Environmental reasons for choosing ubuntu!

[Hightide]

Environmental reasons for choosing ubuntu over vista:

1. Vista is power hungry and needs new machines thus uses more power. unbuntu does not.

2. The manufacture of new machines has an environmental impact as we have to dispose of non vista capable machines.

any thoughts!

:)

[forrestcupp]

1. New machines are made to be much, much more power efficient than old ones are.

2. You are right about this.

[Dr Small]

Linux has less downtime, which means more uptime, and as someone wanted to debate with me, it is helping global warming ... :p

[argraff]

Ubuntu can make use of older computers and peripherals, reducing the demand for new machines and therefore saving the world the environmental impact of manufacturing, transporting, selling and delivering new machines. Plus, the disposal and recycling of old computers has an impact too! (Again, transportation, labor, etc.)

I looked into it, and my 1989 Volvo sedan is better for the environment than some of the newer cars for exactly those reasons...:)

[forrestcupp]

Linux has less downtime, which means more uptime, and as someone wanted to debate with me, it is helping global warming ... :p
And global warming is driving down heating costs and reducing the necessity for natural gas, propane, and fuel oil.


Ubuntu can make use of older computers and peripherals, reducing the demand for new machines and therefore saving the world the environmental impact of manufacturing, transporting, selling and delivering new machines. Plus, the disposal and recycling of old computers has an impact too! (Again, transportation, labor, etc.)
But even Linux users have the drive to always have the latest and greatest. I can't wait to get rid of this old Athlon 64 3500+ and get something better.

[Dr Small]

And global warming is driving down heating costs and reducing the necessity for natural gas, propane, and fuel oil.


But even Linux users have the drive to always have the latest and greatest. I can't wait to get rid of this old Athlon 64 3500+ and get something better.
I guess that is why our heatbill every month keeps rising, and I have burned more wood this year than last?

[toupeiro]

well I guess here is my devils advocate take...

When I build a computer, it's going to have the hottest video card I can afford, the best processor I can get my hands on, and gobs of RAM. And, I will put linux on it. If you mean invironmental in the sense that, I'll be able to get the most out of my environment, I have to agree with you.

I actually use the power my computer puts out in full. If I want to save the environment, I will recycle. They're are plenty of great reasons to use ubuntu, not to sound too obtuse, but I don't think there is a need to stretch to extents like tying ubuntu usage to the environment.

[argraff]

But even Linux users have the drive to always have the latest and greatest. I can't wait to get rid of this old Athlon 64 3500+ and get something better.

Lol - yes, but some of us are poor. :)

[Mr. Picklesworth]

1. New machines are made to be much, much more power efficient than old ones are.

Unfortunately, that tends to be offset by the bloody hungry hardware computers can come with. Gadgets like Linutop (http://www.linutop.com) definitely prove your point, however, that new hardware built to the expected output of older hardware can do incredible things.

Unfortunately, that high end hardware is aimed more at running games than running Windows, which is a fairly prevalent aim. Thus, what we need is a Linux-based games revolution, where games on the platform are mostly pushing towards being fun with pleasant but simple graphics - ie: running on anything. There are a lot of people doing game development as a hobby, so if Linux had one really awesome game development toolkit (IDE + Code Library + Visual logic editor + Modelling / animation tools) there would be attention in no time!

Of course, that last paragraph is miles off topic. Back to the topic at hand: Sleek Linux distros definitely allow for more efficient hardware, but do not magically make it so... and, unfortunately, most off the shelf hardware is quite inefficient.

[eljoeb]

Huh?

Linux vs. Windows Power Usage
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=880&num=1

[Luffield]

Some very good points here. Here's another thought: the vast majority of Vista developers work at the Microsoft offices. They commute to work every day, and the maintenance of the offices takes a lot of energy. Most Linux developers work from home which is much more energy-efficient.

[hessiess]

Unfortunately, that tends to be offset by the bloody hungry hardware computers can come with. Gadgets like Linutop (http://www.linutop.com) definitely prove your point, however, that new hardware built to the expected output of older hardware can do incredible things.

Unfortunately, that high end hardware is aimed more at running games than running Windows, which is a fairly prevalent aim. Thus, what we need is a Linux-based games revolution, where games on the platform are mostly pushing towards being fun with pleasant but simple graphics - ie: running on anything. There are a lot of people doing game development as a hobby, so if Linux had one really awesome game development toolkit (IDE + Code Library + Visual logic editor + Modelling / animation tools) there would be attention in no time!

Of course, that last paragraph is miles off topic. Back to the topic at hand: Sleek Linux distros definitely allow for more efficient hardware, but do not magically make it so... and, unfortunately, most off the shelf hardware is quite inefficient.

it already does, Blender:)

the apricot project will add significantly to the existing tools

http://apricot.blender.org/

[michaelzap]

In my own personal experience with Ubuntu (which is less than a year), I've ket at least three people from buying new PCs by installing (X)Ubuntu on them (and this is only counting the definitive cases where people were already planning to buy new PCs until I did this). They're very happy with their computers now, and this is certainly good for the environment. Not only does it reduce excess consumption in general (which is the main driving force behind global warming, whether or not people like to hear it), but it also reduces the need for mining and disposing of lots of toxic metals and substances.

So absolutely: Ubuntu is good for the environment.

I personally don't need the latest and greatest CPU, video card, etc. I happily use hand-me-down machines if they can do what I need them to do, and I find that Ubuntu makes that possible for most of them. I am going to buy a new laptop in the next few months (it's something I've been debating for a long time), but it's probably going to be an eeePC, which would never work well enough with Windows for me to stand it but is a beautiful thing with Linux.

[Hightide]

Some very good points here. Here's another thought: the vast majority of Vista developers work at the Microsoft offices. They commute to work every day, and the maintenance of the offices takes a lot of energy. Most Linux developers work from home which is much more energy-efficient.


Good one luffield

never thought about the travelling MS office staff.

Just think of the number of disposed PC's that could have a useful life via ubuntu!!

regards

:)

[CaptainCabinet]

1) Linux is free, which means we save paper by not spending money. :)
2) You don't have to buy a top of the line computer to run Linux, Unlike Vista. This will save electrical energy.
....can't think of anymore. :confused: