PDA

View Full Version : Is Ubuntu really free?



Drifter
July 3rd, 2007, 11:59 PM
Ubuntu doesn't cost anything to use, but is it free? Most people looking for an alternative to windows usually can't get all of their programs etc to work in ubuntu. Yes it is a very good os I like it very much, but I can't always use it for everything I need do I wish I could. If linux could get pc makers to install and configure it on the pc's then maybe it would lower the cost of the pc's and it would be free in that way. However, most people do not know how to do a lot of things in linux ubuntu or what ever linux os they may try. It is not free to them because it causes them to use a lot of time trying to get it the way they want it. I dual boot, but I wish I could go with ubuntu only, but until I can use ubuntu to do all I need to do I will need to keep dual booting. I'm not a gamer so that is not an issue to me, but it is to a lot of others.

xthund3rh3adx
July 4th, 2007, 12:02 AM
look at Dell. :D Ubuntu is FREE! no matter what. and yes, it hasnt gotten to the potential to be the only OS on most PCs yet, and yes due to the programs, etc.

KIAaze
July 4th, 2007, 12:03 AM
I don't think this is the right place for this.

The only question I could find is "Is Ubuntu really free?" and from what you wrote it seems more like you want to start a discussion about the notion of "free" and in which sense Ubuntu is free.
Yes, of course it requires some learning, etc. But as you said, it costs no money directly.
And most of all: It is Free as in Freedom. (even though it makes it easier for people to install proprietary drivers)

Rocket2DMn
July 4th, 2007, 12:04 AM
The biggest cost for making the switch is the learning curve. You have to be willing to learn a new system and to get personal with your computer. Using linux generally requires you to have a better understanding of your system, not just "I turn it on and it works". When you get stuck with windows, you think that that is how everything must be, and you use it as a basis for comparison.
Also, because it is free (in the fiscal sense), it can take more time to get everything you want since people are contributing in their free time, for no pay. In the end of the day, the "cost" of the using the "free" software is worth it, and you come out smarter in the end.

Drifter
July 4th, 2007, 12:29 AM
Yes I know about Dell and yes all you say in the posts to this is true but most of the ubuntu people give short answers to people that know very little about it. I have learned to read how to's etc. but most noobs don't know about this and can't understand most of it this is my point. I personally like the challenge to find out about things I do not know about but some people just don't have the time to do so.

KIAaze
July 4th, 2007, 01:08 AM
This is why documentation, tutorials, howtos, GUIs, etc need to be developed.

If you spend some time offline and are forced to resort to the manuals and documentations available on your system, you'll find that they are sometimes quite good.
This happended to me recently and now I also know how to install documentation for programs from the repositories, a very useful thing to do if you don't have a permanent internet connection.

But there is still a lot to be done of course.

Here's an interesting project:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=448312

This pinned topic in the absolute beginner's section is also quite good:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=232059

However, I think it shouldn't be locked so that users can add useful links to it. The thread starter (ubuntu_demon) could then add those links if he thinks they are worth it.
Of course there is also the wiki which can be edited and completed by everybody, so it's not that bad.

FoolsGold_MKII
July 4th, 2007, 01:22 AM
It is free as in money.

It's definately not free as in time.

If you're prepared to spend the time learning, that's the first step.

steven8
July 4th, 2007, 01:43 AM
It's free.

It's my only OS.

It meets all of our needs.

End of story.

sloggerkhan
July 4th, 2007, 01:46 AM
I agree with steven8. This is because I do not need to work with highly specialized softwares for specific applications such as those used oftentimes by engineers (Solid Modeling, GIS, mostly).

Old Pink
July 4th, 2007, 01:47 AM
Of course it's free. 100% free. :)

If you choose to run expensive stuff on it, you can't then put the price on what it runs on. Likewise if you choose to pay to learn. :)

EDIT: After actually reading your post (huge bundles of text, with no order whatsoever scare me) it seems you've started with a title about value, and then gone off on a winge about your games not working. Which is out of place here, the title, or the content?

What do you aim to achieve with this thread?

az
July 4th, 2007, 02:37 AM
I personally like the challenge to find out about things I do not know about but some people just don't have the time to do so.

Every time I visit my father-in-law, I spend lots of time solving his computer problems. Some times, it takes a few hours!

I wish he ran Ubuntu. It would take me a lot less time to fix than trying to figure out windows XP.

reyfer
July 4th, 2007, 02:52 AM
Yes I know about Dell and yes all you say in the posts to this is true but most of the ubuntu people give short answers to people that know very little about it. I have learned to read how to's etc. but most noobs don't know about this and can't understand most of it this is my point. I personally like the challenge to find out about things I do not know about but some people just don't have the time to do so.

Don't you just love when people that you don't know speak for you without asking? I am sick of people writing "noobs can't (insert your favorite here), noobs don't want (insert another favorite here)". The truth is that SOME people YOU know can't or won't. Don't make generalizations. I have made 150 installs, and I am still waiting for one of those people to tell they don't want to learn or that they can't learn. They are all willing and even if some are more impatient than others, they are not stupid enough as to not being able to learn from a howto. And that's what you imply here, that noobs are stupid and therefore unable to learn. Please DON'T GENERALIZE.

Thank you.

bobbybobington
July 4th, 2007, 03:12 AM
You know what they say, Theres no such thing as a free lunch.
But if ubuntu was one, I'm sure it would taste good.

mikewhatever
July 4th, 2007, 03:23 AM
Ubuntu doesn't cost anything to use, but is it free? Most people looking for an alternative to windows usually can't get all of their programs etc to work in ubuntu. Yes it is a very good os I like it very much, but I can't always use it for everything I need do I wish I could. If linux could get pc makers to install and configure it on the pc's then maybe it would lower the cost of the pc's and it would be free in that way. However, most people do not know how to do a lot of things in linux ubuntu or what ever linux os they may try. It is not free to them because it causes them to use a lot of time trying to get it the way they want it. I dual boot, but I wish I could go with ubuntu only, but until I can use ubuntu to do all I need to do I will need to keep dual booting. I'm not a gamer so that is not an issue to me, but it is to a lot of others.

If Ubuntu is not free because it takes time and effort to learn and set up, well, then what is. Even the air we breath is not free, because it takes a double effort, to inhale and exhale. If people do not know how to do things on Linux or Windows, they learn, and in both cases it takes time, so what's the difference. Ubuntu is distributed freely, but who said it could read the user's mind and perform tasks?

darkog
July 4th, 2007, 04:25 AM
It's not free if you consider your time is worth money, and the time you spend learning Ubuntu or Linux, you wish you could have spend that time doing something else. If you look at it in that way, then, no, it's not free. But for most of the ppl here, it's free, because they would be behind a computer anyways, and thats how they want to spend their time.

macogw
July 4th, 2007, 04:37 AM
Well, it took time to learn Windows, didn't it? If you're a kid, you may not have noticed it because you were "just playing around" and happened to learn it at the same time. That's kind of how I learned to use Ubuntu. I didn't dual boot. I just installed it and played around til I felt comfortable. Adults are more likely to remember how hard it was to learn Windows, so they have a context for learning Ubuntu.

I spend all my time on the computer anyway (I wouldn't want it any other way), so it's not like I'm wasting time or something. Besides, "time is money" only applies if you would have used that time to make money. If you would've used it to watch The Price is Right, then you're not wasting any time you wouldn't have wasted anyway. If I wasn't on the computer, I'd be either napping or staring at the TV, so I'm not missing anything.

Tundro Walker
July 4th, 2007, 10:12 AM
Every time I visit my father-in-law, I spend lots of time solving his computer problems. Some times, it takes a few hours!

I wish he ran Ubuntu. It would take me a lot less time to fix than trying to figure out windows XP.

I agree with that. I do the same for my parents. Once a month, it's a cleaning session for their Windows computer, whether it needs it or not (just to be safe).

I think the OP was implying the old saying ... "Linux is only free if your time is worth nothing" statement. I really wish he had to come over and clean my parents computer. I mean, I had to pay to install Windows on my parents computer, and I have to waste a couple hours a month baby-sitting it for periodic cleaning, virus-checking, scans, defrags, answering questions from my folks, my Dad complaining about it being slow and wanting me to "work some magic" to make it faster (but he's too cheap to get a DSL line for Ebay). So, it's like I've paid MS so I can waste some of my free time baby-sitting their OS every so often.

