PDA

View Full Version : ComputerWorld's 'Review' of Ubuntu



Nano Geek
October 1st, 2007, 07:32 PM
Read it here. (http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/137903/linux_still_doesnt_make_it_on_desktop.html)


Basic summary:
Because Linux doesn't have iTunes or Microsoft Office available natively (no mention is made of WINE), Linux is not ready for the desktop.

Thanks ComputerWorld for that in-depth review.

ryno519
October 1st, 2007, 07:39 PM
Strange, I've been using Linux as my primary desktop for over a year... or has it all been an illusion?

As for the article, you don't even have to read it to know what it says, it's yet another generic "Linux isn't ready for the Desktop because it doesn't have application X" article.

a12ctic
October 1st, 2007, 07:40 PM
PC Magazine actually had a serveral page long review of ubuntu. It was very refreshing. I liked it a lot, even if I already knew everythhing in there.

vambo
October 1st, 2007, 07:41 PM
What you'd expect from such a comic

popch
October 1st, 2007, 07:47 PM
3;3457793]
Because Linux doesn't have (...) Microsoft Office available natively (no mention is made of WINE), Linux is not ready for the desktop.

Actually, there are enterprises which for some reason or other depend on MS Office; for those, Linux really is not a viable option. Have you personally tried and used MS Office with Wine? If so, which version of Office?

ticopelp
October 1st, 2007, 08:06 PM
A crap article in every sense of the word. I wrote PC World off long ago anyway -- they're just shills for Microsoft.

Nano Geek
October 1st, 2007, 08:10 PM
Actually, there are enterprises which for some reason or other depend on MS Office; for those, Linux really is not a viable option. Have you personally tried and used MS Office with Wine? If so, which version of Office?

I never said that Linux was a viable option for everyone, I just didn't like it that they said that Linux wasn't ready for anyone.
I believe that I got Office 2000 to work awhile back. I can't remember how well it worked, but I believe that it was usable.

Perpetual
October 1st, 2007, 08:12 PM
I've had my ipod for 2 years and have used itunes twice. Once when I bought it and once when I received it back after being repaired. Maybe itunes is better now but back then it was horrible.

reyfer
October 1st, 2007, 08:17 PM
Oh, God, then how did people manage to survive when there was no iTunes for Windows? That means Windows was not for home users back then?:lolflag::lolflag:

Celegorm
October 1st, 2007, 08:34 PM
My breakdown of the article:

1. They complain about dell's ubuntu computers (with no mention of companies like system76)
2. iTunes and microsoft office dont work (isn't that what crossover office is for?)
3. They complain about it not working with the latest hardware. (which is due to hardware vendors not opening up specs or offering linux drivers, though more companies seem to be offering linux drivers of late)
4. They act like the only thing linux has going for it is that it's free,

Not one single point that any of the developers could improve upon (that I could find), except perhaps the WINE devs. That article was even more disappointing than I thought it would be.

Correction- A lot of people are saying they can get both MS Office and iTunes working in WINE or crossover office

lyceum
October 1st, 2007, 09:03 PM
Actually, there are enterprises which for some reason or other depend on MS Office; for those, Linux really is not a viable option. Have you personally tried and used MS Office with Wine? If so, which version of Office?

I got 2003 to work with Crossover 6 as a test. Access was the only thing that did not work.

b0ng0
October 1st, 2007, 09:24 PM
"...,sorry, there is no iTunes..." - what about this point is negative - surely the lack of a sub-par, bloated audioplayer is a good thing. The author of the article seems to be rather narrow minded and already had his mind set before he started writing.

marco123
October 1st, 2007, 09:32 PM
FUD.

My Laptop and Desktop run Ubuntu, and I can actually do more than I could on Windows, because all that time I spent on maintenance is now spent just using my PC.

Why would I want a system that can't even stay up for a few hundred days, and dies slowly from viruses and registry pollution? :confused:

No my PC World friends, I'm afraid it's Windows that isn't ready for my desktop.:)

jeyaganesh
October 1st, 2007, 09:43 PM
Lets see this in detail;
First, psychology of the human being-
1. Few people only dares to explore new things. They go around the Earth and discover new things like countries, islands etc.

