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

Slicedbread
August 16th, 2005, 11:09 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?

im_ka
August 16th, 2005, 11:17 PM
there are a lot... really

a few practical ones:
no viruses, adware, spyware... whatever all that is called
you don't need to reinstall, just keep upgrading. at least debian based distros such as ubuntu
stability. it just _is_ more stable.

and once you know more about linux, you'll realise that you can tweak it as you want it, customize it to your needs.

plus you don't support an unethical monopolistic company.

my suggestions if you play games: dual boot with windows (games) and ubuntu (everything else)
go here: ubuntuguide.org

drizek
August 16th, 2005, 11:20 PM
if you try some other apps, then you can do all those things better in linux.

try listening to music in amarok, try using kontact/evolution for PIM stuff. there are a lot of free linux apps which are much better than windows ones.

but the reason why i started using linux in the first place was because windows breaks every few months. so one time, instead of reformatting, i installed linux and ive been using it ever since. its more stable, faster, lets you do more with your computer, hell of a lot more fun, looks better and has practically 0 security issues.

TestDummy!
August 16th, 2005, 11:22 PM
Well, I've had my copy of XP for years, quite a bit before I jumped into Linux. I'm trying to get my $120 worth before I decide to ditch it.

And the other reason I dual-boot is I can learn a bit more each day gradually rather than just jumping in. I do know enough now to ditch XP for good, but I'm just not ready yet. :-|

Besides, quite a few people here would freak out if Windows went missing.. ](*,)

Edit: For the record, I don't keep XP around for games. My machine is fairly nice but isn't gaming material (What over half a year old isn't anymore :( ). No worries, gaming is what my PS2 and Gameboy are for :D

Curlydave
August 16th, 2005, 11:32 PM
I can contribute to this discussion. I have a Linux HD and Windows HD. I use Windows for most stuff, Linux for experimenting because as you said, there aren't all that many advantages. However, I just got a nasty case of the Aurora spyware that I couldn't kill, so I went to reformat the HD after backing things up. Apparently my hard-drive is partially fried and neither windows nor Linux will install on it... So I'm using Linux now exclusively until I get a new HD to put Windows on.

I'd honestly dump Windows entirely if it weren't for lack of game support/lack of good ATI drivers on Linux.

aysiu
August 16th, 2005, 11:36 PM
try listening to music in amarok, try using kontact/evolution for PIM stuff. there are a lot of free linux apps which are much better than windows ones. Amarok is pretty good, but the only thing it has over iTunes, in my opinion, is being able to fetch the lyrics of whatever song you're playing--though, that's a pretty awesome feature!

DJ_Max
August 16th, 2005, 11:54 PM
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.

GreyFox503
August 17th, 2005, 12:17 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.

Amen. :)

Slicedbread
August 17th, 2005, 12:22 AM
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.

matthew
August 17th, 2005, 12:31 AM
Also, no ActiveX or registry, which is enough for me.
That alone makes it worthwhile!!

UbuWu
August 17th, 2005, 12:34 AM
All that has been said, plus:

- Lots of free software that can be easily installed without clicking through a lot of dialogs and accepting the weirdest license agreements.

- Possibility of direct contact with the developers, contributing your own ideas, see the bugs you report getting fixed (some even on the same day!)

- Less drivers to install, in Windows I needed drivers for my video card, network, soundcard and motherboard, in Ubuntu only for the video card.

:grin:

krusbjorn
August 17th, 2005, 12:36 AM
The horrific green plastic Start-button is enough for me ;P

RastaMahata
August 17th, 2005, 12:37 AM
talking about games... I currently play ut, ut2004, q2, q3, civ3, Sid meiers alpha centauri (and expansion pack), sim city 3000 unlimited, neverwinter nights. every game runs natively, except for civ3 which runs fine in wine.

more info of games in linux available at:
http://liflg.org/ (Installers for native and wine versions of the games. If the game runs natively, you can use the windows cds)
http://www.linux-gamers.net/ (Lots of info and howtos, besides great linux gaming news)
http://www.happypenguin.org/ (A great guide to feeware and open source games that run in linux)
http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=53 (The forum of gaming in ubuntu, hoary version)

somuchfortheafter
August 17th, 2005, 12:39 AM
personally i like how integrated i can make my network using linux. Currently I am buidling a server which will serve as my home mp3/ogg server, a cups server, and a http/ftp server for some minor hosting of things. I also like the fact i can turn junk hardware and a bit of time into something people pay hundereds of dollars for(I am a do it yourselfer i suppose). I still have windows installed on my laptop however it is never booted but maybe 1 or two times a month depending on whenver I have to use it and a usb drive enclosure for data recovery/ virus recovery.

xequence
August 17th, 2005, 12:43 AM
No spyware/viruses or anything like that. No worries that you will get a virus and loose your 5 GB of music. VERY customizeable. Dont like the default gnome desktop in ubuntu? You can get a whole bunch of themes. Plus if you dont like any gnome themes, you can get XFCE or other ones.

I had windows ME and it kept freezing and blue screening me. Many times a day, it was as stable as jello as someone said a couple days ago. For me, windows is good and stable if you dont have ANYTHING whatsoever installed.

Linux IS freedom. Freedom to do almost whatever you want with it.

The apt-get stuff of ubuntu is great. Type one command and you can download and install something. Type one command and you can download and install updates to ALL of your programs.

Though in my opinion dual booting is great. You get all the good things about linux and the (yes, there are some, but not many) good things about Windows.

I do think one of those really popular games (Unreal Tournament or doom 3 or something) has a linux version. I dont know which one because I dont have a crazy powerful computer.

With linux you get a new up to date modern OS. For free. With a GREAT community. Unlike windows which basicaly doubles the needed RAM each time for its versions, linux is good at using system resources.

Another thing. Linux is much more advanced. On windows I could only get 800*600 resolution. On linux I got 1024*768. I didnt have to install any drivers on linux.

Brunellus
August 17th, 2005, 12:48 AM
Freedom from fear. No viruses, adware, spyware...thus no headaches associated with them & countermeasures.

Freedom from bondage. No chance of being orphaned (in terms of OS or application support), provided the community continues to use & support the software. Try that with Windows down the road.

Freedom of choice. GNOME and XFCE. I prefer both operating environments to Windows. With Windows, you get Windows' GUI....sorry.

Freedom to learn. Linux has been an excellent way to teach myself more about my computer and how it works. I've missed this since DOS.

Freedom to experiment. I've been able to play with lots of different software packages very easily.

Overall, I find Linux a better tool for me--it does all the useful things I want. Windows has been relegated to the 'toy' OS--something to run games on.

Curlydave
August 17th, 2005, 12:57 AM
talking about games... I currently play ut, ut2004, q2, q3, civ3, Sid meiers alpha centauri (and expansion pack), sim city 3000 unlimited, neverwinter nights. every game runs natively, except for civ3 which runs fine in wine.

more info of games in linux available at:
http://liflg.org/ (Installers for native and wine versions of the games. If the game runs natively, you can use the windows cds)
http://www.linux-gamers.net/ (Lots of info and howtos, besides great linux gaming news)
http://www.happypenguin.org/ (A great guide to feeware and open source games that run in linux)
http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=53 (The forum of gaming in ubuntu, hoary version)

Still, many games dont' work on Linux. I've got Doom3, UT2004 and Red Orchestra working on Linux. However, they all perform quite badly, and I can't turn on AA/AF/vsync. I can live without AA, but AF and vsync are very important. If I could turn them on I'd probably get around 2 fps, so I guess it's a good thing that they don't work. :-? Frankly, I don't give a damn who's fault it is that my games run poorly on Linux, but the fact of the matter is that if you have an ATI videocard you'll suffer from the limitations I've mentioned, and pointing out that it's ATI's fault won't fix anything.

Oh, and you can't minimize in fullscreen mode, which I like to do on occasion.

drizek
August 17th, 2005, 12:57 AM
Amarok is pretty good, but the only thing it has over iTunes, in my opinion, is being able to fetch the lyrics of whatever song you're playing--though, that's a pretty awesome feature!

theres also the wikipedia integration, the audioscrobbler integration and hte ability to play formats other than mp3/aac.

amarok also supports plugins, and it is more configurable and has a much better UI IMO.

and most importantly, you are forced to install quicktime if you use itunes. quicktime is a worthless annoying POS.

MetalMusicAddict
August 17th, 2005, 01:33 AM
Its fun. ;)

Really Im kinda of the same opinion as you in that I dont have a big need for linux but I like the Idea of it. I have 3 out of my 6 PCs running linux now. Those 3 machines are really day-to-day machines. Web browsing, e-mail, chatting, Music and video. All done pretty easy with Ubuntu. I dual-boot on my powerhouse machine. I play games and do graphic design on it. I actually paid for Photoshop and Im not gonna let that money go to waste.

There are also some apps I really like on windows. So it stays for when I need them. ;) On a day-to-day basis though Ubuntu gets used. Its fun for me and I dont have to worry about my kids/wife gettin a virus and infecting my home network. That is untill people start targeting Linux. :(

I started also because I like to tinker and I dont agree with some things MS does. Just me. ;)

Takis
August 17th, 2005, 01:56 AM
A mouse whose pixels you can't see!
Seriously though, free and freedom. It's free as in $0. It's free as in spy/mal/somethingelse-ware free. You have the freedom to do whatever you'd like with it - this is by far the biggest plus, but the hardest one to really pick up on. I'm still finding cool stuff to change every day that I didn't even think possible.


Also, no ActiveX or registry, which is enough for me.
The registry ought to be shot.

professor_chaos
August 17th, 2005, 02:38 AM
Besides all the great benifits of freedom, lack of viruses/spyware etc.... I was really blown away as a new linux user as to the almost endless supply of software I could install at the click of a button (sometimes a few clicks and a few lines in the commandline). WOW.
I love experimenting with new software, and in windows, I had to google and search through pages and pages of websites, while being bombarded with ads and popups to finally end up with software that I couldn't uninstall cleanly. Screw that. Linux and the GNU community is a godsend.

Nequeo
August 17th, 2005, 05:48 AM
Personally, I'm amazed at how fast Windows XP can run when you don't install anything. I keep a Windows XP partition around for gaming. I do everything else on Linux. Write novels, develop software, put together business proposals, remote-administration of Windows 2003 servers... you name it.

There were some things I used to do in Windows that I could not do in Linux. These were 'want' things, though, rather than 'need' things. And eventually I found Linux had so many advantages that I stopped booting into Windows to do Windows things. I just stayed in Linux doing Linux things instead.

(At work I do a lot of server admin work. I switched from Windows to Linux, without telling anyone, and the boss didn't notice for a month! Linux plays nicely with other systems...)

I have nothing, absolutely nothing, installed on Windows XP that is not an integral system component or a game. (Or Nvidia drivers) No anti-virus, no internet access. No extranuous codecs, DVD-rippers or P2P software. Not even winamp. No printer drivers. No Microsoft Office. Nothing. I've turned off most of my Windows services, too. Just one straight-through network cable connected to my girlfriend's machine, so we can play Dawn of War together. (She likes Predator tanks best of all...)

It boots in about 10 seconds, and rips through anything I throw at it.

I am glad it is inconvinient to reboot to play games. It separates work and play to a much greater extent. NOT being able to just double-dlick something and start up a game while I'm working keeps me focused on the task at hand. (Which, right now, is posting on forums.)

That being said, I would not pay money for Windows just to play games. If there comes a time when PC games no longer run under Windows XP, I'd just buy a Playstation 3 or something. :)

jyank
August 17th, 2005, 06:13 AM
Pretty much the same reasons others have said for me.

I started using it as something fun to tinker around with, and the next thing I knew I was editing my partions to make my NTFS xp partion smaller and my ubuntu partion bigger.

However, I still keep XP because I do play a good amount of games, and some days, like today, I was booted into windows all day playing some games.

The fact with linux gaming (mostly refering to native games) if you don't really like FPS games, theres not really much out there in terms of gaming. Of course you could use wine/cedega but not every game works through it. For me, I play some MMORPGs, mainly FFXI which doesn't work at all in cedega, even though it was voted all the way up with Point2Play, which kind of ticked me off that they completely ignored it.

I did get WoW working, though but with a serious dent to my FPS, and I found it unplayable. Yes I have an ATI card which I'm sure contributed to that, but when I bought the card I didn't think of using linux and it is a GOOD card and I can run games excellently in windows, so I'm not going to spend money just to buy an nvidia card to play better on linux.

I guess I won't make the full switch until gaming gets better, but really, gaming is the only thing I do through windows, everything else I can do just as well/better and even easier on ubuntu.

;)

weasel fierce
August 17th, 2005, 06:15 AM
I'd say the main reason is that its yours, not some company's.

skoal
August 17th, 2005, 06:22 AM
So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?

Less pollution...More security...

Although not XP, I recently ran a fresh install of Win2k and was spammed to death by "messenger" service pop-ups without ever installing _any_ software. At least those pop ups didn't tell me it was time to re-finance my mortgage or add some more girth to my pants, so I guess no harm done there...

Of course, if not said already, the biggest advantage is that it's _free_, not "as in beer" however, like some like to advertise. I can sit back and enjoy a free beer. In linux, "free" means decyphering cryptic man pages or having the good fellows at Blechley Park decipher the Enigma config scripts for you. Drinking beer was never so hard. So, why the beer analogy?? I guess it's the young whooper snappers drinking imports - they're hard to swallow as well, at first...

But hey, if it's free beer, at least you don't have to pay 2 c notes for an easy swallowing, fresh and cold case of domestic Shiner Bock...

mmmm...beeeeeer...

By the way, if Linux wants to succeed in the marketplace, they need to rollout a Linux GT version, a lot like the XP acronymn. GT turbo, 6800 GT...you get the picture...GT rolls off the tongue like a double "r" in Spanish. It sounds cool. It's catchy. It's synonymous with better. It would be the perfect linux distro...

mmmm....GT beeeeeeeer...

\\//_

drizek
August 17th, 2005, 06:38 AM
Freedom from bondage. No chance of being orphaned (in terms of OS or application support), provided the community continues to use & support the software. Try that with Windows down the road..

thats not really the issue. kde 3.2 is no longer supported in the same way that windows 2000 is no longer supported. the difference with linux is that kde 3.5 is free and actually runs faster than kde 3.2, whereas windows xp is $100-$200 and performs worse than windows 2000.

looking down the road, KDE 4 should be as fast if not faster than kde 3.5. windows vista on the other hand will have insane system requirements.

basically, with KDE/Gnome, you get increased features, increased stability and increased security every 6-12 months for free, whereas with windows you get more features, less stability(until a couple service packs later), worse performance and more secuiryt holes every 3-5 years(depending on how much time MS's employees actually spend working) and you get charged for it.

to put it simply, its like the difference between sex with a beautiful women and getting anal raped in a prison shower.

johnistpropaganda
August 17th, 2005, 07:10 AM
Earlier this year i fixed my mother's old pc by switching out the power supply (i got a not too outta date machine for ten dollers!). i was in need of an OS, but i had just bought XP for my roomates' comp which i had previously trashed, and didnt want pirate it or by another liscence. so i bit the bullet and decided to try this Ubuntu thing out i had picked up with a magazine.

Since then i haven't really missed windows at all, except for itunes and photoshop, along with epson printer and scanner drivers, but all that was hooked up to thier comp if i ever needed it.

I'd have to say my favorite things about linux are:
*of course, no viruses or malicious software.
*customizability. it drove me crazy that i couldn't do this in windows without having to shell out more cash for another program.
*all the cool free software, which while i dont think it's quite up to par with software from major manufacturers (qimp is amazing for freeware, but photoshop and it's plug-ins are just about essential for proffesional work), is easily accessed.
*great community support. i think this one is more a ubuntu thing.
*and of course, it's free, free, & free

plus, using the command line is positively geeky!
-jp-

Dolphin
August 17th, 2005, 07:20 AM
I'd honestly dump Windows entirely if it weren't for lack of game support/lack of good ATI drivers on Linux.

I'm using Ubuntu for gaming with ATI. Honestly, there's not alot I can't play on it. Some things require some tinkering to get them to work the way you want, but all-in-all, the only game I haven't been able to play so far (that I wanted to) is BF2....and I know support is coming.

As for ATI drivers, they've gotten ALOT better. Have you tried the 8.14.13's yet? Quite nice. They're not caught up to nvidia's linux drivers yet, but they're not too far off.

poofyhairguy
August 17th, 2005, 07:29 AM
So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?

It runs my mom's Tivo, my sister's new phone, and my mom's wireless access point. Its flexible enough to run on 9 of the top 10 most powerful computers in the world, but delicate enough to be use in very minimal situations. Google depends on it for their searchs, and Pixar makes their movies using Linux. I can run on almost any CPU around, and I can see the soruce code.

Oh, you mean advantage as a desktop? Tons of free software (without piracy), its fun and can be slick. Many choices. Fast development times. New releases for every six months. Low cost. Runs off a CD easily.

bin
August 17th, 2005, 09:02 AM
The registry ought to be shot.

Applications>SystemTools>Configuration Editor........ :smile:

Tomorrow - THE WORLD!!!!! muahahahahahahahaaaaa

in light

bin

Kvark
August 17th, 2005, 09:02 AM
I can do everything I want on both systems so I don't really need either of them. So why do I use linux... Linux is easier and gives me a lot less trouble. You can have a lot of windows open in linux without any slowdown. You don't have to close down all your programs, save all open documents and stuff an extra time and reboot every other day. Linux can be made to look like anything while there is only 3 color variants of the windows XP theme. Linux has customizeable panels, custimizeable keyboard shortcuts, multiple workspaces/desktops, a good command line terminal and other smart things that makes you much faster once you get used to them.

...and best of all, when I mention to my friends or relatives that I use linux instead of windows, they panic, go pale white, smiles nervously and stutters "heh, eh... t-t-tthat i-is wa-way too advanced for me". Afterwards that they think I'm some kind of 'super hacker' who knows everything about windows.

Knome_fan
August 17th, 2005, 09:24 AM
- Free as in beer
- Free as in freedom
- No spyware
- No adware
- No viruses
- No 659 services running by default and listening on the network
- No activation code
- No having to ask someone if I still can use my OS if I change some hardware
- Focus follows mouse without some clunky add on
- Several workspaces without some clunky add on
- Bash
- Virtual terminals
- I can run it without a graphical environment
- For that matter, I can even run it without a media player and a browser
- Several desktop environments to choose from
- apt-get $program
- one way to keep all my software up to date
- There are actually new versions coming out from time to time
- All in all it simply sucks significantly less

granite230
August 17th, 2005, 02:08 PM
I've been using Ubuntu for over 6 months now, it was my very first distro. I've learned a LOT about Linux on this system and I couldn't have done it without this community!
Now I can do almost everything I want in Ubuntu! Virus/spyware free!
The only game I play is World of Warcraft. It's very easy to install on Linux.

So I said I could do ALMOST everything. Well... the only thing I can't do in Linux is using Visual Studio which I need for school purposes.
I don't dual boot with Windows XP, I'm affraid that Windows XP will eventually take down my entire harddisk, including my Ubuntu installation.
For that I will just switch my harddisk when I have to use Visual Studio. Only a few months until I'm done with that, so hopefully I can then ditch Windows for good!

btw, I DO have Mono installed, but my book works with Visual Studio.

baRRacuda
August 17th, 2005, 03:09 PM
Why not? :D

some of my reasons are:
-no virus etc. (no need for system-using apps like antiviruses, software firewall, anti-spyware...)
-absolutely free and free
-lower pings in enemy-territory than in windows (really!)
-sick of windows' blue screens
- apt-get, of course... :wink:
...

rolfotto
August 17th, 2005, 04:47 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?

Here is my experience using windows:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=302383&postcount=128

Linux has it's own problems but for me, being free of spyware/malware/etc is worth it. Also, that I don't have to waste my time running Anti-virus or spyware detectors everyday. In a small business, the computer should be there for productivity, not for it's own benefit.

XP tends to boot up fast in the beginning but if you install lots of programs you're compture tends to get pwn'ed and it will become sluggish. The login screen in windows is somewhat dishonest - you think you can just sign on and get right to work - but end up waiting a while as Windows starts up all it's services after login. Linux starts up most services before log in (other than the windows manager things) so you get to work faster.

Lots of other things other people mention.

My favority is different distros that are geared for different niches...... I like trying out new stuff.

Curlydave
August 17th, 2005, 05:26 PM
As for ATI drivers, they've gotten ALOT better. Have you tried the 8.14.13's yet? Quite nice. They're not caught up to nvidia's linux drivers yet, but they're not too far off.

Yes, I have them. Imo, there's nothing "quite nice" about not being able to even turn on basic settings such as AF and vsync. (I can live without the other stuff, but those two are important) I get about half the fps I would in windows as well. (see my other post in this thread for more info.)

weasel fierce
August 17th, 2005, 06:02 PM
A friend of mine once stated "if you think configuring windows is a pain, wait untill you try compiling your own linux kernel"

I kindly asked him how easy it is to recompile windows :^o

daejavu
August 17th, 2005, 06:31 PM
i think the question should be asked the other way

" if you have Free Linux , why Pay for winxp?" ;-)

TheDude
August 17th, 2005, 07:31 PM
A friend of mine once stated "if you think configuring windows is a pain, wait untill you try compiling your own linux kernel"


I have been using Linux for a year and I never have recompiled a kernel. Such horror stories are overblown.

