Slashdot Log In
After Ubuntu, Windows Looks Increasingly Bad
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Wed Jun 06, 2007 12:46 PM
from the put-up-yer-dukes dept.
from the put-up-yer-dukes dept.
mrcgran writes "Sys-Con has a look at some advantages of using Ubuntu over Windows. 'My recent switch to a single-boot Ubuntu setup on my Thinkpad T60 simply floors me on a regular basis. Most recently it's had to do with the experience of maintaining the software. Fresh from a very long Windows 2000 experience and a four-month Windows XP experience along with a long-time Linux sys admin role puts me in a great position to assess Ubuntu. Three prior attempts over the years at using Linux as my daily desktop OS had me primed for failure. Well, Ubuntu takes Linux where I've long hoped it would go — easy to use, reliable, dependable, great applications too but more on that later. It has some elegance to it — bet you never heard that about a Linux desktop before.'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Popup / flash / whatever alert (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Popup / flash / whatever alert (Score:4, Interesting)
I wonder of one of their ad providers actually infected me with something. Worst site ever.
Parent
Re:Popup / flash / whatever alert (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Popup / flash / whatever alert (Score:5, Funny)
Poor internet. I'll reboot it, may fix it.
Parent
If that does not work... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Popup / flash / whatever alert (Score:5, Informative)
printer friendly without video, scrolling text, and ads [sys-con.com]
Parent
Re:Popup / flash / whatever alert (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Popup / flash / whatever alert (Score:5, Insightful)
It was nice to read an article that stated that his Linux experience overcame many of the incredulous defects being purposefully incorported. I do not like the fact that the monopolist is forcing these sorts of things down the throat of consumers due to their monopoly. It is always best to have competition. Linux is now a better OS than Windows is and only great things are coming up. It is the great OS that Linux is that has been causing Microsoft to grunt and growl with muted voices at IP in Linux. Now they just need to sue us so we can get this stuff out in the open and end this farce thus ending the claims of IP infringement.
Parent
Print version (Score:4, Informative)
Nah. Windows sucks as a desktop. (Score:5, Insightful)
Ubuntu gets it more right than Windows. The applications themselves are less important, partly because they're mostly free, they get out of the way. Then you have the folders right there on the desktop so you can access the documents themselves directly. The application becomes just a tool to work on the information, which is what it's supposed to be. Ubuntu is actually easier to use than Windows. The metaphor makes sense.
Parent
Re:Print version (Score:5, Insightful)
Can I say it? Windows has the worst desktop in all of computing. Start buttons, taskbars, a work paradigm that encourages monolithic apps and maximized windows, a desktop that gets abusively filled with every program shortcut known to man, a defective clipboard model (crtl-C!?), sloppy filename/type handling (annakournikova.jpg.exe), annoying alerts and confirmation dialogs, application-centric workflow, the list goes on and on.
It was "good enough" on 14-inch monitors in 1995, I'll grant you, and I'm no big fan of the Gnome/KDE attempts to replace it. But there are a few of us out there who think it's a pretty sorry excuse for a desktop in this day and age.
Parent
Re:Print version (Score:5, Insightful)
What do you mean? Is that a bad keystroke to assign to "copy"? IMHO Windows' clipboard is one of its best features. I can copy/paste with confidence distinct types of data between programs and it still hasn't given me an unexpected result.
The filename/type thing *is* a screwup, I agree.
Parent
Re:Print version (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows has the worst desktop in all of computing.
The windows desktop isn't all bad. There are some good usable elements to it.
Start buttons,
While the layout of what's in the start menu is more of an issue, the actual concept of a start menu isn't really bad. The start menu gives you a single point that is always available on the screen to access almost everything on the computer. Pretty good usability decision in my opinion. Unlike way before when you always had to keep going back to the desktop or "program manager" to get to programs you can leave what you're working with and start up another application or open another document. Also, unlike toolbars and docks, it doesn't take up additional screen real estate.
taskbars,
What's wrong with the taskbar? It's a great idea that could be implemented a little better. It shows me all of my applications that are running regardless of if I can see the window or not. Sure, it looks cluttered when there are too many windows but that's find because I always have full visibility of what applications are running or open. We're even seeing the concept reused as something called "tabs."
a work paradigm that encourages monolithic apps and maximized windows,
Ok, this is more of the fault of the developers of applications and not necessarily the desktop. But with all of the applications I work with, I have sometimes felt that working maximized was better while other times working with multiple windows is better. Windows is great because it allows you to do both. For example, when I just need to sit in front of the text editor to really just finish writing a module, I maximize the window because I know I won't be using other windows much if ever. Now when I move over to testing and debugging, having the other windows open like the shell alongside the text editor help and that's when I "un-maximize" the text editor window so I can see both. On the mac desktop you always see people resizing windows especially when they really just want to work with one application. I find that clumsy compared to windows where if you really just want to work with one application, you maximize. When you "un-maximize" (restore down) it returns the window to the original size. I find this saves me a lot of time since I don't have to spend that much time resizing windows.
