Linux or Windows?

Beta Ray Bill

Hey All

I have been using Linux Mint 4.0 now for a few months and I must say its really top notch stuff. I actually want to make a donation!

why on earth are we all paying for windows when Linux distributions such as Ubuntu, Fedora and Mint are free.

And I personally feel that in the case of Linux Mint it performs BETTER than windows. AND ITS FREE!

When I first made the transition I thought Linux was going to be difficult to work with ans use. boy was I wrong. Easier to install. all the codec's etc are installed by default, (Ideal for a home PC or Laptop) while the Linux Terminal is far more powerful than CMD could ever be. The whole lot just works out of the box! its fantastic and has really made me want to never use windows again.

Just my 2 cents

Mach

The reason is that people are afraid of change , if they know one way of doing things and it works , they will stick with it. Also you must remember until recently it wasn’t that easy to install Linux and it was a “geeks OS”. For most people the only OS the know is windows, until Apple switch over to UNIX under the hood for OS X, windows basically had monopoly. Just go into any PC world or and computer shop and see how many have Linux per install and you see that it an uphill battle. People should have a choice, the HD I believe should be blank and when buy the PC you asked if you want windows or Linux or both.

probe

The tide is turning. Linux is as easy to use as Windows for most tasks – surfing the web, creating web content, email, word processing, spreadsheet, and similar and it is all free. And web-surfing on Linux is generally much faster because the Linux operating system is far less bloated, and was written for network based use from the outset.

Google offers free web based word processing, spreadsheet and presentation software as an online service, which you can access from anywhere, and save as a MS Ofice compatible file on your PC, just in case you are afraid that Google will go out of business in the morning.

It would be nice if Openoffice.org moved to / offered a web based alternative package (like Drupal), which would enable everybody in a household, school, office, whatever, use a web based interface to do office word processing and other office tasks, using a Linux server to host the service. Eliminating the need to buy/install software on each PC, and allow documents to be kept on a central server.

I’ve been using SUSE linux for about a year [ http://www.opensuse.org/ ] (v 10.3) on one of my machines, and I increasingly find myself spending more time on the old machine that I installed Linux on (after its useful life as a Windows machine expired) compared with a new high end workstation running Windows! One of the advantages with SUSE linux is that they have a copyright agreement with Microsoft, so Microsoft’s threat to use the “he who has the deepest pockets wins” antiquated backstreet common law system litigation threat to shut down linux won’t prevail against this distribution. SUSE is “made in Germany” and it shows in that it is more refined than other linux offerings in my view.

.probe

patrickolee

Mach wrote: »

The reason is that people are afraid of change , if they know one way of doing things and it works , they will stick with it. Also you must remember until recently it wasn’t that easy to install Linux and it was a “geeks OS”. For most people the only OS the know is windows, until Apple switch over to UNIX under the hood for OS X, windows basically had monopoly. Just go into any PC world or and computer shop and see how many have Linux per install and you see that it an uphill battle. People should have a choice, the HD I believe should be blank and when buy the PC you asked if you want windows or Linux or both.

Hmmm, wouldnt agree with that at all. Its ten years now since my first Linux installation and I can tell you it's come a long way. 13 years since I started programming for the Mac... But I still use Windows. Why? Well for one thing, my business banking wont work on any other platform. Secondly my spades and poker sites only work on Windows! So to say that its because people are 'afraid' of change, is simply incorrect. It's because they are tied in by their applications... although this is getting better, we're still not there.

wasim21k

well first time i ever use linux on my 486-DX4 in 1996(i think), it wasnt easy to install like now a days. behonest i dont like windows at all but i have it as second os as my work related apps are on windows otherwise i use linux.

Linux is getting more generally accessible but I can't imagine my grandmother whizzing around the bash shell and compiling the latest version of Apache from source :rolleyes:
That's the way I'd explain why Windows is more used

oscarBravo

My girlfriend has been using Linux for the past six months or more, since I installed it on her old laptop. She never uses the bash shell or has any desire to compile Apache (or anything else for that matter).

Linux is perfectly usable for anyone who isn't stuck with Windows-only applications, and there are ways around most of those.

oscarBravo

oscarBravo wrote: »

My girlfriend has been using Linux for the past six months or more, since I installed it on her old laptop. She never uses the bash shell or has any desire to compile Apache (or anything else for that matter).

Linux is perfectly usable for anyone who isn't stuck with Windows-only applications, and there are ways around most of those.