Brunellus
August 17th, 2005, 07:33 PM
I have been using Linux for a year and I never have recompiled a kernel. Such horror stories are overblown.
The only reason I can think of to compile my own kernel would be...um...tweaking. which is rarely necessary.

Slicedbread
August 18th, 2005, 04:26 AM
i think the question should be asked the other way

" if you have Free Linux , why Pay for winxp?" ;-)

The questions was if you already had windows xp, ie got it from the manufacturer had an upgrade cd or purchased it.

If you had no os on your computer I would recommend it, but only if you were a proficient computer user who is willing to spend some time configuring it so that it works.

Linux has too big of a learning curve (never had to learn how to install a program or compile it just so I can watch videos) for the average computer user.

It does seem to me however the average linux user has a grudge against windows and may even think linux makes them superior. But thats just me and im not trying to sound like a windows fanboy but I absolutely have no use for linux. So maybe I am lashing out at it.

Begin rant

I cant use my printer/scanner with it, cant unlock my video card. (which is not the fault of linux, its the lack of support outside of its community)
I have to boot into windows to play decent games
I have to learn how to compile and make packages just to install updates
I can only use linux to watch movies, play music, web browse, play solitaire...
If i want to use productivty software have to boot to windows.

end rant

aysiu
August 18th, 2005, 04:43 AM
I cant use my printer/scanner with it, cant unlock my video card. (which is not the fault of linux, its the lack of support outside of its community)
I have to boot into windows to play decent games
I have to learn how to compile and make packages just to install updates
I can only use linux to watch movies, play music, web browse, play solitaire...
If i want to use productivty software have to boot to windows.

Well to each her own. If Linux doesn't work for you, no one's going to force you to use it. For me, however:

Ubuntu auto-detected my printer and what model it was. I just had to click one thing to get it working.
The only game I play is Gnocatan, which is native to Gnome.
I never compile and make packages. I just use Synaptic Package Manager, which I find far easier than hunting down software, worrying about spyware, clicking through a "wizard," and rebooting.
What's productivity software? In Linux, I can do everything I need to do.

I'm not trying to invalidate your problems, but not everyone has those problems. Stay with Windows. That's fine. Have fun with it. In the meantime, I'll have fun with Linux (I'm a newbie, by the way--almost at my four month anniversary with Linux).

Ubunted
August 18th, 2005, 04:55 AM
The smug feeling of superiority I get whenever there's a new worm making rounds devastating Windows networks is enough for me. :smile:

Security and peace of mind are my big things. I know how to protect myself in Windows and all that, but all that crap not even being an issue anymore is pretty darn nice.

Also being free of the whole MS Machine is pretty nice too. Never again will I (hopefully) have to worry about such stupid things as DRM.

Kerberos
August 18th, 2005, 05:09 AM
I can do everything I want on both systems so I don't really need either of them. So why do I use linux... Linux is easier and gives me a lot less trouble. You can have a lot of windows open in linux without any slowdown.
Does that mean I can run multiple copies of the same program in Linux and get exponential increases on my processor power?

You don't have to close down all your programs, save all open documents and stuff an extra time and reboot every other day.
I hibernate my laptop, I never turn it off and I never reboot it. It also never crashes. Theres a guy in this forum going to quit Ubuntu 'cos it crashes too much. In fact I dont remember ever having a serious problem with Windows stability since Win2k was released and then its usually been down to 3rd party drivers.


Linux can be made to look like anything while there is only 3 color variants of the windows XP theme. Linux has customizeable panels, custimizeable keyboard shortcuts, multiple workspaces/desktops, a good command line terminal and other smart things that makes you much faster once you get used to them.

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.


...and best of all, when I mention to my friends or relatives that I use linux instead of windows, they panic, go pale white, smiles nervously and stutters "heh, eh... t-t-tthat i-is wa-way too advanced for me". Afterwards that they think I'm some kind of 'super hacker' who knows everything about windows.
And this is a good thing why? I spend most of my time telling people 'its not that hard' and trying to undo the automatic idiot mode most people enter when using a computer due to years of people pretending to be gurus when in reality they just know a little. Hard to use software is a sign of bad software engineering. Using hard to use software to make people think your clever just makes you an idiot.

aysiu
August 18th, 2005, 05:15 AM
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. And those are free how? That was what pushed me to Linux most recently. I was using Windowblinds for a while, but the nagware was too much. And, you can't really tell me that it's so difficult to go to System > Preferences > Themes > Install Themes is too difficult. You must be joking. I'll concede that on KDE, themes are difficult to install, but Gnome--no way.

In Gnome, I have a custom keyboard shortcut for every command I use most frequently. I was able to have a custom log-in screen and custom bootsplash. How do I do that in Windows? Is it as simple as adding splashimage (hd0,2)/boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz to a file? Why can't I run certain commands in DOS while Windows is running? I see you conveniently ignored certain things and went straight to ThemeXP, which you can subscribe to for "only" $10 a year.

Kerberos, I still don't get why you troll around these Ubuntu forums so much, when you clearly are pro-Windows and anti-Linux. Nothing better to do?

Kerberos
August 18th, 2005, 05:39 AM
And those are free how? That was what pushed me to Linux most recently. I was using Windowblinds for a while, but the nagware was too much. And, you can't really tell me that it's so difficult to go to System > Preferences > Themes > Install Themes is too difficult. You must be joking. I'll concede that on KDE, themes are difficult to install, but Gnome--no way.
I have no problem with paying for software, nor rewarding developers for their time.


Kerberos, I still don't get why you troll around these Ubuntu forums so much, when you clearly are pro-Windows and anti-Linux. Nothing better to do?
I'm not pro-Windows, I'm not pro-Linux either, but I see a ridiculous amount of anti Windows FUD on this forum. Yes Windows does suck, but mostly not for the reasons publically stated and I have a problem with people talking total crap as it just gets repeated like an echo chamber. I also dont see how constantly badmouthing MS at every oppertunity is somehow fine, yet staying in a forum where you dont support the general consensus is not?

Brunellus
August 18th, 2005, 05:42 AM
I have no problem with paying for software, nor rewarding developers for their time.

I'm not pro-Windows, I'm not pro-Linux either, but I see a ridiculous amount of anti Windows FUD on this forum. Yes Windows does suck, but mostly not for the reasons publically stated and I have a problem with people talking total crap as it just gets repeated like an echo chamber. I also dont see how constantly badmouthing MS at every oppertunity is somehow fine, yet staying in a forum where you dont support the general consensus is not?
...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

drizek
August 18th, 2005, 05:45 AM
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.



stylexp and windowblinds are _hacks_. windows was not designed to be themeable nor was it designed to allow third parties to theme it.

the bad things about those apps

first: you have to pay for them
second: they hurt performance(more relevant for stylexp than to windowblinds)
third: windowblinds contains spyware(or at least it did when i demo'd it last)

anyway, i didnt use either one for any extended period of time cause they both sucked. i used the hacked uxtheme.dll, which was free, provided hte best performance, and had the least bloat. rebooting into safemode and replacing dll's and praying it doesnt kill my computer in order to install third party themes is not my definition of easy.

compare that to gnome/kde, which both come with support for themeing built in, and are designed around it.

installing gtk/metacity themes couldnt be easier. its a little harder with kde(you have to download a deb, right click on it, and then click install. heaven forbid) but that is because kde doesnt use pixmaps for themes the way gnome/xp/vista do. but that also means you can do more in qt themes than you can in those others. the same applies to kwin. you can setup kwin to run a screensaver as your titlebar background. not very usable, but still shows hte power and customizability of linux vs windows.

Kerberos
August 18th, 2005, 05:46 AM
In Gnome, I have a custom keyboard shortcut for every command I use most frequently. I was able to have a custom log-in screen and custom bootsplash. How do I do that in Windows?
What commands are you actually talking about?

If you can make a shortcut to it in windows, right click and go 'properties' then set shortcut key. Fairly easy. http://www.themexp.org/how_install.php has install instructions for custom boot screens in Windows (and custom, rather than 'change background image').

Why can't I run certain commands in DOS while Windows is running?
What commands?

I see you conveniently ignored certain things and went straight to ThemeXP, which you can subscribe to for "only" $10 a year.

What things? And the $10 is for the 'No Adverts' version of the site, which again I reckon is fair enough.

Kerberos
August 18th, 2005, 05:48 AM
delete this post as i cant.

aysiu
August 18th, 2005, 05:50 AM
I'm not pro-Windows You sure seem to be. In fact, I took a look at all of your posts on these forums, and the closest I could find to something remotely pro-Linux was you saying you wanted to check out Linux and Ubuntu was the best distro you could find.


but I see a ridiculous amount of anti Windows FUD on this forum. I don't see ridiculous amounts. Can you point out some of these ridiculous amounts? Sure, some FUD exists here, like when people occasionally mention XP not being stable or there being blue screen of death problems (I haven't seen that much, though). The truth is that XP is quite stable, probably Windows' most stable release so far. Sometimes, too, people get a bit carried away with the "free software" thing and forget that GIMP, Firefox, OpenOffice, and many other open source projects have Windows versions as well. Nevertheless, you actually tend to see far more anti-Linux FUD on Linux forums than anti-Windows FUD. Anti-Windows sentiment, yes; anti-Windows FUD, not so much.



Yes Windows does suck I don't agree with this at all. Windows is a very capable operating system. It just isn't all things to all people. Many people like being able to customize their systems even beyond what Microsoft will let them do. Windows XP, however, is a great OS.


I also dont see how constantly badmouthing MS at every oppertunity is somehow fine, yet staying in a forum where you dont support the general consensus is not? Even assuming your extremely exaggerated premise that people "badmouth[] MS at every opportunity" (hardly the case at all) is true, it would make sense in a Linux forum, where most users are ex-Windows users (i.e., they had some problem with Windows and, hence, moved to Linux) that people here would badmouth Windows. It's like wondering why a bunch of divorced women would be bitter about men. It doesn't make sense, though, that someone so pro-Windows and anti-Linux would troll here. You're not offering anything helpful, and we're not offering you anything helpful. You're just wasting our time and yours.

Curlydave
August 18th, 2005, 05:58 AM
To be honest, Kerb is right. People here are biased like anything and would never ever admit that Windows has anything right.

aysiu
August 18th, 2005, 06:02 AM
What commands are you actually talking about?

If you can make a shortcut to it in windows, right click and go 'properties' then set shortcut key. Fairly easy. Tried it. It didn't work--both in my XP at work and my XP at home.



http://www.themexp.org/how_install.php has install instructions for custom boot screens in Windows (and custom, rather than 'change background image'). Yes, clearly this is more convoluted than Linux:

# n Explorer, browse to C:\Windows\System32 and find the file named "ntoskrnl.exe".
# Copy "ntoskrnl.exe" to "ntoskrnl.exe.bak", (COPY not RENAME). This way if anything goes wrong...you will have a backup.
# Extract the files inside the .zip file you downloaded to a temporary location of your hard drive, but NOT to C:\Windows\System32.
# Reboot your computer into Safe Mode (hit F8 before the boot screen appears) or into true DOS mode (from a boot disk)
# Browse to where you extracted the files for your new boot screen in Explorer and select the correct file to copy to C:\Windows\System32. If you have SP1 for Windows XP installed use ntoskrnlsp.exe, otherwise use ntoskrnl.exe. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO USE THE CORRECT FILE, OR YOUR SYSTEM WILL LOCK UP ON BOOT.
# If using ntoskrnl.exe, copy the file to C:\Windows\System32 overwriting the existing ntoskrnl.exe, (which should have been backed up).
# If you are going to use ntoskrnlsp.exe, delete ntoskrnl.exe in the temporary folder and rename ntoskrnlsp.exe to ntoskrnl.exe. Then copy the file to C:\Windows\System32 overwriting the existing ntoskrnl.exe, (which should have been backed up).
# All done! Reboot your computer as you normally would and enjoy your new boot screen.



What commands? Take a look at this page and see all the unavailable DOS commands:

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/dos_diffs.mspx



What things? Kvark said Linux can be made to look like anything while there is only 3 color variants of the windows XP theme. Linux has customizeable panels, custimizeable keyboard shortcuts, multiple workspaces/desktops, a good command line terminal and other smart things that makes you much faster once you get used to them. and the only thing you mentioned was ThemeXP and Windowblinds.

Brunellus
August 18th, 2005, 06:13 AM
To be honest, Kerb is right. People here are biased like anything and would never ever admit that Windows has anything right.
Windows has done a lot of things right.

We forget that back in the wild & wooly '80s, DOS was where it was at, because of the galloping free market in Intel-compatible hardware. DOS was cheaper than its competitors; the Intel architecture was cheaper than its competitors because of myriad clone boxes.

This allowed the Intel x86 to become the dominant personal computing platform on the planet, and hardware prices to drop to their present commodity levels.

This in turn allowed for an untold number of people to connect to the Internet and drive the creation of many of the tools we're using today--the Linux kernel being one of them.

But for my personal use, Windows has been sidelined. I just prefer Ubuntu Linux.

As to charges of bias, I say again: would you like to be the gun-control advocate at NRA HQ? (they're just up the road from me, incidentally. They have a nice indoor shooting range.)

drizek
August 18th, 2005, 06:19 AM
about bsods and customization.

i mentioned in my last post that you can use third party themes in XP with a hacked version of uxtheme.dll. you have to replace it in safe mode and then reboot.

there was another "hack" like this that let you get rid of the word "address:" before the address bar in windows explorer. when i tried to do that one, i got a BSOD, so i had to go into safemode and change everything back to the way it was, and i was still stuck with that stupid waste of space in my toolbar.

compare this konqueror, where you right click-edit toolbars, select the word "Location" and click remove.

windows CAN be customized, but it is far far more difficult than KDE/Gnome, and it is risky.

this is a much bigger issue than the two previous ones however, icons.

the only way to change system icons in windows xp without using that spyware/nagware infested POS Iconpackager, is to use an app such as reshacker nad manually change the icons in shell32.dll. about 400 total, and 3 straight hours of work. but hte best part is, whenever MS releases a service pack, you get to do it all over again. oh joy. of course, that only changes the icons for applications. if you want to change icons for the "common tasks" sidebar in windows explorer, you have to hack another dll(not sure what the name is off hand). BUT, youre still not done yet. If you want to change the toolbar icons in windows explorer, you have to use a program called Yz toolbar, and download/create an appropriate theme for it. yz toolbar was taken off hte net when the author was forced by apple to remove yzdock. not sure how to change toolbar icons ATM(although you can find copies of yztoolbar on p2p/google).

so whats the alternative?

well, you head over to kde-look.org, find yourself a nice icon set such as nuvola and download it to your desktop. open kontrol, go to the icon section, go to "add" and then select nuvola from your desktop and hit OK.

im not an anti-windows fanboy. but the difficulty of visual customization was one of the major reasons why i switched to and stick with KDE. dont tell me its easier in windows, because thats just plain ********.

cosmarium
August 18th, 2005, 06:21 AM
I can contribute to this discussion. I have a Linux HD and Windows HD. I use Windows for most stuff, Linux for experimenting because as you said, there aren't all that many advantages. However, I just got a nasty case of the Aurora spyware that I couldn't kill, so I went to reformat the HD after backing things up. Apparently my hard-drive is partially fried and neither windows nor Linux will install on it... So I'm using Linux now exclusively until I get a new HD to put Windows on.

I'd honestly dump Windows entirely if it weren't for lack of game support/lack of good ATI drivers on Linux.
I installed Ubuntu today. I have been using Windows for a lot of time and now XP, and yes there are advantages that have been mentioned but one more learning, just for exploring!! curiosity and self improvement makes me think about entering linux world.
I feel that when one is starting is easy to feel frustated, but that can be overcome with the help and support that linux world offer!.
By the way, I can browse the web from ubuntu, I dont know how to configurated. At home I use wireless, at work wired... any help?
Thx!

Kerberos
August 18th, 2005, 06:24 AM
http://www.tgtsoft.com/prod_sxp_faq.php

RTFM

Brunellus
August 18th, 2005, 06:24 AM
I installed Ubuntu today. I have been using Windows for a lot of time and now XP, and yes there are advantages that have been mentioned but one more learning, just for exploring!! curiosity and self improvement makes me think about entering linux world.
I feel that when one is starting is easy to feel frustated, but that can be overcome with the help and support that linux world offer!.
By the way, I can browse the web from ubuntu, I dont know how to configurated. At home I use wireless, at work wired... any help?
Thx!
it's generally considered bad form to hijack a thread in progress....

but let me direct you to my favorite Ubuntu wikipages:

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/WiFiHowto

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardwareSupportComponentsWirelessNetworkCards?high light=%28wireless%29

Brunellus
August 18th, 2005, 06:27 AM
http://www.tgtsoft.com/prod_sxp_faq.php

RTFM
Great.

After a month, you pay twenty dollars for a capability that you have for free in Linux.

aysiu
August 18th, 2005, 06:28 AM
Kerberos may think all we do is spread anti-Windows FUD around here, but I'll be perfectly honest--I have far more Windows experience than Linux experience--twenty years v. four months.

While I prefer Linux, I'll admit there are plenty of things I like about Windows. First of all, control-alt-delete solves everything... at least in Windows XP and 2000. All this crap about instability. Well, I've never experienced it anyway. Commercial software almost always has a Windows version. When I try to open a .php file by double-clicking it, Windows actually lets me. There's a little notifier in the system tray when I get new mail in Thunderbird. I love iTunes, and they don't make that for Linux yet. Want me to go on, because I can? In fact, if you pressed every seeming anti-Windows forum participant to think of things that are great about Windows, I bet we could get quite a list going.

However, even in a Linux forum made up of mostly Linux users, we constantly (I'd say every three days or so) get threads by new ex-Windows users who complain about how Linux isn't "ready for the desktop" and spread all types of FUD about having to recompile kernels and ./configure everything. That's f'ed up. I don't join a Windows XP forum just to badmouth XP. In fact, I never badmouth XP. I'll tout Linux's advantages. I'll say why I prefer Linux, and I'll even mention some downsides to XP, but I won't bash XP or pretend Linux is perfect, and I would never recommend Linux (or XP or Mac OS X, or any operating system) to everyone.

To each her own, and if you don't like Linux, use something else.

Kerberos
August 18th, 2005, 06:32 AM
Great.

After a month, you pay twenty dollars for a capability that you have for free in Linux.
I repeat again I have no problems paying for software.

I dont expect clothes for free, computers for free, food for free, books for free, music for free or movies for free. It doesn't mean I can't get them for free It just means I have no problem with people charging money for things. Its a way of making a living.

What is so wrong with paying for software?

Brunellus
August 18th, 2005, 06:37 AM
I repeat again I have no problems paying for software.

I dont expect clothes for free, computers for free, food for free, books for free, music for free or movies for free. It doesn't mean I can't get them for free It just means I have no problem with people charging money for things. Its a way of making a living.

What is so wrong with paying for software?
because it's being given to me!

I paid good money (imagine!) for the games that I run on Windows (I keep a Windows partition for games, exclusively). But Linux is given to me free, and I take it freely. what's so wrong with that?

Linux is worth more than what I've paid for it. About how many things in life can you say that?

drizek
August 18th, 2005, 06:40 AM
I repeat again I have no problems paying for software.

I dont expect clothes for free, computers for free, food for free, books for free, music for free or movies for free. It doesn't mean I can't get them for free It just means I have no problem with people charging money for things. Its a way of making a living.

What is so wrong with paying for software?
paying for ****** ass software(wincuztomize crap in particular) is wrong because there is a better alternative for free.

i prefer to use software where i can contact the developer and ask for a feature and report a bug. or software where i can contribute something myself instead of paying for it.

also, free software allows anyone to have anything. paying for software allowsthe rich to havewhat they want and the poor get screwed(or bittorrent). whats the point of computers anyway if were just going to go back to our old greedy capitalistic ways?

from someones sig- if we each have one apple, and we trade them, we still only have one apple. if we each have an idea and we trade them, we each have two ideas.

Edit: however, i do think that games should be commercial. there are things which simply need to have closed source development. not because it creates a better product, but it destroys the story/suspense/whatever when a game is developed by the community and is available ot it duiring the early stages.

BUT, take games like battlefield 2 for example. a half-assed POS put out by ea/dice to make a shitload of money from the populairity of battlefield 1942. THAT is where closed source development is much much worse than OS.

Kerberos
August 18th, 2005, 06:54 AM
also, free software allows anyone to have anything. paying for software allowsthe rich to havewhat they want and the poor get screwed(or bittorrent). whats the point of computers anyway if were just going to go back to our old greedy capitalistic ways?
I dont think Linux is going to exactly destroy world capitalism. I dont even see why it matters to your actual end users also, as they just want to use the internet + chat. They dont care where it comes from or the politics behind it. Thats consumerism for you.

from someones sig- if we each have one apple, and we trade them, we still only have one apple. if we each have an idea and we trade them, we each have two ideas.
I have an idea! Lose those pages of scrolling debug info that scares everyone when Linux boots - it looks horrible and perpetuates the 'its really hard' myth by flashing information your average user will never understand. Now I've 'shared an idea' I'll get flamed back, told to fix it myself, or told its not Windows and I should deal with it.

