Ubuntu Linux Vs. Windows Vista: The Battle For Your Desktop

[sabret00the]

I've used XP - too good
I've used ubuntu - good but driver issues
I've used Vista - Good but filled with bugs

 

[infra_red_dude]

i tried vista a while ago, but uninstalled it before the trial period expired. back on my xp now. i'd say xp is a more mature OS than vista. of corz it has taken time. as somebody said vista needs some time to settle downl so may new technologies haf come up. we need time for developers to release better code compatible wid it. we need to give some time for it to mature. only then a comparision can be made. i'm a longtime windows user. been using it since the days of windows 3.1!

unless an OS has stable drivers how can u perform some real world tests on it. wait for a while. let the companies ship tested and stable drivers. then let us compare.

btw, ubuntu is a mature os, i must say. again linux was never designed to lure windows users. i've used linux from the dayz of slackware 2.2.. when it came in floppies to ubuntu 7.10. i think linux has matured over the years from being geek only to layman friendly today. hmmm.. but i think as long as we dun get distros like sabayon/dreamlinux/freespire it'll not be as popular as windows for the average joe.

i think ubuntu shud release a non-oss version which contains free software (may not necessarily be oss, but free like codecs, drivers etc.) imagine an ubuntu distro which doesn't require u to download codecs, drivers etc. which will work will all video cards, provide hardware accn. using closed source but free drivers, play all types of multimedia files etc. who wudn't want a distro like that working out of the box and which is legal too, it wud be irresistable!! the installation of the not-included stuff and configuring is what scares away most of the users. i think the whole community needs to re-think and introduce a lot of changes in the software released. just like freespire does, let them release 2 versions. one completely OSS and other wid oss+free closed source software. this will only help in gaining more popularity and first time users will not shy away from it as even almost all of the CLI ops are now gui based.

some very well worked on desktops i've seen in linux:

*ubuntuforums.org/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/1733
*ubuntuforums.org/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/3820
*ubuntuforums.org/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/5095
*ubuntuforums.org/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/1744

this is what will make first time users feel at home. given them a familiar interface, let them play any media file.. everything out of the box. then show them the power of customisation.

 

[iMav]

its very difficult to lure users with only codecs playing media files ... ubuntu, slax all of them are trying their level best to make their distros appeal to a normal windows user by trying to make the distros look and feel like windows but unless things are not simplified linux wont be able to cut the ice ... its very difficult for any user to shift to a new os and find that 90% of the things he knew how to operate on a windows box are entirely different on linux and unless ease of use is not given priority it wont help the cause

 

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

So just wikipedia told u n u believed that MS didn't use any references from previous windows.. Its like "climbing a tree from top" or "Intel developed core 2 duo without developing P1".... Dude just use common sense.. people do not achieve everything in a flash.. It's Called EXPERIENCE that helps... If MS Developers didn't have references and access to previous Windows sources then it would have taken more than 12 years to develop Vista. Hope u guys have little business sense. u guys go visit some companies n talk to the people there. This will help you to think Logically. Just don't talk like Fanboy.

that's what i wanted to say , then y don't u also consider development time of ubuntu to include that of the Development of the Linux kernel from scratch .

Also Ubuntu is based on debian , the developer's didn't make it from scratch , does this ring a bell Amitav , also Mark Shuttleworth didn't even hire new developers , he just took some from the Debian team , these developers too had earlier experience with linux development and had the Debian Source Code before them , now wouldn't that be unfair according to you

 

[iMav]

let it be zeeshan next he is gonna say ... viena was already coded wen MS released windows 98

 

[praka123]

i think ubuntu shud release a non-oss version which contains free software (may not necessarily be oss, but free like codecs, drivers etc.)

Linux Mint is the distro for that!-based on Ubuntu Feisty.

*linuxmint.com/
even there are many custom Ubuntu's there-like multimedia edition,Christian,Moslem Edition!!

Open Source Rules!!Free Software Rules!!

 

[mediator]

WTH, Ubuntu is being used to embrace religions now?

 

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

let it be zeeshan next he is gonna say ... viena was already coded wen MS released windows 98

wow , similarly one of my friends said that he had some insider news that MS had coded successor to XP even before it released Win 98 and said that it was Microsoft's monopoly that it wasn't releasing newer versions .