2. Others just do same things throughout their life and live in small circle. They just live in the same place just doing their routine works.

3. Another few people like glittering luxurious things. They too do same routine works like second catagory people but with some gimmicks.

Now come to the computer world-

1.Most (90% computer users) doing same things from the first Windows, just ctrl c and ctrl v. They dont like to explore more things. I have seen lot of my friends blinking when they first see Firefox, because they have been using IE for years. Such people only using Windows now. They just dont want to explore new things.

2.Other people are luxurious loving people, they use Mac. Mac is nothing but beautified Windows.

3.Linux users. People looking for alternatives; explorers. They are very few in the human population.

Why I want/need Linux?
I want my computer to do what I like not the other way round. If I dont like colour or theme, I can change it only in Linux. If I dont need some junk software, I can remove it only in Linux. No unstability. No security threats. No stupid questions like 'This Program asking your permission to execute' (in Windows Vista).
So that only I need Linux.

In the computer world article, the author mentioned about MS Office, he is definitely comes under secong catogory of human beings. It is obvious, he never seen SUN's Open Office.

Using IPod is like devotion or status symbol nowadays. For me, to choose OS based on IPod compatiblity is immature. Personaly I dont like to use any music player separately, I use only mobile phone with MP3 player (Nokia N95). Comparing OS with that of IPod is childish. You can easily transfer MP3s to any music players.

Dell is a huge corporation, they investing lot of money in their business. It is inevitable to give OS system for free. Why you are hesitating to give money for the OS that give you new and hustle free experience.

He is speaking about Dell selling Ubuntu only 50£ than Windows. Ok, I agree that he wants to save some money. Will he buy any other cheap mp3 player which has same quality as IPod?

Moreover did you look at the bottom of the article only 8 out of 37 recommended to read that article. I feel only exploring people only read such article not the Windows users.

We have to bring Linux to vast second catagory people. It can be done by making day-to-day usable softwares like media players, office suites, messengers, etc installing along with OS itself. I mean making the OS ready to use. It will lure those people to use Linux.

Hope I am speaking correctly:guitar: Have fun folks.:popcorn: Dont Worry. Be Happy:guitar:

blithen
October 1st, 2007, 09:49 PM
Wow, I'm so tired of crappy biased reviews. Open Office is a great alternative to MIcrosoft Office. Gaaaah, this makes me so angry. Everyone has everything wrong about linux...very saddening.

conehead77
October 1st, 2007, 10:17 PM
Wow, I'm so tired of crappy biased reviews. Open Office is a great alternative to MIcrosoft Office. Gaaaah, this makes me so angry. Everyone has everything wrong about linux...very saddening.

Yeah, there is OO, but in the article he says most companies are dependent on MS Office, which is true imo. Maybe some people in a business could switch to Linux, but for example the controlling guys almost always have huge excel sheets with tons of formulas and macros in it. It would be too much effort (and risk) to change the "running system" for them.
Also Calc seems to be much slower when it comes to excessive calculating of formulas, but maybe thats only my perception...

n3tfury
October 1st, 2007, 10:23 PM
hm.

seems they used whine instead of wine. shame, really.

RageOfOrder
October 1st, 2007, 11:08 PM
Ugh.

I love how iTunes is a factor of why Linux just isn't ready for the desktop.
They fail to mention any one of the 5 or six Media players for linux I can think of that do everything iTunes does, and more, without the DRM. And what about the 50 million other media players for linux that are lighweight and don't have all the extra **** that iTunes forces on you?

You find me a business that needs microsoft office specific software that makes Linux unusable! Unless they are all handwriting their databases on OneNote tablets then I think you're covered. On that note, how many home users use Microsoft Office to the point where no other substitute would be sufficient? I use an office suit every day for school, and OpenOffice.org works perfectly for taking notes... Hell, I shut down X and take notes in VIM when I want to conserve my battery....

Don't write an article before you do your research people...

phrostbyte
October 1st, 2007, 11:28 PM
I would like to confirm that iTunes and Microsoft Office 2003 do work on Wine. iTunes support was added recently.

Now that that is settled, we can continue to use our superior Linux media players and good-enough office suites. :)

LookTJ
October 1st, 2007, 11:49 PM
I wouldn't trust major media companies. *propaganda*](*,)

jacob01
October 1st, 2007, 11:54 PM
Read it here. (http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/137903/linux_still_doesnt_make_it_on_desktop.html)


Basic summary:
Because Linux doesn't have iTunes or Microsoft Office available natively (no mention is made of WINE), Linux is not ready for the desktop.

Thanks ComputerWorld for that in-depth review.

yea ok then obviously people would rather pay 150+ bucks for an office suite than use an open source program that is just as good if not better but any way i think people are just lazy thats why people use windows. and if more people used linux then their would be more native programs but yea every ones lazy. an example of this is america

you now i like that linux is a bit more non user friendly or out of the way because it keeps bumbasses away

90% of people (windows users) don't know whats good for them

pcworld is anti linux wich is kinda weird seeing that it is a pc site not an os site they aren't called osworld they shouldn't have an os bias but yea what really makes me mad is that when people think of computer they immediately think of Microsoft and Microsoft did nothing in the evolution of the computer they just provided an operating system.

thats my opinion

-grubby
October 1st, 2007, 11:59 PM
what? they write off Linux because it doesn't support MS office or Itunes? That's Microsoft's and Apple's fault, not Linuxs. And newsflash: not everyone has an Ipod and not everyone needs MS office.

abadtooth
October 2nd, 2007, 12:02 AM
My breakdown of the article:

1. They complain about dell's ubuntu computers (with no mention of companies like system76)
2. iTunes and microsoft office dont work (isn't that what crossover office is for?)
3. They complain about it not working with the latest hardware. (which is due to hardware vendors not opening up specs or offering linux drivers, though more companies seem to be offering linux drivers of late)
4. They act like the only thing linux has going for it is that it's free,

Not one single point that any of the developers could improve upon (that I could find), except perhaps the WINE devs. That article was even more disappointing than I thought it would be.


Exactly.

jacob01
October 2nd, 2007, 12:18 AM
what? they write off Linux because it doesn't support MS office or Itunes? That's Microsoft's and Apple's fault, not Linuxs. And newsflash: not everyone has an Ipod and not everyone needs MS office.

yea thats right and ms doesn't want any one to use their stuff like dx and other technologies they put money on to develop in their favor.

yorkie
October 2nd, 2007, 01:08 AM
I agree with the comments from nathangrubb.
Reading some of the post here people saying "I use Wine or Crossover to run MS Office or Itunes" thats like saying Ubuntu is not good enough. If you need to use Itunes or MS office maybe you should stick with Windows. I can`t see the need to have two O/S on the same computer unless you just have Ubuntu on for Compiz and use is as a toy.
Open office is as good if not better than MS Office and as for Itunes there are plenty of alternatives. Maybe if people just used the programs that Ubuntu has to offer then perhaps future Ubuntu reviews will be more favourable.

WaeV
October 2nd, 2007, 01:16 AM
PC Magazine actually had a serveral page long review of ubuntu. It was very refreshing. I liked it a lot, even if I already knew everythhing in there.

Yeah I saw that article as well. I was just thinking about sending in a letter asking for more linux articles when they published that article. I was really pleased with it.

kopinux
October 2nd, 2007, 01:26 AM
yes, we can vote thumbs down to not recommend the story in the page.

its already 92 when i last did.

derekr44
October 2nd, 2007, 01:30 AM
Actually, there are enterprises which for some reason or other depend on MS Office; for those, Linux really is not a viable option. Have you personally tried and used MS Office with Wine? If so, which version of Office?

Office 2003 works flawlessly with Crossover. I'm running Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Project, InfoPath, Outlook and Publisher with it.


Reading some of the post here people saying "I use Wine or Crossover to run MS Office or Itunes" thats like saying Ubuntu is not good enough. If you need to use Itunes or MS office maybe you should stick with Windows.

Sometimes these suites are needed for work purposes and not just to have (like Outlook, Publisher, InfoPath). I run everything personal off of OpenOffice.

