To me: Disturbing news.

[rasmus91]

Hi there.

I read (some,) of the most disturbing review on Ubuntu 10.04 vs Winodows 7

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_windows_part1&num=1

&

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_windows_part2&num=1

I really don't like this. On my laptop Ubuntu 10.04 x86_64 runs wayyyyyy faster than windows. But i don't like this. With Ubuntu 8.10 My computer could hold battery much longer than with

windows, why isn't it that way any longer? will it be better?
I'm afraid that this could be very bad for ubuntu....

Also
"bloated and huge" is how Linus Torvalds described the Linux kernel last year.

Will this be better? Will there be Improvements, are Linux falling behind or are we ahead?!

Sorry 'bout my frustration, i believe in Linux (best OS IMO), but i also know that being "bloated and huge" is a no go. Will Linux, in the future be, What Linux always has been?
(supreme, fast, power saving, etc etc?)

[Half-Left]

Nothing new at all. Windows has always had the upper hand is both graphics stack and power management. In fact, the graphics stack is where Linux is weak, but it has improved a lot.

I benchmarked the Unigine Engine and both Windows 7 and Linux gave identical scores with the NVIDIA proprietary driver(both ran the OpenGL benchmark).

Personally, I'm not a fan of phoronix. Their memory benchmarks were very misleading with the various desktops.

[chappajar]

It sounds like the answer will probably be ''no'', but are there any ''mainstream'' Linux distros that can match Windows for low power consumption?

I don't want Windows on my netbook, but long times between charges is paramount...

[rasmus91]

but are there any ''mainstream'' Linux distros that can match Windows for low power consumption?

Well, When my battery was working, it ran half an hour longer on battery booted in ubuntu rather than windows...

[Ylon]

It sounds like the answer will probably be ''no'', but are there any ''mainstream'' Linux distros that can match Windows for low power consumption?

I don't want Windows on my netbook, but long times between charges is paramount...
Try run software with puppylinux.
It offer little to nothing help on the side of the "userfriendlyness"... in matter of lightness.
There's a puppy derivate which load the whole system (with proprietary nvidia driver) under 10MiB of Ram usage.

You're still using the linux kernel.. so, anything you do with ubuntu is (virtually) possible with puppy linux also.


Windows don't allow such kind of choice.

Anyway, we're comparing Windows and Ubuntu.. on fair field?

I mean, with Windows able to do all the things ubuntu do by default (pdf, multimedia&co?) and extended with software?

[Shakz]

Dunno I really dont see Windows as a viable OS anymore. In my mind the only viable OSs these days are OSX and Linux. Windows is way too risky. Too many reloads. Too much time. Too many worms/Trojans/self replicating viruses/spybots/toolbars...I could go on and on. I am sick of it. Before I switched to linux my machines were clean but the average American (my family) always falls for it...the popup, the Active X control, the "free" music/videos/whatever.
Windows sucks. I wont support it anymore. Would rather sell an organ and get a mac if for some crazy reason I left nix. I told my family no more reloads. They bring a PC to me its getting nix. They want windows they can go to geeksquad or someone else to fix it.

Ubuntu works great. I have 2 high end machines and its a FAR cry better peforming OS than Vista. I am not giving MS 150 bucks for a malware vulnerable OS.
Funny how the cost of the OS was not on one of their little charts.
I am also sure they were not running antimalware software either...which for a common user is required (not that it does much besides chew up ram and processor cycles.)

bah....

[Frogs Hair]

I use Ubuntu 10.04 and W7 and I've never tried to compare them, but every day I have to get up and download 8 mb of virus and spy-ware updates and they're not for Ubuntu. W7 works great for games and my space simulator and rest of the time is spent using Ubuntu.

[chucky chuckaluck]

I told my family no more reloads. They bring a PC to me its getting nix. They want windows they can go to geeksquad or someone else to fix it.

i guess you'll still see them around the holidays.

[rasmus91]

i guess you'll still see them around the holidays.

hmm well, i installed Xubuntu 8.10 i think it was on my parents old .15 ghz athlon machine, and suddenly it ran much better than with windows xp. At the time it ran windows XP I had to do a virus scan very often.

In fact there was so much maintainance at that time, now they barely even ask me about anything... hmm

Well, thanks for sharing your thoughts everyone, made me feel better. you're the best you guys.

:) Rasmus

[TheNerdAL]

Well Windows can get Viruses and Ubuntu can't.

Windows Fails already with that. :lolflag:

[madjr]

Hi there.

I read (some,) of the most disturbing review on Ubuntu 10.04 vs Winodows 7

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_windows_part1&num=1

&

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_windows_part2&num=1

I really don't like this. On my laptop Ubuntu 10.04 x86_64 runs wayyyyyy faster than windows. But i don't like this. With Ubuntu 8.10 My computer could hold battery much longer than with

windows, why isn't it that way any longer? will it be better?
I'm afraid that this could be very bad for ubuntu....

Also

Will this be better? Will there be Improvements, are Linux falling behind or are we ahead?!