Meanwhile, with Linux, I got to spend some time learning a new OS and customizing things I never thought possible with Windows. And, with expanded CLI and programming IDE's, I've learned more about computers and programming then I did with Windows. So, I guess my time was worth something after all, because learning something new is never a waste of time. And, it didn't cost me anything except my time.

throdon
July 4th, 2007, 10:14 AM
yes it free and i love every g**d**m minute i spend away from the real world with it.

awakatanka
July 4th, 2007, 10:37 AM
Its free in no cost for us users that know a little more, but the bills are paid by costumers, schools and companies that need payed support indirect they pay for our free product. We are the testing grounds for the products those companies take. Canonical is a company and they need to earn money else they can't pay the bills and give away free cd's. They earn money with support and training and may be some other things. http://www.canonical.com/services

Drifter
July 4th, 2007, 07:00 PM
WOW, good replies, it seems that some of you actually read my post while others just vented about what they perceived to be someone talking negative about ubuntu. I said I am not that is am not a gamer, I do not play games that doesn't enter in to my thing about time. The main problem with time is some of the people who answer your posts for help only reply with smart a-- remarks etc. and don't take the time to try and help people. Most of the replies for help are very good and people mostly have good intentions. I am happy with ubuntu, but I still am not able to leave windows completely because of a few things that I am not able to do in ubuntu. But with each distro progress is being made and I hope that pc makers will someday start using this FREE software and maybe the cost of pc's will go down evern more. Yes I do know about Dell.

LouisvilleLIP
July 4th, 2007, 07:36 PM
The main problem with time is some of the people who answer your posts for help only reply with smart a-- remarks etc. and don't take the time to try and help people.

I couldn't disagree more. I am a noob to both Ubuntu and Linux. I have asked lots of questions, and received lots of help. Based on my experience, I would argue that Linux/Ubuntu users are more helpful than Windows users. I have not received a single nasty response, and I've asked some really simple questions that had probably been answered a million times in other posts.

On the discussion about cost, yes, it's true that there is a learning curve/cost, just like with Windows. With that said, it's relatively small. Most people that want to figure out how to install Linux App "X" can get it done. The only complicated things I've encountered has been with Compiz, (which is Alpha software, which would be difficult (costly) on any system). My Ubuntu install was fast, it worked out of the box, and I was able to do all of the things my mom would do on a computer, except I didn't pay for the software. I got Compiz Fusion to work with a little bit of effort. I got Conky installed, modified my .conkyrc to match the wallpaper that I found on gnome-look, and it wasn't that difficult. Is everything perfect? No. My other computer (Gateway 400vtx) maxes out at 800x600, with no solution in sight (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=440398). Is that a monumental problem? No. At least Linux recognized my laptop's touchpad out of the box, Windows couldn't do that right even with 2 years and countless drivers.

Long story short, Ubuntu is free, it is easy, and it is just a matter of time before Linux competes with Windows on a scale that no one can imagine right now. If you don't agree, you might be missing something important in the "Ubuntu experience".

darkog
July 4th, 2007, 07:38 PM
...but I still am not able to leave windows completely because of a few things that I am not able to do in ubuntu. ....

I will just add one thing to your post.

- the only way to move from windows to *nix is to just "move". i am sure there are things you are able to do on windows that you might not be able to do exactly as you are used to on Ubuntu. Just like there are going to be things on Ubuntu that you won't be able to do exactly the same way on windows. But you will find that there is no application that exists for windows for which there is not an exact comparable replacement app. in the FOSS.

fjm03
July 4th, 2007, 10:02 PM
I dual boot, but I wish I could go with ubuntu only, but until I can use ubuntu to do all I need to do I will need to keep dual booting.

Tells me that there is a shortage of study and appreciation. Few dual boot today. Most Install Linux, then install a virtual server and then
finally install a virtual MS machine. It's easy and substantially allows multiple operating systems to run simultaneously. It's not a choice of either or, but both. MS Windows simply becomes another application on a Linux host.

DrMega
July 4th, 2007, 10:28 PM
There have been many comments about learning curves etc, with the implication that Windows takes away the learning curve. This is true for most of us, as most of us came from a Windows background, and some of us will remember MSDOS before that.

