PDA

View Full Version : Why do you choose Ubuntu over Windows



Pages : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

xpod
August 19th, 2006, 03:17 PM
4 MONTHS WITH WINDOWS M.E THEN XP
HAD to learn not just how the basics of computers worked but also had to learn how to find various spy/ad/virus programs and determine which combination of best ones worked together
HAD to quickly learn how to stay on top of a registry and find programs to do so for me.
HAD to learn how to get by without XP cd with numerous utilities such as sfc /scannow always demanding one.
Then once i`d picked up as much as i could on dll`s,jpg`s,rss`s and BSOD`s i then had to go learn about being DE-HYJACKED to get rid of eveything else that those top notch programs mabey missed.Not to mention all the services one has to learn about and disable.And of course i had to learn how to reinstall with no cd`s.........etc etc etc

NEEDLESS TO SAY I ALSO QUICKLY LEARNED ABOUT FF,THUNDERBIRD AND INDEED ISO`S,LIVE CD`S AND.....

2 WEEKS IN UBUNTO SO FAR

I install...It worked.
Obviously ive had many many queries BUT that is because they get answered here and the only issues i have had have been due to pc ignorance as apose to windows mind set problems....AND even if i sometimes do take the long road to a quick fix THATS because theres SO MUCH info out there and SO many helpful people.

If ive said it once i`ll say it a thousand times.."At least NOW i learn how to USE the thing instead of just protect,cleanse and fix the thing.

LINUX ROCKS.... FOR US MERE NORMAL PEOPLE(mmmm;) )

tbrminsanity
August 19th, 2006, 03:26 PM
The only advantage that Windows has over Linux (and any other OS) is the wide range of games and minor software available to it. As more and more software becomes ported to other OSs, the Windows line will suffer. In the future people will be asking "if you have Linux, why do you use Windows?"

xpod
August 19th, 2006, 03:43 PM
ALSO:I aint yet had no pesky little WGA like thing popping up telling me my os is bogus........When it was`nt

gregzilla
August 19th, 2006, 04:24 PM
Hey sliced, I am a linux newbie.

I use Winblows because for my business, all of the industry related software is made for Windows.

When I am in a coffee shop surfing on their free wireless connection, I use my Ubuntu Live CD to do my internet stuff. The reason is simple - Winblows is a security nightmare. I practice safe surfing when in my sterile environment using Winblows at my home office, but have no control over security when using a coffee shop service When I go back homme and plug into my network, I am not bringing any "unfriendlies" home. Linux is a very safe alternative.

regards,
Gregzilla

tabbot
August 19th, 2006, 06:02 PM
well, I was using it for the games until yesterday, I just quit using windows because I had a serious trojan/virus and I'm tired of reinstalling windows :(

azmrb
August 19th, 2006, 07:00 PM
I use my high speed internet access for mostly peer to peer file sharing and I get much higher speeds with linux because WindowsXP is hardcoded to only allow 10 simultaneious connections. The MS mentality is just cripple XP so people can't run servers on it and they will HAVE to buy a server OS as well.

With linux I can have hundreds of simultaneious connections if I want and my router can hold up to it:biggrin:

bmc6053
August 19th, 2006, 08:16 PM
I can't live without photoshop is my reason - I know I can run it under wine and crossover and win4lin - but its just not the same. Gimp is great.. but just not somthing I can see myself working with.

Other than that - Linux for a desktop os is pretty fantastic now and always improving.

XXFCTEXX
August 19th, 2006, 08:43 PM
Why I have left Windows completely.

No WGA

No future Kill Switch

No big brother

No hidden backdoors

No DRMs

No "you're just borrowing me" EULA

No spyware, adware, viruses.

The customer service is courteous, available, free, and in English.

The list goes on and on........

and on and on................

and on..........

freddy metz
August 21st, 2006, 03:43 PM
theres also the wikipedia integration, the audioscrobbler integration and hte ability to play formats other than mp3/aac.

amarok also supports plugins, and it is more configurable and has a much better UI IMO.

and most importantly, you are forced to install quicktime if you use itunes. quicktime is a worthless annoying POS.

i wasnt forced to install quicktime. Is there a way to import my itunes library to amarok?

jonah1980
August 21st, 2006, 04:41 PM
has anyone signed up with this yet:

http://ubuntucounter.geekosophical.net/

that way we promote ubuntu and get an idea of how popular it's becoming without just distro watch stats.

domino
August 24th, 2006, 08:11 AM
77 pages and I'm sure this is posted. Shouldn't it be, "If you have Linux, why do you use Windows?" I need to use windows for flash development (not very often) and watching TV using my TV BT878 capture remote (i'm very lazy). If my emote worked in Linux, then I'd be in Linux 95% of my computer time.

ago
August 24th, 2006, 02:47 PM
We all know Windows is very snappy after a fresh install... Not very secure by default but at least snappy...

But performance tends to degrade with time... And it is not only because of the firewall/AV/Antispyware and all the other software that you have to install to keep it half-secure. It is a terminal illness. The more you use it, the worse it gets. Until it crawls. The hard disk gets slower. Icons start to multiply by themselves in the system tray. When you boot, after you see the wallpaper you have to wait 2 good minutes before the hourglass disappears. Fancy windows start to popup with all sort of contents. Then you notice that there is some application in the start-up that you cannot remove and it happens to be a trojan (but how could it happen? you had an antivirus!).

Nevertheless windows users claim that a "well maintained" Windows can be snappy and safe.

But how easy is it to keep your system "well maintained"? Let me guess:


You need to periodically defragment your hard-disk
You need to periodically run a utility that cleans your registry
You need to periodically run a disk cleanup software
You need to install an antivirus and keep it updated
You need to periodically run an online scan or a scan from a CD because the default antivurus may fail
You need to install and run a firewall
You need to install anti-spyware/malaware/adaware and periodically scan your machine
You need to install pop-up blockers and tweak IE and Outlook settings to make them half-secure
You need to manually upgrade all the software installed on your machine since the auto-update only takes care of the OS (and often is not even good at that).
You need to check periodically what programs start automatically with a tool like startupcontrolpanel because applications have the bad habit of invading your system tray (in the best case) without you having a say
You need to periodically clean the prefetch cache
Even so windows performance inevitably degrades with time, and from the snappy experience of the first few weeks, you find yourself with a crawling system until it becomes so unbearable that you decide to do a fresh install


Been there, done that... Over and over again. After a while it becomes second nature and you do not even notice the effort. You might disregard the routine above, as most people do, but they invariably end up "sharing" their pc with thousands of script kiddies, and/or their machines "strangely" become as slow as a snail. Many wrongly believe it is because they need better hardware, and often they buy better hardware, which fixes the problems, for a few months, until the machine becomes slow and crowded again...

But let's now consider what is the list of tasks required to keep Ubuntu as snappy and as immaculate as its very first day:
End of list

CaveRat
August 24th, 2006, 10:32 PM
Grumbles! MY TURN.

Windows 3.1> not too bad for glorified Dos you could use a mouse in.

Windows 95> From what I can remember it was a little better than 3.1 graphically, but flacky.

Windows 98> Hey what happened to my audio driver? It was working fine this morning. What you forgot to load the video driver at boot, so you just dumped it? What the heck? Blue Screen of death? ERROR xxxx06xx94xxx? Corrupt file? System degradation? I just reinstalled a month ago. Now I have to do it again?

Windows ME> HA HA HA HA HA HA They bit the big one there.

Windows XP> Gotta admit it's more stable. Whoa! Hey what's this? 400.00 phone bill. 900 numbers? How did I get a dialer on my computer? NewDot.net, 180solutions, Aurora, Worm this, Trojan that, Keylogger there, YADA,YADA,YADA!

Hey we have the solution to all those problems. For 49.95 We claim this and we claim that. And if we can't do it all, for another 39.95 they can. Or you can just check us out for free ten days trial. After that, you will no longer be protected unless you hand us 49.95 for the first year, and 29.95 for every year there after.

What support Win 98 any longer? LOL Why would we want to do that? No, you have to buy a whole new faster, badder, system so you can run WinXP. The system will only cost you a months wages unless you work for minimum wage. My operating system Is the next best thing to myself, and will only cost you a weeks wage. Oh forget the bills for a month. Common sucker, you can do it. HA HA HA HA. Oh don't worry about all the holes that hackers can come through. We will patch you up with SP2. They can't get through that bygolly. Huh? WHAT's that? Two hours and they got through? Patch team, get to it.

Oh hey, I've got a whole brand new OS comeing your way. It leaks worse than XP right now, but we will get it on the shelves on time. It's only another weeks wages. Ok maybe two.

NEED I SAY MORE? NOT!
Just my .02 worth. I'm proud of my first cup of Ubuntu.

CaveRat
August 24th, 2006, 10:51 PM
Grumbles! MY TURN.

Windows 3.1> not too bad for glorified Dos you could use a mouse in.

Windows 95> From what I can remember it was a little better than 3.1 graphically, but flacky.

Windows 98> Hey what happened to my audio driver? It was working fine this morning. What you forgot to load the video driver at boot, so you just dumped it? What the heck? Blue Screen of death? ERROR xxxx06xx94xxx? Corrupt file? System degradation? I just reinstalled a month ago. Now I have to do it again?http://ubuntuforums.org/images/smilies/icon_evil.gif

Windows ME> HA HA HA HA HA HA They bit the big one there.

Windows XP> Gotta admit it's more stable. Whoa! Hey what's this? 400.00 phone bill. 900 numbers? How did I get a dialer on my computer? NewDot.net, 180solutions, Aurora, Worm this, Trojan that, Keylogger there, YADA,YADA,YADA!http://ubuntuforums.org/images/smilies/eusa_wall.gif

Hey we have the solution to all those problems. For 49.95 We claim this and we claim that. And if we can't do it all, for another 39.95 they can. Or you can just check us out for free ten days trial. After that, you will no longer be protected unless you hand us 49.95 for the first year, and 29.95 for every year there after. http://ubuntuforums.org/images/icons/icon13.gif

What support Win 98 any longer? LOL Why would we want to do that? No, you have to buy a whole new faster, badder, system so you can run WinXP. The system will only cost you a months wages unless you work for minimum wage. My operating system Is the next best thing to myself, and will only cost you a weeks wage. Oh forget the bills for a month. Common sucker, you can do it. HA HA HA HA. Oh don't worry about all the holes that hackers can come through. We will patch you up with SP2. They can't get through that bygolly. Huh? WHAT's that? Two hours and they got through? Patch team, get to it. http://ubuntuforums.org/images/smilies/icon_confused.gif

Oh hey, I've got a whole brand new OS comeing your way. It leaks worse than XP right now, but we will get it on the shelves on time. It's only another weeks wages. Ok maybe two. http://ubuntuforums.org/images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif

NEED I SAY MORE? NOT!
Just my .02 worth. I'm proud of my first cup of Ubuntu.

Paul133
August 25th, 2006, 02:38 AM
I'd like to add my $0.02. I don't actually use Ubuntu yet (I want to make sure I have my partitioning right) but I plan to install it within the hour. I want to check it out because I like the idea of Open Source and I think it has less buggy software because people are generally writing the software, not companies, and everything can be checked out by the community so bugs are caught (think Wikipedia). I also really like Linux because I want to learn the CLI and not rely on a GUI or fifteen menus or Add/Remove programs freezing as a kind of OS survival training and because it's easier. Linux is also not targeted by crackers and script kiddies. But the biggest reason is because I can tell that Microsoft is looking for more control now that they've beaten the DOJ and that Vista will be very expensive. With Linux, you don't have to pay (in any sense). Linux also breathes new life into old hardware. My Dell is a cheap bottom-of-the-line 1 year old computer with a 40 GB HD and 256 M of RAM. Finally, Linux (and especially Ubuntu!) have community and forums. You can get help when you need it and help others. To me, that's perfect!

RurouniKenshinX
August 25th, 2006, 04:26 AM
Because not using just WindowsXP shows you actually know how to use a computer and you're not a moronic newb who thinks they know everything + virus free, and everything is freeware.

samodelkinas
August 25th, 2006, 05:02 AM
I have heard and read "Ubuntu this and that and nice" so, I decided to take a closer look. Yes it boots from CD, yes it recognizes hardware WAY better than other Linux OSes couple of years ago. But for god's sake, when you boot it , it doesn't even plays MP3. MP3 support was by DEFAULT since Windows 98, media player 6. You have to go and do some libxine-install-stuff. I am DBA, I am not afraid of command prompt, but for all those regular people - forget about Linux. XP does things WAY more better than any other Linux system and it is a de-facto standard. Linux has a million miles to go to be that compatible, user-friendly, etc. The only good thing about it - it's free and you can put it for example on school PC's when you don't wanna kids play counter-strike :). Viruses? Worms? Adware? Imagine having millions of users and I can make a bet - Linux would have the same problem, if not worse - there are no common standards set. There has been an independant test for security holes - after installing all updates, XP proved solve 99 percent of problems. And If you are really looking for something ultra safe and friendly - pay your extra $$$ and go for Mac. But then again - no counter-strike.

mlitty
August 25th, 2006, 07:09 AM
77 pages and I'm sure this is posted. Shouldn't it be, "If you have Linux, why do you use Windows?" I need to use windows for flash development (not very often) and watching TV using my TV BT878 capture remote (i'm very lazy). If my emote worked in Linux, then I'd be in Linux 95% of my computer time.

Yes, This too has probably been said, but there are still some serious weakness to linux. Because hardware manufacturers rarely acknowledge linux, most drivers and hardware dependent software is reverse engeneered, and only to the extent that whatever prgramer felt was necesary for his/her needs. A lot of things just don't work and some things only work if you're willing to invest hours of forum searching, emailing, and digging.

I've been using linux exclusively for over seven years now, and I have to say that the free arguement only goes so far. What is my time worth? I've logged months struggling to get software and hardware to work. I don't complain because it's free software, and there have been a lot of generouse people who have walked me through some troubled times.

I still can't get a decent photo to print, can't do any reliable video editing, can't run a main-stream game without hours of digging, tweaking, and wrenching.

To make it worse, every linux distro is different, even if they share the same parent distro, so I have to find enough experienced users of whatever distro I'm using to learn how to use it.

It's been a long time since I've used Windows on a regular basis. I work ON a lot of Win XP machines at the computer shop I work at, but I've convinced the boss to let me have a linux machine there, so I don't work IN Windows much.

The things I can say about XP? It seems like the most stable Windows released, when I download software (mostly free) I rarely even consider if it's going to work, it just does. My only wories are viruses and spyware, and we find hundreds of those every day on client's machiens. It's the #1 cause of Windows problems, and it's almost always a user problem. They don't run anti-virus/spiware software. Now, I don't either, but I have Linux, and don't really have to worry about such things.

With WinXP, there are still a lot of driver issues, and there is so little flexibility that we rarely "fix" a computer. 99% of the time we have to solve software issues by re-installing everything, and that's no exageration.

Just last week I re-installed a laptop. Four days later it came back in with a problem with Outlook Express. I put three hours into it before giving up and re-installing again. There's just not enough freedom of movement within the OS to be able to really dig and tweak a problem out. Reinstalling, at this point takes many hours and many re-boots due to all of the windows updates needed, even with ADSL. On the other hand, I know that the updates will work, unlike the crash I just experienced upgrading Kanotix Linux, and other crashed I've experienced upgrading other distros.

I'm still a loyal linux user. It does almost everything I need and I'm willing to pay with time for what I cannot afford in cash. But this whole linux is "free as in beer" thing has to go. Beer has never cost me two weeks of my life, and linux has taken much more than that.

majesticturkey
August 25th, 2006, 07:49 AM
Windows boots up in 15 seconds. I log in, and it takes almost TWO MINUTES for me to be able to run anything (all the background programs I need). After a couple hours, my memory has more leaks than a boat made of swiss cheese, and I figure if I don't shut down, my computer's fan will, ironically, catch fire. I run defrag and virus/spyware scans weekly. I'm smart, I never get viruses or spyware, but I still check. When I need a new program, I check over google for it, find out if I can download it, and if I need to buy it, typically pirate it. I have the generic eye-melting bright blue and green Windows theme, because the silver theme is depressing, and the olive theme is sickening. I tried StyleXP, but I love my RAM more than that. When I got my new 1GB flash drive, it took a few minutes for WinXP to detect it, install drivers for it (wtf?) and let me use it.

Ubuntu boots up in 10 seconds. Yes, 10 seconds (initng is wonderful, and i don't have many things to run on boot). I log in, and it takes 20 seconds for my desktop to load. I use XGL and Compiz, and have a beautiful theme customized just the way I want with transparency in the right places so I don't have to alt-tab when I transcribe stuff to OOo. When I want a new program, I check synaptic, or Google first, then just download it. When a client required video editing, I didn't panic because the client was a law firm and I would have to shell $300 for video capture/editing software. I just downloaded professional-grade software. When I got my flash drive, I plugged it in, and instantly it was automatically mounted on my desktop. I run all the programs I want to for work, and secretly have a game of Mahjongg on the other workspace. I work in my dorm room, but hey, it makes me feel sneaky. And my OS is perfectly designed to fit my usage. Like a tool with a custom-fit grip.

ago
August 25th, 2006, 09:37 AM
But for god's sake, when you boot it , it doesn't even plays MP3.

There is a reason for that: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RestrictedFormats

And in Edgy you will get a better explanation why you should NOT use mp3 and an option to install it anyway.


XP does things WAY more better
Sure, it is very good at playing proprietary, standards-breaking, formats...


Imagine having millions of users and I can make a bet - Linux would have the same problem, if not worse
Wrong. Linux is inherently more secure. For several reasons. There is plenty of literature on the subject. And by the way. Linux does have millions of users. But still no viruses.


There has been an independant test for security holes

Yeah we know far to well those "independent" studies. But I trust my experience better. Guess what. Every time a friend brings me their Windows laptop, and I ran a proper scan, it is ALWAYS infested with all sort of trojans. I have yet to see a single linux machine in these conditions.

ubuntu_demon
August 25th, 2006, 12:50 PM
I linked to this thread on my blog (which is also on the planet) :
http://ubuntudemon.wordpress.com/2006/08/24/why-linux-over-xp-how-ubuntu-users-respond/

I also link to this story :
http://www.skarulis.com/?p=22
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Why_Linux_over_XP_How_Ubuntu_Users_Respond

derred
August 25th, 2006, 09:51 PM
...
but the reason why i started using linux in the first place was because windows breaks every few months. so one time, instead of reformatting, i installed linux and ive been using it ever since. its more stable, faster, lets you do more with your computer, hell of a lot more fun, looks better and has practically 0 security issues.

I agree 100%. On the Microsoft(R)(C)(TM)(Whatever) homepage I found out that they say you should format at least every 6 months for "optimum results" or something along those lines. I don't want to have to reinstall not only the OS but also the ton and a half of apps that I use. I have been 100% Ubuntu for a few weeks now mainly because the XP installation CD just gave up in the middle of one of those twice a year formats.

The strange thing is I think I'm becoming careless, or at least the stability that linux offers is making me so. I don't back up daily, weekly, monthly, or actually ever. I hardly even turn of the computer (well it goes into standby if idle for 60mins but it's a laptop after all). In fact administering linux is about twice as easy I think since by at least knowing what everything is doing I can make an educated guess at what's wrong.

Another advantage is that the look of gnome(not the default theme but not far from it) really got my mom interested in using it... the bad part is that I can't spend as much time online :sad:

mrojas73
August 26th, 2006, 04:38 AM
I have been trying out different Linux distros for a long time but didn't decide to give up windows until a a year a go. I can do most things I need to do on Linux, the only thing I am missing is an Automatic Document Feeder scanner that works on Linux for my paperless setup I used to have with windows, so any recommendation on that type of scanners is welcome!

To me Linux, and Ubuntu specially is a different computing experience which I enjoy very much, it's like a passion, an expression!

We just need more support from hardware manufacturers, it's time the start paying attention to us.

Hyakutaro
August 26th, 2006, 08:15 AM
I actually juggle between XP and Ubuntu :p
However I'm using Ubuntu more and more on a daily basis... I can't really add anything new to this thread... Linux is just more fun :D

XXFCTEXX
August 26th, 2006, 08:59 AM
I love the short install process.

I love how when I'm done installing Ubuntu all of my hardware including my printer work, everything just works, and works great. Plus, I have an office suite already installed and ready to use. Not to mention all the other useful apps.

After an XP installation it doesn't even recognize my NIC and I can't access the internet. I have to load about six disks worth of crap to get everything working.

entangled
August 26th, 2006, 04:23 PM
Or to put it another way:
If you have Linux (most of us here do) why do you still use XP?

For me the answer is because I paid for it. You feel a commitment if you've paid for it. This is one thing that Linux obviously lacks!
How can you get a tie-in for Linux? Join a paying club to get the updates? It mustn't cost more than XP and MS can easily undercut.
Any other ideas?

Kelsin
August 27th, 2006, 01:37 AM
If it wasnt for the games I could dump windows entirely but i play games on a whim and I hate having to restart just to play it. I could get used to the complexity of it. Honestly though I dont think I will switch to full install of linux or even being first on the boot up list because of the fact that I have the exact same things on windows and linux.

With Linux I'm able to work quicker. I like the way it does everything better than windows. I play Unreal 2004, Neverwinter nights and all of the Quakes and Dooms native in Linux. I play Warcraft 3, Diablo II and World of Warcraft using wine. I don't have many reasons to use windows when I enjoy linux more for everything and the price is right.

charbo
August 27th, 2006, 02:26 AM
as long as your not being dumb opening random exe's its pretty much non existent. In reality the spyware is a big problem only because of the fact that the average computer user is attracted to flashy things and clicks.
I would have to disagree with this comment. I do not consider myself a dumb user, and certainly I do not click on stupid things or flashy things, but my work computer is often victimized by spyware. And it supposed to be behind all sorts of security measures.


If it wasnt for the games I could dump windows entirely but i play games on a whim and I hate having to restart just to play it.
I would have to agree with you on this. If playing games is important for you, and you only have one machine, I would also keep Windows most of the time.



To me this is the real reason that linux is not adopted by the mass public, theres really no reason to go over to linux if you have windows and a casual computer user.
I can see whole bunch of reasons as other contributors have already mentioned. My take on this reason is not necessarily that people cannot find reason to switch, but they are somewhat locked in, because of all kinds of proprietary tools and their compatibility. For example, most businesses use MS Office for creating documents and calculating budgets, don't they? If you are a supplyer to another company, and the customer demands that they provide the documents to be exactly in those formats, you probably tend to use them. (Though OOo has gotten quite good in the file compatibility, but still not perfect.)

My two cents.

daou
August 27th, 2006, 09:16 AM
I myself get frustrated anytime I boot into Windows. Hard drives seek and load random stuff continuously... making that incessant clicking noise even on my "quiet" Samsung Spinpoints. Right click anywhere, the OS loads, loads... oh loads. Suddenly everything slows down. Oh right, automated virus/spyware scan that I end up stopping anyway. I go get some files from the network... oops, explorer froze the OS, better wait 3 minutes.

Nevertheless I still need it for a couple of programs that I have to use a couple of times per month, frequency depending on what stuff I'm working on at uni. But even then dropping by Windows is a quick stop-n-go.

Aicani
August 27th, 2006, 09:28 AM
I started with Linux because I was curious about it.
I dualbooted with XP and PCLOS for about one and a half month.
Then I did a full install of Mepis and was very happy about that.
Of course I managed to f*** it up good hehe ](*,)
Then I made a fresh install of PCLOS wich I'm using now.
What I'm trying to say is that I never regretted switching to Linux full-time.
The main reason I'm using Linux is that I feel safe, I can do a lot more with it than I ever could in XP and it's much easier to work in Linux.
And of course; its all for free :)

Linux have given me all I need, and then some! 8)

osoviajero
August 28th, 2006, 08:27 PM
I removed WIN2K from my desktop, but have not found a Linux app that plays streaming audio that needs authentication with username and password. Anyone have any ideas?

Ali Imran
August 29th, 2006, 08:23 AM
Long and informative discussion.

As far I can see the major thing is the availability of free applications, when you start using linux you have almsot all kind of software freely avaiable, that you usually purchase if you are a windows user. The other choice you have download ports of that software for your macine runing windows, e.g. GIMP which is usually said as an alternate to PhotoShop which is not true, it is better than PS.

Some light on the products you purchase and their alternates on linux
MS-Office - Open Office
[I think better than MS-Office, with more and more formats support]
Adobe Photoshop - The GIMP
Adobe Illustrator - Inkscape, sodipodi etc
3D studio Max - Blender 3D and many more
Adobe Indesign - Scibrus


As far viruses, I dont count them a big problem since am not beginner level user, viruses are not found in linux that's good, but free antivirus software is available for windows that is Clam AV. As far music playing and video etc, I think that is not the major thing you should switch OS, or may be drivers installation is also not the reason since XP installs all drivers automatically when connected to internet and plugged new hardware, it is the availablity of more and more applications that run perfectly in native linux environment, not the ports which run under wine.

Few cents from me...

regards

ago
August 29th, 2006, 03:09 PM
I linked to this thread on my blog (which is also on the planet) :
http://ubuntudemon.wordpress.com/2006/08/24/why-linux-over-xp-how-ubuntu-users-respond/

I also link to this story :
http://www.skarulis.com/?p=22
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Why_Linux_over_XP_How_Ubuntu_Users_Respond


Suggested edits/additions:

Performance
* No progressive deterioration of performance. Ubuntu will be as snappy after 1 year as it was on its very first day
* No defragmenting
* No registry spring cleaning
* No autonomous proliferation of icons in the system tray
* No Dll hell
* No periodic OS reinstallations as panacea

Desktop customization
* You can use the desktop graphical user interface that better suits your needs. You can choose to work in a more featureful but heavier environment like Gnome or KDE, or in a light and fast one like Xfce. Or you can pick one of several other desktop managers.
* Each desktop enviroment can be further customized to meet your requirements
* You can even choose to have a 3D graphical interface. This feature is still in development but already functional on some setups and improving fast, it provides an incredibly cool, productive, and visionary desktop environment. See this amazing YouTube video demonstration of it…nuff said!

User Experience
* Upgrades (especially with Ubuntu) are a breeze, you can have your OS and all the software installed upgraded in one go, and you can productively work while they are occuring with no impact on system performance.
* Simple access to 10,000s of useful and free applications through apt-get or synaptic package managers. Select an application from a list of available software, and it will be automatically downloaded, installed and configrued. If you don't want it anymore, simply uncheck the box in the list.
* Ubuntu = Windows Desktop + Windows Server. There is no distinction between desktop and server. This means that the same world-class enterprise-level quality is available to home users, but also that, if you so require or even if you are curious, you can install and run quality (free) server applications, the very same software often used by multimillion companies.

Fuzzy / Intangible / Philosophical
* Whenever possible Ubuntu tries to promote open standards/protocols/file formats/codecs, as opposed to other companies that try to break standards and to push closed, proprietary formats in order to trap users.
* You can become inolved at various levels in the development of your operating system. And people tend to listen to what you say.
* You will be able to gain a deeper understanding of how your computer really works, without black boxes in the way, far beyond the monkey-see-monkey-do approach ("to do X, press button Y"). A knowledge that will not go out of fashion when the new user interface comes along. A knowledge that will enable you to actually understand and debug problems, as opposed to blindly trying to restart/reinstall problematic applications and/or the full operating system.
* It's like Christmas... ...but twice a year. You will be using an exciting system with a blazing fast development cycle. You do not have to wait 3-5 years for new versions, every 6 months you will find many new surprises and tangible improvements under the tree.

silver
August 29th, 2006, 04:47 PM
Linux v. Windows. LOL ! A very dangerous subject !

I've been uing Linux off and on since RH4. I've come to the following opinion.

Linux is like a truck and Windows is like a sports car. Want to spend money on something that is stylish, isn't particularly useful and has a high cost of maintainence, get a sports car. Want something that will simply work and keep working until you decide to trade it in, get a truck.

xarinatan
August 29th, 2006, 04:50 PM
have you ever searched google for games on linux?
i even found unreal tournament 2004 and quake4!!
yes it is indeed worth using linux...

ago
August 29th, 2006, 05:09 PM
Linux is like a truck and Windows is like a sports car.

A sport car that is slower than the truck...

And a sport car that USED TO look better than the truck, but that is now dated... In fact if the truck turns Xgl mode on, it completely outshines the sportscar (vista or not)...

The only relevant part of the sportscar comparison that applies today consist of: high cost of maintenance, low reliability, high fuel consumption, high cost of accessories... And it is not even a status symbol, since everybody got one...

whizbaby
August 29th, 2006, 06:06 PM
If you look at skype (I refer to the research puclished in www.secdev.org/conf/skype_BHEU06.handout.pdf, basically showing that skype code is mostly made up of techniques preventing you from knowing what skype exactly does) there are places where mankind doesn't need commercial software. I think the code of basic operations like writing/reading to discs/network/whatever or process monitoring should be open to anybody to learn from it and to verify it. Also, it's rubbish to buy a computer and then buy the ability to use it, that's like buying a car and then later on a steering wheel, brake and gas pedals as well as a monitoring display(Km/h,battery) and so on, but that's exactly the philosophy of Closed-OS-creators. Next thing is that you will NEVER know what financial interests are behind your XPensive, so you'll never know what the system exactly does (e.g. gathering information Billy could resell to companys).
This gets more important when you know that a lot of governmental work is done on computers. Please read 'Steven Levy: Hackers-Heroes of the Computer Revolution' to learn more about what's really the matter in commercial/free struggle.

silver
August 29th, 2006, 06:06 PM
A sport car that is slower than the truck...

And a sport car that USED TO look better than the truck, but that is now dated...

I can't knock the appearance of Windows as it appears to me that several aspects of Linux originated in Windows. Using the browser as a file manager for instance.


In fact if the truck turns Xgl mode on, it completely outshines the sportscar (vista or not)...

Fact is that an optimized version of either OS is actually quite capable for performing light duty work such as creating office documents, listening to MP3's, web browsing and so forth. In the FWIW category my XP system hasn't had a crash in 2+ years while the last time I updated Zenwalk a few weeks after installing it, I ran right into good ol' Kernel Panic. To prove to myself that Linux is the better option, I tried one simple test. I opened XMMS and loaded a playlist of high quality (read "large") MP3's. I then proceeded to install a couple applications, loaded several more and then opened several large files. XMMS never skipped a beat.


The only relevant part of the sportscar comparison that applies today consist of: high cost of maintenance, low reliability, high fuel consumption, high cost of accessories... And it is not even a status symbol, since everybody got one...

I have to somewhat disagree but perhaps I should clarify my post. By status symbol, I think of the status of computer users overall. The vast majority have never used a command prompt and wouldn't know C:\ from C#. It's much the same with cars (again) in that most people have no idea how to change the oil, brakes and belts but that is something that I do on a regular basis.

Someday soon I hope to make the jump to using only Linux and there is little doubt for me that it will be thanks to great efforts such as Ubuntu (Xubuntu).

studiesrule
August 29th, 2006, 06:20 PM
I'd like to change the name of the thread: If you have linux, why use Windows XP? (I think this must have been posted already 23 times already or something)
Linux lets me do ANYthing I'd like to. A good package like Ubuntu (or Kubuntu which I use) sets up everything just like that, (something that my windows didn't do, though it generally does it). I'd like to propose a new way of looking at tihngs. Most of you windowsers would have started from windows, and progressed into linux (as most of us linuxers would have too). So you think, woah, what the heck is this? I don't get that, how do you do this? But if you had to start from scratch, linux wouldn't be half as hard to shift into. You expect too much of windows in linux. I don't know if its a good thing or not, but now a lot of things are similar to windows, and that eases the transition. But, point being, if you started using linux, for two years then for some godforbidden reason install windows, you'd be pretty pissed with it.

ago
August 29th, 2006, 06:33 PM
I'd like to change the name of the thread: If you have linux, why use Windows XP?

To test coLinux/andlinux to help make a better windows installer for Ubuntu.

ago
August 29th, 2006, 06:57 PM
it appears to me that several aspects of Linux originated in Windows.
Well, if you really wanted to dig about the origin of modern user interfaces you will find very little actually originating from redmond... E.G. http://www.usfca.edu/usf/turner/interface-history.html , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_interface


In the FWIW category my XP system hasn't had a crash in 2+ years
I agree that blue screen is not a problem as it used to be with windows 95-98-ME. Today, you need to crank up the gear to see failure in XP. Not as often as it used to but it will still happen. Linux is leagues ahead. It does not matter what you through at it, Linux will not crash. Sure you can misconfigure Linux and get kernel panic, but that is a different story. Once linux has booted properly it is quite difficult to take it down. As an experiment, just write a simple script that consumes memory (something that generates and stores huge matrices) run it under windows and linux and see what happens once memory is over...


The vast majority have never used a command prompt
And with today's distributions they do not need to. The reason why CLI is still in vogue is that, differently from the absolutely useless DOS shell, it is an extremely efficient and effective tool.

handle1790
August 29th, 2006, 06:59 PM
bloat, bloat, bloat.

I have to run 0 maetinance on a linux box.
(other than apt-get autoclean)

When I run a windows box, just leaving it on for 12+ hours, it runs slow as sin unless I reboot.

When I run a windows box, despite what defragging, what cleaning you do, it still gets bloated from everyday use, and I end up reformatting every 6 months or so to get better performance.

When I run a windows box, I'm paying ~100 for the OS, usually a security suite (not as much anymore with free alternatives coming up to pace), which can be $80 a year.

Spyware/malware, its fixable, but it takes TIME out of my day to run all those checks.

No registry. Enough said on that mess.

Open source. If you can't find something, you can make it. You can find someone who can make it.

Peace of mind. When you browse the web on a windows box, you're going to war wearing neon. If someone wants to get into your computer, they'll do it no matter what OS you're on, but the mass attacks out there are aimed at Win boxes.

Patches. Microsoft has how much money, and they still take forever to get a patch out, even for CRITICAL updates. Look at the .wmf patch. It took weeks for MS to do it, some lone guy in Europe had one out in a few days. Things that WERE small problems, become huge vulnerabilities because they let them go.

Multiple inputs, customizing. There is no monolithic linux corp. It is multiple people with multiple ideals adding to the pool. If you don't like something, there's alternatives. You are not stuck with the vision of one megalithic corporation.


In closing, MS has done a lot to get every Joe Sixpack on a computer. I used windows for 15 years or so, and in the past year using Linux, I wish I started earlier. Its definitely not for everyone, but if you're willing to invest the time to learn it, its well worth it.

SoundMachine
August 29th, 2006, 07:08 PM
I can't knock the appearance of Windows as it appears to me that several aspects of Linux originated in Windows. Using the browser as a file manager for instance.

That's your impression because you used Windows long before Linux. It's not true though.


Fact is that an optimized version of either OS is actually quite capable for performing light duty work such as creating office documents, listening to MP3's, web browsing and so forth. In the FWIW category my XP system hasn't had a crash in 2+ years while the last time I updated Zenwalk a few weeks after installing it, I ran right into good ol' Kernel Panic. To prove to myself that Linux is the better option, I tried one simple test. I opened XMMS and loaded a playlist of high quality (read "large") MP3's. I then proceeded to install a couple applications, loaded several more and then opened several large files. XMMS never skipped a beat.

Well apart from the fact that XMMS is a horrible media player i agree with you.




I have to somewhat disagree but perhaps I should clarify my post. By status symbol, I think of the status of computer users overall. The vast majority have never used a command prompt and wouldn't know C:\ from C#. It's much the same with cars (again) in that most people have no idea how to change the oil, brakes and belts but that is something that I do on a regular basis.

Well, c:\ actually doesn't mean anything but the first partition on the first disk, so who knows what's on it? Now in the *nix file structure, things makes sense. It's like having an oil lamp telling you where it is and what to put in it.


Someday soon I hope to make the jump to using only Linux and there is little doubt for me that it will be thanks to great efforts such as Ubuntu (Xubuntu).

Well, I'm on a windows machine now, uptime a tad over a month and it's running fine doing it's job, there is nothing inherently better about using Linux unless you really find something that is better about it FOR YOU. :)

I use Linux/*BSD on all my own machines for that very reason.

SoundMachine
August 29th, 2006, 07:26 PM
bloat, bloat, bloat.

I have to run 0 maetinance on a linux box.
(other than apt-get autoclean)

And people run regcleaners and third party crap on their windows computers and then wonder why they break.


When I run a windows box, just leaving it on for 12+ hours, it runs slow as sin unless I reboot.

Happens in Linux too at times, memory leaks and such, the machine i'm sitting at right now has had a tad over a month of uptime with daily use and it runs just as fast as if i had recently rebooted.


When I run a windows box, despite what defragging, what cleaning you do, it still gets bloated from everyday use, and I end up reformatting every 6 months or so to get better performance.

Defragging NTFS is about as neccessary as defragging ext3, sure, you can do it for fun but it's not really going to do much, using regcleaners and such is just daft, it ruins more than it ever fixes. If it gets bloated it's because you install or download a lot of stuff, it doesn't just sit there and expand all on it's own.


When I run a windows box, I'm paying ~100 for the OS, usually a security suite (not as much anymore with free alternatives coming up to pace), which can be $80 a year.

There is NO need for any extra firewall, the SP2 firewall works just as well, an antivirus that is free? There are loads of them, but none of them will help if the user is intentionally (or out of stupidity) breaking his system.


Spyware/malware, its fixable, but it takes TIME out of my day to run all those checks.

Then don't, it's not needed unless you are visiting pages you shouldn't be, clicking yes and giving permission as you shouldn't be, opening attatchments that you shouldn't be, run without the firewall enabled like it should be.


No registry. Enough said on that mess.

gconf? Don't touch it and it'll be fine.


Open source. If you can't find something, you can make it. You can find someone who can make it.

And he or you can make it for Windows or Linux or whatever.


Peace of mind. When you browse the web on a windows box, you're going to war wearing neon. If someone wants to get into your computer, they'll do it no matter what OS you're on, but the mass attacks out there are aimed at Win boxes.

LOL, no, if you are not disabling the by default enabled firewall in Windows XP SP2 or allowing traffic you shouldn't, opening files you shouldn't then you're safe. Generally people who get viruses are people who download Warez and crap.


Patches. Microsoft has how much money, and they still take forever to get a patch out, even for CRITICAL updates. Look at the .wmf patch. It took weeks for MS to do it, some lone guy in Europe had one out in a few days. Things that WERE small problems, become huge vulnerabilities because they let them go.

Well here i agree with you, MS should improve and has improved on this.


Multiple inputs, customizing. There is no monolithic linux corp. It is multiple people with multiple ideals adding to the pool. If you don't like something, there's alternatives. You are not stuck with the vision of one megalithic corporation.

Actually, Linux is all about Linus Torvalds, the rest is pretty much same as windows, made by different companies and individuals. There are many more alternatives on Windows.



In closing, MS has done a lot to get every Joe Sixpack on a computer. I used windows for 15 years or so, and in the past year using Linux, I wish I started earlier. Its definitely not for everyone, but if you're willing to invest the time to learn it, its well worth it.

You can't blame MS for using good buisness tactics.

And last but not least, anyone who runs ANY box as admin/root for day to day tasks deserves to get whatever he gets.

silver
August 29th, 2006, 07:49 PM
I'd like to change the name of the thread: If you have linux, why use Windows XP?

OK, I've got a new asbestos suit fresh out of the box so I'll play Devil's Advocate here ;>)

#1 - Hardware support and compatibility. I can probably think of as many workarounds as anyone here on the boards however the fact is that Windows makes it easy to work with nearly any hardware configuration easily. Take dual-monitors for instance. Do you have any idea how difficult it can be to setup something so basic ? Try this : http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Dual_Monitors . Next, scanners. Yes, (X)SANE has made life a lot easier however if I had to guess I would say that less than 50% of the scanners on the market have good support and the majority that don't are the cheapy's such as the Lexmark AIO's and the Vioneer's you'll find in many small businesses. Of course this isn't the fault of Linux per se but rather the society of lemmings that forced hardware manufacturers to use the cheapest hardware imagineable. These are just some of the basics but when it comes down to it Windows makes it easy for hardware designers to meet the demands of the market while minimizing the need for tech support.

#2 - Software capabilities. Is it me or is it starting to get warm in here ? Quoting my SIL, the UNIX admin of the family "An OS is just an OS and that's all it should be." But to get something done once a system is working takes software. For nearly every Windows application there is a Linux counterpart that frankly just isn't quite as capable. Take the newsreader and email client Agent (forteinc.com) for instance. Pan is the closest application to having the capabilities of Agent and it's still about 2~3 years behind in development. And does anyone really think that Open Office is anywhere near as good as MS Office 2003 ? How about specialty applications like GIMP vs PAINT.NET ? Both are free and both work quite well but you'll find that PAINT.NET works a little better already and it's only been in development for a little over a year. Can someone, anyone please show me a CD ripper that's as good and capable as Easy CD-DA ? Or how about a HDD cloner as easy to use as Ghost ? A CD burning app as capable as Nero ? An installable encyclopedia as good as Encarta ? Or similarly a mapping program which I can use in my portable to take with me on the road without having to connect to MapQuest ?

#3 - Backward compatibility. On Windows XP one shouldn't have any difficulty running nearly any application written since '97. Yaw'll wanna try that one on Linux ?

#4 - Reasonably priced tech support. I'm going to leave out the forums and such. If you're using an OS for your business you had better be able to pick up the phone and call a help desk for a reasonable price. This is one of the factors in the demise of Netware and why UNIX itself is just holding its' own.

#5 - A single desktop architecture. Along with the option to run different desktops comes numerous limitations and trade-offs. Some may like K-Everything but frankly it isn't everything. Neither is G-Something or even X. I wish the entire community would get it's head on straight and just build one desktop so that developers could program for one environment. This would yeild numerous rewards in both software development and in system functionality and stability.

On a personal note, should this ever be achieved, I hope that every application doesn't start with "K", "G" or "X" !!!!

silver
August 29th, 2006, 08:20 PM
Well, if you really wanted to dig about the origin of modern user interfaces you will find very little actually originating from redmond... E.G. http://www.usfca.edu/usf/turner/interface-history.html , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_interface


I'm familiar with the basics as I've lived through much of it. But I think we can agree that the desktop has been almost completely renovated since MS integrated the browser into the OS.


Sure you can misconfigure Linux and get kernel panic, but that is a different story.

Note that this isn't to be taken too lightly. I've seen KP too many times as the result of a config change such as added hardware though software can also be the source).


Once linux has booted properly it is quite difficult to take it down.

I view Linux much as I do Windows in this context :"If it ain't broke don't fix it 'cause usually you're just going break it.".


As an experiment, just write a simple script that consumes memory (something that generates and stores huge matrices) run it under windows and linux and see what happens once memory is over...

LOL ! And that's kinda what I did and you're exactly right ! After 11 years at the top MS STILL doesn't have good memory management !


And with today's distributions they do not need to. The reason why CLI is still in vogue is that, differently from the absolutely useless DOS shell, it is an extremely efficient and effective tool.

And the reason it's should be easily accessible to anyone on any OS but I think Mr.Jobs has pretty much pulled it from Mac, right ? This brings to mind one thing that I have always found surprising in the Linux community. MS is bashed every second of the day however Mac rarely gets a mention. As someone who used Mac's up to OS 7.X I can honestly state for the record that NT was years ahead of Mac and boy am I ever glad I made that switch !

SoundMachine
August 29th, 2006, 08:27 PM
OK, I've got a new asbestos suit fresh out of the box so I'll play Devil's Advocate here ;>)

This is not intended as a flame at all so don't take it as one.


#1 - Hardware support and compatibility. I can probably think of as many workarounds as anyone here on the boards however the fact is that Windows makes it easy to work with nearly any hardware configuration easily. Take dual-monitors for instance. Do you have any idea how difficult it can be to setup something so basic ? Try this : http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Dual_Monitors . Next, scanners. Yes, (X)SANE has made life a lot easier however if I had to guess I would say that less than 50% of the scanners on the market have good support and the majority that don't are the cheapy's such as the Lexmark AIO's and the Vioneer's you'll find in many small businesses. Of course this isn't the fault of Linux per se but rather the society of lemmings that forced hardware manufacturers to use the cheapest hardware imagineable. These are just some of the basics but when it comes down to it Windows makes it easy for hardware designers to meet the demands of the market while minimizing the need for tech support.

Device for device Linux has more support out of the box than Windows does period. There is no discussion if this is true, it's not harder than to look at the driver database.

When it comes to some hardware working in Windows and not in Linux, well, you wouldn't buy a SPARC station to install XP on so why would you buy incompatible hardware to install Linux on?


#2 - Software capabilities. Is it me or is it starting to get warm in here ? Quoting my SIL, the UNIX admin of the family "An OS is just an OS and that's all it should be." But to get something done once a system is working takes software. For nearly every Windows application there is a Linux counterpart that frankly just isn't quite as capable. Take the newsreader and email client Agent (forteinc.com) for instance. Pan is the closest application to having the capabilities of Agent and it's still about 2~3 years behind in development. And does anyone really think that Open Office is anywhere near as good as MS Office 2003 ? How about specialty applications like GIMP vs PAINT.NET ? Both are free and both work quite well but you'll find that PAINT.NET works a little better already and it's only been in development for a little over a year. Can someone, anyone please show me a CD ripper that's as good and capable as Easy CD-DA ? Or how about a HDD cloner as easy to use as Ghost ? A CD burning app as capable as Nero ? An installable encyclopedia as good as Encarta ? Or similarly a mapping program which I can use in my portable to take with me on the road without having to connect to MapQuest ?

This is opinion and preference, i prefer other programs than you do.


#3 - Backward compatibility. On Windows XP one shouldn't have any difficulty running nearly any application written since '97. Yaw'll wanna try that one on Linux ?

Well XP SP2 can't run thousands of programs made for windows of '97 and Linux offers backward compatability with programs not even made for Linux and pretty much every program that is. Hands down, backwards compatability is a Linux win.


#4 - Reasonably priced tech support. I'm going to leave out the forums and such. If you're using an OS for your business you had better be able to pick up the phone and call a help desk for a reasonable price. This is one of the factors in the demise of Netware and why UNIX itself is just holding its' own.

Reasonably priced for 24/7 high quality tech support? Linux wins hands down again. SuSE takes this medal home.



#5 - A single desktop architecture. Along with the option to run different desktops comes numerous limitations and trade-offs. Some may like K-Everything but frankly it isn't everything. Neither is G-Something or even X. I wish the entire community would get it's head on straight and just build one desktop so that developers could program for one environment. This would yeild numerous rewards in both software development and in system functionality and stability.

Well, everyone who runs KDE or Gnome like X, neither would run without it, X is the network server, KDE and gnome with it's various programs are the clients (Qt programs for KDE, GTK programs for Gnome). If you want one desktop, choose one. KDE and Gnome are so inherently different both in concept and execution, you choose which one you like and stick with it, don't complain about having choices.


On a personal note, should this ever be achieved, I hope that every application doesn't start with "K", "G" or "X" !!!!

What's in a name?

SoundMachine
August 29th, 2006, 08:32 PM
As an experiment, just write a simple script that consumes memory (something that generates and stores huge matrices) run it under windows and linux and see what happens once memory is over...

They seem to have included your script in FireFox! (goes for both Windows and Linux versions.) :-D

ago
August 29th, 2006, 08:40 PM
And people run regcleaners and third party crap on their windows computers and then wonder why they break.
Well you have the choice of not cleaning the registry and see windows perish or cleaning the registry and see windows perish


Happens in Linux too at times
Maybe. Never an issue in may experience


memory leaks and such, the machine i'm sitting at right now has had a tad over a month of uptime with daily use and it runs just as fast as if i had recently rebooted.
Assuming you do open a couple of applications yes, do some semi-serious work on it and you will need to reboot daily. And do a full reinstallation every 6 months.


Defragging NTFS is about as neccessary as defragging ext3
Except that you do not defragment ext3... It sorts things out by itself...


If it gets bloated it's because you install or download a lot of stuff, it doesn't just sit there and expand all on it's own.
Sure, with light use the system will last longer. That does not mean it is a good system. With linux I can install and uninstall hundreds of programs with no problem whatsoever, I can download whatever I want, do heavy multitask etc etc and it never ever slows down. Don't try that with windows...


There is NO need for any extra firewall, the SP2 firewall works just as well
I beg to differ...


an antivirus that is free? There are loads of them, but none of them will help if the user is intentionally (or out of stupidity) breaking his system.
With linux you do not need an antivirus, free or not. You do not need anti spyware, anti malaware, anti whatever...


it's not needed unless you are visiting pages you shouldn't be
You are not for real, are you?


clicking yes
You can install stuff in windows without clicking anything. In fact crackers can access a windows machine as soon as you connect the internet cable, without starting any application. Heck, Sony installed a rootkit when you played a music CD!!!!


and giving permission as you shouldn't be
Permissions are already granted BY DEAULT as they shouldn't be.


opening files you shouldn't then you're safe.
Not so obvious, because it is far too easy in windows to make a file pass for something else.


Generally people who get viruses are people who download Warez and crap.
I have examined lots of machines of people that certainly do not download warez, all with auto-update, crappy default firewall, usual branded AV... AND ALL WITH TROJANS.


the rest is pretty much same as windows, made by different companies and individuals.
Except it is OSS, which makes all the difference.


There are many more alternatives on Windows.
There are many more pay-for applications in windows. But not alternatives. You cannot choose to have a different window manager, to have a slim windows XP version to run on 32MB, to uninstall IE. In fact you will have a tough time even to remove the folder c:\program files\msn gaming zone... That is how much you are in control...


You can't blame MS for using good buisness tactics.
Do not confuse what is effective and what is legal and/or ethical.


And last but not least, anyone who runs ANY box as admin/root for day to day tasks deserves to get whatever he gets.
This is what windows leads a user to. So blame it on them. In Ubuntu you cannot even login as administrator...



So to summarize: windows works well if you do not run too much stuff all together, if you do not install too much software, if you do not download too many files, if you are watchful of the website you visit, if you are careful about the files you open, if you set up permissions properly, if you do not play music CDs, if you don't click yes, if... WOW! Nice OS! What about a modern OS where I can do all I want without any worry?

SoundMachine
August 29th, 2006, 09:11 PM
Well you have the choice of not cleaning the registry and see windows perish or cleaning the registry and see windows perish

I find that the same people who are doing stuff like installing regcleaners to be the same people who use CFLAGS known to break the system when they recompile their system to the latest testing branch and then are surprised when it breaks the system.

Of the 190+ machines in this building that I'm responsible for 160+ are running Windows, never used a regcleaner, never defragged, never reinstalled for three years and pretty much constantly on because I push updates at night if needed.

Not ONE of them has seen a bluescreen because of the OS, not ONE.

You think there may be a reason for that?

The --omg-optimized crowd think they are being bright, but what they save in a second a day they lose by breaking their systems.

Quit spreading FUD, XP is a quite stable and ok OS, if I had a choice i'd run Linux on all machines instead but not for any of the reasons you have mentioned.

Now, I'm out of this thread, no hard feeling, I'll see you around. :)

ago
August 29th, 2006, 09:12 PM
But I think we can agree that the desktop has been almost completely renovated since MS integrated the browser into the OS.
No I don't. I don't see much innovation. Rip-offs yes, like IE7 copying FF, or vista copyng Apple (as usual)... Maybe the ribbons...


I've seen KP too many times as the result of a config change such as added hardware though software can also be the source).
Yes there are several ways to screw up linux. But if people play with things they are not supposed to play, that is what happens. I can try to undo and redo a mercedes engine and the mercedes is guaranteed to work like crap after that. That does not mean that mercedes engines are unreliable.


I view Linux much as I do Windows in this context :"If it ain't broke don't fix it 'cause usually you're just going break it.".
The difference is that a linux engine is simply not going to break (unless you mess with it), you can do the coast-to-coast 2000 times. Windows engine will break after a few runs whether you mess with it or not. It did imporve A LOT in this area, but it is nowhere close to Linux.


LOL ! And that's kinda what I did and you're exactly right ! After 11 years at the top MS STILL doesn't have good memory management !
That is just one examples, you could build similar tests in other areas. Windows is just an inferior system.


And the reason it's should be easily accessible to anyone on any OS but I think Mr.Jobs has pretty much pulled it from Mac, right ?
And ubuntu on Linux. Maybe not yet as user friendly as OSX but getting close, very close...


MS is bashed every second of the day however Mac rarely gets a mention.
I don't see anything strange. Mac products are sane (no viruses there either, no crappy stability, no degrading performance, no flimsy security...). Loads and loads of innovation (regularly ripped off by microsoft). Acceptable company practices... Not much choice (as in windows, but with far less applications), but at least the default is a very good system (unlike windows).

ago
August 29th, 2006, 09:21 PM
I find that the same people who are doing stuff like installing regcleaners to be the same people who use CFLAGS known to break the system when they recompile their system to the latest testing branch and then are surprised when it breaks the system.

There is a huge difference. You do not need to recompile changing CFLAGS.

But just examine the registry after a few months. It will be full of junk. Guaranteed.


Of the 190+ machines in this building that I'm responsible for 160+ are running Windows, never used a regcleaner, never defragged, never reinstalled for three years and pretty much constantly on because I push updates at night if needed.
Because you probably have very strict control on what gets installed, you have strict policies in place (which means you changed all the default settings), chances are you have a professional firewall setup, you probably scan all incoming traffic, because most files will likely be on netowork resources as opposed to local disks, you probably have proper centralized patch management, proper backups....

This is NOT what happens in a home.

To properly maintain a windows machine is a PROFESSIONAL job. For a normal user keeping windows in a "decent shape" as far as performance, and security goes is ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE. I know very few "power users" who managed to keep their machine clean, and generally because they work in a "controlled environment" (always use the same applications, always on the same websites, scan every file before use, no downloads, no magazine CD trials...), but all other users I have seen (the vast majority) had their machine compromised and as slow as a snail.

Ubuntu will just work as well as a professionally maintained windows machine, except that no professional is needed and you do not need to self restrain your daily usage.

silver
August 29th, 2006, 09:32 PM
This is not intended as a flame at all so don't take it as one.

LOL ! I don't as long as the conversation stays civil. I guess you can tell I've been too many years on the USENET ?


Device for device Linux has more support out of the box than Windows does period. There is no discussion if this is true, it's not harder than to look at the driver database.

OOB, sure. But how many devices are in common use that don't have a Linux driver to make them work ? Jeez this brings up flashbacks of dealing with WinModems ! Anyway, I would never use a driver written for a device by Microsoft.


When it comes to some hardware working in Windows and not in Linux, well, you wouldn't buy a SPARC station to install XP on so why would you buy incompatible hardware to install Linux on?

I completely agree however I think the original context of this thread was along the lines of the average user who certainly isn't going to review every piece of hardware.

Regarding programs available ...


This is opinion and preference, i prefer other programs than you do.

And I get the feeling that you're not a casual user, right ? The programs I cited are quite common on the average users systems. Fortunately we don't have to include AOL here ;>)


Well XP SP2 can't run thousands of programs made for windows of '97 and Linux offers backward compatability with programs not even made for Linux and pretty much every program that is. Hands down, backwards compatability is a Linux win.

