Ubuntu cannot compete with OS X or Windows 7

[Methuselah]

Funny, for me windows cannot compete.
Whatever issues I might have, running windows is not really a solution; It is more trouble than it is worth.
The amount of calls I get from friends to fix machines that run an OS I don't even use anymore suggests that using windows isn't even a buy it and forget it proposition.

But on a certain level I agree that linux is designed by hackers for hackers (note: not crackers!).
Free software aims to remove boundaries and restrictions that the average user might not even perceive.
So, for many of them the advantage of running linux might not be so obvious.

IMO, the best candidates for running linux are the people who love to tinker and the people who have very limited requirements.
The former will obviously be in paradise and the latter will find a very stable OS that won't break on them while they browse the web or check email.
Possibly the worst migration candidates are the windows power users who are used to everything the way it is and like it that way.
They are also the quickest to think they can master another OS easily and be bitterly disappointed, even angry, when they realise they have much to learn.

[powerpleb]

Possibly the worst migration candidates are the windows power users who are used to everything the way it is and like it that way.
They are also the quickest to think they can master another OS easily and be bitterly disappointed, even angry, when they realise they have much to learn.

I whole heartedly agree with that. Also, it is frequently those sort of users who just have to have the latest and greatest shiny hardware too, which usually take some time to be fully supported by Linux and this is where the majority of complaints about Linux stem from. By the time the super-duper fancy USB soundcard has become supported in Linux, the Windows uber-power user has already got bored with it and bought a newer and even more expensive one.

[lancest]

What holds linux back for me is the extreme feeling of unpolished-ness... if that's a word.
And the little bugs that are different on every single installation.

Running Ubuntu on 5 machines and can't see what you mean at all. There is no lack of polish on my machines with Ubuntu. Fonts, Themes, performance all excellent.
Ubuntu looks very cool and original in my book - next to the cartoon like Windows.
No way Windows is gonna run better on my netbooks or 64 bit machines.

[craig10x]

I suspect to an avid Windows users..."polish" really means looking like windows with lots of "eye candy"..those types might prefer the look of Linux Mint because it will sort of remind them of that....

Actually, i think Ubuntu looks very unique and pretty attractive in it's own "right"....and it is actually layed out much better the Windows...i find it is much easier to locate things in Ubuntu then it is on Windows.....

And now that i changed the appearance to "dust sand" which gives it that Mac-Type look...since i did do a brief stint with Mac (after moving away from Windows and before coming over to Linux and Ubuntu)....it kind of reminds me of it...and to me, makes Ubuntu look very nice....

[SunnyRabbiera]

I too get annoyed with the term "polish", I mean what do we need to impress people, applications so shiny and crystalline that it shines bright as a frackin diamond?

[cariboo]

There is some truth to that but they all have one thing in common;

WINDOWS 7 Home Basic

WINDOWS 7 Home Premium

WINDOWS 7 Ultimate

Windows is far more unified than Linux is almost every aspect. It's strange how many Linux users slate Windows but refuse to acknowledge any of the lingering problems with their chosen O/S.

Ubuntu is great in a lot ways, but it has some very painful flaws. Xserver/PulseAudio/upgrading for example, and it's not quite the 'minority' that have these issues as some people like to pretend. Personally I think ubuntu missed its chance of not capitalizing more when Mircosoft was wounded with Vista. Now it looks like ChromeOS will push it even further back into the shadows.

You probably missed it while you were away, but ChromeOS is based on Ubuntu, and there are Ubuntu devs doing contract work on it for Google.

[PariahVayne]

x

[User3k]

OS x - Not sure, never tried it.

Windows 7 - Had it, the evaluation, and deleted it after several months of trying it. As far as drivers go out of the box, depends on what you mean. If it is bundled software, for example a Compaq with Windows 7 bundled together with Compaq's stuff, etc, then it will work. But get a new computer without anything installed on it. Then buy the normal Windows 7 Ultimate, or which ever one you choose, and let me know how much hardware works out of the box on your brand new computer. I did this with 98, XP and Vista. The longer they are out, the more hardware advances, then they start to lag behind. Also Flash, Java, etc never worked out of the box for me with Windows in general. I had to download them from their websites for XP and Vista, same goes for DvD players and such.

Besides I refuse to pay for yet another Windows OS. The prices keep going up and I am not impressed enough to save up for it, yeah I am that broke where I would have to save up for it.

Ubuntu and my other favorite Suse are the ones I use only now, actually Ubuntu is the only one I have installed at the moment.

[beloved88]

OS x - Not sure, never tried it.

Windows 7 - Had it, the evaluation, and deleted it after several months of trying it. As far as drivers go out of the box, depends on what you mean. If it is bundled software, for example a Compaq with Windows 7 bundled together with Compaq's stuff, etc, then it will work. But get a new computer without anything installed on it. Then buy the normal Windows 7 Ultimate, or which ever one you choose, and let me know how much hardware works out of the box on your brand new computer. I did this with 98, XP and Vista. The longer they are out, the more hardware advances, then they start to lag behind. Also Flash, Java, etc never worked out of the box for me with Windows in general. I had to download them from their websites for XP and Vista, same goes for DvD players and such.

Besides I refuse to pay for yet another Windows OS. The prices keep going up and I am not impressed enough to save up for it, yeah I am that broke where I would have to save up for it.

Ubuntu and my other favorite Suse are the ones I use only now, actually Ubuntu is the only one I have installed at the moment.

Yeah, totally good point. Comparing a pre-installed windows box to a self-installed ubuntu computer doesn't really match up, like oranges and apples. I could say, yeah i had a lot more issues installing ubuntu than windows, but wait, i've NEVER installed windows, i bought all those machines with windows pre-installed. That could only compare to buying a System76 machine. From what i hear, EVERYTHING works out-of-the-box and it's very "polished" and wonderful, thinking about buying one myself ina year or two. And also, i think you have to compare LTS versions of Ubuntu to OS-X or Win7, and from what i hear, Ubuntu's LTS versions kick butt and for years there-after. We're in that period right before an LTS so i would expect that it's a lot of experimental stuff they are going to "polish" up for the LTS.

And something else i've told lot's of people. There would be no Windows 7 without Linux. It's because Gates see's these unix-like operating systems gaining so much ground that forces MS to produce a good release for once.

[Riffer]

Define "compete", if you mean marketing then of course Ubuntu can't. Simple fact is that canonical doesn't have the cash for a 10's of millions dollar campaigns. All Canoncial can do is provide the best OS that it can and know people will come over. This strategy has worked well.

If you mean compete to mean usability and aesthetics then its in the eye of the beholder. I find Windows to be a bit of a mess, the start menu is jumbled together, basic system tools have to be dug for and basic desktop configuration is some what limited.

As for Macs, I find them counter intuitive, I just never got the "Mac" way of doing things. Yes people will say that that if I gave Macs a longer chance I might of gotten it, but at the end of the day Macs never gave me the alternative that I was looking for.

With Ubuntu I have an OS that lets me tweak the desktop as much or as little as I want. I have access to tons of great programs, and the commercial ones like autodesk or adobe that only run on the other 2 OSes I found I really don't need them. Ubuntu delivers all that I want well.