Another trick is that if you double click the title bar for any window, it is the same thing as clicking the maximize button. If the window is already maximized, it "un-maximizes" the window. Since the window title bar (while in the maximized state) is flush against the top of the screen, it's actually very fast to un-maximize the window with the mouse.
a desktop that gets abusively filled with every program shortcut known to man,
Again, this is more of the fault of the application developers than the desktop. The Windows desktop actually was going in the right direction by removing things from the desktop except the trash bin. I find that every application has the stupid "install icon to desktop" option checked by default when it really should be left off. I no longer start things from the desktop and my desktop space is more of a temporary space with a bunch of junk on it. Everything I actually need to save is kept in a place away from the desktop. That's because with the way I work, I treat anything on the desktop as one-time use that will probably be trashed later. But if it wasn't right there in front of my face, it would just get lost somewhere and I would never clean it up.
a defective clipboard model (crtl-C!?),
The actual windows clipboard is far from defective and actually works the best out of any platform I've used. Now, the key-binding could be better and so could other things like drag and drop. But if there's anything windows has done well, it's gotten developers to stick to some standards like this. On other systems (linux comes to mind) there's so many d
Parent
I'm very impressed with Ubuntu (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, I'm looking forward to UbuntuDupe's post about how Ubuntu sucks because nobody helped with his troubles using Ubuntu, despite his tantrum on the forums.
Re:I'm very impressed with Ubuntu (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:I'm very impressed with Ubuntu (Score:5, Funny)
OK guys. Mod me flaimbait! Let's get it over with...
Parent
Re:I'm very impressed with Ubuntu (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Is it Linux that failed? (Score:4, Interesting)
"...a long-time Linux sys admin role puts me in a great position to assess Ubuntu. Three prior attempts over the years at using Linux as my daily desktop OS had me primed for failure."
If a Linux sysadmin can't use Linux on the desktop, it must be a terrible desktop OS! Right? Right? *looks around frantically*
Come on, man. There are plenty of people who have been using Linux as their daily desktop. That would be why there have been so many "desktop" versions of Linux over the years.
Nice pitch, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
TFA reads less like a comparison of two OS's than an Ubuntu sales pitch. Granted, I use and love Ubuntu, but I like my side-by-sides with a little less bias from the get-go.
Re:Nice pitch, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't get me wrong. I have a lot more use for linux than windows...My windows PC is basically a beefy Xbox that I occasionally use to run photoshop and dreamweaver.
But a passing familiarity with XP doesn't qualify you to judge all of Microsoft. What about Win2k3? What about Vista? A Vista-to-Feisty comparison would at least be apples to apples. Comparing an OS released in April to two released in 2000 and 2001 respectively, is absurd.
Parent
Re:Nice pitch, but... (Score:5, Informative)
I have to call you on that latter point.
His point was that you don't need crappy vendor-supplied restore solutions with Ubuntu because install CDs can be easily obtained for free.
After suffering a total hard drive failure, I tried to obtain a factory-restore CD from IBM (this was before they sold the PC business to Lenovo). They told me I couldn't have one without paying because *Microsoft* forbids them from giving them away.
I think his point is fair and legitimate.
Parent
Whoring for pageviews? (Score:5, Funny)
News at 11.
Symantec? (Score:5, Informative)
Ever try removing Norton from a system? It's like pulling wisdom teeth!
I understand that virus protection wasn't the main focus of the article, but he did make reference to it, and in the defense of Windows and giving the article a bit more of a balanced test, the testers should at least make sure they are using good 3rd party products.
h
Sys admin not always the best to assess software. (Score:5, Insightful)
I find sys admins often don't make the best user-friendly assessments of desktop software and OSs, especially from average Joe's point of view. No offense to the author, who makes many valid points, but I'd rather see a comparison of Ubuntu, Vista, and OS X from a school teacher or small business owner.