OK, I concede that WINE adds a lot of functionality however we might just as well add in Cygwin. And I doubt that an app written to run under libc 4.X is going to work today. Also Windows has some emulation built into the OS as accessed through the properties for each executable. This allows for the useage of programs written for Win2K, NT, 98/ME and even 95.


Reasonably priced for 24/7 high quality tech support? Linux wins hands down again. SuSE takes this medal home.

I'll have to take your word for it as I haven't called them. But to put this back in the context I was addressing, I meant the average EU. Imagine that a networked printer stopped being accessible for one client in a business that is too small to have an IT department. Something like a small real estate office of around 8~10 users. Are they likly to feel very good about calling a Linux support line which would cost well over $100 to get a printer working ? In Windows they can usually just un/reinstall or update the drivers/printer and it will start functioning again.


Well, everyone who runs KDE or Gnome like X, neither would run without it, X is the network server, KDE and gnome with it's various programs are the clients (Qt programs for KDE, GTK programs for Gnome). If you want one desktop, choose one. KDE and Gnome are so inherently different both in concept and execution, you choose which one you like and stick with it, don't complain about having choices.

Nor would I complain about having a single standard for software development. Pluralism is rarely a strength and as was once stated "United we stand, divided we fall." (Dickinson). As has been noted by many, for Linux to make a serious leap across the desktop, it will need to focus more on standardizing.


What's in a name?

Krap ? It might be silly but I could just hurl when I see every single application having a name starting with K, G or X. They might as well be Microsoft Works, Microsoft Office, Microsoft blah blah blah !

SoundMachine
August 29th, 2006, 09:35 PM
Ubuntu will just work as well as a professionally maintained windows machine, except that no professional is needed.

And when an update breaks X?

I have yet to see such a devastating update hit Windows, not even the WGA updates did anything nearly as bad even though it annoyed a lot of legitimate customers.

I'm telling you and if you speak with anyone on the MS dev team they will tell you too, don't use third party tools like regcleaners, don't install Warez, don't disable the SP2 firewall, use automatic updates, don't open unknown attatchments and you will be fine.

Of course i have tight control over these boxes, but your earlier point was that the OS sucked, not that you as a user suck so much that you will break your OS. You can break ANY box by being a daft user, the OS doesn't matter which was my point with the unstable CFLAGS remark (and no, you don't recompile CFLAGS, the compiler uses the CFLAGS as an instruction on what the end code should support and not support)

ago
August 29th, 2006, 09:45 PM
And when an update breaks X?

You wait a few HOURS and redo apt-get upgrade.


I have yet to see such a devastating update hit Windows

I can give you planty of suggestions, ".wmf" sounds familiar? How long did it take to fix that? How many home users actually managed to apply ALL the fixes after they were released?


not even the WGA updates did anything nearly as bad

I beg to differ, WGA was INTENTIONAL...


don't use third party tools like regcleaners, don't install Warez, don't disable the SP2 firewall, use automatic updates, don't open unknown attatchments.
Yes and you will be even safer if you disconnect your machine from the power plug...


Of course i have tight control over these boxes
You simply cannot compare a professionally maintained machine to one used by average joe... Give average joe a boxed windows and a boxed Ubuntu. Come back in 3 months and run a scan. Then we can talk...


but your earlier point was that the OS sucked
And I confirm that. If an OS needs a professional to look after the machine, patch it, put it under corporate firewalls, restrain what users can do, it means it sucks.


You can break ANY box by being a daft user
I am talking about REGULAR use of the machine with DEFAULT SETTINGS. Not breaking anything intentionally. Just installing software, downloading files, opening emails... Things users normally do. Why don't you leave a few of your machines with an unpatched standard XP installation (as it comes off the box) no corporate firewall and no restrain on the user... Try also with a few Ubuntu boxes. Let's see the difference... Bets are on.

DoctorMO
August 29th, 2006, 09:47 PM
So let me get this strait. Install windows... do nothing.

Yay for common sense!

X breaks, **** happens and the devs are dealing with it, what you don't get is a flood of Comercialtastic buzzwords all strung together; you get solutions.

Besides I have an Ace: Freedom, you can't get that with Microsoft and nothing is more important.

I don't care how much X breaks, how crappy Linux gets, I won't be forced to give it up. begone computer before I welcome Microsoft into my home again.

SoundMachine
August 29th, 2006, 09:54 PM
LOL ! I don't as long as the conversation stays civil. I guess you can tell I've been too many years on the USENET ?

Blasphemy! Can't spend too much time on usenet. ;)


OOB, sure. But how many devices are in common use that don't have a Linux driver to make them work ? Jeez this brings up flashbacks of dealing with WinModems ! Anyway, I would never use a driver written for a device by Microsoft.

Ok, take all drivers for either system and Linux would still come out on top. And WinModems isn't hardware though they are fairly well supported now that no one uses them anymore. :D




I completely agree however I think the original context of this thread was along the lines of the average user who certainly isn't going to review every piece of hardware.

Well, some poor scmuch might buy a G5 and can't install Windows on it then if he doesn't know what he's buying. The solution is simple, know what you buy and if it's supported, i claim that that is needed, preferably read up on the product before you buy it whether you are going to use it with Linux, Windows or Solaris. A smart user makes smart choices, a daft user ends up with Windows (i keeed, i keeed) ;)



And I get the feeling that you're not a casual user, right ? The programs I cited are quite common on the average users systems. Fortunately we don't have to include AOL here ;>)

At home i am, it's probably because i've been using FLOSS for so long that i forgot the taste of CS.




OK, I concede that WINE adds a lot of functionality however we might just as well add in Cygwin. And I doubt that an app written to run under libc 4.X is going to work today. Also Windows has some emulation built into the OS as accessed through the properties for each executable. This allows for the useage of programs written for Win2K, NT, 98/ME and even 95.

Well, you would have to install all dependencies but it would run just fine.




I'll have to take your word for it as I haven't called them. But to put this back in the context I was addressing, I meant the average EU. Imagine that a networked printer stopped being accessible for one client in a business that is too small to have an IT department. Something like a small real estate office of around 8~10 users. Are they likly to feel very good about calling a Linux support line which would cost well over $100 to get a printer working ? In Windows they can usually just un/reinstall or update the drivers/printer and it will start functioning again.

Ahhh, an end user get worse support from MS than i get from getting drunk and talking to my cat anyway. (slight exaggeration perhaps but i have been talking to MS a lot lately)

The big difference is the community, once you embrace the FLOSS community you are in safe hands no matter pretty much what. :)


Nor would I complain about having a single standard for software development. Pluralism is rarely a strength and as was once stated "United we stand, divided we fall." (Dickinson). As has been noted by many, for Linux to make a serious leap across the desktop, it will need to focus more on standardizing.

"Ein Volk, Ein Reich!" (Adolf Hitler)

Remove all parties except one and you won't have to worry about how the future will look.

FLOSS is about freedom and freedom is about choice, remove the choice and you have removed the purpose of FLOSS and with that, Linux.

It's very different, it's why the changes in the kernel don't stick to a standard ABI, it changes as they see fit so they are not locked by the software but the software is locked by them.



Krap ? It might be silly but I could just hurl when I see every single application having a name starting with K, G or X. They might as well be Microsoft Works, Microsoft Office, Microsoft blah blah blah !

To be entirely honest, the Kwhathever is getting a bit annoying but it serves a purpose, you know it's a Qt app by simply looking at it's name. :)

And as you are used to Usenet, i'm sure you realize that by mentioning old Adolf up above i invoked Godwins law, for those of you who don't know what it means it means that i immediatly have lost this discussion and that this thread now is over.

TC Silver!

silver
August 29th, 2006, 09:59 PM
So to summarize: windows works well if you do not run too much stuff all together, if you do not install too much software, if you do not download too many files, if you are watchful of the website you visit, if you are careful about the files you open, if you set up permissions properly, if you do not play music CDs, if you don't click yes, if... WOW! Nice OS! What about a modern OS where I can do all I want without any worry?

Playing music CD's ? Jeez ! I'm doing something wrong ! I have over 60GB of MP3's ripped using LAME via Easy CD-DA Extractor which is a program I downloaded from the internet. But note that I don't download from warez sites as I feel that copyright violation is not only criminal but immoral. And I don't bother looking at porn as I'm happily married. I don't frequent chat rooms as I find them to be a waste of time. I don't download applications for testing as I stick to the ones that work. And yes, I'm careful about the files that I open as 4 of my family members are on AOL which at one time I completely filtered at the server as I was getting so much junk. Unfortunately the world is a rather dirty little place and there are thousands of people with far too much time on their hands to create virii, spyware and so forth. So on my Windows boxes I run Avast antivirus, Adaware, Firefox and they all site behind a router. I'm careful about what I open and in fact if you sent me an email without invitation the chances are quite good that I would simply delete it. And if Linux ever achieves a significant marketshare you will be doing something similar. Welcome to the 21st century.

ago
August 29th, 2006, 10:03 PM
Playing music CD's ? Jeez ! I'm doing something wrong !

Exactly, in windows you cannot even safely play the CDs you legally purchased... It is that bad...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Sony_CD_copy_protection_scandal


XCP was put on 52 albums[1] and MediaMax was put on 50 albums.[2] This software was automatically installed on desktop computers when customers tried to play the CDs. The software interferes with the normal way in which the Microsoft Windows or Mac OS X operating systems play CDs, opens security holes that allow viruses to break in, and causes other problems. It is widely described as spyware.

Welcome to the 21st century.

ago
August 29th, 2006, 10:06 PM
By the way, when that happened no antivirus detected the rootkit... And the great MS firewall did let pass absolutely everything through...

silver
August 30th, 2006, 01:21 AM
By the way, when that happened no antivirus detected the rootkit... And the great MS firewall did let pass absolutely everything through...

Perhaps you aren't aware that rootkits were originated on UNIX systems ? In case you're not aware, Linux is a UNIX variant. Don't remember kinsmod ? Loadable kernel modules ? And whatever you do, don't forget the Blue Pill ! And does anyone, ANYONE think that a software firewall is an effective protection against anything ?!

ago
August 30th, 2006, 01:40 AM
Rootkits originated in the Unix word, but that does not mean that they are easy to install on unix systems... Quite the opposite. In order to install a rootkit you first need to break into the system...

And here is the huge difference...

To break into Ubuntu is REALLY difficult.

To break into Windows all you have to do is play a music CD!!!

You can have all the antivirus and firewall you want, you can take all the precautions you want, and still your system will be as waterproof as swiss cheese.

Can it get any worse than this? I seriously doubt it.

In linux, you will never, ever be able to install a rootkit by playing a music CD!

Tomosaur
August 30th, 2006, 01:41 AM
Unless someone writes a program which detects and installs rootkits...

ago
August 30th, 2006, 01:57 AM
And does anyone, ANYONE think that a software firewall is an effective protection against anything ?!

Apparently you did...

You thought that by using AV and firewall and by avoiding opening potentially dangerous files you were safe... SoundMachine thought the same. And probably millions of other windows "power users".

And, as Sony proves, you were all wrong...

With Ubuntu, without AV, without firewall, without any special precaution, I can listen to any CD, open any email, visit any website, play any file I want, and still I am far more secure than you will ever be in windows.

ago
August 30th, 2006, 02:02 AM
Unless someone writes a program which detects and installs rootkits...
detects and installs rootkits??? maybe "detects and uninstalls rootkits". But I am afraid is not that easy...

silver
August 30th, 2006, 02:09 AM
No I don't. I don't see much innovation. Rip-offs yes, like IE7 copying FF, or vista copyng Apple (as usual)... Maybe the ribbons...

IE7 a copy of FF ? Vista a copy of Apple ? Gimmee a break ! IE7 doesn't look much like FF and in fact Opera had tabbed windows before FF (which is the only browser that I use). As to MS copying Apple, Apple copied Xerox. Give it a rest kid.


Yes there are several ways to screw up linux.

Yeah and most of them are exactly the same as screwing up Windows. Updating the kernel is one of the first things I can think of.


But if people play with things they are not supposed to play, that is what happens.

Learned that in school did ya ?


The difference is that a linux engine is simply not going to break (unless you mess with it), you can do the coast-to-coast 2000 times. Windows engine will break after a few runs whether you mess with it or not. It did imporve A LOT in this area, but it is nowhere close to Linux.

LOL ! Have I got news for you ! If you run good hardware and softwares, the end result is the same. They both get the job done. Believe me, it's all about the apps and not the OS !


That is just one examples, you could build similar tests in other areas. Windows is just an inferior system.

Broad statement. Care to specify any details on such a sweeping allegations or should we just swallow this sophistry ?


And ubuntu on Linux. Maybe not yet as user friendly as OSX but getting close, very close...

OSX is friendly ? I compare it to putting a 9v battery on my tongue. Not something I care to remember or to do again.


I don't see anything strange. Mac products are sane (no viruses there either

LOL ! Drinking the KoolAid, eh ? Hopefully you aren't giving advice to Mac newbies ! There is no doubt that it's easier for a virus coder to write for the Windows OS. Also why would one write code for a system that has less than 2.2% of the global market ? That would be akin to breeding a dog to work in the arctic and then delivering it to owners in Africa's rainforest !


... , no crappy stability, no degrading performance, no flimsy security...). Loads and loads of innovation (regularly ripped off by microsoft).

The only seriously stupid mistake that Microsoft continues to make is allowing users to run as admin. That and they include one of the worst email clients in the history of PC's. As to degrading performance and so forth, you really need to know how to build a decent computer if this is truly a problem. I've left my desktop running for over a month on occassion and even then only shut it down as there was a storm coming in. BSOD's ? Thing of the past. I think the last time I had one on one of my systems was when I installed Norton System Works 2000 onto Windows 2000 5+ years ago. Stupid. Should have known better. Learned from my mistake quickly.


Acceptable company practices... Not much choice (as in windows, but with far less applications), but at least the default is a very good system (unlike windows).

You seem to relish broad generalizations. Perhaps you are a politician, a cleric or a lawyer ?

silver
August 30th, 2006, 02:22 AM
Apparently you did...

You thought that by using AV and firewall and by avoiding opening potentially dangerous files you were safe... SoundMachine thought the same. And probably millions of other windows "power users".

Wrong ! And did I say I was using a software firewall ? NO WAY JOSE ! Been working in computers since 1980 and I think I know that a good hardware firewall provides a good deal of security. Now go and look up Firebox.


And, as Sony proves, you were all wrong...

Sony proved that the advent of DRM is a lot more encompassing than anyone cares to believe. FYI, they're close to getting that type of software legalized. Just think what's going to happen when virtualization hits the market in a big way.


With Ubuntu, without AV, without firewall, without any special precaution, I can listen to any CD, open any email, visit any website, play any file I want, and still I am far more secure than you will ever be in windows.

I never said that a good Linux isn't more secure than Windows. I said that with a good A/V and a good firewall, Windows can be nearly as secure. If one configures a Windows box exactly like a Linux box (limited accounts, non-MS email clients and web browser, partitioned /home etc.) which is exactly what I do, then you will have a virtually identical level of security.

ago
August 30th, 2006, 02:50 AM
Sony proved that the advent of DRM is a lot more encompassing than anyone cares to believe.

You were CONVINCED that you were perfectly safe playing legally purchased CDs in windows.

"Playing music CD's ? Jeez !"

And you were WRONG.

Even playing CD is a dangerous operation in windows, and it has nothing to do with software or hardware firewall and nothing to do with DRM.

Simply: the OS sucks. Full stop.

I can understand you are disappointed that I shattered your false sense of security....


I said that with a good A/V and a good firewall, Windows can be nearly as secure.
Wrong again. With no AV and no FW I can listen to any CD, visit any website, open any email, play any file and I will be far safer than you will ever be in windows.


If one configures a Windows box exactly like a Linux box
And, unlike windows, I do not have to configure anything, default settings will do fine...

ago
August 30th, 2006, 03:07 AM
IE7 a copy of FF ? Vista a copy of Apple ? Gimmee a break ! IE7 doesn't look much like FF
Yes it does. Do you think it is sufficient to shift a couple of buttons around to change things?


As to MS copying Apple, Apple copied Xerox. Give it a rest kid.
Except that MS continues to copy Apple, year after year, feature after feature. Give it a rest kid...


Believe me, it's all about the apps and not the OS !
Believe me, a good OS will easily withstand bad apps and sometimes even bad hardware. Try to take linux down with bad apps, if you can... Now try with windows...


Broad statement. Care to specify any details on such a sweeping allegations or should we just swallow this sophistry ?
Another example, try to put several thounsand entries into a folder and open that. What about the file locking mechanism? What happens in windows if an application crashes while it uses a file? What happens in Linux? What about the way they deal with race conditions at different levels? And so on and on and on... I can specify all the details you want...


Also why would one write code for a system that has less than 2.2% of the global market ?
Maybe because the vast majority of webservers open to the world run Linux, and contain quite valuable info. I would guess some tool to crack those servers could be easily ported to desktop users and packed into a nice virus... Or maybe because cracking linux is far more prestigious than cracking windows... There are plenty of reasons... But there are still no viruses... Maybe Linux is just fundamentally more secure than windows...


As to degrading performance and so forth, you really need to know how to build a decent computer if this is truly a problem.
Building a faster and faster PC to compensate for windows degrading performance does not strike me as a smart solution...


I've left my desktop running for over a month on occassion
In windows that depends heavily on the use you make. You mentioned you used a lot of restrain. But if you install lots of software, play lots of files and so on the system will degrade very rapidly. Both within one session and between sessions. In linux it won't, no matter what you do.

silver
August 30th, 2006, 03:20 AM
You were CONVINCED that you were perfectly safe playing legally purchased CDs in windows.

"Playing music CD's ? Jeez !"

And you were WRONG.

First of all I don't even bother playing CD's. I rip them to my hard drive. Period. I currently have some 1600 CD's ripped to my HDD and another 400+ that aren't. Why anyone would listen to a CD played on a computer is beyond me. But then why anyone would use Windows Media Player is also beyond me ;>)


Even playing CD is a dangerous operation in windows, and it has nothing to do with software or hardware firewall and nothing to do with DRM.

Simply: the OS sucks. Full stop.

You make it sound as if Windows is the only OS compromised by rootkits. As I stated before this is not only not the case but in fact Windows was not even the first OS to be compromised in such a manner. As I stated earlier they've compromised all UNIX's as well as Windows. Rootkit-Lrk , Discovery Date: 11/26/1998. tORN Discovery date : 9/13/2000. Adore : Discovery date 9/27/2001. And there are others. In fact you would think that there would be more for Windows but as far as I can tell there are fewer for Windows than for the combined 'NIX's.


I can understand you are disappointed that I shattered your false sense of security....

LOL ! Security on a system connected to the internet ? You're quite the comedian !


Wrong again. With no AV and no FW I can listen to any CD, visit any website, open any email, play any file and I will be far safer than you will ever be in windows.

More sophistry ? Didn't your mama ever tell you to stop diggin' when you got to the bottom of the hole ?


And, unlike windows, I do not have to configure anything, default settings will do fine...

Cool ! So post your IP to the USENET and see how long it takes to get hacked. Probably no takers though as it's federal but then someone from another country might do it.

Now could you please stop making broad generalizations in an attempt to convince yourself that you're right. It doesn't appear to be working.

silver
August 30th, 2006, 03:38 AM
Unless someone writes a program which detects and installs rootkits...

I note from your sig that you have something to do with GRUB. Can you tell us how hard this might be ?

silver
August 30th, 2006, 05:10 AM
<snip;>)

Believe me, a good OS will easily withstand bad apps and sometimes even bad hardware. Try to take linux down with bad apps, if you can... Now try with windows...

As stated the only application that I can recall installing that caused a Windows corruption/BSOD was NSW 2000. That was 6 years ago.


Another example, try to put several thounsand entries into a folder and open that. What about the file locking mechanism? What happens in windows if an application crashes while it uses a file? What happens in Linux? What about the way they deal with race conditions at different levels? And so on and on and on... I can specify all the details you want...

Something pertinent to the average desktop user would be nice. Now at this exact momemt I have 4 copies of FF open with 5 tabs on each. I'm ripping CD's using Easy CD-DA. I have Agent open along with CuteFTP, Paint.NET, FrontPage 2003 and 4 Notepads. Agent is accessing my 1GB database and FrontPage is addressing my web which has about 1GB of files in it. Foobar 2000 is playing Don Henley and not skipping a beat.



Maybe because the vast majority of webservers open to the world run Linux, and contain quite valuable info.

I guess you missed it but we were addressing Mac OSX. The operating system that is installed on Mac systems which have declined in standing in the world from 5.5% in 1999 to >2.2% in 2006.


Building a faster and faster PC to compensate for windows degrading performance does not strike me as a smart solution...

Obviously you know nothing at all about Windows other than what you might have learned on some dead Win98 system. The fact is that WinXP is one of the most scalable OS's available. I've seen it run on a PIII w/128SDRAM with integrated video, sound and NIC. And it runs quite well on my A64 3K+ w/1GB DDR-SDRAM. All you really need to do is loose some of the eye-candy and tweak a few settings (and this is done in Linux as well) and it can really rock.


In windows that depends heavily on the use you make. You mentioned you used a lot of restrain. But if you install lots of software, play lots of files and so on the system will degrade very rapidly. Both within one session and between sessions. In linux it won't, no matter what you do.

It depends on what you call "lots of software". I have both Nero 7 and Roxio 7.5 along with Agent, Avast, Foobar 2k, MS Office 2003 Pro, Corel WordPerfect, MS FrontPage, FF, XnView, Easy CD-DA, Pwer DVD, MS Encarta, MS Streets & Trips, Quick Time and Real Alternative(s), Audacity and Acronis True Image. Oh and add in my Epson 4490 scanners software, a PDF "printer". Note that I also have 2 sound cards and 2 monitors. I use my system for surfing the web, buying on Ebay, editing video and audio files and document creation/management for my home. Also I have a few hobbiest websites that I play with from time to time. So what more does it take to get my system to "degrade" ? Do I have to install KaZaa and other common crapwares ? In the end all i need to do is to log out and log back in to refresh the RAM. Rebooting isn't necessary.

mdsmedia
August 30th, 2006, 08:25 AM
And people run regcleaners and third party crap on their windows computers and then wonder why they break.People RUN third party crap and reg cleaners because of the mess that is the Windows Registry. They are recommended by "experts" to run this "crap" because it is a mess and gets "broken"


Happens in Linux too at times, memory leaks and such, the machine i'm sitting at right now has had a tad over a month of uptime with daily use and it runs just as fast as if i had recently rebooted.It doesn't happen nearly as much in Linux. I bought my notebook in April last year. It's my main working machine. By October I was so sick of the memory leakage and slowdown in XP that it was the reason I installed Ubuntu. That's 6 months runtime. Since October I've run Ubuntu as my main OS and it runs as freshly as the day it was installed.



Defragging NTFS is about as neccessary as defragging ext3, sure, you can do it for fun but it's not really going to do much, using regcleaners and such is just daft, it ruins more than it ever fixes. If it gets bloated it's because you install or download a lot of stuff, it doesn't just sit there and expand all on it's own.You HAVE to download stuff for Windows, to try to get it running properly, or just because it doesn't come preinstalled as it does with Linux. Use XP out of the box and you have one bear system. What are you supposed to do without downloading stuff? On the other hand I've downloaded stuff in Ubuntu over 10 months too, and no slowdown in my system. As for the defrag, you're right. NTFS really doesn't need to be defragged like FAT32 does. It is a common myth.


There is NO need for any extra firewall, the SP2 firewall works just as well, an antivirus that is free? There are loads of them, but none of them will help if the user is intentionally (or out of stupidity) breaking his system.The SP2 firewall DOES NOT work as well as say ZoneAlarm. It blocks incoming traffic. Not outgoing traffic. You get a trojan on your system by allowing it IN. Then it phones home. Windows firewall doesn't prevent that. ZA does. As for anti-virus, the default configuration of Windows makes it necessary to use anti-virus at all. Blame user stupidity, but with Linux you are far better protected by design.



Then don't, it's not needed unless you are visiting pages you shouldn't be, clicking yes and giving permission as you shouldn't be, opening attatchments that you shouldn't be, run without the firewall enabled like it should be.Unless you are the average Windows user you mean? Unless you are being tricked by far more experienced users you mean?


....if you are not disabling the by default enabled firewall in Windows XP SP2 or allowing traffic you shouldn't, opening files you shouldn't then you're safe. Generally people who get viruses are people who download Warez and crap.And others who contract viruses innocently trying to get tools for Windows because Windows users believe they need those tools, or want to run mp3 scripts in IRC, or are exchanging files over P2P networks, or....the list goes on.... it's the average Windows user you're talking about.


Actually, Linux is all about Linus Torvalds, the rest is pretty much same as windows, made by different companies and individuals. There are many more alternatives on Windows.You WHAT!!!??? You are joking right??


You can't blame MS for using good buisness tactics.If that's what you call overbearing, monopolistic, illegal business practices, then no you can't blame them. You can't blame them for getting away with it, but you CAN blame them for using their unethical business methods in the first place.


And last but not least, anyone who runs ANY box as admin/root for day to day tasks deserves to get whatever he gets.So Microsoft makes this the default for Windows, but their users deserve what they get? Well I guess they do then. I've tried using Windows XP as a non-admin user. It aint easy. Lots of programs just don't work without admin priveleges. With some research and work I could probably get it to work, but I'm a little more than an average Windows user.

ago
August 30th, 2006, 09:24 AM
First of all I don't even bother playing CD's. I rip them to my hard drive. Period.
So what?

I just showed you how crap windows really is. You didn't even know about the CD vulnerability. If you do not know about the issues of your system please stop to make false claims. Windows simply cannot be "almost as secure as Linux". Unless you unplug it.


You make it sound as if Windows is the only OS compromised by rootkits.
I do not think you get the concept, or you pretend not to. Rootkits are NOT used to break into a system the first time! The Sony CD just shows you how easy it is to break into a windows system. It shows you that you can launch a rogue executable by simply playing a music CD. Instead of installing a rootkit they could have just as well formatted your C drive... The fact that they used their breach to install a rootkit is irrelevant, the problem is that they gained control so easily and no antivirus or firewall managed to prevent that. And no other OS allows such breaches of security. OSes are NOT born equal.

It also shows you that you cannot EVER trust a binary blob, whether it is warez or whether it is legally purchased software/music from a fully respectable company like Sony. You just do not know what is going to happen to your windows machine when you use them. Your best judgment is NOT enough.

Sure you can install a rootkit on unix systems too, but you need a dedicated professional cracker with a lot of resources to do so, in windows you only need to play a CD...


LOL ! Security on a system connected to the internet ? You're quite the comedian !
I do not mean I can withstand a direct cracker attack, nobody can. But I certainly have no problems getting cracked when I open an email, or display a webpage, or play a file, or listen to music... You do... You need to be careful about what email you open, what website you visit and what file you play. And even those precautions are not enough... A cracker, in order to get into my system, has to do far better than that...


Cool ! So post your IP to the USENET and see how long it takes to get hacked.
You are confusing an active attack (someone targeting your specific machine, like giving your IP on USENET) with a passive one (your machine getting cracked by a virus or a worm/script with automatic port scanner)... Apples and pears.

Every system on earth can be broken by active attack (if the attacker is good enough), but the chances of a good cracker specifically picking your machine among several millions of others are quite slim, you can just as well win the lottery (unless you do something as stupid as posting your IP on USENET).

