PDA

View Full Version : Why do you choose Ubuntu over Windows



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

crtlbreak
July 7th, 2008, 12:25 PM
I think the title says it all for me
" ... you have Windows and use linux

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Tomatz
July 7th, 2008, 12:27 PM
XP just kills Lynux!

Linux is crud because everyone knows all PC's were invented for was to play counterstrike and you cant even do that on lynux.

You n00bs!!!

I'm of to go on beebo and talk about wares!!!

Canis familiaris
July 7th, 2008, 01:29 PM
FINALLY The Truth:

http://www.adequacy.org/stories/2001.12.2.42056.2147.html

LouEven
July 7th, 2008, 01:44 PM
FINALLY The Truth:

http://www.adequacy.org/stories/2001.12.2.42056.2147.html

Leo Laporte had this one on his show a minute or two ago. I laughed when I heard about it then, to actually read it makes it even funnier.

:lolflag:

Tomatz
July 7th, 2008, 01:52 PM
FINALLY The Truth:

http://www.adequacy.org/stories/2001.12.2.42056.2147.html

Crud me!

That was classic.

:lolflag:


:popcorn: for you!

Canis familiaris
July 7th, 2008, 02:02 PM
The most funny part is this (http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=is+my+child+a+hacker&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8)

It comes FIRST on the google search list. Imagine if some ignorant parent takes that SERIOUSLY.

JohnLM_the_Ghost
July 7th, 2008, 02:19 PM
FINALLY The Truth:

http://www.adequacy.org/stories/2001.12.2.42056.2147.html
Bwahaha :lolflag:

I nearly laughed my *** off! I can tell the guy knows nothing of the computers, hacking and hell... the world overall!

If I had this "model parent", I'd kick 'em where it hurts! (This might be a cultural issue)

P.s. If Linux is made by Russians with Xenix as base, then I'm mashed potatoes!

bilijoe
July 7th, 2008, 10:04 PM
i think that linux and windows are for different types of users.Linux for those experienced but windows for those who do not want to know how it works.I'm a novice don't know much but as for me as a home desktop user Windows is more effective in multimedia and GAMES (these two things are most popular for internet is costly).That is why most of my friends prefer using Windows.
Greetings from the Crimea I agree; Linux and Windows are for different types of users, but I draw the dividing line in a different place. Linux is for users who are in the know, and Windows is for those who don't want to know. My experience with modern Linux is limited to Ubuntu (because it is the best), so I can only address that particular distro, but my reasonably extensive experience with Ubuntu Linux has taught me that, at least since Ubuntu 7.10, anyone who can operate and maintain a Windows system is entirely capable of installing, operating, and maintaining a Linux system, and doing everything with it that can be done under Windows (actually, much, much more). I do agree that, at the current time, Windows may still enjoy a slight edge, when it comes to certain games, and possibly also in the realm of some aspects of multimedia. But, I can assure you, this is a temporary situation. As it has already done in every other area, Linux will soon catch up in these areas, and then proceed on, leaving Windows in its dust. Remember, Linux is created, maintained, and expanded by users, so, if users want better gaming support, or better multimedia support, it's simply a given that Linux will [soon] have all the functionality necessary to perform those tasks, as well as, or [probably] better than Windows. With the release of version 7.10 (actually, well before that), I became thoroughly convinced that it is definitely no longer a matter of "if", but of "when" (and the answer is "soon") that Linux will completely overtake Windows, in every important measure of what a quality operating system should be. For my money, it already has, but I do understand that there are a few areas (gaming being the only significant one that I see), where Windows still enjoys a slight edge, but only because the game manufacturers have yet to see the light. In coming years, I am certain that it will be Windows (if there still is such a thing) that will be the problematic OS, when it comes to running the best games.

JohnLM_the_Ghost
July 8th, 2008, 12:59 AM
...Windows may still enjoy a slight edge, when it comes to certain games, and possibly also in the realm of some aspects of multimedia. But, I can assure you, this is a temporary situation. As it has already done in every other area, Linux will soon catch up in these areas, and then proceed on, leaving Windows in its dust.
...Linux will [soon] have all the functionality necessary to perform those tasks, as well as, or [probably] better than Windows. With the release of version 7.10 (actually, well before that), I became thoroughly convinced that it is definitely no longer a matter of "if", but of "when" (and the answer is "soon") that Linux will completely overtake Windows,...
In coming years, I am certain that it will be Windows (if there still is such a thing) that will be the problematic OS, when it comes to running the best games.

You're too optimistic!
And you don't take some simple things into account.
DirectX is currently choice of Game Graphics API (and it's Windows only), and I am not surprised. Being a lame Gamdev guy myself, I have noticed there is a lot of cool stuff DX can do! OpenGL is keeping up, but still lags few steps behind! So DX gained the upper hand from times when they were equal.

Also from Companies view... People using Free Open-Source OSs probably ain't gonna pay the same as Windows' users for proprietary coded game!
So they focus on Windows more!

And Big projects require money to maintain... so there ain't gonna be much big hi-quality games for free (much less open-source)... different story for little stuff.
That would cover the game stuff...

As for multimedia... I see brighter future! Technically Linux is good platform for that already.
Only things that bugs me are:

Video don't play nice with Desktop effects (if you use them)!
Lack of good model/chipset specific drivers... (believe me, if you have good sound card with hi-end surround speakers, you notice the difference) ALSA is cool but they should make something like modules with code and tools specific to a model series (chipset)!
Most software don't run 720p+ video fast enough! (MP Classic within Win does)


and lots of other commercial reasons jb1 talked about earlier!

kaligus
July 8th, 2008, 11:50 AM
I have been using Linux for a year and I never have recompiled a kernel. Such horror stories are overblown.

I have never compiled on a desktop, but I started compiling on a 286 from floppies...

FUD aside kernel compiling isn't that bad if you take the time to get your ducks (penguins) lined up first.

1) Because I did not have to fight with someone speaking a language I don't understand for hours, only to be told that I had to pay to upgrade my OS (again) to get some basic needs met. (long story at the bottom)

Because I can customize it to my hearts content, including removing most of the pre-loaded stuff I don't use (evolution comes to mind) without fear that tomorrow M$ will discover I have modified THEIR OS and undo my changes.

Because I can install, update, uninstall, REALLY uninstall, or REALLY uninstall including configuration with one or two clicks and/or some typoing.

Because I can have 4 desktops with a cute little clicky box to switch between them, fill all 4 with "stuff" and not have my machine breath hard.

Because I can "hold" apps from being upgraded if I have a particular reason for lagging behind "normal".

Because I can try bleeding edge software, decide I don't like it, and revert or uninstall without worrying about registry bloat.

Because my TCO (total cost of ownership) including my time is 1/100th of what it was only a month ago.

In short because I am free to do with MY machine what *I* want to do without worrying about tricking the OS or provider of that OS into stuff which may or may not work today, let alone tomorrow!

LONG STORY from #1

I have been running cli linux for ages and ages (anyone remember cp/m? did that before linux) and have never been too impressed with the desktop on linux (or similar) though its not that much different than my Amiga :) which I love.

A little over a year ago I had some windows driver issues (win 2k) which required me to dig the XP key that came with my machine, only to find out that some one had registered my key already.

So I paid for XP twice! after calling Microsoft customer "service", providing my invoice via fax, and still being told I am a criminal for trying to use the OS I rented once already two years ago.

A month ago XP started giving me grief about updating the same driver and "politely" suggesting that I could not continue using XP and had to switch to Vista...

The device in question (a proprietary smart card attached to a medical device) is now fully working in a virtualbox with win2k, doesn't know it has a network connection available and has not once told me that I had to upgrade my OS to keep using the device.

In fact if not for the uber reliance on M$ stuff including sql server (the reason for the upgrades) I can talk to the proprietary smart card out of the box on linux... something impossible on windows for some reason. Thus making the need for a virtualbox obsolete as soon as I figure out all of the formats etc.

(I even paid for the special drivers from the company making the device "usable" in windowz.

We wont go down that road! Suffice it to say that the smart card software on linux actually talks to the device, hands me the data, etc. I suspect there is some back-room dealing going on on this one for sure)

kaligus
July 8th, 2008, 12:07 PM
..deletia..

Are you telling me that StyleXP and WindowsBlinds dont actually exist? That http://www.themexp.org/ is a figment of my imagination? Its far easier to install a custom skin on Windows than Linux by a long shot also.
..deletia..


Having purchased both of the first two, and looked at the third, and having them mess up my world more than once I must admit that is a reason for me to choose Linux over Windows... and I have far more eyecandy now than I have ever had with windows.

I can even without the world-messing-up load skins made for WindowBlinds, Style-XP and others.

Not wanting to rain on any parades but my experience is upside down to yours ;)

crtlbreak
July 8th, 2008, 12:08 PM
FINALLY The Truth:

http://www.adequacy.org/stories/2001.12.2.42056.2147.html

Hells Teeth - what is Lunix? A new OS?

And I love the part of

"Lunix is extremely dangerous software, and cannot be removed without destroying part of your hard disk surface."


BWAAAAHHHHHHHHHH :lolflag:

kaligus
July 8th, 2008, 12:12 PM
...because it's an Ubuntu forum, and you're likely to get more Ubuntu and GNU/Linux partisans who vigorously disagree with you here.

I don't mind paying developers for their time, either. But why should I do it when the best stuff is given away for free...and I didn't even have to steal it?

You could pay for sex, too...but most people would agree that it's better when given freely

Donations are always good to reward developers as well :guitar:

crtlbreak
July 8th, 2008, 12:18 PM
The most funny part is this (http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=is+my+child+a+hacker&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8)

It comes FIRST on the google search list. Imagine if some ignorant parent takes that SERIOUSLY.

It actually comes a first and second place on the google search!!


and the funniest is

" .... invented by a Soviet computer hacker named Linyos Torovoltos" - this guy surely sounds evil :evil:

BWWAAAAAHHHHH :lolflag::lolflag:

vikramjeet.singla
July 8th, 2008, 12:34 PM
first of all ITS TOTALLY FREE!!! and i think this reason is sufficient for the most of the user and also no viruses, spyware etc...
:) :) :)

leandromartinez98
July 8th, 2008, 01:47 PM
Are you telling me that StyleXP and WindowsBlinds dont actually exist? That http://www.themexp.org/ is a figment of my imagination? Its far easier to install a custom skin on Windows than Linux by a long shot also.


I've tried to download one of those. I clicked in the image, then in the theme, and it said: Are you sure you want to download file 1919181.exe? Should I trust that?

crtlbreak
July 8th, 2008, 02:09 PM
first of all ITS TOTALLY FREE!!! and i think this reason is sufficient for the most of the user and also no viruses, spyware etc...
:) :) :)

hmmmm ... for end users that dont want to pay for support yes but not quite totally free
http://www.ubuntu.com/support/paid


and as for virus - there are a couple - ever heard of Bliss?
but they are mainly the open source people cross testing and referencing - people who work hard at making their software work properly are hardly going to spend all that effort on destructive goals.
just a few corrective pointers :)
regards

LouEven
July 8th, 2008, 11:26 PM
http://www.adequacy.org/stories/2001.12.2.42056.2147.html

I did not know this was a prank...The link above that is.....I thought it was some retarded parent trying to be a nutcase about the internet and electronics, even if was from 2001. It angered me a bit..I don't mind if users trash talk each other but when some nut case jumps in and just starts rambling on you know??....

OK, OK, OK, OK, If you go back to the sites and they are shut down..even the archived ones..you didn't see me..Ok?! CAN WE GET OUR STORIES STRAIGHT HERE!? I was at Tina's just chillin eating those damn frozen pocket pizza's and playing GTA!!!...I'm out!

:guitar:

OldGaf
July 9th, 2008, 02:25 AM
Why? Because it is better.

I have a large combined family... 7 kids from 11 - 20 years old.

We have many desktops, a print server, MythTV master and slaves etc. The younger boys (and myself) dual boot to XP for gaming.

The house used to be a Windows inviroment, and I just could not keep them up to date and running..... Constantly removing viruses and spyware. Finally, I had enough and declared to my family that I was only going to support Linux! They could use windows, but was no longer going to fix it.

Well.... my (at the time 15 year old) daughter went all linux (not a gamer).... I have not had to fix her PC in the 2 years it has been running.... nothing. She does all the usual stuff like her friends..... facebook, chat, email, music etc.

My wife is an IT person (as am I) and "allowed" me to install a dual boot on her notebook a few years ago.... it only has Kubuntu on it now. She has a company notebook that has to have windows.... now she see's all the disadvantages she could not before.

Another HUGE part of the conversion for the house was cost. If I had Windows XP or Vista on all my PC's / Servers in the house, with there own copy of office (kids need it for homework), how much do you think that would cost?

I only boot to windows for gaming. If I need to dial into work, I run XP Pro in Virtual Box on my Linux box.

Another nice thing.... every Linux system in the house is VERY different. Very personal to the owner. You don't really get that with Windows.

Another GREAT thing is networking. Linux is a dream! I bought an eee-pc and use that to access any pc / server in the house. With it I have TOTAL control...... and I have various ways of accessing depending on my needs. I can ssh in and use the command line, I can ssh -X and run individual GUI applications, I can FreeNX in and have a VERY fast complete remote desktop.
Funny story.... one night one of my daughters was playing Amarok too loud. I ssh –X’ed into her pc and loaded the mixer and turned it down. If I was really mean, I could have changed her password and done sudo shutdown -h now!

Anyway..... Loooong story short... Windows is OK..... Linux is just better. You just don’t notice until you use it for a while and then try Windows again!

AlanJM01
July 9th, 2008, 02:54 AM
The reason to use ANY Linux over XP/Vista, etc-

Freedom as in Freedom of choice, or free beer!

ANY reader of http://badvista.com will suddenly see the freedoms (slowly?) being taken away!

Any USER of any MS product will know the bugginess and security drawbacks.

I am an analyst and support users of MS Products and they are as well fed up with the big brother issues that come to light.

David1000
July 9th, 2008, 04:57 AM
In addition to the above:

Linux is free, Windows is expensive

Linux can run on a much lower specification computer than Windows; ie, lower purchase cost, less heat, less power, less noise.

Linux remains much the same. Every time a new Windows comes out, one has to relearn how to use it; and how to get around a new set of bugs.

Windows XP won't "last" for ever. You will eventually have to change to a newer version or switch to Linux. I started in DOS 3.1. I've now taken the plunge, switched to linux and dumped Windows.

With Ubuntu, why should anyone use Windows?

SirBismuth
July 9th, 2008, 07:50 AM
My main reasons are that it is NOT a Microsoft product, and it's free. I used to be happy to promote Flight Simulator, until FS X came out. That runs like rubbish, even on a top-end system, in my experience. I couldn't be bothered shelling out for the expansion pack.

I have Ubuntu 8.04.1 installed at home and at work, still dual-booting on both systems, but plant to eventually only use Linux. This will probably happen on my home PC first, as I have certain apps that I must get working under Wine first at work.

I have also found that the support community for Linux is amazing, I haven't yet NOT found a solution for a problem I was having in Linux. But, I suppose there are Windows forums that also are helpful, I don't know.

If you have an issue with an app in Linux, you can rewrite the source yourself, contact the developer/s directly, or find a fix made by someone else. None of these options are feasible with Microsoft products.

For me, Linux has been far more stable than Windows, and it is more secure. Of course that all depends on the user in any OS. Our IT department at my employer far prefers client machines to be running Linux than Windows, primarily for security and support reasons.

I certainly hope that I can give something back to the Linux community one day, when I have had more experience with Linux. For now, I just promote Linux to virtually everyone that I speak to.

B
:guitar:

NoSmokingBandit
July 9th, 2008, 10:08 PM
If you have an issue with an app in Linux, you can rewrite the source yourself, contact the developer/s directly, or find a fix made by someone else. None of these options are feasible with Microsoft products.

Because we all know open source software doesnt exist on windows...

/sarcasm

tadada
July 9th, 2008, 11:17 PM
I sit here thinking about why I like Linux and it makes my brain hurt with all the reasons why. The ability to change almost anything, almost no viruses, almost everything is open source, free, the list will go on for ever. The only down side I see of Linux is games are mostly for windows, and certain things on Linux can be a pain to configure. (Yes X, I am talking about you. X wouldn't work on multiple other distros but with Ubuntu, X never gave me a problem even with my Ati card. on Ubuntu X just works)

articpenguin
July 11th, 2008, 01:03 AM
I hate windows But i still use it only for video editing. That is why it is tucked in only a 7GB partition on my 500GB HDD.

enchance
July 11th, 2008, 06:40 PM
I use linux because windows is a pain. I boot up my XP only in very rare cases like when it's the end of the world or something like that. The last time I saw my XP desktop was when bush became president. Heehee.

Joshuwa
July 11th, 2008, 06:43 PM
...because I like filling my screen with transparent terminals running insignificant commands and IRC chat, then posting screenshots of it to make Windows users think I'm doing something very important.

</thread>

:popcorn:

LouEven
July 11th, 2008, 09:27 PM
This thread should be shelved, discontinued, and forgotten about, to pay homage to XP and Billy.

Ok start the eulogy,


I'll miss you Bill Xp Dos vista blue Screen Lord of lost Data. I'll tell my children about you, so they do not repeat the mistakes of the past.:)

:lolflag:

JohnLM_the_Ghost
July 12th, 2008, 02:48 AM
...because I like filling my screen with transparent terminals running insignificant commands and IRC chat, then posting screenshots of it to make Windows users think I'm doing something very important.

</thread>

:popcorn:
Bwhaha! Hilarious!
I should try that sometimes... btw up for linking to/sending any screenshot?

RiceMonster
July 12th, 2008, 03:02 AM
...because I like filling my screen with transparent terminals running insignificant commands and IRC chat, then posting screenshots of it to make Windows users think I'm doing something very important.

</thread>

:popcorn:

:lolflag:

Calmeida
July 12th, 2008, 04:11 AM
I guess I might just have to agree with the orgininal poster. Windows does a better job on all the fields I am interested in. But Ubuntu is more fun!

Sadly, Ubuntu for me is a scared relationship since it freezes way to much (I have more OS and programfreezing in Ubuntu then Vista without a doubt) so the acclaimed stability is bollox, as is the so called speed, and a majority off all apps look - and are named - as if they where a schoolproject for little kids, there simply isnt't much of a professional feel to it.

Ubuntu isn't ready yet, and it's not for the everyday user yet either, and it still looks as a leftover from the early 1990's.

Still, I keep booting it...

Le-Froid
July 12th, 2008, 05:23 AM
Because we all know open source software doesnt exist on windows...

/sarcasm

he said
Microsoft products. MS doesn't really release open source products. [Although they release parts of their kernel to certain colleges]

bilijoe
July 12th, 2008, 06:13 AM
I guess I might just have to agree with the orgininal poster. Windows does a better job on all the fields I am interested in. But Ubuntu is more fun!

Sadly, Ubuntu for me is a scared relationship since it freezes way to much (I have more OS and programfreezing in Ubuntu then Vista without a doubt) so the acclaimed stability is bollox, as is the so called speed, and a majority off all apps look - and are named - as if they where a schoolproject for little kids, there simply isnt't much of a professional feel to it.

Ubuntu isn't ready yet, and it's not for the everyday user yet either, and it still looks as a leftover from the early 1990's.

Still, I keep booting it... My guess is that you downloaded an iso file, in order to create an install CD and failed to conduct the MD5 checksum validation of the downloaded file, or that you failed to validate the CD as being an error-free copy of the iso file. Failure to do this may very well result in an installation that will live up to all the horror stories you have ever heard, and one that may be impossible to repair or ever get running correctly! Linux, like any OS, is a highly complex piece of software (actually, many pieces of software). One incorrectly downloaded or copied bit, in all those Megabytes of program code and data, can result in the most hideous and insidious of "bugs". Such "bugs" are absolutely NOT attributable to any flaw or error in Linux, but will inevitably be attributed to it, reinforcing the negative publicity Linux has long been subject to. In the interest of avoiding spreading false information about the quality of the Linux OS, PLEASE! Do NOT overlook this step (the MD5 checksum validation of your downloaded file, and subsequent validation of your install CD). If you have more trouble with system lock-ups under Linux than you do under VISTA, there can be absolutely no doubt that you are working with a defective Linux install. There is absolutely no way possible for a clean and proper Linux install to EVER behave as badly as any Windows OS. As far as lock-ups, or freezing, in my experience, and that of all the people I know who use Linux, none of us has EVER had an experience with Linux freezing--EVER! Sure, an errant program may occasionally freeze, but this is the fault of the program, not the OS, especially when you consider that all you have to do under Linux to "un-freeze" everything (except the defective program itself), is close the errant program's window. At that point, you will find that everything else on the system has been merrily breezing along, doing exactly what it was intended to do. Nope, I'm sorry, I just cannot buy your assertion that Linux itself is in any way responsible for your computer freezing up. Before you go inadvertently spreading inaccurate, negative propaganda about Linux, please, for the sake of the computer using public (many of whom are desperately seeking a viable alternative to VISTA, amd Linux is an excellent choice for such an alternative), download the .iso for whatever version of Ubuntu you prefer, again, and this time, run the checksum validation, and the CD validation routine. Then re-install the validated copy of Linux. I can all but guarantee you, all your problems [with Linux] will go away--completely and forever. The tests necessary to validate the downloaded .iso file, and the CD produced from it are quick and easy, and are well documented and supported in the download instructions provided by Ubuntu. If Linux is prone to freezing up, then the GTO is not a classic car, the Earth is not the third rock from the sun, and everything you have ever learned is wrong. By way of a proper disclaimer, I will state that the foregoing is simply my own personal opinion, but I'll bet, a little querying of other Linux users (especially Ubuntu, because "it's the best" {IMHO}), would turn up myriad others who feel just as I do. As for the whimsical names that are so common in Linux, what's in a name? It's just another way of having a little fun with [programing] projects that are [often] extremely difficult, and not, in themselves, much fun. Forget the names; run the programs. The proof is in the pudding. BTW, do you realize that nearly the entire Internet runs on Linux Server? Do you find that the Internet freezes up on you very often--or ever? It's time for me to get down off my soap box, but please, for your own sake, and that of all those who respect your opinion, confirm, absolutely, that your Linux installation was not somehow damaged in transit. I see no other explanation for the statements you make about its stability. If Linux is anything, it is stable.