PS: he said this bout 2 years ago , then he was new to computers n was one of those newly-introduced to Linux , n u know how those kinda ppl are

 

[amitava82]

Vista took just 3 years to come from the drawing board to the floor.

Well mate thats what you are telling..

 

[iMav]

^^prove otherwise ...

 

[amitava82]

^^ why you don't know that Vista used Windows 2003 Server Code base? Not just came out of nothing from Drawing Board..
Windows Server 2003 is kind of built on Windows 2000 on NT 4.0 on NT 3.51 on NT 3.1... Missing link you know

 

[freebird]

^ I must say what @amitava82 signature says is the ultimate truth.take it!
may be count my siggie too!opens up ur mind

 

[..:: Free Radical ::..]

Windows Vista would be the clear winner for most people and I don't think they would be wrong.

are you coming down with fever or is it just sarcasm

I hate DRM too. thats why I remove wmp from my system everytime i install xp.
( i know you can switch it off but why bother) Too bad, i really like the wmp11 overhaul. For the same reson, i am contemplating to shift from xp to linux, probably openSUSE. fiesty fawn does have some problems with codecs i heard but man, beryl takes the cake out of vista. they are selling that just for the sake of eye candy. you can get it on Linux too and even to a limited degree on xp with wb5 and dreamrender.

 

[nepcker]

If I had to choose between Vista and Ubuntu, I'd choose Ubuntu.

Ubuntu's currently installed on my PC, and Vista's installed on my mac, and though Vista has that additional "polishness", I think Ubuntu is still the winner.

When I finally got hang of the XP's interface, Vista came. I thought Vista would have a good UI, especially considering the fact that many things in Vista's UI were stolen from OS X's UI. But all I got was a UI that's still confusing to navigate (but in different ways).

As for Ubuntu, I had tried some other distributions of Linux before, and found them extremely confusing to navigate. This problem was solved with Ubuntu, and I have now got hang of Ubuntu's interface.

Ubuntu's free, so at least I don't have to pay for it.

 

[shantanu]

Many people say Ubuntu is not polished as Vista which is i must admit is true in certain cases. But they often forget that Vista took more than 15 years to come to current Polished stage from Windows 3.0 (I'm leaving Windows 1.0, 1985), where as Ubuntu is merely 3 Years old. There is a Huge time advantage for Windows. Also I'm leaving out driver issue, mp3 etc... everyone knows the fact. I'm pretty much confident that by the time Microsoft releases next version of Desktop OS Ubuntu will be as Polished as Vista.

I find that the author of this comparison, actually went out of his way to trash Linux. In the beginning he claims to put aside his own bias, and then IMHO fails to do so. For example, he criticizes Ubuntu for not having his HP printer driver... even while admitting that Vista didn't have a native driver either. This is neither the fault of either OS developer groups, its HP's problem, yet he gives points to Vista for this and takes a dig at Ubuntu for not having it. Actually Ubuntu developers works more harder than Microsoft developer. They just Borrow drivers from the product manufacturers where as Ubuntu developers have to reverse engineer to get a working driver.

Also the author left out Synaptic package manager saying its for Advanced users (Whats so advanced in it???) and Comparing Windows "add remove programs" tools with Ubuntu "add remove" tools...

one more comment I'd like to quote from a poste which is very true.. The saying - "Linux is not ready for the desktop" is SO wrong ! Its not linux ! Linux has been desktop ready for years now ! Its the userbase thats not ready for desktop linux. Please remember that Linux is not windows, so don't expect it to operate like Windows. Linux hasnt been built to mimic windows's operability. Its a different O/S in its own right - Please treat it that way.

excuse me.. but as far as i know (correct me if i am wrong) UBUNTU is based on linux isnt it means the same platform which is from years (unix and all) (i dont have much knowledge) so you are saying windows 3.0 why not unix and all.. many things are ready made for ubuntu also.. every distro is made onyl by some enhancements made to the base RAW linux platform.. isnt it...


