PDA

View Full Version : Who thinks Ubuntu is better than Windows



joecool362
October 5th, 2007, 08:22 PM
Who thinks Ubuntu is better than windows (xp and vista).

hessiess
October 5th, 2007, 08:24 PM
its waaaaaaaay better

Nano Geek
October 5th, 2007, 08:25 PM
I think most everyone here would.

ianv01
October 5th, 2007, 08:27 PM
Not me!
Its hardly efficient spending hours to get 1 yr old hardware working Linux which was released recently.
Wireless cards dont work, screen resolution is very soft, and graphics cards are unheard of Linux. Installing software isn't as easy as windows.
Is Linux better than Windows, of course not. The lack of commercial software is surely a sign. Look at Macs!
Having said that, I will continue to experiment with it for another week, then I shall reclaim that HD space.

ghostcrab
October 5th, 2007, 08:31 PM
Ubuntu is way better then windows

rickyjones
October 5th, 2007, 08:32 PM
I voted "Depends on what your doing with the OS"

Why? Simple. For a lot of people Ubuntu would be better than Windows. However, there are still a lot of things that Windows is better at. Here is an immediate example from just today... When I plug my digital camera into my laptop running Windows XP Professional I get a popup asking me what to do. I ignore that and just open the camera up from "My Computer" as it shows up as another device there. In Ubuntu I can't do that. There is no option to just open up the camera. The only option I have is using F-Spot to import my photos. Instead I have to fiddle around with F-Spot photo manager, tell it where to find the pictures, then select the pictures I want, then try to tell it where to go. Oh, but it doesn't recognize the SMB shares I have on my desktop right now, so I have to put it in a temporary directory then move them to the network share... So in this case it would have been faster to use Windows.

While I think Ubuntu is wonderful (hence using it on my work desktop to save the company money) at times it is not the end all be all. And I'm glad that the good majority of people in this community think that as well. Makes me glad to be a part of this community.

Just my two cents everyone. Continue discussing.

Thanks,

-Richard

hessiess
October 5th, 2007, 08:32 PM
Wireless cards dont work
wrong! almost all of them will work somehow



screen resolution is very soft
then change the resolution!


graphics cards are unheard of Linux
again, not true, although thay can take alittle twecking, espetialy ati. i get about 2* graphics proformance on linux.


Installing software isn't as easy as windows

sudo apt-get inatall *******

Eddie Wilson
October 5th, 2007, 08:34 PM
Not me!
Its hardly efficient spending hours to get 1 yr old hardware working Linux which was released recently.
Wireless cards dont work, screen resolution is very soft, and graphics cards are unheard of Linux. Installing software isn't as easy as windows.
Is Linux better than Windows, of course not. The lack of commercial software is surely a sign. Look at Macs!
Having said that, I will continue to experiment with it for another week, then I shall reclaim that HD space.

MS Troll.

smartboyathome
October 5th, 2007, 08:35 PM
Or install using Synaptic or Add/Remove Programs. Can't get much simpler than that. ::)

popch
October 5th, 2007, 08:35 PM
I can not honestly give an answer to that poll.

With respect to OSs (as with practically every piece of software), there is no 'better', there is only 'better for'.

In that sense, I vastly prefer Ubuntu for my personal use at home.

At work, I am responsible for about 400 computers. Since the total number of applications running on those computers is nearly astronomical, and every one of those computers has to work flawlessly in an environment and a network which is designed for exclusice use with Windows PCs, it would be utterly useless to call any flavor of Linux ' better' than Windows.

BTW, that reminds me of the time OS/2 was launched. IBM sold it off as a 'Better Windows than Windows'. Presumably, they were right. Do you know the market share of OS/2 as of now?

mech7
October 5th, 2007, 08:39 PM
I think linux is getting better but not as good as vista yet, especially in the looks and ease of use (read gui) department.