Windows is FAR weaker against passive attacks, which are FAR more common. If you have a windows PC you do not need to post your IP on USENET... All you have to do is dispaly a wmf image or listen to a music CD, or forget to turn on the firewall for 5 minutes or open the wrong email or visit the wrong website... In fact the vast majority of home windows system get cracked in passive mode within a year. Not so for Ubuntu... True I might be victim of an active attack, but again, I might just as well win the lottery...


Now could you please stop making broad generalizations in an attempt to convince yourself that you're right. It doesn't appear to be working.
I just showed that even with all your precautions it is a simple matter to crack windows... You obviously believed you were pretty safe... I am sorry to disappoint you, it is not my fault, really.... don't take it personally...

ago
August 30th, 2006, 09:58 AM
The fact is that WinXP is one of the most scalable OS's available. I've seen it run on a PIII w/128SDRAM with integrated video, sound and NIC.
You must be joking...

XP scalable? Changing the theme makes a system scalable? Since when? Windows XP cannot be trimmed down, you cannot change the window manager, you cannot even uninstall applications like IE, or messenger. In fact you cannot even avoid to preload IE...

In linux I am not talking about changing gnome theme, I am talking about using a different window manager alltogether, a different desktop enviornment, and a different set of applications. How difficult is it to do so in ubuntu? sudo apt-get install xubuntu-desktop... That's it. How difficult it is to do it in Windows XP? You can't.

And I can customize linux even further, much further, people have managed to pack linux and a full set of applications with graphical interface within 50MB... Yes a full 2006 desktop environment in 50MB all included, and they have been able to run them on P1 with 16MB of ram!!! This is scalable... Try that with windows...

As for running windows on old machines, on the same hardware standard Ubuntu with gnome will have better performance than XP... I do not even want to suggest to compare XP with Xubuntu or Puppy or DSL, because it would be completely unfair... Those are customized systems, XP is not and, contrary to your statement, it cannot be...

whizbaby
August 30th, 2006, 10:12 AM
There's only one way I know to run the same losedows installation for a long time:

-get VMware, VMware player
-make an image of a fresh install
-always load that image with the player
-no problems with virus etc. 'cause you're running the same snapshot of the system every time you start the dozer
-want to install new software? Make a new image with software installed.
actually this is done at the central computer department of our university ...

ago
August 30th, 2006, 10:15 AM
that does not count :D

hoagie
August 30th, 2006, 11:02 AM
I use linux over windows because it simply rocks.

1) No drivers needed everything works, even my ipod.
2) Stable and flexible, windows might reboot anytime for no actual reason.
3) You don't need to pay for the newest version yo just keep upgrading
4) Free as in open source, free as in freedom, every single software in linux is free of charge and available to anyone
5) Better graphical interface, both kde and gnome look nicer and boot faster than the stupid xp interface. Not to mention the compiz/xgl
6) Security, you don' have to worry of getting a virus/adware and that kind of crap.
:KS

Donnut
August 30th, 2006, 11:43 AM
Umm, it's simple, flexible, and just works.
It got me into command line slowly.


What more could I want except a new macbook pro?

whizbaby
August 30th, 2006, 11:57 AM
Yesss, good old command line. Why give up language as a means of communication for a bunch of mouseclicks and -drags? Were all the thousands of years of evolution for notn?

silver
August 30th, 2006, 08:36 PM
So what?

I just showed you how crap windows really is. You didn't even know about the CD vulnerability.

Of course I did ! Just as I'm aware of the other one that flashed the firmware on the CD/DVD drives and thereby destroyed them.

Jeez ! YOu're really wound a little too tight aren't you ? You need to take some time and re-read my posts. I've probably been using computers since you were a gleem in your mama's eye.


If you do not know about the issues of your system please stop to make false claims.

Ummmm, "false" ? Again with the generalizations ? I would ask that you clarify that please.


Windows simply cannot be "almost as secure as Linux". Unless you unplug it.

Nothing but the facts, eh ?


I do not think you get the concept, or you pretend not to. Rootkits are NOT used to break into a system the first time! The Sony CD just shows you how easy it is to break into a windows system.

And this same tactic has been successfully used even more on *NIX boxes.


It shows you that you can launch a rogue executable by simply playing a music CD.

And the only difference is that on *NIX the EU is running as User and NOT as Admin. Otherwise they could just as easily target a *NIX box.


Instead of installing a rootkit they could have just as well formatted your C drive... The fact that they used their breach to install a rootkit is irrelevant, the problem is that they gained control so easily and no antivirus or firewall managed to prevent that. And no other OS allows such breaches of security. OSes are NOT born equal.

Boy ! You just don't get it do you ? There is NO SUCH THING as a completely secure OS ! Not one. You show me an OS and I can assure you that there is a leak in it's armor somewhere. And what you're talking about is just a pathetic little peice of social engineering. Believe me if Sony wanted to target Linux boxes it could easily do so.


It also shows you that you cannot EVER trust a binary blob, whether it is warez or whether it is legally purchased software/music from a fully respectable company like Sony.

We definitely differ on the term "respectable". Sony = POS.


You just do not know what is going to happen to your windows machine when you use them. Your best judgment is NOT enough.

And *NIX is different how ? Oh, yeah. That's right, you don't run as admin and the coding is different. Add in the little fact that about 1% of the population is using Linux on the desktop and I think I can imagine why it's perceived as being more secure.


Sure you can install a rootkit on unix systems too, but you need a dedicated professional cracker with a lot of resources to do so, in windows you only need to play a CD...

That was written by a group of programmers working for one of the largest companies in the world. Believe me, if said group was told to hack your Linux box there would be ABSOLUTELY nothing you could do about it.


I do not mean I can withstand a direct cracker attack, nobody can. But I certainly have no problems getting cracked when I open an email, or display a webpage, or play a file, or listen to music... You do... You need to be careful about what email you open, what website you visit and what file you play.

You do as well. But you just go right ahead with your belief that your OS is completely invulnerable.

BTW, as noted previously I use a plain text email client so I don't have to worry about such bogus crap.


And even those precautions are not enough... A cracker, in order to get into my system, has to do far better than that...

LOL ! A little scripting and a dropper will be added to your hard drive in less than the blink of an eye !


Windows is FAR weaker against passive attacks, which are FAR more common. If you have a windows PC you do not need to post your IP on USENET... All you have to do is dispaly a wmf image or listen to a music CD, or forget to turn on the firewall for 5 minutes or open the wrong email or visit the wrong website... In fact the vast majority of home windows system get cracked in passive mode within a year. Not so for Ubuntu... True I might be victim of an active attack, but again, I might just as well win the lottery...

Well I have five systems in my home and none have been cracked and none are running a firewall. As stated earlier any hackers can talk to my little friend, Firebox ;>)


I just showed that even with all your precautions it is a simple matter to crack windows... You obviously believed you were pretty safe... I am sorry to disappoint you, it is not my fault, really.... don't take it personally...

In the selection of an opertating system and the computer you art going to use, you need to weigh the pro's and cons and determine exactly what is right for you. You obviously have minimal needs and have found a computer and OS combo that fulfills that need. So have I. The factors (for me) are really quite simple.

1) Availability (including peripherals)
2) Stability
3) Usability
4) Support
5) Security
6) Cost

1) Availability - This means that the system has the hardware and softwarer necessary to perform the functions you need it to do. My biggest challenge with Linux to date is that it simply doesn't have the application support that I need. Again, show me some good replacements for Ghost, Agent, Easy CD-DA, Nero, Roxio, Encarta, Streets and Trips and other softwares. Show me hardware support for scanners and cameras without exceptions.

2) Stability - Kudos to Linux for having even better stability than XP however the difference is not apparent until you get to 2X installed RAM. I don't think I have more than 2GB of files open too often.

3) Usability - No comparison. Windows is simply quicker and easier to use. KDE is significantly quicker than Gnome but you still not as user friendly as Windows. As an aside, whatever happend to KDE Light ?

4) Support - Well I don't really need support but if I did I think that I could call on a half dozen names quickly and get to speak with someone regarding a difficulty.

5) Security - It's true that Linux is more secure out of the box however if properly configured and used Windows XP can be about 95% as secure. It's not idiot-proof of course. Linux evidently isn't either.

6) Cost - There are always costs associated with any purchase of hardware or softwarer. Regarding Windows the pricetag is clearly affixed to the box. In Linux the costs are less than evident. No doubt I value my time a little more than you do yours. I'm willing to pay a few shekels for the conveniences of having convenience of Windows XP. I think I paid $189 for XP Pro almost 5 years ago. I've reinstalled the OS once. I've had no indications of a security failure. I haven't had any difficulties with any programs that I use. In summation it has done exactly what an OS is supposed to do : Operate.

By the way in that 5 years I have downloaded and installed at least 50 revisions of the diffent Linux distros. None have all of the features I want and most didn't even support the very basic hardware that I have up until about a year ago. Even now getting dual monitors to work is still a hack as is using multiple sound cards.

DoctorMO
August 30th, 2006, 08:59 PM
A CD is normaly mounted noexec and HAL doesn't auto execute code from it.

Regardless of point of view, sucessfull vectors on Linux are far fewer (data: number of infected linux machines) this includes the user vector and root kits.

silver
August 30th, 2006, 09:35 PM
Yesss, good old command line. Why give up language as a means of communication for a bunch of mouseclicks and -drags? Were all the thousands of years of evolution for notn?

Pretty hard to edit a video from the CLI though.

ShagzModo
August 30th, 2006, 10:33 PM
I am MCSE certified for microsoft solutions, sharepoint portal server implementations Exchange migrations, Active directory, you name it. Okay, the argument for the games is a good one but i never really played any games using Micro$oft products. anyway. I only use Ubuntu (and Xubuntu) I even have my girlfriend using it because picasa, Skype and other apps she was using work fine under linux.

I am making a career move and am contemplating on only beeing involved in linux projects from now on. You will see with the new Vista coming out that many people will switch to linux and if i would recommend Ubuntu or Debian.
This all because of heavy system requirements that Vista requires...

Building nice security scanning system like nessus is also impolssible on micro$oft suystems.

cheers

whizbaby
August 30th, 2006, 11:20 PM
Pretty hard to edit a video from the CLI though.
Yeah, real deep founded answer, really tryin hard to understand what I try to say.
Better show me how to do something like 'grep', 'locate' or '|' on your game-like target-and-click interface.
(and is editing video really an argument for getting rid of effective use of language in computer<->human communication?)

DoctorMO
August 30th, 2006, 11:24 PM
Do you think games where invented after GUIs?

Little one you have much to learn.

majesticturkey
August 30th, 2006, 11:26 PM
look
get key
unlock door with key
kill wizard

Commodore 64!

troughton
August 30th, 2006, 11:32 PM
this question keeps beeing asked time and time again in the forums if you like window so much use windows it is a nice operating system if you can aford the£95 for windows the £30 for an antivirus and £25 for a fire wall + your £15 for you anti spyware program and that is befor you have done anything or even swiched on your computer then you need £35 for nero pluss what ever any other program you use like £85 for microsoft office then yes onece you have payed out all that installed it got rid of any confilicts you have sorted out that virus that your windows antivrus has not updated the software to deel with were as i prefer the free ubuntu with the free kb3 and fire wall and free antivius and all writen without conflicts with better support with the forums that are free and not having to pay to join a windows forum. and linux is more stable more secure and you can do anything you do on windows in linux if you just look and find out what program you need please can ppl stop asking why linux if you have windows xp if you prefer windows fine yous windows and leve me to enjoy my free stable virus free fast (and out benchmarking windows on every test) linux ubuntu and i wont go on your support forums and ask why windows

whizbaby
August 30th, 2006, 11:42 PM
Do you think games where invented after GUIs?

Little one you have much to learn.
Nobody said that. I only tried to emphasize the fact that in the dozer the users action is almost restricted to ever-the-same mouse-finger-eye moves, like in most action games. To increase the action, there will be popping up windows with threatening sounds telling you something went wrong.
Next time try to refer to what I actually wrote.

Besides there would be enough to learn for everyone, no need to fuss.

ago
August 30th, 2006, 11:59 PM
Ummmm, "false" ? Again with the generalizations ? I would ask that you clarify that please.
I do not agree with the fact that you can make windows XP as safe as Ubuntu... Or even 95% as secure... See below for explanation.


Nothing but the facts, eh ?
It is a fact that windows can get cracked by playng a CD or by displaying a wmf image...


And this same tactic has been successfully used even more on *NIX boxes.
"This tactic" means using a music CD to install a rootkit... And no, it has never been achieved on Unix boxes.


And the only difference is that on *NIX the EU is running as User and NOT as Admin. Otherwise they could just as easily target a *NIX box.
No you can't. Running executable code is far more difficult on unix systems, by design. Let alone grab the required privileges IF you manage to run executable code.


There is NO SUCH THING as a completely secure OS !
The fact that neither is 100% secure does not mean that they are equally secure...


Believe me if Sony wanted to target Linux boxes it could easily do so.
I doubt. And yours is pure speculation, so far only windows got cracked by playing a CD, and this is a fact...


And *NIX is different how ?
Because on my *NIX system I do not install binary blobs. The source code of everything installed is available and the packages are signed. It would be impossible for anybody to hide spyware, rootkit, backdors in what I install. Moreover it is not possible to run executables when I listen to a music CD. Windows? Any software you install is a question mark. You simply cannot know if it contains spyware or other nasty surprises. Do you really think Sony is the only company/agency that has done such a thing? Don't even think that an AV will catch those...


Oh, yeah. That's right, you don't run as admin
Yes, but there are several other reasons: my browser does not run with kernel privileges, the GUI is not integrated into the OS, programs cannot just be executed by mistake (I explicitly need to make a file executable before it can be run), you cannot change the appearence of a file by changing the extension, the architecture is cleaner and there is far less scope for buffer overruns (see pictures), the firewall is built in into the kernel, it is not an afterfought. etc etc etc... Yes my system is far more secure than yours... By design.

A picture is worth a million words...

Linux
http://blogs.zdnet.com/images/SysCallApachesmall.jpg

Windows
http://blogs.zdnet.com/images/SysCallIISsmall.jpg

In short: each line represents a system call, and a system call is an potential target for malicious code. The fewer the lines, the more secure the system.

For a better explanation: http://blogs.zdnet.com/threatchaos/?p=311


Add in the little fact that about 1% of the population
More like 5%... +70% of webservers +80% of datacenters +90% of supercomputers... But I guess nobody is interested in those...


Believe me, if said group was told to hack your Linux box there would be ABSOLUTELY nothing you could do about it.
So what? That is not a danger I need to worry about, sure a group of well paid crackers can target my machine among millions of others, but I can also win the lottery... The fact that my machine is not 100% secure against a direct attack does not mean that it is highly insecure.


You do as well. But you just go right ahead with your belief that your OS is completely invulnerable.
I never claimed that my system is completely invulnerable, only that is very secure... Differently from windows...


BTW, as noted previously I use a plain text email client so I don't have to worry about such bogus crap.
BTW, I do not need to restrain my PC use because my OS sucks...


LOL ! A little scripting and a dropper will be added to your hard drive in less than the blink of an eye !
If it was as easy as you claim, it would be trivial to pack it up and create a linux worm. Guess what... There is no such worm...


Well I have five systems in my home and none have been cracked and none are running a firewall.
Yeah sure... You have windows with no firewall... And let me guess no antivirus either... But then you use a plain text client because you are concerned about security... It doesn't add up... And by the way, the average time for a windows machine without a firewall to get compromised is about 5 minutes... The time for a coffe... ...even if no application is running... The worm does indeed exist... For windows...


You obviously have minimal needs
Quite the opposite


1) Availability (including peripherals)
2) Stability
3) Usability
4) Support
5) Security
6) Cost
1 depends on your use, for me I am covered with Linux
2, 5, 6 you are not going to beat linux
3 again it comes down to personal preferences, and I far prefer linux
4 normal users will get excellent support from the Ubuntu community, the only downside is that it is not going to work if you have no internet connection, if you do, you are covered.

> Ghost
Partimage. But I have stopped ghosting since I use Linux... I do not need to restore systems because things do not get screwed up as they used to in Windows. And it is easy to completely replicate setups without using images. Tar/dar will do fine and you do not even need to back up everything, a couple of folders (/home and /etc) and a list of packages installed (which you get from apt) are often enough to restore a system... You can even put some important dirs on differential backups or even on a versioning system...

> Agent
Never used, don't know what it is and I am not going to google because name is generic

> Easy CD-DA
there are plenty of rippers:banshee, gnormalize, sound juicer, grip, goobox, abcde, amarok...

> Nero
planty of burners, including nero for linux

> Roxio
same as above

> Encarta
Wikipedia

> Streets/Trips
Don't use it. I am well covered with Google map or worldwind or roadster. If you trust blobs you can run google earth. By the way streets and trips seems to work in wine.


Show me hardware support for scanners and cameras without exceptions.
My Canon works well, even though I find a card reader far more efficient than the direct link to the camera (same thing in windows). I don't use a scanner but there is a list of supported scanners, and it does not need to include all scanners in the world, just your scanner...


2) Stability - Kudos to Linux for having even better stability than XP however the difference is not apparent until you get to 2X installed RAM. I don't think I have more than 2GB of files open too often.
I run fairly heavy computations and stability is quite an issue in my case...


3) Usability - No comparison. Windows is simply quicker and easier to use.
Maybe for you. I found my Xfce interface far quicker and more intuitive than XP (and anything else out there)... And I can do things faster in Linux than in windows (multiple desktops, CLI, ability to sudo, X network transparency...) Add to it that I do not spend a single second maintaining my system (and I used to spend hours every months on windows). I upgrade ALL the software with a single button (in windows each application has its own update policy, and most do not autopdate at all). No contest for me...


KDE is significantly quicker than Gnome but you still not as user friendly as Windows. As an aside, whatever happend to KDE Light ?
Don't use KDE, sorry.


4) Support
No contest here either. I think you haven't tried calling microsoft... When I have a problem it normally cannot be resolved by someone reading a webpage with prepackaged answers, and that is what I used to get... In Linux I almost always manage to get in touch directly with the developers (which will never happen in your lifetime for a windows project). And, when possible, things get fixed within minutes... Moreover I found linux users on average far more competent. On windows whatever the problem 80% of the time I got the same answer. "Restart the application, restart windows, reinstall the application, reinstall windows". Thank you! In linux 80% of the time: "execute this command, what is the output you see? then execute this command. Done.". And the ubuntu community is also quite nice, I guess for beginners it is quite an asset. I really do not think home users need much more. And if you want commercial support talk to Canonical.


if properly configured and used Windows XP can be about 95% as secure.
I think you are far too optimistic... "Properly configuring" windows is a professional job, ms firewall+AV+autoupdates is not enough. You need to change several settings, disable protocols and services, "replace" applications (no IE, no OE, no messenger), apply strict policies (you need tougher policies than required on linux) or alternatively restrain yourself, limit user rights, use decent firewalls, proper patch management, av, as, am... Note that in this case users will be severely limited and ease of use will go down the drain... Add that some applications might not even work properly on such set-ups... And even if you do all this you are still well away from 95% (see above). How many windows home users are able to do that? 5%? The rest run highly insecure systems, by default, and their system will get cracked, guaranteed.


It's not idiot-proof of course. Linux evidently isn't either.
Ubuntu security is idiot proof. You have to do nothing, the system as it ships is extremely robust and secure. It doesn't get any easier than this.


I'm willing to pay a few shekels for the conveniences of having convenience of Windows XP.
As mentioned, I find myself more productive on Linux. So not only I save on the OS and on the licenses of all the software I use but also on productivity. My only cost is the time I spend to give something back to the community and help on some project, but that is an hobby for me and nobody obliges me to do so.


By the way in that 5 years I have downloaded and installed at least 50 revisions of the diffent Linux distros. None have all of the features I want and most didn't even support the very basic hardware that I have up until about a year ago. Even now getting dual monitors to work is still a hack as is using multiple sound cards.
Things in the linux world have changed A LOT in the last five years. Only 2 years ago I would have agreed with you on some of the points above. Not today.

Seremela
August 31st, 2006, 11:53 PM
sorry for the double posts on my last message.

Seremela
September 1st, 2006, 12:14 AM
Ok, here is my own personal reasons for switching over to Linux. Right now, I too am duel booting with Windows and Ubuntu as well. I had first started out using Windows 95 seven years ago and then over the years worked my way up to Windows xp. I had no problems with Windows ME. I had to switch over to the xp version because Windows no longer does any updates on their Millennium Edition. I am tired of having to put out my money just so that I can keep my PC safe or a least somewhat safe. And if the security updates are not installed on the Internet Explorer, this can leave a computer open for attacks. Which I have had. That left me no choice but to go with the Windows xp.

And then that is when I started having trouble. The Windows xp freezes/locks up my mouse; it is not compatible with a UBS mouse. Their firewall does not work as well as the AOL's Safety and Security Center. Before I had installed AOL's (and even though I had run all updates on Windows) I had my PC hacked twice.

And now ever time I load my xp I have to go into the firewall and set the IE to block; which is getting tiresome having to do that. And another thing that was annoying, I have to keep going into the Window's firewall and clicking off the remote assistance. Which I think is the reason why the IE keeps allowing to be accessed; that someone on the other end is unblocking it. I do not want someone unknown to me having access to my PC.

I cannot fully complain about Windows for it is a good OS for those who are new to learning about computers. Once a person has learned how use a computer; they can then move on to the next Operating System if they choose to do so. I have been using Ubuntu for a week now and so far I have very few problems, other than learning where to put the installments and learning about what each terminology means. I like the ideal of having better control over my own personal computer. And having more than one desktop is really great.:D

Sorry, for being so long in this message. I just wanted to give you my own view on Windows vs. Linux.

espo111
September 2nd, 2006, 01:33 AM
for me (being poor) it is either pay for the vista upgrade if i want a contemporary OS or start learning and getting used to Linux right now.

Linux is....

FREE
Opensource
community supported (as opposed to $$ supported)
dont have to worry about virii, spyware, adware....
every time i need a special utility for windows i either have to buy, install a trial, or steal it. and all that gets old when there are hundreds of free and legal ready, available and supported for *nux.


But it is not ready for primetime, ubuntu is making it close but it still needs support from harware manufacturers (getting a wireless on my dell laptop working comes to mind...http://ubuntuforums.org/images/smilies/eusa_wall.gif)


and of course the main reason i still keep windows around GAMES. which will change in time but thats many years off.

modvavet
September 2nd, 2006, 04:05 PM
You say you're looking for GAMES?

http://games.linux.sk/
http://www.tuxgames.com/
http://www.happypenguin.org/
http://www.linuxgames.com/

...and, of course, the wonderful selection available using Wine...

SoundMachine
September 2nd, 2006, 05:34 PM
Didn't i invoke Godwins? Or are you punk assed bitches too stupid to comprehend what it means?

wana10
September 2nd, 2006, 05:54 PM
Didn't i invoke Godwins? Or are you punk assed bitches too stupid to comprehend what it means?


godwin's law doesn't apply if you purposefully invoke it...you "punk assed bitch"

read before you shoot your mouth off, jackass
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

SoundMachine
September 2nd, 2006, 06:02 PM
godwin's law doesn't apply if you purposefully invoke it...you "punk assed bitch"

read before you shoot your mouth off, jackass
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

I have, the point is that i did invoke it an a discussion as a relevant piece of info, where it stands on it's own merit. you stupid piece of shtit, and so, it is valid.

Get that twit? Got it? fine. bye.

wana10
September 2nd, 2006, 06:23 PM
keep reading, after invoking godwin's the thread dies. if it doesn't the one who invoked godwin's, if they meant to, doesn't return to the thread. if the thread irritates you enough to talk about nazis in an attempt to kill a thread...stop posting. contrary to popular belief you don't have to post on every thread

by the way...its **** not "shtit";)

SoundMachine
September 2nd, 2006, 09:24 PM
keep reading, after invoking godwin's the thread dies. if it doesn't the one who invoked godwin's, if they meant to, doesn't return to the thread. if the thread irritates you enough to talk about nazis in an attempt to kill a thread...stop posting. contrary to popular belief you don't have to post on every thread

by the way...its **** not "shtit";)

AH, but if the thread does not die, then?

Well i thought that since you pretend to be a lassie, sh tit would be in order for your dumb ***. ;)

October
September 3rd, 2006, 01:33 AM
Actually I have what I believe is a sort of technology related ADD... I'm easily bored by slow moving progress in technological fields... every year I need to upgrade to the latest and greatest *everything* from cell phones to video cards to operating systems (financial resources allowing).

That said I actually triple boot right now... Win XP Pro, Windows Vista Beta and Debian (I run Ubuntu on my wife's computer and on our family file/music/print server).

I used to be an Emerald Subscriber to Transgaming's WineX so I can't honestly say I keep WinXP for "games" (I game equally well in either OS, given the right games, a bit of wine, a good nvidia card and their superb drivers), but I do have other software that only runs under XP that cost money so I keep it around. I also do freelance IT work and it pays to stay up on top of everything, if possible (will have to break down and buy one of those Mac things someday too, I suppose).

Why linux? If you figured out which computer related hobby was most important to me by lines of code it would be music production, not gaming. My current Debian install is a realtime kernel based on vanilla 2.6.17 and Debian Etch with a few really killer packages from Sid thrown in for good measure. I configured and compiled the kernel myself as well as several of the music apps I run. For music production Windows is comparatively clunky to use as well as very inefficient about clock cycles. As a computer musician I am VERY MUCH more productive under linux than under Windows and I have saved tons of money to boot. My current "studio" setup includes software that would literally cost thousands of dollars in similar Windows software IF you could even find the same functionality, and for me it cost absolutely zero money (outside of donations to this app or that).

Package availability and value? Synaptic with a good source.list is unbeatable. Throw Gdebi in the mix for "point and click" package management and Linux has Windows bested in the software department hands-down.

Stability? My server has over 300 days of uptime at the time of this post. My windows machine(s) are also usually left on but I've never gotten that sort of reliable performance out of any of them.

Virus/malware? Linux it's almost a moot point to discuss. There simply isn't any (or very, VERY few... I've never gotten any). Throw in the fact that hackers and script kiddies have a handful of windows OSs to code for and literally hundreds of fundamentally different linuxes, not to mention custom hybrid installs like what I (and many others) run and which one would you rather try to do evil upon? Windows is simply much easier to code nasty garbage for.

Ease of use? Sure, there are pretty much point-and-click GUIs in linux for everything that a windows user would consider day to day tasks but the real power comes from a little advanced knowledge like automagically rsync'ing system backups to a remote server with a cronjob... just a couple of lines of script will do the trick! And ease of install? Not like the majority of window's users have ever tried a reinstall but distros like Ubuntu, Fedora and PCLinuxOS are lightyears ahead in the graphical "easy" installer department.

WinXP? My Motorola phone tools, FLStudio Producer, and a game or two of BF2 once in awhile as long as I'm already booted in ;)

dark_myself
September 4th, 2006, 11:31 AM
I consider that 90% of all computer users really have nothing to gain from switching to Linux. You all mention viruses/spyware/adaware but with a good antivirus program you don't have to worry about it. (on my home desktop my current windows install is more than 1 year old, and I had no problems - I use a free antivirus called Avast). Some of you said you didn't have to install any drivers on Linux, but Windows has much better hardware support and high quality drivers. When I install WIndows XP on my notebook the wi-fi card works without any driver. Of course I install it afterwards for more speed and more configuration options, but even without it I'm able to acces the Internet. In ubuntu it doesn't work and I have to use NDISwraper. Linux is far behind Windows when it comes to gaming and multimedia exeprience. Why would I spend several hours to tweak a game so that it works in Linux, and still have performance drawbacks, when I can simply use Windows. And i believe that this issue is going to be a problem for Linux for many years to come. And it's not just because of DirectX (the hardware is more and more built to use it's functions so games will never run well on Linux without it, it also develops much faster than OpenGL), but also because of drivers. Instead of supporting ATI and NVIDIA, many developers of Linux think that their drivers are not legal (because they are closed source and they link to the kernel which is open source). I don't think will see open source drivers from these companies, just because there are to many secrets to be kept from each other.

