PDA

View Full Version : Ubuntu 9.04 vs Windows 7 RC vs OSX86 on my laptop!



the8thstar
June 15th, 2009, 05:07 PM
Hellp all,

I thought it might be interesting to try and see how the most prominent OS of the day run on the same hardware. So I setup grub to be able to triple-boot Ubuntu 9.04, Windows 7 RC and Mac OSX86.

The idea was for me to see if my computer is still fit to run with the latest OS software and also to look for a better OS if that's ever possible.

The harware specs are found below.

The boot times (from power on to full desktop) are roughly similar and not one OS is a clear winner. Since OSX86 is customized to make Mac OS work on PCs, the estimate is just, well, estimated.

Ubuntu 9.04 : 35s
Windows 7 RC: 55s
Mac OSX86 : 43s

Comparing software is indeed difficult. Some apps are made to run only on some platforms. Because of my harware, most apps like Firefox and OpenOffice or MSOffice or iWork take about 10-15s to start.

Office Apps


WINDOWS - MS Office 2007 SP2 is a clear winner in Windows 7 RC. Prefetch makes applications launch in 1s the second time with. The software is snappy and supports pdf and openoffice formats.
MAC - iWork 09 Trial Edition takes about 10s to start and is very responsive. Its unconventional presentation takes time to get used to. I haven't tried MS Office 2008 Trial Edition.
UBUNTU - MS Office 2007 through CrossOver in Ubuntu takes about 12s to start the first time and improves to 2-3s from the second time. It's great for everyday use.
OpenOffice takes 15s to start. Start times can be improved through the openoffice startup option, to a zippy one second only. It is responsive but the UI looks dated and the conversion of Word documents is sketchy.



Photo Apps

I downloaded and used Adobe Photoshop Elements Trial Edition on Windows and Mac. I also used Gimp for Windows and Ubuntu. On each platform the programs performed well, except some notable freezes of Gimp in Windows.


The Internet

I use Firefox on Windows and Ubuntu with the same plugins. I have no base for comparison with OSX86 since the required hardware is not recognized.

I have found Firefox to be more stable on Windows than Ubuntu. I believe this is due to some conflicts between Compiz and Firefox that degrade video performances.


The UI

This one is very personal indeed.


WINDOWS - The whole UI is consistent and the new bar functionality is very interesting indeed. The lack of customization out of the box is appaling though.
MAC - The UI is crisp and clean. The only notable exception is that fonts look blurry (something to do with hinting perhaps). Again, the lack of customization right of the box is a problem. Overall the UI looks smooth and professional but a little boring too.
UBUNTU - Customization galore! Ubuntu is really what you make of it and themes can be quite easily changed. The only drawback is graphical unity sometimes.


All the desktop effects were enabled (Aero, Expose and Spaces, Compiz, etc...). All the UIs stood firm with my hardware. However, because of bad Intel support in Jaunty, the desktop effects are slower than in Ibex.

Conclusion

For everyday use I would choose and recommend Ubuntu. Most apps react like they should and perform well. It is free, its community is awesome and you can customize it at will. If you need professional applications like Adobe products or OS restricted products (iLife for instance), you can choose Windows 7 or Mac OSX.

I found Windows 7 RC interesting but I'm still worried about spyware and viruses, which prevents it from being the OS of choice. However it is the desktop reference and MS Office SP2 is absolutely irreplaceable.

OSX86 gives you the opportunity to try OSX and its associated software. In my opinion, OSX is no better than Linux in terms of safety, but the simplicity and elegance of its software (iLife and iWork) makes it a worthy candidate if you want to remain a casual user and don't want to be bothered by your computer acting up on you (outside hardware faults of course). The price of Apple hardware and software is not justified though and brings it down to a shameful 3rd place.

To make a strong and significant difference in the OS world I believe Ubuntu needs companies like Adobe (Photoshop) or even MS (MS Office) and Apple (iTunes) to develop native versions of their acclaimed software. The future will tell...

Tamlynmac
June 15th, 2009, 08:41 PM
the8thstar
To make a strong and significant difference in the OS world I believe Ubuntu needs companies like Adobe (Photoshop) or even MS (MS Office) and Apple (iTunes) to develop native versions of their acclaimed software. The future will tell...

