fuzZzball
November 2nd, 2009, 02:42 AM
This is my first and also my last post that deals with topics like 'Ubuntu sucks/rocks' and 'Windows suck/rocks' or the equivalent. I believe this thread does not belong in 'Ubuntu Testimonials & Experiences', but who knows, maybe it does.
I've used Windows probably the day I first touched a 486, I didn't experience any other OS after I first tried Warthog. I've been using Ubuntu seriously since 5.04, had a dual boot with Windows XP to get acquainted with the environment. I switched completely with the 7.04 release and used VMWare to be able to use some applications on Windows (Photoshop, etc). Discovered ThinApp on 7.10 and started porting apps. On 8.04/8.10 I installed most applications using wine. Since 9.04/9.10 releases, I ported all my Windows applications with wine/vbox from a main server and I don't have a single copy of Windows running on my main computers anymore. It took me roughly a year (from 5.04 to 6.04) to get to this point and become fully customized. The reasons why I switched from Windows to Ubuntu are, in my point of view, the same problems the 'average' computer user has accepted as 'normal computer behavior' or 'normal user behavior'. This behavior is in principle a set of customs people got used to over a period of time in order to work with a system.
I've seen a lot of different people using Windows and to be honest: it is much easier to reboot the computer when it gets stuck, then to search for a permanent solution. This is nothing out of the ordinary, because rebooting it is a permanent solution to the problem, and it always works.
And to be honest again, I've managed to get a Linux machine stuck 3 times (and use the infamous REISUB to avoid the power button), 3 times in 4 years. The funny part is, I can't remember the times Windows got stuck. I do remember that it was a daily business, a custom, accepted as 'something computers do'.
Now is this the fault of Windows? Surely not all of it. Most applications people use are 3rd party applications. But we could say the same for Ubuntu/Debian. Very few applications are from bigger companies with commercial ideas and still my Ubuntu/Debian box does not freak out when an application fails. Not to say that maybe 60%/70% of all the work is done by volunteers (I'm not sure, don't pin me on it).
My personal view is that people don't question enough and this problem can be traced back to the none computer related questions like "Can I believe this bottle contains a 100% orange juice like it says it does?".
Every release of Ubuntu becomes a circus show where Ubuntu gets slaughtered because the 'average' computer user does not like to read, the 'average' computer user does not like to question and the 'average' computer user does not like to act.
And yes, my personal view: 'Windows users' are 'average' computer user - become nothing more - maybe only less. When it comes to Windows, the user learns a lot, but that only restrains to the functionality of the interface (or the behavior of Windows itself). Meaning, what check-box to click or which form to fill in. If the check-box option isn't there? Just maybe, you can use the all-oh-wonderful regedit and set a few options here and there. Not to forget the endless procedures of when and how to install drivers in some curious order, or it will just not work.
This does not imply that I believe a Windows user is stupid (by character or intelligence). For the majority of Ubuntu users, I could probably use the same statement, but at some point, the Ubuntu user will be in contact with some internal implications. Something that can't be solved by a mouse click or a line in the register. That is the turning point where the user learns to interact with an operating system (and of course, has all the opportunities to do so!).
Choosing between Windows or Ubuntu is in my opinion a matter of perspective, it's not a choice. The question should be: "For what purpose should and can I use it".
For example: If you download a lot of crap through torrent (or any p2p), it's more likely you'll use Linux (as in Ubuntu). If you play a lot of crappy games then it's more likely you'll use Windows. If you do both, you'll have a crappy windows with crappy FPS game performance.
If I have to compare the releases from 6.04 to 9.04 (or even 9.10), then 9.10 is a little baby. It hardly comes with any problems that any pre-release ever had. I have server racks (blades) and other stuff running 9.10/9.04/8.04 versions smoothly, where in the previous releases, I always had some minor problems with packages that were stable enough for Ubuntu, but unstable for Debian (main difference for me between Ubuntu <-> Debian).
