Are You 'Gutsy' Enough to Replace Your OS with Linux?
One thing is clear with new Linux distros such as Ubuntu's just-released "Gutsy Gibbon", or version 7.10, and openSUSE's 10.3, nipping at Windows' and Mac OS X's heels: The desktop OS is at a crossroads.
The Windows vs. Mac debate winds on, but as desktop apps become less critical to everyday computing with Web apps gearing up, the OS, er, platform, becomes less relevant.
And who does not like Free? Free OSes, free office suites and more galore make Linux look like a winner.
However, what's less clear, despite mainstream reports suggesting Linux has come of age, is whether this adolesecent desktop OS is right for everyday computer
users' homes.
Mac people argue often that Mac OS just works. Vista has come a long way, baby, in chasing Mac on that. With Linux, however, I can't help think -- despite radical improvements on the user interface and package installers (read: installing software) -- that it is still a step back to the day when Windows was still a pretty face on DOS. It's just too "tweaky" still for me.
It is a big leap for non-techies to replace Windows or Mac OS outright with Linux. And that is understood by groups pushing Linux on the desktop. Ubuntu can be run in full by booting from CD first and offers a partitioner, but openSUSE takes the cake between them on making partitioning a no-brainer, recognizing the Windows install -- almost as well as Apple's BootCamp.
Ahead of our desktop Linux guide, which will post online next week, and upcoming head-to-head review of the two latest desktop Linux contenders a week later, I leave with you this warning: Having had Ubuntu eat my Vista partition just last night with little prompting or even recognizing I had Vista installed on my Dell laptop, I can say openSUSE beats Ubuntu hands-down on that. Just be very careful if Ubuntu is your chosen one -- it has a partitioner but it was not as obvious to me.
On main interface too, I think openSUSE has Ubuntu beaten, with its very thoughtfully designed menus and control centers. Ubuntu can be tweaked to look more like openSUSE, or SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop, Novell's commercial distro, for that matter. It can even be made to look like a Mac, as can openSUSE.
But Ubuntu's latest takes the prize in two areas that have plagued desktop Linux: Installing packages, or software, and font rendering. Installing software is easier with Ubuntu than in openSUSE, which is trying hard with its one-click install site. And font rendering in Ubuntu is on par with Mac or Windows -- finally.
You still can't run iTunes, but both are much, much better on music, photos -- you name it.
But until a default installer arrives that is a hybrid of the best of Ubuntu or openSUSE, desktop Linux is not for me right now. I just don't have the time for it.
You may have the time and desire to go the extra mile, and if so, I'd put the time into Ubuntu, and make it look like openSUSE. You'll end up with a an experience much closer to Mac and Windows.
But, does that not beg the question: Why desktop Linux at home? Sticking it to the man and getting it and an office suite for free is noble. But cost savings over XP home, still available in Dells and Lenovos, at least for while longer, is marginal when talking one or two machines. That said, it really adds up for small, medium and large businesses.
You have my take. Check out our Linux switcher's guide next week before jumping in over your head. And our Ubuntu 7.10 vs openSUSE 10.3 review the following week will give you more to go on when picking your flavor, should the time be right to give Linux a spin on your desktop.
PC World's Marketplace
PC World's Free Whitepapers
tech news tech blogs community & forums laptop prices software reviews downloads
You're making it look like Linux is way below Mac and Windows. Actually, it should be considered on the same level, since thousands of people (and businesses) are using it throughout the world.
The argument of the partitioner is not valid, because anyone with the least knowledge of computers knows that the-big-ntfs-partition-on-my-screen belongs to Bill Gates, and for people who don't, well - you can always ask someone who does before erasing your system.
Cordially,
A Ubuntu user
(who really doesn't need itunes to make an ipod work)
About the comments about the partitioning: Compare a Ubuntu install to a Windows install. Still feel the Ubuntu installer is behind the times? It takes someone with know-how to install Windows. Sure, a Ubuntu install might require a little knowledge of partitions, but its vastly easier the installing Windows. In addition, who needs iTunes? (Which can be run in Ubuntu under WINE or virtualization) There are much much better programs out for music and/or iPods. Amarok, Banshee, Exaile, etc. Linux isn't Windows, its better. So don't expect to run the same software, expect better.
If one considers for a moment how most people use computers at home (email, browse web, write doc, music), I don't think there should be a question about Linux's usability at home. No ITunes? Is this really because of Linux adolescence?
I switched to Linux in 99', and kept switching back and forth, from windows to Linux, because Linux, while awesome on the command line, was just not mature enough to offer me the desktop experience I was used to (which was really a reflection of the graphical managers of the time, not linux). In the last couple few years, that has all changed. Windows has been kicked to the curb, and the only thing I truly miss are my games. But apps like Cedega still make this a possibility. I believe Linux, specifically Ubuntu, to be a far superior OS/distribution than Windows. In fact, I found Windows Vista to be the worst joke to come out of Redmond in many years. Due to it's scale, even a larger one than Windows ME. Who of us remembers that disaster?
I've switched to Linux (PCLinuxOS 2007 after it went final) and it's been great on my PC (HP Athlon 64). No blue screens, no worrying about spyware/viruses, no wondering if MS update goes off in the middle of the night without permission, no WGA servers telling me my registration isn't valid, faster speed, the ability to restore my system in 20 minutes or so (remaster allows you to save your current OS and configuration on a LIVE CD and run/restore it!)...and on and on.
