Windows 7: Microsoft's Linux killer?

[lywyre]

^^. I have installed ubuntu too. Never took more than 25 mins for me either. May be you guys forgot to try, or were fiddling with the partition jargon and got delayed. Anyway, even in an Celeron 900 MHz and 256MB SD RAM PC, I managed to get Ubuntu 7 up in about 27 mins. Ubuntu 8.1 installed in 23 mins on a PIV, 512MB DDR 400 MHz. Thats better than what XP figures.

 

[FilledVoid]

/shrug Maybe Im doing something wrong I guess. My install times have never gone below what I have experienced. But I still don't buy the 13-15 minutes claim. DO any of you actually boot up the Live CD and then install it from there? Because seriously any Live disk I used has gone well beyond 2-3 minutes just to boot up.

 

[desiibond]

ONe thing: Text mode installation is lot faster than full GUI based installation. Not sure if this is available in Ubuntu.

 

[FilledVoid]

ONe thing: Text mode installation is lot faster than full GUI based installation. Not sure if this is available in Ubuntu.

Yes obviously which is why im trying to get people to understand that I used the Live CD/ DVD to do the install on my computer. Well in my case it was the Live DVD although I seriously doubt whether it added anything more than the Live CD would. Actually never mind I have also used the CD version too. I downloaded one from the torrent when I had nothing else to download in my free time.

 

[chandru.in]

@FilledVoid

It is very clearly proved that either you have done something very wrong to get such huge install times. Also one difference I noticed is that you are installing from DVD which has more language packs and hence a bit slower to install (just my guess).

Yes it did take about 1 min and 45 sec boot the Live CD and yeah I didn't count boot time of Live CD. I mean come on how can you count it when comparing with Windows install. Ubuntu Live CD boots to a fully functional desktop but Windows boots just into the installer (if by any odd chance Win 7 has a Live CD mode, I'll take back my words )

 

[FilledVoid]

It is very clearly proved that either you have done something very wrong to get such huge install times. Also one difference I noticed is that you are installing from DVD which has more language packs and hence a bit slower to install (just my guess).

Considering that an expert in Ubuntu agrees with my times I think I'm not actually doing something hideously wrong as you would suggest. I could agree with people installing it with 30 minutes but yours is a straight out lie.

Yes it did take about 1 min and 45 sec boot the Live CD and yeah I didn't count boot time of Live CD. I mean come on how can you count it when comparing with Windows install. Ubuntu Live CD boots to a fully functional desktop but Windows boots just into the installer (if by any odd chance Win 7 has a Live CD mode, I'll take back my words )

Why couldn't I count it . Its part of the install procedure hence to me it is countable. Im not here to compare Windows and Ubuntu like you do in every other post of yours. My post disagrees with your install times. Period. I have no propaganda in proving Windows is better or Linux is better.

 

[j_h]

It takes less than half an hour to install ubuntu on my machines.

 

[Faun]

lol...exatly it takes less than 30 minutes to install on my system too.
E6300, DG965RY, seagate 160GB SATA 2, 1GB RAM Transcend

But to be honest it takes time to shutdown as one of my HDD is crapping out. Hardware plays important role.

But boot time is less than 30 seconds.

 

[MetalheadGautham]

What makes you think that a majority of Windows users are "n00bs" as you put it. Do you have a reliable source that indicates the number of "n00bs" with comparison of Pro users. You invited the flame and imho you sure as well deserved it. A person can be a noob in either Windows or Linux . The only difference is Windows is much more easily available and hence the users increase. Since you seem to be living in the "middle" although your post suggests otherwise illa sk you one thing . How many posts do you have in the Open Source section asking for help ? If you even have one by definition you are noob to the other thousands who probably new the answer.

Im not ranting at Linux users or Windows users. Im just ranting at some peoples attitude that Windows is a bunch of "n00bs" and we Linux users are what balances out the equation. Learn not to classify people by the software they use. That theory is astoundingly stupid.

Let me put my words more formally:

1. Anyone who uses linux does so by choice, so there is a good reason to belive that he is aware of what he is doing, and if he is not, he can ask for help (note: asking for help does not mean that a person is a n00b. Please read *www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=noob )

2. Due the fact that windows is a defacto OS, simply anyone can use it. That includes both those who use it out of choice and total awareness of their actions, and some misc. tom, dick and harry.

3. When security in an OS requires you to KNOW what you are doing, but random users use the OS, there is a high chance that security holes will be opened up by the users themselves.

PS: When I use extreme language, with words like n00b to describe a certain product's user base of a particular kind, you find it offensive. But here, the extremely intelligent and wise author who has written over 36 books says Windows 7 can "kill" linux, and it sounds natural ?