This is especially true (Score:5, Informative)
--E-Mail: Check. Linux has Thunderbird, which is what I use under Windows.
--Web: Check. Again, same thing as I'd use under Windows (Firefox).
--SSH: Check. Maybe the command line SSH client isn't quite as pretty, but it works in ever way as well.
--Remote Desktop: Check. Not as slick as the Windows one, but doesn't lack for anything important.
--Text editor: Check. I like UltraEdit better, but there are plenty that work fine for Linux.
--Ability to map SMB and/or NFS shares: Check.
That's pretty much it for the major tools I need. So long as I can check on the problems that need solving, and get to the servers that they need solving on, that's all my system needs to do for that part of the job. Linux does that just fine. Hell, so does Solaris.
However that doesn't carry over to other areas necessarily. A good example of where it doesn't is media production. The tools for Linux are sub par at best in my experience. In theory it might be possible to do what I need, but in practice I have never been able to figure out how and it is just too much effort. For Windows I just install Sony Vegas and go, it makes everything easy. In Linux it is fighting with many different tools, some of which are quite hard to get compiled (no binary distribution) none of which seem to be able to do everything that is needed.
So picking an area that Linux is strongest at isn't necessarily that useful, especially when talking Linux on the desktop. I mean I've known sysadmins that use Solaris as their desktop OS, doesn't mean that anyone would suggest it is intended for prime time desktop usage. Also, sysadmins are (or at least should be) more able to deal with some of the problems you'll encounter. Dropping to a command line it something a sysadmin should be able to do. A normal user? Not so much. If it isn't pointy and clicky with everything spelled out, it may be past their competence.
Parent
No, not really. (Score:5, Insightful)
Will get bashed (Score:4, Insightful)
For system admins linux might be good but if 30 min of fiddling with the command line to just get the system working is needed then it will not become mainstream.
Also on that hp comp ubuntu takes n15 min to boot up. I am not lying. Xp on the same machine is much faster.I tried getting help on some linux boards and all I got were nasty replies.
So there is a lot of things that have to be done before linux becomes mainstream and really fights microsoft.
Go ahead and bash me all you want butthis is true.
Re:Will get bashed (Score:4, Funny)
I'm sick of all these templatized flamebaits:
1. start with lame attempt at reverse psychology disclaimer.
2. Insert singular bad experience with Linux.
3. Omit all relevant detail so you won't be embarassed when others point out the real source of the problems you were complaining.
4. Recycle old complaints about Linux. Choose from the following:
a) can't install hardware
b) my device Blah doesn't work
c) user interface is ugly
d) there aren't any games
e) my software Blah doesn't work
f) boot time is slow
5. Repeat lame reverse psychology blurb in the beginning.
Parent
Written by a sysadmin? (Score:5, Insightful)
"2) Vulnerabilities - Windows is like Swiss cheese with so many vulnerabilities that it's sick - you can't connect XP to a public Internet connection (i.e., behind a router is OK but direct to the net isn't). Ubuntu? It's Linux - no worries."
I call bullshit on the author being a Linux admin. I'm not trolling and this certainly isn't flamebait, only truth: "It's Linux - no worries" is a load of crap and everyone here knows it.
Re:Written by a sysadmin? (Score:4, Insightful)
He's talking about running it on the desktop here... Really, there aren't any worries if you don't have a firewall and connect the default Ubuntu to the 'net. Pretty much all services that would be exposed to network are disabled or not installed by default anyway. What exactly is your problem with connecting a default install of Ubuntu desktop to the 'net and giving it to grandma?
Parent
not worried about security? (Score:5, Insightful)
From TFA:
That's FANTASTIC! Who is this guy and what's his IP?
Yes, MS sucks, Windows sucks, bugs galore and all that, but all nontrivial software is going to have bugs, and some of those bugs will lead to vulnerabilities, and some of those vulnerabilities will lead to viruses, attacks and so on. The reason that there aren't a lot of Linux viruses/attacks prawling around the net is because the Windows population is orders of magnitude larger than than the Linux population, making the choice obvious for any would-be parasite. Maybe Ubuntu is way better software than Windows in any number of ways - ehm, I mean, of course it is, but if it were to sweep Windows clean off the face of the Earth and take its place, you'd be installing Symantec for Ubuntu and worrying about script kiddies, trojans and the like. If Ubuntu is better then it'll be harder to exploit, but exploits will happen - the perceived calm right now exists because too few people are trying to attack the platform.