For the rest offcourse i cant live without Adobe software so switching over full to linux just won't happen for the moment. ALthough i saw Flexbuilder is going to be on linux soon, though it is just Eclipse i hope they do the same for the oter apps.

rickyjones
October 5th, 2007, 08:40 PM
wrong! almost all of them will work somehow
So all the threads in the Wireless and Networking section about wireless not working are wrong? I'm just applying your logic there, not trying to troll right now.


then change the resolution!
Hard to change the resolution if the only ones listed are 640*480 and 800*600 as sometimes happens to me. Oh, you meant go and manually edit some obscure file... that is not easy, nor should it ever be necessary.


again, not true, although thay can take alittle twecking, espetialy ati. i get about 2* graphics proformance on linux.
So we need to tweak to get it working. And you get 2x the performance as opposed to Windows. I think I might call your bluff on this. Call me when I can install the latest ATI/Nvidia card downloading ONE file and double clicking it.



sudo apt-get inatall *******
Well, technically it is "sudo apt-get install xxxxx", but you have the idea. :). But I still can't do "sudo apt-get install dreamweaver" or "photoshop" or any of the other major applications that I need to use on Windows.

Nice try... I'm not trying to troll here, FYI, just making some quick rebuttals.

Have a nice day. :)

-Richard

eternalperson
October 5th, 2007, 08:42 PM
Ubuntu is much better than Windows!

RAV TUX
October 5th, 2007, 08:45 PM
Who thinks Ubuntu is better than windows (xp and vista).

Thanks for posted this thread it directly inspired me to post this thread/poll:

Poll: Who here thinks Xubuntu is better then OS X? (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=568258)
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=568258

FuturePilot
October 5th, 2007, 08:48 PM
I voted "Depends on what your doing with the OS"

Why? Simple. For a lot of people Ubuntu would be better than Windows. However, there are still a lot of things that Windows is better at. Here is an immediate example from just today... When I plug my digital camera into my laptop running Windows XP Professional I get a popup asking me what to do. I ignore that and just open the camera up from "My Computer" as it shows up as another device there. In Ubuntu I can't do that. There is no option to just open up the camera. The only option I have is using F-Spot to import my photos. Instead I have to fiddle around with F-Spot photo manager, tell it where to find the pictures, then select the pictures I want, then try to tell it where to go. Oh, but it doesn't recognize the SMB shares I have on my desktop right now, so I have to put it in a temporary directory then move them to the network share... So in this case it would have been faster to use Windows.

While I think Ubuntu is wonderful (hence using it on my work desktop to save the company money) at times it is not the end all be all. And I'm glad that the good majority of people in this community think that as well. Makes me glad to be a part of this community.

Just my two cents everyone. Continue discussing.

Thanks,

-Richard

A lot of cameras have two modes you can choose from. PTP mode and Mass Storage mode. If you switch to mass storage mode, it will show up on the desktop and you can browse through it.

hessiess
October 5th, 2007, 08:49 PM
Originally Posted by hessiess View Post
wrong! almost all of them will work somehow
So all the threads in the Wireless and Networking section about wireless not working are wrong? I'm just applying your logic there, not trying to troll right now.

no thay are not wrong, and i stated thay work SOMEHOW, ie not alwase easaly

i do not intend to make a huge argument.

Eddie Wilson
October 5th, 2007, 08:54 PM
Oh I'm sorry. I thought we were talking about an os. I didn't know we were talking about overpriced, apps. that people use because they are too lazy to learn anything else. Give me a break. I've got Photoshop, MS Office and all that other crap and I don't need to use all its features and most people don't. Windows is a total rip off. I know because I've had to install and repair peoples systems every since that crap came out. And the bad thing about all this is that I still do. But thats ok. As long as MS keeps putting out Windows I'll always have a job.
I'm outta here trolls.

rickyjones
October 5th, 2007, 08:55 PM
no thay are not wrong, and i stated thay work SOMEHOW, ie not alwase easaly

I hate to play Devil's Advocate but the "easy" part is what makes Windows better than Ubuntu for most people. Now, this isn't Ubuntu's fault. I do blame the hardware manufacturers for failing to provide drivers and/or specifications that Linux devs can use. But, Linux devs could also help in that regard by continually lobbying and/or coming up /one/ general Linux variant that the manufacturers can provide drivers for.

Just my couple of more cents :P

-Richard

ATrentino
October 5th, 2007, 09:02 PM
I was happy with XP. Then I bought a new laptop with Vista preinstalled, and thought Vista is large, bloated, unreliable (ask the thousands of people with genuine Vista blocked from some features by the WGA that got it wrong) and generally worse than XP. Now I am happier with Ubuntu than I ever was with any Windows.

floke
October 5th, 2007, 09:24 PM
Hard to change the resolution if the only ones listed are 640*480 and 800*600 as sometimes happens to me. Oh, you meant go and manually edit some obscure file... that is not easy, nor should it ever be necessary.

