Ubuntu 12.10 has been released, sporting the rather… Interesting tagline ‘Avoid the pain of Windows 8’. Two main features are that websites can now be treated as actual applications, integrating them into Unity. The divide between local and online content when searching has also been softened, which, they claim, makes it easier to find what you’re looking for. On the server side, it includes the Folsom release of OpenStack, “Cinder, for block storage and Quantum, a virtual networking API. Ubuntu’s Metal-as-a-Service bare-metal provisioning tool has been updated and now supports Calxeda hyperscale hardware based on ARM”.
I’m buying a new laptop tomorrow, just in time to try it out.
The wireless won’t work
:trollface:
As a matter of fact it works, cause I have the same laptop right now but is not mine, It is from the place I work and wireless works good.
Let me tell you one think, if you want a Linux friendly laptop, buy a Samsung.
I normally make sure it has a intel chipset and is either lenovo or dell business.
Seconded. I’ve had better luck with Dell business class machines than any other when it comes to GNU/Linux support. As in, 100%, fully open driver support for pure Intel machines (CPU/GPU/chipset).
Lenovo is nearly as good in my experience, where even an AMD based laptop can be 100% compatible, with the only closed driver belonging to the GPU.
One doesn’t need a closed driver for Linux for an AMD/ATI GPU.
http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature
Runs desktop software beautifully, is distributed along with the Linux kernel, requires no configuration whatsoever, works out of the box, will never be dropped (as legacy hardware) in terms of ongoing support.
Which juvenile downvoted these? They are both perfectly factual and on-topic.
Edited 2012-10-22 00:11 UTC
It depends on the generation of the GPU though. My desktop’s PCIe HD 6570 runs much faster and smoother with the closed driver than the open one, and it’s stable as well. It installs easily on both Slackware and Kubuntu. On the other hand, the computer’s onboard X1150 GPU only works with the legacy open Radeon driver, and isn’t too stable at that.
With some programs/desktops it is the open source radeon driver that runs much faster and smoother.
However, where there is a problem, it is only for the open source driver that FOSS developers can do anything about it. For the closed driver (which comes from Windows and is embedded in a translation wrapper for use on Linux) … the attitude would be “meh, it works on Windows, will not fix”.
Also, in terms of improving and upgrading the Linux graphics stack (for example, for things like KMS and Wayland) … new directions and improvements in the stack can only be embarked upon if the drivers are open. Closed drivers force the status quo, and they will stagnate the Linux graphics stack and will frustrate attempts at improving it.
No arguments from me, I’d love to be able to use 100% F/OSS drivers on all my hardware. Maybe one day I will be able to afford more than off-lease business machines and can attain that goal.
Aww, you beat me to it.
I was going to say sure, avoid the pain of Windows 8 and experience a whole new level of pain you will never forget. Although, truth be told, Wi-Fi isn’t really the main problem with Linux these days. Audio and video, as well as external device connectivity (scanners, etc) are where the real pains are. If your device works, great. If it doesn’t work, you’re fcuked.
I am either Fedora or OpenBSD when it comes to anything *nix … can’t stand anything Debian based.
Scanners, printers and external devices are still massive problems.
Wait until Wayland is in the next release as default everything will bloody break on ubuntu.
Edited 2012-10-18 19:09 UTC
Well, there are a SERIOUS METRIC BUTT LOAD of Packages made up for Fedora and BSDs that are from Debian.
Guess you’ll just have to remove them.
Sorry to hear your bias.
It is an opinion of mine, opinions are like nipples and make snarky comments isn’t big or clever.
It just repackaged Open source software. I don’t like Debian and I don’t like anything based off Debian.
‘Opinions are like nipples’? I’ve never heard that comparison before; do I dare ask what it means?
The full versions is
“Opinion are like nipples, everyone has a couple”.
ah, thanks
Cats have lots of opinions.
If they could only speak
In Australia we say “Opinions are like arseholes – everyone has one.”
There’s a second part to that where I come from:
Opinions are like arseholes. Everyone has one, but no one wants to look at anyone else’s.
Here in the great state of Georgia, USA it’s more blunt: “…everyone has one and they all stink.”
Back to the topic at hand, I agree that it’s all open source software repackaged. Picking one distro over the other shouldn’t lead to fights, it’s just a matter of which one works best in your situation.
And that’s my arseh….er, opinion.
That’s why YOU have problems with scanners, printers and external devices. Fedora itself does a pretty poor job of managing, discovering, utilising those devices, and OpenBSD … well, it has to be worse than that, because OpenBSD has less drivers in place.
I’m an OpenBSD and Debian user myself, so I perfectly know the pains of both worlds [in terms of platforms: GNU/Linux and *BSD]. Unless you shop wisely, there’s going to be the problems [but less than in the past]. The same goes to mainstream OSs, actually [like Windows]. Just don’t tell me you have never experienced incompatible/buggy/badly supported hardware in Windows, ’cause I won’t believe you [experienced it myself].
Last, but not least: stop whining [it’s to all people] about the hardware support in GNU/Linux everytime some article shows up. I know some people will always find the problems in everything, but that’s just how they minds work. Pretty unproductive. I’m sorry to say, but I find more positives, than negatives in GNU/Linux/BSD tandem and I’d never voluntarily use ANY of the Windows, nor Mac OSs.
That being said, it is uber-important that GNU/Linux/BSD doesn’t get that much support when it comes to HW specs for drivers or the drivers itself. Blame vendors. But you know what? I’d rather have less, but high quality drivers, than the mass crap that works in a very funky way under other OSs. In GNU/Linux/BSD I just plug it and it works. In Windows I have to install it manually.
When using OpenBSD I don’t expect everything to work flawlessly with consumer hardware.
OpenBSD works with what it says it works with, nothing more or less.
Yeah, but then again the same can be said for Windows XP and Vista these days. Windows drops support for hardware far quicker than Linux does. The problem is if Linux doesn’t have support from the hardware manufacturer at all and no Linux developers have the device to engineer drivers themselves.
Which is absolutely irrelevant if the hardware doesn’t work in Linux to begin with, isn’t it?
Sorry?
What a load of rubbish. Hardware vendors don’t release a driver for for new hardware on operating systems that are being phased out or EOL.