Linux Security and Noobs (Score:4, Insightful)
2) Vulnerabilities - Windows is like Swiss cheese with so many vulnerabilities that it's sick - you can't connect XP to a public Internet connection (i.e., behind a router is OK but direct to the net isn't). Ubuntu? It's Linux - no worries.
3) Thanks to #1 and #2, I'm free from products like Symantec and Norton and the dollar expense, the complexity of administering them (those pop-ups are annoying and a productivity hit), and wondering when they expire next.
But look at what happened with Firefox. Initially, just like Linux or Mac, no-one bothered trying to break the security. There was no hacks to get around popup blockers, etc. Now Firefox is just a little more popular and the threat landscape has changed.
This isn't to say that Linux can't be made more resilient to viruses if and when they finally show up. It can, and, more importantly, it probably will. Just don't go around saying that Linux is immune to viruses and spyware. Especially, don't go around claiming that this stuff is impossible, because that's exactly the kind of challenge that blackhats go for.
The List (Score:5, Informative)
Whenever these discussions come up, I like to forestall some of the repetition by posting my list of wins for OS X, Windows, and Linux. This is a list of the things each OS does better than some others, not a list of problems. Feel free to post and suggest other items, but please know what you;re talking about. I hate getting posts from people who clearly have never used two of the OS's in question and are simply assuming their favorite OS must do it better.
OS X Wins:
Windows Vista Wins:
This isn't obvious? (Score:4, Funny)
Shocking! (Score:5, Funny)
Ubuntu Rescued our T40 (Score:4, Interesting)
Frankly I was glad to find Ubuntu this easy to install and use because I thought our laptop was done for. Like the author, we had a corrupt Windows partition, and had to start from scratch. After we got everything installed and configured (less than an hour), I was on the deck working on docs and getting things done.
Anyone with a T40 or similar should give some serious thought to at least trying out Ubuntu. While it won't do everything a Linux admin would want, it's more than enough to keep users productive.
that didn't take long (Score:5, Insightful)
Just um, how often do we need to see these, anyway?
When did XP come out? (Score:4, Insightful)
And this guy has only been using XP for four months?
Call me unimpressed with his "great position" to evaluate software.
Re:wow, what a popup! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:wow, what a popup! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:wow, what a popup! (Score:5, Funny)
Fry: My God. It's full of ads!
Parent
Re:wow, what a popup! (Score:5, Funny)
it's not full-proof.
Is it empty-proof, then?
Parent
Re:It's all true... (Score:4, Interesting)
1) buy all the thing
Yeah, I bough all my hardware, theft is usually frowned upon, even if you are using FOSS...
Or were you talking about software?
*Looks at The Gimp icon on his desktop*
*Looks at the Open Office Icons*
Yep, paid *so* much for those! They cost me all of $0.00, I'm gonna go broke!
Seriously, finding free software for Windows is trivial.
2) install them ( each app in another way )
Yep, I have to install stuff to use it. Darn. Whoda thunk.
Oh wait, I install stuff if I use it in Linux. Sometimes by the package fetcher, sometimes by a downloaded package + manager, sometimes by source. Oh, looks there's lots of different ways there too.
In Windows it usually just involves wisards with extremely similar interfaces, where if you want you can put in the CD and keep clicking "next" until done, only having to agree to a EULA. But like Linux, there are the oddballs where you have to go outside of the norm.
3) update them, after paying for the possibilty of update Windows
Yes, because if you have Linux installed, with Xorg 6.9, you will *never* have to upgrade to 7.x to use version 7.x! It's *magical*
Seriously, every complaint in your rant is *just* as applicable to Linux as it is to Windows. The only caveat is that you
Some people find that Windows and some of that commercial software over the free alternatives. I know, having had a lot of experience with both, I prefer Windows to Linux, Corel Photopaint to The Gimp, etc.
It's all a matter of what you use, how you use it, and you method of looking at and solving problems.
Also, there are some games that will run in windows but not Wine, that's another reason some people use Windows...
People won't always agree with you, get over it.
(And if you try to counter me with that one - I never once said people shouldn't use Linux, I simply said that there are reasons not to use it, which may be valid for some users).
Parent
Re:NEWS FLASH! (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Ubuntu Fonts (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:who are ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Website unuseable (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:What is Ubuntu? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:more evidence (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:uhm, no -- corporate environment (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent