Ubuntu as Good as WinXP - Support the Users?

[Quarkrad]

I have been using Ubuntu since 8.04 and am a newbie when it comes to Linux. Having come from the ******* world I've converted, and look after, about 12 machines for family and friends as they got fed up with the slowing down of Windows and me having to rebuild their PC's. So Ubuntu has been great but .... and I can see/sympathise with my BUT. Ubuntu has improved over the past years but in terms of the interface it has changed, things are not the same. Gnome 2 to Unity was a big change and now I read Nautilus is the change with (slightly) reduced functionality. All these small changes has caused grief to varying degrees across those I have converted (some are fairly old folk). It seems a pity that as you can have differing Desktop types across Ubuntu there has not been one that has been constant (I accept classic gnome for Unity is quite good). When I do occasionally go back to WinXP it is refreshing that everything is exactly the same as it always was. Although I hate/detest/etc Windows I have to admit that the unchanging look and feel of their Desktop, over time, is great for users.

[HermanAB]

With Linux, you have choice. You don't have to use Unity/Gnome3 if you don't like it. Why torture yourself and then complain about it?

[BigSilly]

With Linux, you have choice. You don't have to use Unity/Gnome3 if you don't like it. Why torture yourself and then complain about it?

Absolutely. I myself am using KDE with Kubuntu. Same distro, different interface. Try it.

[Jakin]

I agree with Big Silly, try KDE- you can set KDE basic desktop interface up (for the most part) to look and feel like Gnome2 if thats what you and those you talk about are comfortable with - you will of course need to learn a few new ways to deal with administration.

Also there is MATE (fork of Gnome2).

[BigSilly]

Of course, if you want KDE to look like Gnome 2, then there's something wrong with you.

:D

[Jakin]

Theres nothing wrong with a single panel for everything, nor is there anything wrong with a dual panel layout, and KDE's classic menu (works just like gnome2) either. Just depends what you are comfortable with.


Point is it can be done! :D http://ompldr.org/vZjFpOA/snapshot17.png (example of what i mean)

[Kalanac]

With recent versions of Ubuntu you can drop back to the Gnome2 desktop at login by selecting Ubuntu 2D from the session menu. This will then become the default until it's changed again.

Finding Windows XP to be the exact same layout it's always been isn't really much of a shock, it's no longer being developed, just patched every now and then. If you updated to Windows 7 you'd find a very different layout and behaviour indeed :)

As mentioned by others, the great thing about Linux and Ubuntu is choice. If you don't like unity (and many don't) you are free to install something which suits you better :) Change is inevitable, some like and embrace it, some avoid it. With windows, you'd just have to roll with it (though perhaps you can regress the desktop to old layout and behaviours, I've never really checked) and you have few easy options to change things to the way you want.

[Merk42]

So you're saying that Ubuntu has changed from 8.04 to 12.04 but Windows hasn't changed from XP to... XP? Shocking!

[Kalanac]

Merk, was that comment necessary?

[Vakman]

So you're saying that Ubuntu has changed from 8.04 to 12.04 but Windows hasn't changed from XP to... XP? Shocking!

Haha. Yes, Windows has changed as well if you upgrade from XP. If you were to go from XP to even Vista/7, there are some changes for sure. Then if you were to make the jump to Windows 8, well, if you don't go to the Desktop and stay in the Metro interface, some much bigger changes will be in store for you.

Things change. As they should.

Merk, was that comment necessary?
I think it was :P.

[Kalanac]

Quarkrad's point is valid if a little uninformed. People come to these forums for help and advice, not sarcasm.

As the great Bill and Ted say:

"Be excellent to one another"

[tartalo]

Not uninformed. He just says things we don't like to hear.

[kostkon]

The same can be said for Windows; try going from XP to Windows 8 in one go...

[lykwydchykyn]

When Microsoft Office 2007 came out, there was a hew and cry about the ribbon interface, and of course the FLOSS community touted OpenOffice since it had the good old menu interface everone loves.

Five years later, the clangor has died down about the ribbon, and the most common commentary I hear from Office users about Open/LibreOffice is that it "looks outdated".

The point is that, despite the fact that change is painful and rarely welcomed, keeping the old-school alive is not a winning strategy.

[doorknob60]

Maybe it's because XP is 11 years old, OF COURSE IT HASN'T CHANGED! If anyone still uses XP as their primary OS, you're crazy. 11 years old is completely ancient in technology standards, I don't get why people still use that dinosaur. Did people still use Windows 3.1 in 2002?

[lykwydchykyn]

Maybe it's because XP is 11 years old, OF COURSE IT HASN'T CHANGED! If anyone still uses XP as their primary OS, you're crazy. 11 years old is completely ancient in technology standards, I don't get why people still use that dinosaur. Did people still use Windows 3.1 in 2002?

To be fair, it may have been released 11 years ago, but it's not like development stopped at that point. There were 3 service packs in the intervening years, and it's still supported until 2014.

To put it into another perspective, GNOME 2 was originally released in 2002, and people still want to use it. But it's not like the code hasn't changed since 2002.

[Quarkrad]

I myself use Unity and tend to adopt all/most new things - but then, to a degree, my PC is bit like a mecano set and I like to play. But I do see the point of some of the (elderly) people I look after. It takes them an age to get use to what they do - not only do they want the interface to look the same but the workflow/how it works to be the same as well. Perhaps using XP is not fair but even for myself, editing video and producing DVDs I find the trusted software that I know and can use in XP still allows me to produce good DVDs. The software(s) do not work on Vista/7/8, only XP, but I do not have HD so for me, it does the job perfectly. I have played with Mate, Cinnamon but there are issues, in an ideal world there would be an option to have the interface/workflow the same or to have development improvements. But we do not live in an ideal world so I guess ubuntu classic is the best we are going to get. A pity some people get old and do not want the way they work to change - just to stay the same. (E.g. the way File, Edit, View, etc disappears and only reappears when you put the cursor in a certain place - some just do not like it. Yes, there is the global menu change but it is not consistent in all windows so just confuses more).

[Kalanac]

Windows XP is a lot more stable than the festering wart that is Vista at least :D

[Jakin]

I believe win7 far more stable than XP and vista combined, though.

[vexorian]

Ribbons are still awful and a change for the sake of change that does not feel more efficient. It is just that people got familiar with them. One day LibreOffice will add ribbons, two years later Microsoft will switch back to task bars and people will begin saying that LibreOffice looks updated for still having ribbons.


I have been using Ubuntu since 8.04 and am a newbie when it comes to Linux. Having come from the ******* world I've converted, and look after, about 12 machines for family and friends as they got fed up with the slowing down of Windows and me having to rebuild their PC's. So Ubuntu has been great but .... and I can see/sympathise with my BUT. Ubuntu has improved over the past years but in terms of the interface it has changed, things are not the same. Gnome 2 to Unity was a big change and now I read Nautilus is the change with (slightly) reduced functionality. All these small changes has caused grief to varying degrees across those I have converted (some are fairly old folk). It seems a pity that as you can have differing Desktop types across Ubuntu there has not been one that has been constant (I accept classic gnome for Unity is quite good). When I do occasionally go back to WinXP it is refreshing that everything is exactly the same as it always was. Although I hate/detest/etc Windows I have to admit that the unchanging look and feel of their Desktop, over time, is great for users.
There is a flaw in this post.

You are comparing windows XP, an OS that is 11 years old not with a single Ubuntu version but with various ubuntu versions.

Yes, the change of gnome 2 to unity is quite not easy to bear. But windows has changed to. From windows XP to vista, from vista to windows 7 and finally to windows 8. I think your friends would have the same grievances about changing from windows XP to windows 8.

Just like there is nothing written that says that your friends should change windows XP to windows 8, there is nothing that says you had to make them upgrade to ubuntu with unity, is there? If they are happy with 11 years old windows, they shall be happy with 3 years old ubuntu.

[lykwydchykyn]

But we do not live in an ideal world so I guess ubuntu classic is the best we are going to get. A pity some people get old and do not want the way they work to change - just to stay the same.

You do know Linux offers a lot more conservative options than Ubuntu; Debian and CentOS come immediately to mind. Either of those, combined with a more conservative desktop like XFCE, would provide a very stable option for people who just want to get work done and not be on the bleeding edge.

Then there are any number of distros right now capitalizing on Ubuntu's move to Unity and GNOME's radical 3.x changes by offering a more "traditional desktop experience" -- Mint, Solus, or Zorin, just to name a few. Check them out.

Canonical's goals mean that Ubuntu is going to have to keep advancing and staying up with the ever-shifting trends of the technology industry. There's nothing wrong with not wanting that, but if that's the case, you don't want Ubuntu.

[madjr]

I have been using Ubuntu since 8.04 and am a newbie when it comes to Linux. Having come from the ******* world I've converted, and look after, about 12 machines for family and friends as they got fed up with the slowing down of Windows and me having to rebuild their PC's. So Ubuntu has been great but .... and I can see/sympathise with my BUT. Ubuntu has improved over the past years but in terms of the interface it has changed, things are not the same. Gnome 2 to Unity was a big change and now I read Nautilus is the change with (slightly) reduced functionality. All these small changes has caused grief to varying degrees across those I have converted (some are fairly old folk). It seems a pity that as you can have differing Desktop types across Ubuntu there has not been one that has been constant (I accept classic gnome for Unity is quite good). When I do occasionally go back to WinXP it is refreshing that everything is exactly the same as it always was. Although I hate/detest/etc Windows I have to admit that the unchanging look and feel of their Desktop, over time, is great for users.

hi Quarkrad,

I dont really get the point of your first post.

If you want to compare a 2012 OS to another it would be windows 8, not XP (2002/3):

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Technology/Pix/pictures/2011/9/13/1315929218325/win8-start-460.jpg


Won't your folks complain on that ?


Also if you believe ubuntu is changing too much and doesnt look enough like XP anymore and you want an XP like clone then try KDE or linuxmint:

http://linuxmint.com/


good luck !!