LouEven
July 12th, 2008, 06:47 AM
Sadly, Ubuntu for me is a scared relationship since it freezes way to much (I have more OS and programfreezing in Ubuntu then Vista without a doubt) so the acclaimed stability is bollox, as is the so called speed, and a majority off all apps look - and are named - as if they where a schoolproject for little kids, there simply isnt't much of a professional feel to it.

This is transparent flame-baiting.


Ubuntu isn't ready yet, and it's not for the everyday user yet either, and it still looks as a leftover from the early 1990's.

Still, I keep booting it...

The "Ubuntu isn't ready yet" caw of the Windows parrot is a tell tale sign of baiting.

I disagree with the OP and his supporters. Time will tell though, I'm sure we will all be using a browser based O.S. pretty soon.

But until then, these Countries are adopting Linux for the Desktop and Server applications for business and home use.

Thailand, Korea, Japan, Russia, France, Cuba, Karnataka, South Africa, Nigeria, Germany, Italy, Australia, Jordon, Saudi Arabia, Egypt.

If Linux is not ready, then somebody better go tell these millions of people adopting it as a main Distribution to beware, It aint ready yet.

dtsclothing
July 12th, 2008, 08:18 AM
-------Insperation
Freedom-----------
If I ever figure out how to run Dreamweaver and Photoshop on Linux...

In the meantime-Ubuntu/Xp boot. Why do I run Linux? The freedom of linux lets me relax a little, and I dont have to feel like I always owe someone something, validate this and geniune bla,get vista now. Linux allows me to also customize anything and every thing that I want, with Windows you have to pay a small fortune for programs that allow a user to do the exact same things that linux does only linux gives it to you for nothing.Any program for windows that person can find to customize anything will cost $ or cpu, or even worse.The wonderful compiz or beryl (not sure if beryl is still avail.), gives a user endless visul posibilites, leaving me personally with a since of Inspiration.

Can't complain about a free operating system though, that just wouldn't make much scene:-({|=.

lesterness
July 12th, 2008, 08:33 AM
Too many viruses! A Black Plague of Windows viruses was keeping me from editing a book manuscript, so I was put in the Ubuntu CD a pal had given me, and, ABRACADABRA, I could edit my ms without fighting viruses all day.

lesterness
July 12th, 2008, 08:36 AM
Thailand, Korea, Japan, Russia, France, Cuba, Karnataka, South Africa, Nigeria, Germany, Italy, Australia, Jordon, Saudi Arabia, Egypt.

If Linux is not ready, then somebody better go tell these millions of people adopting it as a main Distribution to beware, It aint ready yet.

Linux is the official operating system of the People's Republic of China. At the moment, most computer people are still pirating Windows, but the leaders know that will have to stop eventually,and when it does, LINUX will be cheaper.

boblemur
July 12th, 2008, 11:38 AM
for me it was the fact that i got a new computer...

installed windows... ( nothing worked)... had to fight my sound, video, wireless

then i installed ubuntu... even before it was installed, it already had my drivers ready... put in my wep key. and bang wirless works... tick ok my video card work'd out of the box.. sound plays...

i will never go back, and every time i boot into xp, i see why i changed to linux...

and now id think linux was far more ready for my computer than windows has ever been...

JohnLM_the_Ghost
July 12th, 2008, 01:03 PM
There is absolutely no way possible for a clean and proper Linux install to EVER behave as badly as any Windows OS.

Unless you are dealing with long-term windows power user. At my first experience (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=624126) Ubuntu also didn't ran as fast as my Windows. It still doesn't now, but that's just because I have desktop effects and lots of other cool apps running, while Windows runs only most necessary services.

However as for stability, Linux does much better job of keeping the system running, I've had only one or two occasions, where an app brought down the Linux. In Windows, that's the most probable outcome.

Linux is a different OS, and before one can use it efficiently enough, he must learn a little bit of it -- the same as one must on Windows!

g.filion
July 12th, 2008, 05:42 PM
One word. Productivity. I've been using Windows for years, sometimes for business, and as you all know with business, time is money. I Did a test a few days ago with booting both. Windows 8 minutes, Ubuntu about 25 seconds. Now if you have to wait 8 minutes every day to get access to your Computer, what is your time worth. That's not to mention all of the hours wasted, getting rid of Viruses, spyware etc.

I prefer to spend my time actually USING my computer. Furthermore since our entire family has switched over to Dual Boot Ubuntu, the frustration levels have been reduced dramatically. Ever wonder why faster computers have been coming out every year? Maybe one of the reasons is to offset the software delays that windows continues to put in their software, Frankly, I prefer to support software that has been designed to actually do something, not 50% work and 50% protection schemes.

Most of the Windows updates lately have been focused on security, and protection from hacking or whatever. Ubuntu updates are for improved performance. Take a digital camera for instance, windows has a Disk with over 300Meg of software, some to get the camera working with your computer, and most of it to be pretty, a bit of Junk to sell you, oh and a bit for protection too. The first time I installed Linux and plugged in the camera, it was up and connected in a matter of seconds.

It's jst about efficiency to me. Linux is efficient. As far as drivers? Its like the weather, wait a few weeks and it'll change.

:guitar:

g.filion
July 12th, 2008, 05:43 PM
One word. Productivity. I've been using Windows for years, sometimes for business, and as you all know with business, time is money. I Did a test a few days ago with booting both. Windows 8 minutes, Ubuntu about 25 seconds. Now if you have to wait 8 minutes every day to get access to your Computer, what is your time worth. That's not to mention all of the hours wasted, getting rid of Viruses, spyware etc.

I prefer to spend my time actually USING my computer. Furthermore since our entire family has switched over to Dual Boot Ubuntu, the frustration levels have been reduced dramatically. Ever wonder why faster computers have been coming out every year? Maybe one of the reasons is to offset the software delays that windows continues to put in their software, Frankly, I prefer to support software that has been designed to actually do something, not 50% work and 50% protection schemes.

Most of the Windows updates lately have been focused on security, and protection from hacking or whatever. Ubuntu updates are for improved performance. Take a digital camera for instance, windows has a Disk with over 300Meg of software, some to get the camera working with your computer, and most of it to be pretty, a bit of Junk to sell you, oh and a bit for protection too. The first time I installed Linux and plugged in the camera, it was up and connected in a matter of seconds.

It's all about efficiency for me. Linux is efficient. As far as drivers? Its like the weather, wait a few weeks and it'll change.

:guitar:

RonKZ
July 12th, 2008, 07:45 PM
I go back to the beginning of PC's, maybe MS-DOS 2. M$ did a great job improving DOS, but then came Windoze -- I started that with w95. For all the years afterward, it was one damn thing after another, reinstall this, reformat and reinstall everything, blah blah, and I found half my time wasn't computing at all, it was fixing this and that and trying to keep my computers working in some coherent way. Plus paying for all the upgrades and additional software also cost me a helluva lot of time and dollars. Then came XP, which again forced me into a lotta finagling to avoid dealing with that ridiculous "Documents and Settings" and horribly long URL's to get anywhere at all.

So meanwhile millions of us endured all that abuse from M$ and made them the world's richest while we were forced to endure increasing abuse from them, activation, increasingly restrictive licensing... When I buy something I expect to OWN it, not just get permission to use it on one computer!

So it's taken me 5 years now, while sticking to my resolution to never ever send M$ another nickel, and thanks to Ubuntu and constantly improving Linux, it works for me at last. I still sometimes work on XP to finish my genealogy using Legacy, but that will soon be completed and that will be the end of M$ for me.

The huge spectrum of Open Source software, in particular from Mozilla and Open-Office, is actually much better than anything M$ ever produced. I would actually feel better if we were charged a little something to have all this, as it would quickly help Linux/Ubuntu wipe M$ off the map, which is exactly what they deserve for taking advantage of the world for so many years.

http://ubuntuforums.org/images/smilies/guitar.gif

Tomatz
July 12th, 2008, 10:55 PM
Because i like beards!


:lolflag:

karellen
July 12th, 2008, 11:46 PM
But until then, these Countries are adopting Linux for the Desktop and Server applications for business and home use.

Thailand, Korea, Japan, Russia, France, Cuba, Karnataka, South Africa, Nigeria, Germany, Italy, Australia, Jordon, Saudi Arabia, Egypt.

to put things in a perspective, how can a country (government/companies) adopt Linux for home use? isn't this a personal matter?!
you should check and see how's the software piracy level in those countries ;). 90+ of desktops run an pirate copy of Windows. add Photoshop, Office, games and so and you'll have the big picture).
and if you want facts, I'll give you plenty. from my personal knowledge. I don't know a single person that owns a legitimate copy of Windows. so I guess open source will have a hard time on these markets

Tomatz
July 12th, 2008, 11:56 PM
to put things in a perspective, how can a country (government/companies) adopt Linux for home use? isn't this a personal matter?!
you should check and see how's the software piracy level in those countries ;). 90+ of desktops run an pirate copy of Windows. add Photoshop, Office, games and so and you'll have the big picture).
and if you want facts, I'll give you plenty. from my personal knowledge. I don't know a single person that owns a legitimate copy of Windows. so I guess open source will have a hard time on these markets

Not since vista it wont. How long do you think people will use xp for?

karellen
July 13th, 2008, 12:01 AM
Not since vista it wont. How long do you think people will use xp for?

people will simple switch to anything MS offers them. they are not aware of the alternatives (alternatives not suited for everyone) and they don't want to choose. don't sub estimate the fear of change

Tomatz
July 13th, 2008, 12:11 AM
people will simple switch to anything MS offers them. they are not aware of the alternatives (alternatives not suited for everyone) and they don't want to choose. don't sub estimate the fear of change

Some will, some wont have the money. It's as simple as that.

WGA is microsoft's achilles heel ;)

Vorless DarkChaos
July 13th, 2008, 12:20 AM
I install ubuntu only on my laptop to try it out
I like it
But almost 100% stuff on the market will run only on windows or mac or both

LouEven
July 13th, 2008, 02:25 AM
to put things in a perspective, how can a country (government/companies) adopt Linux for home use? isn't this a personal matter?! How can a Country or Government or Company Adopt Linux you say? Well those Companies, Governments and Countries are made up of People! Very smart people! These very same people have been reporting and yelling to the world that they are tired of paying for bloated licensing fee's and expensive hardware upgrades and maintenance costs on a yearly basis just for a bunch a shoddy buggy device drivers! (Windows).

And the kicker is they are only renting this software. They never really own it.. As for your comment "isn't that a personal matter", Yes! Absolutely software is indeed very personnel for most! We live with it, use it to make a living, communicate with it, It helps run our businesses and helps manage our lives! Also we are entertained by it.

Software is like any other machine, it's either a benefit or a hazard. When it's a benefit it's not my problem--Deckard.


People are making the switch, changing their minds and using software that works for them out of the box (Linux). We can live in a free world market, and if you don't like what software your using, if the product you are using doesn't fit your needs, you now have the option to change it. Something <snip> Microsoft hate because it stands for free will and choice.




you should check and see how's the software piracy level in those countries ;). 90+ of desktops run an pirate copy of Windows. add Photoshop, Office, games and so and you'll have the big picture).

IF 90% of Desktops (in these Countries) are running Pirated Copies of Windows then something must be done. This is a good point, it's well know Pirated copies and unsecured versions of Microsoft software are a very real threat to the Software community. Unchecked they can cause quite a bit of damage by spreading viruses, spam, etc.

My goals are not to try and put Microsoft out of business, I'm not delusional. Hell, they can do that all on their own! I do, However, want to make Linux and it's brothers and sisters a viable option in the community and on the desktop/server. No matter how hard the <snip> Microsoft try, they can't stop a good thing like Linux, people want an option and a choice and they are getting that through Linux and Mac.




and if you want facts, I'll give you plenty. from my personal knowledge. I don't know a single person that owns a legitimate copy of Windows. so I guess open source will have a hard time on these markets

True software enthusiast know that owning a pirated copy of any software is not the right thing to do. If you really want software and you use it to make your day better, then bloody pay for it! Or find a freeware, or shareware version till you can pay for it.

I do not, and never will support O.S. or application piracy!

LouEven
July 13th, 2008, 02:39 AM
people will simple switch to anything MS offers them. they are not aware of the alternatives (alternatives not suited for everyone) and they don't want to choose. don't sub estimate the fear of change

Spoken Like a true <snip>. I don't believe people are just stupid robots. I don't believe people are idiots. But since you obviously do you should apply for a job at Microsoft. <snip>

As for people being aware of their choices, I'll do my best to spread the word Linux. It worked for Firefox, 8 million plus users now know the name Firefox.:guitar:

bilijoe
July 13th, 2008, 05:23 AM
I don't know a single person that owns a legitimate copy of Windows. so I guess open source will have a hard time on these markets Try to use "Windows Update" on any one of those illegal copies. It won't work. As time passes, and these copies age, there will be more and more technology and hardware they will not work with, hence, they will become obsolete. In addition, I would be surprised if Microsoft doesn't find a way to kill these illegal copies, instead if simply informing you (as they do now) that the copy of Windows you are running is not properly licensed and registered, and that you need to go to their site and purchase a license. Billy is out to get you, unless you have only fully legitimate copies of Windows. And, I expect he'll find a way.

As far as countries adopting an "official" OS, you are right, the OS you use is a personal choice, but if all your government services, from applying for grants or welfare, to dealing with your taxes, are geared towards Linux, as the government, and all the big corporations it deals with, move more and more towards accommodating Linux, and pay less and less attention to making an effort to keep their software compatible with Windows, people will tend to follow. It's not like there's a down side to using Linux.

And then there's the price issue. How much money do you suppose the US Government would have saved, if all the computers they purchased last year were equipped with Linux and Open Office, rather than VISTA and Microsoft Office 2007? Millions? Billions? You don't think this fact will be lost on countries on tighter budgets, that have to "live within their means", do you. No, I think the writing is on the wall. One of these days, and it won't be long, Windows is going to be relegated to an "also ran".

And as far as the gamers among us, ever heard of X-box, or PS-2? As windows looses popularity at an accelerating rate as an OS for computers (as opposed to "game machines"), you don't think the hardware manufacturers are going to sit idly by, and watch a golden opportunity slip away, do you? I predict that, within a few years, there will be Windows based game machines out there. The manufacturers will arrange with Microsoft to purchase bulk licenses on a version of Windows that has been scaled back, having functionality not necessary to play games removed, and that have no other software bundled with the "Windows-game" version of the OS. Then, they will offer to the game playing public "Windows" machines that have the fastest currently available processors, plenty of memory, super hot video and audio, probably built onto the "special purpose" gaming mainboards; machines that will very efficiently access the Internet, to support internet based games, and do all the other things that a computer needs to do to be a super hot game machine, but which will not be designed to browse the Internet, read or write email, run a word processor, or a spreadsheet, or accommodate a multi-media business presentation, etc., etc., etc. Waddaya think? X-box, PS-2, WinGame, etc.? Such machines could certainly be manufactured and sold for less than a full-blown computer, equipped with all the hot hardware necessary to be a super game machine, and money talks. If you were a gamer, do you think you'd be more likely to spend $3,000 or more, on a computer, equipped with all the hot gamers hardware, or a few hundred bucks on one of these new, scaled down computers that are beginning to show up, that will handle all your email, document authoring, internet browsing, etc., and $1,500, or so, on a really hot, Windows based, dedicated game machine? My guess is that the only reason there isn't already such a product, is that Microsoft is not interested in making the kind of licensing deal that would make the manufacture of such machines economically feasible. But as their share of the OS market slips away (and it will), they will eventually find it economically advantageous to make such a deal.

Just how badly is Microsoft's market share slipping away? Well consider this; I think Microsoft still claims that Linux has only about 4% or 5% of the OS market, but since nobody has to buy Linux, nobody has to license Linux, and nobody has to register Linux, where do you find the [accurate] data necessary to compute Linux's actual share of the market? I've got at least 5, legitimate copies of various flavors of Windows, lying around somewhere, so I am sure Microsoft considers me part of the Windows users statistical group; but I'm not. I'm a Linux user through and through, and should be "counted", statistically, as a Linux user. Everybody I know has copies of Windows, somewhere in their box of computer CDs (most of them legal copies), but, with almost startling frequency, these people are joining the ranks of those who should be statistically considered Linux users (a few of them have gone the Mac route, but still, that takes them out of the statistical base of Windows users).

Anyway, enough preaching. I'm growing tired of this subject anyway. Linux is categorically a better OS, being firmly based on perhaps the best OS ever written, Unix. It is a fundamentally better design, which is being executed at least as well as Windows (which is a meaningless statement, as Windows really has no true "design", or underlying philosophy). And the fact that the programmers who are responsible for Windows are being paid, says nothing about the quality of the resulting product. The worst programmers I have ever had the misfortune to encounter were all "paid professionals". On the other hand, all of the truly good programmers, those who were creative, and pushed the envelope of what computers or a programing language can do, that I have encountered over the many years I was programming, were, at least for a large part of their careers, unpaid programmers, who did what they did because they thoroughly enjoyed it, and were passionate about the project(s) they worked on. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the unpaid volunteers who are responsible for the creation and evolution of Linux, constitute a far superior talent pool, a far more creative team of developers, who are much more attentive to the important details that divide good programs from great ones, than Microsoft's "paid professionals". I know that by far the best work I ever did, I did at times when I was not on anyones payroll. The business environment, having a manager, or "lead programmer", having to indulge in design meetings that nearly always result in at least some of the programmers involved having to compromise away the most creative aspects of their art and their skills, always stifles the best of the best in every programmer I have known. Programing is an art, not a science, and certainly not a business. Nope, I don't buy for a second, the argument that Linux is inferior because it is being programmed by "amateurs". Those programmers who give freely of their time and talents to something that they are obviously passionate about it (why else would they work, hard, for free), will always prove to be the best of the best, and the quality of what they produce will always supersede that which paid "professionals" grind out for the sake of the almighty buck.

Again, since I have made some strong, possibly even potentially inflammatory comments here, I will close with the obligatory declaration that this is all nothing more than my own personal opinion, with which you absolutely have the right to disagree. I will also mention however, that I had a long and impressive career as a programmer, working under many different conditions, with many different groups, and had the opportunity to get to know well, not only many, many other programmers, with varying degrees of skill and knowledge, but also the quality, utility, dependability, flexibility, and stability of their work. Much of my career was dedicated to doing work for our government, and other "friendly" governments around the world, under circumstances where failure (or inaccuracy, or undependability, instability, etc.) simply was NOT an acceptable option. Hence, I have worked with some of the best programmers there have ever been, and not one of them would have ever taken a programming position for an organization such as Microsoft, regardless of the financial benefits, but most of them would have been (and may be) excited about spending their precious personal free time, working on such a project as Ubuntu Linux. Better design, better execution, better philosophy, better programmers, and a better culture (community). Sorry Windows folks, but the bottom line is that Linux, especially Ubuntu Linux, is simply better. I yield to the inarguable forces of time, to bear me out.

cdtech
July 13th, 2008, 05:30 AM
Wow! I stopped by to say why I have Windows XP and use Linux but I must of made a wrong turn somewhere.

carolinason
July 13th, 2008, 05:53 AM
It's a no brainer, use what you want to.

boblemur
July 13th, 2008, 08:17 AM
i just love the way that nothing is fixed... you can change ANYTHING you want in ubuntu... provided you have the know-how

THE COMMUNITY!! is such a huge reason to move to ubuntu...

i have a prob with windows... there is no one place to come looking... its either look on knowledge base which is some poorly organized bunch of outdated how-to's or you fight it out urself.. or google and hope someone has an awnser...

the amount of time that people dedicated to helping other on these forums alone is enough to convert me to linux... for the most part linux has worked 90% out of the box... and anything that doesnt work... i post and 5 mins later someone has had a crack at fixing it already...

noone on windows wants to help each other... the linux community ( at least the ubuntu community) really looks out for each other...


i was trying so hard to cling onto some of my windows programs iv used for so long... and i come to linux spend a week trying to get them to go in wine.. only to find they are slow and crappy...

and iv moved to the linux equivalent and i have not been disappointed yet..

karellen
July 13th, 2008, 09:01 AM
Spoken Like a true Microlemming. I don't believe people are just stupid robots. I don't believe people are idiots. But since you obviously do you should apply for a job at Microsoft. They need more people like you. Your Neolithic Idealisms are not welcome in the new world.