Its called /etc/X11/xorg.conf - its not exactly obscure. If you're incapable of editing that then you shouldn't even be near a PC.


So we need to tweak to get it working. And you get 2x the performance as opposed to Windows. I think I might call your bluff on this. Call me when I can install the latest ATI/Nvidia card downloading ONE file and double clicking it.

Ever heard of Envy (probably not).


Well, technically it is "sudo apt-get install xxxxx", but you have the idea. :). But I still can't do "sudo apt-get install dreamweaver" or "photoshop" or any of the other major applications that I need to use on Windows

Yes 'technically' that's it. As for Windows apps - try wine.

Please go back to Windows. Your'e not ready for Linux.

KaYnemO
October 5th, 2007, 09:36 PM
Linux (any flavor of it) is WAY better then windows!! linux rulezz!

Crashmaxx
October 5th, 2007, 09:42 PM
So all the threads in the Wireless and Networking section about wireless not working are wrong? I'm just applying your logic there, not trying to troll right now.
I agree that wireless is not as easy as it could be, but I have had a lot more issues with wireless in XP then in Ubuntu. Far too often I get junk like "You have limited or no connectivity" and having repair do nothing. And having basically no options to fix it. It just tells me "Contact your network admin", as the 'network admin' this is not helpful.

Anyway, it stinks that the companies make their wireless drivers such a mess and switch hardware in the same model constantly. There is no good reason for them to do so much of this and they simply ignore us. Only more Linux users will change this problem.

And I bet you can get wireless working if you look around. It has gotten better so most of the time the worst you have to do is use a windows driver.



Hard to change the resolution if the only ones listed are 640*480 and 800*600 as sometimes happens to me. Oh, you meant go and manually edit some obscure file... that is not easy, nor should it ever be necessary.
This is fixed in Gutsy which comes out in just a few weeks. You shouldn't have to mess with obscure files for graphics issues anymore.



So we need to tweak to get it working. And you get 2x the performance as opposed to Windows. I think I might call your bluff on this. Call me when I can install the latest ATI/Nvidia card downloading ONE file and double clicking it.

Have you tried Restricted Drivers Manager? Its pretty easy, just select the driver and click apply. Seems easier then hunting down the right file from the company. And Gutsy makes this even easier by putting driver selection in the GUI for the display.



Well, technically it is "sudo apt-get install xxxxx", but you have the idea. :). But I still can't do "sudo apt-get install dreamweaver" or "photoshop" or any of the other major applications that I need to use on Windows.
But you already have the gimp installed by default and there are a lot of great HTML apps for Linux. If you really need stuff like Photoshop, last I heard it runs great in Wine. Which is no harder to use then installing in Windows once you spend 5 min setting up Wine. I'd consider that quite a feat considering that neither Microsoft or Adobe have any interest in making such a thing possible.

And with more Linux users I can only guess that Adobe would make native versions. So it should be just a matter of time. Although, I'd really like to see commercial apps superseded by open source alternatives, or also becoming open source. And I don't think that is really much of a challenge.


You make some decent points, but a lot of these issues are being quickly solved, aren't technically problems with the OS, and/or still don't make Ubuntu worse then Windows.

The fact that Windows has random issues with everything from Microsoft's own software, drivers, security, to commercial apps, many of which can't even be properly troubleshot, much less fixed easily, makes me feel that Ubuntu is really better IMO.

If you still think Windows is better, then feel free to use it.

lancest
October 5th, 2007, 09:47 PM
User opinions often vary according to the length of their experience. There is a "big picture" with Ubuntu as with anything else. The 10 machines or so I run Ubuntu on do most anything a user would need very well. Often done more efficiently than anything on an MS system. True quality comes in many forms.

tgrisier
October 5th, 2007, 09:56 PM
Who thinks Ubuntu is better than windows (xp and vista).

Isn't that a rather silly question to ask in an Ubuntu forum?

happysmileman
October 5th, 2007, 10:03 PM
Installing software isn't as easy as windows.

I don't mind the other ******** you said, but that really pisses me off...