DoctorMO
September 4th, 2006, 11:50 AM
Linux is far behind Windows when it comes to gaming and multimedia exeprience. Why would I spend several hours to tweak a game so that it works in Linux, and still have performance drawbacks, when I can simply use Windows.

Because windows isn't free, it restricts what you can do with your soul, you remember that thing right? the part of you that is concerned with morality over technicality.

Keep your Microsoft Windows sir! keep your games, keep your multimedia. I'll play _my_ games (SDL) and _my_ multimedia (OGG) and it will be mine. unlike yours which will infact belong to someone else.

Free Software and Open Source blow Microsofts technologies away anyway; your excuse is that your ignorant as well as careless with your freedoms.

ago
September 4th, 2006, 12:16 PM
To rephrase DoctorMO I prefer to support a distro that tries to stick with open international standards, open protocols, open file formats and codecs... as opposed to a distro that tries to break standards at any possible occasion trying to push closed incompatible formats to lock you in... Not to mention a distro that installs (or makes it easy for 3rd parties to install) on "your" machine software like WGA, DRM, Sony rootkits, and who knows what else... Obviously without you having a say on that..

Plus your statement on security is inaccurate... 90% of windows users run highly insecure (default) setu-ups. With or without AV. Only a minority of windows users is proficient enough to close the holes properly to make it half-decent.

As for the hardware it is not such a big deal, really, either it works for you or it doesn't. Just try the live CD, if everything is autodetected and working you are good to go.

hoagie
September 4th, 2006, 12:33 PM
I don't know about you but ubuntu supported all fo my hardware(video card, printer, ethernet modem) without installing a driver, and as phrased above I prefer to use an operating system that supports open/free standards and freedom. aka Ubuntu

kopilo
September 4th, 2006, 03:57 PM
Off the top of my head.

Less Security holes.
More stable (As shown by it's usage on internet servers)
It legally costs nothing
There are full releases of 64bit OSes which can utilise my processor.
Multiple Desktops are generally easier to manage and take up less resources with Linux.
Lack of spyware that comes with open source software, as opposed to programs like Winamp.
Setting up Windows properly and securely takes a lot more time.
Ubuntu looks nicer w/o having to stick a shell program over the top and/or using a lot of resources.
Some of the best software which even Windows developers use, such as Firefox comes with Linux distributions.
With the advent of live discs, it is possible to try before you install.
More/better communal and community support.
Linux does not try to turn on every possible port and function, even if it is not in use.
The terminal in linux is more powerful then command prompt in windows.
Most of the time 'drivers' do not need to be installed at all on linux, where as on windows I can spend up to 4 hours installing drivers for different devices.
Generally Linux distributions do not force people to use specific software and does not lie about uninstalls. Unlike windows, try uninstalling Internet Explorer, then open up my computer and type in a url into the address bar...
When linux comes with a computer, it does not mean it only comes installed on the hard drive and you are given a recovery disk.
Using software on Linux to type in Japanese is not a security hole unlike jmundo (or whatever the package is called in windows).
After long hours of usage, windows should be restarted to improve speed, unix/linux machines seem to hardly ever slow down.
People comment on how well ubuntu runs on a laptop.
Tux is cool, a window pane is fragile.

ashleycrue
September 4th, 2006, 04:10 PM
The reason why I'm using Linux is because I want to ungrade to something more reliable than Windows XP.I still use Xp for the main reason that there is alot of things I still don't know how to do (just changing over).And besides I find Unduntu more of joy to use.

kopilo
September 4th, 2006, 04:21 PM
The reason why I'm using Linux is because I want to ungrade to something more reliable than Windows XP.I still use Xp for the main reason that there is alot of things I still don't know how to do (just changing over).And besides I find Unduntu more of joy to use.
If you haven't, make a new thread on this forum with the programs you would like to find a substitue for.

Also if you haven't been to linux.org then I suggest you do.
www.linux.org then select 'applications'.

elpuerco
September 4th, 2006, 06:15 PM
I have for a long time wanted to move away from Windows but never found a distro that worked in a manner that I expected, sound, network, video etc.

Apart from a hiccup at first loading Kubuntu this is the first distro that works so I can enjoy the experience.

I am forced to use Windows still as this is a work laptop, but now I can boot to Kubuntu at home and be up and running in no time.

I was fed up to the back teeth not only waiting for Windows to start, but sitting there waiting for the anti virus to load and auto update, the firewall to load and all the other dross! Lets not forget the hanging!!

As mentioned early, I own this copy and once I do my homework I could if I wanted start modifying it to my needs.

As with anything there is a learning curve and it will take me time to do this but at the end it will be worth it.

My friend at works is sold on it after seeing my setup today, he is trashing Windows tonight for Kubuntu.

My brother too is interested, he hates MS with a vengence!

The final choice is with the individual, MS or Linux.

At present Kubuntu makes me chose Linux ... it rocks :D

patagonik
September 4th, 2006, 07:11 PM
Ten easy reasons:

1st - It's free
2nd - No viruses
3rd - Much more customizable
4th - Forums like this one are exceptional. To be able to use similar forums for windows you must be an expert.
5th - Come on, it's free!!!
6th - Windows gets slower and slower when installing-removing stuff, linux keeps just as fast as the first day.
7th - Personally i'm tired of the global "fear culture" that sorrounds us in real life, so wahy should i accept normal antiviruses scaring me of "potential dangers" all the time!!???
8th - Not following masses makes me feel much better!
9th - For standard users as myself it's more than enough.
10th - Supporting the "Linux concept" and all the profesionals/non-professionals worldwide that work for it makes me feel also great!

Windows pays their developers, but Linux also counts with thousands of persons developing new ideas for free... how someone can even think in stopping this movement!

Courage people, this is only the beginning!

ashleycrue
September 5th, 2006, 02:50 AM
If you haven't, make a new thread on this forum with the programs you would like to find a substitue for.

Also if you haven't been to linux.org then I suggest you do.
www.linux.org then select 'applications'.

Cheers,Alot of my main applications on XP were firefox,openoffice,etc so changing over isn't that hard just one or two little things like camera,playing dvd's,etc which I haven't had much chance to figure.

silver
September 5th, 2006, 11:52 AM
Free Software and Open Source blow Microsofts technologies away anyway;...

Exactly where does Linux "blow away" Windows ? Yeah security and yada yada stuff. Please. I want to get work done and NOT work on a system all of the time tweaking each little script to get/keep something working.

As to the cost of Windows, jeeez Louise ! Who gives a rats whisker for the $140 upgrade price I paid for Windows XP Pro 4 years ago ? Round it up to $150 and divide by $15/hour and for some reason I think I'm way ahead in when compared to the amount of time I would have had to spend to get Linux to work with every device in/around my system. Just getting my sound cards to work is a challenge and I haven't yet found an audio app for Linux that will take advantage of all the capabilities of my M-Audio card.

Face it. Linux is a great OS/software for servers and mailstations and that's about it.

whizbaby
September 5th, 2006, 12:20 PM
@silver
First:
You are generalising your personal M$ experience to all other dozer users. I can't throw a stone from where I actually sit without hitting at least ten people having big problems with losedoh's (e.g. filesystem completely messed up after electrical power outage). If dozing really is easy as you propagate, why are so many people trying to get away from it then? Because it's not!

silver
September 5th, 2006, 12:35 PM
Off the top of my head.

[QUOTE]Less Security holes.

Given that not as many people are looking for them either. There could be tons of holes however the average coder today isn't going to bother writing some kind of bug for a system that resides on less than 1% of the workstations on the planet.


More stable (As shown by it's usage on internet servers)

In the CLI perhaps but I've seen it crash big just the same as Winderz. Oh and that crash was in a demo being put on by Red Hat.


It legally costs nothing

Cost is measured in several ways. Linux can cost a good deal of your time and in fact usually does. You're time might not have any value but I assure you that mine does.


There are full releases of 64bit OSes which can utilise my processor.

As opposed to XP x64 ?


Multiple Desktops are generally easier to manage and take up less resources with Linux.

And multiple monitors are easier to configure in Windows. BTW, haven't tried the Virtual Desktop Manager in Winderz ? It works OK on my little ATI X700 video card.


Lack of spyware that comes with open source software, as opposed to programs like Winamp.

And Foobar 2000 ? Quintessential Media Player ? How about just the Lite version of WinAmp ? No spyware there.


Setting up Windows properly and securely takes a lot more time.

It does ? I can have my system up and working quite ell wthin 3~4 hours. That's with a complete non-DOS DEBUG of 2 hard drives, a OSRI and completely reloading all documents, MP3's and images from DVD-R's.


Ubuntu looks nicer w/o having to stick a shell program over the top and/or using a lot of resources.

LOL ! The last I looked Ubuntu with Gnome uses more resources than my XP at boot !!!


Some of the best software which even Windows developers use, such as Firefox comes with Linux distributions.

And most don't. Try finding a good Flash editor comparable to Flash MX. How about a good video editor comparable to Sony Vegas Video ? So "some" really means "a few".


With the advent of live discs, it is possible to try before you install.

And a good thing since half the distros on the planet are just now getting support for SATA controllers !


More/better communal and community support.

As opposed to the numerous websites and USENET groups that have info and support from the MSVP's and others ?


Linux does not try to turn on every possible port and function, even if it is not in use.

No doubt a good idea but Winderz simply unloads everything non needed anyway.


The terminal in linux is more powerful then command prompt in windows.

Not true however you have to edit a few registry keys in Winderz to enable some of the capabilities of the Command Console.


Most of the time 'drivers' do not need to be installed at all on linux, where as on windows I can spend up to 4 hours installing drivers for different devices.

And if a driver is not native to the kernel ? Oh sure, now we get to have some real fun hunting a hacked download and building it on our system !


Generally Linux distributions do not force people to use specific software and does not lie about uninstalls. Unlike windows, try uninstalling Internet Explorer, then open up my computer and type in a url into the address bar...

And how about Konqeror ? How about Epiphany ?


When linux comes with a computer, it does not mean it only comes installed on the hard drive and you are given a recovery disk.

So we're talking OEM's here. OEM's that also provide the ISO on the hard drive for you to make a copy of the OS along with burning softwares as well.


Using software on Linux to type in Japanese is not a security hole unlike jmundo (or whatever the package is called in windows).

No doubt this effects millions upon millions of people. NOT !


After long hours of usage, windows should be restarted to improve speed, unix/linux machines seem to hardly ever slow down.

Another myth espoused by another person who either has no idea how to configure a computer.


People comment on how well ubuntu runs on a laptop.

Yeah, Windows definitely can't compete on a laptop. Hmmmm, guess we better write Michael Dell, Mark Hurd, Ted Waitt and the rest that they should stop installing Windows on their laptops and start saving some money with "free" open source software and OS'es.


Tux is cool, a window pane is fragile.

How enlightening.

whizbaby
September 5th, 2006, 12:41 PM
You're time might not have any value but I assure you that mine does.

How are we supposed to believe that? This is already page 87 of a completely senseless discussion, so in fact you've got plenty of time to waste.

silver
September 5th, 2006, 12:57 PM
@silver
First:
You are generalising your personal M$ experience to all other dozer users. I can't throw a stone from where I actually sit without hitting at least ten people having big problems with losedoh's (e.g. filesystem completely messed up after electrical power outage). If dozing really is easy as you propagate, why are so many people trying to get away from it then? Because it's not!

Nothing but the facts, eh ? My last full-time IT position was managing a small network of 600+ Windows boxes and 10 Linux servers. You can leave your XP workstations running for months without a reboot and without seeing a degradation in system performance. If anything all one might have to do is to close out their apps and log out and back in.

About those 10 people that have "big problems", tell them to get a clue on how to setup and use a computer instead of depending on some OEM to program their cookie cutter systems for them.

silver
September 5th, 2006, 01:07 PM
How are we supposed to believe that? This is already page 87 of a completely senseless discussion, so in fact you've got plenty of time to waste.

Yeah but you guys are forgetting one thing, I'm hoping that someone here will actually come close to convincing me that Linux is somehow better than Winderz ! None of you have hit the nail on the head yet though. You run to the ol' "Windows is unstable and insecure" thing all of the time. Yeah, I've ran Ubuntu, Xubuntu, Kubuntu, Fedore, Scientific Linux, Mepis, DSL, Corel Linux, Mandrake, SuSE, Slackware, CentOS, Zenwalk, Puppy, Xandros and even tried that mess known as Gentoo. None, not a single one has been a good replacement for Windows. None are any more stable on the desktop and non have the apps available for a replacement of even a 10 year old application like Eudora Pro or Forte Agent. Show me KDE Lite with some decently capable apps and I'll bite. Show me a CD burning software as capable as Nero. C'mon ! As you note I'm putting my time into this and I'm hoping that someone here can actually make it worth my while !

Demio
September 5th, 2006, 01:20 PM
Silver, I recommend you to read this before spweing any more bs out of your mouth: http://www.theregister.co.uk/security/security_report_windows_vs_linux/

ago
September 5th, 2006, 01:29 PM
My last full-time IT position was managing a small network of 600+ Windows boxes

And that is why your experience is completely irrelevant for anybody else.

Yes an IT professional can cover the windows holes and make windows HALF-decent. It takes time, effort and experience.

But the Windows default set-up of average-Joe will be as water tight as swiss cheese.

What about Ubuntu default set-up for average-Joe?

It will hold water quite well, BY DEFAULT, in fact it will be more secure than the IT professinal Windows set-up will ever be without a full corporate grade firewall.


I'm hoping that someone here will actually come close to convincing me that Linux
We don't have to. If you like windows use it.

whizbaby
September 5th, 2006, 01:35 PM
"Windows is unstable and insecure"
I worked for eight years on a windows station and this is exactly my personal experience with it(was not the admin,though). I also had it on my home computer and it kept crashing at least once a week.
As a mathematician, informatician and musician (that's where the dozer used to crash no matter what I did) I don't miss an app and I'm in fact more productive on linux not claiming this to be the same for all people on earth. I can adjust the software (and OS) to my needs and I don't see this being easy or even allowed in XP.
You can be sure that my time is precious, too, so this will be my last post in this thread, bye.

darrenm
September 5th, 2006, 01:39 PM
As you note I'm putting my time into this and I'm hoping that someone here can actually make it worth my while !

Your trolling doesnt really make me want to reply but can't.fight.the.urge..

Yes people go a little too much into the whole Linux rocks, XP sux type way of thinking but a better way to make your point is to be sensible about your replies and not post things that to any reasonable person with experience of both sides of the fence will instantly look like flamebait or someone trying to pass off like they know what they are talking about but can google a few things.

My personal experience is this:
I run Ubuntu Dapper at home on my single main PC. I have a full legit XP license that I choose not to use but instead have Ubuntu and only Ubuntu installed.
I need support for most popular ways of doing things and so far I haven't found anything that using Ubuntu as a desktop OS stops me from doing. I edit videos, I play music, I do some office work, I watch videos through my TV from the TV-out on my video card, I run SSH, OpenVPN, Apache, Samba, NX etc. and can still get all the eyecandy I want from XGL if I feel that way inclined.

I'm tired of Microsoft accusing me of being a criminal then demanding I prove my innocence. I'm tired of moving a few files around then having the PC mysteriously lock up with me having to end-task explorer then re-run it. I'm tired of constantly having to look over my shoulder at every application that is running.

If you are able to leave XP PC's running for months without rebooting then you must either have very disciplined users or they do nothing but run a terminal through them. I could say I administer 300 Linux/Unix servers and over 6000 XP/98/2k workstations, (which I do) but I don't feel the need to justify my comments with qualifications.

elpuerco
September 5th, 2006, 01:48 PM
:) This is so funny, I can't stop laughing :)

Silver ever thought about advanced anger management?

I can almost sense the preasure in your head ready to pop :)

If you are so anti linux and so pro windows, what the hell are you doing here?

I can't stand poetry so I avoid poetry forums, I dont go there and slag them off?

Take a chill bill dude......it's only an OS that's all :)

ago
September 5th, 2006, 01:50 PM
How are we supposed to believe that? This is already page 87 of a completely senseless discussion, so in fact you've got plenty of time to waste.

Maybe he is working...

darrenm
September 5th, 2006, 02:00 PM
@Silver:

This is currently a problem I'm having and is a perfectly straight, non-sarcastic question.

My sister has a laptop, her daughter knocked and it froze. Its running Windows XP so she had to hold the power button to turn off. Now when it boots it starts loading then resets. she has tried safe mode, last known good config but every time it doesnt error, it just reboots.

She has some life or death important photos on there she can't lose so a reload is out the question until she has got them off.

The only way out of this I can think of is to boot a live Linux distro like Ubuntu or Knoppix, copy the files and burn them to CD, then reload.

Can you suggest any other way to sort it?

silver
September 5th, 2006, 02:13 PM
Geeeee ! What a load of crap ! Good collander material.

Firstoff we're talking workstations here.

Secondly, not all servers are serving the internet.

Third, 2004 ? A little dated (not to mention biased !) dontcha think ?

C'mon ! Show me some real-world comparisons ! I want to see MPEG2 encoding comparisos. MP3 ripping. Image manipulation.

silver
September 5th, 2006, 02:19 PM
@Silver:

This is currently a problem I'm having and is a perfectly straight, non-sarcastic question.

My sister has a laptop, her daughter knocked and it froze. Its running Windows XP so she had to hold the power button to turn off. Now when it boots it starts loading then resets. she has tried safe mode, last known good config but every time it doesnt error, it just reboots.

She has some life or death important photos on there she can't lose so a reload is out the question until she has got them off.

The only way out of this I can think of is to boot a live Linux distro like Ubuntu or Knoppix, copy the files and burn them to CD, then reload.

Can you suggest any other way to sort it?

Boot to the Windows CD and when it says "Press Enter to continue and install Windows or hit "R" for repair" hit R. Once you get to the command prompt just type CHKDSK /R. If this doesn't resolve the issue then you can try FIXBOOT. Note that I'm assuming that you've ran diags on the unit and that all tests passed.

silver
September 5th, 2006, 02:33 PM
Your trolling doesnt really make me want to reply but can't.fight.the.urge..

Trolling ? I'm just looking for answers. I see a lot of stuf bordering on the ad hominem but no "meat on the bones" as it were.


Yes people go a little too much into the whole Linux rocks, XP sux type way of thinking but a better way to make your point is to be sensible about your replies and not post things that to any reasonable person with experience of both sides of the fence will instantly look like flamebait or someone trying to pass off like they know what they are talking about but can google a few things.

My apologies. I was probably reacting (badly) to some of the "flamebait" put forth by some who are convinced but unconvincing.


My personal experience is this:
I run Ubuntu Dapper at home on my single main PC. I have a full legit XP license that I choose not to use but instead have Ubuntu and only Ubuntu installed.
I need support for most popular ways of doing things and so far I haven't found anything that using Ubuntu as a desktop OS stops me from doing. I edit videos, I play music, I do some office work, I watch videos through my TV from the TV-out on my video card, I run SSH, OpenVPN, Apache, Samba, NX etc. and can still get all the eyecandy I want from XGL if I feel that way inclined.

So which programs are you using ? This is my challenge. I need applications that work nearly as good on the desktop as those I can go buy. All total I probably have less than $500 in software on this system but I can't replicate even half the programs in Linux.


I'm tired of Microsoft accusing me of being a criminal then demanding I prove my innocence.

I have a growing concern about DRM. I could care less about streaming media but the encroachment on our privacy is something I do take quite seriously. Unfortunately AMD and Intel are now both up to their chins in assisting DRM softwares.


I'm tired of moving a few files around then having the PC mysteriously lock up with me having to end-task explorer then re-run it. I'm tired of constantly having to look over my shoulder at every application that is running.


I can move gigs of files without even a blink of the GUI. I setup my Windows box exactly as I would a Linux workstation and the OS and application performance is better under Windows.


If you are able to leave XP PC's running for months without rebooting then you must either have very disciplined users or they do nothing but run a terminal through them.

Most of the time our users are using IE to access an Oracle database. I have no problem having 25~35 windows open along with MS Outlook, several copies of Notepad and a few other apps. Most of the time I'm running 700+ MB in the PF.

Demio
September 5th, 2006, 02:56 PM
Here's a more recent article for ya http://support.novell.com/techcenter/articles/nc2005_02c.html

ago
September 5th, 2006, 02:56 PM
Silver, you should listen to yourself sometimes, here is a small summary of your claims. According to you windows is: secure, stable, easy to upgrade, with no performance degradation, no memory leaks, does not need registry cleaning, does not need defragmenting, does not even need a firewall (and according to SoundMachine even AV is an optional, if you are careful), it offers better performance, it is one of the most scalable OS on earth...

...In your dreams...

Anybody that has used windows has had first hand experience with the issues above, and unfortunately for you, most people here, now using Ubuntu, have used windows before, often for a long time, and often with extensive experience. If people did not know any better you could sell your crap, but you will find more competent windows people here than on most windows fora... And do not even try to compare corporate maintained machines with average home set-ups...

darrenm
September 5th, 2006, 03:17 PM
Boot to the Windows CD and when it says "Press Enter to continue and install Windows or hit "R" for repair" hit R. Once you get to the command prompt just type CHKDSK /R. If this doesn't resolve the issue then you can try FIXBOOT. Note that I'm assuming that you've ran diags on the unit and that all tests passed.
Its a Toshiba laptop with an OEM XP install therefore only a recovery disc.
I can use my XP CD to get to a recovery console but I seriously doubt chkdsk or fixboot will resolve the issue.
Which diags do you mean?

DoctorMO
September 5th, 2006, 04:31 PM
Coming onto a Linux forum beating the windows drum, pleading with those Linux bastards to some how perform a miracle of remote brain surgery on what apears to be a highly biased mind is quite disrespectful.

I would ask you sir to understand exactly what Linux is, it isn't something you should ask to solve all your worldly problems, it isn't something which will do everything your used to exactly how your used to doing it and it most defiantly isn't a product where you can demand new features or complain about missing functionality.

This is Linux, if you want something you either a) make it yourself b) pay someone to make if for you c) pay someone who has already made a product d) try and find a free product that some kind soul is giving you for free.

Your own incompetence is not A Linux fault.

Henry Rayker
September 5th, 2006, 04:47 PM
I use Linux for just about everything except for games. My main machine, right now, is actually running WindowsXP just about all the time, but only due to the fact that I spent a LOT of time configuring it to the way i wanted it to look and perform, and I'm nervous it will freak out if I tried to dual boot on it.

When I build my next computer (which might not be for a year ](*,) ) I will be dual booting on it. I can't get rid of Windows because of a lack of game support in Linux, but just about everything else is far better here. (Well, wireless is a little bit frustrating, at first, but the wired connection works out of the box. My windows box requires drivers to even get a LAN connection.)

insane_alien
September 5th, 2006, 04:59 PM
i just did a bit of calculating and discovered that the price of downloading and installing ubuntu(or dist-upgrade ing as they take the same amount of time) is a grand total of 12 pence and 2 hours(1 to download and 1 to install). that include the cost of the electricity and intarweb access. to go from 98 to XP took 2 days(to a usable install) and over £100.

any future upgrades in ubuntu will cost 12p and 2 hours. to get to vista would likely cost something like £200 and require a few more days.

also out of curiosity i scanned my linux and XP machines(before it broke). i had an AV and firewall on XP and used them for surfing(same sites) for a week. now, to the statistics.

(Linux/Windows)
viruses 0/325
adware 0/26
spyware 0/32
worms 0/3

i see one secure system and one unsecure system. can you spot which one is secure?

the other day my XP install broke (it might have been a hardware problem) but linux still runs on the exact same hardware. which is the most robust?

in XP i have to install drivers for my motherboard, webcam, graphics card, printer, scanner, mouse and modem.

in linux graphics card and webcam.

which is more out of the box?

please silver, tell me how windows is the almighty OS you say it is because i have seen none of it.

kopilo
September 5th, 2006, 05:25 PM
Given that not as many people are looking for them either. There could be tons of holes however the average coder today isn't going to bother writing some kind of bug for a system that resides on less than 1% of the workstations on the planet.
So even more the reason to why it is more safe. Ohh wait, were you trying to push a bandwagon argument?


In the CLI perhaps but I've seen it crash big just the same as Winderz. Oh and that crash was in a demo being put on by Red Hat. Blue screen of death in advertisements, I'll give you that it is rather damn amusing.


Cost is measured in several ways. Linux can cost a good deal of your time and in fact usually does. You're time might not have any value but I assure you that mine does.Cost in relative terms of time, money, opportunity cost and resources weighs in for me a lot better with Linux then it does with windows.


As opposed to XP x64 ?
Yes, XP x64 doesn't come with the programs I use in 64 format.



And multiple monitors are easier to configure in Windows. BTW, haven't tried the Virtual Desktop Manager in Winderz ? It works OK on my little ATI X700 video card. I'm not talking multiple monitors, why do I want to buy more hardware and use more electricity when I can utlise one monitor? :-k


And Foobar 2000 ? Quintessential Media Player ? How about just the Lite version of WinAmp ? No spyware there. Winamp was an example, of one program. There are others.



It does ? I can have my system up and working quite ell wthin 3~4 hours. That's with a complete non-DOS DEBUG of 2 hard drives, a OSRI and completely reloading all documents, MP3's and images from DVD-R's.Goody for you. Having over a decade experience with Windows I have it down to a fine art of installing and it still takes a long time to do it properly.

Ubuntu 64 took me 30 mintues to reach the same stage it took around 4 hours in windows to reach. Granted the Windows partinion is sitting on a 36GB 10000RPM SATA Hard drive and Ubunutu is sitting on a 8GB 5700RPM IDE Hard drive.


LOL ! The last I looked Ubuntu with Gnome uses more resources than my XP at boot !!! At boot, is the important words here.


And most don't. Try finding a good Flash editor comparable to Flash MX. How about a good video editor comparable to Sony Vegas Video ? So "some" really means "a few".Well if you want to go multimedia, you go with Apple. 8)


And a good thing since half the distros on the planet are just now getting support for SATA controllers ! Really, Mepis 3.3 which came out over 2-3 years ago could perfectally read my SATA drive and I didn't need to insert a floppy disc unlike my XP installation.


As opposed to the numerous websites and USENET groups that have info and support from the MSVP's and others? Numerous websites? Linux is distributed through the web and yes I prefer to talk to people on the ubuntu forums because they aren't vicious (given some exceptions) :-| .

Granted most of the things I learned in Windows was from trial and error as well as outside training.


No doubt a good idea but Winderz simply unloads everything non needed anyway.Uh huh.


Not true however you have to edit a few registry keys in Winderz to enable some of the capabilities of the Command Console. Can you edit the registry directly through command prompt? I'm sure you at least are required to export and import a file.


And if a driver is not native to the kernel ? Oh sure, now we get to have some real fun hunting a hacked download and building it on our system! I've never had an issue with linux drivers, so I can't comment on finding 'hacked drivers'. Where on the other hand, installing XP SP1 with an ATI Radeon 9200SE, is fine, but if you then install SP2, make sure you have the resolution set to 32 and never change it from that or you have the open source drivers installed.


And how about Konqeror ? How about Epiphany?
You mean Konqueror, anyway if you don't want them/can't replace them, generally you can get a flux box or cml version that doesn't have it.

So we're talking OEM's here. OEM's that also provide the ISO on the hard drive for you to make a copy of the OS along with burning softwares as well. Would seem fairly silly to sell a computer without a burner and just a recovery disk. Lucky for us a technition accidentally left a full version windows disk in the CD drive


No doubt this effects millions upon millions of people. NOT ! Considering my sister is a system admin in Japan for a multinational chain, hmm maybe I'll ask her for a source for you.


Another myth espoused by another person who either has no idea how to configure a computer. Resorting to insults, very mature.


Yeah, Windows definitely can't compete on a laptop. Hmmmm, guess we better write Michael Dell, Mark Hurd, Ted Waitt and the rest that they should stop installing Windows on their laptops and start saving some money with "free" open source software and OS'es.So the demand for Windows isn't inelastic? ](*,)


How enlightening. Glad you think so. :)

Reshin
September 5th, 2006, 05:37 PM
Uh...I use XP with admin rights all the time. Got AV and firewall set up. After clean reinstall some time ago I did some random surfing with IE on a SP2 with no updates and no AV, just windows own firewall. After updating and installing av and third-party firewall did some scanning with online- and pro trial AV:s and found nothing aside from a tracking cookie. I've been running just fine for a long without viruses or having to resort to manual maintenance like some of you like to claim. Same goes for family members and the people I know.

What I wanna know is how the hell do you get your windows machines in so bad shapes?

DoctorMO
September 5th, 2006, 06:07 PM
I look at windows use like I do smoking, every one does it, they know it's not good for them, we know it's not good for them, where ever they go theres a bad smell and being free of it can be difficult.

You wouldn't kill Bambi! so don't use windows!

kopilo
September 5th, 2006, 06:30 PM
What I wanna know is how the hell do you get your windows machines in so bad shapes?
One very easy way, is not to use any defragmentation tools.

Another is not using any spyware tools and browsing websites with lots of adverts, without protection of cookies, activex or javascript...

Using an OS which has had lots of security patches and security upgrades would also be expected to be more stable and secure then when the system first started out.

ago
September 5th, 2006, 07:29 PM
with no updates and no AV

That one was sure missing! So far we have learnt that windows can be very secure without firewall (Silver), without AV (SoundMachine and Reshin) and now it turns out that even updates are not needed!

You even pretend not to understand how you can get a machine screwed up in windows... Maybe someone can send you an "email" to explain the concept...

Reshin
September 5th, 2006, 08:17 PM
That one was sure missing! So far we have learnt that windows can be very secure without firewall (Silver), without AV (SoundMachine and Reshin) and now it turns out that even updates are not needed!

You even pretend not to understand how you can get a machine screwed up in windows... Maybe someone can send you an "email" to explain the concept...

whoa there! I didn't mean it like that :( I meant that I was running AV:less during updating AND with IE and not gotten affected with anything. I never said those thing aren't needed

silver
September 5th, 2006, 09:17 PM
Coming onto a Linux forum beating the windows drum, pleading with those Linux bastards to some how perform a miracle of remote brain surgery on what apears to be a highly biased mind is quite disrespectful.

I would ask you sir to understand exactly what Linux is, it isn't something you should ask to solve all your worldly problems, it isn't something which will do everything your used to exactly how your used to doing it and it most defiantly isn't a product where you can demand new features or complain about missing functionality.

This is Linux, if you want something you either a) make it yourself b) pay someone to make if for you c) pay someone who has already made a product d) try and find a free product that some kind soul is giving you for free.

Your own incompetence is not A Linux fault.

Ya gotta just love ad hominem sometimes ! I can see why the forum server is running so slow now. It's all of the crap spewed by those who simply don't have any good answers to some basic questions.

darrenm
September 5th, 2006, 09:22 PM
I can move gigs of files without even a blink of the GUI. I setup my Windows box exactly as I would a Linux workstation and the OS and application performance is better under Windows.


Perhaps its the video files with dodgy codecs that caused the problems then... ;)

silver
September 5th, 2006, 09:26 PM
Uh...I use XP with admin rights all the time. Got AV and firewall set up. After clean reinstall some time ago I did some random surfing with IE on a SP2 with no updates and no AV, just windows own firewall. After updating and installing av and third-party firewall did some scanning with online- and pro trial AV:s and found nothing aside from a tracking cookie. I've been running just fine for a long without viruses or having to resort to manual maintenance like some of you like to claim. Same goes for family members and the people I know.

What I wanna know is how the hell do you get your windows machines in so bad shapes?

Apparently they try very hard. I've gone as long as 6 months without even an AV installed and haven't had a single hit. In fact the last virus that was sent to me via email came in from my SIL who is on AOL and that was over 3 years ago. All of this poppycock about bugs and such are the result of a bunch of incapable end-users who like to browse porn and warez sites or are so stupid that they actually accidentally clicked on a link to same.

silver
September 5th, 2006, 09:32 PM
Its a Toshiba laptop with an OEM XP install therefore only a recovery disc.
I can use my XP CD to get to a recovery console but I seriously doubt chkdsk or fixboot will resolve the issue.
Which diags do you mean?

Usually there is at least a Built In Self-Test set of diags that will test the HDD, memory and video. I'm a little surprised that Toshiba isn't providing the media for the OS or at least that ability to burn the ISO to disc. Have you tried the basics of reseating the memory and hard drive ?

darrenm
September 5th, 2006, 10:21 PM
No but if the memory was unseated it wouldnt (shouldnt) boot at all, same with the HDD. Bit of a pain with a laptop too.

Havent been there yet to have a look, but TBH I really can't see me fixing it without a reload. And then I will have to get these files off. And I can't do that without Linux in some way ;)

ago
September 5th, 2006, 10:30 PM
AI've gone as long as 6 months without even an AV installed and haven't had a single hit.

Here we go again, another windows "expert" that goes without AV... and let's not forget that Silver mentioned that he did not really need the firewall either... But what do we know about security...

DoctorMO
September 5th, 2006, 10:41 PM
Ya gotta just love ad hominem sometimes ! I can see why the forum server is running so slow now. It's all of the crap spewed by those who simply don't have any good answers to some basic questions.

It's the only real argument here, your not willing to be objective or unbiased. in fact your here to laugh at linux users to tell them how foolish they are for not believing in the Microsoft dream.

when infact sir I am attacking what you are attempting to do in this thread, it's just wrong, your wrong and I wouldn't be your friend if I knew you in real life.

Please just go and don't bother our servers until you take your head from out of your back side and realise why freedom is better than proprietary or have an answer as to why freedom is bad because thats the only argument I have against windows and it's one that can't be solved by the likes of you.

silver
September 5th, 2006, 10:42 PM
No but if the memory was unseated it wouldnt (shouldnt) boot at all, same with the HDD. Bit of a pain with a laptop too.

Havent been there yet to have a look, but TBH I really can't see me fixing it without a reload. And then I will have to get these files off. And I can't do that without Linux in some way ;)

Repair reinstall or a parallel reinstall as well. Still, check hardware first. Jarring a system like that can make a mess of the hard drive and fortunately they don't all die a quick death.

darrenm
September 5th, 2006, 10:47 PM
Apparently they try very hard. I've gone as long as 6 months without even an AV installed and haven't had a single hit. In fact the last virus that was sent to me via email came in from my SIL who is on AOL and that was over 3 years ago. All of this poppycock about bugs and such are the result of a bunch of incapable end-users who like to browse porn and warez sites or are so stupid that they actually accidentally clicked on a link to same.

Hmmm, I would agree to an extent that its more difficult than some people make out to get nasties. It used to be mad though. Pre-SP1 days you could connect an XP machine to the net and within 2 mins it would have something bad. I sat and watched a network of XP machines with standard traffic using etherboy then suddenly saw all UDP traffic bouncing from machine to the next as each machine got infected one ny one and took down the network.

These days you have to run IE and go to a few dodgy sites to get spyware so its a bit more difficult.

silver
September 5th, 2006, 10:55 PM
It's the only real argument here, your not willing to be objective or unbiased. in fact your here to laugh at linux users to tell them how foolish they are for not believing in the Microsoft dream.

Not at all. In fact I applaud the entire open source movement but I will simultaneously state that there is _NO_ open source OS that offers a workstation interface that is as complete and capable as Windows. If you have something to counter that then by all means post a link to it.


when infact sir I am attacking what you are attempting to do in this thread, it's just wrong, your wrong and I wouldn't be your friend if I knew you in real life.

Heartbroken I tell you ! In case you forgot, the title of this thread is "If you have Windows XP, why do you use linux?" and that is what I'm attempting to get to despite all of the obfuscation provided by several in this thread.


Please just go and don't bother our servers until you take your head from out of your back side and realise why freedom is better than proprietary or have an answer as to why freedom is bad because thats the only argument I have against windows and it's one that can't be solved by the likes of you.

LOL ! More ad hominem ! Love it ! When in doubt attack the messenger. Sorry, didn't mean to rain on your little parade. Perhaps you can post back when you have something valuable to contribute ? Like say exactly why you would rather spend 20~30 hours tweaking out Linux than pay MS & Co. $100 for an OS that has a native GUI and basic apps that simply work out-of-the-box.

Hmmmm, I note that Suse Linux 10.1 is now at $50 on Amazon. Must be the cost of those manuals !

silver
September 5th, 2006, 11:02 PM
These days you have to run IE and go to a few dodgy sites to get spyware so its a bit more difficult.

The only place to safely, consistently run IE is inside an intranet. Just as with Outlook. The second biggest failure in an out-of-the-box install of XP is Outlook Express. Unfortunately MS has lost site of the KISS principle just as has many Linux distros. This is one of the reasons I still like Slackware.

silver
September 5th, 2006, 11:07 PM
No but if the memory was unseated it wouldnt (shouldnt) boot at all, same with the HDD. Bit of a pain with a laptop too.

Havent been there yet to have a look, but TBH I really can't see me fixing it without a reload. And then I will have to get these files off. And I can't do that without Linux in some way ;)

Do note that a system can certainly attempt to boot with a loose DIMM or HDD. A poor connection will cause signal degradation and I've seen several occassions where simply reseating a DIMM will resolve the problem. Note that this isn't usually accompanied by a rebooting system however. Also reseating memory on a portable shouldn't be difficult at all. There is usually a hatch on the bottom to access the RAM. It's not even a 5 minute job. If the memory is located under the keyboard then it can take a couple more minutes but still I can do it in less than 5 minutes.

DoctorMO
September 5th, 2006, 11:25 PM
LOL ! More ad hominem ! Love it ! When in doubt attack the messenger. Sorry, didn't mean to rain on your little parade. Perhaps you can post back when you have something valuable to contribute ? Like say exactly why you would rather spend 20~30 hours tweaking out Linux than pay MS & Co. $100 for an OS that has a native GUI and basic apps that simply work out-of-the-box.

I don't spend 30 hours tweaking Linux, I spend 40 minuets installing it and adding codecs and things and then I start working. even if it was 30 hours I'd gladly spend them all tweaking this, editing that because It just better to have a system that is my own.

I'd also never give Microsoft Corp _anything_ they are illigal monopolists and I don't give money to criminals.

ago
September 5th, 2006, 11:29 PM
I will simultaneously state that there is _NO_ open source OS that offers a workstation interface that is as complete and capable as Windows.

The interface does not have to be complete! It only needs to cover normal tasks for normal users. Complex tasks require complex interfaces anyway and are threfore totally irrellevant for normal users.

Let's add that the windows "complete interface" comes at the expense of an incomplete CLI. And I will always pick the second over the first, any day of the year, particularly for complex operations.

Then you have to define "complete" when one system (windows) is far less flaxible than the other (linux).

And you have to explain why would you need all those external tweaking tools if the interface was as "complete" as you claim...

darrenm
September 5th, 2006, 11:43 PM
dup post

darrenm
September 5th, 2006, 11:49 PM
Not at all. In fact I applaud the entire open source movement but I will simultaneously state that there is _NO_ open source OS that offers a workstation interface that is as complete and capable as Windows. If you have something to counter that then by all means post a link to it.

www.ubuntu.com More complete and capable than Windows XP for my use anyway.



LOL ! More ad hominem ! Love it ! When in doubt attack the messenger. Sorry, didn't mean to rain on your little parade. Perhaps you can post back when you have something valuable to contribute ? Like say exactly why you would rather spend 20~30 hours tweaking out Linux than pay MS & Co. $100 for an OS that has a native GUI and basic apps that simply work out-of-the-box.

Hmmmm, I note that Suse Linux 10.1 is now at $50 on Amazon. Must be the cost of those manuals !

20-30 hours?! Takes me about an hour to 2 hours to get everything working as I like with a new install of Linux, assuming I don't just keep the /home directory.

I am quite honestly flabbergasted at the comment about $100 for a native GUI and apps that work out the box. Firstly for a retail copy of XP, its a lot more than $100 unless I'm way out of touch with the exchange rate. Secondly the only apps you get are as you say basic - wordpad, notepad, windows media player and ermmmm, ooo windows movie maker. Are you saying that the apps provided with a distro such as Ubuntu don't simply work out of the box? Gedit, VIM, Amarok and Kino have always worked fine for me.

I can install Ubuntu and get it up and running with almost any kind of configuration a lot quicker than I can do the same with WinXP on the same machine. Not having to spend a few hours installing drivers and 3rd party applications really helps.

If you want to make a point, keep it sensible and within the realms of reality, at least then you can make arguments for WinXP/MS and have some integrity.

silver
September 5th, 2006, 11:49 PM
I'd also never give Microsoft Corp _anything_ they are illigal monopolists and I don't give money to criminals.

Ah ! Then you must not pay taxes either !
:)

silver
September 6th, 2006, 12:29 AM
www.ubuntu.com More complete and capable than Windows XP for my use anyway.

20-30 hours?! Takes me about an hour to 2 hours to get everything working as I like with a new install of Linux, assuming I don't just keep the /home directory.

Not bad but I guess you're a little more profecient than the average user. One of my friends is a retired Bell Labs UNIX developer and he's constantly tweaking his system. In Winderzz I simply get it working and be done with it. I have a life outside of computers afterall !


I am quite honestly flabbergasted at the comment about $100 for a native GUI and apps that work out the box. Firstly for a retail copy of XP, its a lot more than $100 unless I'm way out of touch with the exchange rate.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16832116059
Microsoft Windows XP Professional With SP2B 1 Pack - OEM
$137.99

I'm a little off. And don't go there ! ;)


Secondly the only apps you get are as you say basic - wordpad, notepad, windows media player and ermmmm, ooo windows movie maker. Are you saying that the apps provided with a distro such as Ubuntu don't simply work out of the box? Gedit, VIM, Amarok and Kino have always worked fine for me.

Is Amarok in the base distribution now ? Regarding Windows users, I've always been amazed at how they "need" programs that have far more capability than they will ever be able to use. Media Player might be one of those DRM boogeymen that I abhor but I have to admit that it makes a great mp3 ripper. Notepad is used by many a web builder and in fact I keep a shortcut to it on my toolbars.

This brings to mind a question. Is it possible to rename a program in Linux ? I mean completely rename it. As stated earlier I had high hops that KDE Lite was going to make some headway but it seems to not be used much if at all.


I can install Ubuntu and get it up and running with almost any kind of configuration a lot quicker than I can do the same with WinXP on the same machine. Not having to spend a few hours installing drivers and 3rd party applications really helps.[QUOTE]

My installation of just Winderz from beginning to end takes less than 35 minutes. Installation of drivers is another 20 minutes and that's including :

1)Chipset
2)Video
3)Sound (Two cards, remember ?)
4)NIC
5)Scanner (Epson 490)

Of course one might want to run the automati=c update utility after the drivers are installed. I admit that this last part has me wondering why Microsoft hasn't released a SP3 for XP yet. And before anyone gets on a tear about that, how many of you are running the same Linux for the past 4 years with no updates ?

[QUOTE]If you want to make a point, keep it sensible and within the realms of reality, at least then you can make arguments for WinXP/MS and have some integrity.

I'm actually not trying to argue for Windows. I'm playing Devil's Advocate, remember ? I'm hoping that someone can prove that Linux is superior as a workstation OS. Unfortunately I haven't seen this in practice nor in the comments here in the forums. The day that I can dump Windows and all of the DRM that is coming along with it is the day I feed my COA into the shredder. I had hoped that this would happen by the end of this year however I see that most of the Windows applications that I use have no equal in Linux. And please don't even suggest Mac !

insane_alien
September 6th, 2006, 12:45 AM
My installation of just Winderz from beginning to end takes less than 35 minutes.

ahh you must have one of those recovery partitions where everything is installed automatically and there is even preloaded software like MS office and some other stuff on it. i've seen those work and they are actually quite speedy(kudos to the manufacturers that do this).

but on a clean system from the base XP CD it takes far longer if you get a miracle instalation where there are no errors. then you need to get office which is what another $100 ubuntu gives OOo and its free. i can do things in OOo that i've never been able to do in MSO.

ago
September 6th, 2006, 01:03 AM
How to install windows in 5 hours or less (http://diveintomark.org/archives/2003/08/04/xp) :p

ago
September 6th, 2006, 01:04 AM
Not bad but I guess you're a little more profecient than the average user.
Sure... running easyubuntu or automatix is soo hard and it takes almost 5 full minutes...

ago
September 6th, 2006, 01:36 AM
Cramer vs Cramer

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/expert/northrup_restoreperf.mspx



Restore Your Computer's Performance with Windows XP

If your computer seems slower than it used to be, it probably is. My one-year old Dell laptop is much slower now than when it was new. Over time, [windows] computers get slower for a variety of reasons: files become disorganized, unnecessary software consumes resources, unused network drives slow startup, or too many programs automatically run at startup. Larger, serious issues can dramatically slow your computer's performance too. You may have a virus or need to troubleshoot problems by clean booting.

Fortunately, Windows XP includes tools to clean your computer and restore its performance. As I write this column, I'll be cleaning up my own computer and explaining how its performance improves. I'll cover Backup, Disk Cleanup, Disk Defragmenter, Add or Remove Programs, and the System Configuration tool.

Interesting.... here we have microsoft windows experts that make claims that our very own windows "experts" have vehemently confuted... Apparently windows machines do get slower after all, it wasn't winblozer fantasies... And apparently they need a lot of boring maintenance.. Maybe it even turns out that they need an AV and a firewall, contrary to our very own "experts" claims...

silver
September 6th, 2006, 01:50 AM
ahh you must have one of those recovery partitions where everything is installed automatically and there is even preloaded software like MS office and some other stuff on it. i've seen those work and they are actually quite speedy(kudos to the manufacturers that do this).

Not only "No ! " but "Hell no !" !!!

I haven't used an OEM system outside of work since 1993. That was a 486DX and I was so glad to see it fail that I just had to take my wife out in celebration. She didn't understand it but I explained that the motherboard had failed just outside of warranty and that it would cost more to replace than to build a new system. OEM's are good for ... well let's just say they're not good for me.


but on a clean system from the base XP CD it takes far longer if you get a miracle instalation where there are no errors.

Shouldn't. I'm running XP Pro on an AMD 64 3k with 1GB of DDR RAM. By the way you should see how fast it can install Win98 :) I had some spare time so I plugged in a PATA drive and copied the Win98 cabs to C:. Ran install and it was done in less than a minute. Unfortunately it crashed immediately upon reboot as expected. Had to boot to DOS and edit the config.sys. Sorta worked fine after that though. As well as anyone can imagine a single-threaded OS working anyway.


... then you need to get office which is what another $100

If you find MS Office for $100 please send me the link !


ubuntu gives OOo and its free. i can do things in OOo that i've never been able to do in MSO.

And last I heard it's available for Windows as well as Linux, BSD and the rest. Just as is SmartFTP, Firefox, Paint.NET, Faststone Capture, Exact Audio Copy, Audacity and many, many other freeware programs that I've found to be as good or better than the fee-based counterpart. Note that when it comes to office applications, I'm a WordPerfect fan from long way back. Remember when Novell owned it ? Now if Novell had just developed a Linux about 10 years earlier, this whole thread might have been moot.

silver
September 6th, 2006, 01:59 AM
Cramer vs Cramer

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/expert/northrup_restoreperf.mspx



Interesting.... here we have microsoft windows experts that make claims that our very own windows "experts" have vehemently confuted... Apparently windows machines do get slower after all, it wasn't winblozer fantasies... And apparently they need a lot of boring maintenance.. Maybe it even turns out that they need an AV and a firewall, contrary to our very own "experts" claims...

LOL ! Yes, Windows can certainly be bogged down by the jeezillion applications that some customers think they need. Things like cCrapee Internet Security, KaZaa and so forth are absolute CPU mongers. But if properaly configured and installed, one should have no slowdown at all. In the end you can blame two people here. The EU and the company that makes the crapware they've installed.

Also please remember (as previously stated) that _I_ install Windows _exactly_ like I do Linux. That is to say that teh OS goes on C:\, the apps get installed on D:\, My Documents gets mapped to E:\ and I have a seperate hard drive with my digital images and music on it. Lastly the second drive has a partition used for all swap and temp files.

hc2995
September 6th, 2006, 02:31 AM
This is funny a windows designer is arguing linux

I was a FORMER windows XP services pack 2 user heres why i switched:

1. Running a website BUT most server type applications (like IRC daemons) are for linux boxees

2. MOST server software is made for linux

3. I DIDNT want to pay for Windows server (comon now apache is FREE ubuntu is FREE its a win win configuration)

4. DIDNT want to pay for microsoft office

Basicly i want stuff thats reliable and thats cheap (free is better) and since linux is free and the server stuff for linux is free im set

Windows might have a simple interface (.exe files and such) but so what if i got to tpye ./Configure or what ever else

silver
September 6th, 2006, 04:41 AM
This is funny a windows designer is arguing linux

I was a FORMER windows XP services pack 2 user heres why i switched:

1. Running a website BUT most server type applications (like IRC daemons) are for linux boxees

2. MOST server software is made for linux

3. I DIDNT want to pay for Windows server (comon now apache is FREE ubuntu is FREE its a win win configuration)

4. DIDNT want to pay for microsoft office

Basicly i want stuff thats reliable and thats cheap (free is better) and since linux is free and the server stuff for linux is free im set

Windows might have a simple interface (.exe files and such) but so what if i got to tpye ./Configure or what ever else

#1 & #2 - I agree on the server technology being built around *NIX's.

#3 - Could have just used Apache on Windows.

#4 - There are several alternatives to MS Office including :

A) Star Office
B) Open Office
C) EasyOffice
D) 602PC Suite

I would also like to point out that the vast majority of computer users rarely utilize even half of the features available in these suites. MS Works is adequate for most users. Also don't leave out Corel WordPerfect. Remember when Novell owned WordPerfect ? We'd be singing a different tune if Novell had just jumped on the Linux wagon 10 years earlier before they sold WordPerfect.

BTW, free is good to a point. There comes a time when you have to pony up for something and it's usually counter-productive to nickel-&-dime everything.

As an aside, is there an installable encyclopedia for Linux ?

snakyjake
September 6th, 2006, 05:21 AM
Basically freedom. You have freedom to do whatever you want with Linux. When a new version of Ubuntu comes out, you won't have to pay for the upgrade.

I hear this quite a bit. For me, I may not have spent the $$$ for the OS, but I end up paying Linux with a lot of my time trying to figure out the most simple things, and just trying to get things to work. Microsoft and Apple have Linux desktop beat in this area, but yes, you do have to pay. For me, at some point, time becomes more valuable than the cost of good software.

I still consider Windows and its applications the best in terms of quality, support, and productivity. Windows is still the benchmark in which the Linux desktop is still trying to achieve. This point is difficult to argue when Windows still holds market share, and Linux is a fraction.

If you are a DIY type of person, or consider a computer a hobby, or willing to sacrafice time for a steep learning curve, or don't mind less features, Linux for the desktop is good.

Linux is growing and evolving, and I use Linux because I enjoy its evolution.

Jake

DoctorMO
September 6th, 2006, 08:13 AM
many, many other freeware programs

Thats an insult to the GPL, Open Source and Free Software are not Freeware you need to update your definitions, you obviosly don't care for common sense or the fact that you might be wrong and your ego might just need to be toned down a tad.


I still consider Windows and its applications the best in terms of quality, support, and productivity.

I disagree, I find Linux to be far more productive and I consider Linux to be the Bar that Mac OS X and Windows should aspire to. but considering your willing to blame Linux for 3rd Party failings your hardly going to understand the technoledgy behind it.

Reshin
September 6th, 2006, 08:43 AM
Thats an insult to the GPL, Open Source and Free Software are not Freeware you need to update your definitions, you obviosly don't care for common sense or the fact that you might be wrong and your ego might just need to be toned down a tad.



I disagree, I find Linux to be far more productive and I consider Linux to be the Bar that Mac OS X and Windows should aspire to. but considering your willing to blame Linux for 3rd Party failings your hardly going to understand the technoledgy behind it.

Funny you insult him having a big ego... how's about you read your own text again and think about it? Your own ego and the way you response

And btw, more productive how? If you're talking about open source applications, I've yet to see any OSS surpass it's commercial or non-oss counterpart in usability or functuality. Probably just as good at best but never better :???:

kopilo
September 6th, 2006, 08:58 AM
As an aside, is there an installable encyclopedia for Linux ?
Well there is the one I installed on my bookshelf that can be used without electricity or any OS...

In all seriousness though, why install encyclopedias when they are virtually avaliable through the internet? Such that when an encylopedia changes edition it doesn't cost money or time to upgrade?

Alternatively you could download wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Download
OR a wikipedia ISO
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia-CD/Download

kopilo
September 6th, 2006, 09:08 AM
I've yet to see any OSS surpass it's commercial or non-oss counterpart in usability or functuality. Probably just as good at best but never better :???:
Just some considerations;

Firefox 1.5 vs Internet Explorer 6
Firestarter vs Windows firewall
Shareaza vs Morpheus
Azureus vs Turbo Torrent
Arachnophilia vs Notepad

Why has both MS and Mac taken code from open sources?

Both open source and closed source have their advantages and disadvantages, to say one is better then the other is like saying oranges are better then apples.

silver
September 6th, 2006, 09:11 AM
Well there is the one I installed on my bookshelf that can be used without electricity or any OS...

In all seriousness though, why install encyclopedias when they are virtually avaliable through the internet? Such that when an encylopedia changes edition it doesn't cost money or time to upgrade?

Alternatively you could download wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Download

Note that Wikipedia is certainly one of the greatest resources available. It reminds me of the book by Gordon R. Dickson "Final Encyclopedia" where a central library/encyclopedia for interstellar was placed in orbit around the Earth.

As to why not use Wikipedia, I question its veracity.

kopilo
September 6th, 2006, 09:33 AM
I agree with you on the validity of wikipedia articles, that's why the most I use it for is for the sources which are listed with most articles. :)

ago
September 6th, 2006, 10:25 AM
LOL ! Yes, Windows can certainly be bogged down by the jeezillion applications that some customers think they need.

1) Well maybe those users do need those applications!

2) You often brag about how good all those windows applications are, what good are they if you cannot install them? You even mention that you cannot use even IE, Outlook and OE! Wow great OS!

3) Linux does not get bogged down by the applications you install, you can install as many as you want as often as you want and it runs just fine, it's a windows-only feature


Things like cCrapee Internet Security, KaZaa and so forth are absolute CPU mongers.

It's not a CPU problem! As microsoft says, after a while EVERYTHING becomes slower, even if you uninstall all the applications you have (assuming you manage to uninstall things... which is not always obvious), the system is still slower than when you first installed windows.


But if properaly configured and installed, one should have no slowdown at all.

Sure just use notepad and mspaint, quick to install and you will not have problems! Only catch: do not use those preinstalled programs that connect to the rest of the world! This way you can enjoy an OS that is compatible with lots and lots of aps. Just don't touch them, and you will happy!


Also please remember (as previously stated) that _I_ install Windows _exactly_ like I do Linux.