As for people being aware of their choices, I'll do my best to spread the word Linux. It worked for Firefox, 8 million plus users now know the name Firefox.:guitar:

interesting. if people dare to think (want something different) of what you wish, they are stupid robots with neolithic idealisms ;). so I guess all Windows users are Microlemmings :lolflag:. well, that's deep
funny you talk about me without having any clue :). but that's ok, one of the Internet effects (besides age I suppose)
btw, I've been using Linux since 2003 (suse 9.2 professional if you are curious). how about you?
cheers from a silly drone :)

karellen
July 13th, 2008, 09:17 AM
do you actually read the things you reply to?

to put things in a perspective, how can a country (government/companies) adopt Linux for home use? isn't this a personal matter?!
for home use. see, wasn't that hard to read all the words
and the last one was a question, not a statement. if it was I believe I should have written "(software) it's not a personal matter". I don't know about you, but this is not exactly the same with "isn't this a personal matter?!". the latter is an interrogation. but hey, it's your native language, so you can squeeze any meaning you want from it ;). and back to the topic, it's pretty difficult to tell people what to use on their personal computers, don't you think?
oh, I forgot

Something MicroClowns hate because it stands for free will and choice.
....they are all MicroClowns (sarcasm is, to prevent any confusions), except the gifted ones that happen to use other OS. how dare to disagree with you?

but arguing about semantics and not being rude with persons you don't know is pretty boring, I know. it's easier to apply insulting labels (childish ones, but that's just me, probably others will find them the work of a linguistic genius)
try to grow up a little and respect the choices of others :)

fiddledd
July 13th, 2008, 11:28 AM
Try to use "Windows Update" on any one of those illegal copies. It won't work. As time passes, and these copies age, there will be more and more technology and hardware they will not work with, hence, they will become obsolete. In addition, I would be surprised if Microsoft doesn't find a way to kill these illegal copies, instead if simply informing you (as they do now) that the copy of Windows you are running is not properly licensed and registered, and that you need to go to their site and purchase a license. Billy is out to get you, unless you have only fully legitimate copies of Windows. And, I expect he'll find a way.

As far as countries adopting an "official" OS, you are right, the OS you use is a personal choice, but if all your government services, from applying for grants or welfare, to dealing with your taxes, are geared towards Linux, as the government, and all the big corporations it deals with, move more and more towards accommodating Linux, and pay less and less attention to making an effort to keep their software compatible with Windows, people will tend to follow. It's not like there's a down side to using Linux.

And then there's the price issue. How much money do you suppose the US Government would have saved, if all the computers they purchased last year were equipped with Linux and Open Office, rather than VISTA and Microsoft Office 2007? Millions? Billions? You don't think this fact will be lost on countries on tighter budgets, that have to "live within their means", do you. No, I think the writing is on the wall. One of these days, and it won't be long, Windows is going to be relegated to an "also ran".

And as far as the gamers among us, ever heard of X-box, or PS-2? As windows looses popularity at an accelerating rate as an OS for computers (as opposed to "game machines"), you don't think the hardware manufacturers are going to sit idly by, and watch a golden opportunity slip away, do you? I predict that, within a few years, there will be Windows based game machines out there. The manufacturers will arrange with Microsoft to purchase bulk licenses on a version of Windows that has been scaled back, having functionality not necessary to play games removed, and that have no other software bundled with the "Windows-game" version of the OS. Then, they will offer to the game playing public "Windows" machines that have the fastest currently available processors, plenty of memory, super hot video and audio, probably built onto the "special purpose" gaming mainboards; machines that will very efficiently access the Internet, to support internet based games, and do all the other things that a computer needs to do to be a super hot game machine, but which will not be designed to browse the Internet, read or write email, run a word processor, or a spreadsheet, or accommodate a multi-media business presentation, etc., etc., etc. Waddaya think? X-box, PS-2, WinGame, etc.? Such machines could certainly be manufactured and sold for less than a full-blown computer, equipped with all the hot hardware necessary to be a super game machine, and money talks. If you were a gamer, do you think you'd be more likely to spend $3,000 or more, on a computer, equipped with all the hot gamers hardware, or a few hundred bucks on one of these new, scaled down computers that are beginning to show up, that will handle all your email, document authoring, internet browsing, etc., and $1,500, or so, on a really hot, Windows based, dedicated game machine? My guess is that the only reason there isn't already such a product, is that Microsoft is not interested in making the kind of licensing deal that would make the manufacture of such machines economically feasible. But as their share of the OS market slips away (and it will), they will eventually find it economically advantageous to make such a deal.

Just how badly is Microsoft's market share slipping away? Well consider this; I think Microsoft still claims that Linux has only about 4% or 5% of the OS market, but since nobody has to buy Linux, nobody has to license Linux, and nobody has to register Linux, where do you find the [accurate] data necessary to compute Linux's actual share of the market? I've got at least 5, legitimate copies of various flavors of Windows, lying around somewhere, so I am sure Microsoft considers me part of the Windows users statistical group; but I'm not. I'm a Linux user through and through, and should be "counted", statistically, as a Linux user. Everybody I know has copies of Windows, somewhere in their box of computer CDs (most of them legal copies), but, with almost startling frequency, these people are joining the ranks of those who should be statistically considered Linux users (a few of them have gone the Mac route, but still, that takes them out of the statistical base of Windows users).

Anyway, enough preaching. I'm growing tired of this subject anyway. Linux is categorically a better OS, being firmly based on perhaps the best OS ever written, Unix. It is a fundamentally better design, which is being executed at least as well as Windows (which is a meaningless statement, as Windows really has no true "design", or underlying philosophy). And the fact that the programmers who are responsible for Windows are being paid, says nothing about the quality of the resulting product. The worst programmers I have ever had the misfortune to encounter were all "paid professionals". On the other hand, all of the truly good programmers, those who were creative, and pushed the envelope of what computers or a programing language can do, that I have encountered over the many years I was programming, were, at least for a large part of their careers, unpaid programmers, who did what they did because they thoroughly enjoyed it, and were passionate about the project(s) they worked on. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the unpaid volunteers who are responsible for the creation and evolution of Linux, constitute a far superior talent pool, a far more creative team of developers, who are much more attentive to the important details that divide good programs from great ones, than Microsoft's "paid professionals". I know that by far the best work I ever did, I did at times when I was not on anyones payroll. The business environment, having a manager, or "lead programmer", having to indulge in design meetings that nearly always result in at least some of the programmers involved having to compromise away the most creative aspects of their art and their skills, always stifles the best of the best in every programmer I have known. Programing is an art, not a science, and certainly not a business. Nope, I don't buy for a second, the argument that Linux is inferior because it is being programmed by "amateurs". Those programmers who give freely of their time and talents to something that they are obviously passionate about it (why else would they work, hard, for free), will always prove to be the best of the best, and the quality of what they produce will always supersede that which paid "professionals" grind out for the sake of the almighty buck.

Again, since I have made some strong, possibly even potentially inflammatory comments here, I will close with the obligatory declaration that this is all nothing more than my own personal opinion, with which you absolutely have the right to disagree. I will also mention however, that I had a long and impressive career as a programmer, working under many different conditions, with many different groups, and had the opportunity to get to know well, not only many, many other programmers, with varying degrees of skill and knowledge, but also the quality, utility, dependability, flexibility, and stability of their work. Much of my career was dedicated to doing work for our government, and other "friendly" governments around the world, under circumstances where failure (or inaccuracy, or undependability, instability, etc.) simply was NOT an acceptable option. Hence, I have worked with some of the best programmers there have ever been, and not one of them would have ever taken a programming position for an organization such as Microsoft, regardless of the financial benefits, but most of them would have been (and may be) excited about spending their precious personal free time, working on such a project as Ubuntu Linux. Better design, better execution, better philosophy, better programmers, and a better culture (community). Sorry Windows folks, but the bottom line is that Linux, especially Ubuntu Linux, is simply better. I yield to the inarguable forces of time, to bear me out.

Well, an interesting story. A pro Linux, anti Microsoft post in a Linux Forum, how unique. I'm not going to support your view, or any other views really, I just want to say that, IMHO, none of these types of post actually achieve anything. People either don't understand half of what is said, or pretend they do and repeat bits in other threads, or maybe understand and agree or disagree. The thing is nobody that's reading theses posts has any influence over any Government or large Company that actually helps to decide the future of which OS is adopted. All these posts are merely rants of one form or another, interesting, and sometimes funny rants, but rants nonetheless. Nobody that I know has even heard of Linux or Microsoft, OK, I'm an old man without trendy friends, so maybe I'm a bad example. But the point is people don't care about all this, they just go to a PC shop and buy a PC or Laptop for their own or their children's personal use. I'm not going to try to say what is needed for Linux to succeed on the Desktop because I don't really know. I don't know if one day you'll be able to buy a Linux PC that works with all the latest Games and such, or if Microsoft will go bankrupt. And I don't believe the average user in the street knows either, or cares. If we are all going to end up using FOSS on Open Source OSs (which BTW I would like also) then preaching to the converted in Forums on the Internet is not going hasten this time at all. Just my opinion, based on me being a pretty average Computer user.:)

EDIT: Sorry that this has absolutely nothing to do with the Thread title, but I guess I'm not alone.

karellen
July 13th, 2008, 11:36 AM
Try to use "Windows Update" on any one of those illegal copies. It won't work. As time passes, and these copies age, there will be more and more technology and hardware they will not work with, hence, they will become obsolete.
they do work because they are OEM versions that don't require a serial number. one of my friends has an illegal copy of Vista Ultimate on his pc and is updating just fine, receiving all the updates (including SP1) without any hiccup. I've seen it with my own eyes :). and those illegal versions will always be (even MS is not to enthusiastic about raising the anti-piracy bar because it would hurt its userbase)

fiddledd
July 13th, 2008, 11:52 AM
they do work because they are OEM versions that don't require a serial number. one of my friends has an illegal copy of Vista Ultimate on his pc and is updating just fine, receiving all the updates (including SP1) without any hiccup. I've seen it with my own eyes :). and those illegal versions will always be (even MS is not to enthusiastic about raising the anti-piracy bar because it would hurt its userbase)

Just to confirm that what you are saying is true.:) As an example, there are also Student Editions of XP that have a legitimate key, if Microsoft disabled this key a lot of Universities would lose out bigtime. :)

LouEven
July 13th, 2008, 12:58 PM
do you actually read the things you reply to? Yes I do, and I can translate what the writer is trying to convey. <snip> You are saying people will accept Microsoft no matter how incompatible it is with their needs because of fear, stupidity or straight up lack of awareness of their choices. This is a short sighted idealism, and yes, I do disagree with it. And yes I will reply with a bit of hostility, I will not agree with your opinion that all people are drones. English is not your primary language, this is probably the cause of this disagreement you and I are having.



it's pretty difficult to tell people what to use on their personal computers, don't you think? oh, I forgot....they are all <snip> When I made the statement that people and Countries are adopting Linux, It was meant to draw attention to the millions of people that are very aware they now have a viable choice other than Microsoft products, nothing more nothing less. The <snip> and their mindless drone users crack was just a bonus.Tee Hee!:KS



but arguing about semantics and not being rude with persons you don't know is pretty boring, Arguing? Hardly. Disagreeing with you..yes I disagree with your misguided ideas that the human race is only alive for one reason and that is to use Windows. The fact I do not know you has nothing to do with me replying to your pro-Microsoft propaganda.



I know. it's easier to apply insulting labels Indeed, but you my friend made it way to easy. You opened up the door I just walked through it. Just because you say something doesn't make it fact. Microsoft is not the end all of be alls.


(childish ones, but that's just me, probably others will find them the work of a linguistic genius) Thank you very much for the compliment. I am a linguistic genius! Childish, I didn't tell any poop jokes yet?! Oh wait here IS one, Microsoft's code is poop! HA!


try to grow up a little and respect the choices of others:) I'm all grown girly. I do respect others, I do believe in Free will and choice. If you understood my intentions and what I stand for you would have not said that..lemming. Your the one blabbering about people being afraid to go against the Grand pooba Lord Microsoft for fear of change. Your the one bragging about piracy and the circumvention of the Microsoft EULA. Talk about a walking (typing) contradiction!

Cheers mate, your Microsoft sucks ***, unless they insert a Linux kernel.:0 Hell your friends don't even pay for it? So why do you care if I bash it?

karellen
July 13th, 2008, 01:27 PM
I'm all grown girly. I do respect others, I do believe in Free will and choice

I can clearly see this...

bapoumba
July 13th, 2008, 01:47 PM
How warm and fuzzy in here :D
24h cool off period.

backupdevice
August 5th, 2008, 01:24 PM
I have an older computer with a XP OEM license. I lost the OEM disk, I can't use the online ISO's anymore due to the fact that WGA is difficult ( and i dont want to searcfh for a solution ) and i dont want to use something the wrong way when i have a license. The license is so old that MS doesnt want to send me a new key.

So i installed Linux a year ago, bought 1GB extra memory and installed Ubuntu.

It runs fast, don't need cracks to get things working. No spyware or other ****, i'm a happy man.

tom66
August 5th, 2008, 01:31 PM
Because I like the idea of a community-developed operating system, among other reasons. Also, it's more ahead of time and works well with my hardware.

Prisma
August 5th, 2008, 10:15 PM
I switched to Ubuntu back in 2006. In the bigining I was dual booting all the time with XP. After few months playing with Ubuntu I found that most of the applications I used in Windows were available for Ubuntu. However, I kept XP to play Guild wars, Wow and also to burn CDs and DVDs with Nero. Also, Picasa was not available for Linux at that time and digikam and f-spot sucked big time in 2006. Mp3 players didn't work with Amarok, and in order to synchronize you music you have to download a different application , I think was gnomad or something like that.

Then one day I discovered that Nero was available for Linux and that with Cedega I was able to play Guild Wars and WOW. Suddenly Amarok supported my Zen micro MP3 player and Picassa and google earth was ported to Linux. For me Windows went the way of the dinosaur. Extinct, for good.

Ubuntu in my opinion is a smarter solution for anyone who want to evolve from the Microsoft's dangerous and unstable operating systems to the freedom, stability and security of Linux.

Its like in the mid 90's when people used walled garden internet access like AOL instead of todays internet browsers like Firefox. Jeez I remember those days... :(

We can use that analogy to explain what is going on between Widows and Linux. In my opinion Windows is doom to extinction, like AOL. Eventually people get fed up about abusive companies and chose freedom to do whatever they want with their computers, hardware, appliances, devices, services etc. For the heck of me, we are paying for them. :mad:
Few recent incidents: Comcast's peer to peer bandwidth restrictions, Sony rootkit, Apple DRM monopoly, Windows Media Player pre-instaled just to mention a few.

geekygirl
August 6th, 2008, 06:50 AM
I consider my initial conversion to Linux as rather shallow..lol

I was actually happy with XP, but I didn't like its appearance, tried a few different shell replacments like BB, Talisman, Windowblinds (not a shell replacement though!) and Aston to name a couple.

I saw a picture of Suse 9.0 in a magazine and decided I wanted to have a desktop that looked like that!!!

Suse 9.0 never worked on my old laptop, so after a while I bought a replacement and was given a Warty CD by someone I was working with, and havent looked back - I soon reaslised I was able to do a LOT more with Ubuntu/Linux than I ever could with Windows.

I have since replaced that notebook a couple of times, and admit to using Vista a fair bit, but that was more to get to know it and understand it rather than like and enjoy it!

When I discovered gaming with Linux I haven't been back to Windows since :p (apart from a foray with Vista so I could play Bioshock and Crysis hehe)

I feel dirty and like I am a cheat if I install Windows on any of my PC's now :D

virus2
August 6th, 2008, 09:58 AM
Mainly because of Antivirus and firewall requirements in windows.Booting XP took a lot of time due to various security softwares running at startup.
Linux does not require all these scraps(although antivirus is what may be recommended)and much faster than windows.

Vishal Agarwal
August 6th, 2008, 10:06 AM
:)

Xanatos Craven
August 9th, 2008, 05:11 AM
Because I enjoy its eye candy, believe its software management to be superior, and like the idea of an operating system that has free updates every so often that don't place artificial limitations on an otherwise powerful computer. I don't have a specific dislike of Windows, though -- an NT-based system is fine too if you find a few ways to bring it up to par with what comes out of the box on Ubuntu and trim some of the useless crud off.

MastermindOverdrive
August 9th, 2008, 05:40 PM
Simply 'cause it opens my mind! I think I'm a creative person and m$ don't gives me that sensation... ;)

Mr. Picklesworth
August 9th, 2008, 05:48 PM
Many reasons. I recently found another: I can mount more than 26 file systems in Linux!

To those confused... there are 26 letters in the alphabet. Windows inherits drive letters because it is based on DOS. No, it does not add letters after it passes Z, it just gives up.

...Scream as loudly as you need.

MeTylerDurden
August 9th, 2008, 06:08 PM
I never got any satisfaction fixing a problem with windows- endless pages of help that does nothing.. with ubuntu it is all hands on and there is alot of down to earth help in a language that everyone can easily understand.

if windows had a free scan that fixed everthing automatic it would be fine, but thats just the opposite of the truth .. more like they heap problems on you so you have to pay more to find a solution.. windows is a death trap

insane_alien
August 9th, 2008, 06:11 PM
easy to use, looks nice, don't have to spend thousands to upgrade my computer every time the new version comes out. can use one disc for any number of computers i want.

easy software installation/uninstallation, great support for free.

Alien.col
August 9th, 2008, 06:22 PM
I chose it because i bought a kickass computer a few years ago and I needed a good OS for it. At the time Vista was not out so i double booted it with XP and Ubuntu. When Vista came out i felt that Linux was still more advanced, plus my hardware would not work with it well. Presently i use XP only for gaming and Ubuntu for everything else.

kirsis
August 9th, 2008, 08:17 PM
Main reason: because it's gratis

I also enjoy tinkering with computers and being in full control over them.

Newuser1111
August 9th, 2008, 08:27 PM
Why do you choose Ubuntu over Windows
I don't know why.

Because it's free?(Price)

money2themax
August 9th, 2008, 08:43 PM
cuz it works without too many software problems [hardware however is another story]

estyles
August 9th, 2008, 08:52 PM
I never got any satisfaction fixing a problem with windows- endless pages of help that does nothing.. with ubuntu it is all hands on and there is alot of down to earth help in a language that everyone can easily understand.

if windows had a free scan that fixed everthing automatic it would be fine, but thats just the opposite of the truth .. more like they heap problems on you so you have to pay more to find a solution.. windows is a death trap

+1 on that. I have had way more crashes and driver problems with windows than I have with Ubuntu, and when something breaks in windows, there is very little effective free support to fix the problem. Frex, at work, at least once a week, someone in the office has a problem where their printers completely lock up the system any time they try to print. If you look up the problem on Google, you find about 50 different responses of what could be the problem, and generally none of those things helps at all. The actual way to fix it (on *OUR* machines) is to remove all network printers, and then reinstall them if necessary. This works even if the person was only trying to print from a local printer and never even touched a network printer.

On Ubuntu, the only major problems I've had have been self-caused by two much tweaking. Which is fine - I *like* playing around with my machine and occasionally breaking and fixing things. Some drivers need to be made better with new versions of Ubuntu, but if my only problems with Windows had been wireless drivers and screen resolution like I had when I started out with Ubuntu, then I never would have switched OS's.

Northsider
August 9th, 2008, 08:59 PM
I listen to my music through Rhythmbox, which is far better than Windows Media Player, play films though VLC, use OpenOffice all of which are free, and far better than similar products on Microsoft/Windows.

Honestly, I just use it because I didn't want to use pirated software anymore.
Just to bust some balls here (I LOVE Ubuntu by the way, I'm just playing Devil's Advocate): These programs are almost all available for windows as well. I use Oo, VLC, FF, and Amarok (when the windows port gets released). Open source applications are also freely available for windows, not just Linux

Xanatos Craven
August 10th, 2008, 04:16 AM
Simply 'cause it opens my mind! I think I'm a creative person and m$ don't gives me that sensation...

open mind

creative

M$
Must... not... flame! Gaaah.


Windows inherits drive letters because it is based on DOS. No, it does not add letters after it passes Z, it just gives up.
Artificial limitation kept in the interest of backwards compatibility with old programs. Otherwise, Windows could really name drives whatever it wants to. Windows isn't DOS-based anymore, if you haven't noticed. At any rate, I prefer a verbose file system to one with a bunch of confusing abbreviations that are just as old as DOS letters, but nothing technical is forcing any Linux distro to keep them either, so I'd call the situation about even.

serjofpower
August 10th, 2008, 05:14 AM
I saw this somewhere before... "In an open source world, there are no needs for Windows, doors, or Gates"

I like that quote. I heard a similar one (or maybe it was the same one with some changes) that said, "In a world without Walls or Fences, who needs Windows or Gates?"

I was frustrated with Ubuntu when I first started using it as well. Specifically, I was frustrated that my wireless card didn't work and I had to keep plugging my laptop into the router. However, once the 8.04 version came out, everything started working perfectly. It's nice to not have to worry about spyware, software issues that crash the entire system, etc.

It's also very nice to be able to google "ubunu+Whatever+my+problem+is" and find the answer within a few minutes, from a community of people who offer their time and energy and talent for free to other users on the internet. Ubuntu (well, linux and the open source community in general) is a really amazing byproduct of the internet. Just my opinion :)

Sterkarm
August 10th, 2008, 02:15 PM
for me my comp if totaly and utterly useless.

under widows it quickly becomes cloged up, even installing small programs has it slowing down to unbarable speeds


however with my ubuntu istalation no matter what it just keeps going, its always running at decent speeds and no matter how much i have installed it still runns



Saying all that i am posting this on my brothers laptop using windows(he hasent passworded his windows, wher as the ubuntu part is way to secure ),as my network adapters have gone down - leving me withough internet on both ubuntu and windows :(

2j4ez
October 1st, 2008, 08:16 PM
NO Ad ware
NO spy ware
NO viruses
NO Reg cleaner
NO BSOD
NO 600apps sitting buy the clock needed to protect the system
Most of the programs are free

Confuses the hell out of the isp support people when they say"PRESS THE START BUTTON" I say "I don't have one!" they say "NO YOU MUST HAVE"

Now UBUNTU vs OSX 10 now thats a tuff choice I use them both

spoons
October 1st, 2008, 08:33 PM
NO Ad ware
NO spy ware
NO viruses
NO Reg cleaner
NO BSOD
NO 600apps sitting buy the clock needed to protect the system
Most of the programs are free

Confuses the hell out of the isp support people when they say"PRESS THE START BUTTON" I say "I don't have one!" they say "NO YOU MUST HAVE"

Now UBUNTU vs OSX 10 now thats a tuff choice I use them both

Now be fair, those apps sitting by the clock stop you from getting the viruses and other crapware and I haven't had a BSOD in Windows XP for 6 months. And I have one app sitting by the clock. Bit off 600 isn't it?

