Linux vs. Vista

[Craftycorner]

I got Linux going on in my new computer, along with Windows XP. However, when I need to scan/print/fax, I need to scan/print/fax! I am a convert to Linux, I just don't have the horsepower under the hood to have all I need and run Linux too under that old rustbucket's bonnet.

[idrinkwhisky]

Dear Frodon,

Thanks for your response. I am not really missing any multimedia plugins. Everything is working just fine for me. My point was that everything was just a real pain to get configured. For me personally it was no problem as I enjoyed learning about Ubuntu Linux.

The thing is that I thought that all of this might be less enjoyable for my mom/dad. So my comment should be viewed from that perspective: if Linux wants to beat Vista than it should become easier for the general public.

drinkwhisky

[electrogeek]

Six years of Windows ME.
NET RESULT: Ubuntu ;)

*Sends a boquet of flowers to Bill Gates*

WOW! Did you say 6 years of ME? You ran one of the worst operating systems ever created by Microsoft for 6 years?! That must be a record. That O.S. was a nightmare! I'm sure you weren't running anything other than games I hope. I am digging Ubuntu Edgy however I am having issues getting Vmware, Photoshop and other apps to run. WINE is being a beeotch to get things to run. Vmware needs a C compiler loaded to finish the install. I like the idea of Ubuntu but it's turning out to be quite a challenge to get it tweaked. At least you can transfer it to another machine without being hassled by MS!

[lori.ann]

I've come on board to Ubuntu, using this forum to help me struggle through the setup stages (I don't know much about computers, but I'm learning), because hearing about a NEW Windows come out made me realize that all my Windows stuff would soon be outdated and I'd have to buy upgrades and new programs. That's ridiculous, I thought, and was proved right in the past week I've been using Ubuntu, finding OpenOffice serving all my needs in that area and the operating system in general working just fine. So, for other college kids like me, after hearing me talk about linux for the next several months or however they find out about it, I imagine people will come to linux who don't have the cash to upgrade MS stuff.

[Sunnz]

WOW! Did you say 6 years of ME? You ran one of the worst operating systems ever created by Microsoft for 6 years?! That must be a record. That O.S. was a nightmare! I'm sure you weren't running anything other than games I hope. I am digging Ubuntu Edgy however I am having issues getting Vmware, Photoshop and other apps to run. WINE is being a beeotch to get things to run. Vmware needs a C compiler loaded to finish the install. I like the idea of Ubuntu but it's turning out to be quite a challenge to get it tweaked. At least you can transfer it to another machine without being hassled by MS!
I am not too surprising... I have been running ME for 3+ years too and luckily I never had any problem.

I didn't even know ME was suppose to be the worst OS out there. Does it crash a lot what not?

[kallu_be]

The biggest problem I have found with getting Linux to the desktop is marketing. I hav switch so many people to Ubutnu, and all thanks to Microsoft. Saddly, these people had never heard of Linux. If we could find ways to educate people, it would help. To be honest, unless someone has a problem with their PC they really don't want to hear me talk abiut Linux. It is like I am trying to get them to go to church or something.

Its not about marketing ... apple does a lot of marketing about mac but it still didn't grab market share from MS. Its the developer base that matters. Ace developers in linux are busy in developing linux kernel and other window managers where the quality of other appications is lacking. Programming windows applications is lot more easy than in linux where libraries are still fragmented.
Eg: Macromedia has taken lots of time in developing flash plugin , reason they had given is the developers have a lot of pain in optimizing the compiler for flash runtime.

Once the libraries of the linux are sanitized then i expect the application base of the linux will increase.

[lyceum]

Its not about marketing ... apple does a lot of marketing about mac but it still didn't grab market share from MS. Its the developer base that matters. Ace developers in linux are busy in developing linux kernel and other window managers where the quality of other appications is lacking. Programming windows applications is lot more easy than in linux where libraries are still fragmented.
Eg: Macromedia has taken lots of time in developing flash plugin , reason they had given is the developers have a lot of pain in optimizing the compiler for flash runtime.

Once the libraries of the linux are sanitized then i expect the application base of the linux will increase.


Mac's marketing is awesome, but their computers are too expensive. Before I found out about Linux, I wanted to go Mac, but couldn't afford it. I have many friends that feel the same way, Macs are good, but who has the money? Right now you can get a new windows PC for around $250. If you know nothing about PC's and were light on cash, which would you get?

With the Novell/MS deal, maybe that will help companies (developers) realize that Linux is a platform they need to be worrying about. Just a thought.

I can't say that their isn't still work to do in the Linux/FOSS world, but that doesn't mean that they don't work for a desktop. There are still lots of free replacement programs out there. I read an article from the Mac site a while back where they rated a Linux just under one of their PC's. They said that Firefox was equal to or better than Safari, but that everything else still needed work. They did state that GNU/Linux/FOSS was better than Microsoft. No real point there, just thought that was cool. If I can find it, I'll edit this and link it.

[kallu_be]

Mac's marketing is awesome, but their computers are too expensive. Before I found out about Linux, I wanted to go Mac, but couldn't afford it. I have many friends that feel the same way, Macs are good, but who has the money? Right now you can get a new windows PC for around $250. If you know nothing about PC's and were light on cash, which would you get?

With the Novell/MS deal, maybe that will help companies (developers) realize that Linux is a platform they need to be worrying about. Just a thought.

I can't say that their isn't still work to do in the Linux/FOSS world, but that doesn't mean that they don't work for a desktop. There are still lots of free replacement programs out there. I read an article from the Mac site a while back where they rated a Linux just under one of their PC's. They said that Firefox was equal to or better than Safari, but that everything else still needed work. They did state that GNU/Linux/FOSS was better than Microsoft. No real point there, just thought that was cool. If I can find it, I'll edit this and link it.

I used to have lots of discussions with my friends regarding "this OS is better than this" but i finally concluded to be neutral regarding this subject.

Ur statement "GNU/Linux/FOSS was better than Microsoft" will not be taken as granted as things go relative all the time.

From my exp i found that microsoft windows is like "Jack of all, Master of none" type which makes it compelling for majority of users(If u want to play a game worth 60$, i think there is no big deal in purchasing widows home which worth less than 90$). GNU/Linux/FOSS sure produced some of the masterpieces like kernel, firefox etc, but majority of the apps looks like prototypes to me where we had to kill some time configuring the things to get them work.

[lyceum]

I used to have lots of discussions with my friends regarding "this OS is better than this" but i finally concluded to be neutral regarding this subject.

Ur statement "GNU/Linux/FOSS was better than Microsoft" will not be taken as granted as things go relative all the time.

From my exp i found that microsoft windows is like "Jack of all, Master of none" type which makes it compelling for majority of users(If u want to play a game worth 60$, i think there is no big deal in purchasing widows home which worth less than 90$). GNU/Linux/FOSS sure produced some of the masterpieces like kernel, firefox etc, but majority of the apps looks like prototypes to me where we had to kill some time configuring the things to get them work.

It wasn't my statement, but I do use Ubuntu because I think it is better (of course) but I don't think MS is total crap. I would a agree they are the Jack of all, master of none. But in the future, I do think that FOSS will be the best software, as it is created by users and maintained by comunities. The more people use FOSS the better things are/will be as there are more people to find and fix the bugs.

I have to agree though that the way things look is important and can be improved in some areas.

[Cannaregio]

I bet vista will definitely help the spread of free software.

It's frills and intrusion against substance... serious substance and freedom... serious freedom: Linux -as we all know- is a real bliss for anyone coming from windoze: no more need for hundreds of crap programs running in the background... those horrible norton-cans-of-worms, buggy antivirus appz, broken firewalls, evil rootkits, all sorts of windozian malwares, tons of useless commercial crap phoning home and siphoning your data.

While I agree that the fact that windows comes and will come pre-installed on new boxes will guarantee its majority market share for a very long time, vista-blunder or not, I do really believe that the number of pre-installed linux boxes will grow (from insignificant to significant) during the next months/years.

This, together with the appearence of 'really easy' linux distros à la Ubuntu, could trigger the famous "critical mass" factor against the commercial bastards. Let's hope that these 'really easy' distros will remain 'free from frill' and not sell their soul for a couple of proprietary drivers :-(

Of course we shouldn't underestimate the 'gamers' aspect of windows: as long as the gnu/linux community continues to underestimate the 'gaming' aspect, windows will keep its only valid edge. It's not a coincidence imho, that microsoft has made fortunes ALSO with flight simulator and age of empires & co.

Just my 2 eurocents

[BLTicklemonster]

Pirate or not, I'm just a cheap B*st*rd. That's why I use Ubuntu.

[kiyometane]

I know vista, xp and now i got ubuntu 2 weeks ago.
I'm a windows pro user but i decided to make a final move to linux.
Has a gamer, i fing it better to play my video games xp or linux.
Hardware requirements for Vista is to Higher compared to Windows Xp, for the same task.
Hardware requirement of video games such as battlefield 2142 is higher than xp, even in memory.
vista require almost twice as much ram as to xp in gaming.
the graphism is still less impressive than beryl/compiz on linux

[Craftycorner]

I think there is an underestimation on just how many Linux boxes are out there. Linux is notoriously easy on the resources (depending on the distro). From what I hear, many people are putting Linux on the older computers and saving the sleek new machines for gaming. I don't know a lot about gaming, but Windows is still hot snot on the block for that. The older computer that used to run an orphan Windows OS now sporting Linux is not as easy to count as the sleek new machine sporting Microsoft in the stores leaving a paper trail.

[d3br074]

This is an easy question. First of all, my dad subscribes to MSDN so he got the finished version of vista alreay for trial. It is the completed version but the public doesn't have it yet. I have tried it out and I will say this about it. It does have a very cool feel too it...lots of emphasis on usability and is fun to use. Unfortunatly, Ubuntu still has Windows beaten. It even has the Vista aero effects crushed with beryl, compiz, OpenGL, whatever. And you don't need a mega computer to run linux with better effects. Better luck next time windows!

[dbbolton]

This is an easy question. First of all, my dad subscribes to MSDN so he got the finished version of vista alreay for trial. It is the completed version but the public doesn't have it yet. I have tried it out and I will say this about it. It does have a very cool feel too it...lots of emphasis on usability and is fun to use. Unfortunatly, Ubuntu still has Windows beaten. It even has the Vista aero effects crushed with beryl, compiz, OpenGL, whatever. And you don't need a mega computer to run linux with better effects. Better luck next time windows!
well put.

everything that i have read/heard about vista indicates (to me) that it is ridiculously inefficient, and, as you said implicitly, the eye-candy tradeoff simply isn't worth it when compared to beryl and ubuntu's effeciency.

when i ran xp on my laptop, it repeatedly overheated to the point that the hard drive was destroyed. after installing ubuntu (and getting the hard drive replaced), i haven't had any problems with heat- even with insane uptime. i think if i used vista on that same computer, it would instantly turn into silicate lava.

[Johnsie]

Ubuntu isnt much good to normal non-geek noob people if they cannot run their favourite programs or work with the drivers supplied with their hardware. I hate to say it but a lot of non-linux users would need a lot more compatibility between Linux and Windows so that they can use software they are already happy and familiar with. I prefer Linux but not everyone wants a retrain, especially people who like what they've already got.

[BuffaloX]

It seems like some people thinks eye candy is unimportant.
It's not! At least for some of us.
Would you rather have a cool car with extras, than the plain version?
All the extra equipment may not be needed, the cool color doesn't make the car one bit better. matching bumpers doesn't increase mileage, but people pay for it anyway. I would NEVER buy a sh..t brown car!

I used two days looking for a panel clock replacement!
The standard panel clock can't change font or color or backround.
In fact It can't do anything but showing the time. BOOORRRIIINNG :p

I actually switched to Mepis, because it looks better. Then I decided to go back to Ubuntu, and this time really try to make it look and feel the way I want. It took me FIVE days.
But now I have a really cool desktop, with most of the functionality I want.

I also used almost one day, before finally finding fusesmb, so I can browse my network from any apps like I like it.

Edgy is a step in the right direction, but it's not cool enough to attract the majority of users.

I know nothing about how to program SMP into the kernel, or if it's working at 80 or 90 % efficiency.
But animated floating clouds for my weatherreport on my desktop, THAT could be sooo cool.

[scrooge_74]

The final solution besides preinstalling Ubuntu, would be for someone to write one *** kick malvare Windows distroyer that will wipe out all MS OS from all machines once and for all. Maybe then people will finally change

:D

[spockrock]

my personal opinion ubuntu pretty much trashes vista, and I have my windows friends ooogling, and drooling when they see my desktop....sufficed to say, I doubt it will trash vista where it matters, market share. There is the stigma that its a nerds operating system.....

[skale]

Responding to the "windows is easier to fix" statement (I forget who said it), has anyone tried to make sense of the Microsoft Kowledge Base? I remember few years back, when I switched to Breezy.

Here is what I had to work with, for Windows 98:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/188867/EN-US/

I had to do that, because we lost the 98 CD, could not upgrade from 98 to XP Pro without upgrading to XP Home first (don't ask why, but Microsoft said this specifically). I don't have a Home CD, even though we bought a Dell with it, because it did not ship with the CD. So, in effect, we were screwed. That is, until Ubuntu 5.whatever came along, and it worked hassle-free (relatively). Now, it's on three of five computers in the house (one has Windows and the other has Arch Linux). And there have been no serious hassles yet.

First of all, I don't think that adding the beryl and the god-awful jiggling menus will help sell the distro. I have pressed many a wrong button when I tried out the Xgl, once I got used to that, I just found it irritating.

What you should focus on doing is putting a CD in the hands of as many people as you can, and making sure it goes smoothly when they install it. That means, yes, it would have to include the binary video drivers. Also, some built-in ndiswrapper support would be nice. Shipping with automatix would be nice, but of some of you cannot stomach it, leave it out. The only reaso I went back to windows periodically is when I got sick of the hardware issues. I suppose that that is a problem with Linux in general, and not just Ubuntu.

While silly eye candy gimmicks I don't think are important at all, even my mother managed to change the theme and screensaver on XP. It's my guess that people will prefer that to window jiggling. Actually, I think trying to compete on the advanced graphics front is sort of playig to a weakness. I suppose it would be more rewarding to advertise yourself as a simple, free, no BS, ware-free operating system where you just pop it in and go.

[Magnes]

The only thing where Ubuntu can't trump Vista is applications base - professional apps and games. I use dual boot because of it. I have friends who would change to linux if their games where on it, if they could use their programs. That's why I think WINE is essential.

[steven8]

I think Ubuntu already trumps Vista. In the culture and ideals, not in the eye candy. Linux has an underlying theme that says it can work on new and old machines. It can keep the people going who can't dole out for a new computer. THAT is the trump Ubuntu and most Linux OS's have on Vista. They are for everyone. Even those who haven't much to begin with.

While Vista will be on a heck of a lot of computers, Ubuntu is the everyman's OS!

[raovq]

games.

the only reason most people will buy a copy of vista is directx 10. they want vista to play the newest and best games. i know the fact that game producers do not design for linux is out of the hands of ubuntu staff, it is still a hurdle needed to be overcome.

also, lets say i gave an ubuntu computer to someone. i have installed beryl, firefox and the base system. they use it and come across some flash content; "hang on, ill just download a beta version of flash 9". then they come accross some quicktime content online, "two seconds...", then some real player content "this will take a while...", and lastly some encyrpted windows media player content, "im sorry, that won't work".

then they wish to print something. "your printer isn't supported, so the best we can do is one page at a time". or an example i just came accross yesterday, wanting to transfer data off my phone. "im sorry, there are no linux drivers".


there are countless examples of basic things not working to an acceptable level in linux. some can be overcome with random repositories and messing around with source, but that is hardly a simple process for so many people. posting on a forum like this is completely foriegn to so many people. sure, anyone reading this will look at linuxprinting.org before buying a printer, and avoid any hardware that is uncommon, and even post for answers, but how many times can you tell a windows user "im sorry, it won't work propery" before they just scrap the whole thing and buy vista?

ubuntu is great, and i use it almost exclusively (except for printing, games, my phone, occasional web media....), but it is not going to be ready to combat windows or OSX for a long time.

[scrooge_74]

Do you know how many times i have come across XP PCs without quick time or Media Player or movies that don't run because you have to download codecs and things like that? The average user don't have a clue what all that means.

All the usual call, how do I set up this printer (in XP), I can't see my lan or I can't print to the Lan printer, or Peachtree is not running, it was fine yesterday.

I do think Ubuntu is either ready or almost ready for the masses, if I can get an 11 and a 9 year old to log on, plus a beautifull lawyer with no idea of what is going on behind the display, i think Ubuntu is on the right track.

[daz4126]

Ubuntu pretty much worked out of the box for me. And anything that didn't I had a good time trying to figure it out ... and learnt so much about how my computer worked in the process.

These forums are such a plus for Ubuntu. On many occasions I have looked for solutions to Windows problems online, only to be told that I have to pay to see the solution. There seems to be a culture of paying for things in the Windows world, rather than the community spirit found in the Linux world.

The 6 month release cycle (as opposed to 6 years!!) has to be another plus point.

DAZ

[B0rsuk]

The ironic thing is that Ubuntu doesn't even have to try very hard. They simply have to make their system not suck. In this particular scenario all Ubuntu has to do is to NOT do vista's mistakes.

[red_Marvin]

Ubuntu isnt much good to normal non-geek noob people if they cannot run their favourite programs or work with the drivers supplied with their hardware. I hate to say it but a lot of non-linux users would need a lot more compatibility between Linux and Windows so that they can use software they are already happy and familiar with. I prefer Linux but not everyone wants a retrain, especially people who like what they've already got.

There is an opposite view too; that those apps are not very good for a non geek since they are developed for and only run on a single operative system.:rolleyes:

[Brunellus]

There is an opposite view too; that those apps are not very good for a non geek since they are developed for and only run on a single operative system.:rolleyes:
take my mother. Her first extended computer time was on an Ubuntu system. She has a windows laptop now. She had me put an Ubuntu partition on it, because she was already used to Ubuntu.

[sloggerkhan]

Something interesting: when you call Ubuntu by Ubuntu and not Linux or Ubuntu linux, I think people are often more willing to listen initially.

2nd, I've heard that big PC vendors have agreements with MS to pay more for windows if they sell more than a very small number of computers without it. So they don't sell many with alternate OS's because it would make their windows comps cost more. Is this true? If this is true, isn't somehow illegal? Like a kickback or collusive or anticompetitive?

Also, With Beryl, I agree that shaking windows maybe ought to default to off or a very small value, but what it needs even more than shaky windows is a simplified control panel/preferences dialogue.

And a MAJOR key to getting people to use Ubuntu is the benefits it will have for people on older systems. Generally speaking,it's a lot easier to convince people with computers about 2-4 years old to make the switch because the live CD runs new stuff better than windows does for many of them.



warning: off topic.

I have never understood why gamers spend 1000s on a PC gaming rig when they could just spend 100s on a console. But, hey I'm no gamer, maybe there is a difference...

DAZ

1. TVs before hi-def had REALLY low res screens. Eyes died in 30 minutes or less.

2. MICE + KEYBOARDS PWNS on controller pads. Sorry to burst bubbles, but hardcore Console Players using console controllers will get owned in the same game by someone using a mouse and keyboard.

3. If you are going to buy a computer, why buy a console too?

I do agree that there is really no need pay more than $1200 for computer,even for gamers, ever. (you know, excluding stuff like render farms and scientific computing.)

[addicted68098]

Well its simple their is no advantage to own Windows Vista, its the same thing as XP.
Here are the main advantages that Ubuntu has!
Low Cost Of Ownership Speedy Specs Great GUI No Spyware or Viruses Free Great Support Ease of Use

It isn't as easy to use as Microsoft because it hasn't completly aborted the command line.

[addicted68098]

warning: off topic.



1. TVs before hi-def had REALLY low res screens. Eyes died in 30 minutes or less.

2. MICE + KEYBOARDS PWNS on controller pads. Sorry to burst bubbles, but hardcore Console Players using console controllers will get owned in the same game by someone using a mouse and keyboard.

3. If you are going to buy a computer, why buy a console too?

I do agree that there is really no need pay more than $1200 for computer,even for gamers, ever. (you know, excluding stuff like render farms and scientific computing.)

I think Console games usually offer a better expirence, (not Xbox of course). There are only a couple good PC games that come out every year compared with the haundreds of good console games that come out every year.

[Peyton]

To be honest, I don't think that the whole cavalier attitude is going to get the Ubuntu community, or the Linux community in general, very far. I think that in order for Ubuntu to be successful, the community has to get out and show people what's good about Ubuntu.

[bobbybobington]

Show people that there is an alternative to windows, most people think windows=computer. One person at a time... it will go up exponentially. Don't let kids get used to vista, if you have some get them used to ubie/linux. Lobby your local public schools everybody wins. Get some fellow ubie users and set up displays at local festivals/fairs/whatnot. Even though ms has millions to throw at advertising, word of mouth and a positive experience are the best advertising. To sum it up the community, you and me is what can ultimately trump vista.

[Johnsie]

I think my point was that not everyone wants to be retrained and Ubuntu still doesn't work as well with some hardware as Windows does. Fix that and it would be easy to trump vista.

I haven't used Vista final yet so I dont know how good/bad it's going to be. I'm assuming that most people here haven't either.

[BoyOfDestiny]

Ok I haven't read through the thread. However, there is one area where GNU/Linux trumps Vista absolutely.

I can install it on a machine without phoning home, without entering any codes. No BigBrother.

I can copy the install CD without being called a "pirate". Same goes for installing one copy on multiple machines.

We have live CDs too, a functionality windows lacks.

I can run it in a virtual machine without violating a EULA.

I am allowed to sell my GNU/Linux OS.

I know it doesn't apply to everyone, but longhorn/vistas proposed draconian features are what drove me away more than any other aspects (ok, the security issues did play a role too...)

[Polygon]

ive also heard horror stories on people running the beta about the drm of vista

example:

a engineer for some company installed vista beta on his laptop to make sure the drivers his company was making are working properly. He did not need an internet connection, so his laptop did not have a wireless card and he didnt not bother to set one up

but the fun thing about vista is, that even if you buy it from a licenced offical whatever dealer, you still have to activate it, even if you didnt install the os or even touch it.

if you did NOT activate it however, vista locks your computer and the only thing you can run is a web browser

back to the engineer guy: he didnt even know about this activation crap and he got locked out of his computer, with the only thing that he could use was a web browser... except that he had not set up a network card or adapter so he did not have internet, and couldent even activate the computer if he wanted to

stupid microsoft :rolleyes:

moral of the story: people, espeically power users are going to get fed up with windows, especially when they upgrade major components like the motherboard or cpu and vista requires to to reactivate, except you can only activate your vista copy once, forcing them to buy a new copy of vista. And with all this talk of linux in the news (like the french parliment switching to linux, etc) people are going to be trying it out, some will love it and spread it around, and some will hate it and go back to windows. But eventually, it will catch on, and with distros like ubuntu making it easier and easier to install and more hardware gets supported out of teh box, it will not be long until linux in general gets more and more popular among common people.

[koshari]

i agree that its all about awareness,

i have built a few amarok jukeboxes for friends, now all my friends friends want one...so i have a few more to build, they see it operating and say, "no way wow where did you get that .."

as for the product activation any windows poweruser already has that figured out.... but i agree the closer windows gets to being unpiratable tho closer it gets to being railroaded in the home market,

as for production machines iam afraid the old addage "nobody ever got fired for buying microsoft" is still as relevent as ever.

[skale]

ive also heard horror stories on people running the beta about the drm of vista

example:

a engineer for some company installed vista beta on his laptop to make sure the drivers his company was making are working properly. He did not need an internet connection, so his laptop did not have a wireless card and he didnt not bother to set one up

but the fun thing about vista is, that even if you buy it from a licenced offical whatever dealer, you still have to activate it, even if you didnt install the os or even touch it.

if you did NOT activate it however, vista locks your computer and the only thing you can run is a web browser

back to the engineer guy: he didnt even know about this activation crap and he got locked out of his computer, with the only thing that he could use was a web browser... except that he had not set up a network card or adapter so he did not have internet, and couldent even activate the computer if he wanted to

stupid microsoft :rolleyes:

moral of the story: people, espeically power users are going to get fed up with windows, especially when they upgrade major components like the motherboard or cpu and vista requires to to reactivate, except you can only activate your vista copy once, forcing them to buy a new copy of vista. And with all this talk of linux in the news (like the french parliment switching to linux, etc) people are going to be trying it out, some will love it and spread it around, and some will hate it and go back to windows. But eventually, it will catch on, and with distros like ubuntu making it easier and easier to install and more hardware gets supported out of teh box, it will not be long until linux in general gets more and more popular among common people.


