Ubuntu
-
I installed Ubuntu 11 in VirtualBox inside Win 7 and I was so impressed with it that I decided to install it alongside Windows 7. Here are my reasons on why I feel Ubuntu is better than Win 7. 1. It has a very neat UI compared to Win 7, not that Win 7 UI is bad, but Ubuntu UI is outstanding (makes me think who needs Aero?) 2. It comes pre-installed with many basics apps and utlities like Libre Office, Bluetooth drivers, LAN and WiFi drivers, etc. I took me more than 4 hours to setup Win 7 and hardly 10 mins to setup Ubuntu with identical features. 3. I like the Ubuntu Software Centre, wish Win 7 had such a feature. 4. The System Settings is neatly and logically arranged. It is very easy to use compared to Win 7's Control Panel. For example, to disable Network, all I have to do it click a button. In Win 7, it's not that easy. 5. Supports multiple destops out of the box. 6. Has a neat Taskbar(?) on the left and an information bar(?) on the top that displays almost all required information. (I'm not sure if the names I used are correct. I'm not so knowledgable in Linux.) The only downside is that I had a little trouble configuring by Bluetooth mouse, but at last it worked. In Win 7 all I had to do is just switch on the mouse and Win 7 did all the magic. (Of course, I had to install the Bluetooth system driver first which I didn't have to do in Ubuntu.) Many of the features I listed above are unqiue to Ubuntu and not Linux in general. And the most compelling reason to use Ubuntu is: I paid nothing for it. :-) What are your thoughts?
Windows is user fraindly ,,,, but ubuntu is not user fraindly even if illetrate person can easily oprate the windows operating system
-
I installed Ubuntu 11 in VirtualBox inside Win 7 and I was so impressed with it that I decided to install it alongside Windows 7. Here are my reasons on why I feel Ubuntu is better than Win 7. 1. It has a very neat UI compared to Win 7, not that Win 7 UI is bad, but Ubuntu UI is outstanding (makes me think who needs Aero?) 2. It comes pre-installed with many basics apps and utlities like Libre Office, Bluetooth drivers, LAN and WiFi drivers, etc. I took me more than 4 hours to setup Win 7 and hardly 10 mins to setup Ubuntu with identical features. 3. I like the Ubuntu Software Centre, wish Win 7 had such a feature. 4. The System Settings is neatly and logically arranged. It is very easy to use compared to Win 7's Control Panel. For example, to disable Network, all I have to do it click a button. In Win 7, it's not that easy. 5. Supports multiple destops out of the box. 6. Has a neat Taskbar(?) on the left and an information bar(?) on the top that displays almost all required information. (I'm not sure if the names I used are correct. I'm not so knowledgable in Linux.) The only downside is that I had a little trouble configuring by Bluetooth mouse, but at last it worked. In Win 7 all I had to do is just switch on the mouse and Win 7 did all the magic. (Of course, I had to install the Bluetooth system driver first which I didn't have to do in Ubuntu.) Many of the features I listed above are unqiue to Ubuntu and not Linux in general. And the most compelling reason to use Ubuntu is: I paid nothing for it. :-) What are your thoughts?
I am a Linux user, dual boot all my computers. But, personally, I prefer Linux Mint. It's built on top of Ubuntu, and improves it considerably, IMHO. http://linuxmint.com/[^]
The world is going to laugh at you anyway, might as well crack the 1st joke! My code has no bugs, it runs exactly as it was written.
-
Mono still doesn't do WPF. That, IMHO, is a major drawback.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997WPF for the industry is not relevant.
Windows forms is sufficient. In my case I had two years with ubuntu (9.10) installed on a PC and runs faster than windows xp or 7 with fewer resources.
In these two years had no problem software. The software was developed in .Net and works on Mono without any modification, have access to a database with ~ 45GB (MSSQL2008)NKS
-
I installed Ubuntu 11 in VirtualBox inside Win 7 and I was so impressed with it that I decided to install it alongside Windows 7. Here are my reasons on why I feel Ubuntu is better than Win 7. 1. It has a very neat UI compared to Win 7, not that Win 7 UI is bad, but Ubuntu UI is outstanding (makes me think who needs Aero?) 2. It comes pre-installed with many basics apps and utlities like Libre Office, Bluetooth drivers, LAN and WiFi drivers, etc. I took me more than 4 hours to setup Win 7 and hardly 10 mins to setup Ubuntu with identical features. 3. I like the Ubuntu Software Centre, wish Win 7 had such a feature. 4. The System Settings is neatly and logically arranged. It is very easy to use compared to Win 7's Control Panel. For example, to disable Network, all I have to do it click a button. In Win 7, it's not that easy. 5. Supports multiple destops out of the box. 6. Has a neat Taskbar(?) on the left and an information bar(?) on the top that displays almost all required information. (I'm not sure if the names I used are correct. I'm not so knowledgable in Linux.) The only downside is that I had a little trouble configuring by Bluetooth mouse, but at last it worked. In Win 7 all I had to do is just switch on the mouse and Win 7 did all the magic. (Of course, I had to install the Bluetooth system driver first which I didn't have to do in Ubuntu.) Many of the features I listed above are unqiue to Ubuntu and not Linux in general. And the most compelling reason to use Ubuntu is: I paid nothing for it. :-) What are your thoughts?