I totally disagree with this. I'd prefer to see improvements in FOSS than to support or even consider MS program suppliers. With all the available OSS applications I see no reason to use anything Windows related. Perhaps, the FOSS concept is lost on some, but the principles of Ubuntu are based on that ideology.

I for one, refuse to support that which is not FOSS and suggest if one truly believes in the Ubuntu/Linux principles - than supporting FOSS should be mandatory. If we truly wish to enhance the Ubuntu/Linux experience than lets get behind FOSS and put our money and time towards that philosophy. Not support an ideology that is 180 degrees out of sync (for the most part) with FOSS.

My hope - the future is dominated by OSS programs that smoke anything written by others and become the standard. Without our support that may only be a dream. A wise man once told me to "let go of the present when dreaming of new concepts and concentrate on the future, for our conceptual dreams only come to fruition in the future".

Just my $0.02

eilios
June 15th, 2009, 08:53 PM
I totally disagree with this. I'd prefer to see improvements in FOSS than to support or even consider MS program suppliers. With all the available OSS applications I see no reason to use anything Windows related. Perhaps, the FOSS concept is lost on some, but the principles of Ubuntu are based on that ideology.

I for one, refuse to support that which is not FOSS and suggest if one truly believes in the Ubuntu/Linux principles - than supporting FOSS should be mandatory. If we truly wish to enhance the Ubuntu/Linux experience than lets get behind FOSS and put our money and time towards that philosophy. Not support an ideology that is 180 degrees out of sync (for the most part) with FOSS.

My hope - the future is dominated by OSS programs that smoke anything written by others and become the standard. Without our support that may only be a dream. A wise man once told me to "let go of the present when dreaming of new concepts and concentrate on the future, for our conceptual dreams only come to fruition in the future".

Just my $0.02

My opinion is that people should have the opportunity to choose which programs they want to use.

Ms_Angel_D
June 15th, 2009, 08:55 PM
I totally disagree with this. I'd prefer to see improvements in FOSS than to support or even consider MS program suppliers. With all the available OSS applications I see no reason to use anything Windows related. Perhaps, the FOSS concept is lost on some, but the principles of Ubuntu are based on that ideology.

I for one, refuse to support that which is not FOSS and suggest if one truly believes in the Ubuntu/Linux principles - than supporting FOSS should be mandatory. If we truly wish to enhance the Ubuntu/Linux experience than lets get behind FOSS and put our money and time towards that philosophy. Not support an ideology that is 180 degrees out of sync (for the most part) with FOSS.

My hope - the future is dominated by OSS programs that smoke anything written by others and become the standard. Without our support that may only be a dream. A wise man once told me to "let go of the present when dreaming of new concepts and concentrate on the future, for our conceptual dreams only come to fruition in the future".

Just my $0.02



Tamlynmac, I normally agree with you and your posts, but In this instance, I find myself disagreeing.

Not everyone is all about supporting foss (I am but that's besides the point ;)) Some people just need those products and what they have to offer, be it for business or whatever. I personally have to say that I agree with the OP though I highly doubt you'll ever see MS developing anything to run natively on Linux. But if more of these Big Name Software dev's did develop native Linux programs then less users would have problems transitioning over and Linux would more than likely gain a substantial user base.

Tamlynmac
June 15th, 2009, 10:05 PM
Ms_Angel_D

Perhaps miswritten.

I was referring to the future not the present. If those that use Ubuntu and believe in FOSS don't support it, then why use Ubuntu and not Windows. If one is satisfied with their present OS why switch to one that represents a totally different philosophy?

If Windows programs are required to be used (for whatever reason) then why not use Windows? I've never been against using what works, just don't want Ubuntu to deviate from the path it's on.

As I said in my post, my dream is to have FOSS become the standard not the exception. The only way that will occur is with our support.

Choosing the programs one wishes to use should also apply to an OS. It's been my experience that Windows programs (for the most part) run best in Windows, as that's the platform they were written for. Hence logic suggests, one use Windows should they desire or need to run Windows programs. I'm not against dual booting.

I expect many will argue in belief that this limits the growth of Ubuntu. But it's my opinion the growth of Ubuntu should be grounded in FOSS. As I said this is just my opinion and only my opinion. It should not reflect anyone else's.

Just my $0.02

Ms_Angel_D
June 15th, 2009, 10:33 PM
Perhaps miswritten.

