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

WLAN cards are arses. If its a belkin internal PCI card I may be able to help as mine was a bitch to get working but it does now.

 

It's a belkin F5D7011uk - or at least that's the part number - fits in the PCMCIA slot on my lappy.

 

I tried one of the flight-6 releases Live CD and it was awesome, so pretty, and even the wireless worked perfectly! (but maybe that's because I bought a wireless card that had Linux support )

I'm going to be switching to ubuntu when dapper is released I think, for everything other than gaming of course . I would recommend to anyone that they atleast tried a dapper Live CD.

Exactly, For most people Ubuntu would be great once it's setup. It's fast, (for me it was atleast) secure, and can do more or less anything XP can do. There is only a problem when you need to do more advanced stuff like using Photoshop or whatever.

 

Here's my opinion, based solely on my experience. For instance, I say Ubuntu has no viruses, because for me it hasn't. There are viruses for linux, and I really should install a scanner. But you get the point, here's my experience:
Ubuntu:

• Pros:
  • Not too hard to install (not insanely easy either)
  • Booted to a working desktop on my first try
  • No viruses
  • Not sluggish due to registry junk accumulating
  • Installing software is insanely easy
  • I don't have to use the command line for anything
  • Updating software is easy
  • It doesn't require defragmenting the hard drive
  • I have complete control (really... if I want to end a task, and the computer doesn't want to, I can still kill it. period.)
  • Complete System backups are a single command away
  • It comes with all the software I need, and I easily purchased/installed 3rd party software designed for it that I wanted (Zend Development Environemnt for one)
  • With a simple update, it plays DVDs better than any other players/OSes I've tried
  • Wireless networking was easy once I read the ndiswrapper howto (about 10 minutes to set up wireless drivers, really)
  • Sound worked out-of-the-box, when Windows required obscure drivers from my laptop manufacturer's site, which were hard to find.
• Cons:
  • It doesn't run Photoshop (which I can't afford anyway.. but if they made it for linux, I'd sure make an effort to save up for it!)
  • I can't use all the memory-hogging non-standards compliant, poorly written web applications that my work requires me to support at times. (please, for the love of god, decide if you want a client side app or a server side one... don't do web development that only works in IE!)
  • Playing windows media video streams hasn't worked since I upgraded to Firefox 1.5
  • They only upgrade software when new releases come out.. so we are still stuck on a preview release of OpenOffice.org 2, and Firefox 1.0.7 (unless you install the non-Ubuntu versions from their respective websites, which then breaks some of the integration Ubuntu has developed)
  • No version of Konfabulator/Yahoo! Widget Engine... (gdesklets just isn't the same)
  • My Vinyl cutter, and one of my scanners isn't supported
  • I have to tell it what wireless network to use each time I turn it on, even though the one I want is already selected.. but I think that's because I installed extra wireless management software that messed something up

Now, as far as Vista goes, the only tweaks they planned that made it worth upgrading to were taken off the list, since they couldn't hit a single deadline when developing it.

I'm sorry, but the biggest pitfall for Vista is XP is already good. Yes, I said it, XP is good! If you take care of it, it can, in theory, be a very reliable system. I still get annoyed with all of the rebooting required when installing updates and even software applications, but overall, the system isn't that horrible.

If your reason for upgrading is the shinyness and user-friendlieness of Vista, then why not go with OSX or Linux? Both have been taking advantage of every improvement I've seen advertised for Vista for years now. (check out XGL/Compiz for 3d desktop effects, gdesklets/dashboard/Yahoo! Widget Engine for widgets, OSX/Linux/Unix/Everyone else's User management methods for the new "secure" user management of Vista)

I would say, give Vista a year or two to catch on, and if the software you need requires it, then upgrade, otherwise stick with XP.

If you want to play with an OS that is free, and is getting better and better each year, then set up a dual-boot system with Ubuntu. That's what I do, and the only annoyance is the few times I use XP on this laptop, it needs to update windows, and while I'm in the other room the laptop will reboot itself so the changes take effect, then it naturally boots into Linux by default... But that always makes me laugh... like Microsoft is telling me because of their security holes I should use linux for a while or something.

Oh, and don't let us fanboys sway you, Linux isn't perfect security wise. If anything, we're more flammable, the difference is we have more firemen at the ready, and they are more passionate about what they do.

Last year, Firefox had more security holes found than Internet Explorer. Firefox also fixed every single one of the major threats, while Internet Explorer only fixed about 80% of theirs, and sometimes had to patch the entire Operating System to make up for an Internet Explorer vulnerability.

So I say try an Ubuntu Live CD, if you like it, and feel like playing with a linux distro that is pretty user friendly, then dual boot. Otherwise I'd say stick with XP until the industry forces you into buying Vista. (then maybe question why you are letting an industry force you into spending money)

 

Good post, OneSeventeen.
One thing I'll add is: with Ubuntu, it's a great starter distro for many reasons. It's good for learning Linux, because you can choose whether do do stuff via the GUI or via the command line; you aren't stuck using a confusing command line to do something simple. I know many other distros are like this, but Ubuntu has some of the best documentation and support forums I've been on for a while, everybody there is friendly and gives you the help you need.
Some of the cons that OneSeventeen mentioned do raise points which may or may not be applicable to somebody wondering whether to try Vista or not. He mentioned that some proprietary development stuff doesn''t work, along with some other stuff. This is a problem with most Linux distro's in that some smaller, less frequently used things which you used on Windows may not be supported on Linux. However, this does not apply to the majority, because most people will either not need to use these types of apps, or be using ones which are supported byLinux.
My experience with Ubuntu has been good overall. One negative aspect is the lack of native support for audio and video codecs; however this can be quickly fixed with the likes of Automatix, which easily and quickly installs some other useful things.
I personally am going to wait until Vista has matured a bit until I buy it. Until then, Ubuntu is a great alternative, but not the only one.

 

Just like to thank oneseventeen for his link to ndiswrapper as i'm now typing this in Ubuntu. Only the sound left to go and i get the feeling it might be a tricky one. Thought i had it fixed with the nice hint of using automatix (thanks for the hint), which means all my movies are now playing i just have no sound .

Still it has been a good experiance and as far as linux ditributions go it is good one to start with as far as i can tell.

 

little off topic... but with windows and mac going to / at graphics desktops is the linux community planning this change as well....?

 

You mean 3d desktops? Currently in development are XGL/Compiz and another whose name evades me. They allow you to do all the true transparency and 3d cubes and such stuff (although I really don't see the point in the cubes...).

 

Monkeyville, is it just the videos that don't play with sound, or audio files as well? If it's just the videos, what audio codecs do they have?

Trigger, I also don't see the point in the cubes, but it's still hella cool. The true transparency, especially with the video playing, was impressive though. And I could be wrong, but it seems that all this is way less resource-intensive than the eye candy in Vista.

 

Nope the main laptop speakers play no noises at all. Not even the warning or error sounds. Weirdly after playing with it some more and by some pure fluke i realised you can hear sound through the headphone port on the front with the volume right up.
Whats weird is that i thought the headphone jack and the main speakers are hard wired together so i dont have a clue why its not working. The only explanation i can think of is that the current output is enought to drive a pair of headphones but not the big speakers in the laptop. No idea how i can solve it though

 

The line out may be muted, as is often the case on new installs (annoyingly). Fire up something like alsamixer (or another mixer), and set the levels in there, and you should be good.

 

Not forgetting the holes they didn't tell you about...

Here's a vid

 

Going to the orriginal title of this thread, comparing windows to Linux is in a way like comparing crotch rockets to Harleys/cruisers. They do the same thing but are better in different ways, and both debates have been beaten almost to death (sometimes certian topics need to be brought back up). Also vista is how far away from its release date?

I still need to get an extra computer together and try out Ubntu.

 

IMHO i find mandriva is closer to windows for noobs but im just struggling with samba aty the moment (tyring to set up a server with no idea about what im doing).

 

if your just trying to set it up to do basic file sharing with windows boxes, it is pretty simple. Just makesure in the smb.conf file that your workgroup is the same. i find it makes things easier. another way to see if samba is working, since netbios isn't that great. just type in the computer you wish to connect to's ip address. if it connects and you can see the shares then samba is running. Also don't forget for your windows clients to add a username and passwd in samba using smbpasswd -a <username>.

If you want to compare ubntu to vista you can't really, but as far as graphic features i think the XGL/COMPIZ stuff is amazing

 

I always assumed samba was super-smart, because after installing Ubuntu I just browsed my network found a share, and mounted it. Now I just have to type in the password each session I want to access the data.

Printing worked very similarly, but I didn't password protect my printer, so it was very painless. In fact, it was more difficult to get windows to print to my shared printer than linux! (OSX wouldn't even make an attempt at finding the drivers... )

Oh, and the setup was windows PC with shared folders and one shared printer, with the wireless laptop booting either windows or linux.

 

i am using XGL on my gentoo, it took me 4 hours to set it up (better than waiting 1 years for vista, i will not install it anyway, i am 100% linux) it is nice and less ram eater than simillar effect on XP but it still crash sometime with no reason, i think x.org 7.0 is actually the best stable solution for linux, it come with a good composite manager, real transparency work perfectly on KDE.

Linux (tweeked) in general is 2 to 3 time faster than XP at boot, just pas enabeling parraler boot service and making a new run level order i gain 30 sec at boot, 58 to 26! windows boot (with all services) in 3 minute!

just for that linux is better

 

Does it look as good as it does in the vid I linked to?

 

well i tried this live cd called kororaa that ahs XGL configured and works pretty good. It's based on a gentoo installation and looks jsut like the video.

 

Yea it work perfectly, all efect work fine and fast. I have only DRI working on my laptop, i can't use the fglx driver becose toshiba laptop use a different range of frequecy... It still work fine but if i add a screensaver at remplacement of background it freez, take too much cpu...