Ubuntu better than windows - WHY?

but43r · 05-03-2011 01:20AM #1

So, I have been playing around with Ubuntu for a while and after using it can't really understand why people go on about how good it is.

1. It's very slow - Even on machine that runs windows 7 without any problems I found Ubuntu 10.04 is very slow.

2. It's not too pretty to look at - It looked very pretty when I first installed it but after a while you start noticing how it's actually not. E.g. Skype on Ubuntu looks uber ugly + the video function doesn't work right (ok, thats not an actual Ubuntu but I'd say it's to do with the graphics API's).

3. It's not even that reliable - it froze plenty of times on me and good few minor bugs.

4. You can't play any proper games on it...

Ok, it's free but still, saying that it's better than Windows for a typical user would be wrong.

Anyway, everybody has their opinion and I have outlined mine above.

If somebody has some opinion on Ubuntu it would be nice to hear it.

Pygmalion · 05-03-2011 01:45AM

I don't understand why people feel the need to come onto Linux/Unix forums and complain when they don't like it.
I don't like Windows, but I don't go to the Windows forum and demand people give me a reason to use Windows 7 or explain why there isn't a decent package manager or workspace implementation.

You clearly aren't going to suddenly love it after listening to our reasons, so why should we spend our time explaining why we use it?

matrim · 05-03-2011 01:48AM

I don't think most people here would say it's better than windows for the average user. Overall it's probably nearly as good for a lot of users who only need a web browser and document editor and in some cases it is actually better. The main area it's let down is lack of support for certain applications, drivers which will turn off the average user who just wants a plug in and use type experience.

For your specific complaints

but43r wrote: »

1. It's very slow - Even on machine that runs windows 7 without any problems I found Ubuntu 10.04 is very slow.

Personally I find it faster to boot and load programs. I also like the fact that I can use the same version for all my pc's which I can't with windows as some of them don't meet the latest windows minimum specs. Certain things may have to be turned off on the older pcs but it will still run Ubuntu to a decent speed.

2. It's not too pretty to look at - It looked very pretty when I first installed it but after a while you start noticing how it's actually not. E.g. Skype on Ubuntu looks uber ugly + the video function doesn't work right (ok, thats not an actual Ubuntu but I'd say it's to do with the graphics API's).

The default theme is ok but not great, but if you are up for customising it, you can do a lot of nice things to make it look great.

3. It's not even that reliable - it froze plenty of times on me and good few minor bugs.

The only thing I generally see crash is firefox / flash and even that doesn't take the whole system down. But there is no system that is uncrashable and personally I find it more stable than windows. One of my boxes has been up for 100+ days without any problems.

4. You can't play any proper games on it...

As mentioned one of it's biggest problems is lack of application ports (and not just games). This goes for things like skype features being rolled out to windows first, flash taking ages to come out, drivers for hardware and as you mention games. The only thing that will make this better is for more people to use it and ask for a linux version.

Johnboy1951 · 05-03-2011 11:44AM

If you don't like Ubuntu then try a different distribution.

I don't use it either ... but also I don't use Windows

but43r · 05-03-2011 12:53PM

Pygmalion wrote: »

I don't understand why people feel the need to come onto Linux/Unix forums and complain when they don't like it.
I don't like Windows, but I don't go to the Windows forum and demand people give me a reason to use Windows 7 or explain why there isn't a decent package manager or workspace implementation.

You clearly aren't going to suddenly love it after listening to our reasons, so why should we spend our time explaining why we use it?

The main reason why I started this thread is to see if anybody else is having the same issues with Ubuntu and maybe someone could suggest me how to resolve them or suggest me an alternative OS that I could use.

but43r · 05-03-2011 12:58PM

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

If you don't like Ubuntu then try a different distribution.

I don't use it either ... but also I don't use Windows

What distro would you suggest to somebody who is used to Windows and mostly use it for Web Development and surfing the net?

loldog · 05-03-2011 01:05PM

For me the big draw that made me move from Windows was not having to worry about viruses. Since then I've discovered lots of new reasons to like Linux and Open Source software. Lately though, I've moved from Ubuntu to Debian, which is a lot snappier.

.

but43r · 05-03-2011 01:05PM

Personally I find it faster to boot and load programs. I also like the fact that I can use the same version for all my pc's which I can't with windows as some of them don't meet the latest windows minimum specs. Certain things may have to be turned off on the older pcs but it will still run Ubuntu to a decent speed.