It would, until someone cracks it. I remember reading that the Vista CD comes with all versions, but you need to activate the pricier versions. Unless they have some genius security, it's pretty obvious what will happen.

[Rodneyck]

@nalmeth

I agree with you. I feel strongly that software should be free and make every effort to use only free software, but sometimes my principles have to be sacrificed because everybody else doesn't share them and send me stuff that they say is standard and I say is propriety rubbish.

Being a pragmatist, I still think that if you can get people to switch (using eye candy or whatever) then they will eventually see the light (hopefully...)

DAZ

I agree, people will always follow the brightest, shiniest object, so make it slick and desirable.

However, the biggest attraction, especially for Ubuntu, is their marketing. They have done an excellent job at presenting themselves as a package, logo, colors, snappy website that is simple and inviting. They did the Microsoft/Apple guide illustrating that the OS will work with all computing needs, easily. It sort of panders to the meek computer user creating a bridge. Excellent, I say!

What they are missing, as mentioned previously, is an easy way to learn about the things that are not going to work once installed and why (very important), such as codecs (DVD and some music players), video card drivers, popular media players and PDF viewers (Adobe), etc. I like the fact that Ubuntu, currently, does not support these, but in doing so they should immediately inform the user why and how to get them if they want them, again, easily (providing links or maybe an installer with a licensing warning or something that by signing the USER takes full responsibility for their actions and relieves Ubuntu of any.)

The worst thing for my transition was being left in the dark after install as to why my DVD was not playing and what exactly I needed to get to play and how. This is what turns away other OS crossover users IMO. Linux is a different animal. One I happen to enjoy despite it's learning curve.

[argie]

...

What they are missing, as mentioned previously, is an easy way to learn about the things that are not going to work once installed and why (very important), such as codecs (DVD and some music players), video card drivers, popular media players and PDF viewers (Adobe), etc. I like the fact that Ubuntu, currently, does not support these, but in doing so they should immediately inform the user why and how to get them if they want them, again, easily (providing links or maybe an installer with a licensing warning or something that by signing the USER takes full responsibility for their actions and relieves Ubuntu of any.)

I think this is a brilliant idea. Saying "X and Y won't work because of legal issues blah blah blah. Please visit http://thislink.ubuntu.com/" would be a great idea.

[cvmostert]

I have not even seen Microsoft Vista or even a Beta of it... does not really bother me. I can do what i need with UBUNTU. IF i buy another pc, it will probably have vista or osx on it... but i will install ubuntu on it aswell (real fast) I have been using UBUNTU for too long to use some other OS "only"

my 2c

[ddbann]

I never thought I would use Linux until it just happenned. we were renting a computer for $37 a week an aon older pc with fedora 2 came available for $60. we bought it and put ubuntu on it. rental dell goes back. if we buy a new machine i will get a lower end new comp and probably put ubuntu on it. like a $400 -$500 comoputer. not a $1,000 plus pc

[velkymx]

I think the latest version of Ubuntu definately is viable vs Vista. If I wasnt getting a free version of Vista, I would be making the switch!

[gn2]

Ah the old Apples-V-Oranges dispute rages on.

Ubuntu=Free=Yes please!

Vista=$£$£Lots=No thanks!

[max.diems]

*bumpitybumpbumpbump*
Also, having to get a new computer vs. being able to use an old pentium

[RAV TUX]

moving to windows discussion forum

[drphilngood]

...Also, having to get a new computer vs. being able to use an old pentium

Best one yet and a huge incentive to use linux. It saves you money!

[holylucifer]

Theres 2 types of gamers, PC gamers and console gamers. I'm a PC gamer, and I will not be satisfied with a Wii, Xbox, or PS2/3. I like playing games on my PC and that is the only reason why I still have a Windows partition. I hope that Vista is a flop and gets more people to switch to Linux or a Mac so developers will develop for the growing market, even if its in addition to Windows. Props to ID for their linux versions.

use consoles for Games , and Ubuntu os for the computer(and learn about the command line codes),these windows os's are designed to be spy tools.

[tommcd]

Here are all the reasons why Vista will be a "success"
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2006/pulpit_20061208_001308.html
You ain't got no choice! If you want a choice, use linux.

[holylucifer]

Wheres the actual facts in that, its more propaganda,then facts.

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2006/pulpit_20061208_001308.html

Windows Vista is finally here, a shadow of what it was once supposed to be, but here nonetheless, and now the pundits are holding forth on whether or not Microsoft's new operating system will succeed and out of that market number bet soup basicly the same features. What a waste of good punditry: of course Vista will succeed to ignorant people, and those who think it will fail simply do not know what they are talking about.

There have been good operating systems from Microsoft and bad operating systems from Microsoft, but of those only one that I know of can truly be said to have failed -- Bob, the so-called social interface operating system I always figured was really named after me.

Bob was a functional failure, a user catastrophe, but Microsoft had weathered those before. Remember DOS 4? What might have made Bob fail was its design, which was flawed to say the least, or as my mother would put it -- crappy. But what ALLOWED Bob to fail was something much different -- the fact that the operating system wasn't strategic for Microsoft OR for users. Nobody needed Bob and nobody was forced to use him against their will, which sounds a lot like my old dating life but is actually more profound than that. Microsoft practically guaranteed that Bob would fail by creating no artificial situation (say the forced retirement of the last pre-Bob OS) that forced people to use Bob whether they wanted to or not.

Microsoft -- a company that eventually knowsit programs insecure blatant mistakes -- will not make that particular mistake again, certainly not with Windows Vista, in which they have a $5 billion investment,where linux is free.

What we'll see for ourselves and read about over the next six months, then, are users complaining about Vista instability, an inevitably emerging vulnerability to hackers which windows is blatantly designed to breach security and this spyware crap is out of hand and which windows is designed to be designed for and not like linux, and applications that don't work as well as they do under XP. Enterprise customers will hold back in droves. But does any of that make Vista a failure? Nope.

Those who are trying to figure out if Vista will be successful haven't yet grasped the concept that Vista will be forced on the market, and in time it will be the only operating system you can buy from Microsoft. Of course it will be successful. Will people upgrade their existing systems? Of course not. Microsoft operating systems are always designed for future PC's so it uses more hard ware power to do basicly the same thing and rub the hardware companys back's, not for the installed base. Part of the plan is to make Vista work poorly on current computers so we'll all have to buy new ones to rub sales for hardware companys. This strategy has been around for years and there is no reason to believe we won't fall for it again. Sure, some percentage of people and firms will upgrade, but most of the upgrades will come with whole new computers.

Think back to the Windows 95 introduction, where one of the selling points was that the new OS would work fine on a 66 MHz 486 computer. The truth was that it would RUN on a 486, but not well, so after a try of Win95 on our old hardware, rather than go to some other operating system we all bought new machines. And we'll do that again with Vista where there does exist a design for unlimited ghz over-unity processers.

Following a trend that started with Windows 98, when consumers were hit with the double whammy of a new operating system that was hardware constrained and a new Internet culture that suddenly couldn't get enough storage or processor power, consumers will lead the Vista adoption cycle. But where home users go, corporations soon follow, because people aren't going to long tolerate work systems that are slower and less full-featured than what they have running in their kitchens.

And think about it, what's the alternative to Vista, but Windows XP? Those who don't jump to Vista right away will stick with XP, an operating system into which Microsoft will no longer be investing, making it even more profitable. So even if Microsoft loses they win. In 2007 at least, if people don't like Vista they will, for the most part, still stick with Microsoft rather than jumping to Linux or to the Mac. Maybe that will change in future years, but for 2007 at least, Microsoft's empire is secure and they know it.

this is edited by me,because its more propaganda then facts i say.

[tommcd]

What I meant was the reason Vista will be a success is that most people will have no other choice when buying a new computer, as the article said. Vista will be the only OS available to them, since MS will quickly retire XP. Most people will not want to install their own OS. If other OSs were more widely available preinstalled on PCs, many people might choose an alternative to MS OSs.

[ago]

What I meant was the reason Vista will be a success is that most people will have no other choice when buying a new computer, as the article said.

Except that this time the chinese will flood the market with $100 PCs with linux preinstalled. So in a couple of years you will have to choose between a big shiny desktop costing $1000 with Vista or a tiny desktop costing $100 with Linux. Both machines will do exactly the same thing (including 3D desktop), both will work out of the box. The main differences will be:

1) $900,
2) the linux machine will be already preloaded with all sort of software that you will have to purchase separately on the windows machine,
3) no DRM/TPM on the Linux machine,
4) better games for Windows.

[mewt]

use consoles for Games , and Ubuntu os for the computer(and learn about the command line codes),these windows os's are designed to be spy tools.


argh dude that's no reasoning >.< I am a hardcore computer gamer and the only reason why i keep windows is just for gaming..nothing more..dont tell me to use a console..consoles are GAY..totally useless...they are made for little ladies that play single player games and think they can pwn anyone when they have no skill at all...pcs are what need skill to play on and that is what everyone wants to play on >.<

[ago]

argh dude that's no reasoning >.< I am a hardcore computer gamer and the only reason why i keep windows is just for gaming..nothing more..dont tell me to use a console..consoles are GAY..totally useless...they are made for little ladies that play single player games and think they can pwn anyone when they have no skill at all...pcs are what need skill to play on and that is what everyone wants to play on >.<

True but,

1) hardocre gamers represent maybe 10-20% of the market, at most, the rest plays klondike and minesweeper + console games, so I doubt that hardocre games are such a decisive factor in OS success.

2) rebooting to play typical hardocore game is not such a hussle considering that most hardcore games cannot be "multitasked" with other apps and are usually played for extensive periods.

3) What was true of old consoles may not hold true for new generation consoles. All of them are basically PCs, they support keyboard/mouse and can be used in networking mode. I doubt that there will be such a neat distinction between console games and PC games.

Hardware compatibility is also not as important as people make it up to be. The real issue is having the OS preinstalled or not. If a system is preinstalled hardware is going to work out of the box, at most you might have some issues with exoteric USB peripherals (but less so on Linux than on a Mac). Windows comes preinstalled, OSX comes preinstalled, Linux does not (except for unknown online brands). But IMO that will change rapidly once the chinese enter the PC market with sub $100 "desktops". Granted not an offering for hardcore gamers, but for the rest it will do.

Interestingly, this thread was about Vista vs Linux, and most claims in favor of Vista seem to be about hardware compatibility and games. Which are not even due to techincal merits of the other OS... Ahh and the toxic TCP/DRM/WGA2 combo... Save the nicer default theme, all other points hold true for XP, so it seems to me that Vista as such poses little additional threats to be concerned about. In the meantime Linux keeps progressing at a very fast pace... Best point so far is that Vista will be a success independently of its technical merits simply because it will be preinstalled on each and every PC. I agree 100%. But, as mentioned, Linux might be preinstalled too, and not thanks to Dell or HP... Preinstallation is the key.

[Wall86]

I actually just installed Vista RC1 onto my desktop, all it had been was problem after problem,

1. my wireless card was NOT supported, and i guess NO d-link wireless cards/usb sticks, are supported, so i could not even check on updates to see if there where updates of any kind.

2. a plethera of other software that i could not use.

3. hardware, it ran decently, but it is a huge huge huge hardware hog, like i am talking like 75% of 1GB of RAM (just running ultimate) and like another 1.5 GB in PF

some good things?

1. WIDGETS!!! this has to be one of the best things i have seen windows do ever i think.

2. ....... ummm...... looks better then xp?

[boogiepop88]

I agree with Wall86 i installed it at work to learn and educate some fellow employees on a new operating system which can be scary for people. But problem after problem. It was so slow, clumsy of course. Premium was VERY resource heavy, and the little expose type thing they have put in isnt really all that useful. I myself will not use Vista at all. I think its going to be a trainwreck for Microsoft. If the RC that i used was indeed pretty much a finished version. I feel sorry for them and the problems they are going to have.


Long live Ubuntu!
Vive La Revolucion!

:mrgreen:

[FLPCGuy]

TPM sucks. Its real purpose is to allow M$ to control your computer. It spins this as security.

Roger that! and RIAA, FBI, CIA, etc.

[Wall86]

oh ya, my computer specs:

AMD Athlon 64 x2 3800 + (2.0Ghz)
1 GB RAM (no name)
bfg geforce 7300 gs oc'ed (575MHZ 256 MB GDDR RAM)


it did run semi smoothly (thank you dual core)

but for macrohard to right an operating system written mostly for such a newer technology that only computers built within the last year or so is kind of idiotic.

yes, it will run on older machine, well not run, more like walk, or crawl, but still it would be "functional" not useable.

so ya, if you want to drop your hard earned cash on an OS that will make your computer run uber slow go ahead, if you want to use a macrohard OS, i strongly suggest using XP,

the only reason tho that i did not continue testing it, i used it for a whole about 2 hours, was because i could not even connect to the internet, i could use it even if it did not recognise all of my hardware, but, no point in havign a computer not on the internet.

ya, and every where i have looked, it does not recognise ANY d-link hardware, i tried with the WDA-1320 PCI card, and USB WIFI card. neither worked, it is having problems with the "wlanapi.dll" as well as "wanapi.dll" not too too sure if those are the correct dll's but still, and D-link has not released any new drivers of any kind.

i would have to say that vista is goign to pull a ps3, everyone gets hyped up about it, but it is a complete flop when it hits the market,

so ya, Bravo Alpha MacroHard! you never cease to amaze me in your sheer idiocy...

[matchstich]

linux will never trump windows till linux becomes more user friendly. i have ubuntu and have been trying for 3 days now to get a scanner to work. on a windows box, this scanner would have working 3 days ago.
i am not going to windows, but, this is one thing that really needs to addressed.

[aysiu]

linux will never trump windows till linux becomes more user friendly. i have ubuntu and have been trying for 3 days now to get a scanner to work. on a windows box, this scanner would have working 3 days ago.
i am not going to windows, but, this is one thing that really needs to addressed.
That's circular logic if I've ever seen it.

So Windows always trumps because it trumps.

Wonderful.

Do you really think the scanner works on Windows because of anything wonderful that Windows does? Windows' support for hardware is pretty lacking--Ubuntu's is much better. On the other hand, hardware manufacturers' support for Windows is almost universal because... Windows is almost universal. If I made a scanner and wanted it to sell, do you think I'd make sure it works on Ubuntu and then not provide any Windows drivers for it? How long do you think my business would last?

By being the most popular, it's pretty easy to remain the most popular. The fact that Ubuntu support as many peripherals as it does is quite amazing considering the single-digit desktop market share Linux has.

Read more here:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CriticismFAQ#head-b3df9b3b424c7c689ce1b7fae199e35b5f71ca81

[tommcd]

Roger that! and RIAA, FBI, CIA, etc.
You are so right! This was the reason I decided to explore linux. I wanted to avoid dealing with all that crap and being forced to use vista. Even in winXP, we got "windows genuine advantage", which reports back to MS on a regular basis (and somehow manages to bypass software firewalls) to report who knows what! I'm soooo glad I made the choice to use linux.

[Cannaregio]

What they are missing, as mentioned previously, is an easy way to learn about the things that are not going to work once installed and why (very important), such as codecs (DVD and some music players), video card drivers, popular media players and PDF viewers (Adobe), etc. I like the fact that Ubuntu, currently, does not support these, but in doing so they should immediately inform the user why and how to get them if they want them, again, easily (providing links or maybe an installer with a licensing warning or something that by signing the USER takes full responsibility for their actions and relieves Ubuntu of any.)

I agree but with some caveats:
1) it is very important to explain WHY it would be foolish to use proprietary drivers in general but also, AND ESPECIALLY, in presence of an open (equal or better) alternative. And thus point not only to the 'install crap proprietary codecs' eventual link but *also* (even more important), pointing wherever possible to the 'install open alternative' link.
2) explain newcomers the concepts of 'stability' and 'edgeness' much more, and maybe prepare different basic start configurations (I know that would require a DVD and not a CD, but...): stable generic laptop, stable generic desktop, edgy generic laptop, edgy generic desktop.
Maybe introducing also some 'packages options': "wardriver" dream, "frills & gamer" dream, "openoffice productivity" dream, "IRC & chatter" dream...
3) explain more clearly that this is *not windows, not at all* but that Ubuntu is a) Linux (with all what this means) and also b) debian (with all what this means), and that if the users want real power, there's a steep learning involved. Don't tell people 'its just like windows', tell them the truth: 'its different that windows, that's exactly why I like it and why you'll probably like it as well'.

There's no way you can educate zombies and guinea pigs. They'll just do as they are told by the slavemasters. They are below the horizont.
Our targets are windows users with a minimum amount of brain, and they wont be scared because 'it is not like windows' or because they cannot find the start button.

Trying to trump Vista on useless eye-candies & frills is suicidal imho, especially given that we can trump that overbloated crap just where it really matters most: cost, power, stability, security, anonymity (don't underestimate how much people hate to give around their own data), speed and even (maybe) user-friendliness.

[Wall86]

hey guess what? vista DOES NOT SUPPORT ALL HARDWARE YET, it will not support almost ANY d-link wifi cards or usb wifi sticks (i tried a wda-1320 pci wifi card, and a 122 stick) neither work,

what else? it sucked up close to 65%+ of 1 GB of RAM, with a 2 GB pagefile(swap) running nothing at all, just vista ultimate with aero,

one good thing about vista? i like the one widget that looks like a car console for cpu and RAM, only problem? i could see how big of a resource hog it is.

also, how do you disable aero? no idea, i used vista for a whole like 2 or 3 hours (after 6 hours to download it, close to 7 hours to back up my HDD, and like 1.5 hours of installing), then had to spend another hour re-installing xp, so i could use the internet..oh ya, this was the RC1, so hopefully, if macrohard does not wanna pull a sony ps3, it needs to make sure the full release is much much much better.

[styven]

I have mentioned this before on another thread...........

My daughter won't use linux because she can't do webcam/audio with her mates, she is 10.
If linux can't attract this age group, then we are going to struggle.

To many this may not be important but to this age group it is way up on their priority list, along with anything else technology wise that is cool, ipods, cellphones etc.

Apart form the Sims, this is the "only" reason i can't get rid of XP for her.

Steve.

[Lster]

Basically put...

I think Ubuntu _does_ trump Windows in virtually all areas except games, drivers (?) and ease of use. Although I know virtually everything about Windows, Ubuntu has been a challenge for me because of these things.

[Redlance]

What is the real point here. I mean seriously if ya want to have an OS that 'trumps' vista go out and buy vista and tweak it till your happy.
Same with Mac OSx or any other OS. All have thier own strengths and weaknesses.
I like Linux. I like Knowing what i have installed. I like tweaking and customizing all of it.
try that with Propietary windows.
If your gonna look at windows and yearn for features either make em or find a replacement or better yet just go to windows.
I have found an OS that serves me. and is what *I* want it to be.

[aysiu]

Much like the phrase ready for the desktop, the term trump is too vague to be meaningful in this context (Vista vs. Ubuntu). Its definition as a transitive verb is: To get the better of (an adversary or competitor, for example) by using a crucial, often hidden resource. What does it mean to get the better of another operating system? To gain more market share? To gain the majority market share? To produce a product a certain segment of the population likes more? To produce a product that is more visually appealing to certain segments of the population?

The truth is and always remains that the three dominant populations will continue to appeal to some users more than others. My wife, now that she's become an OS X addict (and graphic designer), is highly unlikely to ever switch to Windows or Ubuntu. I, an emailer/web browser/music listener/cheapskate, am highly unlikely to use another proprietary OS at home again. I do, however, have a hard time finding jobs that let me use Linux on the desktop. I will probably always have to use Windows at work unless I get a job that doesn't require me to use a computer or I suddenly learn how to be a server/network/system administrator.

For my wife, Apple's OS will always "trump" Windows and Ubuntu. For me, Ubuntu will always "trump" Windows and OS X. And for my brother, Windows will always "trump" OS X and Ubuntu.

It's not a competition in terms of one OS being the absolute best in every sense. But it is a competition in terms of there being real choice, and right now there isn't any real choice, which is what Bug #1 is all about. You go to a computer store--guess what's on almost all the PCs there? Windows. The quality of Vista matters very little to its success, so no matter how good Ubuntu gets feature-wise, it's not going to "trump" Vista any more than it's already "trumping" Vista now (depending on what you consider "getting the best of" another operating system).

[Redlance]

Much like the phrase ready for the desktop, the term trump is too vague to be meaningful in this context (Vista vs. Ubuntu). Its definition as a transitive verb is: What does it mean to get the better of another operating system? To gain more market share? To gain the majority market share? To produce a product a certain segment of the population likes more? To produce a product that is more visually appealing to certain segments of the population?

The truth is and always remains that the three dominant populations will continue to appeal to some users more than others. My wife, now that she's become an OS X addict (and graphic designer), is highly unlikely to ever switch to Windows or Ubuntu. I, an emailer/web browser/music listener/cheapskate, am highly unlikely to use another proprietary OS at home again. I do, however, have a hard time finding jobs that let me use Linux on the desktop. I will probably always have to use Windows at work unless I get a job that doesn't require me to use a computer or I suddenly learn how to be a server/network/system administrator.

For my wife, Apple's OS will always "trump" Windows and Ubuntu. For me, Ubuntu will always "trump" Windows and OS X. And for my brother, Windows will always "trump" OS X and Ubuntu.

It's not a competition in terms of one OS being the absolute best in every sense. But it is a competition in terms of there being real choice, and right now there isn't any real choice, which is what Bug #1 is all about. You go to a computer store--guess what's on almost all the PCs there? Windows. The quality of Vista matters very little to its success, so no matter how good Ubuntu gets feature-wise, it's not going to "trump" Vista any more than it's already "trumping" Vista now (depending on what you consider "getting the best of" another operating system).

ahh yes much better said than i did. :) I would never make it as a speech writer :D

[mikerduffy]

Ubuntu is free. It works on existing hardware. It's available right now. You can have as much control as you want. Users and developers have been documenting it for years. You can make your own _buntu. PENGUINS!

[OttifantSir]

The reason why I probably never will use Vista on any of my computers: I ran XP Pro on this laptop I am using now. It was as people describe Vista: crawling along.

Then I switched to Ubuntu. Yeah, I needed to do a tiny amount of tweaking to get it to run, but after that, it worked great.

I posted about this in the Ubuntu Testimonials. Synopsis: XP could barely be used to check my mail. With Ubuntu, I do practically anything I want. Not so different from what other Linux users is saying, right?

Well, I believe I belong to a true minority. The laptop I am using is seven (almost eight) years old. It was just taking up space when I had XP Pro running on it. Especially after I got a P3 server. After switching it to Ubuntu, the P3 server does downloads from Limewire and show me full-length movies.

So, when I get a new laptop for my birthday, I will have used nothing on computers, apart from some peripherals, and I will have a system that is lightning fast. (Don't think I will be installing any 3D-desktop. I'm more at ease with the basic system/desktop)

[Rob_Quads]

But what use is TPM support when no computers come with them? (apart from Macs)

99.99% of PCs these days still use a BIOS, rather than something like EFI. It could be 20 years until any PC actually comes with a TPM chip!

Looks like I am working 20 years ahead of myself typing away of a pc with a TPM chip in it.

As for the Vista/Windows vs Linux. I still use windows as I have found many of the products i use for work to be much more unreliable on linux than i do on windows.

I have played around with linux on all my various PCs at home (server, HTPC, desktop) but all have ended up running windows bases OS for various reasons.

[tbay007]

Ok people. I ended up last night doing an installation of Windows Vista Business build 5840 (its a build before the final version which is 6000) I have found a few things out:

Vista makes life harder for everyone now. Installing drivers is annoying when you have to press yes or ok 5 times due to vista trying to be more "secure." Installing any other applications OTHER THEN Microsoft applications is tough to do now. I couldn't install Firefox well. It kept on coming up with errors. After about 2 hours of just goofing around with it, it gave me the blue screen of death. Overall, Vista looks like the downfall of Microsoft. Oh and its a memory hog, i have 1 gig of DDR ram, and Vista was using 600megabytes of it. XP didn't even consume that much!!

Overall, if linux or ubuntu or any other unix based system is gonna win the public over, it will be after january 27, 2007 because thats when vista comes out, and thats when Microsoft will suck.

SO i am sticking to windows xp due to the fact that i like playing warcraft 3 online. I have TRIED to setup warcraft 3 on ubuntu and looked at various forum help and asked IRC people, but i could never get it to fully run. If someday there could be easier support for video games with linux, i would love that. But yeah....