I do understand what your saying, and it does make sense to keep Ubuntu rooted in FOSS.

I guess all I'm saying is, I do wish to use as many FOSS programs as possible, however there are a few items which don't quite yet have good Linux equivalents.

I personally have yet to find what I personally consider a good FOSS equivalent to Adobe's Dreamweaver, it's sad to say but for now I just need that program. I don't want windows, and I don't dual boot. I'm not a programmer, I don't know a thing about scripting and tbh I have more pressing concerns at present then setting about to learn anything about programming languages, outside of what I know for maintaining my websites.

It's just My opinion but something has to give we either need great Linux FOSS equivalents to some of these programs or these companies need to make native Linux versions. Either way would help Ubuntu to grow IMHO.

supernix
June 16th, 2009, 12:02 AM
That would be great if the commercial software world would get off their humps and support Linux.

supernix
June 16th, 2009, 12:10 AM
That would be my point to, I have sad to say not been able to find anything that could replace the Adobe line of products in the area of FOSS. Once you see anyone making a program that comes close to say Dreamweaver or Flash CS4 then you can ask the question why not use the FOSS alternative but to date nothing exists. And my C programming skills are still to new to attempt to write such software myself.

I would also say that if your going to cast stones at people for using closed source commercial software that you should be actively working seriously to closing the gap that exists in making a FOSS equivalent.

Tamlynmac
June 16th, 2009, 12:58 AM
supernix
I would also say that if your going to cast stones at people for using closed source commercial software that you should be actively working seriously to closing the gap that exists in making a FOSS equivalent.

Well said and I couldn't agree more. Just because one can't program doesn't mean one can't donate or actively participate some other way . There's many ways to provide assistance and promote FOSS.

Finding a FOSS equivalent and supporting it could eventually result in quality programs that may become the standard. Amazingly, many use FOSS programs now without participating and complain that they don't meet the quality of Windows programs. Hmmm Yet they are more than glad to lay out good money for the Windows programs (not including updating). Guess I just don't understand. :(

I do my best to assist and even donate to some projects. Unfortunately, my position prohibits me from doing much more than that. But I refuse to complain, when I don't participate in or support the solution. Guess that's just not in my nature. ;)

the8thstar
June 16th, 2009, 05:52 AM
FOSS is an interesting concept and I am not opposing it. OpenOffice is a great example of a collaborative open source project for instance.

I want commercial companies like Adobe, Microsoft and Apple to deploy their applications because the products they make are good and that could drive more people to use Linux, because they'd know they could find the software they like to use on a Linux platform. It's a shame it's not FOSS but it gets the job done.

Eventually, this is about freedom to choose.

Tamlynmac
June 16th, 2009, 06:58 AM
the8thstar
I want commercial companies like Adobe, Microsoft and Apple to deploy their applications because the products they make are good and that could drive more people to use Linux, because they'd know they could find the software they like to use on a Linux platform. It's a shame it's not FOSS but it gets the job done.

I never meant to imply that these were not good programs, only that should we wish to support FOSS - then do so. Conceptually, if by supporting FOSS we could enhance the quality of the software (potentially exceeding those programs) then why invest in the continuation of said programs?

It's been my experience that money and time can solve many things. Perhaps, investing in that which many believe is beneficial could result in a dominate future for Ubuntu/Linux. I think often we forget about the future and only focus on our present needs. But if we truly wish to see Ubuntu/Linux and FOSS offer freedom of choice in the future, we should support that effort now.

I'm only one voice in the Ubuntu/Linux world. My opinions and beliefs are not shared by all and I understand that. But (IMHO) if one continues to use a free OS and does nothing to support it's compatible software, then why should they complain. I agree that for some specific tasks, FOSS may have limited if any options. But if we don't invest in a replacement option - "it never will" and it's future may become questionable. With support, I truly believe FOSS can build a future based on freedom of choice and reduce the footprint of MS. I also believe that by doing so, it will attract significantly more new users. Assuming that's the goal.

I disagree with the philosophy that this is a freedom of choice issue. I'd prefer to view it as the integration of that choice. Without the support of quality FOSS alternatives, integration becomes necessary. So far I'd say those companies you've mentioned have done a lousy job of even considering integrating. I'd hate to depend on them in the future, based on their performance to date. I just don't think they believe it's profitable. Of course I could be wrong.