Is there a bit of a learning curve? No worst, in my opinion than going from XP to Vista, or Office 2003 to Office 2007. I love the community support, and I can find equivalents to almost all the software I use.
Ubuntu is a fine distro, but from my experience, the best of breed for new windows users looking at Linux are PCLinuxOS (KDE ) and Linux Mint (Gnome). And if you want to keep Windows, Vmware or VirtualBox (along with Wine) allow you to run XP inside Linux along with many windows apps.
You contend that adding packages ("installing software") is some kind of a difficult deal with Linux. It boils down to starting Synaptic, entering the search terms for the kind of free software you'd like, and then clicking a few icons to install it. Rebooting is almost never necessary.
It's as if you're completely forgetting that Windows comes with almost no software beyond its OS-support applications. Anything else, you've got to get off of the Web or buy in a store and then follow each individual piece of software's own installation procedures, which vary from product to product. Then you've got your activation procedures, CD-keys, multiple reboots, etc.
If you want to compare apples to apples, then Ubuntu and its Synaptic repositories and the tens of thousands of free software packages that are available are like a barrel of apples; a veritable orchard, compared to a fresh Windows install - a single rotten apple core that was discarded back in 2001.
I did make the permanent switch to Linux at home in 1999, and have not had a Windows PC here since. Have been running SuSE 6,7,8,9 and now OpenSuSE 10.2 on my 64 bit Athlon for 2 years now delivers great performance with incredible ease; partitioning and software installs. Using Windows at the 'office' is very painful, and unproductive.
As mentioned above, nothing (decent) comes with Windows, the file requesters are still miniature boxes, the amount of anti-spyware and antivirus apps needed to maintain it are incredible, the number of patches are overwhelming.
So what do I do at home? I write Ruby on Rails apps (Eclipse/Radrails behaves MUCH better on Linux than WIndows), surf the web with Firefox 2.x, use Open Office for writing, and spreadsheets, Digicam for photo management, GnuCash for financial management; Linux provides a solid foundation for transparent and reliable computing.
Windows free for 8 years and counting...
My spouse - not a PC guru, also uses linux.
Linux runs solid on my machine I installed opensuse 10.3 over the weekend it was a straight forward install. and yes I agree you don't need itunes i use helix or amarok which are way better in my opinion. I've had experiences where windows thinks that another partition on your hd is actually the C: drive and if you don't pay attention you may end up erasing stuff you don't want to erase. haha yeah I remember the windows me ordeal. thats when i switched to linux. back then i started using Mandrake then moved to redhat and now I run slackware on my Desktop and Opensuse 10.3 on my laptop I havent had any problems. mp3 support comes out of the box also compiz fusion the compositing window manager which is awesome try rotating a cube in winblows. MS came up with that joke of aero glass on vista wich is far inferior than using what compiz or baryl offer.
First of all I would like to say that I take Ubuntu over openSUSE any day. I would also like to point out that you leave out one of the most important reasons linux is better than windows(this does not apply to mac) and that is SECURITY! There are no viruses or security sweets needed that cost tons of money you can be spending in better ways. If you're going to compare linux to windows you MUST include that aspect.
On the note about the Ubuntu partioner I would first argue that it takes about as much "techie" knowledge to install Ubuntu as it does to install windows. And if you want to argue that difficulty in installing windows doesn't matter because it is pre-installed on new computer, well now linux(Ubuntu specifically) is being sold pre-installed on new computers from big manufacturers such as Dell and HP is planning its line of Ubuntu comps. If you are worried about ruining you windows OS and can't seem to dual boot properly than I encourage you to check out Wubi. Simplest EVER!
This a lot of rubish, the installation of ubuntu is the easist i have ever don on a computer, if you can't find out about the partions, you have the computer knowledg of my grandma. I have a very basic know how about computers and it toke me 1 hour to install and everything just working from day 1. When i had XP it toke 5-7 hours and many of the things i should answer i did'nt knesw a thing about. I just crosssed my fingers and hoped for the best. Ubuntu is perhapse 10 years ahead XP, i hav'nt had the guts yet to try Visat$ and im not sure i want to. Ubuntu 7.10 can do anything i want it to and i don't mis Itunes - use Banshee instead it is almost the same.
But the very best thing is the forums, no question is to dum and there are people online around the clock. I had 11 answers within 1 hours and my qustion was not very brigth - a little bit like the partions problems! People always post a solution as soon as they know how. Try that with M$.
And final you don't need pirat programs!!!
All of the (Linux) reviewers I have read so far has the assumption that Linux installers HAVE TO recognize Windows or other OSes already installed on a given system and act accordingly. Does Windows recognize any OS other than Windows, and installs itself properly? Any bugs or inconveniences should be expressed (especially by reviewers writing for general public and not exclusively to Linux users) after appreciating the efforts by FOSS developers for respecting any other OS installed on the system and making Linux coexist with them.
You can even install Ubuntu from within Windows with the help of wubi, or you can do a proper Linux install and tweak the boot.ini file of Windows so that you use the Windows installer for dual (triple, etc) booting. What about MS?
AFAIK, Ubuntu installer warns the user that the whole hard drive will be used by Ubuntu if the Guided partitioning method is used. So, it is probably not installer's fault but the user's decision to delete Windows partition(s).