To stick to the topic of the thread, I dont, I use Windows because there is no compelling reason (politics dont matter, and I want to spend as little time fiddling with the OS as possible) to switch to Linux. If it was really easy to use, or really pretty, or had some other attraction I might but I just see it as another OS, like Windows but with different strengths and weaknesses.

aysiu
August 18th, 2005, 07:07 AM
I have an idea! Lose those pages of scrolling debug info that scares everyone when Linux boots - it looks horrible and perpetuates the 'its really hard' myth by flashing information your average user will never understand. How about this idea? Don't use Ubuntu. there are plenty of distros out there that have lost the scrolling text during bootup for a "silent" splash page. Try Mandriva, Mepis, Xandros, etc. Talk about FUD. Geez.


To stick to the topic of the thread, I dont, I use Windows because there is no compelling reason (politics dont matter, and I want to spend as little time fiddling with the OS as possible) to switch to Linux. If it was really easy to use, or really pretty, or had some other attraction I might but I just see it as another OS, like Windows but with different strengths and weaknesses. More power to you. No one's going to say, "No, you have to use Linux--it's better." If Windows suits your needs, use it. It's all about choice. You choose Windows. We choose Linux. So what are you doing here? I'm a non-smoker. Do I hang out at smoker forums? I'm a heterosexual. Do I hang out at gay forums? I come here to offer support to and get support from other Ubuntu users. What do you come here for?

drizek
August 18th, 2005, 07:11 AM
I dont think Linux is going to exactly destroy world capitalism. I dont even see why it matters to your actual end users also, as they just want to use the internet + chat. They dont care where it comes from or the politics behind it. Thats consumerism for you.

I have an idea! Lose those pages of scrolling debug info that scares everyone when Linux boots - it looks horrible and perpetuates the 'its really hard' myth by flashing information your average user will never understand. Now I've 'shared an idea' I'll get flamed back, told to fix it myself, or told its not Windows and I should deal with it.

To stick to the topic of the thread, I dont, I use Windows because there is no compelling reason (politics dont matter, and I want to spend as little time fiddling with the OS as possible) to switch to Linux. If it was really easy to use, or really pretty, or had some other attraction I might but I just see it as another OS, like Windows but with different strengths and weaknesses.
open source is not going to destroy capitalism. but it does mean that i can use an advanced image editor such as gimp/krita without forking over hundreds of dollars, or be able to use an IM client without getting ads or shortcuts to ebay on my desktop.

that is planned for breezy. ubuntu is still a very young distro. fedora and mandrake have nice bootsplashes though, if thats your thing.

personally, the look and ease of use of KDE are enough to keep me away from windows. the fact that linux pwnz is just an added bonus.

Kerberos
August 18th, 2005, 07:15 AM
How about this idea? Don't use Ubuntu. there are plenty of distros out there that have lost the scrolling text during bootup for a "silent" splash page. Try Mandriva, Mepis, Xandros, etc.
Sorry I missed the 4th option off of my list - the 'Find another distro' answer.

Do you personally think that the debug info on boot is a good thing to have?

drizek
August 18th, 2005, 07:16 AM
Sorry I missed the 4th option off of my list - the 'Find another distro' answer.

Do you personally think that the debug info on boot is a good thing to have?
for chrissakes man, A BOOTSPLASH IS GOING TO BE ADDED IN FOR BREEZY.

stop bitching.

aysiu
August 18th, 2005, 07:20 AM
Sorry I missed the 4th option off of my list - the 'Find another distro' answer.

Do you personally think that the debug info on boot is a good thing to have? A good thing to have for me? Yes. A good thing for everybody? No. To be perfectly honest, I don't think Ubuntu is for everybody. There has been a lot of debate lately (the two weeks) about what "for human beings" means. Whatever it means, I don't think any distro or OS is for everybody, not even the supposedly uber-friendly Mac OS X. When new users tell me they want something totally GUI and that they're afraid of the command-line the last suggestion I offer is Ubuntu. In fact, I was turned off by Ubuntu initially myself when I started Linux. Mepis was my way in, and Mepis is totally point-and-click, including configuration. And Mepis hides the boot-up verbose blah-blah-blah, too (you can change that, of course, if you want). That's part of what I like about Linux (you don't have to love this, but I do): the variety. There are distros for experts, distros for beginners, distros for old systems, distros that fit on USB keys, distros with a lot of apps, distros with few apps, distros with KDE, distros with Gnome. Some are live CDs, some are install CDs. Some are both.

Kerberos
August 18th, 2005, 07:23 AM
for chrissakes man, A BOOTSPLASH IS GOING TO BE ADDED IN FOR BREEZY.

stop bitching.
I never saw your post before I posted mine, and, as the point I was trying to make, II made a suggestion and was told to go elsewhere, rather than anyone actually willing to discuss it or argue its merits as is usually the way. Its this 'Theres nothing wrong with it' attitude thats the problem. Even suggesting putting the DHCP allocated IP in the networking box has got me flamed and I think that its actually a problem its not there.

schmidty
August 18th, 2005, 07:31 AM
One simple word -- MONEY!!!!

Linux is free (both as in 'beer' and as freedom to change, configure, etc.)
Linux is 'crash free' and stable(for the most part -- X server crashes occassionally)
Linux apps are free (like OpenOffice, PostgreSQL, PHP)
Linux is free from most viruses
Linux is a thinking persons OS
Linux is FUN!!!

Schmidty

aysiu
August 18th, 2005, 07:32 AM
I never saw your post before I posted mine, and, as the point I was trying to make, II made a suggestion and was told to go elsewhere, rather than anyone actually willing to discuss it or argue its merits as is usually the way. Its this 'Theres nothing wrong with it' attitude thats the problem. No, I think it's the "there's everything wrong with it" attitude that's really the problem. Love it or leave it. Your "suggestions" at this forum do no good to improve Ubuntu. Develop, file bug reports, contribute money, or live with it, or choose another distro. Whining about it here helps no one, and I believe you've already been told that in another thread.

Kerberos
August 18th, 2005, 07:53 AM
No, I think it's the "there's everything wrong with it" attitude that's really the problem. Love it or leave it. Your "suggestions" at this forum do no good to improve Ubuntu. Develop, file bug reports, contribute money, or live with it, or choose another distro. Whining about it here helps no one, and I believe you've already been told that in another thread.
I think I'll just stick with Windows thx, and hope Linux will have improved next time I try it.

poofyhairguy
August 18th, 2005, 09:22 AM
I also dont see how constantly badmouthing MS at every oppertunity is somehow fine, yet staying in a forum where you dont support the general consensus is not?

Don't worry Kerberos, we won't ban you for liking Windows. Say what you want.


I never saw your post before I posted mine, and, as the point I was trying to make, II made a suggestion and was told to go elsewhere, rather than anyone actually willing to discuss it or argue its merits as is usually the way. Its this 'Theres nothing wrong with it' attitude thats the problem.

If you were told to go elsewhere its because bug reports (aka all things you want to tell developers) should go through bugzilla. Suggestions here are only good for debating.

Most of will admit problems with Linux or our favorite OSS programs. So we are not ignorant. Its just that for some of us, "big problems with Ubuntu" are not that big. Why does a splash screen matter? To make someone feel better? I promise, after dealing with the installer the lack of a splash screen is nothing. Whats that you say, "the installer should be better too?" That might be true, but those people that are here found a way around it, so their tolerance levels are higher. Not you though. Thats cool.

Lets not pretend we help Ubuntu when we rant on the forum. Either way.

Knome_fan
August 18th, 2005, 11:13 AM
People, get a grip.
There's a very simple solution to trolls like Kerberos, simply ignore them and they will get bored.
Answering them and playing along with them hijacking every thread they like will not make them go away.

If Kerberos has shown anything in the past, it's that all he does and all he wants to do on this forum is to flame and troll, so why not simply ignore his stupid flaming?

Kvark
August 18th, 2005, 01:02 PM
And this is a good thing why? I spend most of my time telling people 'its not that hard' and trying to undo the automatic idiot mode most people enter when using a computer due to years of people pretending to be gurus when in reality they just know a little. Hard to use software is a sign of bad software engineering. Using hard to use software to make people think your clever just makes you an idiot.
I agree completely with you. Using hard to use software is just a waste of time. I use whatever is easiest for me. That is whatever allows me to get things done in the shortest amount of time. In my case that happens to be ubuntu (but for others with other needs it might be another distro or windows or OSX).



About this forum being 'anti windows'-baised... If you think OS 'Y' is better then the alternatives, then that means two things...
1. You are baised in favour of that OS since you think it is better then the alternatives.
2. You will use that OS since you like it, and you will maybe even hang out on forums related to it since you use it.
This means people will hang out at forums related to an OS they are baised in favour of and thus OS related forums will always be baised in favour of the OS they are relating to.

Why don't you go to a harley club and complain that the bikers there are baised towards HD and that a HD just doesn't suit your needs. Or to a sports fan club and argue with the hooligans there that they are baised in favour of the team that the fan club is connected to and that you don't like that team?

Slicedbread
August 18th, 2005, 03:17 PM
I didnt mean for this to start a flame war, seems counterproductive in my opinion, but I was just trying to see what reasons people had for switching over if they already had windows xp. I wasnt trying to persuade people to windows/linux.

Yes there is alot of anti windows protest to be expected on a windows forums. But I expected to get logical reasons for the switch, not "MS is the devil" and denouncing that windows is a Good os. It seems the major selling point of Linux is that is free and customizable (at a cost of simplicity).

In response to some previous posts, you dont have to use styleXP, there is a tool witch patches the UXtheme.dll file to allow you to install custom themes which can be found at many sites for free. THe only thing you have to do is press a button then cancel the windows file protection and then restart.

-Oh and yes I do realize that those problems I listed could be unique to me, but you cant say that compatibility and simplicity isnt a problem with linux.
-I did use synaptic for the majority of installations, but it seems to have old outdated software, so i go to the developer site and hope that they have an rpm or deb package.
-If you only play one game, your obviously not a gamer, im not a true gamer but I would like to have full power (instead of an emulator) when I play the windows version of the games I have already purchased. I would actually like to use my hardware. If you were going with linux heck, why not just stick with intergrated everything.

Brunellus
August 18th, 2005, 03:30 PM
-Oh and yes I do realize that those problems I listed could be unique to me, but you cant say that compatibility and simplicity isnt a problem with linux.
-I did use synaptic for the majority of installations, but it seems to have old outdated software, so i go to the developer site and hope that they have an rpm or deb package.
-If you only play one game, your obviously not a gamer, im not a true gamer but I would like to have full power (instead of an emulator) when I play the windows version of the games I have already purchased. I would actually like to use my hardware. If you were going with linux heck, why not just stick with intergrated everything.

1) Conceded. But don't expect solutions to *necessarily* look like Windows solutions in the future.

2) When you live on the bleeding edge, you bleed, too. There's a reason "stable" releases are a little behind "development" releases. Unless there are showstopper bugs in the 'stable' version, or compelling new features in the 'new' version, why bother hunting down the bleeding-edge packages?
Anyway, if you really wanted to do this, I'd recommend switching to Gentoo.

3) Hey, you said it: you bought your hardware with Windows in mind. I buy mine with Linux in mind. And I'm sorry if I'm not a "true gamer," because I only have a handful of games.

Knome_fan
August 18th, 2005, 03:33 PM
I didnt mean for this to start a flame war, seems counterproductive in my opinion, but I was just trying to see what reasons people had for switching over if they already had windows xp. I wasnt trying to persuade people to windows/linux.

Yes there is alot of anti windows protest to be expected on a windows forums. But I expected to get logical reasons for the switch, not "MS is the devil" and denouncing that windows is a Good os. It seems the major selling point of Linux is that is free and customizable (at a cost of simplicity).

And if all you wanted was hear some reasons, why do you ignore most of them? And why shouldn't the opinion that XP is not a good OS, whether you agree with it or not, should not be a valid opinion, but denouncing windows? If you don't want to hear people's opinions, don't ask, it's that simple.



In response to some previous posts, you dont have to use styleXP, there is a tool witch patches the UXtheme.dll file to allow you to install custom themes which can be found at many sites for free. THe only thing you have to do is press a button then cancel the windows file protection and then restart.

Ah, I see what you mean now by customizable at the cost of simplicity...



-Oh and yes I do realize that those problems I listed could be unique to me, but you cant say that compatibility and simplicity isnt a problem with linux.

Oh, but I can. Compatability and simplicity isn't a problem with linux.
See, I just said it.
Btw., I don't like people making apodigtic and wide ranging statements, claiming that of course it could only be their special problems, only to declare in the next half sentence that nobody can disagree with them.



-I did use synaptic for the majority of installations, but it seems to have old outdated software, so i go to the developer site and hope that they have an rpm or deb package.

But that's simply not the way it works. If you don't use the tools provided, don't come running to complain.
And about software being outdated, seeing that Ubuntu is released every six month and that backports exists, I have a hard time understanding your problem.



-If you only play one game, your obviously not a gamer, im not a true gamer but I would like to have full power (instead of an emulator) when I play the windows version of the games I have already purchased. I would actually like to use my hardware. If you were going with linux heck, why not just stick with intergrated everything.
Wine Is Not an Emulator, get your facts straight.

newbie2
August 18th, 2005, 04:02 PM
"Still debating Linux on the Eve of the Zotob WORM?"
http://www.reallylinux.com/docs/debatinglinux.shtml
:-#

aysiu
August 18th, 2005, 04:22 PM
Yes there is alot of anti windows protest to be expected on a windows forums. But I expected to get logical reasons for the switch, not "MS is the devil" and denouncing that windows is a Good os. It seems the major selling point of Linux is that is free and customizable (at a cost of simplicity). I have actually seen things like "MS is the devil" on Linux forums, but I don't think that was a major component of this thread.

Curlydave
August 18th, 2005, 04:39 PM
As to charges of bias, I say again: would you like to be the gun-control advocate at NRA HQ? (they're just up the road from me, incidentally. They have a nice indoor shooting range.)

Haha, you're in Fairfax aren't you? I was just at that range 2 weeks ago. It's mostly a handgun range, but I had a little fun with my SKS and my friend's AK. :)

cowlip
August 18th, 2005, 05:58 PM
Ubuntu is faster in CPU and internet than XP for me, especially with Azureus open. And it has gnomebaker, the best cd burner in the world :)

jdodson
August 18th, 2005, 06:11 PM
I have a copy of WinXP, it came with my laptop. So I have one(1) copy. When I built my new computer it did not allow me to install it in accordance with the EULA. So when I got my laptop I have the right to use XP on one(1) machine. That is lame.

Plus, XP is not free. It is not free as in cost or as in freedom. I care about that.

XP has been a lesser OS than Ubuntu. What I mean is that I prefer the way the kernel handles paging and memory management than WinXP. Plus you can configure the hell out of Ubuntu. I don't need an OS with training wheels, though to be fair the free desktop needs more training wheels for people that dont know how to ride a computer.

I can use my software on _ANY_ platform I choose(for the most part). Lets say I want to use Audacity on my x86_64 machine and a PPC box. Huzzah, I can. I can go with Debian and get even more ports. I think the days need to be over when you get software that only runs on Windows x86. Welcome to the world of multiple arch. types.

Gnome is "funner" than XP. This is pretty subjective, but lets face it, the 6 month release cycle of awesomeness is great! Just when you dug into the coolness of Gnome, lookout, a new version. Ubuntu is the same, we are always privvy to the latest and greatest bits of goodness. And its all free. Blows my mind, but its free.

Free Software is communal. In a world where politics tries to pit man against man or woman against woman for lame ideoligcal reasons, Free Software brings developers together across the globe with a common focus: freedom. We need more worldwide projects that can accomplish this task, I am sick and tired of moden media trying its hardest to get me to hate people in Iraq, Iran, France or the "United States's Most Hated Country of the Month Club!" We are all humans, Ubuntu and Free Software is for us and strikes at the commonality of man/womankind.

Ok I am going to get off my sappy soapbox now...

darkmatter
August 18th, 2005, 06:59 PM
I have a copyof XP Pro that I no longer use. As for my reasoning, don't get me started. I'll I have to say about that without Windows-bashing is that their EULA sucks...

gray-squirrel
August 18th, 2005, 07:55 PM
Why Linux? Because:

1. I'd like to actually make use of the hardware on my system (e.g. graphics, sound, modem), and let the CPU do only that which it can do best.

2. I would like to dictate the nature of my hardware and software upgrades, as well as the pace/frequency of the upgrades.

3. DRM (as proposed by Micro$oft and Intel) goes against fair use.

4. As hip-hop artist Fat Joe would probably say, "I ain't a hater, it just crashes a lot". Windows ME crashes quite often on my box, no matter how well the memory management game is played, and XP at work drags and drags quite often, and applications freeze quite often.

5. More importantly, it's not just an operating system/kernel, it's an adventure. Every time I configure the computer successfully, it feels like an accomplishment. And yes, extensive thinking and work has to be done sometimes to get there.

fig_jam_uk
August 18th, 2005, 08:34 PM
Well i just like the idea of as O/S that doesnt spy on everything i do and report back to
an unethical corporation who produce realy bad programs and then release them onto the market for the general public (you & me) to beta test!!!! check this out if you dont beleve me http://uk.news.yahoo.com/17082005%2F323%2Frival-hacker-groups-spreading-worm-using-windows-flaw.html

jyank
August 19th, 2005, 06:55 AM
Pretty much the same reasons others have said for me.

I started using it as something fun to tinker around with, and the next thing I knew I was editing my partions to make my NTFS xp partion smaller and my ubuntu partion bigger.

However, I still keep XP because I do play a good amount of games, and some days, like today, I was booted into windows all day playing some games.

The fact with linux gaming (mostly refering to native games) if you don't really like FPS games, theres not really much out there in terms of gaming. Of course you could use wine/cedega but not every game works through it. For me, I play some MMORPGs, mainly FFXI which doesn't work at all in cedega, even though it was voted all the way up with Point2Play, which kind of ticked me off that they completely ignored it.

I did get WoW working, though but with a serious dent to my FPS, and I found it unplayable. Yes I have an ATI card which I'm sure contributed to that, but when I bought the card I didn't think of using linux and it is a GOOD card and I can run games excellently in windows, so I'm not going to spend money just to buy an nvidia card to play better on linux.

I guess I won't make the full switch until gaming gets better, but really, gaming is the only thing I do through windows, everything else I can do just as well/better and even easier on ubuntu.

;)
I guess I can update this.

With the latest release of ATI drivers (8.16.20) my FPS in WoW has increased INCREDIBLY. Up to the point where it is about equal or even better than windows, with the settings cranked up. Very promising to see ATI is slowly, but surely getting their act together. With the new auto-installer it takes a few simple steps and we're up and running.

However, that's not going to get me to get of my windows partition yet, unless out of nowhere FFXI becomes cedega compatable, but doubt it :)

nrayever
August 19th, 2005, 07:59 AM
ok, and if i completely change to linux?? may i still answer it?? :grin: :grin:

egon spengler
August 19th, 2005, 11:09 PM
4. As hip-hop artist Fat Joe would probably say, "I ain't a hater, it just crashes a lot". Windows ME crashes quite often on my box, no matter how well the memory management game is played, and XP at work drags and drags quite often, and applications freeze quite often.



I think you might be confusing Fat Joe with Big Pun there

blastus
August 20th, 2005, 09:16 AM
I repeat again I have no problems paying for software.

I dont expect clothes for free, computers for free, food for free, books for free, music for free or movies for free. It doesn't mean I can't get them for free It just means I have no problem with people charging money for things. Its a way of making a living.

What is so wrong with paying for software?

I have no problems with buying software (even though I haven't bought any since 2000.) This issue is not really with free software vs proprietary software. The issue is with CLOSED PROPRIETARY DATA FORMATS vs OPEN FORMATS. Need examples, how about Microsoft Office file formats, Real Media formats, Apple Quicktime formats etc... I don't like the idea of my data being locked up by a company. CLOSED PROPRIETARY DATA FORMATS are designed to lock consumers into a specific product and prevent competitors from making products that can access and manipulate MY DATA. Consequently I am either forced to be locked into an endless upgrade $treadmill$ or forced to migrate my data into another format. But if my data is in an open format I can use more than one application to gain access and manipulate my data.

I use Linux because Linux promotes open standards and OPEN FORMATS. It should be obvious that closed proprietary formats do not benefit the consumer--they only serve to restrict consumer freedom and lock them into some corporation's business strategy. This is one of the reasons why Linux doesn't/can't come with certain software installed. And before someone mentions that OpenOffice can read/write MS-Office closed proprietary data formats, it can ONLY do so because the open source community has purposely reverse engineered the formats. If it were up to Microsoft they would like to have my data permanently locked up in their closed formats indefinitely. Heck, if Microsoft had their way we would all have to use Windows and Internet Explorer to browse the Internet because everyone would be making pages that only work with Internet Explorer and ActiveX.

Another reason I use Linux is because Microsoft has a proven history of UNETHICAL and ILLEGAL conduct and has been and is entrenched in legal battles because of it. Another reason I use Linux is because I like being able to get right into the system. As a programmer myself I appreciate that the way Linux is architectured and designed is much better than Windows.