Is it easier to go into "Add/Remove Programs.", enter your password and check boxes from a huge list of programs, or is it esier to have to open up a browser, find the programs, then keep clicking "next" while they install..

Personally I prefer checking boxes and then having them install in background to be easier than having to download and install them myself. (Though I'm a gentoo user so I compile everything from source, so maybe that doesn't count, but on Ubuntu that's what you do)

n3tfury
October 5th, 2007, 10:07 PM
where's the option to vote "these polls/threads are getting old and ridiculous"?

seriously, give it a rest already.

n3tfury
October 5th, 2007, 10:08 PM
Isn't that a rather silly question to ask in an Ubuntu forum?

exactly. i wonder how this poll will wind up looking like? hm.

Baby Boy
October 5th, 2007, 10:12 PM
Ubuntu is much better as an OS.

Windows is still better for games however, but only because all the games are developed for this platform. I'm sure the games would run better in Ubuntu if they were native and with a little better video driver support.

indigoshift
October 5th, 2007, 10:33 PM
Ubuntu is better than Windows for one big reason:

It's yours.

You're not leasing it. It's not phoning home to let its creators know what's on your hard drive. It doesn't stop you from doing what you want to do with your hardware.

It belongs to you. When you say "jump!" it says "how high?"

rickyjones
October 5th, 2007, 10:41 PM
Its called /etc/X11/xorg.conf - its not exactly obscure. If you're incapable of editing that then you shouldn't even be near a PC.
See, this is the elitist attitude that drags down the Linux community as a whole. How on earth is that file /not/ obscure? I run Ubuntu and Gnome. To the average user how does that file reference /anything/ that has to do with Gnome or Ubuntu? Even the "X11" part will throw users off at first because the display environment is usually referred to as "X", not "X11". Please don't tell users that because they don't know something then they should not be near a computer... it just isn't very nice at all.



Ever heard of Envy (probably not).
Actually, I have. Isn't that for installing your graphics drivers? I tried that on my laptop and it actually worked. Of course my card is quite low end so the only thing I can do is look at GLXGears or maybe run FrozenBubble... Anywho - I only know of it because of my searches for trying to get my drivers installed. How many users are going to want to search for more than a few minutes to find the right driver? This is why I'm glad to see the "restricted-drivers-manager" now - very smart thing to do. Kudos to the Ubuntu devs.



Yes 'technically' that's it. As for Windows apps - try wine.
I keep hearing people say that it is much better in Linux, but I still have to use Wine to get things to sort of work. Last I checked (a couple weeks ago) they got Photoshop 7 working almost perfectly and CS2 would sort of run in Wine. I wouldn't call that 100% ready in my opinion.


Please go back to Windows. Your'e not ready for Linux.
Now that is just not nice. So my typing this on Ubuntu on my workstation at work means I'm not ready for Linux, then, eh?


I agree that wireless is not as easy as it could be, but I have had a lot more issues with wireless in XP then in Ubuntu. Far too often I get junk like "You have limited or no connectivity" and having repair do nothing. And having basically no options to fix it. It just tells me "Contact your network admin", as the 'network admin' this is not helpful.

Anyway, it stinks that the companies make their wireless drivers such a mess and switch hardware in the same model constantly. There is no good reason for them to do so much of this and they simply ignore us. Only more Linux users will change this problem.

And I bet you can get wireless working if you look around. It has gotten better so most of the time the worst you have to do is use a windows driver.

I agree that wireless has gotten a lot better. I'm fortunate enough to have an Atheros chipset in my laptop which is supported quite well by Ubuntu. Just an FYI - usually the "You have limited or no connectivity" means that the computer was unable to get an IP address from the DHCP server. Annoying, yes, but it happens. I get that a lot with cheap residential routers. And yes, more Linux users will help change the minds of manufacturers.


This is fixed in Gutsy which comes out in just a few weeks. You shouldn't have to mess with obscure files for graphics issues anymore.
I've seen screenshots of the new configuration utility for this and I am honestly looking forward to it. I'll install it when it comes out most likely :). Steps in the right direction which is just another reason why I continue to use Ubuntu (the best distro in my opinion).