Sorry 'bout my frustration, i believe in Linux (best OS IMO), but i also know that being "bloated and huge" is a no go. Will Linux, in the future be, What Linux always has been?
(supreme, fast, power saving, etc etc?)

might be good to point this out at the UDS

i also noticed that my CPU goes into max performance by default (which gives max speed, but gets hotter), instead of "ondemand" or "powersave"

but i just tick on the cpu frequency applet and all is good

monitor your temperature and cpu frequency and battery should last longer

[screaminj3sus]

Dunno I really dont see Windows as a viable OS anymore. In my mind the only viable OSs these days are OSX and Linux. Windows is way too risky. Too many reloads. Too much time. Too many worms/Trojans/self replicating viruses/spybots/toolbars...I could go on and on. I am sick of it. Before I switched to linux my machines were clean but the average American (my family) always falls for it...the popup, the Active X control, the "free" music/videos/whatever.
Windows sucks. I wont support it anymore. Would rather sell an organ and get a mac if for some crazy reason I left nix. I told my family no more reloads. They bring a PC to me its getting nix. They want windows they can go to geeksquad or someone else to fix it.

Ubuntu works great. I have 2 high end machines and its a FAR cry better peforming OS than Vista. I am not giving MS 150 bucks for a malware vulnerable OS.
Funny how the cost of the OS was not on one of their little charts.
I am also sure they were not running antimalware software either...which for a common user is required (not that it does much besides chew up ram and processor cycles.)

bah....
I've used windows without a/v for years with no virus infections. I like linux, but posts like this have the most ridiculous criticisms of windows ever.

Reloads: I havent had to format my 7 machines since it came out, still runs like new...

Viruses ect: I cant remember the last time I had a virus. Since windows XP I have had one virus ever. If you have a spec of common sense in windows you are fine.

Linux and windows definitely have their advantages and disadvantages but I see a lot of posts in linux forums saying how using windows you get viruses no matter what are ridiculous.


And people falling for popups? That same crap could happen on *nix (in fact there has been multiple social engineering trojans on OSX) a pop up comes up, you click it, it asks for your pass, a dumb user would just enter is in just like they would click yes on a uac prompt. You cant fix stupid. Of course these people aren't going to get infected using *nix right now because they arent targeted by malware. Windows has actually be decently secure since vista. No matter how secure an os is if the user is dumb enough to click yes/enter pass ect... they will always get infected.

And speedwise I have always found Windows vista/7 and linux (gnome) to be pretty much exactly the same speedwise, in fact gnome feels a bit less responsive IMO (and KDE feels horribly slow but I am very sure that is due to both fglrx and the oss drivers not wanting to play nice with kwin compositing) Unless you have a very old machine performance will be about the same.

There are definitely tons of valid criticisms of windows but that one is getting tired. /rant

[jwbrase]

I really don't like this. On my laptop Ubuntu 10.04 x86_64 runs wayyyyyy faster than windows. But i don't like this. With Ubuntu 8.10 My computer could hold battery much longer than with

windows, why isn't it that way any longer? will it be better?

It's a configuration issue, from what I'm finding.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1466241

[phrostbyte]

The whole Linux video pipeline is being rewritten.

[Quake]

Me, I don't care. Ubuntu 10.04 feels a hell lot faster than it used to so I don't bother comparing it to Windows 7.

And as for games, it's a no brainer. Windows is THE gaming platform right now and the only software that will push the push the graphics drivers development (in my opinion) is Valve's Steam.

[WinterRain]

I've used windows without a/v for years with no virus infections. I like linux, but posts like this have the most ridiculous criticisms of windows ever.
No it's not, it's reality. Just because you havn't gotten a virus, doesn't mean anything.




Viruses ect: I cant remember the last time I had a virus. Since windows XP I have had one virus ever. If you have a spec of common sense in windows you are fine.
If one needs to be extra careful when surfing, then what's the point in using it?


Linux and windows definitely have their advantages and disadvantages but I see a lot of posts in linux forums saying how using windows you get viruses no matter what are ridiculous.
You are the exception, not the norm. Most windows users will get a virus or something similar.

People bashing windows may be ridiculous, but I find windows defending posts just as entertaining. Seriously, this is a linux forum, and not an MS pep rally.

[madjr]

No it's not, it's reality. Just because you havn't gotten a virus, doesn't mean anything.




If one needs to be extra careful when surfing, then what's the point in using it?


You are the exception, not the norm. Most windows users will get a virus or something similar.

People bashing windows may be ridiculous, but I find windows defending posts just as entertaining. Seriously, this is a linux forum, and not an MS pep rally.

i have to agree

not everyone may get viruses , but malware/spyware is a whole different issue

they're the most dangerous in my opinion

i used to get at least 50 different malware infections almost on a daily basis

this is a linux forum what you expect? most people are here trying to get away from all that crap flying around and that only targets windows

and we all know that Anti virus/malware companies sponsor at least 80% of it, is a Billion dollar industry

[murderslastcrow]

Yeah, I can't wait until the day we can talk about Linux without comparing it to someone else. We just need to recognize the obvious differences and stop fretting over them. Just improve what we can, use what we need when we need it. Use the distro that runs best on your computer, support the projects that will make the battery life and graphics better/smoother, and if that's a proprietary driver, thank the company for providing one and ask them about their progress.