 

[FilledVoid]

1. Anyone who uses linux does so by choice, so there is a good reason to belive that he is aware of what he is doing, and if he is not, he can ask for help (note: asking for help does not mean that a person is a n00b. Please read *www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=noob )

This is the same case of WIndows. If the person doesnt know what he/she is doing the person may ask for help. Its the point of forums if you didn't know already.

From the link you gave

Noobs are often referred to as n00bs as a sign of disrespect toward them, and it's often hella funny, but I will refer to them as noobs during this reading.

A noob or n00b is someone that lacks intellegance or common sense, most people think that noob is a word used only in the online gaming world, but in reality it is becoming an ever popular word with teenage society.

2. Due the fact that windows is a defacto OS, simply anyone can use it. That includes both those who use it out of choice and total awareness of their actions, and some misc. tom, dick and harry.

This is funny. You numbered it as a point but basically all it says is that anyone uses Windows uses it out of choice or because hes some random person ? In either case it doesnt justify you calling the users of a product a noob.

3. When security in an OS requires you to KNOW what you are doing, but random users use the OS, there is a high chance that security holes will be opened up by the users themselves.

Again irrelative, New users to either OSes can cause havoc or security risks in the operating system they use. Not only rocket scientists use Linux. You don't need the IQ of someone in NASA to use it.

PS: When I use extreme language, with words like n00b to describe a certain product's user base of a particular kind, you find it offensive. But here, the extremely intelligent and wise author who has written over 36 books says Windows 7 can "kill" linux, and it sounds natural ?

He is entitled to his opinion. His opinion doesn't not include comments like Linux users are gay or noobs do they? By calling everyone who uses a product n00b you are actually worser than he is. The author posted his own educated opinion about the products not the userbase as you did. Hence the difference. Why don't you go there and post your inifinite number of l337 points and take it up with the author instead of criticizing the userbase of Windows.

No offense but alot of my friends and parents use Windows cause it suits there needs. keep on with the "n00b" calling and Ill show you a new meaning to the use of derogatory words.

 

[Faun]

lol...the OP succeeded in his plan
And that author of the article is a blindfolded loled up version of typical stereotypes who's got one leg over MS

 

[MetalheadGautham]

This is the same case of WIndows. If the person doesnt know what he/she is doing the person may ask for help. Its the point of forums if you didn't know already.

From the link you gave






This is funny. You numbered it as a point but basically all it says is that anyone uses Windows uses it out of choice or because hes some random person ? In either case it doesnt justify you calling the users of a product a noob.


Again irrelative, New users to either OSes can cause havoc or security risks in the operating system they use. Not only rocket scientists use Linux. You don't need the IQ of someone in NASA to use it.



He is entitled to his opinion. His opinion doesn't not include comments like Linux users are gay or noobs do they? By calling everyone who uses a product n00b you are actually worser than he is. The author posted his own educated opinion about the products not the userbase as you did. Hence the difference. Why don't you go there and post your inifinite number of l337 points and take it up with the author instead of criticizing the userbase of Windows.

No offense but alot of my friends and parents use Windows cause it suits there needs. keep on with the "n00b" calling and Ill show you a new meaning to the use of derogatory words.

Once again you misunderstood me. I never EVER called all windows users noobs. I just said that you have a good number of noob users who use windows and this is the reason why windows is infested with viruses.

The phrase "noob windows users" does not mean windows users are noobs. It just refers to "windows users WHO are noobs". And such people exist in large numbers. Thats a fact. But that does not mean the opposite type are non-existant.

I too have lots of friends and relatives who use windows, and I never meant anything against such people.

 

[chandru.in]

Considering that an expert in Ubuntu agrees with my times I think I'm not actually doing something hideously wrong as you would suggest. I could agree with people installing it with 30 minutes but yours is a straight out lie.

If you call it a lie only based on you experience I can say nothing.

Why couldn't I count it . Its part of the install procedure hence to me it is countable.

Then go ahead and get an Alternate CD and then compare. Alternate CD of Ubuntu is fairly equal to the install medium of Windows (in terms of booting process). Compare apples to apples.

Im not here to compare Windows and Ubuntu like you do in every other post of yours.

I have never mentioned Linux anywhere unless either the topic was a straight out war (this topic) or some other poster had put a false claim about Linux in the thread before me.

My post disagrees with your install times. Period. I have no propaganda in proving Windows is better or Linux is better.

And so do I. So there is no way you can claim mine as a lie. Also, I never claimed that install time will be 15 mins. You simply removed the whole package refresh time. Even if mirrors were not busy, there would have been package list download albeit a bit faster.

 

[desiibond]

Once again you misunderstood me. I never EVER called all windows users noobs. I just said that you have a good number of noob users who use windows and this is the reason why windows is infested with viruses.

The phrase "noob windows users" does not mean windows users are noobs. It just refers to "windows users WHO are noobs". And such people exist in large numbers. Thats a fact. But that does not mean the opposite type are non-existant.