Ubuntu is good for my downloading of torrents however.

waltclay
October 1st, 2008, 08:33 PM
For better or worse, even beginners learn to use command line interface. They may even be learning a new profession:

Enterprise Windows | J. Peter Bruzzese » Server Core: Time to start embracing the command line

October 01, 2008 | Comments: (2)
4 votes
Server Core: Time to start embracing the command line
Relying on GUIs is a dangerous crutch, so Microsoft is steering Windows Server admins away

TAGS: Windows Server 2008

Give an administrator a command-line tool ... and watch how quickly that admin searches the Internet for a GUI counterpart. But what if the CLI (command-line interface) is the only way to accomplish certain administrative tasks? Well, you might balk. That is why I stick with Windows; it has plenty of GUI interfaces.

And yet, some aspects of Exchange 2007's messaging infrastructure can be configured only through the command-line Exchange Management Shell (built on PowerShell). And with the new Server Core version of Server 2008, it might be time for network admins to re-evaluate their view of the CLI for the sake of their own professional advancement. The reason? Server Core takes the Windows out of Windows and only presents a CLI.

Don Jones, a Microsoft MVP (most valuable professional) for PowerShell says, "The GUI is ultimately a handicap to one's career. I think Server Core represents a low-risk way to start embracing the CLI." So Microsoft is steering admins back to the CLI through its focus on Server Core and PowerShell: "More and more is built on the CLI. Providing people with GUI crutches is like giving your kid Velcro shoes -- it saves some time now, but eventually he'll still have to learn to tie shoelaces, and the longer you put that off the harder it'll be," Jones says.
For more, see http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisewindows/archives/2008/10/server_core_tim.html?source=NLC-DAILY&cgd=2008-10-01

aysiu
October 1st, 2008, 08:39 PM
Now be fair, those apps sitting by the clock stop you from getting the viruses and other crapware and I haven't had a BSOD in Windows XP for 6 months. And I have one app sitting by the clock. Bit off 600 isn't it?

Ubuntu is good for my downloading of torrents however.
Actually, the best app for preventing malware is SuRun. I haven't found anti* software to be effective at preventing infections. LUA (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb456992.aspx) is the only way to go, and SuRun makes LUA easy in a Ubuntu/Mac OS X sudo kind of way.

The most annoying thing about Windows is its defaults. Yes, you can install SuRun to get a proper security system in place. Yes, you can right-click all the tray icons to quit the programs. Yes, you can remove almost all the Windows components (not Internet Explorer, though). Yes, you can use MSCONFIG to turn off a bunch of unnecessary services, and you can download a lot of good open source applications for Windows.

It all seems rather a pain to me. Ubuntu's defaults are sensible, and that's what I like. No, the defaults won't meet everyone's needs (and I do a little tweaking, of course), but why do a lot of tweaking when you can do only a little?

In other words, to get a Windows installation to suit my needs and preferences takes a long time. To get a Ubuntu installation to do the same takes very little time.

Bachstelze
October 1st, 2008, 08:47 PM
Artificial limitation kept in the interest of backwards compatibility with old programs. Otherwise, Windows could really name drives whatever it wants to.

I shall add that since XP, you can mount filesystems in directories just like you do on *NIX.

fredmt
October 15th, 2008, 11:18 PM
I have been asking myself the reverse of that question for the past three weeks, namely: If you have linux, why use windows?

I have a Compaq Presario 2100 cheapo laptop which came with WinXP. I ditched the MS OS and loaded Linux, beginning with Fedora, RHEL, SuSE, to ArchLinux, finally settling on Ubuntu. That was about three years ago and have not looked back. Since I use my laptop for primarily writing, I have not had to worry about much; OO works just fine and since I have the ability to convert my docs to PDF (It is a standard!), I keep control of the original.

Note: I have every iteration of Win OS and MS Office, including corporate stuff and still have not missed Redmond.

My only wish is that the Open Office team would put out a template that would allow for writing scripts for the movie industry but that will come, I am sure of it...

elustran
October 16th, 2008, 08:45 AM
This has probably been said many times in here, but every time I install linux, I have to twist its arm to get it to function how I want it to, and if something goes wrong, or if I want to update the OS, I have to start all over again. It usually works great once I get it working, but I still have to get it working.

Windows tends to require little in the way of tweaking from me to get it working in the first place, though windows does require a little more maintenance than Linux. With Windows, I have to check for viruses, clean the registry (of doom), defrag, and so on.

At the end of the past couple of years I've been using linux, I have poured 10x as many hours into getting linux up to snuff as I have installing and tweaking windows, and windows still does more for me than linux. I could make it do almost everything windows does for me and then some... but that would involve more kitbashing.

Linux is a cool hot-rod that requires a transmission. You can just toss in a cog and it goes forward, but if you want it to go fast you have to build your own transmission from a kit that comes with half a set of instructions in Swedish. You have to search for instructions and people who know Swedish.

If I could get games and important proprietary software to work on linux with as little effort as it takes on windows, I'd consider a total shift over. If I could get both compiz and video to work at the same time, that would be icing on the cake. If I could get my drivers working in less than an hour, that would be some nice ice cream to go with my cake.

My #1 linux problem:
Drivers.

My #1 windows problem:
changing its ******* diapers and keeping it away from strangers with candy, dishonest salesmen and other Bad People.

2j4ez
October 16th, 2008, 08:13 PM
I have a windows machine so why do i use linux?

NO viruses
NO spyware
NO loads of programs sitting by the clock taking ages to load
NO Facebook viruses
All free
Confuses the hell of the help bt help desk when they say"Press start button"
Can spend more time on the pc not just leaving it on to scan for things
No bsod
Can shut machine down with out waiting for updates to install
updates install wile machine is running
Dont have to format every so often because of window$ issues
Can run off a live CD and surf the internet try doing that in window$!
Plugged in a Windows Webcam it just worked did not ask me for drivers or to search the internet

Also pc means personal computer not windows

A Commodore 64 is a pc
A ZX80 Is a pc
I can type on my xbox360 with the chat pad thats a pc

Also if you play with a new os you will find things are soo much better with out windows
I use mac my main machine and ubuntu laptop and mandriva on my EEEPC

cardinals_fan
October 17th, 2008, 12:53 AM
Also pc means personal computer not windows

A Commodore 64 is a pc
A ZX80 Is a pc
I can type on my xbox360 with the chat pad thats a pc

...and a Mac is a PC.

karellen
October 17th, 2008, 02:32 PM
...and a Mac is a PC.

+1. and if we want to be really rigorous, any desk computer based on von Neumann architecture is a PC :)

crazyfuturamanoob
October 17th, 2008, 06:22 PM
What makes linux better than windows:
-Linux works sooo much faster than windows, and boots up faster
-Free
-Windows eats the battery of this laptop in 1 hour, Ubuntu takes 3 hours.
-No viruses/spyware/whatever it is called, no expensive anti-virus software.
-Multiple desktops.
-100% customizable.
-Login sound
-Open source
-Super easy synaptic for installing/removing programs
-Not asking for permissions like windows does.
-Better desktop effects without performance spikes or laag.
-Login sound.

fikelfikel
October 17th, 2008, 08:39 PM
Hey! If the only reason you want Windows is for games, try out Wine Windows Emulator. It allows, almost any windows app or game to work with whatever windows OS you want, from 1.0 to Server 08. Give it a try, and if your games work, I suggest going to the good OS, Ubuntu.

HockeyPlayer
October 17th, 2008, 09:45 PM
I'm bored of XP and thought I'd see what all the fuss is about this side of the fench.

This just made me laugh...


My #1 windows problem:
changing its ******* diapers and keeping it away from strangers with candy, dishonest salesmen and other Bad People.

NoSmokingBandit
October 18th, 2008, 12:06 AM
Hey! If the only reason you want Windows is for games, try out Wine Windows Emulator. It allows, almost any windows app or game to work with whatever windows OS you want, from 1.0 to Server 08. Give it a try, and if your games work, I suggest going to the good OS, Ubuntu.

You are officially the last person to the WINE party.
Allow me to clear some things up for you though. WINE is not an emulator (in fact, thats what WINE stands for). Its the windows API superglued into linux. Nothing is being emulated, all the programs are running natively. If it wre an emulator almost everything would work 100% but seeing as they are trying to run apps native there is less success rates but higher speed if something does work.

BigBananaMan
October 18th, 2008, 12:19 AM
A lot of people have problems transitioning from Windows to the Linux world when they think that Linux is the same thing as Windows except more stable. This of course couldn't be farther from the truth. If all you're going to do is play video games and check your email then Windows is fine for you. If you're an artist, have a kid, or go to starbucks every morning, Mac might be your thing. If you want to do more with your computer than just check email such as write programs, make it run the way you want as opposed to the way some company says you like it, or perform serious work such as running servers, Linux should be your choice. The biggest difference I've seen between Linux and Windows is that they are a different kind of frustrating. In Windows, you're smarter than the OS and all is hopeless until "they" patch the problem. In Linux the OS is smarter than you and the problem is caused because you screwed up, either learn to fix it or ask someone that knows how.

The reason I use Linux, I've grown up and learned to make things do what I want instead of just checking email.

spupy
October 18th, 2008, 02:44 AM
The Window XP disk is catching spider webs somewhere in my desk...

Linux: "Hey, what a nice program, I should install it, seems useful!" *Click* "Done, YAY!"

Windows: "Hey, what a nice program, I should install it, seems useful!" *Click*
"Oh, it's trialware? Then I will take the other one. It doesn't have the same features, but anyway..." *Click* "Hm, well this one is shareware." *Click* "Oh, dammit, I will search for a crack for the shareware one." *Click* "Heh, fullwarez.com, it has the cracked version, YAY..." ...NOT

Frak
October 18th, 2008, 04:51 AM
Hey! If the only reason you want Windows is for games, try out Wine Windows Emulator. It allows, almost any windows app or game to work with whatever windows OS you want, from 1.0 to Server 08. Give it a try, and if your games work, I suggest going to the good OS, Ubuntu.
1. Wine Is Not an Emulator
2. Nothing works under Server '08 compat
3. It's still incredibly buggy

alwayshere
October 18th, 2008, 05:24 AM
linux good for crappy old pc as linux can be smaller and you have choice of wat you want and dont want on ya os . and win vista is the biggest piece of poo iv ever seen it take a really good grunty pc and turns it into a slug.
i got into linux for the challenge and to feel like a big man when im calling the shots lol .but hey i do still use xp pro now and then if i have to for some reason but wine emulator sorts most things windows

slinkey1981
October 18th, 2008, 05:30 AM
Though I see that this thread is from 2005, I still feel the need to reply.

I used Windows 3.1 through Vista. I wasn't a big fan of Vista because I don't always like being asked how sure I am that I want to do something. I know you can disable all of that, but really, it's a hassle. I used Sony Acid (used it since it came out from Sonic Foundry) and I don't know how many times XP just up and died on me while building wave forms for files that had just been recorded.

I remember a few years ago telling my brother that I was about to go Mac because I was sick of losing hours of work because my OS sucked (my opinion). He laughed at me and I continued to use Windows XP. I lost power about 2 years ago, and it killed my hard drive. I had to buy a new one, and while installing XP, I was informed that my code wasn't valid.

I had the box and everything. So I call MS and talk to someone that I can barely understand (not their fault) and basically, 30 minutes later, I get a key that let's me install my OS.

Then the update website said my XP was pirated.

I had one of those moments when you just kinda lose it. I called my brother cause I had heard about this whole Linux thing before, but figured it was for those geeky kids who play D&D all day.

He gives me a Ubuntu 7.04 cd, and I used it for about 5 minutes without breaking it. It was actually a joke for a while.

"How long this time?"

"Three hours."

About 2 months ago, I downloaded a patch for MSN messenger, and who would have guessed, my sound card (integrated) stopped working.

I installed Ubuntu, and have been reading documentation, learning how to do things the right way, and the ONLY thing I can't do on Ubuntu that I could on XP is use Acid, and that's probably because I am NOT very good at setting up Wine.

So, I use Linux because it just kinda works. It's not for everyone, my mother's head would explode trying to use it. To many people have become complacent with the MS standard, and I just get sick of it. Like those damned Mac commercials! Not all PC's are running Windows! My Ubuntu works with everything I have plugged in, UNLIKE Vista.

I get better support from the forums than I did from a MS reps.

That's my rant.

Putu Wiramaswara Widya
October 18th, 2008, 05:49 AM
My reason using Linux than Windows Xp, because by using Linux, I'm not afraid with Virus. When I was using the M$ Windows Xp on my notebook, I'm prohibited my friend to plug his/her flashdisk to my notebook because I ever lost my data from the virus that came from his/her flashdisk.....

Is there any virus for Linux??? I dont't know it. When a lot of virus are infecting the Linux. I want to migrate my notebook to another OS....

Shippou
October 18th, 2008, 06:07 AM
I use Windows only to play games. Linux for everything.

However, I have upgraded my XP copy to SP3, just to be on the updated side. :)

Shippou
October 18th, 2008, 06:12 AM
Is there any virus for Linux??? I dont't know it. When a lot of virus are infecting the Linux. I want to migrate my notebook to another OS....

Yes,. there are Linux viruses.

But the good news is, they are not in the wild, and I think there is a very low chance of getting them (unless you make one, or others make it for your machine). So, even though you have no antivirus installed in your Linux box, you are still safe (lest of course you visit p0orn sites and prohibited sites or malware sites).

Just practice safe computing. The end user can do a lot to thwart off most threats even without the aid of software, I believe.

Also, protect yourself from the recent clickjacking flaw by installing Firefox and the add-on NoScript.

UnfinishedSymphony
October 18th, 2008, 08:23 AM
Basically I dont see any advantages to using linux over windows xp, Im dual booting windows and ubuntu. Ubuntu is nice and all but I dont see anything that would make me prefer it over windows.The only thing i have been using ubuntu for is web browsing playing music/movies (cant play games) which I can do better/hassle free in windows.

So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?

Wow this thread keeps going.

If somebody loves using windows then stick with it nobody can force you to change. My son's duel boot using XP and Ubuntu but they are die hard gamers.

I personally love networking, learning, graphics (always loved the GIMP) and have just got into web design so linux is perfect for me, it's safer, nicer and open source, I very much support the FSF, I think some things are wrong which I won't go into here so I feel linux is great on a moral stance as well -- personally speaking.

Windows is ok, linux is lower case paradise which I just want to install over my XP like I did my vista, to each their own or use them both.

sandy8925
October 18th, 2008, 05:47 PM
I do like the customization of linux but the whole spyware/adware thing and viruses I have never had a problem with, as long as your not being dumb opening random exe's its pretty much non existent. In reality the spyware is a big problem only because of the fact that the average computer user is attracted to flashy things and clicks.


If it wasnt for the games I could dump windows entirely but i play games on a whim and I hate having to restart just to play it. I could get used to the complexity of it. Honestly though I dont think I will switch to full install of linux or even being first on the boot up list because of the fact that I have the exact same things on windows and linux.

To me this is the real reason that linux is not adopted by the mass public, theres really no reason to go over to linux if you have windows and a casual computer user. However I do think if you dont have an OS and dont plan on being a gamer you should use linux because it is a good system. I also think its perfect for schools/governments/large business because you wouldnt have the major problems a windows network environment has curious/dumb users.

that's not true!!
I get spyware even if I visit even hotmail or gmail. I clean them out and then visit those sites. And when I come back - spyware ! And no I don't open spam mail or suspicious looking attachments. In fact I rarely get those nowadays.

herbr
October 19th, 2008, 02:03 AM
I do keep a winXP (or win2k) machine around because I find that some of the support for astronomical imaging (and camera control) are not there yet in Linux.
I have been using Linux since kernel 0.9 1 (I think!) and have found it to be MORE capable than Windows even when doing embedded work!

Herb

cardinals_fan
October 19th, 2008, 03:21 AM
that's not true!!
I get spyware even if I visit even hotmail or gmail. I clean them out and then visit those sites. And when I come back - spyware ! And no I don't open spam mail or suspicious looking attachments. In fact I rarely get those nowadays.
I respect that you may have had problems, but not all of us have. I used Opera/Firefox with NoScript for six years on XP and got no malware at all.

Frak
October 19th, 2008, 03:11 PM
that's not true!!
I get spyware even if I visit even hotmail or gmail. I clean them out and then visit those sites. And when I come back - spyware ! And no I don't open spam mail or suspicious looking attachments. In fact I rarely get those nowadays.
Don't use Internet Explorer (or at least turn off ActiveX)

Problem solved

risu_vk
October 19th, 2008, 03:25 PM
A good way to shift from xp :


start using ubuntu in virtual box ,easy to switch and no reboot is needed
or the other way .. keep xp in virtual box ..( the best one)

and no need for antivirus ,anti-spyware , 1000(!!) reboot per day etc

If u like programming then linux is best as many of the standard stuffs are built in . like gcc/perl/python etc etc and with the packagemanagers installation is very smooth { for additional tools}

crazyness003
October 19th, 2008, 03:54 PM
I use Linux for several reasons. I can makeinstall it look better, Its not mac and I get to get involved in a community like this (although this isnt the best thread to reflect the community ideals)

But really, its because its not winodws. I knew that when i headed in here, and I still understand the difference.



Linux != mac != windows
The good, the bad, the ugly

mbturner
October 21st, 2008, 01:37 AM
Basically I dont see any advantages to using linux over windows xp, Im dual booting windows and ubuntu. Ubuntu is nice and all but I dont see anything that would make me prefer it over windows.The only thing i have been using ubuntu for is web browsing playing music/movies (cant play games) which I can do better/hassle free in windows.

So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?

I'm confused - because you just reffered to windows as "no-hassle". I prefer to refer to windows as "no-hassle-if-you-have-$300-just-for-your-operating-system-and-software-after-you've-already-payed-$900-for-your-rockin-system"

...just sayin.

evilkastel
October 21st, 2008, 06:13 AM
Well, i'm rather a new user of ubuntu and all GNU/linux (disregarding an awful experiment I had with an unremembered distro that runned in KDE by year 2000) but i can't stand much XP. I have a licenced copy, op XP pro, and still, i'll rather use ubuntu. The music, the video, the docs, the multi-tasking, it is all so easy for a non-pro user to keep running. And if i am this happy by learning, and yet i don't know squad about compiling kernel, or anything useful, i wonder how happy will I be when i can tweak my system. that's all. customization, stability, support, no ActiveX no registry (thx god). Also the main reasons I made ubuntu my main boot (still I have 30gb or so with XP), the file system... (NTFS?? it's like stone age!), the all system parallel organization, the libraries system, and dynamic use of components, how most apps work well together, the cute look of compiz, constant upgrade, FREE! i can't ask for more. for my gaming needs, Windows do the trick (if i'm not to lazy to rebbot, ind decide to play neverball or tux world instead. btw I suck) so tht's why. is just better for me.

-grubby
October 21st, 2008, 06:16 AM
Don't use Internet Explorer (or at least turn off ActiveX)

Problem solved

Who still uses activeX?

RealG187
October 21st, 2008, 06:25 AM
Basically I dont see any advantages to using linux over windows xp, Im dual booting windows and ubuntu. Ubuntu is nice and all but I dont see anything that would make me prefer it over windows.The only thing i have been using ubuntu for is web browsing playing music/movies (cant play games) which I can do better/hassle free in windows.

So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?

It isn't really slow and doesn't crash all the time and you are immune to viruses!

rasmus91
October 21st, 2008, 07:15 AM
actually i don't have XP on the machine, but vista. i'm doing dual boot as it is right now...

Ubuntu 8.10 beta and winDOH!ws vista, i hate vista, and i hate that i need it for playing my games.

Linux has all my needs plus extra, a lot of visual effects, which doesn't tear all my ram and CPU.

Also customization, i love that. also that for every program i need i have 10 different possibilities, or more. If i could play all my games in Linux, i would NEVER IN MY LIFE use any winDOH!ws again!

I hate always fixing windows when it breaks, and its even harder on vista than it was on xp. Often when fixing a computer for a friend, I ask them "why don't you go Linux?" they just answer, "its to hard to get to know" good answer, while im fixing their damn blue screen of death or another problem...

david_lynch
October 21st, 2008, 07:31 AM
A microsoft rep at work gave me a copy of xp, and it sat unopened for the longest time. I did some experiments loading xp in vmware on my linux system, but I honestly couldn't see the point, and haven't touched it for a year or so.

My son's laptop came with vista, and we looked at it for a few minutes and had some laughs, and he decided he didn't want it, so we wiped the disk and installed opensuse.

In all the times I've seen and used nt, 2k and xp at work, I just didn't get the hype. I always though "Is this it?" Maybe I've been running linux too long.

I can honestly say the only thing ms windows has going for it is that it was the only game in town for so long that it has a large legacy base of applications. full stop.

Linux is sexy and fun to use, while ms windows makes me feel like a parent crammed into a kindergartner's desk at open house. It's always a relief to get back to linux.

Justin Case
October 22nd, 2008, 12:01 AM
As for me, I just got sick of all the viruses and the lockups and freezes that Windows offers. All it takes is 1 virus to screw up your whole day. And I also got sick and tired of Windows slowing down over time. I defrag, defrag, defrag, but it still turns into a slug over the years. You really can't go wrong doing a fresh reinstall every year. Its just a bloated piece of crap.

I installed Debian, and the world stopped turning for a second. I'll never go back to Windows. If I'm running Debian and BSD, why use Windows? There is no point.

crazyness003
October 23rd, 2008, 06:03 AM
Newest reason: I just got an infamous Activation Required Loop. What this does is, it asks you to activate windows reight when you log on, when you agree to activate, it tells you that "Your copy of windows is already activated", then drops you back to the login screen, sonly to log in again with the same "you must activate" -> "its already activated" -> "you must activate" -> "its already activated" -> "you must act.." i think you get it.

But all is not lost. The only way to beat this is follow some stupid instructions the m$ "customer support" lackeys give you over the phone, and reactivate...or...reinstall...LINUX!

Im gonna dual boot, but i can almost guarantee, Ubuntu is gonna be booted up more than xp. Then im just gonna VirtualBox it so its not to alien, slowly forcing them to accept the way of Ubuntu. Im such a ****ing evil genius! :twisted:

elustran
October 24th, 2008, 07:36 AM
As for me, I just got sick of all the viruses and the lockups and freezes that Windows offers. All it takes is 1 virus to screw up your whole day. And I also got sick and tired of Windows slowing down over time. I defrag, defrag, defrag, but it still turns into a slug over the years. You really can't go wrong doing a fresh reinstall every year. Its just a bloated piece of crap.
I'm not sure I entirely agree with that - I haven't really gotten any 'Windows Bloat' on this box yet, and I haven't even defragged in a while. To be certain, I have seen and had quite a few cases of windows getting sluggish in the past, but my overall experience with XP has been pretty good.

I find that Windows doesn't use that much more in the way of resources - almost double the memory that linux does, but I've never been at risk of using more memory that I have on this box.

Now, linux doesn't get a lot of bloat, and it doesn't break when things are working, but whenever I have to make a hardware modification, my linux box is unusable for a while. I've been running Ubuntu since 7.04 - a little over a year and a half, and my box has been down for maybe a total of 2 months during that time. Part of the reason it's been down is due to linux being picky about hardware, but it's also been down because of trying to get some basic software up and running. I've had this same windows box for about that long (turned my old winbox into my Ubuntu box), and it's never gone down, and never needed any serious service. Installing my new video card was a breeze.

That being said, I still dig linux. I use Ubuntu because it's free and because setting it up as a multi-user home file server is pretty easy. It's also attractive, fun to use, and has that special 'Not Windows' allure.

barcon
October 31st, 2008, 08:33 PM
Business and personal user . . .
1. We had a Windows server print server that we had to restart 4+ times per day. I installed an Ubuntu server four months ago and haven't booted except when updates require.
2. We are testing Ubuntu on laptops. A few bugs, but we hope to migrate most users (45 of them) to Ubuntu once we get it stable enough and reuse our hardware, some of which would be obsolete, but can run Ubuntu quite well.
3. We plan to migrate all Windows servers (9) to Ubuntu (5 servers) and save $25,000 in software costs plus be more stable, which our testing confirms.
4. I ditched Windows at home and only use Ubuntu now. It does everything I need and more, including web site development. Since Vista, I'm totally over Windows.

timmahhny
November 1st, 2008, 01:32 AM
I have been using Ubuntu now for about six years or so. I do love it, but too much software is Windows based. I do however, really like Vista, but will not give up Ubuntu. Maybe, one day, when I am done with projects, I will go all over to Ubuntu. Love the newest version.

perixx
November 1st, 2008, 03:55 PM
As Vista demonstrates, the Windows era has passed its peak.


Even if all-day software under Linux like office still need to be improved, usability is well given and and in some cases already outperforms Windows software.

While this still isn't true for gaming, the situation has been improving a lot and will continue so. Maybe consoles will win the race, anyway.
On the server market, where stability and security are mandatory, Linux is dominating over Windows-based systems. A growing number of industry-leading companies support Linux and focus on open source services or even provide Linux drivers. Buying Linux-supported hardware will make things a lot easier, also, there're many open source driver projects out there.

Stability and Modularity: if some Linux system modules break, re-installing them via packet manager will most certainly fix any problem, because of the modular layout.
Sometimes it's easier: I couldn't boot into the desktop anymore yesterday (first time) - all I had to do was to delete the '~/./cache' folder and all was up and running again.
Anyone who ever had to use XP's recovery console to access his NTFS system at all, or doing a 5min-booting into BartPE's Recovery CD will cherish the advantage of having the alternative to simply switch to open source drivers in 'xorg.conf' or even booting into a console-based graphical desktop!

With a little routine, you'll even fix your system on the command line, because the layout is way more logical than Windows. From my experience, all that Linux needs is more control over all the great software and modules via graphical frontends - GUI's.

I've been using Xubuntu for about 2 years now - occasionally switching back to XP for a quick game. I had good and bad times with Linux. Considering, of how many add-ons and software I've installed, of how much I've fiddled around with the system, it's surprising, how well everything still works. No need for virus scanners or fancy 'tweaks' which ruin your OS; a plain simple and rock-steady security model and firewall, not to speak of the package managing system - all built-in.
While it's a little more work to set up your system to fit your needs, it's well worth the effort and you'll end up having a safe, stable and highly flexible system at YOUR hands.

Considering the fact that more and more services will become web-based in near future, I like knowing to have those features at my disposal - for FREE.


perixx

SomeGuyDude
November 1st, 2008, 09:58 PM
I'm one of those weirdos who thinks Vista was a big fat step forward, but I can still throw my hat in for why I prefer Linux.

1) When things go wrong in Windows, you get NO real indication about what happened or if there's anything you can do about it. Say what you will about the terminal, but the ability to run things through the command line is immensely helpful. Windows' hardcore attempts to bury the command line means when stuff goes wrong you're pretty well stuck.

2) Free upgrades. It's cool.

3) It's MINE. Take a look at the "post your desktop!" threads on most non-tech message boards where a lot of Windows users are. They're all the same, with variations only showing up in how many icons are on the desktop and what wallpaper they use. Maybe a few have Windowblinds installed but holy crap does that slow the machine down. Same with ObjectDesktop.

4) The repo system is beautiful. Far better than the Windows method of "go find it if you want it".

Just a start.

Crisis13
November 1st, 2008, 10:24 PM
145 euro less???
ability to reprogram your self??
OPEn source, no jokes like HARDware DEPENDING on the software like many 56k modem???
severall braches which keep inproving each other???

Scruffynerf
November 1st, 2008, 11:14 PM
Most of my friends are all on windows, and it's useful for LAN gaming.


Also, there are a couple of applications that I need to use for work that do not work under linux, primarily MS Access.

timmahhny
November 2nd, 2008, 01:19 AM
I will say that Vista has improved a great deal. I build, upgrade and fix computers. I told people not to buy Vista, but now that I am using Vista, I will say I like it over XP Pro. And it is more secure than what people think.

However, Ubuntu is fast, fast, fast, and is even more secure. The only reason why I am not completly over to Ubuntu is the software issues. If I could run all my software in Ubuntu, that is all I would do. I also tried to print on a Lexmark, and no drivers.

Soon, very soon, Ubuntu will be able to match Mac and Windows.
I tell everyone about Ubuntu and have them try it out. I try not to be too pushy. I have converted several people over to Ubuntu. They just use their computers for surfing, email, chatting. All of which Ubuntu is great at.

I know the people are working hard on Ubuntu and I for one think they are all doing a great job. Kudos to all who chip in to make Ubuntu what it is.

timmahhny :popcorn:

wmgcf
November 2nd, 2008, 03:54 PM
Basically I dont see any advantages to using linux over windows xp, Im dual booting windows and ubuntu. Ubuntu is nice and all but I dont see anything that would make me prefer it over windows.The only thing i have been using ubuntu for is web browsing playing music/movies (cant play games) which I can do better/hassle free in windows.

So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?

The most annoying thing about windows is that you have to spend time (hours when something goes wrong) running and learning about all kinds of applications that bury your CPU and hardrive while attempting to protect your windows installation.

For example, my xp machine is still fired up to watch netflix instant view movies. Every time xp starts it has to run zonealarm firewall, avg antivirus, and spybot. Those three guardian programs are a performance hit. Even with all the add-on protection and cautious browsing xp still gets infected.

One of my favorite linux features: I have been able to find every software application I have ever needed for free under ubuntu's add/remove software. In fairness, I have also used a lot of free applications on windows over the past few years (most of them are simply ported from Linux), but fow windows shareware I always had to hunt for them online, download, scan the file for infections, hope the source was trustworthy, and manually install. in contrast, with Ubuntu/xubuntu, you have maximum convenience with free software.

Of course, none of my ubuntu or xubuntu installs have ever had any infection, and they don't need to run any resource intensive third-party security applications.

I suppose its a personal preference, but considering the bugginess of windows, the overcomplexity of windows, and the time I have had to waste trying to fix and maintain the secretive, underdocumented windows operating system, you can guess what my preference is.

If ubuntu keeps improving at the rate that it is, I believe many people will convert.

wmgcf
November 2nd, 2008, 04:04 PM
Most of my friends are all on windows, and it's useful for LAN gaming.


Also, there are a couple of applications that I need to use for work that do not work under linux, primarily MS Access.

If you want to try it open office base does a fantastic job of reading/editing access files.

I built a very simple javascript application for a client that uses access. I didn't want to pay $100 plus for a new version of access. so i used open office base to design the tables, etc. The javascript uses the access drivers(which are free and installed on every windows pc*), and my customer uses access to view the project. thanks open office!

*If you pay $100+ for ms access you are only buying a graphical front-end for software and drivers already included in every windows operating system.

travelinman81
November 3rd, 2008, 10:19 PM
The main reason that I use Linux has been stated a thousand times, IT'S FREE. Since I started using Linux I know so much more about networking, servers, my own computer, just everything in general. I went from running a Dell with Windows XP to having 6 *Nix computers one of which acts as a file, print, web, email, what ever else I can think of server. My kids all get to use computers now because I can buy some cheap ole E-bay buck -o- special of the day and bring it home slap some RAM in it throw Ubuntu on it and bam my kid can watch movies, music, surf web on all on some computer somebody was ready to throw away and it is free, now I know what I am doing I have a network at home that some of my NetAdmin buddies envy. The whole design of Linux in a network environment is just perfect. I don't use windows for ANYTHING anymore. I did setup a virtualbox with XP and Vista so I can keep up with the changes I work in the IT industry so it is good to know what the users are using. Luckily since I am a student I get the license keys for free for windows stuff. I would NEVER I mean NEVER pay money for a Windows OS again. Oh yeah did I mention that Linux is FREE.:guitar:

booksbuggy
November 4th, 2008, 02:18 PM
Linux keeps me from being distracted by games but i am distracted by more interesting controls in Ubuntu >.<............

joeycbulk
November 4th, 2008, 04:53 PM
I use linux because its better than XP.

h4v0k_d0m
November 5th, 2008, 01:16 AM
I switched to Linux because only people who have intelligence CAN use Linux

cubanojuan1
November 5th, 2008, 04:52 AM
Basically I dont see any advantages to using linux over windows xp, Im dual booting windows and ubuntu. Ubuntu is nice and all but I dont see anything that would make me prefer it over windows.The only thing i have been using ubuntu for is web browsing playing music/movies (cant play games) which I can do better/hassle free in windows.

So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?



bcus linux is the bomb it is so cool dat i love it....

tvtech
November 5th, 2008, 05:01 AM
A. no virus's so I can surf the web with impunity.
B. I'm a socialist and Linux is a Communist endevour so it makes me happy
C. I like to learn new things
D. Windows will be forced to go open eventually
E. it's cheeper than a mac and it runs my hardware better if configured properly
F. man I already made it to F how many reasons do I need here
G. Bluefish Editor, this is a great web development program
H. The best open source programs are built and only run on linux natively.
I. Servers are cheep or free to set up and dead easy to set up
J. I'm a socialist and Linux has Great communities behind it to help you
K. Man seriously I've made it to k already if your not convinced your clearly not that bright.
L. You purchase support for the software instead of just purchasing the software.
M. You don't HAVE to purchase support for the software
N. There are equal or better linux software alternatives to MOST native windows programs.
O. Macs are great and run on BSD which is essentially linux, and apple is gaining market share like there is no tommorow.
P. Did I say linux boxes are cheaper than macs by like 50- 80% depending on what your buying.
Q. okay I've made it to Q I've got more reasons why I'd use linux instead of XP but seriously I've made it to Q already
R. XP is nearly a 10 year old OS with infrequent updates and lots of security holes.
S. XP is outdated and vista is not a good alternative even if you do like paying 200 plus dollars for a crappy OS you can't configure, can't repair has a lousy update cycle, lots of security holes, and you have to Pay for support AFTER you paid for the software!
T.U.V.W.X.Y.Z seriously if that isn't enough reasons to dump windows I don't know what your looking for here. I mean really.

Barrucadu
November 5th, 2008, 05:59 PM
B. I'm a socialist and Linux is a Communist endevour so it makes me happy
Untrue


D. Windows will be forced to go open eventually
Not necessarily


H. The best open source programs are built and only run on linux natively.
Open source programs can be ported.


O. Macs are great and run on BSD which is essentially linux, and apple is gaining market share like there is no tommorow.
Not really, BSD is different.

Frak
November 6th, 2008, 12:24 AM
A. no virus's so I can surf the web with impunity.
B. I'm a socialist and Linux is a Communist endevour so it makes me happy
C. I like to learn new things
D. Windows will be forced to go open eventually
E. it's cheeper than a mac and it runs my hardware better if configured properly
F. man I already made it to F how many reasons do I need here
G. Bluefish Editor, this is a great web development program
H. The best open source programs are built and only run on linux natively.
I. Servers are cheep or free to set up and dead easy to set up
J. I'm a socialist and Linux has Great communities behind it to help you
K. Man seriously I've made it to k already if your not convinced your clearly not that bright.
L. You purchase support for the software instead of just purchasing the software.
M. You don't HAVE to purchase support for the software
N. There are equal or better linux software alternatives to MOST native windows programs.
O. Macs are great and run on BSD which is essentially linux, and apple is gaining market share like there is no tommorow.
P. Did I say linux boxes are cheaper than macs by like 50- 80% depending on what your buying.
Q. okay I've made it to Q I've got more reasons why I'd use linux instead of XP but seriously I've made it to Q already
R. XP is nearly a 10 year old OS with infrequent updates and lots of security holes.
S. XP is outdated and vista is not a good alternative even if you do like paying 200 plus dollars for a crappy OS you can't configure, can't repair has a lousy update cycle, lots of security holes, and you have to Pay for support AFTER you paid for the software!
T.U.V.W.X.Y.Z seriously if that isn't enough reasons to dump windows I don't know what your looking for here. I mean really.
A. Same with Mac
B. Not even close - Linux isn't communist
C. I'm glad
D. We won't be alive when that happens.
E. Linux != Mac; you cannot compare the two in terms of hardware
F. Well, you made it to T
G. But that's not exactly Linux...
H. Mac OS X can run Linux programs natively thanks to the BSD subsystem, plus cygwin and mingw32 allow Linux ports to Windows fairly easily.
I. Be careful with Generalizations such as "Dead Easy"
J. OK?
K. I'm not convinced, and I'm qualified and certified in the many an area of technology
L. Freeware follows this principle too
M. Same with Freeware
N. That's a very stretched generalization; I've found the alternatives to be at or below par to just plain horrid
O. BSD predates Linux by a decade; BSD has more support for Linux than Linux has support for BSD. They are not even close to being equal, as BSD is (basically) a rewrite of AT&T UNIX while Linux is a (again, basically) knockoff of Minix.
P. My Mac was free, so was the upgrade to tiger and leopard
Q. These little non-endings are annoying
R. It works and is fine if you don't go around asking to get infected
S. FUD; Plus, Windows 7 is almost out, and from what I've seen, it will be the XP of it's lifetime.
T.U.V.W.X.Y.Z... still not convinced as most of those are circumstantial as it is

I don't mean to flame, in fact, I think this post was created out of sheer boredom.

kulshoks2121
November 6th, 2008, 04:54 AM
In XP there are too many spoiled Disk Spaces and XP programs uses a large number of space when installing. I hate it I only got 80GB of HD in my laptop.

JohnLM_the_Ghost
November 6th, 2008, 12:26 PM
B. I'm a socialist and Linux is a Communist endevour so it makes me happy.

Untrue

B. Not even close - Linux isn't communist

Well, I'm NOT a supporter of socialism (or communism), but if you have slightest idea what is socialism's ideology you would know it resembles open-source quite a bit (transferred to computer world).

tvtech put it quite wrong however. Socialism's analogy to open-source DOES NOT imply any connection or support to one another, besides the resemblance.

P.S. I expect this to be flamed, but before you do make sure you know what socialism is all about.

AndreaZ
November 6th, 2008, 12:50 PM
I think we can all agree that Windows is the best computer OS for games at least....all I use it for ;)
Everything else works better really in Ubuntu.

Frak
November 7th, 2008, 02:16 AM
Well, I'm NOT a supporter of socialism (or communism), but if you have slightest idea what is socialism's ideology you would know it resembles open-source quite a bit (transferred to computer world).

tvtech put it quite wrong however. Socialism's analogy to open-source DOES NOT imply any connection or support to one another, besides the resemblance.

P.S. I expect this to be flamed, but before you do make sure you know what socialism is all about.
http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=23200

I've taken many a class on socio-economics, and size really does matter. Make sure you know how communism and socialism work first.

mahirh
November 7th, 2008, 08:25 AM
Basically freedom. You have freedom to do whatever you want with Linux. When a new version of Ubuntu comes out, you won't have to pay for the upgrade. There is no professional version with more feature that costs.

Also, no ActiveX or registry, which is enough for me.

there is a registry
alt + f2 + enter gconf-editor = registry opens

remy06
November 7th, 2008, 10:57 AM
just my 2-cents,I have windows and ubuntu dual-boot.

Am using windows mainly for gaming and MS office only now.Much more "friendly" and I like working with MS office better than openoffice.

But when using windows,periodically i have to reinstall windows as it seems to become unstable.Infected with viruses few times before.Felt rather constraint as I like the freedom of tweaking my os according to my needs.Sometimes find it hard to keep up-to-date with its technology when new stuff for windows comes out.

I like the freedom to customize in linux.Dont have to worry much about viruses and stuff.Learning how to tweak or set things up properly when there is problem allows me to learn about it.And once u learnt how to set it up nicely,it stays there.

However,sometimes it can be quite of an hassle and tedious.And linux can't play my favourite games.

Actually began trying linux few months back,had some setbacks initially but now it seems nice.I guess windows and linux has their own advantages here and I like them both.So in order to get the best of both worlds,im dual-booting it,using whichever i need.

aged hippy
November 7th, 2008, 05:46 PM
I run a triple-boot, XP, KDE 3.5, and KDE 4, but only play games on XP - which it is superb at doing. :) Anything serious i do on Linux.

My use of XP for gaming may well end soon as an Open-source version of my favourite game - Morrowind - is being worked on. :D

innercr
November 8th, 2008, 10:32 PM
Windows XP is very stable and generally nice to use. Linux on the other hand is a challenge and a steep learning curve. The only reason why I still dual-boot Ubuntu with Vista is because I cannot print to my wi-fi Lexmark 4850 printer from Linux - no drivers exist and CUPS don't work through Samba, otherwise I'd completely migrate to Ubuntu. Learning linux is very stimulating, might I add...

presence1960
November 9th, 2008, 04:51 PM
I prefer Linux over Windows, but I bear in mind that is my personal preference. We all need to remember that there are many different flavors of ice cream for a very good reason: each person can eat the flavor they like and at the same time everyone else can be happy too. My opinion is that all these debates about which OS is better or superior do more harm than good. Each person has the right to use which OS with which they are comfortable and not have to take any heat for doing so. Freedom- let's practice that as in FREEDOM to choose my own OS and not take any heat for it. If someone likes Windows let them be, that is their choice- RESPECT it just as you want that same respect!

Bödvar
November 9th, 2008, 05:03 PM
I formatted my computer more than three times and am not allowed to activate my Windows license anymore. And I am not going to pay R1 000 (approx. $80) for a new license! So now I use Ubuntu, which can do everything I had to do on Windows, and it's actually better, because I can instantly PDF my work just like that. I know you could do it in Windows also, but only after downloading OpenOffice, which isn't viable in South Africa as we have bandwidth limits. However, by installing Ubuntu, I get an OS with everything I need preinstalled: an office suite, a web browser, minesweeper and a music player.

Majora26
November 9th, 2008, 08:49 PM
For me, Linux just runs better in general. Just runs faster and doesn't crash nearly as often as Windows does for me. It has almost everything I need. Only reason I still have Windows is for syncing to my ipod touch and for my capture card.

midgemot
November 10th, 2008, 07:39 AM
welli find linux rather **** acctually. my father just came around put it on my computer and i want windows back. I cant play any good windows games (eg portal) and all the versions i have tried have some bug. But there are some advantages as stated there are no virus' and all is free i know my dads mate is the it guy for a primary school and he is having to download windows programs.linux though pop up synpatic and you have great programs for free and no disk is required. i guess im alright with it but i am not used to transferring work from school to home so i use google docs rather alot.

WolfyAU82
November 10th, 2008, 02:47 PM
When you have game development heavy-weights constantly raising the bar with new revolutionised gaming engines, there is inevitable demand for an upgrade.
Linux games like Nexius and Open Arena make good gameplay, look great, but don't demand upgrades every so often. But WINE will accommodate you to a point covering a good number of games and apps. Seriously with the expenses of constant upgrading just to play the latest'N'greatest and get fullest experience possible...

Grab a console! A good console changes every so many years as opposed to every so months of having to upgrade your PC... I got a PS3 so I can play the latest'n'greatest without having to break the bank in order stay on top.

My advise in a nutshell...