Samhain13
October 2nd, 2007, 02:38 AM
Unfortunately, despite major strides in recent years -- notably the Ubuntu release -- Linux still isn't viable for most end users or organizations.

Such a statement warrants citations of statistics and other related material. Define "most", "end users" and "organizations". Then the guy writes as if organisations automatically qualify as businesses, and that businesses that need specialty software have the same specialty needs-- and that business organisations automatically qualify as desktop end users when it is not unheard of having a large office environment having multiple MS Windows workstations exchanging with and storing data on GNU/Linux servers.

Arguably, not all business organisations will have that kind of environment. But surely, an organisation representative of a large end user share will opt to have a network served by GNU/Linux machines realises that it's the best way to serve a high volume of workstations. Now just imagine a high-performance, secure and fully-compatible network it will be among both GNU/Linux servers and desktop workstations.

Again, there are many organisations that maintain a network of a few MS desktop work stations without the need for a good server. But to say they are "most" is overstating it.


The Linux machines were meant for enthusiasts who wanted a "no Windows" option. Users would still have to pay for the operating system -- about US$50 less than Windows, which was hardly a major savings...

Then,


And cost is the hidden factor. While much is made of Linux's being free, the truth is that software costs account for only about 10 percent of total cost of ownership for PCs.

Assuming that "much is being made of Linux's being free" means "it's becoming popular because interested people can try and use it without spending for it", why would people buy Dell laptops with "hardly a major savings..."? Oh, is there any evidence that a lot of peope who bought Dell Ubuntu laptops later replaced their OS with MS? Hummm...

Oh, and here's the thing. My computer cost me around 45K Pesos ($950 US) in hardware to build: AMD Sempron, Nvidia, Wacom, etc., its a complete system. I own a copy of Photoshop CS which I bought for around 20K Pesos ($400).

400 is not 10% of 950!!! Hahahaha!!! (Now, why am I laughing?! I'm the one who lost money! Anyway...)

Somebody should introduce that guy to Dan Brown. They might make good fiction together.

Cheers. :D

jrusso2
October 2nd, 2007, 03:26 AM
Just about everything in the article was true. Ubuntu is not ready for most users desktops. Even Mr. Shuttleworth and Dell have said this.

There is missing driver support, missing commercial application support, and lack of easy configuration of many wireless cards and laptop power management.

Maybe Dell can help get the needed drivers, but the commercial applications are going to be a problem.

aysiu
October 2nd, 2007, 03:29 AM
Interesting. So if Microsoft (which has a vested interest in Linux not spreading) ports Microsoft Office to Linux and if Apple (which also has a vested interest in Linux not spreading) ports iTunes to Linux, then Linux will be "ready for the desktop."

adamorjames
October 2nd, 2007, 03:42 AM
Interesting. So if Microsoft (which has a vested interest in Linux not spreading) ports Microsoft Office to Linux and if Apple (which also has a vested interest in Linux not spreading) ports iTunes to Linux, then Linux will be "ready for the desktop."

I don't think porting will happen anytime soon as you kinda hinted.
:lolflag:

jrusso2
October 2nd, 2007, 03:46 AM
Interesting. So if Microsoft (which has a vested interest in Linux not spreading) ports Microsoft Office to Linux and if Apple (which also has a vested interest in Linux not spreading) ports iTunes to Linux, then Linux will be "ready for the desktop."

This is why a monopoly is bad. Why Adobe won't port to Linux is more interesting question.

Could it be they don't belive the market is big enough? Or is it because they think Linux users are cheap?

Or is it because of too many distros.

They do port flash and reader, reader we dont even need. But they won't port Dreamweaver or Photoshop.

Two important applications along with Microsoft Office would be the trinity.