[meng]

Unfortunately I can't see Linux making a quantum leap within a couple of months, given the nature of the community it's unlikely that one can pull a rabbit out of the hat, so to speak. Of course, it's pretty good right now, but not SO good that it's going to cause an exodus from Microsoft. And as for Microsoft releasing a "bucket-o-crap", they'll muddle through just as they did with Windows ME. The word will spread: don't upgrade! We can reasonably hope to keep chipping away, making slightly larger gains with MS's missteps, including Vista and the WGA.

[23meg]

Overall, if linux or ubuntu or any other unix based system is gonna win the public over, it will be after january 27, 2007 because thats when vista comes out, and thats when Microsoft will suck.

We'll get nowhere near Windows in terms of adoption unless a good amount of manufacturers start to ship Linux based OSes with their computers, no matter how good Linux gets, and/or how bad Windows gets.

Given the present state of things, expecting a quantum leap from Linux and/or a downfall from Windows on the basis of product quality is completely unrealistic. Windows isn't where it is because of how good it is, but how well it's marketed and how Microsoft excelled at making it a de facto standard.

[some_random_noob]

I agree (that vista sucks). If anything linux won't improve but vista will get worse. Or at least people won't like it, read below:

Windows isn't where it is because of how good it is, but how well it's marketed and how Microsoft excelled at making it a de facto standard.

... personally I know I'll never buy vista. Try getting some old computers, putting linux on them and giving them away. I'll be doing some real-life linux promotion in about a month (hopefully)

[PilotJLR]

I feel the same way you do about vista's new "features," but let's be fair here... the RAM is meant to be used. It's good that Vista will utilize all of it... the real question is how efficiently is it doing so?

My main computer has 2 GB of RAM, and Ubuntu uses 100% of it. I'm glad, cause I didn't buy that memory just so it would sit there looking pretty!


Oh and its a memory hog, i have 1 gig of DDR ram, and Vista was using 600megabytes of it. XP didn't even consume that much!!

[aysiu]

Merged with the other Linux v. Vista threads.

[JustBrowsing]

As much as I felt the same way you do, I think I've come around in regards to Windows Vista.

So much to the fact that I have Vista Business (RTM build - 6000) running on my desktop; and my year and a half old laptop.

To be honest, in both machines -- it runs just as fast (if not faster) than Windows XP. Sure the hardware specifications are steep for Vista; but so what. It runs on relatively modern hardware (Vista Capable PCs).

I don't have Aero on my laptop; as my video card (ATi Radeon Mobility 9000) can't run it; oh well; Vista standard theme is still a significant upgrade from the green and blue hues of the Windows XP theme.

I too was dissapointed about the amount of memory usuage that Vista uses -- then I just decided to get over it. It's not going to "hurt" the memory by using it. Not to mention; I think using "600 Megabytes of RAM" is perfectly normal for Vista. From what I've researched Vista caches it's RAM constantly so that often used applications pop up even faster than the first 1 or 2 times it's used.

Aside from the memory usage, I see no worse speed difference using Vista over XP. Although XP was a pretty good operating system overall. (Viruses and Crashes were vastly overstated in my opinon.)

I've also used Mepis, and Ubuntu forms of Unix; and while I was immediately impressed with Ubuntu; as it being a great Linux operating system; with ease of use I haven't seen before in a distro. What it comes down to is software, software, software.... while Linux typically has everything you need to do a Windows to Linux conversion; the truth of the matter that most of the software seemed second rate (Amarok is an exception... great program).... whereas I still have yet to see something that comes close to Adobe's/Macromedia's versions of creative software. K-Spot/Picasa2 doesn't come close. While Piscasa2 is a great program; it is emulated through Wine, and I saw a noticeable processor usuage increase while used. And F-Spot while open-source -- it just doesn't even compare to Adobe's Photoshop Elements 4/5 or Apple's iPhoto.

Whether you hate Vista or not; it doesn't matter. Eventually everybody will be upgraded to it in the next 3-5 years; maybe less considering how cheap computers have come down in price. What made me completely realize that Linux is nothing but a hobbyist operating system, is the fact that Linux has like a 2-3% market share. Apple's OSX is slightly higher at like 4-5%. That's insane.

Ubuntu Linux is great; if you're tired of Windows, especially XP - and want something else. Beryl with AIGLX is totally awesome; but more or less it's a gimick. THe only thing I really like is the Expose function built into Beryl. "Spinning Cube" gets old after a half-hour.

So -- good luck finding something "amazing" out of Linux community to compete with Windows or OSX. It's great -- but it's applications overall just are not there - especially in regard to Photo Management. What about Flash Authoring? There might be a little; but feature wise; it doesn't have near enough to compete.[-(

Geez thirty five pages in 5 minutes!! WOW!

Anyways, specifications for comparision:

Desktop:
Dell Dimension E510
Intel Pentium D @ 3.0Ghz
2.0 GB RAM
250 SATA HDD
ATi x600 with 256MB Hypermemory (whatever that its)

As you'd imagine, runs Vista beautifully -- which is no surprise.... doesn't slouch at all.

Laptop:
Dell Inspiron 600m
Intel Pentium M @ 1.5Ghz
768MB RAM
ATi Radeon Mobility 9000

No Aero interface, (as stated above), but runs Vista pretty smoothly. I use TopDesk for VistaFlip 3D replacement (or a weak Expose replacement) ... considering it's age -- it runs Vista Standard pretty smoothly ... easily just as fast as Windows XP.

[tbay007]

I feel the same way you do about vista's new "features," but let's be fair here... the RAM is meant to be used. It's good that Vista will utilize all of it... the real question is how efficiently is it doing so?

My main computer has 2 GB of RAM, and Ubuntu uses 100% of it. I'm glad, cause I didn't buy that memory just so it would sit there looking pretty!

Right, i agreee, RAM is meant to be used, BUT with a pentium 4, it really slows down my computer. I guess the real answer to it, is on older systems, they won't use the memory efficiently, but on newer systems it will be great, especially since in a year or less we will have quad processors.

[JustBrowsing]

Right, i agreee, RAM is meant to be used, BUT with a pentium 4, it really slows down my computer. I guess the real answer to it, is on older systems, they won't use the memory efficiently, but on newer systems it will be great, especially since in a year or less we will have quad processors.

Try build 6000 before you give up ; there's a huge difference in speed. I tried RC1 and Beta 2 before the RTM release. The difference is night and day. Microsoft must have got rid of a lot of "debug" code.

[Rob_Quads]

Vista makes life harder for everyone now. Installing drivers is annoying when you have to press yes or ok 5 times due to vista trying to be more "secure." Installing any other applications OTHER THEN Microsoft applications is tough to do now.


I find it really funny when people moan about this. Everyone says its really easy to do something stupid in XP and then people moan when they introduce measures to restrict this.

How is it any different than having to change to root do to a change an IP setup or something like that?

Its also easy to turn off. One menu - select disable UAC and it does not happen any more.

Its definatly worth having a look at the RTM version as its much better than the beta. I did not have any problems installing Firefox. There are some apps which have problems installing but thats not really MSs fault.

[Popoi]

I don't think anyone would want their screenshots to look like that (use png next time :P)

:razz: Hahahahaha.

--

Well, I think Vista will be a shock. We are on the imagos culture (Debray), and vista is very visual, but the first impact remains just a few days.

[FLPCGuy]

...Its definatly worth having a look at the RTM version as its much better than the beta.
My $12 beta registration only got me the two betas and neither supported dial-up networking. I understand Vista includes a way to bypass my firewall using hardware built into all new processors. That's all I needed to know about Vista.

I'm sure most people will spend a lot of money for the hardware to run it. I just don' t think the advances and new features (3D desktop..no thanks) are worth accepting the compromises.

It took me a long time to accept XP as more than a bloated, arbitrary menu shuffle release of 2000. I still run both on my other PC with a winmodem and no serial port (both 2k Pro and XP Pro were free handouts from M$ at TS2 events). There are no XP drivers for my scanner and I lost the CD for my photo software installed on 2k so I have two good reasons to run 2k over XP. I'd have the same problems running Vista as I do with Linux, drivers for my hardware and inadequate dial-up support but Linux will run better on 512MB of RAM...Advantage Linux!

SP2 was a good addition to XP, but I've disabled unneeded services in 2k and run a better 2-way firewall anyway. With 512MB of RAM, 2k runs a tiny bit faster than XP. I can't measure the difference or with X-Windows Linux but Firefox is noticeably faster than IE. Vista would surely be the slowest.

With Balmer in charge now M$ won't be giving away samples anymore, even to techies. I'd rather spend my money on some Linux CD's that still support dial-up. SuSe 10.2 looks very promising. SuSe distros have always seen my external full modem, once 9.1 even found and configured my Intel chipset winmodem. I'm hoping 10.2 can use that winmodem on my other PC. Otherwise, I'll be trying to find a USB to Serial cable with current Linux kernel drivers so I can use my external serial modem.

I love Ubuntu 6.10, on this old 1GHz Dell I saved from a dumpster (replacing ME) but it was a bit daunting figuring out how to connect via ppp in the terminal. It's networking still only sees the internal winmodem, not my real external modem on the built-in serial port. KPPP works great, so that's what I'm using now, but I can't use a firewall because the OS doesn't register my connection in networking. I plan to try initiating iptables from the terminal once I'm connected.

Even without a firewall in Linux I'm no worse off than having all that adware, spyware, and viruses in Windoze. But I do feel naked without an outbound firewall asking me before some service tries to access the net. I wish there was a free ZoneAlarm or equivalent for Linux.

[Delvien]

I beta'd Vista, on my laptop, it started to get slow after one week, i noticed everything was lagging slightly, the only thing i really liked searching on Vista was quick, easy, and it finds everything, even your lost socks.

[Fatec]

hey guess what? vista DOES NOT SUPPORT ALL HARDWARE YET, it will not support almost ANY d-link wifi cards or usb wifi sticks (i tried a wda-1320 pci wifi card, and a 122 stick) neither work,

what else? it sucked up close to 65%+ of 1 GB of RAM, with a 2 GB pagefile(swap) running nothing at all, just vista ultimate with aero,

one good thing about vista? i like the one widget that looks like a car console for cpu and RAM, only problem? i could see how big of a resource hog it is.

also, how do you disable aero? no idea, i used vista for a whole like 2 or 3 hours (after 6 hours to download it, close to 7 hours to back up my HDD, and like 1.5 hours of installing), then had to spend another hour re-installing xp, so i could use the internet..oh ya, this was the RC1, so hopefully, if macrohard does not wanna pull a sony ps3, it needs to make sure the full release is much much much better.

You made me laugh, infact alot of posts on here have.

Especially about how much ram vista uses, god guys, that's the whole point of ram isnt it? to use it!

it caches ram, works in pretty much the same way linux does now so apps load faster, thats why it uses more memory.

im so ******* sick of all the windows bashing on here, its stupid.

vista is resource intensive,yes, but its made for the next generation of hardware and the new quadcore cpus, so how about you guys get off your high horse, quit crying how vista is so slow and fork out for some good hardware? /end rant

[Sef]

vista is resource intensive,yes, but its made for the next generation of hardware and the new quadcore cpus....

True, it will be able to run on 64-bit architecture like Linux already does. And for those of us who don't have the next generation of hardware, we can run linux without shelling out money for a new system.

[insane_alien]

yes, RAM is made to be used, but at least ubuntu uses the RAM to make everything faster and it can always be cleared when you need it. vista just sucks it all up into a black hole of unavailability.

[Shay Stephens]

vista is resource intensive,yes, but its made for the next generation of hardware and the new quadcore cpus, so how about you guys get off your high horse, quit crying how vista is so slow and fork out for some good hardware? /end rant

If I had to choose between two os's, one that worked great on existing hardware or one that required hardware from the future to perform well. I think I would choose the os that works good now ;-)

When the future hardware comes out, my os that works good now, is really going to scream.

But I do feel for you. Having to defend the virtues of bloat with the hopes of future hardware must be a thankless job. Soldier on man! ;-)

[petermck]

It's the same marketing strategy Microsoft has always used. Release a new OS that requires users to upgrade hardware (drives new hardware sales) and then bundle the new OS with OEM offers.
The thing I like about Linux and Ubuntu especially is how you can breath new life into old gear. I recently put Dapper onto an old Compaq DeskPro with a 600/66 Celeron processor and 512 MB. It does what he want, which is just web browsing, email and some word processing, so he's happy...:cool:

[sunitram]

The open source community will respond as they always do: have a critical look at Vista, see what works and what does not, then assimilate the good parts in new and innovative ways.

[bobbybobington]

yes assimilate, like the borg ;)

[mushroom]

I'm bored, so time for a subjective point-by-point comparison of Ubuntu Feisty and Windows Vista Ultimate Edition (going with what comes out of the box only)

Linux vs. NT: I don't know too much about kernels, but the fact that Linux doesn't have the GUI tied in with it like NT does has to be a plus, doesn't it?

Compiz/Beryl vs. DWM: Compiz/Beryl runs on a 32 MB integrated card. DWM requires, at minimum, 128 MB of VRAM. Compiz/Beryl does even more than DWM and doesn't make everything cluttered and hard to read by using huge, blurry translucent window borders.

GNOME vs. Aero: I'm not a huge GNOME fan, myself, but it's not black. It's not very, very obscenely black. It also uses simplified dialogs rather than irritating wizards. The revised Start Menu in Vista is interesting, though.

Gksudo vs. UAC: They're essentially the same thing. To be nitpicky, I've heard that UAC's a bit more annoying.

Rhythmbox/Totem vs. WMP: Rhythmbox is about as simple a music library as they come (in interface, not features). To be fair, WMP has everything Rhythmbox has, but in a more awkward interface. For example, organization of music files is done in a file hierarchy manner, which would lead one to assume that there's a different directory for albums, songs, genres, years, etc. There's also a different tab for each function (burn, rip, sync), when they could just be an option in a right-click context menu. And that annoying glass thing on the player controls again. To its credit, though, it's a video and audio library in one.

Patented codecs versus... no patented codecs: In a philisophical perspective (i.e., not mine), Ubuntu wins. In a practical perspective (bingo), Windows wins. On the bright side, it's not too difficult to get them in Ubuntu.

Gedit vs. Notepad: Gedit has some nice features, but is really bloated. Notepad is purely barebones. This one really depends on how important text editing is to you.

OpenOffice vs. MS Office: Oh wait...

GIMP vs. Paint: What?

Firefox vs. IE 7: Please.

Built-in antivirus/antispyware vs. Not needing a built-in antivirus/antispyware: Come on.

System requirements: Vista requires 1 GB of RAM, 128 MB of VRAM, a 1 GHz processor, and 15 GB of free HD space. Feisty, estimating from Edgy's and Compiz/Beryl's requirements, will require 256 MB of RAM, 32 MB of VRAM, a 1 GHz processor and 3 GB of free HD space.

Pricing: Vista's $400. Feisty's free.

There's only two reasons to not run Ubuntu or some other flavor of Linux in favor of Windows at this point: games and really specialized applications. Ubuntu has dispelled the myth of lack of ease in installation (who else does a LiveCD install?) and use. I haven't had to touch the command line once since I installed Kubuntu (but I do, because I've grown accustomed to it). Joe User won't even have to know it exists. It supports more hardware out of the box than any other OS, and it would support even more if it were popular. It includes more, higher-quality applications than Vista. It's prettier than Vista. It's easier to use than Vista. It's requires less than half the resources that Vista requires. Its license allows you to install it on as many computers as you want and make as many copies of it as you want. It allows access to tons of software that's as unrestricted as the OS itself with a few clicks of the mouse, and it all comes free of malware because it all comes from the same people that distribute Ubuntu. It's $400 less than the uncrippled version of Vista.

Of course, I'm preaching to the choir. I was just bored and felt like writing something.

[Frak]

Linux vs. NT: I don't know too much about kernels, but the fact that Linux doesn't have the GUI tied in with it like NT does has to be a plus, doesn't it?

No, in fact it makes it worse, more complicated, like what if you had to change something, that wasn't included in the GUI, not a plus to me, just some patience and anything can be solved with words, or text in this case.

[FLPCGuy]

If I'm not mistaken, Vista Ultimate requires a 3 GHz processor (Pentium equivalent) which would include any recent AMD 1.8 GHz 3000+ or better, core 2 Intel 1.7 GHz or better.

I haven't used Media Edition 2005 or later but I did manage to buy one of the ATI HDTV Wonder video cards before they pulled them from the market. For $99 I can receive NTSC or HDTV (separate inputs), record it in MPEG2 or a proprietary ATI format and schedule with TiVo-like features that aren't fully developed. It works great in XP on 512MB or RAM at 266 MHz with an Athlon XP 2500 CPU at 1.848 MHz. It even digitizes VHS to be burned to DVD. I expect a final release of this card will be out once they dump all their old NTSC TV Wonder cards but only for XP. Specialized hw is one advantage of having a near market monopoly.

...I don't buy music online but does Rhapsody or other Linux media players support the document rights management (DRM) code attached to online purchased music? This whole new industry seems to be highly OS specific and tightly controlled by big business (iTunes music only works on Apple hw, etc., other sites attach DRM code for Windoze, preventing copying or backup).

Old timers like me would never buy into this proprietary music and video, but Blue Ray and HD-DVD are being done this way too. Kids today accept these new formats and limitations as a fact of life. Linux could be left behind for all future high definition multimedia as it gets much more proprietary and controlled. Game writers go after the market and hardware that pay off for them which is definitely XBox, PS3, and maybe Windows.

Even the internet could become locked down soon (in the US) by the big telcos who will only give bandwidth to those who can afford to pay the most. A few big players who pay up will own the only websites you can get to in the AT&T vision of the future. Imagine having to buy your PC from Dell or HP because other vendor's sites won't come up. It could happen by 2008 if the FCC doesn't change it's direction.

I hope this trend doesn't continue, but the numbers are compelling. If it does, we'll be back where UNIX began, as an OS by and for scientists, geeks and engineers.

I'm totally turned off by Vista and all new hardware that uses technology against us (like printers or even new cars that only work with overly expensive mfr. controlled digital components). Without Open Source and open standards enforced by governments responsible to the people instead of big business, the digital future could become a very sad, scary place. The future of more than Linux may be at stake.

[Tutu 1234]

Vista will be nice after about a year of it's release but the M$ boat is sailing now for me and when I do upgrade (Which is going to be longer than I thought now I have Ubuntu and everything runs so, so much faster than XP ever did.) I shall not be getting Vista with it I'd rather donate the cost of windows split 50/50 Ubuntu/Wine.

The one thing I think that will swing the OS percentages are ease of use (Which is certainly starting to happen) and the improvements being made inside of Wine. As soon as you can install a windows program as easily on Linux as you can windows and they run pretty much as they would under windows I think we'll see the mass exodus.

Ubuntu is a bit of a hassle to setup right (At least for me) but using it is at least as easy (If not easier) than XP. Took me an hour to teach my mum how to log in/out, use Openoffice writer and browse the web. We even got Internet explorer 6 installed through wine but discovered she didn't need it after all she was happier with Firefox and she definetly enjoyed the fact that switching user /browsing web and loading programs was faster than windows by several factors. Stopped her going about upgrading my pc.

[Soilman]

the upcoming Windows Vista release seems to be Microsoft's big reteliation on the opposing free software threat, attempting to make every possible improvement that Linux does on Windows and more. How will the open-source community react, and will this be the end of the time when Linux is simply been better?

We must give Microsoft credit for a successful product. Now, that is not saying that it is superior, or even better than another OS. Microsoft OS (their OS's) has been, and will continue to be, used for some time into the future. A great number of people use personal computers (PC) and Microsoft has had considerable influence in the increase in the number of users over time. True, Microsoft is not as flexible as *nix OS.
Often, however, we refer how we interact with the PC OS based on the Microsoft OS model. This is because they are dominant. Fact. We can argue why, but not now, and not here.

Microsoft has, and will, incorporate what they view as the best ideas into the new OS (Vista). But remember how long the Microsoft OS life cycle has been? The *nix community will adapt to anything Microsoft comes up with. Pride should swell in individuals or companies that have innovated to come up with superior products or processes that the balance of the industry wants to incorporate into their products. In this way, we all benefit. Microsoft has and will continue to incorporate desired features that it deems an advantage to the user so that they benefit. That is good. We all do it. The PC is a tool. The OS is a tool. I use it to get a job done. I use it to create. I am not a tool. I use both Microsoft and *nix OS and they both work. Neither is completely superior.

Having said all the above, let us keep adapting the *nix OS environment toward a better, or more useful, tool. Us being the key. The open and free nature of many *nix endeavors is truly astounding and promotes great advances in the usefulness of the PC tool. Let us influence them by creating (a) superior product. Loosing market share to a superior product is what they (they = any business) fear most.
Peace

[LeMax]

The future of Computers is opensource.
A lot of Windows opensource softwares are on http://www.freewebs.com/freesofts4win/ . This is the first step of opensource for a Windows user.

[tommcd]

Why I am still sooo glad I switched to linux:
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2006/pulpit_20061229_001403.html
I hope the linux community can avoid all this crap.

[Simran]

Here is my 50 pence ..

I have been your average windows user since 1995, but when my school started using ubuntu instead of novell's netware (or what ever its called) and in the 2 years of using it at school not once have there been serious complant, just the windows is better than linux banter to annoy the teacher that put so much time setting this up.

So i thaught i would give it a bash. After struggling a bit at the beginning (having never used linux before) now i feel i'm a competent enough user now.

Then the other day my dad asks me ' do you think its worth getting vista ', i chuckled a bit and told him about ubuntu then showed him it. He said it was all well and good but when it comes down to it is it the right thing for him? (you can correct me though) because he doesn't have the time to learn about ubuntu and how to use it.

He has lots of peripheral things, like his PDA and mobile phone which he syncronises on his computer, then he has quite a lot of medical programs .. homeopathic ones etc. that its next to impossible to find linux support for and as good as windows emulators are they aren't the same as using windows.

so if people need something that they can just use without having to learn a new enviroment and want no hassle (i use that term loosely) then they will use windows vista/xp and thats what your paying or overpaying for isn't it?

but apart from for users like that and games then there is no reason not to use ubuntu. You can get the same visual effects & customise your desktop even more, the native programs are excellent and i think the most important thing for me as a new user is that the ubuntu community is allways willing to help, and there is lots of documentation on the internet which you can search through. Where as if you are a windows user and you need some form of help there is not a community athmousphere like there is with ubuntu so most people would say 'phone tech support they are payed to care about your computer breaking' but really its a pain in the *** and i remember when i got a very early version of XP it was extremely buggy and i can't see vista being much different.

Then there is security, i don't have to spend 1 hour of my time scanning for spyware / addware / viruses. hence defeating the point of windows being able to save you time.

Then lastly, i think this has been brought up allready but from what i have seen of the ubuntu community is that its user driven rather than financially driven so the community input is listened to and incorporated into the OS.

But back to my schools network, it would have cost us £150,000 to lisence and pay for all of the computers to be upgraded to windows XP, but instead we spent £5000 on new thin clients and some new moniters and £0 on ubuntu, then spent the remaining £145,000 on a huge new section of the school, so the power of open source stretches further than you would think :D

wouldn't you rather pay somebody £25,000 a year to maintain an open source network than use tax payers money to make allready weathly people even wealthier ?

well thanks for reading if you did ^^, and sorry if i went off the point a little.

[FLPCGuy]

I'm surprised to hear it now costs so much for education licensing from M$. Back when Bill was running things, education got a 90% discount on everything. I built out a school district network of 1,250 employees dirt cheap. We got Windows 2000 included with the Dell or HP ePC computers (under $500 including monitor), client access licenses for our servers for less than $5 each, and Office 2000 Pro for $34.95 including Exchange CAL's (1/10 the retail price of $349.50). Remember, there was no good free office suite back then. At those prices, it was hard to refuse. A SQL server through Dell Education was less than $110 for the OS back then including 20 CAL's.


I'm all for going Open Source for govt. and education, but it was great having all the latest M$ stuff really cheap. Balmer is a bean counter and not so charitable. You'll never see him giving his Billions away to anyone but his kids.

[Fatec]

yes, RAM is made to be used, but at least ubuntu uses the RAM to make everything faster and it can always be cleared when you need it. vista just sucks it all up into a black hole of unavailability.

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

Vista does use RAM quite well, apps load fast, half of the problem you guys on here are down to lack of good drivers.

Vista isnt without its problems, but linux nor ubuntu is either.