Security is one good example of a design flaw in Windows. Windows was never designed to be a multiuser system. Consequently, most applications written for Windows require complete and total access to the machine. In other words, it is practically impossible to use Windows XP except if you login as an Administrator. Linux, on the other hand, was designed to be a multiuser system from the get go. Consequently, no one with insight ever logs into the system as root for usual computer use. Non-administrative applications written for Linux do not require complete and total access to the machine.

I'll give another example. Windows automounts partitions and assigns drive letters to them. In setting up Windows you have no control over what letter the system volume becomes. For example, I have two drives in this computer. The second drive is formatted FAT32. That's fine except that when I go to reinstall Windows XP the system volume becomes F: because there is a FAT32 partition on my second hard drive. The only way I can force XP to assign C: to the system volume is to physically disconnect my second hard drive. This is backwards. I don't like having to unplug a hard drive when installing an OS because of some screwed up automounting thing. And if you think F: is fine to install Windows on, there are certain Windows applications that won't work because they expect Windows to be installed on C: In Linux, however, I know that /dev/hda is my primary master, /dev/hdb is my primary slave and so forth and I can mount them however I like.

entangled
August 20th, 2005, 09:51 AM
Perhaps the main reason for me using linux is that the novelty of XP quickly wears off.
I am expected to use it at work and there is something interesting in system administration of any system. However, at home XP is boring - perhaps why so many gamers stick to it - and occasionally frustrating.

XP looks good and runs well, mostly, but it does have a lot of odd happenings that need research to fix. There are things wrong with Ubuntu too but in my experience it is a bit easier to cure them.

On the philosophical side I like the idea of Linux as an alternative to complete commercial monopoly of computer operating environments, rights to use and data formats. Apple have done their bit, but I suspect they would not be averse to a bit of monopoly too.
The existence of Linux and the remarkable cooperative effort that supports free software development is inspiring. I don't feel at all like that for a company that seems to be trying to devour all competition.

Finally I think we should not expect most people to stop using XP and switch to Linux. It would be out of character.
As consumers we need it to appear to others that we pay for things, or we feel guilt. We also need to belong to the herd, be conservative and do what most other people do. Corporate marketing makes sure that we know how to behave.
Also, Linux presents too many choices for the average computer user.

poofyhairguy
August 20th, 2005, 08:05 PM
Also, Linux presents too many choices for the average computer user.

Which is why Linux needs to be shipped on computers with sane defaults.

jdong
August 20th, 2005, 08:17 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..
I do a lot of spyware cleaning in my daily routine


Actually they get on systems primarily through IE exploits, bypassing the ActiveX confirmation dialog. A properly secured XP system will not get much spyware, but then I spent over $100 "properly securing" our family XP box (I use Linux primarily, after a 6-month weaning with dual-boot).

The advantages that stand out to me:

MULTITASKING. I'm surprised nobody's pointed this one out yet. I run Linux (SuSE 9.3), and my CPU is almost always under 100% load, whether building Backports or donating CPU cycles to Folding and SETI. The system is still extremely responsive. I can't feel a difference doing web browsing, word processing, music playing, even light OpenGL/SDL gaming despite over 300 processes running in the background. Under Windows, I find that a single infinite-loop program can stall a uniprocessor system to the point where Task Manager has trouble showing up! When doing Mozilla builds under Windows, you can seriously feel the lag, and even web browsing becomes extremely annoying when browsers occasionally turn all white and register as not responding.

Performance: I have 1.5GB RAM in my system. After keeping my system booted for a day or so, I find that my daily tasks have been cached. OpenOffice will launch in 3 seconds, and Firefox pops up almost instantaneously. However, as soon as I run an app that requests 1GB RAM, Linux will smoothly flush its cache and make room. I've never seen Windows use RAM this wisely.

drizek
August 20th, 2005, 08:19 PM
Perhaps the main reason for me using linux is that the novelty of XP quickly wears off.
I am expected to use it at work and there is something interesting in system administration of any system. However, at home XP is boring - perhaps why so many gamers stick to it - and occasionally frustrating.

XP looks good and runs well, mostly, but it does have a lot of odd happenings that need research to fix. There are things wrong with Ubuntu too but in my experience it is a bit easier to cure them.

On the philosophical side I like the idea of Linux as an alternative to complete commercial monopoly of computer operating environments, rights to use and data formats. Apple have done their bit, but I suspect they would not be averse to a bit of monopoly too.

i disagree. i would love to be able to game in ubuntu, but i cant because halflife 2/battlefield2 dont run natively and performance sucks. windows is a crappy gaming platform. it has ****** memory management and is highly unoptimized.

when it comes to help, i agree it is easierto solve a linux problem. but when you think about it, linux has less than 2% market share whereas windows has 95%. if linux had just 10-15% market share, then it would sove just about every problem there is. everything would be much better documented, there would be more donation money helping out, game companies would choose opengl over directX so the can port games over, offices would switch to open document standards, there would be more testing/feedback etc.

every linux problem is a direct result of MS's monopoly on the market.

About apple, they would be a worse monopoly than MS. much worse. they sell the hardware, the software, hte ****** proprietary formats and theyll charge you whatever the hell they want. just think ipod applied to computers.

drizek
August 20th, 2005, 08:22 PM
oh, about hte performance. i thought this was funny. i was looking at some benchmarks of an intel 1.8ghz pentium M, and it said it took 2 minutes and 10 seconds to calculate Pi to 2million decimals under windows xp home.

i downloaded the program, and ran it on my laptop with ubuntu under wine, which has a 1.5ghz pentium M. i calculated pi in 2 minutes and 4 seconds.

xequence
August 20th, 2005, 08:23 PM
Perhaps the main reason for me using linux is that the novelty of XP quickly wears off.

I agree. When my family got a new computer with XP I thought it was awesome. I loved the look of it. For about a day. Then it just got boring. Ive used linux for a week now and it is still appealing to me. I like it alot.


As consumers we need it to appear to others that we pay for things, or we feel guilt. We also need to belong to the herd, be conservative and do what most other people do. Corporate marketing makes sure that we know how to behave.
Also, Linux presents too many choices for the average computer user.

Hah, most people out there are proud to not pay for things! To me linux is unique. Linux is what I want it to be.

The choices are good. It isnt that hard to read around and find out what each distro is intended for. If you want to have an OS on a server, why use a desktop OS? You have the choice to get one specificaly made to be a server. You have distros made for older computers, etc.

Stormy Eyes
August 20th, 2005, 08:39 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.

If I wanted Windows XP, I could get it from my office. I use Windows 2000 at work, but Ubuntu at home. I use Ubuntu at home, and refuse to use Windows outside of work, because I am not willing to tolerate Microsoft's "We know better than you do" approach to software design. Everything you run on Windows is made with the assumption that you, the user, are an idiot. If you want to be treated like an idiot, stick to XP. But if you're man enough to ride without training wheels, then welcome to Linux, which gives you enough rope to hang yourself and a few meters more just to make sure.

Ubunted
August 20th, 2005, 08:56 PM
oh, about hte performance. i thought this was funny. i was looking at some benchmarks of an intel 1.8ghz pentium M, and it said it took 2 minutes and 10 seconds to calculate Pi to 2million decimals under windows xp home.

i downloaded the program, and ran it on my laptop with ubuntu under wine, which has a 1.5ghz pentium M. i calculated pi in 2 minutes and 4 seconds.
To be fair, a 1.5Ghz Pentium M is much more powerful than a 1.8Ghz P4. The larger cache allows them to run with chips with twice their clock speed easily.

drizek
August 20th, 2005, 09:00 PM
To be fair, a 1.5Ghz Pentium M is much more powerful than a 1.8Ghz P4. The larger cache allows them to run with chips with twice their clock speed easily.
no, it was a 1.8ghz pentium m

Edit: but my laptop has ddr2 vs pc2700 and mine is the newer sonoma vs the dothan. but there is still a 300mhz difference.

Clansman
August 20th, 2005, 10:15 PM
hi,

couldn't resist, must comment:

as correctly said, linux is more about freedom than eye candy and stability.

freedom to use whatever software you like, freedom in not imposing abusive licenses (quite expensive in almost everywhere), freedom in the opensource sense because most software is available with source code for the community to fix and make better.

some linux distros (like ubuntu, debian, gentoo, slackware) are completely free, in the sense that they have absolutely NO commercial or corporate purposes (you know, conquer the world...). the money some of those companies try to make is used to cover expenses. the lack of economic goals allow the developers and maintainers to focus on what's really important: the users.
OSX and MS windows share the licensing problems: everything is paid for. not very surprising, Apple and Microsoft exist to make money, but the point is that for free we can get equivalent and sometimes much better software applications, with the added bonus of not having to worry about being caught with lots of pirated software.

the linux kernel and the unix-like environment provide a very elegantly designed operating system, with exceptional stability and unequaled performance. The server market knows this and every service that requires Reliability, Availability and Security ends up running some sort of unix OS like solaris, AIX or linux - it is an unquestionable fact. very big companies tend to be very microsoft driven, but the core services, those that can't fail and have to reply on time... those are unices.


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.

not quite so, actually. non-dumb users with updated OS, firewalls, anti-spyware and antivirus software are still very easily caught by spyware/malware/virus/trojan horses. remotely exploitable vulnerabilities are found very frequently which allow all sorts of protection bypassing and microsoft's security policy is just not enforced. they use it as publicity stunts.
The lack of stability (we all know it), the huge design flaws discovered with vulnerabilities, the overhead of security software (firewall+anti-spyware+anti-virus) is just too much to be ignored by informed users. Known anti-virus solutions are known to use up to 220MB of VM (about 150MB of physical RAM) just to mention an example.



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.


Of course the games are a heavy factor, but hey, the choice is yours. One doesn't use linux to see if it is better than windows... you need the curiosity and open-mind to really compare both systems. It's not that practical to use 100% linux but the argument of having the same things in windows isn't quite that simple. (read above)



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.

1. cost
2. applications' cost
3. lack of security
4. lack of stability
5. lack of scalability (not that important to users)
6. lack of performance (well... not that windows lacks performance, it's just that linux has a big performance advantage on some applications)
7. networking performance
8. administration cost and complexity (one could argue about this, but administrating a company network of linuxes for an experienced unix admin is just a walk in the park... of course an unix admin is better paid than windows admin, and lives with 1/1000 of the windows admin's concerns)



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.

even hardcore gamers get excelent results in linux sometimes.

sorry for the big post, hope it doesn't generate unnecessary arguement and noise in the thread.

[]

gray-squirrel
August 21st, 2005, 04:07 AM
I think you might be confusing Fat Joe with Big Pun there

I should have known better. That song was a classic, so it probably was Big Pun. But those two sound so much alike to me. :)

Anyways, I should elaborate on my item #4 from earlier, since there is concern about talks on Windows crashes. First, I found there was a conflict between eTrust's firewall program, which was based on ZoneAlarm 5.0 and my video driver which caused 50% of the crashes from boot-up. I got rid of that resource hog of a firewall, and that issue went away. Can you imagine after a few hours of either firewall running, you have to reboot because system resources dwindle rapidly - even when you're not Web surfing? And speaking of resources, even without the ZoneAlarm-based firewall up, I still have to deal with the fact that closing any program doesn't necessarily guarantee any system resources are freed up. I could close all the system tray icons, and still don't reach above 80% like I used to. And it's not like I have a ton of TSR-like applications running, either - just antivirus, SoundBlaster Live mixer, and the dialer for my Internet connection. Tripling my RAM did not solve the problem, either.

Going to http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html will show the reason why: faulty system architecture.

And as we speak, I'm almost finished downloading the 2.6.10-5-k7 kernel image (edit: for reinstallation); I think I botched the one currently on the system trying to compile ALSA modules again. Quick fix for a serious problem (I'm using an older kernel right now, hehehe), a lot better than a total operating system re-installation. Windows is not really modular as a Linux distro is.

Ride Jib
August 21st, 2005, 04:42 AM
- I just used Linux to save windows files off a hard drive that all my windows boxes failed to recognize.

- Everything just works. If it doesn't, I did something wrong, it's not just a freak thing occurring like I experience every time I boot into Windows

- I don't have to pay for anything. Proprietary software gets expensive very quick. I am poor.

And the most important reason.....
- It makes me look cool and I get lots of girls because I use Linux.

Brunellus
August 21st, 2005, 04:43 AM
- I just used Linux to save windows files off a hard drive that all my windows boxes failed to recognize.

- Everything just works. If it doesn't, I did something wrong, it's not just a freak thing occurring like I experience every time I boot into Windows

- I don't have to pay for anything. Proprietary software gets expensive very quick. I am poor.

And the most important reason.....
- It makes me look cool and I get lots of girls because I use Linux.
chicks dig *nix?

news to me, man.

drizek
August 21st, 2005, 05:09 AM
chicks dig *nix?

news to me, man.
of course. windows is ugly. you can get linux to look good,

and tux is a pimp.

linus wanted tux to look like he was drunk and he had just had sex. did you ever wonder why he had that smirk on his face?

dcraven
August 21st, 2005, 05:24 AM
So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?

At the risk of sounding snobbish or like an elitist, if you need to ask, then there is no advantage for you typically.

~djc

manicka
August 21st, 2005, 05:33 AM
security, performance, peace of mind http://www.cobusnet.nl/images/emoticons/hulde.gif

poofyhairguy
August 21st, 2005, 08:04 AM
- It makes me look cool and I get lots of girls because I use Linux.

Amen...Ubuntu on an old Clamshell iBook is a chick magnet.

Brunellus
August 21st, 2005, 02:32 PM
of course. windows is ugly. you can get linux to look good,

and tux is a pimp.

linus wanted tux to look like he was drunk and he had just had sex. did you ever wonder why he had that smirk on his face?
I don't have a working laptop, so I haven't been able to test the proposition. And as useful as livecds are, they're not that impressive, what with their fairly standard desktops and so on. People tend to be wowed by more intricate desktops....

Chicks dig Apple, though--this I can confirm, having watched one Apple-using friend of mine. Apple means two things: 1) Look how cool & trendy I am! See, I Think Different by buying this stylish hardware and software! and 2) I've got cash money, yo. Both of which are of course very appealing.

Linux, in the damning indictment of my teenage younger brother, is a ghetto OS. By default it isn't pretty. No suitably blingy hardware runs it by default. It doesn't even run any cool games (perceptions count here, not reality....)

The clamshell iBook however--that would be awesome. Anyone know if that mythical USB-wireless adaptor works with that?

weasel fierce
August 21st, 2005, 05:25 PM
Amen...Ubuntu on an old Clamshell iBook is a chick magnet.

BUt its really awkward to drive through da hood, waving an ibook out of the car window .. :)

sapo
August 21st, 2005, 06:04 PM
Simples answer for a simple question:

"I use it cause Ubuntu is better than windows XP."

The reasons why is it better? hum.. there are too many to remember.. but..

Free, no viruses, no spywares, faster, safer, more stable, and the list goes on and on :)

drizek
August 22nd, 2005, 06:42 AM
BUt its really awkward to drive through da hood, waving an ibook out of the car window .. :)
try a ten dollar bill

ghostwind
September 7th, 2005, 10:37 AM
I have windows 2k but only use it for work on C# programs now. All my other PCs run kubuntu. I am very happy with ut2004 games wise. Linux is very stable and I don't suffer virus and spyware. I will never go back now. :smile:

odin
September 7th, 2005, 11:15 AM
Well not so long ago I though there was no meaning running linux.Things gets complicated all the time.I switch like 5 months ago.Completely, like when you quit smoking and oh man I really feel much better.No virus,no nothing that can make you format everything(after backing everything up of course) and freedom to do whatever I want in my system.And If we talk about systems administration there's nothing to compare.You could ever dream about all the software and features ubuntu (linux in general) has free and reliable.You can do almost everything with software(now I'm working on configuring an acces point,God bless hostap).Free with all the meanings that word has,not only money....

And as someone said,for gaming, playstation!!!

Do you need more reasons?

madjo
September 7th, 2005, 01:18 PM
Curious, I see all these claims of "No virusses and no spyware".. but why do we have an AV (Clam I believe it is called) then?
and isn't this just temporary? If Linux ever gets the main system of choice (not when, but if), won't we be targetted by the spyware/virus-writers?

Stormy Eyes
September 7th, 2005, 01:54 PM
Curious, I see all these claims of "No virusses and no spyware".. but why do we have an AV (Clam I believe it is called) then?

ClamAV is intended mainly for use in mail servers that deliver mail to Windows boxen. A Linux mail server can't be infected by a mail-borne worm, but it can still pass it along, hence the need for antivirus on a mail server.


and isn't this just temporary? If Linux ever gets the main system of choice (not when, but if), won't we be targetted by the spyware/virus-writers?

And which distribution will the scumbags target? How will they get the root privileges needed to install if they don't just put the binary in $HOME/bin where it can be found and removed by the user? Most Linuxes don't give the user admin privileges by default. Windows does, thus it is insecure and plagued by malware.

lol
September 7th, 2005, 02:01 PM
If you have Windows XP, why do you use linux?

mm, heu... well, if you have two pairs of shoes, why do you use the one you prefer?

madjo
September 7th, 2005, 09:25 PM
ClamAV is intended mainly for use in mail servers that deliver mail to Windows boxen. A Linux mail server can't be infected by a mail-borne worm, but it can still pass it along, hence the need for antivirus on a mail server.



And which distribution will the scumbags target? How will they get the root privileges needed to install if they don't just put the binary in $HOME/bin where it can be found and removed by the user? Most Linuxes don't give the user admin privileges by default. Windows does, thus it is insecure and plagued by malware.
ah.. yes, indeed, for a moment I forgot the user rights control.. don't know why... must be that goshdarnit spoonfed windows dogma :)

Leif
September 7th, 2005, 10:43 PM
*** this post is unrelated to most of this thread, and meant for aysiu.

you have a post saying you miss the thunderbird notification. there's moztraybiff which integrates exactly like that with thunderbird (http://moztraybiff.mozdev.org/). personally, I prefer mail-notification because it can also keep track of my gmail.

I'm sorry if someone already pointed this out, but I didn't notice it while scanning the thread.

Leif
September 7th, 2005, 10:47 PM
mm, heu... well, if you have two pairs of shoes, why do you use the one you prefer?

that's a bit of a misleading analogy. given that most computers come with windows pre-installed, it's more like if you have a pair of shoes that fit, why go looking for another pair, even if free ?

the answer for me is that windows doesn't fit. or that you can never have too many shoes :)

The Warlock
September 8th, 2005, 09:59 PM
that's a bit of a misleading analogy. given that most computers come with windows pre-installed, it's more like if you have a pair of shoes that fit, why go looking for another pair, even if free ?

the answer for me is that windows doesn't fit. or that you can never have too many shoes :)
For me the thing that really blew me away the first time I really started using Linux was apt. It just amazed me that I could open up a command line, type in a single command, and bam, it downloads and installs a new program, right there.

poofyhairguy
September 8th, 2005, 11:17 PM
For me the thing that really blew me away the first time I really started using Linux was apt. It just amazed me that I could open up a command line, type in a single command, and bam, it downloads and installs a new program, right there.

I know people are used to "next, next, I agree to give you my soul, next. next. finish" but I like Synaptic much more too.

sinbad782
September 13th, 2005, 08:24 PM
I got into Linux as I enjoy building and tweaking computers and I started using Mandrake then Debian and now Ubuntu. I have two home build desktops, one with XP and the other with Ubuntu. I don't really boot up my Windows box unless there's good reason and as time goes on and application support in Linux grows, the reasons for this become less and less.

I do enjoy playing commercial games on Windows, but apart from this, there are very few reasons for me to stick with using XP apart from the fact that I have a MATLAB license for Windows and not Linux. It's a shame that apple don't port a proper version of Quicktime and perhaps iTunes to Linux, but then you can live without such things.

I do still think that the PC is still a better platform for gaming as you can upgrade your hardware incrementally and there is a better support for playing user-created mods for various games. I reckon that if future consoles have hard drives this may be overcome though.

I do IT support part time for my college and it does get pretty wearing going through the whole disinfection CD, install antivirus, install firewall, patching, anti-spyware rigmarole for all the Windows users all the time. I have dealt with countless worm and trojan infections on Windows machines over the last couple of years. At least if more people were using Linux on the desktop it wouldn't be such a big deal if they still insisted on opening up every email attachment in sight.

It sometimes seems to me that we spend too much time fighting fires, mostly due to Windows security issues brought on by people running everything as an administrative user. There are also plenty of Windows apps that break as soon as you try to run as a non-admin and this really shows why Windows was never designed from the ground up as a proper multiuser system.

I am pretty shocked that MS are only just starting to come around to the idea that OS security starts with the principle of least privilege for default installs. Why they can't just force everyone who buys a new XP notebook to create a non-admin account for everyday use is beyond me.

Rant over. PJS

Muhammad
September 13th, 2005, 08:34 PM
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.

I agree, also no defragmenting :D

wabble
September 13th, 2005, 11:24 PM
Well, the nr one reason for my switch was that i was tired of product activation, then validating. Pressing ok to that i was sure i wanted to do what i told the computer to do and then again press yes i am sure that i am sure that i want to do this and that.

Games goes on the xbox or ps2 mostly (freeciv and gnome tetris is ok for the long trips on the road) and as for the people here talking about spyware, viruses and adware i don't agree. It's a plus not having it on linux but i think people managing to get it on their windows machines don't know what they are doing anyway. Pressing yes to continue surfing not taking note to what you are answering (yes active x) I fully support people doing that getting viruses and spyware on their machines.. ok. a bit sarcastic. Sorry.

So.. the reason is. Ease of use.

Greg_G47
September 18th, 2005, 12:00 PM
Several good reasons:

One: its harder for people who don't know what they're doing to break. When you pretty much have to go to the command line and start entering passwords to really screw anything up is happens a lot less often.

Two: You can actually go into the guts of it to fix things (or break them, see #1). In windows it seemed the only things that could make it into the lower levels of the system (i.e places you couldn't conveniently access or reconfigure within the GUI) were viruses and spyware. Once you had them, you could NEVER get rid of them.

Three: Less bloating. You install the features you want. The system runs like greased lightning compared to a windows install simply because there isn't a metric tonne of crap running in the background.

Four: Free software, and piles of it. As a student this is especially nice. Software like TexMacs, Xfig, Ghemical, etc. are miles ahead of their windows counterparts.

There are probably plenty of other reasons for and against switching over. Those are just what I've seen within the first day or so of using Ubuntu.

FatherDale
September 18th, 2005, 01:43 PM
So what are the advantages of l using linux over xp?

What a great thread! Wonder why I just noticed it?
OK: I use linux because I'm a geek. There are linux partitions on three of my five computers (one of them is Ubuntu-only, the rest dual-boot with XP). I need XP to run Google Earth and MS Streets and Trips (the best program ever out of MS). Other than that, I run linux. Since April, Ubuntu or Kubuntu. When I bought this laptop last October, the first thing I did was carve out 10gb for another OS to play with. I started with Mandrake 10. Laptop didn't like it, but it worked. Then SuSe 9.1. Video didn't work, and the fix was too fiddly to deal with. Back to Mandrake. Then Slackware. Then in April, Kubuntu. Very cool. I broke it, and wasn't bright enough to fix it, so I fdisked it and installed Ubuntu 5.04. LOVED it. Had to load kubuntu-base so I could play Grandfather (weak grin). Then M$ came out with the thing that inspects your windoze installation to see if it's legal. It told me mine wasn't. I lost my mind. I've spent THOUSANDS on Windows licenses over the years, and I was just deeply insulted. I'll never buy another one. I always though Linux politics was "cute". I get it now....

Goober
September 18th, 2005, 07:39 PM
I have WinXP, bought it for 260$ 3 years ago, and have had nothing but trouble with it. Granted, it works better then previous versions of Windows, but I have never liked the fact that I am stuck with that stupid "Start" button, I never liked the way it worked, never liked the way it felt. Then I have had huge problems with spyware, adware, viruses, worms, and all of that nasty junk. XP, like other Windows, is unstable. It just randomly doesn't work well, especially if you leave it on for days at a time. I have left Ubuntu running solid for a week, and it was working just as well on Day 1 as on Day 7.

Of course, the thing that killed Windows for me was that somehow, it corrupted its MBR in June, right after Word decided to close randomly, taking a 1,500 English Essay that I had been working on for a long time with it. So I just purged my Hardrives, completely reformatted them, installed Ubuntu, and then Installed XP again. Ubuntu for everything but Gaming, XP for gaming. Frankly, I am never, ever going to use Windows again, not after the very bad experience I have had with it.

Right, the final thing that I love about Ubuntu is that to install a new program, you just have to type a couple letters into a Command Line, usually sudo apt-get whatever. There is Synaptic, but I feel much better typing something in then mucking around with Synaptic. That and I'm too lazy to bother to try and understand Synpatic. The feeling of just typing something in, and getting the program is wonderful, especially for a student like me who would rather throw my few dollars at a College then at Windows.

Brando569
September 29th, 2005, 12:03 AM
ive used linux along side windows for years, i mainly used windows forever and just messed around with linux until i found a good distro i liked, i ordered the ubuntu cds and they came like a month or so later, so i installed them. i liked it. at my university they use this thing called "clean access agent" by cisco systems, what it does is checks your (windows) OS to see if you have all the updates installed, if you have an AV, and if you have updated defs for it. well to make a long story short, Clean Access Agent doesnt like me. I spent about a week trying to get on the internet by reinstalling windows numerous times, cuz it didnt like my unattended cds, so finally i gave in and installed a basic version of it and d/led all the updates and whatnot. after all that was done, it STILL wouldnt let me on! it would just say "Login Failed" and next to details it would be blank. it really pissed me off. i remembered in linux that it only asked you to login through the website, read the AV policy then you were free to go. so i took that route, and have been using Hoary ever since. I like it so much better then XP, although i did have to use it today to play a DVD :( i gotta figure out how to do that and ill be set. plus i love learning new things. linux is so much easier to manage then winblows once you get used to it.

Omnios
September 29th, 2005, 12:21 AM
I dual boot and and probably will till XP is dead or my games run properly on Linux (work wine damit) (only other reason is launch cast plus comes with my isp and will not run on firefox or linux).

Anyways jump out of the box, synaptic and gnome files are not the only things out there thats like limiting your self to tucows and what can you get from the ms page (and you paid how much). Im getting to the point where im going to go hang out at source forge to find stuff saw an interesting music synthisiser thingy that I wanted to download to make dance toons. The stuff is out there unfortanatly I find it hard to find Linux stuff but its definatly there.

I think some people are thinking synaptic is it but there is more out there, free as in bear not free as in time. LOL anyways I have a lot more to do on Linux than windows and basicly XP is there for games!

Having a forum List of what is available and highly rated other than the usual stuff may help eleviate this why am I dual booting feeling as I have had it but just remind myself there is a lot more out there for Linux I just have to devote the time to find and install it.

Cirkus
September 29th, 2005, 12:43 AM
Miscrosoft is increasing the amount of Digital (as opposed to Computer Owner) Rights Management integration in windows, and I want the genuine advantage of having total control over my computer.

After all, it's mine; not Microsoft's. :cool:

openmind
September 29th, 2005, 12:53 AM
I was Dual-booting until a couple of weeks ago, mostly (95%) of the time in Ubuntu but holding onto Windows like a security blanket.

Then during re-partitioning for a clean Breezy install I messed up and ended up with two partitions, "/", and "/home". At first Iwas a little miffed, but now realize that was agreat thing to happen! I had no choice but to get Ubuntu up and running. There's no incentive like necessity, and I've learned more since then than if I'd still had Windows waiting in the wings.

Now I have about everything set up and working, and I feel a sense of accomplishment beyond anything I've felt with Windows.

(If I can do it, anyone can!)

Stormy Eyes
September 29th, 2005, 03:43 AM
I was Dual-booting until a couple of weeks ago, mostly (95%) of the time in Ubuntu but holding onto Windows like a security blanket.
Then during re-partitioning for a clean Breezy install I messed up and ended up with two partitions, "/", and "/home". At first Iwas a little miffed, but now realize that was agreat thing to happen! I had no choice but to get Ubuntu up and running.

Having /home on a separate partition is a good thing. You can tinker to your heart's content, and if you have to reinstall, you can do so without fear of nuking /home as long as you're careful during the partitioning phase of the install process.

poofyhairguy
September 29th, 2005, 07:23 AM
Having /home on a separate partition is a good thing. You can tinker to your heart's content, and if you have to reinstall, you can do so without fear of nuking /home as long as you're careful during the partitioning phase of the install process.

Also you get to keep all your settings. A seperate /home is an awesome thing. Yet another advantage Ubuntu has over XP.

Sirin
October 1st, 2005, 05:15 PM
Here's one for you: No DLLs.
If that doesn't do it, Linux has no
http://www.bbspot.com/Images/News_Features/2002/10/bsod_small.gif
The ext3 filesystem is so advanced and flexible, there is virtually no need for defragmenting.
The only advantage that Windows has over us is their advanced XP Start menu...
http://www.seanet.com/help/dial/winxp/inetwiz/images/xp-start-menu.jpg

manicka
October 1st, 2005, 09:16 PM
The only advantage that Windows has over us is their advanced XP Start menu...

Aaah :eek: ... I hate that thing. It's one of the first things I change in XP

Brunellus
October 1st, 2005, 09:22 PM
Also you get to keep all your settings. A seperate /home is an awesome thing. Yet another advantage Ubuntu has over XP.
I wish /home was set up on its own partition in a default install.

I have two installs already where / is on the same partition as /home, and inertia (and a fear of excesisve breakage) prevents me from tinkering too much with them.

markmark
October 2nd, 2005, 12:09 AM
I wish /home was set up on its own partition in a default install.
I have two installs already where / is on the same partition as /home, and inertia (and a fear of excesisve breakage) prevents me from tinkering too much with them.
I was worried about breaking stuff when I moved /home then I just did it anyway, and it couldn't have been easier. All you have to do is copy everything across and then change your fstab entry to mount the new location as /home. You can even leave all the old stuff sitting there in case something goes wrong.
This (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=46866) thread gives a great step by step guide on doing it.

PatrickMay16
October 2nd, 2005, 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?
For me, I'm duel booting Ubuntu linux/windows for the adventure of it. Fun to try new things, and the feeling I get when I manage to get something working that was difficult to get working is great. I've been having a good time with Ubuntu. I admit, there are times when I get frustrated, but eventually I get past those times.

The games I play are mostly old SNES/megadrive games so I can play them with Emulation on most operating systems.

I haven't needed to use windows for a long while. I could probably remove windows from my computer and survive quite happily, but I won't do that because, unlike most I see on linux forums, I like windows too.

Basically: I enjoy linux for the adventure... trying new things. Also, at one point the thought of no viruses attracted me.
EDIT: By the way, the version of Windows I use is Windows 2000 Professional. A lot better than Windows XP in my opinion.

Maggot
October 2nd, 2005, 12:54 AM
I dual boot using windows only for games.

mrtaber
October 2nd, 2005, 01:06 AM
I just reconfigured my workstation, and I left a Windows XP Pro partition. Why? Can you say, "Civilization 4"? I knew you could. So can I. And I don't want to try to play it under VMWare, which is adequate for all my other office and DBA tool needs... :D

Mark

Stormy Eyes
October 2nd, 2005, 01:53 AM
The only advantage that Windows has over us is their advanced XP Start menu...

I hope you're being sarcastic. I'd rather start apps from a Commodore 64 prompt than have to deal with that demon-ridden abomination.

sparhawk
October 2nd, 2005, 02:06 AM
Reasons to use GNU/Linux... let me think about that...

Windows XP pro 279.98
Ubuntu 0.00

Office 2003 Standard 399.95
OpenOffice 0.00

Windows Antivirus/Antispyware 20~60
GNU/Linux Antivirus... Don't need it but if on a windows network - 0.00

Then there is the server components...

SQL server around 1100 w/5 CAL's
MySQL plus many others... 0.00 What are CAL's

Windows 2003 for terminal server 699.95 for 5 CAL's for the server and then 5 CAL's for Terminal server is 600~700
GNU/Linux server ???? just install what ever server components you want. Terminal server... 0.00

I could go on forever like that but I think thats the idea... if you want to make money off of the OS why not make it off of support and stop the ridiculous license prices. My choice will always be GNU/Linux. Free Software Foundation Rocks

blastus
October 2nd, 2005, 03:29 AM
I have Windows XP but I only use it for games now. I am thinking forward; I don't want to be locked into Windows in the future because...

- Windows is already very expensive and it will only get worse

- I envision a future where Microsoft has complete control over everything and I can't do anything without them knowing it or without their permission

- once TCPA coupled Microsoft's NGSCB become a reality, I will lose a substantial amount of control over my computer

- Windows is too hard to secure

- Internet Explorer is terminally bound to Windows and is probably the most amazingly insecure, intrusive, proprietary-garbage-pushing product ever conceived

- Windows doesn't come with a lot of stuff that is preinstalled with many Linux distributions such as OpenOffice, Firefox, CD/DVD burning, file archivers, GIMP, etc... and never will

- I don't like Microsoft (too many reasons to quote here but fair competition, open standards, open formats, etc... comes to mind)

Brando569
October 2nd, 2005, 10:15 AM
im debating on what to do with windows, keep it as it is, resize the partition to make it ALOT smaller, or just delete it totally. i rarely ever use it. the only time i do is when i cant get something working in linux that i know will work in windows. i do have games but i dont play them that often.

brt
October 2nd, 2005, 10:47 AM
Windows was not able to capture my holiday videos from my sony DV-cam!

i ussually use ubuntu on my workstation. when i wanted to copy my videos from my sony DV-cam this was not possible, as i didnt have any firewire adapter in my PC. so i plugged the cam to my girlfriend's windows xp computer. well the cam was recognised without problems and i started transferring the video to the harddrive... it seemed to work but when it came to save the file the computer did never finish: the progressbar was freezing at 99%. first i thought, "well, it just may take some time..let's wait... but no hd access, hmm strange. it just won't finish. damn. i tried again - no luck - and again - no luck - i gave up.
then i bought a firewire card put it into my pc all i had to do was to create the 1394 device and startup kino, plugged the cam onto the firewire connector - kewl that was plug and play ! :D the remote-controlling of the cam everything worked without any problem. no errors when recording to the hd.
1:0 for my ubuntu box :D

another thing i love with my ubuntu is my multicard reader:
when i plug it to a xp box i get about 5 new "driveletters" everytime when i plug a chip into it i have to guess which one of the driveletters is my smartcard. (was the compactflash E: or F: and is the smartcard H:?) that really sucks!

when the MC reader is plugged to my ubuntu and i insert the CF card, 3 seconds later a window with its content pops up, wow! and just one single symbol appears on my gnome-desktop, the one where i will find the data, and its calles Powershot, just as my Photocamera, no meaningless or unused driveletters. and when i plug in my Phones smarcard a second icon appears on the desktop called Memorycard, yeah easy going :) thats how i like it, thats how it should be !
2:0 for my ubuntu box :D

next round? i would say technical k.o. !

jeremy
October 2nd, 2005, 01:10 PM
I use Linux precisely because it is not windowsxp.

MBro
October 2nd, 2005, 08:29 PM
I use ubuntu becuase I enjoy using linux, I can do whatever I want with it. Too me it feels much more logical than windows. I enjoying being able to mess around with my computer to do whatever I want. I have less problems in linux. I'm just not a big fan of windowz


Amarok is pretty good, but the only thing it has over iTunes, in my opinion, is being able to fetch the lyrics of whatever song you're playing--though, that's a pretty awesome feature!
Amarok can enqueue songs, it automaticly adds to your library, you can see your playlist and collection at the same time, and it has stop playing after current track. I feel amarok is the best audio player out there. You should see amaroK 1.3 that's in breezy, it's amazing.

aysiu
October 2nd, 2005, 08:41 PM
Amarok can enqueue songs, it automaticly adds to your library, you can see your playlist and collection at the same time, and it has stop playing after current track. I feel amarok is the best audio player out there. You should see amaroK 1.3 that's in breezy, it's amazing. Yeah, I take it back. AmaroK has OSD (on-screen display) and global keyboard shortcuts. I just wish it were a bit more responsive (as JuK is).

royg1234
October 2nd, 2005, 09:48 PM
Amarok is pretty good, but the only thing it has over iTunes, in my opinion, is being able to fetch the lyrics of whatever song you're playing--though, that's a pretty awesome feature!

Amarok is the shiznit! It's faster than iTunes. It supports ogg. Also, I haven't figured out how to make iTunes rescan the library for new/removed files like you can in amaroK. Only thing I like better about iTunes is the podcast thing, and the radio's collection is bigger and cleanly categorized.

brentoboy
October 2nd, 2005, 10:24 PM
I made the full swich when I got XPx64. All the CD ripping programs didnt work anymore becuase the sound ripper drivers for windows are 32 bit not 64 bit, and every little po-dunk cd ripper just uses the same atapi drivers.

That is when it really struk home that if those drivers (offered for free) were not really free, becuase I couldnt recompile them to be 64 bit becuase the source was not free.

If you want to actually use a 64 bit processor, dump windows. Ubuntu can rip and burn - at 64 bits.

aysiu
October 2nd, 2005, 10:36 PM
Also, I haven't figured out how to make iTunes rescan the library for new/removed files like you can in amaroK. Theoretically, it's better to have the scan method, but my music collection is so huge that it slows down AmaroK every time I start it. Since iTunes uses a library system, it already knows what's there and what isn't--of course, you have to add new items manually...

aysiu
October 3rd, 2005, 09:23 AM
You know, I got so caught up in Kerberos' trolling and flamebait that I don't think I ever really answered this thread properly. First of all, I have to say that the very idea of this thread is a sad reflection of our times--it assumes inherent value in XP and inherent lack of value in Linux. Only for Linux do the proponents of the forum's OS have to defend themselves constantly. We can't even have people assume our OS has any worth. We have to constantly prove ourselves.

There's no way if I posted in a Windows forum "If you have Linux, why do you use Windows XP" I'd actually get any sort of intelligent responses back; first of all, because, as I said before, we live in sad times... "If you have Windows XP" has meaning because a lot of people don't choose to have XP; it just came with their computer. "If you have Linux" has no meaning because everyone who has Linux had to go out of her way to obtain it and install it. This is sad.

I know the OP probably didn't intend for this thread to be flamebait (and, apart from Kerberos, I think most people have been pretty rational and calm), but can you imagine posting a thread in a vegetarians forum saying, "If you have meat, why are you vegetarian?"

Okay. Rant over.

What do I like about XP? Well, first of all, I have to say there are some things I like about Windows XP. For whatever reason, it boots faster and loads applications faster than any KDE or Gnome installation of Linux I've ever used (and I've used many). XFCE you can't really beat for speed, but that's not a fair comparison, I guess. Google Desktop Search has been far better at functioning than either Beagle or Kat. I know AmaroK is feature-rich, as many people have said, but it's just too unstable for me. I'm currently on JuK because it's stable and immediately responsive, but iTunes still works best for me. I think that's it.

Why do I use Linux?
The ease of customization.
Synaptic/apt-get.
Global shortcuts for my music (volume, forward, back, play/pause) with on-screen display of what's currently playing
Superkaramba/Gdesklets
Having multiple desktop environments to play around with
Knowing that I can take a piece of sh-- computer, load Linux on it and get it running super-quick with the latest software. It hurts to use the Windows 98 computers we have at work (my computer is XP, but some of our older workstations still run 98--I wish I could put Ubuntu or Damn Small Linux or something on those).
Keyboard shortcuts that work for launching programs (I know you can do this theoretically in XP, but I've never gotten this to actually work)
Easy transparent terminals (maybe there's some weird third-party app that lets you do this with DOS, but the solution isn't readily available, and DOS, for the most part is useless)
Easy transparent taskbar
Loads of software that's malware-free at my fingertips
Great community (for Ubuntu, anyway)
More frequent updates (almost too frequent)... new features seem to appear all the time. I can't remember the last time a new feature appeared in XP, except maybe the firewall in SP2.

That's all I can think of for right now. Ultimately, though, you use what works for you. No one's twisting anyone's arm to use Linux. If you're happy with XP, use XP.

blueturtl
October 3rd, 2005, 09:59 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?


No need to reboot unless you happen to update your kernel
Beautiful minimalistic GUI that gets out of your way and let's you do your things
The user is in control of the PC, not the OS
Commandline functionality - saves me tons of time compared to how things have to be done in Windows
No BSODs (yes, I have had those in XP too)
Freedom of choice (aka, no "integrated" applications)
A file system that is not in a constant need of defragmentation
It's faster - after booting things are and *stay* fast
Better hardware support (crappy Win-only-halfhardware not included)
Secure by design - if you set the user with limited rights he cannot mess things up for anybody but him-/herself

GJD
October 5th, 2005, 02:14 AM
Education.

valczir
October 6th, 2005, 11:09 AM
A) Windows crashes. Monthly. Just today, my network card started randomly getting invalid IP addresses from the DHCP that I'm verifying with (or whatever technical terminology is supposed to go with that). Oh, and whenever I try to repair my network connection, I get a BSOD. Ubuntu's running fine.

B) Customization. Seriously. You have to download programs to be able to customize windows. And then, if you're an average computer user, use OTHER PEOPLE'S themes. With gnome, you can have your panel(s) wherever the heck you want, buttons and such wherever on those panels, etc. With Enlightenment, you can move and resize the clock, CPU temp, CPU freq., VWM, etc. to whatever size and place you want. Oh, another thing: I hate clutter, and having a VWM is a must, for me.

C) Speed. Ever try to install Windows on an older computer? One with 128-256 megs of ram? If you're installing XP, that computer's going to take about an hour to start up and ten minutes every time you click on something to come up with a menu. And forget about running programs. Windows is already taking up the system's capabilities - it won't let go, either. Now try to install any version of linux on that same computer. Any difference?

D) Flashiness. Enlightenment (DR17) runs infinitely faster than windows explorer, but looks an astonishing amount better. And guess what. It's not even half finished yet.

E) Absence of stupid things in the EULA. Did you know that in Windows XP's EULA (it may just be SP2), you're agreeing to allow Microshaft to view all software and documents on your computer without your permission, and, if it sees fit, install new software or uninstall something you've been using? Joy. I just gave a company that charges $500 for a $1 product and wants the Chinese to pirate their software so that they become "addicted" to it permission to look at files on my computer and delete them or add more as they deem necessary.