That is utterly impossible...

Linux divides the file system according to the access type. So all your static system config files are in one place, separated by user config files, runtime access files (caches, DB...) are in predetermined folders (/var), libraries are in predetermined folders (/lib /usr/lib), binaries are in a separate folders, documents are have their own folders, icons have their own folders. If you think you can replicate that with 3 pathetic windows partitions you are way off. Just look in any windows application folder, you will find executables, configuration files, data storage, libraries, icons, documents.... plus registry settings, plus other files spread randomly around the system.

ago
September 6th, 2006, 10:35 AM
As to why not use Wikipedia, I question its veracity.

Studies have been made to compare Wikipedia quality to Britannica...


Nature took stories from Wikipedia and Britannica on 42 science-related topics and submitted them to experts for review. The experts were not told which encyclopedia the stories were from. "The exercise revealed numerous errors in both encyclopedias, but among 42 entries tested, the difference in accuracy was not great: the average science entry in Wikipedia contained around four inaccuracies; Britannica, around three," according to Nature.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/online-encyclopedias-put-to-the-test/2005/12/14/1134500913345.html

Considering tha articles on wikipedia are on average twice as long, I do not think you are going to do much better with encarta or britannica or anything else. And anyway, encyclopedias are only a starting point.

thetravellor
September 6th, 2006, 11:11 AM
I am a long term Linux user, I dont use Windows except at work of course).

Once I used RedHat, thought it was cool. Then it went professional. Switched to Suse. Then it went professional.
Tried Debian, and it was a pain in the *** and too old.
Switched to Fedora core, that was OK. Now I am on Ubuntu, have just fried it on ppc due to accidently mixing apt-get repositories late one night.

lol.

Its no more, or no less stable than windows and unfortunately linux distros have a history of going professional and locking their supporters out.

Let us hope that Ubuntu keeps the hope alive and remains open.

elpuerco
September 6th, 2006, 11:21 AM
So if some linux distros go pro where do they stand regarding the whole linux ethic of freeness?

You can still download these distros freely can't you? So is it the support that goes pro? If so surely this is no real problem due to the forums?

Or am I off whack here?

SoundMachine
September 6th, 2006, 11:39 AM
So if some linux distros go pro where do they stand regarding the whole linux ethic of freeness?

You can still download these distros freely can't you? So is it the support that goes pro? If so surely this is no real problem due to the forums?

Or am I off whack here?

Well, no, you can't download the distros, you can download the sourcecode and build it for yourself if you wish, basically what CentOS does with RHEL.

Basically, the "freeness" of FLOSS applies to other programmers and users who wish to compile for themselves, there is nothing about it that states that you have to provide your packages or distribution free of charge.

ago
September 6th, 2006, 12:56 PM
Then it went professional. Switched to Suse. Then it went professional.
Tried Debian, and it was a pain in the *** and too old.
Switched to Fedora core, that was OK. Now I am on Ubuntu, have just fried it on ppc due to accidently mixing apt-get repositories late one night.

Quite the opposite has happened in fact. Companies have delegated the desktop distributions to the community, giving up control over them. RedHat moved to Fedora which is a community based effort as opposed to a corporate controlled one. Suse moved to OpenSuse. Linspire moved to freespire. Once a community based distros is created you cannot take it back, and people can always fork the full distro if they wish. It is a bit like GPL.

Community distros can die, because of lack of interst from users/developers, but that is evolution of the fittest, nobody can shut them down. If anything, that proves that the closed distro model has succumbed to a fully open one...

Demio
September 6th, 2006, 02:12 PM
I've beem running my PC's on M$ windows since I had a 286 on Windows 3.11 (I think it was 2.0 for a while).

As the time passes on ALL windows installations (except for the 1.0-3.11 ones which rocked), they all degrade into unusable pieces of crap consuming space on your hard drive.

From Windows 95 to Windows XP, it happened on all my installations (yes, I have run all desktop Windows versions, 95, 98, ME, 2000 and XP). Besides from that, M$ always manages to include some kind of amazing security flaw in their OS that threatens to **** up your pc.

On my current XP install (it's lasted 2 and half years without formmatting and counting), to be able to withstand it for more than 6 months, I had to search through teh intrawebs for all the little hacks and **** to prevent security flaws from ******* up your pc. I had to install an Anti-Virus (DO NOT INSTALL NORTON, norton is like an octopus and after you install it it's almost impossible to remove the grab of it's tentacles). I installed Kaspersky AV and it's quite good, and I had to install a firewall, I installed Look n' Stop firewall, it also quite good.

Besides the AV and firewall, to be able to run my Windows box properly, I changed my shell from explorer.exe to Aston Shell (it improves stability and reduces system resource comsumption at the same time it provides a very customizeable interface). Also I had to install 3 different anti-spyware software removers (besides the SP2 and all the patches). Then to setup my network properly I had to install another software piece called WinGate (I have recently shafted that and bought a router hehe).

And even with all these security measures and work, I managed to find a Trojan / Virus / Whatever in my shared folders (which were read-only for network members ](*,) ).

Also let's take notice of the intrusive WGA system that keeps calling home to make sure you're not breaking any laws :-k

Now let's make a small sum to see how much all this software cost, I'm not going to be precise but my estimative is (including the windows price) $600.

$600 only to be ABLE to run Windows and a Network. Fantastic isn't it? And you still get treated like a criminal with the WGA ****.

Yea, Microsoft Windows is truely and amazing OS! Everyone in the world should run their pcs on Windows. I only wish I could have Bill Gate's babies. WOOHOOO! ](*,)

And yes, I'm a careful Windows User, if I wasn't my windows install wouldn't have lasted 2 years.

And then I switched to Ubuntu. I installed it in under 40 minutes and, wow, it had access to teh intrawebs! It had SOUND! (no more looking through all my cds for the sound drivers), it had an OFFICE SUITE. All this for free.

It could do everything my windows installation could, just more safely and faster. Boot up times reduced from 5 minutes to 1 minute, and I don't even have to install an ANTI VIRUS nor any kind of ANTI SPYWARE software. There's no little widget calling home to make sure I haven't pirated Ubuntu and the comunity simply rocks. Sure, I may have to actually read the instructions and understand them to get some stuff to work (like Bluetooth), but it's educational so it's cool.

So far I've had less problems in Ubuntu for these 5 days than I had on my first day of the Windows installation.

Yea, windows is amazing, ALL BOW TO MASTER GATES :-|

kopilo
September 6th, 2006, 02:44 PM
I recommend still putting in place anti-spyware tools, such as the NoScript, and Adblock extentions for Mozilla browers. As well as having your cookies set so you have to say if a website can or can not set a cookie.

It wouldn't surprise me if some tracker cookies were cross platform, well in the way they work.

caiman64
September 6th, 2006, 02:54 PM
We should email DELL to ask them to sell PCs without operating system or better... with Debian or Ubuntu pre-installed at no cost!!!... well maybe at some cost so that we can have the Ubuntu support for a year!\\:D/

You can get servers from DELL without operating systems... why can´t we get PCs without OS too!!??:confused:

You cannot update the BIOs from a DELL PC without Windows... they offer a program to do it but works only on windows...](*,)

Regards
Carlos

redDEADresolve
September 6th, 2006, 03:29 PM
XGL, it hard to go back after using it.

kopilo
September 6th, 2006, 03:44 PM
*delete this*

silver
September 6th, 2006, 08:11 PM
We should email DELL to ask them to sell PCs without operating system or better... with Debian or Ubuntu pre-installed at no cost!!!... well maybe at some cost so that we can have the Ubuntu support for a year!\\:D/

You can get servers from DELL without operating systems... why can´t we get PCs without OS too!!??:confused:

You cannot update the BIOs from a DELL PC without Windows... they offer a program to do it but works only on windows...](*,)

Regards
Carlos

Dell, HP and most other OEM's use customized BIOS interfaces. And no OEM would insall a Linux OS they couldn't support on a minimal level. For instance Dell installs RHEL on some of their systems (Precision Workstations) and HP still has their HP-UX OS.

silver
September 6th, 2006, 09:37 PM
1) Well maybe those users do need those applications!

No, they don't. Nobody _needs_ KaZaa. Nobody needs 5 different media players. Nobody needs to have 3 email clients and 3 chat programs.



2) You often brag about how good all those windows applications are, what good are they if you cannot install them? You even mention that you cannot use even IE, Outlook and OE! Wow great OS!

Well at least the OS comes with software as opposed to Linux which is simply the kernel. Also, while I certainly wouldn't use OE due to the number of idiots writing hacks for it, it does satisfy the average user. What is the native email client for Linux again ? Oh, that's right. There isn't one. Just as there isn't a native browser or GUI. Hmmmm, let's think about that for a moment. No native GUI or applications. Hmmmmm, maybe that's why Windows XP is the desktop OS of choice for billions while Linux is relegated to being third well behind Mac OSX.


3) Linux does not get bogged down by the applications you install, you can install as many as you want as often as you want and it runs just fine, it's a windows-only feature

I have my doubts that it's Windows-only however I concede that Linux is not impacted the same. Then again Linux apps are slower right out of the box anyway.


It's not a CPU problem! As microsoft says, after a while EVERYTHING becomes slower, even if you uninstall all the applications you have (assuming you manage to uninstall things... which is not always obvious), the system is still slower than when you first installed windows.

Yep. Windows registry. I try to avoid applications that have too high of a registry load just for this reason.



Sure just use notepad and mspaint, quick to install and you will not have problems! Only catch: do not use those preinstalled programs that connect to the rest of the world! This way you can enjoy an OS that is compatible with lots and lots of aps. Just don't touch them, and you will happy!

Or you can just do like you do in Linux and use all of the non-native applications that you install after the OS is installed.




That is utterly impossible...

Linux divides the file system according to the access type. So all your static system config files are in one place, separated by user config files, runtime access files (caches, DB...) are in predetermined folders (/var), libraries are in predetermined folders (/lib /usr/lib), binaries are in a separate folders, documents are have their own folders, icons have their own folders. If you think you can replicate that with 3 pathetic windows partitions you are way off. Just look in any windows application folder, you will find executables, configuration files, data storage, libraries, icons, documents.... plus registry settings, plus other files spread randomly around the system.

Amazing. So where are the config files in Windows ? C:\Documents and Settings\Username\Application Data. And where are the applications ? C:\Program Files. And where are the Windows system files ? C:\Windows\System32 or C:\Windows\System. Documents, music and images ? C:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\MyDocuments (\Music and \My Pictures).

SWING AND A MISS ! C'MON BATTER !!!!

aysiu
September 6th, 2006, 09:42 PM
Well at least the OS comes with software as opposed to Linux which is simply the kernel. Also, while I certainly wouldn't use OE due to the number of idiots writing hacks for it, it does satisfy the average user. What is the native email client for Linux again ? Oh, that's right. There isn't one. Just as there isn't a native browser or GUI. Hmmmm, let's think about that for a moment. No native GUI or applications. Hmmmmm, maybe that's why Windows XP is the desktop OS of choice for billions while Linux is relegated to being third well behind Mac OSX. This doesn't make any sense. What Linux distribution comes with only the kernel and no software? Every major Linux distribution has default applications for office, email, web browser, and music. What office suite does Windows come with?

You buy a Windows preloaded computer and have a bunch of Excel documents. You try to open them... oops! Can't! You run Ubuntu without installing any additional software, and Ubuntu knows to open those Excel documents with OpenOffice. Ah, the irony...

Maybe you'll swing and hit next time...

cstudent
September 6th, 2006, 09:52 PM
You can always spot those that have MS certification.

insane_alien
September 6th, 2006, 09:54 PM
wow silver. you haven't used linux AT ALL have you? even the lightest of distros(DSL) comes with several browsers, an office suite and email client. and even, yes even, a fully operational GUI(namely fluxbox)

since its obvious that you have never used linux (at least since it evolved from CLI only) the i would say that you are not in a fit position to argue one way or the other about linux.

install ubuntu. then come back and tell us that it is not a fully operational OS. or even use the liveCD mode. and if you use the live CD mode do not come back and complain that it is slow and laggy. of course it is. its a compressed filesystem and from a CD. it needs a bit more time physically than a HDD install.

darrenm
September 6th, 2006, 10:02 PM
You can always spot those that have MS certification.

lol, was thinking exactly the same. Its ok Silver, your MCSE wasnt all wasted, you got a nice badge.

DoctorMO
September 6th, 2006, 11:36 PM
I'm just stunned by silvers ignorance and rudeness, I know a .Net developer. very heavy Windows user, not convinced by FLOSS at all. and he isn't this stupid; at least when we argue we both learn something about each others views and where we had misconceptions and where our biases lie.

silver is just trying to pick a fight, a troll who goes under the guise of someone looking for a fair argument.

ago
September 7th, 2006, 01:39 AM
Well at least the OS comes with software as opposed to Linux which is simply the kernel. Also, while I certainly wouldn't use OE due to the number of idiots writing hacks for it, it does satisfy the average user. What is the native email client for Linux again ? Oh, that's right. There isn't one. Just as there isn't a native browser or GUI. Hmmmm, let's think about that for a moment. No native GUI or applications.
Hmmm interesting theories we add them to your pile of famous statements.


Then again Linux apps are slower right out of the box anyway.
And this...


Yep. Windows registry. I try to avoid applications that have too high of a registry load just for this reason.
But weren't you windows "experts" claiming that the windows registry is sooo good that it needs no cleaning? "high registry load"? I guess they should add a monitor for that too together with CPU and memory, what do you think?


Or you can just do like you do in Linux and use all of the non-native applications that you install after the OS is installed.
You make it sound like you need to run IE within QEmu to be able to browse the internet on Linux... Not only you are a windows expert but quite obviously a linux one as well. I am impressed...


Amazing. So where are the config files in Windows ?
Sometimes in the registry, sometimes in the application folder, sometimes in Application Data, sometimes in Local Settings, sometimes in All users application data, sometimes in all users local settings, sometimes in more than one place at once. If you want to copy ALL the system and user settings of say 10 apps to a different machine, how do you do that in windows?


And where are the applications ? C:\Program Files.
Interesting, after reading this, I went to look for solitaire in C:\Program Files, but it wasn't there... How comes? And when I looked into one of the folders in there I found libraries, icons, data files, documents, settings, databases... A linux /usr folder can be made read only. Have you ever tried to make C:\Program Files read only? What happens? A linux /usr folder is shareable, which means I can just copy it to another Ubuntu machine and all apps will be working. Have you ever tried to copy C:\Program Files to another machine?


And where are the Windows system files ?C:\Windows\System32 or C:\Windows\System.
Which also happens to be the place where the applications drop some (but not all, it would be too easy) of their libraries... So not exactly "system" files... And again, in the "system files" you will find happily mixed together: libraries, executables, configuration files, documents, calculator, drivers, screensavers, kernel, pinball...

And I do not even dare to ask you what is the equivalent of /var in windows...

silver
September 7th, 2006, 02:22 AM
BTW, I note that Dell does in fact offer the BIN files for updating the BIOS of their Precision workstations that don't have Windows installed on them.

silver
September 7th, 2006, 05:57 AM
This doesn't make any sense. What Linux distribution comes with only the kernel and no software? Every major Linux distribution has default applications for office, email, web browser, and music. What office suite does Windows come with?

You buy a Windows preloaded computer and have a bunch of Excel documents. You try to open them... oops! Can't! You run Ubuntu without installing any additional software, and Ubuntu knows to open those Excel documents with OpenOffice. Ah, the irony...

Maybe you'll swing and hit next time...

Lemme get this straight. You can install Linux without Gnome, without KDE and you can run Firefox ? No, you cannot. My point. Windows is built COMPLETELY around the GUI. C-O-M-P-L-E-T-E-L-Y ! Linux never has been built around the GUI. Guess what kind of files you can open in Linux ? Text. Manpages. Heck we could do that in DOS with Note !

In case the n00bs here don't know, Linux is an Operating System. The GUI is installed as an add-on much as Media Center is installed in Windows MCE. KDE, Gnome, XFCE, Blackbox, Fluxbox (my favorite), whatever. They're all add-ons.

Come to think of it, Linux reminds me a good deal of Windows 98 with multithreading and a 32 bit DOS with good record keeping. Yeah, exit to DOS and edit a bunch of scripts/ini's/whatever to get something working. Not my idea of a fun time.

Kindred
September 7th, 2006, 08:14 AM
Lemme get this straight. You can install Linux without Gnome, without KDE and you can run Firefox ? No, you cannot. My point. Windows is built COMPLETELY around the GUI. C-O-M-P-L-E-T-E-L-Y ! Linux never has been built around the GUI. Guess what kind of files you can open in Linux ? Text. Manpages. Heck we could do that in DOS with Note !

In case the n00bs here don't know, Linux is an Operating System. The GUI is installed as an add-on much as Media Center is installed in Windows MCE. KDE, Gnome, XFCE, Blackbox, Fluxbox (my favorite), whatever. They're all add-ons.

Come to think of it, Linux reminds me a good deal of Windows 98 with multithreading and a 32 bit DOS with good record keeping. Yeah, exit to DOS and edit a bunch of scripts/ini's/whatever to get something working. Not my idea of a fun time.

You're not making much sense, to me at least. The whole concept of Unix is based around this modularity (read about the Unix philosophy). That Linux is modular in this way allows for me to remove the gui for a server install if I wish, change my window manager at will and allows for the vast number of varied distributions out there. And that's just a few of the benefits that are available to me as a user... the advantages to programmers of this method of development are numerous.

Really at this point, you're getting a little ridiculous and not making a whole lot of sense. Besides, why are you here anyway? I'm not sure I understand.. if you like Windows, why not just use it? Whining here doesn't achieve so much.

darrenm
September 7th, 2006, 08:30 AM
Lemme get this straight. You can install Linux without Gnome, without KDE and you can run Firefox ? No, you cannot. My point. Windows is built COMPLETELY around the GUI. C-O-M-P-L-E-T-E-L-Y ! Linux never has been built around the GUI. Guess what kind of files you can open in Linux ? Text. Manpages. Heck we could do that in DOS with Note !

In case the n00bs here don't know, Linux is an Operating System. The GUI is installed as an add-on much as Media Center is installed in Windows MCE. KDE, Gnome, XFCE, Blackbox, Fluxbox (my favorite), whatever. They're all add-ons.

Come to think of it, Linux reminds me a good deal of Windows 98 with multithreading and a 32 bit DOS with good record keeping. Yeah, exit to DOS and edit a bunch of scripts/ini's/whatever to get something working. Not my idea of a fun time.

Ok this proves it to me that you're a troll. I wasn't sure before and was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that you were just ill-informed, reliatory and confused but now I can see you're obviously winding people up on purpose.

BTW Linux is a kernel not an operating system. GNU/Linux is an operating system. Ubuntu is a distribution.

Linux is nothing like Windows 98. For many, many reasons I can't be bothered to go into here they are completely different.

Reshin
September 7th, 2006, 09:45 AM
Um...wasn't this thread about personal preferences of using linux instead of XP? This looks like a flamewar to me :???:

ago
September 7th, 2006, 09:51 AM
Um...wasn't this thread about personal preferences of using linux instead of XP? This looks like a flamewar to me :???:

There is a not so subtle distinction between preferences and bs...

DoctorMO
September 7th, 2006, 10:03 AM
agreed

FFred
September 7th, 2006, 10:46 AM
my suggestions if you play games: dual boot with windows (games) and ubuntu (everything else) This is basically what I've been doing for the last 10 years with a number of distros. The last version of Windows I used for anything not game-related was Win 3.11.

I suppose I could fiddle around with Wine to run the games but it's frankly not worth the effort. I consider my "waste" of 40 gigs of disk space and my occasional dual booting is pretty much in the same category to me as buying a gaming console. Except that I never really could get into console games (I tried once with a PS2 a friend lent me). So all in all it's a fair solution.

The only drawback is that I can no longer "use" Windows. The interface is painful (mostly because of the click to focus, focus to front thing that I really have trouble with, also the lack of virtual desktops) and doesn't make much sense anymore. I no longer understand what the machine does (assuming that I *mostly* did back in DOS days). And I don't even know where to find documentation for the most basic things. The technical MS website is mostly garbage compared to any Unix doc. Luckily nowadays I only have to click on Ghost Recon or Battlefield menus.

IMO that's the biggest problem (if you want to see it that way), once you've left, you can't go back.

suhaib
September 7th, 2006, 10:57 AM
For university, for work, but now I'm starting to use it at home.

silver
September 7th, 2006, 11:10 AM
Ok this proves it to me that you're a troll. I wasn't sure before and was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that you were just ill-informed, reliatory and confused but now I can see you're obviously winding people up on purpose.

Yes, it makes them think for themseelves and gets their collective heads out of the Kool-Aid troughs. Although I think your assumption of my level knowledge is not only incomplete but irrational as well.


BTW Linux is a kernel not an operating system. GNU/Linux is an operating system. Ubuntu is a distribution.

Linux is nothing like Windows 98. For many, many reasons I can't be bothered to go into here they are completely different.

Yes, Linux is the kernel and the kernel _IS_ the OS. GNU/Linux is a combination of GNU software and the Linux OS. And yes, Ubuntu is definitely a distro.

Now, will you concede that the OS (Linux) is not specifically designed around desktop/workstation usage ?

silver
September 7th, 2006, 11:16 AM
You're not making much sense, to me at least. The whole concept of Unix is based around this modularity (read about the Unix philosophy). That Linux is modular in this way allows for me to remove the gui for a server install if I wish, change my window manager at will and allows for the vast number of varied distributions out there. And that's just a few of the benefits that are available to me as a user... the advantages to programmers of this method of development are numerous.

I'm well aware of the benfits of modularity but I'm also aware of the limitations of building "something that can be anything". It doesn't do most things any better than something more specialized and in some cases it actually performs significantly poorer. Would you use a car to hall cement ? Or a large truck as a commuter vehicle ? No. You would get the right tools for the job.

BTW, you do not "remove the GUI" from Linux. There is no GUI in Linux. You simply opt not to install one of the add-on's that is usually included with a distro.


Really at this point, you're getting a little ridiculous and not making a whole lot of sense. Besides, why are you here anyway? I'm not sure I understand.. if you like Windows, why not just use it? Whining here doesn't achieve so much.

Do I like Windows ? Not particularly. Unfortunately I don't see a viable alternative. And by "whining" I assume that you mean that I am challenging the close-mindedness of the Linux n00bs. It's good to "stir the pot" now and then.

pufuwozu
September 7th, 2006, 11:29 AM
Yes, Linux is the kernel and the kernel _IS_ the OS. GNU/Linux is a combination of GNU software and the Linux OS.

Wrong, Linux is a kernel. A kernel is the most important part to nearly all operating systems but that doesn't make it a complete operating system. Ubuntu is a complete operating system, Linux by itself is not.

silver
September 7th, 2006, 11:33 AM
Hmmm interesting theories we add them to your pile of famous statements.

So do you contend that there is a native GUI in Linux ? A psuedo-native email client ? C'mon ! I'm trying to be reasonable here but you're in complete denial. Windows was designed solely around the GUI since v.3.0. Linux is designed to be a POSIX compliant server OS. One that was NOT written for a GUI and makes one of the best server OS'es available. Probably second only to BSD.


Then again Linux apps are slower right out of the box anyway.

And you deny that apps in Linux are slower and generally less capable than they are in Windows XP ?



But weren't you windows "experts" claiming that the windows registry is sooo good that it needs no cleaning? "high registry load"? I guess they should add a monitor for that too together with CPU and memory, what do you think?

Nope. I've always stated that the Windows registry is a good thing as long as you don't load a bunch of unnecessary junk in it. Loading in applications like KaZaa that drop in 50~100 registry entries is just another way of looking for trouble.


You make it sound like you need to run IE within QEmu to be able to browse the internet on Linux... Not only you are a windows expert but quite obviously a linux one as well. I am impressed...

No, I make it seem just like I stated, in my opinion one should run a non-native web browser on any OS be it Mac, Windows or Linux. That means that you should run Firefox, Opera, Links or some other application. On Linux this is a given as there no native browser however I note that a lot of the code from Mozilla seems to have made it's way into the GUI's.



Sometimes in the registry, sometimes in the application folder, sometimes in Application Data, sometimes in Local Settings, sometimes in more than one place at once. Just try to backup the settings of all applications in one go and see how easy it is in windows...

Backup ? Yeah, i just clone my drives. 2 X 160's -> 2 X 160's. Real hard to do using Acronis.



With the libraries, icons, data files, documents, some of the settings, databases... A /usr folder can be made read only. Just try to make C:\Program Files read only and see what happens...

Quote:
And where are the Windows system files ?C:\Windows\System32 or C:\Windows\System.
Which also happens to be the place where the applications drop some (but not all, it would be too easy) of their libraries... So not exactly "system" files... And again, in the "system files" you will find happily mixed together: libraries, executables, icons, documents, calculator, drivers, bitmaps, screensavers, kernel, pinball...

And I do not even dare to ask you what is the equivalent of /var in windows...

Who cares ? Am I running a server ? Do I need a gazillion logs about how I use my system ? Jeez I guess Event Viewer is just to simplistic !

silver
September 7th, 2006, 11:44 AM
Wrong, Linux is a kernel. A kernel is the most important part to nearly all operating systems but that doesn't make it a complete operating system. Ubuntu is a complete operating system, Linux by itself is not.

Ubuntu is a distribution of a group of softwares that run on Linux. Linux is the operating system. Gnome is the interface. Ubuntu and other distributions are packages of programs, interfaces, installers and a OS.

ago
September 7th, 2006, 12:31 PM
So do you contend that there is a native GUI in Linux ?
Yes I do...

Learn what "native" means first... By that you mean "built-in within the OS", and it is not what it means...

Yes Linux does have several native GUIs, but no built-in-the-kernel GUI. And that is a MAJOR advantage, for reasons I and others have already explained but that you pretend to ignore.


A psuedo-native email client ?
Yes Linux does have several native email clients. And by the way, you claimed that the "built-in" email clients that ship with Windows shoud not be used... I take your word for it...


Windows was designed solely around the GUI since v.3.0.
And that is wrong too. Original windows versions (including 3.0) had a graphical interface sitting on top of Dos. And when NT originally came out (on which Xp and Vista are based) the GDI was NOT incorporated into the kernel until NT 4.0. And for the record , Dave Cutler, the creator of Windows NT, was not too happy about the decision...


Linux is designed to be a POSIX compliant server OS.
A posix compliant "OS"... "server OS" is your invention... A posix compliant OS can become anything. Even your Tivo is based on a POSIX compliant OS...


And you deny that apps in Linux are slower
Yes I do


and generally less capable than they are in Windows XP ?
There are some specific apps in Windows that are more featureful. But nothing costing less than $200 a piece, and those features would be irrelevant for most users (unless you need professional CAD, certified accounting software, 16bit image editing...). For normal tasks the applications that come with Ubuntu are superior to the windows counterparts... Particularly the "built-in" counterparts...


Nope. I've always stated that the Windows registry is a good thing as long as you don't load a bunch of unnecessary junk in it. Loading in applications like KaZaa that drop in 50~100 registry entries is just another way of looking for trouble.
A "good thing" should be working well irrespective of the load (see linux). 50-100 entries is peanuts for today's machines. If that can kneel a central piece like the registry it simply means that the resistry is not as good as you claim. Nor can the OS that uses such a weak central piece be any better.



in my opinion one should run a non-native web browser on any OS be it Mac, Windows or Linux.
Except that in Windows the browser is "native", in the sense that is built-in... One of its advantages I suppose...