Have you tried Restricted Drivers Manager? Its pretty easy, just select the driver and click apply. Seems easier then hunting down the right file from the company. And Gutsy makes this even easier by putting driver selection in the GUI for the display.
Yes, if the manager can identify the device and has the correct driver then this is a Wonderful piece of software (I enjoy it!). It is easier than downloading one file because it is already there. My qualm is, however, that if it doesn't know about the driver then how does one get it? In that instance the easiest thing would be to have one file from the manufacturer that works on any distro (in our case, Ubuntu). Now, let me repeat... this is NOT Ubuntu's fault. This is, in my opinion, largely on the shoulders of the manufacturers and slightly on the shoulders of the major Linux players as a whole.



But you already have the gimp installed by default and there are a lot of great HTML apps for Linux. If you really need stuff like Photoshop, last I heard it runs great in Wine. Which is no harder to use then installing in Windows once you spend 5 min setting up Wine. I'd consider that quite a feat considering that neither Microsoft or Adobe have any interest in making such a thing possible.

I don't believe that the Gimp can be compared to Photoshop. My main issue with the gimp is that there is no simple way that I have seen to Stroke (Outline) an object or text and provide a shadow to the text. I finally figured out how to do a shadow in the Gimp but if I move the original object then the shadow will not follow it... I'm sorry, but I do not have time to play around with a piece of software that does not offer the same possibilities that my current software does. Now, that is NOT an Ubuntu problem, that is just my opinion. Remember, I'm not saying the Windows is always better than Ubuntu here. I'm pointing out some reasons why you can't just say that Ubuntu is automatically better...


And with more Linux users I can only guess that Adobe would make native versions. So it should be just a matter of time. Although, I'd really like to see commercial apps superseded by open source alternatives, or also becoming open source. And I don't think that is really much of a challenge.
I agree that it would be nice to have native versions. I think if enough Linux users banded together and worked towards it then it would be a possibility. Until then I'm sure I'll continue to see the "killer" opensource application that doesn't have /all/ the features that the original closed source application has. Not an Ubuntu problem, but just my own pet peeve and opinion.


You make some decent points, but a lot of these issues are being quickly solved, aren't technically problems with the OS, and/or still don't make Ubuntu worse then Windows.
Thank you for the compliment. I know and I'm glad that they are being solved - it makes me happy to be a part of that community. And I agree - these points don't make Ubuntu worse, or Windows better, or vice-versa. They are just discussion points after all.


The fact that Windows has random issues with everything from Microsoft's own software, drivers, security, to commercial apps, many of which can't even be properly troubleshot, much less fixed easily, makes me feel that Ubuntu is really better IMO.

This might just be my experience but I've never seen a Microsoft program or a Microsoft certified program ever create an issue on a Windows computer. Third party applications not certified, yes. Security software from McAfee and Symantec... yes. No name apps... yes.


If you still think Windows is better, then feel free to use it.
Thank you for being civil during this discussion. It's quite refreshing! I will continue to use the best tool for the job. For many instances it is Ubuntu. For others it is Windows. That is how I like to work.

Just my two cents.

Thanks,

-Richard

David Valentine
October 5th, 2007, 11:10 PM
Ubuntu is better than Windows for one big reason:

It's yours.

You're not leasing it. It's not phoning home to let its creators know what's on your hard drive. It doesn't stop you from doing what you want to do with your hardware.

It belongs to you. When you say "jump!" it says "how high?"
Bingo. I recently upgraded 3 machines to Gutsy Beta, and the upgrades mostly went well (one machine wound up needing a fresh install cause I borked it somehow). Anyway, I wouldn't trade my experience, warts and all, for life with Windows. I love the sense of freedom in using the software, the responsiveness of the community in addressing issues, and the amazing and growing variety of things I can do. In fact, the only reason why I'm here is because I had to say somewhere that I really am glad I have committed myself to Linux in general and (K)Ubuntu in particular.

Thanks developers, and thanks community.

-grubby
October 5th, 2007, 11:27 PM
it depends, if you are using very specialized software than windows is better but my main point why Ubuntu is better is NO MALWARE!YAY!

JBAlaska
October 6th, 2007, 02:08 AM
I guess it all comes down to productivity, If your PC is just for personal home use productivity does not matter, if it's a business machine and setup properly with very few exceptions, Linux can be more productive in a large LAN environment.