F) Security. A month or so ago, a security flaw was found in KDE's Konqueror and M$'s Internet Explorer web browsers. It was an issue with SSL(what's used for credit cards and social security numbers, etc) that would check to see if a site had an SSL certificate, but not if it was for that site. So a site could just copy some other site's SSL certificate and use it to make it look like it was secure, when it really wasn't. Needless to say, within a few hours after the announcement, a fix had been found for Konqueror and a patch released. Not long after that, Microshaft released an announcement, saying that the security flaw was a non-issue and would be fixed in the next patch. They have yet to release the promised patch, and refuse to comment on the issue.

There are other reasons, dealing with the morality of giving money to microshaft. And others, dealing with the usefulness of updates (oooh - SP2 - a 70 meg file. Must be a lot of fixes. Oh, I was wrong. It didn't fix any of the old problems, it just added new programs, which each have problems of their own.), quickness of use (it takes me about 10% longer, at least, to do things in windows because there are so few keyboard shortcuts. Also, my internet connection speed, assuming that I can connect in windows, is usually at least double in linux.), and helpfulness of the community (is there a windows community? If so, how many of them know how to print "Hello, World." in any computer language?) or creators (seriously, i read an article comparing M$ support of their own products to "Psychic Friends" support of M$ products. Apparently, Psychic Friends were more friendly and cost less, but with M$ support, you get your money back if they don't help you. However, they had to spend quite a bit of time trying to get their money back, because M$ argued that they had done their best, and there obviously wasn't a solution, since they couldn't find one.).

Sorry for writing so much. Anyway, those are the base reasons for my choice to use linux. I should get going on my oral project for Swedish, today. I'm making an Impress presentation. I'm thinking about downloading Elive and using that to do my presentation, so that I can actually use all the features of Impress. Otherwise, I'll have to save as a ppt file and use that on windows xp (on a computer too slow for it). Icky.

-Valc

A-star
October 6th, 2005, 11:49 AM
I changed over to Ubuntu since the beginning of the year, but I still run Windows in VMWare.

Why? The wife. She just refuses to use anything else but windows. but if her windows dies on her (because of the spyware and other things) I can just taunt her saying that my OS doesn't have that problem.

:)

ticklu2deth
October 6th, 2005, 12:29 PM
Everyone has pretty much covered my reasons so I won't duplicate them, but for me THE biggest reason is security. While I know nothing is perfect where a determined hacker is concerned, it's a proven fact that linux is more secure than Windows One example: http://www.theregister.co.uk/security/security_report_windows_vs_linux/

I dual boot with Windows (on a separate disk), but basically just for gaming and a few multimedia apps that I am just more familiar with in Windows, though I'm sure there are good equivalents in Linux (just haven't taken the time to find and/or learn). Mostly for gaming; I just don't care much for the consoles (died in the wool PC gamer I guess). As for the important things such as finances and other personal or business related activities, I just feel safer with Linux. Though thankfully it hasn't happened to me, identity theft and it's increasing prevalence just makes me paranoid.

Cirkus
October 6th, 2005, 05:02 PM
Everyone has pretty much covered my reasons so I won't duplicate them, but for me THE biggest reason is security. While I know nothing is perfect where a determined hacker is concerned, it's a proven fact that linux is more secure than Windows One example: http://www.theregister.co.uk/security/security_report_windows_vs_linux/

BSD is more secure than Linux; if it's a consideration why don't you give it a try? BSD has a reputation for being hard to learn but if you're decently familiar with a CLI interface it's not that bad (and in many ways easier -on a cli level- than Linux once you get used to it). It also has gnome and kde so on a GUI level it's pretty much the same as Linux.

landotter
October 6th, 2005, 05:20 PM
Because it attacts long legged sexy women!!

w00t!

:P

Basically all the software I like runs faster under Linux and is more stable.

I like the Freedom as well.

It's better looking and more configurable.

The community aspect.

thespinesplitter
October 6th, 2005, 07:02 PM
the problem is that hes a n00b, if u dont see why would you use it then u dont need-it, your just making your life extremly complicated for no good reason

blastus
October 7th, 2005, 01:29 AM
First of all, I have to say that the very idea of this thread is a sad reflection of our times--it assumes inherent value in XP and inherent lack of value in Linux. Only for Linux do the proponents of the forum's OS have to defend themselves constantly. We can't even have people assume our OS has any worth. We have to constantly prove ourselves.

Not true. I have found this thread very informative. Of course, everyone has different reasons and some may consider some reasons valid and others not. Some people just have different personal preferences as well so there's going to be some amount of subjectiveness here.

For example, in another thread that was kind of similar to this one (what is preventing you from completely removing Windows), someone posted that the font rendering in Windows makes the fonts crystal clear. I too had the same issue or grip about Linux and posted my response/solution and the guy was very grateful. I have found these kinds of threads informative and helpful and I know others have too.

waynejkruse10
October 7th, 2005, 08:08 AM
i only use Linux for server stuff. I find Linux (Ubutnu) is the easiest operating system to do server stuff with. I once tried to do the same thing with Windows, but it was far too hard.

PhoenixByrd
October 7th, 2005, 01:51 PM
I used to have XP and linux dual boot... till XP KILLED my hard drive, got another one, and installed xp on that. Coudn't reactivate windows, so every 30 days I just kept reinstalling. Finally found out how the reactivation over the phone process works. That's what made me ditch windows for good. There's no way I'm going through what sounds like well over and hour of harrassment just to reactivate a buggy and insecure OS. I can do everything in linux I could do in windows, INCLUDING playing windows games and running windows apps with wine and winex3. Linux is alot more secure. I haven't crashed ONCE with kabuntu. Doubt I'll be getting any virus's or adware/spyware like I did in XP DAILY. I love how kubuntu is alot more customizable then XP too. You won't get used to linux if u don't just give up windows and be a dumb click here user. Honestly, I think everyone who's still dual booting just like's having they're hand's held by microsoft.

megamania
October 7th, 2005, 02:28 PM
I find this thread very interesting, and I thought I'd add my opinion.

Before switching (almost completely) to Linux/Ubuntu, I used to be a Win-only user. My long-time interest in the Linux world had never pushed me to take the time to install a distro.

But one day something happened: I read that Microsoft decided to sell a "reduced edition" to the developing countries. That was enough for me, even though I live in the so-called "developed world". They just spent money to create a cheaper edition to give to the poor. The poor won't be able to run more than 3 applications at a time...

I'm happy when I think I'm not supporting their sad monopoly anymore, and that's the best part for me. Besides, I like Linux and love Ubuntu.

aysiu
October 7th, 2005, 03:06 PM
Not true. I have found this thread very informative. Of course, everyone has different reasons and some may consider some reasons valid and others not. Some people just have different personal preferences as well so there's going to be some amount of subjectiveness here.

For example, in another thread that was kind of similar to this one (what is preventing you from completely removing Windows), someone posted that the font rendering in Windows makes the fonts crystal clear. I too had the same issue or grip about Linux and posted my response/solution and the guy was very grateful. I have found these kinds of threads informative and helpful and I know others have too. My opposition was more to the way the question was phrased and the assumptions it made rather than the results that occurred. I'm proud of this community--that no matter what kind of troll (or accidental troll or well-intentioned troll) happens upon here, we usually end up making it some kind of positive, informative experience.

macewan
October 7th, 2005, 03:20 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?

As someone that only uses Linux this is an interesting question/answer session to watch.

I've used OSX & Win XP from time to time on someone elses computer - would probably go with OSX if made to choose but they both seem rather empty compared to Linux.

Both seem to require you purchase software to make business use of their operating system. Granted Windows is probably easier to use for some people that have used it for years but the same can be said about OSX +/-.

Personally I always felt rather crimpled or held back by a default install of Windows. Seriously, it doesn't really seem to come with functioning software - ftp, image editing, safe browser/email, office software. This is just the tip of the iceB - then you have virus, spyware, worm concerns. Just doesn't strike me as being worth it really.

Looks more like punishment than pleasure.

This is the view of someone that is a Linux user, since 98 so I really am unaware of the joys of Windows since I don't come in contact with it.

william_nbg
October 7th, 2005, 03:30 PM
I think I just started getting bored with XP, Come on, its over 5 years old, that's archaic for an OS. About 2 years ago I started dual booting with various flavors of Linux, Fedora, Debian, Red Hat, Mandrake, Suse, etc ... , it was fun checking them out, but the search wasn't over - then one day found Ubuntu - it just felt right. I'm a web designer by trade and needed a few windows apps for work. It's hard learning a new OS and new apps at the same time. Within 3 months I wasn't using XP at all, within 6 months I took it off my box for good. Quanta and Bluefish replaced Homesite, Gimp replaced Photoshop and so on. The only win app I'm using at the moment is IE browser which I need for testing sites (installed via crossover).

But the big question is: how long can windows users use XP - it's already old. And who in their right-mind would use Vista - Vista's an embarrassment to the OS world. Don't believe me, go read up on it.

Master Shake
October 7th, 2005, 03:39 PM
I want to get away from the Windows monopoly.


I've wanted to do this for some time, but when I first tried Linux about 4-5 years ago, iit wasn't the time. I was testing Mandrake, and while I likedwhat I saw, the hardware support just wasn't there. Fast forward to 2005 and ubuntu. All my hardware was detected upon install, and with the exception of some sound card problems, everything was smooth.

The only reason I'm keeping XP on my box is because of the gaming aspect. While linux does have some great gmaes (Trackballs comes to mind), it doesn't have a native version of most commercial titles. Plus, my most used apps in Windows -- Knarly Mazes, Frugal Video Poker, and TheBike.com Online Poker I've tried installing via wine, but can't figure it out (and I have qualms about trying them through cedega)

Those three porgrams ar the only reason I keep XP. Well... That and the wife. :)

EDIT: May I add that I refuse to give M$ any of my money unless I absolutely have to. That's why I refuse to buy an X-Box.

nsa_767
October 7th, 2005, 05:15 PM
Hi,

I have found that there are many specialist (mostly scientific) application that, even though they may have been ported to Windows, just run better in Linux.

Also, such applications tend to be more tightly integrated with one another under Linux than in Windows (consider that you can use maxima, gnuplot, octave and gfig all within the texmacs editor!).

OK, I know three-quarters of the people out there don't have a clue what I'm talking about, but that is the reason why I'm spending more time in Linux than in Windows.

Oh yeah, before I forget... I just don't like the fact that MS is bogging my PC down with more and more (unneeded) eye-candy in each of its new operating-systems. Do I really need VISTA/Longhorn's new transparency effects?

eneanito
October 7th, 2005, 07:33 PM
If I had linux Why use windows any flavor?


I had never could use linux.

I had destroy 3 Hard disks respartitioning, formating, reformalting, whit Dos, Whith disk manager, w/ those pazrtitioners coming into linux distros.

I want to install linux six o seven years ago. Only a Red Hat 5.0 so like 6 years ago, can instal, but cant recog. any of my devices. I had no Internet in that time.

I feel too much frustrated by so many people using linux. I can't I am Microsoft Jailed.!!!!


HELP ME PLEASE

Puppy live cd Works fine, but i want a 64Bit Sys.


I have an

Athlon64 3.0 GB
512 DDR 400 RAM -2X256 MAXTOR-
MSI R480 939 Mother Board
80 GB HD IBM Hitachi 8060

Thatīs unable. Ubuntu 5.04 Live CD dont runs there
nor 32 bit nor 64 bit

About 64, it puts all text displays an a graph red display with a central rectangle whit logo and word "UBUNTU" ...soft for human beings. When that rectangle just finish to be drew, all life signal is lost. The image remains stupidly unmobil and cursor too.

About 32, it puts very much text displays but stops
after it says:

"ohci _hcd 0000:00:13.1: unlink after no - IRQ? Different ACPI or APIC settings may help "

I donīt know what ACPI , APIC mean.


Thank you in advance

aysiu
October 7th, 2005, 07:47 PM
I want to install linux six o seven years ago. Only a Red Hat 5.0 so like 6 years ago, can instal, but cant recog. any of my devices. I had no Internet in that time. I think you'll find Linux installers have improved a lot over the past six years (or even just the past one year). You'll also find Ubuntu's forums very helpful if you're specific about what you've tried, what error messages you get, and what hardware you have. Start a separate thread to address any specific issues you have.

bluemuffin
October 11th, 2005, 09:49 AM
My government's going Linux, even have a government-sponsored Linux on the works, BAYANIHAN-LINUX. We are gradually shifting our machines to Linux, but BAYANIHAN-LINUX does not have a large community whom I can turn to for support and I experienced problems in installing it on 2 machines, lucky somebody from the academe gave me a copy of ubuntu.

Personally, after two weeks of trying to configure it to run the way we want, I believe ubuntu is heaven sent. Blender opens in it in a split second while it took approx 5 seconds in ms-xp (i'm using a P4 machine). Firefox also seemed faster. If only it is supported by major hardware manufacturers (like canon), I could totally forget XP. Anyways, that's life. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

:razz:

tigerstripedcat
October 13th, 2005, 08:54 PM
Linux benifits that will NEVER change:

1)Repositories. something that windows will NEVER have (yes I said NEVER): online install of software. No need to go to the store, to steal, or to even go to a website just type four words

apt-get install <package name>

2) For science. Almost no one does science (by this I mean physics, I don't know about the others) on windows. At SLAC the entire infrastructure uses *nix. Concequently, most desktops that run linux will work nicer (native X11 support).

3) Control. Out of the box I can have a five terminals sshed into various resources. I compile, run jobs, konsole notifies me when the compiles are complete. Popups notify me of chats, scheduling appointments, or mail. Spam is filtered for free with some of the best server-side spam filtering software out there, and I have complete control over it. I can shade windows, have them always on top, and I have complete control of all information at a glance. Granted, much of this can be done in windows with adding software, but everything is controled by text files that can be edited. Windows will never allow something like that. Mplayer/Xine plays ANYTHING (or at least much more than anything for windows even VLC) it plays iso files for god sake. I can convert any file to any other file (within reason). And all of this is "out of the box" because "the box" is every piece of code ever writen for linux via apt-get. Complete control.

4) Constant improvement. Mac users are constantly floored by the linux inovation. Change occurs everyday, a new feature here, a bug fix there. Do you think you'll ever really need another version of Office? Probably not, it basically does everything you want it to. Now the same thing will happen with Linux--I mean it's already happend with Firefox. IE will never be able to catch up with Firefox. And Firefox is just 9 people from the Mozilla foundation coding. With Linux people were able to acomplish in 4 years,what it took Microsoft 8+.

The windows advantages: more software, the first source for software, games (look at google earth). But that's about it. Which is why I use x2vnc.

That's all, that's all I got.

Rounin
October 13th, 2005, 10:10 PM
I like being able to make obscure changes to text data automatically, which is one of the things Linux is best at. It's also easier to develop programs on Linux, which, with a bit of luck, can later be run on Windows, too. If one uses exactly the right tools, that is.

luckyaba
October 13th, 2005, 10:25 PM
besides the obvious spyware, adware, etc. I think linux is utilizing my system resources much more efficiently. The SMP kernel works great for my dual core and the 64bit breezy release.

I like penguins............

Angry penguin
October 17th, 2005, 12:58 AM
I have used windows since i started college and got my first computer. After that I graduated to building my own computer and even troubleshooting windows. During this learning phase I always felt that there was something wrong, there had to be something out there that was better.

Then one day I found it, as I was walking through a bookstore, I found myself in the computer section and stumbled upon a book claiming that I could "say goodbye to BSOD and illegal operations forever". After being thoroughly intrigued by the title, I picked it up and my eyes were opened to the world of linux.

I am now proud to say that I am windows free and am loving every bit of the freedom and control of linux.

So I guess you could say that I got tired of the error filled box of a computer that macrosoft trapped me in and that is why I switched to linux.:D

newbie2
October 17th, 2005, 08:17 PM
Microsoft: Africa doesn't need free software
"In response to a question on the role of open source software in Africa, Gerald Ilukwe, the general manager of Microsoft Nigeria, said that cost is not important, even though he admitted that the average annual salary in the West African country is only $160 (&#163;91)."
http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/45460/index.html
:rolleyes:

Lovechild
October 17th, 2005, 09:05 PM
I own a copy of Windows XP, but I never bothered to install it because Linux is superior in every way for me.

Shiner
October 17th, 2005, 09:56 PM
Linux newbie here! Installed Breezy yesterday. Had a problem, still working to fix it, (dang blasted Dell diag partitions on dynamic disks!) Anyhoo....

Why use Linux? It's FREE.

I'm looking at Ubuntu to possibly run as an email server at the company I work for. FREE. How much would MS Exchange cost? Not to mention liscensing another copy of Windows server for the server it will run on.

For personal use, yeah, there's not a lot I'll use it for yet. But I'm sure that will change with time.

kellemes
October 18th, 2005, 03:15 PM
Windows has been winning the race for desktop-users without real competition.
If fighting viruses and running after error-boxes was the reality of using Windows, people would have punished it long time ago. By the way, most (if not all) trouble people have with Windows is selfinflicted.
Windows is the better OS for the desktop-user simply because those users say so for many years.
The most important thing is that application-developers are still massively chosing Windows to develop software with/for, including me. As long as that remains, Linux will never be a serious option for mainstream desktop-users.

Also I think there is nothing wrong with commercial software, I would not be able to develop as much if I couldn't sell it. I've been working on some projects for years, giving it away for free is easy to wish for users but for me it's not an option.
If you want something you should be willing to pay for it.

Master Shake
October 18th, 2005, 04:48 PM
Microsoft: Africa doesn't need free software
"In response to a question on the role of open source software in Africa, Gerald Ilukwe, the general manager of Microsoft Nigeria, said that cost is not important, even though he admitted that the average annual salary in the West African country is only $160 (£91)."
http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/45460/index.html
:rolleyes:

That can't be true. Why, just yesterday I got emails from Gen. Sanni Abacha, his wife Mariam, and someone starting a religious mission in Lagos, willing to give me a share of their millions.

santorini
October 18th, 2005, 04:59 PM
I've just installed 5.10.

The reason I use linux:
i) I really cannot afford commercial softwares
ii) I really need softwares
iii) I do not want to support pirated software in any way
iv) I support ethical and altruistic movements.

The reason I downloaded and installed ubuntu:
i) I appreciate and was attraceted by the commitment statements the ubuntu distro. founders made.
ii) I'd like to test it out how well it lives up to its words.
iii) I'd like to have a very user-friendly linux desktop for application purpose so as to recommend to whom I know. For this, I'm actually using Suse Linux for my mom's internet-browsing and TV recording purposes.

mokeyjoe
October 18th, 2005, 06:38 PM
I've only been using Ubuntu (Hoary) for a couple of weeks now, and ran into problems straight away...

First of all the bongo sound played continuously - but I managed to figure this out myself by turning off the integrated sound in the BIOS and plugging the speakers into the soundblaster card.

Second, DVD playback was jumpy and web video wouldn't work. The ubuntu guide fixed these.

Thirdly autodetection stopped working. It turned out to be my own fault as I'd turned of all privilages for Hal. I found this out in a couple of minutes from searching this forum.

The thing that's impressed me, as a total noob to Linux, is that although I've had a few problems there has always seemed to be an easy fix. Its all just a matter of searching on the net and then following someone's instructions. In Windows the problems I have seem to be unique to me. I mean can anyone explain why animated gifs refuse to work in Firefox, even after several upgrades? Bizarre. Also keeping antivirus software updated is irritating. I've been using windows since 3.1 and years ago this wasn't as much of an issue, obviously. Personally the worry about viruses and spyware and the intrusive software designed to keep them at bay has detracted from my computing experience. Its nice to say goodbye to this again.

The other thing is, Windows is so slow. My father uses XP on a fairly new Athlon64 with 256mb RAM and its always stopping and accessing the hard drive causing things to freeze. It drones on for several minutes after boot. Obviously the RAM is the issue. My computer (actually my flatmate's, but he gave it to me to sort out when Windows ME finally died from him surfing with no AV or firewall!)) on Ubuntu is 3 years old, has a slower processor and the same RAM but feels by far the faster system. Now the XP machines at work run great - but they are on 2gig of RAM!

The main point of frustration is that when I need to do something I don't know where to begin. But the more I learn the less this will be an issue, I am aware its due to my lack of knowledge with the OS. And these forums are always here to point me in the right direction.

The main advantage Windows has is support. Support from ISPs, driver disks that come with mobile phones, MP3 players and other hardware etc. I can't afford a gaming PC, so games are irrelevant to me. Besides I'm a die-hard console gamer anyway! But its nice to be able to use virtually anything on your computer.

Oh that and CD ripping is painfully slow in Linux.



So there you go, I'm sticking with Linux and Ubuntu, not just for what it can do for me now, but for what the future of the OS holds as well. Looking at what this free, give away OS can do after 1 year of development (stable Hoary), the mind boggles at what we''ll se 2 or 3 years dopwn the line!

Cyfr
October 18th, 2005, 06:59 PM
Gah. Linux rocks, ubuntu rocks..

But I need webcam for msn damnit :( and amsn/mercury just don't cut it cause they're awful apps apart from the fact that they run on linux and support msn video :(

I want gaim to introduce webcam so I can finaly get rid of windows xp!

anonOmus
October 19th, 2005, 07:31 PM
Beacuse im a dork!


i know im gonna get flamed for this. but here it goes.


My backgound, Istarted using linux in '96, from there I started adminig unix boxes, NeXTStep, Solaris, IRIX the works I did that throught college and a little bit after (6 years or so in total as an admin). I stopped doing it because it was stressful and all the Computer Science students were a hell of alot better at admining than I was. (I majored in Photography)

To be honest unless you ar a high level user linux is more than a pain in the **** to use. it has gotten better (been using linux since 96) over the years. Alot better! If you really want to learn how to use a computer and how they function go with linux. When you get into the higher levels of usership there really is no comparison between windows and linux. Linux is much more configurable, and had a host of features that will NEVER be found in windows. if you want ease of use and many games to play go with windows. I really like the comment earlier that was about running a dual boot system and only playing games on windows, I like it! good idea.

Linux at it's current level is not for the masses. unforutnatley linux is not all that usable for the average joe, Could my mom install windows and get everything working on her computer 80% probability, Ubuntu about 10%. I do think linux is gradually becoming more and more open to the average user.

just my 2 cents

Captn
October 20th, 2005, 01:35 PM
talking about games... I currently play ut, ut2004, q2, q3, civ3, Sid meiers alpha centauri (and expansion pack), sim city 3000 unlimited, neverwinter nights. every game runs natively, except for civ3 which runs fine in wine.

more info of games in linux available at:
http://liflg.org/ (Installers for native and wine versions of the games. If the game runs natively, you can use the windows cds)
http://www.linux-gamers.net/ (Lots of info and howtos, besides great linux gaming news)
http://www.happypenguin.org/ (A great guide to feeware and open source games that run in linux)
http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=53 (The forum of gaming in ubuntu, hoary version)

Americas Army :smile: http://www.americasarmy.com/

Wes24
October 20th, 2005, 02:15 PM
I use Ubuntu mainly at home, originally just to expand my horizon. Also because I kind of messed up my Windows installation due to excessive use of registry cleaners, anti-spyware programs and virusscanners. Slowly programs didn't function properly anymore (which was my fault of course;)). Now I use Ubuntu because it functions fine and I like to play around with new things:).

I only use Windows at the university since I cannot access the wireless network on campus with Ubuntu. Besides, I'm hooked to a specific racing game (GPL) for which there are no Linux clients to race online.

Ahriman
October 21st, 2005, 04:55 AM
I use Windows at work, but am slowly bringing the bosses around to the point where I can "just try" a machine on Linux, to see how they like it.

but at home, I am hooked. I used to try other distros (Mandrake, Suse), but whenever something went wrong, I would wipe the partition and go back to windows.
Now, with ubuntu, I haven't booted into Windows for 2 weeks. The only reason i am keeping it around is for Battlefield 2, and even then, when I can get it working via cedega, windows is out the door.

I like linux more because I have control over how it looks and runs. In windows, if you "patch" your uxtheme.dll file, you're breaking the EULA. If you "edit" your explorer.exe file to change the Start text to something else, you're breaking the EULA.
in Linux, we are not only allowed to change things, we are encouraged!

lost.sync
October 26th, 2005, 11:38 AM
in short:

01) it's far more slick. i don't have to do anything that the OS doesn't natively support to have my desktop look and feel exactly as i want it to. it's the little things, like GNOME's thumbnails of any image or video file replacing generic icons, SVG support, and intuitive setup.

02) it's free. paying extra money for software enabling you turn on and then use your $1,000+ machine seems ridiculous to me.

03) while shareware does a lot for windows, it's bloody irritating and if i have to click "Try Now" in WinZip one more time, i just might die.

04) i can't afford office, photoshop, or dreamweaver. but i need them. or equivalent software. enter OOo, the GIMP, and Nvu

05) being a seasoned computer user who understands what things are risky, i haven't had a lot of trouble with spyware and the like but i tire of being so cautious

06) i lost my xp product key and don't really enjoy hacking around protection to do simple things like get my software updates because i use a generated key

07) it's way more fun

08) my computer is at least twice as responsive under linux than xp. i have an athlon 2400+ with 512 ram and if apps run this well in linux, they should run at least as well if not better on an OS built by a giant corporation with near limitless resources at their disposal. but they don't.

09) # apt-get install <software>.

10) support for a good cause. linux is by far the superior system and it should be spread to as many computers as it can be. by using it and learning it, i can help spread it.

11) DRM sucks

12) amazing community support. with places like this forum around, i will never have to call anyone for help with my machine. and if it's just too much for a chat or a message board, my local LUG is happy to help.

13) the feeling of pride and ownership i have every time i sit down.

14) never looking for a keygen.

15) knowing that if i have a problem with the way something works, i can voice my opinion directly to the authors of the program and perhaps get it changed. and if they won't change it, i have the power to do it myself.

i mean, i could keep going but...why?

BungaMan
October 26th, 2005, 12:47 PM
why not turn the question around and ask "Now that you can install Ubuntu (linux), why do you keep windows?"

Because:
- I think the price for the OS is cheap
- because XP only takes 1GB after a clean install without additional programs
- there is so much choice in freeware that comes along with the install cd
- because MS Office is a real bargain
- I like not being able to tweak the kernel
- I am very found of the DRM implementation
- I can install virusses myself that will bring the system to its knees
- when a driver doesn't work, as a last resort I can get the source from the net and compile myself
- it's so easy to integrate with non-windows systems because they use open standards
- they are frontman for the OpenDocument format
- it takes much more than just a corrupt registry file to being forced a reinstall
- they have a worldwide community behind them that is smart, helpful, knowledgable and not so much works with a $ mindset
- if something isn't supported you are still able to find loads of information on it
- etc... (that's when you can't think of anything anymore at the moment)

But of course that is just my opinion ;)

odin
October 26th, 2005, 12:56 PM
I'm at work and I just found the main reason why i wouldnt use any windows system If i'm not forced to.

The rebooting thing after installing every single application.I'm installing a server and you cant imagin how annoying is to spend more time rebooting than installing it's incredible!!!

Malphas
October 26th, 2005, 12:56 PM
I use XP as my primary OS. I've been dabbling with various Linux distributions for years though, but only really out of interest, it has not yet evolved to the point where I can use it for actually doing anything productive. I keep monitoring what's going on and hoping for the best though, I would really like to get rid of Windows altogether eventually but the main thing holding me back is the lack of third party applications.

For me, the main advantages Ubuntu has over XP is that it's open source, free, robust, more secure and efficient. I don't really buy into the whole "with Ubuntu I don't have to experience malware/viruses/crashes" argument, as a properly locked down and well maintained XP install doesn't have those problems either, but then Ubuntu doesn't really require you to do anything to achieve the same result, which is a good thing obviously.

Pete051
October 26th, 2005, 11:11 PM
I've used Linux on my machine exclusively for the last two years and now if I have to use a windows box it feels too sluggish and clunky and way too fragile

carlosqueso
October 27th, 2005, 05:28 AM
Why to use Ubuntu over XP
*'tis free
*apt-get and synaptic method of installing software
*GNOME just looks nicer
*runs faster than my completely screwed windows installation
*Not using microsoft's crappy software.

Why use winXP:
*Visual Basic (the only good m$ product)
*works with my crappy wireless card
*my computer-illiterate parents understand it.
*I'm used to using it, so can get things done on it easily (when it boots in less than an hour :-/)

chimera
October 27th, 2005, 05:43 AM
Because I'm not supporting capitalists by using it
And everything else listed in this topic so far

AlexanRO
October 27th, 2005, 01:40 PM
At home I use Hoary, and Debian Sarge. I only use it for work and even that is rare I have a Mepis workstation at work. On second thought I don't use windows nevermind.

AlexanRO

Pablo_Escobar
October 27th, 2005, 01:44 PM
Heh, I don't know it happened. I dowloaded some iso, I thought it'd be a Warcraft X game, popped it into the drive, rebooted (normal Windows feature :) ). Then there was a lot of Dos-like questions and instead of the cool game something called Ubuntu showed up. I've been using it for a couple of months now, and I haven't figured out yet how to get back to XP. I'm desperate !! I've tried everything. Someone help me :D :D :D

JOKe
October 27th, 2005, 01:47 PM
hello i have Ubuntu and Windows i will tell you why i have windows

first reason : i use the standalone version of windows becouse "I PLAY WOW" :) i cant STOP :) WOW ROX :+))


other reason : if i was not play WOW and if i install windows with QEMU or somethink other the reason "why i need this windows will be : "
becouse i use Adobe Photoshop , Macromedia Flash and XMLSpy

JOKe
October 27th, 2005, 01:54 PM
Why to use Ubuntu over XP
*'tis free
*apt-get and synaptic method of installing software
*GNOME just looks nicer
*runs faster than my completely screwed windows installation
*Not using microsoft's crappy software.

Why use winXP:
*Visual Basic (the only good m$ product)
*works with my crappy wireless card
*my computer-illiterate parents understand it.
*I'm used to using it, so can get things done on it easily (when it boots in less than an hour :-/)


"Visual Basic (the only good m$ product)"

there is a opinion that says : The basic programmers are injured so they cannot program anymore in any other language so DONT get them to WORK :).
or
"the basic's programmist is injured for all life because he is brain stunt and he cant be a programmers anymore"

so Visual basic is not good becouse its on base of basic wich sux :)

GeneralZod
October 27th, 2005, 02:13 PM
"Visual Basic (the only good m$ product)"

there is a opinion that says : The basic programmers are injured so they cannot program anymore in any other language so DONT get them to WORK :).
or
"the basic's programmist is injured for all life because he is brain stunt and he cant be a programmers anymore"

so Visual basic is not good becouse its on base of basic wich sux :)

This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dijkstra) man's opinion, in fact, so you should take it to heart ;)

The only thing I really like from MS that has no open-source counterpart is Edit and Continue with C++ in Visual Studio. I can live without it, though :)

carlosqueso
October 27th, 2005, 05:25 PM
Meh, I'll still use VB for my stuff. I'm NOT a programmer, but it allows me to make nice little aps to help my office run easier, and impresses everyone else here who doesn't even understand it. :cool: Besides, vb is about as much BASIC (which I learned as a kid) as a soapbox derby car is a genuine car.

On the other hand, is there a good (free 'cause I'm broke) IDE out there for me to begin learning/relearning C++? :smile:

BungaMan
October 28th, 2005, 08:03 AM
http://www.bloodshed.net/download.html

Dev-C++

It's free, looks a bit strange at first but you'll get used to it and it supports gcc so you can easily create apps that work on both windows and linux

fuscia
October 28th, 2005, 02:25 PM
i like to play with my computer. working on a computer that has linux on it is like rebuilding a '69 dodge charger. working on a windows computer is like doing an oil change on ford taurus.

ThirdWorld
October 28th, 2005, 03:23 PM
Then M$ came out with the thing that inspects your windoze installation to see if it's legal. It told me mine wasn't. I lost my mind. I've spent THOUSANDS on Windows licenses over the years, and I was just deeply insulted. I'll never buy another one. I always though Linux politics was "cute". I get it now....

Hey fatherdale, that problem is actually very easy to fix. The only thing you have to do is disable the validation cookie in internet explorer. very simple. I think is under manage extensions in IE.

carlosqueso
October 28th, 2005, 06:09 PM
Thanks BungaMan...I'll give it a try. :smile:

Master Magnus
November 3rd, 2005, 03:19 PM
plus you don't support an unethical monopolistic company.
Enough for using it :)

gabhla
November 3rd, 2005, 03:51 PM
I wonder why I keep Windows, because I seldom use it anymore. I use linux because, for me, it's a brand new world. Converting into linux has been great, I've learned so much about my own computer, linux and software. I'm an older user and have been around Windows since the 80's and one would think a person of my age would be content to simply maintain the status quo, but I've actually enjoyed linux, while the learning curve (for me) has been steep, I've really enjoyed the hunt. It warms this old Irish heart.

Brunellus
November 3rd, 2005, 03:57 PM
I wonder why I keep Windows, because I seldom use it anymore. I use linux because, for me, it's a brand new world. Converting into linux has been great, I've learned so much about my own computer, linux and software. I'm an older user and have been around Windows since the 80's and one would think a person of my age would be content to simply maintain the status quo, but I've actually enjoyed linux, while the learning curve (for me) has been steep, I've really enjoyed the hunt. It warms this old Irish heart.
In my "what was your first OS" poll, I found that most forum users actually began computing around the mid to late '80s (MS-DOS). A significant number began even before then, using CP/M and even older BASIC interpreters on various microcomputers.

The DOS generation is less scared of the present state of GNU/Linux in general, because it more or less mirrors the state of computing as they first came to it.

BungaMan
November 4th, 2005, 02:22 PM
...
The DOS generation is less scared of the present state of GNU/Linux in general, because it more or less mirrors the state of computing as they first came to it.
I don't think you can say that present day linux is the same as computing 15-25 years ago. What you can conclude is that those people at least have a very good knowledge about IT and at the moment you still need to be a little bit of an IT freak to try out linux. Hence the kind of people you have on this forum :)

BoyOfDestiny
November 4th, 2005, 02:30 PM
In my "what was your first OS" poll, I found that most forum users actually began computing around the mid to late '80s (MS-DOS). A significant number began even before then, using CP/M and even older BASIC interpreters on various microcomputers.

The DOS generation is less scared of the present state of GNU/Linux in general, because it more or less mirrors the state of computing as they first came to it.

Got to agree with you on that. Even though I was a little tyke, I'm actually glad to work with command line again. (Even if it's for mostly changing directories, compiling, messing with xorg).

Things used to be a little more "fun". Playing with dma, irqs, etc. Stuff not always working... Having to tinker a little. Linux puts the "fun" back in. Although Ubuntu makes things very friendly, a lot of users have to do a few extra steps to make it work as he/she would like. :KS

To end my rant, the other thing I look forward to in Linux is the software upgrades. New features and improvments, vs (ok I'm generalizing but it's true darn it) adding copyprotection schemes that are failures/annoying instead of improving the actual applications.

dueyfinster
November 6th, 2005, 01:35 AM
I have dual boot aswell, why? I do not know, nostalgia really! I have prop. games that I payed good money for, so I think windows will be a bug on my HDD until the games are broken, lost or are out of date.

Mizzou_Engineer
November 7th, 2005, 02:25 AM
My computer is getting up there in years and had a problem with drivers BSODing the system with each big round of XP updates. I knew a few people who ran Red Hat and chuckled at the Windows problems with BSODs and such. They pointed me to a few Linux live CDs, and being curious, I tried Knoppix. It was pretty neat and worked better than I thought, so I decided to install a few different distributions and try to get a feel for Linux. I have had a good learning experience and ended up with a new hobby :o and a stable, usable computer. I've been running Linux full-time for over a year and have only had a few minor hiccups.

Uncle Che
November 9th, 2005, 04:36 AM
Well, I am in the land of $3 software. I am in a for-profit school with about 40 computers, all running Windows XP Pro SP2, all installed from the same $3 cd, all running Office XP Pro, all installed from another $3 cd. Short of the BSA breaking down the doors, they will NEVER go to another option, never mind that they are told other options exist. It just doesn't fit with what they want.

Windows is so available and so "easy". Being the one in charge of administering the computers and fixing things, I disagree. Students put spyware and trojans on the computers all the time and make them unsafe for use, every week at least one computer needs to be reformatted and reinstalled. Windows breaks as easily as a baseball bat to a car window.

The developing world is where they should be embracing open source but they refuse to. I don't mind the heavy hands of the BSA. If someone makes a product and expects payment for it, then it is criminal to steal. (If someone records a song and puts it out on the radio, then it is fair game.) People try to justify things by the high costs of Windows and Office, great they are expensive. If you go to 7-11 and don't like the price of a bottle of pepsi, you don't steal it do you? If you go to 7-11 and you see a bottle of pepsi for $200 and a bottle of coke for $1, you would buy coke, right? A typical developing world computer user will go ahead and steal the pepsi instead of buying the coke.

The only thing that will force the hands of the monopoly will be a stronger show of force by the BSA in cracking down on piracy and then you would see a massive migration of Linux, but that hasn't happenned in the developing world yet.

etc
November 9th, 2005, 05:01 AM
= If you go to 7-11 and don't like the price of a bottle of pepsi, you don't steal it do you? If you go to 7-11 and you see a bottle of pepsi for $200 and a bottle of coke for $1, you would buy coke, right? A typical developing world computer user will go ahead and steal the pepsi instead of buying the coke.
Copyright infringement is not stealing.

Ocxic
November 16th, 2005, 02:29 AM
I can contribute to this discussion. I have a Linux HD and Windows HD. I use Windows for most stuff, Linux for experimenting because as you said, there aren't all that many advantages. However, I just got a nasty case of the Aurora spyware that I couldn't kill, so I went to reformat the HD after backing things up. Apparently my hard-drive is partially fried and neither windows nor Linux will install on it... So I'm using Linux now exclusively until I get a new HD to put Windows on.

I'd honestly dump Windows entirely if it weren't for lack of game support/lack of good ATI drivers on Linux.

try to find a " low level format " utility for your hard drive that will ussually fix most things not hardware related, I had to do it to mine just last night.

WARNING: LOW LEVEL FORMATTING YOUR DRIVE VOIDS ALL WARRENTIES

Clansman
November 16th, 2005, 12:34 PM
try to find a " low level format " utility for your hard drive that will ussually fix most things not hardware related, I had to do it to mine just last night.
that seems like a windows solution to me: if it's broken, just reinstall. if it throws errors, just format it... honestly, I don't see the point in doing this.


WARNING: LOW LEVEL FORMATTING YOUR DRIVE VOIDS ALL WARRENTIES

no it doesn't. sorry to dissapoint you, but low level format is no big deal and it can be very hard to determine if some hard drive has or has not passed through a low level format. so unless support people are braindead (which sometimes are) nobody will care what you've done to your computer at sofware level (inc low level formats which are essencially very simple).

best regards,

DimaIL
November 16th, 2005, 02:41 PM
Many people install Linux with Windows to test it and to decide if they want to stay with Linux or not(Then if they will want delete Windows).

Dima

slux
November 16th, 2005, 04:55 PM
Frankly, I don't give a damn who's fault it is that my games run poorly on Linux, but the fact of the matter is that if you have an ATI videocard you'll suffer from the limitations I've mentioned, and pointing out that it's ATI's fault won't fix anything.
.

Yeah, well just like if you had a video card that is not fast enough to run those games in Windows, the fact of the matter is that you'll suffer from it's limitations and pointing out that it's the video card's fault won't fix anything. (And this is a problem with Windows?)

You've purchased a video card that doesn't support GNU/Linux well enough. While pointing that out doesn't help with your current issues, you could've chosen otherwise and the fix is quite simple.

Chayak
November 16th, 2005, 05:33 PM
My reasons are pretty much common.
No spyware/adware/viruses (the few that have been created never went far)
I don't have to activate my copy of Ubuntu or call and justify why my system has has changed when I upgrade componets.
No DRM on Ubuntu (IE Sony rootkits don't install if I did care to play one... I don't)
It's free (and it's legal to be so)
It's stable
I can customize it to my liking.
I don't support M$
I will not be using the evil trusted computing DRM beast that will be Vista.
I don't have to reboot every time I update my system.
The community around Ubuntu.
apt-get... I don't have x number of apps calling home and telling me there's a new version availible that I should update to.

bored2k
November 16th, 2005, 05:48 PM
Although I agree with all of Chayak's reasons, the main ones for me are:

Highly reduced crapware (I say "highly" just to keep those who rant about the existance of Linux viruses happy).
Stable, freely customizable and free. Something my other OS lacks.
The learning experience. I like to feel like I'm bettering myself when I use a computer.
The community. I love you all.

squirrelyosis
November 16th, 2005, 09:51 PM
The learning experience. I like to feel like I'm bettering myself when I use a computer.
[/list]

That's a huge one. I've been diving back into Linux recently and I have learned so much in the past month it's amazing. After installing Breezy I haven't booted back to XP but twice in the last 3 months. I'm not a gamer, I did get Quake 4 for work in Breezy, except for the sound. I really have no need for XP any more. When my girlfriend comes over and surfs the web on my PC she was like "Why can't my computer look like that!" I'm just loving the Linux/Ubuntu experience right now, well except for some times;)

hizaguchi
November 16th, 2005, 10:41 PM
Public service announcement... StyleXP and Windowblinds are not the only ways to theme Windows XP. It actually was designed to be themeable, but MS restricted the themes that it would accept to make sure that Windows looks like Windows. You can edit windows\system32\uxtheme.dll (or download an edited version, or download the automatic pather from www.neowin.com) to allow 3rd party themes, which can then be placed in windows\resources\themes and accessed by right-clicking on the desktop and using the properties menu. There is a very nice Vista theme at www.studiotwentyeight.com.

Oh, why use Linux? The ideology mostly. I hate being told what I can and cannot do with my own property.

Rackerz
November 16th, 2005, 11:00 PM
* There's no crap on (K)Ubuntu (Linux)
* It's stable and cuztomizable!
* The great community! It's brilliant here.

The main reason is, i know i can play games on linux and use windows applications, most of the time! I also feel, as said before by bored2k, i feel when using Linux i am learning everytime im using the computer. I've been using Kubuntu for about a day and have learned quite abit already. Im hesitating on whether to boot Windows XP backup im loving linux so much at the moment!
Basically i use Linux because it's fairly easy and comes with all the greats above!

Rackerz

bored2k
November 16th, 2005, 11:53 PM
Public service announcement... StyleXP and Windowblinds are not the only ways to theme Windows XP. It actually was designed to be themeable, but MS restricted the themes that it would accept to make sure that Windows looks like Windows. You can edit windows\system32\uxtheme.dll (or download an edited version, or download the automatic pather from www.neowin.com) to allow 3rd party themes, which can then be placed in windows\resources\themes and accessed by right-clicking on the desktop and using the properties menu. There is a very nice Vista theme at www.studiotwentyeight.com.

Oh, why use Linux? The ideology mostly. I hate being told what I can and cannot do with my own property.
Even more to reason to dislike it's themeing. So I actually have to mess with DLLs? No thanks.

xequence
November 17th, 2005, 01:53 AM
Even more to reason to dislike it's themeing. So I actually have to mess with DLLs? No thanks.

I aggree.

And to install a vista theme on XP, do you know what I had to do? Take a 25 MB exe and install it. Thats monster compared to the biggest linux theme ive seen, 10 MB and I think it was big icons.

slux
November 17th, 2005, 11:38 AM
Public service announcement... StyleXP and Windowblinds are not the only ways to theme Windows XP. It actually was designed to be themeable, but MS restricted the themes that it would accept to make sure that Windows looks like Windows. You can edit windows\system32\uxtheme.dll (or download an edited version, or download the automatic pather from www.neowin.com) to allow 3rd party themes, which can then be placed in windows\resources\themes and accessed by right-clicking on the desktop and using the properties menu. There is a very nice Vista theme at www.studiotwentyeight.com.

Oh, why use Linux? The ideology mostly. I hate being told what I can and cannot do with my own property.

Oh yeah, I tried doing the uxtheme.dll thing with XP. Managed to kill it to the point where it wouldn't start at all except in safe mode. Replacing with the original uxtheme.dll didn't work, trying to use the restore point functionality didn't either. Eventually I ended up reinstalling. I tried to make sure I had the correct version of the dll but I guess I didn't and something went very, very wrong. So when fooling around with uxtheme.dll I'd recommend people to be extremely careful.

Certainly wasn't as nice an experience as installing GNOME themes in my case, I'm sure it turns out better for some others. :P

Carbon Copy Man
November 17th, 2005, 12:17 PM
XP... I'm tired of my computer dying. I set up all kinds of protections on XP, and it still degrades. The first time I'd boot it up, I'd be amazed by how quick it is... but after a while I end up having to wander off and come back while I wait for everything to load after logging in.

I keep XP for the games. And just in case I find a need for it. But I'm hoping I can replace MS Word with PHP and MySQL on Linux. I like the flexibility and reliability of doing it yourself. And I can save the files as light-weight HTML!

Although I'm still in the midst of getting it all the work. Here's me hoping!


In my "what was your first OS" poll, I found that most forum users actually began computing around the mid to late '80s (MS-DOS). A significant number began even before then, using CP/M and even older BASIC interpreters on various microcomputers.

The DOS generation is less scared of the present state of GNU/Linux in general, because it more or less mirrors the state of computing as they first came to it.
Maybe, but I was a little frightened when I first typed "dir" and couldn't tell my folders from my files. It was definitely a little frightening. I've had experience with MS DOS, but I wasn't exactly an advanced user.

Ah, the wonders of "ls"...


Oh yeah, I tried doing the uxtheme.dll thing with XP. Managed to kill it to the point where it wouldn't start at all except in safe mode. Replacing with the original uxtheme.dll didn't work, trying to use the restore point functionality didn't either. Eventually I ended up reinstalling. I tried to make sure I had the correct version of the dll but I guess I didn't and something went very, very wrong. So when fooling around with uxtheme.dll I'd recommend people to be extremely careful.

My experience is that it's a good idea to leave the Windows code alone. It has enough trouble running as it is. The last thing it needs is people making things more difficult for the poor OS. :P

Brunellus
November 17th, 2005, 02:39 PM
Maybe, but I was a little frightened when I first typed "dir" and couldn't tell my folders from my files. It was definitely a little frightening. I've had experience with MS DOS, but I wasn't exactly an advanced user.


I don't know what 'advanced ' means in MS-DOS terms, but I got most of my DOS skills from learning how to make new games run on not-so-new hardware. DOS's terrible memory management meant resorting to all sorts of kludges to make things work. Sometime around 1992, I think I had a separate boot floppy for each of my games, with config.sys and autoexec.bat tweaked to provide memory in all the right places for each one.

So when I came to Linux and saw that I had to hack up a few config files every so often to customize things, I was not scared at all.

I did, however, have the good sense to buy a book which explained a lot of basic bash shell commands, and read that on the train to and from work for a few days, and practice doing innocuous things.

gabhla
November 17th, 2005, 03:11 PM
I use linux (Ubuntu) because .... well, I like it. It's stable, "cool" and I feel more in control. The Ubuntu community is wonderful and I've learned so much about my comuter.

aben
November 17th, 2005, 03:25 PM
Ubuntu is free (as in speech as well as in coca-cola/pepsi) :p

I dont play games.

At this point I should ask myself, if I have ubuntu, why should I pay for windows XP ? hehe.

p/s this is my first post. Hi guys! :D

hanspb
November 17th, 2005, 04:39 PM
A number of reasons comes to mind, most of them have already been mentioned. The other day I was doing something in Windows while Win Update did some updating. After installation of the updates that message about rebooting to finish the installation popped up. Well, I was in the middle of something so I clicked on Reboot later or whatever it's called in English. Then a reminder popped up every 5 minutes or so! "The installation is nearly complete, you just have to reboot bla bla bla". :x So? I want to work, not to spend my valuable time rebooting when a dumb machine tells me to! I think that's a good reason to use Linux. With Ubuntu I only get a happy "Your system is up to date!" message when the updates are finished.
Also, there are Gcompris and Childsplay for the kids, and they love it!:)

mdsmedia
November 17th, 2005, 10:44 PM
You won't get used to linux if u don't just give up windows and be a dumb click here user. Honestly, I think everyone who's still dual booting just like's having they're hand's held by microsoft.

Then how the hell do you think I'm going to get used to Linux if I'm used to Windows? Just dump Windows and get dirty in Linux?? I'd love to but mean time, how do I get my work done? How do I get on the internet and resolve problems I have in Linux?

How the HELL do you know about ANY dual booter? let alone all of them?

I've used windows for a lot of years. I was a DOS user. I've installed Linux before too. Finally I tried Ubuntu live CD and liked it. At the same time I got a message in a mailing list that I should try Linux....dual boot...and eventually I'd see what windows won't do!!

Otherwise I'd still be running XP and screaming about it....but moronic posts like yours are from the old eliteist days when Linux WAS a geek's platform.

I like Linux and I'm a fan of FOSS. I don't like MS, but Windows is OK. I WANT to ditch Windows, but until I can I have to use it. I've made the plunge but I dual boot because SOME OF MY SOFTWARE runs in WINDOWS ONLY!!! Hey, tell me...how do I get my tax software running in Linux. OK run it on Wine. Or VMWare..or CrossOver Office....but HOW DO THOSE THINGS WORK?? I don't know til I get them working. Please MS...hold my hand while I get them working!!

Brunellus
November 17th, 2005, 11:33 PM
Remain calm.

Dual-booters aren't waiting for their hands to be held; some have legitimate reasons for keeping Windows.

With (finally) the emergence of credible alternatives, Windows' standing as the onlytool in any computer-user's toolbox has diminished; it is now one among many tools, and for many uses, probably not even the preferred or recommended one.

As to "getting dirty" and dumping windows. There is something to be said for learning to swim by jumping in the deep end. Luckily, for that, Linux is nowhere near as fearsome as it used to be. Ubuntu in particular sets things up wonderfully well, assuming you have relatively common and well-supported hardware, and your internet connection comes to you through an ethernet cable.

As far as general help for "switchers," I cannot stress enough the importance of getting a good, non-distribution specific Linux book to read when you're not at the computer. It amazes me that people assume that they should be able to use things without reading a manual or at least gaining some sort of familiarity.

I recommend "How Linux Works" by Brian Ward (No Starch Press). Technical without being overwhelming; super-high marks for explaining the command-line in a way that is digestible after one long train commute reading that chapter.

More specifically, there are probably several threads (and I wager a wiki entry) on WINE. Google is always your friend.

xequence
November 18th, 2005, 02:50 AM
You won't get used to linux if u don't just give up windows and be a dumb click here user. Honestly, I think everyone who's still dual booting just like's having they're hand's held by microsoft.

Or wants to be able to use windows programs and games.

mdsmedia
November 18th, 2005, 11:19 AM
Sorry, that was a rant in response to that stupid quote. I don't want MS to hold my hand, but until I'm comfortable that I can do in Linux what I want to do, I have to dual-boot.

As for never getting used to Linux unless you dump Windows...and MS holding my hand? Does PhoenixByrd know anything about Australian tax software that works in Linux? Perhaps he can tell me how the Australian "Tax Agent's Portal" on the Australian Tax Office website, which only runs on IE will work in Linux?

Maybe there's a Linux port of MYOB (Australian business accounting software that my clients use....not me...my clients). No?? OK What should I do then?

I WANT to only use Linux. I really WANT to rid myself of Windows. MS holding my hand?? Hardly. I've taken the plunge. I like Ubuntu. I like the forums. I like the documentation. I like the wiki. I ENJOY the challenge. I'm trying to wean myself off Windows. Moronic posts like the one I quoted don't help.

BoyOfDestiny
November 18th, 2005, 11:34 AM
Sorry, that was a rant in response to that stupid quote. I don't want MS to hold my hand, but until I'm comfortable that I can do in Linux what I want to do, I have to dual-boot.

As for never getting used to Linux unless you dump Windows...and MS holding my hand? Does PhoenixByrd know anything about Australian tax software that works in Linux? Perhaps he can tell me how the Australian "Tax Agent's Portal" on the Australian Tax Office website, which only runs on IE will work in Linux?

Maybe there's a Linux port of MYOB (Australian business accounting software that my clients use....not me...my clients). No?? OK What should I do then?

I WANT to only use Linux. I really WANT to rid myself of Windows. MS holding my hand?? Hardly. I've taken the plunge. I like Ubuntu. I like the forums. I like the documentation. I like the wiki. I ENJOY the challenge. I'm trying to wean myself off Windows. Moronic posts like the one I quoted don't help.

As a former dual-booter, I'll mention that IE should be able to run in Linux under wine. Anyway for me, I got more familiar with linux by having it on my laptop. My main desktop was dual boot, and for some reason (either downloading or work etc) kept me from booting into the other OS.

I'd say once you are comfortable with Linux (if you have an old/spare box) and manage to get the vital stuff you need to work...Whether it be a port, emulated, under WINE, etc... Then at that point, dump windows! If you aren't certain keep waiting. I waited over 1 year before wiping windows for good (notice my join date here ;) )

Best of luck. It's your machine and your choice.

Carbon Copy Man
November 18th, 2005, 11:59 AM
As far as general help for "switchers," I cannot stress enough the importance of getting a good, non-distribution specific Linux book to read when you're not at the computer. It amazes me that people assume that they should be able to use things without reading a manual or at least gaining some sort of familiarity.

I recommend "How Linux Works" by Brian Ward (No Starch Press). Technical without being overwhelming; super-high marks for explaining the command-line in a way that is digestible after one long train commute reading that chapter.

I understand the sentiment, but for now I'd just like to know that it'll work (I'm talking about the wireless) before I start investing in manuals.

migo
November 18th, 2005, 12:18 PM
I'm using Ubuntu because I'm a geek and I like toying with my system, gives me something else to mess around with other than Windows.

almostlinux
November 18th, 2005, 12:35 PM
i like breezy coz it's 'cool'...

and i don't see no reason why I _should_ use windows

jonny
November 18th, 2005, 12:46 PM
Why do I use ubuntu? Itís the applications.

Iíve never found Windows apps that are as easy to use and as elegant to the eye as the latest crop of gnome software. Programs like Nautilus, Muine, Epiphany, Soundjuicer, Totem, Beagle, Fspot, Tomboy, Gdesklets, Liferea wipe the floor with their Windows competitors for combining simplicity with exactly the features that I need. And the quality of GTKís font rendering combined with consistently observed human interface guidelines mean that it all looks beautiful.

And then thereís MythTV. That really is an awesome bit of software thatís reason enough alone to switch to from WIndows.

teaker1s
November 18th, 2005, 12:53 PM
break linux and it's modular enough to fix parts-break windows and there is less hope.
freedom and software isn't deliberately broken on each os upgrade.

each os makes many computers obsolete by requiring hugh increases in processor speed and memory-for those who would have done the same things in windows 98 that we would have done in xp would have required new hardware

if and when you get to the point MS leaves you cold and you have had enough of the spyware viruses etc you'll understand.

for me I dislike the situation where reasonably stable=unprofitable so break it and start again

yaraju
November 18th, 2005, 03:48 PM
Hey, guys! Hi there! I'm using a Compaq Presario 1720US, which my bro was using earlier. It comes with Win XP registered version pre-installed. My bro made it dual-boot.

Well, I attended RMS's seminar here at Hyd. That was enough to convince me. And I got back home, and junked Windows for good! I still have the registered version, but SHALL NOT install it. Don't think it's worth it.

I do EVERYTHING I DO on GNU/Linux. Currently, am comparing Ubuntu 5.10 with FC4. Gaming is one thing I haven't done heavy tests on yet. But I hear Wine is anyways on its way to miracles! Lets hope I'll have something to say on that.

Hey, check out OpenOffice Writer 2.0. Has MS Office(after all you pay Microsoft) ever made it so darn easy to use Indian scripts?
Oh, and OpenOffice Base 2.0. U can connect it to any RDBMS in existance!!!
The Help in Ubuntu 5.10 is certainly gazillions better than Troubleshooting Win XP.
Hey, for those of u who like not-so-heavy games... Do check out pingus, age of penguins, supertux, etc. WIll hopefully add heavy games to the list soon. (After I have some Wine! ;-) )
I use Rhythmbox to organise all my media(which is mostly ogg vorbis)
Hey, I found it easier to set up a wireless access point using my 802.11 PCMCIA on Ubuntu, than i could on Win XP!

Robust, stable, customizable, open source and FREE!! Do I need to say more? Open to comments, criticism, if any. :-)

Goddess_of_Linux
November 18th, 2005, 04:31 PM
That is like asking a person that uses a Mac OSX Tiger or Panther why they switched from Windows XP for...

I am currently only looking into linux, I want something like my Mac is with OSX on my Windows system... I haven't shutdown my powerMac G5 in 6 months and my Mac I-book since 2001... and my powerbook is usually shutdown when I don't need it. But my Aurora system is nice and stable most of the time but I want more from it, not just gaming...

I switched from running the buggy Windows M.E. to Mac OSX because I got tired of the blue screen of death...

Stormspace
November 18th, 2005, 08:36 PM
I bought my PC when Windows Millenium was all the rave. Even though I had heard bad things about it I decided to let it rip since I could install a Win98 copy laying around instead as a back license. I used Millenium for an agonizing 12 months while I struggled with hardware and software issues. I was determined to get the support I had paid for from the manufacturer. As a result I got a new Harddrive and CD-RW before the warranty ran out. at that time I had resolved my issues and kept Millenium. 2 years later the motherboard went belly up in an electrical storm and I had to replace it. I sought to buy an OEM board since I was pleased with the performance of the box and didn't have any issues with speed, but Gateway simply wouldn't sell me a motherboard without first taking the PC 90 miles away to a country store and paying them 75.00 for a diagnostic. Disgusted I bought an aftermarket motherboard which was a considerable upgrade for 100.00 less than the Gateway board, and it included memory. But when I went to reinstall Millenium it couldn't find the information in the bios that said it was a Gateway PC. The install failed. So out of Warranty and ticked at Gateway I used a work license for XP since we had extras. That was fine until a month ago when we started running low on licenses so I decided to switch now before I had to out of necessity.

Efwis
November 19th, 2005, 12:04 AM
I dual boot on my desktop. on my lappy I only have Ubuntu.

I siwtitched back in July, haven't gone back since. I keep WinXP around for the wife factor, as well as the fact that I have games that require ms. Wine doesn't support them, and I don't want to pay for cedega to play them. It't not that I can't, its that I figure why pay for Cedega when I already have WinXP.

games I use
Halo
MS combat flight simulator
MS combat flight simulator 2
The sims plus all expansions
The sims 2
Pacific Fighters

I've never had the stability issues with XP that most people have claimed. its just a case that I got tired of constantly cleaning crapware out of my system. windowblinds corrupted my system causing me to reinstall. Plus I am a spyware removal expert at a number of forums.


Originally Posted by Slicedbread
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..
This is patently untrue. Ever hear of a driveby download??? happens everyday. dont' believe me? go to just about any spyware removal forum and you will find at least 50 posts on each one that topic starter doesn't know how they got infected. They followed all the rules we set up to protect their system. they went to a website looking for something from google and bam there it is!!!!! with no warning at all it was going to happen or that it happened until they rebooted their computer after the next update, if they were lucky enough to
A. get that update
B. Have their system turned on long enough to last between updates

I dont' use windows that much myself anymore, I use Linux. The use windows for fax purposes only. everything else I do in Linux. I feel I shouldn't have to pay for the fax capability on linux because conexant doesn't want to support open source themselves, and they required fees from linuxant to make the drivers and license them. so until my current winsucks modem dies, i will make due. luckily its starting the death dance already so soon I will be rid of that problem.

Windows is great for certain things, particularly making flash. but that isn't windows fault that is macromedia's. If more vendors would get off their proprietary arses and allow access to their stuff from the open source community, they might see more money coming into them. as long as its reasonably priced. Sorry Macromedia I refuse to pay $400USD for a piece of software that you have to go to school to understand how to use.

/end rant

mahalram
November 19th, 2005, 01:51 AM
[QUOTE=Slicedbread]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 you think your windows machine is safe if you dont open random exe's and click on flashy things, I beg to differ.

Unlike those good old days where all script kiddies wanted to do was to yell out "i gotya", now the whole purpose of malware is to be as subliminal as possible to make sure that it goes undetected. Most machines have malware which do not do anything - now.

Yeah, you can be careful and sensible. But all the attackers need is for you to blink once. Once they have a single entry point, you have been had. Try as you might, it may be impossible for you to go for even a month without making a mistake.

I dual boot too. Ububtu and XP. The only reason I use XP is that my son likes to play with the motion eye camera in my vaio laptop. Does not work under linux. When I switch to windows I take a very simple precaution - turning of the wireless switch in my laptop.

john131971
November 19th, 2005, 02:09 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?

longhorn, drm hardware based, rootkits

Now how in L do I get my ati card to work with 64bit coffee! and not to mention tv out!

kcthomas
November 19th, 2005, 07:51 AM
1) ablility ssh to my schools computer lab and run cadence and other programs they have installed to do homework at home. sure you can download an ssh program to run from windows but it works terribly
2) multiple workspaces: when im doin hw or something i usually have tons of programs open: firefox, gaim, cadence, music, text editor, terminal. if you had this many programs open in windows it would be way to clutterd. with multiple workspaces you can set one workspace for each thing
3) focus scheme: i have it set so a window only raises when you click on the title bar, but the focus follows the mouse so it makes it incredibly easy to, say, copy something in your browser and paste it into a text file. in windows you have to resize windows and stuff so you can see two different windows at once
4)free
5)customizability
6)soft links: i have 3 partitions: 1 windows, 1 linux, 1 shared. i tried to make a bookmarks.html on my shared partion, and then link to it from my windows and linux so that when i changed it in one it would change in the other. easy in linux, couldn't figure out how to do it in windows
7)doesn't run all that crap that windows sets as default (and that i have to go through and disable). plus all the software that sets defaults (aim, quicktime, ...plus when you install new programs (ie quicktime, wmp) it tries to set itself as the default program and steals all the extensions AAAAHHHH
8)apt-get
9)text editing. still learning Vim but it is so easy to change files when doing programing and such. plus Vim has color schemes so when your editing a file with a certain extension, reserved words have different colors. plus you can compile pretty much every type of programming...for free!
10)scripts: downloaded a script the other day that automatically makes an html photo gallery out of all the pictures in the folder.
11)networking: using explorer to browse computers and files on xp takes FOREVER. linux you just use terminal or ssh and easily copy files from remote locations
12)has all the programs i like pre installed (firefox, gaim...) where i have to install them in windows as the default counterparts (explorer, aim...) are terrible
13)gdesklets
14)screenshots and gimp

why i still have windows:
-still learning linux, there is a pretty steep learning curve. windows is easy to use
-halo
-google earth
-strokeit: mouse gestures for windows (there might be something like this for linux but i haven't researched yet)
-remote desktop
-linux wont install on my desktop because of my bios
-ease of wireless

ive noticed that there is a linux port for pretty much every windows program, but not the other way around.

Clazzy
November 19th, 2005, 12:16 PM
You can't give an honest, unbiased comparison of various operating systems without trying them for a long period first. That's why I first tried Linux, and that's how I found out that Linux (at least in my opinion) was far superior to XP.
XP still has some good points to it that Linux developers could learn from, but overall I've found that Linux is the more stable, better designed operating system. At least you're not totally reliant on a graphical server, unlike Windows, so it's then possible to fix (whereas you'd just have to do a lovely restart in XP).