Seriously thoughtful Should I switch to Ubuntu, or stay with Windows XP?

[ShortNCuddlyAm]

Originally Posted by Patricia

All of which seems to demonstrate that there is no single solution that will suit everybody. Time to let a thousand flowers bloom...

Very well said

[wodin]

Again;

Originally Posted by wodin

If you need to ask, you'd better stick with Windows. Linux is very capable but is very unfriendly.

Back to my ebook!

[frabjous]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Just went two rounds with Mint Linux Gloria RC1. It won with a straight K.O.

Spend a hour downloading an iso image. Doc says I have to burn an ISO CD and boot from it.

As mentioned, you could have used a USB flash drive, or something else. Check out Unetbootin, for example, which is custom made for this kind of thing.

Anyway, it should be clear this isn't a point against linux in favor of the others; I'd hate to think how hard it would be to try to install Windows without an optical drive or network connection.

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by YGG-

do you know Alternativeto ? It's a great resource!

Interesting link, but I already knew there are a bunch of alternatives for all the major apps. I did enjoy browsing the Synaptic Package Manager for apps and utilities. Unfortunately, some of the software I use are a bit on the esoteric side and trying to find something that works very similarly was too time-consuming.

[djgreedo]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Well, let's see, about Vista, here's a rundown of stuff that I didn't like and that irked me:

Heavy ram usage (Win7 uses a fraction of ram to do the very same thing on the same machine)

Since they are the same OS under the hood, the RAM usage is almost identical. Win7 is slightly more efficient, but not noticably in my experience.

Menu's were all over the place, took twice as long to get anywhere as with XP (Win7 has jumplists on applications, which are very useful)

I agree with that to some extent. Vista was a bit too structured in places, but overall I find that once I got used to Vista it was much easier to use than XP. I don't think I've ever used the 'jumplists' in several months of using Windows 7. I'd really like a taskbar somewhere in between Vista's and 7's.

Slow, very slow, running on 2gb ram and it still felt like I was wading through chocolate to do anything (Win7 feels fast, it reacts much more quickly, my test of this is to run PS CS3 which was a dog on Vista, and now is very comfortable on Win7)

This I don't understand. I ran Vista on several systems, some with as little as 512MB RAM, and never had a speed issue. My main PC during the time I ran Vista had 1GB RAM and was a very modest laptop. It ran super smooth with the aero interface active (and did not have a dedicated GPU either).

My current computers are no faster with Windows 7 than they were with Vista (though I think my laptop boots slightly quicker).

Annoying UAC, yes I could turn it off, but it still annoyed the hell out of me (Win7's iteration of UAC is far more friendly and interrupts you less)

I agree. I still turned it off because one of my most used apps feels the need to fiddle with the Program Files directory...

I assume Vista SP2 will have the same UAC (since 7 is mostly Vista SP2 under the hood).

Crashes (I know you say it's damn near impossible, so I must be the exception to the rule, but I had frequent hard lock-ups on Vista and non-responsive applications. Again, I was using exactly the same machine as I'm using with Win7. Although I must say I have a friend who has no problems at all with Vista, works flawless for him)

It all depends on your hardware and software I suppose. Did you build your own PC while your friend bought one pre-built? I found that my home-built PC had a few issues but my laptop (main PC) never had any problems. The issues could always be traced to a hardware driver or a conflict between two bits of hardware.

The new dock/taskbar I like. It's got the same level of functionality as the OS X variant, but it's far less annoying or distracting.

I half like it, half want the original back (which I know I can sort of get from the settings). I really want some apps to have multiple tabs while keeping the compact width.

Yes, Win7 is not much more than Vista Mark 2, or whatever you'd like to call it, but in my experience with it, it's a whole lot better than Vista. I think of it as Win2000 to the previous Windows ME. For me, and I'm no MS lover, Microsoft have corrected a lot of the mistakes they've made in the past couple of years and brought out the operating system that Vista could have been.

I pretty much agree, however I like Vista more than 7 so far. 7 has a few things I find really useful (dragging windows to the side of the screen to get them auto-sized, etc.), but I'm frustrated by the instability I experience using the same hardware and software as I used with Vista (my media center PC has developed a tendency to stop playing videos halfway through, for example). I shouldn't judge a beta (or RC) though.

Actually I have more of a beef with OS X 10.5 Leopard than I do Vista. I do't know what Apple have done since Tiger, but my machine doesn't seem to like it very much (my ex-machine now, I gave it away).