I too have lots of friends and relatives who use windows, and I never meant anything against such people.

Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder. Some like windows, some like linux. So, peace

 

[FilledVoid]

The phrase "noob windows users" does not mean windows users are noobs. It just refers to "windows users WHO are noobs". And such people exist in large numbers. Thats a fact. But that does not mean the opposite type are non-existant.

Yes which again brings me to what i said earlier. Comparitively to the market share each has its far share of people who don't have a clue of what they are doing. To be frank Im one of those people. You have somehow found a factual source that equates the number of pro users to the number of "noob" users. If you have it post it . Otherwise its not a fact . Its just another guesstimate. "Its a fact that 99% of the Linux users who install it the first time have no clue what they are doing."

f you call it a lie only based on you experience I can say nothing.

You would have wanted me to call it a lie based on someone elses experience?

Then go ahead and get an Alternate CD and then compare. Alternate CD of Ubuntu is fairly equal to the install medium of Windows (in terms of booting process). Compare apples to apples.

In no place did I say that the Alternate CD would not give you a lower install time. If I recall correctly you mentioned that the Live CD gave you the times mentioned and hence merely I said I don't believe it.

I have never mentioned Linux anywhere unless either the topic was a straight out war (this topic) or some other poster had put a false claim about Linux in the thread before me.

Im not even going to use the Search feature to prove this is correct or not. If you believe you haven't good for you.

And so do I. So there is no way you can claim mine as a lie. Also, I never claimed that install time will be 15 mins. You simply removed the whole package refresh time. Even if mirrors were not busy, there would have been package list download albeit a bit faster.

Even on 20 minutes with a Live CD I find that hard to believe. Just to be sure Ill download one and video tape one, obviously as you put it Im doing somethign very wrong. Maybe Ill see if I can arrange a system to get this installed on and then video it on put it on my website. If it does install it in 20 Ill be more than happy to apologize. if it doesnt maybe you could show me those install tips you followed and correct it.

 

[chandru.in]

You would have wanted me to call it a lie based on someone elses experience?

I'd want to call it a lie after sitting beside me while I'm installing and if I fail to install in 20 mins.

In no place did I say that the Alternate CD would not give you a lower install time. If I recall correctly you mentioned that the Live CD gave you the times mentioned and hence merely I said I don't believe it.

Yes Live CD did give me those time but I did not count boot time of Live CD. I asked you to use Alternate only if you want to count boot time of CD in install time.

If it does install it in 20 Ill be more than happy to apologize.

Good but don't count boot time of Live CD. Don't count time taken by you to re-arrange partitions (I have a very clear pre-made partition scheme which I use for every new version). Don't count more than 30 secs for entering user name and password during install.

 

[MetalheadGautham]

@amitava:

Congratulations. Join the club of users who continue misinterpreting others' words and go all whammy over it.

Stop trolling around. You want me to believe that Live Ubuntu CD downloads packages during installation? Please don't lie to prove that Linux is better than any other OS.

Ubuntu does NOT download software from the net while installing. He is simply quoting the time it takes to install ubuntu and get it to a "fully" usable state, as in <including> codecs, flash, etc. I too take an additional 15 min time to get those stuff installed.

You know why I don't talk for Linux anymore? because of guys like you, MetalheadGautham and bunch of new breeds of linux users. If you think it's better, use it. You don't have to lie and spread your FUD to prove it better.

If somebody insults a particular type of windows users, it does not mean the whole windows user community is being insulted.

Nobody, including me, would assume that using a particular OS makes you an idiot. Wait a second, I remember your comment on some old chitchat thread now. Wasn't it YOU who said some guys were racist, because they said some singer called Akon was ugly ?

Or it's all about saving money or being 'geek' & 'expert' in front of you stupid friends who use Windows?

Commenting on someone does not mean that the commenter has a superiority complex.

I hate these guys who keep on shouting: oh look windows and MAC is crap, Windows and MAC users are noob, Linux is freedom, Opensource (half of the linux users don't even care about source code or don't have any idea about programming), look at me, I'm a linux geek, bla bla. Please get a life. (__)

Several linux users don't use it just because its opensource, free, etc. They simply use it because its more flexible. Or, they may have their own reasons. And its their choice, and there is nothing wrong if they praise their OS. Don't others do the same for their OS ? Each person is entitled to his/her own opinion. And expressing one's own opinion does NOT mean that he thinks great things about himself.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Once again, please stop assuming things about everyone. Things you comment about are often told in an entirely different context but you go on and assume the worst and start bashing people for no reason.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

 

[axxo]

@soumya
Thanks for entertaining us with yet another win vs lin war.

 

[Cool G5]

Take it with a pinch of salt

 

[MetalheadGautham]

@soumya
Thanks for entertaining us with yet another win vs lin war.

where is the war ?