I wasn't actually saying you can't use Linux for everyday tasks, in fact I love Linux. I was trying to point out (but didn't succeed) that there is a stereotype that Linux is only for tech-savvy super nerds.
Obviously there are great desktop environments, office programs and even games on Linux. Not many people know this though.. sorry for the ambiguity

mneylon

Deleted User wrote: »

Linux is getting more generally accessible but I can't imagine my grandmother whizzing around the bash shell and compiling the latest version of Apache from source :rolleyes:

A "normal" user doesn't have any need to know about compiling anything from source on *nix, much as most users won't go near a dos shell or use powershell on Windows

FruitLover

Deleted User wrote: »

Linux is getting more generally accessible but I can't imagine my grandmother whizzing around the bash shell and compiling the latest version of Apache from source :rolleyes:
That's the way I'd explain why Windows is more used

Why would she ever need to compile apache from source? Assuming a desktop user is even going to want to run a web server, apache is available in packaged format. In Ubuntu or other Debian derivatives, this is a simple installation.

This is a bad example.

ethernet

FruitLover wrote: »

Why would she ever need to compile apache from source? Assuming a desktop user is even going to want to run a web server, apache is available in packaged format. In Ubuntu or other Debian derivatives, this is a simple installation.

This is a bad example.

You can usually install the package from your distro's repos but, in some cases, it will not have been configured to meet the users' needs. As an example -- with Apache -- perhaps granny needs to compile it from source to enable support for a specific feature, such as the shared object module.

mondeo

Does yahoo messanger work on mint 4.0? I'm thinking of getting mint and installing it but i like yahoo messanger to be usable on it..

Thanks

ethernet

mondeo wrote: »

Does yahoo messanger work on mint 4.0? I'm thinking of getting mint and installing it but i like yahoo messanger to be usable on it..

Thanks

I found this link. It's a guide for getting it to work under Ubuntu, upon which Mint is based. I also found a Unix version of it on Yahoo's site but it seems quite old. You could try running the Windows version under Wine in Linux. For a better experience though, you could use a native Linux app, like Kopete or Pidgin. For web-based IMing, try Meebo.

FruitLover

ethernet wrote: »

As an example -- with Apache -- perhaps granny needs to compile it from source to enable support for a specific feature, such as the shared object module.

If she's using a Debian-based distro, mod_so is already built in. Any other module is available as a package. I'd imagine other standard packages (Suse, RH, etc) would probably be the same, and for pretty much any other software.

ethernet

FruitLover wrote: »

If she's using a Debian-based distro, mod_so is already built in. Any other module is available as a package. I'd imagine other standard packages (Suse, RH, etc) would probably be the same, and for pretty much any other software.

Fine, while we're picking at this issue , let's say one wants MythTV configured without LIRC. Most packages have support for it enabled. This is only one reason for compilation -- customisation. But you're right in saying that the 'average' user will rarely have need to compile software as opposed to simply finding it in their distro's repo and installing.

[-0-]

If you're not into gaming (I know Cedega has come a long way) then I think linux is great for general Internet usage - browsing the web, email, instant messaging, downloading stuff... it's perfect. You can do all of this without worrying about getting viruses and/or spyware/malware - and it's free. AmaroK kicks ass, thunderbird is fine, aMSN isn't the worst either and azureus is the exact same.

I would rather set Linux up for a family member who isn't very computer literate because it would be a lot easier for me to maintain - no anti virus required, no spyware scanners and I know it would run really smoothly.

I think Dell are releasing (if they haven't already?) Ubuntu on their systems in Europe too.

Orion

Dell have already - but it's hard to find on the site. iirc HP are starting to as well. But Windows has such market penetration that a lot of people don't even know about Linux. IT people do but the general user - 90% of the market - don't. But now with things like the Eeepc coming with Linux pre-installed it's starting to get more coverage.

imo education is the way forward. Schools (primary and 2nd level) still use Windows because the computer teachers are stick-in-the-muds. And when children are taught one thing it's hard to get them to change when they become adults. Get 'em young is what I say. I'm on the board of management for a new primary school hopefully opening this September and I'll be doing my best to ensure that the computers in the school are Linux. I'll be using the money angle to propose it. Edubuntu using LTSP = mucho cheapo. There's nothing that is required in a school that needs Windows. Student records can be kept in OO.o Database just as easily as in an Access based solution. And the educational software in Edubuntu is excellent. My two 4 year olds don't know what Windows is yet and during the summer I'm building an old PC with Edubuntu on it just for them. They won't have any fear of Linux when they're older.

[-0-]

I think Linux has come a long way since when I started using it back in the mid 90's both with regards to ease of use and also awareness. Lots of people are annoyed with Vista and won't switch to it from XP. When Microsoft stops supporting XP in 2009 some people will switch over.

I agree about the eeepc. I have one myself and a couple of my mates who were strict windows heads bought them and they're now running Ubuntu on their home machines as well. There's a new eeepc coming out in q3 / q4 of this year with a better screen and better specs.

velocirafter

i'm looking at switching to linux, is ubuntu the best way to go? I'm fairly familiar with linux and the bash shell but nothing special. i dont want to spend more time trying to set up applications than i will using them.

i mainly surf the web, play movies, mp3s, bit of word processing.

i had fedora 6 but it didnt support mp3s and i couldnt for the life of me get the wireless to work.

ethernet

velocirafter wrote: »

i'm looking at switching to linux, is ubuntu the best way to go? I'm fairly familiar with linux and the bash shell but nothing special. i dont want to spend more time trying to set up applications than i will using them.

i mainly surf the web, play movies, mp3s, bit of word processing.

i had fedora 6 but it didnt support mp3s and i couldnt for the life of me get the wireless to work.

Ubuntu is very user-friendly. Getting mp3 files playing shouldn't be a problem -- you'll be prompted to download codecs when you try to play it.

There are several guides to getting wireless cards working. There's nearly always someone who's tried to get the same card working. When all else fails, you can use ndiswrapper with the card's Windows driver to get it working.

Orion

mp3s are not supported natively because of the licensing but it's just a matter of enabling a repository to get the codec. Some distros like new Suse (iirc) will prompt you to grab the codec. For Ubuntu you just tick the box for the Multiverse repository and install it.

Installing software is easier that Windows - for debian based ones like Ubuntu - apt-get install programname - done! It really is that easy.

As for wireless seemingly, the new version of Ubuntu has much greater wireless support than earlier versions. It's out next week. But even worst case, using ndiswrapper is easy to set up.

Oh and for movies - apt-get install vlc. It installs all the codecs you need by default and will play pretty much anything. or you can use Totem but I don't really like it personally.

croo

@velocirafter
and a nice plus is you can run it first as a live CD to check what does and doesn't work... then when you're ready simply select the Install to Harddisk icon on the desktop!

re: apt-get install appName
yeah it is really great. even still some people don't like going to the shell prompt, in which case there is the GUI Synaptic available so you can search the respository of programs and simlpy select what is required (it will find what dependant application are required and get them too).

I installed ubnutu on my seventy year old father's machine. He uses email, browsing, skype, photo editing & the odd letter and he hardly noticed the difference. It would be no more different than going from XP to Vista! He did miss photoshop a little to begin with but now happily uses GIMP but I have since discovered there is a plugin for gimp to make it look like photoshop.

The problems come with hardware in my opinion. By and large the main things work... I've had no problems in recent years with wireless, printers, scanners, mp3 player... but a new phone or camera .. while it comes with drivers & software for windows there is nothing for Linux... After saying that though things often work with the standard software. But it's just annoying that you often don't know for sure when you buy if it will work or not. Mention linux to any sales or call centre people and you'll immediately get "we don't support" response (I've notice very recently though that sometimes you can find linux in the supported OS lists on the box! - so things are changing). I've had many conversations, over the years, with ISP call centre staff who insisted the reason their DHCP or DNS server wasn't responding was because I was using linux and if I'd only install windows then all would be ok :rolleyes: Now if I have to contact a call centre I just tell them I run XP

I think is everyone was paying their commerical software licenses for office, outlook, photoshop etc (I get the distinct impression that even businesses have been buying one CD and installing it on all their machines) then things might change quicker!

croo

ps. if you are considering installing ubuntu I would wait just a little longer as the latest (long term support) version 8.04 is about to be released! on the 24th I think? The servers could be very busy for a while so if you find it slow downloading that could be why!