If you want to play games. Get into console gaming (if you haven't already). It will save you from a strained hip pocket with a fortune of upgrades.

emptiness
November 12th, 2008, 04:51 AM
Cause it's free and does everything I need.I don't do gaming as that's what my psp is for ( other than emu's which rock on linux now).Honestly I started using computers to hack my psp :)

lisati
November 12th, 2008, 04:56 AM
One chooses the tools that best suit the task at hand. Just as you'd probably choose a different car for traveling around New Zealand to the one you'd choose for driving around the USA (we drive on different sides of the road for one thing) you choose the combination of OS and application(s) that suit your situation best.

m.srivathsan
November 13th, 2008, 01:11 PM
This is certainly a hot-debate. But from my experience:

1. You just can't throw away Windows - despite all the bugs, annoyances. The vast array of Applications which are (in general) easier to use than those (again, in general) in Linux, is THE MAJOR reason - forget about free / commericial.

2. Fonts: This is a serious issue as far as I am concerned. I had created a document in MS Office 2003 (in WinXP SP2) and tried to open the doc through OpenOffice 2.4 in Linux (yes, I have dual boot of WinXP SP2 and Ubuntu 8.10) but the font in the doc is rendered much bigger in Linux because of which the pagination is also affected. To check whether this is an inter-operability issue between MS Office and OpenOffice, I installed OpenOffice 2.4 on Windows, created a similar doc and saved it in native OpenOffice format. I then opened it from OpenOffice/Linux - same problem; the fonts are bigger!! WYSIWYG is not the same across Windows and Linux.

It is precisely this problem that stopped me from completely migrating to Linux!

3. Skype - Windows is able to control the Web-cam much better than Linux - I have tried Skype for Linux also but the WebCam image is much darker that that in Windows. I depend on Skype very much to talk to Sister in USA often and she wants to see my 2 year old kid. With Linux, she used to yell at me that she was seeing only a silhouette!!

4. DVD Playing (a big plus for Ubuntu/Linux): On this count I give kudos to Linux. My Video Rental Library (in Bangalore, India) provides me with original DVDs but the problem is some of the DVDs are with different Region Code encryptions, I think it is #5 for India and #1 for US. Windows Media Player and even Nero (on WinXP) would allow me to change the Region Code only 5 times max. But on Linux with VLC Player, it was never an issue. Yes there is a legal grey area in installing packages like "libdvdcss" and "libdvdread" but I am using them only to play the legally rented DVDs!! Ofcourse it was quite a bit of a pain for me to get the basic DVD playing up and running on Ubuntu 8.04 but hat's off to the wonderful community!!

5. WINE - another big plus for Linux: I am able to run very many Windows apps that use only the standard Win32 APIs "as is" on Linux. This is a giant step toward Linux, for me. But this WINE also has few minor issues and needs to improve. Nevertheless, it is GREAT

6. 64-bit and 32-bit apps! Another plus for Linux. I am having x64 Ubuntu 8.10 that allows me to run 32-bit Linux Apps, sid-by-side. This is something I have not seen in Windows. Probably (I am not sure) 64-bit Windows allows 32-bit apps but have not heard a concrete evidence. For free, I am having a 64-bit O/s. As a Software Engineer, this fact gives me enough thrills!

7. This point holds good for both Linux and Windows. I am having a E6750 Core 2 Duo that supports Intel VT-x technlogy. Today, Virtualization is the biggest buzz. I was able to play with 4 different kinds of O/s-es using VirtualBox - on both Windows and Linux. So, even if you need to venture into either Windows or Non-Windows O/S-es, you could go in for Virtualization - ofcourse, the latest AMD/Intel chips that support hardware-assisted Virtualization are very much recommended.

8. Mono 2.0.x: Now we also have a .Net Framework on Linux that looks quite promising. But I have not fully tested that to give a critical comment. Nevertheless, it is one of the strong points that would goad me to move over to Linux!

So, in summary: Ubuntu 8.04 (I am somewhat disappointed with the 8.10 upgrade - that's a different topic, though) is the closest challenger to Windows but not exactly measures upto it - my opinion ofcourse!

Thanks for your patience in going through my essay.

rgds,
Watson

wizard10000
November 13th, 2008, 01:14 PM
The only reason I use Windows at home is because my HTPC is connected to a 50" DLP TV and Nvidia's Linux utilities don't address overscan issues as well as their Windows utilities do.

NoSmokingBandit
November 13th, 2008, 02:20 PM
6. 64-bit and 32-bit apps! Another plus for Linux. I am having x64 Ubuntu 8.10 that allows me to run 32-bit Linux Apps, sid-by-side. This is something I have not seen in Windows. Probably (I am not sure) 64-bit Windows allows 32-bit apps but have not heard a concrete evidence. For free, I am having a 64-bit O/s. As a Software Engineer, this fact gives me enough thrills!


Vista x64 runs 32-bit apps. Idk about XP x64 because its terrible, but i game on my vista install and most game binaries are 32 bit.

Tomatz
November 13th, 2008, 03:54 PM
When you have game development heavy-weights constantly raising the bar with new revolutionised gaming engines, there is inevitable demand for an upgrade.
Linux games like Nexius and Open Arena make good gameplay, look great, but don't demand upgrades every so often. But WINE will accommodate you to a point covering a good number of games and apps. Seriously with the expenses of constant upgrading just to play the latest'N'greatest and get fullest experience possible...

Grab a console! A good console changes every so many years as opposed to every so months of having to upgrade your PC... I got a PS3 so I can play the latest'n'greatest without having to break the bank in order stay on top.

My advise in a nutshell...

If you want to play games. Get into console gaming (if you haven't already). It will save you from a strained hip pocket with a fortune of upgrades.

Personally i hate consoles but it bugs me that i have to have windows installed just to play games :(

tvtech
November 13th, 2008, 04:02 PM
Personally i hate consoles but it bugs me that i have to have windows installed just to play games :(


there are many good open source games, there are many games that work with wine

all of which don't require windows!

however, I use linux to learn new things, it's interesting keeps me out of trouble etc....

other than that i still use windows to run Autocad. I use what I need to use to do my work, I participate in the linux community because I like to support open source software, and use linux because it's fun to learn new things.

dusted
November 13th, 2008, 04:13 PM
I have windows for iPod syncing, newer games (Crysis, Steam games, Rainbow Six: Vegas 1 & 2, Guitar Hero 3, Need for Speed), Photoshop CS2 (haven't gotten around to learning GIMP), and LAN parties.

Linux on the other hand does Compiz, which actually increases productivity on school projects, AKA Scale extension, then programming is way easier, it can be customized way more beautifully, easier to recover from errors, better support forum, plays older Windows games perfectly (Starcraft, Warcraft III, WoW), better file management, playing videos, DVD's, music, torrents, boots faster, runs my CPU and GPU cooler, more battery life and still get more done.

Then in Linux I run Virtualbox with Windows XP for AutoCAD and cross-platform code testing (C/C++, FreeBASIC), and those persky AVI's that just don't play in MPlayer.

cyberfin
November 13th, 2008, 04:24 PM
I have 4 computers at home.

My main computer (ubuntu)

My old laptop (ubuntu)

My htpc (ubuntu + various htpc software)

My wife's laptop (win xp)

And the only reason windows is on her comp is that I'm so damn lazy. I'd have to back up all of her stuff. However, the day will come eventually.

As for gaming, all depends where you put your limits. Not only is the compatibility getting better (very fast) but many games are being programmed to run natively on linux.

Graphics card? Nvidia. Don't look anywhere else. Sorry for the ATI fans. (I used to be one)

MS product issues? If you're patient enough and know how to use google (http://www.googleguide.com/) you can solve almost anything.

Bye bye windows. I won't miss you.

tsali
November 14th, 2008, 12:17 AM
I mess around with it for the same reasons one might keep a hot rod in the garage...it fun to play with.

However, just like keeping a hot rod, it doesn't hurt to have a Honda around when you really need to go somewhere...

doas777
November 14th, 2008, 12:30 AM
Basically I dont see any advantages to using linux over windows xp, Im dual booting windows and ubuntu. Ubuntu is nice and all but I dont see anything that would make me prefer it over windows.The only thing i have been using ubuntu for is web browsing playing music/movies (cant play games) which I can do better/hassle free in windows.

So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?

to be honest the reason I switched is because of all the malware i got while trying to keep all my XP boxen cracked and passing WGA. too many boxes to afford XP pro + office + kaspersky kis + whatever else on every one. no security program in the world is going to help you if you install a rootkit while cracking your core os.

nowadays i have one legit XP box (and several linux), with nothing but legit software on it. I can afford it, I trust the origins of the files (as much as i can trust M$), and I have no worries.

In the end, I'm much happier. I don't have to worry about WGA, i get to learn all kinds of new computery stuff (which really helps if your in IT, but don't have a lot of unix experience), and I feel like i'm helping stab back at the heart of crass commercialism.

don't get me wrong, I remote into my xp box everyday for one reason or other, but I see my focus on working with linux has expanded my computing existence in many favorable ways.


cheers,
franklin

rickbeton
November 14th, 2008, 01:19 AM
Windows:

good for games
good for commercial apps (e.g. Adobe Studio)
everybody knows it, warts and all

A lot of computer users are wedded to MS Office, but I think OpenOffice 3 is closing the gap. I happily do without MS Office.

Ubuntu Linux:

lower cost of ownership
easier to use than Windows (yes I really do think that now; even if many will disagree)
more secure
more reliable & stable
better as an engineering tool (it's my day job)


My non-technical wife happily uses Ubuntu for web, email and office apps. My kids prefer WinXP - but they're wedded to games and iTunes. We all use OpenOffice, Firefox and Thunderbird, inter alia.

On the free/non-free thing, I think iTunes is the epitome of non-free software because it locks you into the Apple culture, even though the software itself is free. I'm not making a political point but a commercial one: "vendor lock-in" is ultimately good for vendors but not customers.

Rick

irish66
November 14th, 2008, 01:39 AM
I just like to try out different stuff.
M

irish66
November 14th, 2008, 12:06 PM
I lie.
Actually it's because no matter what browser i use, in windows xp, it crashes, and no matter what direct connect client i use, that crashes too. So seeing whether I get any better results here.
M

Tomatz
November 14th, 2008, 12:09 PM
I lie.
Actually it's because no matter what browser i use, in windows xp, it crashes, and no matter what direct connect client i use, that crashes too. So seeing whether I get any better results here.
M


Well if you want to use an OS that doesn't crash then your out of luck :(

Computers are crap!

:guitar:

doas777
November 14th, 2008, 03:07 PM
I lie.
Actually it's because no matter what browser i use, in windows xp, it crashes, and no matter what direct connect client i use, that crashes too. So seeing whether I get any better results here.
M

I suspect you have a bad nic

sodather
November 15th, 2008, 12:03 AM
Hi, I thought i'd post this in this thread because it is generally in the same topic area where I need some assistance.
My roommate has a computer with both Windows XP and Linux set up on it. I have been looking a little into Zubuntu as a future operating system, and though i'd try out his, watch some video files on it, etc. However he left town for the weekend, and for fun, he bet me that I would in no way be able to figure out how to run Zubuntu or play the video files which he has on Zubuntu. I know this probably comes across as a really broad request, but if any one can help me out here, i'd really appreciate it. Even just figuring out how to run the linux OS would be really helpful. Sorry if i sound like a total NOOB,
-S

doas777
November 15th, 2008, 05:06 AM
Hi, I thought i'd post this in this thread because it is generally in the same topic area where I need some assistance.
My roommate has a computer with both Windows XP and Linux set up on it. I have been looking a little into Zubuntu as a future operating system, and though i'd try out his, watch some video files on it, etc. However he left town for the weekend, and for fun, he bet me that I would in no way be able to figure out how to run Zubuntu or play the video files which he has on Zubuntu. I know this probably comes across as a really broad request, but if any one can help me out here, i'd really appreciate it. Even just figuring out how to run the linux OS would be really helpful. Sorry if i sound like a total NOOB,
-S

i assume you mean xubuntu? I typically use ubuntu, so hopefully this advice works for you. to watch vid, you probably jsut need codecs.

first open a terminal and enter:

sudo apt-get install ubuntu-restricted-extras vlc

then, follow the instructions here: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Medibuntu . it's easy, just copy and paste the commands into a terminal, and viola! that should allow you to run most common video types. if it won;t work in your default media player, try vlc.

good luck,
franklin

obscur156
November 15th, 2008, 02:37 PM
Just have enough of Mr.Bill Gates and his anti-trust tactics and my pc bugged all the time.

Sorry,i feel like i have to <Beep Beep> Microsoft this morning :) .

Thats just me.

Best regards.

Palanthas
November 26th, 2008, 01:40 AM
The horrific green plastic Start-button is enough for me ;P

Ah, but that's why there is Vista! Its a blue start button! :lolflag:

Inxi
November 26th, 2008, 05:43 PM
To answer the thread topic:

1. Virus-proof (mostly)
2. Better file organization (less accumulation of useless material, registry keys, and weird applications)
3. Better driver/application management (Firefox is already there, etc.)
4. Much better control of the system
5. If something goes wrong, you blame it on yourself, not Windows
6. Windows XP is no longer supported and severely outdated.
7. It's free!
8. Hotkeys!
9. Stuff I didn't discover yet.

otz070
November 26th, 2008, 07:44 PM
My reasons:
1. Linux is FREE
I run (Plan to and working on) a custom built Render Farm so It saves me money that I can invest into the workstations
2. All my prepackaged windows computers came with 32bit version to go to 64 bit cost extra even though the processors support it
3. the majority of software I already run is opensource and available on linux.
4. linux has software that I really want but windows doesn't And it's free
5. I hate paying for software. Especially crappy software that is used to run my free software, only at a lesser quality,speed
6. Windows Idea of new features is a security update for windows or explorer (insert usless version number here____)
7. Vista works If you have more than 3gib ram (mojave) (Lying on a technicality, There's no actual fix for vista to make it faster it's just that new systems come with more ram)
8. Vista still sucks Xp is way better so I UPGRADED from vista to xp (Exactly)
9. A fully tweaked version of vista (with many hacks:twisted:) runs about ten times as slow as a non tweaked version of xp. While a fully tweaked version of xp runs about 10 times as slow as a non tweaked version of Ubuntu. This Is all running the same system.
10. I completly abandoned vista after getting tired of waiting for 1byte files and empty folders to be moved (It froze)
11. I can't stand Xp (Pro) It takes too long to start up (so now I only us Xp for what I cant get working on Ubuntu. (mainly my DAW)
12. Way more customization.
13. Features that I can actually use
14. A non bloated os
15. no extra commercial copyright patent Corporate Protect the Big guys screy the little man Fluff
16. Once you quit thinking like windows then linux is easy...easier...easiest:)
17. Terminal is easier/more responsive/more usful/functional/ than the windows console/
18. Troubleshooting a problem is way more easier. None of that go search ms's crappy error database for a wierd error code that doesn't exist then install more fluff to fix a problem that causes another problem, all while waiting two days just to figure out why one stupid thing doesn't work right and hinders all system functionality.

Windows took Close to 2years for me to learn, I learned linux in 2months.
Windows has given me nothing but a hassle. it seems that I spend more time troubleshooting issues than actually doing anything productive.

And finally linux has community support. MS has GREAT support only 50$ a question. (As if they don't already have enough money:mad:)
But hey the first one is free with oem systems....



And the best reason is that it works.:)

JohnLM_the_Ghost
November 26th, 2008, 09:25 PM
9. A fully tweaked version of vista (with many hacks:twisted:) runs about ten times as slow as a non tweaked version of xp. While a fully tweaked version of xp runs about 10 times as slow as a non tweaked version of Ubuntu. This Is all running the same system.
Not really true. At least not when you tweak it right.
My XP runs twice as fast as Ubuntu. (both are x64) But considering Ubuntu runs compiz, so I guess then they're pretyy equal.
Besides MS Word opens instantly on XP, and Firefox in less than a second.
In Ubuntu Firefox takes some 3 seconds to start and OO Writer takes a bit more.
But I'm pretty sure Vista around as slow as these both combined.


11. I can't stand Xp (Pro) It takes too long to start up (so now I only us Xp for what I cant get working on Ubuntu. (mainly my DAW)
My boot up time is less than 30 seconds for XP and around 40 for Ubuntu.

I'd use Ubuntu exclusively if it offered everything I need. But it doesn't really.

hawkhock
November 26th, 2008, 11:52 PM
I'm a senior citizen living in a remote community -- rely on my computer for a variety of things. My hardware is 4 years old but stable. Win XP support is being discontinued. Win 7 on the horizon. Since I am not sure that my desktop computer has the capacity for a new Win OS, I will soon be using Ubuntu and dual booting until I learn how to use it. I can't afford a new computer every 3-4 years to keep up with MS OS requirements.

I already use as much open source software as I can simply because it usually has a smaller footprint. I am looking forward to a personal FREEDOM from MS day!
G in UT

aeroace
November 27th, 2008, 12:41 AM
I have been using Ubuntu now for a little over 2 weeks and I have to say that I would much rather boot Linux than XP. I am slowly feeling more comfortable with Ubuntu. Have there been issues?? SURE but how fun is it to actually get your hands dirty in the terminal and fix them whenever they may pop up. I can infinitely tweek my system to my liking and the best part...... I'M NOT GIVING MY MONEY TO MICROSOFT!! YIPPIE!!!!

-- aeroace

polarworks
November 28th, 2008, 05:54 PM
With Windows my Laptop was very slow and getting hanged was just like every day routine. Ubuntu has stabilized my Laptop and I dont even hear the annoying sound of my laptop's fan. Its Quite and smooth.

brainac0cult
November 28th, 2008, 07:26 PM
the luna theme looks like play-doh and windows is less costomisable and you get viruses and your feeding bill gates money and windows is slow and linux is mutch faster

madverb
November 29th, 2008, 08:19 AM
Nothing wrong with feeding Bill Gates money. He is a great man and will do much good for the rest of his life. Just look at all the money he is pouring into 3rd world countries!

utnubuuser
November 29th, 2008, 09:11 AM
Don't you think the majority of Windows users are Windows users because they bought a PC with Windows preloaded?

If you'd started out in Ubuntu or Debian or Gentoo or whatever, wouldn't you miss having control of your operating system?

I've stopped referring to Ubuntu as Linux/Ubuntu, because I don't refer to Windows as DOS/Windows, or Macintosh as BSD/Mac or whatever they are.

As soon as you mention the word Linux in mixed company, 80% of your audience either walks away,or goes to sleep,(I think this is mainly from years of DOS-Windows subliminal conditioning).

So if your running Ubuntu, why not just call it Ubuntu? -That way you avoid the Windows vrs.Linux trap.

linuxguymarshall
November 29th, 2008, 09:15 AM
Read my latest blog post and know why. This has turned tonight from what was going to be a Skulltag fragfest into nightmare.

silver
November 29th, 2008, 02:05 PM
I'd use Ubuntu exclusively if it offered everything I need. But it doesn't really.

All too true unfortunately. I haven't tried 8.10 yet though the last time I tried to install 8.04 on my system it would lockup every time. Perhaps it was that ATI 3870 or maybe the X-Fi card. Good thing it wasn't running "fake RAID" on my agin Nforce 570 motherboard. I've tried to figure out how to get my Epson 4490 PHOTO scanner to work but no matter it just doesn't work as well as it does in Windows. Well at least the M-Audio 2496 works under Linux. Perhaos some day I'll build a Linux-only system. One that has full support of that OS. Anyone want to donate a 4990 scanner to the effort ? And while I'm at it, has anyone found a good web IDE comparable to Dreamweaver CS4 ?

PsychoticPrince
November 29th, 2008, 02:39 PM
Basically I dont see any advantages to using linux over windows xp, Im dual booting windows and ubuntu. Ubuntu is nice and all but I dont see anything that would make me prefer it over windows.The only thing i have been using ubuntu for is web browsing playing music/movies (cant play games) which I can do better/hassle free in windows.

So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?

I think..You don't know anything about Ubuntu 8.10

The First Advantage: is Desktop and Effects Window Effect sound effects and others. Ubuntu is better than Windows Vista and better than other Windows about design and graphics effects / Windows / ... so, Have Free Programs, Some Programs is Better Than Windows, (Like Music Players Programs) [Amarok Player is Great] Is better than Windows Media Player
i think Winamp iTunes .. and other programs in Windows great but Amarok Player make the Same Job and many times better job.

So Some Programs like Music and Video and image [View Or Edit, Record, Make] is better in Ubuntu or Same with Windows

Nothing in Windows is Better Than Ubuntu. You Can't Make the same Job and more beutiful on Ubuntu Than Windows Versions. If you know a little things about Ubuntu you can used easy, is a Friendly Operating System.

Second Advantage: Ubuntu Support Sound Drivers/ USB/ ETHER NET/ Wi Fi/ Drivers / Any Modem any / PCI / USB Device with one Connection with your own Hand. So if you install ubuntu / have Sound connection in internet and other thinks you don't need to install anydriver like Windows Versions.The only think you have to Do in Ubuntu is Updates / Update Repositories and install Video Graphics Card Drivers. Its to Easy you make think thinks with one Click.

SO ABOUT *.exe *.dll / And Games /

You Can't RUN ANY GAME on Linux not in UBUNTU PACKAGE ON ANYTHINK LINYX package With > Wine Program/ Wine Emulator



i have ubuntu and i play Wow World of Warcraft

the only think you have to make is: make shortcut in path game wow.exe and write in the and of line -OPENGL

and double Click. and game runs wells / many games run like this and many programs run with double Click

So Install Wine and try to Run some Games like this

I have 2 Game on my ubuntu and run Well like Windows not better Like Windows. the first is Warcraft 3 Frozen Throne, And The Second is World of Warcraft Wrath of the Lich King.