On Linux this is a given as there no native browser however I note that a lot of the code from Mozilla seems to have made it's way into the GUI's.
Please call a translator


Backup ? Yeah, i just clone my drives. 2 X 160's -> 2 X 160's. Real hard to do using Acronis.
Hmmm no I do not want to know how you clone your drives, I asked how you can copy the settings of 10 apps to a different machine. I assume it will be easy to do in your easy to use OS...


Who cares ? Am I running a server ? Do I need a gazillion logs about how I use my system ? Jeez I guess Event Viewer is just to simplistic !
/var is not just for logs, there is a far deeper meaning to it that somehow eludes you...

pufuwozu
September 7th, 2006, 12:38 PM
Ubuntu is a distribution of a group of softwares that run on Linux. Linux is the operating system. Gnome is the interface. Ubuntu and other distributions are packages of programs, interfaces, installers and a OS.

The packages of programs, interfaces, installers and the kernel is what makes an operating system, also know as a distribution. Linux is only a kernel. Try installing and running only the Linux kernel, you'll have no use for it because it's only a kernel. That's why you need the programs to make it a full operating system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernel_(computer_science)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system

Reshin
September 7th, 2006, 12:48 PM
An the point of all this is...? What does it have to do with what one likes to use?

darrenm
September 7th, 2006, 12:56 PM
Yes you're right it should be. So back on track:

Windows XP is easy to use for everyday tasks. Its designed to be used by people with very little computing experience therefore a lot of things are easy to do and to be fair to it, it does trundle along fine and not give much trouble with installed on decent hardware.

I've had Windows XP installed in various ways since it came out. I used to work for an OEM where the PC's are setup using sysprep onto stored images which also gave us a slipstream way of installing which could be burnt to a CD and as long as the DMI string of the BIOS matched what sysprep was looking for, sysprep disabled the activation and didnt ask for the serial number either.

I still have the CD's with SLP XP pro, home, MCE etc and I still have the programs to edit DMI strings in most BIOS' to the one its looking for. So I can install XP onto almost any PC I like without activation, WGA or license key problems. I also have a legit XP pro license key so I'm perfectly legal if I choose to run WinXP.

But with all that I still prefer not to run Windows XP. The only thing I miss is not being able to play rollercoaster tycoon 3 but to me it is worth it.

When I worked for this OEM I was allowed to develop a PC to run Linux. At the time we shipped Mandrake 9.2 on an NForce2 based mainboard with CD-writer, DVD, 6 channel audio, 3d-accelerated VGA etc. It was a superb machine and we actually sold quite a few with virtually zero support calls raised.

Then Microsoft came in and suddenly the PC's were taken out the brochures with no explanation to me. About the same sort of time the company started the Microsoft MDA (Microsoft Development Agreement) A.K.A. fastboot which gives up to around $15 of kickbacks off an XP license depending on the milestones you meet.

To get one milestone all the PC's had to boot from pressing the power button to a useable desktop in under 35 seconds, had to resume from hibernate (suspend to disk ACPI S4) within 25 seconds and resume from standby (suspend to ram ACPI S3) within 5 seconds. Of course lots of hardware simply wouldn't do this so we were forced to in turn force the mainboard manufacturers to hack their BIOS's to do certain non-standards compliant things to get them to work, same with VGA BIOS etc.

Effectively Microsoft were forcing the OEM to only buy hardware that worked with Windows and it didnt matter if it broke anything else. Then there was WHQL...

To pass the next milestone you had to only use hardware and drivers that were WHQL certified. (windows hardware quality labs) Hardware vendors had to send their products to Microsoft to be tested with Windows XP and given a certification where they can use the Designed for Windows logo on the packaging and POS.

They also had to submit the drivers which invariably wouldnt pass the HCT tests and would need to be modified etc. They all had to do this otherwise no OEM that wants to put designed for Windows XP logos on their products (most medium to large OEMs) would buy anything from them. No wonder manufacturers have no time left to check stuff works with Linux.

That is the first part of why I have such a strong dislike of Microsoft. They have very shady business practices that I have experienced first hand and I don't want to support a company (by using their product) that operates in this way.

The second main reason I don't run Windows any more is because I am actually very worried that XP could be phoning home with any kind of information they want to and theres no way of knowing what. I find WGA astounding in that no-one minds having to prove themselves innocent and then cope with all the problems that ensue.

Ubuntu does everything I want to apart from let me play RCT3. I much prefer the stability of the ext3 FS compared to NTFS (NTFS may be faster though) and I much prefer the way everything works. Even if it wasn't free I would pay to get something of this quality.

I think if GNU/Linux wants world domination then Ubuntu is the best avenue and OEM's are the best avenue for Ubuntu. Once a semi-large OEM starts realising that Linux on the desktop isnt the large scale joke it was a few years ago then the scales will tip.

I used to think eventually this whole OS war would be settled with Micrsoft winning the desktop and Linux winning the server side. I now think it will happen the other way around.

Ubuntu as it stands is fantastic for the 2 extremes. Its brilliant for very high-tech users and also for very low-tech users. People who are not yet Microsoft institutionalised will find Ubuntu a lot easier to do simple tasks and even more advanced tasks on than Windows XP / Vista. The main problem demographic is the mid-tech user. The person who has all their Windows developed gizmos and doesnt have the time or inclination to mess with a few text file to get them working. As I say, once the OEM swing starts happening that problem will disappear.

Ramble over, thanks for reading if you got this far.

ago
September 7th, 2006, 12:58 PM
An the point of all this is...? What does it have to do with what one likes to use?

For istance if the GUI is built-in, and you want to play with an old machine, you cannot just use a light-weight GUI like you can with linux, at best you have to use an old os with an old gui... If the GUI is built-in, the system becomes inevitably more unstable and unsecure which in turns costs you time and money... If the GUI is built-in, you can only learn the GUI, you will never understand how your OS works, and your knoledge will last until the next GUI comes out.

xhaan
September 7th, 2006, 01:02 PM
An the point of all this is...? What does it have to do with what one likes to use?

I suppose the point is trying to answer the OP's question:


Basically I dont see any advantages to using linux over windows xp, Im dual booting windows and ubuntu. Ubuntu is nice and all but I dont see anything that would make me prefer it over windows.The only thing i have been using ubuntu for is web browsing playing music/movies (cant play games) which I can do better/hassle free in windows.

So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?

...while in the mean time debating with a linux user who's apparently been here since last year but most of his posts seem to be made in this thread starting a week ago to play 'devil's advocate' and argue the superiority of Windows over Linux...

ago
September 7th, 2006, 01:43 PM
Ubuntu as it stands is fantastic for the 2 extremes. Its brilliant for very high-tech users and also for very low-tech users. People who are not yet Microsoft institutionalised will find Ubuntu a lot easier to do simple tasks and even more advanced tasks on than Windows XP / Vista. The main problem demographic is the mid-tech user. The person who has all their Windows developed gizmos and doesnt have the time or inclination to mess with a few text file to get them working. As I say, once the OEM swing starts happening that problem will disappear.

I completely agree with you. The mid-tech guys are the ones that will not (and probably should not) switch. Until XGL/AIGLX works well that is...

And by the way the OEM section was a nice read, but I cannot say I was surprised, thx for posting.

DoctorMO
September 7th, 2006, 01:46 PM
I agree, thanks for posting the OEM story.

I'm against silver as a person, I don't care about his views any more. his attitude is just wrong for this community.

On a lighter note I know there are a lot of good Programmers at Microsoft that rue their bosses micro management.

elpuerco
September 7th, 2006, 02:11 PM
I began reading this thread with interest, then humour at Silver's ramblings and then with boredom at how it turned into a flame war.

I am all for free speech but not to the point where it turns into a drawn out war of words going over and over the same ground.

I gather for the most part Silver's comments are not agreed with and are found rather annoying.

Why not let him have his say, that is only fair, but why respond to them only to perpertuate him getting his jollies off?

Stick to topic, life is too short.

:)

silver
September 7th, 2006, 02:32 PM
If the GUI is built-in, the system becomes inevitably more unstable and unsecure

More unsupported factoids ? Perhaps you'd care to post a study on this ? And if have an integrated GUI is costing comapies so much, why are they still using Windows ? Hmmm, letsee, could be that :

A) It in fact is not costing anything as you're belief is false.

B) The combined ease of installation and use of a workstation with a consistent theme/configuration across applications requires less training and support for low level usage.

And come to think of it, about that instability, I haven't seen an actual BSOD in over a year and half. Pretty amazing considering the building I work in has over 4000 systems. Must be that all of that instability landed somewhere else !

Demio
September 7th, 2006, 02:38 PM
Hey guys, stop feeding the troll. If he's such a windows lover he can have it's babies for all that I care. All I know is that im satisfied with Ubuntu, and I don't need to prove my opinion to anyone, nor make their opinion mine.

Whatever floats your boat...

silver
September 7th, 2006, 02:41 PM
I began reading this thread with interest, then humour at Silver's ramblings and then with boredom at how it turned into a flame war.

I am all for free speech but not to the point where it turns into a drawn out war of words going over and over the same ground.

I gather for the most part Silver's comments are not agreed with and are found rather annoying.

Why not let him have his say, that is only fair, but why respond to them only to perpertuate him getting his jollies off?

Stick to topic, life is too short.

:)

You call this a flame war ? Do most people in these forums overstate everything ? I don't mean to be annoying. I just want people to admit the truth. To themselves at least if not to others. There are several good reasons why Windows outnumbers linux on the desktop about 999:1. I'm all for the GNU movement and as previously noted I'll gladly shred my license the day I can completely switch to another OS. Mac seems to be a lot closer than Linux for now. I was hoping I was wrong but nobody's convinced me of that. All I've read is how unstable and unsecure Windows is and not how Linux can do anything better than Windows. I guess I have to conclude that it simply can't. Ah well i see that the latest version of Gentoo is finally out. Perhaps I'll go install that this weekend and see if they have something to offer.

darrenm
September 7th, 2006, 03:19 PM
ok, what do you need Windows for that Ubuntu can't provide for you? Which applications can you not find a viable Linux alternative for?

The only good reason why Windows outnumbers Linux on the desktop is purely because of software abvailability. There is no technical advantage Windows has over Linux.

Kindred
September 7th, 2006, 04:03 PM
You call this a flame war ? Do most people in these forums overstate everything ? I don't mean to be annoying. I just want people to admit the truth. To themselves at least if not to others. There are several good reasons why Windows outnumbers linux on the desktop about 999:1. I'm all for the GNU movement and as previously noted I'll gladly shred my license the day I can completely switch to another OS. Mac seems to be a lot closer than Linux for now. I was hoping I was wrong but nobody's convinced me of that. All I've read is how unstable and unsecure Windows is and not how Linux can do anything better than Windows. I guess I have to conclude that it simply can't. Ah well i see that the latest version of Gentoo is finally out. Perhaps I'll go install that this weekend and see if they have something to offer.

Well Linux isn't necessarily for everyone, think most would agree with that. Perhaps it just isn't for you, good luck with Gentoo though.

ago
September 7th, 2006, 04:16 PM
Yeah Gentoo is really a nice choice for someone complaining about lack of built-in gui in the kernel...

nothingworks
September 7th, 2006, 05:41 PM
I dip my toes in linux time to time to see what the latest hype is about, with a hope to switch. I'm always disappointed by what I find :( .
I'm far more productive in windows, All I do in linux is tweak ,restart,repeat trying to get hardware/software working piece by piece.

In Linux I'm only 10% productive & 90% of my time goes into "fixing" things.

Linux is good *only* when you have popular hardware, and a small set of applications that you need to use. Like a kiosk PC.

Even win98SE beats the pants off of ubuntu 6.06 on my P3 PC.

ago
September 7th, 2006, 06:04 PM
6.1(0)??? that is not the right one... use 6.6...

As for the hardware, try the liveCD first, if everything works you are good to go, otherwise A) try it on different hardware, B) check it back in 6M. Ubuntu will work on most machines, but not on all, use the liveCD to check if it works for you before installing anything. By the way, on a P3, you probably want to use Xubuntu (Dapper)

aysiu
September 7th, 2006, 06:55 PM
nothingworks, I take it you've never studied another language, lived abroad, or moved to another country, then?

Switching operating systems is a lot like any of those situations--you have to learn a new language, a new culture, a new way of thinking. Many things will seem strange, inefficient, or confusing to you.

When you learn a new language, the syntax, vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammar will make no sense to you. You will actually think English makes sense and wonder how people can communicate with those other noises.

I am a lot less efficient when I read in Spanish. Does that mean that Spanish is lacking in some way as a language? It just means I'm used to English.

Same with you--you're used to Windows. I, too, was like that even a year and a half ago. Everything in Linux seemed a challenge, a tweak, a fix. It was all troubleshooting and no productivity. Well, now that I know a bit more about Ubuntu, the shoe is on the other foot--using my Windows computer at work, I feel sluggish and unproductive. I can't troubleshoot applications that fail to start or refuse to close no matter how much I Control-Alt-Delete. At home, everything just seems to work with Ubuntu, and I'm far more productive.

nothingworks
September 7th, 2006, 07:59 PM
nothingworks, I take it you've never studied another language, lived abroad, or moved to another country, then?
I use Linux and AIX at work and dont need multimedia or non essential hardware to work, so I'm ok there.
I have installed and used various versions of RedHat, Suse, Fedora and QNX before. I script in perl, csh, awk etc so there is no lack of variety there.

I'm a programmer (linguist), If I have so many problems then how are normal folks ever going to do this?

aysiu
September 7th, 2006, 08:15 PM
I'm not a programmer. If I'm not having so many problems, how are you having so many problems?

And, in answer to your question, normal folks will do this only when preinstalled Linux desktops/laptops become more readily available. As long as people have to install their own operating systems, normal folks will never use that operating system.

The preinstalled/preconfigured operating system will always win.

xhaan
September 7th, 2006, 08:22 PM
I'm normal folk and I did it just fine. :p
I ended up burning a lot of coasters for distros I couldn't get to work or found out I didn't want, and it took me a couple days to get my Ubuntu system set up the way I want it, but that's all done now and it works. There's no constant 'fixing things' for me since theyre already 'fixed'.

nothingworks
September 7th, 2006, 08:35 PM
how are you having so many problems?

It because I'm using old hardware (is'nt that one of the reasons people use linux)



The preinstalled/preconfigured operating system will always win.
I've never bought a preinstalled PC before, and every pirated version of windows I've setup on custom/old hardware has been a success (9x,ME,2K,2K Server, XP, 2003). The same old hardware is a nightmare on linux.

aysiu
September 7th, 2006, 08:39 PM
It because I'm using old hardware (is'nt that one of the reasons people use linux) Actually, one of my Ubuntu computers is from five years ago--766 MHz, 128 MB RAM eMachines, and it works just fine. How old, exactly, are you talking about?



I've never bought a preinstalled PC before, and every pirated version of windows I've setup on custom/old hardware has been a success (9x,ME,2K,2K Server, XP, 2003). The same old hardware is a nightmare on linux. I thought we were talking about "normal folks" here. In any case, you can't argue that preinstalled is more difficult than self-built, even if you've been lucky with self-built PCs.

Your positive experience is not universal, however. I've installed Windows two times, and both times have been nightmares. All my Linux installations were a breeze. Should I then generalize that everyone should be able to install Linux distro because those installations were easy for me? If not, then there's no reason to generalize that everyone should be able to install Windows because those installations were easy for you.

Read my sig for more details.

Sh8kR
September 7th, 2006, 09:21 PM
Funny I see every reason to use Linux over Windows. But to sum it up in one word it is "Freedom". I like the freedom that Linux gives me over OSX or Windows. I get to destroy my system on a regular basis and then build it back up again. I get to solve real problems that let me truly learn how computers work. I get to compile kernels. I have never been given that freedom in any other operating system! So if you want to lead a normal users life then sure Windows is great. But if you want to truly learn then open your mind to the opportunity you are given with linux.

By the way I am not a big fan of Ubuntu for the same reason. I lose freedom by choosing it over Debian but I gain other tings so it is a fair trade off. That is until I figure out the way that Ubuntu does those things. And that is the joy of Linux learing new stuff.

nothingworks
September 7th, 2006, 09:21 PM
Actually, one of my Ubuntu computers is from five years ago--766 MHz, 128 MB RAM eMachines, and it works just fine. How old, exactly, are you talking about?
P3 700Mhz/128MB/Geforce 256/SoundBlaster AWE64 ISA/new Encore Network card (PCI)

I generalized (in that last sentence) because it is a one to one comparison with the same hardware, just different OSs

aysiu
September 7th, 2006, 09:26 PM
I generalized (in that last sentence) because it is a one to one comparison with the same hardware, just different OSs
But so were mine. Did you read the links in my sig?

SoundMachine
September 7th, 2006, 11:05 PM
You can always spot those that have MS certification.

Can you tell if I have one or perhaps even 4, perhaps even been involved in MS projects, can you tell?

Well, duh, of course you can't, you just have nothing to say besides spouting your crap as a good zealot.

I'm sorry but it's so typical and so extremely boring.

SoundMachine
September 7th, 2006, 11:11 PM
/ignore

silver
September 7th, 2006, 11:15 PM
I'm normal folk and I did it just fine. :p
I ended up burning a lot of coasters for distros I couldn't get to work or found out I didn't want, and it took me a couple days to get my Ubuntu system set up the way I want it, but that's all done now and it works. There's no constant 'fixing things' for me since theyre already 'fixed'.

And you have all of the applications that you need ? What do you use your system for ? Quite serious about this. I've tried and tried but I can't seem to find the "magic combination" of applications and UI for my use. Yet.

silver
September 7th, 2006, 11:23 PM
Can you tell if I have one or perhaps even 4, perhaps even been involved in MS projects, can you tell?

MSDBA ? That's one I'm working on. No hurry though as Access is so good that I figure it will keep me employeed just fixing it ;>)


Well, duh, of course you can't, you just have nothing to say
besides spouting your crap as a good zealot.

Kool-Aid is even better in the 21st century it seems.


I'm sorry but it's so typical and so extremely boring.

"Youth is wasted on the young." George Bernard Shaw

silver
September 7th, 2006, 11:31 PM
I'm not a programmer. If I'm not having so many problems, how are you having so many problems?

Probably as he has a higher demand for quality applications.


And, in answer to your question, normal folks will do this only when preinstalled Linux desktops/laptops become more readily available. As long as people have to install their own operating systems, normal folks will never use that operating system.

The preinstalled/preconfigured operating system will always win.

Partially correct however the clincher is simply that people want some modicum of assurance that the applications that they're using are going to be available and be supported. Take Quicken for instance. People expect to pay for something and that something should meet their criteria for ease of installation and use with some assurance of support and future stability. Linux and all of the apps have been in a constant state of flux for the last 10 years. One would be hard pressed to make a business case for using Linux in a small company. Small companies make up the vast majority of businesses in the US.

SoundMachine
September 8th, 2006, 12:02 AM
MSDBA ? That's one I'm working on. No hurry though as Access is so good that I figure it will keep me employeed just fixing it ;>)

Old Skool stuff, the project was NT4 kernel and later the resource kit.

Access is an abomination of a program that is patched together from four different versions. It's probably the crappiest DB solutions out there today.



Kool-Aid is even better in the 21st century it seems.

It's kinda sad that it's gone this far though. Saddest of all things is that the people who most vehemently despise Windows on the forums are the ones that still run it or will eventually go back to it completely, they just feel cool being "hip" with the "linux crowd" right now. In other threads you'll find them asking for help regarding problems that they could find in the man pages or through ONE google search.




"Youth is wasted on the young." George Bernard Shaw

It's so true in so many ways.

SoundMachine
September 8th, 2006, 12:06 AM
Probably as he has a higher demand for quality applications.

Well that isn't really true, most windows apps aren't high quality and most open source apps are, if you say, "high demand for crappy yet needed applications" then i'll agree with you.



Partially correct however the clincher is simply that people want some modicum of assurance that the applications that they're using are going to be available and be supported.

You have to be kidding me? While a company may fail and take the code with them, open souces is ALWAYS open and will be developed as long as there are people who use it.

aysiu
September 8th, 2006, 12:08 AM
Saddest of all things is that the people who most vehemently despise Windows on the forums are the ones that still run it or will eventually go back to it completely, they just feel cool being "hip" with the "linux crowd" right now. In other threads you'll find them asking for help regarding problems that they could find in the man pages or through ONE google search. Here's a classic example:
I abhor Microsoft with a deadly hatred (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=248289)

SoundMachine
September 8th, 2006, 12:21 AM
Here's a classic example:
I abhor Microsoft with a deadly hatred (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=248289)

That thread makes baby Jesus cry. :(

I bookmarked it for future reference to make just that point, thank you.

aysiu
September 8th, 2006, 12:28 AM
Some people call me a zealot, but I just don't think most of the "constructive criticism" leveled at Linux and/or Ubuntu is constructive at all, and if you ask me to cite the faults of the software, I'll create a list for you.

If you want to make a real difference, however, you'll contribute code, write documentation, file bug reports, or donate money. Spouting off the same old "Linux isn't ready for the desktop" BS doesn't really get Linux there any faster, does it?

But what SoundMachine says is true: most people who are adamant about Windows not being worthwhile in any way, most people who hate Windows with a passion end up using Windows or "needing" Windows. I happen to love Windows XP. I think it's a great operating system. I just happen to love Ubuntu more and think it's a better operating system for my needs.

SoundMachine
September 8th, 2006, 12:42 AM
Some people call me a zealot, but I just don't think most of the "constructive criticism" leveled at Linux and/or Ubuntu is constructive at all, and if you ask me to cite the faults of the software, I'll create a list for you.

If you want to make a real difference, however, you'll contribute code, write documentation, file bug reports, or donate money. Spouting off the same old "Linux isn't ready for the desktop" BS doesn't really get Linux there any faster, does it?

But what SoundMachine says is true: most people who are adamant about Windows not being worthwhile in any way, most people who hate Windows with a passion end up using Windows or "needing" Windows. I happen to love Windows XP. I think it's a great operating system. I just happen to love Ubuntu more and think it's a better operating system for my needs.

Oh i do hate XP with a passion at times, however, Vista is going to fix every problem i have ever had with it so i patienty await it.

Being in charge of 160+ who can install whatever they like if they can just get around a simple policy is a job for more than 10 people and i'm only one, with TPM and policy all that will change and that level of security leaves Linux far behind it.

I see TPM support in the Linux kernel though, and i hope there will soon be tools to deal with it, like securityfs implementations and fast group policies, maybe in 5-10 Linux will get there. :)

aysiu, it is very nice to run into people like you on these forums, it restores my firm belief that this forum is indeed one of the greatest in the Linux community. I hope you will excuse my sometimes rude language, i was brought up on usenet. ;)

silver
September 8th, 2006, 01:05 AM
Well that isn't really true, most windows apps aren't high quality and most open source apps are, if you say, "high demand for crappy yet needed applications" then i'll agree with you.

We have to differ here I guess. I see applications like CuteFTP Pro , Forte Agent and even MS FrontPage as being better than comparable Linux apps.


You have to be kidding me? While a company may fail and take the code with them, open souces is ALWAYS open and will be developed as long as there are people who use it.

Not at all. What usually happens when a developer stops developing ? Perhaps another application will take over but after a couple of revisions of the distro, the old apps are dropped. The cost of progress I guess but companies won't invest in something that isn't going to be around for a few years.

silver
September 8th, 2006, 01:14 AM
Some people call me a zealot, but I just don't think most of the "constructive criticism" leveled at Linux and/or Ubuntu is constructive at all,

Color me nietzchean I guess.


and if you ask me to cite the faults of the software, I'll create a list for you.

Actually what I asked for was a list of software that is comparable to what I use in Windows. If half of them were eaqually as good as what I use in Windows then I'd be making the switch ASAP.


If you want to make a real difference, however, you'll contribute code, write documentation, file bug reports, or donate money. Spouting off the same old "Linux isn't ready for the desktop" BS doesn't really get Linux there any faster, does it?

Perhaps not. It doesn't seem that anyone qualified to reply is paying attention.


But what SoundMachine says is true: most people who are adamant about Windows not being worthwhile in any way, most people who hate Windows with a passion end up using Windows or "needing" Windows.

I just don't like the way that Windows is going. Vista in particular. DRM and the whole thing of privacy or the lack thereof. I personally don't think this is completely Microsofts fault but rather pressures from companies like Sony. Even Microsoft would be hard pressed in a legal battle with Sony.


I happen to love Windows XP. I think it's a great operating system. I just happen to love Ubuntu more and think it's a better operating system for my needs.

XP works well but I'd rather move to open source softwares. Trying both Xubuntu and Gentoo soon as I get another drive. Jeez ! 5 hard drives !

DoctorMO
September 8th, 2006, 01:16 AM
It can always be picked up again, by anyone. this doesn't mean it will. it just means it could.

CuteFTP? I mean it's ok and everything but man that programs like 10 years old. even Windows Explorer has built in ftp that no body uses.

personaly I use konquorer for ftp, the ability to have split screens on two or more folders and profiles containing ftp/local file/network drive/http locations combined with kwallet password protection make cuteftp look like the windows 95 throw back it really is.

DoctorMO
September 8th, 2006, 01:18 AM
Actually what I asked for was a list of software that is comparable to what I use in Windows. If half of them were eaqually as good as what I use in Windows then I'd be making the switch ASAP.

We're not here to please you your majesty. get off your backside and do something for a change.

Demio
September 8th, 2006, 01:34 AM
We're not here to please you your majesty. get off your backside and do something for a change.

Exactly. Why do you figure we must convince you to get Ubuntu? If you don't want it then go for whatever floats your boat, but trolling in this forums is not very nice...:rolleyes:

SoundMachine
September 8th, 2006, 01:45 AM
We have to differ here I guess. I see applications like CuteFTP Pro , Forte Agent and even MS FrontPage as being better than comparable Linux apps.

LOL, no.



Not at all. What usually happens when a developer stops developing ? Perhaps another application will take over but after a couple of revisions of the distro, the old apps are dropped. The cost of progress I guess but companies won't invest in something that isn't going to be around for a few years.

Well, give me one example of that ever happening and i'll consider it.

(and this goes only for apps that are not being actively developed where no new replacement for them that is not backwards compatible exists).

I used to travel the EU to tell them about this new app working only on the new great OS win98 , another bloke were traveling introducing a Linux system with the same apps for measuring pellets, these days win98 is no longer supported, with any distro you could use the program i was selling, the users still support it and it's still being developed.

That is anecdotal i know, but it's how things work generally.

silver
September 8th, 2006, 01:47 AM
It can always be picked up again, by anyone. this doesn't mean it will. it just means it could.

CuteFTP? I mean it's ok and everything but man that programs like 10 years old. even Windows Explorer has built in ftp that no body uses.

personaly I use konquorer for ftp, the ability to have split screens on two or more folders and profiles containing ftp/local file/network drive/http locations combined with kwallet password protection make cuteftp look like the windows 95 throw back it really is.

Perhaps you aren't familiar with the "pro" version which is what I've used since v.2.0. http://www.cuteftp.com/cuteftppro/

SoundMachine
September 8th, 2006, 01:48 AM
It can always be picked up again, by anyone. this doesn't mean it will. it just means it could.

CuteFTP? I mean it's ok and everything but man that programs like 10 years old. even Windows Explorer has built in ftp that no body uses.

personaly I use konquorer for ftp, the ability to have split screens on two or more folders and profiles containing ftp/local file/network drive/http locations combined with kwallet password protection make cuteftp look like the windows 95 throw back it really is.

I love konqueror, it's my favourite and i can't wait for 4.0 with the improvements that will make it even better.

DoctorMO
September 8th, 2006, 01:49 AM
It isn't available for my platform, so it doesn't matter how good it is I can't try it out and compare it next to konquorer.