I wish to thank everyone who participated in this thread as I've found it to be stimulating and entertaining. Unfortunately, I struggle with retention and comprehension (due to necessary meds). I also appreciate everyones patiences with regards to my inability to express myself. You have no idea how frustrating it can be. Perhaps, some do.

caravel
June 16th, 2009, 09:23 AM
Tamlynmac you are 100% correct in my view and have put your point over well.


FOSS is an interesting concept and I am not opposing it.
It's more than concept. Without FOSS there would be no GNU/Linux and without that no Debian and thus no Ubuntu. This is what you need to realise. FOSS is the cornerstone of GNU/Linux - without it there is no GNU. It's not an "extra" or a bonus it is vital.


OpenOffice is a great example of a collaborative open source project for instance.
I respectfully disagree, Linux is a good example of FOSS. OpenOffice is probably a lesser example as it's release under the LGPL.


Eventually, this is about freedom to choose.
FOSS is all about freedom of choice. Proprietary software is purely about profit.

moster
June 16th, 2009, 11:28 AM
the8thstar, I was on windows 7 for few weeks. It sure look nice and it is snappy. I think microsoft learn lesson from vista.. But I was not happy running it :) I am sure we all have our reason for being in Ubuntu :)

Caravel, I see that you are freedom fighter and that is good. But this battle cannot be won in way you think. Developers need to eat too :) you cannot expect they will work for nothing. It is ok, for small projects, but big one like firefox and openoffice need money. That is reason for what Gimp will never catch photoshop. For example google is pushing firefox, be sure that if google turn off pipe, firefox progress would stall.

Solution funding is to get more people on linux even if they run proprietary software on it. I think when European union embrace linux, something will change immediately. EU spend I think over 1 bilion euro on microsoft. If linux want that money he will have to be "good enough". You can believe me or not on this statement but this is reality. You cannot expect they will change to linux but in new kernel there is bug that put down half of union computers.

caravel
June 16th, 2009, 12:37 PM
Caravel, I see that you are freedom fighter and that is good. But this battle cannot be won in way you think.
You misunderstand me. In my view there is no "battle" to "win". This post sums up my views on the matter: http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=7465194&postcount=17


Developers need to eat too :) you cannot expect they will work for nothing. It is ok, for small projects, but big one like firefox and openoffice need money. That is reason for what Gimp will never catch photoshop. For example google is pushing firefox, be sure that if google turn off pipe, firefox progress would stall.
So Firefox is a bigger project than Linux? The Linux kernel itself is a big project that manages to do very well and it's not paying for developers, staff, patents, copyrights and marketing. Proprietary backers are bad for GNU/Linux as a whole because they influence and twist development to suit their commercial agenda.


Solution funding is to get more people on linux even if they run proprietary software on it. I think when European union embrace linux, something will change immediately. EU spend I think over 1 bilion euro on microsoft. If linux want that money he will have to be "good enough". You can believe me or not on this statement but this is reality. You cannot expect they will change to linux but in new kernel there is bug that put down half of union computers.
Again I don't see the need to get more people on to Linux. GNU/Linux is about freedom of choice. Currently it is sustained by those that do use and develop it. This is as much about the freedom to not use Linux as the freedom to use it. People will adopt it in their own time as it progresses and if it suits them. This idiotic idea of a "mission" to convert windows users is a myth that is perpetuated on this forum and his forum alone. If you go to the forums for other distros you won't read this.

You have to remember that Linux has gained a lot of ground in the non desktop sector. It runs a lot of the portable devices that are used every day, it can be found running network routers and it runs a large proportion of web servers.

moster
June 16th, 2009, 12:51 PM
Caravel, you remind me of Richard Stallman. Very smart, very clever with world-changing ideas, but in same time very blind. I think free software ONLY is utopia. But I would like to you prove me wrong over time. :D

caravel
June 16th, 2009, 01:09 PM
I take exception to being called "blind", but if you cannot put yourself across without resorting to base insults, then that's your shortcoming.

You fail to see that the reason Linux exists as it is, is because it's FOSS, if it wasn't FOSS Linux would not be Linux and would not exist in the form it is in today. So when people come up with statements like:


FOSS is an interesting concept and I am not opposing it.