Windows doesn’t drop any hardware support, My brother has an ATi Rage 128 running on his desktop with Windows 7, works fine.
That’s not my experience. I find that getting older devices to work on newer versions of Windows is generally more problematic than getting new hardware running on XP/Vista. Even the latest cutting edge gadgets still almost always include drivers for XP.
Probably true, although it can be inconsistent, with things that work in one distribution not working in another. The main issue I find is that graphical configuration tools aren’t updated. I used to be able to control a lot of my Thinkpad’s features from the GUI, but those tools don’t work in newer distributions and now they only be tweaked from config files.
How exactly does Windows XP “drop support” for hardware? Does Microsoft send out an automatic update that kills the driver whenever they feel a certain group of people shouldn’t be using a particular device anymore? Sorry but I call BS on that one.
It’s not that XP drops hardware support at all; rather the hardware manufacturers choose a point in time where they don’t want to offer XP support for their next generation device, and therefore you never had support in the first place. Nothing dropped, just moving forward.
“But if you don’t like it you can always fix it yourself!” ..
Only require me learning C/C++, some graphical library and a few other bits and pieces and playing around with obscure config settings that aren’t documented anywhere.
But you can fix it yourself!
Edited 2012-10-19 08:29 UTC
All one has to do is find a machine for which the supplier is prepared to pre-install Linux. It will then be a machine which will run Linux.
For example, here is the ordering page for the machine on which I am typing this very message (running 64-bit Kubuntu 12.10):
http://www.pioneercomputers.com.au/products/configure.asp?c1=3&c2=1…
Scroll down the page to where you see the heading “Microsoft Windows”, and ensure that no box under that heading is checked. Underneath that, under the next heading “Operating System Options”, check ONLY the box “Ubuntu Linux OS Pre-loaded”.
This is what I did. It saved me $117 over the recommended OS, which was “Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium (32/64 Bit) [+$117]”. I also ensured that no other software, such as Microsoft Office 2010 Home and Business Edition [+$253], was selected, as that would be software for the recommended OS only.
All up I got the machine for the base price of $449, and I saved $370 by selecting no Microsoft software or OS, yet I ended up with a (Linux desktop) system every bit as capable, and I was assured that it was guaranteed to be able to run Linux flawlessly.
BTW, have you seen Kubuntu 12.10? Fantastic OS, it works flawlessly on my machine (as you would expect), it is as fast as blazes, and it has a vast array of excellent desktop software available at zero cost installable in next-to-no-time at the click of a button. External device connectivity (scanners, printers etc) is also flawless.
If your time is worth anything, go for such a Kubuntu option. You will save heaps of time and effort. You also get superb value for money. The total system (hardware + software) is half that of a Windows 7 + recommended desktop software option on the exact same hardware. This is easily the best way I know of to “avoid the pain of Windows 8 and experience a whole new level of pain”.
Edited 2012-10-19 12:52 UTC
That’s kind of illogical as most of the same software is actually also available for Windows. If you’re happy running GIMP, LibreOffice, Firefox etc. etc. on Linux there is no reason why you couldn’t use those on Windows, too. As such you should compare the prices with that in mind, not compare Linux+LibreOffice+GIMP+etc to Windows+Office+PhotoShop+etc — you should compare Linux+LibreOffice+GIMP+etc to Windows+LibreOffice+GIMP+etc which quite really doesn’t match your “half of that of a Windows 7” and so on.
This is the current Office Suite best integrated with a KDE4 desktop:
http://www.calligra.org/
It happens to be the only desktop suite for Linux which happens to have a functional alternative to Microsoft Visio diagramming software.
http://www.calligra.org/flow/
The Office Suite is major component of the desktop software, this particular suite is not available on Windows.
I also have occasion to use mathematical desktop software.
http://edu.kde.org/cantor/
I use a GNU Octave backend for Cantor, so I get a functional clone of MATLAB. MATLAB itself is, of course, available for Windows, but it is quite expensive.
Speaking of expensive, I am merely an amateur when it comes to photography, so I cannot justify expensive software such as photoshop. I do find GIMP is a little clumsy, so instead I tend to use the combination of the following applications:
http://www.digikam.org/drupal/about?q=about/features
(for digital photo management)
http://krita.org/
(for creation of raster graphics)
http://www.calligra.org/karbon/
(for vector graphics)
Also not available for Windows.
As part of the very nice KDE4 default desktop, I get to use very capable, very nice essential desktop utilities such as:
http://dolphin.kde.org/features.html
http://gwenview.sourceforge.net/
http://kate-editor.org/about-kate/
http://www.kdenlive.org/features
http://qalculate.sourceforge.net/
… none of which are available for Windows, as far as I know.
To get the equivalent power and functionality on a Windows box, one would have to spend more on software than one had spent on the hardware alone.
Then again, even if some of this excellent desktop software were available for Windows, to run it on a secure Windows box, one would also have to get anti-virus and anti-spyware programs. Now whilst it is true one can get good Windows software in this area for no cost, it is also true to say that one has to know what one is doing, lest one ends up in the very trouble one was trying to avoid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_security_software
So I repeat, the point stands, to get a great system for half the cost and none of the pain or timewasting, the best approach is to avoid Windows and go with a Linux distribution targeted for desktop users.
Edited 2012-10-19 13:49 UTC
You’re cherry-picking applications that are Linux-only, even when you perfectly well know that there are completely free alternatives also for Windows. There is no reason why you’d have to buy expensive commercial apps for these simply because you run Windows.
… unless you want to get anywhere near the capability that I have installed on my Linux desktop, for no cost.
I repeat, to get for Windows the equivalent power, functionality, and quality of desktop applications that I routinely install on my KDE4 desktop, avoiding trialware, adware, crapware, shovelware, shareware, bloat and all kinds of other dubious-ware that pervades the Windows world, one has to spend at least twice as much on a Windows desktop compared to a Linux desktop with the exact same hardware.
No joke. For real. I kid you not.
Then of course when it comes to your time and effort (have you ever waited through over an hour, and no less than four reboots, for Windows to get through an update? I have) … one simply can’t get consumer Windows that comes anywhere close to the excellent KDE4 Linux desktop experience.