Saruman

Linux is still not user friendly enough for people to switch.
I spent hours yesterday trying to get video on any of my divx/xvid movies. Nothing would give me any video, only sound. In the end i managed to change mplayer to use x11 i think for the display... i can not rememeber.. now i get video but its absolute crap!!!
Now that may be due to the fact its a rubbish integrated video chip on a Dell sc440 server (the bargain from before christmas). However i still have about 4 or 5 other video players.. including VLC which usually plays everything and i get no video on those programs! I would not have that problem in windows. If it played in one application, it would be almost guaranteed to play in the other apps.
If i had problems, and bear in mind im an IT pro (on windows systems). And have had a little experience with Linux on and off from Redhat 4 days, can you imagine your average office worker... who can not even figure out how to set up a signature in outlook, can you imagine them trying to get stuff working?

mathias

The Ubuntu upgrades work , I wouldnt worry about waiting , I first installed Ubuntu ages ago with " dapper drake " , the system in the meantime has updated itself from this to Edgy edge , feisty fawn , and gutsy gibbon , and not once did it have an issue doing so ,

All those funny names are different versions of Ubuntu , you get your version upgrades like an automatic update , and it just works , brilliant.

If ever a version of Windows comes out that can update itself to the next version online I will be amazed !

croo

Saruman wrote: »

Linux is still not user friendly enough for people to switch.
I spent hours yesterday trying to get video on any of my divx/xvid movies.

I think you are the exception to the rule then because besides it always works for me - in recent years anyway.

On the other side of the coin - I have spent many a day (or even weekend) tryng to install windows on machines! Finding the correct drives is always a pain (unless you kept all the original disks to hand) .. the older the hardware the bigger the problem seems to be. While, on precisely the same hardware, installing linux is simply a matter of popping the cd/dvd in the drive. And I too have been working in IT (since 1984) so it's not that I don't know what I'm doing. In fact, I normally install linux just to find out what the hardware is so I can then search for the correct windows drivers online.

The bottom line is windows seems easier because it comes pre-installed.

I think to your average joe bloggs installing something like ubuntu is much easier than windows.

Saruman wrote: »

Now that may be due to the fact its a rubbish integrated video chip on a Dell sc440 server (the bargain from before christmas).

Well how did it look playing under windows?

Saruman wrote: »

can you imagine your average office worker... who can not even figure out how to set up a signature in outlook, can you imagine them trying to get stuff working?

So you think people who cannot setup a signature in outlook could install windows?
You think if you give them any box with a windows cd/dvd they will install windows without problems?

That's not to say the linux situation is perfect either... as I said before when you buy a new printer, scanner, phone or camera, for example, you will get windows software and instructions but none for linux.

FruitLover

I reckon Ubuntu is now easy enough for the majority of regular computer users to use daily. For those that don't have full functionality right off the CD, a quick bit of googling or looking in the Ubuntu forums will solve most problems.

Saruman wrote: »

im an IT pro (on windows systems)

Isn't this an oxymoron?

jedistev

for me i would recommed highly use GOS..sort of Google OS but not owner by Google..it's kind great for Beginner or "dont want freak out if install by shell etc"

for me i use it on old fart laptop..and going older mini laptop called cloudbook..which sell in USA...i hoping get it while my bro in LA for hoilday...

derby7

After messing around with a few distributions, especially Ubuntu, I recently came across one called DreamLinux (www.dreamlinux.com.br) .
I tried it Virtually first, via VMWare Player and the Dreamlinux appliance.
:cool:

cowan

I have been using Linux myself for quite a while, very secure, and with the new Ubuntu 8.04 it seems to be a lot faster. I'm a distro hopper myself, i.e. I'm always changing which version I use, but I always find myself coming back to Mint. If you're considering installing Mint, wait for Mint 5.0 to be released, should be available in a few days/week or two. It's very good. Very very good. Very very very good. I do however keep xp on the computer. I need it for some college stuffs. Linux has become very useable, the first version I used was Ubuntu 6.04 or 6.10 not sure which. Even then I found it to be quite useable, even if setting some stuff up was a pain, you generally only need to do it once. Plus you learn something everytime you use it.

Garth

I installed Ubuntu about a month ago and find myself vary rarely using the windows vista that came installed on my laptop.

I had to get the wireless card working with ndiswrapper but it works perfectly now and is far more stable under 8.04 than under 7.10. I have no problems with mp3, dvd, divx...

I find the support forum for Ubuntu to be brilliant.

And most importantly, my computer runs sooo smoothly compared to Vista. It never overloads the cpu, the memory never gets bogged down. There isn't a mountain of processes running unnecessarily in the background.

I have a new harddrive on order and I will be installing Ubuntu on our home PC as well as soon as it arrives.

I'd recommend people try it... I can't see us going back now.

PS: I'm techy, but not an IT head by any stretch... and I didn't break a sweat. ;-)