The booting and loading time for programs is not a problem for me either. It's switching between windows that is painfully slow. The laptop that I am using it on is very good spec too so I don't think it's hardware problem...

The only thing I generally see crash is firefox / flash and even that doesn't take the whole system down. But there is no system that is uncrashable and personally I find it more stable than windows. One of my boxes has been up for 100+ days without any problems.

I found that the reliability is good if you don't really use the system. I mean for something like hosting websites Linux would be great. Once you are using the system a lot I don't see much of a difference between Ubuntu and Windows 7 reliability wise. About the same amount of freezing although I think I only had 1 or 2 crashes where the whole system went down in the 6 month I used Linux.

As mentioned one of it's biggest problems is lack of application ports (and not just games). This goes for things like skype features being rolled out to windows first, flash taking ages to come out, drivers for hardware and as you mention games. The only thing that will make this better is for more people to use it and ask for a linux version.

Thats true.

loldog · 05-03-2011 01:09PM

but43r wrote: »

The main reason why I started this thread is to see if anybody else is having the same issues with Ubuntu and maybe someone could suggest me how to resolve them or suggest me an alternative OS that I could use.

Try Linux Mint. It's a lot more polished than Ubuntu. First, use something like Unetbootin to load it onto a USB and take a test drive.

.

matrim · 05-03-2011 01:40PM

but43r wrote: »

The booting and loading time for programs is not a problem for me either. It's switching between windows that is painfully slow. The laptop that I am using it on is very good spec too so I don't think it's hardware problem...

How much ram have you got?

Also what Graphics card and are you using, the open source drivers or the binary ones? The binary one's from ATI \ Nvidia should give better performance.

Actually a quick google shows some people having a problem with slow restoring windows on some older ATI cards. I didn't look much but it might be worth googling it.

ricman · 05-03-2011 02:14PM

Linux has the advantage of working on any pc, its more stable, more secure,no viruses, it can work on a pentium 3 with 256meg ram.
windows is constantly downloading,updates and you need to run an antivirus to keep it safe ,its always a target for hackers ,ie its a lot more work to keep secure.Aand its free.
There are many distros of linux avaidable ,depending on what pc you have.
if you wanna recover files from a damaged windows pc,a linux livecd and a usb drive is the easiest way to do it.
there are different distros which may run faster, mint ten is the one i,d recommend for newbies,or non techies.
it comes with media players, cd burners,text editors,firefox etc with an app store,eg software managewr built in.
install vlc for unix and it,ll play any file, you can install linux inside windows ,click on disk install,
dual boot mint, when you want to play a game run windows.
mint has a full graphic interface ,like windows .see www.linuxmint.com ,get the 32bit version
fits on 1 cdr.

matrim · 05-03-2011 03:51PM

ricman wrote: »

windows is constantly downloading,updates

In fairness, Linux is always downloading updates too. My update manager has a new update every couple of days, although alot of these are application updates. But this is a good thing about it for 2 reasons

1) if a problem is found it's fixed and rolled out quickly rather than having to wait for Patch Tuesday e.g. see here

2) And with your application updates coming through the application manager there you can be sure your applications are up to date, rather than the mismatch update styles of applications on windows.

Capt'n Midnight · 05-03-2011 03:59PM

matrim wrote: »

I don't think most people here would say it's better than windows for the average user. Overall it's probably nearly as good for a lot of users who only need a web browser and document editor and in some cases it is actually better. The main area it's let down is lack of support for certain applications, drivers which will turn off the average user who just wants a plug in and use type experience.

You can start to use a live CD in a few minutes

to install windows and all the basic apps and security settings takes bloody ages ( though you could cheat and use the cloud to save time by not installng some apps ) and it's not quite as bad when a machine comes preinstalled

It's horses for courses really, many apps are only written for windows ( AutoCAD / Games / certain devices ) in which case you have no choice.

As for facebook & co. they keep changing stuff all the time

Dr_Phil · 05-03-2011 04:04PM

but43r wrote: »

So, I have been playing around with Ubuntu for a while and after using it can't really understand why people go on about how good it is.

1. It's very slow - Even on machine that runs windows 7 without any problems I found Ubuntu 10.04 is very slow.

2. It's not too pretty to look at - It looked very pretty when I first installed it but after a while you start noticing how it's actually not. E.g. Skype on Ubuntu looks uber ugly + the video function doesn't work right (ok, thats not an actual Ubuntu but I'd say it's to do with the graphics API's).