I use Linux 7years now. I like Suse Linux / Debian Linux / RedHat Linux / Fedora Linux / SlackWare Linux / But my favorite Linux for now is Ubuntu 8.10.00

I Don't See ANY reason to Use Windows i Can make the same jobs in Linux and betters. My job is Networks and Linux have many better network programs and security Than Windows. Unix OS is Crazy

Search the LinuxWorld its Amazing. don't Blame This Free Software

the guys how make this OS is intelligence

gaffurabi
November 30th, 2008, 04:57 AM
well i have to dual boot for some irritating reasons like possibly most of the people have to:

-netbanking. damn banks dont like linux.
-ms office files.
-heroes of might and magic 3 (couldnt run it via wine properly)
-voipwise and alikes

it's just because of the monopoly out there.
also it is sad to see vast majority of people conditioned

PsychoticPrince
November 30th, 2008, 11:25 PM
The Age of Windows end.

josedb
December 1st, 2008, 12:12 AM
because i have to use the damm autocad, and playing games, thats the only reason, but my laptop only has linux.

spandanj
December 1st, 2008, 05:12 AM
I use linux over xp b/c

1) Mainly, b/c xp crashes (hardware problem)
2) compiz, and multi-deskop space

unf4b1x
December 1st, 2008, 09:27 AM
im new to using linux. im just trying to look for an alternative to XP and try other OSes see which is much better... and i get to try and learn new appz... i guess it could be an added perks than knowing just one OS.

automaton26
December 1st, 2008, 10:53 AM
Er, just what you'd expect really:


Secure
Open Source
Uses less resources
Zero initial cost
Lower total cost
Requires less maintenance (registry cleaning, defragging, anti-virus, huge updates)
Not owned by a U.S. corporate
Lower probability of back-doors & hidden information gathering
Simple package management
Availability of many free applications


And most importantly of all, UT2004 is smoother...

8-)

Look, I can perfectly understand a company taking a business decision to have a relationship with Microsoft, but why use Windows on your home PC, or any other personal device ?

tjandracom
December 1st, 2008, 11:46 AM
Windows has its own advantages and disadvantages.
Linux has its own advantages and disadvantages.
Mac has its own advantages and disadvantages.
Mainframe has its own advantages and disadvantages.
If Windows is a Toyota, and Linux is a Honda, and Mac is a Mercedes, and Mainframe is a truck, what car you should have will be depends on your needs. And for some very specific situation, they are not comparable.
It is not like "if you have Honda then you must dump your Toyota" or "if you have Mercedes, why would you need a truck" or vice versa. if u have enough space in your garage, have them all! :):):) plus a Harley Davidson... :lolflag:

Tomatz
December 1st, 2008, 03:05 PM
The REAL reason we use Linux

We tell people we use Linux because it's secure. Or because it's free, because it's customizable, because it's free (the other meaning), because it has excellent community support...

But all of that is just marketing ********. We tell that to non-Linuxers because they wouldn't understand the real reason. And when we say those false reasons enough, we might even start to believe them ourselves.

But deep underneath, the real reason remains.

We use Linux because it's fun!

It's fun to tinker with your system. It's fun to change all the settings, break the system, then have to go to recovery mode to repair it. It's fun to have over a hundred distros to choose from. It's fun to use the command line.

Let me say that again. It's fun to use the command line.

No wonder non-Linuxers wouldn't understand.

The point with us Linux fans is - we use Linux for its own sake. Sure, we like to get work done. Sure, we like to be secure from viruses. Sure, we like to save money. But those are only the side-effects. What we really like is playing with the system, poking around, and discovering completely pointless yet fascinating facts about the OS.

There are three main reasons Linux is so much fun:

1. Linux gives you complete control

Ever tried stopping a process in Windows and the OS wouldn't let you? Ever tried deleting a file - and you couldn't? Even though you had admin rights?

Linux lets you do anything. That's the great benefit of usually logging in as user. If you login as the root, the OS assumes you know what you're doing. Once you become root, everything is allowed.

2. Linux isn't widely used

This is a paradox. We often complain Linux isn't more widely used. But that's one of the reasons we use it. It gives us a feeling of being a special clique. Like we're better than "those ignorant masses".

If Linux becomes widely used, we'll probably switch to something else. Or at least develop an obscure distro that only we will use. Because, let's face it, we want to feel special.

3. Linux is free (as-in-speech)

We can get the source code for all our applications. If we want to know how a certain part of the OS works, we can. This lets us tweak and play with our systems. And we absolutely loo-o-o-ve tweaking our system.

Of course we can't tell non-Linuxers we use Linux because it's fun - they'd stick us into a mental asylum quicker than you can say "antidisestablishmentarianism". So we'll keep telling them the false yet plausible reasons for using Linux. But deep inside, we'll know the real reason we use Linux.

And maybe, just maybe, next time someone asks me why I use Linux, I'll flash a huge smile and answer: "Because using Linux is FUN!"

http://blog.anamazingmind.com/2008/03/real-reason-we-use-linux.html


Says it all really....

outsiderzx
December 1st, 2008, 05:39 PM
hahaha i just born in the world of linux since 24 October 2008...

just have 1 word for linux.........................ROCKZZZ!!!

with linux, you just keen to learn something u dun expect when ure using windows o0o...make it like ur own OS...what else u need huh?

all the GURUs...show me the way o0o!!!

Tomatz
December 1st, 2008, 08:08 PM
hahaha i just born in the world of linux since 24 October 2008...

just have 1 word for linux.........................ROCKZZZ!!!

with linux, you just keen to learn something u dun expect when ure using windows o0o...make it like ur own OS...what else u need huh?

all the GURUs...show me the way o0o!!!

WTH???

Can someone translate please?



Welcome to Linux ;)

Frak
December 2nd, 2008, 02:28 AM
Says it all really....
Aye, what makes people tick: Dominance through a clique, Reciprocity through the community, Trade through code and forum help, and Familial from the attitude that bonds, or makes us alike.

starcannon
December 2nd, 2008, 02:58 AM
WTH???

Can someone translate please?



Welcome to Linux ;)
Translation: He had an Ubuntasm.

Ubuntasm
U-bunt-asm [eww-boon t-az m]
-noun


the physical and emotional sensation experienced at the peak of Linux excitation, usually resulting from stimulation of the enduser and usually accompanied in the mind blowing performance of a system running Ubuntu.
an instance of experiencing this.
intense or unrestrained system performance.
an instance or occurrence of experiencing such excitement.

-verb (used without object)
5. to have an ubuntasm.

dreaminhere
December 2nd, 2008, 07:53 AM
No system bogging anti-virus, and lower cost. I also discovered that I love the add/remove programs in linux. It's great to have the programs come to you instead of searching through 200,000 google hits. That was my reasons for giving linux a whirl. I'm still a windows programmer but do that in vmware. The one thing I don't like in linux is the issue with games. But the free ones are great as well!

Tomatz
December 2nd, 2008, 03:15 PM
Aye, what makes people tick: Dominance through a clique, Reciprocity through the community, Trade through code and forum help, and Familial from the attitude that bonds, or makes us alike.

Well said!

It doesn't matter what community you are part of. Human social interaction is always the same.

;)

Tomatz
December 2nd, 2008, 03:16 PM
Translation: He had an Ubuntasm.

Ubuntasm
U-bunt-asm [eww-boon t-az m]
-noun


the physical and emotional sensation experienced at the peak of Linux excitation, usually resulting from stimulation of the enduser and usually accompanied in the mind blowing performance of a system running Ubuntu.
an instance of experiencing this.
intense or unrestrained system performance.
an instance or occurrence of experiencing such excitement.

-verb (used without object)
5. to have an ubuntasm.


:lolflag:

You forget what its like to have your first Linux!

spaarks
December 2nd, 2008, 03:50 PM
If a free operating system was as good or better than one costing $120 then everybody is going to choose the free one. It's not, so they don't.

I think the main reason why Ubuntu does not appeal to the mass public is that the mass public don't want to go back 20 years—ie to command line inputting to make the thing work. For example Ubuntu doesn't work with the very popular Atheros 5000 wireless card. There isn't even a definitive method published to make it work.

Great for folks who love writing code, otherwise stick with Windows.

starcannon
December 2nd, 2008, 06:10 PM
If a free operating system was as good or better than one costing $120 then everybody is going to choose the free one. It's not, so they don't.

I think the main reason why Ubuntu does not appeal to the mass public is that the mass public don't want to go back 20 years—ie to command line inputting to make the thing work. For example Ubuntu doesn't work with the very popular Atheros 5000 wireless card. There isn't even a definitive method published to make it work.

Great for folks who love writing code, otherwise stick with Windows.
I disagree.

And Linux is rarely free as in beer, every thing costs something. In Linux an install costs the enduser by requiring one to educate oneself about the computer, replace incompatible hardware (not linux's fault if hardware manufacture won't release drivers), or pay a competent person to do these things for them.

I have never seen windows as cheap as $120, and even if I found some great sale, I then have to further purchase every shred of software for it. To do the same things I do in Ubuntu on a Windows equivalent would be a bare minimum of $1500.00, and thats if I used as much free windows software as possible, and does not include subscriptions to antivirus, firewall's, spyware, and all assorted acutraments required just to make windows almost safe.

My Wife and Kids use Linux, my Mother, Father, and Grandmother use Linux, and none of them "know how to code". Nor do they know how to install an operating system, I did it for them, and if they wanted to run Windows, I'd have done that for them as well. I will also point out as far as from an installers point of view, that on a modern computer, an HP dv2600 Laptop, it took me 3 days to track down all of the windowsXP drivers to do a dual boot install on it; for the Ubuntu install I did not have to track anything down, it just worked, wifi and all.

Simply not knowing how to do a thing is not a valid reason to marginalize the thing it self.

GL and have fun

ussndmac
December 2nd, 2008, 06:42 PM
And it's a good thing the mass public don't know how to use the command line in Windows...they could really trash their machines then. ;)


If a free operating system was as good or better than one costing $120 then everybody is going to choose the free one. It's not, so they don't.

I think the main reason why Ubuntu does not appeal to the mass public is that the mass public don't want to go back 20 years—ie to command line inputting to make the thing work. For example Ubuntu doesn't work with the very popular Atheros 5000 wireless card. There isn't even a definitive method published to make it work.

Great for folks who love writing code, otherwise stick with Windows.

wrtpeeps
December 3rd, 2008, 03:56 AM
And it's a good thing the mass public don't know how to use the command line in Windows...they could really trash their machines then. ;)

I hope this is sarcasm. :rolleyes:

PsychoticPrince
December 3rd, 2008, 10:45 AM
Windows has its own advantages and disadvantages.
Linux has its own advantages and disadvantages.
Mac has its own advantages and disadvantages.
Mainframe has its own advantages and disadvantages.
If Windows is a Toyota, and Linux is a Honda, and Mac is a Mercedes, and Mainframe is a truck, what car you should have will be depends on your needs. And for some very specific situation, they are not comparable.
It is not like "if you have Honda then you must dump your Toyota" or "if you have Mercedes, why would you need a truck" or vice versa. if u have enough space in your garage, have them all! :):):) plus a Harley Davidson... :lolflag:

you are to wrong. Linux is Ferrary Windows is Landa and mac is Vector .

I real many post of many users and i see how many little thinks know about linux. linux is and old Operating System.. Ubuntu have Experience Knowledge

JohnLM_the_Ghost
December 3rd, 2008, 08:50 PM
I hope this is sarcasm. :rolleyes:
I'm pretty sure it isn't.
I reckon only a rare people have used command line (cmd) in windows.
I have... but mostly on old Win9x

studavis
December 4th, 2008, 02:01 AM
I'm new to Linux but feel I gotta put my 10cents worth in. I just re-installed it yesterday, everything was detected and works (Toshiba Portege R200) except suspend. it took me 1 minute to install my company VPN and less than a minute to install my home printer which is on a wireless print server. That would have taken be ages on XP. Ubuntu just works for me and I'm now using OO much more and getting to prefer that over Office 2003. If no for my large spreadsheets with mega VBA macros I would dump the dual boot. Oh one other thing is I can't use webcam with Pidgin, it great otherwise. And Webex does not have a Linux version as yet. XP will have to stay a bit longer .. pity...

PsychoticPrince
December 4th, 2008, 10:41 AM
I'm new to Linux but feel I gotta put my 10cents worth in. I just re-installed it yesterday, everything was detected and works (Toshiba Portege R200) except suspend. it took me 1 minute to install my company VPN and less than a minute to install my home printer which is on a wireless print server. That would have taken be ages on XP. Ubuntu just works for me and I'm now using OO much more and getting to prefer that over Office 2003. If no for my large spreadsheets with mega VBA macros I would dump the dual boot. Oh one other thing is I can't use webcam with Pidgin, it great otherwise. And Webex does not have a Linux version as yet. XP will have to stay a bit longer .. pity...

I think you can /Run Windows Live Messenger
With Wine Emulator but need a little road to make It.

bobdobbs
December 5th, 2008, 04:28 AM
XP and ubuntu, like all OS's are pieces of turd.

Ubuntu is a better piece of turd.

I also prefer using my ubuntu machine, because linux is the piece of turd that Im more accustomed to.

nickski
December 5th, 2008, 05:40 AM
Reasons for linux:
-Operating system free
-amazing entertainment apps, like amorak, tovid gui, kino, etc.(did i mention free??)
-There are viruses for linux, but you have to realize that like 80% of all computers run windows, so there arent many targeted linux systems.
-I have never gotten a bsod with ubuntu or any other linux os
-all hardware just, well, works. (ATI has problems, but i have an ati 3450HD card and it works with restricted drivers)
-customizable
-amazing features that can be added for appearance, compiz for example.
-If you run a dual boot, you can access files from the other operating system without logging into that os...not sure if windows has that?

I can see myself not using windows much longer. I have a dual boot with vista ultimate and 8.10 Intrepid, but i find myself only using ubuntu. Vista, of course for games, but linux for everything else. Oh yea, plus its stickin it to the man because its one less os you are buying from that microsoft monopoly.

geogur
December 5th, 2008, 06:28 AM
i have 3 linux machines and 1 xp pro for work (cad cam) linux is my os and work dictates xp pro. if it was my choice i would fdisk windows and have 4 linux machines.

bradosav
December 5th, 2008, 07:32 AM
a lot of times i ask myself the same question. i confess that windows xp software runs 'out-of-the-box', and drivers are easy to come by. but still i believe in linux' future, i've been using it (or trying to) for a decade and it has come a very long way.

i use linux because i believe software should be free. it is so comforting to know that millions of developers have access to the source and would expose any back-doors, or similarly have security issues fixed quickly.

i also use linux because spyware and viruses are aimed at windows clickers, and i feel safe.

i like the community support approach, too. we're all people at different ends of the universe working together.

i use linux because it is truly democratic.

and the list goes on and on.

a shout-out to all you Tuxes out there!

mhh91
December 5th, 2008, 07:35 AM
well,i'm using linux because windows is full of viruses,as i'm facing this problem right now

i'm dualbooting XP and intrepid

jonnykash
December 5th, 2008, 04:42 PM
Hi, I'm new to the forum...
I gave OpenSUSE and Ubuntu a try last year and wasn't really impressed. Then some people started at my company what are really into Linux, so I gave it another try recently put the newest version of Ubuntu on both my work and home laptops, and installed some of the programs we use at work. Some things you should know if you're going to switch from XP:

If you don't know any Linux command line stuff, like how to navigate through directories and create a root password, learn.
If you have certain software that you MUST use for work or for hobby, make sure there's a way to run it in Linux, or keep an XP machine, or dual-boot.
Be open minded.

Also, I recommend Ubuntu, because OpenSUSE was almost as slow as Windows in my opinion. Ubuntu is FAST. Right now I'm just using it on my laptops. All I ever used my personal laptop for was surfing the web and recording band practice sometimes. Web surfing in Firefox is 10x faster than on XP, and I can easily record tracks with Audacity. However, if I do any serious recording, I use my XP desktop and REAPER to record with ASIO over Firewire, which is proprietary, and hasn't been integrated into Audacity, and as far as I know there's no ASIO multitracking programs for Linux, but someone might read this and prove me wrong, haha. Also I'm still using XP on my work desktop because of the IDE programs I use and because of Altium Designer (although we do have Xilinx ISE and Eagle working on the work laptop).
I've also been using XP Pro so long that I know how to set up a fast stable system. I've been using the same installation of XP on my home computer for YEARS and have never had a problem with it. My work computer was running good too until our switch at the one end of the building got nailed by lightning, now it acts funny... I run a 10,000RPM main drive (XP and programs), separate storage drive linked to "My Documents", AVG Internet Security 8, Spybot S&D, and I've found that if you start with XP service pack 1 and upgrade from there it will be much more stable than starting with SP2. Yeah, it's a lot of work to get it set up and install all the updates and anti-virus and anti-spyware programs, but once it's up and running there's no more problems, but sometimes it's luck with XP, haha. Someone could set up a system totally identical and have problems when I do not, that's one of the many bad things about XP, its inconsistency.
Well, enough rambling. If you're just doing basic home or business computing like web, email, music, pictures, document, spreadsheet, open source programs, random included games (Gnome has a lot) and you're sick of XP locking up all the time because you don't know how to maintain it correctly or want a faster system, then I definitely suggest Ubuntu Linux. You can even try it without installing it if you want, and there's plenty of help on the internet.

jsprz8382
December 5th, 2008, 10:33 PM
yeah, I find that in Ubuntu a lot of software isnt avilable yet and its hard to install it but as others mentioned I like the feel of it its faster and more responsive.

josephellengar
December 5th, 2008, 11:11 PM
This is all IMHO:

I'll probably get a little bit of flame for this, but I think that Windows is better than Linux for the average user. There is probably not a single person on these forums who is considered to be an average computer user. I think that anybody who uses linux and didn't grow up with it is automatically a non-average computer user. Why? Because they are willing to put time into learning it. They like tinkering with computers and learning about them. An average computer user wants their computer to work out of the box, do exactly what they want it to do, with someone on the other end of a phone if they don't get something. They don't want to put work into their computer. I agree that Linux is better for me, because I was willing to put work into learning it, and because I have had a programming/scripting past. If someone just doesn't get computers, then there is nothing in Linux that windows doesn't have. An average computer user doesn't want to have anything to do with the command line. It's a mythical thing that only experts will ever use. They don't care about filesystems. They don't care about permission systems. They don't care about package management. They just want their computer to work. And this is why I think that Linux won't catch on.

Also, again IMHO- I think that this is why Mac is gaining on Windows when Windows is better. Because Mac has the just work thing down. It's easier. Windows is more powerful and versatile, as long as you have antivirus software, but Macs are easy.

earrame
December 6th, 2008, 12:51 AM
Ditto the XP machine at work for CAD. Coming home to my Ubuntu System76 Pangolin makes me happy.

PhoenixMaster00
December 6th, 2008, 05:38 AM
Why do i use Ubuntu over Windows? Welllll a long time ago i like many was plagued by spyware/adware/malware/whateverware yeah ok a good removal program gets rid of all that but it was the first straw as it was a pain to have to keep checking it made my computer run slow although after using XP a good number of years i learned that after a certain time period you need a clean install to get it goin fast again. Anyway what really did it for me was how drivers would go dissapearing. Wireless one moment, Sound the next and although its easy to get them drivers back its not something i should have to do if they go virtual walkabouts. And so i switched to OSX and oh the freedom and simplicity but were not talking about OSX so ill move on. Then 3 months ago i had an old computer with no OS on and decided to install XP on it (since OSX was not an option) it was an off shelf copy and when i installed it couldnt get drivers for sound, wireless, and few less minor things and then a friend gave me a Ubuntu 8.04 livecd/installation disc. Of course i had heard of Linux but never considered it since i believed it was more technically minded pc people and was a struggle to get set up. How naive i was straight out the box it recognized everything on my computer ran so smooth and could be configured to give me the same ease of use as OSX and now i use it on all my computers and i very much enjoy it.
Of course all this is due to my opinion and personnal experience ands i no many that have had great experience with XP and dont want to change and good on them. I guess at the end of the day OS preference is down to personnal experience than anything.

rhardie
December 6th, 2008, 09:59 AM
This is actually a good question that I've been asking myself lately (after almost 2 years of using Ubuntu.

I dual boot Linux and Windows XP Pro on two different hard drives and I use Virtual Box to virtualize Windows XP Pro using dual monitors and seamless mouse/keyboard between the two environments.

I've been experiencing a whole host of issues with my Ubuntu lately that suck my time, preventing me from getting my other work done that pays my bills, etc.

Evolution crashes from time to time for no apparent reason; Firefox crashes with Flash, Certain keys on my keyboard fail to work in Firefox unless I wait for what seems to be a timeout or I click outside of Firefox and come back to the address bar, no printer drivers for my HP multifunction printer since upgrading to 8.10, wireless functions broke when upgrading to 8.10, other things stop working after each upgrade.

I continue using my Ubuntu because I support open source and like the security aspects; however, I am paying a price in time and frustration.

On the one hand, I like to tinker with the software and on the other, when I'm under the gun to get paying results in my "other" non-technical career, I don't have time to be dead in the water over an issue.

Sometimes I think I should own a MAC with Open Office. I am running the 64 bit OS on an AMD chip and maybe I need to revert to a 32 bit OS to see if I have fewer issues.

If I 'had my druthers' (old slang expression where I'm from for "I would Rather" or "If I had my choice"), I'd be totally Linux with no issues.

Maybe it would be helpful to qualify my statement with some demographics: I am age 51 as of Oct 2008 and at my phase of life, I have certain financial responsibilities and "X" amount of time, energy and patience. It's not the same as when I was 19, no kids, nobody needing my time, energy or money to live. I have kids and grand kids all with financial, time and other needs. So I have limited ability to tolerate things that go wrong, break, re-break or whatever. Coding software is NOT what I do for a living.

kyleinwuhan
December 6th, 2008, 03:57 PM
Honestly, if I had XP, I probably would have never had the courage to venture into Linux Land, but over the past summer, I bought an HP Pavilion loaded with MS Vista. I hate Vista, no, I loathe Vista. Vista is nothing more than bloat ware and eye-candy. Performance-wise it still needs some work. I find it amazing that for a Vista system to run comparatively well, you'll need at least 2 G of RAM,

Ok that's enough ranting. I just made the transition to Ubuntu (8.10) and I have to say thus far, I've been impressed. I've been able to find tons of software substitutes for things that I've previously used in Windows. For the things that I cannot live without, I've managed to get them working with Wine.