Four reboots? Windows updates can be annoying, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen that many…
The two worst upgrade experiences I’ve ever had were with Linux. In both cases I was dumped to the CLI after updating because something had broken X.
Most non-rolling distributions recommend a clean install when there’s a new version, and there are often lots of problems if you don’t. Reinstalling an OS completely is a more time consuming process than installing a service pack, even if that means rebooting a few times.
I have to laugh at the idea that Linux would save me time and effort. I probably spend 90% of my time using Windows, but easily 90% of the time I’ve had to spend solving problems has been down to Linux issues. To me the idea that Linux is as easy to use as Windows is a total fantasy.
As it happens, I have just gone through both experiences (a Windows update and a new Linux distribution) in the past fortnight.
My daughter is undertaking a course, and she needs to run some Windows apps in order to complete it. Her laptop was purchased back in 2004, and it was not up to the task. I happened to have a Windows 7 netbook that I wasn’t using (hadn’t used it for six months or so), so I dusted it off and brought it up to date. There were 79 updates, it took well over two hours and four reboots. Then I spent another hour searching the net for the applications she wanted, downloading and installing them.
Yesterday, I updated the machine on which I am typing this to Kubuntu 12.10. I keep the root “/” OS and /home on separate partitions, so I just booted from a live USB, reformatted “/” whilst leaving “/home” unchanged, and re-installed the OS. I then set that localisation to Australia, the system language to English(Australia), I set up the same users as before, and then fired up the package manager, and from there I selected and installed the dozen or so applications that I normally use which are not part of the default install. All of this took me just one reboot and about 20 minutes.
Here is a 48 second video of someone using the Kubuntu 12.04 package manager (muon) to install something (Chromium web browser):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VBZEdCfwT8
They were a bit slower than needs be. My modest laptop is faster than the machine in that video.
Questions?
Edited 2012-10-20 05:03 UTC
That’s assuming that everything goes well and works properly after the upgrade, something I’ve rarely experienced with Linux.
It also slows things down when some needed software isn’t available through the repositories, and has to be downloaded from elsewhere, or compiled from source. And of course I’d have to make sure I remembered to back up the various config files I’d had to edit to get things working when I installed the previous version. I wouldn’t want to have to spend another weekend digging through howtos and Linux forums to remind myself how I fixed all the problems the last time.
Package management is nice if all needed software is in the distribution’s repositories. It becomes a bit more hassle when you have to search for a 3rd party repository with a particular package.
The real problem is when the software simply isn’t available for the distribution you’re using. Then you have a choice between trying packages from a slightly different distribution (e.g. Fedora RPMs in Scientific Linux) and hoping for the best, or compiling software from source. Of course that often brings with it the dependency hell that plagued Linux before modern package management.
After an hour or two spent failing to install a nice graphical utility (one that would have saved me from more time spent messing around with config file editing), extra seconds downloading an installer in Windows doesn’t seem like a big deal.
Why won’t you Windows weenies just quit it with this type of misinformation? It get really tiring, it really does.
I repeat … I bought a laptop for which the supplier offerred Linux pre-installed (instead of Windows) as an option. Specifically Ubuntu. I wanted Kubuntu, but the difference in desktop has no impact in terms of hardware compatibility, so this laptop is therefore one which works with Linux. The supplier certifies it.
So I bought it with Ubuntu Linux pre-installed. It was running Linux when I turned it on for the first time. It works with flawlessly with Linux … got it?
Sheesh!
These are the same conditions under which people normally deal with Windows, BTW. It comes pre-installed on a machine which is known to work with it.
Anyway, I wanted to update to Kubuntu 12.10. I obtained an .iso file, and used Unetbootin to make a live USB from that file. I then re-booted the machine from the USB.
At this point, the machine is now running Kubuntu 12.10 from the USB. The hard disk has not been changed at all as yet, but the proposed new OS is nevertheless running on the hardware. I poke around for a bit and make sure that all hardware still works with the new version of OS, as it is expected to do so. Everything is fine, so I go ahead and commit to installing the new version of the OS on the hard disk.
There is effectively zero chance that anything will go wrong form this point. The machine ran Linux from the get-go, and the new version of the OS has already been tested on my hardware before I committed to installing it on the machine’s hard disk.
Sheesh!
Muon reports there are 62,964 packages available, and just 1,795 of those are installed on my 64-bit Kubuntu 12.10 machine.
http://imgur.com/HicZt
For my purposes, I have a full desktop suite installed as it is, but if I found that I did need some other desktop program that was out there available for Linux, what do you suppose are the chances that it is NOT one of those covered by 60,000+ packages I currently don’t have installed?
You Windows weenies are living in fantasy-land. No-one has to compile desktop software for Linux these days. Just get a Linux distribution which is meant for the desktop (such as Ubuntu, Netrunner or Mint or even Mageia), and you will find every possible bit of decent desktop software for Linux you could ever want is covered by the repositories.
OK? Can we finally put this myth about needing to compile desktop software for Linux to bed?
Sheesh!
What part exactly of “tested via live USB, freshly installed the OS, set up the users and the locale and the system Language, and installed a dozen applications not installed by default, in 20 minutes” did you fail to understand?
I added the Ubuntu partner repositories, the backports repository, medibuntu, firefox-kde and getdeb repositories for Ubuntu as a part of the install. This is how I get 62,964 packages available. Doing this involves the arduous task of copying and pasting a few strings such as “ppa:blue-shell/firefox-kde” into muon. Doing this is well documented for new installation “things to do” on Ubuntu forums, and it is well within the time budget of 20 minutes.
Use a popular distribution meant for use on the desktop, it will have a huge set of packages available in repositories. Faux “problem” solved.
FUD. I am running the Kubuntu 12.10 OS right now, as I type this, without having had to edit even one config file. All customisation (what very little has been required) has been done through the “System Settings” GUI.
http://www.kubuntu.org/docs/kquickguide/C/ch03s07.html
Please desist with outright lies and FUD.
Edited 2012-10-21 07:17 UTC
In those circumstances I’m not surprised that Linux installed without any problems. Obviously I was talking about my own experiences with Linux, where I’ve merely bought hardware that was listed as Linux compatible, rather than buying something with it pre-installed.