I already wrote so much crap that I don't have time to start questioning the arguments people use in they're posts. Comparing A with B is not an argument, please understand (if you do not, then please read this article (http://www.virtualschool.edu/mon/SocialConstruction/Logic.html)).
Cheers,
f
I've used Windows probably the day I first touched a 486, I didn't experience any other OS after I first tried Warthog. I've been using Ubuntu seriously since 5.04, had a dual boot with Windows XP to get acquainted with the environment. I switched completely with the 7.04 release and used VMWare to be able to use some applications on Windows (Photoshop, etc). Discovered ThinApp on 7.10 and started porting apps. On 8.04/8.10 I installed most applications using wine. Since 9.04/9.10 releases, I ported all my Windows applications with wine/vbox from a main server and I don't have a single copy of Windows running on my main computers anymore. It took me roughly a year (from 5.04 to 6.04) to get to this point and become fully customized. The reasons why I switched from Windows to Ubuntu are, in my point of view, the same problems the 'average' computer user has accepted as 'normal computer behavior' or 'normal user behavior'. This behavior is in principle a set of customs people got used to over a period of time in order to work with a system.
I've seen a lot of different people using Windows and to be honest: it is much easier to reboot the computer when it gets stuck, then to search for a permanent solution. This is nothing out of the ordinary, because rebooting it is a permanent solution to the problem, and it always works.
And to be honest again, I've managed to get a Linux machine stuck 3 times (and use the infamous REISUB to avoid the power button), 3 times in 4 years. The funny part is, I can't remember the times Windows got stuck. I do remember that it was a daily business, a custom, accepted as 'something computers do'.
Now is this the fault of Windows? Surely not all of it. Most applications people use are 3rd party applications. But we could say the same for Ubuntu/Debian. Very few applications are from bigger companies with commercial ideas and still my Ubuntu/Debian box does not freak out when an application fails. Not to say that maybe 60%/70% of all the work is done by volunteers (I'm not sure, don't pin me on it).
My personal view is that people don't question enough and this problem can be traced back to the none computer related questions like "Can I believe this bottle contains a 100% orange juice like it says it does?".
Every release of Ubuntu becomes a circus show where Ubuntu gets slaughtered because the 'average' computer user does not like to read, the 'average' computer user does not like to question and the 'average' computer user does not like to act.
And yes, my personal view: 'Windows users' are 'average' computer user - become nothing more - maybe only less. When it comes to Windows, the user learns a lot, but that only restrains to the functionality of the interface (or the behavior of Windows itself). Meaning, what check-box to click or which form to fill in. If the check-box option isn't there? Just maybe, you can use the all-oh-wonderful regedit and set a few options here and there. Not to forget the endless procedures of when and how to install drivers in some curious order, or it will just not work.
This does not imply that I believe a Windows user is stupid (by character or intelligence). For the majority of Ubuntu users, I could probably use the same statement, but at some point, the Ubuntu user will be in contact with some internal implications. Something that can't be solved by a mouse click or a line in the register. That is the turning point where the user learns to interact with an operating system (and of course, has all the opportunities to do so!).
Choosing between Windows or Ubuntu is in my opinion a matter of perspective, it's not a choice. The question should be: "For what purpose should and can I use it".
For example: If you download a lot of crap through torrent (or any p2p), it's more likely you'll use Linux (as in Ubuntu). If you play a lot of crappy games then it's more likely you'll use Windows. If you do both, you'll have a crappy windows with crappy FPS game performance.
If I have to compare the releases from 6.04 to 9.04 (or even 9.10), then 9.10 is a little baby. It hardly comes with any problems that any pre-release ever had. I have server racks (blades) and other stuff running 9.10/9.04/8.04 versions smoothly, where in the previous releases, I always had some minor problems with packages that were stable enough for Ubuntu, but unstable for Debian (main difference for me between Ubuntu <-> Debian).
I already wrote so much crap that I don't have time to start questioning the arguments people use in they're posts. Comparing A with B is not an argument, please understand (if you do not, then please read this article (http://www.virtualschool.edu/mon/SocialConstruction/Logic.html)).
Cheers,
f