At the end of the day, its about choice, what suits your needs, but you idiots who come on here and cry foul about everything microsoft really do make yourselfs out to be just as retarded as the microsoft fanboys who scream how bad linux is, why cant you just accept the fact both linux and windows has its uses, XP is fine for me, always has been on any comp i've installed it on, i really do wonder what sort of sites some people visit because in 12 years of computer usage i've not had one virus, spyware, or adware, but then i dont sit there looking at porn and warez sites all day (dont even try to tell me that isnt where most of these problems arise either, i do know better)

so yea, grow up, enjoy the fact u got an OS u like, and quit being immature about microsoft stuff, its stupid.

end of.

[mushroom]

but then i dont sit there looking at porn and warez sites all day

Intelligent computer usage is key in keeping your stuff secure, but the problem with Windows is that it allows things like automatic installation of malware. Even if you are surfing porn and warez sites, things like that shouldn't be able to happen. No OS should have to come with adware- and virus blockers. That's like openly acknowledging that your software is broken and you're too lazy to fix it.

[BuffaloX]

in 12 years of computer usage i've not had one virus, spyware, or adware, but then i dont sit there looking at porn and warez sites all day.

Why? Are you afraid of virus? :-k

[FLPCGuy]

Virus and malware writers will have a field day with Vista because it is incompatible with almost all current 3rd party software to protect Windows but has already been shown vulnerable to an old message dialog vulnerability...just the first of a flood of security holes never fixed.

Average users who can't figure out how to turn off Vista's security warning pop-ups will simply ignore them and click Proceed when malware starts to install. They have no clue what is going on so the warning msg. might as well be in Greek.

Ironically, as Linux gets easier for these folks to use, we will face similar issues.

[Frak]

No offence to anybody, but I'm starting to think not working on Viruses and Malware, is a ploy by Microsoft to make more money off of their partners, like Symantec and Mcaffee. Don't fix it, users do, easy way is an anti-virus, producer gets paid, Microsoft gets paid for promoting it, without saying a word.

[Drifter]

Well I thought when I found Ubuntu that I had found my way out of windows. It seems that there are just too many distros out there. Now thats not all that bad, but I am afraid that Vista is going to knock Linux back a few years. I thought that one day Linux would take over computers, but there just don't seem to be any cooperation going on between all the different Linux users. It seems we may be standing on the dock watching Vista Sail away with the computer market again.

[PilotJLR]

I think the opposite is true... linux delivers on features / needs that Vista has not.

Being open source, linux offers choice. There are a few "major" distributions, and each has their own strengths and weaknesses. This is a positive thing!
So just pick whichever distro you like best... the underlying technology is the same, though implementation and versions differ. For example, a distro like Debian is very thoroughly tested, so it doesn't have the "cutting edge" features. If you want that, then you can use Ubuntu or Fedora Core.

[macogw]

Look, the average Joe doesn't buy a new computer just because Vista comes out. They have their old incapable-of-running-Vista computer, and they'll use it til the spyware, viruses, and dll-remnants eat it. They won't be buying Vista til after SP1 (which is good for them because any pre-SP Windows is a bad idea), unless they need to buy a computer NOW. Aside from that, Vista is a resource-hog. A computer will definitely run Ubuntu faster than Vista. I've used both on this laptop. As Mark Shuttleworth has said, too, eye candy matters. Sit down with your Beryl-running Ubuntu computer next to an Aero Vista computer. Which has better eye-candy? Which will get other people to stop and stare? Beryl. Which uses less system resources? Beryl. I can run it with shared video memory. Aero won't run on my "Vista Capable" laptop because it's not "Premium Capable"--meaning it doesn't have 128mb of dedicated video memory. I don't know how, but Vista needs high video specs for a bit of transparency. Beryl will run on whatever you have and does a LOT more than that.

If you want that, then you can use Ubuntu or Fedora Core.
There will be no Fedora Core 7. Fedora Core and Fedora Extras are merging. It'll be just Fedora 7.

[tommcd]

Well, I do look at porn all day (well, at least part of the day) and I never had a problem with malware in windows either. Of course, I only went online from my limited account, had active X disabled, and was armed to the teeth with:
NOD32 AV
zone alarm
spybot
ad-aware
microsoft antispyware
process explorer
regmon
rootkit revealer
a general sense of paranoia, and lots of time updating all this stuff!
In linux I use firestarter (besause I'm still armed with a general sense of paranoia) and that's all.
I no longer have to worry about all this crap. I no longer have to worry that installing some "free" app might bring a boatload of malware. I also don't have to deal with DRM, windows "genuine advantage", 20,000 word EULA's, or product registration.
Free as in freedom, it's a no-brainer.

[hoagie]

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

Vista does use RAM quite well, apps load fast, half of the problem you guys on here are down to lack of good drivers.

Vista isnt without its problems, but linux nor ubuntu is either.

At the end of the day, its about choice, what suits your needs, but you idiots who come on here and cry foul about everything microsoft really do make yourselfs out to be just as retarded as the microsoft fanboys who scream how bad linux is, why cant you just accept the fact both linux and windows has its uses, XP is fine for me, always has been on any comp i've installed it on, i really do wonder what sort of sites some people visit because in 12 years of computer usage i've not had one virus, spyware, or adware, but then i dont sit there looking at porn and warez sites all day (dont even try to tell me that isnt where most of these problems arise either, i do know better)

so yea, grow up, enjoy the fact u got an OS u like, and quit being immature about microsoft stuff, its stupid.

end of.

I agree with what you have stated, but you don't have to be aggressive and call people idiots. Just let people use what suits them best...

[Dragonbite]

Vista, from the looks of it, will be successful only because of Microsoft's monopolistic position, not so much on technical merit. While the technical aspect will be an improvment (for people currently running Windows) tt will be hard pressed this time next year to find a new computer you can buy that doesn't include Vista.

As for the number of distros out there and paring it down to one, that's like asking all of the car manufactureres to stop making SUVs and all make a single fuel-efficient econo-box. I have a convertible, but my next car needs to hold all of the kids as well. I'm going to choose what I need, not let some corporaton choose.

The problem is that so many people don't realize they have a choice, they just use whatever comes with their system because

they don't want to be bothered installing something else
they think it's too difficult to install something else
don't know there IS something else can be installed
they are familiar with Windows and don't want to try something else

Cars are marketed all over the place and are accessible! You want to see what it is like, you test drive one! Rules of the road are the same in a BMW as it is in a Subaru.

Like previously mentioned, different Linux distros focus on different uses and philosophies and while that doesn't mean any distro cannot be modified to do something totally different, picking the right distro starts you off closer towards your goals.

For example, a distro picked for a laptop may not be the best choice for a server, a distro where everything is tweaked and modified by the user may not be the best for your grandmother, for a low-end machine you may want something lighter than an "include-all-whiz-bang" distro, and so-on.

Is Vista going to sail away on a Tall ship? Cruise liner? Ferry? raft? rowboat? canoe? I don't need it, my ship is already coming in!

[Tomosaur]

I think Vista will be a very big kick in the teeth for Microsoft. Although it may 'look nice', I can get the same appearance (more or less) using Beryl and some theming. Windows has all the media stuff, sure, but it also requires you to buy brand new (very expensive) hardware which hasn't been proven to be successful yet. It intentionally downgrades the quality of media etc even BEFORE the new hardware receives it (read up about HDCP), and has a global killswitch. If it thinks your hardware is circumventing copy protection, or is allowing insecurities, then Vista phones home and kills support for this hardware across the ENTIRE WORLD. So if you have a piece of hardware, such as a brand new nVidia card, and something goes wrong with it, you may be kissing goodbye to it, as will everyone else who tries to use it in the world. This is a real test for Microsoft. If they can successfully distinguish between honest errors in the hardware and nefarious attempts to 'do bad things', then it may not be such a big problem, but Microsoft don't have a great track record in this department. It also is not hard to imagine a dedicated group of people attacking their OWN hardware in order to shut down everyone elses. This is absolutely insane - you don't need to worry about crackers / viruses any more, since if they're intent on causing mayhem, all they have to do is program badly and run it on their own machines.

[Johnsie]

Vista will be big for the same reason as ipod is big... Hype and nothing esle. Linux users need to do more to hype Linux and more Linux users need to sell pre-installed Linux machines.

[zgornel]

Microsoft is not bad if you are willing to spend money on software and system upgrades. As for the virus/worm/malware thing, consider yourself lucky for not getting one yet. 90% of the Windows users don't know what a firewall is, yet alone use it. Check the computer infections statistics once in a while before braging about how safe windows based only on your own experience.

[Hendrixski]

I was just reading an article about how MS is denying the security software vendors access to the Vista Kernel, because they want to dominate the market on anti-virus software...

LOL

[MikeDK]

well i dont wanna continue to vista just read this article

http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/03/0226229

like MY UBUNTU very much its nice to have these dists that's not hard to install for beginners.

and its much likely ill install ubuntu on my 3800+X2 to wich i have xp pro on right now just for gaming and nothing else,
the only thing thats keepin me from uninstalling xp is Americas Army


Best Regards MikeDK

[meng]

I don't think Vista will have a huge impact one way or the other. It won't be adopted quickly enough soon enough to eat into Linux marketshare, but neither is it likely to turn that many people away from Microsoft. After all, Windows XP is still around and it's still satisfactory for many users. So I don't believe the doomsayers on either side. I think Linux should and will keep chipping away slowly, appealing to those users who want more choice in what they can do.

[manmower]

Well I thought when I found Ubuntu that I had found my way out of windows. It seems that there are just too many distros out there. Now thats not all that bad, but I am afraid that Vista is going to knock Linux back a few years. I thought that one day Linux would take over computers, but there just don't seem to be any cooperation going on between all the different Linux users. It seems we may be standing on the dock watching Vista Sail away with the computer market again.

I think there's not much to fear:

Vista is shaping up to be MS's worst since Windows Me, and the fragmentation between users of different distributions isn't very problematic, all these distributions share mostly the same software anyway. So if e.g. the Ubuntu community pushed for improvements in hardware compatibility, when the improvements are made this benefits the entire Linux community.

[Handssolow]

I agree that initially lots of distros means lots of choice, too many for some but I've no wish for Linux based system to lose any further ground to Msoft.

Therefore I think it's a priority that the majority of people loading up Ubutu for the first time should discover a stable OS that they can easily configure for wireless. Once connected to the internet then further assistance is available. If you have no connection it can be very frustrating and folk will return to Wdows.

I don't mind there being lots of distros but lets have one like Ubuntu that everyone can use easily at the start without needing to be an expert.

[BarfBag]

Linux is way ahead of Vista right now. Just take a look at Beryl, for example. Not only is it beautiful and customizable, it adds a nice flow to your work. Compared to Aero (Vista's GUI), it's killer.

I could give other examples, but you get the point.

[doobit]

Linux is way ahead of Vista right now. Just take a look at Beryl, for example. Not only is it beautiful and customizable, it adds a nice flow to your work. Compared to Aero (Vista's GUI), it's killer.

I could give other examples, but you get the point.

Whe you can run a Window Manager/GUI as customizable and beautiful as Enlightenment on a 500 MHZ computer with a 32 MB graphic card and have it seem to be fast, then why would you want Vista?

[Tomosaur]

I can never get enlightenment to work properly, it seems to think my mouse has no buttons :S

[FLPCGuy]

And you can bet M$ A/V won't be free, even though it is to correct defects built in to Windows. They paid $2 Billion for Giant (A/V) and have spent Billions more overcoming the "undocumented features" in Windows. Management wants a return on this investment so they will charge for the products to cover holes they continue to leave open in the OS.

This approach may turn out to be much more profitable than selling a new OS with fewer design flaws (bean counter theory). How much of this problem is the result of a 95% market share (big target theory) and how much is because it is Microsoft (poor programming theory) remains to be seen.

BTW, I ran Windows Defender (betas) for a full year and it never found anything. AdAware and SpyBot Search & Destroy always found and removed tracking cookies and the few items of AdWare that did get through. Without this third party sw in Vista, there will be little defense.

[Flying George]

First off, Linux wins.

I personally have beta tested Windows Vista RTM and let me tell you from experience it has more than it's fair share of bugs and plenty of support issues to go around, which is why i un-installed it and am using xp pro on my 40 gig. It honest to god requires 512 megs of mem. I tried to use it in vmware giving it 256 megs of mem, i gave me an error saying "Microsoft Windows Vista requires 512 megabytes of memory. The installation will now shut down." And as for the Areo theme, it's only included in versions of Vista that are above basic, basically they cost a ton of money. My usual firewall for windows wasn't even supported in Vista for unknown reasons. Not to mention the Navigation issues. I couldn't find my way around that OS with an owners' manual and a flashlight. They renamed practically everything.

It is not what it claims to be. Never take MicroSuck at face value.

Ubuntu all the way.

[OldTimeTech]

The only way Vista is going to be way ahead (financially or in users) is because all the companies who build computers will have Vista on them. Even the computers they say now are Vista compatible will only be compatible with the lowest end Vista and it doesn't have Aero.

Where with Ubuntu or any other Linux distro, you can have a computer that won't run windows, but will run Linux with beautiful eye candy!!!

[doobit]

I have been playing with DamnSmall Linux for a couple of years now and it looks great with Fluxbox, and does something Vista will never do: run easily on a Pentium 233MMX with 64MB of RAM.

[patrick295767]

Well I thought when I found Ubuntu that I had found my way out of windows. It seems that there are just too many distros out there. Now thats not all that bad, but I am afraid that Vista is going to knock Linux back a few years. I thought that one day Linux would take over computers, but there just don't seem to be any cooperation going on between all the different Linux users. It seems we may be standing on the dock watching Vista Sail away with the computer market again.

If you need to buy a new pc to get Vista working, ... since it is requiring damn more ressources, ... more persons will try Linux distros ...

[Frak]

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

Vista does use RAM quite well, apps load fast, half of the problem you guys on here are down to lack of good drivers.

Vista isnt without its problems, but linux nor ubuntu is either.

At the end of the day, its about choice, what suits your needs, but you idiots who come on here and cry foul about everything microsoft really do make yourselfs out to be just as retarded as the microsoft fanboys who scream how bad linux is, why cant you just accept the fact both linux and windows has its uses, XP is fine for me, always has been on any comp i've installed it on, i really do wonder what sort of sites some people visit because in 12 years of computer usage i've not had one virus, spyware, or adware, but then i dont sit there looking at porn and warez sites all day (dont even try to tell me that isnt where most of these problems arise either, i do know better)

so yea, grow up, enjoy the fact u got an OS u like, and quit being immature about microsoft stuff, its stupid.

end of.
I agree with you, but please don't insult anybody, let them hate something for whatever reason they want...

[afeickert]

The main focus for the discussion so far has been features, I know an avid Windows user and he would never consider switching to Linux or any other OS not because he doesn't want to but because it isn't practical. If you are familiar with windows and you know how to efficently get a large amount of work done, windows is great. The main advantage in my mind that MS has over linux is ease of use, If time is money then linux in unexperienced hands is alot of money.
Well, I used to be an avid Windows user... then I discovered Ubuntu, and the transition was incredibly easy. I wouldn't even THINK of going back to Micro$oft,

[BuffaloX]

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

Vista does use RAM quite well, apps load fast, half of the problem you guys on here are down to lack of good drivers.

At the end of the day, its about choice, what suits your needs, but you idiots who come on here and cry foul about everything microsoft really do make yourselfs out to be just as retarded as the microsoft fanboys who scream how bad linux is, why cant you just accept the fact both linux and windows has its uses, XP is fine for me, always has been on any comp i've installed it on, i really do wonder what sort of sites some people visit because in 12 years of computer usage i've not had one virus, spyware, or adware, but then i dont sit there looking at porn and warez sites all day (dont even try to tell me that isnt where most of these problems arise either, i do know better)

so yea, grow up, enjoy the fact u got an OS u like, and quit being immature about microsoft stuff, its stupid.

end of.

I agree with you, but please don't insult anybody, let them hate something for whatever reason they want...

I agree with what you have stated, but you don't have to be aggressive and call people idiots. Just let people use what suits them best...

You agree it's normal to use Windows for 12 years without getting a virus:confused:

Even credible companies like HP has accidentally shipped drivers containing viruses.
You think they don't use a virus scanner before shipping?

Even when you risk getting a virus just by opening an email from a friend:confused:
Even when you risk getting a virus just by browsing the Internet. :confused:
Fact is Windows has always been insecure, many systems are infected without the owner user knowing it.

Microsoft security has always sucked big time, they have always been like 10 years behind in development.
But usually they get it in the end, or manage to hide the fact that they don't.

Maybe Vista has better security, but they don't have a good track record, so being skeptic about it is only natural. It's probably better, but is it good enough?

Oh yeah Vista uses RAM well, if you by that mean it utilizes a system having lots of RAM.

You agree we shouldn't cry foul, about a company convicted for stealing technology, abusing monopoly, unfair trade, and outright lying.
Windows and Office sales has been constantly climbing, without prices dropping.
That means almost every country and company in the world, spend more and get less on software, than if we had a proper competitive market. That's not choice, but abuse of monopoly.

The list goes on but I´ll stop here.

[Kernel Sanders]

The abuse in this thread demeans us all :(

[BuffaloX]

The abuse in this thread demeans us all :(

Sorry You are absolutely right. Removed.

[RAV TUX]

moving to windows forum

[FLPCGuy]

First off, Linux wins.

I personally have beta tested Windows Vista RTM and let me tell you from experience it has more than it's fair share of bugs and plenty of support issues to go around, which is why i un-installed it and am using xp pro on my 40 gig. It honest to god requires 512 megs of mem. ...the Areo theme, it's only included in versions of Vista that are above basic, basically they cost a ton of money. My usual firewall for windows wasn't even supported in Vista for unknown reasons. Not to mention the Navigation issues. I couldn't find my way around that OS with an owners' manual and a flashlight. They renamed practically everything....

A number of posters to this thread have pointed out issues with Vista that make Linux a more reasonable desktop alternative than ever before.

1. Vista costs a lot more in hardware and software without adding significant new functionality. It is designed to be bloatware on steroids and make millions of PC's prematurely obsolete. Linux extends the life of PC's.

2. Vista is not compatible with older Windows security software like AdWare, Spyware, and Anti-virus protection. Vista users may have to buy it from Microsoft or do without for most of the year until 3rd party programmers reverse engineer changes in Vista. Of course, virus writers will do it first. So Vista will likely be less secure than XP for the first year or more unless you pay through the nose for MS security add-ons that will drag it down. Just as XP runs slower than 2000, Vista will run slower than XP on similar hardware. Vista will run less software and far less hardware because there are few Vista drivers available. You may find Linux drivers and support better than support for Vista initially.

3. Microsoft purposely renamed and moved as much stuff as it could to make this rehash of XP seem like an entirely new OS which it isn't. It must be backward compatible or corporations won't buy it. You are paying mostly for a new desktop interface when Linux provides much more variety and customization already. Any worthwhile features are only in the high priced editions. If you have to learn to use it anyway, why not learn Ubuntu? Linux might be easier. I found this particularly true of Firefox 2 vs. IE7.

4. Millions of people will lose capability and spend countless hours struggling just to do the few things they could do in XP. Microsoft even abandoned it's basic MDI/SDI spec.in Vista and has loads of non-standard drop downs arrows and other new code written by recently hired programmers who know nothing about previous Windows standards. Vista is actually less consistently 'Windows-like' than some distros of Linux. The standard isn't standard anymore. Maybe we need a new standard.


5. Microsoft has deep pockets and throws away more on R&D each year than the entire Linux industry exists on. Hardware makers love that it takes more new hardware to run it and they will install it by default wherever possible (adding $150 in perceived value for $45 cost) and quickly write Vista drivers for peripheral hardware. This anti-consumer behavior insures a continued monopoly.

If only we could convince vendors it is easier to write Linux drivers and to provide them for the most widely used distros (Ubuntu, Debian, SuSe, Fedora) while they are writing Vista drivers it could help them sell additional hardware to many who wouldn't buy it otherwise and leave us more funds to spend on hardware instead of Windows we don't want. We have a brief opportunity where Linux looks better compared to Windows Vista than to XP.

[3rdalbum]

I disagree with the original poster. Vista will not set Linux back any length of time at all. Linux has already set Windows back, simply by being a better operating system than the world's biggest software company could come up with in 5 years of development.

In the delay that Microsoft incurred while trying to write Windows Vista, Linux caught up and is surpassing what Vista can do. In 3 or 4 years time, Microsoft will be playing catch-up to a rapidly-moving target. In fact, Linux will be moving quicker in 4 years time than it is right now, as people are switching away from Windows at a faster rate than before, contributing development to the melting pot.

The only way Microsoft can avoid being consigned to the halls of antiquity is through trying to tighten its monopoly. That is what could set Linux back a couple of years, but it's not going to be a lasting effect.

[BoyOfDestiny]

A number of posters to this thread have pointed out issues with Vista that make Linux a more reasonable desktop alternative than ever before.

1. Vista costs a lot more in hardware and software without adding significant new functionality. It is designed to be bloatware on steroids and make millions of PC's prematurely obsolete. Linux extends the life of PC's.

2. Vista is not compatible with older Windows security software like AdWare, Spyware, and Anti-virus protection. Vista users may have to buy it from Microsoft or do without for most of the year until 3rd party programmers reverse engineer changes in Vista. Of course, virus writers will do it first. So Vista will likely be less secure than XP for the first year or more unless you pay through the nose for MS security add-ons that will drag it down. Just as XP runs slower than 2000, Vista will run slower than XP on similar hardware. Vista will run less software and far less hardware because there are few Vista drivers available. You may find Linux drivers and support better than support for Vista initially.

3. Microsoft purposely renamed and moved as much stuff as it could to make this rehash of XP seem like an entirely new OS which it isn't. It must be backward compatible or corporations won't buy it. You are paying mostly for a new desktop interface when Linux provides much more variety and customization already. Any worthwhile features are only in the high priced editions. If you have to learn to use it anyway, why not learn Ubuntu? Linux might be easier. I found this particularly true of Firefox 2 vs. IE7.

4. Millions of people will lose capability and spend countless hours struggling just to do the few things they could do in XP. Microsoft even abandoned it's basic MDI/SDI spec.in Vista and has loads of non-standard drop downs arrows and other new code written by recently hired programmers who know nothing about previous Windows standards. Vista is actually less consistently 'Windows-like' than some distros of Linux. The standard isn't standard anymore. Maybe we need a new standard.


5. Microsoft has deep pockets and throws away more on R&D each year than the entire Linux industry exists on. Hardware makers love that it takes more new hardware to run it and they will install it by default wherever possible (adding $150 in perceived value for $45 cost) and quickly write Vista drivers for peripheral hardware. This anti-consumer behavior insures a continued monopoly.

If only we could convince vendors it is easier to write Linux drivers and to provide them for the most widely used distros (Ubuntu, Debian, SuSe, Fedora) while they are writing Vista drivers it could help them sell additional hardware to many who wouldn't buy it otherwise and leave us more funds to spend on hardware instead of Windows we don't want. We have a brief opportunity where Linux looks better compared to Windows Vista than to XP.


I agree 100%. Found a nice article just now...

Long list of Vista bugs that will keep me off Vista
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=402

Link from badvista.org... I can only wonder if some of the guy's stability issues are due to the DRM added to VIsta. The only time he really confronted it was with his ripped dvds. Fortunately most XP users don't rip their DVDs right? Right... ;)

At least with GNU/Linux, (if? ;)) when a hardware problem arises (doesn't work, or works in a limited capacity), it's not pre-programmed to behave that way...

[aysiu]

Merged into Linux v. Vista.

As for the idea of their being too many distros, I suggest you read this:
http://psychocats.net/essays/unifiedlinux

Or if you have more time, you can also read this:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=328824&highlight=unified+linux

[Cannaregio]

I believe that linux has a *great* chance vis-a-vis vista.

Despite Microsoft's strong points.

Let's list them:
MS-windows is still better for games. True.
MS-windows has a lot more 'professional' applications (à la photoshop) floating around. True.
MS-windows comes (and will cometh) installed with all new boxes on sale. True.
Zombies as usual simply don't know / don't believe / don't understand that there are alternatives. True.

And still.

And still, slowly, and surely... things *are* achanging: take medias and frills, onc ethe absolute microsoft / macintosh turf. Liux is giving them a run for their money (though I fail to understand *why* anyone in his right mind would use beryl).