I tried half a dozen different desktop distributions on my Thinkpad before settling on Scientific Linux. It was the one where the most functionality worked after installation. For example, it was the only one where the laptop successfully entered sleep mode when its lid was closed, while the others required a lot of tweaking just to get that working. I’ve actually had a lot less problems with that distribution than I did with Mint or Ubuntu.
None of them had working graphical tools for things like power management, trackpoint configuration, or fan control. Even with the desktop distributions I’d have to try to compile utilities and edit config files to do things that are easy in Windows.
In my experience with Linux there’s always something that goes wrong or isn’t straightforward. Even when I’ve run mainstream distributions on my desktop there have been problems more time consuming than anything I’ve experienced in Windows.
You may have had good experiences with Linux, but your experiences aren’t universal.
I’m not claiming that everyone will have the problems with Linux that I’ve had. Unlike you I’m not trying to generalise my experiences and make sweeping claims based on them. All I’m saying is that my experience of Linux doesn’t come close to matching the easy to use and trouble free operating system that you’re promoting.
Sigh! Read what is being said.
If you want Linux and an easy to use and trouble free desktop operating system, you are going about it the wrong way. What you need to do is to duplicate the way you get a Windows system. You need to get hold of a system that will run Linux flawlessly. You can do this in either of two ways …
1. you can get a Linux LiveUSB of the operating system you intend to use, and try it on the hardware you intend to use. This is not optimal, but it might work.
2. you can get a system for which the supplier is prepared to sell you Linux pre-installed. This is what you do for Windows, is it not? This is the only fair comparison, like for like, between the ease of maintenance and upkeep of desktop Linux compared with desktop Windows, BTW.
Now, once again, the distribution you choose is important. Scientific Linux is not a general purpose, ease-of-use-focussed distribution, it is made by CERN to control the LHC I believe. Hardly what a typical desktop user wants.
So, once again, to compare apples with apples, we need to compare the Linux OS which suppliers are prepared to pre-install. This is just about always Ubuntu.
Finally, the point about the number of packages available in repositories is crucial. For my Kubuntu 12.10 system, there are over 60,000 packages available in repositories. More importantly, every single package that I use on the system is available in repositories. Every single one.
This means that the single auto-updater, called muon updater, can automatically monitor all repositories, detect updated versions, notify, and update every single package on my desktop system, including muon itself.
You can’t do that for Windows. Windows is a pig to maintain compared to a proper desktop Linux system.
Actually, I prefer to build my own PCs. I like low noise systems, and the only way of guaranteeing both high performance and quietness is to choose the components myself. I haven’t bought a ready built computer with the OS pre-installed for about 15 years.
The nice thing about Windows is that I don’t have to worry about the components I’m buying, let alone get someone else to build and test the system for me. I can select the components that best fit my needs and budget and know that they’ll all work with my OS.
In reality it’s just a tweaked version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, like CentOS. I don’t find its ease of use significantly different from desktop distributions like Mint.
Before someone recommended Scientific Linux I tried Linux Mint, Mint Debian Edition, Ubuntu, Fedora, and a couple of others. Scientific Linux was by far the easiest one to get running on my Thinkpad. Like I mentioned, it was the only one where basic features like sleep mode worked properly after installation.
Even in Ubuntu, things like power management, fan control and the trackpoint still needed to be configured using config files. In Windows there are graphical utilities to tweak all those things quickly and easily.
On my main desktop I have Linux Mint installed, but that hasn’t been trouble free either. Sound doesn’t work reliably and I’ve had updates cause all kinds of glitches.
If you “build your own”, then you must expect to be on your own.
This has no relevance whatsoever to the topic … which is easiest to maintain and keep malware-free (running on a system on which it came pre-installed), user-focussed desktop Linux or user-focussed desktop Windows?
The answer is clearly, and unequivocally, the former. User-focussed desktop Linux is by far easier to upkeep, maintain and keep secure.
You’re just trying to insinuate that F/OSS – applications that run only on Linux are better than ones that run also on Windows, which is actually rather insulting towards the whole F/OSS – movement. There’s PLENTY of completely free, open-source software for Windows, too, but you just keep on jabbering that if one’s running Windows one has to buy closed-source ones because the free ones aren’t up to the snuff unless they run on Linux.
Do you even realize how much of a hypocrite that makes you? Your behaviour is exactly the kind of behaviour that’s frowned upon everywhere and you don’t even realize it yourself.
Many, but by no means all, of the best-of-breed desktop software for Linux that I use happens to run on Linux only.
Here is one great best-of-FOSS application that happens to run on Windows also:
http://www.blender.org/
and to give an indication of quality, here is the latest example of its output:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6MlUcmOul8
There are plenty of examples of both types, some have Windows versions, some do not.
My point stands … I can still get a great set of best-of-breed Linux desktop applications, and a machine to run them on, for half the cost and one tenth of the trouble and my time consumed, than I can get a similar set of the same quality and capability, and run with the same security on Windows running on the exact same hardware.
OK, so I won’t count LibreOffice, blender, GIMP, VLC or whatever other good FOSS software that you want that you can also get on Windows, but in my accounting I will count: Digikam+Krita vs Photoshop, Cantor+Octave vs MATLAB, I will count nothing vs McAfee, I will count Calligra Flow and Kexi vs Visio and MS Access, and so on.
You of course do not have to believe me, but your lack of belief has no impact whatsoever on my bank balance. Regardless of what you might like to tell yourself, I will still end up paying far less than you for my best-of-breed desktop experience, and saving myself a huge amount of my time in its update, maintenance and upgrade.
Edited 2012-10-20 04:35 UTC
Picasa+Krita for Windows ( http://krita.org/item/115-krita-on-windows-the-next-step )
Cantor: http://windows.kde.org/
Octave: https://www.gnu.org/software/octave/download.html
Why McAfee?
Plenty of alternatives to choose from at http://alternativeto.net/software/kivio/?platform=windows and http://alternativeto.net/software/kexi/?platform=windows
You see, you’re still talking out of your arse here. Most of the stuff you mentioned is actually available for Windows, too, and the ones that aren’t available yet have perfectly functional free alternatives. But no, you still keep insisting that only the paid-for ones are useable on Windows.
