such as IrfanView, CDBurnerXP and Skype. And open source Windows programs that you wouldn't need in Linux since the OS has built-in tools that for the tasks, like 7-Zip and DirSyncPro (rsync).

So, no, the only expense is really for the OS itself, except special interest stuff like games and some professional applications, which aren't free or even available for Linux either. The open source/free Linux games all exist for Windows too (Nexuiz, FreeCiv, Battle for Wesnoth, Methack, etc.).

Hardware is actually cheaper if you use Windows because you can buy just about everything and don't have to be concerned about compatibility (applies mostly to periphery stuff like combo-printers and such).

[stinkeye]

What sort of environment is that?

I may have misunderstood the comment, so please feel free to clarify, but if you were talking about the commercial software environment:


No I'm not against commercial software, I'm against microsofts concerted attempts to maintain it's monopoly
in operating systems and to achieve dominance in other markets, not by innovation and other
competition on the merits, but by tie-ins, exclusive dealing contracts, and other anticompetitive agreements
that deter innovation, exclude competition, and rob users
their right to choose between competing alternatives.
I'm not saying any O/S is better than the other but I make a conscious
choice not to use windows and add to their funds to carry out these practices.
So the environment I'm talking about is one of no choice.

[sigurnjak]

To Regenweald :
No one is will get mad ,mad ! :)
I did get recently legit disk with Vista business , and it is installed on a 2nd hd.
But interesting thing is i never use it . I thought it would be good to have when i get stuck with something in Linux i might need MS OS , but in 2 months , did not use it once .
As far performance goes , when i was done updating , adding light weight AV and antispyware it is not such a hog and i tested WIN7 in V-BOX and it is even better .
But still ,i never use it . Good i did not pay money for it , since Ubuntu meets all my needs and i do not need to worry about things like drive-by downloads while my wife is browsing or playing games. While i am here , re. registry , how mwny times did i have to manually remove and trace leftovers from old software to be able to install newer version , to many times . With Synaptic it is so easy , i am downright spoiled .

[zagz]

"sigh" All the benchmarks I've seen show Windows XP to be faster than Win7 overall. Some on here keep claiming Win7 to be faster without showing any data/benchmarks to back it up. :(

Here is another benchmark test where XP owns Vista & 7, I have posted one eatlier in the thread and agian XP won overall.

http://www.testfreaks.com/blog/information/windows-xp-vs-vista-vs-7/

[Diluted]

Yes, XP can run faster than Vista and 7, but it is not exactly a fair comparison since Vista and 7 do more things out of the box. An example would be indexing your files for faster search. For higher editions, Windows will also maintain copies of your system files and user data so that you can retrieve a file you've accidentally deleted or an older version of a file.

I don't really see the point of you posting these benchmarks. Are small differences between XP and 7 that critical to you? Do you value that small performance gain over the various features introduced in Vista or 7?

New versions of operating systems usually consumes more resources, Linux included. If I wanted to maximize my system resources, I'd be running on command line rather than a GUI.

[TheBuzzSaw]

LOL @ everyone saying "Windows 7 is faster than XP"

Ever heard of SuperFetch? Windows Vista and 7 create the illusion of being faster by loading programs when you're not looking. The work is still being done though. All I have to do in Ubuntu is put my most commonly used programs into the startup process. BOOM! Ubuntu is so "fast"!

Windows becomes slower/heavier with each passing release. Granted, 7 is a rare exception in that it is indeed lighter/better than Vista, but it is still an 800-pound gorilla compared to XP.

[Tipped OuT]

Ever heard of SuperFetch? Windows Vista and 7 create the illusion of being faster by loading programs when you're not looking. The work is still being done though. All I have to do in Ubuntu is put my most commonly used programs into the startup process. BOOM! Ubuntu is so "fast"!

Windows becomes slower/heavier with each passing release. Granted, 7 is a rare exception in that it is indeed lighter/better than Vista, but it is still an 800-pound gorilla compared to XP.

You really have no idea what you're talking about do you?

Windows Vista/7 doesn't create an "illusion" that it's faster. The SuperFetch service pre-loads most commonly used applications into your RAM, so the application will start faster and be more responsive. This is why Vista took up so much RAM, but they improved it in 7 to use less.

Windows XP is from 2001. Almost 10 years ago now, of coarse it would be lighter. Windows Vista/7 brings a lot of new things to the plate that Windows XP never had. New services, new features and with all of these comes a price. A price of resources.

If you don't like that, well this is why there's Linux. :)

[Frak]

You really have no idea what you're talking about do you?

When you call an actual event an "illusion", doesn't fare well.

SuperFetch has a Linux clone, it's called Preload. I don't find preload to do as much as SuperFetch does, which is a shame.

[knappers]

Linux killer I Don't think so, my son has a w7 laptop, had a play on it for an hour and it crashed just surfing the web and that isn't the first time either according to him.

I'll stick with Ubuntu. Unfortunately I have to use windoze with the work laptop, reel crappy image on it takes 15-20 minutes to bootup what a load of cr*p. (cr@p)

My ubuntu 9.04 old pantsy laptop boots up in a minute and shuts down in half that time.

[TheBuzzSaw]

You really have no idea what you're talking about do you?

Windows Vista/7 doesn't create an "illusion" that it's faster. The SuperFetch service pre-loads most commonly used applications into your RAM, so the application will start faster and be more responsive. This is why Vista took up so much RAM, but they improved it in 7 to use less.

Windows XP is from 2001. Almost 10 years ago now, of coarse it would be lighter. Windows Vista/7 brings a lot of new things to the plate that Windows XP never had. New services, new features and with all of these comes a price. A price of resources.

If you don't like that, well this is why there's Linux. :)
I know how it works. That's beside the point. I don't want my OS guessing what I might want loaded.

[Tipped OuT]

I know how it works. That's beside the point. I don't want my OS guessing what I might want loaded.

Like I said before. It just pre-loads most commonly used applications by you. It's not guessing, "Hmm I think he might want to use this program.. I don't know". So if you use Firefox all the time, it will start pre-loading Firefox.

I don't see a problem with that, puts my RAM to good use and improves my user experience over all.

Opinions, opinions.

[RiceMonster]

I don't see a problem with that, puts my RAM to good use and improves my user experience over all.

What!? RAM being used!? This bloated nightmare is an outrage!!

[almufadado]

Having recently left the windows train and switched to Ubuntu because of 2 reasons:

The power of my box was being sucked by the system itself leaving few both processor power and time and memory to the me to use the computer.

The constant harassment of the OS and it own internet need is leaving less and less broadband to the user.

It's is clear that windows XP could not already cope with the demand of broadband users, and windows 7 even creates a bigger hole in one's broadband to satisfy it's constant internet access.

For Windows 7 the published and advertised system requirements are not real, are by far under
Current hard drives are to slow to take on windows 7 (6 hours to install !) and even when not in user operations it's always reading and writing taht when one want to open a file has to wait for times not seen since ms-dos floppy disks !

Tested a notebook with windows 7 and it is slow ... and with low memory (in budget laptops) swapping it a nighmare !

Introduced in windows xp sp3, the "does not microsoft logo" (aka they did not pay us) warning is going to be a nightmare both for users and for software studios.

In vista they started the trend of leaving the user out of the system, yet virus still go in, and user do not have the tools (microsoft hides most of them from the general consumers) .

Windows update is out of control and for the average users this is going to be "shot on the feet" of microsoft. Vista gave the hint with failed updated leaving the user out of the system altogether entering loops of recovery for hours.

When users (consumers) start to see the level of intrusion by microsoft on their systems (60 % of their potentially market is pirated).

Companies will also see the raise in costs when systems go down and there are no tools to access systems, as system restore is a failure for it only works well when everything works well, in case of critical failure is a lost of time !

Gamers also are going to dislike it as most of the resources go to the system and not for the game.

Also MSN messenger, the giant lollipop for kids, has become a source of trouble for kids both from microsoft and it's "pirating fight" with windows update and because it is now the main source of system disrupts. Use trillian or another free messenger for god sake !

Conclusion: Think windows 7 is meant for those who have a "Intel core 8 quadruple" and 15000rmp hard drives and (lol) 4GB RAM.

I am the proof the question should be "Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala - Windows 7 killer ?

[Frak]

Conclusion: Think windows 7 is meant for those who have a "Intel core 8 quadruple" and 15000rmp hard drives and (lol) 4GB RAM.

I c wut u did thar.

[Regenweald]

Having recently left the windows train and switched to Ubuntu because of 2 reasons:

The power of my box was being sucked by the system itself leaving few both processor power and time and memory to the me to use the computer.

The constant harassment of the OS and it own internet need is leaving less and less broadband to the user.

It's is clear that windows XP could not already cope with the demand of broadband users, and windows 7 even creates a bigger hole in one's broadband to satisfy it's constant internet access.

For Windows 7 the published and advertised system requirements are not real, are by far under
Current hard drives are to slow to take on windows 7 (6 hours to install !) and even when not in user operations it's always reading and writing taht when one want to open a file has to wait for times not seen since ms-dos floppy disks !

Tested a notebook with windows 7 and it is slow ... and with low memory (in budget laptops) swapping it a nighmare !

Introduced in windows xp sp3, the "does not microsoft logo" (aka they did not pay us) warning is going to be a nightmare both for users and for software studios.

In vista they started the trend of leaving the user out of the system, yet virus still go in, and user do not have the tools (microsoft hides most of them from the general consumers) .

Windows update is out of control and for the average users this is going to be "shot on the feet" of microsoft. Vista gave the hint with failed updated leaving the user out of the system altogether entering loops of recovery for hours.

When users (consumers) start to see the level of intrusion by microsoft on their systems (60 % of their potentially market is pirated).

Companies will also see the raise in costs when systems go down and there are no tools to access systems, as system restore is a failure for it only works well when everything works well, in case of critical failure is a lost of time !

Gamers also are going to dislike it as most of the resources go to the system and not for the game.

Also MSN messenger, the giant lollipop for kids, has become a source of trouble for kids both from microsoft and it's "pirating fight" with windows update and because it is now the main source of system disrupts. Use trillian or another free messenger for god sake !

Conclusion: Think windows 7 is meant for those who have a "Intel core 8 quadruple" and 15000rmp hard drives and (lol) 4GB RAM.

I am the proof the question should be "Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala - Windows 7 killer ?

Fear and doubt, although the acronym FUD look good, almost like an expletive, it does not quite describe your post. Uninformed **** is more suited, although US really is not as oomph'ish as FUD.

[KiwiNZ]

LOL @ everyone saying "Windows 7 is faster than XP"

Ever heard of SuperFetch? Windows Vista and 7 create the illusion of being faster by loading programs when you're not looking. The work is still being done though. All I have to do in Ubuntu is put my most commonly used programs into the startup process. BOOM! Ubuntu is so "fast"!

Windows becomes slower/heavier with each passing release. Granted, 7 is a rare exception in that it is indeed lighter/better than Vista, but it is still an 800-pound gorilla compared to XP.

So a DB9 doesn't go fast we only think it does because of the illusion they created by putting a big engine in it.:p

[hoppipolla]

There we go... 6 desktops in 3D, floating windows, about 10-15 apps open at once (or more), file sharing, video playing, music playing in Amarok, scrobbling, image editing, website design, transparencies, KDE 4... and this PC is what... old? That's what Win 7 would have me believe!

I believe the expression is... pwned! xD

[mivo]

KDE was really slow on my old laptop (512 MB, 2 GHz). So much for the myth it runs well on older computers. :p Dropped it and went with Xfce -- and that is fast.

[GepettoBR]

It's not very logical saying 'fanboy logic ftw' at
I call windows winblows but I'm not a fanboy.

And I call black people the N word but I'm not a racist.

[Roasted]

I just installed Windows 7 Ultimate on my main machine, using a retail DVD a friend of mine bought.

Microsoft allows everyone to install any edition of Windows 7 for free, for 30 days. Of course, assuming one has the original DVD. The 30 days period can be lengthened to 120 days using a simple command. It's perfectly legal and the OS has no restrictions.

I have to say, they definitely nailed it with 7. It's highly polished, extremely stable, supports my old hardware, is faster than XP, and everything is pleasantly solid and integrated.

I mean, Ubuntu's Network Manager can only dream to be like Windows 7's Network and Sharing Center. Everything in the Control Panel has been revamped, and the usability skyrocketed. There are useful links everywhere for common tasks, and every option is just few clicks away.

KDE's K menu is a joke compared to Windows 7's Start menu. In GNOME, everything is all over the place and there's no integration between configuration dialogs.

The taskbar is also revamped and is a joy to use. Windows Update is finally as it should be, and I could go on and on.

Ubuntu ain't got nothing on Windows 7.

LOL??

I'd actually like you to go on and on and explain to me why you like Windows 7 so much. I have it installed on my computer and I use it heavily at work, and each time I still find myself with the same Microsoft headaches as before. I find it ironic you mention it's faster than XP, considering every speed test I read confirmed it is slower than XP, but faster than Vista.

Regardless, I'm glad to hear you're using an operating system you like, however, I'll never understand why. And this is coming from an unbiased user who uses Windows heavily at work. I'll continue using my Ubuntu servers and Kubuntu desktops with the ability to actually control my computer in a practical manner, providing me with a world of stability, security, and expandability, all for the grand total of $0.00.

[almufadado]

Fear and doubt, although the acronym FUD look good, almost like an expletive, it does not quite describe your post. Uninformed **** is more suited, although US really is not as oomph'ish as FUD.

And still, apart from bashing me, you do not add nothing of value or may I say you too are expletive.

Anyway thank you for your warm welcome !;)

[lancest]

There was no way Linux was going to challenge Windows on netbooks a few years back when the netbook craze started. Anyone who thought that was smoking something. So why the all the negativity saying Linux has no chance?
Linux netbook interfaces have greatly improved, Google Chromium OS is on the way and (IMHO) Android phones will eventually defeat the IPhone. From the bottom up Linux is set to do very well using various CPU's like ARM that Windows does not even run on.
The success of the Linux OS is not dependent on competing directly with the 1990's style Windows monopoly desktop. So get over it.

[Dipper]

The only way Windows will kill Linux is if they release an open-source version. The chances of that happening are somewhere around the chances of a snowstorm in Phoenix in July.

[almufadado]

Like I said before. It just pre-loads most commonly used applications by you. It's not guessing, "Hmm I think he might want to use this program.. I don't know". So if you use Firefox all the time, it will start pre-loading Firefox.

I don't see a problem with that, puts my RAM to good use and improves my user experience over all.

Opinions, opinions.

The problem is that most of the time memory and the swap file is filled with stuff you wont be using in a particular moment, making the task or tasks at hand pretty much slower.

Also it starts when there is no disk access, but you if you are working in a active program (in ram) and suddenly you want to save it clogs up disk access.

Those few seconds you gain from pre-loading everything means your drives are in constant activity thous reducing their life.

If the xp prefetch you easier to control (could turn it simply of) in windows 7 it seems to be more tide up to other services.

[almufadado]

I c wut u did thar.

Sorry, i only speak english and some other languages too, so ... wtfdym?

[Tipped OuT]

The problem is that most of the time memory and the swap file is filled with stuff you wont be using in a particular moment, making the task or tasks at hand pretty much slower.

Also it starts when there is no disk access, but you if you are working in a active program (in ram) and suddenly you want to save it clogs up disk access.

Those few seconds you gain from pre-loading everything means your drives are in constant activity thous reducing their life.

If the xp prefetch you easier to control (could turn it simply of) in windows 7 it seems to be more tide up to other services.

*Face Palm*

Clogs up disk space? Reduces drive life?

You know we're talking about RAM here? Not your hard drive.

Wait, do you even know what SuperFetch is and what it does??

[almufadado]

*Face Palm*

Clogs up disk space? Reduces drive life?

You know we're talking about RAM here? Not your hard drive.

Wait, do you even know what SuperFetch is and what it does??

You mean this
SuperFetch

See how this works in Windows 7 (links removed)


Compare editions

Windows SuperFetch enables programs and files to load quickly.
When you're not actively using your computer, background tasks—including automatic backup programs and antivirus scans—run when they will least disturb you to save system memory space.
SuperFetch monitors which applications you use the most and preloads these into your system memory so they'll be ready when you need them. Windows Vista also runs background programs, like disk defragmenting and Windows Defender, at low priority so that they can do their job but your work always comes first.
http://www.micro$oft.com/window$/windows-vista/feature$/$uperfetch.aspx

You mean this ? Sure I am acquainted with it !

They only forget to mention how this poorly performs in systems with 2GB -> if you do not have ram availabe it go to the swap (which in auto size mode it's pretty self explanatory -> it get biiiiggg)

How File Swapping Works

The key to the Windows system lies in its use of the computer's memory - both RAM and the physical memory of the hard drive. Running multiple programs means loading the program into RAM. However, if the RAM available proves insufficient, Windows initiates Virtual Memory to feign or simulate RAM - in effect, pretending that it has more memory than it actually has.
It does this by transferring data from the 'real' memory to a special file on the hard drive, called the swap file in Windows 95/98 or the 'page file' in Windows NT/XP/2000. Program data and codes are moved in increments or pages (memory assigned in 4K or 16K segments in a 64K-format) from the physical drive to the swap file. If data is required by a process, it is paged into the physical memory as needed and, if needed, Windows will replace this by moving other code or data into the swap file.

from http://www.tech-faq.com/windows-file-swapping.shtml

Win xp sp0 and sp1 did this in the worse manner ! Sp2 improved some !

And please don't tell me that constant, in my opinion unneeded, constant read/write in a drive dos not wear the drive out !!!

When I installed 4gb in a xp box and monitored closely the pagefile it made almost no difference .

Clogs and hops you will find working with uncompress video editing, that i stop experiencing when disable all those useless services in the background. And not to mention windows update messing everything in the background while some task is running on the front.

[Tipped OuT]

You mean this

http://www.micro$oft.com/window$/windows-vista/feature$/$uperfetch.aspx

You mean this ? Sure I am acquainted with it !

They only forget to mention how this poorly performs in systems with 2GB -> if you do not have ram availabe it go to the swap (which in auto size mode it's pretty self explanatory -> it get biiiiggg)


I have a laptop with 512 MB's of RAM with Windows 7 Ultimate installed. It does not use Swap.

My dad has a laptop with 2 GB's of RAM with Windows 7 Ultimate installed. It does not use Swap.

If you think SuperFetch over fills your RAM with crap until there's none left for use, then you're wrong.

[Frak]

Sorry, i only speak english and some other languages too, so ... wtfdym?
Cool story bro

[The Real Dave]

Wow, this is just turning into a flame war....

Look guys, Mac pretty much summed up the point > Youtube-Windows 7, Broken Promises (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtvloPFYocw)

EDIT - Apologies for the long post. The Video is pretty much a shorter version of what I'm trying to say. Watch it :)

I've only used the RC of 7, so apologies if I'm missing something.

I like 7. In comparison to Vista its golden. That at least we can agree on. Its interface is nice, attractive and efficient, but its nothing you can't get with KDE. Its quicker than Vista, but doesn't really work on my hardware like XP did. I expected that though, my graphics card is really the only problem.

So, don't get me wrong, I like it. I think its a step forward for Windows. But its not that big a step. Its more of what Vista should have been than a new release in some ways. Its definately a big improvement, but putting make-up on a pig doesn't make it any less of a pig. Its quick, at the beginning. Eventually, as hard as you try, its gonna lose performance, eventually leading to a re-install. Thats a given.

Its not going to be as secure as Linux, Mac/Unix, or BSD. It just isn't. Some may argue that Linux doesn't get viruses because its too small a target, that's naive. Google isn't a big enough target? The reason its more secure, is underpinned in the roots of the OS (or GNU/Linux Kernel, am I using the right terms?), user groups are better defined, and more solidly locked down. Its just built to be secure. Well, a lot of it is common-sense really. In Windows, you know your gonna need your AntiVirals, Firewalls and AntiSpyware programs, sucking more resources.

Its locked down, in the freedom sense. Its so damn difficult to make the OS your own, its as if Microsoft are constantly telling you they own your computer. You just have NOWHERE near the freedom you have in Linux. Case Closed, End of Arguement, Next Point.

In areas, its not as user friendly. Sure Linux can be a pain to set up in some cases, but have you tried to partition your HDD before installing a Windows OS, without wiping it? You can't resize, its just awkward, and not nice to use. True, most users wont need to do this, but still, it should be made more accessible.

Overall, the point I'm trying to get across is that, ya I like 7, and sure, its a step forward for Windows, but its a step wearing the same shoe, dragging with it most of the muck from its past. There are problems that you can predict it will have. Just things that you take for granted will happen, but which don't in Linux.

7 will no more kill Linux than a Comet will kill the earth tomorrow. Linux has a growing userbase, and a dominance in the server and supercomputer industry. Sure, on a desktop market its little known, but on an IT professional level, people at least know the name. And as more and more people learn about Linux, learn that the change over, which is easier every passing minute, isn't that hard, and learn the benefits, they'll move. Eventually. The biggest problem is reaching that critical mass where its more profitable for developers to code for Linux than Windows. Once that happens, its only a matter of time.

[Tipped OuT]

Its not going to be as secure as Linux, Mac/Unix, or BSD. It just isn't. Some may argue that Linux doesn't get viruses because its too small a target, that's naive. Google isn't a big enough target? The reason its more secure, is underpinned in the roots of the OS (or GNU/Linux Kernel, am I using the right terms?), user groups are better defined, and more solidly locked down. Its just built to be secure. Well, a lot of it is common-sense really. In Windows, you know your gonna need your AntiVirals, Firewalls and AntiSpyware programs, sucking more resources.

Google? Google just got started. How would you expect Viruses for their OS already? Linux doesn't have a lot of Viruses because no one bothers to make them. It's too hard to get by Linux's security, and there's not enough gullible users to target, like there is in Windows.

Its locked down, in the freedom sense. Its so damn difficult to make the OS your own, its as if Microsoft are constantly telling you they own your computer. You just have NOWHERE near the freedom you have in Linux. Case Closed, End of Arguement, Next Point.
Freedom? This isn't a way of life, it's an operating system. Something you use to get whatever you need done. Whether it's checking your E-Mails, or listening to music.

7 will no more kill Linux than a Comet will kill the earth tomorrow. Linux has a growing userbase, and a dominance in the server and supercomputer industry. Sure, on a desktop market its little known, but on an IT professional level, people at least know the name. And as more and more people learn about Linux, learn that the change over, which is easier every passing minute, isn't that hard, and learn the benefits, they'll move. Eventually. The biggest problem is reaching that critical mass where its more profitable for developers to code for Linux than Windows. Once that happens, its only a matter of time.
This I can some what agree on.

[GepettoBR]

Fanboys, check. Both sides.
Flame war, check.
Huge wall of pointless tl;dr, check.

Bye, thread! o//

[KiwiNZ]

Closed for 24 hours