XP,Vista Verses Ubuntu ?

[M.Butzin]

Reading through this user group there are many comments regarding the
differences between the MS operating systems and Ubuntu O/S.
Some of the threads have gotten quite heated but unless my eyes decieve me
I
have really read a good reson to switch from MS to Ubuntu.
We have many sales pitches for the MS O/S's but only vague pitches for
Ubuntu.
Putdowns and curt comments aren't sales pitches.
What is it about Ubuntu that would make a person want to change to it ?
What
has it got the MS O/S's don't have ?

Seeing as a lot of novices and newbies read this forum, give them a reason
to try Ubuntu over MS ?
Now if this can be done without childish recriminations against authors
this
might be a good chance to pass on some good information based on facts and
figures.

As a personal comment about any MS operating system that in initial
release
has problems and is buggy. There are many things in this world that have
problems when first released like cars RV's and alike. Nothing in this
world
is perfect from the start, but in time they can and will improve with
consumer input and refinement.

Bob,
It seems to me that MS itself gives up and tries to "start over", eventually
they stop giving support to previous OS because the
1. Hardware changes.
2.It's cheaper to start over.
3.They can write the "New" OS so that it will not work with hardware that
consumers already own.

instead of truly fixing an OS so that it is secure and functions properly,
they release a few update for the biggest problems. Then they start"building
a new OS and stupidly announce "IT'S THE MOST SECURE OS EVER!". Planned
obsolescence......

MB

 

[Guest]

Reading through this user group there are many comments regarding the
differences between the MS operating systems and Ubuntu O/S.
Some of the threads have gotten quite heated but unless my eyes decieve me I
have really read a good reson to switch from MS to Ubuntu.
We have many sales pitches for the MS O/S's but only vague pitches for Ubuntu.
Putdowns and curt comments aren't sales pitches.
What is it about Ubuntu that would make a person want to change to it ? What
has it got the MS O/S's don't have ?

Seeing as a lot of novices and newbies read this forum, give them a reason
to try Ubuntu over MS ?
Now if this can be done without childish recriminations against authors this
might be a good chance to pass on some good information based on facts and
figures.

As a personal comment about any MS operating system that in initial release
has problems and is buggy. There are many things in this world that have
problems when first released like cars RV's and alike. Nothing in this world
is perfect from the start, but in time they can and will improve with
consumer input and refinement.

 

[Spocks Buddy]

XP rules....

faster than vista by faaaaaaaaaaarrrrr
more compatible than ubuntu by faaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrr

the only problem it has is viruses and other malware
compared to linux that is.. because vista is in big trouble..
its less secure than XP.

 

[Guest]

This is a Vista forum. If you wish to inquire about Ubuntu you should go to
the Ubuntu forums.

As for the heated arguments about Ubuntu versus Vista or XP I would suggest
that everyone take the arguments elsewhere. If Ubuntu or any Linux OS is so
great and technogically advanced you should just go ahead and use it.

I am totally content with Microsoft's operating systems, bugs and all. I
will continue to purchase Microsoft's latest operating systems whenever they
become available.

I don't need to be criticized or classified as stupid because I made the
choice to go with Microsoft. I respect the decisions of others and people
should respect my decision.

The arguments I have seen concerning these issues are for the most part
childish and petty. They waste forum space and valuable time. I don't know
anything about Linux and I don't wish to learn anything about it because I am
content with what I have.

The quickest way to put a stop to all these Microsoft-Linux arguments is to
not answer the question or statement. When children realize that their
goading will not produce an answer or reaction they will cease to annoy us.
Yes, I am referring to both sides of the argument.

It disturbs me when a Linux fan consumes my time with his or her unswerving
faith and satisfaction with Linux and then continues on about how Microsoft
sucks. I don't want to hear it. Go to a Linux forum and rant about it. It is
equally disturbing when a Microsoft fan badmouths Linux or responds in a
disrespectful manner.

Yes, everyone has a right to voice their opinions. However, if their
opinions have nothing to do with the subject in question they are wasting my
time. I wouldn't consider going to a Linux forum and trashing the Linux
operating systems.

C.B.

 

[Frank Bright]

Reading through this user group there are many comments regarding the
differences between the MS operating systems and Ubuntu O/S.
Some of the threads have gotten quite heated but unless my eyes decieve me
I
have really read a good reson to switch from MS to Ubuntu.
We have many sales pitches for the MS O/S's but only vague pitches for
Ubuntu.
Putdowns and curt comments aren't sales pitches.
What is it about Ubuntu that would make a person want to change to it ?
What
has it got the MS O/S's don't have ?

Seeing as a lot of novices and newbies read this forum, give them a reason
to try Ubuntu over MS ?
Now if this can be done without childish recriminations against authors
this
might be a good chance to pass on some good information based on facts and
figures.

As a personal comment about any MS operating system that in initial
release
has problems and is buggy. There are many things in this world that have
problems when first released like cars RV's and alike. Nothing in this
world
is perfect from the start, but in time they can and will improve with
consumer input and refinement.

Hi,
I've sort of shared my experience already and I think I'm fairly impartial,
so I'll share again. I have MS and Ubuntu as dual boots on 2 laptops. One
is an older Gateway Pent 4 laptop that I'm not using as much and the other
is my new HP Core 2 Duo DV9030us laptop. First, let me say, I am Not a
Techie
and certainly not a Coder and I in no way, shape or form ever expected I
would dabble in a Linux OS.

My Gateway laptop has Vista on it - seeing how Vista ran so well with its
ATI (vs Nvidia) graphics card opened my eyes. My other, newer HP laptop is
for pro audio so I needed to keep XP on it to run pro 3rd partry
applications. I have both dual-booting with Ubuntu now, and the Ubuntu
install was easy and went smoothly on both laptops.

From what I see and maybe this seems cold, a good bit of this is about
money - what one can or cannot afford. It's that simple...Can you afford a
new Volvo or are you in a position where you can only afford a used car?
Ubuntu has a lot of free software included and you can get to many of the
same places as with Vista or XP, but the ride is a lot less luxurious. Now
you can fix it up and customize much of Ubuntu - inside and outside. I got a
kick out of putting up some Vista wallpaper for my Ubuntu desktop. (Is that
cheating?) There is also a whole different level of troubleshooting with
Linux and it helps to have some innate technical ability, however raw. I
have some technical ability but I am in no way used to dealing with Linux
drivers yet. I may not ever get there; Asi es la vida.

With Vista, many people have pooh-poohed its new graphics by calling them
'eye candy', but it does remain that Vista has upp-ed the bar on having
goodlooking desktop graphics. It was long overdue and I applaud MS for doing
it. Vista is a luxurious ride and I see nothing but positives there. Great
graphics are in large part what a computer is all about, I believe.

On the other hand, Ubuntu is extremely intriguing because it is so
fascinating to see what one can do with a totally free and open source OS.
Maybe it's like the Town vs Country thing. I don't mind spending a day or so
in the country - it gives you a break - but at nightime, I want my Town
comforts. But this is me. Everyone's different and ...

That's what makes the world go 'round !!!

Frank

www.frankbright.com

 

[Guest]

here's my take on vista versus Ubuntu this is quality and why I'm dual
booting with both

 

[Guest]

Planned obsolescence has been around since the beginning of mankind (or
womankind, humankind, whatever you prefer).

What's new?

C.B.

 

[mae]

My policy has been to not use a product promoted by spammers.
If of any value, would not need to spam a help group for recognition.
Advising a newbie to use a spammers product sets a bad precedence.
--
mae

| Reading through this user group there are many comments regarding the
| differences between the MS operating systems and Ubuntu O/S.
| Some of the threads have gotten quite heated but unless my eyes decieve me
I
| have really read a good reson to switch from MS to Ubuntu.
-snip-

 

[ray]

Reading through this user group there are many comments regarding the
differences between the MS operating systems and Ubuntu O/S.
Some of the threads have gotten quite heated but unless my eyes decieve me I
have really read a good reson to switch from MS to Ubuntu.
We have many sales pitches for the MS O/S's but only vague pitches for Ubuntu.
Putdowns and curt comments aren't sales pitches.
What is it about Ubuntu that would make a person want to change to it ? What
has it got the MS O/S's don't have ?

Seeing as a lot of novices and newbies read this forum, give them a reason
to try Ubuntu over MS ?
Now if this can be done without childish recriminations against authors this
might be a good chance to pass on some good information based on facts and
figures.

As a personal comment about any MS operating system that in initial release
has problems and is buggy. There are many things in this world that have
problems when first released like cars RV's and alike. Nothing in this world
is perfect from the start, but in time they can and will improve with
consumer input and refinement.

I see three main advantages of Linux over MS:

1) price - or lack of price since Linux is free (as in free beer and as in
freedom)

2) security - malware problems are not an issue for Linux.

3) stability - I've run Linux on numerous computers over the last five
years and I've never seen a system crash that could not ultimately be
traced back to a hardware malfunction. The desktop will rarely freeze up,
but that can almost always be solved by restarting the desktop rather than
rebooting the computer.

MS has advantages too:

1) more hardware will work with MS because it's designed to. It may take a
few months before the Linux support comes, but it generally does.

2) there is some software that will only run on MS and has no free
counterpart. There are fewer and fewer of these, as the ability of Linux
to run MS software under WINE or Crossover improves and more native Linux
software becomes available.

From a rational standpoint, I think that's about it. Linux distributions
come with much more software, of course, so you get a functional system to
begin with - you don't have to go buy an office suite and a graphics
editor, etc. - of course you don't really have to buy them with MS either
as the same programs that come with Linux often have versions available
for MS as well.

 

[DanS]

Reading through this user group there are many comments regarding the
differences between the MS operating systems and Ubuntu O/S.
Some of the threads have gotten quite heated but unless my eyes
decieve me I have really read a good reson to switch from MS to
Ubuntu. We have many sales pitches for the MS O/S's but only vague
pitches for Ubuntu. Putdowns and curt comments aren't sales pitches.
What is it about Ubuntu that would make a person want to change to it
? What has it got the MS O/S's don't have ?

Bob, there are plenty of differences. I would suggest you read up on
Linux and how things are done and then just try it, Ubuntu if you like,
and see if suits your needs.

The main question to ask yourself is, 'What do I use my computer for ?'.

Firefox and Thunderbird have Linux versions, as does other Internet s/w
that you may use. Other s/w's have a Linux equivalent. From within
Ubuntu, on the 'Applications', there is a menu item for 'Add/Remove...'.
Clicking here makes Ubuntu go to it's server and show you a list of s/w
that you can d/l and install automatically right from there, fairly easy.
And not saying there are 100's of programs to choose from in each
category, but for average use (internet, some work with images, even the
Microsoft Office mostly-compatible suit OpenOffice is installed by
default. There was even a CAD package called Q-CAD for d/l that looks to
be comparable with an AutoCAD Lite package.)

Linux is not as easily configurable as Windows and may include manually
editing one or more configuration files.

I have found most major hardware vendor also release Linux drivers as
well.....ATI, nVidia, Creative Labs.

There are also ways to run your Windows apps that you absolutely need to
use. You can run a virtual machine of XP or Win9X (or your other OS of
choice). There are also several 'packages' that allow you to run Windows
s/w more natively, like WINE, or Crossover Office, or WinLIB if you have
access to the source code for the specific Windows app you want to use.

'Linux' is also more like a 2 part OS. There is the system core, and a
GUI part, the 'desktop' if you will, Ubuntu uses the Gnome Desktop I
believe. (I should remember, I just installed it last night on my mother-
in-laws soon-to-be new PC.) There's also the KDE desktop, and at least
one or more that I used to know that escape me right now. Of course they
are all very similar and each has it's own couple features that are
unique.

Linux also has sidebars, or gadgets, or whatever you like to call those
hideous desktop 'extensions'.

After getting all of your hardware going, which may be the hardest part,
and the desktop set up the way you like everything else is a matter of
user preference.

In Windows, you can drag'n'drop Start Menu items around. In Ubuntu, you
have to go to a Menu manager.

