Linux What is Ubuntu, and how does it compare to Windows Vista?

who has used Ubuntu?
How about the new Windows Vista or formerly known as Longhorn?
What are your thoughts differences of the two?

I think ubuntu is better than getting too much 3d which will consume too much space in my hard drive

 

Yeah, I'd switch to Ubuntu before going to Vista.
Mainly because I don't need all the fancy stuff. Or the DRM.
I didn't even use XP until my laptop came with it. Win2K has always been good to me, and 98SE before that.

The differences are really Night and Day. One is Windows and the other is Linux.
They both have their uses.
For most people (including myself) it is just easier to stick with what we know than going and learning a new way of doing stuff.

Edit: I do plan on having another go at linux this summer.

 

I'm a bit of a noob when it comes to OS's different from either Win98, NT, 2000 Server/Pro, XP or Win2003 Server. So what exactly is Ubuntu?

 

Ubuntu is a linux-based OS. You can get them on bootable cd's, wich is fun, you can use them on most (if not any) computers, they even have bootable cd's for mac.

So there is really a huge difference between the two options you want help choosing between. What you do on a computer is probably going to decide for you wich operating system you are best off with.

I'm sure on a recent computer, hd-space shouldn't be such a big concern though. The biggest concern here is wich kind of software you want and are used too. Also linux-based systems require a bit more knowledge then windows.

Either way, this should go in the operating system subforum.

L

 

I installled Ubuntu the other week on my lappy along with xp and can't for the life of me get the sound working or the wireless card to do anything under linux. On xp though it worked flawlessly first time and without any of the extra hours. I guess you could say i have a favourite

 

I dont like ubuntu, i could never get shared folders to show up on my network from it.

 

Ubuntu is probably the easiest version of Linux that I have used. But for anyone not familiar with linux it will be a learning experience. You might get frustrated along the way because it's not as easy as Windows. With windows it works, with any linux distro, it might take some researching to get it to work.

That being said, I think Ubuntu is great for office applications, surfing the internet, even Graphics(with Gimp that is), and most other OS uses. But If you're going to do a lot of gaming, then a Windows platform is probably better. You could always do a dual boot, but I find that kind of a hassle switching between OS's. Another good thing about Ubuntu is that it is free(and free of drm).

Anyways, like someone above me said, the differences are really night and day. However I wouldn't even bother with Vista until it hits the shelves, and if it still uses an ungodly amount of memory I probably still won't deal with it until I can afford to buy a new DX10 graphics card and 2 gb of ram.

Happy choosing.

 

I had to use Ubuntu for five weeks, and haven't used it since. It can't do anything more or less than XP (except photoshop), and it doesn't feel as smooth and responsive as XP. The only reason I can think of for using it is that it's free.

ch424

 

Er...your machine *never* gets clogged up with spyware/viruses? It's hugely configurable, yada yada

 

What I find hard about this thread, is comparing to something that doesn't even exist yet. Vista isn't out. There were beta's, but nothing guarantees that that will be the final version.

 

Nor does Windows. The virus/trojan/worm argument is a load of BS. I just use Firefox, AVG and a hardware firewall, and I've never had any trouble.

What, you can change the icon sets? That's not really an advantage as the default ones are so ugly.

Now I see what I was missing! All the yada yada.

That's just my experience of it. It doesn't mean it's true for all, even most, users, but it's true for me: there's a lot more I can do with Windows, it's a more pleasant, responsive experience and I don't have to open up a terminal just to do something that should be trivial, like install a program. Sure, semantic package manager (or whatever it's called) is fantastic, but it can't do everything.

Oh yeah, Ubuntu has cooler screensavers than XP.

ch424

 

Indeed, all those patches MS constantly release must just be for the hell of it.

That's just a ridiculous sentiment - you can quite literally change anything about the UI, including window managers. Any program can be customised (since it's all gpl).

The 'yada yada' was put there since this issue has been debated to death, there was little point in going over all the arguments again.

Personally I find doing a quick 'apt-get install x' (or emerge, whatevs) to install a program is somewhat easier than googling for the website, finding the binary, downloading it, then navigating to that directory and installing it, but maybe that's just me.

I'm just going to ignore this, it doesn't warrant any response.


As I said, this issue has been debated so much, it's pretty pointless doing it again.

 

Come on children, stop the flame wars... This is yet another "My Windows is better then your <insert linux distro> because..." thread, and you both walked into it with your eyes open.

Both have their pro's and con's, everyone has his own flavour. The only way to know what suits you best is to try it.

 

Exactly. Sorry for flaming j4ck.

ch424

 

Having never trying anything other than mandrake and fedora I cant really comment on ubuntu. If you do want to try linux I strongly suggest using it on a seperate HD or a seperate computer all together. I helped my friend install fedora on his old computer and its been running stable and happy on the lid of a plastic tote for more than a week.

 

Sarcasm aside, this is a very true statement, and a lot at that.

 

In the end it comes down to price.

If your buying a new computer next year, your going to get Vista whether you like it or not, so you might as well use it. Depending on your personal ethics of free software.

If you want to upgrade your PC to a newer OS than XP, without a massive price tag then Ubuntu (Or another polished Linux distribution) would be the best bet. As it will more than likely run on your existing hardware, and you'll get a much more advanced OS.

£150 for Vista (complete guess there) is a lot more expensive than Ubuntu for free. I couldn't afford to get an XP license for my own computer, so I had to put Ubuntu on it. But it's never given me any hassel, small issue with wireless card and thats it.

 

This is because Samba isn't set up correctly, it is not a Ubuntu problem more an administration error. Most likely caused by an error in /etc/samba/smb.conf or forgetting to add the correct users. Blaming Ubuntu for this is like blaming windows for not showing AVIs when the codecs haven't been installed.

Try reading this.

 

Has anyone tried Ubuntu 6.X beta yet? I've downloaded the flight-6 iso, but forgot my pen drive at home.

 

I've tried the boot CD so far, thinking about dual booting it with XP when i get my main machine up and running...

I find it ok from the CD, doesn't pick up my WLAN card, but i'm sure i would be able to find the driver for it somewhere along the net

Oh and by the way, I don't know if this is any help, but it's a LOT easier than fedora core 4 to use