However, if you are a kid in a less priviledged country, or a grand parent that is just trying out computing for the first time, which has the bigger learning curve?

Looking at it objectively, heres how I see it....

Windows:
-Supplied preinstalled. No problem there.
-Get on the internet using Explorer. Ten minutes in and I'm no longer in control. Popup windows everywhere, machine grids to a halt, because I didn't know about the need for things like popup blockers, antivirus and antispyware, firewalls etc. Pay someone to sort it, if I can afford to.
-All the above prbs sorted, now where can I find the apps I need? Do I have to go and buy them? What if I want to try them first? Do I have to find them and download them? Windows gives me a scary warning when I try to run the EXE I've found at the download site.

Ubuntu:
-Intuitive installer, installs OS
-Get on Internet using FireFox. Built in popup blocker helps me out. The fact that root account is locked by default means my system is fairly safe, but I don't need to know about that.
-Applications menu has Add/Remove feature where all I have to do is tick boxes to indicate what I want. If I want rid of them I just untick them.

Beyond the basics, there are still some issues that need to be ironed out with Linux, but if more people tried it, then more people would support it. If it was the preinstalled OS on new machines, making those new machines more affordable, then the community would grow much more rapidly, as with that the support and ongoing development would improve (that's not to say that it is not already excellent, but there is always room for improvement and growth).

mdsmedia
July 4th, 2007, 11:13 PM
I will just add one thing to your post.

- the only way to move from windows to *nix is to just "move". i am sure there are things you are able to do on windows that you might not be able to do exactly as you are used to on Ubuntu. Just like there are going to be things on Ubuntu that you won't be able to do exactly the same way on windows. But you will find that there is no application that exists for windows for which there is not an exact comparable replacement app. in the FOSS.Sorry, but you are wrong on that one.

This is in no way a criticism of Linux or Ubuntu or FOSS. I love Ubuntu and I have NO intention of complaining about Linux or moving back to Windows in any serious way.

But I am a tax accountant, and my tax software (wouldn't you know it, made by the same company that makes Quicken) ONLY runs on Windows. Yes I might be able to get it to run on WINE but then I have to lodge tax returns on a VPN, and have a digital certificate which needs to be readable by the software when lodging or receiving reports or whatever from the tax office.

I'm not saying this isn't doable in Linux, but it's not something that a non-techie accountant can do without a great deal of effort and a lot of research, and even then it may not be possible. This software is also constantly upgraded throughout the year, and a new version appears every so often which is downloaded and installed from within the package. Again problematic WITHIN linux.

So I need to dual-boot Windows. I don't want to, but I do need to.

For everything else (generally) I'm happy with the FOSS alternatives.

darkog
July 5th, 2007, 12:29 AM
But I am a tax accountant, and my tax software (wouldn't you know it, made by the same company that makes Quicken) ONLY runs on Windows.

Well, thats different. You don't want to mess with your bread & butter in the name of FOSS. I fully agree and can appreciate your POV.

As has been mentioned, if you want, you could have a look and see if your app will operate normally as expected in a VM. i.e. you can try it in Windows XP first, just use MS Virt. PC. it's free. If it works normally -- then you might be home free.

good luck.

Eggnog
July 5th, 2007, 12:58 AM
Tells me that there is a shortage of study and appreciation. Few dual boot today. Most Install Linux, then install a virtual server and then
finally install a virtual MS machine. It's easy and substantially allows multiple operating systems to run simultaneously. It's not a choice of either or, but both. MS Windows simply becomes another application on a Linux host.

That's pretty much me in a nutshell. I've been an Ubuntu user for a couple of weeks or so now and have found these forums and this community very helpful. I was running XP on this machine which is my older machine, an AMD 2000+ 1.67GB. I would get random BSODs and it would occasionally reboot out of nowhere and for no apparent reason. I was growing quite weary of all of this.

Then I read a piece about Ubuntu on the web and decided to try out the live CD. I loved it. I installed it and have been happy ever since. In two weeks I have learned all about the benefits of having a /home partition over just a /home folder and have reinstalled to have such a partition, and how to set up a virtual server with a virtual machine running XP so I don't have to look for an alternative for Quicken and a few other apps I can't live without. I've managed to get my VM to network with my other drives and partitions and get the USB devices working in the VM as well.

