Interested in Ubuntu vs. Vista?

[KittenKoder]

It shows Vista first (in case you don't recognize it) then some of the Ubuntu desktop effects, just some of them, not even all of them. Also you can integrate more in as they are programmed. Best of all, it's ALL free for Ubuntu, not just some of it.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tLnxBgj16A]YouTube - Windows Vista (Aero) vs Linux Ubuntu (Beryl)[/ame]

 

[Steerpike]

I like Ubuntu as well as various other Linux distros. What do you think about non-tech types using it, though? I've installed it for various people who aren't really computer savvy, and with bad results in the end every time. I go back and forth on whether I think Linux is yet ready for non-tech types. It has come a LONG way, but there is still some road to travel.

My 13 year old daughter really likes SUSE, though

 

[KittenKoder]

For the less experienced in computers ... I didn't find it any more complicated to install (8.0.4) than Windoze, unless you do a dual boot then it's a little more complicated. The only thing that they should do is make the swap-file partition setup a little easier to understand, but they're working on it. The problem is that people have just gotten too comfortable with one way of doing it (Windoze) that even a slightly different wording on their menus will make people worry. What one Ubuntu fan has recommended (a very good recommendation to) is to use Ubuntu for 30 days without touching Windoze or Mac, then decide. It's breaking habits and stepping from the comfort zone we have created that usually makes the transition hard for people. I myself was scared to drop Windoze completely, but after 3 days I just eradicated XP from my hard-drive and haven't regretted it at all.

My only real complaint about Mac is that it's all trendy instead of useful. It's an expensive toy for most. Though Apple is going to try to break free of that soon to make it an expensive toy that's useful. I use a lot of tools, but can never find one that fits most times so have to write the code myself. Windoze is a monster for programmers (especially in Java which I use almost exclusively now) and Mac isn't much better. But Mac is faster than Windoze (mostly because the software and hardware are designed for each other) making it ideal for those who do a lot of multimedia or simple communications, but Linux is the only one that's really good for everything (except a lack of video editors, but meh, give it time). As the use of Linux/Ubuntu increases more apps will become available, many programmers are just fed up with Windoze enough that third party Windoze programs will probably fade into the shadows soon. Mac will be able to pick up some of the third party software though because of them opening the *nix kernel in their newer OS's, but Linux will take most of them. Almost all programmers and computer techies I know are raving about Ubuntu now, at least the ones that actually know about computers.

 

[Steerpike]

I'm not talking about the install. I'm talking about the use.

For example, try getting a non-techy (or even a lot of techies) to make wireless work in a Linux distro where it doesn't run out of the box.

One person I installed it for went and bought an HP all-in-one printer. Guess what - doesn't work in Linux. They have to stay in Windows for it.

The most common complaint I got was the person wanting to download some app of the web, only there is no Linux version. Or if there is they have trouble installing it, even with a package manager in place.

I think you have to take into account that what may seem simple or desirable to the two of us wouldn't work for the average computer user. I've tried to disseminate Linux among people I know. People just haven't been receptive to it because of the headaches if they want to do something that it doesn't do 'out of the box.'

The tendencey in the Linux community is to argue with the above viewpoint, or rationalize it, or make a defense of Linux. The reality is, those in the Linux community need to realize and admit that Linux is nowhere near friendly enough for the average unskilled person to displace Windows any time soon. And I say that as a big fan of Linux. If it weren't for gaming, I'd eliminate Windows entirely.

 

[KittenKoder]

I'm not talking about the install. I'm talking about the use.

For example, try getting a non-techy (or even a lot of techies) to make wireless work in a Linux distro where it doesn't run out of the box.

One person I installed it for went and bought an HP all-in-one printer. Guess what - doesn't work in Linux. They have to stay in Windows for it.

The most common complaint I got was the person wanting to download some app of the web, only there is no Linux version. Or if there is they have trouble installing it, even with a package manager in place.

I think you have to take into account that what may seem simple or desirable to the two of us wouldn't work for the average computer user. I've tried to disseminate Linux among people I know. People just haven't been receptive to it because of the headaches if they want to do something that it doesn't do 'out of the box.'

The tendencey in the Linux community is to argue with the above viewpoint, or rationalize it, or make a defense of Linux. The reality is, those in the Linux community need to realize and admit that Linux is nowhere near friendly enough for the average unskilled person to displace Windows any time soon. And I say that as a big fan of Linux. If it weren't for gaming, I'd eliminate Windows entirely.

I have never noticed most of it, using Synaptic and doing a search for the brand name always pulls up what I need, it just takes a bit more time. Though most of it was already plug and play, my wi-fi for instance, because I rely heavily on USB (my preferred hardware is all USB). As for 'out of the box', even in Windoze you have to use installs in most cases, with Linux (since most companies were told to stop compiling for *nix or lose their MS licenses) you just have to use Synaptic or one of the other apt-get systems to search for the drivers. Mac doesn't have this problem because again, their hardware and software are designed for each other. I wonder how anyone ever got along with MS-DOS in the past at this rate though, you didn't even have the benefit of point and click for installs or GUI driven managers.

It is as I said, people just need to learn to step out of the comfort zone. As for gaming, I don't do gaming (except old DOS games, love em), but many of the newer games will soon have Linux ports (most of the engines have recently been released as open source). But since most gamers were not using Linux it's slow in coming, even Open Source obeys the laws of supply and demand sometimes. Again for the installs, people need to step out of comfort zones. I have only had to search for one driver, but that was because I was looking at the wrong name.

 

[Diuretic]

I suppose I've been using Ubuntu for so long I forget that it might not be that easy to use for someone migrating from Windows to Ubuntu. I do remember a little bit of frustration but I'm such a stubborn mongrel that I'll keep at something until I make it work but I learned a lot in that process too.