More pragmatically:
Sound is slowly getting to perfection (from alsa to jack through ardour (http://www.ardour.org/download)).
Gimp is getting better and better and in the public domain there are more and more books (http://rapidshare.de/files/34939129/b-143b01.rar) explaining its remarkable "photographers" possibilities. So old (and expensive) appz à la photoshop will remain confined to first world enthisiasts, while the rest of the planet will switch to gimp for obvious economical (and productivity) reason.

Even idiot commercial programmers will notice the coming of the linux critical mass.

Drivers and games for linux will therefore follow... already during this year 2007.

It's just a matter of time. And do not forget: as soon as somebody devises a better way to boot windows (in order to use those less and less remaining games and specialized commercial appz that you cannot run in vmware or wine) from *an external USB disk* (which is a very important objective imho), windows will be really doomed.

Note that you can already do it, even if windozian programmers really bend backwards (http://www.ngine.de/index.jsp?pageid=4176) in order to avoid this kind of booting :-)

So: yes, vista will sell.
And still: yes: vista is the biggest and last mistake of microsoft.
And surely, yes: linux will slowly prevail.

And finally: yes: even zombies will understand, through the only sensistive body-point they have: their wallet.

I'm very optimistic. Of course I may be wrong. But I am still *very* optimistic :-)

[Flying George]

2. Vista is not compatible with older Windows security software like AdWare, Spyware, and Anti-virus protection. Vista users may have to buy it from Microsoft or do without for most of the year until 3rd party programmers reverse engineer changes in Vista. Of course, virus writers will do it first. So Vista will likely be less secure than XP for the first year or more unless you pay through the nose for MS security add-ons that will drag it down. Just as XP runs slower than 2000, Vista will run slower than XP on similar hardware. Vista will run less software and far less hardware because there are few Vista drivers available. You may find Linux drivers and support better than support for Vista initially.

3. Microsoft purposely renamed and moved as much stuff as it could to make this rehash of XP seem like an entirely new OS which it isn't. It must be backward compatible or corporations won't buy it. You are paying mostly for a new desktop interface when Linux provides much more variety and customization already. Any worthwhile features are only in the high priced editions. If you have to learn to use it anyway, why not learn Ubuntu? Linux might be easier. I found this particularly true of Firefox 2 vs. IE7.

.

first off, i completely agree with your post, i have a question though. are th compatability issues part of their "plan" to make people upgrade?

As for the renamed stuff, once again i agree, but I was simply stating issues I had with the OS personally.

[justin whitaker]

are th compatibility issues part of their "plan" to make people upgrade?

Yes. OEMs will be pushing Vista, because they get to push the hardware upgrade. Microsoft will push the upgrade, getting more business to the OEMs. Everyone is happy.

The problem is, if you think about it, there is absolutely no reason to upgrade.

[Shay Stephens]

The problem is, if you think about it, there is absolutely no reason to upgrade.

Well, not to windows anyway...hehehe ;)

[Kernel Sanders]

The problem is, if you think about it, there is absolutely no reason to upgrade.

I agree, Windows XP is actually better than Vista IMO.

The only thing i'm interested in thats coming out of redmond is Office 2007, specifically, Word 2007. In fact, I just keep thinking up documents that I may need to create on it. The beta was a revelation in computing. :cool:

[FLPCGuy]

first off, i completely agree with your post, i have a question though. are th compatability issues part of their "plan" to make people upgrade?

As for the renamed stuff, once again i agree, but I was simply stating issues I had with the OS personally.
M$ is trying to break into the well established Windoze Security SW market (kinda like Chrysler starting a business selling parts that actually work for their cars) but M$ couldn't compete with McAfee and others fairly so they changed the hooks security software must use to intercept and inspect apps in real time and won't reveal the code necessary for others to write Vista security apps.

This could be purely intentional anti-competitive behavior but it could also just be the consequence of an effort to stop the leakage of OS code that hackers could exploit. How fortunate that M$ is ready to sell you vital security add-ons for Vista, since nobody else can.

As for changing the menu locations and dialogs for everything, this keeps the training and certification mill primed, generating some serious revenue. It also keeps M$ tech weenies busy re-learning Windoze so they never get around to learning Linux. Is this all planned? Good question.

[Flying George]

I'm Willing to believe it's all planned. I've been reading a lot of articles and things that claim this is all an excuse to make everyone buy new things and boost sales of not only M$ but all other hardware vendors (eg Corporations like Nvidia, ATI, etc it's not just video cards from the claims). I had RTM on my box back in December around christmas time. I got a Radeon 7000 for christmas. (Hey, it's a step up from VIA unichrome) I also got a sound card, because my onboard was fried. None of the factory drivers were compatible with vista. That is what made me switch back to XP. I didn't feel like playing hide-and-go seek with driver websites.

I Really don't think there is a need to upgrade, or at least not for about 3-4 years when some service packs and decent drivers/programs become compatible with vista.

Just my opinion.

[tommcd]

The one thing I might like about vista is that my guitar hero Robert Fripp is doing the soundtrack. Have you seen this:
http://channel9.msdn.com/showpost.aspx?postid=151853

[FLPCGuy]

http://www.eweek.com/article (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2048108,00.asp?kc=EWNKT0209KTX1K0100440)

I got a real hoot out of this story about the problems people will have using Vista upgrade coupons they get with PC's & XP they bought during the holidays. Newegg.com has $90 XP Home with an unspecified coupon for Vista Basic [reportedly for $50 more plus shipping & handling when you can provide bar codes, receipts, and other proof of purchase]. You'll need to install Vista over XP and hang onto your original XP CD just as you did with 98-to-XP upgrades and insert it anytime there is a significant update to add (monthly). Upgrade users will have to install Vista themselves and find drivers that work, if any, figure out how to install their old apps when the 'upgrade' fails, and generally go through the same confusion and frustrations new Linux users face but without help.

Then there's the 64-bit issue. It seems there are far fewer Windows Vista 64-bit apps than Linux 64-bit apps and almost no high end 64-bit games.

Somebody explain to me again why people are paying so much for Vista.
Forum about the upgrade coupons
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?goto=lastpost&t=1132123

[Patrick-Ruff]

I agree, Windows XP is actually better than Vista IMO.

The only thing i'm interested in thats coming out of redmond is Office 2007, specifically, Word 2007. In fact, I just keep thinking up documents that I may need to create on it. The beta was a revelation in computing. :cool:

I don't see how you think windows XP is actually better then vista, so far I've seen vista being better then XP in almost every way (except removing the file menu, that was stupid on microsofts part)

and whoever is ignorant enough to believe you need an uber computer to run Aero, you should open your eyes. my laptop with a Mobility X300 PCIe 64MB dedicated ran Aero perfectly. everything was pretty speedy.

the only thing that I hate about windows is its inability to be modified to my pleasure, and it doesn't have a good terminal.

oh and, it looks like crap. no inovation whatsoever.

[sweemeng]

been trying vista for a few minutes first hand. just a few minutes.

just by using it. it looks a lot like windows xp. but there is a few nice thing. but not necessarily useful. the 3d interface not like beryl, but does help make things less messy. when select minimized windows on taskbar, they will show the preview of the windows(not useful, but ok...:-k ).

thats is from first look.

things that i like to see, bitlocker, ready boost, ready disk, speech recognition( actually we have that for some time, just wanted to see how far does it go), ink analysis, for handwriting and tablet( don't think we have similar stuff like ink analysis in linux), collaboration, quick tab.

but from the features on vista site, there is a few feature that look familiar, UAC (i mean we like have them for ages)](*,) , gadget(i have that on win xp too). virtual folder(errr FUSE?), versioning of files( we can do that using svn or cvs for sometime)

but just by looking on the side, some of the feature does look nifty. but really how many will fully use this feature. just have to wait.

p.s some of the features, look surprisingly like beryl.

anyway, i'm a linux user. no matter how nifty the feature is. i prefer to have my machine under my control, using scripting, or comes with development tools baked in, without restriction. so linux(or probably bsd) is more suitable for me.

[insane_alien]

Originally Posted by Fatec View Post
You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

Vista does use RAM quite well, apps load fast, half of the problem you guys on here are down to lack of good drivers.

Vista isnt without its problems, but linux nor ubuntu is either.

At the end of the day, its about choice, what suits your needs, but you idiots who come on here and cry foul about everything microsoft really do make yourselfs out to be just as retarded as the microsoft fanboys who scream how bad linux is, why cant you just accept the fact both linux and windows has its uses, XP is fine for me, always has been on any comp i've installed it on, i really do wonder what sort of sites some people visit because in 12 years of computer usage i've not had one virus, spyware, or adware, but then i dont sit there looking at porn and warez sites all day (dont even try to tell me that isnt where most of these problems arise either, i do know better)

so yea, grow up, enjoy the fact u got an OS u like, and quit being immature about microsoft stuff, its stupid.

end of.

well, i did try vista on a amchine with 2GB of RAM. it got slower and slower all the time, there was no significant processor usage increase when opening programs but pagefile usage was always high and the hardrive was buzzing away with usage alot of the time when it was idle.

I can only assume that the bottle neck was because it wasn't using RAM very effectively. I wasn't trying to say 'M$ sucks a$$ big time' i think they've had some good things along the way but vista really isn't impressive and seems a bit of a step back seeing how much resources it takes to do simple things.

[Flying George]

So many claims, so little time.

So much crap, just one corporation....

[FLPCGuy]

well, i did try vista on a amchine with 2GB of RAM. it got slower and slower all the time, there was no significant processor usage increase when opening programs but pagefile usage was always high and the hardrive was buzzing away with usage alot of the time when it was idle.

I can only assume that the bottle neck was because it wasn't using RAM very effectively....
I'm not crazy about the tendency of all recent operating systems, including Ubuntu to use excess memory to cache everything in sight. If you access one lousy file from a DVD or directory, the OS assumes you will use more and caches everything, filling up your temporary files with thumbnails and reading a lot of old files you have no intention of opening, just to try to make things a bit faster if it guessed right on what you will do next. I'd rather let the memory go unused (or stay ready for use) than having the machine do all that busy work for nothing. This really becomes annoying when you have over 1 GB of RAM and certainly doesn't appear to make anything seem faster at all.

As we move to new FLASH augmented hard drivers (not to mention using USB thumb drive cache), the hardware will already be doing all the caching and predicting that will help. We don't need our OS's staying busy loading the same stuff into page files that are already in the ample HD buffers, IMHO.

[sloggerkhan]

theres a config file somewhere where you can change the tendency of your computer to use swap and cache, I believe.

[tommcd]

Why I'm still glad I switched to linux:
http://www.grc.com/SecurityNow.htm#75
If you got the time then listen to (or read) episodes #73-75 to find out all the dirty details about AACS and the next generation of DRM.

[brentroos]

.

[frolle]

So many claims, so little time.

So much crap, just one corporation....

So true.. Nothing more to say.

[Sef]

Perhaps one day Linux and FOSS in general will mean much more than a philosophy, but it won't be anytime soon.



It does mean much more than a philosophy. There is a push in in Latin American, Europe, and Asia to use GNYU/Linux.

Until the average PC user, which represents the vast, vast majority of PC users mind you, can use something like Ubuntu in an easy way, just like Windows, it will never come close to competing with Windows.

It already is.

[tommcd]

It does mean much more than a philosophy. There is a push in in Latin American, Europe, and Asia to use GNYU/Linux.



It already is.
I read once that the government of Germany decided to go with linux over windows just because MS is evil (sorry I don't have a link for this atm, it was quite a while ago, around the time that the EU was beating the crap out of MS for their monoplolistic practices).
Unforutunately, in the USA if you have enough money and enough lawyers and enough lobbyists you can get away with almost anything.
EDIT: here are the links:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2023127.stm
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-931027.html
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-982816.html
http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/main/0,14179,2869075,00.html

[pulver]

What a load of crap. First of all Microsoft did not create Vista to "compete" with any FOSS. It's FOSS that has, in it's entire existence, tried to compete with corporate business software. While there are a few arenas where FOSS dominates i.e. Apache webserver software, the desktop arena is NOT one of them. Ubuntu is cool, but still far behind XP in terms of function, which at the end of the day is what truly matters. And now Vista? The only thing going for Linux is the price dude, when it comes to competing for desktops. The fact that you have to jump through hoops to play an mp3 is only one of many reasons that I say this. Until the average PC user, which represents the vast, vast majority of PC users mind you, can use something like Ubuntu in an easy way, just like Windows, it will never come close to competing with Windows.

You can cite all of the myths you want, or call Microsoft evil or whatever, but these "words" are meaningless, because reality suggests otherwise. Sorry to spoil it for the fanboys (and gals) out there.

Perhaps one day Linux and FOSS in general will mean much more than a philosophy, but it won't be anytime soon.

As far as eyecandy goes, who cares? I want my machine to WORK.

It's time to snap into reality for just a minute okay?

You're right.. the average PC user already know about windows, it's an environment he feels safe and comfortable in.. sure the teletubby-world collapses every now and then causing hell to arise but that is to be expected.

I mean just calling him on the phone saying UBUNTU! just scares the crap out of him... something that doesn't even run his pirated games and apps. He can use all these and watch pr0n already.. getting infected by virus in the process makes perfect sense to the average PC user.

He here's this voice saying.. you can put ubuntu on your box but it may or may not work with your hardware.. the average PC user then believes ubuntu will damage his brain.. now even if he gets talked into trying it he cannot find the start button and think the system is broken.

He then believes it must be very far behind XP in terms of function.. b/q it doesn't even play mp3s out of the box it didn't came with. The average PC user then realises that windows is not only far ahead in terms of function, it's also more user-friendly and more intuitive. He's glad that Microsoft doesn't see FOSS as a threat b/q then he would really have ubuntu nightmares.

[kazuya]

Linux is worse than Vista because the name sounds too powerful. Linux is bad because it makes life too easy in computing. It makes its users contributers rather than simply users. It gives the user too many options. Users of windows need their app to do one thing only, they do not want an OS that is free that is way superior to what they are used to. They do not want freedom to change the way their software apps work. They want to be led like sheep to the slaughter. Linux is bad because it empowers its users and makes their computing too easy and reliable. Every user {window users} should want to have a little malware, spyware, virus, vendor lock ins from their ISP, and OS company. They all believe that an OS is supposed to have issues so as to have to purchase anti-virus, anti-spyware, etc.


The choice is pretty clear here. So, folks, keep on using your windows box alone, while the world of innovation passes you by. I admire what microsoft did for computing. However, my tough reasoning is why should I pay an arm and a leg or bootleg{many folks} windows XP / Vista with all its incapabilities and computing annoyances when there is a platform {linux / BSD} which is free and affords me software apps to do pretty much anything I desire in computing and is ridiculously easy to administer. Moreover, you get a say as a user into how your OS functions.

Get me a better argument than mentioned thus far to state the opposite. Also, when you think linux.., Ubuntu is one branch, there are almost over 200 variations. One is a near perfect or close adaption to every person.

For a total linux newbie or basic windows user, there is linspire, freespire, pclinuxos, mepis, Xandros, and then even ubuntu.

For an intermediate user, we have Ubuntu, Zenwalk, Vectorlinux, Suse, Mandrake, Mepis, Xandros, pclinuxos, etc

For a power user, the ones mentioned above can be used also, but now you can also add LFS, Gentoo {Sabayon}, Knoppix {Debian}, Arch, Slackware, Fedora, etc.

I personally feel that to learn pure linux, one would have to use the slackware-based distributions, or debian, arch, LFS, and maybe gentoo.

Said enough here. Use windows also as needed by you, but understand that it is no longer the best or easiest OS to use. Windows is increasingly more troublesome to manage or administer because it puts the user against his OS registery, etc.

[Malac]

I think anyone considering Vista should read this, how to program in more instability into an already unstable OS.
I think the part about NT shutting down a submarine particularly scary. :)

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/%7Epgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html)

If that doesn't put you off nothing will.

[Cannaregio]

Why has this guy Brent Roos brentroos turned into a troll?
An ex Ubuntu enthusiast (see below) turned into a windoze fanboy troller, with even a childish sig that says "Ubuntu sucks".
I can't let him out of his hooks unpunished :-)

Stalking can be a nice Web-activity, so let's flex our stalking muscles and try to find out why all this did happen...

Let's first constate some startling differences in his appreciation of Gnu-Linux OSses...

Today:
What a load of crap. First of all Microsoft did not create Vista to "compete" with any FOSS. It's FOSS that has, in it's entire existence, tried to compete with corporate business software. While there are a few arenas where FOSS dominates i.e. Apache webserver software, the desktop arena is NOT one of them. Ubuntu is cool, but still far behind XP in terms of function, which at the end of the day is what truly matters. And now Vista? The only thing going for Linux is the price dude, when it comes to competing for desktops. The fact that you have to jump through hoops to play an mp3 is only one of many reasons that I say this. Until the average PC user, which represents the vast, vast majority of PC users mind you, can use something like Ubuntu in an easy way, just like Windows, it will never come close to competing with Windows.

You can cite all of the myths you want, or call Microsoft evil or whatever, but these "words" are meaningless, because reality suggests otherwise. Sorry to spoil it for the fanboys (and gals) out there.

Perhaps one day Linux and FOSS in general will mean much more than a philosophy, but it won't be anytime soon.

As far as eyecandy goes, who cares? I want my machine to WORK.

It's time to snap into reality for just a minute okay?


But, look: here is what he wrote some time before:

I am a huge advocate for using Ubuntu. However, I will be the first to warn, that it is still Linux. It is not Windows, it is Linux. It is not a Windows replacement. Yes, Linux has come a long way. Yes Ubuntu is very userfriendly, however, let's not forget that it isn't Windows.

Ubuntu can be complicated if you are unfamilier with Linux, especially installations and partitioning, particularly in a dualboot environment.

To any and all newbies out there, considering installing Ubuntu Linux, I suggest you do your homework first, instead of hiring a tutor after installation. That is to say, get an idea of what environment you are about to move to and what challenges you may face.

This is by no means an attempt to drive people away from Ubuntu, at all. I am merly suggesting this to benefit those looking to learn this wonderful operating system. It can be a pain in the rear, if you don't know what you are doing. I have had a relatively smooth time with Ubuntu, but I am a bit experienced from using other distros. Also, I have read much beforehand.

The best thing to do, is study for at least a week, or until you are secure enough in your knowledge on the subject. Printing out some instructions and/or buying a book would not be a bad idea.

I have seen Ubuntu improve, yet it is not completely ready for the (Windows user) typical linux newbie, without any help. Hopefully, development may change this. I have tried many other Linux distros and imo, Ubuntu is, by far, the best.

To all the noobs, good luck. Google is how I learned from the get go. That, and the forums, which by the way is an exellent way to learn. You might want to read very carefully what others have done, before installation, especially in this case, where using multiple drives might be a bit complicated to less advanced users.

If installing a pure Linux system without any other parameters, installation is extremely easy, for anyone. The installer will make default partitions and you are good to go. I myself, prefer to use ReiserFS, which is not the default FS for Ubuntu, so maual partitoning is my personal preference.

Anyway, I hope it works out for you. Sometimes the quickest way we learn is when we really screw things up!



And now he even changed his sig into the absurdly childish:
"Face it, Ubuntu sucks. Stick with Windows. Support America. Down with communism!"

As documented here (http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php?searchid=13060045), he disappeared from ubuntuforums posting in september, still enjoying his Ubuntu (that he weirdly and definitely preferred "blue"), and reappeared only today, 4 months later, with two postings -as a nasty and silly windoze troll.

Well I think I found the answer - both disturbing and fascinating - just scanning quickly his blog: hllp://brentroos.com/

Seldom seen such a concoction of sectarian paranoid nonsense, but it explains imso (in my stalker opinion) his disarray realizing (finally) the iraq & neocons debacle (whose culprits are in his deranged mind, and in this order, the french, the US-democrats and the press & media) and why he now equates open source sofware, and thus Ubuntu, with evil communist-democrat-islamo-fascist enemies bent on destroying (or slaughering or beheading) the freedom loving ueber-christian US-neocons and their commercial and proprietary OS of choice: windoze :-)

[Frak]

What a load of crap. First of all Microsoft did not create Vista to "compete" with any FOSS. It's FOSS that has, in it's entire existence, tried to compete with corporate business software. While there are a few arenas where FOSS dominates i.e. Apache webserver software, the desktop arena is NOT one of them. Ubuntu is cool, but still far behind XP in terms of function, which at the end of the day is what truly matters. And now Vista? The only thing going for Linux is the price dude, when it comes to competing for desktops. The fact that you have to jump through hoops to play an mp3 is only one of many reasons that I say this. Until the average PC user, which represents the vast, vast majority of PC users mind you, can use something like Ubuntu in an easy way, just like Windows, it will never come close to competing with Windows.

You can cite all of the myths you want, or call Microsoft evil or whatever, but these "words" are meaningless, because reality suggests otherwise. Sorry to spoil it for the fanboys (and gals) out there.

Perhaps one day Linux and FOSS in general will mean much more than a philosophy, but it won't be anytime soon.

As far as eyecandy goes, who cares? I want my machine to WORK.

It's time to snap into reality for just a minute okay?
I don't agree with anything you say, many of those things make absolutely no s, and for your signature... HOW RUDE!!!

Oh, and Linux is more than a philosophy, my entire school uses it, every single client and server, all Ubuntu also, it makes my job much easier, and the students love it, for eye candy, games, ease of text work (reports), and that allows us, because not every student has a computer, to take our old computers and install Ubuntu on them and give them to the students, we don't have to worry about Licensing, price, and volume. Every student has a computer now, rich or poor, they all use OpenOffice format for typing reports with. This saves trouble with grading from students saying "we couldn't do one reason or another", because we know they all can.

Oh and something about eye candy, ubuntu has it preinstalled, its called the desktop enviroment, fully themeable, and you can get "extra" resource taking software for more eye candy IF YOU WANT IT. You are not forced to use this, as one more reason why XGL and Compiz/Beryl don't come preinstalled in Ubuntu, So this is a lie, (and don't tell lies, only little kids do that). In fact, shooting your mouth off with total BS makes you look very bad amongst the community.

And reality is, Windows is making it harder for people to use their computer, by adding useless crap. Now see here, you just told a lie against us saying this.

As far as eyecandy goes, who cares? I want my machine to WORK.

This is a problem in Vista, NOT UBUNTU! In fact if you just want your computer to WORK, then use Ubuntu instead!

1. You don't have to buy an "Office" pack
2. You don't have to buy an Upgrade
3. You don't have to worry if your computer is fast enough to run Ubuntu (comparison to Vista)
4. You don't have to worry about Badware entering your system.
and last but not least
5. You don't have to worry about Microsoft invading your system to place "stuff" that you don't want there.

Ubuntu is ready for the Desktop (I know wrong thread to say this in, but still true), its just people are too lazy to get off their (bottoms) and get around to trying something new.

(I do have to say, some of this is not the people's faults, if they knew what Microsoft was actually doing to their computer, they would probably switch too)

</rant>

[brentroos]

:d

[aysiu]

Your Goodbye Ubuntu! (http://brentroos.com/2006/08/25/goodbye-ubuntu/) blog entry was posted 25 August, 2006. It took you five months to figure out someone had hijacked it?

Sounds classic (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=1032104&postcount=2) to me.

[floke]

Bentroos,

for someone who clearly doesn't like Lx - how did you accumulate 68 beans on this forum? Was it ranting to yourself on your own threads? If Lx is so bad then why waste so much time here?

[venik212]

I have been using Ubuntu (6.10) for only a month, but here, IMHO, is why Linux cannot compete seriously with MS at this point in time, although I wish it were otherwise:
--Poor hardware support. I changed a monitor and had to recompile the restricted parts of the OS kernel-- totally unacceptable for the general public. I plugged in an ink jet printer, and again had to go through incredible installation saga, only to discover that my "parallel port is busy, will ry again in 30 seconds"; It simply does not work. XP took both changes in strides, and worked perfectly with them on the same computer.

I WANT Linux to succeed, but without reliable and accessible support for EVERY piece of hardware that is out there (my monitor and printer were very common, not esoteric), Linux is doomed to a niche. I wish it were not so, but this is the reality today.

--Another issue is the proliferation of the distros. There seem to be hundreds of them, with all the variants, and they do behave differently with hardware, software, etc. This is not a good thing. Orwell was right: there is strength in uniformity (at least when it comes to software).

I spent several years trying to stick to OS/2, and when I crawled back to WINDOWS I swore never to leave again. I hope that I shall not have to repeat the experience with Linux.

[Frak]

--Another issue is the proliferation of the distros. There seem to be hundreds of them, with all the variants, and they do behave differently with hardware, software, etc. This is not a good thing. Orwell was right: there is strength in uniformity (at least when it comes to software).