In Windows, dbl-clicking the top LEFT icon closes the program. In Ubuntu,
it doesn't, it just brings up the system-like menu then closes it again
because it sees it as 2 clicks. The windows still have the min/max/close
buttons in the top RIGHT though.

Give it it a shot, what have you got to lose ? It's certainly not going
to cost you two or three hundred dollars to just try it. Note though,
that booting from a CD and running the 'Live' version is nothing like
running it from the HD.

 

[Guest]

Well Gys/Gals, I didn't start this thread for my benefit as I have already
tested Ubuntu and Vista as well as Longhorn beta 3, but what is good to read
here is good opinions from all so far without all the snide remarks that one
reads on other threads.

I do hope that people read what has been written here and that they will
make up their own minds as to which way to go as far as O/S's go.
Personally I am a MS user because of the things I do on my puter.

Thanks for your input it was well worth reading.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

What is it about Ubuntu that would
make a person want to change to it ? What has it got the MS O/S's don't
have ?

My reason for switching to Ubuntu is not based on its features but on a
fundamental unwillingness to continue using Windows. This is based on
two factors.

First, Vista is expensive and demanding of hardware resources, but it
doesn't offer any real functional improvements over XP.

Second, the licensing terms for Vista are obnoxious. When someone pays
for Vista, they do not buy an OS to use as they see fit for as long as
they might want to use it... instead they pay to lease an OS for a
unspecified period to be determined by Microsoft, which has the power to
disable Vista any time it chooses to do so.

Many legal experts argue that this is an unusual, and legally dubious,
way of licensing intellectual property. But Microsoft has political
clout and immense legal resources. If you want to use their products,
you play by their rules.

I have been a user of Windows since 1992. I have always been willing to
play by Microsoft's rules. But Vista has changed that. I am no longer
willing to do business with Microsoft, unless I absolutely have no other
reasonable choice.

Fortunately, I've reached this impasse at a point where Linux has matured
as a desktop OS. If you want to see what Ubuntu is like, download the
iso and burn it onto a CD. You can then run Ubuntu as a live CD without
changing anything on your hard drive.

Charlie

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

Reading through this user group there are many comments regarding the
differences between the MS operating systems and Ubuntu O/S.
Some of the threads have gotten quite heated but unless my eyes decieve me
I have really read a good reson to switch from MS to Ubuntu.
We have many sales pitches for the MS O/S's but only vague pitches for
Ubuntu. Putdowns and curt comments aren't sales pitches.
What is it about Ubuntu that would make a person want to change to it ?
What has it got the MS O/S's don't have ?

Maybe this article and the link it contains will help explain some of the
differences?

http://www.ubuntunews.info/ubuntu-vs-vista-information-week

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

Planned obsolescence has been around since the beginning of mankind (or
womankind, humankind, whatever you prefer).

What's new?

C.B.

I think you are confused about the difference between planned obsolescence
and innovation. Things have changed over time because of new innovations.
Planned obsolescence on the other hand is a relatively new idea that came
about with the rise of the capitalist economy. It was in this mode of
production that manufacturers learned that by building inferior products
with planned limited lifespans, consumers will be forced to always keep
coming back and purchasing again. A simple example is the refrigerator. It
wasn't uncommon 30 years ago to purchase a refrigerator that would last one
30 years. 25 years, anyways. Today, refrigerators are lucky to make it to
10 years. The result is the consumer is forced to purchase 2 instead of one
like before. That's planned obsolescence.

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[antioch]

Doris - I like this one

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

Doris - I like this one

Yeh, saw it quite awhile ago now. It is definitely funny.

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Leythos]

My reason for switching to Ubuntu is not based on its features but on a
fundamental unwillingness to continue using Windows.

That's the only reason anyone has - Since Linux does not fully support
online games, not support most non-online games, not support some
hardware, not support newer hardware, not support most video cards, not
(Ubuntu) support most wireless with WPA/WPA2, etc....

--
Leythos
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling
a drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(e-mail address removed) (remove 999 for proper email address)

 

[Michael Gould]

Charlie,

These might all be valid reasons, however the Linux desktop market at the
current time is a niche market. If you want to play you have to pay.
I've been in this game as a developer of a commercial product for 15 years
and I have a total of 25 years in the industry in various development
roles. In all this time I've never once had a customer ask me if I could
write an application for Unix or Linux. We do use Linux and Solaris for
our database servers on some customer sites, however I've never been asked
to write a Linux application front-end. All of the products that we
are required by our users to interface with are all Windows based products,
some by OCX and other's by web services. The web services could
run on any platform but the OCX's can only run on MS OS's.

What I'm saying is that for some users the switch to Linux might be possible
but for most that switch is not possible. I'm not a big MS fan, in fact
I don't use any MS products to do development in, but the reality of my
world is that if I want to continue to make a living then MS is really the
only path I have at the time.

BTW, I have 2 machines that are running Vista, one with Business and one
with Home Premium. Both run just fine with Vista installed. Both are
newer machines (Opterton 175 dual core) and AMD Turion X2 - TL 52 and I will
agree with many that you must have the hardware to run Vista.
I've sent newsletters to all of my customers and tell them to stick with
2000 or XP if they have equipment that is over 1 year old.

Best Regards,

Michael Gould

 

[Elian]

Charlie,

These might all be valid reasons, however the Linux desktop market at the
current time is a niche market. If you want to play you have to pay.
I've been in this game as a developer of a commercial product for 15 years
and I have a total of 25 years in the industry in various development
roles. In all this time I've never once had a customer ask me if I could
write an application for Unix or Linux. We do use Linux and Solaris for
our database servers on some customer sites, however I've never been asked
to write a Linux application front-end. All of the products that we
are required by our users to interface with are all Windows based
products, some by OCX and other's by web services. The web services could
run on any platform but the OCX's can only run on MS OS's.

What I'm saying is that for some users the switch to Linux might be
possible but for most that switch is not possible. I'm not a big MS fan,
in fact
I don't use any MS products to do development in, but the reality of my
world is that if I want to continue to make a living then MS is really the
only path I have at the time.

BTW, I have 2 machines that are running Vista, one with Business and one
with Home Premium. Both run just fine with Vista installed. Both are
newer machines (Opterton 175 dual core) and AMD Turion X2 - TL 52 and I
will agree with many that you must have the hardware to run Vista.
I've sent newsletters to all of my customers and tell them to stick with
2000 or XP if they have equipment that is over 1 year old.

Best Regards,

Michael Gould

Well, I personally prefer any Windows over XP! I don't know why, it's maybe
that XP is toocluttered and the part of the time of its wide availability
(2002-2005) was not good for me in personal matters. Anyway, I reccommend
using Windows 98, 98SE, Me or 2000 on older computers. Windows 2000 is more
stable than XP. However, I am very happy that Microsoft finally will make XP
history, I never get to like it! I even think that XP Home is more unstable
than Me. If I have an old or current computer, I'll stay with Windows 2000
till I buy a new one with the fantastic Windows Vista!

 

[Stephan Rose]

That's the only reason anyone has - Since Linux does not fully support
online games, not support most non-online games, not support some
hardware, not support newer hardware, not support most video cards, not
(Ubuntu) support most wireless with WPA/WPA2, etc....

Linux supports online and offline games perfectly fine. It simply does not
support WINDOWS online and offline games.

If developers, who really have it much easier writing cross platform code
(no native UI to deal with), would not stick their head up so far DirectX's
butt that they haven't seen sunlight in years...there would be much more
out there for linux.

As far as newer hardware goes. Does my fully supported 8800 GTX qualify as
newer? Not only is it about as new as it gets, it is also a video card.

The entire lines of ATI and nVidia video cards are supported by Linux. I
think that covers like what, almost all of the video card market out there
that any consumer needs to worry about?

About the only thing I will actually partially agree on is Wireless. It
still is a problem with some manufactures chipsets who absolutely refuse to
support linux in any way. However, chipsets (such as intel chipets) are
fully supported all various feature acronyms that are popular these days
included.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