3. It's not even that reliable - it froze plenty of times on me and good few minor bugs.

4. You can't play any proper games on it...

Ok, it's free but still, saying that it's better than Windows for a typical user would be wrong.

Anyway, everybody has their opinion and I have outlined mine above.

If somebody has some opinion on Ubuntu it would be nice to hear it.

1. That's bull IMO, much faster for me than any Windows machine I use'd to work on.
2. When you discover how to use themes you will change your mind.
3. But Windows never froze, me arse!
4. That's why I bought Ps3, PSP, DS and Wii

Just stay with Windows if you don't like Ubuntu.

matrim · 05-03-2011 05:03PM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

You can start to use a live CD in a few minutes

to install windows and all the basic apps and security settings takes bloody ages ( though you could cheat and use the cloud to save time by not installng some apps ) and it's not quite as bad when a machine comes preinstalled

It's horses for courses really, many apps are only written for windows ( AutoCAD / Games / certain devices ) in which case you have no choice.

As for facebook & co. they keep changing stuff all the time

Live CD's are great and a big plus for linux but the average user generally won't care about OS install time as they are going to buy a PC that comes pre-installed with the OS and in some cases stuff like word, AV.

Although I can probably get a full install and all the basic apps with linux nearly as fast as the searching for and installing apps \ security that comes with a basic windows install.

This adds to some of the perception about linux not supporting hardware. A windows box generally comes preinstalled with drivers so it looks like it all works, but in linux you've to go find drivers as it's a manual install.

In truth for most general hardware it's easier to install linux as the basic driver in already in the kernel or available through the app manager in alot of cases, while in windows you've to thrall through the manufactures site to get alot of the drivers for a manual windows install

KylieWyley · 05-03-2011 05:06PM

Developers are more likely to have a slant towards linux with its support of open source, terminal + shell scripting over MS Command Prompt, etc.

OP, if you don't like it. Don't use it. Simple as.

evercloserunion · 05-03-2011 08:04PM

4. You can't play any proper games on it...

Maybe not your super-new super-cool pwnz0r FPS games like COD or Halo, but there are some fantastic games for Linux, depending on what you're looking for. Try looking around here or here, for a start. Most of them have the benefit of being free as well.

The rest I won't bother with, but to say that none of the games you can play on Linux are "proper" games is downright silly.

PrzemoF · 06-03-2011 12:23AM

but43r wrote: »

So, I have been playing around with Ubuntu for a while and after using it can't really understand why people go on about how good it is

Can you give us _one_ thing that we measure/verify/check ? You said it's slow - measure boot time or run a test. Don't like the way ubuntu looks? Go to gnome-look.org and find something that you like. What do you mean by "proper games"? If a linux-box misbehaves it tells you in log files what is wrong - you need some knowledge (or google) to fix it.

I helped yesterday to install linux on a friend's PC - he says it seems faster than windows 7 and he really likes virtual desktops.

Now my part of flame war ;-)
Is it possible to turn on 4 (or 15) virtual desktops in windows?

Johnboy1951 · 06-03-2011 01:45AM

but43r wrote: »

What distro would you suggest to somebody who is used to Windows and mostly use it for Web Development and surfing the net?

You did not say what apps you use or if you use Wine.

I would suggest one of the versions of PCLinuxOS ..... whichever desktop suits your needs and hardware from Openbox, E17, LXDE, Xfce, Gnome, or KDE
Also look at Linux Mint which is based off Ubuntu.

There is a tool on the PCLinuxOS ISO to create a LiveUSB with persistence for a better experience when running live -- good for testing if it suits. You can install apps and update etc and have the changes saved to the stick automatically.
If the USB stick is big enough you can put several versions of the distro on the one stick so you can compare and thus decide which one suits your needs.

Another I would look at is Mandriva .. an excellent distro.

Although I have not used it recently, Mepis, was, and likely still is, another solid distro.

PCLOS stands out from those as it is a rolling distro ..... you keep it fully updated and get the latest packages as they are released ..... on a continuing basis.

Just my thoughts ...... it is worth spending the time to check out alternatives to see what suits you best.
We all have our favourites .......

regards.

selephonic · 11-03-2011 04:46PM

but43r wrote: »

1. It's very slow - Even on machine that runs windows 7 without any problems I found Ubuntu 10.04 is very slow.

Did you install through Wubi and have you got the right graphics driver enabled? I've found that on some computers Wubi can be really slow to use, while a proper install flies along.

but43r wrote: »

2. It's not too pretty to look at - It looked very pretty when I first installed it but after a while you start noticing how it's actually not. E.g. Skype on Ubuntu looks uber ugly + the video function doesn't work right (ok, thats not an actual Ubuntu but I'd say it's to do with the graphics API's).

I disagree. With a little work it can look fantastic. I think KDE is really pretty although I find it slower and kinda buggy. I find that the Skype interface is really cluttered on windows now, much prefer the linux version. The video function works great for me.

but43r wrote: »

3. It's not even that reliable - it froze plenty of times on me and good few minor bugs.

We have multiple installs running for months with little or no slow down or crashes. Only time to restart is when an update requires it.

but43r wrote: »

4. You can't play any proper games on it...

This is probably true regarding most modern games, although that isn't something that concerns me.

but43r wrote: »

Ok, it's free but still, saying that it's better than Windows for a typical user would be wrong.

I think its a better OS for the majority of users. Once its configured it needs very little maintenance. I installed Ubuntu 8.04 on my sisters laptop when that came out and its still running perfect for her(although I should upgrade it). No worries over virus or malware, and after all most users just require Email, Internet, Media and Office applications. Linux/Ubuntu provides all this, securely and for free.

TheDoc · 22-03-2011 04:16PM

Dr_Phil wrote: »

1. That's bull IMO, much faster for me than any Windows machine I use'd to work on.
2. When you discover how to use themes you will change your mind.
3. But Windows never froze, me arse!
4. That's why I bought Ps3, PSP, DS and Wii

Just stay with Windows if you don't like Ubuntu.

I am with the OP tbh, not bashing windows. I use linux on my laptop and I'm trying to get into it.

I run linux on my server too but granted I do not use it alot but there are some great functionality, but I must admit nothing I oculdnt do with Windows. i'm very much just using to get myself up to speed and learn new things .

But on your points.

1) Windows 7 operates alot smoother and faster then Linux ( Ran ubuntu and mint)
2) The look of the OS isn't great I agree, blocky and 90'sish. Tried numerous differnt themes.
3) Never had a crash on either OS on my laptop, nor my server.
4) As a big PC gamer, linux is like a side project, it cant run games, and there is so many issues with the port overs or wine conversions.

I'm mainting a couple of websites and plan to use my server alot more so hopefully my laptop will get more use over the coming months. I know Windows inside out and I really want to learn linux to a medium standard that i can perform some cool things especially through SSH.

Perhaps the OP posted for the same reason I feel about Linux, like me he probably feels like his missing something, or doing somehting wrong.

Its not coming into the linux forum bashing, i dont post here alot but im always reading, and its probably, like the op, a case that I'm a beginner and havnt unlocked its full potential

Naikon · 23-03-2011 01:57AM

TheDoc wrote: »

1) Windows 7 operates alot smoother and faster then Linux ( Ran ubuntu and mint)

Tell me, what OS does the current fastest supercomputer in the world run?. I am guessing it's not Windows based. Both are great OS's. Nothing more, nothing less.

Johnboy1951 · 25-03-2011 12:15AM

TheDoc wrote:

4) As a big PC gamer, linux is like a side project, it cant run games, and there is so many issues with the port overs or wine conversions.

What you probably mean, and should have said, is that it cannot run Windows games.

Yes it can run any games that are written for it.

johnnya4tdi · 30-03-2011 01:47AM

but43r wrote: »

So, I have been playing around with Ubuntu for a while and after using it can't really understand why people go on about how good it is.

1. It's very slow - Even on machine that runs windows 7 without any problems I found Ubuntu 10.04 is very slow.

2. It's not too pretty to look at - It looked very pretty when I first installed it but after a while you start noticing how it's actually not. E.g. Skype on Ubuntu looks uber ugly + the video function doesn't work right (ok, thats not an actual Ubuntu but I'd say it's to do with the graphics API's).

3. It's not even that reliable - it froze plenty of times on me and good few minor bugs.

4. You can't play any proper games on it...

Ok, it's free but still, saying that it's better than Windows for a typical user would be wrong.

Anyway, everybody has their opinion and I have outlined mine above.

If somebody has some opinion on Ubuntu it would be nice to hear it.

i think its more secure ie less viruses etc

also if you want a nice pretty look , download macubuntu , i use it , its nice some cool like 3d 4 desktop window thingy some cool visuals when moving windows,

, prob bad description, try it move your mouse pointer to each bottom corner or the window and see what happens, also hold win key and press E. you can pick something on on one of the 4 desktops and drag it into any of the other 3 ,

i have 3 button mouse the middle one is a scroller, when i press it on an empty space on the desktop the 4 desktops show up in 3d ,while keeping the middle scroll button pressed and moving the mouse i can scroll around the desktop and release on the one want to see, cool

if you want to play games then boot into win ,

i think you can use some program called wine for some games, that right guys?

humbert · 31-03-2011 06:03AM

Naikon wrote: »

Tell me, what OS does the current fastest supercomputer in the world run?. I am guessing it's not Windows based. Both are great OS's. Nothing more, nothing less.

That's a specious argument. Unix is much more customisable and therefore than be more easily tailored to architecture of a supercomputer. It has absolutely no bearing on which is faster on a standard desktop.

Having used Ubuntu and Gentoo I have to agree that Windows 7 is impressively snappy and window management under Linux can be frustratingly clunky.

TheDoc · 31-03-2011 08:30PM

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

What you probably mean, and should have said, is that it cannot run Windows games.

Yes it can run any games that are written for it.

ok if we are nitpicking.

Any games that I want to play, that dont look like they were "written" for the sega megadrive.

I'm giving ubuntu desktop another shot this weekend, or I'm open to suggestions.

I've a server gathering dust that I want to setup to stream media throughout the household, I want it to download my torrents and I want it to have remote access from mobile devices aswell as SSH access.

I'm sure there is other things then ubuntu so I'm open to suggestions

Plan on using ubuntu on the laptop to basically use as a remote control centre for it

Johnboy1951 · 01-04-2011 09:39AM

Johnboy1951 wrote:

What you probably mean, and should have said, is that it cannot run Windows games.

Yes it can run any games that are written for it.

TheDoc wrote: »

ok if we are nitpicking.

Any games that I want to play, that dont look like they were "written" for the sega megadrive.

I see ....... the fact that

Windows cannot run games not written for it

is not the same as

Linux cannot run games not written for it

........ so Linux is specifically lacking but Windows is not .....

interesting logic

Naikon · 01-04-2011 10:36AM

humbert wrote: »

That's a specious argument. Unix is much more customisable and therefore than be more easily tailored to architecture of a supercomputer. It has absolutely no bearing on which is faster on a standard desktop.

Having used Ubuntu and Gentoo I have to agree that Windows 7 is impressively snappy and window management under Linux can be frustratingly clunky.

Ok, I was wrong on this one.

evercloserunion · 01-04-2011 01:17PM

Any games that I want to play, that dont look like they were "written" for the sega megadrive.

Speak for yourself. The OP (who you are "with"), can't understand why other people like Ubuntu when it can't play the specific games that he wants to play.

Which is ridiculous. It plays the games I want to play, why should I be concerned that someone else can't play his games on my laptop?

TheDoc · 01-04-2011 02:53PM

evercloserunion wrote: »

Speak for yourself. The OP (who you are "with"), can't understand why other people like Ubuntu when it can't play the specific games that he wants to play.

Which is ridiculous. It plays the games I want to play, why should I be concerned that someone else can't play his games on my laptop?

ok ok this is going way beyond the point.

Simply put any games I've tried loading into Linux just hasnt worked. These games being World of Warcraft, Call of Duty, Battlefield bad company 2 and a few other titles from my steam catalogue.

The sudden backlash of smart remarks and nitpicking though doesnt help to lend to the sweeping generalisation about linux users though : /

Naikon · 01-04-2011 05:30PM

TheDoc wrote: »

ok ok this is going way beyond the point.

Simply put any games I've tried loading into Linux just hasnt worked. These games being World of Warcraft, Call of Duty, Battlefield bad company 2 and a few other titles from my steam catalogue.

The sudden backlash of smart remarks and nitpicking though doesnt help to lend to the sweeping generalisation about linux users though : /

Do actually understand the primary strengths of GNU/Linux though? Sure, alot of OSS games may look **** in your eyes, but have you actually thought about the merits? The mere fact these games are under the GPL means you are free to redistribute the games, modify them, fix bugs, and hell, even enjoy them without being trampled on by a company, who presumes it's customers are stealing from them. Give bzflag, Oolite or even Wesnoth a shot. Sure, not as nice looking at all, but there is some solid gameplay. GNU/Linux can stand on it's own two feet, irrespective of what some asinine company thinks. Binary blobs die with the OS, source code is forever. Sorry OP, but you are missing the point. Like Commercial stuff? Why are you using Linux tbh. Unix is all about source code availability. Always has been.

Ubuntu better than windows - WHY?

Comments