Hardly. I haven’t had to buy any of the apps I use, only the games, and those I would have to pay for even under Linux. I’m actually perfectly happy using free software under Windows. The only thing I haven’t found a good, free alternative for is Gparted, but luckily that is easy to solve by booting Gparted from USB when I need it, or run it from a VM.
Again, hardly. I see no difference between installing updates on Windows and installing updates on my Linux-installations, and there is no maintenance to do on either OS.
..or so you’d like to be able to claim.
Not even nearly true.
Werecaft … it too one obvious troll comment of mine to start this off … Lemur2 does this all the time.
Pretty much everything quoted is absurd & completely backwards. It’s blatantly obvious you’re either incredibly ill-informed or just trying to push buttons because nothing you’ve said has any merit or credibility what-so-ever.
Your post reads like this: “Liar liar, pants on fire. What you said is wrong, and what I say is right.”
Could you have possibly put forward a lamer, more inane, unsupported and unsubstantiated response if you possibly tried?
Dear Lemur2:
You have talked about your experience and also given data, some of it can be checked by anyone using a virtual machine, for example. If someone doesn’t want to, there’s little that we can do.
> [To “ILoveBeer”:] Could you have possibly put forward a lamer […]
There’s no need to engage in personal fightings. There is a moment in discussions when you realize that the other part simply isn’t listening, they have their opinion and they act like getting closer to the truth was losing. And they don’t like losing.
Those conversations can be ended with something like: “I’ve given enough data. Arguing with someone that doesn’t listen is futile. My time is more valuable than this. This conversation ends there.” or just “I’ve given enough data. Going on this way is futile there. My time is more valuable than this. This conversation ends there.” and you peacefully ignore whatever is dumped later there. Anyway, practically nobody reads those conversations up to those nested levels; it’s better to give some data in the first levels of discussions, where someone reads them.
Doing otherwise will convert “reading news” in “a harmful time sink”. Lately you seldom write in Osnews, some of us have missed for months your informed comments, it’s better to write for us all instead of for someone who doesn’t listen or… for someone worst:
“I submitted an article and trolled Lemur2 upto 300 comments.”
http://www.osnews.com/thread?504542
Don’t get caught, please, cut the conversations when they arrive to the third level or so, do it for us. Your time is better spend talking for everyone instead of for someone who doesn’t listen.
Thanks for your comments!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9616750/Rowan-…
You are more than welcome.
When he stops listing google results for alternatives … we stop with the personal attacks.
Name a desktop application applicable to most users, and I will show you a screenshot of a functional equivalent (or better) running on my desktop.
I wasn’t disputing that. I simply stated that massive walls of text with links that can be easily found on google don’t constitute an argument.
Edited 2012-10-22 19:22 UTC
Nor do your made-up criticisms constitute any kind of argument. Ad hominem comments merely serve to degrade any possible discussion, they add absolutely nothing useful, they are in all likelihood merely attempts to troll, and are best left unsaid.
In the regrettable event someone tries it on anyway, such as yourself, then the best policy for other readers is to conclude that whatever concept that poster is pushing is absolute bunk, and whatever that poster is opposing is good oil.
It wasn’t ad hominem … it was direct criticism of your posting style that added nothing to the conversation.
Look, At the end of the day whenever you post, you end up with these massive long posts which constantly uses double talk, while missing the point at hand.
You are the troll.
As for things like Matlab … you can’t seriously be saying for such a complicated piece of software you can get a 1:1 equivalent … they can’t even get that working with Web Standards (cross browser) which are pretty simple in comparison to Matlab.
All the other applications have 100% free equivalents on Windows as well as other operating systems.
You are like a broken record.
Edited 2012-10-21 17:11 UTC
GNU Octave is a MATLAB work-alike, it uses the same language & syntax etc. Most MATLAB scripts should work fine without modification.
Contrary to your claim, about half of the software applications which I use regularly on my desktop are not available at all on Windows. If you use Windows you would have to find an alternative work-alike program. Fortunately there is a huge range of software available for Windows, but unfortunately for you, many of those work-alike equivalent programs for Windows are proprietary, and they will cost you money. So much money, in fact, that you will have to spend as much again on software as I spent for the complete system.
As far as the quality of FOSS software (such as the GNU Octave MATLAB work-alike) goes, here is one client:
http://www.internetnews.com/skerner/2008/09/large-hadron-collider–…
“Should” being the operative word.
Which is what these programs are to their proprietary equivalents. The argument works both ways.
Well it depends whether they are worth the cost over the free alternatives. Does mean these programs are evil or shouldn’t be purchased.
As far as the quality of FOSS software (such as the GNU Octave MATLAB work-alike) goes, here is one client:
http://www.internetnews.com/skerner/2008/09/large-hadron-collider–… [/q]
We agree almost completely, up to a point. The only thing I would add is that if there is a quality FOSS program work-alike and an expensive proprietary alternative, and they are say 99% compatible but to work in one program or the other one has just to change the odd thing here and there, then my observation would be that say 99.9999% of the parties with an interest would be best served if the consensus was that the FOSS program was the gold standard, and the proprietary program was almost but not quite compatible.
In other words, it should be seen as a case of: “most GNU Octave scripts should work fine in MATLAB. “Should” being the operative word. Sometimes MATLAB is incompatible and it will let you down.”.
Looking at it that way around is in the best interests of the vast majority of people … everybody except MATLAB is best served by such a consensus. I hope you are objective enough to see this point. Too bad (for you) if you aren’t.
Edited 2012-10-23 02:45 UTC
If I am doing anything that requires R or Matlab, you are doing specialized research or it is provided by the University in the labs.
Matlab is used by such a specialized niche of people that having a free alternative isn’t the issue … there is a lot of money getting spent elsewhere and it isn’t on the software licenses.