Shows a level of ignorance. It would be like me driving a car and saying "yes the internal combustion engine is an interesting concept I suppose..."

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/philosophy.html

Out.

Tamlynmac
June 16th, 2009, 04:26 PM
caravel
You fail to see that the reason Linux exists as it is, is because it's FOSS, if it wasn't FOSS Linux would not be Linux and would not exist in the form it is in today. So when people come up with statements like:

Well said. Ubuntu/Linux would not exist without FOSS. If being "blind" equates (in this scenario) with not accepting irrational and illogical theories, then perhaps I also am blind. FOSS represents fundamental freedom of choice, as it provides many with the opportunity to use their system free of charge. The entire world does not enjoy the living standards on which some base their opinion.

(IMHO) Investing money in proprietary software over supporting FOSS projects and then complaining about the lack of integration or quality applications available while using a FOSS OS - just seems steeped in hypocrisy. Then to use freedom of choice as a form of entitlement - simply amazes me. It truly is beyond my ability to comprehend. Obviously, I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed.

I found your link enlightening and direct. Your assessment of freedom of choice to include Ubuntu/Linux was refreshing. Often it appears that recruitment at any cost is a priority to some. Including sacrificing the fundamental principles that many claim as the motive they use Ubuntu/Linux. As I said, this is definitely beyond my ability to understand. Should the objective be domination of the desktop computing market or the principles that FOSS is built upon? Should we sacurfice these values in leiu of increased membership? For what purpose and to what extent?

I would prefer a realistic approach to increased membership, based on freedom of choice and the supporting of said choice. Thus assuring a dedicated user base that shares the values and philosphy of FOSS. Not one that believes in the power of denial, based upon an individuals economic status. This is one of, if not the primary reason I donate (what I can) to FOSS projects.


I do have one question:
Does a Freedom Fighter - Fight Freedom? ;)


This is not meant to offend anyone and only represents my opinion.

HappyFeet
June 16th, 2009, 05:44 PM
It's too bad that these discussions, as well intentioned as they are, are tantamount to spitting into the wind. Especially when a noob comes here and rants about their experience with the intent of helping the community. The only true help comes in the form of bug reporting, bug triaging, and software development.

It's cool that we have a place to vent our frustrations, but make no mistake that our opinions are merely dust in the wind. They will have no affect on linux and foss in general.

Are you part of the solution, or part of the problem?

the8thstar
June 16th, 2009, 10:24 PM
I will not take back what I've written.

The original post I made was about technical comparisons between OS software from a user point of view. I am a computer enthusiast but I am not an IT specialist... so my words are just from personal experience and I didn't run benchmarks or stuff like that, sorry.

Personally I really don't care about FOSS. I am not a zealot and I know we live in a world where you get goods and services with money. I pay for the hardware, so I am not shocked if I have to pay for the software too, as long as the product is worth it. That's how it is.

Tamlynmac
June 17th, 2009, 12:04 AM
the8thstar
Personally I really don't care about FOSS. I am not a zealot and I know we live in a world where you get goods and services with money. I pay for the hardware, so I am not shocked if I have to pay for the software too, as long as the product is worth it.

My only questions might be - what OS are you using and what did you pay for it? If you don't care about FOSS or the cost of software, why use FOSS software? Do you buy hardware that's compatible to Linux or Windows hardware and hope it works?

Just for the record I'm not a zealot, only wish to give back something for the goods and services I've received from FOSS. I've been running Ubuntu/Linux for 3 years and appreciate all the efforts made by the individuals that permitted me to do so.

HappyFeet is correct when stating:

Especially when a noob comes here and rants about their experience with the intent of helping the community. The only true help comes in the form of bug reporting, bug triaging, and software development.
It's cool that we have a place to vent our frustrations, but make no mistake that our opinions are merely dust in the wind. They will have no affect on linux and foss in general.

I will unsubscribing to this thread, per his advice.

the8thstar
June 17th, 2009, 08:52 AM
My only questions might be - what OS are you using and what did you pay for it? If you don't care about FOSS or the cost of software, why use FOSS software? Do you buy hardware that's compatible to Linux or Windows hardware and hope it works?

My original post is clear : I run Ubuntu, Windows 7 RC and OSX86. I use Ubuntu because it is secure and it is free. The commercial versions of Windows 7 will not be free and neither is Vanilla OSX. For the record I didn't mind paying for MS Office because it is superior to OpenOffice (which is free). I am not developing software for Linux and I am not promoting its use... so I have no interest whatsoever in the philosophy of FOSS.