David Ostrom
October 2nd, 2007, 04:27 AM
Why is Dell offering Ubuntu? Look at it this way, Windows Vista sucks big time and Dell knows it, it is forced to look for other alternatives such as Linux to stay competitive, also look at all the twenty something geeks out there running Linux and then you begin to understand that in another twenty years from now
they will be in there forties teaching there kids to use Linux, you get the idea. \\:D/

aysiu
October 2nd, 2007, 04:38 AM
I don't think porting will happen anytime soon as you kinda hinted.
:lolflag:
I hinted at no such thing.

prizrak
October 2nd, 2007, 12:58 PM
I agree with the comments from nathangrubb.
Reading some of the post here people saying "I use Wine or Crossover to run MS Office or Itunes" thats like saying Ubuntu is not good enough. If you need to use Itunes or MS office maybe you should stick with Windows. I can`t see the need to have two O/S on the same computer unless you just have Ubuntu on for Compiz and use is as a toy.
Open office is as good if not better than MS Office and as for Itunes there are plenty of alternatives. Maybe if people just used the programs that Ubuntu has to offer then perhaps future Ubuntu reviews will be more favourable.

Some people need MS Office if just for compatibility purposes. Statements like "If you want MS Office just use Windows" are pretty off putting and actually somewhat elitist. It's as if I said I want to get a BMW 325 because it's better on gas than a 545 and you said "if you want economy go and get a Civic". Obviously those who use Linux based OS's do it because they want to use the specific OS and it works for them for the most part but sometimes there is a need for something that cannot run natively.

P.S. I don't use WINE at all on my system

phen
October 2nd, 2007, 01:33 PM
hello everybody!

i think nobody should waste time by discussing an article that bad.

The author is called a "researcher": Michael Gartenberg is vice president and research director for the personal technology and access and custom research groups at JupiterResearch in New York.

if i would do my research like this I would get fired instantly.

:lolflag:

Samhain13
October 2nd, 2007, 01:41 PM
...if i would do my research like this I would get fired instantly.:lolflag:

It think the article is more of an opinion piece than a research report. And the guy's entitled to an opinion. But then, even opinions need to have some kind of foundation, that in the article's case is too shaky.

:)

the.dark.lord
October 2nd, 2007, 01:48 PM
Just about everything in the article was true. Ubuntu is not ready for most users desktops. Even Mr. Shuttleworth and Dell have said this.

There is missing driver support, missing commercial application support, and lack of easy configuration of many wireless cards and laptop power management.

Maybe Dell can help get the needed drivers, but the commercial applications are going to be a problem.

Just about everything? If I ever wrote such an article and submitted it as my project, I would be kicked outta college. Only the commercial applications part is slightly true... most of the users are more than happy with alternatives like OpenOffice

multifaceted
October 2nd, 2007, 02:24 PM
Oh, God, then how did people manage to survive when there was no iTunes for Windows? That means Windows was not for home users back then?:lolflag::lolflag:

Well said... and excellent point. All hail the Media's unbiased opinion!

:lolflag:

ATrentino
October 2nd, 2007, 03:21 PM
I emailed the author and, in a very civilized and polite manner, explained why I think his article is bad.

stuh84
October 2nd, 2007, 04:01 PM
Quite possibly the worst review of an OS I have ever seen. One application doesn't mean something isn't ready for the desktop.

Absolutely pathetic. I think my IQ went down 12 points just by reading it.

Nano Geek
October 11th, 2007, 09:13 PM
Ugh, they did it again!

Don't Look to Linus Torvalds for Leadership (http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,138360-c,linux/article.html)

Summery:
Basically this guys rant against Torvalds and the fact that the new kernel release didn't include more features that it did.

ryno519
October 11th, 2007, 09:28 PM
Ugh, they did it again!

Don't Look to Linus Torvalds for Leadership (http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,138360-c,linux/article.html)

Summery:
Basically this guys rant against Torvalds and the fact that the new kernel release didn't include more features that it did.

Last I checked, kernels aren't supposed to be exciting.

UI-Freak
October 11th, 2007, 10:30 PM
Few here understand why Linux is not gaining a broader audience. The rest can only understand why Linux is good enough for themselves.

They way you behave and argue year by year must really please Microsoft and vendors of other commercial products. You blame anything but the product itself (and yourself, and the community) and keep Linux where it is.

Improving the product dramatically is key. Posting here doesn't help the product, it only makes you feel better.