[Quake]

Linux and windows definitely have their advantages and disadvantages but I see a lot of posts in linux forums saying how using windows you get viruses no matter what are ridiculous.

Believe me it's not norm. The majority of the computers users are average joes who gets tempted by the word "FREE ____ program". And then... poof, they're infected.

In other cases, they download Spywares masquerading as an antivirus. The majority of the computers I repair are infected by viruses/Spywares

In Linux' case, the repository is a safe heaven to download software. If they want a software, they'll head to Ubuntu Software Centre and safely download a software.

[spoons]

Believe me it's not norm. The majority of the computers users are average joes who gets tempted by the word "FREE ____ program". And then... poof, they're infected.

In other cases, they download Spywares masquerading as an antivirus. The majority of the computers I repair are infected by viruses/Spywares

In Linux' case, the repository is a safe heaven to download software. If they want a software, they'll head to Ubuntu Software Centre and safely download a software.

However this isn't Windows' fault - This is the fault of the carbon based mostly bag of water sitting between the chair and the keyboard. If Ubuntu had 90% of the market it would have the same issue.

[Shakz]

I've used windows without a/v for years with no virus infections. I like linux, but posts like this have the most ridiculous criticisms of windows ever.

Reloads: I havent had to format my 7 machines since it came out, still runs like new...

Viruses ect: I cant remember the last time I had a virus. Since windows XP I have had one virus ever. If you have a spec of common sense in windows you are fine.

Linux and windows definitely have their advantages and disadvantages but I see a lot of posts in linux forums saying how using windows you get viruses no matter what are ridiculous.


And people falling for popups? That same crap could happen on *nix (in fact there has been multiple social engineering trojans on OSX) a pop up comes up, you click it, it asks for your pass, a dumb user would just enter is in just like they would click yes on a uac prompt. You cant fix stupid. Of course these people aren't going to get infected using *nix right now because they arent targeted by malware. Windows has actually be decently secure since vista. No matter how secure an os is if the user is dumb enough to click yes/enter pass ect... they will always get infected.

And speedwise I have always found Windows vista/7 and linux (gnome) to be pretty much exactly the same speedwise, in fact gnome feels a bit less responsive IMO (and KDE feels horribly slow but I am very sure that is due to both fglrx and the oss drivers not wanting to play nice with kwin compositing) Unless you have a very old machine performance will be about the same.

There are definitely tons of valid criticisms of windows but that one is getting tired. /rant

I think its pretty clear I was not talking about my machines. We have never run antiviurs software on any of our 5 computers in my house. We have never got a virus. So....your not special.

My family on the other hand.....anti malware software is required.

[jwbrase]

And people falling for popups? That same crap could happen on *nix (in fact there has been multiple social engineering trojans on OSX) a pop up comes up, you click it, it asks for your pass, a dumb user would just enter is in just like they would click yes on a uac prompt. You cant fix stupid. Of course these people aren't going to get infected using *nix right now because they arent targeted by malware. Windows has actually be decently secure since vista. No matter how secure an os is if the user is dumb enough to click yes/enter pass ect... they will always get infected.


What I'd really like to see is a comparison of prevalences of server infections for *n?x and Windows. There you have a more evenly distributed install base, a much more security-conscious user base, etc.

[Khakilang]

To me I can see that the Ubuntu 10.04 run faster than my Window XP by a small margin. The margin of performance doesn't really affect the performance of a system as a whole. On top of that Ubuntu is more secure than Windows. Windows may be fast now but 6 month down the road it automatically become slow for no reason at all. It happen on Window XP and Vista. So for me Window is not for long term usage. Ubuntu is!
:guitar:

[Dobbie03]

I just bought a new laptop yesterday. 6gbs ram, 2.26GHz processor (64bit machine as well) and Windows was so unbelievably slow and unresponsive it wasnt funny. Ubuntu is like grease lightning.

[rasmus91]

I've used windows without a/v for years with no virus infections. I like linux, but posts like this have the most ridiculous criticisms of windows ever.

Reloads: I havent had to format my 7 machines since it came out, still runs like new...

Viruses ect: I cant remember the last time I had a virus. Since windows XP I have had one virus ever. If you have a spec of common sense in windows you are fine.

First of all: You are the Exception.

And by the way: You say you've used windows without A/V for years without getting any vira... how can you tell if you don't use A/V?

And when at it; an antivirus can't pickup all malware at your computer.

And even if youre experienced, i don't believe that you didn't get anything on your computer: I'm pretty experienced at using Windows my self, i get malware anyway, its like having ants in your house the only thing you can do is looking at them and thinking "where does these come from?!"