That being said, I personally am able to use Linux for every task that is work related and on my computers, Ubuntu is more stable and faster than vista ever was.

I do have 1 computer on my LAN running XP which I use as a headless encoding station and that's only because I am to lazy to learn alternatives to Gordian Knot, CCE and VirtualDubMod.

While wine or duel booting can be a pain, using a dedicated windoze machine through VNC is in imho the best answer to multi-platform compatibility.

So I voted "Ubuntu is Better"
Better OS, better community, better eye candy, better price.

undecided
October 6th, 2007, 02:19 AM
after years of going back and forth with several flavors of Linux, I have to say I believe with the release of "Gutsy" with a little exposure, Ubuntu will start to gain ground and FASSSSSSSSSSST!!!

Quillz
October 6th, 2007, 03:43 AM
I think most everyone here would.
I don't think Ubuntu is better than Windows in certain situations. For the typical work done by end users, that is, browsing the Internet, checking e-mail, writing papers, etc. then absolutely Ubuntu is better. But you still need Windows for tons of so-called "industry standard" software, and that's where Windows will always have an advantage until developers take Linux more seriously as a viable developer's platform.

Quillz
October 6th, 2007, 03:43 AM
after years of going back and forth with several flavors of Linux, I have to say I believe with the release of "Gutsy" with a little exposure, Ubuntu will start to gain ground and FASSSSSSSSSSST!!!
Sorry, this won't happen in the real world.

FranMichaels
October 6th, 2007, 04:25 AM
Ubuntu is better in my opinion. My criteria revolves around package management (and the Free Software ecosystem at my finger tips), simple install (no funny codes to enter), vast hardware support, better memory management, scales better with multiple CPU/cores, and low maintenance (no disk de-fragmentation that I have to worry about :) )

The only advantages, in my opinion, Windows offers is due to it's ubiquity and 3rd party support. If Wine reaches 1.0, what advantage will it offer then? :razz:

vishzilla
October 6th, 2007, 06:07 AM
Here, i think most of em here will go for 1st option. I sure did. I have been using Ubuntu for the last 6 to 8 months, initially i was apprehensive but once i got a hang of it. i realized i have done a lot of stuff which i never tried on Windows

adamorjames
October 6th, 2007, 06:10 AM
It depends on what you use it for.

Quillz
October 6th, 2007, 06:58 AM
Ubuntu is better in my opinion. My criteria revolves around package management (and the Free Software ecosystem at my finger tips), simple install (no funny codes to enter), vast hardware support, better memory management, scales better with multiple CPU/cores, and low maintenance (no disk de-fragmentation that I have to worry about :) )

The only advantages, in my opinion, Windows offers is due to it's ubiquity and 3rd party support. If Wine reaches 1.0, what advantage will it offer then? :razz:
The vast array of services and applications that are made by Microsoft that only run on Windows, which, for better or for worse, have become industry standards. And I'm not talking about things like Office, I'm talking about things like Exchange servers, Visual Basic, Assembly, etc. Maybe WINE can run those, but I doubt it can do so very well, if at all.

FranMichaels
October 7th, 2007, 03:32 AM
The vast array of services and applications that are made by Microsoft that only run on Windows, which, for better or for worse, have become industry standards. And I'm not talking about things like Office, I'm talking about things like Exchange servers, Visual Basic, Assembly, etc. Maybe WINE can run those, but I doubt it can do so very well, if at all.

Exactly. What I'm saying is these advantages are not unique to Windows. MS could port their applications to run on Linux (or other OS's, and they do for Apple for some... Although the Windows version is always "better".)

In the case of wine, some apps work perfectly, others are not useable.
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?bIsQueue=false&bIsRejected=false&sClass=vendor&iId=5&sAction=view&sTitle=View+Vendor

Never heard of MS Assembly, I've heard of assembly language, even used it a little (eax and all that jazz :razz:)
Is it something popular?

Wine isn't finished nor perfect, but like I said, what happens when it achieves compatibility? It doesn't seem so far away, and wine has come in handy for my family when they need a Windows app.

Also, if Microsoft decides to try to break compatibility or checking if their software is being run via wine:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine_%28software%29#Microsoft_and_Wine

It may come down to anti-trust. Either way, things will get very interesting! :KS

roachk71
October 7th, 2007, 03:36 AM
My new computer used to have Vista installed on it, before its bootloader crashed irrecoverably.

Vista also took much longer to boot, and compared to how Ubuntu runs, was quite sluggish by comparison. I think the folks in Redmond have made too many compromises...

Ubuntu is better by far, IMHO. :)

dezoete
October 26th, 2007, 02:02 AM
Unbuntu 7.10

Hi

Till about a week ago I was using windows XP Professional
I saw in the local newspaper an article about an alternative operating system that was simple to use, and has ,included in it's set up, most of the programs that are needed by the average home computer user, was free, very user friendly, and could co-exist on my computer with windows.

It's called Wubi, (http://wubi-installer.org/), and installs Ubuntu linux v. 7.04 on your computer.

I tried it out, and it is all it is advertised to be

One of the big advantages is that it installs itself on top of Windows, so that, at the start, when you still have not organised it exactly to your preferment, you can easily revert to windows
It has a huge amount of programs that are very easy to install,

A few days ago, I got a message that there is a new version out , Ubuntu v 7.10

This is a version that is downloaded as an iso file, and after downloading, can be burned, for example in Nero, to a CD.

The installation disk lets you try out Ubuntu from the CD; the only disadvantage of continuing working from the CD is, that you have to re-build all the options every time you re-start the computer, since the operating system is on the CD.

After a day of trying out this version, I un-installed the Wubi edition, and installed the Ubunto on my computer, (hoping that I still would be able to access windows, in case of emergency), as promised by the program.

The installation was easy. In fact much easier then installing Windows.

This time, , since I probably would continue to use Ubuntu as my operating system, I had freed an entire 250 G Hard disk to install it on, although it does not need much disk space for the installation.

I have an AMD 64 motherboard, and the program installed itself as a 64byte version. (The installed version of Windows on my computer is XP Pro 32byte version)
It installed (without any help from me) all the drivers needed to use my Epson printer/scanner, my soundcard, and all other standard drivers.

After installation, I still had windows, but now as 2nd choice. The computer booted up in Ubuntu, and during the booting up, gives me the ability to choose the existing Windows XP operating system.

The chats say that no Firewall or antivirus are required

I did install an antivirus , ( they are available for free), even though there are very few viruses for linux, just to check from time to time, to be on the safe side.

Since I use my computer for office work (excel & word) I checked if the open office version that comes with Ubuntu, is compatible. It is, for me, (I use standard options of excel, and did not try out the more exotic ones, (macros etc.)
I installed a music player (VLC media player), although the program comes with a movie player installed, that lets you play music.
I installed a graphic program, Gimp, which is comparable to Paintshop pro, or even photoshop, (though it does not have all the bells and whistles of photoshop)

In conclusion:
Advantages of Ubuntu over windows:
1: Free
2: Comes with all standard programs pre-installed (free)
3: finding and installing extra programs is simple (and free)
4: It is very fast

In the meantime the only disadvantage I discovered is that I have to get used to the user interface, though it is similar to Windows, and cleaner.


In the meantime, I don't intend to return to Windows:guitar:

howardjd
October 26th, 2007, 02:48 AM
Linux is better for reasons too numerous to list.

howardjd
October 26th, 2007, 02:57 AM
(this post is needless and I'd remove it if I could)

AgentClank
August 1st, 2008, 09:26 PM
Ubuntu is faster, more stable, and more fun to use.

cespinal
August 1st, 2008, 09:43 PM
Its called /etc/X11/xorg.conf - its not exactly obscure. If you're incapable of editing that then you shouldn't even be near a PC.



Ever heard of Envy (probably not).



Yes 'technically' that's it. As for Windows apps - try wine.

Please go back to Windows. Your'e not ready for Linux.

Nice way to get more people interested in Ubuntu! yay :)

Giant Speck
August 1st, 2008, 10:12 PM
These kinds of threads are just stupid. The reasons should be obvious and yet there will always be more threads like it.

karellen
August 2nd, 2008, 08:18 PM
I chose the second option

gabhla
August 2nd, 2008, 08:36 PM
To utter and absolute shock and amazement of no one Ubuntu wins. In Ubuntu forums. Neither profound nor helpful.

RiceMonster
August 2nd, 2008, 09:24 PM
I voted the second option, because it's closest to "Windows is better for some people, and Linux for others."