So you've subjected some poor soul to OS X? Shame on you!

And Ubuntu continually improves and gets better, apart from wireless, which I've always had a problem with on Linux. That's why I'm dual booting at the moment, apart from Photoshop and Office 2007, there's nothing else I miss from windows when I'm in Linux.

What do you miss from Linux when running Windows? Dual booting is a real turnoff for me. I love the freedom to jump between apps, play a game for a while, sync my Zune, etc. without having to reboot.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by frabjous

As mentioned, you could have used a USB flash drive, or something else. Check out Unetbootin, for example, which is custom made for this kind of thing.

Anyway, it should be clear this isn't a point against linux in favor of the others; I'd hate to think how hard it would be to try to install Windows without an optical drive or network connection.

Thanks. Mint 7 RC1 installer under Windows doesn't work, but they promise to have that working for the stable release. Since everybody says that Ubuntu 9.04 is a major jump forward, and the Mint variant sound like what I want, I'll wait for the stable release of Mint 7. Unetbootin doesn't support Mint 7 RC 1 either, so I'll wait. I've got every thing bookmarked. Thanks for the help.

(You think that the Mint people would mention the Unetbootin (or equivalent) in their 77 page support document for those needing to boot off USB. Sigh.)

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by djgreedo

Since they are the same OS under the hood, the RAM usage is almost identical. Win7 is slightly more efficient, but not noticably in my experience.



I agree with that to some extent. Vista was a bit too structured in places, but overall I find that once I got used to Vista it was much easier to use than XP. I don't think I've ever used the 'jumplists' in several months of using Windows 7. I'd really like a taskbar somewhere in between Vista's and 7's.



This I don't understand. I ran Vista on several systems, some with as little as 512MB RAM, and never had a speed issue. My main PC during the time I ran Vista had 1GB RAM and was a very modest laptop. It ran super smooth with the aero interface active (and did not have a dedicated GPU either).

My current computers are no faster with Windows 7 than they were with Vista (though I think my laptop boots slightly quicker).



I agree. I still turned it off because one of my most used apps feels the need to fiddle with the Program Files directory...

I assume Vista SP2 will have the same UAC (since 7 is mostly Vista SP2 under the hood).



It all depends on your hardware and software I suppose. Did you build your own PC while your friend bought one pre-built? I found that my home-built PC had a few issues but my laptop (main PC) never had any problems. The issues could always be traced to a hardware driver or a conflict between two bits of hardware.



I half like it, half want the original back (which I know I can sort of get from the settings). I really want some apps to have multiple tabs while keeping the compact width.



I pretty much agree, however I like Vista more than 7 so far. 7 has a few things I find really useful (dragging windows to the side of the screen to get them auto-sized, etc.), but I'm frustrated by the instability I experience using the same hardware and software as I used with Vista (my media center PC has developed a tendency to stop playing videos halfway through, for example). I shouldn't judge a beta (or RC) though.



So you've subjected some poor soul to OS X? Shame on you!



What do you miss from Linux when running Windows? Dual booting is a real turnoff for me. I love the freedom to jump between apps, play a game for a while, sync my Zune, etc. without having to reboot.

When I'm in Windows I miss Linux's (Ubuntu's) package management. I love how I can install a package from a central repository and the system will update that along with the system. I miss the ridiculous amount of options that can be had on Linux, from something simple like the look of the desktop, to a choice of desktops. I can run Gnome, KDE, Flux whatever takes my fancy at any particular time. I miss the Gnome menu system, which is for me the most efficient of all the OS's. It's so simple, everything is grouped together and in plain English. I miss Linux's (Ubuntu's) handling of file systems and its recognition of file systems. Ubuntu can recognise and format every filesystem I throw at it. Win and Mac have troubles (although Mac should be a lot better considering what it's built upon).

Like I said before, they all have their pro's and cons. Me, I'm quite happy dual booting Ubuntu and Win7 for the moment. I'll take a look at what Snow Leopard brings (mostly speed from what I've read), but I don't think I'll be splashing out again on a shiny new mac, I'm over that now.

PS. On Vista I was using >900mb ram just to get to the desktop (Didn't use the SP, just the first iteration) on Win7 I'm using >=1gb with full desktop, 3-tabs in Firefox, 6 instances of Word open in Office 2007, Soulseek, Utorrent, Antivir and Windows Media Player open playing a video. Maybe the Vista SP's did some kind of miracle when it came to ram usage, but I'd already given up on Vista by that point.