Trust me, uniformity leads to monopolizing, its not good to have just one, then freedom of choice is shot, and less is achieved than what could be from multiple communities working together, working for different causes than one great cause will cause more area to be covered and even though it is slower when spread over many projects, more good will come out of this, as people can choose what they want/need.

Linux = Freedom of Choice/Freedom to make a choice possible.

[aysiu]

Read the Unified Linux Thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=328824) or Linux doesn't need a unified distro (http://www.psychocats.net/essays/unifiedlinux)

You should also read Linux has terrible hardware support. It needs better/more drivers! (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CriticismFAQ#head-b3df9b3b424c7c689ce1b7fae199e35b5f71ca81)

[venik212]

I don't think we have a disagreement. I know the reasons for hte poor hardware support, but the average user does not and should not have to worry about these things. I would add that Nvidia cards are, supposedly, supported, but I still had to recompile the kernel to get decent screen resolution. So "support" is relative, as Einstein taught us.

This is, of course, a chicken and egg problem: if millions of people were using Linux, the manufactureres will provide the drivers, making it easier for millions to use Linux, etc.

[aysiu]

I don't think we have a disagreement. I know the reasons for hte poor hardware support, but the average user does not and should not have to worry about these things. I would add that Nvidia cards are, supposedly, supported, but I still had to recompile the kernel to get decent screen resolution. So "support" is relative, as Einstein taught us.

This is, of course, a chicken and egg problem: if millions of people were using Linux, the manufactureres will provide the drivers, making it easier for millions to use Linux, etc.
I'vr never had to recompile a kernel to install Nvidia drivers.

You're right about the chicken-and-egg problem, though. The best solution is to recommend to people the OS that works best for them in their current situation.

It'd also help for current Ubuntu users to buy hardware from only those manufacturers who support Linux--either directly by supplying drivers or indirectly by opening their code so Linux developers can incorporate them into the kernel. Money talks. If there are enough people buying hardware that supports Linux, hardware manufacturers will soon realize there's money to be made by supporting Linux.

[Frak]

I'vr never had to recompile a kernel to install Nvidia drivers.

You're right about the chicken-and-egg problem, though. The best solution is to recommend to people the OS that works best for them in their current situation.

It'd also help for current Ubuntu users to buy hardware from only those manufacturers who support Linux--either directly by supplying drivers or indirectly by opening their code so Linux developers can incorporate them into the kernel. Money talks. If there are enough people buying hardware that supports Linux, hardware manufacturers will soon realize there's money to be made by supporting Linux.
Exactly, people don't buy Ralink based cards, buy Orinoco cards, fully supported under linux.

[BoyOfDestiny]

I don't think we have a disagreement. I know the reasons for hte poor hardware support, but the average user does not and should not have to worry about these things. I would add that Nvidia cards are, supposedly, supported, but I still had to recompile the kernel to get decent screen resolution. So "support" is relative, as Einstein taught us.

This is, of course, a chicken and egg problem: if millions of people were using Linux, the manufactureres will provide the drivers, making it easier for millions to use Linux, etc.

Millions of people are using Linux... At least 8 million using Ubuntu specifically (according to Mark Shuttleworth.)

There are millions more using other distros I'm sure, then of course millions upon millions more in the server arena... Which we do share some hardware with...

I'm willing to bet adding server + desktop + embedded gadgets and gizmos, Linux must be at least the #2 OS under Windows...

Anyway, yes there are problems with certain hardware, I guess I've been lucky since 99% of mine just works without tweaking...

It will continue to improve (and as you pointed out, needs to for more people to give it a go.)

That aside, if manufactures would at least provide decent specifications, drivers would be written. I'm impressed some have gotten so far with zero help from the manufacturer...

I'd take an open driver any day as these are the ones that have "just worked" for me, and never required recompiling a kernel or some restricted thingy... I've only compiled a kernel once, since it seemed neat... Never out of necessity...

[BoyOfDestiny]

Exactly, people don't buy Ralink based cards, buy Orinoco cards, fully supported under linux.

I know, nowadays I'm careful to pick hardware that not only works with Linux, but has a free driver (as my choice of vidcards show...)

However, a lot of people are trying to stick Ubuntu on a machine that ran/run windows... And perhaps didn't hand pick the parts.

Also, stores aren't making it easy, the only devices I've seen that say "works with Linux" are usb keys...

Anyway, that's why I'm not too upset when folks have a problematic piece of hardware...

They really should check, I mean you might as well whine about a audio cassette not working in your VCR or something... But it should be MUCH MUCH easier to know if something is Linux compatible...

[Enverex]

Exactly, people don't buy Ralink based cards, buy Orinoco cards, fully supported under linux.

Yeah, I have 2 useless WiFi cards, but I simply couldn't find any cards with properly supported chipsets which made it impossible :(

[FLPCGuy]

I don't think we have a disagreement. I know the reasons for hte poor hardware support, but the average user does not and should not have to worry about these things. I would add that Nvidia cards are, supposedly, supported, but I still had to recompile the kernel to get decent screen resolution. So "support" is relative, as Einstein taught us.

This is, of course, a chicken and egg problem: if millions of people were using Linux, the manufactureres will provide the drivers, making it easier for millions to use Linux, etc.
Actually, millions probably are using Linux, but hundreds of millions if not Billions are using Windows, hence we fall in the 10% who never get the 'word' [...support , drivers, etc.]. It's purely a numbers thing,

It bugs me too. Linux today deserves better but all the distros make the market share numbers appear even worse. Until one distro approaches 10%, maybe even 5%, Linux will remain a generally unsupported backwater technology for enthusiasts [geeks?], not 'Ready' for the too easily confused masses.

What I can't figure is why so many people sheepishly accept the crap Microsoft pulls and struggle to deal with all the random, unnecessary changes in each new version of Windoze instead of saying,
'We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore!'

[Malac]

Did any of you read this link http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/%7Epgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html I posted earlier in the thread.
If MS get this pushed through, how's about your video card being "disabled" remotely if someone decides it's a security leak. Or no more open source drivers as manufacturers will be "forced" to keep some of there code/spec secret. Or have their cards disabled in Vista systems.
Which effectively means they will comply as they won't want people not being able to use their cards in the majority of machines.

The only other way round this is that NVidia, ATI, C-Media et al release two hardware versions of cards one for Linux, one for windows, I don't think they will, do you?.

How does no high definition DVD playback using Linux or Music of a listenable nature in case you have your machine line out/video out hooked up to your stereo / hdtv / dvd recorder / mp3 player.
It won't matter if you don't have any trouble now with your hardware. You will in the future. Read the paper at that link and if you aren't afraid yet, in the words of Yoda, "You will be, you will be." :)

Just my tuppence worth.

[venik212]

Some of the reponders mistakenly got the idea that I am criticizing the Linux community, or wish MS continued success. The opposite is true. I simply reported my (I am sure not atypical) frustrating experience with some rather widely used) video card and printer. I fully understand why they did not work, and why I had to recompile the kernel, but my understanding is not the issue, is it? An audio cassette is not supposed to work in a VCR, but a video card CAN work under both Windows and Linux.

I think that there is no disagreement on these key points:
1) Common hardware, in millions of machines, cannot be simply and easily used by Linux today.
2) The manufacturers are not interested, currently, in providing the needed Linux drivers, or even the specs.
3) The lack of a uniform distro reduces the apparent impact (market share) of Linux usersm which influences point #2.

No simple, near term solution is in sight, it seems,but I would hate to leave it to the Bill Gates of the world to be the sole providers of computing power. We have 25 years of experience to tell us what that might be like.

[Cannaregio]

Did any of you read this link http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/%7Epgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html I posted earlier in the thread.
If MS get this pushed through, how's about your video card being "disabled" remotely if someone decides it's a security leak. Or no more open source drivers as manufacturers will be "forced" to keep some of there code/spec secret. Or have their cards disabled in Vista systems.
Which effectively means they will comply as they won't want people not being able to use their cards in the majority of machines.

The only other way round this is that NVidia, ATI, C-Media et al release two hardware versions of cards one for Linux, one for windows, I don't think they will, do you?

I think you'r much too much pessimistic. Their chances with Vista are decrementing, not incrementing. Take this "I will disable your hardware if you are not a bastard and a slave at the same time" theory. Code is code, and any cracker can reverse it.

Granted, windoze is tons of awful spaghetti code, but still code it is, and you can "open source" windows code whenever it needs be.

In fact, contrarily to what you state, there has always been ANOTHER way round such redmondish crap: disabling the disabling code of Vista.

Thanks god, and despite all criminalisation attempts by the commercial powers that be, there are plenty of good crackers and mighty software reversers out there... :-)

And -once reversed the code- some silly virus kids could also come to the funny idea to infect those vista computer and disable just those "proprietary" cards as well, if needs be. Just the proprietary ones.
Gosh that would be funny! Not that anyone would condone such awful deeds of course, but still worth drinking some champagne as soon as it happens :-)

[Malac]

@ Cannaregio (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/member.php?u=184928)
Yes, you can hack but the point of the new code framework is that it will detect that too. If you don't want to leave security holes in your system, you need to run Windows Update then it will scan your files and check if any are not redmond hash keyed and replace them. It already does this with winlogon.exe in XP to check it isn't an activation crack version.

It also scans your bus lines, etc. every 30ms incase you have inserted anything into the system that might capture sound/video and anything it can't be certain is secure it will disable or "make fuzzy".
E.G. if, at the moment, you play a dvd on a PC with the audio going out of an spdif connection to your surround sound super-duper stereo that will be disabled or made such bad quality as to render it useless.

This is not about cracking software or even Windows necessarily it is about a Linux community that once again will suffer from MS stranglehold on the PC market and it's (IMHO) goal of wrecking the open-architecture philosophy of the original PC. MS could have turned to the Media companies and said nope we're not implementing this. The media companies would of had to take it, 95% of their market (apparently) is PC use.

Most people think too short term, like with hacking the XP Product Activation. Sure that works for a bit then it doesn't and now we have PA that can't be circumvented if you want a usable system or you're some code guru.
IMHO, this is a long-term strategy to control the world............ (of PC's and the media delivery systems anyway). :)

Wait until the only way you can get a Hi-Def Movie at home is to stream it over the net or broadband (once your credit card has received the hit).
That is what they are aiming for, it is their stated goal. "A system with a basic O.S. ....... with only personal storage and secure cache of licensed per-use programs and media streamed to the home/workstation."

Most companies at the moment don't provide drivers for video/sound cards under Linux so it is down to people in the community writing them from backwards engineering or released code if they're lucky.
This will mean that the companies won't be able to release the code and if it is hacked and written that card gets disabled in Vista machines. Manufacturer, not pleased then takes more stringent measures to ensure code is secure.

I think this is very bad for the consumer generally and shows MS way of dealing with security is "**** about face" they do this stuff to target mass pirates but they end up making normal users jump through hoops to get the stuff working.
Normally I wouldn't care about Windows users it's their choice to be tied down by MS practices but when it starts to affect my future Ubuntu/whatever system being able to play dvd or music files that is my gripe.

[FLPCGuy]

I think anyone considering Vista should read this, how to program in more instability into an already unstable OS.
I think the part about NT shutting down a submarine particularly scary. :)

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/%7Epgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html)

If that doesn't put you off nothing will.

The author of Security Watch newsletter has a few comments & questions about this:

"...DRM doesn't only apply to audio/video content. Microsoft software can be licensed/controlled by DRM too, no? If this is true, then Microsoft's implementation of DRM has a huge impact on its own revenue. It also facilitates new revenue models for Microsoft, such as pay-per-use Office applications. Obviously Microsoft isn't the only software maker who could benefit from DRM, but it seems to me that Hollywood equally isn't the only one who will benefit from the "enhanced" copy protection features in Vista.

Q: Why is there no simple Group Policy Object entry that outright
denies the ability to run anything that requires DRM enforcement? I can
imagine that many corporations would be very happy to set such
enforcement in order to ensure they could not become liable for
copyright infringements by their employees. Why wouldn't Microsoft
provide such a feature so obviously beneficial to the fight against
copyright infringement and so clearly possible to implement? If you
can detect that DRM is required, you can easily just prevent it from
running, and avoid everything else that DRM requires. Companies could
avoid unnecessary software/hardware updates/upgrades until the system
has been set to allow DRM-governed content. It should be the company's
choice to allow such content to be used, and nobody else's.

Q: Where can one find a complete listing of all the choices Microsoft
provides to content authors when assembling their DRM policies,
together with a thorough explanation for consumers regarding just what
each policy choice means to them and/or their equipment/experience?
Policy enforcement is done upon insertion of the content; where is the
disclosure of just what I am accepting by doing that? As it is, I have
to accept whatever happens when I run DRM-protected content without
knowing, in technical detail, what I've accepted.

Q: Nick states that DRM policies only affect the content that is
protected. Does Microsoft guarantee that a content author's policy
choices will not affect content/experiences not owned by that author
or governed by that author's policy choices? If an author's policy
choices do affect something else, who is the consumer to turn to?"

The abuse of DRM could turn the public against Microsoft, especially when Vista won't allow output to their home entertainment gear. Balmer [M$] is shooting himself in the foot...the home entertainment market will be huge. Apple will certainly capitalize on this blunder.

[g3k0]

I've played with the Business edition (not the rc) and I am not impressed. I prefer Beryl any day of the week. VIsta seems slow and ... xp-like with prettiness. I think Linux will keep up just fine. One thing I did notice was how fast it shutdown... but thats about it.

[tommcd]

The author of Security Watch newsletter has a few comments & questions about this:

"...DRM doesn't only apply to audio/video content. Microsoft software can be licensed/controlled by DRM too, no? If this is true, then Microsoft's implementation of DRM has a huge impact on its own revenue. It also facilitates new revenue models for Microsoft, such as pay-per-use Office applications. Obviously Microsoft isn't the only software maker who could benefit from DRM, but it seems to me that Hollywood equally isn't the only one who will benefit from the "enhanced" copy protection features in Vista.

Q: Why is there no simple Group Policy Object entry that outright
denies the ability to run anything that requires DRM enforcement? I can
imagine that many corporations would be very happy to set such
enforcement in order to ensure they could not become liable for
copyright infringements by their employees. Why wouldn't Microsoft
provide such a feature so obviously beneficial to the fight against
copyright infringement and so clearly possible to implement? If you
can detect that DRM is required, you can easily just prevent it from
running, and avoid everything else that DRM requires. Companies could
avoid unnecessary software/hardware updates/upgrades until the system
has been set to allow DRM-governed content. It should be the company's
choice to allow such content to be used, and nobody else's.

Q: Where can one find a complete listing of all the choices Microsoft
provides to content authors when assembling their DRM policies,
together with a thorough explanation for consumers regarding just what
each policy choice means to them and/or their equipment/experience?
Policy enforcement is done upon insertion of the content; where is the
disclosure of just what I am accepting by doing that? As it is, I have
to accept whatever happens when I run DRM-protected content without
knowing, in technical detail, what I've accepted.

Q: Nick states that DRM policies only affect the content that is
protected. Does Microsoft guarantee that a content author's policy
choices will not affect content/experiences not owned by that author
or governed by that author's policy choices? If an author's policy
choices do affect something else, who is the consumer to turn to?"

The abuse of DRM could turn the public against Microsoft, especially when Vista won't allow output to their home entertainment gear. Balmer [M$] is shooting himself in the foot...the home entertainment market will be huge. Apple will certainly capitalize on this blunder.

You may be interested in reading this:
http://www.grc.com/sn/SN-074.htm
Or, for a different view, read this:
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2006/pulpit_20061208_001308.html
I think Cringely is right.

[laosboyme]

Because it will be windows end Vista will be more expensive as you know :KS

And its time that Linux kick in you'll just need to react to those FUDs and Stupid Anti-Linux Articles:guitar:

[djb21212]

To be honest, I'm not even worried about Vista. I tried RC2 not too long ago and it was junk. Half of the programs wouldn't even function and, personally, Firefox or even Opera is much better for web browsing than IE7's so-called interface. Ironically, it really is a lot faster shutting itself down. Maybe that's an omen of Microsoft's own future embedded in it's own overpriced software?

In any case, I forsee a lot more Linux boxes out there very soon 'cause of this.

[elbeto]

Something has been bugging me since I have switched to Ubuntu several months ago. Don't get me wrong I LOVE Linux, and Ubuntu is the best distribution I have used (3), but the upcoming Windows Vista release seems to be Microsoft's big reteliation on the opposing free software threat, attempting to make every possible improvement that Linux does on Windows and more. How will the open-source community react, and will this be the end of the time when Linux is simply been better?

Internet Explorer and Firefox has been one of my concerns. IE7 provides tabbed browsing, an RSS reader and claimed %50 better security over IE6, in addition to a overall much more pleasing interface. Will Firefox maintain it's position as a viable competitor?

Vista's new widget API, Aero, which draws glossy trasparencies, blurs and shadows that I am yet to see in a fully stable and supported OpenGL window manager. Will XGL, and hence GNOME and hence Ubuntu feature such good looking graphics-accellerated features by default before Vista officially takes the cake?

What about all the other software improvements, like Office 2007 and Windows Media Player? Will OpenOffice.org and Totem/Rythmbox and the rest of Ubuntu's software be able to keep up?

These are just some things that have been on my mind while reading about Microsoft's new software. I would really like to hear what other people have heard and their opinions!

And remember this is not your average Linux vs Windows thread, this is about Ubuntu, Vista and where you see Ubuntu and it's software being at the time of Vista's release.


I have a $299 good reason to keep using Ubuntu, and that is just for getting the new OS, because I will have to put another $1500 to have a computer that can take the new OS.

Features wise I think that Linux is in shape of getting better against MS, but you have to admit that those guys put much more money and time to get things done that the Linux community does, and that reflects in the products.

Most of the applications for MS and MS itself are bussiness like, and not always meet all the needs of home users, so in that regard I think that Linux have more to gain.

Your question is part of the grand conversation about when Linux will take off, I think there are much more linux users these days than a year before for example, so you are getting more and better products. The only thing that keeps Linux out of the competition is that business prefer Windows because 1000 of reasons, that for me as individual don't make sense.

If I had my own small business I will run Open source products as much as possible because the learning curve is not that big.

I think you should stick with Ubuntu and see what happens.

:guitar:

[Frak]

As I just learned, I will not use Vista in the forseeable future due to its DRM protection, not because I'm going to do anything illegal, but because if the hardware manufacturer doesn't pay its dues per week to the DRM company or whatever it is, or Microsoft, then Microsoft will deactivate your hardware, and that is total BS. I don't want to be playing a game when my video card just goes out, because X company forgot to pay X amount to whomever, just another reason why people will be migrating to Apple and Linux.

[Malac]

As I just learned, I will not use Vista in the forseeable future due to its DRM protection, not because I'm going to do anything illegal, but because if the hardware manufacturer doesn't pay its dues per week to the DRM company or whatever it is, or Microsoft, then Microsoft will deactivate your hardware, and that is total BS. I don't want to be playing a game when my video card just goes out, because X company forgot to pay X amount to whomever, just another reason why people will be migrating to Apple and Linux.
Yeah, it seems they are looking at doing this when you updated your Security Certificates and so on. Sort of like a Device Certificate update. So if you wanted to make sure your system is still up to secure browsing etc. you would have to run this update. Also any hardware manufacturer not complying doesn't get a Device Certificate for their super-duper video card so Vista just feeds it "fuzzy" information rendering it useless.
Bye-bye video-projector output to your home cinema until they can get that interface secured.

[celsofaf]

Bye-bye video-projector output to your home cinema until they can get that interface secured.

By "secure" they mean "impossible to make a copy of the video", right? So, no way! There is always the analogic hole.

[syxbit]

I'd previously tried beta 2, and was NOT impressed.
As I first installed the RTM, I must say, I was very impressed.
installation was quick, painful, and MUCH easier/smoother than edgy.
It was so easy!
You just picked the partion, and clicked install.
No worrying about swap, mounting points, or anything else.
EVERYTHING worked out of the box.
Widescreen support, wireless etc..
I obviously still had to put the nVidia driver on though.

The level of polish and look was really good.
Lets be honest, there's a lot to like about Vista.
In many ways it's far superior to Edgy.
Unfortunately, there's a lot NOT to like, and in many ways it's inferior to even XP.
It crashed on me 3 times in the same night (just while installing a few programs)
The UAC (User account protection) is the most annoying thing in the world.
Luckily you can turn it off.
same for DEP or NoExecute Protection.
Problem is, turning them off requires either a registry hack, or typing something in the command prompt.
an unnecessary pain.


Despite this, I think it's unfair to just blindly say Vista sucks.
It is not yet stable enough (but with SP1, and driver improvements from nVidia etc... it should become more stable over time.)

Rather than be a linux fanboy, I think Ubuntu could learn quite a few things from Vista.
I just wish more of us were open minded.
Just as it annoys us that windows users won't install linux because they think it's only for programmers (despite what we tell them) We shouldn't say "vista sucks" just because it's Micro$oft and not OSS.

The new start menu is good.
Right click menu is better than Ubuntu's.
Control panel is much improved.
The way it organises games is improved.

The new windows explorer (despite crashing on me) seems netter than Nautilus. It's easier to browse around.

The sidebar is better than I thought. It only stays on the desktop, so it isn't really intrusive. Adding post-it notes, cpu speed/mem. usage etc.. is pretty cool

Aero is certainly more polished/better then either Compiz/Beryl.

I've used Compiz and Beryl, but despite claims, they're not 100% stable.
Aero seemed to have no effect on stability.
I personal won't use compiz until it's 100% stable.
I can't have my main OS crashing because of flashy USELESS effects.

people shouldn't be so critical on the price.
Most people will get it for free (not really free, but they'll get it "free" with a new computer, so price really isn't 'an issue.)

I just think we should be open minded. neither windows nor linux sucks.
Both have their place.
I've just seen a few linux gurus doing really stupid things, like running apps in wine instead of dual booting. I know wine works well in some cases, but not well enough for photoshop or other high end apps.
Some linux users have this fear of anything microsoft. We shouldn't fear it.
I can honestly say I spend 98% of my time in Ubuntu, but if vista were to become more stable and better, I'd shift more time over to it.
Isn't that what an open minded person would do?
Use the better product, despite what it is?
I had a friend using linux, and I asked him
"If vista became incredible, and was way better than linux in EVERY WAY, would you use it?"
now obviously this isn't going to happen, but it was a hypothetical question.
he replied "no, because it's m$"
isn't that a bit ridiculous?

your thoughts?

[kairu0]

Most people on this forum are already open-minded. I would say that the average user of this forum bought a computer that already had Windows installed, and so is already aware that there are alternatives and was open enough to try one.

Open-mindedness is one of the things that keeps the community together, and so when a Linux user criticizes an M$ product, they probably have a good reason to do so. Fortunately, Linux, being open source (and free), can be improved more easily than closed-minded, corporate products.

[cunawarit]

Well, I'm one of those Windows users that also uses Linux. However, I am a programmer... Nevertheless, I am of the opinion that many Linux distros are easier to install than aging XP. It is good to know that Vista is better on this front.

I am a little concerned about Vista crashing on you, my current year old XP SP2 machine has never crashed, I am not overly keen on migrating to something that is not going to be as stable. Having said that, apparently SP1 isn't that far away.

I can't give an opinion on Vista, but I am very keen to migrate as soon as funds allow.

[healthpellets]

Thanks for the review.

The reason that I won't be purchasing Vista is more of a philosophical reason. Shouldn't it damn well be the best OS after 5 years and $6B spent? But that's beside the point. MS's business practices are antithetical to my belief in freedom and respecting the human being. It appears that MS views the end user not as person with dignity and freedom, but as a profit source. That is not acceptable. They could at least incorporate some end user freedom and not be so blatant about their views.

So no, I won't be using Vista...or any other MS product that I can avoid. And that's for the same reason I don't shop at Wal-Mart / Target, McDonalds / Wendy's, etc.

[Malac]

By "secure" they mean "impossible to make a copy of the video", right? So, no way! There is always the analogic hole.
Exactly so they "fuzzy" the picture sent to that device so you can't use it to copy from, the unfortunate side effect is that you'll probably end up with an external HD screen with a picture quality that looks like a 1970's CRT (the spec's so far suggest a 640x480 16 bit output) or a Top of the Range digital stereo that sounds like a tiny/tinney transistor radio.

[syxbit]

I respect your ethics healthpellets, but (call me stupid) I will end up using the product I think is best. Price is not an issue. Considering the amount of time I spend at a computer, what's $200 over the course of 4 years?

[cunawarit]

It appears that MS views the end user not as person with dignity and freedom, but as a profit source.

No more so than most other companies.

They do offer their software cheaper for educational purposes, and they also offer some of their products as free Express editions. Am I slightly annoyed that Vista costs what it costs? Yes a little, specially because my other OS of choice, Debian, is free, and OSX is much cheaper.

At the same time Microsoft has given me a living as a .NET developed, the price of Vista is nothing compared to what I have earned in the last couple of years.

[syxbit]

lets not forget that vista will last >4 years with FREE service packs
that's about $50/year
that's cheap than Appl as they are usually $120 every 18mo.

i know linux is free, (and i'm glad) but $50 a year isn't bad.
considering how much we use a computer

[cunawarit]

lets not forget that vista will last >4 years with FREE service packs
that's about $50/year that's cheap than Appl as they are usually $120 every 18mo.

i know linux is free, (and i'm glad) but $50 a year isn't bad.
considering how much we use a computer

The problem is that you have to fork out for it all in one go, IMHO Windows isn't that expensive considering what some software costs. But still, Vista Ultimate at £350 is only £50 less than a Mini Mac with OSX included.

That's the issue, £350 for a some software seems like a lot for the average home user used to paying much less for software. £90 every 12 months for the Ultimate version of Windows wouldn't seem so bad, as that's more inline with the sort of software the average Joe can buy at PC World.

PS: Maybe I'm wrong though, it has been a long time since I buy any software. All my software other than Windows itself is free (both as in speech and beer).

[syxbit]

i agree. But most people will get Home-Premium "free" with their new PC's

what's thte difference between getting windows "free" on your PC, or installing a free OSS on it?
either way, they're not paying.

[kevinf311]

My beta testing of Vista was one of two major reasons that I would not be purchasing Vista at any time in the near future. The other was DRM based, not so much DRM itself, but what it is making the hardware manufactures have to do to keep ms happy. It seems a poor way to conduct business in my opinion.

I am glad that the actual release is much easier and more stable than the testers. It's good that the installer is user friendly too, even though few consumers will ever see it (unless they bork their sytem, but even then, maybe not). My roommate purchased Vista Ultimate Premium Super Fun Happy Time edition or whatever the highest one is called, as well as Office2007 (which I beta tested and loved! It is a wonderful app). I was worried for his sake that he would not have an enjoyable computer experience right off. It is good to hear that it is stable, and I might help him turn off that UAC thing as I remember it breaking up my computing experience every 40 seconds or so when I was testing.

His computer is robust enough to run Vista and I made sure he got a new Video card with DVI instead of VGA so he could run "Premium" content without it being down-mixed. It's good to hear for his sake that this OS is not the steaming pile I expected it to be :)

[cunawarit]

what's thte difference between getting windows "free" on your PC, or installing a free OSS on it?
either way, they're not paying.

Personally my issue is that you don't get the install discs with a new PC, you just tend to get a restore disc.

Whereas with Linux you do get the whole caboodle with many more install options.

Having said that, if I had to choose between using exclusively between either OEM Windows and Debian I'd stick with Windows. Some of the things I do at home like connecting with my phone are still as far as I know not supported by Debian.

[smoker]

Originally Posted by syxbit View Post
what's thte difference between getting windows "free" on your PC, or installing a free OSS on it?
either way, they're not paying.

where do you get the idea that windows is 'free' on a pc? it is part of the price you pay for the package, and you are very limited in what you can do with this 'free' copy of windows that you are getting, read the eula!

[syxbit]

where do you get the idea that windows is 'free' on a pc? it is part of the price you pay for the package, and you are very limited in what you can do with this 'free' copy of windows that you are getting, read the eula!

i don't see how this is hard to understand (not to sound rude)
most people who don't build their own PC's, can't really buy a computer WITHOUT windows, so in a sense, it's bundled in for free.
you can't buy it without windows, so there's not an option to save the money that dell pays microsoft

[Taino]

people shouldn't be so critical on the price.
Most people will get it for free (not really free, but they'll get it "free" with a new computer, so price really isn't 'an issue.)

Windows price is bundled into the price of new PC's so lets say you buy a $1000.00 computer $200.00 or so of that money just went to paying for Windows and $800.00 went to paying for the computer itself.

There is no free Windows for consumers in general...

I just think we should be open minded. neither windows nor linux sucks.
Both have their place.

I think your missing the point here, This isnt about "you and me" or (the public in general), This is about choice and no-choice and if it were up to MicroSoftt (and it has been for some time in PC land) you would have no choices available but Windows,

MicroSoftt is not interested in you having choices, They are a profit based company and they and their stock holders are not interested in you having any choices other than using the product that makes them profitable.

For a long time there were few if any choices out there for desktop computing and nowadays that is changing and change is good, change means options, options mean choices, choices mean freedom, and freedom is priceless.

I support those who support my freedom of choice and i dont support those who would stomp all over my freedom of choice and lock me into their monopoly, I dont support those who tell PC makers to either install their OS in new PC's or else get sued, I dont support those who sell me a CD for $200.00 when it costs them 10 cents to make the CD overseas, I dont support those who try and block out "dual boot" capabilities to block out other OS's etc.

Linux is more than happy to co-exsist with Windows, but Windows makers are only interested in the demise of Linux, MS wants dominance not co-exsistence.

Use what you like but never lose sight of the bigger picture.

[smoker]

i don't see how this is hard to understand (not to sound rude)
most people who don't build their own PC's, can't really buy a computer WITHOUT windows, so in a sense, it's bundled in for free.
you can't buy it without windows, so there's not an option to save the money that dell pays microsoft

the windows operating system is not free, the fact that some people cannot buy a computer without windows, does not mean they are getting the operating system for nothing, they are still paying for it, and if someone cannot buy a pc without windows, and gets rid of it to use linux, they have still payed microsoft for the priviledge, commonly referred to as the ms tax.

[blastus]

The UAC (User account protection) is the most annoying thing in the world. Luckily you can turn it off.

Looks like UAC is going to be huge failure if people are just going to turn it off. I've said it before and I'll say it again, running as root or administrator on a machine is a dumb idea. Personally, I run as administrator on Windows because I just don't give a damn if it gets trashed because I don't use Windows for much of anything anymore. I would not recommend this practice to someone who uses Windows.

i don't see how this is hard to understand (not to sound rude) most people who don't build their own PC's, can't really buy a computer WITHOUT windows, so in a sense, it's bundled in for free. you can't buy it without windows, so there's not an option to save the money that dell pays microsoft

I'm not sure how you can possibly think Windows is free in ANY context whatsoever. Do you have a car? If you do then you must fill it up with gas. Well, your government collects taxes on gas and that is factored into the cost which is hidden from you. If there were no such taxes, the price of gas would be cheaper, ergo the price of gas is affected by the taxes on it.

The price of a PC is affected by the inclusion of Windows on it regardless of who manufacturers the PC. The fact that it is near impossible to buy a blackbox PC without Windows on it does not imply that Windows is sort of free. Where I live, one can save about $80 on a whitebox PC with an Intel processor without Windows XP Home and about $120 on a whitebox PC with an AMD processor without Windows XP Home.

[rsambuca]

you can't buy it without windows, so there's not an option to save the moneyActually, there are many places where you can buy computers without Windows. I haven't checked with Vista yet, but if you wanted a rig without XP, they deducted approx $150 (this was about a year ago up here in Calgary).

Anyways, I am sure I will end up using Vista eventually, as there are a few things we need XP for now. Until then, I am not going to rush out and get Vista, although I like the RC2 I have been using for a while now. Too many driver issues that I don't think will be 100% sorted out right away. I'll probably wait until SP1 or SP2. So for now, XP, ubuntu, Sabayon, and whatever distro I decide to add will more than fulfill my needs.

[brt]

imho it's not a matter of costs or better features, to me it is a about good or evil!

the money you give to m$ ends up in a company that seriously endangers our freedom,
yes also the freedom of us linux users.

and even worse, also linux users will pay:

„Windows Vista includes an extensive reworking of core OS elements in
order to provide content protection for so-called "premium content",
typically HD data from Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sources. Providing this
protection incurs considerable costs in terms of system performance,
system stability, technical support overhead, and hardware and software
cost. These issues affect not only users of Vista but the entire PC
industry, since the effects of the protection measures extend to cover
all hardware and software that will ever come into contact with Vista,
even if it's not used directly with Vista (for example hardware in a
Macintosh computer or on a Linux server). This document analyses the
cost involved in Vista's content protection, and the collateral damage
that this incurs throughout the computer industry.”

this is really worth a read:

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt

[FLPCGuy]

As I just learned, I will not use Vista in the forseeable future due to its DRM protection, not because I'm going to do anything illegal, but because if the hardware manufacturer doesn't pay its dues per week to the DRM company or whatever it is, or Microsoft, then Microsoft will deactivate your hardware, and that is total BS. I don't want to be playing a game when my video card just goes out, because X company forgot to pay X amount to whomever, just another reason why people will be migrating to Apple and Linux.

Same here. Whatever Linux lacks vs M$ at this point is a fair trade for what we don't want added by corporate hogs and Big Brother. I'm making the break, drawing the line at XP and I've got a free (less shipping) upgrade to Vista coming that will not be used.

Perhaps I should get more serious about using only Open Source Software too.

[Frak]

Same here. Whatever Linux lacks vs M$ at this point is a fair trade for what we don't want added by corporate hogs and Big Brother. I'm making the break, drawing the line at XP and I've got a free (less shipping) upgrade to Vista coming that will not be used.

Perhaps I should get more serious about using only Open Source Software too.
My shoulder is starting to hurt from M$ looking over it so much. 'nuff said!

[tagginannie]

I think your missing the point here, This isnt about "you and me" or (the public in general), This is about choice and no-choice and if it were up to MicroSoftt (and it has been for some time in PC land) you would have no choices available but Windows,

MicroSoftt is not interested in you having choices, They are a profit based company and they and their stock holders are not interested in you having any choices other than using the product that makes them profitable.

For a long time there were few if any choices out there for desktop computing and nowadays that is changing and change is good, change means options, options mean choices, choices mean freedom, and freedom is priceless.

I support those who support my freedom of choice and i dont support those who would stomp all over my freedom of choice and lock me into their monopoly, I dont support those who tell PC makers to either install their OS in new PC's or else get sued, I dont support those who sell me a CD for $200.00 when it costs them 10 cents to make the CD overseas, I dont support those who try and block out "dual boot" capabilities to block out other OS's etc.

Linux is more than happy to co-exsist with Windows, but Windows makers are only interested in the demise of Linux, MS wants dominance not co-exsistence.

Use what you like but never lose sight of the bigger picture.

It looks like that we wont have much of choice soon. M$ is set to push new web and audio standards on usWitch would force us to use Vista
Rivals attack Vista as illegal under EU rules:mad: (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070126/tc_nm/vista_microsoft_eu_dc_5)

Suzy

[Polygon]

if microsoft published standards that forced us to use their operating system, then that would be considered a monopoly and the first person to sue microsft over it would most likely win

and also, the whole goal of vista was to shake off its "windows is spyware/virus heaven". And with a LOT of people saying that UAC is really fing annoying, and they just turn it off, and microsoft still shutting out anti virus makers, it seems that vista will soon become what xp was.

[xArv3nx]

Hi.

My problem with Vista is that it needs a supercomputer (hyperbole) to run good. I'm mainly talking about RAM here. I had 768 MB of RAM, Intel Pentium 4 2.8 GHZ, and a GeForce 6600 GT, and it still ran crappy.

My opinion was every public thing they put out just seemed to be horrible. I mean, Pre-RC1 was faster than RC1 was. (Pre-RC1 had a limited download amount) Beta 2 sucked.

I haven't tried it in a while, because I kind of fried my motherboard on the Pentium 4. BUT, from what I can tell, it needs a good amount of memory (1GB+).

I really like Vista, now if only I could use it. :(

[tagginannie]

if microsoft published standards that forced us to use their operating system, then that would be considered a monopoly and the first person to sue microsft over it would most likely win

and also, the whole goal of vista was to shake off its "windows is spyware/virus heaven". And with a LOT of people saying that UAC is really fing annoying, and they just turn it off, and microsoft still shutting out anti virus makers, it seems that vista will soon become what xp was.


I don't think that so, M$ may not be able to get away with monopolistic ways in
Europe but, In the US and some other countries all they have to do is bribe
the right people and they can get away with all most any thing

Suzy

[kairu0]

what's thte difference between getting windows "free" on your PC, or installing a free OSS on it?
either way, they're not paying.

Windows is never free. Even pre-installed, it is still a large hidden cost of a new PC.

[syxbit]

Looks like UAC is going to be huge failure if people are just going to turn it off. I've said it before and I'll say it again, running as root or administrator on a machine is a dumb idea. Personally, I run as administrator on Windows because I just don't give a damn if it gets trashed because I don't use Windows for much of anything anymore. I would not recommend this practice to someone who uses Windows.



I'm not sure how you can possibly think Windows is free in ANY context whatsoever. Do you have a car? If you do then you must fill it up with gas. Well, your government collects taxes on gas and that is factored into the cost which is hidden from you. If there were no such taxes, the price of gas would be cheaper, ergo the price of gas is affected by the taxes on it.

The price of a PC is affected by the inclusion of Windows on it regardless of who manufacturers the PC. The fact that it is near impossible to buy a blackbox PC without Windows on it does not imply that Windows is sort of free. Where I live, one can save about $80 on a whitebox PC with an Intel processor without Windows XP Home and about $120 on a whitebox PC with an AMD processor without Windows XP Home.

a bad comparison.
you can't buy gas without a govt. tax.

I'm not saying windows is free. I'm saying you can't consider it a cost if it comes included in the price.
99% of PC buyers get it, so buy them later installing Ubuntu, they haven't saved any money.

frequent comparisons say "yea, but Ubuntu is free"
but most users have already bought XP, so comparing price isn't that big of a deal.
they aren't going to switch from XP that they've already paid for to Ubuntu just b/c it's free, because, like I said, XP SEEMS free to them.

[BoyOfDestiny]

I'd previously tried beta 2, and was NOT impressed.
As I first installed the RTM, I must say, I was very impressed.
installation was quick, painful, and MUCH easier/smoother than edgy.
It was so easy!
You just picked the partion, and clicked install.
No worrying about swap, mounting points, or anything else.
EVERYTHING worked out of the box.
Widescreen support, wireless etc..
I obviously still had to put the nVidia driver on though.


Hmm. Try it this way. Install Ubuntu first. Then install Vista... Well, did it resize your Ubuntu partition and setup the bootloader for you?

If you use the Ubuntu install and let it go automatically, you don't have to play with partitions and swap. Personally I like /home separately as well swap... It is just a choice though.

Also, on my computer, everything worked out of the box (well ok, I needed to install 915resolution for 1920x1200, but xorg had it right... New intel driver should solve it) Although hardware configs and drivers vary with Linux, same goes for Vista as things are now.

Now when you put the nvidia driver, did you have to go to a website or a central package manager. Did you find one harder than the other (I don't know as I've always used open source video drivers, either old radeons or now the current intel ones... So it's out of the box...)


The level of polish and look was really good.
Lets be honest, there's a lot to like about Vista.
In many ways it's far superior to Edgy.
Unfortunately, there's a lot NOT to like, and in many ways it's inferior to even XP.
It crashed on me 3 times in the same night (just while installing a few programs)


What is there to like? Can you be specific what you prefer over edgy? Edgy won't require activation and need to verify your install. It runs on a larger variety of hardware (i,e, ppc too, and with lower memory, cpu, well actually pretty much every requirement...) Also, it's nice to not have to repurchase it if you change a motherboard (assuming you have an OEM vista...)


The UAC (User account protection) is the most annoying thing in the world.
Luckily you can turn it off.
same for DEP or NoExecute Protection.
Problem is, turning them off requires either a registry hack, or typing something in the command prompt.
an unnecessary pain.



That sounds hard, Vista will never be ready for the masses unless there is a GUI to disable it (tongue in cheek)


Despite this, I think it's unfair to just blindly say Vista sucks.
It is not yet stable enough (but with SP1, and driver improvements from nVidia etc... it should become more stable over time.)


I think Vista sucks because of this:
http://badvista.fsf.org/what-s-wrong-with-microsoft-windows-vista


Rather than be a linux fanboy, I think Ubuntu could learn quite a few things from Vista.
I just wish more of us were open minded.
Just as it annoys us that windows users won't install linux because they think it's only for programmers (despite what we tell them) We shouldn't say "vista sucks" just because it's Micro$oft and not OSS.


Here I mostly agree. Although, I don't have much patience with MS due to their business practices and FUD in regard to Linux. You are right though, I rather not say "Vista sucks". I posted a link above, and say here is why I think it's bad. They can decide on their own. Maybe learn about an alternative, if he/she wants it.



The new start menu is good.
Right click menu is better than Ubuntu's.
Control panel is much improved.
The way it organises games is improved.


Can't comment on the start menu.
How is the right click better? I've heard "open with" is gone now.
Again can't comment on control panel, I can just say ubuntu feisty has gnome-control-center. Which I find fast and friendly.

Did Windows organize games before? I think everything was in Program files and in some folder in the start menu...

The new windows explorer (despite crashing on me) seems netter than Nautilus. It's easier to browse around.

The sidebar is better than I thought. It only stays on the desktop, so it isn't really intrusive. Adding post-it notes, cpu speed/mem. usage etc.. is pretty cool

Aero is certainly more polished/better then either Compiz/Beryl.

I've used Compiz and Beryl, but despite claims, they're not 100% stable.
Aero seemed to have no effect on stability.
I personal won't use compiz until it's 100% stable.
I can't have my main OS crashing because of flashy USELESS effects.


Hmm, can't really comment here either. Can you be specific on what makes it easier to browse? Also, is Aero more polished? all I've read are praises beryl. And having used beryl, I'd agree... I guess give beryl/compiz time? Or disable the effects you find useless.



people shouldn't be so critical on the price.
Most people will get it for free (not really free, but they'll get it "free" with a new computer, so price really isn't 'an issue.)


Why? It's their money. If you get an OEM version it's not an issue. Unless you don't actually use it, and can't buy it without it. Or perhaps you'd be upset if you have to purchase a new copy due to too many hardware changes (or 1 change, new mobo)


I just think we should be open minded. neither windows nor linux sucks.
Both have their place.


I disagree, if whatever functionality windows offered is cloned (let's say wine 1.0), Windows wouldn't be that useful would it?


I've just seen a few linux gurus doing really stupid things, like running apps in wine instead of dual booting. I know wine works well in some cases, but not well enough for photoshop or other high end apps.
Some linux users have this fear of anything microsoft. We shouldn't fear it.

I thought we needed to be open minded... It's "stupid" to run windows apps through an interpreter like wine... Or to have to have a copy of windows, reboot and run it in that environment. Then reboot, just for that ONE app... Don't mistake fear for contempt.


I can honestly say I spend 98% of my time in Ubuntu, but if vista were to become more stable and better, I'd shift more time over to it.
Isn't that what an open minded person would do?
Use the better product, despite what it is?


Use what OS you want, it's nice to have the choice, isn't it? As for just using what is best, despite what it is... Well, if you can live with it, not a problem then?


I had a friend using linux, and I asked him
"If vista became incredible, and was way better than linux in EVERY WAY, would you use it?"
now obviously this isn't going to happen, but it was a hypothetical question.
he replied "no, because it's m$"
isn't that a bit ridiculous?


Hmm, for it to become better (since that's my opinion) it would have to become Free software. In that case, I would definitely give it a go.

If you consider your friend's thoughts ridiculous, then you may not be as open minded as you think.


your thoughts?
You got 'em. :)

[syxbit]

interesting reply.
I do like that it's open source, but at the end of the day, I'm going to use the OS I deem best (right now edgy,)
This could change at any time.
I'm not going to not use a great product JUST because it's M$
that would be closed minded

[Big-Wayne]

Hi,
I just installed Edgy on a new sata drive, so thought I would install RC1 on the old drive. Edgy installed out of the box within 2 hours, once I had added repos. RC1, and I know it's unfair to compare Vista with RC1 but it blue screened three times on install............so I binned it and put XP on it.............which took longer than Edgy, and discovered I had to buy software for the DVD to work.
I won't be installing Vista because of one reason alone........DRM. I believe in choice.
Please read the following article and tell me you think Vista is really in the interest of choice;
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

Remember what Ubuntu stands for;

http://www.ubuntu.com/htdocs/uweb/menu/ubuntu-def.png

Wayne

[BoyOfDestiny]

interesting reply.
I do like that it's open source, but at the end of the day, I'm going to use the OS I deem best (right now edgy,)
This could change at any time.
I'm not going to not use a great product JUST because it's M$
that would be closed minded

We all have different criteria of best.
Use what you want. :)

One thing though, you didn't answer why you like the right click menu more and explorer vs nautilus. I'm genuinely curious, it might be worth filing a bug report or suggestion...

[erlyrisa]

I think the issue isn't wether Vista is better than the average Linux distro, but how much more ahead they're programming model is, and how well integrated it is into the OS. -.Net3 is what the linux communtiy has to worry about. I mean as a programmer why would I bother doing anything on Linux when I can get VC# express, pretend I am doing complex programming (because of the C word) and pretty much open source all of my programming as Xaml and C#- I am starting to find that there are plenty of open source >net code aound now-adays, and I expect that to influx even more when vista is on more PC's. Msoft has just given all programmers a good kick in the OpenSoftware!

-Not only that expect the web to slowly transition to Xaml as .net WPF and such - I really haven't seen any Gecko XUL on the net, which would have been great if people actually used the Gecko engine but this WPF stuff is going to /Everywhere ain't it!.

[Trebuchet]

Hi.

My problem with Vista is that it needs a supercomputer (hyperbole) to run good. I'm mainly talking about RAM here. I had 768 MB of RAM, Intel Pentium 4 2.8 GHZ, and a GeForce 6600 GT, and it still ran crappy.

My opinion was every public thing they put out just seemed to be horrible. I mean, Pre-RC1 was faster than RC1 was. (Pre-RC1 had a limited download amount) Beta 2 sucked.

I haven't tried it in a while, because I kind of fried my motherboard on the Pentium 4. BUT, from what I can tell, it needs a good amount of memory (1GB+).

I really like Vista, now if only I could use it. :(Let's face it: Despite the complaints about steep hardware requirements for Vista, who here wouldn't rather be running their OS of choice on one of those megapowerful systems? Sure, Linux will run fine on older machines with less memory, but we'd all love to have a dual or quad-core CPU with a couple GB of RAM. I can appreciate the fact that many people, stuck with older systems, try to make lemonade out of their lemons, but let's be realistic - we all crave more horsepower under the hood.

I'll probably be buying a new system in the next few weeks, and it'll have Vista installed. It's not because I need a new OS (My experiences with both XP and Linux has been positive) but because I really need a newer system (This one is now 7 years old) and it's time to upgrade. But since Dell or whoever I buy it from is going to be kind enough to give me Vista on my new system, I'll happily accept it. I'd probably buy a Mac if finances weren't so tight, but I'm not impressed with what $700 buys you from Apple - I'll get a MUCH better system with that much money using a Windows installation.

Of course, installing Linux on the new system alongside Windows will give me a chance to see what Tux can do with a dual-core processor. :D

[rsambuca]

But since Dell or whoever I buy it from is going to be kind enough to give me Vista on my new system, I'll happily accept itActually, the OEM software costs are included in the price, so you are not getting it for free. There are many companies that will sell the machine without the Windows OS for approx $150 less.

[syxbit]

there is no way it's that much cheaper ($150)

[rsambuca]

Actually I just checked and it is $160 less without the OS. Canadian dollars, though! Roughly $136US. Please do not be so quick to judge.

[spockrock]

you know what I hated the install process......I just picked the drive and pfffttt..... its done, there was no setup to move my documents another partition, I did not get on board sound until after I did a windows update, and even then I only have 2.0 sound......sorry but ubuntu dapper flight 1 detected and setup the sound on my board.... and that was almost a year ago.......

So once in, (btw I loved teh speed of the install), I changed my documents to another partition, and the icons broke in my computer and in the new start menu, so then I manually changed them so they look and fit properly.

Things I like;
-treats me better then xp so far
-faster then xp
-I like the run as limited user and need admin access idea but I think its poorly implemented
-DRM was cracked, according to slashdot....lol but not released into the wild for fear of being hunted down by the MS legal team......
-aero is nice

Things I do not like
-some time you need to confirm things multiple times for admin acess.
-secondly all you need is an ok, not a password for admin access
-my version is still DRM'd
-out of the box hardware sucks, compared to ubuntu
-does not detect, my ext2/3 filesystems (available from third party sources)
-beryl and compiz blow aero out of the water...

but overall vista has been ok, but it wont cause me to switch back to windows as my primary os.

