Linux: Why you should switch

[friedtofu]

LingLing said:

friedtofu said:

LingLing said
@friedtofu
Debian is a superb distro, but i would never recommend it to anyone not used to operate a linux.

But we were talking mainly about ubuntu and your points are invalid with ubuntu:

Samba, already installed after ubuntu installation
GAIM, already installed after ubuntu installation (also, if you would install it with synaptic instead of apt-get, you needn't care about package relations even in debian)
Office (Text, Spreadsheet, Presentations) already installed after ubuntu installation.

so don't tell me that this is more work than with windows.

Those apps you pointed out are obviously pretty much already included and yes, Ubuntu does have most of the bases covered right off the bat.

I will STILL tell you its more work than Windows because outside of all the preinstalled stuff, it IS more work for alot of things. Especially on older hardware. Or if the software you are installing falls outside the comfort of Synaptic. (Yes, download and compile, hooray!)

Just try googling for "Ubuntu vs Windows", alot of people have already done objective testing in this regard.

Just one example --> http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199201179

Check out the conclusion, Im sure you would have to be able to agree with some of it.

 

I read the article and I must admit, even for a guy who declares himself a "vista-fan" on the first page it is written from a more or less objective point of view.

But What part of the conclusion do you mean? In the end he just says that the only thing better in windows is a level of "completeness and polish", and "Ubuntu's best strength is handling the ordinary task-based day-to-day stuff."

Well, that's exactly what I need my PC for. Handling ordinary stuff. So if you're willing to pay 600$

(cause that's the price for Vista Ultimate in Switzerland) for a level of polish and a shiny aero surface then that's ok with me.

I only was trying to make a point that Linux (even Ubuntu) is still not as friendly as Windows in every aspect. Maybe if you never plan to do anything outside of the preinstalled apps its just as easy. Also Im sure you are technically savvy and can deal with Linux's annoyances. However most *novices* are not. I still would not want to install Ubuntu on my moms computer since the technical support calls would probably be alot longer than they are now (she uses XP).

In the article conclusion he sums up pretty well what we are debating here. And remember, we are not talking about us (regular Linux users) but were trying to look at Windows vs Ubuntu in terms of the non technical masses. He says

"To be honest, there's a lot about Ubuntu that impresses me. The out-of-the-box software available with the OS is well-chosen, and the Ubuntu community folks have made a good effort to support the vast majority of the things people do with their PCs....But there's at least as much about Ubuntu that I find disheartening or frustrating. There are still too many places where you have to drop to a command line and type in a fairly unintuitive set of commands to get something done, or edit a config file, or -- worst of all -- download and compile source code. For a beginner, this last is the kiss of death, because if compiling code fails, a beginner will almost certainly have no idea what to do next."