Just for the record I'm not a zealot, only wish to give back something for the goods and services I've received from FOSS. I've been running Ubuntu/Linux for 3 years and appreciate all the efforts made by the individuals that permitted me to do so.

I will unsubscribing to this thread, per his advice.

It's ok to give your opinion. It's not ok to judge me.

caravel
June 17th, 2009, 09:29 AM
My original post is clear : I run Ubuntu, Windows 7 RC and OSX86. I use Ubuntu because it is secure and it is free. The commercial versions of Windows 7 will not be free and neither is Vanilla OSX. For the record I didn't mind paying for MS Office because it is superior to OpenOffice (which is free). I am not developing software for Linux and I am not promoting its use... so I have no interest whatsoever in the philosophy of FOSS.
Now you'll have to bear with me, you see I have enough difficulty coming to terms with dual booters and you seem to be on a triple boot there...

I cannot comprehend the need to run 3x OS at once. I've tried dual booting myself in the past and found that there is simply no reason to do it - apart from in the case of the absolute beginner. If you need windows for something then you may as well stick with windows and do everything with it surely? It certainly beats rebooting to browse the web, rebooting again to play a game or run Photoshop/Office/etc and then rebooting again to browse the web again. This also introduces a lot of other factors that I personally don't give a **** about. Including cross compatibility with Windows and Windows filesystems.

Also when you make statements like this one:

I want commercial companies like Adobe, Microsoft and Apple to deploy their applications because the products they make are good and that could drive more people to use Linux
Do not expect to be taken seriously. You discount FOSS as unimportant, yet it is the FOSS developers and community that provide GNU/Linux distros like Ubuntu. Then you talk about anti competitive corporations like Adobe, MS and Apple developing their software for Linux! Adobe have made a half hearted attempt with flash but that's really as far as they've gone and are willing to go. The idea of MS and Apple developing Linux software (i.e. Office and iTunes software) is quite frankly a very naive and blinkered outlook. It would seem that you think that GNU/Linux has no future unless it can run MS or other big name proprietary software?

The problem with proprietary software is that if there's no market for it, then the software won't become any more than an idea. FOSS software doesn't depend on a market and can be developed and distributed freely. In order for Linux to get off the ground, certain people need to swtich to FOSS alternatives and stop bitching about Photoshop and iTunes.


It's ok to give your opinion. It's not ok to judge me.
Where were you judged? I seem to rememebr it was yourself using the "zealot" label?

moster
June 17th, 2009, 10:06 AM
You guys are just unbeliveable. You not only attack everyone who has some critique on linux and ubuntu but now you start attacking people who even consider another OS.

Such radical approach has its followers. It is called gNewSense and it is assembled only on free stuff. I am not sure on details but proprietary stuff like flash there is not allowed. I think you are right people for it http://www.gnewsense.org/

Let go this thread, some people enjoy reading this stuff...

caravel
June 17th, 2009, 10:23 AM
The only person that has been posting attacks, and to be frank complete and utter bollox, in this thread so far, is you. If I was merely attacking the OP for the hell of it I would not have taken the time to put my points across.

It is quite clearly you that is seeking to use ridicule and derision to silence opinion and inflict your views on others.

I have not forced my views on others either, I've said that people are free to use whichever OS they like but that I agree with some of the principles of FOSS and I do not see the point in dual/multi booting.

At no point did I say anyone was stupid for dual booting nor did I seek to humiliate anyone. You on the other hand are insulting myself and others that sympathise with GNU philosophy and the whole FOSS idea with posts such as that above.

I have not been attacking anyone, I am merely challenging opinions. It is in fact you that is attacking me for this and it is you labelling me as "blind". If you don't like this thread you can **** off to troll another thread with your misinformed throwaway comments.

moster
June 17th, 2009, 10:40 AM
Ok, I will stop trolling this thread. :)

the8thstar, hope you are not discourage by all this. Just know that there are people actually enjoy reading you stuff. bye :)

lancest
June 17th, 2009, 11:32 AM
"For the record I didn't mind paying for MS Office because it is superior to OpenOffice (which is free)"
Don't forget to state this is only your opinion.
There are many of us that believe Open Office is better. For one OO runs on at least 3 platforms license free. Don't get me started.

longtom
June 17th, 2009, 12:18 PM
If a good principle becomes a "ideology", it has lost already.

You will never convince anybody by blindly attacking anything or anybody which is not fitting to your ideology. All you will achieve is pushing people further away from it.

Whether you are right or wrong becomes irrelevant in such circunstances - unfortunatly.

MS obviously will love this - the old Roman principle: Divide your enemies...

I don't know - a bit of common sense and humilty would do wonders - and all I see is politics....

lancest
June 17th, 2009, 12:38 PM
These forums are not so "We can all just get along". There are going to be differences in opinion. Let it roll.

Sef
June 17th, 2009, 03:00 PM
Moved to Community Cafe.

the8thstar
July 7th, 2009, 01:21 PM
"For the record I didn't mind paying for MS Office because it is superior to OpenOffice (which is free)"
Don't forget to state this is only your opinion.
There are many of us that believe Open Office is better. For one OO runs on at least 3 platforms license free. Don't get me started.

Whose opinion did you expect it to be? Didn't I say I bought MS Office? I believe readers of this thread are smart enough to draw their own conclusions.

the8thstar
July 7th, 2009, 01:24 PM
The only person that has been posting attacks, and to be frank complete and utter bollox, in this thread so far, is you. If I was merely attacking the OP for the hell of it I would not have taken the time to put my points across.

It is quite clearly you that is seeking to use ridicule and derision to silence opinion and inflict your views on others.

I have not forced my views on others either, I've said that people are free to use whichever OS they like but that I agree with some of the principles of FOSS and I do not see the point in dual/multi booting.

At no point did I say anyone was stupid for dual booting nor did I seek to humiliate anyone. You on the other hand are insulting myself and others that sympathise with GNU philosophy and the whole FOSS idea with posts such as that above.

I have not been attacking anyone, I am merely challenging opinions. It is in fact you that is attacking me for this and it is you labelling me as "blind". If you don't like this thread you can **** off to troll another thread with your misinformed throwaway comments.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I only wish you wouldn't had lavished me with yours, as this was not what I had in mind when I started this thread. Eventually I still use Ubuntu the most and as a matter of fact I have removed both Windows 7 and OSX86 from my hard drive as we speak.

BoyOfDestiny
July 7th, 2009, 03:14 PM
I liked your review very much.

One thing that I disagree however, is that you give MS Office the advantage due to alternatives Office Suites dealing with Word documents.
Some governments are mandating ODF, to the point where even the newest MS Office will have support to stay relevant (broken support though, regarding formulas especially: http://www.linuxpromagazine.com/Online/News/Rob-Weir-s-Doubt-MS-Office-2007-ODF-Compatibility )

As for the GUI, I left Windows before all this ribbon business, I genuinely do prefer the menus as they are because I can work efficiently with them and short-cut keys.
For those not experienced with ribbon, I've heard there is a learning curve, and that some like to switch it off. Take that with a grain of salt.

Back when I used Windows, many 3rd party applications deviated from the standard WIMP interface, usually with flashy, 3D looking things. I found Ubuntu's Gnome the most consistent, even with KDE apps with qgtkstyle.

Lastly, as for Adobe Photoshop. If they made a Linux release, those professionals that need it, would buy it.
I am happy with GIMP, as it can more than meet my needs. In my experience, many people whining about no photoshop, downloaded it without paying, and are not using it to its potential.

For now, Photoshop users should try the GIMP every now and then, or just run Photoshop via WINE, if the version he or she requires is well supported. Perhaps if Adobe sees a demand, and other companies producing commercial and proprietary software for Win/Mac will do the same.

From my perspective, I'd rather support what is Free and Open. A simple policy, but one I try to follow.

Cheers.

geoken
July 7th, 2009, 03:49 PM
So Firefox is a bigger project than Linux? The Linux kernel itself is a big project that manages to do very well and it's not paying for developers, staff, patents, copyrights and marketing. Proprietary backers are bad for GNU/Linux as a whole because they influence and twist development to suit their commercial agenda.

Wait, you think the Linux kernel isn't employing payed developers? Before you launch into massive, long winded rants on freedom you should probably verify that fundamental facts you're basing your argument on are correct.