I couldn't be happier with Ubuntu. I am not a techno geek. But I took the time, and am taking the time, to learn as much as I can up front because it's simply not that difficult to do adn it will pay off later. I haven't dual booted back into "real" windows since I got my VM all set up and working. And now I'm sudo'ing along in Ubuntu like I had good sense. :D

vexorian
July 5th, 2007, 01:15 AM
Ubuntu is as free as possible, costs no money and it doesn't lock you.

Regarding learning curve, windows and Mac OS/X also have such learning curve, I think it took me a year to learn windows correctly.

Regarding software compatibility, the software that is incompatible also tends to cost money itself, so not being able to use it, in some ways, saves you money...

Dimitriid
July 5th, 2007, 01:29 AM
Other ( usually older ) Linux distros might not be free but Ubuntu works out of the box and has more than enough suitable applications on Synaptic to do everything you want.

In other words: The "time" you spend learning how to use and work in Ubuntu is as little as a few hours, if you truly need a lot of time to "learn" is not because of the distro, is because you want to learn a lot more things than what is necessary to use it.

The thing is that you probably have been using windows for so long you know a lot about it, not because you sat down for 56 straight hours learning each and every little thing about it but because you have been using it for so long. The same applies here.

If you do a FAIR comparition of the learning curves of say, Feisty vs Vista ( a fair comparition would be asking people who haven't used a computer in all their life at all ) I say the difference would be alot smaller. The thing is that while Vista has many changes, 99% of what you need to know for everyday computing is the same since over a decade and that usually is not taken into consideration when you claim that Ubuntu's learning time is a lot more.

KIAaze
July 5th, 2007, 08:07 AM
I will just add one thing to your post.

- the only way to move from windows to *nix is to just "move". i am sure there are things you are able to do on windows that you might not be able to do exactly as you are used to on Ubuntu. Just like there are going to be things on Ubuntu that you won't be able to do exactly the same way on windows. But you will find that there is no application that exists for windows for which there is not an exact comparable replacement app. in the FOSS.

May I suggest another solution:
Reduce your Windows XP partition to 10GB (or less, but watch out for the Windows updates).
That's what I did. :)

I think the switching happens automatically once you've got everything working that you use everyday (and already have an affinity for GNU/Linux).
Basically if anything you use everyday in Windows doesn't work or doesn't have an equivalent under GNU/Linux, you won't switch.

Doing a forced switch can be dangerous if you ever something very important to do and can't do it in Ubuntu.
But it's just as dangerous as having only one OS on your PC. ^^
(unless you have a system rescue CD (http://www.sysresccd.org/Main_Page))

Hiroshima
July 5th, 2007, 08:23 AM
install a virtual server and then
finally install a virtual MS machine.

Can you point to a how to for this? Sounds like something I would like to try. Or some keywords to google?

Thank you,

Hiroshima

KIAaze
July 5th, 2007, 08:38 AM
Keywords:
VirtualBox
Qemu
VMware

edit:
And if you want the complete list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_virtual_machines

I haven't tried virtualization yet, but I heard VirtualBox is the easiest.
there's even a video tutorial for it on youtube.

re-edit:
Here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ch8X86R6d-g&mode=related&search=

scragar
July 5th, 2007, 08:44 AM
can I point out that Ubuntu has saved me about 10 hours of time that I would have spent atempting to get M$ products to work, even though I had open office and firefox Ubuntu is still faster and easier to follow the logic behind(although occasionaly I think why was it done like that when this would be better)

mdsmedia
July 5th, 2007, 09:24 AM
Basically if anything you use everyday in Windows doesn't work or doesn't have an equivalent under GNU/Linux, you won't switch.
Once again, although I agree with your poiint, this is an over-generalisation.

My tax software is in Windows, as stated in my earlier post, but I use Windows ONLY for that and for one game, then I come home to Linux.

Seriously, if my tax software didn't need Windows, or even better, if I didn't need my tax software, I wouldn't need Windows. The game wouldn't be required, and I'd be more than happy to just use Linux.

My point is, I use my tax software everyday, in Windows, but I switched.

fjm03
July 5th, 2007, 10:04 PM
Can you point to a how to for this?

VMware Server installation via script available from Automatix2.
You provide the NT kernel.