And yes I did build this PC, but that wouldn't account for much when Win7 runs so smoothly and Vista was a hog. Same hardware, different OS, world of difference in my eyes.

[Ankh]

Originally Posted by frabjous

But there's no substitute for familiarity, more ready availability of software, and a broader user base.

And availability of the software should be the major decision point for everybody contemplating a switch to Linux.

I am also a long term Linux user, and that OS is on the target machine at my work. Be it as it may, I still keep VmWare image with XP, to deal with tasks (such as ADE or Sony Reader suite) which can not be accomplished on Linux.

Make a list of software that you need, investigate alternatives and try running Linux in VmWare (free download) virtual machine. See how it goes, the decision is in your hands, where it should be.

[wodin]

Originally Posted by Gideon

VirtualTools should fix that resolution issue. It's called "Guest Additions" under devices.

OK, after much hair pulling, gnashing of teeth, and searching of help forums about how to become root, I got Guest Additions installed, and can now re-size my Ubuntu window to greater than 600X800.



It ain't supposed to be this hard, but in all fairness its not Ubuntu's fault that VBox doesn't install the stuff it needs automatically!

Scroll wheel still doesn't work though. I guess that's my next project.

Yous Guys! you went and got me obsessed, and I could be reading!

[tirsales]

Originally Posted by djgreedo

This I don't understand. I ran Vista on several systems, some with as little as 512MB RAM, and never had a speed issue.

This I dont believe. No really - I've never ever seen a Vista with less then 2GB RAM working w/o speed problems .. (and I've seen a couple of them).
I'm not a Vista Admin, thus I have no idea what they did wrong (apart from a normal installation of Windows Vista).
(Or else you could send me a recipe. I dont use Vista, but I know a couple of people who would be happy )

What do you miss from Linux when running Windows? Dual booting is a real turnoff for me. I love the freedom to jump between apps, play a game for a while, sync my Zune, etc. without having to reboot.

What do I miss from Linux when running Windows? A hell of a lot of stuff (But I'm using Linux since pre-2.2 times, so it's not really a fair answer).
In essence there is not much a normal user will miss between any of those systems - no really, most users (not including gamers) will not see any big difference between Windows, Mac and a user-friendly-optimised Linux. (Oh and all of those systems have some hardware-requirements and hardware-combinations that simply will not work).
Then there are some users that can only work on one of those systems (e.g. I wont find some of the software I need for non-NIX-systems).

[tirsales]

Originally Posted by mores

If you want to stop fiddling around with your system and just use it to get things done, get a mac.

This is SO stereotypical for a Mac user ...

Originally Posted by wodin

Yous Guys! you went and got me obsessed, and I could be reading!

You see - that's the power of Linux

[BlackVoid]

I would have switched to Linux a long time ago, if it were not for the applications. There are a lot more applications for Windows than Linux. Even the Sony Connect software comes for Windows only.

As for Windows versions, Windows XP is THE BEST by far. Vista is SLOW, SLOW, SLOW. AND STUPID. File associations do not work properly under Vista. Default application does not work properly in VISTA. VISTA SUX BIG TIME and I have little hope theat Windows 7 will be better.

Vista is also incompatible with a lot of applications. I dread the day when new software will be no longer compatible with XP. Likely, that will be the time to switch to Linux.

[smurphy]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

Windows XP is about to be superseded by Windows 7, I think.

Of course, philosophically, this probably doesn't change a thing with your feelings about Windows.

Isn't there a version of Linux that's now very friendly? What type of Linux are the new Netbooks being loaded with?


Don

Hmmmm...
IMHO - Linux/UBuntu is easyer to be installed than anything else.
Just take a live CD, and test it out. If you want to install it - click on the install button, answer the 6 questions asked, and read news, browse the web or read your mails while the installation takes place.
After that - forget about Antivirus etc. and have a look at the http://www.howtoforge.com/the-perfec...op-ubuntu-9.04 page to download all the Commercial software that can not be packaged due to Licencing reasons.
You' ll find also the details (with screen-shots) on how to install UBuntu itself BTW ...

After that - enjoy.
PS: My Wife and Mother are using these ... so it is definitly easy for them too

[astra]

Originally Posted by smurphy

After that - forget about Antivirus

Could you explain it please?

[tirsales]

Originally Posted by astra

Could you explain it please?

There are nearly no viruses for Linux - ntl. I still have an Antivir (opensource) running (if not for my own protection, then I could (at least) tell others 'bout virus I found in their files )