now for gaming department.. i played every game on VISTA they all work fine.. well i update my vista regularly and update DX too.. and for the guys saying VISTA is just polished XP they must think again and then rethink on saying a 6yr development crap... XP and VISTA are very much different from each other.. well you should just learn new things and read some literature..

if you only want to critisize then no one can do anything..

every bit in the history of developement of vista makes a difference in the future of the upcoming OS from M$.. and you should not compare an OSS with CSS. i ordered ubuntu from its site got it few days back.. i must say its a good OS, but i dont sit back and try comparing and noting down the flaws in it.. what will i get nothing.. so just think and then say what you are saying.

writing stories cant solve the issues.. just configure everything properly..

well i ask .. dont you guys have to configure ubuntu or any distro before usage , well i did , for many a things i had to configure fedora or ubuntu or rhel . they were not ready in every sense..

same case is with VISTA.. a little configuring is needed.. i manually do the setting for my PF & all.

so the setting are necessary after that your OS becomes as you want it to be..

TILL DATE NO BSODS IN XP OR VISTA..

If I had to choose between Vista and Ubuntu, I'd choose Ubuntu.

Ubuntu's currently installed on my PC, and Vista's installed on my mac, and though Vista has that additional "polishness", I think Ubuntu is still the winner.

When I finally got hang of the XP's interface, Vista came. I thought Vista would have a good UI, especially considering the fact that many things in Vista's UI were stolen from OS X's UI. But all I got was a UI that's still confusing to navigate (but in different ways).

As for Ubuntu, I had tried some other distributions of Linux before, and found them extremely confusing to navigate. This problem was solved with Ubuntu, and I have now got hang of Ubuntu's interface.

Ubuntu's free, so at least I don't have to pay for it.

there no need to say that nepcker will only use ubuntu coz you are a M$ hater..

well for your great knowledge .. Vista's UI is not from OSX.. file a case for it if you can ...

you are the first guy saying VISTA UI to be confusing.. man do you have some common sense.. or you use your comp. with closed eyes.. there is nothing is windows UI (VISTA) thats confusing.. yeah it can be in a MAC or LINUX.. mac is a bit confusing though.. but WINDOWS NO WAY.. ask a kid about VISTA UI.. or say a kid to navigate in windows ...

why you post BS..

 

[nepcker]

same case is with VISTA.. a little configuring is needed.. i manually do the setting for my PF & all.

Which side are you with? Ubuntu or Vista?

TILL DATE NO BSODS IN XP OR VISTA..

Yeah, Windows now restarts automatically without showing a BSOD.

 

[..:: Free Radical ::..]

To each his own.

 

[freebird]

*emergingearth.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/vista-bsod.jpg
*www.thehumorarchives.com/attachment/451/412-windows-vista.jpg
@ TILL DATE NO BSODS IN XP OR VISTA.. :
I hoped it was R(red)SOD for Vista,but no suprises!!!

 

[shantanu]

Which side are you with? Ubuntu or Vista?

i am on the right side.

Yeah, Windows now restarts automatically without showing a BSOD.

another great lie.. buddy if you dont know about windows then why you post it.. dont you know that automatic restart can be disabled.. and well BSODS onyl some to some people who dont know computing in right sense.. i didnt had any BSOD. i think once kiran said he also didnt had.. S18000 and many examples are there.. use genuine buddy and then see.. if you use pirated studd then you cant blame M$.. they say it

counterfeit softwares may put you at risk

 

[faraaz]

I installed Kubuntu 7.04 very recently...and I was very disappointed. It doesn't support my ATI video card at all. I had to stick to a 800x600 resolution...yeah, I know ATI has drivers out for it, but Kubuntu is incompatible with them. There's a workaround maybe...but for me, it is very important that an OS "just works" without all this hassle.

Furthermore, I was very disappointed with the difficulty level of getting to grips with Linux. Of course, I will be the first to admit that I am a complete Linux Noob...but honestly, I am an exact example of the kind of guy Linux needs to win over to increase its user base. Its way too unintuitive to use at this point in time.

Maybe in a year or so, I'll give it another shot...but until then, I'm going to stick to Windows XP. I hate Vista..so until living without DX10 becomes unbearable, I'm not going to shift.