[syxbit]

i still don't belive it would be that much cheaper at most vendors ($136)
I know dell sells their "open source" systems, that are the same, but without windows.
they usually sell for $50
the problem is that you can never get discount, or coupon codes for them, so sometimes it's just cheaper to get the windows version (if you have a code)

as for beryl being better than aero, i have to disagree.
beryl is fluff.
I certainly is more impressive, but it doesn't seem finished.
when you drag the wobbly windows around, they have jagged edges all over.
aero does look professional.

[rsambuca]

i still don't belive it would be that much cheaper at most vendors ($136)

Here, this place is a five minute drive from my house, if you don't believe me. Link (http://www.memoryexpress.com/index.php?PageTag=&page=file&memx_menu=FramePreconfigDetail.php&id=24) Note the "Subtract $160 for no operating system"

[spockrock]

i still don't belive it would be that much cheaper at most vendors ($136)
I know dell sells their "open source" systems, that are the same, but without windows.
they usually sell for $50
the problem is that you can never get discount, or coupon codes for them, so sometimes it's just cheaper to get the windows version (if you have a code)

as for beryl being better than aero, i have to disagree.
beryl is fluff.
I certainly is more impressive, but it doesn't seem finished.
when you drag the wobbly windows around, they have jagged edges all over.
aero does look professional.

not if you have AA and AF enabled..... ;) I can't run at full AA and AF at 3200x1200 but at that resolution you do not really need full AA and AF.

[Trebuchet]

And with a LOT of people saying that UAC is really fing annoying, and they just turn it off, and microsoft still shutting out anti virus makers, it seems that vista will soon become what xp was.UAC is annoying only at first, as you install new software. I have to do this already every time I install software because I run Zone Alarm (firewall software), so I can't see that it's such a big deal. How hard is it to click "OK" anyway?

While I'm sure Symantec and McAfee are not happy that they can't muddle around in the Vista kernel, given my experiences with both of those companies' products I have to say that doesn't distress me a bit. I do find it highly revealing that the smaller anti-virus companies are not complaining, but are simply adapting their programs for Vista. Makes me wonder why huge companies with far more resources seem unwilling to do the same.

[Trebuchet]

i still don't belive it would be that much cheaper at most vendors ($136)
I know dell sells their "open source" systems, that are the same, but without windows.
they usually sell for $50
the problem is that you can never get discount, or coupon codes for them, so sometimes it's just cheaper to get the windows version (if you have a code)

as for beryl being better than aero, i have to disagree.
beryl is fluff.
I certainly is more impressive, but it doesn't seem finished.
when you drag the wobbly windows around, they have jagged edges all over.
aero does look professional.I dunno, but I can cheat. I know someone who works at Microsoft and he got me XP Pro (full version) for $35; I expect Vista would be priced comparably as well as Office 2007 (I've been using the free trial version, and it's nice.)

I don't need Vista; it's just what's going to be installed on my next system. Were money no object, I'd be buying the top-of-the-line Mac with a Vista dual-boot rather than a Wintel system. Since money is always likely to be an object, I'll have to settle for Vista with a Linux dual-boot.

[NickPresta]

The biggest thing for me about the Vista/Beryl/Compiz/etc thing is that you're pretty much stuck with Vista's theme. I can pull open my Emerald theme manager and pick from 30 different themes simply by clicking on them. Can the same be said for Vista? Are all themes or theming software free on Vista?

[qamelian]

there is no way it's that much cheaper ($150)

It sure is. I've been building OEM systems for many years, and even with the lower OEM pricing, XP home adds about $128 Canadian to the cost of your PC. XP Pro adds about $160 Canadian.

[Trebuchet]

Despite many complaints that XP is unstable, I've never had it crash on me even once, although I'll admit my experience with it is limited (OTOH, I seldom had crashes with 98SE either). Maybe the original version did but I suspect that was all fixed by SP2. My boss' brother is an official beta tester for Vista (he used to work for Intel and retired a millionaire at age 34) and said even the beta of Vista was rock solid and the security improvements were superb.

I'm prepared to acknowledge MS' many faults as a corporation; their business practices hardly endear them to me. But I think people claiming Vista is crap are displaying more sour grapes than good sense. Neither Vista nor Mac OS X nor (Fill in the flavor) Linux are perfect operating systems (if such a thing is even theoretically possible); each have their own strengths and weaknesses. Given that all three seem to be heading towards a virtual congruence of features, I suspect these OS wars are going to seem pretty silly in 20 years.

[Lor Boo]

I'm sorry - I did not read all of posts but the first page and here.
This said, my view is negitive towards Windows Vista on 4 fronts.


1) The DRM/TCPA/Game console is just not funny.
I do not want a baby sitter on my computer any more than I want a tracking
monitor on my leg. I just don't buy the 'we need it because the communist are
bleeding "us" (whomever that may be) dry with their internet!


2) The OS is JUST released and the talk about the fixes and improvements being
offered by the service pack has been talked about for some time now.. WTF??
It is no wonder the enterprise customers have their course set to !slow dead slow! to
the move to it since they got access to it in November.
--- by slow I mean slower than history expected them to move.
Not slow because they move slow to play it safe as normal slow ---


3) I do not feel Microsoft is a trustworthy company.

4) I have ethical differences with the MS view about their ability to gather information and
share that information from my computer.
They don't really care who I am and really want the bigger picture...but it troubles me
when I see another scvhost running and I think - now why is that there?
Why does Media player 9 and higher record what I do uniquely and upload it?
Why does IE store all my cookies in that hidden folder?
Why is it that if I delete that folder myself, my system may crash? So I need an app now.

I think most users of linux share these positions and found some of them to be the motives in exploreing linux.
In the growning pains between being a power windows user to linux noob.
Idle intellectual curiousity only takes you so far, and it takes effort to be different.
I just installed unrar and am happy I did it so easily and it worked.
In windows I'd have installed that with the default setup along with the partitions I wanted in the sizes I know they would need to be and the organization to lock things up where I want without having to learn it all over again like I am with Linux - because of some/all of those 4 reasons.

[rahulthewall3000]

Well said. You definitely have a very limited choice when it comes to configuring themes on Vista. I have been an Ubuntu user for the past six months and I have used Vista for the past one month now. As I use my computer rather extensively, I think I am capable of commenting on the functionality of both the OS.
There are very few things which you can't do on Ubuntu and you can do on Vista. Ubuntu can play all media formats, open office is quite good *remember that office 2007 pro costs 650 euros". You can also play, rip and encode dvds easily. Internet works fine as well. Bumps provides all the multimedia format. As for speed, Ubuntu is way ahead. I have a 1 gb ram and Intel duo core processor. Even when my windows is idle, vista eats 70% of my ram. Isn't that ridiculous?
In comparison, even with Beryl and Compiz and Amarok, Linux takes only 25% of my ram and its way faster for everything. The absence of a firewall ensures that browsing is excellently quite fast.
The only shortcomings are that we can't play games on Linux. Games like FIFA are not insatallable on Ubuntu, or at least I can't do it and skype has no video conferencing feature for Ubuntu. Anyhow, I haven't been able to configure my webcam on Ubuntu.

Other than these very few shortcomings. I have to say that Linux rocks!

[blastus]

I can't use Vista on my computer even if I wanted to and even though my machine meets all the specs. My machine is 2.6 Ghz has 1 GB of RAM, a 256 MB video card, and 3/4 of a terabyte of free disk space. The reason? My LCD monitor is unusable at it's native resolution without a custom ModeLine in Ubuntu or PowerStrip in Windows XP.

By default, my monitor's EDID reports a mode at 1280x1024 60Hz but this mode is completely unusable on both Windows and Linux. X and the NVIDIA driver for Linux support advanced timings, so I have a custom Xorg ModeLine for 1280x1024 75Hz and it works fine. However, the NVIDIA driver for Windows XP does not support advanced timing options, so I use a program called PowerStrip. PowerStrip is a piece of crap BTW because if a screen saver kicks in, the timings are destroyed and the display becomes unusable as soon as the screen saver launches. Resolutions below 1280x1024 work fine without having to explicitly specify the timings.

When you install Vista, by default the resolution is set to the native resolution of your monitor--whatever the recommended timing mode the EDID of your monitor reports. The problem is, is that this recommended timing mode is completely unusable on my monitor and I am well aware of it. So after the last reboot after installing Vista, my display becomes all #@$%#@$ garbled and is unreadable. Turning off the computer and turning it on again triggers the menu where I can go into Safe Mode. So I select Safe Mode and then get a nasty message that Safe Mode can't be used because Vista hasn't finished installing.

If I could change the default resolution that Vista uses when it is installed, I could maybe do something about it but there's not a damn thing I can do. The difference with Windows XP, is that it does not ASSUME that your monitor's recommended EDID mode ACTUALLY WORKS, so it doesn't try to set that as the default mode after doing an install. I've tried running Vista with both a D-Sub cable and two different DVI-D cables and the result is the same.

Weather or not this is a problem with my monitor and/or video card, it doesn't matter. The thing is, is that I have no control over it if I cannot set the resolution Vista uses after it is installed. I'd have to change it to a resolution lower than 1280x1024 to get a working display and then access the advanced timing modes (if you can even do that in Vista which I highly doubt.) Vista makes a very dumb assumption that the mode your monitor's EDID recommends works and gives you no option to do anything about it if it doesn't.

I've love to take my computer/monitor to Redmond and show them what happens when I try to install Vista on it. It would be nice if I could evaluate the product. What a #%^!& joke.

[rsambuca]

Hate to say it, but it sounds like your monitor is the joke. If it doesn't work at its own EDID settings, it is the monitors fault, not the OS.

[Kingskid]

I just got very interesting mailing so I'll paste it here:

Greetings to the list.
First of all, this isn't a flame - I'm posting this to the L4C list for a couple of reasons, part of which is that Linc is the list owner and it is on the podcast he participates in, TLLTS, there was a very informative interview with Peter Gutmann of New Zealand, whose Cost Analysis of Windows Content Protection here http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html is very informative and well thought out.

One of the concepts that kept coming up in the Gutmann interview is that Microsoft is requiring hardware manufacturers to build DRM into peripheral devices which include disabling of functionality or decreased playback quality for protected content, as well as "tilt" bits designed to force subsystem reinitialization or other measures if anything that looks like an attempt to scan protected content takes place. All of this is done in the name of getting assurance that hardware manufacturers are making every effort to protect the rights of content owners (Hollywood's and other content producers) over against the rights of computer owners.

All of this should be old hat to anyone who has already been following the discussion, but now I get to the interrogative portion of my post. The ostensible rationale for these requirements of hardware vendors and their device drivers is to prevent the hardware vendors from being sued by content owners, i.e. Hollywood, for failure to protect content. Okay, again, this is fairly straightforward.

But I can't help but to recall some similar language in the verbage of the Novell deal with M$. If I recall correctly, Microsoft made promises to the effect that it would not sue anyone working on Open Source code for Novell. The counterfactual was taken by some to be a veiled threat, to wit, that Microsoft was indirectly threatening the FLOSS community -- by saying they would not sue OSS developers specifically at Novell they left the door open to legal action against OSS developers who had not signed the Mephistopheleian agreement Novell had.

In the light of the foregoing, I cannot help but to wonder if M$ is planning a similar indirect threat to the FLOSS community from the content protection angle. Please tell me if my logic is sound here, or if I'm just being paranoid:

1. M$ requires hardware vendors to show good intent toward content providers by building DRM into their drivers and devices.
2. This is to protect the hardware vendors from lawsuits by content providers.
3. DRM concomitantly requires closed architecture, specifically, encryption and copy protection methods and steps must be kept closed by manufacturers. By nature, the source code cannot be released without overturning the DRM methodologies involved.
4. FLOSS connotes open architecture and source code.
5. Publishing open source drivers does not demonstrate commitment to protecting the rights of content owners.
Therefore
Content owners should be able to sue anyone who supports open architecture or drivers for failure to protect their rights.
The net effect of this is that hardware vendors will be forced to close down their architecture and drivers if they want to participate in the Windows space, and this requires them to set aside any support for Open Source. As hardware vendors fall into line, Linux becomes more and more marginalized.

As poorly expressed as I know this is, I can't help but wonder if the Novell deal and the festooning of Vista with all its DRM features and requirements are not two sides of the same coin, which is an indirect assault on the FLOSS community. Linux isn't really hurting M$ in the desktop space when it comes to market share, but in the server space M$ has lost a great deal of market share, and Linux's footprint continues to grow.

The bright spot in this is, I suppose, in the developing world, where people don't have $400 or more to lay out for an OS (as if any of us had that kind of disposable cash laying around. I think on this list I'm on safe ground here). I can see two factors working in the favor of FLOSS in Africa, Eastern Europe, China, India, and the rest of the developing world:

First, the brightest people among us tend to want to take things apart, figure out how they work, put them back together, improve them, and so fort. Linux is made for this sort of person. Increasingly, Windows is encouraging users of their products to be appliance users. This will tend to create an impetus toward better development in the developing world, where Linux will probably come to the fore as Windows XP becomes increasingly obsolescent and Vista is all but impossible to pirate (I don't know that I saw a single legal copy of windows on a PC in Russia during a trip back in September; they tend to use Windows there, but it's all illegal software). This may result in improvements in computational science capabilities in environments where Linux predominates -- this is where innovation will be going on.

And I think Vista itself is the best demonstration of the stultifying effect that M$ is having on innovation. After all the millions of dollars M$ spent on Vista, what new functionality have they delievered to the desktop user in Vista? There may be some new eye candy in the interface, but functionally Vista doesn't appear to buy the user anything. It will only take away functionality -- your old DVD compression software will no longer work, nor can it be produced for Vista. Content protection works so well that, at least in the Vista beta deployments, even legal content doesn't want to play.

In conclusion, I think that there is some cause for mild concern, but on balance there is also cause to be encouraged. M$ may have painted themselves into a corner. The audience they're playing to is mainly in Hollywood, but Hollywood is not where the dollars come from. This is a very simple and obvious strategic blunder on M$'s part. I don't think they will do well ticking off their own paying customers in order to please Hollywood, which isn't really a paying customer at all. Peter Gutman may be right when he calls Vista DRM the "longest suicide note in history".

What say ye, gentlemen? (Forgive the prejudicial assumption on my part that you're all male. If there is a member of the fairer sex on the list, I will be delighted to be proven wrong).

[BuffaloX]

3. DRM concomitantly requires closed architecture, specifically, encryption and copy protection methods and steps must be kept closed by manufacturers. By nature, the source code cannot be released without overturning the DRM methodologies involved.


Everything you mention, sounds reasonable, and I think you are right.
But that particular point worries me. (point 3)
I hope this will be deemed illegal, just as Apples DRM for Ipod was in Norway.

Anyway I'm sure Linux will handle it, and I hope make it even more obvious to everybody, why nobody should want to be dependent on Microsoft, or any other single vendor.

It would be perfect if MS lost a lot of Windows customers, who would then also switch to Open Office instead of MS Office, and Microsoft lose so much, they are forced to concentrate on making good software instead of software based on strategy designs.

But then Microsoft never won the market by making good software, but rather by being in the right strategic position.

[Tomosaur]

Everything you mention, sounds reasonable, and I think you are right.
But that particular point worries me. (point 3)
I hope this will be deemed illegal, just as Apples DRM for Ipod was in Norway.

Anyway I'm sure Linux will handle it, and I hope make it even more obvious to everybody, why nobody should want to be dependent on Microsoft, or any other single vendor.

It would be perfect if MS lost a lot of Windows customers, who would then also switch to Open Office instead of MS Office, and Microsoft lose so much, they are forced to concentrate on making good software instead of software based on strategy designs.

But then Microsoft never won the market by making good software, but rather by being in the right strategic position.

The hardware lock-in parts of Vista are indeed pretty scary - but this will never hold ground anywhere, except possibly in America. Europe has a long and bountiful history of telling Microsoft off - and I doubt Vista is going to be very successful over here. Most Europeans I've spoken to are reeling at the step backwards Vista is going to force on people.

[Malac]

The hardware lock-in parts of Vista are indeed pretty scary - but this will never hold ground anywhere, except possibly in America. Europe has a long and bountiful history of telling Microsoft off - and I doubt Vista is going to be very successful over here. Most Europeans I've spoken to are reeling at the step backwards Vista is going to force on people.
Probably about 90% of the computer buyers buy ready installed systems and the vast majority of them never even do something as simple as a ram upgrade so they never have the headache of making devices work, etc.

So the majority of users won't even know that they're getting or using this sort of stuff. They may phone technical support but we all know they'll just be told that their dvd (disc or player) or amplifier/whatever isn't compatible therefore isn't supported(thank you very much), so they'll complain a bit then go out and buy a disc or player that is and has the "Windows Vista Ready" sticker (or whatever) on it.

Think about Product Activation, most people on this type of forum (Windows, Mac and Linux) said it was a terrible thing and MS had really shot themselves in the foot with this activation rubbish. The customers wouldn't put up with it and it'd drive them away. Mostly this didn't happen as most people bought pre-activated/OEM machines.

Unfortunately I think that this will be the case here. The occasional person who has a bit of tech savvy and isn't intimidated by opening the case will get burnt buying the wrong video/sound card as they weren't tech savvy enough to think of checking the "System Requirements". They'll just take it back to the shop, lesson learnt, and buy a compatible one. Same way my sister got caught buying the wrong type of ram for her motherboard, "Oops, back to the shop and ask the nice man this time."

As for your "most Europeans", is that most people who use computers that you know, or most people who use computers with Linux on them or are Windows "Power" Users.
Most people I know that use a computer use it for e-mail, surfing the web, to do shopping, word-processing, the occasional spreadsheet and print some photos. These people probably won't know or realise this is going on.

[venik212]

Just one word about "System requirements":: my monitor DID work with Linux, but at a lower resolution. To get the resolution I knew the monitor could produce (I use it under XP on the same box) I needed the right driver. XP gave me the best resolution without my having to do anything, for reasons that you know only too well.

[Rodneyck]

I have to inject a little levity here...

Taken from, http://blog.nixternal.com/2007.02.03/vista-social-engineering/

"This is a new one to me and rather humorous for a hack. It seems Vista is flawed, go figure, where a cracker can gain access and run commands on your computer by:

SHOUTING COMMANDS THROUGH THE SPEECH-RECOGNITION FEATURE!

I thought I had heard it all. So if you stumble upon a website and hear “CONTROL ALT DELETE,” don’t panic, as it is meant for a Windows Vista user. This brings social engineering to the computer now, simply amazing. What’s next?"

[steven8]

Just one word about "System requirements":: my monitor DID work with Linux, but at a lower resolution. To get the resolution I knew the monitor could produce (I use it under XP on the same box) I needed the right driver. XP gave me the best resolution without my having to do anything, for reasons that you know only too well.

Yes, but that was not Linux limiting you on purpose because your monitor was not the type of hardware it wished you to use. That is what Vista brings to us.

Oh yes, I forgot:

CONTROL-ALT-DELETE!

[Malac]

Yes, but that was not Linux limiting you on purpose because your monitor was not the type of hardware it wished you to use. That is what Vista brings to us.

Oh yes, I forgot:

CONTROL-ALT-DELETE!
FORMAT HARD DRIVE NOW!

:D

[blastus]

Hate to say it, but it sounds like your monitor is the joke. If it doesn't work at its own EDID settings, it is the monitors fault, not the OS.

A brand new monitor? Hardly. This actually happens on two different LCD monitors--both are Samsung monitors (a 740B and a brand new 931BF) with high user ratings and both work perfectly on Linux with a custom ModeLine.

You obviously don't know a thing about EDIDs and monitor modes otherwise you would know that a number of people have had sync/timing issues with their LCD monitors, especially when connected with a DVI-D cable. See my other post NVIDIA: How I fixed my display resolution problem with DVI-D connection! (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=194531)

Perhaps it's not the monitor, perhaps it's the video card. I have an FX-5600 NVIDIA card with 256MB. The point is, is that there is not a damn thing I can do to get Vista to work on my computer/monitor because Vista assumes that my monitor's preferred EDID mode is going to work with my video card. Unlike Vista, XP doesn't force this mode after installation. One thing I haven't tried is using a D-Sub cable with my 740b which I know works with Windows XP.

[Jerome36]

I'll probably upgrade to Vista after SP1. As of now I'm just listening to what other people are saying about it, and I really want to see what happens with the 64bit version. I did the 64bit Beta 2, and had ZERO problems, but I never installed ALL the programs I had been using on my XP Pro machine, and I've heard some people say some of their software doesn't work well, or at all.

When I was using Beta 2 I saw a lot of things I liked, and things I didn't like. I'll eventually make the move to Vista, but for now XP is working completely fine for me. I'm fortunate enough to have two computers (one with XP and the other with Ubuntu), and Linux has just as many pros and cons as Windows, as far as I'm concerned.

[the.dark.lord]

Thanks for the review.

The reason that I won't be purchasing Vista is more of a philosophical reason. Shouldn't it damn well be the best OS after 5 years and $6B spent? But that's beside the point. MS's business practices are antithetical to my belief in freedom and respecting the human being. It appears that MS views the end user not as person with dignity and freedom, but as a profit source. That is not acceptable. They could at least incorporate some end user freedom and not be so blatant about their views.

So no, I won't be using Vista...or any other MS product that I can avoid. And that's for the same reason I don't shop at Wal-Mart / Target, McDonalds / Wendy's, etc.

Reflects my thoughts.

[Adamant1988]

Vista appears to be a very solid product, but Microsoft sinking their teeth into my entertainment life is a bit much. Computers are becoming the window to the world, their our Televisions, Radios, internet surfing devices, game systems... I don't like being kept from seeing everything I can see, which is what Vista's built in DRM protections do to me. I have no issue with paying for my music, but I have an issue with not being able to listen to FREE music I attained legally with no DRM on it.

That said, the system requirements (2 GB of ram for a reasonable experience) are a little steep for me, my Laptop has a 64 bit processor and 1 GB of ram, along with a decent graphics card, I don't like my 3 month old laptop being made obsolete by the release of a new operating system.

[msimon1960]

Just chiming in as a noob but the costing discussion is intriguing as it is one of the big reason I'm banging away at trying to get basic computer function with Linux.

Here is my cost structure

3 computers for my home (me and two teenagers) under Microsoft -

$200 per computer for Vista
$700 per computer for Office
$100 per year for AV protection
$$$ for a graphics program
$$$ for a database program (Foxpro, Access, whatever)
$$$ for a web editor (I prefer Frontpage)
$$$ for anything else you want to do
$$$ for heavy equipment to run it all and forced to upgrade every two years just to keep up.

I'm easily into +$2000 per year. I run a small office as well -- 4 workstations and a server -- easily $3,000 with the cost of Windows Server ($1000 in Canada).

3 computers under Ubuntu --
OS - Free
Open Office - Free
AV - Free
Gimp Graphics - Free
Databases galore - Free
NVU Web editor - Free
Most other software - Free
Hardware - previous generation stuff works great.

Even if Microsoft gave me Vista the bill would be too high.

The only thing Ubuntu seems to be missing is a simple networking capability (don't get me started on the disasterously bad Samba and NFS systems). I can't can't two Linux computers to talk to one another reliably after nearly two months of effort. I've tried Ubuntu 6.06 and 6.10, FC6, and Mandriva 2007 -- no luck.

I'm a +25 year vet in personal computers (yes I built my own Sinclair in '78). I know 5-6 computer languages including Assembler so I think it's safe to say I'm at least as capable as the 'average' user and frankly I can't get most of the features to work. Hardware, incomplete system software, and dismally fragmented documentation are the key problems for newbies.

I also think that the Linux needs to take a giant step back from the assertion that Linux is stable -- I frequently have to reboot the OS due to random lockups / Desktop failures. I've run it on everything from P3's, AMD boxes, and and P4 dual cores and it crashes routinely.

The 'ease of installation' argument doesn't hold much water either -- Ubuntu is the best distro so far but frankly -- Windows 2000 is the hands down winner for 'ease of installation'. I bought a copy the day after it was release and I've never run across a computer it wouldn't install on.

I agree with the previous poster that as odious as Microsoft is they understand that functional GUI's are essential to attract and retain users. As a design philosophy, I think we should all consider it an OS failure whenever we have to jump out to a command line to get something done.

Matt.