Mine does with Ubuntu, Mint and Debian. Samsung is fairly linux friendly
I get tired of Windows weenies dabbling with Linux and then concluding after half an hour that this that or the other didn’t work so therefore Linux is crap. No, your hardware is probably crap or your knowledge of Linux is severely lacking. As a long-time Linux user (10 years now) I have learned that you do your homework before you purchase such things as new laptops, printers, scanners, motherboards, video cards and the like. It takes all of about a half hour on Google to figure out what is well supported and what isn’t. Then, you simply buy accordingly saving yourself hours upon hours of headaches trying to force a square peg into a round hole and then blaming the innocent party when it doesn’t work. Hardware manufactures don’t write drivers for Linux and they disclose little about the inner-workings of their devices. Therefore an army of coders working for free has to reverse engineer these drivers. In my opinion, since most things simply work right out of the box, I have to conclude that these folks are doing a fabulous job! If you want to blame someone, blame the hardware vendors who don’t document their devices well or support Linux in any way shape or form.
Why should anyone support something that only a very small minority use? Lets see, linux 1% share, Windows 90% share. Now I was a major Linux advocate and user for nearly ten years myself, but due to the FreeTards expecting me to give up all my time to fix their crap for nothing and not even getting any thanks I decided to go back to Windows development last month. I’m upgrading to Windows 8 because it works great out of the box, no drivers were needed, but they are on the vendors sites if I need them, and I’ve found people are actually paying me for my coding skills, rather than having to work a second job just so I can fix bugs in the Linux Kernel, which I stopped supporting due to the direction things are going.
I won’t be porting my apps to Linux. The market is too small for me to be bothered with, plus the headaches are more in Linux Land due to the Tards unable to read my install instructions which are so easy btw my 7 yr old niece can follow them.
I’ve already had lots of abuse on my site because of my change of OS, and so I am in the middle of selling that site, and setting up my new Windows only Blog/site.
What can I say. Linux really is useful for servers, but as I am launching Windows server based apps then Linux is of no use to me at all nowadays, and it won’t get any better, its marketshare will remain low for the next ten years at least.
Don’t let the door hit you in the a** on your way out.
If Linux fanboys didn’t whitewash its problems then maybe people wouldn’t have false expectations.
It’s nowhere near as easy as that for two reasons:
1. Something that works in one distribution may not work in another, or even in a different version of it. I’ve bought hardware after finding guides to using it with Debian and still had no luck in Linux Mint. My Thinkpad, which works pretty well with Red Hat Enterprise Linux, doesn’t have working power management in either Fedora or Ubuntu. Even if the hardware itself works, it’s often the case that graphical configuration tools are only available for certain distributions, and then aren’t updated to work with newer ones.
2. When Linux compatibility guides state that a particular piece of hardware works in Linux, they don’t necessarily mean that every feature of it works perfectly. For example, I’ve seen soundcards listed as compatible as soon as stereo output works, which isn’t much use if I want to record using the optical input. I’ve been called a nitpicker for complaining that my “Linux compatible” laptop’s special buttons and sleep mode didn’t work. The fact that Linux installed and booted to the desktop was enough for it to be considered fully compatible, with no problems worth listing.
Using Windows it really is as simple as checking that the hardware has drivers for the version I’m running. With Linux, researching compatibility often turns up a lot of misleading and incomplete information, with problems only revealed after actually trying the hardware. I’d rather save myself the time and hassle of dealing with that.
“If Linux fanboys didn’t whitewash its problems then maybe people wouldn’t have false expectations.”
Whose white-washing anything but your own ignorance?
“No, your hardware is probably crap or your knowledge of Linux is severely lacking. As a long-time Linux user (10 years now) I have learned that you do your homework before you purchase such things as new laptops, printers, scanners, motherboards, video cards and the like.”
It’s nowhere near as easy as that for two reasons:
“1. Something that works in one distribution may not work in another, or even in a different version of it. I’ve bought hardware after finding guides to using it with Debian”
See, you’re confused. Debian is not Linux Mint. Red Hat Enterprise Linux isn’t Debian, Fedora or Ubuntu. Again, do your homework. You don’t need a graphical configuration tool to setup hardware and if you’re relying on that then you don’t know what you’re doing and you deserve to keep paying Microsoft.
“2. When Linux compatibility guides state that a particular piece of hardware works in Linux, they don’t necessarily mean that every feature of it works perfectly.”
No, they don’t. But why doesn’t every feature work perfectly? Is it because of Linux or is it because the hardware vendor doesn’t support anything other than the sacred cow Windows?
“Using Windows it really is as simple as checking that the hardware has drivers for the version I’m running. With Linux, researching compatibility often turns up a lot of misleading and incomplete information, with problems only revealed after actually trying the hardware. I’d rather save myself the time and hassle of dealing with that.”
Ah yes. It’s similarly easy to go out and pay for a hooker for the evening instead of doing the work required to form a real relationship. My advice to you is to just keep using Windows. It should be obvious to you why.
Edited 2012-10-21 01:49 UTC
Fanboys often claim that Linux is just as easy to use as Windows. In fact it was claimed in this thread that using Linux would actually save time and effort. I don’t think you can blame people for believing the hype.
You’re missing my point. You claimed that finding out whether hardware is compatible is a quick and easy task. In reality it’s complicated by all the different distributions, as just finding out that other people are successfully using a particular device with Linux isn’t enough.
I can do without graphical tools, but given the choice I’d rather change a setting with a couple of clicks in a control panel, instead of spending time reading howto documents and editing config files. My time is worth something.
Personally, I consider graphical configuration tools to be a pretty basic feature in a modern OS. If one isn’t available for a particular piece of hardware then I wouldn’t consider it to be fully supported. Obviously I’ve been spoilt by Windows and my expectations for Linux are simply too high.
I’m not blaming Linux, but who’s to blame isn’t important to me as a user. What matters to me is that I can easily find hardware that does what I want and works properly with my OS.
That’s made more difficult in Linux because even a distribution’s official compatibility database can provide highly misleading information, listing devices as “working perfectly” when in fact significant features are non-functional.
We should all believe the Windows hype though, right?
Funny how this is always brought up as a problem. Do you also have a problem shopping in a store with more than 2-3 different brands of any product? Amazingly enough people manage this EVERY damn day yet we think they can’t figure out how to chose from a few different OS products. Really?
So is mine which is why I got tired of having to wade through the registry trying change some setting that wasn’t in the UI. It’s also not much fun manually editing XML config files.
This stuff goes both ways.
It’s exactly the opposite for me.
Wow, people aren’t perfect and mistakes are sometime made. Holy crap, this is ground breaking news. Good thing mistakes like this are never done anywhere else.
Seriously, come on.
This is a completely nonsensical comparison. I don’t have to worry about a particular tin of beans being incompatible with my brand of microwave.
In more than a decade of using Windows I’ve only delved into the registry a couple of times. In both cases it was to tweak some obscure setting and there was a simple and straightforward guide to follow to achieve what I wanted.
In Linux I’ve had to spend hours reading poorly written documentation and editing config files to achieve basic things that would take a couple of clicks in Windows.
Obviously I’m just talking about my experiences with Windows and Linux. YMMV.
Read the post that this was responding to. They claimed that finding out if hardware is fully Linux compatible is an easy process. My point is that it’s always a minefield even if someone does their homework.
You aren’t doing it right. Choose a desktop (such as Ubuntu) which is oriented to giving a good desktop experience to non-expert users, and you will have a good experience as a non-expert user. Choose a system which experts (suppliers) will certify runs Linux (by being prepared to sell it to you pre-installed), and you will not have to edit a single config file in a decade.
“{flamebait} often claim that Linux is just as easy to use as Windows. In fact it was claimed in this thread that using Linux would actually save time and effort.”
Not just “claimed” but rather “shown” or “proven” or “demonstrated“.
Evidence was even provided for your perusal.
Edited 2012-10-21 10:36 UTC
Utter rubish. Get a live USB of the distribution you are investigating, and boot the machine you are investigating from that live USB.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_USB
“Like live CDs, live USBs can be used in embedded systems for system administration, data recovery, or the testing of operating system distributions without committing to a permanent installation on the local hard disk drive.”
Here is a FOSS live USB creator program for Windows, to make it easy for you:
http://www.linuxliveusb.com/
You mean like this?
http://imgur.com/gdyAa
That is the System Settings opening GUI for Kubuntu 12.10, which is of course the equivalent of Windows Control Panel. Many of those top-level icons lead to three or four lower-level icons, which in turn lead to GUI dialog boxes for configuration settings. Enjoy.
Edited 2012-10-21 11:20 UTC
I myself am a long time Linux user. Never did I do any homework before buying new hardware. Probably I was lucky but always all my hardware worked, even wireless printers and dual video cards setups. That is not to say I did not encounter problems: I did, several. Still, as a rule I found it easier and more pleasant to deal with those Linux problems than I do dealing with Windows’ problems. Perhaps Linux lacks a company or a group of people to do for a single distribution what I do for my personal use. You see, linux works, period. In too many cases better than Windows. Hardware support in Linux is close to a non-issue to me; at least no more than Windows. I repeat: one company or group should focus effort in doing it easier for users and the tech people alike to solve driver/software problems; as it stands now, it is perceivably (but in reality, for those who know their way around both OSs, it is the same) more diffilcult to solve such problems in Linux than in Windows.
Neither, I am proficient using Linux, OpenBSD, FreeBSD and Solaris.
I do this for Windows to so I don’t get a crap experience.
Linux still fails short if I buy intel chipsets (usually the best support), realtek sound (usually the best supported and nvidia (their drivers on *nix are the only ones that have decent 3d support).
And something still breaks between distro releases.
I like their new web page desing:
http://imagebin.org/232409
Unlike bloody Ubuntu … Windows 8 has been stable since the first beta on my hardware.
BTW
I have a GTX 660 GPU, some dodgy wireless card I picked up in a supermarket in spain and ancient nForce 6 chipset.
No link for Gubuntu, anyone has it?
The pain Unity prompts me to avoid Ubuntu.
Just did a VM install of the new release. I use gnome-session-fall no effects (GNOME 3-based and looks like GNOME 2 with original panel) and it looks like they didn’t break anything… so I might consider to upgrading.
You are truly an utter and complete moron. The problem never was that the crap you are refering to *looks* like GNOME 2 with the original panel, the problem is that it doesn’t *WORK* like GNOME 2 with original panel, dipshit.
Edited 2012-10-21 17:21 UTC
I tweaked it, it does work like GNOME2 for everything I do it with it.
I use it every single day.
Have you ever tried the gnome-session-fallback ?
And just what do you do with it? Watch online episodes of “Teletubbies”?
When I use the system I work from home: system administration, network administration and programming.
Or as a hobby: fix issies with open source projects and other programming projects.
And yes also the normal things you might do with a home system: browsing and watching the occasional video.
You could try one of the many other buntus, or go with Debian proper.
It always grates me that Canonical “recommend” the 32-bit of Ubuntu Desktop on their Web site (despite simultaneously offering only the 64-bit version of Ubuntu Server on the site).
I’ve been running 64-bit Linuxes since 2005 and now have 32GB pf RAM on my desktop and yet apparently, Ubuntu is “recommending” me to use a maximum of 4GB RAM and a 32-bit system! All desktop PCs bought in the last 2-3 years have been 64-bit capable – isn’t it time Ubuntu caught up with its “recommended” bitness?
And as for where the torrent links are – it’s crazy that these are given such low prominence:
http://www.ubuntu.com ->
Get Ubuntu 12.10 ->
Ubuntu Desktop ->
Alternative downloads (scroll way down to the bottom left to discover this link…most people won’t) ->
Ubuntu 12.10 torrents
The irony is that they are now listing 64-bit torrents ahead of 32-bit ones and yet they’re not recommended at all apparently?!
Oh and now the distro finally exceeds a 700MB CD size (who on earth burns Linux distros on CDs nowadays?!), it’s time they added a lot more to their ISO images and actually offered a decent way to customise exactly which packages (both as groups and as individual packages) are installed off the DVD. Fedora is so much better at this than Ubuntu, athough their 18 Alpha revamped Anaconda in a really bad way
Edited 2012-10-18 19:27 UTC
It would be nice if they did the fedora specialised versions.
Anaconda is a crap from Red Hat 9.x to this day and it’s getting worse with every release.
How much RAM it needs now to launch graphical interface? 768 or more? Oh, you always can edit anaconda python files on Live CD and fix that. Did I say that only graphical one supports custom partitions? And you can’t simply create extended partition, because it will be created automatically only after 3rd one. And it’s slow as hell. Thankfully if you install the damn thing, RH/clones/Fedora are pretty fun and stable distros.