-
I installed Ubuntu 11 in VirtualBox inside Win 7 and I was so impressed with it that I decided to install it alongside Windows 7. Here are my reasons on why I feel Ubuntu is better than Win 7. 1. It has a very neat UI compared to Win 7, not that Win 7 UI is bad, but Ubuntu UI is outstanding (makes me think who needs Aero?) 2. It comes pre-installed with many basics apps and utlities like Libre Office, Bluetooth drivers, LAN and WiFi drivers, etc. I took me more than 4 hours to setup Win 7 and hardly 10 mins to setup Ubuntu with identical features. 3. I like the Ubuntu Software Centre, wish Win 7 had such a feature. 4. The System Settings is neatly and logically arranged. It is very easy to use compared to Win 7's Control Panel. For example, to disable Network, all I have to do it click a button. In Win 7, it's not that easy. 5. Supports multiple destops out of the box. 6. Has a neat Taskbar(?) on the left and an information bar(?) on the top that displays almost all required information. (I'm not sure if the names I used are correct. I'm not so knowledgable in Linux.) The only downside is that I had a little trouble configuring by Bluetooth mouse, but at last it worked. In Win 7 all I had to do is just switch on the mouse and Win 7 did all the magic. (Of course, I had to install the Bluetooth system driver first which I didn't have to do in Ubuntu.) Many of the features I listed above are unqiue to Ubuntu and not Linux in general. And the most compelling reason to use Ubuntu is: I paid nothing for it. :-) What are your thoughts?
Games? Games are the reason to run Win 7, right? What FPS games run equivilantly on Linux?
-
I installed Ubuntu 11 in VirtualBox inside Win 7 and I was so impressed with it that I decided to install it alongside Windows 7. Here are my reasons on why I feel Ubuntu is better than Win 7. 1. It has a very neat UI compared to Win 7, not that Win 7 UI is bad, but Ubuntu UI is outstanding (makes me think who needs Aero?) 2. It comes pre-installed with many basics apps and utlities like Libre Office, Bluetooth drivers, LAN and WiFi drivers, etc. I took me more than 4 hours to setup Win 7 and hardly 10 mins to setup Ubuntu with identical features. 3. I like the Ubuntu Software Centre, wish Win 7 had such a feature. 4. The System Settings is neatly and logically arranged. It is very easy to use compared to Win 7's Control Panel. For example, to disable Network, all I have to do it click a button. In Win 7, it's not that easy. 5. Supports multiple destops out of the box. 6. Has a neat Taskbar(?) on the left and an information bar(?) on the top that displays almost all required information. (I'm not sure if the names I used are correct. I'm not so knowledgable in Linux.) The only downside is that I had a little trouble configuring by Bluetooth mouse, but at last it worked. In Win 7 all I had to do is just switch on the mouse and Win 7 did all the magic. (Of course, I had to install the Bluetooth system driver first which I didn't have to do in Ubuntu.) Many of the features I listed above are unqiue to Ubuntu and not Linux in general. And the most compelling reason to use Ubuntu is: I paid nothing for it. :-) What are your thoughts?
I installed Ubuntu 11 Studio as a dual boot two weeks ago and agree with your points. It was the easiest Linux installation/setup I have been through yet. Everything just worked. No sudo commands or funky vi editors were involved. Only when I decided I just couldn't live with the bright magenta login screen did I venture into the vi editor. There seems to be a plethora of software available. I'm really liking it! The hard truth is that Ubuntu could never completely replace Windows for me, at least not for work. For now, it's just an experiment. I will probably only fire it up when I want to play OpenBVE or test a website in Firefox. Eventually, I intend to use it as a training environment for learning some different programming languages.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
-
I'm not a huge fan of the way the UI in Ubuntu is going, with the whole Unity thing. Linux Mint is a distro based on Ubuntu that has a more Windows-like interface, with all the advantages of Ubuntu. If Microsoft doesn't make sure Windows 8 is mouse friendly, I might consider a permanent switch to Mint.