I had a look at DreamLinux which runs xfce and has a Mac look and feel about it. I had to search the forums to work out how to get the internet connection up and running, that's automated in Ubunt. When I got the info I needed it was no big deal and it connected fine. Then I tried to install it on the hard drive. No good. Three attempts but it froze. I know that's just my experience and it could be something in my computer that's causing the problem. I think if someone could get it installed it would be a very good system for a newly migrated Windows or Mac user, it certainly worked nicely off the live cd.

I'm now mucking about with OpenSolaris. I fully expect to be bashing my forehead on the keyboard very shortly

 

[Gord]

I'm not talking about the install. I'm talking about the use.

For example, try getting a non-techy (or even a lot of techies) to make wireless work in a Linux distro where it doesn't run out of the box.

One person I installed it for went and bought an HP all-in-one printer. Guess what - doesn't work in Linux. They have to stay in Windows for it.

The most common complaint I got was the person wanting to download some app of the web, only there is no Linux version. Or if there is they have trouble installing it, even with a package manager in place.

I think you have to take into account that what may seem simple or desirable to the two of us wouldn't work for the average computer user. I've tried to disseminate Linux among people I know. People just haven't been receptive to it because of the headaches if they want to do something that it doesn't do 'out of the box.'

The tendencey in the Linux community is to argue with the above viewpoint, or rationalize it, or make a defense of Linux. The reality is, those in the Linux community need to realize and admit that Linux is nowhere near friendly enough for the average unskilled person to displace Windows any time soon. And I say that as a big fan of Linux. If it weren't for gaming, I'd eliminate Windows entirely.

I agree. Linux is not novice friendly. Windows is already a pain for those who have problems and know nothing about computers. At least they can call a friend or relative that might know enough to help them out. But with Linux? Not a chance. If it gets broke it's going to stay broke unless they can find someone they can pay to fix it. Linux is a long way from replacing Windows...

 

[KittenKoder]

I suppose I've been using Ubuntu for so long I forget that it might not be that easy to use for someone migrating from Windows to Ubuntu. I do remember a little bit of frustration but I'm such a stubborn mongrel that I'll keep at something until I make it work but I learned a lot in that process too.

I had a look at DreamLinux which runs xfce and has a Mac look and feel about it. I had to search the forums to work out how to get the internet connection up and running, that's automated in Ubunt. When I got the info I needed it was no big deal and it connected fine. Then I tried to install it on the hard drive. No good. Three attempts but it froze. I know that's just my experience and it could be something in my computer that's causing the problem. I think if someone could get it installed it would be a very good system for a newly migrated Windows or Mac user, it certainly worked nicely off the live cd.

I'm now mucking about with OpenSolaris. I fully expect to be bashing my forehead on the keyboard very shortly

You pointed out what I have said, it's the comfort zone and people are just too stubborn to give another OS a chance. The funny thing is that it's those who argue about whether Windoze or MacOS is better that are the most stubborn. With the amount of use computers get though it amazes me that people are still not yet use to them. Most schools even start teaching their students how to use (and even abuse ... grr) computers from Elementary age. I haven't tried OpenSolaris, but if you keep at it eventually you'll get it. Just be ready to find out it may or may not be what you expect it to, LOL. That was my problem with switching, I had to adjust to a set of new apps and new ways to do things, but I got over it quick (my talent is the ability to learn quickly). But since I did I also learned that Mac isn't so bad (I use to be a die-hard Windoze supporter until a few months ago). Until my switch all I knew about Linux/Unix was server apps, never thought of it as a possible replacement for Windoze until I stumbled on Ubuntu. Then I realized I didn't have to stick with an OS which the company doesn't really care about the user as much as they pretend. Still haven't gotten a response to my email about a Java app problem (six months and counting).

 

[Diuretic]

My openSolaris experiment stuffed up, All was fine but no internet connection. I think it's my computer and not openSolaris. I have three possible ethernet connections and I have no doubt poor old openSolaris went for eth0 which is crap. I'm just a bit annoyed I have to disable the connection wiz to get the OS to find the right ethernet connection. I hate not being able to dig in, reminds me of Windows.

 

[Steerpike]

I suppose I've been using Ubuntu for so long I forget that it might not be that easy to use for someone migrating from Windows to Ubuntu.

Try installing Ubuntu on a laptop with broadcom wireless (which many of them have). Last version of Ubuntu I put on my laptop required A LOT of time in the Terminal to get wireless to work. A computer novice would never have been able to do it.

gOS on the other hand was relatively simple for wireless on the same laptop, but even then I had to use fwcutter and ndiswrapper. Again, a novice would have been seriously lost.

Dream Linux looks nice to me. I'm trying the pen drive version of that this weekend.

 

[KittenKoder]

My openSolaris experiment stuffed up, All was fine but no internet connection. I think it's my computer and not openSolaris. I have three possible ethernet connections and I have no doubt poor old openSolaris went for eth0 which is crap. I'm just a bit annoyed I have to disable the connection wiz to get the OS to find the right ethernet connection. I hate not being able to dig in, reminds me of Windows.

One of the flaws of having so many choices is that developers can't account for all possible variables and rely on feedback (which most people don't really send any). I just use the standard network applet in Ubuntu for it so it wasn't that difficult. Also my desktop only has room for one ethernet adapter at a time anyway so I never had a problem with the choices. I hate dealing with hardware settings as a whole though, every OS has flaws there, Windoze you have to crack to adjust them with any freedom while Ubuntu you have to look at the name for it. Even then I have to tweak it a lot no matter which OS is used.