Ubuntu alternate is a brilliant thing compared to Anaconda. I always go with alternate, reminds me happy times with Debian, when I had more time for PC than today.
Anaconda work fine, you can always run the text installer if you are short on memory.
Lets make up imaginary problems about an installer that has been working fine since redhat 7.1.
Actually, Ubuntu 32-bit isn’t limited to only 4GB of memory.
Exactly, PAE for the win.
Linus on PAE
http://www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=76912&curpostid=76973
Not a solution
What’s the problem that isn’t solved by either using 32bit+PAE or the simple action of choosing 64bit in the download?
Edited 2012-10-20 01:48 UTC
64-bit is fine; PAE is a hack that should not be encouraged, as Linus explains.
I would describe it like overused antibiotics: good for specific users, bad for the community. Luckily, 64-bit is the standard now, and every major distribution supports 32-bit emulation for apps like Skype.
Indeed it is a hack but on the other hand it solves the problem for most users. Few users in Ubuntu’s target demographic really need to run applications that requires more than 4GB RAM and those who do know to use 64bit.
You are correct that it benefits single users who do not have demanding computing tasks.
However, it’s a pain for system developers who have to cater both the desktop user and the power user, as well as those writing apps for the power user. Better to drag along the desktop user into 64-bit land.
If you add the PPA STEAM still installs on debian wheezy. And *POOF* there went the most interesting part about the new ubuntu release out the window. Do not get me wrong, i really like ubuntu, it is just not for me as they do not even have TWiN in a tgeir proper version yet. Debian fails in this regards too but on the other hand AmiWM on debian is still from 1998 instead of the recent release.
Maaaaan does centralized software management not work in my favour.
Unity and lightdm in 12.04 have been borked with LDAP/NFS environments, which seemed like a giant oversight for an LTS release.
I had a problem with lightdm as a ldap client, but its easy swapped with gdm Unity was no problem. Googling suggests the even lightdm is not a problem now
Still can’t block msn spammers in Empathy? Check.
Unity still slow? Check.
Resets previous settings somehow? Check.
Still feels sluggish on a core i7 / 6G ram machine? Check.
Empathy UI even worse than before? Check.
Still has minimal config for the launcher, and bad dual monitor support? Check.
So basically the same as 12.04, pretty disappointing. There *are* some nice little updates and tweaks, but this is not (and I don’t think it’s supposed to be) a major revolutionary update.
Please please please can someone make it so I can block the 18 msn spammers that message me as soon as I log in to msn (when I can log in).
Something must be wrong with your computer or drivers then. Have you tried submitting a bug report? Unity has problems on low end machines such as those based on Intel Atom or AMD E- or C-series CPUs, but it has no problems running on for example a core 2 machine given a decent graphics card.
Unity still fast on my 7 year old laptop with 768MB ram? Check.
Never had that problem? Check.
Still feels fast on a machine with much lower specs? CHeck.
Still great dual-monitor support and the right launcher config out of the box? Check.
Edited 2012-10-20 04:03 UTC
I agree with the above as far as Unity speed, never losing settings, and the sluggishness not being problems, however dual monitor support has been a big issue for me in Ubuntu. The real issue is not Ubuntu in my case though as it is across board with any distro I use. For whatever reason I have really bad screen tearing and can’t seem to resolve it. I think a hardware change is needed for my setup.
In all fairness, I must agree with this. The Empathy ui is now quite horrible.
With releases like this one, I get the impression that Xubuntu is getting more and more exciting.
Their tagline should have this appended:
“Avoid the pain of Windows 8,
in favour of a pain that you’re used to.”
who is ubuntu relevant to in 2012? who uses it? any businesses, schools? it is not tops at distrowatch anymore, so it appears its now a has-been for enthusiasts.
That’s a bit of a leap. All Mint variations on Distrowatch are counted as a single distro. If you combine the ranking for every official Ubuntu variation that’s on the list you get a drastically different number putting it at the top. Is it as popular as it once was? No. Is it even close to being yesterday’s news? Definitely not. (and to be clear, I haven’t used Ubuntu in years so this isn’t some Ubuntu fanboy defending his favorite distro)
Edited 2012-10-19 20:56 UTC
good point! I didn’t notice the other ubuntu variations on the distrowatch list because they are so unpopular.
Distrowatch isn’t an accurate measurement of anything.
WELL THEN! PLEASE FEEL FREE TO EDUCATE THE IGNORANT, GOOD SIR!
I can see the Microsoft fanboys coming out in full force. That’s the reason I left Neowin.
People seem to forget, there is more than 1 Ubuntu. I myself use Xubuntu and will never, ever have a Microsoft product in my house. Ever.
Even the word Microsoft makes me need a shower. Those people are dirty and crooked, I don’t give a damn if their stuff ‘works’ if it has all sorts of backdoors and a copy of Windows 2 GUI they humbly call Modern. Well I call it garbage, I don’t like Unity also.
As per the article, this is the BEST time for Linux to jump in and put a strangle hold on the OS market. Windows 8 is trash and everybody knows it except fanboys, who willingly crawl around in Microsoft’s intestines like worms.
I don’t like dual booters either, how can you break an addiction if you keep exposing yourself?.
Overdramatic much?
Too bad Linux ain’t up to the snuff.
Just like Windows, then.
lol. windows 8 under the hood is probably is the best windows yet. but since metro is trash, I’ll give that one to you. as for the rest, you might want to see a doctor. your behavior seems abnormal
More like the anti-Ubuntu crowd. For some reason these people think it is of immense interest to the world that they do not use nor like it. In reality though, they’re just annoying nitwits that no-one gives a rats ass about.
“Avoid the pain of Windows 8” and join the pain of Unity.
I prefer Lubuntu these days. Avoid ’em both!
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with Windows 8, so the UbuntuTards should stfu really as they are spreading FUD about something they supposedly don’t even use.
Here’s a clue Ubuntu, how about you reach 90% marketshare eh? Then you can make wisemouth remarks. No? Not even 1%? Then blow it out your arse dumbfucks.
How about you shut up?
Actually, you can install Classic Shell on Windows 8 and get what you want back.
Instructions: http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/windows-8-classic-shell.html
Thanks to Dedo.