I always hear good things about mint, especially from windoze users. I use xfce for a desktop now, because I don't like unity/gnome 3. It might work for some, and I'm not bashing it, I just couldn't get used to it. Also , puppy linux is a neat little distro. It runs all in memory too. You can use it from a live disk and it will "save state" without whiping your current os. I never got it installed, but I have run it several times from the cd.
If it moves, compile it
-
Windows is user fraindly ,,,, but ubuntu is not user fraindly even if illetrate person can easily oprate the windows operating system
-
I installed Ubuntu 11 in VirtualBox inside Win 7 and I was so impressed with it that I decided to install it alongside Windows 7. Here are my reasons on why I feel Ubuntu is better than Win 7. 1. It has a very neat UI compared to Win 7, not that Win 7 UI is bad, but Ubuntu UI is outstanding (makes me think who needs Aero?) 2. It comes pre-installed with many basics apps and utlities like Libre Office, Bluetooth drivers, LAN and WiFi drivers, etc. I took me more than 4 hours to setup Win 7 and hardly 10 mins to setup Ubuntu with identical features. 3. I like the Ubuntu Software Centre, wish Win 7 had such a feature. 4. The System Settings is neatly and logically arranged. It is very easy to use compared to Win 7's Control Panel. For example, to disable Network, all I have to do it click a button. In Win 7, it's not that easy. 5. Supports multiple destops out of the box. 6. Has a neat Taskbar(?) on the left and an information bar(?) on the top that displays almost all required information. (I'm not sure if the names I used are correct. I'm not so knowledgable in Linux.) The only downside is that I had a little trouble configuring by Bluetooth mouse, but at last it worked. In Win 7 all I had to do is just switch on the mouse and Win 7 did all the magic. (Of course, I had to install the Bluetooth system driver first which I didn't have to do in Ubuntu.) Many of the features I listed above are unqiue to Ubuntu and not Linux in general. And the most compelling reason to use Ubuntu is: I paid nothing for it. :-) What are your thoughts?
Ubuntu is the best system for non gamer users, because it is much more simple to be installed and used than windows 7. But its the major advantage is the fact that it is almost immune to common viruses, because one can get almost all software for free from trusted sources.
-
I am a Linux user, dual boot all my computers. But, personally, I prefer Linux Mint. It's built on top of Ubuntu, and improves it considerably, IMHO. http://linuxmint.com/[^]
The world is going to laugh at you anyway, might as well crack the 1st joke! My code has no bugs, it runs exactly as it was written.
I don't dual boot, but I do have a windoze xp and a windoze 7 vm. I got the xp one for some games my brothers wanted me to play, and I have the 7 one for some work/testing I do at home. I prefer gentoo, but there's nothing wrong with Ubuntu or Mint. Especially if you don't want to spend the time, and pay the attention required, for gentoo.
If it moves, compile it
-
Games? Games are the reason to run Win 7, right? What FPS games run equivilantly on Linux?
You can use a vm to play games. I do at home and it works really well. You can check out crossover games, wine, and cedega if you want windoze only games to run on linux, or you can check out games by artists like FrozenByte. I have the new shadowgrounds at home and it's pretty awesome. Look at Desura games.
If it moves, compile it
-
I installed Ubuntu 11 Studio as a dual boot two weeks ago and agree with your points. It was the easiest Linux installation/setup I have been through yet. Everything just worked. No sudo commands or funky vi editors were involved. Only when I decided I just couldn't live with the bright magenta login screen did I venture into the vi editor. There seems to be a plethora of software available. I'm really liking it! The hard truth is that Ubuntu could never completely replace Windows for me, at least not for work. For now, it's just an experiment. I will probably only fire it up when I want to play OpenBVE or test a website in Firefox. Eventually, I intend to use it as a training environment for learning some different programming languages.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
kmoorevs wrote:
funky vi editors
You can edit system files with pico, nano, or gedit. I prefer gedit for a gui editor.
kmoorevs wrote:
Ubuntu could never completely replace Windows for me, at least not for work
I work in a windoze shop so I can see where you are coming from. However, I can set up my gentoo laptop to use all the office file shares, and do all the work I need to. The only thing I'd really have to do is setup vb6 in wine, and write code to process calc sheets instead of office and I'd be good to go. We are moving to .net slowly though, so hopefully mono is a valid option. Soon I may be using my linux box in the windoze shop :D
If it moves, compile it
-
Ubuntu is the best system for non gamer users, because it is much more simple to be installed and used than windows 7. But its the major advantage is the fact that it is almost immune to common viruses, because one can get almost all software for free from trusted sources.