Ubuntu is much faster than Windows. I also like the fact that I don't have to run spyware, adware, or other security features at startup. I do admit that I feel a little naked without all of the above security software, but I'm quickly getting over that.

JdawgZX11d
December 6th, 2008, 04:24 PM
It was put to me like this... (From a certified linux engineer)

"I am sick and tired of helping you with Vista! At least with a Linux based system, I can modify most anything to suit your needs"

That seems to be an age old question. Most of us former Windows users just became 'comfortable' with trying to find the right video card that windows really supported... With Linux being soley based off of open source, EVERYTHING seems to be able to be modified with a script. Most of the problems us greenhorns have had, has been figured out long ago and it is most of the time a quick command and BAM!!

So the moral of the story is this
Asking someone why the use Windows is like asking an alchohalic why he drinks.. They just do.

I am three weeks into my Linux system and it does 8times as much as my Vista computer could ever do. Honestly, I was happy when my Vista Certified IR Remote worked in Linux to change the channel on my STB, and not on the operating system it was BUILT FOR!

gaffurabi
December 6th, 2008, 05:00 PM
It was put to me like this... (From a certified linux engineer)

...
So the moral of the story is this
Asking someone why the use Windows is like asking an alchohalic why he drinks.. They just do.


a nice proverb there :D

silver
December 7th, 2008, 01:42 PM
I'm pretty sure it isn't.
I reckon only a rare people have used command line (cmd) in windows.
I have... but mostly on old Win9x

I use the command prompt nearly every day with both XP and Vista. I have shortcuts in my Quicklaunch bar just for this reason.

JohnLM_the_Ghost
December 7th, 2008, 02:01 PM
I use the command prompt nearly every day with both XP and Vista. I have shortcuts in my Quicklaunch bar just for this reason.

Then You're one of those few!
Though makes me all wondering what you use it for?

pekopenn
December 7th, 2008, 02:40 PM
I do like the customization of linux but the whole spyware/adware thing and viruses I have never had a problem with, as long as your not being dumb opening random exe's its pretty much non existent. In reality the spyware is a big problem only because of the fact that the average computer user is attracted to flashy things and clicks.


If it wasnt for the games I could dump windows entirely but i play games on a whim and I hate having to restart just to play it. I could get used to the complexity of it. Honestly though I dont think I will switch to full install of linux or even being first on the boot up list because of the fact that I have the exact same things on windows and linux.

To me this is the real reason that linux is not adopted by the mass public, theres really no reason to go over to linux if you have windows and a casual computer user. However I do think if you dont have an OS and dont plan on being a gamer you should use linux because it is a good system. I also think its perfect for schools/governments/large business because you wouldnt have the major problems a windows network environment has curious/dumb users.

Hi everyone.....
I have XP, but wanted to switch to Linux mainly to avoid viruses and such,,,,have CD Ubuntu/from Canonical/ but it won`t install,,,so I guess I am stuck with Windows

silver
December 7th, 2008, 02:48 PM
The Age of Windows end.

I think this makes about the 1028th time I've heard such silliness since 1998 when I was running RH 4.x. and dual-booting NT. I heard the same mantra when I moved to Windows 2000 Pro and was dual booting Mandrake as Linux still didn't support my hardware. In 2004 I moved to XP Pro and Libranet which I ran until Jan Danzig passed away. I then moved to XP x64 when I upgraded my system to an Athlon 64 proc and started running with Ubuntu.

Believe me, if it was possible for me to run only Linux I would have jumped the MS ship long ago. Unfortunately I have been consistently disappointed with Linux on even the most basic features which have been available from Microsoft since Windows 2000. I have no doubt that this is exactly why Linux hasn't gained in market share here in the US for quite some time.

I'll be upgrading my system next week as the Black Friday sales at NewEgg.com and Ewiz.com were quite good. I have a new AMD 6000 x2 proc and an Asus M3A78 motherboard coming in for the pittance of $140. I'll try Ubuntu on the "fake RAID" once again with the new/different chipset (I currently run an Nvidia 570 Ultra) however I'm not going to hold my breath that it might actually work. It never worked well with the Nvidia which is 4 year old technology. I do hope that dual video is working better or do we still have to edit xorg.conf ? Oh well, at least I haven't completely given up hope on Linux. Yet.

silver
December 7th, 2008, 03:07 PM
Then You're one of those few!
Though makes me all wondering what you use it for?
From troubleshooting networks, applications and processes to file and backup management.

Roasted
December 7th, 2008, 07:30 PM
Unfortunately I have been consistently disappointed with Linux on even the most basic features which have been available from Microsoft since Windows 2000. I have no doubt that this is exactly why Linux hasn't gained in market share here in the US for quite some time.


Really? Like what? I use Windows 2k Pro, XP Pro, Vista Ultimate, and Ubuntu Intrepid at some point throughout my day - everyday. I find Ubuntu to be richer in things I can do and more efficient at getting certain tasks done.




I do hope that dual video is working better or do we still have to edit xorg.conf ? Oh well, at least I haven't completely given up hope on Linux. Yet.

I'm running a 9600GT 512mb graphics card with dual DVI outputs. For the first time in Ubuntu, yesterday, I tried to set up dual monitors with "twinview." I don't know what kind of graphics card you have, but with Nvidia it was a piece of cake to get this rolling. Just as easy as Windows, in my opinion.

All you have to do is open the Nvidia X Server Settings Manager... but do this via command line, with gedit. Reasoning is you're editing the xorg file when setting up twinview so you need to be in as root to edit/save it... and adjust the settings accordingly. Now I am running happily on a 22 inch LCD as primary and a 17 inch CRT as secondary. Next week, I'll have a 19 inch LCD as my secondary so I can get this honker off my desk!!

Snappo
December 7th, 2008, 08:04 PM
I think this makes about the 1028th time I've heard such silliness since 1998 when I was running RH 4.x. and dual-booting NT. I heard the same mantra when I moved to Windows 2000 Pro and was dual booting Mandrake as Linux still didn't support my hardware. In 2004 I moved to XP Pro and Libranet which I ran until Jan Danzig passed away. I then moved to XP x64 when I upgraded my system to an Athlon 64 proc and started running with Ubuntu.

Believe me, if it was possible for me to run only Linux I would have jumped the MS ship long ago. Unfortunately I have been consistently disappointed with Linux on even the most basic features which have been available from Microsoft since Windows 2000. I have no doubt that this is exactly why Linux hasn't gained in market share here in the US for quite some time.

I'll be upgrading my system next week as the Black Friday sales at NewEgg.com and Ewiz.com were quite good. I have a new AMD 6000 x2 proc and an Asus M3A78 motherboard coming in for the pittance of $140. I'll try Ubuntu on the "fake RAID" once again with the new/different chipset (I currently run an Nvidia 570 Ultra) however I'm not going to hold my breath that it might actually work. It never worked well with the Nvidia which is 4 year old technology. I do hope that dual video is working better or do we still have to edit xorg.conf ? Oh well, at least I haven't completely given up hope on Linux. Yet.

A market share for a free product? :popcorn:

Oh and a quote of a post I made in another Windows thread.

I think we all need to remember lack of driver support isn't the fault of the OS in fact they are doing us a service... take it up with your hardware manufacturer.

NoSmokingBandit
December 8th, 2008, 03:48 AM
Hardware support is a never ending battle. Why should a hardware manufacturer go out of their way and pay people to write drivers for 5% of computer users?

Snappo
December 8th, 2008, 04:56 AM
Hardware support is a never ending battle. Why should a hardware manufacturer go out of their way and pay people to write drivers for 5% of computer users?

Because I will buy hardware that they do write linux drivers for?

Giant Speck
December 8th, 2008, 05:03 AM
Hardware support is a never ending battle. Why should a hardware manufacturer go out of their way and pay people to write drivers for 5% of computer users?

Because they can?

c.e.mcbride.iv
December 8th, 2008, 05:22 AM
i got a used laptop that ran windows 2000. the seller of the laptop didn't inlude the os disk. to make a long story short, i lost everything and had no os. i'm back up and running on ubuntu. still working out my wireless card issues. but i'm back up and running on internet thanks to ubuntu. the time it takes to boot up with ubuntu is much much much less than windows 2000. no viruses either. and it's free. that's why i choose ubuntu.

samuraix51
December 8th, 2008, 06:28 AM
I dual boot. Windows for gaming, Visual Studio, and Adobe apps.
Linux is still my primary OS though.

NoSmokingBandit
December 8th, 2008, 03:23 PM
Because I will buy hardware that they do write linux drivers for?


Because they can?

Do you really think that a tiny niche market is enough to make hardware makers spend their time and money to write drivers? They have to do what makes them the most money, and writing drivers for a tiny percentage of the market is not profitable. Yes, it would be very nice of them, but they are running a business, not a driver charity.

Kaneda187
December 8th, 2008, 03:27 PM
Open your eyes dude its sooo much better I dont need to say anything else look at all the posts!

halovivek
December 8th, 2008, 03:31 PM
Basically I dont see any advantages to using linux over windows xp, Im dual booting windows and ubuntu. Ubuntu is nice and all but I dont see anything that would make me prefer it over windows.The only thing i have been using ubuntu for is web browsing playing music/movies (cant play games) which I can do better/hassle free in windows.

So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?

1. Freeware
2. Fed up with lot of unknown virus and malwares
3. security
4. crashing of systems
5. lot of support from world over.
6. learn

darth_indy
December 8th, 2008, 04:43 PM
My laptop was Linux only for a while, but I had to install XP again for a couple reasons. First, I had a Zune (Now replaced with an iPod so I can sync with Amarok) and the software only worked in Windows. Second, I needed to use Flash, Dreamweaver, and Photoshop CS3, and CS3 doesn't work in WINE, or at least it didn't (I haven't checked in a while). There are no alternatives to Flash for Linux, the FOSS alternatives to Dreamweaver are sub-par, and I'm just more familiar with the Photoshop layout to switch fully to GIMP, though I use it in a pinch if I don't want to restart my computer to boot into XP.

I use Ubuntu for everything else - I have so much more control over my system, and when I do break something, I can fix it of check the forums and learn how to fix it. I don't have to deal with viruses or malware (XP "Anti"virus 2008/2009 ring any bells?), the system is far more stable, and it runs so much faster than Windows.

The biggest draw for me in Linux, however, is the wide variety of free (as in beer) software available - legally! I'm a poor college student, do you think I could afford food after buying CS3 PLUS any other programs I've replaced with FOSS? *grins*

utkjamie
December 8th, 2008, 08:06 PM
I only use Windows for a very small number of tasks:

TV-OUT. I like to run video from my computer to my entertainment system. This used to work in Kubuntu with the ATI open source driver but the upgrade to Intrepid broke this functionality. A bug causes Kubuntu to freeze up. This is a temporary (and extremely frustrating) reason to use Windows when I want to kick back and watch some video streamed from my laptop on the TV.

ITUNES. I don't really like iTunes, but I have thousands of songs in iTunes with ratings, playcounts, and other statistics that I haven't been able to import into Amarok. It's just a matter of time before I figure this out, so it'll be one less reason to use Windows -- especially since I stopped buying music from iTunes and started buying better quality non-DRM music from Amazon.com's MP3 store (http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FMP3-Music-Download%2Fb%3Fie%3DUTF8%26node%3D163856011%26ref% 255F%3Dtopnav%255Fstoretab%255Fdmusic&tag=cybernetek-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=390957).

NETFLIX "WATCH IT NOW." Netflix has basically been giving the finger to non-Microsoft users since it launched it's streaming video service. Only recently have Mac users been able to use the service. Linux users are still Netflix's neglected step-children, even though we pay the same as everyone else for Netflix. But I'm ranting.

To be honest, I can't understand why anyone would choose to use Windows after using Linux. Windows is so limited as to basically be a crippled OS compared to the alternatives.

studavis
December 9th, 2008, 02:53 AM
Thanks for the reply, Wine will be my next task. Unfortunately my attempts to get Suspend working have introduced an intermittent failure of the touchpad. Strange, I actually got Suspend to work for half a day and then it stopped working and the touchpad now gives trouble. (Posted in Shutdown/Resume forum). There are certainly still some strange quirks to the system. I have often chnaged something, thought it not working only to find it works the next day! I'm sure I'm not imagining it and yes I do restart often (cos Suspend does not work).

scottuss
December 10th, 2008, 10:37 AM
Do you really think that a tiny niche market is enough to make hardware makers spend their time and money to write drivers? They have to do what makes them the most money, and writing drivers for a tiny percentage of the market is not profitable. Yes, it would be very nice of them, but they are running a business, not a driver charity.

Clearly you have not analysed the situation correctly. Firstly, Linux is only a niche marked on the desktop. Linux is more popular on servers than Windows is. Fact.

Windows' market share is falling to the likes of Mac OS X and Linux. Only a few years ago most devices would have drivers for ONLY Windows, then the Mac became popular and now it's hard to find a device that doesn't come with Windows AND Mac drivers.

And yet the Mac is still considered a niche market in comparison to the massive Windows one.

So clearly, a small market DOES need drivers, it IS profitable and it WILL benefit the companies in the future.

Last thing big companies need is for Linux to really take off and they be left behind, sobbing with fragments of poorly constructed Windows drivers for their pitiful hardware that the "niche" users cannot use.

Just my thoughts.

JohnLM_the_Ghost
December 10th, 2008, 12:58 PM
Clearly you have not analysed the situation correctly. Firstly, Linux is only a niche marked on the desktop. Linux is more popular on servers than Windows is. Fact.

Windows' market share is falling to the likes of Mac OS X and Linux. Only a few years ago most devices would have drivers for ONLY Windows, then the Mac became popular and now it's hard to find a device that doesn't come with Windows AND Mac drivers.

And yet the Mac is still considered a niche market in comparison to the massive Windows one.

So clearly, a small market DOES need drivers, it IS profitable and it WILL benefit the companies in the future.

Last thing big companies need is for Linux to really take off and they be left behind, sobbing with fragments of poorly constructed Windows drivers for their pitiful hardware that the "niche" users cannot use.

Just my thoughts.

That is all true!
Only I won't be so optimistic of Linux taking off any time soon. But still, Linux desktop userbase is increasing rather rapidly. And yes, Linux servers is pretty much dominant already (and was for quite some years before). Never underestimate power of LAMP!

NoSmokingBandit
December 10th, 2008, 10:05 PM
now it's hard to find a device that doesn't come with Windows AND Mac drivers.


I actually have yet to install any drivers on my osx install. Either something works or it doesnt, there is generally no workaround.
If linux keeps growing on the small hardware support it has now then it will eventually start to have a respectable marketshare, but its not going o happen overnight like alot of the linux zealots like to think.

acelin
December 10th, 2008, 10:09 PM
Because I will buy hardware that they do write linux drivers for?

Too bad it is not even 5%... They just are not going to do it period. It will take companies like IBM to risk an arm making it default and working on their computers... why put effort into something that has no returns?

scottuss
December 11th, 2008, 01:23 AM
You've been lucky then! My girlfriend's mac is usually the same, requires no drivers installing for the most part. However I have noticed that for some reason a lot of hardware does provide a driver disc for Mac OS X, even if not required.

Seems then, companies are willing to write drivers and put them on CD's that aren't needed, so why don't they do this for Linux where they are needed? (That was a rhetorical question, I do understand the reasons why they don't) Anyway don't get me wrong I'm not majorly anti-Windows or MS, (I'm not fussed about Macs though)

jdogg2
December 11th, 2008, 01:44 AM
i personally am sick of windows! its always crashing and its an all around weak os! im ready to make the change currently im running a dual boot but with windows always crashing im getting rid of it! now i just need to figure out where to get a media player like the windows player (probably the only thing i like about windows) oh and not to mention that no matter what you do with windows you are limited!:mad: oh and fire fox looks and feels better than explorer! i could go on and on bout the perks of linux!

scottuss
December 11th, 2008, 01:46 AM
i personally am sick of windows! its always crashing and its an all around weak os! im ready to make the change currently im running a dual boot but with windows always crashing im getting rid of it! now i just need to figure out where to get a media player like the windows player (probably the only thing i like about windows) oh and not to mention that no matter what you do with windows you are limited!:mad: oh and fire fox looks and feels better than explorer! i could go on and on bout the perks of linux!

Instead of Media Player, try Banshee http://banshee-project.org/ it's awesome.

Good luck with the switch over! :D

NoSmokingBandit
December 11th, 2008, 04:06 AM
ion that no matter what you do with windows you are limited!:mad: oh and fire fox looks and feels better than explorer! i could go on and on bout the perks of linux!

Firefox is not a perk of linux, its made for pretty much every operating system on the market atm.

d2globalinc
December 11th, 2008, 11:31 AM
First - #1 reason = Performance and Security - see youtube link below:

With new modern hardware there is no reason to run XP as your main OS - for games, I can see wanting a dual boot setup, but only for the games ;) - And its only a matter of time before those start being available for the virtual environment instead of MADE FOR WINDOWS ;)

I posted this on another thread - but its relevant here..


We will no longer sell windows as the HOST -OS on any new hardware. Vista64 doesn't perform nearly as good as Ubuntu64 Hardy. We install a customized Ubuntu OS for all of our clients then windows apps are now hosted in the datacenter or if necessary to run locally we use Vmware Workstation 6.5 and run windows XP as a virtual machine. XP and Vista both perform better than they do if they were the HOST OS. And we can keep them isolated so they can easily be restored to a snapshot if they get a virus, spyware, or adware - which is only usually a matter of time.

I built my latest personal workstation to test the "Future" of the desktop almost a year ago now. I started with Vista64, then after giving SP1 a good run through we decided to goto ubuntu64 and give it a shot. Windows will never be installed as the HOST OS on a desktop or server of ours (or our clients) again (hasn't been on one of our servers for years).

Here is the original youtube video demo we did after getting Ubuntu64 Hardy up and running ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DWzuIreDGA ) with the thread on how we setup the multiple screens in hardy here ( http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=884161 ). Since this video was made we now have all of our apps available including Adobe CS4 (Photoshop, flash, etc, using Vmware workstation 6.5. So we have the best of both worlds until Adobe begins releasing their software for the virtual environment instead of windows (its only a matter of time before everyone does - there is more $$ in it and hardware is powerful enough to run it at native speeds in a virtual environment - and only getting faster!). Virtualization, hosted apps, and web applications is allowing us to transitions the desktop PC away from windows and onto open source operating systems like Ubuntu. Its also a good point to make that it was really Microsofts release of Vista that prompted most of our clients to start looking for alternatives to windows. Our clients really hated getting those brand new notebook computers that ran slower than their 3 year old notebooks with windows xp on them. So for that, thanks Vista! ;) It's my job to be a consultant and look at all the options and then find the best solution that fits the clients needs, and right now its Ubuntu, virtualization, and hosted apps. If MS can actually innovate for once, we will look at their options too if they price them right.

Just my opinion ;)

Shane Menshik
D2 GLOBAL INC
http://www.d2global.com

Starcraftmazter
December 12th, 2008, 04:04 AM
Well XP (like all windows) is a toy, and it is quite good for playing with (ie. playing games), so that's what I use it for - playing games - like the toy that it is.

But when it comes to actually doing anything remotely useful or productive, it fails harder than the US Economy.

Hence, I use Ubuntu for everything other than gaming.

FoxIII
December 12th, 2008, 04:06 AM
I use xp at college; only because I don't think I would be capable of convincing the place to convert solely to linux. Shame. They're always having their network go down. <sigh>. Apart from that, at home, I have xp for one program only. Streamster. Even wine cannot run it :(

MedianMajik
December 12th, 2008, 05:22 AM
Basically I dont see any advantages to using linux over windows xp, Im dual booting windows and ubuntu. Ubuntu is nice and all but I dont see anything that would make me prefer it over windows.The only thing i have been using ubuntu for is web browsing playing music/movies (cant play games) which I can do better/hassle free in windows.

So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?

The advantages are definitely there, because XP and Ubuntu are completely different operating systems. The first thing I did after installing Ubuntu (Linux) last year on my spare HD was browse youtube, play music/movies, and find a game to dl. I felt as stuck and hopeless about it as I'm sure you do now. It is worth some effort (there is a learning curve) to open yourself up to a totally different computing experience.
The best thing to do is to stop worrying about XP all together and just think about all the features you ever wish you had in a computer. In the end Linux is tailored to the individual by the individual. I always found myself feeling there were faster ways to access files than clicking a mouse or using many of the resource heavy launchers people rave about(Gnome-Do), a way to save and organize text without making sure to save my work or load up google documents (Tomboy), a way to monitor my to-do lists and hold myself accountable (Tasque/rtm/Liferea)...
Can you do these same kinds of things in XP? Yes, but I don't want to sacrifice the stability and high performance of a solid operating system personally configured for my own use. The programs I run are literally integrated together through scripts, plug-ins, etc. Google "Learning the Shell" and it'll make the structure of Linux make a lot more sense.
On the subject of games I've recently stopped playing/uninstalled them altogether (my parents are stunned) unless it is on a console or at a lan cafe. The only things I can't do in Linux is intensive video/audio editing as I must be able to use the latest versions of Adobe CS.

Do what is right for you. You'll learn tons about computers and more about yourself. Good luck! :guitar:

JohnLM_the_Ghost
December 12th, 2008, 11:59 AM
cause i was bored at looking at the same desktop every day and ubuntu allows me to change every little detail of the os

well, with some particular software you can configure look of windows quite radically. but as much experience as I had with windows customization, it virtually always degrades performance and mostly eventually ends with broken (or very slow) system.
So on other hand Linux (Ubuntu and others) were made to be customizable, and it does pretty well!