Member 4683399 wrote:
Ubuntu is the best system for non gamer users
It's pretty simple to play any game you want on Ubuntu. It's for more than non-gamers. It's not hard at all to setup a vm, which I find better than trying to reboot all the time. I have played games like Need For Speed, LoL, etc.. in a vm.
Member 4683399 wrote:
that it is almost immune to common viruses
almost, and common are keywords. It's still possible to get root-kit and/or hijacked in linux. It's not a big worry if you keep strong passwords, and keep your system up to date though. There are worries, just not as common as windoze. Then again, windoze has a bulz eye and linux does not (due to user base and [I believe] open source code). If everyone used linux instead of windoze, linux would have viruses. There's just not much benefit in writing them atm.
If it moves, compile it
-
Mono has come a long way in a very short time. If you havent gotten the most recent updates, you might try it again. That said, I think VS is the superior IDE for it. And I agree that mono probably can't replace it completely.
If it moves, compile it
You might want to try out some C# plugins for Eclipse - there are a few. Didn't try any out myself, since I mostly do Java or Javascript when not programming professionally, though, so I can't tell about how good they are.
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Because all of the apps are already compiled.
Ubuntu is a binary distro. The software center also fetches them very easily for you. If you are looking for pre-compiled apps that "just work" then Ubuntu tends to make it easier in my experience. Other people that I have "converted" tend to agree. There is also codeweavers, which is pretty much automated wine. This runs windows software pretty well, including games. Though the games department is lacking quite a bit. Crossover does cost some money, but it's worth it if you don't want to configure wine.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
More or less, the world runs on Windows
End users do, yeah.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
and IT departments don't want aren't budgeted to devote money or time to support mixed platform networks.
I agree with this. They just don't want to, and many people don't understand linux. A good many people are intimidated by it, so never even attempt to understand it. My brother was going into windows admin, while I was taking linux classes. There were a great many more windows classes to match the 4 linux classes.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Whether the difficulties are real or imagined, that's the way things are.
Agreed.
If it moves, compile it
Even worse, I saw admins with hands-on desktop Linux experience - people you'd expect to know a thing or two - who were too lazy to discover how nice Linux can be managed in an enterprise environment, and insisted on using Windows servers.
-
Ubuntu is a great distro, especially for people who are used to windoze. I've heard good things about mint, but never tried it. I use gentoo personally.
Shameel wrote:
The only downside is that I had a little trouble configuring by Bluetooth mouse, but at last it worked.
One great thing about Linux is the community support. It's very easy to find solutions to a problem that might come up, it's well documented and easy to find. There are also forums and IRC rooms. I don't want to bash windoze, but when I have problems in that OS it usually takes me longer to find solutions. It may be because I'm not as efficient at looking, but it always seems harder.
Shameel wrote:
And the most compelling reason to use Ubuntu is: I paid nothing for it.
Before I was working in computer science, I was pretty poor. It was great to have access to all the software and OS's for a low rate. I try now to contribute back, not always with donations. If you really enjoy these things, it is a good idea to try and do what you can. It could be testing beta stuff and submitting bugs, donations, or whatever you feel like doing.
Shameel wrote:
Here are my reasons on why I feel Ubuntu is better than Win 7.
I would take more care in how you phrase that. I like linux way better than windoze. But, they both have a place. I work in a windoze shop.. I don't use it at home at all. I do use techs that came from windoze though (mono springs to mind). I wouldn't say one is better than the other, outside of personal choice. Besides, many people here won't understand that comment and you might have a debate on your hands.
Shameel wrote:
What are your thoughts?
I am bias :D
If it moves, compile it
You maybe not, but I would definitely say that especially from a home user's POV Kubuntu is way better - except if you're a gamer. Besides not costing anything, it keeps you safe by design (no viruses, no worms), you don't have to skim through dubious software download sites to get software and then spend time manually installing the software, its updates mechanism is way easier to use than that of Windows (you don't have distinct update applications from different vendors, and _all_ apps are updated automatically, not just the ones for which vendors provide updaters). All in all, you spend a lot less time maintaining your system, it works faster and looks better. And except for games, which are the only apps nowadays who really put the hardware at work, you can run mostly anything in wine. Even games are slowly but surely catching up - have a look at 0AD, it is already playable, and its graphics are great.
-
crazy. IIRC, it took about 45 minutes, last time I did it. and as long as the hardware is reasonably standard, Windows will already have a driver ready to use.
Sorry, can't buy that. XP in its time on pretty new hardware took 20-25 minutes. Add office, drivers, VS and other apps and you easily exceed the 45 minutes. Migrate data from an old disk, set up mail accounts, wireless, customize your desktop, and you get to two days without even noticing it. Luckily, I didn't have to go through this during the last three years - that's when I switched. I still have a W7 partition on a laptop - it has no apps whatsoever and was booted maybe 10 times or less.
-
Shameel wrote:
I took me more than 4 hours to setup Win 7
Huh?! What did you do to screw it up?? I've NEVER had an O/S installation go that long. Well, not since the Novell NetWare 2.11 days. My Win 7 install was done in about 12 minutes the last time I ran through it.
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave KreskowiakThe difference is that your Windows install didn't install Office, several graphics apps, browsers, torrent clients, ftp clients, media players, system monitoring tools, loads of desktop widgets, email clients, a ton of smart small games (nothing like tetris, if that's what you were thinking) and all the nifty command line tools that make the Unix console great. Plus several interpreters, a full development environment and a software management system that rocks. Speaking about comparing apples to apples ...
-
Shameel wrote:
What are your thoughts?
The three things that have stopped me in the past from going full-tilt Linux: 1) DVD writer support 2) Scanner support 3) Wireless modem support Of course, it's been about eighteen months since I last tried any of these so they could be supported now, but I've got my Linux box doing Apache and MySQL and Java and everything else goes to Windows and that seems to work for me for now. I may take a look at the latest Ubuntu distro and if it doesn't work, I will blame you. :-D
m.bergman
For Bruce Schneier, quanta only have one state : afraid.
To succeed in the world it is not enough to be stupid, you must also be well-mannered. -- Voltaire
Honesty is the best policy, but insanity is a better defense. -- Steve Landesberg
I never tried scanners on Linux, but I'm inclined to agree with this one. Wireless modem support was an issue for me too, but it stopped being one three years ago. As for DVD writing, I can't recall having such a problem with Linux ever.
-
Erudite_Eric wrote:
I dont know why the world is still Windows obsessed. It really is dumb.
Actually, it's quite easy to understand. Support, applications, and comfort. You go with what works. Users are still idiots. Sit someone down in from of Word and they're comfortable with it. Sit them down in front of any other Word-equivilent and they'll be completely lost. Most users hate change. Hell, just upgrading from Word 2003 to 2007 will throw users into a tizzy.
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave KreskowiakDave Kreskowiak wrote:
Users are still idiots.
I'll agree that some users are idiots but then, so are some developers.
Dave Kreskowiak wrote:
Most users hate change.
Of course most users hate change. Then, again, most changes made is just change for the sake of change. It's not to difficult to determine when change is made for the sake of change: If you see the change and you find yourself scratching your head wondering why the feature was initiated in the way it was, you have change for the sake of change. Word 2003 to 2007 interface is a good example of this. Going from analog broadcast television to digital broadcast television is also a good example. Digital television was touted as being better when in fact it is not. Oh sure, there are more stations, but I never one time had an analog signal go completely black unless the station itself lost power or had a circuit die. Google's newly designed interface is a change for the sake of change. It is in fact not better than the old design. My eyes become strained while using it. I just ran the VS 2011 Ultimate beta installer and found that it was taller than the vertical dimensions of my monitor. Worse yet, I could not reduce it's vertical height so that I could see everything in the panel. Then there's the other problem with Microsoft programs, that is the insistence to install gigabytes of data onto the C: drive despite the fact that I told the installer to instal the program to the D: drive. How often have you opened up an options panel in a program to find that it does not fit your monitor vertically and you are not able to adjust the size so you can access all the options in the panel? This is not just a case of change for the sake of change, it is also an idiot developer who just got his new 52 inch ultra high resolution monitor deciding that everyone in the world has the same size monitor and desktop setup, so he hard codes the programs panel sizes to his own monitor which only rich people can afford. So yeah, there are idiot users, but there are just as many idiots on the development end that make things more difficult to use than they really have to be. Worst part of it is, they're to stupid to make such things optional so the user can adjust the app to their systems setup and abilities. Over the years I have heard developers and other geeks dis the average user for their unwillingness to become a geek. This n